250703.mbx

250703.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Thursday, July 3, 2025, Vol. 27, No. 132 Headlines 1226 SECOND: Fails to Pay Minimum Wages, Calle Suit Alleges AFLAC INC: Fails to Protect Personal, Health Info, Cook Says ALPHA BAKING: Fails to Protect Personal, Health Info, Chance Says ALPHA BAKING: Fails to Secure Personal, Health Info, Crabtree Says AMERICAN FAMILY: Hacker Suit Seeks Class Certification AMERICAN HONDA: Appeals Attorney's Fees Order in Aberin Class Suit AMERICAN SAFETY: Parex Sues Over Refusal to Defend and Indemnify ANKER INNOVATIONS: Iudice Sues Over Anker Power Banks' False Ads APPLE COMMUTER: Abuladze Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class APPLE INC: Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Opposition ASCENT RESOURCES-UTICA: Bid for Partial Summary Judgment Tossed AUDUBON COMPANIES: Faces Murphy Suit Over Inspectors' Unpaid Wages BELLESA ENTERPRISES: Faces Suit Over Disclosure of Sensitive Info BOSTONIAN TOWING: Duff Sues Over Illegal Towing Charges' Collection CHARLES SCHWAB: Hilbert Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website CHECK CITY: Nelson Sues Over Unauthorized Access of Clients' Info CHRISTOPHER MEREDITH: Mejia Seeks Unpaid Overtime for Landscapers CONTINENTAL AUTONOMOUS: Doney Suit Seeks Overtime Pay Under FLSA CREDENCE MANAGEMENT: Gerrard et al. Allege WARN Act Breaches CROCS INC: Court Narrows Claims in Mongalo Suit CROWDVEST LLC: Johnson Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Bid CUSO FINANCIAL: Filing for Class Certification Due Jan. 15, 2026 DECISELY INSURANCE: Garcia Sues Over Unauthorized Info Access DECOPAC INC: Hart Files Suit in Minn. 4th Judicial Dist. DEREK LAM: Dalton Seeks Equal Website Access for Blind Users DEXSTA FEDERAL: Medina Sues Over Unlawful Fee Collection DISPATCH IT: Sends Unsolicited Telemarketing Calls, Pimentel Says DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Plaintiffs Seek More Time to File Class Cert DOTDASH MEREDITH: Cartagenova et al. Allege VPPA Breaches DUO TELEPHONE: Firkins Suit Removed to W.D. Kentucky E.B. ARCHBALD: Fails to Protect Clients' Personal Info, Lahman Says ER CARPENTER: Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Opposition ERIE INDEMNITY: Haas Files Suit in W.D. Pennsylvania EXACT CARE PHARMACY: Yanosick Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Ohio EXPRESS TECHNOLOGIES: Millar Alleges Illegal Autorenewal Fees FEDERAL EXPRESS: Class Cert. Deadlines in Gillyard Stricken FIDELITY NATIONAL: Bartek Seeks Conditional Status of Collective FIFTY WEST: Court Extends Time to File Class Cert Bid FIRST STREET FOOD: Scott Files Suit in E.D. California FIVERR INC: Johnson Suit Transferred to S.D. New York FOSSIL GROUP: Chancy Suit Removed to S.D. California FULLBEAUTY BRANDS: Kempf Suit Removed to W.D. Washington GENERAL MOTORS: Hernandez Suit Transferred to E.D. Michigan GENERAL MOTORS: Sells Vehicles With Defect, Rahaman Suit Alleges GEO GROUP: Parties Seek to Continue July 21 Class Cert. Filing GILEAD SCIENCES: Seeks to Continue Class Cert Hearing to August 20 GLORIA'S HOME: Gordon Class Suit Seeks Overtime Pay Under FLSA GLYKKA LLC: Blind Users Can't Access Online Store, Jackson Claims GOOSEFOOT ACRES: Oh Sues Over Deceptive Beverage Product Packaging GREEN ROLL: Faces Mera Wage-and-Hour Class Suit in S.D.N.Y. GUNBROKER.COM: Boyd and Mitro Sue Over Deceptive Fees HARTZ HOTEL: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Herrera Suit Says HCA HEALTHCARE: McRee Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Reply HIGHMARK INC: Bid for Certificate of Appealability Nixed HOLLIS COBB: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Watson Suit Due Dec. 8 HOMARY INTERNATIONAL: Parties Seek Deadline for Discovery HONEYLOVE SCULTPWEAR: Krull Suit Removed to C.D. California I.C. SYSTEM: Lezark Appeals Class Cert. Ruling to 3rd Circuit IMC LOGISTICS: Macias Suit Removed to M.D. Florida INFAB LLC: Fails to Protect Personal, Health Info, Feeney Says J.A.A. LANDSCAPING: Underpays Landscapers, Ramos Suit Alleges JING-JIN ELECTRIC: Lockhart Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime KINGSLEY DIRECTIONAL: Spears Seeks MWD Engineers' Unpaid Overtime KRISPY KREME: Fails to Protect Personal, Health Info, Burkes Says KRISPY KREME: Fails to Protect Personal, Health Info, Chicas Says LAW OFFICE OF LIZ: Faces Peterson Suit Over Court Corruption LEE ENTERPRISES: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Lawson Says LIGHT RAIL: Reyes Sues Over Unpaid Wages for Restaurant Employees LOVESAC COMPANY: Faces Nguyen Consumer Suit over Pricing Scheme MCLEAN MORTGAGE: Millberry Files Suit in E.D. Virginia MEMPHIS, TN: Faces Lockett Suit Over Unlawful Seizure in W.D. Tenn. MERCY HOSPITAL: Shepard Suit Seeks to Certify Class META PLATFORMS: Kadrey Loses Bid for Partial Summary Judgment METLIFE: Refuses to Provide Accidental Plan Benefit, Roberts Claims MICHAEL BLOOMBERG: Faces Doty Over Termination of Campaign Staff MICROGENICS CORP: Parties Seek Extension to File Class Cert Bid NEW DIRECTION: Theriault Seeks to Consolidate Related Actions OCUCO INC: Fails to Secure Personal, Health Info, Doe Suit Says OLAPLEX HOLDINGS: Bid for Leave to File Docs Under Seal OK'd ONEONCOLOGY LLC: Suit Seeks Patient Communication Specialists' OT OPENAI INC: Bid for Broad Cross-Use of Alter Docs Tossed OPENCARE INC: Discloses Patients' Personal, Health Info, Kady Says PROGRESS RESIDENTIAL: Harris Seeks to Certify Three Classes PROGRESS RESIDENTIAL: More Time to File Class Cert. Bid Sought PROVIDENCE HEALTH: Court Consolidates Actions with Angulo Suit R.D. MERRILL: PIIC Files Declaratory Judgment Action in W.D. Wash. RBG MANAGEMENT: Furment Sues Over Unprotected Private Info RECKITT BENCKISER: Faces Securities Suit Over Misleading Statements ROUSE SERVICES: Matrix Alleges Equipment Rental Market Conspiracy SAGE DENTAL: Aids 3rd Party to Access Patients' PHI/PII, Suit Says SAY CHEESE: Fails to Reimburse Drivers' Business Costs, Miller Says SENSATA TECHNOLOGIES: Fails to Protect Clients' Info, Ryng Alleges SUNO INC: Faces Justice Suit Over Copyrighted Sound Recordings SWEET BASIL: Filing of Class Cert Responses Extended to July 22 TIDEWATER PROPERTY: Floyd Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages Under FLSA TRADER JOE'S: Faces Ramirez Wage-and-Hour Suit in California TRIDENT MARITIME: Jefferson Seeks Class Settlement Prelim Approval TRUIST FINANCIAL: Discloses Confidential Info, Garcia Suit Alleges TWITTER INC: Court Withdraws Class Cert Bid TWITTER INC: Parties Seek Withdrawal of Class Certification Bid VERGIL SERVICES: Faces Suit Over Alleged VPPA Violations VIRTUSA: Sugg Labor Suit Seeks to Certify Three Classes WESTERN TRAFFIC: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due March 2, 2026 WESTGATE PALACE: Steines Suit Seeks Class Certification WVMF FUNDING: Objection to Bifurcate Class Overruled ZIMMER US: Faces Rosati Wage-and-Hour Suit in Super. Calif. ********* 1226 SECOND: Fails to Pay Minimum Wages, Calle Suit Alleges ----------------------------------------------------------- ANGEL CALLE, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 1226 SECOND AVENUE REALTY CORP. d/b/a PRIMOLA RESTAURANT, DJULIANO ZULIANI and SAMUEL MOROCHO, Case No. 1:25-cv-05217 (S.D.N.Y., June 23, 2025) alleges that the Defendants regularly paid Plaintiff for fewer hours than she worked pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Defendants usually paid Plaintiff for 30-35 hours per week, even though Plaintiff worked well in excess of 40 hours per week. For the hours that Defendants did pay Plaintiff, they paid him less than the full minimum wage. However, the Defendants were not entitled to any tip credit against the full minimum wage because Defendants did not give Plaintiff proper notice of the tip credit. The Defendants illegally required Plaintiff to share tips with Dominique, a manager at the restaurant. All the Class Members were subject to the same corporate practices of Defendants, as herein, of failing to pay minimum wage, overtime compensation, and illegal retention of tips. The Defendants' corporate-wide policies and practices affected all Class Members similarly, and Defendants benefited from the same type of unfair and/or wrongful acts as to each Class Member. The Plaintiff worked as a busser at Primola restaurant. She regularly worked more than 40 hours per week. Specifically, the Plaintiff often worked 6-7 dinner shifts per week. Dinner shifts started at 4:00 p.m. and ended after 11:00 p.m. The Plaintiff and other Class Members sustained similar losses, injuries and damages arising from the same unlawful policies, practices and procedures. Mr. Zuliani is an owner and operator of Primola Restaurant. Mr. Morocho is a chef-owner of Primola Restaurant.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: D. Maimon Kirschenbaum, Esq. Josef Nussbaum, Esq. JOSEPH & KIRSCHENBAUM LLP 32 Broadway, Suite 601 New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (212) 688-5640 Facsimile: (212) 981-9587 AFLAC INC: Fails to Protect Personal, Health Info, Cook Says ------------------------------------------------------------ CHRISTOPHER COOK, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. AFLAC INCORPORATED, Case No. 4:25-cv-00192-CDL (M.D. Ga., June 23, 2025) is a class action resulting from the Defendant's inadequate cybersecurity policies and procedures including its failure to implement reasonable and industry standard data security practices to properly secure, safeguard, and adequately destroy Plaintiff and Class Members' sensitive personal information that it had acquired and stored for its business purposes. The Defendant's inadequate data security allowed a targeted cyberattack by a threat actor known to target insurance carriers such as Aflac to compromise sensitive information entrusted to Defendant (the "Data Incident") that contained personally identifiable information (PII) and protected health information (PHI) of Plaintiff and other individuals, that was compromised in a cyber incident in June 2025, the Plaintiff contends. On June 12, 2025, the Defendant identified suspicious activity on its computer network. The Defendant then began its cyber response protocol and launched an investigation to determine the breadth of the Data Incident. The Plaintiff and Class Members' identities are now at a present and imminent risk because of Defendant’s negligent conduct since the Private Information that Defendant collected and maintained is now in the hands of data thieves, asserts the suit. The Defendant is a Fortune 500 company that provides financial protection to millions of policyholders and customers through its subsidiaries in the U.S. and Japan.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Casondra Turner, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC 800 S. Gay Street, Suite 1100 Knoxville, TN 37929 Telephone: (866) 252-0878 Facsimile: (771) 772-3086 E-mail: cturner@milberg.com - and - Terence R. Coates, Esq. Isabel C. DeMarco, Esq. MARKOVITS, STOCK & DEMARCO, LLC 119 East Court Street, Suite 530 Cincinnati, OH 45202 Telephone: (513) 651-3700 Facsimile: (513) 665-0219 E-mail: tcoates@msdlegal.com ALPHA BAKING: Fails to Protect Personal, Health Info, Chance Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- TYLER GENE CHANCE, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ALPHA BAKING CO., INC., Case No. : 1:25-cv-07039 (N.D. Ill., June 24, 2025) arises out of the public exposure of the confidential, private information of Defendant's current and former employees, as well as potentially its customers. Due to the Defendant's inadequately protected computer system, on or around January 23, 2025, an unknown actor gained access to an unknown number of individuals' (the "Class Members") personal identifiable information (PII) and protected health information (PHI), the suit says. According to the Data Breach notification letters that Defendant sent to Plaintiff and the Class Members on June 13, 2025, the Data Breach included, at least, their full names, dates of birth, financial account numbers, health insurance information, medical insurance information and Social Security numbers. The Plaintiff brings this action individually and on behalf of the Class Members, seeking remedies including, but not limited to, compensatory damages, reimbursement of out-of-pocket costs, injunctive relief, reasonable attorney fees and costs, and other remedies this Court deems proper. The Defendant is a bakery company, with more than 300 delivery routes, six production plants, and eighteen production lines.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Lynn A. Toops, Esq. Amina A. Thomas, Esq. COHENMALAD, LLP One Indiana Square, Suite 1400 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Telephone: (317) 636-6481 E-mail: ltoops@cohenmalad.com athomas@cohenmalad.com ALPHA BAKING: Fails to Secure Personal, Health Info, Crabtree Says ------------------------------------------------------------------ CORINNE CRABTREE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ALPHA BAKING CO., INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-06926 (N.D. Ill., June 23, 2025) arises from a double-extortion ransomware attack on the Defendant's systems in which hackers infiltrated the Defendant's information systems, performed reconnaissance operations, identified and stole valuable files containing Plaintiff's and Class Members' Private Information , and then encrypted Defendant's systems. Before Defendant discovered the systems interruption, the hackers had already been in Defendant' information systems and downloaded files. Given that the Defendant did not notice that it had been infiltrated until the hackers announced themselves by disrupting Defendant' information systems, it is likely that Defendant failed to implement necessary and expected monitoring, alerting, and data loss prevention tools that would have identified the malicious activity in a timelier manner. Because of the Defendant' failures, Plaintiff and the proposed Class Members have suffered a severe invasion of their privacy and must now face a substantial increase in identity theft and financial fraud for years to come. The Defendant is a baking company with its headquarters located at 5001 West Polk Street, Chicago, Illinois. The Defendant collects a significant amount of data including personally identifiable information including employee names, addresses, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, drivers’ license numbers; financial account information (PII); and protected health information (PHI) including health insurance information, provider name, and other treatment information (Private Information). On Jan. 23, 2025, Defendant experienced unusual activity on their network systems and upon investigation discovered that an unauthorized party accessed Defendant’s network systems and transferred certain files to an external destination.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeff Ostrow, Esq. KOPELOWITZ OSTROW, P.A. 1 West Las Olas Blvd., Suite 500 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 332-4200 E-mail: ostrow@kolawyers.com AMERICAN FAMILY: Hacker Suit Seeks Class Certification ------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as Craig Hacker, v. American Family Insurance Company, Case No. 2:22-cv-01936-DLR (D. Ariz.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order: -- granting motion for class certification, -- certifying a Class of insureds on the Plaintiff's claims of breach of contract, injunction, and declaratory relief against the Defendant under Rules 23(a), (b)(2), and/or (c)(4), -- appointing the Plaintiff as Class Representative, and -- appointing the Plaintiff's counsel Robert Carey as Class Counsel. The Plaintiff moves to certify a Class of American Family Insurance Company (AFIC) policyholders based on AFIC's imposition of an improper limit on uninsured and underinsured motorist (UM/UIM) coverages under multi-vehicle automobile policies, resulting in thousands of dollars of underpayments to insured accident victims. The Plaintiff alleges that on a classwide basis, AFIC did not meet the statutory conditions that would allow it to avoid stacking coverages. Accordingly, AFIC acknowledges only a fraction of available coverage by applying only one unit of UM/UIM coverage when multiple units were available, all in violation of Arizona’s Uninsured Motorist Act (UMA). The Plaintiff asks that the Court certify the following Class of AFIC insureds: "All insured persons under one or more American Family Insurance Company Policies issued in Arizona to the same purchaser covering multiple vehicles at the time of a covered loss who, from the earliest allowable time to the date judgment enters, received UM/UIM benefits in an amount equal to the limits of only one of the UM/UIM coverages under the applicable policy or policies." American is a private mutual company that focuses on property, casualty, and auto insurance. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 24, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=BxbepR at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert B. Carey, Esq. John DeStefano, Esq. Tory Beardsley, Esq. HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 11 West Jefferson Street, Suite 1000 Phoenix, AZ 85003 Telephone: (602) 840-5900 Facsimile: (602) 840-3012 E-mail: rob@hbsslaw.com johnd@hbsslaw.com toryb@hbsslaw.com - and - Brett L. Slavicek, Esq. James Fucetola, Esq. Justin Henry, Esq. THE SLAVICEK LAW FIRM 5500 North 24th Street Phoenix, AZ 85016 Telephone: (602) 285-4435 Facsimile: (602) 287-9184 E-mail: brett@slaviceklaw.com james@slaviceklaw.com justin@slaviceklaw.com AMERICAN HONDA: Appeals Attorney's Fees Order in Aberin Class Suit ------------------------------------------------------------------ AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC. is taking an appeal from a court order granting the Plaintiffs' motion for final approval of class action settlement and granting in part motion for attorney's fees in the lawsuit entitled Lindsey Aberin, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc., Defendant, Case No. 4:16-cv-04384-JST, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the Plaintiffs' claims arise from their purchase of Acura vehicles which contained a Bluetooth pairing device entitled HandsFreeLink (HFL) that allowed for hands-free cell phone calls. Beginning in 2005, American Honda Motor issued internal Technical Service Bulletins (TSBs) to its dealers describing the defect but offering no solution or warranty. In some cases, the Plaintiffs purchased their Acura vehicles specifically because they had HFL, and because Acuras had a reputation for reliability. The Plaintiffs filed this putative class action alleging claims under California and various other state consumer protection and warranty laws against the Defendants. On Apr. 4, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed a motion for final approval of class action settlement and a motion for attorney fees. On May 9, 2025, Judge Jon S. Tigar granted the Plaintiffs' motion for final approval of class action settlement and granted in part their motion for attorney fees. Class Counsel is entitled to $8,555,519.50 in attorney's fees and $1,026,270.90 in litigation costs. Named Plaintiffs Lindsay Aberin, Jeff Aberin, Don Awtrey, Charles Burgess, John Kelly, and Joy Matza are entitled to $5,000 each as a service award. The parties and settlement administrator are directed to implement this order and the Settlement Agreement in accordance with their terms. The appellate case is entitled Aberin, et al. v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc., Case No. 25-3687, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, filed on June 11, 2025. The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that: -- Appellant's Mediation Questionnaire was due on June 16, 2025; -- Appellant's Appeal Transcript Order was due on June 20, 2025; -- Appellant's Appeal Transcript is due on July 21, 2025; -- Appellant's Opening Brief is due on August 29, 2025; and -- Appellee's Answering Brief is due on September 29, 2025. [BN] Plaintiffs-Appellees LINDSEY ABERIN, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, are represented by: Christopher A. Seeger, Esq. Stephen A. Weiss, Esq. SEEGER WEISS, LLP 55 Challenger Road, 6th Floor Ridgefield Park, NJ 07660 - and - Alec Berin, Esq. James C. Shah, Esq. MILLER SHAH, LLP 1845 Walnut Street, Suite 806 Philadelphia, PA 19103 - and - Amanda M. Steiner, Esq. Toby J. Marshall, Esq. TERRELL MARSHALL LAW GROUP, PLLC 936 N. 34th Street, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98103 - and - Catherine Y.N. Gannon, Esq. Steve Berman, Esq. HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO, LLP 1301 2nd Avenue, Suite 2000 Seattle, WA 98101 - and - David Brian Fernandes, Esq. Roland Tellis, Esq. Mark Philip Pifko, Esq. BARON & BUDD, PC 15910 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 1600 Encino, CA 91436 - and - Shana E. Scarlett, Esq. HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO, LLP 715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202 Berkeley, CA 94710 - and - Shauna Itri, Esq. Scott Alan George, Esq. SEEGER WEISS, LLP 325 Chestnut Street, Suite 917 Philadelphia, PA 19016 - and - James E. Cecchi, Esq. CARELLA BYRNE CECCHI OLSTEIN BRODY & AGNELLO 5 Becker Farm Road, 2nd Floor Roseland, NJ 07068 Defendant-Appellant AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC. is represented by: Michael Lawrence Mallow, Esq. Rachel A. Straus, Esq. SHOOK, HARDY & BACON, LLP 2121 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1400 Los Angeles, CA 90067 - and - Amir Nassihi, Esq. SHOOK, HARDY & BACON, LLP 555 Mission Street, Suite 2300 San Francisco, CA 94105 - and - Christopher R. Wray, Esq. SHOOK, HARDY & BACON, LLP 2555 Grand Boulevard, 19th Floor Kansas City, MO 64108 AMERICAN SAFETY: Parex Sues Over Refusal to Defend and Indemnify ---------------------------------------------------------------- PAREX USA, INC., individually and as successor by merger to MERLEX STUCCO, INC., Plaintiff v. AMERICAN SAFETY INSURANCE COMPANY, TIG INSURANCE COMPANY, FIRST MERCURY INSURANCE COMPANY, INDIAN HARBOR INSURANCE COMPANY, and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 25STCV17278 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., June 13, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for breach of contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and declaratory relief. The case arises from the Defendants' alleged refusal to comply with their duty to defend and indemnify Merlex in a class action that was settled on June 18, 2021. Merlex, therefore, was forced to retain counsel and defend itself in the underlying action, expending significant fees and costs. Parex is the successor by interest to all of Merlex's rights, liabilities, and assets, including Merlex's right to recovery of damages as alleged herein. Parex USA, Inc. with its principal place of business at 2150 Eastridge Avenue, Riverside, California. American Safety Insurance Company is an insurance company in California. TIG Insurance Company is an insurance company in California. First Mercury Insurance Company is an insurance company in California. Indian Harbor Insurance Company is an insurance company in California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Paul A. Alarcon, Esq. Sam Q. Schleier, Esq. BOWMAN AND BROOKE LLP 600 Anton Blvd., Suite 650 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Telephone: (310) 380-6500 Facsimile: (310) 525-6600 Email: Paul.Alarcon@bowmanandbrooke.com Sam.Schleier@bowmanandbrooke.com ANKER INNOVATIONS: Iudice Sues Over Anker Power Banks' False Ads ---------------------------------------------------------------- MEGAN IUDICE, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ANKER INNOVATIONS LIMITED, and FANTASIA TRADING, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 5:25-cv-01483 (C.D. Cal., June 13, 2025) seeks to hold Anker accountable for deceptive business practices, secure compensation for Plaintiff and similarly situated consumers who paid premium prices for illusory safety features, and enjoin Anker from continuing to dupe (and endanger) consumers with products that explode into flames without warning, despite being equipped with the MultiProtect "complete safety" system. According to the complaint, the "MultiProtect" technology is at the core of Anker's marketing strategy. Anker advertises the trademarked safety system as providing complete safety and complete protection against the catastrophic thermal events that otherwise plague lithium-ion batteries. What Anker's unequivocal promise fails to acknowledge, however, is that MultiProtect cannot detect, much less prevent, thermal events resulting from the failure of the Class Products' internal components. Instead, the Class Products can explode or catch fire regardless of the MultiProtect system. The Plaintiff unfortunately discovered this reality when her Anker power bank exploded and caught fire in her home causing thousands of dollars of property damage, says the suit. Anker is well aware of the Products' inability to deliver the safety it promises. There have been multiple product recalls attributed to fires -- the very hazard MultiProtect is marketed to prevent -- and countless incidents like Plaintiff's demonstrating the system's inability to stop thermal runaway. Anker continues, however, to promote the Class Products using the same unequivocal safety claims, the suit contends. Anker Innovations Limited designs and manufactures Class Products for export and sale throughout the world, including throughout the United States and in California and Idaho.