/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/240105.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Friday, January 5, 2024, Vol. 26, No. 5

                            Headlines

1-800-FLOWERS.COM INC: Reyes Suit Moved from Super. Ct. to D. Mass.
3M COMPANY: Simpson PFAS Suit Removed to N.D. Alabama
3M COMPANY: Sylestine PFAS Suit Removed to N.D. Alabama
7-ELEVEN INC: Verdugo Labor Suit Removed to E.D. California
AFFINITY INSURANCE: Williams Sues Over Insurance Policies' Prices

AMERIPRIDE SERVICES: Faces Breach of Contract Suit in MN Court
ANYTIME HEATING: Fails to Pay Technicians' OT Wages, Rollins Says
APPLE INC: Faces Yovanovich Suit Over Unlawful Website Terms
ARK RESTAURANTS CORP: Settles Labor Suit Lodged in New York Court
ARRIAGA USA: Ventura Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices

BALDOR SPECIAL: Civil Case Management Plan Entered in Rosario Suit
BANK OF AMERICA: Bolshakov Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime
BARE KNUCKLE: Discloses Subscribers' Info to Meta, Sancruzado Says
BEAL PROPERTIES: Usera Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
BOYNE USA: Court OK's Bid for Injunctive Relief in Anderson Suit

BRETT SABOL: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Clary Suit Alleges
C&H SUGAR: Wright et al. Labor Suit Removed to N.D. California
CENLAR FSB: Fails to Provide Mortage Loan Info, Ryone Alleges
CITIBANK NA: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Newton Due May 16,
COMCAST CABLE: Wilson Sues Over Alleged Data Breach

COMCAST CORP: Fails to Secure Customers' Info, Prescott Says
COMFORT SYSTEMS: Maddison Appeals FLSA Suit Settlement to 2nd Cir.
COMMUNITY HEALTH: Ross et al. Data Breach Suit Removed to M.D. Pa.
COMPLETE BACKYARD: Townsend, Estes Seek Proper Overtime Wages
COSTCO WHOLESALE: Faces Shah Labor Suit in California Court

COSTCO WHOLESALE: To Settle De Benning Labor Suit
COSTCO WHOLESALE: To Settle Edwards Labor Suit in California Court
COX INDUSTRIES: Class Cert Related Bids in Crout Due Feb. 29
CRAWLEY PETROLEUM: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due Nov. 25
CURIOSITYSTREAM INC: Discloses Subscribers' Info to FB, Tejon Says

DIGITAL TURBINE: Court Dismisses Garfield Stockholder Suit
DILIGENCE CORPORATION: Fails to Pay Guards' OT Wages Under FLSA
DRAFTKINGS INC: Scanlon Alleges Deceptive Sports Betting Platform
EDWARD D. JONES & CO: Bid to Seal & Redact Plaintiffs' Reply OK'd
ESTEE LAUDER: Misleads Investors With False Statements, Suit Says

FARFETCH LIMITED: Wu Sues Over Federal Securities' Law Breaches
FEDCHEX RECOVERY: Sadasey Sues Over Illegal Debt Collection
FLAGSTAR BANK: Court Tosses Bid for Ratification in Gardner Suit
FLOWERS FOODS: Porteous Sues Over Distributors' Unpaid Wages
FMC CORP: Oklahoma Firefighters Sues Over Drop in Share Price

GENERAL MOTORS: Shamoon Sues Over 4.66% Drop in Share Price
GOLDEN HEAVEN: Faces Parks Class Suit Over 27.9% Stock Price Drop
GOLDEN HEAVEN: Udani Living Sues Over Misleading IPO Documents
GW ASTORIA: Estrada Sues Over Unpaid Wages Under FLSA
HOSS CANTEEN: Faces Wien Wage & Hour Lawsuit in S.D. Ind.

ICALL SERVICES: Taylor Sues Over Failure to Pay Proper Overtime
INDUSTRIAL PHYSICS: Yankulin Seeks to Recover Proper Overtime Wages
JANUS INTERNATIONAL: Lopez Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
JERSEY COLLEGE: Faces Watkins-Fields Data Breach Lawsuit
JIANGNANNJ LLC: Ignacio Sues Over Kitchen Workers' Unpaid Wages

JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Bryan Balks at Phenylephrine Products' False Ads
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Valinsky Sues Over Phenylephrine Drug False Ads
JRK PROPERTY: Plaintiffs Bid to Remand Peebles Class Suit Nixed
JUDGMENT ACQUISITIONS: Faces Medeiros Suit Over Collection Letter
KINDER MORGAN: Removes Anderson Suit to C.D. California

LA FONDA PAISA: Velazquez FLSA Suit Removed to S.D. Florida
LINKEDIN CORP: Class Action Settlement in Bailey Gets Final Nod
MICRON TECHNOLOGY: Faces Antitrust Suit in Canadian Courts
MISSION PRODUCE: To Settle Labor Suit in California Court
NEW YORK, NY: Fails to Pay Planner Analysts' OT Wages Under FLSA

NORTHLAND SECURITIES: Tylenda Sues Over Misleading Proxy Statement
NUSCALE POWER: Ryckewaert Sues Over Securities Law Violations
OPENAI INC: Pulitzer-winning Authors Join Class Suit Over Copyright
ORCHARD HOSPITAL: Portillo Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
PIPING ROCK: Faces Balah Suit Over Deceptive Discount Promo

PRIDE SECURITY: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Ausseresses Alleges
PROGRESS SOFTWARE: Adams Files Suit in D. Massachusetts
PROGRESS SOFTWARE: Frazier Files Suit in D. Massachusetts
PROGRESS SOFTWARE: Markley Files Suit in D. Massachusetts
PROSPECT MEDICAL: Stradinger Suit Transferred to E.D. Pennsylvania

QUALITY RESTAURANT: Parker Sues Over Illegal Retention of Tips
RECKITT BENCKISER: Sygal Decongestant Suit Transferred to E.D. NY
RED ROOF: Richardson Balks at Employees' Unprotected Personal Info
RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CA: Homan Sues Over Correction Staff's Unpaid OT
RUMBLE INC: Discloses Subscribers' Info to Meta, Sancruzado Alleges

SARAH BUSH: Appeals Remand Order in John Doe Suit to 7th Circuit
SCOTT SEMPLE: Plaintiffs Seek More Time to File Class Cert Reply
SERV AUTOMOTIVE: Webb Seeks to Recover Proper Overtime Wages
SOLV ENERGY: Rivas Labor Suit Removed to S.D. California
SPORTS BASEMENT: Kimber Labor Suit Removed to N.D. California

SPRING NATURAL: Ponce Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Discrimination
SQUEEZE TRADING: Plaintiffs Seek OK of Briefing Schedule
SUMMIT EDUCATION: Mintz Sues Over Failure to Pay Proper Overtime
SUPERJEWELER.COM INC: Faces Martinez Wage and Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y.
TOYOTA MOTOR: Kilkenny Sues Over Defective Telematics Equipment

UNITED HEALTH: Class Cert Filing Modified to Sept. 27
UNITED PARCEL: Class of Part–Time Supervisors Certified in Diaz
UNLIMITED CARE: Fails to Secure Employees' Info, Rothkranz Alleges
US OUTLET: Fails to Pay Manual Laborers' Timely Wages, Mallory Says
VERNON BOWERS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Stockbridge Suit Alleges

VISIONPRO CONNECTIONS: Fails to Pay Technicians' Minimum, OT Wages
VNET GROUP: Semerak Sues Over Misleading Financial Statements
WAL-MART ASSOCIATES: Taylor FEHA Suit Removed to C.D. California
WESTLAKE SERVICES: Filing for Class Cert Bid Modified to Feb. 1
ZEROED-IN TECHNOLOGIES: Fails to Secure Personal Info, Meyers Says


                        Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hess Corp. Agrees to Pay $190MM to Settle Claims
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Johnson Controls Has $108MM Mark-to-Market Losses


                            *********

1-800-FLOWERS.COM INC: Reyes Suit Moved from Super. Ct. to D. Mass.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned as ROXANNE REYES, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
1-800-FLOWERS.COM, INC. and INTERACTIONS LLC, Case No.
2384CV02502-BLS (Filed Nov. 2, 2023) was removed from the
Massachusetts Superior Court in Suffolk County to the United States
District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Dec. 19, 2023.

The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:23-cv-40178-DHH to the proceeding.

The suit alleges that Interactions, a telephony technology service
provider, intercepted her communications with 1-800-FLOWERS in
violation of M.G.L. c. 272 section 99.

The Plaintiff purports to represent a putative, nationwide class of
"all persons who called the 1-800-FLOWERS phone line whose wire
and/or oral communications passed through Interactions' intelligent
virtual assistant system."

The Plaintiff also purports to represent a putative, Massachusetts
statewide subclass of "all persons located in the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts who called the 1-800-FLOWERS (1-800-356-9377) phone
line whose wire and/or oral communications passed through
Interactions' intelligent virtual assistant system."

The Plaintiff is a resident of Worcester, Massachusetts.

1-800-Flowers.com is a floral and foods gift retailer and
distribution company.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joel D. Smith, Esq.
          Joseph I. Marchese, Esq.
          Matt A. Girardi, Esq.
          Julian C. Diamond, Esq.
          BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
          1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940
          Walnut Creek, CA 94596
          Telephone: (925) 300-4455
          Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
          E-mail: jsmith@bursor.com
                  jmarchese@bursor.com
                  mgirardi@bursor.com
                  jdiamond@bursor.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          David L. Feinberg, Esq.
          VENABLE LLP
          600 Massachusetts Ave., NW
          Washington, D.C. 20001
          Telephone: (202) 344-8278
          Facsimile: (202) 344-8300
          E-mail: DLFeinberg@Venable.com

                - and -

          W. Kyle Tayman, Esq.
          Brooks Brown, Esq.
          GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
          1900 N Street, N.W.
          Washington, DC 20036
          Telephone: (202) 346-4034
          Facsimile: (213) 260-8106
          E-mail: KTayman@goodwinlaw.com
                  BBrown@goodwinlaw.com

3M COMPANY: Simpson PFAS Suit Removed to N.D. Alabama
-----------------------------------------------------
The case styled Roderick Simpson, et al., v. 3M COMPANY, et al,
Case No. 01-CV-2023-904191.00, was removed from the Circuit Court
for the Tenth Judicial Circuit, Jefferson County, Alabama, to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Southern
Division on December 19, 2023.

The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of Alabama assigned
Case No. 2:23-cv-01720-ACA to the proceeding.

The case arises from the Defendants' production of aqueous film
forming foams (AFFF) and/or firefighter turnout gear that contained
toxic chemicals known as "PFAS". The case alleges that such
products were used in firefighting activities, causing injury to
Plaintiffs.   

Headquartered in St. Paul, MN, 3M Company is one of the world's
largest AFFF manufacturers. [BN]

The Defendants are represented
by:                                   
                                           
         M. Christian King, Esq.
         Harlan I. Prater, IV, Esq.
         W. Larkin Radney, IV, Esq.
         Wesley B. Gilchrist, Esq.
         LIGHTFOOT, FRANKLIN & WHITE, L.L.C.         
         The Clark Building, 400 North 20th Street
         Birmingham, AL 35203-3200
         Telephone: (205) 581-0700
         E-mail: cking@lightfootlaw.com
                 hprater@lightfootlaw.com
                 lradney@lightfootlaw.com
                 wgilchrist@lightfootlaw.com

3M COMPANY: Sylestine PFAS Suit Removed to N.D. Alabama
-------------------------------------------------------
The case styled Ralph Jason Sylestine, et al. v. 3M COMPANY, et al,
Case No. 01-CV-2023-904177.00, was removed from the Circuit Court
for the Tenth Judicial Circuit, Jefferson County, Alabama, to the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama,
Southern Division on December 19, 2023.

The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of Alabama assigned
Case No. 2:23-cv-01721-JHE to the proceeding.

The case arises from the defendants' production of aqueous film
forming foams and/or firefighter turnout gear that contained toxic
chemicals known as "PFAS". The case alleges that such products were
used in firefighting activities, causing injury to Plaintiffs.   

Headquartered in St. Paul, MN, 3M Company is one of the world's
largest AFFF manufacturers. [BN]

The Defendants are represented by:
                                                                
     M. Christian King, Esq.
     Harlan I. Prater, IV, Esq.
     W. Larkin Radney, IV, Esq.
     Wesley B. Gilchrist, Esq.
     LIGHTFOOT, FRANKLIN & WHITE, L.L.C.         
     The Clark Building, 400 North 20th Street
     Birmingham, AL 35203-3200
     Telephone: (205) 581-0700
     E-mail: cking@lightfootlaw.com
             hprater@lightfootlaw.com
             lradney@lightfootlaw.com
             wgilchrist@lightfootlaw.com

7-ELEVEN INC: Verdugo Labor Suit Removed to E.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case styled JOSE LUGO VERDUGO, as an individual and on behalf
of all others similarly situated,  Plaintiff v. 7-ELEVEN, INC., a
Texas Corporation; and DOES 1-100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No.
23CV011003, was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California for the County of Sacramento to the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of California on December
22, 2023.

The Clerk of Court for the Eastern District of California assigned
Case No. 1:23-at-01057 to the proceeding.

The case arises from the Defendants' unlawful labor practices that
include failing to pay proper minimum and overtime wages and
failing to provide lawful meal and/or rest periods.

Headquartered in Texas, 7-Eleven, Inc. is a convenience store
chain. [BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

         Julie R. Trotter, Esq.
         Mireya A.R. Llaurado, Esq.
         CALL & JENSEN A Professional Corporation
         610 Newport Center Drive, Suite 700
         Newport Beach, CA 92660
         Telephone: (949) 717-3000
         E-mail: jtrotter@calljensen.com
                 mllaurado@calljensen.com

AFFINITY INSURANCE: Williams Sues Over Insurance Policies' Prices
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ISABEL WILLIAMS, on behalf of herself, the general public, and
those similarly situated, Plaintiff v. AFFINITY INSURANCE SERVICES,
INC., AIS AFFINITY INSURANCE AGENCY, INC., and NATIONWIDE MUTUAL
INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants, Case No. 3:23-cv-06347-TSH (N.D.
Cal., Dec. 8, 2023) seeks redress for Defendants' unlawful and
unfair online marketing and sale of insurance policies for prices
exceeding the insurance rates that they were specifically
authorized to charge for their insurance policies.

According to the complaint, the Defendants are deliberately making
insurance transactions less affordable and more arbitrary by
automatically bundling a so-called "assistance fee" in the single
price they charge consumers for Defendants' travel insurance. The
Defendants are doing this for one reason: they want more money than
they are allowed to charge through their approved insurance
premiums. The Defendants' practice of charging an additional fee
for a supposed non-insurance assistance service is substantially a
sham and a pretext to collect illegal fees at the expense of
millions of consumers, says the suit.

The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of herself, the general
public, and a class of similarly situated individuals, seeking a
judgment against Defendants that would, among other things: (1)
prohibit Defendants from charging mandatory and/or undisclosed fees
(in addition to premiums) for "assistance" and other services in
connection with the insurance purchases; (2) require Defendants to
plainly and truthfully disclose all premiums, fees, and charges to
consumers prior to their online purchase of insurance; (3) require
Defendants to properly distinguish between insurance and
non-insurance services and make any non-insurance services
optional; and (4) require Defendants to pay Plaintiff and class
members restitution.

Affinity Insurance Services, Inc. is a licensed insurance agent
based in California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          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

AMERIPRIDE SERVICES: Faces Breach of Contract Suit in MN Court
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vestis Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-K report for the fiscal
year ended September 29, 2023, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on December 21, 2023, that on May 13, 2022,
Cake Love Co. commenced a putative class action lawsuit against
AmeriPride Services, LLC, a subsidiary of Vestis, in the United
States District Court for the District of Minnesota.

The lawsuit was subsequently updated to add an additional named
plaintiff, Q-Mark Manufacturing, Inc. Plaintiffs allege that the
defendants increased certain pricing charged to members of the
purported class without the proper notice required by service
agreements between AmeriPride and members of the purported class
and that AmeriPride breached the duty of good faith and fair
dealing.

Plaintiffs seek damages on behalf of the purported class
representing the amount of the allegedly improperly noticed price
increases along with attorneys' fees, interest and costs. The
parties continue to engage in discovery. AmeriPride has moved for
summary judgment related to Cake Love.

Vestis Corporation is a provider of uniform rentals and workplace
supplies across the United States and Canada, providing uniforms,
mats, towels, linens, restroom supplies, first-aid supplies, safety
products and other workplace supplies.


ANYTIME HEATING: Fails to Pay Technicians' OT Wages, Rollins Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES ROLLINS, individually and on behalf of similarly situated
persons v. ANYTIME HEATING COOLING & PLUMBING, LLC, Case No.
1:23-cv-05837-SDG (N.D. Ga., Dec. 19, 2023) sues the Defendant for
failing to pay the Plaintiff and other installation technicians
overtime compensation owed to them pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

The Plaintiff worked over 40 hours per week on a regular basis.
other installation technicians also worked overtime hours for AHCP.
However, the Plaintiff and Other installation technicians would
regularly only be paid their per job rates (mislabeled a
"commission" on paystubs) without any additional overtime
compensation for overtime hours worked, the suit claims.

As a result of AHCP's intentional, willful and unlawful acts in
refusing to pay the Plaintiff and other installation technicians
time and one-half their regular rate of pay for each hour worked in
excess of 40 per work week in one or more work weeks, the Plaintiff
and the other installation technicians have suffered damages plus
incurring reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. As a result of
AHCP's willful violation of the FLSA, the Plaintiff and other
installation technicians are entitled to liquidated damages, says
the suit.

The Plaintiff worked as an installation technician for AHCP from
January 2021 to August 2023.

The Defendant owns and operates a business in the Atlanta area
which offers heating, cooling and plumbing services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          C. Ryan Morgan, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
          20 N. Orange Ave, 15th Floor
          Orlando, FL 32801
          Telephone: (407) 420-1414
          Facsimile: (407) 245-3401
          E-mail: RMorgan@forthepeople.com

APPLE INC: Faces Yovanovich Suit Over Unlawful Website Terms
------------------------------------------------------------
PETER MAXWELL YOVANOVICH, an individual; DANIEL PETROV, an
individual, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated, v. APPLE INC., a California corporation; and DOES 1
through 100, Case No. 23ST-CV-30915 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty.,
Dec. 18, 2023) seeks damages, restitution, and relief for
Defendant's alleged violation of the California Civil Code and the
California Business and Professions Code.

The Plaintiffs bring this class action on behalf of the citizens of
the State of California who visited and/or completed a sales
transaction on the website www.apple.com and all associated sites
linked to Apple, its subsidiaries or affiliates. In order to use
the site, visitors and users of the site are informed that they
should agree to the Apple Website Terms of Use.

The Terms include a requirement for visitors not to say anything
negative about Apple brands, products and services. Otherwise,
Apple, in its sole discretion and without prior notice, may
terminate the user's access and/or block future access to the site.
Plaintiffs view this as an intentional business strategy by the
company to silence customers or potential customers and prevent
them from voicing their opinions. Such conduct violates California
laws, the Plaintiffs allege.    

Headquartered in Cupertino,CA, Apple Inc. is an American
multinational technology company that manufactures and sells
personal computers, smartphones, and tablet computers. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

     Christopher R. Rodriguez, Esq.
     Andrew D. Bluth, Esq.
     John R. Ternieden, Esq.
     Trent J. Nelson, Esq.
     Yuqing "Emily" Min, Esq.
     SINGLETON SCHREIBER, LLP  
     1414 K Street, Suite 470
     Sacramento, CA 95814
     Telephone: (916) 248-8478
     Facsimile: (619) 255-1515

          - and –
     
     Thomas A. Leary, Esq.
     LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS LEARY, APC
     3023 First Avenue
     San Diego, CA 92103
     Telephone: (619) 291-1900

ARK RESTAURANTS CORP: Settles Labor Suit Lodged in New York Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ark Restaurants Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-K report for
the fiscal year ended September 30, 2023, filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on December 21, 2023, that settlement
proceeds were distributed to the plaintiffs in the first quarter of
fiscal year 2023 under the terms of the court approved settlement
agreement.

