---

              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Thursday, August 10, 2023, Vol. 25, No. 160

                            Headlines

22ND CENTURY: $3MM Class Settlement to be Heard on Oct. 3
3M CO: Attorney General Opposes Settlement in Contamination Suit
3M COMPANY: AFFF Products Can Cause Cancer, Cain Suit Alleges
3M COMPANY: Cummings Sues Over Side Effects of Using AFFF Products
3M COMPANY: Durham Product Liability Suit Removed to D. Minnesota

3M COMPANY: Exposed AFFF Products' Users to PFAS, Coakley Alleges
3M COMPANY: Exposed Military Members to PFAS, Mendoza Suit Claims
3M COMPANY: Faces Daniello Suit Over AFFF Products' Harmful Effects
3M COMPANY: Frederick Suit Claims PFAS Exposure From AFFF Products
3M COMPANY: Heitzenrader Sues Over Complications From AFFF Products

3M COMPANY: Melanson Sues Over AFFF Products' Risk to Human Health
3M COMPANY: Reid Sues Over Injury Sustained From AFFF Products
3M COMPANY: Settles PFAS Water Contamination Class Suit for $10B
AETNA LIFE: Coverage Suit Remain Class Action Amid Cert. Ruling
AETNA MEDICAID: Faces Class Action Suit Over Wage Theft

AMC ENTERTAINMENT: Bretto Alleges Video Privacy Violations
ASCENDANT CAPITAL: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due Sept. 15
AUDIBLE INC: Wins Summary Judgment on Breach of Contract Claim
BANK OF AMERICA: Gueney Sues Over Deceptive Wire Transfer Fees
BAYER HEALTHCARE: Hansen Sues Over Mislabeled Pet Collars

BRITISH COLUMBIA: G.D. Data Breach Class Suit Certification Denied
BRITISH COLUMBIA: Hearing of Lemon Creek Class Action Set Jan. 2025
CALGARY STAMPEDE: Funding in Abuse Suit Pursued Even After Deal
CANOPY GROWTH: Kantner Sues Over Drop in Share Price
CHILDREN'S PLACE: Sells PFAS-Laced School Uniform, Suit Alleges

COLUMBIA, SC: Judge Denies Class Action Over Emergency Evacuation
CULA LLC: Ajayi Files Suit in D. New Jersey
DISCOVER FINANCIAL: Capp Sues Over Improper Business Practices
DRIV INC: Armas Sues Over Defective Vehicle Ball Joints
DSM-FIRMENICH AG: Crimson Candle Alleges Fragrances' Price Monopoly

EARTH THERAPEUTICS: Luis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Portillo Sues Over Inaccurate Consumer Reports
FARMINGTON STATE BANK: O'Keefe Files Suit in E.D. Washington
FIRST MERCHANTS: Everling Sues Over Failure to Safeguard PII
FLOCK FOODS: Barbee Files TCPA Suit in N.D. California

FLORIDA POWER: Continues to Defend Velez Purported Class Suit
FOLGER COFFEE: Seeks Leave to File Suggestions Under Seal
GIJUNGLE INC: Order on General Pretrial Management Entered in Toro
GOOGLE INC: Parties Seek to Extend Time to Seal Class Cert Briefing
GOOGLE INC: Plaintiffs' Seek to Conditionally Seal Materials

GOOGLE LLC: Faces Class Suit Over Video Ads' Misrepresentation
GREENHILL & CO: Files Misleading Proxy to OK Merger, Lambert Says
HARVEY, IL: Sued Over Improper Building Code Violation Citations
HCA HEALTHCARE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Abramovic Alleges
HCA HEALTHCARE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Bowers Alleges

HCA HEALTHCARE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Coleman Alleges
HCA HEALTHCARE: Hayes Files Suit in M.D. Tennessee
HELP AT HOME: Williams Sues Over Failure to Pay Minimum Wage
HOVEROUND CORPORATION: Williams Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
HOWARD L. NATIONS: Appeals Ruling in Motion to Enforce Judgment

HYUNDAI GROUP: Faces Class Suit Over Charging Plug Defect
INTELLIHARTX LLC: Cabrales Sues Over Cyberattack and Data Breach
IOSM INC: Decena Suit Removed to N.D. California
IT WORKS MARKETING: Perez Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
JEUNESSE GLOBAL: Sun Suit Removed to C.D. California

JUNKFOOD CLOTHING: Hernandez Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
K & H CARE: Delaunay Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
KIRSCHENBAUM & PHILLIPS: Rubin Suit Removed to E.D. New York
KIWI DESIGN INC: Vachnine Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
KOCHAVA INC: Court Certifies Class Suit Over Consumer Privacy

KOHLS INC: Brito Suit Removed to M.D. Florida
L. & J. G. STICKLEY: Clement Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
LABRADA BODYBUILDING: Luis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
LAKESHIRTS INC: Lawal Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
LIK FINE ART MIAMI: Clement Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York

LIP BAR INC: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Lawal Suit Says
LORDSTOWN MOTORS: Faces Class Action Suit for Misleading Investors
LOUISVILLE/JEFFERSON COUNTY, KY: Class Cert Deadlines Extended
LOWE'S HOME CENTERS: Garrido Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
M&M LIMOUSINE SERVICE: Turner Suit Removed to N.D. Illinois

MAC PIZZA MANAGEMENT: Schramm Files Suit in S.D. Texas
MAIN LINE FERTILITY: Sued Over Illegal Disclosure of PII & PHI
MANAGED CARE: Caine Files Suit in D. South Carolina
MARGIE QUIN: B.R. Files Suit in M.D. Tennessee
MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL: Baek Suit Removed to C.D. California

MAXIMUM HUMAN PERFORMANCE: Luis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
MBR FARMS: Time to File Class Status Bid Extended
MDL 1871: TPPs Seeks to Unseal Exhibits for Class Certification
META PLATFORMS: $725M Deal in Privacy Class Action Suit Objected
META PLATFORMS: Settles Parris BIPA Class Suit for $68.5-Mil.

META PLATFORMS: Silverman Files Class Suit for Copyright Violations
METRO FINEST DELI: Garza Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
METROSPEEDY OPERATIONS: Roman Files FLSA Suit in E.D. New York
MIDLAND CREDIT: Lee Files FDCPA Suit in C.D. California
MIKE MCCALL LANDSCAPE: Cabrera Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.

MILKMAN TECHNOLOGIES: Williams Sues Over Retaliatory Discharge
MORTGAGE INDUSTRY: McGee Files Suit in S.D. New York
MUFG BANK: $90MM Class Action Settlement to be Heard on Oct. 17
NATIONAL VISION: Herrera Suit Removed to S.D. California
NATIONSBENEFITS LLC: Caliendo Suit Transferred to D. Connecticut

NATIONSBENEFITS LLC: King Files Suit in S.D. Florida
NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT: King Suit Removed to C.D. California
NEW YORK, NY: Appeals Prelim. Injunction Ruling in Bentkowski Suit
NEW YOU BARIATRIC: Delacruz Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
NEWPORT NEWS NUTRITION: Castro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York

NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL: Poe Allowed to File Reply Under Seal
NORTON HEALTHCARE: Malone Files Suit in W.D. Kentucky
NOVEMBER 19 LLC: Vachnine Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
NYU LANGONE: General Management Order Entered in Ahmed Class Suit
O'REILLY AUTO ENTERPRISES: Clark Suit Removed to E.D. California

OLIN CORP: Seeks to Seal Portions of Post-Evidentiary Hearing Brief
ONE BROOKLYN: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Francis Alleges
ONTRAC LOGISTICS: McNorton Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
OPTUM CARE: Bravo Sues Over Unreimbursed Compensations
OREGON: Court Dismisses Moore Class Suit

P.A.M.TRANSPORT INC: Robinson Files ADA Suit in W.D. Arkansas
PARKWAY MUSIC: Mercedes Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
PATENTS TO RETAIL: Bontrager Files TCPA Suit in E.D. California
PEACEHEALTH: Class Settlement in Davies Suit Gets Initial Approval
PENSKE TRUCK LEASING: Cabral Sues Over Unsolicited Robocalls

PERTUTTI NEW YORK: Hwang Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
PLUG POWER: Underpays Commissioning Specialists, Ronan Suit Claims
PLURALSIGHT INC: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to August 14
PROGRESSIVE SPECIALTY: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due Oct. 16
PROLOGIS INC: Faces Vandervort Class Suit Over Kmart Building Fire

RAY JONES: Filing for Class Certification Due Jan. 31, 2024
RITE AID: Faces Leija Class Suit Over Disclosure of Personal Info
RYDER SYSTEMS: Settlement Documentation for Court Approval
STATE FARM: Class Certification Bid Due April 12, 2024
STATE FARM: Faces Class Suit Over Privacy Rights' Violations

STATE FARM: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due Sept. 1
STRENGTH20 LLC: Pimentel Suit Seeks Security Guards' Unpaid Wages
STRIPPERS INC: Harris Files Suit Over Alleged Tip Skimming
TAYLOR MORRISON HOME: Continues to Defend Gundel Class Suit
TRINET GROUP: Court Closes 401(k) Class Suit

UBER TECHNOLOGIES: Sept. 5 Class Action Opt-Out Deadline Set
UNITED PARCEL: Failure to Reimburse Lost Packages, Suit Alleges
UNLIMITED CARE: Rothkranz Sues Over Unauthorized Access of Info
VIRGINIA: Class Suit Over Student With Special Needs Dismissed
VISA INC: Appeals Denial of Bid to Remand Interchange Fees Suit

WESTERN UNION: Continues to Defend Financial Privacy Act Class Suit
WICHITA, KS: Provisionally Sealed Document Remain Under Seal
ZALMEN MANAGEMENT: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Arciniega Says

                            *********

22ND CENTURY: $3MM Class Settlement to be Heard on Oct. 3
---------------------------------------------------------
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

JOSEPH NOTO, GARDEN STATE
TIRE CORP., and STEPHENS
JOHNSON, Individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

v.

22ND CENTURY GROUP, INC., HENRY
SICIGNANO, III AND JOHN T.
BRODFUEHRER,

Defendants.

Civil Action No. 19-cv-01285-JLS-MJR

SUMMARY NOTICE OF (I) PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION, CERTIFICATION OF
SETTLEMENT CLASS, AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION; (II)
SETTLEMENT HEARING; AND (III) MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF
ATTORNEYS' FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT OF LITIGATION EXPENSES

TO:  All persons and entities who, during the period from February
18, 2016 through July 31, 2019, inclusive (the "Settlement Class
Period"), purchased or otherwise acquired 22nd Century Group, Inc.
("22nd Century") common stock and were allegedly damaged thereby
(the "Settlement Class").

PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY, YOUR RIGHTS WILL BE AFFECTED BY
A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT PENDING IN THIS COURT.

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure and an Order of the United States District Court
for the Western District of New York, that the above-captioned
litigation (the "Action") has been certified as a class action on
behalf of the Settlement Class, except for certain persons and
entities who are excluded from the Settlement Class as set forth in
the full printed Notice Of (I) Pendency Of Class Action,
Certification Of Settlement Class, And Proposed Settlement of Class
Action; (II) Settlement Hearing; And (III) Motion For An Award Of
Attorneys' Fees And Reimbursement Of Litigation Expenses (the
"Notice").

YOU ARE ALSO NOTIFIED that Lead Plaintiffs in the Action have
reached a proposed settlement of the Action for $3,000,000.00 in
cash (the "Settlement"), that, if approved, will resolve all claims
in the Action.

This Summary Notice relates to the proposed Settlement of claims in
a pending securities class action lawsuit brought by investors
alleging, among other things, that Defendants 22nd Century, Henry
Sicignano, III, and John T. Brodfuehrer (collectively, the
"Defendants") violated the federal securities laws by making
alleged misrepresentations or omissions regarding certain alleged
stock promotion articles and Defendants' alleged failure to
disclose an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission
("SEC") into a material weakness in 22nd Century's internal
controls, which Defendants deny.  

A hearing will be held on October 3, 2023 at 11:00 a.m., before the
Honorable Michael J. Roemer, United States Magistrate Judge, at the
United States District Court for the Western District of New York,
Robert H. Jackson United States Courthouse, 2 Niagara Square,
Buffalo, New York 14202, or by telephonic, video conferencing or
other electronic means, as posted on the website of the Claims
Administrator. The hearing will determine (i) whether the proposed
Settlement should be approved as fair, reasonable, and adequate;
(ii) whether the Action should be dismissed with prejudice against
Defendants, and the Releases specified and described in the
Stipulation And Agreement Of Settlement (and in the Notice) should
be granted; (iii) whether the proposed Plan of Allocation should be
approved as fair and reasonable; (iv) whether Lead Counsel's
application for an award of attorneys' fees and reimbursement of
Litigation Expenses should be approved, and (v) whether to award
Lead Plaintiff for reimbursement of Lead Plaintiffs' time and
expenses out of the Settlement Fund and pursuant to 15 U.S.C.
§78u-4(a)(4) in connection with their representation of the
Settlement Class and, if so, in what amount.

If you are a member of the Settlement Class, your rights will be
affected by the pending Action and the Settlement, and you may be
entitled to share in the Settlement Fund. If you have not yet
received the Notice and Claim Form, you may obtain copies of these
documents by contacting the Claims Administrator at 22nd Century
Securities Litigation, c/o Epiq, P.O. Box 3839, Portland, OR
97208-3839. Copies of the Notice and Claim Form can also be
downloaded from the website maintained by the Claims Administrator,
www.22ndCenturySecuritiesLitigation.com.

If you are a member of the Settlement Class, in order to be
potentially eligible to receive a payment under the proposed
Settlement, you must submit a Claim Form either online at the
Settlement website, www.22ndCenturySecuritiesLitigation.com, by
October 10, 2023, or by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail
postmarked no later than October 10, 2023. If you are a Settlement
Class Member and do not timely submit a proper Claim Form, you will
not be eligible to share in the distribution of the net proceeds of
the Settlement but you will nevertheless be bound by any judgments
or orders entered by the Court in the Action.

If you are a member of the Settlement Class and wish to exclude
yourself from the Settlement Class, you must submit a request for
exclusion such that it is received no later than September 12,
2023, in accordance with the instructions set forth in the Notice.
If you properly exclude yourself from the Settlement Class, you
will not be bound by any judgments or orders entered by the Court
in the Action and you will not be eligible to share in the proceeds
of the Settlement.

Any objections to the proposed Settlement, the proposed Plan of
Allocation, or Lead Counsel's motion for attorneys' fees and
reimbursement of expenses, must be filed with the Court and
delivered to representatives of Lead Counsel and Defendants'
counsel such that they are received no later than September 12,
2023, in accordance with the instructions set forth in the Notice.

Please do not contact the Court, the Clerk's office, 22nd Century,
or Defendants' counsel regarding this notice. All questions about
this notice, the proposed Settlement, or your eligibility to
participate in the Settlement should be directed to Lead Counsel or
the Claims Administrator.

Requests for the Notice and Claim Form should be made to:

22nd Century Securities Litigation
c/o Epiq
P.O. Box 3839
Portland, OR 97208-3839

Inquiries, other than requests for the Notice and Claim Form,
should be made to Lead Counsel:

POMERANTZ LLP
Jeremy A. Lieberman
Brian Calandra
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10016
jalieberman@pomlaw.com
bcalandra@pomlaw.com

Dated: August 7, 2023                                              
                                                           

By Order of the Court                                              
                                   
United States District Court                                       
                     
Western District of New York

URL: www.22ndCenturySecuritiesLitigation.com


3M CO: Attorney General Opposes Settlement in Contamination Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
PA Office of Attorney General reports that Attorney General
Michelle Henry, joining a coalition of 21 other state Attorneys
General, announced her opposition to a proposed class action
settlement that could shift the responsibility for the 3M Company's
contamination of Americans' drinking water supply back onto local
water systems and taxpayers.

Under the proposed settlement, water providers would withdraw
hundreds of lawsuits filed against 3M over its use of
polyfluoroalkyl substances -- commonly referred to as "PFAS," a
class of "forever chemicals" -- found in a wide range of consumer
products and firefighting foams. PFAS do not break down over time,
pollute groundwater and are harmful to human health.

The proposed settlement, which is subject to federal court
approval, offers a payout of at least $10.5 billion to public water
systems. The Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General joined
objections to the settlement, under the lead of California.

"Pennsylvanians have a right to clean water, and companies that
continue to produce and distribute products containing dangerous
forever chemicals that then contaminate our water deny us that
basic right," Attorney General Henry said. "3M's proposal not only
falls far short of meeting the financial burden inflicted on
communities left to clean up the PFAS, it also conveniently skirts
responsibility in the future, when the full scope of these
chemicals' harm will be realized."

The Pennsylvania OAG filings state, in part, that the proposed
settlement fails to fill the gap "between monies awarded to the
(water systems) and the actual cost to design, build, operate, and
maintain PFAS treatment systems . . ."

The proposed settlement would apply to nearly every public water
provider in the United States, even those that have not sued and
even those that have yet to test for the presence of PFAS in their
water. In return for waiving their claims, 3M would allegedly pay
out $10.5 to $12.5 billion to water providers, an amount that is
worth far less because of certain provisions that could ultimately
force water providers to reimburse 3M for many of its costs.

In the brief filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of
South Carolina, the coalition warns that:

Individual water providers would be bound by the proposed
settlement unless they proactively opt out, whether or not they
have sued 3M or already tested for PFAS. Troublingly, they would
have to make their opt-out decisions without knowing how much they
would actually receive and, in many cases, before knowing the
extent of contamination in their water supplies and the cost of
remediating it.

The proposed settlement contains an indemnification clause, which
shifts liability from 3M to water suppliers bound by settlement
because they decided not to proactively opt-out. For example, if a
cancer cluster develops in a PFAS-impacted community and the
victims sue 3M, 3M would likely be able to seek compensation from
the community's public water supplier for any amount it owed to the
victims, even an amount greater than the supplier received. As
such, the proposed settlement is worth far less than the advertised
$10.5 billion to $12.5 billion.

Joining in the opposition, along with Attorney General Henry, are
the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado,
Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico,
New York, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Wisconsin, as
well as the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. [GN]

3M COMPANY: AFFF Products Can Cause Cancer, Cain Suit Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
GILBERT CAIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA 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 PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants,
Case No. 2:23-cv-03550-RMG (D.S.C., July 21, 2023) is a class
action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate
warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment,
breach of express and implied warranties, and wantonness.

According to the complaint, the Defendants have failed to use
reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture,
labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and
distribution of aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products
containing synthetic, toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
collectively known as PFAS. The Defendants' AFFF products are
dangerous to human health because PFAS are highly toxic and
carcinogenic chemicals and can accumulate in the blood and body of
exposed individuals. The Defendants have also failed to warn public
entities and military members, including the Plaintiff, who they
knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products.
The Plaintiff used the Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products in
their intended manner, without significant change in the products'
condition due to inadequate warning about the products' danger. The
Plaintiff relied on the Defendants' instructions as to the proper
handling of the products, says the suit.

As a result of alleged exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products,
the Plaintiff was diagnosed with prostate cancer.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.

ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.

Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.

Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.

Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.

Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.

Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.

Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.

Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.

Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.

Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.

Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.

E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.

Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.

Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.

National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.

The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.

Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.

United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.

UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
         Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
         GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
         270 West Main Street
         Sayville, NY 11782
         Telephone: (631) 600-0000
         Facsimile: (631) 543-5450

                  - and –

         Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
         Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
         Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
         ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
         2160 Highland Avenue South
         Birmingham, AL 35205
         Telephone: (205) 328-9200
         Facsimile: (205) 328-9456

3M COMPANY: Cummings Sues Over Side Effects of Using AFFF Products
------------------------------------------------------------------
MARY M. CUMMINGS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA 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 PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants,
Case No. 2:23-cv-03523-RMG (D.S.C., July 21, 2023) is a class
action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate
warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment,
breach of express and implied warranties, and wantonness.

According to the complaint, the Defendants have failed to use
reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture,
labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and
distribution of aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products
containing synthetic, toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
collectively known as PFAS. The Defendants' AFFF products are
dangerous to human health because PFAS are highly toxic and
carcinogenic chemicals and can accumulate in the blood and body of
exposed individuals. The Defendants have also failed to warn public
entities and military members, including the Plaintiff, who they
knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products.
The Plaintiff used the Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products in
their intended manner, without significant change in the products'
condition due to inadequate warning about the products' danger. The
Plaintiff relied on the Defendants' instructions as to the proper
handling of the products, the suit alleges.

As a result of alleged exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products,
the Plaintiff was diagnosed with hypothyroidism.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.

ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.

Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.

Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.

Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.

Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.

Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.

Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.

Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.

Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.

Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.

Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.

E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.

Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.

Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.

National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.

The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.

Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.

United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.

UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         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
         Telephone: (850) 202-1010
         E-mail: dkreis@awkolaw.com
                 baylstock@awkolaw.com
                 jwitkin@awkolaw.com

3M COMPANY: Durham Product Liability Suit Removed to D. Minnesota
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled VICTOR L. DURHAM, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY, Case No.
STK-CV-UOE-2023-0004251, was removed to the U.S. District Court for
the District of Minnesota on July 21, 2023.

The Clerk of Court for the District of Minnesota assigned Case No.
0:23-cv-02187-JRT-TNL to the proceeding.

The Plaintiff seeks to hold 3M liable for alleged injuries that
occurred at federal enclaves or territories subject to the
exclusive jurisdiction of the United States in relation to his
military service.

3M Company is a multinational conglomerate corporation and
designer, marketer, developer, manufacturer, distributor of
firefighting equipment, including those with AFFF. It is located at
3M Center, St. Paul. Minnesota. [BN]

The Defendant is represented by:                                   
                                  
         
         Benjamin W. Hulse, Esq.
         Gene Hummel, Esq.
         NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP
         60 South Sixth Street, Suite 3100
         Minneapolis, MN 55402
         Telephone: (612) 321-2800
         E-mail: ben.hulse@nortonrosefulbright.com
                 gene.hummel@nortonrosefulbright.com

3M COMPANY: Exposed AFFF Products' Users to PFAS, Coakley Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TIMOTHY COAKLEY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA 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 PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants,
Case No. 2:23-cv-03521-RMG (D.S.C., July 21, 2023) is a class
action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate
warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment,
breach of express and implied warranties, and wantonness.

The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of exposure to the Defendants' aqueous film
forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn public entities and military
members, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably
come into contact with their AFFF products that use of and/or
exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due
to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals
and was diagnosed with testicular cancer, says the suit.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.

ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.

Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.

Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.

Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.

Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.

Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.

Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.

Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.

Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.

Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.

Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.

E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.

Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.

Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.

National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.

The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.

Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.

United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.

UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         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
         Telephone: (850) 202-1010
         E-mail: dkreis@awkolaw.com
                 baylstock@awkolaw.com
                 jwitkin@awkolaw.com

3M COMPANY: Exposed Military Members to PFAS, Mendoza Suit Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
GEORGE MENDOZA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA 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 PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants,
Case No. 2:23-cv-03531-RMG (D.S.C., July 21, 2023) is a class
action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate
warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment,
breach of express and implied warranties, and wantonness.

According to the complaint, the Defendants have failed to use
reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture,
labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and
distribution of aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products
containing synthetic, toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
collectively known as PFAS. The Defendants' AFFF products are
dangerous to human health because PFAS are highly toxic and
carcinogenic chemicals and can accumulate in the blood and body of
exposed individuals. The Defendants have also failed to warn public
entities and military members, including the Plaintiff, who they
knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products.
The Plaintiff used the Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products in
their intended manner, without significant change in the products'
condition due to inadequate warning about the products' danger. The
Plaintiff relied on the Defendants' instructions as to the proper
handling of the products, says the suit.

As a result of alleged exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products,
the Plaintiff was diagnosed with hyperthyroidism.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.

ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.

Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.

Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.

Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.

Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.

Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.

Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.

Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.

Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.

Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.

Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.

E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.

Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.

Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.

National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.

The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.

Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.

United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.

UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         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
         Telephone: (850) 202-1010
         E-mail: dkreis@awkolaw.com
                 baylstock@awkolaw.com
                 jwitkin@awkolaw.com

3M COMPANY: Faces Daniello Suit Over AFFF Products' Harmful Effects
-------------------------------------------------------------------
JACOB DANIELLO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA 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 PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants,
Case No. 2:23-cv-03527-RMG (D.S.C., July 21, 2023) is a class
action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate
warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment,
breach of express and implied warranties, and wantonness.

The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn public entities and military
members, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably
come into contact with their AFFF products that use of and/or
exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due
to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals
and was diagnosed with thyroid cancer, says the suit.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.

ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.

Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.

Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.

Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.

Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.

Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.

Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.

Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.

Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.

Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.

Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.

E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.

Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.

Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.

National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.

The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.

Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.

United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.

UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         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
         Telephone: (850) 202-1010
         E-mail: dkreis@awkolaw.com
                 baylstock@awkolaw.com
                 jwitkin@awkolaw.com

3M COMPANY: Frederick Suit Claims PFAS Exposure From AFFF Products
------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID FREDERICK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA 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 PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants,
Case No. 2:23-cv-03529-RMG (D.S.C., July 21, 2023) is a class
action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate
warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment,
breach of express and implied warranties, and wantonness.

According to the complaint, the Defendants have failed to use
reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture,
labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and
distribution of aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products
containing synthetic, toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
collectively known as PFAS. The Defendants' AFFF products are
dangerous to human health because PFAS are highly toxic and
carcinogenic chemicals and can accumulate in the blood and body of
exposed individuals. The Defendants have also failed to warn public
entities and military members, including the Plaintiff, who they
knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products.
The Plaintiff used the Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products in
their intended manner, without significant change in the products'
condition due to inadequate warning about the products' danger. The
Plaintiff relied on the Defendants' instructions as to the proper
handling of the products, says the suit.

As a result of alleged exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products,
the Plaintiff was diagnosed with prostate cancer.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.

ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.

Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.

Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.

Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.

Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.

Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.

Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.

Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.

Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.

Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.

Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.

E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.

Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.

Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.

National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.

The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.

Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.

United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.

UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         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
         Telephone: (850) 202-1010
         E-mail: dkreis@awkolaw.com
                 baylstock@awkolaw.com
                 jwitkin@awkolaw.com

3M COMPANY: Heitzenrader Sues Over Complications From AFFF Products
-------------------------------------------------------------------
RICK HEITZENRADER, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA 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 PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants,
Case No. 2:23-cv-03551-RMG (D.S.C., July 21, 2023) is a class
action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate
warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment,
breach of express and implied warranties, and wantonness.

The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn public entities and firefighter
trainees, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably
come into contact with their AFFF products that use of and/or
exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due
to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals
and was diagnosed with prostate cancer, says the suit.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.

ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.

Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.

Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.

Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.

Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.

Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.

Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.

Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.

Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.

Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.

Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.

E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.

Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.

Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.

National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.

The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.

Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.

United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.

UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
         Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
         GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
         270 West Main Street
         Sayville, NY 11782
         Telephone: (631) 600-0000
         Facsimile: (631) 543-5450

                  - and –

         Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
         Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
         Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
         ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
         2160 Highland Avenue South
         Birmingham, AL 35205
         Telephone: (205) 328-9200
         Facsimile: (205) 328-9456

3M COMPANY: Melanson Sues Over AFFF Products' Risk to Human Health
------------------------------------------------------------------
WILLIAM MELANSON, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA 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 PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants,
Case No. 2:23-cv-03530-RMG (D.S.C., July 21, 2023) is a class
action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate
warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment,
breach of express and implied warranties, and wantonness.

