/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/250418.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Friday, April 18, 2025, Vol. 27, No. 78 Headlines 3M COMPANY: Alexander Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina 3M COMPANY: Ward Sues Over Asbestos Containing Fibers in Products A.P. PAYROLL: Peach Sues to Recover Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages ACV AUCTIONS: Hill Suit Removed to W.D. Washington ALDERFER FAMILY: Settlement Deal in Spindel Gets Initial OK ALN MEDICAL: Cotton Sues Over Cyberattack and Data Breach ALN MEDICAL: Siebuhr Files Suit in D. Nebraska BETTERHELP INC: Class Cert Briefing Deadlines Continued in K Suit BETTERHELP INC: Class Cert Briefing Deadlines Continued in L.M. CIUNI & PANICHI: Bennett Sues Over Failure to Safeguard PII DONALD TRUMP: Kingdom Seeks to File Supplemental Declarations DOWNEY HYUNDAI: Barrera Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ECKERT SEAMANS: Bidar Sues Over Fraudulently Inflated Sale Amounts ECOSHIELD PEST: Shaffer Files Suit in D. Colorado F.A. BARTLETT: Filing for Class Cert Bid Modified to June 18 FIVE BELOW INC: Brenes Suit Removed to E.D. California FLUENT INC: Sassano Files TCPA Suit in S.D. New York FORESTERS LIFE: Ninth Circuit Issues Split Decision in Siino FORTUNE BRANDS: Cantu Suit Removed to C.D. California FORUM COMMUNICATIONS: Robertson Files Suit in D. North Dakota FRENKEL LAMBERT: Bhoge Sues Over Fraudulent Inflation FU FU CAFE: Chivalan Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages GEN 1 PROTECTION: Cullison Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation GENTEX CORPORATION: Adams Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime GET RELIEF RX: Moretto Files TCPA Suit in S.D. Florida GLOBAL TEL: Parkell Wins Bid to Certify Class HBH CALIFORNIA: Garcia Suit Removed to E.D. California INTER-CON SECURITY: Sanders Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. J.B. PRINCE: Alexandria Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website JM FOODS INC: Turner Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. LAMB WESTON: Gilbert Suit Removed to E.D. Washington LEE UNIVERSITY: Butler Sues Over Failure to Secure Sensitive Data MANDO FOOD: Tecun Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages MARTINEZ REFINING: Piscitelli Must File Amended Bid to Seal Docs MCDONALD'S USA: Shulman Suit Removed to D. New Jersey MICRON TECHNOLOGY: Klein Suit Transferred to D. Idaho MILAN LASER: Koffel Files TCPA Suit in W.D. North Carolina MODERN DISPOSAL: Toth Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime Compensation MRB2024 LLC: Contestant 1 Suit Removed to C.D. California MTGLQ INVESTORS: Sued Over Fraudulently Inflated Sale Amounts MV TRANSPORTATION: Oswald Suit Removed to N.D. California NATIONAL STORAGE: Reardon Files Suit in Mass. Super. Ct. O.G. PACKING CO: Macato Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. PARAGON SYSTEMS: Tapia Suit Removed to C.D. California PAYREEL INC: Bernstein Sues Over Unfair Wages Practices PENNSYLVANIA: Twaddell Sues Over Recent Data Breach PHILADELPHIA CORP FOR AGING: Court OKs $975,000 Accord in OT Suit PROFESSIONAL PLASTICS: Phillips Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. PROGRESSIVE PREFERRED: Rodriguez Suit Removed to D. Colorado REAL BROKERAGE: Parties Seek More Time to File Class Certification REDLINE CAPITAL: Bentley Files TCPA Suit in E.D. Arkansas RENAISSANCE ENTERTAINMENT: Hammond Files Suit in S.D. New York RENAISSANCE ENTERTAINMENT: Richards Files Suit in N.D. Texas RONALD BROOMFIELD: Parties in Nickerson Seek Class Certification SCP PROPERTY MANAGEMENT: Alfonso Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. SEGWAY INC: Austin Sues Over Misleading and Defective Products SENTOSACARE LLC: Seeks Leave to Amend Class Cert Order in Chow SHING FAT STORE: Bautista Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages SOLAR CAPITAL GROUP: Cardero Files TCPA Suit in S.D. Florida SOOHYUNG KIM: Miami Police Files Suit in Del. Chancery Ct. ST. TAMMANY PARISH: Baqer Plaintiffs Seek to Amend Complaints STONECO LTD: Lead Plaintiff Seeks to Certify Class Action SUBARU OF AMERICA: Weston Plaintiffs Seek to Certify Four Classes SUBARU OF AMERICA: Weston Plaintiffs Seek to Seal Class Cert Brief TARGET CORPORATION: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to August 18 TOP GOLF: Billingy Seeks Conditional Cert of Collective Action UNITED NATURAL: Faces Sills Securities Suit over SEC Disclosures UNITED STATES: Plaintiffs Seek Provisional Class Certification UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: Doe Sues Over Inadequate Safeguard of Data UPMC: Harrington Suit Seeks to Certify Class Action VERRICA PHARMACEUTICALS: Faces Gorlamari Securities Suit VILLA FURNITURE: Valdez Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. WARREN LICHTENSTEIN: Settlement Reached in Reith Suit WHOLE FOODS: Safari Seeks to File Class Cert Docs Under Seal Asbestos Litigation ASBESTOS UPDATE: Barretts Minerals Proposes Trust to Settle Suits ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Reject J&J's $9BB Talc Lawsuit Settlement ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Tosses Environmental Suit Against ASARCO ********* 3M COMPANY: Alexander Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina ----------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as John Carlos Alexander et al., and others similarly situated v. 3M Company et al, Case No. 1:25-cv-21156 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, to the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina on April 2, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02770-RMG to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability. 3M -- http://www.3m.com/-- is an American multinational conglomerate operating in the fields of industry, worker safety, healthcare, and consumer goods.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael D. Sloan, Esq. CARLTON FIELDS, P.A. CityPlace Tower 525 Okeechobee Blvd., Ste. 1200 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 822-2979 Fax: (561) 659-7368 Email: msloan@carltonfields.com - and - Addie K S Ries, Esq. Clifton L Brinson, Esq. SMITH ANDERSON BLOUNT DORSETT MITCHELL AND JERNIGAN LLP PO Box 2611 Raleigh, NC 27602 Phone: (919) 821-1220 Email: aries@smithlaw.com cbrinson@smithlaw.com 3M COMPANY: Ward Sues Over Asbestos Containing Fibers in Products ----------------------------------------------------------------- Douglas Ward, Individually and as Personal Representative for the Estate of Carol Ward, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY; BAXTER HEALTHCARE CORPORATION, individually and as successor in interest to AMERICAN HOSPITAL SUPPLY CORP. and AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC; CENTRAL SCIENTIFIC COMPANY; CSC SCIENTIFIC COMPANY, INC; FISHER SCIENTIFIC COMPANY, LLC; GUARD-LINE, INC.; KEWAUNEE SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION; MANORCARE HEALTH SERVICES, INC., d/b/o MANOR CARE INC., individually and as successor to PRECISION-COSMET COMPANY, INC., CENTRAL SCIENTIFIC COMPANY, a division of CENCO INCORPORATED, CENTAL SCIENTIFIC COMPANY, a division of CENCO INSTRUMENTS CORPORATION; THOMAS SCIENTIFIC, LLC; VWR INTERNATIONAL, INC., Case No. N25C-03-306 ASB (Del. Super. Ct., March 20, 2025), is brought as a result of the Defendant who were negligent in that they failed to exercise ordinary care and caution for the safety of Carol Ward and that knew or should have known that the asbestos fibers contained in their products had a toxic, poisonous, and highly deleterious effect upon the health of persons inhaling, ingesting, or otherwise absorbing them. Carol Ward was secondarily exposed to, inhaled, ingested, and otherwise absorbed asbestos fibers through laundering her husband's, DOUGLAS WARD, clothing, which had been exposed to asbestos fibers emanating from various sources which were mixed, mined, manufactured, distributed, sold, removed, installed, and/or used by Defendants including, but not limited to: chemistry and scientific equipment. Carol Ward was secondarily exposed to asbestos as a result of DOUGLAS WARD's installation, use, maintenance, servicing, and/or removal of Defendants' products as noted in this Complaint which resulted in the exposure to the asbestos even if the asbestos fibers were not mined, manufactured, sold, or distributed by the Defendants. All Defendants herein were at all times pertinent, directly or indirectly engaged in the specification, mining, manufacturing, distribution, sales, licensing, leasing, installation, removal, or use of asbestos and asbestos-containing products. The Defendants were also engaged in the development, manufacture, distribution, sales, licensing or leasing of equipment, procedures, or technology necessary to mine, manufacture, sell, distribute, install, remove, and use asbestos and asbestos-containing products. Carol Ward was wrongfully exposed to and inhaled, ingested, or otherwise absorbed asbestos fibers, an inherently dangerous toxic substance emanating from certain products he worked with and/or around which were manufactured, sold, distributed, or installed by the Defendants. The Defendants knew or should have known that the asbestos fibers contained in their products had a toxic, poisonous, and highly deleterious effect upon the health of persons inhaling, ingesting, or otherwise absorbing them. As a result of the Defendants wrongful conduct, Carol Ward suffered from an asbestos-related disease(s) including, but not limited to, Mesothelioma, says the complaint, The Plaintiffs Carol Ward and Douglas Ward resided at 19011 Towering Oak Trail, Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 from approximately September, 2017. 3M COMPANY is a foreign business entity doing business in the State of Delaware.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Bartholomew J. Dalton, Esq. Andrew C. Dalton, Esq. Michael C. Dalton, Esq. Jessica L. Needles, Esq. Connor C. Dalton, Esq. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, P.A. Cool Spring Meeting House 1106 West Tenth Street Wilmington, DE 19806 Phone: (302) 652-2050 - and - Adam Balick, Esq. Michael Collins Smith, Esq. BALICK & BALICK, LLC 711 North King Street Wilmington, DE 19801 Phone: (302) 658-4265 Email: msmith@balick.com A.P. PAYROLL: Peach Sues to Recover Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages ------------------------------------------------------------------ Abbey Peach and Meghan Doyle, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. A.P. PAYROLL, LLC, ZACHARY PILLER, AND VICTORIA PILLER, Case No. 3:25-cv-00389 (M.D. Tenn., April 7, 2025), is brought to recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages, unlawfully retained tips, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"). Neighbors paid Plaintiffs and those they seek to represent a tipped hourly wage less than the statutory $7.25 per hour minimum wage and $10.88 per hour minimum overtime wage for hours worked over 40 in a workweek under the tip credit provisions of the FLSA (hereafter, "Tip Credit Employees"). Neighbors, however, failed to satisfy the requirements for utilizing the tip credit to meet their minimum-wage and overtime obligations to their Tip Credit Employees by: failing to provide Tip Credit Employees with the required notice before taking the tip credit; requiring Tip Credit Employees to share tips with non-tipped employees who have no or insufficient customer interaction; requiring Tip Credit Employees to work dual jobs—one job that involves tipped work and another job that involves non-tipped work—all while paid at the lower, tipped hourly rate; requiring Tip Credit Employees to work off-the-clock without pay; and (5) paying Tip Credit Employees less than the statutory minimum tipped wage (i.e., $2.13 per hour) for all regular hours worked in a workweek, says the complaint. The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendant as servers. A.P. Payroll, LLC is a member managed Tennessee limited liability company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David W. Garrison, Esq. Joshua A. Frank, Esq. Nicole A. Chanin, Esq. BARRETT JOHNSTON MARTIN & GARRISON, PLLC 200 31st Avenue North Nashville, TN 37203 Phone: (615) 244-2202 Facsimile: (615) 252-3798 Email: dgarrison@barrettjohnston.com jfrank@barrettjohnston.com nchanin@barrettjohnston.com ACV AUCTIONS: Hill Suit Removed to W.D. Washington -------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Jeffrey Hill, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ACV AUCTIONS INC., a foreign profit corporation; ACV CAPITAL LLC, a foreign limited liability company; ACV TRANSPORTATION LLC, a foreign limited liability company; and DOES 1-20, as yet unknown Washington entities, Case No. 25-2-08131-1 SEA was removed from the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County, to the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington on April 7, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-00616. The Plaintiff asserts one claim against ACV under the Equal Pay and Opportunities Act ("EPOA") for a purported violation of Wash. Rev. Code. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that "he and the Class applied for job openings with the Defendants where the postings did not disclose the wage scale or salary range, and/or a general description of all of the benefits and other compensation to be offered to the hired applicant." The Plaintiff alleges that all of ACV's postings were deficient: "Defendants continue to withhold pay and/or benefits information in some, if not all, of their job postings for Washington based positions."[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Timothy W. Emery, Esq. Patrick B. Reddy, Esq. Paul Cipriani, Esq. Hannah M. Hamley, Esq. EMERY REDDY, PLLC 600 Stewart Street, Suite 1100 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: (206) 442-9106 Fax: (206) 441-9711 Email: emeryt@emeryreddy.com reddyp@emeryreddy.com paul@emeryreddy.com hannah@emeryreddy.com The Defendants are represented by: Emily A. Bushaw, Esq. Kyle D. Nelson, Esq. Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900 Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: +1.206.359.8000 Facsimile: +1.206.359.9000 Email: EBushaw@perkinscoie.com KyleNelson@perkinscoie.com ALDERFER FAMILY: Settlement Deal in Spindel Gets Initial OK ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JEFFERY SPINDEL, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, v. ALDERFER FAMILY FARM LLC, et al., Case No. 7:23-cv-10710-PMH (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Philip Halpern entered an order as follows: 1. The Settlement Class is preliminarily certified. 2. The Plaintiff Jeffrey Spindel is appointed as Class Representative. 3. The Plaintiff's counsel Richman Law & Policy is appointed as Class Counsel. 4. The Settlement agreement is preliminarily approved; and 5. The Class Notice and the Notice Plan are approved. Alderfer is a fifth-generation family farm based in Southeastern Pennsylvania, specializing in producing high-quality eggs. A copy of the Court's order dated April 4, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=rjDuCT at no extra charge.[CC] ALN MEDICAL: Cotton Sues Over Cyberattack and Data Breach --------------------------------------------------------- Joshua Cotton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ALN MEDICAL MANAGEMENT LLC, and NATIONAL SPINE AND PAIN CENTERS LLC., Case No. 4:25-cv-03082 (D. Neb., April 4, 2025), is brought arising out of the public exposure of Defendant NSPC's current and former patients' confidential, private information, including their Personally Identifying Information1 ("PII") and Protected Health Information ("PHI") (collectively "Personal Information"). The Personal Information of Plaintiff and the Class Members was in the possession of Defendants at the time of a cyberattack on ALN's systems, beginning in or around March 2024, which was caused by Defendants' collective failures to adequately safeguard that Personal Information ("the Data Breach"). The Defendants failed to undertake adequate measures to safeguard the Personal Information of Plaintiff and the proposed Class Members. Although Defendants purportedly discovered the Data Breach in March of 2024, they failed to immediately notify and warn current and former patients, with ALN waiting until March 21, 2025, to provide written notice to Plaintiff and the proposed Class. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' failures to protect current and former patients' sensitive Personal Information and warn them promptly and fully about the Data Breach, Plaintiff and the proposed Class Members have suffered widespread injury and damages necessitating Plaintiff seeking relief on a class wide basis, says the complaint. The Plaintiff Cotton is a former patient of NSPC, and a Data Breach victim. ALN is a healthcare advisory firm, provides services such as physician, facility, and non-par provider hospital billing, professional coding, claims recovery, review of billing practices, and credentialing.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew W. Ferich, Esq. AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC 201 King of Prussia Road, Suite 650 Radnor, PA 19087 Phone: (310) 474-9111 Facsimile: (310) 474-8585 Email: aferich@ahdootwolfson.com ALN MEDICAL: Siebuhr Files Suit in D. Nebraska ---------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against ALN Medical Management, LLC. The case is styled as John Siebuhr, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ALN Medical Management, LLC, Case No. 4:25-cv-03077 (D. Neb. April 3, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Contract Dispute. ALN Medical Management, LLC provides consulting services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Leigh S. Montgomery, Esq. ELLZEY & ASSOCIATES LAW FIRM 4200 Montrose Boulevard, Suite 200 Houston, TX 77006 Phone: (888) 350-3931 Email: Lmontgomery@eksm.com - and – Josh Sanford, Esq. SANFORD LAW FIRM 10800 Financial Centre Parkway, Suite 510 Little Rock, AR 72211 Phone: (501) 221-0088 Fax: (888) 787-2040 Email: ecfnotices@sanfordlawfirm.com BETTERHELP INC: Class Cert Briefing Deadlines Continued in K Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as K. et al v. BetterHelp, Inc. (RE BETTERHELP, INC. DATA DISCLOSURE CASES), Case No. 3:23-cv-01653 (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Richard Seeborg entered an order continuing the briefing deadlines for the plaintiffs' motion for class certification and the hearing date by five weeks. BetterHelp is a mental health platform that provides direct online counseling and therapy services via web or phone text communication. A copy of the Court's order dated March 18, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=T99Mrq at no extra charge.