/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/201117.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Tuesday, November 17, 2020, Vol. 22, No. 230
Headlines
3M COMPANY: AFFF Products Contain Toxic Chemicals, Rudenauer Claims
3M COMPANY: Exposed Firefighters to Toxic AFFF, Sobieraj Claims
3M COMPANY: Face Ross Suit Over Harmful Effects of AFFF Products
3M COMPANY: Faces Miller Suit Over Exposure to Toxic AFFF Products
3M COMPANY: Miller Sues Over Harmful Effects of AFFF Products
3M COMPANY: Rogers Alleges Injury From Exposure to Toxic AFFF
3M COMPANY: Schumacher Sues Over Exposure to Toxic AFFF Products
3M COMPANY: Silk Sues Over Health Risks of AFFF Products' Exposure
3M COMPANY: Tumey Says AFFF Products Have Harmful Health Effects
3M COMPANY: Vincent Says AFFF Products Have Harmful Health Effects
3M COMPANY: White Alleges Injury From Exposure to AFFF Products
A BOOK COMPANY: Jaquez Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
ALEXIS DINER: Two Former Waitresses File Class Action
ALLERGAN: Weisbein Seeks Class Certification of Botox Ads Lawsuit
ALLTRAN EDUCATION: Obi Files FDCPA Suit in North Dakota
ALTICOR INC: Garcia Alleges Breach of Fiduciary Duties Under ERISA
APPLEJACK WINE: Monegro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
ARGOS USA: Settles Defective Concrete Class Action for $10.02MM
AURORA CANNABIS: Klein Law Firm Reminds of Dec. 1 Deadline
BABBEL INC: Tenzer-Fuchs Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
BERETTA U.S.A.: Cruz Seeks Full Website Access for Blind Users
BHC LLC: Underpays Kitchen Workers, Santamaria Suit Claims
BIOMARIN PHARMA: Kahn Swick Reminds of Nov. 24 Motion Deadline
BLUEMARK ENERGY: Hay Creek Files Suit in E.D. Oklahoma
CARDONE CAPITAL: Susman Godfrey Files Securities Class Action
CELLO PARTNERSHIP: Judge Approves $1.9MM Class Action Settlement
CLEAN HARBOR: Williams Labor Class Suit Removed to N.D. California
CREDIT ACCEPTANCE: Levi & Korsinsky Reminds of Class Action Filing
CROWD COW INC: Monegro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
CVS HEALTH: Cholewa Says Wipes Unsafe to Flush Despite Label Claims
DALLAS INDEPENDENT: Nuttall FLSA Class Suit Removed to N.D. Texas
DICKEY'S BARBECUE: Faces Diczhazy Suit in Calif. Over Data Breach
DIGITAL MEDIA: Faces Hooper Suit Over Unsolicited Text Messages
E. G. MEINERS: Underpays Pizza Delivery Drivers, Ruehlman Claims
ECOARK HOLDINGS: Abrahms Sues Over Inaccurate Tabulation of Votes
ELECTRONIC ARTS: Player Packs Mislead Gamers, Zajonc Suit Claims
EMPOWER FEDERAL: Wellington Files Suit in N.D. New York
EPIC GAMES: Must Face Suit for Luring Kids to Make In-App Buys
EPSON AMERICA: Website Not Accessible to Blind, Burbon Suit Claims
EXPLORICA CANADA: Faces Class-Action Suit Over Denied Refunds
FLORIDA POWER: Judge Approves Water Main Break Class Action
GARRETT MOTION: Rosen Law Reminds of Nov. 24 Deadline
GARRETT MOTION: Rosen Law Reminds of Nov. 24 Motion Deadline
GOHEALTH INC: Klein Law Reminds of Nov. 20 Lead Plaintiff Deadline
GOHEALTH INC: Robbins Geller Files Class Action Over 2020 IPO
HAWAII: Oahu Correctional Center Inmates File COVID-related Action
HYUNDAI MOTORS: Barnett Sues Over Vehicles' Lack of Safety Systems
IMMANUEL INVESTMENTS: Higgs Sues Over Servers' Unpaid Minimum Wages
JUNK IT: Faces Santos Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
JUUL: Fights E-Cigarette Deceptive Ads Multidistrict Class Action
JUUL: Lexington School District 1 Joins E-Cigarette Class Action
KIA: Exploding Sunroof Lawsuit Fails Class Action Certification
KONA MOUNTAIN: Blind Users Can't Access Website, Cruz Suit Claims
LOOP INDUSTRIES: Bernstein Liebhard Reminds of Dec. 14 Bid Deadline
LOOP INDUSTRIES: Scott+Scott Alerts of Class Action Filing
LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: Savidis Bid for Class Certification Pending
LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: Visnack Putative Class Suit Ongoing
MEDICUS HEALTHCARE: Moreau FLSA Suit Moved to D. New Hampshire
MESOBLAST LIMITED: Robbins Geller Alerts of Class Action Filing
MICHAEL POMPEO: Bid for Another $34MM in Counsel Fees Denied
MICROSOFT: To Extend Xbox Elite Controller 2 Warranty Amid Suit
MODERN WIRELESS: Velazquez Sues Over Unlawful Employment Practices
MONARCH CONDOMINIUM: Preldakaj Sues Over Unpaid Wages for Staff
MOWI USA LLC: Neversink Files Suit in S.D. New York
NEW HAVEN, CT: Child Lead Poisoning Class Action Nears Settlement
NEW YORK, NY: Sydorowitz Seeks Proper Overtime Pay for Counselors
NEW YORK: Gym Owners File Lawsuit Over COVID-19 Restrictions
NEWFOUNDLAND TRAINING: Former Students Waiting for Compensation
NORTHLAND INVESTMENT: Church Street Class Action Settlement Ok'd
OEC DISTRIBUTION: Fails to Pay Propert OT to CSRs, Lambert Claims
OREGON: Businesses Mull Class Suit Over Coronavirus Restrictions
PACIFICORP: Faces Lawsuit Over Wildfires in Oregon
PALOMA LEGACY: Rodriguez Alleges Unpaid Wages, Illegal Tip Credit
PEABODY ENERGY: Kahn Swick Reminds of Nov. 27 Motion Deadline
PETS GLOBAL: Brenner Sues Over Dog Foods' Undisclosed Risk of DCM
PINTEC TECHNOLOGY: Vincent Wong Reminds of Nov. 30 Deadline
PRECIGEN INC: Wolf Haldenstein Reminds of Dec. 4 Motion Deadline
PROCTOR AND GAMBLE: Tenzer-Fuchs Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
PRUDENT PUBLISHING: Thorne Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
REATA PHARMA: Pomerantz Law Alerts of Securities Class Suit Filing
ROYAL CANADIAN: Class Action Certification Hearing Begins
S2 YACHTS: Winegard Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
SACOLO LTD: Nicholson Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Confiscation of Tips
SARASAS WITAED: Faces Class Action Over Student Abuse Claims
SCHUFF STEEL: Ordez Files Suit in Ca. Super. Ct.
SENEX LAW: Tenants File Fair Debt Class Action
SESCO CEMENT: Underpays Welders, Moreno FLSA Suit Alleges
SPECTRUM BRANDS: Aguilar Says Candles Can Explode Due to Defects
SUPER HALAL: Singh Sues Over Restaurant Staff's Unpaid OT Wages
TACTILE SYSTEMS: Rosen Law Reminds of Nov. 30 Deadline
U GYM: Faces Brown Suit Over Membership Fee Charges Amid COVID-19
UBER TECHNOLOGIES: Misclassifies Drivers, Davarci Suit Claims
UNITED STATES: Migrant Parents Sue Over Family Separation Policy
UNIVESITY OF SAN DIEGO: Holden Files Suit in S.D. California
URS MIDWEST: Rodriguez Labor Class Suit Removed to C.D. California
WALMART INC: Ivanoff Says Candles Can Explode Due to Defects
WASHINGTON SENIOR: Langston Files Suit in Ill. Cir. Ct.
WIGGYS INC: Thorne Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
WRAP TECHNOLOGIES: Pomerantz Law Reminds of Nov. 23 Bid Deadline
[*] CCPA Posts Significant Risk of Class Action Litigation
*********
3M COMPANY: AFFF Products Contain Toxic Chemicals, Rudenauer Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------------
EDWIN PORTER RUDENAUER, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company; ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA MANAGEMENT, LLC; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.;
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-03886-RMG
(D.S.C., November 6, 2020) is a class action against the Defendants
for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict
liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied
warranties, and wantonness.
The Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and punitive damages
arising out of serious medical conditions and complications
sustained as a direct result of his exposure to the Defendants'
aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic,
toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as
PFAS at various locations during the course of his training and
firefighting activities. The Defendants failed to use reasonable
and appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning,
instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of
their PFAS-containing AFFF products. Further, the Defendants failed
to warn public entities and firefighter trainees, including the
Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with
their AFFF products, or firefighters employed by either civilian
and/or military employers that use of and/or exposure to the
Defendants' AFFF products containing PFAS and/or its precursors
would pose a danger to human health. Due to inadequate warning, the
Plaintiff used the Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products in
their intended manner, without significant change in the products'
condition.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma Management, LLC is a global color and specialty chemicals
company headquartered in Reinach, Switzerland.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
- and –
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Telephone: (843) 546-2408
Facsimile: (843) 546-9604
3M COMPANY: Exposed Firefighters to Toxic AFFF, Sobieraj Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
MARTIN PETER SOBIERAJ, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company; ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA MANAGEMENT, LLC; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.;
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-03889-RMG
(D.S.C., November 6, 2020) is a class action against the Defendants
for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict
liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied
warranties, and wantonness.
The Plaintiff brings this action against the Defendants due to
their failure to use reasonable and appropriate care in the design,
manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling,
marketing, and distribution of aqueous film forming foam (AFFF)
products containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as per
and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). PFAS are highly toxic and
carcinogenic chemicals. The Defendants knew, or should have known,
that PFAS remain in the human body while presenting significant
health risks to humans. The Defendants' failure to warn public
entities and firefighter trainees, including the Plaintiff, about
the danger of the products to human health caused the Plaintiff to
develop serious medical conditions and complications.
The Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and punitive damages
arising out of the permanent and significant damages sustained as a
direct result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products at
various locations during the course of his training and
firefighting activities.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma Management, LLC is a global color and specialty chemicals
company headquartered in Reinach, Switzerland.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
- and –
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Telephone: (843) 546-2408
Facsimile: (843) 546-9604
3M COMPANY: Face Ross Suit Over Harmful Effects of AFFF Products
----------------------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH STARR ROSS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company; ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA MANAGEMENT, LLC; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.;
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-03885-RMG
(D.S.C., November 6, 2020) is a class action against the Defendants
for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict
liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied
warranties, and wantonness.
According to the complaint, the Defendants have failed to use
reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture,
labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and
distribution of aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products
containing synthetic, toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
collectively known as PFAS. The Defendants' AFFF products are
dangerous to human health because PFAS are highly toxic and
carcinogenic chemicals and can accumulate in the blood and body of
exposed individuals. The Defendants have also failed to warn public
entities and firefighter trainees, including the Plaintiff, who
they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF
products. The Plaintiff used the Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF
products in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition due to inadequate warning about the
products' danger. The Plaintiff relied on the Defendants'
instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
As a result of the Defendants' omissions and misconduct, the
Plaintiff developed serious medical conditions and complications
due to his exposure to Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products
during the course of his training and firefighting activities.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma Management, LLC is a global color and specialty chemicals
company headquartered in Reinach, Switzerland.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
- and –
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Telephone: (843) 546-2408
Facsimile: (843) 546-9604
3M COMPANY: Faces Miller Suit Over Exposure to Toxic AFFF Products
------------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL JOSEPH MILLER, JR., individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY f/k/a Minnesota
Mining and Manufacturing Company; ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.;
AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA MANAGEMENT, LLC; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.;
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-03947-RMG
(D.S.C., November 11, 2020) is a class action against the
Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design
defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express
and implied warranties, and wantonness.
According to the complaint, the Defendants failed to use reasonable
and appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning,
instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of
aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic,
toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as
PFAS. The Defendants' AFFF products are allegedly dangerous to
human health because PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals and can accumulate in the blood and body of exposed
individuals. The Defendants also failed to provide adequate warning
to public entities and firefighter trainees, including the
Plaintiff, about AFFF products' health risks. Due to lack of
awareness about the risks, the Plaintiff was exposed to the
Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products.
As a result of the Defendants' omissions and misconduct, the
Plaintiff developed serious medical conditions and complications
due to his exposure to Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products
during the course of his training and firefighting activities.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma Management, LLC is a global color and specialty chemicals
company headquartered in Reinach, Switzerland.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
- and –
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Telephone: (843) 546-2408
Facsimile: (843) 546-9604
3M COMPANY: Miller Sues Over Harmful Effects of AFFF Products
-------------------------------------------------------------
JOE ALBERT MILLER, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company; ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA MANAGEMENT, LLC; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.;
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-03946-RMG
(D.S.C., November 11, 2020) is a class action against the
Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design
defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express
and implied warranties, and wantonness.
The Plaintiff brings this case to recover compensatory and punitive
damages arising out of serious medical conditions and complications
sustained as a direct result of his exposure to the Defendants'
aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic,
toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as
PFAS. The Plaintiff was exposed to PFAS from the Defendants' AFFF
products at various locations during the course of his training and
firefighting activities. The Defendants failed to use reasonable
and appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning,
instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of
their PFAS-containing AFFF products. Due to inadequate warning and
awareness, the Plaintiff used the Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF
products in their intended manner, without knowing the health
risks.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma Management, LLC is a global color and specialty chemicals
company headquartered in Reinach, Switzerland.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
- and –
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Telephone: (843) 546-2408
Facsimile: (843) 546-9604
3M COMPANY: Rogers Alleges Injury From Exposure to Toxic AFFF
-------------------------------------------------------------
KERRY JOEL ROGERS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company; ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA MANAGEMENT, LLC; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.;
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-03884-RMG
(D.S.C., November 6, 2020) is a class action against the Defendants
for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict
liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied
warranties, and wantonness.
The case arises from the Defendants' failure to use reasonable and
appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning,
instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of
aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic,
toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as
PFAS, which are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals. The
Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products are dangerous as PFAS
binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the material
and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. Further, the Defendants failed to warn
public entities, firefighter trainees who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products, or
firefighters employed by either civilian and/or military employers
that use of and/or exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products
containing PFAS and/or its precursors would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff used the
Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products in their intended manner,
without significant change in the products' condition. The
Plaintiff relied on the Defendants' instructions as to the proper
handling of the products.
As a result of the Defendants' omissions and misconduct, the
Plaintiff developed serious medical conditions and complications
due to his exposure to Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products
during the course of his training and firefighting activities.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma Management, LLC is a global color and specialty chemicals
company headquartered in Reinach, Switzerland.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
- and –
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Telephone: (843) 546-2408
Facsimile: (843) 546-9604
3M COMPANY: Schumacher Sues Over Exposure to Toxic AFFF Products
----------------------------------------------------------------
GEORGE ARTHUR SCHUMACHER, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company; ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA MANAGEMENT, LLC; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.;
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-03887-RMG
(D.S.C., November 6, 2020) is a class action against the Defendants
for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict
liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied
warranties, and wantonness.
The suit arises from the Defendants' failure to use reasonable and
appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning,
instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of
aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products containing the toxic
chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances
(PFAS). The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products are highly
toxic and dangerous as PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of
humans exposed to the material and remains and persists over long
periods of time. Due to their unique chemical structure, PFAS
accumulates in the blood and body of exposed individuals. The
Defendants failed to warn public entities and firefighter trainees,
including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably come into
contact with their AFFF products that use of and/or exposure to the
Defendants' AFFF products containing PFAS and/or its precursors
would pose a danger to human health.
The Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and punitive damages
arising out of the permanent and significant damages sustained as a
direct result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products at
various locations during the course of his training and
firefighting activities.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma Management, LLC is a global color and specialty chemicals
company headquartered in Reinach, Switzerland.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
- and –
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Telephone: (843) 546-2408
Facsimile: (843) 546-9604
3M COMPANY: Silk Sues Over Health Risks of AFFF Products' Exposure
------------------------------------------------------------------
SEAN RYAN SILK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company; ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA MANAGEMENT, LLC; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.;
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-03888-RMG
(D.S.C., November 6, 2020) is a class action against the Defendants
for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict
liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied
warranties, and wantonness.
The Plaintiff brings this case after sustaining personal injury as
a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous film forming
foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn public entities and firefighter
trainees, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably
come into contact with their AFFF products that use of or exposure
to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due to
inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals
and developed serious medical conditions and complications.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma Management, LLC is a global color and specialty chemicals
company headquartered in Reinach, Switzerland.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
- and –
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Telephone: (843) 546-2408
Facsimile: (843) 546-9604
3M COMPANY: Tumey Says AFFF Products Have Harmful Health Effects
----------------------------------------------------------------
GARY LEE TUMEY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company; ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA MANAGEMENT, LLC; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.;
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-03890-RMG
(D.S.C., November 6, 2020) is a class action against the Defendants
for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict
liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied
warranties, and wantonness.
The case arises from the Defendants' failure to use reasonable and
appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning,
instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of
aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products containing the toxic
chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances
(PFAS). The Defendants knew that their AFFF products contained
highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, but they failed to warn end
users of the products about the health risks. The Plaintiff was
unaware of the dangerous properties of the Defendants' AFFF
products and relied on the Defendants' instructions as to the
proper handling of the products.
As a direct result of the Plaintiff's exposure to the Defendants'
AFFF products during the course of his training and firefighting
activities, he developed serious medical conditions and
complications.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma Management, LLC is a global color and specialty chemicals
company headquartered in Reinach, Switzerland.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
- and –
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Telephone: (843) 546-2408
Facsimile: (843) 546-9604
3M COMPANY: Vincent Says AFFF Products Have Harmful Health Effects
------------------------------------------------------------------
DENNIS ALLEN VINCENT, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company; ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA MANAGEMENT, LLC; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.;
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-03891-RMG
(D.S.C., November 6, 2020) is a class action against the Defendants
for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict
liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied
warranties, and wantonness.
According to the complaint, the Defendants designed, marketed,
developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained users,
produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise
released into the stream of commerce aqueous film forming foam
(AFFF) that contained highly toxic and bio persistent
polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants also failed to warn public entities and firefighter
trainees, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably
come into contact with their AFFF products, or firefighters
employed by either civilian and/or military employers that use of
and/or exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products containing PFAS
and/or its precursors would pose a danger to human health. The
Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous properties of the
Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the Defendants'
instructions as to the proper handling of the products. The
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused him to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma Management, LLC is a global color and specialty chemicals
company headquartered in Reinach, Switzerland.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
- and –
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Telephone: (843) 546-2408
Facsimile: (843) 546-9604
3M COMPANY: White Alleges Injury From Exposure to AFFF Products
---------------------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH PATRICK WHITE, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company; ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA MANAGEMENT, LLC; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.;
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-03892-RMG
(D.S.C., November 6, 2020) is a class action against the Defendants
for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict
liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied
warranties, and wantonness.
The case arises from a personal injury sustained by the Plaintiff
as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous film forming
foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn public entities and firefighter
trainees, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably
come into contact with their AFFF products that use of and/or
exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due
to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals
and developed serious medical conditions and complications.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma Management, LLC is a global color and specialty chemicals
company headquartered in Reinach, Switzerland.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
- and –
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Telephone: (843) 546-2408
Facsimile: (843) 546-9604
A BOOK COMPANY: Jaquez Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against A Book Company, LLC.
The case is styled as Ramon Jaquez, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. A Book Company, LLC, Case No.
1:20-cv-09291 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 5, 2020).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
A Book Company, LLC was founded in 2001. The company's line of
business includes the retail sale of new books and magazines.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yitzchak Zelman, Esq.
MARCUS & ZELMAN LLC
701 Cookman Avenue, Suite 300
Asbury Park, NJ 07712
Phone: (845) 367-7146
Fax: (732) 298-6256
Email: yzelman@marcuszelman.com
ALEXIS DINER: Two Former Waitresses File Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------
Chris McKenna, writing for Times Herald-Record, reports that two
former waitresses have filed a class-action lawsuit against the
Alexis Diner, alleging they were bilked out of part of their
deserved pay for years and seek compensation for themselves and an
estimated 40 other employees they say were underpaid.
The plaintiffs, Dayna Mejias and Daniela Vasquez, allege that diner
owner Yiannakis Zacharia understated the number of hours they
worked, failed to pay overtime when they worked more than 40 hours
a week, and withheld at least 15% of their tips and applied it to
their wages without telling them.
The case, filed Aug. 27 in U.S. District Court, gives no estimate
of how much the diner allegedly owes the two plaintiffs. But it
does offer one illustration of how its practices affected Mejias'
pay for one week earlier this year, when she is said to have been
paid $622 but deserved $1,133. She claims to have worked 51 hours
that week but was paid for 33.
Zacharia and his attorneys didn't respond on Sept. 21 to requests
for comment on the allegations.
The case was brought less than four months after the diner paid
another former worker $60,000 to settle a federal lawsuit he
brought. That former waiter, Eddy Andre, also alleged the diner
undercounted his work hours, failed to pay overtime and withheld
15% of his tip income during the four years he worked at the
24-hour eatery on Route 9W.
Mejias worked at the diner from 2015 until March of this year, and
Vasquez worked there from about 2004 to 2017.
Asked on Sept. 21 why the plaintiffs didn't challenge their
compensation when they worked at the diner, Steven Bennett Blau, a
Long Island attorney representing them, said that restaurant
workers often put up with unfair pay out of fear or retaliation by
their employers.
"The restaurant industry is notorious for this kind of conduct,"
Blau said.
Blau said federal claims in the lawsuit would apply to any
violations that occurred within the last two to three years, while
the state claims would cover six years of violations. The
plaintiffs brought their case under the federal Fair Labor
Standards Act and New York's wage and hour laws.