The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn public entities and military
members, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably
come into contact with their AFFF products that use of and/or
exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due
to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals
and was diagnosed with hyperthyroidism and hypothyroidism, the suit
alleges.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.

ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.

Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.

Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.

Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.

Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.

Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.

Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.

Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.

Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.

Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.

Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.

E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.

Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.

Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.

National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.

The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.

Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.

United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.

UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         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
         Telephone: (850) 202-1010
         E-mail: dkreis@awkolaw.com
                 baylstock@awkolaw.com
                 jwitkin@awkolaw.com

3M COMPANY: Reid Sues Over Injury Sustained From AFFF Products
--------------------------------------------------------------
CARL REID, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA 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 PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants,
Case No. 2:23-cv-03534-RMG (D.S.C., July 21, 2023) is a class
action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate
warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment,
breach of express and implied warranties, and wantonness.

The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn public entities and military
members, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably
come into contact with their AFFF products that use of and/or
exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due
to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals
and was diagnosed with prostate cancer, says the suit.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.

ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.

Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.

Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.

Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.

Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.

Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.

Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.

Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.

Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.

Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.

Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.

Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.

Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.

E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.

Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.

Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.

National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.

The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.

Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.

United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.

UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         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
         Telephone: (850) 202-1010
         E-mail: dkreis@awkolaw.com
                 baylstock@awkolaw.com
                 jwitkin@awkolaw.com

3M COMPANY: Settles PFAS Water Contamination Class Suit for $10B
----------------------------------------------------------------
Irvin Jackson of AboutLawsuits.com reports that following reports
of a possible $10 billion PFAS water contamination settlement
agreement with a number of U.S. cities, 3M Company asked a federal
judge to delay the start of the first trial, which was slated to
begin on July 28, 2023 involving claims for damages incurred by on
Florida city removing the toxic chemicals from the local water
supply.

3M Company and other manufacturers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (PFAS), as well as fire safety equipment that contains
the toxic chemicals, face thousands of lawsuits involving
allegations that the companies knew about health risks associated
with the "forever chemicals", but continued to manufacture and
distribute the chemicals.

The chemicals have been widely used in aqueous film-forming foam
(AFFF) products used by the U.S. military and local fire
departments to combat fuel based fires, and have been linked to the
development of various types of cancer and other injuries. However,
runoff fro the fire fighting foam has also caused widespread water
contamination in many communities, leaving local cities and water
suppliers to deal with the clean up costs.

While most of the U.S. claims against 3M Company, DuPont,
Chemguard, Inc., Tyco Fire Products and other manufacturers involve
firefighter cancer lawsuits, brought by individuals who claim they
developed testicular cancer, kidney cancer, pancreatic cancer,
prostate cancer and other forms of cancer from exposure during
their firefighting careers, the first case to go before a jury was
set to begin this week, involving damages sustained by the City of
Stuart, Florida, which indicates that it has spent $100 million
removing the chemicals from the local water supply.

Given common questions of fact and law presented in the litigation,
all AFFF lawsuits are currently centralized before U.S. District
Judge Richard M. Gergel in the District of South Carolina, for
coordinated discovery, pretrial proceedings and a series of early
bellwether trials. However, just as the first case was set to
begin, 3M Company asked the court to delay the trial, indicating it
believes it is on the verge of a final PFAS water contamination
settlement.

$10 Billion PFAS Water Contamination Settlement

Late last week, reports began to spread that 3M was close to
finalizing a $10 billion settlement with numerous cities with
pending PFAS water contamination lawsuits. The reports began after
several other defendants, including Chemours Co., DuPont de Nemours
Inc., and Corteva Inc., announced they had reached a $1.19 billion
settlement with U.S. public water systems to resolve their role in
the claims.

While 3M has not released any statements confirming the settlement,
based on representations made by the company, Judge Gergel did
agree to delay the start of the first trial this morning.

The reported settlement agreement came just a couple weeks after
the fire safety company Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. filed for bankruptcy
protection due to the expected cost of resolving thousands of
firefighter foam lawsuits.

PFAS Water Contamination Risks

PFAS include a group of over 9,000 man-made chemicals, which have
been widely used in fire safety equipment and AFFF products in
recent decades. While the chemicals are also widely found in
products like non-stick pans, pizza boxes and other material, most
of the problems linked to the chemicals stems from direct exposure
to firefighting foam while combating fuel based fires, or releases
into the environment around military bases, airports and other
firefighter training locations.

The number of claims is likely to continue to grow for decades,
given the nature of PFAS, which earned the name "forever chemicals"
due to their persistence in the environment, meaning they will
likely continue to be a toxic threat to water supplies and human
health for a long time to come, and the defendants could be held
liable for much of that as lawsuits continue to be filed for
years.

If the 3M settlement is not finalized, the bellwether lawsuit filed
by the City of Stuart, Florida will be closely watched to help
gauge how juries are likely to respond to certain evidence and
testimony that will be brought throughout the litigation.

AFFF Firefighter Cancer Lawsuits

In addition to claims brought by local cities and water providers
over the damages caused by PFAS chemicals, 3M Company and the other
manufacturers continue to face individual lawsuits brought by
former firefighters diagnosed with various types of cancer.

In late May, the parties were directed to select 28 personal injury
claims for the second bellwether pool involving plaintiffs who say
they were exposed to AFFF through drinking water contamination, as
opposed to direct exposure.

These cases will include eight kidney cancer claims, eight
testicular cancer claims, eight thyroid disease claims and four
ulcerative colitis claims. In addition, they will be limited to
individuals alleging they were exposed to contaminated water near
Peterson Air Force Base, Colorado Springs Municipal Airport, the
Willow Grove Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base and the Naval Air
Warfare Center in Warminister.

The order calls for the parties to select the cases by July 28, and
propose a joint list of selected or proposed cases to the court by
August 11.

If the current efforts do not end in a PFAS water contamination
lawsuit settlement, the outcome of the early bellwether trials will
not have any binding impact on other claims. However, if they
proceed, it is expected that the amount of any AFFF lawsuit payout
awarded by juries may influence future firefighter cancer
settlement negotiations to resolve the litigation. [GN]

AETNA LIFE: Coverage Suit Remain Class Action Amid Cert. Ruling
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jacklyn Wille of Bloomberg Law reports that a lawsuit challenging
Aetna Life Insurance Co.'s coverage of certain spinal surgeries
will remain a class action despite a recent ruling making it harder
to certify classes in health insurance coverage disputes.

Aetna asked Judge Cormac J. Carney to decertify the 239-person
class in light of the Ninth Circuit's January decision in Wit v.
United Behavioral Health, which reversed the certification of a
class of health plan participants who sought "reprocessing" of
their benefit claims. The appeals court held that reprocessing
isn't an appropriate class-wide remedy for benefit claims under the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act. [GN]

AETNA MEDICAID: Faces Class Action Suit Over Wage Theft
-------------------------------------------------------
Shweta Watwe of Bloomberg Law reports that a former call center
agent for Aetna Medicaid Administrators LLC brought a proposed
class action on July 28, 2023 over the company's alleged failure to
pay its agents for off-the-clock work.

Agents at the CVS Health Corp. unit were instructed to be "phone
ready" as soon as their shifts start, which meant they had to spend
time logging in and booting up their computers before clocking in,
according to a complaint was filed in the US District for the
District of Connecticut.

Crystal Palmer and other agents "were pressured to work substantial
amounts of uncompensated, off-the-clock time as part of their job."
[GN]

AMC ENTERTAINMENT: Bretto Alleges Video Privacy Violations
----------------------------------------------------------
JASMINE BRETTO; and NAOMI KOPINSKY, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. AMC ENTERTAINMENT
HOLDINGS, INC., Defendant, Case No. 2:23-cv-02317 (D. Kan., July
19, 2023) alleges Defendant's violation of the Video Privacy
Protection Act.

The Plaintiffs allege in the complaint that the Defendant violates
the VPPA by knowingly and intentionally disclosing consumers'
personally identifiable information" when they purchase movie
tickets on the Defendant's Website. Specifically, when a Facebook
user is logged into Facebook and purchases a movie ticket on the
Defendant's Website, it discloses to Facebook the name of the movie
title the specific Facebook user purchased a ticket to see. Because
many users stay logged into Facebook for prolonged periods of time,
discovery will show that The Defendant has transmitted PII to
Facebook in violation of the VPPA on thousands of occasions, say
the Plaintiffs.

AMC ENTERTAINMENT HOLDINGS, INC. operates as a holding company. The
Company, through its subsidiaries, provides theatrical exhibition,
movie screening, food distribution, online ticket booking, and
other related services.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Paul D. Sinclair, Esq.
          COWING & MENDELSON, P.C.
          3300 N.E. Ralph Powell Road
          Lee’s Summit, MO 64064
          Telephone: (816) 373-8881
          Email: paulsinclair219@gmail.com

               - and -

          Sherrie R. Savett, Esq.
          Lane L. Vines, Esq.
          BERGER MONTAGUE PC
          1818 Market Street, Suite 3600
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (215) 875-3000
          Email: ssavett@bm.net
                 lvines@bm.net

               - and -

          Sophia M. Rios, Esq.
          BERGER MONTAGUE PC
          401 B Street, Suite 2000
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 489-0300
          Email: srios@bm.net

ASCENDANT CAPITAL: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due Sept. 15
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KINNIE MA INDIVIDUAL
RETIREMENT ACCOUNT, DEAN CROOKS, JEFFERY S. GRAMM INDIVIDUAL
RETIREMENT ACCOUNT, STACY GREASOR INDIVIDUAL RETIREMENT ACCOUNT,
CORRI RENE EDEN, CATHERINE KOMINOS, KAREN LOCH, VICTOR WADE
INDIVIDUAL RETIREMENT ACCOUNT, ROBERT A. STONE LIVING TRUST, DATED
JANUARY 9, 1992, AS AMENDED MAY 24, 2005, SHIRLEY STONE LIVING
TRUST, DATED JANUARY 9, 1992, AS AMENDED MAY 24, 2005, KAZUE M.
BELL, MILLICENT R. BARASCH, LORETTA DEHAY, and THE STANLEY S. AND
MILLICENT R. BARASCH LIVING TRUST, v. ASCENDANT CAPITAL, LLC, ET
AL., Case No. 1:19-cv-01050-RP (W.D. Tex.), the Hon. Judge Susan
Hightower entered an order directing the counsel to appear via Zoom
for a hearing on the Defendants' Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending
Resolution of Related Criminal Case at 2:30 p.m. Wednesday, July
26, 2023.

  -- Each side will have 30 minutes for argument. The parties will

     receive a link for the Zoom meeting from courtroom deputy
Celine
     Valverde (Celine_Valverde@txwd.uscourts.gov).

The Court further modifies the following deadlines in the operative
scheduling orders, entered August 29, 2022, and April 27, 2023:

   -- The Plaintiffs' Motion for Class            Sept. 15, 2023
      Certification:

   -- Deadline to Complete Discovery from         Sept. 29, 2023
      the Plaintiffs' Rebuttal Expert(s):

   -- The Defendants' Opposition to the           October 27, 2023
      Plaintiffs' Motion for Class
      Certification:

   -- The Plaintiffs' Reply in Support            Dec. 1, 2023
      of Motion for Class Certification:

Ascendant Capital is a Colorado based private investment & advisory
services firm focused on the residential whole loan mortgage
market.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3qhNi5N at no extra charge.[CC]

AUDIBLE INC: Wins Summary Judgment on Breach of Contract Claim
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GOLDEN UNICORN
ENTERPRISES, INC. et al., on behalf of themselves and all those
similarly situated v. AUDIBLE, INC., Case No. 21-CV-7059 (JMF)
(S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Jesse M. Furman entered an order
granting Audible's motion for summary judgment with respect to the
Plaintiffs' breach of contract claim and with respect to the
Plaintiffs' implied covenant claim to the extent it is based on the
allegation that Audible "surreptitiously" deducted
the Plaintiffs' royalties.

The Court grants Audible's motion to preclude Joseph Egan's
testimony and denies the Plaintiffs' motion to preclude Juli
Saitz's testimony as moot.

The Court otherwise reserves judgment on the Plaintiffs' motions
pending supplemental briefing.

Audible is a provider of audiobook content and offers a program
called ACX, which allows independent authors to produce and publish
audiobooks.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3qaxTUU at no extra charge.[CC]
 


BANK OF AMERICA: Gueney Sues Over Deceptive Wire Transfer Fees
--------------------------------------------------------------
MATTHEW M. GUINEY, ON BEHALF OF E.G., HIS MINOR CHILD, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BANK
OF AMERICA, N.A., Defendant, Case No. 2:23-cv-03905 (D.N.Y., July
21, 2023) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair, deceptive, and
unlawful practice of misleading personal accountholders into paying
undisclosed fees on incoming wire transfers.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant conceals
and omits the fact it charges Incoming Wire Transfer Fees on New
Jersey personal accountholders when they receive funds to their
accounts via domestic wire in the amount of $15, and a $35 fee for
international wires.

The Plaintiff and similarly situated personal accountholders are
shocked when -- after no warning and no disclosure -- they are
assessed Incoming Wire Transfer Fees after receiving wire deposits
into their accounts. The Plaintiff and others like him were charged
fees for incoming wires when they had no opportunity to review,
limit, or avoid the fee, says the suit.

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. is a banking institution in the U.S.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James E. Cecchi, Esq.
          Kevin G. Cooper, Esq.
          Brian F. O'Toole, Esq.
          Jordan M. Steele, Esq.
          CARELLA BYRNE CECCHI
          OLSTEIN BRODY & AGNELLO, P.C.
          5 Becker Farm Road
          Roseland, NJ 07068
          Telephone: (973) 994-1700
          Email: jcecchi@carellabyrne.com
                 kcooper@carellabyrne.com
                 botoole@carellabyrne.com
                 jsteele@carellabyrne.com

BAYER HEALTHCARE: Hansen Sues Over Mislabeled Pet Collars
---------------------------------------------------------
STEPHEN HANSEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BAYER HEALTHCARE LLC; BAYER CORPORATION;
BAYER AG; and ELANCO ANIMAL HEALTH, INC., Defendants, Case No.
1:23-cv-04743 (N.D. Ill., July 21, 2023) alleges that the
Defendants sell and market the Seresto flea and tick collars which
have been associated with tens of thousands of pet injuries and
approximately 2,500 pet deaths.

According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, the Defendants have
maintained and represented that Seresto Collars are safe for pets
to use. Despite the Defendants' claims, Seresto Collars have
resulted in millions of dollars in damages for pet owners, both in
the form of collars that they overpaid for or would have never
purchased had consumers known of Seresto's dangers, and also in
veterinary and other medical expenses incurred by pet owners with
pets injured by the Seresto Collar and its pesticides, the suit
claims.

Had the Defendants disclosed the existence of serious safety risks
associated with Seresto Collars and made the Plaintiff Hansen aware
of such risks, the  Plaintiff would not have purchased the Seresto
Collars at all, and certainly would not have paid a premium for
them, says the suit.

BAYER HEALTHCARE LLC discovers and manufactures healthcare and
medical products. The Company offers products and services such as
pharmaceuticals, blood glucose monitoring systems, lancing devices,
oral contraceptives, and diagnostic testing. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Bradford B. Lear, Esq.
          Todd C. Werts, Esq.
          LEAR WERTS LLP
          103 Ripley Street
          Columbia, MO 65201
          Telephone: (573) 875-1991
          Facsimile: (573) 279-0024
          Email: lear@learwerts.com
                 werts@learwerts.com

               - and -

          Rachel Soffin, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
          PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC
          3833 Central Ave.
          St. Petersburg, FL 33713
          Telephone: (865) 247-0080
          Email: rsoffin@milberg.com

               - and -

          Michael R. Reese, Esq.
          REESE LLP
          100 West 93rd Street, 16th Floor
          New York, NY 10025
          Telephone: (212) 643-0500
          Email: mreese@reesellp.com

               - and -

          Michael Williams, Esq.
          WILLIAMS DIRKS DAMERON LLC
          1100 Main Street, Suite 2600
          Kansas City, MO 64105
          Telephone: (816) 945-7110
          Facsimile: (816) 945-7118
          Email: mwilliams@williamsdirks.com

               - and -

          Carl V. Malmstrom, Esq.
          WOLF HALDENSTEIN ADLER
          FREEMAN & HERZ LLC
          111 W. Jackson Blvd., Suite 1700
          Chicago, IL 60604
          Telephone: (312) 984-0000
          Facsimile: (212) 545-4653
          Email: malmstrom@whafh.com

BRITISH COLUMBIA: G.D. Data Breach Class Suit Certification Denied
------------------------------------------------------------------
Connor Bildfell and Grace Simpson of McCarthy Tetrault report that
in G.D. v. South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority,
the B.C. Supreme Court declined to certify a proposed class action
against a B.C. public body that experienced a data security
incident. The decision teaches that a plaintiff's bare assertion
that a defendant willfully violated their privacy contrary to the
B.C. Privacy Act cannot pass muster at the certification stage, and
B.C. public bodies owe no private law duty of care to comply with
s. 30 of the B.C. Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy
Act ("FIPPA"), which requires B.C. public bodies to protect
personal information by making reasonable security arrangements.

Background

A group of former public sector employees filed a proposed class
action against their former employer's parent company in connection
with a data security incident that allegedly affected their
personal information. At the certification stage, the plaintiffs
made two main claims: (1) the defendant breached s. 1 of the
Privacy Act by willfully and without claim of right violating their
privacy; and (2) the defendant breached a private law duty of care
to comply with s. 30 of FIPPA by failing to protect their personal
information by making reasonable security arrangements.

A bare assertion that the defendant willfully violated privacy is
insufficient

The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant's actions and omissions
"knowingly or recklessly caused, enabled, or resulted in" the data
security incident. But the court found that these "bald and
conclusory allegations" failed to meet the standard required at the
certification stage. Specifically, the plaintiffs failed to plead
any material facts to support any willful violation of privacy by
the defendant, as distinct from the third-party cybercriminals who
willfully caused the incident. Absent any material facts that could
support a willful violation of privacy by the defendant, the court
concluded that the Privacy Act claim was bound to fail.

A statutory duty does not automatically create an actionable
private law duty of care

The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant owed them a private law
duty of care to protect their personal information based on s. 30
of FIPPA. But the court noted that B.C. courts have consistently
rejected the idea that s. 30 of FIPPA creates any actionable
private law duty of care. Although it requires B.C. public bodies
to protect personal information by making reasonable security
arrangements, it does not create an actionable private law duty of
care, and public policy considerations -- including the spectre of
indeterminate liability for every B.C. public body that collects
personal information -- militate against recognizing such a duty.
Absent a duty of care, the court concluded that the negligence
claim was bound to fail.

Because the plaintiffs failed to meet the first requirement for
certification -- pleading cause of action -- the court denied
certification.

Key lessons

G.D. teaches two key lessons for private and public organizations
in British Columbia. First, it teaches that a plaintiff's bare
assertion that a defendant willfully violated their privacy
contrary to the Privacy Act, which applies to both private and
public organizations in British Columbia, cannot pass muster at the
certification stage. Although a plaintiff need not prove their case
to achieve certification, a plaintiff must at least plead materials
facts that, if proven, would amount to a valid cause of action
against a named defendant.

Second, it teaches that B.C. public bodies owe no private law duty
of care to comply with s. 30 of FIPPA. Although B.C. public bodies
have a statutory duty to protect personal information in their
custody or control, this duty does not translate into a private law
duty of care actionable in negligence. [GN]

BRITISH COLUMBIA: Hearing of Lemon Creek Class Action Set Jan. 2025
-------------------------------------------------------------------
John Boivin of Yahoo! News reports that residents of the Slocan
Valley will finally have their day in court seeking compensation
for the damage caused when 35,000 litres of jet fuel spilled into
Lemon Creek a decade ago this week.

The class-action lawsuit for the 2013 spill is set to be heard by a
judge for eight weeks, beginning in January of 2025, the lawyer for
residents has told the Valley Voice. The announcement by the class
action lawyers came just before the 10th anniversary of the spill,
which took place on July 26, 2013.

"There's always the prospect that any litigation could resolve
itself by way of settlement," says David Aaron, a lawyer heading up
the civil litigation. "But in the absence of a settlement, those
are the scheduled trial dates."

The fuel spill occurred when a driver hauling a tanker load of
helicopter fuel took a wrong turn while heading for a wildfire crew
muster station. After driving up the forest service road about a
kilometer, the shoulder gave way and the truck tipped into Lemon
Creek. Nearly 35,000 litres of fuel spilled into the creek. Cleanup
efforts took more than a month and residents were forced out of
their homes, reporting nausea from fumes and blistering if they
came in contact with the fuel. Nearly 2,700 properties were
evacuated for a day, and even when they returned home they were
warned not to drink water from the creek or river, stay out of both
water bodies, and not to eat any food from their gardens if they
could smell fuel.

The lawsuit, first launched just a month after the July 2013 spill,
is in the name of Robert Kirk, who owns 51 acres of rural land
about six kilometres from the mouth of Lemon Creek. He woke up the
morning after the spill to a vicious headache and heard his horse
coughing. He found a back eddy had collected fuel from the spill
the night before into the wetlands on his property. His claim says
he found dead wildlife on his land, and that other common animals
had since disappeared.

But Kirk is only the named plaintiff; the class action launched by
Aaron covers anyone living in the evacuation zone on July 26, 2013
- estimated to be around 600 people in total. Anyone forced to
evacuate that night may be eligible for compensation.

Long delays

Two provincial government ministries - Forests, Lands and Natural
Resource Operations, and Transportation and Infrastructure - as
well as Executive Flight Centre (the aviation fuel supplier), Danny
Lasante (the fuel truck driver) and Transwest Helicopters - are all
listed as defendants.

"The defendants are all pointing the finger at each other as being
responsible," Aaron says. " . . . it is now 10 years after the
spill, and there's been no compensation . . ."

Since launching, the case has had a tortuous path through the court
system. It was first certified as a class action suit by a judge in
2017, only to have that decision appealed. When the higher courts
directed the trial judge to make changes to his decision, he
complied, and recertified the action again - only to have it
appealed again. This time, however, the appeal was rejected, and
the case allowed to proceed.

"The defendants resisted, over the course of nine years, the
certification of the action under the Class Proceedings Act," notes
Aaron. "And they did so after the action was certified by the BC
Supreme Court in March 2017. They appealed the order . . . It was
very clear that we had a defined and delineated class on behalf of
which we could propose class proceedings."

Aaron notes nine years on, evacuees are still waiting for
compensation for the disruption to their lives, and many are even
waiting for reimbursement for their expenses during the 24-hour
evacuation.

"They've been left to wait, but that's all right, because they are
patient," he says. "We are willing to do whatever it takes to
proceed with this litigation to the point of resolution. After 10
years and two lower court certification orders, and two surviving
appeals, we're still at it, and we are happy to provide notice to
the class that the action is now certified, which is readily
proceeding to trial."

The first stage of the civil trial will see the plaintiffs ask the
court to determine if any of the defendants owed a duty of care to
the people in the class action. If so, the court will be asked to
find they were negligent and breached this duty. The court will
also be asked if it finds the defendants acted or failed to act in
a way to cause the evacuation order, and if that order and water
advisory amount to unreasonable interference in the enjoyment of
their properties. It will also be asked to find if the defendants
caused or contributed to the spill.

"Basically this class action deals with loss of use and enjoyment
of property, as well as diminution of property value," says Aaron.

If the court finds the answer to those questions is 'yes,' then the
court will be asked to assign liability to the defendants - how
much they owe in damages.

Though it's been ten years since the spill, and another year and a
half to go before a judge begins to hear arguments, Aaron says the
system is working - and that's because of community strength.

"This is a story of the power of collective action," he says. "The
Slocan Valley is the perfect sociological substrate for class
proceedings because it is a well-integrated community with a strong
sense of common purpose, and quite a potent sense of activism and
sense of entitlement."

Defining 'class'

Anyone who owned, leased, rented or occupied a property in the
evacuation zone (about one kilometre on either side of Lemon Creek
and the Slocan River, including a section of the Kootenay River at
its junction with the Slocan) are automatically part of the class
action. They don't have to do anything to be included. They won't
have to pay legal fees (which will come out of the settlement pot)
nor would they be held liable to pay fees if the class action is
lost.

Anyone who wants to fight the case on their own has to opt out of
the class by notifying David Rosenberg, Aaron's law partner and
class counsel, by August 31. Non-participants won't be eligible for
any compensation from a settlement should they opt out.

More information can be found in a legal notice on page 25 of the
June 29 edition of the Valley Voice, or by contacting
support@rosenberglaw.ca.

This isn't the only potential class action suit. A separate action
is being contemplated by a local farmer for personal injury as a
result of exposure to the spill. That civil action has yet to be
registered - it's using the Kirk action as a "trailblazer," Aaron
says, to settle arguments of fact before proceeding. [GN]

CALGARY STAMPEDE: Funding in Abuse Suit Pursued Even After Deal
---------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Graveland of The Peterborough Examiner reports that Alberta
Premier Danielle Smith says the province won't pull funding from
the Calgary Stampede after the partial settlement of a class-action
lawsuit over the sexual abuse of young boys in its performance
school.

"(It's) the premier festival in Alberta and we just had a very
glorious and exciting and successful 10 days," Smith said at a
press conference in Calgary after announcing funding to fight human
trafficking.

Smith says she will be checking with the Stampede's Young Canadians
School of Performing Arts on its current protocols and how it's
ensuring the safety of young participants.

On July 27, 2023, Calgary member of Parliament George Chahal called
on the federal government to temporarily withdraw funding from the
Stampede. He said the organization has lost people's trust.

"Federal funding should only be reconsidered when the victims
themselves feel that genuine accountability and reconciliation have
occurred," he wrote in an online post.
In 2018, Phillip Heerema was sentenced to 10 years in prison after
he admitted to using his position with the performance school to
lure and groom six boys into sexual relationships.

The lawsuit alleges the performance group failed in its hiring and
supervision of Heerema, that it created or permitted an atmosphere
tolerant of inappropriate sexual behaviour, and that it didn't
adequately investigate and act on one or more complaints.

The school is operated by the Calgary Stampede Foundation.
Three dozen plaintiffs are listed in the lawsuit -- all men who
were students, employees, contractors or volunteers at the
performance school. Their lawyer has said others may still join the
claim.

The lawsuit settlement involves an admission of negligence and
breach of duty, but it must still be approved by a judge. The
Stampede would pay damages that are to be worked out later this
summer.

The Stampede has apologized and said in settling the lawsuit it
takes responsibility in the hopes of helping the victims heal.

On July 28, 2023, Stampede CEO Joel Cowley said the organization
hears and respects concerns about what it knew and when, and that
it took immediate action upon learning of abuse allegations in
2014.

"While we can't change the past, we remain committed to doing
everything possible to guard against anything similar ever
happening again and have taken many meaningful steps over the past
nine years to enhance the safety and wellness of our youth
participants," Cowley said in an email.

