/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/240503.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Friday, May 3, 2024, Vol. 26, No. 90
Headlines
4E BRANDS: Must File Class Cert Response by May 10
A.J. BLOSENSKI: Court Narrows Claims in Salyers Suit
ADMI CORP: Intercepts Electronic Communications, Hollaway Claims
AMAZON.COM INC: Class Cert Filing in De Coster Extended to June 7
AMERICAN AIRLINES: Fails to Refund Canceled Flights, Renteria Says
ARCHDIOCESE OF EDMONTON: Defamatory Class Suit to Move Forward
ARCHDIOCESE OF EDMONTON: Faces Class Action Over Priest's Sermon
ARISE VIRTUAL: Must File Class Cert Response in De Niro by May 9
ARTSANA USA: Zarfati Sues Over Defective Chicco-brand Strollers
ASR GROUP: Controls Granulated Sugar Prices, Vicky Enterprises Says
ASR GROUP: Wilson Sues Over Control of Granulated Sugar Prices
AT&T INC: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Boykin Suit Alleges
ATLANTA, GA: Parties Seek Final Nod of Class Action Certification
AVANADE INC: Jan. 17, 2025 Continuance of Class Cert Filing Sought
AVEM HEALTH: Class Action Settlement Gets Preliminary Approval
BANK OF AMERICA: Plaintiffs Seek More Time for Class Cert Filing
BETTERHELP INC: Auto Renews Therapy Subscription, de la Cruz Says
BOSTON SCIENTIFIC: Class Settlement Approved in Securities Suit
BRADLEY UNIVERSITY: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Sinha
BRIDGESONE CORP: Benton Sues Over Tire Price Monopoly
BROOKLYN GRID: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Chimbolema Alleges
BURGERFI INTERNATIONAL: Class Management Order Entered in Donoghue
CAPITAL VISION: Plaintiffs Seek Leave To File Class Cert Reply
CARECENTRIX INC: Conditional Collective Cert. Bid Extended to May 8
CAROLINA AMATO: Website Not Accessible to Blind, Martinez Says
CARRIAGE SERVICES: Atkinson Sues Over Discrimination & Harassment
CEDAR FAIR: Suit Seeks to Lift Continuance of Class Cert. Briefing
CHG MEDICAL: Class Settlement in Carlino Gets Initial Nod
COFFEE REGIONAL: Plaintiff Must File Class Cert Bids by July 15
COMPLIANCE STAFFING: Griffis Wage-and-Hour Suit Removed to W.D. Pa.
COMPULINK: Dancy-Wilkins Class Cert. Bid Tossed w/o Prejudice
CREDENCE RESOURCE: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Brennan Claims
D'URSO LANDSCAPING: Calles Seeks Conditional Collective Status
D2C LLC: Allowed to Seal Unredacted Opposition in Martinez
DAVA MARKETING: Bid To Hold in Abeyance Rule 68 Judgment Nixed
DELTA DELTA: Vaughan Files Personal Injury Suit in M.D.N.C.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Plaintiffs Seek More Time to File Class Cert.
DONALD COMB: Filing for Class Certification Bids Due July 22
DOYLE LAND: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Combs Suit Says
DUNHAM'S ATHLEISURE: Bid for Interlocutory Appeal in Heppard Denied
ECOPETROL SA: BT Energy Incident-Related Class Suit Pending
EDGEWELL PERSONAL: Glassman Seeks to Seal Certain Documents
ELEVANCE INC: Court Narrows Claims in Union Suit
EMBRY-RIDDLE: Parties Must Confer Class Cert Deadlines
ENHANCE HEALTH: Faces Turner Suit Over Racketeering Activity
EQUIFAX INFO: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Bristol
ESTES EXPRESS: Alvarez Must File Class Cert Bid by Oct. 21
EXP WORLD HOLDINGS: Faces Burton Class Suit in South Carolina
EXPERIAN INFO: Class Cert Bid in Pena Suit Continued to August 2
FEDERAL EXPRESS: Parties Seek to Stay Class Cert Bid Deadline
FLEET FARM: Faces Frost Suit Over ADA Violations in D. Minnesota
FORT BELVOIR: Renewed Bid for Class Cert in Fischer Suit Due May 20
GALESBURG, IL: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Mixon
GEICO: Joint Bids to Seal in MAO-MSO Class Action OK'd
GLOBAL CORD: Faces Class Action Over Self-Serving Transactions
GO NEW YORK: Teta Sues Over Fraud Violations in S.D.N.Y.
GOOGLE LLC: Brown Seeks $217MM Atty's Fees
GORDON LANE: Parrish Amended Class Cert Bid Tossed w/o Prejudice
HALO BRANDED: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Chibazakura Alleges
HILCO REDEVELOPMENT: $12-MM Deal in Little Village Suit Gets OK
HOME PARTNERS: Seeks May 8 Summary Judgment Reply Extension
HUNTINGTON NATIONAL: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert Bid by Dec. 10
INDEGENE INC: Filing for Class Cert Bids in Progressive Due June 7
INJURED WORKERS: Fact Discovery in Webb Suit Due Oct. 10
INTERLAKE MECALUX: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Billings
ISUZU MOTORS: Faces Potential Class Action Over Suspension Defects
JAB EXPRESS: Filing for Class Cert. Bid in Snide Due Sept. 9
JACOBO FARM: Gomez Must File Supplemental Class Cert Briefing
JIM JUSTICE: Plaintiffs' Bid for Sanctions Nixed
JOHN VIRTUSA: Class Cert Bid Filing in Sugg Modified to Oct. 21
KAISER FOUNDATION: Class Settlement Deal in Shcmitt Gets Final Nod
KEENAN & ASSOCIATES: Heinz Suit Removed to C.D. California
KINDER MORGAN: Continues to Defend ERISA Class Suit in Texas
KING COUNTY, WA: Class Cert. Bid in Tucker Due March 31, 2025
KNOX COUNTY, IL: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Hans Suit
KOBE JAPANESE: Jiang Suit Seeks to Certify FLSA Collective Action
L&J TRANSPORTATION: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Perry Alleges
LEE'S HOUSE: Plaintiff Must file Class Cert Reply Brief
LEGACY INC: Elson Sues Over Fraud Violations in D. Minnesota
LEOPOLD & ASSOCIATES: Cabrera FDCPA Suit Removed to D. New Jersey
LIBERTY MUTUAL: Sends Unsolicited Text Messages, Ward Suit Claims
LINCOLN NATIONAL: Meade Files Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. Pa.
LINKEDIN CORPORATION: Class Cert Bid Filing Due Jan. 9, 2025
LINOBGHK LLC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Becerra Alleges
LITTLE CAESAR: Parties Seek Dec. 30 Extension for Class Cert Filing
LOCUST MEDICAL: Class Cert Bid Reply Extended to May 3
LUCKY ELEPHANT: Fact Discovery in Luis Class Suit Due August 15
LUXURY BRAND: Class Action Settlement in Henning Gets Initial Nod
LX HAUSYS: Torres Bid to Revise Pretrial Deadlines Partly OK'd
MARIANI PACKING: Diesel Class Cert Bid Filing for MMPA Claims OK'd
MARK CUBAN: Seeks Denial of Karnas Class Cert Bid
MARLOU CORP: Parties Seek More Time for Class Cert Response
MAUREEN CORCORAN: Plaintiff Seeks Notice of Putative Class Action
ME&I CONSTRUCTION: Stock Seeks to Certify Class of Employees
ME&I CONSTRUCTION: Stock Seeks to Seal Class Cert Documents
MEDICAL EYE: Eufusia Personal Injury Suit Removed to C.D. Cal.
MEDQ INC: Franklin Files Personal Injury Suit in E.D. Texas
MERITAS HEALTH: Ballard Files Contract Suit in W.D. Missouri
MIDLAND FUNDING: Class Cert Bid in Filgueiras Class Suit Tossed
MINISO GROUP: Continues to Defend Federal Securities Class
MISS DU'S TEA: General Pretrial Management Order Entered in Volfman
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: Filing for Class Cert Bids Amended to June 2
NCAA: Plaintiffs Seek to File Docs Under Seal
NESTLE PURINA: Bid for Initial OK of Class Settlement Tossed
NEW SOUTH WALES: Junior Doctors Settle Suit Over Unpaid Overtime
NEW YORK LIFE: Bid to File Class Cert Reply Under Seal OK'd
NEW YORK TIMES: Class Cert Bid in Perkins Suit Extended to June 6
NORTHWELL HEALTH: Lorusso Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class
NU HOLDINGS LTD: Continues to Defend IDC Class Suit
NU-BOTANICS CANDLE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Bolanos Alleges
OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM: Savoie Contract Suit Removed to W.D. La.
OCUGEN INC: Continues to Defend Securities Class Suit
OFFICE DEPOT: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Yount Due Dec. 13
OGILVY HOLDINGS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Chestnut Alleges
ONTRAK INC: Continues to Defend Braun Securities Class Suit
PACCAR INC: Court Won't Adopt Proposed Case Management Schedule
PACIFIC MARKET: Brown Fraud Suit Removed to C.D. California
PEGASYSTEMS INC: Prelim. Approval of Class Settlement Sought
PINK JEEP: Parties Seek More Time for Plaintiff's Class Cert Reply
PRIME HYDRATION: Vera Sues Over Energy Drink Caffeine Content
PROGRESSIVE SELECT: Silverstein Files Consumer Suit in Cal. Super.
PROGRESSIVE UNIVERSAL: Class Cert Redacted Memo Stricken in Taxer
PROSPERITY HOME: Bid to Strike Class Allegations Denied in Keller
R&G BRENNER: Scheduling Order Entered in Cinar Class Suit
REZOLUT CENTRELAKE: Ramirez Labor Suit Removed to C.D. California
ROCHESTER, MN: Tap House Seeks to Certify TID Fee Refund Class
SAGE THERAPEUTICS: Court Sets Rule 26(F) Scheduling Conference
SAINT ELIZABETH: Court Tosses Class Cert Bid in York Lawsuit
SANTANDER CONSUMER: Brown Contract Suit Removed to S.D. Illinois
SCHENKER INC: Wickham Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class
SEWON AMERICA: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert Bid After 180 Days
SHAWN EMMONS: Parties' Agreements Modified in Daughtry Class Suit
SHORT SQUEEZE: Plaintiffs' Bid for Briefing Schedule Tossed
SHOWS & CALI: Seeks to Continue Class Cert Bid in Calogero to May 9
SIG SAUER: Class Cert Discovery in Glasscock Suit Due July 25
SIMM ASSOCIATES: Simpson Files Consumer Credit Suit in D. Delaware
SKYLINE TOWER: Bid for Stay of Remand Order Pending Appeal Denied
STRONGHOLD DIGITAL: Actions Consolidated in Bruno Class Suit
STRONGHOLD DIGITAL: Actions Consolidated in Parker Class Suit
STRONGHOLD DIGITAL: Actions Consolidated in Stockholder Class Suit
SYMETRA LIFE: Davis Must Oppose Summary Judgment Bid by May 24
T-MOBILE USA: Class Cert Bid Filing in Bayani Extended to Sept. 20
TCL NORTH: Faces Ramos Suit Over ADA Violations in N.D. Illinois
TELLURIDE RESORT: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert Bid by May 20
TENARIS SA: Class Settlement in Atanasio Gets Final Nod
TEVA PHARMA: Ct. Conditionally Certifies Class in Kushelowitz
TRINITY TEEN: Court OK's Class Cert Bid Following Remand
TRUEACCORD CORP: Class Cert. Bid Filing in Quinn-Davis Due May 31
TSG ENTERPRISES: Faces Storey Suit Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
UNIBARNS TRADING: August 5 Extension for Class Cert Filing Sought
UNITED HEALTH: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Mitchell Due Nov. 19
UNITED SERVICES: Class Cert Hearing Extended to August 6
UNITED STATES: Lewis Seeks to Certify Class
UNITED STATES: Must Respond to Parks Class Complaint
UNITED STATES: Olguin-Moreno Files Contract Suit in C.D. California
UNITED STATES: Popkova Class Suit Stayed for Additional 30 Days
UR JADDOU: General Pretrial Management Order Entered in Sevastianov
US CUSTOMS: Mora Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class Action
USA WASTE: Eigenberg Files Torts Suit in C.D. California
VALVE CORP: Brooks, et al., Bid to Intervene OK'd in Antitrust Suit
VALVE CORPORATION: Bids to Seal Docs OK'd in Antitrust Suit
VIBRANT HEALTHCARE: Class Discovery in Jackson Extended to June 28
VIBRANT HEALTHCARE: July 5 Extension for Class Cert Filing Sought
VIRGINIA FARM: Dilello Files Personal Property Suit in E.D. Va.
VIRGINIA FARM: Noel Files Contract Suit in E.D. Virginia
VIRGINIA: Court Narrows Claims in Mallory Suit
VMSB LLC: Seeks More Time for Conditional Cert Response in Volpe
VOYA RETIREMENT: Solorzano Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime
WALMART INC: Class Cert. Filing Extended to June 17
WASHINGTON: Johnston Must Submit Forma Pauperis Application
WASTE INDUSTRIES: Faces Stone Soup Contract Suit in D.S.C.
WELLS FARGO: Filing for Class Cert. Bid in SEB Due June 4
WEST COVINA: Class Action Waiver in Arbitration Deal Enforceable
WEST OF CHICAGO: Lee Files Labor Suit in California State Court
WHEATLEIGH CORP: Employees Wait for Class Settlement in Labor Suit
ZENTECH BLOOMINGTON: Ct Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Pryczynski
[*] Class Action on Emails Sent at Inconvenient Time Lacks Merit
Asbestos Litigation
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Claire's Faces Class Action Over Asbestos Concerns
ASBESTOS UPDATE: PPG Industries Has $48MM Reserves as of March 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Trane Tech. Uses Two-Step Resolve Asbestos Claims
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Travelers Cos. Has $1.3BB Reserves as of March 31
*********
4E BRANDS: Must File Class Cert Response by May 10
---------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MELODY CALLANTINE, on
behalf of herself, her minor children K.C. and L.C., and all others
similarly situated, v. 4E BRANDS NORTH AMERICA, LLC, Case No.
3:20-cv-00801-DRL (N.D. Ind.), the Defendant asks the Court to
enter an order granting an extension of time, up to and including
May 10, 2024, to file its response in opposition to the Plaintiff's
motion for class certification and disclose certification related
experts.
On March 15, 2024, the Plaintiff Melody Callantine filed her Motion
for Class Certification.
The deadline for the Defendant to file its response in opposition
of the Plaintiff's motion for class certification and disclose
certification-related experts is currently April 30, 2024.
The Defendant previously filed a voluntary petition for relief
under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the United States
Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, captioned as In re
4E Brands Northamerica LLC, Case No. 22-50009.
The Defendant has since been dissolved which has made it
challenging for defense counsel to obtain the information necessary
to formulate a response to the Plaintiff's motion for class
certification.
The requested extension does not interfere with any other deadlines
and/or hearing dates set by this Court.
The Defense counsel, Corban J. Cavanaugh, has conferred with the
Plaintiff's counsel, Ryan D. Milligan, about this motion and the
Defendant's requested extension, and the Plaintiff's counsel has
advised that the Plaintiff has no objection to the same.
The Defendant is a manufacturer of drugs and pharmaceuticals.
A copy of the Defendant's motion dated April 25, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5k3oPw at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendant is represented by:
Scott B. Cockrum, Esq.
Corban J. Cavanaugh, Esq.
LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP
2211 Main Street, Suite 3-2A
Highland, IN 46322
Telephone: (219) 440-0600
Facsimile: (219) 440-0601
E-mail: Scott.Cockrum@lewisbrisbois.com
Corban Cavanaugh Direct: 219.440.0621
Corban.Cavanaugh@lewisbrisbois.com
A.J. BLOSENSKI: Court Narrows Claims in Salyers Suit
----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JAY SALYERS, v. A.J.
BLOSENSKI, INC., WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC., and WASTE CONNECTIONS US,
INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-04802-WB (E.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Wendy
Beetlestone entered a memorandum to deny the Defendants' motion to
strike.
The Court said that the motion to dismiss will be granted in part
and denied in part.
Salyers's allegation that "Defendants knew that their trash removal
and recycling hauling services would prove deficient" is
conclusory, so his UTPCPL claim must be dismissed.
The Plaintiff Salyers has brought this putative class action
against the Defendants alleging that AJB failed to pick up as
agreed his garbage and recycling.
Salyers, a citizen of Pennsylvania, has been a customer of AJB
since 2018. Along with the putative class members, he makes
quarterly payments to Defendants in exchange for trash and
recycling services.
AJB is a trash and recycling hauler that serves customers in
Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Yu0gzn at no extra
charge.[CC]
ADMI CORP: Intercepts Electronic Communications, Hollaway Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
MICHELLE HOLLAWAY, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ADMI CORP. d/b/a TAG - THE ASPEN
GROUP and ASPEN DENTAL MANAGEMENT, INC., Defendants, Case No.
CV-24-001734 (Cal. Super., Stanislaus Cty., March 4, 2024) is a
class action against the Defendants for violations of the
California Invasion of Privacy Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendants can monitor, read,
record, learn the contents of, or otherwise intercept the
conversations between Aspen Dental's contact center agents and
Aspen consumers through a conversation intelligence
software-as-a-service (SaaS) provided by Invoca, Inc. Neither the
Defendants nor Invoca procured the consent of any person who
interacted with Aspen Dental's contact center, prior to Invoca
recording, accessing, reading, and learning the contents of
conversations between Californians and Aspen Dental's contact
center. The Plaintiff brings this action to prevent the Defendants
from further violating the privacy rights of California residents,
and to recover statutory damages for failing to comply with the
CIPA.
ADMI Corp. d/b/a TAG - The Aspen Group is a healthcare services
provider, with its principal place of business at 800 West Fulton
Market, Chicago, Illinois.
Aspen Dental Management, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of The
Aspen Group, with its principal place of business at 800 West
Fulton Market, Chicago, Illinois. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
L. Timothy Fisher, Esq.
Julia K. Venditti, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 300-4455
Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
Email: ltfisher@bursor.com
jvenditti@bursor.com
- and -
Joseph I. Marchese, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (646) 837-7150
Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
Email: jmarchese@bursor.com
AMAZON.COM INC: Class Cert Filing in De Coster Extended to June 7
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ELIZABETH DE COSTER, et
al., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v.
AMAZON.COM, INC., a Delaware corporation, Case No.
2:21-cv-00693-JHC (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge John H. Chun entered
an order as follows:
1. The interim deadline for Plaintiffs to file their class
certification motion is extended to June 7, 2024.
2. The interim deadline for Amazon to respond to the Plaintiffs'
motion is Sept. 9, 2024.
3. The interim deadline for the Plaintiffs' reply brief is Nov.
11,
2024.
The Court previously granted the parties' request to extend the
deadlines for the class certification briefing schedule by two
months to allow parties time to discuss coordination of depositions
of Amazon witnesses with the Plaintiffs in other related cases. The
parties are still discussing coordination of the related cases and
this matter, including the appropriate schedule for briefing class
certification and scheduling attendant depositions.
To avoid motion practice while the parties discuss the appropriate
deposition and briefing schedules, the parties agree to a one-month
extension of the currently set class certification briefing
deadlines.
Amazon.com is engaged in e-commerce, cloud computing, online
advertising, digital streaming, and artificial intelligence.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=AANxH6 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Steve W. Berman, Esq.
Barbara A. Mahoney, Esq.
Anne F. Johnson, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
1301 Second Avenue, Suite 2000
Seattle, WA 98101
Telephone: (206) 623-7292
Facsimile: (206) 623-0594
E-mail: steve@hbsslaw.com
barbaram@hbsslaw.com
annej@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Zina G. Bash, Esq.
Jessica Beringer, Esq.
Shane Kelly, Esq.
Daniel Backman, Esq.
KELLER POSTMAN LLC
111 Congress Avenue, Suite 500
Austin, TX, 78701
Telephone: (512) 690-0990
E-mail: zina.bash@kellerpostman.com
Jessica.Beringer@kellerpostman.com
shane.kelly@kellerpostman.com
Daniel.Backman@kellerpostman.com
- and -
Derek W. Loeser, Esq.
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200
Seattle, WA 98101-3052
Telephone: (206) 623-1900
Facsimile: (206) 623-3384
E-mail: Dloeser@kellerrohrback.com
- and -
Alicia Cobb, Esq.
Steig D. Olson, Esq.
David D. LeRay, Esq.
Nic V. Siebert, Esq.
Maxwell P. Deabler-Meadows, Esq.
Adam B. Wolfson, Esq.
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP
1109 First Avenue, Suite 210
Seattle, WA 98101
Telephone: (206) 905-7000
E-mail: aliciacobb@quinnemanuel.com
steigolson@quinnemanuel.com
davidleray@quinnemanuel.com
nicolassiebert@quinnemanuel.com
maxmeadows@quinnemanuel.com
adamwolfson@quinnemanuel.com
The Defendant is represented by:
John A. Goldmark, Esq.
MaryAnn Almeida, Esq.
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300
Seattle, WA 98104-1610
Telephone: (206) 622-3150
Facsimile: (206) 757-7700
E-mail: SteveRummage@dwt.com
JohnGoldmark@dwt.com
MaryAnnAlmeida@dwt.com
- and -
Karen L. Dunn, Esq.
William A. Isaacson, Esq.
Amy J. Mauser, Esq.
Martha L. Goodman, Esq.
Kyle Smith, Esq.
PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON &
GARRISON LLP
2001 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006-1047
Telephone: (202) 223-7300
Facsimile: (202) 223-7420
E-mail: kdunn@paulweiss.com
wisaacson@paulweiss.com
amauser@paulweiss.com
mgoodman@paulweiss.com
ksmith@paulweiss.com
AMERICAN AIRLINES: Fails to Refund Canceled Flights, Renteria Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
CHRIS RENTERIA, HERBERT TALLEDO, and STEPHANIE CHIN, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v.
AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1-100,
Defendants, Case No. 24STCV05691 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty.,
March 6, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for breach
of contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair
dealing, unjust enrichment, negligent misrepresentation, and
violations of the Sherman Act and the Robinson Patman Act.
The case arises from the Defendants' failure to adequately
reimburse the Plaintiffs and similarly situated customers with a
refund, compensation, or similarly valued alternative arrangement
upon cancelling their confirmed flight. Additionally, the
Plaintiffs bring this action for the Defendants' failure to provide
a breakdown explaining how the refund, compensation, or similarly
valued alternative arrangement was calculated, upon providing an
inadequate reimbursement.
American Airlines, Inc. is a global carrier based in Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
W. Zev Abramson, Esq.
Jack Gindi, Esq.
Nissim Levin, Esq.
ABRAMSON LABOR GROUP
1700 W. Burbank Blvd.
Burbank, CA 91506
Telephone: (213) 493-6300
Facsimile: (213) 382-4083
ARCHDIOCESE OF EDMONTON: Defamatory Class Suit to Move Forward
--------------------------------------------------------------
Alanna Smith and Kristy Kirkup of The Globe and Mail report that a
proposed class-action lawsuit filed by a residential-school
survivor against a priest and entities associated with the Catholic
Church will move forward after a Calgary judge struck down a motion
to dismiss the case on April 22.
Sphenia Jones, a 79-year-old elder of the Haida Nation in British
Columbia who attended the Edmonton Indian Residential School in the
1950s, is the representative plaintiff in the proposed lawsuit. It
names Rev. Marcin Mironiuk as a defendant. He is accused of making
defamatory statements about residential-school survivors in 2021
and causing harm to their reputations by denying reports of
unmarked graves.
Also named as defendants are the Catholic Archdiocese of Edmonton,
which placed Father Mironiuk on indefinite administrative leave
after calling his comments "thoroughly unacceptable," and the
Oblate Fathers of Assumption Province.
The defendants presented arguments to strike the claim, a
procedural option available if a party believes the case has no
merit. Justice James Farrington, in a same-day decision, said he is
satisfied the claim has a "reasonable chance of success and
completes the basics."
A statement of claim filed in July, 2023, details how Father
Mironiuk made a number of statements in Polish regarding the
discovery of grave sites at residential schools and repeatedly
described it as "lies" and "manipulation," and claimed Indigenous
children died of natural causes. He made his remarks after the
discovery of unmarked burial sites at the former Kamloops Indian
Residential School.
Paul Morrison, legal counsel for the defendants, argued that there
is "no basis" that a reasonable, objective person would consider
his comments in relation to Ms. Jones. He also argued that the
proposed class of "residential-school survivors who have spoken out
about deaths" was poorly defined and questioned whether the claim
could constitute group defamation.
Justice Farrington did note concerns over how "spoken out" will be
interpreted but said that is an issue for the class-action
certification hearing.
Meanwhile, Max Faille, a lawyer representing Ms. Jones, said it is
"cruelly naive" to suggest that parishioners and other people who
heard the words of Father Mironiuk would not be "potentially
inclined to believe them." He said the group described in the claim
is to whom Father Mironiuk's comments were directed.
Mr. Faille, who practises Indigenous law and constitutional
litigation, said Ms. Jones initiated the class action on behalf of
all residential-school survivors who "have had the courage to speak
about their experiences and their knowledge of what happened at
residential schools, including the horrific number of deaths of
children."
He said, in an interview, that the law "does recognize that a group
can be defamed."
Raymond Frogner: Residential-school denialism doesn't stand up to
reality
Ms. Jones, ahead of the court hearing on , said there are few
survivors alive to testify to the abuse that happened at
residential schools. She said she had her fingernails ripped out,
was hit with sticks and witnessed the death of other children.
"She saw where they were buried, along the fence -- an area now
overgrown with trees," the claim states.
"My grandfather's telling me to stand up and be proud, so that's
what I'm doing," she said on the steps of the Calgary court. "This
is my way," she said, pausing, her voice breaking. "My way of
saving our children."
In a statement on behalf of Father Mironiuk and the Oblates, Father
Marcin Serwin said Father Mironiuk has acknowledged he made
statements about the residential-school site in Kamloops but that
he did not question the existence of graves or intend to cause harm
to those who attended residential schools.
The statement also said Father Mironiuk acknowledged the school had
a hurtful reality for some of its attendees and he lamented any
loss of life, adding the Assumption Province echoes these
sentiments and both parties regret the matter is before the courts
despite their apologies.
The Catholic Archdiocese of Edmonton said it cannot comment as the
case is before the courts.
The statement of claim details how Ms. Jones was forced from her
community of Haida Gwaii to Edmonton at the age of 11 on a train
that she said stopped multiple times to pick up other children --
some of whom did not survive the journey. The church has discounted
the experiences of survivors, Ms. Jones said.
"I'm here to say it's true," she said.
Residential-school survivors have spoken out about present-day
denialism of their experiences -- an issue documented in the
preliminary report by Kimberly Murray, the independent special
interlocutor on missing children, unmarked graves and burial
sites.
Ms. Murray is expected to release her final findings this spring.
In the federal budget tabled in Parliament last week, Ottawa
proposed spending $5-million over three years, starting in 2025-26,
for Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada to
establish a program to "combat residential school denialism."
Crown-Indigenous Relations Minister Gary Anandasangaree said that
survivors have expressed that denialism is "deeply hurtful."
"When people deny that this happened, it really does retraumatize
and reignites the hurt that people already have," he said, adding
both religious and political leaders need to be unequivocal in
supporting Indigenous people who have gone through this experience.
[GN]
ARCHDIOCESE OF EDMONTON: Faces Class Action Over Priest's Sermon
----------------------------------------------------------------
Teri Fikowski, writing for CTV News Calgary, reports that a
residential school survivor is leading a class-action lawsuit
against the Catholic Church and one of its priests.
It stems from comments allegedly made by the priest during a sermon
describing evidence of unmarked graves as "lies" and
"manipulation."
On April 22, a judge ruled the proposed class-action lawsuit can go
forward despite efforts from lawyers representing the archdiocese
of Edmonton and a religious order to have it struck down.
That decision was met with lots of tears, smiles and hugs from
elder Sphenia Jones, who is leading the case.
About a dozen of Jones' family and supporters rallied in support of
residential school survivors and the lawsuit.
The lawsuit alleges priest Marcin Mironiuk said Indigenous children
died of natural causes and questioned the validity of unmarked
graves during a mass in 2021.
It sparked backlash and protests at the time.
The archdiocese did not comment but apologized at the time and put
the priest on indefinite administrative leave.
However, a church website in Brampton, Ont., says the priest works
there now.
Lawyers behind the class action say denialism against residential
schools is a growing phenomenon that further traumatizes
survivors.
Jones was forced to attend the former Edmonton residential school
when she was 11 and says images of what she witnessed still haunt
her at 80.
Lawyers representing the church argued the remarks were made in
Polish and misinterpreted, and don't meet the criteria of a
class-action lawsuit -- such as referring to Jones directly.
The judge disagreed and said it can go forward and also awarded
Jones compensation for what she spent to fight the application to
have it struck down. [GN]
ARISE VIRTUAL: Must File Class Cert Response in De Niro by May 9
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Diavion De Niro,
individually, and on behalf of similarly situated individuals, v.
Arise Virtual Solutions, Inc., Case No. 2:24-cv-00695-APG-EJY (D.
Nev.), the Parties file a joint stipulation to extend time to
respond to motion and respond to complaint:
1. The deadline for Arise to respond to Plaintiff's Motion for
conditional certification will be extended to and including
May
9, 2024;
2. The deadline for Arise to respond to the Plaintiff's
Complaint
shall be extended to and including May 16, 2024; and
3. This Stipulation addresses timing only and is without
prejudice
to any of the Parties' positions, arguments, allegations,
defenses, and/or rights in this matter.
On April 10, 2024, the Plaintiff filed both the Complaint in the
instant lawsuit and a Motion for Conditional Certification.
On April 11, 2024, Arise was served with the Summons and Complaint,
along with the Motion for Conditional Certification.
Arise provides business process outsourcing and consulting
services.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 25, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5yBVlb at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esq.
Adelaide Pagano, Esq.
LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
729 Boylston Street, Ste 2000
Boston, MA 02116
Telephone: (671)-994-5800
E-mail: sliss@llrlaw.com
apagano@llrlaw.com
mcassorla@llrlaw.com
- and -
Kristina Hillman, Esq.
Sean W. McDonald, Esq.
WEINBERG, ROGER & ROSENFELD
3199 E. Warm Springs Road, Ste 400
Las Vegas, NV 89120
Telephone: (702)508-9282
E-mail: nevadacourtnotices@unioncounsel.net
khillman@unioncounsel.net
smcdonald@unioncounsel.net
The Defendant is represented by:
Dora V. Lane, Esq.
HOLLAND & HART LLP
5470 Kietzke Lane, Suite 100
Reno, NV 89511
Telephone: (775) 327-3045
E-mail: dlane@hollandhart.com
- and -
Adam P. KohSweeney, Esq.
Katy (Yin Yee) Ho, Esq.
O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP
Two Embarcadero Center, 28th floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 984-8700
E-mail: akohsweeney@omm.com
kho@omm.com
ARTSANA USA: Zarfati Sues Over Defective Chicco-brand Strollers
---------------------------------------------------------------
LEXI LEIGH ZARFATI, MICHELLE WILLIAMS, JORDANA MORRIS, MARIA
ANGELICA NAVAS, and GRANT WEST, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. ARTSANA USA, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-21372-KMM (S.D. Fla., April 12, 2024)
is a class action against the Defendant for unjust enrichment and
for violation of the Florida's Unfair & Deceptive Trade Practices
Act and the Consumer Product Safety Act.
The suit arises from the Defendant's alleged manufacturing,
marketing, and distributing of defective and dangerous Chicco-brand
strollers. Artsana represents these baby strollers to consumers as
safe, including by representing to consumers that the strollers
have an effective braking mechanism. In fact, several models of
these strollers have a defective braking mechanism that allows the
strollers to roll even when the user engages the brakes. This
defective braking mechanism can lead to children being seriously
injured or killed and, in fact, has already led to at least one
child being seriously injured, says the suit.
Artsana's misrepresentations about the efficacy of the braking
mechanism and their omissions about the mechanism were unfair and
deceived consumers including Plaintiffs, who paid for a product
with a serious, undisclosed defect that rendered the product less
valuable, the suit alleges.
Artsana USA, Inc. manufactures, markets, and distributes various
models of baby strollers in the United States, including in
Florida.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Rachel Wagner Furst, Esq.
John R. Byrne, Esq.
Frank R. Maderal, Esq.
Nicole Estrada, Esq.
MADERAL BYRNE & FURST PLLC
2800 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 1100
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Telephone: (305) 520-5690
E-mail: rachel@maderalbyrne.com
john@maderalbyrne.com
frank@maderalbyrne.com
nicole@maderalbyrne.com
alejandra@maderalbyrne.com
ASR GROUP: Controls Granulated Sugar Prices, Vicky Enterprises Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
VICKY ENTERPRISES INC, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ASR GROUP INTERNATIONAL, INC.;
AMERICAN SUGAR REFINING, INC.; DOMINO FOODS, INC.; CARGILL, INC.;
MICHIGAN SUGAR COMPANY; UNITED SUGAR PRODUCERS & REFINERS
COOPERATIVE f/k/a UNITED SUGARS CORPORATION; COMMODITY INFORMATION,
INC.; and RICHARD WISTISEN, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-21386
(S.D. Fla., April 12, 2024) is a class action against the
Defendants for violation of Sections 1 and 3 of the Sherman Act and
various state laws.
