---

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

              Thursday, December 14, 2023, Vol. 25, No. 250

                            Headlines

70-30 AUSTIN STREET: Campos Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages for Bakers
ALLIED WASTE: Chen Suit Seeks to Certify Class & Subclasses
AMAZON.COM INC: Suit Seeks to Modify Class Cert Briefing Schedule
AMERICAN TUNA: Craig's Bid to File Docs Under Seal Granted in Part
AMERICO LIFE: Filing for Summary Judgment Bids Due Oct. 4, 2024

APPLE INC: Class Cert. Bid in Affinity Suit Due Sept. 6, 2024
BENTON COUNTY, AR: Class Cert Response Filing Extended to Dec. 18
BOOZ ALLEN: Employer-Teamsters Appeals Denial of Bid to Amend Suit
BOW PLUMBING: Braswell Seeks to Amend Prelim OK Bid of Settlement
BRINKER INTL: Parties Seek Feb. 7, 2024 Class Cert Filing

CD PROJEKT: Court Okays $1.85MM Class Action Settlement
CENTRAL STATES: Shipp Sues Over Breach of Fiduciary Duties
CERMAQ CANADA: Settles Salmon Price-Fixing Class Action
CHAMPION SPECIALTY: Wrinn Sues Over Waste Supervisors' Unpaid OT
CIRCA HOSPITALITY: Faces Class Action Over Rewards Program

CITI TRENDS: Continues to Defend Green-Fogg Class Suit
CITI TRENDS: Continues to Defend Matousek Class Suit in Georgia
CITI TRENDS: Continues to Defend Sambrano Class Suit in Georgia
CITI TRENDS: Continues to Defend Thomas Class Suit in Georgia
CITY OF NEW YORK: Richards Sues Over Sanitation Workers' Unpaid OT

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY: Lardis Sues Over Unauthorized Info Access
CROSSCITY INSPECTION: Faces Izaguirre Wage & Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y.
DAIRYLAND USA: Prelim Collective Action Certification Sought
DOLLAR GENERAL: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Appointment Due Jan. 26
DUPONT DE NEMOURS: City of West Point Opts Out of PFAs Class Action

FAMILY DOLLAR: Customers Receive Gift Cards as Part of Settlement
FISKER INC: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Appointment Due January 26
FIVE STAR: Underpays Kitchen Laborers, Ramirez Suit Alleges
GEMINI SOLAR: Filing for Conditional Class Cert Due Jan. 8, 2024
GENERAC HOLDINGS: Walling Sues Over Drop of Securities Price

HOME PARTNERS: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to Jan. 11, 2024
HORMEL FOODS: Continues to Defend Antitrust Class Suit
HORMEL FOODS: Continues to Defend Antitrust Class Suit in Illinois
HORMEL FOODS: Continues to Defend Brown Antitrust Suit in Colorado
HORMEL FOODS: Continues to Defend Jien Class Suit

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS: Jenkins Sues Over Unprotected Personal Info
JOHN DAVIS: Sanders' Claims Dismissed from Bailey Class Action
JOHN DAVIS: Sanders' Claims Dismissed from Beneteau Class Action
JOHN DAVIS: Sanders' Claims Dismissed from Jerry Class Action
JOHN DAVIS: Sanders' Claims Dismissed from Ortiz Class Action

JOHN DAVIS: Sanders' Claims Dismissed from Thomas Class Action
JOHN DAVIS: Sanders' Claims Dismissed from Tyree Class Action
KENN KAKOSIAN DDS: Stroude Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
LA ADELITA: Fails to Properly Pay Restaurant Staff, Santos Claims
LOUISIANA: Hooper Files 5th Cir. Appeal in Parker Case

MARTINEZ REFINING: Faces Class Suit Over Refinery's Toxic Releases
META PLATFORMS: Berrien County Joins Addictive Platform Class Suit
NATIONWIDE MUTUAL: Lemus Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
NEW HAMPSHIRE: Allowed to File Class Cert Opposition Under Seal
NEW HAMPSHIRE: Court Certifies Class in Emily Lawsuit

NORTHWELL HEALTH: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Marconi Says
NORTHWELL HEALTH: Fails to Secure Patients' Info, Kaufman Claims
OKTA INC: Rosen Law Firm Investigates Fiduciary Duty Breach
OPENAI INC: Illegally Reproduces Copyrighted Works, Sancton Says
OVERLAKE HOSPITAL: Bid for Class Certification Due Sept. 16, 2024

PEGASUS TRUCKING: Medina Class Certification Bid Partly OK'd
PENSKE TRUCK: McDowell Suit Removed to C.D. California
PERRIGO CO: Settlement Reached in Israeli Shareholder Suit
PIEDMONT HEALTHCARE: T. D. Suit Removed to N.D. Georgia
POSTMEDS INC: Fails to Protect Clients' Info, Johnson Suit Says

PRECISION PLANTING: Court Directs Filing of Discovery Plan in Wage
PREFERRED FAMILY: Bid to Certify Class Stricken from Court's Record
PRIME HEALTHCARE: Must File Class Cert. Materials in Errata
PROGRESSIVE ADVANCED: Seeks Leave to File Supplemental Authority
R&G BRENNER: Court Enters Scheduling Order in Cinar Class Suit

R&G BRENNER: Suit Seeks to Certify Class of Income Tax Preparers
RACE TELECOMMUNICATIONS: Taylor Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
RECKITT BENCKISER: Settles Woolite Class Action for $3.275MM
REDFIN CORP: Class Settlement in Bell Lawsuit Gets Final Nod
RENT THE RUNWAY: Continues to Defend Sharma Class Suit in E.D.N.Y.

SAINT AGNES: Appeals Remand Order in Crouch Suit to 9th Circuit
SECURTEST INC: Court Rejects Proposed Class Settlement in FCRA Suit
SELECTQUOTE AUTO: Class Cert Bid Filing in Davis Due June 28, 2024
SETON HALL UNIVERSITY: Thorne Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
STANDARD INSURANCE: Baker Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts

SUTHERLAND GLOBAL: Savage Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class Action
SUTTER HEALTH: Bland Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
SYNGENTA CROP: Court of Appeals Affirms Attorneys' Fees Award
TENNESSEE: Faces Class Suit Over Sex Offense Registry
VERIZON WIRELESS: Settles Class Suit Over TCPA Violation for $4MM

WASHINGTON COUNTY, OR: 9th Cir. Appeal Filed in Wilson Suit

                            *********

70-30 AUSTIN STREET: Campos Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages for Bakers
--------------------------------------------------------------
LUIS MANUEL CAMPOS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 70-30 AUSTIN STREET BAKERY INC.,
41-06 BELL BLVD. BAKERY LLC, ANTONIOS ZANNIKOS, NICHOLAS ZANNIKOS,
GEORGE DOULIAS, and GEORGIOS STERTSIOS, Defendants, Case No.
724756/2023 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Queens Cty., November 21, 2023) is a
class action against the Defendants for violations of the Fair
Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law including failure to
pay minimum wages, failure to pay overtime wages, failure to pay
spread-of-hour premium, failure to provide wage statements, and
failure to provide wage notices.

Mr. Campos was employed by the Defendants as a baker's helper from
in or around late November 2013 and he worked as a baker starting
early 2019 through late August 2020.

70-30 Austin Street Bakery Inc. is a bakery owner and operator
doing business as Martha's Country Bakery, with its principal place
of business at 70-28 Austin Street, Forest Hills, New York.

41-06 Bell Blvd. Bakery LLC is a bakery owner and operator doing
business as Martha's Country Bakery, with its principal place of
business at 41-06 Bell Blvd., Bayside, New York. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Brent E. Pelton, Esq.
         Taylor B. Graham, Esq.
         PELTON GRAHAM LLC
         111 Broadway, Suite 1503
         New York, NY 10006
         Telephone: (212) 385-9700
         Facsimile: (212) 385-0800
         E-mail: pelton@peltongraham.com
                 graham@peltongraham.com

ALLIED WASTE: Chen Suit Seeks to Certify Class & Subclasses
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as QIHAI CHEN, DUALTONE
AUTOMOTIVE, INC., on behalf of themselves and a class of all others
similarly situated, V. ALLIED WASTE SYSTEMS, INC.; REPUBLIC
SERVICES, INC.; DOES 1-50, inclusive, Case No. 3:22-cv-00099-JO-AHG
(S.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order
granting certification of the proposed class, defined as follows:

   "All persons (with "persons" defined as including both
individuals
   and business entities) who paid Allied for waste removal
services
   from property in the County of San Diego (excluding the City of

   Chula Vista), but did not receive any of the waste removal
services
   they paid for during the work stoppage that occurred between
   December 17, 2021 and/or January 17, 2022; and who were not
given a
   refund or credit equalling all sums paid for services not
   provided."

   Within this Class, Plaintiffs further move the Court to certify
two
   subclasses:

  (1) The "Residential Property Subclass:"

      "All persons who paid Allied for waste removal services from
      residential property (as "residential" property was defined
and
      categorized by Allied from December 17, 2021 through January
17,
      2022) in the County of San Diego (excluding the City of Chula

      Vista), but did not receive any of the waste removal services

      they paid for during the work stoppage that occurred between

      December 17, 2021 and/or January 17, 2022; and who were not
      given a refund or credit equalling all sums paid for services

      not provided."

  (2) The "Commercial Property Subclass:"

      "All persons who paid Allied for waste removal services from

      commercial property (as "commercial" property was defined and

      categorized by Allied from December 17, 2021 through January
17,
      2022) in the County of San Diego (excluding the City of Chula

      Vista), but did not receive any of the waste removal services

      they paid for during the work stoppage that occurred between

      December 17, 2021 and/or January 17, 2022; and who were not
      given a refund or credit equalling all sums paid for services

      not provided."


Alternatively, Plaintiffs move for certification of an "issues
class" pursuant to Fed R. Civ. P. 23(c)(4), encompassing the
above-defined class and subclasses, but certified on the issue of
Defendant Allied’s breach of contract liability only, and
allowing for the determination of individualized damages in
subsequent individual, consolidated, or bifurcated class
proceedings.

Allied operates collection companies and provide quality services
to commercial, industrial, municipal and residential customers.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Nov. 29, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3GzHBF6 at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Ramin R. Hariri, Esq.
          HARIRI LAW GROUP
          12526 High Bluff Drive, Suite 300
          San Diego, CA 92130
          Telephone: (619) 363-2889
          Facsimile: (619) 810-0791
          E-mail: ramin@haririlaw.com

                - and -

          Daryoosh Khashayar, Esq.
          KHASHAYAR LAW GROUP
          12636 High Bluff Dr., Ste. 400
          San Diego, CA 92130
          Telephone: (858) 509-1550
          Facsimile: (858) 509-1551
          Email: daryoosh@mysdlawyers.com

AMAZON.COM INC: Suit Seeks to Modify Class Cert Briefing Schedule
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as YASMINE MAHONE, an
individual, and BRANDON TOLE, an individual, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, v. AMAZON.COM, INC.,
a Delaware corporation, AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC; a Delaware Limited
Liability Company; AMAZON.COM DEDC, LLC; a Delaware Limited
Liability Company; and AMAZON.COM KYDC LLC, a Delaware Limited
Liability Company, Case No. 2:22-cv-00594-MJP (W.D. Wash.), the
Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting modification to
the class-certification briefing schedule in light of additional
discovery undertaken pursuant to the Court's Order on the parties
Rule 37 Submissions.

On April 10, 2023, the Court issued a Case Scheduling Order . On
July 20, 2023, the Court granted the parties' stipulated motion to
extend certain class certification related deadlines.

On October 13, 2023, while the LCR 37 submissions were pending
before the Court, Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Class
Certification. The deadline for Amazon's Response to the Motion for
Class Certification is currently December 15, 2023, and the
deadline for Plaintiffs' Reply is currently January 15, 2024.

On October 19, 2023, the Court granted the parties' LCR 37
submissions in part and denied them in part. The Court ordered both
parties to supplement certain discovery responses and for Amazon to
produce additional 30(b)(6) witnesses on certain topics.

Amazon.com is an American multinational technology company focusing
on e-commerce, cloud computing, online advertising, digital
streaming, and artificial intelligence.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Nov. 28, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3TaPYON at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Daniel Kalish, Esq.
          HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP
          600 Stewart Street, Suite 901
          Seattle, WA 98101
          Telephone: (206) 826-5354
          E-mail: dkalish@hkm.com

                - and -

          Brian J. Lawler, Esq.
          PILOT LAW, P.C.
          4632 Mt. Gaywas Dr.
          San Diego, CA 92117
          Telephone: (619) 255-2398
          E-mail: blawler@pilotlawcorp.com

                - and -

          Gene J. Stonebarger, Esq.
          STONEBARGER LAW, APC
          101 Parkshore Dr., Suite 100
          Folsom, CA 95630
          Telephone: (916) 235-7140
          E-mail: gstonebarger@stonebargerlaw.com

                - and -

          Kevin L. Wilson, Esq.
          KEVIN WILSON LAW PLLC
          3110 Horton Avenue
          Louisville, KY 40220
          Telephone: (502) 276-5050
          E-mail: kevin@klwilsonlaw.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Andrew E. Moriarty, Esq.
          Heather L. Shook, Esq.
          Shannon McDermott, Esq.
          PERKINS COIE LLP
          1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
          Seattle, WA 98101-3099
          Telephone: (206) 359-8000
          Facsimile: (206) 359-9000
          E-mail: AMoriarty@perkinscoie.com
                  HShook@perkinscoie.com
                  SMcDermott@perkinscoie.com

                - and -

          Jason C. Schwartz, Esq.
          Brian A. Richman, Esq.
          Lauren M. Blas, Esq.
          GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
          1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
          Washington, DC 20036-5306
          Telephone: (202) 955-8500
          Facsimile: (202) 467-0539
          E-mail: JSchwartz@gibsondunn.com
                  BRichman@gibsondunn.com
                  LBlas@gibsondunn.com

AMERICAN TUNA: Craig's Bid to File Docs Under Seal Granted in Part
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JEFFREY CRAIG, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated, v. AMERICAN TUNA,
INC. and WORLD WISE FOODS, LTD., Case No. 3:22-cv-00473-RSH-MSB
(S.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Robert S. Huie entered an order

   (1) granting in part and denying in part the plaintiff's motion
to
       file under seal; and

   (2) granting the Defendant's Motion to file under seal.

American Tuna supplies one-by-one wild caught tuna and other
sustainably sourced seafood products to grocery aisles, deli's,
restaurants and homes across the United States.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 28, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/46KrmPW at no extra charge.[CC]
 


AMERICO LIFE: Filing for Summary Judgment Bids Due Oct. 4, 2024
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BEN FABRIKANT,
individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated; v.
LESLIE RIOS, an individual; AMERICO LIFE, INC., a Texas
corporation; and JOHN DOE, Case No. 4:23-cv-03055-JMG-MDN (D.
Neb.), the Hon. Judge Michael D. Nelson entered a case progression
order as follows:

   1) The deadline for serving initial mandatory disclosures under

      Rule 26(a)(1) is January 22, 2024.

   2) The deadline for moving to amend pleadings or add parties is

      January 22, 2024.

   3) A status conference to discuss case progression, class
      certification, and the parties' interest in settlement will
be
      held with the undersigned magistrate judge on January 31,
2024,
      at 10:00 a.m. by telephone.

   4) The deadline for filing motions to dismiss and motions for
      summary judgment is October 4, 2024.

   5) The parties shall comply with all other stipulations and
      agreements recited in their Rule 26(f) planning report that
are
      not inconsistent with this order.

Americo Life operates as a life and annuity insurance company.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 28, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Gqe40u at no extra charge.[CC]

APPLE INC: Class Cert. Bid in Affinity Suit Due Sept. 6, 2024
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as AFFINITY CREDIT UNION, et
al., v. APPLE INC., Case No. 4:22-cv-04174-JSW (N.D. Cal.), the
Hon. Judge Jeffrey S. White entered a scheduling order as follows:


             Event                           Deadline

  Exchange of Initial Disclosures           Dec. 8, 2023

  Substantial Completion of Production      June 20, 2024 (with
  of Documents and Data                     rolling productions
being
                                            made throughout the
                                            discovery period as
                                            materials are ready to
be
                                            produced)

  Class Certification Motion and            Sept. 6, 2024
  Supporting Expert Report(s)

  Exchange Expert Backup Materials          Sept. 10, 2024 (by 5
p.m.)
  for Class Certification Motion

  Class Certification Opposition and        Dec. 17, 2024
  Supporting Expert Report(s)

  Class Certification Reply and             Feb. 25, 2025
  Expert Rebuttal Report(s)

  Exchange Expert Backup Materials for       Feb. 28, 2025 (by 5
p.m.)
  Class Certification Reply

  Close of Fact Discovery                    April 12, 2025

  Exchange of Expert Report(s)               Aug. 21, 2025 (by 5
p.m.)

