/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/210623.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Wednesday, June 23, 2021, Vol. 23, No. 119 Headlines 3M COMPANY: Bertsch Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams ACELRX PHARMA: Bronstein Gewirtz Reminds of Aug. 9 Deadline ACELRX PHARMA: Glancy Prongay Reminds of August 9 Deadline ALPHA FUNDING: Fabricant Files TCPA Suit in C.D. California AMAZON.COM: Garner Sues Over Invasion of Privacy ANCESTRY.COM: Prevails in Yearbook Database Class Action Lawsuit ANNA SHEFFIELD: Roman Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ARRAY TECHNOLOGIES: Frank R. Cruz Reminds of July 13 Deadline ARRAY TECHNOLOGIES: Rosen Law Reminds of July 13 Deadline ASP FARM SEVICES: Pimentel Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ASSURANCE IQ: Smith Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Washington AT&T MOBILITY: Jarrat Files Suit in E.D. California ATERIAN INC: Kirby McInerney Reminds of July 12 Deadline BACKYARD LAWN: Harnish Sues Over FCRA Violation BALTIMORE, MD: Mayor Responds to ADA Class-Action Lawsuit BAPTIST MEMORIAL: Stewart Files Suit in W.D. Tennessee BATH FITTER: Miller Files TCPA Suit in M.D. Pennsylvania BRSI LLC: Still-Dobson Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Oklahoma CAPITAL MANAGEMENT: Rabinowitz Files FDCPA Suit in D. New Jersey CASINO LLC: Iiams Sues Over Wage and Hour Violations CASTLE CREDIT: Fails to Pay Proper OT Wages, Hodges Suit Claims CHEMOCENTRYX INC: Vincent Wong Reminds of July 6 Deadline CHIPPEWA CREE: Class Action Settlement Brings $59M to Descendents CHURCHILL CAPITAL: Vincent Wong Reminds of July 6 Deadline CITY OF BILLINGS: Attempt to Take Over Costly Lawsuit Rejected COAST TO COAST: Fails to Pay Proper OT Wages, Parker Claims COLLICUTT ENERGY: Hernandez Sues Over Unpaid Compensations CONOPCO INC: Huskey Suit Removed to E.D. Missouri CONOPCO INC: Sandbach Fraud Suit Removed to E.D. Missouri CONTEXTLOGIC INC: Frank R. Cruz Reminds of December 16 Deadline CONTEXTLOGIC INC: Kirby McInerney Reminds of July 16 Deadline DANIMER SCIENTIFIC: Levi & Korsinsky Reminds of July 13 Deadline DANIMER SCIENTIFIC: Vincent Wong Reminds of July 13 Deadline DEVON ENERGY: $28 Million Settlement Over Gas Royalties OK'd DIANNE BIGEAGLE: Federal Court Tosses Out Attempted MMIWG Suit EB GOLF MEDIA: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ETERNAL BEVERAGES: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York FITNESS INT'L: Nagy Sues Over Illegal Electronic Fund Transfers FREQUENCY THERA: Bronstein Gewirtz Reminds of Aug. 2 Deadline FREQUENCY THERAPEUTICS: Glancy Prongay Reminds of Aug. 2 Deadline FREQUENCY THERAPEUTICS: Kirby McInerney Reminds of Aug. 2 Deadline FREQUENCY THERAPEUTICS: Klein Law Firm Reminds of Aug. 2 Deadline FRESENIUS USA: Fenske Sues Over Wage and Hour Violations GENERAL MILLS: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York GULF OF MEXICO: Charter Operators Fight Back Against Lawsuit H.E.W. AND ASSOCIATES: Fabricant Files TCPA Suit in C.D. California H.L. GROSS & BRO: Roman Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York HAIN CELESTIAL: Maestre Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct. HERFF JONES: Furcinito Suit Asserts Credit Card Fraud HONEST PAWS: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York HYUNDAI MOTOR: GV80 Subject of Class Action Filed by Boca Raton JIM 'N NICK'S: Porter Sues Over Failure to Compensate OT Wages KAISER FOUNDATION: Settles Employment Class Action for $1.4M LEPOZZI INC: Roman Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York LIMETREE BAY: Boynes Sues Over Harmful Effects of Refinery LOSTMY.NAME INC: Davis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York MDL 2913: Oneida City School District Sues Over E-Cigarette Crisis MEDINAH COUNTRY: Campos Sues Over Unlawful Biometrics Collection MEKONG BK CORP: Gonzalez Seeks Overtime Pay, Slams Tip Credit MIDLAND CREDIT: Belizor Sues Over Deceptive Collection Letter MONTGOMERY, AL: Carter Appeals Denied Class Cert. Bid to 11th Cir. MONTGOMERY, AL: McCullough Appeals Class Certification Bid Denial MUD LAKE, NL: Province Removed as Party in Mud Lake Flood NABC INC: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK: To Settle US Bank Bill Swap Rate Suit NATIONWIDE TAX: Loftus Files TCPA Suit in C.D. California NCAA: Flores Files Suit in Southern District of Indiana NCAA: Harris Files Suit in Southern District of Indiana NCAA: Kirkwood Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois NCAA: Parrish Files Suit in Southern District of Indiana NCAA: Reis Suit Transferred to Northern District of Illinois NCAA: Romashko Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois NOBLR RECIPROCAL EXCHANGE: Greenstein Sues Over Data Breach NON TYPICAL INC: Davis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York O'REILLY AUTO: Faces Suit Over COVID Screenings, Security Checks OCUGEN INC: Gainey McKenna Reminds of August 17 Deadline OCUGEN INC: Johnson Fistel Reminds of August 17 Deadline OCUGEN INC: Schall Law Reminds of August 17 Deadline ONTARIO: Court OKs $100M BMO Class Action Settlement Over FX Fees PELOTON INTERACTIVE: Portnoy Law Firm Reminds of June 28 Deadline PENNSYLVANIA: Judge Tosses Tavern's COVID-19 Coverage Class Suit PERFORMANCE VALIDATION: Mohilo Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime POWELL'S BOOKS: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York PROMED & ASSOCIATED: Khaled Sues Over Failure to Pay EMTs' OT PROVENTION BIO: Klein Law Firm Reminds of July 20 Deadline PURECYCLE TECH: Levi & Korsinsky Reminds of July 12 Deadline PUREFORMULAS INC: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York RED LOBSTER: Marshall Sues Over Questionable Seafood Farm Practices RELIA HOME: Misclassifies Acquisition Specialists, Linares Claims RESURGENT CAPITAL: Bradshaw Files FDCPA Suit in M.D. North Carolina RLX TECHNOLOGY: Wolf Haldenstein Reminds of August 9 Deadline SEND A CAKE: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York SKILLZ INC: Robbins Geller Reminds Investors of July 7 Deadline SUNBUTTER LLC: Davis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York TLM RESEARCH: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York TTT WEST COAST: Scialfo Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages UBIQUITI INC: Glancy Prongay Reminds of July 19 Deadline UBIQUITI INC: Lieff Cabraser Reminds of July 19 Deadline UBIQUITI INC: Vincent Wong Reminds Investors of July 19 Deadline VIRGIN GALACTIC: Levi & Korsinsky Reminds of July 27 Deadline VIRGIN GALACTIC: Thornton Law Reminds of July 27 Deadline VIRGIN GALACTIC: Vincent Wong Reminds of July 27 Deadline WASHINGTON PRIME: Klein Law Reminds Investors of July 23 Deadline WESTCHESTER SURPLUS: Cafe Int'l Appeals Insurance Suit Dismissal WESTERN DIGITAL: To Settle SMR HDD False Advertising Class Action ********* 3M COMPANY: Bertsch Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams ------------------------------------------------------------------ Thomas Bertsch, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing, Co.), AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS, INC., AGC, INC. (f/k/a Asahi Glass Co., Ltd.), AMEREX CORPORATION, ARCHROMA MANAGEMENT, LLC, ARCHROMA U.S., INC., ARKEMA, INC., individually and as successor-in-interest to Atofina, S.A., BASF CORPORATION, individually and as successor-in-interest to Ciba, Inc., BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT CO., CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION, individually and as successor-interest to Kidde-Fenwal, Inc., CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC., CHEMGUARD, INC., CHEMICALS, INC., CHUBB FIRE, LTD., CLARIANT CORPORATION, CLARIANT CORPORATION, individually and as successor-in-interest to Sandoz Chemical Corporation, CORTEVA, INC., individually and as successor-in-interest to DuPont Chemical Solutions Enterprise, DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC., DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC., individually and as successor-in-interest to DuPont Chemical Solutions Enterprise, DYNAX CORPORATION, E.I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS & COMPANY, individually and as successor-in-interest to DuPont Chemical Solutions Enterprise, KIDDE-FENWAL, INC., individually and as successor-in-interest to Kidde Fire Fighting, Inc., KIDDE PLC, INC., NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY, NATIONAL FOAM, INC., THE CHEMOURS COMPANY, individually and as successor-in-interest to DuPont Chemical Solutions Enterprise, THE CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC, individually and as successor-in-interest to DuPont Chemical Solutions Enterprise, TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company, UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, and UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc., Case No. 2:21-cv-01643-RMG (D.S.C., June 2, 2021), is brought for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS. According to the complaint, PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain in the human body while presenting significant health risks to humans. The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products. Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein. Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the same, says the complaint. The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to, AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career as a military and/or civilian firefighter at multiple sites located throughout California and was diagnosed with testicular cancer and thyroid disease as a result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products containing PFAS. The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers, distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals used in AFFF production.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James L. Ferraro, Esq. Janpaul Portal, Esq. James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq. Dick M. Ortega, Esq. THE FERRARO LAW FIRM 600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor Miami, Florida 33131 Phone: (305) 375-0111 Email: jlf@ferrarolaw.com jpp@ferrarolaw.com jjr@ferrarolaw.com dmo@ferrarolaw.com ACELRX PHARMA: Bronstein Gewirtz Reminds of Aug. 9 Deadline ----------------------------------------------------------- Attorney Advertising--Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC notifies investors that a class action lawsuit has been filed against AcelRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("AcelRx" or "the Company") (NASDAQ: ACRX) and certain of its officers, on behalf of shareholders who purchased or otherwise acquired AcelRx securities between March 17, 2020 and February 12, 2021, (the "Class Period"). Such investors are encouraged to join this case by visiting the firm's site: www.bgandg.com/acrx. This class action seeks to recover damages against Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) AcelRx had deficient disclosure controls and procedures with respect to its marketing of DSUVIA; (2) as a result, AcelRx had been making false or misleading claims and representations about the risks and efficacy of DSUVIA in certain advertisements and displays; (3) the foregoing conduct subjected the Company to increased regulatory scrutiny and enforcement; and (4) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to review a copy of the Complaint you can visit the firm's site: www.bgandg.com/acrx or you may contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or his Investor Relations Analyst, Yael Hurwitz of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC at 212-697-6484. If you suffered a loss in AcelRx you have until August 9, 2021 to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff. Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a corporate litigation boutique. Our primary expertise is the aggressive pursuit of litigation claims on behalf of our clients. In addition to representing institutions and other investor plaintiffs in class action security litigation, the firm's expertise includes general corporate and commercial litigation, as well as securities arbitration. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. [GN] ACELRX PHARMA: Glancy Prongay Reminds of August 9 Deadline ---------------------------------------------------------- Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP ("GPM") reminds investors of the upcoming August 9, 2021 deadline to file a lead plaintiff motion in the class action filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired AcelRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("AcelRx" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: ACRX) securities between March 17, 2020 and February 12, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period"). If you suffered a loss on your AcelRx investments or would like to inquire about potentially pursuing claims to recover your loss under the federal securities laws, you can submit your contact information at https://www.glancylaw.com/cases/acelrx-pharmaceuticals-inc/. You can also contact Charles H. Linehan, of GPM at 310-201-9150, Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, or via email at shareholders@glancylaw.com to learn more about your rights. AcelRx is a pharmaceutical company that develops therapies for the treatment of acute pain. One of its lead product candidates is DSUVIA, which has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") for the management of acute pain in adults that is severe enough to require an opioid analgesic in certified medically supervised healthcare settings. On February 16, 2021, AcelRx disclosed that it had received a warning letter from the FDA concerning promotional claims for DSUVIA. Specifically, the FDA concluded that certain of AcelRx's promotional communications "make false or misleading claims and representations about the risks and efficacy of DSUVIA," and "[t]hus . . . misbrand Dsuvia within the meaning of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) and make its distribution violative." On this news, AcelRx's stock price fell $0.21 per share, or 8.37%, to close at $2.30 per share on February 16, 2021, thereby injuring investors. The complaint filed alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) AcelRx had deficient disclosure controls and procedures with respect to its marketing of DSUVIA; (2) as a result, AcelRx had been making false or misleading claims and representations about the risks and efficacy of DSUVIA in certain advertisements and displays; (3) the foregoing conduct subjected the Company to increased regulatory scrutiny and enforcement; and (4) as a result, Defendants' statements about its business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. [GN] ALPHA FUNDING: Fabricant Files TCPA Suit in C.D. California ----------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Alpha Funding 001 LLC, et al. The case is styled as Terry Fabricant, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Alpha Funding 001 LLC, Does 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 2:21-cv-04935 (C.D. Cal., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Alpha Funding LLC -- https://www.alphafunding.com/ -- is a full-service syndicate firm with relationship with all the top lenders.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Todd M. Friedman, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN PC 21550 Oxnard St., Suite 780 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Phone: (323) 306-4234 Fax: (866) 633-0228 Email: tfriedman@toddflaw.com AMAZON.COM: Garner Sues Over Invasion of Privacy ------------------------------------------------ Kaeli Garner, Dolores Sheehan, Ricky Babani, Michael Bates, Dennis and Jeannette Croteau, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. AMAZON.COM, INC., a Delaware Corporation, and A2Z DEVELOPMENT CENTER, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Case No. 2:21-cv-00750-RSL (W.D. Wash., June 7, 2021), is brought against the Defendants to obtain redress for all California, Florida, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire residents who have used Alexa on any Alexa Device, or had their communications monitored, recorded, stored, or intercepted by an Alexa Device--irrespective of whether they were registered or unregistered users--and have therefore been recorded by Amazon without consent. According to the complaint, Alexa devices are designed to record and respond to communications immediately after an individual says a word known as a "wake" word, which usually consists of an individual saying the words "Alexa" or "Echo." Once the Alexa device recognizes the "wake" word, the Alexa device then records the ensuing communication--including anything an individual in the vicinity of the device may say--and then transmits that recording to Amazon's servers for interpretation and processing before receiving the relevant data back in response. Amazon then indefinitely and permanently stores a copy of that recording on its own servers for later use and commercial benefit, warehousing billions of private conversations in the process. Shockingly, Alexa may also capture a person's voice and record their conversations even without the intentional use of a wake word. It has been found that words as varied as "exclamation," "congresswoman," "Kevin's car," "pickle," or "a ghost" have caused an Alexa device to activate if the programmed wake words were "Alexa" or "Echo." Notably, a user may set their own wake word, which brings with it another wide range of false positives that activate Alexa's ears--and Amazon's insidious course of conduct in the process. Alexa's eavesdropping range thus captures a host of private conversations that many individuals would find extremely personal, including conversations about one's family, medical conditions, religious beliefs, political affiliations, and other personal or private matters. Such conversations are located and stored in a cold server owned by Amazon—and left in Amazon's hands to use as they see fit, says the complaint. The Plaintiffs lived in a household with an Alexa Device. Amazon is one of the largest companies in the world, with net sales of over $386 billion in 2020.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Bradley S. Keller, Esq. BYRNES KELLER CROMWELL LLP 1000 Second Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 Phone: (206) 622-2000 Facsimile: (206) 622-2522 Email: bkeller@byrneskeller.com - and - Michael P. Canty, Esq. Carol Villegas, Esq. LABATON SUCHAROW LLP 140 Broadway New York, NY 10005 Phone: (212) 907-0700 Facsimile: (212) 818-0477 Email: mcanty@labaton.com cvillegas@labaton.com - and - Guillaume Buell, Esq. THORNTONLAW FIRM LLP 1 Lincoln Street Boston, MA 02111 Phone: (617) 720-1333 Facsimile: (617) 720-2445 Email: gbuell@tenlaw.com - and - Mark Goldman, Esq. Paul Scarlato, Esq. Brian Penny, Esq. GOLDMAN SCARLATO & PENNY, P.C. 8 Tower Bridge 161 Washington Street Conshohocken, PA 19428 Phone: (484) 342-0700 Facsimile: (484) 580-8747 Email: goldman@lawgsp.com scarlato@lawgsp.com penny@lawgsp.com - and - Alan L. Rosca, Esq. 23250 Chagrin Blvd. Beachwood, OH 44122 Phone: (888) 998-0530 Facsimile: (484) 580-8747 ANCESTRY.COM: Prevails in Yearbook Database Class Action Lawsuit ---------------------------------------------------------------- Ancestry.com Inc. prevailed in a class action which alleged that it misappropriated consumers' images and violated their privacy by using such data to solicit and sell their services and products. The court granted Ancestry.com's motion to dismiss the amended complaint with prejudice because the plaintiffs "did not cure the complaint's deficiencies" after being granted leave to amend the first complaint. As we previously wrote in November 2020, Ancestry.com was hit with a class action in the Northern District of California for "knowingly misappropriating the photographs, likenesses, names, and identities of Plaintiff and the class; knowingly using those photographs, likenesses, names, and identities for the commercial purpose of selling access to them in Ancestry products and services; and knowingly using those photographs, likenesses, names and identities to advertise, sell and solicit purchases of Ancestry services and products; without obtaining prior consent from Plaintiffs and the class." In March 2021, the court dismissed the lawsuit based on lack of standing, but allowed the plaintiffs to amend and address the deficiencies. Although the plaintiffs added allegations of emotional harm, lost time, and theft of intellectual property, that didn't sway the court. U.S. Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler said that the new allegations "do not change the analysis in this court's earlier order." The court held that the plaintiffs still did not establish Article III standing because they had not alleged a concrete injury. Additionally, the court noted that even if standing were established, Ancestry.com is immune from liability under the Communications Decency Act (CDA) because it is not a content creator. Magistrate Beeler said that Ancestry.com "obviously did not create the yearbooks [. . .] [i]nstead, it necessarily used information provided by another information content provider and is immune under [the CDA]." [GN] ANNA SHEFFIELD: Roman Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Anna Sheffield Jewelry Inc. The case is styled as Juan Roman, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated v. Anna Sheffield Jewelry Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-05373 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Anna Sheffield Jewelry -- https://www.annasheffield.com/ -- offers non-traditional fine jewelry & unique engagement rings that are exceptionally crafted with responsibly sourced diamonds.[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 ARRAY TECHNOLOGIES: Frank R. Cruz Reminds of July 13 Deadline ------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Array Technologies, Inc. securities between October 14, 2020 and May 11, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period"); and/or (b) common stock pursuant and/or traceable to the registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with (1) the October 2020 initial public offering (the "IPO"); or (2) the December 2020 secondary public offering (the "December 2020 SPO"); or (3) the March 2021 secondary public offering (the "March 2021 SPO," and together with the IPO and the December 2020 SPO, the "Offerings"). Array investors have until July 13, 2021 to file a lead plaintiff motion. In October 2020, Array completed its initial public offering, selling 7 million shares at $22 per share. On May 11, 2021, after the close of trading, Array announced first quarter 2021 results, reporting lower revenues year-over-year and lower margins as a result of increased steel and shipping costs. The Company also announced that Peter Jonna had resigned from the Board of Directors effective May 10, 2021. On this news, Array's stock price fell $11.49 per share, or 46%, to close at $13.46 per share on May 12, 2021, significantly below the IPO price. The complaint filed alleges that in the registration statements for the Offerings and throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) dating back to the first quarter of 2020, prices of certain commodities such as steel was in the process of more than doubling, and Array was facing increasing freight costs; (2) the increases in commodity and freight costs had been negatively impacting the Company's business and operations; and (3) as a result, Defendants' statements about its business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. If you purchased Array securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than July 13, 2021 to ask the Court to appoint you as lead plaintiff. To be a member of the Class you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the Class. If you purchased Array securities, have information or would like to learn more about these claims, or have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact Frank R. Cruz, of The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz, 1999 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1100, Los Angeles, California 90067 at 310-914-5007, by email to info@frankcruzlaw.com, or visit our website at www.frankcruzlaw.com. If you inquire by email please include your mailing address, telephone number, and number of shares purchased. [GN] ARRAY TECHNOLOGIES: Rosen Law Reminds of July 13 Deadline --------------------------------------------------------- WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds purchasers of the securities of Array Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: ARRY) who: (1) purchased or otherwise acquired Array securities between October 14, 2020 and May 11, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period"); and/or (2) purchased or otherwise acquired Array common stock pursuant and/or traceable to: (i) the registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with the Company's October 2020 initial public offering (the "IPO"); or (ii) the registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with the Company's December 2020 offering (the "December 2020 SPO"); or (iii) the registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with the Company's March 2021 offering (the "March 2021 SPO"); or (iv) any combination of the IPO, December 2020 SPO, or March 2021 SPO, of the important July 13, 2021 lead plaintiff deadline. SO WHAT: If you purchased Array securities during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement. WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Array class action, go to http://www.rosenlegal.com/cases-register-2098.htmlor call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email pkim@rosenlegal.com or cases@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than July 13, 2021. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience or resources. