/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/230719.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Wednesday, July 19, 2023, Vol. 25, No. 144
Headlines
3M COMPANY: Smith Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals
3M COMPANY: Smith Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Smith Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Stern Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
3M COMPANY: Stevens Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
476 K: Koska Collective Action Gets Conditional Certification
976 MADISON RESTAURANT: Mendez Files Suit Over Tip Skimming
ABCM CORP: Greenfield Suit Seeks to Certify FLSA Collective Class
ALLSTATE INSURANCE: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Bond Alleges
AMERICAN GENERAL: Class Settlement in LSIMC Suit Has Final Approval
AMERICAN MEDICAL: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Dagley Says
AMERIGAL CONSTRUCTION: Plaintiffs Must Renew Class Cert Bid
ATLANTIC GENERAL: Ehrisman Sues Over Breach of Private Information
AUDIENCEVIEW TICKETING: Toledo Sues Over Alleged Data Breach
B&W AUTOMOTIVE: Avila Sues Over Technicians' Unpaid Wages
BASSETT HEALTHCARE: Faces Willoughby Wage-and-Hour Suit in N.D.N.Y.
BED BATH & BEYOND: Faces Consolidated Securities Suit in DC Court
BED BATH & BEYOND: Faces Consolidated Securities Suit in NJ Court
BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Clark et al. Sue Over Defective Inflators
BOOXKEEPING CORPORATION: Crumwell Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
BRYAN CAVE: Flores Alleges Negligence, Mishandling Consumers' Info
CAPITAL ONE: Asks Court to Seal Class Cert Opposition
CARGILL INC: N.D. New York Denies Bid to Dismiss Flores Labor Suit
CARNIVAL PLC: Faces Negligence Charges in Italy, Australia
COBBLERS USA: Velez Sues Over False Advertising of Repair Services
CULTURALINK INC: Yang Seeks Unpaid Regular & OT Wages Under FLSA
DELICIOUS INTERNATIONAL: Padilla Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
DORIS LESLIE BLAU: Vachnine Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
DOWN UNDER: Bado Suit Seeks to Certify FLSA Collective Action
EMPOWER FEDERAL: Class Settlement in Wellington Suit Wins Final OK
EMPOWER FEDERAL: Court Dismisses Wellington Suit With Prejudice
ENGINE & TRANSMISSION: Fails to Pay OT Wages, Perez Suit Says
FORAY GOLF LLC: Castro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
FULFILLMENT LAB: Court Certifies Classes in Sihler Lawsuit
GATOS SILVER INC: Faces Securities Suit in Canadian Court
GATOS SILVER INC: Securities Suit in Colorado Court Ongoing
GEOSNAPSHOT PTY: Court Adopts Joint Report & Scheduling Order
GOODWILL INDUSTRIES: Fails to Protect Employees' Info, Booker Says
GOYA FOODS: Mejias Labor Suit Seeks Class Certification
HEALTH SERVICES: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Jumett Alleges
HIGHTECHLENDING INC: Charman Files TCPA Suit in S.D. California
INTERMIX HOLDCO: Visnjevac Sues Over Layoff Without Advance Notice
JACKSON HEWITT: Class Action Settlement in Mardis Gets Final Nod
JOHNS HOPKINS: Beauford Suit Remanded to Baltimore Circuit Court
JOHNS HOPKINS: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Hunter Alleges
KCF TECHNOLOGIES: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Espinoza Alleges
KROGER CO: Bid to Dismiss Granted; White Suit Tossed With Prejudice
MACPHERSON OIL: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Johnston Alleges
MDC STEEL: Fails to Timely Pay Wages, Estrada et al. Claim
MDL 2742: S.D. New York Recommends Termination of Securities Suit
METROPOLITAN LIFE: Jacobson Sues Over Undisclosed Rider Fees
MONTBELL AMERICA: Castro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
NICKELS AND DIMES: Elder Sues Over Alleged FTSA Violations
NOBLE ENERGY: Phelps Oil Appeals Remand Bid Denial
NOMURA HORUDINGUSU: To Settle Bonds Dispute in Canadian Court
NORTH AMERICAN: Abbou Sues Over Failure to Protect Personal Info
OLE MEXICAN: LaBarbera Appeals Case Dismissal to 9th Cir.
OMNI FINANCIAL: Wood Appeals Case Dismissal Ruling to 4th Cir.
ONE SOURCE STAFFING: Mason Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
OSPREY PACKS INC: Castro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
PENSION BENEFIT: Berry, Ng Sue Over Right to Privacy Violations
PHILADELPHIA, PA: Bids to Dismiss Ferebee v. Macklin Partly Granted
PIZZA HUT INC: Cortez Files TCPA Suit in E.D. Washington
PRICE BUSTERS MOVIES: Kunkle Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
PRIMARY UTILITY: Fails to Pay OT Wages Under FLSA, Williams Alleges
PRISMA HEALTH: Andrews Files Suit in D. South Carolina
PROGRESS SOFTWARE: Ortega Files Suit in C.D. California
PROGRESSIVE PREFERRED: Suit Seek to File Class Cert Bid Under Seal
PRYSMIAN CABLES: Montana Bid to Certify Class Denied w/o Prejudice
RB FOOD: Fails to Pay Minimum, OT Wages Under FLSA, Vicent Alleges
REPUBLIC SERVICES: Mira Hospitality Suit Removed to E.D. La.
ROIVANT SCIENCES: Faces Securities Suit Over "Batoclimab" Report
SHEA HOMES: Association Sues Over Concealed Construction Defects
SHOE MART FACTORY: Castro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
SNOW PEAK USA: Sanchez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
SUPER CHOICE: Velasquez Class Suit Seeks Unpaid OT Wages Under FLSA
SUPPORT SERVICES: Parties Seek FLSA Collective Certification
T'SO: Fails to Pay Transporter's OT Wages Under FLSA, Wakim Says
TIOGA DOWNS: Potter Seeks Initial Approval of Settlement Deal
TRAVEL GUARD: Miller Suit Seeks to Certify Class & Subclass
UNITED COAL: Parties Seek Initial Approval of Settlement
VALET KING: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages to Drivers, Ruales Claims
WAUSAU HOMES: Appeals Arbitration Bid Denial in Francis Suit
WELBE HEALTH LLC: Hale Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
WELLS FARGO: Faces Suit Over Housing Loan Refinancing Options
WILSON CAP: Aguilar Sues Over Construction Workers' Unpaid Wages
*********
3M COMPANY: Smith Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals
-------------------------------------------------------
Marcia Smith as Surviving Spouse of Glenn Smith, deceased, and
other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION;
BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION;
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.;
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.); ALLSTAR
FIRE EQUIPMENT; FIRE-DEX, LLC; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC;
HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY
SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., LLC; MUNICIPAL
EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.; SOUTHERN
MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES INC., Case
No. 2:23-cv-02296-RMG (D.S.C., May 26, 2023), is brought for
damages for personal injury and death resulting from exposure to
aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") and firefighter turnout gear
("TOG") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as per
and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not
limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. TOG is personal protective equipment
designed for heat and moisture resistance in order to protect
firefighters in hazardous situations. Most turnout gear is made up
of a thermal liner, moisture barrier, and an outer layer. The inner
layers contain PFAS, and the outer layer is often treated with
additional PFAS.
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory
and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff Marcia Smith is an adult resident of the State of
Georgia, who is the surviving spouse of Glenn Smith, who regularly
used, and was thereby directly exposed to, AFFF in training and to
extinguish fires during his working career as a military and/or
civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with leukemia as a result of
exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
3M COMPANY: Smith Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
----------------------------------------------------------------
Joshua Alan Smith, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY
(f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA,
INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION;
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.;
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA,
INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a
DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM,
INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTSLP, as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No. 2:23-cv-02801-RMG (D.S.C., June 19,
2023), is brought for damages for personal injury resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory
and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to
AFFF in training and during the Plaintiff's working career in the
military and/or as a civilian and was diagnosed with hypothyroidism
as a result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglass A. Kreis, Esq.
Bryan F. Aylstock, Esq.
Justin G. Witkin, Esq.
AYLSTOCK, WITKIN, KREIS & OVERHOLTZ, PLLC
17 East Main Street, Suite 200
Pensacola, FL 32502
Phone: (850) 202-1010
Email: dkreis@awkolaw.com
baylstock@awkolaw.com
jwitkin@awkolaw.com
3M COMPANY: Smith Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
----------------------------------------------------------------
David E. Smith, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTSLP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No.
2:23-cv-02681-RMG (D.S.C., June 14, 2023), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory
and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was prostate cancer
as a result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglass A. Kreis, Esq.
Bryan F. Aylstock, Esq.
Justin G. Witkin, Esq.
AYLSTOCK, WITKIN, KREIS & OVERHOLTZ, PLLC
17 East Main Street, Suite 200
Pensacola, FL 32502
Phone: (850) 202-1010
Email: dkreis@awkolaw.com
baylstock@awkolaw.com
jwitkin@awkolaw.com
3M COMPANY: Stern Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
---------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Phillip Stern, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY
(f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA,
INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION;
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.;
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA,
INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a
DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM,
INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTSLP, as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No. 2:23-cv-02803-RMG (D.S.C., June 19,
2023), is brought for damages for personal injury resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory
and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to
AFFF in training and during the Plaintiff's working career in the
military and/or as a civilian and was diagnosed with
hyperthyroidism as a result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF
products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglass A. Kreis, Esq.
Bryan F. Aylstock, Esq.
Justin G. Witkin, Esq.
AYLSTOCK, WITKIN, KREIS & OVERHOLTZ, PLLC
17 East Main Street, Suite 200
Pensacola, FL 32502
Phone: (850) 202-1010
Email: dkreis@awkolaw.com
baylstock@awkolaw.com
jwitkin@awkolaw.com
3M COMPANY: Stevens Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Allen Stevens, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY
(f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA,
INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION;
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.;
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA,
INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a
DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM,
INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTSLP, as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No. 2:23-cv-02682-RMG (D.S.C., June 15,
2023), is brought for damages for personal injury resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory
and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was testicular cancer
as a result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglass A. Kreis, Esq.
Bryan F. Aylstock, Esq.
Justin G. Witkin, Esq.
AYLSTOCK, WITKIN, KREIS & OVERHOLTZ, PLLC
17 East Main Street, Suite 200
Pensacola, FL 32502
Phone: (850) 202-1010
Email: dkreis@awkolaw.com
baylstock@awkolaw.com
jwitkin@awkolaw.com
476 K: Koska Collective Action Gets Conditional Certification
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARKO KOSKA, individually,
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. 476 K, LLC, dba
CLOAKROOM, et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-03232-JMC (D.D.C.), the Hon.
Judge Jia M. Cobb entered an order granting joint motion to
conditionally certify collective action and continue stay:
(1) The instant action is conditionally certified as a
collective
action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. section 216(b) and D.C. Code
section 32-1308(a)(1)(C) on behalf of all hosts employed by
476
K, LLC, d/b/a Cloakroom at any time on or after February 26,
2015, through present.
(2) The Court hereby approves the parties’ proposed notice and
consent forms for dissemination to the Putative Collective
Members via U.S. Mail and e-mail.
(3) The Defendants shall provide the notice administrator
selected
by the Plaintiff with a spreadsheet of each Putative
Collective
Member's name and last known mailing and e-mail addresses
within 14 days.
(4) Any Putative Collective Member seeking to join this action
must
submit his or her consent form within 45 days from the
mailing
of the notice and consent forms.
(5) The case will remain stayed until 45 days from the mailing
of
the notice and consent forms.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 23, 2023, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3XHzVbo at no extra charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Nicholas Conlon, Esq.
BROWN, LLC
111 Town Square Place, Suite 400
Jersey City, NJ 07310
Telephone: (877) 561-0000
Facsimile: (855) 582-5297
E-mail: nicholasconlon@jtblawgroup.com
- and -
Stephen B. Lebau, Esq.
LEBAU & NEUWORTH, LLC
502 Washington Avenue - Suite 720
Towson, Maryland 21204
Telephone: (443) 273-1203
Facsimile: (410) 296-8660
E-mail: sl@joblaws.net
The Defendant is represented by:
Robert Anthony Cocchia, Esq.
RIMON LAW
3579 4th Avenue
San Diego, CA 92103
Telephone: (858) 348-4383
E-mail: robert.cocchia@rimonlaw.com
- and -
Jonathan Niles Rosen, Esq.
RIMON LAW
1990 K Street NW, Suite 420
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 618-5770
E-mail: jonathan.rosen@rimonlaw.com
976 MADISON RESTAURANT: Mendez Files Suit Over Tip Skimming
-----------------------------------------------------------
IVAN HERRERA MENDEZ; and VALENTIN VIVAR, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 976 MADISON
RESTAURANT LLC d/b/a KAPPO MASA, Defendant, Case No. 519537/2023
(N.Y. Sup., Kings Cty., July 7, 2023) seeks to recover from the
Defendants unpaid wages, including those due to an invalid tip
credit, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees and costs.
976 MADISON RESTAURANT LLC d/b/a KAPPO MASA operates a restaurant
under the trade name "Kappo Masa," located at New York, New York.
[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
C.K. Lee, Esq.
Anne Seelig, Esq.
LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
148 West 24th Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10011
Telephone: (212) 465-1188
Facsimile: (212) 465-1181
ABCM CORP: Greenfield Suit Seeks to Certify FLSA Collective Class
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TAMMY GREENFIELD,
Individually and for Others Similarly Situated, v. ABCM
CORPORATION, Case No. 3:23-cv-03006-LTS-MAR (N.D. Iowa), the
Plaintiffs Tammy Greenfield1 and Kathleen Bruns file a motion for
conditional certification and court-authorized notice.
The Plaintiff requests the Court grant conditional certification
of, and authorize notice to be sent to, the following collective:
"All hourly, non-exempt workers who worked for, on or behalf of,
ABCM, at any ABCM facility, and who received an automatic meal
period deduction at any time during the past 3 years (FLSA
Collective members or FLSA Collective)."
ABCM operates numerous rehabilitation centers, long-term care
facilities, and independent and assisted living communities.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 23, 2023, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/46SajNt at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
Olivia R. Beale, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP, LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 352-1100
Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
adunlap@mybackwages.com
obeale@mybackwages.com
- and -
Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 877-8788
Facsimile: (713) 877-8065
E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com
- and -
Mark D. Sherinian, Esq.
Melissa C. Hasso, Esq.
Emily E. Wilson, Esq.
SHERINIAN & HASSO LAW FIRM
111 E. Grand Ave., Suite 212
Des Moines, IA 50309
Telephone: (515) 224-2079
Facsimile: (515) 224-2321
E-mail: sherinianlaw@msn.com
mhasso@sherinianlaw.com
ewilson@sherinianlaw.com
ALLSTATE INSURANCE: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Bond Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH BOND; BARBARA DURANT; TONIA JEWELL-VINES; and WILLIAM KROLL,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant, Case No.
1:23-cv-04385 (N.D. Ill., July 7, 2023) seeks to stop the
Defendants' practice of making unsolicited calls.
ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY insurance company. The Company offers
auto, home life insurances policies. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Timothy J. Sostrin, Esq.
Keith J. Keogh, Esq.
KEOGH LAW, LTD.
55 W. Monroe St. Suite 3390
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: (866) 726-1092
Email: tsostrin@KeoghLaw.com
AMERICAN GENERAL: Class Settlement in LSIMC Suit Has Final Approval
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the case, LSIMC, LLC, on behalf of itself and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. AMERICAN GENERAL LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 2:20-cv-11518-SVW-PVC (C.D. Cal.),
Judge Stephen V. Wilson of the U.S. District Court for the Central
District of California grants the Plaintiff's unopposed motion to
certify a settlement class, grants final approval of a proposed
class action settlement, and enters final judgment in the action.
Before the Court is the Plaintiff's unopposed motion to certify a
settlement class, grant final approval of a proposed class action
settlement, and enter final judgment in the action, the terms of
which are set forth in a Joint Stipulation and Settlement Agreement
with accompanying exhibits.
On Feb. 16, 2023, the Court granted preliminary approval of the
proposed settlement. Among other things, the Preliminary Approval
Order directed that notice be provided to class members and
approved the proposed method for providing notice.
The Court has considered the Agreement, the Plaintiff's Motion, and
all papers filed in support of the Motion, and the entire docket in
the matter. Having fully considered the matter, pursuant to Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), Judge Wilson grants the Plaintiff's
Motion. He reaffirms the Court's earlier findings that class
certification is appropriate for settlement purposes.
Judge Wilson certifies the following Settlement Class for purposes
of judgment on the proposed Settlement only: The current or the
most recent owner as of January 13, 2022, of one or more life
insurance policies issued by American General Life Insurance
Company, or its predecessors, on which American General Life
Insurance Co. credited interest to the accumulation value, and that
provide that any redetermination of interest rates will be based
only on expectations of future investment earnings and that have a
guaranteed minimum annual effective interest rate of 3%.
Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (a) officers or directors
of American General; (b) any judicial officer presiding over the
Action and the members of his or her immediate family and judicial
staff; and (c) Policyowners who submitted a timely and valid opt
out in response to the notice regarding the Court's order granting
class certification in part or who submitted a valid and timely
Request for Exclusion.
