/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/240122.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Monday, January 22, 2024, Vol. 26, No. 16

                            Headlines

3M COMPANY: Allison Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Armbrust Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Carlson Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Carroll Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Chown Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams

44 STREET F&B: Almazo Files Suit Over Alleged Tip Skimming
600 NORTH: Magistrate Judge Endorses Collective Action Status
ALTO PHARMACY: Muhammad Sues Over Delivery Workers' Unpaid Wages
AMERICAN PAPER: Faces Stringfellow Wage-and-Hour Suit in M.D. Tenn.
ARCHERDX INC: Appeals Ruling in Natera's Patent Infringement Suit

BLOOMBERG LIMITED: Sancruzado Sues Over Unlawful Debt Collection
BMO HARRIS: Nguyen Class Suit Removed from Sup. Ct. to N.D. Cal.
BMW OF NORTH: Meyers-Archer Sues Over Unfair Debt Collection
BOJANGLES' RESTAURANTS: Files Appeal in Stafford's FLSA Suit
BOULDER BJ: Seeks More Time to File Conditional Cert Response

BP ENERGY: Mehl Consumer Protection Suit Seeks Class Certification
BP ENERGY: Stoneberger Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class
BYTEDANCE INC: Filing for Class Cert Bid Modified to June 24
CAJUN RESTAURANT: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Johnson Alleges
CENGAGE LEARNING: Class Cert Bid Filing Amended to March 21

CITIZENS BANK: Reinig Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Classes
CITRIX SYSTEMS: Newell Sues Over Unauthorized Personal Info Access
COMERICA BANK: Court Narrows Claims in First Amended Complaint
DOLEX DOLLAR: Sanchez Labor Suit Seeks to Certify Classes
DOLLAR TREE: Miceli Class Suit Removed from Sup. Ct. to N.D. Cal.

E&E CO: Faces Staples Suit Over Bedding & Linen Products' False Ads
EARTHLINK HOLDINGS: Murray Wins Bid for Leave to File Reply
EHEALTHINSURANCE SERVICES: Nichols Alleges Illegal Telephone Calls
ELITE LINE: Deadline to File Class Cert Opposition Stayed
ELITE LINE: Seeks to Strike Declaration of Tyler Smith in Shaw Suit

ENTERGY CORP: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime Wages, Hollenbach Claims
EPIC LANDSCAPE: Gomez Labor Suit Seeks to Certify Classes
ERLANGER HEALTH: Suit Removed to E.D. Tennessee
EVENFLO COMPANY: Bid to Amend Complaint Partly OK'd
FIDELITY NATIONAL: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Arrowsmith Says

FRED MEYER: Discovery & PTO Deadlines Extended to March 26
GENERAL HOLDING: Faces Milanes Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y.
GEORGIA: Scott Sues Over GDC's Refusal to Produce Medical Records
GERBER LIFE: Seeks to File Class Cert. Opposition Under Seal
GORDON LANE: Filing of Renewed Bid for Class Cert. Due Feb. 9

GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES: Yorba Suit Removed from Sup. Ct. to S.D. Cal.
GRANT CONSTRUCTION: Monday Balks at Unsolicited Telemarketing Calls
GUIDEHOUSE LLP: Underpays Compliance Analysts, Torrez Claims
GUSE C-STORE: Fails to Pay Overtime Premiums, Torres Suit Says
HAIN CELESTIAL: Howard Considers Sealing of Docs

HEARTLAND PAYMENT: Class Cert Responses Deadline Amended to Feb. 22
HILTON DOMESTIC: Bid to Continue Class Cert Deadlines OK'd
HOYA OPTICAL: Court Adopts Joint Report & Proposed Scheduling Order
INFINITE HOMES: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Amaya Alleges
INSOMNIA COOKIES: Court Stays Forte Suit Pending Arbitration

INTEGRIS HEALTH: Fails to Secure Clients' Info, Owens Suit Says
JAB EXPRESS: Filing for Class Certification Bid Due April 1
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Loses Reconsideration Bid on 2022 Court Opinion
KANE & MYERS: Peredia Suit Removed to D. Nevada
KRAFT HEINZ: Galbreth Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois

L&P WINES & LIQUORS: Martin Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
LAS DELICIAS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Aviles Alleges
LEAR CORP: Parsons Seeks to Recover Proper Overtime Wages
LEVI'S ONLY: Fails to Timely Pay Wages, Rankine Suit Alleges
LITTLE BROWN PIZZA: Redick Files ADA Suit in C.D. California

LITTLE CAESAR: Conditional Cert Bid Referred to Magistrate Judge
LOUISIANA: Plan of Class Notice OK'd in A.A. Lawsuit
LUV N' CARE: Baby Products Contains Toxic Chemicals, Suit Says
MAISON SOLUTIONS: Green Sues Over Drop in Share Price
MAKIE MARKETING: Hernandez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York

MARIANI PACKING: Must Disclose Expert Witnesses by Feb. 1
MARION COUNTY, OR: Sawyer Files Suit in D. Oregon
MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL: Salazar Files ADA Suit in C.D. California
MDL 3074: Calvert Appeals Dismissal Order in Wiretapping Suit
MEDLIANT INC: Mabute Suit Removed to D. Nevada

MICROSOFT CORP: Basbanes Sues Over Copyright Infringement
MICROSOFT CORPORATION: Court Narrows Claims in Class Suit
MIKE BLOOMBERG: Court Tosses Bid to Send Notice to Putative Class
MOVAGE INC: Percy Appeals Dismissal of Labor Class Action
NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC: Deadline to Answer Complaint Due Jan. 25

NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC: Parties Seek More Time to File Class Cert Bid
NESTLE WATERS: Patane Suit Seeks to Certify Classes & Subclasses
NESTLE WATERS: Plaintiffs Seek to Seal Portions of Class Cert Memo
NEW YORK, NY: Aboubakar Files Amended Notice of Class Cert Bid
NEW YORK, NY: Brennan Files Amended Notice of Class Cert Bid

NEXT NET: Fails to Pay Content Creator Minimum, OT Wages Under FLSA
NORTHROP GRUMMAN: Suit Seeks to Certify Liability & Damages Classes
OKLAHOMA: AKG Suit Dismissed w/o Prejudice
ONE SOURCE: Newsome Files FCRA Suit in N.D. Georgia
PARKMOBILE LLC: Plaintiffs Seek More Time to File Class Cert Bid

PERRY JOHNSON: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Brown Suit Alleges
PHL VARIABLE: Court Approves Class Settlement Deal in PHT Lawsuit
POLICYGENIUS LLC: Aides Facebook to Intercept Data, Torres Alleges
RACHEL ROSSIN: Essential Home Files Appeal
RAH INDUSTRIES: Fails to Pay Minimum & OT Wages, Trejo Suit Alleges

RELIANT FIELD: Tanner Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages Under FLSA
RES-CARE INC: Wiederhold Sues Over Medical Plan's Tobacco Surcharge
RESONETICS LLC: Parties Seek to Stay Class Cert. Discovery in Reyes
RETINA GROUP: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Boehles Alleges
ROGER S. PENSKE: Edelman Files Suit in Del. Chancery Ct.

ROHR INC: Partly Wins Partial Summary Judgment Bid vs Morgan
RXO LAST: Loses Summary Judgment Bid v. Muniz
SAINT MARTINS UNIVERSITY: Bishop Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
SELLERS INTERNATIONAL: Shapiro Alleges Disclosure of Personal Info
SHERYL SANDBERG: Court Tosses Class Certification Bid in Griffin

SL ALABAMA: Class Certification Deadlines in Bastidas Extended
SNAP INC: To Settle Shareholder Suit in Delaware Court
SOUTHERN STAR: Bell Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime for Delivery Drivers
STANFORD INTERNET: Aspen Appeals Denied Motions to Compel, Stay
STATE FARM: Allowed Leave to File Bid to Seal Docs

STATE FARM: Seeks Leave to Seal Confidential Info
SUN LIFE: Scheduling Order Entered in GC Suit
SYMETRA LIFE: Davis Suit Seeks to Certify Class of Policyholders
TENNESSEE: Moore Suit Seeks to Certify Class Action
TESLA INC: Bid for Class Certification in Urban Due June 21

TRACY CORNETT: Court Dismisses Harris, et al., in Garcia Lawsuit
TUCKETTS INC: Liz Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
UCLA MEDICAL: Deadline to File Class Cert Bids Due March 11
ULTA BEAUTY: Faces Turcios Suit Over Unlawful Labor Practices
UMA EDUCATION: Julmice Sues Over Remote Call Workers' Unpaid Wages

UNITED AIRLINES: Class Cert Appendices May be Filed Under Seal
UNITED AIRLINES: Parties Seek Leave to File Class Cert in Sambrano
UNITED STATES: Court Directs Filing of Discovery Plan in Kai Suit
UNITED STATES: Court Sets Rule 26(f) Scheduling Conference
US IMMIGRATION: Final Nod of Settlement Deal Sought in Padilla

US IMMIGRATION: Parties Seeks More Time for Class Cert Response
VANGUARD CHESTER: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due May 17
VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS: Sarver Balks at Breach of Fiduciary Duties
WARRANTECH CONSUMER: Court Continues Stay of Elliott Suit
WASHINGTON NEWSPAPER: Pileggi Seeks More Time to File Class Cert.

WELLA OPERATIONS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Alcantar Alleges
WELLS FARGO: Court OK's Bid for Leave to File Reply
WEXFORD HEALTH: Court Directs Filing of Discovery Plan in Williams
ZUFFA LLC: Parties Seek to Partially Unseal Record Docs in Le Suit

                            *********

3M COMPANY: Allison Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
------------------------------------------------------------------
Benny Allison, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota) Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA
U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT
COMPANY; CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY CORPORATION; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.;
CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU
PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION;
E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE
PLUS INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY
PRODUCTS USA, INC.; KIDDE FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE P.L.C.; LION GROUP,
INC.; MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO.,
INC.; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; PBI PERFORMANCE
PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS LP.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.;
STEDFAST USA, INC.; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest
to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE &
SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix Inc.);
W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES INC.; Case No. 2:23-cv-06481-RMG (D.S.C.,
Dec. 13, 2023), is brought for damages stemming from personal
injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams
("AFFF") and firefighter turnout gear ("TOG") containing the toxic
chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances
("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic
acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. TOG is personal protective equipment
designed for heat and moisture resistance in order to protect
firefighters in hazardous situations. Most turnout gear is made up
of a thermal liner, moisture barrier, and an outer layer. The inner
layers contain PFAS, and the outer layer is often treated with
additional PFAS.

The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting.

PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
the Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the
products. Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal
absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF or TOG products caused
Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications alleged herein.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF or TOG products at several Fire Departments and or Military
bases during Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities.
Plaintiff further seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory
relief arising from the same, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was regularly exposed to AFFF and TOG in training and
to extinguish fires during their military/civilian firefighting
career and was diagnosed with Thyroid Disease as a direct result of
exposure to Defendants' products.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors, and sellers of
PFAS containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing
chemicals used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
          Randolph L. Lee, Esq.
          Gabrielle A. Sulpizio, Esq.
          BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
          219 N. Ridge Street
          Georgetown, SC 29440
          Phone: (843) 546-2408
          Fax: (843) 546-9604
          Email: jeb@belllegalgroup.com
                 rlee@belllegalgroup.com
                 gsulpizio@belllegalgroup.com

               - and -

          John E. Lichtenstein, Esq.
          LICHTENSTEIN LAW GROUP PLC
          347 Highland Avenue,
          Roanoke, VA 24016
          Phone: (540)343-9711
          Email: John.lichtenstein@lichtensteinlawgroup.com


3M COMPANY: Armbrust Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Karl Armbrust, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota) Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA
U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT
COMPANY; CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY CORPORATION; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.;
CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU
PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION;
E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE
PLUS INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY
PRODUCTS USA, INC.; KIDDE FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE P.L.C.; LION GROUP,
INC.; MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO.,
INC.; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; PBI PERFORMANCE
PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS LP.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.;
STEDFAST USA, INC.; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest
to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE &
SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix Inc.);
W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES INC.; Case No. 2:23-cv-06516-RMG (D.S.C.,
Dec. 13, 2023), is brought for damages stemming from personal
injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams
("AFFF") and firefighter turnout gear ("TOG") containing the toxic
chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances
("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic
acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. TOG is personal protective equipment
designed for heat and moisture resistance in order to protect
firefighters in hazardous situations. Most turnout gear is made up
of a thermal liner, moisture barrier, and an outer layer. The inner
layers contain PFAS, and the outer layer is often treated with
additional PFAS.

The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting.

PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
the Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the
products. Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal
absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF or TOG products caused
Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications alleged herein.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF or TOG products at several Fire Departments and or Military
bases during Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities.
Plaintiff further seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory
relief arising from the same, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was regularly exposed to AFFF and TOG in training and
to extinguish fires during their military/civilian firefighting
career and was diagnosed with Prostate Cancer as a direct result of
exposure to Defendants' products.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors, and sellers of
PFAS containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing
chemicals used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
          Randolph L. Lee, Esq.
          Gabrielle A. Sulpizio, Esq.
          BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
          219 N. Ridge Street
          Georgetown, SC 29440
          Phone: (843) 546-2408
          Fax: (843) 546-9604
          Email: jeb@belllegalgroup.com
                 rlee@belllegalgroup.com
                 gsulpizio@belllegalgroup.com

               - and -

          John E. Lichtenstein, Esq.
          LICHTENSTEIN LAW GROUP PLC
          347 Highland Avenue,
          Roanoke, VA 24016
          Phone: (540)343-9711
          Email: John.lichtenstein@lichtensteinlawgroup.com


3M COMPANY: Carlson Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
------------------------------------------------------------------
Arlen W. Carlson, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota) Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA
U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT
COMPANY; CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY CORPORATION; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.;
CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU
PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION;
E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE
PLUS INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY
PRODUCTS USA, INC.; KIDDE FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE P.L.C.; LION GROUP,
INC.; MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO.,
INC.; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; PBI PERFORMANCE
PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS LP.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.;
STEDFAST USA, INC.; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest
to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE &
SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix Inc.);
W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES INC.; Case No. 2:23-cv-06478-RMG (D.S.C.,
Dec. 13, 2023), is brought for damages stemming from personal
injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams
("AFFF") and firefighter turnout gear ("TOG") containing the toxic
chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances
("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic
acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. TOG is personal protective equipment
designed for heat and moisture resistance in order to protect
firefighters in hazardous situations. Most turnout gear is made up
of a thermal liner, moisture barrier, and an outer layer. The inner
layers contain PFAS, and the outer layer is often treated with
additional PFAS.

The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting.

PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
the Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the
products. Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal
absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF or TOG products caused
Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications alleged herein.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF or TOG products at several Fire Departments and or Military
bases during Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities.
Plaintiff further seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory
relief arising from the same, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was regularly exposed to AFFF and TOG in training and
to extinguish fires during their military/civilian firefighting
career and was diagnosed with Prostate Cancer as a direct result of
exposure to Defendants' products.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors, and sellers of
PFAS containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing
chemicals used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
          Randolph L. Lee, Esq.
          Gabrielle A. Sulpizio, Esq.
          BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
          219 N. Ridge Street
          Georgetown, SC 29440
          Phone: (843) 546-2408
          Fax: (843) 546-9604
          Email: jeb@belllegalgroup.com
                 rlee@belllegalgroup.com
                 gsulpizio@belllegalgroup.com

               - and -

          John E. Lichtenstein, Esq.
          LICHTENSTEIN LAW GROUP PLC
          347 Highland Avenue,
          Roanoke, VA 24016
          Phone: (540)343-9711
          Email: John.lichtenstein@lichtensteinlawgroup.com



3M COMPANY: Carroll Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
-------------------------------------------------------------
David A. Carroll, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota) Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA
U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT
COMPANY; CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY CORPORATION; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.;
CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU
PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION;
E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE
PLUS INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY
PRODUCTS USA, INC.; KIDDE FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE P.L.C.; LION GROUP,
INC.; MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO.,
INC.; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; PBI PERFORMANCE
PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS LP.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.;
STEDFAST USA, INC.; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest
to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE &
SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix Inc.);
W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES INC.; Case No. 2:23-cv-06491-RMG (D.S.C.,
Dec. 13, 2023), is brought for damages stemming from personal
injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams
("AFFF") and firefighter turnout gear ("TOG") containing the toxic
chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances
("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic
acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. TOG is personal protective equipment
designed for heat and moisture resistance in order to protect
firefighters in hazardous situations. Most turnout gear is made up
of a thermal liner, moisture barrier, and an outer layer. The inner
layers contain PFAS, and the outer layer is often treated with
additional PFAS.

The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting.

PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
the Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the
products. Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal
absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF or TOG products caused
Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications alleged herein.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF or TOG products at several Fire Departments and or Military
bases during Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities.
Plaintiff further seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory
relief arising from the same, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was regularly exposed to AFFF and TOG in training and
to extinguish fires during their military/civilian firefighting
career and was diagnosed with Prostate Cancer as a direct result of
exposure to Defendants' products.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors, and sellers of
PFAS containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing
chemicals used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
          Randolph L. Lee, Esq.
          Gabrielle A. Sulpizio, Esq.
          BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
          219 N. Ridge Street
          Georgetown, SC 29440
          Phone: (843) 546-2408
          Fax: (843) 546-9604
          Email: jeb@belllegalgroup.com
                 rlee@belllegalgroup.com
                 gsulpizio@belllegalgroup.com

               - and -

          John E. Lichtenstein, Esq.
          LICHTENSTEIN LAW GROUP PLC
          347 Highland Avenue,
          Roanoke, VA 24016
          Phone: (540)343-9711
          Email: John.lichtenstein@lichtensteinlawgroup.com

3M COMPANY: Chown Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
----------------------------------------------------------------
James Chown, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota) Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA
U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT
COMPANY; CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY CORPORATION; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.;
CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU
PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION;
E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE
PLUS INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY
PRODUCTS USA, INC.; KIDDE FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE P.L.C.; LION GROUP,
INC.; MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO.,
INC.; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; PBI PERFORMANCE
PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS LP.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.;
STEDFAST USA, INC.; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest
to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE &
SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix Inc.);
W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES INC.; Case No. 2:23-cv-06510-RMG (D.S.C.,
Dec. 13, 2023), is brought for damages stemming from personal
injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams
("AFFF") and firefighter turnout gear ("TOG") containing the toxic
chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances
("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic
acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. TOG is personal protective equipment
designed for heat and moisture resistance in order to protect
firefighters in hazardous situations. Most turnout gear is made up
of a thermal liner, moisture barrier, and an outer layer. The inner
layers contain PFAS, and the outer layer is often treated with
additional PFAS.

The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting.

PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
the Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the
products. Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal
absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF or TOG products caused
Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications alleged herein.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF or TOG products at several Fire Departments and or Military
bases during Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities.
Plaintiff further seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory
relief arising from the same, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was regularly exposed to AFFF and TOG in training and
to extinguish fires during their military/civilian firefighting
career and was diagnosed with Prostate Cancer as a direct result of
exposure to Defendants' products.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors, and sellers of
PFAS containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing
chemicals used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
          Randolph L. Lee, Esq.
          Gabrielle A. Sulpizio, Esq.
          BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
          219 N. Ridge Street
          Georgetown, SC 29440
          Phone: (843) 546-2408
          Fax: (843) 546-9604
          Email: jeb@belllegalgroup.com
                 rlee@belllegalgroup.com
                 gsulpizio@belllegalgroup.com

               - and -

          John E. Lichtenstein, Esq.
          LICHTENSTEIN LAW GROUP PLC
          347 Highland Avenue,
          Roanoke, VA 24016
          Phone: (540)343-9711
          Email: John.lichtenstein@lichtensteinlawgroup.com


44 STREET F&B: Almazo Files Suit Over Alleged Tip Skimming
----------------------------------------------------------
MIGUEL ALMAZO; AYRTON GUERRERO; KELLY LUNA; and EVA LEAL-RUTTEN,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs v. 44 STREET F&B LLC d/b/a THE LAMBS CLUB; THE GRAND
TOUR COLLECTION LLC d/b/a THE LAMBS CLUB; CHRIS MILLER; and JACK
LOGUE, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-00096 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 5, 2024)
alleges that the Defendants are engage in a common, willful, and
deliberate policy and practice of denying Plaintiffs and other
similarly situated Waitstaff, minimum and overtime wages by
improperly paying them at a "tipped" minimum wage rate without
satisfying the strict tip credit requirements of the Fair Labor
Standards Act and the New York Labor Law.

The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as waitstaffs.

44 STREET F&B LLC d/b/a THE LAMBS CLUB own and operate a
restaurant, lounge, and event space in New York County, New York,
doing business under the name, "The Lambs Club." [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Innessa M. Huot, Esq.
          Shawn R. Clark, Esq.
          FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
          685 Third Avenue, 26th Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (212) 983-9330
          Facsimile: (212) 983-9331
          Email: ihuot@faruqilaw.com
                 sclark@faruqilaw.com

600 NORTH: Magistrate Judge Endorses Collective Action Status
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CESAR SANCHEZ,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, V. 600
NORTH AKARD LLC D/B/A DAKOTA'S STEAKHOUSE, et al., Case No.
3:23-cv-00540-L-BN (N.D. Tex.), the Hon. Judge David L. Horan
entered an order that the Court should grant the parties' joint
motion for certification of a Collective Action and the Issuance of
Court-Authorized Notice and sign and enter their proposed order.

  -- A copy of these findings, conclusions, and recommendation
shall
     be served on all parties in the manner provided by law. Any
party
     who objects to any part of these findings, conclusions, and
     recommendation must file specific written objections within 14

     days after being served with a copy.

  -- The Court should also order Defendants to provide the
Plaintiffs'
     counsel with the specified contact and identifying information

     regarding all collective members.

  -- This action was filed as a collective action under the Fair
Labor
     Standards Act (FLSA). The case has now been referred to the
     undersigned United States magistrate judge for pretrial
     management under 28 U.S.C. section 636(b) and an order of
     reference from United States District Judge Sam A. Lindsay.

  -- On November 28, 2023, the parties filed a Supplemental Joint
     Status Report, wherein parties advised the Court of their
     agreement and stipulation to certify a collective of employees

     consisting of servers and bartenders under the FLSA,.

  -- Specifically, the parties agree and stipulate to certify a
     collective pursuant to 29 U.S.C. section 216(b), of two groups
of
     employees ("Collective Members") defined as:

        Server Collective Members

        "All current and former employees who worked at least one
        shift as a server (i.e. waiter or waitress) at Dakota's
        Steakhouse since September 1, 2021, through the present and

        were paid a direct cash wage of less than minimum wage."

        Bartender Collective Members

        "All current and former employees who worked at least one
        shift as a bartender at Dakota’s Steakhouse since
September 1,
        2021, through the present and were paid a direct cash wage
of
        less than minimum wage."

Dakota's Steakhouse is a fine dining American Steakhouse.

A copy of the Mag Judge Recommnedation's order dated Dec. 26, 2023
is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3HC99dz at no
extra charge.[CC]

ALTO PHARMACY: Muhammad Sues Over Delivery Workers' Unpaid Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Afiyfah Muhammad, Darwin Wilson, and Dominique Skinner,
Collectively and on behalf of others similarly situated in the
proposed collective action, Plaintiffs v. Alto Pharmacy LLC, JOHN
DOES 1-10, JANE DOES 1-10, ABC CORPORATIONS 1-1O, Defendants, Case
No. 1:23-cv-11315 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 30, 2023) arises from the
Defendants' alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the
New York State Labor Law, and their supporting New York State
Department of Labor regulations.

The complaint alleges the Defendants' failure to pay Plaintiffs
proper overtime, failure to provide wage notices, failure to
furnish wage statements, failure to provide spread-of-hours pay,
and unlawful retention of tips.

Plaintiffs Muhammad, Wilson, and Skinner were employed as delivery
workers at Defendant's pharmacy, known as "Alto Pharmacy," from
September 2023 through and including present, from January 2022
through and including July 2023, and from March 2022 through and
including February 2023, respectively.

Alto Pharmacy LLC operates as a pharmacy company that maintains its
principal place of business in New York.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Tyrone A. Blackburn, Esq.
          T. A. BLACKBURN LAW, PLLC
          1242 E. 80th Street, 3rd Floor
          Brooklyn, NY 11236
          Telephone: (347) 342-7432
          E-mail: Tblackburn@tablackburnlaw.com

AMERICAN PAPER: Faces Stringfellow Wage-and-Hour Suit in M.D. Tenn.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL STRINGFELLOW, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. AMERICAN PAPER & TWINE COMPANY,
Defendant, Case No. 3:24-cv-00024 (M.D. Tenn., January 8, 2024) is
a class action against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime
wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff was employed as an hourly-paid employee at the
Defendant's warehouse facility in Davidson County, Tennessee.

American Paper & Twine Company is an owner and operator of
warehouse facilities in 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
         Attorneys at Law
         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

ARCHERDX INC: Appeals Ruling in Natera's Patent Infringement Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ArcherDX, Inc., et al., filed an appeal from a court ruling entered
in the lawsuit entitled NATERA, INC., Plaintiff V. ARCHERDX, INC.,
ARCHERDX, LLC, and INVITAE CORP., Defendants, Case No.
1:20-cv-00125-GBW, in the United States District Court for the
District of Delaware.

This is an action for patent infringement arising under the patent
laws of the United States, Title 35, United States Code, Section 1,
et seq., which Natera filed against ArcherDX, Inc. on January 27,
2020, for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 10,538,814 ("the '814
patent"). On April 15, 2020, Natera filed a First Amended
Complaint, adding the '172 patent, in addition to U.S. Patent Nos.
10,590,482 ("the '482 patent") and 10,597,708 ("the '708 patent").

On August 6, 2020, Natera filed another patent infringement suit
against ArcherDX, Inc. for infringement of the '220 patent.

On September 25, 2020, Civil Action No. 20-1047-GBW was
consolidated with Civil Action No. 20-125-GBW. All filings were
made in the lead case-Civil Action No. 20-125-GBW.

On January 12, 2021, Natera filed a Second Amended Complaint to add
Defendants Invitae and Archer in view of Archer DX, Inc.'s merger
with Invitae, which caused Archer DX, Inc. to merge with various
subsidiaries to form Archer.

On October 27, 2021, Natera filed a Third Amended Complaint to
include the corrected language of claim 1 of the '482 patent.

On January 24, 2023, the Court heard oral argument on, inter alia,
Natera's motion for summary judgment on no unenforceability of the
Asserted cfDNA Patents due to prosecution laches. On February 6,
2023, the Court, inter alia, denied Natera's summary judgment
motion on no prosecution laches.

Natera accused the following products of infringing the Asserted
cfDNA Patents: LiquidPlex, STRATAFIDE, and Personalized Cancer
Monitoring, and all assays, including comprehensive kits.

On June 22, 2023, the Court held a one-day bench trial in this
action on the issue of whether U.S. Patent Nos. 10,557,172 ("the'
172 patent") and 10,731,220 ("the '220 patent") (collectively, the
"Asserted ctDNA Patents") are unenforceable due to prosecution
laches.