The lawsuit is the third of its kind that the Alexis Diner has
faced. Zaccharia and a diner co-owner agreed in 2006 to pay a
settlement to two former employees who alleged in a federal lawsuit
that the diner had undercounted their work hours and severely
underpaid them for the hours it did report. The terms were not
disclosed.
The latest case alleges the diner failed to pay the two plaintiffs
one and half times their regular wages when they worked more than
40 hours in a week. The attorneys also charge that the diner
violated New York's "tip credit" terms by failing to pay the two
waitresses minimum wage when it applied part of their tip income
toward their wages.
That meant, for example, that Mejias earned $7.85 an hour when she
should have been paid $12.50 an hour for the first 40 hours and
$18.75 an hour in overtime, according to the court complaint.
[GN]
ALLERGAN: Weisbein Seeks Class Certification of Botox Ads Lawsuit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Law360 reports that a man suing Allergan for allegedly violating
the Telephone Consumer Protection Act by sending unsolicited text
advertisements related to Botox asked a California federal judge on
Oct. 13 to certify a class of potentially thousands, arguing a
class action is the only way to resolve their complaints. Lead
plaintiff Ray Weisbein seeks to certify a class of people who
received text messages by Allergan advertising the availability or
quality of Botox, the sale of Botox or the participation in its
Botox Savings Program. [GN]
ALLTRAN EDUCATION: Obi Files FDCPA Suit in North Dakota
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Alltran Education,
Inc., et al. The case is styled as Kingsley Obi, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Alltran Education,
Inc., John Does 1-25, Case No. 3:20-cv-00205-ARS (D.N.D., Nov. 5,
2020).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.
Alltran is a private debt collection agency handling accounts
receivables for hospitals, and federal and state government
agencies. Alltran Education is a subsidiary of Alltran. They have a
contract with the Education Department to handle loan collections
for student loan borrowers in default.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yaakov Saks, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
285 Passaic Street
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Email: ysaks@steinsakslegal.com
ALTICOR INC: Garcia Alleges Breach of Fiduciary Duties Under ERISA
------------------------------------------------------------------
JOSHUA GARCIA, ANDREA P. BRANDT and HOWARD HART, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ALTICOR, INC., THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF ALTICOR, INC., THE FIDUCIARY COMMITTEE OF
ALTICOR, INC., and JOHN DOES 1-30, Case No. 1:20-cv-01078 (W.D.
Mich., Nov. 9, 2020) is a class action brought pursuant to the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, against the plan's
fiduciaries which include Alticor Inc., the Board of Directors of
Alticor Inc. and its members during the Class period and the
Fiduciary Committee of Alticor Inc. and its members during the
Class period for breaches of their fiduciary duties.
According to the complaint, most participants in 401(k) plans
expect that their accounts will be their principal source of income
after retirement. Although at all times 401(k) accounts are fully
funded, that does not prevent plan participants from losing money
on poor investment choices by plan sponsors and fiduciaries,
whether due to poor performance, high fees or both.
Prudent and impartial plan sponsors thus should be monitoring both
the performance and cost of the investments selected for their
401(k) plans, as well as investigating alternatives in the
marketplace to ensure that well-performing, low cost investment
options are being made available to plan participants.
At all times during the Class period (November 9, 2014 through the
date of judgment) the plan had at least 1.1 billion dollars in
assets under management. At the end of 2017 and 2018, the plan had
over 1.2 billion dollars and 1.1 billion dollars, respectively, in
assets under management that were/are entrusted to the care of the
plan's fiduciaries.
The Plaintiffs allege that during the putative Class Period the
Defendants, as "fiduciaries" of the plan, breached the duties they
owed to the plan, to Plaintiffs, and to the other participants of
the plan by failing to objectively and adequately review the plan's
investment portfolio with due care to ensure that each investment
option was prudent, in terms of cost.
The Plaintiffs participated in the plan investing in the options
offered by the plan and which are the subject of this lawsuit.
Alticor Inc., which is the corporate parent of Amway, is the plan
sponsor and a named fiduciary with a principal place of business
being 7575 E. Fulton Street, 56-3T, Kent County, Ada, Michigan.
Amway was founded in "1959 by Rich DeVos and Jay Van Andel and
revolutionized the business model known as direct selling.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Donald R. Reavey, Esq.
Mark K. Gyandoh, Esq.
CAPOZZI ADLER, P.C.
2933 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17110
E-mail: donr@capozziadler.com
Telephone: (717) 233-4101
Facsimile: (717) 233-4103
E-mail: donr@capozziadler.com
markg@capozziadler.com
APPLEJACK WINE: Monegro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Applejack Wine &
Spirits, LLC. The case is styled as Frankie Monegro, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. Applejack Wine &
Spirits, LLC, Case No. 1:20-cv-09309 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 5, 2020).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Applejack offers a variety of wine, beer, and spirits, and
specializes in fine wines, craft beers, and premium spirits.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David Paul Force, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
285 Passaic Street
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Email: dforce@steinsakslegal.com
ARGOS USA: Settles Defective Concrete Class Action for $10.02MM
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pope McGlamry, P.C. and Moss & Gilmore LLP on Sept. 21 disclosed
that a $10.02 million settlement has been reached between Argos USA
LLC, ("Argos") and the plaintiff class ("Plaintiffs") (the
"Settlement"). The litigation stems from Plaintiffs' allegations
that Argos supplied a specific concrete mix that contained an
excessive amount of fly ash that was not designed or intended for
slab or flatwork uses, creating surface durability and dusting
issues at residential properties. The mix was poured during a
six-month period in 2013 in the Savannah, Georgia area and affected
hundreds of residential properties, many owned by veterans.
On August 30, 2019, United States District Judge, the Hon. R. Stan
Baker in the Southern District of Georgia (the "Court"): (i)
granted Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification, in part and
certified the issue of liability; (ii) appointed Class
Representatives, and (iii) appointed attorneys at the law firms of
Pope McGlamry, P.C., and Moss & Gilmore LLP, as class counsel.
On June 26, 2020, the Court granted final approval of the
Settlement. As part of the Settlement, Argos agreed to certain
injunctive relief which included never using this same concrete mix
again for residential homes in the United States; performing
rigorous strength and durability testing of concrete mixes with fly
ash greater than 50% for residential flatwork; and notifying any
purchaser of residential concrete if the concrete's fly ash is 45%
or more.
Participating class members received compensation from the
Settlement Fund based upon the amount of concrete poured at their
respective property that had not been previously repaired or
remediated by Argos or their agents. Participating class members
received an average payment of $20,757.29. Additionally, the Class
Representatives received incentive awards for the substantial role
they played in investigating, initiating, litigating, and settling
this case.
"Without these four brave and very tenacious Class Representative
homeowners stepping forward, Argos might never have been held
accountable for what we contend was a defective and unsuitable
concrete mix. The incentive award awarded to the Class
Representatives is one of the highest ever awarded in the state of
Georgia. It was a great privilege to represent the class and the
Class Representatives," said co-counsel Raymond L. Moss of Moss &
Gilmore LLP.
"Homes are typically the largest investment people have and there
is an expectation that they are built with proper materials. After
four years of contentious litigation including an appeal to the
Eleventh Circuit, we are pleased to see this case come to a
successful resolution that provides valuable relief to all class
members," said Michael J. Moore, former US Attorney and shareholder
at Pope McGlamry, P.C.
The Class was also represented by Wade ("Trip") H. Tomlinson, R.
Timothy Morrison, Jay F. Hirsch, Kimberly J. Johnson, Courtney L.
Mohammadi, and Mike Morrill of Pope McGlamry, P.C.
The case is captioned, McGaffin et al. v. Argos USA, LLC, Case No.
4:16-cv-00104-RSB-BKE, in the Southern District of Georgia,
Savannah Division.
About Pope & McGlamry: Pope McGlamry, P.C. maintains offices in
Atlanta and Columbus, Georgia. The firm represents clients in mass
tort, class action, products liability, commercial litigation,
catastrophic personal injury, and wrongful death litigation. Pope
McGlamry. P.C. also represents whistleblowers who bring cases under
the False Claims Act reporting fraud that has been committed
against the government. The firm has extensive trial experience in
state and federal courts throughout the United States. For more
information, visit www.pmkm.com.
About Moss & Gilmore LLP
With offices in Atlanta and New York, Moss & Gilmore LLP --
http://www.mossgilmorelaw.com-- also represents whistleblowers in
the U.S. and worldwide in federal and state false claim
whistleblower and related retaliation cases involving healthcare
fraud and military procurement fraud. Moss & Gilmore LLP represents
whistleblowers in cases under the False Claims Act and claims under
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Commodity Futures
Trading Commission involving securities and commodities fraud and
IRS whistleblower reward programs.
CONTACT:
Raymond Moss
Moss & Gilmore LLP
(678) 381-8601
rlmoss@mossgilmorelaw.com
http://www.mossgilmorelaw.com[GN]
AURORA CANNABIS: Klein Law Firm Reminds of Dec. 1 Deadline
----------------------------------------------------------
The Klein Law Firm announces that class action complaints have been
filed on behalf of shareholders of the following companies. There
is no cost to participate in the suit. If you suffered a loss, you
have until the lead plaintiff deadline to request that the court
appoint you as lead plaintiff.
Aurora Cannabis Inc. (NYSE:ACB)
Class Period: February 13, 2020 - September 4, 2020
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: December 1, 2020
The complaint alleges that during the class period Aurora Cannabis
Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or
failed to disclose that: (i) Aurora had significantly overpaid for
previous acquisitions and experienced degradation in certain
assets, including its production facilities and inventory; (ii) the
Company's purported "business transformation plan" and cost reset
failed to mitigate the foregoing issues; (iii) accordingly, it was
foreseeable that the Company would record significant goodwill and
asset impairment charges; and (iv) as a result, the Company's
public statements were materially false and misleading at all
relevant times.
Learn about your recoverable losses in ACB:
http://www.kleinstocklaw.com/pslra-1/aurora-cannabis-inc-loss-submission-form-2?id=10243&from=1
Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you
serve as a lead plaintiff. If you suffered a loss during the class
period and wish to obtain additional information, please contact J.
Klein, Esq. by telephone at 212-616-4899 or visit the webpages
provided.
J. Klein, Esq. represents investors and participates in securities
litigations involving financial fraud throughout the nation.
Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar
outcomes. [GN]
BABBEL INC: Tenzer-Fuchs Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Babbel, Inc. The case
is styled as Michelle Tenzer-Fuchs, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. Babbel, Inc., Case No. 2:20-cv-05385
(E.D.N.Y., Nov. 5, 2020).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Babbel is a language learning app.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jonathan Shalom, Esq.
SHALOM LAW, PLLC
105-13 Metropolitan Avenue
Forest Hills, NY 11375
Phone: (718) 971-9474
Email: jshalom@jonathanshalomlaw.com
BERETTA U.S.A.: Cruz Seeks Full Website Access for Blind Users
--------------------------------------------------------------
SHAEL CRUZ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. BERETTA U.S.A. CORP., Defendant, Case No.
1:20-cv-09468 (S.D. Tex., November 11, 2020) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, the New York
State Civil Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its Website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired persons. The Defendant's commercial Website,
www.berettausa.com, contains access barriers which hinder the
Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online
goods, content, and services offered to the general public through
the website. These access barriers include, but not limited to: (1)
lack of alternative text (alt-text), or a text equivalent, which
prevents screen readers from accurately vocalizing a description of
the graphics; (2) empty links that contain no text causing the
function or purpose of the link to not be presented to the user;
(3) redundant links where adjacent links go to the same Uniform
Resource Locator (URL) address, which results in additional
navigation and repetition for keyboard and screen-reader users; and
(4) linked images missing alt-text, which causes problems if an
image within a link contains no text and that image does not
provide alt-text.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that the its Website will become and remain
accessible to blind and visually-impaired individuals.
Beretta U.S.A. Corp. is a firearm manufacturing company
headquartered in Maryland. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq.
COHEN & MIZRAHI LLP
300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Fl.
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Telephone: (929) 575-4175
Facsimile: (929) 575-4195
E-mail: Joseph@cml.legal
BHC LLC: Underpays Kitchen Workers, Santamaria Suit Claims
----------------------------------------------------------
MANUEL SANTAMARIA, Plaintiff v. BHC LLC d/b/a BABYLON CARRIAGE
HOUSE and CYNTHIA CUSACK, Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-05304
(E.D.N.Y., November 3, 2020) is a collective action complaint
brought by the Plaintiff on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated kitchen workers against the Defendants for their
alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the
New York Labor Law (NYLL).
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants as a kitchen worker from
2014 until 2019.
The Plaintiff claims that despite regularly working more than 40
hours per week, the Defendants paid him and other similarly
situated kitchen workers below the statutorily required minimum
wage, and never paid them spread-of-hours pay and an overtime
premium at one and one-half times their regular rate of pay.
Instead, the Plaintiff and other kitchen workers were only paid at
a straight-time rate for all the hours they worked, including hours
worked over 40 per workweek.
Additionally, the Defendants failed to provide the Plaintiff and
other kitchen workers with wage notices and wage statements with
each payment of wages.
BHC LLC d/b/a Babylon Carriage House is a restaurant and catering
venue owned and operated by Cynthia Cusack. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Louis Pechman, Esq.
Laura Rodriguez, Esq.
Galen C. Baynes, Esq.
PECHMAN LAW GROUP PLLC
488 Madison Ave. – 17th Floor
New York, NY 10022
Tel: (212) 583-9500
E-mail: pechman@pechmanlaw.com
rodriguez@pechmanlaw.com
baynes@pechmanlaw.com
BIOMARIN PHARMA: Kahn Swick Reminds of Nov. 24 Motion Deadline
--------------------------------------------------------------
Kahn Swick & Foti, LLC ("KSF") and KSF partner, former Attorney
General of Louisiana, Charles C. Foti, Jr., remind investors with
losses in excess of $100,000 that they have until November 24, 2020
to file lead plaintiff applications in a securities class action
lawsuit against BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc. (NasdaqGS: BMRN), if
they purchased the Company's securities between February 28, 2020
and August 18, 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 securities of BioMarin 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/nasdaqgs-bmrn/ to learn more. If
you wish to serve as a lead plaintiff in this class action, you
must petition the Court by November 24, 2020.
About the Lawsuit
BioMarin and certain of its executives are charged with failing to
disclose material information during the Class Period, violating
federal securities laws.
The alleged false and misleading statements and omissions include,
but are not limited to, that: (i) differences between the Phase 1/2
and Phase 3 study for its drug candidate, valoctocogene
roxaparvovec, limited the reliability of the Phase 1/2 study to
support the drug's durability of effect; (ii) as a result, it was
foreseeable that the FDA would not approve the Biologics License
Application for valoctocogene roxaparvovec without additional data;
and (iii) as a result of the foregoing, BioMarin's statements were
materially false and misleading at all relevant times
The case is Tsantes v. BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc., et al,
20-cv-06719.
About Kahn Swick
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.
To learn more about KSF, you may visit www.ksfcounsel.com. [GN]
BLUEMARK ENERGY: Hay Creek Files Suit in E.D. Oklahoma
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Bluemark Energy, LLC.
The case is styled as Hay Creek Royalties, LLC, on behalf of itself
and others similarly situated v. Bluemark Energy, LLC, Case No.
6:20-cv-00394-JFH (E.D. Okla., Nov. 5, 2020).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract.
Bluemark Energy, LLC is located in Tulsa, Oklahoma and is part of
the Natural Gas Pipelines Industry.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Reagan E. Bradford, Esq.
BRADFORD & WILSON, PLLC
431 W Main St, Ste D
Oklahoma City, OK 73102
Phone: (405) 698-2770
Fax: (405) 234-5506
Email: reagan@bradwil.com
CARDONE CAPITAL: Susman Godfrey Files Securities Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------------
Susman Godfrey L.L.P. ("Susman Godfrey") on Sept. 21 disclosed that
the firm has filed a securities class action lawsuit on behalf of
persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired interests
in Cardone Equity Fund V, LLC and Cardone Equity Fund VI, LLC (the
"Funds") pursuant to their public offerings (the "Class"). The case
was filed in the United States District Court for the Central
District of California, Case No. 2:20-cv-08499-JFW-KS against
Cardone Capital, LLC and Grant Cardone.
The class action asserts claims for violations of Sections 12(a)(2)
and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933. The complaint alleges that
defendants made materially false and misleading statements and
omissions of material fact regarding, among other things,
investors' expected rates of return on their investment. In this
action, plaintiff seeks, among other things, an award of rescission
or rescissory damages and prejudgment interest.
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 September
21, 2020, or by November 20, 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.
If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning
this notice or your rights or interests, please contact: Krysta
Kauble Pachman, Esq. of Susman Godfrey L.L.P. at (310) 789-3100 or
via e-mail at kpachman@susmangodfrey.com.
About Susman Godfrey
Susman Godfrey is a nationwide trial law firm with a talented group
of lawyers who handle high-stakes litigation for both plaintiffs
and defendants. Because we work both sides of the "v." we know what
the other side is thinking. With more than 150 trial lawyers from
coast to coast, we handle the most challenging cases throughout the
country. We offer a broad range of creative, flexible fee
structures which align our and our clients' interests. Traditional
hourly billing accounts for a very small percentage of our work.
Because we often share risk with our clients, evaluating cases
accurately is crucial, and we do it early and often. Visit
susmangodfrey.com to learn more about our unique approach to
winning cases.
Contact:
Krysta Kauble Pachman, Esq.
kpachman@susmangodfrey.com
(310) 789-3100 [GN]
CELLO PARTNERSHIP: Judge Approves $1.9MM Class Action Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Peters, writing for The Athens News, reports that a federal
judge in September approved a nearly $1.9 million settlement to a
class action lawsuit brought against Cello Partnership, which does
business as Verizon Wireless, by a former Marietta store employee
who alleged the telecommunications giant underpaid workers.
The suit -- which was filed in federal court, but settled in
mediation in March -- awarded nearly 4,000 current and former
Verizon store workers across the nation more than $1 million in
compensation, according to an order passed down by Chief Judge
Algenon Marbley of The Southern District of Ohio.
The money will be distributed based on the numbers of unpaid hours
worked.
Neil Rosenbohm, a West Virginia resident who previously worked at a
Verizon store in Marietta, Ohio between May 2015 and January 2017,
filed the lawsuit against the company in 2017 alongside his
attorney Michael Fradin.
Rosenbohm alleged that Verizion violated labor laws by not
adequately paying employees for work preformed at the end of
closing shifts, amounting to "wage theft," according to the
lawsuit.
The company implemented a policy years back that required employees
who close Verizon stores to remain in the store after they clock
out until managers finish their closing duties, resulting in
between 15 and 20 minutes of unpaid labor for workers at the end of
closing shifts, the lawsuit alleged.
Rosenbohm also alleged that Verizon fired him after he complained
to management several times about the policy.
As part of the settlement, Rosenbohm will receive an individual
settlement payment, the amount of which hasn't been finalized,
Fradin said, on top of a $10,000 reward for his participation in
the suit on behalf of Verizon employees.
Fradin and the attorneys on his team will receive an award of
$650,000 as part of the settlement, and an additional $47,000 for
litigation expenses.
"We are very pleased that Judge Marbley approved the settlement
reached during the March mediation," Fradin said in a statement.
"Neil is a top-notch Class Representative and has worked diligently
with the best interests of the Class in mind since we filed the
initial complaint in 2017." [GN]
CLEAN HARBOR: Williams Labor Class Suit Removed to N.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled DAWN WILLIAMS, as an individual and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. CLEAN HARBOR ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES, INC. and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No.
CIV2002149, was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California for the County of Marin to the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of California on November 9, 2020.
The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of California assigned
Case No. 3:20-cv-07872 to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendants' alleged violations of the
California Labor Code and the California's Business and Professions
Code including failure to provide meal and/or rest periods, failure
to pay overtime and minimum wages, failure to furnish accurate wage
statements, and unlawful, deceptive, and/or unfair business
practices.
Clean Harbor Environmental Services, Inc. is a company provides
hazardous and non-hazardous material management and disposal
services, headquartered in Norwell, Massachusetts. [BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Hanna B. Raanan, Esq.
Nicole A. Naleway, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
Park Tower, Suite 1500
695 Town Center Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Telephone: (714) 800-7900
Facsimile: (714) 754-1298
E-mail: hanna.raanan@ogletree.com
nicole.naleway@ogletree.com
CREDIT ACCEPTANCE: Levi & Korsinsky Reminds of Class Action Filing
------------------------------------------------------------------
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP announces that class action lawsuit has
commenced on behalf of shareholders of Credit Acceptance
Corporation. Shareholders interested in serving as lead plaintiff
have until the deadlines listed to petition the court. Further
details about the cases can be found at the links provided. There
is no cost or obligation to you.
CACC Lawsuit on behalf of: investors who purchased November 1, 2019
- August 28, 2020
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: December 1, 2020
TO LEARN MORE, VISIT:
https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/credit-acceptance-corporation-loss-submission-form?prid=10176&wire=1
According to the filed complaint, during the class period, Credit
Acceptance Corporation made materially false and/or misleading
statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the Company was
topping off the pools of loans that they packaged and securitized
with higher-risk loans; (ii) Credit Acceptance was making
high-interest subprime auto loans to borrowers that the Company
knew borrowers would be unable to repay; (iii) the borrowers were
subject to hidden finance charges, resulting in loans exceeding the
usury rate ceiling mandated by state law; (iv) Credit Acceptance
took excessive and illegal measures to collect debt from defaulted
borrowers; (v) as a result, the Company was likely to face
regulatory scrutiny and possible penalties from various regulators
or lawsuits; and (vi) that, as a result of the foregoing,
Defendants positive statements about the Company's business,
operations, and adherence to appropriate laws and regulations were
materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
You have until the lead plaintiff deadlines 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. Attorney
advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. [GN]
CROWD COW INC: Monegro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Crowd Cow, Inc. The
case is styled as Frankie Monegro, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Crowd Cow, Inc., Case No.
