251216.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Tuesday, December 16, 2025, Vol. 27, No. 250
Headlines
100 SENSES: Jones Sues Over Blind's Equal Access to Website
AA BC BAKERY CAFE: Fernandez Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
ABBOTT LABORATORIES: Dominguez Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
AES RESTAURANT: Mortland Sues Over Disabled's Access to Property
ALL PARTIES: Thompson Appeals Case Dismissal to 3rd Circuit
AMAZON.COM INC: Asaro-Angelo Suit Removed to D. New Jersey
AMAZON.COM INC: Bid for Sealing of Class Cert. Briefing Granted
AMGEN INC: Court Narrows Claims in Antitrust Suit
ATHENA BITCOIN: Dulin Sues Over Failure to Employ Safeguards
BEBE STORES: Isbell Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
BELLINGHAM MARINE: Class Cert Bid Filing in Lopez Due Jan. 4, 2027
BISHOP GOLD: Class Settlement in Pitts Suit Gets Final Nod
BLACKSTONE CONSULTING: Alhaj Suit Removed to C.D. California
BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Sangenito Sues Over Defective Vehicles
CANON USA: Smouse Files Suit Over Data Breach
CAPITAL ONE: Class Cert Scheduling Order Entered
CENTRAL ONE FEDERAL: Scafidi Files Suit in Mass. Super. Ct.
CENTRAL PARK WEST: Alexandria Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
CLOUDFLARE INC: Aids Facebook in the Disclosure of NCII, Suit Says
COGIR MANAGEMENT: Hazel Suit Removed to E.D. California
COLGATE-PALMOLIVE: Caruso Sues Over Misleading Statements
COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS: More Time to File Class Cert Bid Sought
COMPSOURCE: Trivestco Energy Files Suit in Okla. Dist. Ct.
CONDUENT INCORPORATED: Luckett Files Suit in S.D. New York
CONSOLIDATED COMMUNICATIONS: Russell Seeks Technicians' Unpaid OT
COVANTAGE CREDIT: Noreika Files Suit Over Data Breach
CTC TRIAD INC: Henderson Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
CURRENEX INC: Seeks to Seal Class Cert Exhibits in Edmar Suit
DEACONESS ILLINOIS: Class Scheduling & Discovery Order Entered
DELAWARE DOUBLETREE: Mattera Sues Over Disabled's Access Barriers
DEXCOM INC: Boston Retirement Sues Over Exchange Act Breach
EATON STEEL: Dean Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime Compensation
EVENFLO COMPANY: Toney Sues Over Slim 360 Car Seats' Choking Hazard
EVERGREEN ALLIANCE: Conant Suit Removed to N.D. California
EXPRESS SCRIPTS: Time to Reply to Class Cert Denial Bid Extended
FASTENAL COMPANY: Hawkins-Brentt Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
FCA US: Class Settlement in Thompson Suit Gets Initial Nod
FIRST STUDENT: Singleton Suit Removed to D. South Carolina
FORTUNE SENIOR: Herrera Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
FORWARD AIR CORP: Settlement Reached in Shareholder Suit
GALAXY DEVELOPERS: Daquilema Sues to Recover Wages Damages
GATEWAYS HOSPITAL: Watson Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
GLOBAL E-TRADING: Class Settlement in Sihler Gets Final Nod
GLOBE LIFE INC: Faces Consolidated Securities Suit in Texas Court
GTV MEDIA GROUP: Dong Suit Removed to S.D. New York
GULFPORT ENERGY: Sued over Royalties Shortpayments
H & M FASHION USA: Murphy Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
HASBRO INC: Pension Fund Files Securities Suit over SEC Disclosures
HERTZ CORP: Class Cert Discovery in Sconce Due April 17, 2026
HUMANA INC: Faces Consolidated Securities Suit over Disclosures
IDAHO: Faces Suit Over Failure to Provide Mental Illness Services
J C MASTER INC: Chirinos Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
J.A. ARGETAKIS: Underpays Construction Workers, Ramirez Suit Says
J.A.K.'S PUPPIES: Plaintiffs Must File Default Judgment
JEFF RUBY: Lamb Class Certification Bid Terminated
JEFFERY EVANS: Vividor Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
JILL PLATNER: Alexandria Seeks Blind's Equal Access to Website
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: L.S. Files Suit in D. New Jersey
KALSHI INC: Pelayo Sues Over Illegal Sports Gambling
KEURIG DR PEPPER: Gray Sues Over Deceptive Conduct
KIMBERLY-CLARK CORP: Burns Sues Over Deceptive Marketing
KINDRED SPIRITS: Romero-Acosta Suit Seeks Class Action Status
KNICKERBOCKER CLOTHING: Valencia Balks at Website's Access Barriers
KOHL'S INC: Mejico Suit Removed to S.D. California
KRISTI NOEM: Class Cert. Hearing Continued to Jan. 16, 2026
LANCASTER SNF HEALTHCARE: Talley Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
LANDCARE USA: Class Cert. Bid in Resendiz Due May 22, 2026
LEGEND SENIOR LIVING: Jackson Files Suit in D. Kansas
LEVAIN BAKERY: Settlement Class in Get Douglass Gets Certification
LEVENGER COMPANY: Blind Can't Access Website, Randolph Alleges
LEW THOMPSON & SON: Avina Suit Removed to E.D. California
LIBERTY MUTUAL: Watts Bid to Certify Class Partly OK'd
LIFESTANCE HEALTH: Plaintiffs Seek Initial OK of Revised Deal
LIGHT & WONDER INC: Faces Antitrust Suit over Card Shuffler Patent
LIGHTBUZZ E-COMMERCE: Perkins Sues Over Fictitious Reference Prices
LITTLE CAESAR: Class Cert. Hearing in Cuevas Set for March 17, 2026
LIVERAMP HOLDINGS: Faces Riganian Data Privacy Suit in California
LORI'S GIFTS: Burrell Sues Over Failure to Pay Compensation
LOS ANGELES COLLECTIVE: Trippett Sues Over Inaccessible Website
LUCKY SHOT: Faces Senior Suit Over Blind-Inaccessible Online Store
MAGIC SPOON INC: Senior Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
MAROHL CONSTRUCTION: Malsack Sues Over Physical Barriers
MARQUIS SOFTWARE: Domenichello Sues Over Failure to Secure PII
MARQUIS SOFTWARE: Raucci Sues Over Data Breach
MARQUIS SOFTWARE: Vines Sues Over Data Breach
MAXIMUS EDUCATION: Chen Sues Over Disclosure of Information
MDL 3162: Class Suit Settlement Admin. Litig. Centralized in D.D.C.
MEDVET FOR PETS: Conwell Suit Removed to N.D. California
MERCEDES-BENZ USA: Jamil Seeks Class Certification Bid Ruling
MONTGOMERY TRANSPORTATION: Marin Sues Over Layoff Without Notice
MONTGOMERY TRANSPORTATION: Padgett Sues Over WARN Act Breach
NAVIENT CORP: Ballard Allowed Leave to File Class Memo Under Seal
NETFLIX INC: Class Suit Seeks to Block $72-Bil. Warner Bros. Merger
NEW HO WAH: Hernandez Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages for Delivery Persons
NEW YORK, NY: Faces Riley Suit Over Denial of Due Process of Law
NEW YORK, NY: Minor Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
NORWAY SAVINGS: Boutot Files Suit Over Data Breach
NOWON INC: Anderson Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
NVIDIA CORP: Ted Sues Over Unlawful Use of Copyrighted Videos
ONTRAC LOGISTICS: Vallarta Suit Transferred to N.D. California
ORACLE CORP: Faces Suit Over Compromised Personal, Health Info
PAPA MURPHY'S: Kambick Files FCRA Suit in E.D. California
PARKWOOD LANDSCAPE: Dickinson Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
PARSONS SERVICES: Menjivar Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
PILOT TRAVEL: Pimentel Gambling Suit Removed to S.D. Florida
PRAIRIE FIELD: Bell Suit Removed to D. New Mexico
PRIVIAL MEDICAL GROUP: Parker Files Suit in Tex. Dist. Ct.
PURFOODS LLC: Settlement in Douglas Gets Final Nod
QUINTESSA LLC: Bland Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Oklahoma
SAMWOOJUNG LLC: Alexandria Sues Over Online Store's Access Barriers
SAN JACINTO: Pumpage Fee "Unconstitutional," Titter-Bell Claims
SCOTT HARRIS: Faces Tomsons Wage-and-Hour Suit in N.D. Ill.
SECURICO LIFE INSURANCE: Bahr TCPA Suit Transferred to W.D. Texas
SLEEP NUMBER CORP: Court Dismisses Consumer Suit over Sale Tag
SRO MANAGEMENT: Blind Users Can't Access Website, Solis Suit Says
STAINLESS FOUNDRY: Underpays Maintenance Technicians, Ryan Claims
SUSHI VIDA: Fernandez Sues Over Blind's Equal Access to Website
SYNOPSYS: New England Teamsters Sues Over Misleading Statements
TARGET CORP: Class Cert Bid Filing in Kelly Due Dec. 19
TARGET CORP: Riviera Suit Transferred to D. Minnesota
TEQUILEROS GROUP: Hernandez Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
TERADATA CORPORATION: Court Dismisses Ostrander Suit
TEVA PHARMACEUTICAL: Settlement Awaits Prelim Approval
TINDER INC: Settles Consumer Suit for $60.5MM
ULTA SALON: Repperger Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
UNDERDOG SPORTS: Kentucky Gambling Suit Removed to E.D. Kentucky
UNION PACIFIC: Williams Suit Removed to D. South Carolina
UNITED STATES: Molina Class Cert Bid Tossed w/o Prejudice
UNITED STATES: Ramos Seeks Leave to File Supplemental Briefing
WEL COMPANIES INC: Lamb Files Suit in E.D. Wisconsin
WEST BEND: Agrees to Settle Nonmaterial Depreciation Class Suit
WPP PLC: Faces Teamsters Suit Over 18% Decline of ADRs' Price
WRAY INC: Visually Impaired Can't Access Website, Alexandria Says
*********
100 SENSES: Jones Sues Over Blind's Equal Access to Website
-----------------------------------------------------------
CLAY LEE JONES, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 100 SENSES, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-09875 (S.D.N.Y., November 26, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, the New York City Human Rights Law, and
declaratory relief.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website,
www.100senses.com, contains access barriers which hinder the
Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online
goods, content, and services offered to the public through the
website. The accessibility issues on the website include but not
limited to: missing alt-text, hidden elements on web pages,
incorrectly formatted lists, unannounced pop ups, unclear labels
for interactive elements, and the requirement that some events be
performed solely with a mouse.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain
accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals.
100 Senses, Inc. is a company that sells online goods and services,
doing business in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
AA BC BAKERY CAFE: Fernandez Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Felipe Fernandez, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. AA BC BAKERY CAFE CORP., Case No. 1:25-cv-09888
(S.D.N.Y., Nov. 26, 2025), is brought against Defendant for its
failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website to
be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and
other blind or visually-impaired people.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to the Website, and
therefore denial of the goods and services offered thereby, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"). Because Defendant's website,
www.kobakoreanbbq.com (the "Website"), is not equally accessible to
blind and visually impaired consumers, it violates the ADA.
Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using the
computer.
The Defendant is a company that owns and operates
www.kobakoreanbbq.com (its "Website"), offering features which
should allow all consumers to access the services that Defendant
offers.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Fax: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
ABBOTT LABORATORIES: Dominguez Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Kassandra Dominguez, individually, and on behalf of others
similarly situated v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES, an Illinois corporation,
Case No. 1:25-cv-14388 (N.D. Ill., Nov. 25, 2025), is brought to
recover unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages,
attorney's fees, costs, and other relief as appropriate under the
Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA").
The Plaintiff and those similarly situated are entitled to overtime
pay equal to 1.5 times their regular rate of pay for hours worked
in excess of 40 hours per week. The 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 Award Pay and other non-discretionary
remuneration for overtime rates as required by the FLSA. As a
result of these prima facie FLSA violations, Defendant is liable to
Plaintiff and those similarly situated for unpaid wages, liquidated
damages, reasonable attorney's fees and costs, interest, and any
other relief deemed appropriate by the Court, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant from April 11, 2021 through
June 3, 2025 as a warehouse associate.
The Defendant is an innovator and manufacturer of health-related
products and technologies.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew L. Turner, Esq.
SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
One Town Square, 17th Floor
Southfield, MI 48076
Phone: (248) 746-4039
Fax: (248) 746-4050
Email: mturner@sommerspc.com
AES RESTAURANT: Mortland Sues Over Disabled's Access to Property
----------------------------------------------------------------
DEREK MORTLAND, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. AES RESTAURANT GROUP, LLC and FOCUS REALTY
GROUP LLC, Defendants, Case No. 4:25-cv-00061 (N.D. Ind., November
28, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violations
of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Indiana Civil Rights
Law.
According to the complaint, the Defendants have failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate their facilities to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other
persons with disabilities. The Defendants have continued to
discriminate against people who are disabled in ways that block
them from access and use of their properties and business. The
Plaintiff and similarly situated disabled individuals encountered
architectural barriers in common areas such parking and accessible
routes, restrooms, and dining.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek injunctive relief to remove
the existing architectural barriers to the physically disabled when
such removal is readily achievable for the place of public
accommodation.
AES Restaurant Group, LLC is a restaurant operator located at 4066
South St., Lafayette, Indiana.
Focus Realty Group LLC is a commercial property owner and operator
doing business in Indiana. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Owen B. Dunn, Jr., Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF OWEN DUNN, JR.
The Offices of Unit C
6800 W. Central Ave., Suite C-1
Toledo, OH 43617
Telephone: (419) 241-9661
Facsimile: (419) 241-9737
Email: obdjr@owendunnlaw.com
ALL PARTIES: Thompson Appeals Case Dismissal to 3rd Circuit
-----------------------------------------------------------
ARTHUR THOMPSON is taking an appeal from a court order dismissing
his lawsuit entitled Arthur Thompson, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. All Parties Involved in
Arrest and Prosecution of Arthur Thompson and all Others Similarly
Situated, Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-05665, in the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
The suit is brought against the Defendant for alleged violation of
prisoner's civil rights.
On Nov. 12, 2025, Judge Karen S. Marston dismissed the case without
prejudice because Thompson, a non-lawyer who is proceeding pro se,
may not pursue claims on behalf of others, including by way of a
class action. All claims raised on Thompson's own behalf are
dismissed without prejudice to Thompson pursuing those claims in
his previously-filed pending civil actions. The motion to proceed
in forma pauperis is denied as moot.
The appellate case is entitled Arthur Thompson v. All Parties
Involved in Arrest and Prosecution of Arthur Thompson and all
Others Similarly Situated, Case No. 25-3335, in the United States
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, filed on November 28, 2025.
[BN]
Plaintiff-Appellant ARTHUR THOMPSON, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, appears pro se.
AMAZON.COM INC: Asaro-Angelo Suit Removed to D. New Jersey
----------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Robert Asaro-Angelo, Commissioner of the New
Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development, and other
similar situated v. AMAZON.COM, INC., and AMAZON LOGISTICS, INC.,
Case No. ESX-L-008049-25 was removed from the Superior Court of New
Jersey, Essex County, to the United States District Court for
District of New Jersey on Nov. 26, 2025, and assigned Case No.
2:25-cv-18014.
The Complaint invokes a state statute that expressly authorizes
class wide relief and seeks individualized monetary recovery on
behalf of thousands of Amazon Flex delivery partners.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Rachel Seaton Brownell, Esq.
LITTLER MENDELSON P.C.
1085 Raymond Blvd., One Newark Center, 8th Floor
Newark, NJ 07102
Phone: 973.848.4762
Facsimile: 973.643.5626
Email: RSBrownell@littler.com
- and -
Jason C. Schwartz, Esq.
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
1700 M Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
Phone: 202.955.8500
Facsimile: 202.467.0539
Email: JSchwartz@gibsondunn.com
AMAZON.COM INC: Bid for Sealing of Class Cert. Briefing Granted
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re Amazon.com, Inc. eBook Antitrust
Litigation, Case No. 1:21-cv-00351-GHW-VF (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon.
Judge Figueredo entered an order granting joint stipulation and
order regarding sealing of class certification briefing.
The Parties have met and conferred with respect to the upcoming
briefing on class certification, and anticipate that their briefs,
declarations, and exhibits will quote from and/or describe in
detail a significant amount of information that has been designated
as Confidential or Highly Confidential by either a Party or other
Producing Party, as those terms are defined in the Protective
Order.
Accordingly, in order to ensure that such materials are treated
appropriately under the Protective Order, and to reduce burdens on
the Court, the Parties, and any other Producing Parties, the
Parties and their respective counsel stipulate and agree to the
following procedure for filing and sealing in connection with the
class certification briefing, subject to the Court's approval.
Each Party will provisionally file under seal its class
certification briefs (including any opening, response, and reply
briefs), expert declarations or reports, exhibits, and all other
evidence and declarations on which that Party relies that contain
material designated Confidential or Highly Confidential-Attorneys'
Eyes Only by any Party or other Producing Party.
Amazon shall propose sealing recommendations for (a) all Amazon
sensitive information and/or information designated by Amazon under
the Protective Order contained in both Plaintiffs' Class
Certification Papers and Amazon's Class Certification Papers; and
(b) all sensitive information and/or information designated by or
pertaining to Producing Parties under the Protective Order
contained in Amazon's Class Certification Papers, after meeting and
conferring with such Producing Parties regarding the need to file
such sensitive or designated material under seal.
Amazon.com is a global technology company primarily involved in the
sale of a range of products and services.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=EYS4aA at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Steve W. Berman, Esq.
Barbara A. Mahoney, Esq.
Nathan Emmons, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
1301 Second Avenue, Suite 2000
Seattle, WA 98101
Telephone: (206) 623-7292
Facsimile: (206) 623-0594
E-mail: steve@hbsslaw.com
barbaram@hbsslaw.com
nathane@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Joseph M. Vanek, Esq.
Paul E. Slater, Esq.
Eamon P. Kelly, Esq.
Phillip F. Cramer, Esq.
James Almon, Esq.
SPERLING & SLATER, LLC
55 W. Monroe Street, 32nd Floor
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: (312) 641-3200
Facsimile: (312) 641-6492
E-mail: jvanek@sperling-law.com
pes@sperling-law.com
ekelly@sperling-law.com
pcramer@sperling-law.com
jalmon@sperling-law.com
The Defendant is represented by:
John E. Schmidtlein, Esq.
Jonathan B. Pitt, Esq.
Carl R. Metz, Esq.
WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP
680 Maine Avenue, S.W.
Washington, DC 20024
Telephone: (202) 434-5000
Facsimile: (202) 434-5029
E-mail: JSchmidtlein@wc.com
JPitt@wc.com
CMetz@wc.com
AMGEN INC: Court Narrows Claims in Antitrust Suit
-------------------------------------------------
Amgen Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 5, 2025, that on August 6, 2024,
CareFirst of Maryland, Inc., Group Hospitalization and Medical
Services, Inc., and CareFirst BlueChoice, Inc., filed a class
action antitrust lawsuit against Amgen Inc., Amgen Manufacturing,
Limited (corrected to Amgen Manufacturing Limited LLC in
CareFirst's amended complaint on October 11, 2024), and Immunex
Corporation in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Virginia, alleging federal and state antitrust claims and state
consumer protection claims.
On September 30, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia issued an order granting in part and denying
in part Amgen’s motion to dismiss. The court dismissed the
plaintiffs' antitrust claim under Puerto Rico law, and their unjust
enrichment claims under the laws of seven states and Puerto Rico,
but otherwise permitted the plaintiffs' claims to proceed.
The plaintiffs allege that, in 2004, Amgen entered into an
anticompetitive agreement with certain F. Hoffman/La Roche AG
entities and other parties that provided Amgen with rights to
Roche's patents in a manner that enabled Amgen to allegedly
unlawfully extend the life of patents applicable to the tumor
necrosis factor blocker drug, etanercept (ENBREL) and, thereby,
delay biosimilar entry.
On November 4, 2024, Amgen filed a motion to dismiss, and
plaintiffs thereafter filed an amended complaint on November 25,
2024. On January 8, 2025, Amgen filed a motion to dismiss the
amended complaint.
Amgen Inc. is a global biotechnology company into human
therapeutics as its only business segment.
ATHENA BITCOIN: Dulin Sues Over Failure to Employ Safeguards
------------------------------------------------------------
Tammy Dulin, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated
v. ATHENA BITCOIN, INC., Case No. 3:25-cv-02587-JZ (N.D. Ohio, Nov.
25, 2025), is brought arising from the Defendant's knowing
facilitation of, and profiteering from, rampant "impersonation" and
tech-support scams conducted through its cash-to-crypto kiosks, and
from the company's deliberate failure to employ reasonable, readily
available safeguards to prevent predictable
victimization--particularly of older adults.
Athena has had actual knowledge for years that its Bitcoin ATMs are
regularly used as the payment rail of choice for impersonation
frauds especially those targeting people 60 and older--because
kiosk transactions are immediate, non-custodial, and effectively
irreversible once transmitted. Athena has publicly acknowledged
receiving "numerous reports of fraud per month" and has described,
in chillingly precise terms, the scam playbook: a victim panicked
by fabricated legal or financial peril; constant phone supervision
by the scammer; withdrawal of large sums of cash; and deposit, one
bill at a time, at an identified Bitcoin ATM to a QR code supplied
by the perpetrator.
The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of herself and similarly
situated class members in Ohio to obtain monetary, injunctive, and
equitable relief. Plaintiff asserts claims under state law,
including negligence, products liability, civil theft for receiving
stolen property, conversion, unjust enrichment, violations of the
Ohio Corrupt Practices Act, and civil conspiracy.
The Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and treble damages,
restitution and disgorgement of ill-gotten fees, and to obtain
forward-looking relief requiring Athena to implement reasonable
transaction holds and reversals, tiered limits and velocity
controls, enhanced identity and wallet-ownership verification, and
other effective safeguards that Athena has acknowledged are both
feasible and necessary to protect consumers--particularly older
adults--from the predictable, continuing misuse of its kiosks, says
the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a senior resident of Marion County, Ohio, was
deceived on June 26, 2025 by a "bank reimbursement/tech support"
impersonation scheme.
Athena is a money services business registered with the U.S.
Department of the Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
(FinCEN) and operates a large network of cash-to-crypto kiosks
("Bitcoin ATMs" or "ATMs") throughout the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Brian D. Flick, Esq.
Marita I. Ramirez, Esq.
Marc E. Dann, Esq.
