/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/250312.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Wednesday, March 12, 2025, Vol. 27, No. 51
Headlines
ACCELLION INC: Court Amends Brown Class Cert Bid
ADOPTIONS FROM THE HEART: LaSalle Sues Over Exposed Personal Info
ALL COUNTIES COURIER: Tello Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
ALLIANCE ELEVATOR: Soto Class Suit Seeks OT Pay Under FLSA, NYLL
ALLIANCE ENTERTAINMENT: Settlement Reached in McKnight Suit
ALLIED OLD ENGLISH: Pitre Sues Over Mislabeled Beverage Products
ALORICA INC: Bid to File Opposition Sur-Reply in Munoz OK'd
APPROVED SCIENCE: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Henry Alleges
CAE USA: Local Lodge 794 Suit Alleges Illegal Mass Layoff
CARE AND DEVELOPMENT: Valdery-Hughes Seeks Oral Argument
CARE AND DEVELOPMENT: Valdery-Hughes Seeks to Certify Class
CHARLESTON AREA: Failed to Protect Personal Info, Holcomb Alleges
CHARLESTON AREA: Fails to Protect Personal, Health Info, Walls Says
CIRCUIT CITY: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Hippe Alleges
CONSOLIDATED NUCLEAR: Reining Class Suit Removed to D.N.M.
CREDIT BUREAU: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to July 18
DELOITTE & TOUCHE: Appeals IBEW Suit Class Cert. Ruling to 4th Cir.
DISA GLOBAL: Duiker Sues Over Unauthorized Personal Info Access
DISA GLOBAL: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Henion Alleges
DISA GLOBAL: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Lewis Suit Alleges
DISA GLOBAL: Webster Sues Over Failure to Protect Clients' Info
DOTDASH MEREDITH: Discloses Personal Info to Meta, Musick Alleges
EIDP INC: PFAS Chemicals Contaminate Private Property, Ryan Says
EVERCARE LLC: Mislabels Apple Cider Vinegar Capsules, Suit Says
FA WORLD: Trippett Sues Over Blind's Equal Access to Online Store
FCA US: Court Excludes Plaintiffs' Expert Opinions
FCA US: Filing for Class Cert. Bid in Jenkins Suit Due Nov. 28
FIGS INC: Hoch Appeals Ruling Narrowing Claims in Securities Suit
FOODSCIENCE LLC: Walker Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
FOREST RIVER: Court Extends Class Cert Response Deadline
GUARDIAN LIFE: Underpays Claims Representatives, Katheren Says
HARRISON COUNTY, TX: Moreau Files 5th Cir. Appeal in FLSA Suit
HDC GROUP: Illegally Sells Cannabis-Infused Products, Martinez Says
HERSHEY COMPANY: Vidal Seeks to Certify Classes
HICKS NURSERIES: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Cantwell Says
HOMETOWN EQUITY: Edry Appeals Summary Judgment Ruling to 9th Cir.
HOSPITALITY CENTER: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Nouvlette Says
HUB GROUP: Andujar Appeals Labor Suit Dismissal to 6th Circuit
INTRASYSTEMS LLC: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, O'Dell Alleges
JMHC INC: Morales Class Suit Seeks OT Wages Under FLSA
KROGER CO: Court Certifies Settlement Classes in Wilder Suit
LHC GROUP: Faces Knight ERISA Class Suit Over Tobacco Surcharge
LOYA CASUALTY: Marroquin Seeks to File Confidential Docs Under Seal
LOYA CASUALTY: Marroquin Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class
MCLANE COMPANY: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to April 29
MCLANE FOODSERVICE: Class Allegations in Madero Stricken
MCMURRY UNIVERSITY: Court Suspends Class Cert Deadline
MDL 02566: Court Re-Opens Arizona Action
MDL 2566: VPL, Sparman Bid to Deny Class Certification Tossed
MEAD JOHNSON: Completion of Expert Discovery Due May 13
MERCEDES-BENZ USA: Wins Summary Judgment v. Hadjian
META PLATFORMS: Filing for Class Bid in Yoon Due Feb. 26, 2026
METRO ONE LOSS: Hager Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
MGM RESORTS: Blind Users Can't Access Online Store, Wills Claims
MOBILE MINI: Herrera Suit Removed to C.D. California
MOBILEYE GLOBAL: Faces McAuliffe Securities Suit in New York Court
MONSANTO COMPANY: Brister Suit Transferred to N.D. California
MONSANTO COMPANY: Loureiro Suit Transferred to N.D. California
MONSANTO COMPANY: Savage Suit Transferred to N.D. California
NANO NUCLEAR ENERGY: Faces Yang Securities Suit in New York
NAR: Bid to Compel Arbitration in Gibson Tossed
NATIONAL GENERAL: King Seeks to Strike Braithwaite's Declaration
NEW YORK: Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Response
NEW YOU: Colvin Files Appeal in Labor Class Suit
NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS: Rodriguez Suit Removed to C.D. California
OCEAN STATE: Plaintiffs Seeks OK to Send Notice to Collective
OCTOBER USA: Trippett Sues Over Blind's Equal Access to Website
PACIFIC MARITIME: Plaintiff Allowed Leave to File Amended Complaint
PAUL RICH GROUP: Web Site Not Accessible to the Blind, Hippe Says
PETDINE LLC: Viveros Sues Over Unpaid Compensation
PHH MORTGAGE: Alexander FDCPA Suit Removed to N.D. Georgia
PHILADELPHIA COUNTY, PA: Valentin's Bid for New Trial Tossed
PORTLAND LEATHER: Faces Lyden Suit Over False Reference Pricing
PPL HOLDINGS LLC: Jordan Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
PRIORITY WRECKER: Initial Case Management Order Entered in Kirby
PROFESSIONAL PARKING: Bid to Modify Sched Order Partly OK'd
PROGRESSIVE SPECIALTY: Williams Suit Removed to D. Maryland
QUALITY CARRIERS: Smith Seeks to Conditionally Certify Collective
QUEST DIAGNOSTICS: Cole Appeals Class Suit Dismissal to 3rd Circuit
RADIO SYSTEMS: Blind Users Can't Access Online Store, Hippe Claims
RENAL TREATMENT: Filing for Class Cert in Zito Suit Due August 20
REPUBLIC SERVICES: Class Cert Bid Filing in Vines Due July 14
REVIVE MD SUPPLEMENT: Suit Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
RILEY POPE: Faces Warren Suit Over Compromised Clients' Info
SEMTECH CORP: Tobi Sues Over 31% Decline of Common Stock Price
SEYBOTH TEAM: Class Cert Filing in Iudiciani Extended to April 21
SHAKE SHACK: Copaken Suit Removed to C.D. California
SMARTMATCH INSURANCE: Mediation Must be Completed by May 5
SMOKE POST: Paniagua Suit Seek Unpaid Back Wages Under FLSA
SOL DE JANEIRO: Faces Manning Class Suit Over Telemarketing Calls
SPD SWISS: Pretrial Schedule & Trial Order Entered in Saedi
STATE FARM: Class Cert Hearing in Pitkin Extended to June 18
STATE FARM: Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Response in Ellis
TARGET CORP: Seeks to Strike Montgomery's Class Evidence
TARGET CORP: Seeks to Strike Montgomery's Declaration
TARGET CORP: Seeks to Strike Putative Class Members' Declarations
TARGET CORP: Seeks to Strike Toney's Declaration
TAYMAN INDUSTRIES: Class Cert Bid Filing in Villarreal Due Oct. 3
TRANSAMERICA LIFE: Plaintiffs Can File Reply Brief Under Seal
UNITED AUTO: Class Cert Bid Filing in Ferrara Suit Due July 2
UNITED SERVICES: Tomczak Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert by May 6
UNITED STATES: Davis Brings Appeal to Fed. Claims Court
USC: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to May 15
USC: Class Cert Bid Filing in Zarnowski Extended to May 15
USCF MEDICAL: Class Cert Hearing Extended to April 22, 2026
VERTIV CORPORATION: Torok Seeks More Time to File Class Cert.
VISA INC: Court Stays Litigation to Certain Claims in AWUS Suit
WESTERN CONFERENCE: Plaintiffs Must File Class Reply by April 18
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION: Class Settlement Gets Initial Nod
WORKFORCE 7 INC: Filing for Class Cert in Ballast Due March 14
*********
ACCELLION INC: Court Amends Brown Class Cert Bid
------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Brown v. Accellion, Inc.
(RE ACCELLION, INC. DATA BREACH LITIGATION), Case No.
5:21-cv-01155-EJD (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Edward Davila entered
an order as follows:
1. The amendment is deemed filed and the words "well-known" at
page 6, line 1 are deemed stricken from the Plaintiffs'
motion for class certification.
2. The case schedule shall remain unaffected.
While the Court appreciates the parties' efforts to avoid burdening
the Court with further disputes, it also encourages the parties to
exercise judgment when it comes to deciding which disputes are
significant enough to raise with each other. It would do much to
further professional courtesy to recognize that the parties' time
and resources, like the Court's, are limited.
The Plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification on Dec.
16, 2024.
Accellion is a provider of on-demand secure file transfer
solutions.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=V9qEO1 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Adam E. Polk, Esq.
Kyle P. Quackenbush, Esq.
GIRARD SHARP LLP
601 California Street, Suite 1400
San Francisco, CA 94108
Telephone: (415) 981-4800
Facsimile: (415) 981-4846
E-mail: apolk@girardsharp.com
kquackenbush@girardsharp.com
- and -
Krysta K. Pachman, Esq.
Michael Gervais, Esq.
Steven G. Sklaver, Esq.
Kevin R. Downs, Esq.
Madeline M. Yzurdiaga, Esq.
SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
1900 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1400
Los Angeles, CA 90067-6029
Telephone: (310) 789-3100
Facsimile: (310) 789-3150
E-mail: kpachman@susmangodfrey.com
mgervais@susmangodfrey.com
ssklaver@susmangodfrey.com
kdowns@susmangodfrey.com
myzurdiaga@susmangodfrey.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Fred Norton, Esq.
Bree Hann, Esq.
Emily Kirk, Esq.
Rebecca Kutlow, Esq.
Gil Walton, Esq.
Heather Bates, Esq.
THE NORTON LAW FIRM PC
300 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, Suite 450
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: (510) 906-4900
E-mail: fnorton@nortonlaw.com
bhann@nortonlaw.com
ekirk@nortonlaw.com
rkultow@nortonlaw.com
gwalton@nortonlaw.com
hbates@nortonlaw.com
- and -
Camilo Artiga-Purcell, Esq.
ACCELLION, INC.
1510 Fashion Island Blvd, Suite 100
San Mateo, CA 94404
Telephone: (415) 515-4724
E-mail: camilo.apurcell@kiteworks.com
ADOPTIONS FROM THE HEART: LaSalle Sues Over Exposed Personal Info
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ERIK LASALLE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ADOPTIONS FROM THE HEART, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 2:25-cv-00974 (E.D. Pa., February 24, 2025) is a class
action against the Defendant for negligence, negligence per se,
breach of implied contract, unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary
duty, breach of confidence, and declaratory judgment.
The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and
safeguard the personally identifiable information and protected
health information of the Plaintiff and similarly situated
individuals stored within its computer system following a data
breach occurred on April 17, 2024. The Defendant also failed to
timely notify the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals
about the data breach. As a result, the private information of the
Plaintiff and Class members was compromised and damaged through
access by and disclosure to unknown and unauthorized third parties,
says the suit.
Adoptions From The Heart, Inc. is an adoption agency, with its
principal place of business in Wynnewood, Pennsylvania. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Patrick Howard, Esq.
SALTZ MONGELUZZI & BENDESKY, PC
1650 Market Street, 52nd Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 575-3895
Email: phoward@smbb.com
- and -
Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
Raina Borelli, Esq.
STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC
980 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610
Chicago, IL 60611
Telephone: (872) 263-1100
Facsimile: (872) 263-1109
Email: sam@straussborrelli.com
raina@straussborrelli.com
ALL COUNTIES COURIER: Tello Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against All Counties Courier,
Inc., et al. The case is styled as Jose Lopez Tello, an individual,
on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. All
Counties Courier, Inc., DI EXPRESS LLC, DI OVERNITE LLC, Case No.
25STCV05640 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Feb. 27, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case
(General Jurisdiction)."
All Counties Courier, Inc. offers logistics, parcel delivery, and
other related services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Sam Sani, Esq.
SANI LAW, APC
595 E. Colorado Blvd., Ste. 522
Pasadena, CA 91101-2017
Phone: 310-935-0405
Fax: 310-935-0409
Email: ssani@sanilawfirm.com
ALLIANCE ELEVATOR: Soto Class Suit Seeks OT Pay Under FLSA, NYLL
----------------------------------------------------------------
ALEXANDER SOTO, on behalf of himself, individually, and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v., ALLIANCE ELEVATOR COMPANY, LLC
d/b/a UNITEC ELEVATOR COMPANY as successor by merger to ELTECH
INDUSTRIES, INC and AMERICAN ELEVATOR GROUP, and AMERICAN ELEVATOR
& MACHINE CORP., Case No. 1:25-cv-01735 (S.D.N.Y., Feb. 28, 2025)
is class action complaint on behalf of the Plaintiff and all others
similarly situated to recover damages for the Defendants' systemic
and continuous overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act
and the New York Labor Law.
Throughout his employment with the Defendants, the Defendants
willfully misclassified Plaintiff Soto as a "Shop Clerk" despite
requiring the Plaintiff to perform, and Plaintiff actually
performing, the work corresponding to the 'A' "Helper" trade
classification, the lawsuit says.
The Defendants employed the Plaintiff Soto to perform work in
furtherance of the Defendants' elevator construction, maintenance,
and modernization business, throughout the State of New York
including Manhattan, from Jan. 6, 2020, through Jan/ 21, 2025.
The Defendants are in the elevator construction, maintenance, and
modernization business and employ workers, laborers, and other
related tradespeople to perform work throughout the State of New
York including Manhattan.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jon L. Norinsberg, Esq.
Michael R. Minkoff, Esq.
Joel L. Goldenberg, Esq.
JOSEPH & NORINSBERG, LLC
110 East 59th Street, Suite 2300
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (212) 227-5700
ALLIANCE ENTERTAINMENT: Settlement Reached in McKnight Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
Alliance Entertainment Holding Corporation disclosed in its Form
10-K report for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on February 15, 2025, that on
August 8, 2024, the company entered into a settlement agreement
regarding a March 31, 2023 class action complaint, titled "Matthew
McKnight v. Alliance Entertainment Holding Corp. f/k/a Adara
Acquisition Corp., Adara Sponsor LLC, Thomas Finke, Paul G. Porter,
Beatriz Acevedo-Greiff, W. Tom Donaldson III, Dylan Glenn, and
Frank Quintero," pending litigation.
On January 17, 2025, the parties submitted a revised Stipulation of
Settlement and related documents to the court.
Said action was filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery against its
pre-Business Combination board of directors and executive officers
and Adara Sponsor LLC, alleging breaches of fiduciary duties by
purportedly failing to disclose certain information in connection
with the merger of Alliance, Adara Acquisition Corp. and a certain
merger sub in February 2023.
Alliance Entertainment Holding Corporation is a comprehensive
provider of distribution services for pre-recorded music, video
movies, video games, and associated accessories and merchandise.
ALLIED OLD ENGLISH: Pitre Sues Over Mislabeled Beverage Products
----------------------------------------------------------------
YOLANDA PITRE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ALLIED OLD ENGLISH, INC., Defendant, Case
No. 3:25-cv-02115-TSH (N.D. Cal., Feb. 28, 2025) alleges
Defendant's violation of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act and
Unfair Competition Law.
According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, the Defendant
manufactures, distributes, advertises, markets, and sells Sun Luck
brand sauce products. The packaging prominently displays on the
front of the label the claim that these Products are "All Natural"
or "Natural." This statement is false. Each of the Products are
made with manufactured citric acid—an artificial ingredient used
in food and beverage products.
The Defendant's packaging, labeling, and advertising scheme is
intended to give consumers the impression that they are buying a
premium product that contains only natural ingredients. The
Plaintiff, who purchased the Products in California, was deceived
by Defendant's unlawful conduct and brings this action on her own
behalf and on behalf of California consumers to remedy Defendant's
unlawful acts, alleges the suit.
Allied Old English Inc. operates as a specialty foods manufacturing
company. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael T. Houchin, Esq.
Craig W. Straub, Esq.
Zachary M. Crosner, Esq.
CROSNER LEGAL, P.C.
9440 Santa Monica Blvd. Suite 301
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
Telephone: (866) 276-7637
Facsimile: (310) 510-6429
Email: mhouchin@crosnerlegal.com
craig@crosnerlegal.com
zach@crosnerlegal.com
ALORICA INC: Bid to File Opposition Sur-Reply in Munoz OK'd
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as AARON MUNOZ and MELISSA
OLEN, individually and as representative of a class of participants
and beneficiaries and on behalf of the ALORICA 401(K) RETIREMENT
PLAN, v. ALORICA INC.; ALORICA RETIREMENT SAVINGS PLAN COMMITTEE;
LISA ADAMSCHICK; JOYCE TODD-GUERRA; CHRIS HYUN; ELIZABETH LAN PAN;
EMILY KILGORE; RICK HAYES; DEON STENNER; MATTHEW VONDETTE; DAN
FINNEGAN; JAE CHANEY; MORGAN STANLEY SMITH BARNEY, LLC; and DOES 1
through 50, inclusive, Case No. 8:22-cv-01856-JWH-DFM (C.D. Cal.),
the Hon. Judge John Holcomb entered an order as follows:
1. The Defendants' motion to file a sur-reply in opposition to
the Plaintiffs' motion to certify class is granted.
2. The hearing on the Defendants' motion to file a sur-reply in
opposition to the Plaintiffs' motion to certify class is
vacated.
3. The Defendants are ordered to file a sur-reply opposing the
Plaintiffs' motion to certify class by Apr. 15, 2025.
Alorica is a global leader in customer experience solutions.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 25, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=HRd1Od at no extra
charge.[CC]
APPROVED SCIENCE: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Henry Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSTANCE HENRY, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. Approved Science LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-02093 (N.D.
Ill., Feb. 28, 2025) sues the Defendant for its failure to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its interactive website,
https://approvedscience.com, to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired persons under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
When visiting the Website, the Plaintiff contends that using JAWS,
encountered the following specific accessibility issues:
a) "Skip to content" link was not implemented. The Plaintiff
was not provided with the mechanism to bypass repeated
blocks of content;
b) Informative images were used as background images on the
website, and did not have alternative text. Plaintiff was
unaware what non-text content element was missed.
The Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer frustration and
humiliation as a result of the discriminatory conditions present on
the Defendant's Website. These discriminatory conditions continue
to contribute to the Plaintiff's sense of isolation and
segregation, the suit contends.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
the Defendant's Website will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.
Approvedscience.com is a commercial website that offers products
and services for online sale. The online store allows the user to
view scientifically formulated nutritional supplements, make
purchases, and perform a variety of other functions.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Davis B. Reyes, Esq.
EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC
Telephone: (630)-478-0856
Flushing, NY 11367
68-29 Main Street,
E-mail: Dreyes@ealg.law
CAE USA: Local Lodge 794 Suit Alleges Illegal Mass Layoff
---------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERS,
LOCAL LODGE 794, AFL-CIO, as representative of, and on behalf of,
similarly situated employees v. CAE USA MISSION SOLUTIONS, INC.
Case No. 1:25-cv-00211 (D.N.M., Feb. 28, 2025) is a class action
complaint for violations of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining
Notification Act.
On Feb. 19, 2024, Ashley Long, President and Directing Business
Representative of Lodge 794, was given a "heads up" call that 20-25
of the Defendant's employees in one of the Union's bargaining units
would be laid off, with their last day being February 29, 2024.