Apple is an American multinational technology company headquartered
in Cupertino, California.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 29, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/488WcDe at no extra charge.[CC]


BENTON COUNTY, AR: Class Cert Response Filing Extended to Dec. 18
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Farella v. Benton County
District Court, DIV.4, Case No. 5:22-cv-05121 (W.D. Ark., Filed
June 24, 2022), the Hon. Judge Timothy L. Brooks entered an order
granting motion for extension of time to file response as to motion
to certify class.

-- The response deadline at issue is extended to December 18,
2023.

The suit alleges violation of the Civil Rights Act.

Benton County District Court handles all matters involving traffic,
non-traffic, parking infractions, anti-harassment and small claims
up to $5,000.[CC]

BOOZ ALLEN: Employer-Teamsters Appeals Denial of Bid to Amend Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs Employer-Teamsters Local Nos. 175 and 505 Pension Trust
Fund, et al., filed an appeal from the District Court's Order dated
October 16, 2023 entered in the lawsuit entitled Langley v. Booz
Allen Hamilton Holding Corporation, et al., Case No.
1:17-cv-00696-LMB-IDD, in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Virginia at Alexandria.

On September 5, 2017, the Court named two Lead Plaintiffs in the
case, and on October 20, the lead Plaintiffs filed a consolidated
amended complaint. The complaint asserts claims under Sections
10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, alleging misrepresentations or omissions by the company
purporting to relate to matters that are the subject of a
Department of Justice investigation.

The Plaintiffs seek to recover from the company and the individual
defendants an unspecified amount of damages.

On February 8, 2018, the case was DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for
failure to State a Claim.

On September 22, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a motion for leave to amend
the dismissed amended complaint or, in the alternative, for relief
from the court's prior dismissal order.

On October 16, 2023, Judge Leonie M. Brinkema denied the
plaintiffs' motion.

The appellate case is captioned as Employer-Teamsters Local Nos.
175 and 505 Pension v. Booz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp., et al.,
Case No. 23-2213, in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Fourth Circuit, filed on November 21, 2023.[BN]

Plaintiffs-Appellants EMPLOYER-TEAMSTERS LOCAL NOS. 175 AND 505
PENSION TRUST FUND, et al., are represented by:

          Magdalene Economou, Esq.
          David A. Rosenfeld, Esq.
          ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD, LLP
          58 South Service Road
          Melville, NY 11747-0000
          Telephone: (631) 454-7709

               - and -

          Benjamin Foster Jackson, Esq.
          Christopher Lometti, Esq.
          COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL, PLLC
          88 Pine Street
          New York, NY 10005
          Telephone: (212) 838-7797

               - and -

          Andrew S. Love, Esq.
          ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD, LLP
          1 Montgomery Street
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 288-4545

               - and -

          Vincent Pitta, Esq.
          PITTA LLP
          120 Broadway
          New York, NY 10271
          Telephone: (212) 652-3890  

               - and -

          Harini P. Raghupathi, Esq.
          ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD, LLP
          655 West Broadway
          San Diego, CA 92101-0000
          Telephone: (619) 231-1058  

               - and -

          Craig Crandall Reilly, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF CRAIG C. REILLY
          209 Madison Street
          Alexandria, VA 22314
          Telephone: (703) 549-5354

               - and -

          Daniel S. Sommers, Esq.
          Steven J. Toll, Esq.
          COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL, PLLC
          1100 New York Avenue, NW
          Washington, DC 20005-3965
          Telephone: (202) 408-4609

Defendant-Appellee BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON HOLDING CORPORATION is
represented by:

          Bradley Klein, Esq.
          SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP
          1440 New York Avenue, NW
          Washington, DC 20005-2107
          Telephone: (202) 371-7000

               - and -

          Darren M. Welch, Esq.
          SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP
          1440 New York Avenue, NW
          Washington, DC 20005-2107
          Telephone: (202) 371-7804

               - and -

          Nicole Chenelle, Esq.
          Jessica L. Pahl, Esq.
          WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP
          680 Maine Avenue, SW
          Washington, DC 20024
          Telephone: (202) 434-5506

BOW PLUMBING: Braswell Seeks to Amend Prelim OK Bid of Settlement
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROSELYN BRASWELL, et al.,
v. BOW PLUMBING GROUP, INC., Case No. 2:21-cv-00025-ECM-KFP (M.D.
Ala.), the Plaintiff files an unopposed motion to amend their
earlier filed motion for preliminary approval of class action
settlement.

The Plaintiffs file this amendment to submit the Declaration of
Steven Weisbrot, Esq., the President and Chief Executive Officer
for Angeion Group, LLC, the proposed class action settlement
administrator, and to submit an amended version of the class action
Settlement Agreement.

The Plaintiffs request that this Court set an expedited preliminary
approval hearing and enter the earlier filed proposed Preliminary
Approval Order:

   (1) Preliminarily approving the parties' Settlement;

   (2) Conditionally certifying the Settlement Class for purposes
of
       the Settlement;

   (3) Approving the form of Notice provided to the Court and
       directing the Plaintiffs to serve such Notice on Class
members;

   (4) Scheduling a Final Approval Hearing;

   (5) Setting the parties’ requested schedule for:

       -- Settlement Class members to opt-out of the Settlement;

       -- Settlement Class members to object to the Settlement;

       -- Plaintiffs to file their Motion for Final Approval; and

       -- Class Counsel to submit an application for approval of
          Attorneys' fees, costs, expenses, and service awards
payable
          to Plaintiffs; and

   (6) Granting such other and further relief as this Court deems
       necessary.

BOW Plumbing manufactures plumbing products. The Company offers
plastic pipe, fittings, drainage, and pressure plumbing products.

A copy of the Plaintiff's unopposed motion dated Nov. 27, 2023 is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RpHQsm at no
extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Kirby D. Farris, Esq.
          Calle Mendenhall, Esq.
          Malia D. Tartt, Esq.
          FARRIS, RILEY & PITT, LLP
          1728 3rd Avenue North, Fifth Floor
          Birmingham, AL 35203
          Telephone: (205) 324-1212
          Facsimile: (205) 324-1255
          E-mail: kfarris@frplegal.com
                  kriley@frplegal.com
                  cmendenhall@frplegal.com
                  mtartt@frplegal.com

BRINKER INTL: Parties Seek Feb. 7, 2024 Class Cert Filing
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as AMANDA HALE and JESUS
GOMEZ, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
and the general public, v. BRINKER INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Delaware
corporation; BRINKER INTERNATIONAL PAYROLL COMPANY, L.P., a
Delaware limited partnership; BRINKER RESTAURANT CORPORATION, a
Virginia corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No.
3:21-cv-09978-VC (N.D. Cal.), the Parties stipulate and agree as
follows:

   1. The Plaintiffs' motion for class             Feb. 7, 2024
      certification shall be due:

   2. Defendants' Opposition shall be due:         March 6, 2024

   3. The Plaintiffs' Reply shall be due:          March 27, 2024

   4. The Hearing on Plaintiffs' Motion            April 25, 2024
      for Class Certification shall be:

On June 17, 2022, the Court denied Defendants' Motion to Compel
Plaintiff Amanda Hale's claims to arbitration.

On August 25, 2022, Plaintiff Amanda Hale propounded class
discovery in Interrogatories and Requests for Production of
Documents (Set One), seeking, among other things, the list of
putative class members' names and contact information pursuant to
Paragraph 68 of the Court's Standing Order, the timekeeping and
payroll records of the putative class members during the Class
Period, and the relevant policies, procedures, and practices during
the Class Period.

On August 31, 2022, the Court ordered Defendants to produce the
Class List as to those putative class members who signed the same
arbitration agreement as Plaintiff Hale1 within 28 days and to meet
and confer regarding other putative class members to determine
whether their arbitration agreements preclude them from being a
part of the class.

On September 28, 2022, Defendants produced the Class List to
Plaintiff. On October 25, 2022, Defendants served only objections
to Plaintiff Hale's discovery requests.

Brinker is an American multinational hospitality industry company
that owns Chili's and Maggiano's Little Italy restaurant chains.

A copy of the Parties' motion dated Nov. 22, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/416o9ZQ at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Shaun Setareh, Esq.
          Jose Maria D. Patino, Jr., Esq.
          Tyson Gibb, Esq.
          SETAREH LAW GROUP
          9665 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 460
          Beverly Hills, CA 90212
          Telephone: (310) 888-7771
          Facsimile: (310) 888-0109
          E-mail: shaun@setarehlaw.com
                  jose@setarehlaw.com
                  tyson@setarehlaw.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Kevin D. Reese, Esq.
          Marina I. Garcia, Esq.
          Robert Yang, Esq.
          JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
          50 California Street, 9th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94111-4615
          Telephone: (415) 394-9400
          Facsimile: (415) 394-9401
          E-mail: Kevin.Reese@jacksonlewis.com
                  Marina.Garcia@jacksonlewis.com
                  Rob.Yang@jacksonlewis.com

CD PROJEKT: Court Okays $1.85MM Class Action Settlement
-------------------------------------------------------
Andy Chalk, writing for PCGamer, reports that terms of the $1.85
million settlement were reached in 2021, but it took this long for
a US court to sign off on it.

PCGamer said in October that Cyberpunk 2077's redemption is
complete, but I think that may have been a little premature because
now it's really complete: CD Projekt has finally settled the class
action lawsuit filed against it in 2020 by investors who weren't
happy with the state of the game at launch.

It's easy to forget now because it all happened three years ago (in
Covid years, more like six), and the PC version was actually pretty
decent, but Cyberpunk 2077 was an absolute shambles at launch. It
was bad enough that Sony kicked the whole thing off the PlayStation
store for more than six months. That was actually at the heart of
at least one of the lawsuits filed against CD Projekt over the
game: That the studio had made false or misleading statements about
Cyberpunk 2077 being properly playable on then-current PS4 and Xbox
One consoles.

In a press release (via the Wayback Machine), Rosen Law Firm said
CD Projekt failed to disclose that "Cyberpunk 2077 was virtually
unplayable on the current-generation Xbox or Playstation systems
due to an enormous number of bugs," and that as a result, "CD
Projekt would suffer reputational and pecuniary harm" that would in
term cause financial damage to investors.

In 2021, four separate lawsuits against the studio were rolled into
one "mega lawsuit," but at the end of that year proceedings were
suspended because an out-of-court settlement was being worked on.
That eventually resulted in a $1.85 million deal to make the whole
thing go away, although it all had to be approved by the courts.

The wheels of justice turn slowly, but initial approval was given
in January 2023, and now, finally, it's a done deal: CD Projekt
said in a regulatory announcement on November 28 (via
GamesIndustry.biz) that "the U.S. District Court for the Central
District of California had issued an order regarding final approval
of the corresponding settlement," which "ends the legal proceedings
related to the US class action lawsuit filed against the Company
and other defendants."

PCGamer's Mr. Chalk said "I said it when the terms of the
settlement were first reached, and I'll say it again now: $1.85
million is a remarkably small price to pay relative to the money CD
Projekt earned on sales of Cyberpunk 2077. CD Projekt reported net
profits of zł203 million ($51 million) in its most recent
financial quarter alone, and said Cyberpunk 2077 sales have now
surpassed 25 million units; the value of the settlement isn't
related to Cyberpunk sales because the lawsuit was based on harm to
the company's value in 2020 but even so, that's basically the
equivalent of flipping a quarter to an annoying child and telling
him to go to the movies."

"So it's good news for CD Projekt, and there's good news for
Cyberpunk 2077 players coming soon too: The studio recently
announced a surprise 2.1 update to the game that will add a number
of new gameplay elements, including a fully functional metro system
that will carry players around Night City in style." [GN]

CENTRAL STATES: Shipp Sues Over Breach of Fiduciary Duties
----------------------------------------------------------
Justin Shipp; Vincent Tate; Terrence Yazel, individually and on
behalf of others similarly situated v. CENTRAL STATES
MANUFACTURING, INC.; CENTRAL STATES MANUFACTURING, INC. BOARD OF
DIRECTORS; GREATBANC TRUST CO.; JAMES SLIKER; CHAD WARE; THOMAS
FERREE; MATT KRAMER; TINA CHANG; MATTHEW STITES, Case No.
5:23-cv-05215-TLB (W.D. Ark., Nov. 28, 2023), is brought seeking
appropriate monetary and equitable remedies as a result of the
Defendants' breached fiduciary duties.

The ESOP provides retirement benefits by holding Company Stock in
trust and allocating shares to the accounts of participants and
beneficiaries. When participants retire or otherwise leave the
Company, their shares are repurchased over the course of several
years.

And yet, in December 2020, the fiduciaries who managed and
administered the ESOP caused the ESOP to borrow $40 million from
Central States in order to purchase from Central States, at the
Company's behest, over 2.2 million additional shares of Central
States stock, an amount equal to nearly a quarter of already
outstanding shares. The ESOP's governing document permitted the
allocation of the newly acquired shares to participants' accounts
only as principal was repaid on the $40 million loan over its
30-year term. The effect was to immediately dilute the value of all
existing shares allocated to participants' accounts, benefiting the
Company by immediately and significantly reducing its stock
repurchase obligations, to the detriment of ESOP participants and
beneficiaries.

The Defendants, all of whom were ESOP fiduciaries who had a hand in
the dilutive transaction, owed and breached fiduciary duties toward
the Plaintiffs and others similarly situated. Plaintiffs seek
appropriate monetary and equitable remedies, says the complaint.

The Plaintiffs are participants in Central States's Employee Stock
Ownership Plan (the "Plan" or "ESOP"), through which the Company
provides retirement benefits.

Central States Manufacturing, Inc. is an Arkansas corporation with
its principal place of business in Tontitown, Arkansas.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Thomas P. Thrash, Esq.
          William T. Crowder, Esq.
          THRASH LAW FIRM, P.A.
          1101 Garland Street
          Little Rock, AR 72201-1214
          Phone: (501) 374-1058
          Fax: (501) 374-2222
          Email: tomthrash@thrashlawfirmpa.com
                 willcrowder@thrashlawfirmpa.com

               - and -

          Gary Gotto, Esq.
          KELLER ROHRBACK, L.L.P.
          3101 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1400
          Phoenix, AZ 85012-2643
          Phone: (602) 230-6322
          Fax: (602) 248-2822
          Email: ggotto@kellerrorhback.com

               - and -

          Jeffrey Lewis, Esq.
          KELLER ROHRBACK, L.L.P.
          180 Grand Avenue, Suite 1380
          Oakland, CA 94612-3750
          Phone: (510) 463-3900
          Fax: (510) 463-3901
          Email: jlewis@kellerrohrback.com

               - and -

          Matthew Gerend, Esq.
          Eric Lombardo, Esq.
          KELLER ROHRBACK, L.L.P.
          1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200
          Seattle, WA 98101-3276
          Phone: (206) 623-1900
          Fax: (206) 623-3384
          Email: mgerend@kellerrohrback.com
                 elombardo@kellerrohrback.com


CERMAQ CANADA: Settles Salmon Price-Fixing Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------
CBC News reports that seven companies accused of conspiring to
manipulate the global price of salmon have agreed to pay a total of
more than $5 million Cdn to settle a class-action lawsuit.

Some of the largest players in the salmon farming industry in
Newfoundland and Labrador, including Mowi and Grieg, were among the
companies involved.

The lawsuit claimed Cermaq Canada, Grieg Seafood, Lerøy Seafood
AS, Marine Harvest Atlantic Canada, Mowi ASA, Nova Sea AS and Sjor
AS conspired to manipulate the Norwegian spot market for salmon
prices and in doing so influence global salmon prices.

The allegation was not been proven in court, and the companies
recently agreed to settle the lawsuit without a trial.

The companies have denied any wrongdoing, and the settlement
doesn't involve an admission of guilt. Linda Visser is a partner
with London, Ont.-based Siskinds LLP, one of the law firms involved
in the class action, said it's often easier for companies to end a
lawsuit by settling it to save time and money.

"Some companies can have reasons for wanting to resolve litigation
related to the potential liability related to the risk involved,
related to the time and effort and expense of defending that
litigation," she told CBC News on Nov. 28.

Class-action members who purchased more than $1 million of salmon
in Canada between April 10, 2013, and Feb. 20, 2019 are eligible to
submit a claim.

"Grocery stores, distributors, fish processing companies, large
hotel chains -- those type of companies that would be buying a
large volume," she said.

"You could have one company who bought a huge amount, and they
would have say, take up eight per cent of the settlement funds, and
another company who's just reaching that threshold might only take
two per cent of the settlement funds. It's really going to depend
on the number of people who actually come forward and file a claim
and the size of their purchases."