On September 5, 2023, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
52(a), and after having considered the entire record in this case
and the applicable law, the Court concluded that Defendants
ArcherDX, Inc., ArcherDX, LLC, and Invitae Corporation have not
shown by clear and convincing evidence that the Asserted cfDNA
Patents are unenforceable due to prosecution laches.

The appellate case is captioned as Natera, Inc. v. ArcherDX, Inc.,
Case No. 24-1287, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit, filed on December 26, 2023.

The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that Appellant's
brief is due on February 26, 2024.[BN]

Defendants-Appellants ARCHERDX, INC. and ARCHERDX, LLC are
represented by:

          Brian E. Farnan, Esq.
          FARNAN LLP
          919 North Market Street
          Wilmington, DE 19801
          Telephone: (302) 777-0300

Plaintiff-Appellee NATERA, INC. is represented by:

          Jack B. Blumenfeld, Esq.
          MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARSHT & TUNNELL LLP
          1201 North Market Street, PO Box 1347
          Wilmington, DE 19899
          Telephone: (302) 658-9200

BLOOMBERG LIMITED: Sancruzado Sues Over Unlawful Debt Collection
----------------------------------------------------------------
RICHARD SANCRUZADO, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BLOOMBERG LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
D/B/A BLOOMBERG.COM, Defendant, Case No. 189334611 (Fla. Cir. Ct.,
11th Jud. Cir., Miami-Dade Cty., January 8, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for violation of the Florida Consumer
Collection Practices Act.

According to the complaint, the Defendant sent electronic mail
communications to Florida consumers, including the Plaintiff, in an
attempt to collect debts between 9:00 PM and 8:00 AM without
consent in violation of the FCCPA.

Bloomberg Limited Partnership, doing business as Bloomberg.com, is
a financial, software, data, and media company, with its principal
place of business located in New York, New York. [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

BMO HARRIS: Nguyen Class Suit Removed from Sup. Ct. to N.D. Cal.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned as YEN THI HOANG NGUYEN, on
behalf of herself and others similarly situated v. BMO HARRIS BANK,
N.A. and BMO HARRIS FINANCIAL ADVISORS, INC.; and DOES 1 through
100, inclusive, Case No. 23CV426352 (Filed Nov. 21, 2023) was
removed from the Superior Court of California for the County of
Santa Clara to the United States District Court for the Northern
District Of California on Jan. 4, 2024.

The Northern California District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
5:24-cv-00092 to the proceeding.

The suit alleges that Defendants failed to pay the Plaintiff and
similarly situated employees all wages at the applicable minimum
wage for all hour worked due to Defendants' policies, practices,
and/or procedures including: 'Rounding down' or 'shaving down' the
Plaintiff's and similarly situated employees' daily hours worked at
the time of their clock-ins and clock-outs, including clock-ins and
clock-outs for meal breaks, to the nearest quarter of an hour, to
the benefit of the Defendants.

The Plaintiff further alleges that because the Defendants failed to
pay the Plaintiff and other putative class members for that time
worked, the Defendants failed to pay employees minimum wage and
overtime wages. The Defendants also failed to pay the Plaintiff
overtime wages at the regular rate of pay by failing to include all
remuneration such as commissions.

The Plaintiff seeks to represent all "current, former, and/or
future employees of the Defendants as direct employee as well as
temporary employees employed through temp agencies who work as
hourly non-exempt employees" at any time from four years prior to
the filing of the Complaint.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants in the State of
California within the four years prior to the filing of the
Complaint.

BMO is the U.S. subsidiary of the Toronto-based multinational
investment bank and financial services company Bank of
Montreal.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Andrew R. Livingston, Esq.
          Annie H. Chen, Esq.
          ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
          The Orrick Building
          405 Howard Street
          San Francisco, CA 94105-2669
          Telephone: (415) 773-5700
          Facsimile: (415) 773-5759
          E-mail: alivingston@orrick.com
                  annie.chen@orrick.com

BMW OF NORTH: Meyers-Archer Sues Over Unfair Debt Collection
------------------------------------------------------------
LISA MEYERS-ARCHER, individually and on behalf of all those
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. CACE-12-023018 (Fla. Cir., 17th Judicial,
Broward Cty., Dec. 29, 2023) arises from the Defendant's alleged
violation of the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act.

According to the complaint, the Defendant sent multiple electronic
communications to Plaintiff in connection with the collection of a
consumer debt. Each of the electronic communications were sent to
Plaintiff between the hours of 9:00 PM and 8:00 AM in the time zone
of the Plaintiff. The Defendant did not have the consent of
Plaintiff to communicate with Plaintiff between the hours of 9:00
PM and 8.00 AM. As such, by and through each of the electronic
communications, the Defendant violated the FCCPA, says the suit.

The Plaintiff is the alleged debtor of the consumer debt.

BMW of North America, LLC markets and sells motor vehicles. The
Company offers vehicle accessories and interior and exterior parts,
apparel and accessories for men, women, and kids, as well as offers
vehicle financing and leasing services. BMW of North America
operates in the State of New Jersey.[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.corn
                  jen@jibraellaw.com
                  zane@jibraellaw.com

BOJANGLES' RESTAURANTS: Files Appeal in Stafford's FLSA Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
BOJANGLES' RESTAURANTS, INC. is taking an appeal from a court order
in the lawsuit entitled Robert Stafford, Jr., et al., individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v.
Bojangles' Restaurants, Inc., et al., Defendants, Case No.
3:20-cv-00266-MOC-SCR, in the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina.

The case is a collective action concerning wage and hour claims
raised by current and former Bojangles' shift managers. The
Plaintiffs allege violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
and state laws.

On Mar. 31, 2023, the Plaintiffs filed a motion to seek further
certification of seven additional classes bringing state law claims
in North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, Alabama,
Georgia, and Virginia. On same day, the Defendant filed a motion to
decertify the Plaintiffs' FLSA class.

On Apr. 28, 2023, the Defendant opposed the Plaintiffs' motion to
certify additional classes.

On Oct. 20, 2023, the Court granted in part and denied in part the
Plaintiffs' motion to certify class through an Order entered by
Judge Max O. Cogburn, Jr. The Plaintiffs' motion was denied with
respect to the Alabama, Virginia, Georgia, Tennessee, and Kentucky
classes. The denial was without prejudice. The Plaintiffs' motion
was granted with respect to the North and South Carolina classes.

On November 3, 2023, the Defendant appealed. That appellate case
was captioned as Bojangles' Restaurants, Inc. v. Robert Stafford,
Jr., Case No. 23-282, in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Fourth Circuit.

On December 14, 2023, the Defendant's petition for permission to
appeal was granted by the Court of Appeals and the case was
transferred to regular docket number 23-2287.

The current appellate case is captioned as Bojangles' Restaurants,
Inc. v. Robert Stafford, Jr., Case No. 23-2287, in the United
States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.[BN]

Defendant-Petitioner BOJANGLES' RESTAURANTS, INC. is represented
by:

            Brendan P. Biffany, Esq.
            Brian Lee Church, Esq.
            Charles Evans Johnson, Esq.
            ROBINSON BRADSHAW & HINSON, PA
            101 North Tryon Street
            Charlotte, NC 28246
            Telephone: (704) 377-2536
                       (704) 377-8354

Plaintiffs-Respondents ROBERT E. STAFFORD, JR., et al.,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, are
represented by:

            L. Michelle Gessner, Esq.
            GESSNERLAW, PLLC
            602 East Morehead Street
            Charlotte, NC 28202
            Telephone: (704) 234-7442

BOULDER BJ: Seeks More Time to File Conditional Cert Response
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROBERT KNERR and KARYN
SQUIRES, on behalf of themselves and those similarly situated, v.
BOULDER BJ, LLC, ARVADA BJ, LLC, WESTMINSTER BJ, LLC LAKEWOOD BJ,
LLC TAMIAMI BJ, LLC, SINGLEDECK, LLC, and SAM ASKAR, Case No.
1:19-cv-00799-JLK-MEH (D. Colo.), the Defendant asks the Court to
enter an order granting an unopposed motion for extension of time
to respond to Plaintiffs' motion for Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA) Conditional Certification and Brief in Support and extending
the time by which the Defendants must file a responsive pleading up
to and including
Jan. 17, 2024.

On December 6, 2023, the Plaintiffs filed their Motion for FLSA
Conditional Certification and Brief in support thereof.

Under D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1(d), a response to a motion is due 21 days
thereafter, which could make Defendants' response to the Motion due
December 27, 2023.

Under Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, when an act
is required or allowed to be done at or within a specific time
period, the Court for cause shown may, at any time in its
discretion with or without motion or notice, order the period
enlarged if the request therefore is made before the expiration of
the period originally prescribed.

Additionally, the request is submitted prior to the expiration of
the arguable December 27, 2023 deadline under the District of
Colorado’s Local Rules.

The Defendants have agreed to toll the running of the FLSA's
statute of limitations from the December 6, 2023, filing of the
Motion through Defendants’ requested January 17, 204 response
date.

The Defendants will be prejudiced if the extension is not granted
because Defendants will be unable to adequately respond to the
Motion given its length and the complexity of the arguments.

A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3tKMqIM at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Andrew R. Biller, Esq.
          Andrew P. Kimble, Esq.
          BILLER & KIMBLE LLC
          8044 Montgomery Road, Suite 515
          Cincinnati, OH 45236

                - and -

          David Lichtenstein, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF DAVID LICHTENSTEIN, LLC
          1556 Williams Street, Suite 100
          Denver, CO 80218

                - and -

          Mark Potashnick, Esq.
          Laura E. Farmwald, Esq.
          WEINHAUS & POTASHNICK
          11500 Olive Blvd., Suite 133
          St. Louis, MO 63141  
The Defendants are represented by:

          Patrick Q. Hustead, Esq.
          Connor L. Cantrell, Esq.
          Aaron M. Bell, Esq.
          Jason J. Patel, Esq.
          THE HUSTEAD LAW FIRM
          4643 South Ulster Street, Suite 1250
          Denver, CO 80237
          Telephone: (303) 721-5000
          E-mail: pqh@thlf.com
                  clc@thlf.com
                  amb@thlf.com
                  jjp@thlf.com

BP ENERGY: Mehl Consumer Protection Suit Seeks Class Certification
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Russ Mehl, Edmund Gross,
Trudy Boyer, Steve Anderson, and Gregory Steadman, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. BP Energy Company,
Southwest Energy L.P., Macquarie Energy LLC, ETC Marketing, Ltd.,
Tenaska Marketing Ventures, and Rockpoint Gas Storage, LLC, Case
No. 6:23-cv-01192-DDC-ADM (D. Kan.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court
to enter an order certifying a class action under Fed. R. Civ. P.
23 for all of the Plaintiffs' claims.

The plaintiffs, and those they seek to represent, are retail
consumers of natural gas hundreds cities in Kansas served by the
Kansas Gas Service ("KGS").

The defendants sold natural gas to KGS at unconscionably high
prices during Winter Storm Uri in February 2021, the costs of which
were destined to be -- and indeed, have been -- passed on to the
plaintiffs. The plaintiffs now seek to hold the defendants
accountable for the unconscionable pricing and profiteering from a
disaster, both in violation of the Kansas Consumer Protection Act.

The plaintiffs seek certification of the following class:

   "All residential customers whose utilities were served by KGS
who
   must pay for the natural gas Defendants sold through KGS,
between
   February 10, 2021, and February 18, 2021."

The Plaintiffs also ask the Court to appoint them as Class
Representatives and appoint their counsel as class counsel under
Rule 23(g) of Foulston Siefkin LLP.

BP Energy explores and produces petroleum products.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41NzI8O at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Jay F. Fowler, Esq.
          Samuel J. Walenz, Esq.
          Scott C. Nehrbass, Esq.
          Lee M. Smithyman, Esq.
          James P. Zakoura, Esq.
          FOULSTON SIEFKIN, LLP
          1551 N. Waterfront Parkway, Suite 100
          Wichita, KS 67206-4466
          Telephone: (316) 291-9541
          Facsimile: (316) 267-6345
          E-mail: jfowler@foulston.com
                  swalenz@foulston.com
                  snehrbass@foulston.com
                  lsmithyman@foulston.com
                  jzakoura@foulston.com

BP ENERGY: Stoneberger Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PJ Stoneberger, Ralph
Stoneberger, Robin Gudde, Wendy Dunkin, and Regeana Shelton,
individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated, v. BP
Energy Company, CIMA Energy, Ltd., Macquarie Energy LLC, and
Southwest Energy L.P., Case No. 6:23-cv-01195-DDC-ADM (D. Kan.),
the Plaintiffs moves the Court for:

   (1) certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)
and
       23(b)(3) of a class of all residential customers whose
       utilities were served by KMGA who must pay for the natural
gas
       Defendants sold through KMGA, between February 10, 2021, and

       Feb. 18, 2021;

   (2) appointment of plaintiffs PJ Stoneberger, Ralph
Stoneberger,
       Robin Gudde, Wendy Dunking, and Regeana Shelton as Class
       Representatives; and

   (3) appointment under Rule 23(g) of Foulston Siefkin LLP as
Class
       Counsel.

The plaintiffs, and those they seek to represent, are retail
consumers of natural gas in 32 cities in Kansas served by the
Kansas Municipal Gas Agency ("KMGA"). The defendants sold natural
gas to KMGA at unconscionably high prices during Winter Storm Uri
in February 2021,
the costs of which were destined to be—and indeed, have
been—passed on to the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs now seek to hold the defendants accountable for the
unconscionable pricing and profiteering from a disaster, both in
violation of the Kansas Consumer Protection Act.

The plaintiffs seek certification of the following class:

   "All residential customers whose utilities were served by KMGA
who
   must pay for the natural gas Defendants sold through KMGA,
between
   February 10, 2021, and February 18, 2021. This includes
residential
   consumers of natural gas in 32 Kansas cities, listed fully in
the
   accompanying memorandum in support."

BP Energy explores and produces petroleum products.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/48rZLVE at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Jay F. Fowler, Esq.
          Samuel J. Walenz, Esq.
          Scott C. Nehrbass, Esq.
          Lee M. Smithyman, Esq.
          James P. Zakoura, Esq.
          FOULSTON SIEFKIN, LLP
          1551 N. Waterfront Parkway, Suite 100
          Wichita, KS 67206-4466
          Telephone: (316) 291-9541
          Facsimile: (316) 267-6345
          E-mail: jfowler@foulston.com
                  swalenz@foulston.com
                  snehrbass@foulston.com
                  lsmithyman@foulston.com
                  jzakoura@foulston.com

BYTEDANCE INC: Filing for Class Cert Bid Modified to June 24
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as REECE YOUNG, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. BYTEDANCE INC.
and TIKTOK INC., Case No. 3:22-cv-01883-VC (N.D. Cal.), the Hon.
Judge Vince Chhabria entered an order modifying the current case
schedule as follows:

            Event                     Current        Modified
                                      Deadlines      Deadline

  Deadline to complete fact        Jan. 31, 2024    Apr. 30, 2024
  discovery

  Deadline for Plaintiffs'         Feb. 1, 2024     May 1, 2024
  expert reports

  Deadline for Defendants'         Feb. 22, 2024    May 22, 2024
  expert reports

  Deadline to complete expert      Mar. 15, 2024    June 13, 2024
  discovery

  Motion for Class Certification   Mar. 25, 2024    June 24, 2024

  Opposition to Motion for Class   Apr. 29, 2024    July 29, 2024
  Certification

  Reply in support of Motion       May 20, 2024     Aug. 19, 2024
  for Class Certification

ByteDance is an internet technology company that operates creative
content platforms.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41NA13s at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Steven N. Williams, Esq.
          STEVEN WILLIAMS LAW, P.C.
          201 Spear Street, Suite 1100
          San Francisco, CA 94105
          Telephone: (415) 697-1509
          E-mail: swilliams@stevenwilliamslaw.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Jesse A. Cripps, Esq.
          Lauren M. Blas, Esq.
          Leonora Cohen, Esq.
          Viola H. Li, Esq.
          GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
          333 South Grand Avenue
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 229-7000
          Facsimile: (213) 229-7520
          E-mail: JCripps@gibsondunn.com
                  LBlas@gibsondunn.com
                  LCohen@gibsondunn.com
                  VHLi@gibsondunn.com

CAJUN RESTAURANT: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Johnson Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------
CHRISTINA JOHNSON, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CAJUN RESTAURANT ALBEE LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 500259/2024 (N.Y. Sup., Kings Cty., Jan. 3,
2024) seeks to recover from the Defendant unpaid spread-of-hours
wages, damages, attorneys' fees, and costs.

Plaintiff Johnson was employed by the Defendant as a server.

CAJUN RESTAURANT ALBEE LLC operates as a restaurant and does
business as KPOT Korean BBQ & Hot Pot. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Lawrence Spasojevich, Esq.
          SPASOJEVICH LAW, P.C.
          9224 Queens Boulevard #740010
          Rego Park, NY 11374
          Telephone: (914) 487-3592
          Email: ls@spasojevichlaw.com

CENGAGE LEARNING: Class Cert Bid Filing Amended to March 21
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Kleiner v. Cengage
Learning Holdings II, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-10245 (D.
Mann., Filed Feb. 14, 2022), the Hon. Judge Richard G. Stearns
entered an order granting motion for extension of time.

-- The court will allow the additional extension of time, but it
is
    not inclined to permit further delay.

-- The pretrial schedule will be amended as follows.

    Class discovery will be completed by:          Feb. 15, 2024

    Class certification motions will be            March 21, 2024
    filed by:

    Any oppositions will be filed by:              April 8, 2024

    All fact discovery will be completed by:       July 10, 2024

    Dispositive motions will be filed by:          Aug. 9, 2024

    Oppositions will be filed by:                  Aug. 30, 2024

The nature of suit alleges violation of the Unfair and Deceptive
Trade Acts states involving Torts -- Personal Property -- Other
Fraud.

Cengage Learning is a global education technology company.[CC]

CITIZENS BANK: Reinig Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Classes
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ALEX REINIG, et al., v.
CITIZENS BANK, N.A., Case No. 2:15-cv-01541-CCW (W.D. Pa.), the
Plaintiffs asks the Court to enter an order certifying the
following classes pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
23(b)(3):

   A. Sub-Class 1 ("Pennsylvania Class"): Rule 23(b)(3)
Pennsylvania
      Class of MLOs employed by Defendant from November 24, 2012,
to
      present in the state of Pennsylvania, seeking unpaid overtime

      and minimum wages which were not paid due to the Defendant's

      compensation plan, as pleaded in Count VII and Count VIII of
the
      Second Amended Complaint ("SAC");

      The Pennsylvania Class is represented by Named Plaintiffs
Alex
      Reinig, Robert Soda, and Kenneth Gritz.

      The Pennsylvania Class brings claims under the Pennsylvania
      Minimum Wage Act, and Pennsylvania Wage Payment and
Collection
      Law.

      The Court should certify all claims that Defendant's
      compensation plan violated the PMWA by failing to pay
one-and-
      one half times the regular rate, and these unpaid wages are
due
      under the PWPCL, as set forth in Count VII and Count VIII.

   B. Sub-Class 2 ("Connecticut Class"): Rule 23(b)(3) Connecticut

      Class of MLOs and those similarly situated, employed by
      Defendant from November 24, 2013 to present in the state of
      Connecticut, seeking unpaid overtime and minimum wages not
paid
      due to Defendant's compensation plan, as pleaded in Count III
of
      the Second Amended Complaint ("SAC").

      The Connecticut Class is represented by the Named Plaintiff
Mary
      Lou Gramesty. The Connecticut Class brings claims under the
      Connecticut Minimum Wage Law. and Connecticut Wage Collection

      Act.

   C. Sub-Class 3 ("New York Class"): Rule 23(b)(3) New York Class
of
      MLOs employed by Defendant from April 1, 2012, to present in
the
      state of New York, seeking unpaid overtime wages and minimum

      which were not paid due to Defendant's compensation plan, as

      pleaded in Count IX of the Second Amended Complaint.

      The New York Class is represented by Named Plaintiff Mark
Ross.

      The New York Class brings claims under the New York Labor
Law.

   D. Sub-Class 4 ("Massachusetts Class"): Rule 23(b)(3)
Massachusetts
      Class of MLOs employed by Defendant from November 24, 2012,
to
      present in the state of Massachusetts, seeking unpaid
overtime
      and minimum wages which were not paid due to Defendant's
      compensation plan, as pleaded in Count V of the SAC.

      The Massachusetts Class is represented by Named Plaintiff
Daniel
      Jenkins. The Massachusetts Class brings claims under the
      Massachusetts Minimum Wage Law.

   E. Sub-Class 5 ("Illinois Class"): Rule 23(b)(3) Class of MLOs
      employed in Illinois by Defendant from November 24, 2012 to
      present, seeking unpaid overtime and minimum wages which were

      not paid due to Defendant's compensation plan, as pleaded in

      Count IV of the Second represented by Named Plaintiff Valerie

      Dal Pino, and brings claims under the Illinois Minimum Wage
Act
      and the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act.

   F. Sub-Class 6 ("North Carolina Class" Rule 23(b)(3) Class of
MLOs
      employed in North Carolina by Defendant from November 24,
2013,
      to present, seeking unpaid overtime and minimum wages which
were
      not paid due to Defendant's compensation plans.

      The North Carolina Class is represented by Named Plaintiff
David
      Howard and Class brings claims under the North Carolina Wage
and
      Hour Act.

   G. Sub-Class 7 (Rhode Island Class"”): Rule 23(b)(3) Class of
MLOs
      employed in Rhode Island by Defendant from November 24, 2013
to
      present, seeking unpaid overtime and mininum wages which were

      not paid due to Defendant's compensation plan.

      The Rhode Island Class is represented by Named Plaintiff
Daniel
      Kolenda brings claims under the Rhode Island Minimum Wage Act

      and the Rhode Island Wage Payment Law.

   H. Sub-Class 8 ("Michigan Class"): Rule 23(b)(3) Class of MLOs
      employed in Michigan by Defendant from November 24, 2012 to
      present, seeking unpaid overtime and minimum wages which were

      not paid due to the Defendant's compensation plan.

      The Michigan Class is represented by Named Plaintiff Ahmad
Naji,
      and brings claims under the Michigan Workplace Opportunity
Wage
      Act, and the Michigan Wage Payment Law.

   I. Sub-Class 9 ("New Hampshire Class"): Rule 23(b)(3) Class of
MLOs
      employed in New Hampshire by Defendant from November 24, 2012
to
      present, seeking unpaid overtime and minimum wages which were

      not paid due to Defendant's nationwide compensation plan.

      The New Hampshire Class is represented by Named Plaintiff
Robert
      Pedersen, and brings claims under the New Hampshire Minimum
Wage
      Law, and the New Hampshire Wage Payment Law.

   J. Appointing Joshua S. Boyette, Justin L. Swidler, and Robert
      Soloff as class counsel for all classes.

Citizens Bank is one of the nation's oldest and largest financial
institutions.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RHsIFO at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Joshua S. Boyette, Esq.
          Justin L. Swidler, Esq.
          SWARTZ SWIDLER, LLC
          9 Tanner Street Suite 101
          Haddonfield, NJ 08033
          Telephone: (856) 685-7420
          Facsimile: (856) 685-7417
          E-mail: jboyette@swartz-legal.com

                - and -

          Robert D. Soloff, Esq.
          ROBERT D. SOLOFF, P.A.
          7805 SW 6th Ct
          Plantation, FL 33324-3203
          Telephone: (954) 472-0002
          Facsimile: (954) 472-0052

CITRIX SYSTEMS: Newell Sues Over Unauthorized Personal Info Access
------------------------------------------------------------------
DOUGLAS NEWELL, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CITRIX SYSTEMS, INC., FIDELITY NATIONAL
FINANCIAL, INC., and LOANCARE, LLC, Defendants, Case No.
0:24-cv-60048 (S.D. Fla., January 8, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendants for negligence, breach of implied contract,
unjust enrichment, and declaratory judgment.

The case arises from Defendant LoanCare's failure to properly
secure and safeguard personally identifiable information (PII) of
the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals stored within its
systems due to a critical flaw in Defendant Citrix's NetScaler
software that resulted to a data breach on November 19, 2023.
LoanCare also failed to timely notify the Plaintiff and similarly
situated patients about the data breach. As a result, the private
information of the Plaintiff and Class members was compromised and
damaged through access by and disclosure to unknown and
unauthorized third parties, says the suit.

LoanCare, LLC is a mortgage servicer based in Virginia Beach,
Virginia.

Fidelity National Financial, Inc. is the parent company of
LoanCare, LLC.

Citrix Systems, Inc. is a cloud computing and virtualization
company based in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Antonio Arzola, Jr., Esq.
         Francesca Kester Burne, Esq.
         MORGAN & MORGAN
         COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP
         201 N. Franklin Street
         Tampa, FL 33602

COMERICA BANK: Court Narrows Claims in First Amended Complaint
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PAULA SPARKMAN, v.
COMERICA BANK, et al., Case No. 4:23-cv-02028-DMR (N.D. Cal.), the
Hon. Judge Donna M. Ryu entered an order granting in part and
denying in part the Defendants' motion to dismiss First amended
class action complaint, as follows:

-- The motion to dismiss claim 2, violation of 15 U.S.C. section
    1693l, is denied.

-- The motion to dismiss claim 3 for breach of contract is
denied.

-- Claims 4 and 8 on behalf of the IVR class and subclass are
    dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter
    jurisdiction.

-- Sparkman's claims for restitution in connection with claims 6
and
    7 (the remaining UCL claims) are dismissed with prejudice.

Accordingly, the FAC fails to state a claim for restitution. The
restitution claims are dismissed. As Sparkman has already been
given the opportunity to amend the complaint to state claims for
restitution, the dismissal is with prejudice.

The Plaintiff Sparkman filed this putative class action against
Defendants Comerica Bank and Conduent Business Services, LLC
alleging claims under the Electronic Funds Transfer Act ("EFTA"),
and California law related to Defendants' operation of prepaid
debit
cards through which a state agency disburses child support
payments.

Sparkman seeks to represent two classes and two subclasses of
allegedly similarly situated persons, defined as:

   Class:

   "All persons issued a California Way2Go Card (TM) Prepaid
   Mastercard (TM) who

    (1) notified Defendants that one or more charges on their
account
        were unauthorized or disputed; and

    (2) were denied reimbursement on the grounds that Defendants
(i)
        could not confirm fraud occurred; or (ii) found a conflict
in
        information provided during an investigation, through the
date
        of any class certification order in this action."

   EFTA Sub-Class:

   "All persons in the Class who

   (1) were denied on or after April 27, 2022 through the date of
any
       class certification order in this action and (2) whose
denial
       was with regard to a disputed charge (or charges) totaling
more
       than $50."

   IVR Surcharge Class:

   "All persons issued a California Way2Go Card (TM) Prepaid
   Mastercard (TM) whose accounts Defendants charged at least one
   $0.50 fee for calling Defendants’ IVR telephone system."

   IVR Surcharge Sub-Class:

   "All members of the IVR Surcharge Class whose accounts
Defendants
   charged at least one $0.50 fee for calling Defendants' IVR
   telephone system without allowing the consumer at least three
free
   calls in a month before imposing the charge."

