/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/231017.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Tuesday, October 17, 2023, Vol. 25, No. 208
Headlines
3M COMPANY: Pagliaroni Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Foams
3M COMPANY: Palaio Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Foams
3M COMPANY: Palmer Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina
3M COMPANY: Salatti Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Sanders Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Slaughter Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
3M COMPANY: Tabb Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina
ABSTRACT ASSOCIATES: Brannon Files Suit in M.D. Pennsylvania
AETNA INTERNATIONAL: T.E. Suit Transferred to S.D. Florida
AG GEAR LLC: Luis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
ALLSTATE INSURANCE: Cleveland Seeks Proper Wages for Adjusters
AMERITA HOLDING: Faces Data Breach Class Action in Calif.
BAYER HEALTHCARE: Kasparie Sue Over Ineffective Decongestants
BINANCE.US: Faces Class Action Over Role in FTX Collapse
EXELA TECHNOLOGIES: $5MM Class Settlement to be Heard on Dec. 7
FENDER MUSICAL: Faces Class Suit Over Price Fixing
FIRSTENERGY SERVICE: Sued Over Illegal Pay-to-Pay Fees
FORD MOTOR: Butler et al. Sue Over 10-Speed Transmission Defect
GRANITE CITY, IL: Issues Citation Without Proper Notice, Suit Says
HENRY FORD: Faces Class Action Over ADA Violations
HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL: Faces Data Breach Class Action
INTER-STAT INC: Fillmore Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
JOLIET CALIFORNIA: Vratil Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
JONES LANG: Serra Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages
JUST KIDS: Faces Class Action Over Alleged Data Breach
LIFEBRIDGE HEALTH: Janetis Sues Over Meal Break Deduction Policy
MEDICAL PROPERTIES: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Appointment Due Nov 28
METROMILE INC: Settles Parker Data Breach Class Suit for $775,000
MIDWEST GERIATRIC: Crawford Seeks Proper Overtime Wages
MURRAY BEIRNE: Faces FDCPA Suit Over Misleading Itemization Date
NORTHWELL HEALTH: Kapla and Zurl Sue Over Private Info Disclosures
NURTURE INC: Judge Tosses Baby Food Labeling Class Action Suit
PHENOM PEOPLE: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime Wages, Downey Says
PURFOODS LLC: Alexander Sues Over Failure to Safeguard PII
PURFOODS LLC: Avant Files Suit in D. South Carolina
PURFOODS LLC: Clements Files Suit in S.D. Iowa
PURFOODS LLC: Keritsis Files Suit in S.D. Iowa
SUNOPTA GRAIN: Foote Seeks Proper Overtime Wages
TARENA INTERNATIONAL: $3.5M Class Settlement to be Heard Jan. 18
TEACHERS INSURANCE: Newman Files Suit in S.D. New York
TERRAFORM LABS: Investors Voluntary Dismiss Class Action
TESLA INC: Averts Class Action Over Autopilot Features
TOTAL QUALITY: Violates Federal Labor Law, Court Ruling Says
ZEMPLEO INC: Furman Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
*********
3M COMPANY: Pagliaroni Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Foams
--------------------------------------------------------
Jack Pagliaroni, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE 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.), Case No.
2:23-cv-04375-RMG (D.S.C., Aug. 30, 2023), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, 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 products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with
leukemia cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Phone: 631-600-0000
Facsimile: 631-543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
3M COMPANY: Palaio Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Foams
----------------------------------------------------
Louis Palaio, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE 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.), Case No.
2:23-cv-04372-RMG (D.S.C., Aug. 30, 2023), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, 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 products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with
colorectal cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Phone: 631-600-0000
Facsimile: 631-543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
3M COMPANY: Palmer Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina
--------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Walter Palmer, et al., and others similarly
situated v. 3M COMPANY; AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS, INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S., INC., ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC; CHEMGUARD,
INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E. I. DU PONT
DE NEMOURS & CO.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC.; FIRE-DEX, LLC; GLOBE
MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.;
JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; LION GROUP, INC.; MINE
SAFETY APPLIANCE COMPANY LLC; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE
PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; STEDFAST USA, INC.; TEN
CATE PROTECTIVE FABRICS USA D/B/A SOUTHERN MILLS INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY LLC.; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, L.P.; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES,
INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-01060 was transferred from the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of Alabama, to the U.S. District
Court for the District of South Carolina on Sept. 27, 2023.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:23-cv-04823-RMG to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Personal Injury.
3M Company is an American multinational conglomerate operating in
the fields of industry, worker safety, healthcare, and consumer
goods.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
The Defendants are represented by:
Harlan Irby Prater, IV, Esq.
M. Christian King, Esq.
Wesley B Gilchrist, Esq.
William Larkin Radney, IV, Esq.
LIGHTFOOT FRANKLIN AND WHITE LLC
400 20th Street North
Birmingham, AL 35203
Phone: (205) 581-0700
Fax: (205) 581-0799
Email: hprater@lightfootlaw.com
cking@lightfootlaw.com
wgilchrist@lightfootlaw.com
lradney@lightfootlaw.com
3M COMPANY: Salatti Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
------------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony Salatti, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE 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.), Case No.
2:23-cv-04377-RMG (D.S.C., Aug. 30, 2023), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, 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 products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with
thyroid cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Phone: 631-600-0000
Facsimile: 631-543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
3M COMPANY: Sanders Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
-------------------------------------------------------------
Troy Sanders, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE 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.), Case No.
2:23-cv-04832-RMG (D.S.C., Sept. 27, 2023), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, 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 products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with
testicular cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Phone: 631-600-0000
Facsimile: 631-543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
3M COMPANY: Slaughter Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Rodney Slaughter, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE 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.), Case No.
2:23-cv-04370-RMG (D.S.C., Aug. 30, 2023), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, 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 products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with
bladder cancer and thyroid cancer as a result of exposure to
Defendants' AFFF products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Phone: 631-600-0000
Facsimile: 631-543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
3M COMPANY: Tabb Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina
------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Jimmy Tabb, et al., and others similarly
situated v. 3M COMPANY; AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS, INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S., INC., ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC; CHEMGUARD,
INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E. I. DU PONT
DE NEMOURS & CO.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC.; FIRE-DEX, LLC; GLOBE
MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.;
JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; LION GROUP, INC.; MINE
SAFETY APPLIANCE COMPANY LLC; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE
PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; STEDFAST USA, INC.; TEN
CATE PROTECTIVE FABRICS USA D/B/A SOUTHERN MILLS INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY LLC.; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, L.P.; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES,
INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-01061 was transferred from the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of Alabama, to the U.S. District
Court for the District of South Carolina on Sept. 27, 2023.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:23-cv-04824-RMG to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Personal Injury.
3M Company is an American multinational conglomerate operating in
the fields of industry, worker safety, healthcare, and consumer
goods.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
The Defendants are represented by:
Harlan Irby Prater, IV, Esq.
M. Christian King, Esq.
Wesley B Gilchrist, Esq.
William Larkin Radney, IV, Esq.
LIGHTFOOT FRANKLIN AND WHITE LLC
400 20th Street North
Birmingham, AL 35203
Phone: (205) 581-0700
Fax: (205) 581-0799
Email: hprater@lightfootlaw.com
cking@lightfootlaw.com
wgilchrist@lightfootlaw.com
lradney@lightfootlaw.com
ABSTRACT ASSOCIATES: Brannon Files Suit in M.D. Pennsylvania
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Abstract Associates
of Lancaster, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Michael Brannon,
individually and on behalf of those similarly situated v. Abstract
Associates of Lancaster, Inc., William Stull, Case No.
1:23-cv-01627-JPW (M.D. Pa., Oct. 2, 2023).
The nature of suit is state as Other Contract.
Abstract Associates of Lancaster, Inc. --
https://www.abstractassociates.com/ -- offering title insurance for
mortgage closings.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
D. Aaron Rihn, Esq.
ROBERT PEIRCE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
2500 Gulf Tower
707 Grant Street
Pittsburgh, PA 15219-1918
Phone: (412) 281-7229
Email: arihn@peircelaw.com
- and -
Jonathan F. Andres, Esq.
JONATHAN F. ANDRES P.C.
1127 Hoot Owl
St. Louis, MO 63005
Phone: (636) 633-1208
Email: andres@andreslawpc.com
AETNA INTERNATIONAL: T.E. Suit Transferred to S.D. Florida
----------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as T.E., individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. AETNA International LLC, Aetna Inc., Aetna
Health Management, Inc., Aetna Health Inc., AETNA Corporate
Services LLC, Aetna Resources LLC, NationsBenefits LLC,
NationsBenefits Holdings LLC, Case No. 3:23-cv-00303 was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Western District
of Missouri, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of Florida on Oct. 2, 2023.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 0:23-cv-61876-RS to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.
Aetna International Inc. -- http://www.aetnainternational.com/--
provides insurance products and related services. The Company
offers range of services including medical, pharmacy, dental, group
life, long term care and disability plans, and other products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John Anthony Love, Esq.
LOVE CONSUMER LAW
2500 Northwinds Parkway, Suite 330
Alpharetta, GA 30009
Phone: (404) 855-3600
Email: tlove@loveconsumerlaw.com
- and -
Sharon Jessica Zinns, Esq.
ZINNS LAW, LLC
4243 Dunwoody Club Drive, Suite 104
Atlanta, GA 30350
Phone: (404) 882-9002
Email: sharon@zinnslaw.com
- and -
Lucy McShane, Esq.