A donation of $250,000 will be made to Food Banks Canada in lieu of
payments to consumers.

The settlement is subject to approval by the Federal Court. [GN]

CHAMPION SPECIALTY: Wrinn Sues Over Waste Supervisors' Unpaid OT
----------------------------------------------------------------
THOMAS WRINN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CHAMPION SPECIALTY SERVICES, LLC d/b/a
CHAMPION SPECIALTY SERVICES PROVIDER, Defendant, Case No.
1:23-cv-12840 (D. Mass., November 21, 2023) is a class action
against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Massachusetts
Wage and Hour Law.

Mr. Wrinn worked for Champion as a Dry Active Waste Supervisor at
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station in Plymouth, Massachusetts from
approximately February 2022 until April 2023.

Champion Specialty Services, LLC, doing business as Champion
Specialty Services Provider, is a provider of construction
services, headquartered in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Philip J. Gordon, Esq.
         Kristen M. Hurley, Esq.
         GORDON LAW GROUP LLP
         585 Boylston Street
         Boston, MA 02116
         Telephone: (617) 536-1800
         Facsimile: (617) 536-1802
         E-mail: pgordon@gordonllp.com

                 - and -

         Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
         Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
         JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP
         11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
         Houston, TX 77046
         Telephone: (713) 352-1100
         Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
         E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
                 adunlap@mybackwages.com

                 - and -

         Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
         BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
         11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025
         Houston, TX 77046
         Telephone: (713) 877-8788
         Facsimile: (713) 877-8065
         E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com

CIRCA HOSPITALITY: Faces Class Action Over Rewards Program
----------------------------------------------------------
Justin Walker, writing for KLAS, reports that a newly filed $3.7
million lawsuit alleges Circa misled patrons, adding "false and
deceptive" fees that deliberately reduced the value of comps
offered by the resort group's rewards program.

The lawsuit alleges that the resort group's "Club One" rewards
program levied non-existent taxes on its members, resulting in the
decreased value of comps, or free benefits, to those who gamble at
Circa Hospitality Group's properties -- Circa Resort & Casino, The
D Hotel & Casino and Golden Gate Hotel & Casino.

According to the lawsuit, one of the plaintiffs purchased lunch at
Circa's Saginaw's Deli, for $23. A receipt shows that the meal's
total included a $1.93 "Add On Tax" deducted from his comps value.
The lawsuit calls the fee "false and deceptive," alleging that
Circa "routinely reduced the amount of consumers' earned comps"
with the taxes.

The lawsuit seeks class action status, alleging that the fees
exceed $3,750,000 in harm across the plaintiffs and "thousands of
other guests" at Circa properties. The six counts of the lawsuit
include breach of contract, breach of implied covenant of good
faith and fair dealing, deceptive trade practices, conversion,
negligence, and misrepresentation.

According to the Circa website, the Club One rewards program
"offers the hottest loyalty card found in Downtown Las Vegas" and
is free to join. Members are promised special room rates, casino
rewards, dining comps, show tickets, and a shot at a special event
and tournament invitations. The Club One program offers three
tiers: gambler, maverick, and legend.

David Chitwood, Robert Deken, Tracy Edgeston, Matthew P. Stokes and
Richard Throop are plaintiffs in the lawsuit. The first four are
residents of Clark County. Throop lives in Bexar County, Texas. The
plaintiffs are represented by the Las Vegas law firms of Eglet
Adams and Kind Law. [GN]

CITI TRENDS: Continues to Defend Green-Fogg Class Suit
------------------------------------------------------
Citi Trends Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending October 28, 2023 filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on December 6, 2023, that the Company
continues to defend itself from the Green-Fogg class suit in the
United States District court for the Southern District of Georgia.

In connection with the January 2023 cyber disruption, a putative
class action lawsuit had been filed against the Company in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia.
The matter, Sabrina Green-Fogg v. Citi Trends, Inc., was filed on
July 14, 2023.

The plaintiff alleges harm in connection with the January 2023
cyber disruption and asserts a variety of claims seeking
unspecified monetary damages and other related relief.

The Company is vigorously defending the lawsuit.

Citi Trends -- http://cititrends.com/-- is an American retail
clothing chain selling discounted products targeted primarily at
urban customers.[BN]

CITI TRENDS: Continues to Defend Matousek Class Suit in Georgia
---------------------------------------------------------------
Citi Trends Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending October 28, 2023 filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on December 6, 2023, that the Company
continues to defend itself from the Matousek class suit in the
United States District court for the Southern District of Georgia.

In connection with the January 2023 cyber disruption, a putative
class action lawsuit had been filed against the Company in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia.
The matter, Sabrina Green-Fogg v. Citi Trends, Inc., was filed on
July 14, 2023.

The plaintiff alleges harm in connection with the January 2023
cyber disruption and asserts a variety of claims seeking
unspecified monetary damages and other related relief.

The Company is vigorously defending the lawsuit.

Citi Trends -- http://cititrends.com/-- is an American retail
clothing chain selling discounted products targeted primarily at
urban customers.[BN]

CITI TRENDS: Continues to Defend Sambrano Class Suit in Georgia
---------------------------------------------------------------
Citi Trends Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending October 28, 2023 filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on December 6, 2023, that the Company
continues to defend itself from the Sambrano class suit in the
United States District court for the Southern District of Georgia.

In connection with the January 2023 cyber disruption, a putative
class action lawsuit had been filed against the Company in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia.
The matter, Yeimy Sambrano v. Citi Trends, Inc. was filed on July
7, 2023.

The plaintiff alleges harm in connection with the January 2023
cyber disruption and asserts a variety of claims seeking
unspecified monetary damages and other related relief.

The Company is vigorously defending the lawsuit.

Citi Trends -- http://cititrends.com/-- is an American retail
clothing chain selling discounted products targeted primarily at
urban customers.[BN]

CITI TRENDS: Continues to Defend Thomas Class Suit in Georgia
-------------------------------------------------------------
Citi Trends Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending October 28, 2023 filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on December 6, 2023, that the Company
continues to defend itself from the Thomas class suit in the United
States District court for the Southern District of Georgia.

In connection with the January 2023 cyber disruption, a class
action lawsuit had been filed against the Company in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia. The
matter, Sienna Thomas v. Citi Trends, Inc. was filed on June 27,
2023.

The plaintiff alleges harm in connection with the January 2023
cyber disruption and asserts a variety of claims seeking
unspecified monetary damages and other related relief.

The Company is vigorously defending the lawsuit.

Citi Trends -- http://cititrends.com/-- is an American retail
clothing chain selling discounted products targeted primarily at
urban customers.[BN]

CITY OF NEW YORK: Richards Sues Over Sanitation Workers' Unpaid OT
------------------------------------------------------------------
SHERMA RICHARDS, WILLIS WYNNE, CHARLES AGNELLO, MICHAEL ARBOLEDA,
THOMAS BRINSKELLE, ANTHONY BRUNETTI, IMMORSH BURTON, MICHAEL
CASSANO, STEVEN CONIGLIARO, RUSSELL COOK, REINALDO CORREA, THOMAS
CRISCI, KERRY ELMORE, KEVIN JANICEK, LANCE KAPLAN, JONATHAN LAM,
FRANCIS LEARY, WOODLEY LOISEAU, PETER LOMBARDI, MANNY MAGNICCARI,
JASON MATTHIAS, TAKASTA MILTON, GREGORY MUTHU, NEVILLE NESTER,
JACQUELINE PAYEA, FRANK PEPERONE, BARRY QUINN, JAMES RASMUSSEN,
JOHN RAY, REGINALD RAYMOND, DANIEL RIVERA, ERICK SASSONE, JAMES
SCHIANO, DAVID SEPULVEDA, THOMAS SKINNER, COREY SMITH, LUTHER
SWINTON, TYRONE TALIAFERRO, RICHARD TOLIN, FELIX TORO, GLORIANN
TORO, MARK TURNER, and MICHAEL UBILES, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. CITY OF NEW YORK,
Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-10220 (S.D.N.Y., November 21, 2023) is
a class action against the Defendant for its failure to pay
overtime wages and failure to properly calculate the regular rate
of pay in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendant as sanitation
workers.

The City of New York is a judicial entity with a principal office
located at Broadway and Park Row, New York, New York. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:                
      
         Gregory K. McGillivary, Esq.
         Sarah M. Block, Esq.
         Patrick Miller-Bartley, Esq.
         McGILLIVARY STEELE ELKIN LLP
         1101 Vermont Ave., N.W., Suite 1000
         Washington, DC 20005
         Telephone: (202) 833-8855
         E-mail: gkm@mselaborlaw.com
                 smb@mselaborlaw.com
                 pmb@mselaborlaw.com

                 - and -

         Hope Pordy, Esq.
         Elizabeth Sprotzer, Esq.
         SPIVAK LIPTON LLP
         1040 Avenue of the Americas, 20th Floor
         New York, NY 10018
         Telephone: (212) 765-2100
         E-mail: hpordy@spivaklipton.com
                 esprotzer@spivklipton.com

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY: Lardis Sues Over Unauthorized Info Access
--------------------------------------------------------------
ALEXANDRA LARDIS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, Defendant,
Case No. 1:23-cv-10241 (S.D.N.Y., November 21, 2023) is a class
action against the Defendant for negligence, breach of implied
contract, breach of express contract, and violation of the New York
General Business Law.

The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and
safeguard the confidential information of the Plaintiff and
similarly situated individuals stored within its MOVEit File
Transfer solution following a data breach that occurred on
approximately May 30, 2023. The Defendant also failed to timely
notify the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals about the
data breach. As a result, the private information of the Plaintiff
and Class members was compromised and damaged through access by and
disclosure to unknown and unauthorized third parties, the suit
alleges.

Columbia University is a private university located in New York,
New York. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Matthew A. Girardi, Esq.
         BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
         1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor
         New York, NY 10019
         Telephone: (646) 837-7150
         Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
         E-mail: mgirardi@bursor.com

                 - and -

         L. Timothy Fisher, Esq.
         BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
         1990 North California Boulevard, Suite 940
         Walnut Creek, CA 94596
         Telephone: (925) 300-4455
         Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
         E-mail: ltfisher@bursor.com

                 - and -

         Jonathan L. Wolloch, Esq.
         BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
         701 Brickell Ave., Suite 1420
         Miami, FL 33131
         Telephone: (305) 330-5512
         Facsimile: (305) 676-9006
         E-mail: jwolloch@bursor.com

CROSSCITY INSPECTION: Faces Izaguirre Wage & Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y.
------------------------------------------------------------------
JEFRY ARIEL IZAGUIRRE, EVER GEOVANNY GONZALEZ CEVEDA, EDAN
CEVEDACACERES, and EDAN CALDERON GARCIA, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. CROSSCITY
INSPECTION SERVICES, INC., HUGE CONSTRUCTION LLC, MEIQIAO LLC, and
WEIHONG HU, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-08646 (E.D.N.Y., November
21, 2023) is a class action against the Defendants for violations
of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law
including failure to pay overtime wages, failure to timely pay
wages, failure to provide wage notices, and failure to provide wage
statements.

The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as masons and/or
carpenters at any time between 2019 and 2022.

Crosscity Inspection Services, Inc. is an inspection services
company, with a principal executive office at 61-27 186th Street
Fresh Meadows, New York.

Huge Construction LLC is a construction company, with a principal
executive office at 61-27 186th Street Fresh Meadows, New York.

Meiqiao LLC is a limited liability company, with a principal
executive office at 61-27 186th Street Fresh Meadows, New York.
[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:                
      
         Roman Avshalumov, Esq.
         HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
         80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601
         Kew Gardens, NY 11415
         Telephone: (718) 263-9591
         Facsimile: (718) 263-9598

DAIRYLAND USA: Prelim Collective Action Certification Sought
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Mauricio Orbetta, Delroy
Harriot, and Gosnell Butler, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, v. Dairyland USA Corporation, The Chef's
Warehouse, Inc., Case No. 1:20-cv-09000-JPC (S.D.N.Y.), the
Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting their motion
for preliminary collective action certification under the Fair
Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

Dairyland USA Corporation wholesales and distributes dairy
products.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Nov. 28, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/481MxxZ at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Jordan El-Hag, Esq.
          EL-HAG & ASSOCIATES, P.C
          777 Westchester Ave., Suite 101
          White Plains, N.Y 10604
          Telephone: (914) 218-6190
          Facsimile: (914) 206-4176
          E-mail: Jordan@elhaglaw.com

DOLLAR GENERAL: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Appointment Due Jan. 26
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized stockholder
rights law firm, reminds investors that a class action lawsuit has
been filed against Dollar General Corporation ("Dollar General" or
the "Company") (NYSE: DG) in the United States District Court for
the Middle District of Tennessee on behalf of all persons and
entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Dollar General common
stock between May 28, 2020 and August 30, 2023, both dates
inclusive (the "Class Period"). Investors have until January 26,
2024 to apply to the Court to be appointed as lead plaintiff in the
lawsuit.

The Dollar General class action lawsuit alleges that defendants
throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements
and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Dollar General stores were
chronically understaffed and suffering from logistical and
inventory management problems which left stores with tens of
millions of dollars' worth of outdated and unwanted inventory,
mispriced goods, and lost and damaged items; (ii) large backlogs of
unsellable merchandise had built up at Dollar General's stores,
which inventory had not been timely written down due to
understaffing and Dollar General's failure to manage its inventory;
(iii) the allotment of employee hours per store per week imposed by
Dollar General management placed employees in virtually impossible
situations where assigned tasks, including those necessary to
effective store operations, could not be completed within the
allotted time; (iv) Dollar General was systematically overcharging
customers for items upon checkout above the listed price in
violation of state laws, including state law violations identified
by state regulators in Arizona, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri,
North Carolina, and Ohio; (v) Dollar General's reported revenue and
earnings during the Class Period were artificially inflated by
defendants' over-pricing scheme; (vi) Dollar General's failure to
manage store inventories and accurately price items upon checkout
risked the loss of customers, lower sales, adverse regulatory
actions, and reputational fallout; and (vii) Dollar General was not
on track to achieve its guidance during the Class Period and such
guidance lacked a reasonable factual basis.

On February 23, 2023, Dollar General announced that fourth quarter
of 2022 sales and earnings would come in materially below what
Dollar General had led investors to expect as recently as December
2022. On this news, the price of Dollar General common stock fell.

Then, on March 16, 2023, Dollar General revealed, among other
things, that it missed its prior annual net sales guidance by
approximately $140 million. On this news, the price of Dollar
General common stock fell nearly 3%.

Thereafter, on June 1, 2023, Dollar General reported first quarter
of 2023 revenue of $130 million below analysts' estimates. Dollar
General also slashed its full year 2023 financial forecast and that
it further only expected full year 2023 net sales growth in the
range of 3.5% to 5%, down 26% at the midpoint from the prior 5.5%
to 6% range provided in March 2023. On this news, the price of
Dollar General common stock fell nearly 20%.

Finally, on August 31, 2023, Dollar General reported lower than
expected second quarter of 2023 financial results and again slashed
its sales and profit outlook for full year 2023. Dollar General
blamed weaker consumer spending on non-essential purchases and
increasing theft for the shortfall. On this news, the price of
Dollar General common stock fell more than 12%.

If you purchased or otherwise acquired Dollar General shares and
suffered a loss, are a long-term stockholder, have information,
would like to learn more about these claims, or have any questions
concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with
respect to these matters, please contact Brandon Walker or Melissa
Fortunato by email at investigations@bespc.com, telephone at (212)
355-4648, or by filling out this contact form. There is no cost or
obligation to you.

About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.:

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm
with offices in New York, California, and South Carolina. The firm
represents individual and institutional investors in commercial,
securities, derivative, and other complex litigation in state and
federal courts across the country. For more information about the
firm, please visit www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior
results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

Contact Information:

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
Brandon Walker, Esq.

Marion Passmore, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
investigations@bespc.com
www.bespc.com [GN]

DUPONT DE NEMOURS: City of West Point Opts Out of PFAs Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Charlotte Reames, writing for The LaGrange Daily News, reports that
the West Point City Council recently voted to opt out of a pending
class action suit against Dupont and 3M concerning harmful
chemicals in the water system.  

During the Nov. 28 work session, the city went into executive
session to discuss the litigation before taking any action.   

According to city attorney Alex Dixon, there is no indication that
the per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), commonly known as
"forever chemicals," are present in the city's water system.   

"The city is simply reserving the right to pursue its own
litigation if that ever becomes an issue in order to protect the
quality of the drinking water for the city of West Point water
system," Dixon said.  

Dupont and 3M have attempted to settle a class action lawsuit with
many companies and cities for chemical contamination. Dixon said a
number of cities have taken similar action, including the city of
LaGrange, who voted to opt out of the pending class action suit
earlier this month.  