On May 1, 2018, two former tipped service workers, individually and
on behalf of all other similarly situated personnel, filed a
putative class action lawsuit against the company and certain
subsidiaries as well as certain officers of the company. Plaintiffs
alleged, on behalf of themselves and the putative class, that the
company violated certain of the New York State Labor Laws and
related regulations.

In December 2020, the parties reached a settlement agreement
resolving all issues alleged in the Complaint, which received final
approval by the New York State Supreme Court in October 2022, for
approximately $600,000, which was previously accrued on the October
1, 2022 consolidated balance sheet.

Ark Restaurants Corp. is a New York corporation that operates
restaurants and bars, fast food concepts, and catering operations
through its subsidiaries.


ARRIAGA USA: Ventura Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
-------------------------------------------------------
DAVID VENTURA, an aggrieved employee and on behalf of other
aggrieved employees, Plaintiff v. ARRIAGA USA, INC., a California
corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, Defendants, Case No.
23STCV30139 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Dec. 8, 2023) seeks to
recover civil penalties under the California Private Attorneys
General Act, California Labor Code, arising from the Defendants'
alleged unlawful labor policies and practices.

During the relevant time period, Defendants' timekeeping and/or
payroll policies and practices resulted in Plaintiff and other
aggrieved employees not being compensated for all hours actually
worked. The Plaintiff and other aggrieved employees regularly
worked more than eight hours in a workday or 40 hours in a
workweek. Upon information and belief, Defendants required
Plaintiff and other aggrieved employees to perform work before
their scheduled shifts, after their scheduled shifts, and/or during
off-the-clock meal breaks, and failed to compensate employees for
this time. As a result, Plaintiff and other aggrieved employees
were not compensated for all earned minimum and overtime wages,
says the suit.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a forklift operator
for approximately six years. His employment with Defendants
terminated on September 1, 2023.

Arriaga USA, Inc. owns, operates, or otherwise manages a stone slap
fabrication and retail business in North Hollywood,
California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Young K. Park, Esq.
          William C. Sung, Esq.
          JUSTICE FOR WORKERS, P.C.
          3600 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1815
          Los Angeles, CA 90010
          Telephone: (323) 922-2000
          Facsimile: (323) 922-2000
          E-mail: young@justiceforworkers.com
                  william@justiceforworkers.com

BALDOR SPECIAL: Civil Case Management Plan Entered in Rosario Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as EDUARDO ANTONIO JIMENEZ
DEL ROSARIO, JAYSON MERCADO, and TANEISHA LEWIS, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, V. BALDOR SPECIAL TY
FOODS, INC., Case No. 1:23-cv-03580-AKH (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge
Alvin K. Hellerstein entered a Civil Case Management Plan order as
follows:

-- Joinder of additional parties must be          April 26, 2024
    accomplished by:

-- Amended pleadings may be filed without         April 26, 2024
    leave of the Court until:

Baldor is an importer and distributor of fresh produce and
specialty foods.

A copy of the Court's civil case management plan dated Dec. 13,
2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3GX2ie2
at no extra charge.[CC]



BANK OF AMERICA: Bolshakov Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime
------------------------------------------------------------
JULIE BOLSHAKOV, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Defendant, Case No.
1:23-cv-10714 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 8, 2023) is a class action brought
against Defendant Bank of America, N.A., on behalf of the Plaintiff
and similarly situated mortgage loan officers as a nationwide
collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act for failure to
pay overtime, and a class action under the New York Labor Law for
failure to pay overtime and for failure to provide compliant
initial pay notifications and pay statements pursuant to NYLL.

The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant at its Manhattan office, and
at branches in Manhattan, as a Mortgage Loan Officer from December
31, 2018 through July 13, 2021.

Bank of America is a multinational investment bank and financial
services holding company that is headquartered in Charlotte, North
Carolina with investment banking and auxiliary headquarters in
Manhattan.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Orin Kurtz, Esq.
          GARDY & NOTIS, LLP
          150 East 52nd Street, 11th Floor
          New York, NY 10022
          Telephone: (212) 905-0509
          Facsimile: (212) 905-0508
          E-mail: okurtz@gardylaw.com

               - and -

          Thomas Wiggin, Esq.
          Thomas Wiggin P.C.
          450 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1304
          New York, NY 10123
          Telephone: (917) 847-7609
          E-mail: thomas@wigginpc.com

BARE KNUCKLE: Discloses Subscribers' Info to Meta, Sancruzado Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
RICHARD SANCRUZADO, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. BARE KNUCKLE FIGHTING CHAMPIONSHIP, INC.,
Case No. 1:23-cv-24657 (S.D. Fla., Dec. 9, 2023) alleges that the
Defendant knowingly discloses to Meta Platforms, Inc. ("Facebook"),
information which identifies the Plaintiff and the putative Class
Members as having requested or obtained specific video materials or
services from the Defendant, in violation of the Video Privacy
Protection Act.

The Defendant allegedly embedded within its website a "Meta Pixel"
that was provided to the Defendant by Facebook. That pixel tracked
the Plaintiff's and the Class Members' video viewing history while
on the Defendant's website and reported the viewing history to
Facebook along with the Plaintiff's and the Class Members' unique
Facebook Identification numbers.

The Defendant shared the Plaintiff's and the Class Members' video
viewing history without providing any notification to the Plaintiff
and the Class Members, and without the Plaintiff's and the Class
Members' informed, written consent. The Defendant's unlawful
conduct caused the Plaintiff and the Class members concrete harm
and injuries, including violations of their substantive legal
privacy rights under the VPPA and invasion of their privacy, the
suit adds.

The Plaintiff seeks actual damages but not less than liquidated
damages in an amount of $2,500 for each and every violation of the
VPPA committed by the Defendant, punitive damages, reasonable
attorneys' fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred, and
any other available preliminary or equitable relief deemed
appropriate.

The Plaintiff has used a digital subscription to request, obtain,
and/or view video content on the Defendant's website while logged
into the Facebook account.

Bare Knuckle is engaged in the business of delivering audio visual
materials through its website and/or mobile application.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
          110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301

                - and -

          Manuel Hiraldo, Esq.
          HIRALDO P.A.
          401 E. Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1400
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (305) 336-7466
          E-mail: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com

                - and -

          Michael Eisenband, Esq.
          EISENBAND LAW. P.A.
          515 E las Olas Blvd. Ste 120,
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 533-4092
          E-mail: MEisenband@Eisenbandlaw.com

BEAL PROPERTIES: Usera Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------
CHRISTIAN N. USERA, individually, and behalf of all other similarly
situated individuals v. BEAL PROPERTIES, LLC, a Michigan Limited
Liability Company, Stewart Beal, Geoffrey Van't Hof, and Ciara
Brannon, individuals, Case No. 2:23-cv-13136-PDB-EAS (E.D. Mich.,
Dec. 10, 2023) arises from the Defendants' willful denial of
Plaintiff of his earned overtime pay in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

The Plaintiff was, from approximately, February 13, 2023 through
September 21, 2023, an employee of Defendant Beal Properties LLC as
an Exterior Assessment Reporter.

The Plaintiff requests judgment in his favor in the amount of
$16,696.36 plus lawful interest broken down as follows: $8,348,18
in earned overtime pay plus liquidated damages in the amount of
$8,348.18. Mr. Usera also requests payment of reasonable attorney
fees and costs, designation of this action as a collective action
pursuant to the FLSA and prompt issuance of notice pursuant to 29
U.S.C. Section 216(b), as well as any other relief available to him
at law or in equity.

Beal Properties, LLC is a company doing business in, at minimum,
Michigan and Ohio, that invests in, and manages, real estate.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Guy T. Conti, Esq.
          CONTILEGAL
          28475 Greenfield Rd. Ste. 113 #7372
          Southfield, MI 48076
          Telephone: (888) 489-3232
          E-mail: gconti@contilegal.com

BOYNE USA: Court OK's Bid for Injunctive Relief in Anderson Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LAWRENCE ANDERSON, as
trustee for the LAWRENCE T. ANDERSON AND SUZANNE M. ANDERSON JOINT
REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST; ROBERT AND NORA ERHART; and TJARDA CLAGETT,
v. BOYNE USA, INC.; BOYNE PROPERTIES, INC.; and SUMMIT HOTEL, LLC,
Case No. 2:21-cv-00095-BMM (D. Mont.), the Hon. Judge Brian Morris
entered an order granting motion for injunctive relief.

-- Boyne is prohibited from terminating its RMAs with the named
    Plaintiffs.

-- The Plaintiffs are prohibited from recovering any damages that
may
    arise from continued operation of the RMAs after the date of
entry
    of this Order.

The Court assumes familiarity with the factual background provided
in its previous orders.

Boyne owns and operates Big Sky, as well as three
condominium-hotels at the base of Big Sky known as the Summit,
Shoshone, and Village Center.

The Plaintiffs own units in the Condos. Unit owners may not lease
their units except through Boyne.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 13, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3TGl0yd at no extra
charge.[CC] 


BRETT SABOL: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Clary Suit Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------
NATHAN CLARY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BRETT SABOL PLUMBING & HEATING, LLC; and
BRETT T. SABOL, Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-05053 (E.D. Va., Dec.
20, 2023) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and
overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys'
fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Plaintiff Clary was employed by the Defendants as a service
technician.

BRETT SABOL PLUMBING & HEATING, LLC is a residential plumbing and
heating business located at Bucks County, PA. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Scott M. Pollins, Esq.
          POLLINS LAW
          303 W. Lancaster Avenue, Ste. 1C
          Wayne, PA 19087
          Telephone: (610) 896-9909
          Facsimile: (610) 896-9910
          Email: scott@pollinslaw.com

C&H SUGAR: Wright et al. Labor Suit Removed to N.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled ANTHONY WRIGHT, WILLEM LEEKS, individually, and on
behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated,
Plaintiffs v. C&H SUGAR COMPANY, INC., an unknown business entity;
AMERICAN SUGAR REFINING, INC., a Delaware corporation; ASR GROUP
COMMODITIES (US), LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and
DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. C23-02538, was
removed from the Superior Court of the State of California for the
County of Contra Costa to the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California on December 21, 2023.

The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of California assigned
Case No. 3:23-cv-06585 to the proceeding.

The case arises from the Defendants' breaches of the California
Labor Code and their unfair business practices.

Headquartered in Crockett, CA, C&H Sugar Company, Inc. is a sugar
processing and distribution company. [BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

        Joanna L. Brooks, Esq.
        Daniel Xuli, Esq.
        LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
        Treat Towers 1255 Treat Boulevard Suite 600
        Walnut Creek, CA 94597
        Telephone: (925) 932-2468
        Facsimile: (925) 946-9809
        E-mail: jbrooks@littler.com
                dxuli@littler.com

CENLAR FSB: Fails to Provide Mortage Loan Info, Ryone Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
Allen Ryone and Amie Ryone, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Cenlar FSB and LoanCare LLC., Case No.
1:23-cv-13149 (D. Mass., Dec. 19, 2023) alleges that the Defendants
failed to conduct a reasonable investigation of the Plaintiffs'
account and also failed to provide the Plaintiffs with a complete
record of the Plaintiffs' file in response to a qualified written
request (QWR), in violation of the Real Estate Settlement
Procedures Act.

On April 1, 2019, the Plaintiffs' mortgage loan was transferred
from the Defendant Cenlar to the Defendant LoanCare.

On January 9, 2023, the Plaintiffs, through counsel, mailed a QWR
via certified mail to Defendant Cenlar to request information
regarding their loan.

In the Defendant LoanCare's response, the Defendant LoanCare
indicated that several of the Plaintiffs' requests were "considered
confidential and proprietary," and "unduly burdensome." Due to
Defendant LoanCare's failure to provide the requested recordings,
the Plaintiffs, through Plaintiffs' counsel, sent a follow-up
letter to the Defendant LoanCare via certified mail on May 24,
2023.

As of the date of the filing of this Complaint, the Plaintiffs have
not received any other documents or supplemental responses from
Defendants relating to the QWR, and the Defendant LoanCare has
willfully failed to provide any of the requested audio
recordings to Plaintiffs.

Accordingly, the Defendants have demonstrated a "pattern or
practice" of failing to adequately respond to borrowers' requests
for account information, which makes the Defendants liable for
statutory damages in an amount up to $2,000 for each failure to
adequately respond, says the suit.

Plaintiffs Allen and Amie are residents and citizens of Barnstable
County, in the State of Massachusetts.

Cenlar operates as a mortgage subservicing company.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Nicola S. Yousif, Esq.
          Matthew McKenna, Esq.
          SHIELD LAW, LLC
          157 Belmont St.
          Brockton, MA 02301
          Telephone: (508) 588-7300
          E-mail: nick@shieldlaw.com
                  matt@shieldlaw.com

CITIBANK NA: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Newton Due May 16,
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROBERT NEWTON, v.
CITIBANK, N.A., Case No. 1:22-cv-00089-KAC-CHS (E.D. Tenn.), the
Hon. Judge Katherine A. Crytzer entered a third amended scheduling
order as follows:

Expert Disclosure Deadline        Plaintiff: 3 months after any
Motion
(Merits)                          for Class Certification.
                                  Defendant: 4 months after any
Motion
                                  for Class Certification
                                  Rebuttal: 5 months after any
Motion
                                  for Class Certification

Motion for Class Certification    May 16, 2024

Expert Disclosure Deadline        Plaintiff: March 8, 2024
(Class Certification)             Defendant: April 12, 2024

Citibank is the primary U.S. banking subsidiary of financial
services multinational Citigroup.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 13, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4ayLqbh at no extra charge.[CC]

COMCAST CABLE: Wilson Sues Over Alleged Data Breach
---------------------------------------------------
MARCIA PROTO WILSON, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 2:23-cv-05091 (E.D. Pa., December 21, 2023)
arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and
safeguard highly valuable, protected, customers' personally
identifiable information and asserts claims against the Defendant
for negligence, negligence per se, breach of implied contract,
unjust enrichment, and for violations of the Federal Trade
Commission Act.

Between October 16 and October 19, 2023, hackers exploited a
critical-rated, unpatched security vulnerability, accessed
Comcast's internal systems, and accessed the PII of approximately
36 million Xfinity customers. However, the Comcast failed to
provide adequate notice to Plaintiff and other members of the Class
that their PII had been accessed and compromised, says the suit.

Headquartered in Philadelphia, PA, Comcast owns and operates
Xfinity -- one of the largest companies in the telecommunications
sector, and provides internet services and products, cable
television, a mobile 5G network, and landline telephone services
and products to individuals and businesses across the United
States. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Steven A. Schwartz, Esq.
          Marissa N. Pembroke, Esq.
          CHIMICLES SCHWARTZ KRINER & DONALDSON-SMITH LLP
          361 W. Lancaster Avenue
          Haverford, PA 19041
          Telephone: (610) 642-8500
          E-mail: sas@chimicles.com
                  mnp@chimicles.com

                  - and -

          Juliana Del Pesco, Esq.
          CHIMICLES SCHWARTZ KRINER  & DONALDSON-SMITH LLP
          2711 Centerville Road Suite 201
          Wilmington, DE 19808
          Telephone: (302) 656-2500
          E-mail: jdp@chimicles.com

COMCAST CORP: Fails to Secure Customers' Info, Prescott Says
------------------------------------------------------------
STEVEN PRESCOTT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. COMCAST CORPORATION, a corporation, Case No.
2:23-cv-05040-GAM (E.D. Pa., Dec. 19, 2023) alleges that the
Defendant failed to institute adequate security measures and
neglected system vulnerabilities that allowed hackers to access the
personal identifiable information (PII), including first and last
names, postal addresses, precise geolocation data, email addresses,
and telephone numbers, for the Plaintiff and the Class.

This PII has since been publicly leaked online, which has allowed
for digital and potential physical attacks against the Plaintiff
and the Class. Now that the PII has been leaked, it is available
for other parties to sell or trade and will continue to be at risk
for the indefinite future, the Plaintiff contends.

On October 10, 2023, the Defendant became aware that a
vulnerability was found in a software product used by the
Defendant. Before Defendant notified consumers, and before
mitigation took place, approximately between October 16 and October
19, 2023, there was unauthorized access to the Defendant's internal
systems. On November 16, 2023, Defendant concluded that customers'
information was likely acquired.

The Defendant notified customers on December 19, 2023, when over
two months had passed since learning of the software vulnerability
and over a month had passed since the Defendant concluded that
customer information had likely been acquired. The Defendant's
customers are now more likely to become victims of SIM Swap attacks
because of the released personal information, the lawsuit adds.

Mr. Prescott purchased Xfinity highspeed internet in 2015. To gain
access to the internet, Prescott was required to create an Xfinity
account. In doing so, Prescott was required to provide the
Defendant with his name, postal address, email address, date of
birth, last four digits of his social security number and phone
number.

Comcast is a provider of broadband, video, voice, wireless, and
other services to residential customers in the United States.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Kenneth Jay Grunfeld, Esq.
          KOPELOWITZ OSTROW P.A.
          65 Overhill Road
          Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
          Telephone: (954) 525-4100
          E-mail: grunfeld@kolawyers.com

                - and -

          Ryan J. Clarkson, Esq.
          Glenn Danas, Esq.
          Yana Hart, Esq.
          CLARKSON LAW FIRM, P.C.
          22525 Pacific Coast Highway
          Malibu, CA 90265
          Telephone: (213) 788-4050
          E-mail: rclarkson@clarksonlawfirm.com
                  gdanas@clarksonlawfirm.com
                  gdanas@clarksonlawfirm.com
                  yhart@clarksonlawfirm.com

                - and -

          Hassan A. Zavareei, Esq.
          TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP
          1828 L Street NW, Ste. 1000
          Washington, DC 20036
          Telephone: (202) 973-973-0900
          E-mail: hzavareei@tzlegal.com

COMFORT SYSTEMS: Maddison Appeals FLSA Suit Settlement to 2nd Cir.
------------------------------------------------------------------
KEVIN T. MADDISON filed an appeal in the lawsuit entitled Kevin T.
Maddison, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Comfort Systems USA (Syracuse), Inc.,
Defendant, Case No. 5:17-cv-00359-LEK-ATB, in the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of New York.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the case
arises from the Defendant's failure to pay overtime in violation of
the Fair Labor Standards Act.

On November 3, 2023, Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn issued an order
granting final approval of the parties' class action settlement.

The appellate case is captioned Maddison v. Comfort Systems USA
(Syracuse), Inc., Case No. 23-7944, in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Second Circuit, filed on December 7, 2023. [BN]

Plaintiff-Appellant KEVIN T. MADDISON, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, is represented by:

            Jason J. Rozger, Esq.
            MENKEN SIMPSON & ROZGER LLP
            80 Pine Street, 33rd Floor
            New York, NY 10005
            Telephone: (212) 509-8088

Defendant-Appellee COMFORT SYSTEMS USA (SYRACUSE), INC. is
represented by:

            Jessica F. Pizzutelli, Esq.
            LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
            375 Woodcliff Drive, 2nd Floor
            Fairport, NY 14450

COMMUNITY HEALTH: Ross et al. Data Breach Suit Removed to M.D. Pa.
------------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled DENNIS ROSS and ANGELA SCHUH, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v.
COMMUNITY HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC., CHSPSC, LLC, WILKES-BARRE HOSPITAL
COMPANY, LLC, d/b/a COMMONWEALTH HEALTH, MOSES TAYLOR HOSPITAL,
REGIONAL HOSPITAL OF SCRANTON, SCRANTON HOSPITAL COMPANY, LLC, and
WILKES BARRE GENERAL HOSPITAL, Defendants, Case No. 23-cv-05082,
was removed from the Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County,
Pennsylvania, to the United States District Court for the Middle
District of Pennsylvania on December 22, 2023.