Maureen M. Brady, Esq.
MCSHANE & BRADY LLC
1656 Washington Street Suite 140
Kansas City, MO 64108
Phone: (816) 888-8010
Email: lmcshane@mcshanebradylaw.com
mbrady@mcshanebradylaw.com
AG GEAR LLC: Luis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against AG Gear LLC. The case
is styled as Kevin Yan Luis, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. AG Gear LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-08662
(S.D.N.Y., Oct. 2, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
AG GEAR -- https://www.aggearstore.com/ -- manufacturers of farm
equipment for Hay, Forestry, Tillage, Snow and Mowers, tractor and
skid steer attachments.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Noor Abou-Saab, I, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF NOOR A. SAAB
380 North Broadway, Suite 300
Jericho, NY 11753
Phone: (718) 740-5060
Email: noorasaablaw@gmail.com
ALLSTATE INSURANCE: Cleveland Seeks Proper Wages for Adjusters
--------------------------------------------------------------
DJAVAN CLEVELAND, on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY and ALLSTATE INSURANCE
HOLDINGS, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-08107 (C.D. Cal., Sept.
27, 2023) alleges that the Defendants violated the Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938; applicable California Labor Code provisions;
applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders; the Unfair
Business Practices Act; and California Business and Professions
Code.
Plaintiff Djavan Cleveland worked for Allstate as an virtual triage
adjuster in Los Angeles, CA from May 29, 2022, until August 4,
2023. In his class action complaint, Plaintiff challenges the
Defendants' policies and practices of: (1) failing to pay
non-exempt, hourly employees who work as Adjusters for all hours
worked; (2) failing to pay required minimum wage; (3) failing to
pay required overtime wages; (4) failing to authorize, permit,
and/or make meal and rest periods available, and failing to pay
premium pay for these missed breaks; (5) failing to provide
accurate, itemized wage statements; and (6) failing to pay all
wages after termination of employment.
Headquartered in Northbrook, Illinois, Allstate offers vehicle
insurance, property insurance, and business insurance. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Carolyn H. Cottrell, Esq.
David C. Leimbach, Esq.
Scott L. Gordon, Esq.
SCHNEIDER WALLACE COTTRELL KONECKY LLP
2000 Powell Street, Suite 1400
Emeryville, CA 94608
Telephone: (415) 421-7100
Facsimile: (415) 421-7105
E-mail: ccottrell@schneiderwallace.com
dleimbach@schneiderwallace.com
sgordon@schneiderwallace.com
AMERITA HOLDING: Faces Data Breach Class Action in Calif.
---------------------------------------------------------
Steve Alder, writing for The HIPAA Journal, reports that the
specialty infusion company Amerita is facing a class action lawsuit
over a recent cyberattack and data breach at its parent company,
PharMerica. On September 5, 2023, suspicious activity was detected
within the computer networks of PharMerica and Amerita. The
forensic investigation confirmed that an unauthorized third party
gained access to its systems between March 12 and March 13, 2023,
and potentially accessed the sensitive data of 5.8 million
individuals. PharMerica reported the breach on behalf of itself and
its parent company, BrightSpring Health Services.
The personal and protected health information of almost 220,000
Amerita patients was also compromised in the attack, including
names, addresses, diagnoses, medications, and health insurance
information. The Money Message ransomware group claimed
responsibility for the attack and claimed on its data leak site to
have stolen 4.7 terabytes of data, and then proceeded to leak
certain files, some of which contained patient data.
Class action lawsuits have already been filed against PharMerica
over the data breach, and now a lawsuit has been filed against
Amerita on behalf of plaintiff Andrew Rose and similarly situated
individuals who had their PHI stolen in the attack. Amerita is
alleged to have failed to implement reasonable and appropriate
security measures to protect the sensitive data of its patients
against unauthorized access, in violation of the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act, and is also alleged to have
unnecessarily delayed the issuing of notification letters to
affected individuals. The breach was discovered on March 13, 2023,
but it took until September 2, 2023, for notifications to be
issued.
The lawsuit claims the plaintiff has suffered an actual injury due
to the data breach, including damages to and diminution in the
value of his sensitive information, loss of privacy, imminent and
impending injury from the increased risk of identity theft and
fraud, and time and money spent mitigating the effects of the data
breach. The plaintiff claims the theft of his personal information
and the knowledge that it may now have been listed for sale on the
dark web has caused him great anxiety due to the risk of identity
theft and fraud.
The 9-count lawsuit alleges negligence, invasion of privacy, breach
of implied contract, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of
confidence, and violations of California's Confidentiality of
Medical Information Act, California Consumer Privacy Act,
California Unfair Competition Law, and the California Customer
Records Act. The lawsuit seeks class action status, a jury trial,
compensatory, statutory, and nominal damages, legal costs, and an
order from the court prohibiting Amerita from engaging in wrongful
and unlawful practices. The lawsuit also seeks an order from the
court for Amerita to implement several cybersecurity measures to
ensure patient data is properly protected in the future. [GN]
BAYER HEALTHCARE: Kasparie Sue Over Ineffective Decongestants
-------------------------------------------------------------
MICHELE KASPARIE and KIMBERLY JAMES, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Bayer Healthcare LLC,
GlaxoSmithKline LLC, Kenvue Inc., McNeil Consumer Healthcare,
Procter & Gamble Company, Target Corporation, and Walmart Inc.,
Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-03783-KNS (E.D. Pa., Sept. 27, 2023)
alleges claims against the Defendants for, among other things,
breach of express warranties, breach of implied warranties, fraud
by omission or concealment, negligent misrepresentation, and
violations of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.
On September 12, 2023, an FDA advisory panel confirmed that
phenylephrine, when taken orally, is not effective. Meanwhile,
Defendants and drug companies comprising the oral decongestant
industry, knew and certainly had reason to know, at all times
material that their oral decongestant products, more fully
identified and discussed below, were no more effective than a
placebo such as a sugar pill.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and all other
purchasers of Defendants' phenylephrine based oral decongestant
products, hereby seek to hold the Defendants accountable for their
deceptions, breaches of warranties, and violations of relevant
state or federal consumer protection statutes.
Procter & Gamble Company is an Ohio corporation with its principal
place of business and headquarters located at One Procter & Gamble
Plaza in Cincinnati, OH. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jeffrey W. Golan, Esq.
Jeffrey A. Barrack, Esq.
Andrew J. Heo, Esq.
BARRACK, RODOS & BACINE
3300 Two Commerce Square
2001 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 963-0600
Facsimile: (215) 963-0838
E-mail: jgolan@barrack.com
jbarrack@barrack.com
aheo@barrack.com
- and -
Stephen R. Basser, Esq.
Samuel M. Ward, Esq.
BARRACK RODOS & BACINE
One America Plaza
600 West Broadway, Suite 900
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 230-0800
BINANCE.US: Faces Class Action Over Role in FTX Collapse
--------------------------------------------------------
Jalpa Bhavsar, writing for The Crypto Times, reports that a
class-action lawsuit was filed against Binance.US and its CEO,
Changpeng Zhao, on October 2 in the Northern California District
Court by Nir Laav, a California resident. A lawsuit alleges that
Binance.US and its CEO violated federal and California laws on
unfair competition by trying to dominate the cryptocurrency market
and damaging their competitor, FTX.
On the eve of FTX's collapse, Zhao made posts in conjunction with
the decision by the defendant to liquidate their holdings in FTX
utility token FTT on Nov. 6. The plaintiffs' estimation suggests
that Binance owned approximately 5% of all FTT tokens.
According to Zhao's post the next day, Binance had signed a letter
of purpose to acquire FTX, but it withdrew from the agreement a day
later. As per the lawsuit, "Zhao publicly disseminated this
information [on the withdrawal of the acquisition offer] on Twitter
and other social media platforms to hurt FTX entities, which
ultimately led to a rushed and unprecedented collapse of FTX
entities."
On November 6, Zhao made a post citing that they planned to
liquidate any remaining FTT on their books due to a revelation.
However, this statement was false and misleading because Binanae
had already sold its FTT holdings, and the post was "intended to
cause the price of FTT in the market to decline."
The plaintiffs interpreted the latter sentence as an indication
that Binance was against the "regulatory efforts" of FTX CEO Sam
Bankman-Fried.
According to the lawsuit, "Zhao's tweet resulted in the FTT price
declining from US 23.1510 to US 3.1468. This significant drop
plummeted FTX Entities into bankruptcy without giving an
opportunity or chance to FTX Entities' executives and board of
directors a chance [sic] to salvage the situation and put in safe
guards to protect its clients and end-users."
As per the lawsuit, the plaintiff estimates that the proposed class
has thousands of members. The plaintiff has proposed a nationwide
class including all persons or entities in the United States, who,
within the applicable statute of limitations period, had any fiat
or cryptocurrency deposited or invested through an FTX trading
platform during the time period of volatility starting before
November 6, 2022 and ending after November 8, 2022.
