---

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

              Wednesday, December 20, 2023, Vol. 25, No. 254

                            Headlines

23ANDME HOLDING: Morgenstern Sues Over Data Security Failure
450 NORTH: Court Tosses Collado Bid for Class Certification
ACTELION PHARMACEUTICALS: GEHA Seeks to File Materials Under Seal
ADP INC: Deol Sues Over Website's Illegal Surveillance Activities
ADVANCED BEHAVIORAL: Legere Sues Over Technicians' Unpaid Overtime

AIR PRODUCTS: Class Cert Bid Filing Modified to June 28, 2024
ALFI INC: $1.73MM Settlement to be Heard on March 5
ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT: Zendejas Sues Over Unpaid Compensations
AMERICAN HONDA: Bids to Decertify Class in Quackenbush Denied
AMERICAN HONDA: Seeks to File Documents Partially Under Seal

AMERICAN MULTI-CINEMA: Khafagy & Horsford Sue Over NYLL Violations
ANTHEM COMPANIES: Midkiff Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification
ANTHONY FASULO: Class Settlement in Palumbo Gets Prelim Approval
ARCHER DANIELS: Seeks to Provisionally Seal Class Cert Opposition
ARIZONA BEVERAGES: Case Management Report Must be Filed by Dec. 19

ARNOT HEALTH: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Abbott-Marsh Alleges
ASCENSION HEALTH: Chaplin Sues Over Illegal Genetic Info Collection
AUTOZONERS LLC: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due August 5, 2024
AYVAZ PIZZA: Ramsey Suit Seeks FLSA Collective Action Status
BALL METAL: Jackson Sues Over Underpayment of OT Wages

BANK OF AMERICA: Fact Discovery Cutoff in Lu Due August 19, 2024
BANK OF GREENE COUNTY: Court OK's Settlement in Broockmann Suit
BATTERIES PLUS: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due April 1, 2024
BEACHBODY COMPANY: Faces Labor Suit in California Court
BERKELEY COUNTY, SC: Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Response

BERNUNZIO UPTOWN: Mercedes Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
BHI ENERGY: Deschamps Sues Over Failure to Safeguard PII
BHI ENERGY: Pyfrom Sues Over Failure to Secure PHI and PII
BIOVENTUS INC: Court Narrows Claims in Ciarciello Suit
BISCUITVILLE INC: Conner Files ADA Suit in W.D. North Carolina

BLACKSTONE CONSULTING: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due June 3, 2024
BLUE RIDGE: Hunter Sues Over Erroneous Financial Statements
BPS DIRECT: Tucker's Claims for Damages Tossed With Prejudice
BRINKER INTERNATIONAL: Opposition to Class Cert Bid Due Jan. 23
BROCK GROUP: Class Certification Discovery Extended to Jan. 9, 2024

CAESARS ENTERTAINMENT: Brewster Sues Over Failure to Secure PII
CALERES INC: Corrales Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
CALPERS: Cheng Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
CALYX ENERGY: Bid to Certify Class Referred to Magistrate Judge
CALYX ENERGY: IRL Suit Seeks to Certify Settlement Class

CANOO INC: Jan. 12 Initial Pretrial Conference for Securities Suit
CAPITAL VISION: Expert Discovery in Clark Suit Due Feb. 22, 2024
CARLYLE GROUP: Abernathy Seeks to Certify Class Action
CARRINGTON MORTGAGE: 3286 Arcara Files FDCPA Suit in S.D. Florida
CAST IRON POT: Sanchez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York

CHARLOTTE, NC: Durham Seeks to File Document Under Seal
CHARLOTTE, NC: Durham Suit Seeks Class Certification
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS: Charman Files TCPA Suit in S.D. California
CHRISTINE WORMUTH: Court Directs Filing of Discovery Plan
COMPASS GROUP: Baldwin Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts

COMPASS GROUP: Moore Suit Transferred to W.D. North Carolina
COSTCO WHOLESALE: Court Certifies Settlement Class in Corker
COTIVITI INC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Pichler Suit Alleges
COUNTRYWIDE FINANCIAL: Court Rejects Class Suit Over Merger
CRISTIANO RONALDO: Faces Sizemore Suit Over Unregistered Securities

CV SCIENCES INC: Colette Class Suit Stayed
CYCLEBAR FRANCHISING: Court Junks Pinn Class Suit
D.G. SMITH ENTERPRISES: Masse Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
DIA DELI GROCERY: Lugo Alleges Labor Law Breaches
DOLEX DOLLAR: Class Allegations in Garcia Suit Stricken

DORIS DAY MD: Stroude Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
DREYER'S GRAND: Salmeron Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
EARGO INC: Court Dismisses Consolidated Class Action
EARTHLINK HOLDINGS: Bid to Seal Murray Transcript OK'd
EBARA TECHNOLOGIES: Lal Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.

EDGARD EL CHAAR: Melendez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
EHP VENTURES LLC: Sanchez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
ELANCO ANIMAL HEALTH: Dismissal of Hunter Suit Under Appeal
ELANCO ANIMAL HEALTH: Faces Antitrust Suit Over Flea/Tick Products
ELANCO ANIMAL HEALTH: Faces Saffron Shareholder Suit Over IPO

ENTRUST CORPORATION: Class Action Settlement Gets Initial Nod
EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Class Cert. Bid Filing Amended to June 17
FIORI FLOWERS CORP: Martin Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
FIRST REPUBLIC: Alecta Leads Class Suit Over Swedish Pension Fund
FLAGSTAR BANK: Scott Sues Over Failure to Secure Information

FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT: Sued Over Service Interruption
FOR LIFE: Iglesias Seeks to Seal Unredacted Docs
FOR LIFE: Iglesias Suit Seeks to Certify Classes
FORD MOTOR: Lessin Suit Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification
FORESIGHT ENERGY: Fact Discovery in Everly Suit Due Feb. 17, 2025

FORTUNE SENIOR: Willingham Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
FRANCESCA'S ACQUISITION: Nolasco Sues Over Failure to Secure PII
FRANCIS DESOUZA: Faces Icahn Partners Suit Over Merger Deal
FREUD AMERICA: Tuter Seeks to Certify Settlement Class
FROST& SULLIVAN: Hays Sues Over Unprotected Private Information

FT MARE DC: Ferlito Seeks More Time to File Class Certification Bid
GAT AIRLINE GROUND: Pereyra Suit Removed to S.D. California
GAUDENTI & SONS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Hidalgo Says
GERBER PRODUCTS: Class Cert Bid Filing Continued to April 26, 2024
GILEAD SCIENCES: Faces Antitrust Suit Over Cipla Generic Drugs Deal

GILEAD SCIENCES: Named in Product Litigation Over Drug Side Effects
GLEN MILLS: Derrick Seeks Leave to File Class Cert Reply Under Seal
GLS US FREIGHT: Whitehead Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
GLUTEN FREE SHOPPE: Sanchez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
GOBT INC: Micele Sues Over Unlawful Collection of Biometrics

GOOD OLD GOLD: Melendez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
GOOGLE INC: Plaintiffs Seek to File Confidential Info Under Seal
GRAND STREET DENTAL: Stroude Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
GREP ATLANTIC: Bosley Sues Over Improper Rental Scheme
HAIN CELESTIAL: Consolidated Suit Stayed Pending Appeal

HARBOR FREIGHT: Court Amends Scheduling Order in Hammock
HARTFORD FINANCIAL: Class Cert Opposition Filing Due Jan. 23, 2024
HARTFORD LIFE: Baker Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
HARTFORD LIFE: Cater Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
HARTFORD LIFE: Matheson Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts

HARTFORD LIFE: McCreery Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
HARTFORD LIFE: Washington Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
HAWAII: Naki Suit Removed to D. Hawaii
HEALTH ENROLLMENT: Court Vacates Amended Scheduling Order in Ketayi
HECLA MINING: Faces Securities Suit Over Misstatements in SEC

HELP SOCIAL: Castillo Suit Alleges Labor Law Breaches
HEMPSTEAD, NY: Kadinsky Sues Over Fraudulent Concealment
HIGH PLAINS: Padilla Seeks Conditional Status of Collective Action
HOLT OF CALIFORNIA: Wilson-Davis Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
HOMOLOGY MEDICINES: Bid to Dismiss Pizzuto Class Suit Pending

HUMASON II INC: Kelly Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
HYUNDAI MOTOR: Bennion Files Suit in C.D. California
HYUNDAI MOTOR: Class Cert Bid Filing in Hageman Due March 3, 2025
IAVARONE TNG LLC: Melendez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
IC MARKETS: Faces Suit Over Misconduct Related to Risk Disclosures

IDEXX DISTRIBUTION: Dula Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
ILLINOIS TOOL: Class Cert Scheduling Order Entered in Hess Suit
INNOVAGE HOLDING: Faces Securities Suit in Colorado Court
INNOVAGE HOLDING: To Settle Labor Suit Lodged in CA Court
INTERFACE INC: Settlement in Securities Suit Gets Initial Nod

INTERPRESS TECHNOLOGIES: Cummings Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
JAMES RIVER: Continues to Defend Employees' Retirement Fund Suit
JOSEPH GARCIA: Ct. Tosses Intervenors' Bid to Intervene in Schwenk
KALEIDA HEALTH: Bid to Extend Class Cert Deadlines in Lutz OK'd
KARAKO SUITS: Colak Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York

KEYPOINT GOVERNMENT: Class Cert. Scheduling Order Entered in Bryman
KEYSTONE CREDIT: Forte Files FDCPA Suit in D. New Jersey
KINKISHARYO INT'L: Amended Scheduling Order Entered in Armendariz
KYOCERA AVAX: Stuart Sues Over Network Security Breach
LANCASTER, PA: Stone Sues Over Improperly Calculated Overtime

LOS DOS POTRILLOS: Parties Must File Status Report by Feb. 9, 2024
LOUISIANA: Court Amends Class Certification Order in A.A. Suit
LUMICO LIFE: Miller Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
LUNDQUIST CONSULTING: Class Cert Filing Extended to March 14, 2024
MEDICAL COLLEGE: Dobratz Sues Over Alleged Data Breach

META PLATFORMS: Seeks to Seal Class Cert Materials in Klein Suit
MEUNDIES INC: Faces Wurm Suit Over Telephonic Sales Calls
MODERN FACILITIES: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Padilla Suit Claims
NASAW/DOUGLASS & ASSOCIATES: Guitierrez Sues Over BIPA Violations
NATIONAL GENERAL: Plaintiffs Seek to Seal Portions of Class Cert.

NATIONAL RIFLE: Dell'Aquila Loses Bid to File TAC
NORTHEAST GEORGIA HEALTH: Houston Sues Over Alleged Spam Calls
NORTHROP GRUMMAN: Court Stays Proceedings in DiBenedetto Action
NOVAVAX INC: Settles Class Suit Over COVID Vaccine for $47MM
OKLAHOMA WINDOWS: Bid to Compel Arbitration Tossed in Parisi Suit

OLDCASTLE SERVICES: Court Dismisses Class Suit Over Biometric Data
OLO INC: Court Certifies Class in Steamship Trade Lawsuit
OPENAI INC: Must File Reply to Amended Complaint by Jan. 12, 2024
ORAL ESSENTIALS: Shafee Alleges Teeth Whitening Products' False Ads
OREGON: Seeks to Modify Class Cert Order to Remove Claims

ORRICK HERRINGTON: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Bass Alleges
ORRICK HERRINGTON: McCauley Sues Over Data Breach of Private Info
OZINGA BROS: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime Wages, Bernal Alleges
PANINO RUSTICO CORP: Stroude Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
PENSKE LOGISTICS: Fails to Pay Minimum & OT Wages, Nelson Alleges

POLYMERIC TECHNOLOGY: Fails to Pay Minimum & OT Wages, Sanchez Says
PRAIRIE FARMS: Williams Alleges Miscalculation of Overtime Wages
PREMIER HEALTH: Pierce et al. Sue Over Private Data Leak
PROCTER & GAMBLE: Amado Sues Over Supplements' Misrepresentation
PROGRESSIVE GULF: Filing of Daubert Opposition Due Jan. 23, 2024

PROGRESSIVE LEASING: Dreger Sues Over Failure to Secure PII
PURECYCLE TECHNOLOGIES: Theodore Seeks to Certify Two Classes
QUALCOMM INC: Court Sets Jan. 29 Deadline for Class Action Opt-Out
R&G BRENNER: Class Scheduling Order Entered in Cinar Class Suit
RED ROBIN: Miller Seeks Approval of Class & PAGA Settlement

REFRESCO BEVERAGES: Berry Sues Over Data Security Failure
RIVIAN AUTOMOTIVE: Crews Seeks to File Exhibits Under Seal
RIVIAN AUTOMOTIVE: Crews Suit Seeks Class Status
RJ WALKER: Suit Seeks Conditional Collective Action Status
ROBINHOOD MARKETS: Golubowski Securities Suit Dismissed

ROBINSON NURSING: Supreme Court Re-Examines 8-Yr Nursing Home Suit
RTX CORP: Seeks to Exclude Stephens' Opinions in Cotromano
RUST-OLEUM CORP: Class Cert. Hearing Extended to Jan. 11, 2024
RUST-OLEUM CORP: Parties Seek to Modify Class Cert. Hearing Date
S-FER INTERNATIONAL: Walker Sues Over Delinquent Wage Payments

SAINT ANSELM COLLEGE: Ortiz Files ADA Suit in W.D. New York
SANTA MONICA, CA: Filing of Class Cert Bid Due Jan. 15, 2024
SANTA MONICA: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Arsene Alleges
SANTANDER BANK: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due March 26, 2024
SCYNEXIS INC: Feldman Shareholder Suit Over Antifungal Drug Ongoing

SEAWORLD PARKS: Seeks to Substitute Redacted Version of Exhibit
SECURITY BENEFIT: Amended Scheduling Order Entered in Clinton Suit
SEPHORA USA: Herrera ADA Suit Removed to D. New Jersey
SEVEN SPORTS: Wilcox Sees to Recover Minimum, OT Wages Under FLSA
SHAHEEN SWEETS: Ramirez Sues Over Labor Law Breaches

SIGNATURE LANDSCAPE: Valdez Gets Partial Conditional Status
SONY INTERACTIVE: Parties Seek Amendment of Briefing Schedule
SOUTHWEST HEALTH: Parties Must Issue FLSA Collective Action Notice
SPARE-TIME INC: Campos Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
STATE FARM: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due August 2, 2024

STATE FARM: Sista Amended Complaint Tossed
STEELCASE INC: Martinez Suit Removed to C.D. California
STEPHANIE CLARK: Bid for Class Certification Due April 1, 2025
STORROW MANAGEMENT: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Robinson Says
STRATEGIC PROPERTIES: Puga Suit Removed to W.D. Missouri

SUBARU OF AMERICA: Sued Over Vehicles' Defective 3G Services
SWEDISH HEALTH: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due August 1, 2024
SWIFT TRANSPORTATION: Bid for Class Cert. Due August 13, 2024
SYSTEMS EAST INC: Boudreaux Files Suit in N.D. New York
T. MINTON: Middlebrook Files Suit in W.D. Michigan

T2 FINANCIAL: Preliminary Pretrial Order Entered in Lauer Lawsuit
TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICAL: Premera Blue Sues Under Antitrust Statutes
TALIS BIOMEDICAL: Continues to Defend Consolidated Securities Suits
TARGET CORP: Filing for Class Certification Bid Due Sept. 27, 2024
TARGET CORPORATION: Davis Wins Class Status Bid

TARGET CORPORATION: Tivin Sues Over Mislabeled Sunscreen Products
TASKUS INC: Forsberg Data Breach Suit Pending in Delaware Court
TASKUS INC: Lozada Securities Suit Over IPO Voluntarily Dismissed
TAYLOR CREATIVE INC: Taylor Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
TD BANK: Nelipa Suit Seeks Class Certification

TESLA INC: Bids to Dismiss Suit Over Denied Insurance Premiums
THERMO TECH: Lopez Suit Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification
TONY'S FINE FOODS: Her Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
TOP GOLF: Class Certification Order Entered in Melvin Suit
TORCH ELECTRONICS: Court Tosses Romano Class Cert Bid

TOWN OF BROOKLINE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Bergeron Alleges
TRANSUNION LLC: Maximoff Suit Removed to S.D. California
TSCHETTER SULZER: Warden Seeks Preliminary Approval of Settlement
TTX COMPANY: Coats Suit Removed to C.D. California
TWO JINN: Class Cert Filing Deadline Reset to Jan. 12, 2024

TYSON FOODS: Faces Antitrust Suit in Illinois
TYSON FOODS: Ruebel Sues Over ERISA Violation
UMPQUA BANK: Dinh Suit Removed to S.D. California
UNITED AIRLINES: Eco-Skies Biofuel Claims Misleading, Zajac Says
UNITED STATES POLO: Perissa Sues Over False Reference Pricing

UNITED STATES: Court Dismisses Paiz-Cornejo Suit
US NURSING CORP: Rubel Suit Removed to C.D. California
VAXART INC: Himmelberg Securities Suit Seeks Class Certification
VENTOUX HOLDINGS: Stroude Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
VETERANS GUARDIAN: Deadline to File Class Cert Bid Vacated

VISTRA CORP: Faces Gas Index Pricing Litigation
VROOM INC: Court OK's Arbitration in Martinez, Suit Stayed
VROOM INC: Court OKs Arbitration in Sonne, Suit Stayed
WASSERMAN MEDIA: Abets FTX Group's Fraud, Garrison Suit Alleges
WATTS EQUIPMENT: Wilcox Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.

WESTIN HOTEL: Faces Moralez ADA Suit Over Bathroom Barriers
WEXFORD HEALTH: Bid to Extend Class Cert Deadlines Filed
WORKINGMAN'S STORE: Website Inaccessible to Blind, Wahab Alleges
XTO ENERGY: Amended Case Management Order Entered in Kriley
ZEROED-IN TECHNOLOGIES: Gordon Sues Over Unprotected Personal Info

ZEROED-IN TECHNOLOGIES: White Sues Over Unprotected Private Info

                            *********

23ANDME HOLDING: Morgenstern Sues Over Data Security Failure
------------------------------------------------------------
MARJORIE MORGENSTERN, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 23ANDME HOLDING CO. and 23ANDME, INC.,
Defendants, Case No. CGC-23-610816 (Cal. Super., San Francisco
Cty., December 4, 2023) asserts claims against the Defendants for
negligence, negligence per se, breach of implied contract, invasion
of privacy, conversion, and for violations of the California Unfair
Competition Law, the California Consumer Privacy Act, and the
Federal Trade Commission Act in connection with the Defendants'
failure to implement or maintain reasonable and appropriate data
security for consumers' sensitive personal information.

On October 6, 2023, 23andMe confirmed that customer profile
information had been accessed without the account users'
authorization, and that a hacker had obtained information from
certain accounts, including information about users' DNA Relatives
profiles, says the suit.

Headquartered in San Francisco, California, 23andMe sells
direct-to-consumer genetic testing kits to the public. The company
also maintains a database of genetic and phenotypic information
crowdsourced from its millions of customers capable of providing
personalized information about consumers’ genetic health risks,
ancestry, and traits. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Mark N. Todzo, Esq.
         Patrick R. Carey, Esq.
         Meredyth L. Merrow, Esq.
         503 Divisadero Street
         San Francisco, CA 94117
         Telephone: (415) 913-7800
         Facsimile: (415) 759-4112
         E-mail: mtodzo@lexlawgroup.com

                 - and -

         Joseph P. Guglielmo, Esq.
         Carey Alexander, Esq.
         SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP
         The Helmsley Building
         230 Park Avenue, 17th Floor
         New York, NY 10169-1820
         Telephone: (212) 223-6444
         Facsimile: (212) 223-6334
         E-mail: jguglielmo@scott-scott.com
                 calexander@scott-scott.com

450 NORTH: Court Tosses Collado Bid for Class Certification
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as OCTAVIO COLLADO, for
himself and all others similarly situated, v. 450 NORTH RIVER
DRIVE, LLC, et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-23074-BB (S.D. Fla.), the Hon.
Judge Beth Bloom entered an order as follows:

   1. Plaintiff's motion for class certification is denied.

   2. Count I shall continue to proceed against Defendants as a
      conditionally certified Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
claim.

   3. Count II shall proceed against Defendants as an individual
      claim.

   4. Count III shall also proceed against Defendant 450 North
River
      Drive, LLC as an individual claim.

   5. The putative class members must file separate claims against

      Defendants if they wish to pursue similar FMWA and Florida
      common law unpaid wages claims.

The case is a putative collection action brought against Defendants
for alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA")
(Count I), the Florida Minimum Wage Act ("FMWA") (Count II), and
Florida common law for unpaid wages (Count III).

The Plaintiff proposes the following class definition for Counts II
and III:

   "All front-of-the-house tipped employees who worked at Kiki on
the
    River from November 17, 2017, and up through the rendition of a

    judgment in this matter."

The plaintiff proposed the following class:

    "All hourly-paid employees of the Defendants, who were employed

    by the Defendants from June 15, 2007 through March 11, 2011,
and
    who the Defendants purported to pay wages through the use of a

    "tip credit," by paying a reduced wage and taking a tip credit
of
    $3.02 per hour, and whose wages were reduced by the cost of
    uniforms, a $3.00–per–shift deduction; who were required to
share
    tips with employees who did not work in the presence of
customers
    and who were paid a rate of $4.19 per hour after July 24, 2009,

    when the Federal minimum wages increased."

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Rn3Sem at no extra charge.[CC]

ACTELION PHARMACEUTICALS: GEHA Seeks to File Materials Under Seal
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
HEALTH ASSOCIATION (GEHA), on behalf of itself and all others
similarly situated, v. ACTELION PHARMACEUTICALS LTD., et al., Case
No. 1:18-cv-03560-GLR (D. Md.), GEHA moves the Court for leave to
file its motion to exclude opinions of James Hughes, Ph.D. and Sean
Nicholson, Ph.D. Related to Class Certification and exhibits
provisionally under seal.

Actelion is a pharmaceuticals and biotechnology company established
in December 1997.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/46NhSUk at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Sharon K. Robertson, Esq.
          Donna M. Evans, Esq.
          Aaron J. Marks, Esq.
          Joseph M. Sellers, Esq.
          COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL
          88 Pine Street, 14th Floor
          New York, NY 10005
          Telephone: (212) 838-7797
          Facsimile: (212) 838-7745
          E-mail: srobertson@cohenmilstein.com
                  devans@cohenmilstein.com
                  amarks@cohenmilstein.com
                  jsellers@cohenmilstein.com

                - and -

          Thomas M. Sobol, Esq.
          Hannah Schwarzschild, Esq.
          Erin C. Burns, Esq.
          Rachel A. Downey, Esq.
          HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
          1 Faneuil Hall Sq., 5th Floor
          Boston, MA 02109
          Telephone: (617) 482-3700
          Facsimile: (617) 482-3003
          E-mail: tom@hbsslaw.com
                  hannahs@hbsslaw.com
                  erinb@hbsslaw.com
                  racheld@hbsslaw.com

                - and -

          John D. Radice, Esq.
          A. Luke Smith, Esq.
          Rishi Raithatha, Esq.
          RADICE LAW FIRM PC
          475 Wall Street Princeton, NJ 08540
          Telephone: (267) 570-3000
          Facsimile: (609) 385-0745
          E-mail: jradice@radicelawfirm.com
                  lsmith@radicelawfirm.com
                  rraithatha@radicelawfirm.com

                - and -

          Archana Tamoshunas, Esq.
          TAUS, CEBULASH & LANDAU, LLP
          123 William Street, Suite 1900A
          New York, NY 10038
          Telephone: (646) 873-7651
          E-mail: atamoshunas@tcllaw.com

ADP INC: Deol Sues Over Website's Illegal Surveillance Activities
-----------------------------------------------------------------
GURMIT DEOL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ADP, INC., a New Jersey Corporation; and
DOES 1 to 10, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 8:23-cv-02287 (C.D.
Cal., December 5, 2023) alleges violations of the California
Invasion of Privacy Act in connection with the Defendants' illegal
surveillance scheme.

During a browsing session on ADP's website, Plaintiff utilized the
chat box feature. However, Plaintiff was not informed that his
conversations were being recorded and exploited for commercial
surveillance purposes without his consent. ADP did not inform
Plaintiff that he was not actually communicating with ADP at all
when chatting online at its website. It does not disclose its
relationship with Drift at all, or that ADP is aiding, abetting,
and paying third parties like Drift, which is recording and
commoditizing their communications using the seemingly harmless
chat box feature, says the suit.

Headquartered in Roseland, NJ, ADP, Inc. provides payroll and HR
software and services through its website https://www.adp.com/.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Robert Tauler, Esq.
          TAULER SMITH, LLP
          626 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 550
          Los Angeles, CA 90017
          Telephone: (310) 590-3927
          E-mail: rtauler@taulersmith.com

                  - and -

           Kevin J. Cole, Esq.
           KJC LAW GROUP, A.P.C.
           9701 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1000
           Beverly Hills, CA 90212
           Telephone: (310) 861-7797
           E-mail: kevin@kjclawgroup.com

ADVANCED BEHAVIORAL: Legere Sues Over Technicians' Unpaid Overtime
------------------------------------------------------------------
KELLY LEGERE, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ADVANCED BEHAVIORAL THERAPY OH LLC d/b/a
ADVANCED BEHAVIORAL THERAPY, Case No. 1:23-cv-02241 (N.D. Ohio,
Nov. 17, 2023) seeks to recover unlawfully unpaid overtime wages
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act as well as the statutes of
the State of Ohio.

Although the Defendant suffered and permitted the Plaintiff, other
Opt-In Plaintiffs, and members of the State Law Class to work more
than 40 hours per workweek, the Defendant failed to pay the
Plaintiff, other Opt-In Plaintiffs, and members of the State Law
Class overtime at a rate of one and one-half times the regular rate
of pay for all hours worked over 40 in a workweek. The Defendant's
pay practices were the result of systematic and companywide
policies originating at the management/directorial level, the
lawsuit alleges.

As a result of the time underpayment practices and policies
employed by the Defendant, the Defendant's practices resulted in a
system that virtually always resulted in less time paid than time
worked to the detriment of the Plaintiff, other Opt-In Plaintiffs,
and members of the State Law Class.

The Plaintiff brings this case as an FLSA and Ohio law collective
action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. Section 216(b) and O.R.C. section
4111.10 on behalf of herself and other employees who opt-into this
action under the FLSA and Ohio law. The Plaintiff also brings this
case as a class action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 on behalf of
herself and other members of a class of persons who assert claims
under O.R.C. sections 4113.15 and 2307.60. Finally, the Plaintiff
brings this case as an individual action pursuant to the Family and
Medical Leave Act of 1993, as amended as a result of the
Defendant's retaliatory, interfering, and otherwise unlawful
conduct as a result of the Plaintiff's exercise of her rights under
that statute.

The Plaintiff, other Opt-In Plaintiffs, and State Law Class members
seek statutory liquidated damages, other penalties and compensation
available under federal and Ohio law, in addition to prejudgment
and post-judgment interest, costs and attorneys' fees incurred in
prosecuting this action, the employer's share of relevant taxes,
and such further relief as the Court deems equitable and just.

Plaintiff Legere was employed by the Defendant from April 2022
until September 2023 as a non-exempt employee. The Plaintiff's job
title was a registered behavioral technician.

Advanced Behavioral Therapy is a "Home-based, Center-based and
School-based ABA Therapy services" company.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph F. Scott, Esq.
          Ryan A. Winters, Esq.
          Kevin M. McDermott II, Esq.
          SCOTT & WINTERS LAW FIRM, LLC
          Telephone: (216) 912-2221
          Facsimile: (440) 846-1625
          50 Public Square, Suite 1900
          Cleveland, OH 44113
          E-mail: jscott@ohiowagelawyers.com
                  rwinters@ohiowagelawyers.com
                  kmcdermott@ohiowagelawyers.com

AIR PRODUCTS: Class Cert Bid Filing Modified to June 28, 2024
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TREVOR JOHNSON, on behalf
of himself and others similarly situated, v. AIR PRODUCTS AND
CHEMICALS, INC.; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No.
2:22-cv-07327-WLH-PD (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Wesley L. Hsu
entered an order regarding joint stipulation to modify case
schedule:

                Event               Current Date       New Date

  Fact Discovery Cutoff            Dec. 15, 2023     May 24, 2024

  Last Day to Serve Initial        Dec. 29, 2023     June 7, 2024
  Expert Reports  

  Last Day to File a Motion        Jan. 19, 2024     June 28, 2024

  for Class Certification

  Last Day to File Motions         Jan. 19, 2024     June 28, 2024

  (Excluding Daubert Motions
  and all other Motions in
  Limine)

  Last Day to Serve Rebuttal       Jan. 26, 2024     July 5, 2024
  Expert Reports  

  Last Day to Conduct              Feb. 16, 2024     July 26,2024
  Settlement Proceedings

  Expert Discovery Cutoff          Feb. 23/2024      Aug. 2, 2024

  Last Day to File Daubert         Mar. 1, 2024      Aug. 9, 2024
  Motions

  Last Day to File an              Mar. 4, 2024      Aug. 12, 2024
  Opposition to Motion for
  Class Certification

Air Products is an American international corporation whose
principal business is selling gases and chemicals for industrial
uses.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 4, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3tcHSdZ at no extra charge.[CC]

ALFI INC: $1.73MM Settlement to be Heard on March 5
---------------------------------------------------
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP on Dec. 11 disclosed that the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Florida has
approved the following announcement of a proposed class action
settlement that would benefit purchasers of common stock and/or
warrants of Alfi, Inc. (NASDAQ: ALF and ALFIW):

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

TO: All Persons and entities who or which purchased or otherwise
acquired the common stock and/or warrants of Alfi, Inc.
(collectively, "Alfi Securities"): (i) pursuant and/or traceable to
the Registration Statement issued in connection with the Company's
IPO on or about May 4, 2021 (i.e., from May 4, 2021 through October
29, 2021, inclusive), and/or (ii) during the period from May 4,
2021 and March 11, 2022, inclusive, and were damaged thereby[1]
(the "Settlement Class"):

Please read this notice carefully, your rights Will be affected by
a class action lawsuit pending in this court.

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

YOU ARE ALSO NOTIFIED that Plaintiffs in the Action have reached a
proposed settlement of the Action for $1,725,000 in cash (the
"Settlement"), that, if approved, will resolve all claims in the
Action.

A hearing will be held on March 5, 2024 at 1:30 p.m., before the
Honorable Kathleen M. Williams at the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida, Wilkie D. Ferguson, Jr. U.S.
Courthouse, Courtroom 11-3, 400 North Miami Avenue, Miami, FL
33128, to determine (i) whether the proposed Settlement should be
approved as fair, reasonable, and adequate; (ii) whether the Action
should be dismissed with prejudice against Defendants, and the
Releases specified and described in the Stipulation, and in the
Notice, should be granted; (iii) whether the proposed Plan of
Allocation should be approved as fair and reasonable; and (iv)
whether Lead Counsel's application for an award of attorneys' fees
and reimbursement of expenses should be approved.

If you are a member of the Settlement Class, your rights will be
affected by the pending Action and the Settlement, and you may be
entitled to share in the Settlement Fund. The Notice and Proof of
Claim Form ("Claim Form"), can be downloaded from the website
maintained by the Claims Administrator,
www.strategicclaims.net/Alfi/ ("Settlement Website"). You may also
obtain copies of the Notice and Claim Form by contacting the Claims
Administrator at In re Alfi, Inc. Securities Litigation, c/o
Strategic Claims Services, P.O. Box 230, 600 N. Jackson Street,
Suite 205, Media, PA 19063, 1-866-274-4004,
info@strategicclaims.net.

If you are a member of the Settlement Class, in order to be
eligible to receive a payment under the proposed Settlement, you
must submit a Claim Form postmarked to the Claims Administrator, or
online at the Settlement Website, no later than March 29, 2024. If
you are a Settlement Class Member and do not submit a proper Claim
Form, you will not be eligible to share in the distribution of the
net proceeds of the Settlement, but you will nevertheless be bound
by any judgments or orders entered by the Court in the Action.

If you are a member of the Settlement Class and wish to exclude
yourself from the Settlement Class, you must submit a request for
exclusion such that it is received no later than February 13, 2024,
in accordance with the instructions set forth in the Notice. If you
properly exclude yourself from the Settlement Class, you will not
be bound by any judgments or orders entered by the Court in the
Action and you will not be eligible to share in the proceeds of the
Settlement.

Any objections to the proposed Settlement, the proposed Plan of
Allocation, or Lead Counsel's motion for attorneys' fees and
reimbursement of Litigation Expenses, must be filed with the Court
and delivered to Lead Counsel and Defendants' Counsel such that
they are received no later than February 13, 2024, in accordance
with the instructions set forth in the Notice.

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

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

GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
Leanne H. Solish, Esq.
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90067
(888) 773-9224
settlements@glancylaw.com

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

In re Alfi, Inc. Securities Litigation
c/o Strategic Claims Services
P.O. Box 230
600 N. Jackson Street, Suite 205
Media, PA 19063
(866) 274-4004
info@strategicclaims.net
www.strategicclaims.net/Alfi/

By Order of the Court

1 All capitalized terms used in this Summary Notice that are not
otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them
in the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement dated July 20, 2023
(the "Stipulation"), which is available at
www.strategicclaims.net/Alfi/.


ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT: Zendejas Sues Over Unpaid Compensations
-------------------------------------------------------------
Mario Zendejas and Miguel Miramontes, as individuals, solely as
aggrieved employee representatives on behalf of all similarly
situated current and former aggrieved employees v. ALL AMERICAN
ASPHALT, a California Corporation; and DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive, Case No. 23STCV26390 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty.,
Oct. 27, 2023), is brought to challenge Defendants' lucrative,
repressive and unlawful business practices, pursuant to the
California Private Attorney General Act for failure to pay
compensations.

The Plaintiffs solely as aggrieved employee representatives on
behalf of all other similarly situated current and former aggrieved
employees of the Defendants who were employed by the Defendants at
any time during the one year preceding the filing of Plaintiffs'
original Private Attorneys General Act ("PAGA") Notice, and
continuing while this action is pending, bring this PAGA action to
recover, among other things, penalties pursuant to PAGA for labor
code violations stemming from unpaid wages earned and due,
including but not limited to unpaid wages, unpaid and illegally
calculated overtime compensation, illegal meal and rest period
policies, failure to maintain required records, failure to provide
accurate itemized wage statements, failure to indemnify employees
for losses incurred in discharging their duties, and interest,
attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses thereon, says the complaint.

The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as a non-exempt
employees.

The Defendants own and operate an asphalt production and
construction company, which provides services to various other
private companies and government entities throughout the United
States.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Shoham J. Solouki, Esq.
          Grant Joseph Savoy, Esq.
          SOLOUKI | SAVOY, LLP
          316 W. 2nd Street, Suite 1200
          Los Angeles, CA 90012
          Phone: (213) 814-4940
          Facsimile: (213) 814-2550


AMERICAN HONDA: Bids to Decertify Class in Quackenbush Denied
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARY QUACKENBUSH, and
MARISSA FEENEY, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated, v. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR COMPANY, INC., Case No.
3:20-cv-05599-WHA (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge William Alsup entered
an order denying the Defendant's motions to decertify the class.

-- The plaintiffs' motion for attorney's fees is granted in
    part and denied in part.

-- Class counsel is awarded $1,207,072.88 in Attorney's fees and
    $315,975.93 in costs for a total of $1,523,048.81.

The Plaintiffs' two class claims are that Honda's failure to
disclose this defect violated consumer protection statutes under
California and Illinois state law, namely California’s Consumer
Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) and the Illinois Consumer Fraud and
Deceptive Business Practices Act (ICFA).

American Honda is the North American subsidiary of the Honda Motor
Company.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3tj2BwB at no extra charge.[CC]


AMERICAN HONDA: Seeks to File Documents Partially Under Seal
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KATHLEEN CADENA, et al.,
v. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC., et al., Case No.
2:18-cv-04007-MWF-MAA (C.D. Cal.), the Defendant asks the Court to
enter an order permitting it to file the following documents
partially under seal:

   1. Portions of AHM's opposition to Plaintiffs' motion for class
      certification;

   2. Portions of AHM's motion to exclude the testimony of Roland
D.
      Hoover pursuant to Rule 702; and

   3. Exhibits A, B, and JJ filed in support of AHM's opposition
to
      Plaintiffs' motion for class certification and AHM's motions
to
      exclude the testimony of Weir, Dennis, and Hoover, which are

      attached to the Declaration of Darlene M. Cho.

American Honda is the North American subsidiary of the Honda Motor
Company.

A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/483PsWU at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Amir Nassihi, Esq.
          Michael L. Mallow, Esq.
          Darlene M. Cho, Esq.
          SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P.
          555 Mission Street, Suite 2300
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 544-1900
          Facsimile: (415) 391-0281
          E-mail: anassihi@shb.com
                  mmallow@shb.com
                  dcho@shb.com

AMERICAN MULTI-CINEMA: Khafagy & Horsford Sue Over NYLL Violations
------------------------------------------------------------------
ZAKARIA KHAFAGY, CHRISTOPHER HORSFORD, on behalf of themselves and
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. AMERICAN MULTI-CINEMA,
INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-08904 (E.D.N.Y., December 4,
2023) seeks to recover damages for Defendant's untimely wages for
Plaintiffs and their similarly situated hourly non-exempt employees
pursuant to the New York Labor Law.

Plaintiff Zakaria Khafagy was employed by Defendant from
approximately February 10, 2023, to October 18, 2023 while
Plaintiff Christopher Horsford was employed from approximately July
2022 to September 1, 2023. Plaintiffs Khafagy and Horsford are
manual workers as defined by NYLL. However, they assert that they
were paid on a bi-weekly basis.

Headquartered in Kansas City, MO, American Multi-Cinema, Inc. and
its subsidiaries are principally involved in the theatrical
exhibition business. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

         Clifford Tucker, Esq.
         SACCO & FILLAS LLP
         31-19 Newtown Ave., 7th Floor
         Astoria, NY 11102
         Telephone: (718) 269-2243
         E-mail: CTucker@SaccoFillas.com

ANTHEM COMPANIES: Midkiff Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WINIFRED MIDKIFF and
ARDAITH BROWN, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated, v. THE ANTHEM COMPANIES, INC., ANTHEM HEALTH PLANS OF
VIRGINIA, INC. d/b/a ANTHEM BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD, and
AMERIGROUP CORPORATION, Case No. 3:22-cv-00417-HEH (E.D. Va.),
Plaintiffs file a motion for
Rule 23 class certification.

Anthem offers managed healthcare related products and
administrative services.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41bnXZu at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Harris D. Butler, Esq.
          Craig J. Curwood, Esq.
          Zev H. Antell, Esq.
          BUTLER CURWOOD, PLC
          140 Virginia Street, Suite 302
          Richmond, VA 23219
          Telephone: (804) 648-4848
          Facsimile: (804) 237-0413
          E-mail: harris@butlercurwood.com
                  craig @butlercurwood.com
                  zev@butlercurwood.com

                - and -

          Rachhana T. Srey, Esq.
          H. Clara Coleman, Esq.
          Caitlin Opperman, Esq.
          NICHOLS KASTER, PLLP
          4700 IDS Center
          80 South Eighth Street
          Minneapolis, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 256-3200
          Facsimile: (612) 338-4878
          E-mail: srey@nka.com
                  ccoleman@nka.com

ANTHONY FASULO: Class Settlement in Palumbo Gets Prelim Approval
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARK PALUMBO, ROSARIO
PRATO, MAURICIO MARTINEZ, and JOSEPH OVILE as participants and/or
former participants of the Pavers and Road Builders District
Council Pension Fund, Welfare Fund, Apprenticeship, Skill
Improvement and Safety Fund and the United Plant and Production
Workers Local 175 Pension Fund, Welfare Fund, and Apprenticeship,
Skill Improvement and Safety Fund, on behalf of themselves and all
persons similarly situated, v. ANTHONY FASULO, ALBERT ALIMENA,
DOMINICK AGOSTINO, JOHN PETERS, ROBERT CHEVERIE, FRANCISCO
FERNANDEZ, JAMES KILKENNEY, PHILIP FAICCO, VINCENT MASINO, ANTHONY
ROBIBERO and KEITH LOSCALZO and/or their successors, in their
capacity as present and former Trustees of the Pavers and Road
Builders District Council Pension Fund, Welfare Fund,
Apprenticeship, Skill Improvement and Safety Fund and the PAVERS
AND ROAD BUILDERS DISTRICT COUNCIL PENSION FUND, WELFARE FUND, and
APPRENTICESHIP, SKILL IMPROVEMENT AND SAFETY FUND, Case No.
1:07-cv-00797-PKC-RML (E.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Pamela K. Chen
entered an order:

-- Granting preliminary Approval to the proposed Settlement,

-- Certifying the Class for settlement purposes,

-- Appointing class counsel for Settlement purposes, and

-- approving and ordering dissemination of the Plaintiffs'
proposed
    notices of Settlement, and scheduling a final approval
(fairness)
    hearing.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3GAsWcD at no extra charge.[CC]
 


ARCHER DANIELS: Seeks to Provisionally Seal Class Cert Opposition
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as AOT HOLDING AG and MAIZE
CAPITAL GROUP, LLC, v. ARCHER DANIELS MIDLAND CO., Case No.
2:19-cv-02240-CSB-EIL (C.D. Ill.), ADM's file a motion to
provisionally seal its reply in opposition to the Plaintiffs'
renewed motion for class certification.

ADM moves the Court pursuant to Local Rule 5.10(A)(2) to
provisionally file under seal its Reply in Opposition to
Plaintiffs' Renewed Motion for Class Certification along with its
supporting documents and exhibits.

As a result, ADM will meet and confer with Plaintiffs' counsel
after this filing to determine which portions of the filed
materials should be publicly available, redacted, or sealed in
their entirety. ADM will then refile on the public docket a
redacted version of the Reply, as well as any supporting document
or exhibit that should not be sealed in its entirety.

Archer is an American multinational food processing and commodities
trading corporation.

A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/486AVKc at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          George A. Zelcs, Esq.
          Chad E. Bell, Esq.
          Ryan Z. Cortazar, Esq.
          Stephen M. Tillery, Esq.
          Michael E. Klenov, Esq
          KOREIN TILLERY LLC
          205 North Michigan Ave., Suite 1950
          Chicago, IL 60601
          Telephone: (312) 641-9750
          Facsimile: (312) 641-9751
          E-mail: gzelcs@koreintillery.com
                  cbell@koreintillery.com
                  rcortazar@koreintillery.com
                  stillery@koreintillery.com
                  mkelnov@koreintillery.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Stephen V. D'Amore, Esq.
          Scott P. Glauberman, Esq.
          Samantha M. Lerner, Esq.
          Matthew R. DalSanto, Esq.
          Reid F. Smith, Esq.
          WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
          35 W. Wacker Drive
          Chicago, IL 60601
          Telephone: (312) 558-5600
          E-mail: sdamore@wiston.com
                  sglauber@winston.com
                  slerner@winston.com
                  mdalsanto@winston.com
                  rfsmith@winston.com

                - and -

          James C. Kearns, Esq.
          HEYL, ROYSTER, VOELKER & ALLEN
          301 N. Neil Street, Suite 505
          Champaign, IL 61820
          Telephone: (217) 344-0060
          E-mail: JKearns@heylroyster.com

ARIZONA BEVERAGES: Case Management Report Must be Filed by Dec. 19
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Hoffman v. Arizona
Beverages USA, LLC, Case No. 6:23-cv-01213 (M.D. Fla., Filed June
29, 2023), the Hon. Judge Paul G. Byron entered endorsed order
striking case management Report.

  -- On or before December 19, 2023, the parties shall file an
amended
     Case Management Report that includes deadlines for

    (1) disclosure of expert reports - class action, plaintiff and

        defendant;

    (2) discovery -- class action;

    (3) motion for class certification;

    (4) response to motion for class certification; and

    (5) reply to motion for class certification.

The nature of suit states Torts -- Personal Property -- Other
Fraud.

Arizona Beverage produces and supplies non-alcoholic beverages.[CC]

ARNOT HEALTH: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Abbott-Marsh Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
KATELYN ABBOTT-MARSH, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ARNOT HEALTH, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 6:23-cv-06685 (W.D.N.Y., Dec. 1, 2023) seeks to recover
from the Defendant unpaid wages and overtime compensation,
interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the
Fair Labor Standards Act.

Plaintiff Abbott-Marsh was employed by the Defendant as a patient
access representative.

ARNOT HEALTH, INC. operates as a non-profit organization. The
Organization offers addiction treatment, angiography, cardiology,
cancer care, dermatology, physical therapy, mammograpy, diagnostic
imaging, nephrology, pain management, urology, rehabilitation,
skilled nursing, wound care, and women's health services. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Seth R. Lesser, Esq.
          Christopher M. Timmel, Esq.
          Sarah Sears, Esq.
          KLAFTER LESSER LLP
          Two International Drive, Suite 350
          Rye Brook, NY 10573
          Telephone: (914) 934-9200
          Email: seth@klafterlesser.com
                 christopher.timmel@klafterlesser.com

               - and -

          Joseph F. Scott, Esq.
          Ryan A. Winters, Esq.
          SCOTT & WINTERS LAW FIRM, LLC
          50 Public Square, Suite 1900
          Cleveland, OH 44113
          Telephone: (216) 912-2221
          Email: jscott@ohiowagelawyers.com
                 rwinters@ohiowagelawyers.com

               - and -

          Kevin M. McDermott II, Esq.
          SCOTT & WINTERS LAW FIRM, LLC
          11925 Pearl Rd., Suite 310
          Strongsville, OH 44136
          Telephone: (216) 912-2221
          Email: kmcdermott@ohiowagelawyers.com

ASCENSION HEALTH: Chaplin Sues Over Illegal Genetic Info Collection
-------------------------------------------------------------------
REBECCA CHAPLIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ASCENSION HEALTH d/b/a ASCENSION SAINT MARY,
Defendant, Case  No. 4:23-cv-01558 (E.D. Mo., December 6, 2023)
alleges violations of the Illinois Legislature Genetic Information
Privacy Act.

Plaintiff Chaplin asserts that the Defendant violated GIPA by
asking its employees in Illinois to provide genetic information in
the form of family medical history to assist the company in making
employment decisions.

In or around January 2023, Plaintiff applied for the position of
patient care technician in the Emergency Department at Ascension
Saint Mary hospital location in Kankakee, IL. On or around January
27, 2023, Plaintiff was required to submit to a pre-employment
physical as a requirement of the hiring process. However, Plaintiff
was also required to complete paperwork during the physical in
which she was asked about her family's medical history.

Based in St. Louis, MO, Ascension Health operates one of the
largest private healthcare systems in the United States, with over
2,000 health care sites nationwide, including 140 hospitals. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Yitzchak Kopel, Esq.
          Alec M. Leslie, Esq.
          BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
          1330 Avenue of the Americas
          New York, NY 10019
          Telephone: (646) 837-7150
          Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
          E-mail: ykopel@bursor.com
                  aleslie@bursor.com

AUTOZONERS LLC: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due August 5, 2024
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Confusione, et al., v.
Autozoners, LLC, Case No. 2:21-cv-00001 (E.D.N.Y., Filed Jan. 2,
2021), the Hon. Judge Joan M. Azrack entered an order on motion for
extension of time to complete discovery.

