/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/231009.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Monday, October 9, 2023, Vol. 25, No. 202 Headlines 3M COMPANY: AFFF Contains Toxic PFAS, Thomley Class Suit Claims ABBOTT LAB: Bid to Dismiss Glenon Amended Complaint Tossed AFFORDABLE PATIO: Torres Seeks to Recover Workers' Unpaid OT Wages ALEXIS BITTAR: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Erkan Suit Says AMAZON.COM INC: Bid to Extend Complete Discovery Partly OK'd AMAZON.COM INC: McCarthy Appeals Suit Dismissal to 9th Circuit AMERICOR FUNDING: Class Cert Discovery Due May 22, 2024 AMERISOURCEBERGEN CORP: Faces Antitrust Suit Over Generic Drugs ARCHER AVIATION: Cenderelli Sues Over Misleading Statements ARDELYX INC: Consolidated Securities Suit Over SEC Filing Stayed ASSURANT INC: St. Fleur Sues Over Unfair Debt Collection Practices ATHENAHEALTH INC: Court Narrows Claims in VCMG Suit BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due Nov. 4, 2024 BLACKBERRY LIMITED: Discovery Ongoing in Parker Employment Suit BLACKBERRY LIMITED: Discovery Ongoing Swisscanto Class Suit CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY: Court Narrows Claims in Fisk Suit CARESOURCE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Cameron Alleges CARIJEAN BUHK: Court Certifies Rule 23 Class in Vargo Suit CME GROUP: Faces Breach of Contract Suit in Illinois Court COMMONWEALTH EDISON: 7th Cir. Affirms Dismissal of Suit COMMONWEALTH EDISON: Dismissal of Class Suit Under Appeal COMMONWEALTH EDISON: Settlement Deal in Class Suit Gets Court OK CONNECTICUT: Counsel Must File Status Report by Oct. 15 CORANET CORP: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Allen Suit Alleges CORCEPT THERAPEUTICS: Deal Reached in Melucci Suit CORPORATE EMPLOYMENT: Frink Seeks to Recover Overtime Wages COTERRA ENERGY: Pension Fund Suit Over SEC Filings Ongoing CR ENGLAND: Coleman, Wilcox Seek Proper Overtime Wages CRISIS24 PROTECTIVE: Fox and Santi Labor Suit Removed to N.D. Cal. DELTA DEFENSE: John Sues Over Unlawful Disclosure of Private Info DEMETRIC GODFREY: Shreves Seeks Certification of Certain Claims EXELON CORP: 7th Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Racketeering Suit EXELON CORP: Awaits Ruling on Bid to Dismiss ERISA-Related Suit EXELON CORP: Dismissal of Consumer Complaint Under Appeal EXELON CORP: Settlement in Putative Class Suit Gets Court OK FIDELITY NATIONAL: Consolidated Shareholder Suit Ongoing FREDDIE MAC: Faces Breach of Contract Suit FREDDIE MAC: Pension Fund Securities Suit Ongoing in Ohio GENWORTH FINANCIAL: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert. Bid by Oct. 16 GEORGIA: Taylor Seeks to Certify Class Action GLEN MILLS SCHOOLS: Derrick Suit Seeks to Certify Issues Classes GLEN MILLS SCHOOLS: Plaintiffs Seek to File Exhibits Under Seal HACKENSACK MERIDIAN: Schelhas Seeks FLSA conditional Certification HAYWARD HOLDINGS: Faces Suit Over Violations of Exchange Act HERBALIFE LTD: Settlement Reached in Rodgers Securities Suit HOME POINT: Al-Johar Seeks Initial Approval of Class Settlement INTEGON GENERAL: Greenwald Sues Over Wrongful Denial of Claims INTERFACE INC: Court Tosses Swanson Class Status Bid w/o Prejudice JANUS HENDERSON: Faces Schissler Suit Over Fund Mismanagement JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Fong Sues Over Decongestant's Deceptive Ads JVK OPERATIONS: Montiel-Flores Wins Class Certification Bid LANDMARK RECOVERY: Isaacs Class Cert Bid Partly OK'd MAPFRE USA: Gregory Sues Over Driver's Privacy Law Violations MARTIN SPORTS: Court Awards Glynn $47K in Attorney's Fees MATERION CORP: Settlement in Lucyk Suit Wins Final Nod MDL 2197: McGuire Suit Consolidated in Hip Implant Product Row MDL 2666: More v. 3M Transferred to D. Minn. MDL 2873: Illinois v. 3M Suit Transferred to D.S.C. MDL 2873: Panel Denies Transfer of Maine v. 3M to D.S.C. MDL 2924: Two Suits Consolidated in Ranitidine Product Litigation MDL 3010: Panel Denies Google's Bid for Stay Pending Appeal MDL 3047: Panel Vacates Nasca Suit Transfer Order META PLATFORMS: Advertiser Plaintiffs Seek Class Certification META PLATFORMS: Advertiser Plaintiffs Seek to File Docs Under Seal META PLATFORMS: Klein Suit Seeks to Certify Consumer Class MIKE BLOOMBERG: Sinclair Seeks to Certify Class Action MITEK SYSTEMS: BIPA-Related Class Suit Dismissed w/ Prejudice MITRE CORP: Annuity Plan Participants Win Class Certification MITRE CORP: Court Tosses as Moot Brown Bid to Certify Class MOSAIC GLOBAL: Faces Class Suit Over Elevated Levels of Radiation NCAA: Parties File Administrative Omnibus Bid to Seal Docs NESTLE WATERS: Opposition Briefs in Patane Suit Due Feb. 16, 2024 NEW YORK, NY: Filing for Class Cert Bid Modified to Oct. 13 NIKE INC: Cahill Files Bid to Compel Production of Documents OLLIE'S BARGAIN: Pauli Suit Seeks FLSA Collective Certification OMNI HOTELS: Beaver Suit Bid for Class Certification OK'd ONE SOURCE: Class Cert Filing Deadline Extended to Dec. 22 ONSITE OILFIELD: Hernandez Balks at Field Technicians' Unpaid Wages ORRSTOWN BANK: Faces Alleman Suit in Pennsylvania ORRSTOWN FINANCIAL: Settles SEPTA Securities Suit PEOPLES BANK: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Brooks Suit Alleges PHYSICAL REHABILITATION: Cushman Labor Suit Removed to S.D. Calif. PRIME HYDRATION: Drugas Sues Over Misleading Product Labels PROGRESSIVE PREMIER: Henson Suit Seeks to Certify Two Classes RBS CITIZENS: Court Vacates Trial Scheduled on Oct. 30 ROCKET CITY SHOWGIRLS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Glover Alleges SBGA INC: Filing for Class Certification Modified to Jan. 19, 2024 SEAGEN INC: Faces Class Suit Over Cancer Meds SELECT REHABILITATION: Bid to Amend McLaughlin Complaint Tossed SIG SAUER: Ct. Stays Class Cert-Related Deadlines in Glasscock SINGULARITY FUTURE: Continues to Defend Crivellaro Class Suit SLEEP NUMBER: Consolidated Securities Suit Dismissed w/ Prejudice SMITTY'S: Plaintiffs Seek More Time to File Class Cert Reply SPIRIT AEROSYSTEMS: Faces Consolidated Securities Suit SPIRIT AEROSYSTEMS: Faces Securities Suit Over Plane Design Flaws STATE FARM: Filing for Class Certification Bid Due Jan. 16, 2024 TENNESSEE: Harris Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification VAG TNRCA: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Boktor Suit Alleges WESTLAKE US: Jones and Jones Sue Over Property Damages, Negligence WILLIAMS COMPANIES: Loses Contamination Suit in Alaska WILLIS-KNIGHTON: Appeals Remand of Horton Suit to State Court WOODMAN'S FOOD: Filing of Class Cert Bid Extended to Oct. 10 ********* 3M COMPANY: AFFF Contains Toxic PFAS, Thomley Class Suit Claims --------------------------------------------------------------- LINDA THOMLEY, as Personal Representative/Administrator/Executor of the Estate of JAMES EARL THOMLEY deceased v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company) et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-04851-RMG (D.S.C., Sept. 28, 2023) is a class action against the Defendants seeking damages for personal injury and death resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams (AFFF) and firefighter turnout gear (TOG) containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF or TOG with knowledge that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which contained PFAS for use in firefighting, says the suit. Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF or TOG products at various locations during the course of Decedent's training and firefighting activities, the suit asserts. Plaintiff Linda Thomley is the duly-appointed personal/representative/administrator/executor of the Estate of James Earl Thomley. James Earl Thomley regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to, AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career as a military and/or civilian firefighter. Prior to death, Decedent was diagnosed with Prostate Cancer as a result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products. Decedent's diagnosis caused and/or contributed to his death. Decedent passed away on approximately May 21, 2023. The Defendants include 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CB GARMENT, INC.; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLUS, INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE PLC; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MILIKEN & COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING CO., INC; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, 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.); VERIDIAN LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP. 3M manufactured, marketed, and sold AFFF from the 1960s to the early 2000s.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Gregory A. Cade, Esq. Gary A. Anderson, Esq. Kevin B. McKie, Esq. ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C. 2160 Highland Avenue South Birmingham, AL 35205 Telephone: (205) 328-9200 Facsimile: (205) 328-9456 ABBOTT LAB: Bid to Dismiss Glenon Amended Complaint Tossed ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as DJ GLENON, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES, Case No. 3:22-cv-02061-AGS-DEB (S.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Andrew G. Schopler entered an order denying the Defendant's motion to dismiss the amended complaint. Abbott's motion to dismiss the amended complaint is denied. Abbott maintains that Glenon "alleges no facts suggesting that Abbott negligently failed to protect the confidentiality of his medical information." In this putative class action, the plaintiff alleges that defendant Abbott Laboratories disclosed medical information about him and hundreds of other patients in a mass email. Abbott moves to dismiss. In 2022, Synovation Medical Group shared with defendant Abbott Laboratories a patient list of 375 chronic-pain patients. Abbott is an American multinational medical devices and health care company. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 18, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4696eDz at no extra charge.[CC] AFFORDABLE PATIO: Torres Seeks to Recover Workers' Unpaid OT Wages ------------------------------------------------------------------ THOMAS TORRES, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. AFFORDABLE PATIO FURNITURE INC. (D/B/A AFFORDABLE PATIO), JAMES REED, and KRISTINA ARMENIA, Case No. 2:23-cv-07239 (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 28, 2023) seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and the New York Labor Law. The Plaintiff regularly worked in excess of 40 hours per week. From approximately April 2021 until October 2021, the Plaintiff's pay did not vary even when he was required to stay later or work a longer day than his usual schedule. For example, the Defendants required the Plaintiff to work an additional 30 minutes to 40 minutes past his scheduled departure time weekdays, and an additional 1-2 hours past his scheduled departure time on weekends, and did not pay him for the additional time he worked, the Plaintiff claims. Rather, the Defendants failed to maintain accurate recordkeeping of the hours worked, and failed to pay the Plaintiff appropriately for any hours worked, either at the straight rate of pay or for any additional overtime premium. Accordingly, 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 overtime compensation required by federal and state law and regulations, the suit asserts. The Plaintiff seeks certification of this action as a collective action on behalf of himself, individually, and all other similarly situated employees and former employees of the Defendants. The Plaintiff also seeks to recover liquidated damages, interest, attorneys' fees and costs. Mr. Torres was employed by the Defendants as construction worker at Affordable Patio from April 2021 until January 2022. Affordable is a construction company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Catalina Sojo, Esq. CSM LEGAL, P.C. 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510 New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 317-1200 Facsimile: (212) 317-1620 ALEXIS BITTAR: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Erkan Suit Says ---------------------------------------------------------------- NIHAL ERKAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ALEXIS BITTAR, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-06973 (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 21, 2023) alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web site, https://www.alexisbittar.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. ALEXIS BITTAR, INC. designs and markets jewelry products. The Company provides products which includes bracelets, necklaces, collars, bangles, ear rings, pendants, and other jewelry products. Alexis Bittar operates in the United States. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mars Khaimov, Esq. MARS KHAIMOV LAW, PLLC 100 Duffy Avenue, Suite 510 Hicksville, NY 11801 Telephone: (929) 324-0717 Facsimile: (929) 333-7774 Email: mars@khaimovlaw.com AMAZON.COM INC: Bid to Extend Complete Discovery Partly OK'd ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jackson v. Amazon.com, Inc., Case No. 3:20-cv-02365 (S.D. Cal., Filed Dec 4, 2020), the Hon. Judge William Q. Hayes entered an order granting in part and denying in part motion for extension of time to Complete Discovery. -- The Court concludes that there is good cause to extend the fact discovery deadline and the deadline for Plaintiff's motion for class certification 60 days. -- All parties must complete all fact discovery by Dec. 8, 2023. -- Any motion for class certification shall be filed by Jan. 9, 2024. Amazon.com is an American multinational technology company focusing on e-commerce, cloud computing, online advertising, digital streaming, and artificial intelligence. The nature of suit states Torts -- Personal Injury -- Other Personal Injury.[CC] AMAZON.COM INC: McCarthy Appeals Suit Dismissal to 9th Circuit -------------------------------------------------------------- TRACY MCCARTHY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, is taking an appeal from a court order dismissing her lawsuit entitled Tracy McCarthy, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. AMAZON.COM, INC., et al., Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-01019-BJR, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The Plaintiff brings this class action against the Defendants for deceptive practices, false advertising, and unjust enrichment by being enrolled in Audible Inc.'s service after completing a transaction on Amazon's website without consent. On Mar. 23, 2023, the Plaintiff filed an amended complaint. The Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's amended complaint for failure to state a claim, which the Court granted through an order entered by Judge Barbara J. Rothstein on Sept. 7, 2023. Judge Rothstein ruled that the Plaintiff failed to plead a plausible deceptive practice or false advertising claim, which also results in a failure to plead an unjust enrichment claim. Because the amended complaint failed to address the pleading insufficiencies in the original complaint, the Plaintiff's amended complaint is dismissed with prejudice. The appellate case is captioned Tracy McCarthy v. AMZN, et al., Case No. 23-35605, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, filed on September 19, 2023. The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that: -- Appellant Tracy McCarthy Mediation Questionnaire was due on September 26, 2023; -- Appellant Tracy McCarthy opening brief is due on November 14, 2023; -- Appellees Amazon.com, Inc. and Audible Inc. answering brief is due on December 14, 2023; and -- Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [BN] Plaintiff-Appellant TRACY MCCARTHY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, is represented by: Sue Jung Nam, Esq. Michael Reese, Esq. REESE, LLP 100 W. 93rd Street, 16th Floor New York, NY 10025 Telephone: (917) 405-6686 (212) 594-5300 - and - Rebecca Solomon, Esq. Kim D. Stephens, Esq. TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS, PLLC 1500 5th Avenue, Suite 1700 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 682-5600 Defendants-Appellees AMAZON.COM, INC., et al., are represented by: Brian D. Buckley, Esq. FENWICK & WEST, LLP 401 Union Street, 5th Floor Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 389-4529 - and - Molly Melcher, Esq. Jedediah Wakefield, Esq. FENWICK & WEST, LLP 555 California Street, 12th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 875-2300 AMERICOR FUNDING: Class Cert Discovery Due May 22, 2024 ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JASON SCHIFFMILLER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. AMERICOR FUNDING, LLC and LIVE CALLS NETWORK, LLC, Case No. 3:22-cv-01299-MPS (D. Conn.), the Plaintiff with the consent of the Defendants Live Calls Network, LLC and Americor Funding files this motion for an extension of time to extend the current motion for class certification deadline. -- Amended Pleadings due by: Aug. 22, 2023 -- Discovery due by: May 22, 2024 -- Dispositive Motions due by: June 22, 2024 -- Joint Status Report due by: Dec. 11, 2023 -- Telephonic Status Conference Dec. 18, 2023 set for: Americor is a debt relief company that has been in business since 2006. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 18, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/458J0MD at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Anthony I. Paronich, Esq. PARONICH LAW, P.C. 350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400 Hingham, MA 02043 Telephone: 617) 485-0018 E-mail: anthony@paronichlaw.com AMERISOURCEBERGEN CORP: Faces Antitrust Suit Over Generic Drugs --------------------------------------------------------------- Amerisourcebergen Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in August 2, 2023, that it is facing a consolidated case before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for allegedly participating in a conspiracy to fix prices, allocate markets and rig bids regarding generic drugs. In December 2019, Reliable Pharmacy, together with other retail pharmacies and North Sunflower Medical Center, filed a civil antitrust complaint against multiple generic drug manufacturers, and also included claims against a company subsidiary AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation (ABDC), H.D. Smith, and other drug distributors and industry participants. The case is filed as a putative class action and plaintiffs purport to represent a class of drug purchasers including other retail pharmacies and healthcare providers. The complaint alleges that ABDC, H.D. Smith, and others in the industry. In March 2020, the plaintiffs filed a further amended complaint. On July 15, 2020, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On May 25, 2022, the court granted the motion to dismiss without prejudice. On July 1, 2022, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, again including claims against ABDC, H.D. Smith, and other drug distributors and industry participants. On August 21, 2022, the company and other industry participants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. All briefs on the motion were filed with the court on November 22, 2022. Amerisourcebergen Corporation is a global pharmaceutical sourcing and distribution services companies, helping both healthcare providers and pharmaceutical and biotech manufacturers improve patient access to products and enhance patient care. ARCHER AVIATION: Cenderelli Sues Over Misleading Statements ----------------------------------------------------------- KEN CENDERELLI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ARCHER AVIATION, INC., ADAM GOLDSTEIN, BRETT ADCOCK, BEN LU, and MARK MESLER, Defendants, Case No. 3:23-cv-04844 (N.D. Cal., Sept. 21, 2023) seeks to recover damages caused by Defendants' violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5. This is a federal securities class action on behalf of a class consisting of all persons and entities other than Defendants that purchased or otherwise acquired Archer securities between September 17, 2021 and August 15, 2023. Throughout the Class Period, the Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the Company relied on heavily edited videos of earlier flights to exaggerate the amount of flight testing it had actually performed and the sophistication of its electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft; (ii) the Company had misrepresented the nature and profitability of its business partnerships, (iii) the Company was unlikely to secure FAA certification in the timeframe it had represented to investors, thereby delaying the start of mass production of its aircraft for commercial sales; (iv) accordingly, the Company had overstated its financial position and/or prospects; (v) all of the foregoing, once revealed, was likely to subject the Company to significant financial and/or reputational harm; and (vi) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. On August 16, 2023, before the market opened, Grizzly Research released a report on Archer's misrepresentations, in which Archer's stock price fell $0.41 per share, or 6.46%, to close at $5.94 per share. As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's securities, Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses and damages, says the suit. Archer purports to design and develop eVTOL aircraft for use in urban air mobility networks. Archer's shares began publicly trading on the New York Stock Exchange in September 2021 when it entered into a business combination with Atlas Crest Investment Corp., a special purpose acquisition company. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jennifer Pafiti, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 1100 Glendon Avenue, 15th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90024 Telephone: (310) 405-7190 E-mail: jpafiti@pomlaw.com - and - Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq. J. Alexander Hood II, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 661-1100 Facsimile: (917) 463-1044 E-mail: jalieberman@pomlaw.com ahood@pomlaw.com - and - Joshua E. Fruchter, Esq. WOHL & FRUCHTER LLP 25 Robert Pitt Drive, Suite 209G Monsey, NY 10952 Telephone: (845) 290-6818 Facsimile: (718) 504-3773 E-mail: jfruchter@wohlfruchter.com ARDELYX INC: Consolidated Securities Suit Over SEC Filing Stayed ---------------------------------------------------------------- Ardelyx, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 2, 2023, that the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California stayed a consolidated securities suit alleging violations of Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, breaches of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and waste of corporate assets, for personally making and/or causing Ardelyx to make materially false and misleading statements regarding the company's business, operations and prospects. The complaint seeks contribution under Sections 10(b) and 21D of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 from two executive officers. On December 7, 2021 a verified shareholders derivative lawsuit was filed in said court purportedly on behalf of Ardelyx against certain of its executive officers and members of its board of directors, captioned "Morris v. Raab, et al., Case No. 4:22-cv-01988-JSC. The complaints alleges that the defendant violated Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, breaches of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and waste of corporate assets, for personally making and/or causing Ardelyx to make materially false and misleading statements regarding the company's business, operations and prospects. The complaint seeks contribution under Sections 10(b) and 21D of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 from two executive officers. On January 19, and April 27, 2022, the court granted the parties' stipulation to stay the Morris action until resolution of the anticipated motion to dismiss a pending securities class action. On October 25, 2022, the parties filed a stipulation to consolidate and stay said action, and was consolidated on October 27, 2022. Ardelyx, Inc. is a biopharmaceutical company into the discovery of new biological mechanisms and pathways to develop potent and efficacious therapies that minimize the side effects and drug-drug interactions frequently encountered with traditional, systemically absorbed medicines. Mike Raab serves as President and CEO of the company. ASSURANT INC: St. Fleur Sues Over Unfair Debt Collection Practices ------------------------------------------------------------------ CASSANDRA ST. FLEUR, individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ASSURANT, INC., Defendant, Case No. 23-008455-CI (Fla. Cir., 6th Judicial, Pinellas Cty., Sept. 21, 2023), alleges violations of the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant violated Section 559.72(17) of the FCCPA, which prohibits persons from communicating with a debtor between the hours of 9:00 PM and 8:00 AM in the debtor's time zone without the prior consent of the debtor. On November 29, 2022, the Defendant allegedly sent an electronic mail communication to Plaintiff 12:22 AM in Plaintiff's zone. Assurant Inc. is a Delaware Corporation, with its principal place of business located in Atlanta, GA. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq. Jennifer G. Simil, Esq. Gerald D. Lane, Jr., Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI 110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 907-1136 E-mail: jibrael@jibraellaw.com jen@jibraellaw.com gerald@jibraellaw.com ATHENAHEALTH INC: Court Narrows Claims in VCMG Suit --------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as VALLEY CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL and VALLEY CHILDREN'S MEDICAL GROUP, v. ATHENAHEALTH, INC., Case No. 1:22-cv-10689-DJC (D. Mass.), the Hon. Judge Denise J. Casper entered an order allowing Athena's motion to dismiss the Chapter 93A claim (Count III). The case shall proceed on the other, remaining claims, Counts I and II. Accordingly, the Court concludes that the alleged misrepresentations by Athena are nonactionable under Chapter 93A as mere puffery and statements of opinion as to future, Valley alleges that Athena's "provision of certain service reports that were false and misleading insofar as they portrayed [Athena] as satisfying its Minimum Service Commitments when in fact Athenahealth was not" violated chapter 93A. The Plaintiffs comprise two commonly owned non-profits: the Hospital which is a freestanding children’s hospital in Madera County, California, and the Medical Group, which provides services to the Hospital through its affiliated contracted medical groups. Athenahealth is a private American company that provides network-enabled services for healthcare and point-of-care mobile apps in the United States A copy of the Court's memorandum and order dated Sept. 18, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3ZGvmiD at no extra charge.[CC] BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due Nov. 4, 2024 --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Mirvis, et al., v. Berkshire Hathaway, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:21-cv-02210 (E.D.N.Y., Filed April 21, 2021), the Hon. Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto entered an order as follows: -- Completion of fact discovery by: May 1, 2024 -- The last date to take the first July 1, 2024 step in class certification motion practice shall be: -- If no class certification motion Nov. 4, 2024 is filed, the last date to take the first step in dispositive motion practice shall be: The suit alleges violation of Federal Trade Commission Act involving Torts -- Personal Injury -- Other Personal Injury. Berkshire is a holding company for a multitude of businesses, including GEICO and Fruit of the Loom.[CC] BLACKBERRY LIMITED: Discovery Ongoing in Parker Employment Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- BlackBerry Limited disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly period ending August 31, 2023 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 29, 2023, that discovery is ongoing for Parker employment class suit and the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has not scheduled trial date for the class action. On March 17, 2017, a putative employment class action was filed against the Company in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Parker v. BlackBerry Limited). The Statement of Claim alleges that actions the Company took when certain of its employees decided to accept offers of employment from Ford Motor Company of Canada amounted to a wrongful termination of the employees' employment with the Company. The claim seeks (i) an unspecified quantum of statutory, contractual, or common law termination entitlements; (ii) punitive or breach of duty of good faith damages of CAD$20 million, or such other amount as the Court finds appropriate, (iii) pre- and post- judgment interest, (iv) attorneys' fees and costs, and (v) such other relief as the Court deems just. The Court granted the plaintiffs' motion to certify the class action on May 27, 2019. The Company commenced a motion for leave to appeal the certification order on June 11, 2019. The Court denied the motion for leave to appeal on September 17, 2019. The Company filed its Statement of Defence on December 19, 2019. The parties participated in a mediation on November 9, 2022, which did not result in an agreement. Discovery is proceeding and the Court has not set a trial date. BlackBerry Limited provides intelligent security software and services to enterprises and governments based in Canada. BLACKBERRY LIMITED: Discovery Ongoing Swisscanto Class Suit ----------------------------------------------------------- BlackBerry Limited disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly period ending August 31, 2023 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 29, 2023, that discovery is ongoing for the Swisscanto Fondsleitung AG class suit and the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has not scheduled trial date for the class action. On July 23, 2014, the plaintiff in the putative Ontario class action (Swisscanto Fondsleitung AG v. BlackBerry Limited, et al.) filed a motion for class certification and for leave to pursue statutory misrepresentation claims. On November 17, 2015, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice issued an order granting the plaintiffs' motion for leave to file a statutory claim for misrepresentation. On December 2, 2015, the Company filed a notice of motion seeking leave to appeal this ruling. On November 15, 2018, the Court denied the Company's motion for leave to appeal the order granting the plaintiffs leave to file a statutory claim for misrepresentation. On February 5, 2019, the Court entered an order certifying a class comprised persons (a) who purchased BlackBerry common shares between March 28, 2013, and September 20, 2013, and still held at least some of those shares as of September 20, 2013, and (b) who acquired those shares on a Canadian stock exchange or acquired those shares on any other stock exchange and were a resident of Canada when the shares were acquired. Notice of class certification was published on March 6, 2019. The Company filed its Statement of Defence on April 1, 2019. Discovery is proceeding and the Court has not set a trial date. BlackBerry Limited provides intelligent security software and services to enterprises and governments based in Canada. CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY: Court Narrows Claims in Fisk Suit -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MADISON FISK, RAQUEL CASTRO, GRETA VISS, CLARE BOTTERILL, MAYA BROSCH, HELEN BAUER, CARINA CLARK, NATALIE FIGUEROA, ERICA GROTEGEER, KAITLIN HERI, OLIVIA PETRINE, AISHA WATT, KAMRYN WHITWORTH, SARA ABSTEN, ELEANOR DAVIES, ALEXA DIETZ, and LARISA SULCS, individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY and SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY, Case No. 3:22-cv-00173-TWR-MSB (S.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Todd Robinson entered an order granting part and denying in part the Defendants' motion to dismiss in part Plaintiffs' third amended complaint. -- Specifically, the Court grants Defendants' motion and dismisses with prejudice (1) the rowing team Plaintiffs' claims for injunctive and declaratory relief relating to their unequal financial aid claim and (2) the claims by Plaintiffs who were no longer students at SDSU when the original Complaint was filed for injunctive and declaratory relief relating to their unequal financial aid claim. -- The Court reserves ruling on whether the Present Plaintiffs have standing to pursue injunctive and declaratory relief as it relates to their retaliation claim until after Plaintiffs' recently filed Motion for the Court to revise its prior Order has been fully briefed and submitted. The Plaintiffs, "past and current female varsity student-athletes at SDSU, " initiated this lawsuit against Defendants on February 7, 2022, alleging SDSU -- a recipient of federal funding—has engaged in intentional discrimination based on sex in its athletics programs in violation of Title IX. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 15, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3taAOOz at no extra charge.[CC] CARESOURCE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Cameron Alleges --------------------------------------------------------- AMANDA CAMERON; CATHERINE CUSTER; and KYLE CUSTER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CARESOURCE, Defendants, Case No. 3:23-cv-00274-WHR-CHG (S.D. Ohio., Sept. 21, 2023) is a class action against the Defendant seeking to recover damages, restitution, and injunctive relief on behalf of a Class of persons whose personal identification information and private health information, (collectively, "PII/PHI" or "Sensitive Information") was accessed without authorization by criminals as a result of Defendant's unreasonable and deficient data security practices. According to the complaint, a recent targeted cyberattack and data breach ("Data Breach") on the Defendant's computer network resulted in unauthorized access to sensitive information to its clients. As a result of the Defendant's failure to secure its network, the Plaintiff's and Class Members' names, addresses, dates of birth, genders, Social Security numbers, ("personally identifiable information" or "PII") and medical and health insurance information, which is protected health information1 ("PHI", and collectively with PII, "Private Information") are now in the hands of criminals. CARESOURCE is a nonprofit that began as a managed health care plan serving Medicaid members in Ohio. Today, it provides public health care programs including Medicaid, Medicare, and Marketplace. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Brian D. Flick, Esq. Marc E. Dann, Esq. Andrew M. Engel, Esq. Jeffrey A. Crossman, Esq. DANNLAW 15000 Madison Avenue Cleveland, OH 44107 Telephone: (216) 373-0539 Facsimile: (216) 373-0536 Email: notices@dannlaw.com CARIJEAN BUHK: Court Certifies Rule 23 Class in Vargo Suit ---------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as VICTOR VARGO, and CARIJEAN BUHK, individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated, v. PETER W. BARCA, Wisconsin Secretary of Revenue, Case No. 3:20-cv-01109-jdp (W.D. Wis.), the Hon. Judge James D. Peterson entered an order: -- Granting Plaintiff Carijean Buhk's motion for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2); -- Certifying the following class: "All persons or entities (including their heirs, assignees, legal representatives, guardians, administrators, and successors in interest) who have property in the form of money that is $100 or more in the State of Wisconsin's custody under the Wisconsin Revised Uniform Unclaimed Property Act that was non-interest bearing at the time it was delivered to the state, and whose claim is allowed under Wis. Stat. section 177.0904(2);" -- Appointing plaintiff Carijean Buhk as class representative; and -- Appointing Dennis Grzezinski, Charles Watkins, Garrett Blanchfield, and Roberta Yard as appointed class counsel. The Plaintiffs bring their facial challenge to the statute’s interest-payment provisions on their own behalf and as a class action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. The Plaintiffs Victor Vargo and Carijean Buhk bring this class action for declaratory and injunctive relief, challenging the constitutionality of certain provisions of Wisconsin's Revised Uniform Unclaimed Property Act, 2021 Wis. Act 87. Before the court is Buhk's motion under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to certify a class under Rule 23(b)(2), designate her as class representative, and appoint Dennis Grzezinski, Charles Watkins, Garrett Blanchfield, and Roberta Yard as class counsel for plaintiffs. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 18, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3REiqIe at no extra charge.[CC] CME GROUP: Faces Breach of Contract Suit in Illinois Court ---------------------------------------------------------- CME Group Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in August 8, 2023, that a putative class action complaint filed on January 15, 2014 in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Chancery Division, against CME Group Inc. and the Board of Trade of the City of Chicago, Inc., is currently ongoing. The plaintiffs are certain Class B shareholders of CME Group and Class B members of the Board of Trade of the City of Chicago, Inc. It alleges breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing for violations of their core rights granted in the defendants' respective Certificates of Incorporation. On December 2, 2021, the court granted the plaintiffs' motion for certification of a damages-only class. No trial date has been set. CME Group Inc., headquartered in Chicago, operates financial derivatives exchanges including the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Chicago Board of Trade, New York Mercantile Exchange, and The Commodity Exchange. COMMONWEALTH EDISON: 7th Cir. Affirms Dismissal of Suit ------------------------------------------------------- Commonwealth Edison Company disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in August 2, 2023, that on August 22, 2022, the Seventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a consolidated federal case filed against the company. Four putative class action lawsuits against Commonwealth Edison were filed in federal court on behalf of its customers in the third quarter of 2020 alleging, among other things, civil violations of federal racketeering laws. In addition, the Citizens Utility Board (CUB) filed a motion to intervene in these cases on October 22, 2020 which was granted on December 23, 2020. On September 9, 2021, the federal court granted Exelon's motion to dismiss and dismissed the plaintiffs' and CUB's federal law claim with prejudice. The federal court also dismissed the related state law claims made by the federal plaintiffs and CUB on jurisdictional grounds. Plaintiffs appealed dismissal of the federal law claim to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Plaintiffs and CUB also refiled their state law claims in state court and moved to consolidate them with the already pending consumer state court class action. Commonwealth Edison Company is a utility services holding company engaged in the energy transmission and distribution businesses in Northern Illinois, including the City of Chicago. COMMONWEALTH EDISON: Dismissal of Class Suit Under Appeal --------------------------------------------------------- Commonwealth Edison Company disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in August 2, 2023, that on June 16, 2023, the Lake County, Illinois Circuit Court granted its motion to dismiss, with prejudice, a putative class action complaint for unjust enrichment and deceptive business practices in connection with the conduct giving rise to a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA). Plaintiff filed its notice of appeal of that dismissal on July 17, 2023. Case was filed on November 3, 2022, and sought an accounting and disgorgement of any benefits Commonwealth Edison allegedly obtained. On July 17, 2020, Commonwealth Edison entered into a DPA with the U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO) for the Northern District of Illinois to resolve its investigation, where it filed a single charge alleging that Commonwealth Edison Company improperly gave and offered to give jobs, vendor subcontracts, and payments associated with those jobs and subcontracts for the benefit of the former Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives and the Speaker's associates, with the intent to influence the Speaker's action regarding legislation affecting Commonwealth Edison's interests. The DPA provides that the USAO will defer any prosecution of such charge and any other criminal or civil case against Commonwealth Edison in connection with the matters identified therein for a three-year period subject to certain of its obligations including payment to the U.S. Treasury of $200 million, which was paid in November 2020. Plaintiff served initial discovery requests in December 2022. Commonwealth Edison filed a motion to dismiss the Complaint on February 3, 2023. Commonwealth Edison Company is a utility services holding company engaged in the energy transmission and distribution businesses in Northern Illinois, including the City of Chicago. COMMONWEALTH EDISON: Settlement Deal in Class Suit Gets Court OK ---------------------------------------------------------------- Commonwealth Edison Company disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in August 2, 2023, that on June 9, 2023, the federal court approved a settlement of a putative class action lawsuit against Commonwealth Edison and certain officers of Commonwealth Edison in December 2019 alleging misrepresentations and omissions in its SEC filings related to its lobbying activities and the related investigations. The complaint was amended on September 16, 2020, to dismiss two of the original defendants and add other defendants. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss in November 2020. The court denied the motion in April 2021. On May 26, 2021, defendants moved the court to certify its order denying the motion to dismiss for interlocutory appeal. Briefing on the motion was completed in June 2021. That motion was denied on January 28, 2022. In May 2021, the parties each filed respective initial discovery disclosures. On June 9, 2021, defendants filed their answer and affirmative defenses to the complaint and the parties engaged thereafter in discovery. On September 9, 2021, the U.S. government moved to intervene in the lawsuit and stay discovery until the parties entered into an amendment to their protective order that would prohibit the parties from requesting discovery into certain matters, including communications with the U.S. government. The court ordered said amendment to the protective order on November 15, 2021 and discovery resumed. The court further amended the protective order on October 17, 2022 and extended it until May 15, 2023. Following mediation, the parties reached a settlement of the lawsuit, under which defendants agreed to pay plaintiffs $173 million. On May 26, 2023, plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement, which the court granted on. The court's settlement hearing was scheduled on September 7, 2023. Commonwealth Edison Company is a utility services holding company engaged in the energy transmission and distribution businesses in Northern Illinois, including the City of Chicago. CONNECTICUT: Counsel Must File Status Report by Oct. 15 ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Carr, et al., v. Department of Health and Human Services, Federal, et al., Case No. 3:22-cv-00988 (D. Conn., Filed Aug. 3, 2022), the Hon. Judge Michael P. Shea entered an order directing counsel to file a status report by October 15, 2023, and shall indicate whether the case may be closed. No activity has occurred in this case since the Court's orders on class certification and injunctive relief, the Court says. The suit alleges violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.[CC] CORANET CORP: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Allen Suit Alleges ----------------------------------------------------------- NEIL ALLEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CORANET CORP. d/b/a CORANET; and MARGARET MARCUCCI, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-08380 (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 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 Allen was employed by the Defendants as a low voltage technician. CORANET CORP. provides IT and network support services. The Company offers network infrastructure, security technology, audio visual, and manufacturing solutions. Coranet serves customers in the United States. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: C.K. Lee, Esq. Anne Seelig, Esq. LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC 148 West 24th Street, 8th Floor New York, NY 10011 Telephone: (212) 465-1188 Facsimile: (212) 465-1181 CORCEPT THERAPEUTICS: Deal Reached in Melucci Suit -------------------------------------------------- Corcept Therapeutics Incorporated disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 2, 2023, that on February 8, 2023, the parties to a purported securities class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California captioned "Nicholas Melucci v. Corcept Therapeutics Incorporated, et al." (Case No. 5:19-cv-01372-LHK). The parties have reached an agreement in principle, subject to the final approval of the court. Said case was filed on March 14, 2019. It asserts violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder and alleges that the defendants made false and materially misleading statements and failed to disclose adverse facts about its business, operations and prospects. The complaint asserts a putative class period extending from August 2, 2017 to February 5, 2019 and seeks unspecified monetary relief, interest and attorneys' fees. On October 7, 2019, the court appointed a lead plaintiff and lead counsel. The lead plaintiff's consolidated complaint was filed on December 6, 2019. Corcept Therapeutics Incorporated is a commercial-stage pharmaceutical company engaged in the discovery and development of medications to treat severe endocrine, oncology, metabolism and neurology disorders by modulating the effects of the hormone cortisol. CORPORATE EMPLOYMENT: Frink Seeks to Recover Overtime Wages ----------------------------------------------------------- WESLEY FRINK, individually and for others similarly situated v. CORPORATE EMPLOYMENT RESOURCES, INC. d/b/a BARTECH, Case No. 2:23-cv-12410-BAF-KGA (E.D. Mich., Sept. 21, 2023) seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and other damages from the Defendants pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New York Labor Law and its implementing regulations. The Defendant employs Frink as a construction manager primarily in Rochester, New York since approximately March 2021. Throughout his employment, Bartech paid Frink straight time for overtime. The Defendant paid Frink the same hourly rate for all hours worked, including those after 40 in a workweek. Moreover, the Defendant violated the laws by depriving Frink of the "time and a half" overtime pay they are owed for all hours worked after 40 in a workweek, says the suit. Bartech is a Delaware corporation that maintains its headquarters in Southfield, MI. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael A. Josephson, Esq. Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq. Olivia R. Beale, Esq. JOSEPHSON DUNLAP, LLP 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 352-1100 Facsimile: (713) 352-3300 E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com adunlap@mybackwages.com obeale@mybackwages.com - and – Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq. BRUCKNER BURCH, PLLC 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 877-8788 Facsimile: (713) 877-8065 E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com - and - Jennifer L. McManus, Esq. FAGAN MCMANUS, PC 25892 Woodward Avenue Royal Oak, MI 58067-0910 Telephone (248) 542-6300 E-mail: jmcmanus@faganlawpc.com COTERRA ENERGY: Pension Fund Suit Over SEC Filings Ongoing ---------------------------------------------------------- Coterra Energy Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 3, 2023, that a class action case it is facing is presently ongoing. In October 2020, a class action lawsuit styled "Delaware County Emp. Ret. Sys. v. Cabot Oil and Gas Corp., et. al." (U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania), was filed against the Company, Dan O. Dinges, its then Chief Executive Officer, and Scott C. Schroeder, its then Chief Financial Officer, alleging that the company made misleading statements in its periodic filings with the SEC in violation of Section 10(b) and Section 20 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. The plaintiffs allege misstatements in the company's public filings and disclosures over a number of years relating to its potential liability for alleged environmental violations in Pennsylvania. The plaintiffs allege that such misstatements caused a decline in the price of the company's common stock when it disclosed in its Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2019 two notices of violations from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and an additional decline when it disclosed on June 15, 2020 the criminal charges brought by the Office of the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania related to alleged violations of the Pennsylvania Clean Streams Law, which prohibits discharge of industrial wastes. The court appointed Delaware County Employees Retirement System to represent the purported class on February 3, 2021. In April 2021, the complaint was amended to include Phillip L. Stalnaker, the company's then Senior Vice President of Operations, as a defendant. The plaintiffs seek monetary damages, interest and attorney's fees. On February 25, 2021, the company filed a motion to transfer the class action lawsuit to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, in Houston, Texas, where its headquarters are located. On June 11, 2021, the company filed a motion to dismiss the class action lawsuit on the basis that the plaintiffs' allegations do not meet the requirements for pleading a claim under Section 10(b) or Section 20 of the Exchange Act. On June 22, 2021, the motion to transfer the class action lawsuit to the Southern District of Texas was granted. On January 12, 2022, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas granted the company's motion to dismiss the class action lawsuit but allowed the plaintiffs to file an amended complaint. The class action plaintiffs filed their amended complaint on February 11, 2022. The company filed a motion to dismiss the amended class action complaint on March 10, 2022. On August 10, 2022, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas granted in part and denied in part the company's motion to dismiss the amended class action complaint, dismissing certain claims with prejudice but allowing certain claims to proceed. The company filed its answer to the amended class action complaint on September 14, 2022. Coterra Energy Inc. is into crude petroleum and natural gas and is based in Houston TX. CR ENGLAND: Coleman, Wilcox Seek Proper Overtime Wages ------------------------------------------------------ EDWARD COLEMAN AND STEPHEN WILCOX on behalf of themselves, and all other plaintiffs similarly situated, known and unknown, Plaintiffs v. C.R. ENGLAND, INC., D/B/A PREMIER TRUCK DRIVING SCHOOL, AN INDIANA CORPORATION, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-13973 (N.D. Ill., Sept. 21, 2023) arises out of the Defendants' violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Illinois Minimum Wage Law. Plaintiffs Coleman and Wilcox are former driving instructor employees of the Defendants. While employed by Defendants, Plaintiffs were classified as "exempt", but were paid by the hour. The Plaintiffs were paid a regular hourly rate for all hours worked, including those over 40 worked in individual work weeks, says the suit. C.R. England Inc. is a Utah corporation that owns and operates a commercial driver’s license truck driving schools in Colton, CA, Laredo, TX, Salt Lake City, UT, Valparaiso, IN. At these instructional facilities, the company provides training for over-the-road truck drivers in accordance with certain commercial driver's license requirements. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: John William Billhorn, Esq. BILLHORN LAW FIRM 53 W. Jackson Blvd., Suite 1137 Chicago, IL 60604 Telephone: (312) 853-1450 CRISIS24 PROTECTIVE: Fox and Santi Labor Suit Removed to N.D. Cal. ------------------------------------------------------------------ The case styled RUSTIN FOX and GABRIELE SANTI, individuals, on behalf of themselves and on behalf of all persons similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. CRISIS24 PROTECTIVE SOLUTIONS, LP, a Limited Partnership; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 23CV418864, was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara, to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on September 28, 2023. The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of California assigned Case No. 5:23-cv-04996-SVK to the proceeding. The case arises from the Defendants unlawful and deceptive policies, practices and procedures that violated the California's Unfair Competition Law. It also alleges that the Defendants failed to provide overtime wages, minimum wages, accurate itemized wage statements, duty-free meal and rest periods, all wages due on termination, and reimbursements due for necessary expenses incurred in the discharge of their job duties. Crisis24 provides consulting, investigation and risk assessment, crisis response, training, and protective services. [BN] The Defendants are represented by: Malcolm A. Heinicke, Esq. MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP 560 Mission Street, 27th Floor San Francisco, CA 94105-2907 Telephone: (415) 512-4000 Facsimile: (415) 512-4077 E-mail: malcolm.heinicke@mto.com - and - Joseph D. Lee, Esq. MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP 350 South Grand Avenue, 50th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071-3426 Telephone: (213) 683-9100 Facsimile: (213) 687-3702 E-mail: joseph.lee@mto.com DELTA DEFENSE: John Sues Over Unlawful Disclosure of Private Info ----------------------------------------------------------------- KEEFE JOHN, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DELTA DEFENSE, LLC and UNITED STATES CONCEALED CARRY ASSOCIATION, INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-01253 (E.D. Wis., Sept. 21, 2023) arises from the Defendants' unlawful disclosure of Plaintiff's and class members' digital subscribers' identities and video-viewing preferences to Meta Platforms Inc., which owns the social networking website and app Facebook. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendants violated the Video Privacy Protection Act by employing tracking technologies (namely, pixels) to collect and to share with third parties, such as Facebook, the viewing information of its subscribers without obtaining informed, stand-alone consent. Accordingly, Plaintiff, on behalf of a class of similarly situated users, seeks all appropriate relief including, but not limited to, statutory damages in an amount not less than $2,500 for each disclosure of PII, punitive damages and attorneys' fees and costs. Delta Defense is a Wisconsin limited liability company that provides sales, marketing, operations, and administrative support services to the United States Concealed Carry Association, Inc. It is a licensed insurance agency in all fifty states and the District of Columbia. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Timothy M. Hansen, Esq. Michael C. Lueder, Esq. HANSEN REYNOLDS LLC 301 N. Broadway, Suite 400 Milwaukee, WI 53202 Telephone: (414) 455-7676 Facsimile: (414) 273-8476 E-mail: thansen@hansenreynolds.com mlueder@hansenreynolds.com - and - David S. Almeida, Esq. ALMEIDA LAW GROUP LLC 849 W. Webster Avenue Chicago, IL 60614 Telephone: (312) 576-3024 E-mail: david@almeidalawgroup.com DEMETRIC GODFREY: Shreves Seeks Certification of Certain Claims --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Richard E. Shreves v. Demetric E. Godfrey et al., Case No. 6:23-cv-00035-BMM-KLD (D. Mont.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting certification as to claims 1, 2 and 5. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Sept. 18, 2023, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3ZxduXg at no extra charge. The Plaintiff appears pro se.[CC] EXELON CORP: 7th Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Racketeering Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- Exelon Corp. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in August 2, 2023, that on August 22, 2022, the Seventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a consolidated federal case filed against the company. Four putative class action lawsuits against Exelon were filed in federal court on behalf of customers of the Commonwealth Edison Company customers in the third quarter of 2020 alleging, among other things, civil violations of federal racketeering laws. In addition, the Citizens Utility Board (CUB) filed a motion to intervene in these cases on October 22, 2020 which was granted on December 23, 2020. On September 9, 2021, the federal court granted Exelon's motion to dismiss and dismissed the plaintiffs' and CUB's federal law claim with prejudice. The federal court also dismissed the related state law claims made by the federal plaintiffs and CUB on jurisdictional grounds. Plaintiffs appealed dismissal of the federal law claim to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Plaintiffs and CUB also refiled their state law claims in state court and moved to consolidate them with the already pending consumer state court class action. Exelon Corporation is a utility services holding company engaged in the energy transmission and distribution businesses. EXELON CORP: Awaits Ruling on Bid to Dismiss ERISA-Related Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- Exelon Corp. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in August 2, 2023, that a savings plan claim filed by seven current and former employees is awaiting a court decision with regards to dismissal moves filed by the company. On December 6, 2021, plaintiffs filed a putative ERISA class action suit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against Exelon, its Board of Directors, the former Board Investment Oversight Committee, the Corporate Investment Committee, individual defendants, and other unnamed fiduciaries of the Exelon Corporation Employee Savings Plan. The complaint alleges that the defendants violated their fiduciary duties under the Plan by including certain investment options that allegedly were more expensive than and underperformed similar passively-managed or other funds available in the marketplace and permitting a third-party administrative service provider/recordkeeper and an investment adviser to charge excessive fees for the services provided. The plaintiffs seek declaratory, equitable and monetary relief on behalf of the Plan and participants. On February 16, 2022, the court granted the parties' stipulated dismissal of the individual named defendants without prejudice. The remaining defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on February 25, 2022. On March 4, 2022, the Chamber of Commerce filed a brief of amicus curiae in support of the defendants' motion to dismiss. On September 22, 2022, the court granted Exelon's motion to dismiss without prejudice. The court granted plaintiffs leave until October 31, 2022 to file an amended complaint, which was later extended to November 30, 2022. Plaintiffs filed their amended complaint on November 30, 2022. Defendants filed their motion to dismiss the amended complaint on January 20, 2023. Exelon Corporation is a utility services holding company engaged in the energy transmission and distribution businesses. EXELON CORP: Dismissal of Consumer Complaint Under Appeal --------------------------------------------------------- Exelon Corp. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in August 2, 2023, that the plaintiffs filed an appeal with the First District Court of Appeals with regards to a consolidated consumer case. Three putative class action lawsuits against Exelon were filed in Illinois state court in the third quarter of 2020 seeking restitution and compensatory damages on behalf of Commonwealth Edison customers. The cases were consolidated into a single action in October of 2020. In November 2020, Citizens Utility Board (CUB) filed a motion to intervene in the cases pursuant to an Illinois statute allowing CUB to intervene as a party or otherwise participate on behalf of utility consumers in any proceeding which affects the interest of utility consumers. On November 23, 2020, the court allowed CUB's intervention, but denied CUB's request to stay these cases. Plaintiffs subsequently filed a consolidated complaint, Exelon filed a motion to dismiss on jurisdictional and substantive grounds on January 11, 2021. Briefing on that motion was completed on March 2, 2021. The parties agreed, on March 25, 2021, along with the federal court plaintiffs discussed above, to jointly engage in mediation. The parties participated in a one-day mediation on June 7, 2021 but no settlement was reached. On December 23, 2021, the state court granted Exelon's motion to dismiss with prejudice. On December 30, 2021, plaintiffs filed a motion to reconsider that dismissal and for permission to amend their complaint. The court denied the plaintiffs' motion on January 21, 2022. Plaintiffs have appealed the court's ruling dismissing their complaint to the First District Court of Appeals. On February 15, 2022, Exelon moved to dismiss the federal plaintiffs' refiled state law claims. The court granted dismissal of the refiled state claims on February 16, 2022. The original federal plaintiffs appealed that dismissal on February 18, 2022. The state appeals were consolidated on March 21, 2022. Parties are awaiting oral argument and/or a decision. Exelon Corporation is a utility services holding company engaged in the energy transmission and distribution businesses. EXELON CORP: Settlement in Putative Class Suit Gets Court OK ------------------------------------------------------------ Exelon Corp. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in August 2, 2023, that on June 9, 2023, the federal court approved a settlement of a putative class action lawsuit against Exelon and certain officers of Exelon in December 2019 alleging misrepresentations and omissions in Exelon's SEC filings related to Commonwealth Edison Company's lobbying activities and the related investigations. The complaint was amended on September 16, 2020, to dismiss two of the original defendants and add other defendants. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss in November 2020. The court denied the motion in April 2021. On May 26, 2021, defendants moved the court to certify its order denying the motion to dismiss for interlocutory appeal. Briefing on the motion was completed in June 2021. That motion was denied on January 28, 2022. In May 2021, the parties each filed respective initial discovery disclosures. On June 9, 2021, defendants filed their answer and affirmative defenses to the complaint and the parties engaged thereafter in discovery. On September 9, 2021, the U.S. government moved to intervene in the lawsuit and stay discovery until the parties entered into an amendment to their protective order that would prohibit the parties from requesting discovery into certain matters, including communications with the U.S. government. The court ordered said amendment to the protective order on November 15, 2021 and discovery resumed. The court further amended the protective order on October 17, 2022 and extended it until May 15, 2023. Following mediation, the parties reached a settlement of the lawsuit, under which defendants agreed to pay plaintiffs $173 million. On May 26, 2023, plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement, which the court granted on. The court's settlement hearing was scheduled on September 7, 2023. Exelon Corporation is a utility services holding company engaged in the energy transmission and distribution businesses. FIDELITY NATIONAL: Consolidated Shareholder Suit Ongoing -------------------------------------------------------- Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS) disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in August 2, 2023, that it facing a consolidated securities case captioned "In re Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. Securities Litigation." Case captioned "Palm Bay Police and Firefighters' Pension Fund v. Fidelity National Information Services, Inc., et al. filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on March 6, 2023 by a shareholder of the company seeking damages on behalf of a class consisting of all persons who purchased the company's common stock between February 9, 2021, and February 10, 2023. This action has been consolidated with a related action that seeks damages on behalf of a class consisting of all persons who purchased the company's common stock between May 7, 2020, and February 10, 2023. This putative class action, which names the company and certain of its current and former officers as defendants, seeks damages for alleged violations of federal securities laws in connection with our disclosures relating to its Merchant Solutions segment. A lead plaintiff has been appointed, and a consolidated amended complaint was due on August 2, 2023. FIS is a provider of technology solutions for financial institutions and businesses by advancing the way the world pays, banks and invests through its architecture. FIS is headquartered in Jacksonville, Florida. FREDDIE MAC: Faces Breach of Contract Suit ------------------------------------------- Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FREDDIE MAC) disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 2, 2023, that it is facing claims of breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in a consolidated class action lawsuit filed by private individual and institutional investors alleging that the net worth sweep dividend provisions of the senior preferred stock that were implemented pursuant to the August 2012 amendments nullified certain of the shareholders' rights, including the rights to receive dividends and a liquidation preference. This was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia under "In re Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement Class Action Litigations." On September 28, 2018, the District Court dismissed all of the claims except those for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The cases were consolidated for trial. The class action lawsuit filed by private individual and institutional investors was captioned "Fairholme Funds, Inc., et al. v. Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), et al." against FHFA, the Federal National Mortgage Association and Freddie Mac. Plaintiffs in each of the District of Columbia lawsuits filed an amended complaint on November 1, 2017 alleging claims for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breach of fiduciary duties, and violation of Delaware and Virginia corporate law. Additionally, the plaintiffs brought derivative claims against FHFA for breach of fiduciary duties and the Individual Plaintiffs brought claims under the Administrative Procedure Act. Freddie Mac is a government-sponsored enterprise chartered by Congress in 1970, with a mission to provide liquidity, stability, and affordability to the U.S. housing market by primarily purchasing single-family and multifamily residential mortgage loans originated by lenders and packaging these loans into guaranteed mortgage-related securities, which are sold in the global capital markets, and transfer interest-rate and liquidity risks to third-party investors. FREDDIE MAC: Pension Fund Securities Suit Ongoing in Ohio --------------------------------------------------------- Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FREDDIE MAC) disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 2, 2023, that a putative securities class action lawsuit captioned "Ohio Public Employees Retirement System vs. Freddie Mac, Syron, et al." is currently ongoing in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. This was filed against Freddie Mac and certain former officers on January 18, 2008 purportedly on behalf of a class of purchasers of Freddie Mac stock from August 1, 2006 through November 20, 2007. The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) later intervened as Conservator, and the plaintiff amended its complaint on several occasions. The plaintiff alleged, among other things, that the defendants violated federal securities laws by making false and misleading statements concerning our business, risk management, and the procedures put into place to protect the company from problems in the mortgage industry. The plaintiff seeks unspecified damages and interest, and reasonable costs and expenses, including attorney and expert fees. In August 2018, the District Court denied the plaintiff's motion for class certification, and in January 2019, the Sixth Circuit denied plaintiff's petition for leave to appeal that decision. On September 17, 2020, the District Court granted a request from the plaintiff for summary judgment and entered final judgment in favor of Freddie Mac and the other defendants. On October 9, 2020, the plaintiff filed a notice of appeal in the Sixth Circuit. On April 6, 2023, the Sixth Circuit reversed the District Court's September 17, 2020 decision and remanded the case to the District Court for further proceedings. The District Court scheduled the trial to begin on October 21, 2024. Freddie Mac is a government-sponsored enterprise chartered by Congress in 1970, with a mission to provide liquidity, stability, and affordability to the U.S. housing market by primarily purchasing single-family and multifamily residential mortgage loans originated by lenders and packaging these loans into guaranteed mortgage-related securities, which are sold in the global capital markets, and transfer interest-rate and liquidity risks to third-party investors GENWORTH FINANCIAL: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert. Bid by Oct. 16 ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as PETER TRAUERNICHT, et al., v. GENWORTH FINANCIAL, INC., Case No. 3:22-cv-00532-REP (E.D. Va.), the Hon. Judge Robert E. Payne entered an order (1) The parties shall file a proposed Oct. 2, 2023 discovery schedule, including the types of experts to be retained and the timing of expert disclosures: (2) Plaintiffs shall file their motion Oct. 16, 2023 for class certification: (3) The Defendant shall file its response: Dec. 4, 2023 (4) The Plaintiffs shall file their Dec. 18, 2023 Reply: (5) Trial will begin on: May 20, 2024 (6) The final pretrial conference May 6, 2024 will be held at 10:00am on: Genworth provides life insurance, long-term care insurance, mortgage insurance, and annuities. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 15, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3PxOmLB at no extra charge.[CC] GEORGIA: Taylor Seeks to Certify Class Action --------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as William M. Taylor v. Terry E. Barnard, State Board of Pardons and Paroles, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-04230-TCB-RDC (N.D. Ga.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting his motion for certification as class action. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Sept. 18, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3LDzV7A at no extra charge.[CC] GLEN MILLS SCHOOLS: Derrick Suit Seeks to Certify Issues Classes ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as DERRICK, by and with his parent and next friend TINA, et al., v. GLEN MILLS SCHOOLS, et al., Case No. 2:19-cv-01541-HB (E.D. Pa.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order: 1. Certifying this action for the following Classes and Issues Classes on behalf of all youth who were adjudicated delinquent, were placed at GMS by a court or state or local agency, and resided at GMS: (a) at any time between April 11, 2017, and April 11, 2019; (b) at any time and who turned 18 years old between April 11, 2017, and April 11, 2019; or (c) at any time and had not yet turned 18 years old by April 11, 2019 (the "Class Period") claims: a. Against DHS Defendants: i. DHS Abuse Class, defined as all youth at GMS within the Class Period, pursuant to Rule 23(b)(3), and appointing Plaintiffs Derrick, Thomas, and Walter as Class Representatives for the same. b. Against Defendants GMS and Ireson: i. Abuse Issues Class, defined as all youth at GMS within the Class Period, pursuant to Rule 23(c)(4) for the following issues, and appointing Plaintiffs Derrick, Thomas, and Walter as Class Representatives for the same c. Against Defendant GMS: i. Education Issues Class, defined as all school- eligible youth at GMS within the Class Period, pursuant to Rule 23(c)(4) for the following issues and appointing Plaintiffs Derrick, Thomas, and Walter as Class Representatives for the same: d. Against Defendant Rivera: i. Education Issues Class, defined as all school- eligible youth at GMS within the Class Period, pursuant to 23(c)(4) for the following issues and appointing Plaintiffs Derrick, Thomas, and Walter as Class Representatives for the same: e. Against Defendant PDE: i. Disability Discrimination Issues Class, defined as all youth with qualifying disabilities as defined under Section 504 and the ADA, either before or during their placement, who were placed at GMS by a court or state or local agency, and resided at GMS after April 11, 2017, pursuant to 23(c)(4) for the following issues and appointing Plaintiffs Derrick and Walter as Class Representatives for the same 2. Appointing Juvenile Law Center, Education Law Center, and Dechert LLP as Class Counsel; and 3. Granting such other and further relief the Court may deem just and proper. Glen was the oldest reform school and residential program in the United States for court-ordered boy. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 15, 2023, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/45bfx4L at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Marsha L. Levick, Esq. Katherine E. Burdick, Esq. Nadia Mozaffar, Esq. Malik Pickett, Esq. Courtney M. Alexander, Esq. Breanne Schuster, Esq. Jasmin Randolph-Taylor, Esq. JUVENILE LAW CENTER 1800 JFK Blvd., Suite 1900B Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 625-0551 - and - Maura McInerney, Esq. Kristina A. Moon, Esq. Margaret M. Wakelin, Esq. EDUCATION LAW CENTER 1800 JFK Blvd., Suite 1900A Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 238-6970 - and - Fred T. Magaziner, Esq. Michael H. McGinley, Esq. Clare Pozos, Esq. Caroline Power, Esq. Roger A. Dixon, Esq. Rachel Rosenberg, Esq. Christopher J. Merken, Esq. DECHERT LLP 2929 Arch St. Philadelphia, PA 19104 Telephone: (215) 994-4000 GLEN MILLS SCHOOLS: Plaintiffs Seek to File Exhibits Under Seal --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as DERRICK, by and with his parent and next friend TINA, et al., v. GLEN MILLS SCHOOLS, et al., Case No. 2:19-cv-01541-HB (E.D. Pa.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting leave to file under seal portions of the Memorandum of Law and certain exhibits to their Motion for Class Certification and Appointment of Class Representatives and Class Counsel, which Plaintiffs are filing simultaneously with the instant Motion. Glen was the oldest reform school and residential program in the United States for court-ordered boy. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Sept. 15, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/48ud8ox at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Marsha L. Levick, Esq. Katherine E. Burdick, Esq. Nadia Mozaffar, Esq. Malik Pickett, Esq. Courtney M. Alexander, Esq. Breanne Schuster, Esq. Jasmin Randolph-Taylor, Esq. JUVENILE LAW CENTER 1800 JFK Blvd., Suite 1900B Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 625-0551 - and - Maura McInerney, Esq. Kristina A. Moon, Esq. Margaret M. Wakelin, Esq. EDUCATION LAW CENTER 1800 JFK Blvd., Suite 1900A Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 238-6970 - and - Fred T. Magaziner, Esq. Michael H. McGinley, Esq. Clare Pozos, Esq. Caroline Power, Esq. Roger A. Dixon, Esq. Rachel Rosenberg, Esq. Christopher J. Merken, Esq. DECHERT LLP 2929 Arch St. Philadelphia, PA 19104 Telephone: (215) 994-4000 HACKENSACK MERIDIAN: Schelhas Seeks FLSA conditional Certification ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as ALAN SCHELHAS, Individually and for Others Similarly Situated, v. HACKENSACK MERIDIAN HEALTH, INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-02466-CCC-ESK (D.N.J.), the Plaintiff asks the granting conditional certification of a collective action and court-authorized notice pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. Hackensack is a not-for-profit health care organization that offers medical services, research, and life care. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Sept. 18, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3PS17ls at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Camille Fundora Rodriguez, Esq. BERGER MONTAGUE, PC 1818 Market Street, Suite 3600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 875-4635 Facsimile: (215) 875-4604 E-mail: crodriguez@bm.net - and - Michael A. Josephson, Esq. Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq. William M. Hogg, Esq. JOSEPHSON DUNLAP, LLP 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 352-1100 Facsimile: (713) 352-3300 E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com adunlap@mybackwages.com whogg@mybackwages.com William C. Alexander, Esq. Austin W. Anderson, Esq. ANDERSON ALEXANDER, PLLC 101 N. Shoreline Blvd., Ste. 610 Corpus Christi, TX 78401 Telephone: (361) 452-1279 Facsimile: (361) 452-1284 E-mail: clif@a2xlaw.com austin@a2xlaw.com HAYWARD HOLDINGS: Faces Suit Over Violations of Exchange Act ------------------------------------------------------------ ERIE COUNTY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HAYWARD HOLDINGS, INC., KEVIN HOLLERAN, EIFION JONES, CCMP CAPITAL ADVISORS, LP, and MSD PARTNERS, L.P., Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-20764 (D.N.J., Sept. 28, 2023) asserts that the Defendants violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Securities and Exchange Commission's Rule 10b-5. This securities class action is brought on behalf of all persons or entities that purchased Hayward common stock between October 27, 2021 and July 28, 2022. Throughout the Class Period, the Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business. Specifically, they credited the Company's increasing net sales to Hayward’s "agile manufacturing capabilities," "competitive positioning," "leading product portfolio," and "innovative technology," as well as the market's "elevated demand" for "higher volumes," when, in fact, they had engaged in a channel-stuffing scheme to create the appearance of demand that far exceeded actual trends. Relatedly, the Defendants issued several statements that claimed, or led investors to believe, that customer inventories were healthy and that Hayward's growth prospects were conservative, when, in fact, both were facing problems. When the truth about Hayward's business reached the market, the price of Hayward's stock sharply declined $2.50 per share, or 18.23%, to close at $11.21 on July 28, 2022. As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's common stock, Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses and damages, says the suit. Hayward was headquartered in Berkeley Heights, NJ for much of the Class Period, and subsequently completed a relocation of its headquarters to Charlotte, NC in July 2022. The Company is a global designer, manufacturer, and marketer of a broad portfolio of pool equipment and associated automation systems. Hayward's common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol "HAYW." [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Peter S. Pearlman, Esq. Matthew F. Gately, Esq. COHN LIFLAND PEARLMAN HERRMANN & KNOPF LLP Park 80 West-Plaza One 250 Pehle Avenue, Suite 401 Saddle Brook, NJ 07663 Telephone: (201) 845-9600 Facsimile: (201) 845-9423 E-mail: psp@njlawfirm.com - and - Thomas L. Laughlin, IV, Esq. Donald A. Broggi, Esq. Jonathan M. Zimmerman, Esq. SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP The Helmsley Building 230 Park Avenue, 17th Floor New York, NY 10169 Telephone: (212) 223-6444 Facsimile: (212) 223-6334 E-mail: tlaughlin@scot-scot.com dbroggi@scott-scott.com jzimmerman@scott-scott.com HERBALIFE LTD: Settlement Reached in Rodgers Securities Suit ------------------------------------------------------------ Herbalife Ltd. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 8, 2023, that it has reached a settlement with regards to a purported class action lawsuit, titled "Rodgers, et al. v Herbalife Ltd., et al." in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. On September 18, 2017, the company and certain of its subsidiaries and Members were named as defendants in and filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, which alleges violations of Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices statute and federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations statutes (RICO), unjust enrichment, and negligent misrepresentation. On August 23, 2018, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida issued an order transferring the action to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California as to four of the putative class plaintiffs and ordering the remaining four plaintiffs to arbitration, thereby terminating the Company defendants from the Florida action. The plaintiffs seek damages in an unspecified amount. The company and the plaintiffs have reached a settlement where it would pay $12.5 million into a fund to be distributed to qualified claimants. As of June 30, 2023, this amount has been adequately reserved for within the company's condensed consolidated financial statements. The settlement is subject to the preliminary and final approval of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The preliminary approval hearing took place on October 24, 2022, and the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California granted preliminary approval on April 6, 2023. Per the terms of the agreement, Herbalife established a settlement fund and deposited $12.5 million into an escrow account on April 19, 2023, which was included in prepaid expenses and other current assets within its consolidated balance sheet as of June 30, 2023. The final approval hearing is set for October 16, 2023. Herbalife Ltd. (formerly Herbalife Nutrition Ltd.) is a global nutrition company that sells weight management, targeted nutrition, energy, sports, and fitness and outer nutrition products to and through a network of independent retailers. HOME POINT: Al-Johar Seeks Initial Approval of Class Settlement --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit re HOME POINT CAPITAL INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, Case No. 4:21-cv-11457-SDK-KGA (E.D. Mich.), the Lead Plaintiff Abdulaziz Jamal Johar Al-Johar moves the Court to enter an Order: (i) preliminarily approving the Settlement in the Stipulation of Settlement; (ii) approving the form and manner of providing notice of the Settlement to the Settlement Class; (iii) preliminarily granting class certification for settlement purposes; and (iv) setting a hearing date at which the Court will consider final approval of the Settlement, approval of the Plan of Allocation, Lead Counsel's application for attorneys' fees and expenses, and an award to Lead Plaintiff. The proposed $5,000,000.00 Settlement is an excellent recovery for the Settlement Class. Lead Plaintiff requests that the Court preliminarily approve the Settlement and enter the Notice Order. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Sept. 15, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3PrUuoE at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ellen Gusikoff Stewart, Esq. Danielle S. Myers, Esq. Juan Carlos Sanchez, Esq. Chad Johnson, Esq. Jonathan Zweig, Esq. Ana Avalos Cuellar, Esq. ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 231-1058 E-mail: elleng@rgrdlaw.com dmyers@rgrdlaw.com jsanchez@rgrdlaw.com chadj@rgrdlaw.com jzweig@rgrdlaw.com aavalos@rgrdlaw.com - and - Thomas C. Michaud, Esq. Francis E. Judd, Esq. VANOVERBEKE, MICHAUD & TIMMONY, P.C. 79 Alfred Street Detroit, MI 48201 Telephone: (313) 578-1200 E-mail: tmichaud@vmtlaw.com fjudd@vmtlaw.com INTEGON GENERAL: Greenwald Sues Over Wrongful Denial of Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- KENNETH GREENWALD, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated persons v. INTEGON GENERAL INSURANCE CORPORATION, Case No. 230902133 (Pa. Com. Pl., Philadelphia Cty., Sept. 21, 2023) alleges that the Defendant has willfully and recklessly denied the underinsured motorist claim of the Plaintiff, in direct violation of the requirements of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law. Among other things, Plaintiff Greenwald asserts that Integon has systemically and wrongfully denied uninsured and underinsured motorists coverages under personal auto policies issued in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Plaintiff seeks declaratory relief, contractual underinsured motorist benefits and extra-contractual bad faith damages on behalf of a class of similarly situated persons. Integon offers several insurance products and services including automobile and general. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James C. Haggerty, Esq. HAGGERTY, GOLDBERG, SCHLEIFER & KUPERSMITH, P.C. 1801 Market Street, Suite 1100 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (267) 350-6600 Facsimile: (215) 665-8197 - and – Scott B. Cooper, Esq. SCHMIDT KRAMER P.C. 209 State Street Harrisburg, PA 17101 Telephone: (717) 232-6300 - and – Jonathan Shub, Esq. SHUBS & JOHNS Four Tower Bridge, 200 Barr Harbor Drive Suite 400 West Conshohocken, PA 19428 Telephone: (610) 477-8638 - and – John P. Goodrich, Esq. JACK GOODRICH & ASSOCIATES 429 Fourth Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Telephone: (412) 261-4663 INTERFACE INC: Court Tosses Swanson Class Status Bid w/o Prejudice ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as Swanson v. Interface, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-05518 (E.D.N.Y., Filed Nov. 12, 2020), the Hon. Judge Hector Gonzalez entered an order denying without prejudice the Plaintiff's prior motion for class certification. The order is without prejudice to Plaintiff renewing its motion if the parties' proposed settlement does not receive final approval. The suit alleges violation of the Securities Exchange Act. Interface is a world-leading modular flooring company with a fully integrated collection of carpet tiles and resilient flooring.[CC] JANUS HENDERSON: Faces Schissler Suit Over Fund Mismanagement ------------------------------------------------------------- Janus Henderson Group PLC disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 2, 2023, that it is currently facing case "Sandra Schissler v. Janus Henderson US (Holdings) Inc., Janus Henderson Advisory Committee, and John and Jane Does 1-30." On September 9, 2022, said class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. Named as defendants are Janus Henderson US (Holdings) Inc. and the Advisory Committee to the Janus 401(k) and Employee Stock Ownership Plan. The complaint purports to be brought on behalf of a class consisting of participants and beneficiaries of a plan that invested in Janus Henderson funds on or after September 9, 2016. On January 10, 2023, in response to the defendants' motion to dismiss filed on November 23, 2022, an amended complaint was filed against the same defendants. The amended complaint names two additional plaintiffs, Karly Sissel and Derrick Hittson. As amended, the complaint alleges that for the period September 9, 2016, through September 9, 2022, among other things, the defendants breached fiduciary duties of loyalty and prudence by selecting higher-cost Janus Henderson funds over less expensive investment options, retaining Janus Henderson funds despite their alleged underperformance and failing to consider actively managed funds outside of Janus Henderson to add as investment options. The amended complaint also alleges that Janus US Holdings failed to monitor the Advisory Committee with respect to the foregoing. The amended complaint seeks various declaratory, equitable and monetary relief in unspecified amounts. On February 9, 2023, the defendants filed an amended motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On March 13, 2023, the plaintiffs filed an opposition to the amended motion to dismiss. The defendants filed their reply to the plaintiffs' opposition on March 28, 2023. A ruling on the amended motion to dismiss is pending. Janus Henderson Group PLC is a global asset manager and manages a range of investment products, operating across various product lines, distribution channels and geographic regions. JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Fong Sues Over Decongestant's Deceptive Ads -------------------------------------------------------------- HEATHER FONG, individually and, on behalf of those similarly situated, Plaintiff v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC., RECKITT BENCKISER LLC, PFIZER, INC., WAL-MART, INC., WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP, Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-02430-JWB-RES (D. Kan., Sept. 21, 2023) arises from the Defendants' misrepresentations of the efficacy of their over-the-counter decongestant products containing phenylephrine. These products, which are manufactured, sold, and distributed by Defendants, have been found by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to lack efficacy. However, the Defendants, who have long been aware of the lack of efficacy, have continued to sell these products. Plaintiff and the putative class suffered economic damages due to Defendants' misconduct. They seek injunctive relief and restitution for the full purchase price of the products they purchased, says the suit. Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc., a McNeil Consumer Healthcare Division, is a New Jersey corporation with its headquarters and principal place of business in New Jersey. The company manufactures, markets, advertises, labels, distributes, and sells phenylephrine products under its Sudafed and Benadryl product lines. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert A. Horn, Esq. Joseph A. Kronawitter, Esq. Taylor P. Foye, Esq. HORN AYLWARD & BANDY, LC 2600 Grand Boulevard, Suite 1100 Kansas City, MO 64108 Telephone: (816) 421-0700 Facsimile: (816) 421-0899 E-mail: rhorn@hab-law.com jkronawitter@hab-law.com tfoye@hab-law.com - and - Kirk J. Goza, Esq. Bradley D. Honnold, Esq. GOZA & HONNOLD, LLC 9500 Nall Avenue, Suite 400 Overland Park, KS 66207 Telephone: (913) 451-3433 Facsimile: (913) 839-0567 E-mail: kgoza@gohonlaw.com bhonnold@gohonlaw.com - and - Thomas P. Cartmell, Esq. Tyler W. Hudson, Esq. WAGSTAFF & CARTMELL LLP 4740 Grand Avenue, Suite 300 Kansas City, MO 64112 Telephone: (816) 701-1100 E-mail: tcartmell@wcllp.com thudson@wcllp.com JVK OPERATIONS: Montiel-Flores Wins Class Certification Bid ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as KENIA MONTIEL-FLORES and ALMANELLY RIVERA ZUNIGA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. JVK OPERATIONS LIMITED and VINOD SAMUEL, Case No. 2:19-cv-03005-JS-SIL (E.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Joanna Seybert entered an order as follows: -- The Defendants' objections are overruled. -- The R&R is adopted as stated, the Defendants' Decertification Motion is denied and the Named Plaintiffs' cross-motion for final certification is granted. -- The Plaintiffs' Certification Motion is granted. JVK and Samuel move to decertify the conditionally certified Fair Labor Standard Act ("FLSA") 19-CV-3005 (JS)(SIL) collective action. JVK is a laundromat that provides dry cleaning and laundry services to hospitals and hotels. A copy of the Court's memorandum and order dated Sept. 18, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3LE5Apy at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Frank R. Schirripa, Esq. HACH ROSE SCHIRRIPA & CHEVERIE LLP 185 Madison Avenue, 14th Floor New York, NY York 10016 - and - John Anthony Blyth, Esq. HACH AND ROSE, LLP 112 Madison Avenue, 10th Floor New York, NY 10016 - and - Kenneth J. Katz, Esq. Adam Joseph Sackowitz, Esq. KATZ MELINGER PLLC 370 Lexington Avenue, Suite 1512 New York, NY 10017 The Defendants are represented by: Douglas E. Rowe, Esq. CERTILMAN BALIN ADLER & HYMAN, LLP 90 Merrick Avenue East Meadow, NY 11554 LANDMARK RECOVERY: Isaacs Class Cert Bid Partly OK'd ---------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSHUA ISAACS, On Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated, v. LANDMARK RECOVERY OF LOUISVILLE, LLC, Case No. 3:23-cv-00210 (M.D. Tenn.), the Hon. Judge Aleta A. Trauger entered an order granting in part and denying in part the plaintiff Joshua Isaacs' motion for conditional class certification and for the Issuance of Court-Supervised Notice under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"): 1. The motion is Denied to the extent it seeks "conditional certification," a term that no longer has a place in FLSA actions in the Sixth Circuit." 