The lawsuit filed seeks seven counts of monetary damages, court
costs, and the return of illegally acquired wealth while the SEC is
currently taking action against both FTX and Binance. [GN]
EXELA TECHNOLOGIES: $5MM Class Settlement to be Heard on Dec. 7
---------------------------------------------------------------
A SUMMARY NOTICE IS PRESENTED OF (I) PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION AND
PROPOSED SETTLEMENT; (II) SETTLEMENT FAIRNESS HEARING; AND (III)
MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT OF
LITIGATION EXPENSES IN THE CASE:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS
DIVISION
BO SHEN, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, Plaintiffs, v
EXELA TECHNOLOGIES, INC., RONALD COGBURN, JAMES G. REYNOLDS, and
PARCHADHA, Defendants, Case No. 3:20-cv-00691-D
TO: All persons and entities who, during the period between March
16, 2018 and March 16, 2020, inclusive, purchased or otherwise
acquired the publicly traded common stock of Exela Technologies,
Inc. ("Exela"), and were damaged thereby (the "Settlement
Class"):1
PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY, YOUR RIGHTS WILL BE AFFECTED BY
A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT PENDING IN THIS COURT.
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure and an Order of the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas, that the above-captioned
litigation (the "Action") has been certified as a class action on
behalf of the Settlement Class, except for certain persons and
entities who are excluded from the Settlement Class by definition
as set forth in the full Notice of (I) Pendency of Class Action,
Certification of Settlement Class, and Proposed Settlement; (II)
Settlement Fairness Hearing; and (III) Motion for an Award of
Attorneys' Fees and Reimbursement of Litigation Expenses (the
"Notice").
YOU ARE ALSO NOTIFIED that the Lead Plaintiff in the Action has
reached a proposed settlement of the Action for $5,000,000 in cash
(the "Settlement"), that, if approved, will resolve all claims in
the Action.
A hearing will be held on December 7, 2023 at 10:00 a.m., before
the Honorable Sidney A. Fitzwater at the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Texas, United States Courthouse,
Courtroom 1351, 1100 Commerce Street, Dallas, Texas 75242-1003, to
determine (i) whether the proposed Settlement should be approved as
fair, reasonable, and adequate; (ii) whether the Action should be
dismissed with prejudice against Defendants, and the Releases
specified and described in the Stipulation (and in the Notice)
should be granted; (iii) whether the proposed Plan of Allocation
should be approved as fair and reasonable; and (iv) whether Lead
Counsel's application for an award of attorneys' fees and
reimbursement of Litigation Expenses should be approved.
If you are a member of the Settlement Class, your rights will be
affected by the pending Action and the Settlement, and you may be
entitled to share in the Settlement Fund. The Notice and Proof of
Claim and Release Form ("Claim Form"), can be downloaded from the
website maintained by the Claims Administrator,
www.ExelaSecuritiesLitigation.com. You may also obtain copies of
the Notice and Claim Form by contacting the Claims Administrator at
Exela Tech. Securities Litigation, c/o Epiq Class Action & Claims
Solutions, Inc., P.O. Box 2147, Portland, OR 97208-2147,
1-888-306-3146.
If you are a member of the Settlement Class, in order to be
eligible to receive a payment under the proposed Settlement, you
must submit a Claim Form postmarked no later than January 24, 2024.
If you are a Settlement Class Member and do not submit a proper
Claim Form, you will not be eligible to share in the distribution
of the net proceeds of the Settlement but you will nevertheless be
bound by any judgments or orders entered by the Court in the
Action.
If you are a member of the Settlement Class and wish to exclude
yourself from the Settlement Class, you must submit a request for
exclusion such that it is received no later than November 16, 2023,
in accordance with the instructions set forth in the Notice. If you
properly exclude yourself from the Settlement Class, you will not
be bound by any judgments or orders entered by the Court in the
Action and you will not be eligible to share in the proceeds of the
Settlement.
Any objections to the proposed Settlement, the proposed Plan of
Allocation, or Lead Counsel's motion for attorneys' fees and
reimbursement of expenses, must be filed with the Court and
delivered to Lead Counsel and Defendants' Counsel such that they
are received no later than November 16, 2023, in accordance with
the instructions set forth in the Notice.
Please do not contact the Court, the Clerk's office, Exela, or its
counsel regarding this notice. All questions about this notice, the
proposed Settlement, or your eligibility to participate in the
Settlement should be directed to Lead Counsel or the Claims
Administrator.
Inquiries, other than requests for the Notice and Claim Form,
should be made to Lead Counsel:
GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
Kara M. Wolke, Esq.
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90067
(310) 201-9150
info@glancylaw.com
Requests for the Notice and Claim Form should be made to:
Exela Tech. Securities Litigation
c/o Epiq Class Action & Claims Solutions, Inc.
P.O. Box 2147
Portland, OR 97208-2147
888-306-3146
www.ExelaSecuritiesLitigation.com
By Order of the Court
1 All capitalized terms used in this Summary Notice that are not
otherwise defined herein have the meanings ascribed to them in the
Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement dated July 27, 2023 (the
"Stipulation"), which is available at
www.ExelaSecuritiesLitigation.com.
URL: www.ExelaSecuritiesLitigation.com [GN]
FENDER MUSICAL: Faces Class Suit Over Price Fixing
--------------------------------------------------
Rachel Roberts of Guitar.com reports that instrument manufacturers
Fender, Yamaha, Korg, Roland and Casio are facing a class-action
lawsuit due to 2019 and 2020 rulings by the Competition and Markets
Authority (CMA) that found they had engaged in price fixing.
Resale Price Maintenance (RPM), or vertical price fixing, is
defined by the CMA as when "a supplier requires a retailer not to
sell below a certain price," and explains that "the goal is to keep
prices artificially high, so consumers are then robbed of a fair
deal."
The claims have been launched by legal firm Pogust Goodhead and
consumer rights campaigner Elisabetta Sciallis, according to Guitar
World. The action occurs in an effort to gain compensation for
customers who bought instruments from the named manufacturers
during specific timeframes.
Any UK customer who purchased instruments or accessories from the
following companies between the dates below is automatically
enrolled in the relevant class action claim. These dates and
manufacturers are as follows:
Fender: 2013-2019
Yamaha: 2013-2018
Roland: 2011-2019
Korg: 2015-2019
Casio: 2015-2019
During the dates affected, Yamaha's brands also included Line 6 and
Ampeg, while Roland has ownership of Boss, and Korg owns Vox and
Takamine.
Similarly, a class action lawsuit was also previously launched
against Fender back in 2022 in regards to a 2020 ruling from the
CMA which found the brand had engaged in price fixing. It was
ordered to pay a fine of GBP4.5 million.
In 2020, the CMA also ruled that Roland, Korg and Yamaha had
engaged in price fixing in the UK market, and issued fines of over
GBP4 million to Roland and GBP1.5 million to Korg. Yamaha was
granted immunity from these fines, but not the class action, after
cooperating with the investigation. Casio was fined GBP3.7 million
in 2019.
Guitar.com has reached out to all five manufacturers regarding the
new class-action lawsuit for comment. [GN]
FIRSTENERGY SERVICE: Sued Over Illegal Pay-to-Pay Fees
------------------------------------------------------
Kelsey McCroskey, writing for ClassAction.org, reports that
FirstEnergy Service Company faces a proposed class action that
claims the electric utility provider charges West Virginia
customers who make payments online or by phone illegal "pay-to-pay"
fees.
The 14-page lawsuit says the defendant, a subsidiary of major
utility company FirstEnergy Corporation, "routinely" violates state
law by "deceptively" collecting "E-Z Pay" fees, convenience fees or
processing fees each time a consumer uses online or telephone
payment systems to pay a bill.
The "pay-to-pay" fees are not approved by the Public Service
Commission, a state agency that regulates public utilities, nor
does any law or customer contract authorize FirstEnergy to assess
such charges, the suit contends.
The case alleges that although the company represents the
"inflated" fees as service charges to cover the cost of collecting
and processing consumer payments, the defendant, in fact, pays
"next to nothing" for this procedure.
"These fees 'nickel and dime' FirstEnergy's captive consumers while
providing hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue to it, even
though consumers' agreements with FirstEnergy do not expressly
provide for the fees and no law authorizes charging them," the
complaint argues.
The plaintiff, a FirstEnergy customer in West Virginia, says she
was charged "pay-to-pay" fees ranging from $4 to $16.77 each time
she paid her bill online or by phone using the company's E-Z Pay
payment system.
"The fees charged can add up to hundreds of dollars over the life
of a single customer's account, providing FirstEnergy with hundreds
of thousands of dollars in profit (if not more)," the filing
stresses.
The lawsuit looks to represent anyone who had a FirstEnergy
residential utility agreement on a West Virginia property and paid
a fee for making a payment online or by phone to the defendant
within four years prior to the date a class is certified. [GN]
FORD MOTOR: Butler et al. Sue Over 10-Speed Transmission Defect
---------------------------------------------------------------
CAITLIN BUTLER, SHANNON HARTMAN, PABLO MARTINEZ, AMANDA SIMMONS,
AND STEVE JONESON, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Defendant,
Case No. 2:23-cv-08070 (C.D. Cal., Sept. 27, 2023) alleges claims
against the Defendants for breach of express warranty, fraudulent
concealment, negligence, unjust enrichment, and for violations of
the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty
Act, the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and the California Unfair
Competition Law.
The Plaintiffs bring this case individually and on behalf of all
similarly situated persons who purchased or leased a Ford vehicle
equipped with a 10R80 10-speed transmission that was designed,
manufactured, distributed, advertised, marketed, sold, and/or
leased by Ford or Ford’s parent, subsidiary, or affiliates.