DANNLAW
15000 Madison Avenue
Lakewood, OH 44107
Phone: (216) 373-0539
E-Fax: (216) 373-0536
Email: notices@dannlaw.com
BEBE STORES: Isbell Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
---------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Kelly Isbell and Haley Henderson, on their
own behalf and on behalf of others similarly situated v. BEBE
STORES, INC., Case No. 25-2-31207-1 SEA was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County, to the
United States District Court for Western District of Washington on
Nov. 25, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02388.
The Plaintiffs generally allege that Bebe violated Washington's
Commercial Electronic Mail Act ("CEMA") and Washington's Consumer
Protection Act ("CPA") by sending marketing emails to Washington
consumers with false and misleading information in the subject
lines.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Shawn Larsen-Bright, Esq.
Benjamin D. Greenberg, Esq.
DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP
701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 6100
Seattle, WA 98104
Phone: (206) 903-8800
Email: larsen.bright.shawn@dorsey.com
greenberg.ben@dorsey.com
BELLINGHAM MARINE: Class Cert Bid Filing in Lopez Due Jan. 4, 2027
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ALBERTO LOPEZ, v.
BELLINGHAM MARINE INDUSTRIES INC., Case No. 2:25-cv-00518-DAD-JDP
(E.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Drozd entered a scheduling order:
The parties shall serve their initial disclosures pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 26(a)(1) no later than Dec.
15, 2025.
A motion for class certification shall be filed no later than Jan.
4, 2027, which is a date proposed by the plaintiff. Any opposition
to that motion shall be filed by Feb. 4, 2027, which is a date
proposed by the plaintiff. Any reply to that opposition shall be
filed by no later than March 4, 2027, a date proposed by the
plaintiff.
All fact discovery shall be completed no later than Oct. 4, 2027.
All expert discovery shall be completed no later than Feb. 4,
2028.
All motions, except motions for continuances, temporary restraining
orders, or other emergency applications, shall be filed on or
before March 20, 2028
The final pretrial conference is set for Aug. 28, 2028 at 1:30 p.m.
A jury trial is set for Oct. 31, 2028, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 4
before District Court Judge Dale A. Drozd.
Bellingham is a construction company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=1AerXy at no extra
charge.[CC]
BISHOP GOLD: Class Settlement in Pitts Suit Gets Final Nod
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JENNIFER PITTS,
Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
BISHOP GOLD GROUP, LLC, Case No. 3:24-cv-00128-MCR-HTC (N.D. Fla.),
the Hon. Judge M. Casey Rodgers entered an order granting final
approval of class action settlement and final judgment:
1. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, the Court finally certifies
the Settlement Class, as identified in the Settlement
Agreement:
"All persons in the United States who, during the four years
prior to the filing of this action, (1) received one or more
text messages from the Defendant; (2) after requesting to not
receive text messages from Defendant by responding with a
"stop" or "unsubscribe" request; and (3) who did not re-opt
in to receive text messages prior to receipt of the text
message(s)."
Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (1) the trial judge
and magistrate judge presiding over this case; (2) Defendant,
as well as any parent, subsidiary, affiliate, or control
person of the Defendant, and the officers, directors, agents,
members, managers, servants, or employees of Defendant; (3)
any of the Released Parties; (4) the immediate family of any
such person(s); and (5) Plaintiff's Counsel, their employees,
and their immediate family.
2. The Court appoints Manuel S. Hiraldo of Hiraldo P.A., and
Michael Eisenband of Eisenband Law P.A., as Class Counsel for
the Settlement Class.
3. The Court designates Plaintiff Jennifer Pitts as the Class
Representative.
4. The Court approves Class Counsel's request for attorneys'
fees, costs, and expenses, and awards Class Counsel $666,000
as reasonable attorneys' fees, which consists of 33.3% of the
Settlement Fund, and $6,952.90 in costs expended by Class
Counsel in prosecuting this matter.
5. The Court awards a Service Award in the amount of $7,500 to
the Plaintiff Jennifer Pitts payable pursuant to the terms of
the Settlement Agreement and pursuant to her claims under the
Florida Telephone Solicitations Act only.
Bishop provides assistance on investing in precious metals.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=8UMDAQ at no extra
charge.[CC]
BLACKSTONE CONSULTING: Alhaj Suit Removed to C.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Ahmed Alhaj, individually and on behalf of
others similarly situated v. BLACKSTONE CONSULTING, INC., a
California corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No.
CIVSB2530326 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California, County of San Bernardino, to the United States District
Court for Central District of California on Nov. 26, 2025, and
assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-11414.
In the Complaint, Plaintiff asserts nine causes of action: failure
to pay overtime, failure to pay minimum wage, failure to provide
meal breaks, failure to provide rest breaks, failure to pay all
wages due upon termination, failure to provide accurate wage
statements, failure to timely pay wages, failure to reimburse
necessary business-related expenses and costs, and violations of
the Business and Professions Code.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Pankit Doshi, Esq.
Danielle Cummins, Esq.
Nicholas Neathamer, Esq.
MCDERMOTT WILL & SCHULTE LLP
415 Mission St., Suite 5600
San Francisco, CA 94105-2616
Phone: +1 628 218 3800
Facsimile: +1 628 877 0107
Email: pdoshi@mwe.com
Dacummins@mwe.com
nneathamer@mwe.com
BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Sangenito Sues Over Defective Vehicles
------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Sangenito, Zhargal Dampilon, Richard Grad, and Kevin Finley,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. BMW
OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC, and BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AG, Case No.
2:25-cv-17858 (D.N.J., Nov. 24, 2025), is brought on behalf of all
persons who purchased and/or leased certain vehicles equipped with
transfer cases that have substantially the same design and are
uniformly defective, and were designed, manufactured, distributed,
warranted, marketed, and sold by BMW of North America, LLC ("BMW
NA") and Bayerische Motoren Werke AG ("BMW AG") (collectively,
"BMW").
The Class Vehicles' transfer cases have a uniform defect that
causes the clutch system to improperly transmit torque between the
front and rear wheels (the "Transfer Case Defect"). The Transfer
Case Defect causes users to experience a jerking or shuddering
sensation when driving the vehicle, especially when shifting gears,
making turns, or driving at low speeds, which adversely affects the
drivability of the Class Vehicles and causes the transfer cases to
fail and require replacement prematurely.
As a result of BMW's alleged misconduct, Plaintiffs and Class
Members were harmed and suffered a diminution of value at the point
of sale in that Plaintiffs and Class Members paid for vehicles that
were merchantable and fit for their ordinary purpose and free of
material defects, but received another, less valuable vehicle with
a Transfer Case Defect.
The Plaintiffs and Class Members have also suffered actual injury
in that they have paid (and will continue to be required to pay)
out-of pocket to replace fluid that should not have to be replaced
and to replace the defective transfer cases during the expected
useful life of the vehicles, and/or were or will be forced to stop
or limit using their vehicles prematurely or sell them at steep
discounts, says the complaint.
The Plaintiffs purchased one of Class Vehicle.
BMW NA is a wholly-owned subsidiary of BMW AG.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
James E. Cecchi, Esq.
CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI, BRODY & AGNELLO, P.C.
5 Becker Farm Road
Roseland, NJ 07068
Phone: (973) 994-1700
Email: jcecchi@carellabyrne.com
- and -
Zachary A. Jacobs, Esq.
CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI, BRODY & AGNELLO, P.C.
222 S. Riverside Plaza,
Chicago, IL 60606
Phone: (973) 994-1700
Email: zjacobs@carellabyrne.com
- and -
Jonathan D. Selbin, Esq.
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10013-1413
Phone: (212) 355-9000
Email: jselbin@lchb.com
- and -
Kenneth S. Byrd, Esq.
Ellie E. Olson, Esq.
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
222 Second Avenue South, Suite 1640
Nashville, TN 37201
Phone: (615) 313-9000
Email: kbyrd@lchb.com
eolson@lchb.com
- and -
Nathan Heber, Esq.
You-Jin Han, Esq.
HEBER HAN, P.C.
3355 Lenox Road NE, Suite 750
Atlanta, GA 30326
Phone: (470) 805-1468
Email: nathan@heberhan.com
you-jin@heberhan.com
CANON USA: Smouse Files Suit Over Data Breach
---------------------------------------------
CAROL SMOUSE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CANON U.S.A., INC. and ORACLE CORPORATION,
Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-1952 (W.D. Tex., December 1, 2025) is
a class action seeking redress for the Defendants' unlawful
conduct, and asserting claims for: (i) negligence, (ii) breach of
implied contract, and (iii) unjust enrichment.
The complaint relates that Canon is an enterprise consumer of
Oracle and uses Oracle's software for business and commercial
purposes. As such, Oracle stores a litany of highly sensitive
personal identifiable information ("PII") about Canon's current and
former employees.
But such PII was inadequately protected and thus exposed to
cybercriminals in a data breach, asserts the complaint. The Private
Information was acquired by the cyber-criminal gang Cl0p who
perpetrated the attack and remains in the hands of those
cyber-criminals. Specifically, in late September 2025, Cl0p began
listing alleged victims of the Oracle EBS intrusion on its leak
site, ultimately naming 29 organizations across multiple sectors,
including universities, transportation companies, industrial firms,
and automotive suppliers such as Canon.
The complaint alleges that the Defendants breached their respective
duties and obligations by failing, in one or more of the following
ways: (1) failing to design, implement, monitor, and maintain
reasonable network safeguards against foreseeable threats; (2)
failing to design, implement, and maintain reasonable data
retention policies; (3) failing to adequately train staff on data
security; (4) failing to comply with industry-standard data
security practices; (5) failing to warn Plaintiff and Class Members
of Defendants' inadequate data security practices; (6) failing to
encrypt or adequately encrypt the PII; (7) failing to recognize or
detect that the network had been compromised and accessed its
network in a timely manner to mitigate the harm; (8) failing to
utilize widely available software able to detect and prevent this
type of attack, and (9) otherwise failing to secure the hardware
using reasonable and effective data security procedures free of
foreseeable vulnerabilities and data security incidents.
The Defendants, through their employees, disregarded the rights of
Plaintiff and Class Members by, among other things, intentionally,
willfully, recklessly, or negligently failing to take adequate and
reasonable measures to ensure its data systems were protected
against unauthorized intrusions, the complaint says. Defendants
also failed to disclose that they did not have adequately robust
computer systems and security practices to safeguard Plaintiff's
and Class Members' Private Information and failed to take standard
and reasonably available steps to prevent the Data Breach. In
addition, Defendants' employees failed to properly monitor the
computer network and systems that housed the Private Information.
Had Defendants' employees (presumably in the IT department)
properly monitored its property, it would have discovered the
intrusion sooner, the complaint states.
Plaintiff Carol Smouse is a citizen of Germantown, Maryland and was
an employee of Canon.
Defendant Canon is a global imaging and optical technology company
that develops and manufactures cameras, printers, medical imaging
systems, and related solutions.
Defendant Oracle is a multinational technology and enterprise
software firm.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Leigh S. Montgomery, Esq.
EKSM, LLP
4200 Montrose Blvd., Suite 200
Houston, TX 77006
Telephone: (888) 350-3931
Facsimile: (888) 276-3455
E-mail: lmontgomery@eksm.com
CAPITAL ONE: Class Cert Scheduling Order Entered
------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as AZLYNNE HOARD and CHIQUITA
PLENTY, individually and on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated, v. CAPITAL ONE, N.A., Case No.
3:24-cv-01133-JLS-VET (S.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Sammartino
entered a scheduling order regarding motion for class certification
and Daubert motions:
The Court sets the following briefing schedule for the Parties'
Daubert Motions:
1. The Parties shall file responses in opposition on or before
Jan. 12, 2026.
2. The Parties shall file replies, if any, on or before Feb. 2,
2026.
Capital is a subsidiary of the financial holding company Capital
One Financial Corporation.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=riNu0L at no extra
charge.[CC]
CENTRAL ONE FEDERAL: Scafidi Files Suit in Mass. Super. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Central One Federal
Credit Union. The case is styled as Christine Scafidi, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Central One
Federal Credit Union, Case No. 2585CV01652 (Mass. Super. Ct.,
Worcester Cty., Nov. 25, 2025).
The nature of suit is stated as Torts.
Central One Federal Credit Union -- https://www.centralfcu.com/ --
offers community-focused banking in Massachusetts with personal &
business accounts, auto loans, home equity, and digital tools.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gary Suzutaro Ishimoto, Esq.
LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
33 Whitehall Street, 17th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Phone: (212) 363-7500
CENTRAL PARK WEST: Alexandria Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
------------------------------------------------------------------
Erika Alexandria, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. CENTRAL PARK WEST DENTAL STUDIO, PLLC, Case No.
1:25-cv-09856 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 26, 2025), is brought against
Defendant for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and
operate its website to be fully accessible to and independently
usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired people.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and
therefore denial of its services offered thereby, is a violation of
Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act
("ADA"). Because Defendant's website, www.cpwdentalstudio.com (the
"Website"), is not equally accessible to blind and visually
impaired consumers, it violates the ADA. The Plaintiff seeks a
permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate
policies, practices, and procedures so Defendant's website will
become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired
consumers, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using the
computer.
The Defendant is a company that owns and operates
www.cpwdentalstudio.com.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Fax: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
CLOUDFLARE INC: Aids Facebook in the Disclosure of NCII, Suit Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
JANE DOE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CLOUDFLARE, INC., JOHN DOE CORPORATE
ENTITIES 1-500, JOHN DOE INVESTORS 1–5,000, and JOHN DOE
EMPLOYEES 1-100,000, Defendants, Case No. 3:25-cv-10300 (N.D. Cal.,
November 30, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for
multiple violations of 15 U.S.C. Section 6851.
The case arises from Cloudflare's role in assisting, facilitating
and participating in the nonconsensual disclosure of identifiable
individuals' intimate images (NCII), including intimate images of
minors and child sexual exploitation images. According to the
complaint, Cloudflare assists Meta Platforms, Inc., formerly
Facebook, Inc., with, and facilitates, the disclosure of these
images. The Plaintiff seeks to address, correct, and hold
Cloudflare accountable and do justice for the untold numbers of
victims of this extremely reckless behavior that causes immense
irreparable harm.
Cloudflare, Inc. is a provider of a range of internet services,
with its principal business address in Palo Alto, California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Craig M. Peters, Esq.
ALTAIR LAW LLP
465 California Street, 5th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (415) 988-9828
Email: cpeters@altairlaw.com
COGIR MANAGEMENT: Hazel Suit Removed to E.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Tia Hazel, individually, and on behalf of
other members of the general public similarly situated v. COGIR
MANAGEMENT USA INC., a Delaware corporation; FRONTIER MANAGEMENT
LLC, an Oregon limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 100,
inclusive, Case No. 25CV018737 was removed from the Superior Court
of the State of California for the County of Sacramento, to the
United States District Court for Eastern District of California on
Nov. 25, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-03425-TLN-SCR.
On August 7, 2025, Plaintiff commenced an action against Cogir
Management USA Inc. and Frontier Management LLC (collectively,
"Defendants") by filing a Class Action Complaint in the Superior
Court of California for the County of Sacramento asserting, on
behalf of a putative class consisting of individual who have been
employed by any of the Defendants in California since August 7,
2021 and classified as hourly-paid or non-exempt, ten causes of
action for unpaid overtime, unpaid meal period premiums, unpaid
rest period premiums, unpaid minimum wage, final wages not timely
paid, wages not timely paid during employment, non-compliant wage
statements, failure to keep requisite payroll records, unreimbursed
business expenses, and violation of Bus & Prof. Section 17200, et
seq. Declaration of Barbara I. Antonucci.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Barbara I. Antonucci, Esq.
Sarah K. Hamilton, Esq.
Stacy Lall, Esq.
Dongying Zhang, Esq.
CONSTANGY, BROOKS, SMITH & PROPHETE, LLP
601 Montgomery Street, Suite 350
San Francisco, CA 94111
Phone: (415) 918-3000
Email: bantonucci@constangy.com
shamilton@constangy.com
slall@constangy.com
dzhang@constangy.com
COLGATE-PALMOLIVE: Caruso Sues Over Misleading Statements
---------------------------------------------------------
Alexandria Caruso, individually, and on behalf of those similarly
situated v. COLGATE-PALMOLIVE COMPANY, individually and as
successor-in-interest to HELLO PRODUCTS LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-14440
(N.D. Ill., Nov. 25, 2025), is brought against the Defendant's
marketing tactics which simultaneously violate the Federal Food
Drug & Cosmetic Act ("FDCA") due to misleading statements.
The Defendant's use of these "misleading" and "aggressive" tactics
is evident through the marketing of its purportedly
health-conscious product line "Hello." Defendant's Hello-branded
kids fluoride toothpaste (the "Product") comes in three flavors:
"Magical Mermaid," "Dragon Dazzle," and "Unicorn Sparkle
The Defendant compounds the misleading impression that the Product
is safe to ingest by using silly and carefree imagery (i.e.,
unicorns, mermaids, and dragons) and words that are incongruent
with a dangerous product that needs to be handled with caution
(e.g., "tastes like Defendant also misleads consumers by presenting
the Product as a health-conscious alternative to mainstream brands,
using words on the packaging that convey greater safety ("naturally
friendly," "choose friendly," and "thoughtfully formulated"), and
emphasizing the absence of substances that can be unhealthy to
ingest ("no artificial sweeteners, no dyes, no artificial flavors,
no preservatives, no parabens, no SLS/sulfates no gluten, no
brainer").
The Defendant's deceptive marketing tactics cause millions of
caregivers in the U.S. to unwittingly permit and encourage their
children to use far more toothpaste than is recommended or safe.
Not only does this pose significant health risks for children, but
it also causes economic loss to consumers by reducing the number of
brushings that they receive per tube, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff usually purchased the Product at the Walmart stores.
The Defendant sells kids-branded toothpastes for preschool
children.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael Connett, Esq.
SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP
700 S. Flower St., Suite 1000
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Phone: (888) 747-4529
Email: mconnett@sirillp.com
- and -
Aaron Siri, Esq.
Elizabeth A. Brehm, Esq.
SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (888) 747-4529
Email: aaron@sirillp.com
ebrehm@sirillp.com
COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS: More Time to File Class Cert Bid Sought
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit RE COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS DATA BREACH
LITIGATION, Case No. 1:25-cv-03535-SLS (D.D.C.), the Plaintiffs ask
the Court to enter an order extending their deadline to file a
motion for class certification until after the Parties hold their
Rule 26(f) conference and submit a proposed scheduling order (which
will include a proposed deadline for the Plaintiffs' motion for
class certification).
To facilitate this, the Plaintiffs request the Court set a
scheduling conference and request the Court set the following
schedule:
-- Rule 26(f) Conference: The Parties shall hold their Rule 26(f)
conference on or before Jan. 16, 2026.
-- Rule 26(f) Report: The Parties shall file their Rule 26(f)
Report and proposed scheduling order (including a proposed
deadline for the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification)
on or before Jan. 23, 2026.
This extension will allow sufficient time to: (i) negotiate a
protective order and ESI protocol; (ii) issue, obtain, and review
necessary written discovery on class certification issues; (iii)
conduct depositions of percipient witnesses related to class
certification; (iv) serve subpoenas for documents and depositions
on third-party witnesses (if necessary); and (v) retain and work
with necessary expert witnesses for the Plaintiffs' class
certification motion, as well as obtain and analyze their expert
reports.
The requested extension will allow Plaintiffs and Defendant to
formulate a proposed discovery plan and proposed class
certification deadline that is proportional to the needs and scope
of the case.
The underlying litigation stems from a data security incident
impacting the Defendant's computer systems on Oct. 21, 2024, in
which the personally identifiable information ("PII") and protected
health information ("PHI") of the Plaintiffs and the Class
(approximately 20,876 individuals) was accessible to an
unauthorized party (the "Data Breach" or "Breach").
On September 9, 2025, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Consolidate
Cases and Appoint Interim Co-Lead Class Counsel and Memorandum in
Support, seeking to consolidate other related putative class action
lawsuits filed against Defendant and appoint interim co-lead class
counsel. The Court granted the Motion to Consolidate and Appoint on
Nov. 24, 2025.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=GOwbVr at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
David K. Lietz, Esq.
MILBERG PLLC
5335 Wisconsin Avenue, NW, Suite 440
Washington, DC 20015
Telephone: (866) 252-0878
Facsimile: (202) 686-2877
E-mail: dlietz@milberg.com
- and -
Tyler J. Bean, Esq.
SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, New York 10151
Telephone: (212) 532-1091
E-mail: tbean@sirillp.com
- and -
Brittany Resch, Esq.
STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC
One Magnificent Mile
980 N Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610
Chicago, IL 60611
Telephone: (872) 263-1100
E-mail: bresch@straussborrelli.com
- and -
Leanna Loginov, Esq.
SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A.
14 NE 1st Ave STE 705
Miami, FL 33132
Telephone: (305) 479-2299
E-mail: lloginov@shamisgentile.com
COMPSOURCE: Trivestco Energy Files Suit in Okla. Dist. Ct.
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Compsource Mutual
Insurance Company. The case is styled as Trivestco Energy Company,
Lobaugh Law Firm, P.C., on behalf of themselves and other similarly
situated v. Compsource Mutual Insurance Company formerly known as
Compsource Oklahoma, Case No. CJ-2025-00274 (Okla. Dist. Ct., Kay
Cty., Nov. 26, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Civil Relief More Than $10,000: Bad
Faith Insurer Liability."
Compsource Mutual Insurance Company --
https://www.compsourcemutual.com/ -- is an insurance agency in
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph Lavi, Esq.
LAVI EBRAHIMIAN, LLP
8889 West Olympic Boulevard, Suite 200
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
Phone: (310) 432-0000
Email: jlavi@lelawfirm.com
CONDUENT INCORPORATED: Luckett Files Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Conduent
Incorporated, et al. The case is styled as Alvin Luckett,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Conduent Incorporated, Conduent Business Services, LLC, American
International Group, Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-09784 (S.D.N.Y., Nov.
25, 2025).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.
Conduent Inc. -- https://www.conduent.com/ -- is an American
business services provider company headquartered in Florham Park,
New Jersey.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Mark K. Svensson, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC
405 East 50th Street
New York, NY 10022
Phone: (202) 975-0468
Email: msvensson@zlk.com
CONSOLIDATED COMMUNICATIONS: Russell Seeks Technicians' Unpaid OT
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID RUSSELL, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CONSOLIDATED COMMUNICATIONS ENTERPRISE
SERVICES, LLC, CS CONTRACT SOLUTIONS, LLC d/b/a CONEXA
TECHNOLOGIES, BENJAMIN SUNDERLAND, and KEITH CRISTOBAL, in their
personal and professional capacities, Defendants, Case No.