The PFAS are long-lasting chemicals that take a long time to break
down. They are often used in many products like to help resist
water, oil and other variables.  

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, studies have
linked the presence of PFAS to harmful health risks in humans and
animals. They are found in the water, air, soil and fish all around
the world. [GN]

FAMILY DOLLAR: Customers Receive Gift Cards as Part of Settlement
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Lydian Kennin and Jordan Gartner of WLBT report that Family Dollar
customers may be eligible for a gift card following a class action
lawsuit against the discount retailer.

Residents in Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri
and Tennessee who shopped at Family Dollar from Jan. 1, 2020,
through Feb. 18, 2022, could receive a $25 gift card.

WMC reports that the gift card is a result of a class action
settlement that was reached after a rat-infested warehouse was
discovered in 2022.

According to a public notice from the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of Tennessee, the settlement stems from a pest
infestation lawsuit that was filed in October against Family
Dollar's branches in six Southern states.

In February 2022, the Food and Drug Administration uncovered a rat
infestation at Family Dollar's West Memphis Distribution Center.

The lawsuit claimed the company sold potentially contaminated
products in certain stores starting in January 2020.

According to court documents, both Family Dollar and the plaintiffs
agreed to a settlement to avoid the costs and risks of a trial.

Family Dollar will reportedly provide a $25 gift card per eligible
household to qualifying shoppers who submit a claim form.

The claim must be submitted by Jan. 9, 2024, and will need to be
approved before the gift card is issued.

More information regarding the settlement and claims are available
online. [GN]

FISKER INC: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Appointment Due January 26
--------------------------------------------------------------
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized stockholder
rights law firm, reminds investors that a class action lawsuit has
been filed against Fisker Inc. ("Fisker" or the "Company") in the
United States District Court for the Central District of California
on behalf of all persons and entities who purchased or otherwise
acquired Fisker securities between August 4, 2023 and November 20,
2023, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"). Investors have
until January 26, 2024 to apply to the Court to be appointed as
lead plaintiff in the lawsuit.

On November 8, 2023, before the market opened, Fisker announced
that the completion of the Company's financial statements would be
delayed due to the appointment of a new chief accounting officer
("CAO") and the departure of the Company's former CAO. The Company
had previously announced former CAO, John Finnucan ("Finnucan")
provided notice of intent to resign on September 19, 2023,
effective October 27, 2023. Fisker's new CAO, Florus Beuting
("Beuting"), was hired effective as of November 6, 2023. The
Company advised it "expects to file its Form 10-Q by November 14,
2023." On this news, the Company's share price fell $0.38, or 8.7%,
to close at $3.99 per share on November 8, 2023, on unusually heavy
trading volume.

Then, on November 13, 2023, after the market closed, Fisker
announced its third quarter 2023 financial results, reporting a
loss of $91.0 million and $0.27 loss per share. The Company also
reported $78.02 million in selling, general and administrative
operating costs and expenses, as well as $9.42 million for research
and development, totaling $87.44 million for total operating costs
and expenses for the three months ended September 30, 2023. The
Company also cut its production forecast for the year and disclosed
that, though 4,725 Oceans were built in the third quarter, only
1,097 were delivered to customers. The Company also announced it
would be unable to timely file the Company's Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2023. The Company
disclosed, in preparing its results, it had determined "it has
material weaknesses" in "internal control over financial
reporting."

On that same day, the Company held an earnings call wherein
Defendants disclosed that the delay in reporting was due to having
a "highly complex quarter" including "very complex accounting along
with convertible notes and accounting for derivative" and "things
like raw material inventory accounting and finished goods inventory
accounting[.]" The Company also disclosed that "delivery and the
service infrastructure" was limiting deliveries and, as a result,
the Company was "in the process of dramatically overhauling our
service and delivery infrastructure." On this news, the Company's
share price fell $0.77, or 18.7%, to close at $3.34 per share on
November 14, 2023, on unusually heavy trading volume.

On November 20, 2023, after the market closed, the Company
disclosed that Beuting (the CAO hired November 6, 2023) had
provided notice of his intent to resign from the Company on
November 14, 2023, effective immediately. On this news, the
Company's share price fell $0.35, or 15%, to close at $2.00 per
share on November 21, 2023, on unusually heavy trading volume

Finally, on November 22, 2023, the Company filed its Form 10-Q
quarterly report for the period ended September 30, 2023, which
disclosed that the Company had "identified approximately $20
million of expenses" which were "incorrectly recorded primarily as
selling, general and administrative expenses in our preliminary
earnings results, but were later determined to be associated with
production set-up activities" and that "other inventory adjustments
were recorded resulting in a $4.0 million increase in net loss
subsequent to the preliminary earnings results."

The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout
the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or
misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material
adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and
prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to
investors: (1) that Fisker had a material weakness in its internal
control over financial reporting; (2) that Fisker had incorrectly
accounted for certain costs; (3) that as a result the Company was
likely to delay filing its quarterly report; (4) that Fisker's
infrastructure was limiting its ability to deliver its production;
and (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive
statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects
were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

"The Best Report Benzinga Has Ever Produced"
Massive returns are possible within this market! For a limited
time, get access to the Benzinga Insider Report, usually $47/month,
for just $0.99! Discover extremely undervalued stock picks before
they skyrocket! Time is running out! Act fast and secure your
future wealth at this unbelievable discount! Claim Your $0.99 Offer
NOW!

If you purchased or otherwise acquired Fisker shares and suffered a
loss, are a long-term stockholder, have information, would like to
learn more about these claims, or have any questions concerning
this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these
matters, please contact Brandon Walker or Marion Passmore by email
at investigations@bespc.com, telephone at (212) 355-4648, or by
filling out this contact form. There is no cost or obligation to
you.

             About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.:

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm
with offices in New York, California, and South Carolina. The firm
represents individual and institutional investors in commercial,
securities, derivative, and other complex litigation in state and
federal courts across the country. For more information about the
firm, please visit www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior
results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

Contact Information:

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
Brandon Walker, Esq.

Marion Passmore, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
investigations@bespc.com
www.bespc.com [GN]

FIVE STAR: Underpays Kitchen Laborers, Ramirez Suit Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
ROLANDO RAMIREZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. FIVE STAR STAFFING, LLC, aka STAFFING BY
CHARLES, LLC, ARAMARK SERVICES, INC., CHARLES GAMBOA, and GLADYS
HERNANDEZ, Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-22572 (D.N.J., November 21,
2023) is a class action against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the
New Jersey State Wage and Hour Law, and the New Jersey Wage Payment
Law.

Plaintiff Ramirez was employed by the Defendants as a kitchen
laborer from approximately July 2022 through mid-December 2022.

Five Star Staffing, LLC, also known as Staffing by Charles, LLC, is
a staffing services provider, with its main business address at 28
Clifton Blvd., Clifton, New Jersey.

Aramark Services, Inc. is a publicly traded company doing business
in New Jersey. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Andrew I. Glenn, Esq.
         Jodi J. Jaffe, Esq.
         JAFFE GLENN LAW GROUP, PA
         300 Carnegie Center, Suite 150
         Princeton, NJ 08540
         Telephone: (201) 687-9977
         Facsimile: (201) 595-0308
         Email: aglenn@jaffeglenn.com
                jjaffe@jaffeglenn.com

GEMINI SOLAR: Filing for Conditional Class Cert Due Jan. 8, 2024
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JUSTIN PACK, et al., v.
GEMINI SOLAR LLC, et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-01156-SDM-KAJ (S.D.
Ohio), the Hon. Judge Kimberly A. Jolson entered an order setting
the deadline for the Plaintiffs to file a Motion for Conditional
Class Certification to January 8, 2024.

Additionally, because this case is an Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA) action and pursuant to the recent decision in Clark v. A&L
Homecare and Training Center, LLC.

The Plaintiffs must file a Motion for Court-Supervised Notice to
Potential Opt-In Plaintiffs.

On November 15, 2023, the Court ordered the Defendants to
supplement discovery responses to fully comply with their discovery
obligations.

The Court understands that Defendants have since served Plaintiffs
supplemental discovery responses, and Plaintiffs now believe they
have enough information to file a Motion for conditional class
certification.

Gemini Solar is in the Solar Energy Contractor business.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 28, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47TeKam at no extra charge.[CC]
 


GENERAC HOLDINGS: Walling Sues Over Drop of Securities Price
------------------------------------------------------------
CHRISTOPHER WALLING, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GENERAC HOLDINGS, INC., AARON P.
JAGFELD, and YORK A. RAGEN, Defendants, Case No. 3:23-cv-00808
(W.D. Wis., November 21, 2023) is a class action against the
Defendants for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

According to the complaint, the Defendants made materially false
and misleading statements regarding Generac's business, operations,
and prospects in order to trade Generac securities at artificially
inflated prices between May 3, 2023 and August 3, 2023.
Specifically, the Defendants made false and misleading statements
about the company's ability to retain and grow its residential
sales sector in the face of difficult macroeconomic trends, such as
inflation. The Defendants underplayed the impact of inflation on
consumer generator sales, going so far as to say that it is trumped
by other factors. Consequently, the Defendants provided investors
with a skewed outlook for 2023, asserting that the company would
recover sales by the second half of 2023, in spite of macroeconomic
factors which disfavored consumer spending, the suit alleges.

When the truth emerged, Generac's shares allegedly dropped to
$153.38 on August 1, 2023 and by the close on August 3, 2023,
shares plummeted to $110.77.

Generac Holdings, Inc. is a producer or standby power generators,
located at S45 W29290 Highway 59, Waukesha, Wisconsin. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Andrew G. Frank, Esq.
         MALLERY SC
         731 North Jackson Street, Suite 900
         Milwaukee, WI 53202
         Telephone: (414) 271-2424
         Facsimile: (414) 271-8678
         E-mail: afrank@mallerysc.com

                 - and -

         Adam M. Apton, Esq.
         LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
         33 Whitehall Street, 17th Floor
         New York, NY 10004
         Telephone: (212) 363-7500
         Facsimile: (212) 363-7171

HOME PARTNERS: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to Jan. 11, 2024
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as FRANK RICHMOND et al., v.
HOME PARTNERS HOLDING LLC et al., Case No. 3:22-cv-05704-DGE (W.D.
Wash.), the Hon. Judge David G. Estudillo entered an order granting
stipulated mnotion to extend deadlines:

                                         Old            New
                                         Deadline       Deadline

  Motion for class certification      Dec. 4, 2023     Jan. 11,
2024
  filed-by deadline.

  Defendants' opposition to           Jan. 12, 2024    Feb. 23,
2024
  Class Certification

  Plaintiffs' reply to Class          Feb. 2, 2024     Mar. 15,
2024
  Certification

  Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs'     Dec. 18, 2023    Jan. 29,
2024
  Individual Claims Motion for
  Summary Judgment filed-by
  deadline

  Plaintiffs' opposition to           Jan. 22, 2024    Feb. 29,
2024
  Summary Judgment

  Defendants' Reply to Summary        Feb. 12, 2024    Mar. 21,
2024
  Judgment

  Discovery shall be completed by     Mar. 1, 2024     May 31,
2024,
                                                       or 120 days

                                                       after class

                                                      
certification
                                                       is decided,

                                                       whichever is

                                                       later

  Dispositive Motion Deadline         Mar. 31, 2024    July 1,
2024,
                                                       or 150 days

                                                       after class

                                                      
certification
                                                       is decided,

                                                       whichever is

                                                       later

Home Partners provides mortgage finance services. The Company
offers financing for homeownership.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 28, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Rs0Kip at no extra charge.[CC]
 


HORMEL FOODS: Continues to Defend Antitrust Class Suit
------------------------------------------------------
Hormel Foods Corp. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending October 29, 2023 filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on December 6, 2023, that the Company
continues to defend itself from an antitrust class suit in the
United States District Court for the District of Minnesota.

Beginning in June 2018, a series of putative class action
complaints were filed against the Company, as well as several other
pork-processing companies and a benchmarking service called Agri
Stats in the United States District Court for the District of
Minnesota styled In re Pork Antitrust Litigation (the Pork
Antitrust Civil Litigation).

The plaintiffs allege, among other things, that beginning in
January 2009, the defendants conspired and combined to fix, raise,
maintain, and stabilize the price of pork and pork
products—including through the use of Agri Stats—in violation
of federal antitrust laws.

The complaints on behalf of the putative classes of indirect
purchasers also include causes of action under various state unfair
competition laws, consumer protection laws, and unjust enrichment
common laws.

The plaintiffs seek treble damages, injunctive relief, pre-and
post-judgment interest, costs, and attorneys' fees.

Since the original filing, certain direct-action plaintiffs have
opted out of class treatment and are proceeding with individual
direct actions making similar claims, and others may do so in the
future.

The Company has not recorded any liability for these matters as it
does not believe a loss is probable, and it cannot reasonably
estimate any reasonably possible loss as the Company believes that
it has valid and meritorious defenses against the allegations.

Hormel Foods is a multinational manufacturer and marketer of high-
quality, brand-name food and meat products for consumers.



HORMEL FOODS: Continues to Defend Antitrust Class Suit in Illinois
------------------------------------------------------------------
Hormel Foods Corp. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending October 29, 2023 filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on December 6, 2023, that the Company
continues to defend itself from Turkey Antitrust class suit in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois.

Beginning in December 2019, a series of putative class action
complaints were filed against the Company, as well as several other
turkey-processing companies and a benchmarking service called Agri
Stats, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois styled In re Turkey Antitrust Litigation.

The plaintiffs allege, among other things, that from at least 2010
to 2017, the defendants conspired and combined to fix, raise,
maintain, and stabilize the price of turkey products—including
through the use of Agri Stats—in violation of federal antitrust
laws.

The complaints on behalf of the putative classes of indirect
purchasers also include causes of action under various state unfair
competition laws, consumer protection laws, and unjust enrichment
common laws. The plaintiffs seek treble damages, injunctive relief,
pre-and post-judgment interest, costs, and attorneys' fees.

Since the original filing, certain direct-action plaintiffs have
opted out of class treatment and are proceeding with individual
direct actions making similar claims, and others may do so in the
future.

The Company has not recorded any liability for these matters as it
does not believe a loss is probable, and it cannot reasonably
estimate any reasonably possible loss as the Company believes that
it has valid and meritorious defenses against the allegations.

Hormel Foods is a multinational manufacturer and marketer of high-
quality, brand-name food and meat products for consumers.



HORMEL FOODS: Continues to Defend Brown Antitrust Suit in Colorado
------------------------------------------------------------------
Hormel Foods Corp. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending October 29, 2023 filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on December 6, 2023, that the Company
continues to defend itself from the Brown Antitrust class suit in
the United States District Court for the District of Colorado.

In November 2022, a putative class of non-supervisory production
and maintenance employees at "red meat" processing plants in the
continental United States filed a class action complaint against
the Company and various other beef- and pork-processing companies
in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado
styled Brown, et al. v. JBS USA Food Co., et al.

The plaintiffs allege that since 2014, the defendants directly and
through a wage survey and benchmarking service exchanged
information regarding compensation in an effort to depress and fix
wages and benefits for employees at beef- and pork-processing
plants in violation of federal antitrust laws.

The plaintiffs seek, among other things, treble monetary damages,
punitive damages, restitution, and pre-and post-judgment interest,
as well as declaratory and injunctive relief.

The Company has not recorded any liability for this matter as it
does not believe a loss is probable, and it cannot reasonably
estimate any reasonably possible loss as the Company believes that
it has valid and meritorious defenses against the allegations.

Hormel Foods is a multinational manufacturer and marketer of high-
quality, brand-name food and meat products for consumers.

HORMEL FOODS: Continues to Defend Jien Class Suit
-------------------------------------------------
Hormel Foods Corp. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending October 29, 2023 filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on December 6, 2023, that the Company
continues to defend itself from the Jien class suit in the United
States District Court for the District of Maryland.

In December 2019, a putative class of non-supervisory production
and maintenance employees at poultry-processing plants in the
continental United States filed an amended consolidated class
action complaint against the Company and various other poultry
processing companies in the United States District Court for the
District of Maryland styled Jien, et al. v. Perdue Farms, Inc., et
al.

The plaintiffs allege that since 2009, the defendants directly and
through a wage survey and benchmarking service exchanged
information regarding compensation in an effort to depress and fix
wages and benefits for employees at poultry-processing plants, feed
mills, and hatcheries in violation of federal antitrust laws.

The plaintiffs seek, among other things, treble monetary damages,
punitive damages, restitution, and pre-and post-judgment interest,
as well as declaratory and injunctive relief.

In July 2022, the Court partially granted the Company’s motion to
dismiss, and dismissed plaintiffs' per se wage-fixing claim as to
the Company.