1:20-cv-09310 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 5, 2020).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Crowd Cow is a mission-driven startup founded in 2015 with the idea
that the most important of food purchases -- beef and other
proteins -- deserves to be associated with high-quality practices,
total transparency, and close connection to the independent family
farms producing the food.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David Paul Force, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
285 Passaic Street
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Email: dforce@steinsakslegal.com
CVS HEALTH: Cholewa Says Wipes Unsafe to Flush Despite Label Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------------
SCOTT CHOLEWA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CVS HEALTH CORPORATION and NICE-PAK
PRODUCTS, INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:20-cv-05483 (E.D.N.Y.,
November 11, 2020) is a class action against the Defendants for
negligent misrepresentation, breach of express warranty, and
violations of New York General Business Law.
According to the complaint, the Defendants are engaged in false,
misleading and deceptive labeling and marketing of wipes. The
Defendants' wipes are labeled as "flushable," but in reality, the
wipes are not suitable for flushing as they do not disintegrate as
effectively as toilet paper and can comingle to cause clogs.
The Plaintiff and Class members would not have purchased the
flushable wipes and/or paid the purchase price had they known that
they are not suitable to be flushed.
CVS Health Corporation is a healthcare company headquartered in
Woonsocket, Rhode Island.
Nice-Pak Products, Inc. is a manufacturer of pre-moistened wipes
products headquartered in Orangeburg, New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Samuel H. Rudman, Esq.
Mark S. Reich, Esq.
Vincent M. Serra, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
58 South Service Road, Suite 200
Melville, NY 11747
Telephone: (631) 367-7100
Facsimile: (631) 367-1173
E-mail: srudman@rgrdlaw.com
mreich@rgrdlaw.com
vserra@rgrdlaw.com
DALLAS INDEPENDENT: Nuttall FLSA Class Suit Removed to N.D. Texas
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled LUKE NUTTALL, individually and on behalf of other
similarly situated taxpayers v. DALLAS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT,
Case No. DC-20-15006, was removed from the Texas 116th District
Court of Dallas County to the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Texas on November 9, 2020.
The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of Texas assigned Case
No. 3:20-cv-03342-M to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged violations of the Fair
Labor Standards Act, the Texas Education Code, the Texas
Whistleblower Act, the Texas Tort Claims Act, and the Texas Public
Information Act.
Dallas Independent School District is a school district based in
Dallas, Texas. [BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
J. David Giddens, Esq.
Heather Rhea, Esq.
THOMPSON & HORTON LLP
500 North Akard Street, Suite 3150
Dallas, TX 75201
Telephone: (972) 853-5115
Facsimile: (972) 692-8334
E-mail: dgiddens@thompsonhorton.com
hrhea@thompsonhorton.com
DICKEY'S BARBECUE: Faces Diczhazy Suit in Calif. Over Data Breach
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ROSS DICZHAZY and WESLEY ETHERIDGE II, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. DICKEY'S BARBECUE RESTAURANTS
INC. Dba DICKEY's BARBEQUE PIT, INC., a Texas corporation; DICKEY'S
CAPITAL GROUP, INC., a Delaware Corporation, and DOES 1-50, Case
No. 3:20-cv-02189-L-MDD (S.D. Cal., Nov. 9, 2020) is a class action
complaint brought by the Plaintiffs against the Defendants seeking
actual and statutory damages and declaratory and injunctive relief
based on a data breach in violations of the California Consumer
Privacy Act and the California Unfair Competition Law.
Dickey's is the fastest-growing BBQ chain in the United States and
has experienced substantial growth in recent years, with annual
revenues of nearly $70 million. Because of lax security measures,
it has also experienced a massive data breach that resulted in
theft of millions of credit card numbers and continued for months
on end, says the complaint.
From May 2019 until September of 2020, around three million credit
card numbers were siphoned from over Dickey's locations and listed
for sale on the well-known dark Web marketplace Joker's Stash. This
is not the first cyber attack Dickey's has suffered in recent
years. The Plaintiffs contend that the Defendants have not notified
customers whose credit card numbers and personal identifying
information (PII) were stolen and sold because of the data breach.
As a result, affected consumers have not taken prophylactic action
to protect their identity and financial accounts, and will continue
to suffer ongoing and imminent risk to their personal information
and assets.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Daniel J. Mogin, Esq.
Jennifer M. Oliver, Esq.
Timothy Z. LaComb, Esq.
MOGINRUBIN LLP
600 West Broadway, Suite 3300
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 687-6611
Facsimile: (619) 687-6610
E-mail: dmogin@moginrubin.com
joliver@moginrubin.com
tlacomb@moginrubin.com
- and -
Alexander M. Schack, Esq.
Natasha N. Serino, Esq.
Shannon F. Nocon, Esq.
SCHACK LAW GROUP
16870 West Bernardo Drive, Suite 400
San Diego, CA 92127
Telephone: (858) 485-6535
Facsimile: (858) 485-0608
E-mail: alexschack@schacklawgroup.com
natashaserino@schacklawgroup.com
shannonnocon@schacklawgroup.com
DIGITAL MEDIA: Faces Hooper Suit Over Unsolicited Text Messages
---------------------------------------------------------------
GRAHAM HOOPER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DIGITAL MEDIA SOLUTIONS, LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company, Defendant, Case No.
8:20-cv-02572-JSM-TGW (M.D. Fla., November 3, 2020) brings this
class action complaint against the Defendant for its alleged
violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendant began sending numerous
telemarketing text messages to the Plaintiff's cellular telephone
number ending in 5783 on or about June 11, 2020 in an attempt to
promote its services. The Plaintiff never provide the Defendant
with his express written consent to be contacted to his cellular
telephone number that was registered with the National Do-Not-Call
Registry since September 22, 2018.
The Plaintiff asserts that he have suffered actual harm due to the
Defendant's unsolicited text messages, including invasion of his
privacy, aggravation, annoyance, intrusion on seclusion, trespass,
conversion, as well as inconvenience and disruption to his daily
life. Thus, the Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to halt the
Defendant's illegal conduct, statutory damages on behalf of himself
and other member of the class, and any other available legal or
equitable remedies.
Digital Media Solutions, LLC is a global marketing-tech company.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
Garrett O. Berg, Esq.
SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A.
14 NE 1st Ave., Suite 705
Miami, FL 33132
Tel: (305) 479-2299
E-mail: ashamis@shamisgentile.com
gberg@shamisgentile.com
- and –
Scott Edelsberg, Esq.
Aaron Ahlzadeh, Esq.
EDELSBERG LAW, P.A.
20900 NE 30th Ave., Suite 417
Aventura, FL 33180
Tel: (305) 975-3320
E-mail: scott@edelsberglaw.com
aaron@edelsberglaw.com
E. G. MEINERS: Underpays Pizza Delivery Drivers, Ruehlman Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
RICHARD RUEHLMAN, on behalf of himself and those similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. E. G. MEINERS ENTERPRISES, INC.; EDWARD
MEINERS, III; DOE CORPORATION 1-10; JOHN DOE 1-10, Defendants, Case
No. 1:20-cv-00903-DRC (S.D. Ohio, November 9, 2020) is a class
action against the Defendants' willful failure to compensate the
Plaintiff and similarly-situated individuals with minimum wages and
overtime wages as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act, the
Ohio Constitution, the Ohio Minimum Wage Fairness Act, Ohio's
Prompt Pay Act, and for unjust enrichment.
The Plaintiff worked as a delivery driver at the LaRosa's pizza
store in Seven Hills, Ohio from approximately the end of 2018
through October 2019.
E. G. Meiners Enterprises, Inc. is an operator of LaRosa's pizza
stores in Cincinnati, Ohio. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew R. Biller, Esq.
BILLER & KIMBLE, LLC
4200 Regent Street, Suite 200
Columbus, OH 43219
Telephone: (614) 604-8759
Facsimile: (614) 340-4620
E-mail: abiller@billerkimble.com
- and –
Andrew P. Kimble, Esq.
Philip J. Krzeski, Esq.
Nathan B. Spencer, Esq.
BILLER & KIMBLE, LLC
8044 Montgomery Road, Suite 515
Cincinnati, OH 45236
Telephone: (513) 715-8712
Facsimile: (614) 340-4620
E-mail: akimble@billerkimble.com
pkrzeski@billerkimble.com
nspencer@billerkimble.com
ECOARK HOLDINGS: Abrahms Sues Over Inaccurate Tabulation of Votes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SIMON ABRAHMS, individually and on behalf of all those similarly
situated v. RANDY S. MAY, JOHN P. CAHILL, PETER A. MEHRING, GARY M.
METZGER, STEVEN K. NELSON, and ECOARK HOLDINGS, INC, Case No.
2:20-cv-02060-RFB-BNW (D. Nev., Nov. 9, 2020) is a class action
suit on behalf of the Plaintiff and other Ecoark stockholders
against the Company and its Board in connection with the tabulation
of stockholders' votes on a proposed amendment to Ecoark's articles
of incorporation.
According to the Defendants, at the annual stockholder meeting held
on February 27, 2020, stockholders approved an amendment to the
articles to increase the number of authorized shares of the
Company's common stock by 100,000,000 shares to 200,000,000. In
truth, however, stockholders did not approve the articles proposal,
the Plaintiff contends.
On February 6, 2020, Ecoark filed a Form 14A Definitive Proxy
Statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC),
through which the Board solicited stockholder approval of the
articles proposal. On February 10, 2020, Ecoark filed an amendment
to the Initial Proxy in which the Company corrected an error in the
said proxy. On February 18, 2020, Ecoark filed another amendment to
the Initial Proxy to fix another error (the "Second Revised Proxy",
together with the Initial Proxy and First Revised Proxy, the
"Proxies"). In the Second Revised Proxy, Ecoark disclosed that the
articles proposal needed the "approval of a majority of the total
voting power of Ecoark stock". In other words, because Ecoark had
69,146,161 shares of common stock outstanding, the articles
proposal needed 34,573,081 "For" votes to be approved.
On March 4, 2020, the Company filed a Form 8-K with the SEC in
which it claimed that the articles proposal "was approved," having
purportedly received approximately 42.5 million "For" votes. The
purported results were false, as the Defendants only achieved them
by miscounting the votes, treating approximately 19 million "Broker
Non-Votes" as "For" votes. Had Defendants correctly tabulated the
articles proposal vote -- namely, counted the votes in the manner
they told stockholders they would in the Proxy and treated
uninstructed shares as Broker Non-Votes, which would have had the
effect of votes "Against", the articles proposal would have failed,
says the complaint.
Through this complaint, the Plaintiff brings claims for breach of
fiduciary duty and declaratory relief to void any amendment to the
Company's articles or other consequence of the Company's treatment
of the articles proposal as validly adopted. The Plaintiff further
seeks other relief as may prove necessary to remedy the harm
resulting from Defendants' wrongful tabulation of the vote on the
articles proposal and attendant actions.
The Plaintiff is and has continuously been, an Ecoark stockholder
at all relevant times.
Ecoark Holdings is a diversified holding company engaged in three
primary business segments: Oil and Gas, Financial Services, and
Food Freshness Management solutions. The Individual Defendants are
directors of the company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John P. Aldrich, Esq.
ALDRICH LAW FIRM, LTD.
7866 West Sahara Avenue
Las Vegas, NV 89117
Telephone: (702) 853-5490
Facsimile: (702) 227-1975
E-mail: jaldrich@johnaldrichlawfirm.com
- and -
William J. Fields, Esq.
FIELDS KUPKA & SHUKUROV LLP
1370 Broadway, 5th Floor - No. 5100
New York, NY 10018
Telephone: (212) 231-1500
Facsimile: (646) 851-0076
E-mail: wfields@fksfirm.com
ELECTRONIC ARTS: Player Packs Mislead Gamers, Zajonc Suit Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
JASON ZAJONC, DANYAEL WILLIAMS, and PRANKO LOZANO, on behalf of
themselves, all others similarly situated, and the general public,
Plaintiffs v. ELECTRONIC ARTS INC., Defendant, Case No.
3:20-cv-07871-JCS (N.D. Cal., November 9, 2020) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of the California Consumers
Legal Remedies Act, the California False Advertising Law, the
California Unfair Competition Law, and unjust enrichment.
The case arises from the Defendant's failure to disclose to
purchasers of EA Sports Games such as Ultimate Team gamers in-game
loot boxes called Player Packs, including the Plaintiffs, that it
utilizes one or more artificial intelligence technologies that
adjust game difficulty dynamically, such as Dynamic Difficulty
Adjustment (DDA) and Adaptive Difficulty. At least some of these
technologies use heuristic prediction and intervention to
adaptively change the difficulty of matches, and influence or even
dictate the outcomes, thereby keeping gamers more engaged. The
Defendant uses Difficulty Adjusting Mechanisms because there is a
direct correlation between heightened gamer engagement and in-game
spending.
As a result of the Defendant's omissions, the Plaintiffs and all
others similarly situated purchasers were injured because they were
deprived of the benefit of their bargains since the Defendant's
Difficulty Adjusting Mechanisms dictate, or at least highly
influence the outcome of the match.
Electronic Arts Inc. is an American video game company, with its
principal place of business at 209 Redwood Shores Parkway, Redwood
City, California. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jack Fitzgerald, Esq.
Trevor M. Flynn, Esq.
Melanie Persinger, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICE OF JACK FITZGERALD, PC
Hillcrest Professional Building
3636 4th Ave., Ste. 202
San Diego, CA 92103
Telephone: (619) 692-3840
Facsimile: (619) 353-0404
E-mail: jack@jackfitzgeraldlaw.com
trevor@jackfitzgeraldlaw.com
melanie@jackfitzgeraldlaw.com
- and –
Paul K. Joseph, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICE OF PAUL K. JOSEPH, PC
3150 Cabrillo Bay Ln.
San Diego, CA 92110
Telephone: (619) 767-0356
Facsimile: (619) 331-2943
E-mail: paul@pauljosephlaw.com
EMPOWER FEDERAL: Wellington Files Suit in N.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Empower Federal
Credit Union, et al. The case is styled as Danielle Wellington,
Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v.
Empower Federal Credit Union, et al., Case No. 5:20-cv-01367-DNH-ML
(N.D.N.Y., Nov. 5, 2020).
The nature of suit is stated as Banks and Banking.
Empower Federal Credit Union is a full-service financial
institution that provides savings, loans, and other financial
products to members in Central New York, and in eight counties
throughout New York State.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Sherief Morsy, Esq.
MCCUNE WRIGHT AREVALO LLP
One Gateway Center, Suite 2600
Newark, NJ 07102
Phone: (973) 737-9981
Email: sm@mccunewright.com
EPIC GAMES: Must Face Suit for Luring Kids to Make In-App Buys
--------------------------------------------------------------
A federal judge has brought back a class action Fortnite developer
Epic Games, alleging the Cary-based game developer lures kids into
making impulsive in-app buys with no "get-out" clause.
A California boy learned this hard lesson after opening a Fortnite
account in 2018, the Courthouse News Service reported.
The minor is identified as C.W., and he used Fortnite's virtual
currency "V-bucks" to buy some nonrefundable items he claims he
didn't know at the time were nonrefundable.
His mother Rebecca White filed a class action against Epic Games in
2019 on his behalf, saying the company violates California law by
exploiting children's ignorance about the relationship of in-game
currency to actual money.
C.W.'s amended complaint says that he also used his mother's credit
card.
In January, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers tossed much
of the case. However, she has kept alive one claim that under
California law, C.W. has a right as a minor to deny responsibility
for a contract.
In her latest order, Gonzalez Rogers said she found no reason to
reconsider.
"In sum, instead of simply stating that no notice was given, which
was contradicted by one of the screenshots in in the initial
complaint, plaintiffs now allege in greater detail that the manner
in which defendant made or failed to make representations about
refundability was confusing, inconspicuous, inadequate, and
designed to induce frequent in-App purchases, which it did by
virtue of C.W.'s age, the nature of the Fortnite ecosystem, and the
lack of parental controls," she was quoted as saying.
"Taking plaintiffs' allegations as true, they suffice to state a
claim that defendant made material misrepresentations or omissions
on which C.W. justifiably relied to his own detriment."
MORE LEGAL WOES
This isn't the only legal battle Epic is facing.
In a role reversal, it is waging an antitrust case against Apple
and Google over mandatory fees charged by their respective app
stores.
The same judge in the class-action lawsuit, Gonzalez Rogers,
presided over this case recommending that it be tried by a jury. It
could be heard as soon as July 2021, reported CNET.
The legal war erupted on Aug. 13 when Epic released a new payment
system that skirts giving Apple and Google a 30 percent cut of the
sales.
Epic Games is now offering the "Fornite Mega Drop" -- a permanent
20 percent discount on V-Bucks, the in-game currency used in
"Fortnite." However, it only works if players paid Epic Games
directly rather than using Apple or Google's payment systems.
This broke rules applied by both stores.
Google and Apple subsequently banned "Fortnite" from its app
stores.
Epic is now suing Google and Apple over the ban, while Apple has
filed a countersuit. [GN]
EPSON AMERICA: Website Not Accessible to Blind, Burbon Suit Claims
------------------------------------------------------------------
LUC BURBON AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHER PERSONS SIMILARLY SITUATED v.
EPSON AMERICA, INC., Case No. 1:20-cv-05437-RRM-RLM (E.D.N.Y. Nov.
9, 2020) alleges that Epson failed to design, construct, maintain,
and operate its Website to be fully accessible to and independently
usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired
people.
The Plaintiff contends that the Defendant's denial of full and
equal access to its Website, and therefore denial of its products
and services offered thereby, is a violation of the Plaintiff's
rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Because
Defendant's Website, WWW.EPSON.COM, is not equally accessible to
blind and visually-impaired consumers, it violates the ADA. The
Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
the Defendant's Website will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read Website content using her
computer. The Plaintiff uses the terms "blind" or
"visually-impaired" to refer to all people with visual impairments
who meet the legal definition of blindness in that they have a
visual acuity with correction of less than or equal to 20 x 200.
Some blind people who meet their definition have limited vision.
Others have no vision.
In a September 25, 2018 letter to U.S. House of Representative Ted
Budd, U.S. Department of Justice Assistant Attorney General Stephen
E. Boyd confirmed that public accommodations must make the Websites
they own, operate, or control equally accessible to individuals
with disabilities.
Based on a 2010 U.S. Census Bureau report, approximately 8.1
million people in the United States are visually impaired,
including 2.0 million who are blind, and according to the American
Foundation for the Blind's 2015 report, approximately 400,000
visually impaired persons live in the State of New York.
The Defendant offers the commercial Website, WWW.EPSON.COM, to the
public. The Website offers features which should allow all
consumers to access the goods and services offered by the Defendant
and which Defendant ensures delivery of such goods throughout the
United States including New York State.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bradly G. Marks, Esq.
THE MARKS LAW FIRM, PC
175 Varick St., 3rd Floor
New York, NY 10014
Telephone: (646) 770-3775
Facsimile: (646) 867-2639
E-mail: brad@markslawpc.com
- and -
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Jeffrey@gottlieb.legal
danalgottlieb@aol.com
EXPLORICA CANADA: Faces Class-Action Suit Over Denied Refunds
-------------------------------------------------------------
cbc.ca reports that Grace Dawson was looking forward to making
memories with her friends on what should have been a
once-in-a-lifetime school trip from St. John's to New York City.
But the COVID-19 pandemic had other plans, cancelling hundreds of
trips like Grace's across the country as a result of border
closures and a growing number of cases throughout the United States
which now has the world's largest caseload at over seven million.
"We had a lot of stuff on the itinerary. Some sightseeing, some
Broadway shows," Grace told CBC News.
"Of course I was really sad, but I understand with the pandemic
that we had to cancel."
Her trip totalled about $2,500 -- money she had saved with the
addition of a few dollars happily donated by her mom, who knows the
value of vacation with friends.
"I think they would have had a really good time," said Renee
Dawson, Grace's mother. "Much more than with their mom and dad."
But with trips now cancelled, parents and students alike are
looking for their money back.
Renee Dawson said she knew they would get their money back, after
officially cancelling the trip 51 days ahead of time, but they
received only a portion of the total -- around $600.
"Some of us had insurance, some of us didn't. We were told and we
understood that what wasn't given back to us by Explorica, the
travel company, would be covered by the insurance company," Renee
Dawson said.
Explorica Canada, based in Toronto, provides a trip-booking service
for teachers and schools to plan educational vacations for groups
of students to cities around the globe.
On its website, the company said it has fulfilled its refund
obligations to families, and the rest remains on the shoulders of
the insurance companies.
Legal Action
Thousands of people across the country are also looking for their
money back.
Travis Payne, a lawyer with Curtis Dawe Lawyers, which represents
some of the complainants, told CBC News he sent a letter to
Explorica Canada and its insurers, Arch Insurance Canada and Old
Republic Insurance Company of Canada, giving them a week to respond
to the missing refunds and avoid litigation.
Payne sent the letter on behalf of the members of the Facebook
group Explorica Canada-Trying to get our Refunds.
The membership of the group has doubled in size, to 960 members,
since CBC News first reported unreturned money related to cancelled
Explorica trips last week.
Payne's deadline passed, and he said he's moving forward with a
national class-action lawsuit. He said there is more than $500,000
in estimated refunds for students from seven schools in
Newfoundland and Labrador, with more than 125 schools involved
across Canada.
"We're still running the numbers, but [it's] easily in the
thousands of people without money," said Payne, who estimated $8
million to $12 million is owed in refunds across the country. [GN]
FLORIDA POWER: Judge Approves Water Main Break Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Weinsier, writing for Local10.com, reports that the water main
break that caused a big mess for businesses in several parts of
Broward County last year is now a class-action lawsuit against
Florida Power and Light.
Attorney Adam Moskowitz is seeking hundreds of millions of dollars
in damages while representing all 9,300 Broward businesses that
suffered during the July 17, 2019 water main break.
Broward Circuit Judge William Haury granted Moskowitz's motion for
class certification in the case on Sept. 18. Moskowitz was
preparing for an Oct. 2 hearing to seek punitive damages.