2. The motion is granted, insofar as it seeks authorization for court-facilitated notice to potential plaintiffs of this collective action. 3. The motion is denied, insofar as it requests approval of the plaintiff's Proposed Notice form. Landmark provides drug & alcohol addiction treatment. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 18, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3t660hP at no extra charge.[CC] MAPFRE USA: Gregory Sues Over Driver's Privacy Law Violations ------------------------------------------------------------- VERONICA GREGORY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MAPFRE U.S.A. CORP. and THE COMMERCE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-12225 (D. Mass., Sept. 28, 2023) arises from the Defendants' negligence and violations of the Driver's Privacy Protection Act. Plaintiff Gregory alleges that the Defendants failed to properly secure and safeguard highly valuable, protected personally identifiable information, including without limitation, Driver's License numbers; failed to comply with industry standards to protect information systems that contain PII; and unlawfully disclosed Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII. Moreover, Plaintiff seeks, among other things, damages and injunctive relief requiring Defendants to fully and accurately disclose the PII and other information that has been compromised and/or disclosed; to adopt reasonably sufficient security practices and safeguards to protect Plaintiff's and the Class's PII from unauthorized disclosures; and to prevent incidents like this disclosure from occurring again in the future. The Plaintiff further seeks injunctive relief requiring Defendants to provide identity theft protective services to Plaintiff and Class Members for three years, as Plaintiff and Class Members are at risk, and will continue to be at an increased risk of identity theft, due to the disclosure of their PII as a result of Defendants' conduct. MAPFRE is a Fortune 500 company that provides insurance, including automotive and property policies, to over 30 million customers worldwide. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph P. Guglielmo, Esq. Amanda M. Rolon, Esq. SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP 230 Park Avenue, 17th Floor New York, NY 10169 Telephone: (212) 223-6444 Facsimile: (212) 223-6334 E-mail: jguglielmo@scott-scott.com arolon@scott-scott.com MARTIN SPORTS: Court Awards Glynn $47K in Attorney's Fees ---------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Glynn, et al., v. Martin Sports & Entertainment, LLC, et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-12189 (D. Mass., Filed Oct 23, 2019), the Hon. Judge Indira Talwani entered an order granting the Plaintiffs motion for attorney's fees and costs in the requested amount of $47,117.74, where Defendants do not dispute the reasonableness of the request for $45,326.25 in fees and $1,791.49 in costs, and the claimed amounts appear reasonable based on the lodestar calculation. The court apportions the fees and costs as follows: -- $35,385.00 in fees and $1,791.49 in costs, for a total of $37,176.49, jointly to all Plaintiffs, and $9,941.25 in fees to Plaintiff Anderson, for work related to the class only. The suit alleges violation of Employee Retirement Income Security Act involving employee benefits.[CC] MATERION CORP: Settlement in Lucyk Suit Wins Final Nod ------------------------------------------------------ Materion Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in August 2, 2023, that on July 7, 2023, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio entered an order approving the final settlement of "Garett Lucyk, et al. v. Materion Brush Inc., et. al." (Case No. 20CV0234, October 14, 2020). Plaintiff, a former hourly production employee at the company's Elmore, Ohio facility, alleges, among other things, that he and other similarly situated employees nationwide are not paid for all time they spend donning and doffing personal protective equipment in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Ohio law. Plaintiff filed a motion for conditional certification, which the Company opposed. On August 2, 2022, the court conditionally certified a class of employees at the company's Elmore facility only and rejected certification of a class across the company's other facilities. The court preliminarily approved the settlement on March 30, 2023 and a final approval hearing was held on July 6, 2023. Materion Corp. is into metal forging and stampings and is based Mayfield Heights OH and specializes in beryllium and non-beryllium containing alloy systems and custom engineered parts in strip, bulk, rod, plate, bar, tube, and other customized shapes and advanced chemicals, micro-electric packaging, precious metal, non-precious metal, and specialty metal products, including vapor deposition targets, frame lid assemblies, clad and precious metal preforms, high temperature braze materials, ultra-fine wire, thin film coatings, optical filter materials, sputter-coated, and precision-converted thin film materials. MDL 2197: McGuire Suit Consolidated in Hip Implant Product Row -------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Karen K. Caldwell, Chairperson of the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, transfers the case captioned "McGuire v. KB Orthopedics, Inc., et al.," C.A. No. 9:23−00047 to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio and, with the consent of that court, assigned to Judge Jeffrey J. Helmick for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings in "In Re: Depuy Orthopaedics, Inc., ASR Hip Implant Products Liability Litigation," MDL No. 2197. McGuire moved to vacate the panel's order conditionally transferring his action to MDL No. 2197. Alternatively, because plaintiff received a DePuy ASR hip implant followed by, in a later surgery, a DePuy Pinnacle hip implant, plaintiff requested separation and remand of his Pinnacle hip-related claims to the transferor court. Karl Buhr, KB Orthopedics, Inc., DePuy Synthes Sales, Inc., Johnson & Johnson, Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc. and DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. all opposed the motion and urged transfer of McGuire in its entirety to MDL No. 2197. The case now before us involves injuries arising, in part, from implantation of a DePuy ASR hip implant, and it clearly falls within the MDL's ambit, notes the panel. "We agree that McGuire should be transferred in its entirety to MDL No. 2197," the panel rules. "Both devices were inside plaintiff's body from 2008 to 2022, when the ASR device was removed, and plaintiff asserts that the devices suffer from the same defect; thus, any differences between the devices appear to be largely immaterial to plaintiff's theory of the case. As defendants note, transfer of McGuire in its entirety to MDL No. 2197 will allow for all case-specific discovery that plaintiff needs (i.e., relevant medical records and witnesses, which will substantially overlap) to be taken once under the supervision of a court experienced in handling device claims against the common DePuy defendants. Transfer also avoids the need for judges in two courts in different circuits to rule on the same motion to remand and, thus, removes the risk of potentially inconsistent pretrial rulings." A full-text copy of the court's August 3, 2022 transfer order is available at https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-2197-Transfer_Order-7-23.pdf MDL 2666: More v. 3M Transferred to D. Minn. -------------------------------------------- Judge Karen K. Caldwell, Chairperson of the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, transfers the case captioned "Moore v. 3M Company, et al., C.A. No. 2:23-01388, E.D. Pa.) to the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota and, with the consent of that court, assigned to Judge Joan N. Ericksen, for inclusion in the coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings in "In re: Bair Hugger Forced Air Warming Devices Products Liability Litigation," MDL No. 2666. Moore moved to vacate the order conditionally transferring the action to the District of Minnesota for inclusion in MDL No. 2666. Defendant 3M Company opposed the motion. After considering the argument of counsel, the panel found that the action involves common questions of fact with the actions transferred to MDL No. 2666, and that transfer will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation. Like the actions in the MDL, Moore involves allegations that plaintiffs or their decedents suffered injuries caused by Bair Hugger warming blankets used during their surgeries. "The efficient resolution of the litigation will be best served by including Moore in the ongoing litigation and mediation efforts in the MDL," ruled the panel. A full-text copy of the court's August 9, 2023 order is available at https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-2666-Transfer_Order-7-23.pdf MDL 2873: Illinois v. 3M Suit Transferred to D.S.C. --------------------------------------------------- Judge Karen K. Caldwell, Chairperson of the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation has entered an order transferring the case captioned "People of the State of Illinois v. 3M Company, et al.," (C.A. No. 1:23−02620, N.D. Ill.) to the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina and, with the consent of that court, assigned to Judge Richard M. Gergel for inclusion in the coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings in "In Re: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation," MDL NO. 2873. Plaintiff moved to vacate the order that conditionally transferred her action to the District of South Carolina for inclusion in MDL No. 2873. Defendants Chemguard, Inc., Royal Chemical Company, Ltd., Tyco Fire Products LP, and 3M Company opposed the motion. The panel finds that the action involves common questions of fact with the actions transferred to MDL No. 2873, alleging that AFFF products used at airports, military bases, or certain industrial locations caused the release of perfluorooctane sulfonate and/or perfluorooctanoic acid into local groundwater and contaminated drinking water supplies. The actions in the MDL share factual questions concerning the use and storage of AFFFs; the toxicity of PFAS and the effects of these substances on human health; and these substances' chemical properties and propensity to migrate in groundwater supplies. A full-text copy of the court's August 3, 2023 Transfer Order is available at https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-2873-Transfer_Order-7-23.pdf MDL 2873: Panel Denies Transfer of Maine v. 3M to D.S.C. -------------------------------------------------------- Judge Karen K. Caldwell, Chairperson of the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, denied the move by defendant 3M Company to transfer the case captioned "State of Maine v. 3M Company, et al. (C.A. No. 2:23−00210) to the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina for inclusion in "In Re: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation," MDL NO. 2873. MDL No. 2873 involves allegations that aqueous film-forming foams (AFFFs) used at airports, military bases, or other locations to extinguish liquid fuel fires caused the release of perfluorooctane sulfonate and/or perfluorooctanoic acid (collectively, these and other per- or polyfluoroalkyl substances are referred to as PFAS) into local groundwater and contaminated drinking water supplies. The parties in State of Maine v. 3M disagree as to whether this action, which is brought by the State as parens patriae to hold defendants liable for PFAS contamination of Maine's natural resources, implicates AFFFs. According to the panel, "On July 26, 2023, the assigned judge in the District of Maine granted the State's motion to remand the action to state court. Although the court will not effectuate remand until thirty days after issuance of the remand order (to allow the removing party an opportunity to move for a stay, to seek reconsideration, and/or to appeal the order and seek relief from the court of appeals), transfer at this time would only introduce procedural inefficiencies with respect to this action. Accordingly, we deny defendant's motion to transfer. Should State of Maine remain in federal court once all proceedings relating to the remand order are concluded, the parties can notify the Panel at that time." A full-text copy of the court's August 3, 2023 Order is available at https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-2873-Order_Denying_Transfer-7-23.pdf MDL 2924: Two Suits Consolidated in Ranitidine Product Litigation ----------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Karen K. Caldwell, Chairperson of the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, transfers two cases from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana and the Eastern District of Michigan to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida and, with the consent of that court, assigned to Judge Robin L. Rosenberg for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings in "In re: Zantac (Ranitidine) Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2924. Plaintiffs in the two actions moved to vacate the panel's order that conditionally transferred their respective actions to the Southern District of Florida for inclusion in MDL No. 2924. Defendants Sanofi US Services Inc., Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC, Chattem, Inc., and GlaxoSmithKline LLC opposed the motions to vacate. One of the Plaintiffs argued that she can receive a fair trial in the transferor court. But the panel may only transfer an action for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings and must remand the action to the transferor court when pretrial proceedings are complete, hence arguments regarding trial in the transferor court, therefore, are irrelevant to the question of transfer. The Plaintiff in the other action claims inconvenience. The panel finds that the two actions involve common questions of fact with the actions transferred to MDL No. 2924, and that transfer will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of this litigation. The actions in the MDL share factual questions arising from allegations that ranitidine, the active molecule in Zantac and similar heartburn medications, can form the carcinogen N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), either during storage or when metabolized in the human body. Like the actions in the MDL, the plaintiffs in the two cases allege that their decedents developed cancer caused by ingestion of Zantac or other ranitidine-containing products. A full-text copy of the court's August 3, 2023 Transfer Order is available at https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-2924-Transfer_Order-7-23.pdf MDL 3010: Panel Denies Google's Bid for Stay Pending Appeal ----------------------------------------------------------- Judge Karen K. Caldwell, Chairperson of the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, has denied a motion for stay a pending appeal filed by Google LLC in the case captioned "The State of Texas, et al. v. Google, LLC", consolidated in "In Re: Google Digital Advertising Antitrust Litigation," MDL No. 3010. This action previously was transferred from the Eastern District of Texas (C.A. No. 4:20−00957) to the Southern District of New York (C.A. No. 1:21−6841) for centralized pretrial proceedings in MDL No. 3010. Following centralization, legislation was enacted in late 2022 amending Section 1407(g) to exempt state antitrust enforcement actions arising under federal antitrust law from MDLs, and plaintiffs in the case then moved for remand to the Eastern District of Texas. On June 5, 2023, the panel held that the amendment to Section 1407(g) applies to the case and ordered remand of the action to the Eastern District of Texas. The matter came before the panel on Google's motion to stay the remand order pending its appeal by petition for writ of mandamus to the Second Circuit under Section 1407(e). The Plaintiffs opposed the motion. The panel finds that a stay pending appeal is not warranted. Google's principal arguments in support of a stay pending appeal are that (1) the Panel erred in interpreting the Section 1407(g) amendment to apply to actions centralized before its enactment; and (2) Google will be irreparably harmed absent a stay because, as Google reads applicable precedent, the Second Circuit risks losing jurisdiction to grant mandamus relief after remand is effectuated, thus depriving Google of meaningful appellate review. The panel finds these arguments unpersuasive. Moreover, the temporary administrative stay entered on June 12, 2023, was set to expire in seven days and Google alternatively requested that the panel stay the remand order for seven days from the denial of its motion for stay pending appeal to provide Google time to seek a stay pending appeal from the Second Circuit. The panel granted the request. But considering that Google already has had nearly two months to prepare to apply to the Second Circuit for a stay pending appeal, the panel says will not entertain any further requests for a temporary administrative stay of the remand order. A full-text copy of the court's August 3, 2023 order is available at https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-3010-Order_Denying_Stay-7-23.pdf MDL 3047: Panel Vacates Nasca Suit Transfer Order ------------------------------------------------- Judge Karen K. Caldwell, Chairperson of the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation granted a motion filed by plaintiffs in the case captioned Nasca, et al. v. Bytedance, Ltd, et al., (C.A. No. 2:23−02786, E.D. N.Y) to vacate the conditional transfer order, designated as "CTO-7", of their case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California for inclusion in "In re: Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation," MDL No. 3047. After considering the argument of counsel, the panel finds that the procedural posture of this litigation makes transfer unnecessary at this time. In its order centralizing this litigation, the panel had held that centralization was warranted for actions alleging that defendants' social media platforms are defective because they are designed to maximize user screen time, which can encourage addictive behavior in adolescents. As in many actions in the MDL, the Nasca plaintiffs allege that the TikTok media platform is designed to promote addictive behavior among minors by encouraging them to maximize time spent on the platform, and that these defendants prioritize minor engagement over user safety. They also allege that TikTok has inadequate parental controls and monitoring, as well as inadequate parental notification of problematic platform usage. Specifically, Plaintiffs allege that their son became addicted to the TikTok platform, which fed him harmful content, leading him to take his life at age 16 by stepping in front of a train. In the MDL, ByteDance Inc., Bytedance, LTD., and TikTok Inc. are alleged of encouraging addictive behavior, failure to verify users' ages, encouragement of adolescents to bypass parental controls and inadequately safeguarding against harmful content and/or intentionally amplify harmful and exploitive content. Plaintiffs do not dispute that their action and the actions in MDL No. 3047 share common factual questions. Instead, in support of their motion to vacate, plaintiffs argue that the Panel should allow the Eastern District of New York to rule on their pending motion for remand to state court. The Panel has held that such jurisdictional objections generally do not present an impediment to transfer. But on July 27, 2023, the magistrate judge recommended plaintiffs' motion to remand to state court be granted. The panel, hence, thinks it most efficient to allow the Eastern District of New York to review the recommendation and any objections defendants file. Should Nasca remain in federal court once all proceedings relating to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation are concluded, the parties can notify the Panel at that time, adds the panel. A full-text copy of the court's August 3, 2023 order is available at https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-3047-Order_Vacating_CTO-7-23.pdf META PLATFORMS: Advertiser Plaintiffs Seek Class Certification -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MAXIMILIAN KLEIN, et al., on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, v. META PLATFORMS, INC., Case No. 3:20-cv-08570-JD (N.D. Cal.), the Advertiser Plaintiffs file a motion for class certification. The Plaintiffs contend that the requirement is met as the Class comprises millions of advertisers -- many, like Advertiser Plaintiffs, individuals or small businesses who made relatively small ad purchases. The Plaintiffs also seek entry of an order appointing Yavar Bathaee of Bathaee Dunne LLP and Amanda F. Lawrence of Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP as Co-Lead Class Counsel for the Class. The Advertiser Plaintiffs propose that the Class for their Sherman Act claims be defined as follows: -- The Advertiser Class "All persons, including entities and/or corporations, in the United States who purchased advertising from Meta Platforms, Inc. between December 1, 2016, and December 31, 2020. Excluded from the Advertiser Class are Meta Platforms, Inc. and its officers, directors, employees, and successors; any person or entity who has (or had during the Class Period) a controlling interest in Meta; any affiliate, legal representative, heir, or assign of Meta; any judicial officer presiding over this action and their immediate family members and judicial staffs; and any juror assigned to this action. Meta, formerly Facebook Inc, is a provider of social networking, advertising, and business insight solutions. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Sept. 15, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/45ZggHn at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Yavar Bathaee, Esq. Andrew C. Wolinsky, Esq. Andrew M. Williamson, Esq. Adam Ernette, Esq. Brian J. Dunne, Esq. Edward M. Grauman, Esq. Allison Watson Cross, Esq. BATHAEE DUNNE LLP 445 Park Avenue, 9th Floor New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (332) 322-8835 E-mail: yavar@bathaeedunne.com awolinsky@bathaeedunne.com awilliamson@bathaeedunne.com aernette@bathaeedunne.com bdunne@bathaeedunne.com egrauman@bathaeedunne.com across@bathaeedunne.com - and - Keith J. Verrier, Esq. Austin B. Cohen, Esq. LEVIN SEDRAN & BERMAN LLP 510 Walnut Street, Suite 500 Philadelphia, PA 19106-3997 Telephone: (215) 592-1500 E-mail: kverrier@lfsblaw.com acohen@lfsblaw.com - and - Amanda F. Lawrence, Esq. Patrick J. McGahan, Esq. Michael P. Srodoski, Esq. Patrick J. Coughlin, Esq. Carmen A. Medici, Esq. Hal D. Cunningham, Esq. Daniel J. Brockwell, Esq. Patrick J. Rodriguez, Esq. SCOTT+SCOTT 156 South Main Street, P.O. Box 192 Colchester, CT 06415 Telephone: (860) 537-5537 E-mail: alawrence@scott-scott.com pmcgahan@scott-scott.com msrodoski@scott-scott.com pcoughlin@scott-scott.com cmedici@scott-scott.com hcunningham@scott-scott.com dbrockwell@scott-scott.com prodriguez@scott-scott.com - and - Tina Wolfson, Esq. Robert Ahdoot, Esq. Theodore W. Maya, Esq. Henry J. Kelson, Esq. AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC 2600 West Olive Avenue, Suite 500 Burbank, CA 91505 Telephone: (310) 474-9111 E-mail: twolfson@ahdootwolfson.com rahdoot@ahdootwolfson.com tmaya@ahdootwolfson.com hkelston@ahdootwolfson.com META PLATFORMS: Advertiser Plaintiffs Seek to File Docs Under Seal ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as MAXIMILIAN KLEIN, et al., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. META PLATFORMS, INC., Case No. 3:20-cv-08570-JD (N.D. Cal.), the Advertiser Plaintiffs submit an administrative motion to file under seal the unredacted versions of Advertiser Plaintiffs' Notice of Motion, Motion for Class Certification, and Memorandum in Support, as well as Exhibits 1-74 and 76-79 to the Lawrence Declaration in their entirety, Exhibits A and B to the Williams Declaration in their entirety, Exhibits A and B to the Kreitzman Declaration in their entirety, Exhibits A and B to the Gans Declaration in their entirety, and Exhibit B to the Fasser Declaration in its entirety. The sealed documents are listed with further detail in the below table. Pursuant to the Court's Standing Order, the reasons for sealing will be discussed in a forthcoming omnibus sealing motion, to be filed upon completion of briefing. Plaintiffs also hereby provide notice of lodging to all parties and their counsel pursuant to Civil Local Rule 79-5(e). Document Confidentiality Filing Form Notice of Motion, Contains Information Filed Under Motion for Class Designated Confidential Seal and Certification, and by Defendant Meta Redacted Memorandum in Support Platforms, Inc. and Version the following third Filed on parties: Snap, Inc. Public Docket and Netflix, Inc. Lawrence Decl. Ex. 1 Designated Confidential Filed Under by Defendant Meta Seal Platforms, Inc. Meta, formerly Facebook Inc, is a provider of social networking, advertising, and business insight solutions. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Sept. 15, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/467s0aV at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Yavar Bathaee, Esq. Andrew C. Wolinsky, Esq. Andrew M. Williamson, Esq. Adam Ernette, Esq. Brian J. Dunne, Esq. Edward M. Grauman, Esq. Allison Watson Cross, Esq. BATHAEE DUNNE LLP 445 Park Avenue, 9th Floor New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (332) 322-8835 E-mail: yavar@bathaeedunne.com awolinsky@bathaeedunne.com awilliamson@bathaeedunne.com aernette@bathaeedunne.com bdunne@bathaeedunne.com egrauman@bathaeedunne.com across@bathaeedunne.com - and - Keith J. Verrier, Esq. Austin B. Cohen, Esq. LEVIN SEDRAN & BERMAN LLP 510 Walnut Street, Suite 500 Philadelphia, PA 19106-3997 Telephone: (215) 592-1500 E-mail: kverrier@lfsblaw.com acohen@lfsblaw.com - and - Amanda F. Lawrence, Esq. Patrick J. McGahan, Esq. Michael P. Srodoski, Esq. Patrick J. Coughlin, Esq. Carmen A. Medici, Esq. Hal D. Cunningham, Esq. Daniel J. Brockwell, Esq. Patrick J. Rodriguez, Esq. SCOTT+SCOTT 156 South Main Street, P.O. Box 192 Colchester, CT 06415 Telephone: (860) 537-5537 E-mail: alawrence@scott-scott.com pmcgahan@scott-scott.com msrodoski@scott-scott.com pcoughlin@scott-scott.com cmedici@scott-scott.com hcunningham@scott-scott.com dbrockwell@scott-scott.com prodriguez@scott-scott.com - and - Tina Wolfson, Esq. Robert Ahdoot, Esq. Theodore W. Maya, Esq. Henry J. Kelson, Esq. AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC 2600 West Olive Avenue, Suite 500 Burbank, CA 91505 Telephone: (310) 474-9111 E-mail: twolfson@ahdootwolfson.com rahdoot@ahdootwolfson.com tmaya@ahdootwolfson.com hkelston@ahdootwolfson.com META PLATFORMS: Klein Suit Seeks to Certify Consumer Class ---------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MAXIMILIAN KLEIN, et al., v. META PLATFORMS, INC., Case No. 3:20-cv-08570-JD (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order: (1) Certifying a proposed Rule 23(b)(3) class ("Consumer Class"); (2) Appointing Consumers Dr. Klein, Ms. Grabert, and Ms. Banks Kupcho as representatives of the Consumer Class; and (3) Appointing Kevin Y. Teruya, of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, and Shana E. Scarlett, of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, as Co-Lead Consumer Class Counsel. Consumers propose that the Court certify the following Consumer Class: "All persons in the United States who maintained and used a Facebook profile at any point from December 3, 2016, to December 3, 2020." Excluded from the Class are: (1) Meta, any entity in which Meta has an interest, any of Meta's corporate parents, affiliates, subsidiaries, officers, directors, legal representatives, successors and assigns; (2) any judge, justice, or judicial officer presiding over this matter and the members of their immediate families and judicial staff; and (3) any juror assigned to this action. Meta, formerly Facebook Inc, is a provider of social networking, advertising, and business insight solutions. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Sept. 15, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RC8FtO at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Shana E. Scarlett, Esq. Steve W. Berman, Esq. HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202 Berkeley, CA 94710 Telephone: (510) 725-3000 E-mail: shanas@hbsslaw.com steve@hbsslaw.com - and - W. Joseph Bruckner, Esq. Robert K. Shelquist, Esq. Brian D. Clark, Esq. Rebecca A. Peterson, Esq. Kyle Pozan, Esq. Laura M. Matson LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P. 100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 2200 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Telephone: (612) 339-6900 E-mail: wjbruckner@locklaw.com rkshelquist@locklaw.com bdclark@locklaw.com rapeterson@locklaw.com kjpozan@locklaw.com lmmatson@locklaw.com - and - Kevin Y. Teruya, Esq. Adam B. Wolfson, Esq. Scott L. Watson, Esq. Claire D. Hausman, Esq. Brantley I. Pepperman, Esq. Michelle Schmit, Esq. Manisha M. Sheth, Esq. QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP 865 South Figueroa Street, 10th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017-2543 Telephone: (213) 443-3000 E-mail: kevinteruya@quinnemanuel.com adamwolfson@quinnemanuel.com scottwatson@quinnemanuel.com clairehausman@quinnemanuel.com brantleypepperman@quinnemanuel.com michelleschmit@quinnemanuel.com manishasheth@quinnemanuel.com MIKE BLOOMBERG: Sinclair Seeks to Certify Class Action ------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as RODNEY SINCLAIR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. MIKE BLOOMBERG 2020, INC., Case No. 1:20-cv-04528-LTS-GWG (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge entered an order as follows: (1) Certifying this action as a class action on behalf of the proposed class pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(3); (2) Appointing Rodney Sinclair as Class Representative; (3) Appointing Outten & Golden LLP and Shavitz Law Group, P.A. as Class Counsel; and (4) Directing the parties to confer regarding an appropriate notice for the class and submit a stipulation regarding the notice, or a letter detailing any disputes, within 30 days of the Court's Order. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Sept. 18, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/48tvUfQ at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Justin M. Swartz, Esq. Michael C. Danna, Esq. Hannah Cole-Chu, Esq. Theanne Liu Svedman, Esq. OUTTEN & GOLDEN LLP 685 Third Avenue, 25th Floor New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (212) 245-1000 Facsimile: (646) 509-2060 E-mail: jms@outtengolden.com mdanna@outtengolden.com hcolechu@outtengolden.com tliusvedman@outtengolden.com - and - Michael Palitz, Esq. SHAVITZ LAW GROUP, P.A. 800 3rd Avenue, Suite 2800 New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (800) 616-4000 Facsimile: (561) 447-8831 E-mail: mpalitz@shavitzlaw.com - and - Gregg I. Shavitz, Esq. Tamra Givens, Esq. SHAVITZ LAW GROUP, P.A. 951 Yamato Road, Suite 285 Boca Raton, FL 33431 Telephone: (561) 447-8888 Facsimile: (561) 447-8831 E-mail: gshavitz@shavitzlaw.com tgivens@shavitzlaw.com MITEK SYSTEMS: BIPA-Related Class Suit Dismissed w/ Prejudice ------------------------------------------------------------- Mitek Systems Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly period ending March 31, 2023 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 29, 2023, that the Northern District of Illinois dismissed the BIPA class suit with prejudice on September 14, 2023. On December 16, 2021, the Company was sued in a putative class action in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois alleging that the Company had violated the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act ("BIPA") with respect to identity verification services that the Company provided to its customer HyreCar, Inc. ("HyreCar") for HyreCar's customers in Illinois (the "BIPA Lawsuit"). Plaintiff claimed that the Company had not obtained the required consent to collect and use Plaintiff's biometric information, and that Plaintiff and a class of similarly situated individuals therefore are entitled to statutory damages under BIPA. The Company removed the BIPA Lawsuit to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, and on March 4, 2022 the Company filed a Motion to Compel Arbitration based on HyreCar's terms and conditions requiring HyreCar customers to arbitrate on an individual (non-class) basis (the "Arbitration Motion"). On May 4, 2022 the trial court denied the Arbitration Motion. On December 21, 2022, the trial court's ruling was upheld on appeal, and the case subsequently was remanded back to the trial court. On March 10, 2023, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint adding a second named plaintiff, who is also a HyreCar end-user, but otherwise not materially changing the allegations. On March 27, 2023, the Company filed a Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, to Strike Class Allegations. On May 11, 2023, and after the Company's Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, to Strike Class Allegations had been fully briefed, Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint seeking to add two new named plaintiffs, who are end-users of Mitek customers Instacart and Roadie, and to remove one named plaintiff. The Company opposed the Motion for Leave. The Motion for Leave is fully briefed and pending before the trial court. On September 13, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal. On September 14, 2023, the Court dismissed the lawsuit without prejudice. Mitek Systems, Inc. -- https://www.miteksystems.com/ -- is a software company that specializes in digital identity verification and mobile capture built on artificial intelligence algorithms.[BN] MITRE CORP: Annuity Plan Participants Win Class Certification ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as AARON L. BROWN, PETER A. YOUNG, NINA DANIEL, RUSSELL S. CRABTREE, KIMBERLY L. NESBITT and ERIN N. WHEELER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. THE MITRE CORPORATION, THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE MITRE CORPORATION, THE INVESTMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE OF THE MITRE CORPORATION and JOHN DOES 1-30, Case No. 1:22-cv-10976-DJC (D. Mass.), the Hon. Judge Denise J. Casper entered an order certifying the following class: "All persons, except Defendants and their immediate family members, who were participants in or beneficiaries of the MITRE Corporation Tax Sheltered Annuity Plan and/or the Qualified Retirement Plan at any time between June 22, 2016, through the date of judgment." The Plaintiffs Peter A. Young, Nina Daniel, Russell S. Crabtree, Kimberly L. Nesbitt, and Eric N. Wheeler are appointed as Class representatives and Capozzi Adler, P.C. is appointed as Class counsel. MITRE is an independent, not-for-profit company working in the public interest that provides technical support to the government. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 18, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/46uZO1d at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Mark K. Gyandoh, Esq. Donald R. Reavey, Esq. CAPOZZI ADLER, P.C. 312 Old Lancaster Road Merion Station, PA 19066 Telephone: (610) 890-0200 Facsimile: (717) 233-4103 E-mail: markg@capozziadler.com donr@capozziadler.com The Defendants are represented by: Keri L. Engelman, Esq. Jeremy P. Blumenfeld, Esq. Shane C. O'Halloran, Esq. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP One Federal Street Boston, MA 02110-1726 Telephone: (617) 341-7828 Facsimile: (617) 341-7701 E-mail: keri.engelman@morganlewis.com jeremy.blumenfeld@morganlewis.com shane.ohalloran@morganlewis.com MITRE CORP: Court Tosses as Moot Brown Bid to Certify Class ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Brown, et al., v. The MITRE Corporation et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-10976 (D. Mass., Filed June 22, 2022), the Hon. Judge Denise J Casper entered an order denying as moot motion to certify class in light of the Stipulation and Order Regarding Class Certification. The nature of suit states Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). MITRE is an independent, not-for-profit company working in the public interest that provides technical support to the government. MOSAIC GLOBAL: Faces Class Suit Over Elevated Levels of Radiation ----------------------------------------------------------------- The Mosaic Company disclosed in its Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 2, 2023, that it is currently facing a putative class action complaint was filed in the Circuit Court of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit in Hillsborough County, Florida against its wholly-owned subsidiary, Mosaic Global Operations Inc. and two unrelated co-defendants The complaint, filed on August 27, 2020, alleges claims related to elevated levels of radiation at two manufactured housing communities located on reclaimed mining land in Mulberry, Polk County, Florida, allegedly due to phosphate mining and reclamation activities occurring decades ago. Plaintiffs seek monetary damages, including punitive damages, injunctive relief requiring remediation of their properties, and a medical monitoring program funded by the defendants. On October 14, 2021, the court substantially granted a motion to dismiss that the company filed late in 2020, with leave for the plaintiffs to amend their complaint. On November 3, 2021, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint and, in response, Mosaic filed a motion to dismiss that complaint with prejudice on November 15, 2021. On December 23, 2021, plaintiffs opposed that motion and Mosaic replied to that opposition on January 26, 2022. On April 6, 2022, the court heard argument on the motions to dismiss filed by Mosaic and each other co-defendant. In late March 2023, the court denied the defendants' motions to dismiss. The Mosaic Company produces and markets concentrated phosphate and potash crop nutrients and conducts its business through wholly and majority owned subsidiaries and businesses. NCAA: Parties File Administrative Omnibus Bid to Seal Docs ---------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as House, et al., v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, et al., Case No. 4:20-cv-03919-CW (N.D. Cal.), the Parties file a joint administrative omnibus motion to seal. The Parties have compiled a narrowly tailored list of materials referenced in the Parties' class certification briefing and related documents that were provisionally sealed pursuant to the Stipulation and Order Modifying Sealing Procedures, for each document or portion thereof included in Exhibit 1, the Parties have identified (i) the designating Party and/or non-party whose confidential information is included in the provisionally-sealed materials, and (ii) the confidentiality designations -- as identified in the stipulations and protective orders in this case -- that were applied when the materials were produced either in this case or in re NCAA Athletic Grant-in-Aid Cap Antitrust Litigation (Case Nos. 4:14-md-2541-CW, 4:14-cv-2758-CW). National Collegiate is a nonprofit organization that regulates student athletics among about 1,100 schools in the United States, and Canada. A copy of the Parties' motion dated Sept. 15, 2023, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3rrOGUd at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Jeffrey L. Kessler, Esq. David G. Feher, Esq. David L. Greenspan, Esq. Adam I. Dale, Esq. Sarah L. Viebrock, Esq. Jeanifer E. Parsigian, Esq. WINSTON & STRAWN LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166-4193 Telephone: (212) 294-4698 Facsimile: (212) 294-4700 E-mail: jkessler@winston.com dfeher@winston.com dgreenspan@winston.com aidale@winston.com sviebrock@winston.com jparsigian@winston.com - and - Steve W. Berman, Esq. Emilee N. Sisco, Esq. Benjamin J. Siegel, Esq. HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 1301 Second Avenue, Suite 2000 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 623-7292 Facsimile: (206) 623-0594 E-mail: steve@hbsslaw.com emilees@hbsslaw.com bens@hbsslaw.com The Defendants are represented by: Beth A. Wilkinson, Esq. Rakesh N. Kilaru, Esq. Kieran Gostin, Esq. Calanthe Cope-Kasten, Esq. Tamarra Matthews Johnson, Esq. Matthew R. Skanchy, Esq. WILKINSON STEKLOFF LLP 2001 M Street NW, 10th Floor Washington, DC 20036 Telephone: (202) 847-4000 Facsimile: (202) 847-4005 E-mail: bwilkinson@wilkinsonstekloff.com rkilaru@wilkinsonstekloff.com kgostin@wilkinsonstekloff.com ccope-kasten@wilkinsonstekloff.com tmatthewsjohnson@wilkinsonstekloff.com mskanchy@wilkinsonstekloff.com - and - Jacob K. Danziger, Esq. ARENTFOX SCHIFF LLP 44 Montgomery Street, 38th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (734) 222-1516 Facsimile: (415) 757-5501 E-mail: jacob.danziger@afslaw.com - and - Whitty Somvichian, Esq. Kathleen R. Hartnett, Esq. Ashley Kemper Corkery, Esq. Mark Lambert, Esq. Dee Bansal, Esq. COOLEY LLP 3 Embarcadero Center, 20th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-4004 Telephone: (415) 693 2000 Facsimile: (415) 693 2222 E-mail: wsomvichian@cooley.com khartnett@cooley.com acorkery@cooley.com mlambert@cooley.com dbansal@cooley.com - and - Britt M. Miller, Esq. Daniel T. Fenske, Esq. Christopher J. Kelly, Esq. MAYER BROWN LLP 71 South Wacker Drive Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 782-0600 Facsimile: (312) 701-7711 E-mail: bmiller@mayerbrown.com dfenske@mayerbrown.com cjkelly@mayerbrown.com - and - Angela C. Zambrano, Esq. David L. Anderson, Esq. Natali Wyson, Esq. Chad Hummel, Esq. SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 555 California Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 772-1200 Facsimile: (415) 772-7412 E-mail: dlanderson@sidley.com angela.zambrano@sidley.com nwyson@sidley.com chummel@sidley.com - and - Robert W. Fuller, III, Esq. Lawrence C. Moore, III, Esq. Amanda P. Nitto, Esq. Travis S. Hinman, Esq. Patrick H. Hill, Esq. ROBINSON, BRADSHAW & HINSON, P.A. 101 N. Tryon St., Suite 1900 Charlotte, NC 28246 Telephone: (704) 377-2536 Facsimile: (704) 378-4000 E-mail: rfuller@robinsonbradshaw.com lmoore@robinsonbradshaw.com anitto@robinsonbradshaw.com thinman@robinsonbradshaw.com phill@robinsonbradshaw.com Mark J. Seifert, Esq. SEIFERT ZUROMSKI LLP One Market Street, 36th Floor San Francisco, CA 941105 Telephone: (415) 999-0901 Facsimile: (415) 901-1123 E-mail: mseifert@szllp.com - and - Christopher S. Yates, Esq. Aaron T. Chiu, Esq. Anna M. Rathbun, Esq. LATHAM & WATKINS LLP 505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 391-0600 Facsimile: (415) 395-8095 E-mail: chris.yates@lw.com aaron.chiu@lw.com anna.rathbun@lw.com - and - D. Erik Albright, Esq. Jonathan P. Heyl, Esq. Gregory G. Holland, Esq. FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP 230 North Elm Street, Suite 1200 Greensboro, NC 27401 Telephone: (336) 378-5368 Facsimile: (336) 378-5400 E-mail: ealbright@foxrothschild.com jheyl@foxrothschild.com gholland@foxrothschild.com NESTLE WATERS: Opposition Briefs in Patane Suit Due Feb. 16, 2024 ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Patane et al., v. Nestle Waters North America, Inc., Case No. 3:17-cv-01381 (D. Conn., Filed Aug. 15, 2017), the Hon. Judge Jeffrey A Meyer entered an order -- Motions for Class Certification and Dec. 19, 2023 for Summary Judgment are due by: -- Opposition briefs by: Feb. 16, 2024 -- Reply briefs by: March 18, 2024 -- The Joint Trial Memorandum is April 2, 2024 due by the later of: The nature of suit states Torts -- Personal Property -- Other Fraud. Nestle produces and distributes bottled water, as well as offers organic and ready-to-drink iced teas.[CC] NEW YORK, NY: Filing for Class Cert Bid Modified to Oct. 13 ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Azor-El, et al. v. New York City Department of Corrections et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-03650-KPF (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Katherine Polk Failla entered an order granting Plaintiffs' request for a modest class certification extension: -- The Plaintiffs shall file their motion Oct. 13, 2023 for class certification on or before: -- The Defendants shall file their Nov. 24, 2023 opposition on or before: -- The Plaintiffs shall file their Dec. 15, 2023 reply, if any, on or before: A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 15, 2023, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/46oW0Pe at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Sonal Bhatia, Esq. E.E. Keenan, Esq. KEENAN & BHATIA, LLC 90 Broad Street, Suite 200 New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (917) 975-5278 NIKE INC: Cahill Files Bid to Compel Production of Documents ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as KELLY CAHILL, et al., v. NIKE, INC., an Oregon Corporation, Case No. 3:18-cv-01477-JR (D. Or.), the Plaintiffs file a motion to compel production of documents. The Plaintiffs move for an order requiring Defendant to: (1) produce discovery related to the setting of starting pay prior to October 2017 that is responsive to Plaintiffs’ Request for Production, or the Court's October 31, 2019 Order; (2) produce retention policies responsive to RFP No. 32; and (3) provide a declaration setting forth (a) what discovery responsive to RFP Nos. 4 or 8 it withheld and why, (b) how and who searched for and collected potentially responsive discovery related to setting starting pay before October 2017, and (c) if any of this responsive discovery was deleted, what, when, and why. The Plaintiffs each allege Nike’s pre-October 2017 practice of using prior pay when setting starting pay had a disparate impact on women. Nike hired one Plaintiff in 2010, one in 2012, and two in 2015. The class certification denial does not negate the need to complete discovery because the Ninth Circuit requires district courts to apply the same prima facie burden to both individual and disparate impact claims: identify an employment practice with a disproportionate impact on a group. The Plaintiffs allege Nike had a practice of using prior pay when setting starting pay until about October 2017 and this had a disparate impact on women Nike is an American athletic footwear and apparel corporation. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Sept. 15, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/453SZCU at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Laura L. Ho, Esq. Barry Goldstein, Esq. James Kan, Esq. Byron Goldstein, Esq. Katharine L. Fisher, Esq. Mengfei Sun, Esq. GOLDSTEIN, BORGEN, DARDARIAN & HO 155 Grand Ave Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (510) 763-9800 - and - Laura Salerno Owens, Esq. David B. Markowitz, Esq. Harry B. Wilson, Esq. Kathryn P. Roberts, Esq. MARKOWITZ HERBOLD PC 1455 SW Broadway Suite 1900 Portland, OR 97201 Telephone: (503) 295-3085 - and - Craig Ackerman, Esq. ACKERMANN & TILAJEF PC 1180 S Beverly Drive, Suite 610 Los Angeles, CA 90035 Telephone: (310) 277-0614 Facsimile: (310) 277-0635 E-mail: cja@ackermanntilajef.com - and - India Lin Bodien, Esq. INDIA LIN BODIEN LAW 2522 North Proctor Street, #387 Tacoma, WA 98406-5338 Telephone: (253) 503-1672 Facsimile: (253) 276-0081 E-mail: india@indialinbodienlaw.com OLLIE'S BARGAIN: Pauli Suit Seeks FLSA Collective Certification --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JAMES PAULI, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, v. OLLIE'S BARGAIN OUTLET INC., Case No. 5:22-cv-00279-MAD-ML (N.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Mae A. D'Agostino entered an order: -- Denying the Plaintiff's motion seeking conditional Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective certification; and -- Denying the Defendant's motion to strike portions of Plaintiff's reply submissions; and The Court will deny the Defendant's motion to strike because it would require making a credibility determination to resolve a factual dispute. Even if the Court were to make a finding favorable to Defendant, "the mere fact that testimony is inconsistent is insufficient to justify striking an entire document." Accordingly, the Defendant's Rule 12(f) motion to strike must be denied. The Plaintiff describes the proposed collective as: "All current and former Co-Team Leaders who have worked for Defendant from March 22, 2019, through the date of trial, and elect to opt-in to this action pursuant to the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. section 216(b) ("Nationwide Collective Class"). On March 22, 2022, the Plaintiff Pauli filed this putative collective and class action against Defendant Ollie's Bargain Outlet, Inc., alleging violations of the Federal Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and the New York Labor Law ("NYLL"). The Plaintiff is a New York resident who has worked at an Ollie's store in Cicero, New York since August 2013. Since November 2013, Plaintiff's position title has been "Co-Team Leader" or "CTL." Ollie's is an American chain of discount closeout retailers. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Sept. 15, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3tgAAW4 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Frank S. Gattuso, Esq. GATTUSO & CIOTOLI, PLLC The White House 7030 East Genesee Street Fayetteville, NY 13066 - and - James E. Murphy, Esq. Michele A. Moreno, Esq. Ladonna Lusher, Esq. VIRGINIA & AMBINDER, LLP 40 Broad Street, 7th Floor New York, NY 10004 The Defendant is represented by: Heather Z. Steele, Esq. Kathleen Mcleod Caminiti, Esq. FISHER & PHILLIPS, LLP Two Logan Square, 12th Floor 100 N. 18th Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 OMNI HOTELS: Beaver Suit Bid for Class Certification OK'd --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as DEAN BEAVER, et al., v. OMNI HOTELS MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, et al., Case No. 3:20-cv-00191-AJB-DEB (S.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Anthony J. Battaglia entered an order: (1) Granting motion for class certification; (2) Granting motion for appointment of co-lead class counsel; and (3) Granting motion to seal exhibit in support of plaintiffs' motion for class certification. Lead Plaintiffs seeks to certify the following class: "All villa owners who entered the RMA with LC Brokerage beginning four years before this action was filed to the present, excluding the defendants/counterclaimants in LC Investment 2010 v. La Costa Investments, San Diego Sup. Court." The Defendants assert Lead Plaintiffs failed to satisfy the requirements for class certification under Rules 23(a) and 23(b). Omni operates hotels and resorts. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 18, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/46tgyGs at no extra charge.[CC] ONE SOURCE: Class Cert Filing Deadline Extended to Dec. 22 ---------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as KHUSCHBU DIDWANIA, RATIKKUMAR PATEL, and BENJAMIN ADAMS, v. ONE SOURCE TO MARKET, LLC, d/b/a HEXCLAD COOKWARE, INC. Case No. 2:23-cv-05110-JFW-JPR (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge John F. Walter entered an order granting application to extend deadline to file motion for class certification: -- The deadline for Plaintiffs to file their motion for class certification is extended and the motion shall now be due on December 22, 2023. HexClad is a new company with a line of hybrid cookware, combining high-quality stainless steel with PFOA-free non-stick. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 18, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RAFjfu at no extra charge.[CC] ONSITE OILFIELD: Hernandez Balks at Field Technicians' Unpaid Wages ------------------------------------------------------------------- ROBERT HERNANDEZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ONSITE OILFIELD SERVICE, LLC AND CODY CADJEW, Defendants, Case No. 7:23-cv-00148 (W.D. Tex., Sept. 21, 2023) alleges that the Defendants have violated the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New Mexico Minimum Wage Act. The Plaintiff began working on a maintenance crew for Onsite in November of 2022. He began as a field technician and was thereafter promoted to the position of lead field technician, and has worked there continuously since. The Plaintiff and other maintenance crew members were required to travel to and work in New Mexico regularly. During his time with Defendants, Plaintiff and others similarly situated were paid a flat daily rate plus a set amount for each pump serviced, and never received overtime pay for their hours worked over 40 in a week, says the suit. Onsite Oilfield Service, LLC is a Texas limited liability company with its principal place of business in Abilene, Texas. The company provides maintenance services on pump equipment for customers in the oil and gas industry. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Josh Borsellino, Esq. BORSELLINO, P.C. 1020 Macon St., Suite 15 Fort Worth, TX 76102 Telephone: (817) 908-9861 Facsimile: (817) 394-2412 E-mail: josh@dfwcounsel.com ORRSTOWN BANK: Faces Alleman Suit in Pennsylvania ------------------------------------------------- Orrstown Financial Services, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 8, 2023, that on March 25, 2022, a customer of Orrstown Bank filed a putative class action complaint in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, in a case captioned "Alleman, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, v. Orrstown Bank." The complaint alleges, among other things, that the bank breached its account agreements by charging certain overdraft fees. The complaint seeks a refund of all allegedly improper fees, damages in an amount to be proven at trial, attorneys' fees and costs, and an injunction against the bank's allegedly improper overdraft practices. Orrstown Financial Services, Inc. is a financial holding company that operates Orrstown Bank, a commercial bank providing banking and financial advisory services in Berks, Cumberland, Dauphin, Franklin, Lancaster, Perry and York Counties, Pennsylvania, and in Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Howard and Washington Counties, Maryland. It operates in the community banking segment and engages in lending activities, including commercial, residential, commercial mortgages, construction, municipal, and various forms of consumer lending, and deposit services, including checking, savings, time, and money market deposits. ORRSTOWN FINANCIAL: Settles SEPTA Securities Suit -------------------------------------------------- Orrstown Financial Services, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 8, 2023, that after years of litigation, on December 7, 2022, the company entered into a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement to settle the putative class action lawsuit filed by the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania against the company, Orrstown Bank, certain current and former officers and directors of the company and the bank, the company's former independent registered public accounting firm and the underwriters of the company's March 2010 public offering of common stock asserting claims under the Federal securities laws. The stipulation provided for a payment to the plaintiffs of $15.0 million, to which the company contributed $13.0 million, a mutual release of claims against all parties, and a stipulation that the lawsuit would be dismissed with prejudice. On May 19, 2023, the court issued an order which, among other things, gave final approval to the Stipulation and dismissed the lawsuit and all related claims with prejudice. The appeal period for this order expired on June 20, 2023, without any appeals having been filed. Orrstown Financial Services, Inc. is a financial holding company that operates Orrstown Bank, a commercial bank providing banking and financial advisory services in Berks, Cumberland, Dauphin, Franklin, Lancaster, Perry and York Counties, Pennsylvania, and in Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Howard and Washington Counties, Maryland. It operates in the community banking segment and engages in lending activities, including commercial, residential, commercial mortgages, construction, municipal, and various forms of consumer lending, and deposit services, including checking, savings, time, and money market deposits. PEOPLES BANK: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Brooks Suit Alleges --------------------------------------------------------------- LATASHA BROOKS; and MICHAEL BROOKS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. PEOPLES BANK, as successor by merger to LIMESTONE BANK, INC., Defendant, Case No. 2:23-cv-03043-MHW-EPD (S.D. Ohio., Sept. 21, 2023) alleges that the Defendant failed to properly secure and safeguard Personally Identifiable Information ("PII") and Protected Health Information ("PHI," together with PII "Private Information") provided by its clients. According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, the Defendant failed to use reasonable industry standard security measures, which would have prevented this type of attack from being successful. Defendant's failure to use such measures is particularly egregious given the amount of highly sensitive Private Information that it maintains and the prevalence of data security incidents in the finance and banking industries. Hackers can access and then offer for sale the unencrypted, unredacted Private Information to criminals. The exposed Private Information of Plaintiffs and Class Members can be sold on the dark web. Plaintiffs and Class Members now face a present and continuing lifetime risk of identity theft, which is heightened here by the loss of Social Security numbers, says the suit. PEOPLES BANK is an Ohio corporation and chartered commercial bank, with 132 full-service branch locations in Ohio, Kentucky, West Virginia, Virginia, Washington D.C., and Maryland. It offers a broad range of services including financing services, investment and money management services, leasing services, and insurance services, along with other general personal and business banking services. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Terence R. Coates, Esq. Spencer D. Campbell, Esq. MARKOVITS, STOCK & DEMARCO, LLC 119 E. Court Street, Suite 530 Cincinnati, OH 45202 Telephone: (513) 651-3700 Facsimile: (513) 665-0219 Email: tcoates@msdlegal.com scampbell@msdlegal.com PHYSICAL REHABILITATION: Cushman Labor Suit Removed to S.D. Calif. ------------------------------------------------------------------ The case styled ANTHONY CUSHMAN, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated; and MARITZA HERNANDEZ, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. PHYSICAL REHABILITATION NETWORK, LLC, a DELAWARE limited liability company; HEALTHCARE EMPLOYEE SERVICES, LLC, a California limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 37-2023-00031035-CU-OE-CTL, was removed from 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 September 28, 2023. The Clerk of Court for the Southern District of California assigned Case No. 3:23-CV-1798-BEN-DDL to the proceeding. The case arises from the Defendants' alleged labor law violations that include their failure to pay proper wages and to provide accurate wage statements to the Plaintiffs. Physical Rehabilitation Networks, LLC is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the State of Delaware. The company owns and operates outpatient physical therapy clinics in the US. [BN] The Defendants are represented by: Evan R. Moses, Esq. OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C. 400 South Hope Street, Suite 1200 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 239-9800 Facsimile: (213) 239-9045 E-mail: evan.moses@ogletree.com - and - Eric E. Suits, Esq. OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C. 500 Capitol Mall, Suite 2500 Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: (916) 840-3150 Facsimile: (916) 840-3159 E-mail: eric.suits@ogletree.com PRIME HYDRATION: Drugas Sues Over Misleading Product Labels ----------------------------------------------------------- KYRA DRUGAS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PRIME HYDRATION LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-08552 (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 29, 2023) arises from the Defendant's misrepresentations on the specific amounts of caffeine of its Prime Energy drinks. According to the complaint, the Defendant's products label plainly states that it contains "200mg of caffeine" on the side and back of the packaging, However, based upon testing commissioned by Plaintiff’s attorneys, the Products actually contain between 215-225 milligrams of caffeine rather than the advertised 200 milligrams. Moreover, the Defendant's false, deceptive, and misleading label statements violate the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices Statutes and/or Consumer Protection Acts. The Plaintiff and each of the Class members accordingly suffered an injury in fact caused by the false, fraudulent, unfair, deceptive, and misleading practices and seek compensatory damages, statutory damages, and injunctive relief, says the suit. Prime Hydration LLC formulates, manufactures, advertises, and sells the popular "PRIME Energy" drinks, which include Prime Energy Blue Raspberry, Prime Energy Ice Pop, Prime Energy Lemon Lime, Prime Energy Orange Mango, Prime Energy Strawberry Watermelon, and Prime Energy Tropical Punch throughout the United States, including in New York. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Russell M. Busch, Esq. J. Hunter Bryson, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC 405 E 50th Street New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (202) 640-1167 E-mail: rbusch@milberg.com hbryson@milberg.com - and - Jeff Ostrow, Esq. Kristen Lake Cardoso, Esq. KOPELOWITZ OSTROW P.A. One West Las Olas, Suite 500 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 525-4100 E-mail: ostrow@kolawyers.com cardoso@kolawyers.com - and - Nick Suciu III, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC 6905 Telegraph Rd., Suite 115 Bloomfield Hills, MI 48301 Telephone: (313) 303-3472 E-mail: nsuciu@milberg.com PROGRESSIVE PREMIER: Henson Suit Seeks to Certify Two Classes ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as SARAH HENSON and DIANA DASALLA, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. PROGRESSIVE PREMIER INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS, an Ohio Corporation, and PROGRESSIVE SOUTHEASTERN INSURANCE CO., an Ohio corporation, Case No. 5:22-cv-00182-M (E.D.N.C.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting class certification pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and (b)(3) and certify the following Classes: -- Progressive Premier Class "All persons who made a first party claim on a policy of insurance issued by Progressive Premier Insurance Company of Illinois to a North Carolina resident where the claim was submitted from May 4, 2019, through the date an order granting class certification is entered, and Progressive determined that the vehicle was a total loss and based its claim payment on an Instant Report from Mitchell where a Projected Sold Adjustment was applied to at least one comparable vehicle. -- Progressive Southeastern Class "All persons who made a first party claim on a policy of insurance issued by Progressive Southeastern Insurance Company to a North Carolina resident where the claim was submitted from May 4, 2019, through the date an order granting class certification is entered, and Progressive determined that the vehicle was a total loss and based its claim payment on an Instant Report from Mitchell where a Projected Sold Adjustment was applied to at least one comparable vehicle. Progressive offers car, home, renters, condo, motorcycle, life, pet, commercial, health, business, boat, and other insurance products and services. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Sept. 15, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/458HnP1 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Jeremy R. Williams, Esq. Jacob M. Morse, Esq. MILLBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC 900 W. Morgan Street Raleigh, NC 27603 Telephone: (919) 600-5000 Facsimile: (919) 600-5035 E-mail: jwilliams@milberg.com jmorse@milberg.com - and - Hank Bates, Esq. Lee Lowther, Esq. CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC 519 W. 7th Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Telephone: (501) 312-8500 E-mail: hbates@cbplaw.com llowther@cbplaw.com - and - Andrew J. Shamis, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A. 14 NE 1st Avenue, Suite 705 Miami, FL 33132 Telephone: (305) 479-2299 E-mail: ashamis@shamisgentile.com - and - Scott Edelsberg, Esq. Christopher Gold, Esq. EDELSBERG LAW, P.A. 20900 NE 30th Avenue, Suite 417 Aventura, FL 33180 Telephone: (786) 289-9471 E-mail: scott@edelsberglaw.com chris@edelsberglaw.com - and - Jacob L. Phillips, Esq. NORMAND PLLC 3165 McCrory Place, Ste. 175 Orlando, FL 32803 Telephone: (407) 603-6031 E-mail: jacob.phillips@normandpllc.com RBS CITIZENS: Court Vacates Trial Scheduled on Oct. 30 ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as REINIG et al v. RBS CITIZENS, N.A., Case No. 2:15-cv-01541 (W.D. Pa., Filed Nov. 23, 2015), the Hon. Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand entered an order regarding Trial and Trial Deadlines. -- The trial scheduled to occur on Oct. 30, 2023 is vacated, as are the corresponding pretrial deadlines set forth in the Court's pretrial orders, as amended. -- The Court will reschedule the trial and corresponding deadlines at a later date. The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.[CC] ROCKET CITY SHOWGIRLS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Glover Alleges ---------------------------------------------------------------- MEKAYLA GLOVER, on behalf of herself and other similarly situated individuals, Plaintiff v. ROCKET CITY SHOWGIRLS, LLC, d/b/a THE PONY TOO, Defendant, Case No. 5:23-CV-01252-LCB (M.D. Ala., Sept. 21, 2023) arises from the Defendant's violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant to work or perform exotic dancer job duties for, at, or in Defendant's Pony Too Gentlemen's Club during the period of about August 2021, through May 2023. However, the Defendant classified Plaintiff and each Class Member that worked or performed as an exotic dancer for, at, or in Defendant's Pony Too Gentlemen's Club as a non-employee independent contractor. It also paid no wages and/or any other form of compensation to Plaintiff or to any other Class Members, says the suit. Accordingly, Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant violated the FLSA by failing to pay Plaintiff any wages for all compensable hours Plaintiff worked and by unlawfully keeping and/or assigning tips and gratuities Plaintiff earned and received from Defendant's customers while working or performing as an exotic dancer for, at, or in Defendant's Pony Too Gentlemen's Club. Rocket City Showgirls is a corporation formed under the laws of the State of Alabama and has maintained its principal place of business, its Pony Too Gentlemen's Club, in Madison County, AL. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David A. Hughes, Esq. HARDIN & HUGHES, LLP 2121 14th Street Tuscaloosa, AL 35401 Telephone: (205) 523-0463 Facsimile: (205) 756-4463 E-mail: dhughes@hardinhughes.com - and - Gregg C. Greenberg, Esq. ZIPIN, AMSTER & GREENBERG, LLC 8757 Georgia Avenue, Suite 400 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: (301) 587-9373 Facsimile: (240) 839-9142 E-mail: GGreenberg@ZAGFirm.Com SBGA INC: Filing for Class Certification Modified to Jan. 19, 2024 ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as RUSSELL JUMPER, an individual, on behalf of himself, all others similarly situated, and the general public, v. SBGA INC., a Delaware corporation, ROBERT T. PARISI, an individual, JASON MOORE, and DOES 1 through 10, Case No. 8:22-cv-01764-WLH-DFM (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Wesley L. HsU entered an order granting joint stipulation to modify case scheduling order as follows: Event Original Date New Date Last Date to Hear Motion to Oct. 6, 2023 Jan. 4, 2024 Amend Pleadings Last day to file Motion for Oct. 20, 2023 Jan. 19, 2024 Class Certification Last day to oppose Motion for Nov. 17, 2023 Feb. 16, 2024 Class Certification Last day for reply for Motion Dec. 15, 2023 March 15, 2024 for Class Certification Non-Expert Discovery Cut-Off Jan. 5, 2023 April 5, 2023 Expert Disclosure (Initial) Jan. 19, 2023 March 19, 2024 Expert Disclosure (Rebuttal) Feb. 2, 2024 April 3, 2024 Expert Discovery Cut-Off Feb. 16, 2023 March 17, 2024 Last Date to Hear Motions April 12, 2024 July 12, 2024 Deadline to Complete Settlement April 26, 2024 July 26, 2024 Conference Trial Filings (first round) June 14, 2024 Aug. 13, 2024 Trial Filings (second round) July 21, 2024 Aug. 20, 2024 A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 15, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RDcbnP at no extra charge.