The Company has not recorded any liability for this matter as it
does not believe a loss is probable, and it cannot reasonably
estimate any reasonably possible loss as the Company believes that
it has valid and meritorious defenses against the allegations.

Hormel Foods is a multinational manufacturer and marketer of high-
quality, brand-name food and meat products for consumers.


INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS: Jenkins Sues Over Unprotected Personal Info
-------------------------------------------------------------------
JARVIS BRYANT JENKINS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES
CORPORATION and JOHNSON & JOHNSON HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS, INC.,
Defendants, Case No. 7:23-cv-10244 (S.D.N.Y., November 21, 2023) is
a class action against the Defendants for negligence, negligence
per se, breach of confidence, breach of implied covenant of good
faith and fair dealing, gross negligence, breach of fiduciary duty,
unjust enrichment, and violation of Florida Deceptive and Unfair
Trade Practices Act.

The case arises from the Defendants' failure to properly secure and
safeguard the personally identifiable information (PII) and
protected health information (PHI) of the Plaintiff and similarly
situated customers stored within International Business Machines
Corporation's network following a data breach that occurred on
August 2, 2023. The Defendants also failed to timely notify the
Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals about the data breach.
As a result, the private information of the Plaintiff and Class
members was compromised and damaged through access by and
disclosure to unknown and unauthorized third parties, says the
suit.

International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) is a technology
company, with a principal place of business located at 1 Orchard
Road Armonk, New York.

Johnson & Johnson Health Care Systems, Inc. is a pharmaceutical
company, with a principal place of business located at 425 Hoes
Lane Piscataway, New Jersey. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Andrew Chan Wolinsky, Esq.
         Yavar Bathaee, Esq.
         Chang Hahn, Esq.
         BATHAEE DUNNE LLP
         445 Park Avenue, 9th Floor
         New York, NY 10022
         Telephone: (332) 322-8835
         E-mail: awolinsky@bathaeedunne.com
                 yavar@bathaeedunne.com
                 chahn@bathaeedunne.com

                 - and -

         Brian J. Dunne, Esq.
         Edward M. Grauman, Esq.
         BATHAEE DUNNE LLP
         901 South MoPac Expressway
         Barton Oaks Plaza I, Suite 300
         Austin, TX 78746
         Telephone: (213) 462-2772
         E-mail: bdunne@bathaeedunne.com
                 egrauman@bathaeedunne.com

                 - and -

         Allison Watson Cross, Esq.
         BATHAEE DUNNE LLP
         3420 Bristol Street, Suite 600
         Costa Mesa, CA 92626
         Telephone: (213) 462-2772
         E-mail: across@bathaeedunne.com

                 - and -

         Tina Wolfson, Esq.
         Deborah De Villa, Esq.
         AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC
         521 Fifth Avenue | 17th Floor
         New York, NY 10175
         Telephone: (917) 336-0171
         Facsimile: (917) 336-0177
         E-mail: twolfson@ahdootwolfson.com
                 ddevilla@ahdootwolfson.com

JOHN DAVIS: Sanders' Claims Dismissed from Bailey Class Action
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Bailey No. 970872 v. JOHN
DAVIS et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01239-JMB-PJG (W.D. Mich.), the Hon.
Judge Jane M. Beckering entered an order that the Plaintiff Sanders
is dismissed from the suit.

-- The Plaintiff Sanders's claims are dismissed without prejudice
to
    his right to file a new case that complies with the applicable

    provisions of 28 U.S.C. section 1915.

-- The Court further ordered that the Clerk of Court shall sever
the
    claims of remaining Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz,

    Thomas, Smith, Jerry and Archie into separate actions.

-- The Plaintiff Beneteau may proceed under the existing case
number.
    The Clerk shall open a new case for the claims of each of the
    remaining Plaintiffs. The pleadings filed to date in the
instant
    case shall appear on the docket of each case. The eight cases
that
    result from the severance of Plaintiffs' claims shall be
related
    cases under the Local Rules.

-- The Clerk of Court shall send to each remaining Plaintiff
    (Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
Jerry
    and Archie) a copy of the form complaint under 42 U.S.C.
section
    1983 for a civil action by a person in state custody.

-- Each remaining Plaintiff (Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree,
    Ortiz, Thomas, Smith, Jerry and Archie) shall, within 28 days,
in
    that the Plaintiff's action, file an amended complaint on the
form
    complaint setting forth only the allegations relevant to that
    Plaintiff's claims for relief. Failure to timely file an
amended
    complaint on the approved Court form may result in dismissal of

    that the Plaintiff's action.

-- The Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie are granted leave to proceed in forma
pauperis,
    and Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie may proceed in forma pauperis without payment
of
    an initial partial filing fee.

-- The Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie will each remain liable for their $38.88
    proportionate share of the filing fee as funds become
available,
    to be paid in each of their respective cases.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 28, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3uMsdCE at no extra charge.[CC]

JOHN DAVIS: Sanders' Claims Dismissed from Beneteau Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Beneteau No. 453276, et
al., v. JOHN DAVIS et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01114-JMB-PJG (W.D.
Mich.), the Hon. Judge Jane M. Beckering entered an order that the
Plaintiff Sanders is dismissed from the suit.

-- The Plaintiff Sanders's claims are dismissed without prejudice
to
    his right to file a new case that complies with the applicable

    provisions of 28 U.S.C. section 1915.

-- The Court further ordered that the Clerk of Court shall sever
the
    claims of remaining Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz,

    Thomas, Smith, Jerry and Archie into separate actions.

-- The Plaintiff Beneteau may proceed under the existing case
number.
    The Clerk shall open a new case for the claims of each of the
    remaining Plaintiffs. The pleadings filed to date in the
instant
    case shall appear on the docket of each case. The eight cases
that
    result from the severance of Plaintiffs' claims shall be
related
    cases under the Local Rules.

-- The Clerk of Court shall send to each remaining Plaintiff
    (Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
Jerry
    and Archie) a copy of the form complaint under 42 U.S.C.
section
    1983 for a civil action by a person in state custody.

-- Each remaining Plaintiff (Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree,
    Ortiz, Thomas, Smith, Jerry and Archie) shall, within 28 days,
in
    that the Plaintiff's action, file an amended complaint on the
form
    complaint setting forth only the allegations relevant to that
    Plaintiff's claims for relief. Failure to timely file an
amended
    complaint on the approved Court form may result in dismissal of

    that the Plaintiff's action.

-- The Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie are granted leave to proceed in forma
pauperis,
    and Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie may proceed in forma pauperis without payment
of
    an initial partial filing fee.

-- The Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie will each remain liable for their $38.88
    proportionate share of the filing fee as funds become
available,
    to be paid in each of their respective cases.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 28, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47J2UQg at no extra charge.[CC]


JOHN DAVIS: Sanders' Claims Dismissed from Jerry Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jerry No. 614415 v. JOHN
DAVIS et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01244-JMB-PJG (W.D. Mich.), the Hon.
Judge Jane M. Beckering entered an order that the Plaintiff Sanders
is dismissed from the suit.

-- The Plaintiff Sanders's claims are dismissed without prejudice
to
    his right to file a new case that complies with the applicable

    provisions of 28 U.S.C. section 1915.

-- The Court further ordered that the Clerk of Court shall sever
the
    claims of remaining Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz,

    Thomas, Smith, Jerry and Archie into separate actions.

-- The Plaintiff Beneteau may proceed under the existing case
number.
    The Clerk shall open a new case for the claims of each of the
    remaining Plaintiffs. The pleadings filed to date in the
instant
    case shall appear on the docket of each case. The eight cases
that
    result from the severance of Plaintiffs' claims shall be
related
    cases under the Local Rules.

-- The Clerk of Court shall send to each remaining Plaintiff
    (Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
Jerry
    and Archie) a copy of the form complaint under 42 U.S.C.
section
    1983 for a civil action by a person in state custody.

-- Each remaining Plaintiff (Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree,
    Ortiz, Thomas, Smith, Jerry and Archie) shall, within 28 days,
in
    that the Plaintiff's action, file an amended complaint on the
form
    complaint setting forth only the allegations relevant to that
    Plaintiff's claims for relief. Failure to timely file an
amended
    complaint on the approved Court form may result in dismissal of

    that the Plaintiff's action.

-- The Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie are granted leave to proceed in forma
pauperis,
    and Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie may proceed in forma pauperis without payment
of
    an initial partial filing fee.

-- The Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie will each remain liable for their $38.88
    proportionate share of the filing fee as funds become
available,
    to be paid in each of their respective cases.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 28, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/418YNL1 at no extra charge.[CC]


JOHN DAVIS: Sanders' Claims Dismissed from Ortiz Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Ortiz No. 956390 v. JOHN
DAVIS et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01241-JMB-PJG (W.D. Mich.), the Hon.
Judge Jane M. Beckering entered an order that the Plaintiff Sanders
is dismissed from the suit.

-- The Plaintiff Sanders's claims are dismissed without prejudice
to
    his right to file a new case that complies with the applicable

    provisions of 28 U.S.C. section 1915.

-- The Court further ordered that the Clerk of Court shall sever
the
    claims of remaining Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz,

    Thomas, Smith, Jerry and Archie into separate actions.

-- The Plaintiff Beneteau may proceed under the existing case
number.
    The Clerk shall open a new case for the claims of each of the
    remaining Plaintiffs. The pleadings filed to date in the
instant
    case shall appear on the docket of each case. The eight cases
that
    result from the severance of Plaintiffs' claims shall be
related
    cases under the Local Rules.

-- The Clerk of Court shall send to each remaining Plaintiff
    (Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
Jerry
    and Archie) a copy of the form complaint under 42 U.S.C.
section
    1983 for a civil action by a person in state custody.

-- Each remaining Plaintiff (Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree,
    Ortiz, Thomas, Smith, Jerry and Archie) shall, within 28 days,
in
    that the Plaintiff's action, file an amended complaint on the
form
    complaint setting forth only the allegations relevant to that
    Plaintiff's claims for relief. Failure to timely file an
amended
    complaint on the approved Court form may result in dismissal of

    that the Plaintiff's action.

-- The Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie are granted leave to proceed in forma
pauperis,
    and Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie may proceed in forma pauperis without payment
of
    an initial partial filing fee.

-- The Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie will each remain liable for their $38.88
    proportionate share of the filing fee as funds become
available,
    to be paid in each of their respective cases.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 28, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/416afa4 at no extra charge.[CC]
 


JOHN DAVIS: Sanders' Claims Dismissed from Thomas Class Action
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Thomas No. 671685 v. JOHN
DAVIS et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01242-JMB-PJG (W.D. Mich.), the Hon.
Judge Jane M. Beckering entered an order that the Plaintiff Sanders
is dismissed from the suit.

-- The Plaintiff Sanders's claims are dismissed without prejudice
to
    his right to file a new case that complies with the applicable

    provisions of 28 U.S.C. section 1915.

-- The Court further ordered that the Clerk of Court shall sever
the
    claims of remaining Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz,

    Thomas, Smith, Jerry and Archie into separate actions.

-- The Plaintiff Beneteau may proceed under the existing case
number.
    The Clerk shall open a new case for the claims of each of the
    remaining Plaintiffs. The pleadings filed to date in the
instant
    case shall appear on the docket of each case. The eight cases
that
    result from the severance of Plaintiffs' claims shall be
related
    cases under the Local Rules.

-- The Clerk of Court shall send to each remaining Plaintiff
    (Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
Jerry
    and Archie) a copy of the form complaint under 42 U.S.C.
section
    1983 for a civil action by a person in state custody.

-- Each remaining Plaintiff (Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree,
    Ortiz, Thomas, Smith, Jerry and Archie) shall, within 28 days,
in
    that the Plaintiff's action, file an amended complaint on the
form
    complaint setting forth only the allegations relevant to that
    Plaintiff's claims for relief. Failure to timely file an
amended
    complaint on the approved Court form may result in dismissal of

    that the Plaintiff's action.

-- The Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie are granted leave to proceed in forma
pauperis,
    and Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie may proceed in forma pauperis without payment
of
    an initial partial filing fee.

-- The Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie will each remain liable for their $38.88
    proportionate share of the filing fee as funds become
available,
    to be paid in each of their respective cases.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 28, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3N9zzGw at no extra charge.[CC]

JOHN DAVIS: Sanders' Claims Dismissed from Tyree Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Tyree v. v. JOHN DAVIS, et
al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01240-JMB-PJG (W.D. Mich.), the Hon. Judge
Jane M. Beckering entered an order that the Plaintiff Sanders is
dismissed from the suit.

-- The Plaintiff Sanders's claims are dismissed without prejudice
to
    his right to file a new case that complies with the applicable

    provisions of 28 U.S.C. section 1915.

-- The Court further ordered that the Clerk of Court shall sever
the
    claims of remaining Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz,

    Thomas, Smith, Jerry and Archie into separate actions.

-- The Plaintiff Beneteau may proceed under the existing case
number.
    The Clerk shall open a new case for the claims of each of the
    remaining Plaintiffs. The pleadings filed to date in the
instant
    case shall appear on the docket of each case. The eight cases
that
    result from the severance of Plaintiffs' claims shall be
related
    cases under the Local Rules.

-- The Clerk of Court shall send to each remaining Plaintiff
    (Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
Jerry
    and Archie) a copy of the form complaint under 42 U.S.C.
section
    1983 for a civil action by a person in state custody.

-- Each remaining Plaintiff (Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree,
    Ortiz, Thomas, Smith, Jerry and Archie) shall, within 28 days,
in
    that the Plaintiff's action, file an amended complaint on the
form
    complaint setting forth only the allegations relevant to that
    Plaintiff's claims for relief. Failure to timely file an
amended
    complaint on the approved Court form may result in dismissal of

    that the Plaintiff's action.

-- The Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie are granted leave to proceed in forma
pauperis,
    and Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie may proceed in forma pauperis without payment
of
    an initial partial filing fee.

-- The Plaintiffs Beneteau, Bailey, Tyree, Ortiz, Thomas, Smith,
    Jerry and Archie will each remain liable for their $38.88
    proportionate share of the filing fee as funds become
available,
    to be paid in each of their respective cases.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 28, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4a4Dm1A at no extra charge.[CC]

KENN KAKOSIAN DDS: Stroude Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Kenn Kakosian,
D.D.S., P.C. The case is styled as Colette Stroude, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated v. Kenn Kakosian, D.D.S.,
P.C., Case No. 1:23-cv-08709 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 27, 2023).

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

Dr. Kenn Kakosian D.D.S, P.C. has been in the dental field for
almost twenty years and has a number of degrees.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          PeterPaul Elhamy Shaker, Esq.
          STEIN SAKS, PLLC
          1 University Plaza, Ste. 620
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Phone: (201) 282-6500
          Email: pshaker@steinsakslegal.com


LA ADELITA: Fails to Properly Pay Restaurant Staff, Santos Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
REBECA NIMIA SANTOS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. LA ADELITA DE WOODSIDE RESTAURANT
CORP., MARIA BONITA 2 CATERING CORPORATION doing business as LA
ADELITA RESTAURANT, and MARIA F. SIMON, Defendants, Case No.
1:23-cv-08642 (E.D.N.Y., November 21, 2023) is a class action
against the Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards
Act and the New York Labor Law including failure to pay overtime
wages, failure to provide wage notices, and failure to provide wage
statements.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as non-exempt cashier,
server, and food packer at La Adelita Restaurant in New York from
January 2021 through April 12, 2023.

La Adelita De Woodside Restaurant Corp. is a restaurant owner and
operator, located at 5321 Roosevelt Avenue, Woodside, New York.

Maria Bonita 2 Catering Corporation, doing business as La Adelita
Restaurant, is a restaurant owner and operator, located at 5321
Roosevelt Avenue, Woodside, New York. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Justin Cilenti, Esq.
         Peter Hans Cooper, Esq.
         CILENTI & COOPER, PLLC
         60 East 42nd Street, 40th Floor
         New York, NY 10165
         Telephone: (212) 209-3933
         Facsimile: (212) 209-7102
         E-mail: pcooper@jcpclaw.com

LOUISIANA: Hooper Files 5th Cir. Appeal in Parker Case
------------------------------------------------------
TIM HOOPER, et al. is taking an appeal from a court order in the
lawsuit entitled Kentrell Parker, et al., on behalf of themselves
and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Tim Hooper,
Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, et al., Defendants, Case No.
3:15-cv-318, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of
Louisiana.

The nature of suit is stated as Prison Conditions.