1:25-cv-00484-JL-AJ (D.N.H, November 26, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New Hampshire
Wage Law.
Plaintiff Russell was employed by the Defendants as a technician
from in or around 2020 through on or around April 5, 2024.
Consolidated Communications Enterprise Services, LLC is a domestic
telecommunications business corporation based in Mattoon,
Illinois.
CS Contract Solutions, LLC, doing business as Conexa Technologies,
is a telecommunications services provider based in Bedford, New
Hampshire. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Megan A. Sigur, Esq.
PAUL FRANK + COLLINS, PC
One Church Street
Burlington, VT 05402
Telephone: (802) 658-2311
Email: msigur@pfclaw.com
- and -
Taylor J. Crabill, Esq.
CRABILL PLLC
71-01 Austin Street
Forest Hills, NY 11375
Telephone: (727) 335-1030
Email: tcrabill@crabilllawfirm.com
COVANTAGE CREDIT: Noreika Files Suit Over Data Breach
-----------------------------------------------------
SHANNON NOREIKA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. COVANTAGE CREDIT UNION and MARQUIS SOFTWARE
SOLUTIONS, INC., Defendants, Case No. 4:25-cv-1332 (E.D. Tex.,
December 4, 2025) is a class action against the Denfendants for
their failure to properly secure and safeguard the personally
identifiable information ("PII") of Plaintiff and other current and
former customers of CoVantage Credit Union (the Class Members).
Defendant Marquis is Defendant CoVantage's third party-vendor. As
part of their business, Defendants receive and maintain the PII of
thousands of CoVantage's current and former customers, including,
but not limited to names, addresses, phone numbers, Social Security
Numbers, financial account information, and dates of birth.
According to the complaint, Defendant Marquis suffered a ransomware
attack on August 14, 2025. The incident was reported to customer
data owners, such as Defendant Covantage on October 27, 2025. The
Defendant Covantage then waited nearly a month before notifying
Plaintiff and Class Members of the Data Breach via email. On
November 26, 2025, Plaintiff was notified by Defendant CoVantage.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff seeks redress for the Defendants'
unlawful conduct, and assert claims for: (i) negligence, (ii)
breach of implied contract, and (iii) unjust enrichment. The
Plaintiff suffered lost time, annoyance, interference, and
inconvenience because of the Data Breach and have anxiety and
increased concerns for the loss of her privacy, asserts the
complaint. The Plaintiff seeks remedies including, but not limited
to, compensatory damages, reimbursement of out-of-pocket costs, and
injunctive relief including improvements to Defendants' data
security systems, future annual audits, and adequate credit
monitoring services funded by Defendants.
Plaintiff Shannon Noreika is a citizen of Crandon, Wisconsin.
Defendant CoVantage Credit Union is a Wisconsin-based credit union
that offers a broad range of financial services for both
individuals and business including checking and savings accounts,
auto loans, mortgage loans, business lending, and digital banking.
Defendant Marquis Software Solutions, Inc. is a Texas-based company
that provides marketing and compliance software to banks and credit
unions nationwide.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Leigh S. Montgomery, Esq.
ELLZEY KHERKHER SANFORD
MONTGOMERY, LLP
4200 Montrose Blvd., Suite 200
Houston, TX 77006
Telephone: (888) 350-3931
E-mail: lmontgomery@eksm.com
Service only: service@eksm.com
CTC TRIAD INC: Henderson Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against CTC Triad, Inc., et
al. The case is styled as Tracie Henderson, and all others
similarly situated v. CTC Triad, Inc., d/b/a Silver Lining
Transport, Does 1-10, Case No. 25CV028289 (Cal. Super. Ct.,
Sacramento Cty., Nov. 24, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case."
CTC Triad, Inc., doing business as Silver Lining Transport --
http://silverliningtrans.com/-- is a trucking company in
Sacramento, California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Marcus J. Bradley, Esq.
BRADLEY/GROMBACHER LLP
31365 Oak Crest Dr., Ste. 240
Westlake Village, CA 91361
Phone: 805-270-7100
Fax: 805-270-7589
Email: mbradley@bradleygrombacher.com
CURRENEX INC: Seeks to Seal Class Cert Exhibits in Edmar Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Edmar Financial Company,
LLC et al., v. Currenex, Inc. et al., Case No.
1:21-cv-06598-LAK-HJR (S.D.N.Y.), the Defendants ask the Court to
enter an order that the seven documents attached as exhibits to
Plaintiffs' motion for class certification, and portions of the
Motion reflecting information from those documents, remain under
seal.
Specifically, Goldman requests that the following remain under
seal:
-- Exhibit 17 to the Brockett Declaration (ECF 391-17 (Schonberg
Transcript));
-- Exhibit 18 to the Brockett Declaration (ECF 391-18 (GS-EDMAR-
00920851));
-- Exhibit 19 to the Brockett Declaration (ECF 391-19 (GS-EDMAR-
00002650));
-- Exhibit 28 to the Brocket Declaration (ECF 391-28 (GS-EDMAR-
00336920));
-- Exhibit 45 to the Brockett Declaration (ECF 391-45 (GS-EDMAR-
00001574));
-- Exhibit 46 to the Brockett Declaration (ECF 391-46 (GS-EDMAR-
00827316));
-- Exhibit 47 to the Brockett Declaration (ECF 391-47 (GS-EDMAR-
00368325)).
Currenex provides an independent global currency exchange to
institutional buyers and sellers around the world.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=UQmCWz at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Rishi N. Zutshi, Esq.
Carmine D. Boccuzzi, Jr., Esq.
CLEARY GOTTLIEB STEEN & HAMILTON LLP
One Liberty Plaza
New York, NY 10006
Telephone: (212) 225-2000
Facsimile: (212) 225-3999
E-mail: cboccuzzi@cgsh.com
rzutshi@cgsh.com
DEACONESS ILLINOIS: Class Scheduling & Discovery Order Entered
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JANE DOE, individually,
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. DEACONESS
ILLINOIS UNION COUNTY HOSPITAL, INC. d/b/a DEACONESS ILLINOIS UNION
COUNTY d/b/a UNION COUNTY HOSPITAL, Case No. 3:24-cv-02284-NJR
(S.D. Ill.), the Hon. Judge Rosenstengel entered a consolidated
class action scheduling and discovery order:
The parties' scheduling and discovery plans are adopted by the
Court as follows:
Initial disclosures, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
26(a)(1), shall be served by each party on or before Dec. 12,
2025.
The Plaintiffs' depositions shall be taken by May 29, 2026.
The Defendants' depositions shall be taken by May 29, 2026.
The Plaintiffs' motion for class certification and memorandum in
support shall be filed by Feb. 26, 2027.
The Defendants' memorandum in opposition to class certification
shall be filed by April 9, 2027. The Plaintiffs' reply memorandum,
if any, must be filed by May 7, 2027.
The Class Certification hearing will take place at 1:30 p.m. on
June 10, 2027, at the East St. Louis Courthouse.
Deaconess is a hospital & health care company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=kA2a1Y at no extra
charge.[CC]
DELAWARE DOUBLETREE: Mattera Sues Over Disabled's Access Barriers
-----------------------------------------------------------------
GENE MATTERA and ACCESS 4 ALL, INC., individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. DELAWARE DOUBLETREE
MANAGEMENT LLC, Defendant, Case No. 3:25-cv-10297 (N.D. Cal.,
November 28, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for
violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 28 C.F.R.
Section 36.302(e)(1), and the Unruh Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its facilities to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiffs and other
persons with disabilities. The Defendant has continued to
discriminate against people who are disabled in ways that block
them from access and use of its property and business. The
Plaintiffs and similarly situated disabled individuals encountered
architectural barriers in common areas such parking and exterior
routes and restrooms.
The Plaintiffs and Class members seek injunctive relief to remove
the existing architectural barriers to the physically disabled when
such removal is readily achievable for the place of public
accommodation.
Access 4 All, Inc. is a nonprofit corporation, with its principal
office in Miami-Dade County, Florida.
Delaware Doubletree Management LLC is a commercial property owner
and operator doing business in California. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jacob A. Gillick, Esq.
GILLICK LEGAL, APC
3990 Old Town Ave., Ste. A200
San Diego, CA 92110
Telephone: (858) 250-0656
Email: jgillick@gillicklegal.com
- and -
John A. Salcedo, Esq.
THE MINEO SALCEDO LAW FIRM, PA
5600 Davie Road
Davie, FL 33314
Telephone: (954) 463-8100
Facsimile: (954) 463-8100
Email: Service@mineolaw.com
DEXCOM INC: Boston Retirement Sues Over Exchange Act Breach
-----------------------------------------------------------
Boston Retirement System, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. DEXCOM, INC., KEVIN R. SAYER, JACOB S. LEACH,
JEREME M. SYLVAIN, and SEAN CHRISTENSEN, Case No.
3:25-cv-03284-WQH-KSC (S.D. Cal., Nov. 25, 2025), is brought on
behalf of a "Class" of all persons and entities who purchased or
otherwise acquired DexCom securities between January 8, 2024 and
September 17, 2025, inclusive (the "Class Period"), seeking to
pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
"Exchange Act"), and SEC Rule 10b-5, promulgated thereunder, as a
result of the Defendants' falsely touted the efficacy and safety of
their CGMs, while intentionally concealing pervasive accuracy
failures that endangered patients and fundamentally impaired the
device's commercial viability and regulatory compliance.
The Defendants concealed these issues throughout the Class Period,
even as the truth gradually emerged between July 2024 to September
2025 through a series of disclosures, including regulatory
warnings, product-related announcements, and disappointing
financial results. Throughout the Class Period, Defendants failed
to disclose that: DexCom had made material design changes to the G6
and G7 unauthorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the
"FDA"); these design changes rendered the G6 and G7 less reliable
than their prior iterations, presenting a material health risk to
users relying on those devices for accurate glucose readings; these
issues subjected DexCom to an increased risk of heightened
regulatory scrutiny and enforcement action as well as significant
legal and reputational harm; based on the foregoing, the Company's
CGM sales were negatively impacted; and as a result, Defendants'
public statements about the reliability, accuracy, safety, and
functionality of their CGMs as well as their financial forecasts
were materially false and/or misleading at all relevant times.
On September 18, 2025, Hunterbrook Media, an investigative news
outlet, issued a report (the "Hunterbrook Report") describing
accuracy problems with DexCom's G7 device which have resulted in
serious medical problems for patients. On this news, DexCom's stock
price fell $8.99 per share, or 11.8 percent, over the following two
trading sessions to close at $67.45 per share on September 19,
2025. As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and
the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's
securities, Plaintiff and Class members have suffered significant
losses and damages, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff purchased shares of DexCom securities at artificially
inflated prices during the Class Period.
DexCom, headquartered in San Diego, California, is a medical device
company that manufactures continuous glucose monitoring systems
("CGMs") for diabetes management.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Reed R. Kathrein, Esq.
Lucas E. Gilmore, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 300
Berkeley, CA 94710
Phone: (510) 725-3000
Facsimile: (510) 725-3001
Email: reed@hbsslaw.com
lucasg@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Francis P. McConville, Esq.
Connor Boehme, Esq.
LABATON KELLER SUCHAROW LLP
140 Broadway
New York, NY 10005
Phone: 212-907-0700
Facsimile: 212-818-0477
Email: fmcconville@labaton.com
cboehme@labaton.com
EATON STEEL: Dean Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime Compensation
--------------------------------------------------------------
Raymond Dean, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. EATON STEEL CORPORATION, a Michigan corporation, Case
No. 2:25-cv-13772-LJM-DRG (E.D. Mich., Nov. 25, 2025), is brought
to recover unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages,
attorney's fees, costs, and other relief as appropriate under the
Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA").
Throughout Plaintiff's employment with Defendant, Defendant failed
to properly calculate Plaintiff's bonus pay and other
non-discretionary remuneration in the regular rate for proper
overtime rate calculation. Throughout Plaintiff's employment with
Defendant, he was eligible for and received bonus pay and other
non-discretionary remuneration. The Defendant's hourly employees
are classified as non-exempt employees, use the same timekeeping
system(s), are subject to the same relevant timekeeping, pay, and
attendance policies, and have the same or similar duties/policies.
As non-exempt employees, Defendant's Hourly Employees were entitled
to full compensation for all overtime hours worked at a rate of 1.5
times their "regular rate" of pay. However, Defendant failed to
take the various routine and non-discretionary renumeration into
consideration when calculating their hourly employees' regular rate
of pay and resulting overtime premium rate. As a result, Defendant
did not pay the proper overtime rate under the law, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant from June 2023 to September
2025.
The Defendant is a business corporation organized under the State
of Michigan.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jesse L. Young, Esq.
SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
141 E. Michigan Avenue, Suite 600
Kalamazoo, MI 49007
Phone: (269) 250-7500
Email: jyoung@sommerspc.com
EVENFLO COMPANY: Toney Sues Over Slim 360 Car Seats' Choking Hazard
-------------------------------------------------------------------
SAMANTHA TONEY, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. EVENFLO COMPANY, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-13605 (D. Mass., November 26, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for unjust enrichment and breach of the
implied warranty of merchantability.
The case arises from the Defendant's false, deceptive, and
misleading advertising, labeling, and marketing of Evenflo Revolve
Slim 360 car seats. According to the complaint, the Defendant
represented that the products are safe for children. The corporate
website proclaims "Family First, Always" as a theme for reassuring
consumers that they provide safe products. The Plaintiff and
consumers do not know, and did not have a reason to know, that the
products purchased carried the potential for choking hazards. As a
result of the Defendant's misrepresentation and omission, the
Plaintiff and the Class suffered losses.
Evenflo Company, Inc. is a manufacturer of infant and juvenile
products based in Miamisburg, Ohio. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Christina Xenides, Esq.
SIRI GLIMSTAD
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Telephone: (737) 313-8560
Email: cxenides@sirillp.com
- and -
Paul J. Doolittle, Esq.
POULIN | WILLEY | ANASTOPOULO, LLC
32 Ann Street
Charleston, SC 29403
Telephone: (803) 222-2222
Email: pauldoolittle@poulinwilley.com
cmad@poulinwilley.com
EVERGREEN ALLIANCE: Conant Suit Removed to N.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Laura Conant, individually, and on behalf of
other similarly situated employees v. EVERGREEN ALLIANCE GOLF
LIMITED, L.P.; ARCIS GOLF LLC; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive,
Case No. 25CV146183 was removed from the Superior Court of the
State of California for the County of Alameda, to the United States
District Court for Northern District of California on Nov. 26,
2025, and assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-10265.
The Complaint alleges causes of action for Minimum wages, Unpaid
Overtime; Meal Break Violations; Rest Break Violations; Wages Not
Timely Paid During Employment; Wage Statement Violations; Untimely
Final Wages; Failure to Reimburse Necessary Business Expenses; all
in violation of Cal. Labor Code and Violation of Cal. Business &
Professions Code.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Grace Y. Horoupian, Esq.
Kristina Noel Buan, Esq.
FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP
2050 Main Street, Suite 1000
Irvine, CA 92614
Phone: (949) 851-2424
Facsimile: (949) 851-0152
Email: ghoroupian@fisherphillips.com
kbuan@fisherphillips.com
EXPRESS SCRIPTS: Time to Reply to Class Cert Denial Bid Extended
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Abbie Gilleland, v.
Express Scripts, Inc., Case No. 3:24-cv-03019-CRL-DJQ (C.D. Ill.),
the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting the
extension for the Plaintiff to respond to the motion to deny class
certification, up to and including Jan. 6, 2026.
The Plaintiff's response to the motion is currently due to be field
by Dec. 2, 2025.
Due to the complexity of the factual and legal issues and
intervening Thanksgiving and other upcoming holidays, the Plaintiff
requires additional time within which to respond to the motion and
seeks a 35-day extension, up to and including Jan. 6, 2026.
Moreover, the Plaintiff intends to request that the motion be held
in abeyance pending class certification discovery at the status
hearing with the Court.
The Plaintiff's counsel conferred with the Defendant's counsel, and
the Defendant does not oppose a 14 day extension of time but
opposes the 35 days requested.
The requested extension will not result in prejudice to any of the
parties as there is presently no case schedule in place, and is not
made for the purpose of undue delay.
This is the Plaintiff's first request for extension to respond to
the motion.
Express offers pharmacy benefit management services.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=2ReBc8 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Avi R. Kaufman, Esq.
KAUFMAN P.A.
237 S Dixie Hwy, Floor 4
Coral Gables, FL 33133
Telephone: (305) 469-5881
E-mail: kaufman@kaufmanpa.com
- and -
Stefan Coleman, Esq.
COLEMAN PLLC
66 West Flagler Street, Unit 900
Miami, FL 33130
Telephone: (877) 333-9427
E-mail: law@stefancoleman.com
FASTENAL COMPANY: Hawkins-Brentt Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Fastenal Company. The
case is styled as Dani Hawkins-Brentt, individually and on behalf
of other members of the general public similarly situated v.
Fastenal Company, Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2025-0017542 (Cal. Super.
Ct., San Joaquin Cty., Nov. 25, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Unlimited Civil Other Employment."
Fastenal -- https://www.fastenal.com/ -- is the largest fastener
distributor in North America.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bevin Allen Pike, Esq.
CAPSTONE LAW APC
1875 Century Park E., Ste. 1000
Los Angeles, CA 90067-2533
Phone: 310-712-8010
Email: Bevin.Pike@capstonelawyers.com
FCA US: Class Settlement in Thompson Suit Gets Initial Nod
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as EBONY THOMPSON AND JUVENAL
RODRIGUEZ, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated,
v. FCA US, LLC, Case No. 2:21-cv-09815-FMO-MBK (C.D. Cal.), the
Hon. Judge Olguin entered an order:
1. The Plaintiffs' renewed motion for preliminary approval of
class action settlement is granted upon the terms and
conditions set forth in this Order.
2. The court preliminarily certifies the class, as defined in
section 2.7. of the Settlement Agreement, for the purposes of
settlement.
3. The court preliminarily appoints plaintiffs Ebony Thompson
and Juvenal Rodriguez as class representatives for settlement
purposes.
4. The court preliminarily appoints Pomerantz LLP and The Law
Offices of Robert L. Starr as class counsel for settlement
purposes.
5. The court preliminarily finds that the terms of the
settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate, and comply with
Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
6. The court approves the form, substance, and requirements of
the Class Notice.
7. The Plaintiffs shall file a motion for attorney's fees and
costs, as well as any incentive payments, no later than Feb.
27, 2026
8. The Plaintiffs shall, no later than May 4, 2026, file and
serve a motion for final approval of the settlement and a
response to any objections to the settlement.
9. A final approval (fairness) hearing is set for June 4, 2026,
at 10:00 a.m.
The settlement class is defined as
"All individuals who, as confirmed by FCA US's records,
purchased a model-year 2015-2017 Chrysler 200 vehicle that
was originally sold as a PZEV vehicle in California,
Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, or Washington
('Reg. 177 States') [("Class Vehicles")]."
Ebony Thompson filed this putative class action against FCA US, LLC
on Dec. 20, 2021, and after the court granted the Defendant's
motion to dismiss her First Amended Complaint with leave to amend,
filed a Second Amended Complaint on April 4, 2023, asserting a
claim under California's Unfair Competition Law.
The SAC alleged that defendant failed to properly identify and pay
for issues with MultiAir Actuators that should be covered for 15
years or 150,000 miles pursuant to the California 28 Emissions
Warranty, California Code of Regs.
The Settlement Agreement provides for up to $980,000 in attorney's
fees and costs, and incentive awards of $7,500 for each named
plaintiff.
FCA designs, engineers, manufactures, and sells vehicles.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=dxkTdq at no extra
charge.[CC]
FIRST STUDENT: Singleton Suit Removed to D. South Carolina
----------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Maria Singleton, and on behalf of others
similarly situated v. FIRST STUDENT, INC., JOY DARDAR, individually
and as an agent of First Student, Inc., and HESTER WASHINGTON,
individually and as an agent of First Student, Inc., Case No.
2025-CP-10-05964 was removed from the Court of Common Pleas for the
State of South Carolina, Charleston County, to the United States
District Court for District of South Carolina on Nov. 26, 2025, and
assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-13589-DCN-MGB.
The Plaintiff's Complaint includes claims of discrimination,
failure to accommodate, hostile work environment, and retaliation
under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA").[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
William H. Foster, Esq.
Katie E. Towery, Esq.
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
110 E. Court Street, Suite 201
Greenville, SC 29601
Phone: 864-775-3190
Email: bfoster@littler.com
ktowery@littler.com
FORTUNE SENIOR: Herrera Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Fortune Senior
Enterprises, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Zenaida Herrera, on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Fortune Senior
Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Comfort Keepers Home Care, Case No.
25CV028478 (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Nov. 26, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case."
Fortune Senior Enterprises, Inc. doing business as Comfort Keepers
-- https://www.comfortkeepers.com/ -- has been dedicated to
providing in-home senior care that brings joy to our clients' lives
for more than 20 years.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Tyler Woods, Esq.
WILSHIRE LAW FIRM, PLC
660 Figueroa St., Sky Lobby
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Phone: 213-381-9988
Fax: 213-381-9989
Email: tyler.woods@wilshirelawfirm.com
FORWARD AIR CORP: Settlement Reached in Shareholder Suit
--------------------------------------------------------
Forward Air Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 5, 2025, that on
September 12, 2025, the parties in a shareholder suit informed the
Chancery Court that they had reached an agreement in principle to
resolve the issue.
On September 26, 2023, company shareholders Rodney Bell, Michael A.
Roberts and Theresa Woods filed a complaint against the company and
certain of its directors and officers in the Third District
Chancery Court sitting in Greeneville, Tennessee. It alleges, among
other things, that the company's shareholders had the right to vote
on certain transactions contemplated by the acquisition of Omni
Newco, LLC and sought an injunction against the consummation of the
transactions until a shareholder vote was held.
The court initially granted a temporary restraining order enjoining
the transactions contemplated by the merger from closing but later
dissolved it on October 25, 2023. Thereafter, the parties to the
Amended Merger Agreement completed the Omni Acquisition. On May 2,
2024, original Plaintiff Michael Roberts, together with the Cambria
County Employees Retirement System filed a stipulation and proposed
order seeking leave of court to file an amended class action
complaint seeking damages, among other forms of relief. Upon
receiving leave of court, on May 15, 2024, the plaintiffs filed the
amended complaint. The Second Amended Complaint challenges the
directors' determination not to subject the Omni Acquisition to a
shareholder vote and alleges that, in so doing, the company and
certain of its current and former directors violated Tennessee
corporate law. It further alleges that certain of the company's
current and former directors breached their fiduciary duties to
shareholders by depriving them of the right to vote on the Omni
Acquisition. Thereafter, on June 14, 2024, Defendants removed the
case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District
of Tennessee, Greeneville Division. Plaintiffs filed a motion to
remand the case to the Chancery Court, and on March 31, 2025, the
District Court granted the motion and remanded the case back to the
Chancery Court.