The not-for-profit Stampede received about $12 million from the
federal government last year to help it recover from the COVID-19
pandemic. The Stampede's 2023 budget estimation prepared last year
and posted online shows it was not counting on federal funding this
year.

The province spends about $6 million dollars annually on the
Stampede. It approved a grant of over $7 million dollars in 2019.

Canadian Heritage did not say if it might halt federal dollars.

Alberta NDP leader Rachel Notley said she shares Chahal's concerns
and her heart goes out to the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. She said
she wants to know more about what happened.

"I'm appalled and quite honestly, was not aware of the scope of
this problem," she said.

One of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit said Chahal "hit the nail on
the head" by calling for funding to be stopped until the Stampede
is fully accountable.

"I don't think anyone's trying to get the Calgary Stampede
cancelled," he told The Canadian Press in an interview.

"That is not our goal and that is not what needs to be done for
justice to be served. But it's very clear that the Calgary Stampede
still hasn't fully faced what happened in the past."

This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 28,
2023.

-- With files from Ritika Dubey in Edmonton

Note to readers: This is a corrected story. An earlier version
misspelled the last name of Stampede CEO Joel Cowley. [GN]

CANOPY GROWTH: Kantner Sues Over Drop in Share Price
----------------------------------------------------
CHRISTIANN KANTNER, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CANOPY GROWTH CORPORATION; DAVID
KLEIN; JUDY HONG, and MICHAEL LEE, Defendants, Case
1:23-cv-06266-LGS (C.D. Cal., July 21, 2023) is a class action on
behalf of persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired
Canopy Growth securities between June 1, 2021 and May 10, 2023,
inclusive, the Plaintiff seeks to pursue claims against the
Defendants under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange
Act").

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that throughout the Class
Period, the Defendants made materially false and misleading
statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts
about the Company's business, operations, and prospects.
Specifically, the Defendants failed to disclose to investors that:
(i) issues with Canopy Growth's BioSteel business, including, inter
alia, aged inventory and overspending, had been significantly
hampering the Company's profitability; (ii) there were material
weaknesses in the Company's internal controls over accounting and
financial reporting; (iii) as a result, the Company improperly
booked sales of its BioSteel business unit; (iv) as a result, the
Company's revenue was overstated; and (v) as a result of the
foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's
business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading
and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

As a result of the Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the
precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's
securities, Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered
significant losses and damages, says the suit.

CANOPY GROWTH CORPORATION is a producer of medical marijuana. The
Company's group of brands represents distinct voices and market
positions designed to appeal to an array of customers, doctors and
strategic industry partners.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

CHILDREN'S PLACE: Sells PFAS-Laced School Uniform, Suit Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
PRNewswire of StreetInsider.com reports that a class action lawsuit
was filed in Illinois federal court by Bradley/Grombacher LLP,
alleging that children's clothing store, The Children's Place, sold
schools uniforms which contain PFAS or "forever chemicals" which
are known to be harmful to children.

The lawsuit was brought by Angala Garland, a mother whose child
wore just such a uniform. The lawsuit alleges these uniforms are
marketed toward parents of school-age children and intended to be
worn roughly 40 hours per week. These uniforms allegedly contain
harmful chemicals according to the suit, known safety hazards to
children as well as to the environment.

"Exposing kids to these levels of toxins day in and day out for
years at a time is an extremely risky behavior," said lead attorney
Kiley Grombacher of Bradley/Grombacher. "Industry-standard tests
were performed on the uniforms in question, and they confirmed the
existence of these harmful chemicals from The Children's Place."

The suit also alleges that because the children who wear the
uniforms have a lower body weight, their prolonged periods of using
the uniforms puts them at greater risk. The lawsuit also states
that The Children's Place knowingly added PFAS to the uniforms.

The case is Angala Garland et al. v. The Children's Place, U.S.D.C
Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division, Case No.
1:23-cv-04899. To read the complaint, click here.

About Bradley/Grombacher LLP
When you find yourself in need of taking legal action against
another party in a dispute, turn to the attorneys at
Bradley/Grombacher for help. Our lawyers have more than 50 years of
combined experience that can be put to work to help you get the
fair and just compensation you deserve in a dispute involving
employment law, consumer law, and personal injury law. [GN]

COLUMBIA, SC: Judge Denies Class Action Over Emergency Evacuation
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Clara Faith of WACH reports that a Richland County judge denying a
request this month for a class action lawsuit tied to the emergency
evacuation of Allen Benedict Court.

In January 2019, two men died of carbon monoxide poisoning and more
than 400 residents were pulled out of the public housing complex
after several gas leaks were found at the complex.

Attorney David Proffitt represents two former tenants.

"I had asked the court to make that case the currently pending
lawsuit a class action lawsuit," said Proffitt. He added, "will
represent all the former tenants to try to collect damage against
Columbia Housing."

This ruling means former tenants must file individual claims
against Columbia Housing.

Wach Fox News, Clara Faith asked Proffitt, "How do you feel about
it being denied by the judge?"

Proffitt answered, "Well we were surprised, because in our view and
the plaintiff view it was an appropriate case for class action
because the common issues of law, common issues of fact, sort of
the fact that everyone was in the same boat."

Proffitt shared his biggest concern is informing other former
tenants about the ruling.

Residents never moved back to Allen Benedict Court because it was
determined to be a hazard. The complex has since been demolished.
He shared although it's been four years clients are still living
the nightmare.

"They remember it vividly and it only takes a couple of questions,
and they remember the headaches, the heart aches, the stress and
the problems," said Proffitt. [GN]

CULA LLC: Ajayi Files Suit in D. New Jersey
-------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against CULA, LLC. The case
is styled as Adenike Ajayi, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. CULA, LLC, Case No. 2:23-cv-04014-JXN-JBC
(D.N.J., July 26, 2023).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract for Breach of
Contract.

CULA -- https://www.cula.com/ -- provides best-in-class program
assistance, analytics reporting, compliance support, dealer
management tools and member services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ari Hillel Marcus, Esq.
          MARCUS & ZELMAN LLC
          701 Cookman Avenue, Suite 300
          Asbury Park, NJ 07712
          Phone: (732) 695-3282
          Fax: (732) 298-6256
          Email: ari@marcuszelman.com


DISCOVER FINANCIAL: Capp Sues Over Improper Business Practices
--------------------------------------------------------------
CAPP, INC.; YOUNG PEOPLES DAY CAMPS INC.; and KMJA DAY CAMPS, INC.,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs v. DISCOVER FINANCIAL SERVICES; DFS SERVICES, LLC; and
DISCOVER BANK, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-04676 (N.D. Ill., July
19, 2023) is an action alleging the Defendants' ongoing fraudulent
business practices involving a scheme to defraud and conceal the
misclassification of interchange fees in millions of transactions
of hard working business owners.

According to the complaint, for an untold number of years, the
Defendants have been engaged in the misclassification scheme within
its own company and utilizing the services of credit card
processors who collaborated in the scheme and benefitted from the
proceeds, while allowing fraudulent practices to remain hidden from
merchants. When the Defendant Bank issues a credit card, it
provides every account a classification. That classification is a
central variable that dictates the interchange fee rate paid by a
merchant on a card purchase transaction. Credit card accounts
classified as "commercial" draw the highest fee rate (i.e., 2.4
percent on the purchase amount) in the industry while basic
consumer accounts draw the lowest fee rate (i.e., 1.4 percent on
the purchase amount), says the suit.

To obtain the highest possible interchange fee, the Defendants was
falsely misclassifying consumer credit cards as "commercial"
pursuant to established systems, practices and procedures that were
intentionally designed to disregard the actual type of credit
account being created. The Defendants' actions have caused the
Plaintiffs and millions of merchants across the United States to
suffer harm, including but not limited to excess interchange fees
of upwards of hundreds of millions of dollars, the suit added.

DISCOVER FINANCIAL SERVICES operates as a credit card issuer and
electronic payment services company. The Company issues credit
cards and offers student and personal loans, as well as savings
products such as certificates of deposit and money market accounts.
[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Amy E. Keller, Esq.
          Nada Djordjevic, Esq.
          DICELLO LEVITT GUTZLER LLC
          Ten North Dearborn Street, Sixth Floor
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Telephone: (312) 214-7900
          Facsimile: (312) 253-1443
          Email: akeller@dicellolevitt.com
                 ndjordjevic@dicellolevitt.com

               - and -

          Catherine Pratsinakis, Esq.
          Nina C. Spizer, Esq.
          DILWORTH PAXSON LLP
          1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E
          Philadelphia, PA 19102
          Telephone: (215) 575-7000
          Facsimile: (215) 575-7200
          Email: cpratsinakis@dilworthlaw.com
                 nspizer@dilworthlaw.com

DRIV INC: Armas Sues Over Defective Vehicle Ball Joints
-------------------------------------------------------
SARA ARMAS; and JASON BUSKEY, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. DRiV INC., Defendant, Case
No. 4:23-cv-11745-SDK-DRG (E.D. Mich., July 20, 2023) is a class
action complaint to prevent grievous injuries to those who
purchased or will purchase the Defendant's product, as well as to
those who could be struck by vehicles that veer out of control due
to the Defendant's failure to sell its ball joint with an adequate
fastener.

According to the complaint, the Defendant sells a ball joint, which
connects a wheel to a motor vehicle and is often replaced every
60,000 miles, with a bolt of inadequate tensile strength. As such,
when subjected to typical driving stress, the bolt breaks and the
ball joint separates from the vehicle, creating a significant
hazard for the vehicle occupants and any person or property in the
vicinity, says the suit.

Industry standards require a bolt with a tensile strength of at
least grade "8" to connect a ball joint to a vehicle. However, the
Defendant sells its ball joint with a bolt of a tensile strength of
less than grade "8."

DRiV INC. is a supplier of innovative light and commercial vehicle
products and services. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Todd A. Holleman, Esq.
          MILLER JOHNSON, ESQ.
          500 Woodward Ave., Suite 2800
          Detroit, MI 48226
          Telephone: (313) 672-6939
          Email: hollemant@millerjohnson.com

               - and -

          Salvatore W. Pirrotta, Esq.
          Miller Johnson, Esq.
          MILLER JOHNSON, ESQ.
          45 Ottawa Ave. SW, Suite 1100
          Grand Rapids, MI 49503
          Telephone: (616) 831-1739
          Email: pirrottas@millerjohnson.com

               - and -

          Talcott J. Franklin, Esq.
          TFPC
          181 Western Promenade
          Portland, Maine 04102
          Telephone: (214) 642-9191
          Email: tal@tfpc.me

               - and -

          Jonathan Sahrbeck, Esq.
          SAHRBECK, P.C.
          15 Silva Drive
          Cape Elizabeth, ME 04107
          Telephone: (207) 233-8500
          Email: jonathansahrbeck@sahrbeckpc.com



DSM-FIRMENICH AG: Crimson Candle Alleges Fragrances' Price Monopoly
-------------------------------------------------------------------
CRIMSON CANDLE SUPPLIES LLC, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DSM-FIRMENICH AG; FIRMENICH
INTERNATIONAL SA; FIRMENICH INC.; AGILEX FLAVORS & FRAGRANCES,
INC.; GIVAUDAN SA; GIVAUDAN FRAGRANCES CORP.; GIVAUDAN FLAVORS
CORP.; UNGERER & COMPANY, INC.; CUSTOM ESSENCE INC.; INTERNATIONAL
FLAVORS & FRAGRANCES INC.; SYMRISE AG; SYMRISE INC.; and SYMRISE US
LLC, Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-03875 (D.N.J., July 20, 2023)
alleges Defendants' violation of the Sherman Act.

According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, the Defendants are
engaged in conspiracy to allocate, and unreasonably restrain trade
in, the market for fragrances and fragrance ingredients
manufactured by Defendants from January 1, 2012 to the present. In
order to restrain trade and inflate prices in the fragrances
market, the Defendants agreed to allocate that market by
collectively deciding to each produce only a fragment of the total
fragrance ingredients that are used to make fragrances, leaving
them each unable to compete for fragrance requests from customers
that required the fragrance ingredients they did not produce, says
the suit.

The Defendants’ conspiracy to inflate the price of fragrances by
allocating products and customers harmed the Plaintiff and members
of the Class. Plaintiff and the Class are the direct purchasers of
fragrances and fragrance ingredients from the Defendants. As
explained, the Defendants are the dominant firms in the fragrance
manufacturing markets and Class members purchased billions of
dollars’ worth of fragrances from them. Little did they know,
however, that those fragrances were worth less than the Plaintiffs
paid for them, and their prices were inflated because Defendants
had agreed not to compete, the suit claims.

DSM-FIRMENICH AG is an innovator in nutrition, health, and beauty
products. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Eric T. Kanefsky, Esq.
          Ralph J. Marra, Jr. , Esq.
          Thomas R. Calcagni, Esq.
          Martin B. Gandelman, Esq.
          CALCAGNI & KANEFSKY LLP
          1085 Raymond Blvd., 14th Floor
          Newark, NJ 07102
          Telephone: (862) 397-1796
          Email: eric@ck-litigation.com
                 rmarra@ck-litigation.com
                 tcalcagni@ck-litigation.com
                 mgandelman@ck-litigation.com

               - and -

          Daniel L. Brockett, Esq.
          Manisha M. Sheth, Esq.
          QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
          SULLIVAN, LLP
          51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
          New York, NY 10010-1601
          Telephone: (212) 849-7000
          Email: danbrockett@quinnemanuel.com
          manishasheth@quinnemanuel.com

               - and -

          Michael Eisenkraft, Esq.
          Laura Posner, Esq.
          Christopher Bateman, Esq.
          COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL PLLC
          88 Pine Street, 14th Floor
          New York, NY 10005
          Telephone: (212) 838-0177
          Email: meisenkraft@cohenmilstein.com
                 lposner@cohenmilstein.com
                 cbateman@cohenmilstein.com

               - and -

          Daniel H. Silverman, Esq.
          COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL PLLC
          769 Centre Street, Suite 207
          Boston, MA 02130
          Telephone: (617) 858-1990
          Email: dsilverman@cohenmilstein.com

EARTH THERAPEUTICS: Luis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Earth Therapeutics,
Inc. The case is styled as Kevin Yan Luis, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Earth Therapeutics,
Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-06447 (S.D.N.Y., July 26, 2023).

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

Earth Therapeutics -- https://www.earththerapeutics.com/ --
provides natural health and beauty products that are both
innovative and affordable..[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


EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Portillo Sues Over Inaccurate Consumer Reports
-------------------------------------------------------------------
JESUS DAVID PORTILLO, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC;
EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.; TRANS UNION, LLC; and WELLS
FARGO BANK N.A., Defendants, Case No. 3:23-cv-00270-DCG (W.D. Tex.,
July 21, 2023) is a class action against the Defendants for
violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

According to the complaint, the Defendants are engaged in the
practice of reporting false and inaccurate adverse information on
consumer reports. The Defendants failed to follow reasonable
procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information
on the Plaintiff's and Class members' consumer reports. As a result
of the Defendants' misconduct, the Plaintiff and Class members have
been damaged including their reputation, creditworthiness, and
credit score, says the suit.

Equifax Information Services LLC is a consumer reporting agency
headquartered in Georgia.

Experian Information Solutions, Inc. is a consumer reporting agency
headquartered in California.

Trans Union, LLC is a consumer reporting agency headquartered in
Illinois.

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. is a national bank headquartered in South
Dakota. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Eliyahu Babad, Esq.
         STEIN SAKS, PLLC
         One University Plaza, Suite 620
         Hackensack, NJ 07601
         Telephone: (201) 282-6500
         E-mail: EBabad@SteinSaksLegal.com

FARMINGTON STATE BANK: O'Keefe Files Suit in E.D. Washington
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Farmington State
Bank, et al. The case is styled as Connor O'Keefe, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. Farmington State Bank
doing business as: Moonstone Bank, Deltec Bank & Trust Company
Limited, Jean Chalopin, Case No. 2:23-cv-00213-TOR (E.D. Wash.,
July 26, 2023).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.

Farmington State Bank are a multigenerational community bank that
aims to enable everyone to be successful in their personal and
business endeavors.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gregory F. Wesner, Esq.
          HERMAN JONES LLP
          15113 Washington Avenue NE
          Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
          Phone: (206) 819-0821
          Email: gwesner@hermanjones.com


FIRST MERCHANTS: Everling Sues Over Failure to Safeguard PII
------------------------------------------------------------
Calab Everling, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. FIRST MERCHANTS BANK, Case No. 1:23-cv-01287-SEB-TAB
(S.D. Ind., July 25, 2023), is brought against FMB for its failure
to properly secure and safeguard Plaintiff's and other similarly
situated FMB customers' sensitive information, including full
names, contact information, dates of birth, Social Security
numbers, financial accounts information, and other sensitive
information ("personally identifiable information" or "PII").

Former and current Defendant customers are required to entrust
Defendant with sensitive, non-public PII, without which Defendant
could not perform its regular business activities, in order to
obtain financial services from Defendant. Defendant retains this
information for at least many years and even after the consumer
relationship has ended. By obtaining, collecting, using, and
deriving a benefit from the PII of Plaintiff and Class Members,
Defendant assumed legal and equitable duties to those individuals
to protect and safeguard that information from unauthorized access
and intrusion.

On June 21, 2023, Defendant learned that one its IT vendors had
been penetrated by a cyberattack and that "certain FMB data may
have been copied without" authorization from their system between
May 28 and May 30, 2023." In response, Defendant "properly
conducted a detailed review of the data involved to determine the
types of information" present and to whom it related."3 As a result
of its investigation, Defendant concluded--on an undisclosed
date--that Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII was compromised in
the Data Breach.

The Defendant failed to adequately protect Plaintiff's and Class
Members PII––and failed to even encrypt or redact this highly
sensitive information. This unencrypted, unredacted PII was
compromised due to Defendant's negligent and/or careless acts and
omissions and their utter failure to protect customers' sensitive
data. Hackers targeted and obtained Plaintiff's and Class Members'
PII because of its value in exploiting and stealing the identities
of Plaintiff and Class Members. The present and continuing risk to
victims of the Data Breach will remain for their respective
lifetimes, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff provided their PII to the Defendant.

The Defendant is an Indiana based regional bank that offers
personal banking, mortgage lending, and wealth management services
to consumers in Indiana, Illinois, and Ohio.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC
          227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Phone: (866) 252-0878
          Email: gklinger@milberg.com


FLOCK FOODS: Barbee Files TCPA Suit in N.D. California
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Flock Foods, LLC. The
case is styled as Natasha Barbee, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Flock Foods, LLC, Case No.
3:23-cv-03664 (N.D. Cal., July 25, 2023).

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

Flock Foods -- https://flockfoods.com/ -- is proud to be a one stop
shop for a variety of healthy, tasty, low carb, high protein
snacks.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Scott Adam Edelsberg, Esq.
          EDELSBERG LAW
          1925 Century Park East, Suite 1700
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Phone: (305) 975-3320
          Email: scott@edelsberglaw.com


FLORIDA POWER: Continues to Defend Velez Purported Class Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
Florida Power & Light Co. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending June 30, 2023 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on July 26, 2023, that the Company continues to
defend itself from the Velez purported class suit in the Miami-Dade
County Circuit Court.

FPL is the defendant in a purported class action lawsuit (Velez, et
al. v. Florida Power & Light Company) filed in February 2018 that
seeks from FPL unspecified damages for alleged breach of contract
and gross negligence based on service interruptions that occurred
as a result of Hurricane Irma in 2017.

There is currently no trial date set.

The Miami-Dade County Circuit Court certified the case as a class
action and FPL's appeal of that decision was denied by Florida's
Third District Court of Appeal (3rd DCA) in March 2023.

FPL filed a motion in March 2023, for rehearing with the 3rd DCA
claiming that the opinion upholding the class certification
contains several errors that should be reheard by the full 3rd DCA.


The motion is pending.

Additionally, in July 2023, FPL filed a motion to dismiss the
lawsuit on the basis that, among other things, it believes the FPSC
has exclusive jurisdiction over any issues arising from a utility's
preparation for and response to emergencies or disasters.

FPL plans to continue to vigorously defend against the claims
asserted in this proceeding.

Florida Power & Light Company (FPL), a rate-regulated electric
utility, engages in the generation, transmission, distribution,
and
sale of electric energy in Florida.  It generates electricity from
natural gas, coal, oil, nuclear, and solar energy.  It was
incorporated in 1925 and is based in Juno Beach, Florida.  The
Company operates as a subsidiary of NextEra Energy, Inc.






FOLGER COFFEE: Seeks Leave to File Suggestions Under Seal
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re: Folgers Coffee Marketing
Litigation, Case No. 4:21-02984-MD-C-BP (W.D. Mo.), the Defendants
The Folger Coffee Company and The J. M. Smucker Company, move the
Court for leave to file under seal the Suggestions in Support of
the Defendants' Opposition to the Plaintiffs' Motion for Class
Certification, as well as declarations and exhibits.

Folger is a manufacturer of consumers food and beverage products.

A copy the Defendants' motion dated July 17, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3rVTUYk at no extra charge.[CC]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Ronald Y. Rothstein, Esq.
          Sean H. Suber, Esq.
          Nathan R. Gilbert, Esq.
          Jeffrey S. Wilkerson, Esq.
          WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
          35 West Wacker Drive
          Chicago, IL 60601
          Telephone: (312) 558-5600
          Facsimile: (312) 558-5700
          E-mail: RRothste@winston.com
                  SSuber@winston.com
                  NRGilbert@winston.com
                  JWilkerson@winston.com

                - and -

          Andrew Ryan, Esq.
          SANDBERG PHOENIX
          & VON GONTARD P.C.
          600 Washington Avenue, 15th Floor
          Saint Louis, MO 63101
          Telephone: (314) 234-3332
          E-mail: ARyan@sandbergphoenix.com

GIJUNGLE INC: Order on General Pretrial Management Entered in Toro
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LUIS TORO, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, v. GIJUNGLE, INC., Case
No. 1:23-cv-05834-JHR-BCM (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Barbara Moses
entered an order regarding general pretrial management:

  -- All pretrial motions and applications, including those related
to
     scheduling and discovery (but excluding motions to dismiss or
for
     judgment on the pleadings, for injunctive relief, for summary

     judgment, or for class certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23)

     must be made to Judge Moses and in compliance with this
Court's
     Individual Practices in Civil Cases, available on the Court's

     website at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-barbara-moses.

  -- Once a discovery schedule has been issued, all discovery must
be
     initiated in time to be concluded by the close of discovery
set
     by the Court.

  -- Discovery applications, including letter-motions requesting
     discovery conferences, must be made promptly after the need
for
     such an application arises and must comply with Local Civil
Rule
     37.2 and section 2(b) of Judge Moses's Individual Practices.
It
     is the Court's practice to decide discovery disputes at the
Rule
     37.2 conference, based on the parties' letters, unless a party

     requests or the Court requires more formal briefing. Absent
     extraordinary circumstances, discovery applications made later

     than 30 days prior to the close of discovery may be denied as

     untimely.

  -- Requests to adjourn a court conference or other court
proceeding
     (including a telephonic court conference) or to extend a
deadline
     must be made in writing and in compliance with section 2(a) of

     Judge Moses's Individual Practices.

  -- In accordance with section 1(d) of Judge Moses's Individual
     Practices, letters and letter motions are limited to four
pages,
     exclusive of attachments.

  -- If you are aware of any party or attorney who should receive
     notice in this action, other than those currently listed on
the
     docket sheet, please notify Courtroom Deputy Tamika Kay at
(212)
     805-0228 immediately.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 14, 2023, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3rSg2Cx at no extra charge.[CC]

GOOGLE INC: Parties Seek to Extend Time to Seal Class Cert Briefing
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re Google RTB Consumer Privacy
Litigation, Case No. 4:21-cv-02155-YGR (N.D. Cal.), the Parties
stipulate in connection with all briefing on the Class
Certification Motion:

   1. The deadline for any response to an Administrative Motion to

      Seal is extended from 4 days after the filing of the motion
to
      18 days after the filing of the motion.

   2. The deadline for any response to an Administrative Motion to

      Consider Whether Another Party's Materials Should Be Sealed
is
      extended from 7 days after the filing of the motion to 21
days
      after the filing of the motion.

   3. The deadline for any response to a designating party's filing
in
      support of sealing is extended from 4 days after the filing
of
      the response to the Administrative Motion to Consider Whether

      Another Party's Materials Should Be Sealed to 18 days after
such
      filing.

   4. The provisions of this stipulation and order apply to non-
      parties as well as to Parties.

Google LLC is an American multinational technology company focusing
on artificial intelligence, online advertising, search engine
technology, cloud computing, computer software, quantum computing,
e-commerce, and consumer electronics. Wikipedia

Google is a US multinational technology company.

A copy of the Parties' motion dated July 14, 2023, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3KisIt7 at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Michael G. Rhodes, Esq.
          Whitty Somvichian, Esq.
          Aarti G. Reddy, Esq.
          Reece Trevor, Esq.
          Anupam S. Dhillon, Esq.
          Robby L.R. Saldaña, Esq.
          Khary J. Anderson, Esq.
          COOLEY LLP
          3 Embarcadero Center, 20th floor San
          Francisco, CA 94111-4004
          Telephone: (415) 693-2000
          Facsimile: (415) 693-2222
          E-mail: rhodesmg@cooley.com
                  wsomvichian@cooley.com
                  areddy@cooley.com
                  rtrevor@cooley.com
                  adhillon@cooley.com
                  rsaldana@cooley.com
                  kjanderson@cooley.com

                - and -

          Elizabeth C. Pritzker, Esq.
          Jonathan Levine, Esq.
          Bethany Caracuzzo, Esq.
          PRITZKER LEVINE LLP
          1900 Powell Street, Suite 450
          Emeryville, CA 94608
          Telephone: (415) 692-0772
          Facsimile: (415) 366-6110
          E-mail: ecp@pritzkerlevine.com
                  jkl@pritzkerlevine.com
                  bc@pritzkerlevine.com

                - and -

          Joe Cotchett, Esq.
          Nanci Nishimura, Esq.
          Brian Danitz, Esq.
          Jeffrey G. Mudd, Esq.
          Karin B. Swope, Esq.
          COTCHETT PITRE & McCARTHY
          840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200
          Burlingame, CA 94010
          Telephone: (650) 697-6000
          Facsimile: (650) 597-0577
          E-mail: POmalley@cpmlegal.com
                  nnishimura@cpmlegal.com
                  BDanitz@cpmlegal.com
                  JMudd@cpmlegal.com
                  KSwope@cpmlegal.com

                - and -

          David A. Straite, Esq.
          Corban Rhodes, Esq.
          James Ulwick, Esq.
          DICELLO LEVITT LLC
          485 Lexington Avenue. 10th Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (646) 993-1000
          E-mail: dstraite@dicellolevitt.com
                  crhodes@dicellolevitt.com
                  Julwick@dicellolevitt.com
                  Julwick@dicellolevitt.com

          Francis A. Bottini, Jr., Esq.
          Yury A. Kolesnikov, Esq.
          BOTTINI & BOTTINI, INC.
          7817 Ivanhoe Avenue, Suite 102
          La Jolla, CA 92037
          Telephone: (858) 914-2001
          Facsimile: (858) 914-2002
          E-mail: fbottini@bottinilaw.com
                  ykolesnikov@bottinilaw.com

GOOGLE INC: Plaintiffs' Seek to Conditionally Seal Materials
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re Google RTB Consumer Privacy
Litigation, Case No. 4:21-cv-02155-YGR (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs
move the Court to consider whether those portions of plaintiffs'
Motion, Expert Reports, and Exhibits, should remain conditionally
under seal and in redacted form pursuant to Google's designation.