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers. DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, the offering documents and defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to adequately disclose the then-existing rise of costs related to certain supplies such as steel, as well as Array's freight costs, and that these were likely to have, and were having, an adverse effect on the Company's business and operations. The complaint also alleges that defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements in press releases and conference calls because defendants omitted and otherwise failed to disclose that dating back to Q1 2020, prices of certain commodities such as steel were increasing dramatically, and that Array was facing increasing freight costs, and as a result of the foregoing, defendants' positive statements about Array's business and operations lacked a reasonable basis. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages. To join the Array class action, go to http://www.rosenlegal.com/cases-register-2098.htmlor call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email pkim@rosenlegal.com or cases@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action. No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff. Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. [GN] ASP FARM SEVICES: Pimentel Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against ASP FARM SERVICES, LLC. The case is styled as Jorge Guzman Pimentel, on behalf of all others similarly situated, and on behalf of the general public v. ASP FARM SERVICES, LLC, Case No. BCV-21-101285 (Cal. Super. Ct., Kern Cty., June 7, 2021). The case type is stated as "Other Employment - Civil Unlimited." Asp Farm Services is located in Delano, California. This organization primarily operates in the General Farms, Primarily Crop business.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Seung L. Yang, Esq. MOON & YANG, APC 1055 W 7th St., Ste. 1880 Los Angeles, CA 90017-2529 Phone: 213-232-3128 Fax: 213-232-3125 Email: seung.yang@moonyanglaw.com ASSURANCE IQ: Smith Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Washington ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Assurance IQ, LLC. The case is styled as Kelsey Smith, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Assurance IQ, LLC, Case No. 2:21-cv-00823 (W.D. Wash., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Assurance IQ -- https://assurance.com/ -- is a direct-to-consumer platform that transforms the buying experience for individuals seeking personalized health and financial wellness solutions.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Samuel J. Strauss, Esq. TURKE & STRAUSS, LLP 613 Williamson Street, Suite 201 Madison, WI 53703 Phone: (608) 237-1775 Email: sam@turkestrauss.com AT&T MOBILITY: Jarrat Files Suit in E.D. California --------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against AT&T Mobility LLC. The case is styled as Casey Jarrat, on behalf of all others similarly situated v. AT&T Mobility LLC, Case No. 34-2021-00302103-CU-BT-GDS (E.D. Cal., June 8, 2021). The case type is stated as "Business Tort." AT&T Mobility LLC, also known as AT&T Wireless and marketed as simply AT&T -- https://www.att.com/ -- is an American telecommunications company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: L. Timothy Fisher, Esq. BURSOR AND FISHER, PA 1990 N. California Blvd., Suite 940 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Phone: (925) 300-4455 Fax: (925) 407-2700 Email: ltfisher@bursor.com ATERIAN INC: Kirby McInerney Reminds of July 12 Deadline -------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Kirby McInerney LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of those who acquired Aterian, Inc. f/k/a Mohawk Group Holdings, Inc. ("Aterian" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: ATER) securities from December 1, 2020 through May 3, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period"). Investors have until July 12, 2021 to apply to the Court to be appointed as lead plaintiff in the lawsuit. On May 4, 2021, Culper Research published a report titled "Aterian (ATER): Bought from Felons & Fraudsters, Sold to You," alleging that Aterian has "ties to convicted criminals" and is "promoting what we believe is an overhyped 'AI' narrative and a string of garbage acquisitions to mask the failure of its already ill-conceived core business." Culper also alleges that "[o]ver 25% of Aterian shares now belong to two felons and two alleged scam artists, all of whom will be free to dump their stock by August." The report alleged that the Company "has been largely unsuccessful in convincing other Amazon sellers to pay for its 'AIMEE' AI platform, and at least 5 former employees and a former customer have expressed doubts regarding AIMEE's legitimacy." On this news, Aterian's stock price declined by $3.04 per share, or approximately 14.7%, from $20.66 per share to close at $17.62 per share on May 4, 2021, thereby injuring investors. The lawsuit alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) the Company's organic growth is plummeting; (2) the Company's recent, self-lauded acquisitions were overpayments for flawed assets from questionable sources; (3) Aterian's purported artificial intelligence software is a flawed product that lacks customer interest; (4) Aterian uses rebate programs and paid or artificial reviews to pump up their product offerings; and (5) as a result, Defendants' statements about its business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. If you purchased or otherwise acquired Aterian securities, have information, or would like to learn more about these claims, please contact Thomas W. Elrod of Kirby McInerney LLP at 212-371-6600, by email at investigations@kmllp.com, or by filling out this contact form, to discuss your rights or interests with respect to these matters without any cost to you. Kirby McInerney LLP is a New York-based plaintiffs' law firm concentrating in securities, antitrust, whistleblower, and consumer litigation. The firm's efforts on behalf of shareholders in securities litigation have resulted in recoveries totaling billions of dollars. Additional information about the firm can be found at Kirby McInerney LLP's website: http://www.kmllp.com. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.[GN] BACKYARD LAWN: Harnish Sues Over FCRA Violation ----------------------------------------------- James Harnish, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. BACKYARD LAWN MASTER, LLC, Case No. 128363755 (Fla. 13th Judical Ct., Hilssbourough Cty., June 8, 2021), is brought against Defendant for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The complaint alleges that the Defendant violated the FCRA by procuring consumer reports on Plaintiff for employment purposes without following the law. Under this subsection of the FCRA, the Defendant is required to disclose to its employees--in a document that consists solely of the disclosure--that it may obtain a consumer report on them for employment purposes. This disclosure must be made by employers prior to obtaining copies of employees', or prospective employees', consumers reports. A "consumer report" means any written, oral, or other communication of any information by a consumer reporting agency bearing on a consumer's credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living which is used or expected to be used or collected in whole or in part for the purpose of serving as a factor in establishing the consumer's eligibility for an employment purpose. The Defendant willfully violated the FCRA by failing to provide the Plaintiff with a copy of a separate document consisting solely of the Defendant's disclosure, stating that Defendant may obtain a consumer report on any person for employment purposes. The Defendant also violated this requirement by failing to provide this disclosure to the Plaintiff prior to obtaining a copy of the person's consumer report. Further, the Defendant violated the FCRA by obtaining consumer reports for the Plaintiff without proper authorization, due to the fact that its disclosure forms fail to comply with the requirements of the FCRA, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a former employee of the Defendant. The Defendant is a foreign limited liability company incorporated under the laws of Michigan but routinely doing business in Tampa, Florida.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Brandon J. Hill, Esq. Luis A. Cabassa, Esq. WENZEL FENTON CABASSA, P.A. 1110 North Florida Ave., Suite 300 Tampa, FL 33602 Main Number: 813-224-0431 Facsimile: 813-229-8712 Email: lcabassa@wfclaw.com bhill@wfclaw.com gnichols@wfclaw.com - and - Chad A. Justice, Esq. JUSTICE FOR JUSTICE LLC 1205 N. Franklin Street, Suite 326 Tampa, FL 33602 Direct No: 813-566-0550 Facsimile: 813-566-0770 Email: chad@getjusticeforjustice.com BALTIMORE, MD: Mayor Responds to ADA Class-Action Lawsuit --------------------------------------------------------- Mayor Brandon Scott has responded to the class-action lawsuit filed in regards to the city's past noncompliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act by assembling a multi-agency task force. "My administration has inherited a host of longstanding challenges that we are committed to addressing with a true equity approach. It's long past time for leaders to commit to building a more accessible Baltimore that values our neighbors with disabilities and creates pathways for them to thrive," said Mayor Scott. The class-action lawsuit was filed on behalf of the people with mobility disabilities that work, live and visit in Baltimore. The suit alleges that Baltimore's pedestrian right of way is inaccessible to people with disabilities. They are asking the court to grant injunctive relief, damages and attorney fees. The mayor assembled the multi-agency task to address Baltimore's ADA compliance and directed it to use all necessary measures to triage current accessibility complaints. The Department of Transportation will develop a remediation plan and a timetable. The task force is expected to provide an update later this summer. Baltimore City has emphasized the newly-elected Mayor's commitment to accessibility and equality for all Baltimore citizens and visitors. [GN] BAPTIST MEMORIAL: Stewart Files Suit in W.D. Tennessee ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Baptist Memorial Health Care Corporation. The case is styled as Gregory Stewart, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Baptist Memorial Health Care Corporation, Case No. 2:21-cv-02377-TLP-cgc (W.D. Tenn., June 7, 2021). The nature of suit is stated as Other Civil Rights for the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Baptist Memorial Hospitals -- https://www.baptistonline.org/ -- provide compassionate, close-to-home care for patients in the Mid-South.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Marc Reed Edelman, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN, PA - Tampa 201 N. Franklin Street, 7th Floor Tampa, FL 33602 Phone: (813) 577-4722 Fax: (813) 257-0572 Email: medelman@forthepeople.com BATH FITTER: Miller Files TCPA Suit in M.D. Pennsylvania -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Bath Fitter Tennessee, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Carol Miller, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Bath Fitter Tennessee, Inc., a Tennessee corporation; Bath Fitter Manufacturing Inc., a Delaware Corporation; Case No. 1:21-cv-01072-JPW (M.D. Pa., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Bath Fitter Tennessee, Inc., doing business as Bath Fitter, Inc. -- https://www.bathfitter.com/us-en/ -- provides bath products.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew M. Carroll, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF ANDREW M. CARROLL 427 N Packard St. Hammonton, NJ 08037 Phone: (856) 426-9815 Email: AndrewCarrrollEsq@gmail.com - and - Avi Robert. Kaufman, Esq. 400 NW 26th Street Miami, FL 33127 Phone: (305) 469-5881 BRSI LLC: Still-Dobson Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Oklahoma ------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against BRSI LLC. The case is styled as Jennifer Still-Dobson, on behalf of all others similarly situated v. BRSI LLC doing business as: Big Red Kia, Case No. 5:21-cv-00579-PRW (W.D. Okla., June 7, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Brsi LLC -- http://www.bigredsports.com/-- is located in Norman, Oklahoma and is part of the Automobile Dealers Industry.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ignacio J. Hiraldo, Esq. IJH LAW 1200 Brickell Ave., Ste. 1950 Miami, FL 33131 Phone: (786) 496-4469 Email: ijhiraldo@ijhlaw.com CAPITAL MANAGEMENT: Rabinowitz Files FDCPA Suit in D. New Jersey ---------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Capital Management Services, LP. The case is styled as Joshua Rabinowitz, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Capital Management Services, LP, Case No. 3:21-cv-12203-PGS-LHG (D.N.J., June 7, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Capital Management Services -- https://cms-collect.com/ -- offers a full suite of professional collection and customized recovery services for creditors.[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 CASINO LLC: Iiams Sues Over Wage and Hour Violations ---------------------------------------------------- Khrystopher Iiams, individually and on behalf of others similarly all situated v. CASINO, LLC; and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Case No. 21STCV21360 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., June 7, 2021), is brought alleging that the Defendants have engaged in a systematic pattern of wage and hour violations under the California Labor Code and Industrial Welfare Commission ("IWC") Wage Orders. The Defendants have increased their profits by violating state wage and hours laws by, among other things; failing to provide lawful meal periods or compensation in lieu thereof; failing to authorize or permit lawful rest breaks or provide compensation in lieu thereof; failing to provide accurate itemized wage statements; failing to pay all wages due upon separation of employment, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a non-exempt employee at the Defendants' California business location. The Defendant is in the business of operating casinos.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Samuel A. Wong, Esq. Kashif Haque, Esq. Jessica L. Campbell, Esq. Kristy R. Connolly, Esq. AEGIS LAW FIRM, PC 9811 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92618 Phone: (949) 379-6250 Facsimile: (949) 379-6251 CASTLE CREDIT: Fails to Pay Proper OT Wages, Hodges Suit Claims --------------------------------------------------------------- CHRISHONA HODGES, Plaintiff v. CASTLE CREDIT CO HOLDINGS LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:21-cv-03148 (N.D. Ill., June 11, 2021) brings this class and collective action complaint on behalf of herself and all other similarly situated employees against the Defendant to recover unpaid wages and damages and to obtain declaratory and injunctive relief pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Illinois Minimum Wage Law. The Plaintiff has worked for the Defendant from October 2019 to June 5, 2021 as a collection specialist. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant failed to properly pay her and other similarly situated collection specialists and customer service representatives' appropriate overtime premium pay as required by the FLSA and IMWL. This is because the Defendant did not include the commissions paid to them in their regular rates of pay for the purpose of calculating their overtime wage. As a result, despite regularly working more than 40 hour per week, the Plaintiff and other similarly situated collection specialists and customer service representatives allegedly did not receive their accurate overtime premium at the rate of one and one-half times their regular rates of pay for all hours they have worked in excess of 40 per workweek. Castle Credit Co Holdings LLC is a consumer finance company that provides financing for home improvement, remodeling, and related trades throughout Illinois and nationwide. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher J. Wilmes, Esq. Justin Tresnowski, Esq. HUGHES SOCOL PIERS RESNICK & DYM, LTD. 70 W. Madison St., Suite 4000 Chicago, IL 60602 Tel: (312) 580-0100 CHEMOCENTRYX INC: Vincent Wong Reminds of July 6 Deadline --------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Vincent Wong announce that a class action lawsuit has commenced in the on behalf of investors who purchased ChemoCentryx, Inc. ("ChemoCentryx") (NASDAQ: CCXI) between November 26, 2019 and May 6, 2021. If you suffered a loss, contact us at the link below. There is no cost or obligation to you. http://www.wongesq.com/pslra-1/chemocentryx-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=16980&wire=5 Allegations against CCXI include that the Company made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the study design of the Phase III ADVOCATE trial presented issues about the interpretability of the trial data to define a clinically meaningful benefit of avacopan and its role in the management of ANCA-associated vasculitis; (2) the data from the Phase III ADVOCATE trial raised serious safety concerns for avacopan; (3) these issues presented a substantial concern regarding the viability of ChemoCentryx's New Drug Application ("NDA") for avacopan for the treatment of ANCA-associated vasculitis; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. If you suffered a loss in ChemoCentryx you have until July 6, 2021 to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff. Vincent Wong, Esq. is an experienced attorney that has represented investors in securities litigations involving financial fraud and violations of shareholder rights. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. CONTACT: Vincent Wong, Esq. 39 East Broadway Suite 304 New York, NY 10002 Tel. 212.425.1140 Fax. 866.699.3880 E-Mail: vw@wongesq.com [GN] CHIPPEWA CREE: Class Action Settlement Brings $59M to Descendents ----------------------------------------------------------------- Andrew Kennard at nativenewsonline.net a $59 million settlement in Peltier v. Haaland, a class action lawsuit alleging trust fund mismanagement and failure to account by the Department of the Interior, will go to four tribes located in the Midwest and Northwest United States and more than 39,000 beneficiaries. On June 10, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia finalized the settlement, which was reached in the Court of Federal Claims with the Chippewa Cree Tribe of the Rocky Boy's Reservation of Montana, the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians of North Dakota, the Little Shell Tribe of Chippewa Indians of Montana, and the White Earth Band of Chippewa Indians of Minnesota, the Interior Department announced. The tribes were represented by the Native American Rights Fund (NARF), according to the website designated for the lawsuit. Want more Native News? Get the free daily newsletter today. "It took them way too long and it's way too little," said Gerald Gray, Chairman of the Little Shell Tribe of Chippewa Indians. The lawsuit has its roots in land ceded by the Pembina Band of Chippewa Indians to the U.S. government in unfair treaties throughout the 19th century. On Oct. 2, 1863, the Red Lake and Pembina Bands ceded about 7.5 million acres of land in the Red River region of North Dakota and Minnesota to the federal government, according to a 1971 report from the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs and a 1982 report from the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. In 1905, the Pembinas ceded roughly 10 million acres of land west of the Red River area to the government for a price of 10 cents an acre as part of what is known as the "Ten Cent Treaty," according to the 1982 report. The report said 8 million acres of the ceded land "extended from the present day north central part of North Dakota to the Canadian border." In 1964 and 1980, the Pembinas were awarded additional compensation for the land ceded in the 1863 treaty and more than 8 million acres of the land ceded in the "Ten Cent Treaty," respectively, according to the lawsuit website and the 1982 report. These funds were put into trust in the Pembina Judgement Fund (PJF). At the request of tribal leaders and with the approval of Congress, per capita payments from the fund ranging from $44 to $1,400 were made to eligible recipients in 1984, 1988, 1990, and 1994, according to an article published in the first 2006 issue of the NARF Legal Review. In 1988, leaders of the Turtle Mountain Chippewa Band of Chippewa Indians "were dismayed at the overall lack of money available for distribution" in the per capita distribution, the article said. The tribe then requested an audit from the Interior Department Office of the Inspector General and "also hired independent accountants who confirmed to the tribe that on this issue, 'you don't need an accounting firm, you need a law firm.'" The Peltier v. Haaland class action breach of trust lawsuit was filed in 1992. [GN] CHURCHILL CAPITAL: Vincent Wong Reminds of July 6 Deadline ---------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Vincent Wong announce that a class action lawsuit has commenced in the on behalf of investors who purchased Churchill Capital Corp IV ("Churchill Capital") (NYSE: CCIV) between January 11, 2021 and February 22, 2021. If you suffered a loss, contact us at the link below. There is no cost or obligation to you. http://www.wongesq.com/pslra-1/churchill-capital-corp-iv-loss-submission-form?prid=16996&wire=5 Allegations against CCIV include that the Company made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Lucid was not prepared to deliver vehicles by spring of 2021; (2) Lucid was projecting a production of 557 vehicles in 2021 instead of the 6,000 vehicles touted in the run-up to the merger with Churchill; and (3) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages. If you suffered a loss in Churchill Capital you have until July 6, 2021 to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff. Vincent Wong, Esq. is an experienced attorney that has represented investors in securities litigations involving financial fraud and violations of shareholder rights. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. CONTACT: Vincent Wong, Esq. 39 East Broadway Suite 304 New York, NY 10002 Tel. 212.425.1140 Fax. 866.699.3880 E-Mail: vw@wongesq.com [GN] CITY OF BILLINGS: Attempt to Take Over Costly Lawsuit Rejected -------------------------------------------------------------- Chris Jorgensen at billingsgazette.com reports that an increasingly costly class-action lawsuit against the City of Billings that has dragged on for more than three years will now drag on even longer. A judge denied a request by two Billings residents to intervene in the lingering case, appoint a new attorney and get it over with. The two residents, Andrew Billstein, an estate attorney, and Jacob Troyer, a business owner, had hoped to take over as representatives of the class and appoint Billings attorney John Heenan as counsel. The trio had offered to do the work for free. Even the city's attorneys thought the trio's intervening would be a good idea. The battle is over an estimated $50 million the city charged ratepayers over several decades in what it called franchise fees for water, sewer services and garbage disposal. When the trio's motion to take over was filed in October 2020, the attorneys' fees in the case had already topped $1.5 million. Those fees are now closer to $2 million. "So far, the only ones who benefit from this case are the lawyers," Heenan argued in a court brief. Paradoxically, win or lose the suit, Billings residents will have to pay. If they win, the city may be ordered to rebate to residents as much as $25 million of the collected fees, plus the plaintiffs' attorneys' fees. That sum, however, because it's city money, would come from taxpayers, and city officials have said paying it may force cuts to other city services including public safety. If residents lose, they're on the hook for attorneys' fees from both sides. In his ruling denying the motion to intervene, Judge Mike Salvagni said he doubted the interveners' sincerity, calling their concerns a pretext. The case was assigned to Salvagni, a retired district judge, because all Yellowstone County judges would have had a conflict of interest. "While proposed interveners denounce the city for being 'stubborn in paying lawyers to defend this claim . . . . to the detriment of the city taxpayers,' they provide no evidence that they have ever protested the city's waste of funds or protested the alleged illegal sales taxes the city began imposing on ratepayers in 1992." The judge also felt the interveners attempting to take over after nearly three years of litigation "raises question about their motives." Matthew Monforton, a Bozeman attorney representing the plaintiffs, said all the motion to intervene did was prolong the suit "and inflict more cost on taxpayers." Now, it's up to the city to end it, he said. "And, they can do that any time they want to make an offer." Back in March 2018, Monforton said he offered to settle with the city for $20,000. The city declined, Monforton has said, leading to the class action suit being filed in May 2018. The city began collecting the so-called franchise fees as early as 1992. Typically, a franchise fee is charged by a utility or other entity and paid to the city as a sort of rent for using public property to run its pipes, poles or wires. In the lawsuit, city residents called the fees an illegal sales tax. The city has insisted the fees were legal, but stopped collecting them after the lawsuit was filed. Already, the two parties in the suit have participated in several settlement conferences and were finally ordered to mediation in May 2020. As eager as Monforton said he is to get the case over with, he isn't budging on at least one condition of settlement, that the city, or a judge, acknowledge that the collection of the franchise fees was illegal. "We have to have something on the record that those fees were illegal in order to prevent the city from charging them again," he said. Heenan said Friday even if he can't intervene in the case, he and other city residents will continue to keep an eye on it as the costs of the lawsuit mount. Monforton's fees "are coming out of our tax dollars," Heenan said. "That money should be used by the city for filling potholes, or funding the police or fire department, things that keep us safe." [GN] COAST TO COAST: Fails to Pay Proper OT Wages, Parker Claims ----------------------------------------------------------- SHARONNA PARKER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. COAST TO COAST CARPORTS, INC., and JORGE ZAVALA, Defendants, Case No. 2:21-cv-02110-PKH (W.D. Ark., June 11, 2021) brings this collective action complaint for its alleged violations of the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the overtime provisions of the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act. The Plaintiff, who was employed by the Defendants as an hourly-paid employee to perform the work necessary to its business, claims that the Defendant failed to properly pay his and other similarly situated employees overtime compensation. Although the Defendant paid them for all the hours they have worked in excess of 40 hours per week at the rate of one and one-half times his regular rates of pay, the Defendant failed to include the commissions that were to them in their regular rates when calculating their overtime pay, the Plaintiff says. Coast to Coast Carports, Inc. manufactures and installs carports, garages and barns. Jorge Zavala is the owner. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Courtney Lowery, Esq. Josh Sanford, Esq. SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC Kirkpatrick Plaza 10800 Financial Centre Pkwy, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72211 Tel: (501) 221-0088 Fax: (888) 787-2040 E-mail: courtney@sanfordlawfirm.com josh@sanfordlawfirm.com COLLICUTT ENERGY: Hernandez Sues Over Unpaid Compensations ---------------------------------------------------------- Robert Hernandez, on behalf of himself and others v. COLLICUTT ENERGY SERVICES INC. and DOES 1 to 25, inclusive, Case No. 21STOV21135 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., June 7, 2021), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay minimum wages and compensations in violation of the California Labor Code. The complaint alleges that Collicutt did not provide Plaintiff and other similarly situated aggrieved employees with the minimum wages to which they were entitled for all work performed and did not compensate him and others for all hours worked pursuant to California Labor Code sections 1194, 1197 and 1197.1. This is so because Plaintiff and others were not paid for all hours worked and for all hours wherein Plaintiff and other employees were under the control of Collicutt. The Plaintiff started working for Collicutt on December 2020 as a parts technician, but also did some retail work in terms of selling parts. The Defendant is a Delaware Corporation, doing business in the County of Los Angeles, State of California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Harout Messrelian, Esq. MESSRELIAN LAW INC. 500 N. Central Ave., Suite 840 Glendale, CA 91203 Phone: (818) 484-6531 Facsimile: (818) 956-1983 Email: hm@messrelianlaw.com CONOPCO INC: Huskey Suit Removed to E.D. Missouri ------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Drew Huskey, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Conopco, Inc. doing business as: Unilever, Does 1 through 10, was removed to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri on June 17, 2021. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:21-cv-00710 to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud. Conopco, Inc., doing business as Unilever -- https://www.conopco.com/ -- provides personal care products. The Company offers perfumes, soaps, and shampoos, as well as food products.[BN] The Plaintiff appears pro se. The Defendant is represented by: James Muehlberger, Esq. SHOOK HARDY LLP - Kansas City 2555 Grand Blvd., 19th Floor Kansas City, MO 64108 Phone: (816) 474-6550 Fax: (816) 421-5547 Email: jmuehlberger@shb.com CONOPCO INC: Sandbach Fraud Suit Removed to E.D. Missouri --------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Jennifer Sandbach, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Conopco, Inc. doing business as: Unilever, Does 1 through 10, was removed to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri on June 17, 2021. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:21-cv-00706 to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud. Conopco, Inc., doing business as Unilever -- https://www.conopco.com/ -- provides personal care products. The Company offers perfumes, soaps, and shampoos, as well as food products.[BN] The Plaintiff appears pro se. The Defendant is represented by: James Muehlberger, Esq. SHOOK HARDY LLP - Kansas City 2555 Grand Blvd., 19th Floor Kansas City, MO 64108 Phone: (816) 474-6550 Fax: (816) 421-5547 Email: jmuehlberger@shb.com CONTEXTLOGIC INC: Frank R. Cruz Reminds of December 16 Deadline --------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired ContextLogic Inc. ("ContextLogic" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: WISH) common stock: (1) between December 16, 2020 and May 12, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period"); and/or (2) pursuant or traceable to the registration statement and prospectus issued on connection with the Company's initial public offering conducted on or about December 16, 2020 (the "IPO" or "Offering"). ContextLogic investors have until July 16, 2021 to file a lead plaintiff motion. If you are a shareholder who suffered a loss, click here to participate. In December 2020, ContextLogic completed its initial public offering ("IPO") in which it sold 46 million shares at $24 per share. On March 8, 2021, ContextLogic reported its fourth quarter and fiscal year 2020 financial results for the period ended December 31, 2020, disclosing that by the time of its December 2020 IPO, ContextLogic's monthly active users ("MAUs") had already "declined 10% YoY during Q4 to 104 million, primarily in some emerging markets outside of Europe and North America where Wish temporarily de-emphasized advertising and customer acquisition as the company worked through logistics challenges it faced earlier in the year." On this news, ContextLogic's common stock price fell $1.83, more than 10%, to close at $15.94 per share on March 8, 2021, thereby injuring investors. On May 12, 2021, ContextLogic reported its first quarter 2021 financial results and disclosed that MAUs had declined another 7% to just 101 million. On this news, ContextLogic's stock price fell $3.36 per share, or approximately 29%, to close at $8.11 per share on May 12, 2021, significantly below the IPO price of $24 per share. The complaint filed alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) ContextLogic's fourth quarter 2020 MAUs had declined materially and were not then growing; and (2) as a result of the foregoing, defendants materially overstated the Company's business metrics and financial prospects. If you purchased ContextLogic securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than July 16, 2021 to ask the Court to appoint you as lead plaintiff. To be a member of the Class you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the Class. If you purchased ContextLogic securities, have information or would like to learn more about these claims, or have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact Frank R. Cruz, of The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz, 1999 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1100, Los Angeles, California 90067 at 310-914-5007, by email to info@frankcruzlaw.com, or visit our website at www.frankcruzlaw.com. If you inquire by email please include your mailing address, telephone number, and number of shares purchased. [GN] CONTEXTLOGIC INC: Kirby McInerney Reminds of July 16 Deadline ------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Kirby McInerney LLP reminds investors that a class action lawsuit has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of those who acquired ContextLogic Inc. ("ContextLogic" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: WISH) securities between December 13, 2020 and May 12, 2021, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"); and/or ContextLogic common stock pursuant and/or traceable to the offering documents issued in connection with the Company's initial public offering conducted on December 16, 2020 (the "IPO" or "Offering"). Investors have until July 16, 2021 to apply to the Court to be appointed as lead plaintiff in the lawsuit. ContextLogic, headquartered in San Francisco, California, is a global mobile e-commerce company that operates the Wish platform that connects its value-conscious user base to merchants. Wish generates revenue by charging merchants a commission on sales made in its marketplace. On December 16 2020, ContextLogic completed its IPO in which it sold 46 million shares at $24 per share. On March 8, 2021, ContextLogic reported its fourth quarter and fiscal year 2020 financial results for the period ended December 31, 2020, disclosing that by the time of its December 2020 IPO, ContextLogic's monthly active users ("MAUs") had already "declined 10% YoY during Q4 to 104 million, primarily in some emerging markets outside of Europe and North America where Wish temporarily de-emphasized advertising and customer acquisition as the company worked through logistics challenges it faced earlier in the year." On this news, ContextLogic's stock price declined by $1.83 per share, or approximately 10.3%, from $17.77 per share to close at $15.94 per share on March 8, 2021, thereby injuring investors. On May 12, 2021, ContextLogic reported its first quarter 2021 financial results and disclosed that MAUs had declined another 7% to just 101 million. On this news, ContextLogic's stock price declined by $3.36 per share, or approximately 29.3%, from $11.47 per share to close at $8.11 per share on May 13, 2021, significantly below the IPO price of $24 per share. The lawsuit alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) ContextLogic's fourth quarter 2020 MAUs had declined materially and were not then growing; and (2) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants materially overstated the Company's business metrics and financial prospects. If you purchased or otherwise acquired ContextLogic securities, have information, or would like to learn more about these claims, please contact Thomas W. Elrod of Kirby McInerney LLP at 212-371-6600, by email at investigations@kmllp.com, or by filling out this contact form, to discuss your rights or interests with respect to these matters without any cost to you. Kirby McInerney LLP is a New York-based plaintiffs' law firm concentrating in securities, antitrust, whistleblower, and consumer litigation. The firm's efforts on behalf of shareholders in securities litigation have resulted in recoveries totaling billions of dollars. Additional information about the firm can be found at Kirby McInerney LLP's website: http://www.kmllp.com. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. Contacts Kirby McInerney LLP Thomas W. Elrod, Esq. 212-371-6600 https://www.kmllp.com investigations@kmllp.com [GN] DANIMER SCIENTIFIC: Levi & Korsinsky Reminds of July 13 Deadline ---------------------------------------------------------------- Levi & Korsinsky, LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has commenced on behalf of shareholders of Danimer Scientific, Inc. Shareholders interested in serving as lead plaintiff have until the deadline listed to petition the court. Further details about the case can be found at the link provided. There is no cost or obligation to you. DNMR Shareholders Click Here: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/danimer-scientific-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=16977&wire=1 Danimer Scientific, Inc. (NYSE:DNMR) DNMR Lawsuit on behalf of: investors who purchased October 5, 2020 - May 4, 2021 Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 13, 2021 TO LEARN MORE, VISIT: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/danimer-scientific-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=16977&wire=1 According to the filed complaint, during the class period, Danimer Scientific, Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Danimer had deficient internal controls; (ii) as a result, the Company had misrepresented, inter alia, its operations' size and regulatory compliance; (iii) Defendants had overstated Nodax's biodegradability, particularly in oceans and landfills; and (iv) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. You have until the lead plaintiff deadlines to request that the court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff. Levi & Korsinsky is a nationally recognized firm with offices in New York, California, Connecticut, and Washington D.C. The firm's attorneys have extensive expertise and experience representing investors in securities litigation and have recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. CONTACT: Levi & Korsinsky, LLP Joseph E. Levi, Esq. Eduard Korsinsky, Esq. 55 Broadway, 10th Floor New York, NY 10006 jlevi@levikorsinsky.com Tel: (212) 363-7500 Fax: (212) 363-7171 www.zlk.com [GN] DANIMER SCIENTIFIC: Vincent Wong Reminds of July 13 Deadline ------------------------------------------------------------ The Law Offices of Vincent Wong announce that class actions have commenced on behalf of certain shareholders in the following companies. If you suffered a loss you have until the lead plaintiff deadline to request that the court appoint you as lead plaintiff. There will be no obligation or cost to you. Danimer Scientific, Inc. (NYSE:DNMR) If you suffered a loss, contact us at:https://www.wongesq.com/pslra-1/danimer-scientific-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=16957&wire=1 Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 13, 2021 Class Period: October 5, 2020 - May 4, 2021 Allegations against DNMR include that: (i) Danimer had deficient internal controls; (ii) as a result, the Company had misrepresented, inter alia, its operations' size and regulatory compliance; (iii) Defendants had overstated Nodax's biodegradability, particularly in oceans and landfills; and (iv) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. To learn more contact Vincent Wong, Esq. either via email vw@wongesq.com or by telephone at 212.425.1140. Vincent Wong, Esq. is an experienced attorney who has represented investors in securities litigations involving financial fraud and violations of shareholder rights. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. [GN] DEVON ENERGY: $28 Million Settlement Over Gas Royalties OK'd ------------------------------------------------------------ Devon Energy Production Co. will pay $28 million to Texas well owners who say they were underpaid royalties after a federal court in the state granted final approval of a class action settlement and plan of allocation. The settlement is fair and reasonable considering the complexity and duration of the case, and the "risks involved in establishing liability and damages," according to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The plan of allocation is also fair and reasonable to the class, the court said. Class counsel was awarded about $9.3 million in attorneys' fees, according to the ruling. The court also approved about $612,000 in litigation expenses and $80,000 to be divided evenly among the named plaintiffs. Plaintiffs argued they were underpaid millions of dollars in royalties for processing gas extracted from wells at the Bridgeport Gas Processing Plant owned by Devon Energy's affiliate, Devon Gas Services, between 2008 and 2014. Devon Gas Services deducted 17.5% of the value of residue gas and natural gas liquids as a processing fee, the lawsuit says, which was improperly passed on to class members by reducing their royalty payments. Devon Energy could have obtained a higher price through a lower processing fee, but it "failed to do so in order to secretly create a lucrative profit center," according to the complaint. Devon Energy has denied any wrongdoing, the court said. Judge Ed Kinkeade issued the final approval. Wick Phillips, Seidel Law Firm PC, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check LLP, and Mattingly & Roselius PLLC represents the class as class counsel. Hedrick Kring PLLC represents the class as local counsel. Thompson & Knight LLP represents Devon. The case is Seeligson v. Devon Energy Prod. Co., N.D. Tex., No. 3:16-cv-00082, 6/16/21. [GN] DIANNE BIGEAGLE: Federal Court Tosses Out Attempted MMIWG Suit -------------------------------------------------------------- Heather Polischuk at leaderpost.com reports that her attempted class action lawsuit having been tossed out, Dianne BigEagle has vowed this won't be the end of her battle for missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls like her daughter. "I'm bound and determined to get justice for my daughter, and nothing's going to stop me . . . . ," said BigEagle, whose 22-year-old daughter Danita went missing in 2007. "I've been in this fight too long for all of these girls." Having found the claim "overly broad," a Federal Court judge quashed the class action which was to represent family and community members of missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls (MMIWG). In September, legal counsel for the families on one side and the federal government on the other argued in a Regina courtroom on whether the claim of BigEagle should be allowed to proceed through court as a class action. Federal Court Justice Glennys McVeigh issued her decision late last month. It was publicly posted this week. "This motion is dismissed given that it is plain and obvious that this Statement of Claim will fail," McVeigh wrote. "That does not mean that individual actions cannot proceed." McVeigh said there were a number of "deficiencies" with the pleadings, despite having been amended several times. "This matter will not be fixed by further amendments," she wrote. She determined the individual issues involved "span far more issues than the common issues." "This is an overly broad claim that when the Pleading(s) were reviewed had no material facts to support a rational connection to the arguments made," McVeigh wrote. She dismissed the motion for class action certification and struck the statement of claim without leave to amend. BigEagle filed the claim in 2018. By the time it came before McVeigh, a total of 43 victims - relating to incidents throughout Canada between 1968 and 2016 - were listed in the motion record. The proposed class action was to ask for declarations and monetary damages for families and community members of listed victims. The claim alleged a failing by RCMP to properly investigate and prosecute cases involving MMIWG as well as members of the 2SLGBTQQIA community. BigEagle's lawyer Tony Merchant said his office will be filing an appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal. "We were surprised . . . . ," he said. "(In) the statement of claim, I ran through the many and myriad problems with Canada's handling of murdered and missing (people) with details that came from the (National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls) report and we thought overwhelmingly justify certification." Merchant said, short of a successful appeal, the decision would effectively freeze many or all would-be claims. "These are David and Goliath circumstances," he said. "While I don't exactly think of myself as a David, I also recognize the battle against big institutions is hard. The way class actions work in being effective is if you gather together hundreds of people or maybe thousands of people who have similar claims, then all together they can carry the freight of the legal expense and the battle. It's just unrealistic to think that any single family or even two or three or four families getting together are going to find a law firm that will take on the Government of Canada and the RCMP over these issues. The battle's just too big a battle." With members of some impacted families passing away due to age and illness, BigEagle said she's made promises to them to take up the battle on their behalf. The attempted claim alleged systemic negligence, breach of common law duties, breach of the Charter and other rights, and breach against the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act. While McVeigh pointed out her role at this point was not to evaluate evidence, she added she needed to assess material facts contained within the plaintiff's pleadings. McVeigh determined neither the RCMP Act nor the Criminal Code "support an undivided loyalty (by RCMP) towards the claimant class" or create a "trust relationship" between the two over and above what's included in general public duty - even though the claimants are considered vulnerable. Further, she found the RCMP doesn't have a "private duty of care" to the families and community members as might exist in cases like a police officer-prisoner situation. She said establishing the necessary basis to proceed became even trickier given many of the allegations involve non-RCMP police services. McVeigh added courts have been "clear and unequivocal" that duty of care applicable to a negligent investigation "is to a person that is being investigated." "This is too large of (a) leap to go from someone that is being investigated to a victim or victim's family or members of this class," she wrote. While the claim alleges Charter breaches related to systemic racism and anti-Indigenous approaches within the RCMP, McVeigh said Charter rights are "personal to an individual," not to that individual's family or community members. McVeigh further found claims of genocide cannot stand given the claimant alleges negligence, which doesn't include the intent necessary for genocide. Additionally, she said nothing in the pleadings shows the RCMP engaged in acts defined as a crime against humanity as part of "a widespread or systemic attack directed against a civilian population." [GN] EB GOLF MEDIA: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against EB Golf Media LLC. The case is styled as Domingo Pascual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. EB Golf Media LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-05368 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. EB Golf Media LLC doing business as Golf Magazine -- https://golf.com/ -- is a sports magazine that provides everything golf enthusiasts need to improve their game.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq. COHEN & MIZRAHI LLP 300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor Brooklyn, NY 11201 Phone: (929) 575-4175 Fax: (929) 575-4195 Email: joseph@cml.legal ETERNAL BEVERAGES: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Eternal Beverages, Inc. The case is styled as Domingo Pascual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Eternal Beverages, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-05366 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Eternal Beverages, Inc. -- https://www.eternalwater.com/ -- is located in Walnut Creek, California and is part of the Food Wholesalers Industry.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq. COHEN & MIZRAHI LLP 300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor Brooklyn, NY 11201 Phone: (929) 575-4175 Fax: (929) 575-4195 Email: joseph@cml.legal FITNESS INT'L: Nagy Sues Over Illegal Electronic Fund Transfers --------------------------------------------------------------- ZOLTON NAGY, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FITNESS INTERNATIONAL, LLC dba L.A. FITNESS, a California corporation; and DOES 1-20 inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 2:21-cv-04766 (C.D. Cal., June 11, 2021) is a class action complaint brought against the Defendants for their alleged violations of the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, Consumer Legal Remedies Act, Unfair Competition Law, and Conversion. From approximately 2015 through June 2020, the Plaintiff has paid for membership at the Defendant's L.A. Fitness brand health and exercise facilities located in Los Angeles County, California. The Plaintiff alleges that since the Defendants automatically withdraw monthly gym membership fees from its members' personal bank accounts via electronic fund transfers (EFTs) as its standard practice, the Defendants illegally made recurring automatic EFTs from his bank account from approximately July 2018 through June 2020. The Plaintiff has discovered that the Defendant had been withdrawing membership fees for both gym memberships from his personal bank accounts without prior written authorization. Although the Defendant acknowledged withdrawal of funds and agreed to refund 3 of the unauthorized payments, the Defendants refused to refund the balance of the remaining payments estimated to be at least $600, the suit says. Fitness International, LLC operates a brand health and exercise facilities. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Todd M. Friedman, Esq. Adrian R. Bacon, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C. 21550 Oxnard St., Suite 780 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Tel: (323) 306-4234 Fax: (866) 633-0228 E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.com abacon@toddflaw.com FREQUENCY THERA: Bronstein Gewirtz Reminds of Aug. 2 Deadline ------------------------------------------------------------- Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC notifies investors that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Frequency Therapeutics, Inc. ("Frequency" or "the Company") (NASDAQ: FREQ) and certain of its officers, on behalf of shareholders who purchased or otherwise acquired Frequency securities between November 16, 2020 and March 22, 2021, (the "Class Period"). Such investors are encouraged to join this case by visiting the firm's site: www.bgandg.com/freq. This class action seeks to recover damages against Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Frequency's development and commercialization of a hearing loss treatment titled "FX-322" was not producing the results desired by Frequency; (2) FX-322's ongoing clinical study was not as positive as Frequency portrayed it; and (3) as a result of the foregoing, defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to review a copy of the Complaint you can visit the firm's site: www.bgandg.com/freq or you may contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or his Investor Relations Analyst, Yael Hurwitz of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC at 212-697-6484. If you suffered a loss in Frequency you have until August 2, 2021 to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff. Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a corporate litigation boutique. Our primary expertise is the aggressive pursuit of litigation claims on behalf of our clients. In addition to representing institutions and other investor plaintiffs in class action security litigation, the firm's expertise includes general corporate and commercial litigation, as well as securities arbitration. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.[GN] FREQUENCY THERAPEUTICS: Glancy Prongay Reminds of Aug. 2 Deadline ----------------------------------------------------------------- Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP ("GPM") reminds investors of the upcoming August 2, 2021 deadline to file a lead plaintiff motion in the class action filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Frequency Therapeutics, Inc. ("Frequency" or "the Company") (NASDAQ: FREQ) common stock between November 16, 2020 and March 22, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period"). If you suffered a loss on your Frequency investments or would like to inquire about potentially pursuing claims to recover your loss under the federal securities laws, you can submit your contact information at https://www.glancylaw.com/cases/frequency-therapeutics-inc/. You can also contact Charles H. Linehan, of GPM at 310-201-9150, Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, or via email at shareholders@glancylaw.com to learn more about your rights. Frequency Therapeutics has conducted several clinical studies evaluating the safety and effectiveness of FX-322, the most significant which was a Phase 2a study that began in October 2019. In April 2020, Frequency's Chief Executive Officer ("CEO"), David L. Lucchino, began selling his shares of Frequency, totaling over 350,000 shares sold and earning over $10.5 million. On March 23, 2021, before the market opened, Frequency disclosed in a press release disappointing interim results of the Phase 2a study, revealing that subjects with mild to moderate SNHL did not demonstrate improvements in hearing measures versus placebo. On this news, Frequency's shares fell $28.30, or 78%, to close at $7.99 per share, thereby damaging investors. The complaint filed alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose: (1) that Frequency's Phase 2a study did not yield positive results to support the commercialization of FX-322; and (2) that, as a result, Defendants' statements about its business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. If you purchased or otherwise acquired Frequency securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than August 2, 2021 to request appointment as lead plaintiff in this putative class action lawsuit. To be a member of the class action you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the class action. If you wish to learn more about this class action, or if you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to the pending class action lawsuit, please contact Charles Linehan, Esquire, of GPM, 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles, California 90067 at 310-201-9150, Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, by email to shareholders@glancylaw.com, or visit our website at www.glancylaw.com. If you inquire by email please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of shares purchased. [GN] FREQUENCY THERAPEUTICS: Kirby McInerney Reminds of Aug. 2 Deadline ------------------------------------------------------------------ The law firm of Kirby McInerney LLP announces that a securities class action lawsuit has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on behalf of those who acquired Frequency Therapeutics, Inc. ("Frequency" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: FREQ) securities from November 16, 2020 through March 22, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period"). Investors have until August 2, 2021 to apply to the Court to be appointed as lead plaintiff in the lawsuit. Frequency Therapeutics is a Massachusetts-based pharmaceutical company focused on the development of treatments for hearing loss, including its drug "FX-322." Frequency Therapeutics has conducted several clinical studies evaluating the safety and effectiveness of FX-322, the most significant of which was a Phase 2a study that began in October 2019. In April 2020, Frequency's Chief Executive Officer ("CEO"), David L. Lucchino, began selling his shares of Frequency, totaling over 350,000 shares sold and earning over $10.5 million. On March 23, 2021, before the market opened, Frequency disclosed in a press release disappointing interim results of the Phase 2a study, revealing that subjects who had mild to moderate SNHL did not demonstrate improvements in hearing measures versus placebo. On this news, Frequency's stock price declined by $28.30 per share, or approximately 78%, from $36.29 per share to close at $7.99 per share on March 23, 2021, thereby damaging investors. The lawsuit alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose: (1) that Frequency's Phase 2a study did not yield positive results to support the commercialization of FX-322; and (2) that, as a result, Defendants' statements about its business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. If you purchased or otherwise acquired Frequency securities, have information, or would like to learn more about these claims, please contact Thomas W. Elrod of Kirby McInerney LLP at 212-371-6600, by email at investigations@kmllp.com, or by filling out this contact form, to discuss your rights or interests with respect to these matters without any cost to you. Kirby McInerney LLP is a New York-based plaintiffs' law firm concentrating in securities, antitrust, whistleblower, and consumer litigation. The firm's efforts on behalf of shareholders in securities litigation have resulted in recoveries totaling billions of dollars. Additional information about the firm can be found at Kirby McInerney LLP's website: http://www.kmllp.com. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. Contacts Kirby McInerney LLP Thomas W. Elrod, Esq. 212-371-6600 https://www.kmllp.com investigations@kmllp.com [GN] FREQUENCY THERAPEUTICS: Klein Law Firm Reminds of Aug. 2 Deadline ----------------------------------------------------------------- The Klein Law Firm announces that a class action complaint has been filed on behalf of shareholders of Frequency Therapeutics, Inc. There is no cost to participate in the suit. If you suffered a loss, you have until the lead plaintiff deadline to request that the court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Frequency Therapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ:FREQ) Class Period: November 16, 2020 - March 22, 2021 Lead Plaintiff Deadline: August 2, 2021 The FREQ lawsuit alleges that throughout the class period, Frequency Therapeutics, Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: the Company's Phase 2a trial results failed to live up to the Company's expectations as the results revealed no discernable difference between FX-322 and the placebo. In spite of the disappointing results, the Company continued to conduct the Phase 2a study while releasing positive statements in earnings calls, press releases, SEC filings, and pharmaceutical presentations about FX-322's potential. These statements materially misled the market and artificially inflated the value of Frequency's common stock. Learn about your recoverable losses in FREQ: https://www.kleinstocklaw.com/pslra-1/frequency-therapeutics-inc-loss-submission-form?id=16978&from=1 Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff. If you suffered a loss during the class period and wish to obtain additional information, please contact J. Klein, Esq. by telephone at 212-616-4899 or visit the webpages provided. J. Klein, Esq. represents investors and participates in securities litigations involving financial fraud throughout the nation. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. CONTACT: J. Klein, Esq. Empire State Building 350 Fifth Avenue 59th Floor New York, NY 10118 jk@kleinstocklaw.com Telephone: (212) 616-4899 Fax: (347) 558-9665 www.kleinstocklaw.com [GN] FRESENIUS USA: Fenske Sues Over Wage and Hour Violations -------------------------------------------------------- Michael Fenske, individually and on behalf of others similarly all situated v. FRESENIUS USA MANUFACTURING, INC; and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Case No. CIVSB2115114 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Bernardino Cty., June 7, 2021), is brought alleging that the Defendants have engaged in a systematic pattern of wage and hour violations under the California Labor Code and Industrial Welfare Commission ("IWC") Wage Orders, all of which contribute to the Defendants' deliberate unfair competition. The Defendants have increased their profits by violating state wage and hours laws by, among other things; failing to pay all wages (including minimum and overtime wages); failing to provide lawful meal periods or compensation in lieu thereof; failing to authorize or permit lawful rest breaks or provide compensation in lieu thereof; failing to provide accurate itemized wage statements; failing to pay all wages due upon separation of employment, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a non-exempt employee at the Defendants' California business location. The Defendants are in the kidney and medical dialysis centers supply industry.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Kashif Haque, Esq. Samuel A. Wong, Esq. Jessica L. Campbell, Esq. AEGIS LAW FIRM, PC 9811 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92618 Phone: (949) 379-6250 Facsimile: (949) 379-6251 GENERAL MILLS: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against General Mills, Inc. The case is styled as Domingo Pascual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. General Mills, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-05367 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. General Mills, Inc. -- https://www.generalmills.com/ -- is an American multinational manufacturer and marketer of branded consumer foods sold through retail stores.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq. COHEN & MIZRAHI LLP 300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor Brooklyn, NY 11201 Phone: (929) 575-4175 Fax: (929) 575-4195 Email: joseph@cml.legal GULF OF MEXICO: Charter Operators Fight Back Against Lawsuit ------------------------------------------------------------ Steve Bittenbender at nationalfisherman.com reports that a week after receiving class-action status in its lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, and NMFS, a nonpartisan civil rights group has filed an amended lawsuit regarding NMFS' plan to monitor charter boats in the Gulf of Mexico. A group of 11 small businesses and fishing-boat owners claim that a policy requiring electronic monitoring and reporting infringes on their operations. Last July, NOAA issued an order to electronically submit reports for each fishing trip, even if no fish were caught. It also requires boats to notify the agency before departing on any kind of trip. "Warrantless GPS surveillance of even a suspected criminal's vehicle is indisputably unconstitutional," said Sheng Li, a lawyer for the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA). "Yet, NOAA is mandating 24-hour GPS surveillance of countless boat owners for running legitimate businesses. It does not take a legal scholar to spot the constitutional violation." The amended lawsuit filed June 9 in a U.S. District Court in Baton Rouge, La., also objects to NOAA mandating captain reveal charter fees, number of paying passengers, and the amount of fuel used. That information, the plaintiffs claim, does not help determine the status of fishing stocks in the Gulf of Mexico. The amended complaint came one week after U.S. District Judge Susie Morgan approved the plaintiffs' request for class-action status. With that designation, more than 1,000 charter operators are now eligible to join the case, according to an NCLA statement. The federal government opposed the motion for class-action status. In a filing on Dec. 11, 2020, U.S. Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jean E. Williams and Shampa Panda, a U.S. Justice Department trial attorney for wildlife and marine resources, said granting class-action status would lead to delays in the case and increase the costs. They also said that there was "significant disagreement" among charter-boat owners. "A survey of the administrative record that was lodged in this case reveals that there are a number of comments from the owners and operators of federal permitted charter vessels on the proposed rule that demonstrate that a number of permit holders are in favor of the final rule, for reasons ranging for accountability to accuracy in data collection," the government argued. However, Morgan determined that the plaintiffs met the standard for class-action status. The plaintiffs seek a decision that the electronic monitoring order is unconstitutional as the data charter owners and operators collect is private property. [GN] H.E.W. AND ASSOCIATES: Fabricant Files TCPA Suit in C.D. California ------------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against H.E.W. and Associates, LLC, et al. The case is styled as Terry Fabricant, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. H.E.W. and Associates, LLC, Does 1 through 10, inclusive, and each of them, Case No. 2:21-cv-04944 (C.D. Cal., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Hew & Associates is a communications consulting firm.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Todd M. Friedman, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN PC 21550 Oxnard St., Suite 780 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Phone: (323) 306-4234 Fax: (866) 633-0228 Email: tfriedman@toddflaw.com H.L. GROSS & BRO: Roman Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against H. L. Gross & Bro. Garden City, Inc. The case is styled as Juan Roman, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated v. H. L. Gross & Bro. Garden City, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-05375 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. H.L. Gross & Bro. Jeweler -- https://www.hlgross.com/ -- has been Long Island's premier diamond jewelry and watch destination since 1910.[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 HAIN CELESTIAL: Maestre Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct. --------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Hain Celestial Group, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Brianna Maestre, Salvatore Stiles, on behalf of themselves and all other individuals similarly situated v. Hain Celestial Group, Inc., Does 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 605375/2021 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Nassau Cty., June 7, 2021). The nature of suit is stated as Commercial Division. The Hain Celestial Group, Inc. -- http://www.hain.com/-- is an American food company whose main focus is foods and personal care products.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: CARLSON LYNCH LLP 1133 Penn Ave., Fl. 5 Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Phone: (412) 322-9243 The Defendants are represented by: JENNER& BLOCK LLP 919 Third Avenue 37eh Floor New York, NY 10022 Phone: (212) 891-1624 HERFF JONES: Furcinito Suit Asserts Credit Card Fraud ----------------------------------------------------- Elizabeth Furcinito and Miriam Barnicle, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Herff Jones, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 21-cv-01661 (S.D. Ind., June 11, 2021), seeks all monetary and non-monetary relief allowed by law, including restitution of all profits stemming from unfair, unlawful and fraudulent business practices, declaratory and injunctive relief, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs under the New York Deceptive Practices Act of the New York General Business Law and the Wisconsin Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Herff Jones manufactures and sells educational recognition and achievement products and motivational materials with production facilities across the United States and Canada. Barnicle, a resident of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, used her Discover credit card to make a purchase with Herff Jones for approximately $8.39 to pay for the shipping costs associated with the cap and gown for her graduation from Alverno College. Following her purchase with Herff Jones, seven fraudulent charges amounting totaling approximately $112 were made on her card. Furcinito, a resident of New York, used her Apple credit card to make a purchase with Herff Jones in the amount of $8.59 to pay for the shipping costs associated with her cap and gown for her graduation from Syracuse University. Following her purchase with Herff Jones, an unauthorized fraudulent charge at a Best Buy store located in El Paso, Texas was made in the amount of $2,995.99. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Irwin B. Levin, Esq. Richard E. Shevitz, Esq. COHEN & MALAD, LLP One Indiana Square, Suite 1400 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Tel: (317) 636-6481 Email: ilevin@cohenandmalad.com rshevitz@cohenandmalad.com - and - Robert Ahdoot, Esq. AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC 2600 W. Olive Ave., Suite 500 Burbank, CA 91505 Tel: (310) 474-9111 Fax: (310) 474-8585 Email: rahdoot@ahdootwolfson.com - and - Andrew W. Ferich, Esq. AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC 201 King of Prussia Road, Suite 650 Radnor, PA 19087 Tel: (310) 474-9111 Fax: (310) 474-8585 Email: aferich@ahdootwolfson.com HONEST PAWS: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Honest Paws LLC. The case is styled as Domingo Pascual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Honest Paws LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-05370 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Honest Paws -- https://www.honestpaws.com/ -- offers premium CBD products for pets.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq. COHEN & MIZRAHI LLP 300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor Brooklyn, NY 11201 Phone: (929) 575-4175 Fax: (929) 575-4195 Email: joseph@cml.legal HYUNDAI MOTOR: GV80 Subject of Class Action Filed by Boca Raton --------------------------------------------------------------- A Boca Raton law firm claims that Hyundai GV80s - the SUV Tiger Woods was driving at the time of his California crash - is unsafe and unrepairable. Marcus W. Corwin of Corwin Law in Boca Raton just filed a Federal Class Action Lawsuit against Hyundai. The suit names Delray Beach resident Dr. Barbara Feinstein as the named plaintiff on behalf of the class, and accuses Hyundai of manufacturing a vehicle with "instability and subpar performance, including shaking, shuddering, vibrating and pulling." Feinstein, alleges the suit, leased a 2021 Genesis GV80, only to have it unusable for nearly half of the first 95 days of the lease. Hyundai, says Feinstein, has been unable to repair the issues. According to an advisory issued by the law firm, "Hyundai is accused of promoting the GV80 luxury SUV despite being aware of dangerous defects affecting the vehicle's drivability that are documented in Korean news media and current customer message boards." Florida's Lemon Law requires vehicle owners to follow several procedures to obtain a refund or new vehicle, including arbitration in front of a three member panel. It was not immediately clear whether Dr. Feinstein - or any of the class members - engaged in the longstanding procedures set by the office of Florida's Attorney General to resolve the alleged vehicle deficiencies. [GN] JIM 'N NICK'S: Porter Sues Over Failure to Compensate OT Wages -------------------------------------------------------------- Lisa Porter, on behalf of herself and those similarly situated v. Jim N Nicks Alabaster, LLC; Jim N Nicks Auburn, LLC; Jim 'N Nick's Bar B Q Homewood, Inc.; Jim 'N Nick's Bar B Q Riverchase, Inc.; Jim 'N Nick's Bar B Q South, Inc.; Jim N Nicks Birmingham, LLC; Jim N Nicks Gardendale, LLC; Jim N Nicks Jasper, LLC; Jim N Nicks Management, LLC; Jim N Nicks Montgomery East, LLC; Jim 'N Nick's of Huntsville, LLC; Jim N Nicks Trussville, LLC; Jim N Nicks Tuscaloosa, LLC; Jim N Nicks 5 Points, LLC; Jim N Nicks Charleston, LLC; Jim N Nicks Atlanta I, LLC, Jim N Nicks Memphis I, LLC; Jim N Nicks Nashville, LLC; Jim N Nicks Nashville II, LLC; Brian Lyman; John Haire; John Doe Corp. 1-10; and John Doe 1-10; Case No. 2:21-cv-01706-BHH (D.S.C., June 8, 2021), is brought to seek appropriate monetary, declaratory, and equitable relief based on Defendants' willful failure to compensate the Plaintiff with overtime wages as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Defendants pay their servers a tip credit minimum wage of $2.13 per hour for the hours they work up to 40 hours each week. By paying $2.13 per hour for regular rate hours, Defendants were required to pay $5.755 per hour for all overtime hours worked. Rather than paying $5.755 per hour, the Defendants paid $3.62 per hour for each hour of overtime. As a result, the Defendants underpay the Plaintiff and similarly situated servers by $2.134 per hour ($5.755 - $3.62) for each hour worked in excess of 40 per workweek. The Defendants underpaid their servers during each week that the employees worked exclusively in a tipped wage capacity, says the complaint. The Plaintiff Lisa Porter worked for Defendants at Jim 'N Nick's Community Bar-B-Q at the Defendants' North Charleston, South Carolina location. The Defendants have operated Jim 'N Nick's Community Bar-B-Q.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Glenn V. Ohanesian, Esq. OHANESIAN & OHANESIAN 504 North Kings Highway P. O. Box 2433 Myrtle Beach, SC 29578 Phone: 843-626-7193 Facsimile: 843-492-5164 Email: OhanesianLawFirm@cs.com KAISER FOUNDATION: Settles Employment Class Action for $1.4M ------------------------------------------------------------ courthousenews.com reports that a class of call center staff for Kaiser Foundation Hospitals reached a settlement with the health care giant on claims it consistently failed to accurately pay employees. Kaiser employed staff in its medical call centers under categories such as "telemedicine specialists," "customer support specialists," and "wellness specialists." Former call center workers Monica Smith and Erika Sierra sued Kaiser in 2018, claiming violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and California laws governing wage and time-tracking protocols for employees. In their class action, Smith and Sierra said Kaiser failed to accurately compensate employees for certain tasks performed during breaks and after their shifts. The tasks included locating work equipment, shredding patient notes, traveling to Kaiser training locations, managing computer stations and commuting to meeting places. Kaiser also failed to reimburse its staff for certain business-related expenditures, the plaintiffs said. The parties have previously moved for preliminary approval of a settlement and have since been denied twice. An initial agreement in principle was reached in February 2019. U.S. District Judge Karen S. Crawford denied the prior motions for preliminary approval due to concerns over the structure of the settlement and the scope of the proposed collective seeking remedy of FLSA claims. In October 2020, the parties filed amendments and corrections to the proposed settlement and filed a third motion for preliminary approval, which the court granted. The settlement class includes employees who worked in Kaiser call centers in San Diego between Feb. 21, 2013, and Feb. 18, 2021, while the FLSA collective includes employees who worked in Kaiser call centers in San Diego between Dec. 21, 2014, and Feb. 18, 2021 At a June 9 fairness hearing held by Crawford, no class members filed objections to the settlement or appeared at the hearing. Six of the 474 class and FLSA collective members requested to be excluded from the settlement. The agreement received final approval by Crawford and will provide a gross settlement of $1,475,000 which, after relevant fees are deducted, will amount to a $922,000 payment to class members. Class members will receive an average payment of $1,971 with the highest payment being $5,894. Named plaintiffs Smith and Sierra will receive $7,500 and $2,500 incentive awards, respectively, while opt-in plaintiff Christa Fox will receive $5,000. The parties have allocated $203,000 of the net settlement to the FLSA collective members. Attorneys for the parties did not immediately respond to emailed requests for comment on the settlement. In exchange for the settlement payment, class members agree to release Kaiser of any and all claims related to their lawsuit. Crawford wrote in the June 15 order that the settlement satisfied the four threshold requirements of numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation. "The court finds that the proposed class representatives and their counsel have vigorously prosecuted this action, leading ultimately to the settlement now before it, and have faithfully discharged their duties as fiduciaries to the absent class members," Crawford wrote. "The court finds no evidence of collusion or antagonism. Furthermore, counsel for the class is experienced in employment litigation, and has successfully litigated numerous wage-and hour class actions such as this one." [GN] LEPOZZI INC: Roman Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York -------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lepozzi, Inc. The case is styled as Juan Roman, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated v. Lepozzi, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-05376 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Lepozzi, Inc. doing business as Lauren B Jewelry -- https://www.laurenbjewelry.com/ -- in New York City specializes in custom engagement ring design, loose diamonds, fine jewelry, moissanites and more.