/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/210204.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Thursday, February 4, 2021, Vol. 23, No. 20 Headlines AARGON AGENCY: Nelson Sues Over Unfair Debt Collection Practices AARGON COLLECTION: Katz Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York AEROJET ROCKETDYNE: Myers Challenges Proposed $5-B Sale to Lockheed ALEX AND ANI: Howard Sues Over Failure to Pay Store Manager's OT AMERICAN AIRLINES: Class Certification Motion Filing Due August 11 AMERICAN RETAIL: Paguada Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ASTRAZENECA PLC: Faces Zhukov Suit Over Decline in Share Price BLACKBERRY LIMITED: Pearlstein Suit Wins Class Certification BLUESTONE PERENNIALS: Williams Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York BNSF RAILWAY: Briefing on Class Status Bid Stayed Pending Mediation BOSTON FOUNDRY: Faces Mekrami Suit Over Unsolicited Text Messages BRENTON BURNS: Riskin Asks Court to Certify Interlocutory Appeal BRICK PLUS: Hedges Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York BUDSGUNSHOP.COM LLC: Paguada Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York CANON U.S.A.: Faces Rouse Class Action Suit Over Data Breach CANTON FOOD: Fails to Pay Minimum & Overtime Wages, Torres Claims CARDELLA & ASSOCIATES: Class of Call-Center Employees Certified CARENET INFOMEDIA: Gabel Seeks to Certify Class of FLSA TeleNurses CARESAVE TECHNOLOGIES: Diggs Suit Seeks Caregivers' Unpaid Wages CARNIVAL CORP: Approval of Request for Private Mediation Pending CARNIVAL CORP: Bid to Dismiss Former Guests' Class Action Pending CARNIVAL CORP: Bid to Dismiss Former Guests' Suit Pending CARNIVAL CORP: Bid to Junk Lindsay & Zehner Class Suit Pending CARNIVAL CORP: Turner Appeal in Dismissal of Class Suit Pending CARRIZO OIL: Chisum Bid for Conditional Cert. Nixed w/o Prejudice CHW GROUP: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Baker Suit Claims CREDIT CONTROL: Einhorn Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York CRYSTEEL MANUFACTURING: Proserv Removal Files Suit in D. Minnesota CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD: Salone Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages DCM SERVICES: Madlinger Files FDCPA Suit in D. New Jersey DEVEREUX FOUNDATION: Children Sexually Abused by Staff, Suit Says FAMILY SOLUTIONS: Faces Williams Suit Over Failure to Pay Wages FEDEX GROUND: Fails to Pay OT Wages to Package Handlers, Chiu Says FIELDWORKS LLC: Response to Mathews' Class Status Bid Due Feb. 25 FIRE STATION: Rison Files TCPA Suit in S.D. New York FLAVORGOD LLC: Faces Hinesley Suit Over Unsolicited Text Messages FLORIDA SOUTHERN: April 2 Extension of Class Cert. Filing Sought FRESH FARMS: Deadline for Class Status Bid Filling Set for March 26 FRIENDS HEALTH: Fails to Properly Pay OT Wages, Jang et al. Claim GABRIEL BROTHERS: Skaggs Bid for Conditional Certification Nixed GC SERVICES: Reply to Class Status Opposition Set for February 16 GENERALI U.S.: Dziagwa Files Insurance Suit in D. Colorado GOLDEN BOLT: Underpays Warehouse Workers, De Gonzalez Suit Claims GOOGLE LLC: Class Settlement Wins Final OK in Profile Litigation GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES: Meredith Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages GREEN GENIE: Jackson Files TCPA Suit in E.D. Michigan HARLAY HOSPITALITY: Website Lacks Accessibility Info, Garcia Says HEIDI KLEIN: Hedges Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York HIGH SPEED: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York IBM CORP: Plaintiffs Must File Class Certification Bid by March 8 ILLINOIS CENTRAL: Luecking BIPA Suit Removed to S.D. Illinois INTERSTATE MUSIC: Paguada Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ITALIANTOUCH USA: Cota Files ADA Suit in S.D. California J.B. HUNT: Wilson Seeks Initial OK of Class Action Settlement JEFFERSON COUNTY, KY: Floyd Files Suit in W.D. Kentucky KRAFT MUSIC: Paguada Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York KRS GLOBAL: Kumar Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages Under FLSA LEXISNEXIS RISK: Court Certifies Settlement Class & Subclass LHC GROUP: Class Certification Bid Deadline Set for Jan. 28, 2022 LURKING CLASS: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York MAGICAL BEAUNI: Xu Must File Class Status Bid by May 28 MARATHON PETROLEUM: Deadline Extension for Class Status Bid Nixed MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Cota Says MATTHEWS SENIOR: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Berglund Suit Says MCKINSEY & COMPANY: County Commission Files Suit in S.D. West Va. MEDICREDIT INC: Court Decertifies Class in Kwasniewski Suit MEDNAX SERVICES: Fails to Secure Patients' Health Info, Cohen Says MERCK & CO: Taylor Sues Over Zostavax Vaccine's Undisclosed Risks MICROSOFT CORP: Ten-Month Claims Period Closes Sept. 23 MIDLAND CREDIT: Pinkesz Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York MOD SUPER: Rocio BIPA Class Suit Removed to N.D. Illinois NALU KAI INC: Paguada Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York NEVADA: Kerkorian Bid for Preliminary Injunction Tossed NGM INSURANCE: Class Status Bid Filing Due March 29 in MSP Suit NOVARTIS AG: Average Wholesale Price Related Suit vs. NPC Underway NOVARTIS AG: Consolidated Exforge-Related Class Suit Ongoing NOVARTIS AG: Sandoz and Fougera Continue to Defend Class Suits NOVARTIS AG: Valsartan and Valsartan/HCT-Related Suits Ongoing OC RAMPS: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York OOGIE'S SNACKS: Jaquez Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York P & Z FOODS: Deadline for Class Status Bid Filing Set for June 30 PACIFICA HOTEL: Fails to Timely Pay Wages, Corvarrubias Claims PAYCOM SOFTWARE: Fredricks FCRA Class Suit Removed to N.D. Illinois PEDIATRIX MEDICAL: Rumely Files Suit in S.D. California PHENIXFIN CORPORATION: Kahn Sues Over Removal Provision in Bylaws PLANT DELIGHTS: Williams Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York PORCH.COM INC: Preston Wage-and-Hour Suit Goes to S.D. California REHABMART LLC: Jaquez Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York RIPPLE LABS: Sale of XRP Tokens Violates FDUTPA, Toomey Alleges ROANOKE AIRPORT: Pinon FLSA Suit Gets Collective Action Status ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Daniels Suit Alleges Stock Market Manipulation ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Faces Fray Suit Over GME Stock Trading Control ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Faces Ng Suit Over Open Market Manipulation ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Illegally Restraint Stock Trade, Nelson Claims ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Manipulates Stock Trading, Courtney Suit Says ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Manipulates Stock Trading, Kayali Suit Claims ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Nabi Sues Over Deceptive Marketing Campaign ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Ross Sues Over Stock Trading Restrictions ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Simpson Sues Over Manipulation of Open-Market ROBINHOOD MARKETS: Perry Sues Over Imposed Trading Restrictions ROBINHOOD SECURITIES: Dalton Sues Over Removal of Stocks From App ROYAL PALACE: Fails to Accommodate Disabled Travelers, Garcia Says SACHS ELECTRIC: Durham Class Certification Bid Partly Granted SAMSON TECHNOLOGIES: Paguada Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York SANCHEZ OIL: Seeks to Stay Class Status Proceedings in "Hutchins" SHOE SHOW INC: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Brooks Alleges SIGUE CORPORATION: Babare Consumer Suit Goes to W.D. Washington SIMMONS BANK: Class Status of Checking Account Holders Sought SKYLINE RESTORATION: Magaliel Suit Seeks Proper Minimum & OT Wages SOUTHERN VALLEY: Bejines-Gonzalez Seeks Initial OK of Settlement SPIRIT MANUFACTURING: Faces Quinn Suit Over Unpaid Overtime Wages SPRING HOME: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Cockrell Suit Claims STARBUCKS CORPORATION: Brekke Labor Suit Removed to N.D. California STATE FARM: Court Reimburses Vogt Class Counsel $245K STL INTERNATIONAL: Williams Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York STRIVECTIN OPERATING: Slowinski Sues Over Mislabelled Neck Cream SUMMERHAYS MUSIC: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York SUNRISE SENIOR: Altamirano Suit Removed to C.D. California SWIFT TRANSPORTATION: Says Class Cert. Has No Effect in Proceedings SYBARITIC CONSULTING: Hindi Sues Over Unsolicited Text Messages TARGET CORPORATION: Bowen Labor Suit Seeks to Certify Two Classes TAX RISE: Class Certification Bid Filing Due June 1 TENAFLY IMPORTS: Jaquez Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York TENNESSEE: Prisoners Seeks to Certify Class Action THIRTY THREE THREADS: Burbon Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York TRADITIONS MANAGEMENT: Toney-Marcum Sues Over Unpaid OT Wages TYCO FIRE: Settlement Agreement Wins Initial Approval in AFFF Suit U.S. TAPE: Burbon Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York UBER TECHNOLOGIES: James Bid to Certify Drivers Class Partly OK'd UNITED AMERICAN: Bailey Seeks Security Guards' Unpaid OT Wages UNITED SERVICES: Marchek Files Suit in W.D. Michigan VAUGHAN & BUSHNELL: Burbon Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York VERTAFORE INC: Mulvey Alleges Unlawful Use of Customers' Records VILLA MONTES: Hotel Online Booking Violates ADA, Whitaker Alleges VIRGINIA MOTEL: Faces Garcia ADA Suit Over Online Booking System VISTA EQUITY: Faces Solak Suit Over Breach of Fiduciary Duties VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Stipulation to Extend Class Status Bid Date Nixed WAL-MART ASSOCIATES: Hernandez Labor Suit Goes to C.D. California WAL-MART ASSOCIATES: Nelson FLSA Class Suit Removed to D. Nevada WAREHOUSE SKATEBOARDS: Paguada Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York WLLC II: Easley Suit Removed to S.D. Alabama XPO LOGISTICS: Faces Hall Suit Over Workplace Racial Discrimination YCI METHANOL: Faces Strawn Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D. Texas ZAGG INC: Rosa Sues Over Misleading SEC Registration Statements ********* AARGON AGENCY: Nelson Sues Over Unfair Debt Collection Practices ---------------------------------------------------------------- DAMON NELSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. AARGON AGENCY, INC. d/b/a AARGON COLLECTION AGENCY, Defendant, Case 4:21-cv-00041-REB (D. Idaho, Jan. 28, 2021) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. Aargon Agency, Inc. provides mercantile and consumer credit reporting services. The Company offers national debt recovery, as well as first party, early out collection, and billing services. Aargon Agency serves customers worldwide. [BN[ The Plaintiff is represented by: Leland K. Faux, Esq. Leland Faux, Esq. PLLC 381 Shoup Ave, Ste 214 Idaho Falls, ID 83402 Telephone: (208) 497-2214 E-mail: Leland@LelandFaux.com AARGON COLLECTION: Katz Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Aargon Collection Agency, Inc. The case is styled as Esty Katz, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Aargon Collection Agency, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-00520 (E.D.N.Y., Feb. 1, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Aargon Collection Agency -- https://www.aargon.com/ -- is a nationally licensed debt collection agency headquartered in Las Vegas, Nevada with four offices in Hawaii, Colorado, Florida and Missouri.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David M. Barshay, Esq. BARSHAY, RIZZO & LOPEZ, PLLC 445 Broadhollow Road, Suite Cl18 Melville, NY 11747 Phone: (631) 210-7272 Fax: (516) 706-5055 Email: dbarshay@brlfirm.com AEROJET ROCKETDYNE: Myers Challenges Proposed $5-B Sale to Lockheed ------------------------------------------------------------------- Richard Myers, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. AEROJET ROCKETDYNE HOLDINGS, INC., EILEEN P. DRAKE, KEVIN P. CHILTON, THOMAS A. CORCORAN, JAMES R. HENDERSON, WARREN G. LICHTENSTEIN, LANCE W. LORD, AUDREY McNIFF and MARTIN TURCHIN, Case No. 2:21-cv-00844 (C.D. Cal., Jan. 29, 2021) is brought on behalf of all other public stockholders of Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings, Inc., against Aerojet Rocketdyne, the Company's Board of Directors for violations of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and for breaches of fiduciary duty as a result of the Individual Defendants' efforts to sell the Company to Lockheed Martin Corporation, and Mizar Sub, Inc., as a result of an unfair process for an unfair price, and to enjoin an upcoming stockholder vote on a proposed all cash transaction valued at approximately $5 billion (the "Proposed Transaction"). The terms of the Proposed Transaction were memorialized in a December 20, 2020, filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") on Form 8-K attaching the definitive Agreement and Plan of Merger (the "Merger Agreement"). Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, Lockheed Martin acquire all of the outstanding shares of Aerojet Rocketdyne's common stock at a price of $56 per share in cash. As a result of the Proposed Transaction, Aerojet Rocketdyne stockholders will be allegedly frozen out of any interest in the surviving entity. Thereafter, on January 25, 2021, Aerojet Rocketdyne filed a Preliminary Proxy Statement on Form PREM14A (the "Preliminary Proxy") with the SEC in support of the Proposed Transaction. According to the complaint, the Proposed Transaction is unfair and undervalued for a number of reasons. Significantly, the Preliminary Proxy describes an insufficient process in which the Board acquiesced to Lockheed Martin's low price bid without fielding indications of interest from other potentially interested third parties. In approving the Proposed Transaction, the Individual Defendants have breached their fiduciary duties of loyalty, good faith, due care and disclosure by, inter alia, (i) agreeing to sell Aerojet Rocketdyne without first taking steps to ensure that Plaintiff and Class members would obtain adequate, fair and maximum consideration under the circumstances; and (ii) engineering the Proposed Transaction to benefit themselves and/or Lockheed Martin without regard for Aerojet Rocketdyne public stockholders. Accordingly, this action seeks to enjoin the Proposed Transaction and compel the Individual Defendants to properly exercise their fiduciary duties to Aerojet Rocketdyne stockholders. Allegedly, in violation of the Exchange Act and in further violation of their fiduciary duties, the Defendants caused to be filed the materially deficient Preliminary Proxy on January 25, 2021 with the SEC in an effort to solicit stockholders to vote their Aerojet Rocketdyne shares in favor of the Proposed Transaction. The Preliminary Proxy is materially deficient, deprives Aerojet Rocketdyne's stockholders of the information they need to make an intelligent, informed and rational decision of whether to vote their shares in favor of the Proposed Transaction, and is thus in breach of the Defendants fiduciary duties. the Preliminary Proxy omits and/or misrepresents material information concerning, among other things: (a) the sales process and in particular certain conflicts of interest for management; (b) the financial projections for Aerojet Rocketdyne, provided by Aerojet Rocketdyne to the Company's financial advisors, Citi Global Markets, Inc. and Evercore Group L.L.C.; and (c) the data and inputs underlying the financial valuation analyses, if any, that purport to support the fairness opinions created by Citi and Evercore and provided to the Company and the Board. Absent judicial intervention, the Proposed Transaction will be consummated, resulting in irreparable injury to Plaintiff and the Class. This action seeks to enjoin the Proposed Transaction or, in the event the Proposed Transaction is consummated, to recover damages resulting from violation of law by Defendants, says the complaint. The Plaintiff has been an Aerojet Rocketdyne stockholder. Aerojet Rocketdyne is an aerospace and defense company that provides propulsion systems and energetics to the space, missile defense and strategic systems, and tactical systems areas, in support of domestic and international customers.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Evan J. Smith, Esq. Ryan P. Cardona, Esq. BRODSKY & SMITH, LLC 9595 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 900 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Phone: (877) 534-2590 Facsimile: (310) 247-0160 Email: esmith@brodskysmith.com rcardona@brodskysmith.com ALEX AND ANI: Howard Sues Over Failure to Pay Store Manager's OT ---------------------------------------------------------------- JAIME HOWARD, and all others similarly situated under 29 U.S.C. Section 216(b), Plaintiff v. ALEX AND ANI, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 0:21-cv-60196-WPD (S.D. Fla., January 26, 2021) brings this complaint against the Defendant for its alleged unlawful pattern and practice of depriving workers of overtime compensation in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Plaintiff began working for the Defendant in or around November 2018 as a store manager. The Plaintiff asserts that although he customarily and regularly worked 40 hours a week for the Defendant, he was deprived of overtime compensation when he worked over 40 hours a week at one and one-half times his regular rate of pay. In addition, the Defendant improperly deducted his compensation if he has worked less than 40 hours a week, specifically for alleged "sick time" used, the suit says. The Plaintiff seeks actual damages for the unpaid wages, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees and costs, all recoverable interest, and any other relief that the Court deems just and proper. Alex and Ani, LLC is a retailer and producer of jewelry. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: J. Freddy Perera, Esq. Bayardo E. Aleman, Esq. Valerie Barnhart, Esq. Brody M. Shulman, Esq. PERERA BARNHART ALEMAN 12401 Orange Drive, Suite 123 Davie, FL 33330 Tel: (786) 485-5232 E-mail: freddy@pba-law.com bayardo@pba-law.com valerie@pba-law.com brody@pba-law.com AMERICAN AIRLINES: Class Certification Motion Filing Due August 11 ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSHUA KOUCHI, as an individual, and on behalf all similarly situated employees, v. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC., and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 2:18-cv-07802-PSG-AGR (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Philip S. Gutierrez entered an order granting stipulation to continue deadline for class certification motion and alter briefing schedule as follows: Event Deadline 1. Class Certification Motion filing: August 11, 2021 2. Opposition to Class Certification: September 8, 2021 Motion 3. Reply in Support of Class September 22, 2021 Certification Motion: 4. Hearing on Motion for Class October 25, 2021 Certification: 5. Trial May 10, 2022 6. All Dates and Deadlines Continued in Related Trial Date: accordance with the Trial Date 7. Final Pretrial Conference April 25, 2022 American Airlines, Inc. is a major American airline headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas, within the Dallas -- Fort Worth metroplex. It is the world's largest airline when measured by fleet size, scheduled passengers carried, and revenue passenger mile. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/2YBifAy at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael G. McGuinness, Esq. Kelly Wood, Esq. O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP 400 South Hope Street Los Angeles, CA 90071-2899 Telephone: (213) 430-6000 Facsimile: (213) 430-6407 E-mail: mmeguinness@omm com kwood@omm.com The Defendant is represented by: Kevin Mahoney, Esq. Katherine J. Odenbreit, Esq. George B. Singer, Esq. MAHONEY LAW GROUP, APC 249 E. Ocean Blivd., Ste. 814 Long Beach, CA 90802 Telephone: (562) 590-5550 Facsimile: (562) 590-8400 E-mail: Kmahoney@mahoney-law.net Kogenbreit@mahoney-law.net psinger@mahoney-law.net AMERICAN RETAIL: Paguada Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against American Retail Supply Corp. The case is styled as Dilenia Paguada, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. American Retail Supply Corp., Case No. 1:21-cv-00733 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 27, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. American Retail Supply Corp. -- https://www.americanretailsupply.com/ -- operates as a retail store and offers various products which includes store fixtures, retail displays, wholesale packaging, security products, back room supplies, computer systems, store signage, merchant services, gift cards, and marketing materials.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mars Khaimov, Esq. 10826 64th Avenue, Ste. 2nd Floor Forest Hills, NY 11375 Phone: (917) 915-7415 Email: marskhaimovlaw@gmail.com ASTRAZENECA PLC: Faces Zhukov Suit Over Decline in Share Price -------------------------------------------------------------- Vladimir Zhukov, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. ASTRAZENECA PLC, PASCAL SORIOT, MARC DUNOYER, and MENELAS PANGALOS, Case No. 1:21-cv-00825 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2021) is brought on behalf of a class consisting of all persons and entities other than the Defendants that purchased or otherwise acquired AstraZeneca securities between May 21, 2020 and November 20, 2020, both dates inclusive, seeking to recover damages caused by the Defendants' violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, against the Company and certain of its top officials, with regard to the Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's securities. In April 2020, the Company partnered with Oxford University to develop a potential recombinant adenovirus vaccine for COVID-19, later dubbed AZD1222. Oxford University's work on developing a COVID-19 vaccine began in January 2020, almost as soon as the virus was recognized globally. Volunteers for the first clinical trial were recruited and screened in March 2020, and a Phase 1 clinical trial was launched the following month. According to the complaint, the Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business, operations, and compliance policies. Specifically, the Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) initial clinical trials for AZD1222 had suffered from a critical manufacturing error, resulting in a substantial number of trial participants receiving half the designed dosage; (ii) clinical trials for AZD1222 consisted of a patchwork of disparate patient subgroups, each with subtly different treatments, undermining the validity and import of the conclusions that could be drawn from the clinical data across these disparate patient populations; (iii) certain clinical trial participants for AZD1222 had not received a second dose at the designated time points, but rather received the second dose up to several weeks after the dose had been scheduled to be delivered according to the original trial design; (iv) AstraZeneca had failed to include a substantial number of patients over 55 years of age in its clinical trials for AZD1222, despite this patient population being particularly vulnerable to the effects of COVID-19 and thus a high priority target market for the drug; (v) AstraZeneca's clinical trials for AZD1222 had been hamstrung by widespread flaws in design, errors in execution, and a failure to properly coordinate and communicate with regulatory authorities and the general public; (vi) as a result of all the foregoing, the clinical trials for AZD1222 had not been conducted in accordance with industry best practices and acceptable standards and the data and conclusions that could be derived from the clinical trials was of limited utility; (vii) as a result of all the foregoing, AZD1222 was unlikely to be approved for commercial use in the U.S. in the short term, one of the largest potential markets for the drug; and (viii) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. On November 23, 2020, AstraZeneca issued a release announcing the results of an interim analysis of its ongoing trial for AZD1222. Although the release claimed that the drug candidate had met its primary efficacy endpoints, the announcement immediately began to raise questions among analysts and industry experts. AstraZeneca disclosed that the interim analysis involved two smaller scale trials in disparate locales -- the United Kingdom and Brazil -- that, for unexplained reasons, employed two different dosing regimens. On this news, AstraZeneca's American Depository Share price fell nearly $2.00 per share during the trading day on November 23, 2020, on extremely high trading volume of over 13 million ADSs traded. As negative news reports continued to reveal previously undisclosed problems and flaws in AstraZeneca's clinical trials for AZD1222, AstraZeneca's ADS price allegedly fell to $52.60 per share by market close on November 25, 2020, a 5% decline over three trading days in response to adverse news on abnormally high trading volume. As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's securities, Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses and damages, says the complaint. The Plaintiff acquired AstraZeneca securities at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period. AstraZeneca PLC is a British–Swedish multinational pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical company with its headquarters in Cambridge, England.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Willie C. Briscoe, Esq. THE BRISCOE LAW FIRM, PLLC 12700 Park Central Drive, Suite 520 Dallas, TX 75251 Phone: (972) 521-6868 Facsimile: (281) 254-7789 Email: wbriscoe@thebriscoelawfirm.com - and - Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq. J. Alexander Hood II, Esq. James M. LoPiano, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 600 Third Avenue New York, NY 10016 Phone: (212) 661-1100 Facsimile: (212) 661-8665 Email: jalieberman@pomlaw.com ahood@pomlaw.com jlopiano@pomlaw.com - and - Patrick V. Dahlstrom, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 10 South La Salle Street, Suite 3505 Chicago, IL 60603 Phone: (312) 377-1181 Facsimile: (312) 377-1184 Email: pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com - and - Peretz Bronstein, Esq. BRONSTEIN, GEWIRTZ & GROSSMAN, LLC 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4600 New York, NY 10165 Phone: (212) 697-6484 Facsimile: (212) 697-7296 Email: peretz@bgandg.com BLACKBERRY LIMITED: Pearlstein Suit Wins Class Certification ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARVIN PEARLSTEIN, Individually And On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. BLACKBERRY LIMITED (F/K/A RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED), THORSTEN HEINS, BRIAN BIDULKA, and STEVE ZIPPERSTEIN, Case No. 1:13-cv-07060-CM-KHP (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge C.J. McMahon entered an order: 1. granting the Plaintiffs' motion to certify a class of "all those who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of BlackBerry Limited on the NASDAQ during the period from March 28, 2013 through and including September 20, 2013 (the 'Class Period'), excluding the Defendants, officers, and directors of BlackBerry Limited, members of their immediate families and their legal representatives, heirs, successors, or assigns, and any entity in which Defendants have or had a controlling interest." The class is modified to exclude true in-and-out traders.; 2. appointing class representatives; and 3. appoint class counsel. On September 29, 2017, the Lead Plaintiffs Todd Cox and Mary Dinzik and additional Plaintiffs Yong M. Cho and Batuhan Ulug filed the Second Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint, the operative complaint in this action, against the Defendants BlackBerry Limited, its former Chief Executive Officer Thorsten Heins, its former Chief Financial Officer Brian Bidulka, and its Chief Legal Officer Steve Zipperstein for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Plaintiffs bring this federal securities class action on behalf of the purchasers of BlackBerry common stock between March 28, 2013 and September 20, 2013. They allege that the Defendants made a series of materially false and misleading statements and omissions concerning the Company's new BlackBerry smartphones (BB10s) during the Class Period. Cho and Ulug were dismissed from this case. They appealed their dismissal to the Second Circuit, where their appeal is currently pending. The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants' misstatements and omissions maintained the price of BlackBerry's stock or otherwise prevented it from falling over the course of the Class Period. Thus, when the Plaintiffs bought BlackBerry common stock during the Class Period, they did so at an artificially inflated price. They were harmed when the stock price dropped as these misrepresentations were revealed throughout the Class Period. A copy of the Court's order granting the plaintiffs' motion for class certification dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3tluq2D at no extra charge.[CC] BLUESTONE PERENNIALS: Williams Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York -------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Bluestone Perennials, Inc. The case is styled as Milton Williams, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated v. Bluestone Perennials, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-00855 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Bluestone Perennials -- https://www.bluestoneperennials.com/ -- is a plant nursery in Ohio enduring 5-acre plant nursery with 1,000+ varieties of shrubs, flowers & grasses, plus supplies.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael A. LaBollita, Esq. GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES 150 E. 18th Street, Suite Phr New York, NY 10003 Phone: (212) 228-9795 Email: michael@gottlieb.legal BNSF RAILWAY: Briefing on Class Status Bid Stayed Pending Mediation ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Macias, et al., v. BNSF Railway Company, et al., Case No. 2:19-cv-02305 (D. Kan.), the Hon. Judge Toby Crouse entered an order stating that: 1. The briefing on Plaintiff's Motion to Certify Class is stayed pending resolution of the Plaintiffs' Motion for Mediation and Motion for Leave to File Fifth Amended Complaint; and 2. The Defendants' deadline to respond to the Plaintiffs' Motion for Mediation and Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Fifth Amended Complaint is extended up to and including Feb. 3, 2021: -- a hearing before Magistrate Judge Gwynne E. Birzer on to these motions is scheduled for Feb. 18, 2021; and -- a Zoom invitation will be sent to counsel a week prior to the hearing. Following the resolution of these motions, District Judge Toby Crouse will set a status conference to set the briefing schedule on Plaintiff's Motion to Certify Class. The nature of suit states Real Property - Torts to Land. District Judge Toby Crouse and Magistrate Judge Gwynne Birzer held a telephone conference to discuss pending motions. The Plaintiffs appeared through counsel, Gerald Lee Cross, Jr. Defendant, BNSF Railway Company, appeared through counsel, Jennifer B. Wieland. Defendant, Miles Leasing, LLC, appeared through counsel, Donald M. McLean. Defendant, Unified Government of Wyandotte County and Kansas City, Kansas, appeared through counsel, Daniel E. Kuhn and Susan Alig. The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company is the largest freight railroad network in North America. One of seven North American Class I railroads, BNSF has 41,000 employees, 32,500 miles of track in 28 states, and more than 8,000 locomotives.