The Clerk of Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania assigned
Case No. 3:23-cv-02128-JKM to the proceeding.

The case alleges that Defendants violated the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 and Section 5 of the
Federal Trade Commission Act. It claims that the said violations
stem from Defendants' failure to use reasonable measures to protect
and failure to comply with industry standards.

Headquartered in Franklin, TN, Community Health Systems is a
Delaware corporation that provides general hospital healthcare
services in the United States. [BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

        Michael S. Friedman, Esq.
        1601 Cherry Street, Suite 1350
        Philadelphia, PA 19102
        Telephone: (267) 319-7802
        Facsimile: (215) 399-2249
        E-mail: michael.friedman@jacksonlewis.com

COMPLETE BACKYARD: Townsend, Estes Seek Proper Overtime Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------
JORDAN TOWNSEND and BRANDON ESTES, individually and on behalf of
similarly situated persons v. THE COMPLETE BACKYARD, INC., and
TIMOTHY R. WOERNER, Case No. 4:23-cv-01256-0 (N.D. Tex., December
19, 2023), accuses the Defendants of failing to pay proper wages
and overtime compensation, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

The Defendants failed to pay Plaintiffs in accordance with the
FLSA. In particular, Plaintiffs were not paid time-and-one half of
their regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40
hours per workweek. The Plaintiffs were misclassified as
independent contractors and were only paid on commission basis
without regard to the number of hours they actually worked, says
the suit.

The Complete Backyard is a custom pool and outdoor design builder
based in Aledo, TX.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

     Colby Qualls, Esq.
     Katherine Serrano, Esq.
     FORESTER HAYNIE PLLC
     400 N. St. Paul Street, Suite 700  
     Dallas, TX 75201
     Telephone: (214) 210-2100
     E-mail: cqualls@foresterhaynie.com
             kserrano@foresterhaynie.com

COSTCO WHOLESALE: Faces Shah Labor Suit in California Court
-----------------------------------------------------------
Costco Wholesale Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for
the quarterly period ended November 26, 2023, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on December 19, 2023, that in
October 2023, a current employee filed suit against the company
asserting collective and class claims on behalf of all supervisors
employed in New Jersey under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New
Jersey Wage and Hour Law for failure to pay all hours worked.

The case is captioned "Shah v. Costco Wholesale Corp., Case No.
2:23-cv-21286, D.N.J. The company has not yet responded to the
complaint.

Costco Wholesale Corporation and its subsidiaries is principally
engaged in the operation of membership warehouses in the United
States and Puerto Rico, Canada, Mexico, Japan, the United Kingdom
(U.K.), Korea, Australia, Taiwan, China, Spain, France, Iceland,
New Zealand and Sweden. Costco operated 861, 838, and 815
warehouses worldwide at September 3, 2023, August 28, 2022, and
August 29, 2021.


COSTCO WHOLESALE: To Settle De Benning Labor Suit
--------------------------------------------------
Costco Wholesale Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for
the quarterly period ended November 26, 2023, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on December 19, 2023, that a
final approval of a settlement of a class action against the
company alleging violations of the California Labor Code regarding
failure to provide sick pay, failure to timely pay wages due at
separation from employment, and for violations of California's
unfair competition law was granted on February 10, 2023. A
compliance hearing is scheduled for February 9, 2024.

Said case is captioned "De Benning v. Costco Wholesale Corp.," Case
No. 34-2021-00309030-CU-OE-GDS, Sacramento Superior Court filed in
September 2021 by an employee. In April 2022, a settlement for an
immaterial amount was agreed upon, subject to court approval.

Costco Wholesale Corporation and its subsidiaries is principally
engaged in the operation of membership warehouses in the United
States and Puerto Rico, Canada, Mexico, Japan, the United Kingdom
(U.K.), Korea, Australia, Taiwan, China, Spain, France, Iceland,
New Zealand and Sweden. Costco operated 861, 838, and 815
warehouses worldwide at September 3, 2023, August 28, 2022, and
August 29, 2021.


COSTCO WHOLESALE: To Settle Edwards Labor Suit in California Court
------------------------------------------------------------------
Costco Wholesale Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for
the quarterly period ended November 26, 2023, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on December 19, 2023, that a
settlement was granted final court approval on October 20, 2023
with regards to a class action against the company alleging
violations of California Labor Code regarding payment of wages,
meal and rest periods, wage statements, reimbursement of expenses,
payment of final wages to terminated employees, and for unfair
business practices which was filed in February 2021 by a former
employee.

The case is captioned "Edwards v. Costco Wholesale Corp.," Case No.
5:21-cv-00716, C.D. Cal. On September 27, 2022, the parties reached
a settlement for an immaterial amount.

Costco Wholesale Corporation and its subsidiaries is principally
engaged in the operation of membership warehouses in the United
States and Puerto Rico, Canada, Mexico, Japan, the United Kingdom
(U.K.), Korea, Australia, Taiwan, China, Spain, France, Iceland,
New Zealand and Sweden. Costco operated 861, 838, and 815
warehouses worldwide at September 3, 2023, August 28, 2022, and
August 29, 2021.


COX INDUSTRIES: Class Cert Related Bids in Crout Due Feb. 29
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Frederick M. Crout, Joseph
Malizia, Joseph C. Taber, Bruce Bennett, and Lakeside Realty, Inc.,
individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
Cox Industries, Inc. n/k/a Koppers Utility and Industrial Products,
Inc., Arch Treatment Technologies, Inc., and Culpeper of Orangeburg
LLC, Case No. 3:22-cv-02417-JFA (D.S.C.), the Hon. Judge Joseph F.
Anderson, Jr. entered an amended scheduling order as follows:

   1. All discovery related to class               Feb. 1, 2024
      certification shall be completed
      by:

   2. The Plaintiffs shall file all                Feb. 29, 2024
      motions related to class
      certification no later than:

   3. The parties shall file and serve
      the witness disclosures required by
      Rule 26(a)(2)(B) and (C) by the
      following dates:

                                    Plaintiff:     May 22, 2024

                                    Defendant:     June 26, 2024

   4. All discovery shall be completed by:         Oct. 23, 2024

   5. The parties shall file dispositive           Nov. 13, 2024
      motions by:

Cox is a utility pole manufacturer in United States.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 13, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47hed1g at no extra charge.[CC]

CRAWLEY PETROLEUM: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due Nov. 25
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as D&N Farms, LLC; and D & R
Minerals, LLC, on behalf of themselves and all other similarly
situated, v. Crawley Petroleum Corporation, Case No.
6:23-cv-00234-RAW-DES (E.D. Okla.), the Hon. Judge D. Edward Snow
entered a scheduling order as follows:

   1. Motions for leave to amend or add         April 30, 2024
      additional parties:

   2. Documents previously produced by          Nov. 13, 2024
      parties shall be deemed
      authenticated except as to those
      objected to:

   3. Class Certification Motion filed          Nov. 25, 2024
      with all supporting evidence,
      including expert disclosures:

   4. Class Certification Response filed        Jan. 24, 2025
      with all supporting evidence,
      including expert disclosures:

   5. Class Certification Reply filed           Feb. 24, 2025
      with any rebuttal evidence,
      including rebuttal expert
      disclosures, if any:

   6. Class Certification Discovery             Feb. 24, 2025
      Cutoff:

Crawley explores and produces petroleum products.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 13, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3TGkNet at no extra charge.[CC]

CURIOSITYSTREAM INC: Discloses Subscribers' Info to FB, Tejon Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
ROGER TEJON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. CURIOSITYSTREAM, INC., Case No. 1:23-cv-24658 (S.D.
Fla., Dec. 9, 2023) alleges that the Defendant knowingly discloses
to Meta Platforms, Inc. information which identifies the Plaintiff
and the putative Class Members as having requested or obtained
specific video materials or services from the Defendant, in
violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act.

The Defendant allegedly embedded within its website a "Meta Pixel"
that was provided to the Defendant by Facebook. That pixel tracked
the Plaintiff's and the Class Members' video viewing history while
on the Defendant's website and reported the viewing history to
Facebook along with the Plaintiff's and the Class Members' unique
Facebook Identification numbers. The Defendant shared the
Plaintiff's and the Class Members' video viewing history without
providing any notification to the Plaintiff and the Class Members,
and without the Plaintiff's and the Class Members' informed,
written consent. The Defendant's unlawful conduct caused the
Plaintiff and the Class members concrete harm and injuries,
including violations of their substantive legal privacy rights
under the VPPA and invasion of their privacy, the suit says.

The Plaintiff seeks actual damages but not less than liquidated
damages in an amount of $2,500 for each and every violation of the
VPPA committed by the Defendant, punitive damages, reasonable
attorneys' fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred, and
any other available preliminary or equitable relief deemed
appropriate.

The Plaintiff has used a digital subscription to request, obtain,
and/or view video content on the Defendant's website while logged
into the Facebook account.

Curiositystream is engaged in the business of delivering audio
visual materials through its website and/or mobile
application.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
          110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301

                - and -

          Manuel Hiraldo, Esq.
          HIRALDO P.A.
          401 E. Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1400
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (305) 336-7466
          E-mail: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com

                - and -

          Michael Eisenband, Esq.
          EISENBAND LAW. P.A.
          515 E las Olas Blvd. Ste 120,
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 533-4092
          E-mail: MEisenband@Eisenbandlaw.com

DIGITAL TURBINE: Court Dismisses Garfield Stockholder Suit
----------------------------------------------------------
Digital Turbine, Inc. disclosed in its Form 8-K for December 20,
2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December
21, 2023, that on December 20, 2023, the Delaware Court of Chancery
entered a Stipulation and Order of Dismissal in the Action to
reflect the settlement of a Verified Stockholder Derivative and
Class Action Complaint against one of its directors captioned
"Garfield v. Gyani," et al., C.A. No. 2023-0755-JTL filed on July
25, 2023.

Plaintiff alleged that in May 2023, the Compensation and Human
Capital Management Committee of the company's Board of Directors
granted the company's Chief Executive Officer certain equity awards
that allegedly exceeded annual limits in the company's 2020 Equity
Incentive Plan.

On September 15, 2023, the Board amended the terms of the awards to
the company's Chief Executive Officer to clarify that any awards
exceeding the annual limit were void, thereby mooting the
plaintiff's claims. The plaintiff and the company agreed that the
board's amendment of the awards rendered the plaintiff's claims
moot. The company agreed to pay $180,000 to settle the plaintiff's
claim to entitlement to an award of attorneys' fees and
reimbursement of expenses.

Digital Turbine, Inc. delivers a mobile services platform that
works with mobile operators and third-party publishers to provide
portal management, user interface, content development and billing
technology that enables the responsible distribution of mobile
entertainment.


DILIGENCE CORPORATION: Fails to Pay Guards' OT Wages Under FLSA
---------------------------------------------------------------
TERRY JACKSON, Individually, and on behalf of himself and other
similarly situated current and former employees v. DILIGENCE
CORPORATION and CEDRIC CHISAM, individually, Case No.
2:23-cv-02761-MSN-atc (W.D. Tenn., Dec. 8, 2023) seeks to recover
unpaid overtime compensation, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

The Plaintiff contends that the Defendant violated the FLSA by
failing to pay the Plaintiff and those similarly situated for all
hours worked over 40 per week within weekly pay periods at one and
one-half times their regular hourly rate of pay. In addition, the
Plaintiff and those similarly situated were required to remain at
their jobs past their scheduled shifts when their relief security
guards failed to arrive on time for their scheduled shifts.

However, the Defendants had a common practice of not compensating
the Plaintiff and those similarly situation for such stay-over "off
the clock" time at one and one-half times their regular hourly
rates of pay within weekly pay periods during all times material to
this action, the lawsuit claims.

The Plaintiff was employed by and performed work as a security
guard for the Defendants in Memphis, Tennessee.

Defendant, Diligence Corporation, is a security company with its
operations located in Memphis (Shelby County), Tennessee.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gordon E. Jackson, Esq.
          J. Russ Bryant, Esq.
          James L. Holt, Jr., Esq.
          J. Joseph Leatherwood IV, Esq.
          JACKSON, SHIELDS, YEISER, HOLT OWEN & BRYANT
          262 German Oak Drive
          Memphis, TN 38018
          Telephone: (901) 754-8001
          Facsimile: (901) 754-8524
          E-mail: gjackson@jsyc.com
                  rbryant@jsyc.com
                  jholt@jsyc.com
                  jleatherwood@jsyc.com

DRAFTKINGS INC: Scanlon Alleges Deceptive Sports Betting Platform
-----------------------------------------------------------------
MELISSA SCANLON AND SHANE HARRIS, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. DRAFTKINGS, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 23CU3402 (Mass. Super., Middlesex Cty., Dec. 8,
2023) is a class action for damages under the Massachusetts
Consumer Protection Act and other statutory law, on behalf of all
citizens of Massachusetts including Plaintiffs, who opened a new
account with DraftKings sports betting platform in response to an
advertising promotion offering a bonus of up to $1,000 for new
customers who opened accounts and deposited money with the
Defendant.

The Plaintiffs allege that the offer of the $1,000 bonus was and is
unfair and deceptive because, among other things, a new customer
would, in order to get a $1,000 bonus, actually need to deposit
five times that amount and then, within 90 days, place $25,000 in
bets with only certain odds of return. In other words, the "$1,000
Bonus" is structured so that it is inordinately expensive to obtain
$1,000, and the new user is, instead, statistically likely to lose
money by chasing the bonus.

DraftKings knowingly and unfairly designed its promotion to
maximize the number of consumers that would sign up for its sports
gambling platform, the number of bets that would be placed through
the platform, and the amount of money that would be placed on bets
through its platforms. This is a particularly unfair business
practice because of the addictive nature of the underlying product
offered by Defendant, says the suit.

DraftKings is an American daily fantasy sports contest and sports
betting company.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Andrew A. Rainer, Esq.
          Mark Gottlieb, Esq.
          Meredith K. Lever, Esq.
          PUBLIC HEALTH ADVOCACY INSTITUTE
          360 Huntington Ave., #117CU
          Boston, MA 02115
          Telephone: (617) 373-8487
          E-mail: arainer@phaionline.org
                  mark@phaionline.org
                  meredith@phaionline.org

EDWARD D. JONES & CO: Bid to Seal & Redact Plaintiffs' Reply OK'd
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as EDWARD ANDERSON, RAYMOND
KEITH CORUM, JESSE AND COLLEEN WORTHINGTON, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, v. EDWARD D. JONES & CO.,
L.P., Case No. 2:18-cv-00714-DJC-AC (E.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge
Daniel J. Calabretta entered an order granting the Plaintiffs'
request to seal and redact the Plaintiffs' reply in further support
of motion for class certification, Daubert motions to Exclude the
opinions and Testimony of Thomas m. Selman and Jennifer
Marietta-Westberg, and Supporting documents.

  -- Plaintiffs' Reply in Further Support of Motion for Class
     Certification and Exhibits 24-28, 34 to the Declaration of
Paul
     R. Wood in Support;

  -- Plaintiffs' Daubert Motion to Exclude the Opinions and
Testimony
     of Thomas M. Selman;

  -- Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of Paul R. Wood in Support of
     Plaintiffs' Daubert Motion to Exclude the Opinions and
Testimony
     of Thomas M. Selman;

  -- Plaintiffs' Daubert Motion to Exclude the Opinions and
Testimony
     of Jennifer Marietta-Westberg; and

  -- Exhibit 1 and 4 to the Declaration of Paul R. Wood in Support
of
     Plaintiffs' Daubert Motion to Exclude the Opinions and
Testimony
     of Jennifer MariettaWestberg.

Edward D. Jones offers securities brokerage and investment advisory
services.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 13, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/48Co6HX at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Franklin D. Azar, Esq.
          Michael D. Murphy, Esq.
          Paul R. Wood, Esq.
          Brian Hanlin, Esq.
          FRANKLIN D. AZAR & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          14426 East Evans Avenue
          Aurora, CO 80014
          Telephone: (303) 757-3300
          Facsimile: (720) 213-5131
          E-mail: azarf@fdazar.com
                  murphym@fdazar.com
                  woodp@fdazar.com
                  hanlinb@fdazar.com

                - and -

          John R. Garner, Esq.
          GARNER & ASSOCIATES
          109 North Marshall Avenue
          Willows, CA 95988
          Telephone: (530) 934-3324
          Facsimile: (530) 934-2334
          E-mail: john@garner-associates.com

ESTEE LAUDER: Misleads Investors With False Statements, Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BRIDGETT MCALICE, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THE ESTEE LAUDER COMPANIES, INC.,
FABRIZIO FREDA, TRACEY T. TRAVIS, Defendants, Case No.
1:23-cv-10669 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 7, 2023) is a federa1 securities
class action on behalf of the Plaintiff and all investors who
purchased or otherwise acquired Estee's common stock between August
18, 2022 and May 2, 2023, inclusive, seeking to recover damages
caused by Defendants' violations of the Securities Exchange Act and
Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

According to the complaint, the Defendants provided investors with
material information concerning Estee's expected revenue for the
full year 2023. The Defendants' statements included, among other
things, Estee's progress made to improve cost structure, pricing
power and strong cash generation. As a result, Estee forecasted net
sales to increase between 3% and 5% versus the prior-year period,
reported diluted net earnings per common share are projected to be
between $7.11 and $7.33 and adjusted diluted earnings per common
share are expected to increase between 5% and 7% on a constant
currency basis.

The Defendants provided these overwhelmingly positive statements to
investors while, at the same time, disseminating materially false
and misleading statements and/or concealing material adverse facts
concerning supply chain issues and mismanagement of inventory
levels in the Asia and the United States. This caused Plaintiff and
other shareholders to purchase Estee's securities at artificially
inflated prices. As a result, the price of Estee stock declined
from $245.22 per share on May 2, 2023 to $202.70 per share on May
3, 2023, says the suit.

The Estee Lauder Companies, Inc. is an American multinational
cosmetics company, a manufacturer and marketer of makeup, skincare,
perfume, and hair care products, based in Midtown Manhattan, New
York City.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

FARFETCH LIMITED: Wu Sues Over Federal Securities' Law Breaches
---------------------------------------------------------------
JASMINE WU, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. FARFETCH LIMITED, JOSÉ NEVES, ELLIOT JORDAN, and
STEPHANIE PHAIR, Case No. 1:23-cv-10982 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 19, 2023)
accuses the Defendant of violating the federal securities laws
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The Plaintiff brings this class action on behalf of persons or
entities who purchased or otherwise acquired publicly traded
Farfetch securities between March 9, 2023 and August 17, 2023 (the
Class Period). The Plaintiff alleges that Farfetch issued
materially false and misleading statements during the Class Period
about the business and financial condition of the company.

Headquartered in London, UK, Farfetch operates a global platform
for the luxury fashion industry. The company's Class A ordinary
shares trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol
"FTCH".[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

FEDCHEX RECOVERY: Sadasey Sues Over Illegal Debt Collection
-----------------------------------------------------------
DION SADASEY, individually and on behalf of all those similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. FEDCHEX RECOVERY, LLC D/B/A FCR COLLECTION
SERVICES D/B/A FCR SERVICES, Defendant, Case No. CACE-23-022188
(Fla. Cir., 17th Judicial, Broward Cty., Dec. 8, 2023) is a class
action against the Defendant for alleged violation of the Florida
Consumer Collection Practices Act.

According to the complaint, the Defendant sent an electronic
communication to Plaintiff in connection with the collection of the
consumer debt. The electronic communication was sent to Plaintiff
between the hours of 9:00 PM and 8:00 AM in the time zone of
Plaintiff. The Defendant did not have the consent of Plaintiff to
communicate with Plaintiff between the said hours. As such, by and
through the electronic communication, Defendant violated the
FCCPA.

