/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/250424.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Thursday, April 24, 2025, Vol. 27, No. 82
Headlines
3M COMPANY: Bowie Suit Removed to N.D. Alabama
A & ASSOCIATES: Ortiz Sues Over Unlawful Tip Retention
ADOBE INC: Faces Class Suit Over Data Harvesting and Monetizing
AEQUOR TECHNOLOGIES: Davidson-Gesser Suit Removed to C.D. Calif.
ALLSTATE INSURANCE: Appeals Certification Ruling in Canchola Case
ARIZONA BEVERAGES: Gillus Suit Removed to E.D.N.Y.
ASP AESTHETICS: Sends Unsolicited Text Messages, Hansen Suit Says
BLUE SHIELD: Bianchini Sues Over Illegally Disclosed PII
BREAKFAST HOUSE: Rogen Seeks to Recover Dishwashers' Unpaid OT
CALIFORNIA PHYSICIAN'S: Maravilla Sues Over Alleged Data Breach
CALIFORNIA PHYSICIANS': Johnson Sues Over Unauthorized Disclosures
CDHA MANAGEMENT: Eury Sues Over Customers' Compromised Info
CDHA MANAGEMENT: Fails to Protect Personal Data, Rawlinson Says
CEREVEL THERAPEUTICS: SM Merger Sues Over False Financial Reports
CHERRY VALLEY GOURMET: Santana Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
CHRISTIAN BROTHERS: Faces Herrera Suit Over Website Inaccessibility
CIRA PAONE: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Jackson Suit Says
CLC OF FULTON: Hargett Seeks Unpaid Wages for Registered Nurses
CLEO COMMUNICATIONS: Ashley Sues Over Failure to Safeguard PII
COINBASE GLOBAL: Exposes Users to Cryptocurrency Investment Scams
COLECTIVO COFFEE: Cazares Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
CONNECTONCALL.COM LLC: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Labuskey Says
CONTRACT FREIGHTERS: Marine Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Calif.
CR CREATIVE SERVICES: Banuelos Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
DE MARKETING: Places Unwanted Marketing Messages, Gaseor Suit Says
DELICATO VINEYARDS: Banta Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
DJB TAP: Faces Wee-Ellis Suit Over Blind-Inaccessible Online Store
EAST OHIO HOSPITAL: Shields Sues Over Failure to Pay Proper Wages
EISNER ADVISORY: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Fallen Alleges
EL SEGUNDO: Faces Smith Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
EQURRA LLC: Faces Smith Suit Over Unsolicited Text Messages
EVERUS CONSTRUCTION: Scofield Sues Over Share Price Drop
FIDELITY BROKERAGE: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Jackson Says
FISKARS BRANDS: Brock Sues Over Mislabeled Gardening Tools
FOODSCIENCE LLC: Georges Sues Over Product's Clinically Proven Ads
FORD MOTOR: Hilburg Sues Over Plug-In Hybrid Vehicles' Fire Risk
GENERAL MOTORS: Vehicles Prone to Engine Failure, Hernandez Says
GOOGLE LLC: Faces EUR5-Bil. UK Class Suit Over Search Dominance
GUIDEHOUSE MANAGED: Hernandez Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Calif.
HALEON PLC: Settles Robitussin False Marketing Suit for $4.5M
HEALTHEQUITY INC: Rosen Law Probes Potential Securities Claims
IFCO SYSTEMS: DeAnda-Zavala Labor Suit Removed to E.D. Calif.
INTER-CON SECURITY: Faces Sumpter Suit Over Unlawful Termination
INTRASYSTEMS LLC: Couchenour Suit Transferred to W.D. Pa.
KG MINING: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Loehr Suit Claims
KUWATA PAN: Underpays Dental Technicians, Suriel Suit Says
LEE UNIVERSITY: Fails to Protect Personal Data, Nabors Says
LIBERTY NATIONAL: Kurmangaliyev Sues Over Unwanted Text Messages
LOS ANGELES, CA: Faces Class Suit Over ADA Violations in Parks
MESA AIR: M&A Investigates Proposed Merger With Republic Airways
MOLINA HEALTHCARE: Court Seals TCPA Class Action Documents
NANAMICA USA: Web Site Not Accessible to the Blind, Bullock Says
NASHVILLE DOWNTOWN: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Chiodo Says
NATUROPATHICA HOLISTIC: El Sayed Balks at Unsolicited Text Messages
NBC FRANCHISOR: Cantwell Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
NY MORTGAGE: Ruiz Sues Over Judgment Post-Foreclosure Sale Amount
OAKWOOD MANAGEMENT: Green Sues Over FDCPA Violations
OLSON REMCHO: Removes Alvarez Suit to E.D. Calif.
ORIGINAL BAND: Berube Class Suit Removed to W.D. Mich.
PALADIN ENERGY: Faces Class Action Lawsuit in Victoria
PETMED EXPRESS: Faces Cobbs Suit Over Illegal Wiretapping
PETROSSIAN INC: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Reyes Says
PHILADELPHIA PIZZA: Jiles Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
PIXIE MARKET: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Pittman Says
RETINA GROUP: Agrees to Settle Data Breach Class Suit for $3.6MM
ROSS HEALTHCARE: Fails to Pay Proper OT Wages, Lanoue Suit Says
SALVATION ARMY: Faces Class Suit Over Denying Addiction Medications
SHAPIRO DICARO: Inflates Post-Foreclosure Sale Amount, Small Says
SOUTHEAST SERIES: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Tucker Alleges
SOUTHEAST SERIES: Fails to Secure Personal Info, K.R. Suit Says
SPICEOLOGY INC: Calcano Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
SPOTHERO INC: Galvez Sues Over Parking Reservations' Hidden Fees
ST. JOSEPH'S COLLEGE: Fails to Secure Personal Info, Earnhardt Says
STARK COUNTY: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Buckley Alleges
STINGRAY PRESSURE: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Keenan Says
TESLA INC: Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Odometer Manipulation
THANG BOTANICALS: Faces Suit Over 7-OH Tablet's False Labeling
TOOTSIE ROLL: Pittman Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
TREACE MEDICAL: Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over False Statements
UNITED PARCEL: Ruggiere Sues Over Unpaid Non-Discretionary Bonuses
UNITED STATES: Faces Lewis Suit Over Disability Discrimination
WAMPLER CARROLL: Baek Family Sues Over Racketeering Scheme
WHITE DIAMOND: Faces Suit Over Deceptive Sales Practices
WINNEBAGO COUNTY, IL: Kramer Sues Over Unlawful Prisoner Custody
WOODRIDGE, NY: Gross Sues Over False Info in Traffic Citations
WW INTERNATIONAL: Faces Giorgio et al. Data Breach Suit
ZENAS BIOPHARMA: Faces Securities Class Action Lawsuit
ZENITH FAST: Faces Gobran Wage-and-Hour Suit in Calif.
*********
3M COMPANY: Bowie Suit Removed to N.D. Alabama
----------------------------------------------
The case styled as Willie James Bowie; et al, and others similarly
situated, and also on behalf of all aggrieved employees v. 3M
COMPANY, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co.; AGC
CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, Inc.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS INC.; CHEMGUARD,
INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD.;
CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.;
DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC., DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC., (f/k/a DOWDUPONT
INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E. I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor in interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), inclusive, Case No. 01-CV-2025-900952.00 was
removed from the Alabama Circuit Court, Jefferson County, to the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
on April 14, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-00552-RDP.
The Plaintiffs, Willie James Bowie et al., seek to hold Tyco and
certain other Defendants liable based on their alleged conduct in
designing, manufacturing, marketing, distributing, and/or selling
aqueous film-forming foam ("AFFF") that Plaintiffs allege caused
them personal injuries. Specifically, Plaintiffs allege that
Defendants' AFFF contained per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
("PFAS"), including perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and
perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS"), and that the use of these
substances caused contamination of the drinking water at
Plaintiffs' homes and places of work, which in turn caused them to
develop certain types of cancers.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Gregory M. Taube, Esq.
NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP
201 17th Street, NW, Suite 1700
Atlanta, GA 30363
Phone: (404) 322-6000
Fax: (404) 322-6050
Email: greg.taube@nelsonmullins.com
A & ASSOCIATES: Ortiz Sues Over Unlawful Tip Retention
------------------------------------------------------
RACHEL ORTIZ, and JOSHUA MILLS individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. A & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Defendant, Case No. 3:25-cv-00814-D (N.D. Tex., April 3, 2025)
seeks damages and other legal and equitable relief from Defendant A
& Associates, Inc. for alleged violations of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
Accordingly, the Plaintiffs bring this action, on behalf of a
collective group of persons employed by Defendant as bartenders in
Texas during the past three years through the final date of the
disposition of this action who were subject to Defendant's unlawful
tip retention practices whereby they were they were deprived of all
credit card tip received in violation of the FLSA and are entitled
to recover: (i) unpaid tips; (ii) liquidated damages; (iii)
interest; (iv) attorney fees and costs; and (i) such other and
further relief as this Court finds necessary and proper.
A & Associates, Inc. is a staffing company that provided Bartenders
for events in Texas such as the United Football League, cricket
matches, and Coca-Cola Classic Christmas.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Larry F. Taylor, Jr. Esq.
THE COCHRAN FIRM - DALLAS, PLLC
1825 Market Center Blvd, Suite 500
Dallas, TX 75207
Telephone: (214) 651-4260
Facsimile: (214) 651-4261
E-mail: ltaylor@cochrantexas.com
- and -
Alexander M. White, Esq.
VALLI KANE & VAGNINI LLP
600 Old Country Road, Suite 519
Garden City, NY 11530
Telephone: (516) 203-7180
E-mail: awhite@vkvlawyers.com
ADOBE INC: Faces Class Suit Over Data Harvesting and Monetizing
---------------------------------------------------------------
Kelsey McCroskey of ClassAction.org reports that a proposed class
action lawsuit accuses Adobe Inc. of harvesting and monetizing the
private data of millions of consumers without their knowledge or
consent.
The 32-page lawsuit centers around Adobe's Experience Cloud
Identity Service and Experience Platform Identity Service, which,
according to the case, are tools website operators and app
developers use to track and aggregate consumer data across the
internet, regardless of a user's browser, device or privacy
settings.
Per the suit, Adobe assigns a unique, cross-platform identifier
known as an Experience Cloud ID (ECID) to each consumer who visits
a website using its services. The ECID cookie and other similar
tracking technology have enabled Adobe to collect data about users'
activity and private communications across third-party apps,
websites and other services for targeted advertising purposes, the
complaint alleges.
While Adobe's cookies allow it to track the same user across the
web, its Experience Platform Identity Service enables the defendant
to build an "identity graph" for each consumer, the filing
explains. The Adobe lawsuit says that this service matches a user's
ECID with additional personally identifiable information, linking
all the collected data together into the user's "identity graph."
The suit contends that these services, which Adobe clients can use
for analytics and marketing purposes, come at the expense of
consumers' privacy rights.
"Adobe's role as a centralized identity broker allows it to develop
complete profiles of individuals and recognize them across websites
and devices—exactly what privacy-preserving mechanisms are meant
to prevent," the case argues.
The complaint claims Adobe intentionally created its unique
identifier, the ECID, to follow consumers across the web despite
knowing this type of tool is "at odds with users' expectation of
privacy."
According to the filing, consumers are unaware that Adobe
intercepts and tracks their identifiers and private communications,
not least because the defendant is silent regarding the extent of
its data collection practices and even what entities use its
services.
"Adobe's conduct is particularly offensive in light of the
secretive nature in which it takes place," the class action suit
charges. "[The plaintiff] and Class Members had no way of knowing
Adobe collected their unique identifiers and other personal data
and other online communications, and Adobe did so from thousands of
websites, if not more."
The lawsuit looks to represent all United States residents from
whom Adobe intercepted or stored an ECID, demdex.net cookie or
other identifying information, or for whom the company created an
identity graph.
The suit also seeks to cover those in the United States who had
their communications with third parties intercepted or used by
Adobe without their consent. [GN]
AEQUOR TECHNOLOGIES: Davidson-Gesser Suit Removed to C.D. Calif.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled ISAAC DAVIDSON-GESSER, individually and on behalf
of all similarly situated individuals, Plaintiff v. AEQUOR
TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, a New Jersey Limited Liability Company; AEQUOR
HEALTHCARE SERVICES, LLC, a New Jersey Limited Liability Company;
and Does 1-10, inclusive; Defendants, was removed from the Superior
Court of the State of California for the County of Orange to the
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on April
10, 2025.
The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 2:25-cv-03185 to the proceeding.
The case arises from Defendants' alleged violations of the
California Labor Code and the California Business & Professions
Code. The violations stem from Defendants' (1) failure to pay
minimum wages; (2) failure to pay overtime wages; (3) failure to
provide meal periods; (4) failure to provide rest periods; (5)
failure to provide and maintain complete and accurate wage
statements; (6) failure to provide wages when due; and (7) failure
to reimburse necessary business expenses.
Aequor Technologies, LLC is an IT solutions and consulting company
headquartered in New Jersey. [BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Scott J. Witlin, Esq.
BARNES & THORNBURG LLP
2029 Century Park East, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90067-2904
Telephone: (310) 284-3880
Facsimile: (310) 284-3894
E-mail: scott.witlin@btlaw.com
- and -
Ashley N. Lopeztello, Esq.
BARNES & THORNBURG LLP
655 West Broadway, Suite 1300
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 321-5000
E-mail: alopeztello@btlaw.com
ALLSTATE INSURANCE: Appeals Certification Ruling in Canchola Case
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Allstate Insurance Co. filed a petition for permission to appeal
the certification decision of the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California, Case No. 8:23-cv-734, before the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, on April 11, 2025. The
case is captioned as JASIBEL CANCHOLA; CARLOS OCHOA; RICHARD
CURTIS; and ROBERT SOUZA, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE
CO., Defendant-Petitioner, Case No. 25-2351, in the United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Allstate Insurance Company insurance company. The Company offers
auto, home life insurances policies. [BN]
The Defendant-Petitioner is represented by:
Z.W. Julius Chen., Esq.
Robert G. Lian, Jr., Esq.
AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP
2001 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 887-4000
- and -
Theane Evangelis, Esq.
Bradley J. Hamburger, Esq.
Alex Harris, Esq.
Matt Aidan Getz, Esq.
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 229-7000
Email: tevangelis@gibsondunn.com
ARIZONA BEVERAGES: Gillus Suit Removed to E.D.N.Y.
--------------------------------------------------
The case styled DAVID GILLUS, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ARIZONA BEVERAGES USA LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 530971/2024, was removed from the Supreme Court
of the State of New York, County of Kings, to the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of New York on April 9, 2025.
The Clerk of Court for the Eastern District of New York assigned
Case No. 2:25-cv-01970 to the proceeding.
The case arises from Defendant's alleged deceptive product labeling
of its Kiwi Strawberry Fruit Juice Cocktail in violation of the New
York General Business Law.
Based in Woodbury, NY, Arizona Beverages, USA LLC produces iced
tea, juice cocktails, and energy drinks. [BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Nicholas P. Eliades, Esq.
STEVENS & LEE
669 River Drive, Suite 201
Elmwood Park, NJ 07407
Telephone: (201) 857-6764
E-mail: Nicholas.eliades@stevenslee.com
ASP AESTHETICS: Sends Unsolicited Text Messages, Hansen Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TYSEN HANSEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ASP AESTHETICS LP, Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-03663 (N.D. Ill., April 4, 2025) is a class action against
the Defendant for violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection
Act.
The case arises from the Defendant's practice of sending
unsolicited text messaging to consumers, including the Plaintiff,
in an attempt to promote its goods and services without consent.
Moreover, the Defendant continues to send text messages to
consumers even after they have opted out of its solicitations. As a
result, the Plaintiff and the Class suffered damages including
invasion of privacy, harassment, aggravation, and disruption of
daily life.
ASP Aesthetics LP is a limited partnership located in Chicago,
Illinois. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq.
HIRALDO P.A.
401 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 400-4713
Email: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com
BLUE SHIELD: Bianchini Sues Over Illegally Disclosed PII
--------------------------------------------------------
Amy Bianchini and Yeselin Parra, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. CALIFORNIA PHYSICIANS' SERVICE D/B/A
BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA, Case No. 25CV118839 (Cal. Super. Ct.,
Alameda Cty., April 14, 2025), is brought to address Defendant's
offensive, illegal, and widespread practice of disclosing its
patients' confidential personally identifiable information ("PII")
and protected health information ("PHI") (collectively referred to
as "Private Information") to unauthorized third parties, including
Google LLC ("Google") and additional unknown data brokers in clear
violation of law.
The Defendant owns and controls blueshield.ca and related webpages
(the "Website"), and it also owns and controls a mobile application
(the "App)(collectively the "Web Properties"). BSCA's unauthorized
disclosures of Private Information occurred because of its use of
tracking technologies that BSCA installed on its Web Properties,
including but not limited to the Google Analytics tool, Google Ads
tool, and other related tracking tools (collectively, "Tracking
Technologies" or "Tracking Tools"). The Tracking Technologies allow
unauthorized third parties to receive and view patients' Private
Information and intercept their private communications, mine it for
purposes unrelated to the provision of healthcare, and then
directly monetize it to deliver targeted advertisements to specific
individuals.
The Plaintiffs and other Class Members who used BSCA's Web
Properties reasonably believed they were communicating only with
their trusted healthcare and insurance providers, and nothing about
the Web Properties' appearance indicated that unauthorized third
parties such as Google would intercept and obtain Private
Information submitted by patients. Unbeknownst to Plaintiffs and
Class Members, however, the Tracking Technologies embedded on
BSCA's Web Properties contain source code that surreptitiously
track, record, and disseminate Plaintiffs' and Class Members'
online activity and communications (including Private Information)
to Google without first obtaining permission, in violation ofHIPAA,
state laws, industry standards, and patient expectations,
By installing and using Tracking Technologies on its Web
Properties, BSCA effectively planted a bug on Plaintiffs' and Class
Members' web browsers and devices, which caused their
communications to be intercepted, accessed, viewed, and captured by
third parties in real time, as they were communicated by patients,
based on BSCA's chosen parameters. Consequently, Plaintiffs bring
this action for legal and equitable remedies to address and rectify
the illegal conduct and action, to enjoin BSCA from making similar
disclosures of its patients' Private Information in the future, and
to require BSCA to fully articulate, inter alia, the specific
Private Information disclosed to third parties and to identify all
the recipients of that information, says the complaint.