Comerica is an American financial services company.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 21, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3tCcaqS at no extra charge.[CC

DOLEX DOLLAR: Sanchez Labor Suit Seeks to Certify Classes
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GABRIELA DE LA ROSA
SANCHEZ on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, v.
DOLEX DOLLAR EXPRESS, INC.; AND DOES 1 TO 100, INCLUSIVE, Case No.
2:23-cv-05848-MEMF-AS (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to
enter an order
certifying class action pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(3).

The Plaintiff class consists of the following:

   1. Opening/Closing Minimum Wage Class

      "All current and former hourly non-exempt employees employed
by
      Defendant at its branch locations in California, who worked
at
      least one opening or closing shift from April 12, 2019, to
July
      31, 2019."

   2. Opening/Closing Overtime Class

      "All current and former hourly non-exempt employees employed
by
      Defendant at its branch locations in California, who worked
at
      least one opening or closing shift from April 12, 2019, to
July
      31, 2019, on a workday they worked over eight hours in the
      workday or a workweek where the shift resulted in working
over
      40 hours in the workweek."

   3. Meal Break Premium Regular Rate Class

      "All current and former commission-eligible hourly non-exempt

      employees employed by Defendant at its branch locations in
      California from April 12, 2019, to June 1, 2022, who worked
at
      least one pay period during which they earned both
commissions
      and meal break premium wages but Defendant failed to include
the
      commissions in the regular rate of compensation when
calculating
      the meal break premium wages during the pay period."

   4. Final Wages Class

      "All hourly non-exempt employees employed by Defendant at
its
      branch locations in California and whose employment ended any

      time from April 12, 2020, through the date the court issues
an
      order certifying the class and who are members of either the

      Opening/Closing Minimum Wage Class or the Meal Break Premium

      Regular Rate Class."

In addition, thr Plaintiff requests that the Court appoint her as
Class Representative. The Plaintiff also request that the Court
appoint their counsel, Joseph Lavi, Jordan D. Bello, and Elizabeth
Harrier of Lavi & Ebrahimian, LLP as Class Counsel.

DolEx engages in providing money transfer and ancillary financial
services.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4aODjrm at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph Lavi, Esq.
          Jordan D. Bello, Esq.
          Elizabeth Harrier, Esq.
          LAVI & EBRAHIMIAN, LLP
          8889 W. Olympic Blvd., Suite 200
          Beverly Hills, CA 90211
          Telephone: (310) 432-0000
          Facsimile: (310) 432-0001
          E-mail: jlavi@lelawfirm.com
                  jbello@lelawfirm.com
                  eharrier@lelawfirm.com

DOLLAR TREE: Miceli Class Suit Removed from Sup. Ct. to N.D. Cal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned as COREY MICELI and CHERI PERRY,
individually, and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. DOLLAR
TREE STORES, INC., a Virginia corporation; and DOES 1 through 25,
inclusive, Case No. 23CV01630 (Filed Nov. 20, 2023), was removed
from the California Superior Court for Sonoma County to the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California on
Jan. 4, 2024.

The Northern California District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
3:24-cv-00083-SK to the proceeding.

The suit asserts nine putative class action causes of action for:
failure to pay minimum wages; failure to pay overtime wages; meal
break violations; rest break violations; wages not timely paid
during employment; failure to provide accurate wage statements;
untimely final wages; failure to reimburse necessary business
expenses; and unfair competition in violation of California
Business and Professions Code sections 17200, et seq.

The Plaintiffs purport to bring class claims on behalf of
themselves and the following putative classes: "All current and
former salaried employees whom Defendants classified as exempt and
who worked for the Defendants in the State of California at one or
more of the Defendants' retail locations at any time during the
period from four years prior to the date of the filing of this
Complaint until final judgment, excluding any members of the
Defendants' executive leadership teams and/or their Board of
Directors."

The Plaintiffs also plead a "Former Employee Sub-class" defined as:
"All Class members whose employment with the Defendants ended
either permanently or temporarily during the Class Period."

Plaintiff Corey Micelli worked for the Defendants from June 2021
through the present as a cashier, operations manager, merchandise
manager, temporary store manager and then store manager. Since
October of 2022, he has held the title of "store manager" at the
Defendants' Inglewood and Hawthorne, California locations.

Dollar Tree is an American multi-price-point chain of discount
variety stores.[BN]

The Defendant is represented by:

          Elena R. Baca, Esq.
          Jennifer Milazzo, Esq.
          Ryan D. Derry, Esq.
          PAUL HASTINGS LLP
          515 South Flower Street, 25th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 683-6000
          Facsimile: (213) 627-0705
          E-mail: elenabaca@paulhastings.com
                  jennifermilazzo@paulhastings.com
                  ryanderry@paulhastings.com

E&E CO: Faces Staples Suit Over Bedding & Linen Products' False Ads
-------------------------------------------------------------------
LORIANN STAPLES, ASHLEY CLARK, and DEANN SCOTT, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, v. E&E CO., LTD., Case No.
3:24-cv-00077-AGT (N.D. Cal., Jan. 4, 2024) is a putative class
action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the Defendant's 1000
thread count Beautyrest-brand bedding and linen products and 1500
thread count Madison Park-brand bedding and linen products.

The Plaintiffs assert that the Defendant labels, markets,
manufactures, distributes, and sells these Products as having
higher thread counts than they actually have. By doing so, the
Defendant's labeling and marketing have the tendency or capacity to
deceive or confuse reasonable consumers into believing the Products
are of better quality, more durable, longer lasting, softer, and
more comfortable for sleeping than products with lesser thread
counts. In purchasing the Defendant's Products, class members
received less than what was promised by Defendant due to the
inflated thread counts represented on the advertisements and labels
of the Products. Independent testing has revealed that, contrary to
the Defendant's representation that its products are made with a
thread count of 1000, the Beautyrest Products are actually made
with a thread count of 216. Likewise, testing has revealed that the
Madison Park Products are not 1500 thread count, but in fact in the
range of 237 to 295, the suit says.

As a cross check against the test results, the same
industry-standard test methodology was used on a competing brand
advertised as 600 thread count. Unlike the Defendant's Products,
the test results for that competing product passed, the suit adds.

The Plaintiffs and Class Members would not have purchased the
Products -- or would not have paid as much as they did to purchase
them -- had they known that they were not in fact the thread count
represented. The Plaintiffs and Class Members thus suffered
monetary damages as a result of the Defendant's deceptive and false
representations, alleges the suit.

In November 2021, the Plaintiff Staples purchased a pack of
Beautyrest 1000 thread count bed sheets from a Target in Fremont,
California. Before buying her Beautyrest Product, the Plaintiff
Staples reviewed the product's labeling and packaging and saw that
the product was labeled and marketed as "1000 thread count."

The Defendant is the designer, manufacturer, marketer, distributor,
and/or seller of the Beautyrest Products.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Joel D. Smith, Esq.
          Brittany S. Scott, 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
                  bscott@bursor.com

                - and -

          Benjamin Heikali, Esq.
          TREEHOUSE LAW, LLP
          2121 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2580
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (310) 751-5928
          E-mail: bheikali@treehouselaw.com

EARTHLINK HOLDINGS: Murray Wins Bid for Leave to File Reply
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Murray v. EarthLink
Holdings Corp., et al., Case No. 4:18-cv-00202 (E.D. Ark., Filed
March 19, 2018), the Hon. Judge James M. Moody Jr. entered an order
granting motion for leave to file the Plaintiff's Reply in support
of Motion for Class Certification and Exhibits A, B, and D of the
Declaration of David Knotts under seal.

The Plaintiff is directed to deliver a copy of the documents being
filed under seal to Chambers in searchable.pdf format upon filing.


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

EarthLink offers customers with managed information technology
services, including cloud computing, data centers, virtualization,
security, and applications.[CC]

EHEALTHINSURANCE SERVICES: Nichols Alleges Illegal Telephone Calls
------------------------------------------------------------------
TERRI NICHOLS and THOMAS MATTHEWS, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. EHEALTHINSURANCE
SERVICES, INC. d/b/a EHEALTH, Defendant, Case No. 5:23-cv-06720
(S.D. Cal., December 29, 2023) seeks injunctive and monetary relief
for all persons injured by Defendant's alleged unlawful conduct in
violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

According to the complaint, the Defendant negligently, knowingly,
and/or willfully placed unsolicited telephone calls to Plaintiffs
and the putative class on their cellular phones and placed
unsolicited telephone calls to Plaintiffs and the putative class to
phone numbers which are registered with the National Do Not Call
Registry. Through this conduct, Defendant has invaded the privacy
of Plaintiffs and the members of the Class, says the suit.

eHealthinsurance Services, Inc is a health insurance servicer that
provides consumers and businesses with health, dental, and vision
insurance options throughout the U.S.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Abbas Kazerounian, Esq.
          Mona Amini, Esq.
          Gustavo Ponce, Esq.
          KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC
          245 Fischer Avenue, Unit D1
          Costa Mesa, CA 92626
          Telephone: (800) 400-6808
          Facsimile: (800) 520-5523  
          E-mail: ak@kazlg.com
                  mona@kazlg.com
                  gustavo@kazlg.com

ELITE LINE: Deadline to File Class Cert Opposition Stayed
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Shaw v. Elite Line
Services, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:21-cv-01084 (E.D. Cal., Filed
July 12, 2021), the Hon. Judge entered an order that the deadline
by which the Defendants must file any opposition to the Plaintiff's
pending motion for class certification is stayed pending the
Court's disposition of Defendants' motion for ex parte relief.

In the event the Defendants seek to withdraw their motion for ex
parte relief, they shall file a new notice no later than 4:00PM,
the Cort says.

The nature of suit states Civil Rights -- Employment.

Elite Line provides airport facility equipment operation and
maintenance services.[CC]

ELITE LINE: Seeks to Strike Declaration of Tyler Smith in Shaw Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL SHAW, on behalf of
himself and the Class Members, v. ELITE LINE SERVICES, INC; DAIFUKU
AMERICA CORPORATION; DAIFUKU NORTH AMERICA HOLDING COMPANY, Case
No. 1:21-cv-01084-NODJ-CDB (E.D. Cal.), the Defendant asks the
Court to enter an order striking the declaration of Tyler Smith
submitted in support of Plaintiff's Motion for Class
Certification.

On Nov. 22, 2023, the Plaintiff submitted a Declaration of Tyler
Smith in Support of Plaintiff's motion for class certification.

The Defendant should also be able to ask Smith if he found any
instances where the "regular rate" was calculated properly in the
data he reviewed.

Elite Line provides airport facility equipment operation and
maintenance services.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3NT2jUi at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Defendant is represented by:

          Richard Simmons, Esq.
          Jason W. Kearnaghan, Esq.
          Rachel P. Howard, Esq.
          Raymond J. Nhan, Esq.
          SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP
          333 South Hope Street, 43rd Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071-1422
          Telephone: (213) 620-1780
          Facsimile: (213) 620-1398
          E-mail: rsimmons@sheppardmullin.com
                  jkearnaghan@sheppardmullin.com
                  rhoward@sheppardmullin.com
                  rnhan@sheppardmullin.com

ENTERGY CORP: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime Wages, Hollenbach Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES HOLLENBACH, Individually and For Others Similarly Situated v.
ENTERGY CORPORATION, Case No. 2:24-cv-00069-GGG-DPC (E.D. La.,
January 9, 2024), seeks to recover unpaid wages and other damages
from Entergy Corporation pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Plaintiff Hollenbach worked for Entergy as a field engineer at the
Waterford 3 Nuclear Plant in Killona, LA from approximately August
2023 until December 2023. Throughout his employment, Entergy
misclassified Hollenbach as an independent contractor to avoid
paying him overtime wages. Instead, Entergy paid Hollenbach
straight time for overtime, says the suit.

Headquartered in New Orleans, LA,  Entergy is an integrated energy
company engaged in electric power production, transmission, and
retail distribution operations. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Philip Bohrer, Esq.
          Scott E. Brady, Esq.
          BOHRER BRADY, LLC
          8712 Jefferson Highway, Suite B
          Baton Rouge, LA 70809
          Telephone: (225) 925-5297
          Facsimile: (225) 231-7000
          E-mail: phil@bohrerbrady.com
                  scott@bohrerbrady.com

                  - and -

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

                  - and -

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

EPIC LANDSCAPE: Gomez Labor Suit Seeks to Certify Classes
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSE GONZALEZ GOMEZ, Jesus
Salvador Hernandez-Devora, et. al., On behalf of themselves, and
all other persons similarly situated, v. EPIC LANDSCAPE
PRODUCTIONS, L.C., Case No. 2:22-cv-02198-JAR-ADM (D. Kan.), the
Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order pursuant to Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 23(a), 23(b)(3), and 23(g):

   1. Certifying this action as a class action on behalf of the
      following classes:

      A: H-2B workers who did not receive overtime compensation
after
         having worked more than 40 hours in a workweek;

      B: Non H-2B workers who did not receive overtime compensation

         after having worked more than 40 hours in a workweek;

      C: Missouri H-2B workers who did not receive overtime
         compensation after having worked more than 40 hours in a
         workweek; and

      D: Missouri non H-2B workers who did not receive overtime
         compensation after having worked more than 40 hours in a
         workweek.

   2. Certifying and appointing Jose Gonzalez Gomez as Class
      representative for the class seeking relief under Unjust
      Enrichment claims because of his citizenship as a U.S.
Citizen;


   3. Certifying and appointing Plaintiff Jesus Salvador
Hernandez-
      Devora as Class representative for the class seeking relief
      under Breach of Contract because of his status as an H-2B
      worker;

   4. Certifying and appointing Plaintiff Jesus Salvador
Hernandez-
      Devora as Class representative for the class seeking relief
      under Missouri Minimum Wage and Maximum Hours Laws for the
work
      he performed as a Missouri Laborer;

   3. Designating and appointing Plaintiff’s counsel of record,
the
      Hodgson Law Firm LLC and Bertram & Graf, LLC.

    4. Granting such other and further relief as the Court may deem

      just and proper.

The Plaintiffs contend that the evidence presented to the Court
unequivocally demonstrates that Defendants have a common practice
and policy of failing to pay its Laborers overtime compensation for
all hours worked in excess of 40 in a workweek.

The Defendants uniformly classified its employees as exempt from
overtime compensation. Plaintiffs have alleged that this uniform
misclassification is violative of Kansas and Missouri law
requirement for compensation of employees, the Plaintiffs add.

The Plaintiffs comprise a group of current and former hourly
laborers who have worked for Defendants.

The Defendants provide lawn care and landscaping for clients in
Kansas and Missouri.

The Defendants employ, among other workers, temporary laborers from
Mexico, using the H2B visa program, as well as laborers from Puerto
Rico and the Kansas City Area.

The Plaintiffs seek to recover back pay, individually and on behalf
of the proposed class, pursuant to breach of contract claims as a
result of guarantees and warranties made to hourly laborers through
the course of job advertisements, as well as through direct
contractual agreements with the Federal Government, and under
common law theories of quantum meruit and unjust enrichment.

Epic specializes in designing and building creative, functional and
fabulous landscape.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RNutBf at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Michael Hodgson, Esq.
          THE HODGSON LAW FIRM, LLC
          3609 SW Pryor Rd.
          Lee’s Summit, MO 64082
          Telephone: (816) 600-0117
          Facsimile: (816) 600-0137
          E-mail: mike@thehodgsonlawfirm.com

                - and -

          Timothy R. West, Esq.
          BERTRAM & GRAF, L.L.C.
          2345 Grand Boulevard, Suite 1925
          Kansas City, MO 64108
          Telephone: (816) 523-2205
          Facsimile: (816) 523-8258
          E-mail: tim@bertramgraf.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Eric W. Barth, Esq.
          HINKLE LAW FIRM LLC
          1617 North Waterfront Parkway, Suite 400
          Wichita, KS 67206
          E-mail: ebarth@hinklaw.com

ERLANGER HEALTH: Suit Removed to E.D. Tennessee
-----------------------------------------------
The case styled as Jane Doe, John Doe, Jack Doe, Janet Doe,
individually, on behalf of themselves, and all others similarly
situated v. Erlanger Health, Case No. 23-00730 was removed from the
Hamilton County Chancery Court, to the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Tennessee on Dec. 13, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:23-cv-00297-CEA-SKL to
the proceeding.

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

Erlanger Health System, incorporated as the Chattanooga-Hamilton
County Hospital Authority, a non-profit, public benefit corporation
registered in the State of Tennessee, is a system of hospitals,
physicians, and medical services based in Chattanooga,
Tennessee.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Andrew E. Mize, Esq.
          J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
          STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
          223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue
          Freedom Building, Ste. 200
          Nashville, TN 37203
          Phone: (615) 254-8801
          Email: amize@stranchlaw.com
                 gstranch@stranchlaw.com

               - and -

          Lynn A. Toops, Esq.
          Mary Kate Dugan, Esq.
          COHEN & MALAD, LLP
          One Indiana Square, Suite 1400
          Indianapolis, IN 46204
          Phone: (317) 636-6481
          Fax: (317) 636-2593
          Email: ltoops@cohenandmalad.com
                 mdugan@cohenandmalad.com

               - and -

          Raina Borelli, Esq.
          Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
          TURKE & STRAUSS LLP
          613 Williamson Street, Suite 201
          Madison, WI 53703
          Phone: (608) 237-1775
          Fax: (608) 509-4423
          Email: sam@turkestrauss.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Arthur P Brock
          Joseph Alan Jackson, II
          SPEARS, MOORE, REBMAN & WILLIAMS P.C.
          601 Market Street, Suite 400
          Chattanooga, TN 37402
          Phone: (423) 756-7000
          Email: apb@smrw.com
                 JAJ@smrw.com

               - and -

          Georgia L. Bennett, Esq.
          John P. Hutchins, Esq.
          BAKER & HOSTETLER, LLP
          1170 Peachtree Street, NE, Suite 2400
          Atlanta, GA 30309
          Phone: (404) 946-9841
          Email: gbennett@bakerlaw.com
                 jhutchins@bakerlaw.com

               - and -

          Paul G. Karlsgodt, Esq.
          BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP (CO)
          1801 California Street, Suite 4400
          Denver, CO 80202
          Phone: (303) 861-0600
          Email: pkarlsgodt@bakerlaw.com


EVENFLO COMPANY: Bid to Amend Complaint Partly OK'd
---------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit Re: Evenflo Company, Inc., Marketing,
Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, Case No.
1:20-md-02938-DJC (D. Mass.), the Hon. Judge Denise J. Casper
entered an order allowing in part and denying in part the motion to
amend.

The motion is denied as to claims brought by the Plaintiffs who did
not purchase boost seats directly from Evenflo for breach of
implied warranty under the California U.C.C. and under the laws of
Florida, Kentucky, New York, North Carolina and Washington (Counts
XI, XV, XXXI, LVI, LX, LXXX);

   -- as to unjust enrichment claims under the laws of Florida and
New
      Jersey (Counts XVI and LII);

   -- as to the KCPA (Count XXIX); and

   -- as to the Louisiana breach of warranty of specified quality
      claim (Count XXXIV).

The Court further denies the motion to amend as to the time-barred
express and implied warranty claims by Sapeika, Matthews and
Schnitzer (Counts XLII, XLIII, LV, LVI, LIX and LX) and as to
Schnitzer's NY DAPA claim (Count LIII).

The Court finally denies the motion to amend as to and Plaintiffs'
request for injunctive relief. The motion to amend is otherwise
allowed.

A putative class of consumers that purchased the Big Kid booster
seat filed this lawsuit against Evenflo alleging that Evenflo
misrepresented the safety features of the Big Kid booster seat.

The Court initially dismissed the consolidated complaint on
standing grounds under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1). D. 119.

The First Circuit affirmed that dismissal as to the injunctive
relief Plaintiffs sought, but reversed the ruling as to Plaintiffs'
monetary claims and remanded the case.

Evenflo manufactures and sells children's car seats.

A copy of the Court's memorandum and order dated Dec. 20, 2023 is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3NKp2BO at no
extra charge.[CC] 


FIDELITY NATIONAL: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Arrowsmith Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
GREGORY ARROWSMITH, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated,  Plaintiff v. FIDELITY NATIONAL FINANCIAL
INC.; and LOANCARE, LLC,  
Defendants, Case No. 3:24-cv-00011 (M.D. Fla., Jan. 4, 2024)
alleges that the Defendants lost control over its computer network
and the highly sensitive personal information stored on the
computer network in a data breach by cybercriminals.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that due to the Defendants'
intentionally obfuscating language, it is unclear when the Data
Breach precisely occurred and how long cybercriminals had
unfettered access to Plaintiff's and the Class's highly sensitive
information. Following an internal investigation, Defendants
learned cybercriminals gained unauthorized access to consumers'
personally identifiable information, including but not limited to
their name, address, Social Security Number, and Loan number, says
the suit.

Cybercriminals were able to breach the Defendants' systems because
the Defendants failed to adequately train their employees on
cybersecurity, failed to adequately monitor their agents,
contractors, vendors, and suppliers in handling and securing the
PII of Plaintiff, and failed to maintain reasonable security
safeguards or protocols to protect the Class's PII—rendering them
easy targets for cybercriminals.

The Plaintiff and the Class are victims of the Defendants'
negligence and inadequate cyber security measures. Specifically,
the Plaintiff and members of the proposed Class trusted the
Defendants with their PII. But Defendants betrayed that trust.
Defendants failed to properly use up-to-date security practices to
prevent the Data Breach, the suit asserts.

Fidelity National Financial, Inc. provides title insurance,
technology, and transaction services to the real estate and
mortgage industries. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jonathan B. Cohen, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
          PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC
          3833 Central Ave.
          St. Petersburg, FL 33713
          Telephone: (813) 699-4056
          Email: jcohen@milberg.com

               -and-

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

FRED MEYER: Discovery & PTO Deadlines Extended to March 26
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Woody, et al., v. Fred
Meyer Stores, Inc., Case No. 3:22-cv-01800 (D. Or., Filed Nov. 17,
2022), the Hon. Judge Marco A. Hernandez entered an order class
certification deadlines as follows:

-- Extension of Discovery & PTO Deadlines           March 26,
2024
    Class certification motion is due by:

-- Dispositive motions are due by:                  April 26, 2024


-- Joint ADR Report and Pretrial Order              April 26,
2024
    are due 30 days after resolution of
    dispositive motions, or, if no
    dispositive motions are filed, by:

The nature of suit states Labor Litigation.

Fred Meyer is an American chain of hypermarket superstores.

GENERAL HOLDING: Faces Milanes Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y.
-------------------------------------------------------------
RAMON MILANES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GENERAL HOLDING LLC, BRANDON YASGUR, JOSEPH
YASGUR, JOSEPH GERSHENOV, WOODSTOCK MANAGEMENT CORP., 4030 BRONX
BLVD. ASSOCIATES, L.L.C., YASGUR REALTY CORP. a/k/a YRC MANAGEMENT,
UNIVERSAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY LLC, ANN-GUR REALTY CORPORATION, REALTY
GROUP, AND ALL RELATED ENTITIES, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-11311
(S.D.N.Y., Dec. 29, 2023) arises from the Defendants' alleged
violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New York Labor Law,
and the supporting New York State Department of Labor Regulations.

This is a class and collective action brought by the Plaintiff to
recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages, reimbursement for
unlawful deductions from wages, liquidated damages for wage
shortfalls and for wages that were not paid on time, and other
wages owed to Plaintiff and similarly situated superintendents who
have worked at the approximately 70 apartment buildings owned,
controlled and/or operated by Defendants in New York City during
the applicable limitations periods.

The Plaintiff was employed by Defendants as a superintendent in
Bronx County, New York, from 2005 through the first week of October
2023.

The Defendants are engaged in a family-owned, residential real
estate enterprise.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Marc A. Rapaport, Esq.
          RAPAPORT LAW FIRM, PLLC
          80 Eighth Avenue, Suite 206
          New York, NY 10011
          Telephone: (212) 382-1600
          E-mail: mrapaport@rapaportlaw.com

               - and -

          Meredith R. Miller, Esq.
          MILLER LAW, PLLC
          167 Madison Avenue, Suite 305
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (347) 878-2587
          E-mail: meredith@millerlaw.nyc

GEORGIA: Scott Sues Over GDC's Refusal to Produce Medical Records
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CHRISTOPHER SCOTT, as surviving spouse of Monica Brown Robinson, on
behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v.
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant, Case No.
5:24-cv-00012-MTT (M.D. Ga., January 8, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for declaratory relief and claim for
attorney's fees.

The case arises from a controversy with regards to the legality of
the Georgia Department of Corrections' (GDC) refusal to produce
medical records to persons otherwise authorized by virtue of being
a surviving spouse or other next-of-kin. The Plaintiff seeks a
declaration from this court that all persons authorized to request
medical records are authorized by the Health Information
Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) to request
records from the GDC because HIPAA regulations defer to state law
to determine who is so authorized.

Georgia Department of Corrections is a department of the State of
Georgia which operates the state prison system from its operational
headquarters in Forsyth, Georgia. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
       
         Craig T. Jones, Esq.
         CRAIG T. JONES, P.C.
         Post Office Box 66
         Savannah, GA 31402
         Telephone: (678) 643-0062
         E-mail: craigthomasjones@outlook.com

GERBER LIFE: Seeks to File Class Cert. Opposition Under Seal
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSEPHINE LOGUIDICE and
EMILIE NORMAN, v. GERBER LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No.
7:20-cv-03254-KMK (S.D.N.Y.), Gerber Seeks to file under seal its
Memorandum in opposition to plaintiffs' motion for class
certification.

In its memorandum in opposition, Gerber Life references documents,
deposition testimony of various witnesses and information
pertaining to the internal operation of Gerber Life’s business,
which Gerber Life reasonably believes to contain and/or comprise
trade secrets or other confidential research, development, or
commercial information that is not generally known, and that Gerber
Life would not normally reveal to third parties or, if disclosed,
would require such third parties to maintain the same in
confidence.

Gerber Life provides juvenile and family life insurance products to
middle-income families along with medical insurance to small- and
medium-sized businesses.

A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Dec. 20, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47luz98 at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Defendant is represented by:

          Eric W. Richardson, Esq.
          Joseph M. Brunner, Esq.
          Brent D. Craft, Esq.
          Emily E. St. Cyr, Esq.
          Petra G. Bergman, Esq.
          VORYS SATER SEYMOUR AND PEASE LLP
          301 East Fourth Street, Suite 3500
          Cincinnati, OH 45202
          Telephone: (513) 723-4019
          Facsimile: (513) 852-7885
          E-mail: ewrichardson@vorys.com
                  jmbrunner@vorys.com
                  bdcraft@vorys.com
                  eestcyr@vorys.com
                  pgbergman@vorys.com

                - and -

          Patrick J. Gennardo, Esq.
          Joseph G. Tully, Esq.
          ALSTON & BIRD LLP
          90 Park Avenue
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 210-9400
          Facsimile: (212) 210-9444
          E-mail: patrick.gennardo@alston.com
                  joe.tully@alston.com

GORDON LANE: Filing of Renewed Bid for Class Cert. Due Feb. 9
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GAIL PARRISH by and
through Successor in Interest, Monica Parrish, v. GORDON LANE
HEALTHCARE, LLC; SUN MAR MANAGEMENT SERVICES; IRVING BAUMAN; FRANK
JOHNSON; ELI MARMUR; WILLIAM PRESNELL and DOES 1-250, inclusive,
Case No. 8:22-cv-01790-WLH-KES (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Wesley
L. Hsu entered an order on joint stipulation regarding the case
schedule.