Fedchex Recovery, LLC was founded in 2001. The Company's line of
business includes collection and adjustment services on claims and
other insurance related issues.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq.
          Jennifer G. Simil, Esq.
          Zane C. Hedaya, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
          110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 907-1136
          E-mail: jibrael@jibraellaw.com
                  jen@jibraellaw.com
                  zane@jibraellaw.com

FLAGSTAR BANK: Court Tosses Bid for Ratification in Gardner Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as VERONICA GARDNER and
CALVIN MORGAN on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated, v. FLAGSTAR BANK, FSB, Case No. 2:20-cv-12061-GAD-DRG
(E.D. Mich.), the Hon. Judge Gershwin A. Drain entered an order:

    (1) Denying the plaintiffs' motion permitting Calvin Morgan to
        continue litigating this Action on behalf of D&C Enterprise

        Group LLC; and

    (2) overruling objection to order on motion to compel.

On March 28, 2023, the Plaintiffs Veronica Gardner and Calvin
Morgan filed a Second Amended Class Action Complaint "on behalf of

themselves and all similarly situated consumers."

Flagstar is an American commercial bank.

A copy of the Court's opinion and order dated Dec. 13, 2023 is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47aeVxj at no
extra charge.[CC]

FLOWERS FOODS: Porteous Sues Over Distributors' Unpaid Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
CLINT PORTEOUS, individually and on behalf of others
similarly-situated, Plaintiff v. FLOWERS FOODS, INC., a Georgia
corporation; FLOWERS BAKERIES, LLC, a Georgia limited liability
company; and FLOWERS BAKING CO. OF PORTLAND, LLC, an Oregon limited
liability company, Defendants, Case No. 6:23-cv-01840-AA (D. Ore.,
Dec. 7, 2023) is a collective action brought by the Plaintiff under
the Fair Labor Standards Act as well as a Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, Rule 23 class action based on Defendants' violations of
Oregon law.

According to the complaint, Flowers deploys an elaborate
independent contractor misclassification scheme to cheat its
employees, its competition, and the state and federal governments.
Flowers does so by willfully and systematically misclassifying its
hundreds of distributors or delivery drivers as "Independent
Contractors." In doing so, Flowers denies these employees,
including the named Plaintiff, access to critical benefits and
protections they are entitled to by law, such as minimum wage,
overtime compensation, and indemnification for business
expenses/deductions.

Flowers' distributors, including Plaintiff, regularly worked (and
continue to work) between 50 and 70 hours per week in accord with
Flowers' mandated schedule. Yet Flowers never paid any Plaintiff or
any member of the FLSA Class any of the overtime pay for work over
40 hours in a week, says the suit.

The Plaintiff served as a distributor from approximately 2016
through present.

Flowers Foods, Inc. is a manufacturer and seller of bakery goods in
the United States.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alan J. Leiman, Esq.
          LEIMAN LAW, P.C.   
          P.O. Box 5383
          Eugene, OR 97405
          Telephone: (541) 345-2376
          E-mail: alan@leimanlaw.com

               - and -

          Craig M. Nicholas, Esq.
          Alex Tomasevic, Esq.
          Shaun Markley, Esq.
          Jordan Belcastro, Esq.
          NICHOLAS & TOMASEVIC, LLP  
          225 Broadway, 19th Floor
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 325-0492
          Facsimile: (619) 325-0496
          E-mail: cnicholas@nicholaslaw.org
                  atomasevic@nicholaslaw.org
                  smarkley@nicholaslaw.org
                  jbelcastro@nicholaslaw.org

FMC CORP: Oklahoma Firefighters Sues Over Drop in Share Price
-------------------------------------------------------------
OKLAHOMA FIREFIGHTERS PENSION AND RETIREMENT SYSTEM, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FMC
CORPORATION, MARK A. DOUGLAS, and ANDREW D. SANDIFER, Defendants,
Case No. 2:23-cv-04842 (E.D. Pa., Dec. 7, 2023) is a securities
class action on behalf of the Plaintiff and all persons and
entities that purchased or acquired FMC common stock between
February 9, 2022 and October 30, 2023, inclusive, asserting claims
under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

Throughout the Class Period, the Company stated that it achieved
"record results" driven by sustainable, recurring factors such as
the introduction of "new products and continued market expansion of
Rynaxypyr(R) and Cyazypyr(R)." FMC also assured investors that
demand for its products was "very, very strong . . . it's very
strong all over the world." When asked regarding the Company's
"channel inventories" (i.e., the amount of product sitting with
distributors that had not yet been sold) and whether FMC's demand
was driven by transitory factors like customer "prebuying," CEO
Douglas dismissed the concerns, stating that "we are not concerned
about channel inventories . . . we're not seeing anything that we
would say is concerning at all." And once FMC began to acknowledge
a buildup of inventory, Douglas said the buildup was limited to
"pockets" in certain regions and attributed the buildup to routine
business events such as being "in the planting season" or "a
drought," says the suit.

In truth, however, and unbeknownst to investors, demand for FMC's
products was artificially boosted by customer double-ordering after
the dissipation of pandemic disruptions, a transitory occurrence
that was unlikely to recur. FMC's channel inventory was full of
product due to this pull-forward of orders rather than channel
inventory being, as Douglas described it, at "normal" levels or due
to cyclical business factors such as seasonality. What's more,
starting in or around September 2022, FMC had lost critical patent
litigation in India and China which led to increased competition
from generic producers, further exacerbating the company's
inventory buildup. FMC knew or recklessly disregarded these facts
at the time given the Company's claimed oversight of its patent
portfolio and in-depth supervision of its supply chain, where it
supposedly had keen visibility into demand, inventory levels, and
how customers used the products, the suit asserts.

The news revealed on October 30 and 31, 2023 caused the price of
the Company's common stock to decline $4.76 per share, or over 8%,
from $57.96 per share on October 30, 2023 to $53.20 per share on
October 31, 2023. As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and
omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of FMC
stock, Plaintiff and other putative Class members have suffered
significant losses and damages, alleges the suit.

FMC Corporation is an American chemical manufacturing company
headquartered in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          John S. Summers, Esq.
          Michael J. Masciandaro, Esq.
          HANGLEY ARONCHICK SEGAL PUDLIN & SCHILLER
          One Logan Square, 27th Floor
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (215) 568-6200
          Facsimile: (215) 568-0300
          E-mail: jsummers@hangley.com
                  mmasciandaro@hangley.com

               - and =

          Javier Bleichmar, Esq.
          BLEICHMAR FONTI & AULD LLP
          7 Times Square, 27th Floor
          New York, NY 10036
          Telephone: (212) 789-1340
          Facsimile: (212) 205-3960
          E-mail: jbleichmar@bfalaw.com

               - and -

          Nancy A. Kulesa, Esq.
          BLEICHMAR FONTI & AULD LLP
          75 Virginia Road
          White Plains, NY 10603
          Telephone: (914) 265-2991
          Facsimile: (212) 205-3960
          E-mail: nkulesa@bfalaw.com

GENERAL MOTORS: Shamoon Sues Over 4.66% Drop in Share Price
-----------------------------------------------------------
EDWARD SHAMOON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GENERAL MOTORS COMPANY, MARY T. BARRA, and
PAUL A. JACOBSON, Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-13132-SDK-EAS (E.D.
Mich., Dec. 8, 2023) is a federal securities class action on behalf
of the Plaintiff and a class consisting of all persons and entities
other than Defendants that purchased or otherwise acquired GM
securities between February 2, 2022 and October 26, 2023, both
dates inclusive, seeking to recover damages caused by Defendants'
violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder, against the Company and certain of its top
officials.

According to the complaint, throughout the Class Period, the
Defendants made materially false and misleading statements
regarding the Company's business, operations, and prospects.
Specifically, the Defendants made false and/or misleading
statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) GM downplayed
concerns with its vehicles' airbags and the need to record
additional warranty accruals for related product recalls; (ii) GM
overstated the extent and efficacy of its efforts to analyze
defects in its vehicles' airbag inflators; (iii) Cruise's AVs
and/or AV technology were less safe and well-developed than
Defendants had led investors, regulators, and the general public to
believe; (iv) accordingly, regulatory approval of Cruise's AV
products was unsustainable and the prospects for widespread
regulatory approval and adoption of Cruise's AV products were
overstated; (v) all the foregoing subjected GM to an increased risk
of governmental and/or regulatory scrutiny and enforcement action,
significant legal liabilities, product recalls, and reputational
harm; and (vi) as a result, Defendants' public statements were
materially false and/or misleading at all relevant times, says the
suit.

On this news, GM's stock price fell $1.33 per share, or 4.66%, to
close at $27.22 per share on October 27, 2023. As a result of
Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous
decline in the market value of the Company's securities, Plaintiff
and other Class members have suffered significant losses and
damages, the suit asserts.

General Motors Company is an American multinational automotive
manufacturing company headquartered in Detroit, Michigan.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq.
          J. Alexander Hood II, Esq.
          POMERANTZ LLP
          600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 661-1100
          Facsimile: (917) 463-1044
          E-mail: jalieberman@pomlaw.com
                  ahood@pomlaw.com

GOLDEN HEAVEN: Faces Parks Class Suit Over 27.9% Stock Price Drop
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JARROD PARKS, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. GOLDEN HEAVEN GROUP HOLDINGS LTD., QIONG JIN, and
JINGUANG GONG, Case No. 2:23-cv-10619 (C.D. Cal., Dec. 19, 2023) is
a class action on behalf of persons or entities who purchased or
otherwise acquired publicly traded Golden Heaven securities between
April 13, 2023 and November 13, 2023, inclusive, seeking to recover
compensable damages caused by the Defendants' violations of the
federal securities laws under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendants, individually and in
concert, directly or indirectly, disseminated or approved the false
statements, which they knew or deliberately disregarded were
misleading in that they contained misrepresentations and failed to
disclose material facts necessary in order to make the statements
made not misleading.

In April 13 Prospectus, the Company stated that it believed the
"following strengths contribute to our growth and differentiate us
from our competitors": easily accessible amusement park locations,
continued guest commitment, experienced senior management teams,
and the quality and variety of cost-effective entertainment
offerings. This statement was materially false and misleading
because many of the Company's parks are in generally poor condition
and do not attract high levels of attendance.

On October 23, 2023, the Company released a press release entitled
"Golden Heaven Group Holdings Ltd. Announces Approximately 10%
Year-on-Year Traffic Growth during China's 2023 Mid-Autumn Festival
and National Day Holidays." These statements were materially false
and misleading because, on information and belief, the Mangshi
Jenshing Park had likely been closed for a longer period of time
than September 30, 2023.

On November 13, 2023, Hindenburg Research posted on X.com, a series
of posts under the heading "NEW FROM US: We Are Short Golden Heaven
Group, Another Classic 'China Hustle'".  Hindenburg noted that
Golden Heaven's share price has dramatically gone up in value since
the Company's April 2023 IPO, despite little news to justify over
the gains.

Golden Heaven's sixth largest park by attendance, the Mangshi
Jinsheng amusement park, is temporarily closed as of September 30,
2023. However, while Hindenburg noted that Golden Heaven disclosed
that the park has been closed since September 30, 2023, Hindenburg
found evidence that this particular park has been closed for a
longer-than-disclosed period of time. In particular, Hindenburg
found that the park had been "overgrown with mature weeds and other
signs of long-term deterioration."

On this news, the price of Golden Heaven stock declined by $6.63
per share, or 27.9%, on high trading volume, to close at $17.12 on
November 13, 2023.

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

Golden Heaven manages and operates amusement parks, water parks,
and complementary recreational facilities.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Laurence M. Rosen, Esq.
          THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
          355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2450
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 785-2610
          Facsimile: (213) 226-4684
          E-mail: lrosen@rosenlegal.com

GOLDEN HEAVEN: Udani Living Sues Over Misleading IPO Documents
--------------------------------------------------------------
UDANI FAMILY LIVING TRUST, DATED 9/18/2015, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GOLDEN HEAVEN
GROUP HOLDINGS LTD., QIONG JIN, JINGUANG GONG, BIN CHEN, DAOFU LIN,
REVERE SECURITIES LLC, R.F. LAFFERTY & CO., COGENCY GLOBAL INC.,
and COLLEEN A. DE VRIES, Defendants, Case No. 161978/2023 (N.Y.
Sup., New York Cty., Dec. 8, 2023) is a securities class action on
behalf of the Plaintiff and a class consisting of all persons and
entities other than Defendants that purchased or otherwise acquired
Golden Heaven securities pursuant and/or traceable to the Offering
Documents issued in connection with the Company's initial public
offering (IPO) conducted on or about April 12, 2023 through April
14, 2023, seeking to recover compensable damages caused by
Defendants' violations of the securities laws and to pursue
remedies under Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933.

The claims in this action arise from Golden Heaven's materially
misleading Offering Documents issued in connection with the IPO.
The Offering Documents were negligently prepared and, as a result,
contained untrue statements of material fact or omitted to state
other facts necessary to make the statements made not misleading
and were not prepared in accordance with the rules and regulations
governing their preparation. Specifically, the Offering Documents
were false or misleading or failed to disclose that: (1) Golden
Heaven's amusement parks were in generally poor condition and (2)
Golden Heaven's Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board
of Directors had prior legal issues which were not disclosed in the
Offering Documents, says the suit.

Golden Heaven Group Holdings Ltd. is an offshore holding company,
engages in the development, construction, management, and operation
of urban amusement parks, water parks, amusement projects, and
amusement facilities in China.[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

GW ASTORIA: Estrada Sues Over Unpaid Wages Under FLSA
-----------------------------------------------------
JORGE ARMANDO VELASQUEZ ESTRADA, MODESTO VARGAS SANCHEZ, and JOSE
ALEJANDRO HERNANDEZ, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. GW ASTORIA LLC (D/B/A GYRO WORLD), GW RIDGEWOOD LLC
(D/B/A GYRO WORLD), TWO DIMITRIS CORP. (D/B/A GYRO WORLD),
DIMITRIOS PETRIDIS, and ATHANASIOS PETRIDIS, Case No. 1:23-cv-09330
(E.D.N.Y., Dec. 19, 2023) accuses the Defendants of violating the
Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiffs are former employees of three Greek restaurants
under the name "Gyro World" located in Queens, NY which are owned
and operated by Defendants. Plaintiffs bring this class action for
unpaid minimum and overtime wages pursuant to the FLSA. They also
accuse the Defendants of breaching the N.Y. Labor Law and the
"spread of hours" and overtime wage orders of the New York
Commissioner of Labor.

GW Astoria is a domestic limited liability company with principal
place of business at 36-02 30th Ave Astoria, NY.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are 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
     E-mail: catalina@csmlegal.com

HOSS CANTEEN: Faces Wien Wage & Hour Lawsuit in S.D. Ind.
---------------------------------------------------------
KAYLA WIEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. HOSS CANTEEN, INC. d/b/a BIG LUG CANTEEN, Case No.
1:23-cv-02269-RLY-MG (S.D. Ind., Dec. 19, 2023) seeks damages for
Defendant’s alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff previously worked as a bartender for the Defendant on
two different occasions -- in mid-2021, and most recently, from May
to December 2023. Throughout her employment, Plaintiff was treated
as an hourly-paid, non-exempt employee. The Plaintiff claims that
she and similarly situated employees were paid significantly less
than the FLSA minimum hourly rate of $7.25. The Plaintiff also
accuses the Defendant of violating the FLSA's tip credit and tip
pooling rules for hourly-paid employees.

Headquartered in Indiana, Hoss Canteen, Inc is primarily involved
in the accommodation and food services industry.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Robert P. Kondras Jr., Esq.
     HASSLER KONDRAS MILLER LLP  
     Terre Haute, IN 47807
     Telephone: (812) 232-9691
     E-mail: kondras@hkmlawfirm.com

ICALL SERVICES: Taylor Sues Over Failure to Pay Proper Overtime
---------------------------------------------------------------
TYRA TAYLOR, individually, and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ICALL SERVICES, INC., an Illinois
Corporation, Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-16631 (N.D. Ill., Dec. 8,
2023) arises from the Defendant's willful violations of the Fair
Labor Standards Act and the Indiana Wage Payment Statute due to
outright failure to pay Plaintiff and the putative class/collective
for overtime premiums.

Plaintiff Taylor is an Indiana resident who worked for Defendant as
a remote customer service representative within the last two years.
She asserts that despite working over 40 hours per week for
Defendant, the Plaintiff was not paid overtime premiums for all
overtime hours worked.

iCall Services, Inc. is in the business of providing call center
services to companies throughout the U.S.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Oscar Rodriguez, Esq.
          HOOPER HATHAWAY, P.C.
          126 South Main St.
          Ann Arbor, MI 48104
          Telephone: (734) 662-4426
          E-mail: orod@hooperhathaway.com

               - and -

          Charles R. Ash, IV, Esq.
          ASH LAW, PLLC
          402 W. Liberty St.
          Ann Arbor, MI 48103-4388
          Telephone: (734) 234-5583
          E-mail: cash@nationalwagelaw.com

               - and -

          Andrew R. Frisch, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
          55 E Monroe Street, Suite 3800
          Chicago, IL 60603
          Telephone: (954) WORKERS
          Facsimile: (954) 327-3013
          E-mail: AFrisch@forthepeople.com

INDUSTRIAL PHYSICS: Yankulin Seeks to Recover Proper Overtime Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------------
LEONID YANKULIN, on his own behalf and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. INDUSTRIAL PHYSICS, INC., Case No.
1:23-cv-01447-UNA (D. Del., Dec. 20, 2023) accuses the Defendant of
violating the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Defendant employs and/or employed Plaintiff and similarly
situated employees as service technicians. Their jobs involve
providing remote support as well as travelling to customer sites to
provide basic maintenance, calibration, repair, and/or installation
for inspection systems. As a result, they usually work an average
of 60 hours per week.

The Defendant has misclassified Plaintiff and similarly situated
employees as exempt under the FLSA and does not pay them overtime
wages for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week. Instead,
they are paid on a salary basis even though they do not qualify for
an exemption from both minimum wage and overtime pay for
computer-related professions as they are not primarily engaged in
computer systems analysis and programming, says the suit.

Industrial Physics, Inc is the world's leading test and inspection
partner headquartered in New Castle, DE.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Carmella P. Keener, Esq.
     COOCH AND TAYLOR, P.A.  
     The Brandywine Building
     1000 N. West Street, Suite 1500
     P.O. Box 1680
     Wilmington, DE 19899-1680
     Telephone: (302) 984-9816
     E-mail: ckeener@coochtaylor.com

             - and –

     Nicholas Woodfield, Esq.
     THE EMPLOYMENT LAW GROUP, P.C.
     1717 K Street, NW, Ste. 1110
     Washington, DC 20006
     Telephone: (202) 261-2812
     Facsimile: (202) 261-2835
     E-mail: soswald@employmentlawgroup.com
             nwoodfield@employmentlawgroup.com

JANUS INTERNATIONAL: Lopez Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
-------------------------------------------------------------
RICHARD LOPEZ, ALVARO BLANCO, JESUS DOMOROMO, and ENZZO LOPEZ,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs v. JANUS INTERNATIONAL GROUP, INC., ANGEL STORAGE
CONSTRUCTION, LLC, MARIO ANGEL, and CLARA RAMIREZ, Defendants, Case
No. 1:23-cv-01671 (E.D. Va., Dec. 7, 2023) arises from the
Plaintiffs' minimum wage and overtime claims against the Defendants
under the Fair Labor Standards Act as well as Virginia, Maryland,
and Pennsylvania state wage laws.

The Plaintiffs worked on Janus projects as construction laborers
and were paid an hourly wage rate. They bring this claim on behalf
of themselves and all other similarly situated employees, including
all non-exempt employees of Angel Storage who were employed to
perform construction laborer work on Janus projects since December
7, 2020 and who: (1) were not paid for all hours worked, including
but not limited to receiving no wages at all for certain weeks
worked; (2) were not paid time and one-half for all hours worked
over 40 per workweek; and/or (3) had various deductions -- such as
domestic travel expenses, the cost of tools/equipment needed for
Janus projects, and potable drinking water at Janus project sites
-- clawed back from their wages.

The Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly
situated employees, further bring anti-trafficking and forced labor
class claims under the Trafficking Victims Protection
Reauthorization Act against the Angel Storage Defendants.

Janus International Group, Inc. operates as a manufacturer,
installer, contractor, and construction manager of storage-unit
facilities on which Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees
worked.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Mark Hanna, Esq.
          Nicole Rubin, Esq.
          MURPHY ANDERSON PLLC
          1401 K Street NW, Suite 300
          Washington, DC 20005
          Telephone: (202) 223-2620
          E-mail: mhanna@murphypllc.com
                  nrubin@murphypllc.com

               - and -

          Rachel Nadas, Esq.
          Matthew K. Handley, Esq.
          HANDLEY FARAH & ANDERSON PLLC
          1201 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 200K
          Washington, DC 20001
          Telephone: (202) 899-2991
          E-mail: rnadas@hfajustice.com
                  mhandley@hfajustice.com

               - and -

          Jason B. Yarashes, Esq.
          Kristin F. Donovan, Esq.
          Rachel C. McFarland, Esq.
          LEGAL AID JUSTICE CENTER
          6402 Arlington Blvd. Suite 1130
          Falls Church, VA 22042
          Telephone: (571) 620-5261
          E-mail: jasony@justice4all.org
                  kristin@justice4all.org
                  rmcfarland@justice4all.org

JERSEY COLLEGE: Faces Watkins-Fields Data Breach Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------
TAMMY WATKINS-FIELDS, on behalf of herself individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. SSS EDUCATION, INC.,
d/b/a JERSEY COLLEGE, Case No. 2:23-cv-23154-JXN-JBC (D.N.J., Dec.
18, 2023) accuses the Defendant of failing to properly secure and
safeguard personally identifiable (PII) of Plaintiff and the class
members.

Between January 11, 2023 and January 25, 2023, cybercriminals
infiltrated Defendant Jersey College's computer network, accessing
Plaintiff and class members' PII. Defendant only discovered the
data breach on January 25, 2023 and did not notify the victims
about the incident until December 5, 2023. Plaintiff accuses Jersey
College of negligence and seeks damages and any other relief
arising from its violations.

Jersey College is a private for-profit college specializing in
nursing education.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Patrick Howard, Esq.
     SALTZ MONGELUZZI & BENDESKY, P.C.
     8000 Sagemore Drive, Suite 8303
     Marlton, NJ 08053
     Telephone: (856) 751-0868
     E-mail: phoward@smbb.com

             - and –

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

JIANGNANNJ LLC: Ignacio Sues Over Kitchen Workers' Unpaid Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
JOSE IGNACIO, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. JIANGNANNJ LLC d/b/a JIANGNAN NJC and LEI CHEN,
individually, Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-22964 (D.N.J., Dec. 7,
2023) is a civil action brought by Plaintiff on behalf of himself
and all similarly situated who worked for Defendants to recover
unpaid minimum wage compensation, overtime compensation and unpaid
earned wages owed to them pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act,
the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law, and the New Jersey Wage Payment
Law.

The Plaintiff worked for Defendants from March 5, 2023 until
November 27, 2023 as a kitchen worker. He asserts that Defendants
have intentionally, willfully and repeatedly harmed him and the
FLSA Collective by engaging in a pattern and/or policy of violating
the FLSA by failing to pay employees the applicable overtime rate
for all time worked in excess of 40 hours per week and failing to
keep accurate records of hours worked by employees.

Jiangnannj LLC d/b/a Jiangnannj NJC is a business incorporated in
the State of New Jersey operating in the restaurant industry.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jacob Aronauer, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICES OF JACOB ARONAUER
          250 Broadway, Suite 600
          New York, NY 10007
          Telephone: (212) 323-6980
          E-mail: jaronauer@aronauerlaw.com

JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Bryan Balks at Phenylephrine Products' False Ads
-------------------------------------------------------------------
William Bryan, an individual; Jack Hinsberger, an individual; and
Nancy Welharticky, an individual; on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Johnson & Johnson
Consumer, Inc., a New Jersey corporation; The Procter & Gamble
Company, an Ohio corporation; Walmart Inc., a Delaware corporation;
Walgreen Co., an Illinois corporation; Costco Wholesale Corp., a
Washington corporation, and John Does 1-200, Defendants, Case No.
8:23-cv-00543 (D. Neb., Dec. 10, 2023) is a class action for
damages related to Defendants' wrongful conduct in connection with
the marketing, advertising, promoting, distribution and sale of
products containing phenylephrine -- a purported decongestant used
as an active ingredient in at least 250 products.

For years, the Defendants have advertised and marketed the
Phenylephrine Products to unsuspecting consumers despite knowing
that phenylephrine is ineffective for the treatment of nasal
congestion and the other cold and flu symptoms for which Defendants
promote its use. On or about September 12, 2023, the Federal Drug
Administration, after careful study and consideration, announced
publicly that phenylephrine is ineffective as a treatment for such
symptoms, says the suit.

As a proximate result of Defendants' deceptive, fraudulent,
unlawful, and/or unfair conduct, Plaintiffs and the putative class
collectively suffered hundreds of millions of dollars in damages in
reliance upon Defendants' knowingly false representations about the
effectiveness of phenylephrine and the Phenylephrine Products, the
suit asserts.

Johnson & Johnson Consumer, Inc. is an American multinational,
pharmaceutical, and medical technologies corporation.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Benjamin I. Siminou, Esq.
          SINGLETON SCHREIBER, LLP
          1414 K Street, Suite 470
          Sacramento, CA 95814
          Telephone: (916) 248-8478
          Facsimile: (619) 255-1515
          E-mail: bsiminou@singletonschreiber.com

JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Valinsky Sues Over Phenylephrine Drug False Ads
------------------------------------------------------------------
JAY VALINSKY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC. and PUBLIX
SUPERMARKETS, INC., Defendants, Case No. 9:23-cv-81574-DMM (S.D.
Fla., December 21, 2023) asserts claims against the Defendants for
fraud, false marketing, false advertising, breach of contract,
breach of warranty, and breaches of state law consumer protection
statutes in connection with their phenylephrine medicine, branded
products, containing phenylephrine, which include Tylenol and
Sudafed branded medicine.

According to the complaint, studies and scientific papers began
accumulating evidence demonstrating that phenylephrine products
were simply ineffective at relieving sinus and nasal congestion.
Nevertheless, the Defendants continued to market and advertise
these products to the public at large as unequivocally effective
for treating nasal and sinus congestion despite knowing that
phenylephrine is ineffective as a treatment for sinus/nasal
conditions, says the suit.

Johnson & Johnson Consumer, Inc. is a multinational corporation
that owns and operates a "Consumer Health" division that markets
and sells a family of over-the-counter medicines that include the
Tylenol and Sudafed family of cold, flu and allergy products. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         David P. Milian, Esq.
         THE MILIAN LEGAL GROUP, P.A.
         1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 800
         Miami, FL 33131
         Telephone: (786) 808-9736
         E-mail: david@lawmilian.com
                 elizabeth@milianlaw.com
                 DavidMilian@Milian-legal.com

JRK PROPERTY: Plaintiffs Bid to Remand Peebles Class Suit Nixed
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Branda Peebles, et. al, v.
JRK Property Holdings, Inc., et. al., Case No. 1:23-cv-10523-NMG
(D. Mass.), the Hon. Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton entered an order
denying the motion of the Plaintiffs, Branda Peebles and Joshua
Berger, to remand.

The stipulation at issue is not the plaintiffs' pleading. Thus,
even accepting plaintiffs' interpretation of their own complaint,
the June 17, 2021 stipulation did not trigger the 30-day
removability period.

The case is a putative class action arises out of alleged
violations of the Massachusetts Security Deposit Statute and the
Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act.

The Plaintiffs claim that JRK Property Holdings, Inc. and its
affiliated companies utilized an unlawful lease provision in their

residential leases and those of other similarly situated
individuals, causing them to incur costs for which they are not
responsible under Massachusetts law.

JRK is a Los Angeles based real estate holding and property
management company.

A copy of the Court's memorandum and order dated Dec. 13, 2023 is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RXQnTC at no
extra charge.[CC]

JUDGMENT ACQUISITIONS: Faces Medeiros Suit Over Collection Letter
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DIANNA MEDEIROS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. JUDGMENT ACQUISITIONS UNLIMITED INC, Case No.
1:23-cv-13024-IT (Mass. Cmmw., Dec. 8, 2023) challenges the actions
of the Defendant with regard to attempts to unlawfully and
abusively collect a debt allegedly owed by the Plaintiff, in
violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Sometime before July 2023, the Plaintiff is alleged by the
Defendant to have incurred certain financial obligations to an
original creditor, The Commons At Windsor Gardens.

Sometime before July 10, 2023, the alleged debt was assigned,
placed, or otherwise transferred to Defendant for collection. At
the time the alleged debt was assigned, placed, or transferred to
Defendant, such obligation was allegedly in default.

On July 10, 2023, the Defendant sent a letter to the Plaintiff in
an attempt to collect the alleged debt.

The Defendant's July 10, 2023 collection letter provided the
Plaintiff less than 30 days to dispute or validate the alleged
debt, as the Defendant's letter was dated July 10 and only allowed
the Plaintiff until August 1, 2023 to either dispute the alleged
debt or request validation.

The above statements and/or omissions in the Defendant's July 10,
2023 collection letter to the Plaintiff and numerous other
similarly situated consumers, were misleading and confusing to the
Plaintiff, and contradicted and overshadowed the Plaintiffs' right
to dispute the debt, the suit asserts.

As a result of the Defendant's unfair, deceptive, false, abusive
and oppressive conduct in connection with its debt collection
activities, the Plaintiff, and each consumer that received the
Defendant's similarly worded collection letter, suffered an
invasion of a legally protected interest under the FDCPA.

The Plaintiff is a natural person who resides in Norwood,
Massachusetts, and is consumer as that term is defined by 15 U.S.C.
Section 1692a(3).

The Defendant engages in debt collection activities in the State of
Massachusetts.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Nicola Yousif, Esq.
          Matthew McKenna, Esq.
          SHIELD LAW, LLC
          157 Belmont St.
          Brockton, MA 02301
          Telephone: (508) 588-7300
          Facsimile: (508) 588-7303

                - and -

          Abbas Kazerounian, Esq.
          Mona Amini, Esq.
          KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC
          245 Fischer Ave., Unit D1
          Costa Mesa, CA 92626
          Telephone: (800) 400-6808
          Facsimile: (800) 520-5523

KINDER MORGAN: Removes Anderson Suit to C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------
The Defendant in the case of CATHERINE ANDERSON, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. KINDER
MORGAN, INC.; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants, filed
a notice to remove the lawsuit from the Superior Court of the State
of California, County of Los Angeles (Case No. 23STCV25789) to the
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on Dec.
20, 2023.

The clerk of court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 2:23-cv-10669. The case is assigned to Judge Wesley L.
Hsu, and referred to Magistrate Maria A. Audero.

KINDER MORGAN, INC. of Delaware operates as a pipeline
transportation and energy storage company. The Company owns and
operates pipelines that transport natural gas, gasoline, crude oil,
carbon dioxide, and other products, as well as terminals that store
petroleum products and chemicals and handle bulk materials like
coal and petroleum coke. [BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Christopher C. Hoffman, Esq.
          Keia J. Atkinson, Esq.
          A.J. Sparagna, Esq.
          FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP
          4747 Executive Drive, Suite 1000
          San Diego, CA 92121
          Telephone: (858) 597-9600
          Facsimile: (858) 597-9601
          E-Mail: choffman@fisherphillips.com
                  katkinson@fisherphillips.com
                  asparagna@fisherphillips.com

LA FONDA PAISA: Velazquez FLSA Suit Removed to S.D. Florida
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case styled CARLOS VELAZQUEZ, Plaintiff, v. LA FONDA PAISA INC
and FERNANDO JARAMILLO, Defendants, Case No. 502023CA015472XXXAMB,
was removed from the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial
Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, to the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of Florida on December 20, 2023.

The Clerk of Court for the Southern District of Florida assigned
Case No. 9:23-cv-81569-XXXX to the proceeding.

The case asserts claims against the Defendants for retaliation
under Sections 440.205, Florida Statutes, and for violations of the
Fair Labor Standards Act. The claims arise from the Defendants'
alleged unpaid overtime and minimum wage compensation, and
retaliation.

La Fonda Paisa Inc owns and operates a restaurant and wedding event
venue in West Palm Beach, FL. [BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

       Adam S. Chotiner, Esq.
       SHAPIRO, BLASI, WASSERMAN & HERMANN, P.A.
       7777 Glades Road, Suite 400
       Boca Raton, FL 33434
       Telephone: (561) 477-7800
       Facsimile: (561) 477-7722
       E-mail: achotiner@sbwh.law

LINKEDIN CORP: Class Action Settlement in Bailey Gets Final Nod
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Bailey, et al., v.
LinkedIn Corporation, et al., Case No. 5:20-cv-05704-EJD (N.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Edward J. Davila entered an order granting
motion for final approval of class action settlement; granting in
part request for Attorneys' fees, costs, and service awards.

The request for attorneys' fees, costs, and service awards is
granted in part as follows:

   Class Counsel is awarded $2,250,000 in attorneys' fees and
   $119,386.02 in litigation costs, and Class Representatives
Bailey,
   Hayes, and Robinson are granted an incentive award of $6,500
each
   Without affecting the finality of this order in any way, the
Court
   retains jurisdiction of all matters relating to the
interpretation,
   administration, implementation, effectuation and enforcement
   of this order and the Settlement.

   The parties shall file a post-distribution accounting in
accordance
   with this District's Procedural Guidance for Class Action
   Settlements on or before February 2, 2025.

The Plaintiffs—former employees of LinkedIn—filed the putative
class action complaint on August 14, 2020, against Defendants
initially alleging two causes of action for breaches of fiduciary
duties of loyalty and prudence and for failure to adequately
monitor other fiduciaries from on or after August 14, 2014, until
July 1, 2020. The
Plan at issue is a participant-directed 401(k) plan which permits
participants to direct the investment of their contributions into
various investment options the Plan offered, including various
mutual
funds, a collective investment trust, and a self-directed brokerage
account.

LinkedIn is a business and employment-focused social media platform
that works through websites and mobile apps.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 13, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3TAU9ni at no extra charge.[CC]

MICRON TECHNOLOGY: Faces Antitrust Suit in Canadian Courts
----------------------------------------------------------
Micron Technology, Inc. disclosed in its Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarterly period ended November 30, 2023, filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 21, 2023, that
it is currently facing antitrust suits filed in Canada and facing
an investigation in Beijing, PROC.

Six cases have been filed against Micron alleging price fixing of
dynamic random access memory (DRAM) products in the following
Canadian courts on the dates indicated: Superior Court of Quebec
(April 30, 2018 and May 3, 2018), the Federal Court of Canada (May
2, 2018), the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (May 15, 2018), and
the Supreme Court of British Columbia (May 10, 2018).

The plaintiffs in these cases are individuals seeking certification
of class actions on behalf of direct and indirect purchasers of
DRAM in Canada (or regions of Canada) between June 1, 2016 and
February 1, 2018.

On May 15, 2018, the Chinese State Administration for Market
Regulation (SAMR) notified Micron that it was investigating
potential collusion and other anticompetitive conduct by DRAM
suppliers in China. On May 31, 2018, SAMR made unannounced visits
to its sales offices in Beijing, Shanghai, and Shenzhen to seek
certain information as part of its investigation.

Micron Technology, Inc. is in to semiconductors and related devices
and is based in Idaho.


MISSION PRODUCE: To Settle Labor Suit in California Court
---------------------------------------------------------
Mission Produce, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-K the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on December 21, 2023, that a final approval hearing date
has been set for January 30, 2024 with regards to a settlement of a
class action lawsuit in the Superior Court of the State of
California for the County of Los Angeles against the company
alleging violation of certain wage and labor laws in California,
including failure to pay all overtime wages, minimum wage
violations, and meal and rest period violations, among others filed
on April 23, 2020 by former Mission Produce employees.

On June 10, 2020, former Mission Produce, Inc. employees filed a
class action lawsuit in the Superior court of the State of
California for the County of Ventura against the company alleging
similar violations of certain wage and labor laws.

The plaintiffs in both cases seek damages primarily consisting of
class certification and payment of wages earned and owed, plus
other consequential and special damages. While the company believes
that it did not violate any wage or labor laws, it nevertheless
decided to settle these class action lawsuits.

In May 2021, the plaintiffs in both class action lawsuits and the
company agreed preliminarily to a comprehensive settlement to
resolve both class action cases for a total of $0.8 million, which
the company recorded as a loss contingency in selling, general and
administrative expenses in the consolidated statements of income
during the three months ended April 30, 2021.

The parties executed a stipulation of the settlement agreement on
such terms in November 2021. This preliminary settlement was
approved by the applicable courts in October 2022. In the course of
preparing to send out notices to the settlement class, issues arose
regarding the nature and scope of the settlement, specifically with
respect to the universe of participants in the settlement class,
which the parties have been unable to resolve to date. The parties
have fully briefed the court on the issues, and a hearing on the
matter is set this month.

Mission Produce, Inc. is into sourcing, producing, and distributing
fresh avocados, serving retail, wholesale, and food service
customers based in California.


NEW YORK, NY: Fails to Pay Planner Analysts' OT Wages Under FLSA
----------------------------------------------------------------
QUINDA POLLARD, MARY BULLEN, NICOLE KORNEGAY, SHARON TROTMAN, MAUDY
ABDUL, TONYA SHAW, BEVERLY WILLIAMS, on behalf of themselves and
all others similarly situated v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Case No.
1:23-cv-10722 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 8, 2023) sues the Defendant for
unlawful deprivation of the Plaintiffs' right to overtime
compensation in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

While working as a Principal Administrative Associate Level I (PAA
I) and/or Health Care Program Planner Analyst (HCPPA) at the New
York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene ("DOHMH"), the
Plaintiffs and all others similarly situated regularly work at
least 40 hours a week. They are scheduled to work five days a week,
for shifts of eight hours each day, with one hour automatically
deducted from each shift as an uncompensated meal period. But the
Defendant fails to compensate the Plaintiffs and all others
similarly situated for all hours worked in excess of 40 in a
workweek at a rate of one and one-half times their regular rate of
pay, the lawsuit alleges.

Specifically, the Defendant fails to compensate the Plaintiffs and
all others similarly situated for hours worked before the start of
their scheduled shifts, after the end of their scheduled shifts,
and during their unpaid, 60-minute meal periods.

The amount of pre-shift and post-shift overtime work hours for
which the Plaintiffs and those similarly situated have not been
paid can be identified through the Defendant's timekeeping system
and through other work and pay records, the lawsuit claims.

The Plaintiffs bring this action against the Defendant for back
pay, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees and costs, and other
relief, to remedy the Defendant's willful and unlawful violations
of federal law.

The Plaintiffs are current and former employees of the Defendant,
City of New York, holding the title of Principal Administrative
Associate Level I (PAAI) and HCPPA at DOHMH.

New York City comprises 5 boroughs sitting where the Hudson River
meets the Atlantic Ocean.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

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

                - and -

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

NORTHLAND SECURITIES: Tylenda Sues Over Misleading Proxy Statement
------------------------------------------------------------------
CRAIG TYLENDA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DARIO CALOGERO, AVI S. KATZ, EMILIO HIRSCH,
MATTEO LODRINI, KATHLEEN MILLER, JOHN MIKULSKY, NEIL MIOTTO,
KARIN-JOYCE TJON, NORTHLAND SECURITIES INC., and TATA
COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED, Defendants, Case No. 2023-1277-NAC (Del.
Ch., December 21,2023) is a class action for breach of fiduciary
duties against former officers and directors of Kaleyra, Inc. in
connection with the acquisition of Kaleyra by Tata Communications.