According to the complaint, Ford Expeditions, Mustangs, Rangers,
F-150s, and Lincoln Navigators equipped with the 10R80 from at
least 2017 to present contain one or more design and/or
manufacturing defects, including but not limited to defects
contained in the Vehicles' 10R80, a 10-speed automatic transmission
that can shift harshly and erratically, causing the vehicle to
jerk, lunge, clunk, hesitate, surge, or slip between gears. Ford
knew or should have known that the Class Vehicles were and are
defective, suffer from the Transmission Defect, and are not fit for
their intended purpose of providing consumers with safe and
reliable transportation. Nevertheless, Ford failed to disclose this
defect to Plaintiffs and Class Members at the time of purchase or
lease, or thereafter, the suit says.
Headquartered in Dearborn, MI, Ford Motor Company is a publicly
traded corporation organized under the laws of the State of
Delaware with The Corporation Trust Company, Corporation Trust
Center, 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, Delaware 19801 as its
registered agent. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Leland H. Belew, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC
280 S. Beverly Drive
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Telephone: (312) 224-8685
Facsimile: (865) 522-0049
E-mail: lbelew@milberg.com
- and -
Gregory F. Coleman, Esq.
Ryan P. McMillan, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC
800 S. Gay Street, Suite 1100
Knoxville, TN 37929
Telephone: (865) 247-0080
Facsimile: (865) 522-0049
E-mail: astraus@milberg.com
lbelew@milberg.com
gcoleman@milberg.com
rmcmillan@milberg.com
- and -
Mitchell Breit, Esq.
Tyler Litke, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC
405 E. 50th Street
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (630) 796-0903
E-mail: mbreit@milberg.com
tlitke@milberg.com
- and -
John R. Fabry, Esq.
THE CARLSON LAW FIRM, P.C.
1717 N. Interstate Highway 35, Suite 305
Round Rock, TX 78664
Telephone: (512) 671-7277
Facsimile: (512) 238-0275
E-mail: JFabry@carlsonattorneys.com
- and -
Sidney F. Robert, Esq.
BRENT COON AND ASSOCIATES
300 Fannin, Suite 200
Houston, TX 77002
Telephone: (713) 225-1682
Facsimile: (713) 225-1785
E-mail: sidney.robert@bcoonlaw.com
- and -
Mark R. Miller, Esq.
WALLACE MILLER LLP
150 N. Wacker Dr., Suite 1100
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 589-6280
Facsimile: (312) 275-8174
E-mail: mrm@wallacemiller.com
GRANITE CITY, IL: Issues Citation Without Proper Notice, Suit Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Nghiem, writing for The Madison-St. Clair Record, reports that
Granite City resident is suing the city for allegedly fining him
$600 without proper notice over a broken-down vehicle parked on a
public street.
Plaintiff Kevin Link filed a class action lawsuit in the Madison
County Circuit Court against the City of Granite City.
According to the lawsuit, Granite City issued Link a citation for a
nonworking vehicle that was parked on Iowa Street. Link claims he
never received notice of this citation and Granite City never
served him a warrant or summons by personal service, certified
mail, or any other legally recognized form of delivery as required.
The lawsuit states that the record of the case shows no service or
process whatsoever.
On July 14, Granite City notified Link that he had been found
liable for a code violation in a May 8 municipal hearing and that
he was being fined $600. The notice was issued more than 35 days
after the hearing, so Link claims he had no chance to file an
appeal and threatened legal action against the plaintiff if payment
was not made within 30 days.
Link states that Granite City issued the fine without mandatory
statutory service of the process. According to Link, the notice
system used by Granite City is illegal and violates state law by
failing to provide personal or certified mail service and then
proceeding with the case regardless of whether service was provided
or not.
The plaintiff is seeking damages for himself and everyone in the
proposed class for an amount in excess of $50,000, plus court
costs, attorneys fees, and any other relief the court deems proper.
He is represented in this case by attorney Thomas G. Maag of the
Maag Law Firm in Wood River.
Madison County Circuit Court case number 2023LA001092 [GN]
HENRY FORD: Faces Class Action Over ADA Violations
--------------------------------------------------
Kelly Mehorter, writing for ClassAction.org, reports that a
proposed class action claims Henry Ford Health and Henry Ford
Medical Group discriminate against employees over the age of 70 by
requiring them to undergo a cognition screening despite having no
"reasonable basis" to perform such an evaluation.
The 16-page case explains that the healthcare organization, as of
July 2017, has enforced a senior and bioscientific staff "fitness
for duty" policy whereby employees who have reached 70 must
complete a "screening assessment for cognition." For Henry Ford
Medical Group employees over 75 years old, the evaluation is
performed annually, the lawsuit says.
The complaint relays that employees who require further evaluation
must see an "independent assessor" for a full fitness-for-duty
evaluation, and staff who fail to comply with the age-based
screening requirement must voluntarily resign or be terminated, the
case states.
According to the filing, Henry Ford Health and Henry Ford Medical
Group have run afoul of the federal Age Discrimination in
Employment Act by "limiting, segregating, or classifying" employees
due to their ages in a way that would deprive them of employment
opportunities or otherwise adversely affect their status as
employees.
The plaintiff, an 84-year-old ophthalmologist who has worked for
Henry Ford Health since 1995, says she has been required to attend
an annual cognition assessment solely because she was over 75 years
old when the defendants began enforcing the fitness-for-duty
policy.
Henry Ford Health and Henry Ford Medical Group, in apparent
violation of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, subjected
the plaintiff and other similarly situated employees to medical
examinations without having a "reasonable basis" for believing that
they were "unable to perform the essential functions of their jobs
or that they posed a direct threat to their own safety or the
safety of others," the case alleges.
Finally, the complaint accuses the defendants of violating the
Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act by subjecting employees
to a "prohibited acquisition" of genetic information.
The case contends that the companies' unlawful discrimination based
on age, disability and genetic information has caused employees
"emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, [and] mental anguish."
The lawsuit looks to represent current and former employees who
were subject to the Henry Ford Medical Group senior and
bioscientific staff fitness-for-duty policy. [GN]
HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL: Faces Data Breach Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------
Kelly Mehorter, writing for ClassAction.org, reports that a
proposed class action alleges Honeywell International failed to
protect individuals' private information from a May 2023 data
breach.
The 40-page case says that after Honeywell, a North Carolina-based
technology and manufacturing company, detected "unusual activity"
on some of its computer systems in early June 2023, a subsequent
investigation revealed that an unauthorized party had gained access
to certain files that contained sensitive information on May 27 of
this year.
According to the lawsuit, the defendant waited until September 13
to inform affected individuals of the incident and disclose that
their names and Social Security numbers may have been impacted.
"As a result of this delayed response, [the plaintiffs and class
members] had no idea for over three months that their Private
Information had been compromised, and that they were, and continue
to be, at significant risk of identity theft and various other
forms of personal, social, and financial harm," the complaint
stresses. "The risk will remain for their respective lifetimes."
Honeywell's notice letter indicates that the data breach
compromised information related to a pension plan the company was
administering and occurred amid the widespread cyberattack on
MOVEit, a popular file transfer tool.
The filing contends the cyberattack was a result of Honeywell's
failure to implement adequate data security practices and properly
monitor the computer network and systems that housed highly
sensitive data.
Per the complaint, Honeywell was "at all times fully aware" of its
legal obligation to safeguard consumers' private information from
the "known risk" of a data breach, yet nevertheless maintained such
data in a condition that was "vulnerable to an attack."
What's more, the defendant has offered no assurance to victims that
all personal data or copies of data exposed in the breach have been
recovered or destroyed or that the company has since enhanced its
cybersecurity practices to prevent future attacks, the case says.
The complaint notes that one plaintiff, a Minnesota resident who
received a notice letter informing her that her data was exposed
during the breach, was employed by Honeywell over 25 years ago.
Another plaintiff, a Kentucky resident who also received a notice
letter from Honeywell, says he has no idea how the company obtained
his private information.
The lawsuit looks to represent anyone in the United States who had
private information accessed and/or acquired as a result of the
data breach experienced by Honeywell International, including all
who were sent a notice of the incident. [GN]
INTER-STAT INC: Fillmore Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Inter-Stat, Inc., et
al. The case is styled as Jacob Fillmore, and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Inter-Stat, Inc., et al., Case No.
23CV009170 (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Sept. 27, 2023).
Inter Stat Cooperative, Inc. is a health, wellness and fitness
company.[BN]
JOLIET CALIFORNIA: Vratil Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------------
John Vratil, individually and on behalf of all other aggrieved
employees v. JOLIET CALIFORNIA, LLC, a Limited Liability Company,
and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 23SMCV04124 (Cal. Super.
Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Aug. 31, 2023), is brought against the
Defendant as a result of unpaid minimum and overtime wages.
The Plaintiff and all other persons similarly situated who worked
for Defendants in their California locations as non-exempt, hourly
employees (herein collectively identified as "Aggrieved Employees")
for: failure to provide employment records in violation of Labor
Code; failure to pay overtime and double time in violation of Labor
Code and the applicable Wage Orders; failure to provide rest and
meal periods in violation of Labor Code and the applicable Wage
Orders; failure to pay minimum wage in violation of Labor Code and
the applicable Wage Orders; failure to keep accurate payroll
records and provide itemized wage statements in violation of Labor
Code and the applicable Wage Orders; failure to pay reporting time
wages in violation of California Code of Regulations, Title 8;
failure to pay split shift wages in violation of California Code of
Regulations; failure to pay all wages earned on time in violation
of Labor Code; failure to pay all wages earned upon discharge or
resignation in violation of Labor Code; failure to reimburse
necessary, business-related expenses in violation of Labor Code;
failure to provide notice of paid sick time and accrual in
violation of Labor Code; employers, and individuals acting on
behalf of employers, violating or causing to be violated a section
of the Labor Code or any Wage Order in violation of Labor Code,
says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is an individual who resides in California and
was employed by the Defendant.