[CC] BETTERHELP INC: Class Cert Briefing Deadlines Continued in L.M. --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as L.M. v. BetterHelp, Inc. (BETTERHELP, INC. DATA DISCLOSURE CASES), Case No. 3:23-cv-01382 (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Richard Seeborg entered an order continuing the briefing deadlines for the plaintiffs' motion for class certification and the hearing date by five weeks. BetterHelp is a mental health platform that provides direct online counseling and therapy services via web or phone text communication. A copy of the Court's order dated March 18, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=43wH09 at no extra charge.[CC] CIUNI & PANICHI: Bennett Sues Over Failure to Safeguard PII ----------------------------------------------------------- Travis Bennett, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. CIUNI & PANICHI, INC. CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS, Case No. 1:25-cv-00672 (N.D. Ohio, April 4, 2025), is brought against Defendant for its failure to properly secure and safeguard personal identifiable information ("PII" or "Private Information") including, but not limited to full names, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, and likely other sensitive information. During the course of its business operations, Defendant acquired, collected, utilized, and derived a benefit from Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII. Therefore, Defendant owed and otherwise assumed statutory, regulatory, contractual, and common law duties and obligations, including to keep Plaintiff and Class Members' Private Information confidential, safe, secure, and protected from the type of unauthorized access, disclosure, and theft that occurred in the Data Breach. Furthermore, Defendant, both expressly and impliedly understood its obligations and promised to safeguard Plaintiff and Class Members' Private Information. Plaintiff and Class Members relied on these express and implied promises when seeking out and paying for Defendant's services. But for this mutual understanding, Plaintiff and Class Members would not have provided Defendant with their Private Information. Defendant, however, did not meet these reasonable expectations, causing Plaintiff and Class Members to suffer injury. The Defendant failed to adequately protect Plaintiff's and Class Members PII––and failed to even encrypt or redact this highly sensitive information. This unencrypted, unredacted PII was compromised due to Defendant's negligent and/or careless acts and omissions and their utter failure to protect customers' sensitive data. Hackers targeted and obtained Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII because of its value in exploiting and stealing the identities of Plaintiff and Class Members. The present and continuing risk to victims of the Data Breach will remain for their respective lifetimes. The Plaintiff brings this class action lawsuit on behalf of those similarly situated to address Defendant's inadequate safeguarding of Class Members' Private Information that it collected and maintained, and for failing to provide adequate notice to Plaintiff and other Class Members that their information had been subject to the unauthorized access of an unknown third party and precisely what specific type of information was accessed, says the complaint. The Plaintiff provided their PII to Defendant. The Defendant is an accounting firm based in Cleveland, Ohio providing tax, accounting, and business advisory services to individuals and companies nationwide.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph M. Lyon, Esq. Kevin M. Cox, Esq. THE LYON FIRM 2754 Erie Avenue Cincinnati, OH 45208 Phone: (513) 381-2333 Facsimile: (513) 766-9011 Email: jlyon@thelyonfirm.com kcox@thelyonfirm.com DONALD TRUMP: Kingdom Seeks to File Supplemental Declarations ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ALISHEA KINGDOM, et al. v. DONALD J. TRUMP, et al.; Case No. 1:25-cv-00691-RCL (D.D.C.)., the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting motion for leave to file supplemental declarations in support of motion for preliminary injunction, to stay agency action, and for provisional class certification The Plaintiffs filed this action on March 7, 2025, in response to Executive Order 14168 and the February 2025 memoranda implementing it. On April 1, 2025, an Amicus Brief was filed by the States of Indiana, Idaho, and 22 other states in support of Defendants' response. In their response brief, Defendants make Implementing Memoranda. And Defendants and the State amici make assertions about the purported lack of efficacy of hormone therapy to treat gender dysphoria. To address and arguments made in the Amicus Brief regarding the efficacy of the prohibited care, and to present the Court with up-to-date facts regarding the status of their access to gender-affirming health care, Plaintiffs respectfully request that they be granted leave to file the supplemental declarations of the three Named Plaintiffs, two putative class members, and Dr. Dan Karasic. The Plaintiffs have incorporated the supplemental declarations into their reply memorandum, filed concurrently with this Motion. Should the Court deny this Motion, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court allow them 48 hours to resubmit their reply brief, omitting references to the supplemental declarations. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 4, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=fg3TGt at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: David C. Fathi, Esq. Maria V. Morris, Esq. Elisa C. Epstein, Esq. Corene T. Kendrick, Esq. Li Nowlin-Sohl, Esq. Leslie Cooper, Esq. Shana Knizhnik, Esq. James D. Esseks, Esq. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION 915 15th Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: (202) 393-4930 E-mail: dfathi@aclu.org mmorris@aclu.org eepstein@aclu.org ckendrick@aclu.org lnowlin-sohl@aclu.org lcooper@aclu.org sknizhnik@aclu.org jesseks@aclu.org - and - Michael Perloff, Esq. Aditi Shah, Esq. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 529 14th Street NW, Suite 722 Washington, DC 20045 Telephone: (202) 457-0800 E-mail: mperloff@acludc.org ashah@acludc.org - and - Shawn Thomas Meerkamper, Esq. Megan Z. F. Noor, Esq. Lynly S. Egyes, Esq. Milo Inglehart, Esq. TRANSGENDER LAW CENTER Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (510) 587-9696 E-mail: shawn@transgenderlawcenter.org megan@transgenderlawcenter.org lynly@transgenderlawcenter.org milo@transgenderlawcenter.org DOWNEY HYUNDAI: Barrera Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against DOWNEY HYUNDAI INC. The case is styled as Alfredo E. Ortiz Barrera, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. DOWNEY HYUNDAI INC., Case No. 25STCV09895 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., April 3, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." Downey Hyundai Inc. -- https://www.downeyhyundai.com/ -- is a Hyundai dealer in Downey, California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph Lavi, Esq. LAVI & EBRAHIMIAN, LLP 8889 W Olympic Blvd., Ste. 200 Beverly Hills, CA 90211-3638 Phone: 310-432-0000 Fax: 310-432-0001 Email: jlavi@lelawfirm.com ECKERT SEAMANS: Bidar Sues Over Fraudulently Inflated Sale Amounts ------------------------------------------------------------------ Sheila Bidar as legal guardian of Ruth Athill, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ECKERT, SEAMANS, CHERIN AND MELLOTT, LLC, DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC., JOHN AND JANE DOE INVESTORS 1-10, and JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-10, Case No. 1:25-cv-01828 (E.D.N.Y., April 3, 2025), is brought alleging that mortgage lenders, the loan servicing agents that service loans and the attorneys that prosecute foreclosure in New York have engaged in a pattern of conduct that intentionally and fraudulently inflates the amount of judgment post-foreclosure sale. The Defendants are alleged to have conspired to systemically insert false figures into the pro-forma judgments of foreclosure and sale and the reports of sale that are reported by the foreclosing referee and confirmed by the Court. The state and federal government enacted numerous protection statutes that require foreclosing mortgagees to provide delinquent homeowners additional preforeclosure notices and require affirmations from attorneys to attest to the veracity of the documents being submitted in court at all stages of the litigation. In an attempt to sidestep these new heightened requirements and to save on the increased costs and diligence required to prosecute a foreclosure, banks and their attorneys began using the courts as a tool to perpetually delay foreclosure cases through dilatory conduct, voluntary dismissal and re-starts. Moreover, a string of appellate decisions have reversed judgments of foreclosure and sale by revealing inaccuracies, overcharges, phantom charges and a lack of evidence in admissible form to substantiate the dollar amount of judgments of foreclosure and sale. Despite these findings, no action has been taken by the judiciary or the legislature to investigate and remedy the systemic and endemic failures in the foreclosure process that permeate and corrupt the computation of amounts due at judgment, for the amounts of surplus monies and deficiencies. This complacency has led to widespread theft of homeowner funds by lenders, their servicers, and their attorneys that act under the color of law. This action alleges widespread, systematic fraud and theft that has been purposefully perpetrated upon homeowners, their creditors, the judiciary, and the public. It is a crisis that has been hiding in plain sight. There can be no uncertainty here: certain lenders, their servicers, and their attorneys are working in a coordinated manner to steal from distressed homeowners, their creditors, those holding subordinate claims to the first mortgage, and Local, State, and Federal government. This action and the others that will follow seeks monetary judgment and injunctive relief hoping to provide a solution, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a consumer. The Defendant maintains its principal place of business in the State of California and conducts business in the State of New York.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mark S. Anderson, Esq. Kimberly Wroblewski, Esq. ANDERSON, BOWMAN & WALLSHEIN, PLLC 80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 600 Kew Gardens, NY 11415 Phone: (718) 263-6800 Fax: (718) 520-9401 Email: manderson@sbagk.com ECOSHIELD PEST: Shaffer Files Suit in D. Colorado ------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against EcoShield Pest Solutions Denver, LLC, et al. The case is styled as Patrick Shaffer, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. EcoShield Pest Solutions Denver, LLC, Robert Douglas Cardon, Gregory Nygren, The Shield Companies, LLC, The Shield Co Management, LLC Case No. 1:25-cv-01057 (D. Colo. April 3, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud. EcoShield Pest Solutions -- https://www.ecoshieldpest.com/ -- provides Extermination and Pest Control Services for homes and businesses.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James Burkett McInturff, III, Esq. WITTELS MCINTURFF PALIKOVIC 305 Broadway, 7th Floor New York, NY 10007 Phone: (910) 476-7253 Email: jbm@wittelslaw.com F.A. BARTLETT: Filing for Class Cert Bid Modified to June 18 ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as WILLIAM BOWEN, as an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. THE F.A. BARTLETT TREE EXPERT COMPANY, a Connecticut Corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, Case No. 2:24-cv-10027-WLH-JC (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Wesley Hsu entered an order amending the Class Certification Briefing Schedule, as follows: Event Current New Proposed Deadline Date Plaintiff's Motion for May 5, 2025 June 18, 2025 Class Certification: Defendant's Opposition to June 2, 2025 July 16, 2025 Class Certification: Plaintiff's Reply to June 16, 2025 July 30, 2025 Defendant's Opposition to Class Certification: Hearing on Motion for July 11, 2025 Aug. 22, 2025 Class Certification: FA Bartlett is a residential and commercial tree and shrub care company. A copy of the Court's order dated March 20, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=qDwKri at no extra charge.[CC] FIVE BELOW INC: Brenes Suit Removed to E.D. California ------------------------------------------------------ The case captioned as Blanca Brenes, an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. FIVE BELOW, INC., a Pennsylvania Corporation; CHRISTINA TORRES, an individual; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. 25CECG00874 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Fresno, to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California on April 7, 2025, and assigned Case No. 1:25-at-00279. The Complaint seeks damages, penalties, and restitution on behalf of a putative class for: failure to pay overtime wages; failure to pay minimum wages; failure to provide meal periods; failure to provide rest periods; waiting time penalties; wage statement violations; failure to indemnify for business expenses; and a derivative claim for unfair competition.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Carrie A. Gonell, Esq. Alexander L. Grodan, Esq. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 600 Anton Boulevard, Suite 1800 Costa Mesa, CA 92626-7653 Phone: +1.714.830.0600 Fax: +1.714.830.0700 Email: carrie.gonell@morganlewis.com alexander.grodan@morganlewis.com - and - Sarah A. Davidson, Esq. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP One Market Spear Street Tower San Francisco, CA 94105-1596 Phone: +1.415.442.1000 Fax: +1.415.442.1001 Email: sarah.davidson@morganlewis.com FLUENT INC: Sassano Files TCPA Suit in S.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Fluent, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Atley Sassano, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Fluent, Inc., Reward Zone USA, LLC, Case No. 7:25-cv-02845-KMK (S.D.N.Y., April 5, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Fluent, Inc. -- https://fluentco.com/ -- is a commerce media solutions provider connecting top-tier brands with highly engaged consumers.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Craig Thor Kimmel, Esq. KIMMEL & SILVERMAN, P.C. 30 E. Butler Ave Ambler, PA 19002 Phone: (267) 468-7638 Fax: (877) 600-2112 Email: teamkimmel@creditlaw.com FORESTERS LIFE: Ninth Circuit Issues Split Decision in Siino ------------------------------------------------------------ Judge Jacqueline H. Nguyen of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court's summary judgment ruling in favor of Plaintiff Dena Siino in the matter captioned as Dena Siino v. Foresters Life Insurance and Annuity Company, No. 23-15087 (9th Cir.). The panel remanded the case with instructions to enter final judgment consistent with its opinion. Siino brought a putative class action against Foresters Life Insurance and Annuity Company under California Insurance Code sections 10113.71 and 10113.72, which require life insurers to provide policyholders with (1) written notice of an impending policy lapse or termination at least 30 days before the effective date and (2) notice of the right to designate another person to receive such lapse notices. Siino alleged that FLIAC failed to comply with these statutory obligations before terminating her life insurance policy for nonpayment of premiums in 2019. Based on those allegations, Siino sought, among other relief, declaratory relief that FLIAC had violated the Statutes and that her policy remained valid and enforceable. FLIAC opposed the request, asserting that any such relief would effectively resolve Siino's underlying breach of contract claim without requiring her to prove the essential elements of that claim, including causation. The district court granted summary judgment in part for Siino and entered declaratory relief in her favor, concluding that FLIAC had violated the Statutes and that Siino's policy remained valid notwithstanding its termination. FLIAC appealed the entry of declaratory relief. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit considered whether the district court had erred in granting the declaratory relief sought by Siino. The Court first held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in entertaining Siino’s request for declaratory relief. The panel reaffirmed that district courts have discretion under the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2201(a), to declare the rights and legal relations of the parties. The panel found no error in the district court’s determination that declaratory relief was appropriate in light of the dispute over the interpretation and application of the Statutes to Siino's circumstances. Turning to the merits of the declaratory relief, the panel addressed Siino's request in two parts. First, the Court affirmed the district court's decision to grant a declaration that FLIAC failed to comply with the Statutes. The Court explained that this portion of the requested relief pertained solely to whether FLIAC breached its statutory obligations under sections 10113.71 and 10113.72. Because this inquiry did not implicate the elements of a common law breach of contract claim -- specifically, causation and damages -- the Court concluded that it was sufficient for Siino to show only that FLIAC had violated the Statutes. The panel found that the undisputed evidence established that FLIAC had not complied with two distinct requirements: (1) the obligation to provide policyholders with at least 30 days' written notice prior to terminating a policy for nonpayment of premiums, and (2) the obligation to notify policyholders of their right to designate a third-party recipient for such notices. The Ninth Circuit Court thus affirmed the grant of the first portion of declaratory relief. The Ninth Circuit Court reached a different conclusion as to the second portion of Siino's requested declaratory relief -- a declaration that her life insurance policy remained valid and enforceable notwithstanding FLIAC's noncompliance with the Statutes. The Court concluded that this relief functionally adjudicated Siino's underlying breach of contract claim. Under well-settled principles of California law, a claim for breach of contract requires proof of four elements: (1) the existence of a contract, (2) plaintiff's performance or excuse for nonperformance, (3) the defendant’s breach, and (4) resulting harm or damages caused by the breach. The Court pointed to Miles v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Tr. Co., 236 Cal. App. 4th 394, 402 (2015). The Court emphasized that Siino's request for a declaration that her policy remained valid could not be granted unless she had proven not only that FLIAC breached the Statutes, but also that FLIAC's statutory violations were the but-for and proximate cause of her injury -- namely, the termination of her policy. The panel acknowledged that prior to its decision in Small v. Allianz Life Insurance Co. of North America, 122 F.4th 1187 (9th Cir. 2024), district courts within the Ninth Circuit had reached differing conclusions regarding whether causation must be proven to prevail on such statutory claims. However, the Court held that Small resolved that split by making clear that a breach of contract claim premised on statutory violations requires a showing that the defendant's noncompliance caused the plaintiff's harm. Under Small, plaintiffs must demonstrate that they did not intentionally or knowingly allow their policies to lapse, and that compliance with the Statutes would have resulted in their continued coverage. Applying Small, the panel found that Siino had not met the required standard. The undisputed evidence showed that although FLIAC failed to provide the required statutory notices, any such notices would not have reached Siino because she had moved in 2014 and failed to ensure that her mailing address was updated in FLIAC's records. Consequently, the panel determined that any pretermination or designee notices sent by FLIAC would have been sent to an outdated address and would not have prevented the policy lapse. Moreover, the panel found that the proximate cause of the policy's termination was Siino's failure to pay her annual premium in 2018. Because the statutory violations did not cause the termination of the policy, the Court concluded that Siino could not establish the causation element required for breach of contract. As a result, the Court reversed the district court's decision to grant the second portion of declaratory relief, which declared that Siino's policy remained in effect. The Court emphasized that the declaratory judgment, in this context, operated as a substitute for a finding of liability on Siino's contract claim and could not be entered absent proof of causation. Because Siino failed to demonstrate that FLIAC's failure to comply with the Statutes was the legal cause of her injury, the Court held that declaratory judgment on this point was not appropriate. In light of this determination, the panel did not reach FLIAC's alternative arguments that Siino had also failed to prove damages or entitlement to specific performance, nor did it address whether the district court erred by declining to consider FLIAC's affirmative defenses to the claim. Citing INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976), the panel reiterated that courts are not obligated to decide issues that are unnecessary to the outcome of a case. The Ninth Circuit Court affirmed the grant of declaratory relief limited to FLIAC's violation of California Insurance Code sections 10113.71 and 10113.72, and reversed the grant of declaratory relief declaring Siino's policy remained valid. Because Siino's remaining claims had previously been dismissed with prejudice, the case was remanded to the district court solely for entry of final judgment in accordance with the panel's decision. The court ordered that each party was to bear its own costs on appeal. A copy of the Ninth Circuit Court's decision is available at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=SZ4QIN FORTUNE BRANDS: Cantu Suit Removed to C.D. California ----------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Tanya Cantu, Miguel Esparza, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Fortune Brands Innovations Group, Inc., Case No. 25STCV05291 was removed from the Superior Court of CA, County of Los Angeles, to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on April 4, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02989 to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other Statutory Actions. Fortune Brands Innovations, Inc. -- https://www.fbin.com/ -- is an industry-leading innovation company focused on creating smarter, safer and more beautiful homes and improving lives.[BN] The Plaintiffs appear pro se. FORUM COMMUNICATIONS: Robertson Files Suit in D. North Dakota ------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Forum Communications Company. The case is styled as Steven Robertson, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Forum Communications Company, Case No. 3:25-cv-00074-PDW-ARS (D.N.D., April 2, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud for Personal Injury. Forum Communications Company -- https://www.forumcomm.com/ -- is an American multimedia and technology company headquartered in Fargo, North Dakota.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Todd Michael Miller, Esq. SOLBERG STEWART MILLER PO Box 1897 Fargo, ND 58107-1897 Phone: (701) 237-3166 Email: tmiller@solberglaw.com FRENKEL LAMBERT: Bhoge Sues Over Fraudulent Inflation ----------------------------------------------------- Indira D. Bhoge, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. FRENKEL LAMBERT WEISS WEISMAN & GORDON LLP, MIDFIRST BANK, JOHN AND JANE DOE INVESTORS 1-10, and JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-10, Case No. 1:25-cv-01836 (E.D.N.Y., April 3, 2025), is brought alleging that mortgage lenders, the loan servicing agents that service loans and the attorneys that prosecute foreclosure in New York, have engaged in a pattern of conduct that intentionally and fraudulently inflates the amount of judgment post-foreclosure sale. The Defendants are alleged to have conspired to systemically insert false figures into the pro-forma judgments of foreclosure and sale and the reports of sale that are reported by the foreclosing referee and confirmed by the Court. The state and federal government enacted numerous protection statutes that require foreclosing mortgagees to provide delinquent homeowners additional preforeclosure notices and require affirmations from attorneys to attest to the veracity of the documents being submitted in court at all stages of the litigation. In an attempt to sidestep these new heightened requirements and to save on the increased costs and diligence required to prosecute a foreclosure, banks and their attorneys began using the courts as a tool to perpetually delay foreclosure cases through dilatory conduct, voluntary dismissal and re-starts. Moreover, a string of appellate decisions have reversed judgments of foreclosure and sale by revealing inaccuracies, overcharges, phantom charges and a lack of evidence in admissible form to substantiate the dollar amount of judgments of foreclosure and sale. Despite these findings, no action has been taken by the judiciary or the legislature to investigate and remedy the systemic and endemic failures in the foreclosure process that permeate and corrupt the computation of amounts due at judgment, for the amounts of surplus monies and deficiencies. This complacency has led to widespread theft of homeowner funds by lenders, their servicers, and their attorneys that act under the color of law. This action alleges widespread, systematic fraud and theft that has been purposefully perpetrated upon homeowners, their creditors, the judiciary, and the public. It is a crisis that has been hiding in plain sight. There can be no uncertainty here: certain lenders, their servicers, and their attorneys are working in a coordinated manner to steal from distressed homeowners, their creditors, those holding subordinate claims to the first mortgage, and Local, State, and Federal government. This action and the others that will follow seeks monetary judgment and injunctive relief hoping to provide a solution, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a consumer. MidFirst Bank conducts business in the State of New York and regularly attempts to collect debts.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mark S. Anderson, Esq. Kimberly Wroblewski, Esq. ANDERSON, BOWMAN & WALLSHEIN, PLLC 80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 600 Kew Gardens, NY 11415 Phone: (718) 263-6800 Fax: (718) 520-9401 Email: manderson@sbagk.com FU FU CAFE: Chivalan Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages ---------------------------------------------------------- Juan Chivalan, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. FU FU CAFE, INC. d/b/a FU FU CAFÉ and FU Z. LUO. v. FU FU CAFE, INC. d/b/a FU FU CAFE and FU Z. LUO, Case No. 4:25-cv-01569 (S.D. Tex., April 4, 2025), is brought to recover unpaid overtime wages and other damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"). Instead, Defendants pay these workers a salary with no overtime compensation, even though they work many hours in excess of forty hours per week. The FLSA requires employers like Defendants to pay their kitchen workers at 1.5 times their regular rates for all hours worked in excess of forty in a workweek. Because Defendants' salary pay scheme unlawfully denies overtime pay to these workers, the Plaintiff to recover unpaid overtime wages under the FLSA, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed and/or jointly employed by Fu Fu Cafe and Fu Z. Luo from 2009 to October 22, 2024 as a Cook's Helper. Fu Fu Cafe is owned and managed by Fu Z. Luo.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David I. Moulton, Esq. BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025 Houston, TX 77046 Phone: (713) 877-8788 Telecopier: (713) 877-8065 Email: dmoulton@brucknerburch.com GEN 1 PROTECTION: Cullison Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation ----------------------------------------------------------------- Jason Cullison and Jaimie Bonitatibus, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. GEN 1 PROTECTION, LLC, BENJAMIN GARRET, individually, and MARVIN MOORE, individually, Case No. 1:25-cv-01055 (D. Colo., April 2, 2025), is brought against the Defendant under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), the Colorado Overtime and Minimum Pay Standards Order ("COMPS Order") and the Colorado Wage Act ("CWA"), by failing to pay Security Personnel overtime compensation at applicable rates as required by law. The Plaintiffs have been paid his overtime rate of pay for some hours worked over 40 per work week, however, it has been revealed that Defendants can, and do, manipulate and edit on the Deputy App the number of work hours the Plaintiffs actually works. The manipulation/editing of recorded work hours decreased for the Plaintiffs, and members of the Plaintiff class, the payment of regular work hours at a regular rate of pay which in turn decreases the overtime rate of pay for hours worked over the 40 per work week, all to the benefit of the Defendants. This has happened throughout the Plaintiffs' employment with Defendants, says the complaint. The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as Security Personnels. The Defendants provide security protection for various businesses in the Denver area.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: John W. Billhorn, Esq. BILLHORN LAW FIRM 53 W. Jackson Blvd., Suite 1137 Chicago, IL 60604 Phone: 312-853-1450 - and - 3773 Cherry Creek N. Drive, Suite 710 Denver, CO 80209 Phone: (312) 853-1450 Email: jbillhorn@billhornlaw.com GENTEX CORPORATION: Adams Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime --------------------------------------------------------- Adekunle Adams, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. GENTEX CORPORATION, a Michigan corporation, Case No. 1:25-cv-00370-JMB-MV (W.D. Mich., April 3, 2025), is brought against the Defendant to recover unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorney's fees, costs, and other relief as appropriate under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"). In addition to the base rate of pay, Defendant incorporated various types of routine and non-discretionary pay into its payment structure. For example, Defendant paid employees shift differential pay and quarterly bonus pay. Throughout Plaintiff's employment with Defendant, he earned shift differential pay, quarterly bonus pay and other remuneration. As non-exempt employees, Defendant's Hourly Employees were entitled to full compensation for all overtime hours worked at a rate of 1.5 times their "regular rate" of pay, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant from December 2023 through November 2024. The Defendant is headquartered in Zeeland, Michigan, and employs thousands of hourly employees in Zeeland, Holland, and Grand Rapids, Michigan.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jesse L. Young, Esq. SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C. 141 E. Michigan Avenue, Suite 600 Kalamazoo, Michigan 49007 Phone: (269) 250-7500 Email: jyoung@sommerspc.com - and - Kevin J. Stoop, Esq. SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C. One Town Square, 17th Floor Southfield, MI 48076 Phone: (248) 355-0300 Email: kstoops@sommerspc.com GET RELIEF RX: Moretto Files TCPA Suit in S.D. Florida ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Get Relief RX LLC. The case is styled as Guilherme Moretto, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Get Relief RX LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-21541-XXXX (S.D. Fla., April 2, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. GetReliefRX -- https://getreliefrx.com/ -- is a compounding pharmacy dedicated to providing compounded medication covering a range if symptoms.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew John Shamis, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE, PA 14 NE 1st Ave., Ste. 1205 Miami, FL 33132 Phone: (305) 479-2299 Fax: (786) 623-0915 Email: ashamis@sflinjuryattorneys.com GLOBAL TEL: Parkell Wins Bid to Certify Class --------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Donald Parkell, et al., v. Global Tel Link, et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-00432-UNA (D. Del.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting motion to certify class and appointing counsel. Global Tel is a private equity owned telecommunications company. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 7, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=UZv1Bl at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs appears pro se. HBH CALIFORNIA: Garcia Suit Removed to E.D. California ------------------------------------------------------ The case captioned as Jose Garcia, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. HBH CALIFORNIA, LLC, a Georgia limited liability company, and DOES 1 thought 50, inclusive, Case No. MCV094441 was removed from the Superior Court for the State of California, in and for the County of Madera, to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California on April 7, 2025, and assigned Case No. 1:25-at-00276. The Complaint asserts the following Class Action Claims: Failure to Provide Compliant Meal Breaks and/or Pay Premiums, Failure to Provide Compliant Rest Breaks and/or Pay Premiums, Failure to Pay Overtime Wages, Failure to Pay Minimum Wages, Failure to Pay Timely Wages Failure to Provide and Maintain Accurate Itemized Wage Statements, and Unfair Business Practices.