---

              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Friday, August 1, 2025, Vol. 27, No. 153

                            Headlines

3M COMPANY: Alaniz Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Aresco Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
3M COMPANY: Bailey Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Bardelman Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Foams
3M COMPANY: Berry Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams

3M COMPANY: Bradford Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals
3M COMPANY: Hard Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Foams & Chemicals
3M COMPANY: Harvey Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Hemphill Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Littlejohn Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals

3M COMPANY: Wallace Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
4EARTH FARMS: Avila Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
AEROVIAS DEL CONTINENTE: Pedroso Suit Removed to C.D. California
ALAMEDA COUNTY, CA: Hearing on Class Cert Bid Set for Sept. 18
ALDI INC: Castillon Sues Over Breach of ERISA's Fiduciary Duties

ALEX ADAMS: Must File Class Cert Response by August 29
ALO LLC: Herrera Sues Over Disability Discrimination
ALTO NEUROSCIENCE: Feldman Sues Over Exchange Act Violation
AMAZON INC: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to April 9, 2026
ANCESTRY.COM: Gehringer Suit Transferred to N.D. California

ANNE ARUNDEL DERMATOLOGY: Farris Sues Over Failure to Properly PII
ANNE ARUNDEL DERMATOLOGY: Hall Files Suit in D. Maryland
ANNE ARUNDEL DERMATOLOGY: Wilson Files Suit in D. Maryland
ANNE ARUNDEL: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Straw Suit Says
ANNE ARUNDEL: Martin Sues Over Failure to Secure Personal Info

APPLE INC: Turner Class Certification Bid Tossed
ARBUCKLE FARMS: Pettigrew Files Suit in Okla. Dist. Ct.
ARMORED GROUP SERVICES: Polanco Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
BAKER COUNTY, OR: Class Settlement in Baker Suit Gets Initial Nod
BAREBONES VENTURES: Ross Sues Over Mislabeled Bone Broth Products

BATTLE CREEK: Parker Suit Seeks FLSA Class Certification
BBBB BONDING: Directed to Respond to All Discovery Requests
BELZBERG & CO: Faces Marks Suit for Breach of Fiduciary Duty
BETSEY JOHNSON: Dalton Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
BETTERHELP INC: Parties Seeks to Modify Briefing Sched

BONANZA WORLDWIDE: Hanson Sues Over Privacy Rights Violation
BUSPATROL AMERICA: Olmea Suit Seeks to Certify Two Classes
CAFE DELIGHTS: Campbell Sues Over Unlawful Discrimination
CALCHEF FOODS: Padilla Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
CALIBER HOLDINGS: Becerra Suit Removed to E.D. California

CAPS UNLIMITED: Evans Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
CASA ORA: Medina Allowed Leave to File Class Cert Bid
CERNER CORPORATION: Coulter Transferred to W.D. Missouri
CG ROXANE LLC: Yarric Suit Removed to N.D. California
CHANGE HEALTHCARE: Aretakis Suit Transferred to D. Minnesota

CHIME FINANCIAL: Charles Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
CHRYSLER PACIFICA: Filing for Class Cert Bid Suspended
CIGNA HEALTHCARE: Avalos Suit Removed to E.D. California
CLASSPASS USA: Blackburn Sues Over Unlawful Expiration Periods
COLUMBIA BBB WESTCHESTER: Pardo Sues Over Discriminative Property

COMCAST CABLE: Scheirer Suit Transferred to E.D. Pennsylvania
COMFORTWEAR COLLECTIONS: More Time to File Class Cert Bid Sought
COMMUNITY REGIONAL: Standing Order Entered in Pierre Class Suit
CONCORA CREDIT: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Seals Due May 8, 2026
CONTINENTAL RESOURCES: Class Cert Bid Filing Due August 5, 2026

COPART INC: $1.27MM Settlement Gets Partial Prelim OK
CREDIT CONTROL: Lefkowitz Files Suit in D. New Jersey
DELAND GROUP HOLDING: Wagner Sues Over Discriminative Actions
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: Court Tosses Class Action
DOTHOUSE HEALTH: Idumwonyi Files Suit in D. Massachusetts

DOTHOUSE HEALTH: Samiotes Files Suit in D. Massachusetts
DRAFTKINGS INC: Macek Sues Over Deceptive Online Casino Scheme
DRT LLC: Clark Sues Over Failure to Safeguard Information
DUKE CANNON: Ortiz Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
EL TIESTO CAFE: Victor Sues Over Unlawful Disability Discrimination

ENVOY MEDIA GROUP: Lorech Files TCPA Suit in S.D. California
EPISOURCE LLC: Lewow Suit Removed to C.D. California
EQUIFAX INFO: Class Cert Bid Filing Modified to Feb. 5, 2026
EVERGY METRO: Filing for Class Certification Bid Due Dec. 22
EVERYTHING BREAKS: Campbell Files TCPA Suit in E.D. Arkansas

EXCELLENCE FORWARD: Lewis Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Georgia
EXPRESS VPN: Greenwood Files Suit in C.D. California
FARMERS INSURANCE: Graham Suit Seeks to Certify Class of Insureds
FAVO CAPITAL INC: Redick Files TCPA Suit in E.D. California
FINEST WS: Watson Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website

FLOWERS BAKERIES: Hass Suit Removed to N.D. California
FLOWERS BAKERIES: Royal Suit Removed to C.D. California
FREEHAND INDIAN CREEK: Watson Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
FTAI AVIATION: Boston, et al., Appointed as Lead Plaintiffs
GARBER CAPITAL: Wagner Sues Over Discriminative Actions

GEO GROUP: Seeks Leave to File Class Cert Opposition Under Seal
GOOGLE DIGITAL: Filing of Certain Exhibits Under Seal Sought
GOOGLE INC: Parties Must File Sealing Stipulation by August 1
GOOGLE INC: Plaintiffs Seeks to File Class Reply Under Seal
GREATER GUIDE: Walstrom Files TCPA Suit in N.D. California

GUESS RETAIL INC: Ortiz Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
GUIDE TO INSURE: Fitzgerald Files FLSA Suit in D. Utah
HAIKU ASIAN BISTRO: Meng Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
HALAL GUYS: Hegazy Suit Seeks Certification of Two Classes
HERTZ CORP: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Ho Suit Bid Due August 29

HOLIDAY INN: Wins Summary Judgment v. Lingard
HOUSTON FOODS: Arroyo Sues Over Unlawful Sloping Conditions
HV FAMILY: Wagner Sues Over Discriminative Actions
IDAHO: Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Response
INDEGENE INC: Progressive Health Wins Class Certification Bid

INTERMOUNTAIN HEALTH: Class Cert Bid Referred to Magistrate Judge
INTERMOUNTAIN HEALTH: Sheehy Seeks Certification of Class Action
INTERNATIONAL PAPER: Bid to Remand Rojas Class Suit Tossed
INTERNATIONAL PAPER: Class Cert Bid Filing Amended to Nov. 25
JEREMIAH'S ORIGINAL: Victor Sues Over Unlawful Discrimination

JMCR SAFETY: Faces Torres Wage-and-Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y.
JOSEPHINE COUNTY, OR: Class Settlement in Gabbert Gets Initial Nod
KABAFUSION HOLDINGS: Ahmad Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
KEVIN REALWORLDFARE: Civil Standing Order Entered in Marinaj Suit
KRISTI NOEM: Plaintiffs Seek to Certify Class of Detainees

LEVY PREMIUM: Rivera Suit Removed to N.D. Illinois
LOANDEPOT.COM LLC: Johnson Sues Over Loan's High Interest Rates
LORI ANN WEST: Mirabelli Files Renewed Bid for Class Certification
LOS ANGELES, CA: Standing Order Entered in Banabou Class Suit
MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION: Class Cert Bid Modified to Jan. 12, 2026

MARION COUNTY, OR: Class Settlement in Sawyer Suit Gets Initial Nod
MARRIOTT HOTEL: Fernandez Suit Removed to C.D. California
MARSHA MCLANE: Richards' Bid for Interim Counsel Appointment Nixed
MDL 2873: Adams Alleges Injury Due to Toxic Chemical Exposure
MDL 2873: Bentley Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams

MDL 2873: Colgrove Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
MDL 2873: Exposes Firefighters to Toxic Chemicals, Calabro Says
MDL 2873: Exposes Firefighters to Toxic Chemicals, Grammer Says
MDL 2873: Exposes Firefighters to Toxic Chemicals, Raade Alleges
MDL 2873: Exposes Firefighters to Toxic Chemicals, Scott Says

MDL 2873: Exposes Firefighters to Toxic Chemicals, Wagner Says
MDL 2873: Faces Begg Suit Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Cook Says
MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Edwards Says
MDL 2873: Griffin Alleges Injury Due to Toxic Chemical Exposure

MDL 2873: Procovich Suit Alleges Toxic Chemical Exposure
MERCEDES-BENZ USA: Class Cert Bid Filing in Ryvkin Due Sept. 22
MICHAEL BICKERS: Rhodes Allowed Leave to Start Discovery
MICHAEL CARROLL: Dous Sues Over Discriminatory Suspension Scheme
MICROMOBILITY.COM INC: Seeks Reconsideration of July 14 Order

MICROSTRATEGY: Dodge Sues Over Breach of Fiduciary Duty
MODERN FRAMER: Costa Files Suit in Mass. Super. Ct.
MONSANTO COMPANY: Harper Suit Transferred to N.D. California
MONSANTO COMPANY: Sessler Suit Transferred to N.D. California
MOTOROLA MOBILITY: Class Cert Bid Filing in Gabrielle Due Sept. 4

MULTNOMAH COUNTY, OR: Settlement in Lynch Suit Gets Initial Nod
MUSTARD SEED FINANCIAL: Pimentel Files TCPA Suit in S.D. Florida
NAPER GROVE VISION: Fett Sues Over Failure to Secure PII & PHI
NAPHCARE ARIZONA: Martin Suit Removed to D. Arizona
NATIONAL TENANT: Clermont Must File Opposition Reply by August 8

NESTLE PURINA PETCARE: Kahley Files Suit in Pa. Ct. of Common Pleas
NEUROLOGICAL INSTITUTE: Wilson Files Suit in Ga. Super. Ct.
NIKITA BAKER: Bid for Expedited Bail Hearings Tossed
NISSAN NORTH: Court OK's Substitution of Class Counsel
NOCO COMPANY: Filing for Class Cert. in Beaudry Due June 12, 2026

NORTHWEST PIPE COMPANY: Calvillo Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
OBI SEAFOODS: Class Cert Bid Filing in Murrillo Due April 17, 2026
OCTAPHARMA PLASMA: Clegg Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
OFFICE DEPOT: Bid for Bifurcated Discovery in Benge Tossed
ON RUNNING INC: Herrera Sues Over Disability Discrimination

ONEBLOOD INC: Newberry Files Suit in Fla. Cir. Ct.
PANERA BREAD: Settlement in Data Security Suit Gets Initial OK
PEI WEI ASIAN: Ariza Sues Over Unlawful Disability Discrimination
PEPGEN INC: Karam Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
PEYTON PALAIO: Tucker Files Suit in E.D. Virginia

PIPER PRODUCTS: Kaseno Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
PORT ST. LUCIE, FL: Cole Suit Removed to S.D. Florida
R. MARLEY LLC: Martinez Seeks to recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
RAWLINGS COMPANY: Allowed Leave to File Docs Under Seal
REALPLAY TECH: Pilati Suit Removed to N.D. Alabama

REX IDRIZI: Smith Sues Over Physical Barriers
ROBINHOOD: Bid to File Class Cert Docs Under Seal OK'd
RS GAMING: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Ortiz Alleges
RUBBERNECK INC: Evans Sues Over Unlawful Discrimination
SARA MIQUE INC: Campbell Sues Over Unlawful Discrimination

SB NORTHWEST: Complete Discovery in Gongora Suit Due Nov. 7
SCI CALIFORNIA: Movsesyan Suit Removed to C.D. California
SELECT MEDICAL: Smith Sues Over Unprotected Personal, Health Info
SEPHORA USA: Cole Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
SETH GREBBIEN: RK Holdings Files Suit in C.D. Illinois

SHOTTENKIRK SAN ANTONIO: Dyer Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Texas
SIMON PARRILLA: Wagner Sues Over Discriminative Actions
SPEEDY CASH: Records Calls Without Notice, Wilson Suit Says
SPRINGER NATURE: Nieves Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
STG LOGISTICS: Nieves Suit Removed to C.D. California

STOP 1 BAGEL: Ruiz Seeks to Recover Unpaid Minimum, OT Wages
STRYKER EMPLOYMENT: Bianchini Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
SYSCO SACRAMENTO: Fite Labor Suit Seeks to Certify Four Classes
TD AMERITRADE: Masud Suit Transferred to C.D. California
TD BANK: Class Certification Bid Filing Extended in Dou

TELLURIDE RESORT: Bid for Class Cert. Referred to Magistrate Judge
TEMPTU INC: Faces Tucker Suit Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
TENNESSEE JACKS: Dillon Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
TESLA INC: Medearis Suit Removed to C.D. California
TIPHANI WEGS: Kauluwehi Suit Removed to W.D. Missouri

TOWER EV LLC: Reese Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
TRADERCODES LLC: Seeks Denial of Wilson Bid for Extension of Time
TRICAM INDUSTRIES: Frost Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
TROPICAL SMOOTHIE: Herrera Sues Over Disability Discrimination
TRUSTEES OF WESTMINSTER: Carfora Files Suit in D. Connecticut

TSG PERSIMMON: Mellenthin Sues Over Physical Barriers
TUFT & NEEDLE: Chebul Suit Seeks Class Certification
UBER TECHNOLOGIES: Tenecela Suit Removed to E.D. New York
UNICAR CO: Parra-Jimenez Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
UNITED BEHAVIORAL: LD Seeks to File Class Cert Reply Under Seal

UNIVERSAL INTERMODAL: Cole Suit Removed to C.D. California
VOTIVO LLC: Williams Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
WALGREEN PHARMACY: Parker Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
WATERSTREET COMPANY: Baldwin Files Suit in D. Montana
WESTROCK SERVICES: Acu Suit Removed to C.D. California

WINCO HOLDINGS: Ayala Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
WINDOWWALL LLC: Moon Files TCPA Suit in M.D. Florida
WW LLC: Winklemann Sues Over Physical Barriers

                        Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Dow Inc. Has $665MM Liabilities as of Dec. 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Genuine Parts Co. Faces 2,864 Suits as of June 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Honeywell Defends Personal Injury Claims
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Otis Worldwide Defends Product Liability Lawsuits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Travelers Co. Still Receives PI Claims

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Westinghouse Air Brake Product Liability Claims


                            *********

3M COMPANY: Alaniz Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Juliana Alaniz, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION  UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No. 2:25-cv-06265-RMG (D.S.C., June 26,
2025), is brought for damages for personal injuries resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires.

The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge that it contained
highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which would expose end users
of the product to the risks associated with PFAS. Further,
defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF which contained
PFAS for use in firefighting.

PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was diagnosed with kidney cancer as a result of
exposure to Defendants' AFFF products and/or PFAS chemicals.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
          Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
          Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
          ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
          2160 Highland Avenue South
          Birmingham, AL 35205
          Phone: 205-328-9200
          Facsimile: 205-328-9456

3M COMPANY: Aresco Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
----------------------------------------------------------------
Brenton Aresco, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION  UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No. 2:25-cv-06266-RMG (D.S.C., June 26,
2025), is brought for damages for personal injuries resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires.

The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge that it contained
highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which would expose end users
of the product to the risks associated with PFAS. Further,
defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF which contained
PFAS for use in firefighting.

PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was diagnosed with kidney cancer as a result of
exposure to Defendants' AFFF products and/or PFAS chemicals.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
          Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
          Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
          ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
          2160 Highland Avenue South
          Birmingham, AL 35205
          Phone: 205-328-9200
          Facsimile: 205-328-9456

3M COMPANY: Bailey Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Bailey, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY
(f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA,
INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION;
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.;
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA,
INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a
DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION  UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION,
INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No. 2:25-cv-06267-RMG
(D.S.C., June 26, 2025), is brought for damages for personal
injuries resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams
("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as per
and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not
limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires.

The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge that it contained
highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which would expose end users
of the product to the risks associated with PFAS. Further,
defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF which contained
PFAS for use in firefighting.

PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was diagnosed with kidney cancer as a result of
exposure to Defendants' AFFF products and/or PFAS chemicals.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
          Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
          Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
          ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
          2160 Highland Avenue South
          Birmingham, AL 35205
          Phone: 205-328-9200
          Facsimile: 205-328-9456

3M COMPANY: Bardelman Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Foams
-------------------------------------------------------
John Bardelman, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION  UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No. 2:25-cv-06268-RMG (D.S.C., June 26,
2025), is brought for damages for personal injuries resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires.

The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge that it contained
highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which would expose end users
of the product to the risks associated with PFAS. Further,
defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF which contained
PFAS for use in firefighting.

PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was diagnosed with kidney cancer as a result of
exposure to Defendants' AFFF products and/or PFAS chemicals.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
          Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
          Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
          ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
          2160 Highland Avenue South
          Birmingham, AL 35205
          Phone: 205-328-9200
          Facsimile: 205-328-9456

3M COMPANY: Berry Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
----------------------------------------------------------------
Rochelle Berry, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION  UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No. 2:25-cv-06269-RMG (D.S.C., June 26,
2025), is brought for damages for personal injuries resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires.

The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge that it contained
highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which would expose end users
of the product to the risks associated with PFAS. Further,
defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF which contained
PFAS for use in firefighting.

PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was diagnosed with kidney cancer as a result of
exposure to Defendants' AFFF products and/or PFAS chemicals.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
          Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
          Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
          ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
          2160 Highland Avenue South
          Birmingham, AL 35205
          Phone: 205-328-9200
          Facsimile: 205-328-9456

3M COMPANY: Bradford Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals
----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Bradford, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BASF
CORP., BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION;
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.;
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA,
INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA INC., DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE
NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU
PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; JOHNSON CONTROLS INC., KIDDE-FENWAL,
INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.;
PERIMETER SOLUTIONS LP, THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS
LP, as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION,
INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No. 2:25-cv-06270-RMG
(D.S.C., June 26, 2025), is brought for damages for personal injury
resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF")
containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as per and
polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not
limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires.

The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge that it contained
highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which would expose end users
of the product to the risks associated with PFAS. Further,
defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF which contained
PFAS for use in firefighting.

PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious
medical conditions and complications alleged herein.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with
Kidney Cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Andrew T. Kagan, Esq.
          Elizabeth P. Kagan, Esq.
          KAGAN LEGAL GROUP, LLC.
          295 Palmas Inn Way, Suite 6
          Humacao, PR, 00791
          Phone: 939-220-2424
          Facsimile: 939-220-2477

3M COMPANY: Hard Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Foams & Chemicals
--------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Hard, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION  UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No. 2:25-cv-06278-RMG (D.S.C., June 26,
2025), is brought for damages for personal injuries resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires.

The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge that it contained
highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which would expose end users
of the product to the risks associated with PFAS. Further,
defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF which contained
PFAS for use in firefighting.

PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was diagnosed with testicular cancer as a result of
exposure to Defendants' AFFF products and/or PFAS chemicals.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
          Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
          Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
          ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
          2160 Highland Avenue South
          Birmingham, AL 35205
          Phone: 205-328-9200
          Facsimile: 205-328-9456

3M COMPANY: Harvey Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Edward Harvey, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No.
2:25-cv-06236-RMG (D.S.C., June 26, 2025), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was directly exposed to AFFF through firefighting
and/or Plaintiff's water supply was contaminated with PFOS and PFOA
as an after effect of such use and was diagnosed with kidney cancer
and thyroid disease as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Tayjes Shah, Esq.
          THE MILLER FIRM, LLC
          108 Railroad Ave.
          Orange, VA 22960
          Phone: 540-672-4224
          Email: tshah@millerfirmllc.com

3M COMPANY: Hemphill Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
--------------------------------------------------------------
James D. Hemphill, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY
(f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS, INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION;
ARCHROMA U.S., INC.; ARKEMA INC.; BASF CORPORATION, individually
and as successor in interest to Ciba, Inc.; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT
COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CB GARMENT, INC.; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS INC.; CHEMGUARD INC.; CHEMICALS INCORPORATED; CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE LTD.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA,
INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS INC.; DUPONT DE
NEMOURS, INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU
PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLUS,
INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS
USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE PLC, INC.;
L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC
MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY, LLC; MUNICIPAL
EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL
FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS,
LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING
COMPANY, INC; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC; SOUTHERN
MILLS INC.; STEDFAST USA INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE
PRODUCTS LP, as successorin interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORP., INC.
(f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN LIMITED; W.L. GORE &
ASSOCIATES INC.; and WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC., Case No.
2:25-cv-06235-RMG (D.S.C., June 26, 2025), is brought for damages
stemming from personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams ("AFFF") and firefighter turnout gear ("TOG")
containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as per and
polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not
limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. TOG is personal protective equipment
designed for heat and moisture resistance in order to protect
firefighters in hazardous situations. Most turnout gear is made up
of a thermal liner, moisture barrier, and an outer layer. The inner
layers contain PFAS, and the outer layer is often treated with
additional PFAS.

The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, Defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
the Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the
products. Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal
absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF or TOG products caused
Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications alleged herein.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF and/or TOG products during Plaintiff's training and
firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks injunctive,
equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the same, says the
complaint.

The Plaintiff was regularly exposed to AFFF and TOG in training and
to extinguish fires during their firefighting career and diagnosed
with kidney and prostate cancer, lymphoma and leukemia kidney and
prostate cancer, lymphoma and leukemia as a direct result of
exposure to Defendants' products.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James C. Ferrell, Esq.
          FERRELL LAW GROUP, PC
          6226 Washington Avenue, Suite 200
          Houston, TX 77007
          Phone: 713-337-3855
          Facsimile: 713-337-3856

3M COMPANY: Littlejohn Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals
------------------------------------------------------------
Leonard Littlejohn, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY
(f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA,
INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION;
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.;
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA,
INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a
DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM,
INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No. 2:25-cv-06241-RMG (D.S.C., June 26,
2025), is brought for damages for personal injury resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was directly exposed to AFFF through firefighting
and/or the Plaintiff's water supply was contaminated with PFOS and
PFOA as an after effect of such use and was diagnosed with kidney
cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF product.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Tayjes Shah, Esq.
          THE MILLER FIRM, LLC
          108 Railroad Ave.
          Orange, VA 22960
          Phone: 540-672-4224
          Email: tshah@millerfirmllc.com

3M COMPANY: Wallace Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
------------------------------------------------------------------
Arthur Wallace, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No.
2:25-cv-06250-RMG (D.S.C., June 26, 2025), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.

Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was directly exposed to AFFF through firefighting
and/or the Plaintiff's water supply was contaminated with PFOS and
PFOA as an after effect of such use and was diagnosed with kidney
cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF product.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Tayjes Shah, Esq.
          THE MILLER FIRM, LLC
          108 Railroad Ave.
          Orange, VA 22960
          Phone: 540-672-4224
          Email: tshah@millerfirmllc.com

4EARTH FARMS: Avila Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against 4Earth Farms. The
case is styled as Moises Pena Avila, individual, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. 4Earth Farms, Case No.
25STCV21455 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., July 21, 2025).

The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case
(General Jurisdiction)."

4Earth Farms -- https://4earthfarms.com/ -- is one of the largest
suppliers of Organic, Conventional, and Specialty Produce in the
nation.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Nazo Koulloukian, Esq.
          KOUL LAW FIRM
          3435 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 1710
          Los Angeles, CA 90010-2003
          Phone: 213-761-5484
          Fax: 818-561-3938
          Email: nazo@koullaw.com

AEROVIAS DEL CONTINENTE: Pedroso Suit Removed to C.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Lais Pedroso, individual and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. AEROVIAS DEL CONTINENTE AMERICANO S.A.
AVIANCA, a Colombian corporation; and DOES 1-100, inclusive, Case
No. 25STCV17790 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California for the County of Los Angeles, to the United States
District Court for Central District of California on July 21, 2025,
and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-06621.

The Complaint asserts four causes of action against Avianca:
violation of the federal Wiretap Act (the "ECPA"); violation of the
California Invasion of Privacy Act ("CIPA"); violation of the
California Computer Data Access and Fraud Act; and invasion of
privacy in violation of Article 1, Section 1 of the California
Constitution.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Shon Morgan, Esq.
          Crystal Nix-Hines, Esq.
          Stephen A. Broome, Esq.
          Alyssa G. Olson, Esq.
          QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
          865 South Figueroa Street, 10th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90017-2543
          Phone: (213) 443-3000
          Facsimile: (213) 443-3100
          Email: shonmorgan@quinnemanuel.com
                 crystalnixhines@quinnemanuel.com
                 stephenbroome@quinnemanuel.com
                 alyolson@quinnemanuel.com

ALAMEDA COUNTY, CA: Hearing on Class Cert Bid Set for Sept. 18
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ARMIDA RUELAS; DE'ANDRE
EUGENE COX; BERT DAVIS; KATRISH JONES; JOSEPH MEBRAHTU; DAHRYL
REYNOLDS; MONICA MASON; SCOTT ABBEY; and all others similarly
situated, v. COUNTY OF ALAMEDA; YESENIA SANCHEZ, SHERIFF; ARAMARK
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, LLC; and DOES 1 through 10, Case No.
4:19-cv-07637-JST (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Jon Tigar entered an
order granting joint stipulation and order setting briefing
schedule on motion for class certification as follows:

  1. The Defendants' oppositions to the Plaintiffs' motion for
     class certification shall be due by July 30, 2025.

  2. The Plaintiffs' reply shall be due by Aug. 27, 2025.

  3. The hearing on the motion remains set for Sept. 18, 2025, at
     2 p.m.

On April 9, 2025, the Court granted the parties' joint stipulation
setting briefing schedule on Plaintiffs' motion for class
certification.

On June 18, 2025, the Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Class
Certification.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Gl1Q7H at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Anne Butterfield Weills, Esq.
          Emilyrose Johns, Esq.
          Sara Beladi, Esq.
          SIEGEL, YEE, BRUNNER & MEHTA
          475 14th Street, Suite 500
          Oakland, CA 94612
          Telephone: (510) 839-1200
          Facsimile: (510) 444-6698
          E-mail: abweills@gmail.com;
                  emilyrose@siegelyee.com;
                  sbeladi@protonmail.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Cortlin H. Lannin, Esq.
          COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
          One CityCenter, 850 Tenth Street NW
          Washington, DC 20001-4956

                - and -

          Gilbert J. Tsai
          HANSON BRIDGETT LLP
          777 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 4200
          Los Angeles, CA 90017

ALDI INC: Castillon Sues Over Breach of ERISA's Fiduciary Duties
----------------------------------------------------------------
Victor Castillon, individually, and as a representative of a class
of participants and beneficiaries on behalf of the Aldi Retirement
Savings Plan v. ALDI INC., THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF ALDI, THE PLAN
ADMINISTRATOR COMMITTEE OF ALDI; JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-30, Case No.
1:25-cv-08321 (N.D. Ill., July 21, 2025), is brought against the
Plan's fiduciaries, which include Aldi; the Board of Directors of
Aldi and its members during the Class Period; the Plan
Administrator Committee of Aldi and its members during the Class
Period; and John and Jane Does 1–30 (the "Members")
(collectively, the Company, the Board, the Committee, and the
Members shall be referred to as the "Defendants"), for breach of
ERISA's fiduciary duties; violation of ERISA's anti-inurement
provision, and engaging in self-dealing and transactions prohibited
by The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA").

The Defendants' breaches of ERISA as alleged herein each arise from
the Defendants' choice to use Plan participant forfeited funds to
reduce Company contributions to the Plan instead of using the funds
to reduce or eliminate the amounts charged to Plan participants for
administrative and recordkeeping ("RKA") services and Defendants'
failure to promptly exhaust millions of dollars of forfeitures.
These choices by Defendants cost Plan participants millions of
dollars during the Class Period, including Plaintiff, says the
complaint.

The Plaintiff was employed by Aldi from November 2018 through
December 6, 2023.

Aldi was headquartered in Batavia, Illinois, and was a large
company with over 45,000 employees that operates as a discount
grocery retailer.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
          227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Phone: (866) 252-0878
          Email: gklinger@milberg.com

               - and -

          Alexander Rudenco, Esq.
          Arlene Boruchowitz, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
          800 S. Gay St., Suite 1100
          Knoxville, TN 37929
          Phone: (865) 247-0080
          Email: arudenco@milberg.com
                 aboruchowitz@milberg.com

               - and -

          Gabriel Mandler, Esq.
          Omer Kremer, Esq.
          EDELSBERG LAW
          20900 NE 30th Ave
          Aventura, FL 33180
          Phone: (305) 975-3320
          Email: gabriel@edelsberglaw.com
                 omer@edelsberglaw.com

               - and -

          Andrew Shamis, Esq.
          SHAMIS GENTILE
          14 NE 1st Ave, Suite 705
          Miami, FL 33132
          Phone: 305.479.2299
          Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com

ALEX ADAMS: Must File Class Cert Response by August 29
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ABBY DAVIDS, MD; K.P.;
N.R.; F.F.; J.A.O.G.; and JOHN DOE, v. ALEX ADAMS, in his official
capacity as Director of the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare;
MIREN UNSWORTH, in her official capacity as the Deputy Director of
IDHW in charge of Health & Human Services; ELKE SHAW-TULLOCH, in
her official capacity as the administrator of IDHW's Division of
Public Health; ANGIE BAILEY, as Director of the Idaho Bureau of
Rural Health & Primary Care; RAÚL LABRADOR, in his official
capacity as the Attorney General of Idaho, Case No.
1:25-cv-00334-AKB (D. Idaho), the Hon. Judge Amanda Brailsford
entered an order regarding Defendants' unopposed motion for
extension of time.

The Court grants the request and will allow the Defendants to file
their responses to the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification
and motion to proceed in pseudonym on or before Aug. 29, 2025.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ih1dDk at no extra
charge.[CC]



ALO LLC: Herrera Sues Over Disability Discrimination
----------------------------------------------------
Oscar Herrera, on behalf of others similarly situated v. ALO, LLC,
a Florida limited liability company, Case No. 1:25-cv-23171-XXXX
(S.D. Fla., July 16, 2025), is brought for declaratory and
injunctive relief, attorney's fees, costs, and litigation expenses
for unlawful disability discrimination in violation of Title III of
the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA").

The Defendant owns, controls, maintains, and/or operates an adjunct
website, https://www.aloyoga.com (the "Website"). One of the
functions of the Website is to provide the public information on
the locations of Defendant's physical stores. Defendant also sells
to the public its merchandise through the Website, which acts as a
critical point of sale for Defendant's merchandise that is also
available for purchase in, from, and through Defendant's physical
stores. In addition, the Website allows users to arrange in-store
pickup of Defendant's merchandise, purchase physical and electronic
gift cards for use online and in the physical stores, check
in-store availability of Defendant's merchandise, and sign up for a
newsletter/rewards account to receive exclusive offers, benefits,
invitations, and discounts for use online and in the physical
stores.

The Plaintiff utilizes available screen reader software that allows
individuals who are blind and visually disabled to communicate with
company websites. However, Defendant's Website contains access
barriers that prevent free and full use by blind and visually
disabled individuals using keyboards and available screen reader
software. These access barriers, one or more of which were
experienced by Plaintiff, are severe and pervasive and, as
confirmed by Plaintiff's expert, include the following (with
reference to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines ("WCAG"),
says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is and has been a blind and visually disabled person
who has been medically diagnosed with complete blindness as a
result of trauma to both eyes.

The Defendant owns, operates, and/or controls a chain of retail
stores nationwide selling men and women's clothing, shoes, and
accessories.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Rodenck V. Hannah, Esq.
          RODERICK V. HANNAH, ESQ., P.A.
          4800 N. Hiatus Road
          Sunrise, FL 33351
          Phone: 954/362-3800
          Facsimile: 954/362-3779
          Email: rhannah@rhannahlaw.com

               - and -

          Pelayo Duran, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF PELAYO
          6355 NW. 36th Street, Suite 307
          Virginia Gardens, FL 33166
          Phone: 305/266-9780
          Facsimile: 305/269-8311
          Email: duranandassociates@gmail.com

ALTO NEUROSCIENCE: Feldman Sues Over Exchange Act Violation
-----------------------------------------------------------
Nathan Feldman, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. ALTO NEUROSCIENCE, INC., AMIT ETKIN, NICHOLAS SMITH, PO
YU CHEN, CHRISTOPHER NIXON COX, CHRIS DIMITROPOULOS, ANDREW
DREYFUS, MICHAEL LIANG, AARON N.D. WEAVER, and GWILL YORK, Case No.
3:25-cv-06105 (N.D. Cal., July 21, 2025), is brought on behalf of a
class consisting of all persons and entities other than Defendants
that purchased or otherwise acquired: Alto common stock pursuant
and/or traceable to the Offering Documents issued in connection
with the Company's initial public offering conducted on or about
February 2, 2024 (the "IPO" or "Offering"); and/or Alto securities
between February 2, 2024 and October 22, 2024, both dates inclusive
(the "Class Period"). Plaintiff pursues claims against the
Defendants under the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Securities Act")
and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act").

On January 12, 2024, Alto filed a registration statement on Form
S-1 with the SEC in connection with the IPO, which, after several
amendments, was declared effective by the SEC on February 1, 2024
(the "Registration Statement"). On February 2, 2024, pursuant to
the Registration Statement, Alto's common stock began publicly
trading on the New York Stock Exchange ("NYSE") under the ticker
symbol "ANRO." On February 5, 2024, Alto filed a prospectus on Form
424B4 with the SEC in connection with the IPO, which incorporated
and formed part of the Registration Statement (the "Prospectus"
and, collectively with the Registration Statement, the "Offering
Documents").

On October 22, 2024, Alto issued a press release announcing topline
results from the Phase 2b trial evaluating ALTO-100 as a treatment
for MDD. That press release stated, in relevant part, that
"ALTO-100 in patients with [MDD] did not meet its primary endpoint,
assessed by a change from baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression
Rating Scale (MADRS), compared to placebo." On this news, Alto's
stock price fell $10.17 per share, or 69.99%, to close at $4.36 per
share on October 23, 2024.

Analysts were quick to comment on the Company's announcement. For
example, on October 22, 2024, Jeffries cut its price target for
Alto to $17 from $33 and stated that ALTO-100's data raises
questions around the Company's overall biomarker approach to CNS
disorders and psychiatry. As of the time this Complaint was filed,
Alto's common stock continues to trade below the $16.00 per share
Offering price, damaging investors. As a result of Defendants'
wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the
market value of Alto's securities, Plaintiff and other Class
members have suffered significant losses and damages, says the
complaint.

The Plaintiff acquired Alto common stock pursuant and/or traceable
to the Offering Documents issued in connection with the IPO, and/or
purchased or otherwise acquired Alto securities at artificially
inflated prices during the Class Period.

Alto operates as a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company in the
U.S.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jennifer Pafiti, Esq.
          POMERANTZ LLP
          1100 Glendon Avenue, 15th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90024
          Phone: 310-405-7190
          Email: jpafiti@pomlaw.com

AMAZON INC: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to April 9, 2026
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re Amazon Prime Video Litigation, Case
No. 2:22-cv-00401-RSM (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Ricardo Martinez
entered an order extend discovery and class- certification briefing
schedule as follows:

              Event               Current Date       Proposed Date


  Close of Fact Discovery:       July 24, 2025       Oct. 24, 2025

  Close of Expert Discovery:     Oct. 13, 2025       Jan. 13, 2026

  Close of Rebuttal Expert       Nov. 25, 2025       Feb. 25, 2026

  Discovery:

  Deadline for Motion for        Jan. 9, 2026        Apr. 9, 2026
  Class Certification:

  Deadline for Amazon's          Feb. 24, 2026       May 26, 2026
  Opposition to Class
  Certification Motion:

  Deadline for Plaintiffs'       March 16, 2026      June 16, 2026
  Reply Brief in Support of
  Motion for Class
  Certification:

Amazon is an American multinational technology company, engaged in
e-commerce, cloud computing, online advertising, digital streaming,
and artificial intelligence.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=8TFBiW at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Carlos F. Ramirez, Esq.
          Michael Robert Reese, Esq.
          George V. Granade, II, Esq.
          REESE LLP
          100 West 93rd Street, Suite 16th Floor
          New York, NY 10025
          Telephone: (212) 643‐0500
          E-mail: cramirez@reesellp.com
                  mreese@reesellp.com
                  ggranade@reesellp.com

                - and -

          Spencer Sheehan, Esq.
          SHEEHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          505 Northern Blvd., Suite 311
          Great Neck, NY 11021
          Telephone: (516) 303‐0552
          E-mail: spencer@spencersheehan.com

                - and -

          Kim D. Stephens, Esq.
          Rebecca L. Solomon, Esq.
          TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
          1200 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1700
          Seattle, WA 98101
          Telephone: (206) 682‐5600
          E-mail: kstephens@tousley.com
                  rsolomon@tousley.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Charles C. Sipos, Esq.
          Mallory Gitt Webster, Esq.
          Thomas J. Tobin, Esq.
          PERKINS COIE LLP
          1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
          Seattle, WA 98101-3099
          Telephone: (206) 359-8000
          Facsimile: (206) 359-9000
          E-mail: CSipos@perkinscoie.com
                  MWebster@perkinscoie.com
                  TTobin@perkinscoie.com

ANCESTRY.COM: Gehringer Suit Transferred to N.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Susan Gehringer, Danielle Arnold, Xander
Luciano, and all others similarly situated v. Ancestry.com
Operations, Inc., a Virginia Corporation; Ancestry.com, Inc., a
Delaware Corporation; Ancestry.com LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company; Case No. 8:24-cv-02810 was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on July
16, 2025.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-05974-JCS to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Personal Property.