The Plaintiffs received an email from the Defendant notifying them
of the Data Breach.
The Defendant is one of the largest health care insurers in
California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
M. Anderson Berry, Esq.
Gregory Haroutunian, Esq.
Brandon P. Jack, Esq.
CLAYEO C. ARNOLD, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
865 Howe Avenue
Sacramento, CA 95825
Phone: (916) 239-4778
Fax: (916) 924-1829
Email: aberry@justice4you.com
gharoutunian@justice4you.com
ljack@justice4you.com
- and -
Daniel Srourian, Esq.
SROURIAN LAWFIRM, P.C.
3435 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1710
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Phone: (213) 474-3800
Fax: (213) 471-4160
Email: daniel@slfla.com
- and -
Paul M. DeMarco, Esq.
MARKOVITS, STOCK & DE MARCO, LLC
119 E. Court, Suite 530
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Phone: (513) 651-3700
Facsimile: (513) 665-0219
Email: pdemarco@msdlegal.com
BREAKFAST HOUSE: Rogen Seeks to Recover Dishwashers' Unpaid OT
--------------------------------------------------------------
Julian Rogen, individually and on behalf of themselves and all
other similarly situated persons, known and unknown, Plaintiff v.
Breakfast House Restaurant Inc.; Breakfast House Belmont, Inc.;
Breakfast House & Coffee Bar Sheridan, Inc.; Breakfast House &
Coffee Bar Harlem Inc.; Breakfast House Lawrence Inc.; Ashland
Enterprises, Inc. dba Breakfast House and Coffee Bar; Breakfast
House Marion Inc.; R. T. Mac's, Inc. dba Breakfast House Restaurant
and Coffee Bar; and Jaime Jara, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-03617
(N.D. Ill., April 3, 2025) seeks redress for Defendants' alleged
willful violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act as well as
Illinois Minimum Wage Law claims, for Defendants' failure to pay
overtime wages owed.
The Plaintiff brings this complaint as a collective action, on
behalf of all current and former Illinois employees who were paid
straight time instead of time-and-a-half for recorded overtime
hours (hours over 40 in each workweek) within three years from the
commencement of this action up to the present.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants as a dishwasher from
December 2023 until March 2025 at the Breakfast House restaurant
locations on Sheridan Road, Irving Park Road, Grand Avenue,
Lawrence Avenue, and Harlem Avenue.
Breakfast House Restaurant Inc. is an Illinois corporation and a
restaurant business that is located, headquartered, and conducts
business in on Grand Street, in Chicago, Illinois.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James Dore, Esq.
DORE LAW OFFICES LLC
6232 N. Pulaski Rd., 3rd Floor
Chicago, IL 60646
Telephone: (773) 415-4898
E-mail: james@dorelawoffices.com
- and -
Daniel Schlade, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF DANIEL I. SCHLADE
6232 N. Pulaski Rd., 3rd Floor
Chicago, IL 60646
E-mail: danschlade@gmail.com
CALIFORNIA PHYSICIAN'S: Maravilla Sues Over Alleged Data Breach
---------------------------------------------------------------
ANA MARAVILLA, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CALIFORNIA PHYSICIANS’ SERVICE D/B/A BLUE
SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA, Defendant, Case No. 4:25-cv-03213 (N.D. Cal.,
April 10, 2025) seeks to address Defendant's illegal, and
widespread practice of disclosing its patients confidential
personally identifiable information and protected health
information to unauthorized third parties, including Google LLC and
additional unknown data brokers.
The Defendant has installed tracking technologies on its website.
These technologies allow unauthorized third parties to intercept
the contents of patients' communications, receive and view
patients' private Information, mine it for purposes unrelated to
the provision of healthcare, and further monetize it to deliver
targeted advertisements to specific individuals, says the suit.
California Physicians' Service d/b/a Blue Shield of California is a
mutual benefit corporation and health plan headquartered in
Oakland, CA. {BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John J. Nelson, Esq.
Heather M. Lopez, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
402 W. Broadway, Suite 1760
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (858) 209-6941
Facsimile: (865) 522-0049
E-mail: jnelson@milberg.com
hlopez@milberg.com
CALIFORNIA PHYSICIANS': Johnson Sues Over Unauthorized Disclosures
------------------------------------------------------------------
ASHLEY JOHNSON on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CALIFORNIA PHYSICIANS' SERVICE D/B/A BLUE
SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA, Defendant, Case No. 4:25-cv-03234 (N.D. Cal.,
April 10, 2025) seeks to address Defendant's unlawful disclosure of
its patients confidential personally identifiable information and
protected health information to unauthorized third parties,
including Google LLC.
According to the complaint, the Defendant's unauthorized
disclosures of private information occurred because of its use of
tracking technologies that Defendant installed on its web
properties, including but not limited to the Google Analytics tool,
Google Ads tool, and other related tracking tools. These tracking
technologies allow unauthorized third parties to intercept the
contents of patients' communications, receive and view patients'
private information, mine it for purposes unrelated to the
provision of healthcare, and monetize it by using it to deliver
targeted advertisements to specific individuals.
California Physicians' Service d/b/a Blue Shield of California is a
mutual benefit corporation and health plan headquartered in
Oakland, CA. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dena C. Sharp, Esq.
Adam E. Polk, Esq.
Simon S. Grille, Esq.
Isabel Velez, Esq.
GIRARD SHARP LLP
601 California Street, Suite 1400
San Francisco, CA 94108
Telephone: (415) 981-4800
Facsimile: (415) 981-4846
E-mail: dsharp@girardsharp.com
apolk@girardsharp.com
sgrille@girardsharp.com
ivelez@girardsharp.com
CDHA MANAGEMENT: Eury Sues Over Customers' Compromised Info
-----------------------------------------------------------
SHEQUITA EURY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CDHA MANAGEMENT, LLC d/b/a CHORD SPECIALTY
DENTAL PARTNERS AND SPARK DSO, LLC d/b/a CHORD SPECIALTY DENTAL
PARTNERS, Defendants, Case No. 3:25-cv-00382 (M.D. Tenn., April 4,
2025) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence,
negligence per se, breach of implied contract, and breach of
fiduciary duty.
The case arises from the Defendants' failure to properly secure and
safeguard the personally identifiable information and protected
health information of the Plaintiff and similarly situated
individuals stored within their network systems following a data
breach between August 19, 2024, and March 24, 2024. The Defendants
also failed to timely notify the Plaintiff and similarly situated
individuals about the data breach. As a result, the private
information of the Plaintiff and Class members was compromised and
damaged through access by and disclosure to unknown and
unauthorized third parties.
CDHA Management, LLC, doing business as Chord Specialty Dental
Partners, is a dental support organization headquartered in
Tennessee.
Spark DSO, LLC, doing business as Chord Specialty Dental Partners,
is a dental support organization headquartered in Tennessee. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
Grayson Wells, Esq.
STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
223 Rosa L. Parks Ave., Ste. 200
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 254-8801
Email: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
gwells@stranchlaw.com
- and -
Leigh S. Montgomery, Esq.
EKSM, LLP
4200 Montrose, Ste. 200
Houston, TX 77006
Telephone: (888) 350-3931
Email: lmontgomery@eksm.com
CDHA MANAGEMENT: Fails to Protect Personal Data, Rawlinson Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
ANDREA RAWLINSON, on behalf of her minor children J.W. and A.B.,
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CDHA
MANAGEMENT, LLC, d/b/a CHORD SPECIALTY DENTAL PARTNERS and SPARK
DSO, LLC d/b/a CHORD SPECIALTY DENTAL PARTNERS, Defendant, Case No.
3:25-cv-00380 (M.D. Tenn., April 3, 2025) is a class action arising
from Chord's failure to protect highly sensitive data.
According to the complaint, the Defendant stores a litany of highly
sensitive personal identifiable information and protected health
information about its current and former patients. But Defendant
lost control over that data when cybercriminals infiltrated its
insufficiently protected computer systems in a data breach.
On information and belief, cybercriminals were able to breach
Defendant's systems because Defendant failed to adequately train
its employees on cybersecurity and failed to maintain reasonable
security safeguards or protocols to protect the Class' PII/PHI. In
short, Defendant's failures placed the Class' PII/PHI in a
vulnerable position -- rendering them easy targets for
cybercriminals, says the suit.
The Plaintiff is a data breach victim and brings this class action
on behalf of her two minor children J.W and A.B., and all others
harmed by Chord's alleged misconduct.
CDHA Management, LLC d/b/a Chord Specialty Dental Partners is a
dental support company based in Tennessee that provides services to
more than 60 dental practices throughout six U.S. states.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
Grayson Wells, Esq.
STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
223 Rosa L. Parks Ave., Ste. 200
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 254-8801
E-mail: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
gwells@stranchlaw.com
- and -
Raina Borrelli, Esq.
STRAUSS BORRELLI, PLLC
980 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610
Chicago, IL 60611
Telephone: (872) 263-1100
Facsimile: (872) 263-1109
E-mail: raina@straussborrelli.com
CEREVEL THERAPEUTICS: SM Merger Sues Over False Financial Reports
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SM MERGER/ARBITRAGE, LP and ASSOCIATED CAPITAL GROUP, INC., on
behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs
v. CEREVEL THERAPEUTICS HOLDINGS, INC., BAIN CAPITAL INVESTORS, LLC
and PFIZER, INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-00417-UNA (D. Del.,
April 3, 2025) seeks to recover damages on behalf of the Plaintiffs
and other shareholders damaged by omissions and wrongdoing in
connection with Cerevel's October 16, 2023 secondary stock offering
and related false and misleading statements in Cerevel's January
18, 2024 Proxy Statement for AbbVie's acquisition of Cerevel for
$45 per share.
The October Offering was orchestrated by Cerevel's controlling
shareholders, Bain and Pfizer, in order for Bain to increase its
investment at a deeply discounted price in advance of AbbVie's
forthcoming acquisition of Cerevel. Bain purchased millions of
shares from the October Offering for just $22.81 per share while in
possession of material nonpublic information regarding Cerevel's
negotiations to be acquired with AbbVie. Moreover, Bain and Pfizer
controlled Cerevel and Cerevel's public statements that failed to
disclose those negotiations or even that Cerevel was for sale.
In connection with the de-SPAC transaction, Bain and Pfizer
continued to maintain control of Cerevel, including, among other
things, collectively owning 51.3% of the voting stock of Cerevel
(as of January 8, 2024) and possessing the right to nominate the
majority of Cerevel's Board of Directors. Bain and Pfizer also had
certain rights to cause Cerevel to issue additional stock and to
purchase their pro-rata share of any additional stock offerings,
effectively guaranteeing that Bain and Pfizer would remain in
control of the Company.
Nowhere did the October Offering documents disclose that AbbVie had
expressed interest in a whole-company acquisition prior to the
offering, nor that the Cerevel Board had met with Centerview to
launch a sales process in response to AbbVie's interest in a whole
company acquisition. These omissions of material facts artificially
deflated the price of Cerevel's stock, permitting Bain to acquire
shares from the October Offering at a deep discount at the expense
of the Insider Trading Class, says the suit.
The Fraud Claim Class and Proxy Claim Class were also damaged by
false and misleading statements in Cerevel's Proxy statement, which
misled investors regarding the true nature and timing of the sales
process and related conflicts, including but not limited to that
the process and October Offering were orchestrated by Bain in order
to maximize its profits and rush through a sale of the Company even
if it was not in the best interest of public shareholders, the suit
alleges.
Cerevel Therapeutics Holdings, Inc. was a Massachusetts-based
biopharmaceutical company co-founded in 2018 by contributions of
neuroscience assets from Pfizer Inc. and monetary investment from
Bain. In 2020, Cerevel went public through a merger with a Special
Purpose Acquisition Company, Arya Sciences Acquisition Corp.
II.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Brian E. Farnan, Esq.
Michael J. Farnan, Esq.
FARNAN LLP
919 North Market Street, 12th Floor
Wilmington, DE 19801
Telephone: (302) 777-0300
Facsimile: (302) 777-0301
Email: bfarnan@farnanlaw.com
mfarnan@farnanlaw.com
- and -
Vincent R. Cappucci, Esq.
Robert N. Cappucci, Esq.
ENTWISTLE & CAPPUCCI LLP
230 Park Avenue, 3rd Floor
New York, NY 10169
Telephone: (212) 894-7200
Facsimile: (212) 894-7272
E-mail: vcappucci@entwistle-law.com
rcappucci@entwistle-law.com
CHERRY VALLEY GOURMET: Santana Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jose Miguel Alegria Santana, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated v. CHERRY VALLEY GOURMET DELI CORP (D/B/A CHERRY
VALLEY GOURMET DELI CORP), ALI ALASSRI, and MUSLEH HASSAN (AKA
TAREQ), Case No. 1:25-cv-02058 (E.D.N.Y., April 14, 2025), is
brought for unpaid overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938 ("FLSA"), and for violations of the N.Y.
Labor Law (the "NYLL"), including applicable liquidated damages,
interest, attorneys' fees and costs.
The Plaintiff has worked for Defendants in excess of 40 hours per
week, without appropriate overtime compensation for the hours that
he worked. Rather, the Defendants have failed to maintain accurate
recordkeeping of the hours worked and failed to pay the Plaintiff
appropriately for his overtime hours.
The Defendants' conduct extended beyond the Plaintiff to all other
similarly situated employees. The Defendants have maintained a
policy and practice of requiring the Plaintiff and other employees
to work in excess of 40 hours per week without providing overtime
compensation required by federal and state law and regulations,
says the complaint.
The Plaintiff has been employed as a deli worker at the deli.
The Defendants own, operate, or control a deli, located at in
Brooklyn, New York under the name "Cherry Valley Gourmet Deli
Corp."[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Clifford Tucker, Esq.
SACCO & FILLAS LLP
3119 Newtown Ave, Seventh Floor
Astoria, NY 11102
Phone: 718-269-2243
Fax: 718-679-9660
Email: ctucker@saccofillas.com
CHRISTIAN BROTHERS: Faces Herrera Suit Over Website Inaccessibility
-------------------------------------------------------------------
EDERY HERRERA, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CHRISTIAN BROTHERS UNIVERSITY, Defendant,
Case No. 1:25-cv-02965 (April 10, 2025), arises from Defendant's
failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its interactive
website to be fully accessible to and independently usable by
Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons.
The Defendant failed to make its website available in a manner
compatible with computer screen reader programs, depriving
Plaintiff and other blind and visually-impaired individuals the
benefits of its online goods, content, and services. Accordingly,
the Plaintiff seeks redress for Defendant's discriminatory conduct
and asserts claims for Americans with Disabilities Act, the New
York State Human Rights Law, the New York City Human Rights Law,
the New York State General Business Law, and the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973.
Christian Brothers University owns and operates the commercial
website, https://www.cbu.edu, which offers goods and services that
include providing information about its athletics, sports teams,
schedule of team games, roster of team participants, game
statistics, and team news. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
CIRA PAONE: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Jackson Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
SYLINIA JACKSON, on behalf of herself and all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CIRO PAONE NEW YORK, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-02951 (S.D.N.Y., April 9, 2025) arises
from Defendant's failure to design, construct, maintain, and
operate its interactive website to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, the New York
City Human Rights Law, and the New York General Business Law.
The Defendant failed to make its website available in a manner
compatible with computer screen reader programs. Defendant also
failed to remove access barriers to its website. Accordingly, the
Plaintiff now seeks redress for Defendant's discriminatory
conduct.
Ciro Paone New York, Inc. offers the commercial website,
https://us.kiton.com, to the public. The website offers features
that allow all consumers to access the goods and services including
information about the company's apparel. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
CLC OF FULTON: Hargett Seeks Unpaid Wages for Registered Nurses
---------------------------------------------------------------
MARCIA HARGETT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CLC OF FULTON, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-00050-GHD-RP (N.D. Miss., April 4, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for failure to pay minimum and overtime wages
in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant as a registered nurse until
March 2025.
CLC of Fulton, LLC is a skilled nursing facility operator in
Itawamba County, Mississippi. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
William Simpson, Esq.
SIMPSON, PLLC
100 South Main Street
Booneville, MS 38829
Telephone: (662) 913-7811
Facsimile: (662) 728-1992
Email: jack@simpson-pllc.com
CLEO COMMUNICATIONS: Ashley Sues Over Failure to Safeguard PII
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jewanna Ashley, on behalf of her minor children D.W. and D.W., and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. CLEO COMMUNICATIONS,
INC., Case No. 3:25-cv-50172 (N.D. Ill., April 14, 2025), is
brought against Cleo for its failure to secure and safeguard the
personally identifying information ("PII") of her minor children
D.W. 1, D.W. 2, and thousands of other individuals', including
their names, dates of birth, gender, Chicago Public Schools student
ID numbers, and Medicaid ID numbers and program eligibility
information.
On March 7, 2025, CPS announced that an unauthorized third party
gained access to Cleo's network systems and obtained files
containing PII, including the PII of current and former CPS
students, including D.W. 1, D.W. 2, and Class members (the "Data
Breach").
Cleo owed a duty to D.W. 1, D.W. 2, and Class members to implement
and maintain reasonable and adequate security measures to secure,
protect, and safeguard their PII against unauthorized access and
disclosure. Cleo breached that duty by, among other things, failing
to implement and maintain reasonable security procedures and
practices to protect Class members' PII from unauthorized access
and disclosure.