Judge Wilson fully and finally approves the Settlement as set forth
in the Agreement, including the releases contained therein, and the
proposed plan of allocation described in Exhibit 3 to the
Declaration of Glenn C. Bridgman, because its terms are fair,
reasonable, and adequate under Rule 23. He makes final his
preliminary findings that, for purposes of settlement only, the
Settlement satisfies the applicable prerequisites for class
treatment under Rule 23.
The Fourth Amended Complaint is deemed filed as of the date of the
Order and the Defendant is concurrently deemed to deny all
allegations contained in it and to raise all of the defenses the
Defendant raised in its Answer to the Third Amended Complaint,
without the need for the Defendant to file an answer to the Fourth
Amended Complaint.
Upon the Effective Date, all of the Releasors will be deemed to
have, and by operation of this Judgment will have, fully, finally,
and forever released, relinquished, and discharged all Released
Claims (including Unknown Claims) as against the Releasees.
The Parties are directed to implement the Settlement according to
the Agreement terms.
In accordance with, and for the reasons stated in this Order, Final
Judgment is entered in the action. Pursuant to the Agreement, the
Court retains jurisdiction for the limited purpose of addressing
any issues that arise in the administration and enforcement of the
Agreement.
A full-text copy of the Court's June 27, 2023 Order is available at
https://tinyurl.com/5n7ubpsa from Leagle.com.
AMERICAN MEDICAL: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Dagley Says
----------------------------------------------------------
Nathanial Dagley, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. American Medical Response, Inc.,
Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-01681-MEH (D. Colo., June 30, 2023)
arises out of the Defendant's alleged violations of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
The Defendant misclassified Plaintiff and other paramedics and EMTs
as independent contractors. Although they worked more than 40 hours
in a workweek, the Defendant did not pay them the proper overtime
wages for the overtime hours they worked, says the suit.
American Medical Response, Inc. provides medical transport and
support to natural disasters and emergencies throughout the U.S. It
also partners with EMS agencies throughout the United States to
help with responses for aide. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rachhana T. Srey, Esq.
NICHOLS KASTER, PLLP
4700 IDS Center
80 S. 8th Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone: (612) 256-3200
Facsimile: (612) 338-4878
E-mail: srey@nka.com
AMERIGAL CONSTRUCTION: Plaintiffs Must Renew Class Cert Bid
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Barrientos, et al., v.
Amerigal Construction Co. Inc., et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-02618
(D.D.C., Filed Aug. 30, 2022), the Hon. Judge Zia M. Faruqui
entered an order directing the Plaintiffs to renew their motion to
certify class collective action and clarify, in light of the
amended complaint, the definition of the Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA) Collective.
The nature of suit states Fair Labor Standards Act.[CC]
ATLANTIC GENERAL: Ehrisman Sues Over Breach of Private Information
------------------------------------------------------------------
Cathy Ehrisman, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Atlantic General Hospital Corporation,
Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-01762 (D. Md., June 30, 2023) alleges
claims against the Defendant for negligence, negligence per se,
breach of implied contract, bailment, intrusion upon seclusion,
unjust enrichment, and for violations of the Maryland Personal
Information Protection Act, the Maryland Consumer Protection Act
and other states' consumer protection statutes, the Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, and Section 5
of the Federal Trade Commission Act.
On January 29, 2023, Atlantic General Hospital Corp. discovered
suspicious files on its company networks and launched an
investigation to ascertain the nature of these files through the
aid of third-party data forensics specialists. This investigation
revealed that intruders had breached AGH's systems starting as
early as January 20, 2023, and accessed numerous files on its
servers. On March 24, 2023, AGH finally informed the public about
the Data Breach and sent notices to patients and other parties
whose highly sensitive information had been stolen by the hackers.
Accordingly, AGH's failure to promptly notify Plaintiff and Class
members that their private information was exfiltrated due to AGH's
apparent security failures virtually ensured that the unauthorized
third parties who exploited those security lapses could monetize,
misuse and/or disseminate that Private Information before Plaintiff
and Class members could take affirmative steps to protect their
sensitive information, says the suit.
Based in Maryland, Atlantic General Hospital Corp. runs multiple
hospitals and other health care services throughout the state.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Thomas Pacheco, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC
900 W Morgan Street
Raleigh, NC 27603
Telephone: (212) 946-9305
E-mail: tpacheco@milberg.com
- and -
Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC
227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (866) 252-0878
E-mail: gklinger@milberg.com
AUDIENCEVIEW TICKETING: Toledo Sues Over Alleged Data Breach
------------------------------------------------------------
RICHARD Z. TOLEDO, an individual, and on behalf of classes of
similarly situated individuals, Plaintiff v. AUDIENCEVIEW TICKETING
CORPORATION AND UNIVERSITYTICKETS.COM, INC., Defendants, Case No.
1:23-cv-05626 (S.D.N.Y., June 30, 2023) arises from the Defendants'
failure to exercise reasonable care in securing sensitive
personally identifiable information.
On or about March 28, 2023, AudienceView notified Plaintiff and
Class Members about a widespread data breach involving Plaintiff's
and Class Member's sensitive PII. The number of individuals
affected by the Data Breach is estimated to be 13,045. AudienceView
explained in the Notice that on February 21, 2023, they discovered
suspicious activity within their Campus product which is embedded
into the website of various colleges and universities. They later
determined that their Campus product was impacted with malware, and
between February 14, 2023, and February 21, 2023, Plaintiff's and
Class Member’s PII was subject to unauthorized access and
acquisition, the suit alleges.
AudienceView Ticketing Corporation is a consumer ticketing online
platform based in Toronto, Canada.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Brian P. Murray, Esq.
GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
230 Park Avenue, Suite 358
New York, NY 10169
Telephone: (212) 682-5340
Facsimile: (212) 884-0988
E-mail: bmurray@glancylaw.com
- and -
Eric J. Artrip, Esq.
D. Anthony Mastando, Esq.
MASTANDO & ARTRIP, LLC
301 Holmes Ave., NE, Suite 100
Huntsville, AL 35801
Telephone: (256) 532-2222
Facsimile: (256) 513-7489
E-mail: artrip@mastandoartrip.com
tony@mastandoartrip.com
B&W AUTOMOTIVE: Avila Sues Over Technicians' Unpaid Wages
---------------------------------------------------------
CATHERINE AVILA, Plaintiff v. B&W AUTOMOTIVE, INC.; DOUGLAS BRAVO;
and DOES 1 to 25, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 23STCV14B44 (Cal.
Super., Los Angeles Cty., June 26, 2023) is a class action brought
by the Plaintiff, on behalf of similarly situated aggrieved
employees, for Defendants' violations of numerous provisions of the
California Labor Code.
The complaint alleges the Defendants' failure to pay minimum and
overtime wages, failure to pay compensation for all hours worked,
failure to provide uninterrupted meal and rest periods, failure to
include pertinent information on the wage statements, failure to
provide earned and due wages upon separation of employment, failure
to keep accurate and complete payroll periods, and failure to
reimburse necessary, business-related expenses and costs.
The Plaintiff started working for B&W around June 2021 as a
technician. During her employment tenure, Plaintiff has been
classified as an hourly, non-exempt employee. Plaintiff's
employment with B&W ended in 2023.
B&W Automotive, Inc. is a California automotive corporation.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Harout Messrelian, Esq.
MESSRELIAN LAW INC.
500 N. Central Ave., Suite 840
Glendale, CA 91203
Telephone: (818) 484-6531
Facsimile: (818) 956-1983
E-mail: hm@messrelianlaw.com
BASSETT HEALTHCARE: Faces Willoughby Wage-and-Hour Suit in N.D.N.Y.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
KEVIN WILLOUGHBY, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BASSETT HEALTHCARE NETWORK,
Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-00791-LEK-DJS (N.D.N.Y., June 29, 2023)
is a class action against the Defendant for its failure to
compensate the Plaintiff and similarly situated workers overtime
pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor
Law.
Mr. Willoughby worked for Bassett as a Security Team Leader at
Bassett's facilities in Cobleskill and Little Falls, New York from
approximately March 2012 until January 2022.
Bassett Healthcare Network is a healthcare provider that maintains
its headquarters in Cooperstown, New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David I. Iversen, Esq.
E. STEWART JONES HACKER MURPHY, LLP
28 Second Street
Troy, NY 12180
Telephone: (518) 274-5820
Facsimile: (518) 274-5875
E-mail: diversen@joneshacker.com
- and -
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 352-1100
Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
adunlap@mybackwages.com
- and -
Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 877-8788
E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com
- and -
William C. (Clif) Alexander, Esq.
Austin W. Anderson, Esq.
ANDERSON ALEXANDER PLLC
101 N. Shoreline Blvd., Suite 610
Corpus Christi, TX 78401
Telephone: (361) 452-1279
Facsimile: (361) 452-1284
E-mail: clif@a2xlaw.com
austin@a2xlaw.com
BED BATH & BEYOND: Faces Consolidated Securities Suit in DC Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-K fiscal year ended
February 25, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on June 14, 2023, that on August 23, 2022, a putative
securities class action and shareholder derivative action was filed
against the company, its former CFO Gustavo Arnal and certain third
parties in the United States District Court for the District of
Columbia.
The case, which is captioned "Si v. Bed Bath & Beyond Corp., et
al.," Case No. 2:22-cv-02541, asserts claims of breach of fiduciary
duty, negligent misrepresentation, and violations of §§ 10(b) and
20(a) of the Exchange Act on behalf of a putative class of
purchasers of our securities from March 25, 2022, through August
18, 2022.
The complaint alleges that certain of its disclosures about the
company's revenue and proposed divestments, as well as other
disclosures made by certain of our investors about their holdings,
during the putative class period were materially false or
misleading. The complaint was amended in November 2022 and again in
January 2023 and a Lead Plaintiff was appointed by the Court.
The Second Amended Complaint removes Mr. Arnal as a defendant, adds
Sue Gove as a defendant, shortens the class period, and reduced the
claims against the company. The matter is now entitled "In re Bed
Bath & Beyond Corporation Securities Litigation."
Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. is a specialty home retailer based in New
Jersey.
BED BATH & BEYOND: Faces Consolidated Securities Suit in NJ Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-K fiscal year ended
February 25, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on June 14, 2023, that on July 10, 2020, the first of
three related shareholder derivative actions was filed in the New
Jersey federal court on behalf of the company against various
present and former directors and officers.
The case, which is captioned "Salu v. Tritton, et al.," Case No.
2:20-cv-08673-MCA-MAH (D.N.J.), asserts claims under the Exchange
Act and for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment and waste
of corporate assets under state law arising from the events
underlying the securities class actions described above and from
the repurchases of its own shares during the class period pled in
the securities cases.
The two other derivative actions, which assert similar claims, are
captioned "Grooms v. Tritton, et al.," Case No.
2:20-cv-09610-SDW-RDW (July 29, 2020, D.N.J.) and "Mantia v.
Fleming, et al.," Case No. 2:20-cv-09763-MCA-MAH (July 31, 2020,
D.N.J.). In August 5, 2020, the court signed a stipulation by the
parties in the Salu case to stay that action pending disposition of
a motion to dismiss in the Securities Class Action, subject to
various terms outlined in the stipulation.
The parties in all three derivative cases have moved to consolidate
them and to apply the Salu stay of proceedings to all three
actions. The court granted the motion on October 14, 2020, but the
stay was subsequently lifted. On January 4, 2022, the defendants
filed a motion to dismiss this case.
Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. is a specialty home retailer based in New
Jersey.
BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Clark et al. Sue Over Defective Inflators
---------------------------------------------------------------
RYAN CHARLES CLARK and KRISTEN LUIZ, Plaintiffs v. BMW OF NORTH
AMERICA, LLC and BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AG, Defendants, Case No.
2:23-cv-03552 (D.N.J., June 30, 2023) is a class action arising
from Defendants' alleged defective inflators that are contained in
the driver and passenger frontal airbag modules of vehicles
manufactured by at least 12 major vehicle manufacturers.
The Plaintiffs seek to remove the dangerous Defective Inflators off
the road and install airbags with demonstrably safe inflators in
the Class Vehicles, enjoin Defendants from further jeopardizing the
lives of tens of millions of Class Members, and compensate
Plaintiffs and Class Members for the economic damage they have
incurred from buying cars with defective safety systems.
Headquartered in New Jersey, BMW of North America manufactures and
sells vehicles throughout the US. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
James E. Cecchi, Esq.
CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI, BRODY & AGNELLO, P.C.
5 Becker Farm Road
New Jersey, NJ 07068
Telephone: (973) 994-1700
Facsimile: (973) 994-1744
E-mail: jcecchi@carellabyrne.com
BOOXKEEPING CORPORATION: Crumwell Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Booxkeeping
Corporation. The case is styled as Denise Crumwell, on behalf of
herself and all other persons similarly situated v. Booxkeeping
Corporation, Case No. 1:23-cv-05754 (S.D.N.Y., July 5, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
BooXkeeping -- https://www.booxkeeping.com/ -- is a nationwide
provider of affordable outsourced bookkeeping services to small and
medium-sized businesses.[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
BRYAN CAVE: Flores Alleges Negligence, Mishandling Consumers' Info
------------------------------------------------------------------
ERIC D. FLORES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BRYAN CAVE LEIGHTON PAISNER LLP, MONDELEZ
GLOBAL LLC, MONDELEZ INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS LLC, and MONDELEZ
INTERNATIONAL, INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-04249 (N.D. Ill.,
June 30, 2023) alleges claims against the Defendants for, among
other things, negligence, negligence per se, breach of implied
contract, unjust enrichment, invasion of privacy, and for
violations of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business
Practices Act.
According to the Breach Notice, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP
first detected suspicious activity within its network on February
27, 2023. Following an internal investigation, BCLP discovered the
Data Breach had occurred between February 23, 2023, and March 1,
2023. Moreover, BCLP did not notify Mondelez about the breach until
March 24, 2022, an entire month after the breach first began.
Accordingly, the Defendants deprived Plaintiff of the earliest
opportunity to guard himself against the Data Breach's effects by
failing to notify him about it for over four months, says the
suit.
BCLP is a law firm that touts itself as "groundbreakers and
innovators" that has "extensive experience handling the full scope
of complex privacy and security issues." BCLP boasts a total annual
revenue of 900 million. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Thomas A. Zimmerman, Jr., Esq.
Sharon A. Harris, Esq.
Matthew C. De Re, Esq.
Jeffrey D. Blake, Esq.
ZIMMERMAN LAW OFFICES, P.C.
77 W. Washington Street, Suite 1220
Chicago, IL 60602
Telephone: (312) 440-0020
Facsimile: (312) 440-4180
E-mail: tom@attorneyzim.com
sharon@attorneyzim.com
matt@attorneyzim.com
jeff@attorneyzim.com
Website: www.attorneyzim.com
- and -
William B. Federman, Esq.
FEDERMAN & SHERWOOD
10205 N. Pennsylvania Ave.
Oklahoma City, OK 73120
Telephone: (405) 235-1560
Facsimile: (405) 239-2112
E-mail: wbf@federmanlaw.com
CAPITAL ONE: Asks Court to Seal Class Cert Opposition
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CLARENCE DAVIS, v. CAPITAL
ONE, N.A., Case No. 1:22-cv-00903-AJT-IDD (E.D. Va.), the Defendant
asks the Court to enter an order sealing Capital One's Opposition
to the Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification and Exhibits B,
C, D, E, F, M, Q, and R to Capital One's Opposition to The
Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification.
Capital One submits contemporaneously a nonconfidential Memorandum
in Support of its Motion to File Documents Under Seal. Capital One
has also filed herewith a Notice of Filing Sealing Motion as
required by Local Rule 5(C).
Capital One offers financial products and services such as personal
and business checking, savings accounts, investment, mortgages,
issues credit card, business loans, and commercial banking
solutions.
A copy of the Defendant's motion dated June 23, 2023, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Q51DNN at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendant is represented by:
Jon S. Hubbard, Esq.
Robert A. Angle, Esq.
Andrew B. Buxbaum, Esq.
Brooke K. Conkle, Esq.
TROUTMAN PEPPER HAMILTON SANDERS LLP
1001 Haxall Point
Richmond, VA 23219
Telephone: (804) 697-1200
Facsimile: (804) 697-1339
E-mail: jon.hubbard@troutman.com
robert.angle@troutman.com
andrew.buxbaum@troutman.com
brooke.conkle@troutman.com
- and -
Daniel JT McKenna, Esq.
BALLARD SPAHR LLP
1735 Market Street, 51st Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 665-8500
Facsimile: (2150 864.8999
E-mail: mckennad@ballardspahr.com
CARGILL INC: N.D. New York Denies Bid to Dismiss Flores Labor Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the case, FREDDIE FLORES, on behalf of himself and all other
persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CARGILL INCORPORATED,
Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-38 (N.D.N.Y.), Judge David N. Hurd of
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York
denies the Defendant's motion to dismiss and the Plaintiff's
cross-motion to amend.
On Jan. 10, 2023, Anthony Chapones filed the putative class action
against Cargill. On Feb. 22, 2023, an amended complaint was filed,
substituting Freddie Flores as the named Plaintiff. The Plaintiff's
amended complaint asserts that the Defendant violated New York
Labor Law ("NYLL") Section 191 by failing to pay him, and the
putative class members, timely wages. On April 7, 2023, Cargill
moved to dismiss the amended complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Flores alleges that during his employment with Cargill as a manual
worker, the Defendant paid him, and the putative class members,
untimely wages in violation of NYLL Section 191. According to him,
the Defendant's payments were untimely because it paid him and the
putative class members bi-weekly instead of weekly, and without
express authorization from the New York State Department of Labor.