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Jon G. Miller, Esq. James E. Hart, Esq. Kimberly M. Shappley, Esq. LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 18565 Jamboree Road, Suite 800 Irvine, CA 92612 Phone: 949.705.3000 Facsimile: 949.724.1201 Email: jmiller@littler.com jhart@littler.com kshappley@littler.com INTER-CON SECURITY: Sanders Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Inter-Con Security Systems, Inc. The case is styled as Candice Joy Sanders, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Inter-Con Security Systems, Inc., Case No. 25NNCV02270 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., April 2, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." Inter-Con Security Systems, Inc. -- https://www.icsecurity.com/ -- is a US-based multinational security services company headquartered in Pasadena, California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Daniel Ginzburg, Esq. FRONTIER LAW CENTER 23901 Calabasas Rd., Ste. 1084 Calabasas, CA 91302 Phone: (818) 914-3433 Fax: (818) 914-3433 Email: dan@frontierlawcenter.com J.B. PRINCE: Alexandria Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ------------------------------------------------------------ Erika Alexandria, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. J.B. PRINCE COMPANY, INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-02792 (S.D.N.Y., April 3, 2025), is brought against Defendant for the failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate Defendant's website, www.jbprince.com (the "Website"), to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired people. The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to the Website, and therefore denial of the goods and services offered thereby, is a violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"). The Defendant's website is not equally accessible to blind and visually impaired consumers; therefore, Defendant is in violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff now 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, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who requires screen-reading software to read website content using the computer. The Defendant's Website, and the goods and services offered thereupon, is a public accommodation.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Rami Salim, Esq. STEIN SAKS PLLC One University Plaza, Suite 620 Hackensack, NJ 07601 Phone: (201) 282-6500 Fax: (201) 282-6501 Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com JM FOODS INC: Turner Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. -------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against JM FOODS INC. The case is styled as Laila Antionette Turner, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. JM FOODS INC. d/b/a JERSEY MIKES SUBS, Case No. 25STCV09712 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., April 2, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." JM FOODS INC. doing business as Jersey Mike's Subs -- https://www.jerseymikes.com/ -- is an American submarine sandwich chain headquartered in Manasquan, New Jersey.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David Keledjian, Esq. D.LAW, INC. 450 N. Brand Blvd., Ste. 840 Glendale, CA 91203-2920 Phone: 818-962-6465 Email: d.keledjian@d.law LAMB WESTON: Gilbert Suit Removed to E.D. Washington ---------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Derrick Gilbert, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. LAMB WESTON, INC., an Idaho corporation; Case No. 25-00002-00135-03 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of Washington in and for the County of Benton, to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington on April 4, 2025, and assigned Case No. 4:25-cv-05040. The Complaint set forth eight causes of action against Defendant: alleged Failure to Provide Rest Periods in Violation of RCW 49.12.020 and WAC 296-126-092; alleged Failure to Provide Meal Periods in Violation of RCW 49.12.020 and WAC 296-126-092; alleged Failure to Pay Overtime Wages in Violation of RCW 49.46.130; alleged Payment of Wages Less Than Entitled in Violation of RCW 49.46.090; alleged Failure to Accrue and Allow Use of Paid Sick Leave in Violation of RCW 49.46.210 and WAC 296-128-620; alleged Unlawful Deductions and Rebates in Violation of RCW 49.52.060 and WAC 296-126-028; alleged Failure to Pay All Wages Due at Termination in Violation of RCW 49.48.010; and alleged Willful Refusal to Pay Wages in Violation of RCW 49.52.050.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Douglas Han, Esq. Shunt Tatavos-Gharajeh, Esq. Dean Petitta, Esq. JUSTICE LAW CORPORATION 751 North Fair Oaks Avenue, Suite 101 Pasadena, CA 91103 Phone: (818) 230-7502 Fax: (818) 230-7259 Email: dhan@justicelawcorp.com statavos@justicelawcorp.com dpetitta@justicelawcorp.com The Defendants are represented by: Breanne Martell, Esq. Gray Jeong, Esq. LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. One Union Square 600 University Street, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101.3122 Phone: 206.623.3300 Fax: 206.447.6965 Email: bsmartell@littler.com gjeong@littler.com LEE UNIVERSITY: Butler Sues Over Failure to Secure Sensitive Data ----------------------------------------------------------------- Katelyn Butler, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Lee University, Case No. 1:25-cv-00114 (E.D. Tenn., April 4, 2025), is brought against Defendant for its failure to properly secure and safeguard sensitive information of its students. The Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive personal information which they entrusted to Defendant on the mutual understanding that Defendant would protect it against disclosure--was targeted, compromised and unlawfully accessed due to the Data Breach. The Defendant collected and maintained certain personally identifiable information of Plaintiff and the putative Class Members, who are (or were) students at Defendant. The PII compromised in the Data Breach included Plaintiff's and Class Members' full names, education-related information, and Social Security numbers ("personally identifiable information" or "PII"). The PII compromised in the Data Breach was exfiltrated by cyber-criminals and remains in the hands of those cyber-criminals who target PII for its value to identity thieves. As a result of the Data Breach, Plaintiff and Class Members suffered concrete injuries in fact including. The Data Breach was a direct result of Defendant's failure to implement adequate and reasonable cyber-security procedures and protocols necessary to protect consumers' PII from a foreseeable and preventable cyber-attack. Moreover, upon information and belief, Defendant was targeted for a cyber-attack due to its status as an educational institution that collects and maintains highly valuable PII on its systems. The Defendant disregarded the rights of Plaintiff and Class Members by, inter alia, intentionally, willfully, recklessly, or negligently failing to take adequate and reasonable measures to ensure its data systems were protected against unauthorized intrusions; failing to take standard and reasonably available steps to prevent the Data Breach; and failing to provide Plaintiff and Class Members prompt and accurate notice of the Data Breach. The Plaintiff's and Class Members' identities are now at risk because of Defendant's negligent conduct because the PII that Defendant collected and maintained has been accessed and acquired by data thieves, says the complaint. The Plaintiff and Class Members are current and former students at Defendant. The Defendant is a private Christian university based in Cleveland, Tennessee.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq. Grayson Wells, Esq. STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC The Freedom Center 223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200 Nashville, TN 37203 Phone: (615) 254-8801 Email: gstranch@stranchlaw.com gwells@stranchlaw.com - and - Casondra Turner, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC 800 S. Gay Street, Suite 1100 Knoxville, TN 37929 Phone: (866) 252-0878 Email: cturner@milberg.com MANDO FOOD: Tecun Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages ---------------------------------------------------------- Ana Maria Tecun, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated v. MANDO FOOD CORP. d/b/a MANDO'S FOOD MINI MART, MANDO'S DISCOUNT INC., and MANDO "MAZZI" MUNTASSER, Case No. 1:25-cv-01891 (E.D.N.Y., April 7, 2025), is brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and the New York Labor Law ("NYLL") she is entitled to recover from Defendants: unpaid minimum wages, unpaid overtime compensation, unpaid "spread of hours" premium," liquidated damages, prejudgment and post judgment interest, and attorneys' fees and costs. The Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff with weekly wage statements/pay stubs setting f01ih Plaintiffs gross wages, deductions, and net wages. By failing to provide Plaintiff with a wage notice and weekly wage statements identifying his actual hours worked, Defendants prevented Plaintiff from determining and seeking payment for the precise number of unpaid hours and, therefore, prevented Plaintiff from promptly raising issues of underpayment with his employers. As a result, Plaintiff was harmed by being deprived of her income for longer than she would have been had she been able to raise her underpayment earlier. The Defendants knowingly and willfully operated their businesses with a policy of not paying the New York State minimum wage to Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees. Defendants knowingly and willfully operated their business with a policy of not paying Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees either the FLSA overtime rate (of time and one-half), or the New York State overtime rate (of time and one-half), in direct violation of the FLSA and New York Labor Law and the supporting federal and New York State Department of Labor Regulations, says the complaint. The Plaintiff worked for Defendants in those capacities until April 9, 2024. MANDO FOOD CORP., owns and operates a groce1y/mini mart doing business as "Mando's Food Mini Mart."[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Justin Cilenti, Esq. Peter H. Cooper, Esq. CILENTI & COOPER, PLLC 60 East 42nd Street - 4th Floor New York, NY 10165 Phone: (212) 209-3933 Fax: (212) 209-7102 Email: info@jcpclaw.com MARTINEZ REFINING: Piscitelli Must File Amended Bid to Seal Docs ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Piscitelli, et al., v. Martinez Refining Company LLC, Case No. 4:23-cv-04184 (N.D. Cal., Filed Aug. 16, 2023), the Hon. Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. entered an order directing the Plaintiffs to file an amended motion to seal that includes the unredacted version of the motion for class certification. In addition to filing the motion to seal only after the briefing on the motion was complete, the Plaintiffs only filed a redacted version of the pending motion for class certification but did not file an unredacted version under seal as required by Civil L.R. 79-5(e). The nature of suit states real property -- torts to land. Martinez Refining Company refines gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel.[CC] MCDONALD'S USA: Shulman Suit Removed to D. New Jersey ----------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Jack Shulman, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. McDONALD'S USA, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Case No. MON-L-00525-25 was removed from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Monmouth County, to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on April 4, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02327. The Plaintiff's cause of action is for an alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Michael C. Zogby, Esq. Kaitlyn E. Stone, Esq. BARNES & THORNBURG LLP 1776 on the Green 67 E. Park Place, Suite 1000 Morristown, NJ 07960 Phone: (973) 775-6101 Fax: (973) 775-6102 Email: michael.zogby@btlaw.com kaitlyn.stone@btlaw.com MICRON TECHNOLOGY: Klein Suit Transferred to D. Idaho ----------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Shlomo (Steve) Klein, Zane Bianucci, Micron Investor Group, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC., SANJAY MEHROTRA, and MARK MURPHY, Case No. 9:25-cv-80040 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho on April 3, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-00191-BLW to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Securities/Commodities for Securities Exchange Act. Micron Technology, Inc. -- https://www.micron.com/ -- designs, develops, manufactures, and sells memory and storage products in the United States, Taiwan, Mainland China, rest of the Asia Pacific, Hong Kong, Japan, Europe, and internationally.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Nathan C. Zipperian, Esq. MILLER SHAH LLP 2103 N. Commerce Parkway Fort Lauderdale, FL 33326 Phone: (866) 540-5505 Fax: (866) 300-7367 Email: nczipperian@millershah.com - and - James M. LoPiano, Esq. Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor New York, NY 10016 Phone: (212) 661-1100 Fax: (212) 661-8665 Email: jlopiano@pomlaw.com jalieberman@pomlaw.com - and - Jayne A. Goldstein, Esq. SHEPHERD, FINKELMAN, MILLER & SHAH, LLP 1640 Town Center Circle, Suite 216 Weston, FL 33326 Phone: (954) 515-0123 Email: jgoldstein@sfmslaw.com - and - Etan Mark, Esq. MARK MIGDAL & HAYDEN 80 SW 8th Street, Suite 1999 Miami, FL 33130 Phone: (305) 374-0440 Email: etan@markmigdal.com - and - Phillip C. Kim, Esq. THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A. 275 Madison Avenue, 34th Floor New York, NY 10016 Phone: (212) 686-1060 Fax: (212) 202-3827 Email: pkim@rosenlegal.com The Defendant is represented by: Erik F Stidham, Esq. HOLLAND & HART LLP 800 W. Main Street, Suite 1750 Boise, ID 83702 Phone: (208) 342-5000 Fax: (208) 343-8869 Email: efstidham@hollandhart.com - and - A. Dean Bennett, Esq. HOLLAND AND HART LLP PO Box 2527 Boise, ID 83701 Phone: (208) 342-5000 EXT 3993 Email: adbennett@hollandhart.com - and - Betty Chang Rowe, Esq. Ignacio E. Salceda, Esq. WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI 650 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050 Phone: (650) 849-3096 Email: browe@wsgr.com isalceda@wsgr.com - and - Gregory L. Watts, Esq. WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI, P.A. 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5100 Seattle, WA 98014 Phone: (206) 883-2500 Email: gwatts@wsgr.com MILAN LASER: Koffel Files TCPA Suit in W.D. North Carolina ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Milan Laser Corporate LLC. The case is styled as Taylor Koffel, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Milan Laser Corporate LLC, Case No. 3:25-cv-00238 (W.D.N.C., April 4, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Milan Laser -- https://milanlaser.com/ -- as the largest laser hair removal company in the United States, provides lifelong results in a fun, inclusive, and relaxing setting.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David M. Wilkerson, Esq. THE VAN WINKLE LAW FIRM P.O. Box 7376 Asheville, NC 28802-7376 Phone: (828) 258-2991 Fax: (828) 257-2767 Email: dwilkerson@vwlawfirm.com MODERN DISPOSAL: Toth Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime Compensation ------------------------------------------------------------------ Ryan Toth, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. MODERN DISPOSAL SERVICES, INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-00304 (W.D.N.Y., April 7, 2025), is brought to recover unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, and attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 ("FLSA"), and unpaid compensation, liquidated damages, and attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the New York Payment of Wages Act ("NYPWA"); and the New York Minimum Wage Act ("NYMWA") (the NYPWA and NYMWA are collectively referred to as the "New York Acts"). Although Plaintiff and the Putative Collective/Class Members have routinely worked (and continue to work) in excess of 40 hours per workweek, Plaintiff and the Putative Collective/Class Members were not paid overtime of at least one and one-half their regular rates for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek. Likewise, Plaintiff and the Putative Collective/Class Members worked under 40 hours per workweek on occasion and were not fully compensated at their regular rate of pay for all hours worked, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed by Modern Disposal as a Driver in New York from July 2020 until August 2024. Modern Disposal is a full-service solid waste company providing waste collection, recycling, and disposal services to commercial, industrial, and residential customers throughout the United States.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Clif Alexander, Esq. Austin W. Anderson, Esq. Carter T. Hastings ANDERSON ALEXANDER PLLC 101 N. Shoreline Blvd., Suite 610 Corpus Christi, TX 78401 Phone: 361-452-1279 Fax: 361-452-1284 Email: clif@a2xlaw.com austin@a2xlaw.com carter@a2xlaw.com - and - Robert L. Mullin, Esq. 40 Wildbriar Road, Suite 100 Rochester, NY 14623 Phone: (585) 869-0210 Fax: (585) 869-0211 Email: rlmullin@FerrMullinLaw.com MRB2024 LLC: Contestant 1 Suit Removed to C.D. California --------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as CONTESTANT 1, a California resident, CONTESTANT 2, a California resident, CONTESTANT 3, a California resident, CONTESTANT 4, a California resident, CONTESTANT 5, a United States resident, CONTESTANT 6, a United States resident, each individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. MRB2024, LLC, a North Carolina Limited Liability Company; OFF ONE'S BASE, LLC, a, North Carolina Limited Liability Company; AMAZON ALTERNATIVE LLC, a California Limited Liability Company; MYSTICART PICTURES, LLC and DOES 1-100, inclusive, Case No. 24STCV24042 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, to the United States District Court for the Central District of California on April 7, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-03051. The Plaintiffs alleged the following causes of action against MrB2024, Off One's Base, and Amazon: Failure to Pay Minimum Wages; Liquidated Damages for Failure to Pay Minimum Wages; Failure to Pay Overtime; Sexual Harassment; Failure to Prevent Harassment; Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress; Failure to Provide Uninterrupted Meal Breaks; Failure to Provide Uninterrupted Rest Breaks; Failure to Pay Wages Properly Upon Termination; Failure to Provide Accurate and Itemized Wage Statements; Failure to Indemnify for Employee Expenses and Losses in Discharging Duties; Unfair Business Practices; (13) False Advertising; and Declaratory Relief.