The case arises from the Defendants' unlawful agreement to
artificially raise, fix, maintain, or stabilize prices of
granulated sugar throughout the class period. The Defendants have
implemented their agreement by sharing accurate, competitively
sensitive, non-public information with one another, including
through Commodity. Commodity provided this reciprocal information
to the Defendants rapidly, often within hours of having received
it. The Defendants then used the information they received from
Commodity when deciding how much to charge for their products, says
the suit.
The Plaintiff allegedly purchased Granulated Sugar indirectly from
one or more Defendants or their co-conspirators in Florida during
the class period.
ASR Group International, Inc. is a refiner and marketer of cane
sugar based in West Palm Beach, Florida.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Peter Prieto, Esq.
Matthew P. Weinshall, Esq.
Dayron Silverio, Esq.
PODHURST ORSECK, P.A.
One S.E. 3rd Avenue, Suite 2300
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 358-2800
E-mail: pprieto@podhurst.com
mweinshall@podhurst.com
dsilverio@podhurst.com
ASR GROUP: Wilson Sues Over Control of Granulated Sugar Prices
--------------------------------------------------------------
WILSON COFFEE HOUSE, LLC D/B/A LINDEN STREET COFFEE HOUSE,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. ASR GROUP INTERNATIONAL, INC., AMERICAN SUGAR
REFINING, INC., DOMINO FOODS, INC., UNITED SUGAR PRODUCERS &
REFINERS COOPERATIVE F/K/A UNITED SUGARS CORPORATION, MICHIGAN
SUGAR COMPANY, CARGILL, INC., COMMODITY INFORMATION, INC., and
RICHARD WISTISEN, Defendants, Case No. 0:24-cv-01322-JMB-ECW (D.
Minn., April 12, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for
violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act, seeking treble damages,
injunctive relief, and other relief pursuant to the federal
antitrust laws and demands a trial by jury on all matters so
triable.
This lawsuit arises from Defendants' unlawful agreement to fix
prices for granulated sugar in the United States. To implement
their price-fixing conspiracy, the Defendants exchanged detailed,
competitively sensitive, non-public information about Granulated
Sugar prices, capacity, sales volume, supply, and demand.
As a result of Defendants' unlawful agreement, commercial indirect
purchasers of granulated sugar in the United States and its
territories, including Plaintiff and the Class members, paid
supra-competitive prices for granulated sugar sold by Defendants in
the United States and its territories beginning no later than
January 1, 2019, and running through the present, says the suit.
ASR Group International, Inc. is a refiner and marketer of cane
sugar based in West Palm Beach, Florida.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Shawn M. Raiter, Esq.
LARSON KING LLP
30 East Seventh Street, Suite 2800
St. Paul, MN 55101
Telephone: (651)312-6518
E-mail: sraiter@larsonking.com
- and -
Michael J. Flannery, Esq.
CUNEO GILBERT & LADUCA, LLP
Two City Place Drive Second Floor
St. Louis, MO 63141
Telephone: (314) 226-1015
E-mail: mflannery@cuneolaw.com
- and -
Cody McCracken, Esq.
Lissa Morgans, Esq.
CUNEO GILBERT & LADUCA, LLP
4725 Wisconsin Ave. NW Suite 200
Washington, DC 20016
Telephone: (202) 789-3960
Facsimile: (202) 589-1813
E-mail: cmccracken@cuneolaw.com
lmorgans@cuneolaw.com
- and -
J. Barton Goplerud, Esq.
SHINDELAR, ANDERSON, GOPLERUD & WEESE, P.C.
5015 Grand Ridge Drive, Suite 100
West Des Moines, IA 50265
Telephone: (515) 223-4567
E-mail: goplerud@sagwlaw.com
- and -
Jon Tostrud, Esq.
Anthony Carter, Esq.
TOSTRUD LAW GROUP, PC
1925 Century Park East Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 278-2600
E-mail: jtostrud@tostrudlaw.com
acarter@tostrudlaw.com
AT&T INC: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Boykin Suit Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
RAH-NITA BOYKIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. AT&T, INC., Defendant, Case No:
1:24-cv-02973 (N.D. Ill, April 12, 2024) alleges that the Defendant
failed to protect the Plaintiff and Class sensitive information,
including their names, phone numbers, addresses, email addresses,
dates of birth, financial account numbers, Social Security numbers
and/or passport numbers ("Personally Identifiable Information" or
"PII"),
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant failed to
properly protect customers by investing in adequate data security,
thereby allowing hackers to exfiltrate the highly sensitive PII
that customers entrusted to Defendant. In mid-March 2024, the
Defendant became aware of a catastrophic, widespread data breach in
which the data of at least 73 million current and former customers
was breached and exfiltrated (the "Data Breach").
As a result, the Plaintiff and Class members will suffer
indefinitely from the substantial and concrete risk that their
identities will be, or already have been, stolen and
misappropriated even beyond the Data Breach itself, says the suit.
AT&T INC. operates as a communications holding company. The
Company, through its subsidiaries and affiliates, provides local
and long-distance phone, wireless and data communications, Internet
access and messaging, IP-based and satellite television,
telecommunications equipment, and directory advertising and
publishing services. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Elizabeth A. Fegan, Esq.
Megan E. Shannon, Esq.
FEGAN SCOTT LLC
150 S. Wacker Drive, 24th Floor
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 741-1019
Facsimile: (312) 264-0100
Email: beth@feganscott.com
megan@feganscott.com
ATLANTA, GA: Parties Seek Final Nod of Class Action Certification
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Laurel Lawson, James
Curtis, and James Turner, on behalf of themselves and other
similarly-situated persons, v. City of Atlanta, Georgia, Case No.
1:18-cv-02484-SDG (N.D. Ga.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an
order, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), approving
final class certification and the Class Action Consent Decree.
The Parties submit that the Class Action Consent Decree is fair,
adequate, and reasonable.
The Consent Decree calls for the certification of a class of (the
"Class"):
"All persons who have, or will have, a Mobility Disability and
who
have been or will have been denied equal access to pedestrian
rights of way in the City of Atlanta at any time up through the
expiration of this Consent Decree as a result of the City's
policies and practices with regard to design, installation,
repair, and maintenance of its pedestrian rights of way."
On May 24, 2018, the Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, filed a class-action complaint against
the City pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23. The complaint alleges that
the City violates Title II of the ADA by failing to maintain
sidewalks and other pedestrian access routes in the public
right-of-way in a manner that is accessible to individuals with
disabilities.
On Aug. 3, 2018, the Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint.
The Plaintiffs are mobility-impaired individuals who have
disabilities recognized by the Americans with Disabilities Act
("ADA") and the Rehabilitation Act.
Atlanta is the capital and largest city of the U.S. state of
Georgia. It is one of the South's largest cities.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 25, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=fSxxXj at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Andrew Y. Coffman, Esq.
A. Lee Parks, Jr., Esq.
J. Daniel Cole, Esq.
PARKS, CHESIN & WALBERT, P.C.
1355 Peachtree St.NE, Suite 2000
Atlanta, GA 30309
Telephone: (404) 873-8000
E-mail: acoffman@pcwlawfirm.com
lparks@pcwlawfirm.com
dcole@pcwlawfirm.com
- and -
James E. Radford, Esq.
Georgia Lord, Esq.
RADFORD SCOTT, LLP
315 W. Ponce de Leon Ave.
Decatur, GA 30030
Telephone: (678) 271-0300
E-mail: jradford@radfordscott.com
glord@radfordscott.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Richard J. Valladares, Esq.
Robert S. Fine, Esq.
Robert S. Galbo, Esq.
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
Terminus 200, Suite 2500
333 Piedmont Road NE
Atlanta, GA 30305
Telephone: (678) 553-2100
Facsimile: (678) 553-4745
E-mail: FineR@gtlaw.com
Valladaresr@gtlaw.com
GalboR@gtlaw.com
AVANADE INC: Jan. 17, 2025 Continuance of Class Cert Filing Sought
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MADISON LAIRD,
individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
AVANADE, INC., a Washington corporation; and DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive, Case No. 3:23-cv-04237-CRB (N.D. Cal.), the Parties ask
the Court to enter an order to continue the class certification
motion and related deadlines set forth in its Nov. 15, 2023 Case
Management Order as follows:
Current Proposed
Deadlines Continued
Deadlines
Class Certification Discovery May 17, 2024 Nov. 18,
2024
Cutoff:
Motion for Class Certification June 17, 2024 Jan. 17,
2025
Deadline:
Opposition to Motion for Class July 17, 2024 Feb. 17,
2025
Certification Deadline:
Reply ISO Motion for Class July 31, 2024 March 3,
2025
Certification Deadline:
Hearing on Motion for Class Aug. 23, 2024 April 4,
2025
Certification:
The Plaintiff filed a Class Action Complaint against Defendant in
the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San
Francisco on June 28, 2023, which alleged three causes of action
for violations of the federal Fair Credit and Reporting Act and
California Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act.
The Parties met and conferred multiple times, including on Oct. 31,
2023 and Nov. 8, 2023, and discussed potential avenues for
resolving the instant action, including through private mediation.
The Parties said that they are still actively discussing the
potential for mediation, including possible mediators. Should the
Parties agree to mediation, said mediation is expected to take
place no earlier than August 2024.
Avanade is a global professional services company providing IT
consulting and services.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=EYlDWB at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kane Moon, Esq.
Allen Feghali, Esq.
Jacquelyne VanEmmerik, Esq.
MOON LAW GROUP, P.C.
1055 West Seventh Street, Suite 1880
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Telephone: (213) 232-3128
Facsimile: (213) 232-3125
E-mail: kmoon@moonlawgroup.com
afeghali@moonlawgroup.com
jvanemmerik@moonlawgroup.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Joan B. Tucker Fife, Esq.
Tristan R. Kirk, Esq.
Zarouhi Papazyan, Esq.
WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
101 California Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 591-1000
Facsimile: (415) 591-1400
E-mail: jfife@winston.com
tkirk@winston.com
zpapazyan@winston.com
AVEM HEALTH: Class Action Settlement Gets Preliminary Approval
--------------------------------------------------------------
Federman & Sherwood announces that the Court has entered an Order
granting preliminary approval to a proposed settlement in the class
action against Avem Health Partners, Inc., styled Samuel Bingaman
v. Avem Health Partners, Incl, United States District Court for the
Western District of Oklahoma, Case No. 23-cv-130-SM. To obtain
additional information regarding the settlement and to submit a
claim form, please visit: https://avemsettlement.com/. The deadline
to submit a claim form is May 25, 2024.
Contacts:
Lacrista Bagley
FEDERMAN & SHERWOOD
10205 N Pennsylvania Ave
The Village, OK 73120
Telephone: (405) 235-1560
Email to: lab@federmanlaw.com [GN]
BANK OF AMERICA: Plaintiffs Seek More Time for Class Cert Filing
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MOHAMMAD FARSHAD, ABDOLLAH
NIA, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Case No. 3:21-cv-01799-BAS-BGS (S.D.
Cal.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order extending the
deadline for the Plaintiff's motion for class certification as to
the presently live claims to May 16, 2024.
Bank of America offers saving and current account, investment and
financial services.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Pukmwg at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jason S. Rathod, Esq.
Nicholas A. Migliaccio, Esq.
MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD LLP
412 H. St. NE, Suite 302
Washington, DC 20002
Telephone: (202) 470-3520
E-mail: nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com
jrathod@classlawdc.com
- and -
Benjamin I. Siminou, Esq.
Jonna D. Lothyan, Esq.
SINGLETON SCHREIBER LLP
591 Camino De La Reina, Suite 1025
San Diego, CA 92108
Telephone: (619) 771-3473
E-mail: bsiminou@singletonschreiber.com
jlothyan@singletonschreiber.com
BETTERHELP INC: Auto Renews Therapy Subscription, de la Cruz Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SEAN SMALL DE LA CRUZ, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BETTERHELP, INC., Defendant, Case
No. 4:24-cv-01317-YGR (N.D. Cal., March 5, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of California Automatic
Renewal Law, California Unfair Competition Law, California
Consumers Legal Remedies Act, and Electronic Funds Transfer Act.
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged illegal and deceptive
practices to trick consumers into enrolling in its pricey therapy
services and using illegal automatic renewal practices in
connection with its subscription plans. BetterHelp's enrollment
process is deceptive and violates the ARL because it fails to
provide clear and conspicuous disclosures regarding its automatic
renewal terms and does not obtain consumers' affirmative consent to
automatic renewal. The enrollment process also fails to obtain
consumers' written authorization for electronic fund transfers, as
required by the EFTA. Similarly, BetterHelp fails to send consumers
copies of their written authorization for electronic fund
transfers, says the suit.
BetterHelp, Inc. is a telehealth company, headquartered in Mountain
View, California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jonathan Shub, Esq.
SHUB & JOHNS LLC
Four Tower Bridge
200 Barr Harbor Drive, Suite 400
West Conshohocken, PA 19428
Telephone: (610) 477-8380
Email: jshub@shublawyers.com
- and -
Ethan D. Roman, Esq.
WITTELS MCINTURFF PALIKOVIC
305 Broadway, 7th Floor
New York, NY 10007
Telephone: (914) 775-8862
Email: edr@wittelslaw.com
BOSTON SCIENTIFIC: Class Settlement Approved in Securities Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re Boston Scientific Corporation
Securities Litigation, Case No. 1:20-cv-12225-ADB (D. Mass.), the
Hon. Judge Allison Burroughs entered an order approving class
action settlement.
The Court certifies for the purpose of Settlement only, the Action
as a class action pursuant to Rules 23(a) and b(3) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure on behalf of the Settlement Class
consisting of:
of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired
Boston Scientific common stock during the period from September
16,
2020 through November 16, 2020, inclusive, and were damaged
thereby."
Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (i) Defendants; (ii)
Immediate Family Members of any Individual Defendant; (iii) any
person who was an Officer or director of Boston Scientific
during
the Class Period and any of their Immediate Family Members; (iv)
any parent, subsidiary, or affiliate of Boston Scientific; (v)
any
firm, trust, corporation, or other entity in which any Defendant
or
any other excluded person or entity has, or had during the Class
Period, a controlling interest; and (vi) the legal
representatives,
agents, affiliates, heirs, successors-in interest, or assigns of
any such excluded persons or entities. Also excluded from the
Settlement Class are the persons and entities listed on Exhibit
1
hereto who or which are excluded from the Settlement Class
pursuant
to request.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ZCtmiy at no extra
charge.[CC]
BRADLEY UNIVERSITY: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Sinha
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Sinha v. Bradley
University, Case No. 1:24-cv-01059-CSB-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.
Bradley University is a private university in Peoria, Illinois.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=NdBTZm at no extra
charge.[CC]
BRIDGESONE CORP: Benton Sues Over Tire Price Monopoly
-----------------------------------------------------
CHERESE BENTON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BRIDGESONE CORPORATION; BRIDGESTONE
AMERICAS, INC.; CONTINENTAL AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT; CONTINENTAL TIRE
THE AMERICAS, LLC; THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY; COMPAGNIE
GENERALE DES ETABLISSEMENTS; MICHELEN SCA; MICHELIN NORTH AMERICA,
INC.; NOKIAN TYRES PLC; NOKIAN TYRES INC.; NOKIAN TYRES U.S.
OPERATIONS LLC; PIRELLI & C.S.P.A.; and PIRELLI TIRE LLC,
Defendants, Case 3:24-cv-02217 (N.D. Cal., April 15, 2024) alleges
violation of the Sherman Act.
According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, the Defendants are
engaged in a conspiracy to artificially raise and maintain the
prices of new replacement tires for cars, vans, trucks and buses
("Replacement Tires") sold in the United States. Beginning on or
about April 1, 2020, and with an end date presently unknown, the
Defendants carried out an agreement to raise and maintain prices
through the exchange of pricing information, the coordination of
capacity and production and other means.
The Defendants' conspiracy to fix prices for Replacement Tires was
predatory and opportunistic and involved taking advantage of
economic conditions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic as an excuse to
raise prices, says the suit.
BRIDGESTONE CORPORATION designs, produces, and sells automobile
tires. The Company also produces and markets scales to weigh racing
cars and jumbo aircrafts and sporting goods including golf
equipment, tennis rackets, and bicycles. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Steven N. Williams, Esq.
Kai'Ree K. Howard, Esq.
Gerald Williams, Esq.
STEVEN WILLIAMS LAW, PC.
201 Spear Street, Suite 1100
San Francisco, CA 94108
Telephone: 415-597-1509
Email: swillliams@stevenwilliamslaw.com
khowards@stevenwilliamslaw.com
BROOKLYN GRID: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Chimbolema Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------
DAMIAN CHIMBOLEMA; DIEGO ARMANDO CORO VALENTE; FELIX GERMAN EVAS
GUAMAN; and ANGELICA MARIA JEREZ ASITIMBAY, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. BROOKLYN
GRID LLC; SAMEER BATRA; and GIL BROITMAN, Defendants, Case No.
1:24-cv-02844 (S.D.N.Y., April 15, 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.
The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as construction
workers.
BROOKLYN GRID LLC a privately held real estate investment company
with headquarters in NYC focusing on property acquisitions,
development, and management. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Linden Miller, Esq.
TAKEROOT JUSTICE
123 William St., Suite 401
New York, NY 10038
Telephone: (908) 251-9748
Email: Lmiller@takerootjustice.org
- and -
Samantha Wilhelm, Esq.
123 William Street, Suite 401
New York, NY 10038
Telephone: (646) 923-8315
Email: Swilhelm@takerootjustice.org
BURGERFI INTERNATIONAL: Class Management Order Entered in Donoghue
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DENNIS J. DONOGHUE et al.,
v. BURGERFI INTERNATIONAL, INC. et al., Case No.
1:23-cv-06400-AT-GWG (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Gabriel Gorenstein
entered a class management order as follows:
-- All pre-trial applications, including those relating to
scheduling and discovery, shall be made to the undersigned
(except
motions to dismiss or for judgment on the pleadings, for
injunctive relief, for summary judgment, or for class
certification).
-- All applications must comply with this Court's Individual
Practices, which are available through the Clerk's Office or
at:
https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-gabriel-w-gorenstein
-- Discovery motions -- that is, any application pursuant to Rules
26
through 37 or 45 -- not only must comply with ¶ 2.A. of the
Court's Individual Practices but also must be made promptly
after
the cause for such a motion arises.
-- The parties are required to make affirmative attempts to settle
this matter through discussions among counsel and mediation if
necessary and appropriate.
BurgerFi owns and operates a chain of restaurants.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=SBVW9Z at no extra
charge.[CC]
CAPITAL VISION: Plaintiffs Seek Leave To File Class Cert Reply
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARY ALICE CLARK,
CHRISTOPHER COULTER, AARON PEREZ, KEVIN NELSON, and PHILLIP ROSCHER
on behalf of themselves, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. CAPITAL VISION SERVICES, LLC d/b/a MYEYEDR, Case No.
1:22-cv-10236-DJC (D. Mass.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter
an order permitting them to file the reply in support of the Motion
for Class Certification and granting any other relief the Court
deems just.
On Feb. 29, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed their motion for class
certification. The same day, the Defendant filed its opposition to
the Motion.
3. A reply memorandum is necessary to address Defendant’s
misstatement of facts regarding adequacy of counsel, and alleged
variations within the testimony of the Plaintiffs.
4. Plaintiffs seek to file the reply at this time because the
proposed reply largely cites to the same evidence as the evidence
cited in the Plaintiffs’ opposition to Defendant’s Motion for
Decertification.
Capital Vision provides optometric and retail optical services.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=8Z2aeX at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Gregg I. Shavitz, Esq.
Camar Jones, Esq.
Alan L. Quiles, Esq.
SHAVITZ LAW GROUP, P.A.
951 Yamato Road, Suite 285
Boca Raton, FL 33431
Telephone: (561) 447-8888
E-mail: gshavitz@shavitzlaw.com
aquiles@shavitzlaw.com
cjones@shavitzlaw.com
- and -
Sam J. Smith, Esq.
Loren Bolno Donnell, Esq.
BURR & SMITH LLP
9800 4th Street North, Suite 200
St. Petersburg, FL 33702
Telephone: (813) 253-2010
E-mail: ssmith@burrandsmithlaw.com
ldonnell@burrandsmithlaw.com
- and -
Hillary Schwab, Esq.
Brant Casavant, Esq.
FAIR WORK, PC.
192 South Street, Suite 450
Boston, MA 02111
Telephone: (617)607-3261
E-mail: hillary@fairworklaw.com
brant@fairworklaw.com
CARECENTRIX INC: Conditional Collective Cert. Bid Extended to May 8
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jones v. CareCentrix,
Inc., Case No. 3:23-cv-01071 (D. Conn., Filed Aug. 10, 2023), the
Hon. Judge Victor A. Bolden entered an order granting joint motion
for extension of time to file response / reply as to motion to
certify class Plaintiff's pre-discovery motion for conditional
collective certification until May 8, 2024.
The suit alleges violation Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
CareCentrix provides home health care services.[CC]
CAROLINA AMATO: Website Not Accessible to Blind, Martinez Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
SILVIA MARTINEZ, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, v. CAROLINA AMATO ACCESSORIES, INC., Case No.
1:24-cv-02984 (E.D.N.Y., Filed April 22, 2024) is a civil rights
action against the Defendant for the failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate the Defendant's website,
www.amatonewyork.com, to be fully accessible to and independently
usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired
people.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to the Website, and
therefore denial of the goods and services offered thereby, is a
violation of the Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA").
Based on a 2020 U.S. Census Bureau report, approximately 8.1
million people in the United States are visually impaired,
including 2.0 million who are blind.
According a 2016 report published by the National Federation of the
Blind, 2016 report, approximately 418,500 visually impaired persons
live in the State of New York.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using the
computer.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
E-mail: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
CARRIAGE SERVICES: Atkinson Sues Over Discrimination & Harassment
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ANGELICA ATKINSON, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CARRIAGE SERVICES OF VIRGINIA LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 202403178 (Va. Cir. Ct., Fairfax Cty., March 4,
2024) is a class action against the Defendant for employment
discrimination and harassment in violation of the Virginia Code.
Carriage Services of Virginia LLC is a provider of funeral and
cemetery services and merchandise in Fairfax, Virginia. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jason F. Zellman, Esq.
SUROVELL ISAACS & LEVY PLC
Fairfax, VA 22030
Telephone: (703) 277-9704
Facsimile: (703) 591-9285
Email: JZellman@SurovellFirm.com
CEDAR FAIR: Suit Seeks to Lift Continuance of Class Cert. Briefing
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MONEVA WALKER, et al., v.
CEDAR FAIR, L.P., et al., Case No. 3:20-cv-02176-JGC (N.D. Ohio),
the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order lifting the
continuance on class certification briefing and directing the
efendants to respond to Plaintiffs' motion for class certification
within the next 30 days.
The Plaintiffs have been seeking to certify this class action since
they filed it, in 2020. They have defeated multiple motions to
dismiss. They have completed the necessary class discovery and
filed their motion for class certification, along with supporting
evidence and expert testimony.
Cedar Fair is an operator of amusement and water parks, and
hotels.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 18, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=1MslSq at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Nicole T. Fiorelli, Esq.
DWORKEN & BERNSTEIN CO., L.P.A.
60 South Park Place
Painesville, OH 44077
Telephone: (440) 352-3391
Facsimile: (440) 352-3469 Fax
E-mail: nfiorelli@dworkenlaw.com
- and -
Jonas Jacobson, Esq.
Simon Franzini, Esq.
DOVEL & LUNER, LLP
201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Telephone: (310) 656-7066
Facsimile: (310) 656-7069
E-mail: jonas@dovel.com
simon@dovel.com
- and -
Richard M. Kerger, Esq.
Kimberly A. Conklin, Esq.
THE KERGER LAW FIRM, LLC
4159 N. Holland-Sylvania Rd. Suite 101
Toledo, OH 43623
Telephone: (419) 255-5990
Facsimile: (419) 255-5997
E-mail: rkerger@kergerlaw.com
kconklin@kergerlaw.com
CHG MEDICAL: Class Settlement in Carlino Gets Initial Nod
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JACQUELINE CARLINO, an
individual on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, v.
CHG MEDICAL STAFFING, INC., Case No. 1:17-cv-01323-LHR-CDB (E.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Christopher Baker entered an order granting
the Plaintiff's motion for preliminary approval of class and
collective action settlement.
The Court preliminary finds that the terms of the Joint Stipulation
and Settlement Agreement are fair, reasonable, and adequate, and
comply with Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The Court appoints CPT Group, Inc. as the settlement administrator,
preliminarily approves settlement administration costs of up to
$12,000, and, in accordance with the Settlement, directs the
settlement administrator to complete dissemination of the notice of
settlement within 30 days of entry of this Order.
A final approval (fairness) hearing is hereby set for Sept. 18,
2024, at 1:00pm Central before the Honorable Lee H. Rosenthal to
consider the fairness, reasonableness, and adequacy of the
Settlement as well as the award of costs to class counsel and a
service award to the class representative.
Class counsel shall file the motion for final approval of the
Settlement, along with any objections to the Settlement and any
responses thereto, no later than 35 days before the final approval
(fairness) hearing.
On Feb. 28, 2019, the Court issued an order granting the
Plaintiff's motion for rule 23 class certification and conditional
certification of an FLSA collective. Specifically, the Court
certified the following class and collective:
-- California Class
"All non-exempt hourly healthcare professionals employed in
California through the RN Network division of CHG Medical
Staffing, Inc., who, at any time from Sept. 29, 2013 through
the
date of certification [Feb. 28, 2019], worked overtime and
had
the value of their meals and incidental stipends, housing
allowance, and/or housing accommodation excluded from their
regular rate for purposes of calculating overtime pay."
-- FLSA Collective
"All non-exempt hourly healthcare professionals employed in
the
United States through the RN Network division of CHG Medical
Staffing, Inc., who, at any time within the three years
preceding certification, worked in excess of 40 hours in one
or
more workweeks and had the value of their meals and
incidentals
stipend, housing allowance, and/or housing accommodation
excluded from their regular rate for purposes of calculating
overtime pay."
The Defendant is a staffing company that employs healthcare
professionals for short-term assignments across the United States.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=OoihLd at no extra
charge.[CC]
COFFEE REGIONAL: Plaintiff Must File Class Cert Bids by July 15
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Doe v. Coffee Regional
Medical Center, Inc., Case No. 5:24-cv-00005 (S.D. Ga.), the Hon.
Lisa G. Wood Judge entered an order on motion for extension of
time.
The Plaintiff shall file any desired class certification documents
on or before July 15, 2024.
The Court will consider any additional requests for extension in
due course.
Coffee Regional is a general medical and surgical facility.[CC]
COMPLIANCE STAFFING: Griffis Wage-and-Hour Suit Removed to W.D. Pa.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled ANDREW GRIFFIS, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. COMPLIANCE STAFFING AGENCY, LLC d/b/a
JENNMAR SERVICES, Case No. GD-24-001121, was removed from the Court
of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, to the U.S.
District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on March 1,
2024.
The Clerk of Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-00268-MPK to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged violations of the
Colorado Wage Claim Act, the Colorado Minimum Wage Act, and the
Colorado Overtime and Minimum Pay Standards Order.
Compliance Staffing Agency, LLC, doing business as Jennmar
Services, is a staffing company based in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
[BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Christopher S. Bouriat, Esq.
Joshua R. Sallmen, Esq.
REED SMITH CENTRE
225 Fifth Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
Telephone: (412) 288-4119
Facsimile: (412) 288-3063
Email: cbouriat@reedsmith.com
jsallmen@reedsmith.com
COMPULINK: Dancy-Wilkins Class Cert. Bid Tossed w/o Prejudice
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Dancy-Wilkins et al v.
Compu-Link Corporation, et al., Case No. 2:22-cv-06208 (E.D.N.Y.,
Filed Oct. 14, 2022), the Hon. Judge Joanna Seybert entered an
order denying without prejudice the Plaintiff's motions for class
certification and Default Judgment.
The nature of suit states Diversity-Breach of Contract.
Compulink is a manufacturer of wire harnesses and custom molded
cable assemblies.[CC]
CREDENCE RESOURCE: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Brennan Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH BRENNAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CREDENCE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, LLC; and
DIRECTV, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-03019 (C.D. Cal., April
13, 2024) seeks to stop the Defendants' practice of making
unsolicited calls.
CREDENCE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, LLC is a debt collection agency
founded in Nevada in 2013, with its current headquarters in Dallas,
Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dana J. Oliver, Esq.
OLIVER LAW CENTER, INC.
8780 19th Street #559
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701
Telephone: (855)384-3262
Facsimile: (888)570-2021
Email: dana@danaoliverlaw.com
- and -
Keith J. Keogh, Esq.
William M. Sweetnam, Esq.
KEOGH LAW, LTD.
55 West Monroe Street, Suite 3390
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: (312) 726-1092
Email: keith@keoghlaw.com
wsweetnam@keoghlaw.com
- and -
Anthony Paronich, Esq.
PARONICH LAW, P.C.
350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400
Hingham, MA 02043
Telephone: (617) 485-0018
Email: anthony@paronichlaw.com
D'URSO LANDSCAPING: Calles Seeks Conditional Collective Status
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JESUS CALLES, et.al., v.
D'URSO LANDSCAPING SERVICES, et.al., Case No. 2:23-cv-04773-MCA-MAH
(D.N.J.), the Plaintiffs will move the Court for an order
conditionally certifying their Fair Labor Standard Act (FLSA)
claims as a collective action and authorizing notice to prospective
FLSA collective action members.
D'Urso offers landscape designs, masonry, paving and landscape
maintenance.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 19, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=x9BgOi at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Andrew I. Glenn, Esq.
Jodi J. Jaffe, Esq.
JAFFE GLENN LAW GROUP, P.A.
300 Carnegie Center, Suite 150
Princeton, NJ 08540
Telephone: (201) 687-9977
Facsimile: (201) 595-0308
E-mail: aglenn@JaffeGlenn.com
jjaffe@JaffeGlenn.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Aaron C. Schlesinger, Esq.
PECKAR & ABRAMSON, P.C.
70 Grand Avenue
New York, NY 10010
Telephone: (212) 382-0909
E-mail: aschlesinger@pecklaw.com
D2C LLC: Allowed to Seal Unredacted Opposition in Martinez
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Martinez v. D2C, LLC, Case
No. 1:23-cv-21394 (S.D. Fla., Filed April 13, 2023), the Hon. Judge
Robert N. Scola, Jr. entered an order granting the Defendant's
unopposed motion to seal.
-- The Defendant may file a sealed unredacted version of its
opposition to the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification,
along with its exhibits.
-- Any redactions must be narrowly applied to only that
information
for which there is a factual and legal basis to depart from the
policy that Court filings should be publicly available.
-- The filing shall be kept under seal until 4/23/2029 at which
time
it shall be destroyed.
The nature of suit states Other Statutory Actions.[CC]
DAVA MARKETING: Bid To Hold in Abeyance Rule 68 Judgment Nixed
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as AUSTIN COOK, individually;
and HARRISON FOLLETT, individually, v. DAVA MARKETING, LLC, a Utah
Limited Liability Company, Case No. 2:23-cv-00632-DBB-DBP (D.
Utah), the Hon. Judge Dustin Pead entered an order denying
Plaintiffs motion to hold in abeyance the Defendant's Federal Rule
68 Offer of Judgment until adequate discovery can take place to
determine whether the offer is "just."
The Plaintiffs filed a "Collective Action Complaint" claiming
Defendant DAVA Marketing LLC failed to comply with federal and
state wage laws in not paying for all hours and time worked,
including overtime.
On Dec. 12, 2023, near the outset of the case, the parties sought a
stay until May 30, 2024, to facilitate settlement negotiations. The
court granted the requested stay.2 Defendant served a Rule 68 Offer
of Judgment on Plaintiffs on approximately
February 2, 2024.
Dava offers post-production media services to enhance digital
content for creators and businesses.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=h66VdJ at no extra
charge.[CC]
DELTA DELTA: Vaughan Files Personal Injury Suit in M.D.N.C.
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Delta Delta Delta
Fraternity, et al. The case is captioned as MASON VAUGHAN,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
DELTA DELTA DELTA FRATERNITY, et al., Case No.
1:24-cv-00186-LCB-JEP (M.D.N.C., March 6, 2024).
The Plaintiff brings personal injury claims against the
Defendants.
Delta Delta Delta Fraternity is a global women's fraternity and
Greek life organization headquartered in Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Edward H. Maginnis, Esq.
Karl S. Gwaltney, Esq.
MAGINNIS HOWARD
7706 Six Forks Rd., Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27615
Telephone: (919) 526-0450
(919) 960-1545
Facsimile: (919) 882-8763
Email: emaginnis@maginnishoward.com
kgwaltney@maginnishoward.com
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Plaintiffs Seek More Time to File Class Cert.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICARDO CLARK, et al., v.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01564-RDM (D.D.C.),
the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order, pursuant to Local
Rule 23.1(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1)(B),
enlarging time to file their class certification motion pursuant to
the Court's scheduling order following the parties' Rule 26(f)
report or a Rule 16 conference.