Ancestry.com Operations Inc. -- https://www.ancestry.com/ -- is the
company behind the popular family history and genealogy platform,
Ancestry.com.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Andrew Gerald Gunem, Esq.
          Raina C. Borrelli, Esq.
          STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC
          980 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610
          Chicago, IL 60611
          Phone: (872) 263-1100
          Fax: (872) 263-1109
          Email: agunem@straussborrelli.com
                 raina@straussborrelli.com

               - and -

          Evan Chase Ghaffari, Esq.
          MORGAN AND MORGAN LLP
          633 West 5th Street, Suite 2200
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Phone: (213) 787-8589
          Fax: (213) 418-3982
          Email: eghaffari@forthepeople.com

               - and -

          Marie Noel Appel, Esq.
          Michael F. Ram, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN, COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP
          711 Van Ness Avenue
          San Francisco, CA 94102
          Phone: (415) 358-7155
          Fax: (415) 358-2037
          Email: mappel@forthepeople.com
                 MRam@forthepeople.com

               - and -

          Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
          TERRELL MARSHALL LAW GROUP PLLC
          936 N 34th Street, Suite 300
          Seattle, WA 98103-8869
          Phone: (206) 816-6603
          Email: sam@turkestrauss.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Cristina Aide Henriquez, Esq.
          John Wall Baumann, Esq.
          Kiel Brunetti Ireland, Esq.
          Shon Morgan, Esq.
          QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN LLP
          865 S. Figueroa Street, 10th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90017
          Phone: (213) 443-3000
          Fax: (213) 443-3100
          Email: cristinahenriquez@quinnemanuel.com
                 jackbaumann@quinnemanuel.com
                 kielireland@quinnemanuel.com
                 shonmorgan@quinnemanuel.com

ANNE ARUNDEL DERMATOLOGY: Farris Sues Over Failure to Properly PII
------------------------------------------------------------------
Brice Farris and Shemika Jones, individually and on behalf of those
similarly situated v. ANNE ARUNDEL DERMATOLOGY, P.A., Case No.
1:25-cv-02369 (D. Md., July 21, 2025), is brought arising out of
Defendant AAD's failures to properly secure, safeguard, encrypt,
and/or timely and adequately destroy Plaintiffs' and Class Members'
sensitive personal identifiable information that it had acquired
and stored for its business purposes.

According to a Data Breach Notification provided to the Vermont
Attorney General's Office, Defendant announced that it had
experienced a hacking incident. The Defendant "Notice of Security
Incident" states that a data breach occurred on its network between
February 14, 2025 and May 13, 2025 (the "Data Breach")

Due to Defendant's data security failures which resulted in the
Data Breach, cybercriminals were able to target Defendant's
computer systems and exfiltrate highly sensitive and personally
identifiable information ("PII") and protected health information
("PHI") (collectively, the "Private Information") belonging to
Plaintiffs and Class Members. As a result of this Data Breach,
Plaintiffs' and Class members' Private Information of remains in
the hands of those cybercriminals.

The Data Breach was a direct result of Defendant's failure to
implement adequate and reasonable cybersecurity procedures and
protocols necessary to protect Plaintiffs' and Class Members'
Private Information with which it was entrusted for either
treatment or employment or both, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff Farris received notice of the Data Breach dated July
11, 2025.

The Defendant is a provider of medical, pediatric, surgical, and
aesthetic dermatology services specializing in general, surgical,
and cosmetic dermatology.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Sonjay Singh, Esq.
          Tyler J. Bean, Esq.
          SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP
          745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
          New York, New York 10151
          Phone: (212) 532-1091
          Email: ssingh@sirillp.com
                 tbean@sirillp.com

               - and -

          Liberato P. Verderame, Esq.
          Marc H. Edelson, Esq.
          EDELSON LECHTZIN LLP
          411 S. State Street, Suite N300
          Newtown, PA 18940
          Phone: (215) 867-2399
          Email: medelson@edelson-law.com
                 lverderame@edelson-law.com

ANNE ARUNDEL DERMATOLOGY: Hall Files Suit in D. Maryland
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Anne Arundel
Dermatology, P.A. The case is styled as Crystal Hall, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Anne Arundel
Dermatology, P.A., Case No. 1:25-cv-02322-GLR (D. Md., July 17,
2025).

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Tort/Non-Motor
Vehicle.

Anne Arundel Dermatology -- https://aadermatology.com/ -- is
committed to providing exceptional dermatologic care throughout the
Mid-Atlantic and Southeastern regions.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Zachary Edmund Howerton, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, LLC
          223 Duke of Gloucester Street
          Annapolis, MD 21401
          Phone: (410) 269-6620
          Fax: (410) 269-1235
          Email: zhowerton@milberg.com

ANNE ARUNDEL DERMATOLOGY: Wilson Files Suit in D. Maryland
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Anne Arundel
Dermatology, P.A. The case is styled as Diana Wilson, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Anne Arundel
Dermatology, P.A., Case No. 1:25-cv-02324-GLR (D. Md., July 17,
2025).

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Tort/Non-Motor
Vehicle.

Anne Arundel Dermatology -- https://aadermatology.com/ -- is
committed to providing exceptional dermatologic care throughout the
Mid-Atlantic and Southeastern regions.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Zachary Edmund Howerton, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, LLC
          223 Duke of Gloucester Street
          Annapolis, MD 21401
          Phone: (410) 269-6620
          Fax: (410) 269-1235
          Email: zhowerton@milberg.com

ANNE ARUNDEL: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Straw Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL STRAW, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ANNE ARUNDEL DERMATOLOGY, P.A., Defendant,
Case No. 1:25-cv-02297-JRR (D. Md., July 15, 2025) is a class
action arising out of the recent data security incident and data
breach that was perpetrated against Defendant, which held in its
possession certain personally identifiable information and
protected health information of Plaintiff and other current and
former patients of Defendant, the putative class members.

The Defendant's public notice of the Data Breach states that they
determined their network had been accessed by an unknown actor
between February 14, 2025, and May 13, 2025. The Data Breach
resulted from Defendant's failure to implement adequate and
reasonable cyber-security procedures and protocols necessary to
protect individuals' Private Information with which they were
entrusted for treatment.

The Plaintiff brings this class action lawsuit on behalf of those
similarly situated to address Defendant's inadequate safeguarding
of Class Members' Private Information that they collected and
maintained, and for failing to provide timely and adequate notice
to Plaintiff and other Class Members that their information was
subjected to unauthorized access by an unknown third party and
precisely what specific type of information was accessed.

Through this Complaint, the Plaintiff seeks to remedy these harms
on behalf of himself and all similarly situated individuals whose
Private Information was accessed during the Data Breach.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff sues Defendant seeking redress for its
unlawful conduct, and asserting claims for: (i) negligence, (ii)
breach of implied contract, (iii) negligence per se, (iv) breach of
fiduciary duty; and (v) unjust enrichment.

Anne Arundel Dermatology, P.A., is a Maryland professional
association with its principal place of business in Linthicum
Heights, Maryland.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Duane O. King, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICES OF DUANE O. KING
          803 W. Broad Street, Suite 210
          Falls Church, VA 22046
          Telephone: (202) 331-1963
          Facsimile: (202) 449-8365
          E-mail: dking@dkinglaw.com

               - and -

          Leigh S. Montgomery, Esq.
          EKSM, LLP
          4200 Montrose Blvd., Suite 200
          Houston, TX 77006
          Telephone: (888) 350-3931
          Facsimile: (888) 276-3455
          E-mail: lmontgomery@eksm.com

ANNE ARUNDEL: Martin Sues Over Failure to Secure Personal Info
--------------------------------------------------------------
RAVEN MARTIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v.  ANNE ARUNDEL DERMATOLOGY, P.A., Defendant,
Case No. 1:25-cv-02288-JRR (D. Md., July 15, 2025) is a class
action arising out of Defendant's failure to properly secure,
safeguard, encrypt, and/or timely and adequately destroy
Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive personal identifiable
information that it had acquired and stored for its business
purposes.

The Defendant's data security failures allowed a targeted
cyberattack in February 2025 to compromise its network that
contained personally identifiable information and protected health
information of Plaintiffs and other individuals.

According to the complaint, this failure to secure and monitor its
network resulted in a February 2025 data breach of highly sensitive
documents and information stored on the computer network of AAD, an
organization that provides medical treatment and/or employment to
individuals, including Plaintiff and Class Members. The data breach
was a direct result of Defendant's failure to implement adequate
and reasonable cyber-security procedures and protocols necessary to
protect individuals' Private Information with which it was
entrusted for either treatment or employment or both.

Through this Complaint, the Plaintiff seeks to remedy these harms
on behalf of themselves and all similarly situated individuals
whose Private Information was accessed during the data breach.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff brings this action against Defendant
seeking redress for its unlawful conduct, and asserting claims for:
(i) negligence, (ii) negligence per se, (iii) breach of implied
contract, (iv) breach of fiduciary duty; and (v) unjust enrichment,
and (vi) declaratory relief.

Plaintiff Martin is and at all times mentioned herein was an
individual citizen of the State of Maryland, residing in the city
of Glen Burnie, and was a patient of AAD.

Anne Arundel Dermatology, P.A. offers general, surgical, and
cosmetic dermatology services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gary E. Mason, Esq.
          Danielle L. Perry, Esq.
          Ra O. Amen, Esq.
          MASON LLP
          5335 Wisconsin Avenue, NW, Suite 640
          Washington, DC 20015
          Telephone: (202) 429-2290
          E-mail: gmason@masonllp.com  
                  dperry@masonllp.com  
                  ramen@masonllp.com

APPLE INC: Turner Class Certification Bid Tossed
------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ALASDAIR TURNER, v. APPLE,
INC., Case No. 5:20-cv-07495-EJD (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Edward
Davila entered an order:

-- denying class certification; and

-- denying as moot motions to exclude.

The Court also entered an order denying as moot Apple's motion for
leave to file a sur-reply.

Turner asks for another chance to attempt class certification. But
the issues preventing class certification—the individual
character of permission and Turner's lack of standing to seek
injunctive relief—are fundamental and uncurable.

The Court will not entertain any future class certification
motions. The parties shall meet and confer and present the Court
with a proposed schedule for resolving the remaining individual
claims in this action within twenty-one (21) days of this Order.

The Court dismissed Turner's fraud and misrepresentation claims
from his first amended complaint. And although the Court granted
leave to amend, Turner did not re-plead any fraud claims when he
filed his second amended complaint. For these reasons, the Court
finds that predominance has not been satisfied.

Turner cannot certify an injunctive (b)(2) class because he, as the
proposed class representative, lacks Article III standing to seek
injunctive relief.

According to Turner, certain versions of iOS 13 contain code that
consumes cellular data without permission. Specifically, iPhones
contain settings that allow users to toggle the usage of cellular
data on or off for specific apps.

Based on these allegations, Turner raised claims for trespass to
chattels, violations of the California Computer Data Access and
Fraud Act (CDAFA) and the unlawful and unfair prongs of the Unfair
Competition Law (UCL). Turner now moves to certify the following
class covering each of those claims:

    "All purchasers, owners, users, or lessees of any Apple
    iPhones in the United States who used a limited cellular data
    plan with that iPhone while any version of iOS 13 was
    installed."

Apple designs, manufactures, and sells iPhones.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=QP9gBu at no extra
charge.[CC]
 


ARBUCKLE FARMS: Pettigrew Files Suit in Okla. Dist. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Arbuckle Farms LLC,
et al. The case is styled as J. Kris Pettigrew, an owner of
Arbuckle Farms LLC on behalf of himself and all other owners of the
limited liability company similarly situated, and Thomas William
Young, individually v. Arbuckle Farms LLC and John Ashton
Barringer, Case No. CV-2025-1767 (Okla. Dist. Ct., Oklahoma Cty.,
July 18, 2025).

The case type is stated as "Other - Civil No Damages."

Arbuckle Farms is a commercial cannabis grower in Oklahoma
City.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Gary David Quinnett, Esq.
          10005 North May Ave., Suite 120
          Oklahoma City, OK 73120

ARMORED GROUP SERVICES: Polanco Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Armored Group
Services, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Valeriano Polanco,
individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated
v. Armored Group Services, Inc., Americorp International Group
Inc., Case No. 25STCV20999 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., July
15, 2025).

The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case
(General Jurisdiction)."

Armored Group Services, Inc. -- https://www.armoredcars.com/ --
manufacture high quality armored cars, trucks & SWAT vehicles.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Vache Thomassian, Esq.
          KJT LAW GROUP, LLP
          230 N. Maryland Ave., Ste. 306
          Glendale, CA 91206-4281
          Phone: 818-507-8525
          Fax: 818-507-8588
          Email: vache@kjtlawgroup.com

BAKER COUNTY, OR: Class Settlement in Baker Suit Gets Initial Nod
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BAKER v. Baker County,
Case No. 2:24-cv-01503 (D. Or.), the Hon. Judge Karin J. Immergut
entered an order:

-- preliminarily approving settlement,

-- conditionally certifying class for settlement purposes,

-- approving form and manner of class notice, and

-- setting date for final approval hearing

Solely for the purpose of settlement in accordance with the
Settlement Agreement, and pursuant to Rule 23(a) and (b)(3),
this Court conditionally certifies the following class (the
"Settlement Class"):

     "All Persons and entities, and their heirs, successors and
     assignees, who owned, or had an ownership interest in, or a
     valid lien on real property that Defendant Multnomah County
     obtained through a foreclosure action to satisfy unpaid real
     estate taxes or other County or local government taxes and
     fees and associated fees and penalties, which the County sold

     for an amount in excess of the unpaid taxes, fees and other
     costs associated with that property, and for which the
     statutory redemption period expired during the Class Period."

     Consistent with the Settlement Agreement, the following are
     excluded from the Settlement Class: (i) All governmental
     units and entities of any type whatsoever including, but not
     limited to, U.S. Department of Treasury, the Internal Revenue

     Service, the State of Oregon, and Multnomah County, albeit
     this provision does not apply to estate administrators who
     pursuing claims on behalf of a deceased Eligible Claimant's
     estate; (ii) All former holders of an interest in an Eligible

     Property as to which any Eligible Claimant has submitted a
     request to be excluded from the Class under the procedures
     set forth in the Class Notice that is accepted by the Court
     and which is not timely revoked; (iii) All former holders of
     an interest in an Eligible Property by reason of a lien to
     secure payment of a debt or judgment which debt or judgment
     has since been satisfied or released; and (iv) All Potential
     Claimants who have already resolved their claim for Surplus
     Proceeds against Multnomah County through a settlement
     agreement, release or final judicial judgment as to which
     there is no appeal pending and/or the time to appeal has
     expired.

The Court preliminarily appoints Kyle Queahpama as heir of the
Estate of Roberta Queahpama as the class representative for the
Settlement Class.

Pursuant to Rule 23(g), the Court appoints Lead Counsel for the
Settlement Class (Fink Bressack; Kohn, Swift & Graf, P.C.; and
Preti, Flaherty, Beliveau & Pachios, Chartered, LLP) and Liaison
Counsel for the Settlement Class (Sugerman
Dahab).

A Final Approval Hearing shall be held before the undersigned at
10:00 a.m. on Nov. 10, 2025.

Baker is one of the 36 counties in the U.S. state of Oregon.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=wvH9zq at no extra
charge.[CC]

BAREBONES VENTURES: Ross Sues Over Mislabeled Bone Broth Products
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JANET ROSS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BAREBONES VENTURES, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
2:25-cv-03929-LGD (E.D.N.Y., July 15, 2025) is a putative class
action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of Bare Bones Bone Broth
products against Defendant for manufacturing, marketing, selling,
and distributing mislabeled bone broth products.

According to the complaint, the marketing and advertising of the
Bone Broth Product contains misleading claims relating to the net
weight of the Product, the serving size of the Product, and the
amount of protein in the Product. By misrepresenting its serving
size on the packaging, the Defendant misleads customers, including
Plaintiff, into believing its Bone Broth Product contains more
protein per standard serving than other bone broth products. The
Defendant advertises the protein content in the Bone Broth Product
as 20 grams on the front and back of the packaging, which
substantially skews the amount of protein in the Product to look
higher due to the inflated serving size, says the suit.

The Plaintiff and Class and Subclass Members thus suffered monetary
damages as a result of Defendant's deceptive and false
representations and omissions, asserts the complaint.

In May 2025, Ms. Ross purchased one container of Bare Bones'
Organic Chicken Bone Broth manufactured by Defendant from Stop &
Shop.

Barebones Ventures, LLC manufactures, markets, sells, and
distributes the Bone Broth Product throughout the United States and
the State of New York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph I. Marchese, Esq.
          Julian C. Diamond, Esq.
          Spencer N. Migotsky, 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: jmarchese@bursor.com
                  jdiamond@bursor.com
                  smigotsky@bursor.com

BATTLE CREEK: Parker Suit Seeks FLSA Class Certification
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Robert Parker, et al., On
behalf of himself and those similarly situated, v. Battle Creek
Pizza, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-00277-PLM-RSK (W.D. Mich.),
the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order affirming that
Plaintiffs are similarly situated as that term is defined by the
Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and that this case will proceed to
judgment as a collective action.

On March 27, 2020, Plaintiff Robert Parker filed this case. The
Complaint generally asserts wage and hour violations pursuant to
the FLSA and Michigan law arising from the Defendants' vehicle
under-reimbursement practices.

Mr. Parker alleged that the Defendants, a Hungry Howie's Pizza
franchisee, systematically underpaid their delivery drivers by (1)
paying them at or close to minimum wage while making deliveries,
(2) requiring them to provide cars to use at work, and (3) not
sufficiently reimbursing them for the vehicle expenses they incur
for the benefit of the company.

The Plaintiff alleged a nationwide FLSA collective action and
asserted Michigan state statutory and common law claims on behalf
of Defendants’ drivers who worked in Michigan.

Battle operates 11 Hungry Howie's pizza delivery stores in Indiana
and Michigan.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 15, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=6Fa5LJ at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Bradley K. Glazier, Esq.
          CUNNINGHAM DALMAN PC
          940 Monroe Ave NW, Suite 253
          Grand Rapids, MI 49422
          Telephone: (616) 392.1821
          E-mail: brad@cunninghamdalman.com

                - and -

          Andrew Biller, Esq.
          Andrew Kimble, Esq.
          Laura E. Farmwald, Esq.
          Emily Hubbard, Esq.
          BILLER & KIMBLE, LLC
          8044 Montgomery Road, Suite 515
          Cincinnati, OH 45236
          Telephone: (513) 202-0710
          Facsimile: (614) 340-4620
          E-mail: abiller@billerkimble.com
                  akimble@billerkimble.com
                  lfarmwald@billerkimble.com
                  ehubbard@billerkimble.com

BBBB BONDING: Directed to Respond to All Discovery Requests
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL BENTON, on behalf
of himself and all persons similarly situated, v. BBBB BONDING
CORPORATION, CLIFFORD JEFFREY STANLEY, ROBERT HILL-VENN, and DOES 1
through 50, inclusive, Case No. 2:24-cv-01294-DC-AC (E.D. Cal.),
the Hon. Judge Allison Claire entered an order granting the
Plaintiff's motion to compel.

The Defendants are ordered to fully respond to all discovery
requests at issue within 14 days of this order.

The Plaintiff has made no argument that the documents do, in fact,
exist. If defendants completed an appropriate search and found no
responsive documents, the court cannot compel further production.

However, with respect to the defendants' offer to produce a 25%
sampling in response to the requests, the court is unpersuaded by
defendants’ logic of limitation.

The Plaintiff argues that there are likely fewer than 50 putative
class members, and that there are potentially different types of
employees within the putative class, rendering a 25% sampling
insufficient. The Defendants do not respond to this point or
provide any justification for their 25% sampling proposal.

Accordingly, the court is unpersuaded that any such limitation is
necessary or appropriate.

The putative wage and hour class action was removed to federal
court from San Joaquin County Superior Court on May 3, 2024.

Plaintiff Michael Benton brings a putative class action, with the
proposed class defined as

    "All current and former employees of the Defendant who
    worked for the Defendant as a bail agent in the State of
    California at the time commencing four years preceding the
    filling of the Plaintiff's Complaint up until the time that
    notice of the certified class action is provided to the
    Class."

The Plaintiff brings multiple causes of action, including multiple
alleged violations of California law and the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

On May 14, 2025, the undersigned approved the parties' stipulated
protective order. Fact discovery in this case closes on April 10,
2026; discovery is not bifurcated and is proceeding in the ordinary
course. The class certification motion filling deadline is November
14, 2025. Id. The motion to compel at bar was filed on June 9,
2025, and became ripe on July 9, 2025.

BBBB specializes in providing a range of bonding services.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=qrqit7 at no extra
charge.[CC]

BELZBERG & CO: Faces Marks Suit for Breach of Fiduciary Duty
------------------------------------------------------------
STEVEN MARKS, derivatively on behalf of TAKE-TWO INTERACTIVE
SOFTWARE, INC., and individually on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. STRAUSS ZELNICK, KARL
SLATOFF MICHAEL SHERESKY, DANIEL EMERSON, JASON VAN ITALLIE,
BELZBERG & CO., L.P., ZELNICK MEDIA CAPITAL, and DOES 1-50,
Defendants, and TAKE-TWO INTERACTIVE SOFTWARE, INC., Nominal
Defendant, Case No. 2025-0816 (Del. Ch., July 15, 2025) is a
verified stockholder derivative and class action complaint against
the Defendants for breach of fiduciary duty, corporate waste,
unjust enrichment, and related equitable relief.

The complaint seeks to protect Plaintiff and other shareholders and
restore lawful governance at Take-Two by addressing systemic
misconduct, material nondisclosures, and undisclosed conflicts of
interest involving Chairman Strauss Zelnick, his affiliates, and
outside counsel.

Filed pro se, this action follows two years of forensic accounting
and corporate governance research. Among the most urgent
discoveries is that Plaintiff, who sold the business he founded to
Belzberg & Co. in a joint venture backed by Zelnick and Sheresky,
was forced to use his personal savings to pay employees at Kairos
Tooling after Belzberg, under the direction of Zelnick and his
advisors, intentionally bounced employee paychecks in an attempt to
apply pressure and seize operational control. This conduct took
place against the backdrop of a known federal investigation into
drug trafficking and money laundering at affiliated entities,
confirmed through internal memos and subpoenas.

Despite being warned, Take-Two's board and counsel took no action.
This complaint seeks reforms that protect investors, enforce
transparency, and hold those responsible accountable, says the
suit.

Belzberg & Co., L.P. is a private investment firm registered with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.[BN]

The Plaintiff, of 13000 Arctic Cir., Los Angeles, California,
appears pro se.

BETSEY JOHNSON: Dalton Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
-----------------------------------------------------------
Julie Dalton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Betsey Johnson, LLC, Case No. 0:25-cv-02914 (D. Minn.,
July 18, 2025), is brought arising because Defendant's Website
(www.betseyjohnson.com) (the "Website" or "Defendant's Website") 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 (the
"ADA") and its implementing regulations. In addition to her claim
under the ADA, Plaintiff also asserts a companion cause of action
under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA).

The Defendant owns, operates, and/or controls its Website and is
responsible for the policies, practices, and procedures concerning
the Website's development and maintenance. As a consequence of her
experience visiting Defendant's Website, including in the past
year, and from an investigation performed on her behalf, Plaintiff
found Defendant's Website has a number of digital barriers that
deny screen reader users like Plaintiff full and equal access to
important Website content--content Defendant makes available to its
sighted Website users.

Still, Plaintiff would like to, intends to, and will attempt to
access Defendant's Website in the future to browse, research, or
shop online and purchase the products and services that Defendant
offers. The Defendant's policies regarding the maintenance and
operation of its Website fail to ensure its Website is fully
accessible to, and independently usable by, individuals with
vision-related disabilities. The Plaintiff and the putative class
have been, and in the absence of injunctive relief will continue to
be, injured, and discriminated against by Defendant's failure to
provide its online Website content and services in a manner that is
compatible with screen reader technology, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is and has been legally blind and is therefore
disabled under the ADA.

The Defendant offers clothing and accessories for sale including,
but not limited to, tops, bottoms, dresses, jumpsuits, shoes,
handbags, wallets 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
          Phone: (763) 515-6110
          Email: pat@throndsetlaw.com
                 chad@throndsetlaw.com
                 jason@throndsetlaw.com

BETTERHELP INC: Parties Seeks to Modify Briefing Sched
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as C.M., on behalf of herself
and all others similarly situated, v. BETTERHELP, INC., Case No.
3:23-cv-01033-RS (N.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an
order modifying the time for briefing and argument on the Motion as
follows, subject to the approval of the Court:

-- Staying briefing on the pending Motion; and

-- Requiring submission to the Court, no later than Aug. 7, 2025,

    either (i) a stipulation and proposed order regarding future
    briefing and hearing schedules, or in the unanticipated event
    the parties are unable to reach an agreement, (ii) an
    administrative motion addressing a modified briefing and
    hearing schedule.

On June 25, 2025, the Court granted the Parties' stipulated request
to extend the briefing schedule making responses to the Plaintiffs'
motion due by July 21, 2025; replies due by Sept. 2, 2025; and the
hearing set for Oct. 2, 2025.

BetterHelp is a mental health platform that provides direct online
counseling and therapy services via web or phone text
communication.

A copy of the Parties' motion dated July 18, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=qM35QW at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gary. M. Klinger, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
          PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
          227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Telephone: (866) 252-0878
          E-mail: gklinger@milberg.com
                  gabramson@milberg.com
                  ahoneycutt@milberg.com
                  rnelson@milberg.com

                - and -

          Christina Tusan, Esq.
          HAMMONDLAW, P.C.
          1201 Pacific Ave, Suite 600
          Tacoma, WA 98402
          Telephone: (310) 601-6766
          Facsimile: (310) 295-2385
          E-mail: ctusan@hammondlawpc.com

                - and -

          Maureen M. Brady, Esq.
          MCSHANE & BRADY
          4006 Central Street
          Kansas City, MO 64111
          Telephone: (816) 888-8010
          E-mail: mbrady@mcshanebradylaw.com

                - and -

          Alan M. Mansfield, Esq.
          WHATLEY KALLAS LLP
          1 Sansome Street, 35th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (619) 308-5034
          Facsimile: (888) 341-5048
          E-mail: amansfield@whatleykallas.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Livia M. Kiser, Esq.
          Jeffrey Hammer, Esq.
          Craig H. Bessenger, Esq.
          James A. Unger, Esq.
          KING & SPALDING LLP
          633 West Fifth Street, Suite 1600
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 443-4355
          Facsimile: (213) 443-4310
          E-mail: lkiser@kslaw.com
                  jhammer@kslaw.com
                  cbessenger@kslaw.com
                  junger@kslaw.com

BONANZA WORLDWIDE: Hanson Sues Over Privacy Rights Violation
------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Hanson, on behalf of himself and all similarly situated
persons v. BONANZA WORLDWIDE LLC, a Florida limited liability
company, Case No. 5:25-cv-01840 (C.D. Cal., July 21, 2025), is
brought under the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) to
prevent the Defendant from further violating the privacy rights of
California residents.

A pixel tracker, also known as a web beacon, is a tracking
mechanism embedded in a website that monitors user interactions. It
typically appears as a small, transparent 1x1 image or a
lightweight JavaScript snippet that activates when a webpage is
loaded or a user performs a tracked action. When triggered, the
pixel transmits data from the user's browser to a third-party
server. This data typically includes page views, session duration,
referrer URLs, IP address, browser and device details, and other
interaction metadata. When users visit the Website, Defendant
causes tracking technologies to be installed, executed, embedded,
or injected in visitors' browsers. These include, but are not
limited to, the following: Google Ads / DoubleClick Tracker;
Facebook Pixel Tracker; Bing/Microsoft Ads Tracker.

The Plaintiff and the Class Members did not consent to the
installation, execution, embedding, or injection of the Trackers on
their devices and did not expect their behavioral data to be
disclosed or monetized in this way. By installing and activating
the Trackers without obtaining user consent or a valid court order,
Defendant violated California Penal Code Section 638.51, which
prohibits the use of pen registers and trap and trace devices under
these circumstances, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was in California when he visited the Website.

The Defendant owns and operate a website, www.bonanza.com.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Reuben D. Nathan, Esq.
          NATHAN & ASSOCIATES, APC
          2901 W. Coast Hwy., Suite 200
          Newport Beach, CA 92663
          Phone: (949) 270-2798
          Email: rnathan@nathanlawpractice.com

               - and -

          Ross Cornell, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF ROSS CORNELL, APC
          40729 Village Dr., Suite 8 - 1989
          Big Bear Lake, CA 92315
          Phone: (562) 612-1708
          Email: rc@rosscornelllaw.com

BUSPATROL AMERICA: Olmea Suit Seeks to Certify Two Classes
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JORGE JUAN RIZO OLMEA, et
al., v. BUSPATROL AMERICA, LLC; MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; and THE
SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, Case No.
1:25-cv-21036-DPG (S.D. Fla.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to
enter an order:

  (a) Certifying the following classes pursuant to Rules 23(a),
      23(b)(2), and 23(b)(3):

      Payment Class:

      "All individuals who received an NOV issued by or through
      BusPatrol under the Bus Camera Program between May 8, 2024,
      and April 17, 2025, for which a civil penalty was demanded,
      and who paid the penalty"; and

      Non-Payment Class:

      "All individuals who received an NOV under the Bus Camera
      Program between May 8, 2024, and April 17, 2025, who
      submitted a request to contest liability and did not pay the

      demanded civil penalty";

  (b) compelling the Defendant BusPatrol to produce a complete and

      accurate list of all recipients of NOVs under the Camera
      Program from its inception through April 17, 2025;

  (c) permitting the Plaintiffs to circulate court-approved class
      action notice(s) to all putative class members;

  (d) appointing Jorge Juan Rizo Olmea, Maria Julia Hernandez de
      la Riva, Susana Vargas, Sonia Bench, Alexis Janet Pino,
      Claudio Humberto Gutierrez, Charlinken Elsa Bendana, Abraham

      Antonio Gavidia, Alexandra Martinez, Jesus Cabrera, and Kurt

      Emil Scherrer as Class Representatives; and

  (e) appointing the Plaintiffs' counsel, Gino Moreno and Arlenys
      Perdomo of Moreno Perdomo, PLLC, and Robert Strongarone of
      Robert Strongarone, P.A., as Class Counsel pursuant to Rule
      23(g).

The action challenges an enforcement program jointly executed by
BusPatrol, the School Board, and the County. The mechanics were
simple: BusPatrol issued boilerplate Notices of Violation demanding
$225.00 from registered vehicle owners based on automated camera
footage. No hearing officers were appointed. No procedures existed
or were implemented to evaluate innocence or error.

Instead, recipients were funneled into a one-directional payment
portal—AlertBus.com—where the only real "option" was to pay the
demanded fine.

BusPatrol is a safety technology company.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 17, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=9CCKUC at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Arlenys Perdomo, Esq.
          Gino Moreno, Esq.
          MORENO PERDOMO, PLLC
          5000 S.W. 75th Avenue, Suite 400
          Miami, FL 33155
          Telephone: (786) 224-5093
          E-mail: aperdomo@morenoperdomo.com
                  gmoreno@morenoperdomo.com

                - and -

          Robert Strongarone, Esq.
          ROBERT STRONGARONE, P.A.
          20134 SW 79th Court
          Cutler Bay, FL 33189
          Telephone: (786) 543-3223
          E-mail: bob@robertstrongaronepa.com

CAFE DELIGHTS: Campbell Sues Over Unlawful Discrimination
---------------------------------------------------------
Andree Campbell, and others similarly situated v. Cafe Delights
Plantation LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, Case No.
0:25-cv-61454-XXXX (S.D. Fla., July 18, 2025), is brought for
declaratory and injunctive relief, attorney's fees, costs, and
litigation expenses for unlawful disability discrimination in
violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act
("ADA").

The Defendant owns, controls, maintains, and/or operates an adjunct
website, https://www.lukarestaurant.com/ (the "Website"). The
Website provides the public with information on the locations,
hours, and contact details of the Defendant's restaurants
specializing in Latin American cuisine, offering authentic dishes
such as parrillas, tacos, Angus Certified steaks, Latin bowls,
fried fish, soups, classic breakfast options, along with hand-brew
specialty coffee.

The Plaintiff utilizes available screen reader software that allows
individuals who are blind and visually disabled to communicate with
websites. However, Defendant's Website contains access barriers
that prevent free and full use by blind and visually disabled
individuals using keyboards and available screen reader software.

The Defendant has not created and instituted on the Website a
useful and effective page for individuals with disabilities, nor
displayed a proper link and information hotline, nor created a
proper information portal explaining when and how Defendant will
have the Website, applications, and digital assets accessible to
the visually disabled and/or blind communities. The Website does
not meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines ("WCAG") 2.2
Level AA or higher versions of web accessibility, says the
complaint.

The Plaintiff is and at all relevant times has been blind and
visually disabled in that Plaintiff suffers from retinopathy.

The Defendant owns, operates, and/or controls two U.S.-based
restaurants offering flavorful Latin American cuisine.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Aleksandra Kravets, Esq.
          ALEKSANDRA KRAVETS, ESQ. P.A.
          865 SW 113 Lane
          Pembroke Pines, FL 33025
          Phone: 347-268-9533
          Email: ak@akesqpa.com

CALCHEF FOODS: Padilla Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Calchef Foods, LLC.
The case is styled as Santiago Padilla, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. Calchef Foods, LLC, Case No.
STK-CV-UOE-2025-0009606 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Joaquin Cty., July
15, 2025).

The case type is stated as "Unlimited Civil Other Employment."

CalChef Foods, LLC, doing business as Kevin's Natural Foods --
https://www.kevinsnaturalfoods.com/ -- provides food products.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jessica L. Campbell, Esq.
          AEGIS LAW FIRM
          9811 Irvine Center Dr., Ste. 100
          Irvine, CA 92618
          Phone: 949-379-6250
          Fax: (949) 379-6251
          Email: jcampbell@aegislawfirm.com

CALIBER HOLDINGS: Becerra Suit Removed to E.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Arturo Becerra, an individual, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. CALIBER HOLDINGS LLC
dba CALIBER COLLISION, and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Case No.
BCV-25-102000 was removed from the Superior Court of California in
and for the County of Kern, to the United States District Court for
Eastern District of California on July 18, 2025, and assigned Case
No. 1:25-at-00599.

The Complaint alleges causes of action for failure to pay all wages
owed, including overtime wages; failure to provide accurate wage
statements; failure to pay minimum wages; failure to pay rest
period premiums; failure to reimburse necessary business expenses;
and unfair competition.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Carrie A. Gonell, Esq.
          Nancy Nguyen, Esq.
          Hailey A. Phelan, Esq.
          MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
          600 Anton Boulevard, Suite 1800
          Costa Mesa, CA 92626-7653
          Phone: +1.714.830.0600
          Fax: +1.714.830.0700
          Email: carrie.gonell@morganlewis.com
                 nancy.nguyen@morganlewis.com
                 hailey.phelan@morganlewis.com

CAPS UNLIMITED: Evans Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
----------------------------------------------------------
James Evans, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
v. Caps Unlimited, Inc. d/b/a Hat Heaven, Case No. 1:25-cv-08275
(N.D. Ill., July 21, 2025), is brought arising from the Defendant's
failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate their website
to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and
other blind or visually-impaired persons.

The Defendant is denying blind and visually impaired persons
throughout the United States with equal access to services the
Defendant provides to their non-disabled customers through
https://hatheaven.com (hereinafter "Hatheaven.com" or "the
website"). The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its
website, and therefore denial of its products and services offered,
and in conjunction with its physical locations, is a violation of
Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (the
"ADA").

Because Defendant's website, Hatheaven.com, is not equally
accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, it violates
the ADA. Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change
in the Defendant's policies, practices, and procedures to that
Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory
damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to
unlawful discrimination, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using the
computer.

Hat Heaven provides to the public a website known as Hatheaven.com
which provides consumers with access to an array of goods and
services, including, the ability to view fitted, snapback,
adjustable, and dad hats, as well as team and city-themed designs,
limited-edition styles, and officially licensed sports
headwear.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David B. Reyes, Esq.
          EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP PLLC
          68-29 Main Street,
          Flushing, NY 11367
          Phone: (844) 731-3343
          Email: Dreyes@ealg.law

CASA ORA: Medina Allowed Leave to File Class Cert Bid
-----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Medina v. Casa Ora, LLC,
et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-02313 (E.D.N.Y., Filed April 25, 2025),
the Hon. Judge Pamela K. Chen entered an order granting the
Plaintiff's request for leave to file a motion for class
certification and seek class discovery prior to moving for default
judgment.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff's deadline to file a motion for default
judgment is adjourned, with a date to be set following the Court's
decision on class certification.

Any deadlines and any disputes relating to class discovery shall be
determined by the presiding Hon. Magistrate Judge Robert M. Levy.

The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

Casa is a family owned and operated Venezuelan-American
restaurant.[CC]


CERNER CORPORATION: Coulter Transferred to W.D. Missouri
--------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Emily Coulter, individually and on behalf of
other similarly situated consumers v. Cerner Corporation d/b/a
Oracle Health, Inc., Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Inc., Case
No. 4:25-cv-00292 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of Florida, to the U.S. District Court for
the Western District of Missouri on July 18, 2025.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:25-cv-00560-BP to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.

Cerner Corporation doing business as Oracle Health --
https://www.oracle.com/ -- is a US-based, multinational provider of
health information technology platforms and services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Matthew Fornaro, Esq.
          MATTHEW FORNARO PA - CORAL SPRINGS FL
          11555 Heron Bay Blvd., Ste. 200
          Coral Springs, FL 33076
          Phone: (954) 324-3651
          Fax: (954) 248-2099
          Email: mfornaro@fornarolegal.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Julie Singer Brady, Esq.
          BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP - ORLANDO FL
          Sun Trust Ctr-Ste 2300
          200 S ORANGE AVE
          Orlando, FL 32801
          Phone: (407) 649-4832
          Fax: (407) 841-0168
          Email: jsingerbrady@bakerlaw.com

CG ROXANE LLC: Yarric Suit Removed to N.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Lionnel Rene Yarric, individually, and on
behalf of other similarly situated employees v. CG ROXANE LLC; and
DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Case No. CV0006576 was removed from
the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County
of Marin, to the United States District Court for Northern District
of California on July 18, 2025, and assigned Case No.
3:25-cv-06094.