  -- Portions of the plaintiffs' memorandum of points and
authorities
     in support of plaintiffs' Motion at 7:4, 7:15, 7:16, 7:18,
     17:19-21, 9:24, 15:20, 15:21, 22:1, 22:24;

  -- Portions of the Plaintiffs' submitted Proposed Order re. Class

     Certification, at 5:17, 5:18, 5:21, 5:22-24;

  -- Exhibits to the Declaration of Elizabeth C. Pritzker submitted
in
     support of plaintiffs' Motion.

The Plaintiffs' request seeks to conditionally seal language in the
Motion and Expert Reports that refers to documents, as well as the
documents and transcripts themselves, that Google has designated
"Confidential" or "Highly Confidential -- Attorneys' Eyes Only"
pursuant to the protective order.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 14, 2023, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/477PuNW at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Elizabeth C. Pritzker, Esq.
          Jonathan K. Levine, Esq.
          Bethany Caracuzzo, Esq.
          Caroline Corbitt, Esq.
          PRITZKER LEVINE LLP
          1900 Powell Street, Ste. 450
          Emeryville, CA 94602
          Telephone.: (415) 692-0772
          Facsimile: (415) 366-6110
          E-mail: ecp@pritzkerlevine.com
                  jkl@pritzkerlevine.com
                  bc@pritzkerlevine.com
                  ccc@pritzkerlevine.com

GOOGLE LLC: Faces Class Suit Over Video Ads' Misrepresentation
--------------------------------------------------------------
Erin Shaak of ClassAction.org reports that Google, LLC has been hit
with a proposed class action lawsuit this week alleging the tech
behemoth has essentially bilked advertisers out of billions of
dollars by misrepresenting the quality and placement of their video
ads.

The 26-page lawsuit, filed on July 26, comes in the wake of a
bombshell report by ad campaign analytics firm Adalytics that found
that the placement of Google's proprietary TrueView video
advertisements violated the company's own standards as much as 80
percent of the time.

According to the suit, though Google promised advertisers that
their video ads would be shown on high-quality websites and
displayed as skippable, audible videos initiated by the user, these
representations were many times far from the truth. Indeed,
Adalytics reported that "significant quantities" of TrueView
skippable in-stream ads were served as muted, auto-playing ads that
were either "out-stream," i.e., not within the site's main video
content, or "obscured" on independent, low-quality sites, the
complaint relays.

The effect of Google's conduct, the suit alleges, is that
advertisers have paid "hefty amounts" for video ads that were not
served in accordance with the company's representations and, in
many cases, were not viewed by the consumers they paid to engage
with.

"Google's conduct was substantially injurious to consumers of
advertising services in that they have been forced to pay a premium
for improper, abusive, and/or unconscionable practices in
purchasing TrueView advertisements that were not in accordance with
Google's policies and representations," the suit summarizes.

Google's TrueView video advertisements
TrueView is a proprietary form of video ads that Google represents
as a "cost-per-view, choice-based ad format that serves on YouTube,
millions of apps, and across the web," the complaint relays.

Per the suit, advertisers pay for TrueView ads, also called
"skippable in-stream video ads," based on their number of views. In
other words, the case says, Google only charges the advertiser when
a user chooses not to skip their ad within the first 30 seconds (or
watches the whole thing if the ad is less than 30 seconds long).

Google further represents that TrueView ads are always skippable,
audible by default and in-stream, meaning they will play along with
the site's main video content (such as before or during a YouTube
video), the case says. Advertisers are also told that
scroll-to-play ads are not permitted for TrueView and that mid-roll
ads, i.e., those that play in the middle of a video, can only be
placed in a video that's at least 10 minutes long, according to the
complaint.

Per the suit, Google also represents that TrueView ads will only be
shown on its network of "high-quality publisher websites and mobile
apps," which are "carefully vetted and must meet Google's inventory
quality standards."

Lawsuit claims Google's representations are far from the truth
Citing the Adalytics report, the lawsuit claims that in many cases,
Google's TrueView advertisements are "not displayed as promised."

Per the suit, Google violates its own policies by serving ads in
the following ways:

-- On muted video players;
-- As auto-playing videos or scroll-to-play ads;
-- At the same time as other ads on the page;
-- Without a clickable skip button; or
-- As out-stream ads, including on websites or apps without video
content, in an article or feed, or on sites or apps that only have
gaming content.

According to the case, these practices have the effect of
artificially inflating advertisers' video completion rates, meaning
they end up paying higher prices for "views" that may have been
unintentional or ineffective.

Further, the lawsuit claims that according to the Adalytics report,
thousands of TrueView ads were displayed on low-quality websites
and apps that fail to meet Google's standards, including those with
copyright violations, sites discussing "executions or children
being murdered," made-for-advertising sites, gaming apps with
content geared toward children, sites with no organic video
content, disinformation sites, and websites or apps developed by
countries subject to U.S. Treasury sanctions.

What's more, the case claims video ads were in some instances
served to web-crawling bots, including bots run by Google itself,
instead of actual consumers.

Adalytics' research reportedly found that in the case of one sample
client, "a major infrastructure brand," more than 80 percent of its
ad budget was spent on "tens of thousands of different websites or
mobile apps" that make up Google's video partners network, the
majority of which served ads in a way that violated Google's
policies.

"The TrueView practice is not only violative of Google's policies
and promises and deceptive, but it serves no purpose but to further
enrich Google who charges a premium for these TrueView
advertisements and receives inflated payments due to artificial
views of TrueView advertisements," the lawsuit scathes.

Who does the lawsuit look to cover?
The proposed class action aims to represent all advertisers who
paid for TrueView in-stream advertisements during the applicable
statute of limitations period and through the date of class
certification.

I paid Google for in-stream ads. How do I join the lawsuit?
When a class action is first filed, there's usually nothing you
need to do to join or be considered part of the lawsuit. The time
to take action is generally if and when the lawsuit settles, at
which point those covered, called the class members, may receive
direct notice of the settlement with instructions on what to do
next. [GN]

GREENHILL & CO: Files Misleading Proxy to OK Merger, Lambert Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ROBERT LAMBERT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SCOTT L. BOK, ROBERT F. GREENHILL, MERYL D.
HARTZBAND, JOHN D. LIU, ULRIKA M. EKMAN, KEVIN T. FERRO, and
GREENHILL & CO., INC., Defendants, Case No. 653497/2023 (N.Y. Sup.
Ct., New York Cty., July 21, 2023) is a class action against the
Defendants for breach of their fiduciary duties of good-faith,
care, and loyalty.

According to the complaint, the Defendants caused Greenhill to file
materially false and misleading definitive proxy statement in
connection with the proposed acquisition of Greenhill by Mizuho
Americas LLC. Specifically, the proxy critically omits Greenhill's
projected unlevered, after-tax free cash flows for years 2023
through 2027 based on the Cash Flow Projections, which were key
inputs utilized by Houlihan Lokey in performing its Discounted Cash
Flow Analysis of Greenhill. Therefore, failure to disclose the Cash
Flow Projections renders the summary of the Discounted Cash Flow
Analysis in the proxy materially misleading and incomplete.

The Plaintiff seeks to enjoin the Defendants from taking any steps
to consummate the proposed transaction until the Defendants
disclose the Cash Flow Projections, and other material information,
prior to the shareholder vote, so Greenhill's shareholders can cast
an informed vote.

Greenhill & Co., Inc. is an independent investment bank,
headquartered in New York, New York. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Juan E. Monteverde, Esq.
         Rossella Scarpa, Esq.
         MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC
         The Empire State Building
         350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4405
         New York, NY 10118
         Telephone: (212) 971-1341
         Facsimile: (212) 202-7880
         E-mail: jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com
                 rscarpa@monteverdelaw.com

HARVEY, IL: Sued Over Improper Building Code Violation Citations
----------------------------------------------------------------
Mary Haydock of Cook County Record reports that the city of Harvey
is the target of a new class action accusing the community in
southwest suburban Cook County of issuing improper building code
violation citations and conducting allegedly illegal building
inspections against custom food maker American Kitchen Delights and
others.

American Kitchen Delights, on behalf of itself and others, filed a
new class action lawsuit against the city of Harvey, Raymond Law
Group, Louis C. Raymond, Christopher Cohen, and B & F Construction
Code Services on July 11 in Cook County Circuit Court. AKD is
accusing the city of allegedly issuing illegal citations against
AKD and unnamed class members for code violations on codes that are
not in effect or do not exist in the city, alleged illegal
administrative action, a supposed failure to disclose ordinances
for public review and presiding over legal matters it has no
jurisdictive right to adjudicate.

According to the complaint, Harvey had at one time adopted the
so-called Illinois Plumbing Code to govern inspections of plumbing
work in the city. However, that was later changed, when the city
adopted Ordinance 2767, allowing the city to enforce different
plumbing standards through the International Code Council.

However, according to the complaint, the city later began issuing
citations to AKD and potentially other businesses under the
Illinois Plumbing Code. Those citations were issued as a result of
inspections allegedly performed by Harvey's contracted building
inspectors, B&F Construction Code Services Inc.  

According to the complaint, in March, B & F performed an inspection
of AKD, reportedly finding and issuing citations against AKD for
alleged grease in the sewer, water contamination and improper
plumbing. According to the complaint, adjacent to B&F's inspection
and subsequent citation, inspections made by the Illinois
Department of Public Health at AKD's facility, found no code
infractions.

AKD asserts in their complaint that no inspector or hearing officer
in Harvey is authorized to prosecute supposed code violations in
Harvey for the Illinois Plumbing Code, or any other building codes
which do not officially exist or are no longer in effect. Despite
this, the city has allegedly continued prosecuting citations issued
against AKD and the unnamed class members.

AKD and the city of Harvey have been at odds for years. Since 2018,
AKD has had multiple disputes with Harvey and others, from civil
rights complaints to alleged illegal seizure and transfer of an AKD
property.

A frozen foods manufacturer located in Harvey, American Kitchen
Delights has operated for over 31 years, employing over 100
residents locally from the surrounding area.

The complaint estimates at least 40 other businesses may have been
similarly cited improperly under the allegedly non-applicable
building codes.

AKD is seeking a court order blocked the city from enforcing or
continuing to issue citations or assess fines or fees against
businesses for infractions of allegedly nonexistent code
infractions. They are also seeking an award of statutory and
punitive damages, plus legal fees.

American Kitchen Delights is represented by attorney Dennis E.
Both, of Harvey. [GN]

HCA HEALTHCARE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Abramovic Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
ANDREA ABRAMOVIC, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HCA HEALTHCARE, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 3:23-cv-00719 (M.D. Ten., July 19, 2023) is an action
arising from the Defendant's failure to safeguard the Personally
Identifiable Information1 and Protected Health Information of the
patients of hospitals and physician groups it owned or operated,
which resulted in unauthorized access to its information systems on
or around June 2023, and the compromised and unauthorized
disclosure of that Private Information, causing widespread injury
and damages to Plaintiff and the proposed Class.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that as a result of the Data
Breach, which Defendant failed to prevent, the Private Information
of patients at hospitals or physician office owned or operated by
Defendant, including Plaintiff and the proposed Class members, were
stolen, and released including their names, cities, states, zip
codes, email addresses, phone numbers, date of birth, gender, and
appointment information.

The Defendant's failure to safeguard patients' highly sensitive
Private Information as exposed and unauthorizedly disclosed in the
Data Breach violates its common law duty and Defendant's implied
contract with its patients to safeguard their Private Information.
The Plaintiff and Class members now face a lifetime risk of
identity theft due to the nature of the information lost, and a
diminishment in the value of their private data, says the suit.

HCA HEALTHCARE, INC. offers health care services. The Hospital
provides diagnosis, treatments, consultancy, nursing, surgeries,
and other services, as well as medical education, physician
resource center, and training programs. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alexandra M. Honeycutt, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
          PHILLIPS GROSSMAN LLC
          800 S. Gay St., Suite 1100
          Knoxville, TN 37929
          Telephone: (865) 247-0080
          Facsimile: (865) 522-0049
          Email: ahoneycutt@milberg.com

               - and -

          William B. Federman, Esq.
          FEDERMAN & SHERWOOD
          10205 North Pennsylvania Avenue
          Oklahoma City, OK 73120
          Telephone: (405) 235-1560
          Facsimile: (405) 239-2112
          Email: wbf@federmanlaw.com

HCA HEALTHCARE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Bowers Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------
ZITA BOWERS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HCA HEALTHCARE, INC., Defendant, Case No.
3:23-cv-00722 (M.D. Tenn., July 19, 2022) is a civil action seeking
monetary damages and injunctive and declaratory relief from the
Defendant, arising from its failure to safeguard certain personally
identifying information1 and protected health information of
millions of its patients.

According to the complaint, the Plaintiff and members of the Class
have been significantly injured by the Data Breach and have
incurred out-of-pocket expenses associated with the reasonable
mitigation measures they were forced to employ. Plaintiff and the
Class also now forever face an amplified risk of fraud and identity
theft due to their sensitive PII falling into the hands of
cybercriminals.

As a result of the data breach, the Plaintiff now faces, and will
continue to face, a heightened risk of identity theft and fraud for
the rest of her life. The Defendant has not provided any
compensation to patients victimized in the Data Breach and has not
offered to provide any assistance or compensation for the costs and
burdens, current and future, associated with the identity theft and
fraud resulting from the data breach, says the suit.

HCA HEALTHCARE, INC. offers health care services. The Hospital
provides diagnosis, treatments, consultancy, nursing, surgeries,
and other services, as well as medical education, physician
resource center, and training programs. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alexandra M. Honeycutt, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
          PHILLIPS GROSSMAN LLC
          800 S. Gay St., Suite 1100
          Knoxville, TN 37929
          Telephone: (865) 247-0080
          Facsimile: (865) 522-0049
          Email: ahoneycutt@milberg.com

               - and -

          William B. Federman, Esq.
          FEDERMAN & SHERWOOD
          10205 North Pennsylvania Avenue
          Oklahoma City, OK 73120
          Telephone: (405) 235-1560
          Facsimile: (405) 239-2112
          Email: wbf@federmanlaw.com

HCA HEALTHCARE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Coleman Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
JONEE COLEMAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HCA HEALTHCARE, INC., Defendant, Case No.
3:23-cv-00724 (M.D. Tenn., July 20, 2023) seeks monetary damages
and injunctive and declaratory relief, arising from the Defendant's
failure to safeguard the Personally Identifiable Information and
Protected Health Information of the patients of hospitals and
physician groups it owned or operated, which resulted in
unauthorized access to its information systems in or around June
2023, and the compromised and unauthorized disclosure of that
Private Information, causing widespread injury and damages to
Plaintiff and the proposed Class members.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that as a result of the Data
Breach, the Private Information of patients at hospitals and other
medical facilities owned or operated by the Defendant, including
the Plaintiff and the proposed Class members, were stolen and
released on a dark web hacker forum including their names, cities,
states, zip codes, email addresses, phone numbers, dates of birth,
genders, patient service dates, patient service locations, and next
appointment dates.

As a result of the Defendant's failure to safeguard Plaintiff's and
Class members' Private Information, Plaintiff and Class members now
face a lifetime risk of identity theft due to the nature of the
information lost, and a diminution in the value of their private
data, the suit claims.

HCA HEALTHCARE, INC. offers health care services. The Hospital
provides diagnosis, treatments, consultancy, nursing, surgeries,
and other services, as well as medical education, physician
resource center, and training programs. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alexandra M. Honeycutt, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
          PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
          800 S. Gay St., Suite 1100
          Knoxville, TN 37929
          Telephone: (865) 247-0080
          Facsimile: (865) 522-0049
          Email: ahoneycutt@milberg.com

               - and -

          Melissa R. Emert, Esq.
          Gary S. Graifman, Esq.
          KANTROWITZ, GOLDHAMER &
          GRAIFMAN, P.C.
          135 Chestnut Ridge Road, Suite 200
          Montvale, NJ 07645
          Telephone: (201) 391-7000
          Facsimile: (201) 307-1086
          Email: memert@kgglaw.com
                 ggraifman@kgglaw.com

               - and -

          M. Anderson Berry, Esq.
          Gregory Haroutunian, Esq.
          Brandon P. Jack, Esq.
          CLAYEO C. ARNOLD
          A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
          865 Howe Avenue
          Sacramento, CA 95825
          Telephone: (916) 239-4778
          Facsimile: (916) 924-182
          Email: aberry@justice4you.com
                 gharoutunian@justice4you.com
                 bjack@justice4you.com

HCA HEALTHCARE: Hayes Files Suit in M.D. Tennessee
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against HCA Healthcare, Inc.
The case is styled as Ebony Hayes, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. HCA Healthcare, Inc.; Midwest
Division RMC, LLC doing business as: Research Medical Center;
Centerpoint Medical Center of Independence, LLC d/b/a Centerpoint
Medical Center; Case No. 3:23-cv-00740 (M.D. Tenn., July 24,
2023).

The nature if suit is stated as Other Personal Property for
Property Damage.

HCA Healthcare -- http://www.hcahealthcare.com/-- is an American
for-profit operator of health care facilities that was founded in
1968.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Francesca K. Burne, Esq.
          Jean Sutton Martin, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN (TAMPA OFFICE)
          201 N Franklin Street, 7th Floor
          Tampa, FL 33602
          Phone: (813) 318-5189
          Email: fburne@forthepeople.com
                 jeanmartin@forthepeople.com

               - and -

          Robert B. Keaty, II, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN (NASHVILLE OFFICE)
          810 Broadway, Suite 105
          Nashville, TN 37203
          Phone: (615) 928-9901
          Email: bkeaty@forthepeople.com


HELP AT HOME: Williams Sues Over Failure to Pay Minimum Wage
------------------------------------------------------------
Barbara Williams, and all other similarly situated employees v.
HELP AT HOME, LLC, Case No. 3:23-cv-02578 (S.D. Ill., July 25,
2023), is brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act (the "FLSA")
and the Illinois Minimum Wage Law ("IMWL") for the Defendant's
failure to pay minimum wage for all hours worked to Plaintiff and
for Defendant's retaliation under the FLSA.

By Plaintiff's estimates, Plaintiff routinely worked 30 hours or
less in a work week. In most if not all work-weeks from on or
around September 2022 through the present, Plaintiff was not paid
at least minimum wage for all hours worked. In other words,
Defendant would not pay Plaintiff her agreed upon pay rate for all
hours worked. Additionally, throughout Plaintiff's employment,
Plaintiff noticed that Defendant billed insurance despite services
not being rendered due to the individual being deceased.

In other words, Plaintiff has reasonable belief that Defendant was
committing insurance fraud after observing multiple examples of
billing insurances even though the individuals were deceased. The
Plaintiff was absolutely shocked and disgusted at Defendant's
fraudulent practices both in failing to pay her minimum wages and
for billing the insurance of deceased clients. As a result,
Plaintiff engaged in protected activity under the FLSA and in
November 2022 reported Defendant to the Illinois Department of
Labor, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was employed as a non-exempt employee in July 2022 as
a caregiver and worked at the Defendant's location in Jackson
County in Carbondale, Illinois.

The Defendant was a limited liability company doing business in and
for Jackson County.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alexander J Taylor, Esq.
          SULAIMAN LAW GROUP, LTD.
          2500 South Highland Avenue, Suite 200
          Lombard, IL 60148
          Phone: (331) 272-1942
          Facsimile: (630) 575-8188
          Email: ataylor@sulaimanlaw.com


HOVEROUND CORPORATION: Williams Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Hoveround
Corporation. The case is styled as Milton Williams, on behalf of
himself and all other persons similarly situated v. Hoveround
Corporation, Case No. 1:23-cv-06486-JMF (S.D.N.Y., July 26, 2023).

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

Hoveround -- https://www.hoveround.com/ -- is an American
corporation that manufactures and distributes the Hoveround brand
of power wheelchairs and sells scooters, lifts, ramps and power
chair accessories.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


HOWARD L. NATIONS: Appeals Ruling in Motion to Enforce Judgment
---------------------------------------------------------------
Howard L. Nations, APC, et al., filed an appeal from the District
Court's Order dated June 13, 2023 entered in the lawsuit entitled
DEBORAH A. GAUDET, ET AL., v. HOWARD L. NATIONS, APC, ET AL., Case
No. 2:19-CV-10356, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Louisiana, New Orleans.

This matter arises out of the April 20, 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil
spill in the Gulf of Mexico (the "BP Oil Spill"), and the Deepwater
Horizon Economic and Property Damage Settlement Agreement (the "BP
Settlement Agreement") that was created to provide monetary
compensation for the losses sustained as a result of the BP Oil
Spill. The BP Settlement Agreement allowed individuals to file a
claim for their losses caused by the BP Oil Spill, including claims
for subsistence losses (Subsistence Claims) caused by closing Gulf
Coast fishing areas due to contamination from the BP Oil Spill. The
claims were processed by the Deepwater Horizon Economic Claims
Center (the DHECC).

On April 19, 2023, the Plaintiffs filed a motion to enforce
judgment (settlement) and to dismiss all claims with prejudice
which the Court granted on June 13, 2023 through an Order signed by
Magistrate Judge Janis van Meerveld. The Court found a valid and
enforceable settlement agreement on the terms stated in the suit.

The appellate case is captioned as Gaudet v. Howard L. Nations,
Case No. 23-30470, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit, filed on July 17, 2023.[BN]

Defendants-Appellants Howard L. Nations, A Professional
Corporation, et al., are represented by:

          Judy Lynn Burnthorn, Esq.
          DEUTSCH KERRIGAN, L.L.P.
          755 Magazine Street
          New Orleans, LA 70130
          Telephone: (504) 593-0688

Plaintiffs-Appellees Deborah A. Gaudet, et al., individually and on
behalf of a class of all other similarly situated persons, are
represented by:

          Jerald P. Block, Esq.
          BLOCK LAW FIRM, A.P.L.C.
          P.O. Box 108
          Thibodaux, LA 70302-0108
          Telephone: (985) 446-0418

HYUNDAI GROUP: Faces Class Suit Over Charging Plug Defect
---------------------------------------------------------
Sebastien Bell of Carscoops reports that the rate at which Hyundai
Group electric vehicles can actually charge when plugged in at home
is at the heart of a newly launched nationwide class-action
lawsuit. Plaintiffs claim that a defect in the plug port means that
it overheats while the vehicle is performing level 2 charging,
dramatically slowing energy recuperation speeds.

The lawsuit, filed in United States District Court in the Central
District of California, cites owner complaints, videos outlining
the alleged flaw, and the Hyundai Group's own efforts to remedy the
situation as evidence of a problem for which owners are entitled to
compensation.

While Hyundai cites a Level 2 home-charging time of between five
and seven hours, owners have noted significantly slower speeds. The
plaintiffs allege that is the result of overheating in the plug,
which prolongs charging or makes it impossible.

Hagans Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP is representing the class of
plaintiffs and reports that in some instances, the charging plug
can overheat in as little as 30 minutes, leaving owners with little
range to go about their daily driving.

Indeed, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's
website lists a number of complaints from owners relating to this
issue. One owner said earlier this month that their vehicle app
reported a "charging failure" every two to three minutes, though
their vehicle did eventually fully charge.

In addition, the plaintiffs claim that a software update designed
to fix the issue is little more than a band-aid, and throttles
charging speeds in order to prevent overheating, leaving owners
with charging times of 10 hours or more.

"Not only do Hyundai, Kia, and Genesis continue to sell vehicles
that are clearly incapable of performing as advertised, they also
issued a software patch which substantially worsens charging rates
and widens the gap between what they promised and what they
delivered," said Steve Berman, managing partner at Hagens Berman.

"Unexpectedly finding a car with an uncharged battery in the
morning causes serious disruption to people's lives and could have
dire consequences in an emergency."

The vehicles implicated in this class-action lawsuit are the
Hyundai Ioniq 5, the Ioniq 6, the Genesis GV60, and the Kia EV6.
Hagans Berman says it is bringing claims of violations of the
Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, violations of the California Computer
Data Access and Fraud Act, and violations of applicable state
consumer protection laws against the Hyundai Group.

We have reached out to Hyundai for comment and will update this
story when we hear back. [GN]

INTELLIHARTX LLC: Cabrales Sues Over Cyberattack and Data Breach
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jose Cabrales, individually and on behalf of all others similar
situated v. INTELLIHARTX, LLC, Case No. 3:23-cv-01439-JRK (N.D.
Ohio, July 25, 2023), is brought on behalf of the Plaintiff and all
other similarly situated victims as a result of a recent
cyberattack and data breach involving the personally identifiable
information of patients of Defendant (hereinafter, the "Data
Breach").

In February 2023, an unknown and unauthorized criminal actor gained
access to ITx's network and exfiltrated name, date of birth, Social
Security number, address, health insurance information, medical
history, and other data provided to ITx ("PII" or "Private
Information").

While there are serious issues surrounding ITx's Data Breach, the
deficiencies in the Data Breach notification letter exacerbate the
circumstances for victims of the Data Breach. ITx's systems were
compromised in February of 2023, but it did not notify any victims
until four months later (in June of 2023). This information is
vital to victims of a data breach, let alone a data breach of this
magnitude, due to the sensitivity and wide array of information
compromised in this specific Data Breach.

As a result of the Data Breach, Plaintiff and Class Members
suffered injury and ascertainable losses in the form of the present
and imminent threat of fraud and identity theft, loss of the
benefit of their bargain, out-of-pocket expenses, loss of value of
their time reasonably incurred to remedy or mitigate the effects of
the attack, and the loss of, and diminution in, value of their
personal information.

In addition, Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive PII--which
was entrusted to Defendant--was compromised and unlawfully accessed
due to the Data Breach. This information, while compromised and
taken by unauthorized third parties, remains also in the possession
of Defendant, and without additional safeguards and independent
review and oversight, remains vulnerable to future cyberattacks and
theft.

The Data Breach was a direct result of Defendant's failure to
implement adequate and reasonable cyber-security procedures and
protocols necessary to protect victims' PII. Plaintiff brings this
class action lawsuit on behalf of those similarly situated to
address Defendant's inadequate safeguarding of Class Members' PII
that Defendant collected and maintained and for failing to provide
timely and adequate notice to Plaintiff and other Class Members
that their information had been subject to the unauthorized access
by an unknown third party, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was a patient of ITx.