The Defendant seeks dismissal of the Plaintiff's amended complaint
pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Cargill first seeks dismissal of Flores' amended complaint pursuant
to Rule 12(b)(1) on the basis that the Plaintiff lacks standing to
pursue his NYLL Section 191 claim. According to the Defendant, the
Plaintiff has not properly alleged that Cargill's purported
violations of Section 191(1)(a) caused him any concrete harm.
Judge Hurd finds that while Flores does not specifically allege
that the temporary deprivation of money resulted in a loss of the
time value of money, the Plaintiff's allegations are sufficient to
establish an injury in fact. The Plaintiff need not, as the
Defendant suggests, spell out how the time value of money, as an
economic theory, applies to their case. Nor does Flores need to
detail how he would have spent his wages had they been received on
a weekly basis. Accordingly, Cargill's motion to dismiss for lack
of standing is denied.
Next, Cargill advocates for dismissal of Flores' amended complaint
pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) on the basis that NYLL Section 191 does
not afford the Plaintiff a private right of action.
Upon review, Cargill's argument must be rejected, Judge Hurd says.
He finds that the Court of Appeals could reasonably find that Vega
v. CM & Assocs. Constr. Mgmt., LLC's interpretation of NYLL Section
191 and NYLL Section 198 comports with the basic policies
underlying the statutes. Indeed, the purposes of NYLL Section 191
and NYLL Section 198 are to protect employees who are "dependent
upon their wages for sustenance" and deter labor law violations.
Without more, Cargill has failed to present any persuasive reason
why the Court should depart from the myriad decisions in this
Circuit that have followed Vega in finding a private right of
action to enforce Section 191. As such, the Defendant's argument
that Vega was wrongly decided and that there is no express private
right of action under NYLL Section 191 must be rejected.
Accordingly, the Defendant's motion to dismiss Flores' complaint is
denied.
Therefore, Judge Hurd denies the Defendant's motion to dismiss and
the Plaintiff's cross-motion to amend. The Defendant will file and
serve an answer to the amended complaint. The Clerk of The Court is
directed to terminate the pending motion.
A full-text copy of the Court's June 27, 2023 Decision & Order is
available at https://tinyurl.com/y5d2s9me from Leagle.com.
THE TOWNE LAW FIRM, P.C., JAMES T. TOWNE, JR., ESQ. --
james.towne@townelaw.com -- RYAN L. ABEL, ESQ. --
ryan.abel@townelaw.com -- Albany, NY, Attorneys for the Plaintiff.
FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP, DANIEL H. DORSON, ESQ. --
daniel.dorson@faegredrinker.com -- GERALD T. HATHAWAY, ESQ. --
gerald.hathaway@faegredrinker.com -- MATTHEW FONTANA, ESQ. --
matthew.fontana@faegredrinker.com -- New York, NY 10036, Attorneys
for the Plaintiff.
CARNIVAL PLC: Faces Negligence Charges in Italy, Australia
----------------------------------------------------------
Carnival PLC disclosed in its Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
ended May 31, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on June 28, 2023, that as of May 31, 2023, 11 purported
class actions have been brought by former guests in several U.S.
federal courts, the Federal Courts in Australia, and Italy.
These actions include tort claims based on a variety of theories,
including negligence, gross negligence and failure to warn,
physical injuries, and severe emotional distress associated with
being exposed to and/or contracting COVID-19 onboard.
As of May 31, 2023, nine of these class actions have either been
settled individually for immaterial amounts or had their class
allegations dismissed by the courts and only the Australian and
Italian matters remain.
Carnival PLC is a cruise operator based in Florida.
COBBLERS USA: Velez Sues Over False Advertising of Repair Services
------------------------------------------------------------------
GABRIELLE VELEZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. THE COBBLERS USA INC., Defendant, Case No.
3:23-cv-03241 (N.D. Cal., June 29, 2023) is a class action against
the Defendant for breach of contract, breach of the covenant of
good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, conversion, false
advertising, and violations of the California's Unfair Competition
Law and the California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act.
The case arises from the Defendant's advertising of itself as
provider of expert cleaning, repair, restoration, and customization
services for most all premium sneakers and high-quality leather
goods. In reality, the Defendant keeps possession of consumers
payments and item without performing the agreed upon services or
returning the items. On information and belief, the Defendant
repaired and retained consumers items with the intent to resell the
items. As a result of material misrepresentations, bad faith, and
unfair and unlawful conduct, the Plaintiff and Class members have
suffered damages, including, without limitation, payments for
repairs of items and the conversion of their items sent in for
repairs, says the suit.
The Cobblers USA Inc. is a shoe repair shop owner, headquartered in
Miami, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mona Deldar, Esq.
P. David Cienfuegos, Esq.
DELDAR LEGAL
10866 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 740
Los Angeles, CA 90024
Telephone: (844) 335-3271
E-mail: mdeldar@deldarlegal.com
dcienfuegos@deldarlegal.com
CULTURALINK INC: Yang Seeks Unpaid Regular & OT Wages Under FLSA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Hong Yang, on behalf of Herself, and other similarly situated
individuals v. Culturalink, Inc., and Culturalink LLC, Case No.
2:23-cv-00483 (M.D. Fla., June 30, 2023) seeks to recover regular
and overtime compensation, and liquidated damages, costs, and
reasonable attorney's fees under the provisions of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
The Plaintiff was hired to work remotely from home in Naples,
Florida, and worked under the supervision of call center supervisor
Imelda Revelo. The Plaintiff has been performing as a translator
from Mandarin to English. The Plaintiff was misclassified as an
"Independent Contractor," the lawsuit alleges.
While employed by the Defendant, the Plaintiff was on-call
permanently from Monday to Sunday. The Plaintiff estimates that she
worked a minimum average of 12 hours daily, or 84 hours weekly. The
Plaintiff was paid at the rate of $0.75 per minute translating, but
she was not paid for the time spent in preliminary activities such
as coordinating the video conference or telephone call, the lawsuit
asserts.
The Plaintiff worked a minimum average of 84 hours weekly, but she
was not paid for overtime hours, as required by law. She was never
in agreement with the number of hours paid to her. Moreover, the
Defendant failed to pay the Plaintiff her wages from October 15,
2022, to June 15, 2023 (35 weeks), and ongoing, because she
continues working for Defendant. This action is intended to include
every translation employee and any similarly situated individuals
who worked for the Defendants at any time during the past three
years, the suit added.
Plaintiff Hong Yang was employed by the Defendant as a
non-exempted, full-time translator, on August 04, 2020, and
continues working for the Defendant to this date, June 22, 2023.
Culturalink, Inc. provides video and telephone translation services
to the healthcare industry.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
9100 S. Dadeland Blvd., Suite 1500
Miami, FL 33156
Telephone: (305) 446-1500
Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com
DELICIOUS INTERNATIONAL: Padilla Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Delicious
International, LLC, et al. The case is styled as Jose Gudalupe
Padilla, Jr., on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, and on behalf of the General Public v. Delicious
International, LLC, Does 1-10, Case No. 23CV004055 (Cal. Super.
Ct., Sacramento Cty., July 3, 2023).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case."
Delicious International LLC is a California Domestic
Limited-Liability Compan.[BN]
DORIS LESLIE BLAU: Vachnine Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Doris Leslie Blau,
Inc. The case is styled as Ness-Lee Vachnine, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated v. Doris Leslie Blau, Inc., Case
No. 1:23-cv-05695 (S.D.N.Y., July 3, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Doris Leslie Blau, Inc. -- https://www.dorisleslieblau.com/ -- is a
New York-based antique rugs purveyor established in 1965.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gabriel Levy, Esq.
GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C.
1129 Northern Blvd, Suite 404
Manhasset, NY 11030
Phone: (516) 287-3458
Email: glevy@glpcfirm.com
DOWN UNDER: Bado Suit Seeks to Certify FLSA Collective Action
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DOUGLAS BADO, on behalf of
himself and all other similarly situated persons, v. DOWN UNDER,
INC. d/b/a BRAVO BRAVO, INC. d/b/a BRAVO BRAVO, and EDGAR URIONA
VEIZAGA, and TATIANA CRUZ, Case No. 1:23-cv-00652-JEB (D.D.C.), the
Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting conditional
certification of this Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective
action:
On March 9, 2023, the Plaintiff filed the Class and Collective
Action Complaint, alleging minimum wage and tip violations of the
FLSA, the District of Columbia Minimum Wage Act Revisions Act, and
the District of Columbia Wage Payment and Collection Law.
On June 21, 2023, the Defendants filed their Answer to the
Complaint. The parties have discussed the topic of consenting to
conditional certification of this collective action, have reached
agreement as to conditional certification, and jointly request that
the Court:
a. Conditionally certify a collective of all current and former
bartenders and cocktail servers who performed work for Bravo
Bravo at any time during the period March 9, 2020 through
March
9, 2023 (the "FLSA Collective") and preserve the right of The
Defendants to challenge the timeliness of individual optin
claims.
b. Order The Defendants to produce to The Plaintiff’s counsel
a
list of the names, last known addresses, telephone numbers,
and
email addresses of all potentialmembers of the FLSA
Collective
within fifteen (15) days of the date of the Order (the "FLSA
Collective List"), which shall only be used for purposes of
issuing the Notice.
c. Permit the Plaintiff's counsel to issue notice to all persons
on
the FLSA Collective List by first-class mail, email and text
message, informing them of their right to opt into this case
(Notice).
d. Order an opt-in period of 60 days beginning from the date of
the
Plaintiff's first issuance of the Notice.
e. Permit the Plaintiff's counsel to send reminder notices by
first-class mail, email and text message to all persons on
the
FLSA Collective List who have not yet responded to notice
within
30 days of the first issuance of Notice.
f. Approve the Plaintiff's proposed form of Notice and the
Plaintiff's proposed Opt-In consent Form.
A copy of the Court's order the Plaintiff's motion dated June 23,
2023, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/46BqgXX
at no extra charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ryan P. McCarthy, Esq.
James E. Goodley, Esq.
GOODLEY McCARTHY LLC
1650 Market Street, Suite 3600
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 394-0541
E-mail: james@gmlaborlaw.com
ryan@gmlaborlaw.com
The Defendants are represented by:
James R. Hammerschmidt, Esq.
Hayes Edwards, Esq.
LERCH, EARLY & BREWER, CHTD.
7600 Wisconsin Ave., Suite 700
Bethesda, MD 20814
Telephone: (301) 841-0191
E-mail: jrhammerschmidt@lerchearly.com
hedwards@lerchearly.com
EMPOWER FEDERAL: Class Settlement in Wellington Suit Wins Final OK
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the case, Danielle Wellington, Dianna Conley, Plaintiff(s) v.
Empower Federal Credit Union, Does 1 through 5, Defendant(s), Case
Nos. 5:21-cv-566, 5:20-cv-1367 (N.D.N.Y.), Judge David N. Hurd of
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York
grants:
a. Final Approval of the Settlement;
b. the Plaintiffs requests for attorneys' fees;
c. the Plaintiffs' request for reimbursement of claims
administration costs to KCC LLC; and
d. the Plaintiffs Danielle Wellington and Dianna Conleys'
request for a class representative service award of $10,000
each.
The action came to trial or hearing before the Court. The issues
have been tried or heard and a decision has been rendered.
Judge Hurd grants Final Approval of the settlement reached between
the parties as set forth in their Settlement Agreement. He
dismisses the Litigation with prejudice. The Court will retain
jurisdiction over the action to enforce the settlement.
Judge Hurd also grants the Plaintiffs requests for attorneys' fees.
He awards the Class Counsel $948,812. He further grants the
Plaintiffs' requests for litigation costs; the Plaintiffs' request
for reimbursement of claims administration costs to KCC; the
Plaintiffs Danielle Wellington and Dianna Conleys' request for a
class representative service award of $10,000 each. The parties are
to submit a candidate for cy pres distribution within 30 days of
the Order.
A full-text copy of the Court's June 27, 2023 Judgment is available
at https://tinyurl.com/5su57s82 from Leagle.com.
EMPOWER FEDERAL: Court Dismisses Wellington Suit With Prejudice
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the case, Danielle Wellington, Individually and on Behalf of All
Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs v. Empower Federal Credit
Union, DOES 1 Through 5, Defendants, Civil Action Case No.
5:20-cv-01367-DNH-ML (N.D.N.Y.), Judge David N. Hurd of the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of New York:
a. grants final approval of the settlement reached between the
parties as set forth in their Settlement Agreement;
b. dismisses the Litigation with prejudice;
c. grants the Plaintiffs' requests for attorneys' fees and
awards the Class Counsel $948,812;
d. grants the Plaintiffs' requests for litigation costs;
e. grants the Plaintiffs' request for reimbursement of claims
administration costs to KCC LLC; and
f. grants Plaintiffs Danielle Wellington and Dianna Conley's
request for a class representative service award of $10,000
each.
The Court will retain jurisdiction over the action to enforce the
settlement.
The parties are to submit a candidate for cy pres distribution
within 30 days of the Order.
A full-text copy of the Court's June 27, 2023 Order is available at
https://tinyurl.com/3c4pur6v from Leagle.com.
ENGINE & TRANSMISSION: Fails to Pay OT Wages, Perez Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
ANDRES PEREZ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ENGINE & TRANSMISSION EXCHANGE, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 2:23-cv-00871 (E.D. Wis., June 30, 2023) arises
out of the Defendant's violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act
of 1938 and the Wisconsin's Wage Payment and Collection Laws.
In approximately July 2017, the Defendant hired Plaintiff as an
hourly-paid, non-exempt employee in the positions of inspector and
operator its Milwaukee, Wisconsin location. Allegedly, the operated
an unlawful compensation system that deprived and failed to
compensate 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 shaving time (via
electronic timeclock rounding) from Plaintiff's and all other
hourly-paid, non-exempt employees' weekly timesheets for pre-shift
and post-shift hours worked and/or work performed, to the detriment
of said employees and to the benefit of Defendant, says the suit.
Engine & Transmission Exchange, Inc. is a transmission
remanufacturer with a principal office address of 4949 West Brown
Deer Road, Brown Deer, 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 Case
FORAY GOLF LLC: Castro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Foray Golf, LLC. The
case is styled as Felix Castro, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. Foray Golf, LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-05698-JGLC
(S.D.N.Y., July 3, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Foray Golf -- https://foraygolf.com/ -- is an apparel company that
offers a collection of ready to wear women's golf apparel with a
focus on style and performance.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Noor Abou-Saab, I, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF NOOR A. SAAB
380 North Broadway, Suite 300
Jericho, NY 11753
Phone: (718) 740-5060
Email: noorasaablaw@gmail.com
FULFILLMENT LAB: Court Certifies Classes in Sihler Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JANET SIHLER, Individually
and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated; CHARLENE BAVENCOFF,
Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly, v. THE
FULFILLMENT LAB, INC; RICHARD NELSON; BEYOND GLOBAL, INC.;
BRIGHTREE HOLDINGS CORP.; BMOR GLOBAL LLC; DAVID FLYNN; RICKIE JOE
JAMES, Case No. 3:20-cv-01528-LL-DDL (S.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge
Linda Lopez entered an order granting the Plaintiffs' motion for
class certification.
The Court certifies the following classes:
(1) A nationwide class for the RICO claims consisting of all
consumers in the United States who, within the applicable
statute of limitations period until the date notice is
disseminated, were billed for shipments of either three
bottles
or five bottles of Ultrafast Keto Boost, InstaKeto, or
Instant
Keto.
(2) A California subclass for the state law causes of action
consisting of all consumers in California who, within the
applicable statute of limitations period until the date
notice
is disseminated, were billed for shipments of either three
bottles or five bottles of Ultrafast Keto Boost, InstaKeto,
or
Instant Keto.
Additionally, the Court appoints Janet Sihler and Charlene
Bavencoff as class representatives. The Court appoints Kevin
Kneupper and Cyclone Covey of Kneupper & Covey, PC as class
counsel.
The Court is not persuaded by TFL The Defendants' arguments against
superiority. The Plaintiffs' class definitions are reasonably
co-extensive with their theory of liability, which is that all
class members were exposed to the same advertisements containing
the same misrepresentations and omissions, and were induced to pay
more for Keto Products than they would have had they known the
truth.
The lawsuit involves an alleged fraudulent scheme in which The
Defendants allegedly use fake celebrity and magazine endorsements,
as well as misrepresentations about price and limited availability,
to induce consumers into purchasing weight-loss pills branded as
"Ultra Fast Keto Boost" and "Instant Keto".
The Defendants allegedly charge customers more than they agreed to
pay, make it difficult or impossible to return the products or
receive a refund, and operate "false front" websites to mislead
banks and credit card companies investigating chargebacks.