On June 12, 2025, Plaintiff Lionnel Rene Yarric filed an unverified
civil Class Action Complaint against Defendant which sets forth the
following ten causes of action: minimum wages; unpaid overtime;
failure to provide one day's rest in seven; meal period violations;
rest break violations; wages not timely paid during employment;
wage statement violations; untimely final wages; failure to
reimburse necessary business expenses; and violation of California
Business & Professions Code section 17200 and violation of the
California Labor Codes.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Kevin D. Reese, Esq.
          JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
          50 California Street 9th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Phone: (415) 394-9400
          Facsimile: (415) 394-9401
          Email: Kevin.Reese@jacksonlewis.com

               - and -

          Raja A. Hafed, Esq.
          JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
          400 Capitol Mall, Suite 1600
          Sacramento, CA 95814
          Phone: (916) 341-0404
          Facsimile: (916) 341-0141
          Email: raja.hafed@jacksonlewis.com

CHANGE HEALTHCARE: Aretakis Suit Transferred to D. Minnesota
------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as John Aretakis, individually and on behalf of all
other persons similarly situated v. Change Healthcare, Inc.,
McKesson Corp., Optum, Case No. 1:25-cv-04814 was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, to
the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota on July 16,
2025.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 0:25-cv-02819-DWF-DJF to
the proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract.

Change Healthcare Inc. -- https://www.changehealthcare.com/ -- is a
provider of revenue and payment cycle management that connects
payers, providers, and patients within the U.S. healthcare
system.[BN]

The Plaintiff appears pro se.

The Defendant is represented by:

          Phoebe Anne Wilkinson, Esq.
          HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP
          875 Third Avenue
          New York, NY 10020
          Phone: (212) 918-3010
          Email: phoebe.wilkinson@hoganlovells.com

CHIME FINANCIAL: Charles Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
--------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Taft Charles, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Chime Financial Inc., Case No.
25-00002-18655-7 SEA was removed from the King County Superior
Court, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Washington on July 18, 2025.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-01361 to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I.

Chime -- https://www.chime.com/ -- is a financial technology
company founded on the premise that basic banking services should
be helpful, easy and free.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Jason T. Dennett, Esq.
          Kaleigh Boyd, Esq.
          TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
          1200 Fifth Ave., Ste. 1700
          Seattle, WA 98101
          Phone: (206) 682-5600
          Fax: (206) 682-2992
          Email: jdennett@tousley.com
                 kboyd@tousley.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Susan Donnelly Fahringer, Esq.
          Erin Kathleen Earl, Esq.
          PERKINS COIE (SEA)
          1301 Second Ave., Ste. 4200
          SEATTLE, WA 98101-3804
          Phone: (206) 359-8687
          Email: SFahringer@perkinscoie.com
                 EEarl@perkinscoie.com

CHRYSLER PACIFICA: Filing for Class Cert Bid Suspended
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re Chrysler Pacifica Fire Recall
Products Liability Litigation, Case No. 2:22-cv-03040 (E.D. Mich.,
Filed Aug. 4, 2022), the Hon. Judge David M. Lawson entered an
order granting in Part Stipulation to Suspend Deadline for Filing
Class Certification Motion.

The nature of suit states Contract Product Liability.

Chrysler is an American brand of automobiles and division owned by
Stellantis North America.[CC]


 


CIGNA HEALTHCARE: Avalos Suit Removed to E.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Myriah Avalos, an individual and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. CIGNA HEALTHCARE OF CALIFORNIA,
INC., a California corporation; CIGNA DENTAL HEALTH OF CALIFORNIA,
INC., a California corporation; and CIGNA HEALTH CORPORATION, a
Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No.
25CV013944 was removed from the Superior Court of California for
the County of Sacramento, to the United States District Court for
Eastern District of California on July 16, 2025, and assigned Case
No. 2:25-at-00928.

The Plaintiff alleges that Cigna "intentionally incorporated on the
Cigna website various trackers from websites and/or applications
such as but not limited to The Trade Desk, LiveRamp, Demandbase,
MediaMath, Pinterest, Snapchat, and Meta ('Trackers')." The
Plaintiff asserts four causes of action under California's
Confidentiality of Medical Information Act ("CMIA"), the California
Consumer Privacy Act ("CCPA"), the California Invasion of Privacy
Act ("CIPA"), and California's Unfair Competition Law ("UCL").
Among other requests for relief, Plaintiff seeks on behalf of
herself and the proposed class: damages, including statutory
damages; injunctive relief; and attorneys' fees.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Tiffany Cheung, Esq.
          Camille Framroze, Esq.
          Eduardo Figueroa, Esq.
          MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
          425 Market Street
          San Francisco, CA 94105-2482
          Phone: (415) 268-7000
          Facsimile: (415) 268-7522
          Email: TCheung@mofo.com
                 CFramroze@mofo.com
                 EFigueroa@mofo.com

CLASSPASS USA: Blackburn Sues Over Unlawful Expiration Periods
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lindsey Blackburn, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. CLASSPASS USA LLC, Case No. 4:25-cv-06109-KAW
(N.D. Cal., July 21, 2025), is brought asserts claims on behalf of
ClassPass subscribers for violation of The Electronic Funds
Transfer Act ("EFTA"), California's Unfair Competition Law, and
California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act due to unlawful
expiration periods.

ClassPass sells exercise sessions, wellness and beauty services,
and select food experiences (collectively, "Experiences") to
consumers. But ClassPass does not directly accep U.S. Dollars.
Instead, it requires customers to buy ClassPass "Credits," which
consumers then redeem for Experiences. These Credits operate like
seashells, doubloons, or any other medium of exchange that humans
use to barter with each other. Except seashells and doubloons
generally don't vanish into thin air. Unfortunately for consumers,
ClassPass Credits do.

Various state and federal laws prohibit companies like ClassPass
from selling expiring pre-paid cards or gift cards. These laws
broadly define these terms to not only cover physical cards, but
any "other payment code or device" or "electronic promise." These
definitions include the aforementioned vanishing ClassPass
Credits.

ClassPass Credits meet the definition of a general-use prepaid card
under EFTA. ClassPass Credits are payment codes and/or devices that
are redeemable at multiple merchants through ClassPass. Moreover,
they are issued in a requested amount on a prepaid basis according
to a consumers' monthly membership fees and/or supplemental
purchases. Finally, they may be redeemed through ClassPass
merchants for goods and services.

By ClassPass' design, these Credits have unreasonably short
expiration periods. A portion of the Credits roll over, but the
remainder of the Credits expire every 30 days. If a user chooses to
stop using the ClassPass App, every credit that the consumer has
purchased but not used expires. There is no way for a user to
cancel their ClassPass membership without losing the Credits they
have accumulated. These expiration periods are in violation of both
EFTA. Specifically, the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility
and Disclosure Act ("CARD Act") and the EFTA, prohibit the sale and
issuance of general use prepaid cards or gift certificates with
expiration periods of less than five years, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff signed up for ClassPass in 2018 and used it off and
on until her final cancellation in May 23, 2024.

The Defendant is a corporation existing under the laws of Virginia
with its principal place of business in New York City.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Philip L. Fraietta, Esq.
          Julian C. Diamond, Esq.
          BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
          1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor
          New York, NY 10019
          Phone: (646) 837-7150
          Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
          Email: pfraietta@bursor.com
                 jdiamond@bursor.com

               - and -

          Stefan Bogdanovich, Esq.
          BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
          1990 North California Blvd., 9th Floor
          Walnut Creek, CA 94596
          Phone: (925) 300-4455
          Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
          Email: sbogdanovich@bursor.com

COLUMBIA BBB WESTCHESTER: Pardo Sues Over Discriminative Property
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Nigel Frank De La Torre Pardo, individually and on behalf of all
other similarly situated v. COLUMBIA BBB WESTCHESTER SHOPPING
CENTER ASSOCIATES; WEST MARINE PRODUCTS, INC.; SUSHI SAKE
WESTCHESTER, INC.; DEVIL FRUIT LLC; SSAIBA#2, LLC and 51 HOIL, LLC,
Case No. 1:25-cv-23231-XXXX (S.D. Fla., July 18, 2025), is brought
for injunctive relief, attorneys' fees, litigation expenses, and
costs pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") as a
result of the Defendant's discrimination against the individual
Plaintiff by denying him access to, and full and equal enjoyment
of, the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or
accommodations of the Commercial Property and business located
therein, as prohibited by the ADA.

Although well over 33 years has passed since the effective date of
Title III of the ADA, Defendant has yet to make its/their
facilities accessible to individuals with disabilities. Congress
provided commercial businesses one and a half years to implement
the Act. The effective date was January 26, 1992. In spite of this
abundant lead-time and the extensive publicity the ADA has received
since 1990, Defendant has continued to discriminate against people
who is disabled in ways that block them from access and use of
Defendant's property and the businesses therein.

The Plaintiff found the commercial property and commercial
restaurant business located within the commercial property to be
rife with ADA violations. The Plaintiff encountered architectural
barriers at the commercial property and commercial restaurant
business located within the commercial property and wishes to
continue his patronage and use of the premises.

The Plaintiff has encountered architectural barriers that is in
violation of the ADA at the subject commercial property. The
barriers to access at Defendants' commercial property and
commercial restaurant business has each denied or diminished
Plaintiff's ability to visit the commercial property and restaurant
and has endangered his safety in violation of the ADA.

The Plaintiff has a realistic, credible, existing and continuing
threat of discrimination from the Defendants' non-compliance with
the ADA with respect to the described commercial property and
restaurant, including but not necessarily limited to the
allegations of this Complaint. Plaintiff has reasonable grounds to
believe that he will continue to be subjected to discrimination at
the commercial property, in violation of the ADA. The Defendants
have discriminated against the individual Plaintiff by denying him
access to, and full and equal enjoyment of, the goods, services,
facilities, privileges, advantages and/or accommodations of the
commercial property, as prohibited by the ADA, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff uses a wheelchair to ambulate.

COLUMBIA BBB WESTCHESTER SHOPPING CENTER ASSOCIATES, owns,
operates, and oversees the Commercial Property, its general parking
lot and parking spots specific to the businesses therein.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Anthony J. Perez, Esq.
          ANTHONY J. PEREZ LAW GROUP, PLLC
          7950 W. Flagler Street, Suite 104
          Miami, FL 33144
          Phone: (786) 361-9909
          Facsimile: (786) 687-0445
          Primary Email: ajp@ajperezlawgroup.com
          Secondary Email: jr@ajperezlawgroup.com

COMCAST CABLE: Scheirer Suit Transferred to E.D. Pennsylvania
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Margaret Scheirer, individually, and all other
California citizens similarly situated v. COMCAST CABLE
COMMUNICATIONS LLC, COMCAST CORPORATION, CITRIX SYSTEMS, INC.,
CLOUD SOFTWARE GROUP, INC., Case No. 3:25-cv-03609 was transferred
from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California, to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania on July 16, 2025.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-12007-ADB to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Securities/Commodities for
Securities Exchange Act.

Comcast Cable Communications, LLC -- https://corporate.comcast.com/
-- doing business as Xfinity, is an American telecommunications
business segment and division of the Comcast Corporation.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James Benjamin Drimmer, Esq.
          LYNCH CARPENTER, LLP
          9171 Towne Centre Drive, Suite 180
          San Diego, CA 92122
          Phone: (619) 762-1910
          Fax: (858) 313-1850

               - and -

          Norman E. Siegel Griffin, Esq.
          Stefon David Griffin, Esq.
          STUEVE AND SIEGAL, LLP
          460 Nichols Road, Suite 200
          Kansas City, MO 64112
          Phone: (816) 714-7100
          Email: siegel@stuevesiegel.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Ashley Lynn Shively, Esq.
          HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP
          560 Mission Street, Ste. 19th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94105
          Phone: (415) 743-6910

               - and -

          Paul J. Bond, Esq.
          HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP
          1650 Market Street, Suite 3300
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Phone: (215) 252-9535

               - and -

          Mark David Mcpherson, Esq.
          GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
          620 Eighth Avenue
          New York, NY 10018
          Phone: (212) 813-8800
          Fax: (212) 355-3333
          Email: MMcPherson@goodwinlaw.com

COMFORTWEAR COLLECTIONS: More Time to File Class Cert Bid Sought
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ETHAN RADVANSKY, on behalf
of himself and others similarly situated, v. COMFORTWEAR
COLLECTIONS INTERNATIONAL INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-02810-TWT (N.D.
Ga.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting
motion for alternate service and for an extension of time to file a
class certification motion.

The Plaintiff contends that the the Court should permit the
Plaintiff to make alternative service of the Summons and Complaint
through the methods indicated and be permitted to file a motion for
class certification at a later time dictated by the entry of a
Scheduling Order.

The Plaintiff filed this Class Action Complaint alleging violations
of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. section 227 on
behalf of a national class.

The Defendant has not yet responded to the complaint and the
Plaintiff will need to conduct discovery and secure expert
testimony before a motion for class certification can be filed. As
such, the Plaintiff requests that the motion for class
certification be filed at a time that is Ordered by the Court when
a joint proposed Scheduling Order is issued. This Court has
“broad discretion over the management of pre-trial activities,
including discovery and scheduling.”

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated July 17, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=CaSzi2 at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Anthony I. Paronich, Esq.
          PARONICH LAW, P.C.
          350 Lincoln St., Suite 2400
          Hingham, MA 02043
          Telephone: (617) 485-0018
          E-mail: anthony@paronichlaw.com
 


COMMUNITY REGIONAL: Standing Order Entered in Pierre Class Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JEAN RICHARD PIERRE, v.
COMMUNITY REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, Case No. 1:25-cv-00322-JLT-HBK
(E.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Jennifer Thurston entered a standing
order as follows:

Before filing a motion in a case in which the parties are
represented by counsel, counsel shall engage in a pre-filing meet
and confer to discuss thoroughly the substance of the contemplated
motion and any potential resolution.

No document will be sealed, nor may a redacted document be filed,
without the prior approval of the court.

The parties are required to submit a joint pretrial statement. It
must be filed seven days before final pretrial conference hearing
date and e-mailed as a Word document to:
JLTorders@caed.uscourts.gov.

Community is a 685-bed regional hospital and trauma center in
Fresno, California.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=xCoBTI at no extra
charge.[CC]

CONCORA CREDIT: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Seals Due May 8, 2026
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Seals v. Concora Credit
Inc., Case No. 3:25-cv-00728 (D. Or., Filed May 1, 2025), the Hon.
Judge Adrienne Nelson entered a scheduling order as follows:

-- The deadline to exchange initial         July 15, 2025
    disclosures is:

-- The deadline to join other parties       Sept 30, 2025
    and amend the pleadings is:


-- The deadline to disclose expert          Feb. 27, 2026
    testimony in support of class
    certification is:

-- The deadline to disclose expert          March 27, 2026
    testimony in opposition to class
    certification is:

-- The deadline to disclose rebuttal        April 17, 2026
    expert testimony in support of
    or in opposition to class
    certification is:

-- The deadline to file a motion for        May 8, 2026
    class certification is:

The suit alleges violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
(TCPA).

Concora provides consumer financing solutions.[CC]

CONTINENTAL RESOURCES: Class Cert Bid Filing Due August 5, 2026
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MITCHELL MINERALS, LLC, v.
CONTINENTAL RESOURCES, INC., Case No. 2:24-cv-00218-KHR (D. Wyo.),
the Hon. Judge Scott P. Klosterman entered an order granting the
parties' joint motion to extend scheduling order deadlines.

              Event                               New Deadline

  Motions for leave to amend or add additional     Nov. 26, 2025
  Parties:

  Fact Discovery for Class Certification           March 25, 2026
  Discovery Deadline (not including expert
  discovery):

  Private Mediation Deadline:                      July 21, 2026

  The Plaintiff's class certification motion:      Aug. 5, 2026

  The Defendant's Class Certification response:    Oct. 5, 2026

  The Plaintiff's Class Certification Reply:       Nov. 5, 2026

  In Person Class Certification Hearing:           Nov. 17, 2026,
                                                   at 2:00 p.m.

The Plaintiff brings claims on behalf of itself and others
similarly situated and seeks to certify two separate classes. As
such, the documents necessary for class certification briefing and
to prepare for mediation are substantial and complex.

The Plaintiff served discovery on the Defendant on Feb. 24, 2025.

Continental is a petroleum and natural gas exploration and
production company.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=cfSUA1 at no extra
charge.[CC]

COPART INC: $1.27MM Settlement Gets Partial Prelim OK
-----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as EDWIN MEJIA, individually,
and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly
situated, v. COPART, INC., a Delaware corporation; COPART
CATASTROPHE RESPONSE FLEET LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company; COPART-DALLAS, LLC, a California limited liability
company; COPART-HOUSTON, LLC, a California limited liability
company; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No.
2:24-cv-01705-SPG-JC (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Sherilyn Peace
Garnett entered an order granting in part and denying in part the
Plaintiff's motion for preliminary approval of class action and
PAGA settlement.

The Court grants the Plaintiff's motion to (1) conditionally
certify the class as defined in the Settlement Agreement; (2)
appoint Plaintiff Edwin Mejia as Class Representative; and (3)
appoint Capstone Law APC as Class Counsel.

The Court denies preliminary approval of the Class Action and PAGA
Settlement Agreement, without prejudice to refiling. The Court also
denies without prejudice the Plaintiff's request to schedule a
final fairness hearing, appoint a Settlement Administrator, and
approve the proposed Class Notice.

Within 30 calendar days from the Order, or by a later date if
stipulated by the parties, the parties shall submit a revised
motion for preliminary approval that addresses the deficiencies
identified in this Order.

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants violated California laws
on overtime, minimum wage, meal and rest periods, maintenance of
payroll records, timely payment of wages on termination and during
employment, and payment of business expenses. The  Plaintiff
asserts claims for various violations of the California Labor Code,
as well as claims under California's Unfair Competition Law ("UCL")
and Private Attorneys General Act ("PAGA").

The Settlement Agreement defines the Class to be "all persons who
worked for Defendants as non-exempt, hourly paid employees in
California at any time during the Class Period." The Class Period
is defined as "the period from Jan. 29, 2020 to Nov. 28, 2024."

The Settlement Agreement also defines a group of "PAGA Members"
consisting of "all persons who worked for the Defendants as
non-exempt, hourly paid employees in California at any time during
the period from Feb. 27, 2023 through Nov. 28, 2024."
The Plaintiff estimates that there are approximately 900 PAGA
Members

The gross settlement amount agreed upon by the parties is
$1,270,000.

The Plaintiff was an employee of the Defendants from January 2006
to August 2023, working as a forklift driver at the Defendants'
facility in Van Nuys, California.

Copart is a provider of online vehicle auction services,
specializing in the resale of used, wholesale, and salvage title
vehicles.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=nPxB6S at no extra
charge.[CC]

CREDIT CONTROL: Lefkowitz Files Suit in D. New Jersey
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Credit Control, LLC.
The case is styled as Shlomo Lefkowitz, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. Credit Control, LLC, Case No.
3:25-cv-13489-GC-RLS (D.N.J., July 18, 2025).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.

Credit Control, LLC -- https://www.credit-control.com/ -- has
partnered with our clients to help care for their customers,
bridging the gap between lenders and consumers.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Yaakov Saks, Esq.
          STEIN SAKS, PLLC
          One University Plaza, Suite 620
          Hackensack, NJ 07601-2726
          Phone: (201) 282-6500
          Email: ysaks@steinsakslegal.com

DELAND GROUP HOLDING: Wagner Sues Over Discriminative Actions
-------------------------------------------------------------
Tavia Wagner, and others who are similarly situated v. DELAND GROUP
HOLDING, LLC, and 11 ALPHA ENTERPRISES, LLC, d/b/a JIMMY JOHNS,
Case No. 6:25-cv-01335 (M.D. Fla., July 17, 2025), is brought for
injunctive relief, attorney's fees and costs (including, but not
limited to, court costs and expert fees), pursuant to the Americans
With Disabilities Act ("ADA") as a result of the Defendants'
discriminative actions.

The Defendants have discriminated, and continue to discriminate,
against the Plaintiff, and others who are similarly situated, by
denying full and equal access to, and full and equal enjoyment of,
goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or
accommodations at Defendants' Subject Facilities in derogation and
as prohibited by the ADA, and by failing to remove architectural
barriers pursuant to the ADA, where such removal is readily
achievable. The Plaintiff has been unable to, and continues to be
unable to, enjoy full and equal safe access to, and the benefits
of, all accommodations and services offered at Defendants' Subject
Facilities, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff's visit to Defendants' Subject Facilities.

DELAND GROUP HOLDING, LLC, is the lessor, operator and/or owner of
the real property and the owner of the improvements where the
Defendants' Subject Facilities.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Anthony T. Litsch, III, Esq.
          1368 Turnbull Bay Road, Suite 303
          New Smyrna Beach, FL 32168
          Phone: 386-409-7252
          Email: bb_litsch4@att.net
                 AnthonyTLitschiii@gmail.com

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: Court Tosses Class Action
------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-9, et
al., v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Case No. 1:25-cv-00325-JMC (D.D.C.),
the Hon. Judge Jia Cobb entered an order granting the Defendants'
motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

The case is therefore dismissed without prejudice. The Plaintiffs'
motions for temporary restraining order (which the Court previously
deferred ruling on in light of the Parties' consent order), and
motion for preliminary injunction, are denied as moot because the
Court has dismissed the underlying case.

\A separate order accompanies this memorandum opinion.

The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants plan to disseminate the
list of names and other personnel information of FBI agents who
worked on January 6 cases, in violation of the Privacy Act (Counts
I and II) and the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause (Count VI).

Department of Justice enforces federal laws, seeks just punishment
for the guilty, and ensures the fair and impartial administration
of justice.

A copy of the Court's memorandum opinion dated July 17, 2025, is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=PqS6uU
at no extra charge.[CC]



DOTHOUSE HEALTH: Idumwonyi Files Suit in D. Massachusetts
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against DotHouse Health, Inc.
The case is styled as Evabakhavbokun Von Idumwonyi, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. DotHouse Health,
Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-12030 (D. Mass., July 18, 2025).

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.

DotHouse Health -- https://www.dorchesterhouse.org/ -- is an
organization that offers a full range of health care and community
services for consumers and staffs.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Robert T. Naumes, Jr., Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICE OF JEFFREY S. GLASSMAN
          One International Place, 18th Floor
          Boston, MA 02110
          Phone: (617) 367-2900
          Fax: (617) 722-9999
          Email: bnaumes@jeffreysglassman.com

DOTHOUSE HEALTH: Samiotes Files Suit in D. Massachusetts
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Dothouse Health, Inc.
The case is styled as Peter Samiotes, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Dothouse Health, Inc., Case No.
1:25-cv-12041 (D. Mass., July 21, 2025).

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.

Dothouse Health, Inc. --
https://www.dothousehealth.org/about/index.html -- is a medical
clinic in Boston, Massachusetts.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Randi A. Kassan, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, LLC
          100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
          Garden City, NY 11530
          Phone: (516) 741-5600
          Fax: (516) 741-0128
          Email: rkassan@milberg.com

DRAFTKINGS INC: Macek Sues Over Deceptive Online Casino Scheme
--------------------------------------------------------------
Kenneth Macek, Matthew Harner, Avi Setton, Lionel Alicea, and
Robert Walker, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. DraftKings, Inc.; Crown PA Gaming Inc.
d/b/a DraftKings; Golden Nugget Online Gaming LLC, Defendants, Case
No. 2:25-cv-03632 (E.D. Pa., July 15, 2025) is a class action
alleging that DraftKings is earning amounts of revenue by
misleading Plaintiffs and other customers into signing up for and
repeatedly engaging with a known addictive product through its
online casino and sportsbook.

According to the complaint, DraftKings attracts new customers and
keeps existing customers coming back by advertising an all-upside
gambling experience, falsely promising customers that they will get
free money that they can wager without any risk. In reality,
DraftKings has created an all upside opportunity only for itself:
to obtain the promised cash bonus, the hidden terms of its
promotions require customers to deposit and gamble their own
substantial funds that they almost always lose. DraftKings also
engages in other undisclosed manipulations, enticing those
customers who are able to initially win to make worse and worse
bets until their funds are exhausted, says the suit.

DraftKings further engages in deceptive practices through its
near-ubiquitous advertisements that offer to match a new sportsbook
customer's first deposit up to $1,000. Many of the customers have
reported DraftKings's deceptive practices to state gambling
regulators. However, despite -- or because of -- DraftKings's
knowledge of how many people it has deceived, and the amount of
money it has misappropriated from customers through its deceptive
conduct, DraftKings continues to mislead customers, the suit
alleges.

DraftKings, Inc. is a Nevada gambling and entertainment corporation
headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Michael Kanovitz, Esq.
          Jon Loevy, Esq.
          Isaac Green, Esq.
          Aaron Tucek, Esq.
          Alexandra Wolfson, Esq.
          Amelia Maxfield, Esq.
          LOEVY & LOEVY
          311 N Aberdeen Street, Suite 3
          Chicago, IL 60607
          Telephone: (312) 243-5900
          E-mail: mike@loevy.com
                  maxfield@loevy.com      

               - and -

          Jacob B. Wolk, Esq.
          Andrew Rainer, Esq.
          Mark Gottlieb, Esq.
          PUBLIC HEALTH ADVOCACY INSTITUTE
          360 Huntington Avenue, CU117
          Boston, MA 02115
          Telephone: (617) 373-2026
          E-mail: jacobwolk@phaionline.org
                  arainer@phaionline.org
                  mark@phaionline.org

DRT LLC: Clark Sues Over Failure to Safeguard Information
---------------------------------------------------------
Terry Clark, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. DRT, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-00014-SMR-WPK (S.D. Iowa,
July 21, 2025), is brought against Defendant for its failure to
properly secure and safeguard the personally identifiable
information that it collected and maintained as part of its regular
business practices, including Plaintiff's and Class Members' full
names and demographic information (such as address, city, state,
and zip), and Social Security numbers (collectively defined herein
as "Private Information").

By obtaining, collecting, using, and deriving a benefit from the
Private Information of Plaintiff and Class Members, Defendant
assumed legal and equitable duties to those individuals to protect
and safeguard that information from unauthorized access and
intrusion.

The Defendant failed to adequately protect Plaintiff's and Class
Members' Private Information––and failed to even encrypt or
redact this highly sensitive information. This unencrypted,
unredacted Private Information was compromised due to Defendant's
negligent and/or careless acts and omissions and its utter failure
to protect Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive data. Hackers
targeted and obtained Plaintiff's and Class Members' Private
Information because of its value in exploiting and stealing the
identities of Plaintiff and Class Members. The present and
continuing risk of identity theft and fraud to victims of the Data
Breach will remain for their respective lifetimes.

In breaching its duties to properly safeguard Plaintiff's and Class
Members' Private Information and give them timely, adequate notice
of the Data Breach's occurrence, Defendant's conduct amounts to
negligence and/or recklessness and violates federal and state
statutes, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is a former employee of one of Defendant's clients.

DRT, LLC a shared services organization that contracts with
entities to provide support services in areas including Real
Estate, Risk Management, Legal, Information Technology,
Contracting, Human Resources and Finance.[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, Iowa 50265-5749
          Phone: (515) 223-4567
          Facsimile: (515) 223-8887
          Email: goplerud@sagwlaw.com
                 marty@sagwlaw.com

               - and -

          Leanna A. Loginov, Esq.
          SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A.
          14 NE 1st Avenue, Suite 705
          Miami, FL 33132
          Phone: 305-479-2299
          Email: lloginov@shamisgentile.com

DUKE CANNON: Ortiz Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
-----------------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH ORTIZ, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DUKE CANNON SUPPLY COMPANY LLC, Defendant,
Case No. 1:25-cv-00628 (W.D.N.Y., July 15, 2025) is a civil rights
action against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate its website, https://dukecannon.com, to be
fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other
blind or visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans
with Disabilities Act and the New York State Human Rights Law.

During Plaintiff's visits to the Website, the last occurring on
July 11, 2025, in an attempt to purchase an Off Grid Bundle from
Defendant and to view the information on the Website, the Plaintiff
encountered multiple access barriers that denied Plaintiff a
shopping experience similar to that of a sighted person and full
and equal access to the goods and services offered to the public
and made available to the public. He was not able to add the item
to the cart due to broken links, pictures without alternate
attributes and other barriers on Defendant's Website, says the
suit.

The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
its Website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers.

Duke Cannon Supply Company LLC operates the website that offers
American-made grooming goods.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
          Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
          Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
          GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
          150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
          New York, NY 10003
          Telephone: (212) 228-9795
          Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
          E-mail: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
                  Dana@Gottlieb.legal
                  Michael@Gottlieb.legal

EL TIESTO CAFE: Victor Sues Over Unlawful Disability Discrimination
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Zephyrin Victor, on behalf of others similarly situated v. El
Tiesto Cafe Group Corp, a Flonda Corporation, Case No.
0:25-cv-61437-WPD (S.D. Fla., July 16, 2025), is brought for
declaratory and injunctive relief, attorney's fees, costs, and
litigation expenses for unlawful disability discrimination in
violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act
("ADA").

The Plaintiff frequently accesses the internet. Because Plaintiff
is blind, to effectively communicate and comprehend information
available on the internet and thereby access and comprehend
websites, Plaintiff uses commercially available screen reader
software to interface with the various websites.

The Defendant also owns, controls, maintains, and/or operates an
adjunct website, https://www.eltiestocafegroup.com/ (the
"Website"). One of the functions of the website is to provide
information about the restaurant locations, their hours of
operation, and contact details. The Defendant has not created and
instituted a useful and effective Specialized Customer Assistance
line or service or email contact mode for customer assistance for
the visually disabled.

The Defendant has not created and instituted on the Website a
useful and effective page for individuals with disabilities, nor
displayed a proper link and information hotline, nor created a
proper information portal explaining when and how Defendant will
have the Website, applications, and digital assets accessible to
the visually disabled and/or blind communities. The Website does
not meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines ("WCAG"), says
the complaint.

The Plaintiff is has been blind and visually disabled in that
Plaintiff suffers from retinopathy.

The Defendant owns, operates, and/or controls 3 U.S.-based
restaurants offering a fusion of Dominican and Japanese
cuisines.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Aleksandra Kravets, Esq.
          ALEKSANDRA KRAVETS, ESQ. P.A.
          865 SW 113 Lane
          Pembroke Pines, FL 33025
          Phone: 347-268-9533
          Email: ak@akesqpa.com

ENVOY MEDIA GROUP: Lorech Files TCPA Suit in S.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Envoy Media Group,
Inc. The case is styled as Terry Lorech, on behalf of himself and
those similarly situated v. Envoy Media Group, Inc. doing business
as: Californiadebtrelief.org, Inc., Case No. 3:25-cv-01836-LL-BLM
(S.D. Cal., July 18, 2025).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

Envoy Media Group -- https://www.envoymediagroup.com/ -- develops
integrated direct marketing solutions to generate high quality
prime prospects and sales.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Abbas Kazerounian, Esq.
          Gustavo Esquivias Ponce, Esq.
          Mona Amini, Esq.
          KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP APC
          245 Fischer Ave., Suite D1
          Costa Mesa, CA 92626
          Phone: (800) 400-6808
          Fax: (800) 520-5523
          Email: ak@kazlg.com
          Email: gustavo@kazlg.com
                 mona@kazlg.com

               - and -

          David James McGlothlin
          KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC
          301 E. Bethany Home Road, Suite C 195
          Phoenix, AZ 85012
          Phone: (602) 265-3332
          Email: david@kazlg.com

EPISOURCE LLC: Lewow Suit Removed to C.D. California
----------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Paul Lewow, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. EPISOURCE LLC; and DOES 1 through 50;
Case No. 25STCV17940 was removed from the Superior Court of the
State of California in and for the County of Los Angeles, to the
United States District Court for Central District of California on
July 17, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-06518.

The Plaintiff brings this case as a "nationwide class action" on
behalf of a putative class of "all individuals whose PII/PHI may
have been accessed and/or acquired in the Data Breach that is the
subject of the Notice of Data Breach."[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Vassi Iliadis, Esq.
          HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP
          1999 Avenue of the Stars, Ste. 1400
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Phone: (310) 785-4600
          Fax: (310) 785-4601
          Email: vassi.iliadis@hoganlovells.com

EQUIFAX INFO: Class Cert Bid Filing Modified to Feb. 5, 2026
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Martinez v. Equifax
Information Services, LLC, Case No. 8:24-cv-02609 (M.D. Fla., Filed
Nov. 8, 2024), the Hon. Judge Thomas P. Barber entered an order
granting Equifax's unopposed motion to amend scheduling order

  -- The Plaintiff may file his motion for class certification on
     or before Feb. 5, 2026.

The suit alleges violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act
(FCRA).

Equifax Information Services, LLC is a subsidiary of Equifax, a
global data, analytics, and technology company. It's a key player
in the consumer credit reporting industry, collecting and
aggregating information on consumers and businesses worldwide.

Equifax is an American multinational consumer credit reporting
agency.[CC]


EVERGY METRO: Filing for Class Certification Bid Due Dec. 22
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BRIAN BAUER, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, v. EVERGY METRO, INC.,
f/k/a KANSAS CITY POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, ET AL., Case No.
4:25-cv-00157-FJG (W.D. Mo.), the Hon. Judge Fernando J. Gaitan,
Jr. entered a scheduling order adopting the following discovery
schedule:

   1. Close of Discovery: Nov. 24, 2025

   2. Motion to join additional parties: Aug. 15, 2025

   3. Motion to amend pleadings: Aug. 15, 2025

   4. Joint Status Report to the Court: Oct. 24, 2025

   5. The Plaintiff's Expert report(s): Sept. 1, 2025

      The Defendants' Expert report(s): Sept. 15, 2025

      Rebuttal report(s): Sept. 29, 2025

      Challenges/Daubert motions: Oct. 13, 2025

   6. The Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification: Dec. 22,
      2025

   7. The Defendants' Responses to Plaintiff's Class
      Certification: Jan. 26, 2026

   8. The Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of Motion for Class
      Certification: Feb. 9, 2026.

Evergy operates as an electricity utility company.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=OhR7TK at no extra
charge.[CC]

EVERYTHING BREAKS: Campbell Files TCPA Suit in E.D. Arkansas
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Everything Breaks,
Inc. The case is styled as Mary Ann Campbell, on behalf of himself
and others similarly situated v. Everything Breaks, Inc., Case No.
4:25-cv-00716-BSM (E.D. Ark., July 17, 2025).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

Everything Breaks -- https://www.everythingbreaks.com/ -- is
America's fastest growing and most trusted auto, home, and
electronics warranty company.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Anthony Paronich, Esq.
          PARONICH LAW, P.C.
          350 Lincoln St., Suite 2400
          Hingham, MA 02043
          Phone: (615) 485-0018
          Email: anthony@paronichlaw.com

               - and -

          Zach Ryburn, Esq.
          RYBURN LAW FIRM
          650 South Shackleford Road, Suite 231
          Little Rock, AR 72211
          Phone: (501) 228-8100
          Email: zach@ryburnlawfirm.com

EXCELLENCE FORWARD: Lewis Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Georgia
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Excellence Forward,
LLC. The case is styled as Robert Lewis, Jr., on behalf of himself
and others similarly situated v. Excellence Forward, LLC, Case No.
1:25-cv-03927-SDG (N.D. Ga., July 15, 2025).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

Excellence LLC is a multi-channel outsourced call/ remote center
that provides customer relationship management solutions.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Valerie Lorraine Chinn, Esq.
          CHINN LAW FIRM, LLC
          245 N. Highland Ave., Suite 230 #7
          Atlanta, GA 30307
          Phone: (404) 955-7732
          Email: vchinn@chinnlawfirm.com

EXPRESS VPN: Greenwood Files Suit in C.D. California
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Express VPN
International Ltd. The case is styled as Charles Greenwood, on
behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Express VPN
International Ltd. d/b/a Express Technologies Limited, Case No.
1:25-cv-08121 (C.D. Cal., July 16, 2025).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.

ExpressVPN -- https://www.expressvpn.com/ -- is a company providing
online privacy and security solutions, including a virtual private
network (VPN) service and a password manager.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Daniel Kieselstein, Esq.
          WITTELS MCINTURFF PALIKOVIC
          305 Broadway, 7th Floor
          New York, NY 10007
          Phone: (708) 983-9289
          Email: djk@wittelslaw.com

FARMERS INSURANCE: Graham Suit Seeks to Certify Class of Insureds
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARK GRAHAM individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. FARMERS
INSURANCE EXCHANGE and MID-CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No.
6:23-cv-00053-BMM-KLD (D. Mont.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to
enter an order granting motion for certification of the class of
882 plus similarly situated Farmers Insurance (TM) Montana insureds
who had his/her insurer subrogate before a determination he/she was
made whole.

The practice is one that Farmers Insurance (TM) pursues through its
in-house Farmers Insurance Subrogation & Recovery Law Firm. The
practice tenders a payment toward the insured's property loss,
minus the insured's deductible, then immediately demands repayment
from the at-fault insurer when it knows the insured has not been
made whole.

The insurer only seeks to recoup a pro rata share of the insured's
deductible and won’t consider 'any unreimbursed out-of-pocket
expenses. The conduct is a clear violation of Montana law, the Made
Whole doctrine, and it results in Farmers Insurance recouping
first-party claims payments without regard to whether the insured
is Made Whole.