Intellihartx, LLC is a Healthcare Revenue Cycle company registered
in Ohio.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
          SHAMIS & GENTILE P.A.
          14 NE 1st Ave., Suite 705
          Miami, FL 33132
          Phone: (305) 479-2299
          Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com

               - and -

          Scott Edelsberg, Esq.
          EDELSBERG LAW, P.A.
          20900 NE 30th Ave., Suite 417
          Aventura, FL 33180
          Phone: (786) 289-9471
          Direct: (305) 975-3320
          Fax: (786) 623-0915
          Email: scott@edelsberglaw.com


IOSM INC: Decena Suit Removed to N.D. California
------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Nichole Gallaher, individually, and on behalf
of other members of the general public similarly situated, and on
behalf of aggrieved employees pursuant to the Private Attorneys
General Act ("PAGA") v. IOSM, INC. d/b/a ON-SITE HEALTH & SAFETY, a
California corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No.
C22-00760 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California for the County of Contra Costa, to the United States
District Court for Northern District of California on July 21,
2023, and assigned Case No. 3:23-cv-03625.

The Plaintiff's Complaint in the State Court Action asserted the
following causes of action: Violation of California Labor Code;
Unpaid Overtime; Unpaid Meal Period Premiums; Unpaid Rest Period
Premiums; Unpaid Minimum Wages; Final Wages Not Timely Paid;
Violation of California Labor Code; Violation of California Labor
Code Unreimbursed Business Expenses; Private Attorneys General Act
of 2004; and Violation of California Business Professions
Code.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Corey J. Cabral, Esq.
          Sander van der Heide, Esq.
          CDF LABOR LAW LLP
          900 University Avenue, Suite 200
          Sacramento, CA 95825
          Phone: (916) 361-0991
          Email: ccabral@cdflaborlaw.com
                 svanderheide@cdflaborlaw.com


IT WORKS MARKETING: Perez Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against It Works Marketing,
Inc. The case is styled as Marites Perez, Individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. It Works Marketing,
Inc., Case No. 23CV038881 (Cal. Super. Ct., Alameda Cty., July 19,
2023).

The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case."

It Works! Marketing -- https://www.itworks.com/ -- is a health &
wellness company specializing in body wraps and weight loss
products.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jonathan M. Lebe, Esq.
          Zachary Taylor Gershman, Esq.
          LEBE LAW, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
          777 S Alameda St., Fl. 2
          Los Angeles, CA 90021-1657
          Phone: 213-444-1973  
          Website: www.lebelaw.com
          Email: zachary@lebelaw.com


JEUNESSE GLOBAL: Sun Suit Removed to C.D. California
----------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Peter Sun, an individual; Kimiko Sun, an
individual; and minor A.S by and through her representative Kimiko
Sun v. JEUNESSE GLOBAL, LLC dba JEUNESSE, LLC; KIM HUI, an
individual; LACORE ENTERPRISES, LLC, and DOES 1-10, Case No.
30-2023-01330851-CU-BT-CXC was removed from the Superior Court of
the County of Orange, to the United States District Court for the
Central District of California on July 24, 2023, and assigned Case
No. 8:23-cv-01329.

The Plaintiffs seek to represent a class of California residents
who voluntarily served as distributors for Jeunesse. The
Plaintiffs' Complaint defines the putative class as "all
participants in Jeunesse who registered in the State of California
for whom the gross amount paid to Jeunesse exceed [sic] the income
paid by Jeunesse in commissions and bonuses."[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Victor J. Sandoval, Esq.
          FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP
          1800 Century Park East, Suite 1500
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Phone: +1 310 203 4000
          Facsimile: +1 310 229 1285
          Email: victor.sandoval@faegredrinker.com

               - and -

          Jeffrey S. Jacobson, Esq.
          FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP
          1177 Avenue of the Americas, 41st Floor
          New York, NY 10036
          Phone: +1 212 248 3140
          Facsimile: +1 212 248 3141
          Email: jeffrey.jacobson@faegredrinker.com


JUNKFOOD CLOTHING: Hernandez Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Junkfood Clothing,
LLC. The case is styled as Janelys Hernandez, on behalf of herself
and all others similarly situated v. Junkfood Clothing, LLC, Case
No. 1:23-cv-06323 (S.D.N.Y., July 21, 2023).

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

Junk Food -- https://www.junkfoodclothing.com/ -- has been making
your favorite tees since 1998.[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


K & H CARE: Delaunay Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------
Karissa Delaunay, individually and on behalf of other aggrieved
employees v. K & H CARE, LLC; JOSE HERNANDEZ; and DOES 1 through
100, inclusive, Case No. 23SMCV03372 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles
Cty., July 25, 2023), is brought under the Labor Code Private
Attorney General Act of 2004 as a result of the Defendant's failure
to pay all wages including minimum and overtime wages.

Defendants knowingly and intentionally misclassified Plaintiff
and others as "Independent Contractors" because, in so doing,
Defendants were able to lower their cost of doing business by means
of, but not limited to, the following: Defendants did not report or
pay the employer's share of federal or state payroll taxes with
respect to any of the funds paid to Plaintiff or other Aggrieved
Employees, as required by required by federal and state law;
Defendants did not provide or pay for Workers' Compensation
insurance for Plaintiff or other Aggrieved Employees; Defendants
did not provide or pay for State Disability insurance for Plaintiff
or other Aggrieved Employees; and Defendants did not provide or pay
for benefits to Plaintiff employees should receive, such as paid
sick leave and other benefits, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant from 2019 to 2020 and again
from 2021 until June 2022 as a non-exempt hourly-paid employee in
California.

K & H CARE, LLC is a California corporation with its principal
place of business in Los Angeles County, California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Aidin D. Ghavimi, Esq.
          Ilana N. Fine, Esq.
          STARPOINT, LC
          15233 Ventura Boulevard, Suite PH16
          Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
          Phone: (310) 424-9971
          Fax: (424) 255-4035
          Email: service@starpointlaw.com


KIRSCHENBAUM & PHILLIPS: Rubin Suit Removed to E.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Zissel Rubin, individually and on behalf of
all other similarly situated consumers v. KIRSCHENBAUM & PHILLIPS,
P.C., Case No. 23STCV12869 was removed from the Supreme Court of
the State of New York, County of Kings, to the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of New York on July 19,
2023, and assigned Case No. 1:23-cv-05447.

The Complaint alleges, in sum and substance, that the defendants
violated the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Michael L. Kohl, Esq.
          KIRSCHENBAUM PHILLIPS, P.C.
          3018 Merrick Road
          Wantagh, NY 11793
          Phone: (631)219-1810


KIWI DESIGN INC: Vachnine Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Kiwi Design, Inc. The
case is styled as Ness-Lee Vachnine, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Kiwi Design, Inc. doing business as:
Kiwi And Fig, Case No. 1:23-cv-06444 (S.D.N.Y., July 26, 2023).

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

KIWI Design -- https://www.kiwidesign.com/ -- specializes in
designing and producing accessories for Quest 2 and Valve
Index.[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


KOCHAVA INC: Court Certifies Class Suit Over Consumer Privacy
-------------------------------------------------------------
Andrea Vittorio of Bloomberg Law reports that Kochava Inc. failed
to avoid a privacy lawsuit accusing the mobile analytics company of
gathering consumers' information, including location and spending
habits data, without their knowledge.

Consumers didn't properly agree to share the data "secretly"
collected from their mobile phones, a judge in the US District
Court for the Southern District of California ruled on July 27,
2023. The ruling lets a state resident who claimed he was affected
move forward with a proposed class action filed on behalf of other
consumers.

Apps that contain Kochava's code gather mobile data that the
company sells to clients, such as retailers, seeking to target.
[GN]

KOHLS INC: Brito Suit Removed to M.D. Florida
---------------------------------------------
The case styled as Lillian Brito, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Qdoba Restaurant Corporation doing
business as: Qdoba Mexican Eats Corporation, Does 1-20, Case No.
22-CA-0006672 was removed from the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, to
the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida on July
20, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 8:23-cv-01637-KKM-AEP to
the proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract.

Kohl's -- https://corporate.kohls.com/ -- is an American department
store retail chain, operated by Kohl's Corporation.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Benjamin W. Raslavich, Esq.
          KUHN RASLAVICH, P.A.
          2110 West Platt Street
          Tampa, FL 33606
          Phone: (813) 422-7782
          Fax: (813) 422-7783
          Email: ben@thekrfirm.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          James B. Saylor, Esq.
          KELLEY DRYE & WARREN, LLP
          101 Park Ave
          New York, NY 10178-0062
          Phone: (212) 808-5052
          Fax: (212) 808-7897
          Email: jsaylor@kelleydrye.com

               - and -

          Lauri A. Mazzuchetti, Esq.
          KELLEY, DRYE & WARREN, LLP
          1 Jefferson Rd
          Parsippany, NJ 07054
          Phone: (212) 808-7800
          Email: lmazzuchetti@kelleydrye.com

               - and -

          Matthew Charles Luzadder, Esq.
          KELLEY, DRYE & WARREN, LLP
          333 W Wacker Dr., Suite 2600
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Phone: (312) 857-2623
          Fax: (312) 857-7095
          Email: mluzadder@kelleydrye.com


L. & J. G. STICKLEY: Clement Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against L. & J. G. Stickley
Incorporated. The case is styled as Vincent Clement, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. L. & J. G. Stickley
Incorporated, Case No. 1:23-cv-05544 (E.D.N.Y., July 21, 2023).

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

Stickley -- https://www.stickley.com/ -- offers best-quality
hardwood furniture and upholstery for living room, bedroom, dining,
and home office, plus rugs and accessories.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
          STEIN SAKS, PLLC
          One University Plaza, Ste. 620
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Phone: (201) 282-6500
          Email: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com


LABRADA BODYBUILDING: Luis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Labrada Bodybuilding
Nutrition Inc. The case is styled as Kevin Yan Luis, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Labrada
Bodybuilding Nutrition Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-06284-JPO (S.D.N.Y.,
July 20, 2023).

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

Labrada Nutrition -- https://labrada.com/ -- is an American company
that produces sports nutritional.[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


LAKESHIRTS INC: Lawal Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lakeshirts, Inc. The
case is styled as Rafia Lawal, on behalf of herself and all others
similarly situated v. Lakeshirts, Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-06317-PGG
(S.D.N.Y., July 21, 2023).

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

Lakeshirts -- https://lakeshirts.com/ -- is a company that provides
custom garment and apparel printing services to customers in the
resort and college markets.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
          STEIN SAKS, PLLC
          One University Plaza, Ste. 620
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Phone: (201) 282-6500
          Email: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com


LIK FINE ART MIAMI: Clement Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lik Fine Art Miami,
Inc. The case is styled as Vincent Clement, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated v. Lik Fine Art Miami, Inc., Case
No. 1:23-cv-05546-NRM-TAM (E.D.N.Y., July 21, 2023).

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

Lik Fine Art Miami, Inc. -- https://lik.com/ -- is an art gallery
in Miami Beach, Florida.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
          STEIN SAKS, PLLC
          One University Plaza, Ste. 620
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Phone: (201) 282-6500
          Email: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com


LIP BAR INC: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Lawal Suit Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
RAFIA LAWAL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. THE LIP BAR, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:23-cv-06319 (S.D.N.Y., July 21, 2023) alleges Defendant's
violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web
site, www.thelipbar.com, is not fully or equally accessible to
blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the Plaintiff, in
violation of the ADA.

The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.

THE LIP BAR, INC.is a luxury cosmetic bar that produces and sells
lipsticks. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
           STEIN SAKS, PLLC
           One University Plaza, Suite 620
           Hackensack, NJ 07601
           Telephone: (201) 282-6500
           Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
           Email: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com

LORDSTOWN MOTORS: Faces Class Action Suit for Misleading Investors
------------------------------------------------------------------
Kyle Anderson of WFMG.com reports that in a new class action
lawsuit, an investor in Lordstown Motors claims that CEO Edward
Hightower and CFO Adam Kroll knowingly and intentionally mislead
and withheld information from investors, leading those investors to
have an "unrealistically positive assessment of Lordstown and its
business, operations, and prospects."

In the 26-page suit, filed in the Northern Ohio United States
District Court's eastern division, Lordstown Motors investor Bandol
Lim claims that Hightower and Kroll purposely mislead investors
into believing that Lordstown Motors and it's partnership with
Foxconn was going better than it actually was, all while knowing
information to the contrary.

The suit results from and directly mention's Lordstown's June 27,
2023 bankruptcy filing, where they claim that Foxconn fell through
on its obligations, causing Lordstown's operations to fail and go
under.

According to the suit, information relating to this deteriorating
agreements was well known by Hightower and Kroll, but not told to
investors, who suffered substantial losses as Lordstown's
agreements with Foxconn continued to deteriorate outside of the
public eye.

The lawsuit highlights several statements made by Hightower during
earnings reports which paint an unrealistically positive picture of
Lordstown's operations, despite Hightower having knowledge that
their partnership with Foxconn was souring.

The primary claim in the suit states that Lordstown was reliant on
the $100 million in the Joint Venture agreement with Foxconn to
stay afloat, yet when that agreement began to sour, did not tell
investors that information.

"Lordstown knew but failed to disclose that the financial life of
the Company was imperiled by its strained relationship with Foxconn
and if the partnership failed, the company faced bankruptcy."

Indeed, when those partnerships eventually deteriorated, Lordstown
Motors was forced to declare bankruptcy, and levied their own
claims in the filing that "Foxconn's fraud and willful and
consistent failure to live up to its commercial and financial
commitments to the Company" led to the decision to declare
bankruptcy and restructure.

Foxconn responded to that lawsuit, stating in part that "[Lordstown
Motors] has continuously attempted to mislead the public and has
been reluctant to perform the investment agreement between the two
parties in accordance with its terms."

The response from Foxconn goes on to say that they view Lordstown's
claims as "false" and "malicious."

True or not, the decline of Lordstown Motors had a substantial cost
to investors, some of whom may have faced a whopping 92.51% loss
after Lordstown's stock saw steep declines, went through a
reverse-split, and declined further. An investor who purchased
$1,000 in Lordstown Motors stock on August 5, 2022 would have just
$74.90 on July 27, 2023.

The suit, which the plaintiff requested go to a jury trial, seeks
to award compensation and punitive damages to members of the class,
in an amount to be determined and proven in trial. [GN]

LOUISVILLE/JEFFERSON COUNTY, KY: Class Cert Deadlines Extended
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ATTICA SCOTT, et al., v.
LOUISVILLE/JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOVERNMENT, et al., Case No.
3:20-cv-00535-BJB-CHL (W.D. Ky.), the Hon. Judge Colin H. Lindsay
entered an order granting the Parties' joint motion for extension
of deadlines to complete discovery and to extend briefing schedule
regarding motion for class certification:

    (1) Fact discovery

        a) Close of fact discovery:                July 31, 2023

        b) The Defendants' reply in further        July 10, 2023
           support of motion to quash:

    (2) Class Certification

        a) The Plaintiffs' motion, if any:         June 16, 2023

        b) The Defendants' opposition, if any:     July 21, 2023

        c) The Plaintiffs' reply, if any:          Aug. 11, 2023

    (3) Expert discovery

        a) Disclosure of experts
           (Rule 26(a)(2)):

               i. The Plaintiffs:                  Sept. 15, 2023

              ii. The Defendants:                  Oct. 20, 2023

             iii. The Plaintiffs' rebuttal:        Nov. 10, 2023

         b) Close of expert discovery:             Dec. 8, 2023

    (4) Joint status report at the close
        of discovery

        a) Joint status report (including          July 21, 2023
           position(s) on mediation):

    (5) Dispositive and expert motions:            Jan. 12, 2024.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3KhWeij at no extra charge.[CC]



LOWE'S HOME CENTERS: Garrido Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lowe's Home Centers,
LLC. The case is styled as Alexis Garrido, an individual, on behalf
of himself and others similarly situated v. Lowe's Home Centers,
LLC, Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2023-0007780 (Cal. Super. Ct., San
Francisco Cty., July 25, 2023).

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

Lowe's Home Centers Inc. -- https://www.lowes.com/ -- retails home
improvement, building materials, and home appliances.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alvin B. Lindsay, Esq.
          DAVID YEREMIAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
          2540 Foothill Blvd., Ste. 201
          La Crescenta, CA 91214-4583
          Phone: 818-230-8380
          Fax: 818-230-0308
          Email: alvin@yeremianlaw.com
          Website: www.yeremianlaw.com


M&M LIMOUSINE SERVICE: Turner Suit Removed to N.D. Illinois
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Zebedee Turner, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. M&M LIMOUSINE SERVICE, INC., M&M
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES LLC, and MINDAUGAS SUSINSKAS, individually,
Case No. 2023-CH-04073 was removed from the Circuit Court of Cook
County, Illinois, to the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois on July 21, 2023, and assigned Case
No. 1:23-cv-04740.

First, Plaintiff alleged that Defendants violated the Illinois
Minimum Wage Law ("IMWL") by "failing to pay [him] and the proposed
class members 1.5 times their regular rate of pay when they have
worked more than forty hours in a workweek." Second, Plaintiff
alleged that Defendants violated the Illinois Wage Payment
Collection Act ("IWPCA"), by "taking unlawful deductions from the
compensation they agreed to pay [him] and the proposed class
members." Third, Plaintiff alleged that Defendants violated the
IWPCA by "keeping gratuities to him and the proposed class members,
which are the property of the drivers." Fourth, Plaintiff alleged
that Defendants violated the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive
Business Practices Act ("ICFA"), by "engaging in the unfair and
deceptive act or practice of charging sums to consumers under the
false pretense that they are paying 'gratuities' for the benefit of
Defendants' drivers while failing to remit the money paid by
consumers to drivers." Fifth, Plaintiff alleged that, as a result
of their alleged failure to remit gratuities to the drivers,
Defendants "have engaged in common law unjust enrichment by falsely
misrepresenting to consumers that they were paying 'gratuities' for
the benefit of their drivers."[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Gerald L. Maatman, Jr., Esq.
          Jennifer A. Riley, Esq.
          George J. Schaller, Esq.
          DUANE MORRIS LLP
          190 S. LaSalle, Suite 3700
          Chicago, IL 60603
          Phone: (312) 499-6700
          Email: GMaatman@duanemorris.com
                 JARiley@duanemorris.com
                 GSchaller@duanemorris.com


MAC PIZZA MANAGEMENT: Schramm Files Suit in S.D. Texas
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Mac Pizza Management,
Inc. The case is styled as Sean Schramm, Craig Hopson, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Mac Pizza
Management, Inc., Case No. 3:23-cv-01559-B (S.D. Tex., July 18,
2023).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract for Breach of
Contract.

Mac Pizza Management Inc. -- https://www.macpizzamgmt.com/ -- is a
restaurant company.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joe Kendall, Esq.
          KENDALL LAW GROUP, PLLC - DALLAS
          3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 1450
          Dallas, TX 75219
          Phone: (214) 744-3000
          Fax: (214) 744-3015


MAIN LINE FERTILITY: Sued Over Illegal Disclosure of PII & PHI
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jane Doe, Individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. MAIN LINE FERTILITY, LTD. and MAIN LINE FERTILITY
CENTER, INC., collectively d/b/a MAIN LINE FERTILITY, Case No.
230702146 (Pa. Ct. of Common Pleas, Philadelphia Cty., July 21,
2023), is brought to address the Defendant's outrageous, illegal,
and widespread practice of disclosing the confidential Personally
Identifying Information ("PII") and/or Protected Health Information
("PHI") (collectively referred to as "Private Information") of
Plaintiff and the proposed Class Members to third parties,
including Meta Platforms, Inc. d/b/a Meta ("Facebook" or "Meta"),
Google, LLC, Simplifi Holdings, LLC, and potentially others ("the
Disclosure").

The Defendant encourages its patients to use its website,
https://www.mainlinefertility.com/, (the "Website") and its various
web-based tools and services, allowing patients to search for
physicians, locate health care facilities, learn about specific
health conditions and treatment options, sign up for consultations,
request appointments, learn about financing options, pay bills,
obtain information about related health care services, sign up for
support groups, and more (collectively referred to as the "Online
Platforms").

Despite its unique position as a trusted provider of extremely
sensitive and private health services (i.e., fertility treatment),
Main Line knowingly configured and implemented into its Website
devices known as "pixels," which then collected and transmitted
patients' information to third parties. This included information
communicated by patients through Defendant's sensitive and
presumptively confidential Online Platforms. When Plaintiff and
Class Members used Defendant's Online Platforms, they thought they
were communicating exclusively with their trusted healthcare
provider. Unbeknownst to them, Defendant embedded pixels from
Facebook, Google, Simplifi, and potentially others into its Website
and Online Platforms, surreptitiously forcing Plaintiff and Class
Members to transmit intimate details about their medical treatment
to third parties.

A pixel (also referred to as a "tracker" or "tracking technology")
is a snippet of code embedded into a website that tracks
information about its visitors and their website interactions. When
a person visits a website with an embedded pixel, the pixel tracks
"events" (i.e., user interactions with the site), such as pages
viewed, buttons clicked, and information submitted. Then, the pixel
transmits the event information back to the website server and to
third parties, where it can be combined with other data and used
for marketing.

The Defendant utilized data from these trackers to market its
services and bolster its profits. Meta Pixel and CAPI are routinely
used to target specific customers by utilizing data to build
profiles for the purposes of retargeting and future marketing.
Facebook also uses Plaintiff's and Class Members' Private
Information to create targeted advertisements based on the medical
conditions and other information disclosed to Defendant.

Neither Plaintiff nor any Class Member signed a written
authorization permitting Defendant to send their Private
Information to Facebook, Google, and Simplifi, or any other third
parties uninvolved in their treatment. Despite willfully and
intentionally incorporating tracking technology, including the Meta
Pixel, potentially CAPI, and other tracking technology, into its
Website and servers, Main Line has never disclosed to Plaintiff or
Class Members that it shared their sensitive and confidential
communications and Private Information with third parties including
Facebook, Google, Simplifi and possibly others.

The Plaintiff and Class Members were unaware that their Private
Information was being surreptitiously transmitted to Facebook and
other third parties as they communicated their confidential PHI
with their healthcare provider via the Website. Defendant further
made express and implied promises to protect Plaintiff's and Class
Members' Private Information and maintain the privacy and
confidentiality of communications that patients exchanged with
Defendant. Defendant owed common law, statutory, and regulatory
duties to keep Plaintiff's and Class Members' communications and
Private Information safe, secure, and confidential.

The Plaintiff seeks to remedy these harms and bring causes of
action for Negligence; Invasion of Privacy; Breach of Implied
Contract; Unjust Enrichment; Breach of Fiduciary Duty; Violation of
the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection
Law; and Violation of the Violation of the Pennsylvania Wiretapping
and Electronic Surveillance Control Act ("WESCA"), says the
complaint.

The Plaintiffs is a patient of Main Line and a victim of
Defendant's unauthorized Disclosure of Private Information.

Main Line is a Pennsylvania-based, for-profit specialty health care
provider that operates multiple clinics located throughout the
greater Philadelphia area.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David L. Kwass, Esq.
          SALTZ, MONGELUZZI & BENDESKY, P.C.
          1650 Market St., 52 Fl.
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Phone: (215) 496-8282
          Email: dkwass@smbb.com

               - and -

          Lynn A. Toops, Esq.
          Mary Kate Dugan, Esq.
          COHEN &MALAD, LLP
          One Indiana Square, Suite 1400
          Indianapolis, IN 46204
          Phone: (317) 636-6481
          Email: ltoops@cohenandmalad.com
                 mdugan@cohenandmalad.com

               - and -

          J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
          Andrew E. Mize, Esq.
          STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
          The Freedom Center
          223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200
          Nashville, TN 37203
          Phone: (615) 254-8801
          Facsimile: (615) 255-5419
          Email: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
                 amize@stranchlaw.com

               - and -

          Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
          Raina Borelli, Esq.
          TURKE & STRAUSS, LLP
          613 Williamson St., Suite 201
          Madison, WI 53703
          Phone: (608) 237-1775
          Facsimile: (608) 509-4423
          Email: sam@turkestrauss.com
                 raina@turkestrauss.com


MANAGED CARE: Caine Files Suit in D. South Carolina
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Managed Care of North
America Inc., et al. The case is styled as Blaeten Caine,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Managed Care of North America Inc., MCNA Insurance Company, MCNA
Health Care Holdings Inc., Case No. 7:23-cv-03437-DCC (D.S.C., July
18, 2023).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract.

Managed Care of North America Inc. (MCNA) -- https://www.mcna.net/
-- is a premier dental benefits administrator that provides
exceptional service to state agencies and managed care
organizations.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Paul J. Doolittle, Esq.
          Blake Garrett Abbott, Esq.
          POULIN WILLEY ANASTOPOULO LLC
          32 Ann Street
          Charleston, SC 29403
          Phone: (843) 834-4712
          Email: pauld@akimlawfirm.com
                 blake@akimlawfirm.com


MARGIE QUIN: B.R. Files Suit in M.D. Tennessee
----------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Margie Quin. The case
is styled as B.R., by her Next Friend Nora El-Chaer, for herself
and all others similarly situated, L. T., by his Next Friend S.T.,
A. B., by his Next Friend C.B., for himself and all others
similarly situated, Advocates for Immigrant Rights, v. Margie Quin,
in her official capacity as the Commissioner of the Tennessee
Department of Children's Services, Case No. 3:23-cv-00737
(S.D.N.Y., July 21, 2023).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Civil Rights for Civil Rights
Act.

Margie Quin is the Commissioner of the Tennessee Department of
Children's Services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Irene A. Firippis, Esq.
          Paul M. Thompson, Esq.
          Rodney D. Swartz, Esq.
          Sam C. Neel, Esq.
          Email: ifirippis@mwe.com
                 PThompson@mwe.com
                 rswartz@mwe.com
                 sneel@mwe.com

               - and -

          Katrina Braun, Esq.
          Leecia Welch, Esq.
          Nicole Taykhman, Esq.
          Stephen Dixon, Esq.
          Email: kbraun@childrensrights.org
                 lwelch@childrensrights.org
                 ntaykhman@childrensrights.org
                 sdixon@childrensrights.org

               - and -

          Paige Waldrop Mills, Esq.
          BASS, BERRY & SIMS (NASHVILLE OFFICE)
          150 Third Avenue South, Suite 2800
          Nashville, TN 37201
          Phone: (615) 742-7770
          Email: pmills@bassberry.com

MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL: Baek Suit Removed to C.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Nina Baek and Megan Ramsey, individually and
on behalf of all similarly situated current and former guests v.
MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC.; COURTYARD MANAGEMENT, LLC.; MARRIOTT
HOTEL SERVICES, LLC, and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No.
23STCV14245 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California for the County of Los Angeles, to the United States
District Court for the Central District of California on July 21,
2023, and assigned Case No. 2:23-cv-05944.