[CC] BOSTON FOUNDRY: Faces Mekrami Suit Over Unsolicited Text Messages ----------------------------------------------------------------- SAMIR MEKRAMI, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BOSTON FOUNDRY, INC., dba MADE IN COOKWARE, Defendant, Case No. CACE-21-001722 (Fla. 17th Jud. Cir. Ct., January 26, 2021) is a class action complaint brought against the Defendant for its alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection ACT. According to the complaint, the Defendant allegedly engages in unsolicited text messaging to promote its products with no regard for consumers' privacy rights. To further its marketing strategy, the Defendant produced and/or created an advertisement on television wherein it directed the Plaintiff and other consumers to text the word "COOK" to 88209 to be able to access its "Black Friday Deals". The Plaintiff texted the word "COOK" without intending to make any purchase and solely to gain access to the catalog of goods, and within moments of texting, the Plaintiff received an automated text-message response from the Defendant on November 27, 2020. The Plaintiff asserts that he never requested or otherwise consented to receive any automated marketing text messages from the Defendant using an "automatic telephone dialing system" (ATDS). However, the Defendant began sending unsolicited marketing text messages to the Plaintiff after the conclusion of the Defendant's purported "Black Friday Deals", specifically in the month of December 2020 and as recently as January 22, 2021. The Defendant allegedly used a messaging platform that permitted the Defendant to transmit thousands of text messages automatically and without any human involvement. The Plaintiff seeks actual, statutory damages, and/or trebled statutory damages, as well as an injunction prohibiting the Defendant from using an ATDS to call and text message telephone numbers assigned to cellular telephones without the prior express consent of the called party, the suit says. Boston Foundry, Inc. sells pots, pans, and other cooking utensils. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq. Thomas J. Patti, Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI 110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Tel: (954) 907-1136 Fax: (855) 529-9540 E-mail: jibrael@jibraellaw.com tom@jibraellaw.com BRENTON BURNS: Riskin Asks Court to Certify Interlocutory Appeal ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the putative class action lawsuit styled DANIEL J. RISKIN, M.D., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. BRENTON BURNS; MARY BETH JENKINS; RAYMOND SCOTT; JOHN STEPHEN WHITEHURST; SCOTT HUEBNER; JOHN KUZMISHIN; FRED SCHWARZER; CRAIG GOMULKA; CHARLES TALBOT HEPPENSTALL, JR.; UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH MEDICAL CENTER; UPMC PRESBYTERIAN SHADYSIDE; UPMC HEALTH PLAN, INC.; CHARTER LIFE SCIENCES (OHIO) II, L.P.; and CHARTER LIFE SCIENCES II, L.P.; CLS PARTNERS II (OHIO), LLC; CLS PARTNERS II, L.P.; and CLS MANAGEMENT II, LLC; and HEALTH FIDELITY, INC., Case No. 2019-0570-KSJM, the Plaintiff filed a request with the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware on January 29, 2021 to certify an interlocutory appeal concerning its December 31, 2020 decision to dismiss Count I of the case's operative complaint. The Plaintiff believes the Delaware Supreme Court should determine the substantial legal issue of whether a company's issuance of underpriced convertible preferred stock to a controlling stockholder, pre-conversion, can constitute a transfer of economic value sufficient to support a direct claim under Gentile v. Rossette, 906 A.2d 91 (Del. 2006). Count I pleads a direct claim because it alleges: (i) UPMC was a controlling stockholder; (ii) Health Fidelity consummated the 2017 Series B Financing at an unfair price; (iii) the 2017 Series B Financing increased UPMC's economic stake and voting power through the issuance of Series B Preferred Stock with liquidation preferences, conversion rights, and the right to vote generally with the common stockholders; and (iv) the 2017 Series B Financing effected a corresponding decrease in the economic value and voting power of Health Fidelity’s minority stockholders. University of Pittsburgh Medical Center is a global nonprofit health enterprise located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. UPMC Presbyterian Shadyside is a tertiary care hospital based in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. UPMC Health Plan, Inc. is a provider of health plans headquartered in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Charter Life Sciences (Ohio) II, L.P. is a venture capital fund operated by Charter Venture Capital in Ohio. Charter Life Sciences II, L.P. is a venture capital fund operated by Charter Venture Capital. CLS Partners II (Ohio), LLC is a provider of employee benefits based in Ohio. CLS Partners II, L.P. is a provider of employee benefits, risk management, and retirement services. CLS Management II, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company. Health Fidelity, Inc. is a healthcare technology company based in San Mateo, California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Richard P. Rollo, Esq. Travis S. Hunter, Esq. Sarah A. Clark, Esq. Robert B. Greco, Esq. Angela Lam, Esq. RICHARDS, LAYTON & FINGER, P.A. 920 N. King Street Wilmington, DE 19801 Telephone: (302) 651-7700 BRICK PLUS: Hedges Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York -------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Brick Plus Mortar LLC. The case is styled as Donna Hedges, on behalf of herself and all other persons similarly situated v. Brick Plus Mortar LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-00844 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Brick + Mortar -- https://thisisbrickandmortar.com/ -- produces southern inspired scented candles.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Justin A. Zeller, Esq. THE LAW OFFICE OF JUSTIN ALEXANDER ZELLER, P.C. 277 Broadway, Suite 408 New York, NY 10007 Phone: (212) 229-2249 Fax: (212) 229-2246 Email: Jazeller@zellerlegal.com BUDSGUNSHOP.COM LLC: Paguada Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against BudsGunShop.Com, LLC. The case is styled as Dilenia Paguada, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. BudsGunShop.Com, LLC., Case No. 1:21-cv-00739 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 27, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Budsgunshop.com, LLC -- https://www.budsgunshop.com/ -- offers for shotguns, pistols, revolvers, rifles, and muzzleloaders.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mars Khaimov, Esq. 10826 64th Avenue, Ste. 2nd Floor Forest Hills, NY 11375 Phone: (917) 915-7415 Email: marskhaimovlaw@gmail.com CANON U.S.A.: Faces Rouse Class Action Suit Over Data Breach ------------------------------------------------------------ DIANA ROUSE, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. CANON U.S.A., INC., Case No. 1:21-cv-00414 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 25, 2021) alleges that Canon failed to properly protect its employees' highly sensitive personal and financial information, including employees' names, social security numbers, dates of birth, numbers for driver's licenses or government-issued IDs, bank account numbers utilized for direct deposits from Canon, and electronic signatures. Canon is a provider of consumer, business-to-business, and industrial digital imaging solutions to the United States, Latin America, and the Caribbean markets. A significant portion of Canon's business products are geared towards the protection of sensitive data and documents. According to Defendant Canon's own product literature, "[f]rom identity theft and intellectual property loss to infection by viruses and malware, IT administrators are tasked with adequately protecting information and assets from threats from the outside as well as within." According to the complaint, the Company failed to adequately protect itself and highly confidential and sensitive private information of its own current and former employees and their dependents and beneficiaries from outside cyberattack. On August 4, 2020, Canon became aware of a serious ransomware attack that occurred between July 20, 2020 and August 6, 2020 on its own networks and systems. This attack resulted in an unauthorized third-party gaining access to files on Canon's servers containing fifteen years' worth of personal, sensitive and confidential information about Canon's current and former employees, and their beneficiaries and dependents, dating back to 2005. To make matters worse, despite learning of the Canon Data Breach in August 2020, Canon allegedly did not publicly announce the Canon Data Breach until more than three months later, on or around November 25, 2020. In this long delayed announcement, Canon disclosed that the data accessed by the attacker included employees' personal identifying information ("PII"), the suit says. The Defendant's security failures enabled the hackers to execute the Canon Data Breach and steal Plaintiff's and Class Members' Private Information. The Canon Data Breach was caused and enabled by Defendant's violation of its obligations to abide by best practices and industry standards concerning the security of Private Information, added the suit. Plaintiff Diana Rouse was employed by Canon for several years until she left the Company in 2005. As a condition of her employment, Ms. Rouse was required to and did provide her personal identifying and financial information to Canon, including the very type of Private Information stolen by the criminals during the Canon Data Breach. The Plaintiff asserts claims for negligence, negligence per se, unjust enrichment, breach of implied contract, and violation of California's Unfair Competition Law, seeking monetary damages, statutory damages, injunctive relief, and all other relief as authorized in equity or by law. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Lori G. Feldman, Esq. GEORGE GESTEN MCDONALD, PLLC 102 Half Moon Bay Drive Croton-on-Hudson, NY 10520 Telephone: (917) 983-9321 Facsimile: (888) 421-4173 E-mail: LFeldman@4-justice.com - and - David J. George, Esq. Brittany L. Brown, Esq. GEORGE GESTEN MCDONALD, PLLC 9897 Lake Worth Road, Suite No. 302 Lake Worth, FL 33467 Telephone: (561) 232-6002 Facsimile: (888) 421-4173 E-mail: DGeorge@4-Justice.com CANTON FOOD: Fails to Pay Minimum & Overtime Wages, Torres Claims ----------------------------------------------------------------- PEDRO TORRES v. CANTON FOOD CO., INC. and DOES 1 to 25, inclusive, Case No. 21STCV02988 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Jan. 25, 2021) is a class action lawsuit brought by the Plaintiff and other similarly situated aggrieved employees alleging that the Defendants failed to compensate for all hours worked, failed to pay minimum wages, and failed to pay overtime in violation of the California Labor Code. The Plaintiff contends that Canton violated Labor Code section 1194, 1194.2, 1197, and 1197.1 because it failed to pay him and other similarly situated aggrieved employees for all hours worked, including the statutory minimum wage for all hours worked and for "off the clock" work. The Plaintiff further asserts that he and others were not paid for all hours worked in violation of Labor Code Section 1194 and the applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order due to Canton's company policy of rounding of the actual hours worked as a part of their business practice, which disproportionately affected the employees and resulted in less working hours and less pay. The Plaintiff started working for Canton on August 21, 2020 as a stocker. Canton Food wholesales and distributes food products.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Harout Messrelian, Esq. MESSRELIAN LAW INC. 500 N. Central Ave., Suite 840 Glendale, CA 91203 Telephone: (818) 484-6531 Facsimile: (818) 956-1983 CARDELLA & ASSOCIATES: Class of Call-Center Employees Certified --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MEGAN ENGER, SARAH INFANTE, and RAMON LOPEZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. THOMAS L. CARDELLA & ASSOCIATES, INC., Case No. 1:20-cv-00078-CJW-KEM (N.D. Iowa), the Hon. Judge C.J. Williams entered an order: 1. conditionally certifying the class of: "all hourly call-center employees who were employed by [defendant], anywhere in the United States, at any time from August 12, 2017 through the final disposition of this matter;" 2. amending the Plaintiffs' proposed notice to reflect the appropriate class description, adding language clarifying that certification is conditional, amending the eligibility requirement to concern start-up/shut-down time around lunch breaks (not clocking out for short rest breaks), correctng the relevant time period, and adding the language requested by defendant on depositions and trial testimony; 3. authorizing the Plaintiffs to send notice via mail and email as requested; 4. authorizing the Plaintiffs to send reminder notices via email as requested and to allow putative class members to complete their consent forms electronically; 5. directing the Defendant to post the notice and consent forms at its call centers in plain view; and 6. directing the Defendant to send plaintiffs' the requested information on putative class members in the requested format within 14 days of this order. The Plaintiff Megan Enger was employed by the defendant in Keokuk, Iowa. The Plaintiff Sarah Infante was employed by the defendant in El Paso, Texas. The Plaintiff Ramon Lopez was employed by defendant in Alamogordo, New Mexico. The Plaintiffs allege that they and other similarly situated persons "have not been paid for all hours worked nor the proper amount of overtime." The Defendant is an employer who operates call centers in various states. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3cxqbet at no extra charge.[CC] CARENET INFOMEDIA: Gabel Seeks to Certify Class of FLSA TeleNurses ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as YVONNE GABEL, individually, and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. CARENET -- INFOMEDIA GROUP, INC., d/b/a CARENET HEALTHCARE SERVICES, Case No. 5:20-cv-01420-JKP-HJB (W.D. Tex.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order: 1. conditionally certifying a collective action for unpaid overtime wages under Section 216(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), 29 U.S.C. section 216(b), on behalf of: "all current and former hourly Tele Nurses who worked for Carenet -- Infomedia Group, Inc. in the United States at any time in the past three years"; 2. requiring the Defendant to identify all putative members of the FLSA Collective by providing a list of their names, last known addresses, dates and location of employment, phone numbers, and email addresses in electronic and importable format within days of the entry of the order; 3. permitting the Plaintiff's counsel to send Court-approved Notice of this action to putative members of the FLSA Collective via U.S. Mail, email and text message; and 4. approving a 60-day opt-in period from the date the Court- approved Notice is sent during which putative FLSA Collective members may join this case by returning their written consents, with one reminder email sent 30 days into the opt-in period to anyone who at that point has not yet opted into the action. The Plaintiff contends that the Court should grant her requested relief because she has identified that she and all other TeleNurses are similarly situated insofar as being required to use the same centrally implemented computer timekeeping system, which does not accurately capture hours worked with respect to certain work activities -- such as loading and logging into computer programs -- that necessarily occurs at the start of every shift and after every lunch period for TeleNurses. She has also identified that the same attendance and schedule adherence policies applied to all TeleNurses. Carenet is an American provider of healthcare support services, healthcare navigation services, care management programs and consumer engagement solutions to private and public institutions. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion to certify class dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3czq2qG at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Charles R. Ash, IV, Esq. Kevin J. Stoops, Esq. Alana Karbal, Esq. SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C. One Towne Square, 17th Floor Southfield, MH 48076 Telephone: (248) 355-0300 E-mail: crash@sommerspc.com kstoops@sommerspc.com akarbal@sommerspc.com CARESAVE TECHNOLOGIES: Diggs Suit Seeks Caregivers' Unpaid Wages ---------------------------------------------------------------- CHERYL DIGGS, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CARESAVE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (d/b/a "HomeCare.com"), Defendant, Case No. 8:21-cv-00205-GJH (D. Md., January 25, 2021) brings this complaint as a class and collective action complaint against the Defendant seeking all available relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant from approximately 2016 until approximately April 2018 as a live-in caregiver that resided at the client's home. The Plaintiff claims that although she and other similarly situated caregivers regularly work over 40 hours per week, the Defendant did not compensate them with the required minimum hourly wage rate for all hours they worked as well as any extra overtime premium for all the hours they worked over 40 in a workweek at the applicable overtime rate in accordance with the law. Caresave Technologies, Inc. owns and operates the Internet platform HomeCare.com which is "the leading mobile and web platform designed to connect care providers to clients seeking in-home care services for themselves or their loved ones." [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Brian J. Markovitz, Esq. JOSEPH, GREENWALD & LAAKE, P.A. 6404 Ivy Lane, Suite 400 Tel: (301) 220-2200 E-mail: bmarkovitz@igllaw.com - and – R. Andrew Santillo, Esq. WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC Twining Office Center, Suite 211 715 Twining Road Dresher, PA 19025 Tel: (215) 884-2491 E-mail: asantillo@winebrakelaw.com CARNIVAL CORP: Approval of Request for Private Mediation Pending ---------------------------------------------------------------- Carnival Corporation said in its Form 10-K report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on January 26, 2021, for the fiscal year ended November 30, 2020, that the parties' request for private mediation in the purported class action suit initiated by former guests from Grand Princess is pending. On April 8, 2020, numerous former guests from Grand Princess filed a purported class action against Carnival Corporation and Carnival plc and two of its subsidiaries, Princess Cruise Lines, Ltd. and Fairline Shipping International Corporation, Ltd. The plaintiffs ultimately removed Fairline Shipping from the case. On September 22, 2020, the court granted our motions to dismiss the plaintiffs' second amended complaint in part. The court granted the company's motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' negligence-based claims without prejudice and with leave to amend and granted our motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' request for injunctive relief without prejudice. The court denied the company's motion to dismiss plaintiffs' claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress. On October 2, 2020, the plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint. On October 20, 2020, the court denied plaintiffs' motion for class certification, and the plaintiffs filed a petition for leave to appeal this ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on November 3, 2020. The petition for leave to appeal is pending. On November 25, 2020, the court granted in part and denied in part the company's motion to dismiss, allowing the negligence claims of those individual plaintiffs who claim to have contracted COVID-19 or to have experienced COVID-19 symptoms to proceed against Carnival Corporation, Carnival plc and Princess Cruises and dismissing the claims of those plaintiffs who did not allege contracting COVID-19 with prejudice. The court also dismissed the plaintiffs' claims for injunctive relief with prejudice. On December 9, 2020, we filed an answer to the plaintiffs' third amended complaint. On December 28, 2020, the parties filed a request for private mediation. Carnival Corporation owns and operates cruise ships offering cruises to all major vacation destinations including North America, United Kingdom, Germany, Southern Europe, South America, and Asia Pacific. The Company, through a subsidiary also owns and operates hotels and lodges. CARNIVAL CORP: Bid to Dismiss Former Guests' Class Action Pending ----------------------------------------------------------------- Carnival Corporation said in its Form 10-K report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on January 26, 2021, for the fiscal year ended November 30, 2020, that the motion to dismiss the purported class action suit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, is pending. On June 4, 2020, another group of former guests from Grand Princess filed a purported class action against Carnival Corporation, Carnival plc, and Princess Cruises in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, seeking compensation based on severe emotional distress associated with being exposed to COVID-19 onboard, contracting COVID-19 onboard, and/or contracting COVID-19 while onboard and subsequently passing away as a result of COVID-19. The action asserts claims for negligence, gross negligence, negligent infliction of emotional distress and intentional infliction of emotional distress. On November 23, 2020, a motion to dismiss plaintiff's amended action was filed and the briefing is now complete. Carnival Corporation owns and operates cruise ships offering cruises to all major vacation destinations including North America, United Kingdom, Germany, Southern Europe, South America, and Asia Pacific. The Company, through a subsidiary also owns and operates hotels and lodges. CARNIVAL CORP: Bid to Dismiss Former Guests' Suit Pending --------------------------------------------------------- Carnival Corporation said in its Form 10-K report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on January 26, 2021, for the fiscal year ended November 30, 2020, that the motion to dismiss filed in the purported class action suit filed against Princess Cruises, Carnival Corporation, and Carnival plc, is pending. On July 13, 2020, another group of former guests from Grand Princess filed a purported class action in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against Princess Cruises, Carnival Corporation, and Carnival plc. On November 23, 2020, a motion to dismiss the plaintiff's amended action was filed and the briefing is now complete. Carnival Corporation owns and operates cruise ships offering cruises to all major vacation destinations including North America, United Kingdom, Germany, Southern Europe, South America, and Asia Pacific. The Company, through a subsidiary also owns and operates hotels and lodges. CARNIVAL CORP: Bid to Junk Lindsay & Zehner Class Suit Pending -------------------------------------------------------------- Carnival Corporation said in its Form 10-K report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on January 26, 2021, for the fiscal year ended November 30, 2020, that the motion to dismiss the purported class action suit initiated by Leonard C. Lindsay and Carl E.W. Zehner, is pending. On June 24, 2020, Leonard C. Lindsay and Carl E.W. Zehner, former guests from Zaandam, filed a purported class action against Carnival Corporation, Carnival plc and Holland America Line N.V. On September 11, 2020, the plaintiffs filed an amended class action on behalf of all persons in the U.S. who were guests from Zaandam who embarked on March 8, 2020. Carnival Corporation, Carnival plc and Holland America Line N.V have filed a motion to dismiss on November 20, 2020. On December 11, 2020, plaintiffs filed their response, to which the company filed its reply on December 24, 2020. Carnival Corporation owns and operates cruise ships offering cruises to all major vacation destinations including North America, United Kingdom, Germany, Southern Europe, South America, and Asia Pacific. The Company, through a subsidiary also owns and operates hotels and lodges. CARNIVAL CORP: Turner Appeal in Dismissal of Class Suit Pending --------------------------------------------------------------- Carnival Corporation said in its Form 10-K report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on January 26, 2021, for the fiscal year ended November 30, 2020, that the appeal made in the purported class action suit initiated by Paul Turner, is pending. On April 7, 2020, Paul Turner, a former guest from Costa Luminosa, filed a purported class action against Costa Crociere, S.p.A. and Costa Cruise Line, Inc. in the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of Florida. On September 10, 2020, the court granted Costa's motion to dismiss based upon forum non conveniens, and directed that the action be filed in Italy. The plaintiff has appealed the order, and the appeal is pending in the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. Carnival Corporation owns and operates cruise ships offering cruises to all major vacation destinations including North America, United Kingdom, Germany, Southern Europe, South America, and Asia Pacific. The Company, through a subsidiary also owns and operates hotels and lodges. CARRIZO OIL: Chisum Bid for Conditional Cert. Nixed w/o Prejudice ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as DON CHISUM, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. CARRIZO OIL & GAS, INC., CALLON PETROLEUM COMPANY, and CALLON PETROLEUM OPERATING COMPANY, Case No. 4:20-cv-00051-DC-DF (W.D. Tex.), the Hon. Judge David B. Fannin entered an order: 1. denying without prejudice the Plaintiff's Motion for Conditional Certification, so as to allow refiling when appropriate; and 2. setting a status conference in conformity with Swales under a forthcoming, separate order. This case is before the U.S. Magistrate Judge David B. Fannin by a standing order of referral from the District Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 636 and Appendix C of the Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to United States Magistrate Judges. The Court said, "District courts in the Fifth Circuit have long employed the Lusardi two-step approach when considering motions for conditional certification under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. section 216(b). Both the Plaintiff's Motion for Conditional Certification and the Defendant's Response are premised on the application of the Lusardi two-step approach to conditional certification. However, on January 12, 2021 in Swales v. KLLM Transport Services, the Fifth Circuit enunciated its rejection of Lusardi. Case No. 19-60847, 2021 WL 98229 (5th Cir. Jan. 12, 2021). The conditional certification standard articulated by the Fifth Circuit in Swales now requires the district court to: "[I]dentify, at the outset of the case, what facts and legal considerations will be material to determining whether a group of "employees" is "similarly situated." And then it should authorize preliminary discovery accordingly. The amount of discovery necessary to make that determination will vary case by case, but the initial determination must be made, and as early as possible. In other words, the district court, not the standards from Lusardi, should dictate the amount of discovery needed to determine if and when to send notice to potential opt-in plaintiffs." A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3oGvQkQ at no extra charge.[CC] CHW GROUP: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Baker Suit Claims -------------------------------------------------------- TYLER BAKER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CHW GROUP, INC. d/b/a CHOICE HOME WARRANTY, Defendant, Case 2:21-cv-01308 (D.N.J., Jan. 28, 2021) seeks to stop the Defendants' practice of making unsolicited calls. CHW Group, Inc. provides home repair and maintenance warranties. It offers home protection, buyers and sellers, and real estate warranty. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Aytan Y. Bellin, Esq. BELLIN & ASSOCIATES LLC 50 Main Street, Suite 1000 White Plains, NY 10606 Telephone: (914) 358-5345 Facsimile: (212) 571-0284 E-mail: aytan.bellin@bellinlaw.com - and - Richard Bennett, Esq. BENNETT & BENNETT 1200 Ananstasia Avenue, Office 360 Coral Gables, FL 33134 Telephone: (305) 444-5925 E-mail: richardbennett27@gmail.com CREDIT CONTROL: Einhorn Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Credit Control Services, Inc. The case is styled as Aryeh Einhorn, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Credit Control Services, Inc. d/b/a Credit Collection Services, Case No. 1:21-cv-00534 (E.D.N.Y., Feb. 1, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Credit Control Services, Inc. -- https://www.ccsusa.com/ -- was founded in 1966. The Company's line of business includes collection and adjustment services on claims and other insurance related issues.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David M. Barshay, Esq. BARSHAY, RIZZO & LOPEZ, PLLC 445 Broadhollow Road, Suite Cl18 Melville, NY 11747 Phone: (631) 210-7272 Fax: (516) 706-5055 Email: dbarshay@brlfirm.com CRYSTEEL MANUFACTURING: Proserv Removal Files Suit in D. Minnesota ------------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Crysteel Manufacturing, Inc. The case is styled as Proserv Removal, Inc., on behalf of itself individually and all others similarly situated v. Crysteel Manufacturing, Inc., Case No. 0:21-cv-00200-SRN-ECW (D. Minn., Jan. 27, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over personal injury claims. Crysteel Manufacturing Inc., -- https://www.crysteel.com/ -- is a dump body, hoist, and platform manufacturer.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Karen Hanson Riebel, Esq. Kate M. Baxter-Kauf, Esq. LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP 100 Washington Ave S Ste 2200 Mpls, MN 55401-2179 Phone: (612) 339-6900 Fax: (612) 339-0981 Email: khriebel@locklaw.com kmbaxter-kauf@locklaw.com CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD: Salone Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages ------------------------------------------------------------------- Gary Salone, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD U.S., INC., CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD, INC., JOHN DOE CORPORATIONS 1-10, Case No. 2:21-cv-00414-MHW-KAJ (S.D. Ohio, Jan. 29, 2021) is brought against the Defendants for the Defendants' failure to pay employees overtime wages, seeking all available relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act, and the Ohio Prompt Pay Act. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff worked 40 or more hours in at least one workweek. During the Plaintiff's employment with the Defendants, the Defendants required the Plaintiff to take an unpaid meal break, generally 30 minutes in length. To deduct the 30-minute meal break from the maintenance employees' compensable hours worked, the Defendants either (1) automatically deducted 30 minutes from their daily hours worked for a meal break; (2) had maintenance employees clock in and out for a meal break; or (3) had maintenance employees submit their time worked into a computer, thereafter manually deducting the 30-minute meal break from their hours worked, the suit says. Regardless of the manner in which the unpaid meal break was deducted, the Plaintiff often was unable to actually take a full 30-minute meal break, or their meal break was interrupted by having to perform work duties. This work time resulted in the Plaintiff not being fully and properly paid for all of their hours worked in violation of the FLSA and Ohio Acts, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed as an hourly maintenance technician at the Defendants' operations located in Columbus, Ohio. The Defendants provide facility maintenance, cleaning, and related services for businesses and organizations throughout the Unites States.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew J.P. Coffman, Esq. Adam C. Gedling, Esq. Kelsie N. Hendren, Esq. COFFMAN LEGAL, LLC 1550 Old Henderson Rd, Suite #126 Columbus, OH 43220 Phone: (614) 949-1181 Fax: (614) 386-9964 Email: mcoffman@mcoffmanlegal.com agedling@mcoffmanlegal.com khendren@mcoffmanlegal.com DCM SERVICES: Madlinger Files FDCPA Suit in D. New Jersey --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against DCM SERVICES, LLC. The case is styled as Patricia Madlinger, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. DCM SERVICES, LLC, Case No. 3:21-cv-01546-BRM-DEA (D.N.J., Jan. 31, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. DCM Services, LLC -- https://www.dcmservices.com/ -- is a third-party collection agency with a primary focus on estate recoveries.