The Defendant provides insurance products and services.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated July 17, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=MXtY6i at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Geoffrey C. Angel, Esq.
          ANGEL LAW FIRM
          803 West Babcock
          Bozeman, MT 59715
          Telephone (406) 922-2210
          Facsimile (406) 922-2211
          E-mail: christianangel@hotmail.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Nathan A. Huey, Esq.
          GORDON, REES, SCULLY, MANSUKHANI, LLP
          201 West Main Street, Suite 101
          Missoula, MT 59802
          E-mail: nhuey@grsm.com

FAVO CAPITAL INC: Redick Files TCPA Suit in E.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against FAVO Capital, Inc.
The case is styled as William Redick, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. FAVO Capital, Inc., Case No.
1:25-cv-00880-JLT-CDB (E.D. Cal., July 17, 2025).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

FAVO Capital, Inc. -- https://www.favocapital.com/ -- a direct
funding company, provides customized and short-term funding to
small and mid-sized businesses in the United States.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gerald D. Lane, Jr., Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
          1515 NE 26TH Street
          Wilton Manors, FL 33305
          Phone: (754) 444-7539
          Email: gerald@jibraellaw.com

FINEST WS: Watson Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
------------------------------------------------------
James Watson, and other similarly situated individuals v. FINEST
WS, LLC, d/b/a Maison Mura, Case No. 1:25-cv-23186-XXXX (S.D. Fla.,
July 16, 2025), is brought for injunctive relief, attorney's fees,
litigation expenses and costs, under Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA") for blind-inaccessible
website.

The Plaintiff uses the internet to help him navigate a world of
goods, products and services like the sighted. The internet and
websites provide him with a window into the world that he would not
otherwise have. The Plaintiff brings this action against Defendant
for offering and maintaining a website that is not fully accessible
and independently usable by visually impaired consumers.

The Plaintiff could not communicate with or within the Website left
him feeling excluded, frustrated, and humiliated, and gave him a
sense of isolation and segregation, as he is unable to participate
in the same browsing, shopping experience, and access to the same
information, sales, and services, as provided at the Website and in
the physical location as the non-visually disabled public.

The Defendant has violated the provisions of the ADA by failing to
interface its website with software used by visually impaired
individuals. Thus, Defendant has violated the following provisions
either directly or through contractual, licensing or other
arrangements. Defendant's violations have resulted in Defendant
denying Plaintiff effective communication on the basis of her
disability in accordance with the ADA, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is legally blind, and substantially limited in
performing one or more major life activities, including, but not
limited to, seeing, accurately visualizing his world, and
adequately traversing obstacles.

The Defendant constructed, or caused to be constructed, a website
https://maisonmura.wine (hereinafter "website").[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          J. Courtney Cunningham, Esq.
          J. COURTNEY CUNNINGHAM, PLLC.
          8950 SW 74th Court, Suite 2201
          Miami, FL 33156
          Phone: 305-351-2014
          Email: cc@cunninghampllc.com
                 legal@cunninghampllc.com

FLOWERS BAKERIES: Hass Suit Removed to N.D. California
------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Michael Hass, individually, and on behalf of
other members of the general public similarly situated v. FLOWERS
BAKERIES SALES OF NORCAL, LLC, a California Limited Liability
Company; FLOWERS BAKERIES LLC, a Georgia Limited Liability Company;
and
DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. CIV2501153 was removed from
the Superior Court of California, County of Humboldt, to the United
States District Court for Northern District of California on July
16, 2025, and assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-06018.

In the Complaint, the Plaintiff asserts the following causes of
action: Unpaid Minimum Wages; Unpaid Overtime; Failure to Provide
Meal Periods; Failure to Provide Rest Periods; Non-compliant Wage
Statements and Failure to Maintain Records; Wages Not Timely Paid
Upon Termination; and Unfair Business Practices.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Frank L. Tobin, Esq.
          OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
          4660 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 900
          San Diego, CA 92122
          Phone: 858-652-3100
          Facsimile: 858-652-3101
          Email: frank.tobin@ogletree.com

               - and -

          Jared L. Palmer, Esq.
          OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
          One Embarcadero Center, Suite 900
          SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111
          Email: jared.palmer@ogletree.com

FLOWERS BAKERIES: Royal Suit Removed to C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Marquaises Royal, individually and on behalf
of others similarly situated v. FLOWERS BAKERIES SALES OF SOCAL,
LLC, a California limited liability company; FLOWERS BAKERIES SALES
OF NORCAL, LLC, a California limited liability company; FLOWERS
BAKERIES SALES OF DESERT SOUTHWEST, LLC, an Arizona limited
liability company; FLOWERS BAKERIES, LLC, a Georgia limited
liability company; FLOWERS BAKERIES BRANDS, INC., a Delaware
corporation; FLOWERS BAKERIES BRANDS, LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company; FLOWERS FOODS, INC., a Georgia corporation; and
DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. CVRI2502526 was removed from
the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of
Riverside, to the United States District Court for Central District
of California on July 18, 2025, and assigned Case No.
5:25-cv-01829.

In the Complaint, Plaintiff asserts the following causes of action:
Failure to Pay Overtime Compensation; Failure to Pay Meal Period
Premiums; Failure to Pay Rest Period Premiums; Failure to Pay
Minimum Wages; Failure to Timely Pay Final Wages at Termination;
Failure to Timely Pay Wages During Employment; Failure to Provide
Accurate Wage Statements; Failure to Reimburse Necessary Business
Expenses; and Unfair Business Practices.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Frank L. Tobin, Esq.
          OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
          4660 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 900
          San Diego, CA 92122
          Phone: 858-652-3100
          Facsimile: 858-652-3101
          Email: frank.tobin@ogletree.com

               - and -

          Jared L. Palmer, Esq.
          OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
          One Embarcadero Center, Suite 900
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Email: jared.palmer@ogletree.com

FREEHAND INDIAN CREEK: Watson Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
------------------------------------------------------------------
James Watson, and other similarly situated individuals v. FREEHAND
INDIAN CREEK LLC, d/b/a Ray's Hometown Bar Miami, Case No.
1:25-cv-23185-XXXX (S.D. Fla., July 16, 2025), is brought for
injunctive relief, attorney's fees, litigation expenses and costs,
under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
("ADA") for blind-inaccessible website.

The Plaintiff uses the internet to help him navigate a world of
goods, products and services like the sighted. The internet and
websites provide him with a window into the world that he would not
otherwise have. The Plaintiff brings this action against Defendant
for offering and maintaining a website that is not fully accessible
and independently usable by visually impaired consumers.

The Plaintiff could not communicate with or within the Website left
him feeling excluded, frustrated, and humiliated, and gave him a
sense of isolation and segregation, as he is unable to participate
in the same browsing, shopping experience, and access to the same
information, sales, and services, as provided at the Website and in
the physical location as the non-visually disabled public.

The Defendant has violated the provisions of the ADA by failing to
interface its website with software used by visually impaired
individuals. Thus, Defendant has violated the following provisions
either directly or through contractual, licensing or other
arrangements. Defendant's violations have resulted in Defendant
denying Plaintiff effective communication on the basis of her
disability in accordance with the ADA, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is legally blind, and substantially limited in
performing one or more major life activities, including, but not
limited to, seeing, accurately visualizing his world, and
adequately traversing obstacles.

The Defendant constructed, or caused to be constructed, a website
https://www.raysbarnyc.com (hereinafter "website").[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          J. Courtney Cunningham, Esq.
          J. COURTNEY CUNNINGHAM, PLLC.
          8950 SW 74th Court, Suite 2201
          Miami, FL 33156
          Phone: 305-351-2014
          Email: cc@cunninghampllc.com
                 legal@cunninghampllc.com

FTAI AVIATION: Boston, et al., Appointed as Lead Plaintiffs
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL SHANNAHAN,
Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v.
FTAI AVIATION LTD., et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-00541-JAV (S.D.N.Y.),
the Hon. Judge Jeannette Vargas entered an order that Boston
Retirement and Hollywood Firefighters Fund are appointed as lead
plaintiffs, and Labaton and Kessler Topaz are appointed as co-lead
counsel.

By July 25, 2025, the parties shall submit a joint letter setting
forth their positions regarding a schedule for any amendment to the
operative complaint and briefing on any potential motions to
dismiss.

Given the lack of opposition to Boston Retirement and Hollywood
Firefighters Fund's motion, no proof has been offered rebutting
this presumption. The Court therefore finds that Boston Retirement
and Hollywood Firefighters Fund are the most adequate plaintiffs
and appoints them to serve as lead plaintiffs.

Boston Retirement and Hollywood Firefighters Fund have selected
Labaton and Kessler Topaz as co-lead counsel. Each firm has
substantial experience in the prosecution of securities fraud class
actions, having served as lead or co-lead counsel in many
securities class actions.

Both firms are qualified to prosecute this securities action on
behalf of the Class. Accordingly, the Court approves the selection
of Labaton and Kessler Topaz as co-lead counsel.

The securities class action seeks relief on behalf of all persons
or entities that purchased or acquired FTAI securities between July
23, 2024, and Jan. 15, 2025.

The action was commenced by Michael Shannahan, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated (the "Class"), against Defendants
FTAI Aviation Limited ("FTAI") and certain of its officers,
alleging violations of sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended by the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the "PSLRA").

The Complaint alleged that, during the Class Period, the Defendants
made materially false and/or misleading statements and failed to
disclose materially adverse facts about FTAI's business in order to
manipulate its financial reporting.

FTAI sells and leases aviation assets and equipment.

A copy of the Court's opinion and order dated July 17, 2025, is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=GW7r4g
at no extra charge.[CC]

GARBER CAPITAL: Wagner Sues Over Discriminative Actions
-------------------------------------------------------
Tavia Wagner, and others who are similarly situated v. GARBER
CAPITAL, LLC, and COURTESY, LLC, d/b/a THE COURTESY, Case No.
6:25-cv-01332 (M.D. Fla., July 17, 2025), is brought for injunctive
relief, attorney's fees and costs (including, but not limited to,
court costs and expert fees), pursuant to the Americans With
Disabilities Act ("ADA") as a result of the Defendants'
discriminative actions.

The Defendants have discriminated, and continue to discriminate,
against the Plaintiff, and others who are similarly situated, by
denying full and equal access to, and full and equal enjoyment of,
goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or
accommodations at Defendants' Subject Facilities in derogation and
as prohibited by the ADA, and by failing to remove architectural
barriers pursuant to the ADA, where such removal is readily
achievable. The Plaintiff has been unable to, and continues to be
unable to, enjoy full and equal safe access to, and the benefits
of, all accommodations and services offered at Defendants' Subject
Facilities, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff's visit to Defendants' Subject Facilities.

GARBER CAPITAL, LLC, is the lessor, operator and/or owner of the
real property.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Anthony T. Litsch, III, Esq.
          1368 Turnbull Bay Road, Suite 303
          New Smyrna Beach, FL 32168
          Phone: 386-409-7252
          Email: bb_litsch4@att.net
                 AnthonyTLitschiii@gmail.com

GEO GROUP: Seeks Leave to File Class Cert Opposition Under Seal
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LIGAYA RONDUEN; CARLOS
CASTILLO; MIRIAM SCHEETZ; CESAR HERNANDEZ CARRILLO; WILFREDO
GONZALEZ MENA; SOMBOON PHAYMANY; and YOLANDA MENDOZA, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated , v. THE GEO GROUP,
INC., a Florida corporation, and SPARTAN CHEMICAL COMPANY, INC., an
Ohio corporation, Case No. 5:23-cv-00481-JGB-SHK (C.D. Cal.), the
Defendants ask the Court to enter an order granting ex parte
application for leave to file documents under seal relating to
their opposition to the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification

GEO is a publicly traded C corporation.

A copy of the Defendant's motion dated July 18, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=GBHhTM at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Defendants are represented by:

          David D. Mesa, Esq.
          Matthew H. Weiner, Esq.
          Daniel Messeloff
          PIERSON FERDINAND LLP
          2100 Geng Road, Suite 210
          Palo Alto, CA 94303
          Telephone: (415) 916-4415
          E-mail: david.mesa@pierferd.com
                  matthew.weiner@pierferd.com
                  daniel.messeloff@pierferd.com

                - and -

          Fred M. Blum, Esq.
          Michael E. Gallagher, Esq.
          Daniel E. Trowbridge, Esq.
          EDLIN, GALLAGHER, HUIE + BLUM
          601 Montgomery Street, Suite 1100
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 397-9006
          Facsimile: (415) 397-1339
          E-mail: fblum@eghblaw.com
                  mgallagher@eghblaw.com
                  dtrowbridge@eghblaw.com

GOOGLE DIGITAL: Filing of Certain Exhibits Under Seal Sought
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action re Google Digital Advertising Antitrust
Litigation, Case No. 1:21-cv-07001-PKC (S.D.N.Y.), the Advertiser
Class Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting motion to
provisionally file under seal Exhibits 40-47 to the joint
declaration of Dena Sharp and Tina Wolfson, their reply in support
of motion for class certification, and opposition to the
Defendants' motion to exclude expert testimony.

Google is an American multinational corporation and technology
company.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 16, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=uS0EjC at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Dena C. Sharp, Esq.
          Scott M. Grzenczyk, Esq.
          Mikaela M. Bock, Esq.
          Isabel Velez, Esq.
          GIRARD SHARP LLP
          601 California Street, Suite 1400
          San Francisco, CA 94108
          Telephone: (415) 981-4800
          Facsimile: (415) 981-4846
          E-mail: dsharp@girardsharp.com
                  scottg@girardsharp.com
                  mbock@girardsharp.com
                  ivelez@girardsharp.com

                - and -

          Tina Wolfson, Esq.
          Theodore W. Maya, Esq.
          Bradley K. King, Esq.
          AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC
          2600 West Olive Ave., Suite 500
          Burbank, CA 91505
          Telephone: (310) 474-9111
          Facsimile: (310) 474-8585
          E-mail: twolfson@ahdootwolfson.com
                  tmaya@ahdootwolfson.com
                  bking@ahdootwolfson.com

                - and -

          Archana Tamoshunas, Esq.
          TAUS, CEBULASH & LANDAU, LLP
          123 William Street, Suite 1900A
          New York, NY 10038
          Telephone: (212) 931-0704
          Facsimile: (212) 931-0703
          E-mail: atamoshunas@tcllaw.com

                - and -

          April D. Lambert, Esq.
          John D. Radice, Esq.
          RADICE LAW FIRM, PC
          475 Wall Street
          Princeton, NJ 08540
          Telephone: (646) 245-8502
          Facsimile: (609) 385-0745
          E-mail: alambert@radicelawfirm.com
                  jradice@radicelawfirm.com

GOOGLE INC: Parties Must File Sealing Stipulation by August 1
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re Google RTB Consumer Privacy
Litigation, Case No. 4:21-cv-02155-YGR (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge
Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers entered an order requiring submission of
omnibus sealing stipulation.

Pursuant to Paragraph 12 of the Court's Standing Order for Civil
Cases, parties shall file an omnibus sealing stipulation no later
than Aug. 1, 2025, relating to the sealing requests pertaining to
the briefing on class certification.

Google is an American multinational corporation and technology
company.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=JBBc90 at no extra
charge.[CC]

GOOGLE INC: Plaintiffs Seeks to File Class Reply Under Seal
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re: Google Digital Advertising
Antitrust Litigation, Case No. 1:21-md-03010 (S.D.N.Y.), the
Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order seek leave to file
preliminary under seal an unredacted version of the Publisher
Plaintiffs' Reply in support of the Plaintiffs' motion for class
certification, the Publisher Plaintiffs' opposition to the
Defendants' motion to exclude the expert testimony of Prof. Einer
Elhauge, and certain exhibits to the Declaration of Izaak
Earnhardt, filed contemporaneously therewith.

These exhibits and portions of the briefs contain or reference
material that Defendant Google has designated as Confidential or
Highly Confidential and material which Plaintiffs designated as
Highly Confidential.

Accordingly, Publisher Plaintiffs submit that good cause exists to
file preliminarily under seal the unredacted version of the
Publisher Plaintiffs' briefs and certain exhibits to the Earnhardt
Declaration. No conference is scheduled.

Exhibit No. 2 is an expert declaration prepared by an expert
witness for Publisher Plaintiffs which analyzes, quotes or
summarizes documents and data that Google has designated as
Confidential or Highly Confidential under the protective order in
this litigation. Exhibits Nos. 4, 5, 6, 9, and 11 are documents
that Google produced in this litigation, designated as Confidential
or Highly Confidential.

Exhibit No. 7 is a discovery request served on Google in the EDVA
litigation; while it does not have a confidentiality designation,
in an abundance of caution, Plaintiffs are filing it under
preliminary seal to provide Google an opportunity to review the
document and determine if they believe that sealing is warranted.
Exhibit No. 8 is a letter from Google’s counsel, designated as
Highly Confidential

Google is an American multinational corporation and technology
company.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 16, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=idm18b at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Philip C. Korologos, Esq.
          BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP
          55 Hudson Yards, 20th Floor
          New York, NY 10001
          Telephone: (212) 446-2300
          Facsimile: (212) 446-2350

GREATER GUIDE: Walstrom Files TCPA Suit in N.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Greater Guide Inc.
The case is styled as Jordan Walstrom, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. Greater Guide Inc. doing
business as: American Service Pets, Case No. 3:25-cv-06073-WHO
(N.D. Cal., July 18, 2025).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

Greater Guide Inc. doing business as American Service Pets --
https://my.americanservicepets.com/ -- is the nation's leading
all-in-one solution for approving emotional support animals for
housing and psychiatric service animals for travel.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gerald D. Lane, Jr., Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
          1515 NE 26TH Street
          Wilton Manors, FL 33305
          Phone: (754) 444-7539
          Email: gerald@jibraellaw.com

GUESS RETAIL INC: Ortiz Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Guess? Retail, Inc.
The case is styled as Andres Puentes Ortiz, on behalf of himself
and others similarly situated v. Guess? Retail, Inc., Case No.
25STCV21513 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., July 21, 2025).

The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case
(General Jurisdiction)."

Guess?, Inc. -- https://www.guess.com/us/en/home/ -- designs,
markets, distributes, and licenses a collection of casual apparel,
accessories, and related consumer products.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph Lavi, Esq.
          LAVI & EBRAHIMIAN, LLP
          8889 W Olympic Blvd., Ste. 200
          Beverly Hills, CA 90211-3638
          Phone: 310-432-0000
          Fax: 310-432-0001
          Email: jlavi@lelawfirm.com

GUIDE TO INSURE: Fitzgerald Files FLSA Suit in D. Utah
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Guide to Insure, LLC.
The case is styled as Nicole Fitzgerald, individually and on behalf
of all similarly situated individuals v. Guide to Insure, LLC, Case
No. 2:25-cv-00594-TC (D. Utah, July 21, 2025).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

GuidetoInsure -- https://www.guidetoinsure.com/ -- has been
providing clients with tailored insurance solutions that meet their
individual needs for over 10 years,.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jared D. Scott, Esq.
          ANDERSON & KARRENBERG
          50 W Broadway, Ste. 600
          Salt Lake City, UT 84101
          Phone: (801) 534-1700
          Fax: (801) 364-7697
          Email: jscott@aklawfirm.com

HAIKU ASIAN BISTRO: Meng Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Haiku Asian Bistro,
Inc. The case is styled as Guang Jin Meng, on his own behalf and on
behalf of others similarly situated v. Haiku Asian Bistro, Inc.
d/b/a Haiku Asian Bistro and Sushi Bar White Plains; HAIKU at WP
INC d/b/a Haiku Asian Bistro and Sushi Bar White Plains; HAIKU
BISTRO 149 INC d/b/a Haiku Asian Bistro and Sushi Bar White Plains;
HAILU ASIAN BISTRO INC d/b/a Haiku Asian Bistro and Sushi Bar White
Plains; JP BRONXVILLE INC d/b/a Haiku Asian Bistro and Sushi Bar
Bronxville; JP CROSS RIVER INC d/b/a Haiku Asian Bistro and Sushi
Bar Cross River; JP SCARSDALE INC d/b/a Haiku Asian Bistro and
Sushi Bar Scarsdale; JP WHITE PLAINS INC d/b/a Haiku Asian Bistro
and Sushi Bar White Plains; MICHAEL LEE a/k/a Soonwah Lee a/k/a
Soon Wah Lee; John Chiang a/k/a Hsingya Chiang, a/k/a Hsing Ya
Chiang; Peter Diana a/k/a Pietro Diana; Jack Zhang a/k/a Jie Zhang;
Case No. 67247/2025 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Westchester Cty., July 21,
2025).

The case type is stated as "Commercial - Other (NYLL Class
Action)."

Haiku Asian Bistro & Sushi Bar -- https://www.haikubistro.com/ --
provides a sophisticated, thoughtful & modern take on classic Asian
dishes representative of China, Thailand, Japan, Malaysia &
elsewhere in the East & South Asia.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          John Troy, Esq.
          TROY LAW, PLLC
          41-25 Kissena Blvd., Suite 110
          Flushing, NY 11355

HALAL GUYS: Hegazy Suit Seeks Certification of Two Classes
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Ahmed Hegazy, et. al. v.
The Halal Guys, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-01880-LAP-KHP
(S.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting
request for a pre-motion conference prior to filing a motion for
certification of two classes pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure.

The first class is the Spread of Hours Class and is defined as

    "all individuals who worked as non-exempt employees at the
    Defendants' restaurant located at 720 Amsterdam Avenue, New
    York, NY and/or at their food carts in New York City between
    April 20, 2014 and April 1, 2021 and worked shifts where the
    spread of hours between the beginning and end of the
    individual's workday exceeded ten hours and for which the
    Defendants did not pay them spread of hours pay of an extra
    hour of pay at the basic minimum wage rate."

The second class is the Food Carts Class and is defined as

    "all individuals who worked as non-exempt employees at the
    Defendants' food carts in New York City between April 20, 2014

    and Feb. 12, 2018, and worked more than 40 hours in a workweek

    for which the Defendants did not pay them overtime pay for
    each hour worked over 40 in a workweek at the rate of one and
    one half times their regular hourly rate of pay and/or from
    whom the Defendants improperly retained gratuities that
    customers intended to be paid to the Defendants' employees and

    to whom the Defendants did not provide proper wage rate and
    wage statement notices as required by the section 195 of the
    New York Labor Law."

Certification of each of these classes is appropriate because each
of the members of the proposed classes suffered the same injuries
caused by Defendants’ violations of the New York Labor Law (NYLL)
and is owed damages because of Defendants’ standard operating
procedures in violation of the NYLL. Ahmed Abouelenein, the CEO of
each of the Defendant Corporations, admitted at his deposition that
the Defendants did not pay spread of hours pay until 2021.

The current scheduling order requires Plaintiffs to file their
motion for class certification by today, July 17, 2025. Because the
parties have been working hard to negotiate individual settlements,
Plaintiffs have not moved for class certification at an earlier
date. However, it is not clear that an individual settlement for
each plaintiff will be possible and therefore Plaintiffs ask for a
premotion conference and permission to file these motions for class
certification.

Halal is a halal fast casual restaurant franchise.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 17, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=wPLf3q at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Julie Salwen, Esq.
          HARRISON, HARRISON & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
          90 BROAD STREET, 2nd Floor
          New York, NY 10004
          Telephone: (718) 799-9111
          Facsimile: (718) 799-9171
          E-mail: jsalwen@nynjemploymentlaw.com

HERTZ CORP: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Ho Suit Bid Due August 29
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CARINA HO and CHRISTINA
MILLS, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
v. THE HERTZ CORPORATION; HERTZ GLOBAL HOLDINGS, INC.; and RENTAL
CAR INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, LLC, Case No. 3:24-cv-01066-MMC (N.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Maxine M. Chesney entered an order granting
joint stipulated motion to modify scheduling order:

-- Deadline for the Plaintiffs to supplement initial disclosures
    to identify declarants in support of class certification: July

    16, 2025

-- The Defendants may depose any identified class declarants:
    Aug. 29, 2025

-- Deadline for the Plaintiffs to file motion for class
    certification: Aug. 29, 2025.

-- Deadline to file opposition to motion for class certification:

    Sept. 26, 2025.

-- Deadline to file reply in support of class certification: Oct.

    10, 2025.

-- Hearing on the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification:
    Oct. 24, 2025 at 9:00 a.m.

Hertz operates as a car rental company.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 15, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=O2lvtJ at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Shawna Parks, Esq.
          Sean Betouliere, Esq.
          Meredith J. Weaver, Esq.
          Scott L. Gordon, Esq.
          DISABILITY RIGHTS ADVOCATES
          2001 Center Street, Third Floor
          Berkeley, CA 94704-1204
          Telephone: (510) 665-8644
          Facsimile: (510) 665-8511
          E-mail: sparks@dralegal.org
                  sbetouliere@dralegal.org
                  mweaver@dralegal.org
                  sgordon@dralegal.org

The Defendants are represented by:

          Kristina M. Launey, Esq.
          SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
          400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2300
          Sacramento, CA 95814
          Telephone: (916) 498-7034
          Facsimile: (916) 558-4839
          E-mail: klauney@seyfarth.com

                - and -

          William C. O'Neil, Esq.
          Jeffrey J. Huelskamp, Esq.
          Emma L. Sutton, Esq.
          WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
          35 West Wacker Drive
          Chicago, IL 60601-9703
          Telephone: (312) 558-5600
          Facsimile: (312) 558-5700
          E-mail: woneil@winston.com
                  jhuelskamp@winston.com
                  esutton@winston.com

HOLIDAY INN: Wins Summary Judgment v. Lingard
---------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANGELIQUE L. LINGARD and
SUDARIEN D. SMITH, v. HOLIDAY INN CLUB VACATIONS, INC. and WILSON
RESORT FINANCE, LLC, Case No. 6:23-cv-00323-JSS-RMN (M.D. Fla.),
the Hon. Judge Julie Sneed entered an order granting the
Defendants' motion for summary judgment:

  -- Count one of the Plaintiffs' third amended complaint is
     dismissed without prejudice for lack of standing. Count two
     of the Plaintiffs' third amended complaint is dismissed
     without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.

  -- The Clerk is directed to terminate any pending motions and
     deadlines and to close this case.

The Defendants maintain that although diversity exists between the
parties, Plaintiffs never invoked diversity jurisdiction as a basis
for their claims in the complaint and have not alleged damages
sufficient to satisfy the amount in controversy requirement. The
court agrees.

The Plaintiffs are United States Air Force servicemembers who
entered into eight timeshare point loan purchase contracts with
Defendant Holiday Inn Club Vacations, Inc. (HICV) from November
2016 through August 2021, with financing from Defendant Wilson
Resort Finance, LLC.

Holiday is a network of resorts across North America.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=DQty71 at no extra
charge.[CC]

HOUSTON FOODS: Arroyo Sues Over Unlawful Sloping Conditions
-----------------------------------------------------------
Diego Arroyo, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. HOUSTON FOODS, INC., and DOES 1 to 25, Case No.
4:25-cv-03308 (S.D. Tex., July 17, 2025), is brought against
Defendants asserting violations of Title III of the Americans with
Disabilities Act (the "ADA"), and its implementing regulations due
to the unlawful sloping conditions in Defendants' purportedly
accessible parking areas.

The Plaintiff's claims arise from his own experience with excessive
sloping conditions in purportedly accessible parking spaces, access
aisles, and curb ramps ("Parking Area" or "Parking Areas") at
places of public accommodation owned, operated, controlled, and/or
leased by Defendants ("Defendants facilities"), and from site
investigations at 10 of Defendants' facilities also finding
excessive sloping conditions.

The Plaintiff asserts that these excessive sloping conditions
persist in part as a result of Defendants' existing but inadequate
internal maintenance policies, practices and/or procedures, which
fail to ensure compliance with the sloping requirements of the
ADA's implementing regulations, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is a person with a mobility disability who uses a
wheelchair for mobility.

The Defendants collectively own, lease, and/or operate at least
one-hundred and 130 Burger King restaurants in the state of
Texas.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          John D. Bosco, Esq.
          Bridget Roddy, Esq.
          BOSCO BLESS PLLC
          13101 Preston Road, Suite 110 #3663
          Dallas, TX 75240
          Phone: (214) 997-4434
          Email: john@boscobless.com

               - and -

          Benjamin J. Sweet, Esq.
          NYE, STIRLING, HALE, MILLER & SWEET, LLP
          101 Pennsylvania Boulevard, Suite 2
          Pittsburgh, PA 15228
          Phone: 412-857-5350
          Email: ben@nshmlaw.com

               - and -

          Jordan T. Porter, Esq.
          NYE, STIRLING, HALE, MILLER & SWEET, LLP
          33 West Mission Street, Suite 201
          Santa Barbara, CA 93101
          Phone: 805-963-2345
          Email: jordan@nshmlaw.com

HV FAMILY: Wagner Sues Over Discriminative Actions
--------------------------------------------------
Tavia Wagner, and others who are similarly situated v. HV FAMILY,
LLC, and SAIGON NOODLE N GRILLED OF CENTRAL FL, LLC, d/b/a SAIGON
NOODLE & GRILL, Case No. 6:25-cv-01337 (M.D. Fla., July 17, 2025),
is brought for injunctive relief, attorney's fees and costs
(including, but not limited to, court costs and expert fees),
pursuant to the Americans With Disabilities Act ("ADA") as a result
of the Defendants' discriminative actions.

The Defendants have discriminated, and continue to discriminate,
against the Plaintiff, and others who are similarly situated, by
denying full and equal access to, and full and equal enjoyment of,
goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or
accommodations at Defendants' Subject Facilities in derogation and
as prohibited by the ADA, and by failing to remove architectural
barriers pursuant to the ADA, where such removal is readily
achievable. The Plaintiff has been unable to, and continues to be
unable to, enjoy full and equal safe access to, and the benefits
of, all accommodations and services offered at Defendants' Subject
Facilities, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff's visit to Defendants' Subject Facilities.

HV FAMILY, LLC, the lessor, operator and/or owner of the real
property.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Anthony T. Litsch, III, Esq.
          1368 Turnbull Bay Road, Suite 303
          New Smyrna Beach, FL 32168
          Phone: 386-409-7252
          Email: bb_litsch4@att.net
                 AnthonyTLitschiii@gmail.com

IDAHO: Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Response
--------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ABBY DAVIDS, MD, K.P.,
N.R., F.F., J.A.O.G., and JOHN DOE, v. ALEX ADAMS, in his official
capacity as Director of the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare,
MIREN UNSWORTH, in her official capacity as the Deputy Director of
IDHW in charge of Health & Human Services, ELKE SHAW-TULLOCH, in
her official capacity as the administrator of IDHW's Division of
Public Health, ANGIE BAILEY, as Director of the Idaho Bureau of
Rural Health & Primary Care, RAÚL LABRADOR, in his official
capacity as the Attorney General of Idaho, Case No.
1:25-cv-00334-AKB (D. Idaho), the Defendants ask the Court to enter
an order extending the deadline for the Defendants to file
responses to the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification and
motion to proceed in pseudonym and resetting that deadline to Aug.
29, 2025.

On July 10, 2025, the Plaintiffs' Counsel confirmed via email that
the Plaintiffs do not oppose this motion for an extension of time.


A copy of the Defendant's motion dated July 16, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=tqiOoL at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

Paul Carlos Southwick, Esq.
E-mail: psouthwick@acluidaho.org


Emily Myrei Croston, Esq.
E-mail: ecroston@acluidaho.org

Seth D. Levy, Esq.
Brian J. Whittaker, Esq.
E-mail: slevy@nixonpeabody.com
        bwhittaker@nixonpeabody.com


Vincent C. Capati, Esq.
Jacqueline D. Relatores, Esq.

E-mail: vcapati@nixonpeabody.com
        jrelatores@nixonpeabody.com


Joanna Cuevas Ingram, Esq.
Kevin Siegel, Esq.
Tanya Broder, Esq.

E-mail: cuevasingram@nilc.org
        siegel@nilc.org
        broder@nilc.org

Nikki Ramierez-Smith, Esq.
Casey Parsons, Esq.
Talia Burnett, Esq.
Neal Dougherty, Esq.

E-mail: nsmith@nrsdt.com
        cparsons@nrsdt.com
        tburnett@nrsdt.com
        ndougherty@nrsdt.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Raul R. Labrador, Esq.
          James E. M. Craig, Esq.
          David J. Myers, Esq.
          Megan Anderson, Esq.
          OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
          Boise, ID 83720-0010
          Telephone: (208) 334-2400
          Facsimile: (208) 854-8073
          E-mail: james.craig@ag.idaho.gov
                  david.myers@ag.idaho.gov
                  megan.anderson@ag.idaho.gov

INDEGENE INC: Progressive Health Wins Class Certification Bid
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PROGRESSIVE HEALTH AND
REHAB CORP., an Ohio corporation, individually and as the
representative of a class of similarly situated persons, v.
INDEGENE, INC., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-10106-ESK-AMD (D.N.J.),
the Hon. Judge Edward S. Kiel entered an order granting the
Plaintiff's motion for class certification:

  1. The Court certifies the plaintiff's proposed "Class A."

  2. The law firm Anderson + Wanca is appointed class counsel.

  3. The law firm Giordano, Halleran & Ciesla is appointed liaison

     counsel.

Indegene provides marketing products and services.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=P6cyJS at no extra
charge.[CC]

INTERMOUNTAIN HEALTH: Class Cert Bid Referred to Magistrate Judge
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Sheehy, et al., v.
Intermountain Health Care, Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-00914 (D. Colo.,
Filed March 20, 2025), the Hon. Judge Regina M. Rodriguez entered
an order referring unopposed motion to certify class to Mag. Judge
Susan Prose.

The nature of suit states Labor Litigation.

Intermountain operates as a hospital.[CC]

INTERMOUNTAIN HEALTH: Sheehy Seeks Certification of Class Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KERRI SHEEHY, DEAN BEACOM,
and TAYLOR ARCHULETA, on their own behalf and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, v. INTERMOUNTAIN HEALTH CARE, INC., Case
No. 1:25-cv-00914-RMR-SBP (D. Colo.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court
to enter an order certifying their Count I, and II claims for
failure to pay overtime wages required by Colorado statutes as a
class action pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(b)(3).

The case tests the legality of an overtime policy called into
question by subsequent judicial decision. The parties dispute the
lawfulness of the policy. They dispute which Colorado statute(s)
provide the applicable right of action. They dispute which statute
of limitations pertains. But they do not dispute the salient facts.


The Plaintiffs have satisfied the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P.
23(a) and (b)(3). Class adjudication would advance the interests of
justice and efficiency. The Plaintiffs request that the Court enter
an Order:

  1. Granting certification to a class defined as:

     "All hourly employees employed by the Defendant or one of
     Defendant's subsidiaries or affiliates in Colorado who worked

     overtime hours and hours eligible for holiday premium pay in
     the same workweek between Feb. 14, 2019 and Sept. 2, 2024."

     Excluded are employees working at Mount Saint Vincent in
     Denver, Colorado and Dr. Fletcher Jones, who is currently the

     plaintiff in Jones v. Sisters of Charity Leavenworth Health
     System, Inc., Broomfield County District Court Case No.
     2025CV30029.

  2. Appointing Plaintiffs Kerri Sheehy, Dean Beacom and Taylor
     Archuleta as Class Representatives;

  3. Appointing Brandt Milstein and Andrew H. Turner of Milstein
     Turner, PLLC as Class Counsel; and

  4. Directing the parties to file a Joint Motion for Approval of
     Class Notice and Distribution Plan within 14 days after the
     entry of any Order granting preliminary certification.

Intermountain operates as a hospital.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 17, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=pxYpnB at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Andrew H. Turner, Esq.
          Brandt Milstein, Esq.
          MILSTEIN TURNER, PLLC
          1490 Lafayette St. #304
          Denver, CO. 80218
          Telephone: (303) 305-8230
          E-mail: andrew@milsteinturner.com
                  brandt@milsteinturner.com

INTERNATIONAL PAPER: Bid to Remand Rojas Class Suit Tossed
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LUIS ROJAS, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. INTERNATIONAL
PAPER COMPANY, a New York corporation, Case No. 1:25-cv-03065-SAB
(E.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Stan Bastian entered an order denying
motion for remand:

The District Court Clerk is directed to enter this Order and
provide copies to counsel.

The Plaintiff brings this matter on behalf of himself and a
proposed class, identified as:

    "All hourly-paid or non-exempt employees of the Defendant in
    the State of Washington at any time during the period from
    March 7, 2022, to final disposition of this action."

The Plaintiff excludes any entity in which the Defendant has a
controlling interest or which has a controlling interest in the
Defendant, or the Defendant's legal representatives, assignees, and
successors.

On May 15, 2024, Defendant terminated Plaintiff from his job for
allegedly sleeping during a graveyard shift. Plaintiff alleged he
was sleeping in his car while on a break, off the warehouse floor,
and his final termination was a result of Defendant’s unlawful
employment practices.

The putative class action case was filed in Yakima County Superior
Court on March 7, 2025. On May 15, 2025, Defendant removed the
matter to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Washington based on (1) diversity jurisdiction, and (2) the Class
Action Fairness Act ("CAFA").

International is an American pulp and paper company.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=6fOC4j at no extra
charge.[CC]

INTERNATIONAL PAPER: Class Cert Bid Filing Amended to Nov. 25
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Ashworth v. International
Paper Co et al., Case No. 2:20-cv-00053-JDC-CBW (W.D. La.), the
Hon. Judge James D. Cain, Jr. entered a first amended scheduling
order for class certification hearing.

The moving party shall provide the undersigned the specific reasons
justifying the extension, even if the motion is unopposed. No
request for extension filed in violation of this order will be
granted absent a showing of good cause.

Although the court sets no specific deadline for completion of
discovery, the parties will note that Phase I Motions to Compel
must be filed no later than September 19, 2025 absent leave of
court.

Phase I motions to compel discovery shall be filed no later than
Sept. 19, 2025.

The Plaintiff's motion for class certification shall be filed no
later than Nov. 25, 2025.

Motions to amend the pleadings must be filed no later than Nov. 25,
2025.

Consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1) and
26(a)(2), Plaintiff shall serve disclosures related to class
certification on or before Nov. 25, 2025.

