/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/221227.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Tuesday, December 27, 2022, Vol. 24, No. 252

                            Headlines

3M COMPANY: Fleming Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina
5TH BITE: Conditional Certification of FLSA Collective Sought
ABBEY ROAD: FLSA Collective Gets Final Certification in Guzman
ACE CASH: Caldera Files Bid for Class Certification
ACUITY BRANDS: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Stark Suit Alleges

ALASKA AIRLINES: Krueger Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
ALG VACATIONS CORP: Rodriguez Suit Removed to M.D. Florida
ALLIANCEBERNSTEIN: Faces Class Suit Over Plan Imprudent Investments
AMAZON.COM SERVICES: Bui Suit Removed to N.D. California
AMAZON.COM SERVICES: Montijo Suit Transferred to C.D. California

AMERICAN EXPRESS: Class Certification Deadlines Set in Oliver Suit
AMERICAN HONDA: Cooper Suit Transferred to C.D. California
ARIZONA BEVERAGES: Class Cert. Filing Extended to April 29, 2023
B & B TRANSPORT: Ballinger Suit Removed to E.D. California
BOMBAS LLC: Carroll Sues Over Unlawful Distribution of Data

CALIFORNIA CASCADE: Bernardino Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
CAPRI LAUNDROMAT: Ponce Seeks Laundromat Attendants' Unpaid Wages
CARLISLE LLC: Johnson Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime Compensation
CARVANA CO: Brent Suit Transferred to D. Arizona
CASINO QUEEN: Suit Seeks to Certify Class of ESOP Participants

CLUB 15: Fails to Pay Entertainers' Minimum Wages Under FLSA
COMMUNITY LIVING: Piddock Files Conditional Certification Bid
CONCENTRIX CORPORATION: Esparza Suit Removed to S.D. California
CORTEVA INC: KM Farms Sues Over Anticompetitive Scheme
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, TN: Barnett Seeks Certification of Class Action

CUMULUS MEDIA: Breaches Fiduciary Duties, Dean ERISA Suit Alleges
D & J CONSTRUCTION: Faces Morales Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D. Fla.
DAWN TO DUSK: Castro Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
DECK HELMET: Mebane Files TCPA Suit in D. Maryland
DISCOUNT GAMES: Toro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York

DOUGLAS L. BRAUNSTEIN: Valdez Sues Over Breaches of Fiduciary Duty
DSSV INC: Chalmer Suit Seeks Sales Reps' OT Wages Under FLSA
ESTES FORWARDING: Villalobos Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
EVONIK CORP: Harris Wins Class Certification Bid
EXPERIAN INFORMATION: Sued Over Falsely Disseminated Information

FACEGYM USA: Website Inaccessible to Blind, Bunting Class Suit Says
FAMILY LEISURE: Toro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
FERRAGAMO USA: Luxury Designer Belts Defective, Fineman Alleges
FULL SPECTRUM: First Modified Case Management Order Entered
G4S SECURE: Patton Sues Over Security Supervisors' Unpaid Overtime

GATEWAY REHAB: Fails to Secure Customers' Info, Ciccozzi Claims
GFM LICENSING GROUP: Toro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
GHIRARDELLI CHOCOLATE: Sheppard Suit Removed to N.D. California
GORDON LANE: Scheduling Order Entered in Parrish Class Suit
ILLUMINUS: Fails to Pay OT & Agreed Upon Wages, Deuel Suit Alleges

IN STRIDE SHOES: Young Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
INDEPENDENT BANK: Grice Must File Memorandum for Class Cert. Bid
IRIS ENERGY: Faces Sterling Suit Over Drop in Share Price
JOHN HEMINGWAY: Wilson Loses Class Certification Bid
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: OGX Dry Shampoo Contains Benzene, Scott Alleges

JVK OPERATIONS: Opposition to Class Cert Must be Filed by Feb. 10
KAMALA HARRIS: Jan. 12, 2023 Class Cert Hearing Vacated
L'OBJET USA: Crosson Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
LABORATORY CORPORATION: Aguilar Suit Removed to C.D. California
LE PALAIS DES THES: Rodriguez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York

LIPPMANN ENTERPRISES: Slade Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
MARRIOTT HOTEL: Stanger Must File Class Cert Bid by March 3, 2023
MCDONALD'S RESTAURANTS: Underpays Restaurant Staff, Romero Claims
MEDICUS HEALTHCARE: Class Cert. Response Extended to Jan. 23, 2023
MEG COMPANY INC: Rodriguez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York

METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION: Class Settlement Gets Initial OK
MEXICAN TACO: Fails to Pay Cooks' Minimum & OT Wages, Marquez Says
MEYER CORPORATION: Clark Files FDCPA Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
MISSISSIPPI: Class Certification Sched Order Entered in Wallace
MUSTANG FUEL: Wake Energy Files Suit in E.D. Oklahoma

NASHVILLE CENTER: Hammel Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
NATIONAL GRID: NIghtingale Files Bid for Class Certification
NEW YORK, NY: Court Modifies Scheduling Order in Azor-El Suit
NIFTY GATEWAY: Hastings Sues Over Unregistered Securities
NORTHWOOD HEALTHCARE: Fails to Pay Nurses' OT Wages, Gifford Says

OFFICIA IMAGING: Gonzales Suit Removed to S.D. California
OLLIE'S BARGAIN: Seeks More Time for Conditional Cert Opposition
PANINI AMERICA: Brashear Appeals Ruling in Fraud Suit to 5th Cir.
PEG PEREGO: Toro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
PELOTON INTERACTIVE: Discloses Viewers' Info to FB, Carroll Claims

PILOTS HQ LLC: Fagnani Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
PRECIGEN INC: Faces Securities Suit Over Methane Bioconversion
PREMIERE GLOBAL: Employees Get Class Certification in ERISA Suit
PROCIDA CONSTRUCTION: Fails to Pay OT Wages & Spread-of-Hours Pay
PROCTER & GAMBLE: Hernandez Must File Class Cert Bid by Jan. 13

PROGRESSIVE HOUSING: Saunders Files FDCPA Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE: Exhibit 6 in Class Cert Bid Substituted
PURE SALT INTERIOR: Bullock Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
QUEST DIAGNOSTICS: Augustine Sues Over Unlawful Interception
RADIUS GLOBAL SOLUTIONS: Pulvar FDCPA Suit Removed to S.D. Florida

REALPAGE INC: Godfrey Sues Over Artificially Inflated Prices
REALPAGE INC: Weaver Alleges Conspiracy of Rental Housing Prices
REDDIT INC: Amerson Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
REGENERON PHARMACEUTICALS: Gamboa Sues Over Untimely Wage Payments
RICHARD S. SACKLER: Lac La Ronge Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.

RYDER INTEGRATED: Fails to Pay Warehouse Employees' OT Wages
SAFELITE FULFILLMENT: Order on Class Cert-Related Dates Entered
SAN JOSE, CA: NAACP "Civil Rights" Suit Seeks to Certify Classes
SANTANDER CONSUMER: Simonis Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Texas
SCORES HOLDING: Phone Conference in Hall Suit Set for Dec. 27

SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO: Cantu Sues Over Unlawful Disclosure of Details
SILVERGATE BANK: Faces Gonzalez Suit Over Fraudulent Scheme
SILVERGATE CAPITAL: Guz Sues Over Materially Misleading Statements
SILVERLINE SERVICES: IGI Sues Over Fraudulent Schemes
SNAP FINANCE: Montgomery Files Suit in D. Utah

SOUTHWEST SOCCER: Hildebrand Seeks Class Certification
SPECTRUM BRANDS: Court OK's Settlement in TP&RFC Suit
SPINE MEDIA: Hunthausen Sues Over Unlawful Disclosure of Details
STAGE DOLLS: Fails to Pay Entertainers' Minimum Wage Under FLSA
STATE FARM: Discriminates Against Black Homeowners, Huskey Claims

TAPESTRY INC: Cantu Sues Over Secret Reporting of Details
TAVISTOCK RESTAURANTS: Fails to Secure Employees' Info, Suit Says
TERRA OILFIELD: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Starks Suit Alleges
TIKTOK INC: Faces Suit Over Alleged Illegal Website Wiretapping
TIKTOK INC: Sued Over Interception of Electronic Communication

TOX CORPORATION: Fernandez Seeks Technicians' Proper Minimum Wages
TRAINWORLD ASSOCIATES: Fagnani Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
TRANSDEV SERVICES: Ganther Suit Removed to N.D. California
U STREET PARKING: Fails to Properly Pay Attendants, Teklu Suit Says
ULTA SALON: Faces Turner Wage-and-Hour Suit in N.D. Illinois

UNILEVER UNITED: Loudenslager Sues Over Shampoos' Benzene Content
UNISYS CORPORATION: Faces Shareholder Suit Over False Statements
UNITED STATES: Garcia Files Suit in W.D. Washington
UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA: Phillips Sues Over Denied Vaccine Exemption
USERTESTING INC: Proxy Statement Misleading, Bushansky Suit Says

UST SELECT: Fails to Pay Minimum & OT Wages, Barnes Suit Alleges
UVVU INC: Reid Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
VALLEY HEALTH: Sued Over Violation of Medical Privacy Rights
VANDERLEIGH PROPERTIES: Nieves Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages for Janitors
VF OUTDOOR: Valencia Appeals Class Cert. Bid Denial to 9th Cir.

VIP PRODUCTS: Slade Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
WAFFLE HOUSE: Collins Sues Over Misleading Advertising Practices
WASTELAND GAMING: Toro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
WEEK PUBLICATIONS: Initial OK Bid of Settlement in Moeller Nixed
WILLIAMS-SONOMA INC: Briefing Schedule For Class Cert Bid Extended

WYNN MA LLC: Turley Files Suit in Mass. Super. Ct.
XERK INDUSTRIES: Toro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
ZIFF DAVIS INC: Seeks Dismissal of Garcia Class Suit
ZOOM VIDEO: Bids to Dismiss Class Suit Remain Pending

                            *********

3M COMPANY: Fleming Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina
---------------------------------------------------------
The case is styled as styled as Justan Fleming, Breanna Mcguire,
Marlene Fleming, and Patsy Moon, individually and on behalf of a
class of persons similarly situated; Mr. William Cantrell, Ms.
Arzealer McGuire, Ms. Connie Wallace, Mr. Judy Shirley, Ms. Wendy
Jo Emerson,Mr. Lee J McGuire, Robert Frost, Mr. Donnie Parker, Ms.
Jaquelin McCollum, Ms. Amanda Conniff, Mr. Dallas Webb, Mr.
Christian Marshall, Ms. Lisa Nix, Steven Shirley, Ms. DANNY MOON,
Mr. Dereck Tesney, Ms. Jacqueline Moon, Mr. George Wallace, Ms.
Nettie Faye Taylor, Mr. Willie Madison, Ms. Ceona Wallace, Mr.
Jarvis Madison, Preston Conniff, Ms. Laura Allman, Mr. Jeffrey
Madison, Mr. Christopher Lipsey, Ms. Daphne Salter, Ms. Quanesha
Ester, Lee A McGuire v. 3M COMPANY, (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); 3M COMPANY, INC., 3M COMPANY GUIN
INDUSTRIAL LANDFILL; CITY OF GUIN WATER WORKS & SEWER BOARD; BEN
HIGHTOWER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY; and BENJAMIN M. HIGHTOWER, CITY OF
GUIN, ALABAMA, MR. TOMMY ASTON, MS. MELISSA AKERS, MR. CURT HUBERT,
MIKE SPEARS, PHILLIP SEGRAVES, MR. RONALD MCDONALD, Case No.
6:22-cv-00285 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Alabama, to the U.S. District Court for the
District of South Carolina on Dec. 16, 2022.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:22-cv-04541-RMG to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.

The 3M Company -- https://www.3m.com/ -- is an American
multinational conglomerate corporation operating in the fields of
industry, worker safety, US health care, and consumer goods.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Anthony C. Ifediba, Esq.
          John Benochi, Esq.
          Corey Mark Masuca, Esq.
          IFEDIBA LAW GROUP LLC
          1220 16th Street S
          Birmingham, AL 35205
          Phone: (205) 933-1515
          Fax: (205) 933-5959
          Email: aifediba@ifedibalaw.com
                 jbenochi@ifedibalaw.com
                 cmasuca@ifedibalaw.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Harlan Irby Prater, IV, Esq.
          William Larkin Radney, IV, Esq.
          Richard Rosario, Esq.
          William H Morrow, Esq.
          LIGHTFOOT FRANKLIN & WHITE LLC
          400 20th Street North
          Birmingham, AL 35203
          Phone: (205) 581-0700
          Fax: (205) 581-0799
          Email: lradney@lightfootlaw.com
                 rrosario@lightfootlaw.com
                 wmorrow@lightfootlaw.com

               - and -

          Richard E Davis, Esq.
          C. Clayton Bromberg, Jr., Esq.
          STARNES DAVIS FLORIE LLP
          100 Brookwood Place, Seventh Floor
          PO Box 598512
          Birmingham, AL 35259-8512
          Phone: (205) 868-6000
          Fax: (205) 868-6099
          Email: rdavis@starneslaw.com
                 ccb@starneslaw.com

               - and -

          James E Fleenor, Jr., Esq.
          FLEENOR LAW, LLC
          1490 Northbank Parkway, Suite 256
          Tuscaloosa, AL 35406
          Phone: (205) 722-1017
          Fax: (205) 776-2604
          Email: jim@jimfleenorlaw.com

               - and -

          A Courtney Crowder, Esq.
          PHELPS JENKINS GIBSON & FOWLER LLP
          1201 Greensboro Avenue
          PO Box 020848
          Tuscaloosa, AL 35402-0848
          Phone: (205) 345-5100
          Fax: (205) 758-4394
          Email: accrowder@pjgf.com


5TH BITE: Conditional Certification of FLSA Collective Sought
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ZEPHANEAH RENTON, on
behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, v. 5th BITE OF
THE APPLE LLC, Case No. 0:22-cv-62082-RKA (S.D. Fla.), the
Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order:

   1. granting conditional certification of the above styled
      Case as a collective action under the Fair Labor Standards
      Act (FLSA) for the following Collectives:

      Tip Notice Collective:

      "All Servers and Bartenders who worked for the Defendant
      during the three (3) years preceding this lawsuit who did
      not receive proper notice from Defendant that they would
      be taking a tip credit toward the required federal minimum
      wage;"

      80/20 Collective:

      "All Servers and Bartenders who worked for the Defendant
      during the three (3) years preceding this lawsuit who were
      required to spend more than 20% of any workweek performing
      non-tipped duties and side work and did not receive the
      full applicable minimum wage for this work;" and

      Substantial Side Work Collective:

      "All Servers and Bartenders who worked for Defendant on or
      after December 28, 2021, who were required to spend 30 or
      more continuous minutes on non-tipped duties and side work
      during any shift;"

   2. appointing Plaintiff Zephaneah Renton as the
      Representative of each Collective with authority to
      negotiate and appear at mediations on behalf of each
      Collective;

   3. appointing Jordan Richards, Esq. from USA Employment
      Lawyers -- Jordan Richards PLLC, and Andrew OBeidy, Esq.
      from OBD Legal as counsel for the collectives;

   4. expediting discovery production from the Defendant, within
      10 calendar days of the Court's Order granting this
      Motion, of a complete list, electronically in an Excel
      spreadsheet, of each and every Server and Bartender listed
      alphabetically from "A" to "Z" -- including their last
      known home address, cellular telephone number, e-mail
      addresses, job location, and the last four digits of
      social security numbers, a separate field corresponding
      with each name -- who was ever employed as a Server or
      Bartender by Defendants at any time within three years of
      the date notice is sent;

   5. permitting the Plaintiffs' counsel to send Court-Approved
      Notice to all such persons about their rights to opt-in to
      this collective action by filing a Consent to Join
      Lawsuit;

   6. requiring the Defendants to post in a conspicuous location
      at their restaurant the notice for all current Servers and
      Bartenders to be apprised of their right to join this
      collective action lawsuit, and allowing Plaintiff's
      counsel to conspicuously post Ex. D on the firm's website;

   7. granting putative class 120 days to submit Consent to Join
      forms, and permitting Plaintiff's Counsel to send a
      reminder notice at the half-way point of the opt-in
      period; and

   8. awarding such other and further relief as the court deems
      just and proper.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion to certify class dated Dec. 16,
2022 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3HUYTOy
at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jordan Richards, Esq.
          Jake Blumstein, Esq.
          USA EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS –
          JORDAN RICHARDS, PLLC
          1800 SE 10th Ave. Suite 205
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316
          Telephone: (954) 871-0050
          E-mail: jordan@jordanrichardspllc.com
                  jake@jordanrichardspllc.com
                  catherine@USAEmploymentLawyers.com

                - and -

          Andrew Obeidy, Esq.
          OBEIDY & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
          2755 E. Oakland Park Blvd. Suite 225
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33306
          Telephone: (305) 892-5454
          Facsimile: (954) 206-6955
          E-mail: andrew@obdlegal.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Scott Bassman, Esq.
          Melissa Scott, Esq.
          COLE SCOTT & KISSANE, P.A.
          110 Tower, 110 S.E. 6th Street, Suite 2700
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 703-3700
          Facsimile: (954) 703-3701
          E-mail: scott.bassman@csklegal.com
                  melissa.scott@csklegal.com

ABBEY ROAD: FLSA Collective Gets Final Certification in Guzman
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SAUL GUZMAN, on behalf of
himself and others similarly situated, v. ABBEY ROAD CONTROL, INC.,
Case No. 3:20-cv-01877-JPW (M.D. Pa.), the Court entered an order
granting the Plaintiffs' motion for final certification of the Fair
Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective.

The Plaintiffs rely on the forthcoming brief and exhibits in
support of the requested relief in this motion, which will be filed
in accordance with Local Rule 7.5. As will be discussed in the
brief, the factors set forth in Zavala support second-stage
certification.

The undersigned counsel also certifies that Plaintiffs sought
Defendant's concurrence in this motion as required by Local Rule
7.1, but it was denied.

Abbey Road is a full-service work zone safety company providing
such services as professional flagging personnel, traffic cones,
and work zone signs.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 16, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3HUYOue at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Pete Winebrake, Esq.
          Deirdre Aaron, Esq.
          WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC
          715 Twining Road, Suite 211
          Dresher, PA 19025
          Telephone: (215) 884-249
          E-mail: pwinebrake@winebrakelaw.com
                  daaron@winebrakelaw.com

ACE CASH: Caldera Files Bid for Class Certification
---------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LUCINA CALDERA,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. ACE
CASH EXPRESS INSURANCE and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, and each
of them, Case No. 2:22-cv-00330-MEMF-AGR (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff
asks the Court to enter an order granting the Plaintiff's motion
for class certification against Populus Financial pursuant to Fed.
R. Civ. P. 23(B)(3) concerning violations of the Invasion of
Privacy Act Cal.:

   -- Class:

      "All persons within California whose inbound and outbound
      telephone conversations were recorded without their
      consent and without notification that the calls were being
      recorded by the Defendant or its agents within the one
      year prior to filing of this action;" and

   -- Sub-Class:

      "All persons in California whose inbound and outbound
      cellphone telephone conversations were recorded without
      their consent within the one year prior to the filing of
      this action;"

The Plaintiff will also move the Court for appointment of Plaintiff
as Class Representatives, and for appointment of Plaintiff's
attorneys as Class Counsel.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion to certify class dated Dec. 16,
2022 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3V2tDjK
at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
          Adrian R. Bacon, Esq.
          Meghan E. George, Esq.
          Thomas E. Wheeler, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
          21031 Ventura Blvd, Suite 340
          Woodland Hills, CA 91364
          Telephone: (323) 306-4234
          Facsimile: (866) 633-0228
          E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.com
                  abacon@toddflaw.com
                  mgeorge@toddflaw.com
                  twheeler@toddflaw.com

ACUITY BRANDS: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Stark Suit Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
MELISSA STARK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ACUITY BRANDS, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:22-cv-04940-JPB (N.D. GA., Dec. 14, 2022) is class action against
the Defendant for its failure to exercise reasonable care in
securing and safeguarding individuals' sensitive personal data on a
massive scale.

According to the complaint, on December 7, 2021, the Defendant
first learned that an unauthorized party had gained access to its
computer network through two separate breaches in which
cybercriminals obtained access to its systems and copied a number
of files out of its network. The first breach occurred on or around
October 6-7, 2020, with the second breach occurring on or around
December 7-8, 2021 (the "Data Breaches"). The stolen data included
current and former employee names, Social Security numbers,
driver's license numbers, and financial account information, as
well as limited health information related to aspects of victims'
employment with Acuity, such as information related to workers
compensation claims or related requests for leave under the Family
and Medical Leave Act (collectively, the "Private Information"),
says the suit.

The Data Breaches led to the compromise and fraudulent misuse of
the Plaintiff and the Class' Private Information and placed them at
a serious, immediate, and ongoing risk of continued misuse.
Additionally, the Defendant's failures resulted in the Plaintiff
and Class incurring costs and expenses associated with the time
spent and the loss of productivity addressing and attempting to
ameliorate the negative impacts of the Data Breaches, as well as
emotional distress associated with constant monitoring of personal
banking and credit accounts and knowing their Private Information
is in the hands of cybercriminals, the suit asserts.

ACUITY BRANDS, INC. designs, produces, and distributes a full range
of indoor and outdoor lighting and control systems. The Company
offers products for commercial and institutional, industrial,
infrastructure, and residential applications. Acuity Brands
manufactures lighting products worldwide. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kyle G.A. Wallace, Esq.
          SHIVER HAMILTON CAMPBELL, LLC
          3490 Piedmont Road, Suite 640
          Atlanta, GA 30305
          Telephone: (404) 593-0020
          Facsimile: (888) 501-9536
          Email: kwallace@shiverhamilton.com

               - and -

          Nicholas A. Migliaccio, Esq.
          Jason Rathod, Esq.
          Tyler Bean, Esq.
          MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD, LLP
          412 H Street NE
          Washington, D.C. 20002
          Telephone: (202) 470-3520
          Email: nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com
                 jrathod@classlawdc.com
                 tbean@classlawdc.com

ALASKA AIRLINES: Krueger Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
--------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Crystal Krueger, an individual on behalf of
herself and others similarly situated v. Alaska Airlines Inc., Case
No. 22-00002-18578-3 SEA was removed from King County Superior
Court, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Washington on Dec. 14, 2022.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:22-cv-01777-JCC to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Labor.

Alaska Airlines -- http://www.alaskaair.com/-- is a major American
airline headquartered in SeaTac, Washington, within the Seattle
metropolitan area.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Donald W Heyrich, Esq.
          Henry Brudney, Esq.
          Jason A Rittereiser, Esq.
          Joseph Wright, Esq.
          Rachel M. Emens, Esq.
          HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP
          600 STEWART STREET, STE 901
          Seattle, WA 98101
          Phone: (206) 838-2504
          Fax: (206) 260-3055
          Email: dheyrich@hkm.com
                 hbrudney@hkm.com
                 jrittereiser@hkm.com
                 jwright@hkm.com
                 remens@hkm.com

               - and -

          Peter Stutheit, Esq.
          STUTHEIT KALIN LLC
          208 SW 1st Ave., Ste. 260
          Portland, OR 97204
          Phone: (503) 493-7488
          Fax: (503) 836-3229
          Email: peter@stutheitkalin.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Andrew Ramiro Escobar, Esq.
          SEYFARTH SHAW LLP (SEA)
          999 Third Ave., Ste. 4700
          Seattle, WA 98104
          Phone: (206) 946-4910
          Email: aescobar@seyfarth.com

               - and -

          N. Joseph Wonderly, Esq.
          ALASKA AIRLINES INC.
          19300 International Blvd.
          Seatac, WA 98188
          Phone: (206) 681-8336
          Email: joe.wonderly@alaskaair.com


ALG VACATIONS CORP: Rodriguez Suit Removed to M.D. Florida
----------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Katherine Rodriguez, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. ALG VACATIONS CORP.,
Case No. 22-CA-009754 was removed from the Ninth Judicial Circuit
Court in and for Orange County, Florida, to the United States
District Court for the Middle District of Florida on Dec. 15, 2022,
and assigned Case No. 6:22-cv-02337.

The Plaintiff's single-count Complaint seeks relief from Defendant,
on behalf of herself and a putative class of similarly situated
persons, for allegedly making or causing to be made multiple
unlawful "telephonic sales calls" without the "prior express
written consent" of Plaintiff and the putative class members, in
purported violation of the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act
("FTSA").[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Josh A. Migdal, Esq.
          Yaniv Adar, Esq.
          MARK MIGDAL & HAYDEN
          80 S.W. 8th Street, Suite 1999
          Miami, FL 33130
          Phone: (305) 374-0440
          Email: josh@markmigdal.com
                 yaniv@markmigdal.com
                 eservice@markmigdal.com


ALLIANCEBERNSTEIN: Faces Class Suit Over Plan Imprudent Investments
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DONALD S. BLOOM, DAVID C. GREENFIELD, DAMIAN L. SMIKLE and JUSTIN
A. STERNHELL, on Behalf of the Profit Sharing Plan for Employees of
AllianceBernstein L.P., themselves, and all others similarly
situated, v. ALLIANCEBERNSTEIN L.P., COMPENSATION AND WORKPLACE
PRACTICES COMMITTEE OF ALLIANCEBERNSTEIN CORPORATION, RAMON DE
OLIVEIRA, PAUL L. AUDET, DANIEL G. KAYE, KRISTI MATUS, MARK
PEARSON, BERTRAM L. SCOTT, ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE, INVESTMENT
COMMITTEE, and JANE and JOHN DOES 1-20, Case No. 1:22-cv-10576
(S.D.N.Y., Dec. 14, 2022) allege that the Defendants repeatedly
failed to remove or replace imprudent proprietary investments
managed and offered by AllianceBernstein L.P. and/or its
subsidiaries or affiliates in violation of Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA).

According to the complaint, the Defenants failed to employ a
prudent and loyal process for selecting and monitoring the Plan's
investment options by improperly prioritizing AllianceBernstein's
proprietary investments over superior available options, and by
failing to critically or objectively evaluate the performance of
the Plan's proprietary investments in comparison to other
investment options.

The Plan had 5,560 Participants with account balances as of the end
of the Plan year ending on December 31, 2021. The Plan had total
assets valued at $1,542,419,287 as of the end of the 2021 Plan
Year. The damages suffered by the Plan due to its imprudent
investment in the Plan's LIS SIP investments alone amount to over
$17 million in investment performance, as compared to low-cost,
better-performing investment options. Instead of acting in the best
interests of Participants, the conduct and decisions of the
Defendants were driven by their desire to drive revenues and
profits to AllianceBernstein and to generally promote
AllianceBernstein's business interests, says the suit.

Accordingly, the Defendants failed to discharge their duties with
respect to the Plan solely in the Participants' interests, and for
the exclusive purpose of providing benefits to Participants and
defraying reasonable expenses of administering the Plan, in
violation of their fiduciary duty of loyalty under 29 U.S.C.
section 1104(a)(1)(A).

AllianceBernstein provides investment management and research
services.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Tanya Korkhov, Esq.
          Garrett W. Wotkyns, Esq.
          SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP
          The Helmsley Building
          230 Park Avenue, 17th Floor
          New York, NY 10169
          Telephone: (212) 223-6444
          Facsimile: (212) 223-6334
          E-mail: tkhorkov@scott-scott.com
                  gwotkyns@scott-scott.com

                - and -

          Daniel J. Carr, Esq.
          Jamie L. Falgout, Esq.
          PEIFFER WOLF CARR KANE
          CONWAY & WISE, LLP
          1519 Robert C. Blakes Sr. Drive
          New Orleans, LA 70130
          Telephone: (504) 523-2434
          E-mail: dcarr@peifferwolf.com
                  jfalgout@peifferwolf.com

AMAZON.COM SERVICES: Bui Suit Removed to N.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Hai Bui, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC, Case No. 22CV399356
was removed from the Santa Clara County Superior Court, to the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
California on Dec. 15, 2022, and assigned Case No.
5:22-cv-08913-NC.

The Plaintiff asserted one cause of action for violation of the
Magnuson Moss Warranty Act. Specifically, the Plaintiff contends
that Amazon's one-year product warranty "leads consumers to believe
that third-party repair will void the warranty," which Plaintiff
asserts is "forbidden" under the Act. The Plaintiff acknowledges
that the Act "does not prohibit the warrantor from disclaiming
liability for defects caused by unauthorized repairs." But the
Plaintiff nonetheless asserts that Amazon's warranty violates the
Act.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Kathryn E. Cahoy, Esq.
          COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
          3000 El Camino Real, 10th Floor
          5 Palo Alto Square
          Palo Alto, CA 94306
          Phone: (650) 632-4700
          Fax: (650) 632-4800
          Email: kcahoy@cov.com


AMAZON.COM SERVICES: Montijo Suit Transferred to C.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Luis Montijo, on behalf of himself and all other
similarly-situated employees v. AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC, Case No.
1:22-cv-00084 was transferred from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California, to the United States
District Court for the Central District of California on Dec. 15,
2022.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:22-cv-09100-FLA-PD to
the proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Labor.