Forward is an asset-light freight provider of transportation
services, including LTL, truckload and intermodal drayage services
across the United States and in Canada and Mexico.
GALAXY DEVELOPERS: Daquilema Sues to Recover Wages Damages
----------------------------------------------------------
Luis Alfonso Garces Daquilema, Joel De Jesus Molina Hernandez,
Victor Hugo Cajamarca Cajamarca, Luis Fernando Cabezas, Julio
Gamaliel Torres Ortega, Marco R. Arpi, Felipe De Jesus Flores
Criollo, Carlos Mauricio Yupangui Riera, Fabian Mauricio Yupangui
Carrion, Marco Vinicio Pesantez Reyes, Vicente Mauricio Sanchez
Ortiz, Manuel Carlos Loja Pizarro, Stalyn Patricio Loja Pulla, and
Lauro Armando Chimbo Chimbo, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. GALAXY DEVELOPERS LLC, BWK
CONSTRUCTION LLC, NKJ2 CONSTRUCTION LLC, and NIGEL JOSEPH, EFRAIN
SANTIAGO and WILKA CUEVAS, as individuals, Case No. 1:25-cv-06554
(E.D.N.Y., Nov. 25, 2025), is brought to recover damages for
egregious violations of state and federal wage and hour laws
arising out of Plaintiffs' employment.
Although Plaintiffs worked for more than 40 hours, Defendants did
not pay Plaintiff time and a half for hours worked over 40, a
blatant violation of the overtime provisions contained in the FLSA
and NYLL. As a direct result of Defendants' violations and failure
to provide proper wage notices and wage statements, Plaintiff
suffered a concrete harm, resulting from Plaintiff's inability to
identify Plaintiff's employer to remedy his compensation problems,
lack of knowledge about the rates of pay he was receiving and/or
should have received for his regular hours and overtime hours,
terms, and conditions of his pay, and furthermore, an inability to
identify his hourly rate of pay to ascertain whether he was being
properly paid in compliance with the FLSA and NYLL – which he was
not, says the complaint.
The Plaintiffs were employed by Defendants.
GALAXY DEVELOPERS LLC is a domestic limited liability company,
organized under the laws of the State of New York.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Roman Avshalumov, Esq.
HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601
Kew Gardens, NY 11415
Phone: 718-263-9591
GATEWAYS HOSPITAL: Watson Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Gateways Hospital and
Mental Health Center. The case is styled as Pamela Watson, an
individual, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated
v. Gateways Hospital and Mental Health Center, Case No. 25STCV34421
(Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Nov. 25, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case
(General Jurisdiction)."
Gateways Hospital and Mental Health Centers --
https://www.gatewayshospital.org/ -- has been delivering
high-quality mental and behavioral health care in the Greater Los
Angeles area.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Nazo Koulloukian, Esq.
KOUL LAW FIRM
3435 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 1710
Los Angeles, CA 90010-2003
Phone: 213-761-5484
Fax: 818-561-3938
Email: nazo@koullaw.com
GLOBAL E-TRADING: Class Settlement in Sihler Gets Final Nod
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JANET SIHLER, Individually
and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated; CHARLENE BAVENCOFF,
Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v.
GLOBAL E-TRADING, LLC DBA CHARGEBACKS911, GARY CARDONE, MONICA
EATON, Case No. 8:23-cv-01450-VMC-LSG (M.D. Fla.), the Hon. Judge
Hernandez Covington entered an order granting the Plaintiffs'
motion for final approval of class action settlement.
Chargebacks911 is a chargeback management company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=VV21r9 at no extra
charge.[CC]
GLOBE LIFE INC: Faces Consolidated Securities Suit in Texas Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Globe Life Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 5, 2025, that on April 30, 2024, a
putative securities class action was filed against Globe Life Inc.
and six of its current/former executives and directors in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
captioned "City of Miami Gen. Emp. & Sanitation Emp. Ret. Trust, et
al. v. Globe Life Inc., et al.," (Case No. 4:24-cv-00376).
Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the litigation on December 3,
2024, which motion was denied on September 29, 2025.
On July 24, 2024, the court appointed Lead Plaintiffs and Lead
Counsel for the putative class of shareholders. The Lead Plaintiffs
filed a Consolidated Complaint on October 4, 2024 that asserts
claims under Sections 10(b), 20(a), and 20(A) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rules 10b-5(a), 10b-5(b), and 10b-5(c)
promulgated thereunder, on behalf of a putative class of purchasers
of Globe Life Inc.'s securities from May 8, 2019 through April 10,
2024.
The Consolidated Complaint adds four additional executives as
defendants and alleges that certain of Globe Life Inc.'s
disclosures about financial performance and certain other public
statements during the putative class period were materially false
or misleading.
Globe Life Inc. is an insurance holding company that provides life
insurance, supplemental health insurance and investments.
GTV MEDIA GROUP: Dong Suit Removed to S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Zhengjun Dong, Wen Lin, Kaixin, Hong,
Chenglong Wang, Fanhui Kong, Chu Lee, and Chingwa Wong,
Individually, and on behalf of all others Similarly situated v. GTV
MEDIA GROUP, INC. and SARACA MEDIA GROUP, INC., Case No.
652190/2021 was removed from the Supreme Court of the State of New
York, County of New York, to the United States District Court for
Southern District of New York on Nov. 25, 2025, and assigned Case
No. 1:25-cv-09815.
On November 21, 2024, counsel for the plaintiffs in the State Court
Action served the SEC with a subpoena in which they requested
documents concerning, among other things, the identification of the
parties who had received payments from the GTV Fair Fund.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Melinda Hardy, Esq.
James M. McHale, Esq.
Robin Crabb, Esq.
OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, N.E.
Washington, DC 20549-9613
Phone: (202) 551-5046 (McHale)
Email: mchalejm@sec.gov
GULFPORT ENERGY: Sued over Royalties Shortpayments
--------------------------------------------------
Gulfport Energy Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for
the quarterly period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 5, 2025, that in
January 2025, Grace E. Moore Great Grandchildren Trust of 2006,
Joseph Gorsha, Damon Faldowski, Damon Faldowski II, and Mark
Faldowski, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, filed a class action against Gulfport and another natural
gas producer in the United States District Court, Southern District
of Ohio, Eastern Division.
The lawsuit alleges, among other things, that defendants underpaid
royalties to the plaintiffs in connection with the production and
sale of natural gas and natural gas liquids involving a variety of
lease forms. The lawsuit seeks compensatory damages, injunctive
relief regarding royalty payment practices, restitution,
disgorgement of profits, prejudgment interest, post-judgment
interest, attorney's fees, and costs.
Gulfport Energy Corporation is an independent natural gas-weighted
exploration and production company focused on the exploration,
acquisition and production of natural gas, crude oil in the United
States with primary focus in the Appalachia and Anadarko basins.
H & M FASHION USA: Murphy Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
---------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Cindy Murphy and Erika McInnis, on their own
behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. H & M
FASHION USA, INC., Case No. 25-2-31578-9 SEA was removed from the
King County Superior Court, to the United States District Court for
Western District of Washington on Nov. 25, 2025, and assigned Case
No. 2:25-cv-02382.
On November 5, 2025, Plaintiffs served the Complaint and Summons on
H&M. The Complaint asserts claims against H&M for violations of the
Washington Commercial Electronic Mail Act ("CEMA") and the
Washington Consumer Protection Act ("CPA"). The Complaint alleges
that H&M violated these statutes by sending "two types of emails to
Washington consumers which contain false or misleading information
in the subject lines."[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
David Freeburg, Esq.
DLA PIPER LLP (US)
701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 6900
Seattle, WA 98104-7029
Phone: 206.839.4800
Email: David.Freeburg@us.dlapiper.com
- and -
Staci J. Trager, Esq.
Erin T. Huntington, Esq.
2000 Avenue of the Stars Suite 400 North Tower
Los Angeles, CA 90067-4735
Phone: 310.595.3000
Email: Staci.Trager@us.dlapiper.com
Erin.Huntington@us.dlapiper.com
- and -
Carlo F. Bustillos, Esq.
55 Mission Street, Suite 2400
San Francisco, CA 94105-0922
Phone: 415.836.2500
Email: Carlo.Bustillos@us.dlapiper.com
HASBRO INC: Pension Fund Files Securities Suit over SEC Disclosures
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Hasbro Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly
period ended September 28, 2025, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 5, 2025, that on November 13, 2024,
West Palm Beach Firefighters' Pension Fund filed a putative class
action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of New York alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and certain rules promulgated
thereunder captioned "West Palm Beach Firefighters' Pension Fund v.
Hasbro, Inc., Richard Stoddart, Christian Cocks, Deborah Thomas,
Gina Goetter and Eric Nyman," Case No.1:24-cv-8633.
The plaintiff asserts claims on behalf of persons and entities that
purchased the company's securities between February 7, 2022 and
October 25, 2023 and seeks compensatory damages, interest, fees,
and costs. The complaint alleges that members of the putative class
suffered losses as a result of false or misleading statements and
withholding of information regarding the company's inventory,
including quality and appropriateness thereof, during the Class
Period.
On August 29, 2025, the court granted the Miami General Employees'
& Sanitation Employees' Retirement Trust and West Palm Beach
Firefighters' Pension Fund's motion for appointment as lead
plaintiff.
Hasbro, Inc. is a manufacturer of toys and games based in
Pawtucket, Rhode Island.
HERTZ CORP: Class Cert Discovery in Sconce Due April 17, 2026
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Sconce v. Hertz
Corporation, Case No. 2:23-cv-01197 (E.D. Cal., Filed June 21,
2023), the Hon. Judge Dale A. Drozd entered an order setting the
class certification deadlines as follows:
-- Class certification discovery shall be completed by April 17,
2026
-- The Plaintiff's deadline to file a class certification motion
is May 29, 2026
-- The Defendant's deadline to file an opposition to the
plaintiff's class certification motion is July 13, 2026
-- The Plaintiff's deadline to file a reply brief in support of
his class certification motion is Aug. 3, 2026.
The nature of suit states Civil Rights -- Employment.
Hertz operates as a car rental company.[CC]
HUMANA INC: Faces Consolidated Securities Suit over Disclosures
---------------------------------------------------------------
Humana Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 5, 2025, that it is facing a
consolidated case captioned "In re Humana Inc. Securities
Litigation," alleges that between July 2022 and October 2024,
Humana made false or misleading statements in its periodic SEC
filings and statements to the financial markets about its financial
performance and the medical costs and Star Ratings in our Medicare
Advantage business. The action seeks, among other things,
unspecified compensatory damages and attorneys' fees.
In June 2024, the initial putative stockholder class action was
filed against Humana Inc. and certain of its current and former
executive officers under the federal securities laws in the United
States District Court for the District of Delaware.
The case, captioned "Iron Workers Local 401 Annuity Fund v. Humana,
Inc.," alleges that between July 2022 and January 2024, Humana made
false or misleading statements in its periodic SEC filings and
statements to the financial markets about its financial performance
and the medical costs in its Medicare Advantage business.
Humana Inc. is provider of hospital and medical service plans based
in Louisville KY.
IDAHO: Faces Suit Over Failure to Provide Mental Illness Services
-----------------------------------------------------------------
RAMON, by and through next friend, G.C.; THOMAS, by and through
next friend, C.G.; CAMERON, by and through next friend, B.E.;
ANTHONY; and WENDY, on behalf of themselves and those similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. JULIET CHARRON, in her official capacity as
Director, Idaho Department of Health and Welfare; SASHA O'CONNELL,
in her official capacity as Deputy Director, Idaho Department of
Health and Welfare; ROSS EDMUNDS, in his official capacity as
Administrator, Division of Behavioral Health, Defendants, Case No.
1:25-cv-00676-DKG (D. Idaho, November 26, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendants for violations of the Americans with
Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act.
The case arises from the Defendants' failure to provide Assertive
Community Treatment services to eligible Medicaid patients seeking
to treat serious mental illnesses under the Idaho Behavioral Health
Plan. The Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief to
compel the Defendants to comply with the Americans with
Disabilities Act and with the Rehabilitation Act by requiring the
Defendants to continue to provide the services. The Plaintiffs need
these services to effectively treat their mental health illnesses
and to avoid prolonged hospitalizations and unnecessary
institutionalization. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jeffrey S. Beelaert, Esq.
Preston N. Carter, Esq.
Don Z. Gray, Esq.
Megann E. Meier, Esq.
GIVENS PURSLEY LLP
601 West Bannock Street
P.O. Box 2720
Boise, ID 83701
Telephone: (208) 388-1200
Facsimile: (208) 388-1300
Email: jbeelaert@givenspursley.com
prestoncarter@givenspursley.com
dongray@givenspursley.com
mem@givenspursley.com
J C MASTER INC: Chirinos Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Carlos Renan Santos Chirinos, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. J.C. MASTER INC., J.C. & SONS HOME
IMPROVEMENT CORP., and JULIAN TELLEZ ULLOA and JUAN CARLOS ARCE, as
individuals, Case No. 1:25-cv-06559 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 25, 2025), is
brought against the Defendants to recover minimum wage and overtime
wage and damages for egregious violations of state and federal wage
and hour laws arising out of Plaintiff's employment under the Fair
Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law.
Although, during the relevant statutory period, Plaintiff worked
approximately between 61 to 72 hours per week, Defendants did not
pay Plaintiff time and a half for hours worked over 40, a blatant
violation of the overtime provisions contained in the FLSA and
NYLL. Defendants willfully failed to post notices of the overtime
wage requirements in a conspicuous place at the location of their
employment as required by the FLSA and NYLL.
The Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff with a wage notice at
the time of his hire or at any time during his employment in
violation of the NYLL. Upon information and belief, Defendants
failed to provide Plaintiff with an accurate wage statement that
included all hours worked and all wages received each week when
Plaintiff was paid in violation of the NYLL. Moreover, Defendants
were aware that they were not properly compensating Plaintiff and
therefore willfully chose to continue to violate the NYLL by not
paying Plaintiff proper minimum wages and overtime wages, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendants as a construction worker
and roofer while performing related miscellaneous duties for the
Defendants, from June 2012 until May 2024.
J. C. MASTER INC., is a New York domestic business corporation
organized under the laws of New York.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Roman Avshalumov, Esq.
HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
80—02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601
Kew Gardens, NY 11415
Phone: 718-263-9591
Fax: 718-263-9598
J.A. ARGETAKIS: Underpays Construction Workers, Ramirez Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
LETICIA RAMIREZ, HECTOR LOPEZ, and LORENZO SANCHEZ, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. J.A.
ARGETAKIS CONTRACTING CO., INC. and ADRONIKOS ARGETAKIS,
Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-03910-JRR (D. Md., November 26, 2025)
is a class action against the Defendants for unpaid prevailing and
overtime wages and fringe benefits in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Maryland Wage and Hour Law, the Maryland
Prevailing Wage Statute, the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection
Law, the Delaware Prevailing Wage Law, and the Delaware Wage
Payment and Collection Law.
The Defendants employed the Plaintiffs to perform construction work
on Maryland projects including as finishers, mechanical carpenters,
carpenters, and painters.
J.A. Argetakis Contracting Co., Inc. is a contractor with its
principal place of business in Baltimore, Maryland. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Mark Hanna, Esq.
David Rodwin, Esq.
MURPHY ANDERSON, PLLC
1401 K. Street NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 223-2620
Facsimile: (202) 296-9600
Email: mhanna@murphypllc.com
drodwin@murphypllc.com
J.A.K.'S PUPPIES: Plaintiffs Must File Default Judgment
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Rebecca Carey et al., v.
J.A.K.'s Puppies, Inc. et al., Case No. 5:21-cv-02095-WLH-DTB (C.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Hsu entered an order directing the Plaintiffs
to file default judgment.
JAK's specializes in breeding and selling puppies.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=m1tel9 at no extra
charge.[CC]
JEFF RUBY: Lamb Class Certification Bid Terminated
--------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JONATHAN LAMB et al., on
behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. JEFF RUBY
CULINARY ENTERTAINMENT, INC. et al. Case No. 3:25-cv-00949 (M.D.
Tenn.), the Hon. Judge J. Gregory Wehrman entered an order
terminating the Plaintiffs "Motion for Rule 23 Class Certification
for Settlement Purposes, for Preliminary Approval of Rule 23 Class
Action Settlement, and for Approval of Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA) Collective Action Settlement" as a pending motion.
The Defendant operates as a restaurant. The Company retails steaks,
sushi, raw bars, and wine for on-premise consumption.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=zFiIfq at no extra
charge.[CC]
JEFFERY EVANS: Vividor Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------
William Vividor and Carlos Gaitan, on behalf of themselves and
others similarly situated v. JEFFERY EVANS, EVANS & PAUL LLC, E&P
HOLDINGS 1, LLC, and EVANS & PAUL UNLIMITED CORP., Case No.
2:25-cv-06598 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 26, 2025), is brought under the Fair
Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), the New York Labor Law ("NYLL") and
N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. ("NYCRR") inter alia, from Defendants:
unpaid wages for overtime work performed, liquidated damages,
(attorneys' fees, interest, and all costs and disbursements
associated with this action.
The Plaintiffs and the other Collective Plaintiffs are, and have
been similarly situated, have had substantially similar job
requirements and pay provisions, and are and have been subject to
Defendants common policies, programs, practices, procedures,
protocols, routines, and rules willfully failing and refusing to
pay them one and one half times their hourly rate for work in
excess of 40 hours per workweek, says the complaint.
The Plaintiffs were employed by Defendants.
The Defendants E&P, the CORP. and the LLC are a multi-faceted
manufacturing firm with divisions specializing in custom
fabrication of architectural millwork, case work, solid surface,
quartz/natural stone, glass, and toilet partitions.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Marcus Monteiro, Esq.
MONTEIRO & FISHMAN LLP
91 N. Franklin Street, Suite 108
Hempstead, NY 11550
Phone: (516) 280.4600
Facsimile: (516) 280.4530
Email: mmonteiro@mflawny.com
JILL PLATNER: Alexandria Seeks Blind's Equal Access to Website
--------------------------------------------------------------
ERIKA ALEXANDRIA, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. JILL PLATNER, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-09858 (S.D.N.Y., November 26, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, the New York City Human Rights Law, and
declaratory relief.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website,
www.jillplatner.com, contains access barriers which hinder the
Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online
goods, content, and services offered to the public through the
website. The accessibility issues on the website include but not
limited to: missing alt-text, hidden elements on web pages,
incorrectly formatted lists, unannounced pop ups, unclear labels
for interactive elements, and the requirement that some events be
performed solely with a mouse.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain
accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals.
Jill Platner, Inc. is a company that sells online goods and
services, doing business in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: L.S. Files Suit in D. New Jersey
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Johnson & Johnson.
The case is styled as L.S., M.P., A.G., M.W., S.C., T.W., on behalf
of themselves and all others similarly situated v. Johnson &
Johnson, Intracellular Therapies, Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals,
Inc., Case No. 3:25-cv-18012-MAS-RLS (D.N.J., Nov. 26, 2025).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.
Johnson & Johnson (J&J) -- https://www.jnj.com/ -- is an American
multinational pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical
technologies corporation.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jack Ryan Spitz, I, Esq.
SIRI & GLIMSTAD, LLP
8 Campus Drive, Ste 105 PMB#161
Parsippany, NJ 07054
Phone: (609) 442-7593
Email: jspitz@sirillp.com
KALSHI INC: Pelayo Sues Over Illegal Sports Gambling
----------------------------------------------------
Crystal Pelayo, Jacob Tingle, Isaiah Esquibel, Gino Gadaleta, Brice
Gambill, Raleigh Melancon, and Micah Parker, individually and on
behalf of others similarly situated v. KALSHI INC.; KALSHIEX LLC;
KALSHI KLEAR INC.; KALSHI KLEAR LLC; and KALSHI TRADING LLC, Case
No. 1:25-cv-09913 (S.D.N.Y, Nov. 26, 2025), is brought against the
Defendants to recover wagers from Defendant's illegal sports
gambling operation.
Kalshi operates an unlicensed sports gambling platform, which is
accessible to any resident of the United States who is over the age
of 18.1 By operating unlicensed sports betting, Defendant has
violated gambling laws, engaged in illegal deceptive activity, and
unjustly enriched itself at the expense of millions of consumers.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and a Class of
similarly situated individuals, bring this lawsuit to recover their
wagers, as well as costs and attorneys' fees.
By operating unlicensed sports betting, Kalshi has violated
gambling laws, engaged in illegal deceptive activity, and unjustly
enriched itself at the expense of tens of thousands of consumers.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a Class of
similarly situated individuals, bring this lawsuit to recover their
wagers, as well as costs and attorneys' fees, says the complaint.
The Plaintiffs signed up through the Kalshi App in California.
Kalshi owns and operates an online and app-based platform that it
markets as a "prediction market."[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David Stellings, Esq.
Wilson M. Dunlavey, Esq.
Jacob S. Miller, Esq.
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10013-1413
Phone: 212.355.9500
Facsimile: 212.355.9592
Email: dstellings@lchb.com
wdunlavey@lchb.com
jmiller@lchb.com
KEURIG DR PEPPER: Gray Sues Over Deceptive Conduct
--------------------------------------------------
Gail Gray, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Keurig Dr Pepper, Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-06527
(E.D.N.Y., Nov. 24, 2025), is brought as a result of the
Defendant's deceptive conduct, Defendant regarding its Mott's
"100%" juices (the "Products").
The Defendant markets its Products in a systematically misleading
manner by conspicuously misrepresenting on the labels of the
Products that they are comprised of "100% Juice." Defendant
reinforces these misrepresentations by adding vignettes of the
fruits and including the claim in the title of the Products.
Unbeknownst to consumers, however, the Products all share a common
ingredient that belies their "100% Juice" representations: ascorbic
acid—a well-documented synthetic ingredient. disclosing these
additional ingredients is not just industry practice; it is
required by law. Defendant knows this, yet it chooses to ignore the
law to increase its sales by taking advantage of unexpecting
consumers, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff purchased Defendant's Products from its Amazon.com
storefront for her personal use on various occasions within the
applicable statute of limitations.