International is an American pulp and paper company.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=uPQ3ke at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Perry R. Sanders, Jr., Esq.
          THE SANDERS LAW FIRM, LLC
          400 Broad Street
          Lake Charles, LA 70601
          Telephone: (719) 630-1556
          E-mail: perry@perrysanders.com

                - and -

          David L. Wallace, Esq.
          518 North Pine Street, P.O. Box 489
          DeRidder, LA 70634
          wnblawoffice@bellsouth.net
          Telephone: 337-462-0473

                - and -

          Andrew K. Glenn, Esq.
          Trevor J. Welch, Esq.
          Jason Rotstein, Esq.
          Nathan J. Ades, Esq.
          GLENN AGRE BERGMAN & FUENTES LLP
          1185 Avenue of the Americas,
          22nd Floor New York, NY 10036
          Telephone: (212) 970-1600
          E-mail: aglenn@glennagre.com
                  twelch@glennagre.com
                  jrotstein@glennagre.com
                  nades@glennagre.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Daniel J. Mulholland, Esq.
          Joshua J. Metcalf, Esq.
          T. Joel Fyke, Esq.
          Taylor D. Waxley, Esq.
          FORMAN WATKINS & KRUTZ LLP
          210 East Capitol Street, Suite 2200
          Jackson, MS 39201
          Telephone: (601) 960-8600
          Facsimile: (601) 960-8613
          E-mail: LAEService@formanwatkins.com

                - and -

          Kevin M. Dills, Esq.
          Kyle L. Gideon, Esq.
          DAVIDSON, MEAUX, SONNIER, McELLIGOTT,
          FONTENOT, GIDEON & EDWARDS, LLP
          900 South College Road – Suite 100
          Lafayette, LA 70503
          Telephone: (337) 237-1600
          Facsimile: (337) 237-3676

JEREMIAH'S ORIGINAL: Victor Sues Over Unlawful Discrimination
-------------------------------------------------------------
Zephyrin Victor, and others similarly situated v. Jeremiah's
Original Water Ice, Inc., d/b/a Jeremiah's Italian Ice, a Florida
Corporation, and Jeremiah's Italian Ice of Coral Springs, LLC, a
Florida Limited Liability Company, Case No. 0:25-cv-61457-XXXX
(S.D. Fla., July 18, 2025), is brought for declaratory and
injunctive relief, attorney's fees, costs, and litigation expenses
for unlawful disability discrimination in violation of Title III of
the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA").

The Defendant owns, controls, maintains, and/or operates an adjunct
website, https://jeremiahsice.com/ (the "Website"). The website
provides the public with information about the location, hours, and
contact details of the Defendant's restaurant, presents various
menu items such as appetizers, burgers, desserts, dinner sides,
kids' menu options, pasta, salads, and sandwiches, including vegan
and vegetarian options, as well as cocktails and various bar
options.

The Plaintiff utilizes available screen reader software that allows
individuals who are blind and visually disabled to communicate with
websites. However, Defendant's Website contains access barriers
that prevent free and full use by blind and visually disabled
individuals using keyboards and available screen reader software.

The Defendant has not created and instituted on the Website a
useful and effective page for individuals with disabilities, nor
displayed a proper link and information hotline, nor created a
proper information portal explaining when and how Defendant will
have the Website, applications, and digital assets accessible to
the visually disabled and/or blind communities. The Website does
not meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines ("WCAG") 2.2
Level AA or higher versions of web accessibility, says the
complaint.

The Plaintiff is and at all relevant times has been blind and
visually disabled in that Plaintiff suffers from Retinitis
pigmentosa.

The Defendant owns, operates, and/or controls a U.S.-based dessert
shop offering authentic Italian ice.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Aleksandra Kravets, Esq.
          ALEKSANDRA KRAVETS, ESQ. P.A.
          865 SW 113 Lane
          Pembroke Pines, FL 33025
          Phone: 347-268-9533
          Email: ak@akesqpa.com

JMCR SAFETY: Faces Torres Wage-and-Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y.
--------------------------------------------------------
JORDON TORRES, GERARDO HENRIQUEZ, KEVIN BONILLA, CHRIS GUEVARA,
HENRY RECINOS, JEFFRY CASTILLO, JUAN PORTILLO, LEONEL RODRIGUEZ and
SANTOS PINEDA on behalf of themselves and others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. JOSE R. HERNANDEZ, CLAUDIA HERNADEZ, JMCR
SAFETY SURFACING CORP., 3 GENERATIONS SURFACING CORP. and MALIHESA
SURFACING CORP., Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-03926 (E.D.N.Y., July
15, 2025) is a class action brought against the Defendant pursuant
to the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New York Labor Law, and
related provisions from Title 12 of New York Codes, Rules, and
Regulations.

The complaint seeks to recover from the Defendants: (i) unpaid
wages for overtime work performed, (ii) unpaid spread of hours
wages for each day Plaintiffs worked 10 or more hours, (iii)
liquidated damages for failure to pay overtime premium and spread
of hours pay, (iv) liquidated damages for failure to furnish
Plaintiff a notice and acknowledgment at the time of hiring, (v)
attorneys' fees, (vi) interest, and (vii) all costs and
disbursements associated with this action.

The Plaintiffs bring these claims as a collective action, on behalf
of all non-exempt persons employed by Defendants at any New York
location on or after the date that is three years before the filing
of the Complaint.

JMCR Safety Surfacing Corp. provides playground surfacing,
resurfacing, and maintenance services.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Marcus Monteiro, Esq.
          MONTEIRO & FISHMAN LLP
          91 N. Franklin Street, Suite 108
          Hempstead, NY 11550
          Telephone: (516) 280-4600
          Facsimile: (516) 280-4530
          E-mail: mmonteiro@mflawny.com

JOSEPHINE COUNTY, OR: Class Settlement in Gabbert Gets Initial Nod
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Gabbert et al., v.
Josephine County, Case No. 1:23-cv-01434 (D. Or.), the Hon. Judge
Karin J. Immergut entered an order:

-- preliminarily approving settlement,

-- conditionally certifying class for settlement purposes,

-- approving form and manner of class notice, and

-- setting date for final approval hearing

Solely for the purpose of settlement in accordance with the
Settlement Agreement, and pursuant to Rule 23(a) and (b)(3),
this Court conditionally certifies the following class (the
"Settlement Class"):

     "All Persons and entities, and their heirs, successors and
     assignees, who owned, or had an ownership interest in, or a
     valid lien on real property that Defendant Multnomah County
     obtained through a foreclosure action to satisfy unpaid real
     estate taxes or other County or local government taxes and
     fees and associated fees and penalties, which the County sold

     for an amount in excess of the unpaid taxes, fees and other
     costs associated with that property, and for which the
     statutory redemption period expired during the Class Period."

     Consistent with the Settlement Agreement, the following are
     excluded from the Settlement Class: (i) All governmental
     units and entities of any type whatsoever including, but not
     limited to, U.S. Department of Treasury, the Internal Revenue

     Service, the State of Oregon, and Multnomah County, albeit
     this provision does not apply to estate administrators who
     pursuing claims on behalf of a deceased Eligible Claimant's
     estate; (ii) All former holders of an interest in an Eligible

     Property as to which any Eligible Claimant has submitted a
     request to be excluded from the Class under the procedures
     set forth in the Class Notice that is accepted by the Court
     and which is not timely revoked; (iii) All former holders of
     an interest in an Eligible Property by reason of a lien to
     secure payment of a debt or judgment which debt or judgment
     has since been satisfied or released; and (iv) All Potential
     Claimants who have already resolved their claim for Surplus
     Proceeds against Multnomah County through a settlement
     agreement, release or final judicial judgment as to which
     there is no appeal pending and/or the time to appeal has
     expired.

The Court preliminarily appoints Kyle Queahpama as heir of the
Estate of Roberta Queahpama as the class representative for the
Settlement Class.

Pursuant to Rule 23(g), the Court appoints Lead Counsel for the
Settlement Class (Fink Bressack; Kohn, Swift & Graf, P.C.; and
Preti, Flaherty, Beliveau & Pachios, Chartered, LLP) and Liaison
Counsel for the Settlement Class (Sugerman
Dahab).

A Final Approval Hearing shall be held before the undersigned at
10:00 a.m. on Nov. 10, 2025.

Josephine is one of the 36 counties in the U.S. state of Oregon.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=RUVBAd at no extra
charge.[CC]

KABAFUSION HOLDINGS: Ahmad Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Kabafusion Holdings,
LLC, et al. The case is styled as Sultan Ahmad, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Kabafusion Holdings,
LLC; Stellar Healthcare, Inc. d/b/a Stellar Home Health, Case No.
25STCV21698 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., July 22, 2025).

The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case
(General Jurisdiction)."

KabaFusion -- https://www.kabafusion.com/ -- is a home infusion
company that excels in its approach to patient care and positive
clinical outcomes.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          James R. Hawkins, Esq.
          JAMES HAWKINS APLC
          9880 Research Drive, Suite 200
          Irvine, CA 92318
          Phone: (949) 387-7200
          Fax: (949) 387-6676

KEVIN REALWORLDFARE: Civil Standing Order Entered in Marinaj Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARINAJ PROPERTIES LLC, v.
KEVIN REALWORLDFARE, et al. Case No. 5:25-cv-01450-SSS-SP (C.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Sunshine Sykes entered a civil standing order
as follows:

The plaintiff must promptly serve the complaint in accordance with
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4 and must comply with Local Rule
5-3 with respect to all proofs of service.

Counsel must file all civil and criminal filings pursuant to
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 5(d)(3) and Local Rule 5-4.

The Court hears scheduling conferences on Fridays beginning at 1:00
p.m.5 Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 16(b) and 26(f),
the Court will issue an Order Setting a Scheduling Conference.

If the action is a putative class action, the parties are to act
diligently and begin pre-certification discovery immediately, so
that the motion for class certification can be filed expeditiously.
All merits discovery is stayed until further order of the Court.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=0bcbjv at no extra
charge.[CC]

KRISTI NOEM: Plaintiffs Seek to Certify Class of Detainees
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as C.M., et al., on behalf of
themselves and all those similarly situated, v. KRISTI NOEM,
Secretary of Homeland Security, in her official capacity, et al.,
Case No. 1:25-cv-23182-RAR (S.D. Fla.), the Plaintiffs ask the
Court to enter an order granting motion to certify class:

    "All persons who are currently, or in the future, held at the
    Alligator Alcatraz detention facility."

The proposed class easily meets the requirements of Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure 23(a) and (b), the Plaintiffs contend.

This action is filed on behalf of a class of detained individuals
held at the immigration detention facility known as "Alligator
Alcatraz."

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 17, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=uqP7lh at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Paul R. Chavez, Esq.
          Christina LaRocca, Esq.
          AMERICANS FOR IMMIGRANT JUSTICE
          2200 NW 72nd Ave
          Miami, FL 33152
          Telephone: (786) 218-3381
          E-mail: pchavez@aijustice.org
                  clarocca@aijustice.org

                - and -

          Eunice H. Cho, Esq.
          AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION
          915 15th St. N.W., 7th Floor
          Washington, DC 20005
          Telephone: (202) 548-6616
          E-mail: echo@aclu.org.

                - and -

          Amy Godshall, Esq.
          Daniel Tilley, Esq.
          Corene Kendrick, Esq.
          Kyle Virgien, Esq.
          AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
          FOUNDATION OF FLORIDA
          4343 West Flagler Street, Suite 400
          Miami, FL 33134
          Telephone: (786) 363-2714
          E-mail: agodshall@aclufl.org
                  dtilley@aclufl.org
                  ckendrick@aclu.org
                  kvirgien@aclu.org

LEVY PREMIUM: Rivera Suit Removed to N.D. Illinois
--------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Sergio Rivera and Riley Nelson, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. LEVY PREMIUM
FOODSERVICE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP D/B/A LEVY, Case No. 2025CH06180
was removed from the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, to the
United States District Court for Northern District of Illinois on
July 18, 2025, and assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-08242.

The Complaint alleges claims for violation of Section 15(a) of
Illinois's Biometric Information Privacy Act ("BIPA"); violation of
Section 15(b) of BIPA; violation of Section 15(c) of BIPA;
violation of Section 15(d) of BIPA.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Kathleen A. Stetsko, Esq.
          PERKINS COIE LLP
          110 N Upper Wacker Dr Suite 3400,
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Phone: 312.324.8400
          Fax: 312.324.9400
          Email: KStetsko@perkinscoie.com

               - and -

          Moez M. Kaba, Esq.
          Sourabh Mishra, Esq.
          HUESTON HENNIGAN LLP
          620 Newport Center Drive
          Newport Beach, CA 92660
          Phone: (949)-356-5536
          Fax: (888) 775-0898
          Email: smishra@hueston.com

LOANDEPOT.COM LLC: Johnson Sues Over Loan's High Interest Rates
---------------------------------------------------------------
NATHAN JOHNSON, RACHEL DeBAUN, NATHAN MOORE, SHAWN DERRICK, ALAN
RABINOWITZ, on behalf of themselves as well as a Class of all
similarly situated persons, Plaintiffs v. LOANDEPOT.COM, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-02294-JRR (D. Md., July 15, 2025) is a
class action arising from loanDepot's deployment of a scheme to
systemically circumvent and conceal its willful violations of the
loan officer compensation laws set forth in the Truth in Lending
Act for the purpose of obtaining a competitive advantage over other
lenders and maximizing profits at the expense of Plaintiffs and
those similarly situated, all to enhance its financial performance
in the months leading up to and following its Initial Public
Offering.

According to the complaint, loanDepot unlawfully steered Plaintiffs
and those similarly situated to loans with higher rates and fees
and further created a system for the falsification of internal
forms and federal disclosures to conceal these illegal activities.
Loan officers were punished with reduced commission rates if they
were unable to sell loans with higher rates, and further punished
with no commission if they did not falsify internal documentation
aimed at concealing the illegal activity.

These actions provided loanDepot an unfair competitive advantage by
giving it the ability to both drive unsuspecting borrowers to loans
with the highest rates, while maintaining its flexibility to lower
rates to match competitors, who -- in compliance with the
applicable laws -- were forced to initially offer borrowers
mortgage loans with rates that more closely approximated the best
terms the lenders could offer. loanDepot's actions were therefore
unfair both to consumers and competitors alike, and upon
information and belief, undertaken to improve its financial results
ahead of its IPO and thereafter elevate its stock price for the
personal financial gain of its highest ranked executives, says the
suit.

Additionally, loanDepot exaggerated its profits by failing to
comply with federal lending regulations applicable to, and at the
expense of, all other lenders and originators of residential
mortgage loans. The Plaintiffs and Class members were victims of
this illegal steering and were charged higher interest rates and/or
fees than were otherwise available through the company, the suit
asserts.

loanDepot.com, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company that is
a wholly owned subsidiary of digital commerce company loanDepot,
Inc. via its holding company LD Holdings.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Ari Karen, Esq.
          Seth Waxman, Esq.
          MITCHELL SANDLER PLLC
          2020 K Street, NW, Suite 760
          Washington, DC 20006
          Telephone: (202) 886-5267
          E-mail: akaren@mitchellsandler.com
                  swaxman@mitchellsandler.com

LORI ANN WEST: Mirabelli Files Renewed Bid for Class Certification
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ELIZABETH MIRABELLI, an
individual, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated;
LORI ANN WEST, an individual, on behalf of herself and all others
similarly situated; et al., v. MARK OLSON, in his official capacity
as President of the EUSD Board of Education, et al., Case No.
3:23-cv-00768-BEN-VET (S.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs, on Aug. 18,
2025, will move the Court for an order to:

  (1) certify that this action is maintainable as a class action
      under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2) and (b)(1)(A), with four
      subclasses;

  (2) certify the class of persons described in the plaintiffs'
      second amended complaint as the plaintiff class; and

  (3) certify the individual plaintiffs as the class
      representatives, and their counsel of record as counsel for
      the plaintiff class.

The Second Amended Complaint proposes the following class and
subclasses:

      "All individuals who desire to participate in California's
      public education system, whether as employees or
      parents/guardians of students, without having to subject
      themselves to Parental Exclusion Policies, and

      (1) Are employees who object on ideological or conscience
          grounds, whether religious or secular, to complying with

          Parental Exclusion Policies (Claim for Relief No. 1);

      (2) Are employees who object on religious grounds to
          complying with Parental Exclusion Policies (Claims for
          Relief No. 2-3);

      (3) Are legal guardians who object on ideological or
          conscience grounds, whether religious or secular, to
          having Parental Exclusion Policies applied against them
          and have children who are attending California public
          schools and are experiencing, or have experienced,
          gender incongruence (Claim for Relief No. 7); or


      (4) Are legal guardians who object on religious grounds to
          having Parental Exclusion Policies applied against them
          and have children who are attending California public
          schools and are experiencing, or have experienced,
          gender incongruence (Claims for Relief No. 6, 8)."

The motion for class certification is made on the grounds that
certification is appropriate under Rule 23(b)(2) because it solely
seeks prospective declaratory and injunctive relief, and is
appropriate for certification under Rule 23(b)(1)(A) to avoid
inconsistent judgments.

Further, for both the overarching class and each of the four
proposed subclasses, the class is numerous, the questions are both
common and typical, and both plaintiffs and counsel will adequately
represent the class. This motion is supported by the accompanying
Memorandum of Points and Authorities, by the declaration of Paul M.
Jonna, Esq., and by such further argument and evidence that may be
adduced at any hearing on this matter or of which the Court may
take judicial notice.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 16, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=eeIzo3 at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Charles S. LiMandri, Esq.
          Paul M. Jonna, Esq.
          Jeffrey M. Trissell, Esq.
          William T. Duke, Esq.
          LiMANDRI & JONNA LLP
          Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067
          Telephone: (858) 759-9930
          Facsimile: (858) 759-9938
          E-mail: cslimandri@limandri.com
                  pjonna@limandri.com
                  jtrissell@limandri.com
                  wduke@limandri.com

                - and -

          Thomas Brejcha, Esq.
          Peter Breen
          THOMAS MORE SOCIETY
          309 W. Washington St., Ste. 1250
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Telephone: (312) 782-1680
          E-mail: tbrejcha@thomasmoresociety.org
                  pbreen@thomasmorsociety.org

The Defendants are represented by:

          Darrell Spence, Esq.
          Kevin L. Quade, Esq.
          Darin L. Wessel, Esq.
          Emmanuelle Soichet, Esq.
          Jennifer Bunshoft, Esq.
          Shatti Hoque, Esq.
          CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
          1300 I Street, Suite 125
          Sacramento, CA 94244-2550
          Telephone: (916) 210-6089
          E-mail: Darrell.Spence@doj.ca.gov
                  kevin.quade@doj.ca.gov
                  Darin.Wessel@doj.ca.gov
                  emmanuelle.soichet@doj.ca.gov
                  Jennifer.Bunshoft@doj.ca.gov
                  shatti.hoque@doj.ca.gov

                - and -

          Daniel R. Shinoff, Esq.
          Jack Sleeth, Esq.
          Maurice Bumbu, Esq.
          Lauren Cambronero, Esq.
          ARTIANO SHINOFF
          3636 Fourth Avenue, Suite 200
          San Diego, CA 92103
          Telephone: (619) 232-3122
          E-mail: dshinoff@as7law.com
                  nlay@as7law.com
                  jsleeth@as7law.com
                  mbumbu@as7law.com
                            lcambronero@as7law.com

LOS ANGELES, CA: Standing Order Entered in Banabou Class Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DANA BENABOU, v. SUPERIOR
COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, et al., Case No.
2:25-cv-06467-AB-PVC (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge entered a standing
order for civil cases assigned to Judge Birotte

The Plaintiff(s) shall promptly serve the Complaint in accordance
with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 and file the proofs of service
pursuant to Fed R. Civ. P. 4(l).

Any Answers filed in state court must be refiled in this Court as a
supplement to the Notice of Removal.

A party seeking any court order on any matter must include with
their filing a Proposed Order setting forth the relief or action
sought and a brief statement of the rationale for the decision with
appropriate citations.

All discovery matters are referred to the United States Magistrate
Judge assigned to this case. Th

Time for Filing and Hearing Motions: Motions must be filed in
accordance with Local Rules 6 and 7. Judge Birotte hears civil
motions on Fridays beginning at 10:00 a.m.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Wm8vwL at no extra
charge.[CC]

MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION: Class Cert Bid Modified to Jan. 12, 2026
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RIVA ON THE RIVER
HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION on behalf of itself and all others
similarly situated, v. THE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, INC. dba THE
MANAGEMENT TRUST, a California Corporation, Case No.
2:24-cv-02782-CSK (E.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Chi Soo Kim entered
an order granting the Parties' request to modify the Court's Jan.
30, 2025 Pretrial Scheduling Order as follows:

                   Event                        New Deadline

  Motion for Class Certification:              Jan. 12, 2026

  Opposition to Motion for Class               April 7, 2026
  Certification:

  Reply to Motion for Class Certification:     June 8, 2026

  Hearing on Motion for Class Certification:   June 30, 2026

  Expert Disclosures:                          Aug. 19, 2026

  Non-Expert Discovery Completion:             Sept. 2, 2026

  Expert Discovery Completion:                 Oct. 21, 2026

  Dispositive Motions Heard By:                Dec. 1, 2026

  Final Pretrial Conference and Motions        April 12, 2027
  In Limine Hearing:

Management is a national community association management firm that
specializes in serving condo and homeowner associations

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ZHiFAe at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael F. Ram, Esq.
          Marie N. Appel, Esq.  
          Colin Losey, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN
          COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP
          711 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 500
          San Francisco, CA 94102
          Telephone: (415) 846-3862
          Facsimile: (415) 358-6923
          E-mail: mram@forthepeople.com
                  mappel@forthepeople.com
                  colin.losey@forthepeople.com

                - and -

          Jeffrey B. Cereghino, Esq.
          CEREGHINO LAW GROUP LLP
          737 Bryant Street
          San Francisco, CA 94105
          Telephone: (415) 433-4949
          Facsimile: (415) 433-7311
          E-mail: jbc@cereghinolaw.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Fletcher C. Alford, Esq.
          Kevin Liu, Esq.
          Myles Lanzone, Esq.
          GORDON REES SCULLY
          MANSUKHANI, LLP
          315 Pacific Avenue
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 986-5900
          Facsimile: (415) 986-8054
          E-mail: falford@grsm.com
                  kliu@grsm.com
                  mlanzone@grsm.com

MARION COUNTY, OR: Class Settlement in Sawyer Suit Gets Initial Nod
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Sawyer et al., v. Marion
County et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-01971 (D. Or.), the Hon. Judge
Karin J. Immergut entered an order:

-- preliminarily approving settlement,

-- conditionally certifying class for settlement purposes,

-- approving form and manner of class notice, and

-- setting date for final approval hearing

Solely for the purpose of settlement in accordance with the
Settlement Agreement, and pursuant to Rule 23(a) and (b)(3),
this Court conditionally certifies the following class (the
"Settlement Class"):

     "All Persons and entities, and their heirs, successors and
     assignees, who owned, or had an ownership interest in, or a
     valid lien on real property that Defendant Multnomah County
     obtained through a foreclosure action to satisfy unpaid real
     estate taxes or other County or local government taxes and
     fees and associated fees and penalties, which the County sold

     for an amount in excess of the unpaid taxes, fees and other
     costs associated with that property, and for which the
     statutory redemption period expired during the Class Period."

     Consistent with the Settlement Agreement, the following are
     excluded from the Settlement Class: (i) All governmental
     units and entities of any type whatsoever including, but not
     limited to, U.S. Department of Treasury, the Internal Revenue

     Service, the State of Oregon, and Multnomah County, albeit
     this provision does not apply to estate administrators who
     pursuing claims on behalf of a deceased Eligible Claimant's
     estate; (ii) All former holders of an interest in an Eligible

     Property as to which any Eligible Claimant has submitted a
     request to be excluded from the Class under the procedures
     set forth in the Class Notice that is accepted by the Court
     and which is not timely revoked; (iii) All former holders of
     an interest in an Eligible Property by reason of a lien to
     secure payment of a debt or judgment which debt or judgment
     has since been satisfied or released; and (iv) All Potential
     Claimants who have already resolved their claim for Surplus
     Proceeds against Multnomah County through a settlement
     agreement, release or final judicial judgment as to which
     there is no appeal pending and/or the time to appeal has
     expired.

The Court preliminarily appoints Kyle Queahpama as heir of the
Estate of Roberta Queahpama as the class representative for the
Settlement Class.

Pursuant to Rule 23(g), the Court appoints Lead Counsel for the
Settlement Class (Fink Bressack; Kohn, Swift & Graf, P.C.; and
Preti, Flaherty, Beliveau & Pachios, Chartered, LLP) and Liaison
Counsel for the Settlement Class (Sugerman
Dahab).

A Final Approval Hearing shall be held before the undersigned at
10:00 a.m. on Nov. 10, 2025.

Marion is one of the 36 counties in the U.S. state of Oregon.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=nYtJBR at no extra
charge.[CC]

MARRIOTT HOTEL: Fernandez Suit Removed to C.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Kevin Fernandez, individually, and on behalf
of other members of the general public similarly situated v.
MARRIOTT HOTEL SERVICES, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company;
MARRIOTT HOTEL SERVICES, INC., a Delaware corporation; MARRIOTT
INTERNATIONAL, INC. a Delaware corporation; SHERATON OPERATING
CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 100,
inclusive, Case No. 25STCV12753 was removed from the Superior Court
of the State of California in and for the County of Los Angeles, to
the United States District Court for Central District of California
on July 17, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-06543.

The Plaintiff's Complaint asserts ten causes of action: failure to
pay overtime; failure to provide meal periods; failure to provide
rest periods; failure to pay minimum wages; failure to timely pay
final wages; failure to pay wages timely during employment; failure
to provide compliant wage statements; failure to keep requisite
payroll records; failure to reimburse necessary business expenses;
and unfair business practices.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Greg S. Labate, Esq.
          Eric T. Angel, Esq.
          SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP
          A Limited Liability Partnership
          Including Professional Corporations
          650 Town Center Drive, 10th Floor
          Costa Mesa, CA 92626-1993
          Phone: 714.513.5100
          Facsimile: 714.513.5130
          Email: glabate@sheppardmullin.com
                 eangel@sheppardmullin.com

MARSHA MCLANE: Richards' Bid for Interim Counsel Appointment Nixed
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JAMES RICHARDS, v. MARSHA
MCLANE, TCCO Executive Director, et al., Case No.
5:25-cv-00075-H-BV (N.D. Tex.), the Hon. Judge James Wesley Hendrix
entered an order denying the motion for designation of interim
counsel and appointment of class counsel.

The Plaintiff has not demonstrated that McLauchlan is willing to
accept appointment in this case in the first place or that he is
admitted to practice in this Court. McLauchlan may, however, enter
an appearance in this case at any time if he has agreed to
represent the Plaintiff and the proposed class on a pro bono or
other basis.

The Plaintiff's request for class certification remains pending the
Court's consideration of the defendants' respective motions to
dismiss. However, once the Court has resolved the pending motions
to dismiss and if it determines that class certification is
appropriate, the Court may sua sponte determine that assistance of
appointed counsel is warranted.

The Plaintiff is not proceeding in forma pauperis, and he has not
shown or attempted to show that he is indigent. But even if he were
financially eligible, the Court would deny appointment of counsel
at this stage in the case.

The Plaintiff asks the Court to "designate and appoint" Robert A.
McLauchlan of Galveston, Texas, as interim and class counsel
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(g)(1) and (g)(3).

To the extent Plaintiff asks the Court to appoint Mr. McLachlan to
represent him, the Court finds that he has, thus far, shown himself
capable of self-representation. The Plaintiff's case does not
appear to be especially complex, and he has filed numerous
pleadings, motions, and briefs, complete with citations to legal
authorities urged in support of his arguments, which demonstrate
that at this stage of the litigation he is quite able to adequately
investigate his case.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=cuOb1S at no extra
charge.[CC]

MDL 2873: Adams Alleges Injury Due to Toxic Chemical Exposure
-------------------------------------------------------------
James Adams, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE
EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA USS. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.;
BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CB GARMENT; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD,
INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD;
CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.1. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX,
LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLU, INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC;
HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON
CONTROLS; KIDDE PLC; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY
SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES
CO.,LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING CO.,INC.; SAFETY
COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.;
STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES
INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC., Defendants, Case No.
2:25-cv-06189-RMG  (D.S.C., June 25, 2025) is a class action for
damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams and firefighter turnout gear containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (PFAS) that includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

According to the complaint, PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of
humans exposed to the material and remains and persists over long
periods of time. Due to their unique chemical structure, PFAS
accumulates in the blood and body of exposed individuals. The
Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. The Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately,
caused him to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications, says the suit.

Plaintiff Adams regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed
to, AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his
firefighting career. He was diagnosed with Thyroid Disease and High
Cholesterol as a direct result of exposure to Defendants' products,
the suit alleges.

The Adams case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul,
Minnesota.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph Y. Shenkar, Esq.
          MARC J. BERN & PARTNERS, LLP
          101 West Elm St., Suite 520
          Conshohocken, PA 19428
          Telephone: (803) 315-3357
          Facsimile: (610) 941-9880
          E-mail: jshenkar@bernllp.com

MDL 2873: Bentley Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------
JAMES M. BENTLEY, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR
FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA USS. INC.; ARKEMA,
INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER
GLOBAL CORPORATION; CB GARMENT; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.;
CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB
FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.;
DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT
INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.1. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLU, INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY
LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON
CONTROLS; KIDDE PLC; LION GROUP, INC.; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; MILLIKEN
& COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY
SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.;
PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RICOCHET
MANUFACTURING CO.,INC.; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES,
INC.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN
LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP,
INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-06207-RMG (D.S.C., June 25,
2025) is a class action for damages for personal injury resulting
from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams and firefighter turnout
gear containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as per and
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) that includes, but is not limited
to, perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

According to the complaint, PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of
humans exposed to the material and remains and persists over long
periods of time. Due to their unique chemical structure, PFAS
accumulates in the blood and body of exposed individuals. The
Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. The Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately,
caused him to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications, says the suit.

Plaintiff Bentley regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed
to, AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working
career as a military and/or civilian firefighter. He was diagnosed
with liver cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products, the suit alleges.

The Bentley case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul,
Minnesota.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James C. Ferrell, Esq.
          FERRELL LAW GROUP, PC
          6226 Washington Avenue, Suite 200
          Houston, TX 77007
          Telephone: (713) 337-3855
          Facsimile: (713) 337-3856

MDL 2873: Colgrove Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
------------------------------------------------------------
NEIL E. COLGROVE, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR
FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA USS. INC.; ARKEMA,
INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER
GLOBAL CORPORATION; CB GARMENT; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.;
CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB
FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.;
DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT
INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.1. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLU, INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY
LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON
CONTROLS; KIDDE PLC; LION GROUP, INC.; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; MILLIKEN
& COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY
SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.;
PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RICOCHET
MANUFACTURING CO.,INC.; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES,
INC.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN
LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP,
INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-06209-RMG (D.S.C., June 25,
2025) is a class action for damages for personal injury resulting
from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams and firefighter turnout
gear containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as per and
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) that includes, but is not limited
to, perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

According to the complaint, PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of
humans exposed to the material and remains and persists over long
periods of time. Due to their unique chemical structure, PFAS
accumulates in the blood and body of exposed individuals. The
Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. The Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately,
caused him to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications, says the suit.

Plaintiff Colgrove regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed
to, AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working
career as a military and/or civilian firefighter. He was diagnosed
with prostate, pancreatic and thyroid cancers as a result of
exposure to Defendants' AFFF products, the suit alleges.

The Colgrove case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul,
Minnesota.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James C. Ferrell, Esq.
          FERRELL LAW GROUP, PC
          6226 Washington Avenue, Suite 200
          Houston, TX 77007
          Telephone: (713) 337-3855
          Facsimile: (713) 337-3856

MDL 2873: Exposes Firefighters to Toxic Chemicals, Calabro Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
PETER CALABRO, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE
EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA USS. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.;
BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CB GARMENT; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD,
INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD;
CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.1. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX,
LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLU, INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC;
HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON
CONTROLS; KIDDE PLC; LION GROUP, INC.; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; MILLIKEN
& COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY
SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.;
PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RICOCHET
MANUFACTURING CO.,INC.; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES,
INC.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN
LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP,
INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-06208-RMG (D.S.C., June 25,
2025) is a class action for damages for personal injury resulting
from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams and firefighter turnout
gear containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as per and
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) that includes, but is not limited
to, perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

According to the complaint, PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of
humans exposed to the material and remains and persists over long
periods of time. Due to their unique chemical structure, PFAS
accumulates in the blood and body of exposed individuals. The
Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. The Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately,
caused him to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications, says the suit.

Plaintiff Calabro regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed
to, AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working
career as a military and/or civilian firefighter. He was diagnosed
with prostate cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products, the suit alleges.

The Calabro case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul,
Minnesota.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James C. Ferrell, Esq.
          FERRELL LAW GROUP, PC
          6226 Washington Avenue, Suite 200
          Houston, TX 77007
          Telephone: (713) 337-3855
          Facsimile: (713) 337-3856

MDL 2873: Exposes Firefighters to Toxic Chemicals, Grammer Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
SHARON AMORA GRAMMER, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota
Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.;
ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA USS. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CB GARMENT; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.;
CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB
FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.;
DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT
INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.1. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLU, INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY
LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON
CONTROLS; KIDDE PLC; LION GROUP, INC.; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; MILLIKEN
& COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY
SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.;
PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RICOCHET
MANUFACTURING CO.,INC.; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES,
INC.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN
LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP,
INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-06200-RMG (D.S.C., June 25,
2025) is a class action for damages for personal injury resulting
from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams and firefighter turnout
gear containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as per and
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) that includes, but is not limited
to, perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

According to the complaint, PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of
humans exposed to the material and remains and persists over long
periods of time. Due to their unique chemical structure, PFAS
accumulates in the blood and body of exposed individuals. The
Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. The Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately,
caused him to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications, says the suit.

Plaintiff Grammer regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed
to, AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working
career as a military and/or civilian firefighter. She was diagnosed
with breast cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products, the suit alleges.

The Grammer case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul,
Minnesota.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James C. Ferrell, Esq.
          FERRELL LAW GROUP, PC
          6226 Washington Avenue, Suite 200
          Houston, TX 77007
          Telephone: (713) 337-3855
          Facsimile: (713) 337-3856

MDL 2873: Exposes Firefighters to Toxic Chemicals, Raade Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Raade, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE
EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA USS. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.;
BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CB GARMENT; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD,
INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD;
CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.1. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX,
LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLU, INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC;
HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON
CONTROLS; KIDDE PLC; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY
SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES
CO.,LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING CO.,INC.; SAFETY
COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.;
STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES
INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC., Defendants, Case No.
2:25-cv-06186-RMG  (D.S.C., June 25, 2025) is a class action for
damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams and firefighter turnout gear containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (PFAS) that includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

According to the complaint, PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of
humans exposed to the material and remains and persists over long
periods of time. Due to their unique chemical structure, PFAS
accumulates in the blood and body of exposed individuals. The
Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. The Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately,
caused him to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications, says the suit.

Plaintiff Raade regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed
to, AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his
firefighting career. He was diagnosed with Thyroid Disease as a
direct result of exposure to Defendants' products, the suit
alleges.

The Raade case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul,
Minnesota.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph Y. Shenkar, Esq.
          MARC J. BERN & PARTNERS, LLP
          101 West Elm St., Suite 520
          Conshohocken, PA 19428
          Telephone: (803) 315-3357
          Facsimile: (610) 941-9880
          E-mail: jshenkar@bernllp.com

MDL 2873: Exposes Firefighters to Toxic Chemicals, Scott Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
Garry Scott, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE
EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA USS. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.;
BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CB GARMENT; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD,
INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD;
CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.1. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX,
LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLU, INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC;
HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON
CONTROLS; KIDDE PLC; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY
SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES
CO.,LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING CO.,INC.; SAFETY
COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.;
STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES
INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC., Defendants, Case No.
2:25-cv-06185-RMG  (D.S.C., June 25, 2025) is a class action for
damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams and firefighter turnout gear containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (PFAS) that includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

According to the complaint, PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of
humans exposed to the material and remains and persists over long
periods of time. Due to their unique chemical structure, PFAS
accumulates in the blood and body of exposed individuals. The
Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. The Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately,
caused him to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications, says the suit.

Plaintiff Scott regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed
to, AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his
firefighting career. He was diagnosed with Thyroid Disease and High
Cholesterol as a direct result of exposure to Defendants' products,
the suit alleges.

The Scott case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul,
Minnesota.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph Y. Shenkar, Esq.
          MARC J. BERN & PARTNERS, LLP
          101 West Elm St., Suite 520
          Conshohocken, PA 19428
          Telephone: (803) 315-3357
          Facsimile: (610) 941-9880
          E-mail: jshenkar@bernllp.com

MDL 2873: Exposes Firefighters to Toxic Chemicals, Wagner Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
Corey Wagner, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE
EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA USS. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.;
BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CB GARMENT; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD,
INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD;
CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.1. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX,
LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLU, INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC;
HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON
CONTROLS; KIDDE PLC; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY
SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES
CO.,LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING CO.,INC.; SAFETY
COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.;
STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES
INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC., Defendants, Case No.
2:25-cv-06187-RMG  (D.S.C., June 25, 2025) is a class action for
damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams and firefighter turnout gear containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (PFAS) that includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

According to the complaint, PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of
humans exposed to the material and remains and persists over long
periods of time. Due to their unique chemical structure, PFAS
accumulates in the blood and body of exposed individuals. The
Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. The Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately,
caused him to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications, says the suit.

Plaintiff Wagner regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed
to, AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his
firefighting career. He was diagnosed with Thyroid Disease, High
Cholesterol as a direct result of exposure to Defendants' products,
the suit alleges.

The Wagner case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul,
Minnesota.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph Y. Shenkar, Esq.
          MARC J. BERN & PARTNERS, LLP
          101 West Elm St., Suite 520
          Conshohocken, PA 19428
          Telephone: (803) 315-3357
          Facsimile: (610) 941-9880
          E-mail: jshenkar@bernllp.com

MDL 2873: Faces Begg Suit Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
--------------------------------------------------------------
DONALD F. A. BEGG, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR
FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA USS. INC.; ARKEMA,
INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER
GLOBAL CORPORATION; CB GARMENT; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.;
CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB
FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.;
DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT
INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.1. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLU, INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY
LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON
CONTROLS; KIDDE PLC; LION GROUP, INC.; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; MILLIKEN
& COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY
SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.;
PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RICOCHET
MANUFACTURING CO.,INC.; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES,
INC.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN
LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP,
INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-06206-RMG (D.S.C., June 25,
2025) is a class action for damages for personal injury resulting
from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams and firefighter turnout
gear containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as per and
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) that includes, but is not limited
to, perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

According to the complaint, PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of
humans exposed to the material and remains and persists over long
periods of time. Due to their unique chemical structure, PFAS
accumulates in the blood and body of exposed individuals. The
Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. The Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately,
caused him to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications, says the suit.