Pursuant to Local Rule 23.1(b), the Plaintiffs' neglect in filing a
motion for class certification within 90 days of filing their
complaint should be found excusable. In support of this Motion, the
Plaintiffs rely upon their Memorandum of Law, filed herewith.
Pursuant to Local Rule 7(m), the Plaintiffs have sought Defendant's
consent for this motion, but Counsel for Defendant does not consent
to the relief requested.
District of Columbia is a compact city on the Potomac River,
bordering the states of Maryland and Virginia.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=BmWAV8 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Pamela M. Keith, Esq.
Scott Lempert, Esq.
CENTER FOR EMPLOYMENT JUSTICE, LLC
650 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Suite 600
Telephone: (818) 800-0292
E-mail: pamkeith@centerforemploymentjustice.com
scottlempert@centerforemploymentjustice.com
DONALD COMB: Filing for Class Certification Bids Due July 22
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jackson v. Personal
Representative of Donald Comb, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-12208 (D.
Mass., Filed Sept. 26, 2023), the Hon. Judge Richard G. Stearns
entered an order
-- Initial disclosures required by Fed. May 10, 2024
R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) will be
completed by:
-- If there is disagreement as to the July 5, 2024
delineation of the plaintiff class,
class discovery will be completed
by:
-- Class certification motions will be July 22, 2024
filed by:
with any opposition by: Aug. 5, 2024
-- If there is no disagreement as to Sept. 6, 2024
delineation of the class (the
class parameters appear clear),
all fact discovery will be
completed by:
If class discovery and certification Dec. 6, 2024
is necessary, all fact discovery will
be completed by:
The suit alleges violation of the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act (EIRSA) involving employee benefits.[CC]
DOYLE LAND: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Combs Suit Says
------------------------------------------------------
TERESA COMBS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DOYLE LAND SERVICES, INC., Case No.
3:24-cv-01111 (S.D. Ill., April 15, 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 Combs was employed by the Defendant as an agent.
DOYLE LAND SERVICES, INC. is a professional land services firm
providing land services in support of the Energy Industry
throughout the US. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglas M. Werman, Esq.
Maureen A. Salas, Esq.
WERMAN SALAS P.C.
77 W. Washington St., Suite 1402
Chicago, IL 60602
Telephone: (312) 419-1008
Facsimile: (312) 419-1025
Email: dwerman@flsalaw.com
msalas@flsalaw.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
Email: 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
Email: rburch@brucknerburch.com
DUNHAM'S ATHLEISURE: Bid for Interlocutory Appeal in Heppard Denied
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jessica Heppard, v.
Dunham's Athleisure Corporation, Case No. 5:23-cv-10834-JEL-APP
(E.D. Mich.), the Hon. Judge Judith E. Levy entered an order:
-- Denying Defendant's motion to certify the Court's order for
interlocutory appeal; and
-- Denying as moot Defendant's motion to stay this action pending
appellate review.
The Court said that the Defendant's motion fails as it has not met
its burden on the firstand third section 1292(b) factors.
Specifically, Defendant has not demonstrated that the Court’s
Order involves a controlling question of law, and that resolution
of this issue would materially advance the ultimate termination of
this suit.
The Court ruled that Plaintiff’s OMFWSA claim can proceed as a
class action because the Ohio law conflicts with Rule 23, and Rule
23 does not exceed the Rules Enabling Act. As a result, Plaintiff
may pursue her FLSA claim as a collective action suit and her
OMFWSA claim as a class action suit.
Plaintiff Jessica Heppard brings a putative collective action and
class action suit under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA“)
and the Ohio Minimum Fair Wages Standards Act ("OMFWSA"). She
alleges that Defendant Dunham's Athleisure Corporation had a policy
and practice of not paying employees for all hours worked,
including for overtime, and that Defendant also failed to keep
accurate records.
The Plaintiff alleges that Defendant had a policy requiring retail
store associates to clock out before completing closing tasks, and
that they could only leave the store when all employees were ready
to leave.
The Plaintiff claims that these policies resulted in 20-30 minutes
a day of unpaid work. The Plaintiff also alleges that she worked
about 60 hours each week but was not compensated for her overtime
hours, and that Defendant did not make, keep, or preserve accurate
records of her unpaid work.
The Plaintiff is a resident of Ohio and worked for Defendant from
Sept. 27 to Dec. 15, 2021, as a full-time retail store associate in
Hillsboro, Ohio.
Dunham's operates a sporting good chain.
A copy of the Court's opinion and order dated April 24, 2024, is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=HuP2II
at no extra charge.[CC]
ECOPETROL SA: BT Energy Incident-Related Class Suit Pending
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ecopetrol S.A. disclosed in its form 20-F Report for fiscal period
ending December 31, 2023 filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on April 18, 2024, that the first instance judgment in
BT Energy incident-related class suit is pending.
On October 22, 2014, the Company was served with a class action
suit against the Company seeking monetary damages of approximately
COP 7.4 trillion related to an incident that occurred on August 21,
2014, during the loading operations of the BT Energy Challenger
vessel.
The claimants alleged possible damage to the port area of Ecopetrol
S.A.'s terminal in Coveñas, as well as of marine and submarine
areas and beaches that form the geographical area of the
Morrosquillo Gulf.
This allegation is currently under investigation by the Harbor
Master of Coveñas.
Ecopetrol S.A. filed a motion requesting the judge to require the
claimants to amend their claim to more precisely set forth the
facts and evidence that allegedly support Ecopetrol S.A.'s
liability.
On March 3, 2015, Ecopetrol S.A. filed its statement of defense
arguing the exclusive fault of a third party.
On October 20, 2015, the Court denied a class action of more than
100 informal traders in the region because there is no common
identity with the initial class (hotel employees).
However, during 2016 the Sucre Administrative Court accepted
another 1,208 informal traders and fishermen as claimants.
On March 10, 2017, a mandatory settlement hearing was held in order
to seek an agreement, but it failed.
In January 2018, a judicial order was issued to commence the
evidence production phase, a decision which was objected by the
parties.
In September 2018, all the ordered statements were made, the
evidentiary stage was finalized and the parties filed their final
closing arguments.
As of the date of this annual report, a first instance judgment is
pending.
Ecopetrol S.A. is an oil company based in Bogota, Colombia.
EDGEWELL PERSONAL: Glassman Seeks to Seal Certain Documents
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KENNETH GLASSMAN,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
EDGEWELL PERSONAL CARE, LLC, Case No. 3:21-cv-07669-RS (N.D. Cal.),
the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order allowing him to file
under seal certain documents containing information that the
Defendant has designated as confidential.
The Plaintiff states that the "compelling reasons" standard applies
to sealing documents related to class certification. However, the
Plaintiff submits this request solely to comply with his
obligations under Civil L.R. 79-5(f) and the Protective Order
entered in this case.
Edgewell is an American multinational consumer products company.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 19, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=HsHJwu at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ryan J. Clarkson, Esq.
Shireen M. Clarkson, Esq.
Katherine A. Bruce, Esq.
Alan Gudino, Esq.
CLARKSON LAW FIRM, P.C.
22525 Pacific Coast Highway
Malibu, CA 90265
Telephone: (213) 788-4050
Facsimile: (213) 788-4070
E-mail: rclarkson@clarksonlawfirm.com
sclarkson@clarksonlawfirm.com
kbruce@clarksonlawfirm.com
agudino@clarksonlawfirm.com
- and -
Neal J. Deckant, 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: ndeckant@bursor.com
bscott@bursor.com
- and -
Lisa Omoto, Esq.
Timothy J. Peter, Esq.
FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1060
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (424) 256-2884
Facsimile: (424) 256-2885
E-mail: lomoto@faruqilaw.com
tpeter@faruqilaw.com
ELEVANCE INC: Court Narrows Claims in Union Suit
------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TRUSTEES OF INTERNATIONAL
UNION OF BRICKLAYERS AND ALLIED CRAFTWORKERS LOCAL 1 CONNECTICUT
HEALTH FUND and TRUSTEES OF SHEET METAL WORKERS' LOCAL NO. 40
HEALTH FUND, individually and on behalf of the INTERNATIONAL
BRICKLAYERS AND ALLIED CRAFTWORKERS LOCAL 1 CONNECTICUT HEALTH
FUND, the SHEET METAL WORKERS' LOCAL NO. 40 HEALTH FUND, and all
others similarly situated, v. ELEVANCE, INC. F/K/A ANTHEM, INC.,
ANTHEM HEALTH PLANS, INC. D/B/A ANTHEM BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD,
ANTHEM BLUE CROSS, EMPIRE BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD, and EMPIRE BLUE
CROSS, Case No. 3:22-cv-01541-VDO (D. Conn.), the Hon. Judge Vernon
Oliver entered an order granting in part and denying in part the
Defendants' motion to dismiss.
Specifically, all claims are dismissed without prejudice under Rule
12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Within 60 days of
this order, the Plaintiffs may move to file an amended complaint.
Any such motion must include a redline comparison of the initial
complaint and proposed amended complaint. Failure to timely file a
request to amend the complaint will result in dismissal of all
claims with prejudice.
The Court concludes that it cannot consider Defendants' exhibits
attached to the motion to dismiss. Defendants assert that the
documents are the contracts that Plaintiffs entered into with
Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield of Connecticut.
However, as previously discussed, the Plaintiffs dispute the
authenticity of these exhibits, asserting that the documents are
drafts that do not contain Plaintiffs’ signatures.
In Dec. 2022, the Plaintiffs brought this action against the
Defendants, alleging breaches of fiduciary obligations in violation
of Sections 404 and 406 of the Employee Retirement Income Security
Act of 1974 ("ERISA").
The Plaintiffs are the trustees of two multi-employer, self-funded
welfare benefit plans that provide medical benefits to union
employees and retiree.
Elevance is an American health insurance provider.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=wJuo2V at no extra
charge.[CC]
EMBRY-RIDDLE: Parties Must Confer Class Cert Deadlines
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Garceau v. Embry-Riddle
Aeronautical University, Inc., Case No. 6:24-cv-00755 (M.D. Fla.,
Filed April 23, 2024), the Hon. Judge Paul G. Byron entered an
order directing the parties to confer regarding deadlines pertinent
to a motion for class certification and advising the Court of
agreeable deadlines in their case management report.
The deadlines should include a deadline for (1) disclosure of
expert reports -- class action, plaintiff and defendant; (2)
discovery -- class action; (3) motion for class certification; (4)
response to motion for class certification; and (5) reply to motion
for class certification.
The suit alleges violation of the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act (ERISA).
Embry–Riddle is a private university focused on aviation and
aerospace programs.[CC]
ENHANCE HEALTH: Faces Turner Suit Over Racketeering Activity
------------------------------------------------------------
CONSWALLO TURNER, TIESHA FOREMAN, ANGELINA WELLS, VERONICA KING,
NAVAQUOTE, LLC and WINN INSURANCE AGENCY, LLC, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. ENHANCE
HEALTH, LLC, TRUECOVERAGE, LLC, SPERIDIAN TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, NUMBER
ONE PROSPECTING, LLC d/b/a MINERVA MARKETING, MATTHEW B. HERMAN and
BRANDON BOWSKY, Defendants, Case No. 0:24-cv-60591-MD (S.D. Fla.,
April 12, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for
conspiracy, negligence per se, and violation of the Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendants were associated with
RICO Enterprise and conducted and participated in the Enterprise's
affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity which comprised
of numerous and repeated uses of the mails and interstate wire
communications to execute a scheme to defraud. Specifically,
Defendants TrueCoverage, Enhance Health and their downlines use the
personally identifiable information to access the accounts of
consumers who already have an Affordable Care Act health plan, then
remove the plan's agent of record. They replace that AOR with their
own in-house or downline AOR. These "AOR Swaps" are done without
the consumer's knowledge or consent, and allow TrueCoverage,
Enhance Health and their downlines to essentially steal the
original AOR's commissions for the policy.
The Defendants knew about and directed these activities. They
obtained money and property belonging to Class Plaintiffs and class
members as a result of these violations. Class Plaintiffs and class
members have been injured in their business or property by
Defendants' overt acts of mail and wire fraud, says the suit.
Enhance Health, LLC is a senior-focused digital insurance
agency.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jason K. Kellogg, Esq.
LEVINE KELLOGG LEHMAN SCHNEIDER
+ GROSSMAN LLP
100 Southeast Second Street
Miami Tower, 36th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 403-8788
Facsimile: (305) 403-8789
E-mail: jk@lklsg.com
- and -
Jason R. Doss, Esq.
THE DOSS FIRM, LLC
1827 Powers Ferry Road Southeast
Atlanta, GA 30339
Telephone: (770) 578-1314
Facsimile: (770) 578-1302
E-mail: jasondoss@dossfirm.com
EQUIFAX INFO: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Bristol
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Bristol v. Equifax
Information Services LLC et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-01039-MMM-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.
Equifax offers financial, consumer and commercial data, and
analytical solutions.
A copy of the Court's standing order dated April 22, 2024, is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=CqJLkW
at no extra charge.[CC]
ESTES EXPRESS: Alvarez Must File Class Cert Bid by Oct. 21
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARIO ALVAREZ, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated, v. ESTES EXPRESS
LINES, Case No. 3:24-cv-00001-REP (E.D. Va.), the Hon. Judge Robert
E. Payne entered an order that:
-- discovery shall proceed simultaneously on the class
certification
questions as well as the merits of the case;
-- plaintiff shall file a motion for class certification on Oct.
21,
2024;
-- the defendant shall file its response on Nov. 20, 2024; and
-- the plaintiff shall file his reply on Dec. 6, 2024.
The court further orders that a hearing on the Motion for class
certification shall be held on Jan. 7, 2025, at 10:00 a.m.
Estes Express is a privately owned American freight transportation
provider.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=63UBn6 at no extra
charge.[CC]
EXP WORLD HOLDINGS: Faces Burton Class Suit in South Carolina
-------------------------------------------------------------
EXP World Holdings Inc. disclosed in its form 8-K Report for April
11, 2024 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April
17, 2024, that the Company faces Burton class suit in the United
States District Court for the District of South Carolina.
On April 11, 2024, a putative class action complaint under the
caption Shauntell Burton et al. v. Bluefield Realty Group, LLC, et
al. (Case No. 7:24-cv-01800-JDA) (the "Class Action") was filed in
the United States District Court for the District of South
Carolina, Spartanburg Division, naming as defendants certain real
estate brokerages, franchisors and real estate brokerage owners,
including the Company.
The Class Action complaint alleges that defendants conspired to
restrain trade by causing certain home sellers to pay buyer broker
fees and inflated commissions on the sale of homes all in violation
of federal antitrust law.
The putative class representatives seek to represent a class of
persons comprising of any person who used a listing broker to sell
a home listed on a multiple listing service in the District of
South Carolina between November 6, 2019, through the present.
Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the putative class, seek a
permanent injunction enjoining the defendants from requiring that
sellers pay the buyer broker, continuing to restrict competition
among buyer brokers and seller brokers and engaging in conduct
determined to be unlawful.
Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the putative class, also
seek an award of declaratory relief, damages and/or restitution in
an amount to be determined at trial, pre-and post-judgment interest
and attorneys’ fees, expenses and costs of suit.
The Company believes that additional antitrust litigation may be
possible.
The Company cannot provide any assurances that results of such
litigation will not have a material adverse effect on its business,
results of operations or financial condition.
eXp World Holdings, Inc. is the holding company for eXp Realty, a
global, cloud-based real estate brokerage.
EXPERIAN INFO: Class Cert Bid in Pena Suit Continued to August 2
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARIA PENA, Successor in
Interest to JOSE PENA, individually, and on behalf of all other
similarly situated consumers, v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS,
INC., Case No. 8:22-cv-01115-SSS-ADS (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge
Sunshine Sykes entered an order as follows:
1. The Plaintiff shall file a reply brief in further support of
the
motion for Class Certification by July 5, 2024.
2. The Motion date for the Motion for Class Certification is
continued from July 12, 2024, to Aug. 2, 2024, at 2:00 p.m.
Experian operates as an information services company.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=bE3sxu at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Erika Angelos Heath, Esq.
James A. Francis, Esq.
John Soumilas, Esq.
Lauren KW Brennan, Esq.
FRANCIS MAILMAN SOUMILAS, P.C.
369 Pine Street, Suite 410
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (628) 246-1352
Facsimile: (215) 940-8000
E-mail: eheath@consumerlawfirm.com
jfrancis@consumerlawfirm.com
jsoumilas@consumerlawfirm.com
lbrennan@consumerlawfirm.com
FEDERAL EXPRESS: Parties Seek to Stay Class Cert Bid Deadline
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHARLINDA WILLIAMS, v.
FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, Case No. 1:24-cv-01056-JPB (N.D. Ga.),
the Parties ask the Court to enter an order to stay the current
deadline for the Plaintiff to file a motion for class
certification.
The Plaintiff filed her class action complaint on March 11, 2024.
The. Defendant waived service of a summons in this action, which
means
that under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(3), the Defendant has 60 days from
March 13, 2024, or until May 13, 2024, to answer or otherwise
respond to the Complaint.
Pursuant to N.D. Ga. Local Rule 23.1(B), the Plaintiff is required
to move for class certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(1)
within 90 days after a complaint is filed—that is, by June 10,
2024—unless the Court extends that deadline upon showing of good
cause.
FedEx is an American multinational conglomerate holding company
focused on transportation, e-commerce and business services.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=y7qJxB at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
R. Joseph Barton, Esq.
BARTON & DOWNES LLP
1633 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 200
Washington DC 20009
Telephone: (202) 734-7046
E-mail: jbarton@bartondownes.com
- and -
Stephen J. Anderson, Esq.
KENNETH S. NUGENT, P.C.
4227 Pleasant Hill Road
Building 11, Suite 300
Duluth GA 30096
Telephone: (770) 820-0893
E-mail: sanderson@attorneykennugent.com
- and -
Matthew Z. Crotty, Esq.
RIVERSIDE NW LAW GROUP, PLLC
905 W. Riverside Ave., Suite 404
Spokane, WA 99201
Telephone: (509) 850-7011
E-mail: mzc@rnwlg.com
- and -
Thomas G. Jarrard, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS G.
JARRARD LLC
1020 N. Washington St.
Spokane, WA 99201
Telephone: (425) 239-7290
E-mail: Tjarrard@att.net
The Defendant is represented by:
T. Brandon Waddell, Esq.
Emily C. Snow, Esq.
CAPLAN COBB LLC
75 Fourteenth Street, NE, Suite 2700
Atlanta, GA 30309
Telephone: (404) 596-5600
Facsimile: (404) 596-5604
E-mail: bwaddell@caplancobb.com
esnow@caplancobb.com
- and -
M. Tristan Morales, Esq.
O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP
1625 Eye Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 383-5300
Facsimile: (202) 383-5414
E-mail: tmorales@omm.com
- and -
Colleen Hitch Wilson, Esq.
FEDERAL EXPRESS
CORPORATION
3620 Hacks Cross Road
Building B, 3rd Floor
Memphis, TN 38125
Telephone: (901) 434-8338
E-mail: chitchwilson@fedex.com
FLEET FARM: Faces Frost Suit Over ADA Violations in D. Minnesota
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Fleet Farm LLC. The
case is captioned as CLARENCE FROST, et al., individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, v. FLEET FARM LLC, Case
No. 0:24-cv-00760-JWB-LIB (D. Minn., March 4, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
Fleet Farm LLC is a retailer headquartered in Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jason D. Gustafson, Esq.
THRONDSET & MICHENFELDER LAW OFFICE LLC
One Central Avenue West, Suite 101
St. Michael, MN 55330
Telephone: (763) 515-6110
Email: jason@throndsetlaw.com
- and -
Patrick W. Michenfelder, Esq.
THRONDSET MICHENFELDER LAW OFFICE, LLC
222 South Ninth Street, Ste. 1600
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone: (763) 515-6110
Facsimile: (763) 226-2515
Email: pat@throndsetlaw.com
FORT BELVOIR: Renewed Bid for Class Cert in Fischer Suit Due May 20
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Chief Petty Officer JOHN
FISCHER and ASHLEY FISCHER, et al., v. FORT BELVOIR RESIDENTIAL
COMMUNITIES LLC, et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-00286-RDA-LRV (E.D. Va.),
the Hon. Judge Rossie Alston, Jr. entered an order granting the
parties' joint motion to extend current deadlines pending execution
of formal settlement agreement as follows:
Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment: May 17,2024
Renewed Motion for Class Certification: May 20, 2024
Defendants' Opposition Briefs: June 3, 2024
Plaintiffs' Reply Briefs: June 10, 2024.
The Clerk is directed to forward copies of this Order to counsel of
record.
Fort Belvoir offers privatized military housing.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=tjs8VR at no extra
charge.[CC]
GALESBURG, IL: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Mixon
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Mixon v. City of Galesburg
et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-01005-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.
Galesburg is the county seat of Knox County and the principal city
of the Galesburg Micropolitan Statistical Area.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=jOwn5Q at no extra
charge.[CC]
GEICO: Joint Bids to Seal in MAO-MSO Class Action OK'd
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MAO-MSO Recovery II, LLC
et al., v. Government Employees Insurance Company (GEICO), Case No.
TDC-17-0711 (D. Md.), the Hon. Judge Theodore Chuang entered an
order granting the joint motions to seal.
The Defendant is an American auto insurance company headquartered
in Chevy Chase, Maryland.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=zEyafD at no extra
charge.[CC]
GLOBAL CORD: Faces Class Action Over Self-Serving Transactions
--------------------------------------------------------------
Robbins LLP informs investors that a shareholder filed a class
action on behalf of all persons and entities that purchased or
otherwise acquired Global Cord Blood Corporation (NYSE: CO)
securities between June 4, 2019 and May 3, 2022. Global Cord Blood
provides umbilical cord blood storage and ancillary services in the
in the Beijing Municipality, Guangdong Province, and Zhejiang
Province of the People's Republic of China.
For more information, submit a form, email attorney Aaron Dumas,
Jr., or give us a call at (800) 350-6003.
The Allegations: Robbins LLP is Investigating the Allegations that
the Board of Global Cord Blood Corporation (CO) Engaged in
Self-Serving and Conflicted Transactions
According to the complaint, during the class period, Defendants
failed to disclose that:
(i) Global Cord employed a capital allocation strategy
designed to reserve funds for Company insiders and related parties
rather than for the benefit of Company shareholders;
(ii) Global Cord's decisions to reject multiple going private
offers and enter into the Transaction were nothing more than
self-serving and conflicted attempts by Defendants to divert
company funds to corporate insiders and related parties;
(iii) Defendants fundamentally misrepresented to investors
Global Cord's approach to capital allocation, strategic
investments, acquisitions, and related party transactions as a
result of the misappropriation by Defendant Kam and his entities of
hundreds of millions of dollars from the Company; and
(iv) as a result, the Company's public statements were
materially false and misleading at all relevant times. As a result,
the Company's stock has declined, harming investors.
What Now: You may be eligible to participate in the class action
against Global Cord Blood Corporation Shareholders who want to
serve as lead plaintiff for the class must file their motions with
the court by June 24, 2024. A lead plaintiff is a representative
party who acts on behalf of other class members in directing the
litigation. You do not have to participate in the case to be
eligible for a recovery. If you choose to take no action, you can
remain an absent class member.
All representation is on a contingency fee basis. Shareholders pay
no fees or expenses.
About Robbins LLP: Some law firms issuing releases about this
matter do not actually litigate securities class actions; Robbins
LLP does. A recognized leader in shareholder rights litigation, the
attorneys and staff of Robbins LLP have been dedicated to helping
shareholders recover losses, improve corporate governance
structures, and hold company executives accountable for their
wrongdoing since 2002. Since our inception, we have obtained over
$1 billion for shareholders.
To be notified if a class action against Global Cord Blood
Corporation settles or to receive free alerts when corporate
executives engage in wrongdoing, sign up for Stock Watch today.
Attorney Advertising. Past results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.
Contact:
Aaron Dumas, Jr.
Robbins LLP
5060 Shoreham Pl., Ste. 300
San Diego, CA 92122
adumas@robbinsllp.com
(800) 350-6003
www.robbinsllp.com [GN]
GO NEW YORK: Teta Sues Over Fraud Violations in S.D.N.Y.
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Go New York Tours,
Inc. The case is captioned as CINDY TETA, et al., individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. GO NEW YORK TOURS,
INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-01614-ER (S.D.N.Y., March 1, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged fraud violations.
Go New York Tours, Inc. is a travel agency in New York, New York.
[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Eduard Korsinsky, Esq.
LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
55 Broadway, 10th Floor
New York, NY 10006
Telephone: (212) 363-7500
Facsimile: (212) 363-7171
Email: ek@zlk.com
GOOGLE LLC: Brown Seeks $217MM Atty's Fees
-------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHASOM BROWN, WILLIAM
BYATT, JEREMY DAVIS, CHRISTOPHER CASTILLO, and MONIQUE TRUJILLO
individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, v.
GOOGLE LLC, Case No. 4:20-cv-03664-YGR (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs
ask the Court to enter an order awarding:
-- $217,643,951.05 in attorneys' fees,
-- $7,656,565.32 in costs, and
-- $30,000 service awards to each of the five named Plaintiffs.
These service awards are justified because this case imposed a
significant burden on the named Plaintiffs. Google served
voluminous discovery requests, requiring each named Plaintiff to
respond to 55 RFAs, 34 RFPs, and 17 Interrogatories. Every
Plaintiff was also deposed for a full day.
Google is an American multinational corporation and technology
company focusing on online advertising, search engine technology,
cloud computing, computer software, quantum computing, e-commerce,
consumer electronics, and artificial intelligence.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5Y1YfH at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
David Boies, Esq.
Mark C. Mao, Esq.
Beko Reblitz-Richardson, Esq.
James Lee, Esq.
Rossana Baeza, Esq.
Alison L. Anderson, Esq.
M. Logan Wright, Esq.
BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP
333 Main Street
Armonk, NY 10504
Telephone: (914) 749-8200
E-mail: dboies@bsfllp.com
mmao@bsfllp.com
brichardson@bsfllp.com
jlee@bsfllp.com
rbaeza@bsfllp.com
alanderson@bsfllp.com
mwright@bsfllp.com
- and -
Bill Carmody, Esq.
Shawn J. Rabin, Esq.
Steven M. Shepard, Esq.
Alexander Frawley, Esq.
Amanda K. Bonn, Esq.
SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
One Manhattan West, 50th Floor
New York, NY 10001
Telephone: (212) 336-8330
E-mail: bcarmody@susmangodfrey.com
srabin@susmangodfrey.com
sshepard@susmangodfrey.com
afrawley@susmangodfrey.com
abonn@susmangodfrey.com
- and -
John A. Yanchunis, Esq.
Ryan J. McGee, Esq.
Michael F. Ram, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN
201 N. Franklin Street, 7th Floor
Tampa, FL 33602
Telephone: (813) 223-5505
E-mail: jyanchunis@forthepeople.com
rmcgee@forthepeople.com
mram@forthepeople.com
GORDON LANE: Parrish Amended Class Cert Bid Tossed w/o Prejudice
----------------------------------------------------------------
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
Hsu entered an order denying the Plaintiff's amended motion for
class certification without prejudice on the basis that according
to the proposed class definitions, named Plaintiff is not a member
of the class.
Parrish proposes to certify the following three classes under Rules
23(a) and 23(b)(3):
Subclass One: Private Pay Residents-CLRA Claim Only.
"All persons who resided in (or continue to reside in) the
California skilled nursing facility Gordon Lane Healthcare,
LLC,
from Aug. 17, 2019, through the date of the final disposition
of
this action pursuant to a Standard Admission Agreement, and
whose
claims are not subject to arbitration because neither the
resident nor the resident's responsible party (as defined in
the
Standard Admission Agreement) agreed to or accepted the
arbitration contract in writing, where the Defendant was
reimbursed for services provided to a "class member" by
private
pay and/or privately acquired insurance and/or any HMO or
PPO."
Subclass Two: All Residents-First And Second Causes of Action.
"All persons who resided in (or continue to reside in) the
California skilled nursing facility Gordon Lane Healthcare,
LLC,
from Aug. 17, 2019, through the date of the final disposition
of
this action pursuant to a Standard Admission Agreement, and
whose
claims are not subject to arbitration because neither the
resident nor the resident's responsible party (as defined in
the
Standard Admission Agreement) agreed to or accepted the
arbitration contract in writing."
Subclass Three: Health & Safety Code Section 1430(b) Violations –
1430(b) Claim Only.
"All persons who resided in (or continue to reside in) the
California skilled nursing facility Gordon Lane Healthcare,
LLC,
from Aug. 17, 2019, through the date of the final disposition
of
this action pursuant to a Standard Admission Agreement,
regardless of the manner in which Defendant was reimbursed for
services, and whose claims are not subject to arbitration
because
neither the resident nor the resident's responsible party (as
defined in the Standard Admission Agreement) agreed to or
accepted the arbitration contract in writing."
On April 12, 2024, the Court held a hearing and heard oral argument
from both parties.
Gordon Lane is a skilled nursing facility.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Yb1PTL at no extra
charge.[CC]
HALO BRANDED: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Chibazakura Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
KEI CHIBAZAKURA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HALO BRANDED SOLUTIONS, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 1:24-cv-03035 (N.D. Ill., April 15, 2024) alleges that the
Defendant failed to properly secure and safeguard the Plaintiff's
and other similarly situated Halo employees' sensitive information,
including name, date of birth, and Social Security number
("personally identifiable information" or "PII").
According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, on November 2023, the
Defendant learned that its computer systems had been penetrated by
a cyberattack. In response, the Defendant launched an investigation
through which the result of its investigation, the Defendant
concluded that Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII was compromised
in the Data Breach.
The Defendant failed to adequately protect Plaintiff's and Class
Members PII––and failed to even encrypt or redact this highly
sensitive information. This unencrypted, unredacted PII was
compromised due to Defendant's negligent and/or careless acts and
omissions and their utter failure to protect employees' sensitive
data. Hackers targeted and obtained Plaintiff's and Class Members'
PII because of its value in exploiting and stealing the identities
of Plaintiff and Class Members. The present and continuing risk to
victims of the Data Breach will remain for their respective
lifetimes, says the suit.
HALO BRANDED SOLUTIONS, INC. provides promotional marketing
products. The Company offers calendars, keychains, tags, novelty
items, toys, personalized bags, drinkware, pens, stationery, and
promotional apparel products. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
Leanna A. Loginov, Esq.
SHAMIS & GENTILE P.A.
14 NE 1st Ave., Suite 705
Miami, FL 33132
Telephone: (305) 479-2299
Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com
lloginov@shamisgentile.com
HILCO REDEVELOPMENT: $12-MM Deal in Little Village Suit Gets OK
----------------------------------------------------------------
Brett Chase, writing for Fox32, reports that thousands of Little
Village residents are eligible for payments after a federal judge
approved a more than $12 million class-action settlement on April
22 for the botched implosion at a former coal plant that left the
community blanketed in dust in 2020.
Hilco Redevelopment and its subcontractors consented to the
settlement, which will thwart potential future lawsuits from those
residents covered by the agreement.
Planning for the implosion of an almost 400-foot smokestack at the
former Crawford power plant failed to contain a massive cloud of
dust that rose when the chimney came crashing down.
One resident, Elizabeth Rodriguez, told U.S. District Judge Young
B. Kim that her husband still has difficulties breathing four years
after the event. She and her family were left out of the agreement
because she was just outside of the agreed boundaries for payouts.
Rodriguez said she lives directly across the street from residents
eligible for payments for either property damage or personal
injury.
Kim told Rodriguez that although she cannot benefit from the
agreement, she is not bound by its restrictions, meaning that she
can individually sue the companies because she's not part of the
class action.
The Easter weekend implosion was a failure of the developer Hilco,
former Mayor Lori Lightfoot said shortly after the incident. Months
later, the city's former inspector general, Joe Ferguson, also
pointed to city officials overseeing the demolition, accusing them
of being "negligent" and showing "incompetence" in their jobs to
protect the public from harm.
The Ferguson report has never been officially released, though the
Sun-Times posted it in full early last year.
Kim Wasserman, executive director of the Little Village
Environmental Justice Organization, said Mayor Brandon Johnson
should officially release the report and explain how any city
employees involved with Crawford planning were reprimanded.
In his report, Ferguson recommended David Graham, a public health
official, be disciplined for his role, including possibly being
fired. Marlene Hopkins, the city's new commissioner for the
Department of Buildings, was also singled out by Ferguson for
discipline.
Lightfoot declined to discipline Hopkins. Graham reportedly
received a written reprimand.
Johnson's representatives didn't respond to requests for comment on
the report or the city officials' roles in the failure.
Hopkins was approved with unanimous City Council support last week.
Council members praised the longtime city employee, including Ald.
Michael Rodriguez (22nd), who represents Little Village.
More than 20,000 residents are expected to receive payouts.
"Our clients held the corporations responsible," said Scott
Rauscher, a lawyer with Loevy & Loevy who represented the
residents. "It's a great result."
Hilco officials declined to comment.
The $12.25 million is considerably larger than penalties Hilco paid
to the state or city over the incident.
Still, Wasserman said the amount is "pennies" to a large developer
like Hilco.