      -- Last Date to file Renewed Motion for           Feb. 9,
2024
         Class Certification:

      -- Last Date to file Opposition to                March 11,
2024
         Renewed Motion for Class
         Certification:

      -- Last Date to File Reply in Support             April 1,
2024
         of Renewed Motion for Class
         Certification:

      -- The renewed class certification motion         April 12,
2024
         shall be noticed for hearing on:

      -- Discovery shall be completed by:               June 21,
2024

      -- All other motions shall be filed               Aug. 2,
2024
         and heard by:

Gordon Lane is a nursing home.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 21, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4aQHMtB at no extra charge.[CC]

GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES: Yorba Suit Removed from Sup. Ct. to S.D. Cal.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned as LUIS YORBA, on behalf of
himself and others similarly situated v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
INSURANCE COMPANY; and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, Case No.
202300051161 (Filed Nov. 27, 2023), was removed from the Superior
Court of the State of California for the County of San Diego to the
United States District Court Southern District of California on
Jan. 4, 2024.

The Southern California District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
3:24-cv-00031-GPC-VET to the proceeding.

The suit asserts minimum wage violations by alleging that the
California Class spent one (1) hour completing the initial process
of setting up their workstations off the clock and five (5) to
fifteen (15) minutes on the boot up process every shift worked
remotely, and that the California Class was not paid for this time.


The Plaintiff brings his claims on behalf of nine purported
classes, collectively referred to as the "California Class,"
consisting of "all current and former hourly non-exempt employees
employed by [GEICO] as direct employees as well as temporary
employees employed through temp agencies in California at any time
from four years prior to the filing of the initial Complaint in
this matter . . . ."

The Plaintiff is an individual residing in California who has
worked for GEICO in California since October 2022.

GEICO is a private American auto insurance company.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Kristin Walker-Probst, Esq.
          Courtney C. Wenrick, Esq.
          WOMBLE BOND DICKINSON (US) LLP
          400 Spectrum Center Drive, Suite 1700
          Irvine, CA 92618
          Telephone: (714) 557-3800
          Facsimile: (714) 557-3347
          E-mail: Kristin.Walker-Probst@wbd-us.com
                  Courtney.Wenrick@wbd-us.com

GRANT CONSTRUCTION: Monday Balks at Unsolicited Telemarketing Calls
-------------------------------------------------------------------
JILL MONDAY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GRANT CONSTRUCTION & ROOFING, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 8:23-cv-02992 (M.D. Fla., December 29, 2023) is
a putative class action against the Defendant to secure redress for
violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

According to the complaint, the Defendant engages in unsolicited
telemarketing utilizing prerecorded voice calls to promote its
roofing inspection and diagnostic services. The message used by
Defendant was recorded prior to it being utilized during the call
to Plaintiff, and a live person did not read a script during the
call. The Plaintiff received the subject calls with a prerecorded
voice within this judicial district and, therefore, Defendant's
violation of the TCPA occurred within this district.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to halt
Defendant's unlawful conduct which has resulted in intrusion into
the peace and quiet in a realm that is private and personal to
Plaintiff and the Class members. The Plaintiff also seeks statutory
damages on behalf of himself and members of the Class, and any
other available legal or equitable remedies.

Grant Construction & Roofing, Inc. is a roofing contractor based in
Florida.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq.
          HIRALDO P.A.
          401 E. Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1400
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 400-4713
          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

GUIDEHOUSE LLP: Underpays Compliance Analysts, Torrez Claims
------------------------------------------------------------
MARIA TORREZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GUIDEHOUSE, LLP, Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-00032 (E.D. Va., January 8, 2024) is a class action against
the Defendant for its failure to pay overtime wages in violation of
the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Ms. Torrez worked for Guidehouse as a compliance analyst and
investigator analyst from approximately October 2019 until January
2023..

Guidehouse, LLP is a provider of consulting services, headquartered
in McLean, Virginia. [BN]

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

                  - and –

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

                  - and –

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

GUSE C-STORE: Fails to Pay Overtime Premiums, Torres Suit Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
Graviel Torrez, Individually and On Behalf of Others Similarly
Situated, Plaintiff v. Rajab A. Momin, Guse C-Store, Inc., Guse
Enterprises, LLC, New Timber Forest C-Store, Inc., Northline
Enterprises Inc., Super Express Food Mart, Inc., Super K Express
Food Mart, Inc., Northline Express, LLC, and Will Clayton Parkway,
LLC, Defendants, Case No. 4:24-cv-00079 (S.D. Tex., January 9,
2024) seeks to recover unpaid overtime that is required by the Fair
Labor Standards Act and damages under the Internal Revenue Code for
reporting false information on Federal tax forms.

Plaintiff Torrez worked for Momin in a gas station/convenience
store run by Rajab A. Momin's company Guse C-Store, Inc. in a
convenience store premises owned by Momin's company Guse
Enterprises, LLC. The Plaintiff worked for Defendants as a cashier
from April of 2018 until November 20, 2023. During the time he
worked for Defendants, Torrez regularly worked more than 40 hours
per week. However, the Defendants failed to pay Torrez an overtime
premium for any of the hours he worked over 40 in a workweek.
Instead, they paid Torrez the same hourly rate for all the hours he
worked, says the suit.

Guse C-Store, Inc. operates as a convenience store and/or gasoline
station in the Houston area. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Josef F. Buenker, Esq.
          THE BUENKER LAW FIRM
          2060 North Loop West, Suite 215
          Houston, TX 77018
          Telephone: (713) 868-3388
          Facsimile: (713) 683-9940
          E-mail: jbuenker@buenkerlaw.com

HAIN CELESTIAL: Howard Considers Sealing of Docs
------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TRACY HOWARD, ADINA
RINGLER, and TRECEE ARTIS on behalf of themselves and those
similarly situated, v. THE HAIN CELESTIAL GROUP, INC. d/b/a EARTH'S
BEST, Case No. 3:22-cv-00527-VC (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs ask the
Court to enter an order granting their administrative motion to
consider whether another party's material should be sealed used in
support of the Plaintiffs' reply for class certification.

Pursuant to Local Rule 79-5(d), the Plaintiffs Tracy Howard, Adina
Ringler, and Trecee Artis respectfully file this administrative
motion to seal certain portions of the following documents that
have been designated as confidential by other parties: Plaintiffs'
Reply in support of Motion for Class Certification and Supporting
Exhibits to the Declaration of Patrick Branson.

These documents contain information designated as confidential or
highly confidential by Defendant pursuant to the protective order
entered in this case. Specifically, information derived
from material designated confidential appears at:

-- Plaintiffs' Reply in support of Motion for Class Certification
at
    pages 7-8.

-- Declaration of Patrick Branson, Exs. 1, 2.

Hain is an international food and personal care company.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' administrative motion dated Dec. 20, 2023
is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47eAT28 at no
extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

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


HEARTLAND PAYMENT: Class Cert Responses Deadline Amended to Feb. 22
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MAX STORY, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, v. HEARTLAND PAYMENT
SYSTEMS, LLC, a Foreign Limited Liability Company, Case No.
3:19-cv-00724-TJC-JBT (M.D. Fla.), the Hon. Judge Timothy J.
Corrigan entered an order amending the Court's Third Amended Phase
One Case Management and Scheduling Order as follows:

  Deadline for moving for class certification.     Jan. 4, 2024

  Deadline for responses to motions for class      Feb. 22, 2024
  certification and Daubert motions.

  Deadline for optional replies, limited           Mar. 21, 2024
  to 10 pages.

  Hearing on class certification motion            Apr. 23, 2024
  (the Court will issue a separate notice
  if it wishes to hear argument on any
  Daubert motions at this hearing).

Heartland Payment is a U.S.-based payment processing and technology
provider.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3S9fPWx at no extra charge.[CC]

HILTON DOMESTIC: Bid to Continue Class Cert Deadlines OK'd
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TRAVELERS UNITED, INC., v.
HILTON DOMESTIC OPERATING COMPANY INC., et al., Case No.
1:23-cv-03584-BAH (D.D.C.), the Court entered an order granting
consent motion to continue Responsive Pleading and Class
Certification Deadlines.

-- The Court orders that the existing January 11, 2024, deadline
to
    respond to the Complaint is deferred pending resolution of
    Plaintiffs' anticipated Motion to Remand.

-- In the event the Court denies the Plaintiffs' anticipated
remand
    motion, unless otherwise agreed to by the parties or ordered by

    the Court, Defendants will answer or otherwise respond to the
    Complaint within 30 days of the Court's ruling on Plaintiff's
    anticipated remand motion, and Plaintiff will be permitted to
file
    a motion for class certification within six months of the
Court's
    ruling on Plaintiff's anticipated remand motion.

The Plaintiff filed its Complaint in the Superior Court of the
District of Columbia on September 20, 2023.

The Defendants removed this action to this Court on December 1,
2023.

On December 7, 2023, the Court issued a Minute Order granting
Defendants' consent motion to extend its deadline to respond to
Plaintiff's complaint until January 11, 2024.

Hilton offers accommodation, beaches, dining, parking, and other
related services.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/48KyhKA at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Hassan Zavareei, Esq.
          Peter Silva, Esq.
          Leora Friedman, Esq.
          TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP
          2000 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Suite 1010
          Washington, DC 20006
          Telephone: (202) 973-0900
          E-mail: hzavareei@tzlegal.com
                  psilva@tzlegal.com
                  lfriedman@tzlegal.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Bridget K. O'Connor, Esq.
          JONES DAY
          51 Louisiana Ave NW
          Washington, DC 20001
          Telephone: (202) 879-3869
          E-mail: boconnor@jonesday.com

HOYA OPTICAL: Court Adopts Joint Report & Proposed Scheduling Order
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ALAN WRINKLE, v. HOYA
OPTICAL LABS OF AMERICA, INC., Case No. 3:23-cv-03308-MAB (S.D.
Ill.), the Hon. Judge Mark A. Beatty entered an order adopting
joint report and proposed scheduling and discovery order:

Hoya manufacture and sell special glass used in various fields
including electronic glasses which are often used in the electric
and electronics industries.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 21, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3NTfrst at no extra charge.[CC]



INFINITE HOMES: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Amaya Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------
JOSE ALFREDO AMAYA; LUIS MIRANDA; and MOISES ALEMAN, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v.
INFINITE HOMES GROUP; INFINITE HOMES GROUP 218 LLC; INFINITE HOMES
GROUP 4108 LLC; INFINITE HOMES GROUP 21AC LLC; INFINITE HOMES GROUP
8N LLC; INFINITE HOMES GROUP 21AA LLC; INFINITE HOMES GROUP 21AD
LLC; INFINITE HOMES GROUP 21AE LLC; INFINITE HOMES GROUP 21AHI LLC;
INFINITE HOMES GROUP 2601 LLC; INFINITE HOMES GROUP 3629 LLC;
GREILYN CONSTRUCTION LLC; SHAY MOKAI; ALFREDO SANDOVAL; ERON HEATH,
Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-00031-ADC (D. Md., Jan. 5, 2024) is an
action against the Defendants for its willful failure to pay the
Plaintiffs their earned wages, including overtime wages, in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Plaintiff Amaya was employed by the Defendants as laborers.

INFINITE HOMES GROUP is a privately owned property preservation and
single family company based in Northeast Ohio. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Monisha Cherayil, Esq.
          Diana Jarek, Esq.
          PUBLIC JUSTICE CENTER
          201 North Charles Street, Suite 1200
          Baltimore, MD 21201
          Telephone: (410) 625-9409
          Facsimile: (410) 625-9423
          Email: cherayilm@publicjustice.org
          jarekd@publicjustice.org

INSOMNIA COOKIES: Court Stays Forte Suit Pending Arbitration
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JENNIPHER FORTE, on her
own behalf and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. INSOMNIA
COOKIES, LLC d/b/a INSOMNIA COOKIES; SERVE U BRANDS, INC; and SETH
BERKOWITZ, Case No. 3:23-cv-00551-DRL-MGG (N.D. Ind.), the Hon.
Judge Damon R. Leichty entered an order:

-- Granting the motion to compel arbitration,

-- Denying the motion to dismiss,

-- Staying the case pending arbitration, and

-- Directing parties to file a joint status report with the court

    within 21 days of the completion of arbitration.

Insomnia Cookies is a chain of bakeries in the United States that
specializes in delivering warm cookies, baked goods, and ice cream.


A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 21, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3SaEzOf at no extra charge.[CC]



INTEGRIS HEALTH: Fails to Secure Clients' Info, Owens Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
BRITTNEY OWENS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. INTEGRIS HEALTH, INC., Defendant, Case No.
5:24-cv-00020-JD (W.D. Okla., January 8, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for negligence, negligence per se, breach of
confidence, invasion of privacy, unjust enrichment, and declaratory
judgment.

The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and
safeguard personally identifiable information of the Plaintiff and
similarly situated patients stored within its data systems
following a data breach on November 28, 2023. The Defendant also
failed to timely notify the Plaintiff and similarly situated
patients about the data breach. As a result, the private
information of the Plaintiff and Class members was compromised and
damaged through access by and disclosure to unknown and
unauthorized third parties, says the suit.

Integris Health, Inc. is a not-for-profit health network, with its
principal place of business located in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Edward L. White, Esq.
         Travis D. Mendoza, Esq.
         EDWARD L. WHITE, PC
         829 E. 33rd St.
         Edmond, OK 73013
         Telephone: (405) 810-8188
         E-mail: ed@edwhitelaw.com
                 travis@edwhitelaw.com

                 - and -

         James E. Cecchi, Esq.
         Kevin G. Cooper, Esq.
         CARELLA BYRNE CECCHI BRODY & AGNELLO, P.C.
         5 Becker Farm Road
         Roseland, NJ 07068
         Telephone: (973) 994-1700
         E-mail: jcecchi@carellabyrne.com
                 kcooper@carellabyrne.com

JAB EXPRESS: Filing for Class Certification Bid Due April 1
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Snide, et al., v. JAB
Express, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:22-cv-01373 (N.D.N.Y., Filed Dec.
20, 2022), the Hon. Judge Gary L. Sharpe entered an order as
follows:

  (1) The parties shall file next status            Feb. 2, 2024
      Reports on or before:

  (2) Mandatory mediation shall be                  Feb. 16, 2024
      completed by:

  (3) All Discovery shall be completed by:          Feb. 28, 2024

  (4) the Class Certification Motion shall          April 1, 2024
      be filed by:

  (5) Dispositive Motions shall be filed by:        May 29, 2024

The nature of suit states Labor Litigation.

JAB is a freight shipping trucking company.



JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Loses Reconsideration Bid on 2022 Court Opinion
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as FRANK HALL, et al., v.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, et al., Case No. 3:18-cv-01833-ZNQ-TJB (D.N.J.),
the Hon. Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni entered an order denying
J&J's motion for reconsideration of the Court's April 29, 2022
opinion.

  -- The Court further ordered that the Clerk of Court terminate
     Docket Entry No. 198.

  -- Accordingly, the Court concludes that this Motion is
time-barred
     as it was filed after the 14-day deadline had elapsed.

  -- J&J's proffered new evidence was available prior to the
Court's
     April 29, 2022 Opinion.

J&J claims, the Court is hard-pressed to find why J&J did not
simply raise or submit these declarations as a supplemental
submission prior to the issuance of the April 29, 2022 Opinion.

The Court presumes the parties' familiarity with the history of
this action and includes herein only background relevant to the
instant motion.

Specifically, it is alleged that "Defendants fraudulently inflated
the value of J&J's stock by issuing false and misleading statements
as part of a long-running scheme to conceal the truth from
investors that the Company’s talc products were contaminated with
asbestos, and that
Plaintiff and other investors relied on these material
misrepresentations and omissions to their detriment."

Johnson & Johnson is an American multinational, pharmaceutical, and
medical technologies corporation.

A copy of the Court's memorandum and order dated Dec. 20, 2023 is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3tBSi71 at no
extra charge.[CC]

KANE & MYERS: Peredia Suit Removed to D. Nevada
-----------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Michelle Peredia, on behalf of herself and
all others similarly situated v. KANE & MYERS, PLLC, d/b/a and
a/k/a THE702FIRM; MICHAEL KANE, an individual; BRADLEY MYERS, an
individual; JOEL HENGSTLER, an individual; TAMARA HARLESS, an
individual; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No.
A-23-882153-C was removed from the Eighth Judicial District Court,
Clark County, Nevada, to the U.S. District Court for the District
of Nevada on Dec. 27, 2023, and assigned Case No.
2:23-cv-02132-APG-VCF.

Peredia, on behalf of herself and all other similarly situated
legal assistants, paralegals, and other nonexempt office staff,
also contends THE702FIRM failed to pay her the minimum wage during
her employment with them. Peredia, on behalf of herself and all
other similarly situated legal assistants, paralegals, and other
nonexempt office staff, also contends that she regularly performed
various litigation support duties for over 40 hours per week but
was not paid overtime.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Sheri M. Thome, Esq.
          Steve Shevorski, Esq.
          WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN, & DICKER LLP
          6689 Las Vegas Blvd. South, Suite 200
          Las Vegas, NV 89119
          Phone: 702.727.1400
          Facsimile: 702.727.1401
          Email: Sheri.Thome@wilsonelser.com
                 Steve.Shevorski@wilsonelser.com


KRAFT HEINZ: Galbreth Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois
-------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Kamilah Galbreth, individually, and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. The Kraft Heinz Company, Case
No. 4:23-cv-06341 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of California, to the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of Illinois on Dec. 27, 2023.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:23-cv-17095 to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.

The Kraft Heinz Company -- https://www.kraftheinzcompany.com/ --
provides high quality, great taste and nutrition for all eating
occasions whether at home, in restaurants or on the go.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Craig Wallace Straub, Esq.
          CROSNER LEGAL, P.C.
          9440 Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 301
          Beverly Hills, CA 90210
          Phone: (310) 496-5818
          Email: craig@crosnerlegal.com

               - and -

          Michael Thomas Houchin, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF RONALD A. MARRON
          651 Arroyo Drive
          San Diego, CA 92103
          Phone: (619) 696-9006
          Email: mike@consumersadvocates.com

               - and -

          Shaun H. Crosner, Esq.
          PASICH LLP
          1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 690
          Manhattan Beach, CA 90266
          Phone: (424) 313-7860
          Email: scrosner@pasichllp.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Dean Nicholas Panos, Esq.
          JENNER & BLOCK LLP
          353 N. Clark Street
          Chicago, IL 60654
          Phone: (312) 222-9350
          Email: dpanos@jenner.com

               - and -

          Alexander Michael Smith, Esq.
          JENNER AND BLOCK LLP
          515 South Flower Street, Suite 3300
          Los Angeles, CA 90660
          Phone: (213) 239-5100
          Email: asmith@jenner.com


L&P WINES & LIQUORS: Martin Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against L&P Wines & Liquors,
Inc. The case is styled as Damian Martin, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated v. L&P Wines & Liquors, Inc., Case
No. 1:23-cv-09536-JAM (E.D.N.Y., Dec. 28, 2023).

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

L&P Wines & Liquors, Inc. -- https://lpwinesandliquors.com/ -- is
an easygoing locale offering classic & speciality liquors & wines,
plus occasional tastings.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


LAS DELICIAS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Aviles Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------
LEONARDO AVILES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. LAS DELICIAS TEX MEX AND GRILL LLC; CELIA
HERNANDEZ; and ADOLFO CAMPO, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-00113
(D.N.J., Jan. 7, 2024) 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 Aviles was employed by the Defendants as a cook.

LAS DELICIAS TEX MEX AND GRILL LLC is engaged in the food industry
business. The Company serves Mexican dishes. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Lina Stillman, Esq.
          STILLMAN LEGAL, P.C.
          42 Broadway, 12t Floor
          New York, New York 10004
          Tel (212) 203-2417
          www.stillmanlegalpc.com

LEAR CORP: Parsons Seeks to Recover Proper Overtime Wages
---------------------------------------------------------
CARRIE PARSONS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. LEAR CORPORATION, Defendant, Case No.
2:24-cv-10057-MFL-PTM (E.D. Mich., January 9, 2024) seeks to
recover unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages,
attorney's fees, costs, and other relief as appropriate under the
Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff is an adult resident of Midland, Michigan and was
employed by Defendant from approximately August 15, 2017 through
the present. Throughout Plaintiff's employment with Defendant she
earned shift differential pay. However, Defendant failed to
incorporate any shift differentials into Plaintiff's regular hourly
rate calculation, says the suit.

Headquartered in Southfield, MI, Lear is a Delaware corporation
that manufactures automotive seating and electrical distribution
systems. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Jesse L. Young, Esq.
         SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
         141 E. Michigan Avenue, Suite 600
         Kalamazoo, MI 49007
         Telephone: (269) 250-7500
         E-mail: jyoung@sommerspc.com

                 - and -

         Jason J. Thompson, Esq.
         SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
         One Town Square, 17th Floor
         Southfield, MI 48076
         Telephone: (248) 355-0300
         E-mail: jthompson@sommerspc.com

                  - and -

         Jonathan Melmed, Esq.
         Laura Supanich, Esq.
         MELMED LAW GROUP, P.C.
         1801 Century Park East, Suite 850
         Los Angeles, CA 90067
         Telephone: (310) 824-3828
         E-mail: jm@melmedlaw.com
                 lms@melmedlaw.com

LEVI'S ONLY: Fails to Timely Pay Wages, Rankine Suit Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------
PATRICK RANKINE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. LEVI'S ONLY STORES, INC., Defendant, Case
No. 600417/2024 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Nassau Cty., January 8, 2024) is a
class action against the Defendant for failure to pay timely wages
in violation of the New York Labor Law.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant as a manual worker at a
Levi's store located in New York, New York from approximately
November 2019 to January 2020.

Levi's Only Stores, Inc. is a retailer of apparel products, with a
principal place of business in San Francisco, California. [BN]

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

LITTLE BROWN PIZZA: Redick Files ADA Suit in C.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Little Brown Pizza
Box, LLC. The case is styled as Crystal Redick, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Little Brown Pizza Box,
LLC doing business as Pieology, Case No. 2:23-cv-10795-DMG-SK (C.D.
Cal., Dec. 27, 2023).

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

Little Brown Pizza Box, LLC doing business as Pieology --
https://pieology.com/ -- is a Tustin, California-based pizza chain
within the fast-casual dining restaurants category.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Robert Sibilia, Esq.
          OCEANSIDE LAW CENTER
          28202 Cabot Road Suite 300
          Laguna Niguel, CA 92677
          Phone: (760) 666-1151
          Fax: (818) 698-0300
          Email: robert@oceansidelawcenter.com


LITTLE CAESAR: Conditional Cert Bid Referred to Magistrate Judge
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Horner, et al., v. Little
Caesar Enterprises, Inc. et al., Case No. 5:22-cv-01324 (N.D.N.Y.,
Filed Dec. 9, 2022), the Hon. Judge Thomas J. Mcavoy entered an
order referring motion to certify class (conditional certification
pursuant to 29 USC 216(b)) to Magistrate Judge Dancks for review
and consideration.

The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
involving Denial of Overtime Compensation.

Little Caesar is an American multinational chain of pizza
restaurants.


LOUISIANA: Plan of Class Notice OK'd in A.A. Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as A. A., by and through his
mother, P.A., ET AL., V. STEPHEN R. RUSSO, in his official
capacity, as Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health, ET
AL., Case No. 3:19-cv-00770-BAJ-SDJ (M.D. La.), the Hon. Judge
Brian A. Jackson entered an order granting the Plaintiffs'
unopposed motion for approval of plan of class notice.

The Court further ordered that within 30 days of the date of this
Order, the Defendants shall post Plaintiffs' notice Form in a
conspicuous format on the following public-facing websites:

   1. Louisiana Department of Health Main Page, available at
      https://ldh.la.gov/

   2. Louisiana Department of Health, "Behavioral Health" homepage,

      available at https://ldh.la.gov/index.cfm/subhome/10

   3. Louisiana Department of Health, "Medicaid" homepage,
available
      at https://ldh.la.gov/index.cfm/subhome/1

   4. Louisiana Department of Health, "Healthy Louisiana" page,
      available at https://ldh.la.gov/index.cfm/subhome/48

   5. Louisiana Department of Health, "Healthy Louisiana Resources"

      page, available at https://ldh.la.gov/index.cfm/page/2477

On November 30, 2023, the Court entered its Order certifying a
class in pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2), with
the class defined as:

   "All Medicaid-eligible youth under the age of 21 in the State of

   Louisiana who have a mental health or behavioral disorder, and
for
   whom a licensed practitioner of the healing arts recommends
   Intensive Care Coordination, Crisis Services, and Intensive
   Behavioral Services to correct or ameliorate their disorders."

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41QYxAP at no extra charge.[CC]



LUV N' CARE: Baby Products Contains Toxic Chemicals, Suit Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
BROOKE RICHARDS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. LUV N' CARE, LTD.; and DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 24STCV00273 (Cal. Super., Los
Angeles Cty., Jan. 4, 2024) is a consumer protection class action
arising out of the existence of organic fluorine in Juvenile
products produced and sold under the brand name "Nuby" that
implicate multiple health and safety concerns.

According to the complaint, through an extensive, widespread,
comprehensive, and uniform nationwide marketing campaign, including
creating marketing materials pertaining to the Product for
third-party sellers, the Defendant promoted itself as a
conscientious company that does not use suspected harmful chemicals
in its manufacturing process and charges a premium for such claimed
standards.

Through the Defendant's marketing and advertising campaign, the
Defendant was able to sell the Product to thousands of consumers
throughout California and the rest of the United States. The
Product is sold individually for prices averaging $4. The Products
at issue contain, among other things, PFAS a class of chemicals
that is highly toxic and highly persistent in the environment, says
the suit.

The Plaintiff would not have purchased but for the Defendant's
false promotion of the Product as being made without any suspected
harmful chemicals. Had the Plaintiff and the Class Member known the
true nature of the Product, they would not have purchased the
Product, or would not have paid as much for them, the suit
asserts.