-- The Plaintiffs shall serve their motion         Aug. 5, 2024
    for class certification by:

-- The Defendants shall serve their                Sept. 6, 2024
    opposition by:

-- The Plaintiffs' reply shall be served,          Sept. 20, 2024
    and the fully briefed motion filed on
    ECF by:

-- Counsel are directed to submit a joint.         Feb. 26, 2024
    status letter on:

The nature of suit states Labor Litigation --
Diversity-(Citizenship)

AutoZoners operates AutoZone stores nationwide.[CC]

AYVAZ PIZZA: Ramsey Suit Seeks FLSA Collective Action Status
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Olivia Ramsey and William
Stratmann, On behalf of themselves and those similarly situated, v.
Ayvaz Pizza, LLC and Shoukat Dhanani, Case No. 1:23-cv-04801-SDG
(N.D. Ga.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order
conditionally certifying the case as an Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA) collective action and authorizing them to send notice of the
pendency of this action to their similarly-situated co-workers.

Specifically, the Plaintiffs seek conditional certification of the
following employees:

   "All current and former delivery drivers employed at Defendants'

   Pizza Hut pizza stores outside of the states of Georgia and
Texas
   between the date three years prior to the filing of the original

   complaint and the date of the Court's Order approving notice."

The case is a wage and hour lawsuit filed on behalf of pizza
delivery drivers who worked at Defendants' Pizza Hut franchise
stores. Plaintiffs Olivia Ramsey and William Stratmann allege that
Defendants' pizza delivery drivers are all employed according to
the same terms: they receive minimum wage minus a tip credit for
all hours worked while completing deliveries, they drive their own
cars to deliver Defendants' pizzas, and they are not properly
reimbursed for their delivery related expenses. Plaintiffs claim
that these employment terms result in a violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

The Plaintiff Olivia Ramsey worked as a delivery driver at three of
Defendants' Pizza Hut stores in Georgia at the Mableton, Smyrna,
Georgia, and Powder Springs locations from September 28, 2021 until
June 2023.

The Plaintiff William Stratmann worked as a delivery driver at
Defendants' Pizza Hut stores from 2021 to October 2023.

Ayvaz owns and operates over 300 Pizza Hut pizza franchise
locations across the United States.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/484eAwT at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Gary R. Kessler, P.C.


          2573 Apple Valley Road NE
          Atlanta, GA 30319
          Telephone: (404) 909-8100
          E-mail: gkessler@martensonlaw.com

                - and -

          Andrew R. Biller
          Andrew P. Kimble
          BILLER & KIMBLE, LLC
          8044 Montgomery Rd., Suite 515
          Cincinnati, OH 45236
          Telephone: (513) 202-0710
          Facsimile: (614) 340-4620
          E-mail: abiller@billerkimble.com
                  akimble@billerkimble.com


BALL METAL: Jackson Sues Over Underpayment of OT Wages
------------------------------------------------------
ROBERT M. JACKSON, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BALL METAL BEVERAGE CONTAINER CORP.,
Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-03196 (D. Colo., December 4, 2023)
seeks all available relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act of
1938.

Plaintiff Jackson was employed by Defendant from approximately
March 2000 through October 10, 2023, as an hourly, non-exempt
employee. The Plaintiff routinely worked more than 40 hours per
workweek. However, the Defendant failed to properly calculate the
regular rates of Plaintiff, resulting in the underpayment of earned
overtime compensation. The Defendant has a company-wide policy of
not including certain non-discretionary compensation into the
regular rates, says the Plaintiff.

Based in Westminster, CO, Ball Metal Beverage Container Corporaton
is engaged in the production and manufacturing of various metal and
aluminum packaging. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Robi J. Baishnab, Esq.
           NILGES DRAHER LLC
           1360 E. 9th Street, Suite 808
           Cleveland, OH 44114
           Telephone: (216) 230-2955
           Facsimile: (330) 754-1430
           E-mail: rbaishnab@ohlaborlaw.com

                   - and -

           Shannon M. Draher, Esq.
           7034 Braucher St., N.W., Suite B
           North Canton, OH 44720
           Telephone: (330) 470-4428
           Facsimile: (330) 754-1430
           E-mail: sdraher@ohlaborlaw.com

BANK OF AMERICA: Fact Discovery Cutoff in Lu Due August 19, 2024
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JEAN LU, GIOVANNA BOLANOS,
and CLAUDE GRANT individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Case No. 3:23-cv-04027-JCS
(N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Joseph C. Spero entered an order
approving
stipulation to joint case management statement & proposed order

            Event                       Proposed Deadline

  Designation of Experts                 May 17, 2024

  Fact Discovery Cutoff                  Aug. 19, 2024

  Briefing Schedule for Class            Motion by Sept. 12, 2024
  Certification                          Opposition by Oct. 10,
2024
                                         Reply by Nov. 1, 2024
                                         Hearing on Dec. 6, 2024 at

                                          9:30 AM by Zoom Webinar.


  Expert Discovery Cutoff                Dec. 13, 2024

  Briefing Schedule and Hearing          Motions by Jan. 17, 2025
  for Daubert and Dispositive Motions    Oppositions by Feb. 14,
2025
                                         Replies by Feb. 21, 2025
                                         Hearing on Mar. 21, 2025
at
                                          9:30 AM by Zoom

Bank of America is one of the Big Four banking institutions of the
United States.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Rxrazm at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          George A. Hanson, Esq.
          Alexander T. Ricke, Esq.
          Caleb J. Wagner, Esq.
          STUEVE SIEGEL HANSON LLP
          460 Nichols Road, Suite 200
          Kansas City, MO 64112
          Telephone: (816) 714-7100
          Facsimile: (816) 714-7101
          E-mail: hanson@stuevesiegel.com
                  ricke@stuevesiegel.com
                  wagner@stuevesiegel.com

                - and -

          Jason S. Hartley, Esq.
          Jason M. Lindner, Esq.
          HARTLEY LLP
          101 West Broadway, Suite 820
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 400-5822
          E-mail: hartley@hartleyllp.com
                  lindner@hartleyllp.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Adam P. KohSweeney, Esq.
          Chelsea E. Espiritu, Esq.
          O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP
          Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94111-3823
          Telephone: (415) 984 8700
          Facsimile: (415) 984 8701
          E-mail: akohsweeney@omm.com
                  cespiritu@omm.com

BANK OF GREENE COUNTY: Court OK's Settlement in Broockmann Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Greene County Bancorp, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for
the quarterly period ended September 30, 2023, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 13, 2023, that on
October 25, 2023, the court granted final approval of a class
action settlement and closed a case filed by an Andrew Broockmann
on April 26, 2022.

Broockmann was a customer of the company's subsidiary, The Bank of
Greene County. The company established a settlement fund of $1.15
million during the quarter ended June 30, 2023, which had been
accrued for in the quarter ended December 31, 2022. Pursuant to the
terms of the parties' settlement agreement, and subject to any
requested extensions, the court-approved claims administrator will
distribute the class members' payments from the settlement fund in
the quarter ended December 31, 2023.

Putative class action complaint against the Bank was filed in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of New York
alleging that the bank improperly assessed overdraft fees on
debit-card transactions that were authorized on a positive account
balance but settled on a negative balance. Mr. Broockmann, on
behalf of the putative class, sought compensatory damages, punitive
damages, enjoinment of the conduct complained of, and costs and
fees. The complaint is similar to complaints filed against other
financial institutions pertaining to overdraft fees. The bank
denies that it improperly assessed overdraft fees or breached any
agreement with Mr. Broockmann or with members of the putative
class.

On February 28, 2023, the parties entered into a settlement
agreement which contemplates, among other things, that the bank
will (a) pay a cash payment of $1.15 million, (b) forgive, waive,
and not collect an additional $64,500 in uncollected overdraft
fees, and (c) cease collecting certain types of overdraft fees.

The company's primary business is the ownership and operation of
its subsidiaries. At September 30, 2023, the bank has 18
full-service offices and an operations center located in its market
area consisting of the Hudson Valley and Capital District Regions
of New York State. It is primarily engaged in the business of
attracting deposits from the general public in the Bank’s market
area, and investing such deposits, together with other sources of
funds, in loans and investment securities.


BATTERIES PLUS: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due April 1, 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Bross v. Batteries Plus
LLC, Case No. 1:22-cv-01468 (E.D. Wisc., Filed Dec. 7, 2022), the
Hon. Judge William C. Griesbach entered an order granting joint
motion to amend scheduling order filed by Batteries Plus LLC.

  -- Discovery is due by:                     Jan. 18, 2024

  -- The Plaintiff's Expert Witness           Jan. 29, 2024
     List due by:

  -- The Defendant's Expert Witness           Feb. 23, 2024
     List is due by:

  -- Any Motion for Class Certification       April 1, 2024
     due by:

  -- The Dispositive Motion deadline is:      July 24, 2024

  -- The final lists of witnesses and         Aug. 8, 2024
     exhibits is due:

  -- Any motion on any currently served       Dec. 15, 2023
     discovery must be filed by:

The nature of suit states Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

Batteries Plus offers a wide variety of replacement batteries and
free auto battery installation.[CC]

BEACHBODY COMPANY: Faces Labor Suit in California Court
-------------------------------------------------------
The Beachbody Company, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for
the quarterly period ended September 30, 2023, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 7, 2023, that in May
2023, a class of similarly situated individuals filed a class
action complaint against the company and certain of its executives
in the Superior Court of California for the County of Los Angeles.

The complaint alleged misclassification of the company's partners
as independent contractors, rather than as employees, under the
California Labor Code and sought, among other things, recovery of
unpaid wages, penalties and injunctive relief.

The court's first availability for an arbitration hearing on the
matter has been delayed until April 2024.

The Beachbody Company, Inc. is a subscription health and wellness
company and the creator of some of the world's most popular fitness
programs.


BERKELEY COUNTY, SC: Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Response
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Loretta Fosdick, on Behalf
of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated, v. Berkeley County,
Case No. 2:23-cv-03375-RMG (D.S.C.), the Defendant asks the Court
to enter an order granting consent motion for extension of time for
the Defendant to respond to plaintiff's motion for conditional
class Certification.

The case is a wage and hour case, including a claim for unpaid
overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Plaintiff
also asserts a claim under the South Carolina Payment of Wages Act.


On Friday, November 17, 2023, the Plaintiff filed her Motion for
Conditional Class Certification. The Defendant's response to the
Motion is due on Friday, December 1, 2023.

Because the week of November 20, 2023, was a holiday week and
because Defendant's counsel had a previously scheduled deposition
on Monday, November 27, 2023, and mediations on Tuesday, November
28, 2023, and Thursday, November 30, 2023, Defendant requests an
additional week, until Friday, December 8, 2023, to assess the
Motion and either respond to it and/or work with Plaintiff’s
counsel on an appropriate consent motion to submit on or prior to
December 8, 2023.

A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Nov. 29, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Rfy62x at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Bob J. Conley, Esq.
          CLEVELAND & CONLEY, L.L.C.
          One Seventy-One Church Street, Suite 310
          Charleston, SC 29401
          Telephone: (843) 577-9626
          E-mail: bconley@clevelandlaborlaw.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Marybeth Mullaney, Esq.
          MULLANEY LAW, L.L.C.
          652 Rutledge Ave., Suite A
          Charleston, SC 29403
          Telephone: (800) 385-8160
          E-mail: marybeth@mullaneylaw.net

BERNUNZIO UPTOWN: Mercedes Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Bernunzio Uptown
Music, LLC. The case is styled as Luis Mercedes, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. Bernunzio Uptown
Music, LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-10472 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 30, 2023).

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

Bernunzio Uptown Music -- https://bernunzio.com/ -- is an online
store for guitars and accessories.[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


BHI ENERGY: Deschamps Sues Over Failure to Safeguard PII
--------------------------------------------------------
Richard Deschamps, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. BHI ENERGY SERVICES, LLC and BHI ENERGY I SPECIALTY
SERVICES, LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-12555-LTS (D. Mass., Oct. 27,
2023), is brought against Defendants for their failure to properly
secure and safeguard personally identifiable information ("PII" or
"Private Information") including, but not limited to Plaintiff and
Class Members' full names, addresses, dates of birth, Social
Security numbers, health information, and potentially health
information.

To provide these services, and in the ordinary course of
Defendants' business, Defendants acquires, possesses, maintains,
analyzes, and otherwise utilizes Plaintiff's and Class Members'
PII. With this action, Plaintiff seeks to hold Defendants
responsible for the harms they caused and will continue to cause
Plaintiff and at least 91,2692 other similarly situated persons in
the massive and preventable cyberattack that occurred between May
30, 2023 and July 7, 2023, by which cybercriminals from the
ransomware group known as Akira, infiltrated Defendants'
inadequately protected network and accessed and exfiltrated highly
sensitive, unencrypted PII belonging to Plaintiff and Class Members
which was being kept unprotected (the "Data Breach"). Plaintiff
further seeks to hold Defendants responsible for not ensuring that
Defendants maintained the PII in a manner consistent with industry
standards.

On October 18, 2023, Defendants notified state Attorneys General
and many Class Members about the widespread Data Breach (the
"Notice Letter"). While the Data Breach occurred between May 30,
2023 and July 7, 2023, Defendants did not begin notifying victims
until October 18, 2023, over three months later. Indeed, Plaintiff
and Class Members were wholly unaware of the Data Breach until they
received Notice Letters from Defendants. During this time,
Plaintiff and Class Members were unaware that their sensitive PII
had been compromised, and that they were, and continue to be, at
significant risk of identity theft and various other forms of
personal, social, and financial harm.

By acquiring, utilizing, and benefiting from Plaintiff's and Class
Members' PII for its business purposes, Defendants owed or
otherwise assumed common law, contractual, and statutory duties
that extended to Plaintiff and Class Members. These duties required
Defendants to design and implement adequate data security systems
to protect Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII in its possession and
to keep Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII confidential, safe,
secure, and protected from unauthorized disclosure, access,
dissemination, or theft. The Defendants breached these duties by
failing to implement adequate data security measures and protocols
to properly safeguard and protect Plaintiff's and Class Members'
PII from a foreseeable cyberattack on its systems that resulted in
the unauthorized access and theft of Plaintiff's and Class Members'
PII.

The Defendants disregarded the rights of Plaintiff and Class
Members by intentionally, willfully, recklessly, and/or negligently
failing to take and implement adequate and reasonable measures to
ensure that the PII of Plaintiff and Class Members was safeguarded,
failing to take available steps to prevent an unauthorized
disclosure of data, and failing to follow applicable, required, and
appropriate protocols, policies and procedures regarding the
encryption of data, even for internal use. As a result, the
Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII was compromised through
disclosure to an unknown and unauthorized criminal third party,
says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is an adult individual and a resident and citizen of
the state of Alabama, residing in Madison County, Alabama.

BHI provides specialty staffing services and specialty services to
industrial, oil and gas, nuclear and power generation markets.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kurt J. Hagstrom, Esq.
          HAGSTROM LAW GROUP
          66 N. Second Street
          New Bedford, MA 02740
          Phone: (508) 612-4677
          Fax: (508) 207-9747
          Email: kurt@hagstromlawgroup.com

               - and -

          Terence R. Coates, Esq.
          Justin C. Walker, Esq.
          MARKOVITS, STOCK & DEMARCO, LLC
          119 East Court Street, Suite 530
          Cincinnati, OH 45202
          Phone: (513) 651-3700
          Fax: (513) 665-0219
          Email: tcoates@msdlegal.com
                 jwalker@msdlegal.com


BHI ENERGY: Pyfrom Sues Over Failure to Secure PHI and PII
----------------------------------------------------------
Johsua Pyfrom, individually and on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. BHI ENERGY SERVICES, LLC and BHI ENERGY I
SPECIALTY SERVICES LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-12532-LTS (D. Mass., Oct.
25, 2023), is brought to arising from BHI's failure to protect and
secure the highly sensitive personally identifiable information
("PII") and protected health information ("PHI"), of Plaintiff and
the Class.

As a result, criminal ransomware group, Akira, easily infiltrated
BHI's computer systems and stole the PII and PHI of approximately
91,269 individuals (the "Class" or "Class Members") in a massive
and preventable data breach (the "Data Breach" or "Breach").

On June 29, 2023, BHI discovered that an unauthorized third-party
gained access to Plaintiff's and Class Members' PHI/PII through
BHI's inadequately protected computer network. After an
investigation, BHI confirmed that "certain BHI Business records
stored in BHI's network, including some records that contained
personally identifiable information ("PII"), were subject to
unauthorized access."

BHI admitted that the types of PHI and PII improperly accessed
during the Data Breach included: "first, middle, and last names,
addresses, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, and potentially
health information" (the "Private Information"). Although the
Breach was discovered in June 2023, BHI did not begin to notify
victims of the Data Breach that their PII and PHI was accessed by
cybercriminals until October 2023—approximately four months
later.

By taking possession and control of Plaintiff's and Class members'
Private Information, Defendants assumed a duty to securely store
and protect the Private Information of Plaintiff and the Class. The
Defendants breached this duty and betrayed the trust of Plaintiff
and Class members by failing to properly safeguard and protect
their Private Information, enabling cyber criminals to access,
acquire, appropriate, compromise, disclose, encumber, exfiltrate,
release, steal, misuse, and/or view it.

The Defendants' misconduct--failing to timely implement adequate
and reasonable measures to protect Plaintiff's and Class members'
Private Information, failing to timely detect the Data Breach,
failing to take adequate steps to prevent and stop the Data Breach,
failing to disclose the material facts that it did not have
adequate security practices in place to safeguard the Private
Information, and failing to provide timely and adequate notice of
the Data Breach—caused substantial harm and injuries to Plaintiff
and Class members across the United States, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff received a Notice of Data Breach Letter ("Notice
Letter") from Defendants notifying him that his Private Information
was compromised in the Data Breach.

BHI is a business services company that provides staffing solutions
and related services to the oil, gas, and energy industries.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael C. Forrest, Esq.
          MAZOW/MCCULLOUGH, P.C.
          10 Derby Square, 4th Fl.
          Salem, MA 01970
          Phone: (978) 744-8000
          Email: mcf@helpinginjured.com

               - and -

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


BIOVENTUS INC: Court Narrows Claims in Ciarciello Suit
------------------------------------------------------
Bioventus Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q for the quarterly period
ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on August 8, 2023, that on November 6, 2023, the Middle
District of North Carolina granted in part and denied in part the
defendants' move to dismiss a second amended complaint that was
filed on August 21, 2023.

A shareholder litigation was filed on January 12, 2023 where the
company and certain of its current and former directors and
officers were named as defendants in a putative class action
lawsuit filed in the Middle District of North Carolina captioned
"Ciarciello v. Bioventus, Inc.," No. 1:23–CV–00032-CCE-JEP.

The complaint asserts violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Exchange Act and of Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act and
generally alleges that the company failed to disclose certain
information regarding rebate practices, its business and financial
prospects, and the sufficiency of internal controls regarding
financial reporting.

On April 12, 2023, the court appointed Wayne County Employees'
Retirement System as lead plaintiff. The lead plaintiff's amended
consolidated complaint was filed with the Court on June 12, 2023.
On July 17, 2023, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the
complaint raising a number of legal and factual deficiencies with
the amended and consolidated complaint. In response to the
company's motion to dismiss, the lead plaintiff filed a second
amended complaint on July 31, 2023. The court's scheduling order
was due last August 14, 2023.

Bioventus Inc. functions as a holding company with no direct
operations, material assets or liabilities other than the equity
interest in BV LLC, a limited liability company that operates as a
partnership.


BISCUITVILLE INC: Conner Files ADA Suit in W.D. North Carolina
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Biscuitville, Inc.
The case is styled as Mary Conner, individually and as the
representative of a class of similarly situated persons v.
Biscuitville, Inc., Case No. 3:23-cv-00707-RJC-DCK (W.D.N.C., Oct.
27, 2023).

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

Biscuitville Fresh Southern -- http://www.biscuitville.com/-- is a
family-owned regional fast-food restaurant chain consisting of 65+
locations in the U.S. states of North Carolina, South Carolina and
Virginia.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Sanjay R. Gohil, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF SANJAY R. GOHIL, PLLC
          2435 Plantation Center Drive, Suite 200
          Matthews, NC 28105
          Phone: (704) 814-0729
          Fax: (704) 814-0730
          Email: srg@gohillaw.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          William J. McMahon, IV, Esq.
          CONSTANGY, BROOKS, SMITH & PROPHETE, LLP.
          One West Fourth Street, Ste. 850
          Winston-Salem, NC 27101
          Phone: (336) 721-6860
          Email: bmcmahon@constangy.com


BLACKSTONE CONSULTING: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due June 3, 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL DIAS, v.
BLACKSTONE CONSULTING, INC., Case No. 5:23-cv-00497-GAP-PRL (M.D.
Fla.), the Hon. Judge Gregory A. Presnell entered a case management
and scheduling order as follows:

  Plaintiff's Expert Disclosure                 April 1, 2024

  Defendant's Expert Disclosure                 May 1, 2024

  Class Discovery Deadline                      May 17, 2024

  Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification    June 3, 2024

  Defendant's Response                          June 24, 2024

  Plaintiff's Rebuttal                          July 1, 2024

Blackstone is a minority owned service provider that extends its
support in janitorial, security, food services and facilities
maintenance.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 29, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41bRMZI at no extra charge.[CC]


BLUE RIDGE: Hunter Sues Over Erroneous Financial Statements
-----------------------------------------------------------
RUSSELL HUNTER, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BLUE RIDGE BANKSHARES, INC., BRIAN K. PLUM,
JUDY C. GAVANT, and G. WILLIAM BEALE, Defendants, Case No.
1:23-cv-08944 (E.D.N.Y., December 5, 2023) seeks to recover
compensable damages caused by Defendant's violations of the federal
securities laws under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Plaintiff Hunter brings this class action on behalf of persons or
entities who purchased or otherwise acquired publicly traded Blue
Ridge securities between March 10, 2023 and October 31, 2023,
inclusive. Throughout the class period, the Defendants allegedly
made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose
that: (1) Blue Ridge Bankshares, Inc.'s financial statements from
March 10, 2023 to the present included certain errors; (2) as a
result, Blue Ridge Bankshares would need to restate its previously
filed financial statements from March 10, 2023 to October 31, 2023.
As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the
precipitous decline in the market value of the company's common
shares, Plaintiff and the other class members have suffered
significant losses and damages, says the suit.

Headquartered in Virginia, Blue Ridge conducts its business
activities through its "wholly-owned subsidiary bank, Blue Ridge
Bank, and its wealth and trust management subsidiary, BRB Financial
Group, Inc." Its common stock trades on the NYSE American Exchange
under the ticker symbol "BRBS". [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Phillip Kim, Esq.
          Laurence M. Rosen, Esq.
          THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
          275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 686-1060
          Facsimile: (212) 202-3827
          E-mail: pkim@rosenlegal.com
                  lrosen@rosenlegal.com

BPS DIRECT: Tucker's Claims for Damages Tossed With Prejudice
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Tucker v. BPS DIRECT, LLC,
Case No. 2:23-cv-02295 (E.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge J. Kearney
entered an order as follows:

-- Dismissing Brittany Vonbergen Gregory Moore, Jr., Brian
Calvert,
    Arlie Tucker, Timothy Durham, and Marilyn Hernandez's claims
for
    damages with prejudice;

-- Dismissing all plead claims for injunctive relief with
prejudice;

-- Dismissing Heather Cornell, Peter Montecalvo, and David Irvin's

    claims for damages without prejudice to their filing amended
    Complaints on or before Jan. 5, 2024, if they can specify plead

    standing based on the sharing of highly sensitive personal
    information such as a medical diagnosis or financial data from

    banks or credit cards; and

-- Staying until further order the parties' prospective
obligations
    regarding discovery including in the Oct. 23, 2023 Order,
November
    17, 2023 Order and November 27, 2023 Order.

BPS offers fishing reels, rods, gears, boating, water sports,
hunting, archery, bows, clothing, footwear, camping gear, clothing,
shoes, boots, home decor, and other related products.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 5, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/46VNozr at no extra charge.[CC]

BRINKER INTERNATIONAL: Opposition to Class Cert Bid Due Jan. 23
---------------------------------------------------------------
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 Hon. Judge Vince Chhabria entered
an order extending time for plaintiffs to file motion for class
certification and continuing related dates:

-- Last Day to File Class Certification Motion:      Dec. 18,
2023

-- Last Day to File to Opposition to Class           Jan. 23,
2023
    Certification Motion:

-- Last Day to File Reply to Opposition to           Jan. 23,
2023
    Class Certification Motion:

-- Mediation:                                        Feb. 6, 2024

-- Hearing on Class Certification:                   March 7,
2024

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

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3NkSuhB 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

BROCK GROUP: Class Certification Discovery Extended to Jan. 9, 2024
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as VALENTIC v. THE BROCK
GROUP, INC. et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-01789 (WD.C. Pa., Filed Dec.
8, 2021), the Hon. Judge W. Scott Hardy entered an order granting
joint motion for extension of time to complete discovery:

-- Class Certification Discovery shall             Jan. 9, 2024
    now be completed by:

-- Plaintiff's Motion and Supporting               March 4, 2024
    Memorandum in Support of Class
    Certification is now due by:

-- Defendants' Memorandum in Opposition            May 1, 2024
    to Class Certification is due by:

-- Plaintiff's Reply Brief is due by:              May 22, 2024

The nature of suit states Civil Rights -- Employment.

Brock Group is a provider of services to the refining,
petrochemical, power generation and other industries.[CC]

CAESARS ENTERTAINMENT: Brewster Sues Over Failure to Secure PII
---------------------------------------------------------------
Crystal Brewster, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. CAESARS ENTERTAINMENT, INC., Case No.
3:23-cv-00525-ART-CSD (D. Nev., Oct. 26, 2023), is brought against
Caesars for its failure to safeguard and secure the personally
identifiable information ("PII") of past and current customers of
Defendant, including Plaintiff.

The individuals affected are past and current customers of Caesars,
whose PII was within Caesars' loyalty program database. The data
reportedly exposed in the breach includes some of the most
sensitive types of data that cybercriminals seek in order to commit
fraud and identity theft. According to Caesars, information
disclosed in the breach includes, but is not limited to, their
names, mailing addresses, telephone numbers, email addresses, dates
of birth, driver's license numbers, and Social Security Numbers,
for a "significant number" of its more than 65 million members of
its loyalty program.

On September 7, 2023, Caesars determined that a malicious actor had
gained access to its network systems and accessed the PII of
Plaintiff and Class members (the "Data Breach"). Armed with the
Personal Information accessed in the Data Breach, data thieves can
commit a variety of crimes including opening new financial
information in Class members' names, taking out loans in Class
members' names, using Class members' names to obtain medical
services, and using Class members' health information to target
other phishing and hacking intrusions based on their individual.

As a result of the Data Breach, Plaintiff and Class members have
been exposed to a heightened and imminent risk of medical and
financial fraud and identity theft. Plaintiff and Class members
must now and in the future closely monitor their financial accounts
and medical information to guard against identity theft.

Caesars owed a non-delegable duty to Plaintiff and Class members to
implement and maintain reasonable and adequate security measures to
secure, protect, and safeguard their PII against unauthorized
access and disclosure. Caesars breached that duty by, among other
things, failing to implement and maintain reasonable security
procedures and practices to protect its customers' PII from
unauthorized access and disclosure.

As a result of Caesars' inadequate security and breach of its
duties and obligations, the Data Breach occurred, and Plaintiff's
and Class members' PII was accessed and disclosed. This action
seeks to remedy these failings and their consequences, says the
complaint.

The Plaintiff received a letter from Caesars notifying her that her
PII was among the information accessed by cybercriminals in the
Data Breach.

Caesars' is a global hospitality and gaming company with its
principal place of business in Reno, Nevada.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David C. O'Mara, Esq.
          THE O'MARA LAW FIRM, P.C.
          311 East Liberty St.
          Reno, NV 89501
          Phone: 775-323-1321
          Fax: 775-323-4082
          Email: david@omaralaw.net

               - and -

          Todd S. Garber, Esq.
          Andrew C. White, Esq.
          FINKELSTEIN, BLANKINSHIP FREI-PEARSON & GARBER, LLP
          One North Broadway, Suite 900
          White Plains, NY 10601
          Phone: (312)621.2000


CALERES INC: Corrales Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Caleres, Inc., et al.
The case is styled as Anthony Corrales, on behalf of himself and
others similarly situated v. Caleres, Inc., et al., Case No.
23CV012350 (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Nov. 29, 2023).

Caleres Inc. -- http://www.caleres.com/-- is an American footwear
company that owns and operates a variety of footwear brands.[BN]

CALPERS: Cheng Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against California Public
Employee's Retirement System (CalPERS), et al. The case is styled
as Terry Cheng, on Behalf of others similarly situated v.
California Public Employee's Retirement System (CalPERS), et al.,
Case No. 23CV010718 (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Oct. 27,
2023).

The California Public Employees' Retirement System is an agency in
the California executive branch that "manages pension and health
benefits for more than 1.5 million California public employees,
retirees, and their families."[BN]

CALYX ENERGY: Bid to Certify Class Referred to Magistrate Judge
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Indianola Resources, LLC
et al v. Calyx Energy III, LLC, Case No. 6:21-cv-00235 (E.D. Okla.,
Filed Aug. 11, 2021), the Hon. Judge Gerald L. Jackson entered an
order referring unopposed motion to certify class to Magistrate
Judge Gerald L. Jackson for Report and Recommendation pursuant to
Title 28, U.S.C. Section 636(b)(1):

-- Preliminarily Certify for Settlement Purposes,

-- Approve the Form and Manner of Notice, and

-- Set a Date for a Final Fairness Hearing.

The nature of suit states Breach of Contract.

Calyx operates as an oil and gas exploration company.[CC]

CALYX ENERGY: IRL Suit Seeks to Certify Settlement Class
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Indianola Resources, LLC,
et al., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
v. Calyx Energy III, LLC, Case No. 6:21-cv-00235-RAW (E.D. Okla.),
the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order:

   (1) Certifying the Settlement Class for Settlement purposes;

   (2) Preliminarily approving the Settlement;

   (4) Appointing the Plaintiffs as Class Representatives for the
       Settlement Class;

   (5) Appointing Reagan E. Bradford and Ryan K. Wilson as Co-Lead

       Class Counsel and Brady L. Smith as Additional Counsel for
the
       Settlement Class;

   (6) Approving the form and manner of the proposed Notice;

   (7) Appointing JND Legal Administration as Settlement
       Administrator;

   (8) Appointing MidFirst Bank as Escrow Agent; and

   (9) Setting a hearing date for final approval of the Settlement
and
       application for an award of Plaintiffs' Attorneys' Fees,
       Litigation Expenses and Administration, Notice, and
       Distribution Costs, and a Case Contribution Award to
       Plaintiffs.

After over two years of litigation, Plaintiffs have obtained an
outstanding recovery for the Settlement Class.

Specifically, the Plaintiffs have reached a settlement with
Defendant worth $1 million in cash for Plaintiffs' class claims for
statutory interest owed on late payments of oil and gas proceeds
under Oklahoma law.

Indianola Resources initiated this case with the filing of the
Complaint on August 11, 2021, alleging that Defendant had failed to
pay statutory interest owed on late payments under Oklahoma's
Production Revenue Standards Act ("PRSA").

Accordingly, Plaintiffs move the Court to certify Settlement Class
consisting of:

   "All non-excluded persons or entities who, during the Claim
Period:
   (1) received late payments under the PRSA from Calyx (or Calyx's

   designee) for oil-and-gas proceeds from Oklahoma wells, or whose

   proceeds were sent as unclaimed property to a government entity
by
   Calyx; and (2) whose proceeds did not include the statutory
   interest required by the PRSA.

   Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (1) Calyx, its
affiliates,
   predecessors, and employees, officers, and directors; (2)
agencies,
   departments, or instrumentalities of the United States of
America
   or the State of Oklahoma; and (3) Meadors Properties, LLC,
   Longreach Energy Investments, LLC, Longreach Energy 2, LLC,
Lahoma
   June Garrison, Teresa Garrison Platt, Richard C. Lerblance,
Cordell
   Royalty Company LLC, CPC Royal-ties Inc., David Oscar Cordell,
KLM
   Royalties Inc., Patricia A. Cordell Trust, Sara Buffington
Scott,
   Susan Gough, and Thomas Cordell Scott, including any of the
   affiliates of the foregoing.

Calyx Energy operates as an oil and gas exploration company.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3v0k6Cg at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Reagan E. Bradford, Esq.
          Ryan K. Wilson, Esq.
          BRADFORD & WILSON PLLC
          431 W. Main Street, Suite D
          Oklahoma City, OK 73102
          Telephone: (405) 698-2770
          E-mail: reagan@bradwil.com
                  ryan@bradwil.com

                - and -

          Brady L. Smith, Esq.
          BRADY SMITH LAW, PLLC
          One Leadership Square, Suite 1320
          211 N. Robinson
          Oklahoma City, OK 73102
          Telephone: (405) 293-3029
          E-mail: brady@blsmithlaw.com

CANOO INC: Jan. 12 Initial Pretrial Conference for Securities Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Canoo Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly
period ending September 30, 2023 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 14, 2023, that the initial pretrial
conference for securities class suit is scheduled on January 12,
2024.

On April 2, 2021 and April 9, 2021, the Company was named as a
defendant in putative class action complaints filed in California
on behalf of individuals who purchased or acquired shares of the
Company's stock during a specified period.

Through the complaint, plaintiffs are seeking, among other things,
compensatory damages.

The Company has filed a pending motion to dismiss the complaints.

On February 28, 2023, the court granted the Company's motion to
dismiss with leave to amend.

On March 10, 2023, the lead plaintiff filed a second amended
consolidated complaint.

On March 23, 2023, the court entered a stipulated order setting a
briefing schedule on the Company's anticipated motion to dismiss
the second amended consolidated complaint.

On April 10, 2023, the court entered a stipulated order granting
the lead plaintiff leave to file a third amended consolidated
complaint and relieving defendants of any obligation to respond to
the second amended consolidated complaint.

Under the April 10, 2023 order, within 14 days of the release of
any order regarding a settlement between the Company and the SEC,
the parties shall confer and jointly submit a proposed schedule for
the filing of any third amended consolidated complaint and for the
filing of the defendant's response to the third amended
consolidated complaint.

The lead plaintiff filed a third amended consolidated complaint on
September 8, 2023.

The court entered a stipulated order setting the deadline to
respond to the third amended consolidated complaint to December 7,
2023 and setting January 11, 2024 as the deadline for lead
plaintiff's opposition to a motion to dismiss and February 8, 2024
as the deadline for a reply in support of a motion to dismiss the
third amended consolidated complaint.

The final determinations of liability arising from these litigation
matters will only be made following comprehensive investigations
and litigation processes.

On August 4, 2023, the SEC announced settled charges against the
Company, its former Chief Executive Officer, Ulrich Kranz, and its
former Chief Financial Officer, Paul Balciunas, for making
inaccurate revenue projections. The SEC also charged Canoo and
Kranz with misconduct related to nearly $1 million in undisclosed
executive compensation.

Without admitting or denying the SEC's allegations, Kranz and
Balciunas have each consented to the entry of judgments against
them, which are subject to court approval.

Kranz agreed to be permanently enjoined from violating the
anti-fraud provision of Section 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act of
1933 and the proxy solicitation provisions of Section 14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 14a-3 and 14a-9
thereunder, as well as from aiding and abetting violations of the
reporting provisions of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules
12b-20, 13a-1, and 13a-11 thereunder.

Kranz also consented to a three-year officer and director bar and
payment of a $125,000 civil penalty.

Balciunas agreed to be permanently enjoined from violating Section
14(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 14a-3 thereunder, as well as
from aiding and abetting violations of Section 13(a) of the
Exchange Act and Rule 13a-11 thereunder.

Balciunas further consented to a two-year officer and director bar,
payment of $7,500 in disgorgement and prejudgment interest, and a
$50,000 civil penalty.

The SEC also instituted a related settled administrative proceeding
against the Company.

Without admitting or denying the findings, the Company agreed to
the entry of a cease-and-desist order prohibiting further
violations of Sections 17(a)(2) and (3) of the Securities Act,
Sections 13(a) and 14(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 12b-20,
13a-1, 13a-11, 14a-3 and 14a-9 thereunder.

The Company also agreed to pay a civil penalty of $1.5 million.

In March 2022, the Company received demand letters on behalf of
shareholders of the Company identifying purchases and sales of the
Company's securities within a period of less than six months by DD
Global Holdings Ltd. (“DDG”) that resulted in profits in
violation of Section 16(b) of the Exchange Act.

On May 9, 2022, the Company brought an action against DDG in the
Southern District of New York seeking the disgorgement of the
Section 16(b) profits obtained by DDG from such purchases and
sales. In the action, the Company seeks to recover an estimated
$61.1 million of Section 16(b) profits.

On September 6, 2022, the Company filed an amended complaint.

On September 20, 2022, DDG filed a motion to dismiss the amended
complaint.

The Company's opposition to DDG's motion to dismiss was filed on
October 4, 2022 and briefing on the motion was completed when DDG
filed its reply brief on October 11, 2022.

On September 21, 2023, the court issued a decision denying DDG's
motion to dismiss.

DDG's answer to the amended complaint was filed on October 19,
2023.

An initial pretrial conference is scheduled for January 12, 2024.

Discovery has not yet commenced.

Canoo Inc. is a mobility technology company into electric vehicles
development.


CAPITAL VISION: Expert Discovery in Clark Suit Due Feb. 22, 2024
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Clark, et al., v. Capital
Vision Services, LLC, Case No. 1:22-cv-10236 (D. Mass., Filed Feb.
11, 2022), the Hon. Judge Denise J. Casper entered an order
allowing in part but denying otherwise joint motion to extend class
certification deadline:

The Court allows it to the extent that the parties sought
extensions of expert discovery deadlines, but the Court adopts only
the following extensions:

-- Expert disclosures due:                 Jan. 8, 2023

-- Rebuttal expert disclosures due:        Feb. 8, 2023

-- Expert discovery to close by:           Feb. 22, 2024

The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Capital Vision provides optometric and retail optical services.[CC]

CARLYLE GROUP: Abernathy Seeks to Certify Class Action
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Michael Abernathy, et al.,
On their own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
v. The Carlyle Group, Inc. et al. Case No. 1:22-cv-03603-ABJ
(D.D.C.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting
certification of a class action on behalf of:

   "All U.S. citizens who worked for ManTech International
Corporation
   or ManTech Telecommunications and Information Systems
Corporation
   at the Kuwait Maintenance and Sustainment Facility from January

   2012 through January 2014."

The Plaintiffs submit a declaration by the undersigned attesting to
his qualifications to serve as class counsel, a memorandum of law,
and a proposed order.

Carlyle Group is a multinational private equity, alternative asset
management and financial services corporation.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 4, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4a6obFn at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Joseph A. Hennessey, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH HENNESSEY, LLC
          2 Wisconsin Circle, Suite 700
          Chevy Chase, MD 20815
          Telephone: (301) 351-5614
          E-mail: jhennessey@jahlegal.com

CARRINGTON MORTGAGE: 3286 Arcara Files FDCPA Suit in S.D. Florida
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Carrington Mortgage
Services, LLC. The case is styled as 3286 Arcara Way 308 Lake Worth
Trust LLC, individually and on behalf of those similarly situated
v. Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC, Case No. 9:23-cv-81413-DMM
(S.D. Fla., Oct. 23, 2023).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.

Carrington -- https://www.carringtonmortgage.com/ -- is a holding
company whose primary businesses include asset management,
mortgages, real estate transactions and real estate logistics.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Scott David Hirsch, Esq.
          SCOTT HIRSCH LAW GROUP, PLLC
          6810 North State Road 7
          Coconut Creek, FL 33073
          Phone: (561) 569-7062
          Email: scott@scotthirschlawgroup.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Eric Marc Levine, Esq.
          ATLAS SOLOMON PLLC
          789 SW Federal Hwy, Suite 206
          Stuart, FL 34994
          Phone: (772) 247-0157
          Email: elevine@atlas-solomon.com


CAST IRON POT: Sanchez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Cast Iron Pot
Factory, Inc. The case is styled as Randy Sanchez, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. Cast Iron Pot Factory,
Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-08829 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 30, 2023).

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

Cast Iron Pot Factory, Inc. doing businesss as Cast Iron Pot BBQ --
https://castironpotbbq.com/ -- is a Korean BBQ restaurant located
in NY/NJ that offers all-you-can-eat Korean BBQ.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Noor H. Abou-Saab, I, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF NOOR A. SAAB
          380 North Broadway, Suite 300
          Jericho, NY 11753
          Phone: (718) 740-5060
          Email: noorasaablaw@gmail.com


CHARLOTTE, NC: Durham Seeks to File Document Under Seal
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as HEATHER NICOLE DURHAM, on
behalf of herself and others similarly situated, v. CITY OF
CHARLOTTE, a North Carolina municipal corporation, Case No.
3:21-cv-00638-RJC-SCR (W.D.N.C.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to
enter an order granting her motion to file document under seal.

The Plaintiff moves the Court to file under seal the Brief in
Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification.

Charlotte is a major city and commercial hub in North Carolina.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3GDjlSt at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          John F. Bloss, Esq.
          Frederick L. Berry, Esq.
          HIGGINS BENJAMIN, PLLC
          301 North Elm Street, Suite 800
          Greensboro, NC 27401
          Telephone:(336) 273-1600
          E-mail: jbloss@greensborolaw.com
                  fberry@greensborolaw.com

                - and -

          J. David Stradley, Esq.
          Robert P. Holmes, IV, Esq.
          WHITE & STRADLEY, PLLC
          3105 Charles B. Root Wynd
          Raleigh, NC 27612
          Telephone: (919) 844-0400
          E-mail: stradley@whiteandstradley.com
                  rob@whiteandstradley.com

                - and -

          Andrew H. Brown, Esq.
          James R. Faucher, Esq.
          BROWN, FAUCHER, PERALDO & BENSON, PLLC
          822 N. Elm Street, Suite 200
          Greensboro, NC 27401
          Telephone:(336) 478-6000
          E-mail: drew@greensborolawcenter.com
                  james@greensborolawcenter.com

CHARLOTTE, NC: Durham Suit Seeks Class Certification
----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as HEATHER NICOLE DURHAM, on
behalf of herself and others similarly situated, v. CITY OF
CHARLOTTE, a North Carolina municipal corporation, Case No.
3:21-cv-00638-RJC-SCR (W.D.N.C.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to
enter an order under Rule 23(c)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil
procedure that this proceeding be maintained as Rule 23(b)(3) class
action on behalf of a class comprised of the Plaintiff and all
other persons similarly situated.

Charlotte is a major city and commercial hub in North Carolina.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41dLb0Y at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          John F. Bloss, Esq.
          Frederick L. Berry, Esq.
          HIGGINS BENJAMIN, PLLC
          301 North Elm Street, Suite 800
          Greensboro, NC 27401
          Telephone:(336) 273-1600
          E-mail: jbloss@greensborolaw.com
                  fberry@greensborolaw.com

                - and -

          J. David Stradley, Esq.
          Robert P. Holmes, IV, Esq.
          WHITE & STRADLEY, PLLC
          3105 Charles B. Root Wynd
          Raleigh, NC 27612
          Telephone: (919) 844-0400
          E-mail: stradley@whiteandstradley.com
                  rob@whiteandstradley.com

                - and -

          Andrew H. Brown, Esq.
          James R. Faucher, Esq.
          BROWN, FAUCHER, PERALDO & BENSON, PLLC
          822 N. Elm Street, Suite 200
          Greensboro, NC 27401
          Telephone:(336) 478-6000
          E-mail: drew@greensborolawcenter.com
                  james@greensborolawcenter.com

CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS: Charman Files TCPA Suit in S.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Charter
Communications, Inc. The case is styled as Thane Charman,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Charter Communications, Inc. doing business as: Spectrum, Case No.
3:23-cv-02184-TWR-DDL (S.D. Cal., Nov. 29, 2023).

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

Charter Communications, Inc. -- http://corporate.charter.com/-- is
an American telecommunications and mass media company with services
branded as Spectrum.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Christopher Reichman, Esq.
          PRATO & REICHMAN, APC
          3675 Ruffin Road, Suite 220
          San Diego, CA 92123
          Phone: (619) 683-7971
          Email: chrisr@prato-reichman.com

               - and -

          Justin Prato, Esq.
          PRATO & REICHMAN
          3675 Ruffin Road, Suite 220
          San Diego, CA 92123
          Phone: (619) 886-0252
          Email: jmprato@gmail.com


CHRISTINE WORMUTH: Court Directs Filing of Discovery Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Molumby v. Wormuth Case
No. 4:23-cv-04152-SLD-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.

A copy of the Court's standing order dated Dec. 4, 2023 is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/46OGjR9 at no
extra charge.[CC]

COMPASS GROUP: Baldwin Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Brian Baldwin, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Compass Group USA, Inc. doing business
as: Canteen, Case No. 2:23-cv-03030 was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, to the
U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Nov. 30,
2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:23-cv-12893-ADB to the
proceeding.

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

Compass Group USA, Inc. -- https://www.compass-usa.com/ -- is the
leading foodservice and support services company.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Graham Lee Newman, Esq.
          RICHARD A. HARPOOTLIAN
          Post Office Box 1090
          Columbia, SC 29202
          Phone: (803) 252-4848
          Fax: (803) 252-4810

               - and -

          Mark Dale Chappell, Sr., Esq.
          CHAPPELL SMITH AND ARDEN
          2801 Devine Street, Suite 300
          PO Box 12330
          Columbia, SC 29205
          Phone: (803) 509-5823
          Fax: (803) 929-3604

               - and -

          Michael Anthony Jenkins, Esq.
          ARIAS SANGUINETTI LLP
          6701 Center Drive West, Suite 1400
          Los Angeles, CA 90045
          Phone: (310) 844-9696
          Fax: (310) 861-0168

The Defendants are represented by:

          Joseph C. Wylie, II, Esq.
          K AND L GATES LLP - Chicago
          70 W. Madison Street, Suite 3100
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Phone: (312) 372-1121


COMPASS GROUP: Moore Suit Transferred to W.D. North Carolina
------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as George Moore, Virginia Carter, James Jilek,
Francis JayeSean Madelmayer, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. Compass Group USA, Inc. doing business as:
Canteen, Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 4:18-cv-01962 was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Missouri, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
North Carolina on Nov. 30, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:23-cv-00818 to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.