The Plaintiffs claim that but for their reliance on the Defendants'
false and misleading representations and omissions about the Keto
Products, they would not have bought them or would have paid less
for them.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 23, 2023, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3rpb007 at no extra charge.[CC]
GATOS SILVER INC: Faces Securities Suit in Canadian Court
---------------------------------------------------------
Gatos Silver, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q for the quarterly
period ended March 31, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on June 28, 2023, that by Notice of Action issued
February 9, 2022, and subsequent Statement of Claim dated March 11,
2022, Izabela Przybylska commenced a putative class action against
the Company, certain of its former officers and directors, and
others in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice on behalf of a
purported class of all persons or entities, wherever they may
reside or be domiciled, who acquired securities of the company in
both the primary and secondary markets during the period from
October 28, 2020 until January 25, 2022.
The action asserts claims under Canadian securities legislation and
at common law and seeks unspecified monetary damages and other
relief in respect of allegations the defendants made false and
misleading statements and omitted material information regarding
the mineral resources and reserves of the Company. The plaintiff
filed motion materials for leave to proceed in respect of her
statutory claims and for class certification on March 3, 2023,
which materials were amended and filed on May 1, 2023. The court
has tentatively set dates in late March of 2024 for the hearing of
the plaintiff's motions.
Gatos Silver, Inc. precious metals exploration, development, and
production company based in Canada.
GATOS SILVER INC: Securities Suit in Colorado Court Ongoing
-----------------------------------------------------------
Gatos Silver, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q for the quarterly
period ended March 31, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on June 28, 2023, that on February 22, 2022, a purported
Gatos stockholder filed a putative class action lawsuit in the
United States District Court for the District of Colorado against
the Company, certain of its former officers, and several directors.
An amended complaint was filed on August 15, 2022. The amended
complaint, allegedly brought on behalf of certain purchasers of
Gatos common stock and certain traders of call and put options on
Gatos common stock from December 9, 2020, through January 25, 2022,
seeks, among other things, damages, costs, and expenses, and
asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 as well as Sections 11 and 15 of the
Securities Act of 1933.
The amended complaint alleges that certain individual defendants
and Gatos, pursuant to the control and authority of the individual
defendants, made false and misleading statements and/or omitted
certain material information regarding the mineral resources and
reserves at the Cerro Los Gatos mine. Gatos and all defendants
filed a motion to dismiss this action on October 14, 2022.
That motion was fully briefed as of December 23, 2022. On April 26,
2023, following a joint motion, the Court ordered that it will
postpone a ruling on the defendant's motion to dismiss until on or
after June 16, 2023.
Gatos Silver, Inc. precious metals exploration, development, and
production company based in Canada.
GEOSNAPSHOT PTY: Court Adopts Joint Report & Scheduling Order
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ADAM MOOMAW, ET AL,
individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, v.
GEOSNAPSHOT PTY LTD, ET AL, Case No. 3:23-cv-01321-DWD (S.D. Ill.),
the Hon. Judge David W. Dugan entered an order adopting joint
report and proposed Scheduling and discovery order.
-- Depositions upon oral examination, interrogatories, requests
for
documents, and answers and responses thereto shall not be
filed
unless on order of the Court.
-- Disclosures or discovery under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure
26(a) are to be filed with the Court only to the extent
required
by the final pretrial order, other Court order, or if a
dispute
arises over the disclosure or discovery and the matter has
been
set for briefing.
-- The parties should note that they may, pursuant to Federal
Rule
of Civil Procedure 29, modify discovery dates set in the Joint
Report by written stipulation, except that they may not modify
a
date if such modification would impact:
(1) the date of any court appearance,
(2) the deadline for completing the mandatory mediation
session
or the mandatory mediation process (if applicable),
(3) the deadline for completing all discovery, or
(4) the deadline for filing dispositive motions.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 22, 2023, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/43bZWAI at no extra charge.[CC]
GOODWILL INDUSTRIES: Fails to Protect Employees' Info, Booker Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
WENDY BOOKER and FRANCIS MASCARO on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF
GREATER NEW YORK AND NORTHERN NEW JERSEY, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:23-cv-04764-AMD-MMH (E.D.N.Y., June 26, 2023) arises from
Defendant's failure to protect highly sensitive data that it
collected and stored.
According to the complaint, the Defendant stores a litany of highly
sensitive personal identifiable information about its current and
former employees and applicants. But Defendant lost control over
that data when cybercriminals infiltrated its insufficiently
protected computer systems in a data breach.
On information and belief, cybercriminals were able to breach
Defendant's systems because Defendant failed to adequately train
its employees on cybersecurity and failed to maintain reasonable
security safeguards or protocols to protect Plaintiffs and Class
members' PII. In short, Defendant's failures placed the Plaintiffs
and Class members' PII in a vulnerable position -- rendering them
easy targets for cybercriminals, the suit alleges.
The Plaintiffs are data breach victims, receiving breach notices on
May 27, 2023. They bring this class action on behalf of themselves,
and all others harmed by Defendant's alleged misconduct.
Goodwill Industries of Greater New York and Northern New Jersey,
Inc. is a nonprofit organization which operates 27 retail stores
and donation centers throughout the region powered by donations of
clothing and household items.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Ilana S. Wolk, Esq.
THE JACOB D. FUCHSBERG LAW FIRM, LLP
3 Park Ave, 37th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (212) 869-3500
Facsimile: (212) 398-1532
E-mail: i.wolk@fuchsberg.com
- and -
Raina C. Borrelli, Esq.
TURKE & STRAUSS LLP
613 Williamson St., Suite 201
Madison, WI 53703
Telephone: (608) 237-1775
Facsimile: (608) 509-4423
E-mail: raina@turkestrauss.com
GOYA FOODS: Mejias Labor Suit Seeks Class Certification
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANIBAL MEJIAS, DENNIS
MINTER, JERRY FULLER, and JOSE PENA, on behalf of themselves and
those similarly situated, v. GOYA FOODS, INC., Case No.
2:20-cv-12365-BRM-JRA (D.N.J.), the Plaintiffs Dennis Minter, Jerry
Fuller, and Jose Pena move the Court for class certification.
The Plaintiffs request that the Court certify the following classes
under the New Jersey Wage Payment Law ("NJWPL"), and the New Jersey
Wage and Hour Law ("NJWHL").
The Plaintiffs Fuller, Minter, and Pena move this Court to certify
the following New Jersey Wage Deduction Class as follows:
"All truck drivers who performed work for Goya in the State of
New
Jersey and who were designated as independent contractors or
owner
operators and from whom Goya withheld wages by deducting money
associated with truck and equipment rental, truck repairs and
maintenance, permits and licenses, fuel, mileage taxes, fees,
tolls, insurance, returned or damaged products, and/or other
deductions as set forth in Goya's records, between July 18, 2013
and the present."
The Plaintiffs Minter and Pena move this Court to certify the
following New Jersey Overtime Class, as follows:
"All truck drivers who performed work for Goya in the State of
New
Jersey and who were designated as independent contractors or
owner
operators, and who were not paid overtime compensation when they
worked over 40 hours in a workweek, at any time between July 18,
2017 and the present."
Goya Foods is a producer of a brand of foods sold in the United
States and many Spanish-speaking countries.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 23, 2023, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/44eINrH at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Shanon J. Carson, Esq.
Alexandra K. Piazza, Esq.
Julie Pollock, Esq.
BERGER MONTAGUE PC
1818 Market St., Suite 3600
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 875-3000
E-mail: scarson@bm.net
apiazza@bm.net
jpollock@bm.net
- and -
David Cassidy, Esq.
Yelena Kofman-Delgado, Esq.
VLASAC SHMARUK
485B Route 1 South, Suite 120
Iselin, NJ 08830
Telephone: (732) 494-3600
E-mail: dcassidy@vslaws.com
ykofman@vslaws.com
HEALTH SERVICES: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Jumett Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------
CAREL JUMETT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HEALTH SERVICES FOR CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL
NEEDS, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-01966 (D.C., July 7, 2023)
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 Jumett was employed by the Defendant as a registered
nurse care manager.
HEALTH SERVICES FOR CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS, INC. provides care
for children and young adults with special health care needs. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregg C. Greenberg, Esq.
Thomas J. Eiler, Esq.
ZIPIN, AMSTER & GREENBERG, LLC
8757 Georgia Avenue, Suite 400
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Telephone: (301) 587-9373
Email: GGreenberg@ZAGFIRM.COM
TEiler@ZAGFIRM.COM
HIGHTECHLENDING INC: Charman Files TCPA Suit in S.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Hightechlending Inc.,
et al. The case is styled as Thane Charman, individual and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Hightechlending Inc.
doing business as: American Senior, John Doe, an unknown business
entity, Case No. 3:23-cv-01235-AJB-KSC (S.D. Cal., July 3, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.
HighTechLending, Inc. -- https://hightechlending.com/ -- is a
mortgage bank and direct lender in Califiornia.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yuri Simpson, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF YURI SIMPSON
PO Box 16232
San Diego, CA 92176
Phone: (619) 762-1118
Email: yuri@lifelinelegal.com
INTERMIX HOLDCO: Visnjevac Sues Over Layoff Without Advance Notice
------------------------------------------------------------------
LELA VISNJEVAC, and other similarly situated individuals, v.
INTERMIX HOLDCO, LLC, and REGENT, L.P., Case No. 1:23-cv-22459
(S.D. Fla., June 30, 2023) seeks to collect unpaid wages and
benefits for 60 calendar days pursuant to the United States Worker
Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act.
The Plaintiff contends that the Defendants are liable under the
WARN Act for the failure to provide the Plaintiff and other
similarly situated former employees at least 60 days advance notice
of their employment losses. On November of 2022, the Defendants
conducted their first massive layoff. The Plaintiff came to learn
that Defendants were experiencing significant financial hardships.
It was around this time that Plaintiff was told that the Lincoln
Road store was being transformed into a warehouse pop-up, which
resulted in her losing her ability to make commissions, but in
exchange the Defendants increased Plaintiff's hourly pay on
December 5, 2022. The Plaintiff continued working as Sales Lead
during this tumultuous time. Suddenly, and without notice, on March
26, 2023, the Plaintiff was informed by her Store Manager that she,
and everyone in the Lincoln Road store, were being terminated
effective immediately, and the store was being closed permanently,
the Plaintiff alleges.
The Defendants failed to pay the Plaintiff and other similarly
situated employees their respective wages, salary, commissions,
bonuses, accrued holiday pay, and accrued vacation for 60 working
days following their respective terminations, and failed to make
the pension and 401(k) contributions, provide other employee
benefits under ERISA, and pay their medical expenses for 60
calendar days from and after the dates of their respective
Terminations, the suit asserts.
The Plaintiff and all similarly situated employees have been
allegedly damaged by the Defendants' conduct constituting
violations of the WARN Act and are entitled to damages for their
back pay and associated benefits for each day of the violation
because the Defendants have not acted in good faith nor with
reasonable grounds to believe their acts and omissions were not a
violation of the WARN Act.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants as a sales associate
starting on March of 2018. The Plaintiff's satisfactory or more
than satisfactory work performance allowed her to get promotions,
which included a promotion to Sales Lead at the Lincoln Road store
in the fall of 2020.
INTERMIX Holdco Inc. retails women's apparel and accessories. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Max L. Horowitz, 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: max@saenzanderson.com
msaenz@saenzanderson.com
JACKSON HEWITT: Class Action Settlement in Mardis Gets Final Nod
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WANDA MARDIS, et al., v.
JACKSON HEWITT TAX SERVICE INC., et al., Case No. e
2:16-cv-02115-LDW (D.N.J.), the Hon. Judge Leda Dunn Wettre entered
an order that granting the Plaintiffs' motion for final approval of
the class action Settlement.
The Order incorporates by reference the definitions in the
Settlement Agreement, and all terms used in this Order shall have
the same meaning as set forth in the Settlement Agreement.
The Court finds that the following classes satisfy the requirements
of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and 23(b) and certifies both classes for
settlement purposes only:
a. The "TSA Employee Class" comprising all persons in the
United
States who prepared tax returns for TSA from December 1,
2013,
to April 18, 2017, and were paid, in whole or in part by, or
were eligible to receive, commissions, bonuses, incentive
pay,
or other similar compensation, derived from their individual
performance.
b. The "Franchisee Employee Class" comprising all persons in
the
United States who prepared tax returns for any of Jackson
Hewitt Inc.’s current or former Franchisees from December
1,
2013, to April 18, 2017, and were paid, in whole or in part
by,
or were eligible to receive, commissions, bonuses, incentive
pay, or other similar compensation, derived from their
individual performance.
Settlement Class Counsel is awarded $550,000 in attorneys' fees and
$123,073.66 in costs.
The Court approves service awards in the amount of $5,000 to Wanda
Mardis and $1,500 each to Kim Alexander, Karla Dozier, Sheila
Baker, Katrina Corbitt, Jacqueline Knight, Amy Donaldson, Sonja
Niemeyer, Terry Meyer, Catherine Dickerson, Carol Scott, Amanda
Disotell, Elaine Fernandez, Jessica Gay, Christina Babineaux,
Brenda Boyd, LaDonna Washington, and Danice Ragland.
The Defendants are directed to fund $30,500 in service awards,
$550,000 in attorneys' fees, and $123,073.66 in costs by the
Funding Deadline.
The Court approves the Settlement Agreement for the deceased The
Plaintiffs, Sandra Coleman and Cecelia Morris, including the
payment of their service awards of $1,500 each, as part of the
entire Settlement.
Jackson Hewitt provides legal services. The Company offers tax
preparation, computerized income tax returns, credit and deduction
handling.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 23, 2023, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3pDKyzA at no extra charge.[CC]
JOHNS HOPKINS: Beauford Suit Remanded to Baltimore Circuit Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the case, ANITA BEAUFORD, Plaintiff v. THE JOHNS HOPKINS HEALTH
SYSTEM CORPORATION, et al., Defendants, Civil No. JKB-23-0660 (D.
Md.), Judge James K. Bredar of the U.S. District Court for the
District of Maryland grants Beauford's Motion to Remand and remands
the action to the Circuit Court for Baltimore County.
Johns Hopkins removed this action to this Court pursuant to the
federal officer removal statute, 28 U.S.C. Section 1442(a)(1).
Pending before the Court is Beauford's Motion to Remand. The Motion
is fully briefed, and no hearing is required.
Beauford filed a purported class action suit against Johns Hopkins
in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County. The suit was brought on
behalf of all Maryland residents who have accessed and used any
website that Johns Hopkins owns and operates, including
www.hopkinsmedicine.org. Beauford alleges that Johns Hopkins aided,
employed, agreed, and conspired with Facebook/Meta to intercept
communications sent and received by Beauford and the Class Members,
including communications containing protected medical information.
Beauford alleges violations of the Maryland Wiretap Act.
Johns Hopkins removed this action to this Court pursuant to the
federal officer removal statute, 28 U.S.C. Section 1442(a)(1). It
asserts that, since at least 2004, the federal government --
through executive order, legislation, and regulatory and
sub-regulatory action -- has directed and overseen a public-private
initiative to develop a nationwide infrastructure for health
information technology. As part of this effort, it has incentivized
and directed providers who participate in the Medicare and Medicaid
program (like Johns Hopkins) to offer patients online access to
their records, and to optimize patient engagement with their
medical information. Johns Hopkins explains that it has dutifully
assisted and followed the federal government's direction in this
effort.
In particular, Johns Hopkins explains that a National Health
Information Technology Coordinator was established in 2004 with the
aim of implementing interoperable health information technology in
both the public and private health care sector. One goal of this
effort was to increase online access to medical records. The Office
of the National Coordinator was codified in 2009. Further, Congress
codified a series of incentive payments for the Department of
Health and Human Services ("HHS"), in conjunction with the Centers
for Medicare and Medicaid Services ("CMS"), to make to health care
providers for their adoption of health information technology,
including through the Medicare program.
HHS adopted "Meaningful Use" regulations. A "central component" of
the Meaningful Use regulations was the ability for patients to
access their health care records online and they required health
care providers to attest to the National Coordinator and to CMS on
their progress with respect to this criteria in particular. Johns
Hopkins explains that the federal government directed health care
providers to make online patient portals available to their
patients" and has provided guidance regarding effective patient
portal programs and how to optimize such programs.
Johns Hopkins' patient portal, MyChart, is a tool created and
promoted by Johns Hopkins for its patients' use as a direct result
of the federal initiative to make health care records available to
patients online and that since establishing the patient portal,
Johns Hopkins has continually met the Meaningful Use criteria, and
has thus received incentive payments from the federal government.
Johns Hopkins also explains that every year, it has submitted
reports on its involvement in the Meaningful Use Program to CMS and
that these reports have been specifically prepared to meet federal
Meaningful Use Program requirements.
Beauford argues that Johns Hopkins has not met its burden to
establish that removal pursuant to the federal officer removal
statute is appropriate. Johns Hopkins contends that it is "acting
under" a federal officer because the federal government is
incentivizing, regulating, monitoring, and supervising Johns
Hopkins actions in the Meaningful Use program to meet the federal
government's national priority of interoperable health information
technology.
Judge Bredar explains that under the federal officer removal
statute, private actors can remove a case to federal court when
they: (1) acted under the direction of a federal officer; (2) have
a colorable federal defense; and (3) are engaged in
government-directed conduct that was causally related to the
plaintiff's claims.
Johns Hopkins' participation in the Meaningful Use Program falls
short of type of relationship that gives rise to federal officer
jurisdiction, Judge Bredar holds. Johns Hopkins has not established
that it is "acting under" the federal government for purposes of
Section 1442(a). It is merely complying with a federal program,
which is insufficient to confer federal jurisdiction under Section
1442(a).