The affected employees were not notified until Feb. 20, 2024. On or
about the same day, Ashley Long was provided a list of the
approximately 20-25 employees mentioned in paragraph 8 that were
being laid off. That list also included approximately 50 other
employees (in a different bargaining unit) who were being "out
processed"; that is, whose employment CAE was terminating, says the
suit.
Lodge 794 is a labor organization that was certified by the NLRB to
represent employees of Defendant CAE USA Mission Solutions, Inc.,
in two different bargaining units.
The Defendant was the employer of employees represented by the
Plaintiff who worked pursuant to a contract between CAE and the
Federal government.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Stephen Curtice, Esq.
Shane C. Youtz, Esq.
James A. Montalbano, Esq.
Grace Rhodehouse Barberena, Esq.
YOUTZ & VALDEZ, P.C.
900 Gold Avenue SW
Albuquerque, NM 87102
Telephone: (505) 244-1200
E-mail: shane@youtzvaldez.com
stephen@youtzvaldez.com
james@youtzvaldez.com
grace@youtzvaldez.com
CARE AND DEVELOPMENT: Valdery-Hughes Seeks Oral Argument
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Sarnita Valdery-Hughes on
behalf of herself and all those similarly situated, v. Care and
Development Center, Inc., Gilbert Charles, and Laverne King, Case
No. 2:24-cv-01708-LMA-MBN (E.D. La.), the Plaintiff asks the Court
to enter an order granting request for oral argument as to their
motion to certify collective action class.
Care and Development is an in-home care provider.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Feb. 21, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=1nvJX8 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jody Forester Jackson, Esq.
Mary Bubbett Jackson, Esq.
JACKSON+JACKSON
201 St. Charles Avenue, Suite 2500
New Orleans, LA 70170
Telephone: (504) 599-5953
Facsimile: (888) 988-6499
E-mail: jjackson@jackson-law.net
mjackson@jackson-law.net
CARE AND DEVELOPMENT: Valdery-Hughes Seeks to Certify Class
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Sarnitra Valdery-Hughes on
behalf of herself and all those similarly situated, v. Care and
Development Center, Inc., Gilbert Charles, and Laverne King, Case
No. 2:24-cv-01708-LMA-MBN (E.D. La.), the Plaintiff asks the Court
to enter an order certifying the following collective action class
under section 216(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act(FLSA), and
facilitating notice to all prospective class members:
"All persons who worked for Care and Development Center, Inc.,
as a direct service worker from 2022 to the present who worked
more than 40 hours a week, but were not paid for all of the
overtime that they worked due to the Defendants' policy of
classifying them as independent contractors or "1099
employees" and not paying overtime on all hours worked in
excess of 40 hours per any given 7-day work period."
The Plaintiff is similarly situated to the class members she seeks
to represent, other persons have indicated that they desire to join
this action as an opt-in Plaintiff, no individualized defenses
exist which would preclude certification, and certification will
undoubtedly serve the interests of the FLSA and judicial economy.
Care and Development is an in-home care provider.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Feb, 21, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=1Y8PzX at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jody Forester Jackson, Esq.
Mary Bubbett Jackson, Esq.
JACKSON+JACKSON
201 St. Charles Avenue, Suite 2500
New Orleans, LA 70170
Telephone: (504) 599-5953
Facsimile: (888) 988-6499
E-mail: jjackson@jackson-law.net
mjackson@jackson-law.net
CHARLESTON AREA: Failed to Protect Personal Info, Holcomb Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------------
HARRY HOLCOMB, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. CHARLESTON AREA MEDICAL CENTER, INC., Case No.
2:25-cv-00138 (S.D.W.Va., Mar. 3, 2025) alleges that the Defendant
failed to properly secure and safeguard sensitive information of
its patients.
The Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive personal information
-- which they entrusted to the Defendant on the mutual
understanding that Defendant would protect it against disclosure --
was targeted, compromised and unlawfully accessed due to the Data
Breach, the lawsuit says.
Accordingly, the Private Information compromised in the Data Breach
included Plaintiff's and Class Members' full names, email
addresses, phone numbers, driver's license numbers, and dates of
birth and medical and health insurance information as defined by
the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.
As a result of the Data Breach, the Plaintiff and approximately
67,000 Class Members allegedly suffered concrete injuries in fact
including, but not limited to invasion of privacy; theft of their
Private Information; lost or diminished value of Private
Information; and lost time and opportunity costs associated with
attempting to mitigate the actual consequences of the Data Breach,
says the suit.
CAMC collected and maintained certain personally identifiable
information and protected health information of Plaintiff and the
putative Class, who are (or were) patients at Defendant.
The Defendant is a healthcare provider headquartered in Charleston,
West Virginia.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Geoffrey Cullop, Esq.
THE CULLOP FIRM, PLLC
5312 MacCorkle Ave SW No. 107
South Charleston, WV 25309
Telephone: (304) 742-2060
E-mail: geoff@thecullopfirm.com
- and -
David K. Lietz, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
5335 Wisconsin Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20015-2052
Telephone: (866) 252-0878
Facsimile: (202) 686-2877
E-mail: dlietz@milberg.com
CHARLESTON AREA: Fails to Protect Personal, Health Info, Walls Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
JEDIDIAH WALLS, MICHAEL HILL, and JENNIFER HILL, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v.
CHARLESTON AREA MEDICAL CENTER, INC., Defendant, Case No.
2:25-cv-00123 (S.D. W. Va., February 25, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for negligence, negligence per se, breach of
implied contract, unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty,
breach of confidence, and declaratory judgment.
The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and
safeguard the personally identifiable information and protected
health information of the Plaintiffs and similarly situated
individuals stored within its computer system following a data
breach on or before October 2, 2024. The Defendant also failed to
timely notify the Plaintiffs and similarly situated individuals
about the data breach. As a result, the private information of the
Plaintiffs and Class members was compromised and damaged through
access by and disclosure to unknown and unauthorized third
parties.
Charleston Area Medical Center, Inc. is a medical center owner and
operator in West Virginia. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Christopher T. Pritt, Esq.
CHRISTOPHER PRITT LAW, PLLC
700 Washington Street, East, Ste. 204
Charleston, WV 25301
Telephone: (304) 720-4412
Email: chris.pritt@prittlaw.com
- and -
Amber L. Schubert, Esq.
SCHUBERT JONCKHEER & KOLBE LLP
2001 Union St., Ste. 200
San Francisco, CA 94123
Telephone: (415) 788-4220
Facsimile: (415) 788-0161
Email: aschubert@sjk.law
CIRCUIT CITY: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Hippe Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------------
XINYUE HIPPE, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. Circuit City Corporation, Inc., Case No.
2:25-cv-00298-PP (E.D. Wisc., Feb. 28, 2025) sues the Defendant for
its failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its
interactive website, https://circuitcity.com, to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other
blind or visually-impaired persons under the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
When visiting the Website, the Plaintiff contends that using JAWS,
encountered the following specific accessibility issues:
-- Images on the website had inappropriate and unclear
alternative text. The Plaintiff could not receive accurate
information from the non-text element of content; and
-- Heading hierarchy was not properly defined, and there were
missing heading levels. As a result, quick navigation through
headings on the website did not help the Plaintiff effectively
find the content and understand the logical structure of the
home page.
The Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer frustration and
humiliation as a result of the discriminatory conditions present on
the Defendant's Website. These discriminatory conditions continue
to contribute to the Plaintiff's sense of isolation and
segregation, the suit contends.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
the Defendant's Website will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.
Circuitcity.com is a commercial website that offers products and
services for online sale. The online store allows the user to view
electronics and home appliances, make purchases, and perform a
variety of other function.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Davis B. Reyes, Esq.
EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC
Telephone: (630)-478-0856
Flushing, NY 11367
68-29 Main Street,
E-mail: Dreyes@ealg.law
CONSOLIDATED NUCLEAR: Reining Class Suit Removed to D.N.M.
----------------------------------------------------------
JACOB REINING, individually and for others similarly situated v.
CONSOLIDATED NUCLEAR SECURITY, LLC, Case No. . D-101-CV-2025-00243
(Filed Jan. 27, 2025) was removed from the from the First Judicial
District Court of the State of New Mexico, Santa Fe County, to the
United States District Court for the District of New Mexico on Feb.
28, 2025.
According to the Plaintiff's complaint, the Plaintiff Reining seeks
damages for work performed by "all CNS employees who received
Exempt OT pay at any time in New Mexico" for alleged violations of
the overtime provisions of the New Mexico Minimum Wage Act.
The Plaintiff furthermore alleges that "Reining and the other
Putative Class Members are entitled to recover their unpaid
overtime in amount equal to 1.5 times their regular rates of pay
for all hours worked in excess of 40 in a 7-day workweek; 'an
additional amount equal to twice the unpaid wages' as treble
damages and all reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in
the action.
The Defendant is an American federal contractor that manages the
Y-12 National Security Complex and the Pantex plant.[BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Samantha M. Hults, Esq.
RODEY, DICKASON, SLOAN, AKIN & ROBB, P.A.
Post Office Box 1888
Albuquerque, NM 87103
Telephone: (505) 765-5900
Facsimile: (505) 768-7395
E-mail: shults@rodey.com
CREDIT BUREAU: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to July 18
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICHARD D. MYERS,
Bankruptcy trustee for the bankruptcy estate of Donna Jean
Lunsford, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated; and DONNA J. HAMILTON, v. CREDIT BUREAU SERVICES, INC.,
and C. J. TIGHE, Case No. 8:20-cv-00141-JFB-RCC (D. Neb.), the Hon.
Judge Ryan Carson entered a fifth amended final progression order:
-- The deadline for completing May 21, 2025
remaining discovery is:
-- The deadline to file motions July 18, 2025
for class certification is:
-- The deadline for filing motions May 21, 2025
for summary judgment is:
Credit Bureau provides collection and adjustment services on claims
and other insurance related issues.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 20, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=cV6HXd at no extra
charge.[CC]
DELOITTE & TOUCHE: Appeals IBEW Suit Class Cert. Ruling to 4th Cir.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP, et al. are taking an appeal from a court
order in the lawsuit entitled International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers Local 98 Pension Fund, on behalf of itself and
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Deloitte & Touche LLP,
et al., Defendants, Case No. 3:19-cv-03304-JDA, in the U.S.
District Court for the District of South Carolina.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, on Nov. 22,
2019, Samuel R. Floyd, III, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated, brought this securities class action against
Deloitte, alleging a violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC")
Rule 10b-5.
On Jan. 15, 2024, the Plaintiff filed a motion to certify class.
On Feb. 5, 2024, the Defendants filed a motion to exclude
damages-related expert opinions of Dr. Matthew D. Cain.
On Nov. 12, 2024, Judge Jacquelyn D. Austin granted the Plaintiff's
motion for class certification, appointment of class
representative, and appointment of class counsel. International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 98 Pension Fund (IBEW) was
appointed as Class Representative; Cohen Milstein was appointed as
Class Counsel; and the Tinkler Law Firm was appointed as Liaison
Counsel. Deloitte's motion to exclude damages-related expert
opinion of Dr. Cain was denied.
The appellate case is captioned International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers v. Deloitte & Touche LLP, Case No. 25-1146, in
the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, filed on
February 13, 2025. Per the appellate court, the appeal is limited
to the issue of damages. [BN]
Plaintiff-Appellee INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS
LOCAL 98 PENSION FUND, on behalf of itself and all others similarly
situated, is represented by:
Jan Eurenius Messerschmidt, Esq.
Steven J. Toll, Esq.
Margaret Elizabeth Wydman, Esq.
COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL, PLLC
1100 New York Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 408-4600
- and –
Laura Helen Posner, Esq.
COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL, PLLC
88 Pine Street
New York, NY 10005
Telephone: (212) 220-2925
- and –
William Paul Tinkler, Esq.
TINKLER LAW FIRM LLC
P.O. Box 31813
Charleston, SC 29417
Telephone: (843) 853-5203
Defendants-Appellants DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP, et al. are represented
by:
Katrin Alissandra Cassidy-Ginsberg, Esq.
Scott Alexander Edelman, Esq.
Andrew B. Lichtenberg, Esq.
Atara Miller, Esq.
Jed Mastren Schwartz, Esq.
MILBANK LLP
55 Hudson Yards
New York, NY 10001
Telephone: (212) 530-5030
(212) 530-5542
(212) 530-5421
(212) 530-5283
- and –
John Anderson Fagg, Jr., Esq.
Mark A. Nebrig, Esq.
Nader Saeed Raja, Esq.
MOORE & VAN ALLEN
100 North Tryon Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
Telephone: (704) 331-3622
(704) 331-3602
(704) 331-3621
- and –
Steven M. Farina, Esq.
WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP
680 Maine Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20024
Telephone: (202) 434-5000
- and –
Lesley Anne Firestone, Esq.
Daniel Fuerst, Esq.
Christopher A. Ogiba, Esq.
Tiffany E. Payne, Esq.
Lauren Nicole Vriesinga, Esq.
MOORE & VAN ALLEN, PLLC
P.O. Box 22828
Charleston, SC 29413
Telephone: (843) 579-7027
(843) 579-7000
(843) 579-7066
(843) 579-7054
(843) 579-7022
DISA GLOBAL: Duiker Sues Over Unauthorized Personal Info Access
---------------------------------------------------------------
CHRISTOPHER DUIKER, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DISA GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 4:25-cv-00821 (S.D. Tex., February 25, 2025) is
a class action against the Defendant for negligence, breach of
implied contract, invasion of privacy, and unjust enrichment/quasi
contract.
The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and
safeguard the personally identifiable information (PII) of the
Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals stored within its
computer system following a data breach between February 9, 2024,
and April 22, 2024. The Defendant also failed to timely notify the
Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals about the data breach.
As a result, the private information of the Plaintiff and Class
members was compromised and damaged through access by and
disclosure to unknown and unauthorized third parties.
DISA Global Solutions, Inc. is a third-party administrator of
employment screening services based in Houston, Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
SHAMIS & GENTILE P.A.
14 NE 1st Ave., Suite 705
Miami, FL 33132
Telephone: (305) 479-2299
Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com
DISA GLOBAL: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Henion Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
ROY HENION, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. DISA GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC., Case No. 4:25-cv-00947
(S.D. Tex., Mar. 3, 2025) alleges that DISA failed to properly
secure and safeguard the Plaintiff's and Class Members' protected
personally identifiable information stored within the Defendant's
information network including, without limitation, names, Social
Security numbers.
The Plaintiff seeks monetary damages and injunctive and declaratory
relief from DISA. The Plaintiff further seeks to hold Defendant
responsible for not ensuring that the PII was maintained in a
manner consistent with industry standards.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff and Members of the Class have suffered
significant injury and damages due to the Data Breach permitted to
occur by DISA, and the resulting misuse of their Personal
Information and fraudulent activity, including monetary damages
including out-of-pocket expenses, including those associated with
the reasonable mitigation measures they were forced to employ, and
other damages.
The Plaintiff and the Class also now forever face an amplified risk
of further misuse, fraud, and identity theft due to their sensitive
Personal Information falling into the hands of cybercriminals
because of the tortious conduct of Defendant. On behalf of
themselves and the Class preliminarily defined below, Plaintiff
brings causes of action for: (I) Negligence and Negligence Per Se;
(ii) Implied Breach of Contract; (iii) Breach of Fiduciary Duty;
(iv) Intrusion Upon Seclusion/Invasion of Privacy; (v) Unjust
Enrichment and (vi) Declaratory Judgment and Injunctive Relief.
The Plaintiff seek damages and injunctive and declaratory relief
arising from DISA's failure to adequately protect their highly
sensitive Personal Information. According to the DISA's own
website, DISA is a leading provider of background screening, drug
and alcohol testing, and compliance solutions, with
industry-leading expertise. The Plaintiff and Class Members'
sensitive personal information --which they entrusted to Defendant
on the mutual understanding that Defendant would protect against
disclosure was targeted, compromised, and unlawfully accessed due
to the Data Breach.
The Defendant states on its website that: On April 22, 2024, DISA
discovered that it was the victim of a cyber incident that impacted
a limited portion of its network.
On Feb. 21, 2025, the Defendant's Data Breach was reported in the
news media: "Reported on February 21st, nearly a year after the
"cyber incident" took place, DISA filed a breach notification with
the Maine Attorney General's office last Friday, revealing that the
personal information of 3,332,750 individuals was compromised in
the hack – including social security numbers, credit card account
numbers and more."
As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's failure to
implement and to follow basic security procedures, Plaintiff's and
Class Members' Private Information now appears to be in the hands
of cybercriminals, the Plaintiff contends.
DISA provides background screening, drug and alcohol testing, and
compliance solutions, with industry-leading expertise. As part of
its business, Defendant collects a treasure-trove of data from
their clients, including highly sensitive Private Information.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joe Kendall, Esq.
KENDALL LAW GROUP, PLLC
3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 825
Dallas, TX 75219
Telephone: (214) 744-3000
E-mail: jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com
- and -
Courtney Maccarone, Esq.
Mark Svensson, Esq.
LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
33 Whitehall Street, 17th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 363-7500
Facsimile: (212) 363-7171
E-mail: cmaccarone@zlk.com
msvensson@zlk.com
DISA GLOBAL: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Lewis Suit Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
AUSHANIQUE LEWIS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. DISA GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC., Case No.
4:25-cv-00949 (S.D. Tex., Mar. 3, 2025) alleges that DISA failed to
properly secure and safeguard the Plaintiff's and Class Members'
protected personally identifiable information stored within the
Defendant's information network including, without limitation,
names, Social Security numbers.
The Plaintiff seeks monetary damages and injunctive and declaratory
relief from DISA. The Plaintiff further seeks to hold Defendant
responsible for not ensuring that the PII was maintained in a
manner consistent with industry standards.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff and Members of the Class have suffered
significant injury and damages due to the Data Breach permitted to
occur by DISA, and the resulting misuse of their Personal
Information and fraudulent activity, including monetary damages
including out-of-pocket expenses, including those associated with
the reasonable mitigation measures they were forced to employ, and
other damages.
The Plaintiff and the Class also now forever face an amplified risk
of further misuse, fraud, and identity theft due to their sensitive
Personal Information falling into the hands of cybercriminals
because of the tortious conduct of Defendant.
On behalf of themselves and the Class preliminarily defined below,
Plaintiff brings causes of action for: (I) Negligence and
Negligence Per Se; (ii) Implied Breach of Contract; (iii) Breach of
Fiduciary Duty; (iv) Intrusion Upon Seclusion/Invasion of Privacy;
(v) Unjust Enrichment and (vi) Declaratory Judgment and Injunctive
Relief.
The Plaintiff seek damages and injunctive and declaratory relief
arising from DISA's failure to adequately protect their highly
sensitive Personal Information.
According to the DISA's own website, DISA is a leading provider of
background screening, drug and alcohol testing, and compliance
solutions, with industry-leading expertise. The Plaintiff and Class
Members' sensitive personal information --which they entrusted to
Defendant on the mutual understanding that Defendant would protect
against disclosure was targeted, compromised, and unlawfully
accessed due to the Data Breach.
The Defendant states on its website that: On April 22, 2024, DISA
discovered that it was the victim of a cyber incident that impacted
a limited portion of its network.
On Feb. 21, 2025, the Defendant's Data Breach was reported in the
news media: "Reported on February 21st, nearly a year after the
"cyber incident" took place, DISA filed a breach notification with
the Maine Attorney General's office last Friday, revealing that the
personal information of 3,332,750 individuals was compromised in
the hack – including social security numbers, credit card account
numbers and more."
As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's failure to
implement and to follow basic security procedures, Plaintiff's and
Class Members' Private Information now appears to be in the hands
of cybercriminals, the Plaintiff contends.
DISA provides background screening, drug and alcohol testing, and
compliance solutions, with industry-leading expertise.
As part of its business, Defendant collects a treasure-trove of
data from their clients, including highly sensitive Private
Information.
Drug screening providers that handle Private Information have an
obligation to employ reasonable and necessary data security
practices to protect the sensitive, confidential and personal
information entrusted to them.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Tarak Anada, Esq.