[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 LIMETREE BAY: Boynes Sues Over Harmful Effects of Refinery ---------------------------------------------------------- Clifford Boynes, Chris Christian, Margaret Thompson, Delia Almestica, Carlos Christian, Minor Child "J.M.M.", Minor Child "V.M.", Minor Child "Z.R.C.", Minor Child "M.M", Anna Rexach-Constantine, Minor Child "O.N.", Mervyn Constantine, Neal Davis, Edna Santiago, Guidrycia Wells, O'Shay Wells, Aaron G. Maynard, Verne McSween, Rochelle Gomez, Joan Mathurin, Myrna Mathurin, Ann Marie John-Baptiste, Warrington Chapman, Loeba John-Baptiste-Pelle, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. LIMETREE BAY VENTURES, LLC; LIMETREE BAY REFINING, LLC; LIMETREE BAY TERMINALS, LLC; ARCLIGHT CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC; FREEPOINT COMMODITIES, LLC; EIG GLOBAL ENERGY PARTNERS, LLC; BP PRODUCTS NORTH AMERICA, INC.; and JOHN DOES 1-100, Case No. 1:21-cv-00252-WAL-GWC (D.V.I., June 7, 2021), is brought in order to seek adequate redress for the harm caused by the Defendant's Refinery and the operation of that refinery. According to the complaint, the Defendants, who own a "world class refinery" called the Limetree Bay Refinery, threaten the integrity of the citizens who live in St. Croix as well as the island's tourist economy due to the Refinery's wrongful emission and discharge of toxic substances, gases and odors including (but not limited to) oil, hydrogen sulfide, sulfur dioxide, petroleum hydrocarbons, and other chemicals and particulates. Previously, the Refinery had been closed due, in part, to other environmental disasters which threatened the island's citizens and its local economy; however, the Refinery was reopened in February of 2021. It took less than a month for the first environmental disaster to occur since the Refinery's reopening – and numerous incidents have occurred since then, including the Refinery "showering oil on local residents twice, spewing sulfuric gases into the surrounding area, and releasing hydrocarbons into the air." In May of 2021, the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") shut the refinery down, claiming that the Refinery's continued operation was an "imminent" threat to the health of people on the island The Plaintiffs and the members of the putative Class have been subjected to unreasonable odors, gases, vapors, and fumes which contain the aforementioned Toxins due to the Defendants' unlawful operation of the Refinery. Particulate matter has been released into the air containing Toxins, and visible droplets of oil have literally fallen from the sky onto the island and the people who reside there, says the complaint. The Plaintiffs are citizens of St. Croix, United States Virgin Islands who live and/or work in communities adjacent to or located downwind from the Refinery, were harmed by the Defendants' Refinery and its operations, and suffered damages as a result. The Defendants operate the aforementioned Limetree Bay Refinery.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Jennifer Jones, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF JENNIFER JONES 9003 Havensight Mall, Ste. 319 St. Thomas, V.I. 00802 Phone: (340) 779-7386 Facsimile: (340) 714-5080 Email: jjones@vienvironmentallaw.com - and - Kerry J. Miller, Esq. Paul C. Thibodeaux, Esq. C. Hogan Paschal, Esq. FISHMAN HAYGOOD, L.L.P. 201 St. Charles Avenue, 46th Floor New Orleans, LA 70170 Phone: (504) 586-5252 Facsimile: (504) 586-5250 Email: kmiller@fishmanhaygood.com pthibodeaux@fishmanhaygood.com hpaschal@fishmanhaygood.com - and - Hugh Lambert, Esq. J. Christopher Zainey, Esq. Brian Mersman, Esq. THE LAMBERT FIRM, PLC 701 Magazine Street New Orleans, LA 70130 Phone: (504) 581-1750 Facsimile: (504) 529-2931 Email: hlambert@thelambertfirm.com czainey@thelambertfirm.com bmersman@thelambertfirm.com - and - Daniel K. Bryson, Esq. Melissa K. Sims, Esq. Blake H. Yagman, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC 100 Garden City Plaza Garden City, NY 11530 Phone: (212) 594-5300 Email: dbrysonh@milberg.com msims@milberg.com byagman@milberg.com LOSTMY.NAME INC: Davis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lostmy.name Inc. The case is styled as Kevin Davis, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Lostmy.name Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-05355 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Wonderbly, previously Lost My Name -- https://www.wonderbly.com/ -- is a technology and publishing business that produces personalized books for children and adults.[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 MDL 2913: Oneida City School District Sues Over E-Cigarette Crisis ------------------------------------------------------------------ Oneida City School District v. JUUL Labs, Inc.. F/K/A PAX LABS, INC.; JAMES MONSEES; ADAM BOWEN; NICHOLAS PRITZKER; HOYOUNG HUH; RIAZ VALANI; ALTRIA GROUP, INC.; ALTRIA CLIENT SERVICES LLC; ALTRIA GROUP DISTRIBUTION COMPANY; and PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC., Defendants, Case No. 3:21-cv-04412 (N.D. Cal., June 9, 2021) is a complaint against the Defendants for negligence, gross negligence, and violations of Public Nuisance Law and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. According to the complaint, the Defendants used three tactics to maintain market dominance in the cigarette industry: (1) product design to maximize addiction, (2) mass deception, and (3) targeting of youth. Defendants JUUL Labs and Adam Bowen designed an e-cigarette device allegedly intended to create and sustain addiction, but without the stigma associated with cigarettes and promoted them to vulnerable young population. JUUL Labs and other Defendants developed and implemented a marketing scheme to mislead users into believing that JUUL products contained less nicotine than they actually do and were healthy and safe. The Defendants enticed newcomers to nicotine with kid-friendly flavors without ensuring the flavoring additives were safe for inhalation. The Defendants targeted the youth market by placing vaporized campaigns on youth-oriented websites and media and using influencers and affiliates to amplify their message to a teenage audience. The Defendants have successfully caused more young people to start using e-cigarettes, creating a youth e-cigarette epidemic and public health crisis, the suit alleges. Oneida City School District is a unified school district with its offices located at 565 Sayles Street in Oneida, New York. JUUL Labs, Inc., formerly known as Pax Labs, Inc., is an American electronic cigarette company, with its principal place of business in San Francisco, California. Altria Group, Inc. is a producer of tobacco products, with its principal place of business in Richmond, Virginia. Altria Client Services LLC provides Altria Group Inc. and its companies digital marketing, packaging design & innovation, product development, and safety, health, and environmental affairs. Altria Group Distribution Company provides sales, distribution and consumer engagement services to Altria's tobacco companies. Philip Morris USA, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Altria Group, Inc., with its principal place of business in Richmond, Virginia. The Oneida case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2913, In Re: JUUL Labs, Inc. Marketing, Sales Practice, and Products Liability Litigation. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge William H. Orrick. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James Frantz, Esq. William B. Shinoff, Esq. FRANTZ LAW GROUP, APLC 402 W. Broadway, Ste. 860 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 233-5945 Facsimile: (619) 525-7672 E-mail: jpf@frantzlawgroup.com wshinoff@frantzlawgroup.com MEDINAH COUNTRY: Campos Sues Over Unlawful Biometrics Collection ---------------------------------------------------------------- ROSEMARY CAMPOS, on behalf of herself and all other person similarly situated, known and unknown, Plaintiff v. MEDINAH COUNTRY CLUB, Defendant, Case No. 2021L000642 (Ill. 18th Jud. Cir. Ct., June 14, 2021) is a class action complaint brought by the Plaintiff against the Defendant pursuant to the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant between 1998 and 2020 as a seasonal employee. According to the complaint, the Defendant required the Plaintiff and other hourly employees to use a biometric time clock time system beginning in approximately 2015 or 2016 to record their time worked by scanning their fingerprints in the Defendant's biometric time clock each time they started and finished working. Allegedly, the Defendant placed its employees at risk by using their biometric identifiers, like fingerprints, to "punch the clock" because it can never be changed when compromised and thus subject a victim identity theft to heightened risk of loss. By compromising the privacy and security of the biometric identifiers and information of the Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees, the Defendant allegedly violated the BIPA. Medinah Country Club is a private country club. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Max P. Barack, Esq. Haskell Garfinkel, Esq. THE GARFINKEL GROUP, LLC 6252 N. Lincoln Ave., Suite 200 Chicago, IL 60659 Tel: (312) 736-7991 E-mail: max@garfinkelgroup.com haskell@garfinkelgroup.com MEKONG BK CORP: Gonzalez Seeks Overtime Pay, Slams Tip Credit ------------------------------------------------------------- Josue Toc Gonzalez, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Mekong BK Corp. and James Hoang Bui, Defendants, Case No. 21-cv-03302 (E.D. N.Y., June 11, 2021), seeks to recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages and spread-of-hours pay pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and New York Labor Law, including applicable liquidated damages, interest, attorneys' fees and costs. Defendants own, operate, or control a Vietnamese restaurant, located in Brooklyn, NY under the name "Mekong," where Gonzalez was employed as a food preparer, cook and delivery worker. He claims to have generally worked in excess of 40 hours a week without overtime for hours in excess of 40 hours per workweek and denied spread-of-hours premium for workdays exceeding 10 hours. Defendants also claimed tip credit for all hours worked despite requiring him to work non-tipped duties for hours exceeding 20% of the total hours worked each workweek. Plaintiff also claims to have never received wage statements. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Faillace, Esq. MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510 New York, NY 10165 Tel: (212) 317-1200 Facsimile: (212) 317-1620 Email: michael@faillacelaw.com MIDLAND CREDIT: Belizor Sues Over Deceptive Collection Letter ------------------------------------------------------------- BARBARA BELIZOR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC. and JOHN DOES 1-25, Defendants, Case No. 3:21-cv-00798 (D. Conn., June 11, 2021) is a class action complaint brought against Defendant Midland Credit for its alleged violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. According to the complaint, the Defendant sent a collection letter to the Plaintiff on or about February 4, 2021 in an attempt to collect the Plaintiff's alleged debt incurred to creditor Comenity Bank primarily for personal, family or household purposes, specifically use of a credit card. Although the Defendant's letter provided three payment options, the third option is not adequately explained and results in two different possible interpretations. The Defendant's letter is allegedly false, deceptive and misleading because it failed to explain whether Option 3 is a settlement option or a full pay option. Midland Credit Management, Inc. is a debt collector. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Raphael Deutsch, Esq. STEIN SAKS, PLLC 285 Passaic Street Hackensack, NJ 07601 Tel: (201) 282-6500 ext. 107 Fax: (201) 282-6501 E-mail: rdeutsch@steinsakslegal.com MONTGOMERY, AL: Carter Appeals Denied Class Cert. Bid to 11th Cir. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Plaintiff ALDARESS CARTER filed an appeal from a court ruling entered in the lawsuit entitled ALDARESS CARTER, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated persons, v. THE CITY OF MONTGOMERY, et al., Case No. 2:15-cv-00555-RCL-SMD, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama. The Plaintiff alleges that several of his statutory and constitutional rights were violated by Defendants' "policies and practices employed to collect debts from the fines, fees, costs, and surcharges that the City assesses, usually for traffic tickets." In sum, the Plaintiff alleges that in 2011 he was placed on "probation" under the supervision of Defendant JCS for failure to pay fines, fees and costs related to traffic tickets. After the Plaintiff failed to respond to several "failure to report" letters issued by JCS, which the Plaintiff alleges he did not receive, JCS petitioned for Plaintiff's "probation" to be revoked. The Plaintiff never received notice that a hearing was being held, but on January 30, 2013, Montgomery issued a warrant for Plaintiff's arrest for "Failure to Appeal" in court. The Plaintiff was arrested nearly a year later, still without having received notice of the earlier court dates or bench warrant until his arrival at the Montgomery City jail. When Plaintiff appeared before the judge he was ordered to pay $915 for the fines and fees associated with his unpaid traffic tickets to secure his release. The Plaintiff was released on January 30, 2014, after his mother paid $452 on his behalf. The Plaintiff then discovered that Defendant Branch D. Kloess had entered a notice of appearance on his behalf, though he had never met Kloess and did not know who he was. Defendant Kloess "did not appear before the judge to plead [Plaintiff's] indigency or request that the judge reduce his sentence based on his inability to pay, nor did he meet with [Plaintiff] and file any pleading raising the issue of his indigency." The Plaintiff is seeking a review of the Court's Memorandum Opinion and Order dated May 21, 2021 wherein Hon. Judge Royce C. Lamberth entered an order denying his motion for class certification. Mr. Carter moved to certify four classes: a City class, a JCS Bearden subclass, a Kloess subclass, and a false-imprisonment class. 1. City Class consists of: "all individuals the Montgomery Municipal Court placed on JCS-supervised probation, who (1) had debt commuted to jail time in a JCS-supervised case after JCS petitioned the court to revoke probation; and (2) served any of that jail time on or after August 3, 2013." 2. JCS Bearden Subclass consists of: "all individuals in the City Class who served any of their post-commutation jail time on or after September 11, 2013." 3. Kloess Subclass consists of: "all individuals in the City Class whose debt was commuted to jail time on a date when Branch Kloess was the public defender assigned to the jail docket or for whom Benchmark court records or other documents indicate the individuals were represented by Branch Kloess for the commutation." 4. False-Imprisonment Class consists of: "all individuals the Montgomery Municipal Court placed on JCS-supervised probation, who (1) had debt commuted to jail time in a JCS-supervised case after JCS petitioned the court to revoke probation; and (2) served any of that jail time on or after September 11, 2009." The appellate case is captioned as Aldaress Carter v. The City of Montgomery, et al., Case No. 21-90015, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, filed on June 4, 2021.[BN] Plaintiff-Petitioner ALDARESS CARTER, individually, and for a class of similarly situated persons or entities, is represented by: Leslie Andrea Bailey, Esq. Brian Hardingham, Esq. John He, Esq. PUBLIC JUSTICE, PC 475 14th St Ste 610 Oakland, CA 94612-1928 Telephone: (510) 622-8203 - and - Alexandra Brodsky, Esq. PUBLIC JUSTICE, PC 1620 L St NW Ste 630 Washington, DC 20036 Telephone: (202) 797-8600 - and - George Daniel Evans, Esq. Maurine C. Evans, Esq. Alexandria Parrish, Esq. THE EVANS LAW FIRM, PC 1736 Oxmoor Rd Ste 101 Birmingham, AL 35209 Telephone: (205) 870-1970 E-mail: gdevans@evanslawpc.com mevans@evanslawpc.com ap@evanslawpc.com - and - Toby James Marshall, Esq. TERRELL MARSHALL & DAUDT, PLLC 936 N 34th St Ste 400 Seattle, WA 98103-8869 Telephone: (206) 816-6603 Defendant-Respondent THE CITY OF MONTGOMERY, BRANCH D. KLOESS, and JUDICIAL CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, INC. are represented by: Michael David Brymer, Esq. Kimberly Owen Fehl, Esq. OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY 103 N Perry St Montgomery, AL 36104 Telephone: (334) 241-2050 - and - Richard Hamilton Gill, Esq. Shannon L. Holliday, Esq. Robert D. Segall, Esq. COPELAND FRANCO SCREWS & GILL, PA 444 S Perry St Montgomery, AL 36104 Telephone: (334) 834-1180 E-mail: holliday@copelandfranco.com - and - Micheal Stewart Jackson, Esq. WEBSTER HENRY LYONS BRADWELL COHAN & BLACK, PC PO Box 239 105 Tallapossa St Ste 101 Montgomery, AL 36101 Telephone: (334) 264-9472 E-mail: mjackson@websterhenry.com - and - Wilson Franklin Green, Esq. FLEENOR & GREEN, LLP 1657 McFarland Blvd N Ste G2A Tuscaloosa, AL 35406 Telephone: (205) 722-1018 - and - Jonathan Griffith, Esq. Michael Leon Jackson, Esq. Larry Logsdon, Esq. Wesley Kyle Winborn, Esq. WALLACE JORDAN RATLIFF & BRANDT, LLC PO Box 530910 Birmingham, AL 35253 Telephone: (205) 870-0555 E-mail: mjackson@wallacejordan.com llogsdon@wallacejordan.com wwinborn@wallacejordan.com MONTGOMERY, AL: McCullough Appeals Class Certification Bid Denial ----------------------------------------------------------------- Plaintiff Angela McCullough, et al., filed an appeal from a court ruling entered in the lawsuit entitled ANGELA McCULLOUGH, et al., individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated persons, Plaintiffs v. THE CITY OF MONTGOMERY, et al., Defendants, Case No. 2:15-cv-00463-RCL-SMD, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama. As reported in the Class Action Reporter on Jan. 5, 2021, Judge Royce C. Lamberth of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, Northern Division: (i) denied the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification; (ii) granted in part and denied in part the City's motion to reconsider and entered summary judgment for the City on Mr. Jones' Section 1983 claim; (iii) denied Judicial Correction Services, Inc. ("JCS")'s motion to reconsider; and (iv) denied the Plaintiffs' motion to reconsider. This case arose from the system of collecting traffic fines in Montgomery, Alabama, between 2009 to 2014. During that time, the Montgomery Municipal Court routinely jailed traffic offenders for failing to pay fines without inquiring into their ability to pay. In carrying out that system, the Municipal Court deprived offenders of their due process and equal protection rights not to be incarcerated for their poverty, asserts the complaint. During that period, the City of Montgomery contracted on behalf of itself and the Municipal Court with JCS to supervise Municipal Court-ordered misdemeanor probation. The Plaintiffs are Montgomery residents, who served probation with JCS after they were unable to pay their traffic tickets. They sued the City and JCS on behalf of themselves and purported classes of similarly situated persons. Their operative complaint alleges causes of action for violations of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and for false imprisonment and abuse of process. The Plaintiffs moved to certify the following three classes: a. The plaintiffs seek to certify a Bearden class consisting of all individuals the Montgomery Municipal Court placed on JCS-supervised probation, who: (1) had debt commuted to jail time in a JCS-supervised case after JCS petitioned the Court to revoke probation; and (2) served any of that jail time on or after July 1, 2013; b. The Plaintiffs seek to certify a false imprisonment class "consisting of all individuals the Montgomery Municipal Court placed on JCS-supervised probation, who: (1) had debt commuted to jail time in a JCS-supervised case after JCS petitioned the Court to revoke probation; and (2) served any of that jail time on or after July 1, 2009"; and c. The Plaintiffs seek to certify an abuse of process class "consisting of all individuals the Montgomery Municipal Court placed on JCS-supervised probation: (1) who at any time paid less than the minimum monthly payment ordered by the Court; and (2) from whom JCS continued to collect or attempt to collect after July 1, 2013." The Plaintiffs now seek a review of the order denying Class Certification entered by Judge Lamberth. The appellate case is captioned as Angela McCullough, et al. v. City of Montgomery, Alabama, et al., Case No. 21-90016, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, filed on June 4, 2021.[BN] Plaintiffs-Petitioners ANGELA MCCULLOUGH, MARQUITA JOHNSON, KENNY JONES, ALGI EDWARDS, LEVON AGEE, HASSAN CALDWELL, and CHRISTOPHER MOONEY, on behalf of themselves, individually, and on behalf of a class of all other similarly situated, are represented by: Jennifer Barrett, Esq. Harold Hirshman, Esq. DENTONS US, LLP 233 S Wacker Dr Ste 5900 Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 876-8000 - and - Greg Bass, Esq. Claudia Wilner, Esq. NATIONAL CENTER FOR LAW AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE 275 7th Ave Ste 1506 New York, NY 10001 Telephone: (212) 633-6967 - and - Martha Irene Morgan, Esq. MORGAN LAW OFFICE 8800 Lodge Lane Cottondale, AL 35453 Telephone: (205) 799-2692 E-mail: mimorgan@yahoo.com - and - Stephen J. O'Brien, Esq. DENTONS US LLP 1 Metropolitan Sq Ste 3000 Saint Louis, MO 63102 Telephone: (314) 241-1800 - and - Henry Sanders, Esq. Faya Rose Toure, Esq. CHESTNUT SANDERS & SANDERS, LLC 1 Union St, PO Box 1290 Selma, AL 36701 Telephone: (334) 875-9264 E-mail: gpompey@csspca.com fayarose@gmail.com Defendants-Respondents CITY OF MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA and JUDICIAL CORRECTION SERVICES, INC., JCS are represented by: Michael David Brymer, Esq. Kimberly Owen Fehl, Esq. OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY 103 N Perry St Montgomery, AL 36104 Telephone: (334) 241-2050 E-mail: mbrymer@montgomeryal.gov kfehl@montgomeryal.gov - and - Richard Hamilton Gill, Esq. Shannon L. Holliday, Esq. Robert D. Segall, Esq. COPELAND FRANCO SCREWS & GILL, PA 444 S Perry St Montgomery, AL 36104 Telephone: (334) 834-1180 E-mail: holliday@copelandfranco.com segall@copelandfranco.com - and - Wilson Franklin Green, Esq. FLEENOR & GREEN, LLP 1657 McFarland Blvd N Ste G2A Tuscaloosa, AL 35406 Telephone: (205) 722-1018 - and - Jonathan Griffith, Esq. Michael Leon Jackson, Esq. Larry Logsdon, Esq. Wesley Kyle Winborn, Esq. WALLACE JORDAN RATLIFF & BRANDT, LLC PO Box 530910 Birmingham, AL 35253 Telephone: (205) 870-0555 E-mail: mjackson@wallacejordan.com llogsdon@wallacejordan.com wwinborn@wallacejordan.com MUD LAKE, NL: Province Removed as Party in Mud Lake Flood ---------------------------------------------------------- Evan Careen at saltwire.com reports that The provincial government was successful in removing itself from the class-action lawsuit brought against it and Nalcor Energy by residents of Mud Lake, Labrador. The class action was launched following a flood in 2017 in the central Labrador town of about 50 people that destroyed homes and caused significant property damage there and in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. The lawsuit alleges Nalcor and the province were negligent and created a nuisance with the Muskrat Falls project. It contends the building of the dam altered the ice buildup on the Churchill River, leading to the flooding in Mud Lake and Happy Valley-Goose Bay. Both the province and Nalcor were granted leave to appeal the certification of the class-action lawsuit in August 2020 and that appeal was heard in March of this year. The decision was released, and only the province was successful in removing itself from the suit. The province argued it "could not be liable in negligence or nuisance for acts or omissions of Nalcor; and the pleadings do not provide a foundation for liability in negligence or nuisance as against the province," according to the written decision from the court of appeal. The decision said the class action relies on what it refers to as the province's "oversight mandate" of the project and the Water Resources Act, which addresses requirements for permits and licences related to waterworks, such as dams, as well as oversight over water rights and the protection of water in the province. The decision said while the act gives the minister authority to do things such as direct an operator of waterworks to make an inspection or submit a report, "this does not amount to the imposition of a duty of care on the minister to take actions that have been imposed on Nalcor and for which Nalcor is responsible. "Rather, the legislation is intended to provide the minister with the tools to facilitate the regulation of waterworks for the public good. In this respect, the legislative provisions are comparable to the regulation, for the public good, of any number of activities, including a multitude of waterworks, that individuals and corporations undertake in the province." The court determined for these reasons the province could be removed from the suit. Nalcor had sought to be removed from just the nuisance aspect of the suit, not the negligence allegation. The ruling said based on the statement of claim and the allegations, it's too early to determine there is no reasonable prospect of the class action proceeding, which is best determined at trial. "The class is claiming that Nalcor's actions or failure to take preventive actions caused them substantial and unreasonable interference with the use and enjoyment of their property," it read. "Whether the claim can be proven, including the question of causation, is a matter for trial." [GN] NABC INC: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against NABC, Inc. The case is styled as Domingo Pascual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. NABC, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-05374 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. NABC, Inc. doing business as New Age Beverages -- https://www.newage.com/ -- is a Colorado-based organic and healthy products company intending to become one of the world's leading social selling and distribution companies.