As a result of Cleo's inadequate security and breach of its duties
and obligations, the Data Breach occurred, and D.W. 1, D.W. 2, and
Class members' PII was accessed and disclosed. This action seeks to
remedy these failings and their consequences. Plaintiff brings this
action on behalf of her minor children D.W. 1, D.W. 2, and all
persons whose PII was exposed as a result of the Data Breach, which
CPS announced on or about March 7, 2025, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff's minor children, D.W. 1, D.W. 2, are students in
CPS.
Cleo is a company that offers cloud-based file transfer
solutions.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ben Barnow, Esq.
Anthony L. Parkhill, Esq.
Riley W. Prince, Esq.
Nicholas W. Blue, Esq.
BARNOW AND ASSOCIATES, P.C.
205 West Randolph Street, Suite 1630
Chicago, IL 60606
Phone: 312.621.2000
Fax: 312.641.5504
Email: b.barnow@barnowlaw.com
aparkhill@barnowlaw.com
rprince@barnowlaw.com
nblue@barnowlaw.com
COINBASE GLOBAL: Exposes Users to Cryptocurrency Investment Scams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kelly Mehorter of ClassAction.org reports that a proposed class
action lawsuit alleges that Coinbase's lackluster fraud prevention
measures have exposed users to cryptocurrency investment scams.
The 32-page lawsuit was filed by a California man who claims
Coinbase failed to protect him from a "pig butchering" scam carried
out on its crypto platform that caused him to lose roughly
$110,000. According to the complaint, Coinbase could have prevented
this and many other instances of fraud had the defendant complied
with its legal obligations to verify customers' identities and
monitor suspicious activity.
A pig butchering scam begins with a fraudster reaching out to their
victim online, often through dating apps, messaging platforms or
social media, the filing says. After gaining the victim's trust, a
scammer will encourage them to participate in a crypto investment
opportunity with the promises of extravagant returns before
eventually stealing their funds, the case explains.
The plaintiff says that in August 2022, he connected with a woman
who went by "Snow" on the LINE messaging app. Per the complaint,
Snow persuaded him to invest more than $4,800 in a fake
crypto-mining operation called Tetherpool using Coinbase Wallet.
She then convinced the plaintiff to invest increasingly larger
amounts until his earnings grew to nearly $500,000, the suit says.
However, when the man attempted to withdraw his funds, Tetherpool
froze his account and demanded an "immediate and substantial" tax,
the Coinbase lawsuit shares.
The lawsuit argues the plaintiff's experience contradicts
Coinbase's representations that it is a "trusted" and "secure"
platform operating in compliance with state and federal regulations
designed to prevent financial fraud.
Indeed, in 2023, Coinbase was ordered by the New York State
Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) to pay a $100 million
settlement after an investigation into the defendant's anti-fraud
procedures found "significant failures" that violated state law and
made the Coinbase platform "vulnerable to serious criminal
conduct," an NYDFS press release reads.
"These failures are not accidental," the case alleges, claiming
that Coinbase's lax customer verification and fraud prevention
measures allow it to process more transactions and collect more
transaction fees—its primary source of revenue.
The filing also accuses Coinbase of failing to fulfill contractual
promises to reverse transactions it suspects of fraud and provide
customers with an adequate support system to report illicit
activity. The plaintiff claims the defendant's AI virtual assistant
failed to offer any substantive help, and its "overwhelmed and
under responsive" representatives told him the company was unable
to assist him in resolving the issue or recovering his stolen
money.
The lawsuit looks to represent all United States residents who,
during the applicable statute of limitations period, bought or
transferred cryptocurrency on the Coinbase platform or the Coinbase
Wallet website or application. [GN]
COLECTIVO COFFEE: Cazares Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
--------------------------------------------------------------
Amelia Cazares, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Abbyson.com LLC, Case No. 2:25-cv-00538-PP (E.D. Wis.,
April 14, 2025), is brought arising from the Defendant's failure to
design, construct, maintain, and operate their website to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind
or visually-impaired persons.
The Defendant is denying blind and visually impaired persons
throughout the United States with equal access to services Broken
Trophies provides to their non-disabled customers through
https://abbyson.com (hereinafter "Abbyson.com" or "the website").
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and
therefore denial of its products and services offered, and in
conjunction with its physical locations, is a violation of
Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (the
"ADA").
Because Defendant's website, Abbyson.com, is not equally accessible
to blind and visually-impaired consumers, it violates the ADA.
Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Colectivo Coffee Roasters' policies, practices, and procedures to
that Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks
compensatory damages to compensate Class members for having been
subjected to unlawful discrimination, 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.
Abbyson.com provides to the public a website known as Abbyson.com
which provides consumers with access to an array of goods and
services, including, the ability to view high quality, stylish
furniture, including sofas, chairs, dining sets, tables, bar
stools, bedroom sets, nightstands, mattresses, bookcases, rugs, and
pillows.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David B. Reyes, Esq.
EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP PLLC
68-29 Main Street,
Flushing, NY 11367
Phone: (630)-478-0856
Email: Dreyes@ealg.law
CONNECTONCALL.COM LLC: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Labuskey Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID LABUSKEY; and BRADLEY MYERS, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CONNECTONCALL.COM, LLC;
and PHREESIA, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-02036 (E.D.N.Y.,
April 11, 2025) is an action against the Defendants for their
failure to properly secure and safeguard individuals' highly
valuable personally identifiable information and protected health
information.
According to the Plaintiffs in the complaint, as a direct and
proximate result of the Defendants' failure to implement and follow
basic, standard security procedures, Plaintiffs' and Class Members'
PII and PHI have been compromised by cybercriminals.
The Plaintiffs and Class Members are now at a significantly
increased and certainly impending risk of fraud, identity theft,
misappropriation of health insurance benefits, intrusion of their
health privacy, and similar forms of criminal mischief -- risks
which may last for the rest of their lives. Consequently, the
Plaintiffs and Class Members must devote substantially more time,
money, and energy to protect themselves, to the extent possible,
from these crimes, says the suit.
ConnectOnCall.com, LLC is a telehealth platform and after-hours
on-call answering service with automated patient call tracking for
healthcare providers. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
William B. Federman, Esq.
Tanner R. Hilton, Esq.
FEDERMAN & SHERWOOD
10205 N. Pennsylvania Ave.
Oklahoma City, OK 73120
Telephone: (405) 235-1560
Email: wbf@federmanlaw.com
trh@federmanlaw.com
CONTRACT FREIGHTERS: Marine Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Calif.
-------------------------------------------------------------
MARTIN MARINE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CONTRACT FREIGHTERS, INC.; HEARTLAND EXPRESS
SERVICES, INC.; and DOE 1 through and including DOE 10, Defendants,
Case No. 25STCV052729, was removed from the Superior Court of the
State of California for the County of Los Angeles to the Central
District of California on April 10, 2025.
The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 2:25-cv-03182 to the proceeding.
The case arises from Defendants' alleged violations of the
California Labor Code and the California Business and Professions
Code. The said violations stem from, among other things, the
Defendants' failures to pay proper wages, to reimburse necessary
expenses, and to provide employment records, says the suit.
Contract Freighters, Inc. is a truckload freight carrier
headquartered in Joplin, MO. [BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
David R. Ongaro, Esq.
Cara R. Sherman, Esq.
Christine Lee, Esq.
ONGARO PC
1604 Union Street
San Francisco, CA 94123
Telephone: (415) 433-3900
Facsimile: (415) 433-3950
E-mail: dongaro@ongaropc.com
csherman@ongaropc.com
clee@ongaropc.com
CR CREATIVE SERVICES: Banuelos Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against CR CREATIVE SERVICES,
LP. The case is styled as Sergio Banuelos, on behalf of himself and
others similarly situated v. CR CREATIVE SERVICES, LP, COMMERCE
PIRATES LLC, Case No. 25STCV10996 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles
Cty., April 14, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case
(General Jurisdiction)."
CR Creative Services -- https://www.crcreativeservices.com/ --
provides transportation, customised packing, crating, warehousing,
and shipping services for home furnishings, decor, and art.[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
DE MARKETING: Places Unwanted Marketing Messages, Gaseor Suit Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
ALYSSA GASEOR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DE MARKETING LLC, Defendant, Case No.
8:25-cv-00847-WFJ-AEP (M.D. Fla., April 4, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for violation of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act.
The case arises from the Defendant's practice of sending
unsolicited text messaging to consumers, including the Plaintiff,
in an attempt to promote its goods and services without consent.
Moreover, the Defendant continues to send text messages to
consumers even after they have opted out of its solicitations. As a
result, the Plaintiff and the Class suffered damages including
invasion of privacy, harassment, aggravation, and disruption of
daily life, says the suit.
De Marketing LLC is a limited liability company located in Texas.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael Eisenband, Esq.
EISENBAND LAW, P.A.
515 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 120
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 533-4092
Email: MEisenband@Eisenbandlaw.com
- and -
Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq.
HIRALDO P.A.
401 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 400-4713
Email: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com
DELICATO VINEYARDS: Banta Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Delicato Vineyards,
LLC. The case is styled as Reese Banta, an Individual on behalf of
herself and all other similarly situated and the general public v.
Delicato Vineyards, LLC, Case No. STK-CV-UBT-2025-0005347 (Cal.
Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., April 14, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Unlimited Civil Business Tort/ Unfair
Business Practice."
Delicato Family Wines -- https://www.delicato.com/ -- is one of the
fastest growing wine companies in the world with nearly a century
of history crafting superior quality wines.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Eric Yaeckel, Esq.
SULLIVAN & YAECKEL LAW GROUP, APC
2330 3rd Ave.
San Diego, CA 92101-1514
Phone: 619-702-6760
Fax: 619-702-6761
Email: Yaeckel@sullivanlawgroupapc.com
DJB TAP: Faces Wee-Ellis Suit Over Blind-Inaccessible Online Store
------------------------------------------------------------------
MELCHION WEE-ELLIS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DJB TAP, INC., Defendant, Case No.
2:25-cv-01868 (E.D.N.Y., April 4, 2025) is a class action against
the Defendant for violations of Title III of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, the New York
State Civil Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law, and
declaratory relief.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website,
https://www.taproomofny.com, contains access barriers which hinder
the Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of their
online goods, content, and services offered to the public through
the website. The accessibility issues on the website include but
not limited to: inaccurate landmark structure, ambiguous link
texts, inaccessible contact information, changing of content
without advance warning, unclear labels for interactive elements,
inaccurate alt-text on graphics, the denial of keyboard access for
some interactive elements, and the requirement that transactions be
performed solely with a mouse.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that its website will become and remain accessible to
blind and visually impaired individuals.
DJB Tap, Inc. is a company that sells online goods and services in
New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael H. Cohen, Esq.
EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC
68-29 Main Street
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (917) 437-3737
Email: mcohen@ealg.law
EAST OHIO HOSPITAL: Shields Sues Over Failure to Pay Proper Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
HEATHER SHIELDS, MORGAN BLEININGER, and JESSICAHARDING individually
and on behalf of all individuals similarly situated, Plaintiffs v.
EAST OHIO HOSPITAL, LLC dba EAST OHIO REGIONAL HOSPITAL, & DOCTOR
JOHN A. JOHNSON, & ACCESS OHIO, LLC dba ACCESS OHIO PRIMARY CARE
ACCESS, Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-00353-MHW-EPD (S.D. Ohio,
April 4, 2025) seeks to recover lost wages, benefits, attorneys'
fees and costs, and other equitable relief under the Worker
Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, the Fair Labor Standard
Act, Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act, the Ohio Prompt Pay Act,
and the Ohio Constitution.
On approximately March 14, 2025, the Defendants closed all
outpatient services except for the emergency room, lab, and x-ray
services. The discontinuation of outpatient services was a "mass
layoff" under the WARN Act. The Closing caused "employment loss"
for more than 100 Putative Plaintiffs who worked in the Defendants'
outpatient services except for the emergency room, lab, and x-ray
services, says the suit.
Prior to its March 21, 2025 Closing, Named Plaintiffs and the
Putative Plaintiffs did not receive several paychecks owed to them
and, as a result, did not receive compensation for all hours
worked. By not paying Named Plaintiffs and the Putative Plaintiffs
minimum wage for all hours worked and 150% of their regular rate
for all hours worked over 40 in a workweek, the Defendants
willfully violated the FLSA and Ohio Wage Laws, asserts the suit.
Plaintiff Sheilds began her employment with the Defendants as a
physician assistant on July 21, 2021, and remains employed as of
the date of the filing of this Complaint.
East Ohio Hospital, LLC is a 140-bed health care facility located
in downtown Martins Ferry, Ohio.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Robert E. DeRose, Esq.
Anna R. Caplan, Esq.
BARKAN MEIZLISH DEROSE COX, LLP
4200 Regent Street, Suite 210
Columbus, OH 43219
Telephone: (614) 221-4221
Facsimile: (614) 744-2300
E-mail: bderose@barkanmeizlish.com
acaplan@barkanmeizlish.com
- and -
Michelle L. Marinacci, Esq.
Jeremy McGraw, Esq.
GOLD, KHOUREY, AND TURAK, L.C.
510 Tomlinson Ave.
Moundsville, WV 26041
Telephone: (304) 845-9750
Facsimile: (304) 845-186
E-mail: mlm@gkt.com
jmm@gkt.com
EISNER ADVISORY: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Fallen Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID FALLEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. EISNER ADVISORY GROUP, LLC, Defendant, Case
No. 1:25-cv-03044 (S.D.N.Y., April 11, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for its failure to properly secure and
safeguard personally identifiable information of Plaintiff and the
Class Members, including, without limitation: names, dates of
birth, home addresses, phone numbers, and Social Security numbers,
and financial information.
According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, by obtaining,
collecting, using, and deriving a benefit from the Plaintiff's and
Class Members' PII, Defendant assumed non-delegable legal and
equitable duties to Plaintiff and the Class members.
The Defendant disregarded the rights of the Plaintiff and the Class
Members by intentionally, willfully, recklessly, or negligently
failing to take and implement adequate and reasonable measures to
ensure their PII 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 in the possession of
its vendor. As a result, the PII of Plaintiff and Class Members was
compromised through access to and exfiltration by an unknown and
unauthorized third party, says the suit.
Eisner Advisory Group LLC operates as a financial advisory service.
The Company offers advisory, accounting, outsourcing and tax. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rachel Dapeer, Esq.
DAPEER LAW, P.A.
New York Bar No. 4995130
156 W 56th St # 902
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (917) 456-9603
Email: rachel@dapeer.com
- and -
Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq.
HIRALDO P.A.
401 E. Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1400
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 400-4713
Email: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com
EL SEGUNDO: Faces Smith Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
DERRICK SMITH, individually and for others similarly situated v. EL
SEGUNDO COAL COMPANY, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-00335-LF-SCY (D.N.M.,
April 4, 2025) is a class and collective action to recover unpaid
overtime wages and other damages from the Defendant pursuant to the
Fair Labor Standards Act and the New Mexico Minimum Wage Act.
Like the other hourly employees, Plaintiff Smith regularly worked
more than 40 hours a workweek. But El Segundo does not pay
Plaintiff and the other hourly employees for all the hours they
work. Instead, El Segundo requires Smith and the other hourly
employees to suit out in protective clothing and safety gear
necessary to safely perform their job duties, gather other
necessary supplies, and travel to their work location, while on El
Segundo premises "off the clock."
El Segundo's off the clock policy violates the state and federal
laws by depriving Plaintiff and the other hourly employees of
wages, including overtime wages for all hours worked, including
overtime hours, says the suit.
Plaintiff Smith worked for El Segundo as an open cut operator in El
Segundo's Mckinley County, New Mexico mine from approximately
February 2022 through July 2024.
El Segundo Coal Company, LLC operates the El Segundo coal mine in
Mckinley County, New Mexico.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 352-1100
Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
adunlap@mybackwages.com
- and -
Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 877-8788
Facsimile: (713) 877-8065
E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com
EQURRA LLC: Faces Smith Suit Over Unsolicited Text Messages
-----------------------------------------------------------
RODERICK SMITH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. EQURRA LLC, Defendant, Case No.
2:25-cv-10975-FKB-EAS (E.D. Mich., April 4, 2025) is a putative
class action against the Defendant pursuant to the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act.
The complaint asserts that the Defendant engages in unsolicited
text messaging and continues to text message Plaintiff and other
consumers after they have opted out of Defendant's solicitations to
promote its goods and services.
Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to halt
Defendant's illegal conduct, which has resulted in the invasion of
privacy, harassment, aggravation, and disruption of the daily life
of thousands of individuals. The Plaintiff also seeks statutory
damages on behalf of Plaintiff and members of the Class, and any
other available legal or equitable remedies.
Equrra, LLC is a corporation whose principal office is located in
Oakland County, Michigan.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq.
HIRALDO P.A.
401 E. Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1400
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 400-4713
Email: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com
EVERUS CONSTRUCTION: Scofield Sues Over Share Price Drop
--------------------------------------------------------
JOHN SCOFIELD, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. EVERUS CONSTRUCTION GROUP, INC., JEFFREY S.
THIEDEAND, and MAXIMILLIAN J. MARCY, Defendants, Case No.
1:25-cv-02835 (S.D.N.Y., April 4, 2025) is a class action on behalf
of Plaintiff and other persons and entities that purchased or
otherwise acquired Everus common stock between October 31, 2024 and
February 11, 2025, inclusive, including investors who held MDU
Resources Group, Inc. common stock as of October 21, 2024 and
acquired Everus common stock issued in connection with the spinoff
of Everus Construction on October 31, 2024, pursuing claims against
the Defendants under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
According to the complaint, the Defendants made materially false
and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose
material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations,
and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to
investors that: (1) the Company's backlog conversion cycle had
become elongated due to larger, more complex projects; (2) as a
result, the Company's revenue recognition would be delayed; and (3)
as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about
the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially
misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the
precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's
securities, the Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered
significant losses and damages.
Everus Construction Group, Inc. offers electrical line
construction, pipeline construction, inside electrical wiring and
cabling, and mechanical services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rebecca Dawson, Esq.
GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
230 Park Ave, Suite 358
New York, NY 10169
Telephone: (212) 682-5340
Facsimile: (212) 884-0988
E-mail: rdawson@glancylaw.com
- and -
Robert V. Prongay, Esq.
Charles H. Linehan, Esq.
GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 201-9150
Facsimile: (310) 201-9160
FIDELITY BROKERAGE: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Jackson Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
SYLINIA JACKSON, on behalf of herself and all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FIDELITY BROKERAGE SERVICES LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-02952 (S.D.N.Y., April 9, 2025) arises
from Defendant's failure to design, construct, maintain, and
operate its interactive website to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired persons.
The Defendant failed to make its website available in a manner
compatible with computer screen reader programs, depriving
Plaintiff and other blind and visually-impaired individuals the
benefits of its online goods, content, and services. Accordingly,
the Plaintiff asserts claims under the Americans with Disabilities
Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, the New York City Human
Rights Law, and the New York State General Business Law.
Fidelity Brokerage Services, LLC offers the commercial website,
https://www.fidelity.com, which provides information about the
company's investments, brokerage services, and trading platform.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
FISKARS BRANDS: Brock Sues Over Mislabeled Gardening Tools
----------------------------------------------------------
REX BROCK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. FISKARS BRANDS INC., Defendant, Case No.
6:25-cv-00645-PGB-LHP (M.D. Fla., April 11, 2025) alleges that the
Defendants manufactures and sells mislabeled hand-powered gardening
tools.
According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, prior to his purchase,
the Plaintiff saw and reviewed the Defendant's advertising claims
on the packaging and labeling itself, and he made his purchase of
the Product in reliance thereon.
The Plaintiff specifically relied upon representations made by
Defendant that the Product has "3X More Cutting Power" and "Less
effort." However, the Plaintiff did not receive the promised
benefits or receive the full value of his purchase. The Plaintiff
would purchase the Product in the future if it worked as
advertised.
Fiskars Brands Inc. is a manufacturer of a variety of consumer
products and is one of the largest hand-powered gardening tool
manufacturers with products available in more than 100 countries,
including the United States. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
William C. Wright, Esq.
Kelly Mata, Esq.
THE WRIGHT LAW OFFICE, P.A.
515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 350
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Telephone: (561) 514-0904
Email: willwright@wrightlawoffice.com
kellymata@wrightlawoffice.com
FOODSCIENCE LLC: Georges Sues Over Product's Clinically Proven Ads
------------------------------------------------------------------
SIMONE GEORGES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. FOODSCIENCE LLC D/B/A VETRISCIENCE
LABORATORIES, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-02972 (C.D. Cal., April
4, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for violations of
California's Unfair Competition Law, California's False Advertising
Law, and California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act.
The case arises from the Defendant's false, deceptive, and
misleading advertising, labeling, and marketing of GlycoFlex line
of canine joint support supplements. The Defendant advertises the
supplements to be clinically proven or clinically tested to improve
joint and hip health in dogs and, specifically, to provide up to 41
percent increase in hind leg strength in just 4 weeks. The
clinically proven claim is false because there was no clinical
study. As a result of the Defendant's misrepresentation, the
Plaintiff and Class members suffered economic damages, says the
suit.
FoodScience LLC, doing business as VetriScience Laboratories, is a
manufacturer of animal supplements, with its principal place of
business in Vermont. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James R. Denlea, Esq.
Jeffrey I. Carton, Esq.
Catherine H. Friesen, Esq.
Amber T. Wallace, Esq.
DENLEA & CARTON LLP
2 Westchester Park Drive, Suite 410
White Plains, NY 10604
Telephone: (914) 331-0100
Facsimile: (914) 331-0105
Email: jdenlea@denleacarton.com
jcarton@denleacarton.com
cfriesen@denleacarton.com
awallace@denleacarton.com
- and -
Michael D. Braun, Esq.
KUZYK LAW, LLP
2121 Avenue of the Stars, Ste. 800
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (213) 401-4100
Facsimile: (213) 401-0311
Email: mdb@kuzykclassactions.com
FORD MOTOR: Hilburg Sues Over Plug-In Hybrid Vehicles' Fire Risk
----------------------------------------------------------------
HARRY HILBURG, MARIANNE BIGELOW, and WILLIAM SIMMONS, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. FORD
MOTOR COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-10970-LVP-CI (E.D.
Mich., April 4, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for
violations of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, state consumer
protection acts, and fraudulent concealment and omission laws,
breaches of implied warranties, and unjust enrichment.
The case arises from the Defendant's design, manufacturing,
marketing, and selling model year 2020-2024 Ford Escape Hybrid and
2021-2024 Lincoln Corsair Grand Touring plug-in hybrid vehicles
with defect in their high-voltage lithium-ion batteries. According
to the complaint, this defect can cause vehicle fires and
explosions, even when the vehicles are parked and off. The
spontaneous fire risk exposes the Plaintiffs and putative class
members to an unreasonable risk of accident, injury, death, or
property damage if their vehicle's high-voltage lithium-ion
battery, located under the front seats, fails or catches fire while
in operation or, perhaps more commonly, spontaneously ignites while
the vehicle is parked at the class member's home, on a public
street, or in a public parking lot.
The Plaintiffs bring this class action on behalf of themselves and
a proposed class of all owners or lessees of a fire risk vehicle to
hold Ford accountable for its defective vehicles and the damages
these consumers have incurred as a result.
Ford Motor Company is a motor vehicle manufacturer, headquartered
in Dearborn, Michigan. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Steve W. Berman, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
1301 Second Avenue, Suite 2000
Seattle, WA 98101
Telephone: (206) 623-7292
Facsimile: (206) 623-0594
Email: steve@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Rachel E. Fitzpatrick, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
11 West Jefferson Street, Suite 1000
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Telephone: (602) 224-2626
Email: rachelf@hbsslaw.com
- and -
E. Powell Miller, Esq.
Dennis A. Lienhardt, Esq.
THE MILLER LAW FIRM PC
950 W. University Drive, Suite 300
Rochester, MI 48307
Telephone: (248) 841-2200
Email: epm@millerlawpc.com
dal@millerlawpc.com
GENERAL MOTORS: Vehicles Prone to Engine Failure, Hernandez Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
JOSE IGNACIO RAMIREZ HERNANDEZ, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GENERAL MOTORS LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-00085-RWS (N.D. Ga., April 3, 2025) is
a class action against the Defendant for breach of express
warranty, breach of implied warranty of merchantability, unjust
enrichment, and violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.
According to the complaint, GM's new engine -- the 6.2L V8 L87 --
is dangerously defective and has no resale value. The consumers
have experienced "sudden and catastrophic" engine failures within
days of buying vehicles GM equipped with the engine. Some consumers
have had the defective engine repaired only to have the repaired
engine fail twice more. The problem is so widespread that GM has
been telling service centers, in effect, that it doesn't have
enough parts to fix all the broken engines. This has left consumers
stranded with little reason to believe that GM will rectify it,
says the suit.
The class vehicles are subject to complete failure with little or
no warning. Repairs are complex, expensive, time-consuming, and
sometimes the repaired engines also fail. The Plaintiff and the
proposed class members also paid more for the class vehicles than
they would have paid if they'd known the vehicles were equipped
with a defective engine.
The Plaintiff's claims are typical of the class: he bought a new
2022 Chevrolet Sil verado 1500, and its engine failed; he could not
use the truck for over two months while GM tried to fix it.
General Motors LLC is an American multinational automotive
manufacturing company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert D. Cheeley, Esq.
Andre T. Tennille III, Esq.
Gabrielle D. Gravel, Esq.
McKenzie R. Nadel, Esq.
CHEELEY LAW GROUP, LLC
2500 Old Milton Parkway Suite 200
Alpharetta, GA 30009
Telephone: (770) 814-7001
E-mail: bob@cheeleylawgroup.com
dre@cheeleylawgroup.com
gabby@cheeleylawgroup.com
mckenzie@cheeleylawgroup.com
GOOGLE LLC: Faces EUR5-Bil. UK Class Suit Over Search Dominance
---------------------------------------------------------------
Barry Schwartz, writing for Search Engine Roundtable, reports that
CNBC reports Google has been sued in the UK for EUR5 billion ($6.6
billion) in potential damages over allegations that the U.S. tech
giant abused its "near-total dominance" in the online search market
to drive up prices. This was a class action lawsuit filed in the
U.K. Competition Appeal Tribunal claims Google abused its position
to restrict competing search engines.
According to CNBC, the suit is being brought on behalf of all
U.K.-based organizations that used Google's search advertising
services from Jan. 1, 2011, up until the time the claim was filed.
A 2020 market study from the U.K.'s competition regulator found
that Google earned 90% of all revenue in the search advertising
market.
"Today, UK businesses and organisations, big or small, have almost
no choice but to use Google ads to advertise their products and
services," Brook said in a statement on April 15. "Regulators
around the world have described Google as a monopoly and securing a
spot on Google's top pages is essential for visibility.
"Google has been leveraging its dominance in the general search and
search advertising market to overcharge advertisers," she added.
"This class action is about holding Google accountable for its
unlawful practices and seeking compensation on behalf of UK
advertisers who have been overcharged."
Google called the case "yet another speculative and opportunistic
case" and said that it plans to "argue against it vigorously."
"Consumers and advertisers use Google because it helpful, not
because there are no alternatives," a spokesperson told CNBC. [GN]
GUIDEHOUSE MANAGED: Hernandez Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Calif.
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled CLAUDIA A. HERNANDEZ individually, and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. GUIDEHOUSE MANAGED
SERVICES, LLC; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants, Case
No. 2025CUOE038604, was removed from the Superior Court of the
State of California, County of Ventura to the U.S. District Court
for the Central District of California on April 10, 2025.
The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 2:25-cv-03173 to the proceeding.
The case arises from Defendants' alleged violations of the
California Labor Code and the California Business and Professions
Code.
Headquartered in Tysons, VA, Guidehouse, Inc. is an advisory,
technology, and managed services firm serving commercial businesses
and government entities. [BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Christina Tellado, Esq.
Austin Schulz, Esq.
POLSINELLI LLP
2049 Century Park East, Suite 2900
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 556-1801
Facsimile: (310) 556-1802
E-mail: ttellado@polsinelli.com
aschulz@polsinelli.com
HALEON PLC: Settles Robitussin False Marketing Suit for $4.5M
-------------------------------------------------------------
Tanasia Kenney of The Fresno Bee reports that Robitussin owes some
cold sufferers money as part of a class-action settlement.
The cough medicine brand has agreed to pay $4.5 million to resolve
claims that it duped consumers by marketing its products as
"non-drowsy," according to the settlement website.
A complaint filed in June 2022 said calling those products
non-drowsy is "false and misleading," arguing that Robitussin
contains dextromethorphan, a cough suppressant commonly found in
over-the-counter medicines.
While rare, side effects can include drowsiness and dizziness,
according to the National Institutes of Health.
"Consumers rely on this 'Non-Drowsy' medicine when they are
driving, working, and supervising their children (when being drowsy
would be problematic or even dangerous)," the lawsuit says. "But
the truth is that the Non-Drowsy Robitussin Products do cause
drowsiness, and Defendants know this."
Pharmaceutical firm Haleon, the maker of Robitussin, has denied
wrongdoing.
McClatchy News reached out to the company for comment April 15 and
was awaiting a response. Going forward, Haleon has agreed to stop
labeling certain Robitussin products as "non drowsy" and will
"exclude that statement from any future marketing," according to
the settlement website. Affected buyers have until May 12 to file a
claim.
Here's what to know:
Who's eligible?
Anyone in the U.S. who bought any flavor Robitussin product
containing dextromethorphan (or DXM) and labeled as "non-drowsy"
between Feb. 16, 2016, and Jan. 21 are eligible to file a claim,
according to the settlement website.
How do I file a claim?
Claim forms can be completed and submitted online or mailed,
administrators said.
Under the terms of the settlement, buyers with a qualifying proof
of purchase may file up to three claims while those without it are
limited to one claim per household.
All claims must be postmarked or submitted by Monday, May 12.
How much is the payment?
Buyers can expect to receive between $1.50 and $4.75 per claim,
though amounts may be higher or lower depending on the number of
valid claims filed, the settlement website says.
When will I get paid?
Buyers who submit a valid and timely claim will be paid after a
court approves the settlement, barring any appeals, according to
the administrator's website. A hearing to finalize the terms is
scheduled for June 30. "It's always uncertain how these appeals
will be resolved and resolving them can take time," administrators
said. "Please be patient." [GN]
HEALTHEQUITY INC: Rosen Law Probes Potential Securities Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Why: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces
an investigation of potential securities claims on behalf of
shareholders of HealthEquity, Inc. (NASDAQ: HQY) resulting from
allegations that HealthEquity may have issued materially misleading
business information to the investing public.
So What: If you purchased HealthEquity securities you may be
entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees
or costs through a contingency fee arrangement. The Rosen Law Firm
is preparing a class action seeking recovery of investor losses.
What to do next: To join the prospective class action, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=37760 or call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com
for information on the class action.
What is this about: On March 19, 2025, during market hours,
Investopedia published an article entitled "HealthEquity Stock
Plummets as Firm's Profit Hurt by Cyber Threats, Fraud." The
article stated that HealthEquity shares sank after the "Health
Savings Account (HSA) custodian missed profit estimates and gave
weak guidance as it dealt with the costs of a rise in criminal
activity targeting the firm."
On this news, HealthEquity's shares fell 17% on March 19, 2025.
Why Rosen Law: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel
with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms
issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or
any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not
actually litigate securities class actions. Be wise in selecting
counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the
globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved the
largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese
Company at the time. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS
Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class
action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4
each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of
dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438
million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was
named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's
attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.
Contact Information:
Laurence Rosen, Esq.
Phillip Kim, Esq.
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Tel: (212) 686-1060
Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
Fax: (212) 202-3827
case@rosenlegal.com
www.rosenlegal.com [GN]
IFCO SYSTEMS: DeAnda-Zavala Labor Suit Removed to E.D. Calif.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled JOSHUA DeANDA-ZAVALA, as an individual and on
behalf of all other similarly situated Class Members, Plaintiff v.
IFCO SYSTEMS US, LLC, a Delaware Corporation; MTNA, INC., a
California Corporation; PEOPLEREADY, INC., a Washington
Corporation; TRUEBLUE, INC., a Washington Corporation; and DOES 1
100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 25CECG00957, was removed from
the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of
Fresno to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
California on April 9, 2025.
The Clerk of Court for the Eastern District of California assigned
Case No. 1:25-cv-00413-KES-SKO to the proceeding.
The case arises from Defendant's alleged violations of the
California Labor Code and the California Business and Professions
Code.
Headquartered in Tacoma, WA, IFCO Systems, US, LLC is a foreign
for-profit corporation that operates as a temporary staffing
company. [BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
David R. Ongaro, Esq.
Cara R. Sherman, Esq.
Christine Lee, Esq.
ONGARO PC
1604 Union Street
San Francisco, CA 94123
Telephone: (415) 433-3900
Facsimile: (415) 433-3950
E-mail: dongaro@ongaropc.com
csherman@ongaropc.com
clee@ongaropc.com
INTER-CON SECURITY: Faces Sumpter Suit Over Unlawful Termination
----------------------------------------------------------------
PARADISE SUMPTER, individually and on behalf of those similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. INTER-CON SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 1:25-cv-03661 (S.D. Ill., April 4, 2025) is a class action
complaint brought under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining
Notification Act by the Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of
the other similarly situated former employees, against Defendant,
for WARN Act purposes.
The Defendant operates a facility located in Chicago, IL, where
Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees worked. Over the
last 90 days, upon information and belief, on March 6, 2025, the
Defendant provided notice that it would be terminating over one
hundred employees and at least 33% of active full-time employees,
including Plaintiff, at the Facility, on April 3, 2025. Despite
this notice, the Plaintiff's last day of employment was on March
29, 2025. Upon information and belief, she was terminated on that
day.
The Plaintiff brings this action, individually, and on behalf of
other similarly situated former employees who worked for Defendant
and were terminated as part of the foreseeable result of a mass lay
off or plant closing ordered by Defendant on or around April 3,
2025 and within 90 days of that date and who were not provided 60
days' advance written notice of their terminations by Defendant, as
required by the WARN Act.
Inter-Con Security Systems, Inc. is a US-based multinational
security services company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
Cassandra Miller, Esq.
STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC
One Magnificent Mile
980 N Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610
Chicago IL, 60611
Telephone: (872) 263-1100
Facsimile: (872) 263-1109
E-mail: sam@straussborrelli.com
cmiller@straussborrelli.com
- and -
J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
Michael C. Iadevaia, Esq.
STRANCH, JENNINGS, & GARVEY, PLLC
223 Rosa Parks Ave. Suite 200
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 254-8801
Facsimile: (615) 255-5419
E-mail: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
miadevaia@stranchlaw.com
- and -
Lynn A. Toops, Esq.
Ian Bensberg, Esq.
COHEN & MALAD, LLP
One Indiana Square, Suite 1400
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Telephone: (317) 636-6481
E-mail: ltoops@cohenmalad.com
ibensberg@cohenmalad.com
INTRASYSTEMS LLC: Couchenour Suit Transferred to W.D. Pa.
---------------------------------------------------------
The case styled DAVID COUCHENOUR, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. INTRASYSTEMS, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-00473-NBF, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts to the U.S.
District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on April 9,
2025.
The Clerk of Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-10190 to the proceeding.
The case arises from Defendant's failure to properly secure and
safeguard Plaintiff's and other similarly situated current and
former patients’ sensitive information.
Intrasystems, LLC is a Massachusetts-based, third-party IT firm
contracted to host, manage, and secure computer systems for its
clients, including for Pennsylvania-based health network Allegheny
Health Network. [BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Jennifer R. O'Shea, Esq.