LUV N' CARE, LTD. manufactures baby products. The Company provides
bottles, brush, nipples, drying racks, grooming set, bath seat,
medical kit, powder dispenser, nursing pads, feeding spoons, and
other related products. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Paul D. Stevens, Esq.
          Lauren A. Bochurberg, Esq.
          STEVENS, LC
          1855 Industrial Street, Suite 518
          Los Angeles, CA 90021
          Telephone: (213) 270-1211
          Facsimile: (213) 270-1223
          Email: pstevens@stevenslc.com
                 lbochurberg@stevenslc.com

MAISON SOLUTIONS: Green Sues Over Drop in Share Price
-----------------------------------------------------
RICK GREEN; and EVGENIA NIKITINA, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. MAISON SOLUTIONS INC.;
JOHN XU; ALEXANDRIA M. LOPEZ; TAO HAN; BIN WANG; MARK WILLIS;
XIAOXIA ZHANG; JOSEPH STONE CAPITAL, LLC; and AC SUNSHINE
SECURITIES LLC, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-00063 (C.D. Cal., Jan.
4, 2024) is a class action on behalf of the Plaintiffs and other
persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Maison
Class A common stock pursuant and traceable to the registration
statement and prospectus (collectively, the "Registration
Statement") issued in connection with the Company's October 2023
initial public offering ("IPO" or the "Offering"); and securities
between October 5, 2023 and December 15, 2023, inclusive (the
"Class Period"), seeking to pursue claims under the Securities Act
of 1933 (the "Securities Act") and the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the "Exchange Act").

The Plaintiffs allege in the complaint that in the Registration
Statement and throughout the Class Period, Defendants made
materially false and misleading statements, as well as failed to
disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business,
operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to
disclose to investors: (1) that the Company's vendor XHJC Holdings
Inc., is a related party; (2) that the Company's CEO and related
entities were alleged to have used supermarkets as a front to
defraud the EB-5 visa program; and (3) that, as a result of the
foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's
business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading
and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

Maison stock has traded as low as $1.50 per share, a more than 62
percent decline from the $4 per share IPO price. As a result of the
Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous
decline in the market value of the Company's securities, Plaintiffs
and other Class members have suffered significant losses and
damages, says the suit.

MAISON SOLUTIONS INC. operates as a supermarket. The Company offers
traditional Asian foods and merchandises such as fresh produce,
meat, seafood, and other daily necessities. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Robert V. Prongay, Esq.
          Charles Linehan, Esq.
          Pavithra Rajesh, Esq.
          GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
          1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (310) 201-9150
          Facsimile: (310) 201-9160
          Email: rprongay@glancylaw.com
                 clinehan@glancylaw.com
                 prajesh@glancylaw.com

MAKIE MARKETING: Hernandez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Makie Marketing, Inc.
The case is styled as Timothy Hernandez, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated v. Makie Marketing, Inc., Case No.
1:23-cv-09535 (E.D.N.Y., Dec. 28, 2023).

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

Makie Marketing, Inc. -- https://www.makieclothier.com/ -- is a
store for high-end children's clothing, outerwear & footwear, plus
women's clothing & housewares.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


MARIANI PACKING: Must Disclose Expert Witnesses by Feb. 1
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KIMBERLY DIESEL, v.
MARIANI PACKING CO., Case No. 4:22-cv-01368-AGF (E.D. Mo.), the
Hon. Judge Audrey G. Fleissig entered a third amended case
management order as follows:

   1. The Defendant shall disclose all class certification expert
      witnesses and shall provide the summaries and reports
required
      by Rule 26(a)(2)(B) and (C), Fed. R. Civ. P., no later than
      February 1, 2024.

   2. Provisions governing pre-trial materials and deadlines as set

      forth in the previous case management orders shall remain in

      place.
Mariani specializes in growing, drying, processing, and packaging
dried fruit snacks and ingredient.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 19, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/487nWs9 at no extra charge.[CC]

MARION COUNTY, OR: Sawyer Files Suit in D. Oregon
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Marion County, et al.
The case is styled as Jeffrey Sawyer, Baltazar Ortiz, on behalf of
themself and all others similarly situated v. Marion County,
Clackamas County, on behalf of itself and all others similarly;
Ellen F. Rosenblum, in her official capacity as Attorney General of
the State of Oregon; Betsy Imholt, in her official capacity as
Director of the Oregon Department of Revenue; Case No.
3:23-cv-01971-SB (D. Ore., Dec. 28, 2023).

The nature of suit is stated as Constitutional - State Statute for
Civil Rights Act.

Marion County -- https://www.marionfl.org/ -- is located in the
northern portion of the U.S. state of Florida.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David F. Sugerman, Esq.
          Nadia H. Dahab, Esq.
          DAVID F. SUGERMAN ATTORNEY, PC
          707 SW Washington Street, Suite 600
          Portland, OR 97205
          Phone: (503) 228-6474
          Fax: (503) 228-2556
          Email: david@sugermandahab.com
                 nadia@sugermandahab.com


MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL: Salazar Files ADA Suit in C.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Marriott
International, Inc. The case is styled as Vivian Salazar,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Marriott International, Inc., Case No. 3:23-cv-06664-TSH (E.D.N.Y.,
Dec. 28, 2023).

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

Marriott International, Inc. -- https://www.marriott.com/default.mi
-- is an American multinational company that operates, franchises,
and licenses lodging including hotel, residential and timeshare
properties.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jennifer Michelle Leinbach, Esq.
          Jesenia Anahy Martinez, Esq.
          Jesse S. Chen, Esq.
          Shahin Rezvani, Esq.
          Thiago Merlini Coelho, Esq.
          WILSHIRE LAW FIRM, PLC
          3055 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90010
          Phone: (213) 381-9988
          Fax: (213) 381-9989
          Email: jleinbach@wilshirelawfirm.com
                 jesenia.martinez@wilshirelawfirm.com
                 jchen@wilshirelawfirm.com
                 srezvani@wilshirelawfirm.com
                 thiago@wilshirelawfirm.com


MDL 3074: Calvert Appeals Dismissal Order in Wiretapping Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs BRIAN CALVERT, et al., filed an appeal from the District
Court's Order dated December 18, 2023 and Memorandum and/or Opinion
Order dated December 5, 2023 entered in the lawsuit styled In RE:
BPS DIRECT, LLC, AND CABELAS, LLC, WIRETAPPING LITIGATION, MDL NO:
23-md-3074, in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania.

In this multi-district action, Judge Karen K. Caldwell, Chairperson
of the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, transfered
one case each from the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of California, District of Massachusetts, Western District
of Missouri and the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and two from
the Western District of Pennsylvania, all to the Eastern District
of Pennsylvania and, with the consent of that court, assigned to
Judge Mark A. Kearney for coordinated or consolidated pretrial
proceedings.

BPS Direct and Cabela's, which are co-owned by Bass Pro, LLC, are
retailers that sell hunting, fishing, camping, and other outdoor
recreation merchandise, both in brick-and-mortar stores and online.
Plaintiffs in these putative class actions allege that Defendants'
websites are embedded with session replay code that tracks and
records the activities and data of all visitors to their websites.
The Plaintiffs assert claims for violation of state wiretap
statutes, the Federal Wiretap Act, or both, as well as various
claims under state consumer protection or data privacy statutes and
common-law claims for invasion of privacy, intrusion upon
seclusion, or unjust enrichment.

The actions will share questions of fact as to whether and how
Defendants record the activities and data of website users, whether
that information is shared with the vendors that supplied the code,
the purposes for which the information is used and by whom, how
defendants' privacy policies are displayed, and where the alleged
recording or interception occurs. The cases are likely to involve
duplicative discovery and overlapping pretrial motions regarding
standing, class certification and the interpretation of the wiretap
statutes.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the Hon. Judge
J. Kearney entered an Order on December 5, 2023:

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

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

-- Dismissing Heather Cornell, Peter Montecalvo, and David Irvin's
claims for damages without prejudice to their filing amended
Complaints on or before Jan. 5, 2024, if they can specify plead
standing based on the sharing of highly sensitive personal
information such as a medical diagnosis or financial data from
banks or credit cards; and

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

On December 18, 2023, the Court ruled that the December 5, 2023
ruling is a final order dismissing all plead claims and there are
no further issues to resolve in this court.

The appellate case is captioned as Brian Calvert, et al. v. BPS
Direct LLC, et al., Case No. 23-3235, in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Third Circuit, filed on Dec. 26, 2023.[BN]

Plaintiffs-Appellants BRIAN CALVERT, et al., are represented by:

          Nicholas Colella, Esq.
          Patrick D. Donathen, Esq.
          Jamisen A. Etzel, Esq.
          Kelly K. Iverson, Esq.
          Gary F. Lynch, Esq.
          Elizabeth Pollock-Avery, Esq.  
          LYNCH CARPENTER
          1133 Penn Avenue, 5th Floor
          Pittsburgh, PA 15222
          Telephone: (412) 322-9243

Plaintiff-Appellee DAVID IRVIN, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated, is represented by:

          Joshua D. Arisohn, Esq.
          Philip L. Fraietta, Esq.
          BURSOR & FISHER
          1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor
          New York, NY 10019
          Telephone: (646) 837-7103

               - and -

          Alex M. Kashurba, Esq.
          Steven A. Schwartz, Esq.
          CHIMICLES SCHWARTZ KRINER & DONALDSON-SMITH
          361 W Lancaster Avenue
          One Haverford Centre
          Haverford, PA 19041
          Telephone: (610) 649-8500

               - and -

          Christopher R. Reilly, Esq.
          BURSOR & FISHER
          701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1420
          Miami, FL 10019
          Telephone: (305) 330-5512  

Defendants-Appellees BPS DIRECT LLC, et al., are represented by:

          MaryBeth V. Gibson, Esq.
          THE FINLEY FIRM
          3535 Piedmont Road NE
          Building 14, Suite 230
          Atlanta, GA 30305
          Telephone: (404) 320-9979

               - and -

          Tiffany M. Yiatras, Esq.
          CONSUMER PROTECTION LEGAL
          308 Hutchinson Road
          Ellisville, MO 63011
          Telephone: (314) 541-0317

MEDLIANT INC: Mabute Suit Removed to D. Nevada
----------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Eliahkim Mabute and Jeddy Anne Delgado, on
behalf of themselves, those similarly situated, and the Proposed
Rule 23 Class v. MEDLIANT INC. and MEDLIANT, Case No. A-23-881156-C
was removed from the District Court for Clark County, Nevada, to
the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada on Dec. 28,
2023, and assigned Case No. 2:23-cv-02148-APG-DJA.

Specifically, Plaintiffs allege Medliant violated the Trafficking
Victims Protection Act. The Plaintiffs further allege Medliant
violated the Fair Labor Standards Act.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Kristen T. Gallagher, Esq.
          McDONALD CARANO LLP
          2300 West Sahara Avenue, Suite 1200
          Las Vegas, Nevada 89102
          Phone: (702) 873-4100
          Email: kgallagher@mcdonaldcarano.com

               - and -

          R. Brandon Bundren, Esq.
          BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS LLP
          1221 Broadway, Suite 2400
          Nashville, Tennessee 37203
          Phone: (615) 244-2582
          Email: bbundren@bradley.com


MICROSOFT CORP: Basbanes Sues Over Copyright Infringement
---------------------------------------------------------
NICHOLAS A. BASBANES; and NICHOLAS NGAGOYEANES, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MICROSOFT
CORPORATION; OPENAI, INC.; OPENAI GP, L.L.C.; OPENAI HOLDINGS, LLC;
OAI CORPORATION, LLC; OPENAI GLOBAL, LLC; OPENAI, L.L.C.; and
OPENAI OPCO, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-00084 (S.D.N.Y.,
Jan. 5, 2024) seek damages for copyright infringement, the lost
opportunity to license their works, and for the destruction of the
market the Defendants have caused and continue to cause to
writers.

According to the complaint, the Defendants, with ready access to
billions in capital, simply stole the Plaintiffs' copyrighted works
to build another billion dollar commercial industry. It bears
emphasis that the Defendants, as sophisticated commercial entities,
clearly decided upon a deliberate strategy to steal the Plaintiffs'
copyrighted works to power their massive commercial enterprise.

The Defendants directly participated in and supported the copyright
infringement alleged in this Complaint by utilizing "a wide variety
of topics within theoretical and applied machine learning,
including learning from interactive data, online learning, natural
language processing, and topics related to interpretability and
fairness of machine learning and artificial intelligence, says the
suit.

MICROSOFT CORPORATION operates as a software company. The Company
offers applications, extra cloud storage, and advanced security
solutions. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Michael P. Richter, Esq.
          Bryan M. Goldstein, Esq.
          GRANT HERRMANN SCHWARTZ & KLINGER LLP
          107 Greenwich Street, 25th Floor
          New York, NY 10006
          Telephone: (212) 682-1800
          Email: mrichter@ghsklaw.com
                 bgoldstein@ghsklaw.com

MICROSOFT CORPORATION: Court Narrows Claims in Class Suit
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JANE DOE, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. MICROSOFT
CORPORATION, et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-00718-JCC (W.D. Wash.), the
Hon. Judge John C. Coughenour entered an order granting in part and
denying in part the Defendants' motions to dismiss and granting in
part and denying in part Qualtrics' motion for judicial notice.

Specifically, the following claims are dismissed with prejudice:

-- Plaintiff's CFAA claim against both Defendants; and

-- Plaintiff’s statutory larceny claim against both Defendants.


The following claims are dismissed without prejudice:

-- Plaintiff's CIPA section 631(a) claim against both Defendants
(but
    only to the extent she bases her claim on intentional
    wiretapping);

-- The Plaintiff's CIPA section 632 claim against Microsoft; and

-- The Plaintiff's conversion claim against both Defendants.

The Plaintiff is a California resident who obtains healthcare from
Kaiser Permanente. She has been a Kaiser member for at least 10
years and has used its website throughout her membership.

The Plaintiff brings nine causes of action against both Qualtrics
and Microsoft: (1) violations of the California Invasion of Privacy
Act ("CIPA") (two counts); (2) violation of the right to privacy
under the California Constitution; (3) intrusion upon seclusion
under California law; (4) violation of the U.S. Computer Fraud and
Abuse Act ("CFAA"), 18 U.S.C. section 1030, et seq.; (5) unjust
enrichment; (6) violation of the California Unfair Competition Law
("UCL"); (7) statutory larceny; and (8) conversion under California
law.

In response, Qualtrics and Microsoft each move to dismiss the
complaint and, in doing so, seek judicial notice of several
exhibits.

Microsoft Corporation is an American multinational technology
corporation.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 19, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4aCdRVP at no extra charge.[CC]


MIKE BLOOMBERG: Court Tosses Bid to Send Notice to Putative Class
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RODNEY SINCLAIR, v. MIKE
BLOOMBERG 2020, INC., Case No. 1:20-cv-04528-LTS-GWG (S.D.N.Y.),
the Hon. Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein entered an order denying the
plaintiff's request to send notice to the putative class about the
district court's denial of class certification.

In any case, notice would not even be warranted at this time
because plaintiff has filed a renewed motion for class
certification as permitted by the district court's opinion denying
class certification. It would be inefficient and confusing for
class members to receive notice of denial of the first motion where
the second motion may be granted.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3vs0k34 at no extra charge.[CC]

MOVAGE INC: Percy Appeals Dismissal of Labor Class Action
---------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs Anthony Percy, et al., filed an appeal from a court
ruling entered in the lawsuit styled Anthony Percy, et al. v.
Movage, Inc., et al., Case No. 650209/2023, in the Supreme Court of
the State of New York, New York County.

In this action, Plaintiff states that he worked for Defendant
Movage, Inc. -- owned by defendant Bajo Vujovic -- as a mover from
February 2018 to July 2022. The Plaintiff states that he reported
to a New York location each day to begin work, that he received his
daily assignments at that location along with the vehicle and other
materials needed to perform his work, and that "about half" of the
customer he serviced were in New York. Plaintiff asserts that at
the end of each day, he would return his moving truck to a New York
location and that payment for his work was performed in New York by
check -- although the check was issued in New Jersey and subject to
New Jersey taxation. Defendant disputes numerous aspects of
Plaintiff's description of his work but in a motion to dismiss "the
facts pleaded are presumed to be true." The Plaintiff's complaint
seeks to recover uniform maintenance pay, spread of hours pay, and
other damages for himself and similarly situated employees who
worked as movers for Defendants, plus liquidated damages pursuant
to New York Labor Laws.

On November 17, 2023, the Court entered an Order granting
Defendants' motion to dismiss the case for failure to state a cause
of action. Furthermore, as Plaintiff's action was dismissed as it
applies to him, the class action sought by Plaintiff was also
dismissed and the court said it need not consider whether a
dismissal of the class action would be appropriate had the action
not been dismissed as against Plaintiff as individually situated.
The court noted that granting Defendants' motion and determining
that New Jersey is the more appropriate jurisdiction in no manner
restricts Plaintiff from bringing his claims in a New Jersey court
should violations exist under New Jersey law. Any requests for
relief not addressed were denied.

The appellate case is captioned as Anthony Percy, et al. vs.
Movage, Inc., et al., Case No. 2023-06745, in the Supreme Court of
New York, Appellate Division, First Judicial Department, filed on
December 25, 2023.[BN]

NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC: Deadline to Answer Complaint Due Jan. 25
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CANTELLI v. NATIONAL
GEOGRAPHIC PARTNERS LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-02955 (D.D.C., Filed Oct.
4, 2023), the Hon. Tanya S. Chutkan Judge entered an order that the
deadline to answer to complaint is due by Jan. 25, 2024.

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

National Geographic is a joint venture between The Walt Disney
Company and the namesake non-profit scientific organization
National Geographic Society.[CC]


NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC: Parties Seek More Time to File Class Cert Bid
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARIE CANTELLI, on behalf
of a putative class, v. NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC PARTNERS, LLC, Case No.
1:23-cv-02955-TSC (D.D.C.), the Parties asks the Court to enter an
order granting their joint consent motion to extend time:

    (1) for defendant to respond to complaint and

    (2) for plaintiff to move for class certification.

The Plaintiff filed a putative class action complaint in this Court
on October 4, 2023.

The Plaintiff's Return of Service indicates the Complaint was
served on November 6, 2023.

On November 27, 2023, the Defendant filed a Consent Motion for
Extension of Time that reset the deadline for Defendant to answer
or otherwise respond to the Complaint to January 11, 2024.

The Defendant has diligently begun to investigate the allegations
in Plaintiff's Complaint, but in light of the holidays, additional
time is needed to complete this investigation and meet-and-confer
with Plaintiff regarding the allegations in the Complaint.

National Geographic is a joint venture between The Walt Disney
Company and the namesake non-profit scientific organization
National Geographic Society.

A copy of the Parties' motion dated Dec. 20, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/47exqkd at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Winston S. Hudson, Esq.
          JOHNSON FIRM
          610 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 300
          Little Rock, AR 72201
          Telephone: (501) 372-1300
          E-mail: winston@yourattorney.com

                - and -

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

The Defendant is represented by:

          Rachel G. Miller-Ziegler, Esq.
          Rose Leda Ehler, Esq.
          Jennifer L. Bryant, Esq.
          Mohamed Said, Esq.
          MUNGER TOLLES & OLSON LLP
          601 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Suite 500 E
          Washington, D.C. 20001
          Telephone: (202) 220-1100
          E-mail: rachel.miller-ziegler@mto.com
                  rose.ehler@mto.com
                  jennifer.bryant@mto.com
                  mohamed.said@mto.com

NESTLE WATERS: Patane Suit Seeks to Certify Classes & Subclasses
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARK J. PATANE, JULIE
HARDING, HEATHER HARRIGAN, STEPHEN S. SHAPIRO, CATHERINE PORTER,
ERICA
RUSSELL, TINA MORETTI, BRIDGET KOPET, JENNIFER S. COLE, BENJAMIN A.
FLETCHER, DIANE BOGDAN, and PARESHKUMAR BRAHMBHATT, Individually
and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. NESTLE WATERS
NORTH AMERICA, INC., Case No. 3:17-cv-01381-JAM (D. Conn.), the
Plaintiffs asks the Court to enter an order certifying the
following classes and
subclasses pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure:

  -- the Indirect Consumer Class

     "All natural persons and entities in Connecticut, Maine,
     Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania,
     and Rhode Island who purchased Poland Spring brand bottled
still
     water from a non-Nestle retailer on or after November 5,
2003;"

  -- the Direct Consumer Class

     "All natural persons and entities in New Jersey, New York,
     Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island who purchased Poland Spring
     brand bottled still water directly from Nestlé through its
     ReadyRefresh business, previously known as Poland Spring
Direct,
     on or after November 5, 2003;"

  -- the Connecticut Subclass

     "All members of the Indirect Consumer Class and Direct
Consumer
     Class in Connecticut who purchased Poland Spring brand bottled

     still water on or after August 15, 2014;"

  -- the Maine Subclass

     "All natural persons in the Indirect Consumer Class and
Direct
     Consumer Class in Maine who purchased Poland Spring brand
bottled
     still primarily for personal, family, or household purposes";

  -- the Massachusetts Subclass

     "All natural persons in the Indirect Consumer Class and
Direct
     Consumer Class in Massachusetts;"

  -- the New Hampshire Subclass

     "All members of the Indirect Consumer Class and Direct
Consumer
     Class in New Hampshire;"

  -- the New Jersey Subclass

     "All members of the Indirect Consumer Class and Direct
Consumer
     Class in New Jersey;"

  -- the New York Subclass

     "All natural persons in the Indirect Consumer Class and
Direct
     Consumer Class in New York;" and

  -- the Pennsylvania Subclass

     "All natural persons in the Indirect Consumer Class and
Direct
     Consumer Class in Pennsylvania who purchased Poland Spring
brand
     bottled still water primarily for personal, family, or
household
     purposes, and who relied on the Poland Spring label's "spring

     water" representation in making their purchasing decision."

     Excluded from the Proposed Classes and Proposed Subclasses are

     Nestle, any of its affiliates or subsidiaries throughout the
     duration of this lawsuit, and any entity in which it has a
     controlling interest, as well as their respective officers,
     directors, employees, agents, legal representatives,
successors,
     and assigns; Plaintiffs' counsel; and the judicial officers
     presiding over this matter and their immediate family
members.

The Plaintiffs also respectfully request that the Court appoint
them as class representatives for the Proposed Classes and Proposed
Subclasses as follows:

  -- Julie Harding, Heather Harrigan, Stephen S. Shapiro, Catherine

     Porter, Erica Russell, Tina Moretti, Bridget Kopet, Jennifer
S.
     Cole, Benjamin A. Fletcher, Diane Bogdan, and Pareshkumar
     Brahmbhatt as class representatives for the Indirect Consumer

     Class;

  -- Julie Harding, Heather Harrington, and Stephen Shapiro as
class
     representatives for the Direct Consumer Class;

  -- Bridget Kopet as class representative for the Connecticut
     Subclass;

  -- Benjamin Fletcher as class representative for the Maine
Subclass;

  -- Jennifer Cole as class representative for the Massachusetts
     Subclass;

  -- Diane Bogdan as class representative of the New Hampshire
     Subclass;

  -- Heather Harrigan, Tina Moretti, Catherine Porter, Erica
Russell,
     and Stephen Shapiro as class representatives for the New
Jersey
     Subclass;

  -- Julie Harding, Heather Harrington, Tina Moretti, and Stephen
     Shapiro as class representatives for the New York Subclass;
and

  -- Pareshkumar Brahmbhatt as class representative for the
     Pennsylvania Subclass.

Finally, the Plaintiffs further request that the Court appoint
Alexander H. Schmidt, Esq.; Susman Godfrey L.L.P.; and Steve
Williams Law, P.C. as Class Counsel for the Proposed Classes and
Proposed Subclasses.

Nestle Waters produces and distributes numerous brands of bottled
water across North America.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 19, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3tB0bcS at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Steven G. Sklaver, Esq.
          Oleg Elkhunovich, Esq.
          Bryan Caforio, Esq.
          Jesse-Justin Cuevas, Esq.
          Max Straus, Esq.
          SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
          1900 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1400
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (310) 789-3100
          E-mail: oelkhunovich@susmangodfrey.com
                  ssklaver@susmangodfrey.com
                  bcaforio@susmangodfrey.com
                  jcuevas@susmangodfrey.com
                  mstraus@susmangodfrey.com

                - and -

          Alexander Schmidt, Esq.
          ALEXANDER H. SCHMIDT, ESQ.
          Fairways Professional Plaza
          5 Professional Circle, Suite 204
          Colts Neck, NJ 07722
          Telephone: (732) 226-0004
          E-mail: alex@alexschmidt.law

                - and -

          Steven Williams, Esq.
          STEVEN WILLIAMS LAW, P.C.
          250 W 55th Street, 17th Floor
          New York, NY 10019

                - and -

          Christopher K.L. Young, Esq.
          JOSEPH SAVERI LAW FIRM, LLP
          601 California Street, Suite 1000
          San Francisco, CA 94108
          Telephone: (415) 500-6800
          E-mail: cyoung@saverilawfirm.com

                - and -

          Craig A. Raabe, Esq.
          Robert A. Izard, Esq.
          Christopher M. Barrett, Esq.
          IZARD, KINDALL & RAABE, LLP
          29 S. Main St., Suite 305
          West Hartford, CT 06107
          Telephone: (860) 493-6292
          E-mail: craabe@ikrlaw.com
                  rizard@ikrlaw.com
                  cbarrett@ikrlaw.com

NESTLE WATERS: Plaintiffs Seek to Seal Portions of Class Cert Memo
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARK J. PATANE, JULIE
HARDING, HEATHER HARRIGAN, STEPHEN S. SHAPIRO, CATHERINE PORTER,
ERICA RUSSELL, TINA MORETTI, BRIDGET KOPET, JENNIFER S. COLE,
BENJAMIN A. FLETCHER and DIANE BOGDAN, and PARESHKUMAR BRAHMBHATT,
Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v.
NESTLE WATERS NORTH AMERICA, INC., Case No. 3:17-cv-01381-JAM (D.
Conn.), the Plaintiffs seek to file under seal portions of
Plaintiffs' Memorandum as indicated and for the reasons provided in
the chart below:

   Portion of Memorandum                            Explanation

  1. Page 5, between          Memorandum describes materials
Defendant
     "admitted that" and      designated "CONFIDENTIAL" or
     ", which"                "CONFIDENTIAL – ATTORNEYS' EYES
ONLY"
                              under the Protective Order.

  2. Footnote 6               Memorandum describes or quotes from
                              materials Defendant designated
                              "CONFIDENTIAL" or "CONFIDENTIAL –
                              ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY" under the
                              Protective Order.

  3. Footnote 7               Memorandum describes or quotes from
                              materials Defendant designated
                              "CONFIDENTIAL" under the Protective
                              Order.

Nestle Waters produces and distributes numerous brands of bottled
water across North America.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 19, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3H2aAl1 at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:


          Steven G. Sklaver, Esq.
          Oleg Elkhunovich, Esq.
          Bryan Caforio, Esq.
          Jesse-Justin Cuevas, Esq.
          Max Straus, Esq.
          SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
          1900 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1400
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (310) 789-3100
          E-mail: oelkhunovich@susmangodfrey.com
                  ssklaver@susmangodfrey.com
                  bcaforio@susmangodfrey.com
                  jcuevas@susmangodfrey.com
                  mstraus@susmangodfrey.com

                - and -

          Alexander Schmidt, Esq.
          ALEXANDER H. SCHMIDT, ESQ.
          Fairways Professional Plaza
          5 Professional Circle, Suite 204
          Colts Neck, NJ 07722
          Telephone: (732) 226-0004
          E-mail: alex@alexschmidt.law

                - and -

          Steven Williams, Esq.
          STEVEN WILLIAMS LAW, P.C.
          250 W 55th Street, 17th Floor
          New York, NY 10019

                - and -

          Christopher K.L. Young, Esq.
          JOSEPH SAVERI LAW FIRM, LLP
          601 California Street, Suite 1000
          San Francisco, CA 94108
          Telephone: (415) 500-6800
          E-mail: cyoung@saverilawfirm.com

                - and -

          Craig A. Raabe, Esq.
          Robert A. Izard, Esq.
          Mark P. Kindall, Esq.
          Christopher M. Barrett, Esq.
          IZARD, KINDALL & RAABE, LLP
          29 S. Main St., Suite 305
          West Hartford, CT 06107
          Telephone: (860) 493-6292
          E-mail: craabe@ikrlaw.com
                  rizard@ikrlaw.com
                  mkindall@ikrlaw.com
                  cbarrett@ikrlaw.com

NEW YORK, NY: Aboubakar Files Amended Notice of Class Cert Bid
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as OLALEKAN ABOUBAKAR, et
al., v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Case No. 20 CV 01716 (NGG)
(CLP) (E.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge entered an order granting their
amended motion for class certification, and such other and further
relief as the Court may consider just and appropriate.