The long list of businesses affected includes all of the 120 stores
at the Galleria Mall and the Riverside Hotel on Las Olas. [GN]
GARRETT MOTION: Rosen Law Reminds of Nov. 24 Deadline
-----------------------------------------------------
Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds
purchasers of the securities of Garrett Motion Inc. (: GTX) (
GTXMQ) between October 1, 2018 and September 18, 2020, inclusive
(the "Class Period"), of the important November 24, 2020 lead
plaintiff deadline in securities class action. The lawsuit seeks to
recover damages for Garrett Motion investors under the federal
securities laws.
To join the Garrett Motion class action, go to
http://www.rosenlegal.com/cases-register-1950.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.
According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period
made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose
that: (1) due to its agreement to indemnify and reimburse Honeywell
for certain asbestos-related liability, Garrett was saddled with an
unsustainable level of debt; (2) Garrett had a highly leveraged
capital structure that posed significant challenges to its overall
strategic and financial flexibility; (3) Garrett's ability to gain
or hold market share was impaired; (4) Garrett was reasonably
likely to seek bankruptcy protection; and (5) as a result of the
foregoing, defendants' positive statements about Garrett's
business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading
and/or lacked a reasonable basis. When the true details entered the
market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.
A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve
as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than November
24, 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-1950.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.
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.
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 achieved the largest
ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company.
Rosen Law Firm's attorneys are ranked and recognized by numerous
independent and respected sources. Rosen Law Firm has secured
hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. Attorney
Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. [GN]
GARRETT MOTION: Rosen Law Reminds of Nov. 24 Motion Deadline
------------------------------------------------------------
Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds
purchasers of the securities of Garrett Motion Inc. (NYSE: GTX)
(OTC: GTXMQ) between October 1, 2018 and September 18, 2020,
inclusive (the "Class Period"), of the important November 24, 2020
lead plaintiff deadline in securities class action. The lawsuit
seeks to recover damages for Garrett Motion investors under the
federal securities laws.
To join the Garrett Motion class action, go to
http://www.rosenlegal.com/cases-register-1950.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.
According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period
made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose
that: (1) due to its agreement to indemnify and reimburse Honeywell
for certain asbestos-related liability, Garrett was saddled with an
unsustainable level of debt; (2) Garrett had a highly leveraged
capital structure that posed significant challenges to its overall
strategic and financial flexibility; (3) Garrett's ability to gain
or hold market share was impaired; (4) Garrett was reasonably
likely to seek bankruptcy protection; and (5) as a result of the
foregoing, defendants' positive statements about Garrett's
business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading
and/or lacked a reasonable basis. When the true details entered the
market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.
A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve
as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than November
24, 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-1950.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.
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.
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 achieved the largest
ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company.
Rosen Law Firm's attorneys are ranked and recognized by numerous
independent and respected sources. Rosen Law Firm has secured
hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. Attorney
Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
[GN]
GOHEALTH INC: Klein Law Reminds of Nov. 20 Lead Plaintiff Deadline
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Klein Law Firm announces that a class action complaint has been
filed on behalf of shareholders of GoHealth, Inc. There is no cost
to participate in the suit. If you suffered a loss, you have until
the lead plaintiff deadline to request that the court appoint you
as lead plaintiff.
GoHealth, Inc. (NASDAQ:GOCO)
The GoHealth lawsuit is on behalf of all purchasers of GoHealth
Class A common stock pursuant and/or traceable to the registration
statement issued in connection with GoHealth's July 2020 initial
public offering.
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: November 20, 2020
The GOCO lawsuit alleges that GoHealth, Inc. made materially false
and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i)
the Medicare insurance industry was undergoing a period of elevated
churn, which had begun in the first half of 2020; (ii) GoHealth
suffered from a higher risk of customer churn as a result of its
unique business model and limited carrier base; (iii) GoHealth
suffered from degradations in customer persistency and retention as
a result of elevated industry churn, vulnerabilities that arose
from the Company's concentrated carrier business model, and
GoHealth's efforts to expand into new geographies, develop new
carrier partnerships and worsening product mix; (iv) GoHealth had
entered into materially less favorable revenue sharing arrangements
with its external sales agents; and (v) these adverse financial and
operational trends were internally projected by GoHealth to
continue and worsen following the initial public offering.
Learn about your recoverable losses in GOCO:
http://www.kleinstocklaw.com/pslra-1/gohealth-inc-loss-submission-form?id=10243&from=1
Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you
serve as a lead plaintiff. If you suffered a loss during the class
period and wish to obtain additional information, please contact J.
Klein, Esq. by telephone at 212-616-4899 or visit the webpages
provided.
J. Klein, Esq. represents investors and participates in securities
litigations involving financial fraud throughout the nation.
Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar
outcomes. [GN]
GOHEALTH INC: Robbins Geller Files Class Action Over 2020 IPO
-------------------------------------------------------------
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP
(https://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases-gohealth-inc-class-action-lawsuit.html)
on Sept. 21 announced that it filed a class action seeking to
represent purchasers of GoHealth, Inc. (NASDAQ:GOCO) Class A common
stock pursuant and/or traceable to the registration statement
issued in connection with GoHealth's July 2020 initial public
offering (the "IPO"). This action was filed in the Northern
District of Illinois and is captioned Hudson v. GoHealth, Inc., No.
20-cv-05593.
The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any
investor who purchased GoHealth Class A common stock pursuant
and/or traceable to the registration statement issued in connection
with GoHealth's IPO to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the
GoHealth class action lawsuit. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of
all other class members in directing the GoHealth class action
lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to
litigate the GoHealth class action lawsuit. An investor's ability
to share in any potential future recovery of the GoHealth class
action lawsuit is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff. If
you wish to serve as lead plaintiff in the GoHealth class action
lawsuit, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from
September 21, 2020. If you wish to discuss the GoHealth 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-gohealth-inc-class-action-lawsuit.html.
The GoHealth class action lawsuit charges GoHealth, certain of its
officers and directors, the private equity sponsor of the IPO and
its affiliates, and the underwriters of the IPO with violations of
the Securities Act of 1933. GoHealth provides an end-to-end health
insurance marketplace that purportedly specializes in matching
consumers with Medicare Advantage plans.
On June 19, 2020, GoHealth filed with the SEC a registration
statement for the IPO on Form S-1 (the "Registration Statement"),
which was used to sell to the investing public 43.5 million shares
of GoHealth Class A common stock at $21 per share, for total gross
proceeds of $913.5 million.
The complaint alleges that the Registration Statement was
negligently prepared and, as a result, contained untrue statements
of material fact, omitted material facts necessary to make the
statements contained therein not misleading, and failed to make
necessary disclosures required under the rules and regulations
governing its preparation. Specifically, the Registration Statement
failed to disclose that at the time of the IPO: (i) the Medicare
insurance industry was undergoing a period of elevated churn, which
had begun in the first half of 2020; (ii) GoHealth suffered from a
higher risk of customer churn as a result of its unique business
model and limited carrier base; (iii) GoHealth suffered from
degradations in customer persistency and retention as a result of
elevated industry churn, vulnerabilities that arose from the
Company's concentrated carrier business model, and GoHealth's
efforts to expand into new geographies, develop new carrier
partnerships and worsening product mix; (iv) GoHealth had entered
into materially less favorable revenue sharing arrangements with
its external sales agents; and (v) these adverse financial and
operational trends were internally projected by GoHealth to
continue and worsen following the IPO.
Since the IPO, the price of GoHealth Class A common stock has
suffered significant price declines. By September 15, 2020,
GoHealth Class A common stock closed at just $12.53 per share –
over 40% below the $21 per share price investors paid for the stock
in the IPO less than two months previously.
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. Please visit http://www.rgrdlaw.comfor more
information.
Contacts:
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP
Brian E. Cochran, 800-449-4900
bcochran@rgrdlaw.com [GN]
HAWAII: Oahu Correctional Center Inmates File COVID-related Action
------------------------------------------------------------------
Rick Daysog, writing for HawaiiNewsNow, reports that several
inmates and an adult correctional officer at the Oahu Community
Correctional Center have filed a class-action lawsuit, alleging
state that prison officials failed to protect staffers there and
housed sick inmates with healthy ones.
A total of 400 people -- 310 inmates and 90 staffers -- were
infected at the prison, making it the largest cluster in the
state.
"This was not just negligence, it was not indifference. It was in
our view malicious that they did not take proper steps to protect
people who cannot protect themselves," said attorney Eric Seitz,
who filed the lawsuit.
Because the lawsuit seeks class-action status, anyone who was
infected at the prison is potentially eligible to join the suit
Among the allegations: One inmates who got sick said he was
required to work in a kitchen with a prison staffer who was
infected with COVID.
Another prisoner said that he got infected after he was placed in
the same room for two days with another inmate, who was feverish
and later tested positive.
The ACO alleged that she was assigned to one of the prison's
annexes where there were 65 positive cases.
The Department of Public Safety had no immediate comment on the
suit but has said that it has provided staff with proper equipment,
including face shields, mask and gloves.
It's also now conducting mass testing at all of its facilities. It
said that 90 percent of the inmates and staffers infected at OCCC
have since recovered. [GN]
HYUNDAI MOTORS: Barnett Sues Over Vehicles' Lack of Safety Systems
------------------------------------------------------------------
HOWARD BARNETT, On Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly
Situated v. HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA, Case No. 8:20-cv-02162 (C.D.
Cal., Nov. 9, 2020) is a class action complaint on behalf of the
Plaintiff and a proposed nationwide class for the benefit and
protection of purchasers and lessees of the Defendant's model year
2020 Ioniq vehicles with SE, SEL, or Limited trims.
According to the complaint, the Defendant deceptively markets and
advertises the Ioniq as having Blind Spot and Rear Cross Traffic
Collision-Avoidance Assist systems when, in fact, it does not. This
causes a safety issue as customers are led to believe that their
vehicles have safety features that will assist them with avoiding
accidents, and may rely on those non-existent features, to their
detriment.
The Plaintiff brings this action to stop the Defendant's false and
misleading advertising relating to the sale and lease of the Ioniqs
and to obtain redress for those who have purchased or leased Ioniqs
across the United States. The Plaintiff alleges violations of the
California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, the Unfair Competition
Law, and the False Advertising Law.
Hyundai Motor America manufactures and retails automobiles.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kolin Tang, Esq.
James C. Shah, Esq.
SHEPHERD, FINKELMAN, MILLER
& SHAH, LLP
1401 Dove Street, Suite 510
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Telephone: (323) 510-4060
Facsimile: (866) 300-7367
E-mail: ktang@sfmslaw.com
jshah@sfmslaw.com
- and -
Robert W. Murphy, Esq.
MURPHY LAW FIRM
1212 SE 2 nd Ave.
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33316
Telephone (954) 763-8660
Facsimile: (854) 763-8607
E-mail: rwmurphy@lawfirmmurphy.com
- and -
David H. Abrams, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICE OF DAVID H.
ABRAMS
P.O. Box 568587
Orlando, FL 32856
Telephone (407) 601-3635
E-mail: david@dhabramslaw.com
IMMANUEL INVESTMENTS: Higgs Sues Over Servers' Unpaid Minimum Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------------
KIMBERLY HIGGS, on behalf of herself and those similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. IMMANUEL INVESTMENTS INC. d/b/a MRS. MAC'S KITCHEN,
Defendant, Case No. 4:20-cv-10125-XXXX (S.D. Fla., November 4,
2020) is a class and collective action complaint brought against
the Defendant for its alleged violation of the Fair Labor Standards
Act by failing to pay minimum wages to its servers.
The Plaintiff, who was employed by the Defendant as a server from
approximately February 2018 through November 2018 at the
Defendant's Key Largo, Florida location, alleges that the Defendant
paid him and other similarly situated servers an hourly wage less
than the federal minimum wage.
Moreover, the Plaintiff and other similarly situated servers earned
tips as servers. The Defendant, however, required them to share
their tips with other non-tipped employees, and paid them pursuant
to a "tip credit" method where they were paid minimum wage minus
the tip credit.
The complaint asserts that the Defendant is not entitled to utilize
the tip credit provision to credit the Plaintiff's and other
similarly situated servers' tips towards a portion of their minimum
wage obligations. Thus, the Plaintiff and other similarly situated
servers is entitled to receive repayment for the tip credit for
each hour worked that was improperly deducted from their wages.
Immanuel Investments Inc. d/b/a Mrs. Mac's Kitchen operates a
restaurant. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Carlos V. Leach, Esq.
THE LEACH FIRM, P.A.
1950 Lee Rd., Suite 213
Winter Park, FL 32789
Tel: (407) 574-4999
Fax: (833) 423-5864
E-mail: cleach@theleachfirm.com
npacheco@theleachfirm.com
JUNK IT: Faces Santos Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case, KELVIN DE LOS SANTOS, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. JUNK IT TODAY NYC CORP.,
and ROBERTO WONG, as an individual, Defendants, Case No.
1:20-cv-05351 (E.D.N.Y., November 4, 2020) arises from the
Defendants' alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and
the New York Labor Law.
According to the complaint, the Plaintiff worked approximately 45
or more hours per week throughout his employment with the
Defendants. However, the Defendants did not pay him overtime at one
and one-half times his regular rate of pay for hours he worked over
40. Additionally, the Defendants failed to post notices of the
minimum wage and overtime wage requirements, and failed to keep
accurate payroll records as required by the FLSA and NYLL.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants from in or around
January 2019 until in or around July 2020 to perform duties such as
demolition work and cleaning and performing other miscellaneous
duties.
Junk It Today NYC Corp. is a company that provides demolition work
and cleaning services, owned and operated by Roberto Wong. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Roman Avshalumov, Esq.
HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, PC
Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601
Kew Gardens, NY 11415
Tel: (718) 263-9591
Fax: (718) 263-9598
JUUL: Fights E-Cigarette Deceptive Ads Multidistrict Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Nicholas Iovino, writing for Courthouse News Service, reported that
lawyers for nicotine giants Juul and Altria pulled out all the
stops on Sept. 21 to defeat a multidistrict class action claiming
they conspired to get young people hooked on addictive e-cigarettes
with deceptive ads and marketing campaigns.
Arguing in a virtual courtroom on Sept. 21, Juul attorney Gregory
Stone of Munger Tolles & Olson said his client can't be held liable
for violating state consumer protection laws because that would
interfere with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's exclusive
power to regulate nicotine products.
"The claim that you should apply state laws will be totally
inconsistent with the FDA's unitary and uniform review," Stone told
U.S. District Judge William Orrick III during a five-hour hearing.
In 2016, the FDA classified e-cigarettes as tobacco products
subject to its jurisdiction. After initially giving companies until
2018 to apply for review of e-cigarette products, the FDA in 2017
extended that deadline to Aug. 8, 2022. A federal judge in Maryland
moved that deadline up to May 2020 after finding the FDA was
violating the law by letting e-cigarettes enter the market without
prior review. The judge set a one-year deadline for the FDA to
review the applications.
Plaintiffs say Juul failed to warn consumers that its e-cigarette
products were highly addictive and that the company falsely claimed
in ads and labels that its prefilled pods contained 5% nicotine,
the same amount in a pack of cigarettes, when the pods actually
contained much higher levels.
Stone argued that Juul and its executives can't be sued for those
alleged violations because the FDA decided not to impose more
stringent requirements on Juul's advertising and labeling.
"The FDA considered broader health warnings," Stone said. "If FDA
determines the 5% nicotine is an accurate statement, then the
claims that it should say 6.2% instead of 5% are preempted."
Plaintiffs also claim Juul gave consumers a false impression that
vape pens could help them break their nicotine addictions and quit
smoking, even though Juul pods are "at least as, if not more,
addictive than combustible cigarettes."
Stone said the FDA recognized vape pens could help cigarette
smokers switch to a "less harmful" product that does not contain
toxic byproducts such as tar and carbon monoxide.
"That's exactly what the FDA was trying to do in making this an
alternative," Stone said.
Juul's vaping pods don't contain tar, but e-cigarettes do contain
substances that have been linked to a higher risk of cancer, and
experts say more study is needed to determine their true impact on
human health.
Arguing for the plaintiffs, attorney Andrew Kaufman of Lief
Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein insisted state law claims against Juul
and its co-defendants are not preempted because the Tobacco Control
Act contains a specific carveout for product liability claims. He
urged Judge Orrick to reject Juul's argument that Congress never
intended to make a carveout for state law claims because that would
contradict the purpose of the statute — to federally regulate
tobacco products.
"It was perfectly reasonable for Congress to create a backstop for
compensation for people injured by tobacco products," Kaufman
said.
The plaintiffs also claim that Juul, its executives and board
members conspired with Juul's largest investor Altria, owner of
Philip Morris USA, to deceptively target young people and create a
new generation of nicotine addicts. They say those defendants
worked together to commit mail and wire fraud in violation of the
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.
Defense lawyers say statements Juul and Altria made to the FDA or
Congress can't be used against them as evidence of fraud because
lobbying speech is protected by the First Amendment under the
Noerr-Pennington Doctrine established by two Supreme Court
decisions.
Plaintiffs say a "sham exception" applies to that rule. They cite
Altria's October 2018 letter to the FDA saying it had "serious
concerns" about youth access to vaping products. In that letter,
Altria vowed to take its pod-based e-cigarette products off the
market.
But Altria failed to mention at the time that it was finalizing a
deal to invest $12 billion in Juul, making it the company's largest
investor.
"To say we're going to take our pod-based products off the market
without disclosing the investment was misleading," plaintiffs'
attorney Sabita Soneji of Tycko & Zavareei said.
Before the five-hour virtual hearing on Sept. 21, Judge Orrick
issued a tentative ruling stating he was inclined to mostly deny
the nicotine giants' motions to dismiss consumer class action
claims and dozens of other lawsuits brought by government entities,
including the city of Denver and multiple school districts.
Orrick said he was likely to reject arguments that state laws in
Arizona, California, Florida, Pennsylvania and New York bar local
governments from suing to recover the cost of public services
provided to residents. The judge wrote that a public nuisance
exception applies to those claims.
"It is foreseeable that school districts would bear the costs of
combating a youth e-cigarette crisis allegedly created by [Juul]'s
conduct in designing a product that appealed to young users and
marketing it directly to youth," Orrick wrote in his tentative
ruling. [GN]
JUUL: Lexington School District 1 Joins E-Cigarette Class Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Fitts, writing for The Post and Courier, reports that a
Midlands school district has become the first in South Carolina to
join a class-action lawsuit against vape manufacturer Juul,
alleging that the district has suffered added disruptions to
discipline from e-cigarettes.
Lexington School District 1, which serves much of the county's
geographic area, filed suit on Oct. 2, joining districts from
around the country, along with municipalities and some individuals
that are suing Juul. [GN]
KIA: Exploding Sunroof Lawsuit Fails Class Action Certification
---------------------------------------------------------------
A Kia exploding sunroof lawsuit has failed class action
certification after a Kia owner claimed the sunroofs contained
defects that caused the glass to shatter.
The plaintiff who sued says he was driving his 2012 Kia Optima on a
highway in 2015 when he suddenly heard a loud noise as his
panoramic sunroof exploded and sent glass into his Kia.
The glass allegedly fell onto him and his wife, causing small cuts
and glass splinters on their arms and legs.
According to the plaintiff, the panoramic sunroofs have common
design defects that cause the sunroofs to shatter, making these
vehicles too dangerous to drive.
2011-2015 Kia Sorento
2011-2015 Kia Sportage
2011-2015 Kia Optima (including hybrid)
2014-2015 Kia Cadenza
The proposed class action was filed on behalf of all persons and
entities who purchased or leased an affected Kia vehicle in Ohio.
Kia uses tempered glass for its panoramic sunoofs which Kia says,
"is the material of choice for about 90% of sunroofs
industry-wide."
Tempered glass is installed because of its strength and reduced
risk of injuries due to how the glass is designed to fragment
immediately into small pieces which are less likely to cause
serious injuries.
Kia alleges it has performed at least six investigations into the
sunroofs and couldn't find any defects. In addition, the judge says
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has been
investigating Kia Sorento sunroofs for six years and has still not
announced a finding of defects.
Judge Matthew W. McFarland says while it may appear that Kia's
spontaneously shattering sunroofs are a problem, "the question
presented to the Court is much narrower: whether a class-action
lawsuit is the most judicially efficient avenue to resolving that
problem?"
The plaintiff insists the lawsuit should be certified as a class
action because "classwide proof can speak to the main issues in
this case: that there's a defect, that it's dangerous, and that Kia
continued to manufacture and sell the vehicles while concealing the
danger from drivers."
According to the judge, the plaintiff's negligent design claim
requires proof that "Kia breached its duty to design against
reasonably foreseeable hazards." Additionally, the implied warranty
claim requires proof that "Kia manufactured and sold Class Vehicles
with a defect."
"The flaw in Kia's design is thus well-understood." - Kia lawsuit
plaintiff
But the judge ruled, "it is not well-understood."
"If it was, NHTSA's six-year investigation would have concluded by
now and Kondash [plaintiff] would not have needed two experts to
testify as to what, exactly, the 'design defect' is and how it is
common amongst all 22 model-year Class Vehicles." - Judge
McFarland
The judge found serious problems with the testimony of an expert
for the plaintiff.
"[F]or some time," the Sixth Circuit has recognized that expert
testimony prepared solely for purposes of litigation, as opposed to
testimony flowing naturally from an expert's line of scientific
research or technical work, should be viewed with some caution."
According to the judge, the expert testimony against Kia was not
only "prepared solely for purposes of litigation, but there is also
evidence that some of it may have been prepared solely by the
litigants."
The plaintiff's expert claims the Kia sunroof failure rate is
2.14%, but the judge ruled the rate isn't reliable, which cancels
out the argument there is a class-wide sunroof defect.
Kia argues the failure rate does not actually calculate "failures"
because the expert counts replacement parts sold, not incidents.
The judge found the expert report shows that multiple replacement
parts may be used in any one sunroof repair, especially since the
vehicles "each have either two or three tempered glass panels." Yet
under the calculation offered by the expert, every replaced pane of
glass would count as a separate "failure."
This means if Kia had to order two or three glass panels for only
one incident in one vehicle, the expert would count each panel that
was ordered, which doubles or triples the number of sunroof
failures.