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Maria C. Rodriguez, Esq. Ariel Beverly, Esq. Claire M. Hagan, Esq. MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP 2049 Century Park East, Suite 3200 Los Angeles, CA 90067-3206 Phone: +1 310 277 4110 Facsimile: +1 310 277 4730 Email: mcrodriguez@mwe.com abeverly@mwe.com chagan@mwe.com MTGLQ INVESTORS: Sued Over Fraudulently Inflated Sale Amounts ------------------------------------------------------------- Jose Caldero, Annabelle G. Geronimo a/k/a Annabelle G. Levien, and Yamilet Salty, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. MTGLQ INVESTORS, L.P.; SELENE FINANCE, L.P.; NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC; FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION; ANSCHUTZ, SCHNEID, CRANE & PARTNERS, PLLC a/k/a RAS BORISKIN LLC; JOHN AND JANE DOE INVESTORS 1-10; and JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-10, Case No. 1:25-cv-01831 (E.D.N.Y., April 3, 2025), is brought alleging that mortgage lenders, the loan servicing agents that service loans and the attorneys that prosecute foreclosure in New York have engaged in a pattern of conduct that intentionally and fraudulently inflates the amount of judgment post-foreclosure sale. The Defendants are alleged to have conspired to systemically insert false figures into the pro-forma judgments of foreclosure and sale and the reports of sale that are reported by the foreclosing referee and confirmed by the Court. The state and federal government enacted numerous protection statutes that require foreclosing mortgagees to provide delinquent homeowners additional preforeclosure notices and require affirmations from attorneys to attest to the veracity of the documents being submitted in court at all stages of the litigation. In an attempt to sidestep these new heightened requirements and to save on the increased costs and diligence required to prosecute a foreclosure, banks and their attorneys began using the courts as a tool to perpetually delay foreclosure cases through dilatory conduct, voluntary dismissal and re-starts. Moreover, a string of appellate decisions have reversed judgments of foreclosure and sale by revealing inaccuracies, overcharges, phantom charges and a lack of evidence in admissible form to substantiate the dollar amount of judgments of foreclosure and sale. Despite these findings, no action has been taken by the judiciary or the legislature to investigate and remedy the systemic and endemic failures in the foreclosure process that permeate and corrupt the computation of amounts due at judgment, for the amounts of surplus monies and deficiencies. This complacency has led to widespread theft of homeowner funds by lenders, their servicers, and their attorneys that act under the color of law. This action alleges widespread, systematic fraud and theft that has been purposefully perpetrated upon homeowners, their creditors, the judiciary, and the public. It is a crisis that has been hiding in plain sight. There can be no uncertainty here: certain lenders, their servicers, and their attorneys are working in a coordinated manner to steal from distressed homeowners, their creditors, those holding subordinate claims to the first mortgage, and Local, State, and Federal government. This action and the others that will follow seeks monetary judgment and injunctive relief hoping to provide a solution, says the complaint. The Plaintiffs are consumers. MLGTQ is a Delaware limited partnership that conducts business in the State of New York and regularly attempts to collect debts alleged to be due to another.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mark S. Anderson, Esq. Kimberly Wroblewski, Esq. ANDERSON, BOWMAN & WALLSHEIN, PLLC 80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 600 Kew Gardens, NY 11415 Phone: (718) 263-6800 Fax: (718) 520-9401 Email: manderson@sbagk.com MV TRANSPORTATION: Oswald Suit Removed to N.D. California --------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Richard Ryan Oswald, an individual, on behalf of himself and the aggrieved v. MV TRANSPORTATION, INC., a California stock corporation; MV PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, INC., a California stock corporation; WESTCATS, a California corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. C25-00449 was removed from the Superior Court for the State of California, in and for the County of Contra Costa, to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on April 3, 2025, and assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-03053. The Complaint contains a single cause of action seeking civil penalties under the Private Attorney's General Act ("PAGA") for the following underlying Labor Code claims: Failure to Pay Minimum Wages; Failure to Pay Wages and Overtime Under Labor Code Section 510; Meal Period Liability Under Labor Code Section 226.7; Rest Break Liability Under Labor Code Section 226. 7; Violation of Labor Code Section 226; Violation of Labor Code Section 221; Violation of Labor Code Section 204; Violation of Labor Code Section 203; Failure to Maintain Records Required under Labor Code Sections 1174, 1174.5; and Failure to Reimburse Necessary Business Expenses Under Labor Code.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Gregory G. Iskander, Esq. Michael W. Nelson, Esq. LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. Treat Towers 1255 Treat Boulevard, Suite 600 Walnut Creek, CA 94597 Phone: 925.932.2468 Fax: 925.946.9809 Email: giskander@littler.com mwnelson@littler.com NATIONAL STORAGE: Reardon Files Suit in Mass. Super. Ct. -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against National Storage Affiliates Trust, et al. The case is styled as Edward P. Reardon, Jr., for himself and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. National Storage Affiliates Trust; SS Mamnoh LLC, collectively d/b/a "iStorage"; Barry S. Rood, individually and as Area Manager for NSA; Neil Pockels, individually and as an employee of NSA; Case No. 2581CV00853 (Mass. Super. Ct., Middlesex Cty., April 4, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Tortious Action." National Storage Affiliates Trust -- https://ir.nsastorage.com/ -- is a Maryland real estate investment trust focused on the ownership, operation and acquisition of self storage properties located within the top 100 metropolitan statistical areas throughout the United States.[BN] The Plaintiff appears pro se. O.G. PACKING CO: Macato Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against O.G. Packing Co. The case is styled as Tony Joseph Macato, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. O.G. Packing Co., Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2025-0004682 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Joaquin Cty., April 2, 2025). The case type is stated as "Unlimited Civil Other Employment." OG Packing and Cold Storage Company -- https://www.ogpacking.com/ -- is a grower, packer, and shipper of California's best fresh sweet cherries, blueberries, apricots, and walnuts.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jessica L. Campbell, Esq. AEGIS LAW FIRM 9811 Irvine Center Dr., Ste. 100 Irvine, CA 92618 Phone: 949-379-6250 Fax: (949) 379-6251 Email: jcampbell@aegislawfirm.com PARAGON SYSTEMS: Tapia Suit Removed to C.D. California ------------------------------------------------------ The case captioned as Steven Tapia, in his representative capacity only, and on behalf of other aggrieved employees pursuant to California Private Attorneys General Act v. PARAGON SYSTEMS, INC., a corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 25STCV04896 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, to the United States District Court for the Central District of California on April 4, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02971. The Complaint asserts one cause of action against Paragon stemming from the employment of Plaintiff and the alleged aggrieved employees based on Labor Code; the Private Attorney's General Act ("PAGA"). Specifically, the Complaint alleges: Underpayment and late of minimum wages and hourly wages; Underpayment of overtime wages; Failure to provide compliant meal periods; Failure to provide compliant rest periods; Failure to reimburse business expenses; Non-compliant wage statements; Failure to pay all wages upon resignation or termination due to the underpayment of wages and/or overtime; Failure to pay, appropriately accrue, and forfeiture of paid time off; Failure to pay and appropriately accrue sick pay wages; and Failure to keep payroll records showing total hours worked and wages paid; all in violation of California Labor Code, IWC Wage Order, California Minimum Wage Order.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Frank A. Magnanimo, Esq. Jasmine R. Kiaei, Esq. FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP 21600 Oxnard Street, Suite 650 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Phone: (818) 230-4250 Facsimile: (818) 230-4251 Email: fmagnanimo@fisherphillips.com jkiaei@fisherphillips.com - and - Landon R. Schwob, Esq. FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP 444 South Flower Street, Suite 1500 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Phone: (213) 330-4500 Facsimile: (213) 330-4501 Email: lschwob@fisherphillips.com PAYREEL INC: Bernstein Sues Over Unfair Wages Practices ------------------------------------------------------- Josef Bernstein, as an individual and on behalf of other similarly situated employees v. PAYREEL, INC., a Colorado corporation, ANHEUSER-BUSCH, LLC, a Missouri corporation. 1600VER90, ENDEAVOR OPERATINF COMPANY, LLC, a corporation, and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Case No. 25STCV08121 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., March 20, 2025), is brought as a result of the Defendants violation of the California Labor Code and Private Attorneys General Act Of 2004 (PAGA) and unfair wages practices. The Plaintiff and other aggrieved employees were required to perform work-related tasks off-the-clock, including staying on duty during meal and rest breaks. Defendants implemented this policy, practice and pattern where Plaintiff, and aggrieved employees were required to perform work-related tasks off-the-clock. These wages amounted to minimum wages or overtime wages that were never paid during employment or at the end of employment, says the complaint. The Plaintiff worked as a brand ambassador and had general laborer duties as assigned by Defendants. Payreel, Inc. is a Colorado corporation doing business in the State of California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Armond M. Jackson, Esq. JACKSON LAW, APC 2 Venture Plaza, Ste. 400 Irvine, CA 92618 Phone: (949) 281-6857 Fax: (949) 777-6218 PENNSYLVANIA: Twaddell Sues Over Recent Data Breach --------------------------------------------------- Robert Twaddell, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. PENNSYLVANIA STATE EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, Case No. 2025-CV-02433 (Pa. Sup. Ct. of Common Please, Dauphin Cty., March 20, 2025), is brought arising out of the recent data breach ("Data Breach") involving Defendant and brought against Defendant for its failure to properly secure and safeguard the personally identifiable information that it collected and maintained as part of its regular business practices, including Plaintiff's and Class Members' names, dates of birth, driver's license or state IDs, account numbers, account PINs, security codes, password and routing numbers, payment card information, passport numbers, and Social Security numbers (collectively defined herein as "PII") and medical and health insurance information, which is protected health information ("PHI", and collectively with PII, "Private Information") as defined by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"). By obtaining, collecting, using, and deriving a benefit from the Private Information of Plaintiff and Class Members, Defendant assumed legal and equitable duties to those individuals to protect and safeguard that information from unauthorized access and intrusion. The Defendant failed to adequately protect Plaintiff's and Class Members Private Information––and failed to even encrypt or redact this highly sensitive information. This unencrypted, unredacted Private Information was compromised due to Defendant's negligent and/or careless acts and omissions and its utter failure to protect its members' sensitive data. In breaching its duties to properly safeguard members' Private Information and give members timely, adequate notice of the Data Breach's occurrence, Defendant's conduct amounts to negligence and/or recklessness and violates federal and state statutes. The Defendant disregarded the rights of Plaintiff and Class Members by intentionally, willfully, recklessly, or negligently failing to implement and maintain adequate and reasonable measures to ensure that the Private Information of Plaintiff and Class Members was safeguarded, failing to take available steps to prevent an unauthorized disclosure of data, and failing to follow applicable, required, and appropriate protocols, policies, and procedures regarding the encryption of data, even for internal use. As a result, the Private Information of Plaintiff and Class Members was compromised through disclosure to an unknown and unauthorized third party. Plaintiff and Class Members have a continuing interest in ensuring that their information is and remains safe, and they should be entitled to injunctive and other equitable relief, says the complaint. The Plaintiff and Class Members are current and former members of Defendant's. The Defendant is an association of education professionals in Pennsylvania.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Charles E. Schaffer, Esq. Nicholas J. Elia, esq. SEDRAN & BERMAN 510 Walnut Steet, Suite 500 Philadelphia, PA 19106 Phone: (215) 592-1500 Fax: (215) 592-4663 Email: cschaffer@lfsblaw.com nelia@lfsblaw.com - and - David K. Lietz, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC 5335 Wisconsin Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20015-2052 Phone: (866) 252-0878 Facsimile: (202) 686-2877 Email: dlietz@milberg.com PHILADELPHIA CORP FOR AGING: Court OKs $975,000 Accord in OT Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------- Judge John F. Murphy of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania approved a $975,000 settlement in a hybrid class and collective action brought by Nequava Matthews on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, against her former employer, Philadelphia Corporation for Aging. The lawsuit alleged that PCA misclassified Older Adult Protective Services (OAPS) investigators as exempt employees, denying them overtime pay in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act (PMWA). The case, filed in November 2022, claimed that PCA improperly classified OAPS investigators as salaried employees exempt from overtime between November 2019 and August 2024, despite their primarily non-exempt duties. Matthews, representing herself and similarly situated employees, argued that these investigators regularly worked over 40 hours per week without proper compensation. After extensive discovery and two mediation sessions, the parties reached a settlement, which Judge Murphy preliminarily approved in January 2025. Following a fairness hearing on March 6, 2025, and no objections from class members, the court granted final approval. Judge Murphy certified the settlement class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 and the FLSA collective action under 29 U.S.C. Sec. 216(b). The class consisted of 53 OAPS investigators employed by PCA during the relevant period who opted into the settlement by returning consent forms. The court found that the class met all Rule 23(a) requirements -- numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation -- as well as Rule 23(b)(3)'s predominance and superiority standards. The claims centered on PCA's uniform classification policy, making common legal and factual issues predominant. Judge Murphy noted that a class action was the most efficient way to resolve the dispute, given the shared nature of the claims and the impracticality of individual lawsuits. Similarly, the FLSA collective was approved because all opt-in plaintiffs held the same job title, performed comparable duties, and were subject to the same pay policy. The final settlement provides that defendant will pay $402,509.12, which is 63.14% of the total possible payment, to the 53 opted-in class members. Individual payments were calculated based on hours worked, with a 50% enhancement for Matthews and the 25 earliest opt-ins due to their active participation in litigation. The average payout was approximately $7,594.51, equivalent to roughly seven weeks of additional wages. Judge Murphy evaluated the settlement under Rule 23(e)(2), finding it fair, reasonable, and adequate. The negotiations were conducted at arm's-length with the assistance of an experienced mediator, and the relief provided accounted for the risks and delays of continued litigation. The distribution method was straightforward, requiring only opt-in consent forms rather than complex claims filings. For the FLSA claims, the court applied a separate reasonableness standard, concluding that the settlement resolved a bona fide dispute fairly. Since the settlement already met the stricter Rule 23 standards, Judge Murphy found it satisfied FLSA requirements as well. The Court also approved the $330,000 combined award for attorneys' fees, litigation expenses, and settlement administration costs. Winebrake & Santillo, LLC has been appointed as class counsel; The Court dismissed the case with prejudice, barring class members from pursuing released claims against PCA as provided in the settlement agreement. Judge Murphy emphasized that the resolution provided meaningful compensation to employees while avoiding the uncertainties of prolonged litigation. A copy of the Court's decision is available at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5dgyX7 from PacerMonitor.com. PROFESSIONAL PLASTICS: Phillips Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Professional Plastics, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Ted T. Phillips, individually, and on behalf of other similarly situated employees v. Professional Plastics, Inc., Spectra360, Inc., Case No. 25CV116316 (Cal. Super. Ct., Alameda Cty., March 21, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case." Professional Plastics -- https://www.professionalplastics.com/ -- is a Plastic Supplier of Plastic Sheets, Plastic Rods, Plastic Tubing, Film and Plastic Parts.