250910.mbx

250910.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Wednesday, September 10, 2025, Vol. 27, No. 181 Headlines ADVANCARE OF SOUTH: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Mosquera Alleges AMAZON.COM INC: Court Certifies Class Suit Over Third Party Sales ANTHROPIC PBC: $1.5BB Settlement Hearing Moved to Sept. 25 ANTONIO PASCARELLA: Faces Solano Wage-and-Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y. APEX CLASS: Silva Alleges Unauthorized Access to Personal Info ARAMARK SERVICES: Faces Adams Wage-and-Hour Suit in Calif. Super. AZUL SYSTEMS: Collects Web Users' Data Without Consent, Orr Says BARKHORDAR OMID: Knight Suit Removed from State Ct. to C.D. Cal. BOWFLEX INC: Court Drops Debtor from Dumbbell Suits BRAD PITT: Faces $20.5MM Suit Filed by Hurricane Katrina Victims CENTURY SUPPORT: Barton Sues Over Failure to Protect Personal Info COA INC: Website Inaccessible to the Blind Users, Cordoba Alleges CONVERSENOW TECHNOLOGIES: Court Refuses to Dismiss Taylor Suit CRYE-LEIKE INC: Files Petition for Writ of Mandamus to 8th Circuit DOSTER LAWN: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Loweth Suit Alleges DRT LLC: Violates Federal Trade Commission Act, Moore Suit Alleges ENCOMPASS HEALTH: Rosen Law Probes Potential Securities Claims FARMERS INSURANCE: Faces Montalvan Suit Over Exposed Private Info FIRST HORIZON: Olmos Sues Over Improper Response to Loan Payment FORD MOTOR: Bryan Sues Over Defective Pickup Trucks GENERAL DYNAMICS: S.D. California Refuses to Remand Lopez Suit HEALTHCARE SERVICES: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Richards Says HELLO PRODUCTS: Faces Nelkin Fraud Class Suit in C.D. Calif. HOME HELPERS: Faces Georgopoulos "TCPA" Suit in N.D. Calif. HUDSON RIVER: Milito Sues Over Job Postings' Undisclosed Wage Scale HYSTER-YALE MATERIALS: Collects Website's Data Without Consent INTERNATIONAL SECURITY: Rodriguez Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages IQVIA INC: Hernandez Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages for Non-Exempt Workers JOHN BOOS: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Walker Says KEYSTONE RV: Massachusetts Court Refuses to Dismiss Hines Suit LATCH INC: $1.95M Class Settlement in Schwartz Suit Has Initial OK LIFEMD INC: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Appointment Due October 27 LUMINAR TECHNOLOGIES: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Deadline Due Sept. 22 LUNAR LANDSCAPING: Sanchez Balks at Failure to Pay Proper Overtime MAUI COUNTY, HI: Bash Class Suit Seeks to Recover $5MM Damages MDL 2873: AFFF Products Can Cause Disease, Hughes Suit Alleges MDL 2873: AFFF/TOG Products "Defective," McGee Suit Alleges MDL 2873: Aqueous Foams Contain Toxic Chemicals, Lubchenko Says MDL 2873: Aqueous Foams Contain Toxic Chemicals, Mullenberg Says MDL 2873: Aqueous Foams Contain Toxic Substances, Chandler Says MDL 2873: Aqueous Foams Contain Toxic Substances, Delisio Says MDL 2873: Aqueous Foams Contain Toxic Substances, Dermody Says MDL 2873: Aqueous Foams Contain Toxic Substances, Henderson Says MDL 2873: Aqueous Foams Contain Toxic Substances, Hunt Alleges MDL 2873: Bishop Sues Over Exposure to PFAS From AFFF/TOG Products MDL 2873: Burton Suit Alleges Complications From AFFF Products MDL 2873: Faces Conklin Suit Over Firefighters' Exposure to PFAS MDL 2873: Faces Durdin Suit Over AFFF/TOG Products' Toxic Elements MDL 2873: Faces Knode Suit Over AFFF/TOG Products' Harmful Effects MDL 2873: Faces Palyok Suit Over Firefighters' Exposure to PFAS MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Galman Says MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Mitchell Says MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Ortiz Says MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Pruitt Says MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Putney Says MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Reyes Says MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Salazar Says MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Sims Says MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Sowers Says MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Soza Says MDL 2873: Gilmore Suit Claims Toxic Exposure From AFFF Products MDL 2873: Kohanski Sues Over Toxic Effects of AFFF/TOG Products MDL 2873: Malave Sues Over Injury Sustained From AFFF/TOG Products MDL 2873: Savage Suit Claims PFAS Exposure From AFFF/TOG Products METROPOLITAN TREE: Faces Perez Wage-and-Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y. MLFS PIZZA: Faces Sanchez Wage-and-Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y. MONSANTO COMPANY: Products Contains Toxic Chemicals, Fox Says MONSANTO COMPANY: Vadnais Suit Transferred to N.D. California MONSANTO COMPANY: Wright Suit Transferred to N.D. California MORGAN & MORGAN: Wins Bid to Compel Arbitration in Gugliuzza Suit MOTUS LLC: Riegert Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages MYBOOKIE INC: Faces Connolly Suit Over Unsolicited Text Messages NEW YORK, NY: Faces Steadman Class Suit Over Protest Response OASIS SCIENTIFIC: Bishop Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind OHIO MEDICAL: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Cooper Alleges PENNSYLVANIA: Court Refuses to Hear H.C. Prisoner Suit v. Chudzik POSIGEN DEVELOPER: Ruperto Balks at Mass Layoff Without Notice PROVIDENCE HEALTH: Underpays Licensed Practical Nurses, Suit Says RB GLOBAL: Township of Middletown Alleges Unlawful Conspiracy SAINT AGNES: Faces Employment Class Suit in Cal. State Court SALESFORCE INC: Personal Info Exposed in Data Breach, Medina Says SALESFORCE INC: Scott Alleges Unauthorized Personal Info Disclosure SHELDON PIZZA: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Brass Alleges SUNFLOWER LTD: McNamara Sues to Recoup Illegal Gambling Losses SUNWEST MILLING: Fails to Properly Pay Workers, Solorio Suit Claims SURFSHARK BV: Faces Class Suit Over Auto Renewal Law Violations TALLAHASSEE MEMORIAL: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Sheward Says TARGET CORP: Faces Orozco Suit Over Dog Food's Deceptive Ads TESLA INC: Faces Class Action Suit Over Securities Law Violations TWILIO INC: Wins Bid to Compel Arbitration; Bender Suit Stayed UNITED STATES: Stroup Sues Over Workers' Unpaid Wages UNITEDHEALTH GROUP: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Ainsworth Says VERRA MOBILITY: Smith Balks at School-Bus Safety Camera Scheme VGW LTD: Simonich Sues Over Illegal Online Gambling Operations VIVINT LLC: Thornton Balks at Unsolicited Telemarketing Calls WELLS FARGO: Files Answer, Affirmative & Other Defenses in Suit WESTCHESTER FIRE: Faces Sage Suit Over Overcharged Pet Insurance WILLIAM R. SHARPE: Cosner Sues Over Civil Rights Violations ZALE DELAWARE: Agrees to Settle TCPA Class Action Suit for $7.5MM ********* ADVANCARE OF SOUTH: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Mosquera Alleges --------------------------------------------------------------- MIRJA MOSQUERA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ADVANCARE OF SOUTH FLORIDA, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-23912-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Aug. 29, 2025) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff Mosquera was employed by the Defendant as a home health aide. Advancare of South Florida, LLC provides in-home senior care services. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Corey L. Seldin, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A. 8151 Peters Road, Suite 4000 Plantation, FL 33324 Telephone: (954) 807-7765 Facsimile: (954) 807-7786 Email: cseldin@forthepeople.com AMAZON.COM INC: Court Certifies Class Suit Over Third Party Sales ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mike Scarcella, writing for Reuters, reports that Amazon.com (AMZN.O), must face a class action on behalf of hundreds of millions of U.S. consumers over claims that the online retail giant overcharged for products sold by third-party sellers, a federal judge in Seattle has ruled. U.S. District Judge John Chun in an order, unsealed on Friday, August 28, certified a nationwide class involving 288 million customers and billions of transactions, marking one of the largest-ever in the United States. The class includes buyers in the United States who purchased five or more new goods from third-party sellers on Amazon since May 26, 2017. The consumers' 2021 lawsuit said Amazon violated antitrust law by restricting third-party sellers from offering their products for lower prices elsewhere on rival platforms while they are also for sale on Amazon. Amazon's policies have allowed the company to impose inflated fees on sellers, causing shoppers to pay higher prices for purchases, the lawsuit said. Amazon has denied any wrongdoing. It has already appealed Chun's class certification order, which was first issued under seal on Aug. 6. Amazon and attorneys for the consumers did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Amazon argued, that the class was too large to be manageable and that the plaintiffs failed to show its alleged conduct had a widespread effect. Amazon also said that since 2019 it has not used a pricing program that the plaintiffs challenged. Chun found there was no evidence at this stage that the size of the class was overbroad. Other federal courts had certified class actions with millions or hundreds of millions of class members, the judge said. The case is Elizabeth De Coster et al v. Amazon.com Inc, U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington, No. 2:21-cv-00693-JHC. For plaintiffs: Steve Berman and Barbara Mahoney of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro; Zina Bash of Keller Postman; and Steig Olson of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan For defendant: Karen Dunn, William Isaacson and Amy Mauser of Dunn Isaacson Rhee, and John Goldmark of Davis Wright Tremaine [GN] ANTHROPIC PBC: $1.5BB Settlement Hearing Moved to Sept. 25 ---------------------------------------------------------- The $1.5 billion settlement agreement announced on Sept. 5 in Bartz et al. v. Anthropic PBC, Case No. 3:24-CV-05417-WHA (N.D. Cal.) failed to receive the district judge's preliminary approval at a hearing held on Sept. 8, Monday. The Honorable Judge William Alsup on Monday afternoon directed the settling parties to submit further clarifying information, specifically, the final versions of the Works List and Class List by noon this coming Monday, Sept. 15, and file clarifications with respect to the Claim Form, claims procedure, and anything else by noon on Sept. 22. The Court will convene another hearing Sept. 25 beginning 1:00 p.m. in San Francisco. Present at the hearing were: 1. Plaintiffs' Attorneys: SUSMAN GODFREY LLP's Justin Nelson, Rohit Nath, Michael Adamson, Samir Doshi, J. Craig Smyser; and LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP's Rachel Geman, Daniel Hutchinson, Jalle Dafa, Elizabeth Cabraser, Jacob Miller 2. Defendant Attorneys: ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP's Joseph Farris, Douglas Winthrop; MORRISON FOERSTER's Daralyn Durie; and the Company's general counsel Jeff Bleich and Devon Hanley Cook 3. NYU Professor Samuel Issacharoff, who advised Plaintiffs on procedural issues 4. Class Plaintiff: Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, Kirk W. Johnson. 5. Authors' Coordination Counsel: COWAN, DEBAETS, ABRAHAMS & SHEPPARD LLP's Nancy Wolff; and FAIRMARK PARTNERS, LLP's Yinka Onayemi 6. Publishers' Coordination Counsel: EDELSON PC's J. Ely Wade-Scott; and OPPENHEIM & ZEBRAK LLP's Matthew Oppenheim. 7. Authors Guild CEO: Mary Rasenberger. 8. Association of American Publishers CEO: Maria Pallante Class Action Updates has a breakdown of the deal. See https://classactionupdates.substack.com/p/anthropics-15-billion-settlement Also check out Class Action Updates' recent coverage on lawsuits against A.I. companies. See https://classactionupdates.substack.com/p/openai-copyright-infringement-mdl [GN] ANTONIO PASCARELLA: Faces Solano Wage-and-Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y. --------------------------------------------------------------- ROGELIO SOLANO, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ANTONIO PASCARELLA LANDSCAPING, INC. (d/b/a ANTONIO PASCARELLA LANDSCAPING) and ANTONIO PASCARELLA, Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-04675 (E.D.N.Y., August 22, 2025) arises from the Defendants' alleged unlawful labor practices in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. The complaint alleges the Defendants' failure to pay proper overtime wages, failure to furnish with written wage notices, and failure to provide accurate wage statements. Plaintiff Solano was employed by Defendants as a gardener from approximately June 2021 until November 2021 and from March 2025 until July 21, 2025. Antonio Pascarella Landscaping, Inc. owns, operates, and controls a landscaping company, located in Woodbury, New York under the name "Antonio Pascarella Landscaping."[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael A. Faillace, Esq. MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510 New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 317-1200 Facsimile: (212) 317-1620 APEX CLASS: Silva Alleges Unauthorized Access to Personal Info -------------------------------------------------------------- MICHAEL SILVA, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. APEX CLASS ACTION LLC and IM DATA CENTERS, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 8:25-cv-01908 (C.D. Cal., August 27, 2025) seeks monetary damages and injunctive and declaratory relief arising from Defendants failure to safeguard the personally identifiable information of Plaintiff and Class members, which resulted in unauthorized access to its information systems on or around July 14, 2025, and the compromised and unauthorized disclosure of that private information, causing widespread injury and damages to Plaintiff and the proposed Class members. The Defendants' investigation found that the private information compromised in the data breach included Plaintiff's and other Class Members information. The Defendants' failure to safeguard Plaintiff and Class Members' highly sensitive private information as exposed and unauthorizedly disclosed in the data breach violates their common law duties, California law, and Defendants' implied contract with Clients to safeguard their private information, says the suit. The Plaintiff brings causes of action against Defendants for negligence, negligence per se, breach of third-party beneficiary contract, breach of implied contract, invasion of privacy, breach of fiduciary duty, violation of the California Unfair Competition Law, violation of the California Consumer Records Act, and unjust enrichment, seeking an award of monetary damages and injunctive and declaratory relief, resulting from Defendant's failure to adequately protect their highly sensitive private information. Apex Class Action LLC is a third-party class action settlement administration firm. IM Data Centers, LLC is a third party data center vendor.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Daniel Srourian, Esq. SROURIAN LAW FIRM, P.C. 468 N. Camden Dr. Suite 200 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 - and - Rachel Dapeer, Esq. DAPEER LAW, P.A. 520 S. Dixie Hwy, #240 Hallandale Beach, FL 33009 Telephone: (954) 799-5914 ARAMARK SERVICES: Faces Adams Wage-and-Hour Suit in Calif. Super. ----------------------------------------------------------------- GARRIAN DESHONE ADAMS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ARAMARK SERVICES, INC. and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 25CV135962 (Cal. Super., Alameda Cty., August 7, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of California Labor Code and California's Business and Professions Code including failure to pay wages including overtime, failure to pay timely wages, failure to provide accurate itemized wage statements, failure to indemnify necessary business expenses, and unfair business practices. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a non-exempt employee with the title of Driver II from approximately June 17, 2024, until approximately August 16, 2024. Aramark Services, Inc. is a food service company in California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James R. Hawkins, Esq. Gregory Mauro, Esq. Michael Calvo, Esq. Lauren Falk, Esq. Ava Issary, Esq. JAMES HAWKINS APLC 9880 Research Drive, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92618 Telephone: (949) 387-7200 Facsimile: (949) 387-6676 Email: James@jameshawkinsaplc.com Greg@jameshawkinsaple.com Michael@jameshawkinsaple.com Lauren@jameshawkinsaplc.com Ava@jameshawkinsaple.com AZUL SYSTEMS: Collects Web Users' Data Without Consent, Orr Says ---------------------------------------------------------------- SALLY ORR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. AZUL SYSTEMS, INC., a California corporation; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-07919 (C.D. Cal., August 22, 2025) arises from the Defendant's installation and use of data broker software without obtaining consent in violation of the California Trap and Trace Law. According to the complaint, the Defendant uses data broker software on its website https://azul.com to secretly collect data about Website visitors' computer, location, and browsing habits. The data broker software then compiles this data and correlates that data with extensive external records it already has about most Californians in order to learn the identity of the Website user. The Plaintiff visited the Website on April 6, 2025. When Plaintiff did so, the identifying information by way of electronic impulses was sent to 6Sense, a software company. The purpose of this transfer of data from Defendant to 6Sense was for de-anonymization, profiling, and targeting. The transfer benefitted both Defendant and 6Sense financially, says the Plaintiff. Azul Systems, Inc. owns, operates, and/or controls the website that offers for sale products and solutions, including a platform, designed to assist individuals and institutions develop software.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Tauler, Esq. J. Evan Shapiro, Esq. TAULER SMITH LLP 626 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 550 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 927-9270 E-mail: rtauler@taulersmith.com eshapiro@taulersmith.com BARKHORDAR OMID: Knight Suit Removed from State Ct. to C.D. Cal. ---------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit captioned as Roman Knight, an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Barkhordar Omid Hamid Dental Group, Inc., et al., Case No. 25STCV18816, was removed from the Los Angeles County Superior Court to the United States District Court for the Central District of California (Western Division - Los Angeles) on Aug. 6, 2025. The Central District of California Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-07284-FMO-SK to the proceeding. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Fernando M. Olguin. The suit alleges violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.[BN] The Defendants include Barkhordar Omid Hamid Dental Group, Inc., Hamid Omid Rabi Barkhordar Dental Group, Inc., Omid Barkhordar Dental Corporation, Omid Barkhordar Dental Group Inc., Omid Hamid Barkhordar Dental, Inc., Omid R Barkhordar DDS, Inc., Omid Rabi Barkhordar D.D.S, Inc., Hamid Barkhordar Dental Corporation, Hamid R. Barkhordar, D.D.S., Inc., and Synchrony Bank. Barkhordar Omid Hamid Dental Group provides dental care services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew R. Snyder, Esq. Todd M. Friedman, Esq. Adrian Robert Bacon, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C. 23586 Calabasas Rd. Suite 105 Calabasas, CA 91302 Telephone: (323) 306-4234 E-mail: msnyder@toddflaw.com tfriedman@toddflaw.com abacon@toddflaw.com Synchrony Bank is represented by: Brianna M. Bauer, Esq. Stephen J. Newman, Esq. STEPTOE LLP 2029 Century Park East, Suite 980 Los Angeles, CA 90067-3086 Telephone: (213) 439-9400 Facsimile: (213) 439-9599 E-mail: bbauer@steptoe.com snewman@steptoe.com BOWFLEX INC: Court Drops Debtor from Dumbbell Suits --------------------------------------------------- Judge Andrew B. Altenburg, Jr., of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey grants the Motion to Enforce the Plan, Confirmation Order, and Sale Order in the lawsuit titled In Re: BOWFLEX, INC., Debtor, Case No. 24-12364-ABA (Bankr. D.N.J.). Before the Court is a Joint Motion of the Bowflex Liquidating Trust and Johnson Health Tech Trading, Inc., Johnson Health Tech Retail, Inc. and their Affiliate Entities to Enforce the Plan, Confirmation Order, and Sale Order. They seek: -- to enforce the release, injunction, gatekeeper, and limitation of liability provisions; -- to compel Elizabeth M. Cosin, Duke Douglas, Alan Calderon, and Robert Ahearn to dismiss with prejudice four putative class-action complaints filed against BowFlex and/or Johnson arising out of the Debtors' pre-petition and pre-closing operations; -- a finding that the Violative Actions and any other similar claims or causes of action based on the manufacture and sale of the Debtors' products that arose prior to April 22, 2024, are void ab initio; and -- further relief as the Court deems just and proper. BowFlex Inc. and BowFlex New Jersey LLC filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy on March 3, 2024. As is the normal course of a mega-case, on March 6, 2024, the Court issued an Order authorizing the Debtors to retain and appoint Epiq Corporate Restructuring, LLC, as the claims and noticing agent, effective as of the Petition Date. On March 15, 2024, the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors was appointed. The Creditors Committee remained active throughout the case. On March 4, 2024, the Debtor entered an Asset Purchase Agreement with Johnson wherein Johnson sought protections to serve as a stalking horse bidder for a sale of the Debtor's assets. On March 5, 2024, the Debtor filed the Motion For Entry Of An Order (I)(A) Approving The Auction And Bidding Procedures, (B) Approving Stalking Horse Bid Protections, (C) Scheduling Bid Deadlines And An Auction, (D) Approving The Form And Manner Of Notice Thereof, (E) Authorizing The Debtors To Enter Into The Stalking Horse Agreement, And (II) (A) Establishing Notice And Procedures For The Assumption And Assignment Of Contracts And Leases, (B) Authorizing The Assumption And Assignment Of Assumed Contracts, (C) Authorizing The Sale Of Assets And (D) Granting Related Relief. On March 8, 2024, the Bankruptcy Court entered an Order approving the bidding procedures and stalking horse protections. The Bid Order contained the Notice of Sale By Auction And Sale Hearing approved by the Court. Between March 13, 2024, and March 15, 2024, the Sale Notice was published in The New York Times, The Seattle Times and The Columbian. The Bid Order was subsequently amended on March 18, 2024. On April 22, 2024, the Debtors and Johnson closed on the sale of substantially all of the Debtors' assets for $37.5 million. On May 23, 2024, the Debtors filed their Chapter 11 Plan and Disclosure Statement. In connection therewith, the Debtors filed a Motion For Entry Of An Order (I) Approving The Adequacy Of The Disclosure Statement, (II) Approving The Solicitation And Voting Procedures With Respect To Confirmation Of The Proposed Joint Chapter 11 Plan Of Liquidation Of Bowflex Inc. And Its Debtor Affiliate, (III) Approving The Forms Of Ballots And Notices In Connection Therewith, (IV) Scheduling Certain Dates With Respect Thereto, And (V) Granting Related Relief. The order approving the adequacy of the Disclosure Statement was signed on June 21, 2024. The Debtors then filed a First Modified Plan, and a Second Modified Plan, which provided for the creation of the Trust to facilitate distributions to creditors. After a full hearing on the Second Modified Plan on Aug. 19, 2024, the Court rendered its oral decision and entered its Findings Of Fact, Conclusions Of Law, And Order Confirming The Second Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan Of Liquidation Of Bowflex Inc. And Its Debtor Affiliate. Plaintiff Cosin has admitted she received notice of the entry of the Confirmation Order. The Debtors also delivered the notice of the entry of the Confirmation Order via email to over 1,800,000 customers. On June 5, 2025, Johnson implemented a Recall for certain BowFlex Adjustable Dumbbells, which the Debtors had been selling since 2004, due to concerns that the weight plates in the dumbbells can dislodge and cause a potential hazard to its user. Thereafter, four Plaintiffs filed putative class action complaints against Johnson in three different district courts. These Complaints seek to hold Johnson responsible and liable for allegedly defective BowFlex Adjustable Dumbbells sold prior to the Closing Date, including on theories of successor liability. Two Plaintiffs--Douglas and Calderon--have named Debtor BowFlex as a defendant. Johnson asserts the Plaintiffs' claims all arise out of BowFlex Adjustable Dumbbells purchased prior to the Petition Date. The Motion to Enforce and certification in support thereof was filed on July 1, 2025. The parties entered into a Stipulation and Consent Order Regarding Joint Motion to Enforce the Plan, Confirmation Order, and Sale Order and Related Deadlines agreeing to, inter alia, the deadlines for the parties to file their responsive pleadings and scheduling the plenary hearing on the matter. The Plaintiffs timely filed an Objection and certifications in support thereof on July 21, 2025. Consistent with the Stipulation, the Trust et al. timely filed a Response and a certification in support thereof on July 25, 2025. the Trust et al. then filed their witness and exhibit list. The Plaintiffs filed a response to that witness and exhibit list. In that response, the Plaintiffs did not dispute the authenticity of the exhibits relied on by the Movants (but reserved the right to object to them on other grounds). The Plaintiffs also indicated that Proposed Class Representative, Ms. Cosin, will be available during the July 31 hearing via Zoom if the Court wishes to ask her any questions regarding her declaration. Consistent with the Stipulation, the plenary hearing was held July 31, 2025, at which the Court heard oral arguments from the party and testimony from Mr. Joseph Saraceni of Epiq. The parties made closing arguments after Mr. Saraceni's testimony. The Plaintiff presented no witness. The Court had no questions about the Declaration of Ms. Cosin. The Douglas Complaint and the Calderon Complaint name the Debtors as defendants. The Plaintiffs have acknowledged the Debtors must be dismissed from the putative class actions. Nevertheless, the Court wishes to emphasize that parties who failed to file a proof of claim prior to the bar date are forever barred from asserting a claim against the Debtors. Further, the Plaintiffs and any other parties who attempt to raise similar claims are bound by the provisions of the Plan and Confirmation Order, including the Injunction provision and the Gatekeeper provision, which prohibit prosecution of claims against the Debtors. The Court also concludes the Douglas Complaint and the Calderon Complaint are void ab initio as to the Debtors. The Court directs the Plaintiffs to dismiss the Debtors from Douglas and Calderon actions. The Court has reached two conclusions: (1) the Court has jurisdiction over the Trust et al.'s Motion to Enforce and (2) the Debtors provided adequate notice of the Sale Transaction to both known and unknown creditors. Following upon these conclusions, the Court finds the Plaintiffs' claims are pre-petition claims that are barred by the Plan and the Confirmation Order. In addition, successor liability for the Plaintiffs' defect claims did not attach to Johnson. The filing of the Plaintiffs' complaints violated the Sale Order, Plan, and Confirmation Order. Based upon these findings and conclusions, the Court holds that the Motion to Enforce will be granted. In addition, the Court need not address the parties' other arguments as a result of the Court's conclusions. A full-text copy of the Court's Memorandum Decision is available at https://tinyurl.com/ykfkct7k from PacerMonitor.com. BRAD PITT: Faces $20.5MM Suit Filed by Hurricane Katrina Victims ---------------------------------------------------------------- Afouda Bamidele, writing for Y! Entertainment, reports that Brad Pitt is still getting haunted by a class action lawsuit from a 2005 tragic incident. One of the actor's biggest nightmares is about to come true in the form of a possible deposition on the 2018 lawsuit filed by victims of Hurricane Katrina against his charity foundation. Brad Pitt has continually denied his involvement in the alleged distasteful construction of the homes by his foundation, according to the victims. A new documentary produced by Spike Lee on Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath, including Pitt's philanthropic interventions, has now shifted attention back to the class action lawsuit filed seven years ago. Residents of the homes built by his foundation in 2007 filed a lawsuit eleven years later against him, the directors of the organization, and all other individuals involved in the project. The victims stated that the homes were in terrible condition, requiring approximately $20 million to repair. Now, the law firm handling the case has shared that they have an arsenal of documents and financial records to help them take down the team of incompetent constructors and Pitt. According to The Sun, lawyers from the firm have promised to ensure that Pitt, witnesses, and other defendants in the case are deposed anytime from October. This is in accordance with the court directive that every deposition connected to Pitt and the Hurricane Katrina victims' case must be concluded by December 3. The father of six has reportedly attempted to get himself entangled in the web of the class action lawsuit, usually blaming his tight schedule for his failure to attend depositions. In the amended lawsuit, Pitt, along with employees, directors, and officers of Make It Right, was accused of breaching their contracts, negligence, and fraud. The filing noted that shady financial activities on the company's part seemingly affected funds set aside for repairs to these homes. Next year, a trial is scheduled to determine if the case can proceed as a class-action lawsuit. The defendants' legal team is seeking to have the fraud allegations dismissed from the trial. Pitt was identified as a significant figure in the motion, with the plaintiff insisting he helped defraud the homeowners with false promises. The actor was identified to have made some promises back in 2007 during a community meeting, which have now turned out to be false. "Plaintiffs further allege that Pitt made promises in 'media interviews' that induced justifiable reliance,'" the lawsuit read. Four years after the court case began, a celebrity-backed eco-charity, Global Green, agreed to settle the victims $20.5 million on Pitt and his charity organization's behalf, signaling a breakthrough in the deadlocked case. As noted by The Blast, the agreement between the charity and the victims collapsed after they discovered Global Green had nowhere near that amount of money. Pitt's representatives explained that the actor was initially a party to the plan due to his relationship with Global Green. In their words: "Brad had supported Global Green many years ago, so when they approached his team stating '$20.5M in funding' had been secured by their 'generous donors,' there was interest in considering their proposal." The charity reportedly led Pitt and his team to believe that the funds had been secured and were ready to go, when in reality, nothing had been sorted, committed to, or even raised. In 2018, The Blast reported that plaintiffs in the suit claimed Pitt was overjoyed to be involved in the mission and did not mind being associated with the project. The victims added that Pitt received "incalculable marketing and publicity benefits from his involvement with the Foundation and the Lower Ninth Ward." As soon as things turned the wrong way, with the homeowners facing the fears of losing their homes to mediocre constructions, the actor was accused of trying to remove himself. "Defendant seeks to be dismissed from legal scrutiny by conveniently ignoring his personal participation and plaintiffs' allegations of fraud," the plaintiffs added. The plaintiffs demanded that the judge refuse to grant Pitt's request to be excluded from the suit because he sold them dreams and failed to deliver. In the midst of all the chaos going on, the movie star expanded his real estate portfolio by adding a $12 million mansion previously owned by Dave Keuning of The Killers. The expansive mansion, set in a Spanish-style architecture, offers the actor a breathtaking view of the Pacific Ocean and Los Angeles. It is a six-bedroom, eight-bathroom mansion that was previously listed for $13.99 million in June, before Pitt closed it for almost $ 2 million less on August 5. Pitt's new home was built in 1989 and was purchased two months after his Los Feliz home was burglarized. According to authorities, three suspects were spotted gaining entrance into the house via the front fence around 10:30 pm on June 25. Will Brad Pitt make himself available for this deposition, or is another excuse around the corner? [GN] CENTURY SUPPORT: Barton Sues Over Failure to Protect Personal Info ------------------------------------------------------------------ MINNA BARTON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CENTURY SUPPORT SERVICES, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-01089 (W.D. Pa., July 22, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for negligence, negligence per se, breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and breach of fiduciary duty. The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard the personally identifiable information (PII) and protected health information (PHI) of the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals stored within its network systems following a data breach from on or around September 10, 2024 until on or around November 7, 2024. The Defendant also failed to timely notify the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals about the data breach. As a result, the private information of the Plaintiff and Class members was compromised and damaged through access by and disclosure to unknown and unauthorized third parties. Century Support Services, LLC is a provider of debt settlement services based in North Huntingdon, Pennsylvania. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Larry Bendesky, Esq. Patrick Howard, Esq. SALTZ, MONGELUZZI & BENDESKY, PC 1650 Market Street, 52nd Floor Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 496-8282 Facsimile: (215) 496-0999 Email: lbendesky@smbb.com phoward@smbb.com COA INC: Website Inaccessible to the Blind Users, Cordoba Alleges ----------------------------------------------------------------- BRITANY CORDOBA, on behalf of herself and all other persons similarly situated v. COA, INC., D/B/A COASTER COMPANY OF AMERICA, Case No. 1:25-cv-06483-JMF (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 6, 2024) alleges that the Defendant failed to design, construct, maintain, and operate the Defendant's website, https://www.coasterfurniture.com/ to be fully accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired people in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Accordingly, the Plaintiff visited the Website in order to puchase a specific piece of furniture but was unable to locate its availability or pricing and was not able to add any item[s] to the cart due to broken links, pictures without alternate attributes and other barriers on Defendant's Website, which prevented her from doing so. Plaintiff has previously purchased furniture and home decor online and wanted to patronize Defendant because Defendant claims that they offer tremendous value with a diverse and stylish selection of casual and formal living room, dining room, bedroom, home office and accent decor. The Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer frustration and humiliation as a result of the discriminatory conditions present on Defendant's Website. These discriminatory conditions continue to contribute to Plaintiff's sense of isolation and segregation, the suit says. The Defendant offers the commercial website, https://www.coasterfurniture.com/, to the public. The Website offers features which should allow all consumers to access the goods and services offered by Defendant and which Defendant ensures de-livery of such goods and services throughout the United States including New York State.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: J Michael A. James, Esq. JOSEPH & NORINSBERG, LLC 10 East 59th Street, Suite 2300 New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 227-5700 Facsimile: (212) 656-1889 E-mail: MJames@employeejustice.com CONVERSENOW TECHNOLOGIES: Court Refuses to Dismiss Taylor Suit -------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Susan Illston of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denies the Defendant's motion to dismiss the lawsuit captioned as ELIZA TAYLOR, Plaintiff v. CONVERSENOW TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:25-cv-00990-SI (N.D. Cal.). Plaintiff Eliza Taylor brings a putative class action against Defendant ConverseNow Technologies, Inc., for violating the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA), California Penal Code sections 631 and 632. ConverseNow provides a "software as a service" that allows restaurants to process customer phone calls using an artificial intelligence virtual assistant. ConverseNow operates across more than a thousand stores in 43 states and processes millions of live conversations each month. ConverseNow's website states that the voice AI assistants automatically answer every call that comes in and accurately records guest orders in real-time, then send those orders to the restaurant for preparation. Live agents may listen in on the calls to put the finishing touches on complex orders when necessary and to help the AI system learn how to handle similar future orders. Beyond providing benefits for its customers, the Plaintiff alleges that ConverseNow itself benefits from the calls because, per ConverseNow's website, by processing millions of live conversations each month, its self-learning system evolves even faster every day to improve the guest experience for new and existing partners alike. The Plaintiff alleges that ConverseNow's continued sales and marketing success relies on this ability to improve its software. Moreover, the company's privacy policy states that it uses the information to improve its ordering platform, advertisements, products, and services. One of ConverseNow's partners is the pizza chain Domino's. ConverseNow has technology custom-tailored for Domino's with quick and easy setup that integrates directly with Domino's data software and phone system. Plaintiff Taylor, an Oakland, California resident, placed a delivery order at the Domino's located in Delano, California, a location employing ConverseNow's voice AI technology. Taylor placed her order and provided her name, address, and credit card information. The Plaintiff believed that Domino's was the only other party on the call when she provided her "personal and confidential information." Taylor did not know the call was being intercepted in real time and wiretapped by Defendant ConverseNow. The Plaintiff alleges that when calling a store that uses ConverseNow's technology, the Defendant "intercepts and redirects the call to its servers for recording." Within seconds, a virtual assistant introduces themselves using their "name" stating they are an employee of the store location the customer is calling. The Plaintiff filed this action on Jan. 30, 2025. ConverseNow filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) on March 24, 2025. The Court granted multiple stipulations for an extended briefing schedule. The Plaintiff opposed the motion on April 23, 2025, and the Defendant replied on May 16, 2025. The Parties dispute whether the Defendant is a third party subject to the law or a party to the conversation exempt from the law; whether the Defendant receives an independent benefit from its use of data; whether the Defendant acted with the requisite intent; and whether the Defendant "intercepted" communications in "real-time." The Court agrees with the capability approach and finds sufficient allegations in the complaint to consider the Defendant a third party under that approach. In sum, the Court adopts the capability approach and considers the Defendant to be a third party to the conversation between the Plaintiff and Domino's because it may use details from that conversation for its own purpose. The second clause of section 631 requires that the Defendant intercepts a communication when it is "in transit." Judge Illston finds that the Plaintiff's allegations establish how the Defendant intercepts communications in real-time. Judge Illston opines, among other things, that these allegations are sufficient to state a claim that the Defendant intercepts communications without consent in real time. In short, the Plaintiff has pled a plausible claim of interception in real time. A full-text copy of the Court's Order is available at https://tinyurl.com/3dr9mxne from PacerMonitor.com. CRYE-LEIKE INC: Files Petition for Writ of Mandamus to 8th Circuit ------------------------------------------------------------------ CRYE-LEIKE, INC., filed on August 4, 2025, a petition for writ of mandamus with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, under Case No. 25-2541, in connection with the May 12, 2025 Order in the lawsuit entitled In Re Crye-Leike, Inc., Case No. 4:23-cv-00788-SRB, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri. Crye-Leike respectfully requests that this Court to grant this petition for a writ of mandamus, vacate the May 12, 2025 Order and instruct the district court to transfer the claim against it to the Western District of Tennessee. [BN] Defendant-Petitioner CRYE-LEIKE INC. is represented by: Joseph C. Blanton, Jr., Esq. Thomas W. Collins, III, Esq. Diedre A. Peters, Esq. Mark D. Blanton, Esq. Shaun D. Hanschen, Esq. BLANTON, NICKELL, COLLINS, DOUGLAS, HANSCHEN & PETERS, LLC 219 South Kingshighway P.O. Box 805 Sikeston, MO 63801 Telephone: (573) 471-1000 Facsimile: (573) 471-1012 Email: jblanton@blantonlaw.com tcollins@blantonlaw.com dpeters@blantonlaw.com mblanton@blantonlaw.com shanschen@blantonlaw.com - and - Marcus Angelo Manos, Esq. MAYNARD NEXSEN PC 1230 Main Street, Suite 700 Columbia, SC 29201 Telephone: (803) 771-8900 Facsimile: (803) 253-8277 Email: mmanos@maynardnexsen.com - and - Carl S. Burkhalter, Esq. MAYNARD NEXSEN PC 1901 Sixth Avenue N, Suite 1700 Birmingham, AL 35203 Telephone: (205) 254-1081 Facsimile: (205) 254-1999 Email: cburkhalter@maynardnexsen.com - and - Alexandra Harrington Austin, Esq. MAYNARD NEXSEN PC 205 King Street, Suite 400 Charleston, SC 29401 Telephone: (843) 579-7827 Facsimile: (843) 720-1777 Email: aaustin@maynardnexsen.com DOSTER LAWN: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Loweth Suit Alleges ----------------------------------------------------------- MORGAN LOWETH; and STEVEN AUSTIN LUNDQUIST, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. DOSTER LAWN & LANDSCAPING; DOSTER RENTALS AND REAL ESTATE; and DEREK DOSTER, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-01208-STA-jay (W.D. Tenn., Aug. 29, 2025) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as landscapers. Doster Lawn & Landscaping provides lawn, landscaping, and real estate/rental services to customers in and around Dresden, Tennessee. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Gordon E. Jackson, Esq. J. Russ Bryant, Esq. J. Joseph Leatherwood IV, Esq. Joshua Autry, Esq. JACKSON, SHIELDS, HOLT, OWEN & BRYANT 262 German Oak Drive Memphis, TN 38018 Telephone: (901) 754-8001 Facsimile: (901) 754-8524 Email: gjackson@jsyc.com rbryant@jsyc.com jleatherwood@jsyc.com jautry@jsyc.com DRT LLC: Violates Federal Trade Commission Act, Moore Suit Alleges ------------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against DRT, LLC. The case is captioned as Mark Moore, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. DRT, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-00016-RGE-HCA (S.D. Iowa, July 24, 2025). The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger. The suit alleges violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act (unfair or deceptive acts). DRT is a transportation company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joshua Lloyd Christensen, Esq. RSH LEGAL 425 Second St SE STE 1140 CEDAR RAPIDS, IA 52401 Telephone: (319) 365-9200 Facsimile: (319) 365-1114 E-mail: jchristensen@fightingforfairness.com - and - J. Barton Goplerud, Esq. SHINDLER, ANDERSON, GOPLERUD & WEESE P.C. 5015 Grand Ridge Drive Suite 100 West Des Moines, IA 50265 Telephone: (515) 223-4567 Facsimile: (515) 223-8887 E-mail: goplerud@sagwlaw.com ENCOMPASS HEALTH: Rosen Law Probes Potential Securities Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces an investigation of potential securities claims on behalf of shareholders of Encompass Health Corporation (NYSE: EHC) resulting from allegations that Encompass Health may have issued materially misleading business information to the investing public. SO WHAT: If you purchased Encompass Health securities you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement. The Rosen Law Firm is preparing a class action seeking recovery of investor losses. WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the prospective class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=44051 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action. WHAT IS THIS ABOUT: On July 15, 2025, The New York Times published an article entitled "Even Grave Errors at Rehab Hospitals Go Unpenalized and Undisclosed." The article stated that "[r]ehab hospitals that help people recover from major surgeries and injuries have become a highly lucrative slice of the health care business. But federal data and inspection reports show that some run by the dominant company, Encompass Health Corporation, [. . .] have had rare but serious incidents of patient harm and perform below average on two key safety measures tracked by Medicare." On this news, the price of Encompass Health stock fell 10.3% on July 15, 2025. WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not actually litigate securities class actions. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company at the time. At the time Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers. Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Contact Information: Laurence Rosen, Esq. Phillip Kim, Esq. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. 275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor New York, NY 10016 Tel: (212) 686-1060 Toll Free: (866) 767-3653 Fax: (212) 202-3827 case@rosenlegal.com www.rosenlegal.com [GN] FARMERS INSURANCE: Faces Montalvan Suit Over Exposed Private Info ----------------------------------------------------------------- CYNTHIA MONTALVAN, and SUSAN STYER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE, FARMERS GROUP, INC., a Nevada corporation, FARMERS NEW WORLD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Washington corporation, Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-08085 (C.D. Cal., August 27, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, breach of implied contract, unjust enrichment, and violations of the California Consumer Privacy Act and the California Customer Records Act. On August 22, 2025, the Defendants disclosed for the first time a massive data breach that had occurred nearly three months earlier. On May 29, 2025, cybercriminals hacked into a database maintained by one of Defendants' vendors. The database contained the private information of Farmers' customers, including names, addresses, dates of birth, driver's license numbers and/or truncated Social Security numbers. By hacking into the vendor's database, cybercriminals were able to access and steal the private information of more than one million Farmers customers, including Plaintiffs. The exposed private information has significant value on illicit markets, particularly on the dark web, since private information can be used to commit identity theft, open fraudulent accounts, obtain loans, file false tax returns, secure government benefits, or facilitate medical and financial fraud. As a direct and foreseeable result of Defendants' conduct, the Plaintiffs and the Class Members face a heightened and continuing risk of identity theft and fraud, have suffered loss of privacy, have spent and will continue to spend time and money on mitigation efforts, and have experienced diminution in the value of their Private Information. The Plaintiffs seek damages, restitution, and injunctive relief to remedy Defendants' unlawful conduct and prevent future harm. Farmers Insurance Exchange provides insurance products and services.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: James F. Clapp, Esq. Jamie N. Herrick, Esq. CLAPP LEGAL APC 701 Palomar Airport Road, Suite 300 Carlsbad, CA 92011 Telephone: (760) 209-6565 ext. 101 Facsimile: (760) 209-6565 E-mail: jclapp@clapplegal.com jherrick@clapplegal.com - and - Edward J. Wynne, Esq. George R. Nemiroff, Esq. WYNNE LAW FIRM 80 E. Sir Francis Drake Blvd., Suite 3G Larkspur, CA 94939 Telephone: (415) 461-6400 Facsimile: (415) 461-3900 E-mail: ewynne@wynnelawfirm.com gnemiroff@wynnelawfirm.com FIRST HORIZON: Olmos Sues Over Improper Response to Loan Payment ---------------------------------------------------------------- JUAN CHRISTIAN PEREZ OLMOS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FIRST HORIZON BANK, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-01776-JTM-EJD (E.D. La., Aug. 29, 2025) is an action concerning an automated response the Defendant sends to mortgage customers upon receipt of payment through the its online portal. According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, when a customer attempts to pay his or her regular mortgage payment through Defendant's online portal, the customer receives the following response: "Dear [customer], Your payment in the amount of [amount] was received and applied to your loan on [date] for the following property: [loan number, address]." The Defendant sends this response to customers regardless of whether such payment was processed, received or applied. This automated response is false and misleading, and gives rise to the damages, says the suit. First Horizon Bank operates as a bank. The Bank offers deposits, auto, personal, mortgage, and home loans, as well as provides online banking services. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Marc R. Michaud, Esq. MICHAUD CONSUMER LAW, LLC 1100 Poydras Street, Suite 2900 New Orleans, LA 70163 Telephone: (504) 910-6775 Facsimile: (504) 910-6953 FORD MOTOR: Bryan Sues Over Defective Pickup Trucks --------------------------------------------------- DANIEL BRYAN; VICTOR CABALLERO; NATHAN DEW; MICHAEL LEPORE; STEPHANIE PAKE; CHARLES WILLIAMSON; BRANDON FISHER; MICHAEL GRUENKE; JOSHUA HAMMONS; DAVID NAVARRO; DANIELLE BELLER; and JACOB BENAVIDES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-12714-JJCG-KGA (E.D. Mich., Aug. 28, 2025) alleges that the Defendant manufacture and sell defective 2018-2020 Ford F-150 pickup trucks equipped with 5.0L engines. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's motor vehicles suffer from a defect that renders these vehicles substantially less durable and dependable than Ford advertises. The Class Vehicles consume engine oil at an excessive rate, far beyond what a reasonable consumer would expect based on Ford's own representations – referred to below as the Oil Consumption Defect. As a result, the engine is not capable of maintaining the proper level of engine oil based on the care and maintenance instructions set forth in the Owner's Manual. Instead, an owner must monitor the oil level more frequently than recommended in the Owner's Manual and add more oil to the engine than is typically required to keep the engine properly lubricated, says the suit. Ford Motor Company designs, manufactures, and services cars and trucks. The Company also provides vehicle-related financing, leasing, and insurance through its subsidiary. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: E. Powell Miller, Esq. Dennis A. Lienhardt, Esq. Dana E. Fraser, Esq. THE MILLER LAW FIRM, P.C. 950 W. University Drive, Suite 300 Rochester, MI 48307 Telephone: (248) 841-2200 Facsimile: (248) 652-2852 Email: epm@millerlawpc.com dal@millerlawpc.com def@millerlawpc.com - and - Matthew D. Schelkopf, Esq. Joseph B. Kenney, Esq. SAUDER SCHELKOPF LLC 1109 Lancaster Avenue Berwyn, PA 19312 Telephone: (888) 711-9975 Facsimile: (610) 421-1326 Email: mds@sstriallawyers.com jbk@sstriallawyers.com - and - Douglas J. McNamara, Esq. Madelyn Petersen, Esq. COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL PLLC 1100 New York Ave. NW Suite 800 Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: (202) 408-4600 Facsimile: (202) 408-4699 Email: dmcnamara@cohenmilstein.com bejohnson@cohenmilstein.com - and - William H. Anderson, Esq. HANDLEY FARAH & ANDERSON PLLC 4730 Table Mesa Drive, Suite G-200 Telephone: (303) 800-9109 Facsimile: (844) 300-1952 Email: wanderson@hfajustice.com - and - Jon Herskowitz, Esq. BARON & HERSKOWITZ 9100 S. Dadeland Blvd., Suite 1704 Miami, FL 33156 Telephone: (305) 670-0101 Facsimile: (305) 670-2393 Email: jon@bhfloridalaw.com - and - Steven G. Calamusa, Esq. GORDON & PARTNERS, PA 4114 Northlake Lake Blvd. Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Telephone: (561) 799-5070 Facsimile: (561) 366-1485 Email: scalamusa@fortheinjured.com GENERAL DYNAMICS: S.D. California Refuses to Remand Lopez Suit -------------------------------------------------------------- Chief Judge Cynthia Bashant of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California refuses to remand the lawsuit styled VERONICA B. LOPEZ, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GENERAL DYNAMICS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, INC., et al., Defendants, Case No. 3:24-cv-01743-BAS-DEB (S.D. Cal.), to the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Diego. Plaintiff Veronica B. Lopez brings this putative class action against Defendants General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc., and Does 1 through 10, alleging multiple violations of the California Labor Code and California's Unfair Competition Law ("UCL"). Presently before the Court are two motions: (1) Lopez's Motion to Remand this action to the San Diego County Superior Court; and (2) General Dynamics's Motion to Dismiss and Strike Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 12(f). The Plaintiff, a former employee of General Dynamics, worked as an "hourly, non-exempt Quality Assurance Representative" in San Diego, California, from Nov. 8, 2021, to April 7, 2023. Lopez alleges that the Defendants, through their business practices, violated multiple provisions of the California Labor Code and engaged in conduct that violated the UCL. Specifically, she asserts eight causes of action: (1) failure to pay minimum wages; (2) failure to pay overtime compensation; (3) failure to provide meal periods; (4) failure to authorize and permit rest periods; (5) failure to indemnify necessary business expenses; (6) failure to timely pay final wages at termination; (7) failure to furnish accurate itemized wage statements; and (8) unfair, unlawful, and fraudulent business practices in violation of the UCL, which are predicated on the alleged Labor Code violations. Ms. Lopez brings this action individually and as a class action on behalf of "certain current and former employees of Defendants . . . who have been employed by [] Defendants in California as [] hourly-paid, non-exempt employee[s] during the statute of limitations period applicable to the claims pleaded here." On Sept. 30, 2024, General Dynamics removed the action from San Diego County Superior Court, invoking the Court's jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 ("CAFA"). Lopez filed the operative First Amended Complaint ("FAC") approximately two months later. Shortly thereafter, on Dec. 9, 2024, General Dynamics moved pursuant to Rules 12(b)(6) and 12(f) to dismiss the Eighth Cause of Action in the FAC ("the Eighth Cause of Action"), which alleges violations of the UCL, and to strike language asserting those allegations and seeking injunctive relief. Lopez filed an opposition, and General Dynamics filed a reply. Separately, about a month after General Dynamics filed its motion, Lopez moved to remand the case, arguing that General Dynamics failed to establish the amount in controversy exceeds $5 million and invoking the "local controversy" exception to CAFA. General Dynamics filed an opposition, and the Plaintiff replied. Thereafter, General Dynamics submitted its Notice of Supplemental Authority in Support of Opposition to Lopez's Motion to Remand, to which Lopez filed a response. Ms. Lopez advances two principal arguments in support of her Motion to Remand: first, that General Dynamics has failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeds $5 million as required under CAFA; and second, that the "local controversy" exception applies, thereby, mandating remand to state court. Judge Bashant finds that applying a 25% attorneys' fee rate to the $1,038,750 attributed by General Dynamics to the wage statement violations yields an estimated $259,687.50 in attorneys' fees. In sum, Judge Bashant points out, General Dynamics's estimated damages for Lopez's Third, Fourth, and Seventh Causes of Action--based on reasonable assumptions grounded in the allegations set forth in the Complaint--combined with an attorneys' fees estimate properly limited to the statutory violations that allow for fee recovery, results in a total amount in controversy of $7,237,354.50. Judge Bashant also finds that Lopez has not met the burden of establishing that all elements of the local controversy exception are satisfied; most notably, she has not shown that General Dynamics is a citizen of the state in which the action was originally filed. Accordingly, because Lopez has failed to offer any evidence to show that General Dynamics's principal place of business is California, and it is undisputed that General Dynamics is incorporated in Virginia, Judge Bashant says she has not met her burden of proving that General Dynamics is "a citizen of the State in which the action was originally filed." The Plaintiff's failure to satisfy this requirement under the local controversy exception to CAFA thus renders the exception inapplicable. Accordingly, the Plaintiff's Motion to Remand is denied. General Dynamics moves to dismiss the Eighth Cause of Action in the FAC, in which Lopez alleges that the California Labor Code violations constitute unfair, unlawful and/or fraudulent business practices in violation of the UCL, and further moves to strike language asserting those allegations and seeking injunctive relief. Judge Bashant holds that Lopez lacks Article III standing to seek injunctive relief. Here, because Lopez has not alleged any facts sufficient to support a conclusion that she has a need for prospective relief--or even could benefit from it--as a former employee of General Dynamics, Judge Bashant finds she lacks standing to pursue injunctive relief. Judge Bashant also finds that Lopez fails to plead inadequacy of legal remedies for restitution, Lopez's UCL claims are derivative of her labor code violations, and remand of the UCL Claim to state court is not warranted. Accordingly, the Eighth Cause of Action in the FAC is dismissed with leave to amend. Accordingly, the Court denies the Plaintiff's Motion to Remand. Furthermore, the Court grants the Motion to Dismiss, and the Eighth Cause of Action in the FAC is dismissed with leave to amend. If Lopez wishes to file a Second Amended Complaint ("SAC") amending the Eighth Cause of Action, her deadline to file a SAC was Aug. 25, 2025. Judge Bashant cautions Lopez that the SAC may not add new claims or parties, or otherwise change the allegations, except to correct the identified deficiencies, absent leave of the Court or stipulation by the parties pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15. If Lopez does not file a SAC by that date, the dismissal of the Eighth Cause of Action will be deemed with prejudice, and the case will proceed on the remaining claims. General Dynamics must file a response to the operative complaint, be it the FAC or the SAC, by no later than Sept. 8, 2025. A full-text copy of the Court's Order is available at https://tinyurl.com/mvhwh295 from PacerMonitor.com. HEALTHCARE SERVICES: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Richards Says ------------------------------------------------------------------ REBECCA RICHARDS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HEALTHCARE SERVICES GROUP, INC., Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-04920 (E.D. Pa., August 27, 2025) is a civil action seeking monetary damages and injunctive and declaratory relief from Defendant, arising from its failure to safeguard certain personally identifying information and protected health information of thousands of its current and former employees, resulting in Defendant's network systems being unauthorizedly accessed between September 27, 2024, and October 3, 2024. According to the complaint, cybercriminals were able to breach Defendant's systems because the Defendant failed to adequately train its employees on cybersecurity and failed to maintain reasonable security safeguards or protocols to protect the Class' private information. In short, the Defendant's failures placed the Class' private information in a vulnerable position -- rendering them easy targets for cybercriminals, says the suit. On or around August 25, 2025 -- more than ten months after the data breach first occurred -- HSG finally began notifying Class Members about the data breach. The Plaintiff, a data breach victim, brings this class action on behalf of herself, and all others harmed by Defendant's misconduct. Healthcare Services Group, Inc., a Pennsylvania corporation, is a national provider of housekeeping, dining, and nutrition services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Charles E. Schaffer, Esq. Nicholas J. Elia, Esq. LEVIN SEDRAN & BERMAN LLP 510 Walnut St, Suite 500 Philadelphia, PA 19106 Telephone: (215) 592-1500 Facsimile: (215) 592-4663 E-mail: cschaffer@lfsblaw.com nelia@lfsblaw.com - and - Raina C. Borrelli, Esq. STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC One Magnificent Mile 980 N Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610 Chicago IL, 60611 Telephone: (872) 263-1100 Facsimile: (872) 263-1109 E-mail: raina@straussborrelli.com HELLO PRODUCTS: Faces Nelkin Fraud Class Suit in C.D. Calif. ------------------------------------------------------------ The class action lawsuit captioned as Tal Nelkin, individually and on behalf of all similarly situated persons, v. Hello Products LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Case No. 25STCV14669, was removed from the Los Angeles County Superior Court to the United States District Court for the Central District Of California (Western Division -- Los Angeles) on July 24, 2025. The Central District of California Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-06770-FLA-PD to the proceedings. The suit alleges violation of the fraud related violations. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha. Hello Products offers a range of personal care items. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Alexander E. Wolf, Esq. John J Nelson, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC 280 South Beverly Drive, Penthouse Beveryly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone: (872) 365-7060 E-mail: awolf@milberg.com jnelson@milberg.com The Defendant is represented by: Sean A. Newland, Esq. Rocco Pallin, Esq. Willis M Wagner, Esq. GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2400 Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: (916) 442-1111 Facsimile: (916) 448-1709 E-mail: Sean.Newland@gtlaw.com rocco.pallin@gtlaw.com Will.Wagner@gtlaw.com HOME HELPERS: Faces Georgopoulos "TCPA" Suit in N.D. Calif. ----------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Home Helpers United. The case is captioned as Anastasia Georgopoulos, on behalf of herself and those similarly situated v. Home Helpers United, Case No. 3:25-cv-06230-AGT (N.D. Cal., July 24, 2025). The case is assigned to the Hon. Mag. Judge Judge Alex G. Tse. The suit alleges violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). The Defendant offers home health care services.[BN] Th Plaintiff is represented by: Gustavo Ponce, Esq. Abbas Kazerounian, Esq. David James McGlothlin, Esq. Mona Amini, Esq. KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC 245 Fischer Avenue, Unit D1 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Telephone: (800) 400-6808 Facsimile: (800) 520-5523 E-mail: gustavo@kazlg.com ak@kazlg.com david@kazlg.com mona@kazlg.com HUDSON RIVER: Milito Sues Over Job Postings' Undisclosed Wage Scale ------------------------------------------------------------------- JOHN MILITO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HUDSON RIVER TRADING LLC; HRT TECHNOLOGY LLC; and DOES 1-20, as yet unknown Washington entities, Defendants, Case No. 25-2-21321-8 SEA (Wash. Super., King Cty., July 22, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violation of Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 49.58.110. The case arises from the Defendants' actions and omissions to disclose the wage scale or salary range and a general description of all of the benefits and other compensation to be offered to the hired applicant in job postings seeking workers for their Washington locations. On and after January 1, 2023, the Plaintiff and Class members applied for job openings with the Defendants where the job postings did not disclose the wage scale or salary range and a general description of all of the benefits and other compensation to be offered to the hired applicant. As a result of the Defendants' actions and omissions, the Plaintiff and Class members have experienced economic and non-economic harm. Hudson River Trading LLC is a foreign limited liability company doing business in King County, Washington. HRT Technology LLC is a foreign limited liability company doing business in King County, Washington. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Timothy W. Emery, Esq. Patrick B. Reddy, Esq. Paul Cipriani, Esq. Hannah M. Hamley, Esq. EMERY REDDY, PLLC 600 Stewart Street, Suite 1100 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 442-9106 Facsimile: (206) 441-9711 Email: emeryt@emeryreddy.com reddyp@emeryreddy.com paul@emeryreddy.com hannah@emeryreddy.com HYSTER-YALE MATERIALS: Collects Website's Data Without Consent -------------------------------------------------------------- GURMIT DEOL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HYSTER-YALE MATERIALS HANDLING, INC., and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 30-2025-01502414-CU-MC-CXC-ROA (Cal. Super., Orange Cty., August 4, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of the California Trap and Trace Law. The case arises from the Defendants' collection of data on its website, https://hyster.com/, regarding the computer, location and browsing habits of website visitors without obtaining prior consent. According to the complaint, the Defendants' installed and used data broker software on its website to collect the data. As a result of the Defendants' unauthorized data capture and privacy invasion, the Plaintiff and Class members suffered harm and damages. Hyster-Yale Materials Handling, Inc. is the owner and operator of the website, https://hyster.com/. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Tauler, Esq. J. Evan Shapiro, Esq. TAULER SMITH LLP 626 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 550 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 927-9270 Email: rtauler@taulersmith.com eshapiro@taulersmith.com INTERNATIONAL SECURITY: Rodriguez Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages --------------------------------------------------------------- ANALISA RODRIGUEZ, JEAN HENRY, MICHAEL SAMBRANO, DWAYNE ETIENNE, and other similarly situated individuals, Plaintiffs v. INTERNATIONAL SECURITY GUARD SERVICES, INC., a Florida Profit Corporation, FENEL LUXAMA, an individual, DORVIL WILMENE, an individual, and MIAMI-DADE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, a government agency. Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-23848 (S.D. Fla., August 27, 2025) is an action to recover money damages for unpaid straight-time wages, overtime wages, retaliation, breach of contract, unjust enrichment, fraud, fraudulent inducement, and negligence under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Florida Minimum Wage Act, and the Florida Constitution. The Plaintiffs and the FLSA and FMWA putative collective members are/were security guards who worked for the Corporate Defendant and MDCPS, as an integrated enterprise, joint employers or agents of each other, within the last three years at the MDCPS Maintenance Coral Reef Satellite Station in Florida. International Security Guard Services, Inc. provides security services doing business in Miami-Dade County, Florida.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Tanesha W. Blye, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF T. WALLS BLYE, PLLC 66 West Flagler Street, Ste. 900 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (786) 796-1814 E-mail: attorneyblye@lawyerofjustice.com IQVIA INC: Hernandez Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages for Non-Exempt Workers ------------------------------------------------------------------- LUZ ESTHER HERNANDEZ HERNANDEZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. IQVIA INC., POPULUS GROUP, LLC, and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. CIVSB2522566 (Cal. Super., San Bernardino Cty., August 4, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of California Labor Code and California's Business and Professions Code including failure to provide meal periods, failure to provide rest periods, failure to pay hourly wages and overtime, failure to pay proper sick pay, failure to provide accurate written wage statements, failure to timely pay all final wages, failure to indemnify necessary business expenses, and unfair competition. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a non-exempt employee. IQVIA Inc. is a provider of biopharmaceutical development, professional consulting and commercial outsourcing services, headquartered in Denver, Colorado. Populus Group, LLC is a people-first solutions company, headquartered in Troy, Michigan. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Emil Davtyan, Esq. David Yeremian, Esq. David Keledjian, Esq. Svetlana Hovhannisyan, Esq. D.LAW, INC. 450 N. Brand Blvd., Suite 840 Glendale, CA 91203 Telephone: (818) 962-6465 Facsimile: (818) 962—6469 Email: emil@d.law d.yeremian@d.law d.keledjian@d.law l.hovhannisyan@d.law JOHN BOOS: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Walker Says ----------------------------------------------------------- LEAH WALKER, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. John Boos & Co., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-10242 (N.D. Ill., August 27, 2025) is a civil rights action against John Boos for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website, https://www.johnboos.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. On March 13, 2025, the Plaintiff decided to visit Johnboos.com to explore offerings and make a cutting board purchase. However, while attempting to complete the purchase, she encountered multiple accessibility barriers. According to the Plaintiff, the website contains access barriers that prevent free and full use by Plaintiff and blind persons using keyboards and screen-reading software. These barriers are pervasive and include, but are not limited to: inadequate focus order, changing of content without advance warning, unclear labels for interactive elements, inaccurate alt-text on graphics, the lack of navigation links, and the requirement that transactions be performed solely with a mouse. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in John Boos' policies, practices, and procedures so that Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to unlawful discrimination. John Boos & Co. operates the website that offer goods and services, including cutting boards, butcher blocks, furniture, and kitchen tools.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Alison Chan, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC 68-29 Main Street Flushing, NY 11367 Telephone: (630) 478-0856 E-mail: achan@ealg.law KEYSTONE RV: Massachusetts Court Refuses to Dismiss Hines Suit -------------------------------------------------------------- In the lawsuit entitled DENNIS HINES, RICHARD PRESCOTT, JR., and JASON BURNS, Plaintiffs v. KEYSTONE RV COMPANY, FOREST RIVER, INC., and WINNEBAGO INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-11476-IT (D. Mass.), Judge Indira Talwani of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued a Memorandum and Order denying motions to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. In this putative class action, Plaintiffs Dennis Hines, Richard Prescott, Jr., and Jason Burns allege that they purchased defective recreational vehicles ("RVs") from Defendants Forest River, Inc., Winnebago Industries, Inc., and Keystone RV Company. The Plaintiffs contend that ionization smoke alarms in the RVs were installed too close to cooking appliances, in violation of certain fire protection standards, resulting in increased risk of false smoke alarms when an occupant is cooking. The Plaintiffs allege that these false alarms led them to disable their smoke detectors, making the alarms ineffective. The Plaintiffs assert claims for negligence, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, breach of implied warranty of merchantability, and misrepresentation, and they seek injunctive relief and damages in the form of a photoelectric smoke alarm replacement for all putative class members, which the Plaintiffs allege will cure the decrease in value caused by the alleged defects in the Defendants' recreational vehicles. The Defendants seek dismissal of the Plaintiffs' Amended pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1). The Court finds that the Plaintiffs' allegations that the Defendants' representations as to the placement of their fire alarms inflated the prices of the RVs Plaintiffs purchased are sufficient to establish standing at the motion to dismiss stage. The Plaintiffs seek to represent a class consisting of all persons (with certain limited exceptions) who purchased and currently own a recreational vehicle manufactured by any of the Defendants that has an ionization smoke alarm installed within ten feet of a fixed cooking appliance. They assert that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the putative class action under the Class Action Fairness Act ("CAFA"). Forest River maintains that the Plaintiffs failed to properly invoke this Court's jurisdiction because they have failed to adequately allege that the "matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $5,000,000, exclusive of interest and costs." Forest River contend that Plaintiff Prescott (who allegedly purchased an RV manufactured by Forest River) does not identify his damages (he has none), much less explain how the putative class's aggregate damages exceed $5 million. But, Judge Talwani notes, the Plaintiffs assert that the Defendants' improper installation of the smoke alarm resulted in the vehicles being defective, that the defect results in a decrease in the value of the recreational vehicles, and that the Plaintiffs are entitled to the replacement cost of a new photoelectric smoke alarm, the installation of which will cure the decrease in value. Judge Talwani points out that Forest River has not addressed these allegations and does not suggest that a replacement smoke alarm for all putative class members would not satisfy the jurisdictional amount. Therefore, Judge Talwani holds that the Plaintiffs have met their burden to establish CAFA jurisdiction here. For these reasons, the Court denies Winnebago's Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1). Forest River's Motion to Dismiss and Keystone's Motion to Dismiss are denied in part and remain under advisement in part. A full-text copy of the Court's Memorandum and Order is available at https://tinyurl.com/3b76nfpt from PacerMonitor.com. LATCH INC: $1.95M Class Settlement in Schwartz Suit Has Initial OK ------------------------------------------------------------------ Judge William C. Bryson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware grants preliminary approval of the $1,950,000 class settlement in the lawsuit entitled SCOTT SCHWARTZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. LATCH, INC, et al., Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-00027-WCB (D. Del.). Plaintiff Scott Schwartz brought this securities class action against Defendant Latch, Inc., and several of Latch's officers and directors. Latch went public via a merger with a special purpose acquisition company in June 2021. On Jan. 11, 2023, Mr. Schwartz filed his complaint in this district, alleging that Latch's pre-merger registration statement contained false and misleading statements that are actionable under Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act. On April 24, 2023, Judge Bryson approved Mr. Schwartz's motion to be appointed lead plaintiff and have his counsel approved as lead counsel. On June 11, 2025, the parties filed a stipulation and agreement of settlement, which set forth the terms of the settlement agreement to which they had agreed. Mr. Schwartz also moved for preliminary approval of that settlement. On Aug. 8, 2025, the Court held a hearing regarding the preliminary approval of the settlement. Under the proposed terms, the Defendants will pay in cash $1,950,000 into a settlement fund. The settlement fund will be distributed on a pro rata basis based on the relative size of each class member's claim. The expected recovery is between $9 and $10 per share of stock minus the sales price if the stock was sold. The settlement determines $10 to be the de minimis amount for distribution, so if any class member's distribution amount is less than $10, those funds will not be distributed but instead will be reallocated on a pro-rata basis to the class members who are receiving a distribution amount of more than $10. If there is a remaining balance that cannot be cost-effectively distributed, those funds will be donated to a not-for-profit organization that will be approved by the Court. Lead counsel expects to seek 33.33% of the funds as their attorneys' fees and will seek to have expenses reimbursed in an amount not to exceed $40,000. Mr. Schwartz expects to seek a lead plaintiff award of no more than $10,000. Judge Bryson preliminarily finds that the settlement treats class members fairly. Judge Bryson previously expressed concerns about the fact that the settlement sets the de minimis amount for recovery at $10, yet the settlement terms identified the expected recovery "per share" to be between $9 and $10. At the hearing, counsel clarified that the expected recovery "per share" relates to the recovery per share of stock, not per share of the settlement fund. In this case, Judge Bryson says the $10 de minimis payment threshold appears reasonable as a means of avoiding burdening the relatively modest recovery fund with outsized administrative costs that would not prove meaningful benefits to the recipients of such small awards. Judge Bryson notes that there is no obvious candidate for a cy pres award. The settlement agreement recognizes the possibility that if some eligible class members do not claim their share of the fund, there may be remaining funds, but that the amount of undistributed funds is likely to be so minimal that the administrative costs to redistribute those funds will be larger than the amount of the funds to be redistributed. For that reason, the settlement agreement provides that those remaining funds will be donated to a not-for-profit organization--i.e., a cy pres. Judge Bryson finds the settlement's approach of distributing as much of the settlement fund to class members as is practicable by reallocating the de minimis payments before donating the remaining funds to be preferable to donating the de minimis payments before attempting to reallocate those payments. Accordingly, Judge Bryson preliminarily determines that the settlement terms treat the class members equitably, and that the requirements of Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have been satisfied. The Court has reviewed the Stipulation and preliminarily finds, pursuant to Rule 23(e)(1), that the Court will likely be able to approve the proposed Settlement as fair, reasonable, and adequate under Rule 23(e)(2). Pursuant to Rule 23(a) and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court certifies, for the purposes of Settlement only, the Settlement Class consisting of all stockholders of Legacy Latch who purchased or otherwise acquired Latch common stock pursuant to Latch's registration statement filed in connection with its June 4, 2021, merger with TS Innovation Acquisitions Corp. (the "Merger") and were allegedly damaged thereby, excluding (i) the Defendants; (ii) the officers and directors of Latch; (iii) members of the officers' and directors' immediate families and their legal representatives, heirs, successors, or assigns; (iv) any entity in which Defendants have or had a controlling interest; and (v) Settlement Class Members who validly and timely request exclusion in accordance with the requirements set forth below and in the Notice. The Court finds and preliminarily concludes that the prerequisites of class action certification under Rules 23(a) and 23(b)(3) have been satisfied for the Settlement Class. Pursuant to Rule 23, preliminarily and for the purposes of this Settlement only, Lead Plaintiff is certified as the class representative on behalf of the Settlement Class, and Lead Counsel is appointed as counsel for the Settlement Class. A Settlement Hearing pursuant to Rule 23 is scheduled to be held by Zoom, on Dec. 9, 2025. The Court retains exclusive jurisdiction over the Action to consider all further matters arising out of or connected with the Settlement. A full-text copy of the Court's Memorandum Opinion and Order is available at https://tinyurl.com/3sa3h8hm from PacerMonitor.com. LIFEMD INC: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Appointment Due October 27 -------------------------------------------------------------- WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces it has filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of securities of LifeMD, Inc. (NASDAQ: LFMD) between May 7, 2025 and August 5, 2025, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"). A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than October 27, 2025 in the securities class action first filed by the Firm. SO WHAT: If you purchased LifeMD securities during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement. WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the LifeMD class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=43404 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than October 27, 2025. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company at the time. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers. DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) defendants materially overstated LifeMD's competitive position; (2) defendants were reckless in raising LifeMD's 2025 guidance, considering that they had not properly accounted for rising customer acquisition costs in LifeMD's RexMD segment, as well as for customer acquisition costs related to the sale of drugs designed to treat obesity, including Wegovy and Zepbound; and (3) as a result, defendants' statements about LifeMD's business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages. To join the LifeMD class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=43404. No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff. Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Contact Information: Laurence Rosen, Esq. Phillip Kim, Esq. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. 275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor New York, NY 10016 Tel: (212) 686-1060 Toll Free: (866) 767-3653 Fax: (212) 202-3827 case@rosenlegal.com www.rosenlegal.com [GN] LUMINAR TECHNOLOGIES: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Deadline Due Sept. 22 ------------------------------------------------------------------- WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds purchasers of securities of Luminar Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: LAZR) between March 20, 2025 and May 14, 2025, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"), of the important September 22, 2025 lead plaintiff deadline. SO WHAT: If you purchased Luminar securities during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement. What to do next: To join the Luminar class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=14243 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com for more information. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than September 22, 2025. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not actually litigate securities class actions, but are merely middlemen that refer clients or partner with law firms that actually litigate the cases. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company at the time. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers. DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Austin Russell ("Russell"), Luminar's President, CEO and Chairman of the Board, was engaged in undisclosed conduct that would make him the subject of an inquiry by the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors; (2) this conduct created material risk that Russell would be released form his positions at Luminar; (3) Luminar's loss of Russell as an employee would then create material risk of adversely affecting Luminar's business by making it more difficult to compete with other market participants, manage R&D activities, and retain existing customers or cultivate new ones. Further, negative public perception and negative news related to Russell could adversely affect Luminar's brand relationships with customers, or standing in the industry; (4) accordingly, Luminar had no reasonable basis to provide and/or maintain Luminar's financial guidance; and (5) as a result, defendants' public statements were materially false and/or misleading at all times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages. To join the Luminar class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=14243. No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff. Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Contact Information: Laurence Rosen, Esq. Phillip Kim, Esq. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. 275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor New York, NY 10016 Tel: (212) 686-1060 Toll Free: (866) 767-3653 Fax: (212) 202-3827 case@rosenlegal.com www.rosenlegal.com [GN] LUNAR LANDSCAPING: Sanchez Balks at Failure to Pay Proper Overtime ------------------------------------------------------------------ JOSE LUIS CISNEROS SANCHEZ, an individual, and GABRIEL VEGA SALAZAR, an individual, on behalf of themselves and all other plaintiffs similarly situated, known and unknown, Plaintiffs, v. LUNAR LANDSCAPING, an unincorporated entity, and VITO PELLETIERE, individually, and d/b/a LUNAR LANDSCAPING, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-10055 (N.D. Ill., August 22, 2025) arises under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Illinois Minimum Wage Law for Defendants' failure to pay Plaintiffs, and other similarly situated employees, overtime compensation for hours worked over 40 in a workweek. Plaintiff Sanchez is a current employee of Defendants' Lunar Landscaping business located in Des Plaines, Illinois where he has worked as a manual labor landscaper since July 2022. The Plaintiffs and the other similarly situated landscape workers and other non-exempt laborers were subject to Defendants' common policy and plan to violate the FLSA by willfully refusing to pay an overtime premium for hours worked in excess of 40 in individual workweeks, says the suit. Lunar Landscaping is engaged in selling and providing landscaping services including, among other things, bush and tree trimming and disposal, grass cutting and disposal, weed control, fertilizer distribution, light installation, brick and paver stone installation, and related landscaping services to residential and commercial customers throughout the northwest suburbs of Chicago in Illinois.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Timothy M. Nolan, Esq. NOLAN LAW OFFICE 53 W. Jackson Blvd., Ste. 1137 Chicago, IL 60604 Telephone: (312) 322-1100 E-mail: tnolan@nolanwagelaw.com MAUI COUNTY, HI: Bash Class Suit Seeks to Recover $5MM Damages -------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Richard T. Bissen, Jr. The case is captioned as Melody Bash, et al., individually and on behalf of the Class of all other persons similarly situated v. Richard T. Bissen, Jr., in his capacity as "emergency worker" of Maui Emergency Management Agency, et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-00332-WRP-NONE (D. Hawaii, Aug. 6, 2025), The suit demands $5,000,001,000 in damages concerning Diversity-(Citizenship). The case is assigned to the Hon. Mag. Judge Wes Reber Porter. The Plaintiffs include Sean Stover, Gina Albanese, Shontel Williams, Dana Branum, Jade Collier, Randy Brock, Hanna Brock, Laura Brock, Nathan Brock, Aaron K. Brock, Cassandra Fairall, Marc Prevot, Kelsey Vadnais, and Laura Finkle, The Defendants include Herman Andaya in his capacity as "emergency worker" of Maui Emergency Management Agency; Maui Emergency Management Agency (MEMA); Maui Department of Fire and Public Safety; County of Maui; Hawaiian Electric Industries, Inc.; Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc.; Hawaii Electric Light Company, Inc.; Maui Electric Company, Limited; Hawaiian Telcom, Inc.; Hawaiian Telcom Communications, Inc.; Cincinnati Bell, Inc.; Spectrum Oceanic, LLC; Charter Communications, Inc.; Elliot Kawaihoolana Mills, in their capacities as Trustees of the Estate of Bernice Pauahi Bishop; Crystal Kauilani Rose, in their capacities as Trustees of the Estate of Bernice Pauahi Bishop; Jennifer Noelani Goodyear Kaopua, in their capacities as Trustees of the Estate of Bernice Pauahi Bishop; Michelle Kauhane, in their capacities as Trustees of the Estate of Bernice Pauahi Bishop; Robert K.W.H. Nobriga, in their capacities as Trustees of the Estate of Bernice Pauahi Bishop; and Doe Defendants 1-200.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Roy Y. Yempuku, Esq. YEMPUKU LAW 714 Honua Street Honolulu, HI 96816 Telephone: (808) 285-1117 E-mail: ryy@yempukulaw.com - and - Samuel P. King , Jr. KING & KING, ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW 1163 Kaeleku Street Honolulu, HI 96825 Telephone: (808) 521-6937 Facsimile: (808) 533-4745 E-mail: sam@kingandking.com MDL 2873: AFFF Products Can Cause Disease, Hughes Suit Alleges -------------------------------------------------------------- MELISSA HUGHES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff 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.; JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE PLC, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING CO., 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.); and WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-08123-RMG (D.S.C., July 22, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied warranties, and wantonness. The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the Plaintiff as a result of her exposure to the Defendants' aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) and firefighter turnout gear (TOG) containing fluorochemical products. The Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of their AFFF and TOG products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their products that use of and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with thyroid disease. The Hughes 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. ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products based in Exton, Pennsylvania. Allstar Fire Equipment is a supplier sells firefighting and safety equipment in California. Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based in Trussville, Alabama. Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey. Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates & hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina. Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. CB Garment, Inc. is a manufacturer of safety equipment in Oregon. Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company based in Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in Baytown, Texas. Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in Wilmington, Delaware. Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection systems based in United Kingdom. Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte, North Carolina. Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Daikin America, Inc. is a chemicals company in New York. Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma. DuPont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York. E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Fire-Dex, LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Ohio. Fire Service Plus, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Georgia. Johnson Controls, Inc. is a global diversified technology and industrial business company in Wisconsin. Kidde PLC, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in Mebane, North Carolina. Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina. National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West Chester, Pennsylvania. Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri. Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense company, headquartered in Arlington, Virginia. Ricochet Manufacturing Co., Inc. is manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Pennsylvania. The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system components and ancillary building construction products, including Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon Technologies. UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control systems based in Bradenton, Florida. Witmer Public Safety Group, Inc. is a safety equipment supplier in Pennsylvania. [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 Email: jshenkar@bernllp.com MDL 2873: AFFF/TOG Products "Defective," McGee Suit Alleges ----------------------------------------------------------- RUBY MCGEE, individually and as Personal Representative/Administrator/Executor of the Estate of JERRY MCGEE, deceased, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT 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; 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.); and ABC CORPORATIONS (1-50), ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; CB GARMENT, INC.; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLUS, INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCT USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING CO., INC; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC. d/b/a TENCATE PROTECTIVE FABRICS; SPRINGFIELD LLC; STEDFAST USA, INC.; VERIDIAN LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-08137-RMG (D.S.C., July 22, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied warranties, wantonness, per quod claim, and survival and wrongful death acts. The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the Decedent as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) and firefighter turnout gear (TOG) containing fluorochemical products. The Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of their AFFF and TOG products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian firefighters, including the Decedent, who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their products that use of and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due to inadequate warning, the Decedent was exposed to toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with liver cancer. The Decedent's diagnosis caused and/or contributed to his death. The McGee 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. ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products based in Exton, Pennsylvania. Allstar Fire Equipment is a supplier sells firefighting and safety equipment in California. Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based in Trussville, Alabama. Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey. Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates & hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina. Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. CB Garment, Inc. is a manufacturer of safety equipment in Oregon. Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company based in Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in Baytown, Texas. Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in Wilmington, Delaware. Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection systems based in United Kingdom. Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte, North Carolina. Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Daikin America, Inc. is a chemicals company in New York. Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma. Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York. E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Fire-Dex, LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Ohio. Fire Service Plus, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Georgia. Globe Manufacturing Company LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in New Hampshire. Honeywell Safety Product USA, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Rhode Island. Innotex Corp. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Alabama. Johnson Controls, Inc. is a global diversified technology and industrial business company in Wisconsin. Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in Mebane, North Carolina. L.N. Curtis & Sons is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Utah. Lion Group, Inc. is a protective clothing supplier in Vandalia, Ohio. Milliken & Company is a chemical industry company in South Carolina. Mine Safety Appliances Co., LLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Pennsylvania. MSA Safety Inc. is a manufacturer and supplier of safety equipment in Pennsylvania. Municipal Emergency Services, Inc. is a public safety company offering fire equipment services based in Utah. Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina. National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West Chester, Pennsylvania. PBI Performance Products, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in North Carolina. Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri. Ricochet Manufacturing Co., Inc. is manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Pennsylvania. Safety Components Fabric Technologies, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in South Carolina. Southern Mills, Inc., d/b/a Tencate Protective Fabrics, is a manufacturer of protective clothing fabric for industrial and military use in Georgia. Springfield LLC is a supplier of a variety of fabrics based in Jericho, New York. Stedfast USA, Inc. is a manufacturer of protective barrier technologies in Tennessee. The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system components and ancillary building construction products, including Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon Technologies. UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control systems based in Bradenton, Florida. Veridian Limited is a manufacturer of fire protective equipment in Iowa. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. is an American multinational manufacturing company in Delaware. Witmer Public Safety Group is a safety equipment supplier in Pennsylvania. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: John E. Keefe, Jr., Esq. KEEFE LAW FIRM, LLC 2 Bridge Ave., Bldg. 6, 2nd Fl., Suite 623 Red Bank, NJ 07701 Telephone: (732) 224-9400 Facsimile: (732) 224-9494 MDL 2873: Aqueous Foams Contain Toxic Chemicals, Lubchenko Says --------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Lubchenko v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-08278-RMG (D.S.C., July 24, 2025) is a class action seeking for damages for 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). 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 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, the Plaintiff contends. Further, the 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. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals. 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. Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products at various locations during the course of the Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities. The Plaintiff contends that he regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to, AFFF and TOG in training and to extinguish fires during his working career as a military and/or civilian firefighter. As a result of his exposure to the Defendants' AFFF and TOG products, the Plaintiff was diagnosed with testicular cancer, which has caused him to suffer severe personal injuries, pain, suffering, and emotional distress. The Lubchenko 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. The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers, distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors, and/or sellers of PFAS-containing AFFF and TOG products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals used in AFFF and TOG production. The Defendants include AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS, INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S., INC.; ARKEMA 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.; 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; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC; SOUTHERN MILLS INC.; STEDFAST USA INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCOFIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-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.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Tayjes Shah, Esq. THE MILLER FIRM, LLC 108 Railroad Ave. Orange, VA 22960 Telephone: (540) 672-4224 E-mail: tshah@millerfirmllc.com MDL 2873: Aqueous Foams Contain Toxic Chemicals, Mullenberg Says ---------------------------------------------------------------- Chad Mullenberg v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-08279-RMG (D.S.C., July 24, 2025) is a class action seeking for damages for 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). 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 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, the Plaintiff contends. Further, the 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. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals. 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. Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products at various locations during the course of the Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities. The Plaintiff contends that he regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to, AFFF and TOG in training and to extinguish fires during his working career as a military and/or civilian firefighter. As a result of his exposure to the Defendants' AFFF and TOG products, the Plaintiff was diagnosed with kidney cancer and thyroid disease, which has caused him to suffer severe personal injuries, pain, suffering, and emotional distress. The Mullenberg 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. The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers, distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors, and/or sellers of PFAS-containing AFFF and TOG products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals used in AFFF and TOG production. The Defendants include AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS, INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S., INC.; ARKEMA 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.; 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; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC; SOUTHERN MILLS INC.; STEDFAST USA INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCOFIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-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.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Tayjes Shah, Esq. THE MILLER FIRM, LLC 108 Railroad Ave. Orange, VA 22960 Telephone: (540) 672-4224 E-mail: tshah@millerfirmllc.com MDL 2873: Aqueous Foams Contain Toxic Substances, Chandler Says --------------------------------------------------------------- Clarence Chandler v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-08268-RMG (D.S.C., July 24, 2025) is a class action seeking for damages for 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). 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 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, the Plaintiff contends. Further, the 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. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals. 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. Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products at various locations during the course of the Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities. The Plaintiff contends that he regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to, AFFF and TOG in training and to extinguish fires during his working career as a military and/or civilian firefighter. As a result of his exposure to the Defendants' AFFF and TOG products, the Plaintiff was diagnosed with kidney cancer. The Chandler 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. The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers, distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors, and/or sellers of PFAS-containing AFFF and TOG products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals used in AFFF and TOG production. The Defendants include AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS, INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S., INC.; ARKEMA 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.; 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; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC; SOUTHERN MILLS INC.; STEDFAST USA INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCOFIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-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.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Tayjes Shah, Esq. THE MILLER FIRM, LLC 108 Railroad Ave. Orange, VA 22960 Telephone: (540) 672-4224 E-mail: tshah@millerfirmllc.com MDL 2873: Aqueous Foams Contain Toxic Substances, Delisio Says -------------------------------------------------------------- Christian Delisio v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-08270-RMG (D.S.C., July 24, 2025) is a class action seeking for damages for 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). 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 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, the Plaintiff contends. Further, the 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. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals. 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. Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products at various locations during the course of the Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities. The Plaintiff contends that he regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to, AFFF and TOG in training and to extinguish fires during his working career as a military and/or civilian firefighter. As a result of his exposure to the Defendants' AFFF and TOG products, the Plaintiff was diagnosed with ulcerative colitis. The Delisio 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. The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers, distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors, and/or sellers of PFAS-containing AFFF and TOG products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals used in AFFF and TOG production. The Defendants include AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS, INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S., INC.; ARKEMA 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.; 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; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC; SOUTHERN MILLS INC.; STEDFAST USA INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCOFIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-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.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Tayjes Shah, Esq. THE MILLER FIRM, LLC 108 Railroad Ave. Orange, VA 22960 Telephone: (540) 672-4224 E-mail: tshah@millerfirmllc.com MDL 2873: Aqueous Foams Contain Toxic Substances, Dermody Says -------------------------------------------------------------- Chesika Dermody, on behalf of the Estate and Next of Kin of Justin Dermody v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-08272-RMG (D.S.C., July 24, 2025) is a class action seeking for damages for 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). 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 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, the Plaintiff contends. Further, the 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. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals. 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. Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products at various locations during the course of the Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities. The Plaintiff contends that he regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to, AFFF and TOG in training and to extinguish fires during his working career as a military and/or civilian firefighter. The Plaintiff was diagnosed with thyroid cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF products. The Plaintiff passed from injuries attributable to the thyroid cancer on January 10, 2024. The Dermody 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. The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers, distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors, and/or sellers of PFAS-containing AFFF and TOG products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals used in AFFF and TOG production. The Defendants include AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS, INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S., INC.; ARKEMA 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.; 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; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC; SOUTHERN MILLS INC.; STEDFAST USA INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCOFIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-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.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Tayjes Shah, Esq. THE MILLER FIRM, LLC 108 Railroad Ave. Orange, VA 22960 Telephone: (540) 672-4224 E-mail: tshah@millerfirmllc.com MDL 2873: Aqueous Foams Contain Toxic Substances, Henderson Says ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Henderson v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-08275-RMG (D.S.C., July 24, 2025) is a class action seeking for damages for 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). 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 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, the Plaintiff contends. Further, the 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. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals. 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. Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products at various locations during the course of the Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities. The Plaintiff contends that he regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to, AFFF and TOG in training and to extinguish fires during his working career as a military and/or civilian firefighter. As a result of his exposure to the Defendants' AFFF and TOG products, the Plaintiff was diagnosed with kidney cancer and thyroid disease, which has caused him to suffer severe personal injuries, pain, suffering, and emotional distress. The Henderson 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. The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers, distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors, and/or sellers of PFAS-containing AFFF and TOG products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals used in AFFF and TOG production. The Defendants include AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS, INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S., INC.; ARKEMA 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.; 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; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC; SOUTHERN MILLS INC.; STEDFAST USA INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCOFIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-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.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Tayjes Shah, Esq. THE MILLER FIRM, LLC 108 Railroad Ave. Orange, VA 22960 Telephone: (540) 672-4224 E-mail: tshah@millerfirmllc.com MDL 2873: Aqueous Foams Contain Toxic Substances, Hunt Alleges -------------------------------------------------------------- Christopher Hunt v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-08276-RMG (D.S.C., July 24, 2025) is a class action seeking for damages for 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). 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 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, the Plaintiff contends. Further, the 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. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals. 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. Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products at various locations during the course of the Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities. The Plaintiff contends that he regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to, AFFF and TOG in training and to extinguish fires during his working career as a military and/or civilian firefighter. The Plaintiff was diagnosed with liver cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF products. The Hunt 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. The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers, distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors, and/or sellers of PFAS-containing AFFF and TOG products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals used in AFFF and TOG production. The Defendants include AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS, INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S., INC.; ARKEMA 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.; 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; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC; SOUTHERN MILLS INC.; STEDFAST USA INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCOFIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-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.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Tayjes Shah, Esq. THE MILLER FIRM, LLC 108 Railroad Ave. Orange, VA 22960 Telephone: (540) 672-4224 E-mail: tshah@millerfirmllc.com MDL 2873: Bishop Sues Over Exposure to PFAS From AFFF/TOG Products ------------------------------------------------------------------ JOSHUA BISHOP, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff 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 PRODUCT 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 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-08121-RMG (D.S.C., July 22, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied warranties, wantonness, and fraudulent transfer. The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) and firefighter turnout gear (TOG) containing fluorochemical products. The Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of their AFFF and TOG products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their products that use of and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with thyroid disease and high cholesterol. The Bishop 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. ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products based in Exton, Pennsylvania. Allstar Fire Equipment is a supplier sells firefighting and safety equipment in California. Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based in Trussville, Alabama. Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey. Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates & hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina. Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. CB Garment, Inc. is a manufacturer of safety equipment in Oregon. Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company based in Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in Baytown, Texas. Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in Wilmington, Delaware. Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection systems based in United Kingdom. Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte, North Carolina. Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Daikin America, Inc. is a chemicals company in New York. Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma. DuPont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York. E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Fire-Dex, LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Ohio. Fire Service Plus, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Georgia. Globe Manufacturing Company LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in New Hampshire. Honeywell Safety Products USA, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Rhode Island. Innotex Corp. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Alabama. Johnson Controls, Inc. is a global diversified technology and industrial business company in Wisconsin. Kidde PLC, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in Mebane, North Carolina. L.N. Curtis & Sons is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Utah. Lion Group, Inc. is a protective clothing supplier in Vandalia, Ohio. Mallory Safety and Supply LLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Longview, Washington. Milliken & Company is a chemical industry company in South Carolina. Mine Safety Appliances Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Pennsylvania. Municipal Emergency Services, Inc. is a public safety company offering fire equipment services based in Utah. Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina. National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West Chester, Pennsylvania. PBI Performance Products, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in North Carolina. Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri. Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense company, headquartered in Arlington, Virginia. Ricochet Manufacturing Co., Inc. is manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Pennsylvania. Safety Components Fabric Technologies, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in South Carolina. Southern Mills, Inc. is a manufacturer of protective clothing fabric for industrial and military use in Georgia. Stedfast USA, Inc., is a manufacturer of protective barrier technologies in Tennessee. The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system components and ancillary building construction products, including Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon Technologies. UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control systems based in Bradenton, Florida. Veridian Limited is a manufacturer of fire protective equipment in Iowa. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. is an American multinational manufacturing company in Delaware. Witmer Public Safety Group, Inc. is a safety equipment supplier in Pennsylvania. [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 Email: jshenkar@bernllp.com MDL 2873: Burton Suit Alleges Complications From AFFF Products -------------------------------------------------------------- JERRY BURTON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff 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.; DUPONT 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.), Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-08149-RMG (D.S.C., July 22, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied warranties, and wantonness. The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with kidney cancer. The Burton 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. ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products based in Exton, Pennsylvania. Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based in Trussville, Alabama. Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates & hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina. Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company based in Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in Baytown, Texas. Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in Wilmington, Delaware. Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection systems based in United Kingdom. Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte, North Carolina. Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma. DuPont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York. E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in Mebane, North Carolina. Lion Group, Inc. is a protective clothing supplier in Vandalia, Ohio. Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina. National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West Chester, Pennsylvania. The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system components and ancillary building construction products, including Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon Technologies. UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: N. Ryan Mayfield, Esq. THE GORI LAW FIRM 156 N. Main Street Edwardsville, IL 62025 Telephone: (618) 659-9833 Facsimile: (618) 659-9834 Email: rmayfield@gorilaw.com - and - Evan D. Buxner, Esq. 156 N. Main Street Edwardsville, IL 62025 Telephone: (618) 659-9833 Facsimile: (618) 659-9834 Email: ebuxner@gorilaw.com MDL 2873: Faces Conklin Suit Over Firefighters' Exposure to PFAS ---------------------------------------------------------------- JAMES CONKLIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff 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.), Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-08437-RMG (D.S.C., July 25, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied warranties, and wantonness. The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with kidney cancer. The Conklin 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. ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products based in Exton, Pennsylvania. Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based in Trussville, Alabama. Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates & hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina. Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company based in Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in Baytown, Texas. Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in Wilmington, Delaware. Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection systems based in United Kingdom. Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte, North Carolina. Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma. Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York. E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in Mebane, North Carolina. Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina. National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West Chester, Pennsylvania. The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system components and ancillary building construction products, including Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon Technologies. UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control systems based in Bradenton, Florida.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Tayjes Shah, Esq. THE MILLER FIRM, LLC 108 Railroad Ave. Orange, VA 22960 Telephone: (540) 672-4224 Email: tshah@millerfirmllc.com MDL 2873: Faces Durdin Suit Over AFFF/TOG Products' Toxic Elements ------------------------------------------------------------------ MARTHA DIANE DURDIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff 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.; 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 PRODUCT USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE PLC, INC.; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE RESPIRATOR COMPANY, 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-08162-RMG (D.S.C., July 22, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied warranties, wantonness, and fraudulent transfer. The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the Plaintiff as a result of her exposure to the Defendants' aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) and firefighter turnout gear (TOG) containing fluorochemical products. The Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of their AFFF and TOG products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their products that use of and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with thyroid disease. The Durdin 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. ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products based in Exton, Pennsylvania. Allstar Fire Equipment is a supplier sells firefighting and safety equipment in California. Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based in Trussville, Alabama. Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates & hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina. Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. CB Garment, Inc. is a manufacturer of safety equipment in Oregon. Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company based in Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in Baytown, Texas. Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in Wilmington, Delaware. Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection systems based in United Kingdom. Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte, North Carolina. Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Daikin America, Inc. is a chemicals company in New York. Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma. DuPont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York. E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Fire-Dex, LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Ohio. Fire Service Plus, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Georgia. Globe Manufacturing Company LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in New Hampshire. Honeywell Safety Products USA, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Rhode Island. Innotex Corp. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Alabama. Johnson Controls, Inc. is a global diversified technology and industrial business company in Wisconsin. Kidde PLC, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in Mebane, North Carolina. L.N. Curtis & Sons is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Utah. Lion Group, Inc. is a protective clothing supplier in Vandalia, Ohio. Milliken & Company is a chemical industry company in South Carolina. Mine Respirator Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Pennsylvania. Municipal Emergency Services, Inc. is a public safety company offering fire equipment services based in Utah. Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina. National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West Chester, Pennsylvania. PBI Performance Products, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in North Carolina. Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri. Ricochet Manufacturing Co., Inc. is manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Pennsylvania. Safety Components Fabric Technologies, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in South Carolina. Southern Mills, Inc. is a manufacturer of protective clothing fabric for industrial and military use in Georgia. Stedfast USA, Inc., is a manufacturer of protective barrier technologies in Tennessee. The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system components and ancillary building construction products, including Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon Technologies. UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control systems based in Bradenton, Florida. Veridian Limited is a manufacturer of fire protective equipment in Iowa. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. is an American multinational manufacturing company in Delaware. Witmer Public Safety Group, Inc. is a safety equipment supplier in Pennsylvania. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James Ryan Ziminskas, Esq. THEMIS LAW, PLLC 7718 Wood Hollow Drive, Suite 105 Austin, TX 78731 Telephone: (737) 208-1636 Email: rziminskas@themislawpllc.com MDL 2873: Faces Knode Suit Over AFFF/TOG Products' Harmful Effects ------------------------------------------------------------------ VANCE ALLAN KNODE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff 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.; 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 PRODUCT USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE PLC, INC.; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE RESPIRATOR COMPANY, 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-08105-RMG (D.S.C., July 22, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied warranties, wantonness, and fraudulent transfer. The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) and firefighter turnout gear (TOG) containing fluorochemical products. The Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of their AFFF and TOG products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their products that use of and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with thyroid disease. The Knode 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. ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products based in Exton, Pennsylvania. Allstar Fire Equipment is a supplier sells firefighting and safety equipment in California. Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based in Trussville, Alabama. Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates & hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina. Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. CB Garment, Inc. is a manufacturer of safety equipment in Oregon. Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company based in Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in Baytown, Texas. Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in Wilmington, Delaware. Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection systems based in United Kingdom. Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte, North Carolina. Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Daikin America, Inc. is a chemicals company in New York. Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma. DuPont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York. E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Fire-Dex, LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Ohio. Fire Service Plus, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Georgia. Globe Manufacturing Company LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in New Hampshire. Honeywell Safety Products USA, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Rhode Island. Innotex Corp. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Alabama. Johnson Controls, Inc. is a global diversified technology and industrial business company in Wisconsin. Kidde PLC, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in Mebane, North Carolina. L.N. Curtis & Sons is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Utah. Lion Group, Inc. is a protective clothing supplier in Vandalia, Ohio. Milliken & Company is a chemical industry company in South Carolina. Mine Respirator Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Pennsylvania. Municipal Emergency Services, Inc. is a public safety company offering fire equipment services based in Utah. Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina. National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West Chester, Pennsylvania. PBI Performance Products, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in North Carolina. Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri. Ricochet Manufacturing Co., Inc. is manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Pennsylvania. Safety Components Fabric Technologies, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in South Carolina. Southern Mills, Inc. is a manufacturer of protective clothing fabric for industrial and military use in Georgia. Stedfast USA, Inc., is a manufacturer of protective barrier technologies in Tennessee. The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system components and ancillary building construction products, including Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon Technologies. UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control systems based in Bradenton, Florida. Veridian Limited is a manufacturer of fire protective equipment in Iowa. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. is an American multinational manufacturing company in Delaware. Witmer Public Safety Group, Inc. is a safety equipment supplier in Pennsylvania. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James Ryan Ziminskas, Esq. THEMIS LAW, PLLC 7718 Wood Hollow Drive, Suite 105 Austin, TX 78731 Telephone: (737) 208-1636 Email: rziminskas@themislawpllc.com MDL 2873: Faces Palyok Suit Over Firefighters' Exposure to PFAS --------------------------------------------------------------- RAYMOND PALYOK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff 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 PRODUCT 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; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; 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-08120-RMG (D.S.C., July 22, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied warranties, wantonness, and fraudulent transfer. The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) and firefighter turnout gear (TOG) containing fluorochemical products. The Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of their AFFF and TOG products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their products that use of and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with thyroid disease and high cholesterol. The Palyok 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. ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products based in Exton, Pennsylvania. Allstar Fire Equipment is a supplier sells firefighting and safety equipment in California. Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based in Trussville, Alabama. Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey. Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates & hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina. Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. CB Garment, Inc. is a manufacturer of safety equipment in Oregon. Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company based in Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in Baytown, Texas. Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in Wilmington, Delaware. Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection systems based in United Kingdom. Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte, North Carolina. Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Daikin America, Inc. is a chemicals company in New York. Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma. DuPont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York. E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Fire-Dex, LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Ohio. Fire Service Plus, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Georgia. Globe Manufacturing Company LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in New Hampshire. Honeywell Safety Products USA, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Rhode Island. Innotex Corp. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Alabama. Johnson Controls, Inc. is a global diversified technology and industrial business company in Wisconsin. Kidde PLC, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in Mebane, North Carolina. L.N. Curtis & Sons is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Utah. Lion Group, Inc. is a protective clothing supplier in Vandalia, Ohio. Mallory Safety and Supply LLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Longview, Washington. Milliken & Company is a chemical industry company in South Carolina. Mine Safety Appliances Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Pennsylvania. Municipal Emergency Services, Inc. is a public safety company offering fire equipment services based in Utah. Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina. National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West Chester, Pennsylvania. PBI Performance Products, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in North Carolina. Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri. Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense company, headquartered in Arlington, Virginia. Ricochet Manufacturing Co., Inc. is manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Pennsylvania. Safety Components Fabric Technologies, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in South Carolina. Southern Mills, Inc. is a manufacturer of protective clothing fabric for industrial and military use in Georgia. Stedfast USA, Inc., is a manufacturer of protective barrier technologies in Tennessee. The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system components and ancillary building construction products, including Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon Technologies. UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control systems based in Bradenton, Florida. Veridian Limited is a manufacturer of fire protective equipment in Iowa. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. is an American multinational manufacturing company in Delaware. Witmer Public Safety Group, Inc. is a safety equipment supplier in Pennsylvania. [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 Email: jshenkar@bernllp.com MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Galman Says -------------------------------------------------------------- STEVEN IRELAND-GALMAN, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff 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., 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.), Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-08216-RMG (D.S.C., July 23, 2025) is an action for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to 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. According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, 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. The Defendants were negligent in their failure to provide Plaintiff with adequate warnings or instruction that the use of their regular drinking of tap water would cause PFAS to be released into the blood and/or body of Plaintiff. As a result of Defendants' conduct and the resulting contamination, Plaintiff suffered severe personal injuries by exposure to PFAS, alleges the suit. The Galman suit is a member case in the multi-district litigation proceeding, MDL No. 2873. 3M Company conducts operations in electronics, telecommunications, industrial, consumer and office, health care, safety, and other markets. The Company businesses share technologies, manufacturing operations, marketing channels, and other resources. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Chandler B. Duncan, Esq. Andrew T. Kagan, Esq. Elizabeth P. Kagan, Esq. KAGAN LEGAL GROUP, LLC 295 Palmas Inn Way, Suite 6 Humacao, PR, 00791 Telephone: (939) 220-2424 Facsimile: (939) 220-2477 MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Mitchell Says ---------------------------------------------------------------- ROBERTA MITCHELL, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff 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., 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.), Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-08224-RMG (D.S.C., July 23, 2025) is an action for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to 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. According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, 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. The Defendants were negligent in their failure to provide Plaintiff with adequate warnings or instruction that the use of their regular drinking of tap water would cause PFAS to be released into the blood and/or body of Plaintiff. As a result of Defendants' conduct and the resulting contamination, Plaintiff suffered severe personal injuries by exposure to PFAS. The Mitchell suit is a member case in the multi-district litigation proceeding, MDL No. 2873. 3M Company conducts operations in electronics, telecommunications, industrial, consumer and office, health care, safety, and other markets. The Company businesses share technologies, manufacturing operations, marketing channels, and other resources. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Chandler B. Duncan, Esq. Andrew T. Kagan, Esq. Elizabeth P. Kagan, Esq. KAGAN LEGAL GROUP, LLC 295 Palmas Inn Way, Suite 6 Humacao, PR, 00791 Telephone: (939) 220-2424 Facsimile: (939) 220-2477 MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Ortiz Says ------------------------------------------------------------- VINCENT ORTIZ, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff 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., 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.), Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-08228-RMG (D.S.C., July 23, 2025) is an action for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to 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. According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, 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. The Defendants were negligent in their failure to provide Plaintiff with adequate warnings or instruction that the use of their regular drinking of tap water would cause PFAS to be released into the blood and/or body of Plaintiff. As a result of Defendants' conduct and the resulting contamination, Plaintiff suffered severe personal injuries by exposure to PFAS, says the suit. The Ortiz suit is a member case in the multi-district litigation proceeding, MDL No. 2873. 3M Company conducts operations in electronics, telecommunications, industrial, consumer and office, health care, safety, and other markets. The Company businesses share technologies, manufacturing operations, marketing channels, and other resources. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Chandler B. Duncan, Esq. Andrew T. Kagan, Esq. Elizabeth P. Kagan, Esq. KAGAN LEGAL GROUP, LLC 295 Palmas Inn Way, Suite 6 Humacao, PR, 00791 Telephone: (939) 220-2424 Facsimile: (939) 220-2477 MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Pruitt Says -------------------------------------------------------------- MARCUS PRUITT, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff 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., 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.), Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-08238-RMG (D.S.C., July 23, 2025) is an action for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to 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. According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, 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. The Defendants were negligent in their failure to provide Plaintiff with adequate warnings or instruction that the use of their regular drinking of tap water would cause PFAS to be released into the blood and/or body of Plaintiff. As a result of Defendants' conduct and the resulting contamination, Plaintiff suffered severe personal injuries by exposure to PFAS, says the suit. The Pruitt suit is a member case in the multi-district litigation proceeding, MDL No. 2873. 3M Company conducts operations in electronics, telecommunications, industrial, consumer and office, health care, safety, and other markets. The Company businesses share technologies, manufacturing operations, marketing channels, and other resources. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Chandler B. Duncan, Esq. Andrew T. Kagan, Esq. Elizabeth P. Kagan, Esq. KAGAN LEGAL GROUP, LLC 295 Palmas Inn Way, Suite 6 Humacao, PR, 00791 Telephone: (939) 220-2424 Facsimile: (939) 220-2477 MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Putney Says -------------------------------------------------------------- WILLIAM PUTNEY, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff 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., 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.), Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-08244-RMG (D.S.C., July 23, 2025) is an action for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to 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. According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, 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. The Defendants were negligent in their failure to provide Plaintiff with adequate warnings or instruction that the use of their regular drinking of tap water would cause PFAS to be released into the blood and/or body of Plaintiff. As a result of Defendants' conduct and the resulting contamination, Plaintiff suffered severe personal injuries by exposure to PFAS, says the suit. The Putney suit is a member case in the multi-district litigation proceeding, MDL No. 2873. 3M Company conducts operations in electronics, telecommunications, industrial, consumer and office, health care, safety, and other markets. The Company businesses share technologies, manufacturing operations, marketing channels, and other resources. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Chandler B. Duncan, Esq. Andrew T. Kagan, Esq. Elizabeth P. Kagan, Esq. KAGAN LEGAL GROUP, LLC 295 Palmas Inn Way, Suite 6 Humacao, PR, 00791 Telephone: (939) 220-2424 Facsimile: (939) 220-2477 MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Reyes Says ------------------------------------------------------------- ANA REYES, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff 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., 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.), Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-08245-RMG (D.S.C., July 23, 2025) is an action for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to 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. According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, 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. Defendants were negligent in their failure to provide Plaintiff with adequate warnings or instruction that the use of their regular drinking of tap water would cause PFAS to be released into the blood and/or body of Plaintiff. As a result of Defendants' conduct and the resulting contamination, Plaintiff suffered severe personal injuries by exposure to PFAS, says the suit. The Reyes suit is a member case in the multi-district litigation proceeding, MDL No. 2873. 3M Company conducts operations in electronics, telecommunications, industrial, consumer and office, health care, safety, and other markets. The Company businesses share technologies, manufacturing operations, marketing channels, and other resources. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Chandler B. Duncan, Esq. Andrew T. Kagan, Esq. Elizabeth P. Kagan, Esq. KAGAN LEGAL GROUP, LLC 295 Palmas Inn Way, Suite 6 Humacao, PR, 00791 Telephone: (939) 220-2424 Facsimile: (939) 220-2477 MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Salazar Says --------------------------------------------------------------- MICHAEL SALAZAR, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff 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., 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.), Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-08247-RMG (D.S.C., July 23, 2025) is an action for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to 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. According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, 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. The Defendants were negligent in their failure to provide Plaintiff with adequate warnings or instruction that the use of their regular drinking of tap water would cause PFAS to be released into the blood and/or body of Plaintiff. As a result of Defendants' conduct and the resulting contamination, Plaintiff suffered severe personal injuries by exposure to PFAS, says the suit. The Salazar suit is a member case in the multi-district litigation proceeding, MDL No. 2873. 3M Company conducts operations in electronics, telecommunications, industrial, consumer and office, health care, safety, and other markets. The Company businesses share technologies, manufacturing operations, marketing channels, and other resources. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Chandler B. Duncan, Esq. Andrew T. Kagan, Esq. Elizabeth P. Kagan, Esq. KAGAN LEGAL GROUP, LLC 295 Palmas Inn Way, Suite 6 Humacao, PR, 00791 Telephone: (939) 220-2424 Facsimile: (939) 220-2477 MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Sims Says ------------------------------------------------------------ MICHAEL SIMS, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff 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., 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.), Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-08248-RMG (D.S.C., July 23, 2025) is an action for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to 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. According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, 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. The Defendants were negligent in their failure to provide Plaintiff with adequate warnings or instruction that the use of their regular drinking of tap water would cause PFAS to be released into the blood and/or body of Plaintiff. As a result of Defendants' conduct and the resulting contamination, Plaintiff suffered severe personal injuries by exposure to PFAS, says the suit. The Sims suit is a member case in the multi-district litigation proceeding, MDL No. 2873. 3M Company conducts operations in electronics, telecommunications, industrial, consumer and office, health care, safety, and other markets. The Company businesses share technologies, manufacturing operations, marketing channels, and other resources. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Chandler B. Duncan, Esq. Andrew T. Kagan, Esq. Elizabeth P. Kagan, Esq. KAGAN LEGAL GROUP, LLC 295 Palmas Inn Way, Suite 6 Humacao, PR, 00791 Telephone: (939) 220-2424 Facsimile: (939) 220-2477 MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Sowers Says -------------------------------------------------------------- WILLIAM SOWERS, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff 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., 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.), Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-08249-RMG (D.S.C., July 23, 2025) is an action for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to 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. According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, 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. The Defendants were negligent in their failure to provide Plaintiff with adequate warnings or instruction that the use of their regular drinking of tap water would cause PFAS to be released into the blood and/or body of Plaintiff. As a result of Defendants' conduct and the resulting contamination, Plaintiff suffered severe personal injuries by exposure to PFAS, says the suit. The Sowers suit is a member case in the multi-district litigation proceeding, MDL No. 2873. 3M Company conducts operations in electronics, telecommunications, industrial, consumer and office, health care, safety, and other markets. The Company businesses share technologies, manufacturing operations, marketing channels, and other resources. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Chandler B. Duncan, Esq. Andrew T. Kagan, Esq. Elizabeth P. Kagan, Esq. KAGAN LEGAL GROUP, LLC 295 Palmas Inn Way, Suite 6 Humacao, PR, 00791 Telephone: (939) 220-2424 Facsimile: (939) 220-2477 MDL 2873: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Soza Says ------------------------------------------------------------ ROSENDO SOZA, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff 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., 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.), Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-08250-RMG (D.S.C., July 23, 2025) is an action for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to 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. According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, 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. The Defendants were negligent in their failure to provide Plaintiff with adequate warnings or instruction that the use of their regular drinking of tap water would cause PFAS to be released into the blood and/or body of Plaintiff. As a result of Defendants' conduct and the resulting contamination, Plaintiff suffered severe personal injuries by exposure to PFAS, says the suit. The Soza suit is a member case in the multi-district litigation proceeding, MDL No. 2873. 3M Company conducts operations in electronics, telecommunications, industrial, consumer and office, health care, safety, and other markets. The Company businesses share technologies, manufacturing operations, marketing channels, and other resources. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Chandler B. Duncan, Esq. Andrew T. Kagan, Esq. Elizabeth P. Kagan, Esq. KAGAN LEGAL GROUP, LLC 295 Palmas Inn Way, Suite 6 Humacao, PR, 00791 Telephone: (939) 220-2424 Facsimile: (939) 220-2477 MDL 2873: Gilmore Suit Claims Toxic Exposure From AFFF Products --------------------------------------------------------------- GILES B. GILMORE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff 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.; DUPONT 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.), Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-08097-RMG (D.S.C., August 14, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied warranties, and wantonness. The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with ulcerative colitis. The Gilmore 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. ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products based in Exton, Pennsylvania. Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based in Trussville, Alabama. Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates & hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina. Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company based in Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in Baytown, Texas. Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in Wilmington, Delaware. Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection systems based in United Kingdom. Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte, North Carolina. Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma. DuPont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York. E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in Mebane, North Carolina. Lion Group, Inc. is a protective clothing supplier in Vandalia, Ohio. Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina. National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West Chester, Pennsylvania. The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system components and ancillary building construction products, including Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon Technologies. UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: N. Ryan Mayfield, Esq. THE GORI LAW FIRM 156 N. Main Street Edwardsville, IL 62025 Telephone: (618) 659-9833 Facsimile: (618) 659-9834 Email: rmayfield@gorilaw.com - and - Evan D. Buxner, Esq. 156 N. Main Street Edwardsville, IL 62025 Telephone: (618) 659-9833 Facsimile: (618) 659-9834 Email: ebuxner@gorilaw.com MDL 2873: Kohanski Sues Over Toxic Effects of AFFF/TOG Products --------------------------------------------------------------- TIMOTHY DEAN KOHANSKI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff 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.; 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 PRODUCT USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE PLC, INC.; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE RESPIRATOR COMPANY, 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-08109-RMG (D.S.C., July 22, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied warranties, wantonness, and fraudulent transfer. The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) and firefighter turnout gear (TOG) containing fluorochemical products. The Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of their AFFF and TOG products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their products that use of and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with thyroid disease. The Kohanski 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. ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products based in Exton, Pennsylvania. Allstar Fire Equipment is a supplier sells firefighting and safety equipment in California. Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based in Trussville, Alabama. Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates & hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina. Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. CB Garment, Inc. is a manufacturer of safety equipment in Oregon. Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company based in Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in Baytown, Texas. Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in Wilmington, Delaware. Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection systems based in United Kingdom. Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte, North Carolina. Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Daikin America, Inc. is a chemicals company in New York. Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma. DuPont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York. E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Fire-Dex, LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Ohio. Fire Service Plus, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Georgia. Globe Manufacturing Company LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in New Hampshire. Honeywell Safety Products USA, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Rhode Island. Innotex Corp. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Alabama. Johnson Controls, Inc. is a global diversified technology and industrial business company in Wisconsin. Kidde PLC, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in Mebane, North Carolina. L.N. Curtis & Sons is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Utah. Lion Group, Inc. is a protective clothing supplier in Vandalia, Ohio. Milliken & Company is a chemical industry company in South Carolina. Mine Respirator Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Pennsylvania. Municipal Emergency Services, Inc. is a public safety company offering fire equipment services based in Utah. Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina. National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West Chester, Pennsylvania. PBI Performance Products, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in North Carolina. Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri. Ricochet Manufacturing Co., Inc. is manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Pennsylvania. Safety Components Fabric Technologies, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in South Carolina. Southern Mills, Inc. is a manufacturer of protective clothing fabric for industrial and military use in Georgia. Stedfast USA, Inc., is a manufacturer of protective barrier technologies in Tennessee. The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system components and ancillary building construction products, including Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon Technologies. UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control systems based in Bradenton, Florida. Veridian Limited is a manufacturer of fire protective equipment in Iowa. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. is an American multinational manufacturing company in Delaware. Witmer Public Safety Group, Inc. is a safety equipment supplier in Pennsylvania. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James Ryan Ziminskas, Esq. THEMIS LAW, PLLC 7718 Wood Hollow Drive, Suite 105 Austin, TX 78731 Telephone: (737) 208-1636 Email: rziminskas@themislawpllc.com MDL 2873: Malave Sues Over Injury Sustained From AFFF/TOG Products ------------------------------------------------------------------ ARTURO MALAVE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff 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.; 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 PRODUCT USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE PLC, INC.; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE RESPIRATOR COMPANY, 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-08155-RMG (D.S.C., July 22, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied warranties, wantonness, and fraudulent transfer. The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) and firefighter turnout gear (TOG) containing fluorochemical products. The Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of their AFFF and TOG products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their products that use of and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with thyroid disease. The Malave 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. ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products based in Exton, Pennsylvania. Allstar Fire Equipment is a supplier sells firefighting and safety equipment in California. Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based in Trussville, Alabama. Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates & hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina. Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. CB Garment, Inc. is a manufacturer of safety equipment in Oregon. Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company based in Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in Baytown, Texas. Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in Wilmington, Delaware. Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection systems based in United Kingdom. Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte, North Carolina. Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Daikin America, Inc. is a chemicals company in New York. Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma. DuPont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York. E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Fire-Dex, LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Ohio. Fire Service Plus, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Georgia. Globe Manufacturing Company LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in New Hampshire. Honeywell Safety Products USA, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Rhode Island. Innotex Corp. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Alabama. Johnson Controls, Inc. is a global diversified technology and industrial business company in Wisconsin. Kidde PLC, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in Mebane, North Carolina. L.N. Curtis & Sons is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Utah. Lion Group, Inc. is a protective clothing supplier in Vandalia, Ohio. Milliken & Company is a chemical industry company in South Carolina. Mine Respirator Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Pennsylvania. Municipal Emergency Services, Inc. is a public safety company offering fire equipment services based in Utah. Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina. National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West Chester, Pennsylvania. PBI Performance Products, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in North Carolina. Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri. Ricochet Manufacturing Co., Inc. is manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Pennsylvania. Safety Components Fabric Technologies, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in South Carolina. Southern Mills, Inc. is a manufacturer of protective clothing fabric for industrial and military use in Georgia. Stedfast USA, Inc., is a manufacturer of protective barrier technologies in Tennessee. The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system components and ancillary building construction products, including Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon Technologies. UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control systems based in Bradenton, Florida. Veridian Limited is a manufacturer of fire protective equipment in Iowa. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. is an American multinational manufacturing company in Delaware. Witmer Public Safety Group, Inc. is a safety equipment supplier in Pennsylvania. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James Ryan Ziminskas, Esq. THEMIS LAW, PLLC 7718 Wood Hollow Drive, Suite 105 Austin, TX 78731 Telephone: (737) 208-1636 Email: rziminskas@themislawpllc.com MDL 2873: Savage Suit Claims PFAS Exposure From AFFF/TOG Products ----------------------------------------------------------------- ANDRE SAVAGE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff 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.; 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 PRODUCT USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE PLC, INC.; L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE RESPIRATOR COMPANY, 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-08118-RMG (D.S.C., July 22, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied warranties, wantonness, and fraudulent transfer. The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) and firefighter turnout gear (TOG) containing fluorochemical products. The Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of their AFFF and TOG products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their products that use of and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with thyroid cancer. The Savage 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. ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products based in Exton, Pennsylvania. Allstar Fire Equipment is a supplier sells firefighting and safety equipment in California. Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based in Trussville, Alabama. Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates & hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina. Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. CB Garment, Inc. is a manufacturer of safety equipment in Oregon. Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company based in Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in Baytown, Texas. Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in Wilmington, Delaware. Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection systems based in United Kingdom. Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte, North Carolina. Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Daikin America, Inc. is a chemicals company in New York. Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma. DuPont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical company based in Wilmington, Delaware. Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York. E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Fire-Dex, LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Ohio. Fire Service Plus, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Georgia. Globe Manufacturing Company LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in New Hampshire. Honeywell Safety Products USA, Inc. is a provider of fire safety services and equipment in Rhode Island. Innotex Corp. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Alabama. Johnson Controls, Inc. is a global diversified technology and industrial business company in Wisconsin. Kidde PLC, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in Mebane, North Carolina. L.N. Curtis & Sons is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Utah. Lion Group, Inc. is a protective clothing supplier in Vandalia, Ohio. Milliken & Company is a chemical industry company in South Carolina. Mine Respirator Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products in Pennsylvania. Municipal Emergency Services, Inc. is a public safety company offering fire equipment services based in Utah. Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina. National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West Chester, Pennsylvania. PBI Performance Products, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in North Carolina. Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri. Ricochet Manufacturing Co., Inc. is manufacturer of firefighting equipment in Pennsylvania. Safety Components Fabric Technologies, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting equipment in South Carolina. Southern Mills, Inc. is a manufacturer of protective clothing fabric for industrial and military use in Georgia. Stedfast USA, Inc., is a manufacturer of protective barrier technologies in Tennessee. The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware. Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system components and ancillary building construction products, including Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin. United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon Technologies. UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control systems based in Bradenton, Florida. Veridian Limited is a manufacturer of fire protective equipment in Iowa. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. is an American multinational manufacturing company in Delaware. Witmer Public Safety Group, Inc. is a safety equipment supplier in Pennsylvania. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James Ryan Ziminskas, Esq. THEMIS LAW, PLLC 7718 Wood Hollow Drive, Suite 105 Austin, TX 78731 Telephone: (737) 208-1636 Email: rziminskas@themislawpllc.com METROPOLITAN TREE: Faces Perez Wage-and-Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y. ------------------------------------------------------------- JOSE RAMIREZ PEREZ and SAMUEL RIVAS CHICAS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. METROPOLITAN TREE AND LANDSCAPING CORP. and SAMUEL VASQUEZ, as an individual, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-04782 (E.D.N.Y., August 27, 2025) arises from the Defendants' alleged unlawful labor practices in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. The Plaintiffs alleges the Defendants' failure to pay overtime and minimum wages, failure to pay wages for all hours worked, failure to provide with a written wage notice, and failure to furnish with wage statements. Plaintiffs Perez and Chicas were employed by the Defendants from March 2019 until November 2023 and from May 2019 until June 2023, respectively. Their primary duties were as a tree cutter, landscaper, laborer and helper, while performing other miscellaneous duties. Metropolitan Tree and Landscaping Corp. provides tree and landscaping services in New York.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Roman Avshalumov, Esq. HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, PC 80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601 Kew Gardens, NY 11415 Telephone: (718) 263-9591 Facsimile: (718) 263-9598 MLFS PIZZA: Faces Sanchez Wage-and-Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y. -------------------------------------------------------- JOEL SAUL MORA SANCHEZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MLFS PIZZA LTD, TLM HARLEM PIZZA LTD, MAURIZIO TROIA individually, SALVATORE NAIMO individually, LEONARDO MUSSO, individually, and DOMINIC DOE (aka: SANTOS DOMINIC) individually, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-04763 (E.D.N.Y., August 27, 2025) is a wage and hour action brought against the Defendants pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. The Plaintiff alleges the Defendants' failure to pay overtime and minimum wages, failure to pay "spread of hours" premiums, failure to maintain accurate and complete payroll records, failure to provide wage notices, and failure to furnish accurate and complete wage statements. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a food preparer from August 2022 until June 27, 2024. MLFS Pizza Ltd. is engaged in the operation of restaurants in New York.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Clifford Tucker, Esq. SACCO & FILLAS LLP 3119 Newtown Ave, Seventh Floor Astoria, NY 11102 Telephone: (718) 269-2243 Facsimile: (718) 425-9715 E-mail: gkalender@SaccoFillas.com MONSANTO COMPANY: Products Contains Toxic Chemicals, Fox Says ------------------------------------------------------------- REBECCA FOX, ROBERT WRIGHT, HELMUT JAHNY, TERRANCE JACKSON, ANN BROMWELL, KAREN DOHN on behalf of the estate of ROBERT DOHN, JENNIFER MARINEZ on behalf of the estate of FRANCIS MARTINEZ, WILDA RAMOS, RANDOLPH POHL, ROBIN on behalf of the estate of PATSY SALYER, LEMAIRE DUMAS, BEVERLY MCKINLEY, WILLIAM SPANN, JOHN A. LARSEN, VANESSA TERRY, LINDA WALKER, HOWARD FENNER on behalf of the estate of BOBBY FENNER, ANNA EASTERLING, RANDAL POPE, PAMELA CELLI ADAMS on behalf of the estate of FRANK CELLI JR., WILLIAM ROGERS, CHRISTOPHER VAN DROMME, WILLIAM JONES, DAVID HELMS, MARK KOBAK, CHERYL SHAW, ADRIENNE PARIS, TERESA MITCHELL, DAVID MCDANIEL on behalf of the estate of DONNA MCDANIEL, LORI GARRISON on behalf of the estate of GREGORY GARRISON, BRYAN BRANDESS, MARYLINE ZIMMERMAN, RAY CERVANTES, LORINDA WOOD on behalf of the estate of IVA WOOD, ARMAND KING, ROBERT JENKINS, SHARON BERNARD on behalf of the estate of KENNY BERNARD, MARION BOTBYLKULWICH, JACQUELINE WYCHE on behalf of the estate of LUTHER WYCHE SR., DIANNA TYLER, ALICIA RUSSELL, CARMEN MALENO HUERTA on behalf of the estate of BEATRICE AGUIRRE ESCANDON, PAUL MYVETT, LANCE PILGRIM on behalf of the estate of TERRY MCMILLAN, LISA HIGGINBOTHAM, RAYMOND BIEGO on behalf of the estate of WILLIAM BIEGO, TAMARA GOODWIN, ANTONIO REID III, SYLVIA CASTANEDA on behalf of the estate of MARY NEGRON, KIMBERLY NEWTON on behalf of the estate of CHAUNCEY MATKIN, ROGELIO MARTINEZ JR. PAULA HACKNEY, JULIE BOGE, IRENE WAGONER, LARRY KOTEWA, BRINDA ROBINSON, HEATHER FORRESTER, ROBIN WILEY, SALVATORE RODIO JR., JOHN DICKERSON, DAVID LAWSON, CHRISTOPHER EGAN, JAMES MCKENZIE JR. on behalf of the estate of CODY MCKENZIE, ELIA MENDOZA, DAVID BRYANT, SUSAN GLOVER, MELBA IRVING on behalf of the estate of DONNIE IRVING, JAMES STALTER, DEBRA BUCCELLI, ANDER GOODWIN JR., HANI AWADALLAH, DAWN VENTURI, RAQUEL FLORES GONZALEZ, MICHAEL HALL, and VICTOR LUISOTTI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. MONSANTO COMPANY, and BAYER CROPSCIENCE LP, Defendants, Case No. N25C-08-283 MON (Del. Sup., Aug. 29, 2025) is an action for damages suffered by the Plaintiffs as a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's negligent and wrongful conduct in connection with the design, development, manufacture, testing, packaging, promoting, marketing, advertising, distribution, labeling, and sale of the herbicide Roundup, containing the active ingredient glyphosate. The Plaintiffs allege in the complaint that the Defendants' product, known as Roundup and/or glyphosate is defective, dangerous to human health, unfit and unsuitable to be marketed and sold in commerce, and has lacked, at all relevant times, proper warnings and directions as to the dangers associated with its use. Monsanto Company provides agricultural products. The Company offers corn, soybean, cotton, wheat, sorghum, and vegetable seeds. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Raeann Warner, Esq. COLLINS PRICE WARNER & WOLOSHIN 8 East 13th Street Wilmington, DE 19801 Telephone: (302) 655-4600 Email: raeann@cpwwlaw.com - and - Emily T. Acosta, Esq. Madison Donaldson, Esq. WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM 940 North Lincoln Street Denver, CO 80203 Telephone: (303) 376-6360 Facsimile: (888) 875-2889 Email: eacosta@wagstafflawfirm.com mdonaldson@wagstafflawfirm.com MONSANTO COMPANY: Vadnais Suit Transferred to N.D. California ------------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Dale Vadnais, and others similarly situated v. Monsanto Company, Case No. 4:25-cv-00923 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 Aug. 28, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-07264-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: Madison Tate Donaldson, Esq. THE WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM 940 Lincoln Street Denver, CO 80203 Phone: (303) 376-6360 Email: mdonaldson@wagstafflawfirm.com MONSANTO COMPANY: Wright Suit Transferred to N.D. California ------------------------------------------------------------ The case captioned as Michial Wright, and others similarly situated v. Monsanto Company, Case No. 4:25-cv-00926 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 Aug. 28, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-07263-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: Madison Tate Donaldson, Esq. THE WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM 940 Lincoln Street Denver, CO 80203 Phone: (303) 376-6360 Email: mdonaldson@wagstafflawfirm.com MORGAN & MORGAN: Wins Bid to Compel Arbitration in Gugliuzza Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Lisa Godbey Wood of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia, Savannah Division, grants the Defendants' motion to compel arbitration in the lawsuit styled MARK GUGLIUZZA, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MORGAN & MORGAN, JACKSONVILLE PLLC d/b/a Morgan & Morgan Jacksonville, LLC, and SETH DIAMOND, Defendants, Case No. 4:25-cv-00064-LGW-BWC (S.D. Ga.). Before the Court is the Defendants' motion to compel arbitration, as well as the Plaintiff's motion to remand. After being injured in a motor vehicle accident in Savannah, Georgia, on Jan. 17, 2021, Plaintiff Mark Gugliuzza entered into a representation agreement with the law firm of Morgan & Morgan, Jacksonville PLLC ("Morgan & Morgan"). The representation agreement contained an arbitration provision. After the Plaintiff retained the firm to represent him, Morgan & Morgan filed a lawsuit on the Plaintiff's behalf and initially demanded five million dollars in damages as a result of the motor vehicle accident. The lawsuit remained pending for three years, during which two mediations took place. Morgan & Morgan's settlement offers remained in the millions of dollars. While representing the Plaintiff, Morgan & Morgan suggested the Plaintiff meet with a "life care planner." The Plaintiff was never advised to meet with a physician to substantiate any life care plan. In late 2024, Morgan & Morgan told the Plaintiff he needed to settle his claim for $125,000. The Plaintiff alleges he was informed this settlement was necessitated because a federal judge involved in his case had made a clear error in knocking his life care plan. The Plaintiff alleges that, in actuality, the court "disqualified" the life care plan because Morgan & Morgan failed to have an appropriate physician review and validate the plan. The Plaintiff alleges this failure was "clear malpractice" on Morgan & Morgan's part. Further, the Plaintiff alleges Morgan & Morgan failed to adequately disclose medical experts, their opinions, and reports, which also constitutes an actionable cause of action for legal malpractice. Ultimately, the Plaintiff begrudgingly agreed to accept the $125,000 settlement. Afterward, the Plaintiff was presented with a settlement statement that, the Plaintiff alleges, improperly recouped to Morgan and Morgan numerous charges that were either excessive or not properly recoverable by the law firm. The Plaintiff filed this lawsuit, a putative class action, against Morgan & Morgan and his attorney, Seth Diamond, on March 20, 2025, in the Superior Court of Chatham County, Georgia. The Plaintiff brings claims against Morgan & Morgan and Mr. Diamond for professional negligence (Count I), breach of fiduciary duty (Count II), and "damages" (Count V). The Defendants removed the case to this Court, basing subject matter jurisdiction on the Class Action Fairness Act ("CAFA") and moved to compel arbitration based on the representation agreement's arbitration provision. Thereafter, the Plaintiff moved to remand this action to the state court from which it was removed. In his motion to remand, the Plaintiff argues the Court must abstain from exercising jurisdiction over this case due to the local controversy exception contained in CAFA. Due to the similarities between this case and Walker, the Court finds the Plaintiff has not met his burden of establishing that this case falls within CAFA's local controversy exception, citing Walker v. Morgan & Morgan, Jacksonville PLLC, No. 2:24-cv-088, 2025 WL 310671 (S.D. Ga. Jan. 28, 2025). Therefore, the Plaintiff's motion to remand is denied. In their Motion to Compel Arbitration, the Defendants contend the Plaintiff's claims are subject to mandatory arbitration, per the parties' agreement, and have moved to compel arbitration and to dismiss or stay this case. The Defendants argue the FAA compels arbitration of the Plaintiff's claims. The Court finds that the Plaintiff, as the "party resisting arbitration," has not met his "burden of showing that the arbitration provision in question should not be enforced," citing Green Tree Fin. Corp.-Ala., 531 U.S. at 91–92. Therefore, the Defendants' motion to compel arbitration granted. Judge Wood concludes that the Plaintiff has failed to meet his burden of establishing that this case falls within CAFA's local controversy exception. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion to remand this case to state court based on the local controversy exception is denied. Further, the Court finds the Agreement's arbitration provision is enforceable pursuant to the FAA. Therefore, the Defendants' motion to compel arbitration is granted in that the Plaintiff's claims will be submitted to arbitration and this case administratively stayed pursuant to 9 U.S.C. Section 3 pending the completion of the alternative dispute resolution process. A full-text copy of the Court's Order is available at https://tinyurl.com/yy5h4cpe from PacerMonitor.com. MOTUS LLC: Riegert Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages -------------------------------------------------------- RICHARD RIEGERT, individually, and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MOTUS LLC, a Michigan limited liability company d/b/a Motus Integrated Technologies, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-01011-RJJ-MV (W.D. Mich., August 26, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant seeking to recover unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorney's fees, costs, and other relief as appropriate under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the common law claim of unjust enrichment. The suit asserts that Plaintiff and those similarly situated regularly worked in excess of 40 hours a week, and were paid some overtime for those hours, but at a rate that did not include Defendant's Bonus Pay and other non-discretionary remuneration for overtime rates as required by the FLSA. The Plaintiff was employed with Defendant from approximately January 2021 through July 10, 2025 as a non-exempt, hourly employee. Motus LLC is an automotive interior supplier with multiple locations located throughout the United States including Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, and Missouri.