The Plaintiffs claim that Defendants' statement that the HWPO Fee
is a "local fee" is "unfair, deceptive, untrue and misleading, and
result in Marriott gaining an unfair advantage over its competitors
in the hospitality industry" because consumers "believe that the
fee goes toward the cost of compliance with the Ordinance and that
it is imposed by the City of Los Angeles." The Plaintiffs assert
claims under California's Unfair Competition Law ("UCL") and
Consumer Legal Remedies Act ("CLRA"), as well as a cause of action
for unjust enrichment.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Matthew Lewitz, Esq.
          COZEN O'CONNOR
          401 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 850
          Santa Monica, CA 90401
          Phone: 310.393.4000
          Facsimile: 310.394.4700
          Email: mlewitz@cozen.com


MAXIMUM HUMAN PERFORMANCE: Luis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Maximum Human
Performance, LLC. The case is styled as Kevin Yan Luis,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Maximum Human Performance, LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-06485-SHS
(S.D.N.Y., July 26, 2023).

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

Maximum Human Performance, LLC (MHP) -- https://mhpstrong.com/ --
provides supplements for bodybuilding, strength, weight loss, and
fitness.[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


MBR FARMS: Time to File Class Status Bid Extended
-------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Hernandez, et al., v.
MARIA LETICIA PATRICIO, ENRIQUE DUQUE TOVAR, JOSE CARMEN DUQUE
TOVAR, and MBR FARMS, INC., a Georgia corporation, Case No.
5:23-cv-00023 (S.D. Ga., Filed April 5, 2023), the Hon. Judge
Benjamin W. Cheesbro entered an order granting the Plaintiffs'
Motion for Extension to File Motion for class certification.

    -- The Plaintiffs shall file their desired motion for class
       certification within 60 days of the close of written
discovery.

The nature of suit states Racketeering (RICO) Act.[CC]

MDL 1871: TPPs Seeks to Unseal Exhibits for Class Certification
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit RE: AVANDIA MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES
AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION, Case No. 2:07-md-01871-CMR (E.D.
Pa.), Third Party Payers move the Court to unseal all exhibits
filed in support of their Memorandum of Law in Support of their
motion for class certification.

  -- First, many of the exhibits filed in support of the TPPs'
class
     certification motion are public documents, never designated as

     confidential by any party. As a result, there is no need
     or justification for their sealing.

  -- Second, counsel for the TPPs and GlaxoSmithKline LLC (GSK)
have
     conferred regarding the Exhibits that are GSK-produced
documents,
     GSK and TPP expert reports that discuss GSK-produced documents
or
     GSK-obtained data, and transcripts of depositions of current
or
     former GSK employees. GSK has consented to the unsealing of
all
     these documents, requesting limited redactions to exhibits 9,
13,
     16, 17, and 18—their experts' hourly rates and redactions
for
     confidential data obtained from non-party OptumHealth.

  -- Third, the TPPs request one redaction for commercially
sensitive
     information in exhibit 4—the Declaration of non-party Mark
     Fischer.

  -- Fourth, non-party Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS) has consented to
the
     unsealing of exhibits that are BMS-produced documents
(exhibits
     72-89). BMS requests one redaction for personal identifying
     information in exhibit 77 that the TPPs do not oppose.

  -- Fifth, non-parties CommonHealth and Cohn & Wolfe have not
opposed
     the unsealing of exhibits that are CommonHealth-produced
     documents or deposition transcripts per Pre-Trial Order 10.

  -- Sixth and finally, non-party Scientific Therapeutics
Information,
     Inc. (STI) no longer exists and has no successor in interest.
As
     a result, the TPPs request that exhibits that are
STI-produced
     documents be unsealed.

Third Party Payers or TPPs includes UFCW Local 1776 & Participating
Employers Health & Welfare Fund (UFCW) and J.B. Hunt Transport
Services Inc. (J.B. Hunt).


A copy of the the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 14, 2023, is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3q7Ouc1 at no
extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Thomas M. Sobol, Esq.
          Erin C. Burns, Esq.
          Hannah W. Brennan, Esq.
          HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
          One Faneuil Hall Square, 5th Floor
          Boston, MA 02109
          Telephone: (617) 482-3700
          Facsimile: (617) 482-3003
          E-mail: tom@hbsslaw.com
                  erinb@hbsslaw.com
                  hannahb@hbsslaw.com

                - and -

          James R. Dugan, II, Esq.
          David S. Scalia, Esq.
          TerriAnne Benedetto, Esq.
          DUGAN LAW FIRM APLC
          One Canal Place – Suite 1000
          365 Canal Street
          New Orleans, LA 70130
          Telephone: (504) 648-0180
          Facsimile: (504) 648-0181
          E-mail: jdugan@dugan-lawfirm.com
                  dscalia@dugan-lawfirm.com
                  tbenedetto@dugan-lawfirm.com

META PLATFORMS: $725M Deal in Privacy Class Action Suit Objected
----------------------------------------------------------------
Andrea Vittorio of Bloomberg Law reports that Meta Platforms Inc.
faces objections to a proposed $725 million settlement for a
long-running consumer privacy lawsuit that claimed Facebook
illegally shared user data with the research firm Cambridge
Analytica.

Two Facebook users took issue with the suggested method of
distributing funds to individuals who may have been impacted by the
data-sharing, according to an objection filed on July 26, 2023 in
the US District Court for California's Northern District. They also
questioned whether the deal too broadly relieves Meta from
liability for claims related to third-party access to user data.

The objection could delay final approval of the deal reached last
December. A federal judge in California gave initial approval in
March to the class action agreement between Meta and users of its
social media platform Facebook.

The settlement is meant to resolve a 2018 lawsuit stemming from
revelations that political consultancy Cambridge Analytica gained
access to data on millions of Facebook users and their friends via
a third-party quiz app. The consulting firm used the data to assist
its clients, such as the 2016 Donald Trump presidential campaign,
with voter profiling and targeting.

The settlement in this case is the largest recovery ever in a
data-privacy class action, according to lawyers representing
Facebook users. Settlement funds are set to be distributed to
Facebook users based on how long they had an account on the social
media platform during a specified time frame.

Fund distribution should factor in how many Facebook friends may
have exposed each user to third-party privacy invasion, the
objection says.

The settlement faces another objection from a civil rights group
representing formerly incarcerated individuals called All of Us or
None, which until recently maintained a Facebook group page for its
members. The organization critiqued how the settlement class is
defined.

Large-scale deals to resolve many similar legal claims at once
often face objections from class members who argue a proposed
settlement is unfair in some way. Sometimes these objections lead
to refinement of the settlement.

The case is In re Facebook Consumer Privacy User Profile Litig.,
N.D. Cal., No. 3:18-md-2843, settlement objections filed 7/26/23.

To contact the reporter on this story: Andrea Vittorio in
Washington at avittorio@bloombergindustry.com

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Tonia Moore at
tmoore@bloombergindustry.com; Jay-Anne B. Casuga at
jcasuga@bloomberglaw.com [GN]

META PLATFORMS: Settles Parris BIPA Class Suit for $68.5-Mil.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Carrie Pallardy of InformationWeek reports that Meta, the parent
company of Instagram, is facing a class action lawsuit focused on
biometric data privacy. The lawsuit (Parris v. Meta Platforms,
Inc.) alleges that Instagram collected and stored users' biometric
data in violation of Illinois' Biometric Information Privacy Act
(BIPA). The company denies any wrongdoing, but it has agreed to pay
a $68.5 million settlement.

Individuals who used Instagram between Aug. 10, 2015, and Aug. 16,
2023, may be entitled to a piece of the settlement. The final
approval hearing for the settlement will take place on Oct. 11.

As biometric data continues to proliferate, regulations are
evolving, companies must work to remain compliant, and individuals
must consider what they can do to protect their data.

Illinois Legislation
BIPA went into effect in 2008. "Illinois' BIPA is the first of its
kind in the US and remains the most stringent," says Eve Maler,
chief technology officer of identity and access management software
company ForgeRock.

Illinois is not the only state to have a biometric data privacy
law, but BIPA includes a unique element: private right of action.
It allows individuals to file lawsuits against corporations that
allegedly violate the law.

"Other state biometric privacy laws lack a private right of action,
leaving it to enforcement government agencies, such as state
attorneys general," explains Bill Roberts, co-chair of the data
privacy, protection, and litigation group at law firm Day Pitney.

Although BIPA has been around since 2008, Roberts points to a 2019
case (Rosenbach v. Six Flags Entertainment Corp.) that has fueled
more cases related to BIPA. Stacy Rosenbach sued the amusement park
because it took her son's fingerprints without the notice and
consent required by BIPA, according to American Civil Liberties
Union. A lower court ruled her son did not experience "actual
injury" necessary to sue under BIPA.

The case made its way to the Illinois Supreme court, which
ultimately ruled that individuals do not need to experience harm or
injury to sue for damages under BIPA. "This was a significant
departure from how most such laws are interpreted and has led to
countless BIPA claims being filed in Illinois state court," Roberts
says.

Six Flags agreed to settle the case for $36 million.

The $65.8 million Instagram settlement is not the first time Meta
has tangled with BIPA. In 2021, Facebook agreed to a $650 million
settlement in another biometric privacy class action lawsuit.  

And litigation continues. X, the recently rebranded Twitter, is
facing a class action lawsuit alleging BIPA violations.

"BIPA litigation is one of the most common types of privacy
litigation that we see in the US on July 28, 2023. That trend will
not change any time soon," says Cobun Zweifel-Keegan, managing
director, Washington, D.C., at the nonprofit advocacy organization
International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP).

Evolving Regulations
Other states, including Texas and Washington, have legislation that
addresses the use of biometric data and privacy. New York City also
has a law that regulates the collection and use of biometric data.

Several other states have their own proposed versions of a
biometric data privacy law. For example, the Oregon Consumer
Privacy Act (SB 619) is awaiting signature by Governor Tina Kotek.
The legislation "defines personal and biometric data broadly,"
according to an Oregon Department of Justice news release.

The state-by-state approach is often referred to as a regulatory
patchwork, making compliance challenging. Will there be a federal
law that provides comprehensive requirements for biometric data
privacy?

Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) introduced the National Biometric
Information Privacy Act of 2020 (S. 4400) in the Senate, but the
last action taken on that proposed legislation was in August 2020.
But biometric data is still being scrutinized at the federal level.
In May, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a policy
statement on the misuses of biometric data and potential harm to
consumers.

The FTC "warns that false or unsubstantiated claims about the
accuracy or efficacy of biometric information technologies or about
the collection and use of biometric information may violate the FTC
Act."

Regulation addressing biometric data privacy is likely to continue
evolving at the state and federal level. "Over time, these
regulations will start to resemble each other, similar to how GDPR
gained copycats worldwide. Greater legal alignment will aid in
organizations' ability to comply, but these initial years will be
messy," ForgeRock's Maler predicts.

Companies will need to remain aware of new and changing regulatory
requirements and have the flexibility to comply, lest they face
costly litigation and regulatory action. "Technical and operational
responsiveness and an unwavering commitment to ethical usage will
help enterprises emerge on strong footing," Maler says.

While companies and regulators work through the next few years,
biometric data will continue to proliferate and so will the
potential harms associated with its misuse. Individuals will have
to grapple with what that means for them. Keeping external
biometrics private isn't feasible in many cases. "Faces and
fingerprints don't make for good secrets," Maler points out.

Individuals can scrutinize use agreements and opt-in policies to
help control who has access to their biometric data, but not
everyone is going to read the fine print as they sign up for new
applications and share information in the course of their daily
lives.

"US consumers have to rely on whatever privacy rights and
protections their state provides for them," says IAPP's
Zweifel-Keegan. [GN]

META PLATFORMS: Silverman Files Class Suit for Copyright Violations
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Donovan Johnson of Fagen Wasanni Technologies reports that Comedian
Sarah Silverman and authors Richard Kadrey and Christopher Golden
have recently filed class-action lawsuits against Meta Platforms
(parent company of Facebook) and OpenAI (backed by Microsoft Corp.)
for allegedly using their copyrighted content without authorization
to train artificial intelligence (AI) language models. The lawsuits
were filed in San Francisco federal court, highlighting the legal
challenges faced by developers of chat bots who rely on copyrighted
material.

The plaintiffs claim that Meta and OpenAI utilized their works
without permission by copying from illegal online "shadow
libraries" that contain the texts of thousands of books. Meta's own
research paper, "LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language
Models," published in February 2023, is cited in the lawsuit
against Meta. The authors argue that the dataset used by Meta
includes their copyrighted materials, demonstrating that the books
were copied for training purposes.

The lawsuit against OpenAI alleges that summaries generated by
ChatGPT, the company's AI language model, are based on the
plaintiffs' copyrighted content. Silverman's memoir, "The
Bedwetter," had a summary composed by ChatGPT provided as an
exhibit to the complaint. The plaintiffs are seeking damages and
injunctive relief on behalf of a nationwide class of copyright
owners whose works were infringed upon.

One challenge the plaintiffs may face is the 2nd Circuit Court's
decision in Authors Guild v. Google, a copyright case that
addressed fair use in copyright law. The court found that Google's
digitizing of copyright-protected works and display of snippets
constituted non-infringing fair use. This case may inform the
court's decision on fair use by Meta and OpenAI.

These lawsuits highlight the potential legal consequences for
developers who use copyrighted material without proper
authorization. Attorneys for the plaintiffs argue that a
significant portion of the training datasets used by OpenAI and
Meta are copied from copyrighted works without consent or
compensation. These lawsuits aim to protect the plaintiffs' rights
and establish boundaries for the use of copyrighted material in AI
development. [GN]

METRO FINEST DELI: Garza Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Luis Alberto Bello Garza, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated v. METRO FINEST DELI, INC. (D/B/A METRO FINEST
DELI), MOHAMED M. ALNOWFI, and NADHER MOHAMMED MOHARRAM, Case No.
1:23-cv-05618 (E.D.N.Y., July 25, 2023), is brought for unpaid
minimum and overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act
of ("FLSA"), and for violations of the N.Y. Labor Law (the "NYLL"),
and the "spread of hours" and overtime wage orders of the New York
Commissioner of Labor (herein the "Spread of Hours Wage Order"),
including applicable liquidated damages, interest, attorneys' fees
and costs.

The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants in excess of 40 hours per
week, without appropriate minimum wage, overtime, and spread of
hours compensation for the hours that he worked. Rather, the
Defendants failed to pay the Plaintiff appropriately for any hours
worked, either at the straight rate of pay or for any additional
overtime premium. Further, the Defendants failed to pay the
Plaintiff the required "spread of hours" pay for any day in which
he had to work over 10 hours a day. The Defendants' conduct
extended beyond Plaintiff Bello to all other similarly situated
employees. The Defendants maintained a policy and practice of
requiring the Plaintiff and other employees to work in excess of 40
hours per week without providing the minimum wage and overtime
compensation required by federal and state law and regulations,
says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was employed as a deli worker at the deli.

The Defendants own, operate, or control a deli, located in
Brooklyn, New York, under the name "Metro Finest Deli."[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


METROSPEEDY OPERATIONS: Roman Files FLSA Suit in E.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Metrospeedy
Operations, LLC. The case is styled as Juan Roman, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Metrospeedy
Operations, LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-05551 (W.D. Ky., July 21, 2023).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Acts.

MetroSpeedy -- https://www.metrospeedy.com/ -- is a delivery
service.[BN]

The Plaintiff appears pro se.


MIDLAND CREDIT: Lee Files FDCPA Suit in C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Midland Credit
Management, Inc. The case is styled as Kyungnan Lee, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Midland Credit
Management, Inc., Case No. 2:23-cv-05784-FLA-PD (C.D. Cal., July
18, 2023).

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

Midland Credit Management, Inc. -- https://www.midlandcredit.com/
-- is a third-party debt collector with headquarters in San
Diego.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jonathan Aaron Stieglitz, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF JONATHAN STIEGLITZ
          11845 W. Olympic Blvd., Suite 800
          Los Angeles, CA 90064
          Phone: (323) 979-2063
          Fax: (323) 488-6748
          Email: jonathan.a.stieglitz@gmail.com


MIKE MCCALL LANDSCAPE: Cabrera Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Mike McCall
Landscape, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Salvador Escobar
Cabrera, Juan Escobar Cabrera, on behalf of all other similarly
situated employees Petitioner v. Mike McCall Landscape, Inc., Does
1-100, Respondent, Case No. 23CV005083 (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento
Cty., July 20, 2023).

The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case."

Mike McCall Landscape -- https://mmlinc.net/ -- is a full service
landscape company providing service to the new home builders.[BN]

MILKMAN TECHNOLOGIES: Williams Sues Over Retaliatory Discharge
--------------------------------------------------------------
Nicholas Ashley Williams, on his behalf and on behalf of others
similarly situated v. MILKMAN TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ROBERT BEECHER,
and RAFAEL KASSIN, Case No. 1:23-cv-22727-JEM (S.D. Fla., July 21,
2023), is brought for damages to remedy violations of the rights of
the Plaintiff for retaliatory discharge in violation of the
Workers' Compensation Law and the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938
("FLSA").

On June 1, 2022, the Plaintiff slipped and fell while moving one of
the Defendants' delivery vehicles, injuring his back. The Plaintiff
immediately notified Mr. Kassin. Over the next few days, the
Plaintiff and Mr. Kassin kept in touch and the Plaintiff updated
Mr. Kassin on his back injury. The Plaintiff wanted to see a doctor
but didn't have insurance and Mr. Kassin did not offer or provide
any workers' compensation information.

On June 21, 2022, Mr. Kassin and the Plaintiff spoke on the phone
and Mr. Kassin said that the Defendants were switching all
independent contractors to employee status. Mr. Kassin told the
Plaintiff that once he returned to work, he would need to sign
paperwork saying that he would not sue the Defendants.

The next day, the Plaintiff told Mr. Kassin that he wanted to "get
hired on" as an employee but requested back pay due to his injuries
because he was behind on his bills. Mr. Kassin denied the
Plaintiff's request. On June 27, 2022, Mr. Kassin texted the
Plaintiff and said that the Plaintiff never signed the paperwork,
and the offer was expiring that same day. The Plaintiff did not
respond because he had not been given the appropriate workers'
compensation information.

To add insult to injury, the Defendants owe the Plaintiff unpaid
overtime wages for five pay periods- from April 2, 2022 through May
27, 2022. The Defendants incorrectly compensated the Plaintiff for
his overtime hours at his straight time rate. The Plaintiff has
engaged the undersigned attorney and is entitled to recover his
attorneys' fees from the Defendants, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was hired by the Defendants as a delivery driver on
March 14, 2022. The Plaintiff's final job title was Warehouse
Manager.

Milkman Technologies, Inc., had employees engaged in commerce or in
the production of goods for commerce, and/or had employees
handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods or materials that
were moved in or produced for commerce by a person.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michelle Cohen Levy, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICE OF MICHELLE COHEN LEVY, P.A.
          4400 N. Federal Highway
          Lighthouse Point, FL 33064
          Phone: (954) 651-9196
          Email: Michelle@CohenLevyLegal.com


MORTGAGE INDUSTRY: McGee Files Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Mortgage Industry
Advisory Corporation. The case is styled as Sharon McGee,
individually and on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. Mortgage Industry Advisory Corporation, Case No.
1:23-cv-06332 (S.D.N.Y., July 21, 2023).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract.

MIAC Analytics -- https://miacanalytics.com/ -- is the leading
provider of pricing, risk management, and accounting solutions for
the mortgage and financial services industries.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Andrew Shamis, Esq.
          SHAMIS & GENTILE, PA
          14 Ne 1st Ave, Suite 1205
          Miami, FL 33132
          Phone: (305) 479-2299
          Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com


MUFG BANK: $90MM Class Action Settlement to be Heard on Oct. 17
---------------------------------------------------------------
If You Owned a U.S. Dollar LIBOR-Based Instrument Between August
2007 and May 2010 A Class Action Settlement Totaling $90 Million
May Affect Your Legal Rights.

A federal court authorized this notice. This is not a solicitation
from a lawyer.

There are lawsuits impacting individuals and institutions that
entered into over-the-counter financial derivative and
non-derivative instruments directly with 17 banks and that received
payments tied to U.S. Dollar LIBOR. A Settlement totaling $90
million has been reached with MUFG Bank, Ltd., The Norinchukin
Bank, and Societe Generale. Earlier settlements totaling $590
million were reached with Barclays, Citibank, Deutsche Bank, and
HSBC, bringing the total settlement amount to $680 million. The
remaining Non-Settling Defendants include Bank of America, Credit
Suisse, HBOS, JPMorgan Chase, Lloyds, Rabobank, Royal Bank of
Canada, Royal Bank of Scotland, UBS, and Portigon. The litigation
claims that the banks manipulated the U.S. Dollar LIBOR rate during
the financial crisis, artificially lowering the rate for their own
profit, which resulted in class members receiving lower interest
payments for their U.S. Dollar LIBOR-Based Instruments from the
banks than they should have. Plaintiffs assert antitrust, breach of
contract, and unjust enrichment claims. MUFG Bank, Norinchukin, and
Societe Generale deny all claims of wrongdoing.

What does the Settlement provide?

The Settlement will create a Settlement Fund totaling $90 million
that will be used to pay eligible Class Members who submit valid
claims, as well as attorneys' fees not to exceed one third of the
gross settlement, expenses not to exceed $5,500,000, and service
awards to the Class Representatives not to exceed $100,000 per
Representative. Additionally, MUFG Bank, Norinchukin, and Societe
Generale will provide certain cooperation to the Plaintiffs in
their ongoing litigation against the Non-Settling Defendants.

Am I eligible to receive a payment from the Settlement?

You are included if you (individual or entity) directly purchased
certain U.S. Dollar LIBOR-based instruments from Bank of America,
Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi, Barclays, Citibank, Credit Suisse,
Deutsche Bank, HBOS, HSBC, JPMorgan Chase, Lloyds, Norinchukin,
Rabobank, Royal Bank of Canada, Royal Bank of Scotland, Societe
Generale, UBS, and Portigon (or their subsidiaries or affiliates)
in the United States; and owned the instruments at any time between
August 2007 and May 2010. The instruments in the Settlement Class
include certain interest rate swaps, forward rate agreements, asset
swaps, collateralized debt obligations, credit default swaps,
inflation swaps, total return swaps, options, and bonds/floating
rate notes.

How do I get a payment from the Settlement?

You can submit a Proof of Claim online or by mail. The deadline to
submit a Proof of Claim is December 15, 2023. You do not need to
submit a Proof of Claim to share in the Settlement if you
previously submitted a valid Proof of Claim in the prior
settlements and do not seek to modify or supplement your Proof of
Claim. You are entitled to receive a payment if you have a
qualifying transaction with any of the following banks: Bank of
America, Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi, Barclays, Citibank, Credit
Suisse, Deutsche Bank, HBOS, HSBC, JPMorgan Chase, Lloyds,
Norinchukin, Rabobank, Royal Bank of Canada, Royal Bank of
Scotland, Societe Generale, UBS, or Portigon (or their subsidiaries
or affiliates). You do not need to have transacted with MUFG Bank,
Norinchukin, or Societe Generale specifically. At this time, it is
unknown how much each Class Member who submits a valid claim will
receive. Visit www.USDollarLiborSettlement.com for more information
on submitting a Proof of Claim.

What are my rights?

If you are a member of the Settlement Class and you do not file a
timely claim, you will lose your right to receive money or benefits
from the $90 million settlement with MUFG Bank, Norinchukin, and
Societe Generale unless you submitted a valid claim in a prior
settlement in the OTC Action. If you would like to retain your
right to file your own lawsuit against MUFG Bank, Norinchukin, or
Societe Generale, you must opt out of the Settlement Class by
September 29, 2023. If you stay in the Settlement Class, you may
object to the Settlement by September 29, 2023.

The Court's hearing.

The Court will hold a hearing on October 17, 2023 to consider
whether to approve the Settlement and approve Class Counsel's
request of attorneys' fees of up to one-third of the Settlement
Fund, plus reimbursement of costs and expenses and service payments
to the Class Representatives. You or your own lawyer may appear and
speak at the hearing at your own expense. More information about
the Settlement is available on the Settlement website,
www.USDollarLiborSettlement.com, and in the Long Form Notice
accessible on that website, or by calling 1-888-619-8688.

This notice is only a summary.

For more information, including the full Notice and Settlement
Agreement, visit www.USDollarLiborSettlement.com, email
info@MUFGLiborSettlement.com, or call 1-888-619-8688


NATIONAL VISION: Herrera Suit Removed to S.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Daniel Herrera, on behalf of himself and
others similarly situated v. NATIONAL VISION, INC.; and DOES 1-100,
inclusive, Case No. 34-2023-00023282-CU-OE-CTL was removed from the
Superior Court of the Superior Court of the State of California for
the County of San Diego, to the United States District Court for
the Southern District of California on July 24, 2023, and assigned
Case No. 3:23-cv-01350-LAB-WVG.

The Complaint alleged causes of action for: Failure to Pay Wages
For All Hours Worked At Minimum Wage; Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
For Daily Overtime Worked; Failure To Authorize Or Permit Meal
Periods; Failure To Authorize And Permit Rest Periods; Failure To
Provide Complete And Accurate Wage Statements; Failure To Timely
Pay All Earned Wages At Termination; Unfair Business Practices (the
"UCL Claim").[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Coby M. Turner, Esq.
          Jeffrey A. Nordlander, Esq.
          SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
          400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2300
          Sacramento, CA 95814-4428
          Phone: (916) 448-0159
          Facsimile: (916) 558-4839
          Email: cturner@seyfarth.com
                 jnordlander@seyfarth.com


NATIONSBENEFITS LLC: Caliendo Suit Transferred to D. Connecticut
----------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Lenore Caliendo, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. NationsBenefits, LLC, Aetna Inc,
Case No. 0:23-cv-60927 was transferred from the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of Florida, to the U.S. District Court
for the District of Connecticut on July 19, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:23-cv-00955-KAD to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Personal Property.

NationsBenefits -- https://www.nationsbenefits.com/ -- is a
supplemental benefits company that provides managed care
organizations.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Stuart A. Davidson, Esq.
          Dorothy P. Antullis, Esq.
          Alex C. Cohen, Esq.
          Bradley M. Beall, Esq.
          Anny M. Martin, Esq.
          ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
          225 NE Mizner Boulevard, Suite 720
          Boca Raton, FL 33432
          Phone: 561/750-3000
          Fax: 561/750-3364
          Email: sdavidson@rgrdlaw.com
                 dantullis@rgrdlaw.com
                 acohen@rgrdlaw.com
                 bbeall@rgrdlaw.com
                 amartin@rgrdlaw.com

               - and -

          Ben Barnow, Esq.
          Anthony L. Parkhill, Esq.
          BARNOW AND ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          205 West Randolph Street, Suite. 1630
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Phone: 312/621-2000
          Fax: 312/641-5504
          Email: b.barnow@barnowlaw.com
                 aparkhill@barnowlaw.com


NATIONSBENEFITS LLC: King Files Suit in S.D. Florida
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against NationsBenefits LLC,
et al. The case is styled as Jefferey King, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. NationsBenefits LLC,
NationsBenefits Holdings LLC, Aetna, Inc., Case No.
0:23-cv-61373-XXXX (S.D. Fla., July 18, 2023).

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I.