Plaintiff Begg regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter. He was diagnosed with
pancreatic cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products, the suit alleges.

The Begg case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re: Aqueous
Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case is
assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul,
Minnesota.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James C. Ferrell, Esq.
          FERRELL LAW GROUP, PC
          6226 Washington Avenue, Suite 200
          Houston, TX 77007
          Telephone: (713) 337-3855
          Facsimile: (713) 337-3856

MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Cook Says
------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL HUGH COOK, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR
FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA USS. INC.; ARKEMA,
INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER
GLOBAL CORPORATION; CB GARMENT; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.;
CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB
FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.;
DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT
INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.1. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLU, INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY
LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON
CONTROLS; KIDDE PLC; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY
SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES
CO.,LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING CO.,INC.; SAFETY
COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.;
STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES
INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC., Defendants, Case No.
2:25-cv-06211-RMG (D.S.C., June 25, 2025) is a class action for
damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams and firefighter turnout gear containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (PFAS) that includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

According to the complaint, PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of
humans exposed to the material and remains and persists over long
periods of time. Due to their unique chemical structure, PFAS
accumulates in the blood and body of exposed individuals. The
Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. The Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately,
caused him to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications, says the suit.

Plaintiff Cook regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his firefighting
career. He was diagnosed with lymphoma as a direct result of
exposure to Defendants' products, the suit alleges.

The Cook case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re: Aqueous
Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case is
assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul,
Minnesota.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph Y. Shenkar, Esq.
          MARC J. BERN & PARTNERS, LLP
          101 West Elm St., Suite 520
          Conshohocken, PA 19428
          Telephone: (803) 315-3357
          Facsimile: (610) 941-9880
          E-mail: jshenkar@bernllp.com

MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Edwards Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
Linda Edwards, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE
EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA USS. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.;
BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CB GARMENT; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD,
INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD;
CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.1. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX,
LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLU, INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC;
HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON
CONTROLS; KIDDE PLC; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY
SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES
CO.,LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING CO.,INC.; SAFETY
COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.;
STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES
INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC., Defendants, Case No.
2:25-cv-06191-RMG  (D.S.C., June 25, 2025) is a class action for
damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams and firefighter turnout gear containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (PFAS) that includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

According to the complaint, PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of
humans exposed to the material and remains and persists over long
periods of time. Due to their unique chemical structure, PFAS
accumulates in the blood and body of exposed individuals. The
Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. The Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately,
caused him to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications, says the suit.

Plaintiff Edwards regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed
to, AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his
firefighting career. He was diagnosed with Thyroid Disease and High
Cholesterol as a direct result of exposure to Defendants' products,
the suit alleges.

The Edwards case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul,
Minnesota.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph Y. Shenkar, Esq.
          MARC J. BERN & PARTNERS, LLP
          101 West Elm St., Suite 520
          Conshohocken, PA 19428
          Telephone: (803) 315-3357
          Facsimile: (610) 941-9880
          E-mail: jshenkar@bernllp.com

MDL 2873: Griffin Alleges Injury Due to Toxic Chemical Exposure
---------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Griffin, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE
EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA USS. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.;
BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CB GARMENT; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD,
INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD;
CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.1. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX,
LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLU, INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC;
HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON
CONTROLS; KIDDE PLC; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY
SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES
CO.,LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING CO.,INC.; SAFETY
COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.;
STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES
INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC., Defendants, Case No.
2:25-cv-06190-RMG (D.S.C., June 25, 2025) is a class action for
damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams and firefighter turnout gear containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (PFAS) that includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

According to the complaint, PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of
humans exposed to the material and remains and persists over long
periods of time. Due to their unique chemical structure, PFAS
accumulates in the blood and body of exposed individuals. The
Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. The Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately,
caused him to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications, says the suit.

Plaintiff Griffin regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed
to, AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working
career as a military and/or civilian firefighter. He was diagnosed
with Thyroid Cancer and High Cholesterol as a result of exposure to
Defendants' AFFF products, the suit alleges.

The Griffin case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul,
Minnesota.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph Y. Shenkar, Esq.
          MARC J. BERN & PARTNERS, LLP
          101 West Elm St., Suite 520
          Conshohocken, PA 19428
          Telephone: (803) 315-3357
          Facsimile: (610) 941-9880
          E-mail: jshenkar@bernllp.com

MDL 2873: Procovich Suit Alleges Toxic Chemical Exposure
--------------------------------------------------------
Stanley Procovich, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR
FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA USS. INC.; ARKEMA,
INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER
GLOBAL CORPORATION; CB GARMENT; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.;
CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB
FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.;
DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT
INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.1. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLU, INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY
LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON
CONTROLS; KIDDE PLC; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY
SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES
CO.,LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING CO.,INC.; SAFETY
COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.;
STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES
INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC., Defendants, Case No.
2:25-cv-06188-RMG (D.S.C., June 25, 2025) is a class action for
damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams and firefighter turnout gear containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (PFAS) that includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.

According to the complaint, PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of
humans exposed to the material and remains and persists over long
periods of time. Due to their unique chemical structure, PFAS
accumulates in the blood and body of exposed individuals. The
Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. The Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately,
caused him to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications, says the suit.

Plaintiff Procovich regularly used, and was thereby directly
exposed to, AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his
working career as a military and/or civilian firefighter. He was
diagnosed with Thyroid Cancer and High Cholesterol as a result of
exposure to Defendants' AFFF products, the suit alleges.

The Procovich case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.

3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul,
Minnesota.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph Y. Shenkar, Esq.
          MARC J. BERN & PARTNERS, LLP
          101 West Elm St., Suite 520
          Conshohocken, PA 19428
          Telephone: (803) 315-3357
          Facsimile: (610) 941-9880
          E-mail: jshenkar@bernllp.com

MERCEDES-BENZ USA: Class Cert Bid Filing in Ryvkin Due Sept. 22
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RYVKIN, et al, v.
MERCEDES-BENZ USA LLC, Case No. 4:24-cv-06975-YGR (N.D. Cal.), the
Hon. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers entered an order setting the
following trial and pretrial dates:

  Joint case management conference                April 27, 2026
  statement:

  Non-expert discovery cutoff:                    May 29, 2026

  Expert discovery cutoff:                        May 15, 2026

  Motion for class certification to be filed by:  June 15, 2026

  Opposition due by:                              July 27, 2026

  Reply due by:                                   Aug. 17, 2026

  Motion for class certification to be heard by:  Sept. 22, 2026,
                                                  at 2:00 p.m.

Mercedes-Benz USA is responsible for the distribution, marketing
and customer service for all Mercedes-Benz products.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 14, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5SGOrc at no extra
charge.[CC]

MICHAEL BICKERS: Rhodes Allowed Leave to Start Discovery
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RHODES v. MICHAEL W.
BICKERS, ET AL., et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-02147 (C.D. Ill., Filed
June 21, 2024), the Hon. Judge Colin Stirling Bruce entered an
order granting the Plaintiffs leave to commence discovery necessary
for the Plaintiff to demonstrate good cause and sufficient
evidentiary support its motion for class certification.

-- The Plaintiff's deadline to file the motion is Nov. 13, 2025.

The nature of suit states Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).[CC]

MICHAEL CARROLL: Dous Sues Over Discriminatory Suspension Scheme
----------------------------------------------------------------
Mena Dous, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v.
MICHAEL CARROLL, in his official capacity Secretary of
Transportation of the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation;
LARRY SHIFFLETT, in his official capacity as Executive Deputy
Secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation; KARA
TEMPLETON, in her official capacity as Deputy Secretary for Driver
and Vehicle Services of the Pennsylvania Department of
Transportation, JOSH SHAPIRO, in his official capacity as Governor
of Pennsylvania; Case No. 1:25-cv-01329-PJC (E.D. Pa., July 21,
2025), is brought pursuant to the violations of the Fourteenth
Amendment to the United States Constitution, seeking declaratory
and injunctive relief, as well as compensatory and punitive damages
due to the Defendants discriminatory driver's license suspension
scheme.

This case is about the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation
operating a discriminatory and economically exploitative driver's
license suspension scheme that punishes the poor and vulnerable,
disproportionately affecting economically and socially
disenfranchised communities, disproportionately affecting Black and
Brown motorists. The Commonwealth automatically suspends the
licenses of individuals who allegedly fail to respond to or pay
citations, even when no conviction exists in cases pertaining to
response, no hearing is held, and no meaningful notice is given.
These suspensions are imposed automatically without judicial
review, conviction, or any meaningful opportunity to contest their
validity violating basic principles of due process.

For those already struggling financially, the loss of a driver's
license is not a minor inconvenience--it's a catastrophic barrier
to employment, family responsibilities, healthcare access, and
survival. To escape the cycle, individuals must pay restoration
fees for each individual suspension incurred, turning the system
into an engine of revenue extraction that feeds on hardship. This
lawsuit challenges that scheme as unconstitutional under the
Fourteenth and Eighth Amendments, exposing a structure designed to
entrap, not rehabilitate; to punish, not protect, says the
complaint.

The Plaintiff's License is unlawfully suspended indefinitely for
failure to respond to a citation which was resolved and that he was
not convicted of.

Michael Carroll oversees and is ultimately responsible for all
actions of PennDOT, which has exclusive authority to suspend or
revoke driver's licenses for drug convictions.[BN]

The Plaintiff appears pro se.

MICROMOBILITY.COM INC: Seeks Reconsideration of July 14 Order
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Barron et al., v.
micromobility.com Inc. et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-04703-PKC
(S.D.N.Y.), the Defendants ask the Court to enter an order
submitted a request for reconsideration of the Court's Orders from
July 14, 2015 granting the Plaintiffs' letter request seeking an
extension of the deadlines regarding the Plaintiffs' anticipated
motion for class certification pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 23.

The Defendants contend that denying reconsideration will severely
prejudice the Micromobility Defendants and cause other harms.
Indeed, the Court's omission to consider the Micromobility
Defendants’ well supported opposition undermines the public’s
faith in our judicial system.

If the Orders are permitted to stand, the public will perceive that
the Court's Individual Rules and this District's Local Rules may be
arbitrarily disregarded, that deadlines can be ignored without
consequences, and a party's rights to make legal and factual
arguments and be heard may be ignored altogether. At a minimum, the
Micromobility Defendants are entitled to a fulsome record for
appeal, the suit says.

Micromobility.com provides dockless intra urban transportation
solutions.

A copy of the Defendants' motion dated July 16, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=jCQZy8 at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Robert G. Heim, Esq.
          TARTER KRINSKY & DROGIN LLP
          1350 Broadway
          New York, NY 10018

                - and -

          Benjamin Galdston, Esq.
          OMNUM LAW APC
          4350 Executive Drive, Suite 350
          San Diego, CA 92121

MICROSTRATEGY: Dodge Sues Over Breach of Fiduciary Duty
-------------------------------------------------------
David Dodge, on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated
stockholders of Microstrategy Incorporated v. MICROSTRATEGY
INCORPORATED, MICHAEL J. SAYLOR, PETER L. BRIGER JR., BRIAN P.
BROOKS, JANE A. DIETZE, PHONG Q. LE, JARROD M. PATTEN, STEPHEN X.
GRAHAM, CARL J. RICKERSTEN, and GREGG J. WINIARSKI, Case No.
2025-0846- (Del. Chancery Ct., July 21, 2025), is brought against
the Company and its board of directors (the "Board") for their
violation of the Delaware General Corporation Law (the "DGCL"), and
to assert a claim against the Board for breach of fiduciary duty in
connection with the DGCL violation.

The Company has two classes of common stock outstanding: Class A
Common Stock and Class B Common Stock (collectively, the "Common
Stock"). In February 2025, the Board used its "blank check" powers
under the Company's Second Restated Certificate of Incorporation
(the "Charter") to create a new series of preferred stock, titled
"8.00% Series A Perpetual Strike Preferred Stock" (the "Perpetual
Strike Preferred Stock"). The terms of the Perpetual Strike
Preferred Stock were set forth in a certificate of designations
(the "Certificate of Designations") filed with the Delaware
Secretary of State (the "Delaware Secretary of State") on February
5, 2025.

As of June 30, 2025, there were 12,201,367 shares of Perpetual
Strike Preferred Stock outstanding; these shares trade on the
NASDAQ under the symbol "STRK." The Perpetual Strike Preferred
Stock ranks senior to the Common Stock with respect to the payment
of dividends and the distribution of assets upon MicroStrategy's
liquidation, dissolution or windup.

On July 7, 2025, the price of the Perpetual Strike Preferred Stock
closed at $120.80 per share. Using the $120.80 price and the
12,201,367 shares of Perpetual Strike Preferred Stock outstanding
as of June 30, 2025, this equates to an aggregate Liquidation
Preference of $1,473,925,134 as a result of the Amendment, an
increase of more than $250 million.

The holders of the Company's common stock were entitled to vote on
the Amendment. In violation of the DGCL, the Board effectuated the
Amendment without seeking stockholder approval. The Plaintiff
therefore seeks to invalidate the Amendment or obtain a stockholder
vote on the Amendment in accordance with Delaware law, says the
complaint.

The Plaintiff has owned Class A Common Stock continuously since
March 2025.

MicroStrategy is a Delaware corporation with its principal
executive offices in Tysons Corner, Virginia.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David A. Jenkins, Esq.
          Neal C. Belgam, Esq.
          Jason Z. Miller, Esq.
          SMITH, KATZENSTEIN & JENKINS, LLP
          1000 West Street, Suite 1501
          Wilmington, DE 19801
          Phone: (302) 652-8400
          Email: daj@skjlaw.com
                 nbelgam@skjlaw.com
                 jmiller@skjlaw.com

MODERN FRAMER: Costa Files Suit in Mass. Super. Ct.
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Modern Framer, Inc.
The case is styled as Saulo Costa, on behalf of Himself and all
others similarly situated individuals v. Modern Framer, Inc.,
Daniel Alves, Case No. 2585CV00980 (Mass. Super. Ct., Worcester
Cty., July 21, 2025).

The case type is stated as "Contract / Business Cases."[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David Denison Dishman, Esq.
          DISHMAN LAW, PC
          224 Lewis Wharf
          Boston, MA 02110
          Phone: (617) 523-5252

MONSANTO COMPANY: Harper Suit Transferred to N.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Christine Harper, and others similarly
situated v. Monsanto Company, Case No. 4:25-cv-00772 was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Missouri, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of California on July 15, 2025.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-05968-VC to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Product Liability.

The Monsanto Company -- https://www.monsanto.com/ -- was an
American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation
founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Tiffany Webber Carpenter, Esq.
          CORY WATSON, P.C.
          254 Court Avenue, Suite 511
          Memphis, TN 38103
          Phone: (901) 402-2000
          Fax: (866) 327-4000
          Email: tcarpenter@corywatson.com

MONSANTO COMPANY: Sessler Suit Transferred to N.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Baylee Sessler, and others similarly situated
v. Monsanto Company, Case No. 2:25-cv-07139 was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, to the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of California on July 17,
2025.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-06040-VC to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Product Liability.

The Monsanto Company -- https://www.monsanto.com/ -- was an
American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation
founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jason Travis Brown, Esq.
          BROWN, LLC
          111 Town Square Place, Suite 400
          Jersey City, NJ 07310
          Phone: (877) 561-0000
          Fax: (855) 582-5297
          Email: jtb@jtblawgroup.com

MOTOROLA MOBILITY: Class Cert Bid Filing in Gabrielle Due Sept. 4
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JONATHAN GABRIELLI, v.
MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC, Case No. 4:24-cv-09533-JST (N.D. Cal.), the
Hon. Judge Jon Tigar entered a scheduling order as follows:

                       Event                       Deadline

  Deadline to add parties or amend the           Aug. 4, 2025
  pleadings:

  Fact discovery cut-off:                        To be set

  Class certification motion and Plaintiff's     Sept. 4, 2026
  class certification expert disclosures due:

  Defendant's motion to exclude Plaintiff's      Dec. 3, 2026
  expert(s) due:

  Class certification opposition and             Dec. 3, 2026
  Defendant's class certification expert
  disclosures due:

  The Plaintiff's opposition to Defendant's      Jan. 14, 2027
  motion to exclude expert(s) due:

  The Defendant's reply in support of            Feb. 1, 2027
  excluding expert(s) due:

  The Plaintiff's reply in support of class      Feb. 4, 2027
  certification due:

The Court sets a further case management conference on October 17,
2025 at 1:30 p.m. (because more than one conference will be set at
that time, the conference may not begin precisely at 1:30 p.m.).
The conference will proceed by video. The parties must file a joint
case management conference statement by October 10, 2025.

Motorola is a consumer electronics manufacturer known for producing
smartphones and other mobile devices.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=pkBhsX at no extra
charge.[CC]

MULTNOMAH COUNTY, OR: Settlement in Lynch Suit Gets Initial Nod
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Lynch et al., v. Multnomah
County et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-01502 (D. Or.), the Hon. Judge
Karin J. Immergut entered an order:

-- preliminarily approving settlement,

-- conditionally certifying class for settlement purposes,

-- approving form and manner of class notice, and

-- setting date for final approval hearing

Solely for the purpose of settlement in accordance with the
Settlement Agreement, and pursuant to Rule 23(a) and (b)(3),
this Court conditionally certifies the following class (the
"Settlement Class"):

     "All Persons and entities, and their heirs, successors and
     assignees, who owned, or had an ownership interest in, or a
     valid lien on real property that Defendant Multnomah County
     obtained through a foreclosure action to satisfy unpaid real
     estate taxes or other County or local government taxes and
     fees and associated fees and penalties, which the County sold

     for an amount in excess of the unpaid taxes, fees and other
     costs associated with that property, and for which the
     statutory redemption period expired during the Class Period."

     Consistent with the Settlement Agreement, the following are
     excluded from the Settlement Class: (i) All governmental
     units and entities of any type whatsoever including, but not
     limited to, U.S. Department of Treasury, the Internal Revenue

     Service, the State of Oregon, and Multnomah County, albeit
     this provision does not apply to estate administrators who
     pursuing claims on behalf of a deceased Eligible Claimant's
     estate; (ii) All former holders of an interest in an Eligible

     Property as to which any Eligible Claimant has submitted a
     request to be excluded from the Class under the procedures
     set forth in the Class Notice that is accepted by the Court
     and which is not timely revoked; (iii) All former holders of
     an interest in an Eligible Property by reason of a lien to
     secure payment of a debt or judgment which debt or judgment
     has since been satisfied or released; and (iv) All Potential
     Claimants who have already resolved their claim for Surplus
     Proceeds against Multnomah County through a settlement
     agreement, release or final judicial judgment as to which
     there is no appeal pending and/or the time to appeal has
     expired.

The Court preliminarily appoints Kyle Queahpama as heir of the
Estate of Roberta Queahpama as the class representative for the
Settlement Class.

Pursuant to Rule 23(g), the Court appoints Lead Counsel for the
Settlement Class (Fink Bressack; Kohn, Swift & Graf, P.C.; and
Preti, Flaherty, Beliveau & Pachios, Chartered, LLP) and Liaison
Counsel for the Settlement Class (Sugerman
Dahab).

A Final Approval Hearing shall be held before the undersigned at
10:00 a.m. on Nov. 10, 2025.

Multnomah County is part of the Portland metropolitan area.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=nkLvkB at no extra
charge.[CC]

MUSTARD SEED FINANCIAL: Pimentel Files TCPA Suit in S.D. Florida
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Mustard Seed
Financial & Insurance, Inc. The case is styled as Jan Carlos
Pimentel, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Mustard Seed Financial & Insurance, Inc., Case No.
1:25-cv-23221-KMW (S.D. Fla., July 18, 2025).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

Mustard Seed Financial & Insurance -- https://mseedfinancial.com/
-- is an independent insurance agency which represents many
different companies.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Zane Charles Hedaya, Esq.
          Gerald Donald Lane, Jr., Esq.
          Faaris Kamal Uddin, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
          1515 NE 26TH Street
          Wilton Manors, FL 33305
          Phone: (754) 444-7539
          Email: zane@jibraellaw.com
                 gerald@jibraellaw.com
                 faaris@jibraellaw.com

NAPER GROVE VISION: Fett Sues Over Failure to Secure PII & PHI
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ashley Fett, on behalf of herself individually and all others
similarly situated v. NAPER GROVE VISION CARE, P.C., Case No.
2025LA000922 (Ill. Cir. Ct., DuPage Cty., July 22, 2025), is
brought against Defendant for its failure to properly secure and
safeguard Plaintiff’s and Class Members' sensitive personally
identifiable information1 (“PII”) and protected health
information (“PHI” and collectively with PII, “Private
Information”) as defined by the Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) (collectively, “Private
Information”).

The Defendant collects and maintains the sensitive, non-public
Private Information of individuals, including Plaintiff and Class
Members, as part of its regular business activities. By obtaining,
collecting, using, and deriving a benefit from the Private
Information of Plaintiff and Class Members, Defendant assumed legal
and equitable duties to those individuals to protect and safeguard
that information from unauthorized access and intrusion.

On July 10, 2025, Defendant filed a breach report with the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights
about the Data Breach. Defendant failed to adequately protect
Plaintiff’s and Class Members’ Private Information––and
failed to even encrypt or redact this highly sensitive information.
This unencrypted, unredacted Private Information was compromised
due to Defendant’s negligent and/or careless acts and omissions
and its utter failure to protect its patients’ sensitive data.
Hackers targeted and obtained Plaintiff’s and Class Members’
Private Information because of its value in exploiting and stealing
the identities of Plaintiff and Class Members. The present and
continuing risk to victims of the Data Breach will remain for their
respective lifetimes.

As a result of Defendant’s inadequate security and breach of its
duties and obligations, the Data Breach occurred, and Plaintiff’s
and Class members’ Private Information was accessed and
disclosed. This action seeks to remedy these failings and their
consequences. Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of herself and
all persons whose Private Information was exposed as a result of
the Data Breach, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff and Class Members are current and former patients
Defendant.

The Defendant is a medical practice that provides personalized eye
care services to patients in the Naperville, Illinois area and
surrounding communities.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN LLC
          227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Phone: (866) 252-0878
          Email: gklinger@milberg.com

NAPHCARE ARIZONA: Martin Suit Removed to D. Arizona
---------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Cindy Martin, on behalf of herself and those
similarly situated v. NaphCare Arizona LLC, a limited liability
company, Case No. S1400CV202500353 was removed from the Yuma County
Superior Court, to the United States District Court for District of
Arizona on July 18, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02551-ESW.

In her First Amended Complaint, Plaintiff alleges a cause of action
for "Violation of FLSA" against NaphCare Arizona. In that cause of
action, Plaintiff alleges that NaphCare Arizona failed to pay her
and other class members for overtime work performed during the
course of their employment and continues to violate the FLSA "by
failing to pay overtime to non-exempt employees for hours that
Defendant requires these employees to work."[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          David C. Potts, Esq.
          JONES, SKELTON & HOCHULI P.L.C.
          40 N. Central Avenue, Suite 2700
          Phoenix, AZ 85004
          Phone: (602) 263-4547
          Fax: (602) 200-7829
          Email: dpotts@jshfirm.com

NATIONAL TENANT: Clermont Must File Opposition Reply by August 8
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Vanessa Clermont v.
National Tenant Network, Inc. et al., Case No.
2:23-cv-03545-MCA-LDW (D.N.J.), the Hon. Judge Leda Dunn Wettre
entered an order granting request of a final seven day extension of
the deadline for LCIJ's Opposition to the Motion, along with a
corollary extension of the Plaintiff's deadline to file a combined
reply to both the Defendants' opposition briefs, as follows:

   1. LCIJ shall file its opposition to the Motion on or before   
      July 23, 2025; and

   2. The Plaintiff shall file her reply to both Defendants'
      Opposition briefs to the Motion on or before August 8, 2025.

National provides resident screening services.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=JIrryC at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Marissa Edwards, Esq.
          HINSHAW & CULBERTSON LLP
          111 Wood Avenue South, Suite 210
          Iselin, NJ 08830
          Telephone: (908)374-0336
          E-mail: marissaedwards@hinshawlaw.com

NESTLE PURINA PETCARE: Kahley Files Suit in Pa. Ct. of Common Pleas
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Nestle Purina Petcare
Co. The case is styled as Jolinda Kahley, on behalf of herself and
others similarly situated v. Nestle Purina Petcare Co., Case No.
250701903 (Pa. Ct. of Common Pleas Cty., July 16, 2025).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract.

Nestle Purina Petcare Co. -- https://www.purina.com/ -- produces
and markets pet food, treats, and cat and dog litter.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark J. Gottesfeld, Esq.
          WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC
          715 Twining Road, Suite 211
          Dresher, PA 19025
          Phone: (215) 884-2491
          Email: mgottesfeld@winebrakelaw.com

NEUROLOGICAL INSTITUTE: Wilson Files Suit in Ga. Super. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against The Neurological
Institute of Savannah & Center for Spine P.C., et al. The case is
styled as Glenn Wilson, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff/Petitioner v. The Neurological
Institute of Savannah & Center for Spine P.C.,
Defendant/Respondent, Case No. SPCV25-01000-MO (Ga. Super. Ct.,
Chatham Cty., July 18, 2025).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Tort.

The Neurosurgical & Spine Institute of Savannah --
https://neurologicalinstitute.com/ -- is one of the largest private
neurosurgical practices on the east coast.[BN]

NIKITA BAKER: Bid for Expedited Bail Hearings Tossed
----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as D.N.N., et al., v. Nikita
Baker, et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-01613 (D. Md., Filed May 20, 2025),
the Hon. Judge Julie Rebecca Rubin entered an order that the
Petitioners-Plaintiffs' Motion for Expedited Bail Hearings is
denied as to the request for an expedited hearing and briefing
schedule and HELD SUB CURIA as to the request for bail hearings.

The Court further entered an order that the Government's Opposed
Motion to Hold in Abeyance Review of Plaintiffs' Motions for Class
Certification and a Preliminary Injunction is granted in part and
denied in part as follows:

-- granted to the extent it seeks leave to file a surreply as to
    the motion for preliminary injunction, and

-- denied in all other respects.

The nature of suit states Judicial Review of Agency Action.[CC]

NISSAN NORTH: Court OK's Substitution of Class Counsel
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOHNSON, v. NISSAN NORTH
AMERICA, INC., Case No. 3:17-cv-00517-WHO (N.D. Cal.), the Hon.
Judge William H. Orrick entered an order granting motion to
substitute class counsel and file sixth amended complaint.

Anna Wall is substituted as class representative for the California
class and subclasses, and Sandria Smith is substituted as class
representative for the New York class and subclasses.

The Class Certification Order is amended to conform with the
contents of this Order. The Sixth Amended Complaint shall be filed
within 7 days of this Order.

Due to plaintiffs' March 2025 narrowing of the class definition in
this case against defendant Nissan North America, they now move for
leave to substitute Anna Wall and Sandria Smith as respective class
representatives of the California and New York subclasses and to
file a Sixth Amended Complaint in line with those substitutions.

Following the March 25, 2025, case management conference,
plaintiffs provided the following updated class definitions on
April 1, 2025:

California Class and Subclasses:

California Class for Unjust Enrichment Claims:

Any person who purchased a new or used Subject Vehicle in
California (which was first sold new in California) on or after
February 1, 2014.

California Subclass for Claims under the California Consumer Legal
Remedies Act:

Any person who purchased a new or used Subject Vehicle in
California (which was first sold new in California) on or after
February 1, 2014, for use primarily for personal, family, or
household purpose.

Colorado Class:

Any person who purchased a new or used Subject Vehicle in Colorado
(which was first sold new in Colorado) on or after February 1,
2014.

Florida Class:

Any person who purchased a new or used Subject Vehicle in Florida
(which was first sold new in Florida) on or after February 1, 2013.


New York Class and Subclasses:

New York Class for Unjust Enrichment Claims:
Any person who purchased a new or used Subject Vehicle in New York
(which was first sold in New York) on or after February 1, 2011.

New York Subclass for Claims under N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law. §§ 349 and
350:

Any person who purchased a new or used Subject Vehicle in New York
(which was first sold in New York) on or after February 1, 2014,
for personal use.

New York Subclass for Warranty Claims:

Any person who purchased a new or used Subject Vehicle in New York
(which was first sold in New York) on or after February 1, 2013.

Nissan operates in the automotive industry.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=PEwGJe at no extra
charge.[CC]

NOCO COMPANY: Filing for Class Cert. in Beaudry Due June 12, 2026
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PETER BEAUDRY, v. THE NOCO
COMPANY, INC., Case No. 4:25-cv-01467-JST (N.D. Cal.), the Hon.
Judge Jon Tigar entered an order setting the following case
deadlines pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16 and Civil
Local Rule 16-10:

                      Event                           Deadline

  Deadline to add parties or amend the pleadings:   Aug. 15, 2025

  Fact discovery cut-off:                           May 15, 2026

  Class certification motion and Plaintiffs'
  expert disclosures due:                           June 12, 2026

  Class certification opposition and Defendants'
  expert disclosures due:                           July 10, 2026

  Expert discovery cut-off:                         Aug. 7, 2026
  Class certification reply due:                    Aug. 28, 2026

Counsel may not modify these dates without leave of court. The
parties shall comply with the Court's standing orders, which are
available https://cand.uscourts.gov/judges/tigar-jon-s-jst/.

The Court sets a further case management conference on October 17,
2025, at 1:30 p.m. (because more than one conference will be set at
that time, the conference may not begin precisely at 1:30 p.m.).
The conference will proceed by video. The parties must file a joint
case management conference statement by October 10, 2025.

NOCO designs and creates consumer battery chargers, jump
starters, air inflators, and batteries.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=OrKHX6 at no extra
charge.[CC]

NORTHWEST PIPE COMPANY: Calvillo Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Northwest Pipe
Company. The case is styled as Ivan Calvillo, as an individual and
on behalf of all other similarly situated class members v.
Northwest Pipe Company, Case No. STK-CV-LOE-2025-0009608 (Cal.
Super. Ct., San Joaquin Cty., July 15, 2025).

The case type is stated as "Limited Civil Other Employment."

Northwest Pipe Company -- https://www.nwpipe.com/ -- is the largest
manufacturer of engineered welded steel pipe water systems in North
America.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Zachary M. Crosner, Esq.
          CROSNER LEGAL, P.C.
          9440 Santa Monica Blvd. Suite 301
          Beverly Hills, CA 90210
          Phone: (310) 496-5818
          Fax: (310) 510-6429
          Email: zach@crosnerlegal.com

OBI SEAFOODS: Class Cert Bid Filing in Murrillo Due April 17, 2026
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARIELA MURRILLO et al.,
v. OBI SEAFOODS, LLC., Case No. 2:25-cv-00588-LK (W.D. Wash.), the
Hon. Judge Lauren King entered a Rule 16(b) and Rule 23(d)(2)
scheduling order regarding class certification motion as follows:

  Deadline for Joining Additional Parties:         Oct. 14, 2025

  Deadline for Discovery Motions:                  Feb. 17, 2026

  Deadline to Complete Discovery on Class          March 17, 2026
  Certification (not to be construed as a
  bifurcation of discovery):

  The Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification   April 17, 2026
  & Initial Expert Reports Under FRCP 26(a)(2):

  The Defendant's Opposition to Motion for Class   June 26, 2026
  Certification, Motion to Exclude Initial
  Experts & Rebuttal Expert Reports:

  The Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of Motion       Aug. 26, 2026
  for Class Certification, Opposition to Motion
  to Exclude Initial Experts & Motion to
  Exclude Rebuttal Experts:

OBI is a producer of fresh, frozen and canned wild Alaska seafood.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 16, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=GyGwOl at no extra
charge.[CC]

OCTAPHARMA PLASMA: Clegg Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Octapharma Plasma,
Inc. The case is styled as Christy Clegg, as an individual and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Octapharma Plasma, Inc.,
Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2025-0009674 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Joaquin
Cty., July 16, 2025).

The case type is stated as "Limited Civil Other Employment."

Octapharma Plasma, Inc. -- https://www.octapharmaplasma.com/ --
collects, tests and supplies human blood plasma for manufacture
into life-saving therapies.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mai Tulyathan, Esq.
          DIVERSITY LAW GROUP
          515 S. Figueroa St., Ste. 1250
          Los Angeles, CA 90071-3316
          Phone: 213-488-6555
          Fax: 213-488-6554

OFFICE DEPOT: Bid for Bifurcated Discovery in Benge Tossed
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Benge v. Office Depot,
LLC, et al, Case No. 2:24-cv-00749 (E.D. Cal., Filed March 11,
2024), the Hon. Judge Daniel J. Calabretta entered an order that
ordering bifurcated discovery in this putative wage and hour class
action is not appropriate at this time.

The Court's finding regarding the bifurcation of discovery is made
without prejudice to Defendants seeking appropriate relief by way
of a properly noticed motion.

The parties shall file with the Court, within fourteen (14) days, a
further Joint Status Report that contains proposed dates for the
following: fact discovery cut-off, expert discovery cut-off, motion
for class certification, dispositive motion(s), final pretrial
conference, and trial.

The nature of suit states Labor Litigation.

Office is a specialty retailer providing innovative products and
services.[CC]

ON RUNNING INC: Herrera Sues Over Disability Discrimination
-----------------------------------------------------------
Oscar Herrera, on behalf of others similarly situated v. ON
RUNNING, INC., a foreign for-profit corporation, Case No.
1:25-cv-23144-XXXX (S.D. Fla., July 15, 2025), is brought for
declaratory and injunctive relief, attorney's fees, costs, and
litigation expenses for unlawful disability discrimination in
violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act
("ADA").

The Defendant also owns, controls, maintains, and/or operates an
adjunct website, https://www.on.com/en-us (the "Website"). One of
the functions of the Website is to provide the public information
on the locations of Defendant's physical stores. Defendant also
sells to the public its merchandise through the Website, which acts
as a critical point of sale for Defendant's merchandise that is
also available for purchase in, from, and through Defendant's
physical stores. In addition, the Website allows users to arrange
in-store pickup of Defendant's merchandise, check in-store
availability of Defendant's merchandise, book in-store appointments
for a variety of services (e.g., shopping appointments, repair
appointments, etc.), and sign up for a newsletter to receive
exclusive offers, benefits, invitations, and discounts for use
online and in the physical stores.

The Plaintiff utilizes available screen reader software that allows
individuals who are blind and visually disabled to communicate with
company websites. However, Defendant's Website contains access
barriers that prevent free and full use by blind and visually
disabled individuals using keyboards and available screen reader
software. These access barriers, one or more of which were
experienced by Plaintiff, are severe and pervasive and, as
confirmed by Plaintiff's expert, include the following (with
reference to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines ("WCAG"),
says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is and has been a blind and visually disabled person
who has been medically diagnosed with complete blindness as a
result of trauma to both eyes.

The Defendant owns, operates, and/or controls a chain of 29 retail
stores selling shoes, apparel, and accessories to the public.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Rodenck V. Hannah, Esq.
          RODERICK V. HANNAH, ESQ., P.A.
          4800 N. Hiatus Road
          Sunrise, FL 33351
          Phone: 954/362-3800
          Facsimile: 954/362-3779
          Email: rhannah@rhannahlaw.com

               - and -

          Pelayo Duran, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF PELAYO
          6355 NW. 36th Street, Suite 307
          Virginia Gardens, FL 33166
          Phone: 305/266-9780
          Facsimile: 305/269-8311
          Email: duranandassociates@gmail.com

ONEBLOOD INC: Newberry Files Suit in Fla. Cir. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against OneBlood, Inc. The
case is styled as Deanna Newberry, Thashell Chambers, Matthew
Henderson, Candy Stallworth, Andy Shuttleworth, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated v. OneBlood, Inc.,
Case No. STK-CV-LOE-2025-0009608 (Fla. Cir. Ct., Broward Cty., July
15, 2025).

The case type is stated as "Contract and Indebtedness."

OneBlood -- https://www.oneblood.org/ -- is a not-for-profit
501(c)(3) community asset responsible for providing safe blood
products.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Jeffrey M. Ostrow, Esq.
          KOPELOWITZ OSTROW, PA
          One West Las Olas Blvd Ste 500
          Ft Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Phone: (954) 525-4100 Ext 215
          Fax: (954) 525-4300
          Email: ostrow@kolawyers.com

PANERA BREAD: Settlement in Data Security Suit Gets Initial OK
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit RE: PANERA DATA SECURITY LITIGATION,
Case No. 4:24-cv-00847-HEA (E.D. Mo.), the Hon. Judge Henry Edward
Autrey entered an order granting preliminary approval of class
action settlement:

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, the Court
preliminarily certifies, for settlement purposes only, the
Settlement Class defined in the Settlement Agreement as follows:

     "All individual U.S. residents to whom Panera sent notice of
     the Incident."

     Excluded from the Settlement Class are (1) the Judge and
     Magistrate Judge presiding over the Lawsuits, any members of
     the Judges' respective staffs, and immediate members of the
     Judges’ respective families; (2) officers, directors,
members
     and shareholders of Panera; (3) persons who timely and
     validly request exclusion from and/or opt-out of the
     Settlement Class and the successors and assigns of any such
     excluded persons; and (4) any person found by a court of
     competent jurisdiction to be guilty under criminal law of
     initiating, causing, aiding or abetting the criminal activity

     or occurrence of the Incident or who pleads nolo contendere
     to any such charge.

Panera represents that there are no such individuals known within
Settlement Class.