Compass Group USA, Inc. -- https://www.compass-usa.com/ -- is the
leading foodservice and support services company.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Elise R Sanguinetti, Esq.
          ARIAS SANGUINETTI WANG AND TORRIJOS LLP
          220 Powell Street Suite 740
          Emeryville, CA 94608
          Phone: (510) 629-4877

               - and -

          Michael Anthony Jenkins, Esq.
          Mickel M. Arias, Esq.
          ARIAS SANGUINETTI LLP
          6701 Center Drive West, Suite 1400
          Los Angeles, CA 90045
          Phone: (310) 844-9696
          Fax: (310) 861-0168

               - and -

          Richard S. Cornfeld, Esq.
          Daniel Scott Levy, Esq.
          GOLDENBERG HELLER PC
          2227 S. State Route 157
          Edwardsville, IL 62025
          Phone: (618) 650-7122
          Fax: (618) 656-6230

The Defendants are represented by:

          Christina N. Goodrich, Esq.
          Kathryn G. Hummel, Esq.
          Paul W. Sweeney, Jr., Esq.
          K&L GATES LLP
          10100 Santa Monica Boulevard 7th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Phone: (310) 552-5000
          Fax: (310) 552-5001

               - and -

          Joseph C. Wylie, II, Esq.
          Kenn Brotman, Esq.
          Nicole C. Mueller, Esq.
          K AND L GATES LLP - Chicago
          70 W. Madison Street, Suite 3100
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Phone: (312) 372-1121


COSTCO WHOLESALE: Court Certifies Settlement Class in Corker
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BRUCE CORKER, et al., on
behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, v. COSTCO
WHOLESALE CORP., et al., Case No. 2:19-cv-00290-RSL (W.D. Wash.),
the Hon. Judge Robert S. Lasnik entered a final judgment and
order of dismissal:

   -- Plaintiff commenced this action by filing their Complaint on

      February 27, 2019, and ultimately filed a Third Amended
      Complaint on April 30, 2020.

   -- The Plaintiffs alleged that the defendants violated the
Lanham
      Act, 15 U.S.C. section 1125, by misleadingly labeling and
      selling coffee not from the Kona region as "Kona" coffee.

   -- On November 12, 2019, the Court denied motions to dismiss
      Plaintiffs’ original complaint, and discovery began.

   -- The Plaintiffs have negotiated a class action settlement with

      defendant Mulvadi Corporation.

   -- The Settlement Class, as defined in each of the Settlement
      Agreements, includes the following:

      "All persons and entities who, between February 27, 2015, and

      the date of Court's order granting preliminary approval to
the
      settlement (July 31, 2023), farmed Kona coffee in the Kona
      District and then sold their Kona coffee."

      Excluded from the Settlement Class are any defendants to the

      action, as well as any judge assigned to the action, and the

      judge's immediate family and staff.

   -- On November 30, 2023, the Court held a hearing on the
proposed
      Settlement, at which time all interested persons were given
an
      opportunity to be heard. Furthermore, the Court has read and

      considered all submissions in connection with the Settlement.
As
      explained below, the Court grants the motion for final
approval
      of the Settlement.

Costco owns and operates a chain of membership warehouses.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Rck5Tp at no extra charge.[CC]


COTIVITI INC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Pichler Suit Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
YVETTE PICHLER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. COTIVITI, INC., a Delaware corporation,
Defendant, Case No. 2:23-cv-00884 (D. Utah, December 6, 2023)
asserts claims against the Defendant for breach of contract, unjust
enrichment/quantum meruit, and for violations of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

The Plaintiff is currently employed as a records retrieval agent
with Defendant. Prior to 2020, Plaintiff worked in Defendant’s
Texas call center. She currently works for Defendant from her home
in Allen, TX. Throughout their employment with Defendant, Plaintiff
and other Agents are/were pressured to work substantial amounts of
uncompensated, off-the-clock time as part of their job duties.
However, the Defendant failed to pay them the federally mandated
overtime compensation for all services they performed, say the
Plaintiffs.

The Plaintiff seeks to redress and end the long-time pattern of
willful and unlawful conduct by Defendant of failing to pay
Plaintiff and its other call center agents for all work performed.

Headquartered in South Jordan, UT, Cotiviti, Inc. is a healthcare
technology firm that offers payment integrity, risk adjustment,
quality, and analytics solutions to healthcare organizations. The
company also provides audit and recovery services to the retail
industry. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          April L. Hollingsworth, Esq.
          HOLLINGSWORTH LAW OFFICE, LLC
          1881 South 1100 East
          Salt Lake City, UT 84105
          Telephone: (801) 415-9909
          E-mail: april@aprilhollingsworthlaw.com

                  - and -

          Kevin J. Stoops, Esq.
          Paulina R. Kennedy, Esq.
          SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
          One Towne Square, 17th Floor
          Southfield, MI 48076
          Telephone: (248) 355-0300
          E-mail: kstoops@sommerspc.com
                  pkennedy@sommerspc.com

COUNTRYWIDE FINANCIAL: Court Rejects Class Suit Over Merger
-----------------------------------------------------------
Gina Keating of Reuters reports that a federal judge in Los Angeles
on December 1, 2023 halted class-action claims, which sought to
stop a merger between Countrywide Financial Corp and Bank of
America, until similar litigation pending in a Delaware Chancery
Court is resolved.

U.S. District Judge Mariana Pfaelzer also rejected a motion by the
plaintiffs, led by the Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, to set
up a trust to preserve separate shareholder derivative claims in
the same lawsuit against Countrywide's directors and officers.

While stopping the class action claims over the merger, Pfaelzer
ruled that the derivative claims, accusing the directors and
officers of reaping hundreds of millions of dollars through alleged
insider trading, could go forward in her court. A similar suit is
pending in Los Angeles Superior Court but had been stayed until
Pfaelzer's ruling.

The judge did not grant the speedy discovery that the plaintiffs
had requested or rule on their request that she try the derivative
claims before the $3.7 billion merger closes after June 30 -- an
event they say would nullify the claims.

Neither Countrywide nor a plaintiffs' attorney could be reached for
comment on the ruling.

The ruling marks a setback for the plaintiffs, who wanted the
merger stopped until after the derivative claims against the
directors and officers were resolved.

They contended that a win on those claims would have returned the
allegedly ill-gotten gains to Countrywide, boosting the company's
value and requiring a higher bid from Bank of America.

They claim Bank of America convinced the directors to approve the
undervalued deal by offering them significant benefits, including
indemnifying them from legal liability.

In declining to set up the trust, Pfaelzer said Bank of America
would acquire the derivative suit from Countrywide, and rejected
the idea that BofA could legally indemnify the Countrywide
directors.

She left the class-action claims over the merger for the Delaware
court to decide.

Shareholder lawsuits against Countrywide mainly have been
consolidated in Los Angeles federal and state courts and in
Delaware Chancery court. The company also is the target of lawsuits
by holders of subprime mortgages and of investigations by states
attorneys general and federal authorities. [GN]

CRISTIANO RONALDO: Faces Sizemore Suit Over Unregistered Securities
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL SIZEMORE, et al., on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated v. CRISTIANO RONALDO, Case No. 1:23-cv-24481-BB
(S.D. Fla., Nov. 27, 2023) is a class complaint on behalf of
themselves, and all other similarly situated consumers who
purchased unregistered securities offered or sold by Binance,
against Defendant, Cristiano Ronaldo, who promoted, assisted in,
and/or actively participated in the offer and sale of unregistered
securities in coordination with Binance.

In November 2022, Binance and Mr. Ronaldo launched a global
advertising campaign announcing that Binance was "the home of
Ronaldo's exclusive NFT collection, available now." The 60-second
advertisement video was published across television, social media,
and digital channels in 74 countries.

In July 2023, Mr. Ronaldo again advertised his partnership with
Binance, posting that he was "proud to be partnered with the best
for [his] NFT journey."

Binance, with Ronaldo's material assistance and personal
participation, offered and sold the unregistered BNB, BUSD, SOL,
ADA, MATIC, FIL, ATOM, SAND, MANA, ALGO, AXS, and COTI tokens, and
the BNB Vault and/or Simple Earn securities to Plaintiffs and the
members of the Classes. As a result of this assistance, the
Defendant violated Fla. Stat. Section 517.07 et seq. and the
Plaintiffs and members of the Classes sustained damages.

The Plaintiffs and consumers in the Classes have been aggrieved in
the amount of their lost investments by the Defendant's unfair and
deceptive practices and acts. The harm suffered by the Plaintiffs
and consumers in the Classes was directly and proximately caused by
the deceptive and unfair practices of the Defendant.

Mr. Sizemore is a citizen and resident of the State of California.
He purchased, repurchased, invested, and/or reinvested unregistered
securities from Binance.

Defendant Cristiano Ronaldo is a professional soccer player who is
widely regarded as the greatest player of his generation. In 2022,
Mr. Ronaldo entered into a multi-year partnership with Binance that
involved the launch of his first ever NFT collection.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Adam M. Moskowitz, Esq.
          Joseph M. Kaye, Esq.
          Barbara C. Lewis, Esq.
          THE MOSKOWITZ LAW FIRM, PLLC
          2 Alhambra Plaza, Suite 601
          Coral Gables, FL 33134
          Telephone: (305) 740-1423
          E-mail: adam@moskowitz-law.com
                  joseph@moskowitz-law.com
                  barbara@moskowitz-law.com
                  service@moskowitz-law.com

                - and -

          Jose M. Ferrer, Esq.
          Desiree Fernandez, Esq.
          MARK MIGDAL & HAYDEN
          Brickell City Tower
          80 SW 8th Street, Suite 1999
          Miami, FL 33130
          E-mail: jose@markmigdal.com
                  desiree@markmigdal.com
                  eservice@markmigdal.com

                - and -

          Stephen Neal Zack, Esq.
          Tyler Ulrich, Esq.
          BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP
          100 SE 2nd St., Suite 2800
          Miami, FL 33131
          Telephone: (305) 539-8400
          E-mail: szack@bsfllp.com
                  tulrich@bsfllp.com

CV SCIENCES INC: Colette Class Suit Stayed
------------------------------------------
CV Sciences Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending September 30, 2023 filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 14, 2023, that the
Colette class suit remains stayed in the Central District of
California pursuant to the original order of the court.

On December 3, 2019, Michelene Colette and Leticia Shaw filed a
putative class action complaint in the Central District of
California, alleging the labeling on the Company's products
violated the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 (the "Colette
Complaint").

On February 6, 2020, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the
Colette Complaint. Instead of opposing the Company's motion,
plaintiffs elected to file an amended complaint on February 25,
2020.

On March 10, 2020, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the
amended complaint.

The court issued a ruling on May 22, 2020 that stayed this
proceeding in its entirety and dismissed part of the amended
complaint.

The court's order stated that the portion of the proceeding that is
stayed will remain stayed until the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (the "FDA") completes its rulemaking regarding the
marketing, including labelling, of CBD ingestible products.

However, on January 26, 2023, the FDA announced that it does not
intend to pursue rulemaking allowing the use of cannabidiol
products in dietary supplements or conventional foods.

As a result, on February 13, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a status report
with the court asking to have the stay lifted.

The Company filed a written opposition.

The court has taken no action since Plaintiffs filed that status
report, and the case remains stayed pursuant to the court's
original order.

CV Sciences, Inc. develops, manufactures, markets and sells herbal
supplements and hemp-based cannabidiol (CBD). The company's
PlusCBD(TM) branded products are sold at select retail locations
in
a variety of market sectors including nutraceutical, beauty care
and specialty foods. In addition, subject to available capital,
the
company is pursuing drug candidates which use CBD as a primary
active ingredient.



CYCLEBAR FRANCHISING: Court Junks Pinn Class Suit
-------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KELLY PINN, v. CYCLEBAR
FRANCHISING, LLC, Case No. 3:23-cv-01540-M (N.D. Tex.), the Hon.
Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn entered an order granting CycleBar's
motion to dismiss.

  -- Plaintiff Kelly Pinn's claims are dismissed with prejudice,
with
     all costs of court taxed to the Plaintiff, and the claims of
the
     putative class are dismissed without prejudice.

Pinn's cell phone number has been on the National Do-Not-Call
Registry since February 9, 2009.

On September 28, 2022, she received a text message from a phone
number identical to that listed on the website for CycleBar's
Southlake Franchise.  The message advertised "unlimited rides for
only $99," and provided a promo code and a hyperlink to CycleBar's
website, where the person using the hyperlink would be presented
with a "Recurring Dues Membership Agreement."

Pinn alleges the text message amounted to solicitation in violation
of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). She alleges a
single cause of action, that CycleBar violated the Texas Business
and Commerce Code.

She brings this lawsuit on behalf of a putative class, defined as
follows:

   "Plaintiff and all residents of the State of Texas (1) to whose

   telephone number Defendant placed (or had placed on their
behalf) a
   text message (2) the same or similar to the text messages sent
to
   Plaintiff Pinn, (3) from four years prior to the filing of the
   Compliant [sic] to the date of certification."

CycleBar operates as a recreational and fitness center.

A copy of the Court's memorandum opinion and order dated Dec. 4,
2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Gx2KQe
at no extra charge.[CC]

D.G. SMITH ENTERPRISES: Masse Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against D.G. Smith
Enterprises, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Victor Masse, and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. D.G. Smith
Enterprises, Inc., et al., Case No. 23CV012300 (Cal. Super. Ct.,
Sacramento Cty., Nov. 28, 2023).

D.G. Smith Enterprises, Inc. was founded in 1987. The Company's
line of business includes the retail sale of prepared foods and
drinks for on-premise consumption.[BN]

DIA DELI GROCERY: Lugo Alleges Labor Law Breaches
-------------------------------------------------
RONALD LISANDRO CASTRO LUGO, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DIA DELI GROCERY CORP. (D/B/A DIA
DELI GROCERY), ALEX PERDOMO, and YESENIA PERDOMO, Defendants, Case
No. 1:23-cv-10597 (S.D.N.Y., December 5, 2023) alleges violations
of the Federal Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law.

Plaintiff Castro was employed by Defendants as a counter worker and
general assistant at Dia Deli Grocery from approximately February
2017 until on or about October 24, 2023. Allegedly, the Defendants
maintained a policy and practice of requiring Plaintiff Castro to
work in excess of 40 hours a week without paying him appropriate
minimum wage, spread of hours pay, and overtime compensation as
required by federal and state laws. In addition, the Defendants'
pay practices resulted in Plaintiff Castro not receiving payment
for all his hours worked, and resulted in Plaintiff Castro's
effective rate of pay falling below the required minimum wage rate,
says the suit.

DIA Deli Grocery Corp. own, operate, or control a deli, located at
1155 E. Tremont Ave, Bronx, NY 10460 under the name "Dia Deli
Grocery". [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Catalina Sojo, Esq.
         CSM LEGAL, P.C.
         60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
         New York, NY 10165
         Telephone: (212) 317-1200
         Facsimile: (212) 317-1620

DOLEX DOLLAR: Class Allegations in Garcia Suit Stricken
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ALMA GARCIA, individually,
and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly
situated, v. DOLEX DOLLAR EXPRESS, INC., a Texas corporation; and
DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Case No. 2:23-cv-02013-MEMF-AS (C.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong entered an order
as follows:

  1. The Defendants Motion to Strike Class Allegations is granted;
and

  2. All class allegations from the operative complaint in this
case
     are hereby stricken.

Garcia also cites Echevarria v. Aerotek, Inc., but the Ninth
Circuit there confirmed that supplemental jurisdiction over a PAGA
claim, even when all the other claims are dismissed, is "purely
discretionary."

Accordingly, the Court denies Garcia's request to remand the case.


On February 1, 2023, Ms. Garcia filed a complaint in Los Angeles
Superior Court individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated against Dolex, alleging violations of the California Labor
Code and Business & Professions Code—specifically: (1) Unpaid
Overtime; (2) Unpaid Minimum Wages; (3) Unpaid Meal Period
Premiums; (4) Unpaid Rest Period Premiums; (5) Failure to Provide
Accurate Wage Statements; (6) Final Wages Not Timely Paid; (7)
Failure to Reimburse Necessary Business Expenses; and (8) Unfair
and Unlawful Business Practices.

On March 17, 2023, Dolex removed the action to the Court. The
parties stipulated on April 14, 2023 to allow Garcia to amend the
complaint to add a ninth cause of action for violation of the
Private Attorneys General Act ("PAGA"), which the Court granted.

Garcia filed the operative First Amended Complaint on April 24,
2023.

DolEx provides financial services.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/474Vi9X at no extra charge.[CC]


DORIS DAY MD: Stroude Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Doris Day, MD, P.C.
The case is styled as Colette Stroude, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. Doris Day, MD, P.C., Case No.
1:23-cv-08819-RPK-SJB (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 30, 2023).

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

Doris Day, MD -- https://dorisdaymd.com/ -- is a board-certified
dermatologist specializing in laser, cosmetic, surgical and
aesthetic dermatology.[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


DREYER'S GRAND: Salmeron Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jose Jenovar Salmeron, individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. DREYER'S GRAND ICE CREAM, INC., a
corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 23CV049021
(Cal. Super. Ct., Alameda Cty., Oct. 27, 2023), is brought against
Defendants for California Labor Code violations and unfair business
practices stemming from Defendants' failure to pay for all hours
worked (minimum, straight time, and overtime wages), failure to
provide meal periods, failure to authorize and permit rest periods,
failure to timely pay final wages, failure to furnish accurate wage
statements, failure to furnish accurate wage statements, and
failure to indemnify employees for expenditures.

The Defendants are subject to the California Labor Code, Wage
Orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission ("IWC"), and the
California Business & Professions Code. Despite these requirements,
throughout the statutory period, Defendants maintained a
systematic, company-wide policy and practice of: Failing to pay
employees for all hours worked, including all minimum, straight
time, and overtime wages in compliance with the California Labor
Code and IWC Wage Orders; Failing to provide employees with timely
and duty-free meal periods in compliance with the California Labor
Code and IWC Wage Orders, failing to maintain accurate records of
all meal periods taken or missed, and failing to pay an additional
hour's pay for each workday a meal period violation occurred;
Failing to authorize and permit employees to take timely and
duty-free rest periods in compliance with the California Labor Code
and IWC Wage Orders, and failing to pay an additional hour's pay
for each workday a rest period violation occurred; Willfully
failing to pay employees all minimum, straight time, overtime, meal
period premium, and rest period premium wages due within the time
period specified by California law when employment terminates;
Failing to provide employees with accurate, itemized wage
statements containing all the information required by the
California Labor Code and IWC Wage Orders; and Failing to indemnify
employees for expenditures incurred in direct discharge of duties
of employment, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is a current and former employee of the Defendants.

The Defendants own/owned and operate/operated an industry,
business, and establishment within the State of California,
including Alameda County.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Justin F. Marquez, Esq.
          Benjamin H. Haber, Esq.
          Daniel J. Kramer, Esq.
          WILSHIRE LAW FIRM, PLC
          3055 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 510
          Los Angeles, CA 90010-1145
          Phone: 213-381-9988
          Fax: 213-381-9989
          Email: justin@wilshirelawfirm.com
                 benjamin@wilshirelawfirm.com
                 dkramer@wilshirelawfirm.com


EARGO INC: Court Dismisses Consolidated Class Action
----------------------------------------------------
Eargo, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the fiscal year
ended September 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on November 7, 2023, that the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California granted the
defendants' motion to dismiss a consolidated class action on August
31, 2023 and entered its final judgment on October 12, 2023.
Plaintiffs have until November 13, 2023 to file a notice of
appeal.

On November 10, 2021, putative shareholder IBEW Local 353 Pension
Plan filed a purported class action and asserts claims under the
federal securities laws against current and former members of the
company's Board of Directors and the underwriters of the company's
October 15, 2020 initial public offering of common stock, captioned
"IBEW Local 353 Pension Plan v. Eargo, Inc., et al.," No.
21-cv-08747 (Nov. 10, 2021, N.D. Cal.)

Said class action seeks damages and other relief and was brought
purportedly on behalf of a class of investors who purchased or
otherwise acquired Eargo shares in or traceable to the company's
October 15, 2020 initial public offering of common stock, shares of
Eargo common stock between October 15, 2020 and September 22,
2021.

On January 5, 2022, the court consolidated the foregoing class
actions under the caption "In re Eargo, Inc. Securities
Litigation," No. 21-cv-08597-CRB, and appointed IBEW Local 353
Pension Plan and Xiaobin Cai as Lead Plaintiffs and Bernstein
Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP and Block & Leviton LLP as Lead
Counsel. On May 20, 2022, lead plaintiffs filed a consolidated
amended complaint, which purported to extend the class period
through March 2, 2022. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on July
29, 2022. The Court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss on
February 14, 2023. Plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint on
March 16, 2023 and defendants filed a second motion to dismiss on
April 21, 2023.

On May 26, 2023, plaintiffs filed an opposition to defendants'
motion, and on June 23, 2023, defendants filed their reply brief in
support of their motion to dismiss.

Eargo, Inc. is a medical device company for people with hearing
loss.


EARTHLINK HOLDINGS: Bid to Seal Murray Transcript OK'd
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Murray v. EarthLink
Holdings Corp et al., Case No. 4:18-cv-00202 (E.D. Ark., Filed
March 19, 2018), the Hon. Judge James M. Moody Jr. entered an order
granting motion to Seal the Murray Transcript and the portions of
the Defendants' Opposition brief quoting or describing the Murray
Transcript under seal.

The Defendants are directed to deliver a copy of the Murray
Transcript and an unredacted copy of the Brief in Opposition to the
motion for class certification to Chambers in searchable.pdf format
upon filing.

The suit alleges violation of the Federal Communications Act of
1934.

EarthLink offers customers with managed information technology
services. [CC]


EBARA TECHNOLOGIES: Lal Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against EBARA Technologies
Incorporated, et al. The case is styled as Sarvesh Lal, and on
behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated v.
EBARA Technologies Incorporated, et al., Case No. 23CV012499 (Cal.
Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Nov. 30, 2023).

EBARA Technologies -- https://www.ebaratech.com/ -- is leading the
way in exhaust abatement technology, by providing high-performance
and environmentally sustainable solutions.[BN]

EDGARD EL CHAAR: Melendez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Edgard El Chaar
D.D.S., P.C. The case is styled as Rhondine Melendez, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated v. Edgard El Chaar
D.D.S., P.C., Case No. 1:23-cv-08712-PKC-VMS (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 27,
2023).

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

Dr. Edgard El Chaar -- https://www.edgardelchaar.com/ -- is a
Clinical Professor at the Department of Periodontics at the
University of Pennsylvania.[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


EHP VENTURES LLC: Sanchez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against EHP Ventures, LLC.
The case is styled as Randy Sanchez, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. EHP Ventures, LLC, Case No.
1:23-cv-08832 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 30, 2023).

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

EHP Ventures -- https://www.ehpventures.com/ -- is a company that
operates in the Financial Services industry.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Noor H. Abou-Saab, I, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF NOOR A. SAAB
          380 North Broadway, Suite 300
          Jericho, NY 11753
          Phone: (718) 740-5060
          Email: noorasaablaw@gmail.com


ELANCO ANIMAL HEALTH: Dismissal of Hunter Suit Under Appeal
-----------------------------------------------------------
Elanco Animal Health Incorporated 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 on
October 25, 2023, plaintiffs in a shareholder class action lawsuit
captioned "Hunter v. Elanco Animal Health Inc., et al."  filed a
notice of appeal to the United Stated Court of Appeals for the
Seventh Circuit.

Earlier on September 27, 2023, the court denied the plaintiffs'
motion for leave, issuing final judgment in favor of Elanco where
on December 7, 2022, the company filed an opposition to the
plaintiffs' motion.

On May 20, 2020, said action was filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Indiana against Elanco
and certain executives. On September 3, 2020, the court appointed a
lead plaintiff, and on November 9, 2020, the lead plaintiff filed
an amended complaint adding additional claims against Elanco,
certain executives and other individuals. The lawsuit alleged, in
part, that Elanco and certain of its executives made materially
false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose
certain facts about Elanco's supply chain, inventory, revenue and
projections.

The lawsuit sought unspecified monetary damages and purports to
represent purchasers of Elanco securities between September 30,
2018 and May 6, 2020, and purchasers of Elanco common stock issued
in connection with Elanco's acquisition of Aratana Therapeutics.

On January 13, 2021, the company filed a motion to dismiss, and on
August 17, 2022, the court issued an order granting its motion to
dismiss the case without prejudice. On October 14, 2022, the
plaintiffs filed a motion for leave to amend the complaint.

Elanco Animal Health Incorporated is a pharmaceutical company which
produces medicines and vaccinations for pets and livestock.


ELANCO ANIMAL HEALTH: Faces Antitrust Suit Over Flea/Tick Products
------------------------------------------------------------------
Elanco Animal Health Incorporated 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 a
trial was scheduled for July 2024 after a motion to dismiss a
second amended complaint was denied in January 2022 with regards to
demands filed by Tevra Brands, LLC for actual and treble damages
with regards to a complaint filed in the third quarter of 2019.

Tevra filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court of the Northern
District of California, alleging that Bayer Animal Health (acquired
by Elanco in August 2020) had been involved in unlawful, exclusive
dealing and tying of its flea and tick products Advantage, Advantix
and Seresto and maintained a monopoly in the market. The complaint
was amended in March 2020 and then dismissed in September 2020 with
leave to amend. A second amended complaint was filed in March 2021
and realleges claims of unlawful exclusive dealing related to
Advantage and Advantix and monopoly maintenance.

Elanco Animal Health Incorporated is a pharmaceutical company which
produces medicines and vaccinations for pets and livestock.


ELANCO ANIMAL HEALTH: Faces Saffron Shareholder Suit Over IPO
-------------------------------------------------------------
Elanco Animal Health Incorporated 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 on
October 13, 2023, plaintiff filed their opposition with regards to
the company's August 7, 2023 motion to dismiss a shareholder class
action lawsuit captioned "Saffron Capital Corporation v. Elanco
Animal Health Inc., et al."

Prior to the ruling on the motion to dismiss, on June 8, 2023, the
plaintiffs filed a motion for leave to file a second amended
complaint, which is now the operative complaint.

On October 16, 2020, said action was filed in the Marion Superior
Court of Indiana against Elanco, certain executives and other
individuals and entities. On December 23, 2020, the plaintiffs
filed an amended complaint adding an additional plaintiff. The
lawsuit alleges, in part, that Elanco and certain of its executives
made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to
disclose certain facts about Elanco's relationships with third
party distributors and revenue attributable to those distributors
within the registration statement on Form S-3 dated January 21,
2020 and accompanying prospectus filed in connection with Elanco's
public offering which closed on or about January 27, 2020.

The lawsuit seeks unspecified monetary damages and purports to
represent purchasers of Elanco common stock or TEUs issued in
connection with the public offering. From February 2021 to August
2022, this case was stayed in deference to another action. On
October 24, 2022, the company filed a motion to dismiss. On
December 23, 2022, the plaintiffs filed their opposition to the
motion to dismiss.

Elanco Animal Health Incorporated is a pharmaceutical company which
produces medicines and vaccinations for pets and livestock.


ENTRUST CORPORATION: Class Action Settlement Gets Initial Nod
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as James Morrison, on behalf
of himself and others similarly situated, v. Entrust Corporation;
and Entrust MN Corporation, Case No. 0:23-cv-00415-WMW-ECW (D.
Minn.), the Hon. Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright entered an order
granting the plaintiff's motion for preliminary approval of class
action settlement.

The Plaintiff James Morrison seeks preliminary approval of a class
action settlement of claims against Defendants Entrust Corporation
and Entrust MN Corporation.

The Plaintiff and Defendants entered into a Stipulation and
Agreement of Settlement dated August 14, 2023, which provides for a
complete dismissal with prejudice of the claims against Defendants
in this action, as well as a release of claims on the terms and
conditions set forth in the Stipulation.

The Settlement Agreement provides for a Settlement Class defined as
follows:

   A. All individuals known to reside in the U.S. whose Private
      Information was potentially compromised as a result of the
Data
      Incident discovered by Entrust Corp. and/or Entrust MN Corp.
on
      or about June 18, 2022.

      Specifically excluded from the Settlement Class are:

      (1) The judges presiding over this Litigation, and members of

          their direct families; and

      (2) Settlement Class Members who submit a valid request for
          exclusion prior to the Opt-Out Deadline.

Entrust Corp provides plastic card personalization and identity
management solutions.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3R648hy at no extra charge.[CC]


EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Class Cert. Bid Filing Amended to June 17
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHARMAYNE BRADBERRY
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC, Case No. 1:22-cv-04754-CAP-LTW
(N.D. Ga.), the Hon. Judge Linda T. Walker entered an amended
scheduling order as follows:


             Event                      Deadline

  Plaintiff's Motion for Class        June 17, 2024
  Certification

  Defendant's Opposition to Class     July 17, 2024
  Certification

  Plaintiff's Reply in Support of     August 16, 2024
  Class Certification

  Any Dispositive Motions             July 2, 2024

  Responses to Dispositive Motions    August 1, 2024

  Replies in Support of Dispositive   August 31, 2024
  Motions

Equifax is a global provider of information solutions and human
resources business process outsourcing services for businesses,
governments, and consumers.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 4, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41dm7r4 at no extra charge.[CC]

FIORI FLOWERS CORP: Martin Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Fiori Flowers Corp.
The case is styled as Damian Martin, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Fiori Flowers Corp., Case No.
1:23-cv-08817 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 30, 2023).

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

Fiori Flowers -- https://fioriflower.com/ -- in NYC where French
sophistication and elegance are beautifully hand crafted into a box
of flowers by a highly professional team of talented floral
designers.[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


FIRST REPUBLIC: Alecta Leads Class Suit Over Swedish Pension Fund
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Louise Breusch Rasmussen of Yahoo! Finance reports that Swedish
pension fund Alecta said on December 5, 2023 it had been appointed
by a U.S. court to lead a class action against First Republic Bank
aimed at recovering as much capital as possible that investors lost
when the bank collapsed earlier this year.

U.S. regulators on May 1 seized First Republic Bank and sold its
assets to JPMorgan Chase & Co, in a deal to resolve the largest
U.S. bank failure since the 2008 financial crisis and draw a line
under lingering turmoil in the industry.

Sweden's largest pension fund provider lost 19.6 billion crowns
($1.92 billion) from share holdings in First Republic Bank and
collapsed rivals Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, and said
on December 5, 2023 it would take part in class actions against all
three.

"We have a duty to take the legal measures we can to recover as
much of the capital as possible after the collapse of First
Republic," Alecta CEO Peder Hasslev, said in a statement.

It normally takes years to reach a solution in a class action of
this kind, however, and it is difficult to assess how much money
Alecta might be able to recover, the pension fund provider said.

The process is being conducted with the help of U.S. litigation
lawyers, Alecta added.

Norway's sovereign wealth fund and Swedish pension fund AP7 were
last week named co-lead plaintiffs in an ongoing class action
relating to the now-defunct Silicon Valley Bank (SVB). [GN]

FLAGSTAR BANK: Scott Sues Over Failure to Secure Information
------------------------------------------------------------
Cynthia Scott, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. FLAGSTAR BANK, N.A., Case No. 4:23-cv-12726-FKB-KGA
(E.D. Mich., Oct. 26, 2023), is brought concerning Flagstar's
failure to secure its customers' confidential information.

For the third time in less than three years, sensitive personal
information of Flagstar customers has been compromised and acquired
in a major cyberattack.

Between May 25 and May 31, 2023, an unauthorized actor accessed
Flagstar's network (the "Data Breach"). After detecting this
hacking incident on Between May 25 and May 31, 2023, an
unauthorized actor accessed Flagstar's network (the "Data Breach").
After detecting this hacking incident on June 3, 2023, Flagstar did
not report it until October 5, 2023. The impacted files contained
names, addresses, Social Security numbers, bank account numbers,
and birthdates of approximately 837,390 customers.

As a result of Flagstar's data security failures, Plaintiff and
Class Members face a significant threat of identity theft and other
harm--now and for the foreseeable future. Plaintiff accordingly
seeks compensatory damages together with injunctive relief to
remediate Flagstar's failure to secure her personally identifiable
information ("PII"), and to provide credit monitoring, identity
theft insurance, and credit repair services to protect the class of
Data Breach victims from identity theft and fraud, says the
complaint.

The Plaintiff a Flagstar customer, was notified by Flagstar of the
Data Breach that occurred between May 27 and May 31, 2023.

Flagstar was chartered in 1987 as a federal savings bank.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael N. Hanna, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
          2000 Town Center, Suite 1900
          Southfield, MI 48075
          Phone: (313) 739-1950
          Email: mhanna@forthepeople.com

               - and -

          Adam E. Polk, Esq.
          Jordan Elias, Esq.
          Simon Grille, Esq.
          GIRARD SHARP LLP
          601 California Street, Suite 1400
          San Francisco, CA 94108
          Phone: (415) 981-4800
          Email: apolk@girardsharp.com
                 jelias@girardsharp.com
                 sgrille@girardsharp.com


FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT: Sued Over Service Interruption
-----------------------------------------------------
Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) disclosed in its Form 10-Q
report for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2023, filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 7, 2023,
that it is a defendant in a purported class action lawsuit filed in
February 2018 that seeks from FPL unspecified damages for alleged
breach of contract and gross negligence based on service
interruptions that occurred as a result of Hurricane Irma in 2017.
There is currently no trial date set.

The Miami-Dade County Circuit Court certified the case as a class
action and FPL's appeal of that decision was denied by Florida's
Third District Court of Appeal in March 2023. The certified class
encompasses all persons and business owners who reside in and are
otherwise citizens of the state of Florida that contracted with FPL
for electrical services, were charged storm charges, experienced a
power outage after Hurricane Irma and suffered consequential
damages because of FPL's alleged breach of contract or gross
negligence. FPL filed a motion on March 31, 2023, for rehearing
with the 3rd DCA claiming that the opinion upholding the class
certification contains several errors that should be reheard by the
full 3rd DCA. The motion is pending.

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

Florida Power & Light Company is the largest power utility in
Florida. It is a Juno Beach, Florida-based power utility company
serving roughly 5 million customers and 11 million people in
Florida.



FOR LIFE: Iglesias Seeks to Seal Unredacted Docs
-------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as THOMAS IGLESIAS, DAVID
SALAZAR, OLIVIA THURMAN, and BETHANY TORBERT, Individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, v. FOR LIFE PRODUCTS, LLC,
Case No. 3:21-cv-01147-TSH (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs ask the
Court to enter an order sealing the unredacted documents filed in
support of their class certification Motion.

The Plaintiffs request limited redactions to Plaintiffs' Class
Certification brief, redaction of depositions transcripts, and the
sealing of documents reflecting sensitive information (that
Defendant has designated as confidential), highly sensitive and
confidential financial information from third-parties (that
Plaintiffs have designated as confidential), and highly sensitive
and confidential trade secreted information from third-parties
(that Plaintiffs have designated as confidential).

The Plaintiffs have taken steps to reduce the volume of material at
issue in this sealing request.

On May 13, 2021, the Court entered the Stipulated Protective Order
governing the confidentiality of information and documents in this
action. Subsequently, the Parties participated in discovery during
which materials such as Defendant’s documents, deposition
transcripts for various witnesses, and sales data from third
parties were designated as "CONFIDENTIAL."

For Life manufactures home improvement products.

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

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Ryan J. Clarkson, Esq.
          Katherine A. Bruce, Esq.
          Kelsey J. Elling, Esq.
          CLARKSON LAW FIRM, P.C.
          22525 Pacific Coast Highway
          Malibu, CA 90265
          Telephone: (213) 788-4050
          Facsimile: (213) 788-4070
          E-mail: rclarkson@clarksonlawfirm.com
                  kbruce@clarksonlawfirm.com
                  kelling@clarksonlawfirm.com

                - and -

          Christopher D. Moon, Esq.
          Kevin O. Moon, Esq.
          MOON LAW APC
          228 Hamilton Ave., 3rd Fl
          Palo Alto, CA 94301
          Telephone: (619) 915-9432
          Facsimile: (650) 618-0478
          E-mail: chris@moonlawapc.com
                  kevin@moonlawapc.com

FOR LIFE: Iglesias Suit Seeks to Certify Classes
------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as THOMAS IGLESIAS, DAVID
SALAZAR, OLIVIA THURMAN, and BETHANY TORBERT, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, v. FOR LIFE PRODUCTS, LLC,
Case No. 3:21-cv-01147-TSH (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs ask the
Court to enter an order granting class certification pursuant to
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3):

   -- the California Class

      "All persons or entities who, within the relevant statute of

      limitations period, purchased one or more of the Products1
      labeled "SAFE FOR PETS & KIDS," in the State of California,
for
      purposes other than resale; and

   -- the Multi-State Class

      All persons or entities who, within the relevant statute of
      limitations period, purchased one or more of the Products2
      labeled "SAFE FOR  PETS & KIDS," in the States of California,

      Delaware, District of Columbia, Kansas, Missouri, New Jersey,

      Ohio, Utah, Virginia, or West Virginia, for purposes other
than
      resale."

      Excluded from the Class are: (i) Defendant, its assigns,
      successors, and legal representatives; (ii) any entities in
      which Defendant has controlling interests; (iii) federal,
state,
      and/or local governments, including, but not limited to,
their
      departments, agencies, divisions, bureaus, boards, sections,

      groups, counsels, and/or subdivisions; and (iv) any judicial

      officer presiding over this matter and person within the
third
      degree of consanguinity to such judicial officer.

The Court further entered an order:

   1. Appointing Plaintiffs Thomas Iglesias, David Salazar, Olivia
      Thurman and Bethany Torbert as Class Representatives; and

   2. Appointing Ryan J. Clarkson, Katherine A. Bruce, and Kelsey
J.
      Elling of Clarkson Law Firm, P.C., and Christopher D. Moon
and
      Kevin O. Moon of Moon Law APC are appointed Class Counsel
      pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g).

For Life manufactures home improvement products.

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

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Ryan J. Clarkson, Esq.
          Katherine A. Bruce, Esq.
          Kelsey J. Elling, Esq.
          CLARKSON LAW FIRM, P.C.
          22525 Pacific Coast Highway
          Malibu, CA 90265
          Telephone: (213) 788-4050
          Facsimile: (213) 788-4070
          E-mail: rclarkson@clarksonlawfirm.com
                  kbruce@clarksonlawfirm.com
                  kelling@clarksonlawfirm.com

                - and -

          Christopher D. Moon, Esq.
          Kevin O. Moon, Esq.
          MOON LAW APC
          228 Hamilton Ave., 3rd Fl
          Palo Alto, CA 94301
          Telephone: (619) 915-9432
          Facsimile: (650) 618-0478
          E-mail: chris@moonlawapc.com
                  kevin@moonlawapc.com

FORD MOTOR: Lessin Suit Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WILLIAM LESSIN, CAROL
SMALLEY, et al., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, a Delaware Corporation; and Doe 1
through 10, inclusive, Case No. 3:19-cv-01082-AJB-AHG (S.D. Cal.),
the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order certifying the
putative classes and appointing McCune Law Group, APC and Cafferty
Clobes Meriwether & Sprengel LLP, as Class Counsel.

The Plaintiffs contend that the Court should certify under Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 23, the following groups as classes and
subclasses pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rules
23(a), Rules 23(b)(2), and/or 23(b)(3):

    1. Nationwide Class, represented by Sheri Powers, Patrick
Powers,
       Llyod Atterson, Brad Nielsen, David Appel, Susanne Hamilton,

       Steve Selgado, Roger Saddler, David Huffstetler, and
Caroline
       McGee, certified for claims under the Magnuson MossWarranty

       Act, 15 U.S.C. section 2301, et seq.: All persons who
purchased
       or leased a 2005-2019 Ford F-250 or F350 4x4 truck from an
       authorized Ford dealership within the United States
primarily
       for personal, family, or household purposes.

    2. California Sub-Class, represented by William Lessin, Sheri
       Powers, Patrick Powers, and Carol Smalley, certified for
claims
       under California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act, fraud by
       concealment/omission under California law, and breach of
       implied warranty: All persons who purchased or leased a
Class
       Vehicle from an authorized Ford dealership within the State
of
       California primarily for personal, family, or household
       purposes.

    3. Arizona Sub-Class, represented by Lloyd Atterson, for claims

       for fraud by concealment/omission under Arizona law, and
breach
       of express warranty: All persons who purchased or leased a
       Class Vehicle from an authorized Ford dealership within the

       State of Arizona primarily for personal, family, or
household
       purposes.

    4. Colorado Sub-Class, represented by Brad Nielsen, certified
for
       claims under Colorado's Consumer Protection Act, fraud by
       concealment/omission under Colorado law, and breach of
implied
       warranty: All persons who purchased or leased a Class
Vehicle
       from an authorized Ford dealership within the State of
Colorado
       primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.

    5. Illinois Sub-Class, represented by David Appel, certified
for
       claims under Illinoi’s Consumer Fraud and Deceptive
Business
       Practices Act, fraud by concealment/omission under Illinois

       law, and breach of express warranty: All persons who
purchased
       or leased a Class Vehicle from an authorized Ford dealership

       within the State of Illinois primarily for personal, family,
or
       household purposes.

    6. Indiana Sub-Class, represented by John Kigin, certified for

       claims under Indiana's Deceptive Consumer Sales Act: All
       persons who purchased or leased a Class Vehicle from an
       authorized Ford dealership within the State of Indiana
       primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.

    7. Maine Sub-Class, represented by Susanne Hamilton, certified
for
       claims under Maine's Unfair Trade Practices Act, breach of
       express warranty, and breach of implied warranty: All
persons
       who purchased or leased a Class Vehicle from an authorized
       Ford dealership within the State of Maine primarily for
       personal, family, or household purposes.

    8. New Mexico Sub-Class, represented by Steve Selgado,
certified
       for claims under New Mexico's Unfair Practices Act breach of

       express warranty, fraud by concealment/omission under New
       Mexico law, and breach of implied warranty: All persons who

       purchased or leased a Class Vehicle from an authorized Ford

       dealership within the State of New Mexico primarily for
       personal, family, or household purposes.

    9. Ohio Sub-Class, represented by Roger Saddler, certified for

       claims for breach of express warranty, and tortious breach
of
       implied warranty under Ohio law: All persons who purchased
or
       leased a Class Vehicle from an authorized Ford dealership
       within the State of Ohio primarily for personal, family, or

       household purposes.

   10. South Carolina Sub-Class, represented by David Huffstetler,

       certified for claims for breach of express warranty, and
breach
       of implied warranty: All persons who purchased or leased a
       Class Vehicle from an authorized Ford dealership within the

       State of South Carolina primarily for personal, family, or
       household purposes.

   11. Texas Sub-Class, represented by Caroline McGee, certified
for
       claims for breach of express warranty, and breach of implied

       warranty: All persons who purchased or leased a Class
Vehicle
       from an authorized Ford dealership within the State of Texas

       primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.

The Plaintiffs satisfy the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3) because
common issues predominate over individual issues for each of the
identified classes. While each of the classes and sub-classes is
governed by different state-law statutes, Plaintiffs will prove
liability and damages using evidence common to all members of each
class.

Ford Motor is an American multinational automobile manufacturer.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3uP8IJJ at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          David C. Wright, Esq.
          Richard D. McCune, Esq.
          Steven A. Haskins, Esq.
          Mark I. Richards, Esq.
          Elaine S. Kusel, Esq.
          MCCUNE LAW GROUP, APC
          3281 Guasti Road, Suite 100
          Ontario, CA 91761
          Telephone: (909) 557-1250
          Facsimile: (909) 557-1275
          E-mail: esk@mccunewight.com
                  rdm@mccunewright.com
                  dcw@mccunewright.com
                  sah@mccunewright.com
                  mir@mccunewright.com

                - and -

          Alex Lee, Esq.
          Bryan L. Clobes, Esq.
          CAFFERTY CLOBES
          MERIWETHER & SPRENGEL LLP
          135 South LaSalle Street, Suite 3210
          Chicago, IL 60603
          Telephone: (312) 782-4880
          Facsimile: (909) 557-1275
          E-mail: alee@caffertyclobes.com
                  bclobes@caffertyclobes.com

                - and -

          Douglas C. Sohn, Esq.
          SOHN & ASSOCIATES
          16870 West Bernardo Drive, Suite 400
          San Diego, CA 92127
          Telephone: (619) 237-7646
          Facsimile: (858) 759-4299
          E-mail: dsohn@sohnlaw.com

FORESIGHT ENERGY: Fact Discovery in Everly Suit Due Feb. 17, 2025
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Everley v. Foresight
Energy LLC, Case No. 3:23-cv-03265 (C.D. Ill., Filed Aug. 31,
2023), the Hon. Judge Colleen R. Lawless entered an order as
follows:

-- The initial brief on class certification         Feb. 20, 2024
    is due by:

-- A response brief is due by:                      March 22,
2024

-- Fact discovery shall be completed by:            Feb. 17, 2025

-- Plaintiff is to provide disclosures              Nov. 15, 2024
    of testifying experts by:

-- Depositions of plaintiff's experts               Dec. 13, 2024
    shall be completed by:

-- The Defendant is to provide                      Jan. 17, 2025
    disclosures of testifying experts by:

-- Depositions of defendant's experts are           Feb. 14, 2025
    to be completed by:

-- Dispositive motions are due by:                  March 20,
2025

The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Foresight produces and mines thermal coal.[CC]

FORTUNE SENIOR: Willingham Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Fortune Senior
Enterprises, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Shonte Willingham,
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Fortune Senior
Enterprises, Inc., et al., Case No. 23CV012376 (Cal. Super. Ct.,
Sacramento Cty., Nov. 29, 2023).

Fortune Senior Enterprises, Inc. is a Homecare in Citrus Heights,
California.[BN]

FRANCESCA'S ACQUISITION: Nolasco Sues Over Failure to Secure PII
----------------------------------------------------------------
Wendy Nolasco, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. FRANCESCA'S ACQUISITION, LLC, Case No. 4:23-cv-04049
(S.D. Tex., Oct. 24, 2023), is brought against Francesca's for its
failure to properly secure and safeguard personally identifiable
information ("PII" or "Private Information") of Plaintiff's and
other similarly situated current and former employees and customers
(collectively, the "Class Members") from hackers.

The Defendant failed to provide timely, adequate, and accurate
notice that the integrity of their PII had been compromised and
stolen. Plaintiff's and Class Members' compromised PII included
their first and last names, Social Security numbers, and financial
account information belonging to roughly 58,387 Class Members.

On January 31, 2023, Francesca's discovered a data security
incident through which an unauthorized third party had accessed
Francesca's network and files in its computer systems, from January
12 through January 31, 2023 (the "Data Breach"). Consequently,
Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII was compromised, including their
first and last names, Social Security numbers, and their financial
account information.

Despite the breadth and sensitivity of the PII exposed, and the
attendant consequences to Plaintiff and Class Members as a result
of the exposure, Francesca's failed to disclose the Data Breach for
approximately eight months from the time the Data Breach occurred,
further exacerbating harm to Plaintiff and the Class. This Data
Breach was a direct result of Francesca's failure to implement
adequate and reasonable cybersecurity procedures and protocols
necessary to protect Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII.

Francesca's disregarded the rights of Plaintiff and Class Members
by: intentionally, willfully, recklessly, or negligently failing to
take adequate and reasonable measures to ensure its data systems
were protected against unauthorized intrusions; failing to disclose
that it did not have adequately robust computer systems and
security practices to safeguard Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII;
failing to take standard and reasonably available steps to prevent
the Data Breach; failing to monitor and timely detect the Data
Breach; failing to provide Plaintiff and Class Members prompt and
accurate notice of the Data Breach; and failing to provide
comprehensive and effective credit protection services after
notification of the Data Breach.

As a result of Francesca's failure to implement and follow basic
security procedures, the PII of past and current employees, as well
as customers, of Francesca's is now in the hands of thieves who,
upon information and belief, have committed criminal acts against
Plaintiff and the Class by misusing their data and/or have
published and/or sold their data on the internet (i.e., the "dark
web") for others to view, access, and/or misuse, says the
complaint.

The Plaintiff is an individual citizen of San Diego, California who
has resided in the state for nearly 22 years.