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jonathan M. Genish, Esq. BLACKSTONE LAW 8383 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 745 Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2442 Phone: 855-786-6355 Fax: 855-786-6356 Email: jgenish@blackstonepc.com PROGRESSIVE PREFERRED: Rodriguez Suit Removed to D. Colorado ------------------------------------------------------------ The case captioned as Andrew Rodriguez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. PROGRESSIVE PREFERRED INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. 2024-CV-33940 was removed from the District Court of Denver County, Colorado, to the United States District Court for the District of Colorado on April 7, 2025, and assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-01086-STV. In the Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that he was insured by Progressive Preferred, that he was in an automobile accident on or about December 21, 2021, and that Progressive Preferred determined that his vehicle was a total loss. The Plaintiff alleges that Progressive Preferred improperly valued his total loss claim because it used a valuation system provided by Mitchell International, Inc. that applies a Projected Sold Adjustment ("PSA") to the comparable vehicles used to determine the value of his total loss vehicle.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Jeffrey S. Cashdan, Esq. Zachary A. McEntyre, Esq. J. Matthew Brigman, Esq. Allison Hill White, Esq. KING & SPALDING LLP 1180 Peachtree St. NE Atlanta, GA 30309 Phone: (404) 572-4600 Fax: (404) 572-5140 Email: jcashdan@kslaw.com zmcentyre@kslaw.com mbrigman@kslaw.com awhite@kslaw.com - and - Angela Tarasi, Esq. KING & SPALDING LLP 1401 Lawrence Street, Suite 1900 Denver, CO 80202 Phone: (720) 535-2300 Fax: (720) 535-2400 Email: atarasi@kslaw.com REAL BROKERAGE: Parties Seek More Time to File Class Certification ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as KYLE MIHOLICH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. THE REAL BROKERAGE, INC., REAL BROKER LLC, REAL BROKERAGE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., REAL BROKERAGE TECHNOLOGIES LFRO, INC., Case No. 3:24-cv-01038-AGS-JLB (S.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order granting the joint motion to extend deadline for filing motion for class certification. The parties suggest the deadline for moving for class certification currently scheduled for April 7, 2025, be extended to May 22, 2025; and that the Discovery Cut-off Date currently scheduled for May 5, 2025 be extended to June 20, 2025. All other remaining dates or deadlines in the scheduling order do not need to be amended at this time. Real Brokerage operates as a real estate brokerage firm. A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 4, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=pMTXGf at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ryan L. McBride, Esq. Nadir O. Ahmed, Esq. 2221 Camino Del Rio S., #101 San Diego, CA 92108 Telephone: (800) 400-6808 Facsimile: (800) 520-5523 KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC E-mail: ryan@kazlg.com nadir@kazlg.com - and - Alex S. Madar, Esq. MADAR LAW CORPORATION 11510 Eaglesview Ct. San Diego, CA 92127 Telephone: (858) 299-5879 Facsimile: (619) 354-7281 E-mail: alex@madarlaw.net The Defendants are represented by: Randall W. Edwards, Esq. O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP Times Square Tower 7 Times Square New York, NY 10036 REDLINE CAPITAL: Bentley Files TCPA Suit in E.D. Arkansas --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Redline Capital Inc. The case is styled as Justin Bentley individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. Redline Capital Inc, Case No. 4:25-cv-00319-KGB (E.D. Ark., April 2, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. RedLine Capital Inc. -- https://redlinecapitalinc.com/ -- specializes in providing quick and flexible financing solutions for small and medium-sized businesses.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Anthony I. Paronich, Esq. PARONICH LAW, P.C. 350 Lincoln St., Suite 2400 Hingham, MA 02043 Phone: (617) 485-0018 Fax: (508) 318-8100 Email: anthony@paronichlaw.com - and - Jason Michael Ryburn, Esq. RYBURN LAW FIRM 650 South Shackleford Road, Suite 231 Little Rock, AR 72211 Phone: (501) 228-8100 Email: jason@ryburnlawfirm.com RENAISSANCE ENTERTAINMENT: Hammond Files Suit in S.D. New York -------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Renaissance Entertainment Productions, Inc. The case is styled as Chantel Hammond, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Renaissance Entertainment Productions, Inc., Case No. 7:25-cv-02796 (S.D.N.Y. April 3, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud. Renaissance Entertainment, LLC -- https://www.ren-ent.com/ -- is a full-service production company specializing in attractions, shows, films, spectaculars, master planning and consultation.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Philip Lawrence Fraietta, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor New York, NY 10019 Phone: (646) 837-7150 Email: pfraietta@bursor.com RENAISSANCE ENTERTAINMENT: Richards Files Suit in N.D. Texas ------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Marsha Mclane, et al. The case is styled as James Richards, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Marsha Mclane - TCCO Executive Director; Management & Training Corporation; Case No. 5:25-cv-00075-H (N.D. Tex. April 3, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Prisoner Pet/Other: Civil Detainee-Conditions of Confinement. Marsha Mclane is the Director of the Texas Civil Commitment Office Appeal from 459th District Court of Travis County.[BN] The Plaintiff appears pro se. RONALD BROOMFIELD: Parties in Nickerson Seek Class Certification ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Nickerson v. Broomfield et al. (RE CIM-SQ TRANSFER CASES), Case No. 5:20-cv-06326-EJD (N.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order granting stipulation re: further order on class certification: The parties agree as to the following class certification-related facts: a. The Liability Class is ascertainable from Defendants' records and/or records maintained by the State of California. b. The Liability Class is so numerous --estimated to exceed 2,000 people -- that joinder of all members is impracticable. c. The Liability Class shares common issues of law and fact, most significantly including what decisions and actions each Defendant took in connection with the transfer of inmates from the California Institution for Men to San Quentin State Prison on May 30, 2020. The Parties also stipulates that: -- Reginald Thorpe should be representative of the Liability Class. -- Previously appointed Interim Class Counsel, should be appointed Class Counsel for the Liability Class. Notwithstanding this appointment, all members of the Plaintiffs' Steering Committee ("PSC") will maintain their roles and responsibilities in this action, and Class Counsel and the PSC will continue to collaborate on all matters pertaining to Phase I of this litigation. -- Prison officials will distribute the approved Notice to Class Members who are currently in State custody. The Notice will be disseminated to all Class Members who are no longer in custody of the State by the third-party Notice Administrator. -- Within 21 days of this Order, Defendants will provide to the Notice Administrator a list of last known mailing addresses for all Class Members who are no longer in custody of the State. The Court provisionally certified the following "Liability Class" for the purpose of resolving Defendants' liability under 42 U.S.C. section 1983: "All current and former inmates at San Quentin State Prison who tested positive with COVID-19 while they were inmates at San Quentin State Prison at any time from May 31, 2020, through Aug. 13, 2020, excluding (1) any inmates who were transferred from the California Institution for Men to San Quentin State Prison on May 30, 2020; and (2) any inmates who had only false positive COVID19 tests during the relevant time period." A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 4, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=HRJhQV at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Charles Kelly, Esq. HERSH & HERSH 1388 Sutter Street, Suite 608 San Francisco, CA 94109 Telephone: (415) 441-5544 E-mail: ckelly@hershlaw.com - and - Matthew D. Carlson, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF MATTHEW D. CARLSON 3959 N. Buffalo Road, No. 29 Orchard Park, NY 14127 Telephone: (716) 242-1234 E-mail: mdcarlson@mdcarlsonlaw.com - and - Benjamin T. Rosenfeld, Esq. 115 1/2 Bartlett St. San Francisco, CA 94110 Telephone: (415) 285-8091 E-mail: ben.rosenfeld@comcast.net - and - Tyler R. Smith, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF TYLER SMITH Martinez, CA 94553 Telephone: (415) 844-0680 E-mail: smithtyler42@gmail.com The Defendants are represented by: Rob Bonta, Esq. Jeffrey T. Fisher, Esq. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA SCP PROPERTY MANAGEMENT: Alfonso Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. -------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against SCP PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, LLC, et al. The case is styled as Leonard Keith Alfonso, Jr., individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. COVENANT AVIATION SECURITY, LLC, Does 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. CGC25624023 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco Cty., April 4, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Non-Exempt Complaints." SCP Properties, LLC is a group of private real estate investors specializing in rehabilitating ("rehabbing") distressed properties in Connecticut.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Kane Moon, Esq. MOON & YANG, APC 725 South Figueroa St., 31st Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 Phone: 213-232-3128 Email: kane.moon@moonyanglaw.com SEGWAY INC: Austin Sues Over Misleading and Defective Products -------------------------------------------------------------- Lucas Austin, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. SEGWAY, INC., Case No. 2:25-cv-01743-KNS (E.D. Pa., April 4, 2025), is brought against the Defendant who engaged in fraudulent, unfair, deceptive, misleading, and/or unlawful conduct stemming from its omissions surrounding the risk of catching fire affecting the Products and to recover damages because the Products are adulterated, defective, worthless, and unfit for human use due to the risk of catching fire. The Scooters are distributed, marketed, and sold by Defendant to consumers across the United States. Unfortunately, the Products are defective because the folding mechanism on the Scooter can fail causing the handlebar or stem to fold while the Scooter is in use posing a fall hazard to the consumer. According to the CPSC Recall Notice, the Defendant has received numerous reports of users sustaining injuries ranging from abrasions to broken bones. Walmart reports have claims of consumers suffering burn injuries and property damage. The Plaintiff purchased the Product, while lacking the knowledge that the Product could have its handle bars collapse while in use, thus causing serious harm to those who use such Products. All consumers who purchased the worthless and dangerous Products have suffered losses. As a result of the above losses, Plaintiffs seek damages and equitable remedies on behalf of themselves and the putative class. The Plaintiff bargained for a Product that was safe to use. Defendant's Products were, and are, unsafe. As a result of the risk of falling while using the Scooter, Plaintiff, and all others similarly situated, were deprived the basis of their bargain given that the Defendant sold them a product whose handlebars/stem could collapse during ordinary use. This dangerous fall risk inherent to the Products renders them unmerchantable and unfit for their normal intended use, says the complaint. The Plaintiff purchased the Product as "new" and intended it for ordinary use. The Defendant is a company that is registered to do business in Pennsylvania, and operates the manufacture and retail of the Product in the State of Pennsylvania, and throughout the United States.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Stuart A. Carpey, Esq. CARPEY LAW, P.C. 600 W. Germantown Pike, Suite 400 Plymouth Meeting, PA 19462 Phone: 610-834-6030 Fax: 610-825-7579 Email: scarpey@carpeylaw.com SENTOSACARE LLC: Seeks Leave to Amend Class Cert Order in Chow -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Chow v. SentosaCare, LLC et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-03541-FB-JRC (E.D.N.Y.), the Defendants ask the Court to enter an order granting their request for pre-motion conference to seek leave to move under Rule 23(c)(1) to alter or amend the Court's granting of class certification on March 13, 2025. In contrast to the Court's original decision denying class certification on September 26, 2023, the Order ignored controlling decisions that Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 governs class certification decisions in a federal court and the requirement that a plaintiff demonstrate that all required Rule 23 factors are satisfied to obtain class certification. The Order further neglected to grasp Defendants' showing of the distinguishing and limiting nature of the decision in Jenack v. Goshen Operations, LLC, 199 N.Y.S.3d 542 (App. Div. 2d Dep't 2023). Accordingly, Defendants request that the Court alter or amend the Order to deny class certification. The Order and its enormity of associated discovery and class-related costs from certifying a class of facility residents from November 27, 2015 to the present forces the facility at issue here to choose between accepting an undesired, negotiated exit to be able to continue to operate or continuing a meritorious defense. That choice should not be present given the numerous reasons discussed above that warrant the Court altering or amending the Order to decertify the class. SentosaCare is a company that services and assists affiliated nursing facilities in New York. A copy of the Defendants' motion dated April 4, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=dIaljL at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendants are represented by: Lori R. Semlies, Esq. WILSON ELSER MOSKOWITZ EDELMAN & DICKER LLP 1133 Westchester Avenue White Plains, NY 10604 Telephone: (914) 872-7731 Facsimile: (914) 323-7001 E-mail: lori.semlies@wilsonelser.com SHING FAT STORE: Bautista Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages ------------------------------------------------------------------ Jose Bautista, on behalf of himself and other similarly situated employees v. SHING FAT STORE INC. (DBA 99 CENT NYC), WEI GUANG HUANG and individually, Case No. 1:25-cv-01901 (E.D.N.Y., April 7, 2025), is brought to recover substantial unpaid minimum wages, overtime compensation, liquidated damages, and statutory penalties for systematic, egregious, and willful violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and New York Labor Law ("NYLL") from January 15, 2024 through April 4, 2025, for Plaintiff, a former employee of Defendant. The Defendants were required, pursuant to New York Labor Law and its implementing regulations, to compensate Plaintiff at no less than the statutory minimum wage rate of $16.50 per hour. In flagrant disregard of their legal obligations, Defendants willfully and knowingly paid and Plaintiff only $15.00 per hour for his regular 40-hour workweek, resulting in systematic underpayment of $1.50 per hour below the statutory minimum wage requirement. Defendants were required, under relevant New York State law, to compensate Plaintiff with overtime pay at one and one-half the regular rate for work in excess of 40 hours per work week, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant. SHING FAT STORE INC. (DBA 99 CENT NYC) is engaged in interstate commerce in that it relies heavily on products that have been transported across state lines.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Lina Stillman, Esq. STILLMAN LEGAL, P.C. 42 Broadway, 12th Floor New York, NY 10004 Phone: (212) 203-2417 Web: www.StillmanLegalPC.com SOLAR CAPITAL GROUP: Cardero Files TCPA Suit in S.D. Florida ------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Solar Capital Group LLC. The case is styled as Maurico Cardero, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Solar Capital Group LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-21522-KMM (S.D. Fla., April 2, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Solar Capital Group -- https://solarcapitalgroup.com/ -- is a direct lending firm that offers uncommonly flexible options for working capital to small and mid-sized businesses.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher Eric Berman, Esq. 1650 SE 17th Street 100 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316 Phone: (865) 603-7365 Email: cberman@shamisgentile.com - and - Garrett O. Berg, Esq. Andrew John Shamis, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE, PA 14 NE 1st Ave., Ste. 1205 Miami, FL 33132 Phone: (305) 479-2299 Fax: (786) 623-0915 Email: gberg@shamisgentile.com ashamis@sflinjuryattorneys.com SOOHYUNG KIM: Miami Police Files Suit in Del. Chancery Ct. ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against SOOHYUNG KIM, et al. The case is styled as Miami Police Relief and Pension Fund and John Samuel Di Dio, on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated v. SOOHYUNG KIM, TERRENCE DOWNEY, TRACEY S. HARRIS, JAYMIN PATEL, JEFFREY ROLLINS, WANDA YOUNG WILSON, and STANDARD GENERAL L.P., Case No. 2025-0306-NAC (Del. Chancery Ct., March 20, 2025). The case type is stated as "Breach of Fiduciary Duties." Soohyung Kim has served as the Chairperson of Bally's Board since December 2019 and as a director since 2016.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ned Weinberger, Esq. Brendan W. Sullivan, Esq. LABATON KELLER SUCHAROW LLP 222 Delaware Ave., Suite 1510 Wilmington, DE 19801 Phone: (302) 573-2540 Email: nweinberger@labaton.com bsullivan@labaton.com ST. TAMMANY PARISH: Baqer Plaintiffs Seek to Amend Complaints ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as AHMED BAQER, et al., v. ST. TAMMANY PARISH GOVERNMENT, a/k/a/ ST. TAMMANY PARISH COUNCIL, et al., Case No. 2:20-cv-00980-DJP-EJD (E.D. La.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order permitting them to state as follows in support of their motion for leave to: (1) amend their complaints in the case, and (2) to file a renewed motion for class certification, which would ask the Court to amend its Jan. 25, 2022 Order denying class certification. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 4, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=h7EpDM at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Sam Harton, Esq. Devon M. Jacob, Esq. JACOB LITIGATION, INC. Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-0837 Telephone: (717) 796-7733 E-mail: djacob@jacoblitigation.com - and - Antonio M. Romanucci, Esq. Sam Harton, Esq. Josh Levin, Esq. ROMANUCCI & BLANDIN, LLC 321 N. Clark Street, Suite 900 Chicago, IL 60654 Telephone: (312) 458-1000 Facsimile: (312) 458-1004 E-mail: aromanucci@rblaw.net b.raveendran@rblaw.net sharton@rblaw.net - and - Maria B. Glorioso, Esq. Vincent J. Glorioso, Jr., Esq. THE GLORIOSO LAW FIRM 2716 Athania Parkway Metairie, LA 70002 Telephone: (504) 569-9999 Facsimile: (504) 569-9022 E-mail: maria@gtorts.com STONECO LTD: Lead Plaintiff Seeks to Certify Class Action --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Ray v. StoneCo Ltd. et al. (RE STONECO LTD. SECURITIES LITIGATION), Case No. 1:21-cv-09620-GHW-OTW (S.D.N.Y.), the Lead Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order: (i) certifying the case as a class action; (ii) appointing the Lead Plaintiff as Class Representative; and (iii) appointing Labaton Keller Sucharow LLP as Class Counsel. StoneCo provides financial technology solutions. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 4, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=TR5iWE at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael P. Canty, Esq. Michael H. Rogers, Esq. Jacqueline R. Meyers, Esq. Grace T. Harmon, Esq. LABATON KELLER SUCHAROW LLP 140 Broadway New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 907-0700 Facsimile: (212) 818-0477 E-mail: mcanty@labaton.com mrogers@labaton.com jmeyers@labaton.com gharmon@labaton.com SUBARU OF AMERICA: Weston Plaintiffs Seek to Certify Four Classes ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as DANNY WESTON, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. SUBARU OF AMERICA, INC., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-05876-CPO-SAK (D.N.J.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order certifying class action pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(3). California Class: "All buyers who purchased or leased new or certified pre-owned Class Vehicles in California who have not sold the vehicle as of April 4, 2025.” Colorado Class: "All buyers who purchased or leased new or certified pre-owned Class Vehicles in Colorado who have not sold the vehicle as of April 4, 2025." Massachusetts Class: "All buyers who purchased or leased new or certified pre-owned Class Vehicles in Massachusetts who have not sold the vehicle as of April 4, 2025." Ohio Class: "All buyers who purchased or leased new or certified pre-owned Class Vehicles in Ohio who have not sold the vehicle as of April 4, 2025." Class Vehicles: 2012-2022 Subaru Forester vehicles, 2015-2020 Subaru Legacy vehicles, and 2015-2020 Subaru Outback vehicles. Subaru of America is the United States–based distributor of Subaru's brand vehicles. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 4, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=JAifPl at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Cody R. Padgett, Esq. Abigail J. Gertner, Esq. Shahin Rezvani, Esq. Majdi Y. Hijazin, Esq. Nathan N. Kiyam, Esq. CAPSTONE LAW APC 1875 Century Park East, Suite 1000 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 556-4811 Facsimile: (310) 943-0396 E-mail: Cody.Padgett@capstonelawyers.com Abigail.Gertner@capstonelawyers.com Shahin.Rezvani@capstonelawyers.com Majdi.Hijazin@capstonelawyers.com Nate.Kiyam@capstonelawyers.com - and - Russell D. Paul, Esq. Amey J. Park, Esq. BERGER MONTAGUE PC 1818 Market Street, Suite 3600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 875-5702 E-mail: rpaul@bm.net apark@bm.net - and - Greg F. Coleman, Esq. Ryan McMillan, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC 800 S. Gay Street, Suite 1100 Knoxville, TN 37929 Telephone: (865) 247-0080 Facsimile: (856) 522-0049 E-mail: gcoleman@milberg.com rmcmillian@milberg.com - and - Michael F. Ram, Esq. Marie Appel, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN 711 Van Ness Ave., Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94102 Telephone: (415) 358-6913 Facsimile: (415) 358-6923 E-mail: mram@forthepeople.com mappel@forthepeople.com SUBARU OF AMERICA: Weston Plaintiffs Seek to Seal Class Cert Brief ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as DANNY WESTON, SANDRA WESTON, SUZANNE BARE, MARY YOUNG, DANIEL YOUNG, TONI BUCHETTO PERRETTA, CHERYL BOUCHER, DAVID BOUCHER, MARTIN GREENWALD, MARGARET GREENWALD, ALICE REH, KATHLEEN SEARS, DAVID DIAN, SUSHMA NARULA, and KATHERINE SPAGNOLO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. SUBARU OF AMERICA, INC. and SUBARU CORPORATION f/k/a FUJI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD., Case No. 1:20-cv-05876-CPO-SAK (D.N.J.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting motion to seal the excerpts of their brief in support of motion for class certification and certain exhibits in support thereof. The brief excerpts and exhibits reference material that the parties have designated "Confidential" or "Confidential – Attorney's Eyes Only" under the standing Discovery Confidentiality Order and thus are at least temporarily protected from public disclosure under Local Civ. R. 5.3(c)(4) until the Court decides this motion. Plaintiffs also move to seal excerpts from exhibits that contain personally identifying information (PII). All other Exhibits to the Declaration of Russell Paul not referenced above should be unsealed as they have not been designated "Confidential" or "Confidential – Attorney's Eyes Only" and as far as Plaintiffs' counsel are aware and understand there is no other basis for those documents to be filed under seal. Subaru of America is the United States–based distributor of Subaru's brand vehicles. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 4, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=T5VliE at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Cody R. Padgett, Esq. Abigail J. Gertner, Esq. Shahin Rezvani, Esq. Majdi Y. Hijazin, Esq. Nathan N. Kiyam, Esq. CAPSTONE LAW APC 1875 Century Park East, Suite 1000 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 556-4811 Facsimile: (310) 943-0396 E-mail: Cody.Padgett@capstonelawyers.com Abigail.Gertner@capstonelawyers.com Shahin.Rezvani@capstonelawyers.com Majdi.Hijazin@capstonelawyers.com Nate.Kiyam@capstonelawyers.com - and - Russell D. Paul, Esq. Amey J. Park, Esq. BERGER MONTAGUE PC 1818 Market Street, Suite 3600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 875-5702 E-mail: rpaul@bm.net apark@bm.net - and - Greg F. Coleman, Esq. Ryan McMillan, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC 800 S. Gay Street, Suite 1100 Knoxville, TN 37929 Telephone: (865) 247-0080 Facsimile: (856) 522-0049 E-mail: gcoleman@milberg.com rmcmillan@milberg.com - and - Michael F. Ram, Esq. Marie N. Appel, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN 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 TARGET CORPORATION: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to August 18 --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as LINDEN KELLY, v. TARGET CORPORATION, Case No. 2:23-cv-01301-RBS (E.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge R. Barclay Surrick entered an order amending the Scheduling Order of Jan. 21, 2025, as follows: 1. The deadline for pre-certification factual discovery shall be extended from April 18, 2025 to June 25, 2025. 2. The deadline for class certification expert discovery shall be extended from June 9, 2025 to Aug. 18, 2025. 3. By Sept. 8, 2025, the Parties will submit a proposed briefing schedule for Plaintiff's class certification motion. 4. Within 14 days from when the Court enters its order on the Plaintiff's motion for class certification, the Parties will submit a proposed schedule for any necessary additional discovery on the class and/or damages, including merits expert discovery. Target operates a chain of discount department stores and hypermarkets. A copy of the Court's order dated April 4, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=jKqQ5m at no extra charge.[CC] TOP GOLF: Billingy Seeks Conditional Cert of Collective Action -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MALERY BILLINGY, RICHARD CAMERON MARSHALL, and ZHANIA SIMON, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. TOP GOLF USA ALPHARETTA, LLC, TOPGOLF PAYROLL SERVICES, LLC, and TOP GOLF USA INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-00398-SDG (N.D. Ga.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order: 1. Conditionally certifying the case to proceed as a collective action with respect to: "all servers and server shift leads who worked for the Defendants for at least one week within the three years prior to the filing of the Complaint or currently work for the Defendant and who were paid a subminimum wage while working as server or server shift lead." 2. Requiring the Defendants to produce to the Plaintiffs' counsel within 10 days of the Court's Order a list, in electronic, importable, and searchable format, of all such persons within the identified class; 3. Authorizing the issuance of Plaintiffs' proposed notice to be provided to all potential opt-in plaintiff servers via U.S. Mail and electronic mail, to be posted on a case- specific webpage, on social media, and posted in hardcopy with all pages visible where employee notices are customarily posted at Topgolf locations; 4. Authorizing the conspicuous posting of the proposed notice in laminate form with all pages visible at all Topgolf locations where notices of employee rights are customarily posted, along with Consent Forms for employees to complete and return to the Plaintiffs' counsel should any persons wish to join this action; and 5. Approving the use of both hard copy and fillable, signable PDF Consent Forms as a means for eligible persons to opt-in to this action. 6. Permitting putative class members 60 days from the date notice is sent to submit (or postmark) a consent form to participate in this action. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 4, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5gXsqp at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Evan P. Drew, Esq. Andrew Y. Coffman, Esq. PARKS, CHESIN & WALBERT, P.C. 1355 Peachtree St., NE, Suite 2000 Atlanta, GA 30309 Telephone: (404) 873-8000 Facsimile: (404) 873-8050 E-mail: edrew@pcwlawfirm.com acoffman@pcwlawfirm.com UNITED NATURAL: Faces Sills Securities Suit over SEC Disclosures ---------------------------------------------------------------- United Natural Foods, Inc. (UNFI) disclosed in its Form 10-K for the quarterly period ended February 1, 2025, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 11, 2025, that the Company and its officers, namely, J. Alexander Miller Douglas, John Howard and Chris Testa are named in a putative securities class action that was originally filed on March 29, 2023. In the case "Dan Sills, et al. v. United Natural Foods, Inc., et al.," pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the plaintiffs allege that defendants violated federal securities laws by making materially false and/or misleading statements and failing to disclose material facts about UNFI’s business, operations and prospects. The defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss on December 21, 2023, and on September 13, 2024, the court issued an opinion granting in part and denying in part the motion. On October 28, 2024, the Company answered the complaint denying the allegations. United Natural Foods, Inc. and its subsidiaries is a distributor of natural, organic, specialty, produce and conventional grocery and non-food products, and provider of support services to retailers, primarily throughout the United States and Canada. UNITED STATES: Plaintiffs Seek Provisional Class Certification -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as D.V.D.; M.M.; E.F.D.; and O.C.G., v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; Kristi NOEM, Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, in her official capacity; Pamela BONDI, U.S. Attorney General, in her official capacity; and Antone MONIZ, Superintendent, Plymouth County Correctional Facility, in his official capacity, Case No. 1:25-cv-10676-BEM (D. Mass.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order provisionally and permanently certifying a class pursuant to Rule 23(b)(2), appointing Plaintiffs as class representatives, and appointing their counsel as class counsel. Specifically, the Plaintiffs move to provisionally certify the following class: "All individuals who have a final removal order issued in proceedings under Section 240, 241(a)(5), or 238(b) of the INA (including withholding-only proceedings) whom DHS has deported or will deport on or after February 18, 2025, to a country (a) not previously designated as the country or alternative country of removal, and (b) not identified in writing in the prior proceedings as a country to which the individual would be removed." The Defendant is the U.S. federal executive department responsible for public security, roughly comparable to the interior or home ministries of other countries. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated March 23, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=hRLqSn at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Tomas Arango, Esq. Trina Realmuto, Esq. Kristin Macleod-Ball, Esq. Mary Kenney, Esq. NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LITIGATION ALLIANCE 10 Griggs Terrace Brookline, MA, 02446 Telephone: (617) 819-4649 E-mail: trina@immigrationlitigation.org - and - Anwen Hughes, Esq. HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST 75 Broad Street, 31st Floor New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (212) 845-5244 E-mail: HughesA@humanrightsfirst.org - and - Matt Adams, Esq. Leila Kang, Esq. Aaron Korthuis, Esq. Glenda M. Aldana Madrid, Esq. NORTHWEST IMMIGRANT RIGHTS PROJECT 615 Second Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98104 Telephone: (206) 957-8611 E-mail: matt@nwirp.org UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: Doe Sues Over Inadequate Safeguard of Data ------------------------------------------------------------------ Jane Doe, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated v. THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN BOARD OF REGENTS, KEFFER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC, and MATTHEW WEISS, Case No. 2:25-cv-10951-MFL-DRG (E.D. Mich., April 2, 2025), is brought against the Defendants who violated their duties to the student athletes under tort, contract, and statutory law, rendering them liable to Plaintiff and the class for the harm this devastating invasion of privacy caused as a result of the Defendants inadequate safeguard of data. The Plaintiff and the class are current and former student athletes and victims of the data breach on the University of Michigan and Keffer Development Services' databases, exposing their highly sensitive personally identifiable information and medical records to a sexual predator, Matthew Weiss. The breach continued for nearly a decade because the University and Keffer failed to prevent, detect, or stop Weiss from accessing those databases without authorization, allowing him to download the private sensitive information belonging to 150,000 student athletes from over 100 colleges and universities. This egregious and devastating breach was entirely preventable by the University and Keffer. As noted in a criminal complaint by the United States Attorney in the Eastern District of Michigan, Weiss breached the University and Keffer's systems using only compromised credentials belonging to University employees. This is because, on information and belief, neither the University nor Keffer required that its employees implement safeguards like multi-factor authentication to access accounts, a standard practice for all entities collecting personally identifiable information, especially medical information. Nor did the University or Keffer implement reasonable security measures to ensure that only authorized individuals could access student PHI. HIPAA and Michigan state law require entities collecting medical information to secure it using reasonable means. Indeed, the University and Keffer recognized those duties under their policies, with Keffer representing that it uses "industry-standard physical, technical and administrative safeguards to secure data against foreseeable risks, such as unauthorized use, access, disclosure, destruction or modification." But despite that promise, Keffer never implemented adequate safeguards, leaving students' PHI an unguarded target for predators like Weiss, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a former student athlete at the University of Michigan, and citizen of Texas, where she intends to remain. The Regents of the University of Michigan is the entity that governs the University of Michigan. Mich. Comp. Laws.