In accordance with the Court's Memorandum and Order dated September
1, 2023, denying Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification without
prejudice and providing Plaintiffs the opportunity to amend their
motion as discussed in the Memorandum and Order, and the briefing
schedule proposed by the parties.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 20, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/48B43JY at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Richard Cardinale, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF RICHARD CARDINALE
          26 Court Street, Suite 1507
          Brooklyn, NY 11201
          Telephone: (718) 624-9391

                - and -

          Stephen Bergstein, Esq.
          BERGSTEIN & ULLRICH
          5 Paradies Lane
          New Paltz, NY 12561
          Telephone: (845) 469-1277

                - and -

          Catherine E. Anderson, Esq.
          Jason Solotaroff, Esq.
          Oren Giskan, Esq.
          GISKAN SOLOTAROFF & ANDERSON LLP
          90 Broad Street, 2nd Floor
          New York, NY 10004
          Telephone: (212) 847-8315

                - and -

          Scott A. Korenbaum, Esq.
          SCOTT A. KORENBAUM, ESQ.
          14 Wall Street, Suite 1603
          New York, NY 10005
          Telephone: (212) 587-0018

NEW YORK, NY: Brennan Files Amended Notice of Class Cert Bid
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DOMINICK BRENNAN, et al.,
v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Case No. 19 CV 2054 (NGG) (CLP)
(E.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge entered an order granting their amended
motion for class certification, and such other and further relief
as the Court may consider just and appropriate.

In accordance with the Court's Memorandum and Order dated September
1, 2023, denying Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification without
prejudice and providing Plaintiffs the opportunity to amend their
motion as discussed in the Memorandum and Order, and the briefing
schedule proposed by the parties.

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

A copy of the Court's order the Plaintiff's motion the Defendant's
motion

dated Dec. 20, 2023 is available from PacerMonitor.com at
https://bit.ly/3NKonQQ at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Richard Cardinale, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF RICHARD CARDINALE
          26 Court Street, Suite 1507
          Brooklyn, NY 11201
          Telephone: (718) 624-9391

                - and -

          Stephen Bergstein, Esq.
          BERGSTEIN & ULLRICH
          5 Paradies Lane
          New Paltz, NY 12561
          Telephone: (845) 469-1277

                - and -

          Catherine E. Anderson, Esq.
          Jason Solotaroff, Esq.
          Oren Giskan, Esq.
          GISKAN SOLOTAROFF & ANDERSON LLP
          90 Broad Street, 2nd Floor
          New York, NY 10004
          Telephone: (212) 847-8315

                - and -

          Scott A. Korenbaum, Esq.
          SCOTT A. KORENBAUM, ESQ.
          14 Wall Street, Suite 1603
          New York, NY 10005
          Telephone: (212) 587-0018

NEXT NET: Fails to Pay Content Creator Minimum, OT Wages Under FLSA
-------------------------------------------------------------------
JENNIFER SWARTZ, individually and on behalf of all persons
similarly situated v. NEXT NET MEDIA, LLC, d/b/a The Hoth;
CLEARVIEW CAPITAL, LLC, Case No. 2:24-cv-10018-MAG-DRG (E.D. Mich.,
Jan. 4, 2024) alleges that the Defendant failed to compensate
Plaintiff and the Class with the minimum wage and overtime premium
pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Michigan Improved
Workforce Opportunity Wage Act.

During the past three years, the Plaintiff regularly worked a range
of 25 to 55 hours per week. The Plaintiff frequently worked more
than 40 hours per workweek. She typically produced 100 to 330
topics per week, at the rate of $2.50 per topics. The Plaintiff's
pay typically ranged between $6.00 to $12.00 per hour (without any
overtime premium). In some weeks during the past three years, the
Plaintiff made less than the federal and/or Michigan minimum wage.
At no time was the Plaintiff paid an overtime premium (1.5x) for
her hours worked in excess of 40 in a week, the lawsuit alleges.

On September 6, 2023, the Plaintiff was fired immediately by NNM by
being locked out of NNM's portal without reason or notice. The
Plaintiff and the FLSA Class were misclassified as independent
contractors, worked pursuant to the Defendants' common pay
practices and, as a result of such practices, were not paid
overtime premium pay for overtime hours worked.

Plaintiff Swartz is an individual currently residing in Shelby
Township, Michigan. She was employed by the Defendants as a Content
Creator (specifically a topic creator and a copywriter) from April
2019 through September 2023 and during this time period worked
remotely for the Defendants from her residence in Michigan.

NNM owns and operates several other similar online content creation
and market brands, including FreeUp, Copymatic, iWriter,
linkbuilder.io, SEO Jet and Authority Builders Co.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James E. Goodley, Esq.
          Ryan P. McCarthy, Esq.
          GOODLEY MCCARTHY LLC
          1650 Market Street, Suite 3600
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (215) 394-0541
          E-mail: james@gmlaborlaw.com
                  ryan@gmlaborlaw.com

NORTHROP GRUMMAN: Suit Seeks to Certify Liability & Damages Classes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JED and ALISA BEHAR,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION AND NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS
CORPORATION, Case No. 2:21-cv-03946-HDV-SK (C.D. Cal.), the
Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.
P. 23(b)(2), (b)(3), and/or (c)(4) certifying liability and damages
classes.

Northrop Grumman is an American multinational aerospace and defense
technology company.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RNT3SG at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Michael Akselrud, Esq.
          W. Mark Lanier, Esq.
          Alex J. Brown, Esq.
          Ryan D. Ellis, Esq.
          THE LANIER LAW FIRM, P.C.
          2829 Townsgate Rd., Ste. 100
          Westlake Village, CA 91361
          Telephone: (310) 277-5100
          Facsimile: (310) 277-5103
          E-mail: michael.akselrud@lanierlawfirm.com
                  WML@lanierlawfirm.com
                  Alex.Brown@lanierlawfirm.com
                  Ryan.Ellis@lanierlawfirm.com

                - and -

          Christopher T. Nidel, Esq.
          Jonathan Nace, Esq.
          NIDEL & NACE, P.L.L.C.
          One Church Street, Suite 802
          Rockville, MD 20850
          Telephone: (202) 780-5153
          E-mail: chris@nidellaw.com
                  jon@nidellaw.com

                - and -

          David P. Page, Esq.
          ENVIRONMENTAL ENERGY & NATURAL
          RESOURCES ADVOCATES, PLLC
          1921 S Boston Ave.
          Tulsa, OK 74119
          Telephone: (918) 764-8984
          E-mail: dpage@eenradvocates.com

                - and -

          Gideon Kracov, Esq.
          Jordan R. Sisson, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF GIDEON KRACOV
          801 S. Grand Ave., 11th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90017
          Telephone: (213) 629-2071
          E-mail: gk@gideonlaw.net
                  jordan@gideonlaw.net

OKLAHOMA: AKG Suit Dismissed w/o Prejudice
------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as A.K.G., a minor; AUSTIN
GUNTER; AARON VANBUSKIRK; and MELISSA GUNTER, next of friend, v.
STATE OF OKLAHOMA, et al., Case No. 5:23-cv-00706-SLP (W.D. Okla.),
the Hon. Judge Scott Palk entered an order as follows:

   1. Ms. Gunter's motion for reconsideration is denied;

   2. Ms. Gunter's "Motion to Vacate" and Mr. Gunter's Motion for
      Leave to Proceed on Appeal Without Prepayment of Costs or
Fees
      are stricken;

   3. The action is dismissed without prejudice.

In sum, Ms. Gunter has not shown this is an "extreme case where the
lack of counsel" would result in fundamental unfairness, the Court
says.

Oklahoma is a state in the South Central region of the United
States, bordered by the state of Texas to the south and west,
Kansas to the north, Missouri to the northeast, Arkansas to the
east, New Mexico to the west, and Colorado to the northwest.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 19, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3tynUKV at no extra charge.[CC]

ONE SOURCE: Newsome Files FCRA Suit in N.D. Georgia
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against One Source
Technology, LLC. The case is styled as Lenard Reginald Newsome,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. One
Source Technology, LLC doing business as: Asurint, Case No.
1:23-cv-05984-ELR-LTW (N.D. Ga., Dec. 27, 2023).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Joseph H. Kanee, Esq.
          MARCUS & ZELMAN LLC
          4000 Ponce De Leon, Ste. 470
          Coral Gables, FL 33146
          Phone: (786) 369-1122
          Email: joseph@marcuszelman.com

               - and -

          Misty Oaks Paxton, Esq.
          THE OAKS FIRM
          3895 Brookgreen Pt.
          Decatur, GA 30034
          Phone: (404) 500-7861
          Email: attyoaks@yahoo.com


PARKMOBILE LLC: Plaintiffs Seek More Time to File Class Cert Bid
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TYLER BAKER, MARIAM
GEORGE, EMMA JACKSON, SAIT KURMANGALIYEV, GREGORY MANSON, HERIBERTO
TRAVIESTO and JACK WEAVER, on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated, v. PARKMOBILE, LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-02182-SCJ
(N.D. Ga.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting
their motion for a 30-day extension of the deadline for the
Plaintiffs to file their motion for class certification and any
accompanying expert declarations.

   1. On Nov. 13, 2023, the Court entered a Corrected Scheduling
      Order setting the deadlines for Plaintiffs' forthcoming
motion
      for class certification.

   2. The Plaintiffs request a 30-day extension to their deadline
to
      file their motion for class certification, setting a new
      deadline of February 12, 2024.

   3. Here, a modest extension to the deadline to file Plaintiffs'

      class certification is warranted. Since the close of fact
      discovery on October 27, 2023, the parties have continued to

      meet and confer over several ongoing discovery disputes.

Parkmobile provides mobile parking solutions.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 28, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/48LIx5q at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          MaryBeth V. Gibson, Esq.
          THE FINLEY FIRM, P.C.
          3535 Piedmont Road
          Building 14, Suite 230
          Atlanta, GA 30305
          Telephone: (404) 320-9979
          Facsimile: (404) 320-9978
          E-mail: mgibson@thefinleyfirm.com

                - and -

          Arthur M. Murray, Esq.
          MURRAY LAW FIRM
          701 Poydras Street, Suite 4250
          New Orleans, LA 70139
          Telephone: (504) 593-6473
          Facsimile: (504) 584-5249
          E-mail: amurray@murray-lawfirm.com

                - and -

          Kate M. Baxter-Kauf, Esq.
          LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P.
          100 Washington Ave. S., Suite 2200
          Minneapolis, MN 55401
          Telephone: (612) 339-6900
          E-mail: kmbaxter-kauf@locklaw.com

                - and -

          Terence R. Coates, Esq.
          MARKOVITS, STOCK & DE MARCO, LLC
          3825 Edwards Rd., Suite 650
          Cincinnati, OH 45209
          Telephone: (513) 651-3700
          Facsimile: (513) 665-0219
          E-mail: tcoates@msdlegal.com

                - and -

          Swathi Boejedla, Esq.
          HAUSFELD LLP
          888 16th Street N.W., Suite 300
          Washington, DC 20006
          Telephone: (202) 540-7150
          Facsimile: (202) 540-7201
          E-mail: sbojedla@hausfeld.com

                - and -

          Bryan L. Bleichner, Esq.
          CHESTNUT CAMBRONNE, PA
          100 Washington Ave. S., Suite 1700
          Minneapolis, MN 55401
          Telephone: (612) 339-7300
          E-mail: bbleichner@chestnutcambronne.com

                - and -

          Joseph M. Lyon, Esq.
          THE LYON FIRM
          2754 Erie Avenue
          Cincinnati, OH 45208
          Telephone: (513) 381-2333
          Facsimile: (513) 721-1178
          E-mail: jlyon@thelyonfirm.com

                - and -

          Michael Laird, Esq.
          ZIMMERMAN REED LLP
          1100 IDS Center
          80 South 8th Street
          Minneapolis, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 341-0400
          Facsimile: (612) 341-0844
          E-mail: michael.laird@zimmreed.com

                - and -

          Nicholas A. Colella, Esq.
          CARLSON LYNCH, LLP
          1133 Penn Avenue, 5th Floor
          Pittsburgh, PA 15222
          Telephone: (412) 322-9243
          Facsimile: (412) 231-0246
          E-mail: ncolella@carlsonlynch.com

                - and -

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

PERRY JOHNSON: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Brown Suit Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
DEBRA L. BROWN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PERRY JOHNSON & ASSOCIATES, INC.; and
NORTHWELL HEALTH, INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-10037-LJM-CI
(E.D. Mich., Jan. 5, 2024) is an action arising out of a targeted
cyberattack and data breach caused by Defendants' failure to secure
and safeguard Plaintiff's and millions of other individuals'
personally identifying information and personal health
information.

According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, the Defendants owed a
duty to the Plaintiff and the other Class members to implement and
maintain reasonable and adequate security measures to secure,
protect, and safeguard their PII and PHI against unauthorized
access and disclosure.

Defendants breached that duty by, among other things, failing to
implement and maintain reasonable security procedures and practices
to protect Northwell's patients' PII and PHI from unauthorized
access and disclosure.

As a result of the Defendants' inadequate security and breach of
their duties and obligations, the Data Breach occurred, and
Plaintiff's and the other Class members' PII and PHI was accessed
and disclosed, says the suit.

PERRY JOHNSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. offers solutions for healthcare
operations like clinical documentation, coding, AI consultation and
telehealth. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Nick Suciu III, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
          PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
          6905 Telegraph Road, Suite 115
          Bloomfield Hills, MI 48301
          Telephone: (313) 303-3472
          Email: nsuciu@milberg.com

               - and -

          Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
          PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
          227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Telephone: (866) 252-0878
          Email: gklinger@milberg.com

               - and -

          James J. Pizzirusso, Esq.
          HAUSFELD LLP
          1700 K Street, NW, Suite 650
          Washington, DC 20006
          Telephone: (202) 540-7200
          Email: jpizzirusso@hausfeld.com

               - and -

          Steven M. Nathan, Esq.
          HAUSFELD LLP
          33 Whitehall Street, Fourteenth Floor
          New York, NY 10004
          Telephone: (646) 357-1100
          Email: snathan@hausfeld.com

PHL VARIABLE: Court Approves Class Settlement Deal in PHT Lawsuit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PHT HOLDING I LLC, and
JAMES KENNEY, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated, v. PHL VARIABLE INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No.
1:18-cv-03444-MKV (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil
entered an order approving class action settlement and certifying
the settlement class:

   1. The Preliminary Approval Order outlined the form and manner
by
      which Plaintiffs would provide potential Settlement Class  
      Members with notice of the Settlement, the fairness hearing,
and  
      related matters.

   2. The Court finds that the Attorney General of the United
States
      and the state attorneys general have received notice of the
      Settlement in accordance with the terms of the Class Action
      Fairness Act.

   3. The Settlement was attained following an extensive
investigation
      of the facts. It resulted from vigorous arm's-length
      negotiations which were undertaken with the assistance of a
      mediator and in good faith by counsel with significant
      experience litigating class actions.

   4. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 and in light
of
      the proposed Settlement, the Court certifies the Settlement
      Class, consisting of:

      "all owners of PAUL and PEL policies issued by PHL whose
      policies experienced an increase to the COI rate scales
between

         (i) November 5, 2017 and

        (ii) the monthly deduction immediately preceding the
policy's
             first policy anniversary date falling on or after
January
             1, 2021" for purposes of judgment on the proposal
under
             Rule 23(b)(3).

      For purposes of the Settlement and this Order, Class Policies

      excludes (i) Policy Nos. 97523677 and 97523828, which are
owned
      by Conestoga Trust and Conestoga Trust Services, LLC and
subject
      to separate litigation against PHL; (ii) the policies
included
      in Exhibit A to the Settlement, which have previously reached

      settlements with PHL; and (iii) the 64 policies that
submitted a
      timely and valid written request to be excluded from the
      Settlement Class.


      In addition, excluded from the Settlement Class are (i) Class

      Counsel and their employees and (ii) the judge presiding over

      the Action and the staff and immediate family of such
judicial
      official.

   5. The Settlement is fully and finally approved because its
terms
      are fair, reasonable, and adequate within the meaning of Rule
23  
      of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Court
directs  
      its consummation pursuant to its terms and conditions.

   6. In reaching this conclusion, the Court considered the  
      complexity, expense, and likely duration of the litigation,
the  
      Class's reaction to the Settlement, and the result achieved.

   7. PHL shall fund the Settlement Fund Account in accordance
with
       the terms of the Settlement Agreement.

   8. Neither the Settlement, nor any act performed or document
      executed pursuant to the Settlement, may be deemed or used as
an
      admission of wrongdoing in any civil, criminal,
administrative,
      or other proceeding in any jurisdiction.

On August 9, 2023, the Court entered its Order Approving
Preliminary Class Action Settlement and Certifying Class. Among
other things, the Preliminary Approval Order authorized Plaintiff
to disseminate notice of the Settlement, the fairness hearing, and
related matters.

On September 8, 2023, the approved short-form notice was mailed to
Class members and the dedicated website for this Action was updated
to include the approved long-form notice.

PHL offers life insurance and annuity services.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 20, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3S4IEDz at no extra charge.[CC]

POLICYGENIUS LLC: Aides Facebook to Intercept Data, Torres Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------------
VALERIE TORRES, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. POLICYGENIUS, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
2:24-cv-00166 (C.D. Cal., January 8, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for intrusion upon seclusion and unjust
enrichment and violations of the California Penal Code, California
Constitution, and California's Business and Professions Code.

According to the complaint, the Defendant aided, agreed, employed,
and conspired with Facebook to intercept the Plaintiff's and Class
Members' sensitive and private communications without their
knowledge or consent. The Defendant intentionally installed a
tracking pixel on its website, www.policygenius.com, to
surreptitiously duplicate and send its customers' private
communications to Facebook, the contents of which include private
information and protected medical information. The Plaintiff and
California residents were allegedly harmed by the Defendant's
conduct and seek relief as alleged herein.

Policygenius LLC is an insurance company, with its principal place
of business at 32 Old Slip, 30th Floor, New York City, New York.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         John J. Nelson, Esq.
         MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
         280 South Beverly Drive, Penthouse
         Beverly Hills, CA 90212
         Telephone: (872) 365-7060
         E-mail: jnelson@milberg.com

RACHEL ROSSIN: Essential Home Files Appeal
------------------------------------------
Plaintiff Essential Home Remodeling, Inc. has filed an appeal from
a court ruling entered in its lawsuit styled Essential Home
Remodeling, Inc., individually, and on behalf of all other
similarly situated New York Lien Law Article 3-A Trust
Beneficiaries v. Rachel Rossin, Case No. 650871/2023, in the New
York Supreme Court, New York County, filed on February 16, 2023.

The nature of the suit is stated as a civil action.

The appellate case is captioned as Essential Home Remodeling, Inc.
v. Rachel Rossin, Case No. 2023-06502, in the Supreme Court of New
York, Appellate Division, First Judicial Department, filed on
December 14, 2023.[BN]

Plaintiff-Petitioner Essential Home Remodeling, Inc., individually,
and on behalf of all other similarly situated New York Lien Law
Article 3-A trust beneficiaries, is represented by:

          Israel Klein, Esq.
          PARDALIS & NOHAVICKA, LLP
          950 Third Avenue, 11th Floor
          New York, NY 10022
          Telephone: (212) 213-8511

RAH INDUSTRIES: Fails to Pay Minimum & OT Wages, Trejo Suit Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------------
ALMA TREJO, v. R.A.H. INDUSTRIES, INC.; SANDRA HANSEN; and DOES 1
to 25, inclusive, Case No. 24STCV00310 (Cal. Super., Jan. 4, 2024)
sues the Defendants for failing to pay the Plaintiff and other
similarly situated aggrieved employees for all hours worked.

The Defendants allegedly failed to pay the Plaintiff and other
similarly situated aggrieved employees the statutory minimum wage
for all hours worked and for "off the clock" work. This is so
because RAH Industries had a company policy wherein, they would
disproportionately round down the number of hours worked, resulting
in "time shaving" and further resulting in aggrieved employees not
being paid for all hours worked.

Due to the above "off the clock" violations, RAH Industries also
violated Labor Code section 510 because it failed to pay the
Plaintiff and other aggrieved employees overtime compensation, the
lawsuit asserts.

Furthermore, RAH Industries failed to include bonuses/incentive
payments in calculating employees' regular rate of pay for use in
deciphering the correct overtime rate of pay, the lawsuit adds.

The Plaintiff started working at RAH Industries on August 2022 in
Quality Assurance. The Plaintiff was classified as an hourly,
non-exempt employee. The Plaintiff's employment ended on September
2023.

RAH Industries provides precision metal fabrication services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Harout Messrelian, Esq.
          MESSRELIAN LAW INC.
          500 N. Central Ave., Suite 840
          Glendale, CA 91203
          Telephone: (818) 484-6531
          Facsimile: (818) 956-1983

RELIANT FIELD: Tanner Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages Under FLSA
-----------------------------------------------------------------
HOLDEN TANNER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. RELIANT FIELD SERVICES, INC., Case No. 5:24-cv-00010
(W.D. Tex., Jan. 4, 2024) is a collective action to recover
overtime wages, liquidated damages, and other applicable penalties
brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff and the Putative Collective Members typically worked
(and continue to work) 50 to 90 hours per week. The Plaintiff and
the Putative Collective Members are (or were) non-exempt salaried
Dispatchers employed by Reliant during the relevant time-period.
Accordingly, Reliant knowingly and deliberately failed to
compensate the Plaintiff and the Putative Collective Members for
overtime compensation on a routine and regular basis, says the
suit.

Plaintiff Tanner worked exclusively for Reliant in Texas from
October 2021 until July of 2023.

Reliant is an oilfield services company operating primarily around
the State of Texas.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Clif Alexander, Esq.
          Austin W. Anderson, Esq.
          Lauren E. Braddy, Esq.
          Carter T. Hastings, Esq.
          ANDERSON ALEXANDER, PLLC
          101 N. Shoreline Blvd., Suite 610
          San Antonio, TX 78401
          Telephone: (361) 452-1279
          Facsimile: (361) 452-1284
          E-mail: clif@a2xlaw.com
                  austin@a2xlaw.com
                  lauren@a2xlaw.com
                  carter@a2xlaw.com

RES-CARE INC: Wiederhold Sues Over Medical Plan's Tobacco Surcharge
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MINDA D. WIEDERHOLD, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. RES-CARE, INC., d/b/a BRIGHTSPRING HEALTH
SERVICES a/k/a NORMAL LIFE, INC., Defendant, Case No.
4:24-cv-00003-SEB-KMB (S.D. Ind., January 8, 2024) is a class
action against the Defendant for violation of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.

The case arises from the Defendant's practice of requiring the
Plaintiff and similarly situated Res-Care medical plan participants
to pay a tobacco surcharge in the amount of $1200 per couple per
year, which was not a permissible wellness program because it did
not provide for a reasonable alternative standard. Res-Care's
nicotine surcharge has discriminated against, and continues to
discriminate against, plan participants based on a health
status-related factor and it is assessing premiums or
contributions, says the suit.

Res-Care, Inc., doing business as Brightspring Health Services, is
a provider of comprehensive home and community-based health
services, headquartered in Louisville, Kentucky. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Robert P. Kondras, Jr., Esq.
         HASSLER KONDRAS MILLER LLP
         100 Cherry Street
         Terre Haute, IN 47807
         Telephone: (877) 656-7602
         Facsimile: (812) 234-2881
         E-mail: kondras@hkmlawfirm.com

                 - and -

         Paul M. Secunda, Esq.
         WALCHESKE & LUZI, LLC
         235 N. Executive Dr., Suite 240
         Brookfield, WI 53005
         Telephone: (414) 828-2372
         E-mail: psecunda@walcheskeluzi.com

RESONETICS LLC: Parties Seek to Stay Class Cert. Discovery in Reyes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JENNIFER REYES, an
individual, on behalf of herself and on behalf of all persons
similarly situated, v. RESONETICS, LLC, a Delaware Limited
Liability Company; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No.
3:23-cv-01552-RBM-BGS (S.D. Cal.), the Parties submit a joint
motion and proposed order to stay Discovery and Vacate Class
Certification Motion Deadline Pending Mediation.

The Plaintiff filed a Class Action Complaint against Resonetics on
July 19, 2023, in San Diego Superior Court and Resonetics removed
to this Court on August 23, 2023.

The Class Action Complaint asserts wage claims on behalf of
Defendant's current and former employees. The Plaintiff filed a
separate complaint in the San Diego Superior Court on September 26,
2023, asserting a representative claim for civil penalties on
behalf of the State of California and Defendant's current and
former employees pursuant to the Private Attorneys General Act,
California Labor Code sections 2699 et seq.

On Sept. 1, 2023, the Parties conveyed their intent for early
private mediation and began efforts to select a mediator.

On Oct. 2, 2023, the Parties attended the Early Neutral Evaluation
Conference with Hon. Skomal.

On Oct. 2, 2023, the Court issued a Scheduling Order. All pre-class
certification discovery shall be completed by all parties by March
1, 2024 and a motion for class certification must be filed no later
than
April 1, 2024.

The Parties agree that in the interest of efficiency and to
conserve resources, the deadlines to complete pre-class
certification discovery and the deadline for Plaintiff to file her
motion for class certification should be stayed and vacated until
after the May 22,
2024 mediation, should mediation prove unsuccessful.

Resonetics provides laser technology services.

A copy of the Parties' motion dated Dec. 21, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41LpUfz at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Roman Shkodnik, Esq.
          D.LAW, INC.
          400 N Brand Blvd 7th Floor
          Glendale, CA 91203
          Telephone: (855) 372-4693

The Defendants are represented by:

          Guillermo A. Escobedo, Esq.
          Lana B. Nassar, Esq.
          Lisa Xu, Esq.
          JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
          225 Broadway, Suite 1800
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 573-4900
          Facsimile: (619) 573-4901
          E-mail: Guillermo.Escobedo@jacksonlewis.com
                  Lana.nassar@jacksonlewis.com
                  Lisa.Xu@jacksonlewis.com

RETINA GROUP: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Boehles Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
JENNIFER BOEHLES, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THE RETINA GROUP OF WASHINGTON,
PLLC, Defendant, Case No. 8:24-cv-00020-DKC (D. Md., Jan. 4, 2024)
is a class action against the Defendant for its failure to properly
secure and safeguard Plaintiff's and other similarly situated
patients' personally identifiable information and protected health
information from criminal hackers.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant failed to
properly monitor and implement security practices with regard to
the computer network and systems that housed the Private
Information. Had the Defendant properly monitored its networks, it
could have prevented the Data Breach, or at least discovered it
sooner.