On June 28, 2023, Kaleyra and Tata issued a joint press release,
announcing that they had entered into a merger agreement, pursuant
to which Tata would acquire Kaleyra, with Kaleyra’s stockholders
receiving in exchange for each share of Kaleyra common stock they
own, $7.25 in cash. Kaleyra issued its Schedule 14A Definitive
Proxy Statement on August 18, 2023, which indicated that Kaleyra's
shareholders would vote on the acquisition at a special meeting on
September 28, 2023. However, the Proxy Statement misrepresented
critical information respecting the valuation analyses that
Northland performed and the Fairness Opinion that Northland
rendered, and such critical information casts significant doubt on
the fairness of the acquisition. Thus, the Defendants intentionally
breached their fiduciary duties by negotiating and agreeing to the
inadequate merger consideration and concealing the true facts
respecting the Company’s value in obtaining shareholder approval
for the acquisition, says the suit.

Northland is a broker-dealer that provides full-service investment
banking services, with a team of merger and acquisitions
professionals providing comprehensive financial and strategic
advisory services to publicly-traded and privately-held companies,
including sell-side and corporate divestitures, mergers,
acquisitions, strategic alternatives review, shareholder rights
plans, fairness opinions, and Dutch auction tenders. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Guri Ademi, Esq.
          Jesse Fruchter, Esq.
          ADEMI LLP
          3620 East Layton Avenue
          Cudahy, WI 53110
          Telephone: (414) 482-8000
          Facsimile: (414) 482-8001
          E-mail: gademi@ademilaw.com
                  jfruchter@ademilaw.com

                  - and -

          Ryan M. Ernst, Esq.
          BIELLI & KLAUDER, LLC.
          1204 N. King St.
          Wilmington, DE 19801
          Telephone: (302) 803-4600
          E-mail: rernst@bk-legal.com

NUSCALE POWER: Ryckewaert Sues Over Securities Law Violations
-------------------------------------------------------------
JEROME RYCKEWAERT, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff V. NUSCALE POWER CORPORATION, JOHN L.
HOPKINS, CHRIS COLBERT, ROBERT R. HAMADY, and CLAYTON SCOTT,
Defendant(s), Case No. 3:23-cv-01956-IM(D. Or., December 26, 2023)
asserts claims against the Defendants for violations of 10(b) and
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated by the United States Securities and Exchange
Commission.

Throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false
and/or misleading statements and failed to disclose material
adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and
prospects. The Defendants misled investors by failing to disclose
that (1) because of the effect of inflationary pressures on the
cost of construction and power, the Company and Utah Associated
Municipal Power Systems would be unable to sign up enough
subscribers to fulfill the Carbon Free Power Project; (2) Standard
Power did not have the financial ability to support its agreement
with NuScale. During the class period, Plaintiff and the Class
purchased NuScale securities at artificially inflated prices. The
price of the Company's securities significantly declined when the
misrepresentations made to the market were revealed, causing
investors' losses, says the suit.

Heaquartered in Portland, OR, NuScale is a nuclear power company
that develops small modular reactor technology. Its common stock
and warrants trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol
"SMR." [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Jeffrey S. Ratliff, Esq.
         RANSOM, GILBERTSON, MARTIN & RATLIFF, LLP
         5441 S. Macadam Avenue, Suite 301
         Portland, OR 97239
         Telephone: (503) 226-3664
         E-mail: RGMR1500@igmail.com

                 - and -

         Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq.
         J. Alexander Hood II, Esq.
         POMERANTZ LLP
         600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
         New York, NY 10016
         Telephone: (212) 661-1100
         Facsimile: (917) 463-1044
         E-mail: jalieberman@pomlaw.com
                 ahood@pomlaw.com

OPENAI INC: Pulitzer-winning Authors Join Class Suit Over Copyright
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Blake Brittain of Reuters reports a group of 11 nonfiction authors
have joined a lawsuit in Manhattan federal court that accuses
OpenAI and Microsoft (MSFT.O) of misusing books the authors have
written to train the models behind OpenAI's popular chatbot ChatGPT
and other artificial-intelligence based software.

The writers, including Pulitzer Prize winners Taylor Branch, Stacy
Schiff and Kai Bird - who co-wrote the J. Robert Oppenheimer
biography "American Prometheus" that was adapted into the hit film
"Oppenheimer" this year - told the court on December 19, 2023 that
the companies infringed their copyrights by using their work to
train OpenAI's GPT large language models.

Representatives for OpenAI and Microsoft did not immediately
respond to requests for comment on December 20, 2023.

"The defendants are raking in billions from their unauthorized use
of nonfiction books, and the authors of these books deserve fair
compensation and treatment for it," the writers' attorney Rohit
Nath said on December 20, 2023.

Writer and Hollywood Reporter editor Julian Sancton first filed the
proposed class-action lawsuit last month. The case is one of
several that have been brought by groups of copyright owners
including authors John Grisham, George R.R. Martin and Jonathan
Franzen against OpenAI and other tech companies over the alleged
misuse of their work in AI training.

The companies have denied the allegations.

Sancton's was the first author lawsuit against OpenAI to also name
Microsoft as a defendant. The tech giant has invested billions of
dollars in the artificial intelligence startup and integrated
OpenAI's systems into its products.

The amended complaint filed on December 18, 2023 said that OpenAI
"scraped" the authors' works along with reams of other copyrighted
material from the internet without permission to teach its GPT
models how to respond to human text prompts.

The lawsuit also said that Microsoft has been "deeply involved" in
training and developing the models and is also liable for copyright
infringement.

The authors asked the court for an unspecified amount of monetary
damages and an order for the companies to stop infringing their
copyrights. [GN]

ORCHARD HOSPITAL: Portillo Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
-------------------------------------------------------------
ANGELA PORTILLO, an individual, on behalf of herself and on behalf
of all persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ORCHARD HOSPITAL, a
California Corporation; ORCHARD GRIDLEY HOSPITAL, INC., a
Corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No.
23CV03393 (Cal. Super., Butte Cty., Dec.7, 2023) arises from the
Defendants' unlawful labor practices in violation of the California
Labor Code and the California Business and Professions Code.

The complaint alleges the Defendants' failure to pay minimum wages,
failure to pay overtime wages, failure to provide required meal and
rest periods, failure to provide accurate itemized statements,
failure to reimburse employees for required expenses, and failure
to pay sick pay wages.

The Plaintiff has been employed by the Defendants in California
since May of 2022 as a non-exempt employee.

Orchard Hospital owns and operates a hospital in Butte County,
California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Norman B. Blumenthal, Esq.
          Kyle R. Nordrehaug, Esq.
          Aparajit Bhowmik, Esq.
          Nicholas J. De Blouw, Esq.
          Christine T. LeVu, Esq.
          BLUMENTHAL NORDREHAUG BHOWMIK DE BLOUW LLP
          2255 Calle Clara
          La Jolla, CA 92037
          Telephone: (858) 551-1223
          Facsimile: (858) 551-1232

PIPING ROCK: Faces Balah Suit Over Deceptive Discount Promo
-----------------------------------------------------------
TANIA BALAH, individually and on behalf of all similarly situated
persons, Plaintiff v. PIPING ROCK HEALTH PRODUCTS, LLC, Defendant,
Case No. 2:23-cv-10632 (C.D. Cal., Dec. 20,2023) is an action
brought to address the Defendant's misleading and unlawful pricing,
sales, and discounting practices on its website www.PipingRock.com
for Piping Rock-branded products.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant
advertises fake and inflated comparison reference prices to deceive
customers into a false belief that the sale price is a deeply
discounted bargain price. The Defendant also falsely advertises
sales as being of limited duration, or available for a limited time
in connection with a holiday or event, when the sale is actually
perpetual. This is accomplished through language like "Hurry!
Expires September 29, 2023" or similar, along with "countdown
timers" to the sale's purported expiration. In truth, when one sale
expires, another comparable sale is promptly instituted. This cycle
continues over and over, says the suit.

The Defendant's products sold on the website not only have a market
value lower than the promised regular price, but the market value
of the products is also lower than the "sale" price. By using false
reference pricing and false limited time sales, Defendant
artificially drives up demand for the products, and by extension
drives up the price of the products. As a result, consumers
received a product worth less than the price paid, the suit
asserts.

PIPING ROCK HEALTH PRODUCTS, LLC provides vitamins and health food
products. The Company offers vitamins, medicines, incense, nuts and
seeds, herbs, supplements, beauty, and pet products. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alexander E. Wolf, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
          280 South Beverly Drive, Penthouse
          Beverly Hills, CA 90212
          Telephone: (872) 365-7060
          Email: awolf@milberg.com

PRIDE SECURITY: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Ausseresses Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------------
DEREK AUSSERESSES, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PRIDE SECURITY LLC; ROY GARTLEY;
and GILLIAN BERNHEIM, Defendants, Case No., 2:23-cv-02662-ROS (D.
Ariz., Dec. 20, 2023) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid
wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages,
attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Plaintiff Ausseresses was employed by the Defendants as a security
guard.

PRIDE SECURITY LLC offer a wide variety of security services, from
personal and executive to security for offices, construction sites,
HOA's, Medical Facilities and more. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jason Barrat, Esq.
          WEILER LAW PLLC
          5050 N.40th St., Suite 260
          Phoenix, AZ 85018
          Telephone: (480) 442-3410
          Email: jbarrat@weilerlaw.com

PROGRESS SOFTWARE: Adams Files Suit in D. Massachusetts
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Progress Software
Corporation, et al. The case is styled as Calvin Adams,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Progress Software Corporation, Cadence Bank, Case No. 1:23-cv-13071
(D. Mass., Dec. 13, 2023).

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

Progress Software Corporation -- http://www.progress.com/-- is an
American public company that produces software for creating and
deploying business applications.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Steven B. Rotman, Esq.
          HAUSFELD
          One Marina Park Drive, Suite 14010
          Boston, MA 02210
          Phone: (617) 207-0601
          Fax: (617) 830-8312
          Email: srotman@hausfeld.com


PROGRESS SOFTWARE: Frazier Files Suit in D. Massachusetts
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Progress Software
Corporation, et al. The case is styled as Anthony Frazier,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Progress Software Corporation, Performance Health Technology, Ltd.,
Case No. 1:23-cv-13072 (D. Mass., Dec. 13, 2023).

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

Progress Software Corporation -- http://www.progress.com/-- is an
American public company that produces software for creating and
deploying business applications.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Steven B. Rotman, Esq.
          HAUSFELD
          One Marina Park Drive, Suite 14010
          Boston, MA 02210
          Phone: (617) 207-0601
          Fax: (617) 830-8312
          Email: srotman@hausfeld.com


PROGRESS SOFTWARE: Markley Files Suit in D. Massachusetts
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Progress Software
Corporation, et al. The case is styled as Jeremy Markley,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Progress Software Corporation, Nuance Communications Inc., Case No.
1:23-cv-13079-ADB (D. Mass., Dec. 13, 2023).

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

Progress Software Corporation -- http://www.progress.com/-- is an
American public company that produces software for creating and
deploying business applications.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James J. Pizzirusso, Esq.
          HAUSFELD LLP
          888 16th Street, NW, Ste. 300
          Washington, DC 20006
          Phone: (202) 540-7200
          Fax: (202) 540-7201
          Email: jpizzirusso@hausfeld.com

               - and -

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

               - and -

          Steven B. Rotman, Esq.
          HAUSFELD
          One Marina Park Drive, Suite 14010
          Boston, MA 02210
          Phone: (617) 207-0601
          Fax: (617) 830-8312
          Email: srotman@hausfeld.com


PROSPECT MEDICAL: Stradinger Suit Transferred to E.D. Pennsylvania
------------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Joshua Stradinger, as an individual and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. PROSPECT MEDICAL
HOLDINGS, INC.; and DOES 1-10, Case No. 2:23-cv-08284 was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Central District
of California, to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Pennsylvania on Dec. 13, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:23-cv-04936-WB to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Statutes: Other Statutory
Actions for Tort/Non-Motor Vehicle.

Prospect Medical Holdings, Inc. -- https://www.pmh.com/ -- operates
as a holding company. The Company, through its subsidiaries,
provides health care services such as cardiology, orthopedic,
oncology, and emergency care.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jason M. Wucetich, Esq.
          Dimitrios V. Korovilas, Esq.
          WUCETICH & KOROVILAS LLP
          222 N. Pacific Coast Hwy., Suite 2000
          El Segundo, CA 90245
          Phone: (310) 335-2001
          Facsimile: (310) 364-5201
          Email: jason@wukolaw.com
                 dimitri@wukolaw.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Cyndie M. Chang, Esq.
          DUANE MORRIS LLP
          865 South Figueroa St Suite 3100
          Los Angeles, CA 90017-5450
          Phone: (213) 689-7400

               - and –

          Alan C. Kessler, Esq.
          Lauren E. Pugh, Esq.
          Ryan F. Monahan
          DUANE MORRIS LLP
          30 South 17th Street, 12 Floor
          Philadelphia, PA 19106
          Phone: (215) 979-1117
          Email: akessler@duanemorris.com
                 lpugh@duanemorris.com

               - and –

          Luke P. Mcloughlin, Esq.
          POTOMAC LAW GROUP, PLLC
          1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 700
          Washington, DC 20037
          Phone: (215) 979-1167
          Email: lpmcloughlin@duanemorris.com


QUALITY RESTAURANT: Parker Sues Over Illegal Retention of Tips
--------------------------------------------------------------
ABIGAIL PARKER, and LANNA BUZBEE, by and through her parent, JOSHUA
BUZBEE, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs v. QUALITY RESTAURANT CONCEPTS, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
2:23-cv-01664-SGC (N.D. Ala., Dec. 7, 2023) arises from the
Defendant's violation of the "tip credit" provisions of the Fair
Labor Standards Act by, among other things, keeping a portion of
the tips earned by its employees in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

During the three-year period preceding the filing of this lawsuit,
the Defendant has employed dozens of servers who were paid an
hourly rate lower than the minimum wage of $7.25 per hour, relying
on the "tip credit" provision of the FLSA. The Plaintiffs assert
that Defendant improperly paid this lower tipped hourly rate to
servers because it did not satisfy the legal requirements necessary
to utilize the "tip credit" provision of the law.

Plaintiff Parker worked for QRC as a restaurant server from May 17,
2023 to September 17, 2023.

Plaintiff Buzbee, a minor, by and through her parent, Joshua
Buzbee, also worked for QRC as a erver from June 2023 to September
2023.

Quality Restaurant Concepts, LLC owns and operates the Applebee's
restaurant.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          David Hughes, Esq.
          HARDIN & HUGHES, LLP
          2121 14th Street
          Tuscaloosa, AL 35401
          Telephone: (205) 523-0463
          E-mail: dhughes@hardinhughes.com

RECKITT BENCKISER: Sygal Decongestant Suit Transferred to E.D. NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled RANDALL SYGAL, et al. v. RECKITT BENCKISER LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 2:23-cv-21090, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the District of New Jersey to the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of New York on December 19, 2023.

The Clerk of Court for the Eastern District of New York assigned
Case No. 1:23-cv-09292-BMC to the proceeding.

The case arises from the Defendant's false and misleading
advertising of its oral phenylephrine products.

Headquartered in Parsippany, NJ, Reckitt Benckiser LLC markets,
sells, and distributes Mucinex products globally, including in New
Jersey. [BN]

The Defendant is represented by:

       Gregory Joseph Hindy, Esq.
       MCCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP
       Four Gateway Center
       100 Mulberry Street
       Newark, NJ 07102
       Telephone: (973) 622-4444
       E-mail: ghindy@mccarter.com

RED ROOF: Richardson Balks at Employees' Unprotected Personal Info
------------------------------------------------------------------
REBECCA RICHARDSON, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. RED ROOF INNS, INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-04190-MHW-CMV
(S.D. Ohio, Dec. 19, 2023) alleges that the Defendant failed to
adequately train its employees on cybersecurity and failed to
maintain reasonable security safeguards or protocols to protect the
Class's highly sensitive personal identifiable information and
protected health information.

The Notice of Data Breach shows that the Defendant cannot—or will
not—determine the full scope of the Data Breach, as the Defendant
has been unable to determine precisely what information was stolen
and when. The Defendant has done little to remedy its Data Breach.
True, the Defendant has offered some victims credit monitoring and
identity related services. But such services are wholly
insufficient to compensate the Plaintiff and Class members for the
injuries that The Defendant inflicted upon them, the suit says.

Because of the Defendant's Data Breach, the sensitive PII/PHI of
Plaintiff and Class members was placed into the hands of
cybercriminals—inflicting numerous injuries and significant
damages upon the Plaintiff and Class members. Further, because of
the Defendant's failure to prevent the Data Breach, the Plaintiff
and Class members suffered—and will continue to suffer damages.
These damages include monetary losses, lost time, anxiety, and
emotional distress, asserts the suit.

In 2020, Ms. Richardson was an employee of the Defendant for one
single day. Despite the brevity of the Plaintiff's employment, the
Defendant unnecessarily maintained the Plaintiff's PII/PHI for
several years.

The Defendant is a hotel chain which boasts "670 properties in the
U.S., Brazil and Japan across our four brands."[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Terence R. Coates, 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

                - 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

RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CA: Homan Sues Over Correction Staff's Unpaid OT
------------------------------------------------------------------
NICHOLAS HOMAN, individually and on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, Case No.
5:23-cv-02516 (C.D. Cal., Dec. 8, 2023) sues the Defendant for
failing to pay all overtime wages, pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

For Plaintiff and all others similarly situated to take a duty free
thirty-minute duty free lunch period, a correctional employee was
required to cover the relieved individual during the entire
duration of his/her lunch period. However, the Defendant was
consistently and routinely understaffed; this meant that the
Plaintiff and all others similarly situated were unable to take a
duty-free lunch period as nobody was available to cover their
position.

As a result, the Plaintiff and all others similarly situated were
often forced to eat their lunch standing while supervising
individuals in custody or not eat at all, the lawsuit claims.

Plaintiff Homan regularly complained about not receiving a duty
free thirty-minute lunch period but was ultimately told, "that's
the way it is." For the entirety of the Plaintiff's employment with
the Defendant, he did not receive any duty free thirty-minute lunch
Periods. For all hours worked in excess of 86 hours per 14 day FLSA
work period, the Defendant allegedly failed to pay the Plaintiff
and all others similarly situated overtime wages for the 30 periods
that were wrongfully deducted as uninterrupted 30 lunch periods,
the lawsuit adds.

Mr. Homan was employed by the Defendant as a Correctional Deputy
from January 2013 through November 2023.

Riverside County is a county located in the southern portion of the
U.S. state of California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Omid Nosrati, Esq.
          Rene M. Maldonado, Esq.
          Sol Nunez, Esq.
          NOSRATI LAW
          1801 Century Park East, Suite 840
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (310) 553-5630
          Facsimile: (310) 553-5691
          E-mail: omid@nosratilaw.com
                  rene@nosratilaw.com
                  sol.nunez@nosratilaw.com

RUMBLE INC: Discloses Subscribers' Info to Meta, Sancruzado Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------------
RICHARD SANCRUZADO, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. RUMBLE, INC., Case No. 1:23-cv-24661-KMM
(S.D. Fla., Dec. 9, 2023) alleges that the Defendant knowingly
discloses to Meta Platforms, Inc., information which identifies the
Plaintiff and the putative Class Members as having requested or
obtained specific video materials or services from the Defendant,
in violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act.

The Defendant allegedly embedded within its website a "Meta Pixel"
that was provided to the Defendant by Facebook. That pixel tracked
the Plaintiff's and the Class Members' video viewing history while
on the Defendant's website and reported the viewing history to
Facebook along with the Plaintiff's and the Class Members' unique
Facebook Identification numbers. The Defendant shared the
Plaintiff's and the Class Members' video viewing history without
providing any notification to the Plaintiff and the Class Members,
and without the Plaintiff's and the Class Members' informed,
written consent, the suit contends.