Amazon.com, Inc. -- http://www.amazon.com/-- is an American
multinational technology company focusing on e-commerce, cloud
computing, online advertising, digital streaming, and artificial
intelligence.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James Jason Hill, Esq.
          Marta Manus, Esq.
          Michael D. Singer, Esq.
          Rosemary Carol Khoury, Esq.
          COHELAN KHOURY AND SINGER
          605 C Street Suite 200
          San Diego, CA 92101-5305
          Phone: (619) 595-3001
          Fax: (619) 595-3000
          Email: jhill@ckslaw.com
                 mmanus@ckslaw.com
                 msinger@ckslaw.com
                 rkhoury@ckslaw.com

               - and -

          Sahag Majarian, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF SAHAG MAJARIAN II
          18250 Ventura Blvd.
          Tarzana, CA 91356
          Phone: (818) 609-0807
          Fax: (818) 609-0892
          Email: sahagii@aol.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Jessica M. Pearigen, Esq.
          Katie Marie Magallanes, Esq.
          Megan Cooney, Esq.
          Michele Leigh Maryott, Esq.
          GIBSON DUNN AND CRUTCHER LLP
          3161 Michelson Drive Suite 1200
          Irvine, CA 92612
          Phone: (949) 451-3800
          Fax: (949) 451-4220
          Email: jpearigen@gibsondunn.com
                 KMagallanes@gibsondunn.com
                 mcooney@gibsondunn.com
                 mmaryott@gibsondunn.com

               - and -

          Lauren Margaret Blas, Esq.
          GIBSON DUNN AND CRUTCHER LLP
          333 S. Grand Ave., Suite 5058
          Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197
          Phone: (213) 229-7503
          Fax: (213) 229-6503
          Email: LBlas@gibsondunn.com

AMERICAN EXPRESS: Class Certification Deadlines Set in Oliver Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Oliver, et al., v.
American Express Company, et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-00566
(E.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Sanket J. Bulsara entered an order
setting class certification deadlines and hearings as follows:

  -- The page limit for Defendants' opposition to Plaintiffs'
     class certification motion shall be 45 pages.

  -- In addition, the motion for an extension of discovery
     deadlines is granted.

The deadlines are extended as follows:

   1. The last day to depose Plaintiffs'       Jan. 15, 2023
      experts shall be:

   2. The deadline for Defendants to           Feb. 16, 2023
      serve class certification
      opposition and expert reports
      on class/merits topics shall
      remain:

   3. The last day to depose Defendants'       March 10, 2023
      experts shall be:

   4. The deadline for Plaintiffs to           March 17, 2023
      serve class certification reply
      and rebuttal expert reports
      shall remain:

   5. The last day to depose Plaintiffs'       April 17, 2023
      experts on rebuttal opinion
      disclosures only is:

   6. The last day to file summary             April 24, 2023
      judgment pre-motion letters is:

The nature of suit states Other Statutes -- Antitrust.

American Express is an American multinational corporation
specialized in payment card services headquartered at 200 Vesey
Street in the Battery Park City neighborhood of Lower Manhattan in
New York City.[CC]

AMERICAN HONDA: Cooper Suit Transferred to C.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as John Cooper, Ilya Birman, Yosef Ben Zev,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
American Honda Motor Co Inc., Case No. 1:22-cv-05299 was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of Illinois, to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
California on Dec. 15, 2022.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:22-cv-09068-GW-KS to
the proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Motor Vehicle Prod. Liability for
Contract Default.

American Honda Motor Co., Inc. -- https://www.honda.com/ --
develops and manufactures automobiles. The Company offers passenger
cars, trucks, motorcycles, ATVs, generators, marine engines, lawn
and garden equipment, parts, and accessories.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Elizabeth A. Fegan, Esq.
          Megan Shannon, Esq.
          FEGAN SCOTT LLP
          150 South Wacker Drive, 24th Floor
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Phone: (312) 741-1019
          Fax: (312) 264-0100
          Email: beth@feganscott.com
                 megan@feganscott.com

               - and -

          Jonathan David Lindenfeld, Esq.
          FEGAN SCOTT LLC
          140 Broadway, 46th Floor
          New York, NY 10005
          Phone: (332) 216-2101
          Email: jonathan@feganscott.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Eric Y. Kizirian, Esq.
          LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD AND SMITH
          633 West Fifth Street Suite 4000
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Phone: (213) 580-3981
          Fax: (213) 250-7900
          Email: eric.kizirian@lewisbrisbois.com

               - and -

          Mary A. Smigielski, Esq.
          Rachel Savannah Mahoney, Esq.
          LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD AND SMITH LLP
          550 West Adams Street Suite 300
          Chicago, IL 60661
          Phone: (312) 463-3377
          Fax: (312) 345-1778
          Email: Rachel.Mahoney@lewisbrisbois.com

ARIZONA BEVERAGES: Class Cert. Filing Extended to April 29, 2023
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Crawford v. Arizona
Beverages USA LLC, Case No. 3:22-cv-00220 (S.D. Ill.), the Hon.
Judge David W. Dugan entered an order granting the stipulation as a
joint motion to extend the briefing deadlines for class
certification as follows:

  -- The Plaintiff's Motion for Class        April 29, 2023
     Certification and Memorandum
     shall be filed by:

  -- The Defendant's opposition shall        June 30, 2023
     be filed by:

On December 15, 2022, the parties submitted a joint stipulation
agreeing to extensions of certain discovery deadlines in the
Court's Scheduling and Discovery Order.

The parties represent that their stipulated modifications do not
impact the date of any Court appearance, the deadline for
completing mandator mediation, the deadline for completing all
discovery, or the deadline for dispositive motions in accordance
with Fed. R. Civ. P. 29.

However, the proposed modifications include a brief extension of
Plaintiff's deadline to file a motion for class certification.

The nature of suit states Torts -- Personal Property -- Other
Fraud.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 16, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at at no extra charge.[CC]


B & B TRANSPORT: Ballinger Suit Removed to E.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Bruce William Ballinger, an individual, on
behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. B & B TRANSPORT,
INC.; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 22STCV34391 was
removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County
of Los Angeles, to the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of California on Dec. 15, 2022, and assigned Case No.
1:22-cv-01607-HBK.

The Plaintiff's Complaint is brought for the Defendants alleged
failure to reimburse expenses pursuant to the Labor Code; Violation
of the Labor Code; and Violation of Business and Professions
Code.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Christina C. Tillman, Esq.
          MCCORMICK, BARSTOW, SHEPPARD, WAYTE & CARRUTH LLP
          7647 North Fresno Street
          Fresno, CA 93720
          Phone: (559) 433-1300
          Facsimile: (559) 433-2300
          Email: josh@markmigdal.com
                 yaniv@markmigdal.com
                 eservice@markmigdal.com

BOMBAS LLC: Carroll Sues Over Unlawful Distribution of Data
-----------------------------------------------------------
Keith Carroll, an individual v. BOMBAS LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company, d/b/a BOMBAS.COM, and DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive, Case No. 22STCV39062 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty.,
Dec. 15, 2022), is brought against the Defendant for violations of
the Video Privacy Protection Act as a result of the Defendant who
secretly report all the details of the visitors' identity, the
titles watched, and more without warning visitors or obtaining
their consent.

Whenever someone watches a video on www.bombas.com (the "Website"),
Defendants secretly report all the details to Facebook: the
visitor's identity, the titles watched, and more. The Plaintiff has
a Facebook account and watched one or more videos on the Website.
Whenever the Plaintiff clicked on any video on the Website,
Defendants disclosed event data, which recorded and disclosed the
video's title and URL, along with every time Plaintiff clicked a
button to pause or play the video. Alongside this event data,
Defendants also disclosed identifiers for Plaintiff, including the
c_user and fr cookies. In other words, Defendants did exactly what
the VPPA prohibits: they disclosed Plaintiff's vido viewing habits
to a third party.

The Defendants' conduct is illegal, offensive, and contrary to
visitor expectations: indeed, a recent study conducted by the
Electronic Privacy Information Center, a respected thought leader
regarding digital privacy, found that: (1) nearly 9 in 10 adults
are "very concerned" about data privacy, and (2) 75% of adults are
unaware of the extent to which companies gather, store, and exploit
their personal data. By disclosing event data and identifiers,
Defendant disclosed the Plaintiff's personally identifiable
information ("PH") to a third-party, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is a consumer privacy advocate with dual motivations
for watching a video on the Website.

The Defendant owns, operates, and/or controls the Website,
www.bombas.com.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Scott J. Ferrell, Esq.
          PACIFIC TRIAL ATTORNEYS
          A Professional Corporation
          4100 Newport Place Drive, Ste. 800
          Newport Beach, CA 92660
          Phone: (949) 706-6464
          Fax: (949) 706-6469
          Email: sferrell@pacifictrialattorneys.com


CALIFORNIA CASCADE: Bernardino Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against California Cascade
Building Materials, Inc., et al. The case is styled as John
Bernardino, on behalf of other members of the general public
similarly situated v. California Cascade Building Materials, Inc.,
Does 1-100, Case No. 34-2022-00331632-CU-OE-GDS (Cal. Super. Ct.,
Sacramento Cty., Dec. 16, 2022).

The case type is stated as "Other Employment - Civil Unlimited."

California Cascade -- https://www.californiacascade.com/ -- has
been an innovative and progressive force in the manufacture and
distribution of building products.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Edwin Aiwazian, Esq.
          LAWYERS FOR JUSTICE, PC
          410 Arden Avenue, Suite 203
          Glendale, CA 91203
          Phone: 818-265-1020
          Fax: 818-265-1021


CAPRI LAUNDROMAT: Ponce Seeks Laundromat Attendants' Unpaid Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ARTURO PONCE RODRIGUEZ, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CAPRI LAUNDROMAT ROOM LIMITED
LIABILITY COMPANY (D/B/A CAPRI LAUNDRY ROOM) and ANGELO CAMPOS DE
ARAUJO, Defendants, Case No. 1:22-cv-10528 (S.D.N.Y., December 13,
2022) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of
the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law including
failure to pay minimum wages, failure to pay overtime wages,
failure to provide written wage notice, failure to furnish accurate
wage statements, unlawful tip deductions, and failure to timely pay
wages.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as laundromat
attendant at Capri Laundry Room from approximately March 2020 until
December 2021.

Capri Laundromat Room Limited Liability Company is an owner and
operator of a laundromat under the name Capri Laundry Room, 343 E.
66th Street, New York, New York. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Catalina Sojo, Esq.
         CSM LEGAL, P.C.
         60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
         New York, NY 10165
         Telephone: (212) 317-1200
         Facsimile: (212) 317-1620
         E-mail: catalina@csmlegal.com

CARLISLE LLC: Johnson Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime Compensation
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ronesha Johnson, Sherica D. Jones, and Alexis Johnson, Individually
and on behalf of other similarly situated v. CARLISLE, LLC, d/b/a
WENDY'S RESTAURANTS, Case No. 2:22-cv-02856 (W.D. Tenn., Dec. 16,
2022), is brought against the Defendant to recover unpaid overtime
compensation and other damages owed to Plaintiffs and other
similarly situated current and former hourly-paid employees who are
members of a class and currently or previously employed by the
Defendant.

The Plaintiffs allege that they were required to work "off the
clock" and/or had their compensable overtime hours "shaved" of
their compensation within. The Plaintiffs and others similarly
situated typically work 40 or more hours per week at these Wendy's
restaurants. The Defendant has had a centralized electronic time
keeping system for tracking and reporting employee hours worked at
each of its Wendy's franchised restaurants. The Defendant has a
common plan and/or practice of inducing, requiring, forcing,
encouraging, expecting, and/or suffering and permitting, Plaintiffs
and those similarly situated to work "off the clock" within weekly
pay periods during all times material. The Defendant fails to
compensate the Plaintiffs with the applicable FLSA overtime
compensation for the overtime hours they worked "off the clock,"
says the complaint.

The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendant as hourly-paid
employees and worked at one of the Defendant's Wendy's franchised
restaurants.

The Defendant owns and operates more than 100 Wendy's franchised
restaurants throughout the United States.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Gordon E. Jackson, Esq.
          J. Russ Bryant, Esq.
          Robert E. Turner, IV, Esq.
          Robert E. Morelli, III, Esq.
          JACKSON SHIELDS YEISER HOLT OWEN & BRYANT
          Attorneys at Law
          262 German Oak Drive
          Memphis, TN 38018
          Phone: (901) 754-8001
          Facsimile: (901) 754-8524
          Email: gjackson@jsyc.com
                 rbryant@jsyc.com
                 rturner@jsyc.com
                 rmorelli@jsyc.com

CARVANA CO: Brent Suit Transferred to D. Arizona
------------------------------------------------
The case styled as John Brent, Individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Carvana Co., Ernest Garcia III, and
Mark Jenkins, Defendants; Warren Chambers, Milan Madhani, Bhanu
Phuyel, Rodeo Collection Limited, Movants; Case No. 2:22-cv-04870
was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of
New Jersey, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
on Dec. 16, 2022.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:22-cv-02126-MTL to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Statutes:
Securities/Commodities for the Securities Exchange Act.

Carvana -- https://www.carvana.com/ -- provides car shoppers a
better way to buy a car.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Christopher A. Seeger, Esq.
          SEEGER WEISS LLP - RIDGEFIELD PARK, NJ
          55 Challenger Rd., 6th Fl.
          Ridgefield Park, NJ 07660
          Phone: (973) 639-9100
          Fax: (973) 639-9393
          Email: cseeger@seegerweiss.com

               - and -

          Laurence Matthew Rosen, Esq.
          THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
          One Gateway Center, Suite 2600
          Newark, NJ 07102
          Phone: (973) 313-1887
          Fax: (973) 833-0399
          Email: lrosen@rosenlegal.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Andrea Lynn Marconi, Esq.
          Doug C. Northup, Esq.
          FENNEMORE CRAIG PC - PHOENIX, AZ
          2394 E Camelback Rd., Ste. 600
          Phoenix, AZ 85016
          Phone: (602) 916-5000
          Email: amarconi@fennemorelaw.com
                 dnorthup@fennemorelaw.com

               - and -

          Kevin M. McDonough, Esq.
          LATHAM & WATKINS LLP - AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS
          1271 Avenue of the Americas
          New York, NY 10020
          Phone: (212) 906-1200
          Fax: (212) 751-4864

The Defendants are represented by:

          Adam M. Apton, Esq.
          LEVI & KORSINSKY LLP - NEW YORK, NY
          55 Broadway, 10th Fl.
          New York, NY 10006
          Phone: (212) 363-7500
          Email: aapton@zlk.com

               - and -

          Alex Jeffrey Hartzband, Esq.
          FARUQI & FARUQI LLP - 3RD AVE, NEW YORK, NY
          685 3rd Ave, 26th Fl.
          New York, NY 10017
          Phone: (212) 983-9330

               - and -

          Daniel Brian Weiss, Esq.
          LEVI & KORSINSKY LLP
          1111 Summer St., Ste. 403
          Stamford, CT 06905
          Phone: (203) 992-4523

               - and -

          James E. Cecchi, Esq.
          CARELLA BYRNE CECCHI OLSTEIN BRODY & AGNELLO PC
          5 Becker Farm Rd.
          Roseland, NJ 07068
          Phone: (973) 994-1700
          Fax: (973) 994-1744


CASINO QUEEN: Suit Seeks to Certify Class of ESOP Participants
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Hensiek et al., v. Board
of Directors of Casino Queen Holding Company, Inc., et al., Case
No. 3:20-cv-00377-DWD (S.D. Ill.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to
enter an order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, certifying
the case as a class action and certifying the following class:

   "All participants in the Casino Queen Employee Stock
   Ownership Plan who had shares of CQ Holding Company, Inc.
   stock in their ESOP account on December 31, 2018, and who had
   not received any distributions for any stock held in their
   ESOP account prior to that date, and those participants'
   beneficiaries;"

   Excluded from the Class are Defendants and their immediate
   family members, any fiduciary of the ESOP, and any legal
   representatives, successors, and assigns of any such
   excluded persons.

Casino Queen offers hospitality and entertainment services.

The Plaintiffs also ask to be appointed as class representatives in
this matter and to have Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC and
Stris & Maher LLP appointed as Class counsel for the proposed under
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g).

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion to certify class dated Dec. 16,
2022 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3BKrsKO
at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Peter K. Stris, Esq.
          Rachana Pathak, Esq.
          Victor O'Connell, Esq.
          John Stokes, Esq.
          Colleen R. Smith, Esq.
          STRIS & MAHER LLP
          777 S. Figueroa St., Suite 3850
          Los Angeles, CA 90017
          Telephone: (213) 995-6800
          E-mail: pstris@stris.com
                  rpathak@stris.com
                  smartin@stris.com
                  voconnell@stris.com
                  jstokes@stris.com
                  csmith@stris.com

                - and -

          Michelle C. Yau, Esq.
          Mary J. Bortscheller, Esq.
          Ryan A. Wheeler, Esq.
          COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL PLLC
          1100 New York Ave. NW, 5th Floor
          Washington, DC 20005
          Telephone: (202) 408-4600
          E-mail: myau@cohenmilstein.com
                  mbortscheller@cohenmilstein.com
                  rwheeler@cohenmilstein.com

CLUB 15: Fails to Pay Entertainers' Minimum Wages Under FLSA
------------------------------------------------------------
JANE DOE, on behalf of herself and all those similarly situated,
c/o Swartz Swidler LLC, v. CLUB 15, LLC And STEVEN VERBESKY c/o
CLUB 15, LLC And JOHN DOES 1-10 c/o CLUB 15, LLC, Case No.
2:22-cv-07307 (D.N.J., Dec. 15, 2022), alleges that the Defendants
unlawfully refused to pay a minimum wage, requested, demanded
and/or received wages from employees, demanded, accepted and/or
retained a part of gratuities or charges purported to be
gratuities, and deducted employee wages through fines and penalties
for lateness and misconduct, in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law, and the New Jersey
Wage Payment Law.

The Plaintiff worked as an adult entertainer for the Defendants in
New Jersey from November 2020 to May 2022. The Defendants
improperly classified Named Plaintiff and other adult entertainer
Class Plaintiffs as independent contractors, the lawsuit claims.

Accordingly, the Defendants required the Plaintiff to pay various
fees from such income, including:

   a. A minimum mandatory fee of at least $35.00 per each shift
      worked, called a “house fee”;

   b. A minimum mandatory fee of at least $20.00 per each shift
      worked for the bouncer;

   c. A minimum mandatory fee of at least $60.00 per each
      15-minute private session;

   d. A minimum mandatory fee of at least $10.00 per each
      private room booking;

The Defendants required the Plaintiff to pay various fines and
penalties for misconduct and/or other violations of Defendants'
House Rules from such income. The Defendants also required Named
Plaintiff to incur costs for costumes and other tools of the trade
that were in reality business expenses of Defendants and which
costs should have been reimbursed by the Defendants, the suit
asserts.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joshua S. Boyette, Esq.
          SWARTZ SWIDLER, LLC
          9 Tanner St. Ste 101
          Haddonfield NJ 08033
          Telephone: (856) 685-7420
          Facsimile: (856) 685-7417
          E-mail: jboyette@swartz-legal.com

COMMUNITY LIVING: Piddock Files Conditional Certification Bid
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SHEILA DENISE PIDDOCK,
Individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated
individuals, v. COMMUNITY LIVING NETWORK, Case No.
5:22-cv-10715-JEL-CI (E.D. Mich.), the Court entered an order
conditionally certifying and allowing judicial notice of this
action to be sent to potential opt-in plaintiffs informing them of
their right to opt-in to this case under the Fair Labor Standards
Act, 29 U.S.C. section 216(b) of the following collective:

   "All current and former employees of Defendant who have
    worked as Direct Care Staff at any time from three years
    preceding the filing of this lawsuit through the culmination
    of this litigation who worked over 40 hours in a workweek
    since April 1, 2019 and were not paid time and a half for
    the hours worked in excess of 40.

The Plaintiff Piddock alleges that the Defendant Community Living
Network violated the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), 29 U.S.C.
section 201, et seq., when it deliberately failed to pay direct
care employees engaged in "Self- Directed" companionship services
("Direct Care Staff"), including the Plaintiff, proper overtime
compensation for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week.

As of January 1, 2015, the Defendant has been required to pay
Direct Care Staff premium for overtime. But the Defendant
intentionally ignored its legal obligation. That is fact, not
hyperbole. For a long time, Defendant has notified participants in
Federal Medicaid programs who it placed companionship services with
that the Final Rule is in effect, while simultaneously compensating
its Direct Care Staff only straight-time for all hours worked.


A copy of the Plaintiff's motion to certify class dated Dec. 16,
2022 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3FFvLrU
at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Noah S. Hurwitz, Esq.
          Grant M. Vlahopoulos, Esq.
          Kara F. Krause, Esq.
          HURWITZ LAW PLLC
          340 Beakes Street Ste 125
          Ann Arbor, MI 48104
          Telephone: (844) 487-9489
          E-mail: noah@hurwitzlaw.com
                  grant@hurwitzlaw.com
                  kara@hurwitzlaw.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Guy T. Conti, Esq.
          CONTILEGAL
          28475 Greenfield Rd., Ste 113 #7372
          Southfield, MI 48076
          Telephone: (888) 489-3232
          E-mail: gconti@contilegal.com

CONCENTRIX CORPORATION: Esparza Suit Removed to S.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Miguel Esparza, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Concentrix Corporation, Does 1
through 10 inclusive, Case No. 37-02022-00042499-CU-MT-CTL was
removed from the Superior Court of California, County of San Diego,
to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
on Dec. 15, 2022.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:22-cv-01994-DMS-KSC to
the proceeding.

The nature suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.

Concentrix -- https://www.concentrix.com/ -- is an American
business services company specializing in customer engagement and
business performance.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Scott J. Ferrell, Esq.
          Victoria C. Knowles, Esq.
          PACIFIC TRIAL ATTORNEYS APC
          4100 Newport Place Drive Suite 800
          Newport Beach, CA 92660
          Phone: (949) 706-6464
          Fax: (949) 706-6469
          Email: sferrell@pacifictrialattorneys.com
                 vknowles@pacifictrialattorneys.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Edward D Totino, Esq.
          BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP
          10250 Constellation Boulevard, Suite 1850
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Phone: (310) 201-4728
          Email: Edward.Totino@bakermckenzie.com

               - and -

          Peter William Shapiro, Esq.
          BAKER MCKENZIE
          Two Embarcadero Center, Suite 1100
          San Francisco, CA 94612
          Phone: (415) 470-6965
          Email: peter.shapiro@bakermckenzie.com


CORTEVA INC: KM Farms Sues Over Anticompetitive Scheme
------------------------------------------------------
KM Farms, Inc.; Blake Turner; John W. Jenkins; Otho Turner; and
Rhett Turner, on behalf of themselves v. CORTEVA, INC.; SYNGENTA
CROP PROTECTION AG; SYNGENTA CORP.; SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION, LLC;
CHS INC.; NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS, INC.; JOHN DOE DEFENDANT
WHOLESALERS 1-5; AND JOHN DOE DEFENDANT RETAILERS 6-10, Case No.
1:22-cv-02420-TWP-MJD (S.D. Ind., Dec. 18, 2022), is brought on
behalf of themselves and a proposed Class of similarly situated
direct purchasers of certain crop protection products ("CPPs",
which include herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides) manufactured
by the Defendant, seeking treble damages and injunctive relief,
demanding a trial by jury of all issues so triable, under Sections
1 and 2 of the Sherman Act as a result of the Defendants
anticompetitive scheme of reducing competition in the market for
the CPPs.

Defendants Corteva and Syngenta each manufactured several CPPs that
are important to large numbers of American farmers. Defendants'
CPPs and the active ingredients therein enjoyed a period of patent
protection and regulatory protection under which they were lawfully
protected from competition. Once those periods expire, generic
manufacturers are allowed to produce their own versions of those
CPPs, and that competition typically drastically reduces the price
of those CPPs.

In order for Defendants Corteva and Syngenta to maintain their
market dominance even after their patent and regulatory
exclusivities on their CPPs expired, Defendants used "loyalty
programs" under which they made substantial payments to their
wholesalers and in certain cases, also retailers, in exchange for
the wholesalers and retailers agreeing to strictly limit their
purchases of--and thereby prevent widespread distribution
of--generic versions of Defendants' CPPs, ensuring that the
Defendants' far more expensive branded CPPs would be most of what
the wholesalers and retailers purchased and sold to their
respective customers.

Since a small number of wholesalers control a very large share of
all sales of CPPs to retailers that sell to farmers, and some of
the wholesalers also own a large number of their own retail
outlets, when there is a loyalty program in effect for a particular
CPP, this forecloses generic CPP manufacturers from nearly all of
the retail market for that CPP. The other channels available to
generic CPP manufacturers to get their products to market are far
more limited. When there is a loyalty program in place for a
particular CPP, the generic CPP manufacturers can typically only
sell much smaller volumes of that CPP, or often cannot sell it
profitably at all, requiring them to exit the market or to not
enter it in the first place. Defendants CHS and Nutrien, which are
both wholesalers and retailers, participated in these loyalty
programs.

Therefore, the Manufacturer Defendants' "loyalty payment" system
has the following effects: the Manufacturer Defendants are able to
maintain a near-monopoly for the sales of each of these CPPs even
though the patent and regulatory protection have expired and there
should be open competition from generics, the Manufacturer
Defendants are able to continue to charge much higher prices for
those CPPs as a result of excluding most generic competition, the
Manufacturer Defendants obtain supracompetitive profits as a
result, the Manufacturer Defendants share part of those
supracompetitive profits with the Wholesaler Defendants (and in
Syngenta's program, also the Retailer Defendants) to ensure their
cooperation with this scheme, farmers have to pay much higher
prices for those branded CPPs than they would if there was the open
competition that would occur absent Defendants' conduct, and the
lesser amounts of generic versions of those CPPs that are able to
be sold are also priced higher than they would be if there was the
open competition that would occur absent Defendants' conduct.

The Defendants' anticompetitive scheme has reduced competition in
the market for the CPPs and thereby artificially inflated the price
of those CPPs and of the generic competitors to those CPPs.
Plaintiffs and members of the proposed Class have been injured by
paying artificially inflated prices for their CPP purchases.
Plaintiffs and the proposed Class were harmed by having to purchase
CPPs at prices that were inflated due to Defendants'
anticompetitive conduct, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff KM Farms, Inc. is a farm business in Mooreton, ND
that purchased CPPs from CHS during the Class Period.

Corteva, Inc. is a Delaware corporation based in Indianapolis, IN
in this District.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          John Radice, Esq.
          Natasha Fernandez-Silber, Esq.
          Daniel Rubenstein, Esq.
          Rishi Raithatha, Esq.
          Kenneth Walsh, Esq.
          RADICE LAW FIRM, P.C.
          475 Wall Street
          Princeton, NJ 08540
          Phone: (646) 245-8502
          Fax: (609) 385-0745
          Email: jradice@radicelawfirm.com
                 nsilber@radicelawfirm.com
                 drubenstein@radicelawfirm.com
                 rraithatha@radicelawfirm.com
                 kwalsh@radicelawfirm.com

               - and -

          R. Lyn Stevens, Esq.
          STEVENS LAW FIRM
          1782 Mountain Springs
          Canyon Lake, Texas 78133
          Phone: (409) 880-9714
          Email: Lyn@Stevens.Law


CUMBERLAND COUNTY, TN: Barnett Seeks Certification of Class Action
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICHARD BARNETT, WILLIAM
E. BENGE, CHRISTOPHER LEE DUFF, JACOB EDMONDS, JOHN HEALY, HALEY
SMITH, MICHAEL STOTTLEMIRE, JEFF TABOR, DOUGLAS TROUT, and ADDISON
WOODY on behalf of themselves and those similarly situated, v.
AMANDA WORLEY, in her official capacity as Cumberland County
General Sessions Judge, JENNIFER PHILLIPS CROSS, PATRICIA ELDRIDGE
AND GREG WATSON, in their official capacities as Judicial
Commissioners of Cumberland County General Sessions Court, and
CASEY COX, in his official capacity as Cumberland County Sheriff,
Case No. 2:22-cv-00060 (M.D. Tenn.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court
to enter an order certifying case as a class action under Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a) and (b)(2), defined as:

   "All people who are or will be arrested and charged with
   criminal offenses and who are or will be detained in the
   Cumberland County Jail because of the Defendants' bail
   practices."

The Named Plaintiffs are individuals who have recently been
detained and held pretrial in the Cumberland County, Tennessee Jail
solely because they cannot pay for their release, bring this action
under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 alleging that the Defendants maintain
bail and pretrial detention practices that violate the Due Process
and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the
U.S. Constitution, as well as the Sixth Amendment right to
counsel.

The Plaintiffs contend that the certification is appropriate under
Rule 23(b) because the Defendants have acted on grounds generally
applicable to all members of the class, and the ongoing violation
of their constitutional rights and the proposed class can be
resolved through class-wide declaratory and injunctive relief.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion to certify class dated Dec. 16,
2022 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3V7u24v
at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          John B. Nisbet III, Esq.
          P.O. Box 531
          Livingston, TN 38570
          Telephone: (931) 267-6203
          E-mail: nisbetcle@gmail.com

CUMULUS MEDIA: Breaches Fiduciary Duties, Dean ERISA Suit Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DEMARLAND DEAN, KIMBERLY VAN DECREEK, BRADLEY KIRK, REYNOLD LEUTZ,
TONDARIUS ROTHCHILD, JASON JONES and JOHN W. BOWER, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. CUMULUS MEDIA,
INC., and JOHN DOES 1-10., Case No. 1:22-cv-04956-TWT (N.D. Ga.,
Dec. 15, 2022) is a class action brought pursuant to the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 against the Plan's
fiduciaries, which include Cumulus Media and any individuals who
may have been appointed by the Company to serve as Plan fiduciaries
during the Class Period for breaches of their fiduciary duties.