The Defendant formulates, manufactures, advertises, and sells its
Mott's "100%" juices throughout the United States, including New
York.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Adnan Gucovschi, Esq.
GCCOVSCHI LAW FIRM, PLLC
140 Broadway, FL. 46
New York, NY 10005
Phone: (212) 8844230
Email: adrian@gucovschilaw.com
KIMBERLY-CLARK CORP: Burns Sues Over Deceptive Marketing
--------------------------------------------------------
Alyssa Burns, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Kimberly-Clark Corporation, Case No.
1:25-cv-01662-MAD-PJE (N.D.N.Y., Nov. 25, 2025), is brought
concerning the Defendant's deceptive marketing and sale of its
Huggies Little Movers disposable diapers (the "Product").
The Defendant markets the Product as being "hypoallergenic." Within
the past year, unbeknownst to consumers, Defendant materially
altered the composition or construction of the Product. Yet,
Defendant continues to market the Product as "hypoallergenic" and
maintains packaging that suggested continuity with prior versions
of the diapers.
The term "hypoallergenic" is a powerful, premium-driving label-
especially for parents of infants. It conveys that the Product
contains fewer irritants, fewer chemicals, and fewer substances
known to cause reactions. However, following the secret
reformulation of the Product, scores of consumers are reporting
that the Product no longer performs like a hypoallergenic diaper.
By branding its Product as "hypoallergenic," Defendant
misrepresents the nature of the Product and extracts a price
premium from consumers. Even in the absence of the "hypoallergenic"
representation, Defendant deceives consumers by failing to advise
them that the Product has a tendency to cause severe skin reactions
in babies.
Had Plaintiff and the Class known the true nature of the Product,
they would not have purchased it or would have only been willing to
pay a significantly lower price for it. The Defendant's conduct
violates New York's consumer protection statutes. Plaintiff brings
this action to seek monetary damages on behalf of herself and a
nationwide class of similarly situated consumers, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff purchased the Product on numerous occasions in the
class period including most recently on Amazon.com on May 21,
2025.
The Defendant manufactures and sells the Product.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Philip J. Furia, Esq.
FURIA LAW, LLC
880 Third Avenue, Fifth Floor
New York, NY 10022
Phone: 646-830-1915
Email: furiap@furiafirm.com
KINDRED SPIRITS: Romero-Acosta Suit Seeks Class Action Status
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as OMAR E. ROMERO-ACOSTA, ET
AL., v. KINDRED SPIRITS, Inc. and RICHARD GONSALVES, Case No.
3:23-cv-01163-JAG-GLS (D.P.R.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to
enter an order granting class action status.
Accordingly, although this motion is submitted in compliance with
the Court's order, the Plaintiffs repeat that which they initially
argued during the November 24, 2025 hearing before Hon. Mag. Judge
López Soler -- that a second motion for class certification is not
needed in order to move the class from "conditionally" certified to
a collective class action fully certified under the Fair Labor
Standards Act (FLSA) and the equivalent provisions of local law.
The case was originally filed in the Court of First Instance in
Bayamón on March 31, 2023, as a "Querella" presented by a single
claimant, Omar E. Romero-Acosta, pursuant to the expedited
procedures which Law 2-1961 provides for labor actions brought by
employees in the courts of Puerto Rico.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=sKrbEl at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Judith Berkan, Esq.
BERKAN/MENDEZ
O'Neill St. G-11
San Juan, PR.00918-2301
Telephone: (787) 764-0814
Facsimile: (787) 250-0986
E-mail: berkanmendez@gmail.com
berkanj@microjuris.com
KNICKERBOCKER CLOTHING: Valencia Balks at Website's Access Barriers
-------------------------------------------------------------------
JUSTIN VALENCIA, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. KNICKERBOCKER CLOTHING CO., LLC, Defendant,
Case No. 1:25-cv-09855 (S.D.N.Y., November 26, 2025) is a class
action against the Defendant for violations of Title III of the
Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York City Human Rights
Law, and declaratory relief.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website,
www.knickerbocker.nyc, contains access barriers which hinder the
Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online
goods, content, and services offered to the public through the
website. The accessibility issues on the website include but not
limited to: missing alt-text, hidden elements on web pages,
incorrectly formatted lists, unannounced pop ups, unclear labels
for interactive elements, and the requirement that some events be
performed solely with a mouse.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain
accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals.
Knickerbocker Clothing Co., LLC is a company that sells online
goods and services, doing business in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
KOHL'S INC: Mejico Suit Removed to S.D. California
--------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Brittney Mejico, individually and on behalf of
all persons similarly situated v. Kohl's, Inc., Case No.
25CU058386C was removed from the Superior Court of California, San
Diego, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
California on Nov. 26, 2025.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-03315-BAS-MMP to
the proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.
Kohl's -- https://www.kohls.com/ -- (stylized in all caps) is an
American department store retail chain, operated by Kohl's
Corporation.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Scott J. Ferrell, Esq.
Victoria C. Knowles
PACIFIC TRIAL ATTORNEYS APC
4100 Newport Place Drive Suite 800
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Phone: (949) 706-6464
Fax: (949) 706-6469
Email: sferrell@pacifictrialattorneys.com
vknowles@pacifictrialattorneys.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Rebecca Blake Durrant, Esq.
KELLEY DRYE & WARREN LLP
888 Prospect Street, Suite 200
La Jolla, CA 92037
Phone: (212) 808-7551
Fax: (213) 547-4901
Email: rdurrant@kelleydrye.com
KRISTI NOEM: Class Cert. Hearing Continued to Jan. 16, 2026
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Immigration Center for
Women and Children, et al., v. Kristi Noem, et al., Case No.
2:25-cv-09848-AB-AS (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Andre Birotte Jr.
entered an order granting stipulation to continue hearing and
briefing deadlines for the Plaintiffs' class certification motion
and preliminary injunction motion:
1. The hearing for the Plaintiffs' class certification motion is
continued from Dec. 12, 2025 to Jan. 16, 2026, at 10:00 a.m.
2. The hearing for the Plaintiffs' preliminary injunction motion
is continued from Dec. 12, 2025 to Jan. 16, 2026, at 10:00
a.m.
3. The Defendants' responses to the class certification and
preliminary injunction motion is due by Dec. 12, 2025.
4. The Plaintiffs must file reply briefs. They are due by
Dec. 23, 2025.
Kristi Noem is an American politician.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=kc9nlK at no extra
charge.[CC]
LANCASTER SNF HEALTHCARE: Talley Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lancaster SNF
Healthcare, LLC. The case is styled as Tina Talley, individually,
and on behalf of other similarly situated employees v. Lancaster
SNF Healthcare, LLC, Case No. 25STCV34462 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los
Angeles Cty., Nov. 24, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case
(General Jurisdiction)."
Lancaster SNF Healthcare, LLC provides non-acute medical and
skilled nursing care services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Miriam Schimmel, Esq.
BLACKSTONE LAW, APC
8383 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 745
Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2442
Phone: 310-622-4278
Fax: 855-786-6356
Email: mschimmel@blackstonepc.com
LANDCARE USA: Class Cert. Bid in Resendiz Due May 22, 2026
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KEVIN IVAN RESENDIZ
HEREDIA, et al., v. LANDCARE USA, LLC, Case No.
3:25-cv-02218-GPC-DEB (S.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Butcher entered
scheduling order regulating discovery, class certification motion
filing, and other pre-trial proceedings:
1. A telephonic Status Conference will be held on Feb. 27, 2026
at 11:00 AM. The Court will email counsel Zoom, audio-only,
connection information prior to the Conference.
2. Any motion to join other parties, to amend the pleadings, or
to file additional pleadings shall be filed by Jan. 5, 2026.
3. A motion for class certification must be filed no later than
May 22, 2026.
4. All fact discovery shall be completed by all parties by July
17, 2026.
5. The parties shall designate their respective experts in
writing by July 17, 2026.
6. All expert discovery shall be completed by all parties by
Oct. 16, 2026.
7. A Mandatory Settlement Conference will be conducted on April
15, 2026 at 2:00 PM with Magistrate Judge Daniel E. Butcher.
8. The final Pretrial Conference is scheduled on the calendar of
the Honorable Gonzalo P. Curiel on March 12, 2027 at 1:30pm.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=EgPY1a at no extra
charge.[CC]
LEGEND SENIOR LIVING: Jackson Files Suit in D. Kansas
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Legend Senior Living,
LLC. The case is styled as Marcus Jackson, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Legend Senior Living,
LLC, Case No. 2:25-cv-02689-TC-ADM (D. Kan., Nov. 24, 2025).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Breach of Fiduciary
Duty.
Legend Senior Living -- https://legendseniorliving.com/ -- offers
award-winning independent living, assisted living, memory care &
respite care.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lucy McShane, Esq.
Maureen M. Brady, Esq.
MCSHANE & BRADY LLC
4006 Central Street
Kansas City, MO 64111
Phone: (816) 888-8010
Email: lmcshane@mcshanebradylaw.com
mbrady@mcshanebradylaw.com
LEVAIN BAKERY: Settlement Class in Get Douglass Gets Certification
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BLAIR DOUGLASS, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated, v. LEVAIN BAKERY
COOKIE COMPANY, LLC, Case No. 2:25-cv-01722-MPK (W.D. Pa.), the
Hon. Judge Kelly entered an order preliminarily certifying
settlement class pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and (b)(2)
defined as:
"A national class of individuals who are blind and/or have a
visual disability and who use appropriate auxiliary aids and
services to navigate digital content and who have accessed,
attempted to access, or been deterred from attempting to
access, or who will access, attempt to access, or be deterred
from attempting to access, [https://levainbakery.com/] from
the United States."
On or before March 13, 2026, the Plaintiff shall move for final
approval and for reasonable attorneys' fees and costs.
A final approval hearing shall be held on March 26, 2026, at 10:00
a.m.
The Defendant is a cookie company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 1, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=skPDJt at no extra
charge.[CC]
LEVENGER COMPANY: Blind Can't Access Website, Randolph Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------------
ERIKA RANDOLPH, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. LEVENGER COMPANY, Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-14463 (N.D. Ill., November 26, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, declaratory relief, and negligent infliction
of emotional distress.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website,
www.levenger.com, contains access barriers which hinder the
Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online
goods, content, and services offered to the public through the
website. The accessibility issues on the website include but not
limited to inaccurate landmark structure, ambiguous link texts,
unclear labels for interactive elements, inaccurate alt-text on
graphics, inaccessible drop-down menus, redundant links where
adjacent links go to the same URL address, and the requirement that
transactions be performed solely with a mouse.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain
accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals.
Levenger Company is a company that sells online goods and services,
doing business in Illinois. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Uri Horowitz, Esq.
14441 70th Road
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (718) 705-8706
Facsimile: (718) 705-8705
Email: Uri@Horowitzlawpllc.com
LEW THOMPSON & SON: Avina Suit Removed to E.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Roberto Avina, on behalf of himself and
others similarly situated v. LEW THOMPSON & SON TRUCKING, INC., an
Arkansas corporation; COVENANT, an entity of unknown form; and DOES
1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 25CV-05982 was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of California, County of Merced, to the
United States District Court for Eastern District of California on
Nov. 26, 2025, and assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-01665-SKO.
The Complaint asserts the following claims for relief: failure to
pay minimum wages; failure to pay wages and overtime under Labor
Code; meal period liability under Labor Code; rest break liability
under Labor Code; failure to pay vacation wages; failure to comply
with Labor Code; violation of Labor Code; failure to reimburse
necessary expenditures under Labor Code; failure to keep required
payroll records under Labor Code; penalties pursuant to Labor Code;
and violation of Business & Professions Code.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
James E. Hart, Esq.
Alejandra Gallegos, Esq.
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
18565 Jamboree Road, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Phone: 949.705.3000
Facsimile: 949.724.1201
Email: jhart@littler.com
agallegos@littler.com
LIBERTY MUTUAL: Watts Bid to Certify Class Partly OK'd
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WATTS, et al., v. LIBERTY
MUTUAL PERSONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. 1:23-cv-12845-BEM (D.
Mass.), the Hon. Judge Brian Murphy entered an order granting in
part the Plaintiffs' motion to certify the class.
The Court certifies the Plaintiffs' Rule 23(b)(3) class and denies
certification of Plaintiffs' Rule 23(b)(2) class.
The Court finds that Plaintiffs primarily seek monetary damages,
and thus certification under Rule 23(b)(2) is not appropriate. At
no point do Plaintiffs assert that injunctive relief is their
primary remedy sought. Thus, certification under Rule 23(b)(2) is
not appropriate here.
The Plaintiffs seek to define the class for their breach of
contract claim as:
"All insureds in the United States who have been policyholders
of automobile insurance policies sold by [LMPIC] that included
optional transportation expenses coverage, who, within the
applicable statute of limitations, have made a claim to
[LMPIC] for transportation expenses coverage as a result of a
total loss of a vehicle damaged in a covered loss, and as to
whom [LMPIC] limited the amount of time such coverage is
provided to a period of time less than 30 days."
The Plaintiffs also seek to define two subclasses for their bad
faith claims:
Missouri Subclass
"All insureds who are members of the Class and who resided in
Missouri at the time their vehicles suffered damage that
resulted in [LMPIC] determining their vehicles were a total
loss."
Illinois Subclass
"All insureds who are members of the Class and who resided in
Illinois at the time their vehicles suffered damaged that
resulted in [LMPIC] determining their vehicles were a total
loss."
On Nov. 21, 2023, the Plaintiffs brought this suit alleging that
LMPIC prematurely terminated rental car benefits in breach of their
insurance policies.
The Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on Feb. 23, 2024,
asserting claims for breach of contract (Count I); vexatious
conduct with respect to the policies issued in Missouri (Count II);
violations of Illinois Section 155 of the Illinois Insurance Code
with respect to the policies issued in Illinois (Count III); and
declaratory judgment (Count IV).
Liberty offers property & casualty insurance.
A copy of the Court's memorandum and order dated Dec. 2, 2025, is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=EknNCB
at no extra charge.[CC]
LIFESTANCE HEALTH: Plaintiffs Seek Initial OK of Revised Deal
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Montana Strong and Debra
Yick, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
v. LifeStance Health Group, Inc. d/b/a LifeStance, a Delaware
corporation, Case No. 2:23-cv-00682-KML (D. Ariz.), the Plaintiffs
ask the Court to enter an order preliminary approving the revised
class action Settlement agreement.
The Plaintiffs request that the Honorable Court:
(i) conditionally certify the Settlement Class further to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23;
(ii) appoint the Plaintiffs Montana Strong and Debra Yick as
Class Representatives and appoint David S. Almeida and
Britany A. Kabakov of Almeida Law Group LLC and Hart L.
Robinovitch and Ryan J. Ellersick of Zimmerman Reed LLP as
Class Counsel;
(iii) appoint Angeion Group, LLC as Settlement Administrator;
(iv) direct that Notice be sent to all Settlement Class
Members;
(iv) set deadlines for exclusions, objections, and briefing on
the Plaintiffs' motion for final approval and petition for
service awards and attorneys' fees and expenses; and
(v) schedule a date for a Final Approval Hearing.
This class action lawsuit alleges that LifeStance used tracking
technologies to collect and to disclose patient communications and
other information to third parties such as Meta Platforms, Inc. and
Google LLC in violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy
Act ("ECPA") and other laws.
The Settlement creates a non-reversionary, common fund totaling
three million, twenty-seven thousand, eight hundred seventy-four
dollars and forty-four cents ($3,027,874.44) for the benefit of all
LifeStance patients.
The Settlement defines the "Settlement Class" as all natural
persons who are members of Settlement Subclass 1 and Settlement
Subclass 2:
(a) Settlement Subclass 1:
"All members of LifeStance's total patient population who
booked at least one session through LifeStance's online
booking tool, accessed through LifeStance’s public
website
lifestance.com, between March 1, 2020 and April 30, 2023."
(b) Settlement Subclass 2:
"All other members of LifeStance's total patient
population between March 1, 2020 and April 30, 2023, not
including those in Settlement Subclass 1."
LifeStance is a behavioral health care company.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 3, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Sx5yLn at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
David S. Almeida, Esq.
Britany A. Kabakov, Esq.
ALMEIDA LAW GROUP LLC
849 W. Webster Avenue
Chicago, IL 60614
Telephone: (708) 529-5418
E-mail: david@almeidalawgroup.com
britany@almeidalawgroup.com
- and -
Hart L. Robinovitch, Esq.
Ryan J. Ellersick, Esq.
ZIMMERMAN REED LLP
14648 N. Scottsdale Road, Suite 130
Scottsdale, AZ 85254
Telephone: (480) 348-6400
Facsimile: (480) 348-6415
E-mail: hart.robinovitch@zimmreed.com
ryan.ellersick@zimmreed.com
LIGHT & WONDER INC: Faces Antitrust Suit over Card Shuffler Patent
------------------------------------------------------------------
Light & Wonder, Inc. (L&W) disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for
the quarterly period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 5, 2025, that it is
currently facing an antitrust suit over automatic card shuffler
patents filed on April 2, 2021 by Casino Queen, Inc. and Casino
Queen Marquette, Inc. On May 8, 2025, the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Illinois held a hearing on the
pending motions for summary judgment.
Said putative class action complaint was filed in said court
against L&W, Bally Technologies, Inc. and LNW Gaming, Inc.
(formerly Bally Gaming, Inc). In the complaint, the plaintiffs
assert federal antitrust claims arising from the defendants’
procurement of particular U.S. patents used to create an allegedly
illegal monopoly in the market for automatic card shufflers sold or
leased in the United States. The plaintiffs seek to represent a
putative class of all persons and entities that directly purchased
or leased automatic card shufflers within the United States from
the defendants, or any predecessor, subsidiary, or affiliate
thereof, at any time between April 1, 2009, and the present. The
complaint seeks unspecified money damages, which the complaint asks
the court to treble, the award of plaintiffs' costs of suit,
including attorneys’ fees, and the award of pre-judgment and
post-judgment interest.
On June 11, 2021, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss
plaintiffs’ complaint, which the court denied on May 19, 2022.
Light & Wonder, Inc. is a cross-platform global games company with
a focus on content and digital markets which includes supplying
game content and gaming machines, casino-management systems and
table game products and services to licensed gaming entities;
providing social casino and other mobile games.
LIGHTBUZZ E-COMMERCE: Perkins Sues Over Fictitious Reference Prices
-------------------------------------------------------------------
AMANDA PERKINS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. LIGHTBUZZ E-COMMERCE LLC d/b/a HEYSHAPE,
Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-11398 (C.D. Cal., November 26, 2025) is
a class action against the Defendant for violations of Consumers
Legal Remedies Act and False Advertising Law, unfair competition
law, fraud, and unjust enrichment.
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged use of inflated,
fictitious reference prices for the sole purpose of increasing its
sales. According to the complaint, the Defendant deceives and
misleads consumers, including the Plaintiff, into believing they
are receiving a bargain on their online purchases to induce them
into making a purchase they otherwise would not have made. As a
result of the Defendant's false and misleading sales practices, the
Plaintiff and Class Members were induced into purchasing the
Defendant's products under the false premise that they were of a
higher grade, quality, or value than they actually were.
Lightbuzz E-Commerce LLC, doing business as HeyShape, is a retail
company, with its principal place of business in Beaverton, Oregon.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Sarah N. Westcot, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, PA
701 Brickell Ave, Suite 2100
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 330-5512
Facsimile: (305) 676-9006
Email: swestcot@bursor.com
LITTLE CAESAR: Class Cert. Hearing in Cuevas Set for March 17, 2026
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSE CUEVAS, DORA MEZA DE
CASTILLO, and GLORIA HERNANDEZ on behalf of themselves, all others
similarly situated, and on behalf of the general public, v. LITTLE
CAESAR ENTERPRISES, INC.; and DOES through 10, inclusive, Case No.
3:23-cv-03166-RFL (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Lin entered an order
granting ninth joint stipulation modifying class certification
schedule:
1. The Motion for Class Certification hearing, previously set
for March 17, 2026, will be conducted via Zoom at 1:30 p.m.
on June 2, 2026;
2. Responses are due by Feb. 24, 2026; and
3. Replies are due by May 1, 2026.
All counsel shall participate in the hearing remotely to
accommodate geographical locations of all involved parties.
The Court expects all participants to adhere to courtroom decorum
during the remote hearing.
Little is an American multinational chain of pizza restaurants.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=MW125Q at no extra
charge.[CC]
LIVERAMP HOLDINGS: Faces Riganian Data Privacy Suit in California
-----------------------------------------------------------------
LiveRamp Holdings, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 5, 2025, that on
January 24, 2025, a purported class action styled "Riganian et al
v. LiveRamp Holdings, Inc. and LiveRamp, Inc." (Case No.
4:25-cv-824-JST) was filed in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of California against the Company and
LiveRamp, Inc., alleging claims based on the California
Constitution, the common law protections against intrusion upon
seclusion, the California Invasion of Privacy Act, the Federal
Wiretap Act and unjust enrichment.
The lawsuit seeks certification of classes of California and
national consumers, unspecified monetary damages, costs and
attorneys’ fees and other relief (including injunctive and
declaratory relief). Discovery has begun, and it is anticipated
that class certification issues will be determined in mid-2026.
LiveRamp Holdings, Inc. is a data collaboration technology company,
that uses a data collaboration network that unites data across
advertisers, platforms, publishers, data providers, and commerce
media networks.
LORI'S GIFTS: Burrell Sues Over Failure to Pay Compensation
-----------------------------------------------------------
Kiasia Burrell, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. LORI'S GIFTS, INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-09766 (S.D.N.Y.,
Nov. 24, 2025), is brought arising out of the Defendant's failure
to comply with the New York Labor Law ("NYLL"), and the New York
City Fair Workweek Law, Title 20, Chapter 12 of the New York City
Administrative Code ("Fair Workweek Law") as a result of the
Defendant failure to pay compensation.
The Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff and Retail Workers minimum
wages and agreed upon wages. Specifically, Defendant paid Plaintiff
and Retail Workers an hourly wage that was below the New York State
minimum wage. The Defendant further required Plaintiff to clock in
and out using Defendant's computerized timekeeping system for each
break. Plaintiff was required to clock out for breaks under 20
minutes in length. Plaintiff was not paid for these breaks, in
violation of the FLSA and the NYLL, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as a Retail Worker from
September 2025 until the present in Manhattan.
The Defendant has employed and/or jointly employed Plaintiff and
similarly situated employees.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James Bouklas, Esq.