The Defendant's unlawful conduct caused the Plaintiff and the Class
members concrete harm and injuries, including violations of their
substantive legal privacy rights under the VPPA and invasion of
their privacy, the suit adds.

The Plaintiff seeks actual damages but not less than liquidated
damages in an amount of $2,500 for each and every violation of the
VPPA committed by the Defendant, punitive damages, reasonable
attorneys' fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred, and
any other available preliminary or equitable relief deemed
appropriate.

Rumble is engaged in the business of delivering audio visual
materials through its website and/or mobile application.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
          110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301

                - and -

          Manuel Hiraldo, Esq.
          HIRALDO P.A.
          401 E. Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1400
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (305) 336-7466
          E-mail: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com

                - and -

          Michael Eisenband, Esq.
          EISENBAND LAW. P.A.
          515 E las Olas Blvd. Ste 120,
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 533-4092
          E-mail: MEisenband@Eisenbandlaw.com

SARAH BUSH: Appeals Remand Order in John Doe Suit to 7th Circuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
SARAH BUSH LINCOLN HEALTH CENTER is taking an appeal from a court
order granting the Plaintiff's motion to remand the lawsuit
entitled John Doe, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Sarah Bush Lincoln Health Center,
Defendant, Case No. 2:23-cv-02170-CSB-EIL, in the U.S. District
Court for the Central District of Illinois.

The lawsuit, which was removed from the First Judicial Circuit
Court of Coles County, Illinois, to the Central District of
Illinois, is filed against the Defendant for violation of Illinois
law by embedding certain third-party source codes, most prominently
the Meta Pixel, onto Sarah Bush Lincoln's publicly available
websites. The Plaintiff brings seven counts against Sarah Bush
Lincoln under Illinois law: common law claims for (1) negligence,
(2) negligence per se, (3) invasion of privacy, (4) breach of
implied contract, (5) unjust enrichment, and (6) breach of
fiduciary duty, and a claim under Illinois law for (7) alleged
violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices
Act.

On Sept. 6, 2023, the Plaintiff filed a motion to remand for lack
of subject matter jurisdiction, which the Court granted through an
Order entered by Judge Colin Stirling Bruce on Nov. 13, 2023. The
case was remanded to the Circuit Court of the First Judicial
Circuit of Coles County, Illinois.

The appellate case is captioned John Doe v. Sarah Bush Lincoln
Health Center, Case No. 23-3340, in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, filed on December 8, 2023. [BN]

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

            Arend J. Abel, Esq.
            Lynn A. Toops, Esq.
            COHEN & MALAD
            One Indiana Square
            Indianapolis, IN 46204-0000
            Telephone: (317) 636-6481

                    - and -

            David I. Cates, Esq.
            CATES LAW FIRM, LLC
            216 W. Pointe Drive
            Swansea, IL 62226
            Telephone: (618) 277-3644

Defendant-Appellant SARAH BUSH LINCOLN HEALTH CENTER is represented
by:

            David A. Carney, Esq.
            BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
            127 Public Square, Key Tower
            Cleveland, OH 44114
            Telephone: (216) 621-0200

                    - and -

            Bonnie Keane DelGobbo, Esq.
            BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
            One N. Wacker Drive
            Chicago, IL 60606
            Telephone: (312) 416-6200

SCOTT SEMPLE: Plaintiffs Seek More Time to File Class Cert Reply
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as HARRY VEGA, ET AL. V.
SCOTT SEMPLE, ET AL., Case No. 3:17-cv-00107-MEG (D. Conn.), the
Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting extension of
time to file their reply in further support of their renewed motion
for class certification.

The Plaintiffs request a seven-day extension of time, through
January 4, 2024, to file their Reply. The Defendants have no
objection to the requested extension of time.

Specifically, the Plaintiffs are working diligently to review
Defendants' Opposition, including the attached exhibits, and assess
the arguments for Plaintiffs' Reply.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 13, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4aFdPN1 at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Martin J. Minnella, Esq.
          MINNELLA, TRAMUTA, & EDWARDS, LLC
          40 Middlebury Road
          Middlebmy, CT 06762
          Telephone: (203) 573-1411
          Facsimile: (203) 757-9313
          E-mail: pcrean@mtelawfirm.com

                - and -

          David X. Sullivan, Esq.
          Thomas J. Finn, Esq.
          Paula Cruz Cedillo, Esq.
          Justyn P. Stokely, Esq.
          McCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP
          CityPlace I, 36th Floor
          185 Asylum Street
          Hartford, CT 06103
          Telephone: (860) 275-6700
          Facsimile: (860) 724.3397
          E-mail: dsul1ivan@mcca1ier.com
                  tfinn@mccmier.com
                  pcedillo@mccarter.com
                  jstokely@mccmier.com

SERV AUTOMOTIVE: Webb Seeks to Recover Proper Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
COURTNEY WEBB, individually and on behalf of similarly situated
persons v. SERV AUTOMOTIVE, LLC, d/b/a ONSITE DEALER SOLUTIONS and
HEATH MAYOR, Case No. 3:23-cv-02780-X (N.D. Tex., Dec. 18, 2023)
accuses the Defendants of violating the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff brings this class action over Defendants' alleged
failure to pay sufficient wages and proper overtime compensation
under the FLSA. The Plaintiff and similarly situated employees were
not paid time-and-one half of their regular rate of pay for all
hours worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek. They were instead
paid on a piece-rate basis regardless of the number of hours they
actually worked, says the suit.

SERV Automotive is a limited liability company based in Kansas that
provides vendor management software solutions in the automotive
industry.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Colby Qualls, Esq.
     Katherine Serrano, Esq.
     FORESTER HAYNIE PLLC
     400 N. St. Paul Street, Suite 700
     Dallas, TX 75201
     Telephone: (214) 210-2100
     E-mail: cqualls@foresterhaynie.com
             kserrano@foresterhaynie.com

SOLV ENERGY: Rivas Labor Suit Removed to S.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------
The case styled MARK RIVAS, individually, and on behalf of other
aggrieved employees pursuant to the California Private Attorneys
General Act, Plaintiff v. SOLV ENERGY, LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants,
Case No. 37-2023-00045389, was removed from Superior Court of the
State of California, County of San Diego to the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of California on December 22, 2023.

The Clerk of Court for the Southern District of California assigned
Case No. 3:23-cv-02330-BEN-DEB to the proceeding.

The case arises from the Defendants' violations of the California
Labor Code and the California Business and Professions Code. The
violations stem from, among other things, the Defendants' failure
to pay proper wages, failure to provide meal periods and rest
breaks, and failure to reimburse business expenses.

Solv Energy LLC provides solar services to utility solar,
high-voltage substation and energy storage markets in the United
States. [BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Elizabeth Staggs Wilson, Esq.
          James Payer, Esq.
          LITTLER MENDELSON P.C.
          633 West 5th Street 63rd Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 443-4300
          Facsimile: (800) 715-1330
          E-mail: estaggs-wilson@littler.com
                  jpayer@littler.com

                  - and -

          Rachael Lavi, Esq.
          LITTLER MENDELSON P.C.
          2049 Century Park East 5th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90067.3107
          Telephone: (310) 553.0308
          Facsimile: (800) 715.1330
          E-mail: rlavi@littler.com

SPORTS BASEMENT: Kimber Labor Suit Removed to N.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled COLDEN KIMBER, an individual, on behalf of himself
and on behalf of all persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THE
SPORTS BASEMENT, INC., a corporation; and DOES 1 through 50,
inclusive, Defendants, Case No. CGC-23-609276, was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of
San Francisco to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of California.

The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of California assigned
Case No. 3:23-cv-06584 to the proceeding.

The class action alleges nine claims for relief stemming from
Plaintiff's prior employment with Defendant: (1) unlawful business
practices; (2) failure to pay minimum wages; (3) failure to pay
overtime compensation; (4) failure to provide required meal
periods; (5) failure to provide required rest periods; (6) failure
to provide accurate itemized statements; (7) failure to reimburse
employees for required expenses; (8) failure to pay wages when due;
and (9) failure to pay sick pay wages.

The Sports Basement, Inc. is an outdoor gear and apparel store in
California. [BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Shannon L. Bettis Nakabayashi, Esq.
          JACKSON LEWIS PC
          50 California St., 9th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 394-9400
          Facsimile: (415) 394-9401
          E-mail: shannon.nakabayashi@jacksonlewis.com

                  - and -

          Louise Ann "Luzann" Fernandez, Esq.
          Patrick M. Ryan, Esq.
          An Nguyen Ruda, Esq.
          Chad E. Deveaux, Esq.
          P. Casey Mathews, Esq.
          Josiah R. Jenkins, Esq.
          Taylor Yamahata, Esq.
          BARTKO ZANKEL BUNZEL & MILLER
          A Professional Law Corporation
          One Embarcadero Center, Suite 800
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 956-1900
          Facsimile: (415) 956-1152
          E-mail: lfernandez@bzbm.com
                  pryan@bzbm.com
                  aruda@bzbm.com
                  cdeveaux@bzbm.com
                  cmathews@bzbm.com
                  jjenkins@bzbm.com
                  tyamahata@bzbm.com

SPRING NATURAL: Ponce Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Discrimination
------------------------------------------------------------
DANIEL PONCE, on behalf of himself, FLSA Collective Plaintiffs, and
the Class v. SPRING NATURAL CORP. d/b/a THYME & TONIC f/d/b/a
SPRING NATURAL KITCHEN, TASTEBUD MARKET LLC d/b/a MODERN BREAD AND
BAGEL, ORLY GOTTESMAN, and JOSH BORENSTEIN, Case No. 1:23-cv-10678
(S.D.N.Y., Dec. 7, 2023) arises from the Defendants' alleged
unlawful labor practices in violation of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, the New York Labor Law, the New York State Human Rights Law,
and the New York City Human Rights Law.

The Plaintiff seeks to recover from Defendants: (1) unpaid wages,
including overtime wages, due to time-shaving; (2) unpaid overtime
wages, due to invalid tip credit deductions; (3) unpaid wages due
to invalid meal credit deductions; ; (4) unpaid spread of hours
premiums; (5) statutory penalties; (6) liquidated damages; and (7)
attorney's fees and costs.

Additionally, Defendants discriminated against Plaintiff by
favoring the newly hired Chef and reducing Plaintiff's hours with
no action being taken upon Chef, despite Plaintiff's innocence in
any arguments between Plaintiff and Chef. The Defendants then
further retaliated against Plaintiff by terminating his employment
because he raised objections to Defendants' discriminatory schedule
change, says the suit.

Plaintiff Ponce was hired by the Defendants to work as a busboy for
Defendants' Spring Natural Kitchen restaurant located in New York.
In or around 2019, Spring Natural Kitchen was replaced by Thyme &
Tonic, and Plaintiff's employment continued through the succession.
From in or about March 2020, to in or about December 2021,
Plaintiff was not employed with Defendants due to the COVID-19
lockdowns and resulting lay-offs. The Plaintiff resumed working for
Defendants in or about December 2021. He was employed by Defendants
until his termination in July 2023.

Spring Natural Corp. owns and operates the restaurants Thyme &
Tonic and Modern Bread and Bagel with locations around New
York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          C.K. Lee, Esq.
          LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
          148 W. 24th Street, 8th Floor
          New York, NY 10011
          Telephone: (212) 465-1180
          Facsimile: (212) 465-1181

SQUEEZE TRADING: Plaintiffs Seek OK of Briefing Schedule
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as IN RE: January 2021 Short
Squeeze Trading Litigation, Case No. 1:21-md-02989-CMA (S.D. Fla.),
the Lead Plaintiffs asks the Court to enter an order granting their
unopposed motion for a briefing schedule.

  -- Motion for Class Certification and           Feb. 15, 2024
     Plaintiffs' Initial Expert Reports
     in Connection with Renewed Motion
     for Class Certification:

  -- Opposition to Motion and Defendants'         April 15, 2024
     Expert Reports in Connection with
     Renewed Motion for Class Certification:

  -- Reply and Plaintiffs' Rebuttal Expert        May 15, 2024
     Reports in Connection with Renewed
     Motion for Class Certification:

The Lead Plaintiffs are Blue Laine-Beveridge and named plaintiffs
Abraham Huacuja, Ava Bernard, Brendan Clarke, Brian Harbison,
Cecilia Rivas, Doi Nguyen, Joseph Gurney, Marcel Poirier, Sandy Ng,
Santiago Gil Bohorquez, and Thomas Cash.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 13, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3vdfxF8 at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Laurence M. Rosen, Esq.
          Phillip Kim, Esq.
          Robin Bronzaft Howald, Esq.
          Jonathan Stern, Esq.
          Brent LaPointe, Esq.
          Michael Cohen, 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: lrosen@rosenlegal.com

SUMMIT EDUCATION: Mintz Sues Over Failure to Pay Proper Overtime
----------------------------------------------------------------
ALEXIS MINTZ, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SUMMIT EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, INC. d/b/a
SUMMIT CREDIT UNION, Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-1070 (M.D.N.C.,
Dec. 7, 2023) seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages, liquidated
damages, and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs as a result of
Defendant's willful violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and
the North Carolina Wage and Hour Act.

The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant as a call center agent from
approximately June 2022 to approximately September 2023. He asserts
that he regularly worked more than 40 hours in a workweek and was
not paid for all hours worked in such weeks.

Summit Education Association, Inc. employs call center agents to
handle inbound telephone calls from its clients and customers.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Brian L. Kinsley, Esq.
          CR LEGAL TEAM, LLP
          2400 Freeman Mill Road
          Greensboro, NC 27406     
          Telephone: (800) 288-1529
          E-mail: BLKinsley@crlegalteam.com

               - and -

          Edmund C. Celiesius, Esq.
          BROWN, LLC
          111 Town Square Place, Suite 400
          Jersey City, NJ 07310
          Telephone: (877) 561-0000
          Facsimile: (855) 582-5279
          E-mail: ed.celiesius@jtblawgroup.com

SUPERJEWELER.COM INC: Faces Martinez Wage and Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
OSCAR MARTINEZ v. SUPERJEWELER.COM INC (DBA SUPER JEWELER) and
ANDREW FOX, individually, Case No. 1:23-cv-11021 (S.D.N.Y., Dec.
20, 2023) is a class action brought by the Plaintiff, on behalf of
himself and similarly situated, accusing the Defendants of
violating the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New York Labor Law, and
the New York Codes, Rules, and Regulations.

The Plaintiff was employed primarily as jewelry polisher by the
Defendants and worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek between
November 2020 and March 2023. However, Plaintiff was not paid the
applicable overtime compensation in accordance with the FLSA. The
Defendants also failed to provide statutorily required wage and
hour records or statements of pay received. Such act was committed
intentionally to hide Defendants' wage and hour violations, says
the Plaintiff.

Plaintiff seeks damages, spread of hours pay, pre-judgment and
post-judgment interest, and attorneys' fees and costs for
Defendants' alleged violations.

Superjeweler.com is a global e-commerce jewelry company with
offices at 62 W 45th St 2nd Floor, New York, NY.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Lina Stillman, Esq.
     STILLMAN LEGAL, P.C.  
     42 Broadway, 12th Floor
     New York, NY 10004
     Telephone: (212) 203-2417
     Website: www.StillmanLegalPC.com

TOYOTA MOTOR: Kilkenny Sues Over Defective Telematics Equipment
---------------------------------------------------------------
ANGELA KILKENNY, WILLIAM BOLTON, TARA WILLIAMS, MONGLYN T.
UTIDJIAN, DAVID SHUGERMAN, LINDSAY L. CLEGETT, TIMOTHY ENGLERT,
VICKY GAFNEY and MARCUS STUBBINS on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION
and TOYOTA MOTOR NORTH AMERICA, INC., Defendants, Case No.
1:23-cv-08997 (E.D.N.Y., Dec. 7, 2023) is a class action on behalf
of the Plaintiffs and on behalf of all similarly situated persons
in the United States who purchased or leased any Toyota vehicles
whose telematics equipment was rendered wholly or partially
inoperable when the major wireless carriers phased out "3G"
beginning in early 2022.

According to the complaint, the Class Vehicles' Internet enabled
features which includes Automatic Collision Notification; Enhanced
Roadside Assistance; Emergency Assistance Button and Stolen Vehicle
Locator, inter alia, ("3G Features") were rendered inoperable after
3G was phased out by carriers and replaced with 4G and/or 5G due to
Defendants' use of obsolete telematics equipment they installed in
the Class Vehicles which were 3G only telematics.

The Defendants collectively designed, engineered, tested,
validated, manufactured and placed in the stream of commerce the
Class Vehicles equipped with the defective 3G only telematics,
thereby overcharging Plaintiffs and class members for the Class
Vehicles and subjecting Plaintiffs and Class Members to safety
risks, increased costs and damaging the value of Plaintiffs and
Class Members vehicles, says the suit.

Toyota Motor Corporation is a Japanese multinational automotive
manufacturer headquartered in Toyota City, Aichi, Japan.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Lee Squitieri, Esq.
          SQUITIERI & FEARON, LLP
          305 Broadway 7th Floor
          New York, NY 10007
          Telephone: (212) 421-6492

UNITED HEALTH: Class Cert Filing Modified to Sept. 27
-----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICK DAVIS, SR., MATHEW
KOOHNS, and BRETT A. LOCKHART, SR., individually and on behalf of
all others similarly shared, v. UNITED HEALTH GROUP INCORPORATED,
UNITEDHEALTHCARE INSURANCE COMPANY, UNITEDHEALTHCARE OF WASHINGTON,
INC., and UNITED HEALTHCARE SERVICES, INC., Case No.
2:21-cv-01220-RSM (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Ricardo S. Martinez
entered an order on the parties' Joint Motion to Modify Scheduling
Order:

  August 16, 2024             Substantial completion of fact
                              discovery

  September 13, 2024         Disclosure of Plaintiffs’ class
                             certification expert
name(s)/CV(s)/brief
                             description of the subject matter of
the
                             expected testimony.

  September 27, 2024         Class certification motion and service
of
                             Plaintiffs’ class-certification
expert
                             report (if any)

  November 8, 2024           Opposition to class certification and

                             service of Defendants’ class-
                             certification expert report (if any)

  Dec. 6, 2024               Reply to class certification and
                             service of rebuttal
class-certification
                             expert report (if any)

  March 7, 2025              Substantial completion of any
                             supplemental fact discovery

  March 28, 2025             Plaintiffs’ merits expert reports
                             due

  April 25, 2025             Defendants’ merits expert reports
                             due

  May 23, 2025               Close of expert discovery

  June 20, 2025              Close of all discovery; dispositive
                             motion(s) filed

  July 25, 2025              Opposition(s) to dispositive motion(s)


  August 15, 2025            Reply in support of dispositive
motion(s)

UnitedHealth is an American multinational health insurance and
services company.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 13, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3txjwvA at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Eleanor Hamburger, Esq.
          SIRIANNI YOUTZ SPOONEMORE HAMBURGER PLLC
          3101 Western Ave. #350
          Seattle, WA 98121
          Telephone: (206) 223-0303
          E-mail: ehamburger@sylaw.com

                - and -

          Andrew N. Goldfarb, Esq.
          ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP
          1800 M Street, NW, Suite 1000
          Washington, DC 20036
          Telephone: (202) 778-1800
          E-mail: agoldfarb@zuckerman.com

UNITED PARCEL: Class of Part–Time Supervisors Certified in Diaz
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as OSCAR DIAZ, et al. v.
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., et al. Case No. 1:22-cv-00246-CDB
(E.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Christopher D. Baker entered an order
granting as modified the Plaintiffs' unopposed motion for Approval
of attorney's fees and costs and unopposed motion for final
approval of class and
Representative action settlement.