According to the complaint, the Plan suffered millions of dollars
of losses due to excessive costs and lower net investment returns
as a direct and proximate result of the breaches of fiduciary
duties. Had Defendant complied with their fiduciary obligations,
the Plan would not have suffered these losses, and Plan
participants would have had more money available to them for their
retirement.

Cumulus breached its fiduciary monitoring duties by, among other
things failing to monitor and evaluate the performance of any
investment managers or have a system in place for doing so,
standing idly by as the Plan suffered significant losses as a
result of any investment managers' imprudent actions and omissions,
says the suit.

Cumulus Media is an American broadcasting company and is the owner
and operator of AM and FM radio stations in the United States
behind Audacy and iHeartMedia.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Michael I. Fistel, Jr., Esq.
          Mary Ellen Conner, Esq.
          JOHNSON FISTEL, LLP
          40 Powder Springs Street
          Marietta, GA 30064
          Telephone: (470) 632-6000
          Facsimile: (770) 200-3101
          E-mail: michaelf@johnsonfistel.com
                  maryellenc@johnsonfistel.com

                - and -

          Mark K. Gyandoh, Esq.
          Donald R. Reavy, Esq.
          CAPOZZI ADLER, P.C.
          312 Old Lancaster Road
          Merion Station, PA 19066
          Telephone: (610) 890-0200
          Facsimile: (717) 233-4103
          E-mail: markg@capozziadler.com
                  donr@capozziadler.com

D & J CONSTRUCTION: Faces Morales Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D. Fla.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
MIGUEL MORALES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. D & J CONSTRUCTION INC., ATTAWAY ELECTRIC,
INC., and RICHARD LEGER, Defendants, Case No. 0:22-cv-62338 (S.D.
Fla., December 14, 2022) is a class action against the Defendants
for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Family and
Medical Leave Act including unpaid overtime wages, retaliation, and
interference.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a construction
worker/technician from August of 2015 until July 2019 and then from
January 2020 until his wrongful termination in March of 2022.

D & J Construction Inc. is a construction firm, doing business in
Broward County, Florida.

Attaway Electric, Inc. is an electrical work and services provider,
doing business in Broward County, Florida. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Julisse Jimenez, Esq.
         R. Martin Saenz, Esq.
         SAENZ & ANDERSON, PLLC
         20900 NE 30th Avenue, Ste. 800
         Aventura, FL 33180
         Telephone: (305) 503-5131
         Facsimile: (888) 270-5549
         E-mail: julisse@saenzanderson.com

DAWN TO DUSK: Castro Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
Roberto Castro, Brayan Jimenez Avila and Jose Eduardo Flores,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. DAWN
TO DUSK LANDSCAPING, INC., ALBERT AMBROGI and THOMAS AMBROGI, as
individuals, Case No. 2:22-cv-07626 (E.D.N.Y., Dec. 15, 2022), is
brought to recover damages for the Defendants' egregious violations
of state and federal wage and hour laws, the Fair Labor Standards
Act and the New York Labor Laws arising out of the Defendants
failure to pay overtime wages.

Although the Plaintiffs regularly worked over 40 hours or more per
week, the Defendants did not pay the Plaintiffs at a wage rate of
time and a half for their hours regularly worked over 40 in a work
week, a blatant violation of the overtime provisions contained in
the FLSA and NYLL, says the complaint.

The Plaintiffs was employed by the Defendants.

DAWN TO DUSK LANDSCAPING, INC., is a New York domestic business
corporation, organized under the laws of the State of New
York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Roman Avshalumov, Esq.
          HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601
          Kew Gardens, NY 11415
          Phone: 718-263-9591


DECK HELMET: Mebane Files TCPA Suit in D. Maryland
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Deck Helmet Inc. The
case is styled as Robert C. Mebane, individually, and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Deck Helmet Inc., Case No.
8:22-cv-03202-PJM (D. Md., Dec. 13, 2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

Deck Helmet -- https://www.deckhelmet.com/ -- is a deck resurfacing
system transforming old worn-out decks in to low maintenance
composite decks.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          John Thomas McGowan, Jr., Esq.
          KINNER & MCGOWAN PLLC
          434 1/2 6th St NE
          Washington, DC 20002
          Phone: (901) 351-6776
          Email: jtmcgowan@gmail.com


DISCOUNT GAMES: Toro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Discount Games, Inc.
The case is styled as Luis Toro, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Discount Games, Inc., Case No.
1:22-cv-10610 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 15, 2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Discount Games Inc. -- https://www.discountgamesinc.com/ --
specializes in board games, roleplaying games, war miniature, card
games, collectible card games, and roleplaying books.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mars Khaimov, Esq.
          10826 64th Avenue, Ste. 2nd Floor
          Forest Hills, NY 11375
          Phone: (917) 915-7415
          Email: mars@khaimovlaw.com


DOUGLAS L. BRAUNSTEIN: Valdez Sues Over Breaches of Fiduciary Duty
------------------------------------------------------------------
Luis Diaz Valdez, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. DOUGLAS L. BRAUNSTEIN, DOUGLAS G. BERGERON, ROBERT
GREIFELD, AMY SCHULMAN, THELMA DUGGIN, JONATHAN DOBRES, OREN FRANK,
MARK HIRSCHHORN, GROOP INTERNET PLATFORM, INC. n/k/a TAILWIND
MERGER SUB II, LLC, HEC SPONSOR LLC, HUDSON EXECUTIVE CAPITAL LP,
and HEC MASTER FUND LP, Case No. 2022-1148 (Del. Chancery Ct., Dec.
13, 2022), is brought on behalf of former HEIC stockholders against
the Defendants for their breaches of fiduciary duty or aiding
abetting such breaches, resulting in the interference of
shareholders' redemption rights in connection with the de-SPAC
transaction wherein HEIC took Talkspace public (the "Merger"),
bypassing the traditional rigorously regulated IPO process.

The Merger was completed on June 22, 2021, and HEIC changed its
name to "Talkspace, Inc." The Merger was effectuated pursuant to
the terms of a Merger Agreement dated as of January 12, 2021. The
Merger Agreement was by and between HEIC, Groop Internet Platform,
Inc., Tailwind Merger Sub I, Inc., a Delaware corporation and a
direct wholly owned subsidiary of HEIC, and Tailwind Merger Sub II,
LLC, a Delaware limited liability company. Pursuant to the Merger
Agreement, Tailwind Merger Sub I, Inc. merged with and into Groop
Internet Platform, Inc. with Groop Internet Platform, Inc.
surviving the first merger, and (ii) immediately following the
first merger and as part of the same overall transaction, Groop
Internet Platform, Inc. merged with and into Tailwind Merger Sub
II, LLC, with Tailwind Merger Sub II, LLC surviving the merger as a
wholly owned subsidiary of HEIC.

The Defendant Braunstein and the Defendant Bergeron--serial
sponsors of SPACs--and with the help of their hand-picked loyalists
on the Board, lured HEIC's public stockholders to support HEIC's
Merger with Talkspace (rather than seek redemption of their
shares), despite concrete signs that Talkspace's projected
financial information was inflated, predicated on unreasonable
assumptions, and could not be achieved. Rather, the Defendants were
highly incentivized to get a deal done, even if it was not in the
best interest of minority shareholders. To that end, the Board
failed to retain an independent, third-party financial advisor to
assess the fairness of the Merger, and while the Board had an
admitted-duty to conduct due diligence, the Board disregarded and
concealed from shareholders material facts that made clear the
acquisition was not in the best interests of HEIC's non-insider
shareholders and that they would have been better off exercising
their redemption rights.

Then, and in furtherance of its deception, on May 28, 2021, HEIC
filed a materially false and misleading definitive proxy statement
(the "Proxy") with the SEC. In soliciting shareholders to vote to
approve the Merger rather than redeem their shares--which would
have returned their investment, plus interest--the Board
affirmatively highlighted the "extensive due diligence" it
performed on Talkspace. The Proxy misrepresented or omitted
material information regarding Talkspace's business and financial
prospects.

As of the close of business on the Record Date, there were
51,750,000 outstanding shares of HEIC's common stock; of that,
25,968,043 shares or nearly 50% were redeemed. Less than two months
following the close of the Merger, those investors that relied upon
the Director Defendants', Officer Defendants', Frank's and
Hirschhorn's purported expertise and Proxy disclosures received a
rude awakening when the true financial condition of Talkspace was
revealed.

As of the drafting of this complaint, Talkspace shares currently
trade at a lowly $0.84 per share, significantly below the
approximately $10.01 per share shareholders would have received if
they had redeemed their shares instead of approving the Merger. The
deeply flawed, unfair and conflicted Merger and resulting
materially false and misleading Proxy triggers entire fairness
review, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is a continuous stockholder of HEIC, now Talkspace,
including prior to the Record Date of the Merger.

Douglas L. Braunstein was the co-founder, President, and Chairman
of HEIC at the time of the Merger.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Blake A. Bennett, Esq.
          COOCH AND TAYLOR, P.A.
          The Nemours Building
          1007 N. Orange St., Suite 1120
          Wilmington, DE 19801
          Phone: (302) 984-3889

               - and -

          Juan E. Monteverde, Esq.
          Miles D. Schreiner, Esq.
          MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC
          The Empire State Building
          350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4405
          New York, NY 10118
          Direct Dial: (646) 300-8921
          Fax: (212) 202-7880
          Cell: (646) 522-4840
          Email: jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com
                 mschreiner@monteverdelaw.com

               - and -

          Michael J. Palestina, Esq.
          KAHN SWICK & FOTI, LLC
          1100 Poydras Street, Suite 3200
          New Orleans, LA 70163
          Phone: (504) 455-1400
          Facsimile: (504) 455-1498
          Email: michael.palestina@ksfcounsel.com


DSSV INC: Chalmer Suit Seeks Sales Reps' OT Wages Under FLSA
------------------------------------------------------------
Jordan Chalmers, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. DSSV, Inc., d/b/a Brightwheel, Case No.
4:22-cv-08863-DMR (N.D. Cal., Dec. 14, 2022) seeks to recover
unpaid overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Defendant employed the Plaintiff as an inside sales
representative, working remotely from his home in Austin, Texas
from May 2021 to May 2022.

According to the complaint, the Defendant provided the Plaintiff
and others similarly situated with the sales leads and expected
them to follow scripts when speaking with potential customers. The
Defendant allegedly put pressure on the Plaintiff and others
similarly situated to contact and respond to potential customers,
and meet sales goals, which led to overtime work, says the suit.

The Plaintiff and others similarly situated worked unpaid overtime
hours to meet Defendant's demands. The Plaintiff worked overtime
regularly and often worked overtime hours at the end of months,
quarters, and years. In addition, the Plaintiff regularly answered
work-related phone calls and emails prior to and after his
scheduled working hours. Defendant's demands for service and
production also caused Plaintiff to routinely work through meal
periods, the suit adds.

DSSV is in the business of "preschool and childcare management
software that integrates automatic billing and payments, real-time
communication, and classroom management." It provides tools for
assessment, communication, and photo sharing, and administrators
can manage their business with enrollment, reporting, and online
bill pay.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Daniel S. Brome, Esq.
          NICHOLS KASTER, LLP
          235 Montgomery St., Suite 810
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 277-7235
          E-mail: dbrome@nka.com

                - and -

          Michele R. Fisher, Esq.
          NICHOLS KASTER, PLLP
          4700 IDS Center
          80 South 8th Street
          Minneapolis, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 256-3200
          E-mail: fisher@nka.com

                - and -

          Charles Scalise, Esq.
          ROSS SCALISE LAW GROUP, P.C.
          1104 San Antonio Street
          Austin, TX 78701
          Telephone: (512) 598-1466
          E-mail: charles@rosslawpc.com

ESTES FORWARDING: Villalobos Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Estes Forwarding
Worldwide, LLC, et al. The case is styled as Eric Villalobos,
individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated v. Estes
Forwarding Worldwide, LLC, Estes Express Lines, GI Trucking
Company, Does 1 through 50, Inclusive, Case No.
34-2022-00327719-CU-OE-GDS (Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco Cty.,
Dec. 14, 2022).

The case type is stated as "Other Non-Exempt Complaints."

Estes Forwarding Worldwide LLC -- https://efwnow.com/ -- provides
logistics services. The Company offers truckload, consolidation,
documentation, supply chain, warehousing, distribution management,
and other services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Larry W. Lee, Esq.
          DIVERSITY LAW GROUP
          515 S Figueroa St., Ste. 1250
          Los Angeles, CA 90071-3316
          Phone: 213-488-6555
          Fax: 213-488-6554
          Email: lwlee@diversitylaw.com

               - and -

          William L. Marder, Esq.
          POLARIS LAW GROUP LLP
          501 San Benito St # 200
          Hollister, CA 95023
          Phone: 831-531-4214
          Fax: 831-634-0333
          Email: bill@polarislawgroup.com

EVONIK CORP: Harris Wins Class Certification Bid
-------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as STEHLE HARRIS, and DAVID
ELLIOT individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
v. EVONIK CORPORATION, PRESIDENT OF EVONIK CORPORATION, BOARD OF
DIRECTORS OF EVONIK CORPORATION, EVONIK INVESTMENT) COMMITTEE, and
JOHN DOES 1-30, Case No. 2:20-cv-02202-MCA-MAH (D.N.J.), the Court
entered an order regarding class certification as follows:

   -- The class is defined as:

      "All persons, except Defendants and their immediate family
      members, who were participants in or beneficiaries of the
      Plan, at any time between February 28, 2014 through the
      date of judgment."

On February 28, 2020, the  Plaintiffs Rhonda Allen and David Elliot
filed the original class action complaint.

The Defendants moved to dismiss the original complaint, and this
Court granted in part and denied in part Defendants' motion on
December 30, 2020.

The Plaintiffs filed the Amended Class Action Complaint on December
7, 2022.

On November 7, 2022, Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Class
Certification. In order to conserve the Parties' and the Court's
resources and avoid unnecessary motion practice, the Parties met
and conferred and agreed to stipulate that a class shall be
certified to pursue the claims alleged in the Complaint.

Evonik Corporation manufactures specialty chemicals.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec.. 15, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3FDi8d0 at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:


          Mark K. Gyandoh, Esq.
          CAPOZZI ADLER
          312 Old Lancaster Road
          Merion Station, PA 19066
          Telephone: (610) 890-0200
          Facsimile (717) 233-4103
          E-mail: markgcapozziadler.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Carla D. Macaluso, Esq.
          Howard Shapiro, Esq.
          Stacey C.S. Cerrone, Esq.
          Lindsey H. Chopin, Esq.
          JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
          200 Connell Drive, Suite 2000
          Berkeley Heights, NJ 07922
          Telephone: (908) 795-5200
          Facsimile: (908) 464-2614
          E-mail: Carla.Macaluso@jacksonlewis.com
                  Howard.Shapiro@jacksonlewis.com
                  Stacey.Cerrone@jacksonlewis.com
                  Lindsey.Chopin@jacksonlewis.com

EXPERIAN INFORMATION: Sued Over Falsely Disseminated Information
----------------------------------------------------------------
George Costa, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., CITIBANK N.A.,
KOHLS DEPARTMENT STORES, INC., and TD BANK USA, N.A., Case No.
5:22-cv-00662 (M.D. Fla., Dec. 16, 2022), is brought under the Fair
Credit Reporting Act, alleging that Experian has negligently and
recklessly disseminated false and logically inconsistent
information regarding the Plaintiff's credit.

Experian is a consumer reporting agency that has been wrongfully
reporting negative payment statuses on accounts that Plaintiff
George Costa had properly discharged in bankruptcy when he filed in
March of 2017. Despite this, Experian has listed 'Negative' or
'Late' payments on multiple accounts for months and years after
Plaintiff had filed for bankruptcy and these accounts were closed
and discharged in bankruptcy. Experian includes this logically
inconsistent information because it does not have adequate policies
and procedures in place to ensure that it prevents such logical
inconsistencies, like reporting negative information on an account
subsequent to its closure and discharge in bankruptcy.

As the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau recently addressed, "a
consumer reporting agency that does not implement reasonable
internal controls to prevent the inclusion of facially false data,
including logically inconsistent information, in consumer reports
it prepares is not using reasonable procedures to assure maximum
possible accuracy." The purpose of this opinion was to "highlight
that the legal requirement to follow reasonable procedures to
assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the
individuals about whom the reports relate includes, but is not
limited to, procedures to screen for and eliminate logical
inconsistencies to avoid including facially false data in consumer
reports." Id. In summary, where an account status (like a
'negative' payment in 2020) is plainly inconsistent with other
information reported on that account (like a "discharged in
bankruptcy" from 2017), this facially illogical reporting is
evidence of a consumer reporting agency's failure to have the
policies and procedures required to meet its FCRA accuracy
obligations.

The Plaintiff therefore brings this putative class action
under the FCRA alleging Experian has negligently and recklessly
disseminated false and logically inconsistent information regarding
the Plaintiff's credit. The Plaintiff further alleges that Experian
failed to follow reasonable procedures to ensure maximum accuracy
of credit reports it prepared concerning Plaintiff and the proposed
class, and that Experian failed to investigate the credit report
inaccuracies in response to the Plaintiff's dispute, says the
complaint.

Plaintiff is a resident of Clermont, Florida and is a "consumer."

Experian Information Solutions, Inc. is one of the largest credit
reporting agencies in the United States and is engaged in the
business of assembling and disseminating credit reports concerning
hundreds of millions of consumers.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph Kanee, Esq.
          MARCUS & ZELMAN, LLC
          701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1550
          Miami, FL 33131
          Phone: (786)369-1122
          Facsimile: (732)298-6256
          Email: Joseph@MarcusZelman.com


FACEGYM USA: Website Inaccessible to Blind, Bunting Class Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
RASHETA BUNTING, Individually and as the representative of a class
of similarly situated persons, v. FACEGYM USA, INC., Case No.
1:22-cv-07582 (E.D.N.Y., Dec. 14, 2022) alleges that the Defendant
denied blind and visually-impaired persons with equal access to the
goods and services Facegym provides to their non-disabled customers
through http//:www.Usa.facegym.com in violation of Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Usa.facegym.com provides to the public a wide array of the goods,
services, price specials, employment opportunities and other
programs offered by Facegym. Yet, Usa.facegym.com contains
thousands of access barriers that make it difficult if not
impossible for blind and visually-impaired customers to use the
website. In fact, the access barriers make it impossible for blind
and visually-impaired users to even complete a transaction on the
website, the Plaintiff claims.

The Plaintiff browsed and intended to make a purchase of the Glow
Boost Kit, the Liftwear, and the Electro-lite Gel Cleanser on
Usa.facegym.com. However, unless the Defendant remedies the
numerous access barriers on its website, the Plaintiff and Class
members will continue to be unable to independently navigate,
browse, use, and complete a transaction on Usa.facegym.com. Thus,
Facegym excludes the blind and visually-impaired from the full and
equal participation in the growing Internet economy that is
increasingly a fundamental part of the common marketplace and daily
living, asserts the Plaintiff.

The Defendant allegedly engaged in acts of intentional
discrimination, including the following policies or practices:

  -- constructed and maintained a website that is inaccessible to
     blind class members with knowledge of the discrimination;

  -- constructed and maintained a website that is sufficiently
     intuitive and/or obvious that is inaccessible to blind class
     members; and/or

  -- failed to take actions to correct these access barriers in
     the face of substantial harm and discrimination to blind
     class members.

Facegym USA operates Facegym Studios in New York State and provides
wellness, beauty, and spa products for sale, amongst other products
and services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Dan Shaked, Esq.
          SHAKED LAW GROUP, P.C.
          14 Harwood Court, Suite 415
          Scarsdale, NY 10583
          Telephone: (917) 373-9128
          E-mail: ShakedLawGroup@gmail.com

FAMILY LEISURE: Toro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Family Leisure of
Indianapolis, Inc. The case is styled as Luis Toro, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. Family Leisure of
Indianapolis, Inc., Case No. 1:22-cv-10613 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 15,
2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Family Leisure -- https://www.familyleisure.com/Indianapolis --
offers patio furniture, pool tables, hot tubs, above ground
swimming pools, poker tables, bar stools, tanning beds and
more.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mars Khaimov, Esq.
          10826 64th Avenue, Ste. 2nd Floor
          Forest Hills, NY 11375
          Phone: (917) 915-7415
          Email: mars@khaimovlaw.com

FERRAGAMO USA: Luxury Designer Belts Defective, Fineman Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
SCOTT FINEMAN, an individual; MOHAMMED WAQAS MALIK, an individual;
CRISTIAN SILVA, an individual; and JAMES MCGRIFF, an individual,
Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v.
FERRAGAMO USA Inc., a New York corporation; S-FER INTERNATIONAL
INCORPORATED, a New York corporation; SATOR REALTY INC., a New York
corporation; SAKS FIFTH  AVENUE LLC, a Massachusetts limited
liability company; and THE NEIMAN MARCUS GROUP LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company, Case No. 9:22-cv-81923 (S.D. Fla., Dec.
15, 2022), is a nationwide class action seeking monetary damages,
restitution, injunctive and declaratory relief from Defendants
arising from their advertising, marketing, and sale of purportedly
high quality, "luxury" designer belts and belt buckles which
quickly become worthless for their intended purpose as fashion
accessories, due to a defect in the buckle design and/or
manufacture.

According to the complaint, the Ferragamo Belt Buckles are
allegedly unfit as fashion accessory because their metal buckles
quickly become discolored and/or tarnished. This discoloration
and/or tarnishing occurs regardless of the way in which customers
use and care for the Belt Buckles and cannot be blamed on the
consumers. Moreover, customers who purchased the defective
Ferragamo Belt Buckles have no easy option to either receive a full
refund or an exchange once the defect becomes apparent. Instead,
the Defendants typically require the Plaintiffs to pay even more
money to replace the defective Ferragamo Belt Buckles, says the
suit.

As a result of Ferragamo USA's, S-FER's and Sator's alleged
breaches of the implied warranty, the Plaintiffs and the Class
members received goods whose latent defect substantially impairs
their value to consumers such as themselves.

Ferragamo USA is part of the Salvatore Ferragamo Group, whose
parent company Salvatore Ferragamo S.p.A. designs, manufactures,
and distributes a collection of designer belts which include a
"signature" metal buckle.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Marcus W. Corwin, Esq.
          MARCUS W. CORWIN, P.A. d/b/a CORWIN LAW
          6501 Congress Avenue, Suite 100
          Boca Raton, FL 33487
          Telephone: (561) 482-3636
          Facsimile: (561) 482-5414
          E-mail: mcorwin@corwinlawfirm.com

                - and -

          Jeffrey C. Schneider, Esq.
          Victor Petrescu, Esq.
          LEVINE KELLOGG LEHMAN SCHNEIDER +
          GROSSMAN LLP
          100 SE 2nd Street, 36th Floor
          Miami, FL 33131
          Telephone: (305) 403-8788
          Facsimile: (305) 403-8789
          E-mail: jcs@lklsg.com
                  vp@lklsg.com

FULL SPECTRUM: First Modified Case Management Order Entered
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as HAYLEY CROZIER,
individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated
individuals v. FULL SPECTRUM PEDIATRIC THERAPY, INC. and LANA K.
BROOME, Case No. 3:22-cv-00106 (M.D. Tenn.), the Hon. Judge Barbara
D. Holmes entered a first modified case management order as
follows:

  -- Motions to decertify the               March 10, 2023
     conditionally certified FLSA
     collective action must be
     filed on or before:

  -- Motions for class certification        March 10, 2023
     must be filed on or before:

  -- The parties must make another          June 30, 2023
     attempt at resolution of this
     case, which must be by mediation.
     The mediation must be concluded
     by no later than:

  -- A report of mediation, which           July 5, 2023
     will constitute the required
     case resolution status report,
     must be filed in accordance
     with Local Rule 16.05(b) and
     by no later than:

  -- The parties must complete all          May 26, 2023
     written discovery and depose
     all fact witnesses on or before:

  -- All discovery-related motions          May 26, 2023
     must be filed by no later than:

  -- Any motions to amend or to             Feb. 28, 2023
     add parties must be filed by
     no later than:

  -- The party bearing the burden          May 26, 2023
     of proof on an issue
     (or issues) must disclose any
     experts and reports on that
     issue (or those issues) by:

  -- The adverse party must disclose       June 30, 2023
     any rebuttal experts and reports
     as to the issue(s) raised in the
     initial report by no later than:

  -- All expert depositions                August 4, 2023.
     must be completed by:

  -- All other dispositive motions         Sept. 1, 2023
     and motions to decertify any
     certified class action(s) must
     be filed on or before:

Full Spectrum is a Medicare Certified Physical Therapy, Speech
Pathology, and/or Occupational Therapy provider.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 15, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3FBTGJ2 at no extra charge.[CC]

G4S SECURE: Patton Sues Over Security Supervisors' Unpaid Overtime
------------------------------------------------------------------
MATTHEW PATTON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. G4S SECURE SOLUTIONS USA INC. and SECURITAS
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES, INC., Defendants, Case No.
6:22-cv-01276 (W.D. Tex., December 14, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendants for failure to compensate the Plaintiff and
similarly situated employees overtime pay for all hours worked in
excess of 40 hours in a workweek in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

Mr. Patton has worked for the Defendants as a security supervisor
at the Glen Rose, Texas nuclear power plant since approximately
March of 2013.

G4S Secure Solutions USA Inc. is a provider of security services in
Austin, Texas.

Securitas Critical Infrastructure Services, Inc. is a provider of
security services in Dallas, Texas. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Clif Alexander, Esq.
         Austin W. Anderson, Esq.
         Lauren E. Braddy, Esq.
         Alan Clifton Gordon, Esq.
         Carter T. Hastings, Esq.
         ANDERSON ALEXANDER, PLLC
         819 N. Upper Broadway
         Corpus Christi, TX 78401
         Telephone: (361) 452-1279
         Facsimile: (361) 452-1284
         E-mail: clif@a2xlaw.com
                 austin@a2xlaw.com
                 lauren@a2xlaw.com
                 cgordon@a2xlaw.com
                 carter@a2xlaw.com

GATEWAY REHAB: Fails to Secure Customers' Info, Ciccozzi Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
CHRISTOPHER CICCOZZI, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. GATEWAY REHABILITATION CENTER, d/b/a GATEWAY
REHAB, Case No. 2:22-cv-01797-WSH (W.D. Pa., Dec. 14, 2022) sues
the Defendant for its failure to properly secure and safeguard the
personally identifiable information and protected health
information of 130,000 individuals.

On an undisclosed date prior to June 13, 2022, one or more
malicious actors gained access to the Defendant's computer network
and systems. The actor(s) had access to Defendant's computer
network and systems from for an undisclosed amount of time. On June
13, 2022, the Defendant became aware of the Data Breach because
some of its computer systems were shut down for a period of time.
Investigation found the Data Breach resulted in the malicious
actor(s) accessing, copying, and/or exfiltrating substantial
amounts of patient PII and PHI, the lawsuit says.

Specifically, the malicious actor(s) took files containing name,
date of birth, Social Security number, driver's license or state ID
number, financial account and/or payment card number, medical
information and health insurance information. The Defendant began
notifying victims about the Data Breach November 18, 2022. The
Defendant's notice sent to impacted individuals fails to explain
how the breach happened, how many people were impacted, and why the
unauthorized party had unfettered access to Plaintiff's and the
Class's Sensitive Information, the lawsuit claims.

Gateway Rehab provides medical services including inpatient and
outpatient drug rehab care, extended care, medically monitored
withdrawal management, substance abuse support and family programs,
adolescent programs, medications for substance abuse disorder,
telehealth, and community-based recover specialists.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gary F. Lynch, Esq.
          LYNCH CARPENTER LLP
          1133 Penn Avenue, 5th Floor
          Pittsburgh, PA 15222
          Telephone: (412) 322-9243
          E-mail: gary@lcllp.com

                - and -

          Brian C. Gudmundson, Esq.
          Jason P. Johnston
          Michael J. Laird
          Rachel K. Tack
          ZIMMERMAN REED LLP
          1100 IDS Center
          80 South 8th Street
          Minneapolis, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 341-0400
          Facsimile: (612) 341-0844
          E-mail: brian.gudmundson@zimmreed.com
                  jason.johnston@zimmreed.com
                  michael.laird@zimmreed.com
                  rachel.tack@zimmreed.com

                - and -

          Christopher D. Jennings, Esq.
          Nathan I. Reiter III, Esq.
          THE JOHNSON FIRM
          610 President Clinton Ave., Suite 300
          Little Rock, AR 72201
          Telephone: (501) 372-1300
          E-mail: chris@yourattorney.com
                  nathan@yourattorney.com

GFM LICENSING GROUP: Toro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against GFM Licensing Group,
LLC. The case is styled as Luis Toro, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. GFM Licensing Group, LLC, Case No.
1:22-cv-10616 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 15, 2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Goodwin Family Management (GFM), LLC is a management company for
the assets of Eric Goodwin.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mars Khaimov, Esq.
          10826 64th Avenue, Ste. 2nd Floor
          Forest Hills, NY 11375
          Phone: (917) 915-7415
          Email: mars@khaimovlaw.com


GHIRARDELLI CHOCOLATE: Sheppard Suit Removed to N.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Romello Sheppard, individually, and on behalf
of other members of the general public similarly situated and on
behalf of other aggrieved employees pursuant to the California
Private Attorneys General Act v. GHIRARDELLI CHOCOLATE COMPANY, a
California corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive; Case No.
22CV0207113 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California in and for the County of Alameda, to the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California on Dec. 15,
2022, and assigned Case No. 3:22-cv-08912.