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Yana Hart, Esq. Mark I. Richards, Esq. CLARKSON LAW FIRM, P.C. 22525 Pacific Coast Highway Malibu, CA 90265 Telephone: (213) 788-4050 E-mail: yhart@clarksonlawfirm.com mrichards@clarksonlawfirm.com APPLE COMMUTER: Abuladze Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as KAKHA ABULADZE, et al., v. APPLE COMMUTER INC., et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-08684-MMG-RFT (S.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiffs shall move the Court at such date and time as counsel may be heard to grant the following relief: (1) Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, certify a Class defined as: "all concierge workers of the Defendants with similar compensation structures and who are or were employed by the Defendants on or after Aug. 23, 2015"; (2) appoint Natia Duduchava and Tamar Zabakhidze as Class Representatives; (3) appoint the Plaintiffs' counsel as Class Counsel; (4) direct Apple Defendants to produce to the Plaintiffs a Microsoft Excel list, in electronic format, of all Class Members' names, last known address, all known telephone numbers, dates of employment, and job titles; and (5) authorize the mailing of the proposed Notice to all Class Members. Apple specializes in shuttle services and private car rentals. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 20, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=KJjpr3 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Vano I. Haroutunian, Esq. BALLON STOLL P.C. 810 Seventh Avenue, Suite 405 New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (212) 575-7900 APPLE INC: Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Opposition -------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as LAUREN HUGHES, et al., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. APPLE INC., a California corporation, Case No. 3:22-cv-07668-VC (N.D. Cal.), the Defendant asks the Court to enter an order extending Apple's deadline to file its opposition to Plaintiffs' motion for class certification from July 18 to August 21. Apple requests the Court adjust the schedule as follows: Event New Deadline Opposition to Class Certification: Aug. 21, 2025 Reply to Opposition to Class Certification: Sept. 11, 2025 Class Certification Hearing: Subject to the Court's Calendar On November 18, 2024, the Court allowed certain claims of the remaining 38 Plaintiffs to proceed. Apple is an American multinational corporation and technology company. A copy of the Defendant's motion dated June 20, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=VlAZaU at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendant is represented by: Tiffany Cheung, Esq. Julie Y. Park, Esq. Melody E. Wong, Esq. Jocelyn E. Greer, Esq. Victor Lopez, Esq. MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94105-2482 Telephone: (415) 268-7000 Facsimile: (415) 268-7522 E-mail: TCheung@mofo.com JuliePark@mofo.com MelodyWong@mofo.com JGreer@mofo.com VLopez@mofo.com ASCENT RESOURCES-UTICA: Bid for Partial Summary Judgment Tossed --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as BRIAN CHRISTOPHER EATON, et al., v. ASCENT RESOURCES-UTICA, LLC, Case No. 2:19-cv-03412-EAS-CMV (S.D. Ohio), the Hon. Judge Edmund A. Sargus, Jr. entered an order denying the Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment. The Court granted that motion, and modified the class definition as follows: All persons or entities (including their predecessors and successors-in-interest) who have received, or who are entitled to receive, royalty payments from natural gas or oil wells located in Ohio, who were paid royalties by Ascent at any time since October 1, 2014, and who fit into one or more of the following subclasses. Subclass (a): All persons or entities who have had deductions for "gathering" and "compression" expenses taken from royalty payments by Ascent. Subclass (b): All persons or entities who have had deductions for "processing" expenses taken from royalty payments by Ascent. Subclass (c): All persons or entities who have had deductions for "transportation" expenses taken from royalty payments by Ascent. Subclass (d): All persons or entities for which Ascent has classified the lessor as having a "market enhancement clause" lease who have had deductions for “processing” expenses taken from royalty payments by Ascent. Subclass (e): All persons or entities for which Ascent has classified the lessor as having a "market enhancement clause" lease who have had deductions for "transportation" expenses taken from royalty payments by Ascent. Exclusions: Excluded from the Class and each Subclass are Ascent, any of its affiliates, parents, subsidiaries, officers, directors, employees, legal representatives, successors, and assigns, and any entity in which Ascent has a controlling interest, as well as that entity’s officers, directors, employees, legal representatives, successors, and assigns, in addition to the judicial officers and their immediate family members and court staff assigned to this lawsuit. Also excluded are those persons or entities whose royalties are paid per an overriding royalty interest, or those with working interests, or those whose leases contain governing arbitration clauses. Ascent is an exploration and production company that contracts with landowners to drill for oil and natural gas on the leased properties. A copy of the Court's opinion and order dated June 20, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=uLMAF8 at no extra charge.[CC] AUDUBON COMPANIES: Faces Murphy Suit Over Inspectors' Unpaid Wages ------------------------------------------------------------------ MICHAEL MURPHY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. AUDUBON COMPANIES, LLC, AUDUBON FIELD SOLUTIONS, LLC, and AUDUBON ENGINEERING COMPANY, L.P., Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-00815 (W.D. Pa., June 13, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages and failure to pay earned wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act, and the Pennsylvania Wage Payment and Collection Law. Mr. Murphy has been employed by Audubon as a safety inspector since approximately May 2023. Audubon Companies, LLC is a provider of engineering, procurement, construction (EPC), consulting, fabrication, and technical field services, headquartered in Metaire, Louisiana. Audubon Field Solutions, LLC is a provider of engineering, procurement, construction (EPC), consulting, fabrication, and technical field services, headquartered in Metaire, Louisiana. Audubon Engineering Company, LP is a provider of engineering, procurement, construction (EPC), consulting, fabrication, and technical field services, headquartered in Metaire, Louisiana. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq. Michael A. Josephson, Esq. JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 352-1100 Facsimile: (713) 352-3300 Email: mjosephson@mybackwages.com adunlap@mybackwages.com - and - Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq. BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 877-8788 Facsimile: (713) 877-8065 Email: rburch@brucknerburch.com BELLESA ENTERPRISES: Faces Suit Over Disclosure of Sensitive Info ----------------------------------------------------------------- D.B. and B.S., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. BELLESA ENTERPRISES US, INC, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-05099 (C.D. Cal., June 5, 2025), seeks to remedy the harms caused Defendant's unlawful conduct and asserts claims for the following statutory and common law claims against Defendant: Invasion of Privacy; Breach of Confidence; Negligence; Breach of Implied Contract; violations of the Video Privacy Protection Act; violations of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act; violations of New York General Business Law; violations of the California Invasion of Privacy Act; and violations of the California Unfair Competition Law. Plaintiffs used Defendant's website to privately view pornographic media. Given the confidential nature of pornography usage, when Plaintiffs used the website, they assumed that Defendant would do its utmost to keep their use thereof private. Unfortunately, unbeknownst to Plaintiffs and other visitors to the website, Bellesa does not keep this information private. Instead, Defendant collects and transmits information related to individuals' use of the website, including the specific pornographic videos that they watch to third party advertisers, including Alphabet Inc. (Google), through the use of surreptitious online tracking tools. In addition, Defendant never obtained informed consent from Plaintiffs or Class Members to share the Sensitive Information it collects with third parties. Headquartered in Woodland Hills, CA, Bellesa Enterprises US, Inc. is a for-profit corporation that produces and distributes pornography. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Daniel Srourian, Esq. SROURIAN LAW FIRM, P.C. 468 N. Camden Dr., Suite 200 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Telephone: (213) 474-3800 E-mail: daniel@slfla.com - and - Tyler J. Bean, Esq. Sonjay C. Singh, Esq. SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP 745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500 New York, NY 10151 Telephone: (212) 532-1091 E-mail: tbean@sirillp.com ssingh@sirillp.com BOSTONIAN TOWING: Duff Sues Over Illegal Towing Charges' Collection ------------------------------------------------------------------- MARISA DUFF on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. BOSTONIAN TOWING SERVICE, INC. Case No. 22-1560 (Mass. Super., June 24, 2025) alleges that the Defendant has wrongfully collected/received money from similarly situated Class Members as a result of the towing services. On March 4, 2025, a vehicle owned by the Plaintiff, a 2016 Nissan Sentra, was the subject of an involuntary tow by the Defendant. 8. The Defendant towed the Plaintiff's vehicle from 261 Alewife Brook Parkway, Somerville to its towyard at 162 Alewife Brook Parkway, Cambridge Massachusetts. The Plaintiffs vehicle was towed less than 5 miles, the suit says. Bostonian is engaged in providing towing services within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Paul F. X. Yasi, Jr., Esq. YASI & YASI, P.C. Two Salem Green Salem, MA 01970 Telephone: (978) 741-0400 E-mail: pj@yasiandyasi.com CHARLES SCHWAB: Hilbert Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ------------------------------------------------------------ LAUREL HILBERT, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CHARLES SCHWAB & CO., INC., Defendant is a civil rights action against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct, maintain, update and operate its website, "Thinkorswim" platform and/or mobile application platforms, 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 District of Columbia Human Rights Act. According to the complaint, Plaintiff Hilbert cannot fully and equally access Defendant's website and mobile app because Defendant's accessibility policies and practices have made it impossible to fully and equally perceive, understand, or operate the Website's content with screen reader auxiliary aids. As a result, this action for injunctive relief seeks an order requiring that Defendant (a) make its Website accessible to the Plaintiff, and (b) adopt sufficient policies and practices, the details of which are more fully described below, to ensure the Website does not become inaccessible again in the future. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction, actual and liquidated damages, and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs to cause a change in Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that Defendant’s Website and mobile app will become and remain accessible to blind and visually impaired consumers. Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. is an American multinational financial services company. The Company's Thinkorswim website offers trading platforms available to retail investors.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Eric L. Siegel, Esq. ERIC SIEGEL LAW, PLLC 888 17th Street, N.W., Suite 1200 Washington, D.C. 20006 Telephone: (771) 220-6116 Facsimile: (202) 223-6625 E-mail: esiegel@ericsiegellaw.com CHECK CITY: Nelson Sues Over Unauthorized Access of Clients' Info ----------------------------------------------------------------- NASHA NELSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CHECK CITY PARTNERSHIP, L.L.C., DBA CHECK CITY, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-01038 (D. Nev., June 12, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for negligence, breach of implied contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment. The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard the personally identifiable information (PII) and financial information of the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals stored within its network systems following a data breach on or no later than May 9, 2025. 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. Check City Partnership, L.L.C., doing business as Check City, is a financial services company based in Las Vegas, Nevada. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Nathan R. Ring, Esq. STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC 3100 W. Charleston Boulevard, Suite 208 Las Vegas, NV 89102 Telephone: (725) 235-9750 Email: lasvegas@stranchlaw.com - and - Andrew Mize, Esq. STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC The Freedom Center 223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200 Nashville, TN 37203 Telephone: (615) 254-8801 Email: amize@stranchlaw.com - and - Kevin Laukaitis, Esq. LAUKAITIS LAW LLC 954 Avenida Ponce De Leon, Suite 205 San Juan, PR 00907 Telephone: (215) 789-4462 Email: klaukaitis@laukaitislaw.com CHRISTOPHER MEREDITH: Mejia Seeks Unpaid Overtime for Landscapers ----------------------------------------------------------------- JOSE MEJIA-AGUILAR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CHRISTOPHER MEREDITH, INC. and CHRISTOPHER MEREDITH, Defendants, Case No. 7:25-cv-04934 (S.D.N.Y., June 12, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law including failure to pay overtime wages and failure to provide accurate wage notice and statements. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a landscaper from 2016 to September 30, 2024. Christopher Meredith, Inc. is a landscaping company, with its principal place of business in Pomona, New York. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Brandon A. Thomas, Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF BRANDON A. THOMAS, PC 1 Glenlake Parkway, Suite 650 Atlanta, GA 30328 Telephone: (678) 862-9344 Facsimile: (678) 638-6201 Email: brandon@overtimeclaimslawyer.com CONTINENTAL AUTONOMOUS: Doney Suit Seeks Overtime Pay Under FLSA ---------------------------------------------------------------- JEFFREY DONEY, GABRIEL ARROYO, AND ALEC EOFF, on behalf of themselves and similarly situated others v. CONTINENTAL AUTONOMOUS MOBILITY US, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-00965 (W.D. Tex., June 23, 2025) alleges that Continental has uniformly misclassified Engineers as exempt, paid them on a salary basis, and failed to track hours worked or pay overtime despite knowing that they were not performing exempt duties and that they routinely worked 50 70 hours per week, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Plaintiffs and similarly situated others are current or former employees of Continental. Continental designs, manufactures, and ships advanced driver assistance ADAS electronic control units, sensors, and related automotive components that move in interstate and foreign commerce, utilizing suppliers, carriers, and the interstate roadway system.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Kevin S. Mullen, Esq. THE MULLEN FIRM PLLC 500 N. Capital of Texas Hwy., Building 2 Austin, TX 78746 Telephone: (512) 537-7959 E-mail: kevin@themullenfirm.com - and - Craig Bryan, Esq. BRYAN LAW FIRM PLLC 500 N. Capital of Texas Hwy., Building 2 Austin, TX 78746 Telephone: (719) 480-2517 Facsimile: (512) 290-9177 E-mail: cbryan@bryanfirm.com CREDENCE MANAGEMENT: Gerrard et al. Allege WARN Act Breaches ------------------------------------------------------------ ANNA GERRARD, ALEXA LUBOMSKI, and SARA LAMB, individually and on behalf of those similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. CREDENCE MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-00952 (E.D. Va., June 6, 2025) arises under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN Act). According to the complaint, the Defendant abruptly terminated several groups of employees, to include the "Institutional Support Contractors" who worked at the United States Agency For International Development (work unit), unilaterally and without proper notice to employees or staff, completely shutting down the work unit and terminating approximately 275 employees, including Plaintiffs. The Defendant made the decision to terminate these employees without 60 days' advance notice, says the suit. Credence Management Solutions, LLC operates a government contracting company based in McLean, VA. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Devon J. Munro, Esq. MUNRO BYRD, P.C. 120 Day Ave. SW, Suite 100 Roanoke, VA 24016 Telephone: (540) 283-9889 Facsimile: (540) 283-5162 E-mail: dmunro@trialsva.com - and - Samuel Gladney, Esq. STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY PLLC 701 Market Street, Suite 1510 St. Louis, MO 63101 Telephone: (314) 390-6750 E-mail: sgladney@stranchlaw.com - and - J. Gerard Stranch, IV, 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 - and - Lynn A. Toops, Esq. COHENMALAD, LLP One Indiana Square, Suite 1400 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Telephone: (317) 636-6481 E-mail: ltoops@cohenmalad.com - and - Samuel J. Strauss, Esq. Raina C. Borrelli, Esq. STRAUSS BORRELLI, LLP 613 Williamson St., Suite 201 Madison, WI 53703 Telephone: (608) 237-1775 Facsimile: (608) 509-4423 E-mail: sam@straussborrelli.com raina@straussborrelli.com CROCS INC: Court Narrows Claims in Mongalo Suit ----------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JACQUELINE MONGALO, et al., v. CROCS, INC., Case No. 3:24-cv-09037-TLT (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Trina Thompson entered an order granting in part and denying in part the Defendant's motion to dismiss and granting in part and denying in part the Defendant's motion to strike. The Court grants the Defendant's motion to dismiss the Plaintiffs' warranty claims to the extent Defendant argue the complaint fails to sufficiently allege pre-litigation notice. The Court denies the Defendant's motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's express warranty claims to the extent the claims are based on Defendants’ advertisements. However, the Court GRANTS the Defendant's motion to the extent the Plaintiffs' claims are based on the Products' size labeling. The Court denies Defendant's 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss the Plaintiffs' implied warranty claim to the extent Defendant argues the Products fell below lacked a basic degree of fitness and did not meet the minimum level of quality for similar shoes. However, The Court grants the Defendant's motion to the extent the Defendant argues lack of vertical privity for the Plaintiff Garland. On Aug. 5, 2024, the Plaintiffs Mongalo, Garland, Werner, and Harmon filed a motion to intervene in Valentine v. Crocs. Crocs manufactures and markets the Crocs brand of foam footwear. A copy of the Court's order dated June 20, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=vJgxLc at no extra charge.