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David H. Fink, Esq. Nathan J. Fink, Esq. FINK BRESSACK 38500 Woodward Ave., Suite 3500 Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304 Phone: (248) 971-2500 Email: dfink@finkbressack.com nfink@finkbressack.com - and - J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq. Grayson Wells, Esq. STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC The Freedom Center 223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200 Nashville, TN 37203 Phone: (615) 254-8801 Email: gstranch@stranchlaw.com gwells@stranchlaw.com UPMC: Harrington Suit Seeks to Certify Class Action --------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHERELL HARRINGTON, DESERAE COOK, and GLORIA LEWIS, individually and on behalf of all persons similarly situated, v. UPMC and ALLEGHENY COUNTY, Case No. 2:20-cv-00497-WSH (W.D. Pa.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order certifying class action on behalf of: "All women who, like them, were subjected under the policies of UPMC and Allegheny County to an intrusive investigation based solely on UPMC's disclosure of a THCpositive urine sample or self-report of THC use during pregnancy or at deliver." Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, Plaintiffs Gloria Lewis, Deserae Cook, and Cherell Harrington move for an Order certifying this lawsuit as a class action on behalf of women who gave birth at a UPMC facility in Allegheny County on or after March 11, 2018, and all named plaintiffs in this action, whose medical information was disclosed by UPMC and/or its subsidiaries to ChildLine based solely on a positive urine drug test for THC during pregnancy or at delivery or self-reported THC use while pregnant, and were subjected to a General Protective Services investigation by the Allegheny County Office of Children, Youth and Families on the basis of UPMC’s disclosure. The Plaintiffs also move for an Order appointing the undersigned as Class Counsel. The Plaintiffs are three women whose confidential medical information was disclosed by UPMC to the state shortly after the births of their babies. As a result of the unlawful disclosure by UPMC that Plaintiffs either tested positive for THC at delivery or during pregnancy or used THC during their pregnancy, Plaintiffs were subjected to intrusive and humiliating investigations by Allegheny County, including thorough inspections of their homes within days or weeks of giving birth. The Plaintiffs sue UPMC for breaching its duty of confidentiality to Plaintiffs under Pennsylvania law and sue UPMC and Allegheny County for violating their Fourteenth Amendment rights. UPMC is an American integrated global nonprofit health enterprise. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 4, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=HUhj1E at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Sara J. Rose, Esq. Richard T Ting, Esq. ACLU OF PENNSYLVANIA Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Telephone: (412) 681-7736 - and - Margaret S. Coleman, Esq. O'BRIEN COLEMAN & WRIGHT, LLC 116 Boulevard of the Allies Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Telephone: (412) 232-4400 VERRICA PHARMACEUTICALS: Faces Gorlamari Securities Suit -------------------------------------------------------- Verrica Pharmaceuticals Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 10, 2025, that that it is facing a putative class action complaint filed on June 6, 2022 by Kranthi Gorlamari captioned "Gorlamari v. Verrica Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al.," in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. An amended complaint alleged that defendants violated federal securities laws by, among other things, failing to disclose certain manufacturing deficiencies at the facility where the company's contract manufacturer produced bulk solution for the "VP-102" drug device for the treatment of molluscum. It claims that such deficiencies posed a risk to the prospects for its regulatory approval. Complaint seeks unspecified compensatory damages and other relief on behalf of persons and entities which purchased or otherwise acquired company securities between May 19, 2021 and May 24, 2022. On April 5, 2023, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On January 12, 2024, the court granted in part and denied in part defendants' motion to dismiss the amended complaint and held that the plaintiff's claims relating to statements made in May and June 2021 were sufficiently pled, but dismissed claims relating to all other statements made during the putative class period. On January 26, 2024, plaintiff filed a second amended complaint in an attempt to cure certain of the deficiencies identified in the January 12, 2024 ruling. Defendants' motion to dismiss the second amended complaint was fully briefed as of April 22, 2024, and is pending before the court. On September 3, 2024, the court granted in part and denied in part Defendants' motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. The court dismissed plaintiff's claims related to one of the two individual defendants but held that the claims against the company and the other individual defendant were sufficiently pled. Verrica Pharmaceuticals Inc. is a dermatology therapeutics company developing medications for skin diseases requiring medical intervention. VILLA FURNITURE: Valdez Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Villa Furniture Manufacturing Co. The case is styled as Francisco Valdez, individually, and on behalf of other similarly situated employees v. Villa Furniture Manufacturing Co., Case No. 25STCV09722 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., April 2, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." Villa Furniture Manufacturing Co is headquartered in the United States. The company's line of business includes the warehousing and storage of a general line of goods.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jonathan M. Genish, Esq. BLACKSTONE LAW 8383 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 745 Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2442 Phone: 855-786-6355 Fax: 855-786-6356 Email: jgenish@blackstonepc.com WARREN LICHTENSTEIN: Settlement Reached in Reith Suit ----------------------------------------------------- Steel Partners Holdings L.P. disclosed in its Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 11, 2025, that Warren G. Lichtenstein, its Executive Chairman was named in an April 13, 2018, a purported shareholder of Steel Connect, Inc. (STCN), Donald Reith, filed a verified complaint, "Reith v. Lichtenstein, et al.," C.A. No. 2018-0277-MTZ in the Delaware Court of Chancery. On December 16, 2024, the court entered an order and final judgment memorializing its approval of its settlement and became effective on January 15, 2025. The plaintiff sought to assert class action and derivative claims against the company and several of its affiliated companies, together with certain members of STCN's board of directors, as well as other named defendants in connection with the acquisition of $35,000 of STCN's Series C Preferred Stock by an affiliate of the company and equity grants made to three individual defendants. The complaint included claims for breach of fiduciary duty against all the individual defendants as STCN directors; claims for aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty against the company; a claim for breach of fiduciary duty as controlling stockholder against the company; and a derivative claim for unjust enrichment against the company and the three individuals who received equity grants. The complaint demanded damages in an unspecified amount for STCN and its stockholders, together with rescission, disgorgement and other equitable relief. On August 13, 2021, the company and the remaining defendants entered into a memorandum of understanding with the plaintiff in connection with the settlement of the Reith litigation. The Court of Chancery declined to approve the proposed settlement on September 23, 2022. On April 8, 2024, STCN, the defendants and Mr. Reith entered into a new memorandum of understanding contemplating the settlement of the Reith litigation. On October 18, 2024, the defendants and Mr. Reith entered into a Stipulation and Agreement of Compromise, Settlement and Release to resolve the litigation. Among other things, the Second Proposed Settlement Agreement requires that defendants shall cause their insurers to make a cash payment of $6,000 to STCN and, after deducting any court-approved award of attorneys' fees and certain litigation expenses, STCN shall distribute the balance of the cash payment to the holders of STCN common stock pursuant to the allocation provisions set forth in the previously disclosed Stockholders Agreement dated April 30, 2023 by and among the company, STCN, and other stockholders signatory thereto as amended by the Settlement Agreement. On December 13, 2024, the court approved the Settlement and approved an award of $1,154 in fees and expenses to plaintiff's counsel, and granted a mootness fee to plaintiff's counsel of $463. The court also approved the requirement in the Second Proposed Settlement Agreement that STCN adopt (i) certain amendments to the Stockholders' Agreement relating to the allocation of its Net Litigation Proceeds (as defined in the Stockholders' Agreement) and (ii) certain corporate governance policies and practices, including a formal review process for compensation clawbacks, enhancing the process for granting equity awards and keeping records of equity awards granted under STCN's stock plans, further enhancing board committee independence, and reducing the materiality threshold for review of related party transactions under the Stockholders' Agreement. The Stockholders' Agreement terminated in connection with the consummation of the Short-Form Merger. On December 16, 2024, the court entered an order and final judgment memorializing its approval of the settlement and became effective on January 15, 2025. On January 2, 2025, the company entered into a Contingent Value Rights Agreement (CVR) with Equiniti Trust Company, LLC, as rights agent. Pursuant to the CVR Agreement, at the effective time of the Short-Form Merger, eligible holders of Steel Connect Common Stock received contingent value rights to receive a portion of the Net Litigation Proceeds, if any, pursuant to the terms of the CVR Agreement. On February 6, 2025, the company paid the full amount owed plaintiff's counsel. Steel Partners Holdings L.P. is a diversified global holding company that owns and operates businesses and has significant interests in various companies, including diversified industrial products, energy, banking, defense, supply chain management and logistics and youth sports. WHOLE FOODS: Safari Seeks to File Class Cert Docs Under Seal ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as SARA SAFARI, et al., on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, v. WHOLE FOODS MARKET SERVICES, INC., a Delaware corporation, et al., Case No. 8:22-cv-01562-JWH-KES (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting their application to file under seal and redact certain portions of their reply in support of the Plaintiffs' motion to certify class, appoint class representative, and appoint class counsel and accompanying documents that have been classified as "Confidential." The application is supported by the Declaration of Taeva C. Shefler. The Plaintiffs have reviewed and complied with L.R. 79-5.2.2(a). The Plaintiffs must file the accompanying documents under seal because they reference or quote information that "shall be maintained under seal" pursuant to the Defendants' or third parties' designation as CONFIDENTIAL under the Protective Order, the lawsuit says. Pursuant to L.R. 79-5.2.2(a), the Shefler Declaration identifies the documents containing the purportedly CONFIDENTIAL information. The sealed documents will be submitted conditionally under seal with this Application. The sealed documents will be concurrently provided to the Court and served on counsel for Defendants. Whole Foods retails organic and natural foods. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 4, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=WDRS30 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Aelish M. Baig, Esq. Taeva C. Shefler, Esq. ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP Post Montgomery Center One Montgomery Street, Suite 1800 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 288-4545 Facsimile: (415) 288-4534 E-mail: aelishb@rgrdlaw.com tshefler@rgrdlaw.com - and - Dylan D. Grimes, Esq. Paige M. Tomaselli, Esq. GRIME LAW LLP 730 Arizona Avenue Santa Monica, CA 90401 Telephone: (310) 747-5095 E-mail: ptomaselli@grimelaw.com dgrimes@grimelaw.com - and - Gretchen Elsner, Esq. ELSNER LAW & POLICY, LLC 314 South Guadalupe Street, Suite 123 Santa Fe, NM 87501 Telephone: (505) 303-0980 E-mail: gretchen@elsnerlaw.org Asbestos Litigation ASBESTOS UPDATE: Barretts Minerals Proposes Trust to Settle Suits ----------------------------------------------------------------- Angelica Serrano-Roman of Bloomberg Law reports that Barretts Minerals Inc., now known as BMI OldCo Inc., has proposed a reorganization plan that directs asbestos claims to a dedicated trust. In an April 2, 2025, filing with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, the bankrupt talc supplier stated that a "channeling injunction" is essential to its restructuring. The plan follows months of mediation. The bankruptcy code allows channeling injunctions to facilitate asbestos-related settlements, a mechanism previously used to resolve billions of dollars in claims by establishing specialized trusts, Bloomberg Law reports. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Reject J&J's $9BB Talc Lawsuit Settlement ---------------------------------------------------------------- Legal-Bay, The pre-settlement funding company, reports that Johnson and Johnson's proposed $9 billion talcum powder settlement is back in limbo as the bankruptcy strategy has now been discredited and the filing in Texas federal court has been dismissed. In a resounding victory for thousands of women who have suffered from ovarian cancer linked to Johnson & Johnson's (NYSE:JNJ) talcum powder products, U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Christopher Lopez has rejected the company's third attempt to shield itself from liability through bankruptcy. The ruling clears the way for claimants to seek speedy jury trials in state courts and through the bellwether process in multidistrict litigation (MDL). "This decision affirms what we have argued all along -- J&J's bankruptcy strategy was nothing more than a bad-faith maneuver to avoid full accountability," said Andy Birchfield of the Beasley Allen Law Firm. "With this ruling, we are now moving forward without delay to trial, where our clients will finally have the chance to present their cases before a jury and obtain the justice they deserve." Judge Lopez's ruling follows years of J&J's attempts to manipulate the bankruptcy process to force victims into an inadequate settlement. J&J has filed for bankruptcy three separate times in three different venues and has used three different company names, including LTL, LLT, and this latest, Red River. The company pursued bankruptcy protections despite being financially solvent and having a market capitalization approaching $400 billion. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Tosses Environmental Suit Against ASARCO --------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Philip P. Simon of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana granted ASARCO Master, Inc.'s motion to dismiss the case captioned as CITY OF HAMMOND, INDIANA, and CITY OF WHITING, INDIANA, Plaintiffs, v. ASARCO MASTER, INC., Defendant, Cause No. 2:24-CV-96-PPS-JEM (N.D. Ind.). Hammond and Whiting allege past and future environmental response costs related to a release of hazardous substances originating from a smelting facility which used to operate in Hammond decades ago. From June 1937 to February 1983, Federated Metals Corporation operated a thirty-six-acre non-ferrous smelting, refining, recovery, and recycling facility in Hammond. Federated Metals is a wholly owned subsidiary of American Smelting and Refining Company ("ASARCO") which purchased Federal Metals in 1932. The operations of the Hammond site over the course of some forty years resulted in the disposal of waste byproducts and the release of hazardous substances into the air around Hammond and Whiting. More specifically, the facility's operations allegedly caused a widespread release of lead into the soil in the Robertsdale neighborhood in Hammond and Whiting. Federated Metals closed the facility in February 1983. After shutting down its Hammond operations, Federated Metals and its parent company, ASARCO, faced a number of environmental claims that placed a significant strain on the company's financial resources. In 1992, Federated Metals entered a consent decree with the Environmental Protection Authority, in which it disclosed that it generated hazardous waste at the facility in the form of toxic dust and waste both of which were byproducts of lead smelting activities. In 2005, ASARCO Master, Inc. merged with Federated Metals and, as a result, assumed Federated Metals' liabilities, including any responsibility for contamination caused at the Hammond facility. ********* 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 ***