Jones Walker LLP
811 Main Street, Suite 2900
Houston, TX 77002
Telephone: (504) 582-8000
Facsimile: (504) 589-8322
E-mail: tanada@joneswalker.com
- and -
James F. Woods, Esq.
Annie E. Causey, Esq.
WOODS LONGERGAN PLLC
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 1410
New York, NY 10165
Telephone: (212) 684-2500
E-mail: jwoods@woodslaw.com
acausey@woodslaw.com
DISA GLOBAL: Webster Sues Over Failure to Protect Clients' Info
---------------------------------------------------------------
DREW WEBSTER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DISA GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC., Defendant, Case
No. 4:25-cv-00826 (S.D. Tex., February 25, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for negligence, negligence per se, breach of
third-party beneficiary contract, and unjust enrichment.
The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and
safeguard the personally identifiable information (PII) of the
Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals stored within its
computer system following a data breach between February 9, 2024,
and April 22, 2024. The Defendant also failed to timely notify the
Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals about the data breach.
As a result, the private information of the Plaintiff and Class
members was compromised and damaged through access by and
disclosure to unknown and unauthorized third parties.
DISA Global Solutions, Inc. is a third-party administrator of
employment screening services based in Houston, Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joe Kendall, Esq.
KENDALL LAW GROUP, PLLC
3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 825
Dallas, TX 75219
Telephone: (214) 744-3000
Facsimile: (214) 744-3015
Email: jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com
- and -
Mariya Weekes, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
201 Sevilla Avenue, 2nd Floor
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Telephone: (786) 879-8200
Facsimile: (786) 879-7520
Email: mweekes@milberg.com
DOTDASH MEREDITH: Discloses Personal Info to Meta, Musick Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ABBY MUSICK, MARI CARTAGENOVA, and KEVIN MANSFIELD, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated v. DOTDASH MEREDITH,
INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-01718 (S.D.N.Y., Feb. 28, 2025) is a
consumer digital privacy class action complaint brought on behalf
of all persons with Facebook accounts who have subscribed to
newsletters from Entertainment Weekly and People, and interacted
with videos on their respective websites (ew.com and people.com).
The Websites are owned and operated by Dotdash. Every time a person
interacts with a video on the Websites (including by clicking play,
pausing the video, adjusting the volume in the video player, or
moving the video into fullscreen mode) while logged into Facebook,
Dotdash Meredith breaches the federal Video Protection Privacy
Act.
Accordingly, Dotdash knowingly and without proper consent discloses
to third party, Meta Platforms, Inc. (Facebook), users': (i)
personally identifiable information including their Facebook ID
numbers, and (ii) a computer file containing the title of the video
along with its corresponding URL, constituting a record of each
video clip they viewed on the Website (Personal Viewing
Information).
The Defendant owns and operates the Websites at issue in this
litigation, "people.com" and "ew.com,” among others. Dotdash
Meredith is a wholly-owned subsidiary of IAC, Inc., a publicly-held
media conglomerate.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Anand Swaminathan, Esq.
Jon Loevy, Esq.
Michael I. Kanovitz, Esq.
Thomas M. Hanson, Esq.
LOEVY & LOEVY
311 N. Aberdeen St., 3rd Floor
Chicago, IL 60607
Telephone: (312) 243-5900
E-mail: anand@loevy.com
jon@loevy.com
mike@loevy.com
hanson@loevy.com
EIDP INC: PFAS Chemicals Contaminate Private Property, Ryan Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
THOMAS RYAN, SUSAN RYAN, SEAN GALLAGHER, ASHLEY SULTAN GALLAGHER,
MICHELE BURT, NANCY DONOVAN, and LAUREN LADUE, individually and on
behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. EIDP, INC.,
DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC., THE CHEMOURS COMPANY, THE CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC, CORTEVA, INC., BALL CORPORATION, RUST-OLEUM CORPORATION,
NEW ENGLAND WASTE SYSTEMS OF ME D/B/A CASELLA ORGANICS, SYNAGRO
TECHNOLOGIES, INC., NEW ENGLAND FERTILIZER COMPANY, NEFCO GP I, and
NEFCO GP II. Defendants, Case No. 4:25-cv-40026 (D. Mass., February
23, 2025) arises from the Defendants' intentional, reckless, and/or
negligent acts and omissions in connection with the discharge,
distribution, and/or disposal of per- and polyfluoroalkyl
substances and their constituents, collectively referred as PFAS,
which have caused the contamination of real property and drinking
water supplies owned and used by Plaintiffs and other Class
members.
According to the complaint, the Plaintiffs and the Class members
have ingested and absorbed PFAS into their bodies, tissue, and
cells where it is known to and has bioaccumulated over time as a
direct result of Defendant's negligent conduct in connection with
disposal of waste materials contaminated with PFAS chemicals at
MassNatural's operations at Otter Farm.
By causing contamination with PFAS of real property owned and/or
possessed by Plaintiffs and the Class Members, Defendant Ball also
has substantially interfered otherwise with the Plaintiffs' and
Class Members' ability to enjoy their property, to avail themselves
of their property's value as an asset and/or source of collateral
for financing, and to use their property in the manner that each
Class Member chooses, says the suit.
EIDP, Inc., f/k/a E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, operates as
a agricultural chemical company.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Sean K. McElligott, Esq.
Ian W. Sloss, Esq.
Johnathan Seredynski, Esq.
Krystyna D. Gancoss, Esq.
Kate Sayed, Esq.
SILVER GOLUB & TEITELL LLP
One Landmark Square, 15th Floor
Stamford, CT 06901
Telephone: (203) 325-4491
Facsimile: (203) 325-3769
E-mail: isloss@sgtlaw.com
smcelligott@sgtlaw.com
jseredynski@sgtlaw.com
kgancoss@sgtlaw.com
ksayed@sgtlaw.com
- and -
David C. Strouss, Esq.
Christian Uehlein, Esq.
Leah M. McMorris, Esq.
THORNTON LAW FIRM LLP
84 State Street, 4th Floor
Boston, MA 02109
Telephone: (617) 720-1333
Facsimile: (617) 720-2445
E-mail: dstrouss@tenlaw.com
cuehlein@tenlaw.com
lmcmorris@tenlaw.com
EVERCARE LLC: Mislabels Apple Cider Vinegar Capsules, Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
MARLO PANTALEON on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. EVERCARE LLC, Defendant, Case No.
4:25-cv-01905 (N.D. Cal., February 23, 2025) is a proposed class
action on behalf of a nationwide and California class of consumers
seeking redress for Defendant's deceptive practices associated with
the advertising, labeling, and sale of its Prime MD Ceylon Cinnamon
Apple Cider Vinegar capsules pursuant to the California's Business
and Professions Code.
The Product's principal display panel claims that it is Apple Cider
Vinegar and the Supplement Fact Section states that each serving
contains 500 mg of Apple Cider Vinegar. By law, any product
claiming to be Apple Cider Vinegar must contain a minimum of 4%
acetic acid. Anything less, the product is not and cannot be called
Apple Cider Vinegar and its content rendered inefficacious and
worthless.
The Plaintiff conducted analytical testing on 12 representative
samples of EverCare's Apple Cider Vinegar capsules which reveal
that the Products contain less than 2.0% acetic acid and
accordingly, less than half of the promised 500 mg of ACV.
Throughout the applicable Class Period, the Defendant has falsely
represented the true nature of its Product. As a result of this
false and misleading labeling, the Defendant was able to sell them
to thousands of unsuspecting consumers throughout California and
the United States, the suit alleges.
EverCare LLC markets, advertises, and sells a line of Apple Cider
Vinegar Dietary Supplements.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael D. Braun, Esq.
KUZYK LAW, LLP
2121 Avenue of the Stars, Ste. 800
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (213) 401-4100
E-mail: mdb@kuzykclassactions.com
FA WORLD: Trippett Sues Over Blind's Equal Access to Online Store
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ALFRED TRIPPETT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. FA WORLD ENTERTAINMENT, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 1:25-cv-01573 (S.D.N.Y., February 25, 2025) is a class
action against the Defendants for violations of Title III of the
Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights
Law, the New York State Civil Rights Law, and the New York City
Human Rights Law, and declaratory relief.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website,
https://www.faworldentertainment.com, contains access barriers
which hinder the Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits
of their online goods, content, and services offered to the public
through the website. The accessibility issues on the website
include but not limited to: inaccurate landmark structure,
inadequate focus order, ambiguous link texts, unclear labels for
interactive elements, redundant links where adjacent links go to
the same URL address, and the requirement that transactions be
performed solely with a mouse, says the suit.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that its website will become and remain accessible to
blind and visually impaired individuals.
Fa World Entertainment, Inc. is a company that sells online goods
and services in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gabriel A. Levy, Esq.
GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C.
1129 Northern Blvd, Suite 404
Manhasset, NY 11030
Telephone: (347) 941-4715
Email: Email: Glevyfirm@gmail.com
FCA US: Court Excludes Plaintiffs' Expert Opinions
--------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as EDWARD PISTORIO, et al.,
v. FCA US LLC, Case No. 2:20-cv-11838-SFC-APP (E.D. Mich.), the
Hon. Judge Anthony Patti entered an order granting the Defendant's
motion to exclude the opinions of the Plaintiffs' expert Steve
Loudon and taking under advisement the Defendant's motion to
exclude the opinions of Steven P. Gaskin and Colin B. Weir.
The Court said that Loudon's opinion does not satisfy Daubert v.
Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), nor does it meet
the standard of Federal Rule of Evidence 702.
The Plaintiffs have failed to show that it is more likely than not
that:
(1)Loudon's scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge
will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to
determine a fact in issue;
(2)Loudon's testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;
(3)Loudon’s testimony is the product of reliable principles and
methods; and
(4)Loudon's opinion reflects a reliable application of the
principles and methods to the facts of the case.
This conclusion is further amplified by the Sixth Circuit’s very
recent opinion in In re Nissan N. Am., Inc. Litig., 122 F.4th 239
(6th Cir. Nov 22, 2024), significantly criticizing Loudon’s
proposed testimony, which was substantially identical to the
opinion testimony presented in this case, and overturning the
district court’s certification which relied upon Loudon’s
testimony.
FCA US LLC designs, engineers, manufactures, and sells vehicles.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=sys08c at no extra
charge.[CC]
FCA US: Filing for Class Cert. Bid in Jenkins Suit Due Nov. 28
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BRIAN JENKINS, et al., v.
FCA US LLC, Case No. 4:23-cv-01075-JSW (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge
Jeffrey White entered an order vacating case management conference
and scheduling order as follows:
Event Deadline
Last day for Plaintiffs to file motion for Nov. 28, 2025
class certification and to disclose expert
reports:
Last day to amend pleadings: Dec. 19, 2025
Last day to depose Plaintiffs' experts: Jan. 12, 2026
Last day to complete fact discovery: Oct. 7, 2026
Hearing on motion for class certification Oct. 30, 2026
and related Daubert motions: at 9:00 a.m.
FCA US designs, engineers, manufactures, and sells vehicles.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=V5AYQP at no extra
charge.[CC]
FIGS INC: Hoch Appeals Ruling Narrowing Claims in Securities Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
RONALD HOCH, et al. are taking an appeal from a court order
granting in part and denying in part the Defendants' motions to
dismiss in the lawsuit entitled Sean Ryan, et al., individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Figs,
Inc., et al., Defendants, Case No. 2:22-cv-07939-ODW-AGR, in the
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit is
brought by the Plaintiff, under the Securities Exchange Act of 1933
and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, on behalf of all persons
or entities that purchased or otherwise acquired: (i) FIGS
securities between May 27, 2021, and May 12, 2022, inclusive;
and/or (ii) FIGS stock pursuant and/or traceable to the Offering
Documents issued in connection with FIGS' initial public offering.
On May 3, 2024, the Defendants filed motions to dismiss, which
Judge Otis D. Wright, II granted in part and denied in part on Jan.
10, 2025. The Court dismissed without leave to amend Plaintiffs
Hoch's, City of Pensacola's, and Kissimmee's Section 11 claims
based on the Secondary Public Offering (SPO), and Section 12(a)(2)
claims; dismissed with prejudice the Plaintiffs' Section 11 claim
based on FIGS's statement about its air freight use in 2020 and
March 2021; dismissed with leave to amend Plaintiff City of
Warren's Section 11 claim based on the SPO; and dismissed with
leave to amend the Plaintiffs' remaining claims under Section 11,
Section 12(a)(2), Section 15, Section 10(b), and Section 20(a).
The appellate case is captioned Hoch, et al. v. Figs, Inc., et al.,
Case No. 25-902, in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit, filed on February 12, 2025.
The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that:
-- Appellant's Mediation Questionnaire was due on February 18,
2025;
-- Appellant's Appeal Opening Brief is due on March 24, 2025;
and
-- Appellee's Appeal Answering Brief is due on April 24, 2025.
[BN]
Plaintiffs-Appellants RONALD HOCH, et al., individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, are represented by:
Shannon L. Hopkins, Esq.
Adam M. Apton, Esq.
LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
33 Whitehall Street, 17th Floor
New York, NY 10004
- and –
Morgan Michelle Embleton, Esq.
LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
1111 Summer Street, Suite 403
Stamford, CT 06905
- and –
Ryan Llorens, Esq.
Steven Francis Hubachek, Esq.
Erika Limpin Oliver, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD, LLP
655 W. Broadway, Suite 1900
San Diego, CA 92101
Defendants-Appellees FIGS, INC., et al. are represented by:
Michael Carl Tu, Esq.
COOLEY, LLP
355 S. Grand Avenue, Suite 900
Los Angeles, CA 90071
- and –
Koji Fukumura, Esq.
COOLEY, LLP
10265 Science Center Drive
San Diego, CA 92121
- and –
Peter B. Morrison, Esq.
Winston Hsiao, Esq.
Raza Rasheed, Esq.
SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM, LLP
2000 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 200
Los Angeles, CA 90067
- and –
Charlene S. Shimada, Esq.
Kevin Papay, Esq.
MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS, LLP
One Market Street, Spear Street Tower
San Francisco, CA 94105
- and –
John Warren Rissier, Esq.
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS, LLP
300 S. Grand Avenue, 22nd Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
FOODSCIENCE LLC: Walker Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
------------------------------------------------------------
LEAH WALKER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. FOODSCIENCE, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-01881 (N.D. Ill., February 24, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendants for violations of Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, declaratory relief, and negligent infliction
of emotional distress.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website,
https://www.davincilabs.com, contains access barriers which hinder
the Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of their
online goods, content, and services offered to the public through
the website. The accessibility issues on the website include but
not limited to: inadequate focus order, ambiguous link texts, the
denial of keyboard access for some interactive elements, empty
links that contain no text, and the requirement that transactions
be performed solely with a mouse.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that its website will become and remain accessible to
blind and visually impaired individuals.
Foodscience, LLC is a company that sells online goods and services
in Illinois. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David B. Reyes, Esq.
EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP PLLC
68-29 Main Street
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (630) 478-0856
Email: Dreyes@ealg.law
FOREST RIVER: Court Extends Class Cert Response Deadline
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JAY NELSON, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. FOREST RIVER,
INC., Case No. 4:22-cv-00049-BMM (D. Mont.), the Hon. Judge Brian
Morris entered an order that:
1) The Defendant Forest River's motion to extend its response
deadline is granted.
2) The Defendant Forest River shall file its response to the
Plaintiff Nelson's motion for class certification within 15
days of the Court's order deciding Nelson's motion for leave
to amend.
Forest River has demonstrated good cause for extending its response
deadline for Nelson's Motion to Certify Class. Nelson's proposed
Fourth Amended Complaint adds three class claims and expands the
scope of the class he seeks to certify. Forest River cannot respond
with specificity to Nelson's Motion to Certify Class until it knows
which Complaint and claims govern the proposed class.
Nelson argues that Forest River has delayed the litigation
unnecessarily and urges the Court to prevent further delay caused
by Forest River. This delay, however, is attributable to Nelson,
who moved to amend his complaint a fourth time immediately before
moving for class certification. Nelson's argument that the proposed
amendments do not affect the scope of the proposed class proves
unavailing. If the proposed changes do not alter the scope of the
claims, Nelson would have no need of amendment. The Court finds
that good cause justifies extending Forest River’s response
deadline.
Nelson filed a Motion for Leave to File a Fourth Amended Complaint
on Jan. 15, 2025.
The Court conducted a hearing on the motion on Feb. 13, 2025.
Nelson filed a Motion to Certify Class on Feb. 11, 2025.
Forest River manufactures recreational vehicles.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb, 21, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=mCt2FQ at no extra
charge.[CC]
GUARDIAN LIFE: Underpays Claims Representatives, Katheren Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
SHERRY KATHEREN, individually on behalf of herself and all others
similarly situated v. THE GUARDIAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF
AMERICA, Case No. 1:25-cv-01794 (S.D.N.Y., Mar. 3, 2025) is a
collective action pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938
on behalf of Plaintiff and all other persons similarly situated who
suffered damages as a result of the Defendant's violations of the
FLSA.
The Defendant allegedly violated the FLSA by failing to pay
Defendant's non-exempt, hourly-paid, and overtime-eligible
Disability Claims Representatives (DCRs) who work or worked for the
Defendant in the United States. The Plaintiff and DCRs were
performing work during meal breaks and were not completely relieved
of work duties as required by the FLSA.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant as a non-exempt,
hourly-paid, and overtime-eligible DCR from March 2022 to present.
The Defendant is a mutual insurance company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregg I. Shavitz, Esq.
Marilyn Linares, Esq.
Michael J. Palitz, Esq.
SHAVITZ LAW GROUP, P.A.
477 Madison Avenue, 6th Floor
New York, New York 10022
Telephone: (800) 616-4000
E-mail: mpalitz@shavitzlaw.com
gshavitz@shavitzlaw.com
mlinares@shavitzlaw.com
- and -
Mitchell Feldman, Esq.
FELDMAN LEGAL GROUP
12610 Race Track Rd., Suite 225
Tampa, FL 33626
Telephone: (813) 680-4428
E-mail: mfeldman@flandgatrialattorneys.com
HARRISON COUNTY, TX: Moreau Files 5th Cir. Appeal in FLSA Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
LYNWOOD MOREAU is taking an appeal from a court order in the
lawsuit entitled Lynwood Moreau, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Harrison County,
Defendant, Case No. 4:19-cv-4719, in the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of Texas.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the Plaintiff
brought this suit against the Defendant for unpaid overtime
compensation in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938
("FLSA").
The appellate case is captioned Moreau v. Harrison County, Case No.
25-20045, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit, filed on February 13, 2025. [BN]
Plaintiff-Appellant LYNWOOD MOREAU, et al., individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, are represented by:
Curt Christopher Hesse, Esq.
MOORE & ASSOCIATES
440 Louisiana Street
Houston, TX 77002
Telephone: (713) 222-6775
Defendant-Appellee Harrison County, Texas is represented by:
Carolyn Ann Russell, Esq.
OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
500 Dallas Street
1 Allen Center
Houston, TX 77002
Telephone: (713) 655-0855
HDC GROUP: Illegally Sells Cannabis-Infused Products, Martinez Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
ALEX MARTINEZ, individually and on behalf of similarly situated
individuals v. HDC GROUP LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-02130 (N.D. Ill.,
Feb. 28, 2025) is class action complaint against the Defendant for
unlawfully manufacturing, marketing, and selling potent
"cannabis-infused products" (CIPs) with excessively high
tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content -- well above the applicable
legal limits imposed under Illinois law for consumers' health and
safety.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff brings this action individually and on
behalf of similarly situated individuals to seek redress for
violations of the Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices and
Illinois Consumer Fraud Act, as well as common law torts of fraud
and fraudulent concealment, breaches of express and implied
warranties, declaratory judgment, and unjust enrichment, among
others.