The Court appoints Samantha Baldwin, Matthew Baldwin, Thomas Jones,
Messiah Jordan Weddle, Gracelyn Donovan, Sydney Hollis, Robyn
Campbell, Amanda Pharr, Forrest Cooley and Taslima Aktar as the
Representative Plaintiffs for the Settlement Class.

Furthermore, the Court provisionally finds that the Representative
Plaintiffs are similarly situated to absent Settlement Class
Members and therefore typical of the Settlement Class and that they
will be adequate Representative Plaintiffs.

Panera is an American multinational chain of bakery-cafe fast
casual restaurants with over 2,000 locations, all of which are in
the United States and Canada.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 14, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=PbeBve at no extra
charge.[CC]

PEI WEI ASIAN: Ariza Sues Over Unlawful Disability Discrimination
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Victor Ariza, and others similarly situated v. PEI WEI ASIAN DINER,
LLC, a foreign limited liability company, Case No.
1:25-cv-23210-XXXX (S.D. Fla., July 18, 2025), is brought for
declaratory and injunctive relief, attorney's fees, costs, and
litigation expenses for unlawful disability discrimination in
violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act
("ADA").

The Defendant owns, controls, maintains, and/or operates an adjunct
website, https://www.peiwei.com (the "Website"). One of the
functions of the Website is to provide the public information on
the locations of Defendant's physical restaurants. Defendant also
sells to the public its food and beverage products through the
Website, which acts as a critical point of sale and ordering for
Defendant's food and beverage products that are made in and also
available for ordering and purchase in, from, and through
Defendant's physical restaurants.

In addition, the Website allows users to arrange in-restaurant
pickup and from-restaurant delivery of Defendant's food and
beverage products, purchase physical and electronic gift cards for
use online and in the physical restaurants, submit an electronic
contact form to get in contact with and/or be contacted by the
physical restaurants, and sign up for a rewards account to receive
exclusive offers, benefits, invitations, and discounts for use
online and in the physical restaurants.

The Plaintiff utilizes available screen reader software that allows
individuals who are blind and visually disabled to communicate with
websites. However, Defendant's Website contains access barriers
that prevent free and full use by blind and visually disabled
individuals using keyboards and available screen reader software.

The Defendant has not created and instituted on the Website a
useful and effective page for individuals with disabilities, nor
displayed a proper link and information hotline, nor created a
proper information portal explaining when and how Defendant will
have the Website, applications, and digital assets accessible to
the visually disabled and/or blind communities. Thus, the Defendant
has not provided full and equal access to, and enjoyment of, the
goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and
accommodations provided by and through the Website and the physical
stores in contravention of the ADA, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is and at all relevant times has been blind and
visually disabled in that he suffers from optical nerve atrophy.

The Defendant owns, operates, and/or controls a chain of
restaurants nationwide selling food and beverage products.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Roderick V. Hannah, Esq.
          RODERICK V. HANNAH, ESQ., P.A.
          Counsel for Plaintiff
          4800 N. Hiatus Road
          Sunrise, FL 33351
          Phone: 954/362-3800
          Facsimile: 954/3623779
          Email:
          Pelavo M. Duran, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF PELAYO DURAN, P.A.
          6355 NW. 36th Street, Suite 307
          Virginia Gardens, FL 33166
          Phone: 305/266-9780
          Facsimile: 305/269-8311
          Email: duranandassociates@gmail.com

PEPGEN INC: Karam Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Johnny Karam, individually and on behalf of all
other persons similarly situated v. PepGen Inc., James McArthur,
Noel Donnelly, Case No. 1:25-cv-03221 was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of New York, to the U.S.
District Court for the District of Massachusetts on July 16, 2025.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-12007-ADB to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Securities/Commodities for
Securities Exchange Act.

PepGen Inc. -- https://www.pepgen.com/ -- is a clinical-stage
biotechnology company advancing the next-generation of
oligonucleotide therapies with the goal of transforming the
treatment of severe neuromuscular and neurological diseases.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeremy Alan Lieberman, Esq.
          J. Alexander Hood, II, Esq.
          James Michael LoPiano, Esq.
          POMERANTZ LLP
          600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
          New York, NY 10016
          Phone: (212) 661-1100
          Fax: (212) 661-8665
          Email: jalieberman@pomlaw.com
                 ahood@pomlaw.com
                 jlopiano@pomlaw.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Michael Charles Griffin, Esq.
          SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP
          One Manhattan West
          New York, NY 10001-8602
          Phone: (212) 735-2844
          Email: michael.griffin@skadden.com

PEYTON PALAIO: Tucker Files Suit in E.D. Virginia
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Peyton Palaio, et al.
The case is styled as Corey Tucker, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Peyton Palaio, also known as:
Peyton Palaia, also known as: Payton Palaia, also known as: Payton
Palaio; Mark D. Reilly; Mark Jennings; Skelmis, LLC doing business
as: RH Natural Products, LLC; Tautline, LLC; FastIncense.com; LGI
Holdings, LLC doing business as: Alphabet Wholesale; LP Ind., LLC,
doing business as: Olistica Life Sciences Group, doing business as:
Centralized Services, doing business as: Cascade Naturals, doing
business as: Jordan Process, doing business as: Della Terra
Pharmaceuticals, doing business as: Naturea Biomaterials (aka
Canopy Corporation); Jopen, LLC, doing business as: A1 Wholesale,
doing business as: Evolutionary Organics, doing business as: Innovo
Activas, doing business as: American Kratom-D, doing business as:
Party Nuts; Martian Sales, Inc.; CAG Holdings CO, LLC doing
business as: Companion AG; Calibre Manufacturing, LLC formerly
known as: Advanced Nutrition, LLC; FMK Group, LLC also known as:
Olistica Life Science Group; John Doe Corporations 1-10; Other John
Doe Entities 1-10; Case No. 3:25-cv-00488-DJN (E.D. Va., June 26,
2025).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Pierce Christopher Murphy, Esq.
          SILVERMAN THOMPSON SLUTKIN & WHITE, LLC
          400 E Pratt Street, Suite 900
          Baltimore, MD 21202
          Phone: (410) 385-2225
          Email: pmurphy@silvermanthompson.com

PIPER PRODUCTS: Kaseno Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
---------------------------------------------------------
PAUL KASENO, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PIPER PRODUCTS, INC., Defendant, Case No.
25-cv-1023 (E.D. Wis., July 15, 2025) is a collective and class
action brought against the Defendant pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act and Wisconsin's Wage Payment and Collection Laws for
unpaid overtime compensation, unpaid straight time (regular) and/or
agreed upon wages, liquidated damages, costs, attorneys' fees,
declaratory and/or injunctive relief, and/or any such other relief
the Court may deem appropriate.

According to the complaint, the Defendant operated an unlawful
compensation system that deprived and failed to compensate
Plaintiff and all other current and former hourly-paid, non-exempt
employees for all hours worked and work performed each workweek,
including at an overtime rate of pay for each hour worked in excess
of 40 hours in a workweek. The complaint further alleges that the
Defendant is: (1) shaving time (via electronic timeclock rounding)
from Plaintiff's and all other hourly-paid, non-exempt employees'
weekly timesheets for pre-shift and post-shift hours worked and/or
work performed, to the detriment of said employees and to the
benefit of Defendant, in violation of the FLSA and WWPCL; and (2)
failing to include all forms of non-discretionary compensation,
such as monetary bonuses, incentives, awards, and/or other rewards
and payments, in said employees' regular rates of pay for overtime
calculation purposes, in violation of the FLSA and WWPCL.

The Defendant's failure to compensate its hourly paid, non-exempt
employees for compensable work performed each workweek, including
but not limited to at an overtime rate of pay, was intentional,
willful, and violated federal law as set forth in the FLSA and
state law as set forth in the WWPCL, says the suit.

The Plaintiff was hired by the Defendant as an hourly-paid,
non-exempt employee in the position of Assembler in approximately
March 2024 and, most recently, Defendant employed him in the
position of Operator.

Piper Products Inc. manufactures and distributes building
products.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James A. Walcheske, Esq.
          Scott S. Luzi, Esq.
          David M. Potteiger, Esq.
          WALCHESKE & LUZI, LLC
          235 N. Executive Drive, Suite 240
          Brookfield, WI 53005
          Telephone: (262) 780-1953
          Facsimile: (262) 565-6469
          E-mail: jwalcheske@walcheskeluzi.com
                  sluzi@walcheskeluzi.com
                  dpotteiger@walcheskeluzi.com

PORT ST. LUCIE, FL: Cole Suit Removed to S.D. Florida
-----------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as ACR Acquisition LLC, and others similarly
situated v. City of Port St. Lucie, Florida., Case No. 25-2-18703-9
SEA was removed from the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit in and for
Saint Lucie County, to the United States District Court for
Southern District of Florida on July 18, 2025, and assigned Case
No. 2:25-cv-14257-XXXX.

On June 12, 2025, Plaintiff ACR Acquisition LLC commenced this
action raising seven counts for breach of contract and three counts
seeking declaratory relief.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Bryan C. Siddique, Esq.
          Matthew H. Mandel, Esq.
          Jamie A. Cole, Esq.
          Richard B. Rosengarten, Esq.
          WEISS SEROTA HELFMAN COLE & BIERMAN, P.L.
          200 East Broward Boulevard, Suite 1900
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Phone: (954) 763-4242
          Telecopier: (954) 764-7770
          Primary Email: mmandel@wsh-law.com
                    jcole@wsh-law.com
                    rrosengarten@wsh-law.com
                    bsiddique@wsh-law.com
          Secondary Email: lbrewley@wsh-law.com
                    msarraff@wsh-law.com
                    szavala@wsh-law.com
                    email: mboschini@wsh-law.com

R. MARLEY LLC: Martinez Seeks to recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
GAUDALUPE MARTINEZ, Plaintiff v. R. MARLEY, LLC, Defendant, Case
No. 2:25-cv-00667-KRS-JHR (D.N.M., July 15, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant to recover unpaid overtime wages and other
damages under the New Mexico Minimum Wage Act.

The complaint alleges that the Defendant employed Plaintiff and
other non-exempt truck drivers to haul loads for Defendant in New
Mexico, but failed to properly pay them for overtime hours worked
at the legally required rate in violation of the state law.

Indeed, the Plaintiff and the other truck drivers regularly worked
over 40 hours in each workweek. However, the Defendant failed to
pay Plaintiff and its other truck drivers overtime wages at one and
one-half their regular rate of pay for the hours they worked over
forty in a week as required by the NMMWA, asserts the complaint.

The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant in New Mexico from
approximately September of 2023 until approximately November or
December of 2023 as a truck driver.

R. Marley, LLC provides logistics services in New Mexico, and
employs approximately one hundred truck drivers to carry out its
core business.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Drew N. Herrmann, Esq.
          Pamela G. Herrmann, Esq.
          HERRMANN LAW, PLLC
          801 Cherry St., Suite 2365
          Fort Worth, TX 76102
          Telephone: (817) 479-9229
          Facsimile: (817) 887-1878
          E-mail: drew@herrmannlaw.com
                  pamela@herrmannlaw.com

               - and -

          Harold L. Lichten, Esq.
          Matthew Thomson, Esq.
          LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
          729 Boylston Street, Suite 2000  
          Boston, MA 02116   
          Telephone: (617) 994-5800
          Facsimile: (617) 994-5801
          E-mail: hlichten@llrlaw.com
                  mthomson@llrlaw.com

RAWLINGS COMPANY: Allowed Leave to File Docs Under Seal
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Zakarian, et al., v. The
Rawlings Company, et al., Case No. 4:24-cv-00229 (W.D. Mo., Filed
March 29, 2024), the Hon. Judge Stephen R. Bough entered an order
granting the Defendants' Motion for Leave to File Documents Under
Seal Pursuant to Protective Order.

The nature of suit states Diversity-Breach of Contract.

Rawlings provides legal services.[CC]

REALPLAY TECH: Pilati Suit Removed to N.D. Alabama
--------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as John Pilati, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. REALPLAY TECH, INC., REALPLAY (EU)
Ltd., and REALPLAY, INC.  Case No. 33-CV-2025-900081.00 was removed
from the Circuit Court of Franklin County, Alabama, to the United
States District Court for Northern District of Alabama on July 18,
2025, and assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-01170-LCB.

The Plaintiff's allegations against RealPlay in this case arise
from RealPlay's publication of online games, namely casino-themed
social games, which Plaintiff claims are unlawful contests of
chance under Alabama law.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          John C. Neiman, Jr., Esq.
          William B. Grimes, Esq.
          MAYNARD NEXSEN PC
          1901 Sixth Avenue N., Suite 1700
          2400 Regions/Harbert Plaza
          Birmingham, Alabama 35203
          Phone: (205) 254-1000
          Email: jneiman@maynardnexsen.com
                 bgrimes@maynardnexsen.com

               - and -

          Walter A. Saurack, Esq.
          DUANE MORRIS LLP
          22 Vanderbilt
          335 Madison Ave. 23rd Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Phone: 212-404-9200
          Email: wasaurack@duanemorris.com

               - and -

          William M. Gantz, Esq.
          DUANE MORRIS LLP
          100 High Street, Suite 2400
          Boston, MA 02110
          Phone: 857-488-4234
          Email: bgantz@duanemorris.com

REX IDRIZI: Smith Sues Over Physical Barriers
---------------------------------------------
Melissa Smith, on behalf of others similarly situated v. REX
IDRIZI, LILIANA CINO and GIDI INC., Case No. 4:25-cv-01042 (E.D.
Mo., July 16, 2025), is brought based upon Defendant's failure to
remove physical barriers to access and violations of Title III of
the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") and the ADA's
Accessibility Guidelines, 28 C.F.R. Part 36 ("ADAAG").

The Defendant, as property owner, is responsible for complying with
the ADA for both the exterior portions and interior portions of the
Property. Even if there is a lease between Defendant, 2187 SCL LLC,
and a tenant allocating responsibilities for ADA compliance within
the unit the tenant operates, that lease is only between the
property owner and the tenant and does not abrogate the Defendant's
requirement to comply with the ADA for the entire Property it owns,
including the interior portions of the Property which are public
accommodations.

The Plaintiff has visited the Property many times over a number of
years as a customer and advocate for the disabled. Plaintiff
intends to revisit the Property after the barriers to access
detailed in this Complaint are removed and the Property is
accessible again. The purpose of the revisit is to be a return
customer of Michael's, to determine if and when the Property is
made accessible and to substantiate already existing standing for
this lawsuit for Advocacy Purposes, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff uses a wheelchair for mobility purposes.

REX IDRIZI is an individual who transacts business in the State of
Wisconsin and within this judicial district.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Douglas S. Schapiro, Esq.
          THE SCHAPIRO LAW GROUP, P.L.
          7301-A W. Palmetto Park Rd., #100A
          Boca Raton, FL 33433
          Phone: (561) 807-7388
          Email: schapiro@schapirolawgroup.com

ROBINHOOD: Bid to File Class Cert Docs Under Seal OK'd
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re Robinhood Order Flow Litigation,
Master File No. 4:20-cv-09328-YGR, Case No. 4:20-cv-09328-YGR (N.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers entered an order
granting omnibus sealing stipulation addressing all documents filed
under seal in connection with the Plaintiff's renewed motion for
class certification.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 17, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Y4xIDd at no extra
charge.[CC]

RS GAMING: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Ortiz Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH ORTIZ, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. RS GAMING LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-00629 (W.D.N.Y., July 15, 2025) is a civil rights action
against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate its interactive website,
https://retroshooter.com/, to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act and the New York State Human Rights Law.

During Plaintiff's visits to the Website, the last occurring on
July 11, 2025, in an attempt to purchase a RS3 Reaper Pro-2 Gun for
gaming from Defendant and to view the information on the Website,
Plaintiff encountered multiple access barriers that denied
Plaintiff a shopping experience similar to that of a sighted person
and full and equal access to the goods and services offered to the
public and made available to the public. He was not able to add the
item to the cart due to broken links, pictures without alternate
attributes and other barriers on Defendant's Website, says the
suit.

The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
its Website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers.

RS Gaming LLC operates the website that offers gaming furniture,
particularly gaming chairs, desks, and accessories.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
          Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
          Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
          GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
          150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
          New York, NY 10003
          Telephone: (212) 228-9795
          Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
          E-mail: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
                  Dana@Gottlieb.legal
                  Michael@Gottlieb.legal


RUBBERNECK INC: Evans Sues Over Unlawful Discrimination
-------------------------------------------------------
Makeda Evans, and others similarly situated v. RUBBERNECK, INC.,
d/b/a THE TOP, Case No. 1:25-cv-00203-MW-MAF (N.D. Fla., July 18,
2025), is brought for declaratory and injunctive relief, attorney's
fees, costs, and litigation expenses for unlawful disability
discrimination in violation of Title III of the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA").

The Defendant owns, controls, maintains, and/or operates an adjunct
website, https://www.thetophub.com/ (the "Website"). The website
provides the public with information about the location, hours, and
contact details of the Defendant's restaurant, presents various
menu items such as appetizers, burgers, desserts, dinner sides,
kids' menu options, pasta, salads, and sandwiches, including vegan
and vegetarian options, as well as cocktails and various bar
options.

The Plaintiff utilizes available screen reader software that allows
individuals who are blind and visually disabled to communicate with
websites. However, Defendant's Website contains access barriers
that prevent free and full use by blind and visually disabled
individuals using keyboards and available screen reader software.

The Defendant has not created and instituted on the Website a
useful and effective page for individuals with disabilities, nor
displayed a proper link and information hotline, nor created a
proper information portal explaining when and how Defendant will
have the Website, applications, and digital assets accessible to
the visually disabled and/or blind communities. The Website does
not meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines ("WCAG") 2.2
Level AA or higher versions of web accessibility, says the
complaint.

The Plaintiff is and at all relevant times has been blind and
visually disabled in that Plaintiff suffers from Retinitis
pigmentosa.

The Defendant owns, operates, and/or controls a U.S.-based
restaurant offering a vibrant dining experience with a diverse menu
that includes signature burgers, vegan and vegetarian options, a
selection of craft cocktails, along with events, a full bar, and
late-night service.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Aleksandra Kravets, Esq.
          ALEKSANDRA KRAVETS, ESQ. P.A.
          865 SW 113 Lane
          Pembroke Pines, FL 33025
          Phone: 347-268-9533
          Email: ak@akesqpa.com

SARA MIQUE INC: Campbell Sues Over Unlawful Discrimination
----------------------------------------------------------
Andree Campbell, and others similarly situated v. Sara Mique Inc.,
a Florida Corporation, Case No. 0:25-cv-61456-XXXX (S.D. Fla., July
18, 2025), is brought for declaratory and injunctive relief,
attorney's fees, costs, and litigation expenses for unlawful
disability discrimination in violation of Title III of the
Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA").

The Defendant owns, controls, maintains, and/or operates an adjunct
website, https://www.saramique.com/ (the "Website"). The Website
provides the public with information about the location, hours, and
contact details of Defendant's store, which offers a variety of
short and long evening dresses and sets, pant sets, separates such
as tops and blouses, non-traditional bridal and mother-of-the-bride
gowns, and custom hand-dyed special occasion wear.

The Plaintiff utilizes available screen reader software that allows
individuals who are blind and visually disabled to communicate with
websites. However, Defendant's Website contains access barriers
that prevent free and full use by blind and visually disabled
individuals using keyboards and available screen reader software.

The Defendant has not created and instituted on the Website a
useful and effective page for individuals with disabilities, nor
displayed a proper link and information hotline, nor created a
proper information portal explaining when and how Defendant will
have the Website, applications, and digital assets accessible to
the visually disabled and/or blind communities. The Website does
not meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines ("WCAG") 2.2
Level AA or higher versions of web accessibility, says the
complaint.

The Plaintiff is and at all relevant times has been blind and
visually disabled in that Plaintiff suffers from retinopathy.

The Defendant owns, operates, and/or controls a U.S.-based store
specializing in unique, elegant evening and casual wear for
women.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Aleksandra Kravets, Esq.
          ALEKSANDRA KRAVETS, ESQ. P.A.
          865 SW 113 Lane
          Pembroke Pines, FL 33025
          Phone: 347-268-9533
          Email: ak@akesqpa.com

SB NORTHWEST: Complete Discovery in Gongora Suit Due Nov. 7
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Aloma Gongora v. SB
Northwest Investments, LLC, et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-00097 (D. Or.,
Filed Jan. 20, 2023), the Hon. Judge Youlee Yim You entered an
order that the deadline to complete discovery is Nov. 7, 2025.

Following the close of discovery, the parties shall file any
renewed motions regarding class certification or dispositive
motions by Dec. 12, 2025.

The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

SB is a real estate investment firm. [CC]
 


SCI CALIFORNIA: Movsesyan Suit Removed to C.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Nune Movsesyan, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. SCI CALIFORNIA FUNERAL SERVICES,
INC.; SERVICE CORPORATION INTERNATIONAL OF CALIFORNIA; SERVICE
CORPORATION INTERNATIONAL; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case
No. 25STCV15828 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California in and for the County of Los Angeles, to the United
States District Court for Central District of California on July
17, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-06501.

The Complaint alleges violations of the California Labor Code and
California Business and Professions Code, and seeks injunctive
relief, statutory penalties, unpaid wages, and damages for multiple
types of alleged violations, including: Failure to pay minimum
wages; Failure to pay overtime compensation; Failure to provide
meal periods; Failure to authorize and permit rest breaks; Failure
to indemnify necessary business expenses; Failure to timely pay
final wages at termination; and Failure to provide accurate
itemized wage statements.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Carrie M. Francis, Esq.
          Timothy S. Lauxman, Esq.
          Ashley V. Cheff, Esq.
          TAFT STETTINIUS & HOLLISTER LLP
          2555 East Camelback Road, Suite 1050
          Phoenix, AZ 85016
          Phone: (602) 240-3000
          Facsimile: (602) 240-6600
          Email: CFrancis@taftlaw.com
                 TLauxman@taftlaw.com
                 ACheff@taftlaw.com

SELECT MEDICAL: Smith Sues Over Unprotected Personal, Health Info
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BRENDEN SMITH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SELECT MEDICAL HOLDINGS CORPORATION and
NATIONWIDE RECOVERY SERVICES, INC., Defendants, Case No.
1:25-cv-01290-JFS (M.D. Pa., July 15, 2025) is a class action
against Defendants for its failure to properly secure and safeguard
protected health information, as defined by the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act, and other personally
identifiable information and for failing to provide timely,
accurate, and adequate notice to Plaintiff and other Class Members
that the integrity of their Private Information was compromised in
a cyber incident.

As a condition of receiving services from Defendant Select,
Plaintiff and other patients are required to provide Defendant with
personal information. When providing highly sensitive information
to Defendant Select, patients expect that Defendant Select will
employ adequate data security practices to protect their
information from unlawful disclosure.

On July 11, 2024, Defendant Nationwide, a third-party vendor of
Defendant Select discovered suspicious activity on its IT network.
In response, Nationwide launched an investigation to determine the
nature and scope of the Data Breach. The investigation determined
that unauthorized access to Nationwide's IT Network occurred
between July 5, 2024, and July 11, 2024.

The Data Breach was a direct result of Defendants' alleged failure
to implement adequate and reasonable cyber-security procedures and
protocols necessary to protect individuals' Private Information
with which it was entrusted for treatment with Defendant Select and
its agent, Nationwide, says the suit.

Select Medical Holdings Corporation is a healthcare services
provider that operates critical illness recovery hospitals,
rehabilitation hospitals, and outpatient rehabilitation clinics in
the United States.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gary F. Lynch, Esq.
          Gerald D. Wells, III, Esq.
          LYNCH CARPENTER LLP
          1133 Penn Avenue, 5th Floor
          Pittsburgh, PA 15222
          Telephone: (412) 322-9243
          E-mail: gary@lcllp.com
                  jerry@lcllp.com
  
               - and -

          Marc E. Dann, Esq.
          Brian D. Flick, Esq.
          DANNLAW
          15000 Madison Ave.
          Lakewood, OH 44107
          Telephone: (216) 373-0539

SEPHORA USA: Cole Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
-------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Beverly Cole, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. SEPHORA USA, INC., a foreign
profit corporation; and DOES 1-20, as yet unknown Washington
entities, Case No. 25-2-18703-9 SEA was removed from the Superior
Court of the State of Washington for King County, to the United
States District Court for Western District of Washington on July
17, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-01342.

The Complaint asserts a cause of action under RCW 49.62.070 on a
class-wide basis on behalf of all current and former employees of
Sephora who worked in Washington and earned less than twice the
applicable state minimum hourly wage from June 25, 2022, through
the date notice is provided to the class.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Alice R. Hoesterey, Esq.
          ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
          401 Union Street, Suite 3300
          Seattle, WA 98101-2668
          Phone: +1 206 839 4300
          Facsimile: +1 206 839 4301
          Email: ahoesterey@orrick.com

               - and -

          Andrew R. Livingston, Esq.
          Simon Cohen, Esq.
          ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
          405 Howard Street
          San Francisco, CA 94105-2669
          Phone: +1 415 773 5700
          Email: alivingston@orrick.com
                 simon.cohen@orrick.com

SETH GREBBIEN: RK Holdings Files Suit in C.D. Illinois
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Seth Grebbien. The
case is styled as RK Holdings d/b/a Rural King, Portioners v. Seth
Grebbien, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Respondent, Case No. 1:25-cv-01296-JEH-RLH (C.D. Ill.,
July 18, 2025).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Statutes: Arbitration for the
U.S. Arbitration Act.[BN]

The Petitioner is represented by:

          Christopher Sean Hennessy, Esq.
          COZEN O'CONNOR
          123 N Wacker Dr., Suite 1800
          Chicago, IL 60606-1293
          Phone: (312) 474-4493
          Email: chennessy@cozen.com

SHOTTENKIRK SAN ANTONIO: Dyer Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Texas
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Shottenkirk San
Antonio, LLC. The case is styled as Christa Dyer, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Shottenkirk San
Antonio, LLC doing business as: Shottenkirk Toyota San Antonio,
Case No. 5:25-cv-00836 (W.D. Tex., July 17, 2025).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

Shottenkirk San Antonio, LLC --
https://www.shottenkirktoyotasanantonio.com/ -- offers new & used
Toyota cars, trucks, and SUVs for sale at Shottenkirk Toyota San
Antonio.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Andrew John Shamis, Esq.
          SHAMIS & GENTILE PA
          14 NE 1st Ave., Ste. 705
          Miami, FL 33132
          Phone: (305) 479-2299
          Fax: (786) 623-0915
          Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com

SIMON PARRILLA: Wagner Sues Over Discriminative Actions
-------------------------------------------------------
Tavia Wagner, and others who are similarly situated v. SIMON
PARRILLA MANAGEMENT, LLC, and SIMON PARRILLA BAR and GRILL OF
LONGWOOD, INC., Case No. 6:25-cv-01338 (M.D. Fla., July 17, 2025),
is brought for injunctive relief, attorney's fees and costs
(including, but not limited to, court costs and expert fees),
pursuant to the Americans With Disabilities Act ("ADA") as a result
of the Defendants' discriminative actions.

The Defendants have discriminated, and continue to discriminate,
against the Plaintiff, and others who are similarly situated, by
denying full and equal access to, and full and equal enjoyment of,
goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or
accommodations at Defendants' Subject Facilities in derogation and
as prohibited by the ADA, and by failing to remove architectural
barriers pursuant to the ADA, where such removal is readily
achievable. The Plaintiff has been unable to, and continues to be
unable to, enjoy full and equal safe access to, and the benefits
of, all accommodations and services offered at Defendants' Subject
Facilities, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff's visit to Defendants' Subject Facilities.

SIMON PARRILLA MANAGEMENT, LLC, is the lessor, operator and/or
owner of the real property.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Anthony T. Litsch, III, Esq.
          1368 Turnbull Bay Road, Suite 303
          New Smyrna Beach, FL 32168
          Phone: 386-409-7252
          Email: bb_litsch4@att.net
                 AnthonyTLitschiii@gmail.com

SPEEDY CASH: Records Calls Without Notice, Wilson Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------
TERRANCE WILSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SPEEDY CASH, and DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive, and each of them, Defendant, Case No. 5:25-cv-01785
(C.D. Cal., July 15, 2025) arises from the Defendant's practice of
recording calls to consumers without having first notified the
consumers or obtaining their consent to have the call recorded, in
violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Act.

On April 8, 2025, the Plaintiff placed an inbound telephone call
from his personal cellular phone to Speedy Cash at its Riverside,
California location in connection with a consumer inquiry. At no
time during the beginning of the call did Defendant, or its agent,
inform Plaintiff that the call was being recorded. Only after
Plaintiff affirmatively asked whether the call was being recorded
did the representative place Plaintiff on hold and then return to
the line and confirm that the call was, in fact, being recorded.

The Defendant intentionally recorded its telephone communications
with Plaintiff without first obtaining his consent or notifying him
that the call was being recorded, thereby violating the law, says
the suit.

SPEEDY CASH is a consumer lending company that offers payday loans,
installment loans, and other financial services to individuals
throughout California and the U.S.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
          Adrian R. Bacon, Esq.
          Meghan E. George, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
          21031 Ventura Blvd., Suite 340
          Woodland Hills, CA 91364
          Telephone: (818) 619-3774
          E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.com
                  abacon@toddflaw.com
                  mgeorge@toddflaw.com

SPRINGER NATURE: Nieves Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Springer Nature
America, Inc. The case is styled as Lana Nieves, individually and
on behalf of all other persons similarly situated v. Springer
Nature America, Inc., Case No. CGC25627243 (Cal. Super. Ct., San
Francisco Cty., July 15, 2025).

The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case
(General Jurisdiction)."

Springer Nature America, Inc. -- https://www.springernature.com/gp
-- are a global publisher dedicated to providing the best possible
service to the whole research community.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Philip Lawrence Fraietta, Esq.
          BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
          1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor
          New York, NY 10019
          Phone: (646) 837-7150
          Email: pfraietta@bursor.com

               - and -

          L. Timothy Fisher, Esq.
          BURSOR & FISHER P.A.
          1990 N. California Blvd., Suite 940
          Walnut Creek, CA 94596
          Phone: (925) 300-4455
          Email: ltfisher@bursor.com

STG LOGISTICS: Nieves Suit Removed to C.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Juan Nieves, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. STG LOGISTICS, INC., a California
corporation; STG CARTAGE, LLC, a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1
through 100, inclusive; Case No. 25STCV14117 was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles,
to the United States District Court for Central District of
California on July 18, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-06607.

The Plaintiff brings claims for the Defendants' alleged willful
misclassification of employees as independent contractors, failure
to pay wages due upon separation, failure to pay for "off the
clock" compensable time; failure to pay overtime wages, failure to
provide uninterrupted meal and rest breaks, failure to provide
accurate itemized wage statements, failure to reimburse business
expenses, and failure to furnish timely and accurate wage
statements. Plaintiff also alleges that Defendants committed acts
of unfair competition as defined by the California Unfair Business
Practices Act.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Scott Voelz, Esq.
          Allison N. Bader, Esq.
          O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP
          400 South Hope Street, 18th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Phone: +1 213 430 6000
          Facsimile: +1 213 430 6407
          Email: svoelz@omm.com
                 abader@omm.com

STOP 1 BAGEL: Ruiz Seeks to Recover Unpaid Minimum, OT Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
CARLOS RUIZ, Plaintiff v. STOP 1 BAGEL& DELI INC. and ALI ABDULLA,
individually, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-03918 (E.D.N.Y., July
15, 2025) is a class action brought against the Defendant pursuant
to the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New York Labor Law, and
related provisions from Title 12 of New York Codes, Rules, and
Regulations.

This Complaint seeks to recover, inter alia, unpaid minimum and
overtime wages for Plaintiff, a former employee of the Defendant.
The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants willfully failed to pay
proper wages including applicable minimum wage rate and failed to
provide overtime pay at one and one-half the regular rate for work
in excess of 40 hours per work week.

The Plaintiff was employed primarily to take out the trash, clean,
organize products, open and close the deli, and perform general
maintenance of the establishment. His period of employment spanned
from approximately May 2021 until July 9, 2025.

Stop 1 Bagel& Deli Inc. is a deli restaurant based in New
York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Lina Stillman, Esq.
          STILLMAN LEGAL, P.C.
          42 Broadway, 12th Floor
          New York, NY 10004
          Telephone: (212) 203-2417

STRYKER EMPLOYMENT: Bianchini Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------
Dean Bianchini, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. STRYKER EMPLOYMENT COMPANY, LLC, a Michigan limited
liability company, Case No. 1:25-cv-00795 (W.D. Mich., July 17,
2025), is brought to recover unpaid overtime compensation,
liquidated damages, attorney's fees, costs, and other relief as
appropriate under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA").

Throughout Plaintiff's employment with Defendant, Defendant failed
to properly calculate Plaintiff's bonus pay and other
non-discretionary remuneration in the regular rate for proper
overtime rate calculation. Throughout Plaintiff's employment with
Defendant, he earned bonus pay and other non-discretionary
remuneration. As non-exempt employees, Defendant's Hourly Employees
were entitled to full compensation for all overtime hours worked at
a rate of 1.5 times their "regular rate" of pay, says the
complaint.

The Plaintiff worked for Defendant from February 2021 through April
23, 2025, as a non-exempt, hourly employee.

The Defendant is headquartered in Kalamazoo, Michigan, and employs
thousands of hourly employees in numerous states throughout the
United States.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kevin J. Stoops, Esq.
          SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
          One Town Square, 17th Floor
          Southfield, Michigan 48076
          Phone: (248) 355-0300
          Email: kstoops@sommerspc.com

SYSCO SACRAMENTO: Fite Labor Suit Seeks to Certify Four Classes
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GLENN FITE and DAVID
GARCIA, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. SYSCO SACRAMENTO, INC., a Delaware Corporation; and
DOES 1-50, inclusive, Case No. 2:21-cv-01633-DJC-AC (E.D. Cal.),
the Plaintiffs, on Dec. 4, 2025 at 1:30 pm, will move the Court for
an Order granting class certification of the following classes:

    Meal Period Class

    "All non-exempt employees of the Defendant employed in
    California at any time from Sept. 10, 2017, to the date of
    trial who have worked as warehouse order selectors and for
    whom the Defendant's records show work activities being
    conducted during meal periods."

    Rest Break Class

    "All non-exempt employees of the Defendant employed in
    California at any time from Sept. 10, 2017, to the date of
    trial who have worked as warehouse order selectors."

    Unpaid Wage Class

    "All non-exempt employees of the Defendant employed in
    California at any time from Sept. 10, 2017, to the date of
    trial who have worked as warehouse order selectors and for
    whom the Defendant's records show work activities being
    conducted during unpaid meal periods."

    Waiting Time Penalties Class (Labor Code section 203)

    "All non-exempt employees of the Defendant employed in
    California at any time from Dec. 5, 2020 to the date of trial
    who have worked as warehouse order selectors."

Sysco is a food service distributor.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 17, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=RBeKOh at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Stan S. Mallison, Esq.
          Hector R. Martinez, Esq.
          Cody A. Bolce, Esq.
          MALLISON & MARTINEZ
          1939 Harrison Street, Suite 730
          Oakland, CA 94549
          Telephone: (510) 832-9999
          Facsimile: (510) 832-1101
          E-mail: StanM@TheMMLawFirm.com
                  HectorM@TheMMLawFirm.com
                  CBolce@TheMMLawFirm.com

TD AMERITRADE: Masud Suit Transferred to C.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Richard Masud, individually and On Behalf of All
Others Similarly Situated v. TD AMERITRADE, INC., and TD AMERITRADE
CLEARING, INC., Case No. 8:24-cv-00499 transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the District of Nebraska, to the U.S. District
Court for the Central District of California on July 23, 2025.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 8:25-cv-01603-FWS-DFM to
the proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract.

TD Ameritrade Holding Corporation was a stockbroker that offered an
electronic trading platform for the trade of financial assets.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Adam A. Schwartzbaum, Esq.
          Scott A. Edelsberg, I, Esq.
          EDELSBERG LAW, P.A.
          20900 NE 30th Avenue Suite 417
          Aventura, FL 33180
          Phone: (305) 740-1423
          Email: adam@edelsberglaw.com
                 scott@edelsberglaw.com

               - and -

          Jeffrey M. Ostrow, Esq.
          KOPELOWITZ, OSTROW LAW FIRM
          One West Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 500
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Phone: (954) 525-4100
          Fax: (954) 525-4300
          Email: ostrow@kolawyers.com

               - and -

          Andrew Shamis, Esq.
          SHAMIS, GENTILE LAW FIRM
          14 N.E. 1st Avenue, Suite 705
          Miami, FL 33132
          Phone: (305) 479-2299
          Fax: (786) 623-0915
          Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Matthew G. Munro, Esq.
          Patrick E Brookhouser, Jr., Esq.
          MCGRATH NORTH LAW FIRM
          1601 Dodge Street, Suite 3700
          First National Tower
          Omaha, NE 68102-1627
          Phone: (402) 341-3070
          Fax: (402) 341-0216
          Email: mmunro@mcgrathnorth.com
                 pbrookhouser@mcgrathnorth.com

               - and -

          Jason Jacob Mendro, Esq.
          GIBSON, DUNN AND CRUTCHER LLP
          1700 M Street, N.W.
          Washington, DC 20036
          Phone: (202) 887-3726
          Fax: (202) 467-0539
          Email: jmendro@gibsondunn.com

               - and -

          Joseph E. Floren, Esq.
          MORGAN LEWIS AND BOCKIUS LLP
          Spear Street Tower
          One Market
          San Francisco, CA 94105
          Phone: (415) 442-1391
          Email: joseph.floren@morganlewis.com

TD BANK: Class Certification Bid Filing Extended in Dou
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Dou, et al., v. TD Bank
N.A., Case No. 1:23-cv-04880 (S.D.N.Y.. Filed June 11, 2023), the
Hon. Judge J. Paul Oetken entered an order granting Letter Motion
for Extension of Time:

-- All deadlines for submitting pretrial papers and motions are
    adjourned sine die pending resolution of Plaintiffs' motion
    for class certification.