Further, although Johns Hopkins invites the Court to find that its
receipt of incentive payments weigh in favor of removal, receiving
incentive payments for acting in a way that promotes a broad
federal interest -- in an area outside the traditional
responsibility of the federal government -- is not the same as
being contracted to carry out, or assist with, a basic governmental
duty.
Because Johns Hopkins has not established that it was "acting
under" the "subjection, guidance, or control" of the federal
government, the Court need not examine the remaining two prongs a
private actor must establish to invoke the federal officer removal
statute. In concluding that Johns Hopkins has not established this
Court's jurisdiction, Judge Bredar joins the numerous district
courts that have found removal inappropriate under similar facts.
For the foregoing reasons, Judge Bredar grants Beauford's Motion to
Remand and remands the action to the Circuit Court for Baltimore
County.
A full-text copy of the Court's June 27, 2023 Memorandum is
available at https://tinyurl.com/3zftxdee from Leagle.com.
JOHNS HOPKINS: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Hunter Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
PAMELA HUNTER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY; and THE JOHNS
HOPKINS HEALTH SYSTEM CORPORATION, Case No. 1:23-cv-01826-JRR (D.
Md., July 7, 2023) for their failure to properly secure and
safeguard the Plaintiff's and Class Members' protected health
information and personally identifiable information stored within
Johns Hopkins's information network.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendants
disregarded the rights of the Plaintiff and Class Members by
intentionally, willfully, recklessly, or negligently failing to
take and implement adequate and reasonable measures to ensure that
Plaintiff's and Class Members' PHI/PII was safeguarded, failing to
take available steps to prevent unauthorized disclosure of data,
and failing to follow applicable, required and appropriate
protocols, policies, and procedures regarding the encryption of
data, even for internal use.
As a result, the PHI/PII of the Plaintiff and Class Members was
compromised through disclosure to an unknown and unauthorized third
party—an undoubtedly nefarious third party that seeks to profit
off this disclosure by defrauding Plaintiff and Class Members in
the future, says the suit.
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY provides educational services. The
University offers undergraduate and graduate degree programs in
business education, engineering, computer science, health services,
and other academic fields. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Courtney L. Weiner, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF COURTNEY WEINER PLLC
1629 K Street, NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 827-9980
Email: cw@courtneyweinerlaw.com
- and -
Kevin Laukaitis, Esq.
LAUKAITIS LAW LLC
954 Avenida Ponce De Leon Suite 205, #10518
San Juan, PR 00907
Telephone: (215) 789-4462
Email: klaukaitis@laukaitislaw.com
KCF TECHNOLOGIES: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Espinoza Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
JULIET ESPINOZA, and other similarly situated individuals,
Plaintiff v. KCF TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:23-cv-22447-XXXX (S.D. Fla., June 30, 2023) alleges claims
against the Defendant for violations of the overtime provisions of
the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiff was hired as a full-time inside sales employee from
or about June 27, 2022, to March 13, 2023, or 37 weeks. At the time
of her hiring, she was promised a salary of $1,153.85, intended to
cover 40 hours of work per week. During her employment with
Defendants, she had an official regular mandatory schedule of five
days per week from 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM, or 40 hours weekly. However,
she worked from Monday to Friday from 8:30 AM to 8:00 PM, (11 hours
daily) or a total of 55 hours weekly. The Plaintiff has already
deducted 30 minutes as lunchtime daily. She was paid the same
salary regardless of the number of hours worked during the week,
says the suit.
KCF Technologies, Inc.is a provider of technology services, machine
health optimization, monitoring, and maintenance solutions, to all
industries throughout the US. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
9100 S. Dadeland Blvd.
Suite 1500
Miami, FL 33156
Telephone: (305) 446-1500
Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com
KROGER CO: Bid to Dismiss Granted; White Suit Tossed With Prejudice
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the case, PHILLIP WHITE, Plaintiff v. THE KROGER CO., et al.,
Defendants, Case No. 21-cv-08004-RS (N.D. Cal.), Judge Richard
Seeborg of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California grants White's motion to dismiss, subject only to the
condition that dismissal of White's individual claims is with
prejudice.
White filed a motion seeking to dismiss this putative class action
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(2) without prejudice, arguing
discovery has shown the damages potentially recoverable by the
class do not meet the minimum required by the Class Action Fairness
Act of 2005, 28 U.S.C. Section 1332(d) (CAFA), under which the
complaint invoked federal jurisdiction. White also asserts he seeks
dismissal to stop Defendant The Kroger Co.'s alleged persistent and
escalating harassment and intimidation through use of subpoenas to
harass him, his friends, his counsel, and his counsel's family
members.
Judge Seeborg finds that White has not shown dismissal for lack of
jurisdiction is compelled. Given his claims for unjust enrichment,
punitive damages, and attorney fees, and at least some uncertainty
as to how any recovery limited to a "price premium" should be
calculated, White has not shown a "legal certainty" that the amount
in controversy is insufficient under CAFA.
White, of course, cannot be compelled to pursue the action
regardless of whether jurisdiction exists, and whether or not his
allegations of "harassment" by Kroger have merit. Furthermore,
Kroger's requested conditions are not warranted. Kroger asks that
White be required to pay claimed attorney fees and costs to Kroger
of $225,528.25 and that, notwithstanding dismissal of the
complaint, Kroger be allowed to complete certain third-party
discovery regarding its allegations that White's counsel has
utilized an unlawful "capper" scheme to procure plaintiffs in this
and other actions.
Judge Seeborg finds it questionable whether Kroger has a cognizable
interest in how White came to be represented by his counsel in this
action now that he no longer seeks to represent the putative class.
Even assuming it does, however, he says it has not shown that
permitting continued third-party discovery on collateral issues is
an appropriate condition to impose on White's dismissal of his
substantive claims.
Accordingly, Judge Seeborg grants White's motion to dismiss,
subject only to the condition that dismissal of White's individual
claims is with prejudice. Because White only stated a desire to
dismiss without prejudice, the Order did not take effect until July
7, 2023. Unless prior to that date, White files a written election
to proceed with the litigation rather than accept dismissal with
prejudice, the dismissal will then go into effect and the case will
be closed without further notice or order.
A full-text copy of the Court's June 27, 2023 Order is available at
https://tinyurl.com/wez98c3d from Leagle.com
MACPHERSON OIL: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Johnston Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
CECIL JOHNSTON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. MACPHERSON OIL COMPANY LLC, Defendant, Case
No. 1:23-at-00574 (E.D. Cal., July 7, 2023) is an action against
the Defendant for failure to pay minimum wages, overtime
compensation, provide meals, and provide accurate wage statements.
Plaintiff Johnston was employed by the Defendant as a drilling
consultant.
Macpherson Oil Company operates as an oil and gas company. The
Company provides geology, drilling, recovery technology, pumping
design, and oil field operations to maximize production. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
William M. Hogg, Esq.
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 352-1100
Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
Email: whogg@mybackwages.com
mjosephson@mybackwages.com
adunlap@mybackwages.com
- and -
Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 877-8788
Email: rburch@brucknerburch.com
MDC STEEL: Fails to Timely Pay Wages, Estrada et al. Claim
----------------------------------------------------------
Edgar A. Estrada, Edixon Trejo, and other similarly situated
individuals, Plaintiffs v. MDC Steel Services, Inc., and Michael D.
Chepenik, individually, Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-14189-XXXX
(S.D. Fla., June 30, 2023) arises out of the Defendants' violations
of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Plaintiffs Edgar A. Estrada and Edixon Trejo were hired by the
Defendants as non-exempted, full-time, hourly employees from April
17, 2023, to April 22, 202, or one week. During their employment
with Defendants, Plaintiffs worked six days per week. From Monday
to Saturday, Plaintiffs worked approximately from 7:00 AM to 5:00
PM (10 hours per day), or 60 hours per week. However, Plaintiffs
were not paid their wages timely on payday. Defendants refused to
pay Plaintiffs for their first week of work, says the suit.
MDC Steel Services, Inc. is a Florida corporation having a place of
business in Fort Pierce. St. Lucie County, Florida. It is a
manufacturer of metal structures and provider of welding services.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
9100 S. Dadeland Blvd.
Suite 1500
Miami, FL 33156
Telephone: (305) 446-1500
Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com
MDL 2742: S.D. New York Recommends Termination of Securities Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the case, IN RE: SUNEDISON, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, Case No.
16-md-2742 (PKC), MDL No. 2742 (S.D.N.Y.), Judge P. Kevin Castel of
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
recommends that:
a. the JPML docket be updated to reflect that the following
cases are closed: Bloom v. SunEdison, Inc., 16 Civ. 7427
(PKC), Bloom v. Goldman, Sachs & Co., 16 Civ. 7528 (PKC),
Beltran v. TerraForm Global, Inc., 16 Civ. 7967 (PKC),
Badri v. TerraForm Global, Inc., 16 Civ. 7996 (PKC), Iron
Workers Mid-South Pension Fund v. TerraForm Global, Inc.,
16 Civ. 7997 (PKC), Fraser v. TerraForm Global, Inc., 16
Civ. 8003 (PKC), Moodie v. SunEdison, Inc., 16 Civ. 8113
(PKC) and Kunz v. SunEdison, Inc., 16 Civ. 8118 (PKC); and
b. the Panel terminate this proceeding.
The Court was recently advised by administrative staff to the
Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation that eight closed member
cases are administratively classified as open on the JPML docket.
Judge Castel respectfully recommends that these member cases be
marked as closed. Further, because all matters in the proceeding
have concluded, he respectfully recommends that the Panel terminate
the multidistrict proceeding.
On Dec. 19, 2016, the Court entered an Order that administratively
closed the following member cases, all of which are currently
listed as open on the JPML docket: Bloom v. SunEdison, Inc., 16
Civ. 7427 (PKC), Bloom v. Goldman, Sachs & Co., 16 Civ. 7528 (PKC),
Beltran v. TerraForm Global, Inc., 16 Civ. 7967 (PKC), Badri v.
TerraForm Global, Inc., 16 Civ. 7996 (PKC), Iron Workers Mid-South
Pension Fund v. TerraForm Global, Inc., 16 Civ. 7997 (PKC), Fraser
v. TerraForm Global, Inc., 16 Civ. 8003 (PKC), Moodie v. SunEdison,
Inc., 16 Civ. 8113 (PKC) and Kunz v. SunEdison, Inc., 16 Civ. 8118
(PKC).
The Beltran, Badri, Iron Workers and Fraser actions were
consolidated as part of In re TerraForm Global, Inc., Securities
Litigation, 16 Civ. 7967. On Feb. 25, 2020, following a fairness
hearing conducted pursuant to Rule 23, the Court entered an Order
and Final Judgment in the consolidated case that included these
consolidated actions. The Court therefore recommends that the JPML
docket classify the following cases as closed: Beltran v. TerraForm
Global, Inc., 16 Civ. 7967 (PKC), Badri v. TerraForm Global, Inc.,
16 Civ. 7996 (PKC), Iron Workers Mid-South Pension Fund v.
TerraForm Global, Inc., 16 Civ. 7997 (PKC) and Fraser v. TerraForm
Global, Inc., 16 Civ. 8003 (PKC).
Moodie, Kunz and the two Bloom actions were consolidated as part of
In re SunEdison, Inc. Securities Litigation, which also bore the
caption Horowitz et al. v. SunEdison, Inc. et al., 16 Civ. 7917. On
Oct. 25, 2019, following a fairness hearing conducted pursuant to
Rule 23, the Court entered a Judgment Approving Class Action
Settlement that entered a final judgment in the consolidated case
that included these consolidated actions. It therefore recommends
that the JPML docket classify the following cases as closed: Bloom
v. SunEdison, Inc., 16 Civ. 7427 (PKC), Bloom v. Goldman, Sachs &
Co., 16 Civ. 7528 (PKC), Moodie v. SunEdison, Inc., 16 Civ. 8113
(PKC) and Kunz v. SunEdison, Inc., 16 Civ. 8118 (PKC).
After the Court filed Suggestion of Remand as to Zornoza v.
Terraform Global, et al., 18 Civ. 11617 (PKC), the Panel filed a
final Conditional Remand Order on June 5, 2023. The Zornoza
proceeding was the last active case in this multidistrict
proceeding. No action has been transferred to Judge Castel since
Dec. 6, 2018. Accordingly, Judge Castel respectfully recommends
that the Panel terminate this multidistrict proceeding.
Judge Castel respectfully recommends that the JPML docket be
updated to reflect that the following cases are closed: Bloom v.
SunEdison, Inc., 16 Civ. 7427 (PKC), Bloom v. Goldman, Sachs & Co.,
16 Civ. 7528 (PKC), Beltran v. TerraForm Global, Inc., 16 Civ. 7967
(PKC), Badri v. TerraForm Global, Inc., 16 Civ. 7996 (PKC), Iron
Workers Mid-South Pension Fund v. TerraForm Global, Inc., 16 Civ.
7997 (PKC), Fraser v. TerraForm Global, Inc., 16 Civ. 8003 (PKC),
Moodie v. SunEdison, Inc., 16 Civ. 8113 (PKC) and Kunz v.
SunEdison, Inc., 16 Civ. 8118 (PKC).
Judge Castel respectfully recommends that the Panel terminate this
proceeding. Should the JPML accept the Court's recommendation, and
a party subsequently files in or removes to a U.S. District Court a
new action related to this proceeding, he recognizes that any
request to transfer such action would likely be directed to the
JPML. If such a request is made, he would welcome the action's
transfer for further proceedings given his experience with the
case.
A full-text copy of the Court's June 27, 2023 Order is available at
https://tinyurl.com/mrfstcde from Leagle.com.
METROPOLITAN LIFE: Jacobson Sues Over Undisclosed Rider Fees
------------------------------------------------------------
Carolyn Jacobson, individually and as a representative of the
Class, Plaintiff v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Defendant,
Case No. 23STCV14788 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., June 26, 2023)
is brought as a class action on behalf of California public school
educators against Defendant for charging teachers millions of
dollars in undisclosed and unauthorized fees on their supplemental
retirement savings plans, in violation of Cal. Educ. Code as well
as the California Unfair Competition Law.
According to the complaint, the Defendant fails to disclose on the
publicly accessible website, 403bcompare.com, the hefty rider
expenses that it charges to teachers trying to save for retirement,
cutting their nest egg substantially by the time of their
retirement. The Defendant's conduct comes at the expense of
educators and those 403(b) vendors that do comply with the Code's
disclosure requirements. By hiding its rider fees, Defendant has
lured unsuspecting teachers into its poorly performing products,
and has made it impossible for teachers that are in their products
to meaningfully compare their product's features to those of other
products or compare their current expenses to the expenses charged
by other vendors or products, says the suit.
The Plaintiff is a teacher. She asserts that over the last several
years, she has paid thousands of dollars to Defendant in unlawful,
undisclosed rider fees on her variable annuity.
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is the largest global provider
of insurance, annuities, and employee benefit programs, and among
the 50 largest U.S. corporations by total revenue.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua P. Davis, Esq.
BERGER MONTAGUE PC
505 Montgomery Street, Suite 625
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 215-0962
Facsimile: (215) 875-4604
E-mail: jdavis@bm.net
- and -
Carl F. Engstrom, Esq.
Brandon T. McDonough, Esq.
Mark E. Thomson, Esq.
ENGSTROM LEE MCDONOUGH THOMPSON & THOMSON LLC
729 N. Washington Ave., Suite 600
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Telephone: (612) 305-8349
Facsimile: (612) 677-3050
E-mail: cengstrom@engstromlee.com
bmcdonough@engstromlee.com
mthomson@engstromlee.com
- and -
E. Michelle Drake, Esq.
John G. Albanese, Esq.
Ariana B. Kiener, Esq.
BERGER MONTAGUE PC
1229 Tyler Street NE, Suite 205
Minneapolis, MN 55413
Telephone: (612) 594-5999
Facsimile: (612) 584-4470
E-mail: emdrake@bm.net
jalbanese@bm.net
akiener@bm.net
MONTBELL AMERICA: Castro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Montbell America,
Inc. The case is styled as Felix Castro, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated v. Montbell America, Inc, Case No.
1:23-cv-05699 (S.D.N.Y., July 3, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Montbell America, Inc. -- https://www.montbell.us/ -- carries a
wide selection of items, from clothing and gear for trekking and
hiking to travel goods.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Noor Abou-Saab, I, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF NOOR A. SAAB
380 North Broadway, Suite 300
Jericho, NY 11753
Phone: (718) 740-5060
Email: noorasaablaw@gmail.com
NICKELS AND DIMES: Elder Sues Over Alleged FTSA Violations
----------------------------------------------------------
MARIAH ELDER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NICKELS AND DIMES INCORPORATED, Defendant,
Case No. CACE-23-015297 (Fla. Cir., 17th Judicial, Broward Cty.,
July 1, 2023) arises out of the Defendants' violations of the
Florida Telephone Solicitation Act.
Plaintiffs Elder alleges that the Defendant violated FTSA's Caller
ID Rules by transmitting a phone number that was not capable of
receiving phone calls when it made telephonic sales calls by text
message to promote Tilt Studio.
Nickels and Dimes Incorporated is registered as a foreign
corporation, which promotes it business throughout the country,
including to Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua A. Glickman, Esq.