NationsBenefits -- https://www.nationsbenefits.com/ -- is a
supplemental benefits company that provides managed care
organizations.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Nathan C. Zipperian, Esq.
          MILLER SHAH LLP
          1625 N. Commerce Parkway, Suite 320
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33326
          Phone: (866) 540-5505
          Fax: (866) 300-7367
          Email: nczipperian@millershah.com


NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT: King Suit Removed to C.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Andrew King, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. Navy Federal Credit Union, Does 1-50,
inclusive, Case No. 23STCV14327 was removed from the Los Angeles
Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for the Central District
of California on July 21, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 8:23-cv-01637-KKM-AEP to
the proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract.

Navy Federal Credit Union -- https://www.navyfederal.org/ -- is a
global credit union headquartered in Vienna, Virginia, chartered
and regulated under the authority of the National Credit Union
Administration.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Sophia Goren Gold, Esq.
          KALIELGOLD PLLC
          950 Gilman Street, Suite 200
          Berkeley, CA 94710
          Phone: (202) 350-4783
          Email: sgold@kalielgold.com

               - and -

          Amanda J. Rosenberg, Esq.
          Jeffrey Douglas Kaliel, Esq.
          KALIEL GOLD PLLC
          1100 15th Street NW, 4th Floor
          Washington, DC 20005
          Phone: (202) 350-4783
          Email: jkaliel@kalielpllc.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Jason Jonathan Kim, Esq.
          Hakop Stepanyan, Esq.
          Marcus Edward Nelson, Esq.
          HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP
          550 South Hope Street Suite 2000
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Phone: (213) 532-2000
          Fax: (213) 532-2020
          Email: kimj@huntonak.com
                 hstepanyan@huntonak.com
                 mnelson@huntonak.com


NEW YORK, NY: Appeals Prelim. Injunction Ruling in Bentkowski Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
THE CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., filed an appeal from a court ruling
entered in the lawsuit entitled ROBERT BENTKOWSKI, KAREN ENGEL,
MICHELLE FEINMAN, NANCY LOSINNO, JOHN MIHOVICS, KAREN MILLER, ERICA
RHINE, ELLEN RIESER, BEVERLY ZIMMERMAN, THE NEW YORK CITY
ORGANIZATION OF PUBLIC SERVICE RETIREES, INC., Petitioners v. THE
CITY OF NEW YORK, ERIC ADAMS, THE CITY OF NEW YORK OFFICE OF LABOR
RELATIONS, RENEE CAMPION, THE NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION, DAVID C. BANKS, Respondents, Case No. 154962/2023, in
the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.

Petitioners Bentkowski, et al., bring this action pursuant to
Article 78, to annul the Respondents' implementation of a new
healthcare plan for City retirees. The Petitioners allege that the
City has unlawfully tried to divest Medicare-eligible retirees and
their dependents of promised healthcare benefits by attempting to
switch the retirees from their existing healthcare plans to an
inferior plan, the Aetna Medicaid Advantage Plan.

The Petitioners moved for a preliminary injunction enjoining the
City from forcing retirees to switch from their existing healthcare
benefits, and from being required to either enroll in an Aetna
Medicare Advantage Plan or seek their own health coverage. The City
opposed the application. The Petitioners' application for a
preliminary injunction was granted on July 6, 2023.

The Court ruled that the Petitioners have, by clear and convincing
evidence, met the requisite burden for a preliminary injunction by
exhibiting the likelihood of ultimate success on the merits, the
prospect of irreparable injury in absence of injunctive relief, and
the balance of equities weighing in the petitioners' favor.
Accordingly, the Court ordered that the Decision and Order of the
Court dated June 6, 2023, is VACATED; and that the Petitioners'
application for preliminary injunction is granted and Respondents
are temporarily enjoined until further order of the Court from
requiring any City retirees, and their dependents from being
removed from their current health insurance plan(s), and from being
required to either enroll in an Aetna Medicare Advantage Plan or
seek their own health coverage.

The appellate case is captioned as ROBERT BENTKOWSKI et al. v. THE
CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Case No. 2023-03503, in the Supreme Court
of New York, Appellate Division, First Judicial Department, filed
on July 17, 2023.[BN]

NEW YOU BARIATRIC: Delacruz Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against New You Bariatric
Group. The case is styled as Emanuel Delacruz, on behalf of himself
and all other persons similarly situated v. New You Bariatric
Group, Case No. 1:23-cv-06405-PAE-KHP (S.D.N.Y., July 24, 2023).

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

New York Bariatric Group -- https://www.newyoubariatriccenter.com/
-- is the largest private bariatric practice in the country with
locations throughout New York, Connecticut and New Jersey.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb, Esq.
          Dana Lauren Gottlieb, 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


NEWPORT NEWS NUTRITION: Castro Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Newport News
Nutrition Corner, LLC. The case is styled as Felix Castro, on
behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Newport News
Nutrition Corner, LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-06291 (S.D.N.Y., July 20,
2023).

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

Newport News Nutrition Corner, LLC --
https://www.thenutritioncorners.com/ -- is a vitamin & supplements
store in Newport News, Virginia.[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


NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL: Poe Allowed to File Reply Under Seal
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHERI POE, on behalf of
herself and others similarly situated, v. THE NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL
LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. 8:21-cv-02065-SPG-E (C.D. Cal.),
the Hon. Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett entered an order granting the
Plaintiff's application to file under seal reply in support of the
Plaintiff's motion for class certification and certain supporting
documents and reply in support of the Plaintiff's motion for
summary judgment.

Northwestern Mutual is a provider of life insurance and investment
products.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47fFXnW at no extra
charge.[CC] 


NORTON HEALTHCARE: Malone Files Suit in W.D. Kentucky
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Norton Healthcare,
Inc. The case is styled as Lanisha Malone, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Norton Healthcare, Inc.,
Case No. 3:23-cv-00373-CHB (W.D. Ky., July 21, 2023).

The nature of suit is stated Other Contract for Breach of
Contract.

Norton Healthcare -- http://nortonhealthcare.com/-- is a Kentucky
healthcare system with more than 40 clinics and hospitals in and
around Louisville, Kentucky.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alexander F. Edmondson, Esq.
          EDMONDSON & ASSOCIATES
          28 W. Fifth Street
          Covington, KY 41011
          Phone: (859) 491-5551
          Fax: (859) 491-0187
          Email: aedmondson@edmondsonlaw.com

               - and -

          Gary E. Mason, Esq.
          MASON LLP
          5335 Wisconsin Avenue NW, Suite 640
          Washington, DC 20015
          Phone: (202) 429-2290
          Fax: (202) 429-2294
          Email: gmason@masonllp.com


NOVEMBER 19 LLC: Vachnine Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against November 19 LLC. The
case is styled as Ness-Lee Vachnine, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. November 19 LLC, Case No.
1:23-cv-06207 (S.D.N.Y., July 19, 2023).

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

November 19 -- https://www.november19market.com/ -- is a
destination for beautifully crafted home and life style goods.[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


NYU LANGONE: General Management Order Entered in Ahmed Class Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as HABEEB AHMED, v. NYU
LANGONE HEALTH SYSTEM et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-01248-JLR-GWG
(S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein entered a general
management order  as follows:

  -- All pre-trial applications, including those relating to
     scheduling and discovery, shall be made to the undersigned
     (except motions to dismiss or for judgment on the pleadings,
for
     injunctive relief, for summary judgment, or for class
     certification).

  -- All applications must comply with this Court's Individual
     Practices, which are available through the Clerk's Office or
at:
     https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-gabriel-w-gorenstein

  -- The parties should write to the Court at any time that they
wish
     to participate in Court-sponsored mediation.

  -- All discovery (as well as requests for admissions) must be
     initiated in time to be concluded by the deadline for all
     discovery.

  -- Discovery motions -- that is, any application pursuant to
Rules
     26 through 37 or 45 -- not only must comply with section 2.A.
of
     the Court's Individual Practices but also must be made
promptly
     after the cause for such a motion arises.

NYU Langone is an academic medical center located in New York
City.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47arrhp at no extra charge.[CC]

O'REILLY AUTO ENTERPRISES: Clark Suit Removed to E.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Elizabeth Clark, as an individual and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. O'REILLY AUTO
ENTERPRISES, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 50, inclusive, Case No. 23STCV14245 was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Joaquin,
to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
California on July 21, 2023, and assigned Case No.
2:23-cv-01471-TLN-AC.

In her Complaint, Plaintiff asserts five class action claims
against O'Reilly for: Unpaid Wages; Unpaid Overtime; Failure to
Provide Meal Periods; Failure to Provide Rest Periods; and Unfair
or Unlawful Business Practices.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          James M. Peterson, Esq.
          Derek W. Paradis, Esq.
          HIGGS FLETCHER & MACK LLP
          401 West A Street, Suite 2600
          San Diego, CA 92101-7910
          Phone: (619) 236-1551
          Facsimile: (619) 696-1410
          Email: peterson@higgslaw.com
                 Paradisd@higgslaw.com


OLIN CORP: Seeks to Seal Portions of Post-Evidentiary Hearing Brief
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Miami Products & Chemical
Co. v. Olin Corporation, et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-00385-EAW-MJR
(W.D.N.Y.), Olin files a motion to seal portions of the Defendants'
Post-Evidentiary Hearing Brief in Opposition to DPPs' Motion for
Class Certification and related exhibits.

In support of its motion to seal, the Defendant relies on the
declaration of Corey W. Roush, dated July 17, 2023, which is being
submitted to the Honorable Elizabeth A. Wolford.

Olin is an American manufacturer of ammunition, chlorine, and
sodium hydroxide.

A copy of the Defendant's motion dated July 17, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/44OHVKC at no extra
charge.[CC]


ONE BROOKLYN: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Francis Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
ANIKA FRANCIS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ONE BROOKLYN HEALTH SYSTEM, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 520757/2023 (N.Y. Sup., Kings Cty., July 19, 2023) seeks
to hold the Defendant responsible for the injuries the Defendant
inflicted on Plaintiff and the Class due to the Defendant's
impermissibly inadequate data security, which caused the personal
information of Plaintiff and those similarly situated to be
exfiltrated by unauthorized access by cybercriminals between July
9, 2022, to November 19, 2023.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendants' conduct
is unconscionable, deceptive, and unfair, as it is likely to, and
did, mislead consumers acting reasonably under the circumstances.
As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants' conduct, the
Plaintiff and the Class have been harmed, in that they were not
timely notified of the Data Breach, which resulted in profound
vulnerability to their personal information and other financial
accounts, says the Plaintiff.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' alleged
unconscionable, unfair, and deceptive acts and omissions, the PII
of Plaintiff and the Class was disclosed to third parties without
authorization, which has caused and will continue to cause damage
to Plaintiff and the Class.

ONE BROOKLYN HEALTH SYSTEM, INC. provides healthcare services
through a network of acute hospitals, and health care specialists.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jonathan M. Sedgh, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN
          350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 6705
          New York, NY 10118
          Telephone: (212) 738-6839
          Email: JSedgh@forthepeople.com

ONTRAC LOGISTICS: McNorton Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Ontrac Logistics,
Inc., et al. The case is styled as Damien McNorton, on behalf of
the state of California, and others similarly situated and
aggrieved v. Ontrac Logistics, Inc., Does 1 to 100, Inclusive, Case
No. CGC23607925 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco Cty., July 25,
2022).

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

OnTrac -- https://www.ontrac.com/ -- helps retailers and shippers
with fast, flexible reliable last-mile delivery that reaches 80% of
the US population in 31 states & D.C.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Zachary Crosner, Esq.
          CROSNER LEGAL, P.C.
          9440 Santa Monica Blvd. Suite 301
          Beverly Hills, CA 90210
          Phone: (310) 496-5818
          Fax: (310) 510-6429
          Email: zach@crosnerlegal.com


OPTUM CARE: Bravo Sues Over Unreimbursed Compensations
------------------------------------------------------
Monique Bravo, an individual, on behalf of herself and all others
similarly situated v. OPTUM CARE, INC., a California Corporation,
and DOES 1 through 25, Case No. 23STCV17426 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los
Angeles Cty., July 25, 2023), is brought arising from Defendant's
violations of the Private Attorney General Act ("PAGA") of 2004,
California Labor Code on behalf of the Plaintiff and other
aggrieved employees of the Defendant(s) in California, who, during
the relevant time period were not reimbursed for necessary
expenditures and losses incurred, including internet charges,
throughout the relevant time period.

From March 2019 to present, Plaintiff has been employed by
Optumcare Management, LLC, and subsequently by Defendant, Optum
Care, Inc., as a Nurse Case Manager. Since the start of the
COVID-19 pandemic, in spring 2020, Plaintiff and other aggrieved
employees have been required to use their personal internet while
working from home. Plaintiff and aggrieved employees have not been
reimbursed for all internet expenses.

The Plaintiff and other aggrieved employees have incurred necessary
expenditures and losses in direct consequence of the discharge of
their employment duties and their obedience to the directions of
Defendant. Expenses include, but are not limited to, internet
charges. Defendant failed to reimburse Plaintiff and other
aggrieved employees for those expenses, in violation of Labor Code.
Defendant's policies and/or practices and/or other unlawful conduct
resulted in Defendant's failure to reimburse Plaintiff and other
aggrieved employees for necessary expenditures and losses occurred
in violation of California Labor Code, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff has been employed with Optumcare Management, LLC, and
subsequently Defendant, Optum Care, Inc., as a Nurse Case Manager.

OPTUM CARE, INC., is a California Corporation, who employed
aggrieved employees during the relevant time period.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David R. Markham, Esq.
          Maggie Realin, Esq.
          Lisa Brevard, Esq.
          THE MARKHAM LAW FIRM
          888 Prospect Street, Suite 200
          La Jolla, CA 92037
          Phone: 619.399.3995
          Fax: 619.615.2067
          Email: dmarkham@markham-law.com
                 mrealin@markham-law.com
                 lbrevard@markham-law.com

               - and -

          Walter Haines, Esq.
          UNITED EMPLOYEES LAW GROUP
          5500 Bolsa Avenue, Suite 201
          Huntington Beach, CA 92649
          Phone: 888.474.7242
          Fax: 562.256.1006
          Email: walter@uelglaw.com


OREGON: Court Dismisses Moore Class Suit
----------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PAUL MICHAEL MOORE, v.
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (ODOC), Case No. 3:21-cv-00599-SB
(D. Or.), the Hon. Judge Stacie F. Beckerman entered an order
granting ODOC's motion to dismiss:

  -- The Court dismisses Moore's claims without leave to amend but

     without prejudice to membership in the Maney class action.

  -- The Court agrees that amendment would be futile here because,

     Moore's claims are duplicative of those raised in Maney and
the
     deadline to opt out of the Maney class action has now expired.


The Plaintiff Moore, a self-represented adult in custody (AIC) of
the Oregon Department of Corrections (ODOC) filed this action in
state court on February 2, 2021, against ODOC, alleging "class
action" claims related to ODOC's handling of the COVID19 pandemic.

ODOC removed the action to this Court on April 21, 2021. The Court
certified a federal class action alleging similar claims in Maney,
et al. v. Brown et al., Case No. 6:20-cv-00570-SB.

In his complaint, Moore alleges that "the Plaintiffs by class have
been, and continue to be [irreparably] harmed, and subjected to
ongoing cruel [and] unusual punishment while being kept and housed
in large groups in germ-filled dorms where social distancing is
being blatantly ignored."

Moore further alleges that "there is a dereliction of duty being
violated by [ODOC] on a daily basis" and that "the Plaintiffs are
subjected to ongoing sickness, and COVID-19 related illness
daily."

Based on the allegations in his complaint, Moore alleges that ODOC
violated his and other similarly situated AICs' rights under the
Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments and that ODOC was negligent in its
response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Oregon Department is the agency of the U.S. state of Oregon charged
with managing a system of 12 state prisons.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 14, 2023, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/454LPyB at no extra
charge.[CC] 



P.A.M.TRANSPORT INC: Robinson Files ADA Suit in W.D. Arkansas
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against P.A.M.Transport, Inc.
The case is styled as Jasmine Robinson, Qwandairus Davis, on behalf
of themselves and all others similarly situated v. P.A.M.Transport,
Inc., Case No. 5:23-cv-05123-TLB (W.D. Ark., July 25, 2023).

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

P.A.M. Transportation Services Inc. -- http://www.pamtransport.com/
-- is an irregular route over-the-road trucking company that is
based in Tontitown, Arkansas.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Matthew R Gunter, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
          20 N. Orange Avenue, Ste. 1600
          Orlando, FL 32801
          Phone: (407) 236-0946
          Email: mgunter@forthepeople.com


PARKWAY MUSIC: Mercedes Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Parkway Music, LLC.
The case is styled as Luis Mercedes, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Parkway Music, LLC, Case No.
1:23-cv-06233-JMF (S.D.N.Y., July 19, 2023).

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

Parkway Music -- https://parkwaymusic.com/ -- provides equipment,
designs and installs sound, lighting and video systems in Houses of
Worship, Night Clubs, Bars, Restaurants, Schools and Government
Buildings.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
          Ara Vahe Naljian, Esq.
          STEIN SAKS, PLLC
          One University Plaza, Ste. 620
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Phone: (201) 282-6500
          Email: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com
                 analjian@steinsakslegal.com


PATENTS TO RETAIL: Bontrager Files TCPA Suit in E.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Patents to Retail
Partners, LLC. The case is styled as Justin Bontrager, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Patents to Retail
Partners, LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-01081-SAB (E.D. Cal., July 19,
2023).

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

Patents To Retail -- https://www.patentstoretail.com/ -- has a vast
line of Patented products. Learn More You will find our items
through-out the retail market place.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
          Adrian R. Bacon, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN PC
          21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 340
          Woodland Hills, CA 91364
          Phone: (323) 306-4234
          Fax: (866) 633-0228
          Email: tfriedman@toddflaw.com
                 abacon@toddflaw.com


PEACEHEALTH: Class Settlement in Davies Suit Gets Initial Approval
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TRACY DAVIES; ASHLEY
DEWITT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. PEACEHEALTH, Case No. 6:21-cv-00825-AA (D. Or.), the
Hon. Judge Ann Aiken entered an order granting the Plaintiffs'
unopposed motion for preliminary approval of class action
settlement and conditional class certification.

   1. Conditional Class Certification for Settlement Purposes:

      The Court certifies the proposed class, as defined in the
      Settlement Agreement and in this Opinion and Order, for
      settlement purposes.

   2. Preliminary Settlement Approval:

      The Court grants preliminary approval of the proposed
settlement
      agreement, subject to the forthcoming fairness hearing
pursuant
      to Rule 23(e).

   3. Appointing Class Representatives:

      Under Rule 23(a), the Court finds that the Plaintiffs Tracy
      Davis and Ashley DeWitt have met their burden and properly
stand
      as representatives for the class.

   4. Appointing Class Counsel: The Court finds that class counsel
has
      proven their competence and ability in fairly and adequately

      representing the class's interests pursuant to Rule 23(g).
The
      Court appoints Peter Stutheit and Jason A. Rittereiser as
class
      counsel.

   5. Administration:

      The Court approves JND Legal Administration as settlement
      administrator as set out in the Settlement Agreement.

   6. Authorization of Notice: The Court approves the form and
content
      of the notices in substantially the same form as attached to
the
      settlement agreement and the Plaintiff’s motion.

The Plaintiffs Tracy Davies and Ashley DeWitt bring this action on
their own behalf and as representatives of a putative class seeking
to recover unpaid wages due to the Defendant PeaceHealth’s
allegedly unlawful time -- rounding policy and practice.

The Plaintiffs were hourly, non-exempt employees of PeaceHealth.

PeaceHealth is a non-profit corporation engaged in the healthcare
industry and it operates numerous hospitals, clinics, and
healthcare facilities in Oregon.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2023, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3OCPuyc at no extra charge.[CC]


PENSKE TRUCK LEASING: Cabral Sues Over Unsolicited Robocalls
------------------------------------------------------------
Sergio Cabral, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. PENSKE TRUCK LEASING CO., L.P., Case No.
3:23-cv-00162-SLH (W.D. Pa., July 24, 2023), is brought pursuant to
the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (the "TCPA") as a result of
the Defendants unsolicited robocalls.

To market its business, the Defendant utilizes robocalls without
first obtaining the required express written consent thereby
contributing to the barrage of robocalls consumers face. Through
this action, the Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to halt the
Defendant's illegal conduct, which has resulted in the invasion of
privacy, harassment, aggravation, and disruption of the daily life
of thousands of individuals. The Plaintiff also seeks statutory
damages on behalf of Plaintiff and members of the Class, and any
other available legal or equitable remedies, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is a natural person who resides in North Hollywood,
California.

The Defendant is a Pennsylvania corporation whose principal office
is located in PA.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq.
          HIRALDO P.A.
          401 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Phone: 954.400.4713
          Email: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com

               - and -

          Benjamin W. Raslavich, Esq.
          KUHN RASLAVICH, P.A.
          2110 West Platt Street
          Tampa, FL 33606
          Phone: (813) 422–7782
          Facsimile: (813) 422–7783
          Email: ben@theKRfirm.com


PERTUTTI NEW YORK: Hwang Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Pertutti New York,
Inc. The case is styled as Jenny Hwang, on behalf of herself and
all others similarly situated v. Pertutti New York, Inc., Case No.
1:23-cv-05502 (E.D.N.Y., July 20, 2023).

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

Pertutti -- https://www.pertutti.com/ -- is a New York City based
Travel store located in Greenwich Village neighborhood.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mars Khaimov, Esq.
          14749 71st Ave.
          Flushing, NY 11367
          Phone: (917) 915-7415
          Email: mars@khaimovlaw.com


PLUG POWER: Underpays Commissioning Specialists, Ronan Suit Claims
------------------------------------------------------------------
SAMUEL RONAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PLUG POWER INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:23-cv-00876-LEK-DJS (N.D.N.Y., July 21, 2023) is a class action
against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Mr. Ronan was employed by the Defendant as a commissioning
specialist from approximately April 2023 to June 2023.

Plug Power Inc. is a developer and supplier of hydrogen fuel cell
systems, with its principal place of business in Latham, Albany
County, New York. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Seth R. Lesser, Esq.
         KLAFTER LESSER LLP
         Two International Drive, Suite 350
         Rye Brook, NY 10573
         Telephone: (914) 934-9200
         E-mail: seth@klafterlesser.com

                  - and –

         Joseph F. Scott, Esq.
         Ryan A. Winters, Esq.
         SCOTT & WINTERS LAW FIRM, LLC
         50 Public Square, Suite 1900
         Cleveland, OH 44113
         Telephone: (216) 912-2221
         Facsimile: (440) 846-1625
         E-mail: jscott@ohiowagelawyers.com
                 rwinters@ohiowagelawyers.com

                  - and –

         Kevin M. McDermott II, Esq.
         SCOTT & WINTERS LAW FIRM, LLC
         11925 Pearl Rd., Suite 310
         Strongsville, OH 44136
         Telephone: (216) 912-2221
         Facsimile: (440) 846-1625
         E-mail: kmcdermott@ohiowagelawyers.com

PLURALSIGHT INC: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to August 14
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as INDIANA PUBLIC RETIREMENT
SYSTEM and PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS’ PENSION AND RETIREMENT FUND OF
CHICAGO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. PLURALSIGHT, INC.; AARON SKONNARD; and JAMES BUDGE,
Case No. 1:19-cv-00128-DBB-DAO (D. Utah), Hon. Judge David Barlow
entered an order Order granting stipulated motion to extend the
deadlines relating to the Plaintiffs' motion for class
certification.

  -- The deadline for the Defendants to file an opposition to Lead
the
     Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification and Appointment of

     Class Representatives and Class Counsel is extended until
August
     14, 2023.

  -- The deadline for the Plaintiffs to file a reply in support of
the
     Motion for Class Certification is extended until October 9,
2023.

Pluralsight is an American privately held online education company
that offers a variety of video training courses for software
developers.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 14, 2023, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/43LnHQB at no extra charge.[CC]

PROGRESSIVE SPECIALTY: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due Oct. 16
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL J. FORD, v.
PROGRESSIVE SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. 2:21-cv-04147-JHS
(E.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Joel H. Slomsky entered an amended
scheduling order as follows:

   1. The Plaintiff's Motion for Class            Oct. 16, 2023
      Certification shall be filed by:

   2. The Plaintiff's Class Certification         Oct.  16, 2023
      Expert Disclosures shall be served
      upon opposing counsel by:

   3. The Plaintiff's Class Certification         Nov. 13, 2023
      Expert Depositions shall be
      completed by:

   4. The Defendant's Opposition to               Dec. 12, 2023
      Class Certification shall be
      filed by:

   5. The Defendant's Challenges to the           Dec. 12, 2023
      Plaintiff's Class Certification
      Experts shall be filed by:

   6. The Defendant's Class Certification         Dec. 12, 2023
      Expert Disclosures shall be served
      upon opposing counsel by:

   7. The Defendant's Class Certification         Jan. 15, 2024
      Expert Depositions shall be
      completed by:

   8. The Plaintiff's Reply to the                Jan. 29, 2024
      Defendant's Opposition to Class
     Certification shall be filed by:

   9. The Plaintiff's Challenges to the           Jan. 29, 2024
      Defendant's Class Certification
      Experts shall be filed by:

Progressive Specialty offers property, casualty, life, and health
insurance services.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3KkFAih at no extra charge.[CC]

PROLOGIS INC: Faces Vandervort Class Suit Over Kmart Building Fire
------------------------------------------------------------------
KATU Staff reports that a man who lives near a former Kmart that
burned down in Northeast Portland this month has filed a
class-action lawsuit.

Stephen Vandervort's lawsuit accuses Prologis and the property
owner of neglecting to maintain the property and prevent conditions
that led to the fire.

The lawsuit says he and his family live within a mile of the
building.

Prologis is the company leasing the former Kmart building on
Northeast 122nd Avenue and Sandy Boulevard.

Fire crews were called to a four-alarm fire at the building at
about 6:30 a.m. Wednesday, July 19, 2023.

The Environmental Protection Agency took samples of the debris and
air and said it found no asbestos.

The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality's initial findings
showed only trace amounts of asbestos.

Vandervort claims, "By allowing the derelict building on the
Property to accumulate dangerous and flammable materials as well as
allowing unhoused individuals to freely enter the site without
appropriate supervision or safety precautions, defendants failed to
maintain the Property so as not to interfere with the neighbors’
property."

KATU reached out to Prologis for comment. It said it hadn't seen
the complaint yet but will review it when it does.

It also called the fire an "unfortunate and unexpected event."

The company cleaned up ash and debris from nearby schools and parks
and it is now helping neighbors remove large debris from their
properties.[GN]

RAY JONES: Filing for Class Certification Due Jan. 31, 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SAMUEL BACK, on Behalf of
Himself and All Others Similarly-Situated, v. RAY JONES TRUCKING,
INC., TERESA JONES, GRANT JONES and STEVEN JONES, Case No.
4:22-cv-00005-GNS-HBB (W.D. Ky.), the Hon. Judge Brent Brennenstuhl
entered an amended scheduling order as follows:

   (1) No later than October 13, 2023, the parties shall complete
all
       pretrial fact discovery.

   (2) No later than September 8, 2023, counsel for the Plaintiff
       shall disclose the identity of any person who may be used at

       trial to provide expert testimony under Fed. R. Civ. P.
       26(a)(2)(A).