Francesca's is a women's fashion boutique that was founded in
1999.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
          JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LAW FIRM
          11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
          Houston, TX 77046
          Phone: 713-352-1100
          Email: mjosephson@mybackwages.com

               - and -

          Jason S. Rathod, Esq.
          Nicholas A. Migliaccio, Esq.
          MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD, LLP
          412 H Street NE
          Washington, D.C. 20002
          Phone: (202) 470-3520
          Fax: (202) 800-2730
          Email: jrathod@classlawdc.com
                 nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com


FRANCIS DESOUZA: Faces Icahn Partners Suit Over Merger Deal
-----------------------------------------------------------
Illumina, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly
period ended October 1, 2023, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 13, 2023, that on October 17, 2023,
a stockholder derivative and class action complaint captioned
"Icahn Partners LP, et al. v. deSouza, et al.," purportedly brought
on behalf of Illumina and public holders of Illumina’s common
stock, was filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery against certain
current and former directors (including our former Chief Executive
Officer). Francis Aurelio deSouza is the former CEO of Illumina.
The company was named as a nominal defendant in the complaint.

The lawsuit alleges the named directors breached their fiduciary
duties by knowingly causing Illumina to unlawfully close the
acquisition of healthcare company Grail Inc., concealing material
facts related to the acquisition and making inadequate disclosures.
The complaint seeks damages, costs and expenses, including attorney
fees, the certification and consolidation of a putative class, the
issuance of amended disclosures, the removal of conflicted
directors and declaratory and other equitable relief. The lawsuit
is brought in part on behalf of Illumina as a nominal defendant.

Illumina, Inc. is a provider of sequencing- and array-based
solutions, serving customers in the research, clinical and applied
markets. Its products are used for applications in the life
sciences, oncology, reproductive health, agriculture and other
emerging segments with customers that include genomic research
centers, academic institutions, government laboratories, and
hospitals, as well as pharmaceutical, biotechnology, commercial
molecular diagnostic laboratories, and consumer genomics
companies.


FREUD AMERICA: Tuter Seeks to Certify Settlement Class
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JEFFREY TUTER, v. FREUD
AMERICA, INC., Case No. 4:22-cv-00282-RK (W.D. Mo.), the Plaintiff
asks the Court to enter an order granting final approval of class
Action settlement, attorneys' fees, costs, expenses, and Service
award, and suggestions in support:

   1. The Settlement Class

      The Agreement provides for the following Settlement Class:

      "All Persons who purchased one or more Covered Products at
      retail in the United States and its territories during the
Class
      Period."

      Excluded from the Settlement Class are:

          (i) Defendant and its employees;

         (ii) any Person who properly and timely opts out pursuant
to
              this Agreement;

        (iii) federal, state, and local governments (including all

              agencies and subdivisions thereof (but employees
thereof
              are not excluded); and

         (iv) any judge who presides over the consideration of
whether
              to approve the settlement of this class action and
any
              member of their immediate family.

      The Class Period is from January 1, 2017, through September
6,
      2023. Id. at section 2.6.

   2. Monetary and injunctive relief

      The Agreement provides Settlement Class members with
significant
      monetary and non-monetary benefits. With respect to the
monetary
      benefits, Defendant will pay up to $1,075,000 to Settlement
      Class Members in accordance with the following terms:

      a. Tier 1 – Claimants Without Proof of Purchase.

         Claimants who do not submit proof of purchase may receive

         payment of up to $2.50 per unit for up to four units.


         The maximum benefit amount under Tier 1 is $10 per
household.

      b. Tier 2 – Claimants with Proof of Purchase.

         Claimants who submit proof of purchase for one or more
         Covered Products may receive reimbursement of the amount
of
         such purchases subject to a maximum Benefit Amount of $50

         (regardless of whether the total amount of such purchases

         exceeded $50).

      c. If the amount of approved claims under Tier 1 and Tier 2
         combined exceed $1,075,000, the Benefit Amounts paid to
each
         approved claimant will be reduced pro rata.

Freud offers wholesale distribution of cutlery and general
hardware.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RA8jn9 at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kenneth B. McClain, Esq.
          Paul D. Anderson, Esq.
          Jonathan M. Soper, Esq.
          Nichelle L. Oxley, Esq.
          Kevin D. Stanley, Esq.
          HUMPHREY FARRINGTON & MCCLAIN, P.C.
          221 West Lexington, Suite 400
          Independence, MO 64050
          Telephone: (816) 836-5050
          Facsimile: (816) 836-8966
          E-mail: kbm@hfmlegal.com
                  pda@hfmlegal.com
                  jms@hfmlegal.com
                  nlo@hfmlegal.com
                  kds@hfmlegal.com

FROST& SULLIVAN: Hays Sues Over Unprotected Private Information
---------------------------------------------------------------
DON HAYS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. FROST & SULLIVAN, INC., Defendant, Case No.
5:23-cv-01490 (W.D. Tex., December 5, 2023) arises from Defendant's
failure to protect highly sensitive data about its current and
former employees and clients, asserting claims against the
Defendant for negligence, negligence per se, breach of implied
contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and unjust enrichment.

The Defendant admits that on separate occasion an unauthorized
individual accessed certain systems. While the data breach began on
March 10, 2023, it would take Defendant until July 8, 2023, before
it noticed its very own data breach -- a full 120 days after the
data breach began. In addition, the Defendant waited until
September 5, 2023, before it began notifying the class -- a full 59
days after Defendant noticed its data breach. Thus, the Defendant
breached its duties by failing to provide reasonably timely notice
of the Data Breach to Plaintiff and Class members, which actually
and proximately caused and exacerbated the harm from the Data
Breach and Plaintiff and Class members' injuries-in-fact, says the
suit.

Headquartered in San Antonio, TX, Frost & Sullivan, Inc. is a
business consulting firm with 1200 experts, growth advisors, and
visionaries in 45 global offices. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

        Joe Kendall, Esq.
        KENDALL LAW GROUP, PLLC
        3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 825
        Dallas, TX 75219
        Telephone: (214) 744-3000
        Facsmile: (214) 744-3015
        E-mail: jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com

                - and -

        Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
        Raina Borrelli, Esq.
        Brittany Resch, Esq.
        TURKE & STRAUSS LLP
        613 Williamson Street, Suite 201
        Madison, WI 53703
        Telephone: (608) 237-1775
        Facsimile: (608) 509-4423
        E-mail: sam@turkestrauss.com
                raina@turkestrauss.com
                brittanyr@turkestrauss.com

FT MARE DC: Ferlito Seeks More Time to File Class Certification Bid
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANDREA FERLITO,
Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. FT
MARE DC, LLC d/b/a FIOLA MARE RESTAURANT, Case No.
1:23-cv-03187-TNM (D.D.C.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter
an order that:

   (1) the Motion to Enlarge the Period for Filing a Motion for
Class
       Certification is hereby granted; and

   (2) Plaintiff be permitted to file their Motion for Class
       Certification at a date to be set at the Federal Rule of
Civil
       Procedure 26(f) conference for this matter

The Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and all other similarly
situated servers, bartenders, barbacks, and other customarily
tipped employees, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby
submits this Motion and Memorandum to Enlarge the Period for Filing
a Motion for Class Certification outlined in this Court's Local
Civil Rule 23.1(b) pursuant to Federal Rule Civil procedure
6(b)(1)(A) for good cause shown.

The Plaintiff filed the instant action on October 24, 2023, as a
"Collective and Class Action Complaint." In addition to the claims
under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), the operative
Complaint articulated clear class action allegations pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 for claims made under the
District of Columbia Wage Payment Collection Law ("DCWPCL") and the
District of Columbia Minimum Wage Act ("DCMWA").

Fiola Mare is a sophisticated Italian seafood restaurant.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3uHucIb at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael K. Amster, Esq.
          ZIPIN, AMSTER & GREENBERG, LLC
          8757 Georgia Avenue, Suite 400
          Silver Spring, MD 20910
          Telephone: (301) 587-9373
          Facsimile: (240) 839-9142
          E-mail: mamster@zagfirm.com

GAT AIRLINE GROUND: Pereyra Suit Removed to S.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Marcelina Pereyra, individually, and on
behalf of all other similarly situated v. GAT AIRLINE GROUND
SUPPORT, INC., and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No.
7-2023-00046746-CU-OE-CTL was removed from the Superior Court of
California, County of San Diego, to the United States District
Court for the Southern District of California on Nov. 30, 2023, and
assigned Case No. 3:23-cv-02195-MMA-MMP.

The Plaintiff's Complaint asserts twelve causes of action against
Defendant: minimum wage violations; failure to pay all overtime
wages; meal period violations; rest period violations; paid sick
leave violations; unpaid vacation wages; untimely payment of wages;
wage statement violations;  waiting time penalties; failure to
reimburse business expenses; failure to provide records; and unfair
competition.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Robert Mussig, Esq.
          Devin S. Lindsay, Esq.
          Emma Husseman, Esq.
          SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP
          A Limited Liability Partnership
          Including Professional Corporations
          333 South Hope Street, 43rd Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071-1422
          Phone: 213.620.1780
          Facsimile: 213.620.1398
          Email: rmussig@sheppardmullin.com
                 dlindsay@sheppardmullin.com
                 ehusseman@sheppardmullin.com


GAUDENTI & SONS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Hidalgo Says
--------------------------------------------------------
WALBERTO HIDALGO, individually and on behalf of all other Aggrieved
Employees, Plaintiff v. GAUDENTI & SONS CORPORATION, a California
Stock Corporation, and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants,
Case No. 23STCV29558 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., December 4,
2023) alleges Defendants' violations of the California Labor Code.

The Plaintiff was hired by Defendants with the job title of
Superintendent on or about March 3, 2021. He worked for Defendants
up until on or about March 8, 2023. Throughout Plaintiff's
employment, the Defendants routinely required him to perform work
tasks before and/or after their scheduled shifts, and/or during
off-the-clock meal breaks, and/or during rest breaks. However, the
Defendants willfully failed to pay him all the wages to which he
was entitled to, says the Plaintiff.

Based in California, Gaudenti & Sons Corporation provides
architectural, irrigation and landscaping design services. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Haig B. Kazandjian, Esq.
          Raffi Tapanian, Esq.
          HAIG B. KAZANDJIAN LAWYERS, APC
          801 North Brand Boulevard, Suite 970
          Glendale, CA 91203
          Telephone: (818) 696-2306
          Facsimile: (818) 696-2307
          E-mail: haig@hbklawyers.com
                  raffi@hbklawyers.com

GERBER PRODUCTS: Class Cert Bid Filing Continued to April 26, 2024
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TRACY HOWARD, as an
individual, on behalf of herself, the general public and those
similarly situated, v. GERBER PRODUCTS COMPANY, Case No.
3:22-cv-04779-VC (N.D. Cal.), the parties stipulate and agree,
subject to Court approval, to continue the class certification
briefing schedule as follows:

             Event                       Current           
Proposed
                                         Deadline          
Deadline

  Motion for Class Certification      Jan. 12, 2024      Apr. 26,
2024
  & Plaintiffs' Disclosure of
  Class Certification Experts

  Opposition to Motion for Class      Mar. 8, 2024       June 21,
2024
  Certification; Defendant's
  Disclosure of Class Certification
  Experts and Rebuttal Experts

  Reply in Support of Motion for      May 3, 2024        Aug. 9,
2024
  Class Certification; Plaintiffs'
  Disclosure of Rebuttal Experts

  Hearing on Motion for               May 30, 2024       Aug. 29,
2024
  Class Certification

On May 19, 2023, this Court entered a scheduling order setting the
class certification briefing schedule.

Gerber Products Company is an American purveyor of baby food and
baby products.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RzMLqE at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Hayley Reynolds, Esq.
          Seth A. Safier, Esq.
          Marie A. McCrary, Esq.
          GUTRIDE SAFIER LLP
          100 Pine Street, Suite 1250
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 639-9090
          Facsimile: (415) 449-6469
          E-mail: seth@gutridesafier.com
                  marie@gutridesafier.com
                  hayley@gutridesafier.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Bryan A. Merryman, Esq.
          Katherine Godar, Esq.
          WHITE & CASE LLP
          555 S. Flower Street, Suite 2700
          Los Angeles, CA 90071-2433
          Telephone: (213) 620-7700
          Facsimile: (213) 452-2329
          E-mail: bmerryman@whitecase.com
                  katherine.godar@whitecase.com

GILEAD SCIENCES: Faces Antitrust Suit Over Cipla Generic Drugs Deal
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Gilead Sciences, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2023, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 7, 2023, that in
September 2020, the company, along with generic manufacturers Cipla
and Cipla USA Inc., were named as defendants in a class action
lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of California by Jacksonville Police Officers and Fire Fighters
Health Insurance Trust on behalf of end-payor purchasers.

Jacksonville Trust claims that the 2014 settlement agreement
between Gilead and Cipla, which settled a patent dispute relating
to patents covering the drugs "Emtriva," "Truvada" and "Atripla"
products and permitted generic entry prior to patent expiry,
violates certain federal and state antitrust and consumer
protection laws.

The plaintiff seeks damages, permanent injunctive relief and other
relief.

Gilead Sciences, Inc. is a biopharmaceutical company headquartered
in Foster City, California, that focuses on researching and
developing antiviral drugs used in the treatment of HIV/AIDS,
hepatitis B, hepatitis C, influenza, and COVID-19, including
ledipasvir/sofosbuvir and sofosbuvir.


GILEAD SCIENCES: Named in Product Litigation Over Drug Side Effects
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Gilead Sciences, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2023, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 7, 2023, that the
company was named as a defendant in a class action lawsuit and
various product liability lawsuits related to "Viread," "Truvada,"
"Atripla," "Complera" and "Stribild."

Plaintiffs allege that these drugs caused them to experience
kidney, bone and/or tooth injuries. The lawsuits, which are pending
in state or federal court in California and Missouri, involve more
than 25,000 active plaintiffs. Plaintiffs in these cases seek
damages and other relief on various grounds for alleged personal
injury and economic loss. The first bellwether trial in California
state court was scheduled to begin in October 2022, but is
currently stayed while the California First District Court of
Appeal considers the merits of plaintiffs' theories of liability.
The first bellwether trial in California federal court is scheduled
to begin in April 2024.

Gilead Sciences, Inc. is a biopharmaceutical company headquartered
in Foster City, California, that focuses on researching and
developing antiviral drugs used in the treatment of HIV/AIDS,
hepatitis B, hepatitis C, influenza, and COVID-19, including
ledipasvir/sofosbuvir and sofosbuvir.


GLEN MILLS: Derrick Seeks Leave to File Class Cert Reply Under Seal
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DERRICK, by and with his
parent and next friend TINA, et al., v. GLEN MILLS SCHOOLS, et al.,
Case No. 2:19-cv-01541-HB (E.D. Pa.), the Plaintiff asks the Court
to enter an order pursuant to Local Rule of Civil Procedure 5.1.5
granting leave to file under seal portions of the Replies and
certain exhibits to their Replies in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion
for Class Certification and Appointment of Class Representatives
and Class Counsel, filed in response to Defendants Glen Mills
School and Randy Ireson, Pennsylvania Department of Education, and
Ted Dallas, Teresa Miller, and Cathy Utz's in opposition to
Plaintiffs' motion, which Plaintiffs are filing simultaneously with
the instant Motion.

Glen Mills Schools was a youth detention center for juvenile
delinquents.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3NeNTh5 at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Marsha L. Levick, Esq.
          Katherine E. Burdick, Esq.
          Nadia Mozaffar, Esq.
          Malik Pickett, Esq.
          Courtney M. Alexander, Esq.
          Breanne Schuster, Esq.
          Jasmin Randolph-Taylor, Esq.
          JUVENILE LAW CENTER
          1800 JFK Blvd., Suite 1900B
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (215) 625-0551

                - and -

          Maura McInerney, Esq.
          Kristina A. Moon, Esq.
          Margaret M. Wakelin, Esq.
          EDUCATION LAW CENTER
          1800 JFK Blvd., Suite 1900A
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telepone: (215) 238-6970

                - and -

          Fred T. Magaziner, Esq.
          Michael H. McGinley, Esq.
          Clare Putnam Pozos, Esq.
          Caroline Power, Esq.
          Roger A. Dixon, Esq.
          Rachel Rosenberg, Esq.
          Christopher J. Merken, Esq.
          DECHERT LLP
          Cira Centre, 2929 Arch St.
          Philadelphia, PA 19104
          Telephone: (215) 994-4000

GLS US FREIGHT: Whitehead Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against GLS US Freight, Inc.
The case is styled as Stetson Whitehead, an individual; on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated v. GLS US Freight,
Inc., Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2023-0012910 (Cal. Super. Ct., San
Joaquin Cty., Nov. 30, 2023).

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

GLS -- https://www.gls-us.com/ -- is a full-service logistics
company offering freight and parcel delivery services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Aaron A. Bart, Esq.


GLUTEN FREE SHOPPE: Sanchez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against The Gluten Free
Shoppe, Ltd. The case is styled as Randy Sanchez, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. The Gluten Free
Shoppe, Ltd., Case No. 1:23-cv-08838 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 30, 2023).

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

The Gluten-Free Shop -- https://theglutenfreeshoppe.com/ -- is a
one-stop shop where you can find products, information, and yummy
recipes to make living gluten-free easier and enjoyable.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Noor H. Abou-Saab, I, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF NOOR A. SAAB
          380 North Broadway, Suite 300
          Jericho, NY 11753
          Phone: (718) 740-5060
          Email: noorasaablaw@gmail.com


GOBT INC: Micele Sues Over Unlawful Collection of Biometrics
------------------------------------------------------------
NIKOLETTA MICELE, on behalf of herself and all similarly situated
individuals, Plaintiff v. G.O.B.T., INC., d/b/a GULLIVER'S OAKBROOK
TERRACE, an Illinois Corporation, Defendant, Case No. 2023LA001299
(Ill. Cir., 18th Judicial, DuPage Cty., December 4, 2023) seeks for
damages and other legal and equitable remedy resulting from the
illegal actions of Defendant in collecting, storing and using
Plaintiff's, and other similarly situated individuals' biometrics
without informed consent in violation of the Illinois Biometric
Information Privacy Act.

The Defendant required Plaintiff and other similarly situated
individuals to clock-in and clock-out from work by scanning their
fingerprints by using Defendant's biometric timekeeping device, a
fingerprint scanner. However, throughout Plaintiff's employment,
the Defendant never provided her nor did she ever sign a written
release allowing the Defendant to collect or store the biometric
identifiers or biometric information associated with her
fingerprints, says the suit.

G.O.B.T. Inc. operates the Gulliver's Pizza & Pub restaurant and
bar located at 17W517 Roosevelt Rd. in Oakbrook Terrace, IL. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jordan Richards, Esq.
          JORDAN RICHARDS PLLC
          1800 SE 10th Ave. Suite 205
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316
          Telephone: (954) 871-0050
          E-mail: jordan@jordanrichardspllc.com
                   michael@usaemploymentlawyers.com
                   sarah@usaemploymentlawyers.com

GOOD OLD GOLD: Melendez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Good Old Gold, Inc.
The case is styled as Rhondine Melendez, on behalf of herself and
all others similarly situated v. Good Old Gold, Inc., Case No.
1:23-cv-08831 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 30, 2023).

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

Good Old Gold, Inc. -- https://www.goodoldgold.com/ -- is a
long-standing retailer of designer jewelry specializing in diamonds
& gold, plus vintage pieces.[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


GOOGLE INC: Plaintiffs Seek to File Confidential Info Under Seal
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re Google RTB Consumer Privacy
Litigation, Case No. 4:21-cv-02155-YGR (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs
move the Court to consider whether those portions of named
plaintiff data identified and in plaintiffs' proposed order should
remain conditionally under seal and in redacted form pursuant to
Plaintiffs' designations.

The Plaintiffs have legitimate privacy interests in this
information and will be injured if it is made public. The
Plaintiffs have lodged with the Court with its Reply brief, and
will serve on counsel for Defendant Google, a complete copy of the
unredacted and unsealed documents in accordance with Civil L.R.
5-1(e).

Pursuant to Civil Local Rules 7-11 and 79-5(c) and (f), plaintiffs,
as the Designating Party, hereby respectfully submit this
Administrative Motion to Seal certain named plaintiff data and
information submitted by plaintiffs with plaintiffs’ reply brief
in support of plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification.

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

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

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

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

GRAND STREET DENTAL: Stroude Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Grand Street Dental,
PLLC. The case is styled as Colette Stroude, on behalf of herself
and all others similarly situated v. Grand Street Dental, PLLC,
Case No. 1:23-cv-08821 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 30, 2023).

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

Grand Street Dental, PLLC -- https://www.grandstreetdental.com/ --
provide top-notch care in a state-of-the-art facility equipped with
dentistry's most modern and trusted technologies.[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


GREP ATLANTIC: Bosley Sues Over Improper Rental Scheme
------------------------------------------------------
DAVID BOSLEY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GREP ATLANTIC, LLC D/B/A GREYSTAR,
Defendant, Case No. 2023-CAB-007340 (D.C. Super., Dec. 1, 2023)
alleges violation of the Columbia Consumer Protection Procedures
Act.

According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, Greystar partitions
the rent for many units of its buildings in the District into two
portions: (1) a fixed monthly rate ("Fixed Rent"), the amount of
which is clearly disclosed in advertising, applications, and
leases, and (2) a variable, hidden rate for utilities and other
related fees ("Utility Rent"). While the fine print in the leases
requires the Utility Rent to be paid to the building as a condition
of living in the building, the specific amount of Utility Rent that
one will have to pay is not identified in the lease, nor any of the
advertising, applications, or disclosures provided, nor is the fact
that Greystar will charge Utility Rent mentioned anywhere in the
advertising or application.

According to the complaint, this practice is illegal: District law
mandates that the entire amount of money owed as a condition of
occupancy be disclosed "at the time a prospective tenant files an
application to lease any rental unit." Long after applying, tenants
learn that Greystar secretly tabulates a new amount for Utility
Rent every month, adds on extra billing fees, and then demands
tenants pay that month's amount immediately -- often in as little
as ten days. Thus, by making the monthly payment of a variable
utility charge a condition of occupancy in these buildings
("Utility Rent Properties"), tenants have little choice but to cede
to Greystar's billing demands, as those who do not pay the Utility
Rent on demand risk negative credit and background reporting, steep
late fees, and eviction, says the suit.

GREP ATLANTIC, LLC D/B/A GREYSTAR integrated real estate company
offering expertise in investment management, development, and
management of rental housing properties globally. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kristen A. Simplicio, Esq.
          F. Peter Silva II, Esq.
          Leora N. Friedman, Esq.
          TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP
          2000 Pennsylvania Ave., Northwest, Suite 1010
          Washington, DC 20006
          Telephone: (202) 973-0900
          Facsimile: (202) 973-0950
          Email: ksimplicio@tzlegal.com
                 psilva@tzlegal.com
                 lfriedman@tzlegal.com

               - and -

          Jason S. Rathod, Esq.
          Nicholas A. Migliaccio, Esq.
          Matthew A. Smith, Esq.
          MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD LLP
          412 H Street NE
          Washington DC 20002
          Telephone: (202) 470-3520
          Facsimile: (202) 800-2730
          Email: jrathod@classlawdc.com
                 nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com

HAIN CELESTIAL: Consolidated Suit Stayed Pending Appeal
-------------------------------------------------------
The Hain Celestial Group, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-K for the
period ended September 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 7, 2023, that on May 9, 2023, upon
consent of the parties, the court stayed consolidated as a single
lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New
York captioned "In re Hain Celestial Heavy Metals Baby Food
Litigation," Case No. 2:21-cv-678, pending the Second Circuit's
decision on appeal in another case captioned "In re Beech-Nut
Nutrition Co. Baby Food Litigation," 21 Civ. 133 (N.D. N.Y.).
Accordingly, the court denied the company's motion to dismiss
without prejudice to renew.

Since February 2021, the company has been named in numerous
consumer class actions alleging that the company's "Earth's
Best(R)" baby food products contain unsafe and undisclosed levels
of various naturally occurring heavy metals, namely lead, arsenic,
cadmium and mercury. Those actions have now been transferred and
consolidated as a single lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of New York captioned "In re Hain Celestial Heavy
Metals Baby Food Litigation," Case No. 2:21-cv-678, which generally
alleges that the company violated various state consumer protection
laws and asserts other state and common law warranty and unjust
enrichment claims related to the alleged failure to disclose the
presence of these metals, arguing that consumers would have either
not purchased the Products or would have paid less for them had the
Company made adequate disclosures.

The court appointed interim class counsel for Plaintiffs in the
Consolidated Proceeding, and plaintiffs filed a consolidated
amended class action complaint on March 18, 2022. The company filed
a motion to dismiss it on November 7, 2022. The plaintiffs filed
their opposition on December 22, 2022, and the company filed its
reply brief on January 20, 2023.

One consumer class action is pending in New York Supreme Court,
Nassau County, which the court has stayed in deference to the
Consolidated Proceeding. The company denies the allegations in
these lawsuits and contends that its baby foods are safe and
properly labeled.

The Hain Celestial Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation
(collectively, along with its subsidiaries, is a manufacturer,
marketer and seller of food and beverages through specialty and
natural food distributors, supermarkets, natural food stores,
mass-market and e-commerce retailers, food service channels and
club, drug and convenience stores worldwide.


HARBOR FREIGHT: Court Amends Scheduling Order in Hammock
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Hammock v. Harbor Freight
Tools USA, Inc., Case No. 4:22-cv-00312 (W.D. Mo., Filed May 10,
2022), the Hon. Judge Stephen R. Bough entered an order granting
joint motion to amend scheduling order.

   (1) Defendant's opposition to class              Jan. 29, 2024
       certification shall be filed on
       or before:

   (2) Plaintiff's class certification              Feb. 12, 2024
       reply shall be filed on or before:

   (3) All dispositive motions, except              March 4, 2024
       those under Rule 12(h)(2) or (3),
       shall be filed on or before:

   (4) All motions to strike expert                 March 4, 2024.
       designations or preclude expert
       testimony premised on Daubert v.
       Merrill Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
       509 U.S. 579 (1993), shall be filed
       on or before:

The nature of suit states Torts - Personal Property - Property
Damage Product Liability.

Harbor Freight is an American privately held tool and equipment
retailer.[CC]

HARTFORD FINANCIAL: Class Cert Opposition Filing Due Jan. 23, 2024
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as REJOICE! COFFEE COMPANY,
LLC, a California limited liability company, on behalf of itself
and all others similarly situated, v. THE HARTFORD FINANCIAL
SERVICES GROUP, INC., a Delaware corporation; SENTINEL INSURANCE
COMPANY, LTD., a Connecticut corporation; Case No.
3:20-cv-06789-EMC (N.D. Cal.), the parties file a joint stipulation
regarding class certification
deadlines:

               Event                              Deadline

  Last Day to File Class Certification       December 18, 2023
  Motion  

  Last Day to File Opposition to Class       January 23, 2024
  Certification Motion

  Last Day to File Reply to Opposition to    February 5, 2024
  Class Certification Motion

  Mediation                                  February 6, 2024
(remains
                                             same)

  Hearing on Class Certification             March 7, 2024 (remains

                                             same)

A copy of the Parties' motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Tib9yu at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Daniel L. Rottinghaus, Esq.
          Fredrick A. Hagen, Esq.
          Gordon A. Walters, Esq.
          BERDING & WEIL LLP
          2175 N. California Blvd, Suite 500
          Walnut Creek, CA 94596
          Telephone: (925) 838-2090
          Facsimile: (925) 820-5592
          E-mail: drottinghaus@berdingweil.com
                  fhagen@berdingweil.com
                  gwalters@berdingweil.com

                - and -

          David M. Birka-White, Esq.
          Laura Carrier, Esq.
          BIRKA-WHITE LAW OFFICES
          178 E. Prospect Avenue
          Danville, CA 94526
          Telephone: (925) 362-9999
          Facsimile: (925) 362-9970
          E-mail: dbw@birka-white.com
                  lcarrier@birka-white.com

HARTFORD LIFE: Baker Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
---------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Tyler Baker, individually, and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance
Company, Case No. 3:23-cv-01076 was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the District of Connecticut, to the U.S.
District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Nov. 28, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:23-cv-12870-ADB to the
proceeding.

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

Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company --
https://www.thehartford.com/ -- provides insurance services. The
Company offers life, health, home, business, and accident insurance
services to individuals, families, groups, and businesses.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          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 -

          Paul Levin, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF PAUL LEVIN LLC
          40 Russ street
          Hartford, CT 06106
          Phone: (860) 560-7226
          Fax: (860) 471-8400
          Email: plevin1111@aol.com

               - and -

          Andrew Tate, Esq.
          PEIFFER WOLF CARR KANE CONWAY & WISE LLP
          235 Peachtree St. NE, Suite 400
          Atlanta, GA 30303
          Phone: (314) 669-3600
          Email: atate@peifferwolf.com

               - and -

          David S. Almeida, Esq.
          BENESCH, FRIEDLANDER, COPLAN & ARONOFF LLP
          333 W. Wacker Dr., Suite 1900
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Phone: (312) 212-4954

               - and -

          Elena A. Belov, Esq.
          ALMEIDA LAW FIRM
          849 W. Webster Avenue
          Chicago, IL 60614
          Phone: (917) 716-7132
          Email: elena@almeidalawgroup.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Jenna Scoville, Esq.
          Wystan M. Ackerman, Esq.
          ROBINSON & COLE LLP
          280 Trumbull Street
          Hartford, CT 06103
          Phone: (860) 275-6453
          Email: jscoville@rc.com
                 wackerman@rc.com


HARTFORD LIFE: Cater Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
---------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Karen Cater, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance
Company, Case No. 3:23-cv-01160 was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the District of Connecticut, to the U.S.
District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Nov. 28, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:23-cv-12875-ADB to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I.

Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company --
https://www.thehartford.com/ -- provides insurance services. The
Company offers life, health, home, business, and accident insurance
services to individuals, families, groups, and businesses.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Erin Green Comite, Esq.
          SCOTT SCOTT LLP
          156 South Main Street
          P.O. Box 192
          Colchester, CT 06415
          Phone: (860) 537-5537
          Fax: (860) 537-4432
          Email: ecomite@scott-scott.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Jenna Scoville, Esq.
          Wystan M. Ackerman, Esq.
          ROBINSON & COLE LLP
          280 Trumbull Street
          Hartford, CT 06103
          Phone: (860) 275-6453
          Email: jscoville@rc.com
                 wackerman@rc.com


HARTFORD LIFE: Matheson Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Dusty Matheson, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance
Company, Case No. 3:23-cv-01122 was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the District of Connecticut, to the U.S.
District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Nov. 28, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:23-cv-12874-ADB to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I.

Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company --
https://www.thehartford.com/ -- provides insurance services. The
Company offers life, health, home, business, and accident insurance
services to individuals, families, groups, and businesses.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David Lietz, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
          5335 Wisconsin Avenue NW, Suite 440
          Washington, DC 20015
          Phone: (866) 252-0878
          Fax: (202) 686-2877
          Email: dlietz@milberg.com

               - and -

          Erin Green Comite, Esq.
          SCOTT SCOTT LLP
          156 South Main Street
          P.O. Box 192
          Colchester, CT 06415
          Phone: (860) 537-5537
          Fax: (860) 537-4432
          Email: ecomite@scott-scott.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Wystan M. Ackerman, Esq.
          Jenna Scoville, Esq.
          ROBINSON & COLE, LLP
          280 Trumbull St.
          Hartford, CT 06103-3597
          Phone: (860) 275-8388
          Fax: (860) 275-8299
          Email: wackerman@rc.com
                 jscoville@rc.com


HARTFORD LIFE: McCreery Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Daphne McCreery, individually, and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Hartford Life and Accident
Insurance Company, Case No. 3:23-cv-01095 was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, to the U.S.
District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Nov. 28, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:23-cv-12871-ADB to the
proceeding.

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

Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company --
https://www.thehartford.com/ -- provides insurance services. The
Company offers life, health, home, business, and accident insurance
services to individuals, families, groups, and businesses.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Frank G. Usseglio, Esq.
          KENNY, O'KEEFE & USSEGLIO, P.C.
          21 Oak Street, Unit 208
          Harford, CT 06106
          Phone: (860) 246-2700

               - and -

          Robert T. Naumes, Jr., Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICE OF JEFFREY S. GLASSMAN
          One International Place, 18th Floor
          Boston, MA 02110
          Phone: (617) 367-2900
          Fax: (617) 722-9999
          Email: bnaumes@jeffreysglassman.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Jenna Scoville, Esq.
          Wystan M. Ackerman, Esq.
          ROBINSON & COLE LLP
          280 Trumbull Street
          Hartford, CT 06103
          Phone: (860) 275-6453
          Email: jscoville@rc.com
                 wackerman@rc.com


HARTFORD LIFE: Washington Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
--------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Jataveya Washington, on behalf of herself and
all others similarly situated v. Hartford Life and Accident
Insurance Company, Case No. 3:23-cv-01164 was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, to the U.S.
District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Nov. 28, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:23-cv-12876-ADB to the
proceeding.

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

Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company --
https://www.thehartford.com/ -- provides insurance services. The
Company offers life, health, home, business, and accident insurance
services to individuals, families, groups, and businesses.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph P. Guglielmo, Esq.
          SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP
          The Helmsley Building
          230 Park Avenue, 17th Floor
          New York, NY 10169
          Phone: (212) 223-6444
          Fax: (212) 223-6334
          Email: jguglielmo@scott-scott.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Jenna Scoville, Esq.
          Wystan M. Ackerman, Esq.
          ROBINSON & COLE LLP
          280 Trumbull Street
          Hartford, CT 06103
          Phone: (860) 275-6453
          Email: jscoville@rc.com
                 wackerman@rc.com


HAWAII: Naki Suit Removed to D. Hawaii
--------------------------------------
The case styled as Chardell Naki, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. State of Hawaii, Hawaii Department of
Land and Natural Resources, Maui County, Peter Klint Martin, Peter
Klint Martin Revocable Trust, Hope Builders Inc., Hope Builders
LLC, Kauaula Land Company LLC, Kipa Centennial LLC, Douglas
Poseley, Donna Anne Poseley, James C. Riley Trust, Jeanne A. Riley
Trust, Wainee Land & Homes, LLC, West Maui Land Company, Inc.,
Makila Ranches Inc., Makila Land Co., LLC, Makila Ranches
Homeowners Association, Inc., Elliot Kawaihoolana Mills as the
Trustees of the Estate of Bernice Pauahi Bishop, Crystal Kauilani
Rose as the Trustees of the Estate of Bernice Pauahi Bishop,
Jennifer Noelani Goodyear-Kaopua as the Trustees of the Estate of
Bernice Pauahi Bishop, Michelle Kauhane as the Trustees of the
Estate of Bernice Pauahi Bishop, Robert K.W.H. Nobriga as the
Trustees of the Estate of Bernice Pauahi Bishop, JV Enterprises,
LLC, Doe State Landowner Defendants 1-10, Doe Private Landowners
1-10, Does 1-100, Hope Builders Holding LLC, Case No.
2CCV-23-0000278 was removed from the Circuit Court of the Second
Circuit, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii on
Oct. 25, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:23-cv-00435-JAO-BMK to
the proceeding.

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

Hawaii -- https://portal.ehawaii.gov/ -- is an island state in the
Western United States, about 2,000 miles from the U.S. mainland in
the Pacific Ocean.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Christopher K. Hikida, Esq.
          D. Kaena Horowitz, Esq.
          Kenneth S. Kasdan, Esq.
          Sharla Ann Manley, Esq.
          KASDAN TURNER THOMSON BOOTH LLLC
          1003 Bishop Street, Suite 1180
          Honolulu, HI 96813
          Phone: (808) 369-8393
          Fax: (808) 369-8392
          Email: chikida@kasdancdlawhawaii.com
                 khorowitz@kasdancdlawhawaii.com
                 kskasdan@kasdancdlaw.com
                 smanley@kllawhawaii.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Michael L. Lam, Esq.
          Steven E. Tom, Esq.
          CASE LOMBARDI
          737 Bishop Street Suite 2600
          Honolulu, HI 96813
          Phone: (808) 547-5400
          Email: mlam@caselombardi.com
                 st@caselombardi.com

               - and -

          Amanda J. Weston, Esq.
          STATE OF HAWAII, DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
          Tort Litigation Division
          425 Queen Street
          Honolulu, HI 96813
          Phone: 586-1300
          Email: amanda.j.weston@Hawaii.gov

               - and -

          David J. Minkin, Esq.
          Jordan K. Inafuku, Esq.
          Kamrie Koi, Esq.
          MCCORRISTON MILLER MUKAI MACKINNON LLP
          500 Ala Moana Blvd., Suite 5-400
          Honolulu, HI 96813
          Phone: (808) 529-7355
          Fax: (808) 535-8072
          Email: minkin@m4law.com
                 jinafuku@m4law.com
                 kjk@m4law.com

               - and -

          Sara M. K. Y. Hayden, Esq.
          14th Division
          First Circuit Court, State of Hawaii
          777 Punchbowl Street
          Phone: (808) 551-6716
          Email: smh@m4law.com

               - and -

          Dara Sayuri Nakagawa, Esq.
          Sheree A. Kon-Herrera, Esq.
          Wesley H.H. Ching, Esq.
          FUKUNAGA MATAYOSHI CHING & KON-HERRERA, LLP
          841 Bishop St Ste 1200
          Honolulu, Hi 96813
          Phone: (808) 533-4300
          Fax: (808) 531-7585
          Email: dsn@fmhc-law.com
                 skh@fmhc-law.com
                 whc@fmhc-law.com

               - and -

          Jonathan L. Ortiz, Esq.
          ORTIZ & ASSOCIATES, A LAW CORPORATION
          Pacific Center
          841 Bishop Street, Suite 2121
          Honolulu, HI 96813
          Phone: (808) 524-6696
          Fax: (808) 524-6690
          Email: jonathan@ortizlawhawaii.com

               - and -

          Nathan P Shimodoi, Esq.
          Nickolas A. Kacprowski, Esq.
          Paul Alston, Esq.
          Madisson Leigh Heinze, Esq.
          Wendy F. Hanakahi, Esq.
          DENTONS US LLP
          1001 Bishop Street, Suite 1800
          Honolulu, HI 96813
          Phone: (808) 524-1800
          Fax: (808) 524-4591
          Email: nathan.shimodoi@dentons.com
                 nick.kacprowski@dentons.com
                 paul.alston@dentons.com
                 madisson.heinze@dentons.com
                 wendy.hanakahi@dentons.com

               - and -

          Courtney C. Whang, Esq.
          QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
          51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
          New York, NY 10010
          Phone: (212) 849-7000
          Fax: (212) 849-7100
          Email: courtneywhang@quinnemanuel.com

               - and -

          Jeffrey N. Boozell, Esq.
          Ryan Landes, Esq.
          QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
          865 S. Figueroa Street, 10th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90017
          Phone: (213) 443-3000
          Fax: (213) 443-3100
          Email: jeffboozell@quinnemanuel.com
                 ryanlandes@quinnemanuel.com


HEALTH ENROLLMENT: Court Vacates Amended Scheduling Order in Ketayi
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ERIC KETAYI, et al. v.
HEALTH ENROLLMENT GROUP, et al., Case No. 3:20-cv-01198-RSH-KSC
(S.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Robert S. Huie entered an order
vacating amended scheduling order and staying the action as to the
Plaintiffs and Non-debtor Defendants until January 30, 2024.

On November 30, 2023, the Plaintiffs and the Non-debtor Defendants
jointly filed a motion to stay this action for 60 days, because
they have reached an agreement in principle to resolve Plaintiffs'
individual claims and need time to finalize a settlement agreement.


A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Re83sD at no extra charge.[CC]


HECLA MINING: Faces Securities Suit Over Misstatements in SEC
-------------------------------------------------------------
Hecla Mining Company disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2023, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 7, 2023, that it is
facing a putative class action lawsuit filed by a purported Hecla
stockholder on May 24, 2019 in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York against Hecla and certain of its
executive officers, one of whom is also a director.

The complaint, purportedly brought on behalf of all purchasers of
Hecla common stock from March 19, 2018 through and including May 8,
2019, asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder and seeks, among other things, damages and costs and
expenses. Specifically, the complaint alleges that Hecla, under the
authority and control of the individual defendants, made certain
material false and misleading statements and omitted certain
material information regarding Hecla's Nevada Operations.

The complaint alleges that these misstatements and omissions
artificially inflated the market price of Hecla common stock during
the class period, thus purportedly harming investors. The court
granted the company's Motion to Dismiss the lawsuit, without
prejudice, in February 2023, and the plaintiffs filed an amended
complaint in March 2023 which repeats the same claims.

Hecla Mining Company is the oldest operating precious metals mining
company in the United States and the largest silver producer in the
United States, producing over 45% of the U.S. silver production at
our Greens Creek and Lucky Friday operations.

Related to this class action lawsuit, Hecla has been named as a
nominal defendant in a shareholder derivative lawsuit which also
names as defendants certain current and past (i) members of
Hecla’s board of directors and (ii) officers of Hecla. The case
was filed on May 4, 2022 in the Delaware Chancery Court. In general
terms, the suit alleges breaches of fiduciary duties by the
individual defendants, waste of corporate assets and unjust
enrichment, and seeks damages, purportedly on behalf of Hecla.

Hecla Mining Company is the oldest operating precious metals mining
company in the United States and the largest silver producer in the
United States, producing over 45% of the U.S. silver production at
our Greens Creek and Lucky Friday operations.


HELP SOCIAL: Castillo Suit Alleges Labor Law Breaches
-----------------------------------------------------
JENNIFER CASTILLO, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. H.E.L.P. SOCIAL SERVICE CORPORATION,
Defendant, Case No. 161729/2023 (N.Y. Sup., New York Cty., December
4, 2023) arises out of the Defendant's violations of the New York
Labor Law and the supporting New York State Department of Labor
Regulations.

The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as case managers from in or
around January 2022 until on or about October 5, 2022. She worked
uncompensated approximately five to ten hours outside of her
scheduled shift per week. In addition, she also never received
accurate wages statements from the Defendant, the Plaintiff
asserts.

H.E.L.P. Social Service Corporation is a homelessness prevention
organization in New York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Louis Ginsberg, Esq.
          THE LAW FIRM OF LOUIS GINSBERG, P.C.
          1613 Northern Boulevard
          Roslyn, NY 11576
          Telephone: (516) 625-0105

HEMPSTEAD, NY: Kadinsky Sues Over Fraudulent Concealment
--------------------------------------------------------
Sergey Kadinsky, on behalf of himself and all other similarly
situated v. Town of Hempstead, Case No. 619279/2023 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.,
Nassau Cty., Nov. 28, 2023), is brought against Defendant seeking
damages sustained as a direct and proximate result of Defendant's
violations of the New York State Constitution, fraudulent
concealment and/or inducement and unjust enrichment in connection
with Defendant's practice of routinely certifying patently invalid
and legally insufficient Notices of Liability ("NOL"s) alleging
violations of New York Vehicle and Traffic Law ("VTL") Section
1174(a) ("Stop-arm Violations") and routinely collecting fines for
these invalid and legally insufficient NOLs.

The Defendant has known or should have known that the Notice of
Liability ("NOL") it was certifying and issuing were facially
insufficient as the NOL failed at times to set forth the correct
violation provisions of the VTL. Such certification and issuance of
the NOLs were unlawful applications of VTL 1174(a) and in
contravention of the terms of the statute and in violation of
Plaintiff and the putative class's rights.

The Defendant has known, or should have known, that, that the
Certification printed on the face of Stop-Arm Violations contained
material misrepresentations or omission regarding the alleged
violation by the vehicle owner of VTL Section 1174(a) Such
certification and issuance of the NOLs were unlawful applications
of VTL 1174(a) and in contravention of the terms of the statute and
in violation of Plaintiff and the putative class's rights.

The Defendant has known, or should have known, that there was
insufficient evidence to support a violation of VTL Section 1174(a)
and that it was impossible to substantiate any of these NOL as the
necessary evidence did not exist. Thus, its actions were unlawful
applications of VTL 1174(a) and in contravention of the terms of
the statute and in violation of Plaintiff and the putative class's
rights.

Nevertheless, from approximately August 6, 2019 through the
present, and continuing, Plaintiff and punitive Class members
received legally insufficient NOL with Technician's Certificates
which contained material misrepresentations or omissions regarding
alleged violations by vehicle owners of VTL Section 1174-a. Such
certification and issuance were unlawful applications of VTL 1174-a
and in contravention of the terms of the statute and in violation
of Plaintiff and the putative class's rights.

By knowingly certifying and issuing these facially insufficient
NOL, and without correcting these omissions or misrepresentations,
Defendant sought to induce Plaintiff and Class Members to make
payments to Defendant for legally insufficient Stop-Arm violations
in contravention of the terms of the statute and in violation of
Plaintiff and the putative class's rights, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff holds a valid New York State driver's license and is
authorized to and does operate a motor vehicle throughout the State
of New York.

Town of Hempstead is a municipal corporation duly existing under
and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph H. Aron, Esq.
          ATTORNEYS FOR SERGEY KADINSKY
          3692 Bedford Avenue, Suite P2
          Brooklyn, NY 11229
          Phone: (718) 635-9500
          Email: jaron@aronlawpllc.com


HIGH PLAINS: Padilla Seeks Conditional Status of Collective Action
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TYSON PADILLA and RODNEY
RAMIREZ, on behalf of themselves and those similarly situated, v.
HIGH PLAINS STEEL SERVICES, LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-02053-NYW-STV (D.
Colo.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order as follows:

   1. Conditionally certifying the case as a "collective action"
under
      29 U.S.C. section 216(b);

   2. Approving the Notice and Consent to Join form, Ex. A;

   3. Directing them to deliver the Notice and Consent to Join form
to
      all potential collective action members via First Class U.S.

      Mail and email, along with authorization for Plaintiffs’
counsel
      to mail and email a reminder notice fifteen days before the
      close of the opt-in period,"

   4. Directing the Defendant to post the Notice and Consent to
Join
      form in conspicuous places in their Colorado plant and
jobsites
      for a period of 90 days;

   5. Directing the Defendant to produce the names, addresses, job

      title, telephone number, dates of employment, employee
      identification number (if any), and last known emails, if
any,
      of all hourly employees that worked for Defendant at any time

      during the three years leading up to the Court's Order
granting
      conditional certification, within 15 days of the Court’s
Order;
      and

   6. Directing the putative collective members shall have 90 days

      from the date Plaintiff disseminates the Notice in which to
opt-
      in to the action.

The Plaintiffs request that the Court conditionally certify
Plaintiffs' claims brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA) as a collective action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. section
216(b):

   "All hourly employees who worked for Defendant in the State of
   Colorado any time within three years of the Court’s Order
granting
   conditional certification through final disposition of this
case."

The Plaintiffs and the putative collective members are or were
hourly, non-exempt employees of Defendant High Plains Steel
Services, LLC, a steel fabrication and erection company operating
out of Windsor, Colorado and various jobsites around the state.

Regardless of working from the plant or the various jobsite
locations, employees' job titles, or the timeframe of their
employment, all putative collective members were responsible for
performing steel fabrication and erection work on behalf of
Defendant. All putative collective members were compensated in the
same manner and were subject to Defendant's policy of not paying
its employees for all of their overtime hours worked by failing to
provide bona fide meal breaks and otherwise requiring off-the-clock
work.