The appellate case is captioned Parker v. Hooper, Case No.
23-30825, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit, filed on November 20, 2023. [BN]

Plaintiffs-Appellees KENTRELL PARKER, et al., on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, are represented by:

            Ronald Kenneth Lospennato, Esq.
            LAW OFFICE OF RONALD LOSPENNATO
            650 Poydras Street
            New Orleans, LA 70130
            Telephone: (504) 407-7454

                    - and -

            Jeffrey B. Dubner, Esq.
            DEMOCRACY FORWARD FOUNDATION
            P.O. Box 34553
            Washington, DC 20043
            Telephone: (202) 701-1773

Defendants-Appellants TIM HOOPER, Warden, Louisiana State
Penitentiary, et al. are represented by:

            Connell L. Archey, Esq.
            BUTLER SNOW, L.L.P.
            445 North Boulevard
            Baton Rouge, LA 70802
            Telephone: (225) 325-8700

MARTINEZ REFINING: Faces Class Suit Over Refinery's Toxic Releases
------------------------------------------------------------------
FOX KTVU reports that a lawsuit filed against the Martinez Refining
Company could soon turn into a class action suit. The complaint
focuses on what it calls the refinery's "toxic releases" and
alleges that the refinery has played a significant role in
releasing toxic chemicals in the homes of nearly 40,000 people. It
cites several incidents including releases in November 2022 and
July of 2023. KTVU's Claudine Wong speaks with Blair Kittle, the
lead attorney representing the plaintiffs in this suit. [GN]

META PLATFORMS: Berrien County Joins Addictive Platform Class Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
WSJM reports that a nationwide class action lawsuit filed against
social media companies over the effects of social media on young
people has been joined by three Berrien County school districts.

St. Joseph Public Schools, Eau Claire Public Schools, and New
Buffalo Area Schools have all joined in the suit.

New Buffalo Superintendent Adam Bowen tells us in his years as an
educator, he has seen what social media has done to young people,
damaging their mental health and ability to learn.

"There are studies out there, research that shows that it's
impacting the way the brain is, and also the dopamine that's
released within the brain, and it's had some serious side effects,"
Bowen said. "That plays a huge factor not only in their
development, but also in their learning, and also in trying to keep
them engaged and on task. When those receptors in the brain aren't
getting what they need, it's hard for us to keep them engaged and
active."

Bowen says the things social media companies are doing to damage
young minds are unacceptable, and it's the duty of educators to try
to protect students.

Named in the lawsuit are Facebook owner Meta Platforms, which also
owns Instagram. Other sites including TikTok and Snapchat have been
added to the suit.

Bowen says New Buffalo Area Schools became part of it when he was
sent some materials on the action and then presented them to the
board of education.

There isn't yet an estimate what kind of damages would be awarded
to participating school districts if the suit is successful, but
the funds would go to mental health programs. [GN]

NATIONWIDE MUTUAL: Lemus Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Nationwide Mutual
Insurance Company, et al. The case is styled as Ana L. Lemus, on
behalf of herself and others similarly situated v. Nationwide
Mutual Insurance Company, et al., Case No. 23CV012222 (Cal. Super.
Ct., Sacramento Cty., Nov. 27, 2023).

Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company -- https://www.nationwide.com/
-- and affiliated companies, commonly shortened to Nationwide, is a
group of large U.S. insurance and financial services companies
based in Columbus, Ohio.[BN]

NEW HAMPSHIRE: Allowed to File Class Cert Opposition Under Seal
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Price, et al., v. NH
Department of Health and Human Services, Commissioner, et al., Case
No. 1:21-cv-00025 (D.N.H., Filed Jan. 11, 2021), the Hon. Judge
Paul J. Barbadoro entered an endorsed order granting motion to file
under seal the Defendants' Memorandum of Law in Opposition to the
Plaintiffs' motion for class certification and several accompanying
Exhibits.

The suit alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

NH Department of Health & Human Services provides services in the
areas of mental health, developmental disability, substance abuse,
and public health.[CC]



NEW HAMPSHIRE: Court Certifies Class in Emily Lawsuit
-----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Emily Fitzmorris, et al.,
v. New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services
Commissioner Lori Weaver, et al. Case No. 1:21-cv-00025-PB
(D.N.H.), the Hon. Judge Paul J. Barbadoro entered an order that
the parties' respective motions to exclude are denied and the
plaintiffs' renewed motion for class certification is granted.

The court certifies the class of:

   "CFI Waiver participants who, during the pendency of this
lawsuit,
   have been placed at serious risk of unjustified
   institutionalization because the Defendants, by act or omission,

   fail to ensure that the CFI participants receive the community-
   based long term care services and supports through the waiver
   program for which they have been found eligible and assessed to

   need."

The Plaintiffs Emily Fitzmorris and Kathleen Bates are appointed as
class representatives, and their chosen counsel are appointed as
class counsel.

The plaintiffs in this putative class action are disabled
individuals who are enrolled in New Hampshire's Choices for
Independence (CFI) Waiver program, a Medicaid program administered
by the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services
(DHHS). The CFI Waiver program provides home and community-based
care services to adults who would otherwise be Medicaid-eligible
for nursing home care.

The plaintiffs contend that DHHS's deficient operation of the CFI
Waiver program has caused participants to be deprived of necessary
medical services in violation of the Medicaid Act, the Americans
with Disabilities Act, and the Rehabilitation Act.

The plaintiffs, Emily Fitzmorris and Kathleen Bates, are disabled
New Hampshire residents who have been authorized to receive a range
of waiver services pursuant to the CFI Waiver program.

New Hampshire Department of Health & Human Services provides
services in the areas of mental health, developmental disability,
substance abuse, and public health.

A copy of the Court's memorandum and order dated Nov. 27, 2023 is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/46HK6zF at no
extra charge.[CC]


NORTHWELL HEALTH: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Marconi Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
AMANDA MARCONI, R.M., a minor, by and through her legal guardian
Amanda Marconi, CORY COYLE, and PATRICK NEALON, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. NORTHWELL
HEALTH, INC. and PERRY JOHNSON & ASSOCIATES, INC., Defendants, Case
No. 2:23-cv-08638 (E.D.N.Y., November 21, 2023) is a class action
against the Defendants for negligence, breach of implied contract,
and violations of New York General Business Law and the New York
Deceptive Sales Practice Act.

The case arises from the Defendants' failure to properly secure and
safeguard personally identifiable information (PII) and protected
health information (PHI) of the Plaintiff and similarly situated
patients stored within their networks following a data breach
discovered from March 27, 2023 until May 2, 2023. The Defendants
also failed to timely notify the Plaintiff and similarly situated
individuals about the data breach. As a result, the private
information of the Plaintiff and Class members was compromised and
damaged through access by and disclosure to unknown and
unauthorized third parties, says the suit.

Northwell Health, Inc. is a healthcare provider with its principal
place of business located at 480 W. 2000 Marcus Ave., New Hyde
Park, New York.

Perry Johnson & Associates, Inc. is a transcription service company
in Henderson, Nevada. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:                
      
         Michael P. Canty, Esq.
         Carol C. Villegas, Esq.
         Danielle Izzo, Esq.
         LABATON SUCHAROW LLP
         140 Broadway
         New York, NY 10005
         Telephone: (212) 907-0700
         Facsimile: (212) 818-0477
         E-mail: mcanty@labaton.com
                 cvillegas@labaton.com
                 dizzo@labaton.com

NORTHWELL HEALTH: Fails to Secure Patients' Info, Kaufman Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
LINDA KAUFMAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NORTHWELL HEALTH, INC. and PERRY JOHNSON &
ASSOCIATES, INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-01935-CDS-EJY (D.
Nev., November 21, 2023) is a class action against the Defendants
for negligence, negligence per se, breach of implied contract, and
violation of New York General Business Law.

The case arises from the Defendants' failure to properly secure and
safeguard personally identifiable information and protected health
information of the Plaintiff and similarly situated patients stored
within their networks following a data breach. The Defendants also
failed to timely notify the Plaintiff and similarly situated
individuals about the data breach. As a result, the private
information of the Plaintiff and Class members was compromised and
damaged through access by and disclosure to unknown and
unauthorized third parties, says the suit.

Northwell Health, Inc. is a healthcare provider with its principal
place of business located at 480 W. 2000 Marcus Ave., New Hyde
Park, New York.

Perry Johnson & Associates, Inc. is a transcription service company
in Henderson, Nevada. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Nathan R. Ring, Esq.
         STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
         3100 W. Charleston Boulevard, Suite 208
         Las Vegas, NV 89102
         Telephone: (725) 235-9750
         E-mail: lasvegas@stranchlaw.com

                 - and -

         M. Anderson Berry, Esq.
         Gregory Haroutunian, Esq.
         Brandon P. Jack, Esq.
         CLAYEO C. ARNOLD
         A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
         865 Howe Avenue
         Sacramento, CA 95825
         Telephone: (916) 239-4778
         Facsimile: (916) 924-1829
         E-mail: aberry@justice4you.com
                 gharoutunian@justice4you.com
                 bjack@justice4you.com

OKTA INC: Rosen Law Firm Investigates Fiduciary Duty Breach
-----------------------------------------------------------
Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, on Dec. 3
disclosed that it is investigating potential breaches of fiduciary
duties by the directors and officers of Okta, Inc. (NASDAQ: OKTA)
regarding Okta's cybersecurity incident impacting the Company's
business, operations, and stock price.

If you currently own shares of Okta, please visit the firm's
website at https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=6365 for
more information. You may also contact Phillip Kim of Rosen Law
Firm toll free at 866-767-3653 or via email at pkim@rosenlegal.com
or cases@rosenlegal.com.

The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the
largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese
Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class
Action Services for number of securities class action settlements
in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013
and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In
2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In
2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a
Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been
recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.

Contacts

Laurence Rosen, Esq.
Phillip Kim, Esq.
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016

Tel: (212) 686-1060
Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
Fax: (212) 202-3827
lrosen@rosenlegal.com
pkim@rosenlegal.com
cases@rosenlegal.com
www.rosenlegal.com [GN]

OPENAI INC: Illegally Reproduces Copyrighted Works, Sancton Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
JULIAN SANCTON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. OPENAI, INC., OPENAI GP, LLC, OPENAI, LLC,
OPENAI OPCO LLC, OPENAI GLOBAL LLC, OAI CORPORATION, LLC, OPENAI
HOLDINGS, LLC, and MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Defendants, Case No.
1:23-cv-10211 (S.D.N.Y., November 21, 2023) is a class action
against the Defendants for copyright infringement and contributory
infringement.

The case arises from the Defendants' disregard for the exclusive
rights of the Plaintiff and similarly situated writers by making
commercial reproductions of millions, maybe billions, of
copyrighted works without any compensation to authors, without a
license, and without permission. In doing so, the Defendants have
infringed on the exclusive rights of the Plaintiff and other
writers and rightsholders whose work has been copied and
appropriated to train their artificial intelligence models. The
Defendants copied and data-mined the works of writers, without
compensation, to build a machine that is capable (or, as technology
advances, will soon be capable) of performing the same type of work
for which these writers would be paid. The Plaintiff, on behalf of
himself and the proposed Class, seeks damages from the Defendants
for their largescale infringement of their copyrighted works, as
well as injunctive relief.

OpenAI Inc. is an American artificial intelligence research
organization, with a principal place of business in San Francisco,
California.

OpenAI GP, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with a
principal place of business in San Francisco, California.

OpenAI OpCo LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with a
principal place of business in San Francisco, California.

OpenAI, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with a
principal place of business in San Francisco, California.

OpenAI Global LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with a
principal place of business in San Francisco, California.

OAI Corporation, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with a
principal place of business in San Francisco, California.

OpenAI Holdings, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company based
in San Francisco, California.

Microsoft Corporation is a technology company, with a principal
place of business and headquarters in Redmond, Washington. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         J. Craig Smyser, Esq.
         SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P
         1301 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor
         New York, NY 10019
         Telephone: (212) 336-8330
         Facsimile: (212) 336-8340
         E-mail: csmyser@susmangodfrey.com

                 - and -

         Justin A. Nelson, Esq.
         Alejandra C. Salinas, Esq.
         SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P
         1000 Louisiana Street, Suite 5100
         Houston, TX 77002
         Telephone: (713) 651-9366
         Facsimile: (713) 654-6666
         E-mail: jnelson@susmangodfrey.com
                 asalinas@susmangodfrey.com

                 - and -

         Rohit D. Nath, Esq.
         SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P
         1900 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1400
         Los Angeles, CA 90067
         Telephone: (310) 789-3100
         Facsimile: (310) 789-3150
         E-mail: rnath@susmangodfrey.com

OVERLAKE HOSPITAL: Bid for Class Certification Due Sept. 16, 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JACQ NIENABER, on behalf
of herself and all others similarly situated, v. OVERLAKE HOSPITAL
MEDICAL CENTER, Case No. 2:23-cv-01159-TL (W.D. Wash.), the Hon.
Judge Tana Lin entered an order setting following case schedule
through class certification:

                 Event                             Date

  Deadline for filing amended pleadings         Jan. 3, 2024

  Deadline for joining additional parties       May 2, 2024

  Motion for Class Certification due            Sept. 16, 2024

  Disclosure of expert testimony under          Sept. 30, 2024
  FRCP 26(a)(2) due

  Disclosure of rebuttal expert testimony       Oct. 30, 2024
  under FRCP 26(a)(2) due

  All motions related to discovery must         Oct. 30, 2024
  be filed by

  Opposition to Motion for Class                Nov. 18, 2024
  Certification due

  Discovery completed by                        Nov. 29, 2024

  Reply in support of Motion for Class          Dec. 16, 2024
  Certification due

Overlake is a nonprofit serving Seattle's Eastside community with a
349-bed hospital and a network of primary care, urgent care, and
specialty clinics.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 27, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3GtSlEM at no extra charge.[CC]

PEGASUS TRUCKING: Medina Class Certification Bid Partly OK'd
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RENA NICOLE MEDINA and
ALYSSA BONHAM on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated, v. PEGASUS TRUCKING LLC; and DOES 1-100, Case No.
2:20-cv-07269-JAK-JPR (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge John A. Kronstadt
entered an order granting in part:

    (1) circulation of notice pursuant to 29 U.S.C. section 216(b);


    (2) class certification pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23; and

    (3) a default judgment against Defendant PEGASUS TRUCKING LLC,

        pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2) and Local Rule 55.

Default Judgment is granted against Defendant in favor of Plaintiff
Medina in the amount of $7,079.75. However, the entry of this
judgment is deferred until all claims are resolved, so that a
single judgment can be entered.

It is further ordered that Notice of this action shall be sent by
Plaintiffs' counsel or a claims administration company that
Plaintiffs' counsel selects, to all current and former nonexempt
hourly-paid employees of Defendant who fall within the following
definition of the FLSA Collective:

   "All current and former hourly paid, non-exempt employees who
   were employed by Defendants within the United States and Puerto

   Rico at any time from August 12, 2017 through the date of this
   Order, who have more than one manual override to the electro-
   mechanical time keeping system resulting in hours “clocked in
but
   not paid."

Pegasus Trucking is a provider of transportation and logistics
solutions across Texas, Oklahoma and North Dakota.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 27, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47Csgzk at no extra charge.[CC]

PENSKE TRUCK: McDowell Suit Removed to C.D. California
------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Eric McDowell, an individual; Noel Perez, an
individual, Aaron Stubbs, an individual: and on behalf of all
persons similarly situated v. PENSKE TRUCK LEASING CO., L.P., and
DOES 1-10, inclusive, Case No. CIVSB2324882 was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of California, County of San
Bernardino, to the United States District Court for the Central
District of California on Nov. 27, 2023, and assigned Case No.
5:23-cv-02406.

Here, the amount in controversy so easily exceeds $5 million that
Defendant's calculations address only a few of Plaintiffs' causes
of action – i.e., failure to pay all wages due; failure to
provide accurate itemized wage statements; failure to pay all wages
owed upon separation; and recovery of attorneys' fees.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Evan R Moses, Esq.
          Madeleine K Lee, Esq.
          OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
          400 South Hope Street, Suite 1200
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Phone: 213.239.9800
          Facsimile: 213.239.9045
          Email: evan.moses@ogletree.com
                 madeleine.lee@ogletree.com

               - and -

          Noel M. Hernandez, Esq.
          OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
          10801 W. Charleston Blvd., Ste. 500
          Las Vegas, NV 89135
          Phone: 702-369-6800
          Facsimile: 702-369-6888
          Email: noel.hernandez@ogletree.com


PERRIGO CO: Settlement Reached in Israeli Shareholder Suit
----------------------------------------------------------
Perrigo Company PLC disclosed in its Form 10-Q for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 7, 2023, that in April 2023, the
parties in a securities class action brought in Israel reported to
the Israeli court that the mediation had led to a preliminary
agreement on settlement.

The court set a deadline for the parties to file settlement papers,
which was later extended to November 16, 2023.