BOUKLAS GAYLORD LLP
357 Veterans Memorial Highway
Commack, NY 11725
Phone: (516) 742-4949
Email: james@bglawny.com
LOS ANGELES COLLECTIVE: Trippett Sues Over Inaccessible Website
---------------------------------------------------------------
Alfred Trippett, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. LOS ANGELES COLLECTIVE, LLC d/b/a L'AGENCE, Case No.
1:25-cv-09771 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 24, 2025), is brought against the
Defendant's violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act
("ADA") as a result of the Defendant's website,
https://lagence.com, which contains discriminative barriers.
Despite the availability of well-established accessibility
standards, the website contains numerous barriers that block blind
consumers from using it in the same way as sighted users. These
barriers prevent Plaintiff from navigating the site, reviewing
merchandise, accessing product details, and completing
transactions. They also shut out blind consumers from the full
digital marketplace that L'AGENCE holds open to everyone else.
Because of these barriers, Plaintiff was unable to shop for the
coat and footwear he intended to buy, including the Melanie suede
booties. He visited the website repeatedly in November 2025,
encountered the same obstacles each time, and was denied the
ability to independently experience the site's offerings. Unless
Defendant makes the changes required under federal and state law,
Plaintiff and other blind consumers will continue to face the same
exclusion going forward, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff cannot navigate or use a website without the
assistance of a screen reader.
The Defendant operates the website located at https://lagence.com,
through which it sells and promotes its line of women's
contemporary apparel, footwear, accessories, and related
goods.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gabriel Levy, Esq.
GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C.
1129 Northern Blvd., Suite 404
Manhasset, NY 11030
Phone: +1 347-941-4715
Email: glevy@glpcfirm.com
LUCKY SHOT: Faces Senior Suit Over Blind-Inaccessible Online Store
------------------------------------------------------------------
FRANK SENIOR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. LUCKY SHOT USA LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-09849 (S.D.N.Y., November 26, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, the New
York City Human Rights Law, and the New York General Business Law.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website,
https://luckyshotusa.com/, contains access barriers which hinder
the Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of their
online goods, content, and services offered to the public through
the website. The accessibility issues on the website include but
not limited to: lack of alternative text (alt-text), empty links
that contain no text, redundant links, and linked images missing
alt-text.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that its website will become and remain accessible to
blind and visually impaired individuals.
Lucky Shot USA LLC is a company that sells online goods and
services in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
Email: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
MAGIC SPOON INC: Senior Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
------------------------------------------------------------
Frank Senior, for himself and on behalf of all other persons
similarly situated, v. MAGIC SPOON INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-09925
(S.D.N.Y., Nov. 26, 2025), is brought against the Defendant for its
failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its interactive
website to be fully accessible to and independently usable by
Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and
therefore denial of its products and services offered thereby, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"). Because Defendant's interactive website,
https://magicspoon.com/, including all portions thereof or accessed
thereon (collectively, the "Website" or "Defendant's Website"), is
not equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, it
violates the ADA. Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a
change in Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures
so that Defendant's Website will become and remain accessible to
blind and visually-impaired consumers.
By failing to make its Website available in a manner compatible
with computer screen reader programs, Defendant deprives blind and
visually-impaired individuals the benefits of its online goods,
content, and services--all benefits it affords nondisabled
individuals--thereby increasing the sense of isolation and stigma
among those persons that Title III was meant to redress, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using her
computer.
MAGIC SPOON INC., operates the Magic Spoon online retail store, as
well as the Magic Spoon interactive Website and advertises,
markets, and operates in the State of New York and throughout the
United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, N.Y. 10003-2461
Phone: (212) 228-9795
Fax: (212) 982-6284
Email: michael@gottlieb.legal
dana@gottlieb.legal
jeffrey@gottlieb.legal
MAROHL CONSTRUCTION: Malsack Sues Over Physical Barriers
--------------------------------------------------------
Darrin Malsack, and on behalf of others similarly situated v.
MAROHL CONSTRUCTION, INC., Case No. 2:25-cv-01857 (E.D. Wis., Nov.
23, 2025), is brought based upon Defendant's failure to remove
physical barriers to access the property and violations of Title
III of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") and the ADA's
Accessibility Guidelines ("ADAAG").
The Plaintiff has visited the Property more than ten times as a
customer, and advocate for the disabled. Plaintiff intends to
revisit the Property after the barriers to access detailed in this
Complaint are removed and the Property is accessible again. The
purpose of the revisit is to be a return customer of Al Wadi, to
determine if and when the Property is made accessible and to
substantiate already existing standing for this lawsuit for
Advocacy Purposes.
The Plaintiff intends on revisiting the Property to purchase food
and/or services as a return customer as well as for Advocacy
Purposes but does not intend to re-expose himself to the ongoing
barriers to access and engage in a futile gesture of visiting the
public accommodation known to Plaintiff to have numerous and
continuing barriers to access, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff uses a wheelchair for mobility purposes.
MAROHL CONSTRUCTION, INC. is a domestic company that transacts
business in the State of Wisconsin and within this judicial
district.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglas S. Schapiro, Esq.
THE SCHAPIRO LAW GROUP, P.L.
7301-A W. Palmetto Park Rd., #100A
Boca Raton, FL 33433
Phone: (561) 807-7388
Email: schapiro@schapirolawgroup.com
MARQUIS SOFTWARE: Domenichello Sues Over Failure to Secure PII
--------------------------------------------------------------
Larry Domenichello, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. MARQUIS SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS, INC., Case No.
4:25-cv-01284 (S.D. Tex., Nov/. 24, 2025), is brought arising from
Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard Plaintiff's
and similarly situated Class Members' sensitive personally
identifiable information ("PII"), which was stolen by
cybercriminals in a foreseeable, preventable data breach.
On August 14, 2025, cybercriminals hacked into Defendant's network
systems and stole Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive PII
stored therein, including their full names, addresses, dates of
birth, social security numbers, tax identification numbers,
financial account information, and other sensitive data
(collectively, "Private Information"), causing widespread injuries
and damages to Plaintiff and Class Members (the "Data Breach").
In providing their Private Information to Defendant, directly or
indirectly, Plaintiff and the Class Members reasonably expected
this sophisticated business entity to keep their Private
Information confidential and security maintained, to use this
information for business purposes, and to disclose it only as
authorized. Defendant failed to do so, resulting in the
unauthorized disclosure of Plaintiff's and Class Members' Private
Information in the Data Breach.
The Defendant breached its duties owed to Plaintiff and Class
Members by failing to safeguard the Private Information it
collected and maintained, including by failing to implement
industry standards for data security to protect against
cyberattacks, failing to use safeguards for initial access to
Private Information-storing servers, and failing to implement
reasonable or adequate logging and alerting methods, which allowed
criminal hackers to access and steal at least thousands of
individuals' Private Information from Defendant's care, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff and Class Members are consumers and current and
former customers of Defendant's Clients.
The Defendant is a software and financial technology company that
provides data management and analytics services for marketing and
compliance functions to hundreds of bank and financial services
across the country.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joe Kendall, Esq.
KENDALL LAW GROUP, PLLC
3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 825
Dallas, TX 75219
Phone: 214-744-3000
Fax: 214-744-3015
Email: jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com
- and -
Jeff Ostrow, Esq.
KOPELOWITZ OSTROW P.A.
One West Las Olas Blvd., Suite 500
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Phone:954-525-4100
Email: ostrow@kolawyers.com
- and -
Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
MILBERG, PLLC
227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60606
Phone: (866) 252-0878
Email: gklinger@milberg.com
MARQUIS SOFTWARE: Raucci Sues Over Data Breach
----------------------------------------------
Christopher Raucci, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. MARQUIS SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS, INC., Case No.
4:25-cv-01280 (E.D. Tex., Nov. 24, 2025), is brought on behalf of
all persons who entrusted Defendant with sensitive Personally
Identifiable Information ("PII" or "Private Information") that was
impacted in a data breach (the "Data Breach" or the "Breach")
arising from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and
safeguard Private Information that was entrusted to it, and its
accompanying responsibility to store and transfer that information.
The Defendant had numerous statutory, regulatory, contractual, and
common law duties and obligations, including those based on its
affirmative representations to Plaintiff and Class Members, to keep
their Private Information confidential, safe, secure, and protected
from unauthorized disclosure or access. In August 2025, Defendant
detected suspicious activity on its computer network. In response,
Defendant launched an investigation to determine the nature and
scope of the Data Breach. Defendant also notified law enforcement
and began working with affected financial institutions to identify
impacted individuals
The Defendant, despite having the financial wherewithal and
personnel necessary to prevent the Data Breach, nevertheless failed
to use reasonable security procedures and practice appropriate to
the nature of the sensitive, unencrypted information it maintained
for Plaintiff and Class Members, causing the exposure of
Plaintiff's and Class Members' Private Information.
As a result of Defendant's inadequate digital security and notice
process, Plaintiff's and Class Members' Private Information was
exposed to criminals. Plaintiff and the Class Members have suffered
and will continue to suffer injuries including: financial losses
caused by misuse of their Private Information; the loss or
diminished value of their Private Information as a result of the
Data Breach; uncompensated lost time associated with detecting and
preventing identity theft; and theft of personal and financial
information, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff and Class Members provided their Private Information
to Defendant.
The arise from Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard
Private Information that was entrusted to it, and its accompanying
responsibility to store and transfer that information.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joe Kendall, Esq.
KENDALL LAW GROUP, PLLC
3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 825
Dallas, TX 75219
Phone: 214-744-3000
Fax: 214-744-3015
Email: jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com
- and -
John J. Nelson, Esq.
MILBERG, PLLC
280 S. Beverly Drive-Penthouse Suite
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Phone: (858) 209-6941
Email: jnelson@milberg.com
MARQUIS SOFTWARE: Vines Sues Over Data Breach
---------------------------------------------
DEB VINES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. MARQUIS SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS, INC. and NORWAY
SAVINGS BANK, Defendants, Case No. 4:25-cv-01319 (E.D. Tex.,
December 3, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for
their failure to properly secure and safeguard the personally
identifiable information ("PII") of its customers, including, but
not limited to names, addresses, dates of birth, Social Security
numbers.
The complaint alleges that in the course of their relationship,
Defendant Norway collected or created PII related to Plaintiff and
Class Members. By sharing that PII with Defendant Marquis,
Defendant Norway was obligated to ensure the data would be
safeguarded and include those data protection obligations in a
business associates' agreement or other vendor contract. The
Plaintiff and the Class Members relied on Defendants to keep their
PII confidential, securely maintained, and to make only authorized
disclosures of this information.
In August 2025, Marquis experienced a cyberattack in which the PII
of tens or hundreds of thousands of current or former customers of
banks and credit unions that engaged Marquis -- including roughly
51,000 costumers of Norway Savings Bank, nearly 7,000 customers of
Community 1st Credit Union, and various CSE Federal Credit Union,
among others -- was compromised and exfiltrated (the "Data
Breach"). The Defendants' conduct resulted in the unauthorized
disclosure of Plaintiff's private information to cybercriminals.
As a result of the Data Breach, Plaintiff suffered injuries
including, but not limited to: (i) invasion of privacy; (ii) theft
of PII; (iii) lost or diminished value of PII; (iv) lost time and
opportunity costs associated with attempting to mitigate the actual
consequences of the Data Breach; (v) loss of benefit of the
bargain; (vi) an increase in spam calls, texts, and/or emails;
(vii) statutory damages; (viii) nominal damages; and (ix) the
continued and increased risk their PII will be further misused,
adds the complaint.
The Plaintiff, hence, seeks to recover all out-of-pocket losses,
compensation for the time spent dealing with issues arising from
the Data Breach, and at least three years of identity theft/fraud
protection and spam-blocking to help detect, prevent, and/or
remediate potential identity theft and fraud.
Plaintiff Deb Vines is a citizen of the State of Maine and is a
customer of Norway Savings whose information was compromised in the
Data Breach.
Defendant Marquis Software Solutions, Inc. is a technology vendor
serving hundreds of banks and credit unions across the United
States.
Defendant Norway Savings Bank provides mutual banking and financial
services in Maine.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rusty M. Messer, Esq.
BIG RIVER TRIAL ATTORNEYS
4626 Sherwood Common Blvd.
Suite 302
Baton Rouge, LA
Telephone: (225) 384-6760
Facsimile: (225) 384-6762
E-mail: rusty@bigriverlaw.com
- and -
Paul J. Doolittle, Esq.
POULIN | WILLEY | ANASTOPOULO
32 Ann Street
Charleston, SC 29403
Telephone: (803) 222-2222
E-mail: pauldoolittle@poulinwilley.com
cmad@poulinwilley.com
MAXIMUS EDUCATION: Chen Sues Over Disclosure of Information
-----------------------------------------------------------
Yina Chen, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. MAXIMUS EDUCATION, LLC d/b/a AIDVANTAGE, Case No.
3:25-cv-10217 (N.D. Cal., Nov. 25, 2025), is brought on behalf of
all Aidvantage account holders who have accessed and used
aidvantage.studentaid.gov (the "Website"), a website owned and
operated by Defendant, as a result of the Defendant's violation the
Electronic Communications Privacy Act ("ECPA") and the California
Invasion of Privacy Act ("CIPA") by disclosing Plaintiff's and
Class Members' private and confidential information without
consent.
To create and access their private financial accounts on the
Website, users must share personally identifying information. When
consumers provide this information and navigate their private
financial accounts, they expect that their confidential information
and activity will be protected and not disclosed to unknown third
parties. Such expectations are based, in part, on the legal
protections afforded to such information.
Information related to student loan debt is deeply sensitive and
personal. Indeed, many student loan borrowers experience feelings
of stress, anxiety, and shame related to their student loan debt.
Despite reasonable expectations of privacy, and Defendant's legal
duties to prevent the disclosure of such private information,
Defendant discloses information related to consumers' student loan
debts to Google LLC, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff accessed her account with Aidvantage in California
and made loan payments through the Website.
The Defendant provides financial services to consumers through the
Website it maintains, under the Aidvantage brand, where Aidvantage
account holders can manage their student loans and select payment
plans.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Philip L. Fraietta, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
50 Main Street, Suite 475
White Plains, NY 10606
Phonr: (914) 874-0710
Fax: (914) 206-3656
Email: pfraietta@bursor.com
MDL 3162: Class Suit Settlement Admin. Litig. Centralized in D.D.C.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Karen K. Caldwell, Chairperson of the U.S. Judicial Panel on
Multidistrict Litigation has entered an order transferring five
cases to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and,
with the consent of that court, assigned to Judge John D. Bates for
coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings in the
multi-district action captioned "In Re: Class Action Settlement
Administration Litigation," MDL No. 3162.
The cases are:
-- from the Northern District of California:
WHALEN, ET AL. v. EPIQ SYSTEMS, INC., ET AL., C.A. No.
3:25−04522
RIEGER v. EPIQ SYSTEMS, INC., ET AL., C.A. No. 3:25−04793
-- from the Southern District of Florida:
TEJON v. EPIQ SYSTEMS, INC., ET AL., C.A. No. 1:25−22453
-- from the Southern District of New York:
WHALEN v. EPIQ SYSTEMS, INC., ET AL., C.A. No. 1:25−04499
-- from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania:
BAKER v. ANGEION GROUP LLC, ET AL., C.A. No. 2:25−02079
These actions share factual questions arising from an alleged
scheme by three of the largest settlement claims administrators
(Angeion Group LLC, Epiq Systems, Inc., and JND Legal
Administration) to divert settlement deposits to two banks
(Huntington National Bank and Western Alliance Bank) in return for
kickbacks in the form of interest and investments earned on the
settlement deposits that otherwise would have been distributed to
plaintiffs and class members or used to pay down the costs of class
administration services. Plaintiffs in all five actions seek to
represent substantially similar nationwide classes and assert
similar claims under federal antitrust law, the Racketeering
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), and common law.
All Plaintiffs support centralization but asked the Panel to
separate and remand under Section 1407(a) the "digital payment
kickback" claims in the Baker action. These claims involve an
alleged scheme in which three providers of digital payment cards,
gift cards, and virtual payment cards (Tremendous LLC, Blackhawk
Network Holdings, Inc., and Digital Settlement Technologies LLC
d/b/a Digital Disbursements Payments) induced the claims
administrators to use their respective digital payment platforms by
sharing a portion of the "breakage" (i.e., revenue gained through
unredeemed gift cards and unclaimed payment cards) with them.
According to the Panel, breaking this litigation apart is not
warranted. "Transfer under Section 1407 does not require a complete
identity of common factual issues or parties as a prerequisite to
transfer, and the presence of additional acts or differing legal
theories is not significant where, as here, the actions still arise
from a common factual core," it points out.
The Panel finds that digital payment kickback allegations involve
the same claims administrator defendants and many of the same
underlying settlements as the bank kickback allegations. Separating
these claims would result in those defendants litigating, and many
of the same witnesses testifying, in multiple districts. In
contrast, centralization of these actions in their entirety will
streamline proceedings and avoid the possibility of duplicative
discovery and pretrial scheduling conflicts. It will also prevent
inconsistent pretrial rulings, particularly with respect to class
certification; and conserve the resources of the parties, their
counsel, and the judiciary, the panel says.
Furthermore, separation and remand may not be practicable, adds the
Panel. Arguably, plaintiffs in Baker do not assert separate
"claims" regarding the digital payment kickback scheme. None of
plaintiffs' claims is directed solely to the "fintech" defendants
or to the digital payment kickback allegations. Moreover,
separation and remand would be required not just for Baker, but
also for the potential tag-along actions, which also assert digital
payment kickback claims, further complicating the litigation, the
Panel relates.
"The District of the District of Columbia is an appropriate
transferee district for this litigation," the Panel opined in its
4-page Order. "This district has very few pending MDLs, has the
capacity and resources to successfully guide this litigation, and
offers a convenient forum for parties and witnesses."
A full-text copy of the Panel's December 12, 2025 transfer order is
available at
https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-3162-Transfer_Order-12-25.pdf
MEDVET FOR PETS: Conwell Suit Removed to N.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Kathryn Conwell, on behalf of herself and
others similarly situated v. MEDVET FOR PETS, INC., an Ohio
corporation; MEDVET CALIFORNIA, INC., an entity of unknown form,
and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,, Case No. 25CV478178 was removed
from the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the
County of Santa Clara, to the United States District Court for
Northern District of California on Nov. 26, 2025, and assigned Case
No. 5:25-cv-10261.
The Complaint is a purported class action alleging the following
causes of action: failure to pay minimum wages; failure to pay
wages and overtime under Labor Code; meal period liability under
Labor Code; rest break liability under Labor Code; failure to pay
vacation wages; failure to comply with Labor Code and 246;
violation of Labor Code; reimbursement of necessary expenditures
under Labor Code; failure to keep required payroll records under
Labor Code; penalties pursuant to Labor Code; and violation of
Business and Professions Code.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Mara D. Curtis, Esq.
REED SMITH LLP
515 South Flower Street, Suite 4300
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Phone: +1 213 457 8000
Facsimile: +1 213 457 8080
Email: mcurtis@reedsmith.com
- and -
Olga Savage, Esq.
REED SMITH LLP
101 Second Street, Suite 1800
San Francisco, CA 94105-3659
Phone: +1 415 543 8700
Facsimile: +1 415 391 8269
Email: osavage@reedsmith.com
MERCEDES-BENZ USA: Jamil Seeks Class Certification Bid Ruling
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LENA JAMIL, SAMAAL
ROBERSON, AND SHIDEH KHABAZIAN, On Behalf Of Themselves And All
Others Similarly Situated, v. MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC, Case No.
2:22-cv-08130-FLA-AJR (C.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to
enter an order granting their joint request for ruling as required
by Civil L.R. 83-9.2.
On July 30, 2025, the Court took the following motions under
submission:
- Plaintiffs' Motion For Class Certification
- MBUSA's Motion For Summary Judgment
- MBUSA's Motion To Exclude David Roth and Edward M. Stockton
- Plaintiffs' Amended Motion To Strike Expert Report and Testimony
Of Sarah Parker, Ph.D. and Peter Lillo, Ph.D.
- Plaintiffs' Amended Motion To Strike Expert Report and
Testimony Of Jeffrey Klenk
Mercedes-Benz is responsible for the distribution, marketing and
customer service for all Mercedes-Benz products.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=2eldTJ at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Roy A. Katriel, Esq.
THE KATRIEL LAW FIRM, P.C.
2262 Carmel Valley Rd., Suite 201
Del Mar, CA 92014
Telephone: (619) 363-3333
Facsimile: (866) 832-5852
E-mail: rak@katriellaw.com
- and -
Ralph B. Kalfayan, Esq.
Ian D. Krupar, Esq.
THE KALFAYAN LAW FIRM, APC
2262 Carmel Valley Road, Suite 200
Del Mar, CA 92014
Telephone: (619) 232-0331
Facsimile: (619) 232-4019
E-mail: ralph@rbk-law.com
ian@rbk-law.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Troy M. Yoshino, Esq.
Frank A. Battaglia, Esq.
WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
101 California St.
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 591-1425
Facsimile: (415) 591-1400
E-mail: tyoshino@winston.com
fbattaglia@winston.com
MONTGOMERY TRANSPORTATION: Marin Sues Over Layoff Without Notice
----------------------------------------------------------------
ASHLEY PADGETT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. MONTGOMERY TRANSPORTATION GROUP, INC;
MONTGOMERY INTERMEDIATE, LLC; CAPACITY LEASE, LLC; MKM LEASING,
LLC; MONTGOMERY ONE, LLC; MONTGOMERY TRANSPORT, LLC; MONTGOMERY
LOGISTICS DE, LLC; MT SELECT, LLC; RM LOGISTICS, LLC; BREAKER
ONE-SWINE, LLC; OEP CAPITAL ADVISORS, L.P., Defendants, Case No.
2:25-cv-02045-SGC (N.D. Ala., November 26, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of the federal Worker
Adjustment and Retraining Notification ("WARN") Act and breach of
contract.
The case arises from the Defendants' action of terminating the
employment of the Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees as a
result of a mass layoff ordered by the Defendant on or about
October 9, 2025, without providing adequate advance notice as
required by the WARN Act.
Montgomery Transportation Group, Inc. is a logistics solutions
provider in Alabama.
Montgomery Intermediate, LLC is a logistics solutions provider in
Alabama.
Capacity Lease, LLC is a logistics solutions provider in Alabama.
MKM Leasing, LLC is a logistics solutions provider in Alabama.
Montgomery One, LLC is a logistics solutions provider in Alabama.
Montgomery Transport, LLC is a logistics solutions provider in
Alabama.
Montgomery Logistics DE, LLC is a logistics solutions provider in
Alabama.
MT Select, LLC is a logistics solutions provider in Alabama.