WINGET, SPADAFORA & SCHWARTZBERG, LLP
Telephone: (617) 943-3919
E-mail: oshea.j@wssllp.com
KG MINING: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Loehr Suit Claims
-------------------------------------------------------
SAMANTHE LOEHR, Individually and On Behalf of Others Similarly
Situated, Plaintiff v. KG MINING (BALD MOUNTAIN) INC., Defendant,
Case No. 2:25-cv-00639-NJK (D. Nev., April 9, 2025) seeks to
recover unpaid wages and other damages from KG Mining (Bald
Mountain) Inc. for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and
Nevada law.
KG Mining employed Plaintiff Loehr in its KG Mining Mine in its
Bald Mountain, Nevada gold mine from approximately July 2022 until
December 2023.
According to the complaint, KG Mining classified Loehr as
non-exempt and paid her by the hour. Under its pre/post shift off
the clock policy, KG Mining does not compensate Loehr for the hours
he spent in donning of protective clothing and safety gear,
gathering of tools and equipment, and in obtaining appropriate
forms that are integral and indispensable for his work duties.
KG Mining operates the Bald Mountain mine in Nevada. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Esther C. Rodriguez, Esq.
RODRIGUEZ LAW OFFICES, P.C.
10161 Park Run Drive, Suite 150
Las Vegas, NV 89145
Telephone: (702) 320-8400
Facsimile: (702) 320-8401
E-mail: info@rodriguezlaw.com
- and -
Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 877-8788
E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com
- and -
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 352-1100
Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
adunlap@mybackwages.com
KUWATA PAN: Underpays Dental Technicians, Suriel Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------
VICTOR SURIEL, on behalf of himself, individually, and all other
persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. KUWATA PAN DENT CORP.
U.S.A. f/k/a KUWATA PAN DENT CORP., YUKIO OTSUBO, and JUNJI INOUE,
Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-02298 (D.N.J., April 3, 2025) is a
civil action for damages and equitable relief based upon willful
violations that the Defendants committed of Plaintiff's rights
guaranteed to him under the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law, and the New Jersey Wage
Payment Law.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a dental technician
from November 1998 through June 14, 2024. He performed non-exempt
duties for the Defendants including making bases for crowns and
other dental implants.
Throughout Plaintiff's employment, the Defendants failed to pay him
at the overtime rate of pay of one and one-half times his regular
rate of pay for any hours that he worked in excess of 40 each week,
and instead paid him at his straight-time rate for those hours. The
Defendants willfully disregarded and purposefully evaded
record-keeping requirements of the FLSA and NJWHL by failing to
maintain accurate records of the hours worked by Plaintiff and
similarly situated employees. The Defendants further failed to post
notices explaining wage and hour requirements in conspicuous places
as required by the state and federal laws, says the suit.
Kuwata Pan Dent Corp. U.S.A is a dental laboratory with its
principal place of business in Cedar Knolls, New Jersey.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew J. Farnworth, Esq.
ROMERO LAW GROUP PLLC
490 Wheeler Road, Suite 277
Hauppauge, NY 11788
Telephone: (631) 257-5588
E-mail: mfarnworth@romerolawny.com
LEE UNIVERSITY: Fails to Protect Personal Data, Nabors Says
-----------------------------------------------------------
CALEB NABORS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. LEE UNIVERSITY, Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-00113 (E.D. Tenn., April 3, 2025) arises from the
Defendant's failure to protect highly sensitive data.
According to the complaint, the Defendant stores a litany of highly
sensitive personal identifiable information about its current and
former consumers. But Defendant lost control over that data when
cybercriminals infiltrated its insufficiently protected computer
systems in a data breach.
It is unknown for precisely how long the cybercriminals had access
to Defendant's network before the breach was discovered. In other
words, the Defendant had no effective means to prevent, detect,
stop, or mitigate breaches of its systems -- thereby allowing
cybercriminals unrestricted access to its current and former
consumers' PII. Cybercriminals were able to breach Defendant's
systems because Defendant failed to adequately train its employees
on cybersecurity and failed to maintain reasonable security
safeguards or protocols to protect the Class' PII, alleges the
suit.
The Plaintiff is a data breach victim. He brings this class action
on behalf of himself, and all others harmed by Defendant's alleged
misconduct.
Lee University is a university based in Cleveland, Tennessee.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
Grayson Wells, Esq.
STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 254-8801
E-mail: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
gwells@stranchlaw.com
- and -
Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
Raina C. Borrelli, Esq.
STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC
980 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610
Chicago, IL 60611
Telephone: (872) 263-1100
Facsimile: (872) 263-1109
E-mail: sam@straussborrelli.com
raina@straussborrelli.com
LIBERTY NATIONAL: Kurmangaliyev Sues Over Unwanted Text Messages
----------------------------------------------------------------
SAIT KURMANGALIYEV, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. LIBERTY NATIONAL FINANCIAL CORP.,
Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-01993-MMH (E.D.N.Y., April 10, 2025)
seeks redress for Defendant's violations of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act.
Beginning at least on November 15, 2024, the Defendant sent or
caused to be sent multiple telemarketing text messages to
Plaintiff' residential telephone number. Despite Plaintiff's
unequivocal opt-out request and Defendant's subsequent opt-out
confirmation, the Defendant ignored Plaintiff's opt-out request and
continued to bombard Plaintiff with more unwanted telemarketing
text messages, beginning again on November 18, 2024, says the
suit.
Based in Norman, OK, Liberty National Financial Corp. offers
various forms of personal insurance. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
Shamis & Gentile, P.A.
14 NE 1st Ave., Suite 705
Miami, FL 33132
Telephone: (305) 479-2299
E-mail: ashamis@shamisgentile.com
LOS ANGELES, CA: Faces Class Suit Over ADA Violations in Parks
--------------------------------------------------------------
Schneider Wallace reports that if you are a person with a mobility
disability who uses a wheelchair, scooter, or other aid for
mobility, and you use or would like to use the parks and recreation
facilities operated by the City of Los Angeles, please read this
information about a class action lawsuit that may affect your
rights.
A class action lawsuit entitled Judy Griffin, et al. v. City of Los
Angeles, Case No. 2:24-cv-06312-RGK-MAR has been filed in the
federal court for the Central District of California against the
City of Los Angeles ("the City") on behalf of the following
people:
All persons with mobility disabilities, including those who use
wheelchairs, scooters, canes or other mobility aids, who use or
desire to use the City of Los Angeles' public parks and park
facilities.
The lawsuit claims that the City has failed to construct, modify
and maintain its parks and park facilities so that they are fully
and equally accessible to people with mobility disabilities, and
that this violates the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") and
similar state and federal laws.
The Plaintiffs in the case are four individuals with mobility
disabilities and an independent living center representing
individuals with mobility disabilities. They seek, on behalf of the
class, a court order ("declaratory and injunctive relief") that
would require the City to fix its parks and park facilities, such
as parking spaces, paths of travel, picnic areas, play areas,
restrooms, recreation centers, senior centers, and other facilities
so that they comply with the laws that require the City to make its
parks and park facilities accessible to people with mobility
disabilities. The lawsuit does not seek money for the class.
On February 13, 2025, the Judge presiding over this case issued an
Order certifying this case as a class action on behalf of the
above-described class. The Court also appointed the named
Plaintiffs as representatives of the class and the law firms listed
below as Class Counsel. A trial in the case is scheduled for July
29, 2025.
YOUR RIGHT TO SUE THE CITY FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
FOR DISABILITY ACCESS TO ITS PARKS AND PARK FACILITIES MAY BE
AFFECTED BY THE OUTCOME OF THIS CASE. AS A CLASS MEMBER, YOU WILL
BE BOUND BY ANY JUDGMENT IN THIS CASE, FAVORABLE OR NOT.
If you so desire, you may seek Court approval to intervene in this
case to make your own claims about the accessibility of the City's
parks and park facilities. Otherwise, you will be represented by
Class Counsel, listed below. Both Class Counsel and the Plaintiff
class representatives have a duty to represent the best interests
of the class, including you, for getting the declaratory and
injunctive relief described above. If you would like information
about the lawsuit, or have questions, please contact Class Counsel
at the below telephone numbers, scan the QR code below, or send an
email to: LA.Parks.Class.Action@dralegal.org. Please do not contact
the Court directly about this case. [GN]
MESA AIR: M&A Investigates Proposed Merger With Republic Airways
----------------------------------------------------------------
Monteverde & Associates PC (the "M&A Class Action Firm"), has
recovered millions of dollars for shareholders and is recognized as
a Top 50 Firm in the 2024 ISS Securities Class Action Services
Report. We are headquartered at the Empire State Building in New
York City and are investigating Mesa Air Group, Inc. (NASDAQ:
MESA), relating to the proposed merger with Republic Airways
Holdings Inc. Under the terms of the agreement, Mesa shareholders
will own a minimum of 6%, and maximum 12% of the combined company
dependent upon Mesa's achievement of certain pre-closing criteria.
Click here for more
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/mesa-air-group-inc/. It is free and
there is no cost or obligation to you.
NOT ALL LAW FIRMS ARE THE SAME. Before you hire a law firm, you
should talk to a lawyer and ask:
1. Do you file class actions and go to Court?
2. When was the last time you recovered money for
shareholders?
3. What cases did you recover money in and how much?
About Monteverde & Associates PC
Our firm litigates and has recovered money for shareholders…and
we do it from our offices in the Empire State Building. We are a
national class action securities firm with a successful track
record in trial and appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme
Court.
No company, director or officer is above the law. If you own common
stock in the above listed company and have concerns or wish to
obtain additional information free of charge, please visit our
website or contact Juan Monteverde, Esq. either via e-mail at
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com or by telephone at (212) 971-1341.
Contact:
Juan Monteverde, Esq.
MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC
The Empire State Building
350 Fifth Ave. Suite 4740
New York, NY 10118
United States of America
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com
Tel: (212) 971-1341 [GN]
MOLINA HEALTHCARE: Court Seals TCPA Class Action Documents
----------------------------------------------------------
Eric J. Troutman of Troutman Amin, LLP, in an article for The
National Law Review, reports that Molina Healthcare is facing a
pretty serious TCPA class action up in Washington state.
At issue are claims a lady was tricked or duped or confused into
switching to Molina from Aetna and then Molina kept calling her
even after she said "I am going to ask you not to call my house
again" -- which is pretty clear in my view.
Plus Molina was using prerecorded calls which are automatically
actionable when sent for marketing purposes without consent to
either a cell phone or landline–not good for Molina.
Perhaps even worse news for Molina, they have #biglaw defending
them against Avi Kaufman -- one of the best class action attorneys
in the nation. So I have a feeling I know where this is headed.
I mean, you can't say BIG LOSS without big law . . .
But who knows, maybe they'll pull off a big win. We'll see.
The Plaintiff's class certification effort is now fully briefed and
the Court just issued an order sealing some of the material
designated confidential by the parties. This means nosy operators
of TCPA blogs can't comb through all the records.
Too bad.
Sealing order is Ramey v. Molina, 2025 WL 1100632 (W.D. Wash March
20, 2025).
But what we do know is Molina (or someone acting on its behalf)
allegedly called the Plaintiff and duped her into switching
healthcare plans away from Aetna. When Plaintiff figured that out
she switched back to Aetna but Molina kept calling. No way to know
for sure if those facts are true.
Then again, according to Plaintiff's expert Molina made hundreds of
prerecorded calls to numbers within a sample set that were on the
company's internal DNC list. Plaintiff extrapolates there will be
over 22,000 individuals in the full set who received approximately
200,000 prerecorded calls AFTER being asked to stop calling. Eesh.
No idea if any of this is true, of course, and a lot of the record
is sealed but it seems Molina could be facing $1BB or so in
exposure here. Eesh.
We'll see what happens next.
But its just another example of how dangerous TCPAWorld can be
folks. If you are using prerecorded calls to contact consumers you
need to make absolutely sure your internal DNC practices are in
great condition and be sure to retain TOP NOTCH TCPA counsel to
defend any resulting class litigation. [GN]
NANAMICA USA: Web Site Not Accessible to the Blind, Bullock Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
JUSTIN BULLOCK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NANAMICA USA INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-03024 (S.D.N.Y., April 11, 2025) alleges violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web
site, www.us.nanamica.com, is not fully or equally accessible to
blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the Plaintiff, in
violation of the ADA.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.
Nanamica Inc. was founded in 2003. The Company's line of business
includes the manufacturing of apparel and accessories. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dan Shaked, Esq.
SHAKED LAW GROUP, P.C.
14 Harwood Court, Suite 415
Scarsdale, NY 10583
Telephone: (917) 373-9128
Email: ShakedLawGroup@gmail.com
NASHVILLE DOWNTOWN: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Chiodo Says
----------------------------------------------------------
JAMES CHIODO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NASHVILLE DOWNTOWN HOTEL, LLC; and
FONTAINEBLEAU DEVELOPMENT LLC, Defendants, Case No. 3:25-cv-00396
(M.D. Tenn., April 9, 2025) seeks to recover from the Defendants
unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated
damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards
Act.
Plaintiff Chiodo was employed by the Defendants as a bartender.
Nashville Downtown Hotel, LLC operates as a hotel. The Company
offers amenities including suites and hotel rooms, dining
restaurants, and entertainment. [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
Telephone: (615) 244-2202
Facsimile: (615) 252-3798
Email: dgarrison@barrettjohnston.com
jfrank@barrettjohnston.com
nchanin@barrettjohnston.com
NATUROPATHICA HOLISTIC: El Sayed Balks at Unsolicited Text Messages
-------------------------------------------------------------------
ALIANA EL SAYED, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NATUROPATHICA HOLISTIC HEALTH INC,
Defendant, Case No. 8:25-cv-00846-SDM-CPT (M.D. Fla., April 4,
2025) is a putative class action brought by the Plaintiff against
the Defendant pursuant to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendant engages in unsolicited
text messaging and continues to text message Plaintiff and other
consumers after they have opted out of Defendant's solicitations to
promote its goods and services.
Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to halt
Defendant's illegal conduct, which has resulted in the invasion of
privacy, harassment, aggravation, and disruption of the daily life
of thousands of individuals. The Plaintiff also seeks statutory
damages on behalf of Plaintiff and members of the Class, and any
other available legal or equitable remedies.
Naturopathica Holistic Health Inc. is a beauty and wellbeing
company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael Eisenband, Esq.
EISENBAND LAW, P.A.
515 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 120
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 533-4092
E-mail: MEisenband@Eisenbandlaw.com
- and -
Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq.
HIRALDO P.A.
401 E. Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1400
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 400-4713
E-mail: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com
NBC FRANCHISOR: Cantwell Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
-----------------------------------------------------------------
LISA CANTWELL, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NBC FRANCHISOR, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-01848 (E.D.N.Y., April 3, 2025) is a civil rights action
against Defendant for the failure to design, construct, maintain,
and operate Defendant's website, www.nothingbundtcakes.com, to be
fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other
blind or visually-impaired people in violation of the Americans
with Disabilities Act and the New York City Human Rights Law.
The Plaintiff was injured when she attempted multiple times, most
recently on January 9, 2025, to access Defendant's website from her
home in an effort to shop for Defendant's products, but encountered
barriers that denied the full and equal access to Defendant's
online goods, content, and services.
The website contains access barriers that prevent free and full use
by the Plaintiff using keyboards and screen-reading software. These
barriers include but are not limited to: missing alt-text, hidden
elements on web pages, incorrectly formatted lists, unannounced pop
ups, unclear labels for interactive elements, and the requirement
that some events be performed solely with a mouse, says the suit.
The Plaintiff now seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers.
NBC Franchisor, LLC, d/b/a Nothing Bundt Cakes, is a Delaware
limited liability company organized on June 14, 2021.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
E-mail: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
NY MORTGAGE: Ruiz Sues Over Judgment Post-Foreclosure Sale Amount
-----------------------------------------------------------------
RICHARD RUIZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. STATE OF NEW YORK MORTGAGE AGENCY, SCHILLER,
KNAPP, LEFKOWITZ, AND HERTZEL, LLP, M&T BANK CORPORATION, JOHN AND
JANE DOE INVESTORS 1-10, and JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-10, Defendants,
Case No. 1:25-cv-01837 (E.D.N.Y., April 3, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendants for negligence, gross negligence, legal
malpractice, unjust enrichment, prima facie tort, and for
violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, New York
General Business Law, New York Judiciary Law, and Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
This action alleges 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 required foreclosing mortgagees to provide delinquent
homeowners additional pre-foreclosure notices and require
affirmations from attorneys to attest to the veracity of the
documents being submitted in court at all stages of the litigation.
Due to these heightened requirements, thousands of mortgages became
uncollectible because certificate-holders, servicers, and their
attorneys simply could not or would not produce the required proof
in admissible form sufficient to prosecute a foreclosure case, says
the suit.
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, the suit
alleges.
The State of New York Mortgage Agency is a New York State
public-benefit corporation created in 1970 by the state government
of New York to provide affordable homeownership to low- and
moderate-income New Yorkers.[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
Telephone: (718) 263-6800
Facsimile: (718) 520-9401
E-mail: manderson@sbagk.com
OAKWOOD MANAGEMENT: Green Sues Over FDCPA Violations
----------------------------------------------------
CARL GREEN, Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated v. OAKWOOD MANAGEMENT COMPANY d/b/a Buckeye Utility
Billing Services, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-00380-MHW-CMV (S.D.
Ohio, April 9, 2025) accuses the Defendant of violating the Fair
Debt Collection Practices Act.
The Defendant breached its contractual duty of good faith and fair
dealing to Plaintiff and each putative class member by charging
for, collecting and/or retaining the so-called "set up" fees and
monthly "administrative fees". In addition, the Defendant failed to
comply with the debt validation and noticing provisions of 15 U.S.
Code Section 1692.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff now also asserts claims for breach of
contract, unjust enrichment, disgorgement pursuant to Ohio Revised
Code, conversion, and for declaratory and injunctive relief.
Oakwood Management Company is a property management company
headquartered in Columbus, OH. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James E. Nobile, Esq.