The Defendants are a restaurant and bar located in Playa Vista,
California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Haig B. Kazandjian, Esq.
Diana Zadykyan, Esq.
HAIG B. KAZANDJIAN LAWYERS, APC
801 North Brand Boulevard, Suite 970
Glendale, CA 91203
Phone: 1-818-696-2306
Facsimile: 1-818-696-2307
Email: haig@hbklawyers.com
diana@hbklawyers.com
JONES LANG: Serra Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages
----------------------------------------------
John Serra, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Jones Lang LaSalle Americas, Inc.; and Does 1-20,
inclusive, Case No. 23CV042838 (Cal. Super. Ct., Alameda Cty.,
Sept. 6, 2023), is brought to recover unpaid wages, among other
things, alleging that the Defendants have engaged in systematic
pattern of wage and hour violations under the California Labor Code
and Industrial Welfare Commission ("IWC") Wage Orders, all of which
contribute to Defendants' deliberate unfair competition.
The Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that
Defendants have increased their profits by violating state wage and
hour laws by, among other things: Failing to pay all wages for all
hours worked, including minimum and overtime wages; Failing to
provide meal periods or compensation in lieu thereof; Failing to
authorize or permit rest breaks or provide compensation in lieu
thereof; Failing to provide accurate, itemized wage statements; and
Failing to pay all final wages, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendants.
JLL is an Illinois corporation with warehouse locations in
California that provides commercial real estate and investment
management services and provides employment to non-exempt employees
in California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jonathan M. Lebe, Esq.
Zachary Gershman, Esq.
Brielle D. Edborg, Esq
LEBE LAW, APLC
777 S. Alameda Street, Second Floor
511 Los Angeles, CA 90021
Phone: (213) 444-1973
Email: Jon@lebelaw.com
Zachary@lebelaw.com
Brielle@lebelaw.com
JUST KIDS: Faces Class Action Over Alleged Data Breach
-------------------------------------------------------
Kelsey McCroskey, writing for ClassAction.org, reports that a
proposed class action claims pediatric dental care provider Just
Kids Dental failed to protect the private information of more than
129,000 people during an August 2023 cyberattack.
According to a September 1 notice letter, Acadia Health -- which
does business as Just Kids Dental -- learned on August 8 that a
"malicious actor" had infiltrated its computer network and
compromised certain patient and employee data stored in the system.
The notice relays that the targeted cyberattack had occurred days
before, on August 2.
The 48-page lawsuit shares that the data breach exposed the
personal information of current and former employees and patients,
including at least individuals' names, addresses, email addresses,
phone numbers, birth dates, Social Security numbers and driver's
license numbers. Per the suit, the cyberattack also may have
compromised health insurance policy information and treatment data,
such as radiographic images; medical record numbers; account
numbers and health conditions.
Reports say the company was contacted by the cybercriminal group
responsible for the attack, and, after allegedly having their
ransom demands fulfilled, the hackers claimed to have deleted the
data without disseminating it.
Despite the defendant's legal obligation to safeguard the
information in its care, Just Kids Dental failed to implement
reasonable cybersecurity practices to protect the data, which it
allegedly stored in a "vulnerable" and "dangerous condition" in its
computer systems, the case argues.
What's more, the company delayed notifying victims of the breach
until early September of this year, a month after the ransomware
attack occurred, the complaint contends. Though the delay has
exacerbated the harms suffered by impacted individuals, Just Kids
Dental has "offered no explanation" for it, the filing charges.
According to the lawsuit, the defendant has "done absolutely
nothing" as far as providing relief for victims and has yet to
offer complimentary credit or identity monitoring services to
affected individuals.
One of the plaintiffs, the mother of a patient who had visited Just
Kids Dental in the past, received notice in mid-September informing
her that their personal information had been compromised in the
breach, the suit says. Like other victims, the mother and child now
face an increased risk of identity theft, fraud and other illegal
schemes as a result of the defendant's negligence, the case
claims.
The lawsuit looks to represent anyone whose private information was
compromised as a result of the data breach discovered by Just Kids
Dental in August 2023, including those to whom it provided notice
in September 2023. [GN]
LIFEBRIDGE HEALTH: Janetis Sues Over Meal Break Deduction Policy
----------------------------------------------------------------
MEGAN JANETIS, individually and for others similarly situated v.
LIFEBRIDGE HEALTH, INC., Case No. 1:23-cv-02628 (D. Md., Sept. 27,
2023) seeks to recover unpaid wages and other damages from
LifeBridge Health, Inc., which allegedly violated the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Maryland Wage and Hour Law, and the Maryland
Wage Payment and Collective Law.
Plaintiff Janetis worked for LifeBridge as a registered nurse at
LifeBridge's Levendale Hebrew and Geriatric Center in Baltimore, MD
from approximately January 2020 until June 2023. Throughout her
employment, LifeBridge classified Janetis as non-exempt and paid
her on an hourly basis. She was also subjected to the company's
automatic meal break deduction policy even when she and other
employees did not actually receive bona fide, non-interrupted meal
breaks. Accordingly, Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant's policy
violated the FLSA, the MWHL and the MWPCL by depriving her of
proper overtime wages for all overtime hours worked.
LifeBridge is a provider of health-related services with five acute
care centers and nearly 150 locations across Maryland. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Taylor A. Jones, Esq.
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 352-1100
Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
E-mail: tjones@mybackwages.com
mjosephson@mybackwages.com
adunlap@mybackwages.com
- and -
Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 877-8788
Facsimile: (713) 877-8065
E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com
- and -
William C. (Clif) Alexander, Esq.
Austin W. Anderson, Esq.
ANDERSON ALEXANDER PLLC
101 N. Shoreline Blvd., Suite 610
Corpus Christi, TX 78401
Telephone: (361) 452-1279
Facsimile: (361) 452-1284
E-mail: clif@a2xlaw.com
austin@a2xlaw.com
MEDICAL PROPERTIES: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Appointment Due Nov 28
------------------------------------------------------------------
Holzer & Holzer, LLC informs investors that a shareholder class
action lawsuit has been filed against Medical Properties Trust,
Inc. ("MPW" or the "Company") (NYSE: MPW). The lawsuit alleges
MPW made false or misleading statements and/or omitted material
adverse information regarding the Company's business, operations,
and prospects, including: (i) the recapitalization transaction (the
"Recap Transaction") was subject to regulatory approval and had in
fact been placed on hold by the Department of Managed Health Care
of the Health and Human Services Agency of the State of California;
(ii) accordingly, MPW had misrepresented the regulatory process for
the Recap Transaction's approval; and (iii) as a result of the
foregoing, MPW overstated the approval prospects and benefits of
the Recap Transaction.
If you bought shares of MPW between May 23, 2023 and August 17,
2023, and you suffered a significant loss on that investment, you
are encouraged to discuss your legal rights by contacting Corey
Holzer, Esq. at cholzer@holzerlaw.com or Joshua Karr, Esq.
at jkarr@holzerlaw.com, by toll-free telephone at (888) 508-6832
or you may visit the firm's website at
https://holzerlaw.com/case/mpw/ to learn more.
The deadline to ask the court to be appointed lead plaintiff in the
case is November 28, 2023.
Holzer & Holzer, LLC, an ISS top rated securities litigation law
firm for 2021 and 2022, dedicates its practice to vigorous
representation of shareholders and investors in litigation
nationwide, including shareholder class action and derivative
litigation. Since its founding in 2000, Holzer & Holzer attorneys
have played critical roles in recovering hundreds of millions of
dollars for shareholders victimized by fraud and other corporate
misconduct. More information about the firm is available through
its website, www.holzerlaw.com, and upon request from the firm.
Holzer & Holzer, LLC has paid for the dissemination of this
promotional communication, and Corey Holzer is the attorney
responsible for its content.
CONTACT:
Corey Holzer, Esq.
(888) 508-6832 (toll-free)
cholzer@holzerlaw.com [GN]
METROMILE INC: Settles Parker Data Breach Class Suit for $775,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Top Class Actions reports that Metromile agreed to a $775,000
settlement to resolve claims that it failed to prevent a data
breach that lasted from July 2020 to January 2021.
The settlement benefits individuals who received a data breach
notification letter from Metromile informing them that their
information may have been compromised in a data breach between July
2020 and January 2021.
Hackers allegedly gained access to sensitive personal information
for over 100,000 Metromile customers during a long-term data breach
between July 2020 and January 2021. According to plaintiffs in a
data breach class action lawsuit, Metromile failed to prevent and
manage this data breach due to a failure to implement cybersecurity
measures.
Metromile is a car insurance company characterized by its
pay-per-mile structure.
Metromile hasn't admitted any wrongdoing but agreed to a $775,000
settlement to resolve the data breach class action lawsuit.
Under the terms of the settlement, consumers can receive up to
$5,000 in reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses related to the
data breach. This reimbursement covers unreimbursed losses, credit
expenses, lost time and other losses. Instead of this
reimbursement, class members can choose to receive a flat-rate
payment of $30.
The settlement also includes two years of free credit monitoring
services through Experian. These services include dark web
scanning, user notifications, fraud-resolution tools and a $1
million identity theft insurance policy.
The deadline for exclusion and objection is Dec. 21, 2023.
The final approval hearing for the Metromile data breach settlement
is scheduled for Jan. 26, 2024.