"Many communities have been gearing up to celebrate Earth Day,"
Wasserman said. "For our community, it is a continuation of the
mourning." [GN]
HOME PARTNERS: Seeks May 8 Summary Judgment Reply Extension
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as FRANK RICHMOND, MICHAEL
MCDERMOTT and KELLEY MCDERMOTT, each individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, v. HOME PARTNERS HOLDINGS LLC, HP
WASHINGTON I LLC, HPA BORROWER 2017-1 LLC, and OPVHHJV LLC, d/b/a
PATHLIGHT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, Case No. 3:22-cv-05704-DGE (W.D.
Wash.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order extending the
deadlines for:
-- the Plaintiffs' reply in support of Class April 26,
2024
Certification and response to the motion
to exclude Dr. Kneuper's Expert Testimony
to be filed by:
-- The Defendant's reply in support of summary May 8, 2024
judgment to be filed:
-- The Defendants' Reply in Support of the May 10, 2024
Motion to Exclude Dr. Kneuper's Expert
Testimony to be filed by:
Home Partners operates as a real estate owners and developers.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=9rdDC8 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Anne T. Regan, Esq.
Lindsey L. Larson, Esq.
HELLMUTH & JOHNSON, PLLC
8050 West 78th Street
Edina, MN 55439
Telephone: (952) 941-4005
E-mail: aregan@hjlawfirm.com
llabellelarson@hjlawfirm.com
- and -
Andrew A. Lemmon, Esq.
Scott C. Harris, Esq.
Michael Dunn, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2200
Seattle, WA 98101
E-mail: alemmon@milberg.com
sharris@milberg.com
Michael.dunn@milberg.com
- and -
Susan E. Ellingstad, Esq.
Joseph C. Bourne, Esq.
Eura Chang, Esq.
LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN,
PLLP
100 South Washington Ave, Suite 2200
Minneapolis, MN 55401
E-mail: seellingstad@locklaw.com
jcbourne@locklaw.com
echang@locklaw.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Fred B. Burnside, Esq.
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
920 5th Avenue, Suite 3300
Seattle, WA 98104
E-mail: fredburnside@dwt.com
- and -
Michael F. Cockson, Esq.
Nate Brennaman, Esq.
Carolyn A. Gunkel, Esq.
Diego E. Garcia, Esq.
FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH
LLP
2200 Wells Fargo Center
90 S. 7th Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
E-mail: michael.cockson@faegredrinker.com
nate.brennaman@faegredrinker.com
carolyn.gunkel@faegredrinker.com
diego.garcia@faegredrinker.com
- and -
Robyn Bladow, Esq.
Andrew Bloomer, Esq.
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
555 South Flower Street, Ste. 3700
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 680-8400
Facsimile: (213) 680-8500
E-mail: robyn.bladow@kirkland.com
andrew.bloomer@kirkland.com
HUNTINGTON NATIONAL: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert Bid by Dec. 10
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TERESA KEELING, in her own
right and as representative of a class of persons similarly
situated, v. THE HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK, Case No. 3:23-cv-00352
(S.D.W. Va.), the Hon. Judge Robert Chambers entered an order
amending the Scheduling Order as follows:
The parties shall complete all discovery requests by September 24,
2024, and all depositions for fact discovery by November 8, 2024.
The party bearing the burden of proof on an issue shall make the
disclosures of information required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(A)
and (B) for that issue to all other parties or their counsel no
later than September 10, 2024.
Plaintiffs shall file their motion for class certification by
December 10, 2024. Response in opposition shall be due within 21
days and a reply within 14 days of a response.
All dispositive motions, except those filed under Fed. R. Civ. P.
12(b), together with depositions, admissions, documents, affidavits
or other exhibits, and a memorandum in support of such motions
shall be filed by January 28, 2025.
No later than Nov. 19, 2024, counsel and any unrepresented parties
shall meet to conduct settlement negotiations.
Huntington offers saving accounts, cards, insurance, mortgage, and
treasury management.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 17, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=611XHB at no extra
charge.[CC]
INDEGENE INC: Filing for Class Cert Bids in Progressive Due June 7
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PROGRESSIVE HEALTH AND
REHAB CORP., an Ohio corporation, individually and as the
representative of a class of similarly situated persons, v.
INDEGENE, INC., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-10106-ESK-AMD (D.N.J.),
the Hon. Judge Ann Marie Donio entered a scheduling order as
follows:
1. By no later than April 26, 2024, the parties shall submit a
joint letter setting forth a proposed schedule for the filing
of
dispositive motions, together with supporting case law, as
set
forth on the record on April 17, 2024.
2. Any motion for class certification shall be filed by no later
than June 7, 2024.
Indegene provides marketing products and services.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=vOWBbt at no extra
charge.[CC]
INJURED WORKERS: Fact Discovery in Webb Suit Due Oct. 10
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Webb, et al., v. Injured
Workers Pharmacy, LLC, Case No. 1:22-cv-10797 (D. Mass., Filed May
24, 2022), the Hon. Judge Richard G. Stearns entered an order:
-- All fact discovery must be completed Oct. 10, 2024
no later than:
-- The Plaintiffs shall designate expert(s) Nov. 20, 2024
and serve Rule 26(a)(2) reports no later
than:
-- Defendants expert(s) will be designated Dec. 10, 2024
and Rule 26(a)(2) reports served no
later than:
-- Expert discovery must be completed by: Jan. 10, 2025
-- Dispositive motions (if any) are due by Jan. 31, 2025
The nature of suit Other Statutory Actions.
Injured is a full-service workers' compensation pharmacy.[CC]
INTERLAKE MECALUX: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Billings
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Billings v. Interlake
Mecalux, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-01125-JBM-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.
Interlake provides industrial machinery and equipment.
A copy of the Court's standing order dated April 25, 2024, is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=7NTKWV
at no extra charge.[CC]
ISUZU MOTORS: Faces Potential Class Action Over Suspension Defects
------------------------------------------------------------------
Chamberlains Law Firm is seeking participants to mount a class
action against Isuzu and Mazda for defects contained within the
suspension of the current generation of Isuzu D-Max (RG, 2019 to
present) and MU-X (RJ, 2020 to present) and the current generation
of Mazda BT-50 (TF, 2020 to present).
A alleged flaw in the design of the front suspension of these
vehicles is allegedly leading to 'bump steer', which causes
excessive and premature tyre wear. Drivers of the affected vehicles
are alleged to have been experiencing premature and uneven tyre
wear.
It is alleged that this not only results in a direct cost for the
vehicle owners in having to rotate and replace tyres more
frequently, but this allegedly widespread issue may also impact on
the resale value of the vehicles.
It is alleged that despite this problem being apparent for a number
of years, no permanent fix has been offered by Isuzu or Mazda in
relation to this issue. In the meantime, independent companies are
offering after-market replacement steering knuckles, at a cost of
approximately $3,000 per vehicle.
It is understood the Mazda BT-50 is made with identical design
elements in the same factory in Thailand as the Isuzu D-Max,
following an arrangement made between the motoring industry
heavyweights in 2016.
Mazda and Isuzu are yet to publicly comment on the alleged design
flaw and whether a fix can be expected by impacted customers.
Both the MU-X and D-Max posted record sales figures in Australia in
2023. Over 31,000 D-Max utes and over 14,000 MU-X vehicles were
sold over the same period, smashing Isuzu's historical sales
figures in both those classes, gaining ground against the class
leaders Ford and Toyota.
You can register your interest in the class action with
Chamberlains Law Firm by clicking on the following link, or by
calling Chamberlains on 02 6188 3600:
https://forms.office.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?id=pgexjawfVkC59a7nEsW_d3HXmC5qVfFNvd6Fg5eYMdxUOEpSWkREOTVUQVJXOUYzOE9MWlRZSVdHMS4u
[GN]
JAB EXPRESS: Filing for Class Cert. Bid in Snide Due Sept. 9
------------------------------------------------------------
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 David N. Hurd entered an order granting
letter motion insofar as and to the extent that:
(1) Mandatory mediation shall be May 20, 2024
completed by:
(2) All Discovery shall be completed Aug. 7, 2024
by:
(3) the Class Certification Motion Sept. 9, 2024
shall be filed by:
(4) Dispositive Motions shall be Oct. 16, 2024
filed by:
The nature of suit states labor -- contract.[CC]
JACOBO FARM: Gomez Must File Supplemental Class Cert Briefing
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARISOL GOMEZ,
individually and on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, v. J. JACOBO FARM LABOR CONTRACTOR, INC., Case No.
1:15-cv-01489-JLT-BAM (E.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Jennifer Leigh
Thurston entered an order directing the Plaintiff to file a notice
of suggestion of death on the record, comply with Rule 25 of the
federal rules of civil procedure, and submit supplemental briefing
on the motion for preliminary approval of the class settlement.
The proposed settlement also indicates that if terms "are
materially modified" by the Court, it any party "may declare the
Settlement null and void." The material modifications include those
related to the releases.
Thus, it is unclear if the Court striking the reference to the Fair
Labor Standards Act (FLSA) would render the Settlement null and
void.
1. Class Counsel shall file a notice of suggestion of death on
the
record related to the Plaintiff Ignacio Osorio within 7 days
of
the date of service of this order, and file proof of service
of
the notice upon Osorio's nonparty successor or
representative.
2. Class Counsel shall file supplemental briefing regarding the
release of claims arising under the FLSA within 21 days of
the
date of service of this order. In the alternative, the
parties
may file a stipulation to amend the settlement and strike the
sole mention of the FLSA from the proposed Settlement.
Marisol Gomez and Ignacio Osorio-Cruz initiated this action on
behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, asserting
violations of California wage and hour laws and the federal
Agricultural Workers Protection Act.
Previously, the Court granted a motion for class certification in
part and certified a class and sub-class related to specific claims
raised
in this action. Gomez now seeks preliminary approval of the
settlement agreement. Significantly, in a footnote Gomez notes that
she "remains the only Plaintiff and Class Representative, due to
the passing of Ignacio Osorio." However, this does not satisfy the
requirements of Rule 25(a)(1) for filing a notice of suggestion of
death on the record. Moreover, the parties have not addressed
whether the claims of Osorio survive in this action.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=26Lasw at no extra
charge.[CC]
JIM JUSTICE: Plaintiffs' Bid for Sanctions Nixed
------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JONATHAN R., et al., v.
JIM JUSTICE, et al., Case No. 3:19-cv-00710 (S.D.W. Va.), the Hon.
Judge Cheryl Eifert entered an order denying the Plaintiffs' motion
for sanctions.
Overall, the Court recognizes Plaintiffs' frustration in dedicating
more effort than they believe should have been necessary to obtain
and review these documents.
In addition, the Defendants have a history of being sanctioned for
spoilation of emails in this case. Yet, the record has only shown
that the Defendants made mistakes in preserving and producing
information, not that they have acted in bad faith or disregarded
the Court's orders.
The Defendants have shown good reasons for the mistakes and delays
in producing the sample case files, and all information has been
provided at this juncture with ample time for Plaintiffs and their
experts to review it. Therefore, the Court concludes that sanctions
are not warranted in this instance.
On Sept. 30, 2019, 12 current and former West Virginia foster
children filed a putative class action complaint against the state
officials responsible for administering the West Virginia foster
care system. The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants' system-wide
foster care policies and practices expose them to a substantial
risk of harm in violation of their substantive due process rights
under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The Court certified a General Class consisting of all foster
children who are or will be in the custody of DHHR or its successor
agency. The Court also certified an ADA Subclass, which includes
all members of the General Class who have physical, intellectual,
cognitive, or mental health disabilities, as defined by federal
law.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=wD3ore at no extra
charge.[CC]
JOHN VIRTUSA: Class Cert Bid Filing in Sugg Modified to Oct. 21
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LEO SUGG, v. VIRTUSA, JOHN
DOES 1-10, Case No. 3:18-cv-08036-GC-DEA (D.N.J.), the Hon. Judge
Rukhsanah Singh entered an amended scheduling order as follows:
1. The Plaintiff's initial expert disclosures and reports must
be
served by July 29, 2024.
2. The Defendant's expert disclosures and reports must be served
by
Sept. 27, 2024.
3. The Plaintiff's reply expert disclosures and reports must be
served by Oct. 21, 2024.
4. The deadline to complete fact discovery is Sept. 16, 2024.
5. The close of expert fact discovery is Nov. 15, 2024.
6. Motion for class certification and any dispositive motions
must
be filed by Oct. 21, 2024. Opposition papers must be filed by
Nov. 18, 2024. Reply papers, if any, must be filed by Dec.
13,
2024.
7. The remaining instructions set forth in the Court's Nov. 18,
2019 Order and the Court's Nov. 29, 2023 Scheduling Order
shall
remain in effect.
8. The parties are to submit a joint status report by July 31,
2024.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=nUHRNU at no extra
charge.[CC]
KAISER FOUNDATION: Class Settlement Deal in Shcmitt Gets Final Nod
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANDREA SCHMITT; ELIZABETH
MOHUNDRO; and O.L. by and through her parents, J.L. and K.L., each
on their own behalf, and on behalf of all similarly situated
individuals, v. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN OF WASHINGTON; KAISER
FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN OF WASHINGTON OPTIONS, INC.; KAISER
FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN OF THE NORTHWEST; and KAISER FOUNDATION
HEALTH PLAN, INC., Case No. 2:17-cv-01611-RSL (W.D. Wash.), the
Hon. Judge Robert Lasnik entered an order as follows:
1. The Settlement Agreement is approved as fair, reasonable, and
adequate under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, and its terms shall bind
all
class members, with the exception of the five class members
who
timely opted out;
2. Class counsel is awarded 33 1/3% of the gross amount of the
Settlement Fund ($3,000,000) created in this matter as
attorney
fees. Such fees ($1,000,000) shall be paid from the common
Settlement Fund.
3. Class counsel be reimbursed $374,137.63 in costs to be paid
from
the common Settlement Fund.
4. The Claims Processor is ordered to accept, adjudicate, and
pay
all late-filed claims and emailed claims received by May 4,
2024, as if the claims were timely received.
5. The Claims Processor is ordered to make payments and
distribute
checks to class members and the named plaintiffs in
accordance
with the Agreement and this Order, as approved by the Claims
Processor or on appeal by the Arbitrator, in whole or in part
based upon the distributions to be made. These amounts are
authorized to be paid from the Settlement Fund.
6. Class Representatives Andrea Schmitt, Elizabeth Mohundro, and
O.L., by and through their parents J.L. and K.L., are awarded
$15,000 each, or $45,000 total, as case contribution awards,
to
be paid from the common Settlement Fund.
7. Class counsel is ordered to submit a Final Report in
accordance
with the Agreement and this Order.
8. Upon Kaiser’s payment of the Settlement Amount minus
deduction
of the amount previously paid by Kaiser pursuant to Section
6.2.1 of the Settlement Agreement, the parties shall file a
request that this matter be dismissed with prejudice.
On Dec. 11, 2023, this Court certified a settlement class and
preliminarily approved an agreement for a class-wide settlement of
claims against the Defendants.
A total of 913 unique claims were received by the Claims Processor
by
April 4, 2024. The total value of these claims, after Epiq's
initial review, is $2,695,629.29.
Kaiser operates as a non-profit health care organization.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=9G8QRC at no extra
charge.[CC]
KEENAN & ASSOCIATES: Heinz Suit Removed to C.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------
The case styled BRIAN HEINZ, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. KEENAN & ASSOCIATES, Case No.
24STCV03227, was removed from the Los Angeles Superior Court to the
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on March
1, 2024.
The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 2:24-cv-01735-MCS-DTB to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and
safeguard the personally identifiable information of the Plaintiff
and similarly situated individuals stored within its system
following a data breach.
Keenan & Associates is a privately held insurance consulting and
brokerage firm based in Torrance, California. [BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
John A. Vogt, Esq.
Ryan D. Ball, Esq.
Matthew T. Billeci, Esq.
JONES DAY
3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 851-3939
Facsimile: (949) 553-7539
Email: javogt@jonesday.com
rball@jonesday.com
mbilleci@jonesday.com
KINDER MORGAN: Continues to Defend ERISA Class Suit in Texas
------------------------------------------------------------
Kinder Morgan Inc. disclosed in its form 10-Q Report for quarterly
period ending March 31, 2024 filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on April 19, 2024, that the Company continues to defend
itself from ERISA class suit in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Texas.
On February 22, 2021, Kinder Morgan Retirement Plan A participants
Curtis Pedersen and Beverly Leutloff filed a purported class action
lawsuit under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
(ERISA).
The named plaintiffs were hired initially by the ANR Pipeline
Company (ANR) in the late 1970s.
Following a series of corporate acquisitions, plaintiffs became
participants in pension plans sponsored by the Coastal Corporation
(Coastal), El Paso Corporation (El Paso) and our company by virtue
of our acquisition of El Paso in 2012 and our assumption of certain
of El Pas's pension plan obligations.
The complaint, which was transferred to the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of Texas (Civil Action No. 4:21-3590) and
later amended to include the Kinder Morgan Retirement Plan B,
alleges that the series of foregoing transactions resulted in
changes to plaintiffs’ retirement benefits which are now
contested on a class-wide basis in the lawsuit.
The complaint asserts six claims that fall within three primary
theories of liability. Claims I, II, and III all challenge plan
provisions which are alleged to constitute impermissible
"backloading" or "cutback" of benefits, and seek the same plan
modification as to how the plans calculate benefits for former
participants in the Coastal plan.
Claims IV and V allege that former participants in the ANR plans
should be eligible for unreduced benefits at younger ages than the
plans currently provide.
Claim VI asserts that actuarial assumptions used to calculate
reduced early retirement benefits for current or former ANR
employees are outdated and therefore unreasonable.
On February 8, 2024, the Court certified a class defined as any and
all persons who participated in the Kinder Morgan Retirement Plan A
or B who are current or former employees of ANR or Coastal, and
participated in the El Paso pension plan after El Paso acquired
Coastal in 2001, and are members of at least one of three
subclasses of individuals who are allegedly due benefits under one
or more of the six claims asserted in the complaint.
Plaintiffs seek to recover early retirement benefits as well as
declaratory and injunctive relief, but have not pleaded, disclosed
or otherwise specified a calculation of alleged damages.
The extent of potential plan liabilities for past or future
benefits, if any, remains to be determined in connection with
pending cross motions for summary judgment on the question of
liability or a bench trial scheduled to begin on August 5, 2024
with respect to any claims not resolved on summary judgment.
The Company believes it has numerous and substantial defenses and
intend to vigorously defend this case.
KING COUNTY, WA: Class Cert. Bid in Tucker Due March 31, 2025
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MALIK TUCKER and REGINALD
WILLIAMS, v. KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, Case No. 2:24-cv-00002-RAJ
(W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Richard Jones entered a scheduling
order as follows:
Event Date
Fact Discovery Deadline: Nov. 30, 2024
Expert Report(s) for Party Bearing Dec. 31, 2024
Burden of Proof:
Responsive Expert Report(s) Due: Jan. 31, 2025
Expert Discovery Deadline: Feb. 28, 2025
Class Certification Motion: March 31, 2025
A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=moa2bj at no extra
charge.[CC]
KNOX COUNTY, IL: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Hans Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Hans v. Sheriff of Knox
County et al., Case No. 4:24-cv-04037-JES-JEH (C.D. Ill.), the Hon.
Judge Jonathan E. Hawley entered a standing order as follows:
-- Rule 16 scheduling conference
The Court will set a Rule 16 scheduling conference
approximately
30 days after the answer or other responsive pleading is
filed.
The conference will generally be conducted by telephone.
-- Discovery plan
The discovery plan shall be filed with the Court at least
three
calendar days before the Rule 16 scheduling conference.
-- Waiver of the Rule 16 scheduling conference
If the parties agree on all matters contained in the
discovery
plan, then the parties may waive the Rule 16 scheduling
conference. To do so, the parties shall indicate in the
discovery that the parties agree upon all maters contained
within the discovery plan, and they request that the Rule 16
scheduling conference be cancelled.
-- Failure of counsel to attend a scheduled telephone hearing
For the convenience of counsel, the Court conducts most
hearings
by telephone when possible. Counsel's failure to appear for a
telephone hearing will be treated as a failure of counsel to
appear for an in-person hearing.
-- Discovery disputes brought to the Court's attention after the
discovery deadline has already passed
The parties may not raise a discovery dispute with the Court
after the relevant discovery deadline has passed; all
discovery
disputes must be brought to the Court's attention before the
relevant discovery deadline passes. Any discovery disputes
raised with the Court after the expiration of the relevant
discovery deadline shall be deemed waived by the Court, even
if
the parties agreed to conduct discovery after the relevant
discovery deadline has passed. If the parties agree to
conduct
discovery after the expiration of a deadline set by the
Court,
they must still file a motion requesting that the Court move
that deadline as agreed by the parties in order to avoid any
subsequent discovery disputes being deemed waived.
-- Settlement conferences and mediation
The parties are encouraged to seek a settlement conference or
mediation with a magistrate judge. Where parties request a
settlement conference or mediation in a case referred to
Judge
Hawley, Judge Hawley will conduct said conference or
mediation.
Galesburg is the county seat of Knox County and the principal city
of the Galesburg Micropolitan Statistical Area.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=xHXXeB at no extra
charge.[CC]
KOBE JAPANESE: Jiang Suit Seeks to Certify FLSA Collective Action
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHUN LIN JIANG, on his own
behalf and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. KOBE JAPANESE
STEAKHOUSE, INC. f/k/a Tokyo Steak Hose Inc d/b/a Tokyo Japanese
Steak House; TOKYO II STEAK HOUSE, INC. d/b/a Tokyo Japanese Steak
House; and GUANGLONG LIN a/k/a Guang Long Lin a/k/a David Lin, Case
No. 1:22-cv-11867-FDS (D. Mass.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to
enter an order:
(1) granting collective action status, under the Fair Labor
Standards Act ("FLSA"), 29 U.S.C. section 216(b);
(2) ordering the Defendants within 14 days of the entry of this
Order to produce an Excel spreadsheet containing first and
last
name, last known address with apartment number (if
applicable),
the last known telephone numbers, last known e-mail
addresses,
WhatsApp, WeChat ID and/or FaceBook usernames (if
applicable),
and work location, dates of employment and position of all
current and former non-exempt and non-managerial employees
employed at any time from Nov. 2, 2019 (three years prior to
the filing of the Complaint) to the date when the Court so-
orders the Notice of Pendency and Consent to Join Form or
the
date when Defendants provide the name list, whichever is
later;
(3) authorizing that notice of this matter be disseminated, in
any
relevant language via mail, email, text message, website or
social media messages, chats, or posts, to all members of
the
putative class within 21 days after receipt of a complete
and
accurate Excel spreadsheet with affidavit from the
Defendants
certifying that the list is complete and from existing
employment records;
(4) authorizing an opt-in period of 90 days from the day of
dissemination of the notice and its translation;
(5) authorizing the Plaintiff to publish the full opt-in notice
on
the Plaintiffs' counsel's website;
Kobe is a Japanese restaurant and events catering services.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 19, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=b1EPdW at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Tiffany Troy, Esq.
TROY LAW, PLLC
41-25 Kissena Boulevard Suite 110
Flushing, NY 11355
Telephone: (718) 762-1324
L&J TRANSPORTATION: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Perry Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------
DORYAL PERRY, individually and on behalf all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. L&J TRANSPORTATION COMPANIES, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 2:24-cv-01538 (E.D. Pa., April 14, 2024) seeks
to recover from the Defendant unpaid wages and overtime
compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and
costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Plaintiff Perry was employed by the Defnedant as a delivery
driver.
L&J TRANSPORTATION COMPANIES, INC. provides transportation
services. The Company offers logistics, warehousing, distribution,
freight forwarding, brokerage, storage, and cargo services. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Sarah Schalman-Bergen, Esq.
LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
729 Boylston Street, Ste. 2000
Boston, MA 02116
Telephone: (267) 256-9973
Email: ssb@llrlaw.com
- and -
Harold L. Lichten, Esq.
Olena Savytska, Esq.
LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
729 Boylston Street, Ste. 2000
Boston, MA 02116
Telephone: (617) 994-5800
Facsimile: (617) 994-5801
Email: hlichten@llrlaw.com
osavytska@llrlaw.com
- and -
Ravi Sattiraju, Esq.
SATTIRAJU & THARNEY, LLP
50 Millstone Road
Building 300, Suite 202
East Windsor, NJ 08520
Telephone: (609) 469-2110
Email: rsattiraju@s-tlawfirm.com
LEE'S HOUSE: Plaintiff Must file Class Cert Reply Brief
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MIN HUI LIN, on his own
behalf and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. LEE'S HOUSE
RESTAURANT, INC., SEN LIN, BAIQUN LIN, Case No. 2:23-cv-03111-MMB
(E.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Michael M. Baylson entered an order
that:
1. The Plaintiff may file a reply brief in support of the Motion
to
Certify the Class within seven (7) days.
2. If the Plaintiff wishes the Court to act on any discovery
disputes, a motion to compel must also be filed within seven
(7)
days and the Defendant must answer within seven (7) days.
3. The Court will have argument on the Motion for Class
Certification, including the request for additional
discovery,
on Monday, May 13, 2024 at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 3A.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ndmtQH at no extra
charge.[CC]
LEGACY INC: Elson Sues Over Fraud Violations in D. Minnesota
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Legacy, Inc. The case
is captioned as STEVE ELSON, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, v. LEGACY, INC., Case No.
0:24-cv-00643-ECT-ECW (D. Minn., March 1, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged fraud violations.
Legacy, Inc. is a company that offers a wide range of rare and
exquisite coins based in Minnesota. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bryan L. Bleichner, Esq.
Christopher P. Renz, Esq.
Jeffrey D. Bores, Esq.
Chestnut Cambronne PA
100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 1700
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Telephone: (612) 339-7300
Facsimile: (612) 336-2940
Email: bbleichner@chestnutcambronne.com
crenz@chestnutcambronne.com
jbores@chestnutcambronne.com
LEOPOLD & ASSOCIATES: Cabrera FDCPA Suit Removed to D. New Jersey
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled MARILUX CABRERA, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. LEOPOLD & ASSOCIATES, LLC a/k/a
LEOPOLD & ASSOCIATES, PLLC; and JOHN DOES 1 to 10, Case No.
ESX-L-00793-24, was removed from the Superior Court of New Jersey,
Law Division, Essex County, to the U.S. District Court for the
District of New Jersey on March 6, 2024.
The Clerk of Court for the District of New Jersey assigned Case No.
2:24-cv-01707-JKS-JSA to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendants' alleged violation of the Fair
Debt Collection Practices Act by making attempts to collect
consumer debts on behalf of debt buyers who operate unlawfully
without a license under the New Jersey Consumer Finance Licensing
Act, thereby misrepresenting the amount of the debt and attempting
to collect amounts not permitted by law.
Leopold & Associates, LLC, also known as Leopold & Associates,
PLLC, is a law firm in New York. [BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Robert A. Berns, Esq.
KAUFMAN DOLOWICH, LLP
Court Plaza North
25 Main Street, Suite 500
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 488-6655
LIBERTY MUTUAL: Sends Unsolicited Text Messages, Ward Suit Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ADAM WARD, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant,
Case No. 1:24-cv-10526-MJJ (D. Mass., March 1, 2024) is a class
action against the Defendant for violations of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).
The case arises from the Defendant's practice of sending
unsolicited text messages to consumers, including the Plaintiff, in
an attempt to promote its products or services without obtaining
prior consent in violation of the TCPA.
Liberty Mutual Insurance Company is an insurance provider, with
headquarters located in Boston, Massachusetts. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Craig Thor Kimmel, Esq.
Jacob U. Ginsburg, Esq.
KIMMEL & SILVERMAN, P.C.
30 East Butler Ave.
Ambler, PA 19002
Telephone: (215) 540-8888
Facsimile: (877) 788-2864
Email: kimmel@creditlaw.com
jginsburg@creditlaw.com
LINCOLN NATIONAL: Meade Files Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. Pa.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP ("GPM") announces that it has filed a
class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania, captioned Meade v. Lincoln
National Corporation, et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-01704, on behalf of
persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Lincoln
National Corporation ("Lincoln National" or the "Company") (NYSE:
LNC) securities between November 4, 2020 and November 2, 2022,
inclusive (the "Class Period"). Plaintiff pursues claims under
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the "Exchange Act").
Investors are hereby notified that they have 60 days from the date
of this notice to move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff in this
action.
If you suffered a loss on your Lincoln National investments or
would like to inquire about potentially pursuing claims to recover
your loss under the federal securities laws, you can submit your
contact information at
www.glancylaw.com/cases/Lincoln-National-Corporation/. You can also
contact Pavithra Rajesh, of GPM at 310-201-9150, Toll-Free at
888-773-9224, or via email at shareholders@glancylaw.com or visit
our website at www.glancylaw.com to learn more about your rights.
On November 2, 2022, after the market closed, Lincoln National
released its third quarter 2022 financial results, reporting a net
loss of $2.6 billion for the quarter. This was compared to a net
income of $318 million for the third quarter of 2021 the previous
year. The Company explained "[t]he current quarter's adjusted
operating results included net unfavorable notable items of $2.0
billion, or $11.62 per share, related to the company's annual
review of DAC and reserve assumptions." The Company also disclosed
that it "incurred a $634 million goodwill impairment to the life
insurance business."
On this news, Lincoln's stock price fell $17.27, or 33.2%, to close
at $34.83 per share on November 3, 2022, on unusually heavy trading
volume.
The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout
the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or
misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material
adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and
prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to
investors:
(1) that the Company was experiencing a decline in its VUL
business;
(2) that, as a result, the goodwill associated with the life
insurance business was overstated;
(3) that, as a result, the Company's policy lapse assumptions
were outdated;
(4) that, as a result, the Company's reserves were overstated;
(5) that, as a result, the Company's reported financial
results and financial statements were misstated; and
(6) 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.
If you purchased or otherwise acquired Lincoln National securities
during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than 60
days from the date of this notice to ask the Court to appoint you
as lead plaintiff. To be a member of the Class you need not take
any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or
take no action and remain an absent member of the Class. If you
wish to learn more about this action, or if you have any questions
concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with
respect to these matters, please contact Pavithra Rajesh, Esquire,
of GPM, 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles California
90067 at 310-201-9150, Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, by email to
shareholders@glancylaw.com, or visit our website at
www.glancylaw.com. If you inquire by email please include your
mailing address, telephone number and number of shares purchased.
This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some
jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. [GN]
LINKEDIN CORPORATION: Class Cert Bid Filing Due Jan. 9, 2025
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TODD CROWDER, et al., v.
LINKEDIN CORPORATION, Case No. 4:22-cv-00237-HSG (N.D. Cal.), the
Hon. Judge Haywood Gilliam, Jr. entered an order setting the
following deadlines pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16
and Civil Local Rule 16-10:
Event Deadline
Deadline for Defendant to answer First May 3, 2024
Amended Complaint:
Deadline for Plaintiff's class certification Jan. 9, 2025
expert disclosures and class certification
motion:
Deadline for Defendant's class certification Feb. 6, 2025
expert disclosures and opposition to class
certification motion:
Deadline for Plaintiff's class certification Feb. 27, 2025
reply expert disclosures and class
certification reply brief:
Deadline to depose experts: March 13, 2025
Deadline to file class Daubert motions: March 20, 2025
Deadline for opposition to class Daubert March 27, 2025
motions (no replies permitted):
Hearing on class certification and class: April 10, 2025,
at
2:00pm.
LinkedIn is a business and employment-focused social media platform
that works through websites and mobile apps.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=sfYshX at no extra
charge.[CC]
LINOBGHK LLC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Becerra Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------
ROBERTO BECERRA; and MIGUEL VIVAR, individually and on behalf of
all other similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. LINOBGHK, LLC d/b/a The
Healthy Kitchen; and MARK SMITH, Defendants, Case No.
1:24-cv-02752-OEM-VMS (E.D.N.Y., April 12, 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.
Plaintiffs Becerra and Vivar were employed by the Defendants as a
dishwasher and as a chef, respectively.
LINOBGHK, LLC d/b/a The Healthy Kitchen operates as a preparation
and delivery meal service company in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael Samuel, Esq.
THE SAMUEL LAW FIRM
1441 Broadway Suite 6085
New York, NY 10018
Telephone: (212) 563-9884
Email: michael@thesamuellawfirm.com
LITTLE CAESAR: Parties Seek Dec. 30 Extension for Class Cert Filing
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSE CUEVAS, on behalf of
himself, all others similarly situated, and on behalf of the
general public, v. LITTLE CAESAR ENTERPRISES, INC.; and DOES
through 10, inclusive, Case No. 3:23-cv-03166-RFL (N.D. Cal.), the
Parties ask the Court to enter an order to extending the case
schedule as follows:
1. ADR Deadline: Sept. 23, 2024
2. Motion for Class Certification due by Dec. 30, 2024
3. Responses due by Jan. 27, 2025
4. Replies due by Feb. 17, 2025
5. Motion for Class Certification Hearing set for Apr. 18, 2025
The Plaintiff filed a class action Complaint on May 12, 2023, in
Santa
Clara County Superior Court and Defendant removed the action to the
Northern District of California on June 26, 2023.
On Oct. 10, 2023, after an initial Case Management Conference, the
Court (J. Chhabria) scheduled dates related to the Plaintiff's
motion for Class Certification.