JENESQ
285 S. Liberty St., Suite 1D
Powell, OH 43065
Telephone: (614) 300-2764
E-mail: jenobile@ntlegal.com
OLSON REMCHO: Removes Alvarez Suit to E.D. Calif.
-------------------------------------------------
The Defendant in the case of JOSE ALVAREZ, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. OLSON REMCHO
LLP; CONNIE BERGSTROM; EMILY A. ANDREWS; MICHELLE WIXOM; and DOES 1
through 20, inclusive, Defendants, filed a notice to remove the
lawsuit from the Superior Court of the State of California, County
of Sacramento (Case No. 25CV002559) to the U.S. District Court for
the Eastern District of California on April 10, 2025.
The clerk of court for the Eastern District of California assigned
Case No. 2:25-at-00464. The case is assigned to Judge Sean C.
Riordan.
Olson Remcho LLP is a political and government law firm based in
California. [BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Vincent R. Fisher, Esq.
Eleno Nunez Gonzalez, Esq.
O'HAGAN MEYER LLP
One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2100
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: (415) 578-6900
Facsimile: (415) 578-6910
Email: Vfisher@ohaganmeyer.com
Egonzalez@ohaganmeyer.com
ORIGINAL BAND: Berube Class Suit Removed to W.D. Mich.
------------------------------------------------------
The Defendant in the case of DENIS BERUBE, JR., individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THE ORIGINAL
BAND OF SAULT STE. MARIE CHIPPEWA INDIANS AND THEIR HEIRS d/b/a
KEWADIN CASINOS, Defendant, filed a notice to remove the lawsuit
from the Circuit Court of the State of Michigan, County of Chippewa
(Case No. 25-18118-CZ) to the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of Michigan on April 10, 2025.
The clerk of court for the Western District of Michigan assigned
Case No. 2:25-cv-00061 to the proceeding. The case is assigned to
Judge Robert J. Jonker and referred to Judge Maarten Vermaat.
The Original Band of Sault Ste. Marie Chippewa Indians and their
Heirs d/b/a Kewadin Casinos are a set of casinos located in the US
state of Michigan. The casinos are owned by the federally
recognized Sault Tribe of Chippewa Indians. The primary property is
located in Sault Ste. Marie, with additional locations on tribal
lands in Christmas, Hessel, Manistique, and St. Ignace. [BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
E. Powell Miller, Esq.
Emily E. Hughes, Esq.
THE MILLER LAW FIRM, P.C.
850 W. University Drive, Suite 300
Rochester, MI 48307
Telephone: (248) 841-2200
Email: epm@millerlawpc.com
eeh@millerlawpc.com
- and -
Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
MILLBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (866) 252-0878
Email: gklinger@milberg.com
- and -
Sheldon H. Klein, Esq.
Daniel V. Barnett, Esq.
Tyler A. Burk, Esq.
BUTZEL LONG, P.C.
300 Ottawa Ave NW, Suite 620
Grand Rapids, MI 49503
Telephone: (616) 988-5600
Email: klein@butzel.com
barnett@butzel.com
burkt@butzel.com
PALADIN ENERGY: Faces Class Action Lawsuit in Victoria
------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Finance reports that Paladin Energy Ltd (ASX:PDN, TSX:PDN,
OTCQX:PALAF) (Paladin) has been served with a class action
proceeding in the Supreme Court of Victoria.
The class action alleges that Paladin made misleading
representations and contravened its ASX continuous disclosure
obligations between June 27, 2024 and November 11, 2024.
Paladin intends to strongly defend this claim.
This announcement has been authorised for release by the Board of
Directors of Paladin Energy Ltd. [GN]
PETMED EXPRESS: Faces Cobbs Suit Over Illegal Wiretapping
---------------------------------------------------------
KRISTIN COBBS; LYNNE KAWAMINAMI; and LORETTA SCHWEINSBURG,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. PETMED EXPRESS, INC., Defendant, Case No.
9:25-cv-80458-XXXX (S.D. Fla., April 10, 2025) is a class action
lawsuit for data privacy violations on behalf of all individuals
who have purchased veterinary medicine on www.1800petmeds.com.
According to the complaint, the Defendant aids, employs, agrees
with, and conspires with third parties -- such as Meta Platforms,
Inc., Attentive Mobile, Inc., and Zeta Global Corporation -- to
eavesdrop on communications sent and received by Plaintiffs and
Class members, including communications that contain sensitive and
confidential information. By assisting third parties with
intercepting sensitive and confidential communications, Defendant
violated state and federal anti-wiretapping laws, says the suit.
PetMed Express, Inc., doing business as 1-800-PetMeds, is an online
pet pharmacy. The Company offers prescription and non-prescription
pet medications, and other health products and supplies for dogs,
cats, and horses. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. Pineiro, Esq.
Brandon S. Floch, Esq.
Christopher R. Reilly, Esq.
MARCUS NEIMAN RASHBAUM & PINEIRO LLP
One Biscayne Tower
2 S. Biscayne Blvd., Ste. 2530
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 400-4260
Email: mpineiro@mnrlawfirm.com
bfloch@mnrlawfirm.com
creilly@mnrlawfirm.com
- and -
Brian Levin, Esq.
Jacob Polin, Esq.
LEVIN LAW, P.A.
2665 S Bayshore Dr., Ph. 2B
Miami, FL 33133
Telephone: (305) 402-9050
Email: brian@levinlawpa.com
jpolin@levinlawpa.com
PETROSSIAN INC: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Reyes Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
NATHALIE REYES, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Petrossian, Inc., Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-02803 (S.D.N.Y., April 4, 2025) is a civil rights action
against Petrossian for its failure to design, construct, maintain,
and operate its website, https://www.petrossian.com, to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind
or visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New
York City Human Rights Law.
The Plaintiff has made an attempt to visit and use Petrossian.com.
On March 31, 2025, the Plaintiff was planning an upcoming family
celebration and wanted to prepare dishes that would be enjoyed by
all her guests. While searching online for a local store offering
delicacies and gourmet foods, she discovered the Defendant's
website, Petrossian.com. Having accessed the website, the Plaintiff
encountered multiple accessibility barriers.
The navigation bar contained drop-down menus that did not indicate
whether they were expanded or collapsed, making it unclear whether
additional options were available. On the Product page, the
requirement to choose the tin size was not focusable with the "Tab"
key. Additionally, when navigating with the arrow keys, it did not
announce its state, so the Plaintiff did not know if the size she
selected was activated. These access barriers have caused
Petrossian.com to be inaccessible to, and not independently usable
by blind and visually-impaired persons, says the suit.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Petrossian's policies, practices, and procedures so that its
website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory
damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to
unlawful discrimination.
Petrossian, Inc. operates the website that offers gourmet food
products, particularly caviar, smoked fish, foie gras, truffle
products, sweets, and gift sets.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael H. Cohen, Esq.
EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC
68-29 Main Street
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (917) 437-3737
E-mail: mcohen@ealg.law
PHILADELPHIA PIZZA: Jiles Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
-------------------------------------------------------
TIFFANIE JILES, individually and on behalf of similarly situated
persons, Plaintiff v. PHILADELPHIA PIZZA TEAM INC. d/b/a Domino’s
Pizza, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-01851 (E.D. Pa., April 10, 2025)
seeks to recover unpaid minimum wages owed to Plaintiff and
similarly situated delivery drivers employed by Defendant.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant from approximately March
2022 to August 2024 as a delivery driver. She worked at two of
Defendant's Domino's Pizza stores during her employment. Allegedly,
the Defendant uniformly failed to reimburse its delivery drivers at
any reasonable approximation of the cost of owning and operating
their vehicles for Defendant's benefit. As a result of Defendant's
flawed reimbursement policy, Plaintiff did not receive mandatory
minimum wage under the Fair Labor Standards Act, says the suit.
Philadelphia Pizza Team, Inc. operates numerous Domino's Pizza
franchise stores in Pennsylvania. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
C. Ryan Morgan, Esq.
Jolie N. Pavlos, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
20 N. Orange Ave., 15th Floor
P.O. Box 4979
Orlando, FL 32802-4979
Telephone: (407) 420-1414
Facsimile: (407) 245-3401
E-mail: RMorgan@forthepeople.com
JPavlos@forthepeople.com
PIXIE MARKET: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Pittman Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
DEBBIE PITTMAN, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated Plaintiff v. Pixie Market, Inc., Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-03572 (N.D. Ill., April 3, 2025) is a civil rights action
against Pixie Market for its failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate its website, https://pixiemarket.com, to be
fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other
blind or visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans
with Disabilities Act.
According to the complaint, the website contains access barriers
that prevent free and full use by Plaintiff and blind persons using
keyboards and screen-reading software. These barriers are pervasive
and include, but are not limited to inaccurate focus order,
ambiguous link texts, unclear labels for interactive elements,
inaccurate alt-text on graphics, inaccessible drop-down menus, the
lack of navigation links, the denial of keyboard access for some
interactive elements, inaccurate landmark structure, and the
requirement that transactions be performed solely with a mouse.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Pixie Market's policies, practices, and procedures so that
Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory
damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to
unlawful discrimination.
Pixie Market, Inc. operates the website that offers women apparel
including outerwear, sweaters, T-shirts, jackets, blazers, skirts,
pants, and shorts.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by
David B. Reyes, Esq.
EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC
68-29 Main Street
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (630) 478-0856
E-mail: Dreyes@ealg.law
RETINA GROUP: Agrees to Settle Data Breach Class Suit for $3.6MM
----------------------------------------------------------------
Top Class Actions reports that Retina Group of Washington has
agreed to a $3.6 million class action lawsuit settlement to resolve
claims that it failed to prevent a 2023 data breach.
The Retina Group of Washington settlement benefits anyone whose
personal information was potentially accessible in the company's
data breach on March 26, 2023.
The RGW data breach reportedly affected thousands of individuals
and jeopardized sensitive information such as Social Security
numbers, driver's license numbers and health insurance data.
Affected patients quickly took legal action against Retina Group of
Washington, arguing that the company could have prevented the data
breach through reasonable cybersecurity measures.
Retina Group of Washington is an eye care center with locations in
Maryland and Virginia that offers a variety of services, including
retina surgery, diabetic eye care, macular degeneration treatment
and more.
RGW hasn't admitted any wrongdoing but agreed to a $3.6 million
class action settlement to resolve these allegations.
Under the terms of the Retina Group of Washington settlement, class
members can receive a cash reimbursement or an alternative cash
payment.
Class members who experienced losses as a result of the data breach
can receive up to $300 for ordinary out-of-pocket expenses such as
bank fees, communication charges, travel expenses and up to four
hours of lost time at a rate of $25 per hour. The settlement also
allows claims for up to $5,000 in additional reimbursement for
extraordinary losses resulting from identity theft or fraud.
Class members who did not experience losses as a result of the data
breach can still benefit from the settlement. The settlement allows
these class members to receive an alternative cash payment of
around $100. Exact alternate payment amounts will vary depending on
the number of claims filed and the funds remaining in the
settlement after paying reimbursement claims.
Class members may also be eligible for two years of free credit
monitoring and identity theft protection services. These services
include daily three-bureau credit monitoring, identity restoration
services and $1 million in identity theft insurance. Class members
who opt to receive an alternate cash payment are not eligible for
credit monitoring
RGW agreed to implement additional data privacy and security
measures to enhance its cybersecurity. These measures include
maintaining a written information security policy, conducting
cybersecurity training, maintaining a written password policy and
more.
The deadline for exclusion and objection is May 27, 2025.
The final approval hearing for the RGW data breach settlement is
scheduled for June 9, 2025.
In order to receive settlement benefits, class members must submit
a valid claim form by June 23, 2025.
Who's Eligible
Anyone whose personal information was potentially accessible in the
Retina Group of Washington data breach or who received a
notification from the defendant regarding the data breach.
Potential Award
Up to $5,300
Proof of Purchase
Documentation of unreimbursed expenses such as bank fees,
long-distance phone charges, cell phone charges, data charges,
postage, gas, fees for credit reports or identity theft protection
products.
Claim Form
NOTE: If you do not qualify for this settlement do NOT file a
claim.
Remember: you are submitting your claim under penalty of perjury.
You are also harming other eligible Class Members by submitting a
fraudulent claim. If you're unsure if you qualify, please read the
FAQ section of the Settlement Administrator's website to ensure you
meet all standards (Top Class Actions is not a Settlement
Administrator). If you don't qualify for this settlement, check out
our database of other open class action settlements you may be
eligible for.
Claim Form Deadline
06/23/2025
Case Name
In re: Retina Group of Washington Data Security Incident
Litigation, Case No. 8:24-cv-00004-LWW, in the United States
District Court for the District of Maryland
Final Hearing
06/09/2025
Settlement Website
RetinaGroupDataSettlement.com
Claims Administrator
Retina Group of Washington Data Breach
Settlement Administrator
PO Box 301134
Los Angeles, CA 90030-1134
(833) 619-2740
Class Counsel
Ben Barnow
BARNOW AND ASSOCIATES PC
Gary M. Klinger
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC
Tyler J. Bean
SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP
Defense Counsel
David Q. Gacioch
MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP [GN]
ROSS HEALTHCARE: Fails to Pay Proper OT Wages, Lanoue Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH LANOUE, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ROSS HEALTH CARE CENTER, INC. d/b/a ROSS
CENTER FOR NURSING AND REHABILITATION, ROSS OPCO LLC d/b/a ROSS
CENTER FOR NURSING AND REHABILIATION, AGNES ZITTER, and PERETZ
STEIN, Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-01985 (E.D.N.Y., April 9, 2025)
seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages under the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendants as a registered nurse from
in or about April 2013 until November 2024. Throughout his
employment, Plaintiff regularly worked more than 40 hours per
workweek. However, the Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff premium
overtime pay at a rate not less than one and one-half times his
regular rate of pay for the hours that he worked in excess of 40
hours each workweek. Moreover, willfully disregarded and
purposefully evaded the record keeping requirements of the FLSA by
failing to record the actual number of hours worked by Plaintiff
each week.
Ross Health Care, Inc. owns and operates a nursing and
rehabilitation center located at 839 Suffolk Avenue, Brentwood, New
York 11717, which provides healthcare and rehabilitation services
to patients from across Long Island. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew J. Farnworth, Esq.
Peter A. Romero, Esq.
ROMERO LAW GROUP PLLC
490 Wheeler Road, Suite 277
Hauppauge, NY 11788
Telephone: (631) 257-5588
SALVATION ARMY: Faces Class Suit Over Denying Addiction Medications
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Lev Facher, writing for STAT News, reports that a federal judge has
given the go-ahead for a class-action lawsuit that could radically
expand Americans' access to lifesaving addiction medications.
The perhaps surprising defendant: The Salvation Army, the Christian
charity known more for its thrift stores than for its nationwide
network of addiction treatment facilities.
Yet following the March 26 ruling from Leo Sorokin, a federal
district court judge in Massachusetts, the nonprofit now finds
itself at the center of a legal fight that could set a precedent
for all Americans seeking treatment for opioid addiction using two
common and effective medications, methadone and buprenorphine.
"The case has the potential to quite dramatically change the access
situation for people with opioid use disorder," said Janet Herold,
an attorney with the nonprofit Justice Catalyst Law, which sued The
Salvation Army on behalf of three plaintiffs who allege they were
denied access to addiction treatment services because of their use
of the medications.
The Salvation Army bills itself as the "largest provider of
residential drug and alcohol abuse treatment," and as of late 2024
ran 122 Adult Rehabilitation Centers across the country.
The organization's current policy of prohibiting roughly 60
medications it says are "known to be abusive and addictive"
includes methadone and buprenorphine, Sorokin wrote in his
decision. The two medications are widely used to treat addiction
and are vastly safer than the drugs they are meant to replace, like
heroin or fentanyl. But they are also opioids themselves, meaning
misuse can occur.
In the fentanyl era, methadone and buprenorphine are essentially
the only means of quitting a highly toxic drug supply. Fentanyl
withdrawal, in particular, is so severe that suddenly stopping use
results in agonizing withdrawal symptoms -- which methadone and
buprenorphine can avert.
Despite their lifesaving potential and the ever-increasing death
toll of the opioid crisis, many Americans view methadone and
buprenorphine as little better than street drugs. As STAT found in
the investigative series The War on Recovery, many recovery-focused
groups -- including The Salvation Army and other rehabilitation
centers, as well as 12-step recovery organizations like Narcotics
Anonymous -- remain opposed to the medications' use despite the
overwhelming evidence of their medical benefit.
The ongoing lawsuit, Herold said, could set a precedent that leads
more treatment providers to offer the medications regardless of
their ideological objections.
"Many providers do allow medications for opioid use disorder, but
there are many that don't, and Salvation Army is a big one," Herold
said. Currently, she added, "people with opioid use disorder have
to choose between a bed and their medication -- if we prevail in
this case, we could turn the corner."
The case, known as Tassinari v. Salvation Army National Corporation
et al, centers on Mark Tassinari, a Massachusetts man who has
battled opioid addiction for years and briefly lived in a Salvation
Army recovery facility in 2018 until, according to the judge's
ruling, "he was involuntarily discharged for using buprenorphine,
which he says he obtained from a doctor with a valid prescription."
Thereafter, Sorokin wrote, "Tassinari suffered housing instability
and a relapse," but was again denied access to a Salvation Army
facility in 2021 because he was on buprenorphine.
The judicial order, which is limited to The Salvation Army's
Northeast region, establishes two classes. The first allows
individuals denied access to the medications to file for injunctive
relief, like an order that the addiction treatment facilities allow
the medications. The second allows individuals who allege they've
been harmed by The Salvation Army's policy to sue for damages.
The injunctive class portion of the case will proceed to a non-jury
trial, Sorokin wrote, and litigation regarding the damages class
cannot proceed until a decision is reached.
The Salvation Army did not respond to STAT's request for comment.
The judge's ruling allows any individual with opioid use disorder
who takes methadone or buprenorphine as provided by a doctor, and
who participates or seeks to participate in The Salvation Army's
rehab centers, eligible for the injunctive relief class.