[CC] CROWDVEST LLC: Johnson Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Bid ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Cynthia Johnson, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, v. Crowdvest LLC, Case No. 2:24-cv-01293-JPS (E.D. Wis.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order to show cause why Crowdvest LLC should not be sanctioned further for its ongoing and brazen disregard for this Court's orders and the ordinary operation of discovery and litigation. Accordingly, the Defendant continues to disregard its obligations to participate in this litigation, and continues to defy the Court's clear instructions, to the ongoing prejudice of Plaintiff. Thus, for all of these reasons, and those previously discussed in the Plaintiff's initial motion to compel, the Plaintiff requests that the Court (1) order the Defendant to show cause why it should not be further sanctioned for its defiance of the Court’s order granting Plaintiff’s motion to compel; and (2) extend the Plaintiff's deadline to move for class certification to August 25, 2025. Crowdvest is a commercial real estate investment firm. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 20, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ApF51L at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Alex D. Kruzyk, Esq. PARDELL, KRUZYK & GIRIBALDO, PLLC 7500 Rialto Blvd., Suite 1-250 Austin, TX 78735 Telephone: (561) 726-8444 E-mail: akruzyk@pkglegal.com CUSO FINANCIAL: Filing for Class Certification Due Jan. 15, 2026 ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as STAN SINITSA, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. CUSO FINANCIAL SERVICES, LP; DOES 1 through 100 inclusive, Case No. 3:24-cv-02290-JO-VET (S.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Valerie Torres entered a scheduling order regulating putative class discovery and setting deadline for motion for class certification: 1. Any motion to join other parties, to amend the pleadings, or to file additional pleadings shall be filed by Aug. 12, 2025. 2. No later than Oct. 14, 2025, the parties shall designate their respective experts for class certification in writing. The date for exchange of rebuttal experts for class certification shall be no later than Nov. 14, 2025. 3. No later than Oct. 14, 2025, each party shall comply with Rule 26(a)(2)(A) and (B) disclosure provisions regarding experts for class certification. 4. No later than Nov. 14, 2025, the parties shall supplement their disclosures regarding contradictory or rebuttal evidence for class certification under Rule 26(a)(2)(D) and 26(e). 5. Fact and class discovery are not bifurcated; however, all discovery related to class certification must be completed by Dec. 15, 2025. 6. The Plaintiffs must file a motion for class certification by Jan. 15, 2026. CUSO provides investment advisory services. A copy of the Court's order dated June 20, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=6rwa4R at no extra charge.[CC] DECISELY INSURANCE: Garcia Sues Over Unauthorized Info Access ------------------------------------------------------------- KEVIN GARCIA, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. DECISELY INSURANCE SERVICES, LLC and METLIFE SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-03466-ELR (N.D. Ga., June 23, 2025) arises out of the recent targeted attack and data breach on the Defendants' network that resulted in unauthorized access to highly sensitive data. The specific information compromised in the Data Breach includes personally identifiable information (PII), such as names, dates of birth, phone number, passport number, digital signature and/or Social Security numbers. The Plaintiff's and Class Members PII -- which was entrusted to Decisely, its officials, and agents -- was compromised and unlawfully accessed due to the Data Breach. Decisely is a benefits brokerage and HR services firm specializing in integrated technology solutions for small businesses. MetLife provides insurance, annuities and employee benefit program.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Casondra Turner, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC 800 S. Gay Street, Suite 1100 Knoxville, TN 37929 Telephone: (866) 252-0878 Facsimile: (771) 772-3086 E-mail: cturner@milberg.com DECOPAC INC: Hart Files Suit in Minn. 4th Judicial Dist. -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Decopac, Inc. The case is styled as Erin Hart, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Decopac, Inc., Case No. 27-CV-25-11487 (Minn. 4th Judicial Dist., Hennepin Cty., June 16, 2025). The case type is stated as "Civil Other." DecoPac, Inc. -- https://www.decopac.com/ -- is a supplier and marketer of cake decorating products headquartered in Anoka, Minnesota.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Philip Joseph Krzeski, Esq. CHESTNUT CAMBRONNE PA 100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 1700 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Phone: (612) 339-7300 Fax: (646) 417-5967 Email: pkrzeski@chestnutcambronne.com DEREK LAM: Dalton Seeks Equal Website Access for Blind Users ------------------------------------------------------------ Julie Dalton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Derek Lam International LLC, Case No. 0:25-cv-02641-PAM-JFD (D. Minn., June 24, 2025) arises because the Defendant's Website, www.dereklam.com, is not fully and equally accessible to people who are blind or who have low vision in violation of both the general non-discriminatory mandate and the effective communication and auxiliary aids and services requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and its implementing regulations, and the Minnesota Human Rights Act. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction requiring a change in Defendant's corporate policies to cause its online store to become, and remain, accessible to individuals with visual disabilities; a civil penalty payable to the state of Minnesota; damages, and a damage multiplier. The Defendant offers clothing and accessories for sale including, but not limited to, tops, bottoms, dresses, jackets, sunglasses and more.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Patrick W. Michenfelder, Esq. Chad A. Throndset, Esq. Jason Gustafson, Esq. THRONDSET MICHENFELDER, LLC 80 S. 8th Street, Suite 900 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (763) 515-6110 E-mail: pat@throndsetlaw.com chad@throndsetlaw.com jason@throndsetlaw.com DEXSTA FEDERAL: Medina Sues Over Unlawful Fee Collection -------------------------------------------------------- VICTOR MEDINA, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DEXSTA FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, Defendant, Case No. N25C-06-075 NJB (Del. Super., June 5, 2025) seeks monetary damages, restitution, and injunctive and declaratory relief from Defendant in connection with its improper assessment and collection of multiple fees on an item. The Plaintiff and other customers have been injured by Defendant's practices. Accordingly, the Plaintiff now brings claims for breach of contract, including the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, and violation of the Delaware Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Headquartered in New Castle County, Delaware, Dexsta Federal Credit Union provides retail banking services. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Derrick B. Farrell, Esq. Lesley E. Weaver, Esq. Matthew L. Miller, Esq. Robert B. Lackey, Esq. BLEICHMAR FONTI & AULD LLP 3411 Silverside Road Baynard Building, Suite 104 Wilmington, DE 19810 Telephone: (302) 499-2158 - and - Lynn A. Toops, Esq. COHEN & MALAD, LLP One Indiana Square, Suite 1400 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Telephone: (317) 636-6481 E-mail: ltoops@cohenandmalad.com - and - Martin F. Schubert, Esq. STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PPLC 223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200 Nashville, TN 37203 Telephone: (615) 254-8801 E-mail: mschubert@stranchlaw.com - and - Christopher D. Jennings, Esq. JENNINGS & EARLEY PLLC 500 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 110 Little Rock, AR 72201 E-mail: chris@jefirm.com DISPATCH IT: Sends Unsolicited Telemarketing Calls, Pimentel Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- JAN CARLOS PIMENTEL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DISPATCH IT NOW CORP, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-22665-BB (S.D. Fla., June 12, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The case arises from the Defendant's practice of sending telemarketing calls to the telephone numbers of consumers, including the Plaintiff, in an attempt to promote its goods and services without prior consent. The Defendant continues to send the unwanted telemarketing calls despite the numbers are registered on the National Do Not Call Registry. As a result of the Defendant's misconduct, the Plaintiff and similarly situated consumers suffered damages. Dispatch It Now Corp is a provider of dispatch assistance to truckers and carriers, with its headquarters in Richmond Hill, New York. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Faaris K. Uddin, Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI 110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (813) 340-8838 Email: faaris@jibraellaw.com DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Plaintiffs Seek More Time to File Class Cert ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COUNCIL OF THE BLIND, et al., v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Case No. 1:25-cv-01694-TSC (D.D.C.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting a 45-day extension to file a motion for class certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23. With the Defendant's consent, the Plaintiffs seek to extend their deadline to file a motion for class certification to Oct. 14, 2025. The Defendant is a compact city on the Potomac River, bordering the states of Maryland and Virginia. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 20, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=vesXq7 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Michael Allen, Esq. Jennifer Klar, Esq. Robert Hunter, Esq. RELMAN COLFAX PLLC 1225 19th Street NW, Suite 600 Washington DC 20036 Telephone: (202) 728-1888 Facsimile: (202) 728-0848 E-mail: mallen@relmanlaw.com jklar@relmanlaw.com rhunter@relmanlaw.com - and - Kaitlin Banner, Esq. Chelsea Sullivan, Esq. WASHINGTON LAWYERS' COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND URBAN AFFAIRS 700 14th Street NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: (202) 319-1000 Facsimile: (202) 319-1010 E-mail: kaitlin_banner@washlaw.org chelsea_sullivan@washlaw.org - and - Rachel Weisberg, Esq. Erin Gallagher, Esq. DISABILITY RIGHTS ADVOCATES 300 South Wacker Drive, Floor 32 Chicago, IL 60606-6680 Telephone: (332) 217-2319 Facsimile: (212) 644-8636 E-mail: rweisberg@dralegal.org egallagher@dralegal.org DOTDASH MEREDITH: Cartagenova et al. Allege VPPA Breaches --------------------------------------------------------- MARI CARTAGENOVA, KEVIN MANSFIELD, and ABBY MUSICK, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. DOTDASH MEREDITH, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-11638 (D. Mass., June 5, 2025), accuses the Defendant of violating the Video Protection Privacy Act (VPPA). The Plaintiffs bring this consumer digital privacy class action complaint on behalf of all persons with Facebook accounts who have subscribed to newsletters from Entertainment Weekly and People, and interacted with videos on their respective websites (ew.com and people.com). Plaintiffs allege that Defendant breaches the VPPA by disclosing to third party, Meta Platforms, Inc. (Facebook), users': (i) personally identifiable information including their Facebook ID numbers, and (ii) a computer file containing the title of the video along with its corresponding URL, constituting a record of each video clip they viewed on the website. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs bring this claim to achieve redress on behalf of themselves and others whose privacy rights were similarly violated by Dotdash Meredith's unlawful conduct. Headquartered in New York, NY, Dotdash Meredith is a wholly-owned subsidiary of IAC, Inc., a publicly-held media conglomerate. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Mark Loevy-Reyes, Esq. Jon Loevy, Esq. Michael I. Kanovitz, Esq. Thomas M. Hanson, Esq. LOEVY & LOEVY 311 N. Aberdeen St., 3rd Floor Chicago, IL 60607 Telephone: (312) 243-5900 E-mail: anand@loevy.com jon@loevy.com mike@loevy.com hanson@loevy.com DUO TELEPHONE: Firkins Suit Removed to W.D. Kentucky ---------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Rilda Firkins, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. DUO Telephone Cooperative Corporation, Inc. doing business as: DUO Broadband, Case No. 25-CI-00183 was removed from the Russell County Circuit Court, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky on June 16, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-00084-GNS to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. DUO Telephone Cooperative Corporation, Inc. doing business as DUO Broadband -- https://duobroadband.com/ -- is a telecommunications and entertainment company based in Kentucky.[BN] The Plaintiff appears pro se. Leigh Montgomery, Esq. EKSM LLP 4200 Montrose Blvd., Suite 200 Houston, TX 77066 Phone: (888) 350-3931 - and - Michele Henry, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF MICHELE HENRY PLC 517 West Ormsby Avenue Louisville, KY 40203 Phone: (502) 536-0085 Email: mhenry@michelehenrylaw.com The Defendant is represented by: Benjamin Sandlin, Esq. THOMPSON HINE LLP 312 Walnut Street, Suite 2000 Cincinnati, OH 45202 Phone: (513) 352-6514 Fax: (513) 241-4771 Email: ben.sandlin@thompsonhine.com - and - Jessica E. Salisbury-Copper, Esq. THOMPSON HINE LLP - MIAMISBURG 10050 Innovation Drive, Suite 400 Miamisburg, OH 45342 Phone: (937) 443-6854 Fax: (937) 443-6635 Email: jessica.salisbury-copper@thompsonhine.com E.B. ARCHBALD: Fails to Protect Clients' Personal Info, Lahman Says ------------------------------------------------------------------- LARRY LAHMAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. E.B. ARCHBALD & ASSOCIATES, INC., Defendant, Case No. 5:25-cv-00649-SLP (W.D. Okla., June 12, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for negligence, negligence per se, breach of third-party beneficiary contract, unjust enrichment, and declaratory and injunctive relief. The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard the personally identifiable information (PII) of the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals stored within its network systems following a data breach discovered on or around March 23, 2025. 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. E.B. Archbald & Associates, Inc. is a service organization, with its principal place of business located in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: William B. Federman, Esq. Kennedy M. Brian, Esq. FEDERMAN & SHERWOOD 10205 N. Pennsylvania Ave. Oklahoma City, OK 73120 Telephone: (405) 235-1560 Email: wbf@federmanlaw.com kpb@federmanlaw.com ER CARPENTER: Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Opposition ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as SAROYA MARROW, v. E.R. CARPENTER COMPANY, INC. D/B/A CARPENTER CO., Case No. 8:23-cv-02959-KKM-LSG (M.D. Fla.), the Defendant asks the Court to enter an order granting motion for an unopposed extension of time to file its response in opposition to the Plaintiff's motion for class certification up to and including July 24, 2025. In light of the rapidly approaching July 7, 2025 deadline for Carpenter to respond to Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification, the outstanding discovery that is necessary to address that Motion (including Plaintiff’s deposition), and the mediation, Carpenter reasonably requests an extension up to and including July 24, 2025, to file its Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification. The Plaintiff filed suit on Dec. 22, 2023 seeking to state claims for failure to provide her and the putative class adequate notice of their right to continued health care coverage under the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 ("COBRA"). On Feb. 26, 2025, this Court issued a Case Management and Scheduling Order setting the deadline for Class Certification as May 15, 2025. On April 9, 2025, a joint motion for extension of the class certification deadline was filed. ER manufactures resins, synthetic rubbers, and fibers. A copy of the Defendant's motion dated June 20, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=jqQIda at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendant is represented by: Sean P. Walsh, Esq. Christopher Michalik, Esq. Heidi E. Siegmund, Esq. MCGUIREWOODS LLP 50 North Laura Street, Suite 3300 Jacksonville, FL 32202 Telephone: (904) 798-2638 Facsimile: (904) 360-6338 E-mail: swalsh@mcguirewoods.com cmichalik@mcguirewoods.com hsiegmund@mcguirewoods.com ERIE INDEMNITY: Haas Files Suit in W.D. Pennsylvania ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Erie Indemnity Company, et al. The case is styled as Amy Haas, individually and on behalf herself, and all others similarly situated v. Erie Indemnity Company, Erie Insurance Company, Case No. 1:25-cv-00162 (W.D. Pa., June 16, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury. Erie Indemnity Company -- https://www.erieinsurance.com/ -- operates as a managing attorney-in-fact for the subscribers at the Erie Insurance Exchange in the United States.[BN] The Plaintiff appears pro se. EXACT CARE PHARMACY: Yanosick Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Ohio ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Exact Care Pharmacy, LLC. The case is styled as Jacob Yanosick, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Exact Care Pharmacy, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-01245-CEF (N.D. Ohio, June 13, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. ExactCare -- https://www.exactcarepharmacy.com/ -- is a full-service pharmacy that specializes in medication management for patients with multiple disease states and on multiple medications.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Max Morgan, Esq. THE WEITZ FIRM, LLC 1515 Market Street, Suite #1100 Philadelphia, PA 19102 Phone: (267) 587-6240 Fax: (215) 689-0875 Email: max.morgan@theweitzfirm.com EXPRESS TECHNOLOGIES: Millar Alleges Illegal Autorenewal Fees ------------------------------------------------------------- TIMOTHY MILLAR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. EXPRESS TECHNOLOGIES, LTD., Defendant, Case No. 8:25-cv-01273 (C.D. Cal., June 13, 2025) arises from the Defendant's alleged violation of the California Automatic Renewal Law by enrolling Plaintiff and similarly situated customers in automatically renewing subscriptions. In September of 2022, Plaintiff Millar purchased one month of ExpressVPN's virtual private network services. Due to ExpressVPN's misleading advertisements and deficient disclosures, he thought he was making a one-time purchase of one-month of the service. Unbeknownst to him and without his consent, ExpressVPN enrolled him in an automatically renewing monthly plan. In October of 2022, ExpressVPN automatically charged his card for $12.95. He asserts that such charge was illegal and should be refunded. He noticed the unwanted charge on his credit card bill and cancelled the plan to stop ExpressVPN from charging him again. The Plaintiff brings this case for himself and all other California consumers that were charged illegal autorenewal fees. Express Technologies Ltd. is a British Virgin Islands corporate entity with its headquarters in Tortola, British Virgin Islands.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jonas B. Jacobson, Esq. Simon Franzini, Esq. DOVEL & LUNER, LLP 201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600 Santa Monica, CA 90401 Telephone: (310) 656-7066 Facsimile: (310) 656-7069 E-mail: jonas@dovel.com simon@dovel.com FEDERAL EXPRESS: Class Cert. Deadlines in Gillyard Stricken ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as STEFFON GILLYARD, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, Case No. 2:24-cv-01666-JHC (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge John Chun entered an order granting stipulated motion to continue class certification motion schedule. 1. The deadlines relating to class certification are stricken. 2. The Parties shall submit a status report no later than 10 days after the scheduled mediation. Federal is an American multinational conglomerate holding company specializing in transportation, e-commerce, and business services. A copy of the Court's order dated June 24, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=4Bm1H7 at no extra charge.[CC] FIDELITY NATIONAL: Bartek Seeks Conditional Status of Collective ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as STUART BARTEK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE AGENCY, INC.; and FIDELITY NATIONAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-01123-JLH (D. Del.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order granting conditional certification of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective pursuant to 29 U.S.C. section 216(b): "All persons currently or formerly employed by Fidelity National Title Agency, Inc. and/or Fidelity National Management Services, LLC as Systems Administrators who were paid on a salary basis, any point from Oct. 9, 2021, to the present." Fidelity is an American provider of title insurance and settlement services to the real estate and mortgage industries. A copy of the Parties' motion dated June 19, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ZAPM4f at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Patrick C. Gallagher, Esq. JACOBS & CRUMPLAR, P.A. 10 Corporate Circle, Ste. 301 New Castle, DE 19720 Telephone: (302) 656-5445 Facsimile: (302) 656-5875 E-mail: pat@jcdelaw.com - and - Matthew S. Parmet, Esq. PARMET LAW PC 2 Greenway, Ste. Ste. 250 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 999-5200 E-mail: matt@parmet.law The Defendants are represented by: Lauren E.M. Russell, Esq. Elizabeth R. Schlecker, Esq. POTTER ANDERSON & CORROON LLP 1313 North Market Street Wilmington, DE 19899-0951 Telephone: (302) 984-6003 Facsimile: (302) 658-1192 E-mail: lrussell@potteranderson.com eschlecker@potteranderson.com - and – Eric W. Iskra, Esq. Eric E. Kinder, Esq. Sarah E. Kowalkowski, Esq. SPILMAN THOMAS & BATTLE, PLLC 300 Kanawha Boulevard, E Charleston, WV 25301 Telephone: (304) 340-3800 E-mail: eiskra@spilmanlaw.com ekinder@spilmanlaw.com skowalkowski@spilman.com FIFTY WEST: Court Extends Time to File Class Cert Bid ----------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Morse v. Fifty West Brewing Company LLC, et al., Case No. 1:21-cv-00377 (S.D. Ohio, Filed June 4, 2021), the Hon. Judge Douglas R. Cole entered granting joint motion for extension of time to file response re: -- motion for partial summary judgment,84 -- motion for summary judgment, and -- motion to certify class. Responses due by July 28, 2025. The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).