The Defendant owns and operates a steel fabrication and erection
plant in Colorado, and it also engages in steel erection at various
jobsites.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3tcGFTZ at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Shelby Woods, Esq.
          Abby Zinman, Esq.
          HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS, LLP
          518 17th Street, Suite 1100
          Denver, CO 80202
          Telephone: (720) 668-8989
          E-mail: swoods@hkm.com
                  azinman@hkm.com

HOLT OF CALIFORNIA: Wilson-Davis Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Holt Of California,
et al. The case is styled as Katharine Marie Wilson-Davis, on
behalf of herself and all others Similarly Situated, and the
general public v. Holt Of California, et al., Case No. 23CV010721
(Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Oct. 26, 2023).

Holt of California -- https://www.holtca.com/ -- is the one stop
shop for all construction equipment rental needs in central
California.[BN]

HOMOLOGY MEDICINES: Bid to Dismiss Pizzuto Class Suit Pending
-------------------------------------------------------------
Homology Medicines, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending September 30, 2023 filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 14, 2023, that the
motion to dismiss the Pizzuto class suit is pending in District of
Massachusetts.

On March 25, 2022, a stockholder of the Company, Michael C.
Pizzuto, filed a putative class action complaint alleging
violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, against the Company and certain
of its executives. Pizzuto v. Homology Medicines, Inc., No. 2:22–
CV – 01968 (C.D. Cal 2022).

The complaint alleges that the Company failed to disclose certain
information regarding efficacy and safety in connection with a
Phase I/II HMI-102 clinical trial, and seeks damages in an
unspecified amount.

The case is in its early stages.

The Company believes the claims alleged lack merit and filed a
motion to transfer venue (filed September 2, 2022) and a motion to
dismiss (filed October 17, 2022).

On April 18, 2023, the court granted the motion to transfer,
finding that venue was not proper in the Central District of
California and transferring the case to the District of
Massachusetts.

Following the transfer, the case number changed to 1:23-cv-10858-AK
(D. Mass.).

On May 9, 2023, the Massachusetts court issued an order permitting
the parties to submit updated briefs in connection with the motion
to dismiss, which were submitted on June 8, 2023, July 13, 2023,
and August 3, 2023.

The motion to dismiss remains pending.

As the outcome is not presently determinable, any loss is neither
probable nor reasonably estimable.

Homology Medicines, Inc. is a clinical-stage genetic medicines
company dedicated to transforming the lives of patients suffering
from rare diseases by addressing the underlying cause of the
disease with one-time gene therapy and gene editing treatments.
The
company was founded in March 2015 as a Delaware corporation with
its principal offices are in Bedford, Massachusetts.



HUMASON II INC: Kelly Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Humason II, Inc., et
al. The case is styled as Joseph D. Kelly, on behalf of himself and
all others Similarly Situated, and the general public v. Humason
II, Inc., et al., Case No. 23CV010650 (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento
Cty., Oct. 26, 2023).

Humason II Inc. specializes in Eating Places.[BN]

HYUNDAI MOTOR: Bennion Files Suit in C.D. California
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Hyundai Motor Co., et
al. The case is styled as Bailey Bennion, on behalf of herself and
all others similarly situated v. Hyundai Motor Co., Hyundai Motor
America, Does through 5, inclusive, Case No. 8:23-cv-02035-JWH-ADS
(C.D. Cal., Oct. 31, 2023).

The nature of suit is stated as Contract Product Liability for
Breach of Contract.

The Hyundai Motor Company -- http://www.hyundai.com/worldwide/en--
often referred to as Hyundai Motors, and commonly known as Hyundai,
is a South Korean multinational automotive manufacturer
headquartered in Seoul, South Korea, which was founded in
1967.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Eric Marc Poulin, Esq.
          POULIN WILLEY ANASTOPOULO LLC
          32 Ann Street
          Charleston, SC 29403
          Phone: (803) 222-2222
          Fax: (843) 494-5536
          Email: eric.poulin@poulinwilley.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Lance A. Etcheverry, Esq.
          Michael Clemens Minahan
          SKADDEN ARPS SLATE MEAGHER AND FLOM LLP
          525 University Avenue Suite 1400
          Palo Alto, CA 94301
          Phone: (650) 470-4500
          Fax: (650) 470-4570
          Email: lance.etcheverry@skadden.com
                 Michael.Minahan@skadden.com


HYUNDAI MOTOR: Class Cert Bid Filing in Hageman Due March 3, 2025
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BRENDA HAGEMAN, et al. v.
HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA, Case No. 8:23-cv-01045-CJC-KES (C.D. Cal.),
the Hon. Judge Cormac J. Carney entered a scheduling order as
follows:

-- All discovery, including discovery motions,       July 31,
2025
    shall be completed by:

-- The parties must to file and have                 Sept. 29,
2025
    heard all other motions, including
    motions to join or amend the
    pleadings until:

-- The case is set for a jury trial:                 Dec. 9, 2025

-- The parties are referred to ADR
    Procedure No. 3 -- Private Mediation:

-- The parties must conduct settlement               Aug.14, 2025
    proceedings by:

-- The Plaintiff must file and have heard            March 3,
2025
    Any class certification motion by:

Hyundai is the operating subsidiary that oversees all operations of
Hyundai Motor Company in Canada, Mexico, and the United States.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3uPTiom at no extra charge.[CC]

IAVARONE TNG LLC: Melendez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Iavarone TNG, LLC.
The case is styled as Rhondine Melendez, on behalf of herself and
all others similarly situated v. Iavarone TNG, LLC, Case No.
1:23-cv-08830 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 30, 2023).

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

Iavarone TNG, LLC was established on Mar 19 2008 as a domestic
limited liability company.[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


IC MARKETS: Faces Suit Over Misconduct Related to Risk Disclosures
------------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathon Davidson of The Market Herald reports that Australian
Contract-for-Difference (CFD) providers will be closely watching
commercial law firm Piper Alderman when it files a class action
lawsuit against IC Markets in an Australian court.

IC Markets is an Australian CFD provider which has been on the
scene since 2007.

But now the company is facing claims of alleged misconduct related
to risk disclosures.

Speaking to The Market Herald, Piper Alderman Partner and class
action manager, Kate Sambrook, expressed her view that the "golden
age" for CFD trading in Australia was over.

"We're saying IC Markets didn't adequately disclose the risks
[inherent in CFD trading,]" she said.

"I think the industry's been woken up to this. You've got ASIC
coming down on it . . . I think the golden age is over."

Wait - what's a CFD?

In simple language, CFDs are products that enable someone to place
money on a prediction that the price of a share will go up or down.


You can think of them as kind of like futures for share prices.

Traders stand to gain money off "leverage" which means basically,
the difference between a bet and the price movements of a selected
asset.

Leverage allows for providers to advertise the potential for huge
gains.

In the past, these could be as high as 500:1, meaning that a $1
investment could net $500. IC Markets advertised such leverage
before the Australian regulator wagged its finger at the sector
some years ago.

And as for that 500:1 gain, in reality, it rarely happens.

The European Securities Markets Authority (ESMA) restricted the
advertising of CFDs to retail investors in 2018, based on its
research which found up to 90 per cent of CFD traders lost money.

The same potential for gains that make CFDs attractive is the
reason why they're so risky.

One can lose more money than they invest - something which can't
happen with trading ordinary shares.
But why the class action?

Piper Alderman will argue that CFDs are generally highly
complicated products not fit for retail traders.

The firm is representing a large pool of Australian traders. Their
collective allegation is that IC Markets failed to advertise risks
appropriately, meaning they, and other Australian consumers,
unfairly lost money.

That view is far from controversial as far as the regulatory
landscape goes. The products are banned outright in the USA.

The American Government doesn't like the fact CFDs are
over-the-counter (OTC) products, and not on a regulated exchange.

The world's largest economy isn't alone. Hong Kong and Belgium have
also banned the products. And the EU has banned CFD providers from
advertising to anyone beyond institutional investors.

Australia, however, for now, still allows CFDs.
Leaning into ASIC's stance

Australia's market regulator could be a sympathetic camp to
Alderman's position.

ASIC is already overseeing a lawsuit against another CFD provider,
eToro.

Ms Sambrook will be grilling IC Markets on its target market
statement. Like eToro, she maintains IC Markets advertises its wish
to attract clients with disposable incomes and risk-on appetite,
despite research suggesting disposable income doesn't particularly
define those traders who pursue CFDs.

The Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC)
introduced a Product Intervention Order (PIO) for CFDs in August
2019. That PIO ordered CFD providers to water down the advertised
gains they claimed users could achieve, with a view to protecting
retail clients.

The report attached to the PIO was revealing. It found that 37 per
cent of CFD traders earned less than $40,000 a year; 72 per cent
were making under $80,000; and, the vast majority were aged between
25 and 50.

A question of appropriateness

"Part of the answer to this question [of adequate risk disclosure]
relates to how risky these products are and who's really using
them," Ms Sambrook said.

"The products are difficult to understand, and the fee and cost
structures aren't particularly transparent . . . so people are
starting from a position where they may not understand these
products, while IC Markets understands."

ASIC has itself taken issue with the general lack of research CFD
traders were doing, often lured in by advertisements on the
internet. Ms Sambrook said prior to the PIO, many CFD providers
were offering perks - including iPad giveaways - to users.

"CFDs are advertised at sporting events and in newspapers and
things like that," she said.

"I don't recall seeing a lot of advertising for share trading. I
don't recall seeing ASX 'come and trade with us' advertisements."

"CFDs are on sporting teams and publications like the AFR, and so I
think that might help [CFDs seem more credible.] "

IC Markets did not respond to multiple requests for comment before
deadline. [GN]

IDEXX DISTRIBUTION: Dula Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against IDEXX Distribution,
Inc., et al. The case is styled as Marnelle Mac Dula, and on behalf
of all other similarly situated employees v. IDEXX Distribution,
Inc., et al., Case No. 23CV010650 (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento
Cty., Oct. 26, 2023).

IDEXX -- https://www.idexx.com/ -- is a global leader in pet
healthcare innovation.[BN]

ILLINOIS TOOL: Class Cert Scheduling Order Entered in Hess Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TINA L. HESS, v. ILLINOIS
TOOL WORKS, INC., et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-05171-DSF-MAA (C.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Dale S. Fischer entered a class certification
scheduling order:

    A. Motion to Amend Pleadings or Add

       Parties Cut-off:                     March 24, 2025

    B. Discovery Cut−Off:                   June 9, 2025

    C. Expert Witness Exchange Deadline:

                                 Initial:   April 7, 2025

                                Rebuttal:   May 5, 2025

                                 Cut−off:   July 9, 2025

    D. Motion Hearing Cut−off:              July 28, 2025

    E. ADR Cut−off:                         Aug. 11, 2025

    F. Trial Documents (Set One):           Sept. 8, 2025

    G. Trial Documents (Set Two):           Sept. 15, 2025

    H. Final Pre-Trial Conference:          Oct. 6, 2025

    I. Trial Date:                          Nov. 4, 2025

Illinois Tool produces engineered fasteners and components,
equipment and consumable systems, and specialty products.

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

INNOVAGE HOLDING: Faces Securities Suit in Colorado Court
---------------------------------------------------------
InnovAge Holding Corp. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2023, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 7, 2023, that on
June 28, 2023, upon stipulation of the parties, the District Court
for the District of Colorado entered an order staying a litigation
pending the resolution of a motion to dismiss in the securities
action or upon fifteen days' notice by any party to the
litigation.

On October 14, 2021, and subsequently amended on June 21, 2022, the
company was named as a defendant in a putative class action
complaint filed on behalf of individuals who purchased or acquired
shares of the company's common stock during a specified period.
Through the complaint, plaintiffs are asserting claims against the
company, certain of its officers and directors, Apax Partners,
L.P., Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe and the underwriters in the
company's IPO, alleging violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15
of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for making allegedly inaccurate and
misleading statements and omissions in connection with the IPO and
subsequent earnings calls and public filings, and seeking
compensatory damages, among other things.

On September 13, 2022, the company and the officer and director
defendants and Apax Partners, L.P. and Welsh, Carson, Anderson &
Stowe filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint for failure
to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. On April 20,
2022, the Board of Directors of the company received a books and
records demand pursuant to Section 220 of the Delaware General
Corporation Law, from a purported stockholder of the company, Brian
Hall, in connection with the stockholder's investigation of, among
other matters, potential breaches of fiduciary duty, mismanagement,
self-dealing, corporate waste or other violations of law by the
company's Board with respect to these matters.

On May 15, 2023, Hall filed a lawsuit in the Delaware Court of
Chancery asserting derivative claims for breach of fiduciary duty
against certain of the company's current and former officers and
directors generally relating to alleged failures by the defendants
to take remedial actions to address the matters that resulted in
sanctions by CMS at certain of the company's centers, and alleged
misstatements in the company's public filings relating to those
matters.

InnovAge Holding Corp. and its subsidiaries provides a broad range
of medical and ancillary services for seniors in need of care and
support to safely live independently in their communities,
including in-center services such as primary care, physical
therapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy, dental services,
mental health and psychiatric services, meals, and activities;
transportation to the Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly
center and third-party medical appointments; and care management.


INNOVAGE HOLDING: To Settle Labor Suit Lodged in CA Court
---------------------------------------------------------
InnovAge Holding Corp. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2023, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 7, 2023, that in the
third fiscal quarter of 2023, the company agreed to settle a wage
and hour class action lawsuit in the State of California for a cash
payment of $1.2 million.

Subsequently, the company was notified of certain additional
individual claims and has agreed to include such claims within the
class. As a result, in October 2023, the company agreed to increase
the settlement amount to a total of $1.3 million. The agreement is
subject to court approval, which it expects to occur in the second
half of 2024.

InnovAge Holding Corp. and its subsidiaries provides a broad range
of medical and ancillary services for seniors in need of care and
support to safely live independently in their communities,
including in-center services such as primary care, physical
therapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy, dental services,
mental health and psychiatric services, meals, and activities;
transportation to the Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly
center and third-party medical appointments; and care management.


INTERFACE INC: Settlement in Securities Suit Gets Initial Nod
-------------------------------------------------------------
Interface Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 7, 2023, that in a putative class
action, the United States District Court
Eastern District of New York preliminarily approved a settlement of
the lawsuit for $7.5 million, and the company's insurers funded the
settlement amount into escrow.

Putative class member proofs of claims were due last September 13,
2023, and in a hearing on October 19, 2023, the court approved the
final settlement of the action.

Interface, Inc. is a global manufacturer of commercial flooring
with an integrated collection of carpet tiles and resilient
flooring.


INTERPRESS TECHNOLOGIES: Cummings Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Interpress
Technologies, Inc. The case is styled as Robert L. Cummings, on
behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. Interpress
Technologies, Inc., Case No. 23CV010787 (Cal. Super. Ct.,
Sacramento Cty., Oct. 27, 2023).

Interpress Technologies -- https://interpresstechnologies.com/ --
is recognized as an innovative leader in the food packaging
industry.[BN]

JAMES RIVER: Continues to Defend Employees' Retirement Fund Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
James River Group Holdings Ltd. disclosed in its Form 10-Q/A Report
for the quarterly period ending June 30, 2023 filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 14, 2023, that the
Company continues to defend itself from the Employees' Retirement
fund class suit in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of
Virginia.

On July 9, 2021 a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia (the "Court") by
Employees' Retirement Fund of the City of Fort Worth against James
River Group Holdings, Ltd. and certain of its present and former
officers (together, "Defendants").

On September 22, 2021, the Court entered an order appointing
Employees' Retirement Fund of the City of Fort Worth and the City
of Miami General Employees' and Sanitation Employees' Retirement
Trust as co-lead plaintiffs (together, "Plaintiffs").

Plaintiffs’ consolidated amended complaint was filed on November
19, 2021 (the "First Amended Complaint").

The Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the First Amended
Complaint on January 18, 2022, Plaintiffs' opposition thereto was
filed on March 4, 2022, and the Defendants' reply to the
Plaintiffs’ opposition was filed on April 4, 2022.

On August 25, 2022, Plaintiffs filed a motion for leave to file a
second amended class action complaint (the "Second Amended
Complaint").

On September 8, 2022, the Defendants consented to the Plaintiffs'
motion to file the Second Amended Complaint, and filed a motion to
dismiss the Second Amended Complaint on October 24, 2022 (the
"Second MTD").

The Plaintiffs' opposition to the Second MTD was filed on November
7, 2022, and the Defendant's reply to the Plaintiffs' opposition
was filed on November 14, 2022.

The First Amended Complaint and Second Amended Complaint assert
claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 on behalf of a putative class of persons and entities
that purchased the Company's stock between February 22, 2019 and
October 25, 2021, and allege that Defendants failed to make
appropriate disclosures concerning the adequacy of reserves for
policies that covered Rasier LLC, a subsidiary of Uber
Technologies, Inc., and seek unspecified damages, costs, attorneys'
fees and such other relief as the court may deem proper.

The Company believes that the Plaintiffs' claims are without merit
and we intend to vigorously defend this lawsuit.

James River Group Holdings, Ltd. is a Bermuda-based holding
company. The company owns and operates a group of specialty
insurance and reinsurance companies with the objective of
generating compelling returns on tangible equity while limiting
underwriting and investment volatility.




JOSEPH GARCIA: Ct. Tosses Intervenors' Bid to Intervene in Schwenk
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHRISTOPHER LEE SCHWENK
and KEITH DRUCK, v. JOSEPH GARCIA, et al., Case No.
1:21-cv-02079-JPW (M.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Jennifer P. Wilson
entered an order denying Intervenors' motion to intervene.

The Court said, "The Plaintiffs second motion to amend their
complaint will be denied without prejudice. Because Plaintiffs make
no argument regarding whether their proposed second amended
complaint relates back to an earlier pleading such that they can
add the proposed Defendants, the court will not address this
argument and will instead deny the motion to amend without
prejudice."

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47NYw2F at no extra charge.[CC]


KALEIDA HEALTH: Bid to Extend Class Cert Deadlines in Lutz OK'd
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Lutz, et al., v. Kaleida
Health et al., Case No. 1:18-cv-01112 (W.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge
Elizabeth A Wolford entered an order granting the Plaintiffs'
unopposed letter motion to extend the deadlines in October 27, 2023
Text Order.

-- By December 29, 2023 the named plaintiffs shall address the
effect
    (if any) of the striking of the Garber Reports on their ability
to
    obtain class certification.

-- Defendants shall respond by February 9, 2024, and the named
    plaintiffs may reply by February 19, 2024.

The nature of suit states Employee Retirement Income Security Act
(ERISA)

Kaleida is a not-for-profit healthcare network that manages five
hospitals in the Buffalo–Niagara Falls metropolitan area.[CC]

KARAKO SUITS: Colak Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Karako Suits Ltd. The
case is styled as Ali Colak, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. Karako Suits Ltd., Case No. 2:23-cv-08839
(E.D.N.Y., Nov. 30, 2023).

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

Karako Suits Ltd. -- https://karakosuits.com/ -- offers high
quality mens suits at an affordable price.[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


KEYPOINT GOVERNMENT: Class Cert. Scheduling Order Entered in Bryman
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Brayman v. Keypoint
Government Solutions, Inc., Case No. 1:18-cv-00550 (D. Colo., Filed
Mar 8, 2018), the Hon. Judge William J Martinez entered an order:

-- No later than December 8, 2023, the Defendant shall provide to

    Plaintiffs:

    (1) an updated total number of absent class members;

    (2) the total number who signed arbitration agreements prior to

        March 8, 2018; and

    (3) the total number of absent class members who signed
        arbitration agreements prior to January 13, 2020.

-- No later than December 15, 2023, Plaintiffs shall inform
Defendant
    whether they intend to request that the Court certify a class
and,
    if so, provide Defendant with the class definition.

-- No later than December 22, 2023, the Parties are directed to
    update the Court as to Plaintiffs' position and request that
the
    Court either (a) issue an updated ruling on class certification

    motion based on the current briefing or (b) set a schedule for

    briefing summary judgment as to each Named Plaintiff.

The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

KeyPoint provides security services.[CC]

KEYSTONE CREDIT: Forte Files FDCPA Suit in D. New Jersey
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Keystone Credit
Services, LLC. The case is styled as Mark Forte, on behalf of
himself and all other similarly situated v. Keystone Credit
Services, LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-21656-KMW-EAP (D.N.J., Oct. 31,
2023).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.

Keystone Credit Services LLC -- https://keystonecredit.net/ -- is a
full-service collection agency offering Commercial, Consumer,
Medical and Tax Collection Services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Max S. Morgan, Esq.
          THE WEITZ FIRM, LLC
          1515 Market Street, Ste #1100
          Philadelphia, PA 19102
          Phone: (267) 587-6240
          Fax: (215) 689-0875
          Email: max.morgan@theweitzfirm.com


KINKISHARYO INT'L: Amended Scheduling Order Entered in Armendariz
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as NOE ARMENDARIZ,
individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
KINKISHARYO INTERNATIONAL, LLC a limited liability company; and
DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 2:19-cv-08757-JAK-KS (C.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge John A. Kronstadt entered an order amending
scheduling order as follows:

               Event              Current Date       Amended Date

  Deadline to Participate in     Oct. 24, 2023      May 8, 2024
  Mediation

  Deadline to File Notice of     Nov. 20, 2023      May 14, 2024
  Settlement or Joint Status
  Report

  Post Mediation Status          Nov. 27, 2023      May 20, 2024
  Conference

If a settlement is reached, the parties are ordered to file a
notice of settlement, with a proposed date by which the matter will
be dismissed. No appearance will be required on May 20, 2024, if
such notice is filed on or before May 14, 2024.

Kinkisharyo provides customized solutions for urban transit
agencies.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 4, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3tbrvOO at no extra charge.[CC]

KYOCERA AVAX: Stuart Sues Over Network Security Breach
------------------------------------------------------
Jacob Stuart, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Kyocera AVX Components Corporation,
Defendant, Case No. 6:23-cv-06332-BHH (D.S.C., December 6, 2023)
arises out of the recent targeted cyberattack and data breach on
Defendant's network that resulted in unauthorized access to its
employees' sensitive personal data, alleging claims against the
Defendant for negligence,invasion of privacy, unjust enrichment,
breach of implied contract, and breach of fiduciary duty.

Over a span of six weeks -- between February 16, 2023 and March 30,
2023 -- Defendant learned that it experienced a network security
incident that involved an unauthorized party gaining access to
Defendant's network environment. Moreover, the Defendant's failure
to employ reasonable and appropriate measures to protect against
and detect unauthorized access to customers' personally
identifiable information constitutes an unfair act or practice
prohibited by Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, says
the suit.

Headquartered in South Carolina, Kyocera AVX Components Corporation
is an American manufacturer of advanced electronic components, and
a subsidiary of the Japanese company Kyocera. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Harper T. Segui, Esq.
           MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, LLC
           825 Lowcountry Blvd., Suite 101
           Mount Pleasant, SC 29464
           Telephone: (919) 600-5000
           Facsimile: (865) 522-0049
           E-mail: hsegui@milberg.com

                   - and -

           Bryan L. Bleichner, Esq.
           Philip J. Krzeski, Esq.
           CHESTNUT CAMBRONNE PA
           100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 1700
           Minneapolis, MN 55401
           Telephone: (612) 339-7300
           Facsimile: (612) 336-2940
           E-mail: pkrzeski@chestnutcambronne.com

LANCASTER, PA: Stone Sues Over Improperly Calculated Overtime
-------------------------------------------------------------
Geoff L. Stone, an individual on behalf of himself and other
individuals similarly situated v. CITY OF LANCASTER, Case No.
2:23-cv-04187 (E.D. Pa., Oct. 30, 2023), to recover unpaid,
improperly calculated overtime compensation, liquidated damages,
attorney's fees and costs under the provisions of the Fair Labor
Standards Act ("Act").

The City is patty to a collective bargaining agreement ("CBA") With
the Union. Pursuant to the CBA, the Plaintiff receive longevity pay
("Longevity Pay") which is calculated as a percentage of their base
pay and is paid at an hourly rate. The Plaintiff is eligible for
the Longevity pay beginning on January 1st of the year following
the completion of 4 years of service with increases to the
Longevity Pay each year thereafter.

The City has failed to factor in the when calculating the
aforementioned overtime hours, thus depriving the Plaintiffs of
their full compensation. The City has failed to apply a properly
calculated overtime rate to hours of work that qualified for an
overtime rate of pay, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is employed by the City as a full-time firefighter.

The City of Lancaster ("City"), is a political subdivision
organized and existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          W. Daniel Feehan, Esq.
          Stephen J Royd, Esq.
          HOLROYD GELMAN, P.C.
          2005 Market Street, Suite 920
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Phone: (215) 351-06577


LOS DOS POTRILLOS: Parties Must File Status Report by Feb. 9, 2024
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Castaneda v. Los Dos
Potrillos LLC et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-00162 (D. Colo., Filed Jan.
19, 2023), the Hon. Judge Raymond P. Moore entered an order
vacating class certification deadlines set in the Scheduling
Order:

-- The matter is stayed to allow the parties to attend mediation
on
    Feb. 2, 2024.

-- The parties are directed to file a joint status report with the

    court by Feb. 9, 2024.

The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.[CC]

Los Dos Potrillos is a Mexican restaurant.

 


LOUISIANA: Court Amends Class Certification Order in A.A. Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as A. A., by and through his
mother, P.A., ET AL., V. STEPHEN R. RUSSO, in his official
capacity, as Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health, ET
AL., Case No. 3:19-cv-00770-BAJ-SDJ (M.D. La.), the Hon. Judge
Brian A. Jackson entered an amended class certification order as
follows:

-- The Plaintiffs' motion to amend class definition be and is
    granted.

-- The Court's May 25, 2021 Class Certification Order be and is
    amended to reflect the new class definition and
ascertainability
    analysis set forth.

The class is defined as follows:

   "All Medicaid-eligible youth under the age of 21 in the State of

   Louisiana who have a mental health or behavioral disorder, and
for
   whom a licensed practitioner of the healing arts recommends
   Intensive Care Coordination, Crisis Services, and Intensive
   Behavioral Services to correct or ameliorate their disorders."

The Plaintiffs, by and through their legal representatives, are
designated as the class representatives.

The Plaintiffs' counsel are hereby designated as class counsel.

LDH protects and promotes health to ensure access to medical,
preventive and rehabilitative services for all residents of the
State of Louisiana.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41bTeeC at no extra charge.[CC]

LUMICO LIFE: Miller Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
--------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Samuel Miller, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Lumico Life Insurance Company, Case
No. 1:23-cv-06797 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of New York, to the U.S. District Court for
the District of Massachusetts on Nov. 29, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:23-cv-12899-ADB to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Statutory Actions.

Lumico -- https://lumico.com/ -- is a leading provider of both Life
& Medicare Supplement insurance policies.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Patrick A. Barthle, II, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP
          201 N. Franklin Street, 7th Floor
          Tampa, FL 33602
          Phone: (813) 223-5505
          Email: pbarthle@forthepeople.com

               - and -

          Jonathan M. Sedgh
          MORGAN & MORGAN
          350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 6705
          New York, NY 10118
          Phone: (212) 225-6747
          Email: jsedgh@forthepeople.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Francis Xavier Nolan , IV
          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 -

          Michael Bahar
          EVERSHEDS SUTHERLAND (US) LLP
          700 6th St NW, Ste. 700
          Washington, DC 20001
          Phone: (202) 383-0882
          Fax: (202) 637-3593
          Email: michaelbahar@eversheds-sutherland.com


LUNDQUIST CONSULTING: Class Cert Filing Extended to March 14, 2024
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WILLIAM NORMAN BROOKS,
III, ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, v.
LUNDQUIST CONSULTING, INC., Case No. 3:22-cv-01916-RFL (N.D. Cal.),
the Parties file a joint stipulation to extend deadlines regarding
motion for class certification:

   1. The deadline for Plaintiff to file his motion for class
      certification and class certification expert disclosures is
      extended from December 15, 2023 to March 14, 2024.

   2. If Plaintiff files a motion for class certification,

      -- the deadline for Defendant to file an opposition and file

         class certification expert disclosures is extended from
         January 29, 2024 to April 29, 2024,

      -- the deadline for class certification expert discovery is
         extended from February 20, 2024 to May 22, 2024, and

      -- the deadline for Plaintiff's reply is extended from
February
         27, 2024 to May 29, 2024.

Lundquist provides risk insight, prediction, and management
solutions for banks and creditors.

A copy of the Parties' motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3TdXVmf at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James A. Francis, Esq.
          Lauren KW Brennan, Esq.
          FRANCIS MAILMAN SOUMILAS, P.C.
          1600 Market St., Suite 2510
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (215) 735-8600

                - and -

          Tammy Hussin, Esq.
          HUSSIN LAW FIRM
          1596 N. Coast Hwy 101
          Encinitas, CA 92024
          Telephone: (877) 677-5397

The Defendant is represented by:

          David T. Biderman, Esq.
          Kristine E. Kruger, Esq.
          Dennis Hopkins, Esq.
          Emily Craven, Esq.
          PERKINS COIE LLP
          505 Howard Street, Suite 1000
          San Francisco, CA 94105
          E-mail: DBiderman@perkinscoie.com
                  KKruger@perkinscoie.com
                  DHopkins@perkinscoie.com
                  ECraven@perkinscoie.com

MEDICAL COLLEGE: Dobratz Sues Over Alleged Data Breach
------------------------------------------------------
JILLINE DOBRATZ, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. THE MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN, INC. and
PROGRESS SOFTWARE CORPORATION, Defendants, Case No.
1:23-cv-12968-ADB (D. Mass., December 5, 2023) arises from the
Defendants' failure to properly secure and safeguard Plaintiff's
and other similarly situated individuals' sensitive information,
asserting claims against the Defendants for negligence, breach of
implied contract, unjust enrichment, and for violations of the
right of privacy, and Wisconsin Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

According to the complaint, MCW utilized a software by Progress
Software Corporation known as the MOVEit Transfer for the sending
and receiving of sensitive information, and on an undisclosed date,
MCW learned of a vulnerability in MOVEit Transfer software that had
been actively exploited by unauthorized actors. As a result of the
investigation, MCW concluded -- on September 21, 2023 -- that
certain files containing personal information were potentially
removed from our MOVEit server by an unauthorized party on May 27,
2023. Accordingly, Plaintiff seeks to remedy the harms of the
Defendants' conduct and prevent any future data compromise on
behalf of herself and all similarly situated persons whose personal
data was compromised and stolen as a result of the data breach and
who remain at risk due to Defendants' inadequate data security
practices.

Based in Milwaukee, WI, MCW is a corporation that provides medical
services to its patients. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Randi Kassan, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
          PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, LLC
          100 Garden City Plaza
          Garden City, NY 11530
          Telephone: (212) 594-5300
          E-mail: rkassan@milberg.com

META PLATFORMS: Seeks to Seal Class Cert Materials in Klein Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MAXIMILIAN KLEIN, et al.,
on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. META
PLATFORMS, INC., a Delaware Corporation headquartered in
California, Case No. 3:20-cv-08570-JD (N.D. Cal.), Meta files a
supplemental administrative motion to seal materials submitted in
connection with Class certification and Daubert briefing.

On November 21, 2023, the parties filed an omnibus motion to seal
certain portions of the parties’ class certification and Daubert
briefing.

The proposed order submitted in connection with the omnibus motion
to seal inadvertently omitted twelve of Meta's sealing requests.

Meta requests to supplement the sealing requests contained in the
omnibus motion to seal with these twelve additional sealing
requests listed below, which are narrowly tailored, relate to
Meta's non-public, confidential data regarding user behavior.

Meta builds technologies that help people connect, find
communities, and grow businesses.

A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3TziqdB at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Defendant is represented by:

          Sonal N. Mehta, Esq.
          David Z. Gringer, Esq.
          Ross E. Firsenbaum, Esq.
          Ryan Chabot, Esq.
          Paul Vanderslice, Esq.
          Ari Holtzblatt, Esq.
          Molly M. Jennings, Esq.
          Michaela P. Sewall, Esq.
          WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE
          AND DORR LLP
          2600 El Camino Real, Suite 400
          Palo Alto, CA 94306
          Telephone: (650) 858-6000
          E-mail: Sonal.Mehta@wilmerhale.com
                  David.Gringer@wilmerhale.com
                  Ross.Firsenbaum@wilmerhale.com
                  Ryan.Chabot@wilmerhale.com
                  Paul.Vanderslice@wilmerhale.com
                  Ari.Holtzblatt@wilmerhale.com
                  Molly.Jennings@wilmerhale.com
                  Michaela.Sewall@wilmerhale.com

MEUNDIES INC: Faces Wurm Suit Over Telephonic Sales Calls
---------------------------------------------------------
CHARMING WURM, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. MEUNDIES, INC, Case No. CACE-23-021348 (Fla. Cir., Nov.
18, 2023) sues the Defendant for transmitting a phone number that
was not capable of receiving phone calls when it made Telephonic
Sales Calls by text message, in violation of the Florida Telephone
Solicitation Act Caller ID Rules.

According to the complaint, the Defendant made Text Message Sales
Calls that promoted MeUndies and violated the Caller ID Rules when
it transmitted to the recipients' caller identification services a
telephone number that was not capable of receiving telephone calls.
The Defendant allegedly transmitted 863437 to the Plaintiff's Cell
Phone's caller identification service when it made the MeUndies
Text Message Sales Calls. The Plaintiff called 863437 and call
could not be completed. The named Plaintiff and the members of the
Plaintiff Class are entitled to $500 in liquidated damages against
the Defendant for each violation of the Caller ID Rules, the suit
claims.

The named Plaintiff and the members of the Plaintiff Class are
entitled to an injunction requiring the Defendant to transmit to
Plaintiffs' caller identification services a telephone number that
is capable of receiving telephone calls, the suit adds.

The Plaintiff is the regular user of a cellular telephone number
that receives the Defendant's telephonic sales calls. The Plaintiff
resides in Broward County, Florida.

Meundies offers both men's and women's underwear as well as socks,
bralettes and loungewear.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joshua A. Glickman, Esq.
          Shawn A. Heller, Esq.
          SOCIAL JUSTICE LAW COLLECTIVE, PL
          974 Howard Ave.
          Dunedin, FL 34698
          Telephone: (202) 709-5744
          Facsimile: (866) 893-0416
          E-mail: josh@sjlawcollective.com
                  shawn@sjlawcollective.com

MODERN FACILITIES: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Padilla Suit Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------------
FRANKLIN PADILLA, on behalf of himself and all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MODERN FACILITIES SERVICES, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 619651/2023 (N.Y. Sup., December 4, 2023) seeks
to recover unpaid wages and all available relief under the New York
Labor Law.

The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as an hourly-paid cleaner
from in or about 2017 until on or about September 30, 2020.
Throughout his employment, the Plaintiff regularly worked more than
40 hours during his workweeks. However, the Defendant failed to pay
Plaintiff overtime compensation at the rate of one and one-half
times his regular rate of pay for certain hours worked in excess of
40 hours during a single workweek, in violation of the NYLL, says
the Plaintiff.

Headquartered in East Hanover, NJ, Modern Facilities Services, Inc.
provides janitorial services to clients throughout the State of New
York, including in New York City and Nassau and Suffolk Counties in
Long Island, New York. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David D. Barnhorn, Esq.
          Peter A. Romero, Esq.
          ROMERO LAW GROUP PLLC
          490 Wheeler Road, Suite 250
          Hauppauge, NY 11788
          Telephone: (631) 257-5588

NASAW/DOUGLASS & ASSOCIATES: Guitierrez Sues Over BIPA Violations
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ALONSO GUITIERREZ, on behalf of himself and all similarly situated
individuals, Plaintiff v. NASAW/DOUGLASS & ASSOCIATES, LTD. d/b/a
MCFARLANE DOUGLASS AND COMPANIES, Defendant, Case No. 2023LA001304
(Ill. Cir., 18th Judicial, DuPage Cty., December 4, 2023) seeks for
damages and other legal and equitable remedy resulting from the
illegal actions of Defendant in collecting, storing and using
Plaintiff's, and other similarly situated individuals' biometric
identifiers and biometric information without informed without
consent in violation of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy
Act.

The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as a foreman and began his
employment with Defendant on or about May 4, 2016, at a facility
located in Burr Ridge, IL, and has been required to scan his
fingerprints into Defendant's biometric fingerprint scanner.
However, Plaintiff never consented, agreed or gave permission --
written or otherwise -- to this Defendant for the collection or
storage of the biometric identifiers or biometric information
associated with his unique identifiers associated with his
fingerprints. Further, the Defendant never provided Plaintiff, nor
did he ever sign a written release allowing this Defendant to
collect or store the biometric identifiers or biometric information
associated with their fingerprint scans.

Nasaw/Douglas & Associates owns, operates, and/or controls
McFarlane Douglass & Companies in Illinois and has employed
hundreds of individuals in the state of Illinois. The company is
engaged in landscaping and commercial decorating. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Jordan Richards, Esq.
         JORDAN RICHARDS PLLC
         1800 SE 10th Ave. Suite 205
         Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316
         Telephone: (954) 871-0050
         E-mail: jordan@jordanrichardspllc.com
                 michael@usaemploymentlawyers.com
                 trish@usaemploymentlawyers.com
                 sarah@usaemploymentlawyers.com
                 lawclerk@usaemploymentlawyers.com

NATIONAL GENERAL: Plaintiffs Seek to Seal Portions of Class Cert.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as EDD KING, DIEDRE KING,
ELMO SHEEN, and SHEILA LEE, on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated, v. NATIONAL GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, NATIONAL
GENERAL ASSURANCE COMPANY, INTEGON NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY,
INTEGON PREFERRED INSURANCE COMPANY, MIC GENERAL INSURANCE
CORPORATION, PERSONAL EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, SEQUOIA INSURANCE
COMPANY, and DOES 1 through 200, inclusive, Case No.
4:15-cv-00313-DMR (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs seek to seal certain
portions of the Plaintiffs' motion for Class Certification.

National General is a Winston-Salem, North Carolina-based property
and casualty insurance company.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3t9ci0y at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Michael F. Ram, Esq.
          Marie N. Appel, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN
          COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP
          711 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 500
          San Francisco, CA 94102
          Telephone: (415) 358-6913
          Facsimile: (415) 358-6923
          E-mail: mram@forthepeople.com
                  mappel@forthepeople.com

                - and -

          Jeffrey B. Cereghino, Esq.
          CEREGHINO LAW GROUP LLP
          649 Mission Street, Floor 5
          San Francisco, CA 94105
          Telephone: (415) 433-4949
          E-mail: jbc@cereghinolaw.com

                - and -

          W. Craig Bashein, Esq.
          John P. Hurst, Esq.
          BASHEIN & BASHEIN CO., L.P.A.
          Terminal Tower
          35th Floor, 50 Public Square
          Cleveland, OH 44113
          Telephone: (216) 771-3239

 


NATIONAL RIFLE: Dell'Aquila Loses Bid to File TAC
-------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DAVID DELL'AQUILA,
LORANNDA BORJA, TODD CHESNEY, and BRENT WEBER, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, v. NATIONAL RIFLE
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, Case No. 3:19-cv-00679 (M.D. Tenn.), the
Hon. Judge William L. Campbell, Jr. entered an order denying
Plaintiffs' motion for leave to file a third amended complaint.

The Defendant has filed a response in opposition to Plaintiffs'
motion. The Plaintiffs' Motion for Review is granted. The Court
will reverse or modify a non-dispositive ruling from the Magistrate
Judge only if it is clearly erroneous or contrary to law.

The deadline for filing for class certification will be reset. As
such, the Plaintiffs' motion for extension of time to file for
class certification (and the NRA's motion to strike Plaintiffs'
class action allegations are denied as moot.

National Rifle is a gun rights advocacy group based in the United
States.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4a8Z7xj at no extra charge.[CC]
 


NORTHEAST GEORGIA HEALTH: Houston Sues Over Alleged Spam Calls
--------------------------------------------------------------
Kelly Mehorter of ClassAction.org reports that a Georgia consumer
claims in a proposed class action that he received at least 200
unsolicited, pre-recorded phone calls from Northeast Georgia Health
System, Inc. in less than two months.

The 13-page case alleges that the community health system, in
violation of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act, has
placed automated medical debt collection calls to individuals who
never provided their consent to be contacted.

According to the lawsuit, the plaintiff began receiving
pre-recorded phone calls to his cell phone from the defendant in
October 2023 despite having never used Northeast Georgia Health
System's healthcare services.

The complaint says that soon after the calls began, the man got in
touch with a live employee who confirmed that he did not owe a debt
to Northeast Georgia Health System and should not be receiving the
calls. Nevertheless, the calls continued, the suit contends.

The plaintiff then complained to three additional Northeast Georgia
Health System employees about the unwanted phone calls to no avail,
the suit says. The filing claims that one representative for the
defendant, when asked why Northeast Georgia Health System was still
contacting the plaintiff, stated, "I don't know what to tell you."

Between October 2023 and into November of this year, the plaintiff
received at least 200 unauthorized calls from Northeast Georgia
Health System, which harmed him in the form of "annoyance,
nuisance, and invasion of privacy," the case contends.

"In fact, [the plaintiff] was so frustrated because of the unwanted
pre-recorded calls that he received from the Defendant, he incurred
a financial cost and had his phone number changed," the filing
says.

The lawsuit looks to represent anyone in the United States who,
within the past four years, received a call to their cell phone
with an artificial or pre-recorded voice from Northeast Georgia
Health System in connection with a medical debt that was not
assigned to a person with a medical debt or their authorized
representative. [GN]

NORTHROP GRUMMAN: Court Stays Proceedings in DiBenedetto Action
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DiBenedetto, et al., v.
Northrop Grumman Corporation, et al., Case No. 2:22-cv-07353
(E.D.N.Y., Filed Dec. 5, 2022), the Hon. Judge Gary R. Brown
entered an order granting request to stay the proceedings in the
action pending the resolution of the motion for class certification
in the related action, Romano v. Northrop Grumman, Case No.
2:16-cv-5760-GRB-ST.

-- Accordingly, the Court stays all discovery pending adjudication
of
    the Romano class certification motion. The parties are reminded

    that in accordance with this Court's prior January 20, 2023
Order,
    the Initial Conference and any related joint Proposed Discovery

    Plan/Scheduling Order deadlines are adjourned sine die.

-- The parties are directed file a joint status report 30 days
after
    adjudication of the Romano class certification motion. So
Ordered
    by Magistrate Judge James M. Wicks on 12/1/2023.

The nature of suit states Real Property -- Tort Product Liability.

Northrop is an American multinational aerospace and defense
technology company.[CC]


NOVAVAX INC: Settles Class Suit Over COVID Vaccine for $47MM
------------------------------------------------------------
Preeti Singh of Seeking Alpha reports that Novavax (NASDAQ:NVAX)
has agreed to settle a securities class action over its COVID-19
vaccine claims for $47M.

The lawsuit was filed in 2021 by Sothinathan Sinnathurai in the
U.S. District Court of Maryland, alleging Novavax (NVAX) made
purportedly false and misleading statements concerning its ability
to manufacture its then prototype vaccine on a commercial scale and
to secure the prototype vaccine's regulatory approval.

Novavax (NVAX) filed a motion in April 2022 to dismiss the
complaint. The motion was denied towards the end of the year.

The parties have now agreed to a binding settlement to fully
resolve the surviving claims. The $47M will be put into a
settlement fund. Novavax (NVAX) will use its directors and
officers' liability insurance to pay the amount. [GN]

OKLAHOMA WINDOWS: Bid to Compel Arbitration Tossed in Parisi Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SUSAN PARISI, v. OKLAHOMA
WINDOWS AND DOORS, LLC, d/b/a RENEWAL BY ANDERSEN OF OKLAHOMA; and
BMO HARRIS BANK, NA, d/b/a GREENSKY, LLC, Case No. 5:23-cv-00115-R
(W.D. Okla.), the Hon. Judge David L. Russell entered an order
denying the Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration and Motion to
Dismiss:

-- The evidence presented by GreenSky goes only to the existence
of
    the transaction, not Parisi's authorization of it. That is not

    sufficient to prove a contract between the parties existed.

-- Accordingly, no summary trial of factual matters is necessary.


-- The conclusory and self-serving affidavit from Mr. Kaliban,
    supported only by the transaction ledger, is not sufficient
    evidence. As a matter of law, the parties did not agree to the

    High-Interest Loan and, thus, did not agree to arbitrate any
    disputes. The Defendant’s motion to compel arbitration is
denied.

The case stems from a purported loan agreement to finance the
installation of new windows in Plaintiff's home. The chronology of
facts proves to be crucial to the Court's determination, so it must
be discussed with some particularity.

Renewal serves the window replacement and patio door replacement
needs of the Oklahoma and NW Arkansas areas

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Ri6Rog at no extra charge.[CC]

OLDCASTLE SERVICES: Court Dismisses Class Suit Over Biometric Data
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ufonobong Umanah of Bloomberg Law reports that he son of a deceased
employee of an engineering solutions company, who filed a proposed
class action alleging it violated Illinois' Biometric Information
Privacy Act by collecting and storing employees' information,
voluntarily dismissed the case after the court ruled he had a
property interest in his late father's information.

The late Jermaine Minor alleged Oldcastle Services Inc. required
him to use a finger sensor timekeeping system that collected and
stored biometric information, without issuing proper notice,
consent, or disclosing its retention and destruction policies, in
violation of BIPA. After he died without an estate or will. [GN]

OLO INC: Court Certifies Class in Steamship Trade Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as STEAMSHIP TRADE
ASSOCIATION OF BALTIMORE-INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMAN'S ASSOCIATION
PENSION FUND, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, v. OLO INC., NOAH GLASS, and PETER J. BENEVIDES, Case No.
1:22-cv-08228-JSR (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Jed Rakoff entered an
order certifying a class.

Olo powers digital ordering and delivery programs that connect
restaurant brands to the on-demand world.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3uXa84E at no extra charge.[CC]

OPENAI INC: Must File Reply to Amended Complaint by Jan. 12, 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as AUTHORS GUILD, ET AL., v.
OPENAI INC., ET AL., Case No. 1:23-cv-08292-SHS (S.D.N.Y.), the
Hon. Judge Sidney H. Stein entered an order that:

   1. Discovery in this matter commenced on November 6, 2023;

   2. Plaintiffs shall file an amended complaint on or before
December
      4, 2023;

   3. The last day for defendants to answer or move in response to
the
      amended complaint is January 12, 2024;

   4. The last day for defendants to respond to the complaint in
      Julian Sancton v. Open AI Inc., 23-Cv-10211 is January 12,
2024;

   5. The last day for the parties to file their positions on which

      should proceed first, summary judgment or class
certification,
      is January 12, 2024;

   6. The last day for plaintiffs to respond to any motion in
response
      to the amended complaint is January 26, 2024; and

   7. The reply to any motion is due on or before February 2,
2024.

OpenAI is an American artificial intelligence research
organization.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RaxR97 at no extra charge.[CC]

ORAL ESSENTIALS: Shafee Alleges Teeth Whitening Products' False Ads
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Kelsey McCroskey of ClassAction.org reports that a proposed class
action alleges Lumineux Whitening Strips are falsely advertised in
that they "systematically" fail to adhere to consumers' teeth for
the recommended 30-minute treatment and do not achieve any
meaningful teeth whitening within that period.