On Jan. 23, 2024, the Parties submitted a stipulation requesting a
modification of the Plaintiff's motion for Class Certification
because they were in the process of attempting to schedule private
mediation to meet the June 5, 2024 ADR deadline.
On March 6, 2024, after the Court further extended the deadline to
schedule private mediation to March 6, 2024, the Parties informed
the Court that they had scheduled private mediation with Jeffrey
Ross for May 22, 2024.
Little Caesar is an American multinational chain of pizza
restaurants
A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=yzZFxX at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark Yablonovich, Esq.
Monica Balderrama, Esq.
Tony Roberts, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF MARK YABLONOVICH
9595 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 900
Beverly Hills, CA 90212-2511
Telephone: (310) 286-0246
Facsimile: (310) 407-5391
E-mail: Mark@Yablonovichlaw.com
Monica@Yablonovichlaw.com
Tony@Yablonovichlaw.com
- and -
Bevin Allen Pike, Esq.
Daniel Jonathan, Esq.
Trisha K. Monesi, Esq.
CAPSTONE LAW APC
1875 Century Park East, Suite 1000
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 556-4811
Facsimile: (310) 943-0396
E-mail: Bevin.Pike@capstonelawyers.com
Daniel.Jonathan@capstonelawyers.com
Trisha.Monesi@capstonelawyers.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Ellen M. Bronchetti, Esq.
Priya E. Singh, Esq.
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
101 Second Street, Suite 2200
San Francisco, California 94105
Telephone: (415) 655-1300
E-mail: Ellen.bronchetti@gtlaw.com
Priya.singh@gtlaw.com
LOCUST MEDICAL: Class Cert Bid Reply Extended to May 3
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GERARD JACKSON, v. LOCUST
MEDICAL, LLC, Case No. 4:22-cv-00424-MWB (M.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge
Matthew W. Bran entered an order granting Plaintiff's motion for
extension of time to file a reply to motion for class certification
and motion to amend, of until May 3, 2024.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=uybazc at no extra
charge.[CC]
LUCKY ELEPHANT: Fact Discovery in Luis Class Suit Due August 15
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KEVIN YAN LUIS, v. LUCKY
ELEPHANT COUTURE LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-09982-PAE-GS (S.D.N.Y.), the
Hon. Judge Gary Stein entered civil case management plan and
scheduling order as follows:
-- All fact discovery shall be completed by: Aug. 15, 2024
-- Initial requests for production May 17, 2024
were / shall be served by:
-- Expert discovery shall be completed by: Sept. 29,
2024
A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=BmKGHP at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Noor A. Saab Esq.
THE LAW OFFICE OF NOOR A. SAAB
380 North Broadway, Penthouse West
Jericho, NY 11753
Telephone: (718) 740-5060
E-mail: NoorASaabLaw@Gmail.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Michael Samuel, Esq.
THE SAMUEL LAW FIRM
1441 Broadway, Suite 6085
New York, NY 10018
Telephone: (212) 563-9884
E-mail: michael@thesamuellawfirm.com
LUXURY BRAND: Class Action Settlement in Henning Gets Initial Nod
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ELLA HENNING, et al., v.
LUXURY BRAND PARTNERS, LLC, Case No. 3:22-cv-07011-TLT (N.D. Cal.),
the Hon. Judge Trina Thompson entered an order granting motion for
preliminary approval of class action settlement as follows:
-- Class data to be provided to Settlement May 21, 2024
Administrator:
-- Class Notice to be sent by: June 3, 2024
-- Class Counsel to file their motion for Aug. 2, 2024
fees and costs and Class Representative
awards:
-- Motion for Final Approval to be filed by: Aug. 2, 2024
-- Postmark deadline to submit objection or Sept. 6, 2024
request for exclusion:
-- Class counsel and settlement administrator Oct. 18, 2024
to submit supplemental statements regarding
status of notice:
The Plaintiffs filed the putative class action complaint on Nov. 8,
2022, against Luxury Brand. The pleadings allege that the
defendants purchased "adulterated" IGK products containing more of
the highly carcinogenic chemical benzene (2.49 ppm) than allowed by
U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
The Settlement Agreement defines the class as:
"All persons in the United States, who, during the Class Period,
purchased one or more of the IGK Products for personal, family,
or
household use and not for resale. Excluded from the Settlement
Class are (a) all persons who are employees, directors,
officers,
and agents of [Luxury Brand Partners], or its subsidiaries and
affiliated companies; (b) persons or entities who purchased the
IGK
Products primarily for the purposes of resale to consumers or
other
resellers; (c) governmental entities; and (d) the Court, the
Court's immediate family, and Court staff."
Luxury develops and manufactures personal care products.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=pc2Qms at no extra
charge.[CC]
LX HAUSYS: Torres Bid to Revise Pretrial Deadlines Partly OK'd
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SINUHE CABRERA TORRES and
PEDRO DOMINGUEZ BALDERAS, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated, v. LX HAUSYS AMERICA, INC.; CL GLOBAL, LLC;
andTOTAL EMPLOYEE SOLUTION SUPPORT, LLC, Case No.
1:24-cv-01283-MLB-RDC (N.D. Ga.), the Hon. Judge Regina Cannon
entered an order granting in part Plaintiffs and LXHA's motion to
revise certain pretrial deadlines.
1. LXHA must respond to the complaint on or before June 10,
2024.
2. If LXHA moves to dismiss the complaint under Rule 12(b),
then:
3. Within 14 days after briefing on all Rule 12(b) motions to
dismiss (whether filed by LXHA or other Defendants) is
complete,
lead counsel for all parties who have made an appearance must
meet and confer to discuss possible settlement.
4. The parties must hold their Rule 26(f) planning conference
within 21 days after all live Defendants have filed their
answers or defaulted.
5. The parties must file their Joint Preliminary Report and
Discovery Plan and serve their initial disclosures within 21
days after the Rule 26(f) conference.
6. The Plaintiffs must move for class certification within 60
days
after all live Defendants have filed their answers or
defaulted.
This is an employment-discrimination class action LX Hausys
manufactures and markets building materials.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=08Svqz at no extra
charge.[CC]
MARIANI PACKING: Diesel Class Cert Bid Filing for MMPA Claims OK'd
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KIMBERLY DIESEL,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
MARIANI PACKING COMPANY, INC., Case No. 4:22-cv-01368-AGF (E.D.
Mo.), the Hon. Judge Audrey Fleissig entered an order:
-- Granting the Plaintiff's motion for class certification for
claims
under the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act (MMPA);
-- Appointing the named Plaintiff Kimberly Diesel as Class
Representatives to represent the MMPA Class, defined as
follows:
"All persons who purchased the Vanilla Yogurt Raisins in
seven-
ounce packages sold by the Defendant in Missouri between Nov.
14,
2017, through present, excluding the judge or magistrate
assigned
to this case; Defendant; any entity in which Defendant has a
controlling interest; Defendant's officers, directors, legal
representatives, successors, and assigns; and person who
purchased
the Product for the purpose of resale"; and
-- Appointing Daniel F. Harvath of Harvath Law Group, LLC, 75 W
Lockwood Ave Ste 1, Webster Groves, Missouri 63119 as Class
Counsel.
The parties shall meet and confer and within 14 days of this order
submit a joint proposed order regarding notice in accordance with
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B).
On Feb. 7, 2024, the Court ordered the parties to provide
supplemental briefing regarding the impact of the MMPA's 2020
Amendments on class
certification.
The Plaintiff filed this putative class-action complaint alleging
breach of express warranty and violations under the MMPA. She
alleges that the Defendant misled customers by under-filling their
seven ounce bag of Mariani Premium Vanilla Yogurt Raisins (the
"Product"), such that the package is only filled to 42% capacity
with Vanilla Yogurt Raisins, and contains 58% empty space. In other
words, the Plaintiff alleges that the Product contains excessive
slack fill.
The Plaintiff alleges that she purchased the Product at locations
including Dierbergs in St. Louis, Missouri in or around October
2022.
Mariani is a food production company that offers dried fruits
packaging services.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=pQEHtA at no extra
charge.[CC]
MARK CUBAN: Seeks Denial of Karnas Class Cert Bid
--------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DOMINIK KARNAS, et al., v.
MARK CUBAN, et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-22538-RKA (S.D. Fla.), the
Defendants request that the Court deny Plaintiffs' Motion and
decline to certify any class.
No class should be certified, but if the Court considers redefining
the class, it should at minimum exclude those that suffered no harm
due to Defendants’ conduct, the Plaintiffs contend.
Thus, in the alternative, Defendants propose a class definition of:
All persons or entities in the United States who:
1. Opened a Voyager EPA using the MAVS100 promotional code
between
October 27, 2021, and October 29, 2021;
2. Made an initial deposit of $100, and an initial investment in
an
asset listed on the Voyager Earn Program of an amount greater
than the minimum threshold balance;
3. Held that threshold balance for the requisite period to earn
a
reward from Voyager, and
4. Did not recover the entirety of that initial investment as a
result of Voyager’s bankruptcy.
The Plaintiffs moved for class certification on March 15, 2024, and
proposed two classes:
A "security class" of "All persons or entities in the United
States who, from applicable statutes of limitation through July 5,
2022, purchased, repurchased, invested, reinvested, deposited, held
and/or transferred additional funds to an EPA and/or purchased,
repurchased,
invested, and/or reinvested in VGX Tokens."
and a "solicitation class" of "All persons or entities in the
United States who, from October 27, 2021, through July 5, 2022,
purchased, repurchased, invested, reinvested, deposited, held
and/or transferred additional funds to an EPA and/or purchased,
repurchased, invested,
and/or reinvested in VGX Tokens."
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=x8GNSC at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Christopher E. Knight, Esq.
Esther E. Galicia, Esq.
Alexandra L. Tifford, Esq.
FOWLER WHITE BURNETT, P.A.
Brickell Arch, Fourteenth Floor
1395 Brickell Avenue
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 789-9200
Facsimile: (305) 789-9201
E-mail: cknight@fowler-white.com
egalicia@fowler-white.com
atifford@fowler-white.com
- and –
Paul C. Huck, Jr., Esq.
LAWSON HUCK GONZALEZ, PLLC
334 Minorca Avenue
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Telephone: (850) 825-4334
E-mail: paul@lawsonhuckgonzalez.com
- and –
Stephen A. Best, Esq.
Rachel O. Wolkinson, Esq.
Daniel L. Sachs, esq.
Jonathan D. White, Esq.
BROWN RUDNICK LLP
601 Thirteenth Street, N.W., Suite 600
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 536-1737
Facsimile: (202) 536-1701
E-mail: sbest@brownrudnick.com
rwolkinson@brownrudnick.com
dsachs@brownrudnick.com
jwhite@brownrudnick.com
MARLOU CORP: Parties Seek More Time for Class Cert Response
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LINDA WHEELER and KARISSA
ANN HUGH, individually, and on behalf of similarly situated
individuals, v. MARLOU CORPORATION d/b/a CLUB PLATINUM, a Nevada
corporation, and RITA CAPOVILLA, Case No. 2:23-cv-01556-APG-BNW (D.
Nev.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order extending the
time for the Defendants to file a response to the Motion for
conditional certification from the current deadline of April 24,
2024, up to and including May 8, 2024.
Club platinum is a premium nightclub.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 24, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=xLdM4L at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Matthew Thomson, Esq.
Adelaide Pagano, Esq.
LITCHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, PC
729 Boylston St 2000
Boston, MA 02116
Telephone: (617) 994-5800
- and -
Kristina L. Hillman, Esq.
Sean W. McDonald, Esq.
WEINBERG, ROGER, ROSENFELD, P.C.
1001 Marina Village Parkway. Suite 200
Alameda, CA 94501
The Defendants are represented by:
Laurent R.G. Badoux, Esq.
Kelsey E. Stegall, Esq.
Emil S. Kim, Esq.
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
Camelback Esplanade
2425 East Camelback Road, Suite 900
Phoenix, AZ 85016
Telephone: (602) 474-3600
Facsimile: (602) 957-1801
E-mail: lbadoux@littler.com
kstegall@littler.com
ekim@littler.com
MAUREEN CORCORAN: Plaintiff Seeks Notice of Putative Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Alfar Kynwulf, V. Maureen
Corcoran, et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-00213-SDM-CMV (S.D. Ohio), the
Plaintiff files notice of putative class action possibility.
The facts common to the Class may possibly include the fact that
the Ohio Department of Medicaid and or the Ohio Department of Jobs
and Family Services may inappropriately enroll the elderly or
disabled into the Medicaid program in an effort to subject them to
the mandates of the Medicaid Estate Recovery to later confiscate
their estates after death.
On March 17, 2024, Amanda Seitz, Associated Press reported,
published an article entitled, "State Medicaid offices target dead
people’s homes to recoup their health care costs."
https://apnews.com/article/medicaid- estate- recovery- nursing-
homes-65d5e637e19dc27bd1bd3b097d239b53. In this article it is clear
that many elderly and or family are unfamiliar with the provisions
of the medicaid Estate Recovery, and or that they did not
knowingly, intelligently nor voluntarily consent to the provisions
of the
Medicaid Estate Recovery, due most likely to a failure to properly
inform or verbally communicate these matters to reciepients for
proper understanding.
At least one Democratic lawmaker has introduced a bill entitled
"Stop
Unfair Medicaid Recoveries Act of 2024" to prevent the uninformed
act of confiscation of homes after death permitted by the Medicaid
Estate
Recovery.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 25, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=edyvQ9 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Alfar Kynwulf, Esq.
2107 Dixie Hwy
Hamilton, OH 45011
Telephone: (513) 668- 7215
E-mail: ancestral.ways@aol.com
ME&I CONSTRUCTION: Stock Seeks to Certify Class of Employees
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WALTER STOCK, III, v. ME&I
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES USA, INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-00064-MRH (W.D.
Pa.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting
motion to certify lawsuit as a class action pursuant to Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and (b)(3).
The proposed class is defined as follows:
"All individuals who, during any time since Feb. 7, 2019, were
employed by the Defendant as hourly craft workers at the
petrochemical facility located in Monaca, PA."
-- appointing the undersigned law firms to serve as Class Counsel,
and
-- approving both (i) the "Notice of Class Action Lawsuit" form
attached as Exhibit A and (ii) the class notice protocols and
procedures detailed in paragraph 4 of the accompanying proposed
order.
ME&I is a full-service maintenance and construction services
company.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 19, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=8UrPxQ at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Peter Winebrake, Esq.
R. Andrew Santillo, Esq.
WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC
715 Twining Road, Suite 211
Dresher, PA 19025
Telephone: (215) 884-2491
Facsimile: (215) 884-2492
E-mail: pwinebrake@winebrakelaw.com
asantillo@winebrakelaw.com
- and -
Timothy Conboy, Esq.
CONBOY LAW, LLC
733 Washington Road, Suite 201
Pittsburgh, PA 15228
Telephone: (412) 343-9060
Facsimile: (412) 343-9062
E-mail: tim@conboylaw.com
ME&I CONSTRUCTION: Stock Seeks to Seal Class Cert Documents
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WALTER STOCK, III, v. ME&I
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES USA, INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-00064-MRH (W.D.
Pa.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order to seal
documents referenced in the Plaintiff's motion for class
certification.
Consistent with the Parties' protective order, the Plaintiff
requests the Court to allow it to file these documents under seal.
However, if the Court believes that more justification is needed as
to why Exhibits D-E and H should be sealed, the Plaintiff would
request that the Court so indicate and presumably the Defendant or
Great Arrow Builders, LLC will file any supplemental briefing in
support of its position.
On April 19, 2024, the Plaintiff filed his "Motion for Class
Certification."
As part of Plaintiff’s Motion, the Plaintiff references Exhibit
D, E, and H which consist of documents produced in discovery by the
Defendant or third parties to this litigation. Specifically, these
documents consist of the following:
a. Exhibit D - Great Arrow Builders LLC Offsite Parking &
Transport
(Mar. 1, 2019);
b. Exhibit E - Loaned Personnel Agreement; and
c. Exhibit H - Great Arrow Builders LLC Project Work Rules.1
These documents have been labeled as "Confidential" pursuant to the
July 20, 2023 Protective Order, and have not been previously
publicly
filed by the producing parties in this case. As a result, the
Plaintiff is prohibited from filing the documents publicly, and
seeks leave from this Court to file them under seal pursuant to
Local Rule 5.2(H).
ME&I is a full-service maintenance and construction services
company.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 19, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=RQvXUs at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Peter Winebrake, Esq.
R. Andrew Santillo, Esq.
WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC
715 Twining Road, Suite 211
Dresher, PA 19025
Telephone: (215) 884-2491
Facsimile: (215) 884-2492
E-mail: pwinebrake@winebrakelaw.com
asantillo@winebrakelaw.com
- and -
Timothy Conboy, Esq.
CONBOY LAW, LLC
733 Washington Road, Suite 201
Pittsburgh, PA 15228
Telephone: (412) 343-9060
Facsimile: (412) 343-9062
E-mail: tim@conboylaw.com
MEDICAL EYE: Eufusia Personal Injury Suit Removed to C.D. Cal.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled ERIC E. EUFUSIA, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. MEDICAL EYE SERVICES, INC., Case No.
30-2023-01369472-CU-CO-CXC, was removed from the California
Superior Court, County of Orange, to the U.S. District Court for
the Central District of California on March 1, 2024.
The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 8:24-cv-00432-DOC-ADS to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged personal injury
claims.
Medical Eye Services, Inc. is a medical service provider in Santa
Ana, California. [BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Kyle T. Cutts, Esq.
BAKER AND HOSTETLER LLP
Key Tower
127 Public Square Suite 2000
Cleveland, OH 44114
Telephone: (216) 586-7576
Facsimile: (216) 696-0740
Email: kcutts@bakerlaw.com
MEDQ INC: Franklin Files Personal Injury Suit in E.D. Texas
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against medQ, Inc. The case
is captioned as SHELBY D. FRANKLIN, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, v. MEDQ, INC., Case No.
4:24-cv-00198-ALM (E.D. Tex., March 5, 2024).
The Plaintiff brings personal injury claims against the Defendant.
medQ, Inc. is a software company in Plano, Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
William B. Federman, Esq.
FEDERMAN & SHERWOOD
10205 North Pennsylvania Ave.
Oklahoma City, OK 73102
Telephone: (405) 235-1560
Facsimile: (405) 239-2112
Email: wbf@federmanlaw.com
MERITAS HEALTH: Ballard Files Contract Suit in W.D. Missouri
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Meritas Health
Corporation, et al. The case is captioned as GARY BALLARD, et al.,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
MERITAS HEALTH CORPORATION, et al., Case No. 4:24-cv-00154-RK (W.D.
Mo., March 4, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged breach of
contract.
Meritas Health Corporation is a medical group based in Kansas City,
Missouri. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Andrew B. Protzman, Esq.
David D. Burkhead, Esq.
PROTZMAN LAW FIRM
4001 W. 114th St., Suite 110
Leawood, KS 66211
Telephone: (816) 421-5100
Facsimile: (816) 421-5105
Email: andy@protzmanlaw.com
david@protzmanlaw.com
MIDLAND FUNDING: Class Cert Bid in Filgueiras Class Suit Tossed
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSEFA FILGUEIRAS, on
behalf of herself and those similarly situated, v. MIDLAND FUNDING,
LLC, and MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC., Case No.
2:16-cv-03037-ES-JSA (D.N.J.), the Hon. Judge Esther Salas entered
an order denying the motion for class certification.
Accordingly, the predominance requirement is not satisfied. Because
the class cannot be certified absent predominance, the Court need
not consider the remaining requirements.
Ms. Filgueiras filed this putative class action against the
Defendants Midland Funding, LLC, and Midland Credit Management,
Inc. for alleged
violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA").
On May 26, 2016, Ms. Filgueiras filed this suit against Midland. On
January 10, 2020, Ms. Filgueiras filed the present motion for class
certification.
In the Complaint, Ms. Filgueiras proposed both a class and a
subclass. In the instant motion, however, Ms. Filgueiras proposed
only the following class:
"All natural persons with addresses within the State of New
Jersey, to whom, from May 26, 2015 through June 16, 2017,
Midland
Credit Management, Inc., sent one or more letters on behalf of
Midland Funding LLC in the form attached as Exhibit B to the
Complaint (letter code OS_0001), which debt arose from a Target
store account that is not a Visa or MasterCard, where the debt
was
in default for more than four years prior to the date of the
letter."
Around 2008, Ms. Filgueiras became a cardholder at Target. Ms.
Filgueiras made payments on the Target card through August 2009. In
Sept. 2009, however, she defaulted on the account.
Midland is a debt collection agency that collects different types
of debt but focuses on consumer debts.
A copy of the Court's opinion dated April 18, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=UO6TXw at no extra
charge.[CC]
MINISO GROUP: Continues to Defend Federal Securities Class
----------------------------------------------------------
MINISO Group Holdings Ltd. disclosed in its Form 20-F Report for
the transition period from July 1, 2023 to December 31, 2023 filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 16, 2024 that
the Company continues to defend itself from federal securities
class suit in the Southern District of New York.
In August 2022, a putative federal securities class action was
filed against the Company and certain of its officers and
Directors, alleging that the Company made misleading misstatements
or omissions regarding its business operations and financials in
violation of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934.
The action is captioned In re MINISO Group Holding Limited
Securities Litigation, 1:22-cv-09864 (S.D.N.Y.). Lead plaintiff was
appointed in November 2022 and filed the operative complaint to the
court.
The Company and other defendants filed a motion to dismiss the
complaint, and the motion was granted by the court in February
2024, with leave to amend.
Plaintiffs have filed a motion for reconsideration of the court's
decision and intended to file a further amended complaint.
As of December 31, 2023, the Directors were unable to assess the
outcome of the action or reliably estimate the potential losses, if
any.
MINISO Group Holding Limited -- https://www.miniso.com/ --
operates
as a holding company. The Company, through its subsidiaries,
retails home decor, small electronics, textile, accessories,
beauty
tools, toys, cosmetics, personal care, snacks, fragrance and
perfumes, and stationery and gifts.[BN]
MISS DU'S TEA: General Pretrial Management Order Entered in Volfman
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSEPH VOLFMAN, v. MISS
DU'S TEA SHOP, INC., et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-02973-PAE-BCM
(S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Barbara Moses entered an order regarding
general pretrial management as follows:
-- All pretrial motions and applications, including those related
to
scheduling and discovery (but excluding motions to dismiss or
for
judgment on the pleadings, for injunctive relief, for summary
judgment, or for class certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23)
must be made to Judge Moses and in compliance with this Court's
Individual Practices in Civil Cases, available on the Court's
website at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-barbara-moses.
-- Once a discovery schedule has been issued, all discovery must
be
initiated in time to be concluded by the close of discovery set
by
the Court.
-- Discovery applications, including letter-motions requesting
discovery conferences, must be made promptly after the need for
such an application arises and must comply with Local Civil
Rule
37.2 and section 2(b) of Judge Moses's Individual Practices.
-- Requests to adjourn a court conference or other court
proceeding
(including a telephonic court conference) or to extend a
deadline
must be made in writing and in compliance with section 2(a) of
Judge Moses's Individual Practices.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Pe56oV at no extra
charge.[CC]
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: Filing for Class Cert Bids Amended to June 2
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BETSY NELSON, Individually
and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. NATIONSTAR
MORTGAGE, LLC d/b/a Mr. Cooper, and CENLAR AGENCY, INC. d/b/a
Cenlar FSB, Case No. 6:23-cv-03339-MDH (W.D. Mo.), the Hon. Judge
Douglas Harpool entered a first amended schedule and order:
-- All class-related discovery is to commence June 2, 2025
immediately and be completed by:
-- All motions related to Class Discovery June 2, 2025
shall be filed by:
-- The Plaintiff shall file all motions June 2, 2025
seeking class certification by:
-- The Defendant shall file any responsive July 2, 2025
motions objecting to class certification
by:
-- The Plaintiff will designate any expert March 14,
2025
witnesses as to class certification by:
Nationstar provides mortgages loan, re-financing, and home equity
loan.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=fW5fF3 at no extra
charge.[CC]
NCAA: Plaintiffs Seek to File Docs Under Seal
---------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHUBA HUBBARD and KEIRA
MCCARRELL, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated, v. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION; ATLANTIC
COAST CONFERENCE; THE BIG TEN CONFERENCE, INC.; THE BIG 12
CONFERENCE, INC.; PAC-12 CONFERENCE; and SOUTHEASTERN CONFERENCE,
Case No. 4:23-cv-01593-CW (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs file an
administrative motion to provisionally file under seal pursuant to
Civil Local Rules 7-11, 79-5 and the stipulation and order
regarding administrative motions to seal.
The Order provides that "a single combined administrative motion to
seal covering all sealing requests would be the most efficient way
for the Court to handle all sealing issues arising from the
Parties’ class certification papers and related documents."
It also provides that the parties shall file redacted versions of
their class certification briefs and related documents on the
public docket "without accompanying interim motions to seal," and
shall file sealed versions of those documents "using the ECF Event
for 'Documents e-Filed Under Seal."
National Collegiate is a nonprofit organization that regulates
student athletics among about 1,100 schools in the United States,
and one in Canada.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=SDOrap at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Steve W. Berman, Esq.
Emilee N. Sisco, Esq.
Stephanie A. Verdoia, Esq.
Benjamin J. Siegel, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
1301 Second Avenue, Suite 2000
Seattle, WA 98101
Telephone: (206) 623-7292
Facsimile: (206) 623-0594
E-mail: steve@hbsslaw.com
emilees@hbsslaw.com
stephaniev@hbsslaw.com
bens@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Jeffrey L. Kessler, Esq.
David G. Feher, Esq.
David L. Greenspan, Esq.
Sofia Arguello, Esq.
Adam I. Dale, Esq.
Jeanifer E. Parsigian, Esq.
WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
200 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10166-4193
Telephone: (212) 294-4698
Facsimile: (212) 294-4700
E-mail: jkessler@winston.com
dgreenspan@winston.com
sarguello@winston.com
aidale@winston.com
dfeher@winston.com
jparsigian@winston.com
NESTLE PURINA: Bid for Initial OK of Class Settlement Tossed
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as EMMAUEL SALINAS, on behalf
of himself and the Class Members, v. NESTLE PURINA PETCARE COMPANY,
Case No. 1:21-cv-01140-JLT-CDB (E.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Jennifer
Thurston entered an order denying the motion for preliminary
approval of the class action settlement without prejudice to a
renewed motion addressing the Court's concerns.
The Court said that because there is no showing that the cashing or
depositing of checks by a class member constitutes proper written
consent, the consent mechanism identified in the Settlement fails
to comply with the requirements of the FLSA.
Salinas fails to carry his burden to show the prerequisites of Rule
23(a) are satisfied for the proposed settlement class, and the
Court is unable to certify the class, the Court adds.
Accordingly, the Court declines to consider whether the Settlement
satisfies the requirements of Rule 23(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure.
Pursuant to the "Joint Stipulation of Settlement and Release", the
parties agree to a gross settlement amount of $3,000,000.00 for the
class including: "all persons employed by the Defendant in a Job
Position at any time during the Class Period."
The Settlement Class includes all persons employed by Nestle Purina
in the state of California in any non-exempt hourly or non-exempt
salaried position from Jan. 29, 2017 through Feb. 5, 2023.
Mr. Salinas asserts Nestle Purina PetCare Company failed to comply
with wage and hour laws arising under the California Labor Code,
California Business & Professions Code, and Fair Labor Standards
Act.
Mr. Salinas began working for Nestle Purina PetCare Company in Feb.
2015, and is currently employed as a forklift operator in Maricopa,
California.
Nestle produces and markets pet food, treats, and cat and dog
litter.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=yg94pw at no extra
charge.[CC]
NEW SOUTH WALES: Junior Doctors Settle Suit Over Unpaid Overtime
----------------------------------------------------------------
Alexander Lewis, writing for ABC News, reports that junior doctors
settle class action with NSW Health over unpaid overtime.
In short: NSW Health has settled a class action alleging junior
doctors were underpaid in overtime and meal breaks between 2014 and
2020.
Health Minister Ryan Park said NSW Health had made "significant
inroads" in addressing payment concerns over the last 12 months.
A class action alleging NSW Health underpaid junior doctors has
settled after the department agreed to a payout of nearly a quarter
of a billion dollars.
More than 20,000 medicos may be eligible to claim a share of almost
$230 million for the alleged underpayment of overtime and paid meal
breaks.
Law firms Hayden Stephens and Associates and Maurice Blackburn,
which represented the plaintiffs, said the settlement was the
largest underpayment class action outcome in Australian legal
history.
Dr Amireh Fakhouri brought the claim on behalf of junior doctors
who worked in the state's public health system from December 2014
to December 2020.
In a statement of claim, she alleged NSW Health failed to pay the
overtime and weekend meal break entitlements she and her colleagues
were owed.
On April 24, Dr Fakhouri told News Breakfast that for her, the case
was never about the money.
"I did this for a cultural change to make it better for the next
generation of junior doctors, for my fellow medical students," she
said.
Dr Fakhouri was employed by NSW Health from 2015 to 2018,
completing her internship and residency at Sydney's Westmead
Hospital.
She now works in general practice and says the few thousand dollars
she might receive from the settlement is merely a bonus.
"It's not going to make a difference to our income, but it's about
the changes that we're making."
'A big indent in the last 12 months'
Health Minister Ryan Park said he was disappointed the matter was
not resolved by Coalition government when it was in power.
He said NSW Health had made "significant inroads" in addressing the
payment concerns but still needed to do better.
"I'm not saying we fixed it, but we've made a big indent in the
last 12 months," he said.
Greens NSW health spokesperson Dr Amanda Cohn, who is a former GP
and emergency doctor, said her own junior years were traumatic.
"I became a GP for many reasons, but one of them was to get out of
the brutally hierarchical hospital system that made it hard to turn
up to work every day," Dr Cohn said.
"This is a clear message that exploitation of the skill and
commitment of healthcare workers is unacceptable and cannot
continue."
Dr Fakhouri's lawyer Hayden Stephens said concerns over the
dangerous working conditions of junior doctors were ignored for
years.
"This landmark settlement now represents a seismic shift in the way
junior doctors are treated in their workplace," Mr Stephens said.
Maurice Blackburn principal Rebecca Gilsenan said the class action
had already resulted in change.
"Our clients report that NSW Health has already implemented several
improvements in the workplace," Ms Gilsenan said.
Provided the settlement is approved by the Supreme Court of NSW, a
process for assessing the claims of current and former doctors will
begin this year. [GN]
NEW YORK LIFE: Bid to File Class Cert Reply Under Seal OK'd
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BARBARA LINHART, on behalf
of herself and others similarly situated, v. NEW YORK LIFE
INSURANCE AND ANNUITY CORPORATION, and DOES 1 TO 50, inclusive,
Case No. 5:21-cv-01640-CJC-DTB (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Cormac
Carney entered an order granting Plaintiff's application to file
under seal her reply memorandum in support of her motion for class
certification.
The Plaintiff's reply memorandum in support of her motion for class
certification and appointment of Class Representative and Class
Counsel shall be filed under seal pursuant to Local Rule 79-5.
New York Life provides annuity services.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=f6HZ6e at no extra
charge.[CC]
NEW YORK TIMES: Class Cert Bid in Perkins Suit Extended to June 6
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Perkins v. The New York
Times Company d/b/a The New York Times, Case No. 1:22-cv-05202-PKC
(S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Kevon P. Caster entered an order
extending the motion for class certification and pre-motion letters
regarding summary judgment to June 6.
New York Times is an American mass-media company that publishes The
New York Times.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=0xdl3D at no extra
charge.[CC]
NORTHWELL HEALTH: Lorusso Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WILLIAM LORUSSO, MARGARET
GURLIDES, LINDA MORIARTY, RICHARD SEABERG, GARY LEONARD, CAROL
VORPERIAN, NICHOLAS CAMPAGNOLA, JEROLD SCHERER, DENISE BEVILACQUA,
AND KAREN CERVANTES, on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated, v. NORTHWELL HEALTH PENSION PLAN, NORTH SHORE
UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL, NORTHWELL HEALTH, INC., AND PENSION COMMITTEE,
Case No. 2:24-cv-02785-JS-AYS (E.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiffs will move
the Court for and order:
(1) certifying a class pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2);
(2) appointing the Named Plaintiffs as Class Representatives;
(3) appointing Thomas & Solomon PLLC as Class Counsel; and
(4) such other and further relief as this Court deems just and
proper.
Northwell is a healthcare provider that owns an integrated health
care delivery system in the New York metropolitan area.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=HJnVyE at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
J. Nelson Thomas, Esq.
Jessica L. Lukasiewicz, Esq.
THOMAS & SOLOMON PLLC
693 East Avenue
Rochester, NY 14607
Telephone: (585) 272-0540
E-mail: nthomas@theemploymentattorneys.com
jlukasiewicz@theemploymentattorneys.com
NU HOLDINGS LTD: Continues to Defend IDC Class Suit
---------------------------------------------------
Nu Holdings Ltd. disclosed in its form 20-F Report for fiscal
period ending December 31, 2023 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on April 19, 2024, that the Company continues
to defend itself from the IDC class suit.