The Plaintiff's Complaint seeks damages and civil penalties
pursuant to the California Labor Code, including the Private
Attorneys General Act ("PAGA"), on behalf of himself and other
allegedly similarly situated and aggrieved employees who are
currently or formerly employed by the Defendant during the relevant
period.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Michael J Nader, Esq.
          OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
          500 Capital Mall, Suite 500
          Sacramento, CA 95814
          Phone: 916-840-3150
          Facsimile: 916-840-3159
          Email: michael.nader@ogletreedeakins.com

               - and -

          Jade Butman, Esq.
          OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
          One Embarcadero Center, Suite 900
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Phone: 415-442-4810
          Facsimile: 415-442-4870
          Email: jade.butman@ogletree.com

GORDON LANE: Scheduling Order Entered in Parrish Class Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GAIL PARRISH et al v.
GORDON LANE HEALTHCARE, LLC, et al., Case No. 8:22-cv-01790-CJC-KES
(C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Cormac J. Carney entered a scheduling
order as follows:

   1. All discovery, including discovery      Oct. 12, 2023
      motions, shall be completed by:

   2. The parties shall have until            Dec. 11, 2023
      to file and have heard all
      other motions, including motions
      to join or amend the pleadings:

   3. A pretrial conference will be           Feb. 12, 2024
      held on:  

   4. The case is set for a jury trial:       Feb. 20, 2024

   5. The parties shall have until            Oct. 26, 2023
      to conduct settlement
      proceedings:

   6. The Plaintiff shall have until          May 15, 2023
      to file and have heard any
      class certification motion:

Gordon Lane is a Medicare certified 99-bed skilled nursing facility
located in Fullerton, California.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec.. 15, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3uZZozn at no extra charge.[CC]

ILLUMINUS: Fails to Pay OT & Agreed Upon Wages, Deuel Suit Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------------
JENNIFER DEUEL, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. ILLUMINUS 2979 Triverton Pike Road Fitchburg, Wisconsin
53711 and ST. ELIZABETH MANOR, INC. 111 Commercial Drive Footville,
Wisconsin 53537, Case No. 2:22-cv-01504 (E.D. Wis., Dec. 14, 2022)
seeks to recover unpaid OT compensation and unpaid agreed upon
wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA) and
Wisconsin's Wage Payment and Collection Laws (WWPCL), and
liquidated damages, costs, attorneys' fees, declaratory and/or
injunctive relief.

The Defendants allegedly operated an unlawful compensation system
that deprived and failed to compensate the Plaintiff and all other
current and former hourly-paid, non-exempt employees for all hours
worked and work performed each workweek, including at an overtime
rate of pay for each hour worked in excess of 40 hours in a
workweek, by failing to include all forms of non-discretionary
compensation, such as monetary bonuses, incentives, awards, and/or
other rewards and payments, in said employees' regular rates of pay
for overtime calculation purposes, says the suit.

In December 2020, the Defendants hired the Plaintiff into the
positions of Certified Nursing Assistant and Medication Technician
working primarily at Defendants' Janesville, Wisconsin (St.
Elizabeth Manor) location. In October 2022, the Plaintiff's
employment with Defendants ended. During the three years
immediately preceding the filing of this Complaint, the Plaintiff
and all other hourly-paid, non-exempt employees were employed by
the Defendants in hourly-paid, non-exempt job positions and
performed compensable work on Defendants' direction, on Defendants'
behalf, for Defendants' benefit, and/or with Defendants' knowledge
at locations that were owned, operated, and managed by Defendants,
the suit claims.

Illuminus is a healthcare management company that owns, operates,
and/or manages assisted living, independent living, skilled
nursing, and rehabilitation facilities and other physical locations
throughout the State of Wisconsin.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James A. Walcheske, Esq.
          Scott S. Luzi, Esq.
          David M. Potteiger, Esq.
          WALCHESKE & LUZI, LLC
          235 N. Executive Drive, Suite 240
          Brookfield, WI 53005
          Telephone: (262) 780-1953
          Facsimile: (262) 565-6469
          E-mail: jwalcheske@walcheskeluzi.com
                  sluzi@walcheskeluzi.com
                  dpotteiger@walcheskeluzi.com

IN STRIDE SHOES: Young Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against In Stride Shoes
L.L.C. The case is styled as Leshawn Young, on behalf of herself
and all other persons similarly situated v. In Stride Shoes L.L.C.,
Case No. 1:22-cv-10645 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 16, 2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

In Stride Shoes offers kids shoes, sneakers, sandals & boots for
every season & every stage of their active lives, from baby to big
kids shoes.[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


INDEPENDENT BANK: Grice Must File Memorandum for Class Cert. Bid
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Grice v. Independent Bank,
Case No. 7:20-cv-01948 (D.S.C.), the Hon. Judge Timothy M Cain
entered an order on Motion to Seal Document.

The Plaintiff is directed to file the Memorandum in Support of
Motion for Class Certification and Exhibits A and MM using the
event "Sealed Document.

The nature of suit states Diversity-Breach of Contract.

Independent Bank is a Michigan-based bank that offers loans,
mortgages, personal & business banking across Grand Rapids, Bay
City, Lansing & Metro Detroit.[CC]

IRIS ENERGY: Faces Sterling Suit Over Drop in Share Price
---------------------------------------------------------
SCOTT STERLING, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. IRIS ENERGY LIMITED; DANIEL ROBERTS; WILLIAM
ROBERTS; BELINDA NUCIFORA; DAVID BARTHOLOMEW; CHRISTOPHER GUZOWSKI;
and MICHAEL ALFRED, Defendants, Case No. 1:22-cv-07273 (D.N.J.,
Dec. 14, 2022) alleges violation of the Securities Act of 1933, and
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

According to the complaint, the Offering Documents with the SEC
filed by the Defendants were negligently prepared and, as a result,
contained untrue statements of material fact or omitted to state
other facts necessary to make the statements made not misleading
and were not prepared in accordance with the rules and regulations
governing their preparation. Additionally, throughout the Class
Period, the Defendants made materially false and misleading
statements regarding the Company's business, operations, and
prospects.

Iris's ordinary shares continue to trade significantly below the
$28 per share Offering price, damaging investors. As a result of
the Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous
decline in the market value of the Company's securities, the
Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses
and damages, says the suit.

IRIS ENERGY LTD operates as a renewable energy company. The Company
owns and operates real assets, including data center
infrastructure, powered by renewable energy. Iris Energy serves
clients in Australia. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Thomas H. Przybylowski, Esq.
          Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq.
          J. Alexander Hood II, Esq.
          POMERANTZ LLP
          600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 661-1100
          Facsimile: (917) 463-1044
          Email: tprzybylowski@pomlaw.com
                 jalieberman@pomlaw.com
                 ahood@pomlaw.com

JOHN HEMINGWAY: Wilson Loses Class Certification Bid
----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KEN KENYATTA WILSON, et al
v. JOHN HEMINGWAY, Case No. 2:22-cv-10538-LVP-PTM (E.D. Mich.), the
Hon. Judge Linda v. Parker entered an order:

   1. severing the Lead Plaintiff Wilson's case from the
      remaining plaintiffs;

   2. summarily dismissing without prejudice the complaint with
      respect to the remaining plaintiffs;

   3. denying a request for class certification; and

   4. directing the Plaintiff Wilson to cure the filing fee
      deficiency within 30 days of the order.

The Court said, "Mr. Wilson may file an application to proceed
without prepayment of fees and costs, an authorization to with draw
from his trust fund account, a signed certification of his prison
trust account from an authorized prison official, and a current
computerized trust fund account showing the history of the
financial transactions in plaintiff's institutional trust fund
account for the past six months."

This is a prisoner civil rights case brough pursuant to Biven v.
Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics.

The Plaintiffs are all prisoners confined in one of the
following:

   1. the Federal Correctional Institution in Milan, Michigan;

   2. the Allenwood Medium Federal Correctional Institution in
      White Deer, Pennsylvania; or

   3. the Hazelton United States Penitentiary in Bruceton Mills,
      West Virginia.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec.. 15, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3VdmaOJ at no extra charge.[CC]

JOHNSON & JOHNSON: OGX Dry Shampoo Contains Benzene, Scott Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------------
MARINA SCOTT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC., VOGUE INTERNATIONAL
LLC, Case No. 1:22-cv-07069 (N.D. Ill., Dec. 15, 2022) is a class
action lawsuit regarding Defendants' manufacturing, distribution,
and sale of OGX brand dry shampoo products that contain dangerously
high levels of benzene, a carcinogenic impurity that has been
linked to leukemia and other cancers.
These Products are not designed to contain benzene, and in fact no
amount of benzene is acceptable in dry shampoo products such as the
Products manufactured, distributed, and sold by Defendants.

According to the complaint, the presence of benzene in the Products
renders them adulterated and misbranded, and therefore illegal to
sell under both federal and state law. As a result, the Products
are unsafe and illegal to sell under federal law, and therefore
worthless, the lawsuit says.

Furthermore, although the Defendants list both active and inactive
ingredients on the Products' labels, benzene is not among those
ingredients listed. Thus, Defendants misrepresent that the Products
do not contain benzene, or otherwise Defendants fail to disclose
that the Products contain benzene. The Defendants engaged in unfair
conduct in violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive
Trade Practices Act (ICFA), including but not limited to selling
adulterated and misbranded products in violation of the Food, Drug
and Cosmetics Act (FDCA) and IL FDCA, the suit claims.

Benzene is a component of crude oil, gasoline, and cigarette smoke,
and is one of the elementary petrochemicals. The Department of
Health and Human Services has determined that benzene causes cancer
in humans.

Johnson & Johnson is an American multinational corporation founded
in 1886 that develops medical devices, pharmaceuticals, and
consumer packaged goods.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Carl V. Malmstrom, Esq.
          WOLF HALDENSTEIN ADLER
          FREEMAN & HERZ LLC
          111 W. Jackson Blvd., Suite 1700
          Chicago, IL 60604
          Telephone: (312) 984-0000
          Facsimile: (212) 686-0114
          E-mail: malmstrom@whafh.com

                - and -

          Max S. Roberts, Esq.
          Sarah N. Westcot, Esq.
          Stephen A. Beck, Esq.
          Jonathan L. Wolloch, Esq.
          BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
          888 Seventh Avenue
          New York, NY 10019
          Telephone: (646) 837-7150
          Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
          E-mail: mroberts@bursor.com
                  swestcot@bursor.com
                  sbeck@bursor.com
                  jwolloch@bursor.com

JVK OPERATIONS: Opposition to Class Cert Must be Filed by Feb. 10
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KENIA MONTIEL-FLORES and
ALMANELLY RIVERA ZUNIGA, individually and on behalf of all other
similarly situated, v. JVK OPERATIONS LIMITED and JIVK VINOD
SAMUEL, Case No. 2:19-cv-03005-JS-SIL (E.D.N.Y.), the Parties
stipulated and agreed as follows:

   -- The time in which Defendants have to serve opposition
      papers in response to Plaintiff's motion for class
      certification is hereby extending to and including
      February 10, 2023;

   -- The time in which Plaintiffs have to serve reply papers,
      if any, is hereby extended to and including March 10,
      2023.

   -- That a photocopy, email copy or facsimile copy of this
      Stipulation fully executed by the parties, or their
      attorneys shall be deemed an original for all purposes.

JVK Operations is a leading provider of linen and garments laundry
services for healthcare facilities on the East Coast.

A copy of the Parties' motion dated Dec.. 15, 2022 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3PBWN8g at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Adam Sackowitz, Esq.
          KATZ MELINGER PLLC
          370 Lexington Avenue, Suite 1512
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (212) 460-0047
          E-mail: aisackowitz@katzmelinser.com

                - and -

          Frank R. Schirripa, Esq.
          HACH ROSE SCHIRRIPA & CHEVERIE LLP
          112 Madison Avenue, 10th Flr.
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212)213-8311
          E-mail: fschirripa@hrsclaw.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Douglas E. Rowe, Esq.
          CERTILMAN BALIN ADLER & HYMAN, LLP
          90 Merrick Avenue
          East Meadow, NY 11554
          Telephone: (516) 296-7000
          E-mail: drowe@certilmanbalin.com

KAMALA HARRIS: Jan. 12, 2023 Class Cert Hearing Vacated
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GARY WAYNE WELCHEN,
Plaintiff, v. KAMALA HARRIS, Attorney General; et al., Case No.
2:16-cv-00185 (E.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Troy L. Nunley entered an
order that the Plaintiff's renewed motion to certify class is
submitted without oral argument.

   -- The hearing set for Jan. 12, 2023 is vacated.

   -- If the Court determines oral argument is necessary, it
      will be scheduled at a later date.

   -- All briefing shall be filed in accordance with amended
   -- Local Rule 230(c) and (d).

The suit alleges violation of the Civil Rights Act.[CC]

L'OBJET USA: Crosson Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against L'Objet USA, LLC. The
case is styled as Aretha Crosson, individually and as the
representative of a class of similarly situated persons v. L'Objet
USA, LLC, Case No. 1:22-cv-07585 (E.D.N.Y., Dec. 14, 2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

L'Objet USA, LLC -- https://www.l-objet.com/ -- is home and
lifestyle design brand.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Dan Shaked, Esq.
          SHAKED LAW GROUP, P.C.
          14 Harwood Court, Suite 415
          Scarsdale, NY 10583
          Phone: (917) 373-9128
          Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com


LABORATORY CORPORATION: Aguilar Suit Removed to C.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Adriana Aguilar, on behalf of herself and
others similarly situated v. LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMERICA; and
DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, Case No. 22STCV31442 was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles,
to the United States District Court for the Central District of
California on Dec. 14, 2022, and assigned Case No. 2:22-cv-09061.

The Plaintiff alleges twelve causes of action on a class basis
during the putative class period. The caption of the Complaint
states that it is a Class Action Complaint for Damages and
Restitution and asserts the following class claims: Failure to Pay
All Wages for All Hours Worked at Minimum Wage; Failure to Pay
Overtime Wages for Daily Overtime Worked; Failure to Include
Additional Remuneration When Calculating Overtime Wages; Failure to
Pay Meal Period Premium Wages at the Regular Rate of Pay; Failure
to Authorize or Permit Rest Periods; Failure to Pay Rest Period
Premium Wages; Failure to Indemnify Employees for
Employment-Related Losses/Expenditures; Failure to Pay All Accrued
and Vested Vacation/PTO Wages; Failure to Timely Pay Earned Wages
During Employment; Failure to Provide Complete and Accurate Wage
Statements; Failure to Timely Pay All Earned Wages and Final
Paychecks Due at Time of Separation of Employment; Unfair Business
Practices in Violation of Business & Professions Code.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Eugene Ryu, Esq.
          Neil A Eddington, Esq.
          K&L GATES LLP
          10100 Santa Monica Blvd., 8th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Phone: 310.553.5000
          Fax: 310.553.5001
          Email: Gene.Ryu@klgates.com
                 Neil.Eddington@klgates.com

LE PALAIS DES THES: Rodriguez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Le Palais Des Thes
LLC. The case is styled as Angel Rodriguez, individually and as the
representative of a class of similarly situated persons v. Le
Palais Des Thes LLC, Case No. 1:22-cv-07583 (E.D.N.Y., Dec. 14,
2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Le Palais Des Thes -- https://us.palaisdesthes.com/en_us/ -- offers
premium teas, herbal teas, iced teas, tea gifts and teaware.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Dan Shaked, Esq.
          SHAKED LAW GROUP, P.C.
          14 Harwood Court, Suite 415
          Scarsdale, NY 10583
          Phone: (917) 373-9128
          Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com


LIPPMANN ENTERPRISES: Slade Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lippmann Enterprises,
L.L.C. The case is styled as Linda Slade, individually and as the
representative of a class of similarly situated persons v. Lippmann
Enterprises, L.L.C., Case No. 1:22-cv-10545-LJL (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 14,
2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Lippmann Enterprises, L.L.C. doing business as Deborah Lippmann --
https://deborahlippmann.com/ -- is the go-to brand for the most
fashionable magazines and renowned fashion houses with over 75 long
wearing shades and luxury specialty treatments for nails, hands and
feet.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Dan Shaked, Esq.
          SHAKED LAW GROUP, P.C.
          14 Harwood Court, Suite 415
          Scarsdale, NY 10583
          Phone: (917) 373-9128
          Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com

MARRIOTT HOTEL: Stanger Must File Class Cert Bid by March 3, 2023
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TIMOTHY STANGER, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated, v. MARRIOTT HOTEL
SERVICES, INC., doing business as Gaylord Opryland Resort &
Convention Center, Case No. 3:22-cv-00800 (M.D. Tenn.), the Hon.
Judge Aleta A. Trauger entered an order that the plaintiffs shall
file their motion for class certification and notice by March 3,
2023.

The defendant shall respond within 30 days, and the plaintiffs may
file a reply within 14 days after the filing of the response.

Marriott Hotel owns and operates hotels. The Company offers
accommodation, dining, spa, and fitness center facilities.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec.. 15, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3VagQMd at no extra charge.[CC]

MCDONALD'S RESTAURANTS: Underpays Restaurant Staff, Romero Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CHRISTINA ROMERO, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MCDONALD'S RESTAURANTS OF
CALIFORNIA, INC., and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants,
Case No. 22CV023757 (Cal. Super., Alameda Cty., December 13, 2022)
is a class action against the Defendants for violations of the
California Labor Code and the California's Business and Practices
Code including failure to provide meal periods, failure to provide
rest periods, failure to pay hourly wages, failure to pay sick
time, failure to indemnify, failure to provide accurate wage
statements, failure to timely pay all final wages, failure to pay
wages without discount, and unfair competition.

The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants as an hourly, non-exempt
employee from approximately December 2021 through July 2022.

McDonald's Restaurants of California, Inc. is a restaurant owner
and operator in California. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Shaun Setareh, Esq.
         Thomas Segal, Esq.
         Tyson Gibb, Esq.
         SETAREH LAW GROUP
         9665 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 430
         Beverly Hills, CA 90212
         Telephone: (310) 888-7771
         Facsimile: (310) 888-0109
         Email: shaun@setarehlaw.com
                thomas@setarehlaw.com
                tyson@setarehlaw.com

MEDICUS HEALTHCARE: Class Cert. Response Extended to Jan. 23, 2023
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as McCarthy v. Medicus
Healthcare Solutions, LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-00668 (D.N.H.), the
Hon. Judge Joseph N. Laplante entered an endorsed order granting
motion to extend time to object/respond to motion to certify class
and court-authorized notice to Jan. 23, 2023.

The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Medicus Healthcare delivers medical staffing services to healthcare
facilities.[CC]



MEG COMPANY INC: Rodriguez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Meg Company Inc. The
case is styled as Angel Rodriguez, individually and as the
representative of a class of similarly situated persons v. Meg
Company Inc. doing business as: Monitaly, Case No. 1:22-cv-07584
(E.D.N.Y., Dec. 14, 2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Meg Company Inc. doing business as Monitaly --
https://www.monitaly.com/ -- offers mens clothing brand directed by
Yuki Matsuda.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Dan Shaked, Esq.
          SHAKED LAW GROUP, P.C.
          14 Harwood Court, Suite 415
          Scarsdale, NY 10583
          Phone: (917) 373-9128
          Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com


METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION: Class Settlement Gets Initial OK
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JESSICA DE LA ROSA, JEAN
RYAN, BRONX INDEPENDENT LIVING SERVICES, BROOKLYN CENTER FOR
INDEPENDENCE OF THE DISABLED, CENTER FOR INDEPENDENCE OF THE
DISABLED, NEW YORK, DISABLED IN ACTION OF METROPOLITAN NEW YORK,
HARLEM INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, v. METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION
AUTHORITY, JANNO LIEBER, in his official capacity as chair and
chief executive officer of the Metropolitan Transportation
Authority, NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, RICHARD DAVEY, in his
official capacity as President of the New York City Transit
Authority, and the CITY OF NEW YORK, Case No. 1:19-cv-04406-ER
(S.D.N.Y.), the Court entered an order granting preliminary
approval of class settlement, certifying settlement class,
approving notice, and setting dates for final approval.

  -- The proposed Class is certified pursuant to Rules 23(a) and
     23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for
     purposes of settlement as follows:

     "All people whose disabilities make the use of stairs
     difficult or impossible and who require stair-free paths of
     travel in the New York City subway system."

  -- Any Settlement Class member who fails to properly and
     timely file and serve objections or comments shall be
     foreclosed from objecting to the Stipulation of Settlement,
     unless otherwise ordered by the Court.

  -- Any member of the Settlement Class may also request
     permission to speak at the Fairness Hearing by submitting a
     request in writing as outlined above, postmarked by this
     same deadline.

  -- Class Counsel and the Transit Defendants will respond to
     any timely filed objections not later than 21 days prior to
     the Fairness Hearing.

  -- The Plaintiffs will file their Motion for Final Approval of
     Settlement no later than 21 days before the Fairness
     Hearing.

  -- Agreement without material alteration, the proposed
     Settlement Agreement and all evidence and proceedings in
     connection with the Settlement shall be null and void nunc
     pro tunc.

  -- The Court further orders that pending further order from
     the Court, all proceedings in this Action, except those
     contemplated herein and in the Stipulation of Settlement,
     shall be stayed.

  -- The Court appoints Plaintiffs Jessica De La Rosa; Jean
     Ryan; Bronx Independent Living Services; Brooklyn Center
     for Independence of the Disabled; Center for Independence
     of the Disabled, New York; Disabled In Action of
     Metropolitan New York; and Harlem Independent Living Center
     as Class representatives.

  -- The Court appoints Disability Rights Advocates and Sheppard
     Mullin Richter and Hampton LLP, Plaintiffs' attorneys of
     record, as Class Counsel.

  -- The Proposed Settlement Agreement is the product of arm's
     length, serious, informed and non-collusive negotiations
     between experienced and knowledgeable counsel.

  -- The Proposed Settlement Agreement is fair and warrants the
     dissemination of notice to the Settlement Class apprising
     them of the Settlement.

  -- The Court grants preliminary approval of the terms and
     conditions in the proposed Settlement Agreement.

  -- The Court preliminarily finds that the terms of the
     Settlement Agreement appear to be within the range
     appropriate for possible approval, pursuant to Rule 23(c)
     of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and applicable law.

The Court said, "The class meets the requirements for class
certification under Rule 23(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure because (1) the number of class members is so numerous
that joinder of all class members is impracticable; (2) there are
questions of law or fact common to the class; (3) the claims of the
named Plaintiffs are typical of those of the class; and (4) the
named Plaintiffs and their counsel will fairly and adequately
protect the interests of the class."

Metropolitan Transportation is a public benefit corporation
responsible for public transportation in the New York City
metropolitan area.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec.. 15, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3BHLfe4 at no extra charge.[CC]

MEXICAN TACO: Fails to Pay Cooks' Minimum & OT Wages, Marquez Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
GENOVEVA CASTELAN MARQUEZ, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated, v. MEXICAN TACO RICO CORP. (D/B/A MEXICAN TACO
RICO), EL TACO RICO CORP. (D/B/A EL TACO RICO), ILARIO SANCHEZ, and
ROSARIO GONZALEZ, Case No. 1:22-cv-07593 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 14, 2022)
seeks to recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages pursuant to the
Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and for violations of the New York
Labor Law as well as the "spread of hours" and overtime wage orders
of the New York Commissioner of Labor, including applicable
liquidated damages, interest, attorneys' fees and costs.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants at Mexican Taco Rico
and El Taco Rico from August 20, 2019, until March 2020 and then
from July 2020 until September 4, 2022. The Plaintiff was employed
as a cook at the restaurant and food truck located at 264 E Gun
Hill Rd, Bronx, NY 10467, and 208 Jerome Ave, Bronx, NY 10467,
respectively.

The Plaintiff worked for Defendants in excess of 40 hours per week,
without appropriate minimum wage, overtime, and spread of hours
compensation for the hours that she worked, the suit claims. The
Defendants allegedly failed to maintain accurate recordkeeping of
the hours worked and failed to pay the Plaintiff appropriately for
any hours worked, either at the straight rate of pay or for any
additional overtime premium. Further, the Defendants failed to pay
the Plaintiff the required "spread of hours" pay for any day in
which she had to work over 10 hours a day, says the Plaintiff.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Catalina Sojo, Esq.
          CSM LEGAL, P.C.
          60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
          New York, NY 10165
          Telephone: (212) 317-1200
          Facsimile: (212) 317-1620

MEYER CORPORATION: Clark Files FDCPA Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Meyer Corporation,
U.S. The case is styled as Howard Clark, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. Meyer Corporation, U.S., Case
No. CGC22603458 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco Cty., Dec. 13,
2022).

The case type is stated as "Contract/Warranty."

Meyer Corporation -- http://www.meyerus.com/-- is a cookware
distributor based in Vallejo, California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael H. Pearson, Esq.
          PEARSON, SIMON & WARSHAW, LLP
          15165 Ventura Blvd., Suite 400
          Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
          Phone: 818-788-8300

               - and -

          Alex R. Straus, Esq.
          GREG COLEMAN LAW, P.C.
          16748 Mccormick St
          Encino, CA 91436
          Phone: 917-471-1894


MISSISSIPPI: Class Certification Sched Order Entered in Wallace
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ERIC WALLACE, et al. v.
MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., Case No.
3:21-cv-00516-CWR-LGI (S.D. Miss.), the Hon. Judge LaKeysha Greer
Isaac entered a class certification scheduling order as follows:

  -- The parties will exchange initial         Jan. 23, 2023
     disclosures regarding class
     certification issues pursuant to
     Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 on or prior to:

  -- The deadline to file any motions          Dec. 20, 2023
     to amend the pleadings or to join
     additional parties is:

  -- The deadline for Defendants to            Jan. 20, 2023
     respond to Plaintiffs' amended
     complaint, if any, is:

  -- Expert witnesses for class
     certification, if any, shall be
     disclosed, in compliance with
     Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26,
     by:

           for Plaintiffs' side:              April 3, 2023

           for Defendants' side:              June 5, 2023

  -- Discovery must be completed by:          Aug. 21, 2023

  -- Daubert motions challenging              Sept. 19, 2023
     the parties' class certification
     experts must be filed by:

  -- The Plaintiffs' side motion for          Oct. 31, 2023
     class certification and memorandum
     shall be filed by:

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec.. 15, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Wqv6Bn at no extra charge.[CC]

MUSTANG FUEL: Wake Energy Files Suit in E.D. Oklahoma
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Mustang Fuel
Corporation, et al. The case is styled as Wake Energy, LLC  on
behalf of itself and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Mustang Fuel Corporation, Mustang Gas Products, LLC, Case No.
6:22-cv-00364-GLJ (E.D. Okla., Dec. 14, 2022).

The nature suit is stated as Insurance for Other Contract.

Mustang Fuel Corporation -- https://www.mustangfuel.com/ --
provides gas and oil exploration and production services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Brady L. Smith, Esq.
          Harry Skeeter Jordan, Esq.
          BRADY SMITH LAW, PLLC
          One Leadership Square
          211 N Robinson Ave, Ste 1320
          Oklahoma City, OK 73102
          Phone: (405) 293-3029
          Email: brady@BLSmithlaw.co
                 skeeter@blsmithlaw.com

               - and -

          Randy C. Smith, Esq.
          RANDY C SMITH & ASSOC
          211 N Robinson, Ste 1310
          Oklahoma City, OK 73102
          Phone: (405) 212-2786
          Email: randy@rcsmithlaw.com


NASHVILLE CENTER: Hammel Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Warren Hammel and Brian Bloomfield, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated v. NASHVILLE CENTER FOR REHABILITATION
AND HEALING, LLC, Case No. 3:22-cv-01011 (M.D. Tenn., Dec. 13,
2022), is brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act for the
Defendant's failure to pay overtime wages.

The Plaintiffs were paid an hourly rate of pay; were classified as
non-exempt employees by Defendant; and regularly and routinely
worked more than 40 hours in a typical workweek. Throughout their
employment at the Nashville Center, including during the Recovery
Period, Plaintiffs regularly and routinely worked "off the clock"
and/or were denied proper overtime compensation for all the hours
they worked in excess of 40 in a workweek. Throughout Plaintiffs'
employment at the Nashville Center, including during the Recovery
Period, the Defendant regularly and routinely violated the FLSA in
a willful manner by failing to pay overtime to the Plaintiffs and
Collective Class Members at time and one-half their regular rates
of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek,
says the complaint.

The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants as physical therapist/
physical therapy assistant.