The 19-page lawsuit says that despite the prominent statement "30
[m]inutes to whiter teeth" featured on the products' packaging, the
whitening strips -- which are manufactured and sold by defendant
Oral Essentials, Inc. -- fail to live up to consumer expectations
"by large margins."

"In fact, the scant scientific studies that [Oral Essentials]
possesses, as well as ample feedback from dissatisfied consumers,
demonstrate that the Products fail to noticeably whiten teeth after
a single 30-minute application," the suit charges. "To make matters
worse, the Products' poor design makes them fall off consumers'
teeth well before the recommended 30-minute treatment."

According to the case, the manufacturer does not provide adequate
disclaimers about the whitening strips' advertised application
period and fails to explain that customers must regularly use the
products for at least a week or two in order to achieve full
results.

Contrary to its representations, Oral Essentials "does not possess
a single reliable scientific study that has measured or concluded
that the Products are able to whiten teeth within a 30-minute
single-use application," the complaint argues, adding that "the
sole study that supports [the defendant's] efficacy was based on
observations taken on a weekly basis for a total of two weeks."

The company knew that by marketing the products as effective within
30 minutes, shoppers would be misled into believing that the
whitening strips worked more efficiently than competing items, the
filing contends.

Likewise, the lawsuit alleges that Oral Essentials was also aware
of the products' poor adhesion, not least because of hundreds of
complaints posted online by consumers.

Like other buyers, the plaintiff -- a New York resident who ordered
the whitening strips in November 2023 -- had difficulty keeping the
strips from peeling off his teeth a few minutes after applying them
and ultimately threw most away because of their "defective design,"
the suit claims.

When a competing company recently challenged Oral Essentials'
products in a dispute before the National Advertising Division's
(NAD) self-regulatory department of the Better Business Bureau, the
agency found that the claims about the whitening strips at issue
could indeed be misleading and recommended the representations be
removed from all packaging, the case relays.

Despite agreeing to modify the challenged claims per the NAD's
conclusion, the defendant continues to sell the whitening strips
"in complete disregard of the NAD’s findings," the complaint
contests.

The lawsuit looks to represent anyone in the United States who
purchased Oral Essentials' Lumineux Whitening Strips for personal
or household purposes and not for resale. [GN]

OREGON: Seeks to Modify Class Cert Order to Remove Claims
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PAUL MANEY; GARY CLIFT;
GEORGE NULPH; THERON HALL; DAVID HART; SHERYL LYNN SUBLET; and
FELISHA RAMIREZ, personal representative for the ESTATE OF JUAN
TRISTAN, individually, on behalf of a class of other similarly
situated, v. STATE OF OREGON; KATE BROWN; COLETTE PETERS; HEIDI
STEWARD; MIKE GOWER; MARK NOOTH; ROB PERSSON; KEN JESKE; PATRICK
ALLEN; JOE BUGHER; and GARRY RUSSELL, Case No. 6:20-cv-00570-SB (D.
Or.), the Defendants ask the Court to enter an order modifying the
class certification order to remove claims.

The discovery has revealed that the named plaintiffs cannot prove
economic damages, which is an essential element of their state-law
claims.

The Plaintiffs' claims are governed by two different prison
litigation statutes: the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA") and
an Adult in Custody ("AIC") damages statute. Those two statutes
impact the plaintiffs’ claim for damages in two important
respects. First, the PLRA bars two of the named plaintiffs' claims
for mental/emotional injury because they have no evidence of
"physical injury" as required by the PLRA.

Second, the AIC damages statute bars all named plaintiffs'
state-law negligence and wrongful death claims because they have no
evidence that they suffered "economic damages."

Furthermore, the Court should narrow its class certification order
to exclude state-law claims. Discovery is closed and no plaintiff
could establish a necessary element of their state law
claims—economic damages.

Oregon is a part of the Western United States, with the Columbia
River delineating much of Oregon's northern boundary with
Washington, while the Snake River delineates much of its eastern
boundary with Idaho.

A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47Nl43A at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Kerry J. Shepherd, Esq.
          Molly K. Honore, Esq.
          Jermaine F. Brown, Esq.
          R. Kyle Busse, Esq.
          Chad A. Naso, Esq.
          Anit K. Jindal, Esq.
          

The Attorneys for The State of Oregon:

          1455 SW Broadway, Suite 1900
          Portland, OR 97201
          Telephone: (503) 295-3085
          E-mail: KerryShepherd@MarkowitzHerbold.com
                  MollyHonore@MarkowitzHerbold.com
                  JermaineBrown@MarkowitzHerbold.com
                  KyleBusse@MarkowitzHerbold.com
                  ChadNaso@MarkowitzHerbold.com
                  AnitJindal@MarkowitzHerbold.com

                - and -

          Tracy Ickes White, Esq.
          DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
          1162 Court Street NE
          Salem, OR 97301-4096
          E-mail: Tracy.I.White@doj.state.or.us

ORRICK HERRINGTON: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Bass Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
ROBERT BASS and JODY FREASE, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. ORRICK, HERRINGTON &
SUTCLIFFE LLP, Defendant, Case No. 3:23-cv-06227 (N.D. Cal., Dec.
1, 2023) is an action against the Defendant for its failure to
adequately secure and safeguard the Plaintiffs' and the Class's
personally identifying information ("PII") and personal health
information ("PHI").

According to the Plaintiffs in the complaint, in the course of
providing legal services to its clients, individuals provided PII
and PHI from hundreds of thousands of persons, including minors. In
turn, the Defendant comes into the possession of, and maintains
extensive files containing, the PII and PHI of its clients and
other persons, and owes these individuals a duty to adequately
protect and safeguard this private information against theft and
misuse. Despite such duties created by statute and common law, at
all relevant times, the Defendant utilized deficient data security
practices, thereby allowing hundreds of thousands of persons'
sensitive and private data to fall into the hands of strangers.

Between February 28, 2023 and March 13, 2023, the Defendant lost
control over this highly sensitive and confidential PII and PHI of
Plaintiffs and the Class Members in a massive and preventable data
breach apparently perpetrated by cybercriminals (the "Data
Breach"). The Data Breach was directly and proximately caused by
Orrick's failure to implement reasonable and industry standard data
security practices necessary to protect its systems from a
foreseeable and preventable cyberattack, says the suit.

The Plaintiffs and the Class will suffer and will continue to
suffer injury as a result of the compromise of their PII and PHI
and the risk remains that further compromises of their private
information will occur in the future, the suit asserts.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Robert C. Schubert, Esq.
          Dustin L. Schubert, Esq.
          Amber L. Schubert, Esq.
          SCHUBERT JONCKHEER & KOLBE LLP
          2001 Union. St., Suite 200
          San Francisco, CA 94123
          Telephone: (415) 788-4220
          Facsimile: (415) 788-0161
          Email: rschubert@sjk.law
                 dschubert@sjk.law
                 aschubert@sjk.law

ORRICK HERRINGTON: McCauley Sues Over Data Breach of Private Info
-----------------------------------------------------------------
KIMBERLEY L. McCAULEY, individually and on behalf of all similarly
situated individuals, Plaintiff v. ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE,
LLP, Defendant, Case No. 3:23-cv-06264-LB (N.D. Cal., December 4,
2023) seeks to hold Defendant responsible for the harms it caused
Plaintiff and approximately 461,100 similarly situated persons in a
massive and preventable data breach of Defendant's inadequately
protected computer network, alleging claims against the Defendant
for negligence, negligence per se, breach of fiduciary duties,
breach of confidence, breach of implied contract, and invasion of
privacy.

Between February 28, 2023 and March 13, 2023, criminal hackers
infiltrated and freely accessed the inadequately protected computer
systems of Defendant and stole the sensitive personal information
of over 461,100 of those individuals. Despite detecting the breach
back in late February and early March, Defendant did nothing to
warn Plaintiff and Class Members until seven months later in which
or about October 31, 2023, the Defendant sent letters to Plaintiff
and Class Members informing them about the data breach. Thus, the
Defendant failed to provide timely and adequate notice of the data
breach, causing substantial harm and injuries to Plaintiff and
Class Members, says the suit.

Headquartered in San Francisco, CA, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe
LLP is an international law firm that serves several area of
practice including finance, corporate and technology. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         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

OZINGA BROS: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime Wages, Bernal Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
GIANFRANCO BERNAL, individually and on behalf of all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. OZINGA BROS, INC. and OZINGA SOUTH
FLORIDA, INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-24584-XXXX (S.D. Fla.,
December 5, 2023), seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation
under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Defendants willfully misclassified Plaintiff as exempt from the
overtime requirements of the FLSA. While employed as a dispatcher,
Plaintiff regularly worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek.
However, Plaintiff never received overtime compensation as required
by federal law, says the suit.

Ozinga Bros, Inc. supply ready mix concrete and other materials to
commercial, residential, industrial, and agricultural customers
using a fleet of cement trucks. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Peter J. Solnick, Esq.
         SOLNICK LAW, P.A.
         3363 NE 163rd Street, Suite 801
         North Miami Beach, FL 33160
         Telephone: (786) 629-6530
         E-mail: pete@solnicklaw.com

PANINO RUSTICO CORP: Stroude Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Panino Rustico Corp.
The case is styled as Colette Stroude, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. Panino Rustico Corp., Case No.
1:23-cv-08823-TAM (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 30, 2023).

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

Panino Rustico Corp. -- https://paninorustico.com/ -- offers
breakfast, coffee and tea.[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


PENSKE LOGISTICS: Fails to Pay Minimum & OT Wages, Nelson Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TERRY NELSON, an individual, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. PENSKE LOGISTICS LLC, a Delaware corporation;
and DOES 1 through 10, Inclusive, Case No. 2:23-at-01212 (E.D.
Cal., Nov. 27, 2023) sues the Defendant for failing to pay all
minimum, regular rate and overtime wages for off-the-clock work, in
violation of the California's wage and hour laws.

The Plaintiff claims that employees are required to arrive at least
ten minutes prior to their shifts in order to prepare their lift
and conduct safety checks so they can start their assignments on
time. However, employees are not allowed to clock in until the
start time of their shifts. This results in unpaid off-the-clock
work.

Additionally, the Defendant regularly paid several types of
bonuses, but failed to factor those bonuses into the regular rate
of pay for the purpose of calculating: overtime premium wages;
missed meal and rest premium wages; sick leave wages; and vacation
pay wages. Further, the Defendant regularly failed to provide
employees with proper meal breaks, failed to authorize and permit
legally compliant rest breaks, and failed to provide meal and rest
break premiums in lieu of such breaks. The Defendant also failed to
provide accurate wage statements and maintain adequate records and
failed to pay all wages owed upon termination of employment, says
the suit.

The Plaintiff worked at one of Defendant's distribution facilities
in Manteca, California. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant
from November 2018 through May 11, 2023.

Penske operates warehouse distribution facilities throughout the
state of California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ben Travis, Esq.
          BEN TRAVIS LAW, APC
          4660 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 100
          San Diego, CA 92122
          Telephone: (619) 353-7966
          E-mail: ben@bentravislaw.com

POLYMERIC TECHNOLOGY: Fails to Pay Minimum & OT Wages, Sanchez Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
ADRIAN SANCHEZ, an individual, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. POLYMERIC TECHNOLOGY, INC., a California
corporation; and DOES 1 TO 50, Case No. 23CV052248 (Cal. Super.,
Nov. 27, 2023) sues the Defendant for failing to pay minimum and
overtime wages, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure
section 382.

The Class Members were not paid all wages for all hours worked due
to the Defendants' uniform payroll policies and practices that
unfairly rounded employees' wages to the4 detriment of the Class
Members. This rounding policy routinely failed to capture the
entirety of the hours the Class Members worked and was structured
in a way that in favored underpayment, the lawsuit asserts.

The Defendant also failed to provide rest periods and pay missed
rest period premiums; and failed to provide meal periods and pay
missed meal period premiums, the lawsuit claims.

The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself and the
following class pursuant to Section 382 of the Code of Civil
Procedure as follows:

          All individuals who are or were employed by the
          Defendants as non-exempt employees in California during
          the Class Period (the "Class Members").

The Plaintiff, who is over the age of 18, was and currently is a
citizen of California residing in the State of California. The
Defendants employed the Plaintiff as a non-exempt hourly employee
in the County of Alameda.

Polymer Technology is the leader in acoustic, vibration, thermal,
and air and fluid transfer solutions including hoses and custom
molded foam.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jonathan Melmed, Esq.
          Laura Supanich, Esq.
          Rebecca Harteker, Esq.
          MELMED LAW GROUP P.C.
          1801 Century Park East, Suite 850
          Los Angeles, California 90067
          Telephone: (310) 824-3828
          Facsimile: (310) 862-6851
          E-mail: jm@melmedlaw.com
                  lms@melmedlaw.com
                  rh@melmedlaw.com

PRAIRIE FARMS: Williams Alleges Miscalculation of Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
STEPHANIE JOANTHA WILLIAMS, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PRAIRIE FARMS DAIRY, INC.,
an Illinois corporation, Defendant, Case No. 3:23-cv-03851 (S.D.
Ill., December 6, 2023) seeks to recover unpaid overtime
compensation, liquidated damages, attorney's fees, costs, and other
relief as appropriate under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff has worked for Defendant since approximately April
2022 as a non-exempt, hourly laboratory technician. She worked more
than 40 hours in a workweek and, on occasions, she also worked in
the night shift and also earned a shift differential. However, the
Defendant failed to incorporate any shift differentials into
Plaintiff's regular hourly rate calculation, resulting in
violations of the FLSA.

Headquartered in Edwardsville, IL, Prairie Farms Dairy, Inc.
produces dairy products. It operates a laboratory facility in in
Battle Creek, MI. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Jesse L. Young, Esq.
         SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
         141 E. Michigan Avenue, Suite 600
         Kalamazoo, MI 49007
         Telephone: (269) 250-7500
         E-mail: jyoung@sommerspc.com

                 - and -

         Kevin J. Stoops, Esq.
         SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
         One Town Square, 17th Floor
         Southfield, MI 48076
         Telephone: (248) 355-0300
         E-mail: kstoops@sommerspc.com

                 - and -

         Jonathan Melmed, Esq.
         Laura Supanich, Esq.
         MELMED LAW GROUP, P.C.
         1801 Century Park East, Suite 850
         Los Angeles, CA 90067
         Telephone: (310) 824-3828
         E-mail: jm@melmedlaw.com
                 lms@melmedlaw.com

PREMIER HEALTH: Pierce et al. Sue Over Private Data Leak
--------------------------------------------------------
GLORIA PIERCE, CHRISTINE HUGHES, and MICHAEL FINLEY, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v.
PREMIER HEALTH PARTNERS, Defendant, Case No. 3:23-cv-00364-MJN-CHG
(S.D. Ohio, December 6, 2023) seeks to recover damages,
restitution, and injunctive relief on behalf of a Class of persons
whose private information was accessed without authorization by
criminals as a result of Defendant's unreasonable and deficient
data security practices.

The class action arises out of a recent targeted cyberattack and
data breach on Premier's computer network that resulted in
unauthorized access to private information of Premier's clients.
The Plaintiffs allege claims against the Defendants for, among
other things, negligence, negligence per se, negligent
misrepresentation, negligent entrustment, breach of contract,
invasion of privacy, disclosure of non-public information, and for
violations of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.

Based in Dayton, OH, Premier is the largest comprehensive health
care system in Southwest Ohio. It offers access to preventive care,
and major medical treatments and procedures with three acute-care
hospitals, an extensive network of physicians, numerous affiliate
organizations, and more than 100 locations across seven Ohio
counties. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

         Brian D. Flick, Esq.
         Marc E. Dann, Esq.
         Andrew M. Engel, Esq.
         DANNLAW
         15000 Madison Avenue
         Cleveland, OH 44107
         Telephone: (216) 373-0539
         Facsimile: (216) 373-0536
         E-mail: notices@dannlaw.com

                 - and -

         Thomas A. Zimmerman, Jr., Esq.
         ZIMMERMAN LAW OFFICES, P.C.
         77 W. Washington Street, Suite 1220
         Chicago, IL 60602
         Telephone: (312) 440-0020
         Facsimile: (312) 440-4180
         E-mail: tom@attorneyzim.com
         Website: www.attorneyzim.com

PROCTER & GAMBLE: Amado Sues Over Supplements' Misrepresentation
----------------------------------------------------------------
TARA AMADO, on behalf of herself, all others similarly situated,
and the general public, Plaintiff v. THE PROCTER & GAMBLE CO.,
Defendant, Case No. 3:23-cv-06308-SK (N.D. Cal., December 6, 2023)
asserts claims against the Defendant for, among things, consumer
fraud, breach of implied warranties, negligent and intentional
misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and for violations of the
Proposition 65 in connection with the Defendant's deceptive
marketing of metamucil.

Procter & Gamble Co. (P&G) sells metamucil, a psyllium fiber
supplement, which it markets as healthy and safe for consumers 12
years and older. However, P&G's health and safety representations
are false or at least highly misleading because the metamucil
products contain dangerous amounts of lead and P&G fails to
disclose material facts regarding that lead content and its
potentially harmful effects on consumers, says the suit.

Headquartered in Cincinnati, OH, P&G is an Ohio corporation that
manufactures and markets several consumer goods, including a wide
range of personal care and hygiene products. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Jack Fitzgerald, Esq.
         Paul K. Joseph, Esq.
         Melanie Persinger, Esq.
         Trevor M. Flynn, Esq.
         Caroline S. Emhardt, Esq.
         FITZGERALD JOSEPH LLP
         2341 Jefferson Street, Suite 200
         San Diego, CA 92110
         Telephone: (619) 215-1741
         E-mail: jack@fitzgeraldjoseph.com
                 paul@fitzgeraldjoseph.com
                 melanie@fitzgeraldjoseph.com
                 trevor@fitzgeraldjoseph.com
                 caroline@fitzgeraldjoseph.com

PROGRESSIVE GULF: Filing of Daubert Opposition Due Jan. 23, 2024
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BETTY VANTREE and CYNTHIA
RAYBORN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated V. PROGRESSIVE GULF INSURANCE COMPANY; and MOUNTAIN LAUREL
ASSURANCE COMPANY, Ohio corporations, Case No.
4:22-cv-00070-DMB-JMV (N.D. Miss.), the Hon. Judge Debra M. Brown
entered an order as follows:

-- The plaintiffs' deadline to reply in         Dec. 15, 2023
    support of their class certification
    and Daubert motions is extended to:

-- The Daubert opposition deadline is           Jan. 23, 2024
    extended to:

-- The Daubert reply deadline is                Feb. 13, 2024
    extended to:

Progressive provides property and casualty insurance company.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/48rYSfp at no extra charge.[CC]

PROGRESSIVE LEASING: Dreger Sues Over Failure to Secure PII
-----------------------------------------------------------
Raymond Dreger, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. PROGRESSIVE LEASING, LLC, Case No. 2:23-cv-00783-BSJ
(D. Utah, Oct. 27, 2023), is brought against the Defendant for its
failure to properly secure and safeguard the Plaintiff's and Class
Members' personally identifiable information stored within
Defendant's information network, including, without limitation,
full names, addresses, phone numbers, Social Security numbers,
dates of birth, bank account numbers, monthly gross incomes, and
email addresses (these types of information, inter alia, being
thereafter referred to, collectively, as "personally identifiable
information" or "PII").

The Plaintiff seeks to hold Defendant responsible for the harms it
caused and will continue to cause the Plaintiff and, at least,
thousands of other similarly situated persons in the massive and
preventable cyberattack purportedly discovered by Defendant on
September 11, 2023, in which cybercriminals infiltrated Defendant's
inadequately protected network servers and accessed highly
sensitive PII that was being kept unprotected ("Data Breach").

While Defendant claims to have discovered the breach as early as
September 11, 2023, Defendant did not inform victims of the Data
Breach until October 23, 2023. Indeed, the Plaintiff and Class
Members were wholly unaware of the Data Breach until they received
letters from Defendant informing them of it. Defendant acquired,
collected, and stored the Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII.
Therefore, at all relevant times, Defendant knew or should have
known that the Plaintiff and Class Members would use Defendant's
services to store and/or share sensitive data, including highly
confidential PII.

By obtaining, collecting, using, and deriving a benefit from the
Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII, Defendant assumed legal and
equitable duties to those individuals. These duties arise from
state and federal statutes and regulations, and common law
principles.

The Defendant disregarded the rights of the Plaintiff and Class
Members by intentionally, willfully, recklessly, and/or negligently
failing to take and implement adequate and reasonable measures to
ensure that the Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII was safeguarded,
failing to take available steps to prevent unauthorized disclosure
of data and failing to follow applicable, required and appropriate
protocols, policies, and procedures regarding the encryption of
data, even for internal use.

As a result, the Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII was compromised
through disclosure to an unknown and unauthorized third party--an
undoubtedly nefarious third party seeking to profit off this
disclosure by defrauding the Plaintiff and Class Members in the
future. the Plaintiff and Class Members have a continuing interest
in ensuring that their information is and remains safe and are
entitled to injunctive and other equitable relief., says the
complaint.

The Plaintiff is a victim of the Data Breach.

The Defendant provides lease-to-own services to consumers across
the country.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Steven A. Christensen, Esq.
          Cameron S. Christensen, Esq.
          CHRISTENSEN YOUNG & ASSOCIATES, PLLC
          9980 South 300 West, Suite 200
          Sandy, UT 84070
          Phone: 801-676-6447
          Email: steven@christensenyounglaw.com
                 cameron@christensenyounglaw.com


PURECYCLE TECHNOLOGIES: Theodore Seeks to Certify Two Classes
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WILLIAM C. THEODORE,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
PURECYCLE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., MICHAEL OTWORTH, MICHAEL E. DEE,
DAVID BRENNER, and BYRON ROTH, Case No. 6:21-cv-00809-PGB-RMN (M.D.
Fla.), Plaintiffs ask that the Court to issue an Order:

   (1) Certifying this action pursuant to Rule 23 as a class
action
       and certifying the defined Classes:

   (2) appointing Plaintiffs as the Class Representatives;

   (3) appointing Pomerantz LLP as Class Counsel; and

   (4) granting such other and further relief as the Court may deem

       just and proper.

The interest of class members in "individually controlling" the
prosecution of separate actions is minimal. The costs and expenses
of individual actions, when weighed against the individual
recoveries potentially obtainable, would be prohibitive.

The Plaintiffs seek certification of two Classes, each of which
satisfies the Rule 23 certification requirements:

   -- Section 10(b) Class

      "All persons and entities that purchased or otherwise
acquired
      PureCycle Technologies, Inc. securities between November 16,

      2020 and November 10, 2021, inclusive, and where damaged
      Thereby;"

   -- Section 14(a) Class

      "All persons and entities that held shares of Roth CH
      Acquisition I Corp. ("ROCH") common stock as of November 16,
      2020 or February 12, 2021 and were entitled to vote at the
      special meeting of stockholders held on March 16, 2021;"

      The Plaintiffs are members of each Class. Excluded are: (a)
      Defendants; (b) any current or former officers or directors
of
      PureCycle; (c) the immediate family members of any Defendant
or
      any current or former officer or director of PureCycle; and
(d)
      any entity that any Defendant owns or controls, or owned or
      controlled during the Class Period.

The Plaintiffs also request that the Court certify Robert Ciecko
and Mariusz Ciecko as representatives of both Classes and appoint
Pomerantz LLP as Class Counsel.

PureCycle produces recycled polypropylene.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3t7AvnZ at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Tamar A. Weinrib, Esq.
          POMERANTZ LLP
          600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (646) 581-9973
          Facsimile: (917) 463-1044
          E-mail: taweinrib@pomlaw.com

QUALCOMM INC: Court Sets Jan. 29 Deadline for Class Action Opt-Out
------------------------------------------------------------------
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE QUALCOMM INCORPORATED
SECURITIES LITIGATION

Case No. 3:17-cv-00121-JO-MSB

SUMMARY NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION

To:  All persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired
the common stock of Qualcomm Inc. ("Qualcomm") from February 1,
2012 through January 20, 2017, inclusive (the "Class Period"), and
who were damaged thereby (the "Class").

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure and an Order of the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California that the above-captioned
action (the "Action") has been certified to proceed as a class
action on behalf of the Class as defined above.

In the Action, Lead Plaintiffs allege that Defendant Qualcomm and
certain of its executives violated the federal securities laws by
making material misstatements and omissions concerning Qualcomm's
alleged bundling of the negotiations and terms of its patent
licenses and chipset agreements. Defendants deny all of Lead
Plaintiffs' allegations and deny any wrongdoing or violation of
law. Please note: at this time, there is no judgment, settlement,
or monetary recovery.

IF YOU ARE A MEMBER OF THE CLASS, YOUR RIGHTS WILL BE AFFECTED BY
THIS ACTION. You may obtain a copy of the more detailed Notice of
Pendency of Class Action (the "Notice") by downloading it from
www.QualcommSecuritiesLitigation.com or by contacting the Notice
Administrator at:

Qualcomm Securities Litigation
c/o A.B. Data, Ltd.
P.O. Box 173043
Milwaukee, WI 53217

1-877-390-3401

Inquiries, other than requests for the Notice, may be made to the
following representatives of Class Counsel:

Jonathan D. Uslaner

BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ
BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP

2121 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2575
Los Angeles, CA 90067

1-310-819-3472

Gregg S. Levin
MOTLEY RICE LLC
28 Bridgeside Blvd.
Mount Pleasant, SC 29464
1-843-216-9000

If you are a Class Member, you have the right to decide whether to
remain a member of the Class. If you want to remain a member of the
Class, you do not need to do anything at this time other than to
retain your documentation reflecting your transactions and holdings
in Qualcomm common stock. If you are a Class Member and do not
exclude yourself from the Class, you will be bound by the
proceedings in this Action, including all past, present, and future
orders and judgments of the Court, whether favorable or
unfavorable. If you move, or if the Notice was mailed to an old or
incorrect address, please send the Notice Administrator written
notification of your new address.

If you ask to be excluded from the Class, you will not be bound by
any order or judgment of this Court in this Action, however you
will not be eligible to receive a share of any money which might be
recovered for the benefit of the Class. To exclude yourself from
the Class, you must either submit an Opt-Out Form online at
www.QualcommSecuritiesLitigation.com by no later than January 29,
2024, or submit a written request for exclusion postmarked no later
than January 29, 2024, in accordance with the instructions set
forth in the Notice. Please note, if you decide to exclude yourself
from the Class, you may be time barred from asserting the claims
covered by the Action.

Further information regarding this notice may be obtained by
writing to the Notice Administrator at the address provided above.

PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE COURT REGARDING THIS NOTICE.

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:
United States District Court for the
Southern District of California


R&G BRENNER: Class Scheduling Order Entered 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 Plaintiffs' motion for class certification is deemed
served;

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

    2023; and

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

On November 29, 2023, the Hon. Rachel P. Kovner referred
plaintiffs' motion for class certification to the Court.

Since Judge Kovner's Individual Practice Rules provide for the
bundling rule, plaintiffs' motion for class certification is
stricken as filed.

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

R&G Brenner offers tax preparation services.[CC]

RED ROBIN: Miller Seeks Approval of Class & PAGA Settlement
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as STEVEN MILLER, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated, v. RED ROBIN
INTERNATIONAL, INC. dba RED ROBIN BURGER AND SPIRITS EMPORIUMS, and
DOES 1-100, inclusive, Case No. 3:22-cv-02574-JCS (N.D. Cal.), the
Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting his Motion for
an Order Provisionally Certifying Settlement Class and
Preliminarily Approving Class Settlement.

The Plaintiff Steven Miller seeks preliminary approval of a
$3,200,000 class action and Private Attorneys General Act ("PAGA")
representative action settlement on behalf Assistant Managers,
Kitchen Managers, and Assistant General Managers ("Salaried
Managers" or "SMs") who worked at Red Robin restaurants in
California, whom Plaintiff alleges were misclassified as exempt
employees.

Red Robin is a national chain of burger restaurants which operates
over 50 restaurants in California. The proposed settlement includes
a class of 205 SMs who did not sign arbitration agreements, 110 of
whom are included in the PAGA settlement, and 47 SMs who signed
arbitration agreements but who are included in the PAGA
settlement.

The Plaintiff alleges that Red Robin misclassified Salaried
Managers as exempt and unlawfully denied them overtime pay, meal
breaks, and rest breaks in violation of California law.

The FAC defines the proposed Class as:

   "All employees who are currently or have been employed by
Defendant
   in the State of California for workweeks during which those
   individuals work or worked as Assistant General Managers (AGMs),

   Kitchen Managers (KMs), or Assistant Managers (AMs) at any time

   from April 27, 2018 to September 30, 2023, excluding:

      (1) any workweeks any Salaried Managers who did not opt out
of
          the settlement in Armando Bautista v. Red Robin
          International, Inc., Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2018-0002270,
          Superior Court of the state of California, San Joaquin
          County ("Bautista") worked as KMs during the period
between
          April 27, 2018 and February 17, 2019; and

       (2) any workweeks any Salaried Managers who consented to
join a
           prior settlement in Outlaw v. Red Robin International,
           Inc., Case No. 2:18-cv-04357, United States District
Court
           for the Eastern District of New York ("Outlaw") worked
           during the period between April 27, 2018 and March 31,
           2020; and

       (3) any Salaried Manager who signed an arbitration agreement

           with Defendant.

The Settlement Class is comprised of all employees who are
currently or have been employed by Defendant in the State of
California for workweeks during which those individuals work or
worked as Salaried Managers at any time during the Class Period
(April 27, 2018 to September 30, 2023), excluding:

    (1) any workweeks any Salaried Managers who did not opt out of
the
        settlement in Armando Bautista v. Red Robin International,

        Inc., Case No. STKCV-UOE-2018-0002270, Superior Court of
the
        state of California, San Joaquin County worked as KMs
during
        the period between April 27, 2018 and February 17, 2019;

    (2) any workweeks any Salaried Manager who consented to join a

        prior settlement in Outlaw v. Red Robin International,
Inc.,
        Case No. 2:18-cv-04357, United States District Court for
the
        Eastern District of New York worked during the period
between
        April 27, 2018 and March 31, 2020; and

    (3) any Salaried Manager who signed an arbitration agreement
with
        Defendant

-- Settlement Fund

    The Settlement Agreement creates a non-reversionary common fund
of
    $3,200,000 to settle claims against Defendant. The Gross
    Settlement Amount covers Class Members' settlement awards,
    Plaintiff’s service award, attorneys' fees and costs, the
    Settlement Claims Administrator's fees and costs, and all
amounts
    to be paid to the LWDA.

    The Gross Settlement Amount does not include the employer's
share
    of payroll taxes, which shall be paid separately from the Gross

    Settlement Amount by Defendant.

-- PAGA Allocation

    The Settlement Agreement allocates $100,000 to Plaintiff's PAGA

    claims, which represents approximately 3.1% of the Gross
    Settlement Amount

    Attorneys' Fees and Litigation Costs; Class Representative
Service
    Awards At the Fairness Hearing, Class Counsel will apply for up
to
    25% of the Gross Settlement Amount (up to $800,000) as
attorneys'
    fees.

Red Robin operates as a restaurant.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3t8ClFk at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Rebecca Peterson-Fisher, Esq.
          Jennifer Liu, Esq.
          C. Leah Kennedy, Esq.
          KATZ BANKS KUMIN LLP
          150 California Street, 16th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 813-3260
          Facsimile: (415) 813-2495
          E-mail: Peterson-Fisher@katzbanks.com
                  Liu@katzbanks.com
                  Kennedy@katzbanks.com

REFRESCO BEVERAGES: Berry Sues Over Data Security Failure
---------------------------------------------------------
JOHN BERRY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. REFRESCO BEVERAGES U.S. INC., Defendant,
Case No. 8:23-cv-02763-JSM-SPF (M.D. Fla., December 5, 2023) arises
from the Defendant's failure to exercise reasonable care in
securing and safeguarding its employees' sensitive personal
information, asserting claims against the Defendants for
negligence, breach of contract, breach of implied contract, breach
of fiduciary duty, and for violations of the California
Constitution's Right to Privacy and of Florida's Deceptive and
Unfair Practices Act .

The Defendant's data security failure allowed a targeted
cyberattack in or about March 2023 to compromise Defendant's
network. Despite learning of the data breach on or about May 14,
2023, and determining that private information was involved in the
March 2023, Defendant claims it did not begin sending notices of
the data breach until November 9, 2023, says the suit.

Headquartered in Tampa, FL, Refresco Beverages U.S. Inc. is a
beverages company incorporated under the state laws of Georgia.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Scott D. Hirsch, Esq.
         SCOTT HIRSCH LAW GROUP, PLLC
         6810 N. State Road 7
         Coconut Creek, FL 33073
         Telephone: (561) 569-7062
         E-mail: scott@scotthirschlawgroup.com

                 - and -

         Nicholas A. Migliaccio, Esq.
         Jason S. Rathod, Esq.
         MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD LLP
         412 H Street N.E., Suite 302
         Washington, D.C. 20002
         Telephone: (202) 470-3520
         Facsimile: (202) 800-2730

RIVIAN AUTOMOTIVE: Crews Seeks to File Exhibits Under Seal
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHARLES LARRY CREWS, JR.,
Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v.
RIVIAN AUTOMOTIVE, INC., et al., Case No. 2:22-cv-01524-JLS-E (C.D.
Cal.), the Plaintiffs file an application for leave to file
partially under seal certain portions of certain exhibits in
support of the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification.

The Plaintiffs request leave to file Exhibits 3, 4, and 5 to the
Declaration of Sharan Nirmul in Support of the Motion for Class
Certification partially under seal.

The Plaintiffs are filing redacted versions of these transcripts
which will "provide the public with sufficient insight into the
content of the deposition transcripts at issue without revealing
information that could be used to identify the confidential
witnesses."

Rivian is an American electric vehicle manufacturer and automotive
technology and outdoor recreation company.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RzmLfe at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Sharan Nirmul, Esq.
          Darren J. Check, Esq.
          Richard A. Russo, Jr., Esq.
          Alex B. Heller, Esq.
          Austin W. Manning, Esq.
          Jennifer L. Joost, Esq.
          KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK, LLP
          280 King of Prussia Road
          Radnor, PA 19807
          Telephone: (610) 667-7706
          Facsimile: (610) 667-7056
          E-mail: snirmul@ktmc.com
                  dcheck@ktmc.com
                  rrusso@ktmc.com
                  aheller@ktmc.com
                  amanning@ktmc.com
                  jjoost@ktmc.com

                - and -

          Stephen G. Larson, Esq.
          Paul A. Rigali, Esq.
          LARSON LLP
          555 South Flower Street, Suite 4400
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 436-4888
          Facsimile: (213) 623-2000
          E-mail: slarson@larsonllp.com
                   prigali@larsonllp.com

RIVIAN AUTOMOTIVE: Crews Suit Seeks Class Status
------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHARLES LARRY CREWS, JR.,
Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v.
RIVIAN AUTOMOTIVE, INC., et al., Case No. 2:22-cv-01524-JLS-E (C.D.
Cal.), the Lead Plaintiff Sjunde AP-Fonden and additional Plaintiff
James  Stephen Muhl ask the Court to enter an order:

   1. granting the Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification:

      "All other persons and entities who purchased or otherwise
      acquired Rivian Class A common stock between November 10,
2021
      and March 10, 2022, inclusive, and were damaged thereby;"

   2. Appointing Sjunde AP-Fonden and James Stephen Muhl as Class
      Representatives; and

   3. Appointing Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP as Class
Counsel
      and Larson LLP as Liaison Counsel to the Class.

Rivian is an American electric vehicle manufacturer and automotive
technology and outdoor recreation company.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41iSnsH at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Sharan Nirmul, Esq.
          Darren J. Check, Esq.
          Richard A. Russo, Jr., Esq.
          Alex B. Heller, Esq.
          Austin W. Manning, Esq.
          Jennifer L. Joost, Esq.
          KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK, LLP
          280 King of Prussia Road
          Radnor, PA 19807
          Telephone: (610) 667-7706
          Facsimile: (610) 667-7056
          E-mail: snirmul@ktmc.com
                  dcheck@ktmc.com
                  rrusso@ktmc.com
                  aheller@ktmc.com
                  amanning@ktmc.com
                  jjoost@ktmc.com

                - and -

          Stephen G. Larson, Esq.
          Paul A. Rigali, Esq.
          LARSON LLP
          555 South Flower Street, Suite 4400
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 436-4888
          Facsimile: (213) 623-2000
          E-mail: slarson@larsonllp.com
                   prigali@larsonllp.com

RJ WALKER: Suit Seeks Conditional Collective Action Status
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GREG SIMPSON and MARY
PAUOLE on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
v. RJ WALKER V, LLC d/b/a MY FATHER'S MOUSTACHE, and ROBERT J.
WALKER, V, individually, Case No. 2:23-cv-05808-RMG (D.S.C.), the
Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting conditional
collective action certification, pursuant to section 16(b) of the
Fair Labor Standards Act 29 U.S.C section 216 (FLSA), and an order
sending notices to the putative class members.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/48bUO2F at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Bruce E. Miller, Esq.
          BRUCE E. MILLER, P.A.
          147 Wappoo Creek Drive, Suite 603
          Charleston, SC 29412
          Telephone: (843) 579-7373
          Facsimile: (843) 614-6417
          E-mail: bmiller@brucemillerlaw.com

ROBINHOOD MARKETS: Golubowski Securities Suit Dismissed
-------------------------------------------------------
Robinhood Markets, Inc. (RHM) 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
February 2023, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California granted Robinhood's motion to dismiss a putative class
action complaint without prejudice.

In March 2023, plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint.

In December 2021, Philip Golubowski filed in against RHM, the
officers and directors who signed Robinhood's initial public
offering (IPO) offering documents, and Robinhood's IPO
underwriters. Plaintiff's claims are based on alleged false or
misleading statements in Robinhood's IPO offering documents
allegedly in violation of Sections 11 and 12(a) of the Securities
Act of 1933 and seeks compensatory damages, rescission of
shareholders' share purchases, and an award for attorneys' fees and
costs.

In February 2022, certain alleged Robinhood stockholders submitted
applications seeking appointment by the court to be the lead
plaintiff to represent the putative class in this matter, and in
March 2022, the court appointed lead plaintiffs. In June 2022,
plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. In August 2022, Robinhood
filed a motion to dismiss the complaint.

Robinhood Markets, Inc. and, together with its subsidiaries, are
registered introducing broker-dealer, which provides users the
ability to buy, sell, and transfer cryptocurrencies and is
responsible for the custody of user cryptocurrencies held on our
platform and a spending account that help customers invest, save,
and earn rewards. It facilitates the purchase and sale of options,
cryptocurrencies, and equities through its platform by routing
transactions through market makers, who are responsible for trade
execution.


ROBINSON NURSING: Supreme Court Re-Examines 8-Yr Nursing Home Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Kathleen Steele Gaivin of McKnights Senior Living reports that the
Arkansas Supreme Court on November 30, 2023 reopened a nearly
decade-old class action lawsuit against a nursing home provider
after the plaintiffs claimed that Judge Timothy Fox "repeatedly
failed to follow directions issued by the high court across the
five appeals associated with the suit," the Arkansas Democrat
Gazette reported.

Further, according to court records, the justices admonished Fox
"for the wholly inappropriate comments he made while performing his
judicial duties."

Residents of the Robinson Nursing and Rehabilitation Center in
Little Rock, and the estates of deceased residents, claim that the
skilled nursing facility violated the state's Deceptive Trade
Practices Law by breaching contracts and deliberate understaffing
that led to inadequate care. Under the law, according to the
plaintiffs, the provider's actions were tantamount to
bait-and-switch advertising; that is, the provider didn't keep its
end of the bargain and provide services as advertised.

The state's high court reopened the case last week because of two
Pulaski County Circuit Court orders from Fox that denied the
nursing home's motion to compel the members of the class action
lawsuit to submit their claims to binding arbitration. Fox granted
the request to enforce the arbitration agreements of 93 residents
and denied arbitration regarding the other 104 residents in the
class action lawsuit.

Writing for the majority, Associate Justice Shawn Womack said,
"Because the circuit court refuses to make specific findings that
provide the parties and this court with a rationale for its
decisions, we must remand to the circuit court with the specific
instructions provided herein."

Therefore, Womack said, it is necessary for the case to be
reassigned, and the case must be reassigned to a new judge within
10 days.

Citing precedent, Associate Justice Karen R. Baker wrote the
dissenting opinion, arguing that the case should be heard on its
merits and not be remanded back to the district court.  She deemed
the majority decision to be "a waste of judicial resources." [GN]

RTX CORP: Seeks to Exclude Stephens' Opinions in Cotromano
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICHARD COTROMANO, et al.,
all on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v.
RTX Corporation, d/b/a Pratt & Whitney, and PALM BEACH AGGREGATES,
LLC, a Florida Corporation, Case No. 9:13-cv-80928-KAM (S.D. Fla.),
RTX, pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, moves the Court to
exclude the opinions and testimony of Daniel B. Stephens, Ph.D.

This motion concerns expert testimony regarding scientific and/or
medical issues, and is therefore more complex than a typical
motion. Pratt & Whitney believes that oral argument will aid this
Court in understanding the facts and issues presented in the
parties’ briefing. Pratt & Whitney estimates that this motion
requires 30 minutes of oral argument.

As is clear, Stephens assumed that sporadic, low-level detections
of 1,4-dioxane came from Pratt & Whitney then went in search of a
theory to show that it was possible.

Stephens relies on similarly circular logic regarding detections of
dioxins and furans in wells just south of Pratt & Whitney. Stephens
admits that dioxins and furans are "relatively immobile," but
peculates they could have moved in groundwater through a method
called "colloidal transport."

The Plaintiffs rely on Dr. Daniel Stephens, a hydrogeologist.
Stephens offers no opinions specific to any of the Plaintiffs’
properties at issue in this case. Instead, his primary opinion is
that "the residents of The Acreage have reason to be concerned
about the potential for contaminants from the UTC site to migrate
beneath their property."

RTX is an American multinational aerospace and defense
conglomerate.

A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/488C7gg at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Gregor J. Schwinghammer, Jr., Esq.
          Barbara Bolton Litten, Esq.
          GUNSTER, YOAKLEY & STEWART, P.A.
          777 South Flagler Drive, Suite 500 East
          West Palm Beach, FL 33401
          Telephone: (561) 650-0595
          Facsimile: (561) 655-5677
          E-mail: gschwinghammer@gunster.com
                  blitten@gunster.com

                - and -

          Sean W. Gallagher, Esq.
          Andrew C. Macnally, Esq.
          Daniel R. Mcelroy, Esq.
          Alexander L. Groden, Esq.
          William D. Gohl, Esq.
          BARTLIT BECK LLP
          54 West Hubbard Street, Suite 300
          Chicago, IL 60654
          Telephone: (312) 494-4400
          Facsimile: (312) 494-4440
          E-mail: sean.gallagher@bartlitbeck.com
                  andrew.macnally@bartlitbeck.com
                  daniel.mcelroy@bartlitbeck.com
                  alex.groden@bartlitbeck.com
                  will.gohl@bartlitbeck.com

RUST-OLEUM CORP: Class Cert. Hearing Extended to Jan. 11, 2024
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANTHONY BUSH, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. RUST-OLEUM
CORP., Case No. 3:20-cv-03268-LB (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Laurel
Beeler entered an order granting Parties Joint Stipulation to
Modify the Hearing Date on Plaintiff's Motion to Certify,
Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, Plaintiff's Motion to
Exclude Dr. Kivetz, and Defendant's Motion to Exclude Dr. Dennis,
and all relevant papers, from December 14, 2023 to January 11, 2024
(hybrid).

All other dates and deadlines will remain the same.

Rust-Oleum is a manufacturer of protective paints and coatings for
home and industrial use.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47NYAPX at no extra charge.[CC]


RUST-OLEUM CORP: Parties Seek to Modify Class Cert. Hearing Date
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANTHONY BUSH, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. RUST-OLEUM
CORPORATION, an Illinois corporation, Case No. 3:20-cv-03268-LB
(N.D. Cal.), the Parties files joint stipulation to modify the
Hearing date on motion to certify class, motion for summary
judgment, motion to Exlude Dr. Kivetz, and motion to Exclude Dr.
Dennis, from December 14, 2023 at 9:30 a.m. to January 11, 2024, at
9:30 a.m.(hybrid).

On May 13, 2020, Plaintiff filed this action Class Action Complaint
against the Defendant, the manufacturer, marketer, and seller of
Krud Kutter brand cleaning products that Plaintiff alleges are
deceptively labeled and advertised as "non-toxic" and "earth
friendly" in violation of California consumer protection statutes,
including the Unfair Competition Law.

On September 28, 2022, the Plaintiff filed his motion for class
certification which Defendant opposed on March 31, 2023, and
Plaintiff replied to on June 29, 2023.

On May 12, 2023, Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment,
which Plaintiff opposed on August 1, 2023, and Defendant replied to
on August 15, 2023.

Rust-Oleum is a manufacturer of protective paints and coatings for
home and industrial use.

A copy of the Parties' motion dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4a3hLGS at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ryan J. Clarkson, Esq.
          Katherine A. Bruce, Esq.
          Kelsey J. Elling, Esq.
          CLARKSON LAW FIRM, P.C.
          22525 Pacific Coast Highway
          Malibu, CA 90265
          Telephone: (213) 788-4050
          Facsimile: (213) 788-4070
          E-mail: rclarkson@clarksonlawfirm.com
                  kbruce@clarksonlawfirm.com
                  kelling@clarksonlawfirm.com

                - and -

          Christopher D. Moon, Esq.
          Kevin O. Moon, Esq.
          MOON LAW APC
          228 Hamilton Ave., 3rd Fl
          Palo Alto, CA 94301
          Telephone: (619) 915-9432
          Facsimile: (650) 618-0478
          E-mail: chris@moonlawapc.com
                  kevin@moonlawapc.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Karen M. Sullivan, Esq.
          MANNING GROSS + MASSENBURG LLP
          400 Spectrum Center Drive, Suite 1450
          Irvine, CA 92618
          Telephone: (949) 892-4700
          Facsimile: (949) 892-4701
          E-mail: ksullivan@mgmlaw.com

                - and -

          Anthony J. Monaco, Esq.
          P. Stephen Fardy, Esq.
          William D. Patterson, Esq.
          Bryan E. Rogers, Esq.
          SWANSON, MARTIN & BELL, LLP
          E-mail: amonaco@smbtrials.com
                  sfardy@smbtrials.com
                  wpatterson@smbtrials.com
                  berogers@smbtrials.com

S-FER INTERNATIONAL: Walker Sues Over Delinquent Wage Payments
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lamar Walker, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. S-FER INTERNATIONAL INC. d/b/a SALVATORE FERRAGAMO; and
any other related entities, Case No. 617294/2023 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.,
Nassau Cty., Oct. 24, 2023), is brought pursuant to New York Labor
Law ("NYLL") to recover damages for delinquent wage payments made
to workers who qualify as manual laborers and who were employed by
Defendant.