On September 8, 2023, Instituto de Defesa Coletiva, or "IDC" filed
a class action lawsuit against Nu Pagamentos and other financial
institutions (5 in total) seeking a R$ 50 million indemnification
for the financial crisis that affected 123 Milhas, a Brazilian
company that offers travel packages and services to consumers.
In summary, Instituto Defesa Coletiva argues that, ever since 123
Milhas suspended travel packages and flight tickets issuance,
several clients tried to suspend charges on their credit card bills
but did not succeed, in violation of Article 54-G of the Consumer's
Protection Act.
Nu Pagamentos filed its defense on February 09, 2024 and now awaits
further developments.
Nu Holdings Ltd is headquartered in England. The company's line of
business includes designing, developing, and producing prepackaged
computer software. [BN]
NU-BOTANICS CANDLE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Bolanos Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------------
INGRID BOLANOS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NU-BOTANICS CANDLE CORP.; POOYA BAKHTIARI;
and DOES 1 THROUGH 50, INCLUSIVE, Defendants, Case No. 24STCV09340
(Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., April 12, 2024) is an action
against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum wages, overtime
compensation, provide meals and rest periods, and provide accurate
wage statements.
Plaintiff Bolanos was employed by the Defendants as a staff.
NU-BOTANICS CANDLE CORP. is an online shop for Religious, Santeria,
Witchcraft, Occult, Religious, Feng Shui, Botanica Supplies. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. Kirk Donnelly, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF J. KIRK DONNELLY, APC
2173 Salk Avenue, Suite 250
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Telephone: (760) 209-5894
Email: kdonnelly@jkd-law.com
OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM: Savoie Contract Suit Removed to W.D. La.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled ROBERT SAVOIE, et al., individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM CORP., et
al., Case No. 10-21049, was removed from the 38th Judicial District
Court, Cameron Parish, to the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of Louisiana on March 6, 2024.
The Clerk of Court for the Western District of Louisiana assigned
Case No. 2:24-cv-00340-JDC-TPL to the proceeding.
The suit is brought over the Defendants' alleged contract
violations.
Occidental Petroleum Corp. is an American company engaged in
hydrocarbon exploration, headquartered in Texas. [BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Tarak Anada, Esq.
Edward H. Bergin, Esq.
JONES WALKER
201 St. Charles Ave. FL 51
New Orleans, LA 70170
Telephone: (504) 582-8322
Facsimile: (504) 589-8322
Email: tanada@joneswalker.com
nbergin@joneswalker.com
- and -
Eric Phillip Morvant, Esq.
JONES WALKER
445 N. Blvd., Ste. 800
Baton Rouge, LA 70802
Telephone: (225) 248-3098
Email: emorvant@joneswalker.com
- and -
Meghan Elizabeth Smith, Esq.
CURRY & FRIEND
228 St. Charles Ave., Ste. 1200
New Orleans, LA 70130
Telephone: (504) 524-8556
Facsimile: (504) 524-8703
Email: msmith@joneswalker.com
OCUGEN INC: Continues to Defend Securities Class Suit
-----------------------------------------------------
Ocugen Inc. disclosed in its form 10-K Report for the fiscal period
ending December 31, 2023 filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on April 16, 2024 that the Company continues to defend
itself from a securities class suit.
In April 2024, a securities class action lawsuit was filed against
the Company and certain of its agents in the Court (Case No.
2:24-cv-01500) that purported to state a claim for alleged
violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule
10b-5 promulgated thereunder, based on statements made by the
Company concerning its previously-issued audited consolidated
financial statements for each fiscal year beginning January 1, 2020
and its previously-issued unaudited interim condensed consolidated
financial statements for each of the first three quarters in such
years and the effectiveness of its disclosure controls and
procedures during each such period.
The complaints seek unspecified damages, interest, attorneys' fees,
and other costs.
The Company believes that these lawsuits are without merit and
intend to vigorously defend against them.
Ocugen, Inc. operates as a clinical stage biopharmaceutical
company. The Company offers products for improving the body's
ability to regenerate healthy cartilage, joint function, and
prevention of degenerative diseases. Ocugen serves patients and
orthopedist throughout the United States.[BN]
OFFICE DEPOT: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Yount Due Dec. 13
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as NICOLE YOUNT, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. OFFICE DEPOT,
LLC, et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-00392-RSL (W.D. Wash.), the Hon.
Judge Robert Lasnik entered an order setting trial date and related
class action dates as follows:
-- Deadline for joining additional parties: May 1, 2024
-- Motion for class certification due and Dec. 13,
2024
noted on the Court's calendar for the
fifth Friday thereafter:
-- Deadline for amending pleadings: March 12,
2025
-- Expert Disclosures/Reports under March 12,
2025
FRCP 26(a)(2) due:
-- All motions related to discovery must May 11, 2025
be noted on the motion calendar no
later than the Friday before discovery
closes pursuant to LCR 7(d) or
LCR 37(a)(2) Discovery completed by:
-- Settlement conference held no later than: May 25, 2025
-- All dispositive motions must be filed by June 10,
2025
and noted on the motion calendar no later
than the fourth Friday thereafter:
Office Depot is an American office supply retailer.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=QAZe57 at no extra
charge.[CC]
OGILVY HOLDINGS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Chestnut Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------
ROBERT CHESTNUT; and ANTIONETTE STANIEWICZ, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. OGILVY
HOLDINGS LLC; OGILVY PUBLIC RELATIONS WORLDWIDE LLC; THE OGILVY
GROUP, LLC; EXTREME REACH PAYROLL SOLUTOINS, INC.; EXTREME REACH
PRODUCTION PAYROLL, INC.; EXTREME REACH TALENT INC.; EXTREME REACH,
INC., Defendants, Case No. 24CV071898 (Cal. Super., Alameda Cty.,
April 15, 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.
The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as staffs.
OGILVY HOLDINGS LLC provides advertising services. The Company
offers marketing communications, including direct marketing,
interactive media, media planning & buying, database management,
telemarketing, directory services, public relations, sales
promotion, and graphic design. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by;
Douglas Han, Esq.
Shunt Tatavos-Gharajeh, Esq.
Chris Petersen, Esq.
JUSTICE LAW CORPORATION
751 N. Fair Oaks Avenue, Suite 101
Pasadenia, CA 91103
Telephone: (818) 230-7502
Facsimile: (818) 230-7259
ONTRAK INC: Continues to Defend Braun Securities Class Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ontrak Inc. disclosed in its form 20-F Report for the fiscal period
ending December 31, 2023 filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on April 16, 2024 that the Company continues to defend
itself from the Braun securities class suit in the Superior Court
of California for Los Angeles County.
In February 2022, a purported securities class action was filed in
the Superior Court of California for Los Angeles County, entitled
Braun v. Ontrak, Inc., et al., Case No. 22STCV07174, on behalf of a
putative class of all purchasers of our Series A Preferred Stock in
such offerings.
The action was brought against the Company, its officers and
directors, and the investment banking firms that acted as
underwriters for the offerings.
The plaintiff asserted causes of actions alleging that it violated
the federal securities laws in connection with the offerings based
upon allegations that statements made regarding the growth of its
customer base and expansion of its program with health plan
customers were false or misleading.
The Company believes that the allegations of falsity lack merit and
that it has meritorious defenses, and it intends to defend against
the action vigorously.
Ontrak, Inc. is an artificial intelligence powered and
telehealth-enabled, virtualized healthcare company with a platform
that provides claim-based analytics and predictive modeling to
provide analytic insights throughout the delivery of personalized
treatment program.
PACCAR INC: Court Won't Adopt Proposed Case Management Schedule
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as 10TH GEAR LLC, et al., v.
PACCAR INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-01933-RSL (W.D. Wash.), the Hon.
Judge Robert Lasnik entered an order that while the parties'
proposed case management schedule will be considered, it will not
be adopted.
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d)(1), the discovery period opened
when the parties held their Rule 26(f) conference. If defendant
seeks a stay of discovery while the motion to dismiss is pending,
it must file a separate motion.
The Court takes this matter under advisement. The parties should be
aware, however, that the Court's standard class action case
management order includes a trial date and that the Court views
class certification as a preliminary procedural matter to be
decided at the outset of the case.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=lNuMjf at no extra
charge.[CC]
PACIFIC MARKET: Brown Fraud Suit Removed to C.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case styled MACKENZIE BROWN, et al., individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. PACIFIC MARKET INTERNATIONAL,
LLC, et al., Case No. 24STCV02653, was removed from the Los Angeles
Superior Court to the U.S. District Court for the Central District
of California on March 4, 2024.
The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 2:24-cv-01765-ODW-AJR to the proceeding.
The suit is brought against the Defendants' alleged fraud
violations.
Pacific Market International, LLC is a manufacturer of food and
beverage gear doing business in California. [BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
James F. Speyer, Esq.
E. Alex Beroukhim, Esq.
ARNOLD AND PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP
777 South Figueroa Street, 44th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Telephone: (213) 243-4000
Facsimile: (213) 243-4199
Email: james.speyer@arnoldporter.com
alex.beroukhim@arnoldporter.com
PEGASYSTEMS INC: Prelim. Approval of Class Settlement Sought
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as City of Fort Lauderdale
Police And Firefighters' Retirement System et al v. Pegasystems
Inc. et al. (PEGASYSTEMS INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION), Case No.
1:22-cv-11220-WGY (D. Mass.), the Lead Plaintiffs ask the Court to
enter an order
(i) preliminarily approving the proposed settlement;
(ii) preliminarily certifying the Settlement Class for
settlement
purposes;
(iii) approving the proposed form and manner of providing notice
of
the proposed Settlement to the Settlement Class; and
(iv) setting a hearing date for the Court to consider final
approval of the Settlement, approval of the Plan of
Allocation
of the Net Settlement Fund, Lead Counsel's application for
attorneys' fees and expenses, and Lead Plaintiffs'
applications for awards pursuant to 15 U.S.C. section 78u-
4(a)(4), as well as a schedule for deadlines relevant
thereto.
Pegasystems develops software for customer relationship management
and business process management.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=T1U41I at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Debra J. Wyman, Esq.
Christopher D. Stewart, Esq.
Megan A. Rossi, Esq.
Nicole Q. Gilliland, Esq.
Chad Johnson, Esq.
Snehee Khandeshi, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 231-1058
Facsimile: (619) 231-7423
E-mail: debraw@rgrdlaw.com
cstewart@rgrdlaw.com
mrossi@rgrdlaw.com
ngilliland@rgrdlaw.com
chadj@rgrdlaw.com
skhandeshi@rgrdlaw.com
- and -
Theodore M. Hess-mahan, Esq.
HUTCHINGS BARSAMIAN MANDELCORN, LLP
110 Cedar Street, Suite 250
Wellesley Hills, MA 02481
Telephone: (781) 431-2231
Facsimile: (781) 431-8726
E-mail: thess-mahan@hutchingsbarsamian.com
PINK JEEP: Parties Seek More Time for Plaintiff's Class Cert Reply
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Geoffrey H. Slepian, on
behalf of himself and all those similarly situated, v. Pink Jeep
Tours, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company; Herschend
Adventure Holdings, LLC, a Georgia limited liability company, Case
No. 3:23-cv-08105-SPL (D. Ariz.), the Parties ask the Court to
enter an order granting a two-week extension up through and
including May 10, 2024, for the Plaintiff to respond to the
Defendants' opposition to the Plaintiff's motion for Rule 23 Class
Action Certification.
Absent said extension, the deadline for the Plaintiff to file a
reply brief is April 26, 2024. The Plaintiff is seeking an
extension due in part to pre-existing and conflicting work
commitments. Additionally, the Plaintiff must thoroughly review
information the Defendants submitted in support of their
Opposition, including three declarations submitted on behalf of
Pink Jeep Guides.
This request is made in good faith and not for the purposes of
delay, and the extension does not prejudice either party.
Pink Jeep is a passenger tour operator that offers off-road and
road-based excursions to various destinations.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=SaM5zx at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ty D. Frankel, Esq.
Patricia N. Syverson, Esq.
FRANKEL SYVERSON PLLC
2375 E. Camelback Road, Suite 600
Phoenix, AZ 85016
Telephone: (602) 598-4000
E-mail: ty@frankelsyverson.com
patti@frankelsyverson.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Tracy A. Miller, Esq.
J. Alexander Dattilo, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK &
STEWART, P.C.
Esplanade Center III, Suite 800
2415 East Camelback Road
Phoenix, AZ 85016
PRIME HYDRATION: Vera Sues Over Energy Drink Caffeine Content
-------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Limehouse of USA TODAY reports that YouTubers Logan Paul
and KSI founded Prime Hydration in 2022, and while their products
have become increasingly popular and profitable, the company
continues to face class action suits over the ingredients in their
energy and sports drinks.
Prime Hyrdation LLC was sued April 8 in the Southern District of
New York over "misleading and deceptive practices" regarding the
company's 12-ounce energy drinks containing between 215-225
milligrams of caffeine as opposed to the advertised 200 milligrams,
according to the class action suit.
Lara Vera, a Poughkeepsie, New York resident, filed the suit in
federal court on behalf of herself and others who bought Prime
products across the U.S., the complaint says. Vera purchased
Prime's Blue Raspberry products several times in August 2022 for
about $3 to $4 each, but she would have never bought the drinks if
she had known the actual caffeine content, according to the suit.
Vera's suit is seeking $5 million from the company owned by Paul
and KSI, real name Olajide Olayinka Williams "JJ" Olatunji, court
records show.
Court records do not say whether Prime Hydration retained legal
counsel for Vera's suit.
How much caffeine is in Prime energy drinks?
Prime's advertised 200 milligrams of caffeine is equivalent to
"half a dozen Coke cans or nearly two (12-ounce) Red Bulls," Vera's
class action suit says.
A 12-ounce can of Red Bull energy drink contains 114 milligrams of
caffeine, and a cup of coffee contains around 100 milligrams of
caffeine, according to the suit.
The suit continues to say that "there is no proven safe dose of
caffeine for children." Side effects of kids consuming caffeine
could include rapid or irregular heartbeats, headaches, seizures,
shaking, upset stomach and adverse emotional effects on mental
health, according to the complaint.
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., called on the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) to investigate Prime energy drinks in 2023
because of dangerously high caffeine levels. Schumer alleged in a
letter to the FDA that vague marketing targeting young people
influenced parents to buy a "cauldron of caffeine" for their kids.
Schumer's call to action to the FDA is referenced in Vera's suit.
USA TODAY contacted Prime Hydration's attorneys but did not receive
an immediate response.
What are the Prime Hydration lawsuits?
Vera's legal battle is beginning, but Prime is still dealing with
another class action suit from 2023 alleging a flavor of the
company's sports drinks contains PFAS, or "forever chemicals."
Independent third-party testing determined the presence of PFAS
chemicals in Prime Hydration grape flavor, according to a class
action suit filed Aug. 2, 2023, in the Northern District of
California by the Milberg law firm on behalf of Elizabeth Castillo
and others similarly affected.
"Lead plaintiff Elizabeth Castillo, a resident of California,
purchased Prime Hydration on multiple occasions but says she would
not have bought it at all if the product had been accurately
marketed and labeled as containing PFAS," the Milberg law firm said
in an August 2023 news release. "These chemicals were not
reasonably detectible to consumers like herself."
Castillo's suit is seeking a $5 million judgment, court records
show.
As of April 18, the judge in the case has heard Prime's argument to
dismiss the suit due to Castillo not alleging "a cognizable injury"
and her not alleging "facts showing a concrete (and) imminent
threat of future harm," according to the drink company's motion.
Paul addressed Castillo's claims in a 3-minute TikTok video.
"First off, anyone can sue anyone at any time that does not make
the lawsuit true," Paul said in the TikTok video. "And in this
case, it is not . . . one person conducted a random study and has
provided zero evidence to substantiate any of their claims."
What are forever chemicals?
PFAS are called forever chemicals because they "bioaccumulate, or
accrue in the body over time," the Milberg law said in its news
release.
"These man-made chemicals are well-studied and have been found to
have adverse effects on the human body and environment," the New
York City-headquartered law firm said.
Many PFAS are found in people's and animal's blood and can be
detected at low levels in a variety of food products and in the
environment, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said.
Forever chemicals can be found in water, air, fish and soil at
locations across the nation and the globe, according to the EPA.
"There are thousands of PFAS chemicals, and they are found in many
different consumer, commercial, and industrial products," the EPA
said. "This makes it challenging to study and assess the potential
human health and environmental risks."
Who made Prime energy drinks?
Before founding Prime Hydration LLC, Logan Paul, 29, and KSI, 30,
were YouTubers who turned their millions of subscribers into
supporters of their boxing, wrestling, music, social media content
and other endeavors.
Going into the drinks business proved to be profitable for both
YouTubers as "Prime Hydration generated more than $250 million in
retail sales in its first year, including $45 million in a single
month," according to the Milberg law firm.
Paul and KSI continue to keep Prime products in the spotlight
whether it is paying for an ad during Super Bowl 57, having
livestreamer IShowSpeed dress up in a Prime sports drink bottle
during Wrestlemania 40 or signing athletes including Patrick
Mahomes, Aaron Judge, Israel Adesanya, Tyreek Hill, Kyle Larson,
Alisha Lehmann and others to sponsorship deals. [GN]
PROGRESSIVE SELECT: Silverstein Files Consumer Suit in Cal. Super.
------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Progressive Select
Insurance Co. The case is captioned as TERESA SILVERSTEIN,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
PROGRESSIVE SELECT INSURANCE CO., Case No. CVRI2401167 (Cal.
Super., Riverside Cty., March 4, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged unfair business
practices.
Progressive Select Insurance Co. is an insurance company based in
Ohio. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael Merriman, Esq.
Hilgers Graben PLLC
San Diego Office
655 W. Broadway, Suite 900
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 369-6232
Email: mmerriman@hilgersgraben.com
PROGRESSIVE UNIVERSAL: Class Cert Redacted Memo Stricken in Taxer
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Taxer v. Progressive
Universal Insurance Company, Case No. 3:22-cv-01255 (D. Or., Filed
Aug. 24, 2022), the Hon. Judge Marco A. Hernandez entered an order
striking the Plaintiff's Redacted Memorandum in Support of
Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification and supporting exhibits.
-- Within three days of this Order, the Plaintiffs shall refile
their
redacted memorandum and redacted supporting materials
consistent
with the requested redactions in the Third-Party Motion66 and
Defendants' Response.
The nature of suit states diversity-breach of contract.[CC]
Progressive provides property and casualty insurance services.
PROSPERITY HOME: Bid to Strike Class Allegations Denied in Keller
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Keller v. Prosperity Home
Mortgage LLC, Case No. 6:23-cv-05048 (D.S.C., Filed Oct. 09, 2023),
the Hon. Judge Jacquelyn D. Austin entered an order denying motion
to strike class allegations.
The suit alleges violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection
Act.
The Defendant moves to strike the class allegations pertaining to
Count II of Plaintiff's Complaint purporting to state a class claim
under the South Carolina Telephone Privacy Protection Act
("SCTPPA").
Specifically, Defendant contends the SCTPPA class cannot be
certified as a matter of law because "actual loss" occasioned by a
claimed violation is inherently individualized and fact-bound, thus
defeating Plaintiff's ability to prove liability on a class-wide
basis.
The Plaintiff, on the other hand, contends that "Defendant's
attempt to bootstrap the merits of the class claims capable of
mathematical calculation and twist them into claims it contends are
not subject to class wide proof must be rejected."
Further, the Plaintiff argues that a Rule 12(f) motion is not the
proper vehicle for the relief Defendant seeks, and that these
arguments are more appropriately suited for briefing on a motion
for class certification. [Id.] Rule 12(f) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure provides that "the court may strike from a pleading
any insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent,
or scandalous matter." Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f).
Prosperity is a local full-service mortgage banker specializing in
residential and refinance loans.[CC]
R&G BRENNER: Scheduling Order Entered in Cinar Class Suit
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Cinar v. R&G Brenner
Income Tax, LLC, Case No. 1:20-cv-01362 (E.D.N.Y., Filed March 13,
2020), the Hon. Judge Rachel P. Kovner entered a scheduling order
setting in-person motion hearing for May 10, 2024.
The parties should come prepared to argue the motion for class
certification and discovery dispute. Ordered by Magistrate Judge
James R. Cho on 4/23/2024. (JDP)
The nature of suit states Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) involving
denial of overtime compensation.
R&G Brenner is a full service income tax preparation business.[CC]
REZOLUT CENTRELAKE: Ramirez Labor Suit Removed to C.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled CHRISTINA RAMIREZ, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. REZOLUT CENTRELAKE MSO LLC, et
al., Case No. 24STCV02393, was removed from the Los Angeles
Superior Court to the U.S. District Court for the Central District
of California on March 4, 2024.
The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 2:24-cv-01768-DMG-JC to the proceeding.
The suit is brought against the Defendants' alleged labor
violations.
Rezolut Centrelake MSO LLC is a diagnostic medical imaging services
provider doing business in California. [BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Frank C. Olah, Esq.
Orlando J. Arellano, Esq.
JACKSON LEWIS PC
725 South Figueroa Street, Suite 2500
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Telephone: (213) 689-0404
Facsimile: (213) 689-0430
Email: frank.olah@jacksonlewis.com
orlando.arellano@jacksonlewis.com
ROCHESTER, MN: Tap House Seeks to Certify TID Fee Refund Class
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Tap House Real Estate,
LLC, individually and on behalf of the putative class, v. City of
Rochester, Case No. 0:22-cv-00492-ECT-DTS (D. Minn.), the Plaintiff
asks the Court to enter an order granting certifying a
Transportation Improvement District ("TID") fee refund class
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(1), (2),
and (3) defined as follows:
"All entities subject to the payment of TID fees to the
Defendant."
The Plaintiff will further move for an order appointing it as class
representative and appointing Anthony J. Nemo, Meshbesher & Spence,
Ltd, and John T. Giesen, Dunlap & Seeger, P.A., as class counsel.
Rochester is a city on Lake Ontario, in New York State.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=e3aJQl at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew L. Davick, Esq.
Konstandinos Nicklow, Esq.
Anthony J. Nemo, Esq.
MESHBESHER & SPENCE, LTD
2519 Commerce Dr NW, Ste 120
Rochester, MN 55901
Telephone: (507) 280-8090
E-mail: adavick@meshbesher.com
gnick@meshbesher.com
tnemo@meshbesher.com
- and -
John T. Giesen, Esq.
DUNLAP & SEEGER, P.A.
30 Third Street SE, Suite 400
Rochester, MN 55904
Telephone: (507) 288-9111
E-mail: jtg@dunlaplaw.com
SAGE THERAPEUTICS: Court Sets Rule 26(F) Scheduling Conference
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MATHEW DOURAGHI, v. SAGE
THERAPEUTICS, INC., et al., Case No. 8:24-cv-00716-FWS-DFM (C.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Fred Slaughter entered an order setting Rule
26(F) Scheduling Conference:
At the Scheduling Conference, the court will dismiss all remaining
fictitiously named Defendants.
The court will also set a date by which motions to amend the
pleadings or add parties must be heard.
Sage develops treatments for central nervous system disorders.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=bjNK42 at no extra
charge.[CC]
SAINT ELIZABETH: Court Tosses Class Cert Bid in York Lawsuit
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SARAH YORK, v. SAINT
ELIZABETH MEDICAL CENTER, INC., Case No. 2:21-cv-00125-DLB-CJS
(E.D. Ky.), the Hon. Judge David Bunning entered an order denying
Plaintiff's motion for class certification.
The Court concludes that Plaintiff has not met her burden to show
class certification would be proper.
The Plaintiff has not shown that the class claims would rise and
fall together or that common issues predominate as is necessary to
certify a 23(b)(3) class.
Even if the Plaintiff had met this burden, her Motion for Class
Certification would still be denied because of the clear conflict
of interest between the named Plaintiff and the class members.
Instead of adequately addressing Defendant's substantive arguments,
Plaintiff's counsel has chosen to use its Reply primarily as a
vehicle to make snide comments and references, which do not assist
the Court in making its decision on this Motion.
Ms. Sarah York brought this putative class action alleging that the
Defendant engaged in fraudulent billing. She alleges in the Amended
Complaint that she is "one of thousands of patients who received a
bill from St. Elizabeth that was inflated" based on the charges she
should have incurred for her care.
On May 6, 2021, the Plaintiff delivered a baby at St. Elizabeth.
She received two bills from St. Elizabeth for her stay from May 6
to May 7, 2021. The first bill was for a total charge of
$15,136.37, $11,250.54 of which was paid by the Plaintiff's
insurer, United Health Care ("UHC"). The second bill was for a
total of $4,497.71, $1,066.34 of which was paid by UHC. The
Plaintiff alleges the "true charges" of these bills were $8,452.03
and $2,590.37, respectively.
The Plaintiff alleges these bills were inflated based upon an
"all-inclusive billing" policy at St. Elizabeth.
The Plaintiff seeks to certify the following class:
"Plaintiff and all current and former patients of St.
Elizabeth
Medical Center, Inc., who were private payers or whose bills
were
paid in full or in part by a private insurance payor, whose
bills
were inflated, by the addition of variable charge so as to
match
a selected reimbursement rated for Diagnosis-Related Groups
("DRG") through "All-Inclusive Billing" (excluding members of
the
Court and its staff, and Counsel for Plaintiffs and their
staffs,
Counsel for the Defendant and its staff, and Board members,
Officers, and Employees of Defendant)."
Elizabeth's is a Boston University teaching hospital.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=cwDvOA at no extra
charge.[CC]
SANTANDER CONSUMER: Brown Contract Suit Removed to S.D. Illinois
----------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled CRYSTAL BROWN, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC., Case No.
24-LA-0123, was removed from the State of Illinois Circuit Court
St. Clair County to the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of Illinois on March 6, 2024.
The Clerk of Court for the Southern District of Illinois assigned
Case No. 3:24-cv-00665-RJD to the proceeding.
The suit is brought against the Defendant's alleged contract
violations.
Santander Consumer USA Inc. is a consumer finance company
headquartered in Dallas, Texas. [BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Richard P. Darke, Esq.
DUANE MORRIS LLP
190 S. LaSalle Street, Suite 3700
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: (312) 499-6743
Facsimile: (312) 499-6701
Email: rpdarke@duanemorris.com
SCHENKER INC: Wickham Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ERIC WICKHAM, on behalf of
himself, all others similarly situated, v. SCHENKER, INC., a New
York corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No.
5:23-cv-00946-PCP (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff, on June 20, 2024 will
move for an order appointing Plaintiff as class representative,
appointing Setareh Law Group as class counsel, and certifying the
following class pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23.:
"All of the Defendant's current, former and prospective
applicants for employment in the United States who applied
for a
job with Defendant at any time during the period for which a
background check was performed beginning five years prior to
the
filing of this action and ending on the date that final
judgment
is entered in this action."
The Plaintiff and the putative class of more than 30,000 are job
applicants and employees of the Defendant for whom Schenker
obtained employment related background checks without following
basic requirements of federal law.
Schenker is an international logistics company with locations
across the United States.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 23, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ZYeiyW at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Shaun Setareh, Esq.
William M. Pao, Esq.
Brian Louis, Esq.
SETAREH LAW GROUP
9665 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 430
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Telephone (310) 888-7771
Facsimile (310) 888-0109
E-mail: shaun@setarehlaw.com
william@setarehlaw.com
brian@setarehlaw.com
SEWON AMERICA: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert Bid After 180 Days
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jimmy Ruiz Heredia and
Edgar Emmanuel Serrano Mondragon, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, v. Sewon America, Inc., and Total
Employee Solution, LLC individually, Case No. 3:24-cv-00050-TCB-RGV
(N.D. Ga.), the Hon. Judge Russell Vineyard entered an order on
joint motion for extension of time:
-- The Plaintiffs are permitted to file their motion for class
certification pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23
and
Local Rule 21.1(B) within 180 days of after all Defendants
have filed an answer to the complaint or defaulted.
Sewon manufactures and supplies automobile parts and components.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=I4tQWx at no extra
charge.[CC]
SHAWN EMMONS: Parties' Agreements Modified in Daughtry Class Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICARDO DAUGHTRY, et al.,
v. SHAWN EMMONS, TYRONE OLIVER, AHMED HOLT, STAN SHEPARD, JOE
WILLIAMS, DENNIS TURNER, and FLEMISTER WILEY, Case No.
5:15-cv-00041-MTT (M.D. Ga.), the Hon. Judge Marc Treadwell entered
an order that the injunction and the terms of the underlying
parties' agreements are extended and modified as follows:
-- The Court will appoint an independent monitor, at the
Defendants'
expense, to assist the defendants in achieving compliance. The
Defendants have made clear that they cannot monitor compliance
internally. The parties shall confer and propose by May 4,
2024, a
candidate to serve as independent monitor. The parties shall
further confer and propose procedures allowing the independent
monitor access to all information necessary to monitor
compliance.
-- The term of the settlement agreement, the addendum agreement,
and
the Court's injunction are extended. That term shall expire six
months after the appointment of the independent monitor.
However,
any party may move for the extension of the term.
-- Because of the Defendants' longstanding and flagrant violations
of
the Court's injunction, the Court finds that coercive sanctions
are necessary to compel compliance. The Court imposes a daily
fine
of $2,500.00. That fine will be payable upon the termination of
the Court's injunction. The Defendants shall be purged of
payment
if they comply with the injunction. Beginning May 20, 2024, and
every 30 days thereafter, the Defendants shall deposit with the
Clerk of Court the sum of $75,000.
-- The Court awards the plaintiffs reasonable attorney's fees and
expenses incurred during the enforcement of the injunction. The
Plaintiffs' counsel shall submit their fee request with
supporting
evidence by May 4, 2024.
Accordingly, the Court finds the appointment of an independent
monitor is necessary, narrowly tailored, and the least intrusive
means to correct the violation of the federal rights by achieving
compliance with the Court’s injunction.
The inmates imprisoned in the Georgia Department of Corrections'
("GDC") Special Management Unit ("SMU") are, by definition, the
worst inmates in Georgia's prison system. They are there because
they require intense and close supervision.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=rL4aCq at no extra
charge.[CC]
SHORT SQUEEZE: Plaintiffs' Bid for Briefing Schedule Tossed
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit RE: January 2021 Short Squeeze Trading
Litigation, Case No. 1:21-md-02989-CMA (S.D. Fla.), the Hon. Judge
Cecilia Altonaga entered an order denying Lead Plaintiff, Blue
Laine-Beveridge; Named Plaintiffs, Abraham Huacuja, Ava Bernard,
Brendan Clarke, Brian Harbison, Cecilia Rivas, Doi Nguyen, Joseph
Gurney, Marcel Poirier, Sandy Ng, Santiago Gil Bohorquez, and
Thomas Cash's unopposed motion for a briefing schedule.
Nothing in the Court's Nov. 13, 2023, Order amended the Scheduling
Order's deadline for seeking class certification. Since Plaintiffs
have not demonstrated good cause to extend the deadlines in the
Scheduling Order, they may not file a renewed class certification
motion.
On Oct. 7, 2022, the Court entered an order setting trial and
pre-trial schedule, requiring mediation, and referring certain
matters to Magistrate Judge, which set a deadline of Apr. 28, 2023,
for the Plaintiffs to file a motion for class certification.
On April 28, 2023, the Plaintiffs filed their motion for class
certification, which the Court denied, explaining that the
Plaintiffs had failed to identify a presumption of reliance
sufficient to demonstrate that individualized issues of reliance
would not
predominate over common issues.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Ny7DVy at no extra
charge.[CC]
SHOWS & CALI: Seeks to Continue Class Cert Bid in Calogero to May 9
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Iris Calogero, Ind. and
obo all others similarly situated and Margie Nell Randolph, Ind.
and obo all others similarly situated, v. Shows, Cali & Walsh, LLP,
a Louisiana Limited Liability Partnership; Mary Catherine Cali, an
individual; and John C. Walsh, an individual, Case No.
2:18-cv-06709-BWA-DMD (E.D. La.), the Defendants move the Court to
continue the submission date on Plaintiffs' motion to certify class
to May 9, 2024.
Shows is a company that operates in the legal services industry.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=JmVQEE at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
David S. Daly, Esq.
Elliot M. Lonker, Esq.
Allen J. Krouse, Esq.
Suzanne M. Risey, Esq.
FRILOT, LLC
1100 Poydras St., Suite 3700
New Orleans, LA 70163
Telephone: (504) 599-8329
Facsimile: (504) 599-8139
E-mail: DDaly@Frilot.com
AKrouse@Frilot.com
SRisey@Frilot.com
SIG SAUER: Class Cert Discovery in Glasscock Suit Due July 25
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Glasscock v. Sig Sauer,
Inc., Case No. 6:22-cv-03095 (W.D. Mo., Filed April 18, 2022), the
Hon. Judge Stephen R. Bough entered an order granting the joint
motion to modify scheduling order.