The Nashville Center is a subacute care and nursing center,
providing a full range of care for short-term patients and
long-term residents, including rehabilitation and daily physical,
occupational and speech therapies.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Martin D. Holmes, Esq.
          Autumn L. Gentry, Esq.
          DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC
          424 Church Street, Suite 800
          Nashville, TN 37219
          Phone: 615-244-6538
          Fax: 844-670-6009
          Email: mdholmes@dickinsonwright.com
                 agentry@dickinsonwright.com


NATIONAL GRID: NIghtingale Files Bid for Class Certification
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROBERT NIGHTINGALE, on
behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, v. NATIONAL
GRID USA SERVICE COMPANY, INC., FIRST CONTACT LLC, and IQOR US
INC., Case No. 1:19-cv-12341-NMG (D. Mass.), the Hon. Judge entered
an order certifying, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3), the
following class and sub-class:

   -- The Class

      "All persons residing in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
      who, within four years prior to the filing of this action,
      the Defendants initiated in-excess of two telephone calls
      regarding a debt within a seven-day period to their
      residence, cellular telephone, or other provided telephone
      number;" and

   -- NER1BO & NER5BO Sub-Class

      "All persons residing in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
      who, within four years prior to the filing of this action,
      Defendants initiated in-excess of two telephone calls
      regarding a debt within a seven-day period to their
      residence, cellular telephone, or other provided telephone
      number pursuant to Program Codes NGR.USUT.FE.NER1BO or
      NGR.USUT.FE.NER5BO.

The Plaintiff further requests that the Court appoint Plaintiff as
the class representative and appoint Lemberg Law, LLC, as class
counsel.

National Grid distributes electricity and gas energy.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion to certify class dated Dec. 16,
2022 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3BMJ3Su
at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Sergei Lemberg, Esq.
          Stephen Taylor, Esq.
          Joshua Markovits, Esq.
          LEMBERG LAW L.L.C.
          43 Danbury Road
          Wilton, CT 06897
          Telephone: (203) 653-2250
          Facsimile: (203) 653-3424

NEW YORK, NY: Court Modifies Scheduling Order in Azor-El Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Azor-El, et al v. New York
City Department of Corrections, et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-03650-KPF
(S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Katherine Polk Failla entered an order
granting the application to modify scheduling order as follows:

In light of the extended period provided for class certification
discovery in the Court's case management plan, the Court will not
grant further extensions of the discovery deadlines in this case
absent exceptional circumstances. The pretrial conference scheduled
to take place on January 24, 2023, is hereby adjourned to March 21,
2023 at 10:00 a.m.

At this conference, the parties should be prepared to discuss a
briefing schedule for the Plaintiffs' motion for class
certification, as well as the need for expert discovery on the
issue of class certification.

The Plaintiffs also noticed Rule 30(b)(6) depositions for
class-related topics, and the City has been working on
supplementing its discovery production.

This would affect the following deadlines under the Scheduling
Order:


-- Paragraph 7(e) (close of fact discovery)

         Current deadline:       January 15, 2023

         Proposed deadline:      March 16, 2023

-- Paragraph 8(d) (depositions of fact witnesses)

         Current deadline:       December 15, 2022

         Proposed deadline:      March 16, 2023

-- Paragraph 8(e) (service of requests to admit)

         Current deadline:      December 15, 2022

         Proposed deadline:     February 14, 2023

The New York City Department of Correction is the branch of the
municipal government of New York City responsible for the custody,
control, and care of New York City's imprisoned population, housing
the majority of them on Rikers Island.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 16, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3YBwkM4 at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          E.E. Keenan, Esq.
          KEENAN & BHATIA, LLC
          90 Broad Street, Suite 200
          New York, NY 10004
          Telephone: (917) 975-5278
          E-mail: www.keenanbhatia.com

NIFTY GATEWAY: Hastings Sues Over Unregistered Securities
---------------------------------------------------------
John Hastings, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. NIFTY GATEWAY, LLC and THE GEMINI TRUST COMPANY, LLC,
Case No. 1:22-cv-10517 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 13, 2022), is brought
against the Defendants who promotes, offers, and sells securities
known as "Nifties" throughout the United States which an
unregistered securities therefore violating of the federal
securities laws.

Nifties sold by Defendants are non-fungible tokens, or NFTs. NFTs
are a form of digital assets that can be bought, sold, and
exchanged on proprietary trading platforms. Defendants focus their
Nifties on digital artwork and curated collections. No matter the
visual difference among individual tokens, at their core, Nifties
are NFTs. NFTs exist on a "blockchain," which is essentially a
decentralized ledger that records digital asset transactions.
Assets on the blockchain are referred to as "crypto assets." There
are various kinds of crypto assets in existence, and among the most
well-known are Bitcoin and Ethereum.

Any digital asset, including an NFT, can be classified by
securities regulators as a "security." Certain types of digital
assets derive their value from the success or failure of a given
project, promoter, or startup. Investors purchase this type of
digital asset with the hope that its value will increase in the
future as the project grows in popularity, based upon the
managerial efforts of the issuer and those working to develop the
project. Because this type of digital asset is properly classified
as a security under federal law, the issuers of this type of crypto
assets, including the Defendants, are required to file registration
statements with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
("SEC"), and comply with federal securities laws.

The Defendants knew of these requirements, but nonetheless failed
to comply. By selling these unregistered securities to investors,
Defendants reaped hundreds of millions of dollars in profits.

On the date of the release for each respective Nifty, the Plaintiff
purchased 10 Nifties on the Nifty Gateway Platform, using United
States Dollars to make the purchase. All Nifties purchased by the
Plaintiff were offered, promoted, and published by Nifty Gateway
Curated, a storefront operated and managed by a specialized team at
Nifty Gateway. The Plaintiff relied on Nifty Gateway and their
efforts to make his Nifties more valuable.

As a result of the Defendants' issuance, promotion, and sale of
unregistered securities, Plaintiff and the Class--many of whom are
retail investors who lack the technical and financial
sophistication necessary to evaluate the risks associated with
their investment in Nifties and were denied the information that
would have been contained in the materials required for the
registration of the Nifties--have suffered significant damages,
says the complaint.

The Plaintiff purchased unregistered Nifty securities from
Defendants during the Class Period.

The Defendants own and operate a platform called Nifty
Gateway.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Serina M. Vash, Esq.
          HERMAN JONES, LLP
          153 Central Avenue, # 131
          Westfield, NJ 07090
          Phone: 404-504-6516
          Email: svash@hermanjones.com

               - and -

          John C. Herman, Esq.
          HERMAN JONES, LLP
          3424 Peachtree Road, Suite 1650
          Atlanta, GA 30326
          Phone: 404-504-6500
          Email: jherman@hermanjones.com


NORTHWOOD HEALTHCARE: Fails to Pay Nurses' OT Wages, Gifford Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DONNA GIFFORD, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated
v. NORTHWOOD HEALTHCARE GROUP, LLC, and GARDEN HEALTHCARE GROUP,
LLC, Case No. 2:22-cv-04389-SDM-CMV (S.D. Ohio, Dec. 15, 2022)
seeks to recover overtime wages under the Fair Labor  Standards Act
of 1938, the Ohio Wage Act, and the Ohio Prompt Pay Act.

According to the complaint, Ms. Gifford and other similarly
situated employees were not fully and properly paid for all
overtime wages because the Defendants required a 30-minute meal
break deduction from their compensable hours worked even when Ms.
Gifford and other similarly situated employees were unable to take
a full, uninterrupted bona fide meal break of 30 minutes.
Accordingly, the Defendants' facilities were regularly understaffed
and Ms. Gifford and other similarly situated employees were often
too busy with work to take a full, 30-minute meal break, says the
suit.

Ms. Gifford and other similarly situated employees regularly
complained to the Defendants that they were unable to take a meal
break, but the Defendants still applied the meal break deduction to
their daily hours worked. Additionally, the Defendants permitted
Ms. Gifford and those similarly situated employees to work more
than 40 hours per workweek while not compensating them for all such
hours worked over 40 at a rate of at least one-and-one-half times
(1.5x) their regular rates of pay, the suit further asserts.

The Plaintiff worked as an hourly, non-exempt "employee" of the
Defendants, primarily in the position of Licensed Practical Nurse
(LPN) at their Capital City Gardens Rehabilitation and Nursing
Center location from 2018 to 2021 and at their Whispering Hills
Care Center location from April 2022 to November 2022.

Northwood is a healthcare private investment firm focused on
partnering with founders and business owners to build market
leading healthcare.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Matthew J.P. Coffman, Esq.
          Adam C. Gedling, Esq.
          Kelsie N. Hendren, Esq.
          Tristan T. Akers, Esq.
          COFFMAN LEGAL, LLC
          1550 Old Henderson Rd
          Suite #126
          Columbus, OH 43220
          Telephone: (614) 949-1181
          Facsimile: (614) 386-9964
          E-mail: mcoffman@mcoffmanlegal.com
                  agedling@mcoffmanlegal.com
                  khendren@mcoffmanlegal.com
                  takers@mcoffmanlegal.com

OFFICIA IMAGING: Gonzales Suit Removed to S.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Ivonne Gonzales, an individual, on behalf of
herself, and on behalf of all persons similarly situated v. OFFICIA
IMAGING, INC., dba OFFICE1, a Nevada corporation; ALTERNATIVE
BUSINESS EQUIPMENT, INC. dba OFFICE1 a Nevada corporation; and DOES
1-50, Inclusive, Case No. 2 37-2022-00041104-CU-OE-CTL was removed
from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San
Diego, to the United States District Court for the Southern
District of California on Dec. 14, 2022, and assigned Case No.
3:22-cv-01982-DMS-MDD.

The Complaint purports to assert the following 9 causes of action:
Unfair Competition in violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code; Failure
to pay minimum wages in violation of Cal. Lab. Code; Failure to pay
overtime wages in violation of Cal. Lab. Code; Failure to provide
required meal periods in violation of Cal. Lab. Code and the
applicable IWC Wage Order; Failure to provide rest periods in
violation of Cal. Lab. Code and the applicable IWC Wage Order;
Failure to provide wages when due in violation of Cal. Lab. Code;
Failure to provide accurate itemized statements in violation of
Cal. Lab. Code; Retaliation in violation of Cal. Lab. Code;
Constructive Discharge in violation of public policy.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Michael L. Kibbe, Esq.
          John Keeney, Esq.
          LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
          18565 Jamboree Road, Suite 800
          Irvine, CA 92612
          Phone: 949.705.3000
          Fax: 949.724.1201
          Email: mkibbe@littler.com
                 jkeeney@littler.com

OLLIE'S BARGAIN: Seeks More Time for Conditional Cert Opposition
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Pauli v. Ollie's Bargain
Outlet, Inc., Case No. 5:22-cv-00279-MAD-ML (N.D.N.Y.), the
Defendant asks the Court to enter an order granting extension of
the deadline for opposition to motion for conditional
certification.

The Defendant's counsel said, "The Plaintiff filed his Motion for
Conditional Certification this afternoon, December 16, 2022. Under
Local Rule 7.1(a)(2), Ollie's opposition would be due on January 6,
2023. Due to the upcoming holidays, the fact that Ollie's busiest
season extends through early January, and my preplanned vacation
out of the country, we respectfully request an extension of the
deadline to file Ollie's opposition to the Motion." Plaintiff's
counsel has consented to Ollie's request and the parties have
agreed to the following briefing schedule:

   -- Ollies opposition to Plaintiff's      January 30, 2023
      Motion for Conditional
      Certification:

   -- Plaintiff's Reply:                    February 24, 2023."

Ollie's Bargain is an American chain of discount closeout
retailers.

A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Dec. 16, 2022 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3FH9xpF at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Defendant is represented by:

          Kathleen McLeod Caminiti, Esq.
          FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP
          430 Mountain Avenue, Suite 303
          Murray Hill, NJ 07974
          Telephone: (908) 516-1050
          Facsimile: (908) 516-1051
          E-mail: kcaminiti@fisherphillips.com

PANINI AMERICA: Brashear Appeals Ruling in Fraud Suit to 5th Cir.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
KEVIN B. BRASHEAR and CHRISTOPHER S. KITCHEN are taking an appeal
from a court order in the lawsuit entitled Kevin B. Brashear and
Christopher S. Kitchen, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Panini America, Inc., Defendant,
Case No. 3:19-cv-00201, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Texas.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, this lawsuit
was brought against the Defendant for violations of the Texas
Deceptive Trade Practices Act, fraud, and unjust enrichment. The
Defendant allegedly failed to: (1) adhere to its delivery schedule
in sending actual collectible cards, (2) communicate redemption
order status, and (3) fails to respond to emails and telephone
calls.

The appellate case is captioned Kevin B. Brashear and Christopher
S. Kitchen v. Panini America, Inc., Case No. 05-22-01338-CV, in the
Texas Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, filed on December 13,
2022. [BN]

PEG PEREGO: Toro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Peg Perego U.S.A.,
Inc. The case is styled as Luis Toro, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Peg Perego U.S.A., Inc., Case No.
1:22-cv-10552-VSB (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 14, 2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Peg Perego -- http://www.pegperego.com/-- offers a whole range of  
products for babies: high chairs, strollers, ride-on toys and much
more.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mars Khaimov, Esq.
          10826 64th Avenue, Ste. 2nd Floor
          Forest Hills, NY 11375
          Phone: (917) 915-7415
          Email: mars@khaimovlaw.com

PELOTON INTERACTIVE: Discloses Viewers' Info to FB, Carroll Claims
------------------------------------------------------------------
KEITH CARROLL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. PELOTON INTERACTIVE, INC., a Delaware corporation,
d/b/a ONEPELOTON.COM; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Case No.
2:22-cv-09109 (C.D. Cal., Dec. 15, 2022) alleges that the
Defendants disclosed to a third party, Facebook, the Plaintiff's
and the Class members' personally identifiable information, in
violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act.

The Defendants allegedly utilized the Facebook Tracking Pixel to
compel Plaintiff's web browser to transfer Plaintiff's identifying
information, like his Facebook ID, along with Plaintiff's event
data, like the title of the videos he viewed. The Defendants
knowingly disclosed Plaintiff's PII because it used that data to
build audiences on Facebook and retarget them for its advertising
campaigns, the lawsuit contends.

The Plaintiff and Class members did not provide Defendants with any
form of consent -- either written or otherwise -- to disclose their
PII to third parties.

Accordingly, when the Plaintiff watched videos on Onepeloton.com,
the Defendants disclosed event data, which recorded and disclosed
the video's title and URL, along with every time the Plaintiff
clicked a button to pause or play the video. The Defendants also
disclosed identifiers for Plaintiff, including the c_user and fr
cookies. In other words, Defendants did exactly what the VPPA
prohibits: they disclosed Plaintiff's video viewing habits to a
third party. Viewers would be shocked and appalled to know that
Defendants secretly disclose to Facebook all of key data regarding
a visitors' viewing habits, says the lawsuit.

The Plaintiff is a consumer privacy advocate with dual motivations
for watching a video on Defendants' Website Onepeloton.com.

Peloton Interactive is an American exercise equipment and media
company based in New York City.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Scott J. Ferrell, Esq.
          PACIFIC TRIAL ATTORNEYS
          4100 Newport Place Drive, Ste. 800
          Newport Beach, CA 92660
          Telephone: (949) 706-6464
          Facsimile: (949) 706-6469

PILOTS HQ LLC: Fagnani Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Pilots HQ, LLC. The
case is styled as Mykayla Fagnani, on behalf of herself and all
other persons similarly situated v. Pilots HQ, LLC, Case No.
1:22-cv-10578-JPC (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 14, 2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Pilots HQ LLC -- https://pilotshq.com/ -- is an online aviation
supplier established in late 2009 in Waterford Michigan.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb, Esq.
          Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
          GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
          150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR
          New York, NY 10003
          Phone: (212) 228-9795
          Fax: (212) 982-6284
          Email: nyjg@aol.com
                 michael@gottlieb.legal


PRECIGEN INC: Faces Securities Suit Over Methane Bioconversion
--------------------------------------------------------------
Precigen, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2022, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 9, 2022, that in October 2020,
several shareholder class action lawsuits were filed in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California on
behalf of certain purchasers of the Company's common stock. The
complaints name as defendants the Company and certain of its
current and former officers.

The plaintiffs' claims challenged disclosures about its proprietary
methane bioconversion platform program from May 10, 2017, to March
1, 2019. In March 2021, the court granted an order consolidating
the claims and, in April 2021, appointed a lead plaintiff and lead
counsel in the case, captioned "In re Precigen Securities
Litigation," Case No. 5:20-cv-06936-BLF (N.D. Cal.). In May 2021,
the lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint.

The defendants moved to dismiss that complaint. In September 2021,
the court issued an order mooting the defendants' motion to dismiss
in light of the lead plaintiff's stated intent to file a second
amended complaint in response to the motion to dismiss. On
September 27, 2021, the lead plaintiff filed a second amended
complaint, which the defendants moved to dismiss. On May 31, 2022,
the court granted the motion, dismissing the second amended
complaint with leave to amend.

On August 1, 2022, the lead plaintiff filed a third amended
complaint. On August 2, 2022, the Court granted the parties'
stipulated request to vacate all case deadlines to permit the
parties to conduct a private mediation session to explore the
potential resolution of the action. In the event that litigation
resumes, the defendants intend to move to dismiss the third amended
complaint.

Precigen, Inc. discovery and clinical-stage biopharmaceutical
company based in Maryland.


PREMIERE GLOBAL: Employees Get Class Certification in ERISA Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KIMBERLY GOODNOW,
individually and behalf of all others similarly situated, et al.,
v. PREMIERE GLOBAL SERVICES, INC., et al., Case No.
1:22-cv-02184-TWT (N.D. Ga.), the Hon. Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr.
entered an order granting the Plaintiffs' motion for class
certification:

   -- The Plaintiffs Kimberly Goodnow, Audra Terrazas, and
      Timothy Steffens are appointed as the Class
      Representatives.

   -- The Attorneys Jeremy Stephens and Bryan L. Arbeit of the
      firm Morgan & Morgan, P.A., are appointed as Class
      Counsel.

   -- The Defendants Premiere Global Services, Inc., American
      Teleconferencing Services, Ltd., and Audio
      Telecommunications Technology II, LLC are ordered to
      produce a list of all individuals falling within the class
      definition, and their last known addresses and email
      addresses, within 30 days of the date of the Order.

   -- The Plaintiffs Kimberly Goodnow, Audra Terrazas, and
      Timothy Steffens are ordered to send a copy of the Class
      Notice to all putative class members via mail and email
      within 60 days of the date of the Order.

   -- Defining the Class, Claims, Issues, and Defenses Pursuant
      to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(1)(B), the Court certifies the
      following Class in this action:

      "All former employees of PGi who: (1) entered into a
      Severance Agreement in connection with layoffs conducted
      on or around March 31, 2021, June 25, 2021, or August 20,
      2021; and (2) were not paid the full amount of their Basic
      Severance or Enhanced Severance promised in the Severance
      Agreement."

The Court further certifies the following claims of the Class:

   (1) Unpaid Benefits under ERISA, 29 U.S.C. section 1132(a)(1)
       (B); and

   (2) Breach of Contract for Enhanced Severance Pay under
       Georgia common law.

The named Plaintiffs Kimberly Goodnow, Audra Terrazas, and Timothy
Steffens were formerly employed by Defendants Premiere Global
Services, Inc. and American Teleconferencing Services, Ltd. and
were terminated from their employment on March 31, June 25, and
August 20, 2021,
respectively.

The named Plaintiffs allege that they each entered into severance
agreements with PGi under the "Premiere Global Services U.S.
Affiliates Severance Pay Plan Amended and Restated Effective
January 1, 2018 and that they were terminated for a
"Severance-Qualifying Event" under the terms of the Plan.

In September 2021, however, PGi informed the named Plaintiffs and
the putative class members that it would no longer be processing
severance payments for them due to a forbearance agreement PGi had
entered with its lenders.

On that basis, the named Plaintiffs brought this action on behalf
of themselves, and the putative class members similarly situated,
to recover their unpaid Basic Severance Paid under the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA") and to recover their
Enhanced Severance Pay under Georgia common law.

Premiere Global provides collaboration software. The Company offers
web casting, event streaming, project management, cloud based
virtual meeting, audio, video, and web conferencing solutions.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 15, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3V8SClp at no extra charge.[CC]

PROCIDA CONSTRUCTION: Fails to Pay OT Wages & Spread-of-Hours Pay
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kyle Cox, and Kasim Adams, on behalf of themselves and others
similarly situated in the proposed FLSA Collective Action, v.
Procida Construction Corp., Procida Construction Corp. of NY, and
Mario Procida, Case No. 1:22-cv-10549 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 14, 2022),
seek injunctive and declaratory relief and to recover unpaid
overtime wages, unpaid spread-of-hours, unpaid prevailing wages,
liquidated and statutory damages, pre-and post-judgment interest,
and attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards
Act (FLSA), New York State Labor Law (NYLL) and the NYLL's Wage
Theft Prevention Act (WTPA).

Mr. Cox worked as a "Tier A Interior Demolition Worker" and manual
laborer at the Procida Construction. He performed work for public
works projects funded by New York City government
instrumentalities.

An example of a publicly funded construction project that Mr. Cox
worked on includes:

-- the "Senior Housing Complex" development, having an address
    at 811 Lexington Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11221;

-- the "Senior Housing Complex" development, having an address
    in the Bronx, New York; and

-- the "Hope Gardens" development, having an address at 314
    Wilson Ave Brooklyn, NY 11237.

From August 2020 to December 2020, Mr. Cox worked five days a week
at the "Hope Gardens" public works project 8.5 hours each day, with
a 30-minute meal break and a 15-minute coffee break, for a total
period of 38.75 hours during each of the weeks.

On multiple occasions, during the winter months, Mr. Cox worked six
(6) days a week at the "Hope Gardens" public works project
for a total period of 46.5 hours during each of the weeks, Mr. Cox
claims.

For the first day of the Plaintiff's employment at the "Hope
Gardens" public works project, the Defendants paid Plaintiff Cox
$69.50 per hour. For the remainder of Plaintiff's employment at the
"Hope Gardens" public works project (i.e., from August 2, 2020 to
December 2020), Defendants paid Mr. Cox $44.20 per hour, for all
hours worked, the lawsuit says.

The Defendants improperly accounted for Mr. Cox as a "Tier B
Interior Demolition Worker", despite the fact that he was actually
performing work as a "Tier A Interior Demolition Worker." Thus, he
was paid less than prevailing wages on the "Hope Gardens" public
works project, the lawsuit adds.

Procida Construction provides residential construction
services.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Joshua Levin-Epstein, Esq.
          Jason Mizrahi, Esq.
          LEVIN-EPSTEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4700
          New York, NY 10165
          Telephone: (212) 792-0046
          E-mail: Joshua@levinepstein.com

PROCTER & GAMBLE: Hernandez Must File Class Cert Bid by Jan. 13
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Christian Hernandez v.
Procter and Gamble Distributing, LLC, et al., Case No.
5:21-cv-00921-FMO-SP (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Fernando M. Olguin
entered an order on the Joint Notice of Settlement filed on
December 1, 2022:

   1. All pending deadlines and proceedings are hereby vacated.

   2. The Plaintiff shall file a Motion for Class Certification
      and Preliminary Approval of Settlement Agreement no later
      than January 13, 2023.

   3. The Defendant is encouraged to also file a brief in
      support of the motion for preliminary approval.

   4. The Plaintiff is advised that the court will not grant the
      Motion unless it includes a discussion of the Rule 23(e)
      of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requirements.

Procter & Gamble distributes household and pharmaceuticals
products.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 15, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3G1Vooc at no extra charge.[CC]

PROGRESSIVE HOUSING: Saunders Files FDCPA Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Progressive Housing,
Inc., et al. The case is styled as Jerime Saunders, on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Progressive Housing, Inc., Does
1-20, Cathy Lemke, Fred Lemke, Case No. 34-2022-00331427-CU-OE-GDS
(Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Dec. 13, 2022).

The case type is stated as "Other Employment – Civil Unlimited."

Progressive Housing, Inc. offers developmental training, assisted
living, money management, job placement, training, community
outings, and other services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kelly M. Hatfield, Esq.


PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE: Exhibit 6 in Class Cert Bid Substituted
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SOCORRO MORELAND,
Individually, and on Behalf of the Class, v. THE PRUDENTIAL
INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, a New Jersey Corporation; PRUCO LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANY, an Arizona Corporation, Case No.
3:20-cv-04336-RS (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Richard Seeborg
entered an jointly stipulated order to substitute new exhibit 6 to
plaintiff's motion for class certification.

  -- The the partially redacted Exhibit 6 which was attached to
     the Parties' Joint 7 Stipulation shall be filed publicly as
     a substitute for the interim sealed version of Exhibit 6 to
     Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification.

Prudential Insurance provides life and group insurance, investment,
and retirement services.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 12, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3FSA2tE at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

                - and -

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

The Defendants are represented by:

          Sandra D. Hauser, Esq.
          Leanna M. Anderson, Esq.
          DENTONS US LLP
          1999 Harrison Street, Suite 1300
          Oakland, CA 94612
          Telephone: (415) 882-5000
          Facsimile: (415) 882-0300
          E-mail: sandra.hauser@dentons.com
                  leanna.anderson@dentons.com

                - and -

          Laura Leigh Geist, Esq.
          WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP
          One Front Street, 34th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 858-7440
          Facsimile: (415) 858-7599
          E-mail: lgeist@willkie.com

PURE SALT INTERIOR: Bullock Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Pure Salt Interiors,
Inc. The case is styled as Justin Bullock, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated v. Pure Salt Interiors, Inc., Case
No. 1:22-cv-10550 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 14, 2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Pure Salt Interiors -- https://puresaltinteriors.com/ -- is a full
service interior design studio and e-commerce shoppe.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mars Khaimov, Esq.
          10826 64th Avenue, Ste. 2nd Floor
          Forest Hills, NY 11375
          Phone: (917) 915-7415
          Email: mars@khaimovlaw.com

QUEST DIAGNOSTICS: Augustine Sues Over Unlawful Interception
------------------------------------------------------------
Ophelia Augustine, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. QUEST DIAGNOSTICS INCORPORATED, Case No.
3:22-cv-01980-JLS-DEB (S.D. Cal., Dec. 14, 2022), is brought for
damages and injunctive relief against the Defendant, and its
present, former, or future direct and indirect parent companies,
subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, related entities for violations
of the Federal Wiretap Act (the "Wiretap Act") and the California
Invasion of Privacy Act ("CIPA"), in relation to the unauthorized
interception, collection, recording, and dissemination of
Plaintiff's and Class Members' communications and data.

The Plaintiff and Class Members reasonably expected that visits to
Defendant's website would be private, and that Defendant would not
be intercepting or tapping their communications with Defendant's
website, particularly because Defendant failed to present Plaintiff
and Class Members with a pop-up disclosure or consent form alerting
Plaintiff that the visits to the website were monitored and
recorded by Defendant.

Over the last few years, Defendant has had embedded within its
website code and has continuously operated at least one "session
replay" script that was provided by a third party ("Session Replay
Provider"). The "session replay" spyware was always active and
intercepted every incoming data communication to Defendant's
website the moment a visitor accessed the site. The Session Replay
Provider that provided that "session replay" spyware to Defendant
is not a provider of wire or electronic communication services, or
an internet service provider.

Defendant's use of "session play" spyware was not instrumental or
necessary to the operation or function of Defendant's website or
business. Defendant's use of "session replay" spyware to intercept
Plaintiff's electronic communications was not instrumental or
necessary to Defendant's provision of any of its goods or services.
Rather, the level and detail of information surreptitiously
collected by Defendant indicates that the only purpose was to gain
an unlawful understanding of the habits and preferences of users to
its websites, and the information collected was solely for
Defendant's own benefit.

During one or more of Plaintiff's and Class Members' visits to
Defendant's website, Defendant utilized "session replay" spyware to
intercept the substance of Plaintiff's and Class Members'
electronic communications intentionally and contemporaneously with
Defendant's website, including mouse clicks and movements,
keystrokes, search terms, information inputted by Plaintiff, pages
and content viewed, scroll movements, and copy and paste actions.
In other words, Defendant tapped and made unauthorized connections
to the electronic communications of Plaintiff and Class Members
made during visits to Defendant's website.

The Defendant then stored the communications and played them back
and analyzed them for business purposes. Defendant never sought
consent and Plaintiff and Class Members never provided consent for
Defendant's unauthorized access to their electronic communications.
Plaintiff and Class Members did not have a reasonable opportunity
to discover Defendant's unlawful and unauthorized connections
because Defendant did not disclose its actions or seek consent from
Plaintiff or Class Members prior to making the connections to the
electronic communications through the "session replay" spyware,
says the complaint.

The Plaintiff visited Defendant's website.

The Defendant owns and operates the following website:
www.questdiagnostics.com.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Daniel G. Shay, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF DANIEL G. SHAY
          2221 Camino del Rio S, Ste 308
          San Diego, CA 92108
          Phone: 619-222-7429
          Email: DanielShay@TCPAFDCPA.com

               - and -

          Joshua B. Swigart, Esq.
          Spencer L. Pfeiff (SBN 343305)
          SWIGART LAW GROUP, APC
          2221 Camino del Rio S, Ste 308
          San Diego, CA 92108
          Phone: 866-219-3343
          Email: Josh@SwigartLawGroup.com
                 Spencer@SwigartLawGroup.com

RADIUS GLOBAL SOLUTIONS: Pulvar FDCPA Suit Removed to S.D. Florida
------------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Lisa Pulvar, individually and on behalf of all
those similarly situated v. Radius Global Solutions LLC, Does 1
through 10, inclusive, was removed to the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of Florida on Dec. 14, 2022.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:22-cv-14418-XXXX to
the proceeding.