The Defendant has compensated all its employees on a bi-weekly
(every other week) basis, regardless of whether said employees
qualified as manual laborers under the NYLL. the Defendant has at
no time during the Relevant Period been authorized by the New York
State Department of Labor Commissioner to compensate its employees
who qualify as manual laborers on a bi-weekly basis, in
contravention of NYLL, which requires that without explicit
authorization from the Commissioner, such workers must be
compensated not less frequently than on a weekly basis. The
Plaintiff has initiated this action seeking for himself, and on
behalf of all similarly situated employees, compensation
owed—plus interest, attorneys' fees, and costs--owing to
Defendant's illegal pay practices, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant in 2017.

S-FER INTERNATIONAL INC. is a business entity that authorized to,
and does, business in the State of New York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Brett R. Cohen, Esq.
          Jeffrey K. Brown, Esq.
          Michael A. Tompkins, Esq.
          LEEDS BROWN LAW, P.C.
          One Old Country Road, Suite 347
          Carle Place, NY 11514
          Phone: (516) 873-9550


SAINT ANSELM COLLEGE: Ortiz Files ADA Suit in W.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Saint Anselm College.
The case is styled as Joseph Ortiz, on behalf of himself and all
other persons similarly situated v. Saint Anselm College, Case No.
1:23-cv-01238 (W.D.N.Y., Nov. 29, 2023).

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

Saint Anselm College -- https://www.anselm.edu/ -- is a private
Benedictine liberal arts college in Goffstown, New Hampshire.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
          Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
          GOTTFRIED & GOTTFRIED, LLP
          122 East 42nd. St., Suite 620
          New York, NY 10168
          Phone: (212) 228-9795
          Email: jeffrey@gottlieb.legal
                 michael@gottlieb.legal


SANTA MONICA, CA: Filing of Class Cert Bid Due Jan. 15, 2024
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BLACK LIVES MATTER LOS
ANGELES, an organization, DAVID BROWN, DAVID CLENNON, and KERRY
HOGAN, all individually and on behalf of a class of similarly
situated persons, v. CITY OF SANTA MONICA, a municipal entity,
CHIEF CYNTHIA RENAUD, and Does 1-10 inclusive, Case No.
2:21-cv-05253-CAS-AFM (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Christina A.
Snyder entered an order on stipulation for request to set new
Scheduling dates:

-- Class Certification Motion Cutoff:           Jan. 15, 2024

-- Opposition to Class Certification            Feb. 19, 2024
    Motion Cutoff:

-- Reply to Class Certification Motion          March 4, 2024
    Cutoff:

-- Hearing Class Certification Motion:          March 18, 2024

-- Settlement Completion Cutoff:                May 17, 2024

-- Factual Discovery Cut-off:                   June 14, 2024

-- Last Day to File Motions:                    Aug. 2, 2024

-- Exchange of Expert Reports Cut-off:          June 28, 2024

-- Exchange of Rebuttal Reports Cut-off:        July 12, 2024

-- Expert Discovery Cut-off:                    July 26, 2024

Santa Monica is a coastal city west of downtown Los Angeles.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41b7B37 at no extra charge.[CC]

SANTA MONICA: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Arsene Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------
CRISTINA ARSENE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SANTA MONICA COMMUNITY COLLEGE; and DOES 1
through 100, Defendants, Case No. 23STCV2949S (Cal. Super., Los
Angeles Cty., Dec. 1, 2023) is an action against the Defendants for
failure to pay minimum wages, overtime compensation, provide meals
and rest periods, and provide accurate wage statements.

Plaintiff Arsene was employed by the Defendants as a staff.

SANTA MONICA COMMUNITY COLLEGE provides employment services,
post-secondary education and services for older adults. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Manny Starr, Esq.
          Daniel Ginzburg, Esq.
          FRONTIER LAW CENTER
          23901 Calabasas Road, Suite 1084
          Calabasas, CA 91302
          Telephone: (818) 914-3433
          Facsimile: (818) 914-3433
          Email: manny@frontierlawcenter.com
                 dan@frontierlawcenter.com

SANTANDER BANK: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due March 26, 2024
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DAVID ELBARDISSI, v.
SANTANDER BANK, NA AND JOHN DOES, Case No. 2:23-cv-02069-WB (E.D.
Pa.), the Hon. Judge Wendy Beetlestone entered an amended
scheduling order as follows:

   1. The Defendant's Answer will be due:         Dec. 8, 2023

   2. Fact discovery on class certification       Feb. 27, 2024
      will be completed by:

   3. A Motion for Class Certification will       March 26, 2024
      be filed and served by:

   4. Any Opposition to the Motion for            April 23, 2024
      Class Certification will be filed by:

Santander Bank is an American bank operating as a wholly-owned
subsidiary of the Spanish Santander Group.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 29, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/48qJEHx at no extra charge.[CC]

SCYNEXIS INC: Feldman Shareholder Suit Over Antifungal Drug Ongoing
-------------------------------------------------------------------
SCYNEXIS, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 13, 2023, that on November 7, 2023,
a securities class action was filed by Brian Feldman against the
company and certain executives in the United States District Court,
District of New Jersey, alleging that, during the period from March
31, 2023 to September 22, 2023, the company made materially false
and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose
material adverse facts about the its business, operations and
prospects, alleging specifically that it failed to disclose to
investors that the equipment used to manufacture the drug
"ibrexafungerp" was also used to manufacture a non-antibacterial
beta-lactam drug substance, presenting a risk of
cross-contamination, that the company did not have effective
internal controls and procedures, as well as adequate internal
oversight policies to ensure that its vendor complied with current
Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP), that, due to the substantial
risk of cross-contamination, the company was reasonably likely to
recall its ibrexafungerp tablets and halt its clinical studies and
as a result of the foregoing, the company's statements about its
operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked
a reasonable basis.

The complaint seeks unspecified damages, interest, fees and costs
on behalf of all persons and entities who purchased and/or acquired
shares of its common stock between March 31, 2023 to September 22,
2023.

SCYNEXIS, Inc. is a biotechnology company, headquartered in Jersey
City, New Jersey, that is developing its proprietary class of
enfumafungin-derived antifungal compounds as broad-spectrum,
systemic antifungal agents for multiple fungal indications.


SEAWORLD PARKS: Seeks to Substitute Redacted Version of Exhibit
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as QUINTON BURNS, et al., v.
SEAWORLD PARKS & ENTERTAINMENT, INC.; and SEAWORLD PARKS &
ENTERTAINMENT LLC, Case No. 2:22-cv-02941-WB (E.D. Pa.), the
Defendants move pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(a)
for the Court to substitute a redacted version of Exhibit 26 to
Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification.

On November 27, 2023, the Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Class
Certification.

SeaWorld is an American theme park and entertainment company
headquartered in Orlando, Florida.

A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Nov. 29, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3uLZYE1 at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Leigh M. Skipper, Esq.
          Aleksander W. Smolij, Esq.
          Michelle C. Pardo, Esq.
          John M. Simpson, Esq.
          Rebecca E. Bazan, Esq.
          DUANE MORRIS LLP
          30 South 17th Street
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (215) 979-1157
          Facsimile: (215) 689-4939
          E-mail: lmskipper@duanemorris.com
                  awsmolij@duanemorris.com
                  mcpardo@duanemorris.com
                  jmsimpson@duanemorris.com
                  rebazan@duanemorris.com

SECURITY BENEFIT: Amended Scheduling Order Entered in Clinton Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ELLA CLINTON, individually
and on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, et al.,
v. SECURITY BENEFIT LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No.
5:20-cv-04038-HLT-RES (D. Kan.), the Hon. Judge Rachel E. Schwartz
entered an order:

-- On or before May 16, 2024, the parties shall send a joint email
to
    the Magistrate Judge's chambers at
    ksd_schwartz_chambers@ksd.uscourts.gov regarding any next
    steps concerning settlement offers and/or mediation.

-- Substantial completion of the rolling production of documents
in
    response to Plaintiffs' First Set of Requests for Production of

    Documents must occur on or before February 15, 2024.

-- Plaintiffs' class certification experts must be served at the
time
    Plaintiffs file their motion for class certification, which is
due
    on or before August 16, 2024.

-- The Defendant's class certification experts must be served at
the
    time Defendant files its response to Plaintiffs' motion for
class
    certification, which is due on or before October 18, 2024.

Security Benefit is a leader in the U.S. retirement market and
wealth segments.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 29, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3t7qzek at no extra charge.[CC]

SEPHORA USA: Herrera ADA Suit Removed to D. New Jersey
------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Carlos Herrera, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. SEPHORA USA INC., Case No.
HUD-L-003012-23 was removed from the Hudson County Superior Court,
to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on Oct.
26, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:23-cv-21531-MCA-MAH to
the proceeding.

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

Sephora -- https://www.sephora.com/ -- is a French multinational
retailer of personal care and beauty products with nearly 340
brands, along with its own private label, Sephora Collection, and
includes beauty products such as cosmetics, skincare, fragrance,
nail color, beauty tools, body lotions and haircare.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Daniel Zemel, Esq.
          ZEMEL LAW LLC
          660 Broadway
          Paterson, NJ 07514
          Phone: (862) 227-3106
          Fax: (973) 525-2552
          Email: dz@zemellawllc.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Daniel Robert Levy, Esq.
          EPSTEIN BECKER & GREEN PC
          One Gateway Center, 13th Floor
          Newark, NJ 07102-5311
          Phone: (973) 642-1900
          Fax: (973) 642-0099
          Email: dlevy@ebglaw.com


SEVEN SPORTS: Wilcox Sees to Recover Minimum, OT Wages Under FLSA
-----------------------------------------------------------------
AMANDA WILCOX, individually and on behalf of all those similarly
situated v. SEVEN SPORTS BAR & LOUNGE, LLC and Ernest Earvin, III,
Jointly and Severally, Case No. 1:23-cv-05284-JPB (N.D. Ga., Nov.
17, 2023) seeks to recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages,
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

According to the complaint, the Plaintiff's only earnings were tips
that she received from customers at Seven Sports Bar. The
Defendants allegedly made illegal deductions to the Plaintiff's
pay, by requiring "cleaning fees" of $25-75 each week to clean
Seven Sports Bar, which amounts to an illegal kickback. The
Defendants would also assess the Plaintiff with illegal "fines" for
her conduct, such as being late, during times when the Defendants
had not paid minimum wages to the Plaintiff. These fines also
amount to an illegal kickback, the lawsuit says.

In lieu of paying the $25-75 cleaning fee, during hours when Seven
Sports Bar was not operating, the Plaintiff would be required to
clean Seven Sports Bar for several hours each week. If the
Plaintiff did not clean Seven Sports Bar as instructed, or failed
to pay the $25-75 cleaning fee, the Defendants would refuse to put
her on the schedule for the following week. The Plaintiff was paid
no wages whatsoever for all time she spent cleaning Seven Sports
Bar, as she worked completely for tips from customers. On average,
the Plaintiff worked 45 hours each week. As a result of paying the
Plaintiff no wages, the Defendants have failed to pay Plaintiff
minimum wages for all hours worked, asserts the lawsuit.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a waitress and
bartender from October 2017 to October 16, 2023.

Seven Sports is a bar and restaurant.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Brandon A. Thomas, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICES OF BRANDON A. THOMAS, PC
          1 Glenlake Parkway, Suite 650
          Atlanta, GA 30328
          Telephone: (678) 862-9344
          Facsimile: (678) 638-6201
          E-mail: brandon@overtimeclaimslawyer.com

SHAHEEN SWEETS: Ramirez Sues Over Labor Law Breaches
----------------------------------------------------
RAMIRO RAMIREZ, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SHAHEEN SWEETS OF QUEENS CORP (D/B/A SHAHEEN
SWEETS OF QUEENS) and TARIQ HAMID, Defendants, Case No.
1:23-cv-08957 (E.D.N.Y., December 6, 2023) alleges violations of
the Fair Labor Standards and the New York Labor Law.

Plaintiff Ramirez was employed as a cook and dishwasher at the
Defendant's wholesale bakery. He worked for Defendants in excess of
40 hours per week. However, the Defendants failed to maintain
accurate recordkeeping of the hours worked and failed to pay him
appropriately for any hours he worked, either at the straight rate
of pay or for any additional overtime premium, says the Plaintiff.

Shaheen Sweets of Queens Corp owns, operates, or controls a
wholesale bakery, located at 184-13 Jamaica Ave, Queens, NY 11423,
under the name "Shaheen Sweets of Queens". [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Catalina Sojo, Esq.
         CSM LEGAL, P.C.
         60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
         New York, NY 10165
         Telephone: (212) 317-1200
         Facsimile: (212) 317-1620

SIGNATURE LANDSCAPE: Valdez Gets Partial Conditional Status
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROGELIO GARCIA VALDEZ AND
MARBELLA GOMEZ, ON BEHALF OF THEMSELVES AND OTHERS SIMILARLY
SITUATED, v. SIGNATURE LANDSCAPE, LLC, Case No.
2:22-cv-02276-TC-ADM (D. Kan.), the Hon. Judge Toby Crouse entered
an order granting in part the Plaintiffs' motion for conditional
class certification.

-- The conditional class is certified under Section 216(b), and
    denied in part regarding the approval of the proposed Notice
and
    Opt-in.

-- The parties shall appear at a brief in-person hearing to
discuss
    notice procedures, the proposed Notice, and associated
documents.

-- The Plaintiffs' request approval of their proposed notice, and

    their proposed method of notice to putative class members.

The Plaintiffs Rogelio Garcia Valdez and Marbella Gomez are current

and former employees of Signature Landscape, LLC. On behalf of all

similarly situated current and former employees, they allege that
Signature violated the Fair Labor Standards Act by not paying
landscape laborers overtime pay for hours worked in excess of 40
per work week.

The Plaintiffs now seek the conditional certification of the
following
class under Section 216(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA):


   "All Landscape Laborers (or persons with similar job duties) who

   worked, or will work during the liability period, for Defendant
at
   any time from three years prior to the filing of this Complaint
who
   were not paid one and one-half their regular rate of pay for all

   hours worked in excess of forty per workweek."

The Plaintiffs have adequately alleged that the proposed class
should be conditionally certified under Section 216(b) of the FLSA.
The proposed notice, however, has unresolved issues that require
further development at an in-person hearing. As a result,
Plaintiffs’ motion to certify is granted in part and denied in
part.

Signature is a Kansas-based commercial land-scaping provider that
serves home and business customers in Kansas and Missouri.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3NjDCAb at no extra charge.[CC]


SONY INTERACTIVE: Parties Seek Amendment of Briefing Schedule
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CACCURI, et al., v. SONY
INTERACTIVE ENTERTAINMENT LLC, Case No. 3:21-cv-03361-AMO (N.D.
Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order changing
briefing schedule for the Defendant's motion to deny class
certification and case management conference.

On November 15, 2023, Sony informed Plaintiffs that it intended to
file its motion to deny class certification the following day with
a noticed hearing date of December 21, 2023.

Sony's current deadline to reply to Plaintiffs' response to the
Motion is December 7, 2023.

Sony Interactive is a multinational video game and digital
entertainment company.

A copy of the Parties' motion dated Nov. 29, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47NNrOX at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Michael M. Buchman, Esq.
          MOTLEY RICE LLC
          777 Third Avenue, 27th Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (212) 577-0050
          E-mail: mbuchman@motleyrice.com

                - and -

          Jeff S. Westerman, Esq.
          ZIMMERMAN REED LLP
          6420 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1080
          Los Angeles, CA 90048
          Telephone: (877) 500-8780
          E-mail: jwesterman@jswlegal.com

                - and -

          Joseph R. Saveri, Esq.
          Steven N. Williams, Esq.
          Christopher K.L. Young
          JOSEPH SAVERI LAW FIRM, LLP
          601 California Street, Suite 1000
          San Francisco, CA 94108
          Telephone: (415) 500-6800
          E-mail: jsaveri@saverilawfirm.com
                  swilliams@saverilawfirm.com
                  cyoung@saverilawfirm.com

                - and -

          Blake H. Yagman, Esq.
          ISRAELDAVID LLC
          17 State Street, Suite 4010
          New York, NY 10004
          Telephone: (212) 739-0622
          E-mail: blake.yagman@davidllc.com

                - and -

          Peggy J. Wedgworth, Esq.
          Elizabeth McKenna, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
          PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
          100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
          Garden City, NY 11530
          Telephone: (212) 868-1229
          E-mail: pwedgworth@milberg.com
                  emckenna@milberg.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          John F. Cove, Jr., Esq.
          Patrick T. Hein, Esq.
          Brian C. Hauser, Esq.
          SHEARMAN & STERLING LLP
          Mission Street, 25th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94105
          Telephone: (415) 616-1100
          E-mail: john.cove@shearman.com
                  patrick.hein@shearman.com
                  brian.hauser@shearman.com

SOUTHWEST HEALTH: Parties Must Issue FLSA Collective Action Notice
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Colvin, Zachary v.
Southwest Health Center, Inc., Case No. 3:23-cv-00303 (W.D. Wisc.,
Filed May 10, 2023), the Hon. Judge William M. Conley entered an
order that the parties are authorized to issue a stipulated notice
of collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act consistent
with the representations of the parties and the court's revisions
to their notice set forth during that hearing.

The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Southwest Health provides general medical and surgical hospital
services.[CC]

 


SPARE-TIME INC: Campos Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Spare-Time, Inc., et
al. The case is styled as Lillibeth Campos, on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Spare-Time, Inc., et al., Case No. 23CV010872
(Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Oct. 31, 2023).

Spare Time Sports Clubs -- https://www.sparetimesportsclubs.com/ --
in Greater Sacramento offering competitive sports, fitness classes,
social programs, and spa services.[BN]

STATE FARM: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due August 2, 2024
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CARMEN DANIELLE MORA
SANCHEZ, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, v.
STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, HIDAY & RICKE,
P.A., JEFF RICKE, an individual, and ROBERT HIDAY, an individual,
Case No. 3:21-cv-00372-TJC-LLL (M.D. Fla.), the Hon. Judge Timothy
J. Corrigan entered an amended phase one case management and
scheduling order as follows:

-- Deadline for disclosing expert reports
    on class certification:

                  Plaintiff:                          March 28,
2024

                  Defendant:                          April 29,
2024

                  Rebuttal:                           May 28, 2024


-- Deadline for completing all discovery             June 26, 2024

    and filing   motions to compel:

-- Deadline for moving for class certification:      Aug. 2, 2024


-- Deadline for filing any Daubert motions           Aug. 2, 2024
    related to class certification.

-- Deadline for responses to motions for class       Sept. 3, 2024

    certification and Daubert motions.

-- Deadline for optional replies, limited            Sept. 23,
2024
    to 10 pages.

-- Hearing on class certification motion             Dec. 17,
20241
    10:00 a.m.

-- In all other respects, the parties shall
    continue to be governed by the

State Farm is a group of mutual insurance companies throughout the
United States.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 29, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RgRw7q at no extra charge.[CC]

STATE FARM: Sista Amended Complaint Tossed
------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KIMBERLY K. SISIA,
individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. STATE
FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No.
1:21-cv-02376-ELR (N.D. Ga.), the Hon. Judge Eleanor L. Ross
entered an order granting the Defendant's "motion to dismiss the
Plaintiff's amended complaint" and dismissing with prejudice the
action.

Additionally, the Court denies as moot MOOT Plaintiff's "Renewed
Motion for Conditional Class Certification." Finally, the Court
directs the Clerk to close this case.

The action arises from Defendant’s purported breach of its
insurance contract with Plaintiff.

In total, Defendant paid only $1,254.00 of Plaintiff's claimed
medical expenses.

State Farm offers vehicle, auto, accident, homeowners, condo
owners, renters, life and annuities, fire and casualty, health,
disability, flood, business, and boat insurance products and
services.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3R75bh2 at no extra charge.[CC]
 


STEELCASE INC: Martinez Suit Removed to C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Regina Martinez, individually, and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. STEELCASE, INC.; KELLEY
SERVICES GLOBAL, LLC, a limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive, Case No. CIVSB2324513 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. 29, 2023, and assigned Case No.
2:23-cv-10055.

The Plaintiff bases her claims on alleged violations of the
California Labor Code. Specifically, Plaintiff claims that Kelly
violated the Labor Code by: failing to pay Plaintiff and the
putative class members minimum wages for time worked; failing to
pay Plaintiff and the putative class members overtime wages for
time worked; failing to provide Plaintiff and the putative class
members with meal periods in accordance with California law;
failing to provide Plaintiff and the putative class members with
rest periods in accordance with California law; failing to
indemnify Plaintiff and the putative class members for necessary
business expenses; failing to timely pay Plaintiff and the putative
class members wages owed at separation; failing to provide
Plaintiff and the putative class members with accurate itemized
wage statements; and unfair business practices.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Nick Baltaxe, Esq.
          DUANE MORRIS LLP
          865 South Figueroa Street, Suite 3100
          Los Angeles, CA 90017
          Email: nbaltaxe@duanemorris.com

          Gerald L. Maatman, Esq.
          Jennifer A. Riley, Esq.
          DUANE MORRIS LLP
          190 S. LaSalle Street, Suite 3700
          Chicago, IL 60603
          Email: gmaatman@duanemorris.com
                 jariley@duanemorris.com

          Shireen Y. Wetmore, Esq.
          DUANE MORRIS LLP
          Spear Tower
          One Market Plaza, Suite 2200
          San Francisco, CA 94105-1127
          Email: sywetmore@duanemorris.com


STEPHANIE CLARK: Bid for Class Certification Due April 1, 2025
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Kenneth Okonski, v.
Stephanie Clark, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01548-PAG (N.D. Ohio),
the Hon. Judge Patricia A. Gaughan entered a case management order
as follows:

-- Expert reports shall be exchanged            Jan. 1, 2025
    on or before:

-- (Rebuttal) and Expert Discovery shall        March 1, 2025
    be completed on or before:

-- The pleadings shall be amended without       March 8, 2024
    leave of Court and new parties shall
    be joined on or before:

-- Motion for Class Certification is due:       April 1, 2025

-- Daubert motions are due:                     May 1, 2025

-- Dispositive motions shall be                 July 15, 2025
    filed on or before:

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41g973G at no extra charge.[CC]

STORROW MANAGEMENT: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Robinson Says
------------------------------------------------------------
TRENT ROBINSON, on behalf of himself and all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. STORROW MANAGEMENT, LLC and
WILLIAM GREEN, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-08971 (E.D.N.Y.,
December 6, 2023) seeks to recover statutory damages for
Defendants' violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New
York Labor Law, and the supporting New York State Department of
Labor Regulations.

The Plaintiff was employed by Defendants as a maintenance worker
and porter from October 2022 through January 2023. Despite being a
manual worker under NYLL, Plaintiff received his wages on a
bi-weekly basis. In addition, he was never paid for for all hours
worked in excess of 40 hours per week at the rate of one and
one-half times his regular rate of pay. Instead, he was paid
straight time for every hour worked, including those hours worked
in excess of 40, says the Plaintiff.

Headquartered in New York, NY, Storrow is a domestic limited
liability company that operates several self-storage facilities and
locations throughout New York State, including two locations in
Brooklyn, and one in Queens. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Matthew J. Farnworth, Esq.
          ROMERO LAW GROUP PLLC
          490 Wheeler Road, Suite 250
          Hauppauge, NY 11788
          Telephone: (631) 257-5588
          E-mail: mfarnworth@RomeroLawNY.com

STRATEGIC PROPERTIES: Puga Suit Removed to W.D. Missouri
--------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Elena Puga, Nicole Edwards, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated v. Strategic
Properties, LLC, Nephrite Fund I, LLC, Jesse Davila, Case No.
2116-CV13008 was removed from the Circuit Court of Jackson County,
Missouri, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Missouri on Oct. 27, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:23-cv-00774-DGK to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Jobs Civil Rights for Employment
Discrimination.

Strategic Properties -- https://www.strategicproperties.com/ --
offers property management, asset management, development, and
process outsourcing in Texas, Florida.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Andrea M. Knernschield, Esq.
          Gregory A. Leyh, Esq.
          Nicholas Leyh, Esq.
          GREGORY LEYH, P.C.
          1600 Genessee St., Suite 132
          Kansas City, MO 64102
          Phone: (816) 283-3380
          Fax: (816) 283-0489
          Email: aknernschield@leyhlaw.com
                 gleyh@leyhlaw.com
                 nleyh@leyhlaw.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Curtis L Tideman, Esq.
          David R. Frye, Esq.
          Rebecca J. McMahon, Esq.
          LATHROP GPM LLP
          2345 Grand Avenue, Suite 2200
          Kansas City, MO 64108-2618
          Phone: (913) 451-5100
          Fax: (913) 451-0875
          Email: curtis.tideman@lathropgpm.com
                 david.frye@lathropgpm.com
                 rebecca.mcmahon@lathropgpm.com

               - and -

          Brian T Goldstein, Esq.
          11705 W. 164th Pl
          Overland Park, KS 66221
          Phone: (913) 558-0228
          Email: btgoldsteinlaw@gmail.com


SUBARU OF AMERICA: Sued Over Vehicles' Defective 3G Services
------------------------------------------------------------
David A. Wood of CarComplaints.com reports that a Subaru 3G battery
drain class action lawsuit alleges six vehicle models were left
defective when 3G wireless service was phased out beginning in
2022.

According to the battery drain lawsuit, Subaru vehicles lost
several features when 3G wireless service was phased out.

Those services include, "Automatic Collision Notification, SOS
Emergency Assistance, Stolen Vehicle Recovery, Bluetooth Hands-Free
Calling, and Remote Features such as unlocking and locking the
vehicles."

The lawsuit alleges those features stopped functioning in February
2022.

The Subaru battery drain lawsuit involves these vehicles.

    2016-2019 Subaru Forester
    2016-2019 Subaru Legacy
    2016-2019 Subaru Outback
    2016-2019 Subaru Impreza
    2016-2019 Subaru Crosstrek
    2016-2019 Subaru WRX

The plaintiffs contend the batteries drain because the vehicles
constantly try to connect to the 3G networks.

Subaru allegedly knew years ago that 3G wireless would eventually
be phased out just like 2G service had been. But Subaru allegedly
did nothing to prepare for the changes.

The plaintiffs assert as early as 2015, Subaru began employing 4G
LTE connectivity in its vehicles while at the same time continuing
to sell 3G-only vehicles.

According to the class action, Subaru offered a complimentary
upgrade for any vehicle with an active STARLINK Safety and Security
subscription. This upgrade would allegedly allow continued access
to the STARLINK Safety and Security features.

The lawsuit alleges if a vehicle owner did not update their vehicle
before the 3G connectivity was phased out, the STARLINK
subscription was cancelled and any use of features requiring 3G
would stop working.

But the class action alleges Subaru's complimentary upgrade with
regard to STARLINK features did not fix the problem because it
affected only about 110,000 Subaru vehicles.

The plaintiffs claim this "left a population of approximately
710,000 vehicles with a chance of experiencing various issues due
to the loss of 3G connectivity."

The Subaru battery drain class action lawsuit was filed by these
plaintiffs.

    James Garrett / Michigan / 2019 Subaru Legacy
    Christopher Roach / New York / 2019 Subaru Outback
    Demaris Martz / California / 2017 Subaru Outback
    Marcum Martz / California / 2017 Subaru Outback
    Kimberly Rohrberg / Washington / 2019 Subaru Legacy
    Taylor Paddock / Florida / 2019 Subaru Outback
    Robert Donnelly / New York / 2016 Subaru Outback

The Subaru 3G battery drain class action lawsuit was filed in the
U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey: Garrett, et
al., v. Subaru of America, Inc., et al.

The plaintiffs are represented by Dilworth Paxson LLP, Wexler Boley
& Elgersma LLP, and Wallace Miller. [GN]

SWEDISH HEALTH: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due August 1, 2024
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Adan v. Swedish Health
Services, Case No. 2:23-cv-01266 (W.D. Wash., Filed Aug. 18, 2023),
the Hon. Judge Tana Lin entered an order adopting the Parties'
Proposed Case Management Schedule:

-- The deadline to join additional              Dec. 15, 2023
    parties is:

-- The deadline to amend pleadings is:          Jan. 26, 2024

-- Plaintiffs' deadline to move for             Aug. 1, 2024
    class certification shall be:

The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Swedish Health is the largest nonprofit health provider in the
Seattle metropolitan area.[CC]


SWIFT TRANSPORTATION: Bid for Class Cert. Due August 13, 2024
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DAVID CARLSON, an
individual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated,
v. SWIFT TRANSPORTATION CO. OF ARIZONA, LLC; and DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive, Case No. 3:23-cv-05722-RJB (W.D. Wash.), the Court
entered an order setting class certification briefing schedule as
follows:

  Plaintiff's motion for class certification due:   Aug. 13, 2024

  Defendants' response to Plaintiff's motion        Sept. 12, 2024

  for class certification due:

  Plaintiff's reply dueL                            Sept. 26, 2024


  Hearing on motion for class certification:        To be set by
the
                                                    Court

Swift Transportation is a Phoenix, Arizona-based American truckload
motor shipping carrier.

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

SYSTEMS EAST INC: Boudreaux Files Suit in N.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Systems East, Inc.
The case is styled as Angie Boudreaux, an individual, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated v. Systems East, Inc.,
Case No. 5:23-cv-01498-DNH-ML (N.D.N.Y., Nov. 29, 2023).

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

Systems East, Inc. -- http://www.systemseastinc.com/-- is a
leading provider of comprehensive finance, billing, and payment
solutions since 1981.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Benjamin Y. Kaufman, Esq.
          WOLF HALDENSTEIN ADLER FREEMAN & HERZ, LLP
          270 Madison Avenue
          New York, NY 10016
          Phone: (212) 545-4600
          Fax: (212) 545-4653
          Email: kaufman@whafh.com

               - and -

          Kate M. McGuire, Esq.
          WOLF HALDENSTEIN ADLER FREEMAN & HERZ, LLP
          270 Madison Avenue
          New York, NY 10016
          Phone: (212) 545-4600
          Email: mcguire@whafh.com


T. MINTON: Middlebrook Files Suit in W.D. Michigan
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against T. Minton. The case
is styled as Marcus D. Middlebrook, and all other similarly
situated prisoners v. T. Minton, Facility Manager, sued in
individual and official capacities, Case No. 2:23-cv-00227-MV (W.D.
Mich., Nov. 30, 2023).

The nature of suit is stated Prison Condition for Prisoner Civil
Rights.

T. Minton is a Facility Manager in Baraga Maximum Correctional
Facility.[BN]

The Plaintiff appears pro se.


T2 FINANCIAL: Preliminary Pretrial Order Entered in Lauer Lawsuit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KEVIN M. LAUER, v. T2
FINANCIAL, LLC, Case No. 2:23-cv-02796-ALM-CMV (S.D. Ohio), the
Hon. Judge Chelsey M. Vascura entered an order a preliminary
pretrial order as follows:

-- The parties have agreed to make initial       Dec. 18, 2023
    disclosures by:

-- Amendments to Pleadings and/or Joinder        Feb. 29, 2024
    of Parties Motions or stipulations
    addressing the parties or pleadings,
    if any, must be filed no later than:

-- Plaintiff's motion for class                  May 20, 2024
    certification must be filed no later
    than:

-- By agreement of the parties, the              June 19, 2024
    opposition brief must be filed by:

-- The reply brief must be filed by:             July 9, 2024

T2 Financial is an FHA Approved Lending Institution.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 4, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47Oiydm at no extra charge.[CC]

TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICAL: Premera Blue Sues Under Antitrust Statutes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Premera Blue Cross, on behalf of itself and all others similarly
situated v. TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY LIMITED, TAKEDA
PHARMACEUTICALS U.S.A., INC., and TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS AMERICA,
INC., Case No. 1:23-cv-12918 (D. Mass., Nov. 30, 2023), is brought
under state antitrust statutes, state consumer protection statutes,
and state law governing unjust enrichment.

Since 2006, Takeda has marketed and sold Amitiza (lubiprostone), a
constipation drug, in the United States. For nearly fifteen years,
and for nearly seven years beyond the expiration of the patent
covering Amitiza's active pharmaceutical compound, Takeda held a
monopoly in the lubiprostone market, making hundreds of millions of
dollars in annual sales revenue. Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. ("Par")
entered the market with a license to sell authorized generic
Amitiza on January 4, 2021. Until January 1, 2023, the two
companies maintained a duopoly.

This timeline does not reflect the ordinary operation of the United
States Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") approval process and
federal patent litigation. Rather, Takeda, Takeda's partner Sucampo
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("Sucampo"), and Par reached an agreement in
September 2014 (the "2014 Takeda/Sucampo-Par Agreement") that
artificially extended the period of Amitiza's brand exclusivity and
ensured that, at the onset of generic competition, only one generic
version could enter the market for at least six months, and up to
two years.

The 2014 Takeda/Sucampo-Par Agreement, which is partly reflected in
and partly obscured by a September 30, 2014 written settlement of
Takeda and Sucampo's patent infringement suit against Par,
restrained competition in the lubiprostone market and provided for
a 50/50 division of profits earned from sales of the
supra-competitively priced authorized generic Amitiza. Takeda,
Sucampo, and Par's extra profits came at the direct expense of drug
payers and consumers.

Four additional manufacturers have received FDA approval for
generic Amitiza products, but each one agreed to a January 1, 2023
entry date following litigation with Takeda and Sucampo. As a
result, the lubiprostone market remained restrained through the end
of 2022, and the effects of the restraint are still being felt
thereafter.

Takeda, Sucampo, and Par concealed the true nature of their
agreement from the public, including Plaintiff Premera and Class
members, by redacting crucial portions of their agreement in public
filings and falsely representing to the court overseeing their
patent infringement litigation that the agreement was
"procompetitive." Plaintiff Premera and the Class did not discover,
and could not have discovered, their injuries until at least
January 2021. The Plaintiff Premera and Class members were directly
injured by Takeda and its co-conspirators' restraint of the market,
says the complaint.

The Plaintiff Premera Blue Cross is a health care services
contractor incorporated in the State of Washington, with its
principal place of business in Mountlake Terrace, Washington.

Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with
its principal place of business located at 95 Hayden Avenue,
Lexington, Massachusetts.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Scott J. Tucker, Esq.
          William J. Fidurko, Esq.
          TUCKER, DYER & O'CONNELL, LLP
          199 Wells Avenue
          Newton, MA 02459
          Phone: (617) 986-6226

               - and -

          Peter D. St. Phillip, Esq.
          Uriel Rabinovitz, Esq.
          Renee Nolan, Esq.
          Charles Kopel, Esq.
          LOWEY DANNENBERG, P.C.
          44 South Broadway, Suite 1100
          White Plains, NY 10601
          Phone: 914.997.0500
          Email: PStPhillip@lowey.com
                 URabinovitz@lowey.com
                 RNolan@lowey.com
                 Ckopel@lowey.com


TALIS BIOMEDICAL: Continues to Defend Consolidated Securities Suits
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Talis Biomedical Corp. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending September 30, 2023 filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 14, 2023, that the
Company continues to defend itself from the consolidated securities
class suits in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California.

On or about January 7, 2022, John Modrak filed a class action in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California against the Company, certain of its officers and
directors, and J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, BofA Securities, Inc.,
Piper Sandler & Co., and BTIG, LLC, underwriters of its February
2021 initial public offering ("IPO"), captioned as Modrak v. Talis
Biomedical Corp., et al., No. 3:22-cv-00105, purportedly on behalf
of shareholders who purchased shares of its stock that were
registered in our IPO.

On February 18, 2022, Karen Mitcham filed a substantively identical
lawsuit in the same court captioned as Mitcham v. Talis Biomedical
Corp., et al., No. 3:22-cv-01039-JD, against the Company, and the
same officers and directors as the Modrak lawsuit.

The complaints alleged that its registration statement and
prospectus issued in connection with its IPO was false and
misleading and omitted to state material adverse facts related to
the comparator test used in its primary study, its EUA application
for its Talis One COVID-19 test system, and associated regulatory
approval and commercialization.

The complaints sought unspecified damages under Section 11 and
Section 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 ("Securities Act"), and
reasonable attorneys’ and expert witnesses' fees and other costs.


These two cases have been consolidated and co-lead plaintiffs have
been appointed as mandated by the applicable federal securities
laws.

On December 9, 2022, the Court granted its motion to dismiss and
plaintiffs leave to amend their consolidated complaint.

On January 13, 2023, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint,
asserting claims for violation of Section 11 of the Securities Act
against all defendants and Section 15 of the Securities Act against
the individual defendants and seeking unspecified damages,
reasonable attorneys' fees and other costs.

The consolidated complaint does not assert claims against the
above-referenced underwriters.

On April 28, 2023, the Court denied its motion to dismiss.

The initial stages of discovery are underway.

The Company disputes these claims and intends to defend these
matters vigorously.

Talis purportedly develops diagnostic tests to enable accurate,
reliable, low cost, and rapid molecular testing for infectious
diseases and other conditions at the point-of-care. The Talis One
tests are being developed for respiratory infections, infections
related to women's health, and sexually transmitted infections.
The Individual Defendants are officers and directors of the
company.[BN]


TARGET CORP: Filing for Class Certification Bid Due Sept. 27, 2024
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jennifer Stephens, James
Bruno, and Krystal Lopez, On behalf of themselves and a class of
all others similarly situated, v. Target Corporation, Case No.
0:22-cv-01576-PJS-DLM (D. Minn.), the Hon. Judge Douglas L. Micko
entered a pretrial scheduling order as follows:

   1. The Plaintiffs shall file their motion for     Sept. 27,
2024
      class certification on:

   2. The Defendant shall file papers in             Nov. 1, 2024
      opposition on or before:

   3. The Plaintiff's reply shall be filed           Dec. 6, 2024
      on or before:

   4. The hearing on Plaintiff's Motion              Dec. 20, 2024
      for Class Certification will be held
      on:

   5. The parties must make their initial            Dec.19, 2023
      disclosures under Fed. R. Civ. P.
      26(a)(1) on or before:

   6. The parties must commence fact discovery       March 7, 2025
      procedures in time to be completed
      on or before:

   7. All motions that seek to amend the             Jan. 19, 2024
      pleadings to include punitive damages,
      if applicable, must be filed and served
      on or before:

Target is an American retail corporation that operates a chain of
discount department stores and hypermarkets.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Gz4cBz at no extra charge.[CC]

TARGET CORPORATION: Davis Wins Class Status Bid
-----------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TIMOTHY DAVIS, v. TARGET
CORPORATION, Case No. 2:23-cv-00089-JFM (E.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge
Murphy, J. entered an order granting the Plaintiff's motion for
class certification as follows:

The action is certified pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and
23(b)(3) for the following class:

   All Progression Team Members who have been employed by Target at

   its Chambersburg Distribution Center at any time since November
29,
   2019."

The following law firms are appointed class counsel pursuant to
Rule 23(g)(1): Winebrake & Santillo, LLC; Lichten & Liss-Riordan,
P.C.; and Werman Salas P.C.

Target Corporation is an American retail corporation that operates
a chain of discount department stores and hypermarkets.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3NlkqSJ at no extra charge.[CC]

TARGET CORPORATION: Tivin Sues Over Mislabeled Sunscreen Products
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ANNET TIVIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. TARGET CORPORATION, Case No. 0:23-cv-62245-RS (S.D.
Fla., Nov. 27, 2023) alleges that the Defendant misleads consumers
by labeling its sunscreen (under its up&up brand) as a
"reef-conscious formula."

Though consumers buying the Defendant's sunscreen expect it to be a
"reef-conscious formula" which will "protect and safeguard" coral
reefs, it includes ingredients which are contrary to this
objective, such as "Avobenzone (3.0%), Homosalate (10.0%),
Octisalate (5.0%), [and] Octocrylene (4.0%)," only disclosed on the
back of the container in fine print under "Active ingredients," the
Plaintiff contends.

Nowhere on the labeling does the Product tell purchasers that its
active ingredients of avobenzone, homosalate, octisalate, and
octocrylene are inconsistent with "protecting and safeguarding"
coral reefs, which is what they expect from a "reef-conscious
formula."

Moreover, it contains nine inactive ingredients: alcohol denat.,
butyloctyl salicylate, acrylates/octylacrylamide copolymer,
panthenol, tocopherol (vitamin E), fragrance,
stearoxytrimethylsilane, caprylic/capric triglyceride, and
glycerin. Many of these nine chemicals have been linked to causing
harm to coral reef ecosystems.

As a result of the false and misleading representations, the
Product is sold at a premium price, approximately no less than no
less than $4.09 for 2.2 oz (65 g) and $4.99 for 5.5 oz (156 g),
excluding tax and sales, higher than similar products, represented
in a non-misleading way, and higher than it would be sold for
absent the misleading representations and omissions, says the
suit.

The Plaintiff purchased the Product between October 2019 and
October 2023, at Target locations in Broward County, and/or other
areas.

Target is an American multinational retail corporation that
operates almost 2,000 big box retail stores throughout the nation,
with 128 in Florida, selling everything from furniture to
electronics to groceries.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          William Wright, Esq.
          THE WRIGHT LAW OFFICE, P.A.
          515 N Flagler Dr Ste P300
          West Palm Beach FL 33401
          Telephone: (561) 514-0904
          E-mail: willwright@wrightlawoffice.com

                - and -

          Spencer Sheehan, Esq.
          SHEEHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          60 Cuttermill Rd Ste 412
          Great Neck NY 11021
          Telephone: (516) 268-7080
          E-mail: spencer@spencersheehan.com

TASKUS INC: Forsberg Data Breach Suit Pending in Delaware Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
TaskUs, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 7, 2023, that it is currently
facing a purported class action lawsuit filed on April 1, 2022,
captioned "Gregory Forsberg, Christopher Gunter, Samuel Kissinger
and Scott Sipprell vs. TaskUs, Inc. and Shopify, Inc., Shopify
Holdings (USA), Inc., Shopify (USA) Inc.," No. 1:22-cv-00436-UNA.
On April 8, 2022, the filed a motion to dismiss, which is currently
pending. This case is currently stayed.

Case was initially filed in the United States District Court for
the District of Delaware. The complaint alleges the named
defendants failed to exercise reasonable care in securing and
safeguarding consumer information in connection with a 2020 data
breach impacting "Ledger SAS" cryptocurrency hardware wallets,
resulting in the unauthorized public release of approximately
272,000 pieces of detailed personally identifiable information,
including plaintiffs' and class members' full names, email
addresses, postal addresses, and telephone numbers.

The four named plaintiffs allege aggregate losses of approximately
$140,000, and allege that the damages exceed $5 million for
purposes of class action jurisdiction.

TaskUs, Inc. was used as a vehicle for the acquisition of TaskUs
Holdings, Inc. on October 1, 2018. The company is a provider of
outsourced digital services and next-generation customer experience
helping its clients represent, protect and grow their brands.


TASKUS INC: Lozada Securities Suit Over IPO Voluntarily Dismissed
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TaskUs, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 7, 2023, that on October 16, 2023,
the plaintiffs in a purported class action lawsuit captioned
"Lozada v. TaskUs, Inc. et al.," No. 22-cv-1479-JPC voluntarily
dismissed with prejudice certain claims.

On February 23, 2022, said case was filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York against the
company, its Chief Executive Officer, President and Chief Financial
Officer.

The complaint alleges that the registration statement filed in
connection with the Company's IPO and its second and third quarter
2021 earnings calls contained materially false and misleading
information in violation of the federal securities laws.

On October 20, 2022, the court entered an order appointing Humberto
Lozada as lead plaintiff in the lawsuit. On December 16, 2022, lead
plaintiff filed an amended complaint, alleging additional
misstatements in certain of the company's 2021 earnings releases
filed on Form 8-K and at an investor conference, and asserting
additional securities claims, including against members of TaskUs's
board of directors.

The complaint seeks unspecified damages and an award of costs and
expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, as well as
equitable relief.

On February 17, 2023, TaskUs filed a motion to dismiss, which is
currently pending. On September 28, 2023, the court heard oral
argument on the motion to dismiss. On September 29, 2023, the court
issued a stay of this action. On October 16, 2023, the plaintiffs
voluntarily dismissed with prejudice certain claims based on
certain theories of liability. On October 17, 2023, the court
lifted the stay of the action.

TaskUs, Inc. was used as a vehicle for the acquisition of TaskUs
Holdings, Inc. on October 1, 2018. The company is a provider of
outsourced digital services and next-generation customer experience
helping its clients represent, protect and grow their brands.


TAYLOR CREATIVE INC: Taylor Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against TAYLOR CREATIVE INC.,
et al. The case is styled as Dwane Taylor, on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. TAYLOR CREATIVE INC. WILL DO BUSINESS IN
CALIFORNIA AS TAYLOR CREATIVEGROUP, et al., Case No. 23CV012371
(Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Nov. 29, 2023).

Taylor Creative Inc. -- https://www.taylorcreativeinc.com/ --
offers an exclusive rental collection of modern furniture ideally
suited for launch parties, greenrooms, media events, trade shows,
social affairs, weddings and private events.[BN]

TD BANK: Nelipa Suit Seeks Class Certification
----------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LUDMILA NELIPA, ALLISON
ARCHER, VERDENIA EDWARDS, on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated, v. TD BANK, N.A., Case No.
1:21-cv-01092-LDH-JAM (E.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to
enter an order granting the Plaintiffs' motion for class
certification.

TD Bank is an American national bank and the United States
subsidiary of the multinational TD Bank Group.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Ra8zbf at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Blythe H. Chandler, Esq.
          Beth E. Terrell, Esq.
          Ryan Tack-Hooper, Esq.
          TERRELL MARSHALL LAW GROUP PLLC
          936 North 34th Street, Suite 300
          Seattle, WA 98103
          Telephone: (206) 816-6603
          Facsimile: (206) 319-5450
          E-mail: bterrell@terrellmarshall.com
                  ryan@terrellmarshall.com
                  bchandler@terrellmarshall.com

                - and -

          Daniel A. Schlanger, Esq.
          SCHLANGER LAW GROUP LLP
          80 Broad Street, Suite 1301
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 500-6114
          Facsimile: (646) 612-7996
          E-mail: dschlanger@consumerprotection.net

The Defendant is represented by:

          Martin C. Bryce, Esq.
          Thomas F. Burke, Esq.
          Althea Daley, Esq.
          Gerard Belfort, Esq.
          Mitchell Turbenson, Esq.
          BALLARD SPAHR ANDREWS & INGERSOLL, LLP
          1735 Market Street, 51st Floor
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (215) 864-8238
          Facsimile: (215) 864-8999
          E-mail: bryce@ballardspahr.com
                  burket@ballardspahr.com
                  daleya@ballardspahr.com
                  belfortg@ballardspahr
                  turbensonm@ballardspahr.com

TESLA INC: Bids to Dismiss Suit Over Denied Insurance Premiums
--------------------------------------------------------------
Colin Velez of CBT News reports that a California judge on December
4, 2023 refused to dismiss a lawsuit targeting Tesla and its
insurance arm, setting the company up for a difficult legal battle
involving plaintiffs from multiple states.

The class-action lawsuit, filed this April by plaintiff Ricky
Stevens, alleged that the electric vehicle maker increased customer
insurance premiums based on false data. According to the company,
rates are determined based on a scoring system that uses
information obtained from the vehicle to estimate how safely the
owner is driving. One of the monitoring devices used to grade
customers is the Forward Collision Warning, which alerts car
occupants when they are at risk of crashing into an object. The
more this alarm is triggered, the more likely the owner's rate is
to increase.