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq. COHEN & MIZRAHI LLP 300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor Brooklyn, NY 11201 Phone: (929) 575-4175 Fax: (929) 575-4195 Email: joseph@cml.legal NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK: To Settle US Bank Bill Swap Rate Suit -------------------------------------------------------------- Kurian Nainan at Reuters reports that National Australia Bank Ltd said it has agreed to settle a 2016 class action lawsuit in the United States over alleged manipulation of a key short-term interest rate. The terms of settlement in the bank bill swap rate lawsuit are confidential and without any admission of liability, Australia's third largest bank said. (https://bit.ly/35yyemo) [GN] NATIONWIDE TAX: Loftus Files TCPA Suit in C.D. California --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Nationwide Tax Consulting LLC, et al. The case is styled as William Loftus, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. H Nationwide Tax Consulting LLC, Does 1 through 10, inclusive, and each of them, Case No. 2:21-cv-04924 (C.D. Cal., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Nationwide Tax Consulting LLC -- https://nationwidetaxconsulting.com/ -- is a professional tax resolution company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Todd M. Friedman, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN PC 21550 Oxnard St., Suite 780 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Phone: (323) 306-4234 Fax: (866) 633-0228 Email: tfriedman@toddflaw.com NCAA: Flores Files Suit in Southern District of Indiana ------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against the National Collegiate Athletic Association. The case is styled as Daniel Flores, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, Case No. 1:21-cv-03256 (S.D. Ind., June 17, 2021). The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury. The National Collegiate Athletic Association -- https://www.ncaa.org/ -- is a non-profit organization which regulates athletes of 1,268 North American institutions and conferences.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey L. Raizner, Esq. RAIZNER SLANIA, LLP 2402 Dunlavy Street Houston, TX 77006 Phone: (713) 554-9099 Fax: (713) 554-9098 Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com The Defendant appears pro se. NCAA: Harris Files Suit in Southern District of Indiana ------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against the National Collegiate Athletic Association. The case is styled as Shane Harris, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, Case No. 1:21-cv-01817-JPH-DLP (S.D. Ind., June 17, 2021). The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury. The National Collegiate Athletic Association -- https://www.ncaa.org/ -- is a non-profit organization which regulates athletes of 1,268 North American institutions and conferences.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey L. Raizner, Esq. RAIZNER SLANIA, LLP 2402 Dunlavy Street Houston, TX 77006 Phone: (713) 554-9099 Fax: (713) 554-9098 Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com The Defendant appears pro se. NCAA: Kirkwood Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois ------------------------------------------------ The case styled as Robert Kirkwood, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, Case No. 1:21-cv-01284, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on June 17, 2021. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:21-cv-03208 to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury. The National Collegiate Athletic Association -- https://www.ncaa.org/ -- is a non-profit organization which regulates athletes of 1,268 North American institutions and conferences.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey L. Raizner, Esq. RAIZNER SLANIA, LLP 2402 Dunlavy Street Houston, TX 77006 Phone: (713) 554-9099 Fax: (713) 554-9098 Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com The Defendant appears pro se. NCAA: Parrish Files Suit in Southern District of Indiana -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against the National Collegiate Athletic Association. The case is styled as Ronald Parrish, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, Case No. 1:21-cv-01818-JRS-MG (S.D. Ind., June 17, 2021). The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury. The National Collegiate Athletic Association -- https://www.ncaa.org/ -- is a non-profit organization which regulates athletes of 1,268 North American institutions and conferences.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey L. Raizner, Esq. RAIZNER SLANIA, LLP 2402 Dunlavy Street Houston, TX 77006 Phone: (713) 554-9099 Fax: (713) 554-9098 Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com The Defendant appears pro se. NCAA: Reis Suit Transferred to Northern District of Illinois ------------------------------------------------------------ The case styled as Chester Reis, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, Case No. 1:21-cv-01303, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on June 17, 2021. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:21-cv-03209 to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury. The National Collegiate Athletic Association -- https://www.ncaa.org/ -- is a non-profit organization which regulates athletes of 1,268 North American institutions and conferences.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey L. Raizner, Esq. RAIZNER SLANIA, LLP 2402 Dunlavy Street Houston, TX 77006 Phone: (713) 554-9099 Fax: (713) 554-9098 Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com The Defendant appears pro se. NCAA: Romashko Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois ------------------------------------------------ The case styled as Alexander Romashko, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, Case No. 1:21-cv-01283, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on June 17, 2021. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:21-cv-03207 to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury. The National Collegiate Athletic Association -- https://www.ncaa.org/ -- is a non-profit organization which regulates athletes of 1,268 North American institutions and conferences.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey L. Raizner, Esq. RAIZNER SLANIA, LLP 2402 Dunlavy Street Houston, TX 77006 Phone: (713) 554-9099 Fax: (713) 554-9098 Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com The Defendant appears pro se. NOBLR RECIPROCAL EXCHANGE: Greenstein Sues Over Data Breach ----------------------------------------------------------- Michael Greenstein and Cynthia Nelson, on behalf of themselves and all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. NOBLR Reciprocal Exchange, Defendant, Case No. 21-cv-04537, (N.D. Cal., June 1, 2021) seeks damages, restitution and injunctive relief resulting from negligence, breach of implied contract, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment and violation of the Drivers' Privacy Protection Act and California's Unfair Competition Law. Noblr Reciprocal Exchange is an insurance provider currently providing insurance in Arizona, Colorado, Ohio, Louisiana, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New Mexico and Texas, and has insurance licenses in all fifty states. Greenstein is a resident of Watchung, New Jersey. In May 2021, Plaintiff Greenstein received notice from Noblr that it improperly exposed his personal information to unauthorized third parties. Greenstein never sought a quote for insurance of any sort from Noblr. Nelson received notice from Noblr informing her of the Unauthorized Data Disclosure and that her driver's license number and address may have been accessed. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David S. Casey, Jr., Esq. Gayle M. Blatt, Esq. P. Camille Guerra, Esq. CASEY GERRY SCHENK FRANCAVILLA BLATT & PENFIELD, LLP 110 Laurel Street San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 238-1811 Facsimile: (619) 544-9232 Email: dcasey@cglaw.com gmb@cglaw.com camille@cglaw.com - and - Kate M. Baxter-Kauf, Esq. Karen Hanson Riebel, Esq. LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P. 100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 2200 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Telephone: (612) 339-6900 Facsimile: (612) 339-0981 Email: kmbaxter-kauf@locklaw.com khriebel@locklaw.com NON TYPICAL INC: Davis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Non Typical, Inc.. The case is styled as Kevin Davis, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Non Typical, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-05362 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Non Typical, Inc. doing business as Cuddeback -- https://www.cuddeback.com/ -- produces digital scouting camera and equipment in the United States and is the leader in digital scouting cameras.[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 O'REILLY AUTO: Faces Suit Over COVID Screenings, Security Checks ---------------------------------------------------------------- Daniel Wiessner at Reutes reports that O'Reilly Auto Enterprises LLC has been hit with a proposed nationwide class action claiming the retailer should have paid workers at its 28 U.S. distribution centers for time they spent each day in COVID-19 screenings and security checks. Jeffrey Pipich, who worked at an O'Reilly distribution center in California until February, said in a complaint filed in San Diego federal court that he and other workers spent as much as 20 minutes per shift in screenings but were not paid the minimum wage or overtime for that time, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Pipich, who is represented by Berger Montague, says O'Reilly began conducting COVID-19 screenings last year. Distribution center employees were required to have their temperatures taken and answer a series of questions before they proceeded to a security check. Workers also went through a security screening after clocking out at the end of their shifts, he said. Springfield, Missouri-based O'Reilly did not immediately respond to a request for comment. O'Reilly is just the latest company to face class-action claims over employee security screenings and, more recently, COVID-19 screenings such as temperature checks. Walmart Inc was sued in February for allegedly violating the FLSA and California law by not paying workers for COVID checks. The retailer has said that it added wages to hourly workers' paychecks to reflect the time they spent in screenings. In the 2014 case, Integrity Staffing Solutions Inc v. Busk, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that security screenings are not part of workers' "principal activities," and thus are not compensable under the FLSA. But Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan in a concurring opinion said security checks that are directly related to worker safety or efficiency should be covered by the wage law, and several courts have agreed. Last year, for example, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said corrections officers at a New Mexico prison had to be paid for time spent in security checks because they were integral to ensuring the safety of the facility. Pipich's lawyers in his complaint did not address Busk, but asserted that time O'Reilly employees spent in screenings were compensable under the FLSA. Pipich proposed a nationwide opt-in collective and is seeking lost wages, liquidated damages, restitution and statutory penalties. The case is Pipich v. O'Reilly Auto Enterprises LLC, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, No. 3:21-cv-01120. For Pipich: Sophia Rios of Berger Montague For O'Reilly: Not available [GN] OCUGEN INC: Gainey McKenna Reminds of August 17 Deadline -------------------------------------------------------- Gainey McKenna & Egleston announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Ocugen, Inc. ("Ocugen") (NASDAQ: OCGN) in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on behalf of those who purchased or otherwise acquired Ocugen publicly traded securities between February 2, 2021 and June 10, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The Complaint alleges that Defendants made materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the information submitted to the FDA was insufficient to support an EUA; (2) the Company would not file an Emergency Use Authorization with the FDA; (3) as a result of the foregoing, the Company's financial statements, as well as Defendants' statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects, were false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. On June 10, 2021, the Company announced that it would "no longer pursue an emergency use authorization" for its COVID-19 vaccine candidate, Covaxin, and would instead go through the process of obtaining full approval. The Company said that the decision was "based on a recommendation from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration," which also "requested more information and data" for the approval. The news shocked the market, as the Company had previously indicated that it intended to apply for emergency use authorization. On this news, the Company's share price dropped to $6.69 from $9.31 at close the day before. Investors who purchased or otherwise acquired shares of Ocugen during the Class Period should contact the Firm prior to the August 17, 2021 lead plaintiff motion deadline. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. If you wish to discuss your rights or interests regarding this class action, please contact Thomas J. McKenna, Esq. or Gregory M. Egleston, Esq. of Gainey McKenna & Egleston at (212) 983-1300, or via e-mail at tjmckenna@gme-law.com or gegleston@gme-law.com. Please visit our website at http://www.gme-law.comfor more information about the firm. [GN] OCUGEN INC: Johnson Fistel Reminds of August 17 Deadline -------------------------------------------------------- Shareholder rights law firm Johnson Fistel, LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has commenced on behalf of investors of Ocugen, Inc. ("Ocugen" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: OCGN). The class action is on behalf of shareholders who purchased Ocugen between February 2, 2021 and June 10, 2021, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"). If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff in this class action, you must move the Court no later than August 17, 2021. The Complaint alleges that Defendants made materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the information submitted to the FDA was insufficient to support a EUA; (2) the Company would not file an Emergency Use Authorization with the FDA; (3) as a result of the foregoing, the Company's financial statements, as well as Defendants' statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects, were false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. On June 10, 2021, the Company announced that it would "no longer pursue an emergency use authorization" for its COVID-19 vaccine candidate, Covaxin, and would instead go through the process of obtaining full approval. The Company said that the decision was "based on a recommendation from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration," which also "requested more information and data" for approval. The news shocked the market, as the Company had previously indicated that it intended to apply for emergency use authorization. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages. A lead plaintiff will act on behalf of all other class members in directing the Ocugen class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the class action lawsuit. An investor's ability to share any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff. If you are an Ocugen shareholder and have losses greater than $250,000, and are interested in learning more about being a lead plaintiff, please contact Jim Baker (jimb@johnsonfistel.com) at 619-814-4471. If emailing, please include a phone number. About Johnson Fistel Johnson Fistel, LLP is a nationally recognized shareholder rights law firm with offices in California, New York and Georgia. The firm represents individual and institutional investors in shareholder derivative and securities class action lawsuits. For more information about the firm and its attorneys, please visit http://www.johnsonfistel.com.Attorney advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Contact: Johnson Fistel, LLP Jim Baker, 619-814-4471 jimb@johnsonfistel.com [GN] OCUGEN INC: Schall Law Reminds of August 17 Deadline ---------------------------------------------------- The Schall Law Firm, a national shareholder rights litigation firm, reminds investors of a class action lawsuit against Ocugen, Inc. ("Ocugen" or "the Company") (NASDAQ: OCGN) for violations of §§10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Investors who purchased the Company's securities between February 2, 2021 and June 10, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period"), are encouraged to contact the firm before August 17, 2021. If you are a shareholder who suffered a loss, click https://schallfirm.com/cases/ocugen-inc/#case-form to participate. We also encourage you to contact Brian Schall of the Schall Law Firm, 2049 Century Park East, Suite 2460, Los Angeles, CA 90067, at 310-301-3335, to discuss your rights free of charge. You can also reach us through the firm's website at www.schallfirm.com, or by email at brian@schallfirm.com. The class, in this case, has not yet been certified, and until certification occurs, you are not represented by an attorney. If you choose to take no action, you can remain an absent class member. According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading statements to the market. Ocugen's information submission to the FDA for the development of a COVID-19 vaccine failed to include sufficient data to support an Emergency Use Authorization ("EUA"). The Company did not submit an EUA to the FDA. Based on these facts, the Company's public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Ocugen, investors suffered damages. Join the case to recover your losses. The Schall Law Firm represents investors around the world and specializes in securities class action lawsuits and shareholder rights litigation. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and rules of ethics. Contacts The Schall Law Firm Brian Schall, Esq. www.schallfirm.com Office: 310-301-3335 info@schallfirm.com [GN] ONTARIO: Court OKs $100M BMO Class Action Settlement Over FX Fees ----------------------------------------------------------------- James Langton at advisor.ca reports that an Ontario court has approved a $100-million settlement in a class action against several Bank of Montreal (BMO) subsidiaries over undisclosed foreign exchange fees charged in clients' RRSPs and other registered accounts. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice approved the deal, which was brought against the bank's brokerage subsidiaries, BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc. and BMO Investorline Inc., and BMO Trust Co. in 2006. The settlement followed a court ruling in 2020, which found that "the BMO defendants were liable to the class over the 10-year class period for breach of trust, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract, and concluded that the appropriate remedy for the defendants' wrongdoing was an accounting and disgorgement of profits." Ultimately, the two sides agreed on a settlement of $100 million, which will be paid out to approximately 135,000 affected clients, subject to a $25 minimum, with the defendants paying the distribution costs. The court granted the plaintiffs' lawyers a $20 million fee and granted $50,000 to a former advisor who helped bring the case. The court said that approving the settlement was easy, as the $100 million amount "is well within the required zone of reasonableness" and the resolution is "fair and reasonable and in the best interests of the class." On the tougher issue of legal fees, the court ruled that $20 million was appropriate, saying that in a "mega" settlement such as this, "the legal fees approved must take into account not only the risks incurred and results achieved but also the need to maintain the integrity of the legal profession." In this case, the class counsel sought a $25-million fee, reflecting their 25% contingent retainer. However, the court said that simply applying a contingency fee percentage in mega-settlements "can result in undeserved windfalls and transform class action litigation into something approaching a lottery." Ultimately, after considering the risks incurred and the results achieved by the litigation, "the most this court can justify and explain in a principled fashion consistent with comparable case law is a legal fees award that falls within a range of $18 million to $20 million," the decision read. "The right number may well be around $19 million," the court said. "However, given that this was a truly self-made class action that consumed 15 years of litigation, 10,000 hours in docketed time and resulted in a genuinely commendable settlement, I am prepared to err on the side of caution and in favour of class counsel." The representative plaintiffs in the case were also awarded a combined $70,000 with $10,000 going to each of two representative plaintiffs, and $50,000 going to a third plaintiff -- James Richard Macdonald, a former advisor at Nesbitt Burns, who the court said suffered financial hardship as a result of bringing the case. Macdonald was "entitled to the additional $40,000 because of the financial harm he sustained as the lead plaintiff in what became a high-profile class action in the banking community," the court ruled. "His employment as an investment advisor became strained and he had to leave the industry well before his retirement age," the court said, noting that while Macdonald ultimately found a job teaching finance courses at a local community college, "his income today is much less than when he worked as an investment advisor." "I therefore have no difficulty concluding that Mr. MacDonald suffered significant financial hardship in taking on the role and responsibilities of the lead representative plaintiff. The request for a $50,000 honorarium is more than justified," the court said. [GN] PELOTON INTERACTIVE: Portnoy Law Firm Reminds of June 28 Deadline ----------------------------------------------------------------- The Portnoy Law Firm advises investors that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of Peloton Interactive, Inc. (NASDAQ: PTON) investors that acquired shares between September 11, 2020 and May 5, 2021. Investors have until June 28, 2021 to seek an active role in this litigation. Investors are encouraged to contact attorney Lesley F. Portnoy, to determine eligibility to participate in this action, by phone 310-692-8883 or email, or click here to join the case. The investigation focuses on whether Peloton issued misleading and/or false statements and/or failed to disclose information pertinent to investors. Peloton is the subject of a press release issued on April 17, 2021 by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, titled: "CPSC Warns Consumers: Stop Using the Peloton Tread+." According to this press release, the CPSC's "Urgent Warning Comes After Agency Finds One Death and Dozens of Incidents of Children Being Sucked Beneath the Tread+ (Formerly Known as the Tread)." The agency added, "the urgent warning comes less than a month after Peloton itself released news of a child's death by a Peloton Tread+ and CPSC's announcement of an investigation into that incident," and "to date, CPSC is aware of 39 incidents including one death." Shares of Peloton fell sharply across the next several trading sessions, based on this news. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than June 28, 2021. Please visit our website to review more information and submit your transaction information. The Portnoy Law Firm represents investors in pursuing arising from corporate wrongdoing. The Firm's founding partner has recovered over $5.5 billion for aggrieved investors. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. [GN] PENNSYLVANIA: Judge Tosses Tavern's COVID-19 Coverage Class Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- Daphne Zhang at law360.com reports that a Pennsylvania federal judge tossed a tavern's proposed class action against an insurer seeking coverage for pandemic-related losses, saying the complaint doesn't allege how COVID-19 or government closure orders caused any physical harm on its property. U.S. District Judge John R. Padova granted judgment on the pleadings to American Fire and Casualty Co., rejecting policyholder Spring House Tavern's argument that its mere loss of use of its property due to pandemic-related shutdown orders triggered coverage. The judge emphasized that Spring House didn't claim the COVID-19 virus was on its premises. "The complaint in this case does not allege that any amount of the COVID-19 virus was, itself, present in plaintiff's property, or that some amount of the COVID-19 virus itself made plaintiff's property 'physically unusable,'" the judge said, adding that, even if Spring House had included such allegations, coverage would be foreclosed by a virus exclusion in its policy. Although the policy covers government closure orders due to food contamination from a "communicable disease," the tavern's complaint never alleged that its food stock was contaminated with any harmful substance. According to the suit, Spring House of Ambler, Pennsylvania, said it was forced to close business and furlough employees due to the pandemic and government closure orders. The restaurant held a policy with American Fire which provides business income, contamination and civil authority coverage. It sued American Fire after the insurer denied coverage, seeking a declaration that the policy covers its COVID-19-related losses. The carrier has maintained that Spring House failed to allege property loss or damage, but the tavern has argued that the meaning of "direct physical loss of or damage to property" includes "loss of use" of property, so it does not need to allege physical harm to get coverage. "Spring House has identified no authority in this Circuit, or decision of the Superior Court or Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, that supports its position," which is "not a reasonable alternative interpretation," Judge Padova said. Additionally, the judge said, Spring House is not entitled to civil authority coverage because the tavern never alleged it was unable to access its property due to dangerous physical conditions nearby or any surrounding property was damaged by COVID-19 or had another dangerous physical condition. The tavern is represented by James C.Haggerty of Haggerty Goldberg, Schleifer & Kupersmith, P.C. The insurer is represented by Cari K.Dawson of Alston & Bird LLP, Christopher S.Finazzo and Robert F.Cossolini of Finazzo Cossolini O'Leary Meola &Hager LLC and Matthew Burke of Robins Kaplan LLP. The case is Spring House Tavern, Inc v. American Fire and Casualty Co., Case Number: 2:20-cv-02872, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. [GN] PERFORMANCE VALIDATION: Mohilo Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime ---------------------------------------------------------------- The case, REBEKAH MOHILO individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PERFORMANCE VALIDATION, INC., and PERFORMANCE VALIDATION, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:21-cv-00491 (W.D. Mich., June 11, 2021) arises from the Defendants' alleged violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as salaried Validation Engineers from March 2019 until May 2021. The Plaintiff claims that the Defendants misclassified her and other and other Validation Engineers as exempt from the overtime requirements of the FLSA. Although they regularly worked over 40 in a workweek, the Defendants allegedly denied them of overtime compensation at the rate of one and one-half times their regular rate of pay for all hours they worked in excess of 40 per workweek. The Corporate Defendants provide commissioning, qualification and validation services to the pharmaceutical, biotech and medical device industries. [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 Tel: (501) 221-0088 Fax: (888) 787-2040 E-mail: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com POWELL'S BOOKS: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Powell's Books, Inc. The case is styled as Jenisa Angeles, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Powell's Books, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-05353 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Powell's Books -- https://www.powells.com/ -- is a chain of bookstores in Portland, Oregon, and its surrounding metropolitan area.[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 PROMED & ASSOCIATED: Khaled Sues Over Failure to Pay EMTs' OT ------------------------------------------------------------- NASSER M. KHALID, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. PROMED & ASSOCIATED, INC., MEGA CARE EMS, INC., and NASR-EDDINE BENCHAITA, Defendants, Case No. 4:21-cv-01908 (S.D. Tex., June 11, 2021) alleges the Defendants of violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Plaintiff was originally hired by Defendant Promed & Associated, Inc. as Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) in or about 2008. Mega Care began working in conjunction with Promed Care in or about 2010 conducting the same services from the same physical address and sharing personnel, equipment, and other business-related items. The Plaintiff claims that he and other similarly situated EMTs were not properly compensated for the overtime hours in which they were required by the Defendants to continue to perform the same EMT duties. Accordingly, once they worked or were close to working 40 hours in a workweek with that first Defendant, they were required to clock-in with a different named Defendant and work additional hours. However, instead of paying them overtime at the federally mandated overtime rate for the hours they performed work in excess of 40 with the second Defendant, the Defendants paid them straight time without overtime. The Defendants allegedly continued the scheme of avoiding to pay overtime by splitting their hours between multiple companies until on or about September 2019. Moreover, the Defendants failed to keep records of the hours the Plaintiff and other similarly situated EMTs have worked in a workweek. The Corporate Defendants provide emergency medical services. Nasr-Eddine Benchaita is the owner and President of Texas forfeited corporation, Mega Care Ambulance. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Derrick A. Reed, Esq. Marrick Armstrong, Esq. STEPHENS REED & ARMSTRONG, PLLC 12234 Shadow Creek Pkwy Building 1, Suite 1104 Pearland, TX 77584 Tel: (281) 489-3934 Fax: (281) 657-7050 E-mail: derrick@srapllc.com PROVENTION BIO: Klein Law Firm Reminds of July 20 Deadline ---------------------------------------------------------- The Klein Law Firm announces that a class action complaint has been filed on behalf of shareholders of Provention Bio, Inc. There is no cost to participate in the suit. If you suffered a loss, you have until the lead plaintiff deadline to request that the court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Provention Bio, Inc. (NASDAQ:PRVB) Class Period: November 2, 2020 - April 8, 2021 Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 20, 2021 The PRVB lawsuit alleges that throughout the class period, Provention Bio, Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the teplizumab Biologics License Application ("BLA") was deficient in its submitted form and would require additional data to secure U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval; (ii) accordingly, the teplizumab BLA lacked the evidentiary support the Company had led investors to believe it possessed; (iii) the Company had thus overstated the teplizumab BLA's approval prospects and hence the commercialization timeline for teplizumab; and (iv) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. Learn about your recoverable losses in PRVB: https://www.kleinstocklaw.com/pslra-1/provention-bio-inc-loss-submission-form?id=16978&from=1 Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff. If you suffered a loss during the class period and wish to obtain additional information, please contact J. Klein, Esq. by telephone at 212-616-4899 or visit the webpages provided. J. Klein, Esq. represents investors and participates in securities litigations involving financial fraud throughout the nation. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. [GN] PURECYCLE TECH: Levi & Korsinsky Reminds of July 12 Deadline ------------------------------------------------------------ Levi & Korsinsky, LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has commenced on behalf of shareholders of PureCycle Technologies, Inc. Shareholders interested in serving as lead plaintiff have until the deadline listed to petition the court. Further details about the case can be found at the link provided. There is no cost or obligation to you. PCT Shareholders Click Here: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/purecycle-technologies-inc-information-request-form?prid=16977&wire=1 PureCycle Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ:PCT) PCT Lawsuit on behalf of: investors who purchased November 16, 2020 - May 5, 2021 Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 12, 2021 TO LEARN MORE, VISIT: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/purecycle-technologies-inc-information-request-form?prid=16977&wire=1 According to the filed complaint, during the class period, PureCycle Technologies, Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the technology PureCycle licensed from Procter & Gamble is not proven and presents serious issues even at lab scale; (ii) the challenges posed by the availability and competition for the raw materials necessary to commercialize the licensed technology are significant; (iii) PureCycle's financial projections are baseless; and (iv) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. You have until the lead plaintiff deadlines to request that the court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff. Levi & Korsinsky is a nationally recognized firm with offices in New York, California, Connecticut, and Washington D.C. The firm's attorneys have extensive expertise and experience representing investors in securities litigation and have recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. CONTACT: Levi & Korsinsky, LLP Joseph E. Levi, Esq. Eduard Korsinsky, Esq. 55 Broadway, 10th Floor New York, NY 10006 jlevi@levikorsinsky.com Tel: (212) 363-7500 Fax: (212) 363-7171 www.zlk.com [GN] PUREFORMULAS INC: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Pureformulas, Inc. The case is styled as Jenisa Angeles, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Pureformulas, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-05354 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. PureFormulas -- https://www.pureformulas.com/ -- is a one-stop shop for health supplements, vitamins, minerals and other nutritional supplements.[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 RED LOBSTER: Marshall Sues Over Questionable Seafood Farm Practices ------------------------------------------------------------------- Dezzi Rae Marshall, individually and on behalf of other similarly situated individuals, Plaintiff, v. Red Lobster Management LLC, Red Lobster Seafood Co., LLC, Red Lobster Restaurants LLC, and Red Lobster Hospitality LLC, Defendants, Case No. 21-cv-04786 (C.D. Cal., June 11, 2021) seeks relief including actual damages, interest, costs and reasonable attorneys' fees for violation of the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act, California's False Advertising Law and Unfair Competition Law. Marshall brings this action regarding the allegedly deceptive marketing and sale of Red Lobster's Maine lobster and shrimp products as "sustainable" when they may have been sourced from suppliers that use environmentally harmful and inhumane practices. The lawsuit also alleges environmentally destructive practices, poor reporting of environmental data and standards, and overuse of antibiotics. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew Strugar, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF MATTHEW STRUGAR 3435 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 2910 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Tel: (323) 696-2299 Email: matthew@matthewstrugar.com - and - Jay R. Shooster, Esq. RICHMAN LAW & POLICY 535 Mission Street San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: (718) 705-4579 Facsimile: (718) 228-8522 Email: jshooster@richmanlawpolicy.com RELIA HOME: Misclassifies Acquisition Specialists, Linares Claims ----------------------------------------------------------------- JHOVANNI LINARES, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. RELIA HOME BUYERS, LLC; CODY PURTLE; and JARED GRAVES, Defendants, Case No. 4:21-cv-01915 (S.D. Tex., June 11, 2021) is a collective action complaint brought against the Defendants for its alleged willful violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act by failing to pay minimum wage and overtime compensation to their Acquisition Specialists. The Plaintiff has worked for the Defendants as Acquisition Specialist from approximately June 2019 to April 2020. According to the complaint, the Defendant misclassified its Acquisition Specialists as independent contractors exempt from the minimum wage and overtime pay, instead of classifying them as employees. The Defendants purportedly compensated them on a commission basis, but they were being rarely paid any commissions in reality and denied them full compensation for their hours worked over 40. The Plaintiff claims that despite the fact he has worked for 7 months in 2019, the Defendants paid him approximately $4,400 which equates to an hourly rate below the minimum. The Defendants frequently promised to pay the Plaintiff commissions for his work, but those commissions never materialized, says the suit. Relia Home Buyers, LLC is a real estate company that buys distressed properties and resells those properties. Cody Purtle and Jared Graves are the owners of Relia Home. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: John Neuman, Esq. SOSA-MORRIS NEUMAN, PLLC 5612 Chaucer Drive Houston, TX 77005 Tel: (281) 885-8630 Fax: (281) 885-8813 E-mail: JNeuman@smnlawfirm.com RESURGENT CAPITAL: Bradshaw Files FDCPA Suit in M.D. North Carolina ------------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Resurgent Capital Services, L.P. The case is styled as Eleanore Bradshaw, Rebecca Perez, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. Resurgent Capital Services, L.P., Case No. 1:21-cv-00461-CCE-LPA (M.D.N.C., June 7, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Resurgent Capital Services, LP -- https://www.resurgent.com/ -- provides financial services. The Company manages debt portfolios for credit grantors and debt buyers.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Scott C. Harris, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC 900 W. Morgan Street Raleigh, NC 27603 Phone: (919) 600-5000 Fax: (919) 600-5035 Email: sharris@milberg.com RLX TECHNOLOGY: Wolf Haldenstein Reminds of August 9 Deadline ------------------------------------------------------------- Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP announces that a federal securities class action lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of investors that purchased RLX Technology Inc. (NYSE: RLX) ("RLX") American Depositary Receipts ("ADRs") pursuant or traceable to RLX's January 2021 initial public stock offering (the "IPO"). All investors who purchased the ADR's of RLX Technology Inc. and incurred losses are urged to contact the firm immediately at classmember@whafh.com or (800) 575-0735 or (212) 545-4774. You may obtain additional information concerning the action or join the case on our website, www.whafh.com. If you have incurred losses in the ADR's of RLX Technology Inc., you may, no later than August 9, 2021, request that the Court appoint you lead plaintiff of the proposed class. Please contact Wolf Haldenstein to learn more about your rights as an investor in the ADR's of RLX Technology Inc. RLX claims to be the "No. 1 branded e-vapor company in China," which it also claims is its "largest potential market." On January 19, 2021, RLX filed its final amendment to a Form F-1 registration statement (the "Registration Statement"), which registered 133,975,000 RLX ADR for public sale. On January 22, 2021, the defendants priced the IPO at $12 per ADR and filed the final prospectus for the IPO, which forms part of the Registration Statement. Through the IPO, the defendants issued and sold approximately 116,500,000 RLX ADR, all pursuant to the Registration Statement, for gross proceeds of nearly $1.4 billion. The filed complaint alleges that the Registration Statement misrepresented and omitted, among other things, RLX's exposure to China's then-existing campaign to establish a national standard for e-cigarettes that would bring them into line with regular cigarette regulations. The truth was revealed when draft regulations were posted by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, before the market opened on March 22, 2021, eight weeks after RLX's IPO, which confirmed e-cigarettes and new tobacco products would be regulated similar to traditional tobacco offerings. Following this news, the price of RLX's shares suffered an enormous decline. On March 22, 2021, RLX's ADR closed at $10.15 per ADR, down nearly 48% from its previous close of $19.46 per ADR on March 19, 2021, the previous trading day. Wolf Haldenstein has extensive experience in the prosecution of securities class actions and derivative litigation in state and federal trial and appellate courts across the country. The firm has attorneys in various practice areas; and offices in New York, Chicago and San Diego. The reputation and expertise of this firm in shareholder and other class litigation has been repeatedly recognized by the courts, which have appointed it to major positions in complex securities multi-district and consolidated litigation. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions regarding your rights and interests in this case, please immediately contact Wolf Haldenstein by telephone at (800) 575-0735, via e-mail at classmember@whafh.com, or visit our website at www.whafh.com. [GN] SEND A CAKE: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Send A Cake LLC. The case is styled as Jenisa Angeles, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Send A Cake LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-05360 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Send A Cake -- https://sendacake.com/ -- is an ultimate birthday cake and gift delivery store specializing in surprise cake gifts.[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 SKILLZ INC: Robbins Geller Reminds Investors of July 7 Deadline --------------------------------------------------------------- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces that purchasers of Skillz Inc. f/k/a Flying Eagle Acquisition Corp. (NYSE:SKLZ) securities between December 16, 2020 and April 19, 2021 (the "Class Period") have until July 7, 2021 to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Skillz class action lawsuit, Jedrzejczyk v. Skillz Inc. f/k/a Flying Eagle Acquisition Corp., No. 21-cv-03450 (N.D. Cal.), which is assigned to Richard G. Seeborg. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased Skillz securities during the Class Period to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Skillz class action lawsuit. A lead plaintiff is generally the movant with the greatest financial interest in the relief sought by the putative class who is also typical and adequate of the putative class. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other class members in directing the Skillz class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the Skillz class action lawsuit. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery of the Skillz action lawsuit is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff of the Skillz class action lawsuit or have questions concerning your rights regarding the Skillz class action lawsuit, please provide your information here or contact counsel, J.C. Sanchez of Robbins Geller, at 800/449-4900 or 619/231-1058 or via e-mail at jsanchez@rgrdlaw.com. Lead plaintiff motions for the Skillz class action lawsuit must be filed with the court no later than July 7, 2021. Flying Eagle Acquisition Corp. ("FEAC") was formed as a special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC, in early January 2020. Within eight months, FEAC secured $158 million in private placement commitments in connection with a business combination between FEAC and its target - Skillz. FEAC and Skillz finalized their merger, valuing Skillz at $3.5 billion, on December 16, 2020. The Skillz class action lawsuit alleges that, throughout the Class Period, defendants issued materially misleading statements and omissions including representations relating to certain of Skillz's business operations, performance metrics, and ultimate valuation, including, among others: (i) Skillz's ability to attract new end-users, (ii) future profitability, (iii) the shrinking popularity of Skillz's hosted games that accounted for 88% of its revenue, and (iv) Skillz's valuation. The Skillz class action lawsuit also alleges that one of Skillz's objectively unrealistic promises included the unsupportable claim that Skillz was valued at $3.5 billion, based on revenue projections in excess of $550 million for 2022. However, Skillz allegedly failed to inform investors that downloads of games accounting for a majority share of Skillz's revenue had been declining since at least November 2020. On March 8, 2021, Wolfpack Research released a report titled: "SKLZ: It Takes Little Skill to see this SPACtacular Disaster Coming," alleging, among other things, that the growth speculations that Skillz and its insiders had touted were "entirely unrealistic." Specifically, the Wolfpack Research report alleged, among other things, that the three games Skillz relies on for 88% of its revenue had begun to decline prior to Skillz going public. The Wolfpack Research report concluded that Skillz buried this decline in downloads and revenue in its disclosures while continuing to tout massive future revenue growth. On this news, the price of Skillz shares fell by nearly 11%. Then, on April 19, 2021, Eagle Eye Research posted an anonymous report on Twitter claiming that, through the use of providing users with incentive bonus payments, Skillz "likely recognizes substantial non-cash revenue, and . . . cash revenue may be less than ½ of GAAP revenue." On this news, the price of Skillz shares fell an additional 6%, further damaging investors. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP has launched a dedicated SPAC Task Force to protect investors in blank check companies and seek redress for corporate malfeasance. Comprised of experienced litigators, investigators, and forensic accountants, the SPAC Task Force is dedicated to rooting out and prosecuting fraud on behalf of injured SPAC investors. The rise in blank check financing poses unique risks to investors. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP's SPAC Task Force represents the vanguard of ensuring integrity, honesty, and justice in this rapidly developing investment arena. With 200 lawyers in 9 offices nationwide, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP is the largest U.S. law firm representing investors in securities class actions. Robbins Geller attorneys have obtained many of the largest shareholder recoveries in history, including the largest securities class action recovery ever - $7.2 billion - in In re Enron Corp. Sec. Litig. The 2020 ISS Securities Class Action Services Top 50 Report ranked Robbins Geller first for recovering $1.6 billion for investors last year, more than double the amount recovered by any other securities plaintiffs' firm. Please visit http://www.rgrdlaw.comfor more information. Contacts Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP 655 W. Broadway, San Diego, CA 92101 619-231-1058 J.C. Sanchez, 800-449-4900 jsanchez@rgrdlaw.com [GN] SUNBUTTER LLC: Davis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Sunbutter, LLC. The case is styled as Kevin Davis, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Sunbutter, LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-05364 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. SunButter, LLC -- https://sunbutter.com/ -- manufactures SunButter Sunflower Butter in a peanut and tree nut free facility.[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 TLM RESEARCH: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against TLM Research Labs LLC. The case is styled as Domingo Pascual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. TLM Research Labs LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-05372 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. TLM Research Labs doing business as Innovet Pet Products -- https://www.innovetpet.com/ -- offers hemp oil for dogs or cats.