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

Radius Global Solutions -- https://www.radiusgs.com/ -- is a
leading provider of accounts receivable, customer relations and
revenue cycle management solutions.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jennifer Gomes Simil, Esq.
          Jibrael Jarallah Said Hindi, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
          110 SE 6th St., 17th Floor
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Phone: (954) 907-1136
          Email: jen@jibraellaw.com
                 jibrael@jibraellaw.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Dayle Marie Van Hoose, Esq.
          Michael Paul Schuette, Jr., Esq.
          SESSIONS, ISRAEL & SHARTLE, LLC
          3350 Buschwood Park Drive, Suite 195
          Tampa, FL 33618
          Phone: (813) 890-2463
          Fax: (866) 466-3140
          Email: dvanhoose@sessions.legal
                 mschuette@sessions.legal

REALPAGE INC: Godfrey Sues Over Artificially Inflated Prices
------------------------------------------------------------
Michelle K. Godfrey, Individually and on Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated v. REALPAGE, INC.; GREYSTAR REAL ESTATE
PARTNERS, LLC; LINCOLN PROPERTY CO.; FPI MANAGEMENT, INC.;
MID-AMERICA APARTMENT COMMUNITIES, INC.; AVENUE5 RESIDENTIAL, LLC;
EQUITY RESIDENTIAL; THE IRVINE COMPANY, LLC; ESSEX PROPERTY TRUST,
INC.; THRIVE COMMUNITIES MANAGEMENT, LLC; and SECURITY PROPERTIES
INC., Case No. 2:22-cv-01759 (W.D. Wash., Dec. 13, 2022), is
brought challenging a cartel among lessors of multifamily
residential real estate leases ("Lessors") artificially inflating
the prices of multifamily residential real estate in the United
States above competitive levels.

Until 2016, and potentially earlier, many of the nation's largest
Lessors priced their leases based upon their own assessments of how
to best compete against other Lessors. Lessors generally priced
their units competitively to maximize occupancy (that is,
maximizing output). Lessors had an incentive to lower their prices
to attract lessees away from their competitors, until all available
leases were sold. In this way, competition drove rent levels to
reflect available supply of rental units and lessee demand. Lessors
also independently determined when to put their leases on the
market, resulting in unpredictable supply levels--a natural
phenomenon in a competitive market. When supply exceeded demand,
Lessors cut prices.

However, beginning in approximately 2016, and potentially earlier,
Lessors replaced their independent pricing and supply decisions
with collusion. Lessors agreed to use a common third party that
collected real-time pricing and supply levels, and then used that
data to make unit-specific pricing and supply recommendations.
Lessors also agreed to follow these recommendations, on the
expectation that competing Lessors would do the same.

That third party is RealPage, Inc. RealPage provides software and
data analytics to Lessors. RealPage also serves as the mechanism by
which Lessors collude and avoid competition, increasing lease
prices to the Plaintiff and other members of the proposed Class.
RealPage openly boasts that its services "balance supply and demand
to maximize Lessors' revenue growth." And that is precisely what
RealPage has done, facilitating an agreement among participating
Lessors not to compete on price, and allowing Lessors to coordinate
both pricing and supply through two mutually reinforcing mechanisms
in furtherance of their agreed aim of suppressing price competition
for multifamily residential real estate leases.

First, Lessors "outsource daily pricing and ongoing revenue
oversight" to RealPage, replacing separate centers of independent
decision-making with one. While Lessors are able reject the
RealPage pricing through an onerous process, RealPage emphasizes
the need for "discipline" among participating Lessors. To encourage
adherence to its common scheme, RealPage explains that for its
services to be most effective in increasing rents, Lessors must
accept the pricing at least eighty percent of the time. These
efforts are successful, with a RealPage employee explaining that as
many as 90 percent (and at least 80 percent) of prices are adopted
by participating Lessors without any deviation.

Second, RealPage allows participating Lessors to coordinate supply
levels to avoid price competition. In a competitive market, there
are periods where supply exceeds demand, and that in turn puts
downward pressure on market prices as firms compete to attract
lessees. To avoid the consequences of lawful competition, RealPage
provides Lessors with information sufficient to "stagger" lease
renewals to avoid oversupply. By staggering lease renewals to
artificially smooth out natural imbalances of supply and demand,
RealPage and participating Lessors also eliminate any incentive to
undercut or cheat on the cartel (avoiding a race to the bottom, or
"prisoner's dilemma"). This is a central mantra of RealPage, to
sacrifice "physical" occupancy (i.e., to decrease output) in
exchange for "economic" occupancy, a manufactured term RealPage
uses to refer to increasing prices and decreasing occupancy
(output) in the market.

RealPage is proud of its role in the exploding increase in the
prices of residential leases. In a marketing video used to attract
additional Lessors to the conspiracy, a RealPage Vice President
discussed the recent and never-before seen price increases for
residential real estate leases, as high as 14.5% in some markets.
The conspiracy Plaintiff challenges is unlawful under Section 1 of
the Sherman Act. Plaintiff brings this action to recover their
damages, trebled, as well as injunctive and other appropriate
relief, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff has rented a multifamily residential unit in a
property managed by Lessor Defendant Essex Property Trust, Inc. in
San Jose, California.

RealPage provides software and services to the residential real
estate industry.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Steve W. Berman, Esq.
          Breanna Van Engelen, Esq.
          HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
          1301 Second Avenue, Suite 2000
          Seattle, WA 98101
          Phone: (206) 623-7292
          Facsimile: ( 206) 623-0594
          Email: steve@hbsslaw.com
                 breannav@hbsslaw.com

               - and -

          David M. Wilkerson, Esq.
          THE VAN WINKLE LAW FIRM
          11 N. Market Street
          Asheville, NC 28801
          Phone: (828) 258-2991
          Facsimile: (828) 257-2767
          Email: dwilkerson@vwlawfirm.com


REALPAGE INC: Weaver Alleges Conspiracy of Rental Housing Prices
----------------------------------------------------------------
JEFFREY WEAVER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. REALPAGE, INC.; ALLIED ORION GROUP LLC;
AVALONBAY COMMUNITIES, INC.; AVENUE5 RESIDENTIAL, LLC; BELL
PARTNERS, INC.; BH MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC; CAMDEN PROPERTY TRUST;
CORTLAND PARTNERS LLC; CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD, INC.; EQUITY
RESIDENTIAL; FPI MANAGEMENT, INC.; GREYSTAR REAL ESTATE PARTNERS,
LLC; INDEPENDENCE REALTY TRUST, INC.; LINCOLN PROPERTY CO.; LYON
MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC.; MIDAMERICA APARTMENT COMMUNITIES, INC.;
SECURITY PROPERTIES INC.; SHERMAN ASSOCIATES, INC.; and UDR, INC.,
Defendants, Case No. 1:22-cv-03224 (D. Col., Dec. 14, 2022) alleges
violation of the Sherman Act.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendants are
engaged in the conspiracy to fix, raise, maintain, and stabilize
rental housing prices in the Greater Denver Metro Area. Beyond the
anticompetitive exchange of nonpublic and competitively sensitive
information among competing property managers, the Defendant
RealPage uses additional mechanisms to facilitate coordination
among cartel members and prevent cheating by conspiracy
participants, says the suit.

The Defendants' alleged price fixing conspiracy resulted in
artificially inflated rent prices and a diminished supply of rental
units in the Greater Denver Metro Area. Plaintiff and the Class,
who rent in the Greater Denver Metro Area from property managers
that use RealPage's software, paid significant overcharges on rent
and suffered harm from the reduced availability of rental units
they could reasonably afford.

REALPAGE, INC. provides products and services to the multifamily
real estate industries. The Company offers applicant screening,
accounting, budgeting, property management, and compliance
reporting solutions. RealPage also develops and delivers
proprietary web-based applications that enhance client information
management capabilities. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Rusty E. Glenn, Esq.
          SHUMAN, GLENN & STECKER
          600 17th Street, Suite 2800 South
          Denver, CO 80202
          Telephone: (303) 861-3003
          Facsimile: (303) 536-7849
          Email: rusty@shumanlawfirm.com

               - and -

          David R. Scott, Esq.
          Amanda Lawrence, Esq.
          Patrick McGahan, Esq.
          Michael Srodoski, Esq.
          G. Dustin Foster, Esq.
          SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP
          156 South Main Street
          P.O. Box 192
          Colchester, CT 06145
          Telephone: (860) 537-5537
          Facsimile: (860) 537-4432
          Email: david.scott@scott-scott.com
                 alawrence@scott-scott.com
                 pmcgahan@scott-scott.com
                 msrodoski@scott-scott.com
                 gfoster@scott-scott.com

               - and -

          Thomas J. Undlin, Esq.
          Stacey Slaughter, Esq.
          Geoffrey H. Kozen, Esq.
          J. Austin Hurt, Esq.
          ROBINS KAPLAN LLP
          800 LaSalle Avenue, Suite 2800
          Minneapolis, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 349-8500
          Facsimile: (612) 339-4181
          Email: tundlin@robinskaplan.com
                 sslaughter@robinskaplan.com
                 gkozen@robinskaplan.com
                 ahurt@robinskaplan.com

               - and -

          Vincent Briganti, Esq.
          Christian P. Levis, Esq.
          Peter Demato, Esq.
          Radhika Gupta, Esq.
          LOWEY DANNENBERG, P.C.
          44 South Broadway, Suite 1100
          White Plains, NY 10601
          Telephone: (914) 997-0500
          Facsimile: (914) 997-0035
          Email: vbriganti@lowey.com
                 clevis@lowey.com
                 pdemato@lowey.com
                 rgupta@lowey.com

REDDIT INC: Amerson Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Reddit, Inc., et al.
The case is styled as Maya Amerson, an individual, on behalf of
herself and on behalf of all persons similarly situated v. Reddit,
Inc., Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. CGC22603466 (Cal.
Super. Ct., San Francisco Cty., Dec. 13, 2022).

The case type is stated as "Other Non-Exempt Complaints."

Reddit -- https://www.reddit.com/ -- is an American social news
aggregation, content rating, and discussion website.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Nicholas James Blouw, Esq.
          BLUMENTHAL NORDREHAUG BHOWMIK DE BLOUW
          2255 Calle Clara
          La Jolla, CA 92037-3107
          Phone: 858-952-0354
          Fax: 858-551-1232
          Email: DeBlouw@bamlawca.com

REGENERON PHARMACEUTICALS: Gamboa Sues Over Untimely Wage Payments
------------------------------------------------------------------
JACKSON GAMBOA and PEDRO ROCHA, on behalf of themselves and all
other persons similarly situated v. REGENERON PHARMACEUTICALS,
INC., Case No. 7:22-cv-10605 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 15, 2022) seeks to
recover underpayment caused by untimely wage payments and other
damages for Plaintiffs and similarly situated non-exempt hourly
paid Animal Care Technicians who work or have worked for Defendant
in New York State, in violation of the New York Labor Law.

The Plaintiffs spent more than 25% of their work time performing
physical tasks including changing and cleaning cages, equipment,
water bottles, and food; unpacking and housing animals upon
arrival; janitorial maintenance of facility rooms and stocking of
supplies; performing preventative maintenance of animal facility
equipment and supplies; sanitizing equipment and the facility; and
restocking supplies. Similarly, aquatic animal care technicians
change and clean tanks, equipment and feeds of aquatic animals, the
Plaintiffs say.

The Defendants allegedly failed to pay Plaintiffs and similarly
situated persons who have worked as animal care technicians and
aquatic animal care technicians "on a weekly basis and not later
than seven calendar days after the end of the week in which the
wages are earned". Instead, the Defendant paid Plaintiffs and
similarly situated persons who have worked as animal care
technicians and aquatic animal care technicians on a bi-weekly
basis. Every time that Defendant failed to pay Plaintiffs and Class
Members their wages earned within seven days of the end of the
workweek, Defendant deprived them of the use of money to which they
were legally entitled, the lawsuit further claims.

Mr. Gamboa, has been employed by Defendant as an animal care
technician in New York since 2016. Mr. Rocha has been employed by
Defendant as an animal care technician in New York since 2017.

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals is engaged in the manufacture and
distribution of pharmaceutical products.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Peter A. Romero, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF PETER A. ROMERO PLLC
          490 Wheeler Road, Suite 250
          Hauppauge, New York 11788
          Telephone: (631) 257-5588
          E-mail: promero@romerolawny.com

RICHARD S. SACKLER: Lac La Ronge Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Richard S. Sackler,
et al. case is styled as Lac La Ronge Indian Band, individually,
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Charles Ro
Manufacturing Co. Inc., Case No. 160667/2022 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., New
York Cty., Dec. 14, 2022).

Richard Stephen Sackler is an American billionaire businessman and
physician who was the chairman and president of Purdue Pharma.[BN]

RYDER INTEGRATED: Fails to Pay Warehouse Employees' OT Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
WILLIAM FISHER, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. RYDER INTEGRATED LOGISTICS, INC., Case No.
1:22-cv-00051 (M.D. Tenn., Dec. 15, 2022) seeks to recover unpaid
overtime compensation under Fair Labor Standards Act, liquidated
damages, interest, reasonable attorneys' fees, costs, and
disbursements relating to this action for the three-year statutory
period.

Mr. Fisher alleges that he and those similarly situated were
required to work "off the clock" before and after their scheduled
shifts, as well as through unpaid meal beak. Accordingly, the
Defendant has had a common practice of inducing, requiring,
forcing, encouraging, expecting, and/or suffering and permitting,
the Plaintiff and class members to perform "off the clock" overtime
work within weekly pay periods during all times material, without
compensating them for such overtime hours, says the Plaintiff.

Mr. Fisher was employed by Defendant as an hourly-paid warehouse
employee. As "full-time" employees Plaintiff and class members
worked 40 or more hours per week.

Ryder Integrated provides transportation services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gordon E. Jackson, Esq.
          J. Russ Bryant, Esq.
          Robert E. Turner, IV, Esq.
          Robert E. Morelli, III, Esq.
          JACKSON SHIELDS YEISER HOLT
          OWEN & BRYANT
          262 German Oak Drive
          Memphis, TN 38018
          Telephone: (901) 754-8001
          Facsimile: (901) 754-8524
          E-mail: gjackson@jsyc.com
                  rbryant@jsyc.com
                  rturner@jsyc.com
                  rmorelli@jsyc.com

SAFELITE FULFILLMENT: Order on Class Cert-Related Dates Entered
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARIE DEMARTINI,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
SAFELITE FULFILLMENT, INC., an Ohio Corporation, and DOES 1-10,
inclusive, Case No. 3:20-cv-05952-MMC (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge
Maxine M. Chesney entered an order regarding class
certification-related dates as follows:

   1. The January 27, 2023 deadline for Plaintiffs to file their
      Motion for Class Certification is extended to March 31,
      2023.

   2. The March 24, 2023 deadline for Defendant to file its
      Opposition to the Motion for Class Certification is
      extended to May 26, 2023.

   3. The April 21, 2023 deadline for Plaintiffs to file their
      Reply in support of their Motion for Class Certification
      is extended to June 23, 2023.

   4. The May 8, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. hearing date for Plaintiffs'
      Motion for Class Certification is vacated and rescheduled
      for July 10, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. or a date thereafter that
      is convenient for the Court, July 14, 2023, at 9:00 a.m.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 16, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3HJnohR at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James R. Hawkins, Esq.
          Christina M. Lucio, Esq.
          JAMES HAWKINS APLC
          9880 Research Drive, Suite 200
          Irvine, CA 92618
          Telephone: (949) 387-7200
          Facsimile: (949) 387-6676
          E-mail: christina@ jameshawkinsaplc.com
                  james@jameshawkinsaplc.com

                - and -

          Norman B. Blumenthal, Esq.
          Kyle R. Nordrehaug, Esq.
          Aparajit Bhowmik, Esq.
          Piya Mukherjee, Esq.
          Victoria Rivaplacio, Esq.
          Charlotte E. James, Esq.
          BLUMENTHAL NORDREHAUG BHOWMIK DE BLOUW LLP
          2255 Calle Clara
          La Jolla, CA 92037
          E-mail: norm@bamlawca.com
                  kyle@bamlawca.com
                  aj@bamlawca.com
                  piya@bamlawca.com
                  victoria@bamlawca.com
                  charlotte@bamlawca.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          M. Leah Cameron, Esq.
          CDF LABOR LAW LLP
          601 Montgomery Street, Suite 350
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 981-3233
          Facsimile: (415) 981-3246
          E-mail: lcameron@cdflaborlaw.com

                - and -

          Daniel J. Clark, Esq.
          Adam J. Rocco, Esq.
          Michael J. Shoenfelt, Esq.
          Amanda M. Miggo, Esq.
          VORYS, SATER, SEYMOUR AND PEASE LLP
          52 East Gay Street, P.O. Box 1008
          Columbus, Ohio 43216-1008
          Telephone: (614) 464-5497
          Facsimile: (614) 719-4760
          E-mail: DJClark@vorys.com
                  ajrocco@vorys.com
                  MJShoenfelt@vorys.com
                  ammiggo@vorys.com

SAN JOSE, CA: NAACP "Civil Rights" Suit Seeks to Certify Classes
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as NAACP OF SAN JOSE/ SILICON
VALLEY; et al., v. CITY OF SAN JOSE, et al., Case No.
4:21-cv-01705-PJH (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to
enter an order certifying the Injunctive Relief Class under Rule
23(b)(2) and certifying the Damages Class under Rule 23(b)(3).

The Injunctive Relief Class is defined as:

   "All persons who have in the past participated, presently are
   participating, or may in the future participate in, or be
   present at, 12 demonstrations within the City of San Jose in
   the exercise of their rights of free speech, 13 assembly and
   petition."

The injunctive relief organizational class representatives are
NAACP of San Jose/Silicon Valley and the San Jose Peace and Justice
Center, and plaintiffs Joseph Canas, Leslie Vasquez, Peter Allen,
Shaunn Cartwright, Yessica Riles, José Gustavo
Flores Rodriguez, and Cindy Cuellar.

The Damages Class is defined as:

   "all persons present at protests regarding the killing of
   George Floyd in the City of San Jose on May 29, 2020 or May
   30, 2020 who were struck by either Projectile Impact Weapons
   (including 37mm and 40mm projectiles and bean-bag  shotguns),
   batons, or otherwise physically struck by a San Jose Police
   Department officer."

The Class Representatives for the Damages Class are named
plaintiffs Joseph Canas, Leslie Vasquez, Peter Allen, Shaunn
Cartwright, Yessica Riles, Jose Gustavo Flores Rodriguez,and Cindy
Cuellar.

The Plaintiffs further request the Court enter an order designating
them as class representatives and appointing their counsel as class
counsel. The Plaintiffs also request the Court order the parties to
meet and confer and present the Court, within thirty days of an
order granting class certification, with a proposed notice to the
certified classes.

This case is about the San Jose Police Department's use of
indiscriminate and excessive force against people protesting police
brutality.

In late May 2020, George Floyd was murdered by then-Minneapolis
police officer Derek Chauvin. This sparked protests against police
violence and in support of Black lives across the nation.

The plaintiffs in this civil rights case present federal claims
under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 and supplemental state law claims
seeking declaratory, equitable, injunctive, and monetary relief.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion to certify classes dated Dec. 16,
2022 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Wpm3ki
at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Rachel Lederman, Esq.
          ALEXIS C. BEACH & RACHEL
          LEDERMAN, ATTORNEYS
          P.O. Box 40339
          San Francisco, CA 94140-0339
          Telephone: (415) 282-9300
          E-mail: rachel@sbfla.com

                - and -

          Tifanei N. Ressl-Moyer, Esq.
          LAWYERS' COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL
          RIGHTS OF THE
          SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA
          131 Steuart Street #400
          San Francisco, CA 94105
          Telephone: (415) 814-7631
          E-mail: tresslmoyer@lccrsf.org

                - and -

          R. Michael Flynn, Esq.
          FLYNN LAW OFFICE
          1720 Broadway, Ste. 430
          Telephone: (510) 893-3226
          Facsimile: (866) 728-7879
          E-mail: michael@flo-law.com

                - and -

          Tammy B. Webb, Esq.
          Alicia J. Donahue, Esq.
          Chris A. Johnson, Esq.
          SHOOK, HARDY & BACON, LLP
          555 Mission Street, Suite 2300
          San Francisco, CA 94105
          Telephone: (415) 544-1900
          Facsimile: (415) 391-0281
          E-mail: tbwebb@shb.com
                  adonahue@shb.com
                  cjohnson@shb.com

                - and -

          Mitchell F. Engel, Esq.
          SHOOK, HARDY & BACON, LLP
          2555 Grand Blvd.
          Kansas City, MO, 64108
          Telephone: (816) 474-6550
          Facsimile: (816) 421-5547
          E-mail: mengel@shb.com

                - and -

          James B. Chanin, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF JAMES B. CHANIN
          3050 Shattuck Ave.
          Berkeley, CA 94705
          Telephone: (510) 848-4752
          Facsimile: (510) 848-5819
          E-mail: jbcofc@aol.com

SANTANDER CONSUMER: Simonis Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Texas
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Santander Consumer
USA Holdings Inc., et al. The case is styled as Mathias W. Simonis,
individually, and on behalf of all other individuals similarly
situated v. Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc. doing business as:
Chrysler Capital, John Does 1-10, Case No. 3:22-cv-02770-M (N.D.
Tex., Dec. 13, 2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc. doing business as Chrysler
Capital -- https://chryslercapital.com/ -- provides full-service
auto finance and leases for Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Ram and FIAT
vehicles.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Marwan R. Daher, Esq.
          Mohammed Omar Badwan, Esq.
          SULAIMAN LAW GROUP, LTD.
          2500 S. Highland Avenue, Suite 200
          Lombard, IL 60148
          Phone: (630) 575-8181
          Fax: (630) 575-8188
          Email: mdaher@sulaimanlaw.com
                 mbadwan@sulaimanlaw.com

SCORES HOLDING: Phone Conference in Hall Suit Set for Dec. 27
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JESSICA BROOKE HALL, v.
SCORES HOLDING COMPANY, INC. et al., Case No. 1:21-cv-03387-JPC-SLC
(S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Sarah L. Cave entered an order that:

  -- A Telephone Conference to address the pending motion to
     compel, is scheduled for Tuesday, December 27, 2022 at
     11:00 a.m. on the Court's conference line.

  -- The parties are directed to call: (866) 390-1828; access
     code: 380-9799, at the scheduled time.

This action has been referred, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1)(A), to Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave for general
pretrial management, including scheduling discovery,
non-dispositive pretrial motions, and settlement.

All pretrial motions and applications, including those relating to
scheduling and discovery (but excluding motions to dismiss or for
judgment on the pleadings, for injunctive relief, for summary
judgment, or for class certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23) must
be made to Magistrate Judge Cave and must comply with her
Individual Practices, available on the Court's website at
https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-sarah-l-cave.

Scores Holding is engaged in licensing and stand-ready for
consulting and club set-up services.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 16, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3hBVPfG at no extra charge.[CC]

SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO: Cantu Sues Over Unlawful Disclosure of Details
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesse Cantu, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. THE SHERWIN-WILLIAMS COMPANY, and DOES 1 through 25,
inclusive, Case No. 3:22-cv-01971-BEN-JLB (S.D. Cal., Dec. 13,
2022), is brought against the Defendant for violations of the Video
Privacy Protection Act as a result of the Defendant who secretly
report all the details of the visitors' identity, the titles
watched, and more without warning visitors or obtaining their
consent.

Whenever someone watches a video on www.sherwin-williams.com (the
"Website"), the Defendants secretly report all the details to
Facebook: the visitor's identity, the titles watched, and more.
When Plaintiff watched videos on sherwin-williams.com, the
Defendants disclosed event data, which recorded and disclosed the
video's title and URL. Alongside this event data, the Defendants
also disclosed identifiers for the Plaintiff, including the c_user
and fr cookies. In other words, the Defendants did exactly what the
VPPA prohibits: they disclosed the Plaintiff's vido viewing habits
to a third party. Given the nature of the Defendants' business,
visitors would be shocked and appalled to know that the Defendants
secretly disclose to Facebook all of key data regarding a visitors'
viewing habits."

The Defendants' conduct is illegal, offensive, and contrary to
visitor expectations: indeed, a recent study conducted by the
Electronic Privacy Information Center, a respected thought leader
regarding digital privacy, found that: (1) nearly 9 in 10 adults
are "very concerned" about data privacy, and (2) 75% of adults are
unaware of the extent to which companies gather, store, and exploit
their personal data, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff visited sherwin-williams.com and watched a video.

The Defendant is an Ohio corporation that owns, operates, and/or
controls the Website, www.sherwin-williams.com.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Scott J. Ferrell, Esq.
          PACIFIC TRIAL ATTORNEYS
          A Professional Corporation
          4100 Newport Place Drive, Ste. 800
          Newport Beach, CA 92660
          Phone: (949) 706-6464
          Fax: (949) 706-6469
          Email: sferrell@pacifictrialattorneys.com


SILVERGATE BANK: Faces Gonzalez Suit Over Fraudulent Scheme
-----------------------------------------------------------
JOEWY GONZALEZ, on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
SILVERGATE BANK, SILVERGATE CAPITAL CORPORATION, and ALAN J. LANE,
Case No. 3:22-cv-01981-BEN-WVG (S.D. Cal., Dec. 14, 2022) alleges
that Silvergate accepted billions of dollars of irregular deposits
and approved the related-party transfers, atypical lending and
funds commingling that marked FTX Trading's CEO Sam Bankman-Fried's
fraudulent scheme.

In connection with providing such material assistance, the
Defendants were aware of their essential role in the scheme and
knowingly acted in furtherance of it. The Defendants also
substantially benefited from their participation in this scheme.
Starting in November 2021, the Plaintiff placed funds in an FTX
account in anticipation of executing cryptocurrency trades,
engaging in investment activity. After FTX announced its
bankruptcy, the Plaintiff attempted to withdraw the cryptocurrency
in his FTX account but was unable to do so.

On November 15th, Marcus Aurelius Value, an investment research
firm, tweeted that "r]ecently subpoenaed Silvergate bank records
reveal $425 million in transfers from $SI crypto bank accounts to
South American money launderers. Affidavit from investigation into
crypto crime ring linked to smugglers/drug traffickers."

On November 17th, the investment newsletter The Bear Cave released
a report entitled "The Great Crypto Collapse" that discussed in
part Silvergate's involvement in crypto markets.
The report notes an "alarming" August 2022 forfeiture application
for probable cause filed in Broward County, Florida that asserts
Silvergate's link to a money laundering operation.

According to that court filing, portions of which the report
reproduces, "Records produced by Silvergate Bank found: (i) During
the period of September 2021 to June 2022 ten companies had
transferred a total of over $425 million dollars off these
cryptocurrency trading platforms into accounts held at different US
banks. (ii) The accounts were receiving funds in the same pattern
as those used to facilitate the laundering of illicit funds."

On December 1st, The Bear Cave issued a further report raising
additional concerns about Silvergate's role in illegal transfers
related to crypto currency. That report highlights a July 2021 plea
agreement filed in the Middle District of Florida stating that the
convicted defendant, Joel Greenberg, wired "$200,000 from the
account of the Tax Collector's Office at Florida Capital Bank to
Silvergate Bank" in order to buy cryptocurrency for himself.
"Greenberg quickly spent the $200,000 in multiple  purchases of
cryptocurrency," the plea agreement states. "Greenberg engaged in
more than 40 transactions over the course of about four days" and
then withdrew almost all of the cryptocurrency from the Silvergate
account.

On December 5th, investment bank Morgan Stanley downgraded
Silvergate's investment rating, explaining that Silvergate's
ability to make money may be impaired by the continued stress in
crypto markets caused by FTX's bankruptcy, says the suit.

Silvergate is a publicly traded and federally regulated bank
catering to cryptocurrency customers.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Daniel C. Girard, Esq.
          Adam E. Polk, Esq.
          Makenna Cox, Esq.
          GIRARD SHARP LLP
          601 California Street, Suite 1400
          San Francisco, CA 94108
          Telephone: (415) 981-4800
          E-mail: dgirard@girardsharp.com
                  apolk@girardsharp.com
                  mcox@girardsharp.com

                - and -

          Jason S. Hartley, Esq.
          Jason M. Lindner, Esq.
          HARTLEY LLP
          101 West Broadway, Suite 820
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 400-5822
          E-mail: hartley@hartleyllp.com
                  lindner@hartleyllp.com

SILVERGATE CAPITAL: Guz Sues Over Materially Misleading Statements
------------------------------------------------------------------
Jacob Guz, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. SILVERGATE CAPITAL CORPORATION, ALAN J. LANE, and
ANTONIO MARTINO, Case No. 3:22-cv-01968-AJB-BGS (S.D. Cal., Dec.
13, 2022), is brought on behalf of persons and entities that
purchased or otherwise acquired Silvergate securities between
November 9, 2021 and November 17, 2022, inclusive (the "Class
Period"), pursuing claims against the Defendants under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"), as a result
of the Defendants' materially misleading statements.