However, the lawsuit claims that the collision warning system
frequently exhibited "sporadic and random" behavior, alerting
owners of a threat that never existed and Tesla of poor driving
that never happened. The plaintiff argues that these false alarms
contributed to poorer safety scores, leading the company to hike
the premiums of many customers without due cause. On its website,
the EV brand notes that the scoring system ensures that rates are
calculated based on "real-time driving behavior," a claim that
Stevens and his lawyer labeled as false advertising.

Tesla will now have to face the class-action suit in California,
with an initial hearing scheduled for January. The judge's refusal
to dismiss the case arrives just after the brand launched its
long-awaited Cybertruck to mixed reviews, while CEO Elon Musk faces
mounting criticism for his online behavior. [GN]

THERMO TECH: Lopez Suit Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JUAN LOPEZ, on behalf of
himself, FLSA Collective Plaintiffs and the Class, v. THERMO TECH
MECHANICAL, INC., GOWKARRAN BUDHU, and SHANTI BUDHU, Case No.
1:20-cv-09113-LTS-BCM (S.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to
enter an order granting motion for class certification pursuant to
Fed.r.civ.p. 23.

Thermo Tech is an HVAC solution company that offers commercial
equipment installations, troubleshooting, repairs, and service.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3t8Cdpk at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          C.K. Lee, Esq.
          LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
          148 West 24th Street, Eighth Floor
          New York, NY 10011
          Telephone: (212) 465-1188
          Facsimile: (212) 465-1181

TONY'S FINE FOODS: Her Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Tony's Fine Foods, et
al. The case is styled as Tou Her, and all others similarly
situated v. Tony's Fine Foods, et al., Case No. 23CV010748 (Cal.
Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Oct. 27, 2023).

Tony's Fine Foods -- http://tonysfinefoods.com/--- is a retail
food chain company.[BN]

TOP GOLF: Class Certification Order Entered in Melvin Suit
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MELVIN J. TRANCHEZ MOLINA,
v. TOP GOLF USA INC., et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-08636-FMO-AS (C.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Fernando M. Olguin entered an order re:
motions for class certification.

   1. Joint Brief: The parties shall work cooperatively to create a

      single, fully integrated joint brief covering each party's
      position, in which each issue (or sub-issue) raised by a
party
      is immediately followed by the opposing party's/parties'
      response.

   2. Citation to Evidence: All citation to evidence in the joint
      brief shall be directly to the exhibit and page number(s) of
the
      evidentiary appendix, or page and line number(s) of a
      deposition.

   3. Meet and Confer: In order for a motion for class
certification
      to be filed in a timely manner, the meet and confer must take

      place no later than 35 days before the deadline for class
      certification motions set forth in the Court's Case
Management
      and Scheduling Order.

Top Golf operates as an amusement and recreation company.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 4, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47LIMgz at no extra charge.[CC]

TORCH ELECTRONICS: Court Tosses Romano Class Cert Bid
-----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PATRICK ROMANO, et al.,
Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
TORCH ELECTRONICS, LLC, et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-04043-BCW (W.D.
Mo.), the Hon. Judge Brian C. Wimes entered an order denying the
Plaintiff's motion for class certification:

   "All natural persons who deposited money into any electronic
gaming
   device owned or operated by Torch Electronics, LLC, in the State
of
   Missouri and not located on the premises of a Missouri-licensed

   casino on any one or more days on or after March 3, 2018, and
who
   received back following their play an amount of money less than
the
   amount deposited that day."

The Plaintiffs Patrick Romano, Joshua Wilson, Krystal Christensen,
Jeffery Cordaro, Carmen Weaver, Monica McGee, and Mary Bolden are
individuals who reside in the State of Missouri.

The Plaintiffs filed the instant action on behalf of themselves and
those similarly situated alleging they were injured after using
Defendants' electronic gaming devices.

Torch owns and operates thousands of electronic gaming devices in
Missouri.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 22, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3sSIHbP at no extra
charge.[CC] 


TOWN OF BROOKLINE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Bergeron Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------------
BRIAN BERGERON; and PAUL TRAHON, individually and on behalf of all
other similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. TOWN OF BROOKLINE; and
BROOKLINE FIRE DEPARTMENT, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-12934 (D.
Mass., Dec. 1, 2023) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid
wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages,
attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as fire
lieutenants.

TOWN OF BROOKLINE is a town in Norfolk County, Massachusetts,
United States, and part of the Boston metropolitan area. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          John M. Becker, Esq.
          SANDULLI GRACE, P.C.
          44 School Street, 11th Floor
          Boston, MA 02108
          Telephone: (617) 523-2500
          Email: jbecker@sandulligrace.com

TRANSUNION LLC: Maximoff Suit Removed to S.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Mordechay Maximoff, on behalf of himself and
all other similarly situated consumers v. TRANSUNION LLC, TRUIST
BANK, and FIRST COMMUNITY BANK, Case No. 2023-CC-012332 was removed
from the County Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in and for
Palm Beach County, Florida, to the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District on Oct. 26, 2023, and assigned Case No.
9:23-cv-81422-DMM.

On September 19, 2023, the Plaintiff filed a Class Action Complaint
for Damages (hereinafter, the "Complaint") against Truist and
co-defendants TransUnion LLC and First Community Bank ("FCB") in
the County Court for the for alleged violations of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act ("FCRA").[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Omar M. Salazar II, Esq.
          Ely R. Levy, Esq.
          LEVY & PARTNERS, PLLC
          3230 Stirling Road, Suite 1
          Hollywood, FL 33021
          Email: omar@lawlp.com
                 christina@lawlp.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Sara L. Solano, Esq.
          BURR & FORMAN LLP
          350 East Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1440
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Phone: (954) 414-6220
          Facsimile: (954) 414-6221
          Email: ssolano@burr.com

               - and -

          David Elliott, Esq.
          BURR & FORMAN LLP
          420 North 20th Street, Suite 3400
          Birmingham, AL 35203
          Phone: (205) 244-5631
          Facsimile: (205) 244-5631
          Email: delliott@burr.com


TSCHETTER SULZER: Warden Seeks Preliminary Approval of Settlement
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SHAWNTE WARDEN,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
TSCHETTER SULZER, P.C., a Colorado professional corporation, Case
No. 1:22-cv-00271-CNS-NRN (D. Colo.), the Plaintiff asks the Court
to enter an order:

-- Granting Preliminary Approval of the Settlement; and

-- Directing that Notice be disseminated to the Settlement Class
as
    set forth the Settlement, and setting dates for Settlement
Class
    Members to object or request to be excluded, for the submission
of
    papers in support of Final Approval, and for a Final Approval
    Hearing, and for such additional relief as the Court deems
    necessary and just.

The Plaintiff Shawnte, individually and on behalf of a class of
similarly-situated individuals, respectfully moves the Court, in
accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, for an Order
granting preliminary approval of the proposed class action
Settlement Agreement agreed to by the Parties and, in support,
states as follows:

The Plaintiff has brought this alleged class action lawsuit against
Tschetter challenging certain debt collection practices that
Plaintiff alleges Defendant engaged in in violation of the Fair
Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA).

Warden alleges that Tschetter violated the FDCPA by providing
tenants who owe a debt to their landlords with form authorizations
and stipulations that Plaintiff alleges were deceptive.

Tschetter denies all claims asserted against it in this action,
denies all allegations of wrongdoing and liability, and has raised
other defenses to class certification and the merits.

Notwithstanding their disagreements, the Parties, following a full
day mediation session overseen by the Honorable Ann B. Frick (ret.)
of the Judicial Arbiter Group, Inc. in Denver, Colorado, have
entered into a Settlement Agreement, subject to Court approval,
that provides the following relief:

     (i) Certification of a Settlement Class for settlement
purposes
         only defined as:

         "All Tenants who signed the Stipulation between January
31,
         2021, and February 28, 2022 and for whom any Judgment of
         Possession has not yet been vacated."

         The Parties understand the Settlement Class to consist of

         approximately 249 individuals.

    (ii) The establishment of a settlement fund of no less
$60,000.00
         USD for the payment of all Settlement Class Members who do

         not opt out.

         In the event that the Settlement Class exceeds 249
         individuals, Defendant will increase the amount of the
         settlement fund so as to ensure that there are sufficient

         funds for each Class Member to receive a settlement
payment
         in the amount of $240;

   (iii) an agreement from Tschetter that it will seek to have
         judgments for possession that were entered against class
         members vacated upon obtaining approval to do so from each

         class member tenant's respective landlord or where the
         landlord does not timely raise an objection to vacating
the
         judgment based on the tenants failure to vacate;

    (iv) revisions to Defendant’s form Advisement and
Stipulation,
         subject to approval by Class Counsel. The Mediator has
         reviewed the suggested revisions and believes they are
         appropriate;

     (v) payment by Tschetter of any notice and settlement
         administration expenses;

    (vi) payment of a Class Member incentive award, subject to
Court
         approval, of $10,000; and

   (vii) payment of any award of reasonable attorneys' fees and
         reimbursement of expenses, subject to the approval of the

         Court, not to exceed $150,000.

The case concerns Defendant's use of a form Authorization and
Stipulation that Plaintiff alleged was misleading in violation of
the FDCPA. The matter has been heavily litigated for nearly two
years, including multiple motions to dismiss, a motion for
reconsideration, extensive written and oral discovery, and a formal
mediation session.

Tschetter is a full-service real estate law firm.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4ab8e0A at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Steven L. Woodrow, Esq.
          WOODROW & PELUSO, LLC
          3900 East Mexico Ave., Suite 300
          Denver, CO 80210
          Telephone: (720) 213-0675
          Facsimile: (303) 927-0809
          E-mail: swoodrow@woodrowpeluso.com

                - and -

          Jason Legg, Esq.
          CADIZ LAW, LLC
          501 S. Cherry St., Suite 1100
          Denver, CO 80246
          E-mail: jason@cadizlawfirm.com

TTX COMPANY: Coats Suit Removed to C.D. California
--------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Dominic Coats, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. TTX COMPANY, a Delaware corporation;
and DOES 1 to 10, inclusive, Case No. CVRI2304993 was removed from
the Riverside County Superior Court, to the United States District
Court for the Central District of California on Nov. 27, 2023, and
assigned Case No. 5:23-cv-02405.

The Plaintiff's Complaint asserts causes of action on a class wide
basis for: failure to pay overtime; failure to pay all wages;
failure to provide meal periods; failure to provide rest periods;
failure to furnish accurate wage statements and maintain records;
waiting time penalties, and unfair business practices.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Spencer C. Skeen, Esq.
          Jesse C. Ferrantella, Esq.
          Cameron O. Flynn, Esq.
          OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
          4660 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 900
          San Diego, CA 92122
          Phone: 858-652-3100
          Facsimile: 858-652-3101
          Email: spencer.skeen@ogletree.com
                 jesse.ferrantella@ogletree.com
                 cameron.flynn@ogletree.com


TWO JINN: Class Cert Filing Deadline Reset to Jan. 12, 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SARA MEDINA and ALICIA
MARTINEZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. TWO JINN, INC., a California corporation, d/b/a
ALADDIN BAIL BONDS, and ADLER WALLACH & ASSOCIATES, INC., d/b/a AWA
COLLECTIONS, a California corporation, Case No. 3:22-cv-02540-RFL
(N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Rita F. Lin entered an order resetting
the following class certification deadlines:

                 Event                              Deadline

  Plaintiffs' Deadline to File Motion             Jan. 12, 2024
  for Class Certification and any
  supporting Expert Reports:

  Defendants' Deadline to File                    March 1, 2024
  Oppositions to Plaintiffs' Motion
  for Class Certification and any
  supporting Expert Reports or Rebuttal
  Expert Reports, as well as any
  Daubert Motions

  Plaintiffs' Deadline to file Replies            April 5, 2024
  in support of Class Certification and
  Replies to Defendants’ Expert Reports;
  any Opposition(s) to Defendants'
  Daubert Motion(s); and any Daubert
  Motions as to Defendants' Experts

  Defendants' Deadline to file Replies            April 19, 2024
  in support of their Daubert Motions
  and Oppositions to Plaintiffs' Daubert
  Motions

  Plaintiffs' Deadline to file Replies            April 26, 2024
  in support of their Daubert Motions

  Hearing on Class Certification                  May 14, 2024

Two Jinn provides consulting services.

A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 30, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3uPT7tc at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq.
          Yaman Salahi, Esq.
          J. Aaron Lawson, Esq.
          Natasha Fernández-Silber, Esq.
          Julian Zhu, Esq.
          EDELSON PC
          150 California Street, 18th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 212-9300
          Facsimile: (415) 373-9435
          E-mail: rbalabanian@edelson.com
                  ysalahi@edelson.com
                  alawson@edelson.com
                  nfernandezsilber@edelson.com
                  jzhu@edelson.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Beatriz Mejia, Esq.
          K.C. Jaski, Esq.
          Katelyn L. Kang, Esq.
          Robby L.R. Saldaña, Esq.
          COOLEY LLP
          3 Embarcadero Center, 20th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94111-4004
          Telephone: (415) 693-2000
          Facsimile: (415) 693-2222
          E-mail: mejiab@cooley.com
                  kjaski@cooley.com
                  kkang@cooley.com
                  rsaldana@cooley.com

                - and -

          David J. Kaminski, Esq.
          Martin Schannong, Esq.
          CARLSON & MESSER LLP
          5901W. Century Boulevard, Suite 1200
          Los Angeles, CA 90045
          Telephone: (310) 242-2200
          Facsimile: (310) 242-2222
          E-mail: kaminskid@cmtlaw.com
                  schannongm@cmtlaw.com

TYSON FOODS: Faces Antitrust Suit in Illinois
---------------------------------------------
Tyson Foods, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2023, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 7, 2023, that on
September 12, 2023, the first trial which involves claims brought
by direct purchasers of broiler chicken began.

The company did not participate in the first trial as it had
settled all of its claims with the plaintiffs in the first trial.

Beginning in September 2016, a consolidated putative federal class
action lawsuit styled "In re Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation"
was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois against the company and certain of its poultry
subsidiaries, as well as several other poultry processing
companies.

The operative complaints, which have been amended throughout the
litigation, contain allegations that, among other things, assert
that beginning in January 2008, the defendants conspired and
combined to fix, raise, maintain, and stabilize the price of
broiler chickens in violation of United States antitrust laws. The
plaintiffs also allege that defendants "manipulated and
artificially inflated a widely used Broiler price index, the
Georgia Dock."

The plaintiffs further allege that the defendants concealed this
conduct from the plaintiffs and the members of the putative
classes. The plaintiffs seek treble damages, injunctive relief,
pre- and post-judgment interest, costs, and attorneys' fees on
behalf of the putative classes. In addition, the complaints on
behalf of the putative classes of indirect purchasers include
causes of action under various state unfair competition laws,
consumer protection laws, and unjust enrichment common laws. Since
the original filing, certain putative class members have opted out
of the matter and are proceeding with individual direct actions
making similar claims, and others may do so in the future.

Tyson Foods, Inc. and its subsidiaries is one of the world's
largest food companies. It operates a fully vertically-integrated
chicken production process, integrated operations consisting of
breeding stock, contract farmers, feed production, processing,
further-processing, marketing and transportation of chicken and
related specialty products, including animal and pet food
ingredients.


TYSON FOODS: Ruebel Sues Over ERISA Violation
---------------------------------------------
Randall W. Ruebel, Mario Hudson, and Tammy L. Johnson,
individually, and as representatives of a Class of Participants and
Beneficiaries of the Tyson Foods, Inc. Retirement Savings Plan v.
TYSON FOODS, INC. and BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF TYSON FOODS, INC., Case
No. 5:23-cv-05216-TLB (W.D. Ark., Nov. 30, 2023), is brought allege
two the Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA")
violations against Defendants: a violation of the duty of prudence
against Defendants under the ERISA for charging Plan participants
excessive Total RKA fees, and a claim against Defendants for
failure to monitor fiduciaries responsible for Plan administration
with regard to Plan Total RKA fees.

More specifically, Count I alleges a breach of the fiduciary duty
of prudence by Defendants for incurring unreasonable Total RKA
fees. Among other things, Defendants paid over a 75% premium
per-participant for Total RKA fees for the Plan to the Plan
recordkeeper, Northwest, during the Class Period. The Defendants
should have lowered its Total RKA fees by soliciting bids from
competing providers and using its massive size and correspondent
bargaining power to negotiate for fee rebates, but it did not do
so, or did so ineffectively, during the Class Period.

Counts II alleges a breach of fiduciary duty by Defendants for
failing to monitor those individuals responsible for paying these
unreasonable Total RKA fees. Under the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act ("ERISA"), plan fiduciaries must discharge their duty
of prudence "with the care, skill, prudence, and diligence under
the circumstances then prevailing that a prudent man acting in a
like capacity and familiar with such matters would use in the
conduct of an enterprise of a like character and with like aims."

These breaches of fiduciary duty caused Plaintiff and Class Members
millions of dollars of harm in the form of lower retirement account
balances than they otherwise should have had in the absence of
these unreasonable Plan fees. To remedy these fiduciary breaches,
Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of the Plan under the ERISA
to enforce Defendants' liability under the ERISA to make good to
the Plan all losses resulting from these breaches, says the
complaint.

The Plaintiffs are participants in the Plan under ERISA.

Tyson Foods Inc. and the Board of Directors of Tyson Foods Inc. are
fiduciaries under the ERISA.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Randall K. Pulliam, Esq.
          CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC
          519 W. 7th Street
          Little Rock, AR 72201
          Phone: 501-312-8500
          Email: rpulliam@cbplaw.com

               - and -

          Paul M. Secunda, Esq.
          WALCHESKE & LUZI, LLC
          235 N. Executive Dr., Suite 240
          Brookfield, WI 53005
          Phone: (414) 828-2372
          Fax: (262) 565-6469
          Email: psecunda@walcheskeluzi.com


UMPQUA BANK: Dinh Suit Removed to S.D. California
-------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Nhu Dinh, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. UMPQUA BANK, Case No. 23-2-09568-1 was
removed from the Superior Court for the State of Washington in and
for Pierce County, to the United States District Court for the
Western District of Washington on Oct. 30, 2023, and assigned Case
No. 3:23-cv-05980-DWC.

The Plaintiff brings claims for negligence, negligence per se,
breach of implied contract, breach of fiduciary duty, invasion of
privacy, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unjust
enrichment, and injunctive and declaratory relief based on a data
incident involving Umpqua Bank’s file transfer vendor, discovered
in June of 2023 (the “Incident”).[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Robert Mussig, Esq.
          Devin S. Lindsay, Esq.
          Emma Husseman, Esq.
          SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP
          A Limited Liability Partnership
          Including Professional Corporations
          333 South Hope Street, 43rd Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071-1422
          Phone: 213.620.1780
          Facsimile: 213.620.1398
          Email: rmussig@sheppardmullin.com
                 dlindsay@sheppardmullin.com
                 ehusseman@sheppardmullin.com


UNITED AIRLINES: Eco-Skies Biofuel Claims Misleading, Zajac Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
ALEXANDER ZAJAC, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. UNITED AIRLINES INC., Case No. 8:23-cv-03145-PX (D.
Md., Nov. 19, 2023) alleges that the Defendant made material
misrepresentations and/or omissions of fact in its advertising,
promotion and/or marketing of its environmental initiatives.

The Plaintiff contends that the Defendant's conduct was and
continues to be fraudulent because it deceives consumers into
believing flying can be "100% Green," that "Eco-Skies" meant flying
can be ecologically friendly, it relied significantly on energy
sources which were not fossil fuels and/or its other environmental
claims. The United's claims about biofuel are misleading because
they are unqualified, and almost all the energy it uses comes from
non-renewable fossil fuels, the lawsuit asserts.

United's emphasis on biofuels is misleading because out of the four
billion gallons of fuel it uses every year, only one million
gallons comes from biofuels, the lawsuit adds.

By promoting biofuels, potential fliers will believe most, or at
least a non-de minimis amount, of United's fuel is from
"sustainable" sources. As a result of the false and misleading
representations and omissions about its environmental initiatives,
flights on United cost more than on other airlines, higher than
similar airline flights, represented in a non-misleading way, and
higher than they would be sold for absent the misleading
representations and omissions, asserts the lawsuit.

The Plaintiff is concerned about effects of climate change. The
Plaintiff paid money directly to United or its codeshare partners
via purchase of flights, whether operated by United or its
codeshare partners, between October 2020 and October 2023.

The Defendant is one of the largest airlines in the world.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Spencer Sheehan, Esq.
          SHEEHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          60 Cuttermill Rd Ste 412
          Great Neck NY 11021
          Telephone: (516) 268-7080
          E-mail: spencer@spencersheehan.com

UNITED STATES POLO: Perissa Sues Over False Reference Pricing
-------------------------------------------------------------
BARBEL PERISSA, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. UNITED STATES POLO ASSOCIATION, and USPA
PROPERTIES INC., and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No.
1:23-cv-10650 (S.D.N.Y., December 6, 2023) seeks monetary damages,
restitution, and declaratory and injunctive relief from Defendants
who were allegedly engaged in deceptive business practice of
advertising fictitious "original" prices and corresponding phantom
discounts on apparel, accessories, watches, and other items sold in
their retail stores in violation of the New York Consumer
Protection from Deceptive Acts and Practices Act, the New York
False Advertising Law, and the Federal Trade Commission Act.

According to the complaint, the process of how Defendants' false
reference pricing scheme injures consumers proceeds as follows.
Defendants advertised their merchandise with false reference
prices, which then caused consumers to be deceived into overvaluing
those products. As a result, consumers' demand for the U.S. Polo
Association merchandise has artificially increased. This
artificial, illusory increase in consumers' demand further resulted
in an increase in the price of Defendants' U.S. Polo Association
merchandise, says the suit.

U.S. Polo Association, Inc. is an Illinois not-for-profit
corporation with its principal executive offices in Lake Worth, FL.
The company owns and operates retail and outlet stores in New York,
and advertises, markets, distributes, and/or sells clothing and
clothing accessories in New York, and throughout the United States.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

        Gary F. Lynch, Esq.
        LYNCH CARPENTER LLP
        1133 Penn Ave., 5th Floor
        Pittsburgh, PA 15222
        Telephone: (412) 322-9243
        E-mail: gary@lcllp.com

                - and -

        Todd D. Carpenter, Esq.
        Scott G. Braden, Esq.
        LYNCH CARPENTER LLP
        1234 Camino del Mar
        Del Mar, CA 92014
        Telephone.: (619) 762-1910
        Facsimile: (619) 756-6991
        E-mail: todd@lcllp.com
                scott@lcllp.com

UNITED STATES: Court Dismisses Paiz-Cornejo Suit
------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DAVID PAIZ-CORNEJO, v.
UNITED STATES, et al., Case No. 3:22-cv-00756-JPW (M.D. Pa.), the
Hon. Judge Jennifer P. Wilson entered an order that:

   1) The report and recommendation is adopted.

   2) The Defendants' motion to dismiss and for summary judgment,
is
      granted.

   3) The Plaintiff's motion for class certification is denied.

   4) The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

U.S. is a country of 50 states covering a vast swath of North
America, with Alaska in the northwest and Hawaii extending the
nation's presence into the Pacific Ocean.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 4, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Nj19Bm at no extra charge.[CC]

US NURSING CORP: Rubel Suit Removed to C.D. California
------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Heidi Rubel; Olga Malysheva, on behalf of
themselves and others similarly situated v. U.S. NURSING
CORPORATION; FASTAFF, LLC; and DOES 1-20, inclusive, Case No.
BCV-23-103524 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California, County of Kern, to the United States District Court for
the Central District of California on Nov. 29, 2023, and assigned
Case No. 1:23-at-01002.

The Complaint seeks damages and restitution including lost wages,
statutory penalties, reimbursement of all incurred business-related
expenditures; and injunctive relief on behalf of a putative class
for: failure to pay overtime wages; failure to pay wages for all
hours worked; failure to pay minimum wages; failure to provide meal
periods; failure to authorize and/or permit rest periods; failure
to reimburse business expenses; failure to provide accurate
itemized wage statements; waiting time penalties; and unfair
business practices.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          John S. Battenfeld, Esq.
          MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
          300 South Grand Avenue
          Twenty-Second Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071-3132
          Phone: +1.213.612.2500
          Fax: +1.213.612.2501
          Email: john.battenfeld@morganlewis.com

               - and -

          David J. Rashe, Esq.
          MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
          600 Anton Boulevard, Suite 1800
          Costa Mesa, CA 92626-7653
          Phone: +1.714.830.0600
          Fax: +1.714.830.0700
          Email: david.rashe@morganlewis.com


VAXART INC: Himmelberg Securities Suit Seeks Class Certification
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Himmelberg v. Vaxart, Inc.
et al. (VAXART, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION), Case No.
3:20-cv-05949-VC (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter
an order, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil procedure 23(a) and
23(b)(3):

    (i) certify a Class of all persons or entities who purchased or

        otherwise acquired publicly traded Vaxart securities
between
        June 15, 2020 and August 19, 2020, inclusive, and were
damaged
        thereby;

   (ii) certify a Subclass of all persons or entities who purchased

        publicly traded Vaxart common stock contemporaneously with
the
        June 26 and 29, 2020 sales of Vaxart common stock by
        Defendants Armistice, and were damaged thereby;

  (iii) appoint Plaintiffs Wei Huang, Langdon Elliott, and Ani
        Hovhannisyan as Class Representatives; and

   (iv) appoint Lead Counsel Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP and
        Scott+Scott as Class Counsel.

Accordingly, Plaintiffs Wei Huang, Langdon Elliott, and Ani
Hovhannisyan respectfully request this Court certify a Rule
23(b)(3) Class consisting of:

   "All persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired
   publicly traded Vaxart securities between June 15, 2020 and
August
   19, 2020, inclusive, and were damaged thereby, including a
Subclass  
   of all persons or entities who purchased publicly traded Vaxart

   common stock contemporaneously with the June 26 and 29, 2020
sales  
   of Vaxart common stock by the Armistice Defendants, and were  
   damaged thereby."

The Plaintiffs also ask that the Court appoint them as Class
Representatives and appoint Hagens Berman and Scott+Scott as Class
Counsel under Rule 23(a)(4) and (g).

Vaxart is a clinical-stage biotechnology company developing a range
of oral recombinant vaccines based on its proprietary delivery
platform.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4a6ouA5 at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Reed R. Kathrein, Esq.
          Lucas E. Gilmore, Esq.
          Steve W. Berman, Esq.
          Raffi Melanson, Esq.
          HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
          715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 300
          Berkeley, CA 94710
          Telephone: (510) 725-3000
          Facsimile: (510) 725-3001
          E-mail: reed@hbsslaw.com
                  lucasg@hbsslaw.com
                  steve@hbsslaw.com
                  raffim@hbsslaw.com

                - and -

          John T. Jasnoch, Esq.
          William C. Fredericks, Esq.
          Jeffrey P. Jacobson, Esq.
          SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP
          600 W. Broadway, Suite 3300
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 233-4565
          Facsimile: (619) 233-0508
          E-mail: jjasnoch@scott-scott.com
                  wfredericks@scott-scott.com
                  jjacobson@scott-scott.com

                - and -

          Brian J. Schall, Esq.
          THE SCHALL LAW FIRM
          2049 Century Park East, Suite 2460,
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (310) 301-3335
          Facsimile: (310) 388-0192
          E-mail: brian@schallfirm.com

VENTOUX HOLDINGS: Stroude Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Ventoux Holdings,
LLC. The case is styled as Colette Stroude, on behalf of herself
and all others similarly situated v. Ventoux Holdings, LLC, Case
No. 1:23-cv-08711 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 27, 2023).

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

Ventoux -- https://ventouxholdings.com/ -- is a broad-based
manufacturing and industrial holding company with a long term
buy-and-build strategy.[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


VETERANS GUARDIAN: Deadline to File Class Cert Bid Vacated
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JENNIFER FORD,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
VETERANS GUARDIAN VA CLAIM CONSULTING, LLC, Case No.
1:23-cv-00756-TDS-LPA (M.D.N.C.), the Hon. Judge Thomas D.
Schroeder entered an order granting the Plaintiff's consent motion
requesting that the court vacate the Local Rule 23.1(b) deadline
for filing a motion for class certification.

The Defendant has consented to the relief requested. The court will
set the deadline for Plaintiff's motion for class certification at
the time the court enters a scheduling order in this matter.

Veterans Guardian is a pre-filing consulting firm that assists
veterans in attaining the appropriate disability rating.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 4, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3NjDctM at no extra charge.[CC]
 


VISTRA CORP: Faces Gas Index Pricing Litigation
------------------------------------------------
Vistra Corp. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the fiscal year
ended September 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on November 7, 2023, that in April 2023, the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit heard oral argument on an
interlocutory appeal challenging the district court's order
certifying a class in a gas index pricing litigation.

The company, through its subsidiaries, and another company remain
named as defendants in one consolidated putative class action
lawsuit pending in federal court in Wisconsin claiming damages
resulting from alleged price manipulation through false reporting
of natural gas prices to various index publications, wash trading
and churn trading from 2000-2002.

The plaintiffs in these cases allege that the defendants engaged in
an antitrust conspiracy to inflate natural gas prices during the
relevant time period and seek damages under the respective state
antitrust statutes.

Vistra Corp. is a holding company operating an integrated retail
and electric power generation business primarily in markets
throughout the U.S. Through our subsidiaries, it is engaged in
competitive energy market activities including electricity
generation, wholesale energy sales and purchases, commodity risk
management and retail sales of electricity and natural gas to end
users.


VROOM INC: Court OK's Arbitration in Martinez, Suit Stayed
----------------------------------------------------------
Vroom, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 7, 2023, that in September 2023,
Vroom's motions to compel arbitration were granted and the court
action was stayed pending the outcome of any arbitration proceeding
over the respective plaintiffs' individual claims.

In August 2022, certain plaintiffs filed a putative class action
lawsuit in the New York State Supreme Court against Vroom, Inc.,
and Vroom Automotive LLC as defendants, alleging, among other
things, deficiencies in Vroom's titling and registration of sold
vehicles.

The case is captioned "Emely Reyes Martinez, on behalf of all
others similarly situated, v. Vroom Automotive, LLC and Vroom
Inc.," No. 652684/2022. The company removed the case to the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No.
22-cv-7631) and filed motions to compel arbitration of all claims
in both cases.

Vroom, Inc., and its wholly owned subsidiaries is a end-to-end
ecommerce platform for the used vehicle industry.


VROOM INC: Court OKs Arbitration in Sonne, Suit Stayed
------------------------------------------------------
Vroom, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 7, 2023, that in September 2023,
Vroom's motions to compel arbitration were granted and the court
action was stayed pending the outcome of any arbitration proceeding
over the respective plaintiffs' individual claims.

In July 2022 plaintiffs filed a putative class action lawsuit in
the District Court of Cleveland County, Oklahoma against Vroom,
Inc., and Vroom Automotive LLC as defendants, alleging, among other
things, deficiencies in Vroom's titling and registration of sold
vehicles.

The case is captioned "Blake Sonne, individually and on behalf of
all others similar situated, v. Vroom Automotive, LLC and Vroom,
Inc.," No. CJ-2022-822 was removed to the U.S. District Court for
the Western District of Oklahoma (Case No. 22-cv-761) and the
company filed motions to compel arbitration of all claims in this
case.

Vroom, Inc., and its wholly owned subsidiaries is a end-to-end
ecommerce platform for the used vehicle industry.


WASSERMAN MEDIA: Abets FTX Group's Fraud, Garrison Suit Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
EDWIN GARRISON, et al., on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated v. WASSERMAN MEDIA GROUP, LLC and DENTSU MCGARRY
BOWEN LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-24478-KMM (S.D. Fla., Nov. 27, 2023)
sues the Defendants for the collapse of FTX Trading LTD d/b/a
FTX's, West Realm Shires Services Inc. d/b/a FTX US's, and Alameda
Research, LLC's.

The Defendants specifically aid and abet and/or actively
participate in the FTX Group's massive, multibillion dollar global
fraud, and promote, offer, or sell unregistered securities such as
FTX's yield-bearing accounts ("YBA") and FTX's native
cryptocurrency token ("FTT"), which caused the Plaintiffs
substantial harm, the lawsuit asserts.

Accordingly, Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) and his FTX Group caused
billions of dollars in losses to the Plaintiffs, through at least
two separate schemes, both of which contributed to the downfall of
the FTX Group. On one hand, SBF and the FTX Group stole customer
deposits and used billions of dollars in customer funds to support
the operations and investments of FTX and Alameda, to fund
speculative venture investments, to make charitable and political
contributions, and to personally enrich SBF himself, all while
publicly touting the safety of the investment and the segregation
of customer funds, the suit claims.

On the other hand, the FTX Group offered and sold securities
without proper registration, thereby depriving the Plaintiffs of
financial and risk-related disclosures that would have impacted
their calculus as to whether to invest in the FTX Group, the suit
adds.

This conduct allegedly violates numerous laws, including laws
related to the sale of unregistered securities, consumer
protection, professional malpractice, fraud, and conversion.
Because of these schemes, the FTX Group allegedly imploded, and
over $30 billion in value evaporated almost overnight when the FTX
Group filed its emergency Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition in
Delaware.

Plaintiff Brandon Orr is a citizen and resident of the State of
Arizona. He purchased or held legal title to and/or beneficial
interest in any fiat or cryptocurrency deposited or invested
through an FTX Platform.

Wasserman is a global sports and media talent management and
marketing agency.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Adam M. Moskowitz, Esq.
          Joseph M. Kaye, Esq.
          Barbara C. Lewis, Esq.
          THE MOSKOWITZ LAW FIRM, PLLC
          2 Alhambra Plaza, Suite 601
          Coral Gables, FL 33134
          Telephone: (305) 740-1423
          E-mail: adam@moskowitz-law.com
                  joseph@moskowitz-law.com
                  barbara@moskowitz-law.com
                  service@moskowitz-law.com

                - and -

          Jose M. Ferrer, Esq.
          Desiree Fernandez, Esq.
          MARK MIGDAL & HAYDEN
          Brickell City Tower
          80 SW 8th Street, Suite 1999
          Miami, FL 33130
          E-mail: jose@markmigdal.com
                  desiree@markmigdal.com
                  eservice@markmigdal.com

                - and -

          Stephen Neal Zack, Esq.
          Tyler Ulrich, Esq.
          BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP
          100 SE 2nd St., Suite 2800
          Miami, FL 33131
          Telephone: (305) 539-8400
          E-mail: szack@bsfllp.com
                  tulrich@bsfllp.com

WATTS EQUIPMENT: Wilcox Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Watts Equipment
Company. The case is styled as Richard Wilcox, individually, and on
behalf or all others similarly situated v. Watts Equipment Company,
Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2023-0012859 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Joaquin
Cty., Nov. 30, 2023).

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

Watts Equipment -- https://www.wattsequipment.com/ -- offers lift
trucks, pallet jacks, forklifts, and other material handling
equipment, as well as provides services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Justin F. Marquez, Esq.
          WILSHIRE LAW FIRM, PLC
          3055 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 510
          Los Angeles, CA 90010-1145
          Phone: 213-381-9988
          Fax: 213-381-9989
          Email: justin@wilshirelawfirm.com


WESTIN HOTEL: Faces Moralez ADA Suit Over Bathroom Barriers
-----------------------------------------------------------
FRANCISCA MORALEZ v. THE WESTIN HOTEL PALO ALTO; BOARD OF TRUSTEES
OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY; MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL,
INC.; PACIFIC HOTEL MANAGEMENT, LLC; PACIFIC LAND DEVELOPMENT
VENTURE, L.P.; PLDV, INC.; PALO ALTO HOTEL DEVELOPMENT VENTURE,
L.P.; PAHDV, INC.; CITY OF PALO ALTO; and DOES 1 through 30,
Inclusive, Case No. 5:23-cv-06131-NC (N.D. Cal., Nov. 27, 2023)
alleges that the facilities, amenities, and services of the Westin
Palo Alto and Sheraton Palo Alto are inaccessible to individuals
using wheelchairs.

The Plaintiff brings this action for herself and all other
similarly situated members of the public to vindicate rights under,
inter alia, under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act
of 1990 (ADA), 42 U.S.C. Sections 12101 et seq.; Health & Safety
Code; Civil Code Sections 54 and 54.1; and Business & Professions
Code Sections 17200 and 17500. Because of the inaccessible public
sidewalks, curb ramps, and related facilities, additional causes of
action are brought against the Government Entity Defendants and
strictly as to that facility under Title II of the ADA, 42 U.S.C.
Sections 12131 et seq.; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, 29 U.S.C. Section 794; and Government Code Sections
4450-4456; 11135; and 12948, the lawsuit claims.

Accordingly, the Defendants were on notice and knew their barriers
and practices would act to exclude and deter individuals using
wheelchairs. In fact, the barriers in the guestroom bathroom are so
obvious as to implicate a case of discriminatory intent. The
Plaintiff complained directly to staff and management. But her
complaints were waived off as not being applicable to "an existing
building built before the ADA." She also sent detailed written
notice regarding her complaints by certified return receipt
on December 14, 2021, but received no response from the
Defendants.

The Plaintiff utilized the subject facilities of the hotel, as well
as the public facilities, during the period on November 27 through
the 28, 2021. All barriers she encountered as alleged were within
this period.

The Plaintiff has physical disabilities that require her full time
use of a wheelchair for mobility as well as the use of other aids
for accomplishing ordinary tasks.

Westin is a luxury hotel in Palo Alto.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Timothy S. Thimesch, Esq.
          Gene A. Farber, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF TIMOTHY S. THIMESCH
          4413 Prairie Willow Ct.
          Concord, CA 94521-4440
          Telephone: (925) 588-0401
          Facsimile: (888) 210-8868
          E-mail: tim@thimeschlaw.com
                  genefarber@gmail.com

WEXFORD HEALTH: Bid to Extend Class Cert Deadlines Filed
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SANDRA SOLIS, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. WEXFORD HEALTH
SOURCES, INC. Case No. 2:22-cv-00878-MLG-GBW (D.N.M.), the Parties
file a joint motion to extend time to continue class certification
deadlines as follows:

  -- Pre-certification discovery:                  Nov. 17, 2023

  -- Motion for class certification:               Dec. 1, 2023

  -- Pre-certification discovery motions:          Dec.  4, 2023

  -- Other pre-trial motions:                      Dec. 14, 2023

  -- Plaintiff's pre-class certification           Feb. 13, 2024
     order:

  -- Defendant's pre-class certification           Feb.  20, 2024
     order:

Wexford is an American healthcare services company.

A copy of the Parties' motion dated Dec. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3R754lC at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Matthew S. Parmet, Esq.
          PARMET PC
          2 Greenway Plaza, Ste. 250
          Houston, TX 77046
          Telephone: (713) 999-5228
          E-mail: matt@parmet.law

                - and -

          C. Ryan Morgan, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
          20 N. Orange Ave., 15th Floor
          Orlando, FL 32801
          Telephone: (407) 420-1414
          Facsimile: (407) 867-4791
          E-mail: rmorgan@forthepeople.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Kimberly S. Moore, Esq.
          Michael Keeley, Esq.
          CLARKHILL
          2600 Dallas Parkway, Suite 600
          Frisco, TX 75034
          Telephone: (469) 287-3922
          Facsimile: (469) 227-6563
          E-mail: ksmoore@clarkhill.com
                  mkeeley@clarkhill.com

WORKINGMAN'S STORE: Website Inaccessible to Blind, Wahab Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
ANGELA WAHAB, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. THE WORKINGMAN'S STORE, INC., Case No. 1:23-cv-10124
(S.D.N.Y., Nov. 17, 2023) is a civil rights action against the
Defendant for the failure to design, construct, maintain, and
operate the Defendant’s website, www.bluecollarmercantile.com, to
be fully accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff
and other blind or visually-impaired people, in violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.

The Plaintiff was injured when the Plaintiff attempted on September
4, 2023 and again on October 26, 2023 to access the Defendant's
Website from the Plaintiff's home in an effort to shop, but
encountered barriers that denied the full and equal access to the
Defendant's online goods, content, and services. Specifically, the
Plaintiff wanted to purchase the Rebar Graphic Printed Hoody in
Heather Grey Camo by Ariat. The Plaintiff wished to purchase this
product because she was looking for a warm hooded sweater for the
cold season. However, the Website contains access barriers that
prevent free and full use by the Plaintiff using keyboards and
screen-reading software. These barriers include but are not limited
to: missing alt-text, hidden elements on web pages, incorrectly
formatted lists, unannounced pop ups, unclear labels for
interactive elements, and the requirement that some events be
performed solely with a mouse, the suit claims.

The Website also contained a host of broken links, which is a
hyperlink to a non-existent or empty webpage. For the visually
impaired this is especially paralyzing due to the inability to
navigate or otherwise determine where one is on the website once a
broken link is encountered, the suit adds.

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

Ms. Wahab is a visually-impaired and legally blind person, who
cannot use a computer without the assistance of screen-reading
software. Ms. Wahab is, however, a proficient NVDA screen-reader
user and uses it to access the Internet.

The Defendant offers high-quality outerwear products readily
available for purchase through the Website.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          PeterPaul Shaker, Esq.
          STEIN SAKS, PLLC
          One University Plaza, Suite 620
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Telephone: (201) 282-6500
          Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
          E-mail: pshaker@steinsakslegal.com

XTO ENERGY: Amended Case Management Order Entered in Kriley
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DOUGLAS KRILEY and TINA
KRILEY, THOMAS A. MICHEL and CAROL L. MICHEL, GERALDINE C.
WIEFLING, and CHARLES E. WADDINGHAM II and CAROL G. WADDINGHAM, v.
XTO ENERGY INC., Case No. 2:20-cv-00416-CRE (W.D. Pa.), the Hon.
Judge Cynthia Reed Eddy entered an eighth amended case management
order:

   1. The deadline for Defendant to depose Charles Waddingham II
and
      Carol Waddingham with respect to issues related to class
      certification is 30 days after the Court rules on the
privilege
      assertions during the depositions of Geraldine Wiefling,
Carol
      Michel, and Thomas Michel.

      The deadline for Defendant to depose Douglas Kriley and Tina

      Kriley is 30 days after Plaintiffs' counsel informs XTO that
the
      Krileys are able to sit for their depositions in Pittsburgh.


   2. Plaintiff's Expert Reports related to class certification
are
      due on or before January 15, 2024.

      Defendant's Expert Reports related to class certification are

      due on or before February 19, 2024.

      Plaintiff's Reply Expert Reports related to class
certification,
      which are limited to issues raised for the first time in
      Defendant's expert reports, are due on or before March 11,
2024.

      Defendant's sur-reply expert reports, which are limited to
      issues raised for the first time in Plaintiffs’ reply
expert
      reports, are due by March 29, 2024. Depositions of all
experts
      related to class certification shall be on or before April
30,
      2024.

   3. The parties have already submitted an ADR Stipulation.

   4. The parties shall complete the ADR process they selected by
May
      15, 2024.

      Discovery is NOT stayed pending completion of ADR.

   5. A post-ADR video status conference is scheduled for May 22,
2024
      at 10:00 a.m.

   6. Plaintiffs shall file their motion for class certification,
      memorandum in support and all supporting evidence on or
before
      May 24, 2024.

XTO is an American energy company and subsidiary of ExxonMobil
principally operating in North America.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 4, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41dtkau at no extra charge.[CC]

ZEROED-IN TECHNOLOGIES: Gordon Sues Over Unprotected Personal Info
------------------------------------------------------------------
JAHNISHA GORDON, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ZEROED-IN TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, DOLLAR TREE,
INC., and FAMILY DOLLAR, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-03284
(D. Md., December 4, 2023) arises from the Defendants' failure
properly secure and safeguard personally identifiable information
including, but not limited to full names, dates of birth, and
Social Security Numbers, for customers and employees of Dollar Tree
that utilized the services of Zeroed-In. Moreover, Plaintiff Gordon
asserts claims against the Defendants for negligence, breach of
implied contract, and unjust enrichment.

With this class action, the Plaintiff seeks to hold Defendants
responsible for the harms it caused and will continue to cause
Plaintiff and at least 1,977,486 other similarly situated persons
in the massive and preventable cyberattack purportedly discovered
by Defendant Zeroed-In on August 8, 2023, by which cybercriminals
infiltrated Defendant Zeroed-In's inadequately protected network
servers and accessed and exfiltrated highly sensitive PII belonging
to Plaintiff and Class Members which was being kept unprotected.

Zeroed-In Technologies, LLC is a Florida registered limited
liability corporation with its principal place of business located
at 780 Elkridge Landing Road, Suite 208, Linthicum, MD. The company
provides human resource analytics software and solutions. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Thomas A. Pacheco, Esq.
           MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, LLC
           900 W Morgan Street
           Raleigh, NC 27603
           Telephone: (212) 946-9305
           E-mail: tpacheco@milberg.com

                   - and -

           David K. Lietz, Esq.
           MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
           5335 Wisconsin Ave., NW, Suite 440
           Washington, DC 20016
           Telephone: (866) 252.0878
           E-mail: dlietz@milberg.com

                   - and -

           Terence R. Coates, Esq.
           Justin C. Walker, Esq.
           MARKOVITS, STOCK & DEMARCO, LLC
           119 East Court Street, Suite 530
           Cincinnati, OH 45202
           Telephone: (513) 651-3700
           Facsimile: (513) 665-0219
           E-mail: tcoates@msdlegal.com
                   jwalker@msdlegal.com

ZEROED-IN TECHNOLOGIES: White Sues Over Unprotected Private Info
----------------------------------------------------------------
BRIDGET WHITE, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ZEROED-IN TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, and DOLLAR
TREE, INC. and FAMILY DOLLAR, LLC, Defendants, Case No.
1:23-cv-03320 (D. Md., December 6, 2023) arises from the
Defendants' failure to properly secure and safeguard personally
identifiable information of Dollar Tree's customers and employees
who utilized the services of Zeroed-In.

According to the complaint, Plaintiff seeks to hold Defendants
responsible for the harms it caused and will continue to cause
Plaintiff and at least 1,977,486 other similarly situated persons
in the massive and preventable cyberattack purportedly discovered
by Defendant Zeroed-In on August 8, 2023, by which cybercriminals
infiltrated Defendant Zeroed-In's inadequately protected network
servers and accessed and exfiltrated highly sensitive PII.

Headquartered in Linthicum, MD, Zeroed-In Technologies, LLC offers
workforce analytics and data management software to over 70 clients
and has over 30,000 registered users. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James P. Ulwick, Esq.
          KRAMON & GRAHAM, P.A.
          One South Street, Suite 2600
          Baltimore, MD 21202
          Telephone: (410) 752-6030
          Facsimile: (410) 539-1269
          E-mail: julwick@kg-law.com

                  - and -

          James J. Pizzirusso, Esq.
          Amanda V. Boltax, Esq.
          HAUSFELD LLP
          888 16th Street N.W. Suite 300
          Washington, D.C. 20006
          Telephone: (202) 540-7200
          E-mail: jpizzirusso@hausfeld.com
                  mboltax@hausfeld.com

                  - and -

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


                            *********

S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania,
USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.  Rousel Elaine T.
Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche A. Castillon, Julie Anne L.
Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2023. All rights reserved. ISSN 1525-2272.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior
written permission of the publishers.

Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to
be reliable, but is not guaranteed.

The CAR subscription rate is $775 for six months delivered via
e-mail. Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same
firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof
are $25 each. For subscription information, contact
Peter A. Chapman at 215-945-7000.

                   *** End of Transmission ***