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jesse L. Young, Esq. SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C. 141 E. Michigan Avenue, Suite 600 Kalamazoo, MI 49007 Telephone: (269) 250-7500 E-mail: jyoung@sommerspc.com MYBOOKIE INC: Faces Connolly Suit Over Unsolicited Text Messages ---------------------------------------------------------------- CODY CONNOLLY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MYBOOKIE, INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:25-cv-06688-VC (N.D. Cal., August 7, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The case arises from the Defendant's practice of sending unsolicited text messages to the telephone numbers of consumers in an attempt to promote its goods and services without obtaining prior consent. As a result of the Defendant's misconduct, the Plaintiff and similarly situated consumers suffered harm including intrusion upon seclusion, invasion of privacy, harassment, aggravation, and disruption of their daily life. MyBookie, Inc. is an owner and operator of an online sports betting platform, headquartered in the Netherlands. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: L. Timothy Fisher, Esq. Julia K. Venditti, Esq. Joshua B. Glatt, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 1990 North California Blvd., 9th Floor Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Telephone: (925) 300-4455 Facsimile: (925) 407-2700 Email: ltfisher@bursor.com jvenditti@bursor.com jglatt@bursor.com NEW YORK, NY: Faces Steadman Class Suit Over Protest Response ------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against THE CITY OF NEW YORK, et al. The case is captioned as HILARY STEADMAN and KRISTIN HERBECK, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK; NYPD MEMBER JACOB CRAIG; NYPD MEMBER CANDICE RICHARDS (Shield No. 8120); NYPD MEMBERS JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-20, Case No. 1:25-cv-04081-RER-JAM (E.D.N.Y., July 24, 2025). The lawsuit seeks justice for and accountability around the City of New York's -- and its police force's -- retaliatory, disproportionate, and unreasonable response to that protest and to First Amendment Activities. On April 30, 2024, the Plaintiffs were participating in a protest against Israel's genocide of Palestinians in Gaza when police violently assaulted them, arrested them, and later falsely and maliciously prosecuted them. The Defendants were duly appointed and acting officers, servants, employees, and agents of Defendant City who were acting for, and on behalf of, and with the power and authority vested in them by Defendant City and were otherwise performing and engaging in conduct incidental to the performance of their lawful functions in the course of their duties.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Tahanie A. Aboushi THE ABOUSHI LAW FIRM, PLLC 4924 4th Avenue, 2nd floor Brooklyn, NY 11220 E-mail: Tahanie@aboushi.com - and - J. Remy Green, Esq. Elena L. Cohen, Esq. Regina J. Yu, Esq. COHEN&GREEN P.L.L.C. 1639 Centre Street, Suite 216 Ridgewood (Queens), NY 11385 Telephone: (929) 888-9480 Facsimile: (929) 888-9457 E-mail: elena@femmelaw.com remy@femmelaw.com regina@femmelaw.com - and - Jessica Massimi, Esq. MASSIMI LAW PLLC 99 Wall Street, Suite 1264 New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (646) 241-9800 Facsimile: (212) 202-4779 E-mail: jessica.massimi@gmail.com - and - Leena Mohmoud Widdi, Esq. 1825 Foster Ave, Ste 1K Brooklyn, NY 11230 Telephone: (929) 344-7611 E-mail: Leenawiddi.esq@gmail.com - and - GIDEON ORION OLIVER 277 Broadway, Suite 1501 New York, NY 10007 Telephone: (718) 783-3682 Facsimile: (646) 349-2914 E-mail: Gideon@GideonLaw.com - and - David B. Rankin, Esq. Luna Droubi, Esq. BELDOCK LEVINE & HOFFMAN LLP 99 Park Ave., PH/26th Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 490-0400 Facsimile: (212) 277-5880 OASIS SCIENTIFIC: Bishop Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind ----------------------------------------------------------------- CEDRIC BISHOP, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. OASIS SCIENTIFIC, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-07134 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 28, 2025) alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web site, https://www.oasisscientific.com/, is not fully or equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the Plaintiff, in violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. Oasis Scientific Inc was founded in 2010. The company's line of business includes the manufacturing of instruments and apparatus that measure an optical property. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael A. LaBollita, Esq. Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq. Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq. GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC 150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR New York, NY 10003 Tel: (212) 228-9795 Fax: (212) 982-6284 Email: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal Dana@Gottlieb.legal Michael@Gottlieb.legal OHIO MEDICAL: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Cooper Alleges ---------------------------------------------------------- KRISTOPHER COOPER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. OHIO MEDICAL ALLIANCE LLC d/b/a OHIO MARIJUANA CARD, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-01793-JPC (N.D. Ohio, Aug. 28, 2028) is an action arising from the Defendant's failure to secure the personally identifiable information ("PII") and protected health information ("PHI") of the Plaintiff and the members of the proposed Class, who are current and former patients of Defendant. According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, the Defendant disregarded the rights of the Plaintiff and Class Members by intentionally, willfully, recklessly, and negligently failing to implement reasonable measures to safeguard its current and former patients' Private Information and by failing to take necessary steps to prevent unauthorized disclosure of that information. Defendant's woefully inadequate data security measures made the Data Breach a foreseeable, and even likely, consequence of its negligence. As a result of the Data Breach, which Defendant failed to prevent, the Private Information of its patients, including Plaintiff and the proposed Class Members, was stolen, says the suit. Ohio Medical Alliance LLC d/b/a Ohio Marijuana Card operates medical marijuana doctor offices located throughout Ohio, as well as clinic in Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Virginia, and West Virginia. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Terence R. Coates, Esq. Dylan J. Gould, Esq. Spencer D. Campbell, Esq. MARKOVITS, STOCK & DEMARCO, LLC 119 East Court Street, Suite 530 Cincinnati, OH 45202 Telephone: (513) 651-3700 Facsimile: (513) 665-0219 Email: tcoates@msdlegal.com dgould@msdlegal.com scampbell@msdlegal.com - and - Kenneth J. Grunfeld, Esq. KOPELOWITZ OSTROW P.A. One West Las Olas Boulevard Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 525-4100 Email: grunfeld@kolawyers.com PENNSYLVANIA: Court Refuses to Hear H.C. Prisoner Suit v. Chudzik ----------------------------------------------------------------- Judge John M. Gallagher of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania declines to exercise jurisdiction over the Plaintiffs' claims in the lawsuit captioned H.C., et al., Plaintiffs v. HON. BRIAN CHUDZIK, et al., Defendants, Case No. 5:22-cv-01588-JMG (E.D. Pa.). The Court invokes abstention under Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971). The Court, therefore, declines to exercise jurisdiction over the Plaintiffs' claims, and they are dismissed without prejudice. The Court denies as moot the Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Responses to Their Second Set of Requests for Production of Documents and the Plaintiffs' Motion for a Status Conference. The Court directs the Clerk of Court to mark the case closed. The Plaintiffs are incarcerated in Lancaster County Prison. In April 2022, they sued certain Lancaster County Magisterial District Judges (MDJs), Lancaster County, and Warden Cheryl Steberger. They say that the MDJs imposed unaffordable cash bail on them and a putative class of other pretrial detainees without conducting a meaningful, individualized inquiry into their financial condition as required by the Pennsylvania Constitution and the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure. Because this case falls within the exception laid out by Younger and its progeny, the Court abstains. The named Plaintiffs in this case, H.C., R.H., C.B., A.D., S.M., D.B., and G.H., were arrested at different times in Lancaster County in early 2022. They all appeared before MDJs for their preliminary arraignments, which took place through video either from Lancaster County Prison or from a police station. During each of these preliminary arraignments, the Plaintiffs say that the MDJs failed to ask them about the required factors laid out in Rule 523, including financial status. But, according to the Plaintiffs, the MDJs still imposed cash bail on them. Since they could not afford to post bail, the Plaintiffs remained imprisoned pending trial. On April 25, 2022, the Plaintiffs brought this class action lawsuit against certain MDJs, Lancaster County, and Warden Steberger. Specifically, the Plaintiffs assert violations of Procedural and Substantive Due Process against the MDJs and Warden Steberger, violations of their Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment Right to Counsel against the MDJs and Lancaster County, and violations of Equal Protection against the MDJs and Warden Steberger. The gravamen of the Plaintiffs' case is that the Defendants violated their constitutional rights by imposing unaffordable cash bail on them without considering their ability to pay, which they claim violates Rule 523. The Defendants tried several times to dismiss the claims against them. The first attempt came on July 18, 2022. On that day, Lancaster County and Warden Steberger filed a joint Motion to Dismiss. Later that day, the MDJs filed their own Motion to Dismiss. The Court granted in part and denied in part the Motions to Dismiss on March 31, 2023. Specifically, the Court denied the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Counts I and II of the Complaint, dismissed with prejudice Count III of the Complaint, and dismissed without prejudice Count IV of the Complaint. The Plaintiffs were granted leave to file an Amended Complaint as to Count IV. The Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint on May 22, 2023. The MDJs then moved to dismiss the Amended Complaint on June 13, 2023. The Court denied the MDJs' second Motion to Dismiss on Jan. 22, 2024. Eight days later, on Jan. 30, 2024, the Court issued an order requiring the parties to brief the following topics: (1) Whether Younger abstention should apply to this case in light of Stewart v. Abraham, 275 F.3d 220 (3d Cir. 2001), and Daves v. Dallas County, 64 F.4th 616 (5th Cir. 2023); (2) Whether Pullman abstention (Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co., 312 U.S. 496 (1941)) should apply to this case, i.e., whether the Plaintiffs' allegations present a facial or as-applied challenge and whether Pennsylvania state courts are better situated to answer that question based on their own interpretation of their constitution, statutes, and codes; and (3) Whether this case is properly brought under the Ex parte Young exception to the Eleventh Amendment. Because abstention is required under Younger, the Court says its analysis begins and ends with the first question. Judge Gallagher finds that the Younger abstention has not been waived. In this case, Judge Gallagher says, the Defendants have only failed to ask the Court to abstain in their Motions to Dismiss. They have not taken any affirmative steps--like filing a motion for stay of any state court proceedings--that shows a desire to have the Court resolve this case on the merits. In the absence of such additional steps, Judge Gallagher points out the Defendants have not waived their ability to invoke Younger. Judge Gallagher holds that Younger abstention is appropriate. Judge Gallagher opines, among other things, that Pennsylvania courts are well equipped for determining the Plaintiffs' bail challenges, completely obviating the need for a federal court to hear these claims. So, abstention is appropriate under Younger. Judge Gallagher concludes that the case implicates two core concepts that underpin the Republic's system of governance: the limited powers granted to the federal government, and its obligation to protect the civil liberties of its people. In this instance, the Court must abstain from inserting itself in the Plaintiffs' challenge to the implementation of state bail requirements by state judicial officials in ongoing state criminal prosecutions. The Plaintiffs' ask here would necessarily require open-ended federal court oversight of disputed state bail determinations, an area in which the state has a significant interest, and for which its laws provide numerous paths for review. A full-text copy of the Court's Memorandum Opinion is available at https://tinyurl.com/5b8ttcb3 from PacerMonitor.com. A full-text copy of the Court's Order is available at https://tinyurl.com/3fd2ahfz from PacerMonitor.com. POSIGEN DEVELOPER: Ruperto Balks at Mass Layoff Without Notice -------------------------------------------------------------- ALEX RUPERTO, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. POSIGEN DEVELOPER, LLC; and POSIGEN, PBC Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-01074-UNA (D. Del., August 26, 2025) is a class action brought by the Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees, seeking to recover damages arising from Defendants' violation of their rights under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff and the other similarly situated employees were terminated as part of, or as a result of a mass layoff and/or plant closing ordered by Defendants on or about August 24, 2025. The Defendants violated the WARN Act by failing to give the Plaintiff and the other similarly situated employees of the Defendants at least 60 days' advance written notice of termination, as required by the WARN Act. As a consequence, the Plaintiff and the other similarly situated employees of the Defendants are entitled under the WARN Act to recover from the Defendants their wages and ERISA benefits for 60 days, none of which has been paid. The Plaintiff also brings this action against Defendants on behalf of himself and the other similarly situated former employees seeking pay for accrued but unused vacation time, the suit asserts. Posigen Developer, LLC provides residential solar and energy efficiency solutions.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James E. Huggett, Esq. MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN 300 Delaware Avenue Suite 800 Wilmington, DE 19801 Telephone: (302) 888-1112 Facsimile: (302) 888-1119 - and - Stuart J. Miller, Esq. Johnathan Miller, Esq. LANKENAU & MILLER, LLP 100 Church Street, 8th Fl. New York, NY 10007 Telephone: (212) 581-5005 Facsimile: (212) 581-2122 - and - Mary E. Olsen, Esq. M. Vance McCrary, Esq. THE GARDNER FIRM, P.C. 182 St. Francis Street, Suite 103 Mobile, AL 36602 Telephone: (251) 433-8100 Facsimile: (251) 433-8181 PROVIDENCE HEALTH: Underpays Licensed Practical Nurses, Suit Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- RENDA THORNTON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PROVIDENCE HEALTH CARE, INC., Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-00412-JRS-MJD (S.D. Ind., August 26, 2025) challenges policies and practices of the Defendant that violate the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Indiana Wage Claims Statute. The complaint is a collective action brought on behalf of the Plaintiff and other similarly situated hourly, non-exempt employees who were subjected to Defendant's automatic meal break deduction policy. But these employees do not actually receive bona fide meal breaks. Thus, the Defendant uniformly deprives these employees of overtime wages for all hours worked after 40 in a workweek in willful violation of the FLSA, says the suit. Plaintiff Thornton was employed by the Defendant in Terre Haute, Vigo County, Indiana as a Licensed Practical Nurse from the beginning of 2022 until the Defendant involuntarily terminated his employment on July 14, 2025. Providence Health Care, Inc. is a domestic nonprofit corporation headquartered in Saint Mary of the Woods, Indiana. It offers services including short-term rehab to home, long-term care, assisted living, and outpatient therapy.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert P. Kondras, Jr. HASSLER KONDRAS MILLER LLP 100 Cherry St. Terre Haute, IN 47807 Telephone: (812) 232-9691 Facsimile: (812) 234-2881 E-mail: kondras@hkmlawfirm.com RB GLOBAL: Township of Middletown Alleges Unlawful Conspiracy ------------------------------------------------------------- TOWNSHIP OF MIDDLETOWN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. RB GLOBAL, INC.; ROUSE SERVICES LLC; ROUSE ANALYTICS LLC; H&E EQUIPMENT SERVICES, INC.; HERC HOLDINGS INC.; HERC RENTALS INC.; SUNBELT RENTALS, INC.; THE HOME DEPOT, INC.; UNITED RENTALS, INC. and UNITED RENTALS (NORTH AMERICA), INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-10267 (N.D. Ill., August 27, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant under Section 1 of the Sherman Act and Sections 4 and 16 of the Clayton Act. This action arises from a per se unlawful conspiracy among the Rental Defendants, which are the largest construction equipment rental companies in the United States, and Rouse, an information services company that provides benchmarking and appraisals to the construction industry, to artificially fix, raise, maintain and/or stabilize rental prices of construction equipment rented in the United States from as early as March 31, 2021 until Defendants' unlawful conduct and its anticompetitive effects cease to persist. The Defendants effectuated their conspiracy through their collective elimination of price competition for rented construction equipment by, among other means: (i) agreeing to supply Rouse with confidential and competitively sensitive internal data, including pricing, utilization rates, inventory levels, and other key metrics in real time to power Rouse's platform; and (ii) delegating what should be independent competitive rental pricing to a common decision-maker -- Rouse. The Defendants' unlawful anticompetitive conduct artificially fixed, raised, maintained and/or stabilized rental prices of construction equipment in the United States, causing Plaintiff and members of the Class to pay supracompetitive rental prices for construction equipment. In the absence of Defendants' conspiracy, the Plaintiff and members of the class would have paid less to rent construction equipment than they did during the Class Period, says the suit. The Plaintiff rented construction equipment from one or more Defendants for use in public projects for the benefit of its residents during the Class Period. RB Global, Inc. is a publicly traded company listed on the Toronto and New York Stock Exchange. RB Global is legally domiciled in Canada and maintains its U.S. headquarters in Westchester, Illinois.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michelle C. Clerkin, Esq. SPIRO HARRISON & NELSON 1111 Lincoln Road, Suite 500 Miami Beach, FL 33139 Telephone: (786) 730-2090 Facsimile: (973) 232-0887 E-mail: mclerkin@shnlegal.com - and - Blake Hunter Yagman, Esq. SPIRO HARRISON & NELSON 40 Exchange Place, Suite 1100 New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (202) 557-1221 Facsimile: (973) 232-0887 E-mail: byagman@shnlegal.com SAINT AGNES: Faces Employment Class Suit in Cal. State Court ------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Saint Agnes Medical Center. The case is captioned as Susan Valenzuela, an individual, on behalf of herself and on behalf of all persons similarly situated v. Saint Agnes Medical Center, a Corporation, Case No. 25CECG03459 (Cal, Super., Fresno Cty., July 24, 2025), The nature of suit states Unlimited -- Other Employment. Saint Agnes offers healthcare services.[BN] SALESFORCE INC: Personal Info Exposed in Data Breach, Medina Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- ZENAIDA MEDINA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SALESFORCE, INC. and FARMERS GROUP, INC., Defendants, Case No. 3:25-cv-07245 (N.D. Cal., August 27, 2025) is a class action lawsuit on behalf of the Plaintiff and all persons who entrusted Defendant with highly sensitive personally identifiable information that was subsequently exposed in a data breach. On May 30, 2025, Defendant Salesforce alerted Defendant Farmers Group to suspicious activity involving an unauthorized actor accessing one of its databases containing Defendant Farmers Group customer information. The Plaintiff alleges the Defendants' failure to properly secure and safeguard private information that was entrusted to them, and their accompanying responsibility to store and transfer that information. The Defendants owed Plaintiff and Class Members a duty to take all reasonable and necessary measures to keep the private information they collected safe and secure from unauthorized access. Yet, the Defendants breached their duty by failing to implement or maintain adequate security practices, says the suit. Salesforce is a cloud-based software company that provides applications focused on sales, customer service, marketing automation, e-commerce, analytics, artificial intelligence, and application development, including to Defendant Farmers Group.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Kristen Lake Cardoso, Esq. Jeff Ostrow, Esq. KOPELOWITZ OSTROW P.A. One West Las Olas, Suite 500 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 525-4100 E-mail: cardoso@kolawyers.com ostrow@kolawyers.com SALESFORCE INC: Scott Alleges Unauthorized Personal Info Disclosure ------------------------------------------------------------------- MALCOLM SCOTT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SALESFORCE, INC., and DOES 1-100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 3:25-cv-07232-SK (N.D. Cal., August 27, 2025) is a class action brought by the Plaintiff, on behalf of all other individuals who had their sensitive personal information, including, at minimum, names, addresses, dates of birth, driver's license numbers, and/or partial Social Security numbers disclosed to unauthorized third parties during a data breach compromising Salesforce in or around May 2025. On May 30, 2025, Farmers Group, Inc., an American insurance company, discovered suspicious activity involving an unauthorized actor accessing one of its third-party vendor's databases containing Farmers customer information. On information and belief, that third-party vendor is Salesforce, whose software was reportedly targeted through compromised customer OAuth tokens, and/or phishing attempts utilizing fake Salesforce apps to obtain victims' login details. The Defendants' failures to ensure that their servers and systems were adequately secure fell far short of their obligations and Plaintiff's and Class members' reasonable expectations for data privacy jeopardized the security of Plaintiff's and Class member's Personal Information, and exposed Plaintiff and Class members to fraud and identity theft or the serious risk of fraud and identity theft. As a result of Defendants' conduct and the resulting data breach, Plaintiff and Class members' privacy has been invaded, their Personal Information is now in the hands of criminals, they have either suffered fraud or identity theft, or face an imminent and ongoing risk of identity theft and fraud, says the suit. Salesforce is a cloud-based software company providing its services to various corporate clients throughout the U.S.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Tina Wolfson, Esq. Robert Ahdoot, Esq. AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC 2600 W. Olive Avenue, Suite 500 Burbank, CA 91505-4521 Telephone: (310) 474-9111 Facsimile: (310) 474-8585 E-mail: twolfson@ahdootwolfson.com rahdoot@ahdootwolfson.com - and - Bradley K. King, Esq. AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC 521 Fifth Avenue, 17th Floor New York, NY 10175 Telephone: (917) 336-0171 Facsimile: (917) 336-0177 E-mail: bking@ahdootwolfson.com - and - John J. Nelson, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC 280 South Beverly Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone: (858) 209-6941 E-mail: jnelson@milberg.com - and - 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 - and - William "Billy" Peerce Howard, Esq. THE CONSUMER PROTECTION FIRM, PLLC 401 East Jackson Street, Suite 2340 Truist Place Tampa, FL 33602 Telephone: (813) 500-1500 E-mail: billy@TheConsumerProtectionFirm.com SHELDON PIZZA: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Brass Alleges ------------------------------------------------------- JARROD BRASS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SHELDON PIZZA, LLC d/b/a Domino's Pizza; PORT PIZZA, LLC d/b/a Domino's Pizza; and Sheldon Port, Defendants, Case No. 4:25-cv-01611-MWB (M.D. Pa., Aug. 28, 2025) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff Brass was employed by the Defendants as a delivery driver. Sheldon Pizza, LLC operates Domino's pizza stores throughout Pennsylvania. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Angeli Murthy, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A. 8151 Peters Road, Suite 4000 Plantation, FL 33324 Telephone: (954) 327-5369 Facsimile: (954) 327-3016 Email: AMurthy@forthepeople.com - and - C. Ryan Morgan, Esq. Jolie N. Pavlos, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A. 20 N. Orange Ave., 15th Floor P.O. Box 4979 Orlando, FL 32802-4979 Telephone: (407) 420-1414 Facsimile: (407) 245-3401 Email: RMorgan@forthepeople.com JPavlos@forthepeople.com SUNFLOWER LTD: McNamara Sues to Recoup Illegal Gambling Losses -------------------------------------------------------------- KELLY MCNAMARA, Plaintiff v. SUNFLOWER LTD., and SUNFLOWER TECHNOLOGY, INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-01757 (N.D. Ohio, August 22, 2025) is a state-wide class action seeking recovery of illegal gambling losses by Ohio residents, including Plaintiff, who played Sunflower's illegal online gambling games. Sunflower is a game developer that has created games that simulate slot machines and other gambling games. Sunflower's games operate with two forms of virtual currency -- crown coins and Sweeps Coins. Notwithstanding Sunflower's misrepresentation to the contrary, when played with sweeps coins, Sunflower's games constitute real money gambling because users can get sweeps coins by spending real money, can risk those sweeps coins on games or schemes of chance to try to win more, and can redeem their sweeps coins for cash. Sunflower's games also constitute illegal gambling when played with crown coins, because, notwithstanding Sunflower's misrepresentation to the contrary, they are redeemable for continued or additional amusement, asserts the suit. Plaintiff McNamara spent money on packages including crown coins and sweeps coins, played Sunflower's gambling games, and lost money on the games within the six months preceding the filing of this complaint. Sunflower, Ltd. and Sunflower Technology, Inc. are foreign corporations organized under the laws of Israel, with its principal place of business in Tel Aviv-Jaffa Israel.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joshua D. Rockwell, Esq. ROCKWELL LLC 47 East Wilson Bridge Road Worthington, OH 43085 Telephone: (614) 315-1970 E-mail: jrockwell@lawrockwell.com - and - Dargan M. Ware, Esq. DAVIS & NORRIS, LLP 2154 Highland Avenue South Birmingham, AL 35205 Telephone: (205) 930-9900 Facsimile: (205) 930-9989 E-mail: dware@davisnorris.com SUNWEST MILLING: Fails to Properly Pay Workers, Solorio Suit Claims ------------------------------------------------------------------- REYMUNDO SOLORIO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SUNWEST MILLING, INC.; SUNWEST FOODS, INC.; and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 25CV03108 (Cal. Super., Butte Cty., August 4, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of California Labor Code and California's Business and Professions Code including failure to pay minimum wages, failure to pay overtime wages, failure to provide meal periods, failure to permit rest breaks, failure to reimburse business expenses, failure to provide accurate itemized wage statements, failure to pay all wages due upon separation of employment, and unfair competition. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a non-exempt employee. SunWest Milling, Inc. is a rice mill facility owner and operator in California. SunWest Foods, Inc. is a diversified rice, wild rice and nut marketing firm in California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Samuel A. Wong, Esq. Kashif Haque, Esq. Jessica L. Campbell, Esq. AEGIS LAW FIRM, PC 9811 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92618 Telephone: (949) 379-6250 Facsimile: (949) 379-6251 Email: jcampbell@aegislawfirm.com SURFSHARK BV: Faces Class Suit Over Auto Renewal Law Violations --------------------------------------------------------------- Maya Perez, writing for WPN, reports that In the competitive world of virtual private networks, Surfshark has found itself entangled in a legal battle that underscores broader tensions in subscription-based services. A class-action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California accuses the company of violating California's Automatic Renewal Law by charging customers for auto-renewing subscriptions without proper consent or clear disclosures. The plaintiff, identified as California resident Joshua Brown, claims he was charged $77.88 for a renewal without adequate notification, highlighting what critics see as predatory billing practices in the tech sector. This isn't an isolated incident. Surfshark joins a growing roster of VPN providers facing similar scrutiny, including NordVPN and ExpressVPN, which have encountered lawsuits over their auto-renewal mechanisms in recent months. According to a report from TechRadar, the complaint alleges that Surfshark failed to present renewal terms in a "clear and conspicuous" manner and did not obtain explicit affirmative consent before initiating charges. Such practices, the suit argues, trap consumers into unwanted recurring payments, a tactic that has drawn regulatory ire across digital industries. The Ripple Effects on VPN Providers Industry insiders note that these lawsuits reflect a crackdown on subscription models that prioritize retention over transparency. California's law, enacted to protect consumers from surprise charges, requires companies to provide easy cancellation options and upfront details about renewals. Surfshark's case echoes complaints against other firms, where plaintiffs have pointed to hidden fees and complex opt-out processes as deliberate barriers. For Surfshark, which markets itself as a user-friendly VPN with strong privacy features, this legal challenge could tarnish its reputation among privacy-conscious users who value straightforward dealings. The broader implications extend to how VPN companies structure their revenue streams. Many rely on long-term subscriptions to maintain profitability in a market saturated with competitors offering low introductory rates. As detailed in coverage from Tom's Guide, ExpressVPN faced analogous allegations earlier this year, with claims that it unlawfully renewed subscriptions without consent, leading to calls for industry-wide reforms. Analysts suggest this pattern may prompt VPN providers to overhaul their billing systems, potentially incorporating more robust consent mechanisms or shorter trial periods to avoid litigation. Surfshark's Response and Industry Precedents Surfshark has yet to publicly comment on the lawsuit, but sources indicate the company is preparing a defense emphasizing compliance with existing regulations. In a statement referenced by TechNadu, experts predict that if the case proceeds, it could result in significant settlements or changes to auto-renewal policies. This follows a similar trajectory to NordVPN's ongoing legal woes, where a class-action suit accused the provider of deceptive pricing, as reported in Tom's Guide. For insiders, these developments signal a shift toward greater accountability, where failing to adapt could lead to financial penalties and lost customer trust. Beyond the courtroom, the VPN sector is watching closely as regulatory bodies like the Federal Trade Commission intensify oversight of subscription services. Recent FTC actions against dating apps and other platforms for similar auto-renewal issues, as noted in reports from Top Class Actions, illustrate a precedent that could influence outcomes here. Surfshark, owned by the larger Nord Security group, might leverage its resources to settle quickly, but prolonged litigation could expose internal practices and deter potential subscribers wary of hidden costs. Potential Paths Forward for the Sector Looking ahead, industry executives are debating whether these lawsuits will catalyze voluntary changes or necessitate stricter laws. Some advocate for standardized disclosure templates across subscription services to preempt legal risks. As TechRadar has explored in related coverage, the wave of suits against VPNs might indicate systemic issues in how tech firms balance growth with consumer rights. For Surfshark, resolving this matter transparently could reinforce its commitment to user privacy, a core selling point amid rising data protection concerns. Ultimately, this lawsuit serves as a cautionary tale for the digital services industry, where convenience often masks complex financial entanglements. As more consumers demand clarity in billing, VPN providers like Surfshark may need to prioritize ethical practices to sustain long-term loyalty in an increasingly litigious environment. [GN] TALLAHASSEE MEMORIAL: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Sheward Says ------------------------------------------------------------------ PAULA SHEWARD, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. TALLAHASSEE MEMORIAL HEALTHCARE, INC., and CERNER CORPORATION d/b/a ORACLE HEALTH, Defendants, Case No. 4:25-cv-00364-MW-MAF (N.D. Fla., August 27, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for its failure to properly secure and safeguard Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive protected health information and personally identifying information, and the preventable data breach of Defendants' inadequately protected computer systems. On or around January 22, 2025, cybercriminals hacked into Defendants' computer network systems and stole Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive, confidential PII and PHI stored therein. The Defendants allegedly breached their duties owed to Plaintiff and Class Members by failing to safeguard their private information they collected and maintained, including by failing to implement industry standards for data security to protect against cyberattacks, which failures allowed criminal hackers to access and steal patients' private information from Defendants' care. To recover from Defendants for these harms, the Plaintiff, on her own behalf and on behalf of the Class as defined herein, brings claims for negligence/negligence per se, breach of implied contract, invasion of privacy, and unjust enrichment, to address Defendants' inadequate safeguarding of Plaintiff's and Class Members' private information in its care. The Plaintiff and Class Members are current and former patients of Defendants who, in order to obtain healthcare services from Defendants, were and are required to entrust Defendants with their sensitive, non-public private information. Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare, Inc. is a private, nonprofit community-based healthcare system.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeff Ostrow, Esq. KOPELOWITZ OSTROW FERGUSON WEISELBERG GILBERT One West Las Olas Blvd, Suite 500 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 525-4100 E-mail: ostrow@kolawyers.com TARGET CORP: Faces Orozco Suit Over Dog Food's Deceptive Ads ------------------------------------------------------------ ANDRES OROZCO, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. TARGET CORPORATION, Case No. 2:25-cv-07254-KS (C.D. Cal., Aug. 6, 2025) is a California consumer class action for violations of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, Unfair Competition Law, and for breach of express warranty. The Defendant manufactures, distributes, advertises, markets, and sells Kindfull brand dog food products. The packaging prominently displays on the front of the label the claim that these Products contain "No Artificial Colors, Flavors, or Preservatives." According to the complaint, the statement is false. Each of the Products are made with manufactured citric acid -- an artificial preservative ingredient used in food and beverage products. The Defendant's packaging, labeling, and advertising scheme is intended to give consumers the impression that they are buying a premium product that contains "No Artificial Preservatives," says the suit. The Plaintiff, who purchased the Products in California, was allegedly deceived by Defendant's unlawful conduct and brings this action on his own behalf and on behalf of California consumers to remedy Defendant's unlawful acts. TARGET CORPORATION is an American retail corporation headquartered in Minneapolis, Minnesota.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael T. Houchin, Esq. Craig W. Straub, Esq. Zachary M. Crosner, Esq. CROSNER LEGAL, P.C. 9440 Santa Monica Blvd. Suite 301 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Telephone: (866) 276-7637 Facsimile: (310) 510-6429 E-mail: mhouchin@crosnerlegal.com craig@crosnerlegal.com zach@crosnerlegal.com TESLA INC: Faces Class Action Suit Over Securities Law Violations ----------------------------------------------------------------- Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC, a nationally recognized law firm, notifies investors that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Tesla, Inc. ("Tesla" or "the Company") (NASDAQ:TSLA) and certain of its officers. Class Definition This lawsuit seeks to recover damages against Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws on behalf of all persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Tesla securities between April 19, 2023 and June 22, 2025, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"). Such investors are encouraged to join this case by visiting the firm's site: bgandg.com/TSLA. Case Details The complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Tesla overstated the effectiveness of its autonomous driving technology; (2) there was thus a significant risk that the Company's autonomous driving vehicles, including the Robotaxi, would operate dangerously and/or in violation of traffic laws; (3) the foregoing increased the likelihood that Tesla would become subject to heightened regulatory scrutiny; (4) accordingly, Tesla's business and/or financial prospects were overstated; and (5) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. What's Next? A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to review a copy of the Complaint, you can visit the firm's site: bgandg.com/TSLA. or you may contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or his Client Relations Manager, Nathan Miller, of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC at 332-239-2660. If you suffered a loss in Tesla you have until October 3, 2025, to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as lead plaintiff. There is No Cost to You We represent investors in class actions on a contingency fee basis. That means we will ask the court to reimburse us for out-of-pocket expenses and attorneys' fees, usually a percentage of the total recovery, only if we are successful. Why Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a nationally recognized firm that represents investors in securities fraud class actions and shareholder derivative suits. Our firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors nationwide. Contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. Nathan Miller, Esq. Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC 332-239-2660 | info@bgandg.com [GN] TWILIO INC: Wins Bid to Compel Arbitration; Bender Suit Stayed -------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California grants the Defendant's motion to compel arbitration in the lawsuit titled NOAH BENDER, Plaintiff v. TWILIO INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:24-cv-04914-AMO (N.D. Cal.). Plaintiff Noah Bender brings this putative class action to represent consumers, who downloaded and used any mobile application that included Defendant Twilio's software development kit ("SDK") without its presence being disclosed. Bender alleges the Twilio SDK collects consumers' in-app search terms, search results, keystrokes, button presses, page views, and consumers' names and email addresses without their knowledge or authorization. On these allegations, the Plaintiff asserts three causes of action: (1) violation of the Wiretap Act; (2) violation of the California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act ("CDAFA"); and 3) violation of the wiretapping provision of the California Invasion of Privacy Act ("CIPA"). Twilio moves to compel arbitration pursuant to an agreement between Bender and Calm.com, Inc., the creator of the mobile application he used, which included a Twilio SDK. Judge Martinez-Olguin notes that the instant motion presents two issues. First, whether a valid agreement to arbitrate was formed between Bender and Calm.com. Second, if a valid agreement was formed, can Twilio--as a nonsignatory--move to enforce it under the theory of equitable estoppel? The Court finds no dispute of fact as to the Plaintiff's manifestation of assent. For these reasons, the Court determines Bender entered into a valid agreement to arbitrate with Calm.com. Having established the existence of a valid agreement between Bender and Calm.com, the Court turns to the question of whether Twilio, a nonsignatory, may enforce that agreement. The Court determines Twilio may enforce the agreement to arbitrate between Bender and Calm.com under the theory of equitable estoppel. For the reasons stated in this Order, the Court grants Twilio's motion to compel arbitration. The case is stayed pending arbitration. Having found the motion appropriate for determination on the papers, the Court vacates the Aug. 14, 2025 hearing. All other pending motions are terminated as moot. This Order disposes of Docket No. 19. A full-text copy of the Court's Order is available at https://tinyurl.com/yzthyjd3 from PacerMonitor.com. UNITED STATES: Stroup Sues Over Workers' Unpaid Wages ----------------------------------------------------- MARIA STROUP, Plaintiff v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-01431-RAH (Fed. Cl., August 26, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant brought on behalf of the Plaintiff and other employees similarly situated, including current and former employees of the Defendant for back pay and the overtime provisions pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. Each of the Plaintiffs is a current or former correctional worker employed by the United States Department of Justice, Bureau of Prisons, at FCC Victorville in Victorville, California. Section 7(a) of the FLSA provides that an employer, including the United States, shall compensate its employees at a rate not less than one and one-half times their regular rate for each hour employed in excess of 40 hours per week. At all or some of the times material herein, Plaintiff and other employees similarly situated have been entitled to FLSA overtime pay for all hours of work in excess of eight in a day and/or 40 in a workweek. Because the Defendant has failed to count as compensable work time these required pre-shift and post-shift tasks, the Plaintiffs have not been compensated for all hours of work as required by the FLSA, says the suit. The United States is, and at all material times has been, an employer under Title 5 of the U.S. Code. It employs, or has employed, the Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees and has its principal place of business in Washington, D.C.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David Ricksecker, Esq. McGILLIVARY STEELE ELKIN LLP 1101 Vermont Avenue, N.W. Suite 1000 Washington, D.C. 20005 Telephone: (202) 833-8855 E-mail: dr@mselaborlaw.com - and - Rachel Lerner, Esq. McGILLIVARY STEELE ELKIN LLP 1101 Vermont Avenue, N.W. Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: (202) 833-8855 E-mail: rbl@mselaborlaw.com UNITEDHEALTH GROUP: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Ainsworth Says ---------------------------------------------------------------- JANICE AINSWORTH; QUINETTA BELL; LESLIE BOWER; YOLANDA BRADFORD; DAVID BROWN; MICHELE CAIN; MARK CAMPLESE; CHRIS CASSIL; JESSICA CONN; CARRA CONNERS; LEW DIGGS; MICHELLE DURDEN; ROBERT GRAY; HEBATULLAH ISSA; JUDY KISLING; JENNIFER MARINO; JEREMY MEYER; ANTHONY MCGINTY; JERMISE MEDINA; AMOGH RAJAN; DAVID RAMIREZ; SHANNON ROBERTSON; DIANE RYLAND; TARA SAYERS; NICHOLAS SHELDON; LISA TAYLOR-AUSTIN; ROBERT THOMPSON, and RANDY VANDERLINDE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INCORPORATED; OPTUM, INC.; OPTUMINSIGHT, INC.; and CHANGE HEALTHCARE INC., Defendants, Case No. 3:25-cv-00989 (M.D. Tenn., Aug. 29, 2025) is an action against the Defendants for their failure to properly secure and safeguard Personally Identifiable Information or ("PII"), and Protected Health Information ("PHI") of the Plaintiff and the Class Members. According to the Plaintiffs in the complaint, had the Defendants employed basic, long-established, and recommended security tools, the Data Breach should have been easily thwarted. However, the Defendants' "Citrix Remote PC Access portal did not have multi-factor authentication," among other failures, meaning a ransomware group known as ALPHV had virtually no roadblocks in gaining access to the large quantities of Personal Information Defendants stored. As a result of the Defendants' inadequate security and breach of their duties and obligations, the Data Breach occurred and Plaintiffs' and Class members' Personal Information was accessed by, and disclosed to, unauthorized third-party actors, says the suit. Unitedhealth Group Incorporated UnitedHealth Group Incorporated owns and manages organized health systems. The Company provides employers products and resources to plan and administer employee benefit programs. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Burke Keaty, Esq. MORGAN AND MORGAN, P.A. 150 4th Ave North, Suite 300 Nashville, TN 37219 Telephone: (615) 490-0944 Email: bkeaty@forthepeople.com - and - Karen Hanson Riebel, Esq. LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP 100 Washington Avenue S., Suite 2200 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Telephone: (612) 339-6900 Email: khriebel@locklaw.com - and - Bryan L. Bleichner, Esq. CHESTNUT CAMBRONNE PA 100 Washington Avenue S., Suite 1700 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Telephone: (612) 339-7900 Email: bbleichner@chestnutcambronne.com - and - Brian C. Gudmundson, Esq. ZIMMERMAN REED LLP 1100 IDS Center Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 341-0400 Email: Brian.Gudmundson@zimmreed.com VERRA MOBILITY: Smith Balks at School-Bus Safety Camera Scheme -------------------------------------------------------------- RICHARD PAUL SMITH, individually, and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. VERRA MOBILITY CORPORATION; THE SCHOOL BOARD OF POLK COUNTY, FLORIDA; and THE POLK COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE; Defendants, Case No. 8:25-cv-02300 (M.D. Fla., August 27, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, Fourteenth Amendment and the Florida Constitution, and the Florida Unfair Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. The Defendants launched a school-bus "safety" camera scheme that has already generated more than 11,400 citations in Polk County, generating more than $1.3 million in civil penalties -- a large-scale revenue generator masquerading as a public safety initiative. Each Notice of Violation (NOV) issued under this program demands a $225 penalty and is formatted to resemble an official traffic citation. The NOV prominently warns, in red font, that failure to respond will result in the issuance of a Uniform Traffic Citation, at which point the financial consequences escalate to $329, with the added risk of further penalties, court costs, and potential license suspension. However, the NOV fails to clearly inform recipients that they cannot contest liability at the NOV stage. Rather, the NOV omits that fact that the only way contest liability is to allow the NOV to lapse -- thereby triggering increased penalties and greater legal risk -- in order to exercise their right to be heard. Nowhere in the NOV does it state the process to contest liability, says the suit. The complaint asserts that the actual process is flawed and unlawful. Drivers should be able to challenge an NOV without facing the risk of UTC penalties. Drivers are not provided with a meaningful opportunity to be heard before facing increased penalties. Instead, they are forced to either preemptively pay the $225 or wait for the UTC to be issued -- with no clearly presented, risk-free mechanism to contest the initial notice. The NOV also warns that payment constitutes an admission of guilt, further discouraging recipients from exercising any challenge, the suit alleges. Verra Mobility Corporation, f/k/a American Traffic Solutions, Inc., is a Delaware corporation with a principal place of business in Mesa, Arizona. Verra entered into a contract with the School Board to install and operate a school bus camera system.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Strongarone, Esq. ROBERT STRONGARONE, P.A. 20134 SW 79th Court Cutler Bay, FL 33189 Telephone: (786) 543-3223 E-mail: bob@robertstrongaronepa.com - and - Gino Moreno, Esq. Arlenys Perdomo, Esq. MORENO PERDOMO, PLLC 5000 S.W. 75th Avenue, Suite 400 Miami, FL 33155 Telephone: (786) 224-5093 E-mail: gmoreno@morenoperdomo.com aperdomo@morenoperdomo.com VGW LTD: Simonich Sues Over Illegal Online Gambling Operations -------------------------------------------------------------- DARYL SIMONICH, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. VGW, LTD; VGW HOLDINGS, US; VGW US, INC.; VGW HOLDINGS, LTD; VGW CANADA, INC.; VGW GP, LTD; VGW MALTA, LTD; VGW GAMES, LTD and VGW LUCKYLAND, INC., Defendants, Case No. 5:25-cv-01758 (N.D. Ohio, August 22, 2025) is a state-wide class action seeking recovery of illegal gambling losses by Ohio residents, including Plaintiff, who played VGW's illegal online gambling games. According to the complaint, VGW's games operate with two forms of virtual coins -- gold coins and Sweeps Coins. Notwithstanding VGW's misrepresentation to the contrary, when played with sweeps coins, VGW's games constitute real money gambling because users can get sweeps coins by spending real money, can risk those sweeps coins on games or schemes of chance to try and win more, and can redeem their sweeps coins for cash. VGW's games also constitute illegal gambling when played with gold coins, because, notwithstanding VGW's misrepresentation to the contrary, they are redeemable for continued or additional amusement, says the suit. Plaintiff Simonich spent money on packages including gold coins and sweeps coins, played VGW's gambling games, and lost money on the games within the six months preceding the filing of this complaint. VGW. Ltd is a foreign corporation headquartered in Perth, Australia. It does business through its online gambling games in all counties in Ohio.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joshua D. Rockwell, Esq. ROCKWELL LLC 47 East Wilson Bridge Road Worthington, OH 43085 Telephone: (614) 315-1970 E-mail: jrockwell@lawrockwell.com - and - John E. Norris, Esq. DAVIS & NORRIS, LLP 2154 Highland Avenue South Birmingham, AL 35205 Telephone: (205) 930-9900 Facsimile: (205) 930-9989 E-mail: jnorris@davisnorris.com VIVINT LLC: Thornton Balks at Unsolicited Telemarketing Calls ------------------------------------------------------------- DAVID THORNTON, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. VIVINT LLC, a Utah Limited Liability Company, Defendant, Case No. 3:25-cv-00346-KC (W.D. Tex., August 26, 2025) is a class action to stop Defendant's illegal practice of placing unsolicited telemarketing phone calls to people on the Do Not Call list, and to redress injuries suffered by the Class pursuant to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. As a part of its marketing, the Defendant placed multiple unsolicited phone calls soliciting Plaintiff and the putative class for its clients' services. The Defendant did not check whether these phone numbers were registered on the Federal Do Not Call Registry. By placing phone calls to people who have registered their phone numbers on the national database, the Defendant violated the privacy and statutory rights of Plaintiff and the Class, alleges the suit. Vivint LLC is a solar panel company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mark L. Javitch, Esq. JAVITCH LAW OFFICE 3 East 3rd Ave. Ste. 200 San Mateo, CA 94401 Telephone: (650) 781-8000 Facsimile: (650) 648-0705 WELLS FARGO: Files Answer, Affirmative & Other Defenses in Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION filed on August 20, 2025, its answer, affirmative and other defenses to the class action complaint filed by the Plaintiff entitled James Seethaler, Plaintiff vs. WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION and DOES 1-20, Defendant, Case No. 25-2-21271-8 SEA. The Defendant alleges that the Plaintiff's individual claims, and the claims asserted on behalf of the putative members of the proposed class set forth in the complaint, fail to state claims upon which relief may be granted, or upon which the damages and other relief sought may be awarded. Wells Fargo & Company is an American multinational financial services company.[BN] The Defendant is represented by: Douglas E. Smith, Esq. Anne E. Reuben, Esq. Laura Y. Davis, Esq. LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. One Union Square 600 University Street, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 623-3300 Facsimile: (206) 447-6965 Email: desmith@littler.com areuben@littler.com ladavis@littler.com WESTCHESTER FIRE: Faces Sage Suit Over Overcharged Pet Insurance ---------------------------------------------------------------- SAMANTHA SAGE, an individual; REKA JANOSI, an individual, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. WESTCHESTER FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY; INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA; ATLANTIC EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY; HEALTHY PAWS PET INSURANCE LLC; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-01644 (W.D. Wash., August 27, 2025) is a class action for breach of contract, insurance bad faith, and unfair business practices against the Defendants arising out of their unlawful conduct in overcharging for pet insurance sold under the brand name Healthy Paws Pet Insurance. According to the complaint, the Healthy Paws policies specifically provide that monthly premiums can only be changed "to reflect changes in the costs of veterinary medicine," and that the policy term is "continuous until cancelled." The Plaintiffs' Healthy Paws policies were initially issued and underwritten by Indemnity Insurance Company of North America and Atlantic Employers Insurance Company. Although Plaintiffs and class members did not cancel their Healthy Paws Pet Policies underwritten by Defendants Indemnity Insurance Company of North America and Atlantic Employers Insurance Company, the Defendants had these policies taken over, continued or rewritten under the name of Defendant Westchester Fire Insurance Company. The switch unlawfully facilitated an undisclosed, substantial increased premium cost. The Defendants have substantially and unlawfully increased Plaintiffs and Class members' monthly premiums, disregarding their representations, contractual promises, and rate filings. As a result of Defendants' unlawful conduct, the Plaintiffs and class members have been substantially damaged, including through premium overcharges by Defendants. The Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated for compensatory and other damages, restitution, and injunctive relief. Westchester Fire Insurance Company operates as an insurance firm, doing business in the States of Washington and New Jersey.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Joshua H. Haffner, Esq. Alfredo Torrijos, Esq. Vahan Mikayelyan, Esq. HAFFNER LAW PC 15260 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1520 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Telephone: (213) 514-5681 Facsimile: (213) 514-5682 E-mail: jhh@haffnerlawyers.com at@haffnerlawyers.com vh@haffnerlawyers.com WILLIAM R. SHARPE: Cosner Sues Over Civil Rights Violations ----------------------------------------------------------- RONALD L. COSNER; TESS F. BAILEY; GINA HOND; KASSIDY J. OHLER; GINGER D. WHITEHAIR; and MEREDITH D. WILLIAMS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PAT RYAN, in his official capacity as CEO of William R. Sharpe, Jr. Hospital, Case No. 2:25-cv-00021 (N.D.W.V., Aug. 28, 2025) alleges violation of the Civil Rights Act. The case is assigned to Judge Thomas S Kleeh, and referred to Michael John Aloi. William R. Sharpe, Jr. Hospital is a psychiatric facility in Weston, WV. The Plaintiff appears pro se.[BN] ZALE DELAWARE: Agrees to Settle TCPA Class Action Suit for $7.5MM ----------------------------------------------------------------- Nicole Aljets, writing for ClaimDepot, reports that Individuals who received telemarketing text messages from Zales while their number was listed on the National Do Not Call Registry may qualify to submit claim for up to $100 from a class action settlement. Zale Delaware Inc. agreed to pay $7,548,300 to settle a class action lawsuit alleging the company violated federal law by sending unsolicited marketing text messages to consumers whose numbers were registered on the National Do Not Call Registry. The class consists of approximately 75,483 phone numbers. Who is eligible for a Zales TCPA settlement payout? -- Class members are individuals who received more than one text message from Zale Delaware Inc. or its agents promoting the company's goods or services and did not provide their number to the company. -- Zales must have sent the text messages within a 12-month period between Oct. 15, 2020, and July 28, 2025. -- The phone number that received the messages must have been registered with the National Do Not Call Registry for at least 30 days before they received at least two text messages from Zale Delaware Inc. within a 12-month period. Who is excluded from the class? Consumers who provided their telephone number directly to Zale Delaware do not qualify to participate in the settlement. How much is the unwanted text message settlement payment? Cash payment: Approved claimants will receive a cash payment of up to $100. The settlement administrator will determine the final payment amount by the number of claims filed. How to claim a class action rebate Class members can submit a claim form online or download a PDF claim form to print, complete and mail to the settlement administrator. Settlement administrator's mailing address: Miller v. Zale Delaware, Inc., P.O. Box 301132, Los Angeles, CA 90030-1132 Claimants must submit or postmark the form by Oct. 27, 2025, and may only submit one claim per phone number. Required claim information Class members must provide the ID and PIN from their settlement notice or their phone number. Payout options Approved claimants will receive a paper check mailed to the address provided. $7.55 million TCPA class action settlement fund The settlement fund of $7,548,300 will include the following: -- Settlement administration costs: Up to $150,000 -- Attorneys' fees: Up to $2,516,100 -- Attorneys' expenses: Submitted to the court for approval at a later date -- Service award to lead plaintiff: $5,000 -- Payments to approved claimants: Remaining settlement funds Important dates -- Deadline to file a claim: Oct. 27, 2025 -- Deadline to opt out: Oct. 27, 2025 -- Final approval hearing: Nov. 17, 2025 When is the Zales unwanted text message settlement payout date? The settlement administrator will issue payments to class members with valid claims approximately 90 days after the settlement receives final approval and claim processing is complete. Why did this class action settlement happen? The lawsuit alleged Zale Delaware Inc. violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act by sending telemarketing text messages to cell phone numbers listed on the National Do Not Call Registry without consent. Zales denied any wrongdoing but agreed to settle the case to avoid cost and risk of continued litigation. [GN] ********* 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 ***