The judge found the expert also counts every time a replacement
part was sold regardless of the reasons why, even though parts
could be ordered for many reasons (car crash, leaking, wind or the
mechanism that opens the sunroof).
This caused the judge to rule the expert opinion has no factual
basis and is purely speculative.
"In sum, without the expert testimony of Hannemann and Read [the
experts], there is no evidence of a class-wide defect. And without
evidence of a class-wide defect, there is nothing that ties the
class together in order to satisfy predominance." - Judge
McFarland
The Kia exploding sunroof lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of Ohio: Kondash, et al., Kia
Motors America, Inc., et al.
The plaintiff is represented by the Gibbs Law Group, Berger
Montague, Merriman Legal, and Greg Coleman Law. [GN]
KONA MOUNTAIN: Blind Users Can't Access Website, Cruz Suit Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SHAEL CRUZ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. KONA MOUNTAIN COFFEE, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:20-cv-09467 (S.D.N.Y., November 11, 2020) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, the New York
State Civil Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its Website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired persons. The Defendant's Website,
www.konamountaincoffee.com, contains access barriers which hinder
the Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online
goods, content, and services offered to the general public through
the Website. The access barriers encountered by blind users
include, but not limited to: (1) lack of alternative text
(alt-text), or a text equivalent, which prevents screen readers
from accurately vocalizing a description of the graphics; (2) empty
links that contain no text causing the function or purpose of the
link to not be presented to the user; (3) redundant links where
adjacent links go to the same Uniform Resource Locator (URL)
address, which results in additional navigation and repetition for
keyboard and screen-reader users; and (4) linked images missing
alt-text, which causes problems if an image within a link contains
no text and that image does not provide alt-text.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that its Website will become and remain accessible to
blind and visually-impaired individuals.
Kona Mountain Coffee, LLC is a coffee manufacturing company based
in Kailua-Kona, Hawaii. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq.
COHEN & MIZRAHI LLP
300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Fl.
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Telephone: (929) 575-4175
Facsimile: (929) 575-4195
E-mail: Joseph@cml.legal
LOOP INDUSTRIES: Bernstein Liebhard Reminds of Dec. 14 Bid Deadline
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard, a nationally acclaimed investor rights law
firm, reminds investors of the deadline to file a lead plaintiff
motion in a securities class action that has been filed on behalf
of investors that purchased or acquired the securities of Loop
Industries ("Loop" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: LOOP) between
September 24, 2018 and October 12, 2020 (the "Class Period"). The
lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York alleges violations of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934.
If you purchased Loop securities, and/or would like to discuss your
legal rights and options please visit Loop 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 false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose
that:(1) that Loop scientists were encouraged to misrepresent the
results of Loop's purportedly proprietary process; (2) that Loop
did not have the technology to break PET down to its base chemicals
at a recovery rate of 100%; (3) that, as a result, the Company was
unlikely to realize the purported benefits of Loop's announced
partnerships with Indorama and Thyssenkrupp; and (4) 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.
On October 13, 2020, Hindenburg Research published a report
alleging, among other things, that "Loop's scientists, under
pressure from CEO Daniel Solomita, were tacitly encouraged to lie
about the results of the company's process internally." The report
also stated that "Loop's previous claims of breaking PET down to
its base chemicals at a recovery rate of 100% were 'technically and
industrially impossible,'" according to a former employee.
Moreover, the report alleged that "Executives from a division of
key partner Thyssenkrupp, who Loop entered into a 'global alliance
agreement' with in December 2018, told us their partnership is on
'indefinite' hold and that Loop 'underestimated' both costs and
complexities of its process."
On this news, the Company's share price fell $3.78, or over 32%, to
close at $7.83 per share on October 13, 2020, thereby damaging
investors.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no
later than December 14, 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 Loop securities, and/or would like to discuss your
legal rights and options please visit
https://www.bernlieb.com/cases/loopindustriesinc-loop-shareholder-class-action-lawsuit-stock-fraud-324/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.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING. (c) 2020 Bernstein Liebhard LLP. The law firm
responsible for this advertisement is Bernstein Liebhard LLP, 10
East 40th Street, New York, New York 10016, (212) 779-1414. The
lawyer responsible for this advertisement in the State of
Connecticut is Michael S. Bigin. Prior results do not guarantee or
predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter. [GN]
LOOP INDUSTRIES: Scott+Scott Alerts of Class Action Filing
----------------------------------------------------------
Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP, an international shareholder and
consumer rights litigation firm, announces the filing of a class
action lawsuit against Loop Industries, Inc. ("Loop" or the
"Company") (NASDAQ: LOOP) and certain of its officers and
directors, alleging violations of federal securities laws. If you
purchased Loop securities between September 24, 2018 and October
12, 2020, inclusive, and have suffered losses, you are encouraged
to contact attorney Jonathan Zimmerman at (888) 398-9312 or
jzimmerman@scott-scott.com for additional information about your
rights.
The lawsuit alleges that Loop and the other named defendants issued
materially false and/or misleading information, and failed to
disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business,
operations, and prospects. Specifically, according to the
complaint: (1) Loop scientists were encouraged to misrepresent the
results of Loop's purportedly proprietary process for recycling
plastics; (2) Loop did not have the technology to break PET
plastics down to its base chemicals at a recovery rate of 100%; and
(3) as a result, the Company was unlikely to realize the purported
benefits of Loop's announced partnerships with Indorama and
Thyssenkrupp.
On October 13, 2020, Hindenburg Research ("Hindenburg") published a
report describing Loop's technology for recycling plastics as being
"smoke and mirrors." Having purportedly spoken with multiple former
employees, company partners, experts, and competitors during its
6-month investigation, Hindenburg stated that Loop's scientists had
been "tacitly encouraged to lie about the results of the
[C]ompany's process," that "Loop's previous claims of breaking PET
down to its base chemicals at a recovery rate of 100% were
'technically and industrially impossible," and that Loop's
partnership with Thyssenkrupp was on an "indefinite hold."
On this news, Loop's stock price fell sharply from $11.61 per share
on October 12, 2020 to close at $7.83 per share on October 13,
2020, representing a decline of 32.56%.
What You Can Do
If you purchased or otherwise own Loop stock, or if you have
questions about this notice or your legal rights, you are
encouraged to contact attorney Jonathan Zimmerman at (888)
398-9312, or at jzimmerman@scott-scott.com, or visit the Loop page
on our website at
https://scott-scott.com/case/loop-industries-inc/. The lead
plaintiff deadline is December 14, 2020.
About Scott+Scott Attorneys
Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP 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.
Jonathan Zimmerman
Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP
230 Park Ave, 17th Fl.
New York, NY 10169
Tel No: (888) 398-9312
E-mail: jzimmerman@scott-scott.com [GN]
LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: Savidis Bid for Class Certification Pending
---------------------------------------------------------------
Lumber Liquidators Holdings, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 2,
2020, for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2020, that the
Savidis Plaintiffs seek certification of a class action covering
the prior four-year period prior to the filing of the complaint to
the date of class certification (the "California Employee Class"),
as well as a subclass of class members who separated their
employment within three years of the filing of the suit to the date
of class certification (the "Waiting Time Subclass").
On April 9, 2020, Lumber Liquidators was served with a lawsuit
filed by Tanya Savidis, on behalf of herself and all others
similarly situated.
Ms. Savidis filed a purported class action lawsuit in the Superior
Court of California, County of Alameda on March 6, 2020, on behalf
of all current and former Lumber Liquidators employees employed as
non-exempt employees.
The complaint alleges violation of the California Labor Code
including, among other items, failure to pay minimum wages and
overtime wages, failure to provide meal periods, failure to permit
rest breaks, failure to reimburse business expenses, failure to
provide accurate wage statements, failure to pay all wages due upon
separation within the required time, and engaging in unfair
business practices (the "Savidis matter").
On or about May 22, 2020, the Savidis Plaintiffs provided notice to
the California Department of Industrial Relations requesting they
be permitted to seek penalties under the California Private
Attorney General Act for the same substantive alleged violations
asserted in the Complaint.
The Savidis Plaintiffs seek certification of a class action
covering the prior four-year period prior to the filing of the
complaint to the date of class certification (the "California
Employee Class"), as well as a subclass of class members who
separated their employment within three years of the filing of the
suit to the date of class certification (the "Waiting Time
Subclass").
The Savidis Plaintiffs did not quantify any alleged damages but, in
addition to attorneys' fees and costs, seek statutory penalties,
unspecified amounts for unpaid wages, benefits, and penalties,
interest, and other damages.
The Company disputes the Savidis Putative Class Employees’ claims
and intends to defend the matter vigorously.
Lumber Liquidators said, "Given the uncertainty of litigation, the
preliminary stage of the case and the legal standards that must be
met for, among other things, class certification and success on the
merits, the Company cannot estimate the reasonably possible loss or
range of loss, if any, that may result from this action and
therefore no accrual has been made related to this. Any such losses
could, potentially, have a material adverse effect, individually or
collectively, on the Company's results of operations, financial
condition and liquidity."
Lumber Liquidators Holdings, Inc., together with its subsidiaries,
operates as a multi-channel specialty retailer of hard-surface
flooring, and hard-surface flooring enhancements and accessories.
The company also offers its products through its Website, catalogs,
and call center. Lumber Liquidators Holdings, Inc. was founded in
1994 and is headquartered in Toano, Virginia.
LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: Visnack Putative Class Suit Ongoing
-------------------------------------------------------
Lumber Liquidators Holdings, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 2,
2020, for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2020, that the
company continues to defend a purported class action lawsuit,
initiated by Michael Visnack.
On June 29, 2020, Michael Visnack, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated (collectively, the "Visnack Plaintiffs")
filed a purported class action lawsuit in the Superior Court of
California, County of San Diego, on behalf of all current and
former store managers, and others similarly situated.
The Complaint alleges violation of the California Labor Code
including, among other items, failure to pay wages and overtime,
wage statement violations, meal and rest break violations, unpaid
reimbursements and waiting time, and engaging in unfair business
practices (the "Visnack matter").
The Visnack Plaintiffs seek certification of a class period
beginning September 20, 2019, through the date of Notice of Class
Certification, if granted.
The Visnack Plaintiffs did not quantify any alleged damages but, in
addition to attorneys' fees and costs, they seek unspecified
amounts for each of the causes of action such as unpaid wages and
overtime wages, failure to provide meal periods and rest breaks,
payroll record and wage statement violations, failure to reimburse
expenses and waiting time, liquidated and/or punitive damages,
declaratory relief, restitution, statutory penalties, injunctive
relief and other damages.
The Company is evaluating the Visnack Putative Class Employees'
claims and intends to defend itself vigorously in this matter.
Lumber Liquidators said, "Given the uncertainty of litigation, the
preliminary stage of the case and the legal standards that must be
met for, among other things, class certification and success on the
merits, the Company cannot estimate the reasonably possible loss or
range of loss, if any, that may result from this action and
therefore no accrual has been made related to this. Any such losses
could, potentially, have a material adverse effect, individually or
collectively, on the Company's results of operations, financial
condition and liquidity."
No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report.
Lumber Liquidators Holdings, Inc., together with its subsidiaries,
operates as a multi-channel specialty retailer of hard-surface
flooring, and hard-surface flooring enhancements and accessories.
The company also offers its products through its Website, catalogs,
and call center. Lumber Liquidators Holdings, Inc. was founded in
1994 and is headquartered in Toano, Virginia.
MEDICUS HEALTHCARE: Moreau FLSA Suit Moved to D. New Hampshire
--------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled LEAH MOREAU, individually and for others similarly
situated v. MEDICUS HEALTHCARE SOLUTIONS, LLC and MEDICUS
HOSPITALIST SERVICES, LLC, Case No. 4:20-cv-02893, was transferred
from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas to
the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire on
November 10, 2020.
The Clerk Court for the District of New Hampshire assigned Case No.
1:20-cv-01107 to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendants' alleged violations of the Fair
Labor Standards Act by failing to compensate the Plaintiff and all
others similarly situated nurse practitioners overtime pay for all
hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek.
Medicus Healthcare Solutions, LLC is a company that provides
recruitment and management services based in Windham, New
Hampshire.
Medicus Hospitalist Services, LLC is a provider of staffing
solutions for the medical industry, headquartered in Windham, New
Hampshire. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
Richard M. Schreiber, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP, LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 352-1100
Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
adunlap@mybackwages.com
rschreiber@mybackwages.com
- and –
Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
BRUCKNER BURCH, P.L.L.C.
8 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1500
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 877-8788
Facsimile: (713) 877-8065
E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com
MESOBLAST LIMITED: Robbins Geller Alerts of Class Action Filing
---------------------------------------------------------------
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces that a class action
lawsuit has been filed in the Southern District of New York on
behalf of purchasers or acquirers of Mesoblast Limited
(NASDAQ:MESO) securities between April 16, 2019 and October 1,
2020, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The case is captioned Kristal
v. Mesoblast Limited, No. 20-cv-08430, and is assigned to Judge
Philip M. Halpern. The Mesoblast class action lawsuit charges
Mesoblast and certain of its executives with violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any
investor who purchased Mesoblast securities during the Class Period
to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Mesoblast class action
lawsuit. A lead plaintiff will act on behalf of all other class
members in directing the Mesoblast class action lawsuit. The lead
plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the
Mesoblast class action lawsuit. An investor's ability to share in
any potential future recovery of the Mesoblast class action lawsuit
is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff. If you wish to
serve as lead plaintiff of the Mesoblast class action lawsuit or
have questions concerning your rights regarding the Mesoblast class
action lawsuit, please provide your information here or contact
counsel, J.C. Sanchez of Robbins Geller, at 800/449-4900 or
619/231-1058 or via e-mail at jsanchez@rgrdlaw.com. Lead plaintiff
motions for the Mesoblast class action lawsuit must be filed with
the court no later than December 7, 2020.
Mesoblast develops allogeneic cellular medicines using its
mesenchymal lineage cell therapy platform. Mesoblast's lead product
candidate, RYONCIL (remestemcel-L), is an investigational therapy
comprising mesenchymal stem cells derived from bone marrow. In
February 2018, Mesoblast announced that remestemcel-L met its
primary endpoint in a Phase 3 trial to treat children with steroid
refractory acute graft versus host disease ("SR-aGVHD"). In early
2020, Mesoblast completed its rolling submission of its Biologics
License Application with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
("FDA") to secure marketing authorization to commercialize
remestemcel-L for children with SR-aGVHD.
The Mesoblast class action lawsuit alleges that during the Class
Period defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or
failed to disclose that: (1) comparative analyses between
Mesoblast's Phase 3 trial and three historical studies did not
support the effectiveness of remestemcel-L for SR-aGVHD due to
design differences between the four studies; (2) thus, the FDA was
reasonably likely to require Mesoblast to conduct further clinical
studies; (3) as such, Mesoblast's commercialization of
remestemcel-L in the United States was likely to be delayed; and
(4) as a result of the foregoing, defendants' positive statements
about Mesoblast's business, operations, and prospects were
materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
On August 11, 2020, the FDA released briefing materials for its
Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee meeting revealing that Mesoblast
provided post hoc analyses of other studies "to further establish
the appropriateness of 45% as the null Day-28" overall response
rate for its primary endpoint. The briefing materials further
stated that, due to design differences between these historical
studies and Mesoblast's submitted study, "it is unclear that these
study results are relevant to the proposed indication." On this
news, Mesoblast's share price fell by nearly 35%.
Then, on October 1, 2020, Mesoblast disclosed that it had received
a Complete Response Letter ("CRL") from the FDA regarding its
marketing application for remestemcel-L for treatment of SR-aGVHD
in pediatric patients. According to the CRL, the FDA recommended
that Mesoblast "conduct at least one additional randomized,
controlled study in adults and/or children to provide further
evidence of the effectiveness of remestemcel-L for SR-aGVHD." The
CRL also "identified a need for further scientific rationale to
demonstrate the relationship of potency measurements to the
product's biologic activity." On this news, Mesoblast's share price
fell an additional 35%, further damaging investors.
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP is one of the world's leading law
firms representing investors in securities class action 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.
J.C. Sanchez
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP
Tel No: 800-449-4900
E-mail: jsanchez@rgrdlaw.com [GN]
MICHAEL POMPEO: Bid for Another $34MM in Counsel Fees Denied
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CAROLEE BRADY HARTMAN, et
al., v. MICHAEL R. POMPEO, et al., Case No. 1:77-cv-02019-APM
(D.C.), the Hon. Judge Amit P. Mehta entered an order denying
without prejudice the Plaintiffs' Motion for a Final Determination
of Attorneys' Fees.
A status hearing was set for November 13, 2020, at 10:30 a.m., to
discuss further proceedings in this matter.
The Court said the Plaintiffs need to go back to the drawing board.
They bear the burden of "identifying a factor that the lodestar
does not adequately take into account and proving with specificity
that an enhanced fee is justified."
Since 1995, there have been 28 interim payments to class counsel
for fees, expenses, and interest accrued during the pendency of the
case, totaling $26,570,701.19. The Plaintiffs now seek an
additional $34,114,143.52, for a final total fee recovery of
$75,000,000. To justify this demand, the Plaintiffs primarily argue
that they are entitled to a percentage of the total settlement
under a "constructive common fund" theory.
Judge Mehta acknowledges the case is "in all respects
extraordinary." Originating over 40 years ago, it represents the
largest Title VII sex discrimination class action settlement in
United States history. Its over 1,000 class members each received
an average of $460,000 -- the largest per-capita recovery in a case
of its kind. Class members are women who sought employment or
promotions with the United States Information Agency, a former
agency of the United States government, the relevant components of
which were incorporated into the State Department. Remarkably, the
lead counsel for the class, Bruce Fredrickson, took on the case as
a 26-year-old just one year out of law school and, now well into
his sixties, has stayed on for its duration. Over the last four
decades, Mr. Fredrickson has led a team of over 120 individuals
across seven law firms. In 2018, the last of the $508 million
settlement fund was distributed to class members, leaving
resolution of attorneys' fees as the sole remaining issue.
A copy of the Court's Order dated Nov. 3, 2020 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3eU2Mmx at no extra charge.[CC]
MICROSOFT: To Extend Xbox Elite Controller 2 Warranty Amid Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Matt Brown, writing for Windows Central, reports that Microsoft has
outlined plans to extend its warranty for the Xbox Elite Controller
Series 2, the company's premium gamepad, amid reports of issues
among buyers. The amendment extends coverage to one year, effective
immediately, over the previous 90-day window offered alongside the
accessory.
The changes to retroactively apply to all previous Xbox Elite
Controller Series 2 shipped since its November 2019 debut, in
response to a "small percentage" of users encountering hardware
issues. Microsoft also states payments made for repairs outside the
previous warranty will be refunded by October 31, 2020.
Microsoft's original Xbox Elite Controller was notorious for
long-term durability issues, with peeling grips, faulty bumpers,
and stick drift among common issues voiced by buyers. The
second-generation design undoubtedly reinforced its souped-up
controller, but the former warranty neglected many returning
troubles.
"We've received claims that a small percentage of our customers are
experiencing mechanical issues when using their Xbox Elite Wireless
Controller Series 2," Microsoft stated via the Xbox Support
website. "To ensure your satisfaction, we're extending the warranty
coverage period on Elite Series 2 controllers from 90 days to 1
year from the date of purchase."
Elite Series 2 owners expressed concerns from launch, with sticky
or unresponsive buttons, inconsistent connectivity, and drifting
thumbsticks among prominent issues. "We are aware that a small
number of users may be experiencing issues with the Elite Wireless
Controller Series 2 and are actively investigating with our
engineering teams," Microsoft told Windows Central in November
2019. "We encourage any customers who experience issues with their
hardware to contact Xbox Support."
But this extended warranty comes as Microsoft faces a class-action
lawsuit for "drifting joysticks," with plaintiffs alleging a known
hardware flaw saw controller thumbsticks develop unwanted movement
over time. The lawsuit, first filed back in April, was recently
updated to include both the Xbox Elite Controller and Xbox Elite
Controller Series 2, providing a likely motive for the sudden
change.
"Microsoft does not disclose to consumers that the Xbox controllers
are defective, causing the joystick component to fail. Members of
the general public have the right to know the latent defects with
the Xbox controller components," the lawsuit states. The complaint
also impacts other Xbox One controllers outside the Elite series.
The ongoing lawsuit seeks monetary compensation from Redmond, along
with a public injunction, pushing the company to notify controller
owners about the alleged defect. [GN]
MODERN WIRELESS: Velazquez Sues Over Unlawful Employment Practices
------------------------------------------------------------------
JESUS VELAZQUEZ and KRYSTLE GARCIA, in their individual capacities
and as aggrieved employees under the California Labor Code Private
Attorneys General Act of 2004 v. MODERN WIRELESS, INC., a
California corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No.
30-2020-01166337-CU-WT-CXC (Cal. Super., Orange Cty., October 23,
2020) is an action against the Defendants for violation of the
California Fair Employment and Housing Act and violations of the
California Labor Code for damages, resulting from the Defendants'
unlawful employment practices.
The Plaintiffs allege the Defendants failed to pay all wages due
for work performed, including a premium overtime rate for all hours
worked in excess of eight in a workday and 40 in a workweek; failed
to pay all wages at termination; failed to provide meal and rest
breaks; failed to provide accurate itemized wage statements; failed
to reimburse business expenses; and engaged in a wrongful
termination.
The complaint further asserts that Mr. Velazquez's employment with
the Defendants was ultimately terminated because of his opposition
to discrimination and harassment in the workplace, in violation of
the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. Throughout his
employment with the Defendants, Velazquez was subjected to sexual
harassment by Eylin Cardani, a supervisor at MWI.
Velazquez worked for the Defendants as outside field representative
from on or about September 28, 2015 until February 21, 2020, at
which time his employment was terminated.
Garcia has worked for the Defendants as an inside sales support
specialist since on or about January 20, 2017 and remains an active
employee of MWI.
Modern Wireless, Inc. sells cellular telephones, electronics and
accessories and pre-paid phone services from its corporate office
located in Anaheim, California.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Drew L. Alexis, Esq.