[CC] SEAGEN INC: Faces Class Suit Over Cancer Meds --------------------------------------------- Seagen Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 2, 2023, that on March 14, 2023, a purported class action was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California against the company, Astellas and Agensys, Inc., alleging that the defendants failed to warn of side effects to the skin that can occur when taking PADCEV (enfortumab vedotin-ejfv) used for the treatment of certain metastatic urothelial cancers. The complaint alleges claims under strict liability, negligence and fraud, and seeks damages, including punitive damages, interest, attorneys' fees and costs. Seagen is a biotechnology company that develops and commercializes targeted therapies to treat cancer. SELECT REHABILITATION: Bid to Amend McLaughlin Complaint Tossed ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as McLaughlin v. Select Rehabilitation LLC, Case No. 3:22-cv-00059 (M.D. Fla., Filed Jan 18, 2022), the Hon. Judge Harvey E. Schlesinger entered an endorsed order terminating as moot the Plaintiffs' motion for leave of court to amend complaint to add or join an additional plaintiff and class representative and motion to enlarge deadline to file for class certification in light of plaintiffs' voluntary withdrawal or dismissal of pending motion for leave to amend complaint. The suit alleges violation of Fair Labor Standards Act. Select provides comprehensive physical, occupational and speech therapy services.[CC] SIG SAUER: Ct. Stays Class Cert-Related Deadlines in Glasscock -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Glasscock v. Sig Sauer, Inc., Case No. 6:22-cv-03095 (W.D. Mo., Filed April 18, 2022), the Hon. Judge Stephen R. Bough entered an order staying the deadlines related to class certification. -- The parties shall file a stipulation Oct. 16, 2023 of dismissal or status report on or before: The nature of suit states Fraud -- Diversity-Product Liability. Sig Sauer designs and manufactures firearms for military, law enforcement, and commercial markets.[CC] SINGULARITY FUTURE: Continues to Defend Crivellaro Class Suit ------------------------------------------------------------- Singularity Future Technology Ltd. disclosed in its Form 10-K Report for the annual period ending August 31, 2023 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 29, 2023, that the Company continues to defend itself from the Crivellaro class suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. On December 9, 2022, Piero Crivellaro, purportedly on behalf of the persons or entities who purchased or acquired publicly traded securities of the Company between February 2021 and November 2022, filed a putative class action against the Company and other defendants in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, alleging violations of federal securities laws related to alleged false or misleading disclosures made by the Company in its public filings. The plaintiff seeks unspecified damages, plus interest, costs, fees, and attorneys' fees. On February 7, 2023, two additional plaintiffs moved to be appointed as the lead class plaintiff in this action; those motions remain under the Court's consideration. As this action is still in the early stage, the Company cannot predict the outcome. Singularity Future Technology Ltd. is into the arrangement of transportation of freight & cargo based in New York. Singularity Future Technology Ltd. is into the arrangement of transportation of freight & cargo based in New York. SLEEP NUMBER: Consolidated Securities Suit Dismissed w/ Prejudice ----------------------------------------------------------------- Sleep Number Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 8, 2023, that on July 10, 2023, the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota issued an order dismissing the plaintiffs' consolidated amended complaint with prejudice. Defendants moved to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint on September 19, 2022, which motion was heard by the court on January 17, 2023 and on July 10, 2023, the court issued an order dismissing the plaintiffs' consolidated amended complaint with prejudice. On December 14, 2021, purported Sleep Number shareholder, Steamfitters Local 449 Pension & Retirement Security Funds, filed a putative class action complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota on behalf of all purchasers of Sleep Number common stock between February 18, 2021 and July 20, 2021, inclusive, against Sleep Number, Shelly Ibach and David Callen, the company's former Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Steamfitters alleges material misstatements and omissions in certain of Sleep Number's public disclosures during the purported class period, in violation of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). The complaint seeks, among other things, unspecified monetary damages, reasonable costs and expenses and equitable/injunctive or other relief as deemed appropriate by the District of Minnesota. On February 14, 2022, a second purported Sleep Number shareholder, Ricardo Dario Schammas, moved for appointment as lead plaintiff in the action. On March 24, 2022, the District of Minnesota heard argument on Schammas's motion, and subsequently appointed Steamfitters and Schammas as Co-Lead Plaintiffs (together, Co-Lead Plaintiffs). On July 19, 2022, Co-Lead Plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint, which, like the predecessor complaint, asserts claims against Sleep Number, Shelly Ibach, and David Callen under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act. Co- Lead Plaintiffs purport to assert these claims on behalf of all purchasers of Sleep Number common stock between February 18, 2021 and July 20, 2021. On May 12, 2022, Gwendolyn Calla Moore, as the appointed representative of purported Sleep Number shareholder Matthew Gelb, filed a derivative action in the District of Minnesota against Jean-Michel Valette, Shelly Ibach, Barbara Matas, Brenda Lauderback, Daniel Alegre, Deborah Kilpatrick, Julie Howard, Kathleen Nedorostek, Michael Harrison, Stephen Gulis, Jr., David Callen, and Kevin Brown. Moore purports to assert claims on behalf of Sleep Number for breaches of fiduciary duty, waste, and contribution under Sections 10(b) and 21(d) of the Exchange Act. Moore's allegations generally mirror those asserted in the securities complaint described above. The Moore complaint seeks damages in an unspecified amount, disgorgement, interest, and costs and expenses, including attorneys' and experts' fees. On September 13, 2022, the District of Minnesota entered a joint stipulation staying all proceedings in the Derivative Action pending the outcome of any motion to dismiss the Steamfitters consolidated amended complaint. On March 25, 2022, Sleep Number received a shareholder litigation demand, requesting that the Board investigate the allegations in the securities class action complaint and pursue claims on Sleep Number's behalf based on those allegations. On May 12, 2022, the Board established a special litigation committee to investigate the demand. On October 5 and October 12, 2022, Sleep Number received two additional shareholder litigation demands, which adopted and incorporated the allegations and requests in the demand. Both of these additional litigation demands were referred to the special litigation committee. Sleep Number is a wellness technology company to help solve sleep problems, by providing individualized temperature control for each sleeper through its smart beds, marketing and selling its innovations directly to new and existing customers through direct-to-consumer retail touch points. SMITTY'S: Plaintiffs Seek More Time to File Class Cert Reply ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit re: Smitty's/Cam2 303 Tractor Hydraulic Fluid Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, Case No. 4:20-md-02936-SRB (W.D. Mo.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting for a two-week extension of time to October 5, 2023, for Plaintiffs to file their Reply Suggestions in Support of Plaintiffs' motion for class certification. -- The hearing on class certification has now been set for November 16, 2023. An extension to October 5 will still result in Plaintiffs' Reply Suggestions being filed more than five weeks before the hearing. -- In addition, the extension will result in Plaintiffs having approximately two months to file their Reply Suggestions following Defendants filing of their Suggestions in Opposition on August 4, 2023. -- The Defendants had more than three months to file their Response Suggestions to Plaintiffs' motion for class certification filed on April 21, 2023. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 15, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3rwpnQS at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Thomas V. Bender, Esq. Dirk Hubbard, Esq. HORN AYLWARD & BANDY, LLC 2600 Grand Boulevard, Ste. 1100 Kansas City, MO 64108 Telephone: (816) 421-0700 Facsimile: (816) 421-0899 E-mail: tbender@hab-law.com dhubbard@hab-law.com - and - Bryan T. White, Esq. WHITE, GRAHAM, BUCKLEY, & CARR, L.L.C 19049 East Valley View Parkway Independence, MO 64055 Telephone: (816) 373-9080 Facsimile: (816) 373-9319 E-mail: bwhite@wagblaw.com - and - Clayton Jones, Esq. CLAYTON JONES, ATTORNEY AT LAW 405 W. 58 Hwy. Raymore, MO 64083 Telephone: (816) 318-4266 Facsimile: (816) 318-4267 E-mail: clayton@claytonjoneslaw.com - and - Don M. Downing, Esq. Gretchen Garrison, Esq. GRAY RITTER GRAHAM 701 Markey Street, Suite 800 St. Louis, MO 63101 Telephone: (314) 241-5620 Facsimile: (314) 241-4140 E-mail: ddowning@grgpc.com ggarrison@grgpc.com SPIRIT AEROSYSTEMS: Faces Consolidated Securities Suit ------------------------------------------------------ Spirit AeroSystems Holdings, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 2, 2023, that it is facing a consolidated securities litigation over alleged violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder against the company, it Chief Executive Officer, Tom Gentile III, former Chief Financial Officer, Jose Garcia, and former Controller (principal accounting officer), John Gilson, for violations of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act against the individual defendants, and violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5(a) and promulgated thereunder against all defendants. On February 10, 2020, February 24, 2020, and March 24, 2020, three separate private securities class action lawsuits were filed against the company in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma, together with Gentile, Garcia, and Gilson. On April 20, 2020, the Class Actions were consolidated by the court and on July 20, 2020, the plaintiffs filed a consolidated class action complaint which added Shawn Campbell, the company's former Vice President for the B737NG and B737 MAX program, as a defendant. Spirit AeroSystems Holdings provides manufacturing and design expertise in a wide range of fuselage, propulsion, and wing products and services for aircraft original equipment manufacturers and operators through its subsidiaries including Spirit. SPIRIT AEROSYSTEMS: Faces Securities Suit Over Plane Design Flaws ----------------------------------------------------------------- Spirit AeroSystems Holdings, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 2, 2023, that on May 3, 2023, a private securities class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against the company, its Chief Executive Officer, Tom Gentile III, and its Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Mark J. Suchinski. The lawsuit was brought on behalf of certain purchasers of securities of the company, who allege purported misstatements and omissions concerning alleged faulty production controls and the alleged incorrect installation of fittings on certain B737 MAX planes. The specific claims in the Securities Class Action include violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder against all defendants, and violations of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act against the individual defendants. Lead plaintiff and counsel in the b737 securities class action have not yet been appointed. Spirit AeroSystems Holdings provides manufacturing and design expertise in a wide range of fuselage, propulsion, and wing products and services for aircraft original equipment manufacturers and operators through its subsidiaries including Spirit. STATE FARM: Filing for Class Certification Bid Due Jan. 16, 2024 ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as PAULA GULICK, ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND ALL OTHER SIMILARLY SITUATED, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. 2:21-cv-02573-TC-TJJ (D. Kan.), the Hon. Judge Teresa J. James entered a Phase I Scheduling Order as follows: Event Deadline/Setting Class certification expert discovery: Plaintiff's expert disclosures and reports Oct. 20, 2023 for class certification: Defendant's expert disclosures and reports Dec. 15, 2023 for class certification: Motion for class certification; Defendant's Jan. 16, 2024 motion for summary judgment on individual claims or issues; any motions to exclude expert testimony under Rule 702 to be filed by: Responses to the above motions: Feb. 12, 2024 Replies to responses to the above motions: Mar. 4, 2024 All Phase I discovery completed: Mar. 4, 2024 State Farm is a group of insurance and financial services companies. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 15, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3EWeGdC at no extra charge.[CC] TENNESSEE: Harris Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification --------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICKY HARRIS, v. CANDICE WHISMAN, in her official Capacity as Director of Sentence Management Services for the TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, Case No. 3:19-cv-00174 (M.D. Tenn.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting motion for Rule 23 class certification. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 18, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/458WmbC at no extra charge.[CC] VAG TNRCA: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Boktor Suit Alleges --------------------------------------------------------- NASHAT BOKTOR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. VAG TNRCA, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 23STCV22967 (Cal. Sup., Los Angeles Cty., Sept. 21, 2023) is an action against the Defendant for failure to pay minimum wages, overtime compensation, authorize and permit meal and rest periods, provide accurate wage statements, and reimburse necessary business expenses. Plaintiff Boktor was employed by the Defendant as a car salesperson. VAG TNRCA, LLC operates automobile dealership in California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Nazo Koulloukian, Esq. KOUL LAW FIRM 3435 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1710 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Telephone: (213) 761-5484 Facsimile: (818) 561-3938 Email: nazo@koullaw.com WESTLAKE US: Jones and Jones Sue Over Property Damages, Negligence ------------------------------------------------------------------ CHRISTINA ELAINE JONES and DONNA MARTIN JONES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. WESTLAKE US 2, LLC; WESTLAKE CORPORATION; and EAGLE SPINCO INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-01311 (W.D. La., Sept. 21, 2023) asserts several claims against the Defendants including negligence, nuisance, and for violations of the Louisiana Environmental Quality Act and the Louisiana Mineral Code's Article 10. Among other things, Plaintiffs allege that Westlake's contamination of the Chicot Aquifer, the potable water source, has caused and will continue to cause bodily injury, economic losses, business interruption, increased business expenses, medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering. In addition, Plaintiffs also allege that Westlake's operation of and failure to properly monitor and maintain the Salt Dome Facilities has resulted in property damage, including but not limited to subsidence and diminution in value of their property. Westlake US 2 LLC, formerly known as Eagle US 2 LLC, is a Delaware limited liability company having its principal place of business in Houston, Texas. Westlake and its related entities manufacture and/or supply chlorine, caustic soda, chlor-alkali derivatives, polyvinylchloride, petrochemicals, polymers, and fabricated building products. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Gladstone N. Jones, III, Esq. Lynn E. Swanson, Esq. Kevin E. Huddell, Esq. Michael P. Arata, Esq. Alayne Gobeille, Esq. Thomas F. Dixon, Esq. Rosa E. Acheson, Esq. JONES SWANSON HUDDELL LLC 601 Poydras Street, Suite 2655 New Orleans, LA 70130 Telephone: (504) 523-2500 Facsimile: (504) 523-2508 E-mail: gjones@jonesswanson.com khuddell@jonesswanson.com lswanson@jonesswanson.com marata@jonesswanson.com agobeille@jonesswanson.com tdixon@jonesswanson.com racheson@jonesswanson.com - and - Bernard E. Boudreaux, Jr., Esq. John T. Arnold, Esq. JONES SWANSON HUDDELL LLC One American Place 301 Main Street, Suite 1920 Baton Rouge, LA 70801 Telephone: (225) 810-3165 Facsimile: (225) 810-3169 E-mail: bboudreaux@jonesswanson.com jarnold@jonesswanson.com WILLIAMS COMPANIES: Loses Contamination Suit in Alaska ------------------------------------------------------ The Williams Companies, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 2, 2023, that a decision was made in favor of the State of Alaska with regards to sulfolane contamination. The actions primarily arise from sulfolane contamination allegedly emanating from the refinery in North Pole, Alaska, from 1980 until 2004, through its wholly owned subsidiaries Williams Alaska Petroleum Inc. (WAPI) and MAPCO Inc. The State of Alaska filed its action in March 2014, seeking damages. The City of North Pole (North Pole) filed its lawsuit in November 2014, seeking past and future damages, as well as punitive damages. The company asserted counterclaims against the State of Alaska and North Pole. The State of Alaska later announced the discovery of additional contaminants per- and polyfluoralkyl (PFOS and PFOA) offsite of the refinery, and the court permitted the State of Alaska to amend its complaint to add a claim for offsite PFOS/PFOA contamination. The court subsequently remanded the offsite PFOS/PFOA claims to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation for investigation and stayed the claims pending their potential resolution at the administrative agency. Several trial dates encompassing all three cases have been scheduled and stricken. In the summer of 2019, the court deconsolidated the cases for purposes of trial. A bench trial on all claims except North Pole's claims began in October 2019. In January 2020, the Alaska Superior Court issued its Memorandum of Decision finding in favor of the State of Alaska and the Flint Hills Resources Alaska, LLC. The court found that FHRA is not entitled to contractual indemnification from the company because FHRA contributed to the sulfolane contamination. On March 23, 2020, the court entered final judgment in the case. Filing deadlines were stayed until May 1, 2020. However, on April 21, 2020, the company filed a Notice of Appeal and also filed post-judgment motions including a Motion for New Trial and a Motion to Alter or Amend the Judgment. These post-trial motions were resolved with the court's denial of the last motion on June 11, 2020. Our Statement of Points on Appeal was filed on July 13, 2020. On June 22, 2020, the court stayed the North Pole's case pending resolution of the appeal in the State of Alaska and FHRA case. On December 23, 2020, we filed our opening brief on appeal. Oral argument was held on December 15, 2021. On May 26, 2023, the Alaska Supreme Court issued its Opinion substantially affirming the Superior Court's decision. On June 26, 2023, the company filed a motion to stay the effect of the Alaska Supreme Court's Opinion because it intended to file a petition for writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme Court. On July 18, 2023, the Superior Court granted its stay of execution of the monetary judgment portions of the judgment while seeking review before the United States Supreme Court. The Williams Companies, Inc. is into gas transmission and pipelines. WILLIS-KNIGHTON: Appeals Remand of Horton Suit to State Court ------------------------------------------------------------- WILLIS-KNIGHTON MEDICAL CENTER, doing business as Willis-Knighton Health System, is taking an appeal from a court order granting the Plaintiff's motion to remand the lawsuit entitled Jacqueline Horton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Willis-Knighton Medical Center, doing business as Willis-Knighton Health System, Defendant, Case No. 1:23-CV-314, from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana to state court. As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit, which was removed from the Tenth Judicial District Court to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, was brought against the Defendant for violation of the Louisiana Wiretap Act and for unjust enrichment by embedding the Meta Pixel source code on its website. On Mar. 14, 2023, the Plaintiff filed a motion to remand the case to State Court, which the Court granted through an Order entered by Judge Terry A. Doughty on Aug. 18, 2023. The appellate case is captioned Horton v. Willis-Knighton Medical Ctr, Case No. 23-30653, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, filed on September 19, 2023. [BN] Plaintiff-Appellee JACQUELINE HORTON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, is represented by: Stephen Jay Herman, Esq. HERMAN HERMAN & KATZ, L.L.C. 820 O'Keefe Avenue New Orleans, LA 70113 Telephone: (504) 680-0554 - and - Foster Calhoun Johnson, Esq. AHMAD & ZAVITSANOS & MENSING, P.L.L.C. One Houston Center, Suite 2500 1221 McKinney Street Houston, TX 77010 Telephone: (713) 655-1101 - and - Keenan K. Kelly, Esq. KELLY & TOWNSEND, L.L.C. 137 Saint Denis Street Natchitoches, LA 71457 Telephone: (318) 352-2353 Defendant-Appellant WILLIS-KNIGHTON MEDICAL CENTER, doing business as Willis-Knighton Health System, is represented by: David Alan Carney, Esq. BAKER & HOSTETLER, L.L.P. 127 Public Square Key Tower Cleveland, OH 44114 Telephone: (216) 861-7634 - and - Lamar Powell Pugh, Esq. PUGH, PUGH & PUGH, L.L.P. 333 Texas Street Shreveport, LA 71101 Telephone: (318) 227-2270 WOODMAN'S FOOD: Filing of Class Cert Bid Extended to Oct. 10 ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as Wyngaard v. Woodman's Food Market Inc., Case No. 2:19-cv-00493 (E.D. Wisc., Filed April 5, 2019), the Hon. Judge Pamela Pepper entered an order granting expedited non-dispositive joint motion pursuant to Civil L.R. 7(h) for extension of time. -- The court orders that the time for the consolidated plaintiffs to file their motions for final collective certification and for class certification is extended until the end of the day on October 10, 2023. -- The court vacates the current September 19, 2023, summary judgment deadline. -- The court approves the parties' agreement to file a joint status report by December 22, 2023, indicating the results of the December 15, 2023, mediation and, if necessary, proposing new deadlines for the completion of discovery and filing of dispositive motions. The suit alleges violation of Fair Labor Standards Act. Woodman's Food owns and operates supermarkets. The Company offers liquors, clothing, automotive, housewares, and food products.[CC] ********* 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 ***