RM Logistics, LLC is a logistics solutions provider in Alabama.
Breaker One-Swine, LLC is a logistics solutions provider in
Alabama.
OEP Capital Advisors, LP is a limited partnership, with its
principal place of business in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Eric J. Artrip, Esq.
MASTANDO & ARTRIP, LLC
301 Holmes Ave. NE., Suite 100
Huntsville, AL 35801
Telephone: (256) 532-2222
Facsimile: (256) 513-7489
Email: artrip@mastandoartrip.com
- and -
William "Jack" Simpson, Esq.
SIMPSON, PLLC
100 South Main Street
Booneville, MS 38829
Telephone: (662) 913-7811
Email: jack@simpson-pllc.com
- and -
W. Thomas McCraney, III, Esq.
MCCRANEY MONTAGNET QUIN & NOBLE, PLLC
602 Steed Road, Suite 200
Ridgeland, MS 39157
Telephone: (601) 707-5725
Facsimile: (601) 510-2939
Email: tmccraney@mmqnlaw.com
MONTGOMERY TRANSPORTATION: Padgett Sues Over WARN Act Breach
------------------------------------------------------------
Ashley Padgett, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. MONTGOMERY TRANSPORTATION GROUP, INC; MONTGOMERY
INTERMEDIATE, LLC; CAPACITY LEASE, LLC; MKM LEASING, LLC;
MONTGOMERY ONE, LLC; MONTGOMERY TRANSPORT, LLC; MONTGOMERY
LOGISTICS DE, LLC; MT SELECT, LLC; RM LOGISTICS, LLC; BREAKER
ONE-SWINE, LLC; OEP CAPITAL ADVISORS, L.P., Case No.
2:25-cv-02045-SGC (N.D. Ala., Nov. 26, 2025), is brought
challenging Defendants' violation of the federal Worker Adjustment
and Retraining Notification Act (the "WARN Act"), and breach of
contract.
In October of 2025, the Montgomery Transportation Group Entities
employed more than 500 full-time employees that worked at or
reported to the Alabama Facility – including Plaintiff. On
October 9, 2025, Plaintiff and the other employees at the Alabama
Facility were informed that their employment was terminated
effective immediately.
The number of affected employees was more than 50 and more than one
third of the total employees at the Alabama Facility. Thus, the
October 9, 2025, notification amounted to a "plant closing" or
"mass layoff." Plaintiff, and all other employees who were laid off
on October 9, 2025, were not provided with sixty days' worth of
advance notice. As such, the Montgomery Transportation Group
Entities' failure to provide the requisite sixty days' worth of
notice amounts to a violation of the WARN Act, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff worked for Defendants prior to her termination on
October 9, 2025.
Montgomery Transportation Group, Inc. is a corporation formed under
the laws of the State of Delaware.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Eric J. Artrip, Esq.
MASTANDO & ARTRIP, LLC
301 Holmes Ave. NE., Suite 100
Huntsville, AL 35801
Phone: (256) 532-2222
Fax: (256) 513-7489
Email: artrip@mastandoartrip.com
NAVIENT CORP: Ballard Allowed Leave to File Class Memo Under Seal
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JILL BALLARD, REBECCA
VARNO, and MARK POKORNI, on behalf of themselves and the class
members described herein, v. NAVIENT CORPORATION, NAVIENT
SOLUTIONS, INC. and NAVIENT SOLUTIONS, LLC, Case No.
3:18-cv-00121-JFS-PJC (M.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Caraballo entered
an order granting the motion for leave to file the Plaintiffs'
memorandum in support of class certification under seal.
The Plaintiffs are directed to file a public version of these
documents with redactions of any material designated as
"confidential," and to file an unredacted version under seal.
Navient is an American financial services company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=54Dx0y at no extra
charge.[CC]
NETFLIX INC: Class Suit Seeks to Block $72-Bil. Warner Bros. Merger
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Scarcella of Reuters that Netflix (NFLX.O), has been hit with
a consumer lawsuit seeking to block the online video giant's
planned $72 billion acquisition of Warner Bros Discovery's (WBD.O),
studio and streaming businesses.
The proposed class action, was filed on Monday, December 8, by a
subscriber to Warner Bros-owned HBO Max who said the proposed deal
threatened to reduce competition in the U.S. subscription
video-on-demand market.
Some members of Congress have sharply questioned Netflix's
proposal, which is expected to face significant U.S. regulatory
scrutiny under antitrust laws. Paramount Skydance (PSKY.O),
launched a hostile bid worth $108.4 billion for Warner Bros
Discovery (WBD) in a challenge to Netflix's bid.
U.S. federal antitrust laws allow consumers to sue over mergers and
acquisitions, separate from any federal regulatory agency lawsuit,
though such cases face high legal hurdles.
Netflix, the world's largest streaming service, in a statement said
"we believe this suit is meritless and is merely an attempt by the
plaintiffs bar to leverage all the attention on the deal."
Lead attorneys for the plaintiff declined to comment.
"Netflix has demonstrated repeated willingness to raise
subscription prices even while facing competition from full-scale
rivals such as WBD," the lawsuit said.
The Netflix-Warner Bros deal was announced last week following a
weeks-long bidding war.
The Warner Bros Discovery board of directors said it would review
Paramount's competing offer.
The lawsuit said the Warner Bros deal would eliminate one of
Netflix's closest rivals, HBO Max, and give Netflix control over
Warner Bros marquee franchises including Harry Potter, DC Comics
and Game of Thrones.
Warner Bros is not a defendant in the lawsuit.
The law firm Bathaee Dunne, behind the new case, has pursued other
antitrust lawsuits against major entertainment and financial
companies.
In one case, the firm represents subscribers of YouTube TV and
other platforms in a lawsuit accusing The Walt Disney Co (DIS.N),
of harming competition in the market for live-streamed paid
television.
Disney, which has denied wrongdoing, has agreed to pay an
undisclosed amount to resolve the case.
The case is Michelle Fendelender v. Netflix, U.S. District Court,
Northern District of California, No. 5:25-cv-10521.
For plaintiff: Yavar Bathaee and Brian Dunne of Bathaee Dunne
For Netflix: No appearance yet [GN]
NEW HO WAH: Hernandez Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages for Delivery Persons
------------------------------------------------------------------
AQUILINO HERNANDEZ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NEW HO WAH CHINESE TAKE OUT INC., ZHEN LIN,
and JOHN/JANE DOE, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-06610 (E.D.N.Y.,
November 28, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for
violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor
Law including failure to pay minimum wages, failure to overtime
wages, failure to pay spread-of-hours compensation, failure to
provide wage notice, and failure to provide wage statements.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a delivery person
and a restaurant helper/cleaner from March 2024 until August 28,
2025.
New Ho Wah Chinese Take Out Inc. is a restaurant owner and operator
based in Astoria, New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David Harrison, Esq.
HARRISON, HARRISON & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
110 State Highway 35, 2nd Floor
Red Bank, NJ 07701
Telephone: (718) 799-9111
Email: dharrison@nynjemploymentlaw.com
NEW YORK, NY: Faces Riley Suit Over Denial of Due Process of Law
----------------------------------------------------------------
LEVAR RILEY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK; in his official
capacity as then New York City Police Officer: JERRY BOWENS,
Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-06616 (E.D.N.Y., November 29, 2025) is
a class action against the Defendants for violations of the Fourth
and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and 42 U.S.C
Section 1983.
The case arises from Defendant Jerry Bowens' engagement in a
pattern and practice of illegal and unconstitutional conduct,
fabricating evidence, denial of due process of law, perjury in
circumventing Fourth Amendment restrictions, and arrests without
probable cause. According to the complaint, Defendant City of New
York, knew or should have known that Bowens, with hundreds of
arrests to his credit, through his key participation, sent numerous
people to prison by denying them due process of law. As a result of
the Defendants' denial of due process, the Plaintiff and similarly
situated individuals suffered damages.
The City of New York is a municipal government in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rudy Velez, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF RUDY VELEZ & ASSOCIATES
930 Grand Concourse, Suite 1A
Bronx, NY 10451
Telephone: (917) 674-0573
Email: rvesq@yahoo.com
NEW YORK, NY: Minor Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against The City of New York.
The case is styled as Lisa Minor, individually and on behalf of all
similarly situated former and current women employees of the New
York City Department of Correction v. The City of New York, Case
No. 165420/2025 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty., Nov. 25, 2025).
New York --- https://www.nyc.gov/ -- often called New York City
(NYC), is the most populous city in the United States.[BN]
NORWAY SAVINGS: Boutot Files Suit Over Data Breach
--------------------------------------------------
JESSICA BOUTOT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NORWAY SAVINGS BANK and MARQUIS SOFTWARE
SOLUTIONS, INC., Defendants, Case No. 4:25-cv-1321 (E.D. Tex.,
December 3, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for
their failure to adequately safeguard Plaintiff's and Class
Members' Private Information.
The complaint alleges that the Plaintiff and Class Members were
required to provide their sensitive, personal, and private
information to Defendants with the reasonable expectation and on
the mutual understanding that Defendants would comply with their
obligations to keep such information confidential and secure from
unauthorized access.
However, in a data security incident notice filed with the Office
of the Maine Attorney General, NSB said that on August 14, it was
notified of unauthorized activity at a third-party service
provider, Marquis. The Plaintiff and Class Members face substantial
risk of out-of-pocket fraud losses such as loans opened in their
names, medical services billed in their names, tax return fraud,
utility bills opened in their names, credit card fraud, and similar
identity theft.
The Plaintiff seeks redress for Defendants' unlawful conduct, and
assert claims for: (i) negligence, (ii) breach of implied contract,
and (iii) unjust enrichment. The Plaintiff seeks remedies
including, but not limited to, compensatory damages, reimbursement
of out-of-pocket costs, and injunctive relief including
improvements to Defendants' data security systems, future annual
audits, and adequate credit monitoring services funded by
Defendants.
Plaintiff Jessica Boutot is a citizen of South Paris, Maine.
Norway Savings Bank ("NSB") is one of numerous financial
institutions that utilized Marquis's technology services. It is a
mutual banking institution serving over 38,000 residents in Maine.
Marquis Software Solutions, Inc. ("Marquis") is a technology and
enterprise software firm. Defendant Marquis is Defendant NSB's
third party-vendor which suffered a ransomware attack on August 14,
2025.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Leigh S. Montgomery, Esq.
ELLZEY KHERKHER SANFORD
MONTGOMERY, LLP
4200 Montrose Blvd., Suite 200
Houston, TX 77006
Telephone: (888) 350-3931
E-mail: lmontgomery@eksm.com
Service only: service@eksm.com
NOWON INC: Anderson Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
--------------------------------------------------------
Derrick Anderson, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Nowon, Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-06581 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 26,
2025), is brought against the Defendant for their failure to
design, construct, maintain, and operate their website to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind
or visually-impaired persons.
The Defendants are denying blind and visually impaired persons
throughout the United States with equal access to services DL
Lounge provides to their non-disabled customers through
https://www.nowonusa.com (hereinafter "Nowonusa.com" or "the
website"). Defendants' denial of full and equal access to their
website, and therefore denial of their services offered, and in
conjunction with their physical location, is a violation of
Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (the
"ADA").
Because Defendants' website, Nowonusa.com, is not equally
accessible to blind and visually impaired consumers, it violates
the ADA. Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change
in the Defendant's policies, practices, and procedures to that
Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory
damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to
unlawful discrimination, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using the
computer.
Nowon provides to the public a website known as Nowonusa.com which
provides consumers with access to Korean-American dishes which
Defendant offers in connection with their physical locations.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Uri Horowitz, Esq.
14441 70th Road
Flushing, NY 11367
Phone: 718.705.8706
Fax: 718.705.8705
Email: Uri@Horowitzlawpllc.com
NVIDIA CORP: Ted Sues Over Unlawful Use of Copyrighted Videos
-------------------------------------------------------------
TED ENTERTAINMENT, INC., MATT FISHER, and GOLFHOLICS, INC., on
behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs
v. NVIDIA CORPORATION, Defendant, Case No. 3:25-cv-10287 (N.D.
Cal., November 26, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant
for violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged practice of unlawfully
circumventing technological measures to access and scrape millions
of copyrighted videos from the online video viewing platform,
YouTube, in order to feed, train, improve, and commercialize the
Defendant's large-scale generative artificial intelligence ("AI")
foundational model named "Cosmos."
According to the complaint, the Defendant used the Plaintiff's and
Class members' intellectual property for its own commercial gain.
In doing so, the Defendant has violated YouTube's Terms of Service,
which were intended to protect the Plaintiffs and others similarly
situated.
Ted Entertainment, Inc. is a media company based in California.
Golfholics, Inc. is a golf content channel operator in California.
Nvidia Corporation is an American technology company headquartered
in Santa Clara, California. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Rom Bar-Nissim, Esq.
HEAH BAR-NISSIM LLP
1801 Century Park East, Suite 2400
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 432-2836
- and -
Jarrett Lee Ellzey, Esq.
Tom Kherkher, Esq.
Leigh S. Montgomery, Esq.
Natischa Volpe, Esq.
ELLZEY KHERKHER SANFORD MONTGOMERY LLP
4200 Montrose Street, Suite 200
Houston, TX 77006
Email: JEllzey@EKSM.com
TKherkher@EKSM.com
LMontgomery@EKSM.com
NVolpe@EKSM.com
ONTRAC LOGISTICS: Vallarta Suit Transferred to N.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Gregorio David Resendiz Vallarta, individually,
and on his own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Ontrac Logistics, Inc., Does 1 through 100, inclusive,
Case No. 2:25-cv-10603 was transferred from the U.S. District Court
for the Central District of California, to the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of California on Nov. 26, 2025.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-10243-VC to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Other Labor for Labor/Mgmnt.
Relations.
OnTrac Logistics, Inc. -- https://www.ontrac.com/ -- was a
privately held logistics company that contracted regional shipping
services in the Western United States.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Kevin A. Lipeles, Esq.
LIPELES LAW GROUP, APC
880 Apollo Street, Suite 336
El Segundo, CA 90245
Phone: (310) 322-2211
Fax: (310) 322-2252
Email: kevin@kallaw.com
- and -
Thomas H. Schelly, Esq.
2601 Airport Dr., Suite 360
Torrance, CA 90505
Phone: (310) 784-2443 x107
Email: thomas@kallaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Damian Moos, Esq.
SCOPELITIS GARVIN LIGHT HANSON AND FEARY LLP
2 North Lake Avenue, Suite 560
Pasadena, CA 91101
Phone: (949) 800-8601
Fax: (626) 795-4790
Email: dmoos@scopelitis.com
ORACLE CORP: Faces Suit Over Compromised Personal, Health Info
--------------------------------------------------------------
J.S., J.P., and T.S., by their parent and natural guardian, TONIQUE
PROCTOR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. ORACLE CORPORATION, Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-01939 (W.D. Tex., November 26, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for negligence, negligence per se, breach of
implied contract, invasion of privacy, unjust enrichment, and
breach of fiduciary duty.
The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and
safeguard the personally identifiable information and protected
health information of the Plaintiff and similarly situated
individuals stored within its network systems following a data
breach on July 10, 2025. The Defendant also failed to timely notify
the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals about the data
breach. As a result, the private information of the Plaintiff and
Class members was compromised and damaged through access by and
disclosure to unknown and unauthorized third parties.
Oracle Corporation is a multinational technology and enterprise
software company, headquartered in Austin, Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Bruce W. Steckler, Esq.
STECKLER WAYNE & LOVE PLLC
12720 Hillcrest Road, Suite1045
Dallas, TX 75230
Telephone: (972) 387-4040
Email: Bruce@stecklerlaw.com
- and -
Sabita J. Soneji, Esq.
TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP
1970 Broadway, Suite 1070
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: (510) 254-6808
Email: ssoneji@tzlegal.com
PAPA MURPHY'S: Kambick Files FCRA Suit in E.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Papa Murphy's
International LLC. The case is styled as Hope Fernandez Kambick,
individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated v. Papa
Murphy's International LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-01645-KES-SAB (E.D.
Cal., Nov. 25, 2025).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.
Papa Murphy's -- https://www.papamurphys.com/ -- is a take-and-bake
pizza company based in Vancouver, Washington.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gerald D. Lane, Jr., Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
1515 NE 26TH Street
Wilton Manors, FL 33305
Phone: (754) 444-7539
Email: gerald@jibraellaw.com
PARKWOOD LANDSCAPE: Dickinson Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Parkwood Landscape
Maintenance, Inc. The case is styled as Adam Dickinson,
individually, and on behalf of other similarly situated employees
v. Parkwood Landscape Maintenance, Inc., Case No. 25STCV34534 (Cal.
Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Nov. 25, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case
(General Jurisdiction)."
Parkwood Landscape Maintenance is a landscaping service based in
Van Nuys, California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ryan A. Quadrel, Esq.
BLACKSTONE LAW, APC
8383 Wilshire Boulevard., Ste. 745
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
Phone: 310-622-4278
Fax: 855-786-6356
Email: rquadrel@blackstonepc.com
PARSONS SERVICES: Menjivar Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Parsons Services
Company. The case is styled as Robert Menjivar, individually, and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Parsons Services
Company d/b/a Parsons Services Company of Texas, Parsons
Corporation, Case No. 25STCV34525 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles
Cty., Nov. 25, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case
(General Jurisdiction)."
Parsons -- https://www.parsons.com/ -- is an American multinational
technology-focused defense, intelligence, and infrastructure
engineering firm.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Seung L. Yang, Esq.
THE SENTINEL FIRM, APC
355 S. Grand Ave., Suite 1450
Los Angeles, California 90071
Phone: (213) 985-1150
Fax: (213) 985-2155
Email: seung.yang@thesentinelfirm.com
PILOT TRAVEL: Pimentel Gambling Suit Removed to S.D. Florida
------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Jan Carlos Pimentel, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. PILOT TRAVEL CENTERS
LLC, Case No. 2025-020907-CA-01 was removed from the Circuit Court
of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County,
Florida, to the United States District Court for Southern District
of Florida on Nov. 26, 2025, and assigned Case No.
1:25-cv-25566-CMA.
On October 23, 2025, Plaintiff, filed a Complaint in the Circuit
Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade
County, Florida (the "State Court Action") against PTC alleging
receipt of two telephone solicitations in violation of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA").[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Nicolas T. Burnosky, Esq.
MAYNARD NEXSEN PC
200 E. New England Avenue, Suite 110
Winter Park, FL 32789
Phone: (407) 647-2777
Primary: nburnosky@maynardnexsen.com
Secondary: nnashed@maynardnexsen.com
PRAIRIE FIELD: Bell Suit Removed to D. New Mexico
-------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Mark Bell, Gary Gover, Rene Chavez, And
Richard Baldwin, and others similarly situated v. PRAIRIE FIELD
SERVICES, LLC, Case No. D-101-CV-2025-02611 was removed from t the
First Judicial District Court of Santa Fe County, New Mexico, to
the United States District Court for District of New Mexico on Nov.
26, 2025, and assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-01181.
The Plaintiffs' Complaint seeks to recover alleged unpaid overtime
wages under the New Mexico Minimum Wage Act ("NMMWA") and the Fair
Labor Standards Act ("FLSA").[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
James E. Hart, Esq.
Alejandra Gallegos, Esq.
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
18565 Jamboree Road, Suite 800
Irvine, CA 92612
Phone: 949.705.3000
Facsimile: 949.724.1201
Email: jhart@littler.com
agallegos@littler.com
PRIVIAL MEDICAL GROUP: Parker Files Suit in Tex. Dist. Ct.
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Privial Medical Group
West Texas, PLLC. The case is styled as Steven Parker, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Privial Medical
Group West Texas, PLLC, Case No. 29625-B (Tex. Dist. Ct., Taylor
Cty., Nov. 25, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Other Civil."
Privial Medical Group West Texas, PLLC --
https://www.priviahealth.com/ -- support practices across
population health, payer contracting, patient engagement, and
more.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jarrett L. Ellzey, Esq.
ELLZEY & ASSOCIATES PLLC
1105 Milford Street
Houston, TX 77006
Phone: (713) 554-2325
Email: jarrett@ellzeylaw.com
PURFOODS LLC: Settlement in Douglas Gets Final Nod
--------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL DOUGLAS, DOROTHY
GOODON, DOROTHY ALEXANDER, STELLA KERITSIS, JOHNNIE JONES, YOLANDA
BETTS, LOGAN ALDRIDGE, STEVEN D'ANGELO, CHRISTINE ASHE, VERNITA
FORD, and DIANE YOUNG, v. PURFOODS, LLC, Case No.
4:23-cv-00332-RGE-SBJ (S.D. Iowa), the Hon. Judge entered a final
approval order and judgment approving class action settlement.
1. The Court grants final approval of the Settlement Agreement
and finally certifies the following Settlement Class:
"All residents of the United States who were sent notice that
their personal information may have been accessed, stolen, or
compromised as a result of the Data Incident."
The Settlement Class specifically excludes: (i) PurFoods and
its respective officers and directors; (ii) any Person who
would otherwise be a member of the Settlement Class but who
timely and validly requests exclusion from the Settlement
Class; (iii) the Judge and Magistrate Judge assigned to
evaluate the fairness of this settlement, the Court's staff,
and the Court's immediate family members; and (iv) any other
Person found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be
guilty under criminal law of initiating, causing, aiding, or
abetting the Data Incident or who pleads nolo contendere to
any such charge.
2. The Court finds that PurFoods has fully complied with the
notice requirements of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005,
28 U.S.C. section 1715.
3. The Court approves payments to Representative Plaintiffs in
the amount of $2,500.00 each as a Service Award for their
efforts on behalf of the Settlement Class.
4. The Court affirms the appointment of Cafferty Clobes
Meriwether & Sprengel LLP; Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips
Grossman PLLC; Siri & Glimstad LLP; and Federman & Sherwood
as Settlement Class Counsel and finds that they have
adequately represented the interests of the Settlement Class.
5. The Court grants Settlement Class Counsel's application for
Attorneys' fees in the amount of $1,416,666.67 and expenses
in the amount of $13,167.18. Payment shall be made pursuant
to the terms of the Settlement Agreement.
Purfoods is a food production company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=WSBfd1 at no extra
charge.[CC]
QUINTESSA LLC: Bland Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Oklahoma
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Quintessa LLC. The
case is styled as Kelly Bland, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Quintessa LLC, InfoWorx Direct LLC,
IWDLLC LLC, Ronald Perlstein, Case No. 5:25-cv-01428-J (W.D. Okla.,
Nov. 26, 2025).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.