Silvergate's platform, the Silvergate Exchange Network ("SEN"),
provides payments, lending, and funding solutions for an expanding
class of digital currency companies and investors. Silvergate is
also the parent company of Silvergate Bank which provides financial
services that include commercial banking, commercial and
residential real estate lending, mortgage warehouse lending, and
commercial business lending.

On November 15, 2022, Marcus Aurelius Research tweeted that
"Recently subpoenaed Silvergate bank records reveal $425 million in
transfers from $SI crypto bank accounts to South American money
launderers. Affadavit from investigation into crypto crime ring
linked to smugglers/drug traffickers." On this news, the Company's
Class A common stock price fell $6.13, or 17%, to close at $29.36
per share on November 15, 2022, on unusually heavy trading volume.

On November 17, 2022, The Bear Cave newsletter released an article
about several companies with potential exposure to recently
collapsed cryptocurrency exchange FTX, including Silvergate. The
article highlighted the connection linking Silvergate to a money
laundering operation that transferred $425 million off
cryptocurrency trading platforms. On this news, the Company's Class
A common stock price fell $3.00, or 10.7%, to close at $24.90 per
share on November 18, 2022, on unusually heavy trading volume.

The Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements,
as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the
Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically,
Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that the Company's
platform lacked sufficient controls and procedures to detect
instances of money laundering; (2) that Silvergate's customers had
engaged in money laundering in amounts exceeding $425 million; (3)
that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company was reasonably
likely to receive regulatory scrutiny and face damages, including
penalties and reputational harm; and (4) that, as a result of the
foregoing, Defendant's positive statements about the Company's
business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading
and/or lacked a reasonable basis, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff purchased Silvergate securities during the Class
Period.

Silvergate is a digital currency company.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jennifer Pafiti, Esq.
          POMERANTZ LLP
          1100 Glendon Avenue, 15th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90024
          Phone: (310) 405-7190
          Email: jpafiti@pomlaw.com

SILVERLINE SERVICES: IGI Sues Over Fraudulent Schemes
-----------------------------------------------------
Inventory Generation, Inc. d/b/a Coast to Coast Dispatch and Earl
David, individually and on behalf of all of those similarly
situated v. SILVERLINE SERVICES INC., SHMUEL BRUMMEL, PROVENTURE
CAPITAL FUNDING LLC, BENJAMIN ARYEH; WYNWOOD CAPITAL GROUP LLC,
ZALMEN TEITELBAUM, SAM GROSS; GLOBEX FUNDING LLC, JACK BROWN; MCA
RECEIVABLES, LLC D/B/A UNITED FUND USA, YISROEL C. GETTER; JOHN
DOES 1-10; and JOHN DOE INVESTORS 1-10, Case No. 1:22-cv-10529
(S.D.N.Y., Dec. 13, 2022), is brought against several merchant cash
advance ("MCA") companies that are controlled and manipulated,
respectively, by the individual Defendants to carry out fraudulent
schemes to collect upon unlawful debts and otherwise fraudulently
obtain funds from the Plaintiffs and hundreds of other similarly
situated victims through the use of their sham MCA agreements.

Unfortunately, the type of conduct by Defendants here is a
ballooning national problem that has raised the attention of both
state and federal regulators. In November 2018, Bloomberg News and
renowned journalist Bethany McLean (of Vanity Fair acclaim)
published what would be the first in a series of groundbreaking
news articles exposing the abuses of the MCA industry, and its use
of confessions of judgments to seize out-of-state bank accounts.
The New York Legislature quickly took action, banning the use of
out-of-state confessions of judgment in September 2019. In support,
the Legislature cited Bloomberg News.

More recently, on February 10, 2022, Bloomberg News exposed a new
tactic being abused by the predatory MCA industry, and in
particular, at least one group of the Defendants here.
Specifically, predatory MCA operators operate out of New York but
abuse an apparent loophole under Connecticut procedural law to
collect upon their unlawful debts. In doing so, the operators
freeze out-of-state bank accounts by simply serving legal papers
(which have not been reviewed or scrutinized by any court) on a
bank that has a branch located in Connecticut. As justification for
their bank freezes, the operators represent and attest under oath
that their small business victims owe them a debt and that the
operators are unaware of any defenses to their claims.

This in fact has occurred with the Plaintiffs as it relates to the
Defendants who recently levied against the Plaintiffs' accounts
without any notice whatsoever, creating catastrophic harm for the
Plaintiffs. In doing so, the Defendants violated the Plaintiffs'
Fourteenth Amendment right to Due Process under the color of
Connecticut state law. Among these intentional violations of due
process, Defendants, like here, knowingly and purposely issue
Prejudgment Writs of Attachment to third-party banks without first
filing a complaint in state court, and without serving notice.
Instead, the Defendants require the Plaintiffs to execute form
contracts of adhesion waiving their rights to a hearing, while at
the same time agreeing to the jurisdiction of two different states,
Connecticut and New York. Thus, the first notice received by the
Plaintiffs is when their bank accounts become frozen, says the
complaint.

The Plaintiff is a trucking company that desperately needed a cash
infusion as a result of depressed business due to COVID as well as
the recent supply chain issues.

SILVERLINE SERVICES INC. is a domestic New York corporation with
its principal place of business in Rockville Centre, New York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jonathan E. Neuman, Esq.
          176-25 Union Turnpike, Suite 230
          Fresh Meadows, NY 11366
          Phone: (347) 450-6710
          Facsimile: (718) 228-3689
          Email: jnesq@jenesqlaw.com


SNAP FINANCE: Montgomery Files Suit in D. Utah
----------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Snap Finance, et al.
The case is styled as Tameka Montgomery, Sterling Simeon,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Snap
Finance, Snap RTO, Case No. 2:22-cv-00775-RJS (D. Utah, Dec. 14,
2022).

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.

Snap Finance -- https://snapfinance.com/ ¬-- is a rapidly growing
digital-finance company that specializes in providing consumer
financing and rent-to-own purchase options.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Timothy W. Emery, Esq.
          EMERY REDDY PLLC
          600 Stewart St., Ste. 1100
          Seattle, WA 98101
          Phone: (917) 373-9128
          Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com

SOUTHWEST SOCCER: Hildebrand Seeks Class Certification
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BRITTNEY HILDEBRAND,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
SOUTHWEST SOCCER CLUB TOURNAMENTS; SOUTWEST SOCCER CLUB, INC.;
MOULAY ELBEKRAOUI; MARINA BOLDACHOVA; and DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive, Case No. 8:21-cv-01871-DOC-KES (C.D. Cal.), the
Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order:

   1. granting the Plaintiff's motion for class certification
      against the Defendants pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(B)
      (2) and 23(B)(3) concerning violations of the Telephone
      Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA"):

      "All persons within the United States who received a
      telephone call from Defendants to said person's cellular
      telephone made using a prerecorded voice between November
      12, 2017 and Present whose telephone number was not
      provided to Defendants on a tournament application for a
      Southwest Soccer Club tournament, as evidenced by
      application forms to be produced by the Defendants;"

   2. appointing the Plaintiff as Class Representative; and

   3. appointing the Plaintiff's attorneys as Class Counsel.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 16, 2022 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3WaDWn8 at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
          Adrian R. Bacon, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
          21031 Ventura Blvd., Suite 340
          Woodland Hills, CA 91364
          E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.com
                  abacon@toddflaw.com


SPECTRUM BRANDS: Court OK's Settlement in TP&RFC Suit
-----------------------------------------------------
Spectrum Brands Holdings, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-K Report
for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2022, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 22, 2022, that the
approval of class action settlements, alleging violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, was approved by the court in March
2022.

On July 12, 2019, an amended consolidated class action complaint
filed earlier in 2018 was filed in the United States District Court
for the Western District of Wisconsin by the Public School
Teachers' Pension & Retirement Fund of Chicago and the Cambridge
Retirement against Spectrum Brands' Legacy, Inc. The complaint
alleges that the defendants violated the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. The amended complaint added HRG Group, Inc., the predecessor
to the company, as a defendant and asserted additional claims
against the company on behalf of a purported class of HRG
shareholders.

The class period of the consolidated amended complaint is from
January 26, 2017, to November 19, 2018, and the plaintiffs seek an
unspecified amount of compensatory damages, interest, attorneys'
and expert fees, and costs. During the year ended September 30,
2020, the company reached a proposed settlement resulting in an
insignificant loss, net of third-party insurance coverage and
payment, pending final approval by the court.

In February 2021, the court declined to approve the proposed
settlement without prejudice because the court determined that as a
procedural matter the plaintiff's counsel had not taken the
appropriate actions to be appointed to represent the purported
class of HRG shareholders. The court subsequently appointed
separate counsel to represent the HRG shareholder class.

In August 2021, the company reached an agreement in principle to
settle the claims of the Spectrum Legacy class, the cost of which
has been defrayed by third-party insurance. In October 2021, the
Company reached an agreement in principle to settle the claims of
the HRG class, the cost of which also has been defrayed by
third-party insurance. In March 2022, the court granted approval to
both settlements.

Spectrum Brands Holdings, Inc. is a branded consumer products and
home essentials company based in Wisconsin.


SPINE MEDIA: Hunthausen Sues Over Unlawful Disclosure of Details
----------------------------------------------------------------
Drew Hunthausen, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. SPINE MEDIA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,
and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Case No. 3:22-cv-01970-BEN-DDL
(S.D. Cal., Dec. 13, 2022), is brought against the Defendant for
violations of the Video Privacy Protection Act as a result of the
Defendant who secretly report all the details of the visitors'
identity, the titles watched, and more without warning visitors or
obtaining their consent.

Whenever someone watches a video on www.yourbump.com (the
"Website"), the Defendants secretly report all the details to
Facebook: the visitor's identity, the titles watched, and more.
When the Plaintiff watched videos on www.yourbump.com, the
Defendants disclosed event data, which recorded and disclosed the
video's title and URL. Alongside this event data, the Defendants
also disclosed identifiers for the Plaintiff, including the c_user
and fr cookies. In other words, the Defendants did exactly what the
VPPA prohibits: they disclosed the Plaintiff's vido viewing habits
to a third party. Visitors would be offended to know that
Defendants secretly disclose to Facebook all of key data regarding
a visitors' viewing habits.

The Defendants' conduct is illegal, offensive, and contrary to
visitor expectations: indeed, a recent study conducted by the
Electronic Privacy Information Center, a respected thought leader
regarding digital privacy, found that: (1) nearly 9 in 10 adults
are "very concerned" about data privacy, and (2) 75% of adults are
unaware of the extent to which companies gather, store, and exploit
their personal data. By disclosing his event data and identifiers,
the Defendant disclosed the Plaintiff's personally identifiable
information ("PII") to a third-party, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff visited www.yourbump.com and watched a video.

The Defendant is a Delaware limited liability company that owns,
operates, and/or controls the Website, www.yourbump.com.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Scott J. Ferrell, Esq.
          PACIFIC TRIAL ATTORNEYS
          A Professional Corporation
          4100 Newport Place Drive, Ste. 800
          Newport Beach, CA 92660
          Phone: (949) 706-6464
          Fax: (949) 706-6469
          Email: sferrell@pacifictrialattorneys.com


STAGE DOLLS: Fails to Pay Entertainers' Minimum Wage Under FLSA
---------------------------------------------------------------
JANE DOE, on behalf of herself and all those similarly situated, v.
STAGE DOLLS, And GIOVANNI MAGGIORE, And AGOSTINO MAGGIORE, And JOHN
DOES 1-10, Case No. 3:22-cv-07312 (D.N.J., Dec. 15, 2022) alleges
that the Defendants failed to properly pay at least the minimum
wage for all hours worked as required by the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

The Plaintiff worked as an adult entertainer for the Defendants in
New Jersey from November 2020 to July 2022. The Defendants
improperly classified the Plaintiff and other adult entertainer
Class Plaintiffs as independent contractor. Accordingly, the
Defendants did not pay the Plaintiff any wages during her entire
tenure with Defendants. The Plaintiff's only income was non-wage
gratuities paid by patrons, says the suit.

The Defendants allegedly required Named Plaintiff to pay fees from
such income, including:

   a. A minimum mandatory fee of at least $25.00 per each shift
      worked, called a "house fee";

   b. A minimum mandatory fee of at least $40.00 per each shift
      worked for the bouncer; and

   c. A minimum mandatory fee of at least $10.00 per each
      private room booking.

Additionally, the Defendants also required the Plaintiff to pay
various fines and penalties for misconduct and/or other violations
of Defendants' House Rules from such income, and required the
Plaintiff to incur costs for costumes and other tools of the trade
that were in reality business expenses of Defendants and which
costs should have been reimbursed by Defendants. Moreover, to the
extent that Named Plaintiff received any gratuities from customers,
she was required to share same with Defendants' management and
other non-service employees and agents of Defendants, alleges the
suit.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joshua S. Boyette, Esq.
          SWARTZ SWIDLER, LLC
          9 Tanner St. Ste 101
          Haddonfield NJ 08033
          Telephone: (856) 685-7420
          Facsimile: (856) 685-7417
          E-mail: jboyette@swartz-legal.com

STATE FARM: Discriminates Against Black Homeowners, Huskey Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JACQUELINE HUSKEY, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. STATE FARM FIRE & CASUALTY
COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 1:22-cv-07014 (N.D. Ill., December 14,
2022) is a class action against the Defendant for violation of the
Fair Housing Act.

The case arises from the Defendant's discriminatory homeowners
insurance claim processing policies and practices. According to the
complaint, there are marked disparities between State Farm's
handling of claims filed by white homeowners relative to claims
filed by Black homeowners. As a general matter, claims made by
Black homeowners are disproportionately subjected to greater
suspicion than claims made by their white counterparts.
Accordingly, State Farm takes longer to process and approve claims
made by Black customers than it does to process and approve claims
made by white customers. Black homeowners thus experience greater
inconvenience as well as detrimental impact to the value of their
home and their quality of life as necessary repairs remain
unaddressed for months on end. These delays mean that Black State
Farm policyholders receive a less valuable product than white State
Farm policyholders, says the suit.

State Farm Fire & Casualty Company is an insurance firm, with its
principal office in Bloomington, Illinois. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Joshua Karsh, Esq.
         MEHRI & SKALET PLLC
         1237 Judson Ave.
         Evanston, IL 60202
         Telephone: (773) 505-7533
         E-mail: jkarsh@findjustice.com

                 - and -

         Aisha Rich, Esq.
         Alexander Rose, Esq.
         Jamie Crooks, Esq.
         FAIRMARK PARTNERS, LLP
         1825 7th St. NW, Ste. 821
         Washington, DC 20001
         Telephone: (301) 458-0564
         E-mail: aisha@fairmarklaw.com
                 alex@fairmarklaw.com
                 jamie@fairmarklaw.com

                 - and -

         Deborah N. Archer, Esq.
         Jason D. Williamson, Esq.
         CENTER ON RACE, INEQUALITY, AND THE LAW AT NEW YORK
         UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW
         139 MacDougal Street
         New York, NY 10012
         Telephone: (212) 998-6882
         E-mail: deborah.archer@nyu.edu
                 jason.williamson@nyu.edu

TAPESTRY INC: Cantu Sues Over Secret Reporting of Details
---------------------------------------------------------
Jesse Cantu, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. TAPESTRY, INC., a Maryland corporation, d/b/a
COACH.COM; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Case No.
3:22-cv-01974-BAS-DDL (S.D. Cal., Dec. 13, 2022), is brought
against the Defendant for violations of the Video Privacy
Protection Act as a result of the Defendant who secretly report all
the details of the visitors' identity, the titles watched, and more
without warning visitors or obtaining their consent.

Whenever someone watches a video on www.coach.com (the "Website"),
Defendants secretly report all the details to Facebook: the
visitor's identity, the titles watched, and more. When Plaintiff
watched videos on Coach.com, Defendants disclosed event data, which
recorded and disclosed the video's title and URL. Alongside this
event data, Defendants also disclosed identifiers for Plaintiff,
including the c_user and fr cookies. In other words, Defendants did
exactly what the VPPA prohibits: they disclosed Plaintiff's vido
viewing habits to a third party. Given the nature of Defendants'
business, visitors would be shocked and appalled to know that
Defendants secretly disclose to Facebook all of key data regarding
a visitors' viewing habits."

The Defendants' conduct is illegal, offensive, and contrary to
visitor expectations: indeed, a recent study conducted by the
Electronic Privacy Information Center, a respected thought leader
regarding digital privacy, found that: (1) nearly 9 in 10 adults
are "very concerned" about data privacy, and (2) 75% of adults are
unaware of the extent to which companies gather, store, and exploit
their personal data, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff visited Coach.com and watched a video.

The Defendant is a Maryland corporation that owns, operates, and/or
controls the Website, www.coach.com.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Scott J. Ferrell, Esq.
          PACIFIC TRIAL ATTORNEYS
          A Professional Corporation
          4100 Newport Place Drive, Ste. 800
          Newport Beach, CA 92660
          Phone: (949) 706-6464
          Fax: (949) 706-6469
          Email: sferrell@pacifictrialattorneys.com


TAVISTOCK RESTAURANTS: Fails to Secure Employees' Info, Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SHAWN HOFFMAN and BENJAMIN IRONS, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. TAVISTOCK RESTAURANTS
UPSCALE GROUP HOLDINGS, LLC and TAVISTOCK CORPORATION, Defendants,
Case No. 6:22-cv-02323-RBD-DCI (M.D. Fla., December 14, 2022) is a
class action against the Defendants for negligence, breach of
implied contract, and violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair
Trade Practices Act.

The case arises from the Defendants' failure to properly secure and
safeguard the personal identifiable information (PII) of their
current and former employees, including the Plaintiffs, following a
data breach on their network that occurred on or around April 6,
2022. The PII was compromised due to the Defendants' negligent
and/or careless acts and omissions. Moreover, the Defendants waited
more than six months after the data breach occurred to report it to
the states Attorneys General and affected individuals. As a result,
the Plaintiffs and Class members now face a lifetime risk of (i)
identity theft, which is heightened here by the loss of Social
Security numbers, and (ii) the sharing and detrimental use of their
sensitive information, says the suit.

Tavistock Restaurants Upscale Group Holdings, LLC is a restaurant
firm, with its principal place of business in Windermere, Florida.

Tavistock Corporation is a private equity company based in
Windermere, Florida. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:                
      
         Ryan D. Maxey, Esq.
         MORGAN & MORGAN COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP
         201 N. Franklin Street, 7th Floor
         Tampa, FL 33602
         Telephone: (813) 223-5505
         E-mail: rmaxey@ForThePeople.com

TERRA OILFIELD: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Starks Suit Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------------
MAURICE STARKS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. TERRA OILFIELD SERVICES, LLC; and TERRA-ACE
INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, LLC dba ACE FLUID SOLUTIONS, Defendant, Case
No. 7:22-cv-00259 (W.D. Tex., Dec. 14, 2022) seeks to recover from
the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest,
liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

Plaintiff Starks was employed by the Defendants as supervisor.

TERRA OILFIELD SERVICES, LLC provides ferry transportation
services. The Company serves customers in the United States. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Aaron Johnson, Esq.
          FAIR LABOR LAW
          314 E. Highland Mall Blvd, Ste. 401
          Austin, TX 78752
          Telephone: (512) 277-3505
          Facsimile: (512) 277-3254
          Email: ajohnson@fairlaborlaw.com

TIKTOK INC: Faces Suit Over Alleged Illegal Website Wiretapping
---------------------------------------------------------------
E.K., through her/his guardian, SHLOMA KALLER, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. TIKTOK INC.
and BYTEDANCE INC., Defendants, Case No. 7:22-cv-10574 ((S.D.N.Y.,
Dec. 14, 2022) alleges violation of the Federal Wiretap Act.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendants' use of
its in-app web browser ("IAWB") allows them to profit unjustly from
the data it collects from its users, like the Plaintiff and members
of the Class. The Defendants intercepts the data of its users
without their consent when those users are unknowingly brought to a
website through TikTok's IAWB and TikTok records and stores that
data created therefrom, says the Plaintiff.

TIKTOK INC. operates as a free service and social media application
for creating and sharing short mobile videos. The Company provides
a fully realized platform for connecting individuals to a vibrant
community of content creators. TikTok serves customers worldwide.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Blake Hunter Yagman, Esq.
          Israel David, Esq.
          ISRAEL DAVID LLC
          17 State Street, Suite 4010
          New York, New York 10004
          Telephone: (212) 739-0622
          Facsimile: (212) 739-0628
          Email: blake.yagman@davidllc.com
                 israel.david@davidllc.com

TIKTOK INC: Sued Over Interception of Electronic Communication
--------------------------------------------------------------
Isabella Kowalski, a Pennsylvania resident, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. TIKTOK INC., a
California corporation, and BYTEDANCE INC., a Delaware corporation,
Case No. 2:22-cv-04947-MAK (E.D. Pa., Dec. 13, 2022), is brought
against the Defendants' conduct of intercepting the electronic
communications of users of the TikTok app when they link to
third-party websites in the TikTok app, directly violating the
Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act
("WESCA" or the "Act").

The Defendants employ JavaScript computer code ("Session Replay
Code") to track users' every move as they browse the Internet from
within the TikTok app. As users browse a third-party website from
within the TikTok app, they do so via TikTok's in-app web browser
(with no option to use the mobile phone's default web browser), and
the Session Replay Code intercepts and records the user's
electronic communications, including their keystrokes, clicks,
scrolling and swiping finger movements, text being entered into an
information field or text box (even when never sent to the
website), and/or other electronic communications as they occur in
real time ("Website Communications").

Session Replay Code goes far beyond the expectations of ordinary
users of the Internet of the data they might be offering to
companies. According to a Princeton University study: "The extent
of the data collected 'far exceeds user expectations,' including
recording what you type into a text box before you submit it, 'all
without any visual indication to the user.'"

Moreover, the use of Session Replay Code is not tolerated by some
of the largest tech companies. In 2019, Apple warned app developers
using Session Replay Code that they were required to disclose this
type of tracking and recording to their users, or they would be
immediately removed from the Apple Store. "Protecting user privacy
is paramount in the Apple ecosystem. Our App Store Review
Guidelines require that apps request explicit user consent and
provide a clear visual indication when recording, logging, or
otherwise making a record of user activity."

The Plaintiff brings this action individually and on behalf of a
class of all Pennsylvania citizens whose Website Communications
were intercepted through Defendants' use of Session Replay Code in
the TikTok app via TikTok's in-app web browser and seek all civil
remedies provided under the cause of action, including but not
limited to actual, liquidated, and/or punitive damages, and
attorneys' fees and costs, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff has had the TikTop app downloaded on her iPhone since
2018, and had its predecessor the Musical.ly app downloaded
starting in about 2016.

TikTok is a corporation organized and validly existing under the
laws of California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kenneth J. Grunfeld, Esq.
          GOLOMB SPIRT GRUNFELD, P.C.
          1835 Market Street, Suite 2900
          Philadelphia, PA 19104
          Email: kgrunfeld@golomblegal.com

               - and -

          Steven Sukert, Esq.
          Jeff Ostrow, Esq.
          Jonathan M. Streisfeld, Esq.
          KOPELOWITZ OSTROW FERGUSON WEISELBERG GILBERT
          One West Las Olas Blvd., Suite 500
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Email: sukert@kolawyes.com
                 ostrow@kolawyers.com
                 streisfeld@kolawyers.com



TOX CORPORATION: Fernandez Seeks Technicians' Proper Minimum Wages
------------------------------------------------------------------
LILIBETH FERNANDEZ, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, v. THE TOX CORPORATION; COURTNEY YEAGER; and
RYAN YEAGER, Case No. 2:22-cv-09079 (C.D. Cal., Dec. 15, 2022),
seeks to recover unpaid minimum wage under the Fair Labor Standards
Act of 1938 and the New York Labor Law.

Accordingly, the Defendant requires Technicians to undergo an
initial unpaid training of 6-8 days over the course of two weeks.
After training is complete, the Defendant pays its Technicians on
an hourly basis, plus commissions from massage bookings. If Tox and
its agents determine that a particular Technician's massage
bookings are too low in a given working day, Tox shaves part of the
Technician's working time off of clock-in/clock-out records, says
the suit.

On September 23, 2022, the Plaintiff complained to Human Resources
staff person Alyssa Edwards that her clock-in/clock-out times did
not match her actual hours of work. On September 26, 2022, the
Plaintiff Fernandez received an email from Courtney stating that
the Plaintiff employment at Tox was terminated, the suit asserts.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a Technician from
September 6, 2022 to September 26, 2022.

Tox provides Lymphatic Body and Facial Massages and sells related
products for at-home use.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Matthew S. Parmet, Esq.
          Jane M. Braugh, Esq.
          PARMET PC
          440 N. Barranca Ave., #1228
          Covina, CA 91723
          Telephone: (310) 928-1277
          E-mail: matt@parmet.law
                  jane@parmet.law

                - and -

          James E. Goodley, Esq.
          Ryan P. McCarthy, Esq.
          GOODLEY MCCARTHY LLC
          1650 Market Street, Suite 3600
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (215) 394-0541
          E-mail: james@gmlaborlaw.com
                  ryan@gmlaborlaw.com

TRAINWORLD ASSOCIATES: Fagnani Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Trainworld
Associates, LLC. The case is styled as Mykayla Fagnani, on behalf
of herself and all other persons similarly situated v. Trainworld
Associates, LLC, Case No. 1:22-cv-10580 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 14, 2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Trainworld Associates, LLC -- https://www.trainworld.com/ --
operates as a toy retailer.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb, Esq.
          Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
          GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
          150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR
          New York, NY 10003
          Phone: (212) 228-9795
          Fax: (212) 982-6284
          Email: nyjg@aol.com
                 michael@gottlieb.legal


TRANSDEV SERVICES: Ganther Suit Removed to N.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Brenda Ganther, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated, and on behalf of the general public v.
TRANSDEV SERVICES, INC., a Maryland Corporation, and DOES 1 through
10, inclusive, Case No. 22CV00138 was removed from the Superior
Court of the State of California, County of Napa, to the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California on
Dec. 14, 2022, and assigned Case No. 3:22-cv-08894.

The Plaintiff asserts a single cause of action for penalties under
the Private Attorneys General Act ("PAGA"), alleging failure to
provide meal periods; failure to provide rest periods; failure to
pay all straight time wages due; failure to pay all overtime wages
due; failure to provide accurately itemized wage statements;
failure to pay all final wages due upon separation; failure to pay
all wages earned in a timely manner; and failure to reimburse for
business expenses.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Tyler M. Paetkau, Esq.
          Olga Savage, Esq.
          HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP
          1999 Harrison St., Suite 700
          Oakland, CA 94612
          Phone: 510.768.0650
          Facsimile: 510.768.0651
          Email: tyler.paetkau@huschblackwell.com
                 olga.savage@huschblackwell.com

U STREET PARKING: Fails to Properly Pay Attendants, Teklu Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
FRIAT TEKLU and TEKLU FOLLE ODA, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. U STREET PARKING, INC.,
SERVE HENOK TESFAYE, and HENOK TESFAYE, Defendants, Case No.
1:22-cv-03721 (D.D.C., December 13, 2022) is a class action against
the Defendants for failure to pay minimum wages and failure to pay
overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the
District of Columbia Wage Payment and Collection Law, the Maryland
Wage and Hour Law, and the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection
Law.

Plaintiffs Friat Teklu and Teklu Folle Oda have been employed by
the Defendants as parking attendants since March 2019 and September
2017, respectively.

U Street Parking, Inc. is a parking management company and
transportation company in Washington, D.C. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:                
      
         Michael K. Amster, Esq.
         Zipin, Amster & Greenberg, LLC
         8757 Georgia Ave., Suite 400
         Silver Spring, MD 20910
         Telephone: (301) 587-9373
         Facsimile: (240) 839-9142
         E-mail: mamster@zagfirm.com

ULTA SALON: Faces Turner Wage-and-Hour Suit in N.D. Illinois
------------------------------------------------------------
LORI TURNER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ULTA SALON, COSMETICS & FRAGRANCE, INC. dba
ULTA BEAUTY, Defendant, Case No. 1:22-cv-06993 (N.D. Ill., December
13, 2022) is a class action against the Defendant for failure to
pay the Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees all earned
minimum and overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards
Act and the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act.

The Plaintiff was employed as a non-exempt employee at Ulta's
Lancaster, Ohio location from March 2019 through August 23, 2022.

Ulta Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc., doing business as Ulta
Beauty, is a cosmetics company, headquartered in Bolingbrook,
Illinois. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Michael L. Fradin, Esq.
         8401 Crawford Ave. Ste. 104
         Skokie, IL 60076
         Telephone: (847) 986-5889
         Facsimile: (847) 673-1228
         E-mail: mike@fradinlaw.com

                 - and -

         James L. Simon, Esq.
         THE LAW OFFICES OF SIMON & SIMON
         5000 Rockside Road
         Liberty Plaza, Suite 520
         Independence, OH 44131
         Telephone: (216) 525-8890
         E-mail: james@bswages.com

                 - and -

         Brian S. Kabateck, Esq.
         Anastasia Mazzella, Esq.
         Jerusalem F. Beligan, Esq.
         KABATEK LLP
         633 W. Fifth Street, Suite 3200
         Los Angeles, CA 90071
         Telephone: (213) 217-5000
         E-mail: bsk@kbklawyers.com
                 am@kbklawyers.com
                 jfb@kbklawyers.com

                 - and -

         Richard E. Quintilone II, Esq.
         Jeffrey T. Green, Esq.
         QUINTILONE & ASSOCIATES
         22974 El Toro Road, Suite 100
         Lake Forest, CA 92630
         Telephone: (949) 458-9675
         Facsimile: (949) 458-9679
         E-mail: req@quintlaw.com
                 jtg@quintlaw.com

UNILEVER UNITED: Loudenslager Sues Over Shampoos' Benzene Content
-----------------------------------------------------------------
LINDA LOUDENSLAGER, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. UNILEVER UNITED STATES INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 3:22-cv-01020-JWD-RLB (M.D. La., December 14,
2022) is a class action against the Defendant for violations of the
Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices Act, breach of express warranty,
breach of implied warranty, inadequate warning, fraudulent
misrepresentation, fraud by omission, negligent misrepresentation,
redhibition, and unjust enrichment.