ALEXIS LAW FIRM
100 W. Broadway, Suite 250
Long Beach, CA 90802
Telephone: (562) 544-2495
Facsimile: (562) 546-4495
E-mail: dalexis@alexislawfirm.com
- and -
C. E. Kimberly Lind, Esq.
Adriana C. Quintero, Esq.
KO LEGAL, INC.
100 W. Broadway, Suite 250
Long Beach, CA 90802
Telephone: (562) 332-6169
Facsimile: (714) 242-1590
E-mail: Kim@KO-Legal.com
Adriana@KO-Lgal.com
MONARCH CONDOMINIUM: Preldakaj Sues Over Unpaid Wages for Staff
---------------------------------------------------------------
EMANUEL PRELDAKAJ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. THE MONARCH CONDOMINIUM, THE MONARCH
CONDOMINUM BOARD OF MANAGERS and LASALA MANAGEMENT, INC.,
Defendants, Case No. 1:20-cv-09433 (S.D.N.Y., November 10, 2020) is
a class action against the Defendants for violations of the Fair
Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law including failure to pay
minimum wage and overtime premiums to the Plaintiff and Class
members, failure to pay the straight wages due to them, failure to
provide a written wage notice, and failure to furnish itemized wage
statements.
Mr. Preldakaj was employed by the Defendants as a doorman/concierge
at the Monarch Condominium in New York from June 2009 through
September 29, 2020.
The Monarch Condominium is an entity comprised of a group of
condominium owners, with its principal executive office located in
New York, New York.
Lasala Management, Inc. is the property manager for the Monarch
Condominium and is the exclusive property manager for all the
residential and commercial space in the Monarch. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Brett R. Gallaway, Esq.
Lee S. Shalov, Esq.
Jason S. Giaimo, Esq.
MCLAUGHLIN & STERN, LLP
260 Madison Ave.
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (212) 448-1100
E-mail: bgallaway@mclaughlinstern.com
lshalov@mclaughlinstern.com
jgiaimo@mclaughlinstern.com
MOWI USA LLC: Neversink Files Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Mowi USA, LLC. The
case is styled as Neversink General Store, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Mowi USA, LLC, Mowi
Ducktrap, LLC, Case No. 1:20-cv-09293 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 5, 2020).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.
Mowi produces and delivers fresh, frozen, and further-processed
seafood products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jonathan Shub, Esq.
SHUB LAW FIRM
134 Kings Highway, Second Floor
Haddonfield, NJ 08033
Phone: (856) 772-7200
Email: ecf@shublawyers.com
NEW HAVEN, CT: Child Lead Poisoning Class Action Nears Settlement
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Breen, writing for New Haven Independent, reported in
mid-October that the City of New Haven and legal aid are weeks away
from reaching a proposed settlement in a child lead poisoning class
action lawsuit that has dragged on for over 17 months.
The proposed settlement update is described in an Oct. 8 joint
status report submitted to the state judicial system's digital
docket in the case Nyriel Smith v. City of New Haven.
It comes at a time when the city health department has revamped its
lead inspection and abatement enforcement program, which has seen a
flurry of recent activity -- including over 50 new lead hazard
abatement orders filed on the public land records database over the
past two and a half months.
Following a September court order requiring a formal update within
a month, the Oct. 8 filing states that the city and legal aid
"continue to be engaged in constructive settlement negotiations and
expect to have a proposed settlement agreement to submit to the
Court within the next two weeks, to be approved by the Court after
a notice to the class and a final hearing."
The report then hints at a legal hurdle recently surmounted in the
ongoing talks between the two sides. "Such settlement has taken
longer than expected on account of disagreement over the definition
of the class, but such disagreement has now been resolved," the
report reads. "Having resolved the class definition, the parties
are working to resolve the substantive obligations, enforcement
mechanism, and proposed notice through phone conversations and Zoom
meetings."
State Superior Court Judge Claudia Baio subsequently issued an
order on Oct. 9 requiring the two sides to submit a new status
report no later than Nov. 9.
The one-paragraph update gestures towards one of the most
consequential steps forward in recent months in a class action suit
first filed in May 2019 by the New Haven Legal Assistance
Association against the administration of former Mayor Toni Harp.
The original class action lawsuit alleged -- and Harp health
department officials admitted in state housing court -- that the
city had stopped mandating lead paint inspections and issuing lead
paint abatement when children tested at blood lead levels between 5
and 20 micrograms per deciliter (μg/dL).
Legal aid attorneys Amy Marx and Shelley White argued that city law
required such protections for children testing at and above 5
μg/dL, rather than above the state lead poisoning threshold of 20.
City and city-hired attorneys responded that local law was
ambiguous, and that the city's few lead paint inspectors had to
triage child lead poisoning cases with higher blood lead levels.
State court judge after state court judge sided with legal aid - in
the class action suit and in previous similar suits - in rulings
that the city health department had been neglecting local law. The
Board of Alders weighed in in late 2019 with a new, updated version
of city law that clarified and reinforced the local lead poisoning
threshold as 5 μg/dL.
In August 2019, state Superior Court Judge John Cordani agreed to
certify a class in the Smith suit, thereby allowing a group of
plaintiffs to sue the city. His ruling defined the class as
consisting of roughly 300 children who live in New Haven, who are
under six years old, and who have tested as having an elevated
blood lead level at or above 5 μg/dL. His class certification
carved out an exception for children living in federally-subsidized
housing authority residences—which in turn led to further,
yet-to-be-resolved briefs by both parties arguing, respectively,
for broader and narrower definitions of that exemption.
The adversarial court battles between legal aid and the city
shifted tone abruptly in January, when Mayor Justin Elicker assumed
his office and the city and legal aid started "exploring" the
possibility of a settlement to the class action suit. Elicker had
campaigned in part on criticizing his predecessor's handling of the
lead paint inspection and abatement enforcement program.
In the intervening months, as the Covid-19 pandemic largely shut
down the state's judicial system, the court case—like many others
across the state—was pushed out again and again, first because of
the temporary suspension of civil housing matters, and then because
of status report after status report indicating that the two
parties were still in negotiations.
A legal aid attorney and a city spokesperson both declined to
comment for this article on the pending proposed settlement and the
latest status report in the class action suit.
Bond: Lead Program Has Been A Top Priority
Although resolution of the court case has been delayed for months,
the city has kept up its lead paint inspections during the
pandemic.
It's also formally convened the new Lead Paint Advisory Commission,
which has met three times since late July, with its next meeting
slated for Oct. 20.
According to the city online land records database, since Aug. 1,
the local health department has filed 56 new lead paint abatement
orders for residences across the city. The orders span lead paint
hazard inspections completed by the city health department between
mid-April and late September.
Roughly 60 percent of those abatement orders pertain to the
presence of dangerously high levels of lead paint - sometimes
intact and sometimes chipped and crumbling - in bedrooms, kitchens,
hallways, porches, and other areas of a house or an apartment where
a child lives. The remaining 40 percent pertain to dangerously high
levels of lead paint in the soil surrounding a house or apartment
building where a child lives.
Nearly all of the orders call on the respective landlords to abate
the lead hazards within 90 days, with a few requiring a speedier
45-day abatement turnaround.
A recent presentation given by city Health Director Maritza Bond to
the Lead Paint Advisory Commission states that, in 2019, the city
saw 191 children under 6 years old test as having blood lead levels
above 5 μg/dL, 58 tested at blood lead levels greater than 10
μg/dL, 21 tested at blood lead levels greater than 15 μg/dL, and
13 tested at blood lead levels greater than 20 μg/dL.
That same presentation indicates that a total of 3,833 local
children under 6 years old received confirmed blood lead tests last
year; 3,624 of those children tested as having blood lead levels
between 0 and 4 μg/dL.
Another slide in that presentation, meanwhile, states that the city
currently has a total of 598 child cases above 5 μg/dL, though not
all of those cases are children under 6 years old.
Bond told the Independent in a recent phone interview that the city
currently has five full-time lead hazard inspectors, and is in the
process of hiring a sixth. She said the department also has a
"healthy homes" educator, and a dedicated outreach worker.
Since her appointment to the top local health job in January, Bond
said, one of her top priorities "was to conduct an assessment of
the lead program and really ensure that we implement the new
ordinance" passed by the Board of Alders, and "ensure that protocol
and policies and procedures were in line with local ordinances and
state regulations and statutes."
She stressed that her department has been conducting inspections
and issuing follow-up lead abatement orders when children test at
or above 5 μg/dL, per city law.
"Inspection includes testing of all paint (interior, exterior and
common areas), water and bare soil," her PowerPoint presentation
reads. "Abatement of defective lead-based paint and bare soil and
management of intact lead-based paint" is required after said
inspections.
Bond said she has worked to make sure that city lead inspectors
have Microsoft Surface tablets to allow for easier electronic
recordkeeping around their inspections. And she's pushed to have
abatement orders filed in a more timely fashion on the public land
records database, "so that they can be more readily accessible to
individuals interested in potential lead cases."
Bond also said that her staff has worked closely with the state
Department of Public Health to train local lead inspectors on how
to use the MAVEN surveillance system to track lead poisoning
cases.
And she said the city plans to use the $5.6 million it got from the
federal government last fall to make 200 loans to local landlords
across the city over the next three years to help cover the costs
of lead hazard abatement. She said the Covid-19 pandemic slowed
down the loan application process, and that six pending
applications are currently under review by her department.
Bond stressed that the city is sticking to the 5 μg/dL local
threshold for child lead poisoning. "Anything above a 5 activates
and inspection and goes through the proper timeline," she said,
including the potential issuance of a lead hazard abatement order.
[GN]
NEW YORK, NY: Sydorowitz Seeks Proper Overtime Pay for Counselors
-----------------------------------------------------------------
LISA SYDOROWITZ, individually and on behalf of all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendant,
Case No. 1:20-cv-09233 (S.D.N.Y., November 4, 2020) brings this
collective action complaint against the Defendant to recover unpaid
overtime compensation pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and
the New York Labor Law.
The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant has engaged in a policy
and practice of depriving him and other similarly situated
employees of their lawfully earned overtime compensation at the
proper rate of one and one-half times their regular hourly rate of
pay for all the hours they worked in excess of 40 per week.
According to the complaint, the Plaintiff and other similarly
situated employees were paid certain bonus compensation above their
base hourly rate of pay such as longevity pay after a certain
amount of years in service, night-shift differentials, assignment
differentials, and other bonus compensation. However, the Defendant
failed to include earned differentials and other covered payments
when calculating the Plaintiff and other similarly situated
employees' regular hourly rate of pay, thereby failing to pay them
accurate overtime compensation.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant as a Juvenile Counselor from
2002 until 2018, was promoted to Associate Youth Development
Specialist I in 2018, and then to Associate Youth Development
Specialist II in November 2019.
The City of New York, often called simply New York, is the most
populous city in the United States with an estimated 2019
population of 8,336,817 distributed over about 302.6 square miles.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lloyd R. Ambinder, Esq.
James Emmet Murphy, Esq.
Rachel R. Feingold, Esq.
VIRGINIA & AMBINDER, LLP
40 Broad Street, 7th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Tel: (212) 943-9080
NEW YORK: Gym Owners File Lawsuit Over COVID-19 Restrictions
------------------------------------------------------------
news12.com reports that a lawsuit is being filed against New York
Gov. Andrew Cuomo by New York gym owners.
The New York Fitness Coalition has filed a class action suit that
seeks to strip the governor of his executive order and mandate
privilege.
The coalition says forcing gyms and restaurants to operate at
reduced capacity, cancelling youth sports, and limiting in-person
education is hurting the economic and mental health of New
Yorkers.
"As a direct result of his executive orders and mandates, thousands
of businesses have been shut forever. These were successful
businesses, family owned businesses," says Charles Cassara of NY
Fitness Coalition.
Gov. Cuomo has previously said that public health has to be his
number one priority.
Similar lawsuits have been filed against the governors of
Pennsylvania and Michigan. [GN]
NEWFOUNDLAND TRAINING: Former Students Waiting for Compensation
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Quinn at cbc.ca reports that lawyers for more than 70 people
who claim they were abused at Newfoundland Training Schools in the
1970s and 1980s are asking a judge to rule in their clients' favour
without a trial, saying they shouldn't have to wait any longer for
justice.
Lawyer Lynn Moore of Mount Pearl law firm Morris Martin Moore said
that three people identified as class members have died since the
students' statement of claim was filed in 2017.
"The delays in getting this brought on are really very tragic," she
said.
The class-action lawsuit was certified more than a year ago. The
provincial government filed a statement of defence denying
liability last January but lawyers for the students say a long
trial is unnecessary because it's clear the provincial government
was negligent for decades.
"We feel that there really is no defence for government here," said
Moore.
"The entire [provincial government] program was negligent and did
not care properly for children and really turned a blind eye to the
abuse that was happening."
Moore says there's no doubt the former students were physically and
sexually abused at the schools.
"The evidence in that regard is just overwhelming. They were
abused. They were badly abused, and they suffered then and they are
suffering now," she said.
Former director of youth corrections supports claims
Included in the court documents filed by the class-action lawyers
is an affidavit from Sharron Callahan, a former director of youth
corrections. She also has no doubt children were abused at the
schools.
"During a visit to the Boys' Training School at Whitbourne in 1983,
I observed blood on the walls, beds and floors," says the document
Callahan signed.
Callahan said information about past abuse at the schools was kept
from her.
"Critical information about child sexual abuse in the training
schools was withheld from me," said Callahan in the affidavit.
She said she was not told that two men were convicted of sexually
abusing children in the schools in the 1950s and the 1970s.
But even without that knowledge, Callahan concluded the training
schools were "inhumane places to house children."
"I was not surprised by these allegations of abuse of children in
the training schools. Indeed, I was expecting them," she wrote in
her affidavit. Callahan also wrote, "The provincial training school
system was fundamentally flawed and could not appropriately care
for children."
Court Date Later This Year
The case is scheduled to return to court in December. Moore hopes
provincial government leaders will follow it.
"We know that there has been a change in leadership at the highest
levels in our province and we are really hopeful that change in
leadership will see a change in the litigation strategy in this
case, which to date has been delay and denial," she said.
"They have a responsibility, yes, to spend the people's money
wisely but they also have a responsibility to do the right thing."
If the class action is successful, Moore expects the group of
former students will be awarded tens of millions of dollars in
compensation.
From 1949 to 1984 children who were declared delinquent or
neglected by their parents were sent to training schools created by
the Department of Child Welfare in Newfoundland and Labrador. After
1984, when the Young Offenders Act was enacted, those facilities
became custodial facilities where children were sentenced. [GN]
NORTHLAND INVESTMENT: Church Street Class Action Settlement Ok'd
----------------------------------------------------------------
Talat Aman and Gamze Kazakoglu, writing for Yale News, report that
after over three years of court proceedings and added delays, the
most recent of which was brought upon by the pandemic, plaintiffs
of New Haven's largest tenant class action lawsuit in recent years
have reached the final steps of a settlement.
On Oct. 14, Superior Court Judge Linda Lager granted preliminary
approval to a lawsuit filed by about 1,000 former residents of the
now-razed Church Street South, a federally subsidized apartment
complex located across from Union Station. The ruling has brought
these residents one step closer towards finalizing a settlement
deal with their former Massachusetts-based landlord, Northland
Investment Corporation. New Haven civil rights attorney David Rosen
LAW '69 assisted the plaintiffs, including lead plaintiff Personna
Noble, in filing the initial civil summons in December 2016.
Through the suit, the plaintiffs sought monetary reimbursements for
a litany of health-related problems that they attributed to the
neglected conditions of the demolished apartment complex. Residents
said they experienced skin disorders, migraines and respiratory
problems due to hazardous apartment conditions. This past March,
right before the pandemic hit, Rosen and attorneys for Northland
Investment Corporation reached an $18.75 million settlement.
"Everyone is very eager to have the case go forward so that they
can finally get the benefits for themselves and their families,"
Rosen said. "We tried very hard to make the settlement as fair and
just as possible, and within the limits of the possible we think it
measures up well."
Northland has refused all allegations of wrongdoing. In a statement
to the News, the company said that it has "denied, and continues to
deny all allegations whatsoever of any wrongdoing."
The most recent settlement will create a trust to allocate funds
for minors, disabled class members and the estates of deceased
class members, which the March 6 settlement would not have
provided. The newest settlement also simplifies the forms
plaintiffs must complete to qualify for funds.
Rosen told the News that all approximately 1,000 members of the
settlement will receive a $5,000 base payment, with an additional
$3,000 for every year that they lived on the property. Some former
residents will get as low as $8,000, while others will receive as
much as $20,000. The court's preliminary approval allows the
plaintiffs a final chance to join the settlement and qualify for
payments, a process Rosen says will finish in about six months.
The arrival of the settlement was slowed by the pandemic, which
brought courts to a "screeching halt," Rosen said. On March 10,
Gov. Ned Lamont signed an executive order suspending noncritical
court operations and limiting court hours. For the past two months,
the courts have slowly been reopening.
"Finalizing the settlement was delayed along with everything else,
but I'm glad we were able to use the time to improve the settlement
and also to reach out to more of the former residents," Rosen told
the News.
Northland currently intends to build new housing on the razed land
that Church Street South once occupied. As a part of the
settlement, Northland has agreed to prioritize former residents as
recipients of any affordable and low-income housing built on the
land.
"We remain committed to helping the former Church Street families
move forward in a positive way and believe this improved process
will make it easier for claimants to access funds," the company
told the News in a written statement.
A complex history
Northland bought the Church Street South property in 2008 with
plans to redevelop the complex. But plans never materialized, and
the complex remained low-income housing due to a combination of the
subsequent recession and new community demands for affordable
housing -- demands that, according to New Haven Independent editor
and New Havener of over 30 years Paul Bass '82, the company had not
expected.
In November 2010, the city of New Haven fined Church Street South
$63,000 for multiple apartment code violations. Still, the
Northland property scraped by a federal Department of Housing of
Urban Development inspection that same fall with a passing score --
68 out of 100 points. A passing score is 60 points.
According to Bass, residents complained that these inspectors were
always sent to select apartments units, all of which were in better
condition than the average unit at Church Street South. Tenant
organizing and press attention followed suit.
Northland vacated the apartments by May 2015, forcing out some 300
families, in what Bass called "the biggest displacement of people
that I can remember in New Haven."
A few months later, in August 2015, Bass recorded a video in a
basement apartment that provided a glimpse of the living conditions
of many of the apartments. The video included footage of a resident
peeling paint off the ceiling. Bass said there were "leaks
everywhere" and decrepit furniture amid faltering parts of the
structure -- and that rain made matters worse, adding to the
concentrations of mold that made it difficult for residents to
breathe. Bass said this was particularly hard on children with
asthma.
The site received a HUD inspection score of 20 in September 2015.
The inspection found 512 "life-threatening" violations out of 1,015
instances of health and safety violations. These included
inoperable smoke detectors, exposed wires and blocked fire exits.
In June 2018, Northland began to demolish the site, promising to
redevelop the area into new housing. And the current settlement
plans to offer some compensation to the residents who had to
stomach these conditions for many years.
The demolished Church Street South complex is located at 34 Cinque
Green. [GN]
OEC DISTRIBUTION: Fails to Pay Propert OT to CSRs, Lambert Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
RENA LAMBERT and SALLY LACOUR, each individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. OEC DISTRIBUTION
SERVICES, INC., OEC TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC., and OEC
LOGISTICS, INC., Defendants, Case No. 4:20-cv-03759 (S.D. Tex.,
November 4, 2020) is a collective action complaint brought against
the Defendants for their alleged failure to pay proper overtime
compensation in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiffs worked for the Defendants as hourly-paid customer
service representatives.
The Plaintiffs claim that the Defendants did not pay them for the
time they sent performing pre-shift and post-shift duties which are
not recorded, and sometimes shaved the Plaintiffs' hours to reflect
fewer hours than they actually worked. Moreover, the Defendants
failed to include the Plaintiffs' nondiscretionary bonuses in their
regular rates when calculating their overtime pay.
As a result, despite regularly or occasionally working more than 40
hours per week throughout their employment with the Defendants, the
Plaintiffs and other similarly situated customer service
representatives were not properly paid by the Defendants for their
lawfully earned overtime compensation at one and one-half times
their base hourly rate for some of the hours they worked over 40 in
a workweek.
The Defendants operate as a single enterprise and maintain a
Website at https://www.oecgroup.com/, offering online services
which include booking shipments, billing customers, responding to
customer questions and tracking freight. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are 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
E-mail: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com
OREGON: Businesses Mull Class Suit Over Coronavirus Restrictions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Brad Schmidt, writing for The Oregonian/OregonLive, reports that
three Oregon businesses have threatened a class action lawsuit
against the state over restrictions implemented by Gov. Kate Brown
to slow the coronavirus pandemic.
An attorney representing the businesses argued that Oregon
officials should draft a plan to compensate small business owners
for financial hardship caused by those restrictions.
The demand letter was filed on behalf of a Linn County salon, a
Coos County bowling alley and the Wilsonville Family Fun Center,
better known as Bullwinkle's.
"As a result of your orders, my clients and many other businesses
like theirs closed as ordered and thousands of workers found
themselves without employment," attorney John DiLorenzo wrote in a
tort claim letter to the state on Sept. 18.
Brown's office said on Sept. 21 it doesn't comment on pending or
potential litigation.
DiLorenzo is one of the state's most high-profile attorneys, having
successfully battled the city of Portland over improper
expenditures by the water and sewer bureaus and, most recently,
scoring a $1 billion jury verdict against the state for failing to
maximize timber harvests. The state has appealed.
DiLorenzo is staking his latest cause on one of many state laws
Brown cited in March when she ordered the closure of a long list of
businesses to slow coronavirus. The closures included amusement
parks, gyms, spas, malls, theaters, tattoo parlors and yoga
studios.
DiLorenzo isn't challenging Brown's authority. Instead, he argued
that a related provision in state law calls for reasonable
compensation when the government takes real or personal property
during a declared emergency.
DiLorenzo argued that's exactly what's happened. He claimed the
state's closures deprived businesses of "goodwill," or the
intangible assets that come along with a business when it's sold --
such as a customer base or brand recognition.