The Defendant masquerades its CIPs as legal for purchase and
consumption in Illinois; in actuality, however, the products vastly
exceed the applicable THC limits for CIPs, as well as the personal
possession limits for those products. This subjects purchasers to
risks of adverse effects associated with overconsumption of THC, as
well as legal risks for possession of illegal products, the lawsuit
says.
Nevertheless, the Defendant manufactures, markets, labels, and/or
packages Vapable Oil products as though they are smokeable
concentrates, in 500 mg and 1 g quantities, including under the
Timeless brand, and Defendant HDC manufactures Vapable Oils for
other companies.
As a result, consumers have been and continue to be overcharged,
placed at risk from overconsuming the Defendant's illegal product,
and incurring other consequential damages and harm.
HDC as a licensed infuser and contracts with third parties to
manufacture, produce, process, package, label, sell, and distribute
CIPs.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Laura Luisi, Esq.
Jamie Holz, Esq.
LUISI HOLZ LAW
161 N. Clark St., Suite 1600
Chicago, IL 60601
Telephone: (312) 639-4478
E-mail: LuisiL@luisiholzlaw.com
HolzJ@luisiholzlaw.com
HERSHEY COMPANY: Vidal Seeks to Certify Classes
-----------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Nathan Vidal, Debra
Kennick, Abdjul Martin, and Eduardo Granados, on behalf of
themselves and all other similarly situated individuals, v. The
Hershey Company, Case No. 0:24-cv-60831-MD (S.D. Fla.), the
Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting motion for
class certification:
The Plaintiffs contend that the proposed classes meet all of the
Rule 23 requirements, and request that the Court certify the
nationwide class, appoint plaintiffs as class representatives, and
appoint Anthony J. Russo, Jr. and James C. Kelly as counsel for the
class.
The Plaintiffs propose the following class for certification based
on Hershey’s misleading packaging for the Products under Florida
Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA), as follows:
"All individuals who purchased, in the State of Florida, a
Reese's Medal, Reese's Peanut Butter Pumpkins, Reese's White
Pumpkins, Reese's Pieces Pumpkins, Reese's Peanut Butter
Ghost, Reese's White Ghost, Reese's Peanut Butter Bats,
Reese's Peanut Butter footBalls, or Reese's Peanut Butter
Shapes Assortment Snowmen Stockings Bells, at any time between
June 1, 2021, and the date of the final disposition of this
action."
Excluded from the Class are Defendant's current or former
officers, directors, and employees; counsel for Plaintiffs and
Defendant; and the judicial officer to whom this lawsuit is
assigned.
If the Court declines to certify a class of purchasers for all of
the Products at issue, the Plaintiffs propose that the Court
certify the following class of purchasers of the Products that
Plaintiffs purchased:
"All individuals who purchased, in the State of Florida, a
Reese's Peanut Butter Pumpkins, Reese's White Pumpkins,
Reese's Peanut Butter Ghost, Reese's Peanut Butter Bats, or
Reese's Peanut Butter footBalls, at any time between June 1,
2021, and the date of the final disposition of this action."
Excluded from the Class are Defendant's current or former
officers, directors, and employees; counsel for Plaintiffs and
Defendant; and the judicial officer to whom this lawsuit is
assigned.
The Plaintiffs allege that Hersey is falsely representing several
Reese's Peanut Butter products as containing explicit carved out
artistic designs when there are no such carvings in the actual
products and the products are blanks.
Hershey is an American multinational confectionery company.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Feb, 21, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=iH0ZS8 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Anthony Russo, Esq.
James C. Kelly, Esq.
THE RUSSO FIRM
1001 Yamato Road, Suite 106
Boca Raton, FL 33431
Telephone: (844) 847-8300
E-mail: anthony@therussofirm.com
jkelly@therussofirm.com
HICKS NURSERIES: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Cantwell Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
LISA CANTWELL, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. HICKS NURSERIES, INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-01161 (E.D.N.Y.
Feb. 28, 2025) contends that the Defendant failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website,
www.hicksnurseries.com, to be fully accessible to and independently
usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired
people, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
On Jan. 9, 2025, the Plaintiff visited the Defendant's website to
purchase an indoor plant. Despite the Plaintiff's efforts, however,
the Plaintiff was denied a shopping experience similar to that of a
sighted individual due to the website’s lack of a variety of
features and accommodations, which effectively barred Plaintiff
from having an unimpeded browsing experience.
Accordingly, the Website contains access barriers that prevent free
and full use by the Plaintiff using keyboards and screen-reading
software. These barriers include but are not limited to: missing
alt-text, hidden elements on web pages, incorrectly formatted
lists, unannounced pop ups, unclear labels for interactive
elements, and the requirement that some events be performed solely
with a mouse.
The Plaintiff now seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so
the Defendant's Website will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumer.
Ms. Cantwell is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using the
computer.
The Defendant's Website offers products and services for online
sale and general delivery to the public. The Website offers
features which ought to allow users to browse for items, access
navigation bar descriptions, inquire about pricing, and avail
consumers of the ability to peruse the numerous items offered for
sale.[BN]
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
HOMETOWN EQUITY: Edry Appeals Summary Judgment Ruling to 9th Cir.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
IDAN U. EDRY is taking an appeal from a court order in the lawsuit
entitled Idan U. Edry, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Hometown Equity Mortgage, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 2:22-cv-00804-MMD-MDC, in the U.S. District
Court for the District of Nevada.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, this is a
straightforward breach of contract case involving commercial
mortgage loans and interest rate lock agreements. All the loans
were processed under the Defendant's standard process and using
form documents. They also included interest rate-lock agreements
that the Defendant extended to approximately 430 borrowers,
including Plaintiff Idan Edry.
On Aug. 15, 2022, the Defendant filed a motion to dismiss the case,
which Judge Miranda M. Du granted in part and denied in part on
Jan. 31, 2023. The Court denied the motion as it relates to the
Plaintiff's breach of contract claim. The Court granted the motion
and dismissed with prejudice as to the Plaintiff's claims for
violation of the Nevada Deceptive Trade Practices Act, negligent
misrepresentation, and declaratory relief.
On Apr. 29, 2024, the Plaintiff filed a motion to certify class.
On May 10, 2024, the Plaintiff filed a motion for partial summary
judgment.
On June 21, 2024, the Defendant filed a counter motion for summary
judgment.
On Jan. 21, 2025, Judge Du entered an Order denying the Plaintiff's
motion for partial summary judgment and granting the Defendant's
counter motion for summary judgment. The Plaintiff's motion to
certify class was also denied as moot.
Judgment is entered in favor of the Defendant on Jan. 23, 2025.
On Feb. 6, 2025, the Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration.
The appellate case is captioned Edry v. Hometown Equity Mortgage,
LLC, Case No. 25-1074, in the United States Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit, filed on February 20, 2025. [BN]
Plaintiff-Appellant IDAN U. EDRY, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, is represented by:
Royi Moas, Esq.
WOLF, RIFKIN, SHAPIRO, SCHULMAN AND RABKIN, LLP
3773 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 590
South Las Vegas, NV 89169
Defendant-Appellee HOMETOWN EQUITY MORTGAGE, LLC is represented
by:
Kristen T. Gallagher, Esq.
MCDONALD CARANO, LLP
2300 W. Sahara Avenue, Suite 1200
Las Vegas, NV 89102
- and –
Matthew P. Previn, Esq.
PAUL HASTINGS, LLP
200 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10166
HOSPITALITY CENTER: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Nouvlette Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
JOSUE J. NOUVLETTE, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THE HOSPITALITY CENTER OF
FLORIDA.INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-20964-XXXX (S.D. Fla.,
Feb. 28, 2025) 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 Nouvlette was employed by the Defendant as a staff.
The Hospitality Center of Florida.Inc. is a staffing agency
providing personnel to the hospitality industry. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
9100 S. Dadeland Blvd. Suite 1500
Miami, FL 33156
Telephone: (305) 446-1500
Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
Email: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com
HUB GROUP: Andujar Appeals Labor Suit Dismissal to 6th Circuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
JORGE ANDUJAR, et al. are taking an appeal from a court order
dismissing their lawsuit entitled Jorge Andujar, et al., on behalf
of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Hub
Group Trucking, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 2:24-cv-02296, in the
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit,
which was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District
of New Jersey to the U.S. District Court for the Western District
of Tennessee, is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay
wages.
On July 3, 2024, the Defendant filed a motion to dismiss, which
Judge Thomas L. Parker granted on Feb. 13, 2025.
The appellate case is captioned Jorge Andujar, et al. v. Hub Group
Trucking, Inc., Case No. 25-5130, in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, filed on February 19, 2025. [BN]
Plaintiffs-Appellants JORGE ANDUJAR, et al., individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, are represented by:
Harold L. Lichten, Esq.
LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN
729 Boylston Street, Suite 2000
Boston, MA 02116
Telephone: (617) 994-5800
Defendant-Appellee HUB GROUP TRUCKING, INC. is represented by:
Allan Bloom, Esq.
PROSKAUER ROSE
Eleven Times Square
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: (212) 969-3000
INTRASYSTEMS LLC: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, O'Dell Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------------
LINDA O'DELL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. INTRASYSTEMS, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-10491 (D. Mass., Feb. 28, 2025) is an action against the
Defendants for its failure to adequately secure and safeguard the
personally identifying information and protected health information
of the Class Members.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the the Data Breach was
directly and proximately caused by IntraSystems' failure to
implement and maintain reasonable and industry-standard data
security practices necessary to protect its systems from a
foreseeable and preventable cyberattack. Through this wrongful
conduct, the sensitive PII and PHI of the Class Members are now in
the hands of cybercriminals, who target this sensitive data for its
value to identity thieves.
The Plaintiff and Class Members are now at a significantly
increased and impending risk of fraud, identity theft, and similar
forms of criminal mischief—risks which may last the rest of their
lives, the suit alleges.
Intrasystems, LLC specializes in the deployment and delivery of IT
infrastructure, virtualization services, security, and cloud
solutions. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Edward F. Haber, Esq.
Ian J. McLoughlin, Esq.
Patrick J. Vallely, Esq.
SHAPIRO HABER & URMY LLP
One Boston Place, Suite 2600
Boston, MA 02108
Telephone: (617) 439-3939
Facsimile: (617) 439-0134
Email: ehaber@shulaw.com
imcloughlin@shulaw.com
pvallely@shulaw.com
- and -
Amber L. Schubert, Esq.
SCHUBERT JONCKHEER & KOLBE LLP
2001 Union Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94123
Telephone: (415) 788-4220
Facsimile: (415) 788-0161
Email: aschubert@sjk.law
- and -
Charles "Rusty" Webb, Esq.
THE WEBB LAW CENTRE, PLLC
716 Lee Street East
Charleston, WV 25301
Telephone: (304) 344-9322
Facsimile: (304) 344-1157
Email: rusty@rustywebb.com
JMHC INC: Morales Class Suit Seeks OT Wages Under FLSA
------------------------------------------------------
Rene Morales, and other similarly situated individuals v. JMHC,
Inc. and Candice H. Blomeley, individually, Case No. 6:25-cv-00342
(M.D. Fla., Feb. 28, 2025) seeks to recover monetary damages for
unpaid overtime wages and retaliation under the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
While employed by the Defendants, the Plaintiff worked more than 40
hours every week, but he was not paid for overtime hours, the suit
says.
Accordingly, the Defendants willfully failed to pay the Plaintiff
overtime wages at the rate of time and a half his regular rate for
every hour that he worked in excess of 40, in violation the FLSA.
JMHC is a construction general contractor serving the Orlando area.
The Plaintiff performed his work at different workplaces.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
ANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
9100 S. Dadeland Blvd., Suite 1500
Miami, FL 33156
Telephone: (305) 446-1500
Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com
KROGER CO: Court Certifies Settlement Classes in Wilder Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BRANDON WILDER,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. THE
KROGER CO., Case No. 1:22-cv-00681-JPH (S.D. Ohio), the Hon. Judge
Jeffery Hopkins entered a preliminary approval order:
The Court certifies the following settlement classes pursuant to
Federal Rule of Procedure 23:
Class A includes individuals employed by Kroger as non-exempt
employees from Sept. 1, 2022 to May 31, 2023, in Arizona,
California, Colorado, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New
Jersey, and Virginia who experienced an instance of underpayment
within a given pay period for the hours they worked (or that they
took as PTO) in that pay period (a "Negative Variance") or
experienced an over-deduction from their wages relating to benefits
(an "Over Deduction") as identified in the Deloitte Analysis.
Class B includes all individuals employed by Kroger as non-exempt
employees from Sept. 1, 2022 to May 31, 2023, in every other state
where Kroger does business, excluding Oregon and Washington, who
experienced an instance of underpayment within a given pay period
for the hours they worked (or that they took as PTO) in that pay
period (a "Negative Variance") or experienced an over-deduction
from their wages relating to benefits (an "Over Deduction") as
identified in the Deloitte Analysis.
The Court appoints Anderson Alexander, PLLC and Barkan Meizlish
DeRose Cox, LLP as Class Counsel for purposes of this Settlement.
The Court approves Plaintiffs as representative plaintiffs
of the Settlement Class for settlement purposes only.
The Court approves Rust Consulting, Inc., as Claims Administrator
for the purpose of this Settlement.
A hearing (the "Settlement Fairness Hearing") is scheduled to be
held before the Court on June 24, 2025 at 10:00 am.
Kroger is an American retail company that operates supermarkets and
multi-department stores throughout the United States.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 20, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ny5Qlc at no extra
charge.[CC]
LHC GROUP: Faces Knight ERISA Class Suit Over Tobacco Surcharge
---------------------------------------------------------------
AMANDA J. KNIGHT, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. LHC GROUP, INC., Case No. 6:25-cv-00263-RRS-CBW (W.D.
La., Mar. 3, 2025) challenges LHC's unlawful practice of charging a
"tobacco surcharge" without complying with the regulatory
requirements under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of
1974.
The Plaintiff contends that it is both unfair and unlawful for
entities like LHC to impose discriminatory and punitive health
insurance surcharges on employees who use tobacco products.
Under ERISA, wellness programs must offer, and provide notice of, a
reasonable alternative standard that allows all participants to
obtain the "full reward" -- including refunds for surcharges paid
while completing the program. Instead, under the LHC Group Benefits
Plan, LHC operates a non-compliant, discriminatory tobacco wellness
program that does not offer the "full reward" to participants who
satisfy the alternative standard and does not provide proper notice
in all plan materials, violating federal regulations and depriving
participants of benefits required under ERISA.
Tobacco surcharges have become more prevalent in recent years but
to be lawful plans can impose these surcharges only in connection
with compliant "wellness programs," meaning they must adhere to
strict rules set forth by ERISA and the implementing regulations
established by the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services,
and the Treasury over ten years ago in 2014.
Accordingly, the Departments have issued clear regulatory criteria
that plans must satisfy to qualify for the statutory exception or
safe-harbor, which they may invoke only if they can affirmatively
demonstrate full compliance with these strict requirements in
response to claims that their program is discriminatory.
Moreover, courts must defer to the agency's interpretation of its
own regulations, as long as that interpretation is neither plainly
erroneous nor inconsistent with the regulatory framework, ensuring
that plans cannot evade ERISA's anti-discrimination protections by
selectively or improperly applying these rules.
Ms. Knight is an employee of Caretenders, which is a part of LHC,
who paid, and continues to pay a tobacco surcharge of $25 per
paycheck ($650 annually) associated with the health insurance
offered through LHC during her employment.
The Defendant operates across multiple states, offering
comprehensive healthcare solutions through various subsidiaries and
service lines.
LHC is the sponsor of the Plan and the Plan Administrator under 29
U.S.C. section 1002(16). The Plan, which publicly filed documents
show had over 15,000 participants as of Sept. 30, 2023, is an
employee benefit plan subject to the provisions and statutory
requirements of ERISA.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Charlotte Y. Bergeron, Esq.
1040 Audubon Street
Lake Charles, LA 70605
Telephone: (225) 229-7135
Facsimile: (504) 605-1214
E-mail: cbergeronlaw@gmail.com
- and -
Oren Faircloth, Esq.
Scott Haskins, Esq.
Kimberly Dodson, Esq.
SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Telephone: (212) 532-1091
E-mail: ofaircloth@sirillp.com
shaskins@sirillp.com
kdodson@sirillp.com
LOYA CASUALTY: Marroquin Seeks to File Confidential Docs Under Seal
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jose Marroquin and Juan
Gonzalez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. Loya Casualty Insurance Company, Case No.
5:23-cv-00927-SPG-SHK (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to
enter an order granting their motion to seal documents marked
confidential and to file redacted motion.
The Plaintiff does not believe that the majority, if not all, of
the documents and information marked "confidential" by the
Defendant meets the standard to be sealed.
However, out of an abundance of caution, the Plaintiff files this
motion to file the following documents under seal as well as to
file a redacted version of the motion for class certification,
which contains information from the documents marked as
"confidential" by the Defendant.
Loya offers car insurance.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Feb, 21, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=7WH8GT at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Ryan L. McBride, Esq.
KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC
2221 Camino del Rio S, Suite 101
San Diego, CA 92108
Telephone: (800) 400-6808
Facsimile: (800) 520-5523
E-mail: ryan@kazlg.com
LOYA CASUALTY: Marroquin Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jose Marroquin and Juan
Gonzalez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. Loya Casualty Insurance Company, Case No.
5:23-cv-00927-SPG-SHK (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs, on May 7, 2025,
will move the Court for class certification, pursuant to Fed. R.
Civ. P. 23(a), 23(b)(3) and 23(b)(2).
The Defendant offers basic coverage, including state-mandated
insurance, comprehensive and collision coverage.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Feb, 21, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=RWUzny at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Ryan L. McBride, Esq.
KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC
2221 Camino del Rio S, Suite 101
San Diego, CA 92108
Telephone: (800) 400-6808
Facsimile: (800) 520-5523
E-mail: ryan@kazlg.com
MCLANE COMPANY: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to April 29
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Paris McGowan v. McLane
Company Inc. et al., Case No. 5:24-cv-00689-JLS-MAR (C.D. Cal.),
the Hon. Judge Josephine Staton entered an order:
(1) Granting in part Plaintiff's ex parte application to
extend deadline to file motion for class certification,
and
(2) Striking the Plaintiff's motion to compel discovery.
The Court grants the Plaintiff's ex parte application insofar as it
seeks to extend the deadline to file a motion for class
certification.
Accordingly, the Scheduling Order's deadline to file a motion for
class certification is continued from Feb. 28, 2025, to April 29,
2025. The Opposition is due no later than June 10, 2025, and the
Reply no later than July 8, 2025.
The Court finds that the Plaintiff has shown good cause to extend
the Scheduling Order's deadline to file a motion for class
certification. Plaintiff has also shown that she is without fault
in creating the circumstances requiring ex parte relief, as the
Defendants declined to provide any substantive responses to
Plaintiff's discovery requests pending a ruling on Defendants'
motion to dismiss.
Moreover, the Plaintiff would be irreparably prejudiced if she were
required to file her motion for class certification before having
sufficient time to engage in discovery and prepare her motion.
McLane is an American wholesale supply chain services company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=DyLaEQ at no extra
charge.[CC]
MCLANE FOODSERVICE: Class Allegations in Madero Stricken
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jordan Orozco Madero, et
al., v. McLane Foodservice, Inc., Case No. 5:24-cv-00073-KK-DTB
(C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Kenly Kiya Kato entered an order
granting the Defendant's motion to strike.
As an initial matter, the Plaintiffs concede they "will not move
forward with class certification." Further, the Plaintiffs'
deadline to move for class certification has passed, therefore, the
class allegations in the FAC are immaterial and must be stricken.
On March 14, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed the operative First Amended
Complaint ("FAC") against their former employer, defendant McLane
Foodservice, Inc., alleging federal and California state law claims
for wage and hour violations.
On Jan. 17, 2025, Defendant filed the instant Motion to Strike
class allegations from the FAC pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure 23(d)(1)(D) and 12(f).
On Jan. 30, 2025, the Plaintiffs filed an Opposition to the Motion.