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Lawrence C. Hersh, Esq. 17 Sylvan Street, Suite 102B Rutherford, NJ 07070 Phone: (201) 507-6300 Email: lh@hershlegal.com DEVEREUX FOUNDATION: Children Sexually Abused by Staff, Suit Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- KATHERINE JINES, JANE DOE 1, JANE DOE 2, JANE DOE 3, JOHN DOE 1 (a minor by and through his parent), and JOHN DOE 2 (a minor by and through his parent), on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. The DEVEREUX FOUNDATION (d/b/a DEVEREUX ADVANCED BEHAVIORAL HEALTH) and QUALITYHEALTH STAFFING, LLC, Case No. 2:21-cv-00346-AB (E.D. Pa., Jan. 26, 2021) is a class action lawsuit seeking to hold Devereux accountable for the harm it caused and to prevent devastating abuse from happening to any other child in Devereux's care. Each year, the Devereux Foundation, along with its staffing company QualityHealth Staffing, through 21 facilities in 13 states, takes on responsibility for protecting more than 25,000 of our country's most vulnerable members: children with autism, intellectual and developmental disabilities, and specialty mental health needs, including youth in the child welfare system. The Plaintiff contends that instead of fulfilling its promise and solemn responsibility to protect these vulnerable youth, they were exposed to predators and abusers. Devereux failed to enact safety measures and other policies to protect the children, failed to adequately screen, hire, train, and supervise staff, and failed to fulfill its duties under state and federal law. Accordingly, Plaintiffs Katherine Jines, Jane Doe 1, Jane Doe 2, Jane Doe 3, John Doe 1 (a minor by and through his parent), and John Doe 2 (a minor by and through his parent) make individual claims for the abuse they suffered and bring on behalf of others similarly situated a class action for injunctive relief to enjoin the Defendant from continuing conduct that threatens imminent harm to the proposed class. The Devereux Foundation is a nonprofit behavioral health organization that operates programs and services in 13 U.S. states, working with children and adults with developmental disabilities, emotional and behavioral disorders, and mental illnesses.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Joseph G. Sauder, Esq. Lori G. Kier, Esq. Davina C. Okonkwo, Esq. SAUDER SCHELKOPF LLC 1109 Lancaster Avenue Berwyn, PA 19312 Telephone: (610) 200-0580 Facsimile: (610) 421-1326 E-mail: jgs@sstriallawyers.com lgk@sstriallawyers.com dco@sstrialllawyers.com - and - Annika K. Martin, Esq. LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor New York, NY 10013 Telephone: (212) 355-9500 Facsimile: (212) 355-9592 E-mail: akmartin@lchb.com - and - Mark Chalos, Esq. Hannah Lazarz, Esq. LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 222 2nd Ave, Suite 1640 Nashville, TN 37201 Telephone: (615) 313-9000 Facsimile: (615) 313-9965 E-mail: mchalos@lchb.com hlazarz@lchb.com FAMILY SOLUTIONS: Faces Williams Suit Over Failure to Pay Wages --------------------------------------------------------------- The case, CAROLYN WILLIAMS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FAMILY SOLUTIONS OF OHIO, INC., PROSTAR MANAGEMENT, INC., JOHN HOPKINS, and DAWN SMITH, Defendants, Case No. 1:21-cv-00196 (N.D. Ohio, January 25, 2021) challenges the Defendants' alleged unlawful wage-and-hour practices that willfully violated the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Ohio laws. The Plaintiff has worked for the Family Solutions as a Qualified Mental Health Specialist from June 2017 through December 2018 at its Cleveland location, and then from December 2018 through December 2019 at its Columbus location. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants failed to pay her and other similarly situated employees the required minimum wage for some or all of their workweeks, as well as their overtime compensation at one and one-half times of their regular rate of pay for all hours they worked in excess of 40 in a workweek. The Plaintiff brings this complaint as a class and collective action complaint on behalf of herself and other similarly situated employees against the Defendants seeking compensatory damages in the amount of their unpaid wages and commissions, as well as liquidated damages in an equal amount, attorneys' fees and costs, and other relief as the Court deems equitable and just. Family Solutions of Ohio, Inc. provides community behavioral healthcare services. Prostar Management, Inc. was the parent company of Family Solutions. John Hopkins was the owner of Prostar and the President and chief executive of Family Solutions. Dawn Smith was the Chief Operating Officer of Family Solutions. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott D. Perlmuter, Esq. TITLE LAW FIRM 4106 Bridge Ave. Cleveland, OH 44113 Tel: (216) 308-1522 Fax: (888) 604-9299 E-mail: scott@tittlelawfirm.com - and – Thomas A. Downie, Esq. 46 Chagrin Falls Plaza Chagrin Falls, OH 44022 Tel: (440) 973-9000 E-mail: tom@chagrinlaw.com FEDEX GROUND: Fails to Pay OT Wages to Package Handlers, Chiu Says ------------------------------------------------------------------ J. CHIU, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:21-cv-01181 (D.N.J., Jan. 26, 2021) is an action against the Defendant's failure to pay the Plaintiff and the class overtime compensation for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week. Plaintiff Chiu was employed by the Defendant as package handler. Fedex Ground Package System, Inc. provides package delivery services. The Company delivers packages by truck to residential and business addresses throughout North America. [BN The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew D. Miller, Esq. Justin L. Swidler, Esq. Richard S. Swartz, Esq. SWARTZ SWIDLER, LLC 1101 Kings Highway N., Ste. 402 Cherry Hill, NJ 08034 Tel: (856) 685-7420 Fax: (856) 685-7417 FIELDWORKS LLC: Response to Mathews' Class Status Bid Due Feb. 25 ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL MATHEWS v. FIELDWORKS, LLC, Case No. 5:20-cv-06057-RK (W.D. Mo.), the Hon. Judge Roseann A. Ketchmark entered an order: 1. directing the parties to submit briefing regarding whether the Court has subject matter jurisdiction on or before Feb. 3, 2021; 2. holding an oral argument regarding subject matter via teleconference on Feb. 10, 2021; and 3. scheduling the Defendant's response to Plaintiff's motion for class certification is now due on or before Feb. 25, 2021. Fieldworks LLC provides campaigning and event planning services. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3oCv744 at no extra charge.[CC] FIRE STATION: Rison Files TCPA Suit in S.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against The Fire Station Precinct 1, LLC. The case is styled as Tanya Rison, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. The Fire Station Precinct 1, LLC doing business as: The Fire Station Wellness Center, a Michigan Limited Liability Company, Case No. 2:21-cv-10227-GCS-DRG (E.D. Mich., Feb. 1, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for restrictions of use of telephone equipment. The Fire Station Precinct 1, LLC -- https://www.thefirestation420.com/ -- is a first-class dispensary that offers a wide selection of cannabis products.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew Shamis, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE, PA 14 NE 1st Ave, Ste. 705 Miami, FL 33132 Phone: (305) 479-2299 Fax: (786) 623-0915 Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com FLAVORGOD LLC: Faces Hinesley Suit Over Unsolicited Text Messages ----------------------------------------------------------------- The case, STEVEN HINESLEY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FLAVORGOD, LLC, Defendant, Case No. CACE-21-001766 (Fla. 17th Jud. Cir. Ct., January 26, 2021), arises from the Defendant's alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The Plaintiff claims that the Defendant sent him unsolicited text messages on his cellular telephone on or about June 3, 4, and 7, 2019 in attempt to promote its products and goods. The impersonal and generic nature of the Defendant's text messages demonstrate that the Defendant utilized an "automatic telephone dialing system" (ATDS) in transmitting the messages. The Plaintiff contends that he never provided the Defendant his "prior express written consent" to be contacted with advertisement using an ATDS. The complaint further states that the Defendant's unsolicited text messages have caused harm to the Plaintiff, such as invasion of his privacy and annoyance, inconvenienced and disruption to his daily life. Thus, the Plaintiff seeks an injunction prohibiting the Defendant from using an ATDS to call and text message telephone numbers assigned to cellular telephones without the prior consent of the called party, as well as actual, statutory damages, and/or trebled statutory damages, and other relief that the Court deems reasonable and just. Flavorgod LLC sells cooking and seasoning products. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq. HIRALDO P.A. 401 E. Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1400 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 Tel: (954) 400-4713 E-mail: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com - and – Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI 110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Tel: (954) 907-1136 Fax: (855) 529-9540 E-mail: jibrael@jibraellaw.com FLORIDA SOUTHERN: April 2 Extension of Class Cert. Filing Sought ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as LINDSAY MURILLO, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, v. FLORIDA SOUTHERN COLLEGE, Case No. 8:20-cv-01494-JSM-SPF (M.D. Fla.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order extending her deadline to move for class certification and accompanying deadline to disclose Rule 23 experts from February 17, 2021 to April 2, 2021. The Plaintiff requests a six-week extension of the February 17, 2021 class certification deadline. The proposed extension would extend the class certification deadline to Friday, April 2, 2021. The Defendant has agreed to the requested extension and has represented to the Plaintiff that it does not intend to file an opposition. Florida Southern College is a private college in Lakeland, Florida. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3oReDFv at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Sarah N. Westcot, Esq. Stephen A. Beck, Esq. Max S. Roberts, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1420 Miami, FL 33133 Telephone: (305) 330-5512 Facsimile: (305) 676-9006 E-mail: swestcot@bursor.com mroberts@bursor.com FRESH FARMS: Deadline for Class Status Bid Filling Set for March 26 ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Yarger v. Fresh Farms, LLC, Case No. 2:19-cv-02767 (D. Kan.), the Hon. Magistrate Judge James P. O'Hara entered an order granting the plaintiff's third motion for extension of time to complete discovery and file renewed motion for class certification as follows: 1. The Plaintiff's new filing deadline is March 26, 2021, and this deadline will not be further extended absent a showing of extraordinary circumstances. 2. The Plaintiff may wish to keep this deadline and admonition in mind when deciding whether (and when) to file a motion to compel discovery. The suit alleges violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Fresh Farms provide customers fruits and vegetables.[CC] FRIENDS HEALTH: Fails to Properly Pay OT Wages, Jang et al. Claim ----------------------------------------------------------------- The case, JAE SUK JANG and SOONKUM PARK, Plaintiffs v. FRIENDS HEALTH CARE TEAM, INC. d/b/a FRIENDS HEALTH CARE or FRIENDS HEALTH, and REBECCA T. CHO, Defendants, Case No. 1:21-cv-00093 (E.D. Va., January 25, 2021), arises from the Defendants' alleged intentional and willful violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Plaintiffs worked for the Defendants as personal care aide or personal care assistants (PCAs). Plaintiff Jang was hired from on or about August 2019 until on or about February 2020, while Plaintiff Park was from on or about August 26, 2017 until on or about March 3, 2019. The Plaintiffs claim that although they regularly worked more than 40 hours a week while employed by the Defendant, they never received the proper amount of their overtime wages. The Defendant allegedly manipulated their employees' pay stubs to hide the true regular rate and hours worked of their employees. The Plaintiffs bring this complaint on behalf of themselves and those similarly situated against the Defendants seeking an amount equal to the unpaid overtime at the rate of not-les-than one and one-half ties their regular hourly wage rate, unpaid overtime penalties/liquidated damages, all other applicable penalties and liquidated damages, attorney's fees and costs, and pre- and post-judgment interest. Friends Health Care Team, Inc. provides an adult day care center service and adult home care service. Rebecca T. Cho was the President and CEO of the corporate Defendant. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: (Michael) Hyunkweon Ryu RYU & RYU, PLC 301 Maple Ave West, Suite 620 Vienna VA 22180 Tel: (703) 319-0001 Fax: (703) 562-0787 GABRIEL BROTHERS: Skaggs Bid for Conditional Certification Nixed ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as DEBORAH SKAGGS, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. GABRIEL BROTHERS, INC., Case No. 1:19-cv-02032-JPW (M.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Jennifer P. Wilson entered an order denying the Plaintiff's motion for conditional certification. According to the memorandum, the court finds that denial of conditional certification is appropriate in this case in light of the significant differences in job duties presented by the relatively small sample of the potential collective members under current consideration. The court would need to conduct individualized inquiries into each Plaintiff's job duties -- a task ill-suited for collective resolution. Therefore, on these additional grounds, the court will deny Skaggs' motion for conditional certification. This action was brought on behalf of a putative collective comprised of: "all current and former assistant managers, including merchandise managers and customer support/experience managers, employed by Defendant Gabriel Brothers, Inc. ("Gabe's") from November 26, 2016 to the present. Plaintiff Skaggs, is a former AM who alleges that she was misclassified as exempt from the overtime provisions of the FLSA since she largely performed the work of hourly employees, rather than the work listed in Gabe's AM job descriptions. Skaggs commenced this civil action on November 26, 2019, alleging FLSA violations for unpaid overtime wages and that she was misclassified as exempt under the FLSA's overtime provisions. Skaggs seeks to bring this lawsuit as a collective action on behalf of all AMs who are or were employed by Gabe's any time on or after November 26, 2016. Gabe's stores, formerly Gabriel Brothers stores, are a private discount fashion retailer owned by Gabriel Brothers, Inc. It was founded in 1961 and is headquartered in Morgantown, West Virginia. A copy of the Court's memorandum dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3cBoCvS at no extra charge.[CC] GC SERVICES: Reply to Class Status Opposition Set for February 16 ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Francis DiDonato v. GC Services Limited Partnership, et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-02154-LGS (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Lorna F. Schofield entered an order: 1. directing the Defendants to file any opposition to the Plaintiff's motion for class certification by February 4, 2021; and 2. directing the Plaintiff to file any reply to Defendant's opposition to class certification by February 16, 2021 GC Services is the largest privately-held outsourcing provider of call center management. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3rfpUAJ at no extra charge.[CC] GENERALI U.S.: Dziagwa Files Insurance Suit in D. Colorado ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Generali U.S. Branch, et al. The case is styled as Val Dziagwa, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Generali U.S. Branch, Customized Service Administrators, Inc. doing business as: CSA Travel Protection and Insurance Services, Case No. 1:21-cv-00314-SKC (D. Colo., Feb. 1, 2021). The nature of suit is stated as breach of insurance contract. Generali US Branch -- https://www.generaliusa.com/ -- is licensed as a domestic insurance/reinsurance company in all 50 states and territories for all major business lines.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Benjamin Charles Wickert, Esq. RAIZNER SLANIA LLP 2402 Dunlavy Street Houston, TX 77006 Phone: (713) 5549-078 Email: bwickert@raiznerlaw.com GOLDEN BOLT: Underpays Warehouse Workers, De Gonzalez Suit Claims ----------------------------------------------------------------- PATRICIA MEJIA DE GONZALEZ, as an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GOLDEN BOLT, LLC, a California limited liability company, GOLDEN HIPPO HOLDCO INC., a California corporation, WHOLE BODY RESEARCH, LLC, a California limited liability company, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 21STCV02962 (Cal. Super., January 25, 2021) brings this complaint against the Defendants seeking to recover unpaid wages and penalties under the California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004. The Plaintiff was hired by the Defendants on or around March 29, 2016 as a packer at the Defendants' warehouse in Woodland Hills, California. The Plaintiff asserts that during her employment with the Defendants, she was not provided all legally required meal periods due to the Defendant's policy and practice of requiring their employees to clock back in at the end of their meal period at approximately 12:30pm, which often necessitated waiting in line to se the timeclock. As a result, the Plaintiff and other non-exempt employees received meal periods of less than 30 minutes. The Defendants also allegedly failed to provide their employees with rest periods, and failed to compensate them with the required rest period premium for each workday. In addition, the Defendants did not accurately pay their employees' overtime compensation at one and one-half times their regular rate of pay for all hours they worked over 40 in a workweek because the Defendants failed to include all forms of incentive pay when calculating their regular rate of pay, the suit says. As a result of the Defendants' alleged failure to pay overtime wages as well as meal and rest period premium wages, the Defendants maintained inaccurate payroll records and issued inaccurate wage statements. The Corporate Defendants manufactures and distributes nutritional supplements. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott M. Lidman, Esq. Elizabeth Nguyen, Esq. Milan Moore, Esq. Romina Tamiry, Esq. LIDMAN LAW, APC 2155 Campus Drive, Suite 150 El Segundo, CA 90245 Tel: (424) 322-4772 Fax: (424) 322-4775 E-mail: slidman@lidmanlaw.com enguyen@lidmanaw.com mmoore@lidmanlaw.com rtamiry@lidmanlaw.com - and – Paul K. Haines, Esq. HAINES LAW GROUP, APC 2155 Campus Drive, Suite 180 El Segundo, CA 90245 Tel: (424) 292-2350 Fax: (424) 292-2355 E-mail: phaines@haineslawgroup.com GOOGLE LLC: Class Settlement Wins Final OK in Profile Litigation ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit RE GOOGLE PLUS PROFILE LITIGATION, Case No. 5:18-cv-06164-EJD (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Edward J. Davila entered an order granting final approval of class settlement, awarding reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and service awards; and entering final judgment. SUMMARY OF SETTLEMENT TERMS: -- Under the Settlement, Google stipulated to a nationwide settlement for the following Class: "all persons residing within the United States who (1) had a consumer Google+ account for any period of time between January 1, 2015 and April 2, 2019; and (2) had their non- public Profile Information exposed as a result of the software bugs Google announced on October 8, 2018 and December 10, 2018." -- Google agreed to a non-reversionary $7,500,000.00 Settlement Fund to cover all costs associated with the Notice Program, monetary benefits to members of the Settlement Class, incentive awards for the class representatives, and Class Counsel's attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses. -- The Settlement represents a fair resolution of the claims asserted on behalf of the Plaintiffs and the Settlement Class Members in this Action and released by the Settlement, and fully and finally resolves all such claims. -- Google, Plaintiffs, and the Settlement Class Members shall be bound by the Settlement. This case concerns the alleged exposure of Google+ users' Profile Information as a result of software bugs that Google, LLC announced on October 8, 2018, and December 10, 2018. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 25, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/39DGOmE at no extra charge.[CC] Counsel for the Plaintiffs Matt Matic and Zak Harris are: John A. Yanchunis, Esq. Ryan J. McGee, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP 201 N. Franklin Street, 7th Floor Tampa, FL 33602 Telephone: (813) 223-5505 Facsimile: (813) 223-5402 E-mail: jyanchunis@forthepeople.com rmcgee@forthepeople.com - and - Clayeo C. Arnold, Esq. Joshua H. Watson, Esq. CLAYEO C. ARNOLD A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION 865 Howe Avenue Sacramento, California 95825 Telephone: (916) 777-7777 Facsimile: (916) 924-1829 E-mail: carnold@justice4you.com jwatson@justice4you.com Counsel for the Plaintiffs Charles Olson and Eileen M. Pinkowski, are: Franklin d. Azar, Esq. Margeaux R. Azar, Esq. FRANKLIN D. AZAR & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 14426 East Evans Avenue Aurora, Colorado 80014 Telephone: (303) 757-3300 Facsimile: (720) 213-5131 E-mail: azarf@fdazar.com azarm@fdazar.com GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES: Meredith Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages ----------------------------------------------------------- Bradley Meredith, Adam Meredith, Bethany Reese, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY d/b/a GEICO, Case No. 1:21-cv-00106 (E.D. Va., Jan. 29, 2021), seeks to recover the unpaid wages and other damages owed to the Plaintiffs under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Virginia Wage Payment Act. Through the Defendant alleged company-wide policies and business practices, carried out through intimidation tactics and implied adverse employment consequences, the Defendant successfully pressured the Plaintiffs to customarily enter 7.75 hours of compensable time per day notwithstanding that the Plaintiffs regularly and customarily worked more than 8 hours per day and, by extension, more than 40 hours per week. The Defendant perpetrated an unlawful payroll policy designed to withhold and deny the Plaintiffs earned compensation and/or overtime wages as required by the FLSA, the VWPA, and/or as otherwise contractually and/or equitably guaranteed or owed, says the complaint. The Plaintiffs have been employed by GEICO as Region 7 automobile damage adjusters. GEICO operated continuously and substantially as an insurance company, providing insurance related services to businesses and individuals in all counties and jurisdictions of Virginia, North Carolina, and Tennessee.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Gregg C. Greenberg, Esq. ZIPIN, AMSTER & GREENBERG, LLC 8757 Georgia Avenue, Suite 400 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Phone: (301) 587-9373 Email: GGreenberg@ZAGFirm.com GREEN GENIE: Jackson Files TCPA Suit in E.D. Michigan ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Green Genie Inc. The case is styled as Lucinda Jackson, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Green Genie Inc., a Michigan Limited Liability Company, Case No. 2:21-cv-10190-GAD-RSW (E.D. Mich., Jan. 27, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Green Genie -- https://www.greengenieprovisioningcenter.com/ -- is a medical marijuana dispensary located in Detroit, Michigan.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew Shamis, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE, PA 14 NE 1st Ave, Ste. 705 Miami, FL 33132 Phone: (305) 479-2299 Fax: (786) 623-0915 Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com HARLAY HOSPITALITY: Website Lacks Accessibility Info, Garcia Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- ORLANDO GARCIA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HARLAY HOSPITALITY, INC., Defendant, Case No. 21NWCV00059 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., January 29, 2021) is a class action against the Defendant for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Unruh Civil Rights Act. The case arises from the Defendant's failure to provide information about the accessible features in the rooms at the Motel 6 Norwalk on its reservation Website, https://www.motel6.com/content/g6/en/home/motels.ca.norwalk.8683.html, for people with disabilities, including the Plaintiff. The Website reservation system lacks sufficient information needed by disabled travelers to assess independently whether a given hotel room would work for them. As a result, the Plaintiff is unable to engage in an online booking of the hotel room with any confidence or knowledge about whether the room will actually work for him due to his disability, the suit says. Harlay Hospitality, Inc. is an owner and operator of the Motel 6 Norwalk located at 11734 Imperial Hwy., Norwalk, California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Raymond Ballister Jr., Esq. Russell Handy, Esq. Amanda Seabock, Esq. Zachary Best, Esq. CENTER FOR DISABILITY ACCESS 8033 Linda Vista Road, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92111 Telephone: (858) 375-7385 Facsimile: (888) 422-5191 E-mail: amandas@potterhandy.com HEIDI KLEIN: Hedges Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York --------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Heidi Klein, Inc. The case is styled as Donna Hedges, on behalf of herself and all other persons similarly situated v. Heidi Klein, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-00828 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Heidi Klein -- https://www.heidiklein.com/ -- offers collection of cut designer beachwear and swimwear.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Justin A. Zeller, Esq. THE LAW OFFICE OF JUSTIN ALEXANDER ZELLER, P.C. 277 Broadway, Suite 408 New York, NY 10007 Phone: (212) 229-2249 Fax: (212) 229-2246 Email: Jazeller@zellerlegal.com HIGH SPEED: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York --------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against High Speed Productions Inc. The case is styled as Jenisa Angeles, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. High Speed Productions Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-00833 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. High Speed Productions Inc. -- https://www.hsproductions.com/ -- operates as a parent company. The Company through its subsidiaries produces several Websites, online magazines, and blogs.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mark Rozenberg, Esq. STEIN SAKS, PLLC 285 Passaic Street Hackensack, NJ 07601 Phone: (201) 282-6500 Email: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com IBM CORP: Plaintiffs Must File Class Certification Bid by March 8 ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as LARRY W. JANDER, RICHARD J. WAKSMAN, and all other individuals similarly situated, v. RETIREMENT PLANS COMMITTEE OF IBM, RICHARD CARROLL, MARTIN SCHROETER, and ROBERT WEBER, Case No. 1:15-cv-03781-WHP (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge William H. Pauley III entered a scheduling order as follows: 1. The Plaintiffs shall file any motion for class certification by March 8, 2021; 2. The Defendants shall file any opposition brief to plaintiffs' motion for class certification by April 9, 2021; 3. The Plaintiffs shall file any reply brief in further support of plaintiffs' motion for class certification by May 7, 2021; 4. The parties shall appear for a telephonic oral argument on plaintiffs' motion for class certification on May 5, 2021 at 11:00 a.m. The dial-in number is 888-363-4749, passcode 3070580; 5. The parties shall substantially complete document discovery by March 31, 2021; 6. The parties shall exchange expert disclosures by April 30, 2021; 7. The parties shall complete fact discovery by May 28, 2021; 8. The Plaintiffs shall serve their expert reports by July 7, 2021; 9. The Defendants shall serve their rebuttal expert reports by August 6, 2021; and 10. The parties shall complete expert discovery by September 8, 2021. The International Business Machines Corporation is an American multinational technology company headquartered in Armonk, New York, with operations in over 170 countries. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/2MOSEBw at no extra charge.[CC] ILLINOIS CENTRAL: Luecking BIPA Suit Removed to S.D. Illinois ------------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned Rebecca Luecking and Tracey Meyer, on behalf of themselves and other persons similarly situated v. ILLINOIS CENTRAL SCHOOL BUS LLC, Case No. 20L1028, was removed from the Circuit Court of St. Clair County, Illinois, to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois on Jan. 29, 2021, and assigned Case No. 3:21-cv-00109. The Plaintiffs, former employees of Defendant, allege that Defendant maintained a "fingerprint-scanning machine" and, in using that machine, violated the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act ("BIPA"), in the following ways: (1) "failing to develop and/or make public its written policy of how biometric data will be handled and destroyed to the Plaintiffs and class members"; (2) "collecting, capturing, storing, and/or sharing Plaintiffs' and class members' biometrics identifiers and/or information without informing them in writing and obtaining a written release that: (a) the biometric data was being recorded, obtained, collected, or stored; and (b) the specific purpose and length of term for which the biometric data was being collected, captured, obtained, and/or stored"; (3) "failing to store class members' biometric data using the reasonable standard of care within its industry and/or in a manner that is the same as or more protective than the manner in which the private entity stores, transmits, and protects other confidential and sensitive information"; and (4) failing to "disclose to the Plaintiffs the identities of any third parties with whom Illinois Central was directly or indirectly sharing, disclosing, or otherwise disseminating class members' biometric information."[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Roberto Luis Costales, Esq. William H. Beaumont, Esq. BEAUMONT COSTALES LLC 107 W. Van Buren, Suite 209 Chicago, IL 60605 Email: rlc@beaumontcostales.com whb@beaumontcostales.com The Defendant is represented by: Paula M. Ketcham, Esq. Michael P. Wissa, Esq. SCHIFF HARDIN LLP 233 South Wacker Drive, Suite 7100 Chicago, Illinois 60606 Phone: (312) 258.5500 Fax: (312) 258.5600 Email: PKetcham@schiffhardin.com MWissa@schiffhardin.com INTERSTATE MUSIC: Paguada Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Interstate Music LLC. The case is styled as Dilenia Paguada, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Interstate Music LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-00742 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 27, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Interstate Music -- https://interstatemusic.com/ -- is one of the largest online music stores featuring music technology and instruments.