To receive settlement benefits, class members must submit a valid
claim form by Dec. 21, 2023.
Who's Eligible
Individuals who received a data breach notification letter from
Metromile informing them that their information may have been
compromised in a data breach between July 2020 and January 2021
Potential Award
$5,000
Proof of Purchase
Documentation of data breach-related expenses, such as a bank
statement showing claimed fees.
Claim Form
CLICK HERE TO FILE A CLAIM »
NOTE: If you do not qualify for this settlement do NOT file a
claim.
Remember: you are submitting your claim under penalty of perjury.
You are also harming other eligible Class Members by submitting a
fraudulent claim. If you're unsure if you qualify, please read the
FAQ section of the Settlement Administrator's website to ensure you
meet all standards (Top Class Actions is not a Settlement
Administrator). If you don't qualify for this settlement, check out
our database of other open class action settlements you may be
eligible for.
Claim Form Deadline
12/21/2023
Case Name
Parker v. Metromile Inc., Case No. 37-2022-00049770-CU-BT-CTL, in
the California Superior Court for San Diego County
Final Hearing
1/26/2024
Settlement Website
MetromileSettlement.com
Claims Administrator
Metromile Data Incident Settlement Administrator
1650 Arch Street, Suite 2210
Philadelphia, PA19103
833-222- 9383
Class Counsel
Anderson Berry
CLAYEO C ARNOLD APC
Rachele R Byrd
WOLF HALDENSTEIN ADLER FREEMAN & HERZ LLP
Defense Counsel
Benjamin H Kleine
Elizabeth Sanchez Santiago
Tiana A Demas
COOLEY LLP [GN]
MIDWEST GERIATRIC: Crawford Seeks Proper Overtime Wages
-------------------------------------------------------
CHELSEA CRAWFORD, individually and for others similarly situated v.
MIDWEST GERIATRIC MANAGEMENT, LLC d/b/a MGM HEALTHCARE, (E.D. Mo.,
Sept. 27, 2023) accuses the Defendant for violations of the Fair
Labor Standards Act.
Plaintiff Crawford worked for MGM Healthcare as a Licensed
Practical Nurse approximately April 2023 until June 2023.
Throughout her employment, MGM Healthcare classified Crawford as
non-exempt and paid her on an hourly basis. However, MGM Healthcare
subjected Crawford to its common practice of automatically
deducting 30 minutes a day from her recorded work time for
so-called meal breaks even though she still required to remain
on-duty and perform compensable work throughout their shifts. She
was also continuously subjected them to work interruptions during
their unpaid "meal breaks," the suit says.
Accordingly, Plaintiff Crawford claims that MGM Healthcare's
auto-deduction policy violated FLSA by depriving her and the
putative class members of overtime wages for all overtime hours
worked.
Headquartered in St. Louis, MO, MGM Healthcare operates nursing
and assisted care facilities across Missouri, Iowa, and
Oklahoma.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
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 -
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 352-1100
Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
adunlap@mybackwages.com
- and -
William C. (Clif) Alexander, Esq.
Austin W. Anderson, Esq.
ANDERSON ALEXANDER PLLC
101 N. Shoreline Blvd., Suite 610
Corpus Christi, TX 78401
Telephone: (361) 452-1279
Facsimile: (361) 452-1284
E-mail: clif@a2xlaw.com
austin@a2xlaw.com
MURRAY BEIRNE: Faces FDCPA Suit Over Misleading Itemization Date
----------------------------------------------------------------
ANGELLA HENRY, individually and on behalf of all those similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. MURRAY, BEIRNE AND ASSOCIATES, INC. D/B/A JP
RMP, Defendant, Case No. CACE-23-018895 (Fla. Cir., 17th Judicial,
Broward Cty., Sept. 27, 2023) alleges violations of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.
Plaintiff Henry accuses the Defendant of violating FDCPA by using
the Represented Itemization Date in the Collection Letter because
such date is not one of the five dates permitted of Reg F and using
that date as though is false, deceptive, and/or otherwise
misleading to the least sophisticated consumer. Among other things,
Plaintiff also accuses the Defendant of attempting to collect
consumer debts from Florida consumers without first registering
and/or maintaining a valid consumer collection agency license in
accordance with Florida law.
Murray, Beirne and Associates, Inc. is an Ohio corporation, with
its principal place of business located in Rocky River, OH. [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
NORTHWELL HEALTH: Kapla and Zurl Sue Over Private Info Disclosures
------------------------------------------------------------------
ERYN KAPLAN and MICHAEL ZURL, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. NORTHWELL HEALTH,
Defendant, Case No. 9:23-cv-07205 (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 27, 2023)
alleges claims against the Defendant for invasion of privacy,
breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment,
breach of implied contract, breach of confidence, bailment, and for
violations of the New York Deceptive Trade Practices Act, the
Electronic Communications Privacy Act, and the Computer Fraud and
Abuse Act.
Operating as designed and as implemented by Northwell, the Pixel
allows the
Private Information that Plaintiffs and Class members provide to
Defendant to be unlawfully disclosed to Facebook alongside the
individual’s unique and persistent Facebook ID. In addition to
the Facebook Pixel, Defendant, also installed and implemented
Facebook's Conversions Application Programming Interface (CAPI) on
its Website servers. CAPI tracks the User's website interaction,
including Private Information, records and stores that information
on the website owner's servers and then transmits the data to
Facebook from the website owner's servers. The Facebook Pixel and
CAPI are routinely used to target specific customers by utilizing
data to build incredibly fulsome and robust profiles for the
purposes of retargeting and future marketing, the suit alleges.
Northwell owns and operates medical centers and entities including
Lenox Hill Hospital, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, and North
Shore University Hospital. It offers a wide range of services, from
primary and urgent care to cancer treatment, cardiac and kidney
transplants, heart and vascular, orthopedics, and neurology. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Elena A. Belov, Esq.
David S. Almeida, Esq.
ALMEIDA LAW GROUP LLC
849 W. Webster Avenue
Chicago, IL 60614
Telephone: (312) 576-3024
E-mail: david@almeidalawgroup.com
elena@almeidalawgroup.com
- and -
Nicholas A. Coulson, Esq.
Matthew Z. Robb, Esq.
LIDDLE SHEETS COULSON P.C.
975 East Jefferson Avenue
Detroit, MI 48207-3101
Telephone: (313) 392-0015
Facsimile: (313) 392-0025
E-mail: ncoulson@lsccounsel.com
mrobb@lsccounsel.com
NURTURE INC: Judge Tosses Baby Food Labeling Class Action Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Leal, writing for Courthouse News, reports that a federal judge
tossed the bulk of a putative class action challenging the nutrient
content of the company's "Happy Tot" and "Happy Baby" lines of
product.
Plaintiffs Melissa Sanchez, Beverly Cassel and others brought the
food labeling action against Nurture, complaining about "nutrient
content" claims on 43 products intended for children under the age
of two.
The challenged nutrient content claims are prominently displayed on
defendant's products and contain language such as "2g of Protein,
4g of Fiber and 350 mg Omega-3 from Chia ALA."
The nutrient amounts reflected in the nutrition content claims
match the information contained on the nutritional facts panel on
the back of the products. Some products also advertise that
additional nutrients were added, such as protein and choline, and
"+ 1 1/3 tsp pea protein."
The plaintiffs say that the nutrient content claims on defendant's
product "deceive and mislead reasonable consumers into believing
that the products provide physical health benefits for their
children when in fact, the products are harmful for children under
two, both nutritionally and developmentally."
U.S. District Judge Edward Davila had previously dismissed
plaintiff Sanchez's complaint with leave to amend, which has since
been amended to add an additional plaintiff and new theories of
fraud and deceptive labeling. Defendant Nurture moved again to
dismiss the claims and the court heard oral arguments on April 27.
The first amended complaint cites three harmful effects of the
products on young children. First, the plaintiffs say the products
have high amounts of both added and free sugars. They also say that
because many of defendant's products are pureed, the raw
ingredients are "stripped of insoluble fiber and the liver is no
longer protected from the sugar in the food." And third, they claim
the long-term use of puree pouches may be detrimental to children
because they prevent children from learning to chew and swallow
soft foods, which in turn may lead to "delays in motor development"
and "bad long-term snacking habits and routine overeating."
The first amended complaint includes five claims for relief under
California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act, Fair Advertising Law,
and Unfair Competition Law, and common law fraud, deceit, and/or
misrepresentation and unjust enrichment. Plaintiffs seek various
damages, restitution, and injunctive relief. Nurture moved to
dismiss all claims.
On Sept. 27, Davila granted the bulk of Nurture's motion, with only
a portion of the Unfair Competition Law claim surviving — and in
tandem, unjust enrichment and the request for injunctive relief.
Specifically, Davila rejected Nurture's argument that California's
Sherman Law is a mirror of federal law and therefore their claims
under it are preempted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's
labeling regulations. He noted while FDA regulations are also the
food labeling regulations of California, Sherman Law allows the
state to adopt additional labeling regulations and does not
automatically accept federal additions or rescissions.
"These features of the Sherman Law indicate that it is more than a
federal doppelganger and operates as an independent source of state
law from the Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act, thereby avoiding federal
preemption," Davila wrote.
He gave the plaintiffs 21 days to again amend what's left of their
complaint. [GN]
PHENOM PEOPLE: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime Wages, Downey Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
GEORGE DOWNEY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PHENOM PEOPLE, INC., Defendant, Case No.