Shawn A. Heller, Esq.
SOCIAL JUSTICE COLLECTIVE
974 Howard Ave.
Dunedin, FL 34698
Telephone: (202) 709-5744
Facsimile: (866) 893-0416
E-mail: josh@sjlawcollective.com
shawn@sjlawcollective.com
NOBLE ENERGY: Phelps Oil Appeals Remand Bid Denial
--------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff PHELPS OIL AND GAS, LLC filed an appeal from the District
Court's Order dated June 13, 2023 entered in the lawsuit entitled
PHELPS OIL AND GAS, LLC, on behalf of itself and a class of
similarly situated royalty owners, Plaintiff v. NOBLE ENERGY, INC.,
and DCP MIDSTREAM, LP, Defendants, Case No. 1:22-cv-02637-RM-SKC,
in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado,
Denver.
In August 2014, the Plaintiff filed its original class action
Complaint in state court, asserting claims against the Defendants
for, inter alia, breach of contract and unjust enrichment. Central
to its case is the allegation that the DCP Settlement shortchanged
the Holman Settlement class out of royalties which they were owed.
The following month, DCP removed the case to the District Court
based on diversity jurisdiction, where it was assigned to now
Senior United States District Judge Robert E. Blackburn. The
Plaintiff filed a motion to remand, arguing that the $75,000
amount-in-controversy requirement was not met but Judge Blackburn
denied the motion.
The litigation proceeded for about five years, during which the
Plaintiff filed its Revised First Amended Class Action Complaint
and Judge Blackburn dismissed or granted summary judgment on all
the Plaintiff's claims except its breach of contract claim against
Noble and its unjust enrichment claim against DCP. In September
2019, Judge Blackburn granted summary judgment in the Defendants'
favor on those remaining claims and entered final judgment.
On remand, Judge Blackburn vacated several orders and the final
judgment and remanded the matter to the District Court for the City
and County of Denver, Colorado.
In October 2022, DCP removed the case a second time, this time
based on the Class Action Fairness Act ("CAFA"), 28 U.S.C. Section
1332(d). The new case was assigned to a different district judge.
The Plaintiff has again moved to remand the matter to state court.
The Defendants have moved to have the Court re-enter judgment in
their favor based on the Court's prior orders or, alternatively, to
have their dispositive motions from the previous case re-filed in
the case, subject to any necessary supplemental briefing.
Judge Moore first examined the Motion to Remand. The Plaintiff
contends that the operative complaint, following the remand to
state court, is the original Complaint it filed in August 2014, not
the Amended Complaint it filed in December 2015 after removal.
Without the civil theft and conversion claims that were added in
the Amended Complaint, Plaintiff contends that Defendants cannot
meet CAFA's $5 million threshold.
Judge Moore disagreed that the original Complaint is the operative
complaint and held that that even if it were treated as such, the
CAFA amount-in-controversy requirement would be satisfied in any
event. First, he said the Amended Complaint was the operative
complaint at the time of the removal pursuant to the Defendants'
Notice of Second Removal. Second, the Amended Complaint was the
operative complaint at the time of the removal pursuant to
Defendants' Notice of Second Removal.
On June 13, 2023, Judge Moore entered an Order denying the
Plaintiff's Motion to Remand and directed the Clerk to re-file the
case.
The appellate case is captioned as Phelps Oil and Gas v. Noble
Energy, et al., Case No. 23-701, in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, filed on June 23, 2023.
The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that:
-- Response was due July 3, 2023 for DCP Midstream, LP and Noble
Energy Inc.;
-- Notice of appearance was due July 7, 2023 for DCP Midstream,
LP, Noble Energy Inc. and Phelps Oil and Gas, LLC;
-- Disclosure statement was due July 7, 2023 for DCP Midstream,
LP, Noble Energy Inc. and Phelps Oil and Gas, LLC.[BN]
Plaintiff-Petitioner PHELPS OIL AND GAS, LLC, on behalf of itself
and a class of similarly situated royalty owners, is represented
by:
George Barton, Esq.
Stacy Ann Burrows, Esq.
BARTON AND BURROWS
5201 Johnson Drive, Suite 110
Mission, KS 66205
Telephone: (913) 563-6250
Defendants-Respondents NOBLE ENERGY INC. and DCP MIDSTREAM, LP are
represented by:
James Robert Henderson, Esq.
Kyle M. Holter, Esq.
Jonathan William Rauchway, Esq.
DAVIS GRAHAM & STUBBS
1550 Seventeenth Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202
Telephone: (303) 892-7533
- and -
Francisco J. Escobar-Calderon, Esq.
Daniel Mead McClure, Esq.
NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT
1301 McKinney Street, Suite 5100
Houston, TX 77010
Telephone: (713) 651-5151
NOMURA HORUDINGUSU: To Settle Bonds Dispute in Canadian Court
-------------------------------------------------------------
Nomura Horudingusu Kabushiki Kaisha disclosed in its Form 20-F for
the fiscal year ended March 31, 2023, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on June 28, 2023, that Nomura International plc
and Nomura Securities International, Inc. were named as defendants
in a separate class action filed in the Toronto Registry Office of
the Federal Court of Canada alleging violations of Canadian
competition law relating to the alleged manipulation of the market
for supranational, sub-sovereign and agency bonds.
In October 2022, subject to approval by the Federal Court of
Canada, NIP, and NSI have agreed to settle the class action.
Nomura Horudingusu Kabushiki Kaisha is a financial holding company
based in Tokyo, Japan.
NORTH AMERICAN: Abbou Sues Over Failure to Protect Personal Info
----------------------------------------------------------------
MOHAMED ABBOU, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NORTH AMERICAN AUTOMOTIVE SERVICES, INC.,
d/b/a Ed Napleton Automotive Group, Defendant, Case No.
1:23-cv-04094 (N.D. Ill., June 26, 2023) arises from Napleton's
failure to secure its computer networks to guard against the theft
of Plaintiff and other customers' personally identifiable
information.
Although Napleton discovered unusual activity on its computer
network as early as February 13, 2023, it waited a full 10 weeks
before it began notifying Plaintiff and other members of the Class
about the breach. This delay deprived Plaintiff and class members
of knowledge of the breach and the ability to take any action to
secure the information they entrusted to Napleton that was stolen
before any further dissemination or misuse of such information
occurred. As a result of this delayed response, Plaintiff and Class
Members had no idea their PII had been compromised, and that they
were, and continue to be, at significant risk of identity theft and
various other forms of personal, social, and financial harm. The
risk will remain for their respective lifetimes, says the suit.
The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of all persons whose PII
was compromised as a result of Defendant's failure to: (i)
adequately protect the PII of Plaintiff and Class Members: (ii)
warn Plaintiff and Class Members of Defendant's inadequate
information security practices; and (iii) effectively secure
hardware containing protected PII using reasonable and effective
security procedures free of vulnerabilities and incidents. The
Defendant's conduct amounts to negligence and violates the Illinois
Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, the suit
alleges.
North American Automotive Services, Inc. operates 74 automobile
dealerships in seven states, including Illinois.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Keith J. Keogh, Esq.
William M. Sweetnam, Esq.
KEOGH LAW, LTD.
55 West Monroe Street, Suite 3390
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: (312) 726-1092
E-mail: keith@keoghlaw.com
wsweetnam@keoghlaw.com
OLE MEXICAN: LaBarbera Appeals Case Dismissal to 9th Cir.
---------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff TAMMY LABARBERA filed an appeal from the District Court's
Order dated May 18, 2023 entered in the lawsuit entitled TAMMY LA
BARBERA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. OLE MEXICAN FOODS, INC., Defendant, Case No.
5:20-cv-02324-JGB-SP, in the U.S. District Court for the Central
District of California, Riverside.
On November 6, 2020, Plaintiff Hardy filed the complaint after he
suffered a cognizable injury when he paid a price premium for a La
Banderita product that he otherwise would not have purchased had he
known it was not made in Mexico. The complaint also makes clear
that the injury is fairly traceable to the packaging of Ole's
products, and that it is redressable by damages against Ole.
On December 22, 2020, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss the
complaint. The Plaintiff filed an opposition on January 29, 2021.
The Defendant replied on February 19, 2021. On April 22, 2021, the
Court denied the motion to dismiss.
On January 10, 2023, Ms. La Barbera filed a first amended
complaint. The FAC asserts the same core factual allegations and
identical causes of action as the complaint.
On January 24, 2023, the Defendant filed a motion to dismiss the
first amended class action complaint which the Court granted in
entirety without leave to amend on May 18, 2023, through an Order
signed by Judge Jesus G. Bernal. The Court also denied as moot
Plaintiff's application to file under seal, motion for class
certification and motion to exclude.
The appellate case is captioned as Tammy LaBarbera v. Ole Mexican
Foods, Inc., Case No. 23-55550, in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, filed on June 23, 2023.
The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that:
-- Appellant Tammy LaBarbera Mediation Questionnaire was due
June 30, 2023;
-- Appellant Tammy LaBarbera opening brief is due on August 24,
2023;
-- Appellee Ole Mexican Foods, Inc. answering brief is due on
September 25, 2023; and
Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of
the answering brief. [BN]
Plaintiff-Appellant TAMMY LABARBERA, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, is represented by:
Lisa Omoto, Esq.
FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1060
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (424) 365-3225
- and -
Timothy J. Peter, Esq.
FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1550
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 277-5770
Defendant-Appellee OLE MEXICAN FOODS, INC. is represented by:
Joe Reynolds, Esq.
KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON, LLP
1100 Peachtree Street, NE, Suite 2800
Atlanta, GA 30309
Telephone: (404) 815-6534
- and -
Nancy Louise Stagg, Esq.
KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP
11225 El Camino Real, Suite 250
San Diego, CA 92130
Telephone: (858) 350-6156
OMNI FINANCIAL: Wood Appeals Case Dismissal Ruling to 4th Cir.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff ISHAYKA WOOD filed an appeal from the District Court's
May 31, 2023 Memorandum Opinion entered in the lawsuit entitled
ISHAYKA WOOD, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, et al., Plaintiffs v. OMNI FINANCIAL OF NEVADA, INC.,
d/b/a Omni Financial and Omni Military Loans, Defendant, Case No.
1:22-cv-01148-LMB-IDD, in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Virginia at Alexandria.
The Plaintiff alleges that Omni facilitates predatory lending by
using dishonest tactics on its standard forms and unlawful terms in
violation of the Military Lending Act.
The Plaintiff contends that Omni Financial:
-- charges interest rates that exceed the federal statutory
rate cap of 36%;
-- refinances/rolls over installment loans for covered
borrowers;
-- requires mandatory allotment as a condition to a loan; and
-- requires to give security interest in the borrower's bank
account.
About 90% of Omni's loans are extended to active-duty members of
the armed forces and their dependents, while the remaining loans
are extended to civilians and non-covered service members (such as
military veterans and retirees) who do not have access to the
allotment system. Omni's unlawful conduct has occurred for many
years, however, the applicable time period for this lawsuit brought
by Plaintiff and the Class is made over the last five years, says
the suit.
The Amended Complaint claims that Omni's installment loans violated
the MLA in four ways. Firstly, the Complaint alleges that Omni's
Repayment Agreement and Disclosure Form incorrectly calculated the
Military Annual Percentage Rate (MAPR) by excluding prepaid finance
charges, resulting in a MAPR exceeding the 36% interest rate cap
for certain loans. Secondly, Omni is accused of unlawfully
refinancing loans by rolling over previous loans into new ones.
Thirdly, Omni allegedly required borrowers to establish military
allotments or preauthorized electronic fund transfers as a
condition for loan approval, which is prohibited by the MLA.
Lastly, the Complaint states that Omni required borrowers to
provide a security interest in their bank accounts, which is also
prohibited under the MLA.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, Judge Leonie
M. Brinkema of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Virginia, Alexandria Division entered an Memorandum Opinion on May
31, 2023:
a. denying Omni's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction;
b. granting Omni's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a
Claim; and
c. dismissing the Amended Class Action Complaint.
The appellate case is captioned as Ishayka Wood v. Omni Financial
of Nevada, Inc., Case No. 23-1662, in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, filed on June 22, 2023.[BN]
Plaintiff-Appellant ISHAYKA WOOD, individually, and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, is represented by:
Leonard Anthony Bennett, Esq.
Craig Carley Marchiando, Esq.
CONSUMER LITIGATION ASSOCIATES, P.C.
763 J. Clyde Morris Boulevard
Newport News, VA 23601
Telephone: (757) 930-3660
- and -
Christopher James Brochu, Esq.
BROCHU LAW, LLC
841 Prudential Drive
Jacksonville, FL 32207
Telephone: (904) 201-1771
- and -
Drew David Sarrett, Esq.
CONSUMER LITIGATION ASSOCIATES
626 East Broad Street
Richmond, VA 23219
Telephone: (804) 905-9900
- and -
Janet R. Varnell, Esq.
Brian W. Warwick, Esq.
VARNELL & WARWICK, P.A.
1101 East Cumberland Avenue
Tampa, FL 33602
Telephone: (352) 753-8600
Defendant-Appellee OMNI FINANCIAL OF NEVADA, INC., d/b/a Omni
Military Loans, d/b/a Omni Financial, is represented by:
Patrick Broderick, Esq.
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
777 South Flagler Drive
West Palm Beach, FL 33401-0000
Telephone: (561) 660-7900
- and -
Syed Mohsin Reza, Esq.
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
1750 Tysons Boulevard
McLean, VA 22102
Telephone: (703) 749-1344
ONE SOURCE STAFFING: Mason Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against One Source Staffing
Solution, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Cynthia Ann Mason,
individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. One
Source Staffing Solution, Inc., Case No. 23CV004157 (Cal. Super.
Ct., Sacramento Cty., July 5, 2023).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case."
OneSource Staffing Solutions -- https://www.onesourcestaffing.com/
-- was founded in 1978 to fill critical staffing needs in
Northeastern Pennsylvania.[BN]
OSPREY PACKS INC: Castro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Osprey Packs, Inc.
The case is styled as Felix Castro, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Osprey Packs, Inc., Case No.
1:23-cv-05700 (S.D.N.Y., July 3, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Osprey Packs, Inc, commonly known as Osprey --
https://www.osprey.com/ -- is an American company that manufactures
outdoor backpacks.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Noor Abou-Saab, I, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF NOOR A. SAAB
380 North Broadway, Suite 300
Jericho, NY 11753
Phone: (718) 740-5060
Email: noorasaablaw@gmail.com
PENSION BENEFIT: Berry, Ng Sue Over Right to Privacy Violations
---------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID BERRY and BONNIE GAYLE NG, individually and on behalf of
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. PENSION BENEFIT
INFORMATION, LLC (doing business as PBI RESEARCH SERVICES); THE
BERWYN GROUP, INC.; and DOES 1 through 100, Defendants, Case No.
4:23-cv-03297 (N.D. Cal., June 30, 2023) alleges claims against the
Defendants for violations of the California Consumer Privacy Act,
the Customer Records Act, the California Right to Privacy, and the
Unfair Competition Law.
In May 2023, the Defendants failed to prevent an unauthorized user
from a ransomware group to exploit an undetected security flaw in a
file transfer system. The total number of pensioners who were
affected is still unknown, but over one million California Public
Employees and California State Teachers pensioners' personal
information was infiltrated. However, the Defendants failed to
disclose the attack immediately and waited several days to inform
the funds on June 4, 2023. As a result, Plaintiffs and the Class
suffered and continue to suffer harms and losses including but not
limited to the loss of control over the use of their identity, harm
to their constitutional right to privacy, lost time dedicated to
the investigation of and attempt to recover the loss of funds and
cure harm to their privacy, the need for future expenses and time
dedicated to the recovery and protection of further loss, and
privacy injuries associated with having their sensitive personal
information disclosed, says the suit.
Pension Benefit Information, LLC and The Berwyn Group, Inc. provide
pension plan management services. They jointly contract with public
pension funds, including CalPERS, CalSTRS, and dozens of other
groups, to perform the crucial fiduciary duty of identifying any
pensioners who have died. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Julie Erickson, Esq.
Elizabeth Kramer, Esq.
Kevin Osborne, Esq.
ERICKSON KRAMER OSBORNE LLP
44 Tehama Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 635-0631
Facsimile: (415) 599-8088
PHILADELPHIA, PA: Bids to Dismiss Ferebee v. Macklin Partly Granted
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the case, DOLLY E. FEREBEE, for herself and others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NYCOLE MACKLIN, SCOTT A. PETRI, II, DENNIS
G. WELDON, JR., PHILADELPHIA PARKING AUTHORITY, MICHAEL GIUNTA,
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, JOHN DOE NO. 1, JOHN DOE NO. 2, and OMIKA
BARNES, Defendants, Civil Action No. 22-1155 (E.D. Pa.), Judge
Kelley B. Hodge of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Pennsylvania grants in part and denies in part:
a. Defendants Michael Giunta, Omika Barnes, and the City of
Philadelphia's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended
Class-Action Complaint; and
b. Defendant Philadelphia Parking Authority's Motion to
Dismiss Second Amended Complaint.