   (3) No later than October 6, 2023, counsel for the Defendant
shall
       disclose the identity of any person who may be used at trial
to
       provide expert testimony under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(A).


   (4) No later than November 10, 2023, the Plaintiff shall
disclose
       the identity of any person who may be used at trial to
provide
       rebuttal expert testimony with respect to the Plaintiff's
       claims under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(A).

   (5) The discovery depositions of all expert witnesses shall be
       completed no later than December 8, 2023.

   (6) No later than January 31, 2024, counsel for the Defendants
       shall file any motion for "de-certification" of this action

       under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

   (7) No later than January 31, 2024, counsel for the Plaintiff
shall
       file any motion for class certification under Rule 23 with
       respect to the Plaintiff’s claims under state law.

   (8) By February 29, 2024, counsel for the parties shall file all

       dispositive motions and motions related to the admissibility
of
       expert testimony pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702
       (Daubert motions), provided, however, that if the Plaintiff

       files a motion for class certification under Rule 23 with
       respect to the Plaintiff's claims under state law, such
motions
       shall not be due until the date 30 days after the Court
rules
       on the Plaintiff's motion for class certification under Rule
23
       with respect to the Plaintiff’s claims under state law.

Ray Jones is an active intrastate freight carrier based out of
Greenville, Kentucky.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 14, 2023, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3QgTplr at no extra charge.[CC]


 


RITE AID: Faces Leija Class Suit Over Disclosure of Personal Info
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Marian Zboraj of Progressive Grocer reports that Rite Aid has been
hit with a class action in California that alleges the drug store
chain disclosed the personal and health information of millions of
customers to major website and social media companies without
customers' express consent, according to a Consumer Affairs
report.

The lawsuit claims that when consumers visited RiteAid.com to make
a request for a prescription to be filled using the Manage
Prescriptions feature, tracking tools including Meta Pixel -
invisible to the user but embedded into the website - "secretly"
sent sensitive information to Meta, Google, TikTok and other
companies.

That information supposedly included the person's name, phone
number, email address, birthdate, Rite Aid client ID numbers,
services selected, assessment responses, patient statuses, medical
conditions, treatments, provider information and appointment
information. According to the filing, this data is used by Rite Aid
and the third parties it partners with to improve their targeted
advertising capabilities.

Rite Aid isn't the only one facing these type of allegations. The
Markup reported last month that 12 of the largest drug stores and
food retailers in the United States also sent shoppers' sensitive
health information to Facebook or other platforms.

Meanwhile, the lawsuit against Rite Aid claims that the company
violated its own privacy policy promises, the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and several federal and
state statutes by failing to secure website visitors' permission
before tracking and sharing their highly confidential information.

However, the company's privacy policy does note that "we may
otherwise continue to share your personal information with our
affiliates and service providers, and as otherwise directed by you,
for the purposes described in our policy."

Rite Aid declined Progressive Grocer's request to comment as this
is a litigation matter.

Employing more than 6,300 pharmacists, Philadelphia-based Rite Aid
operates 2,300-plus retail pharmacy locations across 17 states. The
company is No. 22 on The PG 100, Progressive Grocer's 2023 list of
the top food and consumables retailers in North America. [GN]

RYDER SYSTEMS: Settlement Documentation for Court Approval
----------------------------------------------------------
Ryder System Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending June 30, 2023 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on July 26, 2023, that the settlement
documentation filed by parties in a putative securities-related
class suit are subject for court approval.

On May 20, 2020, a putative class action on behalf of purchasers of
our securities who purchased or otherwise acquired their securities
between July 23, 2015 and February 13, 2020, inclusive (Class
Period), was commenced against Ryder and certain of our current and
former officers in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of Florida (the "Securities Class Action"). The complaint
alleges, among other things, that the defendants misrepresented
Ryder's depreciation policy and residual value estimates for its
vehicles during the Class Period in violation of Section 10(b) and
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder, and seeks to recover, among other things,
unspecified compensatory damages and attorneys' fees and costs.

On August 3, 2020, the State of Alaska, Alaska Permanent Fund, the
City of Fort Lauderdale General Employees' Retirement System, and
the City of Plantation Police Officers Pension Fund were appointed
lead plaintiffs.

On October 5, 2020, the lead plaintiffs filed an amended complaint.


On December 4, 2020, Ryder and the other named defendants in the
case filed a Motion to Dismiss the amended complaint.

On May 12, 2022, the court denied the defendants' motion to
dismiss.

The court entered a case management schedule on June 27, 2022,
which, among other things, provides that discovery shall be
completed by October 2023 and trial shall commence in June 2024.

On April 18, 2023, the parties reached an agreement in principle to
resolve the Securities Class Action.

On May 19, 2023, plaintiffs filed an unopposed Motion for
Preliminary Approval of the settlement, and the parties filed
corresponding settlement documentation, which are pending court
approval.

The Company expects that the settlement amount will be covered by
insurance, and accordingly is not material to its financial
position or results of operations.

Ryder System, Inc. provides auto rental & leasing services based in
Florida.


STATE FARM: Class Certification Bid Due April 12, 2024
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Meave v. State Farm Mutual
Automobile Insurance Company, Case No. 4:22-cv-00438 (N.D. Okla.,
Filed Oct. 11, 2022), the Hon. Judge Claire V. Eagan entered an
order granting the joint motion to extend discovery and related
class certification deadlines.

  -- The Plaintiff's deadline to submit expert         Dec. 18,
2023
     identification and reports is extended
     to:

  -- The Defendant's deadline to submit expert         Feb. 16,
2024
     identification and reports is extended to:

  -- Discovery Cutoff is extended to:                  March 15,
2024

  -- Deadline for all motions for class                April 12,
2024
     certification and any other dispositive
     motions extended to:

                     response extended to:             May 17,
2024

                     replies due:                      June 7,
2024

  -- Discovery due by:                                 March 15,
2024

  -- Dispositive Motions due by:                       April 12,
2024

The nature of suit states Contract -- Diversity-Breach of
Contract.

State Farm is a group of mutual insurance companies throughout the
United States with corporate headquarters in Bloomington,
Illinois.[CC]

STATE FARM: Faces Class Suit Over Privacy Rights' Violations
------------------------------------------------------------
Mary Haydock of Cook County Record reports that insurance giant
State Farm has been named in a new class action lawsuit accusing
the company of violating the privacy rights of policyholders by
allegedly sharing their medical information with another company to
purportedly build a database for weighing risk when issuing
policies.

Named plaintiffs Mary Brown, Andy Velazquez, William Midgett and
Diane Coughlin filed suit on behalf of themselves and others in a
class action in Cook County Circuit Court on July 19 against State
Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance and Insurance Services Office
Inc., for alleged violation of Illinois privacy rights laws.

Specifically, State Farm is accused in the suit of allegedly
disclosing personal health information by submitting it to ISO for
what the plaintiffs are stating is a "symbiotic" relationship
between State Farm and ISO that both financially benefit from.
Plaintiffs are claiming they were not notified by State Farm that
their personal health information would be maintained, stored or
shared with ISO at any point. The complaint raises the concern that
such a massive database of personal health information maintained
by ISO puts that information at risk and is an invasion of people's
rights under the Federal Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act (HIPPA) and under the Illinois state
constitution.

HIPAA articulates a standard of care for entities to follow when
receiving such information. According to the complaint, the
Illinois Supreme Court has determined that this standard of care
applies to both ISO and insurers like State Farm.

The complaint accuses State Farm of violating this standard by
disclosing a member's personal health information to ISO for
collection and harvesting. The complaint states that ISO also
violates this standard of care by collecting and harvesting the
information from State Farm to build its database, and then
allegedly selling the information to insurance industry customers
that include State Farm.

Plaintiffs assert this takes advantage of members who were unaware
their health information is being used for profit without
compensating them. The complaint asserts that ISO and State Farm
have unjustly profited from the sale of members' health information
without their express consent or knowledge.

According to its website, ISO is a subsidiary of Verisk Analytics,
in business since 1971 to help insurers develop and manage their
insurance and set independent premium rates.

The new lawsuit comes about two years since State Farm lost before
the Illinois Supreme Court in a dispute over alleged HIPPA
violations. In an opinion filed in 2021 in the case of Haage v
Zavala, the state high court rejected State Farm's argument that
property and casualty insurers fall outside the protection of
HIPAA.

The new lawsuit estimates the case could ultimately include a class
of thousands of additional plaintiffs whose health information may
have been allegedly shared by State Farm with ISO.

Plaintiffs are seeking unspecified actual and punitive damages, in
addition to court costs and legal fees.

Plaintiffs are represented by attorneys Daniel S. Hirschner and
William T. Gibbs, of Corboy & Demetrio, of Chicago; Korey Nelson,
Amanda Klevom and Claire Borsage of Burns Charest, of New Orleans;
Scott A. Kitner and Martin Woodward, of Kitner Woodward, of Dallas;
and Scott E. Smith, of Scott Elliot Smith, of Columbus, Ohio. [GN]

STATE FARM: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due Sept. 1
--------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CARLLYNN NICHOLS, v. STATE
FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No.
2:22-cv-00016-SDM-EPD (S.D. Ohio), the Hon. Judge Elizabeth A.
Preston Deavers entered an order granting the parties' joint motion
to amend the preliminary pretrial order.

The Amended Preliminary Pretrial Order dated November 22, 2022, as
modified on March 17, 2023, is further modified as follows:  

  -- The motion for class certification and          Sept. 1, 2023

     the Plaintiff's expert reports in
     support of class certification shall be
     filed by:

  -- The Plaintiff agrees to produce class           Oct. 6, 2023
     certification experts for a deposition
     by:

  -- The Defendant's opposition to class             Nov. 6, 2023
     certification and expert reports in
     opposition to class certification due
     by:

  -- The Defendant agrees to produce class           Dec. 8, 2023
     certification experts for a deposition
     by:

  -- Reply in support of class certification         Dec. 22, 2023
     due by:

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47cc2gq at no extra charge.[CC]

STRENGTH20 LLC: Pimentel Suit Seeks Security Guards' Unpaid Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
EMMANUEL PIMENTEL, RANCEL MORENO, JOHNNY CUEVAS, RAMON CUEVAS, ADAM
OROZCO, and IRVIN MALDONADO, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. STRENGTH20, LLC, D/B/A
"STRENGTH20 GENERAL SERVICES & CONTRACTING"; GLOBAL STRATEGIES
CONSULTANT GROUP, CORP.; ROMMEL A. ARIZA; FLORIDA STRUCTURAL GROUP,
INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-00544 (M.D. Fla., July 21, 2023)
is a class action against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime wages, failure to pay minimum wages, and failure to pay
common law wages and allowances in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Florida Constitution, and the Florida Minimum
Wage Act and for common law breach of contract.

The Plaintiffs worked for the Defendants as security guards between
October 24, 2022 and November 17, 2022.

Strength20, LLC, doing business as Strength20 General Services &
Contracting, is a provider of security services in Florida.

Global Strategies Consultant Group, Corp. is a provider of security
services in Florida.

Florida Structural Group, Inc. is a construction firm in Florida.
[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:                
      
         Anthony F. Sanchez, Esq.
         ANTHONY F. SANCHEZ, P.A.
         6701 Sunset Drive, Suite 101
         Miami, FL 33143
         Telephone: (305) 665-9211
         E-mail: afs@laborlawfla.com

STRIPPERS INC: Harris Files Suit Over Alleged Tip Skimming
----------------------------------------------------------
RODNISHA HARRIS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. STRIPPERS, INC.; and JUSTIN CHAMBERS,
Defendants, Case No. 5:23-cv-00260-MTT (M.D. Ga., July 21, 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 Harris was employed by the Defendants as a dancer.

STRIPPERS, INC. owns and operates as an entertainment club. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kimberly N. Martin, Esq.
          Thomas F. Martin, Esq.
          MARTIN & MARTIN, LLP
          Post Office Box 1070
          Tucker, GA 30085-10170
          Telephone: (404) 313-5538
          Email: kimberlymartinlaw@gmail.com
                 tfmartinlaw@msn.com

TAYLOR MORRISON HOME: Continues to Defend Gundel Class Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
Taylor Morrison Home Corp. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for
the quarterly period ending June 30, 2023 filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on July 26, 2023, that the Company
continues to defend itself from the Gundel class suit

On April 26, 2017, a class action complaint was filed in the
Circuit Court of the Tenth Judicial Circuit in and for Polk County,
Florida by Norman Gundel, William Mann, and Brenda Taylor against
Avatar Properties, Inc. (an acquired AV Homes entity), generally
alleging that the Company's collection of club membership fees in
connection with the use of one of its amenities in its East
homebuilding segment violates various laws relating to homeowner
associations and other Florida-specific laws.

The class action complaint seeks an injunction to prohibit future
collection of club membership fees.

On November 2, 2021, the trial court determined that the club
membership fees were improper and that plaintiffs were entitled to
$35.0 million in fee reimbursements.

The Company appealed the court's ruling to the Sixth District Court
of Appeal on November 29, 2021, and on June 23, 2023 the District
Court affirmed the trial court judgment in a split decision, with
three separate opinions.

Recognizing the potential "far-reaching effects on homeowners
associations throughout the State," the District Court certified a
question of great public importance to the Florida Supreme Court.

The Company have since filed a notice to invoke the discretionary
review of the Florida Supreme Court.

Plaintiffs have agreed to continue to pay club membership fees
pending the outcome of the appeal to the Florida Supreme Court.

The Company believes, based on our assessment and the opinion of
external legal counsel, that the trial and District Court’s legal
interpretation constitutes legal error and the courts incorrectly
ruled on this matter. In accordance with ASC Topic 450,
Contingencies, it evaluated the range of loss and the likelihood of
each potential amount of loss within the range.

While the ultimate outcome and the costs associated with litigation
are inherently uncertain and difficult to predict, in evaluating
the potential outcomes, the Company believes the more likely
outcome is that it wins the appeal to the Florida Supreme Court.
This belief is based on its review of the legal merit of the
judgment and the opinions of the trial and District Courts, as well
as the opinion of external legal counsel. Accordingly, in assessing
the range of possible loss, it believes the more likely outcome is
that it wins on appeal to the Florida Supreme Court and will have
zero liability.

Taylor Morrison Home Corporation is into residential homebuilding
and the development of lifestyle communities based in Arizona.





TRINET GROUP: Court Closes 401(k) Class Suit
---------------------------------------------
Trinet Group Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending June 30, 2023 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on July 26, 2023, that the 401(k) class suit is
closed as no appeal was filed timely by the plaintiffs.

On September 29, 2020, a class action was filed in the United
States District Court for the Middle District of Florida against
the directors of certain TriNet subsidiaries and other TriNet
employees on behalf of a putative class of participants in two
retirement plans available to TriNet's eligible worksite employees,
the TriNet 401(k) Plan and the TriNet Select 401(k) Plan. The
complaint is similar to claims recently brought against a number of
employers including PEOs and generally alleges that the defendants
violated certain fiduciary obligations to Plan participants under
the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 with respect to
overseeing plan investment and recordkeeping fees.

On October 21, 2022, the court issued an order declining to certify
a class with respect to claims against the TriNet 401(k) Plan, but
certified a class with respect to claims against the TriNet Select
401(k) Plan.

On April 26, 2023, the court entered an order granting TriNet's
motion for summary judgment on all remaining claims. No appeal was
timely filed and the matter is closed.

Trinet Group, Inc. is a provider of HR expertise, payroll
services,
employee benefits, employment risk mitigation services and human
capital management software for small and medium-size businesses
based in California.


UBER TECHNOLOGIES: Sept. 5 Class Action Opt-Out Deadline Set
------------------------------------------------------------
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

BOSTON RETIREMENT SYSTEM, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 3:19-cv-06361-RS

CLASS ACTION

SUMMARY NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION

To:

All persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Uber
Technologies, Inc. ("Uber") publicly traded common stock pursuant
and/or traceable to the Offering Documents1 for Uber's initial
public offering ("IPO"), and who were damaged thereby
(collectively, the "Class" and individually, the "Class Members").

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure and an Order of the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California, that the above-captioned
action (the "Action") has been certified to proceed as a class
action on behalf of the Class defined above.  Please note: at this
time, there is no judgment, settlement, or monetary recovery.  A
trial date in the Action has not been set.

IF YOU ARE A MEMBER OF THE CLASS, YOUR RIGHTS WILL BE AFFECTED BY
THIS ACTION.  A Postcard Notice is currently being mailed to known
potential Class Members.  If you have not yet received the Postcard
Notice, you may obtain a copy of it or a long-form Notice of
Pendency of Class Action by downloading them at
www.UberIPOSecuritiesLitigation.com or by contacting the
Administrator at:

Uber Securities Litigation
c/o A.B. Data, Ltd.
P.O. Box 173070
Milwaukee, WI 53217
(877) 390-3460

Inquiries, other than requests for the Notices, may be made to the
following representative of Class Counsel:

Alfred L. Fatale III, Esq.
LABATON SUCHAROW LLP
140 Broadway
New York, NY 10005
(888) 219-6877

If you are a Class Member, you have the right to decide whether to
remain in the Class or to request exclusion.  If you want to remain
in the Class, you do not need to do anything at this time other
than retain documentation reflecting your transactions and holdings
in Uber common stock.  If you are a Class Member and do not request
exclusion, you will stay in the Class and be bound by the
proceedings in the Action, including all past, present, and future
orders and judgments of the Court, whether favorable or
unfavorable.  You may also be eligible for a future recovery in the
Action, if there is one.

If you do not wish to remain in the Class, you must take steps to
exclude yourself.  If you timely and validly ask to be excluded
from the Class, you will not be bound by anything that happens in
the Action.  However, you will not be eligible to receive any money
that might be recovered in the future.  To exclude yourself from
the Class, you must submit a written request for exclusion
postmarked no later than September 5, 2023, in accordance with the
instructions set forth in the Notice available at
www.UberIPOSecuritiesLitigation.com.  Pursuant to Rule 23(e)(4) of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is within the Court's
discretion whether to allow a second opportunity to request
exclusion from the Class in the event there is a settlement or
judgment in the Action.

Further information about the case may be obtained by contacting
the Administrator as provided above.

PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE COURT REGARDING THIS NOTICE.

Dated: July 21, 2023

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

United States District Court for the
Northern District of California

1 The "Offering Documents" are Uber's April 11, 2019, registration
statement on Form S-1, which following amendment, was declared
effective by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on May 5,
2019 (the "Registration Statement"), and a May 9, 2019, final
prospectus on Form 424(b)(4), which forms part of the Registration
Statement.


UNITED PARCEL: Failure to Reimburse Lost Packages, Suit Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
Kelsey McCroskey of ClassAction.org reports that a Washington
consumer has filed a proposed class action that alleges UPS refused
to reimburse him after it lost his insured package based on a
disclaimer that was "buried in a long list" of terms and
conditions.
The nine-page lawsuit says that after UPS lost the plaintiff's
shipment containing 11 one-ounce American Gold Eagle coins worth
over $25,000, the company denied the man's insurance claim, citing
a part of its "excessively complex and impenetrable" terms and
conditions stating that UPS does not cover the shipment of currency
or precious metals.

On January 22, 2022, the plaintiff entered a contract with UPS for
the interstate shipment of his gold coins to a buyer in Texas, the
suit relays. During the company's online shipment process, the man
was required to pay an "additional option fee" of $243.75 to insure
the package in the event of loss or damage, the case says. Because
of the declared value of the contents, he was also required to
hand-deliver the shipment directly to a UPS agent who was informed
at the time of pickup what the package contained and that it was
insured, the complaint adds.

As the filing tells it, the plaintiff received an automated message
from UPS on February 18 informing him that the company had lost the
package. Per the lawsuit, the man filed a claim for reimbursement,
and after months of delay and countless hours trying to navigate
UPS's "impossibly frustrating phone maze," he was finally advised
that his claim had been denied on the basis that the contents of
his shipment were not covered under the company's terms and
conditions.

At no point did the online shipping system or UPS pickup agent
disclose to the plaintiff that the company did not insure the
shipment of currency or precious metals, the suit contends.

What's more, this denial of liability is located amidst the
company's "hundreds of pages" of terms and conditions listing what
claims UPS will not honor, the case relays.

According to the complaint, UPS could easily adjust its online
system to examine a consumer's inputted package contents and
provide a warning if the item would not be covered in the event of
loss or damage.

The filing also claims that UPS fails to reimburse consumers for
the additional option fees they paid to insure their shipments.

"By not making any effort to parse the goods being shipped by the
public, UPS collects hundreds of millions of dollars of 'additional
option fees' (which clients assume are insurance premiums) only
later to have the claims denied," the case charges. "This is
blackletter law fraud."

The lawsuit looks to represent anyone in the United States who
purchased insurance for shipping items of value via UPS, suffered a
loss and has been denied compensation by the defendant. [GN]

UNLIMITED CARE: Rothkranz Sues Over Unauthorized Access of Info
---------------------------------------------------------------
LINDZY ROTHKRANZ, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. UNLIMITED CARE INC., Defendant,
Case No. 7:23-cv-06350 (S.D.N.Y., July 21, 2023) is a class action
against the Defendant for negligence, breach of implied contract,
unjust enrichment, and declaratory judgment.

The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and
safeguard the personally identifiable information (PII) of the
Plaintiff and similarly situated customers stored within its
network systems following a data breach on February 16, 2023. The
Defendant also failed to timely notify the Plaintiff and similarly
situated individuals about the data breach. As a result, the PII of
the Plaintiff and Class members were compromised and damaged
through access by and disclosure to unknown and unauthorized third
parties, says the suit.

Unlimited Care Inc. is a provider of home health care services,
with its principal place of business at 707 Westchester Avenue,
Suite 110, White Plains, New York. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         James J. Bilsborrow, Esq.
         WEITZ & LUXENBERG, PC
         700 Broadway
         New York, NY 10003
         Telephone: (212) 558-5500
         E-mail: jbilsborrow@weitzlux.com

                  - and –

         Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
         Raina Borrelli, Esq.
         TURKE & STRAUSS LLP
         613 Williamson Street, Suite 201
         Madison, WI 53703
         Telephone: (608) 237-1775
         Facsimile: (608) 509-4423
         E-mail: sam@turkestrauss.com
                 raina@turkestrauss.com
                 brittanyr@turkestrauss.com

VIRGINIA: Class Suit Over Student With Special Needs Dismissed
--------------------------------------------------------------
Alexandra Rodriguez of ABC News reports that a class action lawsuit
filed against Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) and the Virginia
Department of Education (VDOE) by a parent of a special needs child
was dismissed.

The lawsuit was filed in November, citing a failure of oversight
and a conflict with the hearing officers and the VDOE that
certifies and pays them.

FCPS released the following statement following the court's order:

"FCPS appreciates the court's careful consideration of the
arguments presented and agrees with the dismissal of the lawsuit.
FCPS remains committed to working with parents to provide students
with disabilities an education that meets their needs."

Trevor Chaplick said he filed the suit after he learned that
two-thirds of the hearing officers that preside over due process
hearing cases in Virginia had never ruled in favor of a disabled
child in 20 years.

From 2010 to June 2021, data pulled from Chaplick's Freedom of
Information Act request to the Virginia Department of Education
showed rates in Northern Virginia that painted the same picture.

Out of 395 cases, 48% were withdrawn, 17% settled, 32% were
dismissed or ruled in favor of schools and just 0.76% were ruled in
favor of parents. [GN]

VISA INC: Appeals Denial of Bid to Remand Interchange Fees Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Visa Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly
period ending June 30, 2023 filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on July 25, 2023, that the plaintiffs appealed the
decision of the California state court denying their motion to
remand the interchange fees-related putative class action.

On December 30, 2022, a putative class action was filed in
California state court against Visa, Mastercard, and certain
financial institutions on behalf of all Visa and Mastercard
cardholders in California who made a purchase using a Visa-branded
or Mastercard-branded payment card in California from January 1,
2004.

Plaintiffs primarily allege a conspiracy to fix interchange fees
and seek injunctive relief, attorneys' fees and damages as direct
and indirect purchasers based on alleged violations of California
law.

On January 11, 2023, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint
asserting the same claims as asserted in the prior complaint.

On January 30, 2023, Visa removed the action to federal court.

On February 10, 2023, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation issued an order transferring the case to MDL 1720.

On June 15, 2023, plaintiffs' motion to remand the case to
California state court was denied, and plaintiffs have appealed.

Visa Inc. operates as a payments technology company worldwide. The
company facilitates commerce through the transfer of value and
information among consumers, merchants, financial institutions,
businesses, strategic partners, and government entities. Visa Inc.
was incorporated in 2007 and is headquartered in San Francisco,
California.




WESTERN UNION: Continues to Defend Financial Privacy Act Class Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Western Union disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending June 30, 2023 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on July 26, 2023, that the Company continues to
defend itself from the Financial Privacy Act related class suit in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California.

In December 2022, a purported class action complaint was filed
against several money transfer business defendants, including the
Company, in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California, alleging that these defendants violated the
federal Right to Financial Privacy Act and California's Financial
Information Privacy Act. The United States Department of Homeland
Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement are also named as
defendants.

The operative complaint alleges that the defendants violated
plaintiffs' financial privacy rights by sharing private financial
information with law enforcement agencies through a program
coordinated by the Transaction Record Analysis Center.

On January 24, 2023, an amended complaint was filed naming the
Company's subsidiary Western Union Financial Services, Inc.
("WUFSI") as a defendant in place of The Western Union Company.

Due to the preliminary stage of this matter, the ultimate outcome
and any potential financial impact to the Company cannot be
reasonably determined at this time. WUFSI intends to defend itself
vigorously in this matter.

The Western Union Company provides money movement and payment
services worldwide. The company operates in two segments,
Consumer-to-Consumer and Business Solutions. It serves primarily
through a network of agents. The Western Union Company was
incorporated in 2006 and is headquartered in Denver, Colorado.


WICHITA, KS: Provisionally Sealed Document Remain Under Seal
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Progeny, et al., v.
Wichita City, Kansas, et al., Case No. 6:21-cv-01100 (D. Kan.,
Filed April 15, 2021), the Hon. Judge Eric F. Melgren entered an
order granting motion to seal or redact document provisionally
sealed.

  -- The motion requested that the provisionally sealed document
     remain under seal. The motion is granted. The document shall
     remain under seal.

  -- All documents including the motion may be unsealed with the
     exception of Exhibits 14 and 15.

  -- The clerk is directed to remove the provisional designation
from
     the specified docket entry.

The nature of suit states Civil Rights Act.

Wichita is a city in south-central Kansas. [CC]

ZALMEN MANAGEMENT: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Arciniega Says
------------------------------------------------------------
DANIEL ANTONIO BAEZ ARCINIEGA, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ZALMEN MANAGEMENT LLC,
ZALMEN MANAGEMENT CO. INC., and SHNAYER KLEIN, Defendants, Case No.
1:23-cv-05532 (E.D.N.Y., July 20, 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 Arciniega was employed by the Defendants as a
superintendent.

ZALMEN MANAGEMENT LLC provides development services for residential
and commercial properties. [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
          Email: Joshua@levinepstein.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 ***