"Here, the governor closed, shuttered the business and destroyed
the goodwill," DiLorenzo said in an interview. "The goodwill is
personal property. The goodwill was destroyed for a public purpose,
the public purpose being to limit the spread of coronavirus and
COVID-19. So no question it was a taking."
Brown lifted many of her business restrictions beginning in May.
Bullwinkle's, for instance, had been partially open for businesses
this summer but later closed, according to its website. The company
cited unspecified "changes in occupancy regulations."
DiLorenzo in his letter invited the state to share any compensation
plans for impacted businesses "if you are of a mind to attempt to
address this issue without resort to litigation." [GN]
PACIFICORP: Faces Lawsuit Over Wildfires in Oregon
--------------------------------------------------
One of the Northwest's biggest private utilities faces a class
action lawsuit for allegedly failing to maintain power lines that
caused a significant portion of the catastrophic Labor Day
wildfires in Oregon.
The suit was filed in the Multnomah County Circuit Court by three
Pacific Northwest law firms: Keller Rohrback LLP, Stoll Berne and
Nick Kahl LLC.
PacifiCorp and one of its divisions, Pacific Power, were named in
the suit. The suit also alleges the utilities failed to take simple
measures, like cutting off power in high-risk areas to prevent
tragic loss.
"Many of these fires were not ignited by lightning or careless
campers. Instead, these fires were whipped to their overwhelming
size by a series of ignitions caused by these defendants' power
lines," said Daniel Mensher, a partner at Keller Rohrback and a
former environmental law professor at Lewis & Clark Law School in
Portland.
Fire officials have already determined downed power lines caused at
least 13 wildfires. Dry, high east winds blew west of the Cascades
for nearly four days, contributing both to the downing of power
lines and to the furnace-blast effect that caused the fires to grow
so large, racing down canyons and valleys.
The east winds reignited three wildfires: the Lionshead Fire on the
Warms Springs Reservation, the Beachie Creek Fire on the Willamette
National Forest east of Salem, and the Holiday Farm Fire 3 miles
west of McKenzie Bridge in Lane County. These fires alone have
collectively burned more than 570,000 acres.
Firefighting conditions were so dangerous during that fire crews
focused on rescue efforts rather than fighting fires.
Nick Kahl is one of the attorneys with the lawsuit. He said other
local utilities across the state turned off power to prevent tragic
losses when news came of the high east winds that would be in the
region by Sept. 7.
He says the weather and fire conditions across the state amounted
to the perfect storm, but that it came with warning. PacifiCorp had
plenty of time to safely shut off power, he said, but it failed to
take those simple measures to prevent sparking more wildfires.
"If you don't do that and other utilities in the same exact
position as you do, I don't know how you can try to claim what you
did was reasonable, especially when you look at the consequences,"
Kahl said.
During a special meeting of the Oregon Public Utility Commission,
several telecommunications and utility companies gave damage and
restoration updates.
Pacific Northwest utilities including PacifiCorp, which covers more
than 21,000 square miles of service territory, said the devastation
from the Labor Day wildfires has created a long road to recovery
and rebuilding in affected cities.
PacifiCorp vice president David Lucas said that in rare instances,
such as when the high east winds blew up Oregon's fires last month,
his company does resort to shutting off power in high-risk areas.
"As we've learned through extensive, local community engagement,
public safety power shutoff events must be properly planned and
coordinated, so that our loss of power does not have unintended
consequences of actually increasing public safety risk," Lucas
said.
He said it was vital to ensure the utility is providing power to
critical facilities like fire, police, water districts,
communications companies and other local emergency response, to
help with fire suppression and other emergencies that may occur.
In the Medford area, Lucas said the utility did not meet protocols
for using a public safety power shutoff in high-risk areas, but
they did "de-energize lines at the request of local emergency
agencies to allow firefighters to do their job safety and to assist
in removing debris to unblock roadways."
Stoll Berne attorney and shareholder Yoona Park said the assertion
by PacifiCorp that it kept power on in certain areas for
communications efforts for first responders is astounding.
"These are people's lives, these are people's homes," Park said.
"It was a perfect storm that required something to spark it and
that thing that sparked, it could have been shut off."
Other utilities, including Portland General Electric, Avista
Utilities and NW Natural, said they are working diligently on
getting power and gas restored to customers as quickly as they
can.
A spokesperson said PacifiCorp does not comment directly on active
litigation.
In 2018, California's Pacific Gas and Electric company faced
similar scrutiny after 85 people died in the deadly Camp Fire. PG&E
was sued and agreed to pay a $13.5 billion settlement. [GN]
PALOMA LEGACY: Rodriguez Alleges Unpaid Wages, Illegal Tip Credit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
STACEY RODRIGUEZ, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PALOMA LEGACY, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
2:20-cv-01687-SCD (E.D. Wis., November 9, 2020) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of the Fair Labor Standards
Act and the Wisconsin's Wage Payment and Collection Laws by failing
to compensate the Plaintiff and all others similarly situated
employees the required minimum wages and overtime pay for all hours
worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek and claiming a tip
credit without obtaining signed tip declarations from employees
each pay period.
The Plaintiff performed compensable work in hourly-paid, non-exempt
positions, such as server, bartender, host, and supervisor, at
Defendant's Lake Geneva, Wisconsin location from approximately
April 2017 until September 2020.
Paloma Legacy, LLC is a hospitality company with a principal office
address of 1221 Geneva National Avenue South, Lake Geneva,
Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James A. Walcheske, Esq.
Scott S. Luzi, Esq.
David M. Potteiger, Esq.
WALCHESKE & LUZI, LLC
235 North Executive Drive, Suite 240
Brookfield, WI 53005
Telephone: (262) 780-1953
Facsimile: (262) 565-6469
E-mail: jwalcheske@walcheskeluzi.com
sluzi@walcheskeluzi.com
dpotteiger@walcheskeluzi.com
PEABODY ENERGY: Kahn Swick Reminds of Nov. 27 Motion Deadline
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kahn Swick & Foti, LLC ("KSF") and KSF partner, former Attorney
General of Louisiana, Charles C. Foti, Jr., remind investors with
losses in excess of $100,000 that they have until November 27, 2020
to file lead plaintiff applications in a securities class action
lawsuit against Peabody Energy Corp. (NYSE: BTU), if they purchased
the Company's shares between April 3, 2017 and October 28, 2019,
inclusive (the "Class Period"). This action is pending in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York.
What You May Do
If you purchased shares of Peabody 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/nyse-btu/ to learn more. If you
wish to serve as a lead plaintiff in this class action, you must
petition the Court by November 27, 2020.
About the Lawsuit
Peabody and certain of its executives are charged with failing to
disclose material information during the Class Period, violating
federal securities laws.
On September 28, 2018, a fire erupted at the Company's North
Goonyella mine, resulting in operations being suspended
indefinitely. Following a series of negative disclosures relating
to delays in resuming operations at the mine, on October 29, 2019,
the Company disclosed that regulators were placing strict
restrictions on restarting operations resulting in drastic
adjustments to its reentry plan, ultimately announcing a minimum
three year delay.
On this news, the price of Peabody's shares plummeted.
The case is Oklahoma Firefighters Pension and Retirement System v.
Peabody Energy Corp., 20-cv-08024.
About Kahn Swick
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. [GN]
PETS GLOBAL: Brenner Sues Over Dog Foods' Undisclosed Risk of DCM
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TRISHA BRENNER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PETS GLOBAL, INC., Defendant, Case No.
2:20-cv-10245 (C.D. Cal., November 9, 2020) is a class action
against the Defendant's fraud by omission, fraudulent
misrepresentation, breach of implied warranty, unjust enrichment,
violation of the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act and the
California Unfair Competition Law.
The case arises from the Defendant's false, misleading and
deceptive advertising and marketing of its grain-free dog food
products. The Defendant was aware that grain-free diets are
associated with the risk of canine dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM).
Despite this, the Defendant failed to disclose the risk of DCM on
its packaging, and instead reaped the benefits from its continued
promotion of its dog foods as healthy, safe, and of superior
nutrition.
As a result of the Defendant's omissions and misrepresentations,
the Plaintiff and Class members were injured when they paid the
purchase price or a price premium for the Defendant's dog foods
that did not deliver what was promised or represented given the
undisclosed risk for DCM presented by consumption of the dog
foods.
Pets Global, Inc. is a manufacturer of pet foods and supplies,
headquartered at 28334 Industry Drive in Valencia, California.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert K. Shelquist, Esq.
Rebecca A. Peterson, Esq.
LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P.
100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 2200
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Telephone: (612) 339-6900
Facsimile: (612) 339-0981
E-mail: rapeterson@locklaw.com
rkshelquist@locklaw.com
- and –
Jon W. Borderud, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF JON BORDERUD
1116 E. Cota Street
Santa Barbara, CA 93103
Telephone: (310) 621-7004
E-mail: borderudlaw@cox.net
- and –
Kenneth A. Wexler, Esq.
Michelle Perkovic, Esq.
WEXLER WALLACE LLP
55 W. Monroe Street, Suite 3300
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: (312) 346-2222
E-mail: kaw@wexlerwallace.com
mp@wexlerwallace.com
- and –
Mark J. Tamblyn, Esq.
WEXLER WALLACE LLP
333 University Avenue, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95825
Telephone: (916) 565-7692
Facsimile: (312) 346-0022
E-mail: mjt@wexlerwallace.com
PINTEC TECHNOLOGY: Vincent Wong Reminds of Nov. 30 Deadline
-----------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Vincent Wong announces that a class action has
commenced on behalf of certain shareholders of Pintec Technology
Holdings Limited. If you suffered a loss you have until the lead
plaintiff deadline to request that the court appoint you as lead
plaintiff. There will be no obligation or cost to you.
Pintec Technology Holdings Limited (NASDAQ:PT)
If you suffered a loss, contact us at:
http://www.wongesq.com/pslra-1/pintec-technology-holdings-limited-loss-submission-form?prid=10418&wire=1
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: November 30, 2020
This lawsuit is on behalf of shareholders who purchased PT
securities pursuant and/or traceable to the registration statement
and prospectus issued in connection with the Company's October 2018
initial public offering.
Allegations against PT include that: (1) the Company erroneously
recorded revenue earned from certain technical service fee on a net
basis, rather than a gross basis; (2) there were material
weaknesses in Pintec's internal control over financial reporting
related to cash advances outside the normal course of business to
Jimu Group, a related party, and to a non-routine loan financing
transaction with a third-party entity, Plutux Labs; (3) as a result
of the foregoing, the Company's financial results for fiscal 2017
and 2018 had been misstated; and (4) 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.
Vincent Wong, Esq. is an experienced attorney who has represented
investors in securities litigations involving financial fraud and
violations of shareholder rights. Attorney advertising. Prior
results do not guarantee similar outcomes. [GN]
PRECIGEN INC: Wolf Haldenstein Reminds of Dec. 4 Motion Deadline
----------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP announces that a federal
securities class action lawsuit has been filed in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of
persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired on behalf
of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Precigen, Inc.
("Precigen" or the "Company") f/k/a Intrexon Corporation
("Intrexon") (NASDAQ: PGEN, XON) securities between May 10, 2017
and September 25, 2020, inclusive (the "Class Period").
All investors who purchased shares of Precigen, Inc. and incurred
losses are urged to contact the firm immediately at
classmember@whafh.com or (800) 575-0735 or (212) 545-4774. You may
obtain additional information concerning the action or join the
case on our website, www.whafh.com.
If you have incurred losses in the shares of Precigen, Inc., you
may, no later than December 4, 2020, request that the Court appoint
you lead plaintiff of the proposed class. Please contact Wolf
Haldenstein to learn more about your rights as an investor in the
shares of Precigen, Inc.
The filed complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period,
Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as
well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the
Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically,
Defendants failed to disclose to investors that:
-- Intrexon was using pure methane as feedstock for its announced
yields for its methanotroph bioconversion platform instead of
natural gas;
-- Yields from natural gas as a feedstock were substantially lower
than the aforementioned pure methane yields;
-- Due to the substantial price difference between pure methane
and natural gas, pure methane was not a commercially viable
feedstock;
-- The Company's financial statements for the quarter ended March
31, 2018 were false and could not be relied upon;
-- Intrexon had material weaknesses in its internal controls over
financial reporting;
-- The Company was under investigation by the SEC since October
2018; and
-- 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.
Wolf Haldenstein has extensive experience in the prosecution of
securities class actions and derivative litigation in state and
federal trial and appellate courts across the country. The firm has
attorneys in various practice areas; and offices in New York,
Chicago and San Diego. The reputation and expertise of this firm in
shareholder and other class litigation has been repeatedly
recognized by the courts, which have appointed it to major
positions in complex securities multi-district and consolidated
litigation.
If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions regarding
your rights and interests in this case, please immediately contact
Wolf Haldenstein by telephone at (800) 575-0735, via e-mail at
classmember@whafh.com, or visit our website at www.whafh.com.
Kevin Cooper, Esq.
Gregory Stone
Tel: (800) 575-0735
(212) 545-4774
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP
Email: gstone@whafh.com
kcooper@whafh.com [GN]
PROCTOR AND GAMBLE: Tenzer-Fuchs Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against The Proctor and
Gamble Company. The case is styled as Michelle Tenzer-Fuchs, on
behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. The Proctor
and Gamble Company, Case No. 2:20-cv-05384 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 5,
2020).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
The Procter & Gamble Company is an American multinational consumer
goods corporation headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jonathan Shalom, Esq.
SHALOM LAW, PLLC
105-13 Metropolitan Avenue
Forest Hills, NY 11375
Phone: (718) 971-9474
Email: jshalom@jonathanshalomlaw.com
PRUDENT PUBLISHING: Thorne Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Prudent Publishing
Co., Inc. The case is styled as Braulio Thorne, On Behalf Of
Himself And All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. Prudent
Publishing Co., Inc., Case No. 1:20-cv-09307 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 5,
2020).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Prudent Publishing Company is a business-to-business publisher of
personalized Christmas, Holiday, Birthday and All-Occasion greeting
cards in the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Phone: (212) 228-9795
Email: michael@gottlieb.legal
REATA PHARMA: Pomerantz Law Alerts of Securities Class Suit Filing
------------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed
against Reata Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("Reata" or the "Company")
(NASDAQ: RETA) and certain of its officers. The class action,
filed in United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Texas, Sherman Division, and docketed under 20-cv-00796, is on
behalf of a class consisting of all persons other than Defendants
who purchased or otherwise, acquired Reata securities between
October 15, 2019 and August 7, 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 Reata securities during the
class period, you have until December 14, 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 at newaction@pomlaw.com
or 888.476.6529 (or 888.4-POMLAW), toll-free, Ext. 7980. Those who
inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing address,
telephone number, and the number of shares purchased.
Reata is a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company that develops
novel therapeutics for patients with serious or life-threatening
diseases by targeting molecular pathways that regulate cellular
metabolism and inflammation.
Among Reata's drug candidates under development is omaveloxolone,
which is in Phase 2 clinical development to treat Friedreich's
ataxia ("FA"). Following the announcement of positive data from
the MOXIe Part 2 study of omaveloxolone for FA in October 2019, the
Company represented that it would seek submission for marketing
approval of omaveloxolone for the treatment of FA in the U.S. with
the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ("FDA").
The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made materially false and misleading statements regarding the
Company's business. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or
misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the
MOXIe Part 2 study results were insufficient to support a single
study marketing approval of omaveloxolone for the treatment of FA
in the U.S. without additional evidence; (ii) as a result, it was
foreseeable that the FDA would not accept marketing approval of
omaveloxolone for the treatment of FA in the U.S. based on the
MOXIe Part 2 study results; and (iii) as a result, the Company's
public statements were materially false and misleading at all
relevant times.
On August 10, 2020, during pre-market hours, Reata issued a press
release announcing its second quarter 2020 financial results,
wherein it disclosed that the FDA "is not convinced that the MOXIe
Part 2 results" of the Company's study assessing omaveloxolone for
the treatment of FA "will support a single study approval without
additional evidence that lends persuasiveness to the results," and
that, "[i]n preliminary comments for [a] meeting, the FDA stated
that [Defendants] will need to conduct a second pivotal trial that
confirms the mFARS [modified Friedreich's Ataxia Rating Scale]
results of the MOXIe Part 2 study with a similar magnitude of
effect."
On this news, Reata's stock price fell $51.79 per share, or 33.16%,
to close at $104.41 per share on August 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. See
www.pomerantzlaw.com. [GN]
ROYAL CANADIAN: Class Action Certification Hearing Begins
---------------------------------------------------------
Allison Bamford, writing for Global News, reports that a Federal
Court certification hearing in a $600-million proposed class-action
lawsuit filed against the federal government and the Royal Canadian
Mounted Police began at Regina's Court of Queen Bench on Sept. 21.
The proposed suit, filed by Tony Merchant, alleges systemic
negligence from the RCMP while investigating dozens of cases of
missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls (MMIWG).
"We have a whole series of individuals who've sworn affidavits of
their personal experience about what happened in their dealings
with the police," Merchant said.
He added his arguments over the course of the five-day hearing will
focus on the impacts colonialism has on policing in Canada.
"We know the huge difference of risks between Indigenous women and
girls and other women and girls," Merchant said.
"All of these factors have to be considered by the court."
Diane Bigeagle is the lead plaintiff. Her daughter, Danita, has
been missing since February 2007.
While court heard the Regina Police Service launched the initial
investigation into Danita's disappearance, the lawsuit claims
Bigeagle spoke with RCMP more than 50 times over the years.
Bigeagle claims that most of the time officers did not seem to
listen and only sometimes wrote things down.
She said when Danita first went missing, police were quickly
contacted, but her worries were was brushed off with the assurance
her daughter would probably be home soon.
In addition to Bigeagle's case, 35 other MMIW investigations are
listed in the claim.
In a statement emailed to Global News, Federal Public Safety
Minister Bill Blair says the government opposes the certification
"for legal reasons that are specific to this case, as it is
unprecedented in its breadth, is inconsistent with previous rulings
surrounding private duty of care, and contains cases where the RCMP
is not the police of jurisdiction." [GN]
S2 YACHTS: Winegard Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against S 2 Yachts, Inc. The
case is styled as Jay Winegard, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. S 2 Yachts, Inc. doing business as:
www.tiaraspot.com, Case No. 1:20-cv-05372 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 5,
2020).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
S2 Yachts is an American boat builder based in Holland, Michigan.
From 1974 until 1989 the company specialized in the design and
manufacture of fiberglass sailboats and it continues as a builder
of motorboats.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mitchell Segal, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF MITCHELL SEGAL P.C.
1129 Northern Boulevard, Suite 404
Manhasset, NY 11030
Phone: (516) 415-0100
Email: msegal@segallegal.com
SACOLO LTD: Nicholson Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Confiscation of Tips
------------------------------------------------------------------
WHITNEY NICHOLSON, on behalf of herself and behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SACOLO LTD. d/b/a PERFECT 10 MEN'S
CLUB SAN ANTONIO, and GLENN WILLIAMS, THERESA THOMPSON, WILLIAM
COX, JOHN HESTER, and GABRIEL CARDENAS, Defendants, Case No.
5:20-cv-01319 (W.D. Tex., November 10, 2020) is a class action
against the Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standard
Act by failing to compensate the Plaintiff and all others similarly
situated exotic dancers at federally mandated minimum wage rate,
imposing house fee charges, and illegally confiscating their tips.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants as an exotic dancer at
Perfect 10 Men's Club San Antonio in Texas from on or before
September 2017 until about November 2019.
Sacolo Ltd. is an operator of an adult entertainment club under the
name Perfect 10 Men's Club San Antonio in Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David W. Hodges, Esq.
Tina E. Gutierrez, Esq.
HODGES & FOTY, L.L.P.
4409 Montrose Blvd., Suite 200
Houston, TX 77006
Telephone: (713) 523-0001
Facsimile: (713) 523-1116
E-mail: dhodges@hftrialfirm.com
tgutierrez@hftrialfirm.com
SARASAS WITAED: Faces Class Action Over Student Abuse Claims
------------------------------------------------------------
Maya Taylor, writing for The Thaiger, reports that a school in the
central province of Nonthaburi is facing a class-action lawsuit
from parents, amid allegations of abuse at the facility. The claims
originally came to light when a teacher was captured on CCTV
physically abusing students in her care. In the footage, Ornuma
Plodprong, aka, "Khru Jum", can be seen repeatedly hitting
students, pushing one to the floor, and dragging another child
across the room. The incidents occurred at the Sarasas Witaed
Ratchaphruek School, just north of central Bangkok.
After being physically attacked by some angry parents, Ornuma filed
a police complaint against them, which she has since withdrawn. The
parents in question, Chanwit Noisuekying and Kancharinrat
Singdechudom, have paid fines of 100 baht following the assault.
Rumours emerged that a group of parents had decided to forgive
Ornuma when they were seen being photographed at a police station
in the company of the teacher. Chanwit has dismissed the rumours,
saying he is still bringing charges against her. He adds that his
son, Seu, showed signs of trauma after seeing the teacher.
Since the original claims of abuse surfaced, the scandal has grown,
with allegations of abuse surfacing at other Sarasas schools and
subsequent investigations uncovering a host of other violations,
including the employment of unqualified teachers and foreigners
working without work permits.
The private school has had to return tuition fees and has been
ordered to install additional CCTV cameras and to display the
qualifications of its teachers. It has also been ordered to pay any
medical expenses incurred by the victims. To date, it's understood
16 teachers and caretakers have been charged. [GN]
SCHUFF STEEL: Ordez Files Suit in Ca. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Schuff Steel Company.
The case is styled as Edward Ordez, individually, and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Schuff Steel Company, a Delaware
corporation, Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2020-0009361 (Cal. Super. Ct., San
Joaquin Cty., Nov. 5, 2020).
The case type is stated as "Unlimited Civil Other Employment".
Schuff Steel is one of the structural steel fabricators and
erectors in America.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by Kane Moon, Esq.