The Plaintiff's and Class Members' identities are now at risk
because of the Defendant's negligent conduct as the Private
Information that the Defendant collected and maintained is now in
the hands of data thieves and other unauthorized third parties,
says the suit.

THE RETINA GROUP OF WASHINGTON, PLLC provides healthcare services.
The Company offers retinal diagnostic, cryotherapy, eye surgery,
and other related medical services. [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
           Email: tpacheco@milberg.com

                - and -

           Mason A. Barney, Esq.
           Tyler J. Bean, Esq.
           SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP
           745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
           New York, NY 10151
           Telephone: (212) 532-1091
           Email: mbarney@sirillp.com
                  tbean@sirillp.com

ROGER S. PENSKE: Edelman Files Suit in Del. Chancery Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Roger S. Penske, et
al. The case is styled as Jeffrey Edelman, and others similarly
situated v. Roger S. Penske, Penske Corporation, Greg C. Smith,
Greg Penske, H. Brian Thompson, John D. Barr, Kimberly J. McWaters,
Kota Odagiri, Lisa Davis, Masashi Yamanaka, Michael R. Eisenson,
Robert H. Kurnick Jr., Ronald G. Steinhart, Sandra E. Pierce,
Wolfgang Durheimer, Case No. 2023-1291-JTL (Del. Chancery Ct., Dec.
27, 2023).

The case type is stated as "Breach of Fiduciary Duties."

Roger Penske is a retired American professional auto racing driver
and businessman and is the founder and chairman of Penske
Corporation.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Stephen E Jenkins, Esq.
          Phone: (302) 654-1888
          Fax: (302) 654-2067
               - and -

          Tiffany Geyer Lydon, Esq.
          ASHBY & GEDDES
          PO Box 1150
          Wilmington, DE 19899
          Phone: (302) 654-1888
          Email: tlydon@ashbygeddes.com


ROHR INC: Partly Wins Partial Summary Judgment Bid vs Morgan
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as NATHANIEL MORGAN, an
individual; MICHAEL BEVAN, an individual; individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, v. ROHR, INC., a
corporation; HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND, d/b/a COLLINS AEROSPACE; UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, Case No. 3:20-cv-00574-GPC-AHG (S.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel entered an order

   1) granting in part and denying in part the Defendants' motion
for
      partial summary judgment; and

   2) granting in part and denying in part the Plaintiffs' motion
for
      partial summary judgment.

When analyzed alongside Defendants' CBAs, training, and posted
policies, the Court concludes that the Defendants have created at
least a genuine issue of fact as to whether the presumption has
been rebutted.

As a result, the Court denies the Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial
Summary Judgment and denies the Defendants' Motion for Partial
Summary Judgment as they relate to Defendants' liability to the
First Meal Period Class.

The Court denies both parties' motions as they pertain to the
226,733 noncompliant shifts taken by employees working between ten
and twelve hours long, concluding that the evidence is sufficient
to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether there
existed a practice of regularly waiving second meal periods.

The Court agrees with the Plaintiffs. In its Class Certification
Order, the court did not intend to include an exhaustive list of
the "confusing" pay codes. The Court simply certified a class based
on Defendants' alleged failure to provide earnings statements that
allowed employees to "promptly and easily determine" the hours
worked and the applicable pay code, as is required by the Labor
Code.

On March 27, 2019, the Plaintiff Morgan filed this action in Solano
County Superior Court. On May 6, 2019, the Defendants removed the
case to the Eastern District of California pursuant to the Class
Action Fairness Act. On March 26, 2020, the action was transferred
to the Southern District of California.

Rohr Inc. is an aerospace manufacturing company.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 20, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3NMeD91 at no extra charge.[CC]



RXO LAST: Loses Summary Judgment Bid v. Muniz
----------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JUSTIN MUNIZ, MOHAMMED
BELAABD, NELSON QUINTANILLA, JOSE DILONE, and VICTOR AMARO, on
behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. RXO LAST
MILE, INC., Case No. 4:18-cv-11905-MRG (D. Mass.), the Hon. Judge
Timothy S. Hillman entered an order denying RXO's motion for
summary judgment.

Finally, RXO's reliance on Somers is misplaced. The SJC rejected
the employer's argument that the employee was receiving a windfall
via misclassification because, had the employee been correctly
classified, the rate would have been lower.
The Court here is not recalculating the DSP's wages. Those wages
are clearly set out in the DSA. RXO may internalize the costs of
insurance and damages by setting a lower overall standard delivery
rate, but it may not deduct damages from its employees on an ad hoc
basis, at least absent some clear independent review, nor may it
require its employer to pay for Workman's Compensation or other
types of liability insurance.

The Plaintiffs Justin Muniz, Mohammed Belaabd, Jose Dilone, and
Victor Amora bring this action on behalf of a certified class
against RXO.

The Plaintiffs are employees of RXO, a federally authorized freight
forwarder, who deliver appliances and other large consumers goods
for RXO's retail clients.

The Plaintiffs allege that RXO unlawfully deducted wages from their
pay in violation of the Massachusetts Wage Act.

RXO arranges and facilitates deliveries of large goods on behalf of
retailers to the purchasing customer.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 21, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Sa9w55 at no extra charge.[CC]

SAINT MARTINS UNIVERSITY: Bishop Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Saint Martins
University. The case is styled as Cedric Bishop, on behalf of
himself and all other persons similarly situated v. Saint Martins
University, Case No. 1:23-cv-11236-JPC (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 28, 2023).

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

Saint Martin's University -- https://www.stmartin.edu/ -- is a
private Benedictine university in Lacey, Washington.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb, Esq.
          Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
          GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
          150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR
          New York, NY 10003
          Phone: (212) 228-9795
          Email: nyjg@aol.com
                 michael@gottlieb.legal


SELLERS INTERNATIONAL: Shapiro Alleges Disclosure of Personal Info
------------------------------------------------------------------
ISAAC SHAPIRO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. SELLERS INTERNATIONAL LLC, Case No. 3:24-cv-00079
(N.D. Cal., Jan. 4, 2024) sues the Defendant for collecting and
sharing highly-specific and sensitive information about consumers'
video consumption habits without their consent to HubSpot, Inc. in
violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act.

The lawsuit contends that the Defendant knowingly disclosed the
personally identifiable information of the Plaintiff and class
members, including a record of Case Brief videos they consumed,
their names, and their emails to Hubspot, Inc. without their
consent. Specifically, the Defendant installed computer code on its
website called the "HubSpot Tracking Code," which tracks and
records the Plaintiff's and the Class Members' private video
consumption. Behind the scenes of the webpages that display the
case briefs -- and unbeknownst to video viewers -- this code
collects the Plaintiff and Class Members' video-watching history
and discloses it to HubSpot, Inc.

In December 2022, the Plaintiff Isaac Shapiro created a Quimbee
account using a Gmail email account, bearing his real-life name,
and began paying for a subscription. He also gave Quimbee his
real-life first and last name. When Plaintiff Isaac Shapiro watched
Quimbee's case brief videos through his Quimbee account, the
Defendant disclosed his event data, which recorded and disclosed
the video's URL and title as well as Plaintiff's name and email
address to Hubspot in English and Base64. The Plaintiff discovered
that the Defendant surreptitiously collected and transmitted his
personally identifiable information in December 2023, says the
suit.

The Defendant owns and operates Quimbee.com, which is an online
study aid service for law student.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Neal J. Deckant, Esq.
          Stefan Bogdanovich, 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: ndeckant@bursor.com
                  sbogdanovich@bursor.com

SHERYL SANDBERG: Court Tosses Class Certification Bid in Griffin
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHICORY GRIFFIN, v. SHERYL
SANDBERG, et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-04047-JSC (N.D. Cal.), the Hon.
Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley entered an order of dismissal with
leave to amend and denying motion for class certification.

The complaint is dismissed with leave to amend. If Plaintiff opted
out of the In re Facebook settlement, Plaintiff may file an amended
complaint on or before January 18, 2024, that alleges he opted out,
and how and when he did so. Plaintiff is not given leave to add
any new claims or defendants. The amended complaint must include
the caption and civil case number used in this order and the Words
"Court-Ordered First Amended Complaint" on the first page. Because
an amended complaint completely replaces the original complaint.

The Plaintiff may not incorporate material from the original by
reference; he must include in his amended complaint all the claims
he wishes to pursue. If Plaintiff does not file an amended
complaint within the designated time, the case will be dismissed
without prejudice.

It is Plaintiff's responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff
must keep the Court informed of any change of address by filing a
separate paper with the clerk headed "Notice of Change of Address."
He also must comply with the Court's orders in a timely fashion.
Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for
failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
41(b).

The motion for class certification is denied. The clerk shall send
Plaintiff the court’s photocopy request form.

The Plaintiff Griffin is an inmate in Missouri who is proceeding
without representation by an attorney. He filed this civil
complaint against Sheryl Sandberg, the corporations Cambridge
Analytica and Meta Platforms, Inc., and other unidentified
defendants.

The Plaintiff alleges Sandberg "assisted the violations of my data
privacy right" by "illegally disclosing" his data to "3rd parties,
app developers, whitelisted parties, data brokers, etc."

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 19, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3vf9YFX at no extra charge.[CC]



SL ALABAMA: Class Certification Deadlines in Bastidas Extended
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CESAR EDUARDO BASTIDAS
PEREGRINA, JOSE LUIS MARTINEZ VASQUEZ, ALBERTO VAZQUEZ GARCIA,
JESUS ABNERT HERNANDEZ NUNEZ, AND SEBASTIAN GUTIERREZ HERNANDEZ,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. SL
ALABAMA, LLC; GB2G, INC. d/b/a ALLSWELL; SPJ CONNECT INC.; and
YOUNGJIN LEE, individually. Case No. 3:23-cv-00206-TCB-RGV (N.D.
Ga.), the Hon. Judge Russel G. Vineyard entered an order granting
extending class certification deadlines:

   1. The Defendants' responses to the Plaintiffs' Complaint will
be
      due on or before February 2, 2024.

   2. The Plaintiffs are granted an extension of time to submit
      Plaintiff's opposition to Defendant's motions to dismiss, if

      any, up to and including Mar. 4 2024.

   3. The Defendants are granted an extension of time to submit
their
      respective reply briefs in support of their motions to
dismiss,
      if any, up to and including Mar. 18, 2024.

   4. The parties are granted an extension of time to file their
Local
      Rule 23.1(C) Joint Statement until 30 days after all the
      Defendants have filed an answer to the complaint or
defaulted.

   5. The Plaintiffs are granted an extension of time to file their

      motion for class certification pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.23 and

      Local Rule 21.1(B) until 90 days after all Defendants have
filed
      and answer to the complaint or defaulted.

SL Alabama manufactures motor vehicle parts and accessories.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3HbPCAs at no extra charge.[CC]

SNAP INC: To Settle Shareholder Suit in Delaware Court
------------------------------------------------------
Snap, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-K report for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2022, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on February 1, 2023, that on December 19, 2023, a
scheduling order was entered by the Court of Chancery of the State
of Delaware, concerning an Amended Stipulation of Compromise and
Settlement that was executed on December 15, 2023 by the parties in
a class action lawsuit in Delaware Chancery Court purportedly
brought on behalf of Class A stockholders, that sets forth the
terms and conditions for the settlement and dismissal, with
prejudice, of the Lawsuit. The Amended Stipulation of Settlement
amends a prior scheduling order which was entered by the Court of
Chancery of the State of Delaware on June 21, 2023 concerning a
superseded stipulation of Compromise and Settlement that was
executed by the parties to the Lawsuit on June 13, 2023.

On August 2, 2022, the company, and certain of its directors, were
named as defendants in a class action lawsuit in Delaware Chancery
court purportedly brought on behalf of Class A stockholders,
alleging that a transaction between the company's co-founders and
the company, in which the co-founders agreed to employment
agreements, and the company agreed to amend its certificate of
incorporation and issue a stock dividend if certain conditions were
met, was not advantageous to the stockholders, constituted a breach
of fiduciary duty, and should have been put to a vote of the Class
A stockholders. Defendants seek monetary damages and other relief.


On July 21, 2022, the company entered into a series of transactions
that provided for, among other things, the future declaration and
payment of a special dividend of one share of Class A common stock
on each outstanding share of Snap's common stock, which would not
be declared and paid until the later of June 30, 2023 and the first
business day following the date on which the 65-Day volume-weighted
average price (VWAP) equals or exceeds $40 per share, or, if the
board of directors so determined, a date that is within five
business days after the later of such two dates.

The Amended Stipulation of Settlement provides that the company has
agreed to, among other things, modify the condition for the
declaration of the Special Dividend to be the first business day
following the date that, subject to certain adjustments, the 90-Day
VWAP equals or exceeds $40 per share, and the ratio of the 90-day
VWAP to $8.70 (the closing price of Snap Class A common stock on
May 10, 2023), equals or exceeds the ratio of the average closing
price of the S&P 500 index for the same 90 trading days for which
the 90-Day VWAP was calculated to 8,862.85 (the closing value of
the S&P 500 Total Return index on May 10, 2023).

The Amended Stipulation of Settlement provides other terms and the
company's stockholders should review its complete terms. The
Amended Stipulation of Settlement remains subject to the
satisfaction of various conditions, including sending notice to
Snap Inc. common stockholders and judicial approval, the settlement
fairness hearing for which is currently scheduled for February 26,
2024.

Snap Inc. is a technology company based in California.


SOUTHERN STAR: Bell Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime for Delivery Drivers
-------------------------------------------------------------------
LINDA BELL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SOUTHERN STAR EXPRESS, LLC, Defendant, Case
No. 3:24-cv-00059 (N.D. Tex., January 8, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for its failure to pay overtime wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Portal-to-Portal
Act.

The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant as a delivery driver from
October 2019 until September 2021.

Southern Star Express, LLC is a package delivery service provider
based in Dallas, Texas. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Melinda Arbuckle, Esq.
         Ricardo J. Prieto, Esq.
         WAGE AND HOUR FIRM
         5050 Quorum Drive, Suite 700
         Dallas, TX 75254
         Telephone: (214) 489-7653
         Facsimile: (469) 319-0317
         E-mail: marbuckle@wageandhourfirm.com
                 rprieto@wageandhourfirm.com

STANFORD INTERNET: Aspen Appeals Denied Motions to Compel, Stay
---------------------------------------------------------------
Defendant Aspen Institute filed an appeal from the District Court's
MEMORANDUM ORDER dated December 21, 2023 entered in the lawsuit
entitled JILL HINES, ET AL. v. ALEX STAMOS ET AL., Case No.
3:23-CV-571, in the United States District Court for the Western
District of Louisiana, Monroe.

As reported in the Class Action Reporter, on May 2, 2023, America
First Legal filed a federal class action lawsuit against key
persons and entities involved in the so-called "Election Integrity
Partnership" and the "Virality Project," on behalf of Jill Hines,
the co-Director of Health Freedom Louisiana, and Jim Hoft, the
founder the popular news website The Gateway Pundit. Defendants
include the Stanford Internet Observatory and its Director and
Research Manager, Alex Stamos and Renee DiResta, Dr. Kate Starbird
of the University of Washington, Graphika, and the Atlantic
Research Council's Digital Forensic Lab.

This historic lawsuit alleges that these parties conspired with the
federal government to conduct a mass surveillance and censorship
operation targeting the political speech of millions of Americans
on social media platforms like Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter
(under its prior ownership). This operation was specifically
designed to target conservative political speech on questions of
great public interest like election integrity, COVID-19 vaccines,
and vaccine mandates.

On December 18, 2023, Defendant Aspen Institute filed motions to
compel individual arbitration and to stay proceedings which the
Court both denied on December 21 through an Order entered by Judge
Terry A. Doughty.

The appellate case is captioned as Hines v. Aspen Institute, Case
No. 23-30916, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit,
filed on December 26, 2023.[BN]

Defendant-Appellant Aspen Institute is represented by:

          Elizabeth Mendell Carmody, Esq.
          COOK, YANCEY, KING & GALLOWAY, A.P.L.C.
          333 Texas Street
          Shreveport, LA 71101
          Telephone: (318) 221-6277

Plaintiffs-Appellees Jill Hines, on behalf of herself and others
similarly situated, et al., are represented by:

          Julianna Petchak Parks, Esq.
          LANGLEY PARKS, L.L.C.
          4444 Viking Drive
          Bossier City, LA 71111
          Telephone: (318) 383-6422

STATE FARM: Allowed Leave to File Bid to Seal Docs
--------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CARLLYNN NICHOLS, on
behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, v. STATE FARM
MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. 2:22-cv-00016-SDM-EPD
(S.D. Ohio), the Hon. Judge Elizabeth A. Preston Deavers entered an
order granting the Defendant's unopposed motion for leave to file
motion to seal contemporaneously with opposition to the Plaintiff's
motion for class certification:

The Court said, "The Defendant is granted leave to file a motion to
seal on December 29, 2023, contemporaneously with its opposition to
the Plaintiff's motion for class certification, concerning
information in its opposition to the Plaintiff's motion for class
certification, expert disclosures, or other supporting exhibits,
and at which time Defendant will also include proposed redactions
for the Court's consideration."

State Farm offers vehicle, auto, accident, homeowners, condo
owners, renters, life and annuities, fire and casualty, health,
disability, flood, business, and boat insurance products and
services.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 20, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/48B4mEC at no extra charge.[CC]



STATE FARM: Seeks Leave to Seal Confidential Info
-------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CARLLYNN NICHOLS, on
behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, v. STATE FARM
MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. 2:22-cv-00016-SDM-EPD
(S.D. Ohio), the Defendant file an unopposed motion for leave to
file motion to seal contemporaneously with opposition to the
plaintiff's motion for class certification.

State Farm offers vehicle, auto, accident, homeowners, condo
owners, renters, life and annuities, fire and casualty, health,
disability, flood, business, and boat insurance products and
services.

A copy of the Defendant's unopposed motion dated Dec. 19, 2023 is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41IKvRA at no
extra charge.[CC]

The Defendant is represented by:

          James R. Gallagher, Esq.
          GALLAGHER, GAMS, TALLAN, BARNES & LITTRELL, L.L.P.
          471 East Broad Street, 19th Floor
          Columbus, OH 43215
          Telephone: (614) 228-5151
          Facsimile: (614) 228-0032
          E-mail: jgallagher@ggtbl.com

                - and -

          Peter W. Herzog III, Esq.
          Eric L. Robertson, Esq.
          Thomas C. Dec, Esq.
          WHEELER TRIGG O'DONNELL LLP
          One Metropolitan Square
          211 N. Broadway, Suite 2825
          St. Louis, MO 63102-2723
          Telephone: (314) 226-4129
          Facsimile: (303) 244-1879
          E-mail: pherzog@wtotrial.com
                  robertson@wtotrial.com
                  dec@wtotrial.com

SUN LIFE: Scheduling Order Entered in GC Suit
---------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GENESETT CORPORATION, as
Trustee of the Genesett Trust, on behalf of itself and all others
similarly situated, v. SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CANADA, Case
No. 1:23-cv-12276-AK (D. Mass.), the Hon. Judge Angel Kelley
entered a scheduling order pursuant to Rule 16(b) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 16.1(f) as follows:

-- Initial disclosures required by Fed.             Dec. 5, 2023
    R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) must be completed by:

-- Except for good cause shown, no motions          March 5, 2024
    seeking leave to add new parties or to
    amend the pleadings to assert new claims
    or defenses may be filed after:

-- Written discovery (requests for production       July 1, 2024
    of documents, interrogatories, and requests
    for admissions) shall be served no later than:

-- All depositions, other than expert               Aug. 12, 2024
    depositions, must be completed by:

-- All discovery, other than expert discovery,      Aug. 12, 2024
    must be completed by:

-- Deadline for reply in support of the             Nov. 18, 2024
    motion for class certification on or
    before:

-- Plaintiff's expert disclosures:                  Jan. 10, 2025

-- Defendant's expert disclosures:                  Feb. 25, 2025

-- Plaintiff's rebuttal expert disclosures:         March 25,
2025

-- Completion of expert depositions and             May 9, 2025
    expert discovery:

Sun Life offers its life and health insurance, mortgage protection,
investments, workplace benefits, and savings.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 21, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3HdjrR3 at no extra charge.[CC]

SYMETRA LIFE: Davis Suit Seeks to Certify Class of Policyholders
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DENNIS E. DAVIS,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
SYMETRA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Washington corporation, Case No.
2:21-cv-00533-KKE (W.D. Wash.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to
enter an order granting his motion for class certification.

The Plaintiff contends that because all of the required elements of
Rule 23 are satisfied, his motion for class certification should be
granted, and he should be appointed as the Class Representative and
his counsel appointed as Class Counsel.

Mr. Davis purchased a standardized universal life insurance policy
from Symetra with express limits on what Symetra could deduct from
the associated savings account.

The Plaintiff seeks to certify a class of Symetra policyholders
with the same or materially identical standardized life insurance
policies.

  -- The Plaintiffs proposed class includes policyholders whose
     Policies were issued in eleven states: Arizona, California,
     Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri,
South
     Carolina, Texas, and Washington. The case will turn on the
     interpretation of materially identical form contracts and
     Symetra's common conduct toward the class and is therefore
     ideally suited for class treatment.

The Plaintiff moves to certify the following Class:

   "All current and former owners of one or more of the
MasterPlan,
   Executive MasterPlan, MasterPlan Plus, or Juvenile MasterPlan
Plus
   policies insured by Symetra that were issued in Arizona,
   California, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Minnesota,
   Missouri, South Carolina, Texas, or Washington whose policy was
in
   force on or after 2000."

The Plaintiff asserts Symetra breached the Policies each month by
deducting excessive charges for the COI by calculating the COI
charge using COI rates inflated with undisclosed non-mortality
factors unrelated to and in excess of Symetra’s expectations as
to future mortality experience, including by failing to lower the
COI rates to reflect improvement in Symetra's mortality
expectations over time.

Symetra is an American family of companies providing retirement
plans, employee benefits, annuities and life insurance.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 19, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3txRTmf at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kim D. Stephens, Esq.
          Rebecca L. Solomon, Esq.
          TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
          1200 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1700
          Seattle, WA 98101
          Telephone: (206) 682-5600
          Facsimile: (206) 682-2992
          E-mail: kstephens@tousley.com
                  rsolomon@tousley.com

                - and -

          Patrick J. Stueve, Esq.
          Lindsay Todd Perkins, Esq.
          Ethan M. Lange, Esq.
          David A. Hickey, Esq.
          STUEVE SIEGEL HANSON LLP
          460 Nichols Road Ste. 200
          Kansas City, MO 64112
          Telephone: (816) 714-7100
          Facsimile: (816) 714-7101
          E-mail: stueve@stuevesiegel.com
                  perkins@stuevesiegel.com
                  lange@stuevesiegel.com
                  hickey@stuevesiegel.com

                - and -

          John J. Schirger, Esq.
          Joseph M. Feierabend, Esq.
          MILLER SCHIRGER, LLC
          4520 Main Street Ste. 1570
          Kansas City, MO 64111
          Telephone: (816) 561-6500
          Facsimile: (816) 561-6501
          E-mail: jschirger@millerschirger.com
                  jfeierabend@millerschirger.com

TENNESSEE: Moore Suit Seeks to Certify Class Action
---------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Joshua Moore, James W.
Clark, Jr., Delmar Mack, and Kevin Forman, v. Tennessee Department
of
Corections (TDOC), TDOC Commuisioner Frank Strada, Chaplain Gregory
Williams (Bledsoe), Associated Warden of Treatment (AWT), Bret
Cobble (Bledsoe), Aramark John Doe, Case No. 1:23-cv-00302-TRM-SKL
(E.D. Tenn.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order
granting their motion to certify class action.

Tennessee Department operates safe and secure prisons and provides
effective community supervision in order to enhance public safety.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 19, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/48mPREM at no extra
charge.[CC]

TESLA INC: Bid for Class Certification in Urban Due June 21
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOHN L. URBAN, v. TESLA,
INC., Case No. 5:22-cv-07703-PCP (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge P.
Casey Pitts entered a case management order as follows:

-- Joinder and Other Amendments:                    March 1, 2024

-- Motion for Class Certification:                  June 21, 2024

-- Designation of Opening Experts with              July 22, 2024
    Reports:

-- Deadline to Oppose Class Certification:          Aug. 20, 2024

-- Reply in Support of Class Certification:         Oct. 4, 2024

-- Trial (7–10 days):                               To be
determined
                                                     within 30 days
of
                                                     class
                                                     certification

                                                     order

Tesla is an American multinational automotive and clean energy
company.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 20, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/48mBiAT at no extra charge.[CC]

TRACY CORNETT: Court Dismisses Harris, et al., in Garcia Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JAMES GARCIA, MONTEZ
HARRIS, LAVON LAMPKINS, JAMES SCARBOUROUGH, and CHARLES KNIGHT, v.
TRACY CORNETT, GARY LEWIS, JOSEPH FARLEY, MATTHEW BATEY, KIMBERLY
HUGHES, JAQULIN ALGOZINE, and JOHN GALIPEAU, Case No.
3:23-cv-01056-HAB-SLC (N.D. Ind.), the Hon. Judge Holly A. Brady
entered an order:

   (1) Dismissing Montez Harris, Lavon Lampkins, James
Scarbourough,
       and Charles Knight;

   (2) Directing the clerk to open a separate case for Montez
Harris,
       Lavon Lampkins, James Scarbourough, and Charles Knight with

       the order, the complaint, and the motion for a preliminary
       injunction;

   (3) Directing the clerk to directly assign these related, newly

       opened cases pursuant to N.D. Ind. L.R. 40-1(e);

   (4) Denying the motion for counsel; and

   (5) Denying the motion for class certification.

James Garcia, a prisoner without a lawyer, filed a complaint. On it
he
included as plaintiffs the names of four other inmates at the
Westville Correctional Facility, but only he signed the complaint.


Based on the facts of the case, joinder of these five unrepresented
prison inmates is not appropriate. None of the plaintiffs are
lawyers and none of them may represent any of the others.

Inmates are constantly being released from custody, transferred to
another facility, and relocated within a facility. Once convicted,
an inmate can be relocated at any time without notice.

A copy of the Court's opinion and order dated Dec. 20, 2023 is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41FmStd at no
extra charge.[CC]

TUCKETTS INC: Liz Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Tucketts, Inc. The
case is styled as Pedro Liz, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. Tucketts, Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-11282-VEC
(S.D.N.Y., Dec. 29, 2023).