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mars Khaimov, Esq. 10826 64th Avenue, Ste. 2nd Floor Forest Hills, NY 11375 Phone: (917) 915-7415 Email: marskhaimovlaw@gmail.com ITALIANTOUCH USA: Cota Files ADA Suit in S.D. California -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Italiantouch USA, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Julissa Cota, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Italiantouch USA, Inc. doing business as: Tod's, a New York corporation; DOES 1 to 10, inclusive; Case No. 3:21-cv-00154-GPC-DEB (S.D. Cal., Jan. 27, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Italiantouch USA, Inc. -- http://www.italiantouch.com/-- is in the catalog and mail-order houses industry situated in New York.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Thiago M. Coelho, Esq. WILSHIRE LAW FIRM 3055 Wilshire Boulevard 12th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90010 Phone: (213) 381-9988 Email: thiago@wilshirelawfirm.com J.B. HUNT: Wilson Seeks Initial OK of Class Action Settlement ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as KAREEM WILSON, on behalf of himself, and all others similarly situated, and as an "aggrieved employee" on behalf of other "aggrieved employees" under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004, v. J.B. HUNT LOGISTICS, INC., an Arkansas corporation; J.B. HUNT TRANSPORT, INC., a business entity of unknown form; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 2:18-cv-03487-SVW-AFM (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order: 1. provisionally certifying the Class for settlement purposes only; 2. preliminarily approving the class action settlement embodied in the Joint Stipulation and Settlement Agreement; 3. approving the Notice of Class Action Settlement and the plan for its distribution to Class Members; 4. appointing ILYM as the Settlement Administrator; and 5. scheduling a Final Approval Hearing. The Class or Class Members means all persons employed by the Defendants in California as hourly, non-driver Installation Specialists, and in other comparable positions, at any time from March 2, 2014 through January 3, 2020. J.B. Hunt is an American transportation and logistics company based in Lowell, Arkansas. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3cBwtty at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: David G. Spivak, Esq. Caroline Tahmassian, Esq. THE SPIVAK LAW FIRM 16530 Ventura Blvd., Ste 203 Encino, CA 91436 Telephone: (818) 582-3086 Facsimile: (818) 582-2561 E-mail: david@spivaklaw.com caroline@spivaklaw.com - and - Walter Haines, Esq. UNITED EMPLOYEES LAW GROUP 5500 Bolsa Ave, Suite 201 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Telephone: (562) 256-1047 Facsimile: (562) 256-1006 E-mail: whaines@uelglaw.com JEFFERSON COUNTY, KY: Floyd Files Suit in W.D. Kentucky ------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Anne Haynie. The case is styled as Toni Floyd, Cheri Nicholson, on behalf of themselves and all those similarly situated v. Anne Haynie, in her official capacity as Chief Judge of the Jefferson County District Court, Case No. 3:21-cv-00058-DJH (W.D. Ky., Feb. 1, 2021). The case is brought over alleged civil rights violations. Anne Haynie is a judge of the Kentucky 30th District Court.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ben Carter, Esq. KENTUCKY EQUAL JUSTICE CENTER 222 S. First Street, Suite 305 Louisville, KY 40202 Phone: (502) 303-4062 Email: ben@kyequaljustice.org KRAFT MUSIC: Paguada Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Kraft Music Ltd. The case is styled as Dilenia Paguada, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Kraft Music Ltd., Case No. 1:21-cv-00740 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 27, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Kraft Music -- https://www.kraftmusic.com/ -- began as a Keyboard and MIDI specialty shop, and since has branched out into digital pianos, electronic drums, guitars, music software, live sound equipment, and more recently, consumer electronics.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mars Khaimov, Esq. 10826 64th Avenue, Ste. 2nd Floor Forest Hills, NY 11375 Phone: (917) 915-7415 Email: marskhaimovlaw@gmail.com KRS GLOBAL: Kumar Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages Under FLSA ---------------------------------------------------------- SURESH KUMAR, Individually, and on Behalf of All Employees Similarly Situated v. KRS GLOBAL BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC., CLEVELAND DIABETES CARE, INC., Case No. 9:21-cv-80151-DMM (S.D. Fla., Jan. 26, 2021) is a collective action seeking to recover wages and penalties from unpaid wages earned and due, interest, attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Plaintiff contends that the Defendants failed to pay any wages to him and the others similarly situated for the period of November 15, 2019 to January 10, 2020. He adds that the Defendants knew that their refusal to pay the wages due was at all times prohibited by the FLSA. The Plaintiff and all others similarly situated were employees of the Defendants. KRS Global provides pharmacy services. The Company offers capsules and tablets, drops, lozenges, injectables, creams, and gels products. Cleveland Diabetes is an American Bio Pharma, Gene Therapy and Medical Devices company based in Jacksonville, Florida.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Christine M. Tomasello, Esq. TOMASELLO LEGAL, P.A. 10299 Southern Boulevard, Unit 212451 Royal Palm Beach, FL 33411 Telephone: (561) 755-7090 LEXISNEXIS RISK: Court Certifies Settlement Class & Subclass ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as DELORIS GASTON, et al., v. LEXISNEXIS RISK SOLUTIONS INC., et al., Case No. 5:16-cv-00009-KDB-DCK (W.D.N.C.), the Hon. Judge Kenneth D. Bell entered an order: 1. granting motion for preliminary approval of proposed settlement; 2. preliminarily approving class action settlement; 3. certifying conditional settlement class and subclass; -- Settlement Class: "all persons who: (i) at any time within the four years prior to the date the Complaint was filed through the date of Final Judgment, (ii) had his or her personal information (including a driver identification number, name, address, or telephone number) appear on a Crash Report, and (iii) that Crash Report was available for purchase via an online solution supported, owned or operated by or on behalf of PoliceReports.US, LLC or LexisNexis Claims Solutions Inc;" -- Settlement Subclass: "all persons who: (i) are members of the Rule 23(b)(2) Settlement Class, and (ii) whose Crash Report was prepared by the CMPD;" Excluded from the Settlement Class and Settlement Subclass are counsel of record (and their respective law firms) for any of the Parties, employees of Defendants, and any judge presiding over this action and their staff, and all members of their immediate families; 4. designating Class Counsel under Rule 23(g)(l): -- David M. Wilkerson and Larry S. McDevitt of the Van Winkle Law Firm; -- Christopher L. Cogdill of Christopher L. Cogdill P.A.; and -- Eugene Clark Covington, Jr., of Eugene C. Covington, P.A. 5. designating the Plaintiffs Deloris Gaston and Leonard Gaston as the Class Representatives: 6. designating American Legal Claim Services LLC as the Settlement Administrator; and 7. scheduling final fairness hearing on May 24, 2021. In this action, Plaintiffs Deloris and Leonard Gaston, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, assert claims against the Defendants for alleged violations of the Driver's Privacy Protection Act (DPPA). The Named Plaintiffs contend that crash reports contain "personal information" "from a motor vehicle record" and are thus regulated by the DPPA. The Named Plaintiffs claim that Defendants violated the DPPA by allegedly disclosing Plaintiffs' crash reports to third parties on the PRUS eCommerce web portal for the purposes of marketing and solicitation without Plaintiffs' express consent. The Named Plaintiffs filed their Complaint on January 12, 2016 and a Class Action Amended Complaint on May 12, 2016. The Class Action Amended Complaint described a single putative class. It sought injunctive and equitable relief, compensatory, statutory and punitive damages, and an award of attorneys' fees and costs. The Defendants denied each of the claims asserted against them in this action and any liability to the putative class. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 25, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3jbAPJ5 at no extra charge.[CC] LHC GROUP: Class Certification Bid Deadline Set for Jan. 28, 2022 ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as SHANA FARMER, et al., v. LHC GROUP, INC., Case No. 2:20-cv-03838-JLG-CMV (S.D. Ohio), the Hon. Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura entered a preliminary pretrial order as follows: 1. The parties have agreed to make initial disclosures by February 26, 2021. 2. Motions or stipulations addressing the parties or pleadings, if any, must be filed no later than July 30, 2021. 3. The motion for class certification must be filed by January 28, 2022. 4. Primary expert reports, if any, must be produced within 60 days after the resolution of dispositive motions. Rebuttal expert reports, if any, must be produced within 5 days after service of the primary expert reports. 5. All discovery shall be completed by January 28, 2022. 6. Case dispositive motions must be filed by April 29, 2022. Responses in opposition must be filed by June 10, 2022. Replies, if any, must be filed by July 1, 2022. 7. The Plaintiff shall make a settlement demand within 30 days after production of payroll and timekeeping records and a scope of Opt-Ins to be agreed upon after the close of the opt-in period. The Defendants shall respond within 30 days after receipt of Plaintiffs' demand. LHC Group is a national provider of in-home healthcare services and innovations, providing quality, value-based healthcare to patients primarily within the comfort and privacy of their home or place of residence. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3rh9esD at no extra charge.[CC] LURKING CLASS: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lurking Class, LLC. The case is styled as Jenisa Angeles, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Lurking Class, LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-00808 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Lurking Class -- https://www.lurkingclass.com/ -- is a brand based on the artwork of Sketchy Tank.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mark Rozenberg, Esq. STEIN SAKS, PLLC 285 Passaic Street Hackensack, NJ 07601 Phone: (201) 282-6500 Email: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com MAGICAL BEAUNI: Xu Must File Class Status Bid by May 28 ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Xu v. Magical Beauni Nails, Case No. 5:20-cv-01332-LEK-TWD (N.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Therese Wiley Dancks entered a uniform pretrial scheduling order that: 1. The deadlines set in this scheduling order supersede the deadlines set forth in fed. r. civ. p.26(a)(3) and are firm and will not be extended, even by stipulation of the parties, absent good cause. 2. Venue motions are to be filed within 60 days of the date of this Order following the procedures set forth in Local Rule 7.1 (b)2 and are to be made returnable before the assigned Magistrate Judge. 3. Jurisdiction motions are to be filed within 60 days of the date of this Order following the procedures set forth in Local Rule 7.1 (b)1 (unless a party who is not an attorney is appearing pro se, in which case L.R. 7.1 (b)2 should be followed) and are to be made returnable before the assigned District Judge. 4. Joinder of Parties: Any application to join any person as a party to this action shall be made on or before May 28, 2021. 5. Amendment of pleadings: Any application to amend any pleading in this action shall be made on or before May 28, 2021. 6. Discovery: Rule 26(a)(1) Mandatory Disclosures due Jan. 29, 2021. Rule 33 and 34 Requests to be served by Feb. 22, 2021. Class Certification Motion to be filed by May 28, 2021. All discovery in this matter is to be completed on or before June 25, 2021. Discovery motions due July 2, 2021. Service of discovery requests must be made a sufficient number of days before this deadline to allow responses to be served before the cut-off. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3cFwnkv at no extra charge.[CC] MARATHON PETROLEUM: Deadline Extension for Class Status Bid Nixed ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Clement Gray, v. Marathon Petroleum Logistics Services, LLC, et al., Case No. 2:20-cv-07865-JFW-JC (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge entered an order denying the plaintiff's ex parte application for an order continuing the deadline for plaintiff to file his motion for class certification pursuant to local rule 23-3. In this case, the Court concludes that the Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate the requisite good cause necessary to grant a second extension of the deadline to file his motion for class certification. The Plaintiff argues that an extension of the deadline is necessary because the Defendants have failed to provide adequate response to the special interrogatories, requests for production, and requests for admission and the Defendants have failed to make the person most knowledgeable available for deposition pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6). The Plaintiff did not propound those discovery requests until October 6, 2020. On November 16, 2020, Marathon LLC provided written responses to the Plaintiff's discovery requests. However, despite concluding that Marathon LLC's discovery responses were inadequate (and the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition still needed to be scheduled) more than two months before the Plaintiff's deadline to file a motion for class certification, the Plaintiff chose to wait until January 12, 2021 -- nearly two months and less than two weeks before the deadline for filing the motion for class certification -- to raise the discovery issues with Marathon LLC. In addition, even though Marathon LLC responded the next day (January 13, 2021) and offered to meet and confer with respect to the discovery disputes, the Plaintiff never responded to Marathon LLC's offer. Instead, the Plaintiff filed his Application. Therefore, any "crisis" in meeting the deadline is due to Plaintiff's own neglect and, thus, a crisis of the Plaintiff's own making. Marathon Petroleum Corporation is an American petroleum refining, marketing, and transportation company headquartered in Findlay, Ohio. A copy of the Court's civil minutes dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3tn3ijW at no extra charge.[CC] MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Cota Says ------------------------------------------------------------------- JULISSA COTA, individually and on behalf all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC. d/b/a HOTEL PASEO; and DOES 1 to 10, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 3:21-cv-00140-JLS-AHG (S.D. Cal., Jan. 26, 2021) arises from the Defendants' violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendants' Website, https://www.hotelpaseo.com/, is not fully or equally accessible to her and other blind and visually-impaired consumers, which is a violation of the ADA. She seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the Defendants' corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendants' Website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers like her. Neiman Marcus Group, Inc. operates as a departmental store. The Company offers women's and men's apparel, handbags, shoes, cosmetics, jewelry, and home decoration products. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Thiago Coelho, Esq. Jasmine Behroozan, Esq. WILSHIRE LAW FIRM 3055 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90010 Telephone: (213) 381-9988 Facsimile: (213) 381-9989 E-mail: thiago@wilshirelawfirm.com jasmine@wilshirelawfirm.com MATTHEWS SENIOR: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Berglund Suit Says -------------------------------------------------------------- CARLA BERGLUND, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MATTHEWS SENIOR HOUSING LLC; and CUDAHY PLACE SENIOR LIVING LLC, Defendants, Case 2:21-cv-00108-PP (E.D. Wis., Jan. 26, 2021) seeks to recover from the Defendant unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff Berglund was employed by the Defendants as staff. Matthews Senior Housing LLC provides health care services. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James A. Walcheske, Esq. Scott S. Luzi, Esq. David M. Potteiger, Esq. WALCHESKE & LUZI, LLC 235 N. Executive Drive, Suite 240 Brookfield, Wisconsin 53005 Telephone: (262) 780-1953 Facsimile: (262) 565-6469 E-mail: jwalcheske@walcheskeluzi.com sluzi@walcheskeluzi.com dpotteiger@walcheskeluzi.com MCKINSEY & COMPANY: County Commission Files Suit in S.D. West Va. ----------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against McKinsey & Company, Inc. The case is styled as The County Commission of Mingo County, The Town of Kermit, West Virginia, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. McKinsey & Company, Inc., Case No. 2:21-cv-00079 (S.D.W. Va., Jan. 31, 2021). The case is brought over personal injury allegations. McKinsey & Company -- https://www.mckinsey.com/ -- is an American worldwide management consulting firm, founded in 1926 by University of Chicago professor James O. McKinsey, that advises on strategic management to corporations, governments, and other organizations.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: H. Truman Chafin, Esq. Letitia Neese Chafin, Esq. THE H. TRUMAN CHAFIN LAW FIRM P. O. Box 1799 Williamson, WV 25661 Phone: (304) 235-2221 Fax: (304) 235-2777 Email: Tish@thechafinlawfirm.com truman@thechafinlawfirm.com MEDICREDIT INC: Court Decertifies Class in Kwasniewski Suit ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as HELEN KWASNIEWSKI, on behalf of plaintiff and a class, v. MEDICREDIT, INC., Case No. 3:19-cv-00701-wmc (W.D. Wisc.), the Hon. Judge William M. Conley entered an order that: 1. Under Rule 23(c)(1)(C), the class previously certified by the court is decertified. 2. The Named plaintiff Helen Kwasniewski's individual complaint is dismissed for lack of standing. 3. The clerk's office is directed to enter final judgment and close this case. The Court said, "The class was only recently certified, and no notice has yet been sent to class members. Indeed, the defendant is currently seeking to appeal that certification to the Seventh Circuit. In light of the court's consideration of further developments in FDCPA standing law as set forth above and for the reasons discussed with the parties' counsel, the court finds it proper to decertify the class as well." In a previous order, the court certified the following class pursuant to Rule 23: "(a) all individuals (b) to whom Medicredit sent a letter to a Wisconsin address (d) seeking to collect a debt for St. Mary's Hospital in the amount of less than $1200, (e) which letter was sent at any time during a period beginning August 28, 2018 (one year prior to the filing of this action) and ending September 18, 2019 (21 days after the filing of this action)." Medicredit is a large collections agency focused exclusively on medical and healthcare debts. A copy of the Court's opinion and order dated Jan. 25, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/36zubYa at no extra charge.[CC] MEDNAX SERVICES: Fails to Secure Patients' Health Info, Cohen Says ------------------------------------------------------------------ CHELSEA COHEN, as parent and legal guardian of A.H., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MEDNAX SERVICES, INC., Defendant, Case 1:21-cv-20375-JEM (S.D. Fla., Jan. 28, 2021) arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard personal identifiable information and personal health information, including without limitation, patients' names, Social Security numbers, driver's license numbers, dates of birth, addresses, health insurance information, medical and treatment information, and other health-related billing and claims information (collectively, "personal identifiable information," "PII" or "PHI"). The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that on December 16, 2020, the Defendant started notifying patients that unauthorized and unknown third-parties accessed the Defendant's business email accounts between June 17 and June 22, 2020 ("Data Breach"). The Defendant discovered the Data Breach on June 19, 2020, but allowed the breach to continue for days and did not notify affected patients for almost six months. The Defendant failed to provide timely, accurate, and adequate notice to the Plaintiff and the Class that their PII had been lost and precisely what types of information was unencrypted and in the possession of unknown, unauthorized third-parties. The Defendant's conduct amounts to negligence and violates federal and state statutes. MEDNAX Services, Inc. provides physician services. The Company offers neonatology, maternal-fetal medicine, and anesthesiology, as well as provides pediatric, cardiology, intensive care, emergency medicine, surgery, urology, and hospital services. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert J. Kuntz Jr., Esq. DEVINE GOODMAN & RASCO, LLP 2800 Ponce de Leon Blvd., Suite 1400 Coral Gables, FL 33134 Telephone: (305) 374-8200 E-mail: rkuntz@devinegoodman.com -and- M. Anderson Berry, Esq. Clayeo C. Arnold, Esq. A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP. 865 Howe Avenue Sacramento, CA 95825 Telephone: (916) 777-7777 E-mail: aberry@justice4you.com MERCK & CO: Taylor Sues Over Zostavax Vaccine's Undisclosed Risks ----------------------------------------------------------------- MICHAEL TAYLOR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MERCK & CO., INC. and MERCK SHARP & DOHME, CORP., Defendants, Case No. 2:21-cv-01547-JMV-MF (D.N.J., January 31, 2021) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, strict liability, products liability, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, negligent misrepresentations, and unjust enrichment. The case arises from the Defendants' failure to provide information about the potential risk of viral infection of using Zostavax vaccine. The patient information sheet, as well as the label and prescribing information for Zostavax, did not adequately, if at all, address the risk of viral infection. Despite the potential correlation between being administered the Zostavax vaccine and within a relatively short period of time developing an infection, leading to the development of shingles or varicella-zoster virus pneumonia, Merck allegedly failed to properly address and provide this information both to the patient and the medical providers prescribing the vaccine. As a result of the Defendants' wrongful conduct, the Plaintiff sustained severe and permanent personal injuries, as well as significant conscious pain and suffering, mental anguish, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, physical impairment and injury. Merck & Co., Inc. is an American multinational pharmaceutical company based in New Jersey. Merck Sharp & Dohme, Corp. is an company that operates as a research-intensive biopharmaceutical company located in New Jersey. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert S. Greenwell, Esq. MORRIS BART, LLC 601 Poydras Street, 24th Floor New Orleans, LA 70130 Telephone: (504) 525-8000 Facsimile: (504) 599-3392 E-mail: bgreenwell@morrisbart.com MICROSOFT CORP: Ten-Month Claims Period Closes Sept. 23 ------------------------------------------------------- Microsoft Corporation said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January 26, 2021, for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2020, that ten-month claims period commenced on November 23, 2020 and will close on September 23, 2021. Antitrust and unfair competition class action lawsuits were filed against us in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec, Canada. All three have been certified on behalf of Canadian indirect purchasers who acquired licenses for Microsoft operating system software and/or productivity application software between 1998 and 2010. The trial of the British Columbia action commenced in May 2016. Following a mediation, the parties agreed to a global settlement of all three Canadian actions, and submitted the proposed settlement agreement to the courts in all three jurisdictions for approval. The final settlement and form of notice have been approved by the courts in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec. The ten-month claims period commenced on November 23, 2020 and will close on September 23, 2021. Microsoft Corporation develops, licenses, and supports software, services, devices, and solutions worldwide. The company was founded in 1975 and is headquartered in Redmond, Washington. MIDLAND CREDIT: Pinkesz Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Midland Credit Management, Inc. The case is styled as Lea Pinkesz, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Midland Credit Management, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-00536 (E.D.N.Y., February 1, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Midland Credit Management (MCM) -- https://www.midlandcredit.com/ -- provides debt recovery solutions for consumers across a broad range of assets.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David M. Barshay, Esq. BARSHAY, RIZZO & LOPEZ, PLLC 445 Broadhollow Road, Suite Cl18 Melville, NY 11747 Phone: (631) 210-7272 Fax: (516) 706-5055 Email: dbarshay@brlfirm.com MOD SUPER: Rocio BIPA Class Suit Removed to N.D. Illinois --------------------------------------------------------- The case styled JENNIFER ROCIO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. MOD SUPER FAST PIZZA, LLC, Case No. 2020 CH 07479, was removed from the Illinois Circuit Court of Cook County to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on January 28, 2021. The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of Illinois assigned Case No. 1:21-cv-00507 to the proceeding. The case arises from the Defendant's alleged violations of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act by failing to inform the Plaintiff and the Class in writing that their biometrics were being collected and stored, prior to such collection or storage; failing to inform them in writing of the specific purpose and length of time for which their biometrics were being captured, collected, stored, and used; failing to obtain written releases; failing to publicly provide a publicly-available retention schedule detailing the length of time for which the biometrics are stored and/or guidelines for permanently destroying the biometrics they store; and failing to obtain consent from the Plaintiff and the Class to disclose, redisclose, or other disseminate their biometric data to a third party. Mod Super Fast Pizza, LLC is a fast casual pizza restaurant chain, headquartered in Bellevue, Washington. [BN] The Defendant is represented by: Kwabena Appenteng, Esq. Orly Henry, Esq. LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 321 North Clark Street, Suite 1100 Chicago, IL 60654 Telephone: (312) 372-5520 E-mail: kappenteng@littler.com ohenry@littler.com - and – Patricia J. Martin, Esq. LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 600 Washington Avenue, Suite 900 St. Louis, MO 63101 Telephone: (314) 659-2000 E-mail: pmartin@littler.com NALU KAI INC: Paguada Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Nalu Kai Incorporated. The case is styled as Dilenia Paguada, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Nalu Kai Incorporated, Case No. 1:21-cv-00734 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 27, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Kai Nalu Incorporated -- https://www.naishsurfing.com/ -- is located in Haiku, Hawaii and is part of the sporting goods manufacturing industry.[BN] The Plaintiff appears pro se. NEVADA: Kerkorian Bid for Preliminary Injunction Tossed ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as KERKORIAN v. STATE OF NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, et al., Case No. 2:20-cv-00950-RFB-BNW (D. Nev.), the Hon. Judge Richard F. Boulware, II entered an order: 1. denying the Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction; 2. denying the Plaintiff's Proposed Discovery Plan and the Defendants' Motion in Opposition to Plaintiff's Discovery Plan; and 3. giving the Plaintiff 14 days to file a motion to amend the complaint or this case will be dismissed in its entirety without prejudice, given the fact that the Plaintiff is no longer in custody, and all claims sought were only for injunctive relief. The Court denies Plaintiff's motion because it finds that Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate he will likely suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief. At the time this action was commenced, Plaintiff was in custody at Nevada Department of Corrections (NDOC) residing at Southern Desert Correctional Center. The Plaintiff alleges that because Defendants are not following COVID-19 policies and guidelines, he is at risk of serious irreparable harm, including death from COVID-19, which is spreading in NDOC facilities. As of October 29, 2020, however, Plaintiff is no longer in NDOC custody and paroled. Because Plaintiff is no longer in custody, his basis of relief is moot. Therefore, this Court finds that the Plaintiff will not suffer any irreparable harm in the absence of the requested relief, the Court says. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3ri8bZG at no extra charge.[CC] NGM INSURANCE: Class Status Bid Filing Due March 29 in MSP Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MSP RECOVERY CLAIMS, SERIES LLC, et al., v. NGM INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., Case No. 3:19-cv-00128-MMH-JRK (M.D. Fla.), the Hon. Judge Maria Morales Howard entered an order granting the Plaintiffs' Consent Motion to Amend Case Management and Scheduling Order as follows: Date 1. The Plaintiffs' Motion for Class March 29, 2021 Certification and Proposed Class Wide Trial Plan; Plaintiffs' Initial Class Expert Disclosures: 2. The Defendants' Opposition to June 21, 2021 Motion for Class Certification and Response to Trial Plan; Defendants' Rebuttal Class Expert Disclosures; Completion of Discovery on Plaintiffs' Class Experts: 3. The Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of August 2, 2021 Class Certification Motion; Completion of Discovery on Defendants' Class Experts: 4. Hearing on Class Certification To be set by the Court at a later date 5. Disclosure of Non-Class Expert September 21, 2021 Reports by the Plaintiffs and Defendants: 6. Disclosure of Non-Class Expert October 19, 2021 Rebuttal Reports by the Plaintiffs and Defendants: 7. Mediation Deadline October 4, 2021 8. Fact Discovery Deadline: October 19, 2021 9. Non-Class Expert Discovery Deadline November 15, 2021 10. Dispositive and Daubert Motions December 13, 2021 11. Responses to Dispositive and January 18, 2022 Daubert Motions 12. All Other Motions Including May 2, 2022 Motions In Limine: ..13. Responses to Other Motions May 16, 2022 Including Motions In Limine 14. Joint Final Pretrial Statement May 16, 2022 MSP Recovery provides professional services. NGM provides insurance services. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3tnOKAf at no extra charge.