(1) The Defendant shall file an early summary May 31,
2024
judgment motion on or before:
(2) The Plaintiff shall file an opposition to June 28,
2024
Defendant's early summary judgment motion
on or before:
(3) The Defendant shall file a reply in support July 12,
2024
of its early summary judgment motion on or
before:
(4) Discovery shall close for class July 25,
2024
certification on:
(5) The Plaintiff shall designate class Sept. 5,
2024
certification experts and file his
motion for class certification on
or before:
(6) The Defendant shall designate class Oct. 14,
2024
certification experts and file its
opposition brief to Plaintiff's motion
for class certification on or before:
(7) The Plaintiff shall file his reply to Nov. 11,
2024
his motion for class certification
on or before:
The nature of suit states Torts - Diversity-Product Liability.[CC]
Sig Sauer designs and manufactures firearms for military, law
enforcement, and commercial markets.
SIMM ASSOCIATES: Simpson Files Consumer Credit Suit in D. Delaware
------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Simm Associates,
Inc., et al. The case is captioned as PATRICIA SIMPSON,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
SIMM ASSOCIATES, INC., et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-00273-JLH (D. Del.,
March 1, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendants' alleged violation of the
Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
Simm Associates, Inc. is a family owned and operated financial
services company based in Delaware. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph Andrews, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH ANDREWS
737 S. Queen St., Suite 3
Dover, DE 19904
Telephone: (302) 724-7176
Email: jandrews@firststatelaw.com
SKYLINE TOWER: Bid for Stay of Remand Order Pending Appeal Denied
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ELIZABETH L. GOLDBERG, et
al., v. SKYLINE TOWER PAINTING INC., et al., Case No.
1:23-cv-01708-JRR (D. Md.), the Hon. Judge Julie R. Rubin entered
an order denying the Motion for stay of remand order pending
appeal.
The Court said that the Defendants fail to demonstrate that any
factor weighs significantly in favor of a stay. As the court
succinctly stated in Mayor and City Council of Baltimore,
"Defendants may seek, and the state court may issue, a stay pending
the Fourth Circuit's resolution of the appeal of the remand.
However, the Defendants have not met their burden of demonstrating
that this Court should issue a stay pending appeal."
On May 10, 2023, the Plaintiffs initiated suit in the Circuit Court
for Baltimore City alleging that they "sustained property value
depreciation as a result of lead contamination caused by the
wrongful and negligent conduct of the Defendants."
On June 23, 2023, the Defendants removed the action to this court.
The Plaintiffs subsequently filed a motion to remand, which this
court granted.
On March 21, 2024, the Defendants filed petitions for permission to
appeal with the Fourth Circuit.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Puxo7w at no extra
charge.[CC]
STRONGHOLD DIGITAL: Actions Consolidated in Bruno Class Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GLENN BRUNO, Derivatively
on Behalf of Nominal Defendant STRONGHOLD DIGITAL MINING, INC., v.
GREGORY A. BEARD, WILLIAM B. SPENCE, RICARDO R.A. LARROUDE, SARAH
P. JAMES, THOMAS J. PACCHIA, MATTHEW J. SMITH, and THOMAS R.
TROWBRIDGE, IV, and STRONGHOLD DIGITAL MINING, INC., Case No.
1:24-cv-798-JGLC-GS (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Gary Stein entered
an order granting the parties' joint motion to consolidate Case
Nos. 1:23 Civ. 10028 (RA) (GS) and 1:24 Civ. 798 (RA) (GS).
On Sept. 5, 2023, the Plaintiff Wilson filed a Verified Stockholder
Derivative Complaint for violations of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, abuse
of control, gross mismanagement, and unjust enrichment.
On Oct. 24, 2023, the Court entered an order consolidating the
Wilson and Navarro Actions into an action styled In re Stronghold
Digital Mining, Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, and
appointing The Brown Law Firm, P.C. and Lifshitz Law PLLC as
Co-Lead Counsel representing plaintiffs in the Consolidated
Action.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=2iYa8c at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Joshua M. Lifshitz, Esq.
LIFSHITZ LAW PLLC
1190 Broadway
Hewlett, NY 11557
Telephone: (516) 493-9780
Facsimile: (516) 280-7376
E-mail: jlifshitz@lifshitzlaw.com
- and -
Timothy Brown, Esq.
Saadia Hashmi, Esq.
THE BROWN LAW FIRM, P.C.
767 Third Avenue, Suite 2501
New York, NY 10017
Telephone: (516) 922-5427
Facsimile: (516) 344-6204
E-mail: tbrown@thebrownlawfirm.net
shashmi@thebrownlawfirm.net
- and -
Melissa A. Fortunato, Esq.
J. Brandon Walker, Esq.
BRAGAR EAGEL & SQUIRE, P.C.
810 Seventh Avenue, Suite 620
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (212) 308-5858
E-mail: fortunato@bespc.com
walker@bespc.com
- and -
Serina M. Vash, Esq.
John C. Herman, Esq.
HERMAN JONES LLP
153 Central Avenue, # 131
Westfield, NJ 07090
Telephone: (404) 504-6516
E-mail: svash@hermanjones.com
jherman@hermanjones.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Sandra D. Grannum, Esq.
FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE &
REATH LLP
1177 Avenue of the Americas, 41st Floor
New York, NY 10036-2714
Telephone: (212) 248-3140
E-mail: Sandra.grannum@faegredrinker.com
- and -
Marisa Antonelli, Esq.
Jeffrey Crough, Esq.
VINSON & ELKINS LLP
1114 Avenue of Americas
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: (212) 237-0000
Facsimile: (212) 237-0100
E-mail: mantonelli@velaw.com
jcrough@velaw.com
STRONGHOLD DIGITAL: Actions Consolidated in Parker Class Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JEFF PARKER and TIAN YANG,
Derivatively on Behalf of STRONGHOLD DIGITAL MINING, INC., v.
GREGORY A. BEARD, WILLIAM B. SPENCE, RICARDO R.A. LARROUDE, SARAH
P. JAMES, THOMAS J. PACCHIA, MATTHEW J. SMITH, and THOMAS R.
TROWBRIDGE, IV, and STRONGHOLD DIGITAL MINING, INC., Case No.
1:23-cv-10028-RA-GS (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Gary Stein entered
an order granting the parties' joint motion to consolidate Case
Nos. 1:23 Civ. 10028 (RA) (GS) and 1:24 Civ. 798 (RA) (GS).
On Sept. 5, 2023, the Plaintiff Wilson filed a Verified Stockholder
Derivative Complaint for violations of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, abuse
of control, gross mismanagement, and unjust enrichment.
On Oct. 24, 2023, the Court entered an order consolidating the
Wilson and Navarro Actions into an action styled In re Stronghold
Digital Mining, Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, and
appointing The Brown Law Firm, P.C. and Lifshitz Law PLLC as
Co-Lead Counsel representing plaintiffs in the Consolidated
Action.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=nHAywl at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Joshua M. Lifshitz, Esq.
LIFSHITZ LAW PLLC
1190 Broadway
Hewlett, NY 11557
Telephone: (516) 493-9780
Facsimile: (516) 280-7376
E-mail: jlifshitz@lifshitzlaw.com
- and -
Timothy Brown, Esq.
Saadia Hashmi, Esq.
THE BROWN LAW FIRM, P.C.
767 Third Avenue, Suite 2501
New York, NY 10017
Telephone: (516) 922-5427
Facsimile: (516) 344-6204
E-mail: tbrown@thebrownlawfirm.net
shashmi@thebrownlawfirm.net
- and -
Melissa A. Fortunato, Esq.
J. Brandon Walker, Esq.
BRAGAR EAGEL & SQUIRE, P.C.
810 Seventh Avenue, Suite 620
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (212) 308-5858
E-mail: fortunato@bespc.com
walker@bespc.com
- and -
Serina M. Vash, Esq.
John C. Herman, Esq.
HERMAN JONES LLP
153 Central Avenue, # 131
Westfield, NJ 07090
Telephone: (404) 504-6516
E-mail: svash@hermanjones.com
jherman@hermanjones.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Sandra D. Grannum, Esq.
FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE &
REATH LLP
1177 Avenue of the Americas, 41st Floor
New York, NY 10036-2714
Telephone: (212) 248-3140
E-mail: Sandra.grannum@faegredrinker.com
- and -
Marisa Antonelli, Esq.
Jeffrey Crough, Esq.
VINSON & ELKINS LLP
1114 Avenue of Americas
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: (212) 237-0000
Facsimile: (212) 237-0100
E-mail: mantonelli@velaw.com
jcrough@velaw.com
STRONGHOLD DIGITAL: Actions Consolidated in Stockholder Class Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re: STRONGHOLD DIGITAL MINING, INC.
STOCKHOLDER DERIVATIVE LITIGATION., Case No. 1:23-cv-07840-RA-GS
(S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Gary Stein entered an order granting the
parties' joint motion to consolidate Case Nos. 1:23 Civ. 10028 (RA)
(GS) and 1:24 Civ. 798 (RA) (GS).
On Sept. 5, 2023, the Plaintiff Wilson filed a Verified Stockholder
Derivative Complaint for violations of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, abuse
of control, gross mismanagement, and unjust enrichment.
On Oct. 24, 2023, the Court entered an order consolidating the
Wilson and Navarro Actions into an action styled In re Stronghold
Digital Mining, Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, and
appointing The Brown Law Firm, P.C. and Lifshitz Law PLLC as
Co-Lead Counsel representing plaintiffs in the Consolidated
Action.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Tucrdn at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Joshua M. Lifshitz, Esq.
LIFSHITZ LAW PLLC
1190 Broadway
Hewlett, NY 11557
Telephone: (516) 493-9780
Facsimile: (516) 280-7376
E-mail: jlifshitz@lifshitzlaw.com
- and -
Timothy Brown, Esq.
Saadia Hashmi, Esq.
THE BROWN LAW FIRM, P.C.
767 Third Avenue, Suite 2501
New York, NY 10017
Telephone: (516) 922-5427
Facsimile: (516) 344-6204
E-mail: tbrown@thebrownlawfirm.net
shashmi@thebrownlawfirm.net
- and -
Melissa A. Fortunato, Esq.
J. Brandon Walker, Esq.
BRAGAR EAGEL & SQUIRE, P.C.
810 Seventh Avenue, Suite 620
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (212) 308-5858
E-mail: fortunato@bespc.com
walker@bespc.com
- and -
Serina M. Vash, Esq.
John C. Herman, Esq.
HERMAN JONES LLP
153 Central Avenue, # 131
Westfield, NJ 07090
Telephone: (404) 504-6516
E-mail: svash@hermanjones.com
jherman@hermanjones.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Sandra D. Grannum, Esq.
FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE &
REATH LLP
1177 Avenue of the Americas, 41st Floor
New York, NY 10036-2714
Telephone: (212) 248-3140
E-mail: Sandra.grannum@faegredrinker.com
- and -
Marisa Antonelli, Esq.
Jeffrey Crough, Esq.
VINSON & ELKINS LLP
1114 Avenue of Americas
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: (212) 237-0000
Facsimile: (212) 237-0100
E-mail: mantonelli@velaw.com
jcrough@velaw.com
SYMETRA LIFE: Davis Must Oppose Summary Judgment Bid by May 24
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Dennis Davis, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. SYMETRA LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. 2:21-cv-00533-KKE (W.D. Wash.), the
Hon. Judge Kymberly Evanson entered an order modifying scheduling
order as follows:
Event Deadline
Deadline to file Plaintiff' opposition May 3, 2024
to Defendant's motion for summary judgment:
Deadline to file Defendant's reply brief May 24, 2024
in support of motion for summary judgment:
Settlement Conference, if mediation has been Sept. 23, 2024
requested by the parties per LCR 39.1, held
no later than:
Mediation per LCR 39.1, if requested by the Oct. 28, 2024
Parties, held no later than:
Symetra offers annuities, disability, medical, accidental, and life
insurance services.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=pVZRF1 at no extra
charge.[CC]
T-MOBILE USA: Class Cert Bid Filing in Bayani Extended to Sept. 20
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as EMAN BAYANI, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. T-MOBILE USA,
INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-00271-JHC (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge John
Chun entered an order extending the class certification deadlines
as follows:
Event Current
Proposed
Deadline
Deadline
Deadline for discovery related to Feb. 23, 2024 June 21,
2024
Numerosity. The parties agree to
Stay discovery on other issues
Until numerosity discovery is
complete:
Plaintiff's motion for class: June 21, 2024 Sept. 20,
2024
Certification:
Defendants' response to class July 19, 2024 Oct. 18,
2024
Certification motion:
Plaintiff's reply in support of Aug. 2, 2024 Nov. 1,
2024
Motion for class certification:
On Feb. 27, 2023, Plaintiff Eman Bayani commenced a putative class
action in this Court.
On Oct. 20, 2023, the Court issued an order granting in part and
denying in part T-Mobile's motion to dismiss.
On Nov. 3, 2023, the parties submitted a joint proposed case
schedule that included deadlines for completing discovery on
numerosity and for briefing class certification. The Court entered
the proposed schedule on Nov. 6, 2023.
On Nov. 28, 2023, the Plaintiff propounded discovery requests
directed at the issue of numerosity on T-Mobile. After multiple
agreed extensions, T-Mobile produced its initial objections and
responses on January 18, 2024. The parties met and conferred on the
discovery.
T-Mobile is an American wireless network operator.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=tju2wb at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Beth E. Terrell, Esq.
Adrienne D. McEntee, Esq.
Elizabeth A. Adams, Esq.
TERRELL MARSHALL LAW GROUP PLLC
936 North 34th Street, Suite 300
Seattle, WA 98103
Telephone: (206) 816-6603
E-mail: bterrell@terrellmarshall.com
amcentee@terrellmarshall.com
eadams@terrellmarshall.com
- and -
Joseph A. Fitapelli, Esq.
Frank J. Mazzaferro, Esq.
FITAPELLI & SCHAFFER, LLP
28 Liberty Street, 30th Floor
New York, NY 10005
Telephone: (212) 300-0375
E-mail: jfitapelli@fslawfirm.com
fmazzaferro@fslawfirm.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Stephen M. Rummage, Esq.
Jennifer K. Chung, Esq.
Daniel H. Leigh, Esq.
James Moon, Esq.
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300
Seattle, WA 98104
Telephone: (206) 622-3150
E-mail: steverummage@dwt.com
jenniferchung@dwt.com
danielleigh@dwt.com
jamesmoon@dwt.com
TCL NORTH: Faces Ramos Suit Over ADA Violations in N.D. Illinois
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against TCL North America,
Inc. The case is captioned as ESLIMERARI RAMOS, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, v. TCL NORTH AMERICA,
INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-01745 (N.D. Ill., March 1, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
TCL North America, Inc. is a consumer electronics manufacturer
based in California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yaakov Saks, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Email: ysaks@steinsakslegal.com
TELLURIDE RESORT: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert Bid by May 20
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Alvarez, et al., v.
Telluride Resort Partners, LLC, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-00354 (D.
Colo., Filed Feb. 7, 2023), the Hon. Judge John L. Kane entered an
order
Granting joint motion to extend time for class certification and
dispositive motions.
-- The Plaintiffs shall file the Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 motion for
class
certification and any party shall file the Fed. R. Civ. P. 56
motion for summary judgment on the issue of joint employment by
no
later than May 20, 2024.
The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA).[CC]
TENARIS SA: Class Settlement in Atanasio Gets Final Nod
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Atanasio v. Tenaris S.A.
et al. (Tenaris S.A. Securities Litigation), Case No.
1:18-cv-07059-KAM-SJB (E.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Kiyo Matsumoto
entered an order that:
-- the Lead Plaintiffs' motion for final approval of the Class
Action
Settlement and the Plan of Allocation is granted in its
entirety;
and
-- the Lead Counsel's motion for attorneys' fees, including an
award
of 33 1/3% of the Settlement Fund plus interest as attorneys'
fees, $83,935.26 in out-of-pocket litigation expenses, and a
total
PSLRA award of $15,000 in total ($7,500 for each Lead
Plaintiff)
is granted in its entirety.
The Clerk of Court is requested to enter Judgment and close this
case.
The Court finds that the requested reimbursement is based on
reasonably incurred expenses that "were essential to the successful
prosecution and resolution of the" instant case and that the
relevant expenses are adequately documented.
On Dec. 12, 2018, the Plaintiff commenced the instant securities
class action in the Eastern District of New York before Judge
Raymond Dearie, against the Defendants Tenaris S.A., Paolo Rocca,
and three other Defendants who have since been dismissed.
On Sept. 14, 2023, Lead Plaintiffs filed the instant motion seeking
final approval of the proposed settlement and the Court held a
settlement conference and fairness hearing on Oct. 19, 2023.
The Lead Plaintiffs filed a supplemental submission on March 29,
2024 confirming that claims processing was complete and outlining
the results of the processed claims.
Tenaris is a global manufacturer and supplier of steel pipes and
related services.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Hx36pF at no extra
charge.[CC]
TEVA PHARMA: Ct. Conditionally Certifies Class in Kushelowitz
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Barry Kushelowitz and
Kerri Baldwin, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, USA, Inc. and Teva Sales and
Marketing, Inc., Case No. 2:22-cv-07599-SDW-JRA (D.N.J.), the Hon.
Judge Susan D. Wigenton entered an order granting Baldwin's motion
to conditionally certify class pursuant to section 16(b) of the
Fair Labor Standard Act ("FLSA").
Accordingly, the Court is satisfied that Plaintiffs have met their
burden. It is clear from the pleadings and Teva's own admissions
that, although assigned to different products and markets, Sales
Specialists are required to undergo and successfully complete the
same training and are all classified as exempt from overtime pay
during such training.
The Plaintiffs initiated this lawsuit on December 30, 2022.
Because Teva allegedly classified all Sales Specialists as exempt
from overtime pay during training, paid them a base salary during
training, and utilize a uniform job description for all Sales
Specialist positions, on Oct. 25, 2023, Plaintiff filed the instant
motion seeking conditional certifications for all Sales Specialists
who worked in Teva's mandatory training during the three-year
liability period from Aug. 19, 2019, through December 2022.
The Plaintiffs are current and former Sales Specialists of the
Defendant.
Teva manufactures and markets generic pharmaceutical products.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=lultVv at no extra
charge.[CC]
TRINITY TEEN: Court OK's Class Cert Bid Following Remand
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CARLIE SHERMAN, ANNA
GOZUN, and AMANDA NASH, on behalf of themselves and all similarly
situated persons, v. TRINITY TEEN SOLUTIONS, INC., a Wyoming
corporation; ANGELA C. WOODWARD; JERRY D. WOODWARD; KARA WOODWARD;
KYLE WOODWARD; and DALLY-UP, LLC, a Wyoming limited liability
company, Case No. 2:20-cv-00215-SWS (D. Wyo.), the Hon. Judge Scott
Skavdahl entered an order granting class certification following
remand.
The Court previously denied class certification from which
Plaintiffs took an interlocutory appeal. The Tenth Circuit vacated
the class certification denial and remanded the matter for further
consideration by the Court.
The Plaintiffs putative class action alleges the parents of
"troubled teen" female minors paid to send their children to a
working ranch in northern Wyoming where the teens were supposed to
receive various forms of traditional and cutting-edge therapy and
schooling to address their misbehavior. The Plaintiffs are the
former teenaged residents of the ranch, and they contend the ranch
was light on the education and therapy.
Trinity is an all-teen-girls', residential treatment center,
treating dual diagnosis mental health patients.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=7eqKfO at no extra
charge.[CC]
TRUEACCORD CORP: Class Cert. Bid Filing in Quinn-Davis Due May 31
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as NINA QUINN-DAVIS,
Individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated, v.
TRUEACCORD CORP., Case No. 1:23-cv-23590-DSL (S.D. Fla.), the Hon.
Judge David Leibowitz entered an amended order setting jury trial
and class certification deadlines as follows:
Accordingly, this case remains set for trial during the Court’s
two-week trial calendar beginning on Nov. 4, 2024, but before the
Honorable David S. Leibowitz. Counsel for all parties shall also
appear at a calendar call at 1:45 p.m. on Oct. 29, 2024.
Unless instructed otherwise by subsequent order, the trial and all
other proceedings in this case shall be conducted in Courtroom 202A
at the U.S. Federal Building and Courthouse, 299 East Broward
Boulevard, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301.
The parties shall adhere to the following schedule:
-- Mediation shall be held on May 7, 2024, at 2:00 p.m.; Mediator
Barbara Locke.
-- The parties have filed all motions to amend pleadings or to
join
parties.
-- May 17, 2024. The parties shall exchange rebuttal expert
witness
summaries and reports.
-- Class Certification Motions due: May 31, 2024
-- All discovery, including expert discovery, June 28, 2024
shall be completed:
-- Class Certification Responses due: June 30, 2024
-- The parties must have completed mediation July 19, 2024
and filed a mediation report:
-- Hearing on Class Certification: July 31, 2024
-- The parties shall file all pre-trial Aug. 2, 2024
motions, including motions for summary
judgment, and Daubert motions:
-- The parties shall submit all trial Aug. 30, 2024
preparation materials including, but
not limited to, a joint pre-trial
stipulation of all undisputed facts,
proposed jury instructions and
TrueAccord provides debt recovery services.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=tB4GV5 at no extra
charge.[CC]
TSG ENTERPRISES: Faces Storey Suit Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kyle Storey, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. TSG Enterprises, LLC d/b/a Pure Hockey &
David Nectow, Defendant, Case No. 2481CV971 (Mass. Super.,
Middlesex Cty., April 12, 2024) seeks to recover damages arising
from the Pure Hockey's misclassification of Plaintiff and all other
similarly situated persons as overtime exempt in violation of the
Fair Labor Standards Act.
Plaintiff Storey was employed by Pure Hockey as an Assistant Store
Manager at its Burlington, Massachusetts store from approximately
December 2021 through November 2023.
Pure Hockey is a specialty retailer that sells hockey gear and
apparel and related products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Adam J. Shafran, Esq.
RUDOLPH FRIEDMANN LLP
92 State Street
Boston, MA 02109
Telephone: (617) 723-7700
Facsimile: (617) 227-0313
UNIBARNS TRADING: August 5 Extension for Class Cert Filing Sought
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ORLANDO JONES, v. UNIBARNS
TRADING, INC. d/b/a UNICE HAIR, Case No. 1:23-cv-00594-CCE-JEP
(M.D.N.C.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting
a 90-day extension of the current May 6, 2024, deadline to file a
motion for class certification to August 5, 2024.
Orlando Jones has filed this putative class action under the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. 227(c)(5), because he
received the text messages from Unibarns Trading, Inc. UNice Hair
despite being on the Do Not Call List and asking them to stop the
text messages in
response to several solicitations he received.
Unibarns is a modern logistic company.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 23, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=LgLZ74 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Anthony I. Paronich, Esq.
PARONICH LAW, P.C.
350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400
Hingham, MA 02043
Telephone: (617) 485-0018
Facsimile: (508) 318-8100
E-mail: anthony@paronichlaw.com
- and -
Karl S. Gwaltney, Esq.
MAGINNIS HOWARD
7706 Six Forks Road, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27615
Telephone: (919) 526-0450
Facsimile: (919) 882-8763
E-mail: kgwaltney@maginnishoward.com
UNITED HEALTH: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Mitchell Due Nov. 19
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Mitchell v. United Health
Centers of the San Joaquin Valley, Case No. 1:23-cv-00060 (E.D.
Cal., Filed Jan. 11, 2023), the Hon. Judge Jennifer L. Thurston
entered an order modifying the Court's scheduling order as
follows:
-- The deadline for non-expert disclosures Aug. 26, 2024
is extended to:
-- The deadline for expert disclosures is Sept. 15,
2024
extended to:
-- The deadline for rebuttal expert Nov. 12, 2024
disclosures is extended to:
-- The Plaintiff shall file a motion for Nov. 19, 2024
class certification by no later than:
The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
United is a private non-profit organization, established from a
grass root movement by people trying to improve access to
healthcare in their rural communities in California's Central
Valley.[CC]
UNITED SERVICES: Class Cert Hearing Extended to August 6
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as HAROLD J. DAVIDSON, a
married man, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, v. UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, a Texas
Corporation, Case No. 2:20-cv-00527-JWH-MAA (C.D. Cal.), the Hon.
Judge John Holcomb entered an order vacating the April 23, 2024,
deadline for expert disclosures.
That deadline will be reset following the court's decision on the
Plaintiff's motion for class certification.
The hearing on Plaintiff's motion for class certification is
continued to Aug. 6, 2024, at 10:00 a.m.
United Services is an American financial services company providing
insurance and banking products.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Jlpugq at no extra
charge.[CC]
UNITED STATES: Lewis Seeks to Certify Class
-------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHARLES LEWIS, et al., v.
UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-02182-RCL
(D.D.C.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order:
-- certifying a class as to all claims in this action, defined as
follows:
"All District of Columbia code parolees who meet all of the
following requirements: (1) have not had their parole
terminated
after being on parole continuously for five years; (2) have not
had a termination hearing once they reached five years; and (3)
have not had a termination hearing every two years thereafter
(where applicable)."
-- certifying Charles Lewis, Anthony Mack, Carlton Paige, and
Darin
Hagins as class representatives, and
-- appointing Zoe Friedland, Hanna Perry, and Maya Chaudhuri from
the
Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia as class
counsel.
United States Parole is the parole board responsible for granting
or denying parole to, and supervising the parole releases of,
incarcerated individuals who fall under its jurisdiction.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 19, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=gkdZEQ at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Zoe Friedland, Esq.
Hanna Perry, Esq.
Maya Chaudhuri, Esq.
PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICE
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
633 3rd St. N.W.
Washington, DC 20004
Telephone: (202) 824-2524
UNITED STATES: Must Respond to Parks Class Complaint
----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PARKS, et al., v.
Alejandro Mayorkas, Case No. 1:23-cv-03561 (D.D.C., Filed Nov. 29,
2023), the Hon. Judge Randolph D. Moss entered an order that the
Defendant shall respond to the complaint within 14 days after the
Court resolves Plaintiffs motion to extend time to move for class
certification.
The nature of suit states Employment Discrimination.[CC]
UNITED STATES: Olguin-Moreno Files Contract Suit in C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against United States
Automobile Association, et al. The case is captioned as HUGO
OLGUIN-MORENO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. UNITED STATES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, et al., Case No.
5:24-cv-00474-WLH-SHK (C.D. Cal., March 1, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged breach of
contract.
United States Automobile Association is an American financial
services company headquartered in San Antonio, Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Manfred Patrick Muecke, Esq.
MANFRED APC
600 West Broadway Suite 700
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 550-4005
Facsimile: (619) 550-4006
Email: mmuecke@manfredapc.com
- and -
Jae Kook Kim, Esq.
LYNCH CARPENTER LLP
117 East Colorado Boulevard, Suite 600
Pasadena, CA 91105
Telephone: (626) 550-1250
Facsimile: (619) 756-6991
Email: ekim@lcllp.com
- and -
Todd D. Carpenter, Esq.
LYNCH CARPENTER, LLP
1234 Camino del Mar
Del Mar, CA 92014
Telephone: (619) 762-1900
Facsimile: (724) 656-1556
Email: todd@lcllp.com
UNITED STATES: Popkova Class Suit Stayed for Additional 30 Days
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Larisa Popkova, DSHS
Employee No. 1, Paula Brantner-Thomas, DSHS Employee No. 2,
Katherine Rowlette, DSHS Employee No. 3, Karen Robbins, DSHS
Employee No. 4, Gary C. Bright, DSHS Employee No. 5, on behalf of
themselves and all other similarly situated persons, v. DEPARTMENT
OF SOCIAL AND HEALTH SERVICES, Don Clintsman and Jilma Meneses DOES
1-50, Case No. 3:23-cv-05130-DGE (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge David
Estudillo entered an order to stay the action for an additional 30
days.
The Court says that on or before the expiration of 30 days
following entry of this order, the parties shall file a status
report with the Court describing the status of the parties'
settlement discussions.
The Court has set no other deadlines in this matter, so no other
case deadlines will be affected by this request. This stay will
continue to conserve the resources of the Court and the parties and
will additionally facilitate a resolution of this action.
On Jan. 11, 2024 and Feb. 14, 2024, the parties jointly requested
extensions of the class certification briefing schedule to enable
the parties to focus their efforts on resolving the class
certification issues without Court involvement.
On March 15, 2024, the parties jointly asked the Court to strike
the class certification briefing schedule and to stay the action
for 30 days while the parties worked toward resolution. The Court
granted that request on March 18, 2024.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=sTDITL at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Tracy Tribbett, Esq.
Harold Franklin, Esq.
PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE
6404 Three Rivers Drive
Pasco, WA 99301
Telephone: (509) 713-9868
E-mail: ttribbett@pji.org
hfranklin@pji.org
The Defendants are represented by:
Mary Crego Peterson, Esq.
Michael J. Ewart, Esq.
HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON P.S.
999 Third Avenue, Suite 4600
Seattle, WA 98104
Telephone: (206) 623-1745
E-mail: mary.peterson@hcmp.com
jake.ewart@hcmp.com
UR JADDOU: General Pretrial Management Order Entered in Sevastianov
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as IGOR SEVASTIANOV, v. UR
JADDOU, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-01075-DEH-BCM (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon.
Judge Barbara Moses entered an order regarding general pretrial
management as follows:
-- All pretrial motions and applications, including those related
to
scheduling and discovery (but excluding motions to dismiss or
for
judgment on the pleadings, for injunctive relief, for summary
judgment, or for class certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23)
must be made to Judge Moses and in compliance with this Court's
Individual Practices in Civil Cases, available on the Court's
website at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-barbara-moses.
-- The Plaintiff is reminded that it is his obligation to serve
the
summons and complaint on each defendant within 90 days of the
issuance of the summonses.
-- The Plaintiff must serve a copy of this Order on all defendants
served with the summons and complaint.
-- The Plaintiff must file with the Court an affidavit with proof
of
service of the summons and complaint (and this Order) on each
defendant.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=IuVmm1 at no extra
charge.[CC]
US CUSTOMS: Mora Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Julian SANCHEZ MORA,
Siobhan WALDRON, Carlos Moctezuma GARCIA, Brenda CANUDAS TIRADO,
and Ali AINAB, v. U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION; and U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, Case No. 3:24-cv-02430-JCS (N.D.
Cal.), the Plaintiffs will move this Court for class certification
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.
The Plaintiffs seek an order from this Court certifying the
proposed class, appointing the named Plaintiffs as class
representatives, and appointing the undersigned attorneys as class
counsel.
The Plaintiffs challenge the Defendant U.S. Customs and Border
Protection's (CBP) nationwide pattern and practice of failing to
respond to requests for records under the Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA) within the timeframe mandated by the statute.
The Plaintiffs are attorneys and individuals who seek records that
pertain to their clients and themselves, respectively, including
records related to an individual's entry into and/or exit from the
United States, admission, criminal history, and records of
inspection, apprehensions, or interactions with CBP employees.
These records are critical to determining eligibility for
immigration benefits, including lawful permanent residence,
naturalization, and acquisition of citizenship; defending against
deportation; responding to automobile seizures; and/or
investigating damages claims
based on tortious or unconstitutional conduct by CBP employees, the
Plaintiffs contend.
Pursuant to Rules 23(a) and 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, the Plaintiffs move the Court to certify the following
class:
"All persons who filed, or will file, FOIA requests with CBP
for
an individual's records which have been pending, or will be
pending, with CBP for more than 30 business days without a
determination."
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 24, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=fLzqh2 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Trina Realmuto, Esq.
Mary Kenney, Esq.
Aidan Langston, Esq.
NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LITIGATION ALLIANCE
10 Griggs Terrace
Brookline, MA, 02446
Telephone: (617) 819-4447
- and -
Matt Adams, Esq.
Leila Kang, Esq.
NORTHWEST IMMIGRANT RIGHTS PROJECT
615 Second Avenue, Suite 400
Seattle, WA 98104
Telephone: (206) 957-8611
- and -
Marc Van Der Hout, Esq.
Johnny Sinodis, Esq.
VAN DER HOUT LLC
360 Post St., Suite 800
San Francisco, CA 94108
Telephone: (415) 981-3000
USA WASTE: Eigenberg Files Torts Suit in C.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against USA Waste of
California, Inc. The case is captioned as HOWARD EIGENBERG,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. USA
WASTE OF CALIFORNIA, INC., Case No. 5:24-cv-00490-SVW-SHK (C.D.
Cal., March 5, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged torts to land.
USA Waste of California, Inc. is a solid waste & recycling company
headquartered in California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mickel M. Arias, Esq.
Arnold C. Wang, Esq.
Michael Anthony Jenkins, Esq.
ARIAS SANGUINETTI WANG AND TORRIJOS LLP
6701 Center Drive West, 14th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90045
Telephone: (310) 844-9696
Facsimile: (310) 861-0168
Email: mike@aswtlawyers.com
anthony@aswtlawyers.com
- and -
D. Reed Solt, Esq.
Laura L. Sheets, Esq.
Matthew Z. Robb, Esq.
Steven D. Liddle, Esq.
LIDDLE SHEETS COULSON PC
975 East Jefferson Avenue
Detroit, MI 48207
Telephone: (313) 392-0015
Facsimile: (313) 392-0025
Email: lsheets@LSCcounsel.com
mrobb@LSCcounsel.com
sliddle@LSCcounsel.com
VALVE CORP: Brooks, et al., Bid to Intervene OK'd in Antitrust Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Wolfire Games LLC et al v.
Valve Corporation (VALVE ANTITRUST LITIGATION), Case No.