On December 31, 2018, a shareholder filed an action against the
company, its former CEO Murray Kessler, and our former CFO Ronald
Winowiecki in Tel Aviv District Court (Baton v. Perrigo Company
plc, et. al.).

The Baton case alleges that persons who purchased securities
through the Tel Aviv stock exchange and suffered damages can assert
claims under Israeli securities law that will follow the liability
principles of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the U.S. Securities
Exchange Act. The plaintiff does not provide an estimate of class
damages. Since 2019, the court granted several requests by Perrigo
to stay the proceedings pending the resolution of proceedings in
the New York federal court.

During 2022, the case was reassigned to a newly-appointed judge.
After the settlement of the U.S. case in New York federal court,
Perrigo's counsel informed the Israeli Court of the final approval
of the settlement of the U.S. case. The parties then sought further
stays of the case while they attempted mediation, which the Court
granted.

Perrigo Company PLC is a provider of over-the-counter health and
wellness solutions. It is headquartered in Ireland and markets
around the world.


PIEDMONT HEALTHCARE: T. D. Suit Removed to N.D. Georgia
-------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as T. D., individually on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Piedmont Healthcare, Inc., Case No.
2023CV387619 was removed from the Superior Court of Fulton County,
to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia on
Nov. 27, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:23-cv-05416-SEG to the
proceeding.

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

Piedmont -- https://www.piedmont.org/ -- is a not-for-profit,
community health system.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Andrew Ready Tate, Esq.
          PEIFFER WOLF CARR KANE CONWAY & WISE LLP
          235 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 400
          Atlanta, GA 30303
          Phone: (404) 282-4806
          Fax: (504) 608-1465
          Email: atate@peifferwolf.com

               - and -

          Brandon Michael Wise, Esq.
          PEIFFER WOLF CARR KANE CONWAY & WISE LLP
          One US Bank Plaza, Suite 1950
          St. Louis, MO 63101
          Phone: (314) 833-4827
          Email: bwise@peifferwolf.com

               - and -

          David S. Almeida, Esq.
          ALMEIDA LAW GROUP LLC
          849 W. Webster Avenue
          Chicago, IL 60614
          Phone: (312) 576-3024
          Email: david@almeidalawgroup.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Alfred J. Saikali, Esq.
          SHOOK HARDY & BACON, LLP-FL
          201 S. Biscayne Blvd., Suite 3200
          Miami, FL 33131
          Phone: (305) 358-5171
          Email: asaikali@shb.com

               - and -

          Caroline Gieser, Esq.
          Joshua Luke Becker, Esq.
          SHOOK, HARDY & BACON
          1230 Peachtree Street, Suite 1200
          Atlanta, GA 30309
          Phone: (864) 680-7518
          Email: cgieser@shb.com
                 jbecker@shb.com


POSTMEDS INC: Fails to Protect Clients' Info, Johnson Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
LINDA JOHNSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. POSTMEDS, INC. d/b/a TRUEPILL, Defendant,
Case No. 3:23-cv-06038-LB (N.D. Cal., November 21, 2023) is a class
action against the Defendant for negligence, negligence per se,
gross negligence, breach of implied contract, unjust enrichment,
bailment, and breach of fiduciary duty.

The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and
safeguard the personally identifiable information (PII) and
protected health information (PHI) of the Plaintiff and similarly
situated customers stored within its network following a data
breach that occurred between August 30, 2023 to September 1, 2023.
The Defendant also failed to timely notify the Plaintiff and
similarly situated individuals about the data breach. As a result,
the private information of the Plaintiff and Class members was
compromised and damaged through access by and disclosure to unknown
and unauthorized third parties, says the suit.

Postmeds, Inc., doing business as Truepill, is a provider of online
pharmacy delivery services, with its principal place of business
located at 3121 Diablo Avenue, Hayward, California. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Daniel L. Warshaw, Esq.
         PEARSON WARSHAW, LLP
         15165 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 400
         Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
         Telephone: (818) 788-8300
         Facsimile: (818) 788-8104
         E-mail: dwarshaw@pwfirm.com

                 - and -

         Jill M. Manning, Esq.
         Neil J. Swartzberg, Esq.
         PEARSON WARSHAW, LLP
         555 Montgomery Street, Suite 1205
         San Francisco, CA 94111
         Telephone: (415) 433-9000
         Facsimile: (415) 433-9008
         E-mail: jmanning@pwfirm.com
                 nswartzberg@pwfirm.com

                 - and -

         Jeffrey A. Koncius, Esq.
         Nicole Ramirez Jones, Esq.
         KIESEL LAW LLP
         86648 Wilshire Boulevard
         Beverly Hills, CA 90211
         Telephone: (310) 228-6929
         Facsimile: (310) 854-0812
         E-mail: koncius@kiesel.law
                 ramirezjones@kiesel.law

                 - and -

         James J. Pizzirusso, Esq.
         HAUSFELD LLP
         888 16th Street, NW, Suite 300
         Washington, DC 20006
         Telephone: (202) 542-7200
         Facsimile: (202) 542-7201
         E-mail: jpizzirusso@hausfeld.com

                 - and -

         Steven M. Nathan, Esq.
         HAUSFELD LLP
         33 Whitehall Street, 14th Floor
         New York, NY 10004
         Telephone: (646) 357-1100
         Facsimile: (212) 202-4322
         E-mail: snathan@hausfeld.com

PRECISION PLANTING: Court Directs Filing of Discovery Plan in Wage
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Wage v. Precision Planting
Inc et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01388-JES-JEH (C.D. Ill.), the Hon.
Judge Jonathan E. Hawley entered a standing order as follows:

   -- Rule 16 scheduling conference

      The Court will set a Rule 16 scheduling conference
approximately
      30 days after the answer or other responsive pleading is
filed.
      The conference will generally be conducted by telephone.

   -- Discovery plan

      The discovery plan shall be filed with the Court at least
three
      calendar days before the Rule 16 scheduling conference.

   -- Waiver of the Rule 16 scheduling conference

      If the parties agree on all matters contained in the
discovery
      plan, then the parties may waive the Rule 16 scheduling
      conference. To do so, the parties shall indicate in the
      discovery that the parties agree upon all maters contained
      within the discovery plan, and they request that the Rule 16

      scheduling conference be cancelled.

   -- Failure of counsel to attend a scheduled telephone hearing

      For the convenience of counsel, the Court conducts most
hearings
      by telephone when possible. Counsel's failure to appear for a

      telephone hearing will be treated as a failure of counsel to

      appear for an in-person hearing.

   -- Discovery disputes brought to the Court's attention after the

      discovery deadline has already passed

      The parties may not raise a discovery dispute with the Court

      after the relevant discovery deadline has passed; all
discovery
      disputes must be brought to the Court's attention before the

      relevant discovery deadline passes. Any discovery disputes
      raised with the Court after the expiration of the relevant
      discovery deadline shall be deemed waived by the Court, even
if
      the parties agreed to conduct discovery after the relevant
      discovery deadline has passed. If the parties agree to
conduct
      discovery after the expiration of a deadline set by the
Court,
      they must still file a motion requesting that the Court move

      that deadline as agreed by the parties in order to avoid any

      subsequent discovery disputes being deemed waived.

   -- Settlement conferences and mediation

      The parties are encouraged to seek a settlement conference or

      mediation with a magistrate judge. Where parties request a
      settlement conference or mediation in a case referred to
Judge
      Hawley, Judge Hawley will conduct said conference or
mediation.

Precision Planting is an Agri-tech design and manufacturing
company.

A copy of the Court's standing order dated Nov. 29, 2023 is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/46OprtK at no
extra charge.[CC]

PREFERRED FAMILY: Bid to Certify Class Stricken from Court's Record
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Gordon v. Preferred Family
Healthcare, Inc., Case No. 2:23-cv-00027 (E.D. Mo., Filed May 18,
2023), Hon. Judge Ronnie L, White entered an order that motion to
certify class, motion to certify class conditionally for collective
action and memorandum in support of motion to certify class
conditionally for collective action, filed by Plaintiff Tara Gordon
are stricken from the record for filing error, as the motion was
filed out of time.

The Court further ordered that the Clerk of the Court shall delete
ECF Nos. 15 and 16 from the record for filing error.

The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Preferred is a health care organization that offers behavioral
health, child welfare, and medical services.[CC]


PRIME HEALTHCARE: Must File Class Cert. Materials in Errata
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re: Prime Healthcare ERISA Litigation,
Case No. 8:20-cv-01529-JLS-JDE (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge
Josephine L. Staton entered an order granting the Defendants'
application for an order permitting Defendants to file Materials in
errata Supporting opposition to Plaintiffs' motion for Class
certification
Under seal.

           Document                 Page(s)               
Redactions

  Exhibit 02 to Declaration    24355-24362; 24341-       
Highlighted
  of Rachel P. Kaercher        24348; 24349-24354         Text
  (Maria Ornelas Account
  Statements)

  Exhibit 03 to Declaration    8341-8346; 8247-8252;     
Highlighted
  of Rachel P. Kaercher        8279-8284; 8311-8318;      Text
  (Brian Horton Account        8347-8354; 24281-
  Statements)                  24288; 24295-24302;
                               24311-24318; 24333-
                               24339

Prime Healthcare is a United States privately held healthcare
company.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 27, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3N9zoek at no extra charge.[CC]
 


PROGRESSIVE ADVANCED: Seeks Leave to File Supplemental Authority
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LILLIAN BARTEE and LISA
BLEDSOE, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated,
v. PROGRESSIVE ADVANCED INSURANCE COMPANY and PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY
INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. 4:22-cv-00342-MTS (E.D. Mo.), the
Defendant asks the Court to enter an order granting its motion for
leave to file supplemental authority.

Kroeger confirms that class certification is inappropriate as a
matter of law where, as here, liability depends on estimating the
values of individual cars when the insurance policy does not
dictate a specific method of estimating actual cash value.

The Defendants request that that the Court consider the Kroeger
decision when deciding Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification.

Progressive operates as an insurance firm. The Company underwrites
motor vehicle insurance policies.

A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Nov. 21, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3R4ydOC at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Jeffrey S. Russell, Esq.
          Ryan V. Bert, Esq.
          BRYAN CAVE LEIGHTON PAISNER LLP
          One Metropolitan Square
          211 N. Broadway, Suite 3600
          St. Louis, MO 63102
          Telephone: (314) 259-2725
          E-mail: jsrussell@bclplaw.com
                  ryan.bert@bclplaw.com  
                - and -

          Jeffrey S. Cashdan, Esq.
          Zachary A. McEntyre, Esq.
          J. Matthew Brigman, Esq.
          Allison Hill White, Esq.
          Allexia Bowman Arnold, Esq.
          Julia C. Barrett, Esq.
          KING & SPALDING LLP
          1180 Peachtree Street, N.E.
          Atlanta, GA 30309
          Telephone: (404) 572-4600
          Facsimile: (404) 572-5100
          E-mail: jcashdan@kslaw.com
                  zmcentyre@kslaw.com
                  mbrigman@kslaw.com
                  awhite@kslaw.com
                  aarnold@kslaw.com
                  jbarrett@kslaw.com

R&G BRENNER: Court Enters Scheduling Order in Cinar Class Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Cinar v. R&G Brenner
Income Tax, LLC, Case No. 1:20-cv-01362 (E.D.N.Y., Filed March 13,
2020), the Hon. Judge Rachel P. Kovner entered a scheduling order
as follows:

-- The defendant shall serve, but not file,         Dec. 22, 2023
    a response by:

-- The plaintiffs may serve a reply,                Jan. 8, 2024
    if any, by:

-- The parties shall file all documents             Jan. 8, 2024
    associated with the fully briefed motion
    in sequential order:

Judge Kovner referred plaintiffs' motion for class certification to
this Court. Since Judge Kovner's Individual Practice Rules provide
for the bundling rule, plaintiffs' motion for class certification
is stricken as filed. Instead, the parties shall adhere to the
following briefing schedule: plaintiffs' motion for class
certification is deemed served.

The suit alleges violation of Fair Labor Standards Act involving
denial of overtime compensation.

R&G Brenner offers tax preparation.[CC]

R&G BRENNER: Suit Seeks to Certify Class of Income Tax Preparers
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as AVE CINAR, CELESTE
DRAYTON, NICOLE ADOLPHUS, DARLENE RIERA, and STUART BARON,
individually on behalf of themselves and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, v. R&G BRENNER INCOME TAX, LLC, SUMMIT
CONSULTANTS, INC., APEX PLANNING INC., and BENJAMIN K. BRENNER,
Case No. 1:20-cv-01362-RPK-JRC (E.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiffs ask the
Court to enter an order:

   1. Certifying a Rule 23 class consisting of:

      "all income tax preparers who worked for Defendants, R&G
BRENNER
      INCOME TAX, LLC, SUMMIT CONSULTANTS, INC., APEX PLANNING
INC.,
      and BENJAMIN K. BRENNER from March 13, 2014 until the
present;"

   2. Appointing Plaintiffs as Class Representatives; and

   3. Appointing The NHG Law Group, P.C. as Class Counsel; and

R&G Brenner is a full service Income Tax preparation business.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 27, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47G5F57 at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Keith E. Williams, Esq.
          THE NHG LAW GROUP, P.C.
          4242 Merrick Road
          Massapequa, NY 11758
          Telephone: (516)228-5100
          E-mail: keith@nhglaw.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          John K. Diviney, Esq.
          RIVKIN RADLER LLP
          926 RXR Plaza
          Uniondale, NY 11556
          Telephone: (516) 357-3000
          E-mail: John.diviney@rivkin.com



RACE TELECOMMUNICATIONS: Taylor Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Race
Telecommunications, LLC, et al. The case is styled as Gregory
Taylor, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all persons similarly
situated v. Race Telecommunications, LLC, et al., Case No.
23CV012232 (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Nov. 27, 2023).

Race Communications -- https://race.com/ -- is the leading fiber
Internet provider in California.[BN]

RECKITT BENCKISER: Settles Woolite Class Action for $3.275MM
------------------------------------------------------------
Top Class Actions reports that Reckitt Benckiser agreed to a $3.275
million class action lawsuit settlement to resolve claims that it
falsely advertised Woolite Color Renew products as able to revive
colors, and no proof of purchase is required for consumers to
participate.

The settlement benefits consumers who purchased Woolite Color Renew
products in California between Feb. 1, 2017, and May 1, 2023; in
New York between Feb. 22, 2018, and May 1, 2023; and/or in
Massachusetts between Feb. 22, 2017, and May 1, 2023.

Plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit claim Reckitt Benckiser
violated California, New York and Massachusetts laws by falsely
advertising its Woolite Color Renew products as capable of renewing
or reviving colors in laundry. The class action lawsuit argues that
these claims are untrue and misleading.

Reckitt Benckiser is a hygiene and personal-care company that owns
numerous prominent brands, such as Air Wick, Lyson and Woolite.

Reckitt hasn't admitted wrongdoing but agreed to a $3.275 million
settlement to resolve the false advertising class action lawsuit.

Under the terms of the settlement, class members can receive a cash
payment based on the number of products they purchased.

Claimants in the class action lawsuit settlement who submit no
proof of purchase can receive payments for up to three bottles of
Woolite Color Renew products.

With proof of purchase, class members can claim additional bottles
of the products.

No payment estimates are available at this time. Payments will vary
depending on the number of claims filed, each claimant's purchases
and other factors.

The deadline for exclusion and objection is Dec. 19, 2023.

The final approval hearing for the settlement is scheduled for Feb.
1, 2024.

In order to receive a settlement payment, class members must submit
a valid claim form by Dec. 19, 2023.

Who's Eligible
Consumers who purchased Woolite Color Renew products in California
between Feb. 1, 2017 and May 1, 2023, in New York between Feb. 22,
2018 and May 1, 2023 and/or in Massachusetts between Feb. 22, 2017
and May 1, 2023

Potential Award
Varies

Proof of Purchase
No proof of purchase is required for individuals to submit a claim
in the class action lawsuit settlement. However, those who wish to
claim more than three bottles must provide documentation such as a
receipt, shipping confirmation, email receipt or picture of the
product that establishes the class member purchased Woolite bottles
with a label bearing the phrases "Color Renew" and/or "revives
colors" in California, New York or Massachusetts during the
relevant class periods.

Claim Form
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
12/19/2023

Case Name
Prescott, et al. v. Reckitt Benckiser LLC, Case No.
5:20-cv-02101-BLF, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California

Final Hearing
02/01/2023

Settlement Website
ColorRenewClassAction.com

Claims Administrator
Woolite Color Renew Class Action
c/o Epiq
P.O. Box 4516
Portland, OR 97208-4516
info@ColorRenewClassAction.com
855-338-1822

Class Counsel
COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL PLLC

Defense Counsel
SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER
HAMPTON LLP [GN]

REDFIN CORP: Class Settlement in Bell Lawsuit Gets Final Nod
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JASON BELL and DEVIN COOK,
individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. REDFIN
CORPORATION, Case No. 3:20-cv-02264-AJB-SBC (S.D. Cal.), the Hon.
Judge Anthony J. Battaglia entered an order:

   (1) granting the Plaintiffs' motion for final approval of
       Class action and PAGA Settlement; and

   (2) granting the plaintiffs' motion for Attorneys' fees.