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

Tucketts -- https://tucketts.com/ -- offers high performance
toeless grip socks enhance the foot-brain connection.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gabriel Levy, Esq.
          GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C.
          1129 Northern Blvd., Suite 404
          Manhasset, NY 11030
          Phone: (516) 287-3458
          Email: glevy@glpcfirm.com


UCLA MEDICAL: Deadline to File Class Cert Bids Due March 11
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TURESA WILCOX, v. UCLA
MEDICAL CENTER GUILD, INC., et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-02802-MCS-JC
(C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Mark C. Scarsi entered an scheduling
order setting additional dates, including pretrial and trial dates,
after a
ruling on class certification:

                Event                           Date

  Non-Expert Discovery Cut-Off               Apr. 1, 2024

  Expert Disclosure (Initial)                Jan. 2, 2024

  Expert Disclosure (Rebuttal)               Mar. 1, 2024

  Expert Discovery Cut-Off                   May 1, 2024

  Deadline to File a Motion for Class        March 11, 2024
  Certification

  Deadline to File an Opposition to the      April 1, 2024
  Motion for Class Certification

  Deadline to File a Reply in Support        April 22, 2024
  of the Motion for Class Certification

  Hearing Date on Motion for Class           May 20, 2024
  Certification:

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 21, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4aLINTC at no extra charge.[CC]



ULTA BEAUTY: Faces Turcios Suit Over Unlawful Labor Practices
-------------------------------------------------------------
Lovely Turcios, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. Ulta Beauty, Incorporated, Case No. 1:24-cv-00126 (N.D.
Ill., Jan. 4, 2024) fails to provide a "reasonable break time for
an employee to express breast milk" and fails to provide sufficient
lactation accommodations, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards
Act and the Providing Urgent Maternal Protections for Nursing
Mothers Act.

Ms. Turcios was an employee of Ulta Beauty in Silver Spring,
Maryland. She had her baby in July 2023 and, after taking some time
off, returned to work in September 2023. Before she had her child,
Ms. Turcios discussed pumping accommodations with her supervisor,
Tori Mullins. When she returned to work after having her child, Ms.
Turcios had to pump in her car. At times, passersby would see her
pumping in her car.

The Defendant did not accommodate Ms. Turcios to pump breast milk
at work. By failing to provide a place to pump, the Defendant
deprived Ms. Turcios of her rights as a nursing mother guaranteed
by the PUMP Act to a clean and secure space to pump milk for her
infant child, the lawsuit contends.

As a result, Ms. Turcios experienced engorgement and a reduction in
her milk supply for her new baby. This reduction and the lack of
accommodation provided by the Defendant have caused Ms. Turcios to
endure pain, anguish, anxiety, hardship, humiliation, and emotional
distress, says the suit.

The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of herself and a
nationwide collective of similarly situated former and current
employees of Ulta Beauty. The Plaintiff seeks injunctive and
declaratory relief, compensatory and punitive damages, reasonable
attorneys' fees, litigation costs, and pre-and post-judgment
interest.

Ulta Beauty is a beauty retailer offering cosmetics, fragrance,
skin care, and hair products along with salon services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mason Barney, Esq.
          Oren Faircloth, Esq.
          Lisa R. Considine, Esq.
          SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP
          745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
          New York, NY 10151
          Telephone: (212) 532-1091
          Facsimile: (646) 417-5967
          E-mail: mbarney@sirillp.com
                  ofaircloth@sirillp.com
                  lconsidine@sirillp.com

UMA EDUCATION: Julmice Sues Over Remote Call Workers' Unpaid Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------------
YVANNE JULMICE, individually, and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. UMA EDUCATION, INC., a corporation,
Defendant, Case No. 8:24-cv-00090 (M.D. Fla., January 9, 2024),
arises from the Defendant's willful violations of the Fair Labor
Standards Act and common law.

Plaintiff Yvanne Julmice is a resident of Miami, FL and worked for
Defendant as a non-exempt remote call workers (RCW) in Florida from
September 20, 2021 through March 15, 2023. The Defendant
compensated the Plaintiff through the payment of an hourly rate,
most recently $19.67 per hour. However, Defendant failed to
compensate RCWs for the substantial time they spent performing
activities such as turning on and booting up their computer prior
to clocking in to Defendant's timekeeping system, says the suit.

The Defendant violated the FLSA and common law by systematically
failing to compensate its RCWs for work tasks completed before
their scheduled shifts, when they were not logged into Defendant's
timekeeping system, which resulted in RCWs not being paid for all
hours worked, whether at the employee's base rate in non-overtime
weeks, or overtime hours worked in weeks where RCWs worked at least
40 hours, the suit added.

Headquartered in Florida, UMA Education, Inc. operates Ultimate
Medical Academy, a nonprofit healthcare educational institution
with a national presence. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Bradley W. Butcher, Esq.
          BUTCHER & ASSOCIATES, P.L.
          6830 Porto Fino Circle, Suite 2
          Fort Myers, FL 33912
          Telephone: (239) 322-1650
          E-mail: bwb@b-a-law.com

                  - and -

          Mark R. Miller, Esq.
          Juan Garibay, Esq.
          WALLACE MILLER
          150 N. Wacker Dr., Suite 1100
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Telephone: 312-261-6193
          E-mail: mrm@wallacemiller.com

                  - and -

          Jason J. Thompson, Esq.
          Paulina R. Kennedy, Esq.
          SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
          One Towne Square, 17th Floor
          Southfield, MI 48076
          Telephone: 248-355-0300
          E-mail: jthompson@sommerspc.com
                  kmilz@sommerspc.com
                  jmg@wallacemiller.com

UNITED AIRLINES: Class Cert Appendices May be Filed Under Seal
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DAVID SAMBRANO, ET AL., v.
UNITED AIRLINES, INC., Case No. 4:21-cv-01074-P (N.D. Tex.), the
Hon. Judge Mark T. Pittman entered an order granting the Parties'
joint motion for leave to file class certification appendices under
seal.

United Airlines is a major American airline headquartered at the
Willis Tower in Chicago, Illinois.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 21, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3H9bJHt at no extra charge.[CC]



UNITED AIRLINES: Parties Seek Leave to File Class Cert in Sambrano
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DAVID SAMBRANO, et al.,
individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
UNITED AIRLINES, INC., Case No. 4:21-cv-01074-P (N.D. Tex.), the
Parties ask the Court to enter an order granting their joint motion
for leave to file class certification appendices under seal.

On May 1, 2023, the parties entered into a confidentiality
agreement which permitted, among other things, either party to
designate produced documents as confidential if they contain
"confidential, proprietary, trade secret, or other sensitive
information, as well as certain personally identifiable information
(e.g., social security numbers, dates of birth, home addresses,
and/or personal phone numbers), private medical/health information,
or other material that a producing party reasonably believes should
remain confidential."

The parties' agreement further provides that if a document is
designated as confidential, a party that wishes to use the document
in support of a filing shall notify the other party of its intent
to do so, thereby allowing time to confer about the need for filing
under seal. Pursuant to that provision, the Plaintiffs notified
United that they intend to use materials in support of their Motion
for Class Certification that United designated as confidential.
With limited exceptions, United has determined that it will not
seek to seal many of these records.

Rather, the parties have conferred and agree that names and/or
personal identifying information related to certain non-parties
should be kept confidential at this stage of proceedings.

Accordingly, in order to protect the privacy of putative class
members, the parties jointly propose the following:

   1. The Plaintiffs will file the Appendix accompanying their
Motion
      for Class Certification under seal on the date that their
Motion
      is due.

   2. On the same day, Plaintiffs will provide an unredacted copy
of
      the Appendix to United and the parties will cooperate in
      redacting any personal identifying information in the
Appendix
      documents based on a document-by-document, lineby-line
review.

   3. Within fourteen days of Plaintiffs' filing of the Motion for

      Class Certification, Plaintiffs will file a redacted Appendix
on
      the public docket.

   4. The same procedure and conditions shall be used when United
      files its Opposition to Class Certification.

The parties agree that this process will adequately protect the
putative class members' privacy interests while ensuring that the
public has access to all appropriate information.

Thus, for these reasons, the parties respectfully request leave to
file their Appendices in support of and in opposition to
Plaintiffs' Class Certification Motion under seal pursuant to the
parameters outlined above.

United Airlines is a major American airline headquartered at the
Willis Tower in Chicago, Illinois.

A copy of the Parties' motion dated Dec. 20, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3S1C5l3 at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          John C. Sullivan, Esq.
          S|L LAW PLLC
          610 Uptown Boulevard, Suite 2000
          Cedar Hill, TX 75104
          Telephone: (469) 523-1351
          Facsimile: (469) 613-0891
          E-mail: john.sullivan@the-sl-lawfirm.com

                - and -

          Mark R. Paoletta, Esq.
          Gene C. Schaerr, Esq.
          Brian J. Field, Esq.
          Kenneth A. Klukowski, Esq.
          Annika M. Boone, Esq.
          SCHAERR | JAFFE LLP
          1717 K Street NW, Suite 900
          Washington, DC 20006
          Telephone: (202) 787-1060
          Facsimile: (202) 776-0136
          E-mail: mpaoletta@schaerr-jaffe.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Donald J. Munro, Esq.
          Jordan M. Matthews, Esq.
          JONES DAY
          51 Louisiana Avenue, NW
          Washington, DC 20001
          Telephone: (202) 879-3939
          Facsimile: (202) 626-1700
          E-mail: dmunro@jonesday.com
                  jmatthews@jonesday.com

                - and -

          Russell D. Cawyer, Esq.
          KELLY HART & HALLMAN LLP
          201 Main St., Ste. 2500
          Fort Worth, TX 76102
          Telephone: (817) 878-3562
          russell.cawyer@kellyhart.com

UNITED STATES: Court Directs Filing of Discovery Plan in Kai Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Khai Grocery & Gifts et
al., v. United States of America, Case No. 4:23-cv-04167-SLD-JEH
(C.D. Ill.), the Hon. Judge Jonathan E. Hawley entered a standing
order as follows:

   -- Rule 16 scheduling conference

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

   -- Discovery plan

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

   -- Waiver of the Rule 16 scheduling conference

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

      scheduling conference be cancelled.

   -- Failure of counsel to attend a scheduled telephone hearing

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

      telephone hearing will be treated as a failure of counsel to

      appear for an in-person hearing.

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

      discovery deadline has already passed

      The parties may not raise a discovery dispute with the Court

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

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

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

      subsequent discovery disputes being deemed waived.

   -- Settlement conferences and mediation

      The parties are encouraged to seek a settlement conference or

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

A copy of the Court's standing order dated Dec. 21, 2023 is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3TRA3VP at no
extra charge.[CC]

UNITED STATES: Court Sets Rule 26(f) Scheduling Conference
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v. 43,564.00, et al., Case No. 2:22-cv-00004-FWS-MRW (C.D. Cal.),
the Hon. Judge Fred W. Slaughter entered an order setting rule
26(f) scheduling conference.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 19, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/48ismwi at no extra charge.[CC]



US IMMIGRATION: Final Nod of Settlement Deal Sought in Padilla
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as YOLANY PADILLA, et al., v.
U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, et al., Case No.
2:18-cv-00928-MJP (W.D. Wash.), the Parties ask the Court to enter
an order granting final approval of the Settlement Agreement that
the Court preliminarily approved on October 30, 2023.

As noted, on October 30, 2023, the Court preliminarily approved the
settlement agreement in this case. Following the preliminary
approval, Defendants posted the court-approved class notice at all
detention centers throughout the country in English and Spanish.

Accordingly, they request that the Court issue final approval of
the agreement at the Fairness Hearing on January 5, 2024.

As part of that final approval, Plaintiffs request that the Court
approve an award of attorney's fees in the amount of $100,000.

Pursuant to Section IX of the Agreement, the Defendants agreed to
"pay Class counsel the sum of $100,000 to settle and resolve
Plaintiffs' claims to all attorney's fees and costs.

US Immigration enforces federal laws governing border control,
customs, trade, and immigration.

A copy of the Parties' motion dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/48AMvxw at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Matt Adams, Esq.
          Aaron Korthuis, Esq.
          Glenda M. Aldana Madrid, Esq.
          NORTHWEST IMMIGRANT RIGHTS PROJECT
          615 Second Avenue, Suite 400
          Seattle, WA 98104
          Telephone: (206) 957-8611
          E-mail: matt@nwirp.org
                  aaron@nwirp.org
                  glenda@nwirp.org

                - and -

          Trina Realmuto, Esq.
          Kristin Macleod-Ball, Esq.
          NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LITIGATION ALLIANCE
          10 Griggs Terrace
          Brookline, MA 02446
          Telephone: (617) 819-4447
          E-mail: trina@immigrationlitigation.org
                  kristin@immigrationlitigation.org

                - and -

          Emma Winger, Esq.
          AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL
          1331 G Street NW, Suite 200
          Washington, DC 20005
          Telephone: (202) 507-7512
          E-mail: ewinger@immcouncil.org

The Defendants are represented by:

          Lauren C. Bingham, Esq.
          OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION
          CIVIL DIVISION
          Ben Franklin Station
          Washington, DC 20044
          Facsimile: (202) 305-7000
          E-mail: lauren.c.bingham@usdoj.go

US IMMIGRATION: Parties Seeks More Time for Class Cert Response
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JIMENEZ, et al., v. U.S.
IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, et al., Case No.
1:23-cv-06353-RMI (N.D. Cal.), the Parties stipulate to an
enlargement of time for the Defendants to respond to the
Plaintiffs' preliminary injunction and class certification motions.


Currently, the responses to both the motion for preliminary
injunction and the motion for class certification are scheduled for
December 28, 2023.

The Defendants' request that this Court extend the deadline for
Defendants' responses to Plaintiffs' preliminary injunction and
class certification motions until January 26, 2024.

The parties further stipulate to enlarge Plaintiffs' time to reply
by 7 days until February 9, 2024. The hearing on the motion for
preliminary judgment would take place on February 27, 2024.

US Immigration enforces federal laws governing border control,
customs, trade, and immigration.

A copy of the Parties' dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3H6XiUu at no extra charge.[CC]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Anna L. Dichter, Esq.
          U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, CIVIL DIVISION
          Ben Franklin Station
          Washington, DC 20044
          Telephone: (202) 353-2405
          Facsimile: (202) 305-7000
          E-mail: Anna.L.Dichter@usdoj.gov

VANGUARD CHESTER: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due May 17
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit RE: VANGUARD CHESTER FUNDS LITIGATION
Case No. 2:22-cv-00955-JFM (E.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Murphy
entered an order as follows:

   1. All motions directed at the pleadings shall be filed no later

      than January 20, 2024, or within thirty days after any
amended
      pleading is filed by an opposing party.

   2. All motions to further amend the pleadings and to join or add

      additional parties shall be filed by May 10, 2024.

   3. The Plaintiffs' motion for class certification and any
      supporting expert report(s) shall be filed no later than May
17,
      2024.

   4. The Depositions of plaintiffs' class certification expert(s)

      shall be concluded no later than June 14, 2024.

   5. Any opposition to class certification motions and any
supporting
      expert report(s) shall be filed no later than June 28, 2024.

   6. Depositions of the defendants' class certification expert(s)

      shall be concluded no later than July 19, 2024.

   7. Any reply to class certification motions shall be filed by
      August 2, 2024.

   8. All fact discovery shall be completed no later than December
20,
      2024.

   9. Affirmative expert reports shall be served no later than Jan.

      20, 2025.

  10. Motions for summary judgment shall be filed no later than May

      16, 2025.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 21, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3S8nQe9 at no extra charge.[CC]



VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS: Sarver Balks at Breach of Fiduciary Duties
------------------------------------------------------------------
WADE SARVER, derivatively on behalf of VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC.,
v. HANS VESTBERG, MATTHEW ELLIS, CLARENCE OTIS, JR., SHELLYE L.
ARCHAMBEAU, ROXANNE S. AUSTIN, MARK T. BERTOLINI, VITTORIO COLAO,
MELANIE L. HEALEY, LAXMAN NARASIMHAN, DANIEL H. SCHULMAN, RODNEY E.
SLATER, CAROL B. TOME, GREGORY G. WEAVER, LOWELL C. MCADAM, RICHARD
CARRION, FRANCES KEETH, and KATHRYN TESIJA, Defendants, and VERIZON
COMMUNICATIONS INC., Nominal Defendant, Case No. 3:24-cv-00063
(D.N.J., Jan. 4, 2024) is a shareholder derivative action brought
on behalf of Verizon against certain officers and members of the
Company's Board of Directors for breaches of their fiduciary
duties, and violations of the federal securities laws.

This shareholder derivative action stems from Verizon’s
long-standing decision to leave toxic cable wires buried in the
ground throughout the country, which allowed these wires to
contaminate ground water and pose potential health risks to those
exposed to these wires. Verizon kept this policy quiet, concealing
this practice from nearby residents as well as from investors in
violation of its disclosure obligations and fiduciary duties. The
Plaintiff did not make a demand prior to bringing this action
because it would be futile. Verizon's directors are neither
disinterested nor independent. In the absence of this action,
Verizon will neither recover its damages nor properly remediate the
weaknesses in its internal controls and corporate governance
practices and procedures.

The Plaintiff brings this action derivatively in the right and for
the benefit of the Company to redress injuries suffered and to be
suffered as a direct and proximate result of the breaches of
fiduciary duties and violations of the federal securities laws by
the Individual Defendants.

The Proxy Statements further failed to disclose that the Company
was violating federal law, issuing false and misleading statements
in violation of securities laws, and had failed to establish or
maintain adequate internal controls. As a result, the market price
of Verizon common stock was artificially inflated. In ignorance of
the falsity of the statements, stockholders relied on the
statements described above and/or the integrity of the market price
of Verizon common stock in purchasing Verizon common stock at
prices that were artificially inflated as a result of these false
and misleading statements and were damaged thereby, says the suit.

The Plaintiff is an owner of Verizon common stock and has been a
continuous Verizon shareholder at all relevant times.

Verizon is a provider of communications, technology, information
and entertainment products and services to consumers, businesses
and government entities.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Laurence M. Rosen, Esq.
          Phillip Kim, Esq.
          Erica L. Stone, Esq.
          THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
          One Gateway Center, Suite 2600
          Newark, NJ 07102
          Telephone: (973) 313-1887
          Facsimile: (973) 833-0399
          E-mail: lrosen@rosenlegal.com
                  pkim@rosenlegal.com
                  estone@rosenlegal.com

WARRANTECH CONSUMER: Court Continues Stay of Elliott Suit
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Elliott et al v.
Warrantech Consumer Product Services, Inc. et al., Case No.
4:22-cv-00091 (N.D. Ga., Filed April 15, 2022), the Hon. Judge
Michael L. Brown entered an order as follows:

-- Directing the Defendants to produce the discovery sought by
the
    Plaintiff in the parties' joint discovery dispute statement;

-- Staying the order pending the Court's review of Plaintiff's
motion
    for Class Certification;

-- Continuing the stay pending the Court's resolution of
Plaintiff's
    motion.

The nature of suit states Diversity-Breach of Contract.

Warrantech provides innovative extended service plans (ESPs) and
warranty programs for retailers, dealers, distributors, and
manufacturers.

WASHINGTON NEWSPAPER: Pileggi Seeks More Time to File Class Cert.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as NICOLE PILEGGI,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
WASHINGTON NEWSPAPER PUBLISHING COMPANY, LLC, Case No.
1:23-cv-00345-BAH (D.D.C.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter
an order extending the deadline for the Plaintiff to file her
motion for class certification from January 19, 2024 to June 21,
2024.

Two previous extension have been granted in this case. The first
extension was from May 8, 2023 (which would have been 90 days after
the filing of the Complaint) to September 5, 2023.

The second extension was from September 5, 2023 to January 19,
2024.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 19, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RFnV7F at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael A. Caddell, Esq.
          Cynthia B. Chapman, Esq.
          Amy E. Tabor, Esq.
          CADDELL & CHAPMAN
          628 East 9th Street
          Houston, TX 77007-1722
          Telephone: (713) 751-0400
          Facsimile: (713) 751-0906
          E-mail: mac@caddellchapman.com
                  cbc@caddellchapman.com
                  aet@caddellchapman.com

                - and -

          Michael L. Murphy, Esq.
          BAILEY & GLASSER LLP
          1055 Thomas Jefferson Street NW, Suite 540
          Washington, DC 20007
          Telephone: (202) 463-2101
          Facsimile: (202) 463-2103
          E-mail: mmurphy@baileyglasser.com

WELLA OPERATIONS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Alcantar Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
MARI ALCANTAR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. WELLA OPERATIONS US LLC; WELLA COMPANY; and
DOES 1 to 25, inclusive, Case No. 24STCV00285 (Cal. Super., Los
Angeles Cty., Jan. 4, 2024) is an action against the Defendants for
failure to pay minimum wages, overtime compensation, authorize and
permit meal and rest periods, provide accurate wage statements, and
reimburse necessary business expenses.

Plaintiff Alcantar was employed by the Defendants as accounting
analyst.

WELLA OPERATIONS US LLC operates as a special purpose entity. The
Company was formed for the purpose of issuing debt securities to
repay existing credit facilities, refinance indebtedness, and for
acquisition purposes. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Harout Messrelian, Esq.
          MESSRELIAN LAW INC.
          500 N. Central Ave., Suite 840
          Glendale, CA 91203
          Telephone: (818) 484-6531
          Facsimile: (818) 956-1983

WELLS FARGO: Court OK's Bid for Leave to File Reply
---------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Henzel v. Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A., Case No. 2:22-cv-00529-GMN-NJK (D. Nev.), the Hon.
Judge Gloria M. Navarro entered an order that:

-- Wells Fargo's Objection is denied.

-- Wells Fargo's Motion for Leave to File Reply, is granted as
    unopposed.

The case arises from the fallout of a Ponzi scheme that ended with
an armed standoff between a lawyer and the FBI.

The Court set forth the details of the scheme in its prior Order
granting in part and denying in part a motion to dismiss and
incorporates that background information herein.

Wells Fargo operates as a bank.

A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 19, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41Gj5M1 at no extra charge.[CC]



WEXFORD HEALTH: Court Directs Filing of Discovery Plan in Williams
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WILLIAMS v. Wexford Health
Sources Inc et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01284-SLD-JEH (C.D. Ill.), the
Hon. Judge Jonathan E. Hawley entered a standing order as follows:

   -- Rule 16 scheduling conference

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

   -- Discovery plan

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

   -- Waiver of the Rule 16 scheduling conference

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

      scheduling conference be cancelled.

   -- Failure of counsel to attend a scheduled telephone hearing

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

      telephone hearing will be treated as a failure of counsel to

      appear for an in-person hearing.

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

      discovery deadline has already passed

      The parties may not raise a discovery dispute with the Court

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

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

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

      subsequent discovery disputes being deemed waived.

   -- Settlement conferences and mediation

      The parties are encouraged to seek a settlement conference or

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

Wexford is an American healthcare services company.

A copy of the Court's standing order dated Dec. 19, 2023 is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3tKXHIZ at no
extra charge.[CC]

ZUFFA LLC: Parties Seek to Partially Unseal Record Docs in Le Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Cung Le, Nathan Quarry,
Jon Fitch, Brandon Vera, Luis Javier Vazquez, and Kyle Kingsbury,
on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v.
Zuffa, LLC, d/b/a Ultimate Fighting Championship and UFC, Case No.
2:15-cv-01045-RFB-BNW (D. Nev.), the Parties file joint motion to
partially unseal record documents containing personally identifying
information.

On August 21, 2023, after the Court informed the Parties that it
intended to unseal the record in this action except for personally
identifying information and medical information, the Court ordered
the parties to "jointly file the record with the proposed
redactions and to file any motion requesting additional redactions
apart from those concerning the personal identifying information
described above."

Zuffa was an American sports promotion company specializing in
mixed martial arts.

A copy of the Parties' motion dated Dec. 22, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RO3rK4 at no extra charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Joseph R. Saveri, Esq.
          Kevin E. Rayhill, Esq.
          Christopher K. L. Young, Esq.
          Itak Moradi, Esq.
          JOSEPH SAVERI LAW FIRM, LLP.
          601 California St., Suite 1000
          San Francisco, CA 94108
          Telephone: (415) 500-6800
          Facsimile: (415) 395-9940
          E-mail: jsaveri@saverilawfirm.com
                  krayhill@saverilawfirm.com
                  cyoung@saverilawfirm.com
                  imoradi@saverilawfirm.com

                - and -

          Eric L. Cramer, Esq.
          Michael Dell'Angelo, Esq.
          Patrick F. Madden, Esq.
          Najah Jacobs, Esq.
          Joshua P. Davis, Esq.
          BERGER MONTAGUE PC
          1818 Market St., Suite 3600
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (215) 875-3000
          E-mail: ecramer@bm.net
                  mdellangelo@bm.net
                  pmadden@bm.net
                  njacobs@bm.net
                  jdavis@bm.net

                - and -

          Richard A. Koffman, Esq.
          Benjamin Brown, Esq.
          Daniel H. Silverman, Esq.
          COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL, PLLC
          1100 New York Ave., N.W., Suite 500 East, Tower
          Washington, DC 20005
          Telephone: (202) 408-4600
          Facsimile: (202) 408-4699
          E-mail: rkoffman@cohenmilstein.com
                  bbrown@cohenmilstein.com
                  dsilverman@cohenmilstein.com

                - and -

          Don Springmeyer, Esq.
          KEMP JONES, LLP
          3800 Howard Hughes Parkway, 17th Floor
          Las Vegas, NV 89169
          Telephone: (702) 385-6000
          Facsimile: (702) 385-6001
          E-mail: dspringmeyer@kempjones.com

                - and -

          Robert C. Maysey, Esq.
          Jerome K. Elwell, Esq.
          WARNER ANGLE HALLAM JACKSON &
          FORMANEK PLC
          2555 E. Camelback Road, Suite 800
          Phoenix, AZ 85016
          Telephone: (602) 264-7101
          Facsimile: (602) 234-0419
          E-mail: rmaysey@warnerangle.com
                  jelwell@warnerangle.com

                - and -

          Crane Pomerantz, Esq.
          CLARK HILL PLC
          1700 S. Pavilion Center Drive, Suite 500
          Las Vegas, NV 89135
          Telephone: (702) 697-7545
          E-mail: cpomerantz@clarkhill.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          William A. Isaacson, Esq.
          Jessica Phillips, Esq.
          Brette M. Tannenbaum, Esq.
          Yotam Barkai, Esq.
          PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON &
          GARRISON LLP
          2001 K Street, NW
          Washington, DC 20006
          E-mail: wisaacson@paulweiss.com
                  jphillips@paulweiss.com
                  btannenbaum@paulweiss.com
                  ybarkai@paulweiss.com

                - and -

          Christopher S. Yates, Esq.
          Sean M. Berkowitz, Esq.
          Laura Washington, Esq.
          David L. Johnson, Esq.
          LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
          505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          E-mail: chris.yates@lw.com
                  sean.berkowitz@lw.com
                  laura.washington@lw.com
                  david.johnson@lw.com

                - and -

          Donald J. Campbell, Esq.
          J. Colby Williams, Esq.
          CAMPBELL & WILLIAMS
          700 South 7th Street
          Las Vegas, NV 89101
          E-mail: djc@campbellandwilliams.com
                  jcw@campbellandwilliams.com


                            *********

S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania,
USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.  Rousel Elaine T.
Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche A. Castillon, Julie Anne L.
Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 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 ***