McLane provides grocery and foodservice supply chain solutions.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb, 21, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=fuxYyd at no extra
charge.[CC]
MCMURRY UNIVERSITY: Court Suspends Class Cert Deadline
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re McMurry University Data Incident
Litigation, Case No. 1:25-cv-00002-H (N.D. Tex.), the Hon. Judge
James Wesley Hendrix entered an order granting the Plaintiffs'
unopposed motion to suspend the deadline to move for class
certification.
The deadline for the plaintiffs to move for class certification is
suspended. The Court will include a new deadline in its scheduling
order.
McMurry is a private Methodist university in Abilene, Texas.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 20, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ThZCHG at no extra
charge.[CC]
MDL 02566: Court Re-Opens Arizona Action
----------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Dos Santos v.
Telexelectric LLLP, et al., Case No. 4:15-cv-13614 (D. Mass., Filed
Oct. 21, 2015), the Hon. Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton entered an order
that the Arizona action was closed erroneously and now reopens the
case.
-- The Court sets the following briefing schedule for class
certification for the Arizona action:
-- Plaintiffs motion for class Certification to be filed on or
before Friday, March 7, 2025, responses to be filed on or
before Friday, March 21, 2025.
te
The nature of suit states diversity-fraud.
Telexfree, a trade name owned by Telexfree Inc., was a
multibillion-dollar Ponzi scheme disguised as an internet phone
service company.[CC]
MDL 2566: VPL, Sparman Bid to Deny Class Certification Tossed
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit Re: Telexfree Securities Litigation,
Case No. 4:14-md-02566-NMG (D. Mass.), the Hon. Judge Nathaniel
Gorton entered an order denying Defendants Vantage Payments LLC and
Dustin Sparman's bid to deny Rita Dos Santos class certification.
Telexfree, a trade name owned by Telexfree Inc., was a
multibillion-dollar Ponzi scheme disguised as an internet phone
service company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=FjN5b2 at no extra
charge.[CC]
MEAD JOHNSON: Completion of Expert Discovery Due May 13
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Amanda Seutter, v. Mead
Johnson & Company, LLC, Case No. 0:24-cv-02179-JRT-DJF (D. Minn.),
the Hon. Judge Dulce Foster entered a pretrial scheduling order.
-- Deadline for initial disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P.
26(a)(1): March 18, 2025.
-- Deadline for completion of all expert discovery, including
depositions: May 13, 2026.
-- The parties anticipate that a claim for attorney's fees may be
submitted to the Court for approval. The parties must meet and
confer regarding the manner of documentation (billing time
increments, time entry detail, block billing protocol, etc.)
to the Court on or before March 7, 2025.
-- All dispositive motions and supporting documentation (notice
of motion, motion, exhibits, affidavits, memorandum of law,
and proposed order) shall be served and filed by the moving
party on or before June 12, 2026.
-- Counsel are directed to meet and confer regarding settlement
on or before September 2, 2025. Each party's confidential
letter must be submitted by email to Judge Foster at
foster_chambers@mnd.uscourts.gov by Sept. 9, 2025.
Mead Johnson is a manufacturer of infant formula.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 25, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=g7qDPG at no extra
charge.[CC]
MERCEDES-BENZ USA: Wins Summary Judgment v. Hadjian
---------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as HAGOP HADJIAN, v.
MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC., Case No. 1:21-cv-00469-ELR (N.D. Ga.), the
Hon. Judge Eleanor Ross entered an order granting the Defendant's
motion for summary judgment.
In view of the grant of summary judgment, the Court denies as moot
Defendant's Motions to Strike the Reports and Rebuttal Reports of
Plaintiff's Experts Murat Okcuoglu and Steven B. Boyles and
Plaintiff's Motion to Exclude Defendant's Experts Keller and Ugone
and Motion for Class Certification.
Because no issues remain pending in this action, the Court directs
the Clerk to enter judgment in favor of Defendant and to terminate
this matter.
Accordingly, the Court concludes that under the undisputed facts,
the discovery rule does not apply to toll the accrual of
Plaintiff's Song-Beverly and ULC Claims until Plaintiff discovered
the Inlet Defect on March 27, 2017. Rather, the Plaintiff failed to
show a material dispute as to the existence of inquiry notice from
around the time of sale. And, because the Plaintiff's Song-Beverly
and UCL Claims were filed outside of the four-year statute of
limitations, they are time-barred.
On July 31, 2016, Plaintiff bought a model year 2016 Mercedes-Benz
C63 AMG (the “MB C63”) from a Mercedes-Benz car dealer in
Encino, California.
The Plaintiff filed suit for himself and on behalf of others
similarly situated, alleging that certain specified Mercedes Benz
vehicle models, including Plaintiff's, that Defendant manufactures
and sells have a defect in their front bumper covers and air inlets
that allows rocks, pebbles, or other road debris to enter and
damage the vehicles' radiators.
Mercedes-Benz USA is responsible for the Distribution and Marketing
of Mercedes-Benz and smart products in the United States.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 25, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=SNcYeo at no extra
charge.[CC]
META PLATFORMS: Filing for Class Bid in Yoon Due Feb. 26, 2026
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARY YOON, ET AL., v. META
PLATFORMS, INC., Case No. 5:24-cv-02612-NC (N.D. Cal.), the Parties
ask the Court to enter an order setting case schedule through the
hearing on Plaintiffs' class certification motion as follows:
Event Deadline
Motion for class certification and
associated class expert report(s) due: Feb. 26, 2026
Opposition to class certification and
associated class expert report(s) due: May 7, 2026
Class certification reply and reply
expert Report(s) due: June 4, 2026
Hearing on class certification motion: June 24, 2026
The action was filed in the Superior Court of California for the
County of Santa Clara on March 27, 2024.
On May 1, 2024, Meta filed a notice of removal in the Superior
Court of California for the County of Santa Clara removing this
case to the Northern District of California where it was assigned
Case No. 5:24-cv-02612.
On Jan. 15, 2025, following the submission of the parties joint
case management statement), the Court set certain deadlines and
instructed the parties to file a "joint proposed order with
proposed case schedule through class certification, by Feb. 21,
2025."
Meta operates as a social technology company.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Feb, 21, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=JzrnDQ at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Neal J. Deckant, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: 925-300-4455
E-mail: ndeckant@bursor.com
- and -
Yeremy O. Krivoshey, Esq.
Joel D. Smith, Esq.
SMITH KRIVOSHEY, PC
166 Geary Street, Ste. 1500-1507
San Francsico, CA 94108
Telephone: (415) 839-7000
E-mail: yeremey@skclassactions.com
joel@skclassactions.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Lauren R. Goldman, Esq.
Darcy C. Harris, Esq.
Elizabeth K. Mccloskey, Esq.
Abigail A. Barrera, Esq.
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
200 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10166-0193
Telephone: (212) 351-4000
Facsimile: (212) 351-4035
E-mail: lgoldman@gibsondunn.com
dharris@gibsondunn.com
emccloskey@gibsondunn.com
abarrera@gibsondunn.com
METRO ONE LOSS: Hager Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
-----------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Dennis Hager, individually and on behalf of
those similarly situated v. METRO ONE LOSS PREVENTION SERVICES
GROUP, INC., a Maryland corporation, METRO ONE LOSS PREVENTION
SERVICES GROUP (WEST COAST), INC., and METRO ONE LOSS PREVENTION
SERVICES GROUP (GUARDS), Case No. 25-2-05748-3 was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of Washington in and for Pierce County,
to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
on Feb. 27, 2025, and assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-05164.
The Plaintiff's Complaint asserts two causes of action against
Defendants under Washington law: classwide violations of the
Silenced No More Act and classwide violations of the Noncompete
Act.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Patrick M. Madden, Esq.
Ai-Li A. Chiong-Martinson, Esq.
K&L GATES LLP
925 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2900
Seattle, WA 98104-1158
Phone: +1 206 370 6795
Fax: +1 206 623 7022
Email: Patrick.Madden@klgates.com
Ai-Li.Chiong-Martinson@klgates.com
MGM RESORTS: Blind Users Can't Access Online Store, Wills Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
LAURENCE WILLS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. MGM RESORTS INTERNATIONAL, Defendant, Case
No. 1:25-cv-01048 (E.D.N.Y., February 25, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendants for violations of Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act and the New York City Human Rights Law, and
declaratory relief.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website,
mgmgrand.mgmresorts.com, contains access barriers which hinder the
Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of their online
goods, content, and services offered to the public through the
website. The accessibility issues on the website include but not
limited to: missing alt-text, hidden elements on web pages,
incorrectly formatted lists, unannounced pop ups, unclear labels
for interactive elements, and the requirement that some events be
performed solely with a mouse.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that its website will become and remain accessible to
blind and visually impaired individuals.
MGM Resorts International is a company that sells online goods and
services in New York. [BN]
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
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
MOBILE MINI: Herrera Suit Removed to C.D. California
----------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Miguel A. Herrera, on behalf of himself and
others similarly situated v. MOBILE MINI, INC.; and DOES 1 to 100,
inclusive, Case No. 23STCV03200 was removed from the Superior Court
of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, to the
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on Feb.
26, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-01678.
The Complaint brings claims for alleged: Failure to Pay Proper
Overtime Wages for Daily Overtime Worked in Violation of Labor
Code; Failure to Authorize or Permit Meal Periods and Pay Meal
Period Premium Wages at the Regular Rate of Pay in Violation of
Labor Code; Failure to Authorize or Permit Rest Periods and Pay
Rest Period Premium Wages at the Regular Rate of Pay in Violation
of Labor Code; Failure to Pay Wages for Accrued Paid Sick Days at
the Regular Rate of Pay in Violation of Labor Code; Failure to
Provide Complete and Accurate Wage Statements in Violation of Labor
Code; Failure to Timely Pay All Earned Wages and Final Paychecks
Due at Time of Separation of Employment in Violation of Labor Code;
and Unfair Business Practices in Violation of Business and
Professions Code Sections.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Jared L. Palmer, Esq.
Carolyn B. Hall, Esq.
Ethan Lai, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
One Embarcadero Center, Suite 900
San Francisco, CA 94111
Phone: 415-442-4810
Facsimile: 415-442-4870
Email: jared.palmer@ogletree.com
carolyn.hall@ogletree.com
ethan.lai@ogletree.com
MOBILEYE GLOBAL: Faces McAuliffe Securities Suit in New York Court
------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobileye Global Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-K for the fiscal year
ended December 28, 2024, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on February 15, 2025, that on January 16, 2024, a
putative class action captioned "McAuliffe v. Mobileye Global Inc.,
et al.," 1:24-CV-00310, was filed in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York against Mobileye and
certain of its current and former officers, asserting violations of
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 in
connection with defendants' alleged misstatements and omissions
concerning the build-up of excess inventory by certain Tier 1
Mobileye customers.
The complaint seeks unspecified damages and other relief on behalf
of all persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired
Mobileye securities between January 26, 2023 and January 3, 2024.
The second amended complaint also includes claims asserted by an
additional plaintiff under Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act
of 1933 on behalf of a putative class of purchasers of Mobileye
Class A common stock offered in Mobileye's June 5, 2023 secondary
public offering. Mobileye and the individual defendants filed a
motion to dismiss the second amended complaint on December 20,
2024.
Mobileye is into the development and deployment of advanced driver
assistance systems and autonomous driving technologies and
solutions.
MONSANTO COMPANY: Brister Suit Transferred to N.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Larry Brister, and others similarly situated
v. Monsanto Company, Case No. 3:25-cv-00119 was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana, to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on
Feb. 26, 2025.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-02023-VC to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability.
The Monsanto Company -- https://www.monsanto.com/ -- was an
American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation
founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mikalia Miceli Kott, Esq.
Joseph Edward Cain, Esq.
HERMAN HERMAN & KATZ
909 Poydras St Ste 1860
New Orleans, LA 70112
Phone: (504) 581-4892
Fax: (504) 561-6024
Email: mkott@hkgclaw.com
jcain@hhklawfirm.com
MONSANTO COMPANY: Loureiro Suit Transferred to N.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Edwin Loureiro, and others similarly situated
v. Monsanto Company, Case No. 1:25-cv-00115 was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on
Feb. 26, 2025.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-02024-VC to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Product Liability.
The Monsanto Company -- https://www.monsanto.com/ -- was an
American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation
founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jo Anna Pollock, Esq.
SIMMONS FIRM
One Court Street
Alton, IL 62002
Phone: (618) 259-2222
Fax: (618) 259-2251
Email: jpollock@simmonsfirm.com
- and -
Erin Elizabeth Jewell, Esq.
HARTY JEWELL, PLLC
6515 George Washington Mem Hwy, Suite 205
Yorktown, VA 23692
Phone: (757) 568-9635
Fax: (757) 703-0357
Email: erin@hartyjewell.com
MONSANTO COMPANY: Savage Suit Transferred to N.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Rodmond Savage, and others similarly situated
v. Monsanto Company, Case No. 1:25-cv-00728 was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on
Feb. 26, 2025.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-02025-VC to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Product Liability.
The Monsanto Company -- https://www.monsanto.com/ -- was an
American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation
founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jo Anna Pollock, Esq.
SIMMONS FIRM
One Court Street
Alton, IL 62002
Phone: (618) 259-2222
Fax: (618) 259-2251
Email: jpollock@simmonsfirm.com
NANO NUCLEAR ENERGY: Faces Yang Securities Suit in New York
-----------------------------------------------------------
Nano Nuclear Energy Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2024, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on February 15, 2025, that on August 9, 2024, a
putative securities class action lawsuit was filed against the
company and certain of its directors and officers in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York
captioned "Yvette Yang v. Nano Nuclear Energy Inc., et al.," No.
1:24-cv-06057.
On October 28, 2024, the court entered an order appointing Hongyu
Xie as lead plaintiff. On January 6, 2025, lead plaintiff filed an
amended complaint, naming as defendants the company, Jay Yu, James
Walker, and Jaisun Garcha. The amended complaint asserts claims for
alleged violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of persons who purchased or
otherwise acquired its securities from May 8, 2024 through July 30,
2024. The claims in the amended complaint relate to statements made
by the company and/or its directors or officers concerning the its
business and prospects, including the company's progress toward
development of nuclear microreactors and fuel fabrication
facilities.
NANO Nuclear Energy Inc. is an early-stage, pre-revenue nuclear
energy company developing portable clean energy solutions.
NAR: Bid to Compel Arbitration in Gibson Tossed
-----------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Gibson, et al., v.
National Association of Realtors, et al., Case No. 4:23-cv-00788
(W.D. Mo., Filed Oct. 31, 2023), the Hon. Judge Stephen R. Bough
entered an order denying the Defendant motion to compel arbitration
and/or stay proceedings pending arbitration pursuant to sections 3
and 4 of the Federal Arbitration Act.
Accordingly, "courts repeatedly have held that the earliest time to
move to compel arbitration is after class certification" because
"at that juncture, previously putative class members first become
subject to a court's jurisdiction."
Finally, turning to the parties' alternative motions to stay the
case, in Coinbase , the question of whether to stay proceedings
pending an interlocutory appeal on the question of arbitrability
involved whether Coinbase as a party to the arbitration agreement
could compel arbitration.
Further, as class certification has not occurred, putative
non-party class members are not subject to the Court's
jurisdiction. Therefore, the Court declines to stay the proceedings
in this litigation. For the foregoing reasons, the motions are
denied.
NAR is an American trade association for those who work in the real
estate industry.[CC]
NATIONAL GENERAL: King Seeks to Strike Braithwaite's Declaration
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as EDD KING, DIEDRE KING,
ELMO SHEEN, and SHEILA LEE, on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated, v. NATIONAL GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, INTEGON
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, INTEGON PREFERRED INSURANCE COMPANY,
MIC GENERAL INSURANCE CORPORATION, PERSONAL EXPRESS INSURANCE
COMPANY, SEQUOIA INSURANCE COMPANY, and DOES 1 through 200,
inclusive, Case No. 4:15-cv-00313-DMR (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs,
on March 27, 2025, will move to strike the Declaration of Paul
Braithwaite submitted in opposition to Plaintiffs' renewed motion
for class certification.
The Plaintiffs assert that Mr. Braithwaite is not qualified to
render the expert testimony and opinions set forth in his
Declaration in Support of the Defendants' opposition to renewed
motion for class certification, his testimony lacks a sufficient
factual foundation, and his opinions include impermissible legal
opinion, and subjects beyond his qualifications and expertise.
The consumer protection case concerns the National General
Insurance Defendants' class-wide failure to cross-offer the lowest
available California Good Driver premiums from within their
AmTrust/NGH Control Group Number 2538 of companies to policyholders
who purchased California GD private passenger automobile policies
and did not receive the lowest available rate.
National General is a property and casualty insurance company.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Feb. 20, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=FiIY5D at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Michael F. Ram, Esq.
Marie N. Appel, Esq.
Shelby Serig, Esq.
Abraham Barkhordar, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN
COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP
711 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 500
San Francisco, CA 94102
Telephone: (415) 358-6913
Facsimile: (415) 358-6923
E-mail: mram@forthepeople.com
mappel@forthepeople.com
sserig@forthepeople.com
abarkhordar@forthepeople.com
- and -
Jeffrey B. Cereghino, Esq.
CEREGHINO LAW GROUP LLP
649 Mission Street, Floor 5
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 433-4949
E-mail: jbc@cereghinolaw.com
- and -
W. Craig Bashein, Esq.
John P. Hurst, Esq.
BASHEIN & BASHEIN CO., L.P.A.
Terminal Tower
35th Floor, 50 Public Square
Cleveland, OH 44113
Telephone: (216) 771-3239
NEW YORK: Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Response
-----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Canadian St. Regis, et
al., v. State of New York, et al., THE ST. REGIS MOHAWK TRIBE, by
THE ST. REGIS MOHAWK TRIBAL COUNCIL, and THE PEOPLE OF THE
LONGHOUSE AT AKWESASNE, by THE MOHAWK NATION COUNCIL OF CHIEFS,
Plaintiffs, and THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Intervenor,
v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, et al., Case No. 5:82-cv-00783-LEK-TWD
(N.D.N.Y.), the Defendant asks the Court to enter an order granting
a 31-day extension, to March 31, 2025, to respond to motions filed
by:
(1) the Mohawk Nation Council of Chief's ("MNCC") Motion to
Dismiss Without Prejudice, and
(2) the Mohawk Council of Akwesasne's by and through the Mohawk
Council of Akwesasne's ("MCA") Amendment of Complaint and
Motion to Decertify Defendant Class and Motion for Stay.
Both Motions were filed on Feb. 7, 2025 and responses to the
Motions are due on Feb. 28, 2025. As grounds for its Motion to
Extend, the United States asserts that, due to the recent change in
administration on January 20, 2025, leadership at both the
Department of Justice and the Department of the Interior has
changed. The new leadership at these federal Agencies require
additional time to become informed of the details of this case and
to determine the United States’ position on the two Motions.
A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Feb. 25, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=yp7kJL at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James B. Cooney, Esq.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
ENVIRONMENT & NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION
INDIAN RESOURCES SECTION
Ben Franklin Station
Washington, DC 20044-7611
NEW YOU: Colvin Files Appeal in Labor Class Suit
------------------------------------------------
DYSHAWN COLVIN has filed an appeal in his lawsuit entitled Dyshawn
Colvin, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. New You Bariatric Group, LLC, Defendant,
Case No. 154686/2023, in the Superior Court of New York, New York
Cty.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the Plaintiff
brought this suit against the Defendant to recover unpaid wages and
overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys'
fees, and costs.
The appellate case is captioned Dyshawn Colvin, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, vs. New You Bariatric
Group, LLC, Case No. 25-00977, in the New York Appellate Division's
First Judicial Department, filed on February 18, 2025. [BN]
Plaintiff-Petitioner DYSHAWN COLVIN, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, is represented by:
Abdul Karim Hassan, Esq.