2:23-cv-03781 (E.D. Pa., Sept. 27, 2023) seeks unpaid overtime
compensation and other damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards
Act (FLSA) and the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act of 1968 for
Plaintiff and similarly situated co-workers who have worked as
exempt-classified inside salespeople Defendant Phenom People Inc.
Mr. Downey was employed by Phenom in its Ambler, Pennsylvania
office as a Sales Development Representative from September 2019 to
September 2021. He regularly worked more than 40 hours in a
workweek but was not paid for overtime compensation. In addition,
the Defendant willfully misclassified him as exempt from the
protections of federal and state overtime laws and failed to keep
payroll records as required by the FLSA, says the Plaintiff.
Headquartered in Ambler, PA, Phenom operates as a global software
company and offers human resource technology solutions. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Deirdre A. Aaron, Esq.
WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC
715 Twining Road, Suite 211
Dresher, PA 19025
Telephone: (215) 866-1551
E-mail: daaron@winebrakelaw.com
- and -
Melissa L. Stewart, Esq.
Emma R. Janger, Esq.
OUTTEN & GOLDEN LLP
685 Third Avenue, 25th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Facsimile: (646) 509-2060
E-mail: mstewart@outtengolden.com
ejanger@outtengolden.com
- and -
Pooja Shethji, Esq.
OUTTEN & GOLDEN LLP
1225 New York Avenue NW, Suite 1200B
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 847-4400
Facsimile: (646) 952-9114
E-mail: pshethji@outtengolden.com
PURFOODS LLC: Alexander Sues Over Failure to Safeguard PII
----------------------------------------------------------
Dorothy Alexander, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. PURFOODS, LLC d/b/a MOM'S MEALS, Case No.
4:23-cv-00338-RGE-SBJ (S.D. Iowa, Sept. 6, 2023), is brought
arising out of the recent data breach ("Data Breach") involving the
Defendant for its failure to properly secure and safeguard the
personally identifiable information that it collected and
maintained as part of its regular business practices, including,
but not limited to, names, dates of birth, driver's license
numbers, state identification numbers, financial account
information, payment card information, meal categories and costs,
Social Security numbers, ("personally identifying information" or
"PII") and medical and health insurance information, which is
protected health information ("PHI", and collectively with Private
Information, "Private Information") as defined by the Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA").
Former and current customers of Defendant's are required to entrust
Defendant with sensitive, non-public Private Information, without
which Defendant could not perform its regular business activities,
in order to obtain services from Defendant. Defendant retains this
information for at least many years and even after the relationship
has ended. By obtaining, collecting, using, and deriving a benefit
from the Private Information of Plaintiff and Class Members,
Defendant assumed legal and equitable duties to those individuals
to protect and safeguard that information from unauthorized access
and intrusion.
According to its Notice of Data Event letter sent to Plaintiff and
other victims of the Data Breach (the "Notice Letter"), "on
February 22, 2023," Defendant identified "suspicious account
behavior" on its computer networks. The Defendant proceeded to
"launched an investigation" with the help of third-party
specialists." As a result of its investigation, Defendant
concluded--on an undisclosed date--that "experienced a cyberattack
between January 16, 2023, and February 22, 2023, that included the
encryption of certain files in our network."
The Defendant failed to adequately protect Plaintiff's and Class
Members' Private Information––and failed to even encrypt or
redact this highly sensitive information. This unencrypted,
unredacted Private Information was compromised due to Defendant's
negligent and/or careless acts and omissions and their utter
failure to protect customers' sensitive data. Hackers targeted and
obtained Plaintiff's and Class Members' Private Information because
of its value in exploiting and stealing the identities of Plaintiff
and Class Members. The present and continuing risk to victims of
the Data Breach will remain for their respective lifetimes.
Moreover, although Defendant became aware of the Data Breach on
February 22, 2023, Defendant nonetheless did not notify Plaintiff
and Class Members of the Data Breach and/or inform them that their
Private Information was compromised until sixth months later, on or
about August 24, 2023. Since the Data Breach started--on January
16, 2023--Plaintiff and Class Members were unaware that their
sensitive Private Information had been compromised, and that they
were, and continue to be, at significant risk of identity theft and
various other forms of personal, social, and financial harm, says
the complaint.
The Plaintiff provided their Private Information to the Defendant.
The Defendant is a "healthcare provider" that provides "fully
prepared, nutritionally tailored, refrigerated meals delivered
directly to homes nationwide."[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. Barton Goplerud, Esq.
Brian O. Marty, Esq.
SHINDLER, ANDERSON, GOPLERUD & WEESE
5015 Grand Ridge Drive, Suite 100
West Des Moines, IA 50265
Phone: (515) 223-4567
Fax: (515) 223-8887
Email: goplerud@sagwlaw.com
marty@sagwlaw.com
- and -
David K. Lietz, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, LLC
5335 Wisconsin Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20015-2052
Phone: (866) 252-0878
Facsimile: (202) 686-2877
Email: dlietz@milberg.com
PURFOODS LLC: Avant Files Suit in D. South Carolina
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against PurFoods LLC. The
case is styled as Billy Avant, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. PurFoods LLC doing business as: Mom's
Meals, Case No. 4:23-cv-04830-RBH (D.S.C., Sept. 27, 2023).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract for Breach of
Contract.
PurFoods LLC doing business as Mom's Meals --
https://www.momsmeals.com/ -- provides fully-prepared, refrigerated
meals directly to homes nationwide.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Blake Garrett Abbott, Esq.
Paul J. Doolittle, Esq.
POULIN WILLEY ANASTOPOULO LLC
32 Ann Street
Charleston, SC 29403
Phone: (843) 834-4712
Email: blake@akimlawfirm.com
pauld@akimlawfirm.com
PURFOODS LLC: Clements Files Suit in S.D. Iowa
----------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against PurFoods LLC. The
case is styled as Maria Clements, Johnnie Jones, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated v. PurFoods LLC doing
business as: Mom's Meals, Case No. 4:23-cv-00340-RGE-SBJ (S.D.
Iowa, Sept. 6, 2023).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract for Federal Trade
Commission Act (Unfair or Deceptive Acts).
PurFoods LLC doing business as Mom's Meals --
https://www.momsmeals.com/ -- provides fully-prepared, refrigerated
meals directly to homes nationwide.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
J. Barton Goplerud, Esq.
Brian O. Marty, Esq.
SHINDLER, ANDERSON, GOPLERUD & WEESE P.C.
5015 Grand Ridge Drive, Suite 100
West Des Moines, IA 50265
Phone: (515) 223-4567
Fax: (515) 223-8887
Email: goplerud@sagwlaw.com
marty@sagwlaw.com
PURFOODS LLC: Keritsis Files Suit in S.D. Iowa
----------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against PurFoods LLC. The
case is styled as Stella Keritsis, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated and on behalf of the general public
v. PurFoods LLC doing business as: Mom's Meals doing business as:
Mom's Meals Nourishcare, Case No. 4:23-cv-00339-RGE-SBJ (S.D. Iowa,
Sept. 6, 2023).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract for Federal Trade
Commission Act.
PurFoods LLC doing business as Mom's Meals --
https://www.momsmeals.com/ -- provides fully-prepared, refrigerated
meals directly to homes nationwide.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. Barton Goplerud, Esq.
Brian O. Marty, Esq.
SHINDLER, ANDERSON, GOPLERUD & WEESE P.C.
5015 Grand Ridge Drive, Suite 100
West Des Moines, IA 50265
Phone: (515) 223-4567
Fax: (515) 223-8887
Email: goplerud@sagwlaw.com
marty@sagwlaw.com
SUNOPTA GRAIN: Foote Seeks Proper Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------
TRE FOOTE, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. SUNOPTA GRAIN AND FOODS, INC., Defendant, Case No.
5:23-cv-03773 (E.D. Pa., Sept. 27, 2023) arises out of the
Defendant's alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and
the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act of 1968.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant in the last three years in
its manufacturing facility in Allentown, Pennsylvania. The
Plaintiff's job duties involved the manufacturing, packaging, and
handling of food products. Other similarly situated employees are
and were employed by Defendant in the manufacturing, packaging, and
handling of food at Defendant's manufacturing facilities.
Allegedly, the Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees
were not paid for all of the time spent donning and doffing their
sanitary clothing that protects against the contamination of food,
food-contact surfaces, or food-packaging materials, washing their
hands, or for associated travel and wait time.
Headquartered in Eden Prairie, MN, Sunopta Grain and Foods, Inc.
manufactures, packages, distributes, and sells food products at its
facilities in Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Kansas, Minnesota,
California, Washington, and Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James E. Goodley, Esq.
Ryan P. McCarthy, Esq.
GOODLEY MCCARTHY LLC
1650 Market Street, Suite 3600
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 394-0541
E-mail: james@gmlaborlaw.com
ryan@gmlaborlaw.com
- and -
Hans A. Nilges, Esq.
NILGES DRAHER LLC
7034 Braucher St., N.W., Suite B
North Canton, OH 44720
Telephone: (330) 470-4428
Facsimile: (330) 754-1430
E-mail: hans@ohlaborlaw.com
TARENA INTERNATIONAL: $3.5M Class Settlement to be Heard Jan. 18
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. on Oct. 2 disclosed that the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of New York has approved
the following announcement of a proposed class action settlement
that would benefit purchasers of Tarena International, Inc.
American Depositary Shares (NASDAQ: TEDU):
SUMMARY NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT
TO: ALL PERSONS WHO PURCHASED THE AMERICAN DEPOSITARY SHARES OF
TARENA INTERNATIONAL, INC. ("TARENA") FROM AUGUST 16, 2016 THROUGH
NOVEMBER 1, 2019, INCLUSIVE.