The damages class is more limited, including only those who can
document they were discharged from an Adult Rehabilitation Center
"for taking prescribed FDA-approved methadone or buprenorphine
medication for opioid use disorder."
Herod, the attorney participating in the lawsuit against The
Salvation Army, estimated that a substantial number of people would
fit the criteria, estimating "more than a hundred" could be
eligible to participate in the class action but cautioning that she
had not yet reviewed the nonprofit's records.
"At this point, we know that each Salvation Army adult recovery
center in the region was denying people access, between 10 and 20
people a week," she said. "So that's a lot."
The judge's ruling relies in large part on the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973, legislation that bars any group receiving federal
financial assistance from discriminating against an individual
solely on the basis of their disability.
Other courts, and the Department of Justice, have expressed on
several occasions that denial of medications for opioid use
disorder constitutes a violation of the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
A 2023 memo from the O'Neill Institute at Georgetown University
singles out recovery housing, in particular, as a common venue for
discrimination against people using methadone or buprenorphine.
The current system "wreaks havoc" on people seeking recovery from
opioid addiction, said Sally Friedman, the senior vice president of
legal advocacy for the Legal Action Center, a separate nonprofit
that champions access to addiction medications but has not
participated in the Tassinari case. In particular, she said, lack
of medication access in facilities like Salvation Army's can be
disruptive for incarcerated people who recently began medication
treatment in jail or prison.
"People find that when they are discharged from jail or prison,
they are told they have to be in some kind of transitional housing
or recovery housing," Friedman said. "And then those entities tell
them: You've got to get off the medication you just started. And
that's crazy."
Perhaps more importantly, she argued, the court's certification of
class status could have nationwide ramifications -- both by setting
a legal precedent and also by demonstrating to facilities that
denying access to medication can carry consequences.
"It's basically telling anybody who operates recovery housing or
even residential treatment in this country that if you don't allow
methadone and buprenorphine, you may have a class action certified
against you," she said. [GN]
SHAPIRO DICARO: Inflates Post-Foreclosure Sale Amount, Small Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BARBARA SMALL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SHAPIRO DICARO & BARAK LLC, NEWPENN
FINANCIAL LLC d/b/a SHELLPOINT MORTGAGE SERVICING, THE BANK OF NEW
YORK MELLON f/k/a THE BANK OF NEW YORK, JOHN AND JANE DOE INVESTORS
1-10, and JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-10, Defendants, Case No.
1:25-cv-01834 (E.D.N.Y., April 3, 2025) is a class action against
the Defendants for negligence, gross negligence, legal malpractice,
unjust enrichment, prima facie tort, and for violations of the Fair
Debt Collection Practices Act, New York General Business Law, New
York Judiciary Law, and Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
Organizations Act.
This action alleges 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 required foreclosing mortgagees to provide delinquent
homeowners additional pre-foreclosure notices and require
affirmations from attorneys to attest to the veracity of the
documents being submitted in court at all stages of the litigation.
Due to these heightened requirements, thousands of mortgages became
uncollectible because certificate-holders, servicers, and their
attorneys simply could not or would not produce the required proof
in admissible form sufficient to prosecute a foreclosure case, says
the suit.
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, the suit
alleges.
The State of New York Mortgage Agency is a New York State
public-benefit corporation created in 1970 by the state government
of New York to provide affordable homeownership to low- and
moderate-income New Yorkers.[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
Telephone: (718) 263-6800
Facsimile: (718) 520-9401
E-mail: manderson@sbagk.com
SOUTHEAST SERIES: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Tucker Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL TUCKER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SOUTHEAST SERIES OF LOCKTON COMPANIES, LLC,
and DOLLAR TREE, INC. Defendants, Case No. 4:25-cv-00237-GAF (W.D.
Mo., April 4, 2025) is a class action against Defendants for its
failure to properly secure and safeguard Plaintiff's and at least
1,706 Class Members' personally identifiable information including
names, date of birth, and protected health information, including
medical information and medical insurance.
On November 20, 2024, hackers targeted and accessed a network
system and stole Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive,
confidential private information stored therein, causing widespread
injuries to Plaintiff and Class Members.
The Plaintiff and Class Members are current and former Benefit
Recipients of Defendant Lockton's clients who, in order to obtain
and facilitate employment benefit programs from Defendant Lockton's
clients, were and are required to entrust Defendants with their
sensitive, non-public private information.
The Defendants failed to adequately protect Plaintiff's and Class
Members' private information--and failed to even encrypt or redact
this highly sensitive data. This unencrypted, unredacted private
information was compromised due to Defendants' negligent and/or
careless acts and omissions and its utter failure to protect its
customers' sensitive data.
To recover from Defendants for these harms, the Plaintiff, on his
own behalf and on behalf of the Class, brings claims for
negligence/negligence per se, breach of third-party contract,
invasion of privacy, and unjust enrichment, to address Defendant's
inadequate safeguarding of Plaintiff's and Class Members' private
information in its care, says the suit.
Southeast Series of Lockton Companies, LLC is a company that
provides insurance, risk management, and employee-benefit
management services to its clients.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Maureen M. Brady, Esq.
MCSHANE & BRADY, LLC
4006 Central Street
Kansas City, MO 64111
Telephone: (816) 888-8010
Facsimile: (816) 332-6295
E-mail: mbrady@mcshanebradylaw.com
- and -
Jeff Ostrow, Esq.
KOPELOWTIZ OSTROW P.A.
One West Las Olas Blvd., Suite 500
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 525-4100
E-mail: ostrow@kolawyers.com
SOUTHEAST SERIES: Fails to Secure Personal Info, K.R. Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
K.R., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. SOUTHEAST SERIES OF LOCKTON COMPANIES, LLC, and
STERLING PHARMA SOLUTIONS, Defendants, Case No. 4:25-cv-00235-RK
(W.D. Mo., April 4, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants
for its failure to properly secure and safeguard Plaintiff's and at
least 1,706 Class Members' personally identifiable information
including names, date of birth, and protected health information,
including medical information and medical insurance.
On November 20, 2024, hackers targeted and accessed Defendants'
network systems and stole Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive,
confidential private information stored therein, causing widespread
injuries to Plaintiff and Class Members.
The complaint alleges that Defendants failed to adequately protect
Plaintiff's and Class members' private information--and failed to
even encrypt or redact this highly sensitive data. This
unencrypted, unredacted private information was compromised due to
Defendants' negligent and/or careless acts and omissions and its
utter failure to protect its customers' sensitive data.
To recover from Defendants for these harms, the Plaintiff, on her
own behalf and on behalf of the Class, brings claims for
negligence/negligence per se, breach of third-party contract,
invasion of privacy, and unjust enrichment, to address Defendant's
inadequate safeguarding of Plaintiff's and Class Members' private
information in its care.
Southeast Series of Lockton Companies, LLC is a company that
provides insurance, risk management, and employee-benefit
management services to its clients.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Maureen M. Brady, Esq.
Lucy McShane, Esq.
MCSHANE & BRADY, LLC
4006 Central Street
Kansas City, MO 64111
Telephone: (816) 888-8010
Facsimile: (816) 332-6295
E-mail: mbrady@mcshanebradylaw.com
lmcshane@mcshanebradylaw.com
SPICEOLOGY INC: Calcano Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
----------------------------------------------------------------
MARCOS CALCANO, on behalf of himself and all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SPICEOLOGY, INC., Defendant, Case
No. 1:25-cv-02841 (S.D.N.Y., April 4, 2025) is a civil rights
action against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate its interactive website,
https://spiceology.com/, to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired persons in violation of Plaintiff's rights under
the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human
Rights Law, the New York City Human Rights Law, and the New York
State General Business Law.
During Plaintiff's visits to the website, the last occurring on
March 26, 2025, in an attempt to purchase Ultimate Rub Collection -
12 Mini Rub Jars from Defendant and to view the information on the
website, the Plaintiff encountered multiple access barriers that
denied him a shopping experience similar to that of a sighted
person and full and equal access to the goods and services offered
to the public and made available to the public. He was not able to
add the item to the cart due to broken links, pictures without
alternate attributes and other barriers on Defendant's website,
says the suit.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
its website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers.
Spiceology, Inc. operates the website that offers spices, as well
as other types of goods, pricing, terms of service, refund, privacy
policies and internet pricing specials.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
SPOTHERO INC: Galvez Sues Over Parking Reservations' Hidden Fees
----------------------------------------------------------------
EDWARD GALVEZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SPOTHERO, INC., Defendant, Case No.
2:25-cv-02974 (C.D. Cal., April 4, 2025) is a class action against
the Defendant for violations of California's Consumer Legal
Remedies Act and Unfair Competition Law, and quasi-contract.
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged use of drip pricing
scheme in its parking reservations. The Defendant added a hidden
service fee during the checkout process. Had the Plaintiff and
similarly situated customers known about the hidden fee, they would
not have bought parking through the Defendant's service, or would
have paid less for it.
SpotHero, Inc. is a company that sells parking reservations with
its principal place of business in Chicago, Illinois. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Christin Cho, Esq.
Simon Franzini, Esq.
DOVEL & LUNER, LLP
201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Telephone: (310) 656-7066
Facsimile: (310) 656-7069
Email: christin@dovel.com
simon@dovel.com
ST. JOSEPH'S COLLEGE: Fails to Secure Personal Info, Earnhardt Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH EARNHARDT, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. TRUSTEES OF ST. JOSEPH'S COLLEGE,
d/b/a SAINT JOSEPH'S COLLEGE OF MAINE, Defendant, Case No.
2:25-cv-00130-KFW (D. Me., April 4, 2025) is a class action against
the Defendant for negligence, breach of implied contract, unjust
enrichment, invasion of privacy, and declaratory judgment.
The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and
safeguard the personally identifiable information of the Plaintiff
and similarly situated individuals stored within its network
systems between December 15, 2023, and January 24, 2024. The
Defendant also failed to timely notify the Plaintiff and similarly
situated individuals about the data breach. As a result, the
private information of the Plaintiff and Class members was
compromised and damaged through access by and disclosure to unknown
and unauthorized third parties.
Trustees of St. Joseph's College, doing business as Saint Joseph's
College of Maine, is a nonprofit higher education institution,
located at 278 Whites Bridge Road, Standish, Maine. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Braden A. Beard, Esq.
JOHNSON & WEBBERT, LLP
1 Bowdoin Mill Island, Ste. 300
Topsham, ME 04086
Telephone: (207) 623-5110
Email: bbeard@work.law
- and -
David S. Almeida, Esq.
ALMEIDA LAW GROUP LLC
849 W. Webster Avenue
Chicago, IL 60614
Telephone: (312) 576-3024
Email: david@almeidalawgroup.com
STARK COUNTY: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Buckley Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------
JACOB BUCKLEY, ASHLEY NEIGGEMANN, and JEFF MARTIN, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. STARK
COUNTY AMBULANCE SERVICES, INC.; TEAM TRIAGE, INC.; and JAMES
ROESNER, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-01141-JEH (C.D. Ill., April 9,
2025) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and
overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys'
fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as staff.
Stark County Ambulance Services, Inc., is an Illinois corporation
that provides ambulance, EMT and paramedic services to various
communities in central Illinois. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John Kunze, Esq.
Martin Stainthorp, Esq.
WORKPLACE LAW PARTNERS P.C.
155 N. Michigan Ave. Suite 719
Chicago, IL 60601
Telephone: (312) 861-1800
Facsimile: (630) 778-0400
Email: docketing@fishlawfirm.com
kunze@fishlawfirm.com
mstainthorp@fishlawfirm.com
- and -
Quinton Osborne, Esq.
OSBORNE EMPLOYMENT LAW LLC
799 Roosevelt Road, Suite 3-201
Glen Ellyn, IL 60137
Telephone: (331) 702-1538
Facsimile: (331) 465-0450
Email: Quinton@OsborneEmploymentLaw.com
STINGRAY PRESSURE: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Keenan Says
-----------------------------------------------------------
JOSHUA KEENAN, individually and for others similarly situated v.
STINGRAY PRESSURE PUMPING LLC, Case No. 2:25-cv-00461 (W.D. Pa.,
April 3, 2025) is a class and collective action seeking to recover
unpaid wages and other damages from the Defendant pursuant the Fair
Labor Standards Act and the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act.
According to the complaint, Plaintiff Keenan and the other hourly
employees regularly work more than 40 hours but Stingray does not
pay them at least one and a half times their regular rates of pay
-- based on all remuneration -- for all hours they work in excess
of 40 a workweek. Instead, Stingray pays Plaintiff Keenan and the
other Hourly Employees non-discretionary bonuses that it fails to
include in these employees' regular rates of pay for overtime
purposes, says the suit.
Plaintiff Keenan was employed by the Defendant as an equipment
operator and electronics technician from approximately May 2022
until September 2023 and as an Electronics Tech II from September
2024 until February 2025.
Stingray Pressure Pumping LLC is an oil and gas company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 877-8788
Facsimile: (713) 877-8065
E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com
- and -
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 352-1100
Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
adunlap@mybackwages.com
- and -
Joshua P. Geist, Esq.
William F. Goodrich, Esq.
GOODRICH & GEIST, PC
3634 California Ave.
Pittsburgh, PA 15212
Telephone: (412) 766-1455
Facsimile: (412) 766-0300
E-mail: josh@goodrichandgeist.com
bill@goodrichandgeist.com
TESLA INC: Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Odometer Manipulation
----------------------------------------------------------------
Matt Wilson, writing for Drive Tesla, reports that Tesla is facing
a proposed class action lawsuit in California accusing the company
of deliberately inflating odometer readings in its vehicles. The
lawsuit claims Tesla manipulated vehicle mileage data to shorten
warranty periods and reduce repair obligations -- a move that could
impact thousands of owners across the state.
According to the lawsuit, lead plaintiff Nyree Hinton purchased a
used 2020 Tesla Model Y in December 2022 with an odometer reading
of 36,772 miles. Shortly after, he began experiencing suspension
issues and brought the car in for repairs. But while monitoring his
daily mileage, Hinton noticed what he called "peculiar patterns" --
abnormal spikes in mileage despite maintaining a consistent routine
of short commutes.
The lawsuit, brought forward by law firm Singleton Schreiber,
alleges the vehicle began logging an average of over 72 miles per
day -- nearly quadruple the 20 miles Hinton expected based on his
driving habits. This sudden surge in mileage pushed the vehicle
past the 50,000-mile limit of Tesla's Basic Vehicle Limited
Warranty, which covers repairs for four years or 50,000 miles,
whichever comes first.
When Hinton returned to Tesla for continued service, the automaker
informed him the warranty had expired and refused to cover further
repairs.
Then, Hinton alleges the mileage readings returned to expected
levels after the warranty lapsed.
According to the claims in the lawsuit, Tesla's odometer system
estimates mileage using predictive algorithms that factor in energy
consumption and driver behavior, unlike traditional odometers that
rely on physical distance measurement. The lawsuit argues that
Tesla assigns lower efficiency values to aggressive driving -- such
as rapid acceleration -- causing the system to report inflated
distances.
These discrepancies, the complaint alleges, can artificially
accelerate depreciation, force early warranty expiration, and
pressure owners into purchasing extended warranties.
The lawsuit claims that Tesla's algorithmic approach can inflate
mileage readings, and that "Tesla knowingly overstates the
distances traveled in Tesla vehicles," calling the practice a
calculated effort to reduce warranty-related costs and increase
profit margins.
Tesla has not publicly commented on the lawsuit, and none of the
claims have been verified in court.
The class action seeks damages for all California residents who
purchased or leased a Tesla vehicle for personal use, arguing that
these systemic inaccuracies violate consumer protection laws and
undermine trust in the brand. [GN]
THANG BOTANICALS: Faces Suit Over 7-OH Tablet's False Labeling
--------------------------------------------------------------
M.L., individually on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THANG BOTANICALS, INC., and FTLS
HOLDINGS LLC, collectively doing business as 7ΩHMZ, and DOES 1-10,
inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 3:25-cv-03191 (N.D. Cal., April 9,
2025) arises from Defendants' false, misleading, deceptive, and
negligent sales practices regarding their 7-Hydroxymitragynine
(7-OH) tablet products.
Allegedly, the Defendants have intentionally failed to disclose
these material facts regarding the dangers of 7-OH consumption
anywhere on its 7-OH Tablets' labeling, packaging, or marketing
material. As a result, Defendants have violated warranty law and
state consumer protection laws. Accordingly, the Plaintiff now
seeks relief in his action individually, and as a class action, on
behalf of similarly situated purchasers of Defendants' 7-OH tablet
products, for the following violations of: (i) Oregon's Unlawful
Trade Practices Act; (ii) breach of implied warranty; (iii) unjust
enrichment; and (iv) fraud by omission.
Thang Botanicals, Inc., d/b/a 7ΩHMZ, is a Delaware corporation
headquartered in San Francisco, CA. The company owns and operates
the 7-OHMZ website, www.7ohmz.com, and also advertises, markets,
distributes, and sells its products in California, Oregon, and
throughout the United States. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Todd D. Carpenter, Esq.
Scott G. Braden, Esq.
LYNCH CARPENTER, LLP
9171 Towne Centre Dr, Ste 180
San Diego, CA 92122
Telephone: (619) 762-1910
Facsimile: (858) 313-1850
E-mail: todd@lcllp.com
scott@lcllp.com
- and -
Neal J. Deckant, Esq.
Luke Sironski-White, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1990 North California Blvd., 9th Floor
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 300-4455
Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
E-mail: ndeckant@bursor.com
lsironski@bursor.com
TOOTSIE ROLL: Pittman Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
--------------------------------------------------------------
DEBBIE PITTMAN, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated Plaintiff v. Tootsie Roll Industries, Inc., Defendant,
Case No. 1:25-cv-03573 (N.D. Ill., April 3, 2025) is a civil rights
action against Tootsie Roll for its failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate its website, https://tootsie.com, to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind
or visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
According to the complaint, the website contains access barriers
that prevent free and full use by Plaintiff and blind persons using
keyboards and screen-reading software. These barriers are pervasive
and include, but are not limited to ambiguous link texts, changing
of content without advance warning, inaccessible contact
information, inaccurate heading hierarchy, inaccurate landmark
structure, inadequate focus order, unclear labels for interactive
elements, and the requirement that transactions be performed solely
with a mouse.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Tootsie Roll Industries' policies, practices, and procedures so
that its website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory
damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to
unlawful discrimination.