The nature of suit states Securities & Exchange related issues.

TD is an American national bank and the United States subsidiary of
the Canadian multinational TD Bank Group.[CC]

TELLURIDE RESORT: Bid for Class Cert. Referred to Magistrate Judge
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Alvarez, et al., v.
Telluride Resort Partners, LLC, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-00354 (D.
Colo., Filed Feb. 7, 2023), the Hon. Judge John L. Kane entered an
order referring the following motions to Magistrate Judge Chung.

-- Motion for Summary Judgment on Issue of Joint Employment
    filed by Defendant Telluride Resort Partners, LLC, and

-- Motion for Class Certification filed by Plaintiffs Karina Ruiz
Alvarez, Karla Gonzalez Velez, Gabriela Moctezuma Castillo, and
Amelia Colon Chairez.

The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

Telluride is a resort in the heart of Colorado's San Juan
mountains.[CC]

TEMPTU INC: Faces Tucker Suit Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
-------------------------------------------------------------
HENRY TUCKER, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. TEMPTU INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-05787 (S.D.N.Y., July 15, 2025) is a civil rights action
against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate its interactive website,
https://temptupro.com, to be fully accessible to and independently
usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons in
violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York
State Human Rights Law, the New York City Human Rights Law, and the
New York State General Business Law.

During Plaintiff's visits to the Website, the last occurring on
April 14, 2025, in an attempt to purchase a TEMPTU One Glowing
Complexion Airbrush Kit from Defendant and to view the information
on the Website, he encountered multiple access barriers that denied
him a shopping experience similar to that of a sighted person and
full and equal access to the goods and services offered to the
public and made available to the public. He was unable to locate
pricing and was not able to add the item to the cart due to broken
links, pictures without alternate attributes and other barriers on
Defendant's Website, says the suit.

The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
its website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually
impaired consumers.

TEMPTU INC. operates the website that retails cosmetics
particularly airbrush makeup.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
          Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
          Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
          GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
          150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
          New York, NY 10003
          Telephone: (212) 228-9795
          Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
          E-mail: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
                  Dana@Gottlieb.legal
                  Michael@Gottlieb.legal

TENNESSEE JACKS: Dillon Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kimberly Dillon, individually, and on behalf of herself and all
other similarly situated current and former employees v. TENNESSEE
JACKS, LLC, Case No. 3:25-cv-00342 (E.D. Tenn., July 17, 2025), is
brought against Defendant as a multi-plaintiff action under the
Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), to recover unpaid minimum wages,
overtime compensation, and other damages owed to the Plaintiff.

The Defendant either failed to record all the overtime hours of
Plaintiff and those similarly situated into its timekeeping system
or "edited out" such overtime hours from its timekeeping system.
The Defendant failed to maintain true and accurate pay records of
Plaintiff and those similarly situated, as is required by the FLSA.
The unpaid wage claims of Plaintiff and those similarly situated
are unified through common theories of Defendant's FLSA statutory
violations.

The Defendant knowingly committed the above FLSA violations. The
Defendant's violations were willful with reckless disregard to
clearly established FLSA wage and hour requirements, and without a
good faith basis. The net effect of Defendant's violations was to
save payroll costs and payroll taxes. As a consequence, Defendant
has enjoyed ill gained profits at the expense of Plaintiff and
those similarly situated, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff has been employed by Defendant as a tipped employee.

The Defendant owns and operates the Tennessee Jacks restaurant in
the Morristown, Tennessee area.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gordon E. Jackson, Esq.
          J. Russ Bryant, Esq.
          J. Joseph Leatherwood, Esq.
          Joshua Autry, Esq.
          Cooper Mays, Esq.
          JACKSON, SHIELDS, YEISER, HOLT, OWEN AND BRYANT
          262 German Oak Drive
          Memphis, TN 38018
          Phone: (901) 754-8001
          Facsimile: (901) 754-8524
          Email: gjackson@jsyc.com
                 rbryant@jsyc.com
                 jleatherwood@jsyc.com
                 jautry@jsyc.com

TESLA INC: Medearis Suit Removed to C.D. California
---------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Trenton Medearis, individually, on behalf of
others similarly situated v. TESLA, INC., a Texas corporation;
TESLA MOTORS, INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 50,
inclusive, Case No. 25STCV16439 was removed from the Superior Court
of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, to the United
States District Court for Central District of California on July
18, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-06585.

The Complaint seeks damages and penalties on behalf of a putative
class for: failure to pay all overtime wages; failure to provide
meal periods; failure to provide rest periods; failure to pay
minimum wages; failure to timely pay final wages; failure to timely
pay wages during employment; failure to provide accurate wage
statements; failure to reimburse for necessary business
expenditures; and unfair business practices.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Michael D. Weil, Esq.
          Nicole L. Antonopoulos, Esq.
          Regina Agopian, Esq.
          MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
          1400 Page Mill Road
          Palo Alto, CA 94304-1124
          Phone: +1.650.843.4000
          Fax: +1.650.843.4001
          Email: michael.weil@morganlewis.com
                 nicole.antonopoulos@morganlewis.com
                 regina.agopian@morganlewis.com

TIPHANI WEGS: Kauluwehi Suit Removed to W.D. Missouri
-----------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Juline Nalia Kauluwehi, v. Tiphani Wegs, on
behalf of themselves individually and all other similarly situated
employees, Case No. 25OS-CC00022 was removed from the Circuit Court
of Osage County, Missouri, to the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of Missouri on July 23, 2025.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-04158 to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Jobs Civil Rights.[BN]

The Plaintiff appears pro se.

TOWER EV LLC: Reese Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Tower EV LLC. The
case is styled as Keonna Nicole Reese, on behalf of herself and
others similarly situated v. Tower EV LLC, Case No. 25STCV20991
(Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., July 15, 2025).

The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case
(General Jurisdiction)."

Tower EV LLC -- https://www.towerev.com/ -- offers electric
vehicles that features the latest in automotive technology,
offering a smarter, more connected way to travel.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph Lavi, Esq.
          LAVI & EBRAHIMIAN, LLP
          8889 W Olympic Blvd., Ste. 200
          Beverly Hills, CA 90211-3638
          Phone: 310-432-0000
          Fax: 310-432-0001
          Email: jlavi@lelawfirm.com

TRADERCODES LLC: Seeks Denial of Wilson Bid for Extension of Time
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ERIN WILSON, individually
and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. TRADERCODES, LLC DBA
ALGO EXCHANGE, Case No. 1:25-cv-03211-ELR (N.D. Ga.), the Defendant
asks the Court to enter an order denying the Plaintiff's motion for
extension of time.

Putative class members that provided their phone numbers and prior
express written consent to Algo Exchange never suffered any injury,
and there were no TCPA violations as to those putative class
members.

The Plaintiff filed the Motion on July 3, 2025 without any prior
consultation or communication with counsel for Algo Exchange
regarding the extension requested whether Algo Exchange would
object to the request.

The Plaintiff defines the putative class as follows:
National Do Not Call Registry Class:

    "All persons throughout the United States (1) who did not
    provide their telephone number to Tradercodes, LLC DBA Algo
    Exchange., (2) to whom Tradercodes, LLC DBA Algo Exchange
    delivered, or caused to be delivered, more than one voice
    message or text message within a 12-month period, promoting
    Tradercodes, LLC DBA Algo Exchange goods or services, (3)
    where the person's residential or cellular telephone number
    had been registered with the National Do Not Call Registry for

    at least thirty-one days before Tradercodes, LLC DBA Algo
    Exchange delivered, or caused to be delivered, at least two of

    the voice messages or text messages within the 12-month
    period, (4) within four years preceding the date of this
    complaint and through the date of class certification. "

Tradercodes is a software engineering and distribution company
focused on the trading and investing industry.

A copy of the Defendant's motion dated July 17, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=WrtdPQ at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Valerie Chinn, Esq.
          CHINN LAW FIRM, LLC
          245 N. Highland Ave., Suite 230 #7
          Atlanta, GA 30307
          Telephone: (404) 955-7732
          Facsimile: (404) 745-8605
          E-mail: vchinn@chinnlawfirm.com

                - and -

          Anthony I. Paronich, Esq.
          PARONICH LAW, P.C.
          350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400
          Hingham, MA 02043
          Telephone: (617) 485-0018
          E-mail: anthony@paronichlaw.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Theresa L. Nelson, Esq.
          GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP
          55 Ivan Allen Jr. Blvd. N.W., Suite 750
          Atlanta, GA 30308
          Telephone: (404) 869-9054
          E-mail: tlnelson@grsm.com

TRICAM INDUSTRIES: Frost Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
-------------------------------------------------------------
Clarence and Tammy Frost, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Tricam Industries, LLC d/b/a Gorilla, Case
No. 0:25-cv-02912 (D. Minn., July 18, 2025), is brought arising
because the Defendant's Website (www.gorillamade.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 (the "ADA") and
the Minnesota Human Rights Act ("MHRA").

As a consequence of Plaintiffs experience visiting Defendant's
Website, including in the past year, and from an investigation
performed on their behalf, Plaintiffs found Defendant's Website has
a number of digital barriers that deny screen-reader users like
Plaintiffs full and equal access to important Website
content--content Defendant makes available to its sighted Website
users.

Still, Plaintiffs would like to, intend to, and will attempt to
access Defendant's Website in the future to browse, research, or
shop online and purchase the products and services that Defendant
offers. Defendant's policies regarding the maintenance and
operation of its Website fail to ensure its Website is fully
accessible to, and independently usable by, individuals with
vision-related disabilities.

The Plaintiffs and the putative class have been, and in the absence
of injunctive relief will continue to be, injured, and
discriminated against by Defendant's failure to provide its online
Website content and services in a manner that is compatible with
screen reader technology, says the complaint.

The Plaintiffs are and have been legally blind and are therefore
disabled.

The Defendant offers home improvement equipment for sale including,
but not limited to, ladders, carts, garden hoses, hand trucks, hose
reels, replacement tires, wheelbarrows and more.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Chad A. Throndset, Esq.
          Patrick W. Michenfelder, Esq.
          Jason Gustafson, Esq.
          THRONDSET MICHENFELDER, LLC
          80 South 8th Street, Suite 900
          Minneapolis, MN 55402
          Phone: (763) 515-6110
          Email: chad@throndsetlaw.com
                 pat@throndsetlaw.com
                 jason@throndsetlaw.com

TROPICAL SMOOTHIE: Herrera Sues Over Disability Discrimination
--------------------------------------------------------------
Oscar Herrera, on behalf of others similarly situated v. TROPICAL
SMOOTHIE CAFE, LLC, a foreign limited liability company, Case No.
1:25-cv-23192-XXXX (S.D. Fla., July 17, 2025), is brought for
declaratory and injunctive relief, attorney's fees, costs, and
litigation expenses for unlawful disability discrimination in
violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act
("ADA").

The Defendant owns, controls, maintains, and/or operates an adjunct
website, https://www.tropicalsmoothiecafe.com (the "Website"). One
of the functions of the Website is to provide the public
information on the locations of Defendant's physical restaurants.
Defendant also sells to the public its food and beverage products
through the Website, which acts as a critical point of sale and
ordering for Defendant's food and beverage products that are made
in and also available for ordering and purchase in, from, and
through Defendant's physical restaurants.

The Plaintiff utilizes available screen reader software that allows
individuals who are blind and visually disabled to communicate with
company websites. However, Defendant's Website contains access
barriers that prevent free and full use by blind and visually
disabled individuals using keyboards and available screen reader
software. These access barriers, one or more of which were
experienced by Plaintiff, are severe and pervasive and, as
confirmed by Plaintiff's expert, include the following (with
reference to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines ("WCAG"),
says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is and has been a blind and visually disabled person
who has been medically diagnosed with complete blindness as a
result of trauma to both eyes.

The Defendant was and still is an organization that owns, operates,
and/or controls, either directly or through franchise agreements, a
chain of restaurants under the name "Tropical Smoothie Café". Each
"Tropical Smoothie Cafe" restaurant is open to the public.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Rodenck V. Hannah, Esq.
          RODERICK V. HANNAH, ESQ., P.A.
          4800 N. Hiatus Road
          Sunrise, FL 33351
          Phone: 954/362-3800
          Facsimile: 954/362-3779
          Email: rhannah@rhannahlaw.com

               - and -

          Pelayo Duran, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF PELAYO
          6355 NW. 36th Street, Suite 307
          Virginia Gardens, FL 33166
          Phone: 305/266-9780
          Facsimile: 305/269-8311
          Email: duranandassociates@gmail.com

TRUSTEES OF WESTMINSTER: Carfora Files Suit in D. Connecticut
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Trustees of
Westminster School, Inc. The case is styled as John Carfora, Sandra
Putnam, Juan Gonzales, individually and as representatives of a
class of similarly situated individuals v. Trustees of Westminster
School, Inc., Case No. 3:25-mc-00074-OAW (D. Mont., July 18,
2025).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Statutory Actions.

The Westminster School -- https://www.westminster-school.org/ -- is
a private, coeducational college-preparatory, boarding and day
school located in Simsbury, Connecticut.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Ari J. Hoffman, Esq.
          Kaelyn M. Mostafa, Esq.
          COHEN & WOLF, P.C.
          1115 Broad St., Po Box 1821
          Bridgeport, CT 06604
          Phone: (203) 368-0211
          Fax: (203) 394-9901
          Email: ahoffman@cohenandwolf.com
                 kmostafa@cohenandwolf.com

TSG PERSIMMON: Mellenthin Sues Over Physical Barriers
-----------------------------------------------------
Daniel Mellenthin, on behalf of others similarly situated v. TSG
PERSIMMON POINTE, LLC, Case No. 4:25-cv-01042 (E.D. Mo., July 16,
2025), is brought based upon Defendant's failure to remove physical
barriers to access and violations of Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act ("ADA") and the ADA's Accessibility
Guidelines, 28 C.F.R. Part 36 ("ADAAG").

The Defendant, as property owner, is responsible for complying with
the ADA for both the exterior portions and interior portions of the
Property. Even if there is a lease between Defendant, 2187 SCL LLC,
and a tenant allocating responsibilities for ADA compliance within
the unit the tenant operates, that lease is only between the
property owner and the tenant and does not abrogate the Defendant's
requirement to comply with the ADA for the entire Property it owns,
including the interior portions of the Property which are public
accommodations.

The Plaintiff intends on revisiting the Property to purchase food,
drinks, and/or services as a return customer of Oishi, and for
Advocacy Purposes, but does not intend to re expose himself to the
ongoing barriers to access and engage in a futile gesture of
visiting the public accommodation known to Plaintiff to have
numerous and continuing barriers to access. As such, he is
dissuaded from returning to the Property as a customer until the
barriers to access have been removed, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff uses a wheelchair for mobility purposes.

2187 SCL LLC is a domestic limited liability corporation that
transacts business in the State of Missouri.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Douglas S. Schapiro, Esq.
          THE SCHAPIRO LAW GROUP, P.L.
          7301-A W. Palmetto Park Rd., #100A
          Boca Raton, FL 33433
          Phone: (561) 807-7388
          Email: schapiro@schapirolawgroup.com

TUFT & NEEDLE: Chebul Suit Seeks Class Certification
----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as EMILY CHEBUL, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. TUFT & NEEDLE,
LLC, Case No. 2:24-cv-02707-JLS-MAR (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff, on
Sept. 26, 2025, will move the Court to certify this case as a class
action.

The Plaintiff also moves for her appointment as class
representative and for the appointment of Dovel & Luner LLP as
class counsel.

Plaintiff seeks to certify the following class:

    "All persons who, during the class period, purchased one or
    more mattress product advertised at a discount from the
    Defendant's website while in the State of California."

    Excluded from the Class are persons who received a full refund

    on their purchase, any Judge or Magistrate presiding over this

    case, Defendant and its employees or affiliates, anyone who
    opts out, anyone who has previously released their claims, and

    the Plaintiff's and Defendant's counsel and experts.

Like all other class members, the Plaintiff bought a mattress from
Tuft & Needle through its website at a deceptive discount. They
assert claims under section 1770(a)(13) of the California Consumers
Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) and section 17501 of the FAL, both of
which specifically prohibit fake discounting.

Tuft & Needle markets and sells mattresses.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated July 16, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=UZdCvJ at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Richard Lyon, Esq.
          Simon Franzini, Esq.
          Martin Brenner, Esq.
          DOVEL & LUNER, LLP
          201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600
          Santa Monica, CA 90401
          Telephone: (310) 656-7066
          Facsimile: (310) 656-7069
          E-mail: rick@dovel.com
                  simon@dovel.com
                  martin@dovel.com

UBER TECHNOLOGIES: Tenecela Suit Removed to E.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Deivi Tenecela, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Case No.
612444/2025 was removed from the Supreme Court of the State of New
York, Nassau County, to the United States District Court for
Eastern District of New York on July 17, 2025, and assigned Case
No. 2:25-cv-03989.

The Plaintiff brings this proposed class action under the Fair
Credit Reporting Act.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Stephen A. Fuchs, Esq.
          Andrew M. Spurchise, Esq.
          Vinay D. Patel, Esq.
          LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
          900 Third Avenue
          New York, NY 10022.3298
          Phone: 212.583.9600
          Email: sfuchs@littler.com
                 aspurchise@littler.com
                 vpatel@littler.com

UNICAR CO: Parra-Jimenez Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------
Luis Parra-Jimenez, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated v. UNICAR CO., INC., d/b/a UNICAR CAR SERVICE, and
SALVATORE MUNOZ, Case No. 1:25-cv-05862 (S.D.N.Y., July 17, 2025),
is brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act("FLSA") and the
New York Labor Law ("NYLL"), and the supporting New York State
Department of Labor Regulations, seeking from Defendants: unpaid
overtime wages, liquidated damages, and attorneys' fees and costs.

The Plaintiff and FLSA Collective Members are and have been
similarly situated, have had substantially similar job requirements
and pay provisions, and are and have been subject to Defendants'
common policies, practices, procedures and patterns with regards to
their compensation, including their willful and repeated failure to
pay Plaintiff and FLSA Collective Members the full and proper wages
for all hours worked. Specifically, Defendants failed to pay
overtime pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 per workweek to
Plaintiff and FLSA Collective Members. Plaintiff's claims stated
herein are essentially the same as those of the other FLSA
Collective Members, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff worked for Unicar as a dispatcher from May 2023 until
the termination of his employment in September 2024.

The Defendants operated Unicar Car Service.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          William Brown, Esq.
          BROWN, KWON & LAM LLP
          521 Fifth Avenue, 17th Floor
          New York, NY 10175
          Phone: (212) 295-5825
          Fax: (718) 795-1642
          Email: wbrown@bkllawyers.com

UNITED BEHAVIORAL: LD Seeks to File Class Cert Reply Under Seal
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LD et al., v. United
Behavioral Health et al., Case No. 4:20-cv-02254-YGR (N.D. Cal.),
the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting the
Plaintiffs' interim administrative motion to consider whether
another party's material should be sealed in portions of the
Plaintiffs' reply brief in support of renewed motion for class
certification.

The Plaintiffs submit this Interim Administrative Motion to
Consider Whether Another Party's Material Should Be Sealed pursuant
to the January 19, 2024, Stipulation Modifying Sealing Procedures
("Stipulation"), Civil Local Rules 7-11(a) and 79-5(f), and
Standing Order for Civil Cases ¶ 12, Hon. Yvonne Gonzales Rogers,
U.S. District Court, N.D. Cal.

The Plaintiffs move to seal portions of their memorandum of points
and authorities in support their renewed motion for class
certification and certain exhibits to the Declaration of Matthew M.
Lavin in support thereof. The reasons for sealing will be discussed
in a forthcoming omnibus sealing motion, to be filed jointly by the
parties "within 14 days after the conclusion of briefing on the
underlying motion or filing."

United provides behavioral health services and solutions.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 14, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=uc2t60 at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Matthew M. Lavin, Esq.
          ARNALL GOLDEN GREGORY LLP
          2100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 350S
          Washington, DC 20037
          Telephone: (202) 677-4030
          Facsimile: (202) 677-4031
          E-mail: matt.lavin@agg.com

                - and –

          David M. Lilienstein, Esq.
          Katie J. Spielman, Esq.
          DL LAW GROUP
          345 Franklin St.
          San Francisco, CA 94102
          Telephone: (415) 678-5050
          Facsimile: (415) 358-8484
          E-mail: david@dllawgroup.com
                  katie@dllawgroup.com

UNIVERSAL INTERMODAL: Cole Suit Removed to C.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Ada Casillas Gascon, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. UNIVERSAL INTERMODAL
SERVICES, INC.; and DOES 1 through 50, Inclusive, Case No.
CIVSB2516196 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California for the County of San Bernardino, to the United States
District Court for Central District of California on July 21, 2025,
and assigned Case No. 5:25-cv-01892-JVS-SK.

The Plaintiff seeks to recover waiting time penalties for
Defendant's alleged failure to pay Plaintiff all wages. the
Plaintiff alleges that Defendant failed to provide accurate
itemized wage statements as required by California Labor Code
section 226 and seek penalties pursuant to Sections 226(e). The
Plaintiff alleges that Defendant failed to provide Plaintiff with
meal and rest periods during her employment. The Plaintiff alleges
that Defendant failed to pay her within the time period permissible
under California Labor Code section 204. The Plaintiff seeks to
recover unreimbursed business expenses. The Plaintiff also seeks to
recover attorneys' fees.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Christian J. Keeney, Esq.
          Alis M. Moon, Esq.
          Huy M. Tran, Esq.
          Emma C. Cunningham (SBN 341271)
          JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
          200 Spectrum Center Drive, Suite 500
          Irvine, CA 92618
          Phone: (949) 885-1360
          Fax: (949) 885-1380
          Email: Christian.Keeney@jacksonlewis.com
                 Alis.Moon@jacksonlewis.com
                 Huy.Tran@jacksonlewis.com
                 Emma.Cunningham@jacksonlewis.com

VOTIVO LLC: Williams Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
---------------------------------------------------------
Darnell Williams, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Votivo, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-08333 (N.D. Ill., July
22, 2025), is brought arising from the Defendant's failure to
design, construct, maintain, and operate their website to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind
or visually-impaired persons.

The Defendant is denying blind and visually impaired persons
throughout the United States with equal access to services the
Defendant provides to their non-disabled customers through
https://votivo.com (hereinafter “Votivo.com” or “the
website”). The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its
website, and therefore denial of its products and services offered,
and in conjunction with its physical locations, is a violation of
Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (the
"ADA").

Because Defendant's website, Votivo.com, is not equally accessible
to blind and visually-impaired consumers, it violates the ADA.
Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the
Defendant's policies, practices, and procedures to that Defendant's
website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory
damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to
unlawful discrimination, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using the
computer.

Votivo provides to the public a website known as Votivo.com which
provides consumers with access to an array of goods and services,
including, the ability to view various home fragrance products,
including scented candles, reed diffusers, room and linen sprays,
car fragrances.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David B. Reyes, Esq.
          EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP PLLC
          68-29 Main Street,
          Flushing, NY 11367
          Phone: (844) 731-3343
          Email: Dreyes@ealg.law

WALGREEN PHARMACY: Parker Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
---------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Sean Parker, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. WALGREEN PHARMACY SERVICES
MIDWEST, LLC, an Illinois Limited Liability Company; WALGREEN CO.,
an Illinois Corporation, and DOES 1-20, inclusive, Case No.
25-2-08798-6 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
Washington for the County of Pierce, to the United States District
Court for Western District of Washington on July 18, 2025, and
assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-05624.

The Plaintiff purports to bring the State Action pursuant to
Washington's wage and hour laws and Seattle's secure scheduling
ordinance as a class action, and seek class certification on behalf
of a class that includes Plaintiff and all hourly, non-exempt
Walgreens employees who worked in the State of Washington at any
time within the period beginning May 23, 20222 through class
certification.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Adam S. Belzberg, Esq.
          STOEL RIVES LLP
          600 University Street, Suite 3600
          Seattle, WA 98101
          Phone: 206.624.0900
          Facsimile: 206.386.7500
          Email: adam.belzberg@stoel.com

               - and -

          Christopher T. Wall, Esq.
          600 University Street, Suite 3600
          Seattle, WA 98101
          Phone: 206.624.0900
          Facsimile: 206.386.7500
          Email: christopher.wall@stoel.com

               - and -

          Ryan S. Kunkel, Esq.
          STOEL RIVES LLP
          760 SW Ninth Avenue, Suite 300
          Portland, OR 97205
          Phone: 503.224.3380
          Facsimile: 503.220.2480
          Email: ryan.kunkel@stoel.com

WATERSTREET COMPANY: Baldwin Files Suit in D. Montana
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against WaterStreet Company.
The case is styled as Daniel Baldwin, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. WaterStreet Company, Case No.
9:25-cv-00110-KLD (D. Mont., July 18, 2025).

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.

WaterStreet Company -- https://www.waterstreetcompany.com/ --
provides cloud P&C Insurance Software and support services for
carriers, MGAs, insurtechs & start-ups.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          John M. Fitzpatrick, Esq.
          TOWE & FITZPATRICK, PLLP
          619 SW Higgins, Suite O
          PO Box 1745
          Missoula, MT 59806
          Phone: (406) 829-1669
          Fax: (406) 493-0538
          Email: jfitz@towefitzlaw.com

WESTROCK SERVICES: Acu Suit Removed to C.D. California
------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Edgar R. Acu, individually, and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. WESTROCK SERVICES, LLC; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive, Case No. CVRI2401400 was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of California, County of Riverside, to
the United States District Court for Central District of California
on July 18, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-06602.

On July 18, 2024, while already proceeding in federal court,
Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint ("FAC"). The Plaintiff
alleges that Defendant are collectively liable to Plaintiff and
Class Members for the following: Failure to pay Plaintiff and Class
Members the applicable minimum wage pursuant to California Labor
Code and "any additional applicable Wage Orders, which require such
compensation to non-exempt employees;" Failure to pay Plaintiff and
Class Members for all overtime pursuant to California Labor Code;
Failure to provide Plaintiff and Class Members with meal periods
pursuant to California Labor Code; Failure to provide Plaintiff and
Class Members with rest periods pursuant to California Labor Code;
Failure to indemnify Plaintiff and Class Members for all necessary
expenditures or losses incurred in direct consequence of the
discharge of their duties pursuant to Labor Code; Failure to pay
wages due to Plaintiff and Class Members upon discharge pursuant to
California Labor Code; Failure to furnish Plaintiff and Class
Members timely, accurate, and itemized wage statements pursuant to
California Labor Code; Unfair and unlawful business practices
pursuant to California Business and Professions Code; Civil
penalties under PAGA pursuant to California Labor Code.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Mia Farber, Esq.
          JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
          725 South Figueroa Street, Suite 2800
          Los Angeles, CA 90017-5408
          Phone: (213) 689-0404
          Facsimile: (213) 689-0430
          Email: Mia.Farber@jacksonlewis.com

               - and -

          Scott P. Jang, Esq.
          JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
          50 California Street, 9th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94111-4615
          Phone: (415) 394-9400
          Facsimile: (415) 394-9401
          Email: Scott.Jang@jacksonlewis.com

               - and -

          Isabella L. Shin, Esq.
          JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
          160 W. Santa Clara St., Suite 400
          San Jose, CA 95113
          Phone: (408) 579-0404
          Facsimile: (408) 454-0290
          Email: Isabella.Shin@jacksonlewis.com

WINCO HOLDINGS: Ayala Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
-----------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Andres Ayala, individually and on behalf of
all other similarly situated v. WINCO HOLDINGS, INC., an Idaho
corporation, Case No. 25-2-00418-08 was removed from the Superior
Court of the State of Washington for the County of Cowlitz, to the
United States District Court for Western District of Washington on
July 23, 2025, and assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-05653.

The Complaint alleges, inter alia: the Defendant has engaged in,
and continues to engage in, a common course of wage and hour abuse
against its hourly-paid or non-exempt employees in the state of
Washington. The Defendant has engaged in a common course of failing
to provide Plaintiff and the Class members with a paid ten-minute
rest break for every four hours of work. The Defendant has engaged
in a common course of requiring or permitting Plaintiff and the
Class members to work more than three consecutive hours without a
rest break. The Defendant has engaged in a common course of failing
to provide Plaintiff and the Class members with a thirty-minute
meal break for every five hours of work. The Defendant has engaged
in a common course of requiring or permitting Plaintiff and the
Class members to work more than five consecutive hours without a
meal break. Failure to pay minimum wages for all hours worked.
Defendant has engaged in a common course of failing to pay minimum
wages to Plaintiff and the Class members for all hours worked. The
Defendant has engaged in a common course of failing to pay
Plaintiff and the Class members for all hours worked over forty in
a week at a rate of not less than one and one-half times their
regular rate of pay.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Dean L. Petitta, Esq.
          Shunt Tatavos-Gharajeh, Esq.
          Douglas Han, Esq.
          JUSTICE LAW CORPORATION
          751 North Fair Oaks Avenue, Suite 101
          Pasadena, CA 91103
          Phone: (818) 230-7502
          Email: dpetitta@justicelawcorp.com
                 statavos@justicelawcorp.com
                 dhan@justicelawcorp.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Kyle D. Nelson, Esq.
          Matthew R. Kelly, Esq.
          SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
          999 Third Avenue, Suite 4700
          Seattle, WA 98104-4041
          Phone: (206) 393-4060
          Email: knelson@seyfarth.com
                 mrkelly@seyfarth.com

WINDOWWALL LLC: Moon Files TCPA Suit in M.D. Florida
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against WindowWall LLC. The
case is styled as Marion Alexis Moon, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. WindowWall LLC, Case No.
8:25-cv-01951 (M.D. Fla., July 24, 2025).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

WindowWall LLC -- https://windowwallfl.com/ -- offer a wide variety
of high-quality window replacement options for your home, including
double-hung, picture, casement, and more.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Stefan Coleman, Esq.
          COLEMAN, PLLC
          18117 Biscayne Blvd-Ste 4152
          Miami, FL 33160
          Phone: (877) 333-9427
          Email: law@stefancoleman.com

WW LLC: Winklemann Sues Over Physical Barriers
----------------------------------------------
Mitchell Winklemann, on behalf of others similarly situated v. WW,
LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-08130 (E.D. Mo., July 16, 2025), is brought
based upon Defendant's failure to remove physical barriers to
access and violations of Title III of the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA") and the ADA's Accessibility Guidelines, 28
C.F.R. Part 36 ("ADAAG").

The Defendant, as property owner, is responsible for complying with
the ADA for both the exterior portions and interior portions of the
Property. Even if there is a lease between Defendant, 2187 SCL LLC,
and a tenant allocating responsibilities for ADA compliance within
the unit the tenant operates, that lease is only between the
property owner and the tenant and does not abrogate the Defendant's
requirement to comply with the ADA for the entire Property it owns,
including the interior portions of the Property which are public
accommodations.

The Plaintiff has visited the Property many times over a number of
years as a customer and advocate for the disabled. Plaintiff
intends to revisit the Property after the barriers to access
detailed in this Complaint are removed and the Property is
accessible again. The purpose of the revisit is to be a return
customer of Michael's, to determine if and when the Property is
made accessible and to substantiate already existing standing for
this lawsuit for Advocacy Purposes, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff uses a wheelchair for mobility purposes.

WW, LLC, is the owner or co-owner of the real property and
improvements that El Mana.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Douglas S. Schapiro, Esq.
          THE SCHAPIRO LAW GROUP, P.L.
          7301-A W. Palmetto Park Rd., #100A
          Boca Raton, FL 33433
          Phone: (561) 807-7388
          Email: schapiro@schapirolawgroup.com

                        Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Dow Inc. Has $665MM Liabilities as of Dec. 31
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dow Inc., in its press release issued on July 24, 2025, has
recorded a total $665 million and $713 million in asbestos-related
liabilities - noncurrent as of June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2024,
respectively, according to the Company's Form 8-K filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

A full-text copy of the Form 8-K is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Uj1VpO


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Genuine Parts Co. Faces 2,864 Suits as of June 30
------------------------------------------------------------------
Genuine Parts Company has 2,864 pending asbestos lawsuits as of
June 30, 2025, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

The Company states, "The amount accrued for pending and future
claims was $240 million as of June 30, 2025, which represented our
best estimate of the liability within our calculated range of $212
million to $302 million, discounted using a discount rate of 4.24%.
The amount accrued for pending and future claims was $256 million
as of December 31, 2024, which represented our best estimate of the
liability within our calculated range of $219 million to $313
million, discounted using a discount rate of 4.58%. Our
undiscounted product liability was $317 million and $336 million as
of June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively. There have
been no significant developments to the information presented in
our 2024 Annual Report on Form 10-K with respect to litigation or
commitments and contingencies.

"We hold insurance policies that cover some asbestos settlements
and defense costs. Annually, we conduct an insurance exhaustion
study to model expected recoveries for pending and future claims,
and we adjust the insurance receivable balance to reflect the
present value of these recoveries. Our receivable for estimated
insurance recoveries related to pending and future claims was $40
million and $44 million as of June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024,
respectively."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=hjVHYM

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Honeywell Defends Personal Injury Claims
---------------------------------------------------------
Honeywell International Inc. is named in asbestos-related personal
injury claims related to the Bendix Friction Materials business,
which was sold in 2014, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Honeywell International states, "Bendix manufactured automotive
brake linings that contained chrysotile asbestos in an encapsulated
form. Claimants consist largely of individuals who allege exposure
to asbestos from brakes from either performing or being in the
vicinity of individuals who performed brake replacements.

"The Consolidated Financial Statements reflect an estimated
liability for resolution of asserted (claims filed as of the
financial statement date) and unasserted Bendix-related asbestos
claims, which exclude the Company's ongoing legal fees to defend
such asbestos claims which will continue to be expensed as they are
incurred.

"The Company reflects the inclusion of all years of epidemiological
disease projection through 2059 when estimating the liability for
unasserted Bendix-related asbestos claims. Such liability for
unasserted Bendix-related asbestos claims is based on historic and
anticipated claims filing experience and dismissal rates, disease
classifications, and average resolution values in the tort system
over a defined look-back period. The Company valued Bendix asserted
and unasserted claims using average resolution values for the
previous two years. The Company reviews the valuation assumptions
and average resolution values used to estimate the cost of Bendix
asserted and unasserted claims during the fourth quarter each
year."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=IZJBTZ

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Otis Worldwide Defends Product Liability Lawsuits
------------------------------------------------------------------
Otis Worldwide Corporation has been named as defendants in lawsuits
alleging personal injury as a result of exposure to asbestos,
according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission.

The Company states, "While we have never manufactured any
asbestos-containing component parts, and no longer incorporate
asbestos in any current products, certain of our historical
products have contained components manufactured by third parties
incorporating asbestos. A substantial majority of these
asbestos-related claims have been dismissed without payment or were
covered in full or in part by insurance or other forms of
indemnity. Additional cases were litigated and settled without any
insurance reimbursement. The amounts involved in asbestos-related
claims were not material individually or in the aggregate as of and
for the periods ended June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024.

"The estimated range of total liabilities to resolve all pending
and unasserted potential future asbestos claims through 2059 is
approximately $11 million to $21 million as of June 30, 2025 and
December 31, 2024. Since no amount within the range of estimates is
more likely to occur than any other, we have recorded the minimum
amount of $10 million (including $1 million of payments made in the
six months ended June 30, 2025) and $11 million as of June 30, 2025
and December 31, 2024, respectively, which is principally recorded
in Other long-term liabilities on our Condensed Consolidated
Balance Sheets. Amounts are on a pre-tax basis, not discounted, and
exclude the Company's legal fees to defend the asbestos claims
(which will continue to be expensed as they are incurred). In
addition, the Company has an insurance recovery receivable for
probable asbestos-related recoveries of approximately $3 million as
of June 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024, which is principally
included in Other assets on our Condensed Consolidated Balance
Sheets."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=zcogvH

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Travelers Co. Still Receives PI Claims
-------------------------------------------------------
The Travelers Companies, Inc., has received and continues to
receive a significant number of asbestos claims, according to the
Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.

Travelers Cos. states, "In the ordinary course of its insurance
business, the Company has received and continues to receive claims
for insurance arising under policies issued by the Company
asserting alleged injuries and damages from asbestos-related
exposures that are the subject of related coverage litigation. The
Company is defending asbestos-related litigation vigorously and
believes that it has meritorious defenses; however, the outcomes of
these disputes are uncertain. In this regard, the Company employs
dedicated specialists and comprehensive resolution strategies to
manage asbestos loss exposure, including settling litigation under
appropriate circumstances. Currently, it is not possible to predict
legal outcomes and their impact on future loss development for
claims and litigation relating to asbestos claims. Any such
development could be affected by future court decisions and
interpretations, as well as future changes, if any, in applicable
legislation. Because of these uncertainties, additional liabilities
may arise for amounts in excess of the Company's current insurance
reserves. In addition, the Company's estimate of ultimate claims
and claim adjustment expenses may change. These additional
liabilities or changes in estimates, or a range of either, cannot
now be reasonably estimated and could result in income statement
charges that could be material to the Company's results of
operations in future periods.

"Net asbestos paid loss and loss adjustment expenses in the first
six months of 2025 and 2024 were $103 million and $135 million,
respectively. Net asbestos reserves were $1.24 billion as of both
June 30, 2025 and 2024."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=POt5pz

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Westinghouse Air Brake Product Liability Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Claims have been filed against Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies
Corporation and certain of its affiliates in various jurisdictions
across the United States by persons alleging bodily injury as a
result of exposure to asbestos-containing products, according to
the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission.

The Company states, "The vast majority of the claims are submitted
to insurance carriers for defense and indemnity, or to
non-affiliated companies that retain the liabilities for the
asbestos-containing products at issue. We cannot, however, assure
that all of these claims will be fully covered by insurance, or
that the indemnitors or insurers will remain financially viable.
Our ultimate legal and financial liability with respect to these
claims, as is the case with other pending litigation, cannot be
estimated. A limited number of claims are not covered by insurance,
nor are they subject to indemnity from non-affiliated parties.
Management believes that the costs of the Company's
asbestos-related cases will not be material to the Company's
overall financial position, results of operations and cash flows."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=jqaQpb


                            *********

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 ***