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq. COHEN & MIZRAHI LLP 300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor Brooklyn, NY 11201 Phone: (929) 575-4175 Fax: (929) 575-4195 Email: joseph@cml.legal TTT WEST COAST: Scialfo Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages ---------------------------------------------------------------- Carmine Scialfo, and other similarly situated aggrieved employees v. TTT WEST COAST, INC.; B-T-L PAYROLLS, LLC; and DOES 1 to 25, inclusive, Case No. 21STCV21137 (Cal. Super. Ct., June 7, 2021), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay the Plaintiff for all hours worked, including the statutory minimum and overtime wages for all hours worked and for "off the clock" work. TTT violated Labor Code because it failed to pay the Plaintiff for all hours worked, including the statutory minimum wage for all hours worked and for "off the clock" work. Plaintiff was not paid for all hours worked in violation of Labor Code Section 1194 and the applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order as the Plaintiff would work several hours per week that were not counted towards his hours worked. When the Plaintiff logged the actual hours he worked, he would get reprimanded, and the company would not allow it since there was a company policy of not allowing overtime. Due to the latter, the company would do anything in its power to make sure that the Plaintiff's work hours were 40 hours per week on the dot or less, despite how many hours the Plaintiff actually worked, says the complaint. The Plaintiff initially worked as a producer on the Extra TV show and then was brought 20 back as a Media Manager, working in the library. TTT WEST COAST, INC. is a California corporation, doing business in the County of Los Angeles, State of California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Harout Messrelian, Esq. MESSRELIAN LAW INC. 500 N. Central Ave., Suite 840 Glendale, CA 91203 Phone: (818) 484-6531 Facsimile: (818) 956-1983 Email: hm@messrelianlaw.com UBIQUITI INC: Glancy Prongay Reminds of July 19 Deadline -------------------------------------------------------- Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP ("GPM") reminds investors of the upcoming July 19, 2021 deadline to file a lead plaintiff motion in the class action filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Ubiquiti Inc. ("Ubiquiti" or the "Company") (NYSE: UI) securities between January 11, 2021 and March 30, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period"). If you suffered a loss on your Ubiquiti investments or would like to inquire about potentially pursuing claims to recover your loss under the federal securities laws, you can submit your contact information at https://www.glancylaw.com/cases/ubiquiti-inc/. You can also contact Charles H. Linehan, of GPM at 310-201-9150, Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, or via email at shareholders@glancylaw.com to learn more about your rights. On March 30, 2021, after the market closed, Krebs on Security published an article entitled "Whistleblower: Ubiquiti Breach 'Catastrophic'" stating that the Company had downplayed a data breach from January 2021 and that the "third-party cloud provider claim was a fabrication." According to the article, the attacker(s) had accessed "privileged credentials that were previously stored in the LastPass account of a Ubiquiti IT employee, and gained root administrator access to all Ubiquiti AWS [Amazon Web Services] accounts, including all S3 data buckets, all application logs, all databases, all user database credentials, and secrets required to forge single sign-on (SSO) cookies." As a result, the article noted that the Company should have immediately invalidated customers' credentials and forced a reset, rather than asking customers to change their passwords when they next log on. On this news, the Company's stock price fell $50.70, or 14.5%, to close at $298.30 per share on March 31, 2021, on unusually heavy trading volume. The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants, in their statements concerning the data breach, failed to speak fully and truthfully because they failed to disclose to investors: (1) that the Company had downplayed the data breach in January 2021; (2) that attackers had obtained administrative access to Ubiquiti's servers and obtained access to, among other things, all databases, all user database credentials, and secrets required to forge single sign-on (SSO) cookies; (3) that, as a result, intruders already had credentials needed to remotely access Ubiquiti's customers' systems; and (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. If you purchased or otherwise acquired Ubiquiti securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than July 19, 2021 to request appointment as lead plaintiff in this putative class action lawsuit. To be a member of the class action you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the class action. If you wish to learn more about this class action, or if you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to the pending class action lawsuit, please contact Charles Linehan, Esquire, of GPM, 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles, California 90067 at 310-201-9150, Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, by email to shareholders@glancylaw.com, or visit our website at www.glancylaw.com. If you inquire by email please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of shares purchased. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. [GN] UBIQUITI INC: Lieff Cabraser Reminds of July 19 Deadline -------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP announces that class action litigation has been filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired the securities of Ubiquiti Inc. ("Ubiquiti" or the "Company") (NYSE:UI) between January 11, 2021 and March 30, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period"). If you purchased or otherwise acquired Ubiquiti securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than July 19, 2021. A lead plaintiff is a representative party who acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. Your share of any recovery in the actions will not be affected by your decision of whether to seek appointment as lead plaintiff. You may retain Lieff Cabraser, or other attorneys, as your counsel in the action. Ubiquiti investors who wish to learn more about the litigation and how to seek appointment as lead plaintiff should click here or contact Sharon M. Lee of Lieff Cabraser toll-free at 1-800-541-7358. Background on the Ubiquiti Securities Class Litigation Ubiquiti, headquartered in New York, New York, manufactures and sells wireless data communication and wired products for enterprises and homes. The action alleges that, throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the Company minimized the severity of its data breach in January 2021; (2) hackers had obtained full access to Ubiquiti's servers and also obtained access to, among other things, all databases, user database credentials, and secrets required to forge single sign-on (SSO) cookies; (3) as a result of the data breach, attackers could remotely access Ubiquiti's customers' devices; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. On March 30, 2021, following the close of the market, cybersecurity news website Krebs on Security ("Krebs") reported that Ubiquiti had understated the scale of its data breach, which began in December 2020, and that the Company's statement on the breach "downplayed and [was] purposefully written to imply that a 3rd party cloud vendor was at risk and that Ubiquiti was merely a casualty of that, instead of the target of the attack." According to the Krebs report, a Ubiquiti security professional noted that the Company had been aware for months that attackers had "administrative access to all Ubiquiti AWS accounts, including . . . all user database credentials, and secrets required to forge single sign-on (SSO) cookies." On this news, the Company's stock price fell $50.70, or 14.5%, from its closing price of $349.00 on March 30, 2021, to close at $298.30 per share on March 31, 2021, on unusually heavy trading volume. On April 4, 2021, Krebs published another article, highlighting that Ubiquiti continued to "confirm[] and reinforce[] th[e] claims" from the March 30, 2021 article. About Lieff Cabraser Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, with offices in San Francisco, New York, and Nashville, is a nationally recognized law firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting corporate responsibility. The National Law Journal has recognized Lieff Cabraser as one of the nation's top plaintiffs' law firms for fourteen years. In compiling the list, the National Law Journal examines recent verdicts and settlements and looked for firms "representing the best qualities of the plaintiffs' bar and that demonstrated unusual dedication and creativity." Law360 has selected Lieff Cabraser as one of the Top 50 law firms nationwide for litigation, highlighting our firm's "laser focus" and noting that our firm routinely finds itself "facing off against some of the largest and strongest defense law firms in the world." Benchmark Litigation has named Lieff Cabraser one of the "Top 10 Plaintiffs' Firms in America." For more information about Lieff Cabraser and the firm's representation of investors, please visit https://www.lieffcabraser.com/. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. [GN] UBIQUITI INC: Vincent Wong Reminds Investors of July 19 Deadline ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Vincent Wong announced that a class action has commenced on behalf of certain shareholders of Ubiquiti Inc. If you suffered a loss you have until the lead plaintiff deadline to request that the court appoint you as lead plaintiff. There will be no obligation or cost to you. Ubiquiti Inc. (NYSE:UI) If you suffered a loss, contact us at:https://www.wongesq.com/pslra-1/ubiquiti-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=16957&wire=1 Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 19, 2021 Class Period: January 11, 2021 - March 20, 2021 Allegations against UI include that: (1) the Company had downplayed the data breach in January 2021; (2) attackers had obtained administrative access to Ubiquiti's servers and obtained access to, among other things, all databases, all user database credentials, and secrets required to forge single sign-on (SSO) cookies; (3) as a result, intruders already had credentials needed to remotely access Ubiquiti's customers' systems; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. To learn more contact Vincent Wong, Esq. either via email vw@wongesq.com or by telephone at 212.425.1140. Vincent Wong, Esq. is an experienced attorney who has represented investors in securities litigations involving financial fraud and violations of shareholder rights. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. CONTACT: Vincent Wong, Esq. 39 East Broadway Suite 304 New York, NY 10002 Tel. 212.425.1140 Fax. 866.699.3880 E-Mail: vw@wongesq.com [GN] VIRGIN GALACTIC: Levi & Korsinsky Reminds of July 27 Deadline ------------------------------------------------------------- Levi & Korsinsky, LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has commenced on behalf of shareholders of Virgin Galactic Holdings, Inc. Shareholders interested in serving as lead plaintiff have until the deadline listed to petition the court. Further details about the case can be found at the link provided. There is no cost or obligation to you. SPCE Shareholders Click Here: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/virgin-galactic-holdings-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=16977&wire=1 Virgin Galactic Holdings, Inc. (NYSE:SPCE) SPCE Lawsuit on behalf of: investors who purchased October 26, 2019 - April 30, 2021 Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 27, 2021 TO LEARN MORE, VISIT: https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/virgin-galactic-holdings-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=16977&wire=1 According to the filed complaint, during the class period, Virgin Galactic Holdings, Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) for accounting purposes, Social Capital Hedosophia Holdings Corp.'s ("SCH") warrants were required to be treated as liabilities rather than equities; (ii) Virgin Galactic had deficient disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting; (iii) as a result, the Company improperly accounted for SCH warrants that were outstanding at the time of the business combination; and (iv) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. You have until the lead plaintiff deadlines to request that the court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff. Levi & Korsinsky is a nationally recognized firm with offices in New York, California, Connecticut, and Washington D.C. The firm's attorneys have extensive expertise and experience representing investors in securities litigation and have recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. CONTACT: Levi & Korsinsky, LLP Joseph E. Levi, Esq. Eduard Korsinsky, Esq. 55 Broadway, 10th Floor New York, NY 10006 jlevi@levikorsinsky.com Tel: (212) 363-7500 Fax: (212) 363-7171 www.zlk.com [GN] VIRGIN GALACTIC: Thornton Law Reminds of July 27 Deadline --------------------------------------------------------- The Thornton Law Firm alerts investors that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors of Virgin Galactic Holdings, Inc. (NYSE:SPCE). The case is currently in the lead plaintiff stage. Investors who purchased SPCE stock or other securities between October 26, 2019 and April 30, 2021 may contact the Thornton Law Firm's investor protection team by visiting www.tenlaw.com/cases/SPCE for more information. Investors may also email investors@tenlaw.com or call 617-531-3917. The case alleges that Virgin Galactic and its senior executives made misleading statements to investors and failed to disclose that: (i) for accounting purposes, the warrants of Social Capital Hedosophia Holdings Corp. ('SCH') were required to be treated as liabilities rather than equities; (ii) Virgin Galactic had deficient disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting; and (iii) as a result, Virgin Galactic improperly accounted for SCH warrants that were outstanding at the time of the Business Combination. Interested SPCE investors have until July 27, 2021 to retain counsel and apply to be a lead plaintiff if they are interested to do so. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other investor class members in managing the class action. Investors do not need to be a lead plaintiff in order to be a class member. If investors choose to take no action, they can remain an absent class member. The class has not yet been certified. Until certification occurs, investors are not represented by an attorney. Thornton Law Firm is not currently representing a plaintiff who filed a complaint but is investigating the case on behalf of investors interested in being a lead plaintiff. Thornton Law Firm's securities attorneys are highly experienced in representing investors in recovering damages caused by violations of the securities laws. Its attorneys have established track records litigating securities cases in courts throughout the country and recovering losses on behalf of investors. This may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter. CONTACT: Thornton Law Firm LLP 1 Lincoln Street State Street Financial Center Boston, MA 02111 www.tenlaw.com/cases/SPCE [GN] VIRGIN GALACTIC: Vincent Wong Reminds of July 27 Deadline --------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Vincent Wong announced that a class action has commenced on behalf of certain shareholders of Virgin Galactic Holdings, Inc. If you suffered a loss you have until the lead plaintiff deadline to request that the court appoint you as lead plaintiff. There will be no obligation or cost to you. Virgin Galactic Holdings, Inc. (NYSE:SPCE) If you suffered a loss, contact us at:https://www.wongesq.com/pslra-1/virgin-galactic-holdings-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=16957&wire=1 Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 27, 2021 Class Period: October 26, 2019 - April 30, 2021 Allegations against SPCE include that: (i) for accounting purposes, Social Capital Hedosophia Holdings Corp.'s ("SCH") warrants were required to be treated as liabilities rather than equities; (ii) Virgin Galactic had deficient disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting; (iii) as a result, the Company improperly accounted for SCH warrants that were outstanding at the time of the business combination; and (iv) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. To learn more contact Vincent Wong, Esq. either via email vw@wongesq.com or by telephone at 212.425.1140. Vincent Wong, Esq. is an experienced attorney who has represented investors in securities litigations involving financial fraud and violations of shareholder rights. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. CONTACT: Vincent Wong, Esq. 39 East Broadway Suite 304 New York, NY 10002 Tel. 212.425.1140 Fax. 866.699.3880 E-Mail: vw@wongesq.com [GN] WASHINGTON PRIME: Klein Law Reminds Investors of July 23 Deadline ----------------------------------------------------------------- The Klein Law Firm announces that a class action complaint has been filed on behalf of shareholders of Washington Prime Group, Inc. There is no cost to participate in the suit. If you suffered a loss, you have until the lead plaintiff deadline to request that the court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Washington Prime Group, Inc. (NYSE:WPG) Class Period: November 5, 2020 - March 4, 2021 Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 23, 2021 The WPG lawsuit alleges that Washington Prime Group, Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) WPG's financial condition was deteriorating substantially; (2) as a result, there was substantial uncertainty about the Company's ability to meet its capital structure obligations as they became due; and (3) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. Learn about your recoverable losses in WPG: https://www.kleinstocklaw.com/pslra-1/washington-prime-group-inc-loss-submission-form?id=16978&from=1 Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff. If you suffered a loss during the class period and wish to obtain additional information, please contact J. Klein, Esq. by telephone at 212-616-4899 or visit the webpages provided. J. Klein, Esq. represents investors and participates in securities litigations involving financial fraud throughout the nation. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. CONTACT: J. Klein, Esq. Empire State Building 350 Fifth Avenue 59th Floor New York, NY 10118 jk@kleinstocklaw.com Telephone: (212) 616-4899 Fax: (347) 558-9665 www.kleinstocklaw.com [GN] WESTCHESTER SURPLUS: Cafe Int'l Appeals Insurance Suit Dismissal ---------------------------------------------------------------- Plaintiff Cafe International Holding Company LLC filed an appeal from a court ruling entered in the lawsuit entitled CAFE INTERNATIONAL HOLDING COMPANY LLC, Plaintiff v. WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 1:20-cv-21641-JG, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. As reported in the Class Action Reporter on May 17, 2021, Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, granted Westchester's motion for judgment on the pleadings and dismissed the complaint. Westchester issued a commercial property insurance policy to Cafe International -- the owner and operator of IT Italy, a restaurant in Fort Lauderdale, Florida -- for the policy period from Nov. 29, 2019 to Nov. 29, 2020. The Policy specifies what it covers and what it does not. Coverage is available only if Cafe International proves that a "Covered Cause of Loss" caused direct physical loss of or damage to the property. The Policy defines "Covered Cause of Loss" as "direct physical loss unless the loss is excluded or limited in this policy." The Policy provides three types of coverage relevant in the case: Business Income, Extra Expense, and Civil Authority. Each type of coverage is triggered only where there is (i) direct physical harm to property (ii) caused by or resulting from a Covered Cause of Loss. Cafe International filed suit on April 20, 2020, asserting six claims for breach of contract and declaratory judgment on the theory that it is entitled to Business Income, Extra Expense, and Civil Authority coverage from Westchester for certain losses Café International allegedly suffered during the coronavirus pandemic. The Complaint alleges that, in March 2020, Cafe International was "forced to suspend business operations at its restaurant, as a result of COVID-19" and because civil authority orders allegedly "prohibited public access" to the restaurant. The Complaint also asserts a legal conclusion that the suspension of Cafe International's business operations resulted from "the presence of COVID-19 causing direct physical loss of and/or damage to" Cafe International's restaurant. But the Complaint does not, and cannot, allege facts supporting this conclusory allegation. Moreover, at the hearing on Westchester's motion for judgment on the pleadings, the Plaintiff's counsel was likewise unable to articulate any specific facts about this conclusory allegation; he said it was not commercially feasible to now pinpoint any specific property which was in fact damaged. The Plaintiff is seeking a review of the case dismissal order entered by Judge Goodman. The appellate case is captioned as Cafe International Holding Company LLC v. Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company, Case No. 21-11930, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, filed on June 4, 2021. The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that: -- Appellant's Certificate of Interested Persons was due on June 18, 2021 as to Appellant Cafe International Holding Company LLC; and -- Appellee's Certificate of Interested Persons is due on or before July 2, 2021 as to Appellee Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company.[BN] Plaintiff-Appellant CAFE INTERNATIONAL HOLDING COMPANY LLC, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, is represented by: Alexander Boies, Esq. Nicholas A. Gravante, Jr., Esq. BOIES SCHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP 55 Hudson Yards Fl 20 New York, NY 10001 Telephone: (212) 446-2230 E-mail: aboies@bsfllp.com ngravante@bsfllp.com - and - David Boies, Esq. BOIES SCHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP 333 Main St Armonk, NY 10504 Telephone: (914) 749-8200 E-mail: dboies@bsfllp.com - and - Lea Pilar Bucciero, Esq. Kristina Marie Infante, Esq. Steven Craig Marks, Esq. Aaron S. Podhurst, Esq. Pablo Rojas, Esq. Matthew P. Weinshall, Esq. PODHURST ORSECK, PA 1 SE 3rd Ave Ste 2300 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 E-mail: lbucciero@podhurst.com kinfante@podhurst.com smarks@podhurst.com apodhurst@podhurst.com mweinshall@podhurst.com - and - Marshall Dore Louis, Esq. Bruce Alan Weil, Esq. Stephen Neal Zack, Esq. BOIES SCHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP 100 SE 2nd St Ste 2800 Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 539-8400 E-mail: mlouis@bsfllp.com bweil@bsfllp.com szack@bsfllp.com Defendant-Appellee WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY is represented by: Steven J. Brodie, Esq. CARLTON FIELDS, PA 700 NW 1st Ave Ste 1200 Miami, FL 33136-4118 Telephone: (305) 530-0050 E-mail: sbrodie@carltonfields.com - and - Allen W. Burton, Esq. Leah Godesky, Esq. O'MELVENY & MYERS, LLP 7 Times Sq Ste 34 New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 326-2000 E-mail: aburton@omm.com - and - Andrew Kenneth Daechsel, Esq. CARLTON FIELDS PA 100 SE 2nd St Ste 4200 Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 530-3000 E-mail: akdaechsel@carltonfields.com - and - Richard Blair Goetz, Esq. O'MELVENY & MYERS, LLP 400 S Hope St Ste 1800 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 430-6000 E-mail: rgoetz@omm.com - and - Amy J. Laurendeau, Esq. O'MELVENY & MYERS, LLP 610 Newport Center Dr Fl 17 Newport Beach, CA 92660-6419 Telephone: (949) 823-6900 E-mail: alaurendeau@omm.com - and - Daniel M. Petrocelli, Esq. O'MELVENY & MYERS, LLP 1999 Avenue of the Stars 8th Fl Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 553-6700 E-mail: dpetrocelli@omm.com - and - Heidi Hudson Raschke, Esq. CARLTON FIELDS, PA 4221 W Boy Scout Blvd Ste 1000 PO Box 3239 Tampa, FL 33601-3239 Telephone: (813) 223-7000 E-mail: hraschke@carltonfields.com WESTERN DIGITAL: To Settle SMR HDD False Advertising Class Action ----------------------------------------------------------------- Paul Alcorn at tomshardware.com reports that WD has moved to settle one of its ongoing class-action lawsuits for false advertising associated with its SMR WD Red hard drives, according to a report from LawStreet. The proposed settlement comes after widespread criticism from WD's customers about its surreptitious use of slower shingled magnetic recording (SMR) technology in some of its hard drives without disclosing that fact in marketing materials or specification sheets. Notably, this settlement is only proposed for one of the multiple litigation actions against Western Digital on the matter. With the settlement, WD would agree that the WD Red NAS HDDs with SMR tech aren't suitable for NAS and RAID usage. The negotiated terms come to $2.7 million, with complainants receiving $4 to $7 in cash for each drive purchased with a maximum pro-rata adjustment of 85% of the retail price possible. That means the maximum damages per drive in the ~$160 range (although this is hard to calculate due to inflated pricing due to ongoing HDD shortages). You won't need proof of purchase to make a claim. WD previously disclosed to Tom's Hardware that the 2 to 6TB WD Red hard drives, among others, use SMR technology. This tech boosts capacity and results in a lower manufacturing cost, but it comes at the expense of performance, particularly in random write activity. Aside from generally slower performance, that can also cause excessive rebuild times (resilvering) in the targets NAS use cases, particularly if they use ZFS RAID arrays. The settlement value comes as the culmination of 10 weeks of negotiations and also includes lawyers' fees and other costs. WD also agrees to fully disclose the recording technology used in its drives, both on the packaging and its web pages, for the next four years. The original false advertising claims against WD touched off a wave of class-action lawsuits, with one even calling for a ban to block WD from selling SMR drives for NAS usage. The company has since clarified which drives use SMR technology and even released new drives to address the issue. WD isn't the only HDD manufacturer to ship the slower SMR tech without full disclosure - Toshiba and Seagate also shipped drives without full disclosure. We aren't aware of any pending litigation against those companies. We do know that multiple class-action lawsuits have been filed against WD in different regions. LawStreet reports that one such lawsuit has been dismissed while the plaintiff amends the complaint. [GN] ********* S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA. Rousel Elaine T. Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche A. Castillon, Julie Anne L. Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors. Copyright 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 ***