Tootsie Roll Industries, Inc. operates the website that offers a
range of confectionery products, including rolls, pops, chews,
lollipops, caramel candies, chocolate mints and creamy peppermint
patties.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David B. Reyes, Esq.
EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC
68-29 Main Street
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (630) 478-0856
E-mail: Dreyes@ealg.law.
TREACE MEDICAL: Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over False Statements
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action securities lawsuit was filed against Treace Medical
Concepts, Inc. that seeks to recover losses of shareholders who
were adversely affected by alleged securities fraud between May 8,
2023 and May 7, 2024.
CASE DETAILS: The filed complaint alleges that defendants made
false statements and/or concealed that: (1) competition impacted
the demand for and utilization of its primary product, the 3D
bunion correction system, the "Lapiplasty"; (2) as a result, Treace
Medical's revenue declined and the Company needed to accelerate its
plans to offer a product that was an alternative to osteotomy (a
surgical procedure that involves cutting and realigning a bone to
improve its position or function); and (3) defendants' positive
statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects
were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
WHAT'S NEXT? If you suffered a loss in Treace Medical Concepts,
Inc. stock during the relevant time frame - even if you still hold
your shares - go to
https://zlk.com/pslra-1/treace-medical-concepts-inc-lawsuit-submission-form-2?prid=143406&wire=1
to learn about your rights to seek a recovery. There is no cost or
obligation to participate.
WHY LEVI & KORSINSKY: Over the past 20 years, Levi & Korsinsky LLP
has established itself as a nationally-recognized securities
litigation firm that has secured hundreds of millions of dollars
for aggrieved shareholders and built a track record of winning
high-stakes cases. The firm has extensive expertise representing
investors in complex securities litigation and a team of over 70
employees to serve our clients. For seven years in a row, Levi &
Korsinsky has ranked in ISS Securities Class Action Services' Top
50 Report as one of the top securities litigation firms in the
United States. Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee
similar outcomes.
CONTACT:
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
Joseph E. Levi, Esq.
Ed Korsinsky, Esq.
33 Whitehall Street, 17th Floor
New York, NY 10004
jlevi@levikorsinsky.com
Tel: (212) 363-7500
Fax: (212) 363-7171
https://zlk.com/ [GN]
UNITED PARCEL: Ruggiere Sues Over Unpaid Non-Discretionary Bonuses
------------------------------------------------------------------
KELLI RUGGIERE and TODD RUGGIERE, on behalf of themselves and those
similarly situated Plaintiffs v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-10811 (D. Mass., April 3, 2025) is a
class action brought against the Defendant pursuant to the
Massachusetts Wage Act and state common law arising from its
alleged unlawful labor policy.
The Plaintiffs are two of many former and current employees who
participated in Defendant's referral program under which Defendant
promised bonus wage payments to any employee who successfully
referred an individual to work for UPS.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to make full
payment of all non-discretionary bonuses earned by Plaintiff Kelli
and the Wage Act Class Members under the Referral Program, for the
successful referrals Plaintiff Kelli and the Class Members made
during the three years preceding the filing of this Complaint.
The Defendant also breached its contracts with Plaintiffs and the
Contract Class Members by failing to make full payment on all
successful recruitments made to UPS by Plaintiffs and the Contract
Class Members during the peak seasons for 2021, 2022, and 2023.
As Defendant solicited and encouraged Plaintiffs and the Contract
Class Members to perform extra work on behalf of UPS in the form of
engaging in recruitment activities for UPS, it would be unjust and
inequitable for Defendant to retain the value of the benefits that
it received from Plaintiffs' and the Contract Class Members'
additional work, without providing extra compensation to Plaintiffs
and the Contract Class members, says the suit.
United Parcel Service, Inc. operates delivery centers and shipping
depots in the state of Massachusetts, employing thousands of hourly
employees in Massachusetts that are part of its package and parcel
delivery network that serves all regions of the United States and
several countries around the world.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Harold Lichten, Esq.
LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
729 Boylston Street, Suite 2000
Boston, MA 02116
Telephone: (617) 994-5800
E-mail: hlichten@llrlaw.com
- and -
Trent R. Taylor, Esq.
David H. Miller, Esq.
WILHITE & MILLER LAW FIRM
1600 N. Ogden Street
Denver, CO 80218
Telephone: (303) 551-7663
E-mail: ttaylor@wilhitelawfirm.com
dhmiller@wilhitelawfirm.com
UNITED STATES: Faces Lewis Suit Over Disability Discrimination
--------------------------------------------------------------
LASHAN LEWIS, Plaintiff v. ELAND DUDEK, Acting Commissioner of
Social Security Administration, Defendant, Case No.
2:25-cv-00532-JHE (N.D. Ala., April 10, 2025) is a class action
arising from Defendant's alleged violations of Plaintiff's civil
rights guaranteed by Sections 501 and 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973.
Plaintiff Lewis and other current and former employees were
allegedly subjected to a pattern and practice of disability
discrimination by being required to accept a demotion and reduction
in pay in order to obtain a reasonable accommodation. Moreover, the
Plaintiff and all Class members suffered loss of wages and benefits
and compensatory damages including, but not limited to, pain and
suffering and mental anguish, says the suit.
Social Security Administration is a U.S. federal government agency
that administers Social Security, a social insurance program
providing retirement, disability, and survivor benefits. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Roderick T. Cooks, Esq.
Lee Winston, Esq.
WINSTON COOKS, LLC
351 24th Street North, Box 122
Birmingham, AL 35203
Telephone: (205) 502-0970
Facsimile: (205) 278-5876
E-mail: lwinston@winstoncooks.com
rcooks@winstoncooks.com
WAMPLER CARROLL: Baek Family Sues Over Racketeering Scheme
----------------------------------------------------------
BAEK FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, LLC; AB HOLLYWOOD, LLC; MY, LLC; and THE
PENNEY KIM TRUST, by and through its Trustee, PENNEY KIM,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. WAMPLER CARROLL WILSON & SANDERSON, P.L.L.C.; WADE
LAW, LLC; J. LUKE SANDERSON; and B.J. WADE; JESSICA MOLLIGAN; and
JOHN DOES 1-50; CONNER SLEVIN; and JOHN DOES 51-100, Defendants,
Case No. 3:25-cv-00584-AN (D. Or., April 10, 2025) alleges that the
Defendants created a sophisticated racketeering scheme across more
than 15 states involving more than four thousand fraudulent demand
letters and lawsuits purportedly brought under the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
According to the complaint, at the center of the massive scheme
(hereinafter, the "Wampler ADA Racket") were the lawyers and staff
of the law firms of Wampler, Carroll, Wilson & Sanderson, P.C.
("Wampler") and Wade Law LLC ("Wade Law"), along with attorneys
B.J. Wade and Luke Sanderson (hereinafter collectively, the
"Wampler Defendants") in Memphis, Tennessee.
As part of their racketeering scheme to abuse and contort the ADA's
critical civil rights protections for Americans with disabilities,
the Wampler Defendants improperly enriched themselves by hiring
disabled persons to unwittingly serve as fraudulent "testers" of
local businesses for ADA compliance purposes, including Nominal
Defendants Conner Slevin and John Does 51-100 (collectively, the
"Fake Testers"), says the suit.
Wampler, Carroll, Wilson & Sanderson, P.C. is a Tennessee
professional legal corporation in Tennessee. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Joseph M. Mabe, Esq.
Neal S. Shechter, Esq.
Keith A. Pitt, Esq.
SAPIENT LAW
425 NW 10th Avenue, Ste 200
Portland, OR 97209
Telephone: (503) 417-7777
Email: joe@sapientlaw.com
neal@sapientlaw.com
keith@sapientlaw.com
WHITE DIAMOND: Faces Suit Over Deceptive Sales Practices
--------------------------------------------------------
L.K., individually on behalf of herself and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. WHITE DIAMOND, LLC, a California
limited liability company, and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendants,
Case No. 5:25-cv-00869 (C.D. Cal., April 9, 2025) arises from
Defendant White Diamond's false, misleading, deceptive, and
negligent sales practices regarding its kratom products.
Allegedly, the Defendant has intentionally failed to disclose the
material facts regarding the dangers of addiction, physical and
psychological dependence posed by consumption of its kratom
products. Nowhere on the products' labeling, packaging, or
marketing material is any such warning or disclosure given.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff seeks relief in her action individually,
and as a class action, on behalf of similarly situated purchasers
of Defendant's products, which are still on the market without any
label warning about addiction, for the following violations of: (i)
California's Unfair Competition Law; (ii) California's Consumer
Legal Remedies Act; (iii) California's False Advertising Law; (iv)
breach of implied warranty; (v) unjust enrichment; and (vi) fraud
by omission.
Headquartered in Los Angeles, CA, White Diamond LLC owns and
operates the website, https://whitediamondkratoms.com/, and also
advertises, markets, distributes, and sells its numerous kratom
roducts in California and throughout the United States. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Todd D. Carpenter, Esq.
Scott G. Braden, Esq.
LYNCH CARPENTER, LLP
9171 Towne Centre Dr, Ste 180
San Diego, CA 92122
Telephone: (619) 762-1910
Facsimile: (858) 313-1850
E-mail: todd@lcllp.com
scott@lcllp.com
WINNEBAGO COUNTY, IL: Kramer Sues Over Unlawful Prisoner Custody
----------------------------------------------------------------
JEFFREY KRAMER, individually and on behalf of all those similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GARY CARUANA, in his official capacity as
the Sheriff of Winnebago County and WINNEBAGO COUNTY, Defendants,
Case No. 3:25-cv-50166 (N.D. Ill., April 10, 2025) seeks
compensatory damages for Plaintiff's extended detention and
injunctive and declaratory relief for himself and all others
similarly situated to halt Defendants' unconstitutional practices.
The Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Gary Caruana has adopted and
implemented a policy whereby individuals who have completed their
court-ordered terms of incarceration are unnecessarily and
illegally held in custody in the Winnebago County Jail for an
unreasonable period of time prior to their being transferred to the
Illinois Department of Corrections where they are processed for
release back into the community to serve their terms of mandatory
supervised release. Accordingly, the Plaintiff asserts claims for
Defendant's violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States
Constitution.
Winnebago County is a political subdivision of Illinois. The county
provides public safety services through its sheriff's department.
[BN]
The Plaintiff' is represented by:
Mark G. Weinberg, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF ADELE D. NICHOLAS
5707 W. Goodman Street
Chicago, IL 60630
Telephone: (847) 361-3869
E-mail: adele@civilrightschicago.com
- and -
Adele D. Nicholas, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF MARK G. WEINBERG
3612 N. Tripp Avenue
Chicago, IL 60641
Telephone: (773) 283-3913
E-mail: mweinberg@sbcglobal.net
WOODRIDGE, NY: Gross Sues Over False Info in Traffic Citations
--------------------------------------------------------------
JACOB GROSS on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. VILLAGE OF WOODRIDGE, WOODRIDGE POLICE STATION, JOAN
COLLINS in her official and individual capacity, JOHN CALVELLO in
his official and individual capacity, MICHAEL SPINELLI, Defendants,
Case No. 7:25-cv-02947 (S.D.N.Y., April 9, 2025) accuses the
Defendants of violating the New York Vehicle and Traffic Law.
Plaintiff Gross alleges that Defendant Michael Spinelli fabricated
false information by issuing traffic citations for violations of
the VYL 1180 and misrepresenting himself as being a sworn police
office of the Woodridge Police Station.
Village of Woodridge is a municipality in Sullivan County of New
York. Its law enforcement unit is Woodridge Police Station. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Levi Huebner, Esq.
LEVI HUEBNER & ASSOCIATES, PC
464 Malbone Street, Suite 100
Brooklyn, NY 11225
Telephone: (212) 354-5555
WW INTERNATIONAL: Faces Giorgio et al. Data Breach Suit
-------------------------------------------------------
ALLISON GIORGIO, ASHLEY RODRIGUEZ, JENNIFER TORRES, NANCY OWEN,
ANTOINETTE WACHTL, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. WW INTERNATIONAL, INC., WW.COM,
LLC, WEEKEND HEALTH OF TEXAS, PA, WEEKEND HEALTH OF NEW JERSEY
P.C., WEEKEND HEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, P.C., AND BRANTLEY T. JOLLY,
M.D., PROF. CORP., Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-02944 (S.D.N.Y.,
April 9, 2025) seeks to address Weight Watchers' illegal and
widespread practice of disclosing its users’ private data,
including personally identifiable information and health
information, to unauthorized third parties, including at least Meta
Platforms, Inc., Google LLC, and Amplitude, Inc.
According to the complaint, the unlawful disclosure occurred and
continues to occur because of the tracking technologies Weight
Watchers installed on the WW Websites it made available to its
users, including but not limited to the Facebook Pixel, Google
Analytics, Google Ads, Amplitude Analytics, as well as tracking
software from New Relic, Braze, Customer.io, and Nextdoor. These
tracking technologies allow unauthorized third parties to intercept
the contents of users' communications, receive and view users'
private information, and use it for their own purposes, including
in connection with lucrative ad services. Accordingly, the
Plaintiffs now seek to remedy the harms of Defendants' unlawful
conduct and brings causes of action for (1) violations of New York
General Business Law; (2) violations of the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act; (3) violation of California Penal Code
Section 631; (4) intrusion upon seclusion; and (5) unjust
enrichment.
Weight Watchers is headquartered in New York and operates not only
the websites, weightwatchers.com and joinsequence.com, but also
hundreds of studios across 49 states. The company provides
weight-management programs and weight-related telehealth services
to users through the said websites. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Vicki J. Maniatis, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC
405 East 50th Street
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (212) 594-5300
E-mail: vmaniatis@milberg.com
- and -
Christian Levis, Esq.
Amanda Fiorilla, Esq.
Rachel Kesten, Esq.
LOWEY DANNENBERG, P.C.
44 South Broadway, Suite 1100
White Plains, NY 10601
Telephone: (914) 997-0500
Facsimile: (914) 997-0035
E-mail: clevis@lowey.com
afiorilla@lowey.com
rkesten@lowey.com
ZENAS BIOPHARMA: Faces Securities Class Action Lawsuit
------------------------------------------------------
Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces it has
filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the
securities of Zenas BioPharma, Inc. (NASDAQ: ZBIO) pursuant and/or
traceable to the registration statement and related prospectus
(collectively, the "Registration Statement") issued in connection
with Zenas BioPharma's September 2024 initial public offering (the
"IPO"). The lawsuit seeks to recover damages for Zenas BioPharma
investors under the federal securities laws.
To join the Zenas BioPharma class action, go
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=37109 or call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com
for information on the class action.
According to the lawsuit, the Registration Statement contained
false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that:
(1) Zenas BioPharma materially overstated the amount of time it
would be able to fund its operations using existing cash and
expected net proceeds from the IPO; and (2) as a result,
defendants' public statements were materially false and misleading
at all relevant times and negligently prepared. When the true
details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors
suffered damages.
A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve
as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than June 16,
2025. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf
of other class members in directing the litigation. If you wish to
join the litigation, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=37109 or to discuss
your rights or interests regarding this class action, please
contact Phillip Kim, Esq. of Rosen Law Firm toll free at
866-767-3653 or via e-mail at case@rosenlegal.com.
NO CLASS HAS YET BEEN CERTIFIED IN THE ABOVE ACTION. UNTIL A CLASS
IS CERTIFIED, YOU ARE NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL UNLESS YOU RETAIN
ONE. YOU MAY RETAIN COUNSEL OF YOUR CHOICE. YOU MAY ALSO REMAIN AN
ABSENT CLASS MEMBER AND DO NOTHING AT THIS POINT. AN INVESTOR'S
ABILITY TO SHARE IN ANY POTENTIAL FUTURE RECOVERY IS NOT DEPENDENT
UPON SERVING AS LEAD PLAINTIFF.
Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1
by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities
class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the
top 4 each year since 2013. Rosen Law Firm achieved the largest
ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company
at the time. Rosen Law Firm's attorneys are ranked and recognized
by numerous independent and respected sources. Rosen Law Firm has
secured hundreds of millions of dollars for investors.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.
Contacts
Laurence Rosen, Esq.
Phillip Kim, Esq.
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Tel: (212) 686-1060
Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
Fax: (212) 202-3827
case@rosenlegal.com
www.rosenlegal.com [GN]
ZENITH FAST: Faces Gobran Wage-and-Hour Suit in Calif.
------------------------------------------------------
PATRICK GOBRAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ZENITH FAST FOOD, INC., and DOES 1 through
10, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 25STCV10129 (Cal. Super., Los
Angeles Cty., April 4, 2025) is a class action against the
Defendants for violations of California Labor Code including
failure to pay all wages, failure to provide meal and rest periods
or compensation in lieu thereof, failure to comply with itemized
employee wage statements, failure to pay wages due at the time of
discharge, failure to timely pay employees, failure to reimburse
business expenses, and failure to pay overtime wages.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a non-exempt,
hourly employee in California.
Zenith Fast Food, Inc. is a restaurant owner and operator doing
business in California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Roman Otkupman, Esq.
Nidah Farishta, Esq.
OTKUPMAN LAW FIRM, A LAW CORPORATION
5743 Corsa Ave., Suite 123
Westlake Village, CA 91362
Telephone: (818) 293-5623
Facsimile: (888) 850-1310
Email: Roman@OLFLA.com
Nidah@OLFLA.com
*********
S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N
Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania,
USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA. Rousel Elaine T.
Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche A. Castillon, Julie Anne L.
Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.
Copyright 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 ***