  -- The Court previously conditionally certified the Class for
     settlement purposes. The Court grants final certification
     approval for settlement purposes to the Class, defined as:

     "All current and former Part–Time Supervisors, including
     employees with similar job titles and/or duties, who worked
for
     Defendant within the State of California during the Settlement

     Class Period, defined as from April 19, 2018 and through May
24,
     2023, and who at least once during the Settlement Class Period

     took paid vacation under UPS's vacation policy, and whose
average
     straight-time daily paid hours exceeded 5.5 hours per day for
the
     prior Vacation Year, but whose vacation pay was limited to 5.5

     hours per day, or 27.5 hours per week of vacation in the
Vacation
     Year."

  -- The Court finds that the services provided by the Settlement
     Administrator were for the benefit of the Class, and the cost
of
     $38,400 is fair, reasonable, and appropriate for
reimbursement,
     and approves payment of that amount to Simpluris, Inc. for
     administration fees, which include all costs and fees incurred
to
     date, as well as estimated costs and fees involved in
completing
     the administration of the Settlement.

  -- The Court confirms The Markham Law Firm and United Employees
Law
     Group as Class Counsels in this action. The Court finds that
     Class Counsels have the sufficient experience, knowledge, and

     skill to promote and safeguard the interests of the Class. The

     Court therefore finds that Plaintiffs' counsels satisfy the
     professional and ethical obligations of Class Counsels.

  -- The Court further approves an award of attorneys' fees of
     $343,750.00.

  -- In the course of this litigation, Class Counsels incurred
     $21,213.94 in costs in the form of court filing fees,
mediation
     fees, deposition transcripts, document copying fees, legal
     research charges, deposition travel expenses, and delivery
     charges.

  -- The Court approves the reimbursement of Class Counsels' costs
in
     the amount of $21,213.94, pursuant to the terms of the
Settlement
     Agreement.

United Parcel is an American multinational shipping & receiving and
supply chain management company.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 13, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3GZGfUg at no extra charge.[CC]

UNLIMITED CARE: Fails to Secure Employees' Info, Rothkranz Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------------
LINDZY ROTHKRANZ, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. UNLIMITED CARE INC., Case No. 7:23-cv-10988 (S.D.N.Y.,
Dec. 19, 2023) alleges that the Defendant failed to adequately
train its employees on cybersecurity and failed to maintain
reasonable security safeguards or protocols to protect the Class's
highly sensitive personal identifiable information.

The compromised PII were name, address, date of birth, and Social
Security number. In total, 29,066 persons, including the
Defendant's current and former employees, were injured.

Allegedly, the Defendant waited more than three weeks after
discovering the Data Breach before it began notifying the Class.
Thus, the Defendant kept the Class in the dark—thereby depriving
the Class of the opportunity to try and mitigate their injuries in
a timely manner. The lawsuit claims that the Defendant has done
little to remedy its Data Breach. True, the Defendant has offered
concessions of credit monitoring and identity services to the
Plaintiff and the Class. But such services do not properly
compensate the Plaintiff and Class Members for the injuries that
the Defendant inflicted upon them. Because of the Defendant's Data
Breach, the sensitive PII of the Plaintiff and Class Members were
placed into the hands of cybercriminals—inflicting numerous
injuries and significant damages upon the Plaintiff and Class
Members, says the suit.

Ms. Rothkranz was injured by the Defendant's Data Breach. She was
employed by Defendant during the summer of 2017 as a personal
health aide. As a condition of her employment with the Defendant,
the Plaintiff provided the Defendant with her PII.

Unlimited is a New York based provider of home health care services
with 16 offices located throughout the state of New York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James J. Bilsborrow, Esq.
          WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C.
          700 Broadway
          New York, NY 10003
          Telephone: (212) 558-5500
          E-mail: jbilsborrow@weitzlux.com

                - and -

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

US OUTLET: Fails to Pay Manual Laborers' Timely Wages, Mallory Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MARIAH MALLORY, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. U.S. OUTLET STORES, LLC; and any other related
entities, Case No. 619951/2023 (N.Y. Sup., Dec. 8, 2023) seeks to
recover damages for delinquent wage payments made to workers who
qualify as manual laborers and who were employed by the Defendant
between May 19, 2017 and September 11, 2023 pursuant to the New
York Labor Law.

The Plaintiff alleges that 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.

Ms. Mallory worked in an hourly, non-exempt position, where she
would typically perform physical tasks for more than of 25% of her
workday. Ms. Mallory was compensated every other week by the
Defendant throughout the entirety of her employment, and in so
doing was time and again injured by the Defendant's failure to pay
her timely wages, inasmuch as the Defendant's conduct routinely
deprived her on a temporary basis of monies she had earned, the
lawsuit asserts.

The Plaintiff is an individual who currently resides in the State
of New York, and who was employed by the Defendant in 2018.

The Defendant is general merchandise retail store.[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
          Telephone: (516) 873-9550

VERNON BOWERS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Stockbridge Suit Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------------
ABIGAIL STOCKBRIDGE v. VERNON BOWERS ENTERPRISES, INC. D/B/A
VERNON'S KUNTRY KATFISH, Case No. 4:23-cv-04800 (S.D. Tex.,
December 22, 2023) is a class action brought by the Plaintiff, on
behalf of herself and others similarly situated, to recover unpaid
wages from the Defendant pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff worked for a restaurant called Vernon's Kuntry
Katfish. The Defendant has paid Plaintiff less than minimum wage
for her work as a waitress taking advantage of federal law
involving tip credits. However, Defendant requires Plaintiff to
contribute a portion of her tips to a tip pool that is controlled
by Defendant and is not distributed to customarily tipped employees
in accordance with federal law, says the Plaintiff.

Vernon Bowers Enterprises, Inc. owns and operates Vernon's Kuntry
Katfish located in Conroe, TX. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Hessam Parzivand, Esq.
         THE PARZIVAND LAW FIRM, LLC
         10701 Corporate Drive, Suite 185
         Stafford, TX 77477
         Telephone: (713) 533-8171
         Facsimile: (713) 533-8193
         E-mail: HP@parzfirm.com

VISIONPRO CONNECTIONS: Fails to Pay Technicians' Minimum, OT Wages
------------------------------------------------------------------
ANDY ROLLE, on behalf of himself, FLSA Collective Plaintiffs, and
the Class v. VISIONPRO CONNECTIONS INC., VISIONPRO NETWORKS INC.,
VISIONPRO INSTALLATIONS CORP., VISIONPRO SYSTEMS INC., VISIONPRO
CORP., and JOSEPH ROMANO, Case No. 1:23-cv-09025 (E.D.N.Y., Dec. 8,
2023) seeks to recover unpaid minimum wages and unpaid overtime
premium for hours worked beyond 40 hours per week, pursuant to the
Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law.

In the Plaintiff's contract, the Plaintiff was scheduled to work
five days per week, nine hours per day from 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.,
for a total of 45 hours per week. However, the Defendants' payment
system offered to the Plaintiff was improper, because $600 for 45
hours of work results in an hourly rate of $13.33 per hour. The
Defendants also failed to properly pay all commissions owed to
Plaintiff, resulting in the Plaintiff being paid only between $260
and $600 per week, for 45 hours of work. The Defendants similarly
failed to pay FLSA Collective Plaintiffs and Class Members for all
hours they worked in excess of 40 each week, the lawsuit says.

The Plaintiff alleges that, pursuant to New York law, he and others
similarly situated were victims to the Defendants' breach of
contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unjust
enrichment, promissory estoppel, and fraudulent misrepresentation.
The Plaintiff additionally seeks to recover unreimbursed expenses
for tools of the trade, statutory penalties, liquidated damages,
and attorney's fees and costs.

The Plaintiff further asserts claims for relief pursuant to the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 23, on behalf of all current
and former non-exempt employees, including technicians,
electricians, wiremen, electrical experts, and engineers, employed
by the Defendants on or after the date that is six years before the
filing of the Complaint.

Mr. Rolle was hired by the Defendants to work as a Cable Technician
for the Defendants' VisionPro business from May 18, 2023 until
August 13, 2023.

Visionpro Connections specializes in cable and internet
installation.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          C.K. Lee, Esq.
          Anne Seelig, Esq.
          LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
          148 West 24th Street, Eighth Floor
          New York, NY 10011
          Telephone: (212) 465-1180
          Facsimile: (212) 465-1181

VNET GROUP: Semerak Sues Over Misleading Financial Statements
-------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL SEMERAK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. VNET GROUP, INC., JOSH SHENG CHEN, JIE DONG.
SAMUEL SHEN, and TIM CHEN, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-11187
(S.D.N.Y., December 26, 2023) alleges violations of Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5.

Throughout the Class period, Defendants failed to disclose to
investors: (1) that GenTao was experiencing financial difficulties
and was at risk of defaulting on the $50.25 million margin loan
facility; (2) that, as a result, there was a substantial likelihood
that Bold Ally would acquire Defendant Sheng Chen's significant
ownership stake in VNET; (3) that, to restore Defendant Sheng
Chen's voting interest in VNET, the Company would issue newly
created shares to Defendant Sheng Chen, diluting investors'
interest. As a result of these materially false and/or misleading
statements, and/or failures to disclose, VNET's securities traded
at artificially inflated prices during the Class period, says the
suit.

VNET is incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands with its
principal executive offices located in Beijing, China. VNET's
American depositary shares trade on the NASDAQ under the symbol
"VNET." [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gregory B. Linkh, Esq.
          Rebecca Dawson, Esq.
          GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
          230 Park Ave, Suite 358
          New York, NY 10169
          Telephone: (212) 682-5340
          Facsimile: (212) 884-0988
          E-mail: glinkh@glancylaw.com

                  - and -

          Robert V. Prongay, Esq.
          Charles H. Linehan, Esq.
          GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
          1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (310) 201-9150
          Facsimile: (310) 201-9160

WAL-MART ASSOCIATES: Taylor FEHA Suit Removed to C.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled MARIE TAYLOR, an individual, Plaintiff, v. WAL-MART
ASSOCIATES, INC. a Delaware Corporation; SAM'S WEST, INC. dba SAM'S
CLUB, a Delaware Corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,
Defendants, Case No. 23STCV27061, was removed from the Superior
Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, to the
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on
December 18, 2023.

The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 2:23-cv-10561 to the proceeding.

The case arises from the Defendants' alleged employment
discrimination, wrongful termination and unfair business practices.
It alleges violations of the Fair Employment and Housing Act.

Headquartered in Arkansas, Wal-Mart is a multinational retail
corporation that operates a chain of hypermarkets, discount
department stores, and grocery stores throughout the United States.
[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

       Terry L. Higham, Esq.
       CONSTANGY, BROOKS, SMITH & PROPHETE, LLP
       2029 Century Park East, Suite 1100
       Los Angeles, CA 90067
       Telephone: (310) 909-7775
       E-mail: thigham@constangy.com

               - and -

       Cody L. Saal, Esq.
       CONSTANGY, BROOKS, SMITH & PROPHETE, LLP
       601 Montgomery Street, Suite 350
       San Francisco, CA 94111
       Telephone: (415) 918-3000
       E-mail: csaal@constangy.com

WESTLAKE SERVICES: Filing for Class Cert Bid Modified to Feb. 1
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARY NGUYEN, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. WESTLAKE
SERVICES HOLDING COMPANY; WESTLAKE SERVICES HOLDING COMPANY
EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN; WESTLAKE SERVICES HOLDING COMPANY
EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN COMMITTEE; DON HANKEY; BRET HANKEY;
IAN ANDERSON; PAUL KERWIN, EUGENE LEYDIKER, GRACIA ANG, and DOES 1
- 50, Case No. 8:23-cv-00854-FWS-ADS (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge
Fred W. Slaughter entered an order re joint stipulation to modify
parties' class certification briefing schedule:

                     Event                              Date

  Final Pretrial Conference & Hearing on          Oct. 24, 2024
  Motions in Limine

  Last Date to File Motion for Class              Feb. 1, 2024
  Certification

  Last Date to File Opposition to Motion          Feb. 22, 2024
  for Class Certification

  Last Date to File Reply in Support of           Mar. 14, 2024
  Motion for Class Certification

  Hearing on Motion for Class Certification       Apr. 4, 2024

  Non-Expert Discovery Cut-Off                    Apr. 25, 2024

  Last Date to Hear Motions                       Aug. 1, 2024

  Deadline to Complete Settlement Conference      Aug. 15, 2024

Westlake offers auto finance, equity loans, and other financial
products.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 13, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41U3qsV at no extra charge.[CC]

ZEROED-IN TECHNOLOGIES: Fails to Secure Personal Info, Meyers Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
JACK MEYERS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
v. ZEROED-IN TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, and DOLLAR TREE, INC. and FAMILY
DOLLAR, LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-03342 (D. Md., Dec. 8, 2023) sues the
Defendants for their failure to properly secure and safeguard
personally identifiable information including, the Plaintiff and
Class Members' names, dates of birth, and Social Security numbers
for customers and employees of Dollar Tree that utilized the
services of Zeroed-In.

On November 27, 2023, Defendant Zeroed-In notified state Attorneys
General and many Class Members about the widespread Data Breach. As
a result of the Data Breach, the unencrypted PII of the Plaintiff
and Class Members will end up for sale on the dark web or fall into
the hands of companies that will use the detailed PII for targeted
marketing without the consent of the Plaintiff and Class Members.

The Plaintiff seeks to hold the Defendants responsible for the
harms it caused and will continue to cause the Plaintiff and at
least 1,977,486 other similarly situated persons in the massive and
preventable cyberattack purportedly discovered by the Defendant
Zeroed-In on August 8, 2023.

The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of all persons whose PII
was compromised as a result of the Defendants' alleged failures to:
adequately protect the PII of Plaintiff and Class Members; warn the
Plaintiff and Class Members of the Defendants' inadequate
information security practices; and effectively secure hardware
containing protected PII using reasonable and effective security
procedures free of vulnerabilities and incidents.

Mr. Meyers is a resident and citizen of the state of California,
residing in West Sacramento, California, Yolo County.

Zeroed-In offers workforce analytics and data management software
to over 70 clients and has over 30,000 registered users.[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 -

          Rachele R. Byrd, Esq.
          WOLF HALDENSTEIN ADLER FREEMAN & HERZ LLP
          750 B Street, Suite 1820
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 239-4599
          E-mail: byrd@whafh.com

                - and -

          M. Anderson Berry, Esq.
          Gregory Haroutunian, Esq.
          CLAYEO C. ARNOLD
          A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
          6200 Canoga Avenue, Suite 375
          Woodland Hills, CA 91367
          Telephone: (747) 777-7748
          Facsimile: (916) 924-1829
          E-mail: aberry@justice4you.com
                  gharoutunian@justice4you.com

                        Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hess Corp. Agrees to Pay $190MM to Settle Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Global oil and gas company Hess Corp. and its bankrupt subsidiary
reached a deal to pay about $190 million under a plan to resolve
hundreds of asbestos claims stemming from a Caribbean refinery.

Honx Inc. filed notice of the creditor settlement in the US
Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas.  The deal
would resolve 910 current claims from workers and their families
who say they were exposed to asbestos at a former Hess oil refinery
in St. Croix.

Honx Inc. filed in Bankruptcy Court a binding term sheet describing
a proposed settlement by and between:

    * HONX, Inc.,

    * Hess Corporation,

    * the Honorable Barbara J. Houser, retired U.S. Bankruptcy
Judge for the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern
District of Texas, in her capacity as legal representative for the
future asbestos claimants (the "FCR"),

    * the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors, and

    * Burns Charest LLP in its capacity as counsel to certain
Holders of Asbestos Claims.

The Term Sheet does not address all terms, conditions or other
provisions that would be required in connection with the Settlement
or that will be set forth in the Plan Documents, which are subject
to agreement in accordance with this Term Sheet.  The Plan
Documents will not contain any terms or conditions that are
inconsistent with the Term Sheet.

The key economic terms provided for in the Term Sheet are:

  -- Funding to cover malignant and non-malignant Current Asbestos
Claims: HONX and Hess to contribute $105 million and 100% of the
New Common Equity of the Reorganized Debtor on the Effective Date
to cover payment to malignant and non-malignant Current Asbestos
Claims.  For the avoidance of doubt, the entire $105 million will
be used to pay Holders of Current Asbestos Claims, in accordance
with the Plan; none of the $105 million will be used to pay
anything else such as, but without limitation, funding of the
Asbestos Trust and the funding of Reorganized HONX.

  -- Reorganized HONX Board of Managers: On the Effective Date,
Reorganized HONX's Board of Managers shall include at least two
Managers. Hess shall be entitled to appoint at least 50% of the
Managers on the Board of Managers of Reorganized HONX for so long
as Reorganized HONX is in existence.

  -- Reorganized HONX expenses: Hess shall pay all fees and
expenses associated with Reorganized HONX.

  -- Initial Funding to cover Asbestos Claims by Future Demand
Holders and Asbestos Trust fees and expenses: HONX and Hess to
contribute $45 million and 100% of the New Common Equity of the
Reorganized Debtor to cover payment to potential malignant or
non-malignant Claims asserted by Future Demand Holders, and any
other fees and expenses of the Asbestos Trust after the Trust
Expense Contribution is exhausted.  The $45 million contribution
will be broken down over time as follows: (1) $25 million and 100%
of the New Common Equity of the Reorganized Debtor on the Effective
Date; and (2) An additional $20 million on the 5th Anniversary of
the Effective Date.

  -- Supplemental Funding to cover malignant Claims asserted by
Future Demand Holders based on Asbestos Trust experience: In
addition to the $20 million that may be paid on the 5th Anniversary
of the Effective Date, Hess shall pay, if needed per the terms
below, an additional amount to the Asbestos Trust at predetermined
check-in dates on the 5th, 10th, 15th, 20th, and 25th Anniversaries
of the Effective Date.  Hess' total additional contribution set
forth in this specific provision shall be capped at $37 million,
provided that $11,562,500 out of this $37 million shall be reserved
by the Asbestos Trust for payment of approved mesothelioma Claims
asserted by Future Demand Holders from the Effective Date up until
the 20th Anniversary of the Effective Date.

  -- Asbestos Trust Expenses: On the Effective Date, Hess shall
contribute $3 million for payment of liabilities, costs, or
expenses incurred by the Asbestos Trust related to the
administration of Claims, including with respect to the Asbestos
Trustee carrying out the terms of the Asbestos Trust Documents,
participating in a Tort Out (including paying any District Court
Judgment related thereto) (both as defined below), and enforcing
its rights and management of the Asbestos Trust Assets (the "Trust
Expense Contribution").  After the Trust Expense Contribution is
exhausted, all further expenses related to the liabilities, costs,
or expenses incurred by the Asbestos Trust related to the
administration of Claims, including with respect to the Asbestos
Trustee carrying out the terms of the Asbestos Trust Documents,
participating in a Tort Out (including paying any District Court
Judgment related thereto), and enforcing its rights and management
of the Asbestos Trust Assets, shall be paid from the $82 million
contributed by HONX and Hess for distribution to Future Demand
Holders.

The Settlement shall continue in effect until the earlier of (a)
Dec. 22, 2023, unless the Amended Plan Documents have been filed,
(b) Jan. 20, 2024, unless an order confirming the Plan has been
entered, and (c) Feb. 10, 2024, unless the Effective Date of the
Plan has occurred; provided that these dates may be extended by
agreement of all the Parties.

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Johnson Controls Has $108MM Mark-to-Market Losses
------------------------------------------------------------------
Johnson Controls International plc, in its press release dated
December 12, 2023, has reported net pre-tax mark-to-market losses
of $108 million related primarily to the remeasurement of its
pension and postretirement benefit plans and restricted asbestos
investments, according to the Company's Form 8-K filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

A full-text copy of the Form 8-K is available at
http://surl.li/ovwav



                            *********

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 2024. 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 ***