The Court grants the Plaintiffs' motions for final approval of the
Settlement and for attorneys' fees.

The Court further orders:

   1. Defendant Redfin Corporation to pay the Settlement Amount of

      $3,000,000.00 as a no reversionary settlement payment to
settle
      and resolve all claims in the action by or on behalf of the
      2,754 Class Members against Defendant.

   2. As soon as practicable after receipt of the $3,000,000.00,
ILYM
      Group must distribute all of the $3,000,000.00 by paying
Class
      Counsel's attorney's fees and costs as stated above;
      distributing checks for the service awards as stated above;
      withdrawing its administrative costs as stated above; and
      distributing the proportional share of balance of the money
      among the 2,754 Participating Class Members as indicated in
the
      Declaration of Nicole Bench supporting Plaintiffs' Motion for

      Final Approval.

   3. In exchange for the Settlement Amount, Redfin Corporation is

      also dismissed with prejudice. The releases by the
Participating
      Class Members afforded Defendant is strictly limited to the
      claims in the action in Section V of the Settlement
Agreement,
      which provides that upon the Final Effective Date, in and for

      the valuable consideration as provided in the Settlement
      Agreement, each of the 2,754 Class Members agree that they
      forever discharge, waive, and release Defendant from any and
all
      claims, demands, obligations, actions, causes of action,
      damages, arising from the First Amended Complaint (FAC), to
      include the FAC and all Counts and all forms of relief sought
by
      the 2,547 Class Members through the FAC against Defendant,
that
      arose within the Class Period certified by the Court.

Redfin provides residential real estate brokerage and mortgage
origination services.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 28, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4847nwG at no extra charge.[CC]
 


RENT THE RUNWAY: Continues to Defend Sharma Class Suit in E.D.N.Y.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Rent the Runway Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending October 31, 2023 filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on December 6, 2023, that the Company
continues to defend itself from the Sharma class suit in the
Eastern District of New York.

On November 14, 2022, a purported stockholder of the Company filed
a putative class action lawsuit in the Eastern District of New York
against the Company, certain of its officers and directors, and the
underwriters of its IPO, entitled Rajat Sharma v. Rent the Runway,
Inc., et al. 22-cv-6935.

The complaint alleges that the defendants violated Sections 11 and
15 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities
Act"), by making allegedly materially misleading statements, and by
omitting material facts necessary to make the statements made
therein not misleading concerning, inter alia, the Company's growth
at the time of the IPO.

The lawsuit seeks, among other things, compensatory damages, an
award of attorneys' fees and costs and such other relief as deemed
just and proper by the court.

On June 8, 2023, the court appointed Delaware Public Employees'
Retirement System and Denver Employees Retirement Plan as lead
plaintiffs.

On August 21, 2023, lead plaintiffs filed an amended complaint
against the Company, certain of its officers and directors, and the
underwriters of its IPO.

The amended complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 11,
12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act by allegedly making certain
false and misleading statements, and by omitting material facts
necessary to make the statements made therein not misleading,
concerning, among other things, the Company's growth prospects and
fulfillment costs at the time of the IPO.

The lawsuit seeks an award of damages, attorney's fees and costs,
and such other relief as the court deems just and proper.

The Company intends to vigorously defend itself against these
claims.

The Company believes it has meritorious defenses to the claims
asserted in the amended complaint and any liability for such claims
is not currently probable and the potential loss or range of loss
is not reasonably estimable.

Rent The Runway, Inc. is an e-commerce platform offering fashion
services.

SAINT AGNES: Appeals Remand Order in Crouch Suit to 9th Circuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
SAINT AGNES MEDICAL CENTER is taking an appeal from a court order
granting plaintiff's motion to remand her lawsuit entitled Kathryn
Crouch, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Saint Agnes Medical Center, Defendant, Case
No. 1:22-cv-01527-ADA-EPG, pending in the U.S. District Court for
the Eastern District of California.

The Plaintiff alleges that her (and the putative class's) private
medical information was shared with Facebook without her consent by
the Defendant's use of Pixel on its website. And this unauthorized
sharing led to violations of California's Invasion of Privacy Act
(Count I) and Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (Count
II).

The Defendant alleges jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Section
1442(a)(1), which is known as the federal officer removal statute.

The Plaintiff argues that the Court lacks jurisdiction under the
federal officer removal statute and thus should remand the case to
state court. Specifically, she was not acting under a federal
officer because it has no agency relationship with the Government,
was not under its control, did not fulfill a task the Government
otherwise would have had to do, and would not face a significant
risk of state-court prejudice as a result of its conduct.

The Defendant countered that, by building a patient portal, it was
assisting the Government "to fulfill a federal goal." Moreover, the
Government monitored its compliance with the Meaningful Use
Program, with the Defendant submitting detailed reports on patient
portal activities. And if not for the Defendant, the Government
would have had to build the electronic records system, and it could
face significant state-court prejudice for its actions. The
Defendant asserted that these circumstances show that it was acting
under a federal officer for purposes of establishing jurisdiction
under the federal officer removal statute.

The Plaintiff moved to remand the case to state court, arguing that
the Defendant was not acting under a federal officer so as to
provide subject matter jurisdiction. The presiding District Judge
has referred the motion for the preparation of findings and
recommendations, and Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean held a
hearing on the motion on April 14, 2023.

On April 19, 2023, Mag. Judge Grosjean concluded that the
Defendant's participation in the Meaningful Use Program does not
give rise to the type of circumstances necessary to conclude that
it acted under a federal officer so as to confer jurisdiction under
the federal officer removal statute. Accordingly, she recommended
that (1) the Plaintiff's motion to remand be granted; (2) the
Defendant's request for judicial notice in support of its
opposition be granted; and (3) the Defendant's pending motion to
dismiss be denied as moot.

On Oct. 20, 2023, the District Court adopted Judge Grosjean's
findings and recommendations through an Order entered by Judge Ana
de Alba. The Court granted the Plaintiff's motion to remand the
case back to the Superior Court of the State of California, County
of Fresno; and as well as the Defendant's request for judicial
notice. The Defendant's motion to dismiss was denied as moot.

The appellate case is captioned Crouch v. Saint Agnes Medical
Center, Case No. 23-3635, in the United States Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit, filed on November 20, 2023.

The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that:

   -- Appellant Mediation Questionnaire was due on November 27,
2023;

   -- Appellant Transcript Order was due on December 1, 2023;

   -- Appellant Transcript Due is due on January 2, 2024;

   -- Appellant Opening Brief is due on February 9, 2024; and

   -- Appellee Answering Brief is due on March 11, 2024. [BN]

Plaintiff-Appellee KATHRYN CROUCH, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, is represented by:

            Mickel Montalban Arias, Esq.
            ARIAS SANGUINETTI WANG & TORRIJOS, LLP
            6701 Center Drive, Suite 1400
            Los Angeles, CA 90045

SECURTEST INC: Court Rejects Proposed Class Settlement in FCRA Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Ufonobong Umanah of Bloomberg Law reports that Securtest Inc.'s
proposed settlement of a class representative's individual claims
remains a stumbling block after Judge Richard Seeborg has
preliminarily rejected a proposed class action settlement two
times.

Regmon Hawkins alleged he and 1,579 other class members didn't
receive "appropriate written disclosures" for employment background
checks under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The settlement proposed
to Seeborg, of the US District Court for the Northern District of
California, provided that Hawkins wouldn’t receive $50,000 in
resolution of his individual claims until the court approved a
$100,000 class settlement. Due to an additional $5,000 service
award to Hawkins in the new. [GN]

SELECTQUOTE AUTO: Class Cert Bid Filing in Davis Due June 28, 2024
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BRADLEY P. DAVIS, v.
SELECTQUOTE AUTO & HOME INSURANCE SERVICES, LLC, Case No.
3:22-cv-00185-RJC-DCK (W.D.N.C.), the Hon. Judge David C. Keesler
entered an order granting the "joint motion to extend certain
deadlines set in the case management plan:"

The scheduling order deadlines are revised as follows:

-- Discovery completion:                 Feb. 29, 2024

-- Expert reports:                       

           Plaintiff:                     March 29, 2024

           Defendant                      April 30, 2024

-- Class certification motion:           June 28, 2024

-- Defendant's response to class         July 30, 2024
    certification motion:

--  Plaintiff's reply to class           Aug. 14, 2024
     certification motion:

SelectQuote is an insurance company that offers auto and home
insurance services.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 22, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47HyU7m at no extra charge.[CC]

SETON HALL UNIVERSITY: Thorne Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Seton Hall
University. The case is styled as Braulio Thorne, for himself and
on behalf of all other persons similarly situated v. Seton Hall
University, Case No. 1:23-cv-10331 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 27, 2023).

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

Seton Hall University -- https://www.shu.edu/index.html -- is a
private Roman Catholic research university in South Orange, New
Jersey.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


STANDARD INSURANCE: Baker Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
--------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Tyler Baker, individually, and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Standard Insurance Company, Case No.
3:23-cv-01407 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the
District of Oregon, to the U.S. District Court for the District of
Massachusetts on Nov. 27, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:23-cv-12866-ADB to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Personal Property.

Standard Insurance -- https://my.standardinsuranceonline.com/ --
offers the most comprehensive car insurance.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Benjamin A. Schwartzman, Esq.
          BAILEY & GLASSER LLP
          950 West Bannock Street, Suite 940
          Boise, ID 83702
          Phone: (208) 342-4411
          Fax: (208) 342-4455
          Email: bschwartzman@baileyglasser.com
                 pauld@akimlawfirm.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Francis Xavier Nolan, IV, Esq.
          EVERSHEDS SUTHERLAND (US) LLP
          1114 Avenue of the Americas
          The Grace Building, 40th Floor
          New York, NY 10036
          Phone: (212) 389-5083
          Email: franknolan@eversheds-sutherland.com

               - and -

          Janet Marie Schroer, Esq.
          Matthew J. Kalmanson, Esq.
          HART WAGNER, LLP
          1000 SW Broadway, Suite 2000
          Portland, OR 97205
          Phone: (503) 222-4499
          Fax: (503) 222-2301
          Email: mjk@hartwagner.com



SUTHERLAND GLOBAL: Savage Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class Action
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ASHLEY SAVAGE, DAVID
LEIDLEIN, RONALD COHEN, AND JAMES SHERBURNE, individually and as
representatives of similarly situated persons, and on behalf of the
Plan, v. SUTHERLAND GLOBAL SERVICES, INC., CVAGS, LLC d/b/a
CLEARVIEW GROUP, SHILPA KONDA, DIANE MOHORTER, LORI D'AMBROSIO,
KATHLEEN DECANN, AND JOHN DOES 1-20, Case No. 6:19-cv-06840-EAW-MWP
(W.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order:

   (1) Certifying case as a class action pursuant to Rule 23;

   (2) approving the plaintiffs as class representatives;

   (3) appointing Thomas & Solomon LLP as class counsel; and

   (4) for such other relief as this Court deems just and proper.

Sutherland operates as a digital transformation company.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Nov. 22, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41amQJE at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          J. Nelson Thomas, Esq.
          Adam T. Sanderson, Esq.
          THOMAS & SOLOMON LLP
          693 East Avenue
          Rochester, NY 14607
          Telephone: (585) 272-0540
          E-mail: nthomas@theemploymentattorneys.com
                  asanderson@theemploymentattorneys.com 


SUTTER HEALTH: Bland Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Sutter Health, et al.
The case is styled as Kimberly Bland, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Sutter Health, et al., Case No. 23CV012404
(Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Nov. 27, 2023).

Sutter Health is a family of doctors and hospitals, serving more
than 100 communities in Northern California including Sacramento,
San Francisco.[BN]

SYNGENTA CROP: Court of Appeals Affirms Attorneys' Fees Award
-------------------------------------------------------------
Gray Reed reports that On February 28, 2023, the United States
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed a Kansas district
court's allocation of attorneys' fees and expense awards stemming
from the "historic class action settlement" reached with Syngenta
in 2018.

The lawsuit was based on claims that Switzerland-based Syngenta's
premature marketing of its genetically modified strains of corn,
led to the loss of an important market for U.S. corn, causing them
economic harm. The $1.51 billion settlement that covered payments
to eligible U.S. corn farmers, grain handling facilities and
ethanol production facilities is believed to be the largest
agricultural settlement in U.S. history.

"We were honored to have been part of the Kansas MDL leadership
team representing farmers and others that Judge Lungstrum
recognized, and the 10th Circuit affirmed, had made 'many
contributions to the ultimate settlement recovery' in this historic
litigation," Gray Reed Partner Bill Chaney, one of four co-lead
counsel, says. "This decision should be the final step in what has
been a long and hard-fought battle to finalize all issues related
to the class action settlement."

A copy of the 10th Circuit's 179-page opinion is available here.

Gray Reed and other members of the leadership team are still
involved in one claim against Syngenta asserted outside of the
class action settlement.

ABOUT GRAY REED

A full-service Texas law firm with offices in Dallas, Houston and
Waco, Gray Reed provides legal services to companies ranging from
start-up to Fortune 100 as well as high net worth individuals. Gray
Reed attorneys assist clients with a myriad of legal issues
including commercial litigation, corporate transactions, oil and
gas, tax planning and litigation, real estate, construction,
healthcare, trusts and estates, employment law, family law,
intellectual property and bankruptcy. For more information, visit
www.grayreed.com. [GN]

TENNESSEE: Faces Class Suit Over Sex Offense Registry
-----------------------------------------------------
Florida Action Committee reports that a group of eight individuals
forced to register filed a Federal lawsuit seeking relief from the
Tennessee Sex Offense Registry. Judges ruled in 2021 that the 2004
changes to Tennessee's registry were punishment and
unconstitutionally ex post facto for a person whose convictions
were prior to then.  Recent rulings affirming these rulings were
made to benefit single individuals. That would require anyone else
whose convictions were prior to 2004 seeking relief from the
registry to file an individual lawsuit.   

Lawyers for the eight have certified the lawsuit as class action so
a win would benefit all Tennessee convictions that occurred prior
to 2004.   

The State of Tennessee has not yet commented on the lawsuit.

While court case facts, state constitutions and individual state
registries vary, a win in a Federal Court would be a citable win in
lawsuits in other states and federal jurisdictions. [GN]

VERIZON WIRELESS: Settles Class Suit Over TCPA Violation for $4MM
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Maginnis Howard reports that Verizon Wireless settled a class
action lawsuit for $4 million for purported violations of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The Verizon class action lawsuit
alleged that Verizon Wireless hired Collecto, a debt collector,
unlawfully used an automatic dialing system to robocall consumers.
Further, some class members claim Verizon Wireless made unwanted
robocalls to individuals who were not even customers of Verizon.

here are two separate classes; one for California residents alone,
and one national TCPA class. Individuals across North Carolina are
expected to begin receiving correspondence alerting them to the
Verizon class action settlement. If you have received a letter
about TCPA violations by Verizon Wireless, contact our attorneys
for a free case evaluation.

Be aware that many Verizon Wireless class members will receive much
smaller awards than if they pursued their claims outside of the
class settlement. Under the TCPA consumers can obtain between
$500.00 and $1,500.00 per telephone call. It is likely that
individual Verizon Wireless class members will receive
significantly less than they could for even 1 violation of the
TCPA.

Our experienced TCPA attorneys will review your case to determine
the most beneficial option on an individualized basis. In order to
properly asses your claim, contact our attorneys on December 1,
2023. You can reach us by phone at 919.526.0450 or by email at
info@carolionalaw.com. You may also utilize our confidential
contact page. [GN]

WASHINGTON COUNTY, OR: 9th Cir. Appeal Filed in Wilson Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
An appeal has been filed in the lawsuit entitled Timothy Wilson, et
al., on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, v. Patrick Garrett, Washington County Sheriff, in his
official capacity, et al., Defendants, Case No. 3:23-cv-01097-CL,
in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon.

The appellate case is captioned Betschart, et al. v. Garrett, et
al., Case No. 23-3573, in the United States Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit, filed on November 17, 2023. [BN]

Defendants-Respondents PATRICK GARRETT, Washington County Sheriff,
in his official capacity, et al. are represented by:

            Eamon P. McMahon, Esq.
            OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL
            155 N. First, Suite 340
            Hillsboro, OR 97124
            Telephone: (503) 846-8747


                            *********

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 ***