215-28 Hillside Avenue
Queens Village, NY 11427
Telephone: (718) 740-1000
NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS: Rodriguez Suit Removed to C.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Jose Rodriguez, individually, and on behalf
of other members of the general public similarly situated v.
NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS, INC., a Delaware corporation; NUTRIEN US LLC,
a Colorado limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive, Case No. 24CV06119 was removed from the Superior Court
of the State of California for the County of Santa Barbara, to the
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on Feb.
27, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-01728.
The Complaint asserts claims for: Failure to Provide Meal Periods;
Failure to Authorize and Permit Rest Periods; Unpaid Overtime;
Unpaid Minimum Wages; Non-Compliant Wage Statements and Failure to
Maintain Payroll Records; Wages Not Timely Paid Upon Termination;
Failure to Timely Pay Wages During Employment; Unlawful Business
Practices; and all in Violation of California Labor Code and
Violation of California Business & Professions Code.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Christopher W. Decker, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
400 South Hope Street, Suite 1200
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Phone: 213-239-9800
Facsimile: 213-239-9045
Email: christopher.decker@ogletree.com
- and -
Ethan Lai, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
One Embarcadero Center, Suite 900
Phone: 415-442-4810
Facsimile: 415-442-4870
Email: ethan.lai@ogletree.com
OCEAN STATE: Plaintiffs Seeks OK to Send Notice to Collective
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JONATHAN BELANGER, GARRETT
DAVIS, and ERIK MACINTYRE, Individually and on Behalf of All Other
Persons Similarly Situated, v. OCEAN STATE JOBBERS INC., Case No.
2:24-cv-00103-NT (D. Me.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an
order authorizing the sending of notice to a conditionally
certified collective of ATLs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards
Act ("FLSA").
The Plaintiffs filed this class and collective action complaint on
March 28, 2024. The Complaint alleges that they and other ATLs are
similarly situated, and were denied overtime pay by Ocean State due
to Defendant's uniform company-wide policy of misclassifying ATLs
as exempt employees, despite the fact that ATLs primarily perform
non-managerial work, do not exercise meaningful independent
judgment in performing their duties, and routinely work more than
40 hours in a week.
The Plaintiff Belanger was employed by Ocean State and worked as an
ATL from April 2024 to June 2024.
Ocean State is a Rhode Island corporation that operates over 150
stores in New England, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania that
sell a wide-range of closeout and overstock merchandise.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=X2k5L8 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Seth R. Lesser, Esq.
Christopher Timmel, Esq.
Jessica Rado, Esq.
KLAFTER LESSER LLP
Two International Drive, Suite 350
Rye Brook, NY 10573
Telephone: (914) 934-9200
- and -
Richard L. O'Meara, Esq.
MURRAY PLUMB & MURRAY
75 Pearl Street, P.O. Box 9785
Portland, ME 04104
Telephone: (207) 773-5651
E-mail: romeara@mpmlaw.com
- and -
Marc S. Hepworth, Esq.
Charles Gershbaum, Esq.
David A. Roth, Esq.
Rebecca S. Predovan, Esq.
HEPWORTH GERSHBAUM & ROTH, PLLC
192 Lexington Avenue, Suite 802
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (212) 545-1199
- and -
Sam J. Smith, Esq.
Loren B. Donnell, Esq.
BURR & SMITH LLP
9800 4th Street North
St. Petersburg, FL. 33702
Telephone: (813) 253-2010
OCTOBER USA: Trippett Sues Over Blind's Equal Access to Website
---------------------------------------------------------------
ALFRED TRIPPETT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. OCTOBER USA, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-01525 (S.D.N.Y., February 24, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendants for violations of Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, the New
York State Civil Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights
Law, and declaratory relief.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website,
https://www.us.octobersveryown.com, contains access barriers which
hinder the Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of
their online goods, content, and services offered to the public
through the website. The accessibility issues on the website
include but not limited to: inaccurate landmark structure,
incorrectly formatted lists, inadequate focus order, ambiguous link
texts, changing of content without advance warning, and the
requirement that transactions be performed solely with a mouse,
says the suit.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that its website will become and remain accessible to
blind and visually impaired individuals.
October USA, LLC is a company that sells online goods and services
in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gabriel A. Levy, Esq.
GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C.
1129 Northern Blvd, Suite 404
Manhasset, NY 11030
Telephone: (347) 941-4715
Email: Email: Glevyfirm@gmail.com
PACIFIC MARITIME: Plaintiff Allowed Leave to File Amended Complaint
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JEREMY FOWLER,
individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. PACIFIC
MARITIME ASSOCIATION and SSA MARINE INC., individually and on
behalf of others similarly situated, Case No. 2:24-cv-00974-TL (D.
Wash.), the Hon. Judge Tana Lin entered an order granting leave to
file amended complaint:
The Plaintiff is granted leave to file the Amended Complaint within
10 days of this signed Order. The deadline for the motion to
certify the Plaintiff and Defendant Classes shall be July 25, 2025.
Any opposition shall be filed no later than Aug. 25, 2025, and any
reply shall be filed no later than Sept. 15, 2025.
Pacific Maritime is a non-profit mutual benefit corporation that
serves as a multi-employer collective bargaining agent.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=PWOvjY at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lindsay L. Halm, Esq.
Hong (Chen-Chen) Jiang, Esq.
Adam J. Berger, Esq.
SCHROETER GOLDMARK & BENDER
401 Union Street, Suite 3400
Seattle, WA 98101
Telephone: (206) 622-8000
E-mail: halm@sgb-law.com
jiang@sgb-law.com
berger@sgb-law.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Joe Wonderly, Esq.
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
999 Third Avenue, Suite 4700
Seattle, WA 98104-4041
Telephone: (206) 946-4910
E-mail: jwonderly@seyfarth.com
PAUL RICH GROUP: Web Site Not Accessible to the Blind, Hippe Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
XINYUE HIPPE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PAUL RICH GROUP, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
2:25-cv-00299-LA (E.D. Wis., Feb. 28, 2025) alleges violation of
the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web
site, https://paul-rich.com, is not fully or equally accessible to
blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the Plaintiff, in
violation of the ADA.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.
Paul Rich Group, LLC source for classic, crafted watches made with
from cutting-edge materials. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Davis B. Reyes, Esq.
EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC
68-29 Main Street
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (630) 478-0856
Email: Dreyes@ealg.law
PETDINE LLC: Viveros Sues Over Unpaid Compensation
--------------------------------------------------
Dustin Viveros, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. PETDINE, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-00651-NYW (D. Colo.,
Feb. 27, 2025), is brought arising from Defendant's willful
violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), the Illinois
Minimum Wage Law ("IMWL"), and the Illinois Wage Payment and
Collection Act ("IWPCA"), and common law as a result of unpaid
compensation.
The Plaintiff and all other production employees performed
uncompensated, off-the-clock work in the range of 35 to 50 minutes
per shift. The Defendant did not pay Plaintiff and all other
production employees for any of this time, which was their first
and last principal activities of the workday. Plaintiff's and all
other production employees' shifts did not start until they entered
the manufacturing facility and accessed the time clock, say the
complaint.
The Plaintiff worked for Defendant as a Material Handler in
Defendant's Harvard, Illinois production facility from February
2024 to January 2025.
The Defendant is a producer of pet products and produces a wide
range of products including soft chews, dental chews, kibble,
powder, and liquids.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kevin J. Stoops, Esq.
SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
One Towne Square
17th Floor
Southfield, MI 48076
Phone: (248) 355-0300
Email: kstoops@sommerspc.com
PHH MORTGAGE: Alexander FDCPA Suit Removed to N.D. Georgia
----------------------------------------------------------
The case is styled as Leticia Alexander, on behalf of herself and
all others similarly situated v. PHH Mortgage Corporation assumed
business name PHH Mortgage Services, Case No. 25-A-49 was removed
from the The State Court of Cobb County, to the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia on Feb. 26, 2025.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-01006-MHC-WEJ to
the proceeding.
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.
PHH Mortgage -- https://www.phhmortgage.com/ -- a wholly owned
subsidiary of Ocwen Financial Corporation, is one of the largest
subservicers of residential mortgages in the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Edward H. Maginnis, Esq.
MAGINNIS HOWARD
7706 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27615
Phone: (919) 526-0450
- and -
Scott Crissman Harris, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
900 West Morgan Street
Raleigh, NC 27603
Phone: (919) 600-5000
Fax: (919) 600-5035
Email: sharris@milberg.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Michael R. Pennington, Esq.
Zachary A. Madonia, Esq.
BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS, LLP-B. AL
One Federal Place
1819 Fifth Avenue North
Birmingham, AL 35203-2119
Phone: (205) 521-8500
Email: mpennington@babc.com
- and -
Scott Eric Zweigel, Esq.
BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS LLP
1230 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 2000
Atlanta, GA 30309
Phone: (404) 868-2005
Email: szweigel@bradley.com
PHILADELPHIA COUNTY, PA: Valentin's Bid for New Trial Tossed
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JONATHAN VALENTIN, v.
PHILADELPHIA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, et al., Case No.
2:19-cv-01175-MSG (E.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Mitchell Goldberg
entered an order denying the Plaintiff's motion for new trial and
denying the motion for class certification.
Judge Goldberg said that because the Plaintiff presents no other
grounds for relief, he has failed to meet the standard for
reconsideration and I must deny the Motion.
The Plaintiff also moves "to have a class action certification
appended to the current amended civil complaint." In effect, he
moves to file a fourth amended complaint more than 5 years after he
filed the operative complaint.
Pro se Plaintiff Jonathan Valentin brings a series of state tort
law and section 1983 claims against Deputy Sheriffs Derek Murphy
and Amada Rodriguez. From March through October of 2019, the
Plaintiff amended his Complaint three times.
The Plaintiff failed to appear for his trial on Jan. 13, 2025—a
date previously agreed to by the Plaintiff. Instead, the Plaintiff
appeared virtually and the Defendant moved to dismiss the case for
Plaintiff's failure to prosecute.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=6rGC22 at no extra
charge.[CC]
PORTLAND LEATHER: Faces Lyden Suit Over False Reference Pricing
---------------------------------------------------------------
COOPER LYDEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. PORTLAND LEATHER GOODS, INC., a Delaware corporation;
PORTLAND LEATHER GOODS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company,
Case No. 2:25-cv-01835 (C.D. Cal., Mar. 3, 2025) seeks to hold PLG
liable for its unlawful, unfair, and fraudulent business practice
of advertising fictitious prices and corresponding phantom
discounts on nearly every product sold through its website,
https://PLG.com/, pursuant to the California's Unfair Competition
Law.
Accordingly, this practice of false reference pricing occurs when a
retailer fabricates a fake regular, original, and/or former
reference price, and then offers an item for sale at a deeply
"discounted" price.
The result is a sham price disparity that misleads consumers into
believing they are receiving a good deal, thereby inducing them
into making a purchase. Companies like PLG drastically benefit from
employing a false reference pricing scheme and experience increased
sales, the lawsuit says.
Plaintiff Lyden purchased from PLG's website a "Bifold Leather
Wallet -- Dakota" on Sept. 16, 2024, from his home in Los Angeles
County. The Plaintiff's total purchase price was $42, which
included shipping and taxes.
PLG, through its website, offers a wide variety of clothing
items.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kevin J. Cole, Esq.
W. Blair Castle, Esq.
KJC LAW GROUP, A.P.C.
9701 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1000
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Telephone: (310) 861-7797
E-mail: kevin@kjclawgroup.com
PPL HOLDINGS LLC: Jordan Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against PPL HOLDINGS, LLC.
The case is styled as Katheryn Jordan, on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. PPL HOLDINGS, LLC, Case No. BCV-25-100725
(Cal. Super. Ct., Kern Cty., Feb. 27, 2025).
The case type is stated "Other Employment - Civil Unlimited."
PPL Corporation -- https://www.pplweb.com/ -- is an energy company
headquartered in Allentown, Pennsylvania in the Lehigh Valley
region of eastern Pennsylvania.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John G. Yslas, Esq.
William M Pao, Esq.
Won Chang, Esq.
WILSHIRE LAW FIRM
3055 Wishire Blvd., 12th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Phone: 213-255-3937
Email: jyslas@wilshirelawfirm.com
william.pao@wilshirelawfirm.com
christina.chang@wilshirelawfirm.com
PRIORITY WRECKER: Initial Case Management Order Entered in Kirby
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TAYLOR L. KIRBY and THOMAS
MAYNARD, Individually, and on behalf of themselves and others
similarly situated, v. PRIORITY WRECKER SERVICE, INC, and JONATHAN
MAYE, Individually, Case No. 3:24-cv-00664 (M.D. Tenn.), the Hon.
Judge Aleta Trauger entered an initial case management order.
The Plaintiffs seek to represent all current and former hourly paid
tow-truck drivers employed by Defendants at any time during the
applicable limitation’s period covered by this Multi-Plaintiff
Action Complaint and seek the facilitation of notice as a
collective action under Section 216(b) of the Fair Labor Standards
Act ("FLSA").
The action is brought to recover overtime compensation resulting
from Defendants' failure to pay overtime compensation for all hours
worked.
The Defendants deny liability and maintain that each employee was
appropriately paid for each hour that respective employee worked
while employed at Priority Wrecker Service, Inc.
The parties shall file a Joint Motion and Stipulation for
Conditional Class Certification and Notice to Putative Collective
Action Members no later than March 10, 2025,
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=uvfCzK at no extra
charge.[CC]
PROFESSIONAL PARKING: Bid to Modify Sched Order Partly OK'd
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PETER CICALE, JR., and
FRANCES REMY, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. PROFESSIONAL PARKING MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, Case No.
0:24-cv-61146-AHS (S.D. Fla.), the Hon. Judge Raag Singhal entered
an order granting in part and denying in part the Plaintiffs'
motion to modify scheduling order.
The parties shall file an amended proposed Scheduling Order, if
applicable, within ten (10) days of the Court's Order on the
Defendants' motion to dismiss.
Accordingly, the Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification or,
Alternatively, Motion to Lift Stay of Discovery is denied without
prejudice.
Professional Parking is a parking management company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=EiccZV at no extra
charge.[CC]
PROGRESSIVE SPECIALTY: Williams Suit Removed to D. Maryland
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as James Williams, III, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. PROGRESSIVE SPECIALTY
INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. C-03-CV-24-004526 was removed from the
Circuit Court of Baltimore County, Maryland, to the U.S. District
Court for the District of Maryland on Feb. 27, 2025, and assigned
Case No. 1:25-cv-00666-JRR.
In the Class Action Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that he had an
insurance policy with Progressive Specialty, and that following a
"car wreck," Plaintiff made a property damage claim. Progressive
Specialty declared Plaintiff's vehicle to be a total loss, meaning
Plaintiff was entitled to receive the Actual Cash Value ("ACV") of
the vehicle.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Mark I. Bailen, Esq.
MARK I. BAILEN P.C.
1250 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 700
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 656-0422
Email: mb@bailenlaw.com
- and -
Jeffrey S. Cashdan, Esq.
Zachary A. McEntyre, Esq.
J. Matthew Brigman, Esq.
Allison Hill White, Esq.
Seth I. Euster, Esq.
KING & SPALDING LLP
1180 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Atlanta, GA 30309
Phone: (404) 572-4600
Fax: (404) 572-5100
Email: jcashdan@kslaw.com
zmcentyre@kslaw.com
mbrigman@kslaw.com
awhite@kslaw.com
seuster@kslaw.com
- and -
Julia Barrett Bates, Esq.
KING & SPALDING LLP
500 W. 2nd Street
Austin, TX 78701
Phone: (512) 457-2000
Fax: (512) 457-2100
Email: jbates@kslaw.com
QUALITY CARRIERS: Smith Seeks to Conditionally Certify Collective
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WINSTON SMITH, DUANE
NELSON, JEROME JONES, and FRED DEAN, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, v. QUALITY CARRIERS, INC., Case No.
8:24-cv-02815-VMC-AAS (M.D. Fla.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to
enter an order granting the Plaintiffs' motion for conditional
certification and:
(1) conditionally certify a collective of:
"all individuals who entered into an agreement to work as
delivery drivers for Quality Carriers in the United States
and were classified by Quality Carriers as independent
contractors during the last three years";
(2) order that judicially-approved notice be sent to collective
action members;
(3) approve the form and content of Plaintiffs' proposed
notice;
(4) order Quality Carriers to produce to Plaintiffs' Counsel
the contact information (including the name, address, email
address, telephone number, and dates of employment) for
each collective action member in a usable electronic
format; and
(5) authorize notice to be sent via First Class Mail, e-mail
and text message to collective action members pursuant to
Plaintiffs' proposed notice plan.
The Plaintiffs worked as delivery drivers for Quality Carriers,
delivering chemicals and other hazardous freight for Quality
Carriers' clients in New Jersey and throughout the United States.
Although the Plaintiffs were classified as independent contractors,
they were, in fact, employees of Quality Carriers for purposes of
the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA").
Quality Carriers is a delivery company specializing in transport of
chemical materials and hazardous products.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Feb. 25, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=eyn6OF at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jason L. Gunter, Esq.
Conor P. Foley, Esq.
GUNTERFIRM
2165 W. First St., #104
Fort Myers, FL 33901
Telephone: (239) 334-7017
E-mail: Jason@GunterFirm.com
Conor@GunterFirm.com
- and -
Harold Lichten, Esq.
Olena Savytska, Esq.
LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
729 Boylston St., Suite 2000
Boston, MA 02116
Telephone: (617) 994-5800
Facsimile: (617) 994-5801
E-mail: 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
Facsimile: (609) 228-5649
E-mail: rsattiraju@s-tlawfirm.com
QUEST DIAGNOSTICS: Cole Appeals Class Suit Dismissal to 3rd Circuit
-------------------------------------------------------------------
ANGELA COLE, et al. are taking an appeal from court orders in the
lawsuit entitled Angela Cole, et al., on behalf of themselves and
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Quest Diagnostics
Inc., Defendant, Case No. 2:23-cv-20647, in the U.S. District Court
for the District of New Jersey.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit is
brought against the Defendant for aiding, employing, agreeing with,
and conspiring with Facebook to eavesdrop on communications sent
and received by the Plaintiffs and Class members, including
communications containing protected medical information, in
violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Act.
On Feb. 5, 2024, the Defendant filed a motion to dismiss the
Plaintiff's amended complaint, which Judge William J. Martini
granted in part and denied in part on July 2, 2024. The Defendant's
motion to dismiss Count One was denied and its motion to dismiss
Count Two was granted. Count Two was dismissed without prejudice
and the Plaintiffs was given leave to amend.
On July 16, 2024, the Defendant filed a motion for reconsideration
of the July 2 Order, which Judge Martini granted on Jan. 14, 2025.
The Defendant's motion to dismiss Count One was granted. Count One
was dismissed with prejudice.
The appellate case is captioned Angela Cole, et al. v. Quest
Diagnostics Inc., Case No. 25-1219, in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Third Circuit, filed on February 13, 2025. [BN]
Plaintiffs-Appellants ANGELA COLE, et al., individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, are represented by:
Kevin G. Cooper, Esq.
CARELLA BYRNE CECCHI OLSTEIN BRODY & AGNELLO
5 Becker Farm Road
Roseland, NJ 07068
Telephone: (973) 994-1700
- and –
Philip L. Fraietta, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER
1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (646) 837-7150
Defendant-Appellee QUEST DIAGNOSTICS INC. is represented by:
William J. Lattimore, Esq.
Paul A. Rosenthal, Esq.
FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH
600 Campus Drive
Florham Park, NJ 07932
Telephone: (973) 549-7000
RADIO SYSTEMS: Blind Users Can't Access Online Store, Hippe Claims
------------------------------------------------------------------
XINYUE HIPPE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. RADIO SYSTEMS CORPORATION, Defendant, Case
No. 2:25-cv-00270 (E.D. Wis., February 24, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendants for violations of Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, declaratory relief, and negligent infliction
of emotional distress.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website,
https://www.kurgo.com, contains access barriers which hinder the
Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of their online
goods, content, and services offered to the public through the
website. The accessibility issues on the website include but not
limited to: inaccurate landmark structure, inaccurate heading
hierarchy, ambiguous link texts, changing of content without
advance warning, unclear labels for interactive elements, lack of
alt-text on graphics, inaccessible drop-down menus, redundant links
where adjacent links go to the same URL address, and the
requirement that transactions be performed solely with a mouse.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that its website will become and remain accessible to
blind and visually impaired individuals.
Radio Systems Corporation is a company that sells online goods and
services in Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David B. Reyes, Esq.
EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP PLLC
68-29 Main Street
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (630) 478-0856
Email: Dreyes@ealg.law
RENAL TREATMENT: Filing for Class Cert in Zito Suit Due August 20
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHARLOTTE ZITO and ALECIA
BOWDON, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
v. RENAL TREATMENT CENTERS – West, Inc., a Colorado Corporation,
Case No. 2:24-cv-00820-LK (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Lauren King
entered an order granting the Parties' stipulated motion to
continue case schedule.
The case schedule is modified as follows:
Deadline Date
Affirmative Class Certification Expert
Disclosures due by: June 4, 2025
Rebuttal Class Certification Expert
Disclosures due by: June 25, 2025
Deadline to Complete Depositions of
Class Certification Experts: July 23, 2025
Deadline for the Plaintiffs to file
Motion for Class Certification: Aug. 20, 2025
Deadline for the Defendant to file
Opposition to Motion for Class
Certification: Sept. 10, 2025
Deadline for the Plaintiffs to file
Reply in Support of Motion for Class
Certification: Sept. 17, 2025
Renal Treatment is an independent provider of outpatient kidney
dialysis services.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 25, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=jWzXze at no extra
charge.[CC]
REPUBLIC SERVICES: Class Cert Bid Filing in Vines Due July 14
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as VINES v. REPUBLIC
SERVICES, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-00697 (M.D.N.C., Filed Aug. 19,
2024), the Hon. Judge William L. Osteen, Jr. entered an order
granting consent motion to extend class certification deadlines.
The discovery deadlines are extended as follows:
-- The Plaintiff's deadline for disclosing April 14, 2025
class-related expert(s), providing all
required expert disclosures, and
producing expert report(s) shall be:
-- The Defendant's deadline for disclosing May 26, 2025
expert(s), providing all required expert
disclosures, and producing expert
report(s) shall be:
-- The deadline for completing all June 30, 2025
discovery on class certification issues
shall be:
-- The Plaintiff's deadline to move for July 14, 2025
class certification shall be:
-- The Defendant's deadline to file an Aug. 14, 2025
opposition to a motion for class
certification shall be:
-- The Plaintiff's deadline to file Aug. 28, 2025
a reply to Defendant's opposition
to a class certification shall be:
The nature of suit states Real Property -- Torts to Land.
Republic Services is a North American waste disposal company whose
services include non-hazardous solid waste collection, waste
transfer, waste disposal, recycling, and energy services.[CC]
REVIVE MD SUPPLEMENT: Suit Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
-------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSTANCE HENRY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. REVIVE MD SUPPLEMENT COMPANY LLC, Defendant,
Case No. 1:25-cv-02094 (N.D. Ill., Feb. 28, 2025) alleges violation
of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web
site, https://revivesups.com, is not fully or equally accessible to
blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the Plaintiff, in
violation of the ADA.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.
Paul Rich Group, LLC source for classic, crafted watches made with
from cutting-edge materials. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Davis B. Reyes, Esq.
EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC
68-29 Main Street
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (630) 478-0856
Email: Dreyes@ealg.law
RILEY POPE: Faces Warren Suit Over Compromised Clients' Info
------------------------------------------------------------
JASON WARREN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. RILEY POPE & LANEY, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
3:25-cv-01069-MGL (D.S.C., February 24, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for negligence, negligence per se, breach of
contract, unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty, invasion of
privacy, and violation of the South Carolina Data Breach Security
Act.
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 computer
system following a data breach between August 11, 2024, and August
12, 2024. The Defendant also failed to timely notify the Plaintiff
and similarly situated individuals about the data breach. As a
result, the private information of the Plaintiff and Class members
was compromised and damaged through access by and disclosure to
unknown and unauthorized third parties, says the suit.
Riley Pope & Laney, LLC is a law firm, with its principal place of
business in Columbia, South Carolina. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Paul J. Doolittle, Esq.
POULIN | WILLEY | ANASTOPOULO, LLC
32 Ann Street
Charleston, SC 29403
Telephone: (803) 222-2222
Facsimile: (843) 494-5536
Email: Paul.doolittle@poulinwilley.com
cmad@poulinwilley.com
- and -
Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
Raina Borelli, Esq.
STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC
980 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610
Chicago, IL 60611
Telephone: (872) 263-1100
Facsimile: (872) 263-1109
Email: sam@straussborrelli.com
raina@straussborrelli.com
SEMTECH CORP: Tobi Sues Over 31% Decline of Common Stock Price
--------------------------------------------------------------
LIRAN TOBI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SEMTECH CORPORATION, HONG HOU, and MARK LIN,
Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-01612 (C.D. Cal., February 25, 2025)
is a class action against the Defendants for violations of Sections
10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule
10b-5 promulgated thereunder.
According to the complaint, the Defendants made materially false
and misleading statements regarding Semtech's business, operations,
and prospects in order to trade Semtech common stock at
artificially inflated prices from August 27, 2024, to February 7,
2025. Specifically, the Defendants failed to disclose that: (1)
Semtech's CopperEdge products were not well-positioned for a
substantive ramp in fiscal 2026; (2) Semtech's most valuable
customer, NVIDIA Corporation ("NVIDIA"), had provided negative
feedback about CopperEdge; (3) end users of its server rack
platform had discussions with Semtech that aligned with NVIDIA's
negative feedback; and (4) based on the foregoing, the Defendants
lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements related to
CopperEdge, as well as related financial results, growth, and
prospects.
When the truth emerged, Semtech's stock price declined more than 31
percent, from a closing price of $54.51 per share on February 7,
2025, to $37.60 per share on February 10, 2025, the following
trading day. As a result of the Defendants' wrongful acts and
omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the
company's common stock, the Plaintiff and other Class members have
suffered significant losses and damages, the suit alleges.
Semtech Corporation is a manufacturer of analog and mixed-signal
semiconductors and advanced algorithms, headquartered in Camarillo,
California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jacob A. Walker, Esq.
BLOCK & LEVITON LLP
400 Concar Drive
San Mateo, CA 94402
Telephone: (650) 781-0025
Email: jake@blockleviton.com
SEYBOTH TEAM: Class Cert Filing in Iudiciani Extended to April 21
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Iudiciani v. The Seyboth
Team Real Estate Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-00443 (D.R.I., Filed Oct.
26, 2023), the Hon. Judge Mary S. Mcelroy entered an order
extending the time to file motion for class certification to April
21, 2025.
The suit alleges violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
(TCPA).[CC]
SHAKE SHACK: Copaken Suit Removed to C.D. California
----------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Aviva Copaken, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. SHAKE SHACK INC., Case No. 24STCV33113
was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California,
County of Los Angeles, to the U.S. District Court for the Central
District of California on Feb. 27, 2025, and assigned Case No.
2:25-cv-01734.
According to Plaintiff, the manner in which Shake Shack discloses
these fees conceals "the true costs of its food and delivery
service" and "misrepresents the price of any given food item, when
in fact those costs are actually higher." Based on these
allegations, she pleads that "Shake Shack deceives consumers and
gains an unfair upper hand on competitors that fairly disclose
their true charges" in violation of California unjust enrichment
principles, the California Unfair Competition Law, California False
and Misleading Advertising Laws and California's Consumer Legal
Remedies Act.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Michelle C. Doolin, Esq.
COOLEY LLP
10265 Science Center Drive
San Diego, CA 92121-1117
Phone: +1 858 550 6000
Facsimile: +1 858 550-6420
Email: mdoolin@cooley.com
- and -
Reece Trevor, Esq.
3 Embarcadero Center, 20th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Phone: +1 415 693 2000
Facsimile: +1 415 693-2222
Email: rtrevor@cooley.com
SMARTMATCH INSURANCE: Mediation Must be Completed by May 5
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LISA COCCIOLILLO,
individually, and on behalf of others similarly situated, v.
SMARTMATCH INSURANCE AGENCY, LLC, Case No. 4:24-cv-00627-SRB (W.D.
Mo.), the Hon. Judge Stephen Bough entered a scheduling order as
follows:
1. Any motion to amend the pleadings shall be filed on or
before April 11, 2025.
2. Any motion to join additional parties shall be filed on or
before April 11, 2025.
3. Discovery on individual claims shall be completed on or
before July 1, 2025. The Court will not entertain any
discovery motion absent full compliance with Local Rule
37.1. A memorandum of the discovery dispute, not to exceed
two pages in length, should be electronically submitted by
each party no later than twenty-four hours prior to the
teleconference.
4. Any dispositive motion relating to individual claims shall
be filed on or before Aug. 1, 2025.
5. Mediation shall be completed on or before May 5, 2025. Any
request for an extension or other request for relief
relating to mediation shall be directed to the director of
the Mediation and Assessment Program.
SmartMatch is an independent insurance comparison shopping agency
that partners with national carriers.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 25, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=E8JOb7 at no extra
charge.[CC]
SMOKE POST: Paniagua Suit Seek Unpaid Back Wages Under FLSA
-----------------------------------------------------------
CESAR PANIAGUA, DEVON EATON AND KELLIE RUSSELL, on behalf of
themselves and all other similarly situated plaintiffs, known and
unknown v. SMOKE POST, SMOKE POST HARLEM LLC, SMOKE POST BUCKTOWN
LLC, SMOKE POST DIVISION LLC, SMOKE POST BELMONT LLC, SMOKE POST
LOOP LLC, SMOKE POST OLD TOWN, DIMITRI GROZDOV, INDIVIDUALLY, AND
SMADJA ELAD, INDIVIDUALLY, Case No. 1:25-cv-02120 (N.D. Ill., Feb.
28, 2025) seeks to recover unpaid back wages under the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Illinois Minimum Wage Law, and the Chicago
Minimum Wage Ordinance.
Accordingly, the Plaintiffs' daily job tasks included helping
customers at the counter, dispensing of goods ordered, completing
the purchases at the cash register, as well as other randomly
assigned tasks and duties based on the work schedule assigned by
Defendants.
During Plaintiffs' employment, Defendants consistently assigned
Plaintiffs to work as many as 25 hours or more at one of
Defendants' various locations, and another 25 hours or more at one
of the other locations during the same workweeks, and in an attempt
to intentionally avoid the mandates of the wage and hour laws cited
herein, paid Plaintiffs on a different payroll from each of the
locations they performed work, says the suit.
The Plaintiffs are current or former employees who worked for
Defendants.
The Defendants, Dimitri Grozdov and Smadja Elad, are owners and or
high level managers of the corporate Defendants' SmokePost
locations.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
John William Billhorn, Esq.
BILLHORN LAW FIRM
53 West Jackson Blvd, Suite 1137
Chicago, IL 60604
Telephone: (312) 853-1450
SOL DE JANEIRO: Faces Manning Class Suit Over Telemarketing Calls
-----------------------------------------------------------------
AMANI MANNING, individually and on behalf of all those similarly
situated v. SOL DE JANEIRO USA, INC., Case No. 3:25-cv-02164-RS
(N.D. Cal., Mar. 3, 2025) contends that the Defendant promotes and
markets its merchandise, in part, by sending unsolicited text
messages to wireless phone users, in violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act.
The Plaintiff contends that the problem with receiving unwanted
telemarketing communications is a problem that most people in this
country frequently face. For example, in 2024 alone, approximately
52.8 billion robocalls were placed in the United States.
RobocallIndex.com, YouMail Robocall Index,
https://robocallindex.com/history/time (last visited January 6,
2025).
The Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to halt Defendant’s
unlawful conduct which has resulted in intrusion into the peace and
quiet in a realm that is private and personal to Plaintiff and the
Class members. The Plaintiff also seeks statutory damages on behalf
of themselves and members of the Class, and any other available
legal or equitable remedies.
The Plaintiff brings this lawsuit as a class action on behalf of
Plaintiff individually and on behalf of all other similarly
situated persons pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23. The class that
Plaintiff seeks to represent is defined as:
"All persons in the United States who from four years prior to
the filing of this action through the date of class
certification (1) Defendant, or anyone on the Defendant's
behalf, (2) placed more than one marketing text message within
any 12-month period; (3) where such marketing text messages
were initiated before the hour of 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m. (local
time at the called party’s location)."
Sol de Janeiro is an American skincare and fragrance brand founded
in 2015 by Heela Yang.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gerald D. Lane Jr., Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
1515 NE 26th Street,
Wilton Manors, FL 33305
Telephone: (754) 444-7539
E-mail: gerald@jibraellaw.com
SPD SWISS: Pretrial Schedule & Trial Order Entered in Saedi
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROZ SAEDI, v. SPD SWISS
PRECISION DIAGNOSTICS GMBH ET AL., Case No. 2:24-cv-06525-WLH-E
(C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Wesley Hsu entered an order a civil
pretrial schedule and trial order as follows:
-- Fact and Expert Discovery Cut-Offs
The cut-off date for discovery is not the date by which
discovery requests must be served; it is the date by which all
discovery, including all hearings on any related motions, must
be completed.
-- Settlement Proceedings/Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
Deadline.
Pursuant to Local Rule 16-15, the parties must participate in
a settlement conference/ADR procedure.
-- Daubert Motions
Daubert motions will be heard not later than eight (8) weeks
before the FPTC.
-- Joint Statement of the Case (Jury Trial Only)
The parties must file a Joint Statement of the Case fourteen
(14) days before the FPTC for the Court to read to the
prospective jurors before commencement of voir dire.
The joint statement should be brief and neutral and should not
be more than one page in length.
SPD Swiss is a company that supplies home pregnancy and
fertility/ovulation tests.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=KvcwsP at no extra
charge.[CC]
STATE FARM: Class Cert Hearing in Pitkin Extended to June 18
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MELISSA PITKIN and DAN
GROUT, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
v. STATE FARM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, an Illinois Corporation,
Case No. 3:23-cv-00924-WHO (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge William
Orrick entered an order granting stipulation for extension of time
to file reply in support of motion to certify class, appoint class
representatives, and appoint class counsel.
Pursuant to stipulation, the Plaintiffs' reply papers will be due
on May 28, 2025. The Class Certification hearing will be held on
June 18, 2025, at 2:00 PM, via Zoom videoconference.
State Farm provides property liability insurance services.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=cldgJH at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Frank M. Pitre, Esq.
Nabilah A. Hossain, Esq.
Tyson C. Redenbarger, Esq.
COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY, LLP
San Francisco Airport Office Center
840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200
Burlingame, CA 94010
Telephone: (650) 697-6000
Facsimile: (650) 697-0577
E-mail: fpitre@cpmlegal.com
nhossain@cpmlegal.com
tredenbarger@cmplegal.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Jennifer M. Hoffman, Esq.
Anna S. McLean, Esq.
SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER &
HAMPTON LLP
350 South Grand Avenue, 40th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071-3460
Telephone: (213) 620-1780
Facsimile: (213) 620-1398
E-mail: jhoffman@sheppardmullin.com
amclean@sheppardmullin.com
STATE FARM: Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Response in Ellis
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANDREA ELLIS, individually
and behalf of all those similarly situated, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL
AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, an Illinois Corporation, Case No.
6:22-cv-01005-RBD-DCI (M.D. Fla.), the Defendant asks the Court to
enter an order granting an extension of time through March 6, 2025,
to respond to the Plaintiff Andrea Ellis' motion to seal, and to
file motion to seal.
On Feb. 13, 2025, the Plaintiff filed a Motion to Seal requesting
the Court seal certain filings in connection to its Motion for
Class Certification.
Pursuant to Local Rule 1.11(c) State Farm's, and any other
non-party's, Response and Memorandum of Law in Support of Sealing
is due on Feb. 27, 2025.
State Farm is currently preparing a Motion to Seal and Memorandum
of Law, together with declarations in support of its forthcoming
motion and requests an extension of seven (7) days, to March 6,
2025, to file its Motion and Memorandum of Law.
State Farm provides property liability insurance services.
A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=e3IDjx at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendant is represented by:
Johanna W. Clark, Esq.
CARLTON FIELDS, P.A.
200 S. Orange Ave., Ste 100
Orlando, FL 32801
Telephone: (407) 849-0300
- and –
Daniel F. Diffley, Esq.
Blake Simon, Esq.
Melissa G. Quintana, Esq.
ALSTON & BIRD LLP
1201 W. Peachtree Street
Atlanta, GA 30309
Telephone: (404) 881-7000
TARGET CORP: Seeks to Strike Montgomery's Class Evidence
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SHERRY MONTGOMERY and
YESENIA ALBA, on behalf of themselves, all others similarly
situated, v. TARGET CORPORATION; a Minnesota corporation; and DOES
1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 2:19-cv-04924-JGB-MBK (C.D.
Cal.), the Defendants, on April 28, 2025, will move to strike the
Plaintiffs' compendium of evidence submitted in support of the
Plaintiffs' motion for class certification.
The motion is brought on the grounds that the Compendium of
Evidence was not timely filed and served in violation of the
Court’s June 7, 2024, scheduling order. Accordingly, the
Compendium of Evidence should be stricken and not considered in
connection with the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification.
Target operates general merchandise discount stores.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Mc2Pjl at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Jeffrey D. Wohl, Esq.
Eric D. Distelburger, Esq.
Anna M. Skaggs, Esq.
Aja S. Nunn, Esq.
PAUL HASTINGS LLP
101 California Street, 48th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 856-7000
Facsimile: (415) 856-7100
E-mail: jeffwohl@paulhastings.com
ericdistelburger@paulhastings.com
annaskaggs@paulhastings.com
ajanunn@paulhastings.com
TARGET CORP: Seeks to Strike Montgomery's Declaration
-----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SHERRY MONTGOMERY and
YESENIA ALBA, on behalf of themselves, all others similarly
situated, v. TARGET CORPORATION; a Minnesota corporation; and DOES
1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 2:19-cv-04924-JGB-MBK (C.D.
Cal.), the Defendants, on April 28, 2025, will move to strike the
Declaration of Sherry Montgomery and the Declaration of Yesenia
Alba submitted in support of the Plaintiffs' motion for class
certification.
The motion is brought on the grounds that:
1. the declarations were not timely filed and served in
violation of the Court's June 7, 2024, scheduling order; and
2. the declarations contradict the declarants' deposition
testimony.
Accordingly, the declarations should be stricken and not considered
in connection with the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification.
Target operates general merchandise discount stores.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=kwVlyl at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Jeffrey D. Wohl, Esq.
Eric D. Distelburger, Esq.
Anna M. Skaggs, Esq.
Aja S. Nunn, Esq.
PAUL HASTINGS LLP
101 California Street, 48th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 856-7000
Facsimile: (415) 856-7100
E-mail: jeffwohl@paulhastings.com
ericdistelburger@paulhastings.com
annaskaggs@paulhastings.com
ajanunn@paulhastings.com
TARGET CORP: Seeks to Strike Putative Class Members' Declarations
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SHERRY MONTGOMERY and
YESENIA ALBA, on behalf of themselves, all others similarly
situated, v. TARGET CORPORATION; a Minnesota corporation; and DOES
1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 2:19-cv-04924-JGB-MBK (C.D.
Cal.), the Defendants, on April 28, 2025, will move to strike the
Plaintiffs' putative class member declarations submitted in support
of their motion for class certification.
The motion is brought on the grounds that:
1. the declarations were not timely filed and served in
violation of the Court’s June 7, 2024, scheduling order;
2. the Merriweather Declaration was not signed under penalty of
perjury; and
3. the McNeese, Reitman, Hanna-Baker, Gallardo, Wright, and Law
Declarations contradict the declarants' deposition
testimony.