[CC] FIRST STREET FOOD: Scott Files Suit in E.D. California ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against First Street Food LLC. The case is styled as Everett Scott, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. First Street Food LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-00732-CDB (E.D. Cal., June 16, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Trenton Ross Kashima, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC 401 West Broadway, Suite 1760 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: (212) 946-9389 Email: tkashima@milberg.com FIVERR INC: Johnson Suit Transferred to S.D. New York ----------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Marcus Johnson, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated v. Fiverr Inc., Case No. 3:25-cv-03303 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on June 17, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-05079-UA to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other Statutory Actions. Fiverr Inc. -- https://www.fiverr.com/ -- is an Israeli multinational online marketplace connecting businesses with freelance talent for digital services.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Andrew Gerald Gunem, Esq. Carly M. Roman, Esq. STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC 980 North Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610 Chicago, IL 60611 Phone: (872) 263-1100 Fax: (872) 263-1109 Email: agunem@straussborrelli.com - and - Gerard J. Stranch, Esq. STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC 223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue Freedom Building Ste 200 Nashville, TN 37203 Phone: (615) 254-8801 - and - Vess Allen Miller, Esq. COHEN & MALAD, LLP One Indiana Square, Suite 1400 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Phone: (317) 636-6481 Fax: (317) 636-2593 Email: vmiller@cohenandmalad.com The Defendant is represented by: David Grant Hille, Esq. WHITE & CASE LLP (NY) 1221 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 Phone: (212) 819-8200 Fax: (212) 354-8113 Email: dhille@whitecase.com - and - Julian Lamm, Esq. Russell J. Gould, Esq. WHITE & CASE LLP 555 South Flower Street, Suite 2700 Los Angeles, CA 90071-2433 Phone: (213) 620-7818 Email: jlamm@whitecase.com russell.gould@whitecase.com - and - Bryan A. Merryman, Esq. WHITE & CASE LLP (CA) 633 West Fifth Street, Suite 1900 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Phone: (213) 620-7802 Email: bmerryman@whitecase.com FOSSIL GROUP: Chancy Suit Removed to S.D. California ---------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Alexander Chancy, Joshua Hyun¸ Tyler Curington, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. Fossil Group, Inc., Case No. 25CU024862N was removed from Superior Court of California, County of San Diego, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on June 18, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-01566-AJB-DEB to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud. Fossil Group, Inc. -- https://www.fossilgroup.com/ -- is a global design, marketing, distribution and innovation company specializing in lifestyle accessories.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Matthew W. Ruan, Esq. 100 Tri-State International, Suite 128 Lincolnshire, IL 60069 Phone: (224) 632-4500 The Defendant is represented by: Christopher E. Stretch, Esq. Meegan Bay Brooks, Esq. Nicolette Shamsian, Esq. Stephanie A. Sheridan, Esq. BENESCH, FRIEDLANDER, COPLAN & ARONOFF LLP 100 Pine Street, Suite 3100 San Francisco, CA 94111 Phone: (628) 600-2250 Fax: (628) 221-5828 Email: cstretch@beneschlaw.com mbrooks@beneschlaw.com ssheridan@beneschlaw.com FULLBEAUTY BRANDS: Kempf Suit Removed to W.D. Washington -------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Julie Anne Kempf, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. FULLBEAUTY BRANDS OPERATIONS, LLC, an Indiana limited liability company, Case No. 25-2-14717-7 SEA, was removed from the Superior Court for King County, to the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington on June 18, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-01141. On May 19, 2025, Plaintiff acting individually and on behalf of a purported class of persons she seeks to represent, served the Complaint and Summons on FullBeauty's registered agent, the Corporation Service Company ("CSC").[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Kaleigh N. Boyd, Esq. TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC 1200 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1700 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: 206-682-5600 Email: kboyd@tousley.com - and - Edwin J. Kilpela, Jr., Esq. James Lamarca, Esq. WADE KILPELA SLADE LLP 6425 Living Place, Suite 200 Pittsburgh, PA 15206 Phone: 412-314-0515 Email: ek@waykayslay.com jlamarca@waykayslay.com - and - Evan E. North, Esq. NORTH LAW PLLC 1900 Market Street, Suite 800 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Phone: 202-921-1651 Email: evan@northlawpllc.com The Defendants are represented by: Lauren B. Rainwater, Esq. Emily Parsons, Esq. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300 Seattle, WA 98104-1610 Phone: 206-622-3150 Email: laurenrainwater@dwt.com emilyparsons@dwt.com - and - Jacob Harper, Esq. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 350 South Grand Avenue, 27th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Phone: 213-633-6800 Email: jharper@dwt.com GENERAL MOTORS: Hernandez Suit Transferred to E.D. Michigan ----------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Jose Ignacio Ramirez Hernandez, James M. Alecxih, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. General Motors LLC, Case No. 2:25-cv-00085 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on June 16, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:25-cv-11797-SDK-KGA to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Motor Vehicle Prod. Liability. General Motors Company -- https://www.gm.com/ -- is an American multinational automotive manufacturing company headquartered in Detroit, Michigan.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Adam J. Levitt, Esq. Daniel R Ferri, Esq. John E. Tangren, Esq. DICELLO LEVITT & CASEY LLC Ten North Dearborn Street, Eleventh Flr Chicago, IL 60602 Phone: (312) 214-7900 Fax: (440) 953-9138 Email: alevitt@dicellolevitt.com dferri@dicellolevitt.com jtangren@dicellolevitt.com The Defendant is represented by: April N. Ross, Esq. Rachel Paige Raphael, Esq. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP-DC OFFICE 1111 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20004 Phone: (202) 739-3000 Fax: (202) 739-3001 Email: april.ross@morganlewis.com rachel.raphael@morganlewis.com GENERAL MOTORS: Sells Vehicles With Defect, Rahaman Suit Alleges ---------------------------------------------------------------- MEZANUR RAHAMAN, GERALD REED, and FARRAH FORREST, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. GENERAL MOTORS LLC, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-03032 (E.D. Pa., June 13, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, fraud, unjust enrichment, and violations of the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, and the New York General Business Law. The case arises from the Defendant's design, manufacturing, advertising, marketing, and selling of vehicles, including the 2021-2024 Cadillac Escalade and Escalade ESV, Chevrolet Silverado 1500, Suburban, and Tahoe, and GMC Sierra 1500, Yukon, and Yukon XL vehicles, with a uniform defect in the connecting rod or crankshaft engine component. According to the complaint, the defect can cause severe and unexpected engine damage, failure, and loss of propulsion. The Defendant announced a recall, but it is inadequate and does not provide a complete and lasting remedy for the defect, suit says. Had the Plaintiffs and Class members known about the defect, they would not have purchased or leased a Class Vehicle or would have only paid substantially less for it. General Motors LLC is an automobile manufacturer, with its principal place of business in Detroit, Michigan. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Charles E. Schaffer, Esq. Nicholas J. Elia, Esq. LEVIN SEDRAN & BERMAN LLP 510 Walnut Street, Suite 500 Philadelphia, PA 19106 Telephone: (215) 592-1500 Email: cschaffer@lfsblaw.com nelia@lfsblaw.com - and - Jeffrey Brown, Esq. Brett Cohen, Esq. LEEDS BROWN LAW, P.C. One Old Country Road, Suite 347 Carle Place, NY 11514 Telephone: (516) 268-3579 Email: jbrown@leedsbrownlaw.com bcohen@leedsbrownlaw.com GEO GROUP: Parties Seek to Continue July 21 Class Cert. Filing -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as HUGO GONZALEZ, JOSE BACA, ERICK LOPEZ, MARIO MANJARREZ, and RICARDO SANDOVAL GUADARRAMA, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. THE GEO GROUP, INC., et al., Case No. 2:22-cv-04014-JGB-SHK (C.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order granting continuance of the current summary judgment and class action motions hearing date, trial date, and current pretrial deadlines as follows: The Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment: July 21, 2025 The Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification: July 21, 2025 Final Pretrial Conference: Oct. 20, 2025 Jury Trial: Nov. 18, 2025 The case concerns a June 12, 2020, incident at the Adelanto Detention Facility in Adelanto, California; WHEREAS, the parties have previously participated in mediation on October 16, 2024, but were unable to resolve the case. GEO provides evidence-based rehabilitation programs to individuals while in-custody and post-release into the community. A copy of the Parties' motion dated June 23, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=XxuWyt at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Catherine Sweetser, Esq. UCLA LAW CLINICS 385 Charles E Young Drive East Los Angeles, CA 90095 E-mail: csweetser@sshhzlaw.com - and - Paul Hoffman, Esq. John Washington, Esq. SCHONBRUN SEPLOW HARRIS HOFFMAN & ZELDES LLP 200 Pier Avenue, #226 Hermosa Beach, CA 90245 Telephone: (310) 396-0731 E-mail: hoffpaul@aol.com jwashington@sshhzlaw.com - and - Barrett S. Litt, Esq. Lindsay Battles, Esq. McLANE, BEDNARSKI & LITT, LLP 975 East Green Street Pasadena, CA 91106 Telephone: (626) 844-7660 E-mail: blitt@mbllegal.com lbattles@mbllegal.com The Defendants are represented by: Susan E. Coleman, Esq. Deann R. Rivard, Esq. BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP 444 South Flower Street, Suite 2400 Los Angeles, CA 90071-2953 Telephone: (213) 236-0600 Facsimile: (213) 236-2700 E-mail: scoleman@bwslaw.com drivard@bwslaw.com - and - Joseph L. Mcgeady, Esq. Ariel N. Redfern, Esq. Marshall C. Wallace, Esq. ALLEN MATKINS LECK GAMBLE MALLORY & NATSIS LLP One America Plaza 600 West Broadway, 27th Floor San Diego, CA 92101-0903 Telephone: (619) 233-1155 Facsimile: (619) 233-1158 E-mail: jmcgeady@allenmatkins.com aredfern@allenmatkins.com mwallace@allenmatkins.com GILEAD SCIENCES: Seeks to Continue Class Cert Hearing to August 20 ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as DARREN JOHNSON, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, and JONATHAN SEARCY, on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated, v. GILEAD SCIENCES, INC., a foreign corporation, Case No. 4:20-cv-01523-MTS (E.D. Mo.), the Defendant asks the Court to enter an order continuing the tentatively set July 14 hearing to Aug. 20, 2025. The Defendant moves the Court to continue the hearing on the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification and Gilead's motions to exclude to Aug. 20, 2025. Pursuant to a prior scheduling order, those motions had been "tentatively" set for hearing on July 14, 2025, but Gilead's counsel now has unexpected conflict outside of counsel's control. Gilead is an American biopharmaceutical company. A copy of the Defendant's motion dated June 23, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=f9dFAm at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendant is represented by: David R. Carpenter, Esq. Sean A. Commons, Esq. SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 350 S. Grand Avenue Los Angeles, California 90071 Telephone: (213) 896-6000 Facsimile: (213) 896-6600 E-mail: drcarpenter@sidley.com scommons@sidley.com - and - William Michael Corrigan, Jr., Esq. Tyler Schwettman, Esq. Jennifer A. Hill, Esq. SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P. 190 Carondelet Plaza, Suite 1350 Clayton, MO 63105 Telephone: (314) 690-0200 E-mail: bcorrigan@shb.com tschwettman@shb.com jshill@shb.com GLORIA'S HOME: Gordon Class Suit Seeks Overtime Pay Under FLSA -------------------------------------------------------------- CHARLOTTE GORDON and SYNCERIA THOMPSON, Individually, and on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated current and former employees v. GLORIA'S HOME, LLC and GLORIA PEGUES, Individually, Case No. 2:25-cv-02637-TLP-tmp (W.D. Tenn., June 23, 2025) seek to recover unpaid overtime compensation and other damages under Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, the Defendants violated the FLSA by failing to pay Plaintiffs and those similarly situated for all hours worked at the applicable FLSA minimum wage and overtime compensation rates of pay within bi-weekly pay periods during all times material to this action. The lawsuit is also brought against Defendants as a Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 class action, alleging breach of contract under Tennessee state law, to recover unpaid contractual wages or, in the alternative, unjust enrichment/quantum meruit compensation, owed to Plaintiffs and other similarly situated current and former hourly-paid caregivers who are members of a Rule 23 class. Gloria's Home, LLC offers home health care services for vision and hearing impaired people. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Gordon E. Jackson, Esq. J. Russ Bryant, Esq. J. Joseph Leatherwood IV, Esq. Joshua Autry, Esq. Cooper Mays, Esq. JACKSON, SHIELDS, HOLT OWEN & BRYANT 262 German Oak Drive Memphis, TN 38018 Telephone: (901) 754-8001 Facsimile: (901) 754-8524 E-mail: gjackson@jsyc.com rbryant@jsyc.com jleatherwood@jsyc.com jautry@jsyc.com cmays@jsyc.com GLYKKA LLC: Blind Users Can't Access Online Store, Jackson Claims ----------------------------------------------------------------- SYLINIA JACKSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GLYKKA LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-04991 (S.D.N.Y., June 12, 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 City Human Rights Law, and New York General Business Law. 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://signeasy.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: lack of alternative text (alt-text), empty links that contain no text, redundant links, and linked images missing alt-text. 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. Glykka LLC is a company that sells online goods and services in New York. [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 Email: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal Dana@Gottlieb.legal Michael@Gottlieb.legal GOOSEFOOT ACRES: Oh Sues Over Deceptive Beverage Product Packaging ------------------------------------------------------------------ JUDY OH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GOOSEFOOT ACRES, INC., an Ohio corporation, d/b/a DANDY BLEND, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-05140 (C.D. Cal., June 5, 2025) accuses the Defendant of violating the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, the Unfair Competition Law, and the False Advertising Law. To increase profits at the expense of consumers and fair competition, the Defendant deceptively sells its Dandy Blend Instant Herbal Beverage product in oversized packaging that does not reasonably inform consumers that they are half empty. The Defendant markets the said product in a systematically misleading manner by representing it as adequately filled when, in fact, it contains an unlawful amount of empty space or "slack-fill." Accordingly, the Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief, compensatory damages, statutory damages, restitution, and attorneys' fees. Headquartered in Valley City, OH, Goosefoot Acres, Inc. manufactures and sells dandelion tea products throughout California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott J. Ferrell, Esq. Victoria C. Knowles, Esq. PACIFIC TRIAL ATTORNEYS A Professional Corporation 4100 Newport Place Drive, Ste. 800 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Telephone: (949) 706-6464 Facsimile: (949) 706-6469 E-mail: sferrell@pacifictrialattorneys.com vknowles@pacifictrialattorneys.com GREEN ROLL: Faces Mera Wage-and-Hour Class Suit in S.D.N.Y. ----------------------------------------------------------- DANILO MERA, on behalf of himself, FLSA Collective Plaintiffs, and the Class, Plaintiff v. THE GREEN ROLL NYC INC d/b/a WILLOW, BEYOND SUSHI INC d/b/a ANIXI, BS 37 LLC d/b/a BEYOND SUSHI, BEYOND SUSHI NYC INC d/b/a BEYOND SUSHI, BS PINE LLC d/b/a COLETTA, BS MULBERRY LLC d/b/a/ SENTIR, CR UNION LLC d/b/a LE BASQUE, GUY VAKNIN, and JOHN DOE ENTITIES 1-5, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-05017 (S.D.N.Y., June 13, 2025) alleges, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law, that Plaintiff and others similarly situated are entitled to recover from Defendants, (1) unpaid minimum wages; (2) unpaid wages, including overtime, due to an invalid tip credit; (3) unpaid tips due to tip retention; (4) unpaid spread of hours premiums; (5) statutory penalties; (6) liquidated damages; and (7) attorneys' fees and costs. The Plaintiff was hired by the Defendants to work as a busboy and runner for Defendants' Willow Vegan Bistro restaurant in New York City from February 2024 to February 2025. The Defendants collectively owned and operated an enterprise of eight restaurants throughout New York City under the umbrella of "City Roots Hospitality Group."[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: C.K. Lee, Esq. Anne Seelig, Esq. LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC 148 West 24th Street, 8th Floor New York, NY 10011 Telephone: (212) 465-1188 Facsimile: (212) 465-1181 GUNBROKER.COM: Boyd and Mitro Sue Over Deceptive Fees ----------------------------------------------------- ANDREW BOYD and CHRIS MITRO, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. GUNBROKER.COM, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-06287 (N.D. Ill., June 5, 2025) arising from Defendant's deceptive and undisclosed addition of 1% "Compliance Fees" to all purchases. In or around 2022, the Defendant allegedly began adding a 1% hidden Compliance Fee to the total cost of all orders. Defendant adds this fee to orders without informing consumers it would be added until after a consumer won an auction or otherwise decided to purchase a firearm. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs now seek redress for Defendant's unlawful conduct and asserts claims for negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and for violations of the Georgia Fair Business Practices Act, and the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act. Based in Kennesaw, GA, GunBroker.com operates as an online firearms marketplace in the US. It allows gun owners and dealers to sell their firearms for a set price or in an online auction. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey D. Kaliel, Esq. Amanda J. Rosenberg, Esq. KALIELGOLD PLLC 1100 15th Street NW, 4th Floor Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: (202) 350-4783 E-mail: jkaliel@kalielgold.com arosenberg@kalielgold.com - and - Sophia Goren Gold, Esq. KALIELGOLD PLLC 490 43rd Street, No. 122 Oakland, CA 94609 Telephone: (202) 350-4783 E-mail: sgold@kalielgold.com - and - Tyler B. Ewigleben, Esq. Christopher D. Jennings, Esq. JENNINGS & EARLY PLLC 500 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 110 Little Rock, AR 72201 Telephone: (501) 255-8569 E-mail: tyler@jefirm.com chris@jefirm.com HARTZ HOTEL: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Herrera Suit Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- EDERY HERRERA, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HARTZ HOTEL SERVICES, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-04698 (S.D.N.Y., June 5, 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 blind and visually-impaired individuals the benefits of its online goods, content, and services. Accordingly, the Plaintiff now brings claims under 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. Headquartered in Secaucus, NJ, Hartz Hotel Services, Inc. owns and operates the Roxy Cinema New York online interactive website, https://www.roxycinemanewyork.com, and physical theatre location and entertainment venue across the United States. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented: 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 HCA HEALTHCARE: McRee Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Reply -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as SHARON MCREE, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals, v. HCA HEALTHCARE, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-00128-MOC-WCM (W.D.N.C.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order extending the deadline for filing a reply in support of its motion for notice and conditional certification pursuant to 29 U.S.C. section 216(b). The Plaintiffs' time to file a reply in support of their motion for notice and conditional certification in this action is June 23, 2025. The Plaintiffs move the Court pursuant to Rule 6(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for an Order enlarging time for Plaintiffs to file their reply up through and including Monday, July 7, 2025. On March 12, 2025, the Plaintiffs filed an unopposed motion for extension of time to file their motion for notice and conditional certification. On June 16, 2025, the Defendant filed its memorandum in opposition to the Plaintiffs' motion for notice and conditional certification pursuant to 29 U.S.C. section 216(b). HCA is an American for-profit operator of health care facilities. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 20, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=1BZ7vu at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew E. Lee, Esq. Jeremy R. Williams, Esq. Katharine Batchelor, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC 900 W. Morgan Street Raleigh, NC 27603 Telephone: (919) 600-5000 E-mail: mlee@milberg.com jwilliams@milberg.com kbatchelor@milberg.com - and - Seth R. Lesser, Esq. Christopher M. Timmel, Esq. Sarah Sears, Esq. KLAFTER LESSER LLP Two International Drive, Suite 350 Rye Brook, NY 10573 Telephone: (914) 934-9200 E-mail: seth@klafterlesser.com christopher.timmel@klafterlesser.com sarah.sears@klafterlesser.com - and - Joseph F. Scott, Esq. Kevin M. McDermott II, Esq. Ryan A. Winters, Esq. SCOTT & WINTERS LAW FIRM, LLC Telephone: (216) 912-2221 50 Public Square, Suite 1900 Cleveland, OH 44113 E-mail: jscott@ohiowagelawyers.com rwinters@ohiowagelawyers.com kmcdermott@ohiowagelawyers.com HIGHMARK INC: Bid for Certificate of Appealability Nixed -------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHANELLE ZIMMERMAN, BARBARA STEETLE, ROBERT WARUSZEWSKI, WENDY MARSHALL, ANGELA HOLLANDSWORTH, and KEVIN HARRISON individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. HIGHMARK, INC., a Pennsylvania Corporation, Case No. 2:23-cv-00250-NR (W.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Nicholas Ranjan entered an order denying the Defendant's motion for certificate of appealability. On April 28, 2025, the Court issued an opinion in which it granted in part and denied in part Highmark’s motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' amended complaint. On May 23, 2025, Highmark filed a motion for a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. section 1292(b). Highmark is an American for-profit healthcare company and Integrated Delivery Network based in Pittsburgh. A copy of the Court's order dated June 20, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=BGMidO at no extra charge.[CC] HOLLIS COBB: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Watson Suit Due Dec. 8 ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as SHANE WATSON, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, v. HOLLIS COBB ASSOCIATES, INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-00682-SEG (N.D. Ga.), the Hon. Judge Sarah E. Geraghty entered an order as follows: -- All discovery in this matter shall conclude on Feb. 5, 2026; -- The Plaintiff shall disclose expert(s) by Oct. 2, 2025; -- The Defendant shall disclose expert(s) and/or any rebuttal expert(s) by Nov. 3, 2025; -- The Plaintiff shall disclose any rebuttal expert(s) by Dec. 2, 2025; -- The Plaintiff, should she seek to certify a class, shall file a motion for class certification by Dec. 8, 2025; and -- All dispositive or partially dispositive motions shall be filed within 60 days of the Court's ruling on the Plaintiff's motion for class certification. Hollis provides revenue recovery services. A copy of the Court's order dated June 20, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=3OdI8X at no extra charge.[CC] HOMARY INTERNATIONAL: Parties Seek Deadline for Discovery --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as LAILA LAWYER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. HOMARY INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, Case No. 4:24-cv-04113-HSG (N.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order setting a deadline for class discovery and a briefing schedule for Plaintiff's motion for class certification. Discovery on issues related to class certification shall close on Feb. 1, 2026. The Plaintiff's motion for class certification shall be filed by Feb. 20, 2026. The Defendant's opposition to the motion for class certification shall be filed by April 6, 2026. The Plaintiff's reply to the motion for class certification shall be filed by May 21, 2026. Homary is an e-commerce platform for home furnishing products. A copy of the Parties' motion dated June 23, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=GrygXG at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Neal J. Deckant, Esq. Julian C. Diamond, Esq. Matthew A. Girardi, 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 jdiamond@bursor.com mgirardi@bursor.com The Defendant is represented by: Ana Tagvoryan, Esq. Erica R. Graves, Esq. Ping Zhang, Esq. BLANK ROME LLP 2029 Century Park East | 6th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (424) 239-3400 Facsimile: (424) 239-3434 E-mail: ana.tagvoryan@blankrome.com erica.graves@blankrome.com ping.zhang@blankrome.com HONEYLOVE SCULTPWEAR: Krull Suit Removed to C.D. California ----------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Jane Krull, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. HONEYLOVE SCULTPWEAR, INC., Case No. 25STCV12297 was removed from the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, to the United States District Court for the Central District of California on June 16, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-05468. The Complaint purports to allege causes of action for violations of California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA), California Civil Code Section 1770 et. seq.; California's Unfair Competition Law (UCL), California Business and Professions Code Section 17200 et. seq.; and unjust enrichment.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Christine M. Reilly, Esq. Justin Jones Rodriguez, Esq. MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP 2049 Century Park East, Suite 1700 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Phone: 310.312.4000 Facsimile: 310.312.4224 Email: creilly@manatt.com jjrodriguez@manatt.com I.C. SYSTEM: Lezark Appeals Class Cert. Ruling to 3rd Circuit ------------------------------------------------------------- JEFFREY LEZARK is taking an appeal from a court order denying his motion for class certification in the lawsuit entitled Jeffrey Lezark, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. I.C. System, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 2:20-cv-00403, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the Plaintiff brings this complaint against the Defendant for its violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. On Oct. 8, 2024, the Plaintiff filed a motion for class certification, which Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand denied on May 29, 2025. The Court finds that, like the Proposed Alternative Class, the Proposed Class does not satisfy Rule 23(b)(3)'s predominance requirement and cannot be certified. The appellate case is entitled Jeffrey Lezark v. I.C. System, Inc., Case No. 25-8026, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, filed on June 12, 2025. [BN] IMC LOGISTICS: Macias Suit Removed to M.D. Florida -------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Gustavo Javier Macias, and other similarly situated servers v. EL BALON, INC., and FABIAN JIMENEZ, Case No. 25-CA-003070 was removed from the Circuit Court of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Hillsborough County, Florida, to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on June 17, 2025, and assigned Case No. 8:25-cv-01574. The Plaintiff commenced this Fair Labor Standards Act (hereinafter called the "FLSA") and breach of contract action on April 4, 2025, to recover alleged unpaid overtime and/or minimum wages by filing a Complaint against Defendants.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Dean A. Kent, Esq. Micah R. Novey, Esq. TRENAM, KEMKER, SCHARF, BARKIN FRYE, O'NEILL & MULLIS, P.A. 2700 Bank of America Plaza 101 E. Kennedy Blvd. Tampa, FL 33602 Phone: (813) 223-7474 Fax: (813) 229-6553 Email: dkent@trenam.com mnovey@trenam.com INFAB LLC: Fails to Protect Personal, Health Info, Feeney Says -------------------------------------------------------------- DENNIS FEENEY, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. INFAB, LLC, Case No. 2:25-cv-05748 (C.D. Cal., June 24, 2025) arises from the Defendant's failure to protect highly sensitive data. According to the complaint, the Defendant store a litany of highly sensitive personal identifiable information (PII) about its employees, including names and Social Security numbers. But Defendant lost control over that data when cybercriminals infiltrated its insufficiently protected computer systems in a data breach. An unauthorized actor gained access to the Defendant's systems on Feb. 6, 2025. Thus, for more than two weeks, cybercriminals had unfettered access to Defendant's network and the stored files. Accordingly, cybercriminals were able to breach the 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's PII. The Plaintiff is a Data Breach victim, having received a breach notice. He brings this class action on behalf of himself, and all others harmed by Defendant's misconduct. The Defendant is a medical equipment manufacturing company based in California that specializes in radiation protection products.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Carly Roman, Esq. STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC 980 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610 Chicago, IL 60611 Telephone: (872) 263-1100 Facsimile: (872) 263-1109 E-mail: croman@straussborrelli.com J.A.A. LANDSCAPING: Underpays Landscapers, Ramos Suit Alleges ------------------------------------------------------------- HUMBERTO RAMOS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ABC CORPORATION d/b/a J.A.A. LANDSCAPING, name of the corporation being fictitious and unknown to Plaintiff, and JOSE AREVALO and MIGUEL AREVALO, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-03287 (E.D.N.Y., June 12, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law including failure to pay overtime wages, failure to provide wage notice, and failure to provide accurate wage statements. The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants as a landscaper from in or around March 2018 until in or around December 2024. ABC Corporation, doing business as J.A.A. Landscaping, is a landscaping company in Flushing, New York. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Roman Avshalumov, Esq. HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, PC 80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601 Kew Gardens, NY 11415 Telephone: (718) 263-9591 Facsimile: (718) 263-9598 JING-JIN ELECTRIC: Lockhart Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime ------------------------------------------------------------- DEANDRE LOCKHART, individually, and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. JING-JIN ELECTRIC NORTH AMERICA LLC, a Michigan limited liability company, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-11784-JJCG-APP (E.D. Mich., June 13, 2025) seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorney's fees, costs, and other relief as appropriate under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Plaintiff is an adult resident of Warren, Michigan and was employed by Defendant as an hourly Material Handler from approximately September 2023 through April 8, 2025. Throughout Plaintiff's employment with the Defendant, the Plaintiff was not earning a consistent and properly calculated overtime wage that included bonus pay and other non-discretionary pay in the regular rate for proper overtime calculation. As non-exempt employees, the Defendant's hourly employees were entitled to full compensation for all overtime hours worked at a rate of one and a half times their "regular rate" of pay, says the suit. Headquartered in Farmington Hills, Michigan, Jing-Jin Electric North America LLC is a Tier 1 electric vehicle supplier of drive train systems, power electronics and software for passenger and commercial vehicles.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jesse L. Young, Esq. SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C. 141 E. Michigan Avenue, Suite 600 Kalamazoo, MI 49007 Telephone: (269) 250-7500 E-mail: jyoung@sommerspc.com - and - Paulina R. Kennedy, Esq. SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, PC One Towne Square, 17th Floor Southfield, MI 48076 Telephone: (248) 355-0300 E-mail: pkennedy@sommerspc.com KINGSLEY DIRECTIONAL: Spears Seeks MWD Engineers' Unpaid Overtime ----------------------------------------------------------------- CHRIS SPEARS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. KINGSLEY DIRECTIONAL, LLC and DUSTY SEWELL, Defendants, Case No. 4:25-cv-02773 (S.D. Tex., June 13, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Mr. Spears was employed by Kingsley as a Measurement While Drilling (MWD) Engineer from approximately July 5, 2023, through February 1, 2024. Kingsley Directional, LLC is a well drilling contractor in Houston, Texas. [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 Email: rburch@brucknerburch.com - and - Joseph A. Fitapelli, Esq. Armando A. Ortiz, Esq. FITAPELLI & SCHAFFER, LLP 28 Liberty Street, 30th Floor New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 300-0375 Email: aortiz@fslawfirm.com KRISPY KREME: Fails to Protect Personal, Health Info, Burkes Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- AUGUSTA M. BURKES and MICHAEL FLETCHER, individually and on behalf of those similarly situated v. KRISPY KREME DOUGHNUT CORPORATION, Case No. 3:25-cv-00447 (W.D.N.C., June 24, 2025) alleges that Krispy Kreme failed to properly secure and safeguard the Plaintiffs' and Class members' personally identifiable information (PII) stored within the Defendant's information network On May 22, 2025, Krispy Kreme, a multinational doughnut and coffeehouse company, announced that it concluded "a months-long investigation in which they determined that personal information was stolen from 161,676 people," the "vast majority of those affected are Krispy Kreme employees, members of their families, and former employees." The data stolen includes Social Security numbers, driver's licenses, financial account numbers and login information, debit card or credit card numbers with security codes, passport numbers, digital signatures, biometric data, USCIS or Alien Registration Numbers, military ID numbers, health insurance information and more. As a retailer and employer, Krispy Kreme knowingly obtains sensitive employee and customer PII and has a resulting duty to securely maintain such information in confidence. The Plaintiffs bring this Class action on behalf of themselves other individuals whose PII was accessed and exposed to unauthorized third parties during a data breach of Defendant's system which was announced when Krispy Kreme began mailing out notices to affected individuals on or about June 16, 2025. KRISPY KREME DOUGHNUT CORPORATION operates as a restaurant. The Company offers milk shakes, doughnuts, cookies, buns, sundaes, coffee, fruit beverages, and other related products. Krispy Kreme Doughnut serves customers in the United States.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David M. Wilkerson, Esq. WILKERSON JUSTUS PLLC Asheville, NC 28804 Telephone: (828) 316-6902 E-mail: dwilkerson@wilkersonjustus.com - and - Marc H. Edelson, Esq. Liberato P. Verderame, Esq. EDELSON LECHTZIN LLP 411 S. State Street, Suite N300 Newtown, PA 18940 Telephone: (215) 867-2399 E-mail: medelson@edelson-law.com lverderame@edelson-law.com KRISPY KREME: Fails to Protect Personal, Health Info, Chicas Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- ERICKA SOLIS CHICAS individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. KRISPY KREME DOUGHNUT CORPORATION, Case No. 3:25-cv-00450 (W.D.N.C., June 24, 2025) is a class action lawsuit on behalf of all persons who entrusted the Defendant with sensitive Personally Identifiable Information (PII) and Protected Health Information (PHI) that was impacted in a data breach that Defendant publicly disclosed on June 18, 2025. The Plaintiff's claims arise from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard Private Information that was entrusted to it, and its accompanying responsibility to store and transfer that information. On Nov. 29, 2024, the Defendant became aware of a security incident on its information technology systems. The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of all persons whose Private Information was compromised as a result of the Defendant's failure to adequately protect the Private Information of Plaintiff and Class Members. The Defendant is an American doughnut and coffeehouse chain. The company is headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David M. Wilkerson, Esq. WILKERSON JUSTUS PLLC Asheville, NC 28802 Telephone: (828) 316-6902 E-mail: dwilkerson@wilkersonjustus.com - and - Mark S. Reich, Esq. Melissa G. Meyer, Esq. LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP 33 Whitehall Street, 17th Floor New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (212) 363-7500 Facsimile: (212) 363-7171 E-mail: mreich@zlk.com mmeyer@zlk.com LAW OFFICE OF LIZ: Faces Peterson Suit Over Court Corruption ------------------------------------------------------------ GARY PETERSON, CHRIS NAKASHIMA, JOHN ENGLISH, JAQUETTA ENGLISH, LT-1 EXCHANGE TRUST, LT-2 EXCHANGE TRUST, LT-3 EXCHANGE TRUST, LT-4 EXCHANGE TRUST, LT-5 EXCHANGE TRUST, LT-6 EXCHANGE TRUST, LT-7 EXCHANGE TRUST, LT-8 EXCHANGE TRUST, LT-9 EXCHANGE TRUST, LT-12 EXCHANGE TRUST, LT-14 EXCHANGE TRUST, LT-15 EXCHANGE TRUST, LT-17 EXCHANGE TRUST, LT-18 EXCHANGE TRUST, LT-19 EXCHANGE TRUST, LT-20 EXCHANGE TRUST, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. DAVID R. JONES, ELIZABETH CAROL FREEMAN, THE LAW OFFICE OF LIZ FREEMAN, PLLC, JACKSON WALKER, LLP, and PORTER HEDGES, LLP, Defendants, Case No. 4:25-cv-02761 (S.D. Tex., June 12, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violation of Title 18 U.S.C., common law fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, negligent misrepresentation, professional negligence, common law civil conspiracy, and unjust enrichment. The case arises from the Defendants' unprecedented and systemic corruption in the Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of Texas. According to the complaint, they carried out their scheme by ensuring cases were assigned to David R. Jones, a chief bankruptcy judge. That allowed Jones to award Jackson Walker, Freeman, and indirectly himself millions of dollars in attorneys' fees while keeping interested parties in those bankruptcies unaware of the disqualifying conflict. Even in cases where Jones was not presiding, the group arranged for him to serve as a judicial mediator, ensuring liquidation of distressed entities for their pecuniary gain. As a result of the foregoing conduct of all Defendants, GWG Holdings, Inc., a multi-billion-dollar business, sustained billions of dollars in losses and the Plaintiffs have suffered significant damages. The Law Office of Liz Freeman, PLLC is a law firm, with its principal place of business in Houston, Texas. Jackson Walker, LLP is a law firm, with its principal place of business in Dallas, Texas. Porter Hedges, LLP is a law firm, with its principal place of business in Houston, Texas. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Mikell A. West, Esq. Robert W. Clore, Esq. BANDAS LAW FIRM, P.C. 555 Carancahua Street, Suite 1200 Corpus Christi, TX 78401 Telephone: (361) 698-5200 Facsimile: (361) 698-5222 Email: mwest@bandaslawfirm.com rclore@bandaslawfirm.com - and - Shelby A. Jordan, Esq. JORDAN & ORTIZ, P.C. 500 N. Shoreline Blvd., Suite 804 Corpus Christi, TX 78401 Email: sjordan@jhwclaw.com LEE ENTERPRISES: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Lawson Says ------------------------------------------------------------ DECLAN LAWSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. LEE ENTERPRISES INCORPORATED, Defendant, Case No. 3:25-cv-00071-RGE-HCA (S.D. Iowa, June 13, 2025) is a class action lawsuit on behalf of the Plaintiff and all persons who entrusted Defendant with sensitive personally identifiable information that was impacted in a data breach that Defendant publicly disclosed in June 2025. The Plaintiff's claims arise from Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard private information that was entrusted to it, and its accompanying responsibility to store and transfer that information. The Defendant failed to take precautions designed to keep individuals' private information secure. As a result of Defendant's inadequate digital security and notice process, Plaintiff's and Class Members' private information was exposed to criminals. Plaintiff and the Class Members have suffered and will continue to suffer injuries including: financial losses caused by misuse of their Private Information; the loss or diminished value of their Private Information as a result of the Data Breach; lost time associated with detecting and preventing identity theft; and theft of personal and financial information. The Plaintiff seeks to remedy these harms and prevent any future data compromise on behalf of himself, and all similarly situated persons whose personal data was compromised and stolen as a result of the data breach and who remain at risk due to Defendant's inadequate data security practices. The Plaintiff is a former employee of Defendant. As a condition of employment, Defendant required Plaintiff to provide them his private information. Lee Enterprises, Incorporated is a media company that provides local news, information, and advertising in 72 markets and 25 states.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: J. Barton Goplerud, Esq. Brian O. Marty, Esq. SHINDLER ANDERSON GOPLERUD & WEESE P.C. 5015 Grand Ridge Drive, Suite 100 West Des Moines, IA 50265-5749 Telephone: (515) 223-4567 Facsimile: (515) 223-8887 E-mail: goplerud@sagwlaw.com marty@sagwlaw.com - and - John J. Nelson, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC 402 W Broadway, Suite 1760 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (858) 209-6941 E-mail: jnelson@milberg.com LIGHT RAIL: Reyes Sues Over Unpaid Wages for Restaurant Employees ----------------------------------------------------------------- LEONARDO A. REYES DIAZ and LAURA BRENES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. LIGHT RAIL CAFE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, d/b/a Light Rail Cafe, and JERMAINE ROBINSON, Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-11700 (D.N.J., June 14, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New Jersey Administrative Code, the New Jersey State Wage and Hour Law, and the New Jersey Wage Payment Law including failure to pay overtime wages, failure to pay minimum wages, and failure to pay full amount of wages. Plaintiffs Diaz and Brenes were employed by the Defendants at Light Rail Cafe as a kitchen manager and a busser from approximately 2016 until April 27, 2025, and from approximately February 1, 2025, until April 2025, respectively. Light Rail Cafe Limited Liability Company, doing business as Light Rail Cafe, is a restaurant owner and operator located in New Jersey. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Reena Forst, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF REENA FORST 345 Union Street Hackensack, NJ 07601 Telephone: (201) 568-5689 Facsimile: (201) 568-4479 Email: rforst@rflawfirm.com LOVESAC COMPANY: Faces Nguyen Consumer Suit over Pricing Scheme --------------------------------------------------------------- The Lovesac Company disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended May 4, 2025, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 11, 2025, that it is facing a March 21, 2024 putative class action complaint related to the company's pricing captioned, "Nguyen v. The Lovesac Company" filed in the Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento, and was removed to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. The complaint generally alleges that the company falsely advertised discounts on certain products. The plaintiff seeks, among other things, an unspecified amount of monetary damages, including treble damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief related to the company's sales practices, and attorneys' fees, expert fees, and other expenses. On June 24, 2024, the company filed a motion to dismiss. On July 15, 2024, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint. On August 12, 2024, the company filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff's amended complaint. On November 26, 2024, the court entered an order to stay all proceedings in the case in light of a mediation of the dispute scheduled for January 23, 2025. The parties were unable to come to an agreement at the January 23, 2025 mediation. On February 7, 2025, the court unstayed the proceedings in the case for the purpose of ruling on the company's pending motion to dismiss. On March 28, 2025, the court granted the company's motion to dismiss with leave to amend, but dismissed plaintiff's request for equitable relief, including injunctive relief, without leave to amend. On April 18, 2025, the plaintiff filed a second amended complaint. On June 2, 2025, the company filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff's second amended complaint. Lovesac is a technology company that designs, manufactures and sells modular couches, premium foam beanbag chairs and their associated home decor accessories. It market and sell through showrooms, mobile concierge and kiosks and online directly at www.lovesac.com. MCLEAN MORTGAGE: Millberry Files Suit in E.D. Virginia ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against McLean Mortgage Corporation. The case is styled as Priscilla Millberry, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. McLean Mortgage Corporation, Case No. 3:25-cv-00461-RCY (E.D. Va., June 16, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Tort/Non-Motor Vehicle. McLean Mortgage Corporation -- https://apply.mcleanmortgage.com/ -- provides real estate mortgage services.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Lee Adair Floyd, Esq. Justin Matthew Sheldon, Esq. 2100 East Cary Street, Ste. 310 Richmond, VA 23223 Phone: (804) 351-9040 Fax: (804) 351-9170 Email: lee@bbtrial.com justin@bbtrial.com MEMPHIS, TN: Faces Lockett Suit Over Unlawful Seizure in W.D. Tenn. ------------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against CITY OF MEMPHIS, Mayor Paul Young, C.J. Davis, Police Chief [OFFICER 1 Matthews ID-13383], [OFFICER 2 Brittenum ID-1524], in their individual capacities, et al. The case is captioned as JALECIA LOCKETT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. CITY OF MEMPHIS, Mayor Paul Young, C.J. Davis, Police Chief [OFFICER 1 Matthews ID-13383], [OFFICER 2 Brittenum ID-1524], in their individual capacities, et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-02597-SHL-tmp (W.D. Tenn., June 12, 2025). The Plaintiff brings suit against the Defendant for unlawful seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. City of Memphis is a municipal government in Tennessee. [BN] The Plaintiff appears pro se. MERCY HOSPITAL: Shepard Suit Seeks to Certify Class --------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as AMY SHEPARD, MARISSA MOFFATT, JANE DOE 1, JANE DOE 2, JANE DOE 3, JANE DOE 4, JANE DOE 5, JANE DOE 6, JANE DOE 7 and JANE DOE 8, v. MERCY HOSPITAL SPRINGFIELD, Case No. 6:25-cv-03163-DPR (W.D. Mo.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting their motion for certification of class. Mercy is a highly integrated, multi-state health care system. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 23, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ygavw8 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Kristi S. Fulnecky, Esq. FULNECKY LAW, LLC 2627 W. Republic Rd. Suite A-108 Springfield, MO 65807 Telephone: (417) 882-1044 E-mail: Kristi@fulneckylaw.com META PLATFORMS: Kadrey Loses Bid for Partial Summary Judgment ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICHARD KADREY, et al., v. META PLATFORMS, INC., Case No. 3:23-cv-03417-VC (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Vince Chhabria entered an order denying the Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment and granting META's cross-motion for partial summary judgment. In cases involving uses like Meta's, it seems like the plaintiffs will often win, at least where those cases have better-developed records on the market effects of the defendant's use. In this case, because Meta's use of the works of these thirteen authors is highly transformative, the plaintiffs needed to win decisively on the fourth factor to win on fair use. And to stave off summary judgment, they needed to create a genuine issue of material fact as to that factor. Meta owns and operates several prominent social media platforms and communication services. A copy of the Court's order dated June 25, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=uhyGnp at no extra charge.[CC] METLIFE: Refuses to Provide Accidental Plan Benefit, Roberts Claims ------------------------------------------------------------------- LATORIA ROBERTS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. METLIFE and SENECA RESOURCES, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 7:25-cv-00937-ACA (N.D. Ala., June 14, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The case arises from the Defendants' alleged scheme to undermine ERISA by refusing to deliver promised employee Short Term Disability (STD), Long Term Disability (LTD), and Accidental Insurance Plan benefits and a reasonable and ERISA compliant process to make a claim for the same. According to the complaint, the Defendants operated and exploited the Plan to maximize their own profit and shift the burden of and otherwise pass the costs and damages associated with employee losses due to injuries to Plan participants. As a result, the Plaintiff and similarly situated Plan participants suffered damages. MetLife is a claim, administrative and distribution agent and service provider, located in Bloomington, Illinois. Seneca Resources, LLC is a workforce solutions firm, located in Reston, Virginia. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Lee Wendell Loder, Esq. LODER, P.C. P.O. Box 13545 Birmingham, AL 35202 Telephone: (205)326-0566 Facsimile: (856)997-1401 Email: lloder@loderpc.com MICHAEL BLOOMBERG: Faces Doty Over Termination of Campaign Staff ---------------------------------------------------------------- ROSS DOTY, NOAH WALKER, ZACHARY HALL, JACOB EDELMAN, KEVIN OYAKAWWA, NICHOLAS ALTO, AREZ ARAN, TIM CLINTON, ROBBIN CORDWELL, ANDREW, DESROCHERS, BREEN EGAN, ALEX FAYE, STEPHEN FIORE, DENISE GEANACOPOULOS, SETH GREENWALD, DARCIE GRUNBLATT, MATTHEW HAMEL, DEIRDRE LOPES, FARRAH MYERS, CHIGOZIE ANDY NGWABA, NATALYA ORLANDO, CODY PARKER, MARK SELIG, JEFFREY WILDSTEIN, and ELIZABETH WOODRUFF, Executor of the Estate of Morgan Woodruff, Deceased, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. MICHAEL BLOOMBERG and MIKE BLOOMBERG 2020, INC., Case No. 25-1556 (Mass. Super., June 24, 2025) is as a class action on behalf of all Bloomberg campaign staff who worked in Massachusetts, seeking to recover damages they suffered based on the Bloomberg campaign's premature termination of its staff and failure to pay their promised wages and benefits through November 2020. In November 2019, billionaire Michael Bloomberg, former Mayor of New York, announced that he was entering the race for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination. Having entered the primary race much later than his Democratic rivals, he quickly established a nationwide campaign, hiring thousands of field organizers and other campaign staffers around the country. In Massachusetts, he hired approximately 60 campaign staff. In order to attract talent, and to build up his campaign operation quickly, he made an unusual promise to the staff he was hiring: in addition to paying them generous salaries and benefits, he guaranteed they would keep their jobs until the general election, through November 2020. He promised them that, if he did not win the Democratic nomination, he would keep the campaign organization running through the general election, in support of whichever candidate won the Democratic nomination. However, after Mr. Bloomberg's candidacy faltered, and he dropped out of the race after a disappointing performance on Super Tuesday, he reneged on this promise he had made to campaign staffers nationwide. Rather than keep the operation running to support the Democratic nominee as promised, or providing any other employment, the Bloomberg campaign simply shuttered and terminated its staff nationwide, says the suit. Michael Bloomberg is an entrepreneur and three-term mayor of New York City.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esq. Michael J. Romano, Esq. LIGHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C. 729 Boylston Street, Suite 2000 Boston, MA 02116 Telephone: (617) 994-5800 E-mail: sliss@llrlaw.com mromano@llrlaw.com MICROGENICS CORP: Parties Seek Extension to File Class Cert Bid --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Moreland et al., v. Microgenics Corporation et al., Case No. 1:21-cv-00748-ENV-MMH (E.D.N.Y.), the Defendants ask the Court to enter an order granting request a one-week extension of time, until July 7, 2025, for the plaintiffs and defendants Kelly and Bedard, to file Defendants' summary judgment and denial of class certification motions, after they are fully briefed on June 30, 2025. Microgenics develops, manufactures, and markets medical equipment. A copy of the Court's order the Defendants' motion dated June 26, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=PFv0WU at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendants are represented by: Jeffrey P. Man, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF JEFFREY P. MANS Albany, NY 12211-0282 Telephone: (518) 265-4135 E-mail: adkhighlander@gmail.com NEW DIRECTION: Theriault Seeks to Consolidate Related Actions ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSEPH THERIAULT and WILLIAM WEIGEL, individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated, v. NEW DIRECTION IRA, INC., NEW DIRECTION TRUST COMPANY, and MAINSTAR TRUST, Case No. 2:23-cv-02477-JWB-ADM (D. Kan.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order: (a) consolidating the actions pursuant to Rule 42(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and (b) appointing attorneys Scott C. Nehrbass and Jeff P. DeGraffenreid of Foulston Siefkin LLP as interim lead class counsel, and Willem F. Jonckheer and Daniel L.M. Pulgram of Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe LLP as additional interim class counsel, pursuant to Rule 23(g)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants instructed depositors to select Higgins' depository to store their precious metals, had undisclosed business or other relationships with Higgins, and knew or should have known about Higgins' theft of Plaintiffs' precious metals. The Plaintiffs in the two actions seek to represent the same class of depositors and assert claims for fraud, negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, violation of state consumer protection statutes, and successor liability. New Direction is a provider of self-directed IRA and HSA accounts and education. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 23, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=vK8OVM at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Scott C. Nehrbass, Esq. Jeff P. DeGraffenreid, Esq. FOULSTON SIEFKIN LLP 7500 College Boulevard, Suite 1400 Overland Park, KS 66210 Telephone: (913) 498-2144 E-mail: snehrbass@foulston.com jdegraffenreid@foulston.com - and - Roger N. Walter, Esq. MORRIS LAING LAW FIRM 800 SW Jackson, Suite 1310 Topeka, KA 66612 Telephone: (785) 232-2662 E-mail: rwalter@morrislaing.com - and - Willem F. Jonckheer, Esq. Daniel L.M. Pulgram, Esq. SCHUBERT JONCKHEER & KOLBE LLP 2001 Union St., Suite 200 San Francisco, CA 94123 Telephone: (415) 788-4220 E-mail: dpulgram@sjk.law wjonckheer@sjk.law OCUCO INC: Fails to Secure Personal, Health Info, Doe Suit Says --------------------------------------------------------------- JOHN DOE, on behalf of himself individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. OCUCO, INC., Case No. 8:25-cv-01623 (M.D. Fla., June 23, 2025) arises from a recent cyberattack resulting in a data breach of sensitive information in the possession and custody and/or control of Defendant (the Data Breach). The Data Breach resulted in unauthorized disclosure, exfiltration, theft, and dissemination on the dark web of Defendant;s clients’ current and former patients' highly personal information, including, on information and belief, names, Social Security numbers, and other patient demographic data (PII), and medical information, such as diagnostic codes and provider notes (PHI). The Plaintiff refers to both PII and PHI collectively as "Sensitive Information." Ocuco's Data Breach affects current and former patients of Defendant's clients who had no relationship with Ocuco, never sought one, and never consented to Ocuco collecting and storing their information. Ocuco sourced their information from third parties, stored it on its systems, and assumed a duty to protect it, advertising that we do our utmost to protect user privacy through the appropriate use of security technology. The Plaintiff and members of the proposed Class are victims of Defendant's negligence and inadequate cyber security measures. Specifically, Plaintiff and members of the proposed Class trusted Defendant with their Sensitive Information. But Defendant betrayed that trust. The Defendant failed to effectively use up-to-date security practices to prevent the Data Breach, says the suit. The Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief, damages, and restitution, together with costs and reasonable attorneys' fees, the calculation of which will be based on information in Defendant's possession.    The Plaintiff is a long-time patient of Houston Eye Associates, a client of Defendant. 27. On information and belief, Defendant collects and maintains its clients' current and former patients' Sensitive Information in its computer systems. Ocuco states it is "the largest optical retail software company in the world" with "over 7,500 sites in 77 countries" and "over 200 staff based in the U.S., Canada, Ireland, England, Wales, France, Italy, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, The Netherlands, Spain, Australia and China."[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Maryia Weekes, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC 201 Sevilla Ave, 2nd Floor Coral Gables, FL 33134 Telephone: (786) 879-8200 E-mail: mweekes@milberg.com - and - Raina Borrelli, Esq. STRAUSS BORELLI PLLC One Magnificent Mile 980 N Michigan Ave, Suite 1610 Chicago, IL 60611 Telephone: (872) 263-1100 Facsimile: (872) 263-1109 OLAPLEX HOLDINGS: Bid for Leave to File Docs Under Seal OK'd ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as LESLIE LILIEN, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. OLAPLEX HOLDINGS, INC., et al., Case No. 2:22-cv-08395-SVW-SK (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Stephen V. Wilson entered an order granting the Defendants' application for leave to file documents under seal: (1) The Defendants shall file under seal, as soon as is practicable, an unredacted version of Exhibit 21 to the Declaration of Anne Johnson Palmer submitted in support of the Defendants' opposition to Lead Plaintiff's motion for class certification (the "Opposition Declaration"); (2) The Defendants shall file under seal, as soon as is practicable, Exhibit 24 to the Opposition Declaration; and (3) The Defendants shall file under seal, as soon as is practicable, Exhibit 25 to the Opposition Declaration. Olaplex is a foundational health and beauty company. A copy of the Court's order dated June 25, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Zdg3AA at no extra charge.[CC] ONEONCOLOGY LLC: Suit Seeks Patient Communication Specialists' OT ----------------------------------------------------------------- ARABI CHOWDHURY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ONEONCOLOGY LLC, Case No. 2:25-cv-03527 (E.D.N.Y., June 24, 2025) seeks damages and other legal and equitable relief from OneOncology for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, New York Labor Law, and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Defendant employed the Plaintiff and all those similarly situated as Patient Communication Specialists (PCSs). The Defendant, however, required the PCSs to work "off-the-clock" whereby they performed integral work before and/or after their scheduled shift and while "clocked out" without any compensation, including overtime pay, in violation of the FLSA and the NYLL. Throughout the relevant time period, the PCSs were employed by Defendant at its call centers in Ridge, New York, and Shirley, New York. 20. The PCSs' job duties included, among other things, taking telephone calls from Defendant's patients and assisting them with their medical treatment. The Defendant is a medical provider that provides cancer and blood disorder care to its patients. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert J. Valli, Jr., Esq. Alexander M. White., Esq. VALLI KANE & VAGNINI LLP 600 Old Country Road, Suite 519 Garden City, NY 11530 Telephone: (516) 203-7180 E-mail: rvalli@vkvlawyers.com awhite@vkvlawyers.com OPENAI INC: Bid for Broad Cross-Use of Alter Docs Tossed -------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Alter et al v. OpenAI Inc. et al (RE: OPENAI, INC., COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT LITIGATION), Case No. 1:23-cv-10211 (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Ona T. Wang entered an order denying OpenAI's request for broad cross-use of the Plaintiffs' documents and depositions. The parties are directed to meet and confer on OpenAI's AEO designations and inform the Court how they have elected to proceed by June 30, 2025. The parties are directed to begin finalizing and to submit a finalized deposition protocol and omnibus protective order for the Court's review by July 7, 2025. OpenAI asserts, in conclusory fashion, that absent broad, unfettered cross-use of Plaintiffs' documents, "[f]or the reasons discussed in OpenAI's supplemental letter regarding the Deposition Protocol," OpenAI "will have to litigate the cases individually, for example, filing separate motions on common issues" that the MDL Court could otherwise address at once. Notwithstanding OpenAI's failure to articulate ripe issues, the Court has reviewed ECF 223—which discusses OpenAI's arguments about deposition protocol disputes—but finds only the same speculative and conclusory arguments for the cross-use of Plaintiffs' depositions. The Plaintiffs assert that OpenAI used their copyrighted material to train their LLMs, and OpenAI has not articulated why one Plaintiff's documents are relevant to OpenAI's defenses in another case brought by a different Plaintiff. OpenAI operates as an investment company. A copy of the Court's order dated June 24, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=QgbgvK at no extra charge.[CC] OPENCARE INC: Discloses Patients' Personal, Health Info, Kady Says ------------------------------------------------------------------ ANNABEL KADY and ALEXYS TAYLOR, on behalf of themselves and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. OPENCARE, INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:25-cv-05037 (N.D. Cal., June 13, 2025) is a class action lawsuit for damages and injunctive relief arising from Defendant's unlawful practice of disclosing Plaintiffs' and Class members' individually identifiable health information and protected health information to unauthorized third parties including, but not limited to, Google LLC and TikTok Inc. The Defendant owns, controls, and maintains https://www.opencare.com/, a website which requires individuals to share highly sensitive private information in order to participate in health screenings and be matched with dental care providers. According to the complaint, the Defendant installed and implemented "pixels" and similar tracking technologies such as those made available by the Information Recipients on the Website. Through the use of Tracking Technologies, Defendant's Website directs Plaintiffs' and Class members' communications -- including Private Information -- to automatically be sent to the servers of the corresponding Information Recipients. While Defendant willfully and intentionally incorporated the Tracking Technologies into the Website, the Defendant failed to affirmatively disclose to Plaintiffs or Class members that they shared their sensitive and confidential assessment responses via the Website with third parties, says the suit. The Plaintiffs seek to remedy these harms and bring causes of action for: (1) negligence; (2) invasion of privacy; (3) breach of confidence; (4) unjust enrichment; (5) violations of the Electronics Communication Privacy Act; (6) violations of the California Invasion of Privacy Act; (7) violations of the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act; and (8) violation of the California Customer Records Act. Headquartered in San Francisco, California, Opencare, Inc. focuses on the provision of dental care by connecting patients with local dentists.