2:21-cv-00563-JCC (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge John Coughenour
entered an order granting Jason Brooks, Robert Austin McCuistion,
and Apeirogon Games' motions to intervene.
The Court said that the proposed Intervenors sought leave to
intervene and submitted opposition briefs in lockstep with the
parties’ briefing on Defendant’s motion to seal.
The Plaintiffs Wolfire Games, LLC, Dark Catt Studios Holdings,
Inc., and Dark Catt Studios Interactive, LLC recently moved the
Court to certify a class of game developers and/or game publishers
who paid the Defendant for the use or sale of their games on the
Defendant's game platform.
In doing so, Plaintiffs filed under seal unredacted versions of
their motion and supporting exhibits in accordance with a prior
order from this Court. The Defendant then moved to maintain the
unredacted filings under seal, based on what it deems to be
confidential information included in those filings.
Proposed Intervenors Brooks and McCuistion, as gamers and consumers
of Defendant's platform, assert an interest in this matter and,
correspondingly, the redacted information and sealed documents
relating to Plaintiff’s motion for class certification.
Specifically, they contend that, as game consumers, they have
effectively borne the cost of the allegedly inflated commissions
paid to Defendant. And because this Court has previously ruled that
their claims must be brought through arbitration, they require
access to this information to assist in pursuing their individual
claims.
Valve is an American video game developer, publisher, and digital
distribution company.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=dwiPdF at no extra
charge.[CC]
VALVE CORPORATION: Bids to Seal Docs OK'd in Antitrust Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Wolfire Games LLC et al v.
Valve Corporation (VALVE ANTITRUST LITIGATION), Case No.
2:21-cv-00563-JCC (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge John C. Coughenour
entered an order granting motions to seal by non-parties Epic
Games, Inc. and Microsoft, Inc., along with Plaintiffs Dark Catt
Studios Holdings, Inc. and Dark Catt Studios Interactive, LLC.
The Clerk is directed to maintain under seal the portions of Docket
Numbers 192, 182-27, 182-48, and 182-74 described in the movants'
motions.
No party has lodged an opposition to the movants' motions to seal.
Therefore, the Court concludes that each have merit, regardless of
which standard need be applied.
The Plaintiffs recently moved the Court for the certification of a
class of game developers and/or game publishers who paid Defendant
for the use or sale of the developers/publishers' games on
Defendant's game platform.
Valve is an American video game developer, publisher, and digital
distribution company.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=VfToe4 at no extra
charge.[CC]
VIBRANT HEALTHCARE: Class Discovery in Jackson Extended to June 28
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GERARD JACKSON, v. VIBRANT
HEALTHCARE, LLC, Case No. 4:22-cv-01221-MWB (M.D. Pa.), the Hon.
Judge Matthew Brann entered an order granting extending:
-- class certification discovery to June 28, 2024; and
-- the deadline for the Plaintiff to file a motion for class
certification deadline is July 5, 2024.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=FMxi0I at no extra
charge.[CC]
VIBRANT HEALTHCARE: July 5 Extension for Class Cert Filing Sought
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GERARD JACKSON, v. VIBRANT
HEALTHCARE, LLC, Case No. 4:22-cv-01221-MWB (M.D. Pa.), the
Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order extending the discovery
to June 28, 2024, and the deadline for the Plaintiff to file a
motion for class certification to July 5, 2024.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 19, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=7KyKCQ at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Anthony I. Paronich, Esq.
PARONICH LAW, P.C.
350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400
Hingham, MA 02043
Telephone: (617) 485-0018
E-mail: anthony@paronichlaw.com
VIRGINIA FARM: Dilello Files Personal Property Suit in E.D. Va.
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Virginia Farm Bureau
Holding Corporation, et al. The case is captioned as THOMAS
DILELLO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. VIRGINIA FARM BUREAU HOLDING CORPORATION, et al., Case
No. 3:24-cv-00156-HEH (E.D. Va., March 2, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendants' alleged personal property
violations.
Virginia Farm Bureau Holding Corporation is a company that offers
insurance services in Virginia. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Steven T. Webster, Esq.
WEBSTER BOOK LLP
300 N. Washington Street, Suite 404
Alexandria, VA 22314
Telephone: (888) 987-9991
Facsimile: (888) 987-9991
Email: swebster@websterbook.com
- and -
Carl Vincent Malmstrom, Esq.
WOLF HALDENSTEIN ALDER FREEMAN & HERZ LLC
111 W. Jackson Boulevard, Suite 1700
Chicago, IL 60604
Telephone: (312) 984-0000
Facsimile: (212) 686-0114
Email: malmstrom@whafh.com
- and -
Matthew Thomas Sutter, Esq.
SUTTER & TERPAK PLLC
Annandale, VA 22003
Telephone: (703) 256-1800
Facsimile: (730) 991-6116
Email: matt@sutterandterpak.com
VIRGINIA FARM: Noel Files Contract Suit in E.D. Virginia
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Virginia Farm Bureau
Insurance Company. The case is captioned as CAMERON NOEL,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
VIRGINIA FARM BUREAU INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. 3:24-cv-00155-HEH
(E.D. Va., March 2, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged contract
violations.
Virginia Farm Bureau Insurance Company is an insurance firm in
Virginia. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew Thomas Sutter, Esq.
SUTTER & TERPAK PLLC
Annandale, VA 22003
Telephone: (703) 256-1800
Facsimile: (730) 991-6116
Email: matt@sutterandterpak.com
- and -
Jason S. Rathod, Esq.
Nicholas Alexander Migliaccio, Esq.
MIGLIACCIO AND RATHOD LLP
412 H. St. NE
Washington, DC 20002
Telephone: (202) 470-3520
Email: jrathod@classlawdc.com
nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com
VIRGINIA: Court Narrows Claims in Mallory Suit
----------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Mallory Patterson, Emily
Comer, Carla McDowney, v. Virginia Department of Corrections,
Director Chadwick Dotson, Case No. 3:23-cv-00757-DJN (E.D. Va.),
the Hon. Judge David Novak entered an order granting in part and
denying in part the Defendants' joint motion to dismiss.
The Court grants the motion to dismiss Counts III and IV, as to the
Plaintiffs' class and individual claims. However, the Court denies
the motion to dismiss Counts I and II. This order should not be
construed as ruling on the merits of the Plaintiffs' class claims
in Counts I and II, as the Court will direct the class
certification to be briefed in a forthcoming scheduling order.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=8M9vC9 at no extra
charge.[CC]
VMSB LLC: Seeks More Time for Conditional Cert Response in Volpe
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ERIC VOLPE, ENZO FERRER,
AND VINCENZO MATINO, each individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated, v. VMSB LLC, a Florida limited liability
company, Case No. 1:23-cv-23888-RAR (S.D. Fla.), the Defendant asks
the Court to enter an order granting a 7-day extension of time to
file its response to the motion for conditional certification, up
and through April 29, 2024, and award such other relief the Court
deems proper.
The requested enlargement is brief, is not made for purpose of
delay and will not cause any undue delay or prejudice to
Plaintiffs. Pursuant to S.D. Fla. L.R. 7.1, counsel for VMSB
certifies that he has conferred with counsel for the Plaintiffs,
and that they do not oppose the requested relief.
This is an action for claims of purported violations of the Fair
Labor Standards Act (FLSA) brought by the Plaintiffs, current
employees of VMSB.
On Dec. 28, 2023, the Plaintiffs served its Amended Fair Labor
Standards Act Complaint upon VMSB.
On Jan. 11, 2024, VMSB filed a Motion to Dismiss the Amended
Complaint, which the Court scheduled for hearing on April 23, 2024.
On Apr. 2, 2024, the Court, after a sua sponte review of the record
noting that the deadline to move for conditional certification had
passed, entered an Order to Show Cause requiring the Plaintiffs to
file their motion for conditional certification by April 8, 2024.
A copy of the Defendant's motion dated April 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=zf0bFc at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendant is represented by:
Andrew B. Zelmanowitz, Esq.
Nikki Branch, Esq.
BERGER SINGERMAN, LLP
201 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1500
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 525-9900
Facsimile: (954) 523-2872
E-mail: azelman@bergersingerman.com
nbranch@bergersingerman.com
DRT@bergersingerman.com
VOYA RETIREMENT: Solorzano Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime
------------------------------------------------------------
JUAN SOLORZANO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. VOYA RETIREMENT INSURANCE and ANNUITY
COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 2:24-cv-00837-DGC (D. Ariz., April 12,
2024) arises under the Fair Labor Standards Act for Defendant's
failure to pay Plaintiff and other similarly situated phone
representatives all overtime pay for all time worked in excess of
40 hours per week.
The Plaintiff is an individual who Defendant employed as an hourly,
non-exempt telephone-dedicated employee at the call center operated
by Defendant located in Tempe, Arizona from approximately January
2019 to August 2023.
Voya Retirement Insurance is a financial and investment company
offering financial products and services and health insurance
products and services throughout Arizona and the United
States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James X. Bormes, Esq.
Catherine P. Sons, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF JAMES X. BORMES, P.C.
8 South Michigan Avenue Suite 2600
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: (312) 201-0575
E-mail: jxbormes@bormeslaw.com
cpsons@bormeslaw.com
- and -
Thomas M. Ryan, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS M. RYAN, P.C.
35 East Wacker Drive Suite 650
Chicago, IL 60601
Telephone: (312) 726-3400
E-mail: tom@tomryanlaw.com
- and -
Michelle R. Matheson, Esq.
MATHESON & MATHESON, P.L.C.
15300 North 90th Street, Suite 550
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
Telephone: (480) 889-8951
E-mail: mmatheson@mathesonlegal.com
WALMART INC: Class Cert. Filing Extended to June 17
---------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SUSAN GAGETTA and TRACIE
GOMEZ, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
v. WALMART INC., Case No. 3:22-cv-03757-AMO (N.D. Cal.), the Hon.
Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin entered an order extending time to
file motion for class certification as follows:
Event Original Date Proposed
Date
Motion for Class Certification May 13, 2024 June 17, 2024
and Expert Reports Due:
Defendant's Opposition to July 9, 2024 Aug. 8, 2024
Motion for Class Certification,
Expert Reports and Daubert
Motions Due:
Plaintiffs' Class Cert Reply, Aug. 13, 2024 Sept. 12,
2024
Daubert Opposition and
Daubert Motions Due
Defendants Daubert Reply and Aug. 27, 2024 Sept. 26,
2024
Opposition to Daubert
Motions Due:
Plaintiffs' Daubert Reply Sept. 10, 2024 Oct. 10,
2024
Due:
Close of Fact Discovery: Sept. 20, 2024 Oct. 21, 2024
Hearing on Motion for Class Oct. 24, 2024 Nov. 7, 2024
Certification and Daubert
Motions
Walmart operates a chain of hypermarkets, discount department
stores, and grocery stores.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=RdrdLP at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
L. Timothy Fisher, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1990 North California Boulevard, Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 300-4455
Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
E-mail: ltfisher@bursor.com
- and -
Jonathan Shub, Esq.
SHUB & JOHNS LLC
Four Tower Bridge
200 Barr Harbor Drive, Suite 400
Conshohocken, PA 19428
Telephone: (610) 477-8380
E-mail: jshub@shublawyers.com
- and -
Kevin Laukaitis, Esq.
LAUKAITIS LAW FIRM LLC
954 Avenida Ponce De Leon Suite 205, #10518
San Juan, PR 00907
Telephone: (215) 789-4462
E-mail: klaukaitis@laukaitislaw.com
- and -
Gary E. Mason, Esq.
Danielle Perry, Esq.
MASON LLP
5335 Wisconsin Avenue NW, Suite 460
Washington, DC 20015
Telephone: (202) 640-1168
E-mail: gmason@masonllp.com
dperry@masonllp.com
- and -
Lori G. Feldman, Esq.
David J. George, Esq.
Brittany L. Brown, Esq.
Janine L. Pollack, Esq.
Michael Liskow, Esq.
GEORGE FELDMAN MCDONALD, PLLC
102 Half Moon Bay Drive Croton-on-Hudson, NY 10520
Telephone: (833) 346-3587
E-mail: lfeldman@4-justice.com
eservice@4-justice.com
dgeorge@4-justice.com
bbrown@4-justice.com
eservice@4-justice.com
jpollack@4-justice.com
mliskow@4-justice.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Livia M. Kiser, Esq.
Rose J. Hunter jones, Esq.
Michael l. Resch, Esq.
Ethan p. Davis, Esq.
Samuel r. Diamant, Esq.
KING & SPALDING LLP
50 California Street, Suite 3300
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 318-1200
Facsimile: (415) 318-1300
E-mail: lkiser@kslaw.com
rjones@kslaw.com
mresch@kslaw.com
edavis@kslaw.com
sdiamant@kslaw.com
WASHINGTON: Johnston Must Submit Forma Pauperis Application
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KURT J. ANGELONE, JOHN
GRIFFIN HEADRICK, ADAM PERSELL, ALEX MIYARES, and JONATHAN
JOHNSTON, v. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
SUPERINTENDENT RONALD
HAYNES, AHCC, AARON BROWN, LANCE HALL, SGT. D. YOUNG, SGT.
McKINNEY, DANIEL JONES, JANE and JOHN DOE CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS AND
PERSONNEL, Case No. 2:24-cv-00096-TOR (E.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge
Thomas Rice entered an order that:
(1) Within 30 days of the date of this Order, the Plaintiff
Jonathan Johnston shall submit a completed and signed
declaration and application to proceed in forma pauperis by
a
prisoner bringing a Civil Rights Action Pursuant to 42
U.S.C.
section 1983;
(2) In the alternative, the Plaintiff Jonathan Johnston may pay
a
full $405.00 filing fee ($350.00 statutory filing fee, plus
$55.00 administrative fee);
(3) The Plaintiff Jonathan Johnston's failure to comply with
this
Order will be construed as his consent to being dismissed
from
this action.
(4) The Clerk of Court shall re-note for hearing the Motion for
Class Certification, Memorandum, Declarations in Support,
Requesting Appointment of Interim Counsel to Protect Class
Pending Certification and Appointment of Counsel; or Joinder
of
Parties by All Plaintiffs, ECF No. 3, to 30 days after the
date
of this Order and terminate the current hearing deadline for
this Motion.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=EaDe45 at no extra
charge.[CC]
WASTE INDUSTRIES: Faces Stone Soup Contract Suit in D.S.C.
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Waste Industries,
LLC, et al. The case is captioned as STONE SOUP MARKET AND CAFE,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
WASTE INDUSTRIES, LLC, et al., Case No. 7:24-cv-01137-TMC (D.S.C.,
March 5, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendants' alleged breach of
contract.
Stone Soup Market and Cafe is a restaurant owner and operator in
Landrum, South Carolina.
Waste Industries, LLC is a solid waste & recycling company
headquartered in Raleigh, North Carolina. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Christopher James Moore, Esq.
RICHARDSON THOMAS HALTIWANGER MOORE AND LEWIS
1513 Hampton Street, 1st Floor
Columbia, SC 29201
Telephone: (803) 281-8147
Facsimile: (803) 632-8263
Email: chris@richardsonthomas.com
- and -
Grace Madeline Babcock, Esq.
RICHARDSON THOMAS HALTIWANGER MOORE AND LEWIS
1513 Hampton Street, First Floor
Columbia, SC 29205
Telephone: (803) 440-8500
Facsimile: (803) 632-8263
Email: grace@richardsonthomas.com
- and -
Patrick Eugene Knie, Esq.
KNIE AND SHEALY
P.O. Box 5159
250 Magnolia Street (29306)
Spartanburg, SC 29304
Telephone: (864) 582-5118
Facsimile: (864) 585-1615
Email: pat@knieshealy.com
WELLS FARGO: Filing for Class Cert. Bid in SEB Due June 4
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SEB INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT
AB, et al., v. WELLS FARGO & COMPANY, et al., Case No.
3:22-cv-03811-TLT (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Trina Thompson
entered a revised case management and scheduling order as follows:
Trial Date: May 5, 2025
Final Pretrial Conference: April 3, 2025
Last day to file dispositive motions: Dec. 20, 2024
Fact Discovery Cut-Off: Aug. 9, 2024
Expert Discovery Cut-Off: Nov. 22, 2024
Private Mediation to be completed by: Aug. 30, 2024
Class Certification:
Motion: June 4, 2024
Opposition: June 25, 2024
Reply: July 9, 2024
Hearing: July 23, 2024, 2:00 p.m.
Wells Fargo provides personal banking, investing, mortgage, and
commercial finance.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=0dAL1D at no extra
charge.[CC]
WEST COVINA: Class Action Waiver in Arbitration Deal Enforceable
----------------------------------------------------------------
Travis J. Anderson and Shannon Z. Petersen, writing for National
Law Review, reports that In Flores v. West Covina Auto Group, ---
Cal.Rptr.3d ----, 2013 WL 139200 (Cal.App. 2 Dist. Jan. 11, 2013),
the California Court of Appeal extended the U.S. Supreme Court's
landmark decision in AT&T Mobility, Inc. v. Concepcion, 131 S. Ct.
1740 (2011) by holding that the Federal Arbitration Act preempts
any right to a class action under the California Consumers Legal
Remedies Act ("CLRA"), and class action waivers in arbitration
agreements governed by the FAA are therefore enforceable.
The CLRA grants consumers the right to file class actions to
enforce its terms, and -- according to the Flores court -- provides
that "any waiver by a consumer" of this right "is contrary to
public policy and shall be unenforceable and void." Cal. Civ. Code
Sec. 1751. The court determined that the FAA preempts the CLRA's
antiwaiver provision because the latter "stands as an obstacle to
the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objective
of the FAA," which is to enforce arbitration agreements according
to their terms. If an arbitration provision is subject to the FAA
and contains a class action waiver, the waiver must be enforced
regardless of state public policy concerns.
In Flores, consumers filed a putative class action against an car
dealership, alleging the dealership sold them a "lemon" and failed
to fully disclose all sale terms. The dealership moved to compel
arbitration and enforce the class action waiver contained in a form
contract widely used by dealerships throughout California.
Plaintiffs opposed, contending the CLRA prevented enforcement of
the class action waiver, and that the arbitration agreement was
unconscionable and therefore unenforceable. The trial court granted
the dealership's motion and compelled arbitration.
The Court of Appeal affirmed. In doing so, it disagreed with Fisher
v. DCH Temecula Imports LLC, 187 Cal.App.4th 601 (2010), which had
denied arbitration on the ground that the CLRA establishes an
unwaivable right to bring class actions. The Flores court correctly
noted that, "since Fisher, the United States Supreme Court's
decision in Concepcion has altered the legal landscape
substantially." The Court of Appeal found "no meaningful
distinction" between the CLRA's antiwaiver provision and the
preempted class action waiver rule in Concepcion, and held that the
FAA preempted both Fisher and the CLRA's prohibition against class
waivers.
The Flores court further held that the arbitration agreement was
not substantively unconscionable for any other reason. Plaintiffs
focused on four terms they claimed were one-sided in favor of the
dealership -- 1) a party who loses at arbitration can appeal to a
panel of three arbitrators only if the award is $0, exceeds
$100,000, or grants injunctive relief; 2) the dealership only pays
the first $2,500 of plaintiffs' arbitration costs; 3) only certain
arbitration organizations could be selected by the plaintiffs
without the dealership's approval; and 4) self-help remedies,
including the right to repossession, are excluded from arbitration.
Citing Pinnacle Museum Tower Association v. Pinnacle Market
Development (US), LLC, 55 Cal.4th 223 (2012), the Flores court held
that none of these terms were "so one-sided as to shock the
conscience." Thus, the agreement was fully enforceable.
The California Supreme Court will soon address these and/or related
issues in Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co. LLC, 201 Cal.App.4th 74
(2011) review granted, 139 Cal.Rptr.3d 2 (Mar. 21, 2012), which
involves the same form contract. [GN]
WEST OF CHICAGO: Lee Files Labor Suit in California State Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against West of Chicago
Restaurants, Inc., et al. The case is captioned as MIKAYLA LEE, et
al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
v. WEST OF CHICAGO RESTAURANTS, INC., et al., Case No. 24CV004334
(Cal. Super., Sacramento Cty., March 6, 2024).
A case management conference is set for February 28, 2025, before
Judge Richard K. Sueyoshi.
West of Chicago Restaurants, Inc. is a restaurant company in
California. [BN]
WHEATLEIGH CORP: Employees Wait for Class Settlement in Labor Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Mass. Lawyers Weekly reports that where the parties have reached a
global settlement agreement in a class action brought by wait staff
employees, that agreement should be approved as fair, reasonable
and adequate.
"Defendants raise several arguments in opposition to final
approval. First, Defendants argue that Plaintiff has not submitted
any evidence that Class Counsel obtained informed consent for a
global settlement of this class action and the Individual Cases as
required by Mass. R. Prof. C. 1.8(g) ('Rule 1.8(g)'), which
prohibits a lawyer who represents two or more clients from
participating in making an aggregate settlement of the claims
absent informed consent in a writing signed by each client.
Defendants do not cite to any authority to support the argument
that Plaintiff has the burden to prove that she and the Individual
Plaintiffs provided informed consent. . . .
"Second, Defendants claim that Plaintiff failed to identify all
agreements made in connection with the settlement proposal as
required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(e)(3), because Plaintiff failed to
identify joint representation and co-counsel agreements involving
Class Counsel and Michael A. Rivkin, an associate with the law firm
Cohen Kinne Valicenti & Cook, for Plaintiff and each of the
Individual Plaintiffs. Defendants have not pointed to any case
holding that Class Counsel may not rely on the services of an
attorney employed by a different firm to provide representation to
class members. In the court's experience, Cohen Kinne Valicenti &
Cook is a very reputable Berkshire County law firm that provides
highly competent representation to its clients. Rule 23(e)(3)
requires parties seeking approval of a class action settlement to
file a statement identifying any agreement made in connection with
the proposal. The agreements, which were drafted and signed in 2018
at the beginning of the litigation, were not 'made in connection
with the [settlement] proposal' in 2021. Thus, Defendants have not
shown that Plaintiff was obliged to identify them, and Defendants'
argument is unavailing.
"Third, Defendants maintain that the order certifying the class
failed to identify which specific claims of Plaintiff's were being
certified as required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(c)(1)(B). As noted by the
court in the order granting Plaintiff's motion for class
certification and certifying the Class, Plaintiff sought class
certification as to all her state law claims but did not seek
certification of a collective action as to her FLSA claims (Dkt.
No. 113 at 2). The court's granting of the motion and certifying of
the Class correspondingly included all of Plaintiff's state law
claims, as evidenced by the court's discussion of the relevant
state law in connection with its analysis of the suitability of the
proposed class for certification. However, even if the court's
certification order were deficient on this point, 'an order
certifying a class and detailing the class composition and the
case's issues and claims . . . can [be] amend[ed] before final
judgment.' . . . In the court's view, Defendants waived the
argument that the certification order was deficient by failing to
raise it at the time of preliminary approval and then failing to
file a proposed alternative by the deadline set by the court at the
fairness hearing. Nevertheless, the court alters or amends the
certification order to clarify that the claims for which the Class
is certified include: (1) that Defendants violated Mass. Gen. Laws
ch. 151, Secs.1 and 7 by paying the service rate to compensate
Plaintiff and members of the Class when they should have received
the full minimum wage due to Defendants' unlawful distribution of
its tip pools, the un-tipped tasks to which Plaintiff and members
of the Class were assigned, and Defendants' failure to provide
proper written notice before utilizing the service rate (Count I);
(2) that Defendants violated Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149, Sec.152A by
unlawfully distributing wages from the tip pool to non-wait staff
employees and supervisors (Count III); and (3) that Defendants
violated Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149, Secs.148 and 150 by failing to
timely pay wages to Plaintiff and members of the Class (Count IV).
. . .
"The court has discretion to calculate reasonable counsel fees as a
percentage of the fund ('POF') or by utilizing a lodestar analysis.
. . .
"Consideration of the pertinent factors supports the 27.2% POF
sought here. . . .
Class Counsel is awarded $92,893.20 in attorneys' fees."
Mongue v. The Wheatleigh Corporation, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No.
02-213-24) (15 pages) (Robertson, U.S.M.J.) (Civil No.
3:18-cv-30095-KAR) (April 16, 2024). [GN]
ZENTECH BLOOMINGTON: Ct Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Pryczynski
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Pryczynski v. Zentech
Bloomington, LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-01451-JBM-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.
Zentech is an engineering driven electronics contract
manufacturer.
A copy of the Court's standing order dated April 22, 2024, is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=IjkBcR
at no extra charge.[CC]
[*] Class Action on Emails Sent at Inconvenient Time Lacks Merit
----------------------------------------------------------------
John Rossman, writing for insideARM, reports that consumer
attorneys are filing new class action lawsuits asserting that debt
collector emails are being sent before 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m. in
violation of the FDCPA. While debt collectors must adhere to the
time restrictions for sending debt collection emails, it will be
impossible for the consumer attorneys to certify any FDCPA class
action asserting that a debt collector sent emails at an
inconvenient time because email providers routinely delay the
delivery of emails. As discussed below, this delay between when a
debt collector sends an email and when the consumer receives the
email necessitates an "individualized inquiry" to establish
standing for each potential class member which will defeat any
class action.
Time-Restrictions on Sending Debt Collection Emails
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau articulated in Regulation
F that debt collection email communications violate 1692c as
inconvenient if they are sent before 8 a.m. and after 9 p.m. local
time for the consumer. Regulation F further provides that "an
electronic communication occurs when the debt collector sends it,
not, for example, when the consumer receives or views it."
Consumer attorneys are now asserting putative FDCPA class action
lawsuits against debt collectors premised on the time that an email
was received by the consumer. However, the time that a consumer
receives an email is often different from the time that the email
was sent by the debt collector, sometime by many hours.
How to Identify Email Delivery Delays to Defeat a Class Action
An email that a consumer receives utilizing the Yahoo email
platform does not, on its face, always disclose the actual time
that the email is sent despite including a "time sent" field in the
email. Yahoo publishes the following information on its website to
assist consumers with accessing the "full header" on an email to
determine how long an email was delayed.
In the example published on the Yahoo website above, the email is
delayed "for about 1 hour and 15 minutes." However, the recipient
of the email would be unaware of this delay unless the recipient
took the multiple steps outlined on the Yahoo website to access the
"full header" for the email. Gmail likewise uses "predelivery
scanning" to delay certain email messages before delivery, in some
cases for hours.
Email Delays Necessitate Individualized Standing Inquiries, thus
Defeating Class Certification
While Regulation F provides that "an electronic communication
occurs when the debt collector sends it," the United States Supreme
Court held in Ramirez v. TransUnion that each consumer seeking to
participate in a class action must suffer some "concrete injury."
This standing requirement of a "concrete injury" is problematic for
any FDCPA class action alleging that debt collection emails were
sent at an inconvenient time because the receipt of emails are
frequently delayed. How could a potential class member in an FDCPA
lawsuit establish any "concrete injury" if a debt collection email
that was sent at an inconvenient time is received by the
consumer’s computer at a convenient time due to delivery delays
by the email carrier?
Thus, to determine whether a consumer qualifies as a member of any
potential class action asserting that debt collection emails were
sent at an inconvenient time, an individualized inquiry must be
conducted to determine if the email was received at an inconvenient
time by each member of the potential class due to email delays. For
potential class members with a Yahoo email address, the multi-step
process described on the Yahoo website and cited above must be used
to identify the sending time in the full header.
Notably, the requirement for an individualized inquiry regarding
the actual receipt time of each email for each potential class
member defeats the "predominance" or "superiority" element of a
class action. The United States Supreme Court has held in Comcast
v. Behrend that a class action is improperly certified if
individual questions overwhelm questions common to the class.
Conclusion
Any company facing class allegations that it sent debt collection
emails at an inconvenient time -- whether those allegations arise
under the FDCPA, the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act or
some other law -- should consider whether delays in email delivery
may defeat these claims. [GN]
Asbestos Litigation
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Claire's Faces Class Action Over Asbestos Concerns
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Neutral IT reports that Claire's was hit with a proposed class
action on April 10, 2024 in New York federal court, a day after the
retail company recalled three of its makeup products, over asbestos
presence concerns. The plaintiffs alleged that the recall would not
fully compensate for their loss.
Two plaintiffs told that the voluntary recall of the products was
not fulfilling enough to repay the consumers for their damages and
future diagnostic screening. A recent test conducted by the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration and AMA Analytical
Services Inc. indicated the retailer sold cosmetics contaminated
with asbestos. The FDA recently found that three samples collected
from Claire's and one from another retailer Justice tested positive
for asbestos presence.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: PPG Industries Has $48MM Reserves as of March 31
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PPG Industries Inc. has been a defendant in lawsuits involving
claims alleging personal injury from exposure to asbestos,
according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission.
PPG Industries states, "The Company monitors and reviews the
activity associated with its asbestos claims and evaluates, on a
periodic basis, its estimated liability for such claims and all
underlying assumptions to determine whether any adjustment to the
reserves for these claims is required. Additionally, as a
supplement to its periodic monitoring and review, the Company
conducts discussions with counsel and engages valuation consultants
to analyze its claims history and estimate the amount of the
Company's potential liability for asbestos-related claims. As of
both March 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023, the Company's
asbestos-related reserves totaled $48 million.
"The Company believes that, based on presently available
information, the total reserves of $48 million for asbestos-related
claims will be sufficient to encompass all of the Company's current
and estimable potential future asbestos liabilities. These
reserves, which are included within Other liabilities on the
accompanying consolidated balance sheets, involve significant
management judgment and represent the Company's current best
estimate of its liability for these claims.
"The amount reserved for asbestos-related claims by its nature is
subject to many uncertainties that may change over time, including
(i) the ultimate number of claims filed; (ii) whether closed,
dismissed or dormant claims are reinstituted, reinstated or
revived; (iii) the amounts required to resolve both currently known
and future unknown claims; (iv) the amount of insurance, if any,
available to cover such claims; (v) the unpredictable aspects of
the tort system, including a changing trial docket and the
jurisdictions in which trials are scheduled; (vi) the outcome of
any trials, including potential judgments or jury verdicts; (vii)
the lack of specific information in many cases concerning exposure
for which the Company is allegedly responsible, and the claimants'
alleged diseases resulting from such exposure; and (viii) potential
changes in applicable federal and/or state tort liability law. All
of these factors may have a material effect upon future
asbestos-related liability estimates. While the ultimate outcome of
the Company's asbestos litigation cannot be predicted with
certainty, the Company believes that any financial exposure
resulting from its asbestos-related claims will not have a material
adverse effect on the Company's consolidated financial position,
liquidity or results of operations."
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=dFuUHD
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Trane Tech. Uses Two-Step Resolve Asbestos Claims
------------------------------------------------------------------
Evan Ochsner of Bloomberg Law reports that plaintiffs fighting
Trane Technologies Plc's attempt to use bankruptcy to resolve
asbestos liabilities lost their bid for a fast-tracked appeal
challenging the legality of the maneuver.
A divided panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
rejected a request by asbestos claimants to quickly consider
whether the bankruptcies of two Trane Technologies units -- Aldrich
Pump and Murray Boiler -- should be dismissed. The case must now
go through the traditional bankruptcy appeals process, which
requires a federal district court to consider the dispute before
the Fourth Circuit.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Travelers Cos. Has $1.3BB Reserves as of March 31
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Travelers Companies, Inc., has net asbestos paid loss and loss
expenses in the first three months of 2024 and 2023 of $74 million
and $33 million, respectively, according to the Company's Form 10-Q
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company states, "Net asbestos reserves were $1.30 billion and
$1.27 billion at March 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
"In the ordinary course of its insurance business, the Company has
received and continues to receive claims for insurance arising
under policies issued by the Company asserting alleged injuries and
damages from asbestos- and environmental-related exposures that are
the subject of related coverage litigation. The Company is
defending asbestos- and environmental-related litigation vigorously
and believes that it has meritorious defenses; however, the
outcomes of these disputes are uncertain. In this regard, the
Company employs dedicated specialists and comprehensive resolution
strategies to manage asbestos and environmental loss exposure,
including settling litigation under appropriate circumstances.
Currently, it is not possible to predict legal outcomes and their
impact on future loss development for claims and litigation
relating to asbestos and environmental claims. Any such development
could be affected by future court decisions and interpretations, as
well as future changes, if any, in applicable legislation. Because
of these uncertainties, additional liabilities may arise for
amounts in excess of the Company's current insurance reserves. In
addition, the Company's estimate of ultimate claims and claim
adjustment expenses may change. These additional liabilities or
changes in estimates, or a range of either, cannot now be
reasonably estimated and could result in income statement charges
that could be material to the Company's results of operations in
future periods.
"The Company continues to be involved in disputes, including
litigation, with a number of policyholders, some of whom are in
bankruptcy, over coverage for asbestos-related claims. Many
coverage disputes with policyholders are only resolved through
settlement agreements. Because many policyholders make exaggerated
demands, it is difficult to predict the outcome of settlement
negotiations. Settlements involving bankrupt policyholders may
include extensive releases which are favorable to the Company, but
which could result in settlements for larger amounts than
originally anticipated. Although the Company has seen a reduction
in the overall risk associated with these disputes, it remains
difficult to predict the ultimate cost of these claims. As in the
past, the Company will continue to pursue settlement
opportunities."
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=qT9A97
*********
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 ***