[CC] NOVARTIS AG: Average Wholesale Price Related Suit vs. NPC Underway ------------------------------------------------------------------ Novartis AG said in its Form 20-F report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on January 26, 2021, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020, that Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation (NPC) continues to defend a putative class action suit related to the Average Wholesale Price (AWP) litigation initiated by private payors in New Jersey Lawsuits have been brought, the latest in February 2016, by various US state governmental entities and private parties against various pharmaceutical companies, including NPC, alleging that they fraudulently overstated the AWP that is or has been used by payors, including state Medicaid agencies, to calculate reimbursements to healthcare providers. NPC remains a defendant in a putative class action brought by private payors in New Jersey, and vigorously contests those claims. Novartis AG researches, develops, manufactures, and markets a range of healthcare products worldwide. The company's Innovative Medicines segment offers patented prescription medicines to enhance health outcomes for patients and health-care providers. Novartis AG has collaboration agreements with Xencor; QIAGEN N.V.; Surface Oncology; Intellia Therapeutics; Caribou Biosciences; Bristol-Myers Squibb; IBM Watson Health; Amgen; Allergan plc; Science 37, Inc.; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; PEAR Therapeutics; Pfizer; and Conatus Pharmaceuticals Inc. Novartis AG was founded in 1895 and is headquartered in Basel, Switzerland. NOVARTIS AG: Consolidated Exforge-Related Class Suit Ongoing ------------------------------------------------------------ Novartis AG said in its Form 20-F report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on January 26, 2021, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020, that the company continues to defend a consolidated class action suit related to Exforge. Since 2018, Novartis Group companies as well as other pharmaceutical companies have been sued by various direct and indirect purchasers of Exforge in multiple US individual and putative class action complaints. They claim that Novartis made a reverse payment in the form of an agreement not to launch an authorized generic, alleging violations of federal antitrust law and state antitrust, consumer protection and common laws, and seeking damages as well as injunctive relief. The cases have been consolidated in the S.D.N.Y. and the claims are being vigorously contested. No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report. Novartis AG researches, develops, manufactures, and markets a range of healthcare products worldwide. The company's Innovative Medicines segment offers patented prescription medicines to enhance health outcomes for patients and health-care providers. Novartis AG has collaboration agreements with Xencor; QIAGEN N.V.; Surface Oncology; Intellia Therapeutics; Caribou Biosciences; Bristol-Myers Squibb; IBM Watson Health; Amgen; Allergan plc; Science 37, Inc.; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; PEAR Therapeutics; Pfizer; and Conatus Pharmaceuticals Inc. Novartis AG was founded in 1895 and is headquartered in Basel, Switzerland. NOVARTIS AG: Sandoz and Fougera Continue to Defend Class Suits -------------------------------------------------------------- Novartis AG said in its Form 20-F report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on January 26, 2021, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020, that Sandoz Inc. and Fougera Pharmaceuticals Inc. continue to defend multiple class action suits related to the price-fixing of generic drugs. Since 2016, Sandoz Inc. has received a grand jury subpoena and a civil investigative demand and interrogatories from the Antitrust and Civil Divisions of the US Department of Justice (DOJ), and a subpoena and interrogatories from the Attorney General of the State of Connecticut in connection with those agencies' investigation into alleged price fixing and market allocation of generic drugs in the US market as well as alleged federal False Claims Act (FCA) violations. In 2020, Sandoz Inc. reached a resolution with the DOJ Antitrust Division, pursuant to which Sandoz Inc. agreed to pay USD 195 million and entered into a deferred prosecution agreement. The Sandoz resolution related to instances of misconduct at the company between 2013 and 2015 with regard to certain generic drugs sold in the United States. Under the terms of that agreement, Sandoz Inc. will continue to take steps to enhance its compliance program, employee training and monitoring, and will continue to cooperate with the US government's ongoing investigation into the generic pharmaceutical industry. Sandoz Inc. is also in negotiations with the DOJ Civil Division to resolve potential related claims and has recorded a provision of USD 187 million. Since the third quarter of 2016, Sandoz Inc. and Fougera Pharmaceuticals Inc. have been sued alongside other generic pharmaceutical companies in numerous individual and putative class action complaints by direct and indirect private purchasers and by 54 states and US territories, represented by their respective Attorneys General. Plaintiffs claim that defendants, including Sandoz, engaged in price-fixing and market allocation of generic drugs in the US market, and seek damages and injunctive relief. The actions contain product-specific complaints as well as complaints alleging the existence of an overarching industry conspiracy, and assert violations of federal and state antitrust laws as well as consumer protection laws. The cases have been consolidated for pretrial purposes in the United States District Court (USDC) for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and the claims are being vigorously contested. No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report. Novartis AG researches, develops, manufactures, and markets a range of healthcare products worldwide. The company's Innovative Medicines segment offers patented prescription medicines to enhance health outcomes for patients and health-care providers. Novartis AG has collaboration agreements with Xencor; QIAGEN N.V.; Surface Oncology; Intellia Therapeutics; Caribou Biosciences; Bristol-Myers Squibb; IBM Watson Health; Amgen; Allergan plc; Science 37, Inc.; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; PEAR Therapeutics; Pfizer; and Conatus Pharmaceuticals Inc. Novartis AG was founded in 1895 and is headquartered in Basel, Switzerland. NOVARTIS AG: Valsartan and Valsartan/HCT-Related Suits Ongoing -------------------------------------------------------------- Novartis AG said in its Form 20-F report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on January 26, 2021, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020, that Sandoz Inc. and other pharmaceutical companies continue to defend class action suits in Canada and a Multidistrict Litigation in New Jersey related to valsartan and valsartan/HCT product liability. Since 2018, claims have been brought against Sandoz and other pharmaceutical companies alleging injury from carcinogenic impurities found in valsartan and valsartan/HCT film-coated tablets and/or losartan marketed or manufactured by Sandoz. These claims include several putative class actions in Canada. Claims have also been brought alleging injury from carcinogenic impurities in ranitidine-containing medicines. These claims also include several putative class actions in Canada and a multidistrict litigation in Florida. All of these claims are being vigorously contested. No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report. Novartis AG researches, develops, manufactures, and markets a range of healthcare products worldwide. The company's Innovative Medicines segment offers patented prescription medicines to enhance health outcomes for patients and health-care providers. Novartis AG has collaboration agreements with Xencor; QIAGEN N.V.; Surface Oncology; Intellia Therapeutics; Caribou Biosciences; Bristol-Myers Squibb; IBM Watson Health; Amgen; Allergan plc; Science 37, Inc.; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; PEAR Therapeutics; Pfizer; and Conatus Pharmaceuticals Inc. Novartis AG was founded in 1895 and is headquartered in Basel, Switzerland. OC RAMPS: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against OC Ramps Inc. The case is styled as Jenisa Angeles, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. OC Ramps Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-00814 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. OC Ramps -- https://www.ocramps.com/ -- is a manufacturer of skateboard ramps & rails in the U.S.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mark Rozenberg, Esq. STEIN SAKS, PLLC 285 Passaic Street Hackensack, NJ 07601 Phone: (201) 282-6500 Email: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com OOGIE'S SNACKS: Jaquez Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Oogie's Snacks LLC. The case is styled as Ramon Jaquez, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Oogie's Snacks LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-00847 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Oogie's Snacks LLC -- https://oogiesnacks.com/ -- is located in Denver, Colorado and is part of the snack foods manufacturing industry.[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 P & Z FOODS: Deadline for Class Status Bid Filing Set for June 30 ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANGELICA GARCIA, individually and acting in the interest of other current and former employees, v. P & Z FOODS, INC., et al., Case No. 3:17-cv-06253-MMC (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Maxine M. Chesney entered a scheduling order as follows: Deadline 1. Plaintiff's Motion for June 30, 2021 Class Certification: 2. Plaintiff's Motion for September 30, 2021 Default Judgment: The Status Conference currently scheduled for February 26, 2021, is continued to December 10, 2021. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 25, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3tinAej at no extra charge.[CC] PACIFICA HOTEL: Fails to Timely Pay Wages, Corvarrubias Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- ZACHARY CORVARRUBIAS, on behalf of all aggrieved employees, Plaintiff v. PACIFICA HOTEL COMPANY and DOES 1-25, Defendants, Case No. 21STCV03280 (Cal. Super., January 26, 2021) brings this complaint against the Defendant seeking for penalties and unpaid wages under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA). The Plaintiff asserts these claims: -- The Defendant failed to provide meal and rest periods to its aggrieved employees as required by the Labor Code and the relevant Wage Order; -- The Defendant failed to timely pay all wages owed to each aggrieved employee each pay period, including proper calculation of the regular rate for shifts during which the Defendants intended its employees not to received compliant meal periods as required by the Labor Code Section 512; -- The Defendant failed to pay all accrued vacation and all wages owing to its employees upon separation from employment; and -- The Defendant failed to provide accurate itemized wage statements. Pacifica Hotel Company operates several hotel and motels throughout California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Kenneth A. Goldman, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH GOLDMAN, PC 15303 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1650 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Tel: (818) 287-7689 Fax: (818) 287-7816 - and – Sahag Majarian, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF SAHAG MAJARIAN, II 18250 Ventura Boulevard Tarzana, CA 91356 Tel: (818) 609-0807 PAYCOM SOFTWARE: Fredricks FCRA Class Suit Removed to N.D. Illinois ------------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled VICTOR J. FREDRICKS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. PAYCOM SOFTWARE, INC., Case No. 2020 CH 07423, was removed from the Illinois Circuit Court of Cook County to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on January 28, 2021. The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of Illinois assigned Case No. 1:21-cv-00504 to the proceeding. The case arises from the Defendant's alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Paycom Software, Inc. is an American online payroll and human resource technology provider based in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. [BN] The Defendant is represented by: Todd P. Stelter, Esq. HINSHAW & CULBERTSON LLP 151 North Franklin Street, Suite 2500 Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 704-3966 Facsimile: (312) 704-3001 E-mail: tstelter@hinshawlaw.com PEDIATRIX MEDICAL: Rumely Files Suit in S.D. California ------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Pediatrix Medical Group, et al. The case is styled as Michael Rumely, Abigail Bean, Jessica Jay, Matias Soto, Gregory Baum, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and on behalf of the general v. Pediatrix Medical Group, Mednax, Inc., Case No. 3:21-cv-00152-BAS-JLB (S.D. Cal., Jan. 27, 2021). The case arises from alleged personal injury violations. Pediatrix Medical Group Inc. -- http://www.pediatrix.com/-- provides maternal-fetal, newborn and pediatric physician services.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Robert S Green, Esq. GREEN & NOBLIN, P.C. 2200 Larkspur Landing Circle, Suite 101 Larkspur, CA 94939 Phone: (415) 477-6700 Fax: (415) 477-6710 Email: gnecf@classcounsel.com PHENIXFIN CORPORATION: Kahn Sues Over Removal Provision in Bylaws ----------------------------------------------------------------- DAVID L. KAHN; and DOREEN R. DE LEON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. PHENIXFIN CORPORATION; DAVID A. LORBER; ARTHUR S. AINSBERG; HOWARD AMSTER; KAREN HIRTLER-GARVEY; and LOWELL W. ROBINSON, Defendants, Case No. 2021-0076 (Del. Ch., Jan. 28, 2021) is an action against the Defendants and the members of its Board, seeking a declaratory judgment that the Removal Provision violates the Delaware General Corporation Law ("DGCL") and Delaware common law and is thus invalid. According to the complaint, a certain provision of the Company's bylaws, adopted and maintained by the Defendants provides that the Company's directors may be removed from office by a supermajority vote, contrary to Delaware law. In Delaware, any director or the entire board of directors may be removed by the holders of a majority of the shares. PhenixFIN Corporation is a non-diversified closed-end management investment company that operates as a business development company. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Blake A. Bennett, Esq. COOCH AND TAYLOR, P.A. The Nemours Building 1007 N. Orange St. #1120 Wilmington, DE 19801 Telephone: (302) 984-3889 E-mail: bbennett@coochtaylor.com -and- Brian P. Murray, Esq. GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP 230 Park Ave., Suite 530 New York, NY 10169 Telephone: (212) 682-5340 E-mail: bmurray@glancylaw.com -and- Werner R. Kranenburg, Esq. KRANENBURG 80-83 Long Lane London EC1A 9ET United Kingdom Telephone: +44-20-3174-0365 E-mail: werner@kranenburgesq.com PLANT DELIGHTS: Williams Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Plant Delights Nursery, Incorporated. The case is styled as Milton Williams, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated v. Plant Delights Nursery, Incorporated, Case No. 1:21-cv-00858 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Plant Delights Nursery https://www.plantdelights.com/ is a plant nursery in North Carolina that offers perennial garden plants.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael A. LaBollita, Esq. GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES 150 E. 18th Street, Suite Phr New York, NY 10003 Phone: (212) 228-9795 Email: michael@gottlieb.legal PORCH.COM INC: Preston Wage-and-Hour Suit Goes to S.D. California ----------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled ARIANA PRESTON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. PORCH.COM, INC., HIRE A HELPER, LLC, KERI MILLER, and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 37-2020-00042869-CU-OE-CTL, was removed from the Superior Court in the State of California for San Diego County to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on January 28, 2021. The Clerk of Court for the Southern District of California assigned Case No. 3:21-cv-00168-BEN-BLM to the proceeding. The case arises from the Defendants' alleged violations of the California Labor Code, the California Business and Professions Code, and the Fair Employment and Housing Act including failure to pay overtime, failure to pay compensation when due at time of separation of employment, unlawful and unfair business practices, retaliation, discrimination, hostile work environment harassment based on disability, failure to engage in the interactive process, failure to accommodate, failure to prevent discrimination, harassment and retaliation, and wrongful constructive termination. Porch.com, Inc. is an online website that connects homeowners with local home improvement contractors, headquartered in Seattle, Washington. Hire A Helper, LLC is a company that offers helper services based in California. [BN] The Defendants are represented by: Danielle Hultenius Moore, Esq. Kevonna J. Ahmad, Esq. FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP 4747 Executive Drive, Suite 1000 San Diego, CA 92121 Telephone: (858) 597-9600 Facsimile: (858) 597-9601 E-mail: dmoore@fisherphillips.com kahmad@fisherphillips.com REHABMART LLC: Jaquez Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against RehabMart, LLC. The case is styled as Ramon Jaquez, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. RehabMart, LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-00849 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. RehabMart, LLC -- https://www.rehabmart.com/ -- provides rehabilitation products. The Company offers air pillows, arm slings, body wipes, bariatric walkers, blood pressure cuff and monitor, oxygen carts, pulse oximeters, as well as pool wheel chairs.[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 RIPPLE LABS: Sale of XRP Tokens Violates FDUTPA, Toomey Alleges --------------------------------------------------------------- TYLER TOOMEY, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, v. RIPPLE LABS, INC., XRP II, LLC, and BRADLEY GARLINGHOUSE, Case No. 3:21-cv-00093-BJD-JBT (M.D. Fla., Jan. 25, 2021), is a class action lawsuit regarding the Defendants' sale of XRP cryptocurrency tokens to Florida residents in violation of Florida securities laws. According to the complaint, the Defendants sold millions of dollars (or more) of XRP tokens, which are securities under Florida law, to Florida investors without registering the same either with federal or Florida authorities. Recently, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed a lawsuit against Defendants and certain other individuals, Securities And Exchange Commission v. Ripple Labs, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-10832 (S.D.N.Y.), alleging that "[f]rom at least 2013 through the present, the Defendants sold over 14.6 billion units of a digital asset security called 'XRP,' in return for cash or other consideration worth over $1.38 billion U.S. Dollars ("USD"), to fund Ripple's operations. The Defendant undertook this distribution without registering their offers and sales of XRP with the SEC as required by the federal securities laws, and no exemption from this requirement applied." The Defendants similarly failed to comply with Florida securities laws by failing to register with the Florida Office of Financial Regulation, the suit says. The Plaintiff contends that the Defendants did not provide Florida investors with material information regarding the offering of XRP, as would have been required had the Defendants complied with the law. The Defendants began their unregistered and unlawful sale of XRP in 2013, despite having knowledge as early as 2012 that XRP could be considered an "investment contract" under and, by extension, Florida law. Nevertheless, the Defendants allegedly chose to disregard filing requirements and initiated a vast offering of XRP without registration. The Plaintiff brings this action for violation of the Florida Securities and Investor Protection Act, violation of Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, Fla. Stat. Ann. Sections 501.201, et seq. ("FDUTPA"), fraudulent misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and money had and received. As a result of Defendants' conduct, Plaintiff and Class members have suffered damages, the suit added. Mr. Tyler Toomey is a citizen of Florida who resides in Jacksonville, Florida. The Plaintiff purchased 135 XRP on or around November 24, 2020 for $97.80. The Plaintiff sold his XRP first in a transaction on or around December 7, 2020 wherein he sold 33.1 XRP for $20, and second in a transaction on or around December 28, 2020 wherein he sold 101.9 XRP for 0.0383 Ethereum ($28.56). Thus, Plaintiff sustained a loss of $48.56, or just over 50% of his initial investment. Defendant XRP II, LLC is Ripple's wholly-owned subsidiary. It was founded in approximately 2013, has been organized as a New York limited liability company since at least 2015, and is the entity through which Ripple offered and sold most of its XRP. The Defendant Bradley Garlinghouse is the Chief Executive Officer of Ripple. The Defendant Garlinghouse became CEO of Ripple in or around January 2017. Defendant Garlinghouse was Ripple's President and Chief Operating Officer from April 2015 through December 2016.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Richard R. Best, Esq. Preethi Krishnamurthy, Esq. Jorge G. Tenreiro, Esq. Dugan Bliss, Esq. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION New York Regional Office Brookfield Place 200 Vesey Street, Suite 400 New York, NY 10281-1022 Telephone: (212) 336-9145 E-mail: TenreiroJ@sec.gov ROANOKE AIRPORT: Pinon FLSA Suit Gets Collective Action Status -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROBERT BRANDON PINON, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. ROANOKE AIRPORT HOTEL PARTNERS, LLC, and KALYAN PLAZA, LLC, Case No. 7:20-cv-00205-EKD (W.D. Va.), the Hon. Judge Elizabeth K. Dillon entered an order: 1. conditionally certifying the case as a collective action under 29 U.S.C. section 216(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act; 2. authorizing and approving judicial notice as agreed to by the parties to inform potential collective members of the action and to give them an opportunity to join this action as party plaintiffs by opting in; 3. directing the Plaintiffs' counsel to administer the notice through first class mail and/or electronic mail using a Notice substantially similar to the Notice proposed by the parties; 4. directing the Defendants' counsel, within 10 calendar days of the entry of this Order, to provide a list to the Plaintiffs' counsel in an electronically manipulable format, e.g. excel, of: "all persons employed by the Defendants as Salaried Management Employees who worked at hotels owned, managed, and/or where benefits were administered by either Kalyan Plaza, LLC or Roanoke Airport Hotel Partners, LLC from April 9, 2017, through the present who were classified as exempt, including their names, last known addresses, personal email addresses (if known), telephone numbers, and employment dates;" 5. directing the Plaintiffs' counsel to disburse the Notice within 7 calendar days of receipt of such list from the Defendants; and 6. giving the Notice period extending 30 days from the date that the Plaintiffs' counsel disburses the Notice. As soon as reasonably practicable, Plaintiffs' counsel will file a submission indicating Notice has been sent. The Defendants are part of the hotels, motels & resorts industry. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3jcovYY at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Brittany M. Haddox, Esq. STRELKA EMPLOYMENT LAW Warehouse Row 119 Norfolk Avenue, S.W., Suite 330 Roanoke, VA 24011 E-mail: brittany@strelkalaw.com thomas@strelkalaw.com leigh@strelkalaw.com - and - Zev H. Antell, Esq. BUTLER ROYALS, PLC 140 Virginia Street, Suite 302 Richmond, VA 23219 Telephone: (804) 648-4848 Facsimile: (804) 237-0413 E-mail: harris.butler@butlerroyals.com zev.antell@butlerroyals.com paul.falabella@butlerroyals.com The Defendants are represented by: Susan Childers North, Esq. Jesse D. Pound, Esq. GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP 5425 Discovery Park Boulevard, Suite 200 Williamsburg, VA 23188 Telephone: (757) 903-0870 E-mail: snorth@grsm.com jound@grsm.com ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Daniels Suit Alleges Stock Market Manipulation ------------------------------------------------------------------- CHANCE DANIELS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL, LLC, ROBINHOOD SECURITIES, LLC, ROBINHOOD MARKETS, INC., TD AMERITRADE, INC., CITADEL SECURITIES, LLC, CHARLES SCHWAB & CO., INC., INTERACTIVE BROKERS, LLC, OPEN TO THE PUBLIC INVESTING, INC., and WEBULL FINANCIAL, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:21-cv-00290 (D. Colo., Jan. 28, 2021) is an action alleging stock market manipulation. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint the Defendants purposefully, willfully, and knowingly removed numerous stocks including but not limited to "GME", "BB", "NOK", "AMC", "BBBY", "EXPR", and "KOSS" (hereinafter "Subject Securities") from their trading platforms in the midst of an unprecedented stock rise thereby deprived retail investors of the ability to invest in the open-market, thereby manipulating the open-market. In so doing, the Defendants allegedly created a one-way buy-sell situation by which the only option of retail investors who had already purchased the above securities, and others, to sell or liquidate their holdings, thus depriving these stocks of buy liquidity to counter selling pressure by permitting purchase of the equity to take place. The end result was that all of these equities, and Plaintiff and other class members that held them suffered massive losses to their equity shares, the suit says. Robinhood Financial LLC operates as an institutional brokerage company. The Company provides online and mobile application-based discount stock brokerage solutions that allows users to invests in publicly-traded companies and exchange-traded funds. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Kevin S. Hannon, Esq. The Hannon Law Firm, LLC 1641 Downing Street Denver, CO 80218 Telephone: (303) 861-8800 Facsimile: (303) 861-8855 E-mail: khannon@hannonlaw.com ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Faces Fray Suit Over GME Stock Trading Control ------------------------------------------------------------------- PETER FRAY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL LLC, ROBINHOOD SECURITIES, LLC, and ROBINHOOD MARKETS, INC., Defendants, Case No. 0:21-cv-60226 (S.D. Fla., January 28, 2021) is a class action against the Defendants for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, negligence, and breach of fiduciary duty. The case arises from the Defendants' removal of Gamestop Corp. (GME) stock and other securities from their Web-based application in the midst of an unprecedented stock rise thereby deprived retail investors, including the Plaintiff, of the ability to invest in the open-market. The Plaintiff and Class members allege that the Defendants purposefully and knowingly pulled the stocks in their trading platform to manipulate the market for the benefit of people and financial intuitions who were not Robinhood's customers. Robinhood Markets, Inc. is an online brokerage firm, with its principal place of business at 85 Willow Road, Menlo Park, California. Robinhood Financial LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Robinhood Markets, Inc., with its principal place of business at 85 Willow Road, Menlo Park, California. Robinhood Securities, LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Robinhood Markets, Inc., with its principal place of business at 500 Colonial Center Parkway, Suite 100, Lake Mary, Florida. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Caroline Miller, Esq. DEREK SMITH LAW GROUP, PLLC 701 Brickell Ave, Suite 1310 Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 946-1884 Facsimile: (305) 503-6741 E-mail: caroline@dereksmithlaw.com - and – Alexander G. Cabeceiras, Esq. DEREK SMITH LAW GROUP, PLLC One Penn Plaza, Suite 4905 New York, NY 10119 Telephone: (212) 587-0760 Facsimile: (212) 587-4169 E-mail: alexc@dereksmithlaw.com ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Faces Ng Suit Over Open Market Manipulation ---------------------------------------------------------------- Brian Ng, Chetah Patel, Anuj Kapur, Jayesh Shah, and Summit Thakrai, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL LLC, ROBINHOOD SECURITIES, LLC, ROBINHOOD MARKETS, INC., and DOES 1-50, Case No. 4:21-cv-00311 (S.D. Tex., Jan. 30, 2021) alleges that Robinhood Financial purposefully, willfully, and knowingly restricts access to the open markets in publicly available securities, thereby depriving retail investors from investing additional monies into the market through these securities, and openly manipulates the open market to the detriment of all the Plaintiffs and the market at large by restricting purchase of non-exhaustive list of tickers. Allegedly, in the early morning hours of January 28, 2021, in the midst of an unprecedented rise in the per share value of the Restricted Tickers, Robinhood without providing prior notice to its users or the market at large restricted solely on its platform the purchase of the Restricted Tickers. Robinhood, did however allow its users to "close their positions." Closing positions, given the suffocation of additional purchases through the Robinhood app would be dubious as the price per share of the Restricted Tickers plummeted, the suit says. Robinhood's claim is that their mission is to "democratize finance for all." And that they were restricting transactions for certain securities to position closing only on the Restricted Tickers. Further, they remain committed to the same restriction. On January 29, 2021, rather than lift the restrictions in their entirety Robinhood implemented "capped restrictions." Robinhood allowed the trades of Restricted tickers but limited the total number of shares that each account would be able to hold. They set aggregate limits for each of the Restricted Tickers to the tune of the following: $AAL (55 shares), $AMC (115 shares), $BB (65 shares), $BBBY (30 shares), $CTRM (1650 shares), $EXPR (200 shares), $GME (5 shares), $KOSS (25 shares), $NAKD (750 shares), $NOK (110 shares), $SNDL (1200 shares), $TR (25 shares), and $TRVG (400 shares), added the suit. The conduct of Robinhood and DOES 1-50 allegedly violated their obligations under relevant federal and state law, including California law. Specifically, Robinhood's acts and omissions breached Robinhood's agreements with Plaintiffs and Class Plaintiffs, fiduciary duty to Plaintiffs and Class Plaintiffs, committed fraud, breaches of express and implied warranties, says the complaint. The Plaintiffs are active traders that use the Robinhood platform. Robinhood is a mobile application and Website investment service that places stock trade orders on behalf of users.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Dennis C. Reich, Robert J. Binstock Shreedhar R. Patel REICH & BINSTOCK, LLP 4265 San Felipe, Suite 1000 Houston, TX 77027 Phone: (713) 622-7271 Fax: (713) 623-8724 Email: dreich@reichandbinstock.com bbinstock@reichandbinstock.com spatel@reichandbinstock.com ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Illegally Restraint Stock Trade, Nelson Claims ------------------------------------------------------------------- BRENDON NELSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL LLC, ROBINHOOD SECURITIES, LLC, and ROBINHOOD MARKETS, INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:21-cv-00777 (S.D.N.Y., January 28, 2021) is a class action against the Defendants for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, negligence, and breach of fiduciary duty. The case arises from the Defendants' removal of Gamestop Corp. (GME) stock from their Web-based application in the midst of an unprecedented stock rise thereby deprived retail investors, including the Plaintiff, of the ability to invest in the open-market. The Plaintiff and Class members allege that the Defendants purposefully and knowingly pulled GME stock in their trading platform to manipulate the market for the benefit of people and financial intuitions who were not Robinhood's customers. Allegedly, Robinhood continues to randomly pull other securities from its application for no legitimate reason. Robinhood Markets, Inc. is an online brokerage firm, with its principal place of business at 85 Willow Road, Menlo Park, California. Robinhood Financial LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Robinhood Markets, Inc., with its principal place of business at 85 Willow Road, Menlo Park, California. Robinhood Securities, LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Robinhood Markets, Inc., with its principal place of business at 500 Colonial Center Parkway, Suite 100, Lake Mary, Florida. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Alexander G. Cabeceiras, Esq. DEREK SMITH LAW GROUP, PLLC One Penn Plaza, Suite 4905 New York, NY 10119 Telephone: (866) 470-8261 Facsimile: (212) 587-4169 ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Manipulates Stock Trading, Courtney Suit Says ------------------------------------------------------------------ ANDREW B. COURTNEY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL LLC, ROBINHOOD SECURITIES, LLC, and ROBINHOOD MARKETS, INC., Defendants, Case No. 0:21-cv-60220 (S.D. Fla., January 28, 2021) is a class action against the Defendants for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, negligence, and breach of fiduciary duty. The case arises from the Defendants' removal of Gamestop Corp. (GME), BlackBerry Ltd. (BB), AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. (AMC), Sundial Growers Inc. (SNDL), and Naked Brand Group Ltd. (NAKD) stocks from their Web-based application in the midst of an unprecedented stock rise thereby deprived retail investors, including the Plaintiff, of the ability to invest in the open-market. The Plaintiff and Class members allege that the Defendants purposefully and knowingly pulled the stocks in their trading platform to manipulate the market for the benefit of people and financial intuitions who were not Robinhood's customers. Robinhood Markets, Inc. is an online brokerage firm, with its principal place of business at 85 Willow Road, Menlo Park, California. Robinhood Financial LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Robinhood Markets, Inc., with its principal place of business at 85 Willow Road, Menlo Park, California. Robinhood Securities, LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Robinhood Markets, Inc., with its principal place of business at 500 Colonial Center Parkway, Suite 100, Lake Mary, Florida. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael McMullen, Esq. COHEN & MCMULLEN, P.A. 1132 SE 3rd Ave, Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33316 Telephone: (954) 523-7774 Facsimile: (954) 523-2656 ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Manipulates Stock Trading, Kayali Suit Claims ------------------------------------------------------------------ HANNA KAYALI AND MOHAMMED A. DOLEH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL, LLC, ROBINHOOD SECURITIES, LLC, ROBINHOOD MARKETS, INC., CITADEL ENTERPRISE AMERICAS, LLC, MELVIN CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LP, TD AMERITRADE, INC., THE CHARLES SCHWAB CORPORATION, and CHARLES SCHWAB & CO. INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:21-cv-00835 (C.D. Cal., January 28, 2021) is a class action against the Defendants for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, civil conspiracy, and violations of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act and the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act. The case arises from the Defendants' removal of Gamestop Corp. (GME), AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. (AMC), Nokia Oyj (NOK), and Naked Brand Group Ltd. (NAKD) stocks from their web-based application in the midst of an unprecedented stock rise thereby deprived retail investors, including the Plaintiffs, of the ability to invest in the open-market. The Plaintiffs and Class members allege that the Defendants purposefully and knowingly pulled the stocks in their trading platform to manipulate the market for the benefit of people and financial intuitions other than the Defendants' own client investors. As a result of the Defendants' contract combination, or conspiracy, and the unreasonable restraint of trade in the stock market, the Plaintiffs and the Class were damaged because they were prohibited to purchase shares of the stocks, the suit says. Robinhood Markets, Inc. is an online brokerage firm, with its principal place of business at 85 Willow Road, Menlo Park, California. Robinhood Financial LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Robinhood Markets, Inc., with its principal place of business at 85 Willow Road, Menlo Park, California. Robinhood Securities, LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Robinhood Markets, Inc., with its principal place of business at 500 Colonial Center Parkway, Suite 100, Lake Mary, Florida. Citadel Enterprise Americas, LLC is an American multinational hedge fund and financial services company, with its principal place of business at 131 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois. Melvin Capital Management, LP is an American investment management firm, with its principal place of business at 535 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor, New York, New York. TD Ameritrade, Inc. is a financial services company based in Nebraska. The Charles Schwab Corporation is an American multinational financial services company, with its principal place of business at 211 Main Street, San Francisco, California. Charles Schwab & Co. Inc. is a brokerage, banking and financial advisory services provider, with its principal place of business at 211 Main Street, San Francisco, California. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Heather L. Blaise, Esq. BLAISE & NITSCHKE, P.C. 123 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 250 Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 448-6602 Facsimile: (312) 803-1940 E-mail: hblaise@blaisenitschkelaw.com - and – Lana B. Nassar, Esq. BLAISE & NITSCHKE, P.C. 123 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 250 Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 448-6602 Facsimile: (312) 803-1940 E-mail: lnassar@blaisenitschkelaw.com ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Nabi Sues Over Deceptive Marketing Campaign ---------------------------------------------------------------- Sarkhan Nabi, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL, LLC, a Delaware LLC, and ROBINHOOD SECURITIES, LLC, a Delaware LLC, Case No. 3:21-cv-00755 (N.D. Cal., Jan. 29, 2021) is brought against the Defendants for material misrepresentations and omissions by Robinhood relating to its revenue sources, statements concerning the execution quality Robinhood achieved for consumers' orders, and Robinhood's failure to satisfy its duty of best execution in violations of the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, the California Unfair Competition Law, the California False Advertising Law, and the the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 as well as negligent misrepresentation, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and breach of fiduciary duty. In order to distinguish itself from competitors, Robinhood allegedly engaged in an aggressive marketing campaign promoting its "commission free trading." This purported advantage, however, came with a catch: Robinhood's customers, such as the Plaintiff, received inferior execution prices compared to what they would have received from Robinhood's competitors. In fact, the difference in execution price typically exceeded the commission Robinhood's competitors would have charged, the suit says. Allegedly, Robinhood engaged in this deceptive campaign while failing to disclose its inferior execution prices to consumers. The Plaintiff seeks an order for relief including, but not limited to, the following: (1) requiring the Defendants to pay damages and restitution to the Plaintiff and the putative Class; (2) enjoining the Defendants from further legal violations through Robinhood's payment for order flow collection scheme; and (3) requiring Defendants to publicly correct the false and misleading statements and omissions, says the complaint. The Plaintiff opened an account with Robinhood in 2017. Robinhood is an online brokerage firm founded in 2013.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Sarah N. Westcot, Esq. Stephen A. Beck, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1420 Miami, FL 33131 Phone: (305) 330-5512 Facsimile: (305) 679-9006 Email: swestcot@bursor.com sbeck@bursor.com - and - L. Timothy Fisher, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 1990 North California Boulevard, Suite 940 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Phone: (925) 300-4455 Facsimile: (925) 407-2700 Email: ltfisher@bursor.com ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Ross Sues Over Stock Trading Restrictions -------------------------------------------------------------- Ryan Zachary Ross, Erika Mercado, C. Louis Bunya, and Drew Hunnicutt, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL LLC, ROBINHOOD SECURITIES, LLC, ROBINHOOD MARKETS, INC., TD AMERITRADE, INC., TD AMERITRADE CLEARING, INC., TD AMERITRADE HOLDING CORPORATION, THE CHARLES SCHWAB CORPORATION, AND WEBULL FINANCIAL LLC, Case No. 4:21-cv-00292 (S.D. Tex., Jan. 29, 2021) is brought against online brokerage firms for engaging in an anticompetitive conspiracy through conscious parallelism that impacted the value of various securities by preventing individual retailer investors who utilize these firms from being able to purchase specific stocks, including but not limited to GameStop Corp. ("GME"), AMC Entertainment ("AMC"), and Nokia ("NOK"), and further restricting transactions related to these securities. Over the past several weeks, an online forum of clever and eccentric amateur stock enthusiasts, having grown increasingly frustrated by the stranglehold major players maintain over the world of finance, began developing a strategy to capitalize on over-exposed short positions held by some of the nation's most aggressive hedge funds. Noting that short positions for declining video game retailer GameStop far exceeded the available stock, they theorized that a collective buying movement coordinated through the online forum could raise the price of stock, potentially triggering a price-inflationary feedback-loop known as a "short squeeze," ultimately punishing the hedge funds and transferring a large sum of their money to individual investors. To do this, the online group needed to make the stock an Internet meme, the suit says. Their plan began to slowly gain steam over mid-January 2021. Other heavily shorted and financially troubled businesses were targeted for meme status in the same way. By Tuesday, January 26th, 2021, the wider world began to take notice of GameStop and other "Meme Stocks." As the prices rose and understanding began to spread about the ideological underpinnings of the Meme Stock concept, public interest in trading these stocks grew dramatically. On Wednesday, January 27, 2021, the meme stocks all underwent explosive growth in prices along with a corresponding rise in public interest, added the suit. After the trading day on Wednesday, TD Ameritrade informed its customers that it was enacting restrictions on its users' ability to trade certain meme stocks, including GameStop (GME), and AMC Entertainment Holding, Inc. (AMC). Early Thursday morning, a social media user posted a message noting that Robinhood was no longer allowing new purchases of the most popular meme stocks, notably GME, AMC, Nokia ("NOK"). Shortly thereafter, a user posted a screenshot of the Robinhood app showing an error message disallowing additional purchases of AMC. An hour later, Robinhood belatedly announced it was restricting purchases on the meme stocks. Almost immediately following Robinhood's announcement, the Defendant Webull also informed its retail customers that new purchases would not be allowed for GME, AMC, and KOSS. The stock continued heavy trading the remainder of the day. Stock prices for AMC and NOK showed identical behavior, with the same dramatic rises and falls as the sales and purchases played out. As this process occurred, millions of dollars were made by traders on this historic and unprecedented day, but Defendants' customers were entirely excluded from the process. Even worse, Defendants' alleged actions manipulated the course of the Meme Stocks, disrupting a crowd-sourced collective purchasing strategy in the midst of enormous public enthusiasm and interest in trading these stocks. This understanding violated the underlying customer contracts, breached fiduciary duties, and violated the U.S. antitrust law on anti-competitive conduct and price fixing, says the complaint. The Plaintiffs purchased stocks through the Defendants. Robinhood Financial is an online brokerage firm.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Gabriel A. Assaad, Esq. McDonald "Don" Worley, Esq. Matthew S. Yezierski, Esq. MCDONALD WORLEY, PC 1770 St. James St., Suite 100 Houston, TX 77056 Phone: (713) 523-5500 Facsimile: (713) 523-5501 Email: gassaad@mcdonaldworley.com don@mcdonaldworley.com matt@mcdonaldworley.com - and - William R. Ogden, Esq. Mark D. Bankston, Esq. FARRAR & BALL LLP 1117 Herkimer St. Houston, TX 77008 Phone: (713) 221-8300 Facsimile: (713) 221-8301 Email: bill@fbtrial.com mark@fbtrial.com ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL: Simpson Sues Over Manipulation of Open-Market ------------------------------------------------------------------ Riley Simpson, Noah Alan Henderson, Jacob Chapman, and Suzanne Seed, and all others similarly situated v. ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL LLC, ROBINHOOD SECURITIES, LLC, ROBINHOOD MARKETS, INC., TD AMERITRADE HOLDING CORPORATION, CHARLES SCHWAB CORPORATION, CITADEL LLC, and MELVIN CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LP, Case No. 3:21-cv-00207-B (N.D. Tex., Jan. 29, 2021) seeks to recover the damages caused to them by the Defendants' nefarious actions by depriving retail investors, like Plaintiffs, of the ability to invest in the open-market, deprived those investors of purchasing certain stocks while the Defendants were making unprecedented gains, and manipulated the open-market to the detriment of retail investors. The Hedge Fund Defendants are Citadel, a multinational hedge fund and financial services company, and Melvin Capital, an American investment management firm and hedge fund. In the days preceding the filing of this lawsuit, retail investors -- many of whom are young investors simply looking to earn some money in the stock market -- have been abhorrently taken advantage of and denied the opportunity to participate in a so called "open market" by Defendants and Hedge Fund Defendants, says the suit. These retail investors, like the Plaintiffs, made investments in certain stocks to the detriment of wealthy, elite hedge funds that had short sold these stocks. Allegedly, the retail investors' purchase of these stocks resulted in a drastic increase in value, which threatened to cause billions of dollars in losses to certain hedge funds like the Hedge Fund Defendants. According to the complaint, in an effort to offset these enormous losses, Defendants purposefully, willfully, and knowingly removed certain stocks and/or imposed sudden restrictions on the trading of certain stocks on their trading platforms during unprecedented stock price increases. These actions were done at the behest of and in concert with the Hedge Fund Defendants. By doing so, Defendants deprived retail investors, like Plaintiffs, of the ability to invest in the open-market, deprived those investors of purchasing certain stocks while they were making unprecedented gains, and manipulated the open-market to the detriment of retail investors, including Plaintiffs, added the suit. The reason is simple -- hedge funds, like Citadel and Melvin Capital, who had been taking advantage of the market for years, were now facing astronomical losses, having short sold stocks that were now realizing unprecedented gains. The Hedge Fund Defendants conspired with the other Defendants to prohibit the purchase of certain stocks, effectively driving the price down to save themselves at the expense of Defendants' users and customers, to whom they owed fiduciary and contractual duties, says the complaint. The Plaintiffs purchased stocks through the Robinhood app. The Defendants are online brokerage firms and/or financial services companies.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Lawrence J. Friedman, Esq. Ryan K. Lurich, Esq. FIREDMAN & FEIGER, L.L.P. 5301 Spring Valley Road, Suite 200 Dallas, TX 7554 Phone: (972) 788-1400 Facsimile: (972) 788-2667 Email: lfriedman@fflawoffice.com rlurich@fflawoffice.com - and - Bruce W. Steckler, Esq. Paul D. Stickney, Esq. Austin Smith, Esq. STECKLET WAYNE COCHRAN, PLLC 12720 Hillcrest Rd., Suite 1045 Dallas, TX 75230 Phone: (972) 387-4040 Facsimile: (972) 387-4041 Email: Bruce@swclaw.com judgestickney@swclaw.com austin@swclaw.com - and - W. Carter Boisvert, Esq. CARTER BOISVERT LAW GROUP, P.C. 12600 Hill Country Boulevard, Suite R-275 Bee Cave, TX 78738 Phone: (512) 538-5788 Facsimile: (512) 329-2604 Email: carterboisvert@cblawaustin.com - and - Michael L. Gaubert, Esq. GAUBERT LAW GROUP, P.C. 100 Crescent Court, 7th Floor Dallas, TX 75201 Phone: (214) 593-6440 Facsimile: (972) 441-2960 Email: michael@gaubertlawgroup.com ROBINHOOD MARKETS: Perry Sues Over Imposed Trading Restrictions --------------------------------------------------------------- Taylor Perry, Ryan Heitz, and Kevin Sheehan, on behalf of themselves and the Class of others similarly situated v. ROBINHOOD MARKETS, INC., ROBINHOOD SECURITIES, LLC, and ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL LLC, Case No. 8:21-cv-00234 (M.D. Fla., Jan. 29, 2021) is brought against the Defendants by failing to adequately or properly maintain the systemic resources and sufficient capital to maintain the Plaintiffs' and Class members' access to trading services. Allegedly, on January 28, 2021, Robinhood proactively decided to impose trading restrictions on its own customers, preventing them from participating in the marketplace. Robinhood stated that its justification for these restrictions was market volatility, however, the exchange-based volatility measures were still fully operational. Robinhood took the extraordinary step of not only prohibiting trades of derivatives, but of the securities themselves. Accordingly, the customers who wanted to acquire positions in these securities are unduly prohibited from participating in market transactions, whereas customers of other broker-dealers do not have similar limitations, the suit says. These restrictions prevented Robinhood users from freely participating in major market movements, whereas customers of many other broker-dealers were free to capture the value associated with these market movements. Moreover, these restrictions fly in the face of the principles that Robinhood promoted to its own customers through its marketing materials and customer agreements. Moreover, Robinhood executives had been acutely aware of the growing demand and popularity within its platform for investments in volatile stocks, including $GME, for several months. While Robinhood was actively encouraging stock trading on its platform, Robinhood deliberately chose to remain silent and leave its customers in the dark that preventing trades in popular stocks was a potential consequence of the same increased volatility and volume, the suit added. In short, Robinhood allegedly chose to deny its customers access to the marketplace despite profiting off the customers who it lured in under the promise of market participation. These customers were harmed by their inability to access the markets during periods of peak volatility due to their choice of broker-dealer. These customers had no advance warning about a possibility that trades would be declined despite Robinhood knowing full well that this was in consideration. The complaint further asserts that Robinhood acted negligently by failing to adequately or properly maintain the systemic resources and sufficient capital to maintain the Plaintiffs' and Class members' access to trading services. Due solely to its own negligence and failure to maintain sufficient capital, Robinhood breached obligations owed to Plaintiffs and Class members and caused them substantial losses. Robinhood's failures are all the more serious due to Robinhood's history of such failures, including several major trading outages, the absence of alternative means for customers to protect their positions, and lack of communication and customer support, says the complaint. The Plaintiffs were customers of Robinhood. Robinhood is an online brokerage firm founded in 2013.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Michael S. Taaffe, Esq. Michael D. Bressan, Esq. Brandon M. Taaffe, Esq. Jeremy M. Halpern, Esq. SHUMAKER, LOOP & KENDRICK, LLP 240 South Pineapple Ave., 10th Floor Sarasota, FL 34236 Phone: (941) 366-6660 Facsimile: (941) 366-3999 Email: mtaaffe@shumaker.com mbressan@shumaker.com btaaffe@shumaker.com jhalpern@shumaker.com ROBINHOOD SECURITIES: Dalton Sues Over Removal of Stocks From App ----------------------------------------------------------------- CHRISTIAN A. DALTON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ROBINHOOD SECURITIES LLC, ROBINHOOD FINANCIAL LLC, and ROBINHOOD MARKETS, INC., Defendants, Case No. 3:21-cv-00697 (N.D. Cal., January 28, 2021) is a class action against the Defendants for fraud and deceit, breach of fiduciary duty, and violations of the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act and the California's Unfair Competition Law. The case arises from the Defendants' removal of Gamestop Corp. (GME); AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. (AMC); BlackBerry Ltd. (BB); Nokia Oyj (NOK); Bed Bath & Beyond, Inc. (BBBY); Express, Inc. (EXPR); Koss Corporation (KOSS); and Naked Brand Group Ltd. (NAKD) stocks from their Web-based application in the midst of an unprecedented stock rise thereby deprived retail investors, including the Plaintiff, of the ability to invest in the open-market. The Plaintiff and Class members allege that the Defendants purposefully and knowingly pulled the stocks in their trading platform to manipulate the market for the benefit of people and financial intuitions other than the Defendants' own client investors. As a result of the Defendants' actions, the Plaintiff and the Class were damaged because they were prevented from using their accounts and making planned trades or exercising options, which would have been very lucrative. Robinhood Markets, Inc. is an online brokerage firm, with its principal place of business at 85 Willow Road, Menlo Park, California. Robinhood Financial LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Robinhood Markets, Inc., with its principal place of business at 85 Willow Road, Menlo Park, California. Robinhood Securities, LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Robinhood Markets, Inc., with its principal place of business at 500 Colonial Center Parkway, Suite 100, Lake Mary, Florida. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Richard C. Dalton, Esq. RICHARD C. DALTON, LLC P.O. Box 358 Carencro, LA 70520 Telephone: (337) 371-0375 E-mail: rick@rickdaltonlaw.com ROYAL PALACE: Fails to Accommodate Disabled Travelers, Garcia Says ------------------------------------------------------------------ ORLANDO GARCIA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ROYAL PALACE HOTELS PARTNERSHIP, LP, AAMES-WARNER CORPORATION, and DOES 1-10, Defendants, Case No. 21SMCV00220 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., January 29, 2021) is a class action against the Defendant for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Unruh Civil Rights Act. The case arises from the Defendants' failure to provide information about the accessible features in the rooms at the Royal Palace Westwood Hotel on its reservation Website, http://www.royalpalacewestwood.com/,for people with disabilities, including the Plaintiff. The Website reservation system lacks sufficient information needed by disabled travelers to assess independently whether a given hotel room would work for them. As a result, the Plaintiff is unable to engage in an online booking of the hotel room with any confidence or knowledge about whether the room will actually work for him due to his disability, the suit says. Royal Palace Hotels Partnership, LP is the owner of the Royal Palace Westwood Hotel located at 1052 Tiverton Ave., Los Angeles, California. Aames-Warner Corporation is the operator of the Royal Palace Westwood Hotel located at 1052 Tiverton Ave., Los Angeles, California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Raymond Ballister Jr., Esq. Russell Handy, Esq. Amanda Seabock, Esq. Zachary Best, Esq. CENTER FOR DISABILITY ACCESS 8033 Linda Vista Road, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92111 Telephone: (858) 375-7385 Facsimile: (888) 422-5191 E-mail: amandas@potterhandy.com SACHS ELECTRIC: Durham Class Certification Bid Partly Granted ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as WILLIAM DURHAM, et al., v. SACHS ELECTRIC COMPANY, et al., Case No. 5:18-cv-04506-BLF (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Beth Labson Freeman entered an order granting in part and denying in part motion to certify class as follows: 1. The Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification is denied as moot as to the Unpaid Wages Class (Meal Period Time). 2. The Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification is granted as to the Unpaid Wages Class (Buggy Time Claim), Termination Pay Subclass, and Wage Statement Subclass. The action is certified for the Rule 23(b)(3) Class and Subclasses as to wage and hour claims brought pursuant to the Cal. Labor Code and the UCL. 3. Pursuant to Rule 23(c)(1)(B), a. The Buggy Time Class is defined as: "all non-exempt employees of Sachs Electric Company who worked on the construction of the California Flats Solar Project at any time within the period from July 25, 2014 through the date of class certification who were not paid for all time spent after arriving at the parking lots and waiting for and traveling to their daily work sites and the time spent waiting for and traveling from their daily work sites to the parking lots." b. The Termination Pay Subclass is defined as: "all members of Class whose employment with Sachs Electric Company terminated within the period beginning July 25, 2015 to the date of class certification." c. The Wage Statement Subclass is defined as: "all member of Class who received wage statements from Sachs Electric Company during the period beginning July 25, 2017 to the date of class certification." 4. The class issues are (1) whether Sachs had a uniform policy that workers were required to engage in buggy rides before the start time from which they were 4 paid; (2) whether Buggy Time constituted "hours worked" under California 5 law; and (3) whether Sachs uniformly compensated class members for Buggy Time. 5. The Court appoints William Durham as the class representative. 6. Pursuant to Rule 23(g), the Court appoints the Dion-Kindem Law Firm and the Blanchard Law Group, APC as co-class counsel. 7. On January 21, 2021, the Court lifted the stay on Plaintiff's Drive Time claims. On that date, the Plaintiff represented to the Court that he intends to file a motion for class certification related to that claim. Because the Court expects class notice will be sent only once, Plaintiff need not file a notice plan related to the above classes until the Court considers the forthcoming class certification motion. This wage and hour class and PAGA action arise out of Plaintiff William Durham and the proposed class members' employment by Defendant Sachs at the California Flats Solar Project. Mr. Durham seeks to bring the following claims: failure to pay wages for hours; wage statement and record-keeping violations; and failure to pay waiting time wages in violation of the California Labor Code and California's Unfair Competition Law. Durham also separately brings a representative claim for the recovery of civil penalties under the California Private Attorney General Act. Durham was employed at the California Flats Solar Project by Sachs as a journeyman wireman, crew foreman, and general foreman between July 2016 and September 2017. Sachs Electric is a national electrical contracting, communications, instrumentation, and engineering company serving the United States, Canada, and Puerto Rico. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 25, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/39ENW2s at no extra charge.[CC] SAMSON TECHNOLOGIES: Paguada Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Samson Technologies Corp. The case is styled as Dilenia Paguada, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Samson Technologies Corp., Case No. 1:21-cv-00747 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 27, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Samson Technologies Corp. -- http://www.samsontech.com/-- was founded in 1986. The company's line of business includes the manufacturing of electronic audio and video equipment for home entertainment.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mars Khaimov, Esq. 10826 64th Avenue, Ste. 2nd Floor Forest Hills, NY 11375 Phone: (917) 915-7415 Email: marskhaimovlaw@gmail.com SANCHEZ OIL: Seeks to Stay Class Status Proceedings in "Hutchins" ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JAMES HUTCHINS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. SANCHEZ OIL & GAS CORPORATION, Case No. 5:20-cv-00195-DAE (W.D. Tex.), the Defendant asks the Court to enter and order staying proceedings in this matter, including a hearing on its Motion to Compel, as well as the scheduling deadlines in this case, pending consideration of a Motion for Reconsideration of Conditional Class Certification, which SOG shall file not later than February 12, 2021, and grant such further relief as the Court may deem appropriate. Plaintiff Hutchins's Complaint was filed on February 18, 2020. SOG timely answered on March 12, 2020. On May 22, 2020, Plaintiff moved for conditional certification, and that Motion was fully briefed by the parties on June 12, 2020. The Court set the Motion for hearing on July 7, 2020. The Court orally granted the Motion at the hearing and issued a written order granting the Motion on July 21, 2020. The Court rejected SOG's argument that application of the Lusardi standard was improper and that Plaintiff did not show that similarly situated individuals existed. On July 31, 2020, SOG filed a Motion to Reconsider the Magistrate Judge's Order on Conditional Class Certification. On August 28, 2020, SOG timely filed objections to the Order Granting Plaintiff's Motion for Conditional Certification and Motion to Stay Certification Order. On October 29, 2020, the Court entered its Order (1) Denying Defendant's Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Conditional Certification Order; (2) Adopting That Order in Its Entirety; and (3) Denying Defendant's Motion to Stay as Moot. Sanchez Oil & Gas Corporation manages oil and gas properties. The Company generates drilling opportunities, as well as reduces risks through cutting-edge, controlling large land positions, and acquiring and controlling 3D seismic surveys. Sanchez Oil & Gas serves customers in North America. A copy of the Court's the Defendant's motion dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3atjYxp at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael A. Josephson, Esq. Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq. William R. Liles, Esq. JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050 Houston, TX 77046 E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com adunlap@mybackwages.com wliles@mybackwages.com - and - Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq. BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC 8 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1500 Houston, TX 77046 E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com - and - Ms. Olivia Howe, Esq. Ms. Megan Coker, Esq. Legal & Government Relations RIGUP, INC., RUDTUK OPERATING, LLC AND RUSCO OPERATING, LLC 111 Congress Ave., Suite 900 Austin, TX 78701 E-Mail: Olivia.Howe@rigup.com megan.coker@rigup.com The Defendant is represented by: George R. Gibson, Esq. Iain L. C. Kennedy, Esq. NATHAN SOMMERS JACOBS 2800 Post Oak Boulevard, 61 st Floor Houston, TX 77056 Telephone: (713) 960-0303 Facsimile: (713) 892-4800 E-mail: ggibson@nathansommers.com ikennedy@nathansommers.com SHOE SHOW INC: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Brooks Alleges --------------------------------------------------------------- VALERIE BROOKS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SHOE SHOW, INC. d/b/a SHOE SHOW MEGA, and DOES 1 to 10, inclusive, Defendant, Case No. 2:21-at-00073 (E.D. Cal., Jan. 26, 2021) arises from the Defendants' violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendants' Website, https://www.shoeshowmega.com/, is not fully or equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers like her, which is a direct violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the Defendants' corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendants' Website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, the suit says. Shoe Show, Inc. operates as a footwear retailing company. The Company offers boots, casuals, slippers, and sandals, as well as shoe care products. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Thiago Coelho, Esq. Jasmine Behroozan, Esq. WILSHIRE LAW FIRM 3055 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90010 Telephone: (213) 381-9988 Facsimile: (213) 381-9989 E-mail: thiago@wilshirelawfirm.com jasmine@wilshirelawfirm.com SIGUE CORPORATION: Babare Consumer Suit Goes to W.D. Washington --------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled DANIEL BABARE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. SIGUE CORPORATION, Case No. 20-2-01321-37, was removed from the Superior Court of the State of Washington in and for Whatcom County to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on January 29, 2021. The Clerk of Court for the Western District of Washington assigned Case No. 2:21-cv-00114 to the proceeding. The case arises from the Defendant's alleged violations of the Washington's Consumer Protection Act and the Commercial and Electronic Mail Act by sending unsolicited commercial text messages to consumers, including the Plaintiff. Sigue Corporation is a provider of payment processing services based in Sylmar, California. [BN] The Defendant is represented by: R. Omar Riojas, Esq. GOLDFARB & HUCK ROTH RIOJAS, PLLC 925 Fourth Avenue, Suite 3950 Seattle, WA 98104 Telephone: (206) 452-0260 Facsimile: (206) 397-3062 E-mail: riojas@goldfarb-huck.com - and – Joshua Briones, Esq. Matthew J. Novian, Esq. MINTZ LEVIN COHN FERRIS GLOVSKY AND POPEO P.C. 2029 Century Park East, Suite 3100 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 586-3200 E-mail: jbriones@mintz.com mjnovian@mintz.com SIMMONS BANK: Class Status of Checking Account Holders Sought ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as DANNY L. WALKINGSTICK, WHITYNE A. FORT, on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated, v. SIMMONS BANK, Case No. 6:19-cv-03184-RK (W.D. Mo.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order: 1. certifying a Rule 23(b)(3) damages class and a Rule 23(b) (2) declaratory and injunctive relief class; 2. appointing themselves as class representatives; and 3. appointing their attorneys and firms as class counsel for the Class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g), for the following Class: "all holders of a Simmons Bank checking account, who, from May 22, 2014 forward, were assessed an Overdraft Fee as a result of Simmons Bank's practice of assessing Overdraft Fees based on the account's available balance rather than its ledger or account balance." Simmons Bank is a bank with operations in Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion to certify class dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/36DnNyR at no extra charge.[CC] Counsel for the Plaintiffs and the Proposed Plaintiff Class, are: Lynn A. Toops, Esq. COHEN & MALAD, LLP One Indiana Square, Suite 1400 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Telephone: (317) 636-6481 E-mail: ltoops@cohenandmalad.com - and - Ashlea G. Schwarz, Esq. PAUL LLP 601 Walnut Street, Suite 300 Kansas City, MO 64106 Telephone: (816) 984-8100 E-mail: Ashlea@PaulLLP.com - and - Christopher D. Jennings, Esq. LINVILLE JOHNSON 610 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 300 Little Rock, AR 72201 Telephone: (501) 372-1300 E-mail: chris@yourattorney.com - and - J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq. Anthony A. Orlandi, Esq. Martin F. Schubert, Esq. BRANSTETTER, STRANCH & JENNINGS, PLLC 223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200 Nashville, TN 37203 Telephone: (615) 254-8801 E-mail: gerards@bsjfirm.com aorlandi@bsjfirm.com martys@bsjfirm.com The Defendant is represented by: Jason C. Smith, Esq. Rodney H. Nichols, Esq. SPENCER FANE LLP 2144 E. Republic Road, Suite B300 Springfield, MO 65804 E-mail: jcsmith@spencerfane.com rnichols@spencerfane.com - and - Debra Bogo-Ernst, Esq. Matthew C. Sostrin, Esq. MAYER BROWN LLP 71 South Wacker Drive Chicago, IL 60606 E-mail: dernst@mayerbrown.com msostrin@mayerbrown.com SKYLINE RESTORATION: Magaliel Suit Seeks Proper Minimum & OT Wages ------------------------------------------------------------------ DONAL MAGALIEL PEREZ MOLINA, FELIPE FLORES NICOLAS, JESUS ORELLANA, JULIO PENARANDA ASTUDILLO, MARCO ANTONIO SALVADOR BERNARDINO, and SEGUNDO CARLOS PALA YUICELA, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. SKYLINE RESTORATION INC. (D/B/A SKYLINE RESTORATION), JOHN KALAFATIS, VASILIOS PIERRAKEAS, RONALD DUARTE, and ERIC DOE, Case No. 1:21-cv-00647 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 25, 2021) seeks to recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and the New York Labor Law (the "NYLL") as well as applicable liquidated damages, interest, attorneys' fees and costs. The Plaintiffs contend that they worked for the Defendants in excess of 40 hours per week, without appropriate minimum wage and overtime compensation for the hours that they worked. Rather, the Defendants failed to maintain accurate recordkeeping of the hours worked and failed to pay Plaintiffs appropriately for any hours worked, either at the straight rate of pay or for any additional overtime premium. The Plaintiffs were employed as construction laborers, brick layer workers, demolition workers, cement layer workers, and scaffold workers at the construction corporation's projects located mostly at various locations in Manhattan. The Defendants own, operate, or control a construction company, located at 49-28 31st Pl, Long Island City, New York.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Michael Faillace, Esq. MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES , P.C. 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510 New York, New York 10165 Telephone: (212) 317-1200 Facsimile: (212) 317-1620 E-mail: Faillace@emloymentcompliance.com SOUTHERN VALLEY: Bejines-Gonzalez Seeks Initial OK of Settlement ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JESUS BEJINES-GONZALEZ, ABRAHAAM SAYAGO-HERNANDEZ And all others similarly situated, v. SOUTHERN VALLEY FRUIT & VEGETABLE, INC.; HAMILTON GROWERS, INC.; KENT HAMILTON; HAMILTON FARMS MEX, L.P.; HAMILTON PRODUCE, L.P.; KENDA PROPERTIES, L.P.; WK HOLDINGS, LLC; WK MEX PROPERTIES, L.P.; and WKW, LLC, Case No. 7:19-cv-00055-HL (M.D. Ga.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order: 1. conditionally certifying the settlement class 2. appointing their counsel as class counsel; 3. approving the settlement of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) claims; 4. granting preliminary approval to the Settlement Agreement; 5. approving the proposed Class Notice and Notice distribution plan; and 6. scheduling a final approval hearing. Settlement Terms: (1) The Defendants shall pay a total gross settlement amount of $880,000 in settlement of all claims. (2) The Plaintiffs' Counsel will request an award of up to $237,600, or 27% of the Fund as an all-inclusive award of attorneys' fees, and request an award of up to $20,000 for out-of-pocket costs and expenses. (3) The Settlement Administrator Atticus Administration, LLC shall establish and administer an account to hold and distribute the Fund, and shall be paid from the Fund an amount estimated at no more than $25,000. (4) The Plaintiffs will request the Court award up to $10,000 each as additional compensation in addition to any payment they may otherwise receive as Settlement Class Members. The Plaintiffs Loida Osorio-Jimenez and Margarito Osorio- Jimenez ("Retaliation Plaintiffs") request $10,000 and $7,000 respectively as compensation for their FLSA retaliation claims. Each opt-in Plaintiffs will request $1,500 in additional compensation for their claims. (5) The Plaintiffs Loida Osorio-Jimenez and Margarito Osorio- Jimenez will to be offered employment under the terms of an H-2A job order of at least eight months duration during the 2021 calendar year or 2022 calendar year. (6) Jesus Bejines-Gonzalez, Abraham Sayago-Hernandez, Loida Osorio-Jimenez, Margarito Osorio-Jimenez and all Opt-in Plaintiffs will release the Defendants from all wage claims and employment claims (including retaliation claims) through the date of the Agreement which arise from their employment with the Defendants, with the exception that bodily injury torts, worker's compensation, and industrial injury claims will not be released. (7) Class members will release Defendants from all causes of action, claims, losses, damages, and wages that were asserted in this action or which arise out of the factual allegations in the operative complaint, but not such claims that may not be waived under applicable state and federal including but not limited to claims arising from an industrial injury. (8) Any remaining funds, after redistribution to class members, will not revert to the Defendants and will go to a cy pres recipient, the Migrant Clinicians Network, Inc., which works with farmworkers to improve access to health care. In April 2019 Mr. Bejines-Gonzalez and Mr. Sayago-Hernandez filed the instant lawsuit alleging that they and other similarly-situated employees had not been paid overtime or properly reimbursed for travel expenses when they worked for the Defendants in violations of FLSA minimum wage and overtime provisions, violations of the Migrant and Agricultural Worker Protection Act (AWPA), as well as common law claims for breach of contract and fraud. The Plaintiffs' FLSA overtime claims, contract claims, and AWPA claims all arise from the written employment contract between the parties which promised compliance with federal wage laws. The Plaintiffs and putative class members in this case are farmworkers who came to Georgia from Mexico through Defendants' use of the federal H-2A visa program to work in the Defendants' packing shed operations, or are non-H2A workers who were employed in similar positions under the terms of an H-2A clearance order. Southern Valley is a highly recognized progressive and innovative growing, packing, and shipping facility. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Jan. 25, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/2YCslkS at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Dawson Morton, Esq. DAWSON MORTON, LLC 1003 Freedom Blvd. Watsonville, CA 95076 Telephone 404-590-1295 E-mail: dawson@dawsonmorton.com - and - Patricia Kakalec, Esq. KAKALEC LAW PLLC 195 Montague Street, 16th Floor Brooklyn, NY 11201 Telephone: (212) 705-8730 E-mail: patricia@kakaleclaw.com SPIRIT MANUFACTURING: Faces Quinn Suit Over Unpaid Overtime Wages ----------------------------------------------------------------- William Quinn, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. SPIRIT MANUFACTURING, INC., Case No. 3:21-cv-00031-BSM (E.D. Tex., Jan. 29, 2021) seeks a declaratory judgment, monetary damages, liquidated damages, prejudgment interest, and a reasonable attorney's fee and costs as a result of the Defendant's failure to pay proper overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the overtime provisions of the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act. The Plaintiff regularly worked in excess of 40 hours per week throughout their tenure with the Defendant. The Plaintiff was paid 1.5x times their base hourly rate for the hours they worked over 40 in a workweek. However, the Defendant did not include the commissions or bonuses that were paid to the Plaintiff in their regular rates when calculating their overtime pay even though the Plaintiff and received commissions and bonuses in pay periods in which they also worked in excess of 40 hours per week, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant as an hourly-paid technical support specialist from January of 2019 until January of 2021. The Defendant's primary business is manufacturing and distributing fitness equipment.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Josh Sanford, Esq. SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC Kirkpatrick Plaza 10800 financial Centre Pkwy, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72211 Phone: (501) 221-0088 Facsimile: (888) 787-2040 Email: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com SPRING HOME: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Cockrell Suit Claims ------------------------------------------------------------ KASANA COCKRELL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SPRING HOME HEALTH CARE LLC, Defendant, Case: 2:21-cv-00346-SDM-KAJ (S.D. Ohio, Jan. 26, 2021) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff Cockrell was employed by the Defendant as home health aide. Spring Home Health Care LLC is a home health agency. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew J.P. Coffman, Esq. Adam C. Gedling, Esq. Kelsie N. Hendren, Esq. COFFMAN LEGAL, LLC 1550 Old Henderson Road, Suite 126 Columbus, OH 43220 Tel: (614) 949-1181 Fax: (614) 386-9964 E-mail: mcoffman@mcoffmanlegal.com agedling@mcoffmanlegal.com khendren@mcoffmanlegal.com STARBUCKS CORPORATION: Brekke Labor Suit Removed to N.D. California ------------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled AMANDA BREKKE, OMAR GARLAND, CASEY MCKAY, and JORDONE SHANE-SANCHEZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. STARBUCKS CORPORATION and DOES 1-10, inclusive, Case No. CIV 2003380, was removed from the Superior Court of California for the County of Marin to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on January 29, 2021. The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of California assigned Case No. 3:21-cv-00751 to the proceeding. The case arises from the Defendant's alleged violations of the California Labor Code and the California Business and Professions Code including failure to compensate all hours worked, failure to pay the minimum wage, failure to pay overtime wages, failure to provide accurate wage statements, failure to timely pay final wages, and unfair business practices. Starbucks Corporation is an American multinational chain of coffeehouses and roastery reserves headquartered in Seattle, Washington. [BN] The Defendant is represented by: Gregory W. Knopp, Esq. Jonathan P. Slowik, Esq. Laura L. Vaughn, Esq. AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP 1999 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 229-1000 Facsimile: (310) 229-1001 E-mail: gknopp@akingump.com jpslowik@akingump.com vaughnl@akingump.com STATE FARM: Court Reimburses Vogt Class Counsel $245K ----------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL VOGT, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, v. STATE FARM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. e 2:16-cv-04170-NKL (W.D. Mo.), the Hon. Judge Nanette K. Laughrey entered an order: 1. granting Class Counsel's motion for a fee award of one- third of the Common Fund ($34,322,414.84, plus $4,521,674.38 in prejudgment interest, plus post-judgment interest, which continues to accrue) and reimbursement of their expenses, which total $245,658.05; and 2. granting in part the motion for a service award for Mr. Vogt: -- Mr. Vogt is awarded $15,000 from the Common Fund. The Court has reviewed the requested expenses and finds that they were reasonably incurred on behalf of the Class, and that Class Counsel should be reimbursed $245,658.05. State Farm Life Insurance Company was founded in 1929. It is licensed to sell life insurance and annuity products. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 25, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3rfR1Mk at no extra charge.[CC] STL INTERNATIONAL: Williams Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ----------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against STL International, Incorporated. The case is styled as Milton Williams, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated v. STL International, Incorporated, Case No. 1:21-cv-00857-PAE-SLC (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. STL International, Incorporated, doing business as Teeter -- https://teeter.com/ -- distributes sporting products. The Company offers wide variety of fitness and athletic products, as well as provides online services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb, Esq. Michael A. LaBollita, Esq. GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES 150 E. 18th Street, Suite Phr New York, NY 10003 Phone: (212) 228-9795 Email: nyjg@aol.com michael@gottlieb.legal STRIVECTIN OPERATING: Slowinski Sues Over Mislabelled Neck Cream ---------------------------------------------------------------- CHRISTINE SLOWINSKI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. STRIVECTIN OPERATING COMPANY, INC., Case No. 1:21-cv-00406 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 25, 2021) is an action for damages, injunctive relief, and any other available legal or equitable remedies for violations of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Businesses Practices Act, common law fraud, unjust enrichment, and breach of warranty, resulting from the illegal actions of Defendant in intentionally labeling its TL Advanced Tightening Neck Cream PLUS with false and misleading claims that they tighten neck skin, when those products do not tighten neck skin. During the Class Period Defendant sold TL Advanced Tightening Neck Cream PLUS products that were advertised to tighten neck skin, when those products do not tighten neck skin, the Plaintiff claims, whose latest purchase of the products was on October 12, 2020. As a result, the Plaintiff has been misled into purchasing products she would not have otherwise purchased. By making false and misleading claims about the qualities of their products, the Defendant allegedly impaired Plaintiff's ability to choose the type and quality of products she chose to buy. Therefore, Plaintiff has been deprived of her legally protected interest to obtain true and accurate information about her consumer products as required by Illinois law, the suit says. The Plaintiff is an individual and a citizen of Illinois, who was at all relevant times residing in Schaumburg, Illinois. The Defendant manufactures, advertises, markets, sells, and distributes cosmetic products throughout Illinois and the United States under the brand name "StriVectin."[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Todd M. Friedman, Esq. Steven G. Perry, Esq. David B. Levin, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C. 21550 Oxnard Street, Suite 780 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Telephone: (877) 619-8966 Facsimile: (866) 633-0228 E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.com steven.perry@toddflaw.com dlevin@toddflaw.com SUMMERHAYS MUSIC: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Summerhays Music. The case is styled as Jenisa Angeles, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Summerhays Music, Case No. 1:21-cv-00827 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Summerhays Music Center -- https://www.summerhaysmusic.com/ -- is the oldest established family music store in Utah.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mark Rozenberg, Esq. STEIN SAKS, PLLC 285 Passaic Street Hackensack, NJ 07601 Phone: (201) 282-6500 Email: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com SUNRISE SENIOR: Altamirano Suit Removed to C.D. California ---------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Myrna Altamirano, Angela Samson, on behalf of themselves, others similarly situated and the general public v. Sunrise Senior Living Services, Inc., Sunrise Senior Living Management Inc., Sunrise Senior Living LLC, Sunrise Development Inc., Case No. 3:20-cv-08881, was removed from the U.S. District Court for Southern District California to the U.S. District Court for Central District California on Jan. 27, 2021. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:21-cv-00748-PA-JEM to the proceeding. The case is brought over alleged labor violations. Sunrise Senior Living -- https://www.sunriseseniorliving.com/ -- communities provide senior care services including assisted living, independent living, and memory care in the U.S., Canada, and the UK.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Arlo Garcia Uriarte, Esq. Jonathan S. Rebong, Esq. Sandra A. Beltran, Esq. LIBERATION LAW GROUP PC 2760 Mission Street San Francisco, CA 94110 Phone: (415) 695-1000 Fax: (415) 695-1006 Email: arlo@liberationlawgroup.com The Defendants are represented by: Michele L. Maryott, Esq. Ashley L. Allyn, Esq. GIBSON DUNN AND CRUTCHER LLP 3161 Michelson Drive Irvine, CA 92612-4412 Phone: (949) 451-3945 Fax: (949) 451-4220 Email: mmaryott@gibsondunn.com aallyn@gibsondunn.com SWIFT TRANSPORTATION: Says Class Cert. Has No Effect in Proceedings ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as GRANT FRITSCH, an individual, v. SWIFT TRANSPORTATION CO. OF ARIZONA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and, DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 5:17-cv-02226-VAP-KK (C.D. Cal.), the Defendant will move the Court on February 22, 2021 to enter an order for a determination that the class certification order entered by the Superior Court of California for the County of San Bernardino on February 5, 2018 is without force or effect in these federal proceedings. The Defendant says that its motion should be granted on two separate grounds. First, the order was issued by the state court after this action had been properly removed to federal court. Second, the order was issued under state procedural law, and thus there were no findings that the conditions of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 were satisfied. Swift is a trucking company that is accurate and timely when it comes to transportation and logistics. A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Jan. 25, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3aoe4gZ at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendant is represented by: Paul S. Cowie, Esq. Robert E. Mussig, Esq. John D. Ellis, Esq. SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP Four Embarcadero Center, 17 Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-4109 Telephone: (415) 434 9100 Facsimile: (415) 434 3947 E-mail: pcowie@sheppardmullin.com rmussig@sheppardmull.com jellis@sheppardmullin.com SYBARITIC CONSULTING: Hindi Sues Over Unsolicited Text Messages --------------------------------------------------------------- JAMIL HINDI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SYBARITIC CONSULTING INC., Defendant, Case No. CACE-21-001582 (Fla. 17th Jud. Cir. Ct., January 25, 2021) is a class action complaint brought against the Defendant for its alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. According to the complaint, the Defendant sent automated text messages to the Plaintiff's cellular telephone number ending in 0358 encouraging the Plaintiff to purchase its products and services. Allegedly, the Defendant used a standard 10-digit phone number, which is a platform that enabled the Defendant to send SMS text messages en masse. Moreover, the text message appears generically formatted and scripted which is another indication of the use of an "automatic telephone dialing system" (ATDS). The Plaintiff asserts that he never provided the Defendant his "prior express consent" to be contacted by the Defendant through text messages via an ATDS. Despite the Plaintiff's opt-out request, the Defendant allegedly failed to honor or abide and instead, continued to send text message. As a result of the Defendant's alleged unsolicited text messages, the Plaintiff suffered actual harm, such as invasion of his privacy, aggravation, annoyance, intrusion on seclusion, trespass, and conversion. Thus, the Plaintiff seeks statutory and treble damages, an injunction requiring the Defendant to cease unsolicited text messaging activity and prohibiting the Defendant from using ATDS with the recipient's consent, and any other relief that the Court deems necessary. Sybaritic Consulting Inc. sells cellular telephone accessories through its Website themagnetmount.com. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq. HIRALDO P.A. 401 E. Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1400 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 Tel: (954) 400-4713 E-mail: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com TARGET CORPORATION: Bowen Labor Suit Seeks to Certify Two Classes ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as AISHA BOWEN, an individual on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated; STACEY WILLIAMS, an individual on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, v. TARGET CORPORATION; a Minnesota corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 2:16-cv-02587-JGB-MRW (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs will move the Court on May 3, 2021 to enter an order: 1. certifying the following classes: Regular Rate Class: "all current and former non-exempt employees of the Defendant Target in the State of California during the period of December 7, 2011 through the date of the order granting class certification (the "Class Period"), and who were paid a shift differential and/or holiday premium pay during at least one workweek that they earned overtime wages during the Class Period;" and Reimbursement Class: "all current and former non-exempt employees of Target in the State of California who participated in Target's Bring Your Own Device program during the Class Period;" 2. certifying the derivative claims for waiting time penalties and unfair and unlawful business practices; 3. appointing themselves as class representatives; and 4. appointing Matern Law Group, PC as class counsel. The Plaintiffs Aisha Bowen and Stacey Williams brought this wage and hour lawsuit against the Defendant Target and seek to certify classes for failure to pay overtime wages, failure to indemnify for necessary expenditures, and derivative claims for waiting time penalties under Labor Code, and unfair and unlawful business practices. Target Corporation is an American retail corporation. The eighth-largest retailer in the United States. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion to certify class dated Jan. 25, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3rpMaIz at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Matthew J. Matern, Esq. Mikael H. Stahle, Esq. Matthew W. Gordon, Esq. MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 200 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Telephone: (310) 531-1900 Facsimile: (310) 531-1901 E-mail: mmatern@maternlawgroup.com mstahle@maternlawgroup.com mgordon@maternlawgroup.com TAX RISE: Class Certification Bid Filing Due June 1 ---------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICAH WATKINS, on behalf of herself, and all others similarly situated, v. TAX RISE, INC., Case No. 8:20-cv-00029-JVS-KES (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge James V. Selna entered an order extending deadlines in scheduling and case management as follows: Deadline 1. Last Day to file Motion for June 1, 2021 Class Certification: 2. Last Day to Conduct Fact Discovery: August 2, 2021 3. Deadline for Parties to August 2, 2021 complete Settlement Conference: 4. Last Day to Conduct October 28, 2021 Expert Discovery: 5. Law and Motion Cut-Off: December 13, 2021 6. Pre-Trial Conference: January 24, 2022 7. Jury Trial: February 8, 2022 Tax Rise is located in Irvine, California, and is part of the Legal Services Industry. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 25, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3atJh2b at no extra charge.[CC] TENAFLY IMPORTS: Jaquez Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Tenafly Imports, LLC. The case is styled as Ramon Jaquez, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Tenafly Imports, LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-00843 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Tenafly Imports LLC -- https://www.gunterwilhelm.com/ -- is located in Ramsey, New Jersey and is part of the home furnishings stores industry.[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 TENNESSEE: Prisoners Seeks to Certify Class Action -------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Tennessee Prisoners v. Tony Parker, et al., Case No. 2:20-cv-02781-JTF-atc (W.D. Tenn.), the Plaintiffs Marvin Green, Nathaniel Wilmoth and Thomas Pruitt ask the Court to enter an order certifying class action. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion to certify class dated Jan. 25, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/39A7IMh at no extra charge.[CC] THIRTY THREE THREADS: Burbon Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Thirty Three Threads, Inc. The case is styled as Luc Burbon and on behalf of all persons similarly situated v. Thirty Three Threads, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-00507-NGG-SJB (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Thirty Three Threads -- https://www.thirtythreethreads.com/ -- is a manufacturer of sock and accessories based in Vista, California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Bradly Gurion Marks, Esq. THE MARKS LAW FIRM PC 175 Varick Street 3rd Floor New York, NY 10014 Phone: (646) 770-3775 Fax: (646) 867-2639 Email: bmarkslaw@gmail.com TRADITIONS MANAGEMENT: Toney-Marcum Sues Over Unpaid OT Wages ------------------------------------------------------------- Zachary Andrew Toney-Marcum, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. TRADITIONS MANAGEMENT, LLC and ANDREA NOE, Case No. 1:21-cv-00069-MWM (S.D. Ohio, Jan. 29, 2021) is brought against the Defendants for unlawfully denying the Plaintiff overtime pay in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act for hours worked. The Defendants' managers routinely and improperly modify employee time records to avoid paying overtime. The Plaintiff often worked more than 40 hours per week during his employment and the Defendants were aware he worked these hours; yet the Defendants repeatedly failed to pay overtime for the hours worked over 40 hours per workweek, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a licensed practical nurse. Traditions Management, LLC owns and operates Traditions of Deerfield, a nursing home in Circle Loveland, Ohio.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robb S. Stokar, Esq. MINNILLO LAW GROUP CO., LPA 2712 Observatory Avenue Cincinnati, OH 45208 Phone: (513) 723-1600 Fax: (513) 723-1620 Email: rss@mlg-lpa.com TYCO FIRE: Settlement Agreement Wins Initial Approval in AFFF Suit ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit RE: AQUEOUS FILM-FORMING FOAMS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION, Case No. 2:19-cv-00422-RMG (D.S.C.), the Hon. Judge Richard Mark Gergel entered an order: 1. granting the joint motion for preliminary approval of the settlement agreement and certification of the settlement class; and 2. adopting and approving the parties' Proposed Timeline. The Court said, "The class members are readily identifiable and the implicated threshold requirement to proceed under Rule 23 is satisfied. The proposed class representatives' claims arise from the same alleged exposure to the same chemicals in the same geographical area during same time period, as do the putative members' claims. Typicality is therefore satisfied. The causes of action brought in the complaint encompass the types of injuries provided for in the parties' First Amended Class Settlement and Release Agreement and, therefore, are interrelated to the class claims. Adequacy is, therefore, satisfied. The proposed Agreement treats class members equitably in relation to one another in the context of settlement fund allocation and the claim submission process." This is a putative class action brought by property owners Joan and Richard Campbell of Marinette County, Wisconsin against Tyco Fire Products L.P., Chemguard, Inc., and Chemdesign, Inc. The complaint alleges that Aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) is manufactured, tested and used at the Ansul Fire Technology Center (AFTC), an active fire suppressant training, testing and research site in Marinette that is owned and operated by Defendant Tyco. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the AFFF, alleged to be manufactured by Defendants and used at the AFTC, allegedly contaminated certain water well systems that supply potable water to Marinette County residences such as the Campbells. This well contamination required identification and supply of alternative water sources. The Campbells allege that, as a result of their exposure to the PFAS-contaminated water, Joan developed thyroid disease and thyroid cancer and Richard is at an increased risk to develop certain serious health conditions. In the complaint, they seek to represent a medical monitoring class and a property damage class. A copy of the Court's preliminary approval order dated Jan. 25, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/2YC4aTr at no extra charge.[CC] U.S. TAPE: Burbon Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York ------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against U.S Tape Company, Inc. The case is styled as Luc Burbon and on behalf of all persons similarly situated v. U.S Tape Company, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-00506 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. U.S. Tape Company, Inc. -- https://www.ustape.com/ -- has been manufacturing professional grade tape measures since 1876.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Bradly Gurion Marks, Esq. THE MARKS LAW FIRM PC 175 Varick Street 3rd Floor New York, NY 10014 Phone: (646) 770-3775 Fax: (646) 867-2639 Email: bmarkslaw@gmail.com UBER TECHNOLOGIES: James Bid to Certify Drivers Class Partly OK'd ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHRISTOPHER JAMES, et al., v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES INC., Case No. 3:19-cv-06462-EMC (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Edward M. Chen entered an order granting in part and denying in part the plaintiffs' motion for class certification: -- The Court grants in part Plaintiffs' Rule 23(b)(3) motion to certify a class of Uber drivers who drove for Uber in the State of California between February 28, 2019 and December 16, 2020, and who opted out of Uber's arbitration agreement. The trier of fact will first consider on a class-wide basis whether this class of drivers satisfies prongs A and B of the ABC test. If these drivers do not satisfy either prong, then the trier of fact will proceed to consider, also on a class-wide basis, this class' expense reimbursement and itemized wage statement claims. -- The Court also denies in part Plaintiff's Rule 23(b)(3) motion as it pertains to prong C of the ABC test and the Plaintiffs' minimum wage, overtime, and paid sick leave claims. -- The parties are ordered to meet and confer regarding the contents and logistics of class notice and other relevant procedural details in advance of the next case management conference, to be held at 10:30 a.m., February 18, 2021. Uber is an American technology company. Its services include ride-hailing, food delivery, package delivery, couriers, freight transportation, and, through a partnership with Lime, electric bicycle and motorized scooter rental. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3cC6X7d at no extra charge.[CC] UNITED AMERICAN: Bailey Seeks Security Guards' Unpaid OT Wages -------------------------------------------------------------- The case, HOLLIS BAILEY, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. UNITED AMERICAN SECURITY, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:21-cv-00257-NYW (D. Colo., January 26, 2021) challenges the Defendant's alleged willful violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Colorado Wage Act, and the Colorado Overtime and Minimum Pay Standards Order. The Plaintiff, who was employed by the Defendant as a security guard and was classified as non-exempt employee, alleges that the Defendant did not compensate him and other similarly situated security guards for the time they spent performing pre-shift "pass down" work, that is approximately 10-15 minutes, which constituted an integral and indispensable part of their principal activities. As a result, despite the Plaintiff and other security guards regularly worked 40 or more hours per week, they were not paid overtime compensation for all the hours they worked over 40 each workweek at the applicable overtime rate in accordance with the law, the suit says. The Plaintiff brings this complaint as a collective and class action on behalf of himself and other similarly situated security guards seeking actual damages for unpaid wages, liquidated damages equal in amount to the unpaid wages, pre- and post-judgment interest at the statutory rate, attorneys' fees, costs and disbursements, and other relief as the Court deems just and proper. United American Security, LLC provides security services. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Hans A. Nilges, Esq. Shannon M. Draher, Esq. NILGES DRAHER LLC 7266 Portage Street, N.W., Suite D Massillon, OH 44646 Tel: (330) 470-4428 Fax: (330) 754-1430 E-mail: hans@ohlaborlaw.com sdraher@ohlaborlaw.com - and – Jeffrey J. Moyle, Esq. NILGES DRAHER LLC 614 West Superior Ave., Suite 1148 Cleveland, OH 44113 Tel: (234) 401-9286 E-mail: jmoyle@ohlaborlaw.com - and – Lori M. Griffin, Esq. Anthony J. Lazzaro, Esq. Chastity L. Christy, Esq. THE LAZZARO LAW FIRM, LLC The Heritage Bldg., Suite 250 34555 Chagrin Boulevard Moreland Hills, OH 44022 Tel: (216) 696-5000 Fax: (216) 696-7005 E-mail: lori@lazzarolawfirm.com chastity@lazzarolawfirm.com anthony@lazzarolawfirm.com UNITED SERVICES: Marchek Files Suit in W.D. Michigan ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against United Services Automobile Association. The case is styled as Jeremy Marchek, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. United Services Automobile Association, a Texas Corporation, Case No. 1:21-cv-00087 (W.D. Mich., Jan. 27, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over insurance contract violations. United Services Automobile Association -- https://www.usaa.com/ -- provides financial services. The Company offers auto, life, flood, vehicle, business, health, and condo, insurance services, as well as banking, investment, real estate, retirement, financial planning, and mortgage services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew Shamis, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE, PA 14 NE 1st Ave, Ste. 705 Miami, FL 33132 Phone: (305) 479-2299 Fax: (786) 623-0915 Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com VAUGHAN & BUSHNELL: Burbon Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Vaughan & Bushnell Manufacturing Company. The case is styled as Luc Burbon and on behalf of all persons similarly situated v. Vaughan & Bushnell Manufacturing Company, Case No. 1:21-cv-00505 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Vaughan & Bushnell Manufacturing, also known as Vaughan Manufacturing and branded as simply Vaughan, -- https://www.vaughanmfg.com/ -- is an American manufacturing company that specializes in the production of hammers, axes, prybars, and hand saws.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Bradly Gurion Marks, Esq. THE MARKS LAW FIRM PC 175 Varick Street 3rd Floor New York, NY 10014 Phone: (646) 770-3775 Fax: (646) 867-2639 Email: bmarkslaw@gmail.com VERTAFORE INC: Mulvey Alleges Unlawful Use of Customers' Records ---------------------------------------------------------------- Aaron Mulvey, individually, and on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated individuals v. VERTAFORE INC., Case No. 3:21-cv-00213-E (N.D. Tex., Jan. 31, 2021) is seeking redress for the unlawful and negligent obtainment, use, and redisclosure of millions of Texas resident's Personal Identifying Information ("PII") and sensitive information, a "Data Event" that reportedly included the names, addresses, dates of birth, vehicle registrations, vehicle registration histories, and driver's license numbers issued before February 2019 involving 27.7 million Texas residents. According to the complaint, the entire database of the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles, was compromised, reportedly the event beginning on March 11, 2020, the result of glaring weaknesses and vulnerabilities in the Defendant's data computing systems. On November 10, 2020, Defendant Vertafore announced publicly in a press release that it was subject to one of the largest data events in Texas history, the severity unprecedented, affecting most, if not all, of the Texas adult population. Reportedly, databases of PII involving Texas consumers were accessed, without authorization. The public concern being, using this information, identity thieves can then create fake identities, fraudulently obtain loans and tax refunds, and destroy a consumer's insurance-worthiness -- the very thing the Defendant exists to assess and report, the suit says. Allegedly, the Defendant stated that in mid-August 2020 it was made aware of the "Data Event," by a "trusted third-party," refraining from disclosing the identity of the third-party. During this five (5) month period, from the date of the breach to the initial notice of the breach, the Defendant claims to have failed to detect the unauthorized access of the massive amounts of data that were being exfiltrated from its computing system, reportedly delaying notice to involved consumers for 90 days to conduct an investigation while actively assisting law enforcement. This class action is brought by individuals throughout Texas whom suffered an invasion of a legally protected interest, and were victimized by these events, in order to redress the harm that they have suffered, and to obtain appropriate relief, risking that the Defendant will continue to obtain, use, and re-disclose motor vehicle records in its possession, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a licensed and registered driver in the State of Texas. Vertafore plays a central role in the modern American economy, collecting and selling vast amounts of data about the most intricate details of consumers' financial lives, connecting every point within the insurance distribution channel.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph H. Malley, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH H. MALLEY, P.C. 1045 North Zang Blvd Dallas, Tx 75208 Phone: (214) 943-6100 Email: malleylaw@gmail.com VILLA MONTES: Hotel Online Booking Violates ADA, Whitaker Alleges ----------------------------------------------------------------- BRIAN WHITAKER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. JOSE A. MONTES and MARIA G. MONTES, Trustees of the Montes Family Revocable Trust of November 11, 1996; and VILLA MONTES HOTEL, L.P., Defendants, Case No. 3:21-cv-00679-SK (N.D. Cal., January 28, 2021) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the California Unruh Civil Rights Act. The case arises from the Defendants' failure to provide information about the accessible features in the rooms at the Villa Montes Hotel, Ascend Hotel Collection on its reservation Website, https://www.choicehotels.com/california/san-bruno/ascend-hotels, for people with disabilities, including the Plaintiff. The Website reservation system lacks sufficient information needed by disabled travelers to assess independently whether a given hotel room would work for them. As a result, the Plaintiff is unable to engage in an online booking of the hotel room with any confidence or knowledge about whether the room will actually work for him due to his disability, the suit says. Villa Montes Hotel, LP is the operator of the Villa Montes Hotel, Ascend Hotel Collection located at 620 El Camino Real, San Bruno, California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Raymond Ballister Jr., Esq. Russell Handy, Esq. Amanda Seabock, Esq. Zachary Best, Esq. CENTER FOR DISABILITY ACCESS 8033 Linda Vista Road, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92111 Telephone: (858) 375-7385 Facsimile: (888) 422-5191 E-mail: amandas@potterhandy.com VIRGINIA MOTEL: Faces Garcia ADA Suit Over Online Booking System ---------------------------------------------------------------- ORLANDO GARCIA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. VIRGINIA MOTEL, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 21GDCV00142 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., January 29, 2021) is a class action against the Defendant for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the California Unruh Civil Rights Act. The case arises from the Defendant's failure to provide information about the accessible features in the rooms at the Travelodge by Wyndham Rosemead on its reservation Website, https://www.wyndhamhotels.com/travelodge/rosemead-california/travelodge-rosemead/overview, for people with disabilities, including the Plaintiff. The Website reservation system lacks sufficient information needed by disabled travelers to assess independently whether a given hotel room would work for them. As a result, the Plaintiff is unable to engage in an online booking of the hotel room with any confidence or knowledge about whether the room will actually work for him due to his disability, the suit says. Virginia Motel, LLC is an owner and operator of the Travelodge by Wyndham Rosemead located at 3327 Del Mar Ave., Rosemead, California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Raymond Ballister Jr., Esq. Russell Handy, Esq. Amanda Seabock, Esq. Zachary Best, Esq. CENTER FOR DISABILITY ACCESS 8033 Linda Vista Road, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92111 Telephone: (858) 375-7385 Facsimile: (888) 422-5191 E-mail: amandas@potterhandy.com VISTA EQUITY: Faces Solak Suit Over Breach of Fiduciary Duties -------------------------------------------------------------- John Solak, Individually And On Behalf Of All Others Similarly Situated v. AARON SKONNARD, ARNE DUNCAN, BONITA C. STEWART, BRAD RENCHER, FRITZ ONION, GARY CRITTENDEN, KARENANN TERRELL, LEAH JOHNSON, RYAN HINKLE, SCOTT DORSEY, TIM MAUDLIN, VISTA EQUITY PARTNERS FUND VII, L.P., LAKE HOLDINGS, LP, LAKE GUARANTOR, LLC, LAKE MERGER SUB I, INC., AND LAKE MERGER SUB II, LLC, PLURALSIGHT, INC., Case No. 2021-0077- (Del. Ch. Ct., Jan. 29, 2021) is brought to remedy their misconduct in connection with the buyout (the "Buyout") of Pluralsight by Vista Equity Partners Fund VII, L.P., Lake Holdings, LP, Lake Guarantor, LLC, Lake Merger Sub I, Inc., Inc. and Lake Merger Sub II, LLC (collectively referred to as "Vista") and to enjoin the Buyout unless and/or until Defendants cure their breaches of fiduciary duty, and/or recover damages resulting from Defendants' violations of their fiduciary duties. On December 13, 2020, the Company and Vista issued a joint press release announcing that the Board had caused the Company to enter into a merger agreement whereby Pluralsight agreed to be acquired by Vista for $20.26 per share in cash. Pluralsight's controlling stockholder, co-Founder, Chairman, and CEO Aaron Skonnard spearheaded the decision to pursue and ultimately agree to the Buyout. Skonnard steered the Board towards the transaction with Vista because it secures significant and immediate benefits for Company insiders like himself. Less than three years ago, in May 2018, Pluralsight had gone public through an initial public offering (the "IPO"). In connection with the IPO, Skonnard, several members of Pluralsight's management team, and Pluralsight's Board entered into an income tax receivable agreement (the "TRA") with Pluralsight. The TRA requires a payout upon a Company change of control transaction. In connection with the Buyout, on January 7, 2021, the Individual Defendants allegedly issued materially incomplete and misleading disclosures in a Preliminary Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Specifically, the Proxy Statement is materially deficient and misleading because, inter alia, it omits material information regarding: (i) potential conflicts of interest surrounding Qatalyst and Vista; (ii) the financial analysis conducted by Qatalyst; (iii) Skonnard's agreement with Vista; and (iv) that the Buyout is subject to Section 203 of the DGCL and thus requires an affirmative vote of at least 66 2/3% of the outstanding voting stock not owned or affiliated with Skonnard. Without this information, Pluralsight stockholders cannot make an informed decision with respect to the Buyout, the suit says. According to the complaint, by agreeing to the Buyout for self-serving purposes, the Individual Defendants have breached their fiduciary duties. The Board allegedly failed to act in good faith when it approved the sale of the Company to Vista for unfair consideration and pursuant to an unfair process. Pluralsight conducted a deeply flawed and highly manipulated sales process that conspicuously occurred during a period when the Company's quarterly billings growth rate showed optically weaker growth than expected simply because of a shift in the timing of the Company's annual user conference, the suit added. As a result of this flawed process, the price per share Vista had agreed to pay for the Company is grossly inadequate. As the process and economic terms of the Buyout were clearly unfair to Pluralsight and its stockholders, Plaintiff brings this action directly on behalf of a class of Pluralsight stockholders to seek redress for the harms stemming from Defendants' breaches of fiduciary duty and to recover all amounts that Skonnard has cost the Company and its stockholders by its inequitable manipulations of his control over the Company. Additionally, Plaintiff brings claims against Vista for aiding and abetting the Skonnard's breach of fiduciary duties, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a stockholder of Pluralsight. Vista Equity Partners is an American investment firm focused on financing and forwarding software, data and technology-enabled startup businesses. Skonnard has served at all relevant times as the Company's Chief Executive Officer, Co-Founder and a Chairman of Pluralsight's Board of Directors.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ryan M. Ernst, Esq. O'KELLY & ERNST, LLC 824 N. Market St., Suite 1001A Wilmington, DE 19801 Phone: (302) 778-4000 Email: rernst@oelegal.com - and - Donald J. Enright, Esq. Elizabeth K. Tripodi, Esq. Gregory Nespole, Esq. Jordan Cafritz, Esq. LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP 1101 30th Street, N.W., Suite 115 Washington, DC 20007 Phone: (202) 524-4290 VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Stipulation to Extend Class Status Bid Date Nixed ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as DAVID PATRICK, individually, and on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals, v. VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF AMERICA, INC., a New Jersey Corporation, Case No. 8:19-cv-01908-MCS-ADS (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Mark C. Scarsi entered an order denying stipulation to extend plaintiff's deadline to file his motion for class certification and associated briefing schedule by 45 days. Volkswagen Group is the North American operational headquarters, and subsidiary of the Volkswagen Group of automobile companies of Germany. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 26, 2020 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3atntUz at no extra charge.[CC] WAL-MART ASSOCIATES: Hernandez Labor Suit Goes to C.D. California ----------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled JESSICA HERNANDEZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. WAL-MART ASSOCIATES, INC., and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. CIVSB2024738, was removed from the Superior Court in the State of California for San Bernardino County to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on January 28, 2021. The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned Case No. 5:21-cv-00166 to the proceeding. The case arises from the Defendants' alleged violations of the California Labor Code and the California Business and Professions Code including failure to provide meal periods, failure to provide rest periods, failure to pay overtime wages, failure to pay minimum wages, failure to pay all wages due to discharged and quitting employees, failure to maintain required records, failure to provide accurate wage statements, failure to indemnify employees for necessary expenditures incurred in discharge of duties, and unfair and unlawful business practices. Wal-Mart Associates, Inc. is an American multinational retail corporation that operates a chain of hypermarkets, discount department stores, and grocery stores from the United States, headquartered in Bentonville, Arkansas. [BN] The Defendant is represented by: Paloma P. Peracchio, Esq. OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C. 400 South Hope Street, Suite 1200 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 239-9800 Facsimile: (213) 239-9045 E-mail: paloma.peracchio@ogletree.com - and – Mitchell A. Wrosch, Esq. OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C. Park Tower, Fifteenth Floor 695 Town Center Drive Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Telephone: (714) 800-7900 Facsimile: (714) 754-1298 E-mail: mitchell.wrosch@ogletree.com WAL-MART ASSOCIATES: Nelson FLSA Class Suit Removed to D. Nevada ---------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled CHRISTOPHER NELSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. WAL-MART ASSOCIATES, INC. and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 20-TRT 00004 1E, was removed from the First Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada to the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada on January 29, 2021. The Clerk of Court for the District of Nevada assigned Case No. 3:21-cv-00066 to the proceeding. The case arises from the Defendant's alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Nevada Constitution including failure to pay overtime wages, failure to pay minimum wages, failure to pay wages for all hours worked, and failure to timely pay all wages due and owing upon termination. Wal-Mart Associates, Inc. is an American multinational retail corporation that operates a chain of hypermarkets, discount department stores, and grocery stores from the United States, headquartered in Bentonville, Arkansas. [BN] The Defendant is represented by: Anthony L. Martin, Esq. Dana B. Salmonson, Esq. OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C. Wells Fargo Tower, Suite 1500 3800 Howard Hughes Parkway Las Vegas, NV 89169 Telephone: (702) 369-6800 Facsimile: (702) 369-6888 E-mail: anthony.martin@ogletreedeakins.com dana.salmonson@ogletreedeakins.com WAREHOUSE SKATEBOARDS: Paguada Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York -------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Warehouse Skateboards, Inc. The case is styled as Dilenia Paguada, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Warehouse Skateboards, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-00748 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 27, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Warehouse Skateboards -- https://www.warehouseskateboards.com/ -- offers largest selection of skateboards, skateboard decks, complete skateboards, skate trucks, wheels and more.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mars Khaimov, Esq. 10826 64th Avenue, Ste. 2nd Floor Forest Hills, NY 11375 Phone: (917) 915-7415 Email: marskhaimovlaw@gmail.com WLLC II: Easley Suit Removed to S.D. Alabama -------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Lillian Easley, and all others similarly situated v. WLCC II d/b/a Arrowhead Advance was removed from the Circuit Court for Mobile County, Alabama, to the U.S. District Court for Southern District of Alabama on Jan. 29, 2021. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:21-cv-00049-KD-MU to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract for Contract Dispute. Arrowhead Advance -- https://www.arrowheadadvance.com/ -- provides loans and installment services. The Company specializes in consumer lending.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Earl P. Underwood , Jr., Esq. UNDERWOOD & RIEMER, PC 21 South Section Street Fairhope, AL 36532 Phone: (251) 990-5558 Fax: (251) 990-0626 Email: epunderwood@gmail.com - and - Kenneth J. Riemer, Esq. UNDERWOOD & RIEMER, PC 2153 Airport Boulevard Mobile, AL 36606 Phone: (251) 432-9212 Email: kriemer@alalaw.com - and - Steven P Gregory, Esq. GREGORY LAW FIRM, P.C. 505 20th Street North, Suite 1215 Birmingham, AL 35203 Phone: (205) 208-0312 Email: steve@gregorylawfirm.us The Defendant is represented by: Jaclyn Carol Combs, Esq. MAYNARD COOPER & GALE 11 N. Water Street, Ste. 24290 Mobile, AL 36602 Phone: (251) 432-0001 Email: jcombs@maynardcooper.com - and - John N. Bolus, Esq. MAYNARD, COOPER, and GALE P.C. 1901 6th Ave. N., Ste. 2400 Birmingham, AL 35203 Phone: (205) 254-1000 Fax: (205) 254-1999 Email: jbolus@mcglaw.com XPO LOGISTICS: Faces Hall Suit Over Workplace Racial Discrimination ------------------------------------------------------------------- RODNEY HALL v. XPO LOGISTICS, LLC, d/b/a XPO LOGISTICS, Case No. 2:21-cv-00053-RAJ-RJK (E.D. Va., Jan. 25, 2021) is a class action complaint brought by the Plaintiff and other similarly situated comparator employees, seeking compensatory and punitive damages, declaratory, and injunctive relief under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, to redress injury caused by the Defendant's disparate treatment motivated by his race and/or and in retaliation against his protected conduct. The case arises out of discrimination by Defendant-employer motivated by race, as well as its retaliation for internal complaints and for requests for medical leave, in the course of employment of, and termination of the Plaintiff, Rodney Hall, an African-American male. The Plaintiff is an African-American male who worked for the Defendant as a truck driver. The Defendant is a global provider of freight transportation services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James R. Theuer, Esq. JAMES R. THEUER, PLLC www.theuerlaw.com 555 E. Main Street, Suite 1212 Norfolk, VA 23510 Telephone: (757) 446-8047 Facsimile: (757) 446-8048 - and - Michael G. Green II, Esq. John P. Salas, Esq. SALAS LAW FIRM, P.A. 8551 West Sunrise Boulevard, Suite 300 Plantation, FL 33322 Telephone: (954) 315-1155 Facsimile: (954) 452-3311 E-mail: michael@jpsalaslaw.com jp@jpsalaslaw.com YCI METHANOL: Faces Strawn Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D. Texas ----------------------------------------------------------- TOMMY STRAWN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. YCI METHANOL ONE, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 4:21-cv-00309 (S.D. Tex., January 29, 2021) 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 quality assurance inspectors overtime pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek. Mr. Strawn worked for the Defendant as a quality assurance inspector at its construction site in Saint James, Louisiana from approximately June 2019 until November 2020. YCI Methanol One, LLC is a methanol producer based in Houston, Texas. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael A. Josephson, Esq. Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq. Melodie K. Arian, 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 marian@mybackwages.com - and – Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq. BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC 8 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1500 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 877-8788 Facsimile: (713) 877-8065 E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com ZAGG INC: Rosa Sues Over Misleading SEC Registration Statements --------------------------------------------------------------- Steven Rosa, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. ZAGG, INC., CHERYL A. LARABEE, CHRIS AHERN, DAN MAURER, SCOTT STUBBS, MICHAEL BIRCH, RON GARRIQUES, and EDWARD TERINO, Case No. 2:21-cv-01415 (D.N.J., Jan. 29, 2021) is brought on behalf of other public holders of the common stock of Zagg, Inc. against the Company and the members of the Company's board of directors for their violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Regulation G in connection with the proposed merger (the "Proposed Transaction") between Zagg and a buyer group led by Evercel, Inc. due to materially incomplete and misleading Proxy statements. On December 10, 2020, the Board caused the Company to enter into an agreement and plan of merger ("Merger Agreement"), pursuant to which the Company's shareholders stand to receive $4.20 in cash and an additional $0.25 per share contingent on the Company's Paycheck Protection Program Loan being forgiven for each share of Zagg stock they own (the "Merger Consideration"). On January 7, 2021, in order to convince Zagg shareholders to vote in favor of the Proposed Transaction, the Board allegedly authorized the filing of a materially incomplete and misleading Form PREM14A Preliminary Proxy Statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission, in violation of the Exchange Act. According to the complaint, while touting the fairness of the Merger Consideration to the Company's shareholders in the Proxy, Defendants have failed to disclose certain material information that is necessary for shareholders to properly assess the fairness of the Proposed Transaction, thereby violating SEC rules and regulations and rendering certain statements in the Proxy materially incomplete and misleading. In particular, the Proxy allegedly contains materially incomplete and misleading information concerning: (i) the financial projections for the Company that were prepared by the Company and relied on by Defendants in recommending that Zagg shareholders vote in favor of the Proposed Transaction; and (ii) the summary of certain valuation analyses conducted by Zagg's financial advisor, BofA Securities, Inc. in support of its opinion that the Merger Consideration is fair to shareholders, on which the Board relied. It is imperative that the material information that has been omitted from the Proxy is disclosed prior to the forthcoming vote to allow the Company's shareholders to make an informed decision regarding the Proposed Transaction, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a holder of Zagg common stock. Zagg designs, manufactures and distributes mobile technology accessories for smartphones, tablets, smartwatches, and other mobile devices.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Alex Hartzband, Esq. FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP 685 Third Avenue, 26th Floor New York, NY 10017 Phone: (212) 983-9330 Facsimile: (212) 983-9331 Email: ahartzband@faruqilaw.com - and - Maxwell Michael, Esq. FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP 685 Third Avenue, 26th Floor New York, NY 10017 Phone: (212) 983-9330 Fax: (212) 983-9331 Email: mmichael@faruqilaw.com - and - Brian Schall, Esq. THE SCHALL LAW FIRM 2049 Century Park East, Suite 2460 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Phone: (424) 303-1964 Facsimile: (877) 590-0482 Email: brian@schallfirm.com ********* S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA. Rousel Elaine T. Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche A. Castillon, Julie Anne L. Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors. Copyright 2021. 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 ***