SENEX LAW: Tenants File Fair Debt Class Action
----------------------------------------------
Maura Mazurowski, writing for Virginia Lawyers Weekly, reports that
three Virginia residents are filing a federal class action lawsuit
against a Virginia law firm for alleged abusive and unfair debt
collection practices. The lawsuit, filed Sept. 9, alleges
Hampton-based Senex Law violated federal debt collection laws and
tacked on unreasonable attorneys' fees as they attempted to collect
unpaid rent on behalf of landlords. [GN]
SESCO CEMENT: Underpays Welders, Moreno FLSA Suit Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------
HECTOR MORENO, JR., individually and for others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. SESCO CEMENT, CORP., Defendant, Case No. 4:20-cv-03831
(S.D. Tex., November 10, 2020) is a class action against the
Defendant for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act by failing
to compensate the Plaintiff and all others similarly situated
welders overtime pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours in
a workweek.
Mr. Moreno worked for the Defendant as a welder from approximately
May 2020 until July 2020.
Sesco Cement, Corp. is a cement manufacturer and construction
project company, with its corporate office located in Houston,
Harris County, Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 352-1100
Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
adunlap@mybackwages.com
- and –
Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
BRUCKNER BURCH, P.L.L.C.
8 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1500
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 877-8788
Facsimile: (713) 877-8065
E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com
SPECTRUM BRANDS: Aguilar Says Candles Can Explode Due to Defects
----------------------------------------------------------------
MARK AGUILAR, individually and on behalf of all persons similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SPECTRUM BRANDS, INC., DOES 1-10, inclusive,
Defendants, Case No. 2:20-at-01091 (E.D. Cal., November 3, 2020) is
a class action complaint brought against the Defendants for their
alleged breach of implied warranties, breach of warranty under the
Magnuson-Moss Act, and violations of the California's Unfair
Competition Law, Business & Professions Code Section 17200.
The Plaintiff contends that the Defendant is selling a very
dangerous candle that can explode and cause injury when
extinguished, which is proven by the hundreds of consumers
complaining about it on the Internet. The Plaintiff has purchased
and utilized the Repel Insect Citronella Candle, which exploded
when he extinguished it in accordance with the way in which a
reasonable consumer would expect to utilize a candle, and caused
him to suffer burns all over his face as the hot wax and chemicals
sprayed all over him.
The Defendants allegedly breached their implied warranties because
its manufactured candle products failed to perform in the ordinary
purposes for which they were used. Moreover, the Defendant's
unlawful conduct and representations constitute an "unfair"
business act or practice under Section 17200 for knowingly or
negligently failing to adequately disclose the terms of its
automatic renewal offers and continuous service offers.
The Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and all other similarly
situated consumers who have purchased and used the Defendant's
defective and explosive candle, seeks to recover damages as
provided by statute, costs, attorneys' fees, rescission and other
relief as is deemed appropriate pursuant to the laws of
California.
Spectrum Brands, Inc. manufactures, tests, distributes, and sells
its trademark candle product, the Repel Insect Repellant
Citronella, in major retail stores throughout the U.S., including
Walmart, Target, Home Depot, and numerous other retailers
nationwide. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
Meghan E. George, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
21550 Oxnard Street, Suite 780
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Tel: (323) 306-4234
Fax: (866) 633-0228
E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.com
mgeorge@toddflaw.com
SUPER HALAL: Singh Sues Over Restaurant Staff's Unpaid OT Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
GURNAM SINGH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SUPER HALAL MEAT OF JAMAICA INC., and SHIRAZ
KHAN, as an individual, Defendants, Case No. 1:20-cv-05333
(E.D.N.Y., November 4, 2020) is a collective action complaint
brought against the Defendants for their alleged violations of the
overtime provisions under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New
York Labor Law.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants from in or around
September 2014 until in or around September 2020 as a cook and
cashier.
The Plaintiff claims that he worked approximately 80.5 or more
hours per week during his employment with the Defendants. However,
the Defendants failed to pay him overtime at one and one-half times
his regular rate of pay for all the hours he worked over 40.
Moreover, the Defendants willfully failed to keep accurate payroll
records and to post notices of the minimum wage and overtime wage
requirements in accordance with the FLSA and NYLL requirements.
Super Halal Meat of Jamaica Inc. is a restaurant owned and operated
by Shiraz Khan. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Roman Avshalumov, Esq.
HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, PC
Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601
Kew Gardens, NY 11415
Tel: (718) 263-9591
Fax: (718) 263-9598
TACTILE SYSTEMS: Rosen Law Reminds of Nov. 30 Deadline
------------------------------------------------------
Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds
purchasers of the securities of Tactile Systems Technology, Inc.
(NASDAQ: TCMD) between May 7, 2018 and June 8, 2020, inclusive (the
"Class Period"), of the important November 30, 2020 lead plaintiff
deadline in the securities class action. The lawsuit seeks to
recover damages for Tactile investors under the federal securities
laws.
To join the Tactile class action, go to [To enable links contact
MENAFN] or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or
email or for information on the class action.
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
that: (1) while Tactile publicly touted a $4 plus billion or $5
plus billion market opportunity, in truth, the total addressable
market for Tactile's medical devices was materially smaller; (2) to
induce sales growth and share gains, Tactile engaged in illegal
sales and marketing activities; (3) Tactile's revenues were in part
the product of unlawful conduct and thus unsustainable; and (4) as
a result, defendants' public statements were materially false and
misleading at all relevant times. When the true details entered the
market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.
A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve
as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than November
30, 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 [To enable links contact MENAFN]
or 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 or .
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.
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 achieved the largest
ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company.
Rosen Law Firm's attorneys are ranked and recognized by numerous
independent and respected sources. Rosen Law Firm has secured
hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. Attorney
Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. [GN]
U GYM: Faces Brown Suit Over Membership Fee Charges Amid COVID-19
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JENNIE BROWN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. U GYM, LLC d/b/a UFC GYM, CLUBREADY, LLC,
and DOES 1-10, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 8:20-cv-02119 (C.D.
Cal., November 3, 2020) brings this class action complaint against
the Defendants for their alleged violations of the Electronic Funds
Transfer Act, the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and the California
Business and Professions Code Section 17200.
The Plaintiff alleges the Defendant for illegally debiting his and
other similarly situated persons' bank accounts on a recurring
basis without obtaining a written authorization signed or similarly
authenticated for preauthorized electronic fund transfers from
their accounts, and for unlawfully charging them for services that
it failed to provide contrary to its written contract after the
Defendant UFC closed its gyms due to the COVID-19 crisis.
According to the complaint, the Plaintiff entered into a 12-month
agreement with the Defendant UFC's franchisee for a gym membership
at its 24320 Swartz, Lake Forest, CA 92630 location on June 11,
2019, in which agreement the Defendant can automatically withdraw
of approximately $79 from the Plaintiff's bank accounts up until
May 11, 2020. Unexpectedly, the Defendant UFC closed it gyms on or
about March 2020 in light of the COVID-19 crisis and those gyms
have remained closed ever since.
On or about April 2020, a letter was sent by the Plaintiff to the
Defendant UFC to cancel her agreement and to request the Defendant
to stop its auto-withdrawals from the Plaintiff's bank account.
Although the letter was acknowledged as received by the Defendant
on April 30, 2020, the Defendant has auto-withdrawn $79 from the
Plaintiff's bank account without obtaining authorization from the
Plaintiff.
The complaint asserts that the Defendant failed to honor the
provision of its written contract regarding the right to cancel and
be issued a pro-rata refund in light of the Defendant UFC's closure
of its gyms.
U Gym LLC d/b/a UFC Gym, Clubready LLC operates gyms. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
Adrian R. Bacon, Esq.
Meghan E. George, Esq.
Thomas E. Wheeler, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
21550 Oxnard Street, Suite 780
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Tel: 323-306-4234
Fax: 866-633-0228
E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.com
abacon@toddflaw.com
mgeorge@toddflaw.com
twheeler@toddflaw.com
UBER TECHNOLOGIES: Misclassifies Drivers, Davarci Suit Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
SANCAK DAVARCI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:20-cv-09224 (S.D.N.Y., November 3, 2020) is a class action
complaint brought against the Defendant for its alleged violation
of the New York Labor Law.
The Plaintiff, who worked for the Defendant as a driver, claims
that the Defendant classified him and other drivers as independent
contractors.
The Plaintiff asserts these claims:
-- The Defendant failed to reimburse its drivers for any
necessary expenses they incur while working for the Defendant;
-- The Defendant failed to assure that drivers make the
applicable minimum wage for all hours worked; and
-- The Defendant failed to pay its drivers the appropriate
overtime premium of one and one-half times their regular rate of
pay for all overtime hours worked beyond 40 per week.
Uber Technologies, Inc. is a San Francisco-based car service that
provides transportation service to its customers in cities
throughout the country, including New York, via an on-demand
dispatch system or on a mobile phone application. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esq.
Anne Kramer, Esq.
LIGHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
729 Boylston St., Suite 2000
Boston, MA 02116
Tel: (617) 994-5800
E-mail: sliss@llrlaw.com
akramer@llrlaw.com
UNITED STATES: Migrant Parents Sue Over Family Separation Policy
----------------------------------------------------------------
K.O. and E.O., JR., by and through their parents and next friends,
E.O. and L.J.; and C.J, by and through his father and next friend
F.C.; each individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant, Case
No. 1:20-cv-12015 (D. Mass., November 9, 2020) is a class action
against the Defendant for intentional infliction of emotional
distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, false
imprisonment, false arrest, assault and battery, negligent
supervision, tortious interference with parent-child relationship,
and loss of parental consortium.
The case arises from the Defendant's unlawful actions that caused
harm to the Plaintiffs and Class members, including: (i) forcible
separation of thousands of children from their parents in
immigration detention with no legal justification and without their
consent; (ii) seizing those children and separating them from their
parents without any legal basis for unreasonable lengths of time;
and (iii) inflicting emotional and psychological harm to deter
immigration, particularly from Central and South American
countries. Many of these children and their parents, including the
Plaintiffs in this case, fled their native countries to lawfully
seek asylum upon arriving in the United States. The Defendant chose
to keep immigrant children from the care and custody of their
parents and, even where both child and parent remained in
immigration detention, refused opportunities to hold them together
in their existing immigration family detention centers.
The Plaintiffs seek damages and the establishment of a fund for the
mental health treatment of all Class members to remedy the harm
caused by the Defendant. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Howard M. Cooper, Esq.
Joseph M. Cacace, Esq.
TODD & WELD LLP
One Federal Street, 27th Floor
Boston, MA 02110
Telephone: (617) 720-2626
E-mail: hcooper@toddweld.com
jcacace@toddweld.com
- and –
Susan B. Church, Esq.
Derege Demissie, Esq.
Heather Yountz, Esq.
Brittanie Allen, Esq.
DEMISSIE & CHURCH
929 Massachusetts Avenue, Suite 01
Cambridge, MA 02139
Telephone: (617) 319-2399
E-mail: sbc@demissiechurch.com
dd@demissiechurch.com
- and –
Jeff Goldman, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JEFF GOLDMAN LLP
125 Washington Street, Ste. 204
Salem, MA 01970
Telephone: (781) 704-3897
E-mail: Jeff@jeffgoldmanimmigration.com
- and –
David A. Vicinanzo, Esq.
Nathan P. Warecki, Esq.
Lauren Maynard, Esq.
NIXON PEABODY LLP
53 State Street, Exchange Place
Boston, MA 02109
Telephone: (617) 345-1000
E-mail: dvicinanzo@nixonpeabody.com
nwarecki@nixonpeabody.com
lmaynard@nixonpeabody.com
- and –
Ivan Espinoza-Madrigal, Esq.
Oren N. Nimni, Esq.
LAWYERS FOR CIVIL RIGHTS
61 Batterymarch Street, 5th Floor
Boston, MA 02110
Telephone: (617) 988-0624
E-mail: iespinoza@lawyersforcivilrights.org
onimni@lawyersforcivilrights.org
UNIVESITY OF SAN DIEGO: Holden Files Suit in S.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against University of San
Diego, et al. The case is styled as Catherine Holden, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated v. University of San
Diego, a California Corporation; Does 1 through 10, inclusive, Case
No. 3:20-cv-02169-BEN-LL (S.D. Cal., Nov. 5, 2020).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract.
The University of San Diego is a private Roman Catholic research
university in San Diego, California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Carney Richard Shegerian, Esq.
SHERIGERIAN & ASSOCIATES, INC,
145 S. Spring Street, Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Phone: (310) 860-0770
Email: CShegerian@shegerianlaw.com
URS MIDWEST: Rodriguez Labor Class Suit Removed to C.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled ISRAEL RODRIGUEZ, individually, and on behalf of
other members of the general public similarly situated v. URS
MIDWEST, INC.; UNITED ROAD SERVICES, INC.; and DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive, Case No. CIVDS1909752, was removed from the California
Superior Court for the County of San Bernardino to the U.S.
District Court for the Central District of California on November
10, 2020.
The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 2:20-cv-10306 to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendants' alleged violations of the
California Labor Code and the California's Business and Professions
Code including unpaid minimum wages, failure to provide meal
periods, failure to authorize and permit rest periods,
non-compliant wage statements and failure to maintain payroll
records, wages not timely paid upon termination, unreimbursed
business expenses, unlawful and unfair business practices.
URS Midwest, Inc. is a company that engages in the transportation
of freight and cargo, with its principal place of business in
Romulus, Michigan.
United Road Services, Inc. is a company that provides vehicle
transportation logistics solutions, headquartered in Romulus,
Michigan. [BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Timothy M. Fisher, Esq.
SCOPELITIS, GARVIN, LIGHT, HANSON & FEARY, LLP
2 North Lake Avenue, Suite 560
Pasadena, CA 91101
Telephone: (626) 795-4700
Facsimile: (626) 795-4790
E-mail: tfisher@scopelitis.com
- and –
Christopher J. Eckhart, Esq.
SCOPELITIS, GARVIN, LIGHT, HANSON & FEARY, P.C.
10 West Market Street, Suite 1400
Indianapolis, IN 46214
Telephone: (317) 637-1777
Facsimile: (317) 687-2414
E-mail: ceckhart@scopelitis.com
WALMART INC: Ivanoff Says Candles Can Explode Due to Defects
------------------------------------------------------------
AMANDA IVANOFF, JUSTIN MARC WILLIAMS, BJ JONES, NIKOLE SUTTON, DAWN
AMENT, SCOTT T. CLARK, DEBRA BELL, CHANDRA BROOKS, SHAWNTRELL
WASHINGTON, BRANDON BULGER, LUANE LAGRECA, CHRISTY ROOKER, VALERIE
TAYLER, BRIAN SLAFTER, TENIKA IMAKU, REBECCA DOOLIN, ROBERT
BOTTERILL, KEISHA NELSON, SUHEL NAZARIO, AMY METZINGER, JACOB
QUILL, TIMOTHY E. SHERER, NANCY STOCKWELL, TONY MCLEMORE, MAKAHLA
RUTLEDGE, DEBORAH REYNOLDS, SHANNON MCFARLAND, MARK BLANCHE JR.,
CELIA WILLIAMS, DOLORES CUNNINGHMA, DANIELLE THOMAS, LYNETTE
WAKEFIELD and SARAH KINGERY, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. WALMART INC., CL PRODUCTS
INTERNATIONAL, LLC, CANDLE-LITE COMPANY, LLC, and LUMINEX HOME
DECOR AND FRAGRANCE COMPANY, LLC, Defendants, Case No.
1:20-cv-00896-MRB (S.D. Ohio, November 6, 2020) is a class action
against the Defendants for negligence, strict liability for
defective product design and manufacture, strict liability for
failure to warn, and unjust enrichment.
According to the complaint, the Defendants are engaged in the
design and manufacturing of defective candles. The Defendants'
Mainstays candles are allegedly dangerous because of their
excessive flames that caused scorching or smoke damage to ceilings
and explosions that created shower of glass, melted wax, and/or
burning wax. The Defendants knew or should have known of these
problems and the dangerous conditions of these candles, yet they
failed to inform purchasers, including the Plaintiffs, of the
dangers of the candles and instead sold the Mainstays products as
suitable and safe for use.
As a result of the Defendants' negligence and omissions, the
Plaintiffs and Class members have been damaged.
Walmart Inc. is an American multinational retail corporation that
operates a chain of hypermarkets, discount department stores, and
grocery stores, with its principal place of business located at 708
SW 8th Street, Bentonville, Arkansas.
CL Products International, LLC is a manufacturer of housewares,
with its principal place of business in Cincinnati, Ohio.
Candle-Lite Company, LLC is a manufacturer of candles, with its
principal place of business in Cincinnati, Ohio.
Luminex Home Decor and Fragrance Company, LLC is a manufacturer of
home decor and fragrance, with its principal place of business in
Cincinnati, Ohio. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Gregory S. Reichenbach, Esq.
P.O. Box 711
Perrysburg, OH 43552-0711
Telephone: (419) 529-8300
Facsimile: (419) 529-8310
E-mail: Greg@ReichenbachLaw.com
- and –
Gene P. Graham, Jr., Esq.
William L. Carr, Esq.
Bryan T. White, Esq.
WHITE GRAHAM BUCKLEY & CARR, LLC
19049 E. Valley View Pkwy, Ste. 200
Independence, MO 64055
Telephone: (816) 373-9080
Facsimile: (816) 373-9319
E-mail: ggraham@wagblaw.com
bcarr@wagblaw.com
bwhite@wagblaw.com
- and –
A. Scott Waddell, Esq.
WADDELL LAW FIRM, LLC
1900 W. 75th Street, Suite 220
Prairie Village, KS 66208
Telephone: (816) 914-5365
E-mail: scott@aswlawfirm.com
- and –
Eric S. Playter, Esq.
Chris R. Playter, Esq.
PLAYTER & PLAYTER, LLC
400 SW Longview Boulevard, Suite 220
Lee's Summit, MO 64081
Telephone: (816) 666-8902
Facsimile: (816) 666-8903
E-mail: eric@playter.com
chris@playter.com
- and –
Jack D. McInnes, Esq.
Benjamin Ashworth, Esq.
Rob Wasserman, Esq.
MCINNES LAW LLC
1900 W. 75th Street, Suite 220
Prairie Village, KS 66208
Telephone: 913-220-2488
Facsimile: 913-273-1671
E-mail: jack@mcinnes-law.com
ben@mcinnes-law.com
rob@mcinnes-law.com
WASHINGTON SENIOR: Langston Files Suit in Ill. Cir. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against WASHINGTON SENIOR
LIVING, LLC. The case is styled as Jennifer Langston, individually,
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. WASHINGTON SENIOR
LIVING, LLC, Case No. 20-L-00257 (Ill. Cir. Ct., Peoria Cty., Nov.
5, 2020).
The case type is stated as "Contract - Money Damages".
Washington Senior Living is a Retirement & Assisted Living Facility
in Washington, Illinois.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by MARA BALTABOLS, ESQ.
WIGGYS INC: Thorne Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Wiggys Inc. The case
is styled as Braulio Thorne, On Behalf Of Himself And All Other
Persons Similarly Situated v. Wiggys Inc., Case No. 1:20-cv-09306
(S.D.N.Y., Nov. 5, 2020).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Wiggy's Inc. is a manufacturer of sleeping bags in the USA.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Phone: (212) 228-9795
Email: michael@gottlieb.legal
WRAP TECHNOLOGIES: Pomerantz Law Reminds of Nov. 23 Bid Deadline
----------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed
against Wrap Technologies, Inc. ("Wrap" or the "Company") (NASDAQ:
WRTC) and certain of its officers. The class action, filed in
United States District Court for the Central District of
California, and docketed under 20-cv-09030, is on behalf of a class
consisting of all persons other than Defendants who purchased or
otherwise, acquired Wrap securities between July 31, 2020 and
September 23, 2020, inclusive (the "Class Period"). Plaintiff seeks
to recover compensable damages caused by Defendants' violations of
the federal securities laws under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the "Exchange Act").
If you are a shareholder who purchased Wrap securities during the
class period, you have until November 23, 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 at newaction@pomlaw.com or
888.476.6529 (or 888.4-POMLAW), toll-free, Ext. 7980. Those who
inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing address,
telephone number, and the number of shares purchased.
Wrap purports to develop security products for law enforcement and
security personnel, including the BolaWrap 100, a hand-held remote
restraint device that discharges an eight-foot bola style Kevlar
tether to entangle a subject at a range of 10-25 feet.
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 that: (i) the Company had concealed the
results of the Los Angeles Police Department, or ("LAPD") BolaWrap
pilot program, which demonstrated that the BolaWrap was
ineffective, expensive, and sparingly used in the field; and (ii)
as a result, Defendants' public statements were materially false
and/or misleading at all relevant times.
On September 23, 2020, while the market was open, White Diamond
Research published a report entitled "Wrap Technologies: Disastrous
LAPD BolaWrap Pilot Program Results, No Evidence These Have Been
Communicated To Investors" alleging, among other things, that the
Company's trial pilot program with the LAPD was a disaster, and
that the Company had not disclosed the results to investors.
On this news, Wrap's stock price fell $2.07 per share, or 25.43%,
to close at $6.07 per share on September 23, 2020, damaging
investors.
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]
[*] CCPA Posts Significant Risk of Class Action Litigation
----------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey N. Rosenthal, Esq. -- rosenthal-j@blankrome.com -- David J.
Oberly, Esq. -- doberly@blankrome.com -- and Harrison M. Brown,
Esq. -- hbrown@blankrome.com -- of Blank Rome, in an article for
Law.com, report that when it comes to biometric privacy, all eyes
seem to be focused on the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy
Act (BIPA), which is quickly developing into the nation's next
class action battleground. But other state privacy statutes that
may have gone under the radar also have important implications for
the larger patchwork of biometric laws.
For instance, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), which
went into effect at the start of the year, directly implicates a
wide swath of entities collecting/using the biometric data of
California residents - even if the entity does not maintain any
physical presence in the state. The CCPA also poses a significant
risk of class action litigation. Taken together, all companies
handling biometric data and falling under the scope of the CCPA
must take immediate action to ensure strict compliance with
California's game-changing privacy law to mitigate the substantial
risk of exposure. [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 ***