Upon consideration of Defendants Michael Giunta, Omika Barnes, and
the City of Philadelphia's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second
Amended Class-Action Complaint, Defendant Philadelphia Parking
Authority's Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint, the
responses thereto, and for the reasons set forth in the
accompanying Memorandum, Judge Hodge grants in part and denies in
part the Defendants' Motions to the following extent:
a. The claims against the Individual Defendants Nycole
Macklin, Scott A. Petri, Dennis G. Weldon, Jr., Omika Barnes, and
Michael Giunta are dismissed with prejudice;
b. The Section 1983 procedural due process claim is dismissed
with prejudice against PPA only;
c. The City's motion to dismiss the Section 1983 procedural
due process claim is denied; and
d. Both the Defendants' motions to dismiss the declaratory
judgment claim are granted.
A full-text copy of the Court's June 27, 2023 Order is available at
https://tinyurl.com/u89vduz2 from Leagle.com.
PIZZA HUT INC: Cortez Files TCPA Suit in E.D. Washington
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Pizza Hut, Inc. The
case is styled as Danuel Cortez, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Pizza Hut, Inc., Case No.
2:23-cv-00192 (E.D. Wash., July 5, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.
Pizza Hut -- https://www.pizzahut.com/ -- is an American
multinational restaurant chain and international franchise founded
in 1958 in Wichita, Kansas by Dan and Frank Carney.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kira Meshawn Rubel, Esq.
HARBOR LAW GROUP
3615 Harborview Drive, Suite C
Gig Harbor, WA 98329
Phone: (253) 251-2955
Email: kira@theharborlawgroup.com
PRICE BUSTERS MOVIES: Kunkle Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Price Busters Movies
and Games, Inc. The case is styled as Frank Kunkle, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. Price Busters Movies
and Games, Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-05697 (S.D.N.Y., July 3, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Price Busters Movies and Games, Inc. --
https://pricebustersgames.com/ -- buys, sells, and trades retro
video games, comic books, Baseball cards, sport collectibles, Magic
the Gathering, Pokemon, Star Wars, GI Joe, Transformers, action
figures.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Noor Abou-Saab, I, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF NOOR A. SAAB
380 North Broadway, Suite 300
Jericho, NY 11753
Phone: (718) 740-5060
Email: noorasaablaw@gmail.com
PRIMARY UTILITY: Fails to Pay OT Wages Under FLSA, Williams Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------------
TERRY WILLIAMS, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated v. PRIMARY UTILITY SERVICES, LLC, Case No. 5:23-cv-00139-H
(N.D. Tex., June 30, 2023) seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages
and other damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiff Williams, and the Putative Collective Action Members
regularly worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek. The Defendant
allegedly failed to include all forms of remuneration in the
calculation of the Plaintiff's regular rate, and therefore did not
pay the appropriate overtime rate to the Plaintiff and the Putative
Collective Action Members. The Defendant further failed to include
all hours worked by the Plaintiff and the Putative Collective
Action Members when calculating the total number of overtime hours
for which the Plaintiff and the Putative Collective Action Members
should be compensated during any given workweek, says the suit.
Throughout his employment with the Defendant, the Plaintiff
Williams was paid an hourly rate for hours worked. In addition to
his hourly rate, PUS paid the Plaintiff Williams $90.00 per day,
but failed to include this compensation in the regular rate of pay,
and therefore illegally reduced the overtime rate the Plaintiff was
entitled to receive under the FLSA, the suit claims.
Plaintiff Williams was also not compensated for travel time, which
was all part of the normal workday, and which lasted approximately
five hours each day that he worked, thereby miscalculating the
total number of overtime hours for which Williams should have
received overtime premium compensation during each workweek, the
suit added.
Plaintiff Williams worked for the Defendant as an Equipment
Operator from March 1, 2022 until July 14, 2022.
The Defendant PUS provides workers and services to "electrical
power providers throughout West Texas."[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew S. Yezierski, Esq.
Gabriel A. Assaad, Esq.
McDONALD WORLEY, P.C.
1770 St. James St., Suite 100
Houston, TX 77056
Telephone: (713) 523-5500
Facsimile: (713) 523-5501
E-mail: matt@mcdonaldworley.com
gassaad@mcdonaldworley.com
- and -
Galvin Kennedy, Esq.
KENNEDY LAW FIRM, LLP
2925 Richmond Ave., Ste. 1200
Houston, TX 77098
Telephone: (713) 425-6445
Facsimile: (888) 389-9317
E-mail: Galvin@KennedyAttorney.com
PRISMA HEALTH: Andrews Files Suit in D. South Carolina
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Prisma Health. The
case is styled as Regena Andrews, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. Prisma Health, Case No.
6:23-cv-03153-DCC (D.S.C., July 3, 2023).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.
Prisma Health -- https://prismahealth.org/ -- is the largest
not-for-profit health organization in South Carolina, serving more
than 1.2 million patients annually.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Harper Todd Segui, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC
217 Lucas Street, Suite G
Mount Pleasant, SC 29464
Phone: (919) 600-5000
Fax: (919) 600-5035
Email: hsegui@milberg.com
PROGRESS SOFTWARE: Ortega Files Suit in C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Progress Software
Corporation, et al. The case is styled as Juan Ortega, David
Merkle, Nancy Merkle, on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated v. Progress Software Corporation, Pension
Benefit Information, LLC, Case No. 5:23-cv-01329-SSS-KK (C.D. Cal.,
July 3, 2023).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Tort Negligence.
Progress Software Corporation -- https://www.progress.com/ -- is an
American public company that offers software for creating and
deploying business applications.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Ramin R. Younessi, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF RAMIN YOUNESSI APLC
3435 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 2200
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Phone: (213) 480-6200
Fax: (213) 480-6201
Email: ryounessi@younessilaw.com
PROGRESSIVE PREFERRED: Suit Seek to File Class Cert Bid Under Seal
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Elliott Ambrosio and
Sierra Trenholm, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated, v. Progressive Preferred Insurance Company and
Progressive Advanced Insurance Company, Case No. 2:22-cv-00342-SMB
(D. Ariz.), the Plaintiffs file unopposed motion to file under seal
motion for class certification.
Progressive Preferred provides insurances services. The Company
offers homeowners insurance, and workmen's compensation coverage.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 23, 2023, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3O6g2I7 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jacob L. Phillips, Esq.
NORMAND PLLC
3165 McCrory Place, Ste. 175
Orlando, FL 32803
Telephone: (407) 603-6031
Facsimile: (888) 974-2175
E-mail: jacob.phillips@normandpllc.com
PRYSMIAN CABLES: Montana Bid to Certify Class Denied w/o Prejudice
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL MONTANA, et al.,
v. PRYSMIAN CABLES AND SYSTEMS USA, LLC, Case No.
2:22-cv-00143-DLB-EBA (E.D. Ky.), the Hon. Judge Edward B. Atkins
entered an order that:
1. The Plaintiffs' motion to certify class is denied without
prejudice;
2. The parties' joint motion to stay is denied as moot; and
3. The parties' joint motion for re-briefing is granted, and the
briefing schedule is as follows:
a. On or before July 7, 2023, the Plaintiffs shall file a
Motion
for Conditional Certification;
b. No later than 30 days after service of the Plaintiffs'
motion, the Defendant shall file its Response; and
c. No later than 14 days after service of the Defendant's
Response.
Prysmian Cables manufactures telecommunication equipment. The
Company offers a wide range of optic fibers, optical and copper
cables.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 23, 2023, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/43oHJQQ at no extra charge.[CC]
RB FOOD: Fails to Pay Minimum, OT Wages Under FLSA, Vicent Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------------
Julio Vicent, Cecilia Kontadinis, on behalf of themselves and other
similarly situated individuals v. RB Food Management, Inc. a/k/a
Maroosh Mediterranean Restaurant Janette C. Bakhos, and Maremi
Bakhos, individually, Case No. 1:23-cv-22442 (S.D. Fla., June 30,
2023) seeks to recover monetary damages for unpaid minimum and
overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and
retaliation under United States laws.
While employed by the Defendants, the Plaintiffs were misclassified
as executive or administrative exempted employees, and they were
not compensated for overtime and regular wages properly. However,
the Plaintiff's primary duty was non-exempted regular restaurant
work. The Plaintiff had duties as a server, food runner, and
cleaning employee. During his employment period with the
Defendants, Plaintiff Vicent worked at the restaurant 54 hours
daily. He did not take bonafide lunch periods. At home, he worked
an average of two hours daily for six days or 12 hours weekly to
complete reports and paperwork related to the restaurant work.
Plaintiff Vicent was allegedly paid the same salary regardless of
the number of hours paid.
On May 24, 2023, the Plaintiff Vicent was fired by business owner
AnaMary Bakhos, because he complained about unpaid wages. At the
time of his termination, the Defendants refused to pay his last two
weeks of employment, the suit alleges.
Plaintiff Kontadiniss' primary duty was clerical work. She worked
an average of 43 hours weekly. During her employment with the
Defendants, she did not receive her wages timely, on the regular
payday. The Defendants delayed payment and failed to pay the
Plaintiff her regular wages. The Defendants also never paid the
Plaintiff her overdue wages, contends the suit.
This action is intended to include every server, kitchen employee,
and any similarly situated individuals who worked for the
Defendants at any time during the past three (3) years.
Plaintiff Vicent and Plaintiff Kontadiniss were employed by the
Defendant from March 20, 2023 to May 24, 2023, or 9 weeks.
Maroosh Restaurant is a retail business operating as a
Mediterranean restaurant.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
9100 S. Dadeland Blvd., Suite 1500
Miami, FL 33156
Telephone: (305) 446-1500
Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com
REPUBLIC SERVICES: Mira Hospitality Suit Removed to E.D. La.
------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Mira Hospitality LLC, Arjun Hospitality, LLC,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Republic Services, Inc., BFI Waste Services, LLC, Case No.
20230001703 was removed from the 21st Judicial District Court,
Tangipahoa Parish, to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Louisiana on July 3, 2023.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:23-cv-02312-GGG-KWR to
the proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract for Breach of
Contract.
Republic Services -- https://www.republicservices.com/ -- is a
North American waste disposal company whose services include
non-hazardous solid waste collection, waste transfer, waste
disposal, recycling, and energy services.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Lawrence J. Centola, III, Esq.
MARTZELL & BICKFORD
338 Lafayette St.
New Orleans, LA 70130
Phone: (504) 581-9065
Email: lcentola@mbfirm.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Francis V. Liantonio, Jr., Esq.
Erica Sensenbrenner, Esq.
Gerard J. Gaudet, Esq.
Jeffrey E. Richardson, Esq.
Martin Alan Stern, Esq.
Adams & Reese, LLP
701 Poydras St., Suite 4500
New Orleans, LA 70139
Phone: (504) 581-3234
Fax: (504) 566-0210
Email: Frank.Liantonio@arlaw.com
erica.sensenbrenner@arlaw.com
gerard.gaudet@arlaw.com
jeff.richardson@arlaw.com
martin.stern@arlaw.com
ROIVANT SCIENCES: Faces Securities Suit Over "Batoclimab" Report
----------------------------------------------------------------
Roivant Sciences Ltd. disclosed in its Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended March 31, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on June 28, 2023, that in February 2021, a putative
securities class action complaint was filed against Immunovant, a
subsidiary of the company, and certain of its current and former
officers in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New
York on behalf of a class consisting of those who acquired
Immunovant's securities from October 2, 2019, and February 1, 2021.
The complaint alleged that Immunovant and certain of its officers
violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, by making false and misleading statements
regarding the safety of the drug "batoclimab" and sought
unspecified monetary damages on behalf of the putative class and an
award of costs and expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees.
In December 2021, the U.S. District Court appointed a lead
plaintiff. In March 2022, the lead plaintiff filed an amended
complaint adding both the Company and Immunovant's directors and
underwriters as defendants, and asserting additional claims under
the Securities Act, on behalf of a putative class consisting of
those who purchased or otherwise acquired Immunovant's securities
pursuant and/or traceable to Immunovant's follow-on public offering
on or about September 2, 2020.
In February 2023, after a further briefing on the amended
complaint, the U.S. District Court issued an order permitting the
lead plaintiff to file a second amended complaint. That second
amended complaint was filed in March 2023. The defendants' motions
to dismiss were filed in May 2023.
Roivant Sciences Ltd. is a commercial-stage biopharmaceutical
company based in the UK.
SHEA HOMES: Association Sues Over Concealed Construction Defects
----------------------------------------------------------------
THE TRALEE VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, on behalf of itself and
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SHEA HOMES, INC.; SHEA
HOMES, LP; and DOES 1 through 200, inclusive, Defendants, Case No.
23CV037344 (Cal. Super., Alameda Cty., June 29, 2023) is a class
action against the Defendants for violations of statutory standards
for residential construction, breach of implied warranty, and
breach of fiduciary duty.
According to the complaint, the Defendants did not reveal,
disclose, or inform the Plaintiff or its members of the conditions
of the Project observed during inspections conducted by said
parties, and the Plaintiff's members reasonably relied on the
implied and express representation that the project was free from
construction or design defects and premature and unreasonable
deterioration of the improvements and other conditions requiring
repair. Since the construction of the Project and for a period of
several years thereafter, the Defendants promised, agreed to, and
actually did make repairs to the Project's common areas, separate
interests and related site components, and in doing so, the
Plaintiff reasonably relied on said Defendants' promises,
agreements and repairs and thereby deferred the filing of the
within action. During the period in which said Defendants made such
promises, agreements and repairs, all statutes of limitation were
tolled and said Defendants are estopped from claiming that the
alleged expiration of all of the statutes of limitation bar the
within action. As a result of the Defendants' acts and/or
omissions, the Plaintiff and class members suffered consequential
damages, says the suit.
The Tralee Village Homeowners Association is a nonprofit
association located in Dublin, California.
Shea Homes, Inc. is a homebuilding company headquartered in
California.
Shea Homes, LP is a provider of construction services based in
California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael J. Cochrane, Esq.
Mark R. Kirkland, Esq.
HUGHES GILL COCHRANE TINETTI, P.C.
2820 Shadelands Drive, Suite 160
Walnut Creek, CA 94598
Telephone: (925) 926-1200
Facsimile: (925) 926-1202
SHOE MART FACTORY: Castro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Shoe Mart Factory
Outlet, Inc. The case is styled as Felix Castro, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. Shoe Mart Factory
Outlet, Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-05702 (S.D.N.Y., July 3, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Shoe Mart -- https://www.theshoemart.com/ -- offer Alden Shoes and
other top quality brands from dress shoes to athletic wea.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Noor Abou-Saab, I, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF NOOR A. SAAB
380 North Broadway, Suite 300
Jericho, NY 11753
Phone: (718) 740-5060
Email: noorasaablaw@gmail.com
SNOW PEAK USA: Sanchez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Snow Peak USA, Inc.
The case is styled as Randy Sanchez, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Snow Peak USA, Inc., Case No.
1:23-cv-05006-DG-RER (E.D.N.Y., July 3, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Snow Peak -- https://www.snowpeak.com/ -- is a Japanese camping
brand that makes heirloom-quality gear and apparel.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Noor H. Abou-Saab, I, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF NOOR A. SAAB
380 North Broadway, Suite 300
Jericho, NY 11753
Phone: (718) 740-5060
Email: noorasaablaw@gmail.com
SUPER CHOICE: Velasquez Class Suit Seeks Unpaid OT Wages Under FLSA
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Maria L. Velasquez and other similarly situated individuals v.
Super Choice Foods, Inc. and Jimand Zaed, individually, Case No.
8:23-cv-01482 (M.D. Fla., June 30, 2023) seeks to recover unpaid
overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act,
retaliatory damages, liquidated damages, costs, and reasonable
attorney's fees.
The Plaintiff worked six days per week, 48 hours weekly. She was
paid for all her hours but at her regular rate. She was also not
able to take bonafide lunchtime, she ate while working, the
Plaintiff asserts. The Plaintiff disagreed with her low wage rate
and the lack of payment for overtime hours, and she complained
verbally to the owner of the business Jimand Zaed many times.
Defendant Jimand Zaed promised that he would fix the problem soon,
says the suit.
On or about June 27, 2023, the Plaintiff complained again to the
Defendant Jimand Zaed. This time Jimand Zaed told Plaintiff: "I
told you that I am going to pay you," and sent Plaintiff home.
Later Jimand Zaed called the Plaintiff and told her: "Never came
back, you are fired."
The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of herself and all other
current and former employees similarly situated to the Plaintiff
who worked more than 40 hours during one or more weeks on or after
October 2019 without being adequately compensated.
Ms. Velasquez worked at the supermarket as a lead employee in the
meat department.
Super Choice engages in supermarket business based in Florida.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
9100 S. Dadeland Blvd., Suite 1500
Miami, FL 33156
Telephone: (305) 446-1500
Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com
SUPPORT SERVICES: Parties Seek FLSA Collective Certification
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Lakeythia Gates, On Behalf
of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated, v. Support Services
Group, Inc. (a/k/a Legacy Support Services, LTD and/or Legacy
Support Services, LLC), Case No. 6:22-cv-00045-ADA-DTG (W.D. Tex.),
the Parties file an agreed motion and stipulation regarding Fair
Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Certification and Notice to Putative
Collective Action Members.