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to an Order of the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of New York, that a hearing
will be held on January 18, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. before the Honorable
Pamela K. Chen, United States District Judge of the Eastern
District of New York, 225 Cadman Plaza East, Courtroom 4F North,
Brooklyn, NY 11201 for the purpose of determining: (1) whether the
proposed Settlement of the claims in the above-captioned Action for
consideration including the sum of $3,500,000 should be approved by
the Court as fair, reasonable, and adequate; (2) whether the
proposed plan to distribute the Settlement proceeds is fair,
reasonable, and adequate; (3) whether the application of Lead
Counsel for an award of attorneys' fees of up to one-third plus
interest of the Settlement Amount, reimbursement of expenses of not
more than $40,000 and a service payment of no more than $15,000 in
total to Plaintiffs, should be approved; and (4) whether this
Action should be dismissed with prejudice as set forth in the
Second Amended Stipulation of Settlement, dated August 18, 2023
(the "Settlement Stipulation"). The Court reserves the right to
hold the Settlement Hearing telephonically or by other virtual
means.
If you purchased Tarena's American Depositary Shares ("ADSs")
during the period from August 16, 2016 through November 1, 2019,
both dates inclusive, your rights may be affected by this
Settlement, including the release and extinguishment of claims you
may possess relating to your ownership interest in Tarena ADSs. If
you have not received a detailed Notice of Pendency and Proposed
Settlement of Class Action ("Notice") and a copy of the Proof of
Claim and Release Form, you may obtain copies by writing to or
calling the Claims Administrator: Tarena International, Inc.
Securities Litigation, c/o Strategic Claims Services, P.O. Box 230,
600 N. Jackson St., Ste. 205, Media, PA 19063; (Toll-Free) (866)
274-4004; (Fax) (610) 565-7985; info@strategicclaims.net. You can
also download copies of the Notice and submit your Proof of Claim
and Release Form online at www.strategicclaims.net/Tarena/. If you
are a member of the Settlement Class, in order to share in the
distribution of the Net Settlement Fund, you must submit a Proof of
Claim and Release Form electronically or postmarked no later than
December 28, 2023 to the Claims Administrator, establishing that
you are entitled to recovery. Unless you submit a written exclusion
request, you will be bound by any judgment rendered in the Action
whether or not you make a claim.
If you desire to be excluded from the Settlement Class, you must
submit to the Claims Administrator a request for exclusion so that
it is received no later than December 28, 2023, in the manner and
form explained in the Notice. All members of the Settlement Class
who have not requested exclusion from the Settlement Class will be
bound by any judgment entered in the Action pursuant to the
Settlement Stipulation.
Any objection to the Settlement, Plan of Allocation, or Lead
Counsel's request for an award of attorneys' fees and reimbursement
of expenses and award to Plaintiffs must be in the manner and form
explained in the detailed Notice and received no later than
December 28, 2023, by each of the following:
Clerk of the Court
United States District Court
Eastern District of New York
225 Cadman Plaza East
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Phillip Kim, Esq.
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
275 Madison Ave
40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Lead Counsel
Robert A. Fumerton, Esq.
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
One Manhattan West
New York, NY 10001
Counsel for Tarena
If you have any questions about the Settlement, you may call or
write to Lead Counsel:
Phillip Kim, Esq.
THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
275 Madison Ave
40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Tel: (212) 686-1060
pkim@rosenlegal.com
PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE COURT OR THE CLERK'S OFFICE REGARDING
THIS NOTICE.
DATED: SEPTEMBER 5, 2023
BY ORDER OF THE UNITED STATES
DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK [GN]
TEACHERS INSURANCE: Newman Files Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Teachers Insurance
and Annuity Association of America. The case is styled as Joyce
Newman, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v.
Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America, Case No.
1:23-cv-08641-UA (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 2, 2023).
The nature of suit is state as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.
Teachers Insurance & Annuity Association of America (TIAA) --
https://www.tiaa.org/public/ -- provides banking services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kevin Sylvan Landau, Esq.
TAUS, CEBULASH & LANDAU, LLP
123 William Street, Suite 1900a
New York, NY 10038
Phone: (646) 873-7654
Email: klandau@tcllaw.com
TERRAFORM LABS: Investors Voluntary Dismiss Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------
Turner Wright, writing for Coin Telegraph, reports that a group of
investors behind a class-action lawsuit against Terraform Labs and
its co-founder Do Kwon over fraud allegations have dropped the
case.
In a Sept. 28 filing in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, lawyers representing plaintiff
Nick Patterson, who filed the lawsuit on behalf of investors, filed
a notice of voluntary dismissal only against Terraform and Kwon.
The notice did not explicitly state the reasons for dropping the
case without prejudice, but a spokesperson for Terraform Labs said
the "briefing process exposed weaknesses in their cases" and the
firm expected to see additional "meritless legal claims fail".
"The [Terraform Labs] Defendants have neither answered the
complaint [. . .] nor filed motions for summary judgment," said the
filing. "Because the Court has not certified the proposed class for
any purpose in this case and this dismissal is without prejudice,
it will not bind members of the proposed class."
Patterson's legal team filed the lawsuit in June 2022 following the
collapse of Terraform Labs, which many attributed to kicking off a
major crypto market crash. Kwon and the company have since been the
target of many authorities globally for their role in an alleged
scheme aimed at defrauding investors.
In February, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed a
civil suit against Kwon and Terra for allegedly "orchestrating a
multi-billion dollar crypto asset securities fraud." Authorities in
Montenegro arrested Kwon in March and subsequently sentenced him to
four months in prison for using false travel documents. At the time
of publication, it was unclear if he would be released in
Montenegro or face extradition to the U.S. or South Korea. [GN]
TESLA INC: Averts Class Action Over Autopilot Features
------------------------------------------------------
Leo Grieco, writing for Proactive Investors, reports that Tesla Inc
(NASDAQ:TSLA), the electric vehicle (EV) producer, can celebrate
another win after a judge ruled that a group of owners of its cars,
who claimed the company used misleading information to market its
autopilot features, will need individual arbitration rather than
pursuing a class-action lawsuit.
U.S. District Judge Haywood Gilliam in Oakland, California, stated
that the four Tesla owners who initiated the proposed class action
had agreed to arbitrate any legal claims when they accepted the
company's terms and conditions during vehicle purchases on the
Tesla website.
Under the ruling, Tesla is now shielded from facing larger
class-action claims from numerous vehicle owners.
Plaintiffs alleged that Tesla repeatedly made false statements
suggesting that its advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS)
technology was close to achieving fully self-driving vehicles.
Having bought Tesla cars between 2017 and 2022, the complainants
claimed they paid extra for the optional autonomous technology, but
the car manufacturer's promises were not fulfilled.
While Tesla didn't comment on the ruling, Andrew Kirtley, a lawyer
for some plaintiffs, expressed readiness to file thousands of
individual arbitration cases on behalf of Tesla customers.
"It is telling that Tesla doesn't want to defend its marketing
practices in public in open court but instead has fought to get as
many of these claims as possible sent to private arbitration,"
Kirtley said. [GN]
TOTAL QUALITY: Violates Federal Labor Law, Court Ruling Says
------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Wetterich, writing for Cincinnati Business Courier, reports
that a judge has ruled that Total Quality Logistics violated
federal law and must pay thousands of its former employees overtime
for working more than 40 hours a week during their early employment
at the company.
The ruling could end up being costly for Greater Cincinnati's
fast-growing and largest private company, which generated $8.8
billion in revenue in 2022.
U.S. District Judge Michael Barrett issued the ruling in the
13-year-old case Sept. 26, months after a nearly two-week bench
trial in late February and early March. Barrett ruled that not only
do the employees have to be paid the overtime they are owed but
that Union Township-based TQL also must pay liquidated damages in
an amount equal to the actual damages. [GN]
ZEMPLEO INC: Furman Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------
WILLIAM FURMAN, Individually and for Others Similarly Situated,
Plaintiff v. ZEMPLEO, INC., Defendant, Case No.
3:23-cv-01777-AJB-DEB (S.D. Cal., Sept. 27, 2023) seeks to recover
unpaid overtime wages and other damages from Zempleo, Inc., which
allegedly violated the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Plaintiff Furman worked for Zempleo as an Implementation Manager
from approximately April 2021 until May 2022. Throughout his
employment, Zempleo misclassified Furman as exempt from overtime.
Furman brings this action on behalf of himself and all other
similarly situated employees who Zempleo paid under its straight
time for overtime pay scheme.
Headquatered in San Diego, California, Zempleo is a staffing
company that provides workers to construction, energy, and
industrial clients across the country.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
William M. Hogg, Esq.
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 352-1100
Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
E-mail: whogg@mybackwages.com
mjosephson@mybackwages.com
adunlap@mybackwages.com
- and -
Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 877-8788
Facsimile: (713) 877-8065
E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com
*********
S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N
Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania,
USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA. Rousel Elaine T.
Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche A. Castillon, Julie Anne L.
Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.
Copyright 2023. All rights reserved. ISSN 1525-2272.
This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior
written permission of the publishers.
Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to
be reliable, but is not guaranteed.
The CAR subscription rate is $775 for six months delivered via
e-mail. Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same
firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof
are $25 each. For subscription information, contact
Peter A. Chapman at 215-945-7000.
*** End of Transmission ***