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Robert Mackey, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT MACKEY 16320 Murphy Road Sonora, CA 95370 Telephone: (412) 370-9110 E-mail: bobmackeyesq@aol.com - and - Nicholas Migliaccio, Esq. Jason Rathod, Esq. Bryan G. Faubus, Esq. Zachary O. Chambers, Esq. MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD LLP 412 H St. NE Washington, DC 20002 Telephone: (202) 470-3520 Facsimile: (202) 800-2730 E-mail: nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com jrathod@classlawdc.com tbean@classlawdc.com PROGRESS RESIDENTIAL: Harris Seeks to Certify Three Classes ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHEYENNE HARRIS and ROBERT WHITAKER, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. PROGRESS RESIDENTIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, Case No. 6:24-cv-00859-CEM-DCI (M.D. Fla.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order: a. Certifying this action as a class action as provided by Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, appointing the Plaintiffs as Class Representatives, and appointing the undersigned as Class Counsel; b. Adjudging that Progress Residential violated the FRLTA, the FCCPA, and breached the Lease and awarding the Plaintiffs and Class members actual damages in the Security Deposit amounts collected or withheld by the Defendant; c. Awarding Statutory damages to Plaintiffs and Class Members under the FCCPA; d. Awarding the Plaintiffs their costs and attorneys' fees pursuant to Fla. Stat. sections 83.48, the Lease Agreement, the FCCPA, and FRLTA; and e. Awarding such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. This class action arises from Progress Residential’s unlawful taking of Security Deposits from its residential tenants. Specifically, Progress Residential (a) fails to provide tenants the statutorily required Notice of Intention to Impose a Claim on Security Deposit language in violation of the Florida Residential Landlord Tenant Act (FRLTA); and (b) unlawfully takes the security deposit funds before they are due and seeks a setoff for amounts allegedly due over and above the security deposit in violation of the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act (FCCPA). The Plaintiffs brings this action as a class action pursuant to Rule 23 (b)(2) and (b)(3), of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated as members of the Class listed below: Mediation Class: "All persons in the State of Florida who signed a lease agreement that contains a Mediation provision substantially similar to the one contained in Exhibit A, ¶ 21." The Plaintiffs brings this action as a class action pursuant to Rule 23 (b)(2) and (b)(3), of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated as members of the Class listed below: Notice Class: "All persons in the State of Florida who had any portion of their security deposit retained without receiving the FRLTA Notice Language." The Plaintiffs brings this action as a class action pursuant to Rule 23 (b)(2) and (b)(3), of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated as members of the Class listed below: Collections Class: "All persons in the State of Florida who received a Tenant Ledger and/or a Collections Communication in substantially the same form as Exhibit B, from Progress Residential and had any portion of their security deposit subsequently retained and/or any amount above their security deposit demanded (Collectively the "FCCPA Sub-class")." Progress Residential is the management subsidiary of the $51 billion investment firm, Pretium Partners, LLC. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 25, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=RFf0V4 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Jeffrey L. Newsome, Esq. Brian W. Warwick, Esq. Janet R. Varnell, Esq. Pamela G. Levinson, Esq. Christopher J. Brochu, Esq. VARNELL & WARWICK, P.A. 400 N Ashley Drive, Suite 1900 Tampa, FL 33602 Telephone: (352) 753-8600 Facsimile: (352) 504-3301 E-mail: jnewsome@vandwlaw.com bwarwick@vandwlaw.com jvarnell@vandwlaw.com plevinson@vandwlaw.com cbrochu@vandwlaw.com ckoerner@vandwlaw.com PROGRESS RESIDENTIAL: More Time to File Class Cert. Bid Sought -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHEYENNE HARRIS and ROBERT WHITAKER, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. PROGRESS RESIDENTIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, Case No. 6:24-cv-00859-CEM-DCI (M.D. Fla.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order granting a 19-day extension on the deadline for the Plaintiffs to file class certification, as follows: Deadline for moving for class July 18, 2025 certification, if applicable: Progress is a provider of property management services for single-family rental homes. A copy of the Parties' motion dated June 25, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=0cBYn2 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Jeffrey L. Newsome, Esq. Brian W. Warwick, Esq. Janet R. Varnell, Esq. Pamela G. Levinson, Esq. Christopher J. Brochu, Esq. VARNELL & WARWICK, P.A. 400 N Ashley Drive, Suite 1900 Tampa, FL 33602 Telephone: (352) 753-8600 Facsimile: (352) 504-3301 E-mail: jnewsome@vandwlaw.com bwarwick@vandwlaw.com jvarnell@vandwlaw.com plevinson@vandwlaw.com cbrochu@vandwlaw.com ckoerner@vandwlaw.com The Defendant is represented by: Ardith Bronson, Esq. Jose M. Espinosa, Esq. Angela C. Agrusa, Esq. Christine E. Ellice, Esq. Dustin A. Linden, Esq. DLA PIPER LLP (US) 2200 S. Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2500 Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 423-8562 Facsimile: (305) 503-9583 E-mail: ardith.bronson@us.dlapiper.com jose.espinosa@us.dlapiper.com angela.agrusa@us.dlapiper.com christine.ellice@us.dlapiper.com dustin.linden@us.dlapiper.com PROVIDENCE HEALTH: Court Consolidates Actions with Angulo Suit -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CAROLINE ANGULO, a single person; ERIC KELLER, a single person; EBEN NESJE, a single person; KIRK SUMMERS, a single person; CHRISTINE BASH, individually and as a personal representative of THE ESTATE OF STEVEN BASH; RAYMOND SUMERLIN, JR., and MARYANN SUMERLIN, a married couple; and MARTIN WHITNEY and SHERRYL WHITNEY, a married couple, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. PROVIDENCE HEALTH & SERVICES WASHINGTON, a non-profit Washington Corporation, also d/b/a/ PROVIDENCE ST. MARY MEDICAL CENTER; DR. JASON A. DREYER, DO, and JANE DOE DREYER, husband and wife and the marital community thereof; and DR. DANIEL ELSKENS DO and JANE DOE ELSKENS, husband and wife and the marital community thereof, Case No. 4:25-cv-05029-SAB (E.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Stan Bastian entered an order consolidating Sells, Goold, And Angulo, for the purpose of considering class certification: The suits are: "Sells et al v. Providence St. Joseph Health et al., Case No. 4:24-CV05160- SAB;" "Goold, et al, v. Dreyer, et al., Case No. 4:25-CV-05025-SAB; and "Angulo, et al., v. Providence Health & Services Washington et al., Case 4:25-CV-05029-SAB, are consolidated, for the purpose of resolving the issue of class certification. The parties shall utilize case No. 4:25-CV-05029-SAB for any filings. The Defendant's motion to dismiss or stay in Sells Suit is denied. The Plaintiffs' request to strike the Defendants' filing of material facts, noted in their response is denied. The Defendant's motion to dismiss, first to file in Goold Suit is denied. The Plaintiffs' request to strike the Defendants' filing of material facts, noted in their response is denied. The Clerk of Court shall administratively close Sells Suit and Goold Suit until the issue of class certification is resolved. All deadlines and hearings in Sells and Goold are stricken. The District Court Clerk is directed to enter this Order, provide copies to counsel, and administratively close Sells suit and Goold suit. The Court finds consolidation appropriate for managing these three related matters and for the purposes of adjudicating the question of class certification. All three cases involve patients who allegedly suffered harm from surgeries performed and medical advice provided by Drs. Dreyer or Elskens, In Angulo, the Plaintiffs further seek to certify two classes of plaintiffs, Providence Class and MultiCare Class: Providence Class: "All surgical patients of the Doctors at Providence who were subject to the RVU compensation scheme in connection with their treatment. MultiCare Class: "All surgical patients of Dr. Jason A. Dreyer, DO, while he was employed in Spokane, Washington, by MultiCare Health Systems, from May 3, 2019, through November 18, 2021. The Angulo case was filed in King County Superior Court on May 13, 2022. On March 19, 2025, it was transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, because of several related pending matters and in the interest of justice and judicial economy. The Sells case was filed on December 4, 2024, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1332. The Goold case was filed on March 11, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1332. Providence is a not-for-profit Catholic healthcare system. A copy of the Court's order dated June 23, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ZDDltj at no extra charge.[CC] R.D. MERRILL: PIIC Files Declaratory Judgment Action in W.D. Wash. ------------------------------------------------------------------ PHILADELPHIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. R.D. MERRILL REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS, LLC; MCKENNA DUFFY, MICHAEL BRETT, MADISON SHEWMAKER, and JAMAAR FAISON, Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-01102 (W.D. Wash., June 12, 2025) is a class action seeking declaratory relief against the Defendants. This declaratory judgment action seeks rulings regarding the Plaintiff's obligations under commercial insurance policies that it issued to R.D. Merrill Company, a separate corporation that is, upon information and belief, the managing member of R.D. Merrill Real Estate Holdings, LLC, for claims asserted in an underlying, consolidated lawsuit filed by Defendants McKenna Duffy, Brett, Shewmaker and Faison in this Court, Case No. 2:23-cv-01391-RSL. Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company is an insurance company, with its principal place of business in Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania. R.D. Merrill Real Estate Holdings, LLC, doing business as Pillar Properties, is a real estate company in Washington. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Rishabh R. Agny, Esq. FORSBERG & UMLAUF, P.S. 401 Union St., Suite 1400 Seattle, WA 98164 Telephone: (206) 689-8500 Email: rhesselgesser@foum.law ragny@foum.law RBG MANAGEMENT: Furment Sues Over Unprotected Private Info ---------------------------------------------------------- HECTOR FURMENT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. RBG MANAGEMENT CORP. and MORTON WILLIAMS SUPERMARKETS, INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-04730 (S.D.N.Y., June 5, 2025) arises from Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard highly valuable, protected, personally identifiable information and its failure to comply with industry standards to protect information systems that contain PII. Despite their duties to safeguard its employees' PII, on April 25, 2024, Morton Williams became aware of a cybersecurity incident as a hacker broke into Morton Williams's computer servers at their corporate office, locked the office computers, and downloaded stored information of individuals who were employed there at least four years prior to June 5, 2025. Accordingly, the Plaintiff now brings claims for negligence, unjust enrichment, and declaratory judgment, seeking damages and injunctive relief, including the adoption of reasonably sufficient data security practices to safeguard the PII in Defendants' possession in order to prevent incidents like the data breach from reoccurring in the future. Morton Williams is a food retailer with 17 locations in the New York City Metropolitan Area. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Gary F. Lynch, Esq. Nicholas A. Colella, Esq. LYNCH CARPENTER, LLP 1133 Penn Ave., 5th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Telephone: (412) 322-9243 Facsimile: (412) 231-0246 E-mail: gary@lcllp.com nickc@lcllp.com RECKITT BENCKISER: Faces Securities Suit Over Misleading Statements ------------------------------------------------------------------- ELEVATOR CONSTRUCTORS UNION LOCAL NO. 1 ANNUITY & 401(K) FUND on Behalf of Itself and All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff v. RECKITT BENCKISER GROUP PLC, LAXMAN NARASIMHAN, NICANDRO DURANTE, KRISTOFFER LOE LICHT, PATRICK SLY, and JEFFERY CARR, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-04708 (S.D.N.Y., June 5, 2025) seeks to pursue remedies under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Securities and Exchange Commission's Rule 10b-5. The Defendants touted the purportedly conclusive science on which Enfamil is based to assure investors and consumers of Enfamil's safety. Unbeknownst to investors, Reckitt failed to warn investors and consumers (1) that preterm infants were at an increased risk of developing Necrotizing Enterocolitis by consuming Reckitt's cow's milkbased formula, Enfamil, and (2) of the attendant impact on Reckitt's sales of Enfamil and Reckitt's exposure to legal claims. As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the company's American Depositary Shares (ADSs), Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses and damages. Accordingly, the Plaintiff now brings this federal securities class action on behalf of all persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Reckitt ADSs between January 13, 2021, and July 28, 2024, inclusive, against Reckitt and certain of its officers and executives. Reckitt is a U.K.-based consumer goods and health conglomerate. The company maintains substantial operations in the United States, including its principal U.S. corporate offices, which are located in Parsippany, NJ. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Thomas L. Laughlin, IV, Esq. Donald A. Broggi, Esq. Kassandra A. Nelson, Esq. Jonathan Zimmerman, Esq. Nicholas S. Bruno, Esq. SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP The Helmsley Building 230 Park Avenue, 24th Floor New York, NY 10169 Telephone: (212) 223-6444 Facsimile: (212) 223-6334 E-mail: tlaughlin@scott-scott.com dbroggi@scott-scott.com knelson@scott-scott.com jzimmerman@scott-scott.com nbruno@scott-scott.com ROUSE SERVICES: Matrix Alleges Equipment Rental Market Conspiracy ----------------------------------------------------------------- MATRIX CONSTRUCTION L.L.C., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ROUSE SERVICES LLC; RB GLOBAL INC.; UNITED RENTALS, INC.; SUNBELT RENTALS, INC.; HERC RENTALS INC.; HERC HOLDINGS INC.; H&E EQUIPMENT SERVICES, INC.; SUNSTATE EQUIPMENT CO., LLC; THE HOME DEPOT, INC.; and EQUIPMENTSHARE.COM INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-05364 (C.D. Cal., June 13, 2025) is an action against the Defendants for treble damages and injunctive relief under Section 1 of the Sherman Act. According to the complaint, the artificially high rental price for U.S. construction equipment industry is a direct result of Defendants' anticompetitive conduct alleged herein. Specifically, the Equipment Rental Company Defendants have been using Rouse Service LLC to coordinate their equipment rental pricing and inflate or maintain their equipment rental rates at artificially high levels to maximize their profits. Together with Rouse Service, the Equipment Rental Company Defendants no longer need to live with the uncertainty of setting prices to compete against one another. The Equipment Rental Company Defendants opted to outsource their once independent pricing and supply decisions to a single decision maker -- Rouse Service, with which they jointly implemented and enforced a coordinated pricing strategy unlawfully. The Plaintiff challenges this conspiracy among the Defendants which has led to artificially inflated prices for construction equipment rentals that it and other class members paid across the United States. The Defendants' conspiracy has benefited themselves, who are reporting record profits in recent years, to the detriment of Plaintiff and other renters of construction equipment. The Defendants have violated and continue to violate U.S. antitrust laws. Instead of setting their rental rates independently, the Equipment Rental Company Defendants, who control much of the nation's construction equipment rental market, outsource rate-setting to a common entity -- Rouse Service, says the suit. The Plaintiff rented construction equipment directly from one or more of the Defendants during the Class Period. Rouse Services LLC provides construction equipment market intelligence solutions such as appraisals, sales and analytics.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Elizabeth A. Fegan, Esq. FEGAN SCOTT LLC 100 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 700 Santa Monica, CA 90401 Telephone: (312) 741-1019 Facsimile: (312) 264-0100 E-mail: beth@feganscott.com SAGE DENTAL: Aids 3rd Party to Access Patients' PHI/PII, Suit Says ------------------------------------------------------------------ DANIEL MORENO and TAYLOR RUMMEL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. SAGE DENTAL MANAGEMENT, LLC d/b/a SAGE DENTAL, Defendant, Case No. 6:25-cv-01043 (M.D. Fla., June 13, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for violations of the Florida Security of Communications Act and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, breach of confidence, and unjust enrichment. According to the complaint, the Defendant aids, employs, agrees, and conspires with third parties LinkedIn Corporation ("LinkedIn") and Google, LLC ("Google") to intercept patients' communications as they seek dental services and book medical appointments on its website, https://mysagedental.com/, without prior consent. The Defendant secretly installed tracking technologies on its website which serve to track and disclose its patients' activity, in real time, including their protected health information (PHI) and personally identifiable information (PII), to LinkedIn and Google, suit says. In doing so, the Defendant undermined the importance of safeguarding the identities and personal medical information of individuals seeking dental services and breached its patients' trust, violating state and federal law. Sage Dental Management, LLC, doing business as Sage Dental, is a dental provider with its principal place of business in Boca Raton, Florida. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Sarah N. Westcot, Esq. Stephen A. Beck, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, PA 701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 2100 Miami, FL 33133 Telephone: (305) 330-5512 Facsimile: (305) 679-9006 Email: swestcot@bursor.com sbeck@bursor.com SAY CHEESE: Fails to Reimburse Drivers' Business Costs, Miller Says ------------------------------------------------------------------- ROBERT MILLER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SAY CHEESE, INC. d/b/a PAPA JOHN'S, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-00434-ECM-JTA (M.D. Ala., June 13, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for failure to reimburse business expenses in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant as a delivery driver at Papa John's store in Gulf Shores, Alabama from approximately May 2020 to September 2020, and in Fairhope, Alabama from approximately September 2020 to October 2024. Say Cheese, Inc., doing business as Papa John's, is a restaurant owner and operator, with its principal place of business in Montgomery, Alabama. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Erby J. Fischer, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN, PA 216 Summit Blvd., Suite 300 Birmingham, AL 35243 Telephone: (659) 204-6364 Facsimile: (659) 204-6389 Email: efischer@forthepeople.com - and - C. Ryan Morgan, Esq. Jolie N. Pavlos, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN, PA 20 N. Orange Ave., 15th Floor P.O. Box 4979 Orlando, FL 32802 Telephone: (407) 420-1414 Facsimile: (407) 245-3401 Email: RMorgan@forthepeople.com JPavlos@forthepeople.com SENSATA TECHNOLOGIES: Fails to Protect Clients' Info, Ryng Alleges ------------------------------------------------------------------ DONALD RYNG, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SENSATA TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-11735 (D. Mass., June 13, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for negligence, breach of implied contract, unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty, and declaratory judgment and injunctive relief. The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard the personally identifiable information (PII) of the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals stored within its network systems following a data breach discovered on or around April 6, 2025. 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. Sensata Technologies, Inc. is a global industrial technology company, with its principal place of business in Attleboro, Massachusetts. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Christina Xenides, Esq. Tyler J. Bean, Esq. SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP 745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500 New York, NY 10151 Telephone: (929) 677-5144 Email: cxenides@sirillp.com tbean@sirillp.com - and - A. Brooke Murphy, Esq. MURPHY LAW FIRM 4116 Will Rogers Pkwy., Suite 700 Oklahoma City, OK 73108 Telephone: (405) 389-4989 Email: abm@murphylegalfirm.com SUNO INC: Faces Justice Suit Over Copyrighted Sound Recordings -------------------------------------------------------------- ANTHONY JUSTICE and 5TH WHEEL RECORDS, INC., each individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. SUNO, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-11739 (D. Mass., June 14, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant alleging copyright infringement for willfully using copyrighted sound recordings to train Suno's artificial intelligence music generator. According to the complaint, the Plaintiffs and the Class Members own or exercise exclusive control over rights in the federally copyrighted songs that Suno illegally copied, reproduced and used in training of its generative AI model and the development and production of the Suno Website to its customers. The Plaintiffs and the Class Members have duly registered each of the Songs. Suno has knowingly and willfully infringed Plaintiffs' and the Class Members' exclusive rights in copyrighted songs, including but not limited to those songs. As a direct and proximate result of Suno's infringement of Plaintiffs' exclusive rights, Suno has caused and will continue to cause irreparable injury to Plaintiffs for which Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law, says the suit. Plaintiff Justice is an independent country music artist, selling over 100,000 albums and earning over 21,000,000 YouTube views. He owns and operates 5th Wheel Records, Inc., a recording company. Suno, Inc. is a generative AI service that creates digital music based on user prompts, typically within seconds.