The Plaintiff and The Defendant have conferred and agree to
stipulate to the Court entering an Order certifying a collective
action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. section 216(b) as follows:
"All current and/or former employees of The Defendant who
work(ed)
as hourly paid customer service representatives (CSR) and/or
subject matter experts (SME) in the United States of America
between May 1, 2020 and May 1, 2022."
The Parties also ask that the Court enter an Order:
-- certifying that collective and authorizing the issuance of
notice;
-- allowing the Plaintiff's counsel to use the following
information on the outside of the Notice Packet mailing
envelope
and in the subject line of the e-mail to the Putative
Collective
Action Members -- "Notice of Unpaid Overtime Lawsuit --
Deadline
to Join;"
Support Services is an outsourcing company providing customer
response and call center support outsource services.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated June 23, 2023, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/44aSRBQ at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Allen R. Vaught, Esq.
VAUGHT FIRM, LLC
1910 Pacific Ave., Suite 9150
Dallas, TX 75201
Telephone: (972) 707-7816
Facsimile: (972) 591-4564
E-mail: avaught@txlaborlaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Dan. N. MacLemore, Esq.
Susan E. Cates, Esq.
BEARD KULTGEN BROPHY
BOSTWICK & DICKSON, PLLC
220 South Fourth Street
Waco, TX 76701
Telephone: (254) 776-5500
Facsimile: (254) 776-3591
E-mail: maclemore@thetexasfirm.com
cates@thetexasfirm.com
T'SO: Fails to Pay Transporter's OT Wages Under FLSA, Wakim Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
TED WAKIM, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, v. T'SO, Case No. 1:23-cv-00748 (W.D. Tex.,
June 30, 2023) alleges that the Defendant, pursuant to their
policies and practices, failed and refused to pay overtime wages,
in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Starting in February 2023 and continuing until he was wrongfully
terminated on April 11, 2023, Mr. Wakim was classified as a
non-exempt employee who was supposed to be paid time and a half for
hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week. From February 28
through March 7, the Plaintiff worked more than 40 hours in the
week and was not properly paid overtime for that work. The
Plaintiff was terminated on April 11, 2023, after complaining of
the Defendant's pay practices, the suit claims.
As a result of Defendant's unlawful conduct, the Plaintiff and
others similarly situated have suffered damages in the amounts of
their unpaid overtime compensation, lost wages, liquidated damages,
interest, and such other legal and equitable relief as the Court
deems just and proper. The Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and
others similarly situated, seeks recovery of attorneys' fees and
costs as provided by the FLSA. In addition, the Plaintiff seeks
actual damages as a result of his wrongful termination for no good
reason.
The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of the following class
of similarly situated employees:
All employees who were, are, or will be employed by the
Defendant during the period of three years prior to the
date of commencement of this action through the date of
judgment in this action.
The Plaintiff was employed as a food transporter working for the
Defendant at its location at 2704 S. Congress Avenue, Austin,
Texas.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John F. Melton, Esq.
THE MELTON LAW FIRM, P.L.L.C.
925 South Cap. Of Tx Hwy., Suite B225
Austin, TX 78746
Telephone: (512) 330-0017
E-mail: jmelton@jfmeltonlaw.com
TIOGA DOWNS: Potter Seeks Initial Approval of Settlement Deal
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DAVID POTTER, on behalf of
himself and others similarly situated, v. TIOGA DOWNS RACETRACK,
LLC, Case No. 3:22-cv-00869-TJM-ML (N.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiff asks
the Court pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 and 29
U.S.C. section 216(b), for an Order:
1. Preliminarily approving the Settlement Agreement and all
terms
thereof;
2. Certifying the NYLL Class pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 23, and certifying the FLSA Collective pursuant the
Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA);
3. Appointing David Potter as representative of the NYLL Class
and
FLSA Collective
4. Appointing the Law Office of Matthew D. Carlson as
Class/Collective Counsel;
5. Approving the Notice Form and notice plan (including the
process
of opting out and objecting to the settlement) pertaining
thereto as set forth in Settlement Agreement;
6. Appointing CAC Services Group, LLC as Settlement
Administrator
and directing the parties and the Settlement Administrator to
proceed in accordance with the terms of the Settlement
Agreement;
7. Scheduling a Fairness Hearing regarding final approval of the
Settlement Agreement, Class Counsel’s request for
attorneys’
fees and costs, the Settlement Administrator’s fees and
costs,
and the service award to the named The Plaintiff; and
8. Removing all other current deadlines and hearings from the
calendar.
Tioga Downs is a county-fair-themed standardbred racetrack and
racino.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 23, 2023, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3POwRsi at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew D. Carlson, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF MATTHEW D.
CARLSON
3959 N. Buffalo Road, Suite 29
Orchard Park, NY 14127
Telephone: (716) 242-1234
E-mail: mdcarlson@mdcarlsonlaw.com
TRAVEL GUARD: Miller Suit Seeks to Certify Class & Subclass
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TAMIKA MILLER and JULIANNE
CHUANROONG, on behalf of themselves, the general public, and those
similarly situated, v. TRAVEL GUARD GROUP, INC., AIG TRAVEL, INC.,
and NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA, Case
No. 3:21-cv-09751-TLT (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to
enter an order:
1. certifying their proposed class for the first two prongs of
the
Unfair Competition Law (UCL) claim (for unlawful and unfair
conduct); and
2. certify the proposed subclass for the deception claims under
the
UCL, California False Advertising Law (FAL), and the common
law).
The Plaintiffs Tamika Miller and Julianne Chuanroong move the
Court, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
to certify the following classes:
-- Class
"All natural persons who, using a California address,
purchased
travel insurance from The Defendants at any point from
December
17, 2017, until the present, and who were charged a fee for
Travel Guard's supposed assistance service on top of the
applicable insurance premium rate The Defendants were
authorized
to charge;"
-- Online Purchase Subclass
"All Class members who purchased The Defendants' travel
insurance through a third-party travel retailer’s online
purchase path."
The Class and Online Purchase Subclass will pursue claims against
The Defendants on theories that The Defendants' conduct was
unlawful and/or unfair under the UCL. The Subclass will pursue
claims against The Defendants on theories that The Defendants'
conduct was deceptive, misleading, and/or fraudulent under the UCL,
the FAL, and the common law.
The Plaintiffs further request that the Court:
-- appoint (1) The Plaintiffs Tamika Miller and Julianne
Chuanroong
as class representatives on all claims for the Class and the
Online Purchase Subclass, and
-- Gutride Safier LLP as class counsel for each certified class.
The Plaintiffs finally request that the Court order the parties to
meet and confer and present this Court, within 15 days of an order
granting class certification, a proposed notice to the certified
class.
Travel Guard offers travel insurance plans and assistance programs.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 23, 2023, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3PNqrK2 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Seth A. Safier, Esq.
Stephen M. Raab, Esq.
Rajiv V. Thairani, Esq.
GUTRIDE SAFIER LLP
100 Pine Street, Suite 1250
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 336-6545
Facsimile: (415) 449-6469
E-mail: stephen@gutridesafier.com
seth@gutridesafier.com
rajiv@gutridesafier.com
UNITED COAL: Parties Seek Initial Approval of Settlement
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SHAUN CHAPMAN, on Behalf
of Himself and All Others Similarly-Situated, v. UNITED COAL
COMPANY, LLC, JURY DEMANDED WELLMORE COAL COMPANY, LLC, and
WELLMORE ENERGY COMPANY, LLC, Case No. 2:21-cv-00137-CEA-CRW (E.D.
Tenn.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order:
1. Preliminarily approving Rule 23 class action settlement.
2. Appointing the Plaintiff as the Class Representative of the
class.
3. Appointing Law Office of Mark N. Foster, PLLC and Law Office
of
John R. Kleinschmidt, III, PLLC as Class Counsel for the
class.
4. Preliminarily approving the Agreement with regard to the Rule
23
Class.
5. Approving transmission by the Plaintiff to the Rule 23 Class
of
the Notice Materials.
The Plaintiff is a former underground coal miner who worked at the
Wellmore mine, alleging that The Defendants did not pay the correct
amount of wages for work at the Wellmore mine because they
allegedly
(a) did not pay for pre-shift and post-shift activities that the
Plaintiff alleges constituted work and
(b) deducted time from workers' pay for underground travel time
that The Plaintiff alleges was compensable.
The Plaintiff alleges that the practices violated the Fair Labor
Standards Act (FLSA), and seeks to proceed under the FLSA on behalf
of a collective of similarly-situated employees under 29 U.S.C.
section 216(b).
The Plaintiff also alleges that these practices violated the
Kentucky Wages and Hours Act (KWHA) and/or Virginia common law, and
seeks to proceed under state law on behalf of a Rule 23 class of
similarly-situated employees.
The Plaintiff seeks the unpaid overtime compensation he alleges he
and the similarly-situated employees earned but were not paid, plus
liquidated damages, litigation costs, expenses, reasonable
attorneys’ fees, and further relief as this Court deems just and
proper
per the terms of the Agreement.
United Coal is a producer of high-grade metallurgical coals.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 23, 2023, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/43l9mtQ at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark N. Foster, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF MARK N. FOSTER, PLLC
Madisonville, KY 42431
Telephone: (270) 213-1303
E-mail: MFoster@MarkNFoster.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Jonathan R. Ellis, Esq.
Joseph U. Leonoro, Esq.
STEPTOE & JOHNSON PLLC
Charleston, WV 25326-1588
E-mail: Jonathan.Ellis@steptoe-johnson.com
Joseph.Leonoro@steptoe-johnson.com
VALET KING: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages to Drivers, Ruales Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bady Marcelo Ruales, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. The Valet King Limited Liability Company,
and John Fuda, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-05579 (S.D.N.Y., June
29, 2023) alleges claims against the Defendants for violations of
the Fair Labor Standards Act and of Articles 6 and 19 of the New
York State Labor Law and their supporting New York State Department
of Labor regulations.
The Plaintiff was employed as a valet driver at the Valet King
worksites in New York from approximately November 2020 to, through
and including February 2023. Throughout his employment, the
Plaintiff was required to work in excess of 40 hours per week, but
never received an overtime premium of one and one-half times his
regular rate of pay for those hours. In addition, Plaintiff was
also not provided accurate wage notices and accurate wage
statements, says the suit.
Moreover, the Plaintiff seeks injunctive and declaratory relief and
to recover unpaid overtime wages, spread-of-hours, liquidated and
statutory damages, pre- and post-judgment interest, and attorneys'
fees and costs pursuant to the FLSA, NYLL, and the NYLL's Wage
Theft Prevention Act.
Valet King offers valet services and maintains a principal place of
business in New Jersey. [BN]
The Plaintiff is 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
WAUSAU HOMES: Appeals Arbitration Bid Denial in Francis Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
Wausau Homes Incorporated filed an appeal from the District Court's
Order dated June 7, 2023 entered in the lawsuit entitled CHRISTINA
FRANCIS and COLE FRANCIS, individually and on behalf of all those
similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. WAUSAU HOMES INCORPORATED, and
PHILLIPS BUILDERS, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 5:23-cv-06019-SRB, in
the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, St.
Joseph.
According to the complaint, the Plaintiffs decided to purchase a
Wausau Home for themselves and their children. Plaintiffs and a
local Builder, Defendant Phillips Builders, LLC entered into a
Contract for Custom Home Construction. The Construction Contract
provides that Phillips Builders would "provide the labor,
materials, equipment, and services necessary to complete the
construction of the custom home consistent with the Plans and
Specifications." In exchange, Plaintiffs were required to make
payments to Phillips Builders pursuant to a payment schedule. The
Construction Contract expressly states that Phillips Builders "is
an independent contractor, separate and distinct from Wausau Homes,
Inc. Wausau Homes, Inc. is a supplier of building material for this
custom home and is not a party to this contract."
On February 7, 2023, Plaintiff filed this putative class action
lawsuit against Defendant and Phillips Builders. The Plaintiffs
allege their home was not built on-time, is still not constructed,
is defective, and exceeded the stated price in the Construction
Contract. The Complaint asserts several claims against Defendant
and/or Phillips Builders, including violation of the Missouri
Merchandising Practices Act, negligent misrepresentation, and
breach of warranty. The Plaintiffs seek damages for themselves and
on behalf of a class of others similarly situated.
On April 12, 2023, the Defendant moved the Court to compel
arbitration. The Defendant argued it is entitled to enforce the
arbitration clause in the Construction Contract. The Defendant also
argued Plaintiffs are required to arbitrate their claims under a
separate Builder Agreement entered into between Defendant and
Phillips Builders. The Plaintiffs opposed arbitration.
On June 7, 2023, the Court entered an Order signed by Judge Stephen
R. Bough denying Defendant's motion to compel arbitration and to
dismiss or stay proceedings pending arbitration.
The appellate case is captioned as Cole Francis, et al. v. Wausau
Homes Incorporated, Case No. 23-2474, in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, filed on June 22, 2023.
The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that:
-- Appendix is due on August 1, 2023;
-- BRIEF OF APPELLANT Wausau Homes Incorporated is due on August
1, 2023; and
-- Appellee brief is due 30 days from the date the court issues
the Notice of Docket Activity filing the brief of appellant.[BN]
Defendant-Appellant Wausau Homes Incorporated is represented by:
Robert J. Hoffman, Esq.
Grace Colato Martinez, Esq.
BRYAN & CAVE
3800 One Kansas City Place
1200 Main Street
Kansas City, MO 64105-0000
Telephone: (816) 374-3200
WELBE HEALTH LLC: Hale Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Welbe Health, LLC, et
al. The case is styled as Djuana Shanella Hale, individually and on
behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated v.
Welbe Health, LLC, Stockton Pace, LLC, Case No.
STK-CV-UOE-2023-0006866 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Joaquin Cty., July 5,
2023).
The case type is stated as "Unlimited Civil Other Employment."
WelbeHealth -- https://welbehealth.com/ -- provides full-service
healthcare and personalized support to help you age well at home
and in your community.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jonathan M. Genish, Esq.
BLACKSTONE LAW
8383 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 745
Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2442
Phone: 855-786-6355
Fax: 855-786-6356
Email: jgenish@blackstonepc.com
WELLS FARGO: Faces Suit Over Housing Loan Refinancing Options
-------------------------------------------------------------
RAUL GARCIA, PATTY MORA, MIGUEL RAMIREZ, & KEVIN HINOJOSA, ON
BEHALF OF THEMSELVES AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED v. WELLS
FARGO BANK, N.A., Case No. 5:23-cv-00825 (W.D. Tex., June 30, 2023)
is a class action lawsuit under the Fair Housing Act and other
civil rights laws brought by minority consumers who received less
favorable refinancing options, following a Bloomberg News report
finding that Wells Fargo rejected half its Black applicants during
the mortgage refinancing boom.
Wells Fargo has a long history of charging higher fees to Hispanic
borrowers or improperly placing minority customers into subprime
loans. In 2012, Wells Fargo agreed to pay $184.3 million in
compensation for Hispanic and Black borrowers who were steered into
subprime mortgages or who paid higher fees and rates than white
borrowers because of their race or national origin. Wells Fargo
violated the law by creating a program with a disproportionately
adverse effect on Hispanic members of the Bilingual team who are
from Mexico or other Central and South American countries, says the
suit.
This lawsuit is brought on behalf of all current and former
Bilingual team members who were denied access to the Pilot
program.
Mr. Raul Garcia is an individual of Hispanic ethnicity from Mexico
who joined the Bilingual team in 2019. Wells Fargo denied him
admittance to the Pilot program beginning in late 2021 due to his
membership on the Bilingual team.
Wells Fargo is an American multinational financial services
company.[BN]
The Plaintiffs is represented by:
Lawrence Morales II, Esq.
Allison Sarah Hartry, Esq.
THE MORALES FIRM, P.C.
6243 IH-10 West, Suite 132
San Antonio, TX 78201
Telephone: (210) 225-0811
Facsimile: (210) 225-0821
E-mail: lawrence@themoralesfirm.com
ahartry@themoralesfirm.com
WILSON CAP: Aguilar Sues Over Construction Workers' Unpaid Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
NOELIO AGUILAR, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. WILSON CAP CORP. d/b/a CAP MARR CONSTRUCTION
CORP., a New York Corporation, and WILSON S CAP MARROQUIN, an
individual, Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-04746 (E.D.N.Y., June 26,
2023) is a class action against the Defendants for unpaid overtime
wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and for violations
of the N.Y. Labor Law, the Wage Theft Prevention Act, and the
spread of hours and overtime wage orders of the New York
Commissioner of Labor.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants from approximately June
2022 through December 2022 as a construction worker. His job
included remodeling homes and businesses, cleaning, and any other
task or job that he was assigned at any given time.
Wilson Cap Corp. is a New York corporation that owns and operates a
construction and home improvement company known as and doing
business as Cap Marr Construction.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Erik M. Bashian, Esq.
BASHIAN & PAPANTONIOU, P.C.
500 Old Country Road, Ste. 302
Garden City, NY 11530
Telephone: (516) 279-1554
Facsimile: (516) 213-0339
E-mail: eb@bashpaplaw.com
- and -
Nolan Klein, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF NOLAN KLEIN, P.A.
5550 Glades Road, Ste. 500
Boca Raton, FL 33431
Telephone: (954) 745-0588
E-mail: klein@nklegal.com
*********
S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N
Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania,
USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA. Rousel Elaine T.
Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche A. Castillon, Julie Anne L.
Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.
Copyright 2023. 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 ***