The case arises from the Defendant's false, deceptive, and
misleading advertising, labeling, and marketing of dry shampoo
products. The Defendant advertised the products as properly
manufactured, free from defects, and safe for their intended use.
However, the Defendant failed to disclose the presence of benzene,
a substance known as a human carcinogen, in the products. The
Plaintiff and the Class suffered economic damages as a result of
the Defendant's misconduct, says the suit.

Unilever United States Inc. is a manufacturer of personal care
products, headquartered in Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         E. Blair Schilling, Esq.
         H.S. Bartlett III, Esq.
         Carly E. Jonakin, Esq.
         FISHMAN HAYGOOD, L.L.P.
         201 St. Charles Avenue, 46th Floor
         New Orleans, LA 70170
         Telephone: (504) 586-5252
         Facsimile: (504) 586-5250
         E-mail: bschilling@fishmanhaygood.com
                 tbartlett@fishmanhaygood.com
                 cjonakin@fishmanhaygood.com

                 - and -

         S. Eliza James, Esq.
         FORREST CRESSY AND JAMES, LLC
         1222 Annunciation Street
         New Orleans, LA 70130
         Telephone: (504) 605-0777
         Facsimile: (504) 322-3884
         E-mail: eliza@fcjlaw.com

UNISYS CORPORATION: Faces Shareholder Suit Over False Statements
----------------------------------------------------------------
Unisys Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2022, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 23, 2022, that on
November 11, 2022, a purported stockholder of the company filed a
putative securities class action complaint in the United States
District court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against the
company and certain of its current officers, alleging violations of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, based on allegedly
false or misleading statements related to projections and certain
other statements positively characterizing the company's momentum,
business, prospects and operations, and the effectiveness of the
company's internal control over financial reporting and the
company's disclosure controls and procedures.

The plaintiff seeks an award of compensatory damages, among other
relief, and costs and attorneys' and experts' fees.

Unisys Corporation is an information technology company based in
Pennsylvania.


UNITED STATES: Garcia Files Suit in W.D. Washington
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against US Citizenship and
Immigration Services. The case is styled as Linda Cabello Garcia,
on behalf of herself and others similarly situated v. US
Citizenship and Immigration Services; Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary
of Homeland Security; Ur M Jaddou, Director, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services; Case No. 3:22-cv-05984 (W.D. Wash., Dec. 16,
2022).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Statutes: Administrative
Procedures Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision for the
Administrative Procedure Act.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services -- https://www.uscis.gov/
-- is an agency of the United States Department of Homeland
Security that administers the country's naturalization and
immigration system.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Aaron Korthuis, Esq.
          Glenda M Aldana Madrid, Esq.
          Matt Adams, Esq.
          NORTHWEST IMMIGRANT RIGHTS PROJECT (SEA)
          615 2nd Ave., Ste. 400
          Seattle, WA 98104
          Phone: (206) 957-8611
          Email: aaron@nwirp.org
                 glenda@nwirp.org
                 matt@nwirp.org


UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA: Phillips Sues Over Denied Vaccine Exemption
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DWAYNE PHILLIPS, MARK EHRLICH, RYAN MESZAROS, REBECCA TYSON,
REBECCA LOFLIN, AND JANET RIPLEY, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. RECTOR AND VISITORS OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA, Whittington W. CLEMENT, in his official
capacity as Rector; Robert D. HARDIE, in his official capacity as
Vice Rector; Visitors Robert M. BLUE, Mark T. BOWLES, Carlos M.
BROWN, Elizabeth M. CRANWELL, Thomas A. DEPASQUALE, U. Bertam ELLIS
Jr., Louis S. HADDAD; Babur B. LATEEF, Stephen P. LONG, Angela
Hucles MANGANO, James B. MURRAY Jr., L.F. PAYNE, Amanda L. PILLION,
James V. REYES, Douglas D. WETMORE, Susan E. KIRK, and Lily A.
ROBERTS, each in her or his official capacity; K. Craig KENT, CEO
UVA Health and UVA Executive Vice President for Health Affairs, in
his individual and official capacities; Wendy HORTON, CEO UVA
Medical Center, in her individual capacity; Mary Frances
SOUTHERLAND, Chief Administrative Officer UVA Health, in her
individual capacity; Melissa FREDERICK, former Assistant Vice
President, UVA Health System, in her individual capacity; and John
DOES 1-5, senior Human Resources personnel of UVA Health, in their
individual capacities, Defendants, Case No. 3:22-cv-00075-NKM (W.D.
Va., December 14, 2022) is a class action against the Defendants
for violations of the Free Exercise Clause, the Establishment
Clause, and the Equal Protection Clause under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983
and Virginia Constitution's Free Exercise guarantee and
Establishment Clause.

The case arises from the Defendants' denial of COVID-19 exemption
requests of employees who were not included on UVA Health's list of
officially approved religions. UVA Health drew up a list of
churches that its human-resources personnel believed had official
doctrines prohibiting vaccination. It then automatically exempted
members of these religions from receiving the vaccine. As to
employees who were members of other faiths, UVA Health
automatically dismissed their religious objections to the COVID-19
vaccine as insincere, as non-religious in nature, as based on
misinformation or as a misinterpretation of the objector's own
religious beliefs. If employees were unwilling to violate their
religious beliefs, UVA Health promptly fired them. As a result of
the Defendants' and their subordinates' unlawful acts, the
Plaintiffs and Class members have suffered and continue to suffer
economic and other damages, says the suit.

The Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia (UVA) are the
corporate board for the UVA, headquartered in Charlottesville,
Virginia. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:                
      
         Charles B. Molster, III, Esq.
         LAW OFFICES OF CHARLES B. MOLSTER, III PLLC
         129 East Davis Street, Suite 250
         Culpeper, VA 22701
         Telephone: (703) 346-1505
         E-mail: cmolster@molsterlaw.com

                 - and -

         Samuel W. Diehl, Esq.
         Nicholas J. Nelson, Esq.
         Nathan Hopkins, Esq.
         CROSSCASTLE PLLC
         333 Washington Avenue N., Ste. 300
         Minneapolis, MN 55401
         Telephone: (612) 429-8100
         Facsimile: (612) 234-4766
         E-mail: sam.diehl@crosscastle.com
                 nicholas.nelson@crosscastle.com
                 nathan.hopkins@crosscastle.com

                 - and -

         Joshua A. Hetzler, Esq.
         FOUNDING FREEDOMS LAW CENTER
         707 E. Franklin St.
         Richmond, VA 23219
         Telephone: (804) 801-6707
         E-mail: josh@foundingfreedomslaw.org

USERTESTING INC: Proxy Statement Misleading, Bushansky Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
STEPHEN BUSHANSKY, v. USERTESTING, INC., ANDREW BRACCIA, ANDREW
MACMILLAN, CYNTHIA RUSSO, DARRELL BENATAR, ALEXANDER WONG, TATYANA
MAMUT, and SHANNON NASH, Case No. 3:22-cv-08870 (N.D. Cal., Dec.
14, 2022) alleges that the Defendants disseminated false and
misleading Proxy Statement, which failed to disclose material
facts, including material information about the Company's financial
projections, the data and inputs underlying the financial valuation
analyses that support the fairness opinion provided by Morgan
Stanley, and the background of the Proposed Transaction necessary
to make the statements, in violation of Section 14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) Rule 14a-9.

On October 27, 2022, UserTesting issued a press release announcing
entry into an Agreement and Plan of Merger dated October 26, 2022
to sell UserTesting to Thoma Bravo and Sunstone. Under the terms of
the Merger Agreement, each  UserTesting stockholder will receive
$7.50 in cash for each share of UserTesting common stock. The
Proposed Transaction is valued at approximately $1.3 billion.

The omissions and false and misleading statements in the Proxy
Statement are material in that a reasonable stockholder would
consider them important in deciding how to vote on the Proposed
Transaction or seek to exercise their appraisal rights, the lawsuit
claims.

Unless remedied, UserTesting's public stockholders will be
irreparably harmed because the Proxy Statement's material
misrepresentations and omissions prevent them from making a
sufficiently informed voting or appraisal decision on the Proposed
Transaction, the lawsuit contends. The Plaintiff also seeks to
enjoin the stockholder vote on the Proposed Transaction unless and
until such Exchange Act violations are cured, says the suit.

UserTesting engages in the operation of a software-as-a-service
platform that enables organizations to see and hear the experiences
of real people as they engage with products, designs, apps,
processes, concepts, or brands.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joel E. Elkins, Esq.
          WEISS LAW
          611 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 808
          Los Angeles, CA 90017
          Telephone: (310) 208-2800
          Facsimile: (310) 209-2348
          E-mail: jelkins@weisslawllp.com

                - and -

          Michael Rogovin, Esq.
          476 Hardendorf Ave. NE
          Atlanta, GA 30307
          Telephone: (404) 692-7910
          Facsimile: (212) 682-3010

UST SELECT: Fails to Pay Minimum & OT Wages, Barnes Suit Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
BRANDON BARNES, individually, and on behalf of other members of the
general public similarly situated v. UST SELECT, INC., a South
Carolina corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No.
22CV02939 (Cal. Super., Dec. 14, 2022) seeks to recover unpaid
minimum and overtime wages, and unpaid meal period premiums in
violation of the California Labor Code.

Accordingly, the Defendants engaged in a pattern and practice of
wage abuse against their hourly-paid or non-exempt employees within
the State of California. This scheme involved, inter alia, failing
to pay them for all hours worked, missed meal periods, and missed
rest breaks in violation of California law. The Plaintiff and other
class members did not receive complete and accurate wage statements
from Defendants. The deficiencies included, inter alia, the failure
to include the total number of hours worked by Plaintiff and other
class members, the Plaintiff claims.

The Defendants also failed to pay Plaintiff and other class members
the wages owed to them upon discharge or resignation, and failed to
provide complete or accurate wage statements to the Plaintiff and
other class members. Furthermore, the Defendants have intentionally
and willfully failed to reimburse Plaintiff and other class members
for all necessary business-related expenses and costs. the
Plaintiff adds.

The Plaintiff and other class members worked over eight hours in a
day, and/or 40 hours in a week during their employment with the
Defendants.

UST Select provides warehousing and delivery services coast to
coast.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Douglas Han, Esq.
          Shunt Tatavos-Gharajeh, Esq.
          William Wilkinson, Esq.
          JUSTICE LAW CORPORATION
          751 N. Fair Oaks Avenue, Suite 101
          Pasadena, CA 91103
          Telephone: (818) 230-7502
          Facsimile: (818) 230-7259

UVVU INC: Reid Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against UVVU Inc. The case is
styled as Nadreca Reid, individually and as the representative of a
class of similarly situated persons v. UVVU Inc. doing business as:
Solawave, Case No. 1:22-cv-10541 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 14, 2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

UVVU Inc. doing business as Solawave -- https://solawave.co/ --
offers award-winning red light therapy & blue light therapy
wands.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Dan Shaked, Esq.
          SHAKED LAW GROUP, P.C.
          14 Harwood Court, Suite 415
          Scarsdale, NY 10583
          Phone: (917) 373-9128
          Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com

VALLEY HEALTH: Sued Over Violation of Medical Privacy Rights
------------------------------------------------------------
Jane Doe, individually and on behalf of all other Citizens of the
state of New Jersey similarly situated v. VALLEY HEALTH SYSTEM,
INC. d/b/a THE VALLEY HOSPITAL, INC., VALLEY HOME CARE, INC.,
VALLEY MEDICAL GROUP, Case No. BER-L-006646-22 (N.Y. Super. Ct.,
Bergen Cty., Dec. 13, 2022), is brought arising from the
Defendant's systematic violation of the medical privacy rights of
its patients, exposing highly sensitive personal information to
third parties without those patients' knowledge or consent.

As recently as September 21, 2022, Defendant disclosed information
about its patients--including their status as patients, their
physicians, their medical treatments, the hospitals they visited,
and their personal identities--to Facebook and other third parties
without its patients' knowledge, authorization, or consent.

The Defendant disclosed this protected health information through
the deployment of various digital marketing and automatic rerouting
tools embedded on its websites that purposefully and intentionally
redirect patients' personal health information to third parties who
exploit that information for advertising purposes. The Defendant's
use of these rerouting tools caused Plaintiff's and Class Members'
personally identifiable information and the contents of their
communications exchanged with Defendant to be automatically
redirected to third parties in violation of those patients'
reasonable expectations of privacy, their rights as patients, their
rights as citizens of New Jersey, and both the express and implied
promises of the Defendant.

The Defendant's conduct in disclosing such protected health
information about its patients to Facebook and other third parties
without notice or consent violates New Jersey law, including
Wiretapping, Right to Privacy and Confidentiality of Medical
Records, and the fiduciary duty of confidentiality owed by
hospitals and physicians to their patients, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is a New Jersey citizen residing in Bergen County,
Jersey, has been treated by the Defendant's physicians, and has
been a patient at Valley Hospital, and thus also a patient of the
Defendant.

Valley Health System, Inc. d/b/a/ The Valley Hospital, Inc., Valley
Home Care, Inc., and Valley Medical Group is a non-profit
corporation that operates a general acute care hospital.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jason J. Rozger, Esq.
          MENKEN, SIMPSON, & ROZGER, LLP
          80 Pine Street, 33rd Floor
          New York, NY 10005
          Phone: (212) 509-1616


VANDERLEIGH PROPERTIES: Nieves Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages for Janitors
-------------------------------------------------------------------
EDUARDO NIEVES and VERONICA RAMIREZ, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. VANDERLEIGH
PROPERTIES, LLC, 7 OF 8 REALTY CO. LLC, JAYDEN 65 CO. LLC, LOQUTIS
80 CO. LLC, PRAXIS REALTY CO. LLC, HENRY MOSES, JR. (A/K/A SKIP
MOSES), ROBERT MOSES, and KELVIN TREVINO, Defendants, Case No.
1:22-cv-10581 (S.D.N.Y., December 14, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards
Act and the New York Labor Law including failure to pay minimum
wages, failure to pay overtime wages, failure to compensate spread
of hours pay, failure to provide wage notices, failure to furnish
accurate wage statements, and failure to timely pay wages.

Mr. Nieves and Ms. Ramirez have been employed by the Defendants as
janitorial workers since January 2013 and January 2019,
respectively.

Vanderleigh Properties, LLC is a real estate firm located in
Tuckahoe, New York.

7 of 8 Realty Co. LLC is a real estate firm located in Tuckahoe,
New York.

Jayden 65 Co. LLC is a real estate firm located in Tuckahoe, New
York.

Loqutis 80 Co. LLC is a real estate firm located in Tuckahoe, New
York.

Praxis Realty Co. LLC is a real estate firm located in Tuckahoe,
New York. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:                
      
         Joshua Levin-Epstein, Esq.
         Jason Mizrahi, Esq.
         LEVIN-EPSTEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
         60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4700
         New York, NY 10165
         Telephone: (212) 792-0046
         E-mail: Joshua@levinepstein.com

VF OUTDOOR: Valencia Appeals Class Cert. Bid Denial to 9th Cir.
---------------------------------------------------------------
BRIANA VALENCIA is taking an appeal from a court order denying her
motion for class certification in the lawsuit entitled Briana
Valencia, Plaintiff, v. VF Outdoor, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:20-cv-1795-ADA-SKO, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of California.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the Plaintiff
filed this class action against the Defendant and asserted causes
of action for its failure to pay minimum and regular wages, failure
to pay all overtime wages, failure to provide timely and/or
off-duty meal periods and rest periods, failure to provide accurate
itemized wage statements, and failure to pay all wages within a
timely manner pursuant to the California Labor Code.

The Defendant removed the action to federal court, invoking
jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act. The Defendant
then filed a motion to transfer the action, which was granted on
December 17, 2020.

On November 15, 2021, the Plaintiff filed a motion for class
certification. VF Outdoor filed its opposition on January 31,
2022.

On February 14, 2022, the Plaintiff filed her reply, along with a
motion to strike five video files submitted in support of
Defendant's opposition to the motion for class certification.

On November 30, 2022, the Court denied the Plaintiff's motion to
strike and motion for class certification through an Order entered
by Judge Ana de Alba.

The appellate case is captioned Briana Valencia v. VF Outdoor, LLC,
Case No. 22-80141, in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit, filed on December 13, 2022. [BN]

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

            Mark D. Potter, Esq.
            POTTER HANDY, LLP
            8033 Linda Vista Road, Suite 200
            San Diego, CA 92111
            Telephone: (760) 480-4162

                    - and -

            James Michael Treglio, Esq.
            POTTER HANDY, LLP
            100 Pine Street, Suite 1250
            San Francisco, CA 94111
            Telephone: (858) 375-7385

Defendant-Respondent VF OUTDOOR, LLC is represented by:

            Lonnie Domonic Giamela, Esq.
            FISHER & PHILLIPS, LLP
            444 S. Flower Street, Suite 1500
            Los Angeles, CA 90071
            Telephone: (213) 330-4500

                    - and -

            LaLonnie Gray, Esq.
            FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP
            1125 17th Street, Suite 2400
            Denver, CO 80202
            Telephone: (720) 744-4783

VIP PRODUCTS: Slade Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against VIP Products L.L.C.
The case is styled as Linda Slade, individually and as the
representative of a class of similarly situated persons v. VIP
Products L.L.C., Case No. 1:22-cv-10544 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 14, 2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

VIP Products is a global company that specializes in custom product
design, development and manufacturing.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Dan Shaked, Esq.
          SHAKED LAW GROUP, P.C.
          14 Harwood Court, Suite 415
          Scarsdale, NY 10583
          Phone: (917) 373-9128
          Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com

WAFFLE HOUSE: Collins Sues Over Misleading Advertising Practices
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jessica Collins, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. WAFFLE HOUSE, INC., Case No. 5:22-cv-00295-TKW-MJF
(N.D. Fla., Dec. 17. 2022), is brought seeking damages and an
injunction to stop the Defendant's false and misleading advertising
practices with regard to its combinations of (1) two eggs with
toast and either grits, hash browns, or sliced tomatoes, (2) a
waffle and (3) bacon, sausage, or ham for $10.00, less than the
$13.25 it previously was sold for ("All-Star Special" or
"Product").

The $10.00 price is misleading because these three items were not
previously sold together at the strikethrough price of $13.25. This
means the reference price does not provide a legitimate basis for
advertising a price comparison to the offered price. By listing the
All-Star Special price as formerly $13.25, the "bargain" advertised
to customers is a false one, such that they are not receiving the
unusual value they expect because the $10.00 price is its regular
price. The $13.25 is based on the total price of the three items
when purchased separately, because the toast, eggs and grits, hash
browns or tomatoes costs $5.25, the waffle costs $4.50 and the
bacon, sausage, or ham costs $3.50. To the extent any savings or
value is alleged through the savings of $3.25 or 32% when the
All-Star Special is purchased at $10.00, this is a false bargain
based on the purchase of other merchandise.

In a typical example, a merchant will offer a customer bargains in
the form of additional merchandise on the condition they purchase a
particular article at the price usually offered. This includes
promotions like "Buy One – Get One Free," "2-For-1 Sale," "Half
Price Sale," and "50% Off." In the example of the All-Star Special,
the customer is enticed to buy the Breakfast Meal and waffle for
almost $10.00 ($9.75) at which point they will receive the bacon,
sausage or ham for free, instead of having to pay $3.50. However,
because the All-Star Special was not sold at the strikethrough
price of $13.25, getting the bacon, sausage or ham without paying
more than $10.00 is not the bargain or value customers expect, says
the complaint.

The Plaintiff purchased the Product at Waffle House locations.

The Defendant operates over 1,900 Waffle House restaurants, known
for its fast service of freshly prepared food, across twenty-five
states, with a majority of locations in the southern states.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Spencer Sheehan, Esq.
          SHEEHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          60 Cuttermill Rd Ste 412
          Great Neck NY 11021
          Phone: (516) 268-7080
          Email: spencer@spencersheehan.com


WASTELAND GAMING: Toro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against The Wasteland Gaming,
LLC. The case is styled as Luis Toro, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. The Wasteland Gaming, LLC, Case No.
1:22-cv-10585 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 15, 2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

The Wasteland Gaming, LLC -- https://www.thewastelandgaming.com/ --
offers great deals on all kinds of trading card games, board games,
table top games, and more.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mars Khaimov, Esq.
          10826 64th Avenue, Ste. 2nd Floor
          Forest Hills, NY 11375
          Phone: (917) 915-7415
          Email: mars@khaimovlaw.com

WEEK PUBLICATIONS: Initial OK Bid of Settlement in Moeller Nixed
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ELIZABETH MOELLER,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. THE
WEEK PUBLICATIONS, INC., Case No. 1:22-cv-10666-TLL-PTM (E.D.
Mich.), the Hon. Judge Thomas L. Ludington entered an order denying
without prejudice the Plaintiff's motion for preliminary approval
of settlement.

In this class-action suit brought under Michigan's Preservation of
Personal Privacy Act (PPPA), the Plaintiff Elizabeth Moeller
alleges Defendant The Week Publications improperly disclosed
"detailed information" about her subscription to The Week, leading
to "a barrage of unwanted junk mail."

Following successful settlement negotiations, the Plaintiff filed
an unopposed motion for preliminary approval of the class-action
settlement.

The Parties were directed to file supplemental briefing "addressing
(1) whether Plaintiff Moeller's $5,000 service award created an
inappropriate incentive to settle regardless of the benefit to
other class members and (2) why Plaintiff is entitled to $5,000 as
a service award."

But neither brief provided a persuasive explanation justifying
Plaintiff Moeller's proposed incentive award -- which would be more
than 2000% greater than the $248 that what the unnamed class
members would receive.

The Defendant merely states that it "is not aware of any
information to suggest that the proposed 'service award' created an
inappropriate settlement in this case," and that it "has no
first-hand knowledge as to Plaintiff Moeller's involvement in the
case, other than his being a named plaintiff."

The Plaintiff, on the other hand, makes three arguments to justify
the $5,000 incentive award. First, she argues the incentive award
does not create an inappropriate incentive to settle, because "the
proposed settlement outperforms almost every other previously
approved PPPA settlement, both in terms of its structure and
per-class member recovery," because it is "equal to or less than
the service awards previously approved in this District in other
PPPA cases."

In this way, Moeller's $5,000 incentive payment would seem to make
her whole under the PPPA, grouping it with the "most dubious of
incentive payments."

On top of that, it is more than 20 times greater than the proposed
relief of the unnamed class members. With both sides of Moeller's
incentive award tainted as such, and no extraordinary circumstances
present, this Court must reject the Agreement to ensure adequacy of
relief for the unnamed class members.

The Plaintiff's second argument, that she spent "considerable time"
protecting the Class's interests, is supported by only a vague
affidavit that does not quantify Moeller's invested time.

But the tasks Plaintiffs outline require little to no time or
involvement and appear to be requirements for even the least
involved plaintiffs.

Simply put, Moeller's involvement has not been extraordinary
compared to other lead plaintiffs such that she deserves a 2000%
multiplier for her monetary relief.

Accordingly, because the proposed service award is more than 20
times larger than the $248 that the unnamed class members would
receive, the Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class
Action Settlement, will be denied without prejudice.

Week Publications publishes and prints periodicals.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec.. 15, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3WwFAiV at no extra charge.[CC]

WILLIAMS-SONOMA INC: Briefing Schedule For Class Cert Bid Extended
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WILLIAM RUSHING and
ELIZABETH PERLIN, individually and on Behalf of all Others
Similarly Situated, v. WILLIAMS-SONOMA, INC., a Delaware
corporation, also d/b/a Williams-Sonoma, and Williams-Sonoma Home,
Pottery Barn, PB Teen, and PB Dorm, Pottery Barn Kids, Pottery Barn
Baby, and West Elm; WILLIAMS-SONOMA DTC, INC., a California
corporation; WILLIAMS-SONOMA ADVERTISING, INC., a California
corporation; and DOES 1-30, Case No. 3:16-cv-01421-WHO (N.D. Cal.),
the Hon. Judge William H. Orrick entered an order setting a
briefing schedule for Plaintiff Elizabeth Perlin's Motion for Class
Certification as follows:

            EVENT                                 DEADLINE

-- Deadline for Perlin to produce            January 25, 2023
    class certification expert(s) for
    deposition

-- Last day to file opposition to            March 28, 2023
    Motion for Class Certification

-- Deadline for Defendants to produce        April 13, 2023
    class certification expert(s) for
    deposition

-- Last day to filed reply in support        May 29, 2023
    of Motion for Class Certification

-- Hearing                                   June 14, 2023

Williams-Sonoma is an American publicly traded consumer retail
company that sells kitchenware and home furnishings.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 14, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3FUJ8G2 at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Leonard W. Aragon, Esq.
          Robert B. Carey, Esq.
          Leonard W. Aragon, Esq.
          Shana E. Scarlett, Esq.
          HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP

The Defendants are represented by:

          P. Craig Cardon, Esq.
          Robert J. Guite, Esq.
          Benjamin O. Aigboboh, Esq.
          Alyssa Sones, Esq.
          SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP
          Four Embarcadero Center, 17th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94111-4109
          Telephone: (415) 434-9100
          Facsimile: (415) 434-3947
          Email: ccardon@sheppardmullin.com
                 rguite@sheppardmullin.com
                 baigboboh@sheppardmullin.com
                 asones@sheppardmullin.com

WYNN MA LLC: Turley Files Suit in Mass. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Wynn MA, LLC, et al.
The case is styled as Jason Turley, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Wynn MA, LLC d/b/a Encore Boston
Harbor, Wynn Resorts Holdings, LLC, Wynn Resorts Limited, Case No.
2281CV04251 (Mass. Super. Ct., Middlesex Cty., Dec. 15, 2022).

The case type is stated as "Torts."

Wynn MA, LLC doing business as Encore Boston Harbor --
https://www.encorebostonharbor.com/ -- offers the finest in Boston
hotel resort accommodations, five-star dining, gaming, shopping and
more.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Harold Lichten, Esq.
          LICHTEN AND LISS-RIORDAN P.C.
          729 Boylston St., Suite 2000
          Boston, MA 02116


XERK INDUSTRIES: Toro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Xerk Industries, Inc.
The case is styled as Luis Toro, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Xerk Industries, Inc., d/b/a Brick
Loot, Case No. 1:22-cv-10588 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 15, 2022).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Xerk Industries, Inc., doing business as Brick Loot --
https://www.brickloot.com/ -- is a subscription box for the
ultimate LEGO and brick fans.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mars Khaimov, Esq.
          10826 64th Avenue, Ste. 2nd Floor
          Forest Hills, NY 11375
          Phone: (917) 915-7415
          Email: mars@khaimovlaw.com


ZIFF DAVIS INC: Seeks Dismissal of Garcia Class Suit
----------------------------------------------------
Ziff Davis, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2022, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2022, that on
July 8, 2020, Jeffrey Garcia filed a putative class action lawsuit
against the company in the Central District of California (Case No.
20-cv-06906), alleging violations of federal securities laws. The
company has moved to dismiss the consolidated class action
complaint.

The court granted the motion to dismiss and the plaintiff has filed
an amended complaint. The company has moved to dismiss the amended
complaint. On August 8, 2022, the court granted the company's
motion to dismiss the amended complaint without leave to amend.

Ziff Davis, Inc. is a digital media and internet company based in
New York.


ZOOM VIDEO: Bids to Dismiss Class Suit Remain Pending
-----------------------------------------------------
Zoom Video Communications, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report
for the quarterly period ended October 31, 2022, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 23, 2022, that the
motions to dismiss three class action lawsuits remain pending.

On June 11, 2020, and July 30, 2020, purported shareholder
derivative complaints were filed in the United States District
court for the District of Delaware. The first complaint names as
defendants nine of its officers and directors, and the second
complaint names eight of its officers and directors. The lawsuits
assert state and federal claims and are based on the same alleged
misstatements as the shareholder class action complaint. The
lawsuits accuse the company's board of directors of failing to
exercise reasonable and prudent supervision over its management,
policies, practices, and internal controls.

The plaintiffs seek unspecified monetary damages on behalf of it as
well as governance reforms. On September 25, 2020, the derivative
cases were consolidated. The consolidated case has stayed pending
the resolution of the motion to dismiss the securities class
action. On October 27, 2021, a third substantially identical
lawsuit was filed in the same court against the same defendants,
seeking unspecified monetary damages and governance reforms. On
November 17, 2021, all three derivative lawsuits were consolidated
and remain stayed pending resolution of the motion to dismiss the
securities class action.

Zoom Video Communications, Inc. is a software company based in
California.



                            *********

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 2022. 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 ***