Accordingly, these declarations should be stricken and not
considered in connection with plaintiffs’ motion for class
certification.
The motion to strike is based on this notice and the accompanying
memorandum in support of the motion, Declaration of Jeffrey D. Wohl
in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification, and
the [Proposed] Order Granting Defendant Target Corporation's Motion
to Strike and Sustaining Target's Objections to Plaintiffs'
Putative Class Member Declarations Submitted in Support of
Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification; the record of this
action; all matters of which the Court may take notice; and all
other matters received by the Court at the hearing on the motion.
Target operates general merchandise discount stores.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Nn7aoB at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Jeffrey D. Wohl, Esq.
Eric D. Distelburger, Esq.
Anna M. Skaggs, Esq.
Aja S. Nunn, Esq.
PAUL HASTINGS LLP
101 California Street, 48th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 856-7000
Facsimile: (415) 856-7100
E-mail: jeffwohl@paulhastings.com
ericdistelburger@paulhastings.com
annaskaggs@paulhastings.com
ajanunn@paulhastings.com
TARGET CORP: Seeks to Strike Toney's Declaration
------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SHERRY MONTGOMERY and
YESENIA ALBA, on behalf of themselves, all others similarly
situated, v. TARGET CORPORATION; a Minnesota corporation; and DOES
1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 2:19-cv-04924-JGB-MBK (C.D.
Cal.), the Defendants, on April 28, 2025, will move to strike the
Declaration of James Toney submitted in support of the Plaintiffs'
motion for class certification and the supplemental declaration of
James Toney submitted in support of the Plaintiffs' motion for
class certification.
The motion is brought on the grounds that:
1. The Toney Declarations were not timely filed and served in
violation of the Court's June 7, 2024, scheduling order;
2. The Supplemental Toney Declaration was not timely disclosed
and constitutes new evidence; and
3. The Toney Declarations are neither relevant nor reliable,
particularly because none of the opinions offered by Toney
resolves any question of liability, and thus do not answer
the fundamental question posed by the Plaintiffs' class
certification motion of whether putative class members were
subjected to any unlawful common policy or practice that can
serve as the basis for certifying a class (they were
not—and
the Toney Declarations cannot show otherwise).
Target operates general merchandise discount stores.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=XcInPb at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Jeffrey D. Wohl, Esq.
Eric D. Distelburger, Esq.
Anna M. Skaggs, Esq.
Aja S. Nunn, Esq.
PAUL HASTINGS LLP
101 California Street, 48th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 856-7000
Facsimile: (415) 856-7100
E-mail: jeffwohl@paulhastings.com
ericdistelburger@paulhastings.com
annaskaggs@paulhastings.com
ajanunn@paulhastings.com
TAYMAN INDUSTRIES: Class Cert Bid Filing in Villarreal Due Oct. 3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DANIEL VILLARREAL, an
individual, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all persons
similarly situated, v. TAYMAN INDUSTRIES, INC., a Corporation; and
DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 3:24-cv-02413-BEN-VET (S.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Valerie Torres entered a scheduling order
regulating putative class discovery and setting deadline for motion
for class certification:
1. Any motion to join other parties, to amend the pleadings, or
to file additional pleadings shall be filed by Apr. 4, 2025.
2. No later than June 18, 2025, the parties shall designate
their respective experts for class certification in writing.
The date for exchange of rebuttal experts for class
certification shall be no later than July 18, 2025.
3. No later than June 18, 2025, each party shall comply with
Rule 26(a)(2)(A) and (B) disclosure provisions regarding
experts for class certification.
4. No later than July 18, 2025, the parties shall supplement
their disclosures regarding contradictory or rebuttal
evidence for class certification under Rule 26(a)(2)(D).
5. Fact and class discovery are not bifurcated; however, all
discovery related to class certification must be completed
by Aug. 19, 2025.
6. The Plaintiffs must file a motion for class certification by
Oct. 3, 2025.
Tayman is a San Diego family owned and operated waste collection
and recycling company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=QLLTTU at no extra
charge.[CC]
TRANSAMERICA LIFE: Plaintiffs Can File Reply Brief Under Seal
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BOAGF Holdco LP v.
Transamerica Life Insurance Company, Case No. 1:23-cv-00032 (N.D.
Iowa, Filed May 11, 2023), the Hon. Judge CJ Williams entered an
order granting the Plaintiffs' motion for leave to file under seal
their reply brief and exhibits in support of their motion for class
certification.
The nature of suit states Diversity-Breach of Contract.
Transamerica is an American holding company for various life
insurance companies and investment firms operating primarily in the
United States, offering life and supplemental health insurance,
investments, and retirement services.[CC]
UNITED AUTO: Class Cert Bid Filing in Ferrara Suit Due July 2
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Ferrara, et al., v. United
Auto Supply of Syracuse, Inc., Case No. 5:24-cv-00337 (N.D.N.Y.,
Filed March 8, 2024), the Hon. Judge David N. Hurd entered an order
granting insofar as and to the extent that:
(1) The Plaintiffs shall serve a March 4, 2025
copy of the proposed amended
complaint on Defendant by:
(2) The Defendant shall advise March 13, 2025
(3) If Defendant consents to filing March 14, 2025
of the proposed amended
complaint, the Plaintiffs shall
file the amended complaint by:
(4) if the amended complaint is March 4, 2025
filed by consent, the Plaintiffs
shall serve the amended complaint
on all Defendants by:
(5) If Defendant does not consent March 21, 2025
to the filing of the proposed
amended complaint, Plaintiffs
may file a motion which shall
be filed by:
(6) The Plaintiffs shall file any July 2, 2025,
class certification motion by:
(7) The Plaintiffs expert disclosure June 17, 2025
deadline is:
(8) The Defendants expert disclosure July 30, 2025
deadline is:
The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
The Defendant provides motor vehicle supplies, accessories, tools,
and equipment.[CC]
UNITED SERVICES: Tomczak Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert by May 6
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MALLOREY TOMCZAK, KALITHA
HEAD, JOSEPHINE WALKER, AND LESLIE WYATT, on behalf of themselves
and all others similarly situated, v. UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE
ASSOCIATION, USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, USAA GENERAL
INDEMNITY COMPANY, AND GARRISON PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE
COMPANY, Case No. 5:21-cv-01564-MGL (D.S.C.), the Hon. Judge Mary
Geiger Lewis entered a ninth amendment scheduling order as
follows:
1. The Plaintiffs shall file their motion for class
certification no later than May 6, 2025. The Defendants
shall file their brief in opposition to the Plaintiffs'
motion for class certification no later than Sept. 2, 2025.
The Plaintiffs shall file their reply brief in support of
their motion for class certification no later than Nov. 12,
2025.
2. The Plaintiff(s) shall file and serve a document identifying
by full name, address, and telephone number each person whom
the Plaintiff(s) expects to call as an expert at trial and
certifying that a written report prepared and signed by the
expert including all information required by Fed. R. Civ. P.
26(a)(2)(B) has been disclosed to other parties by May 6,
2025.
3. The Defendant(s) shall file and serve a document identifying
by full name, address, and telephone number each person whom
the Defendant(s) expects to call as an expert at trial and
certifying that a written report prepared and signed by the
expert including all information required by Fed. R. Civ. P.
26(a)(2)(B) has been disclosed to other parties by Sept. 2,
2025.
4. The parties shall file a joint status report with the Court
no later than Dec. 8, 2025. All subsequent scheduling order
deadlines are stayed pending ruling on the motion for class
certification.
United Services is an American financial services company providing
insurance and banking products.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 25, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=uNtjGI at no extra
charge.[CC]
UNITED STATES: Davis Brings Appeal to Fed. Claims Court
-------------------------------------------------------
RODNEY L. DAVIS, et al. have filed an appeal in the lawsuit
entitled Rodney L. Davis, et al., on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant,
Case No. 1:24-cv-00364-EGB, in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.
The Plaintiffs, from both major political parties, have all served
in Congress for various periods of time during the relevant period,
brought the lawsuit against the Defendant for violations of the
27th Amendment including failure to pay salary, failure to pay
retirement pay, and failure to pay Thrift Savings Plan (TSP)
Employer Match.
The appellate case is captioned Davis v. U.S., Case No. 25-119, in
the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, filed
on February 18, 2025. [BN]
Plaintiffs-Petitioners RODNEY L. DAVIS, et al., on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, are represented by:
Kenneth Cuccinelli, II, Esq.
10007 N. Harris Farm Road
Spotsylvania, VA 22553
Telephone: (804) 286-2550
Defendant-Respondent UNITED STATES is represented by:
Galina I. Fomenkova, Esq.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
P.O. Box 480
Ben Franklin Station
Washington, DC 20044
Telephone: (202) 514-5495
USC: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to May 15
---------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as IOLA FAVELL, SUE
ZARNOWSKI, MARIAH CUMMINGS, and AHMAD MURTADA, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, v. UNIVERSITY OF
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA and 2U, INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-00846-GW-MAR
(C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge George Wu entered an order granting
second joint stipulation to continue hearing on plaintiffs' motion
for class certification:
-- The hearing on Plaintiffs' motion for class certification is
continued from Feb. 27, 2025, to May 15, 2025 at 8:30 a.m.
University of Southern California is a private research university
in Los Angeles, California.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=YBcU0L at no extra
charge.[CC]
USC: Class Cert Bid Filing in Zarnowski Extended to May 15
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as IOLA FAVELL, SUE
ZARNOWSKI, MARIAH CUMMINGS, and AHMAD MURTADA, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, v. UNIVERSITY OF
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA and 2U, INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-03389-GW-MAR
(C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge George Wu entered an order granting
second joint stipulation to continue hearing on plaintiffs' motion
for class certification:
-- The hearing on Plaintiffs' motion for class certification is
continued from Feb. 27, 2025, to May 15, 2025 at 8:30 a.m.
University of Southern California is a private research university
in Los Angeles, California.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=EAVW3R at no extra
charge.[CC]
USCF MEDICAL: Class Cert Hearing Extended to April 22, 2026
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JANE DOE, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. THE REGENTS OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA d/b/a UCSF MEDICAL CENTER, Case No.
3:23-cv-00598-WHO (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge William Orrick
entered an order extending class certification hearing for April
22, 2026, at 2:00 p.m.
The case schedule should be extended as follows:
Event Current Requested
Deadline Deadline
Fact Discovery Deadline: Mar. 17, 2025 Sept. 17, 2025
Motion for Class May 15, 2025 Nov. 14, 2025
Certification:
Expert Depositions: July 2, 2025 Jan. 5, 2026
Class Certification Aug. 14, 2025 Feb. 18, 2026
Opposition:
Rebuttal Expert Depositions: Oct. 1, 2025 Apr. 1, 2026
Expert Discovery Deadline: Oct. 1, 2025 Apr. 1, 2026
Class Certification Reply: Oct. 1, 2025 Apr. 1, 2026
UCSF Medical is a research and teaching hospital in San Francisco,
California.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=8FvphT at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Christian Levis, Esq.
Amanda Fiorilla, Esq.
Rachel Kesten, Esq.
LOWEY DANNENBERG, P.C.
44 South Broadway, Suite 1100
White Plains, NY 10601
Telephone: (914) 997-0500
Facsimile: (914) 997-0035
E-mail: clevis@lowey.com
afiorilla@lowey.com
rkesten@lowey.com
- and -
James M. Wagstaffe, Esq.
ADAMSKI MOROSKI MADDEN
CUMBERLAND & GREEN LLP
6633 Bay Laurel Place.
Avila Beach, CA 93424
The Defendant is represented by:
Dyanne J. Cho, Esq.
Alexander Vitruk, Esq.
Paul G. Karlsgodt, Esq.
Teresa C. Chow, Esq.
BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
Key Tower 127 Public Square, Suite 2000
Cleveland, OH 44114-1214
VERTIV CORPORATION: Torok Seeks More Time to File Class Cert.
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LAWRENCE TOROK, an
individual, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, v.
VERTIV CORPORATION, an Ohio corporation; and DOES 1 through 50,
inclusive, Case No. 3:24-cv-01645-WHA (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff
asks the Court to enter an order extending the deadline for the
Plaintiff to file a class certification motion.
The Plaintiff also requests such other and further relief as the
Court may deem necessary and appropriate.
The Plaintiff has tried to make this request as brief and as
neutral as possible, avoiding argument or assigning blame to any
party or counsel.
The Plaintiff has also refrained from lodging lengthy
correspondence among counsel regarding the discovery and respective
positions at issue. The Supporting Declaration of David Keledjian
offers more information regarding the Parties efforts, and reasons
for the requested continuance. Plaintiff sincerely hopes this Court
acknowledges the level of diligence on Plaintiff's part in
preparing for class certification given the amount of work
necessary, and the expedited briefing schedule.
If granted, this would be the first continuance to the original
Class Certification Motion filing deadline in this case.
The Plaintiff just received the first draft of the PMK deposition
transcripts yesterday afternoon, which are vital to Plaintiff's
moving papers. These transcripts need to be read, summarized,
analyzed, and excerpts need to pulled and organized for the
Plaintiff's compendium in support of Class Certification. The
Defendant has not yet deposed the Plaintiff.
Additionally, the Plaintiff has worked with his expert diligently
to analyze the data, but has had to deal with production delays, as
the last of the data was supplied recently on February 8, 2025.
Once the PMK deposition transcripts are analyzed, Plaintiff then
needs to work with the expert on how to interpret an analyze the
volumes of time and pay data for class certification. The
Plaintiff's motion for class certification is due in 3 court days,
and the Plaintiff cannot feasibly prepare the moving papers,
properly, by the current deadline. This simply cannot be done in 3
court days.
Vertiv is a global provider of mission-critical infrastructure
technologies for vital applications in data centers, communication
networks, and commercial and industrial environments.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Feb. 25, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=hm8XUB at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Emil Davtyan, Esq.
David Yeremian, Esq.
David Keledjian, Esq.
Kevin Burns, Esq.
D.LAW, INC.
450 N Brand Blvd., Ste. 840
Glendale, CA 91203
Telephone: (818) 962-6465
Facsimile: (818) 962-6469
E-mail: emil@d.law
d.yeremian@d.law
d.keledjian@d.law
k.burns@d.law
VISA INC: Court Stays Litigation to Certain Claims in AWUS Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as All Wrapped Up Signs and
Graphix LLC v. Visa Inc. (Re: Visa Debit Card Antitrust
Litigation), Case No. 1:24-cv-07435-JGK (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge
John Koeltl entered an order granting request to stay of litigation
as to certain putative class representatives and certain claims.
Visa Inc. is an American multinational payment card services
corporation.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=bfoukK at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendant is represented by:
Anne P. Davis, Esq.
ARNOLD & PORTER
250 West 55th St.
New York, NY 10019-9710
Telephone: (202) 942-6197
E-mail: Davis@arnoldporter.com
WESTERN CONFERENCE: Plaintiffs Must File Class Reply by April 18
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL PAIERI, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated, v. WESTERN CONFERENCE
OF TEAMSTERS PENSION TRUST; THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE WESTERN
CONFERENCE OF TEAMSTERS PENSION TRUST, Case No. 2:23-cv-00922-LK
(W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Lauren King entered an order as
follows:
1. The Defendants shall have an opportunity to file an amended
opposition to the motion for class certification by March
26, 2025 with a word limit of up to 10,000 words, consistent
with the Court's Feb. 18, 2025 Minute Order.
2. The Defendants shall have an opportunity to file an amended
motion to exclude the Plaintiffs' expert by March 26, 2025,
and that amended motion to exclude shall specify a May 9,
2025 noting date.
3. The new noting date for the motion for class certification
shall be May 9, 2025.
4. The Plaintiffs shall file their reply on the Motion for
Class Certification on April 18, 2025 and shall have a word
limit of 1,600 words over the limit specified in Local Civil
Rule 7(f)(4), consistent with the Court's Feb. 18, 2025
Minute Order.
5. The Plaintiffs shall file their opposition to Defendants'
anticipated March 26, 2025 amended Motion to Exclude
Plaintiffs’ Expert on April 18, 2025.
6. The Defendants shall file their reply for Defendants’
anticipated March 26, 2025 amended Motion to Exclude
Plaintiffs’ Expert on May 9, 2025.
7. The Defendants shall not object to the Notice of Errata nor
to the filing and consideration of Plaintiffs’ Corrected
Class 1 definition.
Western Conference provides plan coverage, participation and
vesting, losing and protecting benefits, normal retirement,
disability retirement, and other services.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=NpXcov at no extra
charge.[CC]
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION: Class Settlement Gets Initial Nod
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as NICOLE PATTERSON,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY, Case No. 1:24-cv-00171-JMF
(S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Jesse Furman entered an order granting
preliminary approval of class action settlement agreement,
certifying settlement class, appointing class representative,
appointing class counsel, and approving notice plan.
The Final Approval Hearing shall be held by telephone before this
Court on June 5, 2025, at 3:30 p.m.
Class Counsel shall file papers in support of their Fee Award and
Class Representative's service award with the Court on or before
April 17, 2025.
The Defendant may, but is not required to, file a response to Class
Counsel's Fee Petition with the Court on or before May 15, 2025.
Class Counsel may file a reply in support of their Fee Petition
with the Court on or before May 22, 2025.
For purposes of settlement only, the Court conditionally certifies
the following Settlement Class as defined in the Settlement
Agreement:
"All individuals in the United States who purchased electronic
tickets to the Bronx Zoo from Defendant's website,
bronxzoo.com, from Aug. 28, 2022 to and through Jan. 16, 2024,
and were charged processing fees."
Wildlife Conservation is an international wildlife conservation
organization.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 25, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=kb4tj7 at no extra
charge.[CC]
WORKFORCE 7 INC: Filing for Class Cert in Ballast Due March 14
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as VICTOR BALLAST, LUIS
SIMONE, RICHARD WALKER and ORLANDO OBRET, Individually and On
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. WORKFORCE 7 INC.,
CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY of NEW YORK, INC., VALI INDUSTRIES,
INC. and RONALD HILTON, Jointly and Severally, Case No.
1:20-cv-03812-ER (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Edgardo Ramos entered a
revised civil case discovery plan and scheduling order
1. The terms of the October 11, 2024 Revised Civil Case
Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order and Jan. 14, 2025 Memo
Endorsement shall continue in full force and effect except
for the following modifications:
a. The Plaintiffs shall file their pre-motion letter
regarding their anticipated motion for class
certification motion practice by no later than March 14,
2025;
b. The Defendants shall file their opposition letter in
response to Plaintiffs' pre-motion letter for class
certification motion practice by no later than March 19,
2025;
c. Dispositive motions on all counts in Plaintiffs' Third
Amended Complaint, except for Count 10 shall be submitted
by no later than March 24, 2025 (should such a motion
prove necessary based on Plaintiffs' proposed settlement
with co-Defendants Workforce 7 and Vali Industries);
d. Any opposition briefs in response to the dispositive
motion shall be filed by no later than April 23, 2025;
e. Any reply briefs in further support of the dispositive
motion shall be filed by no later than May 5, 2025;
f. Expert disclosures shall be served no later than May 30,
2025;
g. Fact discovery, including all depositions of fact and
Rule 30(b)(6) witnesses regarding Count 10 shall be
completed by June 27, 2025;
h. Expert reports regarding Count 10 shall be served no
later than July 11, 2025;
i. Rebuttal expert reports regarding Count 10 shall be
served no later than August 1, 2025;
j. Expert witness depositions, and all discovery regarding
Count 10 shall be completed no later than September 22,
2025;
k. Any dispositive motions with respect to Count 10 must be
filed no later than thirty (30) calendar days from the
last day to complete expert discovery.
Workforce7 provides professional flagging services.
A copy of the Court's order dated Feb. 24, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=RmTwIQ at no extra
charge.[CC]
*********
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 2025. 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 ***