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Michael V. Glennon, Esq. BRODY, HARDOON, PERKINS & KESTEN, LLP 265 Franklin Street, 12th Floor Boston, MA 02110 Telephone: (617) 880-7100 E-mail: mglennon@bhpklaw.com - and - Jarrett L. Ellzey, Esq. Leigh S. Montgomery, Esq. EKSM, LLP 4200 Montrose Blvd., Suite 200 Houston, TX 77006 Telephone: (888) 350-3931 Facsimile: (888) 276-3455 E-mail: jellzey@eksm.com lmontgomery@eksm.com - and - Krystle Delgado, Esq. DELGADO ENTERTAINMENT LAW, PLLC 6803 E Main St # 1116 Scottsdale, AZ 85251 E-mail: krystle@delgadoentertainmentlaw.com SWEET BASIL: Filing of Class Cert Responses Extended to July 22 --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Liu v. Sweet Basil Fairfield LLC ,et al., Case No. 3:24-cv-01436 (D. Conn., Filed Sept. 8, 2024), the Hon. Judge Janet C. Hall entered an order granting Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re: motion to certify class conditional collective certification under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). -- Responses due by July 22, 2025. The suit alleges violation of the FLSA. Sweet Basil is a dining establishment.[CC] TIDEWATER PROPERTY: Floyd Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages Under FLSA ------------------------------------------------------------------ TIRA FLOYD, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. TIDEWATER PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-02003-MJM (D. Md., June 23, 2025) seeks to recover unpaid wages, liquidated damages, attorney's fees and cost under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Maryland Wage and Hour Law. Accordingly, the Plaintiff was not exempt for overtime purposes. Nevertheless, for all her hours worked in excess of 40 hours, the Defendant failed to pay her the required overtime pay rate of one-and-half times her regular rate, says the suit. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant from 2020 through May 27, 2025. The Defendant operates as a property management company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Philip B. Zipin, Esq. ZIPIN, AMSTER & GREENBERG, LLC 8757 Georgia Ave., Suite 400 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: (301) 587-9373 Facsimile: (240) 839-9142 TRADER JOE'S: Faces Ramirez Wage-and-Hour Suit in California ------------------------------------------------------------ EDUARDO RAMIREZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. TRADER JOE'S COMPANY; and DOES 1 to 50, Defendants, Case No. 25STCV17226 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., June 13, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), California Labor Code, and California's Business and Professions Code including unlawful discrimination, harassment and retaliation, invasion of privacy, wrongful termination/discharge, failure to pay overtime, failure to pay minimum wages, meal period violations, rest break violations, failure to pay vested vacation benefits, sick and covid period/benefits' violations, failure to maintain employee records, unreimbursed business expenses, release of claims for wage violations, reporting time violations, untimely payment of wages, failure to timely pay wages at separation, wage statements violations, failure to pay regular rate of pay, and unfair business practices. Mr. Ramirez was employed by the Defendants as a crew from May 2002 to November 22, 2024. Trader Joe's Company is a retail grocery chain in California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Zorik Mooradian, Esq. Haik Hacopian, Esq. Nanor C. Kamberian, Esq. MOORADIAN LAW, APC 24007 Ventura Blvd., Suite 210 Calabasas, CA 91302 Telephone: (818) 487-1998 Facsimile: (888) 783-1030 Email: zorik@mooradianlaw.com haik@mooradianlaw.com nanor@mooradianlaw.com TRIDENT MARITIME: Jefferson Seeks Class Settlement Prelim Approval ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as SHANNON OATES JEFFERSON, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. TRIDENT MARITIME SYSTEMS, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-00375-LMB-LRV (E.D. Va.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter the proposed order granting preliminary approval of the class action settlement. The Defendant offers engineered maritime solutions, specializing in cryogenic insulation, marine outfitting, system integration, automation, hybrid propulsion, energy management, scrubber installation and environmental solutions. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 24, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=O1IFOr at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Daniel Srourian, Esq. SROURIAN LAW FIRM, P.C. 468 N. Camden Dr., Suite 200 Beverly Hills, CA 90010 Telephone: (213) 474-3800 E-mail: daniel@slfla.com - and - David Hilton Wise, Esq. Dylan Scout Graham, Esq. WISE LAW FIRM PLC 10640 Page Avenue, Suite 320 Fairfax, Virginia 22030 Telephone: (703) 934-6377 E-mail: dwise@wiselaw.pro dgraham@wiselaw.pro TRUIST FINANCIAL: Discloses Confidential Info, Garcia Suit Alleges ------------------------------------------------------------------ CHRIS GARCIA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION, Case No. 2:25-cv-05753 (C.D. Cal. June 24, 2025) is a class action lawsuit brought on behalf of all Truist account holders who have accessed and used its website, truist.com, to apply for a loan or credit card. The Defendant provides financial services to consumers through the Website it maintains, where Truist account holders can manage and apply for credit cards, loans, and select payment plans. To apply for one of Defendant's financial products, users must share personally identifying information, including their citizenship, housing status, and employment information. When consumers provide this information on their applications, they expect that such confidential information and activity will be protected and not disclosed to unknown third parties. Such expectations are based, in part, on the legal protections afforded to such information. Despite reasonable expectations of privacy, and Defendant's legal duties to prevent the disclosure of such private information, Defendant discloses information provided by consumers on loan and credit card applications to LinkedIn Corporation. These disclosures include communications that contain sensitive and confidential information -- i.e., "nonpublic personal information." The Defendant violated the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) and the California Invasion of Privacy Act by disclosing the Plaintiff's and Class Members' private and confidential information without consent, says the suit. Plaintiff Garcia is a resident and citizen of Los Angeles, California. On May 2025, the Plaintiff applied for a LightStream unsecured loan through the Website. During the application process, the Defendant required Plaintiff to provide private information related to his citizenship, housing status, and employment information. The Plaintiff applied for a loan through the Website using the same device and browser used to access his LinkedIn account.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Philip L. Fraietta, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (646) 837-7150 Facsimile: (212) 989-9163 E-mail: pfraietta@bursor.com TWITTER INC: Court Withdraws Class Cert Bid ------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Frederick-Osborn v. Twitter, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:24-cv-00125 (N.D. Cal., Filed Jan. 5, 2024), the Hon. Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley entered an order granting stipulation re Plaintiff's Withdrawal of Motion for Class Certification. The nature of suit states Employment Discrimination. Twitter was an American social media company based in San Francisco, California, which operated and was named for its flagship social media network prior to its rebrand as X.[CC] TWITTER INC: Parties Seek Withdrawal of Class Certification Bid --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as SYDNEY FREDERICK-OSBORN, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, v. TWITTER, INC., and X CORP., Case No. 3:24-cv-00125-JSC (N.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order granting joint stipulation re Plaintiff's withdrawal of motion for class certification. The Defendant requested that Plaintiff withdraw the Motion for a few reasons, including the Defendant's position that the putative class does not satisfy numerosity under Rule 23(a)(1). After meeting and conferring, Defendant has produced data on the numerosity issue. The Plaintiff has agreed to withdraw the Motion provided that the Defendant also produce the names of the members of the putative class who meet all three of the following conditions: they are subject to an arbitration agreement, they have not signed a release of their claims, and they are not (to Defendant's knowledge) represented by counsel. On Oct. 17, 2024, the Plaintiff filed a motion for class certification. The Defendant's opposition to the motion is currently due on July 11, 2025. Twitter provides online social networking and microblogging service. A copy of the Parties' motion dated June 25, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=mgm55E at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esq. Thomas Fowler, Esq. LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C. 729 Boylston Street, Suite 2000 Boston, MA 02116 Telephone: (617) 994-5800 Facsimile: (617) 994-5801 E-mail: sliss@llrlaw.com tfowler@llrlaw.com The Defendants are represented by: Eric Meckley, Esq. Brian D. Berry, Esq. Roshni C. Kapoor, Esq. Ashlee N. Cherry, Esq. Kassia Stephenson, Esq. Carolyn M. Corcoran, Esq. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP One Market, Spear Street Tower San Francisco, CA 94105-1596 Telephone: (415) 442-1000 Facsimile: (415) 442-1001 E-mail: eric.meckley@morganlewis.com brian.berry@morganlewis.com roshni.kapoor@morganlewis.com ashlee.cherry@morganlewis.com kassia.stephenson@morganlewis.com carolyn.corcoran@morganlewis.com VERGIL SERVICES: Faces Suit Over Alleged VPPA Violations -------------------------------------------------------- D.M., L.O., and G.V., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. VERGIL SERVICES, INC. D/B/A REDGIFS, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-05102 (C.D. Cal., June 5, 2025), accuses the Defendant of violating numerous state and federal laws, including the Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA). The Plaintiffs used Defendant's website to privately view pornographic media from the comfort of their own homes. Given the confidential nature of pornography usage, when Plaintiffs used the website, they assumed that RedGifs would do its utmost to keep their use of its service private. Unfortunately, unbeknownst to Plaintiffs and other visitors to the website, RedGifs does not keep sensitive information about their website visitors private. Instead, the Defendant collects and transmits information related to individuals' use of the website, including the specific pornographic videos that they watch, to third party advertisers, including Alphabet Inc., through the use of surreptitious online tracking tools. However, Defendant never obtained informed consent from Plaintiffs or Class Members to share such sensitive information it collects with third parties. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs seek, on behalf of themselves and a class of similarly situated persons, to remedy these harms and assert the following statutory and common law claims against Defendant: Invasion of Privacy; Breach of Confidence; Negligence; Breach of Implied Contract; violations of the Video Privacy Protection Act; violations of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act; violations of the New York General Business Law; violations of the California Invasion of Privacy Act; and violations of the California Unfair Competition Law. Vergil Services, Inc. d/b/a RedGifs is a for-profit corporation based in Los Angeles, CA. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Daniel Srourian, Esq. SROURIAN LAW FIRM, P.C. 468 N. Camden Dr., Suite 200 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Telephone: (213) 474-3800 E-mail: daniel@slfla.com - and - Tyler J. Bean, Esq. Sonjay C. Singh, Esq. SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP 745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500 New York, NY 10151 Telephone: (212) 532-1091 E-mail: tbean@sirillp.com ssingh@sirillp.com VIRTUSA: Sugg Labor Suit Seeks to Certify Three Classes ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as GWYNNE SUGG, individually and on behalf of other similarly situated, v. VIRTUSA, Case No. 3:18-cv-08036-GC-JTQ (D.N.J.), the Plaintiff, on Sept. 2, 2025, will move the Court for certification of three classes of non-South Asians who were (1) denied employment with Virtusa, (2) employed by Virtusa in the U.S. and not promoted, and/or (3) were employed by Virtusa in the U.S. and were terminated. The Plaintiff seeks certification of her claims for monetary damages pursuant to Rule 23(b)(3). The Plaintiff seeks certification of three classes for Plaintiff’s pattern or practice disparate treatment claims in accordance with the well-established, two-phase framework for such claims set forth in International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States, 431 U.S. 332, 360-61 (1977). Pursuant to this framework, Plaintiff seeks certification of the following classes for the purpose of Phase One where the issue of classwide liability will be determined: Hiring Class: "All non-South Asian applicants who applied for a position with Virtusa in the United States between Feb. 28, 2014 and the date of class certification and who were not hired." Promotion Class: "All non-South Asian employees who worked for Virtusa in the United States between Feb. 28, 2014 and the date of class certification and who were not promoted." Terminations Class: "All non-South Asian employees who worked for Virtusa in the United States between Feb. 28, 2014 and the date of class certification and who were involuntarily terminated." The Plaintiff alleges that Virtusa has a discriminatory preference for South Asians (including those who it brings to the U.S. from India and Sri Lanka on work visas) and that Virtusa has engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination against non-South Asians in violation of Section 1981. Virtusa is an American-based global information technology services company. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 25, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=hoqfur at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jonathan Rudnick, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF JONATHAN RUDNICK, LLC. 788 Shrewsbury Avenue Tinton Falls, NJ 07724 Telephone: (732) 842-2070 Facsimile: (732) 879-0213 E-mail: jonr@jonrudlaw.com - and - Daniel Kotchen, Esq. Lindsey Grunert, Esq. KOTCHEN & LOW LLP 1918 New Hampshire Ave. NW Washington, DC 20009 Telephone: (202) 471-1995 Facsimile: (202) 280-1128 E-mail: dkotchen@kotchen.com lgrunert@kotchen.com WESTERN TRAFFIC: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due March 2, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as Padilla, v. Western Traffic Control, Inc., Case No. 3:25-cv-01949-TLT (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Trina Thompson entered a case management and scheduling order: 1. Trial date: Feb. 1, 2027 2. Final pretrial conference: Dec. 3, 2026 3. Expert discovery cut-off: June 26, 2026 4. Fact discovery cut-off: March 25, 2026 5. Hearing on motion for class certification: April 21, 2026 6. Motion for class certification due: March 2, 2026 Western is in the business of highway and street construction. A copy of the Court's order dated June 25, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=hcFaPf at no extra charge.[CC] WESTGATE PALACE: Steines Suit Seeks Class Certification ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ADAM U. STEINES and MIRANDA L. STEINES, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. WESTGATE PALACE, L.L.C., a Florida limited liability company, WESTGATE RESORTS, INC., a Florida corporation, WESTGATE RESORTS, LTD., L.P., a Florida limited partnership, CENTRAL FLORIDA INVESTMENTS, INC., WESTGATE VACATION VILLAS, LLC, and CFI RESORTS MANAGEMENT, INC., Case No. 6:22-cv-00629-RBD-DAB (M.D. Fla.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order: -- granting motion for class certification, -- appointing themselves as Class Representatives, and -- appointing their counsel as Class Counsel. The Plaintiffs allege that Palace violated 10 U.S.C. section 987(a) of the MLA by charging Plaintiffs and the Class "interest" on timeshare loans that contain terms declared unlawful by section 987(e) and because Palace failed to give Plaintiffs and the Class the written and oral disclosures mandated by section 987(c). The Plaintiffs propose the following Class Definition: "All active-duty service members or their dependents who financed the purchase of one or more timeshare interests via an extension of credit from Palace made between Feb. 22, 2017 and Feb. 28, 2025, who paid interest, and who did not sign an MLA waiver form in the form of Exhibit I, 2025 MLA Disclosure." Westgate is a 4-star family-friendly resort in Orlando. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 23, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=UqNsqm at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Brian W. Warwick, Esq. Janet R. Varnell, Esq. Christopher J. Brochu, Esq. Pamela G. Levinson, Esq. Jeffrey L. Newsome, Esq. VARNELL & WARWICK, P.A. 400 N. Ashley Drive, Suite 1900 Tampa, FL 33602 Telephone: (352) 753-8600 Facsimile: (352) 504-3301 E-mail: jvarnell@vandwlaw.com bwarwick@vandwlaw.com cbrochu@vandwlaw.com ckoerner@vandwlaw.com - and - Craig E. Rothburd, Esq. Dylan J. Thatcher, Esq. CRAIG E. ROTHBURD, P.A. 320 W. Kennedy Blvd., #700 Tampa, FL 33606 Telephone: (813) 251-8800 E-mail: craig@rothburdpa.com dylan@rothburdpa.com maria@rothburdpa.com - and - Scott R. Jeeves, Esq. Roger L. Mandel, Esq. JEEVES LAW GROUP, P.A. 2100 1st Ave S Ste 2 Saint Petersburg, FL 33712-1212 Telephone: (727) 894-2929 E-mail: sjeeves@jeeveslawgroup.com khill@jeeveslawgroup.com rmandel@jeevesmandellawgroup.com WVMF FUNDING: Objection to Bifurcate Class Overruled ---------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARIANNE RENOIS AS ADMINISTRATOR, FIDUCIARY AND BENEFICIARY OF AND FOR THE ESTATE OF ELLIS DEANGELO, MYRTEEN LEE and TAUNA THOMPSON on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. WVMF FUNDING, LLC, and COMPU-LINK CORPORATION D/B/A CELINK, Case No. 1:20-cv-09281-LTS-VF (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Laura Taylor Swain entered an order overruling the Defendant's Rule 72 objection to Magistrate Judge Figueredo's Nov. 1, 2024, Order denying Defendant's motion to bifurcate class and merits discovery. The Plaintiffs bring this putative class action for injuries "caused to borrowers of reverse mortgages and Home Equity Conversion Mortgages" upon whom, they assert, the Defendants erroneously imposed force-placed insurance and charged related costs and fees, despite either providing such consumers inadequate notice of their intention to do so and/or having already received adequate notice from borrowers regarding pre-existing hazard insurance policies on the mortgaged properties. The Second Amended Complaint defines three proposed classes. The main class includes, "All borrowers, and heirs and estates of borrowers, who had an HECM or reverse mortgage loan serviced or subserviced by Celink since Dec. 21, 2015, and for whom Celink failed to timely refund or credit back force-placed insurance and related fees, charges, penalties, interest or mortgage insurance premiums." The two proposed subclasses included New York and California subclasses for all class members where the home secured by the mortgage was or is located in either New York or California, respectively. A copy of the Court's memorandum order dated June 24, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=n7xTmr at no extra charge.[CC] ZIMMER US: Faces Rosati Wage-and-Hour Suit in Super. Calif. ----------------------------------------------------------- JARED ROSATI, individually, and on behalf of other similarly situated employees, Plaintiff v. ZIMMER US, INC.; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 25STCV17297 (Super. Calif., Los Angeles Cty., June 13, 2025) arises from the Defendants' violation of the California Labor Code and the applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order. The Plaintiff alleges that Defendants hired Plaintiff and Class Members but, among other things, failed to properly pay them all wages owed for all time worked (including minimum wages, straight time wages, and overtime wages), failed to provide them with all meal periods and rest periods and associated premium wages to which they were entitled, failed to timely pay them all wages due during their employment, failed to timely pay them all wages due upon termination of their employment, failed to provide them with accurate itemized wage statements, and failed to reimburse them for necessary business expenses. Plaintiff Rosati worked for the Defendants from approximately March 2015 through approximately January 2022 as a warehouse driver. Zimmer US, Inc. is a subsidiary of Zimmer Biomet, a global medical technology company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Karen I. Gold, Esq. Marissa M. Mayhood, Esq. Noam Y. Reiffman, Esq. Sara Pezeshkpour, Esq. BLACKSTONE LAW, APC 8383 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 745 Beverly Hills, CA 90211 Telephone: (310) 622-4278 Facsimile: (855) 786-6356 E-mail: kgold@blackstonepc.com mmayhood@blackstonepc.com nreiffman@blackstonepc.com spezeshkpour@blackstonepc.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 ***