Quintessa -- https://quintessamarketing.com/ -- is the premier
source of Premium MVA Retainers for personal injury lawyers and law
firms.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jason B. Aamodt, Esq.
Matthew D. Alison, Esq.
INDIAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL LAW GROUP, PLLC
233 South Detroit Ave., Suite 200
Tulsa, OK 74120
Fax: (918) 347-6169
Fax: (918) 948-6190
Email: jason@iaelaw.com
matthew@iaelaw.com
SAMWOOJUNG LLC: Alexandria Sues Over Online Store's Access Barriers
-------------------------------------------------------------------
ERIKA ALEXANDRIA, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SAMWOOJUNG, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-09860 (S.D.N.Y., November 26, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, the New York City Human Rights Law, and
declaratory relief.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website,
www.samwoojung1963.com, contains access barriers which hinder the
Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online
goods, content, and services offered to the public through the
website. The accessibility issues on the website include but not
limited to: missing alt-text, hidden elements on web pages,
incorrectly formatted lists, unannounced pop ups, unclear labels
for interactive elements, and the requirement that some events be
performed solely with a mouse.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain
accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals.
Samwoojung, LLC is a company that sells online goods and services,
doing business in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
SAN JACINTO: Pumpage Fee "Unconstitutional," Titter-Bell Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
JASON TITTER-BELL and CDF TEXTILES, LTD, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. SAN JACINTO RIVER
AUTHORITY, Defendant, Case No. 4:25-cv-05722 (S.D. Tex., November
26, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for taking
private property without compensation under color of state law in
violation of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution,
violation of due process, illegal exaction, declaratory judgment,
restitution, and preservation of evidence/spoliation notice.
The Plaintiffs bring this complaint to seek (i) a declaratory
judgment that the pumpage fee charged and collected by the
Defendant, and paid by the Plaintiffs and other residential and
commercial water customers in Montgomery County, Texas, on their
monthly water bills since September 8, 2020, is an unconstitutional
and illegal tax or exaction, and (ii) a refund of the pumpage fees
paid by the Plaintiffs and Class Members since September 8, 2020 in
the form of restitution.
As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's wrongful
actions, the Plaintiffs and Class Members have suffered, and will
continue to suffer, injury and harm in the form of the
unconstitutional and illegal tax or exaction.
CDF Textiles, Ltd. is a textile manufacturing company in Texas.
San Jacinto River Authority (SJRA) is a government agency in Texas.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Marvin W. Jones, Esq.
C. Brantley Jones, Esq.
SPROUSE SHRADER SMITH PLLC
701 S. Taylor, Suite 500
Amarillo, TX 79105
Telephone: (806) 468-3300
Facsimile: (806) 373-3454
Email: marty.jones@sprouselaw.com
brantley.jones@sprouselaw.com
- and -
Richard L. Coffman, Esq.
THE COFFMAN LAW FIRM
3355 West Alabama, Suite 240
Houston, TX 77098
Telephone: (713) 528-6700
Facsimile: (866) 835-8250
Email: rcoffman@coffmanlawfirm.com
SCOTT HARRIS: Faces Tomsons Wage-and-Hour Suit in N.D. Ill.
-----------------------------------------------------------
SCOTT TOMSONS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SCOTT HARRIS HOSPITALITY, LLC, DAVANTI
HOLDING, LLC, DAVANTI'S WESTERN SPRINGS, LLC, DAVANTI NAPERVILLE,
LLC, DAVANTI LINCOLNWOOD, LLC, FRANCESCA'S FRANKFORT LLC,
FRANCESCA'S BARRINGTON, LLC, FRANCESCA RESTAURANTS, LLC,
FRANCESCA'S OAK LAWN, LLC, FRANCESCA'S ON CHESTNUT, LLC,
FRANCESCA'S FIORE, INC., FRANCESCA'S MOZZAFIATO, INC., PIGNATORO
CORP., VASILI'S NAPERVILLE, LLC, FRANCESCA'S MIO MODO, LLC, and
ITALIAN 101, LLC, and SCOTT HARRIS, Defendants, Case No.
1:25-cv-14488 (N.D. Ill., November 26, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for failure to pay minimum and overtime wages
in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Illinois
Minimum Wage Law.
The Plaintiff started to work for the Defendants as a bartender in
July 2023 and he was promoted as a manager in October 2023. He was
terminated in April 2025.
Scott Harris Hospitality, LLC is a restaurant owner and operator in
Illinois.
Davanti Holding, LLC is a restaurant owner and operator in
Illinois.
Davanti's Western Springs, LLC is a restaurant owner and operator
in Illinois.
Davanti Naperville, LLC is a restaurant owner and operator in
Illinois.
Davanti Lincolnwood, LLC is a restaurant owner and operator in
Illinois.
Francesca's Frankfort LLC is a restaurant owner and operator in
Illinois.
Francesca's Barrington, LLC is a restaurant owner and operator in
Illinois.
Francesca Restaurants, LLC is a restaurant owner and operator in
Illinois.
Francesca's Oak Lawn, LLC is a restaurant owner and operator in
Illinois.
Francesca's On Chestnut, LLC is a restaurant owner and operator in
Illinois.
Francesca's Fiore, Inc. is a restaurant owner and operator in
Illinois.
Francesca's Mozzafiato, Inc. is a restaurant owner and operator in
Illinois.
Pignatoro Corp. is a restaurant owner and operator in Illinois.
Vasili's Naperville, LLC is a restaurant owner and operator in
Illinois.
Francesca's Mio Modo, LLC is a restaurant owner and operator in
Illinois.
Italian 101, LLC is a restaurant owner and operator in Illinois.
[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jordan Richards, Esq.
Michael Miller, Esq.
USA EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS - JORDAN RICHARDS, PLLC
1800 SE 10th Ave., Suite 205
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316
Telephone: (954) 871-0050
Email: jordan@jordanrichardspllc.com
michael@usaemploymentlawyers.com
SECURICO LIFE INSURANCE: Bahr TCPA Suit Transferred to W.D. Texas
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Jonathan Bahr, individually and on behalf of
a class of all persons and entities similarly situated v. Securico
Life Insurance Company, Case No. 2:25-cv-02721 was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, to the U.S.
District Court for the Western District of Texas on Nov. 26, 2025.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-01950 to the
proceeding.
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.
Securico Life -- https://www.securicolife.com/ -- offers secure,
affordable final expense insurance with comprehensive coverage and
living benefits.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Madison Tate Donaldson, Esq.
WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM, PC
940 N. Lincoln St.
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: (303) 376-6360
Email: mdonaldson@wagstafflawfirm.com
SLEEP NUMBER CORP: Court Dismisses Consumer Suit over Sale Tag
--------------------------------------------------------------
Sleep Number Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 5, 2025, that on
January 14, 2025, purported customers served a putative class
action complaint on behalf of themselves and a putative class of
California consumers against Sleep Number in the United States
District Court for the Central District of California alleging that
Sleep Number's beds are perpetually on sale in violation of
California law.
On April 8, 2025, the court granted Sleep Number's motion to
transfer or, alternatively, dismiss and dismissed the matter in its
entirety based on the first-to-file doctrine. The plaintiffs did
not appeal the dismissal.
The plaintiff sought injunctive relief, damages and attorney's
fees. Sleep Number brought a motion to dismiss for failure to state
a claim and a motion to transfer or, alternatively, dismiss based
on the first-to-file doctrine (citing the purported class action
complaint filed on September 27, 2024 as described below).
Sleep Number Corp. is a furniture company based in Minneapolis,
Minnesota.
SRO MANAGEMENT: Blind Users Can't Access Website, Solis Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ROBERTO SOLIS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SRO MANAGEMENT, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-06589 (E.D.N.Y., November 26, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, the New York City Human Rights Law, and
declaratory relief.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website,
www.uplandnyc.com, contains access barriers which hinder the
Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online
goods, content, and services offered to the public through the
website. The accessibility issues on the website include but not
limited to: missing alt-text, hidden elements on web pages,
incorrectly formatted lists, unannounced pop ups, unclear labels
for interactive elements, and the requirement that some events be
performed solely with a mouse.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain
accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals.
SRO Management, LLC is a company that sells online goods and
services, doing business in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
STAINLESS FOUNDRY: Underpays Maintenance Technicians, Ryan Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CHRISTOPHER RYAN, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. STAINLESS FOUNDRY & ENGINEERING,
LLC, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-01885 (E.D. Wis., November 29,
2025) is a class action against the Defendant for failure to pay
regular and overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards
Act and Wisconsin's Wage Payment and Collection Laws.
The Plaintiff worked as an hourly-paid, non-exempt employee in the
position of maintenance technician at the Defendant's Milwaukee,
Wisconsin location from approximately December 2023 until on or
about November 18, 2025.
Stainless Foundry & Engineering, LLC is a foundry and engineering
firm based in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James A. Walcheske, Esq.
Scott S. Luzi, Esq.
David M. Potteiger, Esq.
WALCHESKE & LUZI, LLC
235 N. Executive Drive, Suite 240
Brookfield, WI 53005
Telephone: (262) 780-1953
Facsimile: (262) 565-6469
Email: jwalcheske@walcheskeluzi.com
sluzi@walcheskeluzi.com
dpotteiger@walcheskeluzi.com
SUSHI VIDA: Fernandez Sues Over Blind's Equal Access to Website
---------------------------------------------------------------
FELIPE FERNANDEZ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SUSHI VIDA, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-09886 (S.D.N.Y., November 26, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, the New York City Human Rights Law, and
declaratory relief.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website,
www.mamasushi.com, contains access barriers which hinder the
Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online
goods, content, and services offered to the public through the
website. The accessibility issues on the website include but not
limited to: missing alt-text, hidden elements on web pages,
incorrectly formatted lists, unannounced pop ups, unclear labels
for interactive elements, and the requirement that some events be
performed solely with a mouse.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain
accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals.
Sushi Vida, Inc. is a company that sells online goods and services,
doing business in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
SYNOPSYS: New England Teamsters Sues Over Misleading Statements
---------------------------------------------------------------
New England Teamsters Pension Fund, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. SYNOPSYS, INC., SASSINE GHAZI,
SHELAGH GLASER, SUDHINDRA KANKANWADI, AART J. DE GEUS, LUIS BORGEN,
MARC N. CASPER, JANICE D. CHAFFIN, BRUCE R. CHIZEN, MERCEDES
JOHNSON, ROBERT G. PAINTER, JEANNINE P. SARGENT, JOHN G. SCHWARZ,
and ROY VALLEE, Case No. 5:25-cv-10201 (N.D. Cal., Nov. 25, 2025),
is brought as a securities class action, which asserts both strict
liability claims under the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Securities
Act") and fraud based claims under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the "Exchange Act"), arising from Defendants' materially
false and misleading statements and omissions to investors
regarding Synopsys' business operations, financial performance, and
market conditions.
The Defendants misled investors by failing to disclose the
following adverse facts: the Company's growing emphasis on
artificial intelligence ("AI") customers, who require more
customization, was weakening the economics of its Design IP
business; as a result, certain of the Company's road map and
resource choices were unlikely to achieve their intended outcomes;
these issues were materially harming the Company's financial
performance; and as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive
statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects
that were made during the Class Period or contained in the
Acquisition Materials were materially misleading and/or lacked a
reasonable basis.
On September 9, 2025, investors learned the truth about the
negative impact of Synopsys' operational challenges within its
Design IP business. On that day, Synopsys reported its third
quarter 2025 financial results and revealed that the Company's "IP
business underperformed expectations." Defendant Ghazi reported
that revenues for its Design IP segment had declined eight percent
year-over-year and that the Company would "need to pivot our IP
resources and road map to the highest-growth opportunities." On
this news, Synopsys' stock price fell by 35.8 percent, dropping
from $604.37 to $387.78 per share on September 10, 2025.
As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the
precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's
securities, Plaintiff and Class members have suffered significant
losses and damages, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff purchased Synopsys securities during the Class Period
and was damaged as the result of Defendants' wrongdoing alleged in
this complaint.
Synopsys is a Mountain View, California-based technology company
that provides software, intellectual property, and services used to
design and verify advanced semiconductor chips.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lucas E. Gilmore, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 300
Berkeley, CA 94710
Phone: (510) 725-3000
Facsimile: (510) 725-3001
Email: lucasg@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Francis P. McConville, Esq.
Connor C. Boehme, Esq.
LABATON KELLER SUCHAROW LLP
140 Broadway
New York, NY 10005
Phone: (212) 907-0700
Facsimile: (212) 818-0477
Email: fmcconville@labaton.com
cboehme@labaton.com
TARGET CORP: Class Cert Bid Filing in Kelly Due Dec. 19
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LINDEN KELLY, v. TARGET
CORPORATION, Case No. 2:23-cv-01301-RBS (E.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge
R. Barclay Surrick entered an order amending July 25, 2025,
Scheduling Order amended as follows:
1. The Plaintiff shall file a motion for class certification no
later than Dec. 19, 2025;
2. The Defendant shall file its opposition to the Plaintiff's
motion for class certification no later than Jan. 26, 2026;
and
3. The Plaintiff shall file a reply in support of her motion for
class certification no later than March 2, 2026.
Target is an American retailer, known for its big box general
merchandise stores.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=BsJ93e at no extra
charge.[CC]
TARGET CORP: Riviera Suit Transferred to D. Minnesota
-----------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as City of Riviera Beach Police Pension Fund,
State Board of Administration of Florida, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Target Corporation,
Brian C. Cornell, David P Abney, Douglas M. Baker, Jr., George S.
Barrett, Gail K. Boudreaux, Robert L. Edwards, Melanie L. Healey,
Donald R. Knauss, Christine A. Leahy, Monica C. Lozano, Grace Puma,
Derica W. Rice, Dimitri L. Stockton, Case No. 2:25-cv-00085 was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of
Florida, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota
on Nov. 26, 2025.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 0:25-cv-04461-NEB-SGE to
the proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Securities/Commodities for the
Securities Exchange Act.
Target Corporation -- https://www.target.com/ -- is an American
retail corporation that operates a chain of discount department
stores and hypermarkets.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua E. Dubin, Esq.
JOSH DUBIN, P.A.
201 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 1210
Miami, FL 33131
Phone: (212) 219-1469
Fax: (212) 219-1897
Email: josh@jdubinlaw.com
- and -
Jay W. Eisenhofer, Esq.
Caitlin M. Moyna, Esq.
Vincent J. Pontrello, Esq.
GRANT & EISENHOFER P.A.
485 Lexington Avenue
New York, NY 10017
Phone: (646) 722-8500
Fax: (646) 722-8501
Email: jeisenhofer@gelaw.com
cmoyna@gelaw.com
vpontrello@gelaw.com
TEQUILEROS GROUP: Hernandez Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Tequileros Group,
Inc. The case is styled as Daniel Hernandez, individually, and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Tequileros Group, Inc.,
Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2025-0017541 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Joaquin
Cty., Nov. 25, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Unlimited Civil Other Employment."
Tequileros Group, Inc. is the corporate entity behind a rapidly
expanding chain of Mexican street food restaurants and food trucks
primarily located in Northern and Central California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kane Moon, Esq.
MOON & YANG, APC
725 South Figueroa St., 31st Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Phone: 213-232-3128
Fax: 213-232-3125
Email: kane.moon@moonyanglaw.com
TERADATA CORPORATION: Court Dismisses Ostrander Suit
----------------------------------------------------
Teradata Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 5, 2025, that on
September 26, 2025, the United States District Court for the
Southern District of California granted the motion to dismiss in
full a June 14, 2024 putative securities class action lawsuit was
filed against the company and certain of its officers in said court
captioned "Ostrander v. Teradata Corporation," (No. 24-cv-01034)
with leave to amend. Plaintiff elected not to file an amended
complaint and will have 30 days from entry of final judgment to
file a notice of appeal.
The complaint asserts claims for alleged violations of federal
securities laws related to statements concerning the company's
business and 2023 financial outlook for Total and Public Cloud
Annual Recurring Revenue.
The plaintiff seeks to represent a class of certain persons who
purchased or otherwise acquired the company's stock during the
period from February 13, 2023 to February 12, 2024 and seeks
unspecified damages and other relief.
On December 6, 2024, the lead plaintiff in the case filed an
amended complaint, after which the Company filed a motion to
dismiss on February 4, 2025.
Teradata Corporation builds and operates comprehensive open and
connected cloud analytics and data platform for artificial
intelligence.
TEVA PHARMACEUTICAL: Settlement Awaits Prelim Approval
------------------------------------------------------
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited disclosed in its Form 10-Q
report for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2025, filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 5, 2025,
that on August 4, 2025, the parties in putative class action
complaints informed the United States District Court for the
District of Massachusetts that they had reached a settlement in
principle, and the settlement was subsequently filed and is
awaiting preliminary approval.
In May 2023, certain plaintiffs filed putative class action
complaints in said court against Teva and a number of its
affiliates, alleging that Teva engaged in anticompetitive conduct
to suppress generic competition to its branded "QVAR" asthma
inhalers in violation of state and federal antitrust laws and state
consumer protection laws.
On May 7, 2024, the court granted Teva's motion in part and denied
its motion in part. The court dismissed plaintiffs' claim that Teva
had engaged in "sham litigation" and certain of plaintiffs' state
antitrust and consumer protection claims, but permitted the case to
proceed on the remainder of plaintiffs' allegations. Following this
decision, two direct purchaser plaintiffs filed similar putative
class action complaints in the U.S. District Court for the District
of Massachusetts.
On June 18, 2024, Teva answered in all cases and simultaneously
moved for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c), which
remains pending. Subsequently, on June 28, 2024, Teva stipulated to
the dismissal of the two direct purchaser plaintiffs' claims, with
prejudice.
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited is a global pharmaceutical
company into generics, innovative medicines and biopharmaceuticals,
with worldwide operations and headquarters in Israel and a
significant presence in the United States, Europe and many other
markets around the world.
TINDER INC: Settles Consumer Suit for $60.5MM
---------------------------------------------
Match Group, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 5, 2025, that on
September 10, 2025, the parties in a state-wide class action agreed
to settle the case on a class-wide basis for $60.5 million.
On May 28, 2015, a putative state-wide class action was filed
against its subsidiary, Tinder Inc. in said court. The complaint
principally alleges that Tinder violated California's Unruh Civil
Rights Act by offering and charging users age 30 and over a higher
price than younger users for subscriptions to its premium "Tinder
Plus" service. The complaint seeks certification of a class of
California Tinder Plus subscribers age 30 and over and damages in
an unspecified amount.
On June 27, 2022, the Superior Court of California, County of Los
Angeles issued an order staying the class claims in case captioned
"Allan Candelore v. Tinder, Inc.," Case No. BC583162 pending the
Ninth Circuit Court's decision on case captioned "Lisa Kim v.
Tinder, Inc.," Case No. 18-cv-3093 (Central District of
California).
On July 15, 2024, the court granted plaintiff's motion to certify a
class of approximately 270,000 individuals based upon California
Tinder Plus and Tinder Gold subscribers age 29 and over. On January
17, 2025, the court denied the company's motion to compel the class
and the Plaintiff to arbitration. The company filed a Notice of
Appeal on January 24, 2025, and on April 18, 2025, the court stayed
the case pending appeal.
Match Group, Inc., through its portfolio companies, is a provider
of digital dating apps.
ULTA SALON: Repperger Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
-----------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Veronica Repperger, Amber Lamar, Charra
Caldwell, and Rebekah Clark, on their own behalf and on behalf of
others similarly situated v. ULTA SALON, COSMETICS & FRAGRANCE,
INC., Case No. 25-2-00608-15 was removed from the Superior Court of
the State of Washington in Island County, to the United States
District Court for Western District of Washington on Nov. 26, 2025,
and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02398.
In the Complaint, Plaintiffs allege that commercial emails to
Washington citizens sent by Ulta violated Washington's Commercial
Electronic Mail Act ("CEMA") and Consumer Protection Act (the
"CPA") because they allegedly contain false or misleading
information in their subject lines.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Markus W. Louvier, Esq.
EVANS, CRAVEN & LACKIE, P.S.
818 West Riverside, Suite 250
Spokane, WA 99201-0910
Phone: (509) 455-5200
Fax: (509) 455-3632
Email: mlouvier@ecl-law.com
UNDERDOG SPORTS: Kentucky Gambling Suit Removed to E.D. Kentucky
----------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Kentucky Gambling Recovery LLC, and others
similarly situated v. UNDERDOG SPORTS HOLDINGS, INC. dba UNDERDOG
FANTASY; DABBLE SPORTS LLC; DABBLE SPORTS PTY LTD; BLAZESOFT LTD;
BLAZEGAMES, INC.; SCPS LLC dba ZULA CASINO, Case No. 25-Cl-00513
was removed from the Circuit Court of Franklin County, Kentucky, to
the United States District Court for Eastern District of Kentucky
on Nov. 26, 2025, and assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-00066.
The Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (the "FAC") in the
Circuit Court on October 29, 2025. The Plaintiff's FAC asserts a
single count under a Kentucky statute, the Loss Recovery Act,
Kentucky Revised Statutes ("KRS") to recover alleged losses on
behalf of "thousands" of unidentified "individuals within Kentucky"
who "have lost – and continue to lose – more than $5 at any
single time (or over 24 hours) by allegedly gambling with
Defendants, and have not sued to recover those losses within six
months of payment to Defendants."[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Timothy J. Weatherholt, Esq.
FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP
220 West Main Street, Suite 1700
Louisville, KY 40202
Phone: (502) 565-3982
Fax: (502) 561-3991
Email: tweatherholt@fisherphillips.com
- and -
William Gantz, Esq.
DUANE MORRIS LLP
100 High Street, Suite 2400
Boston, MA 02110
Phone: (857) 488-4200
Fax: (857) 403-3026
Email: BGantz@duanemorris.com
UNION PACIFIC: Williams Suit Removed to D. South Carolina
---------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Miyah Williams, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, Case
No. 2025CH10886 was removed from the Circuit Court of Cook County,
Illinois, to the United States District Court for Northern District
of Illinois on Nov. 26, 2025, and assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-14508.
In her Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that Union Pacific violated the
Illinois Genetic Information Privacy Act ("GIPA"), when Plaintiff
applied for employment with Union Pacific. The Plaintiff alleges
that Union Pacific asked prospective employees to provide family
medical histories as part of a pre-employment medical
examination.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Harry N. Arger, Esq.
Melanie J. Chico, Esq.
DYKEMA GOSSETT PLLC
10 S. Wacker Drive, Suite 2300
Chicago, IL 60606
Phone: (312) 876-1700
Fax: (312) 876-1155
Email: HArger@dykema.com
MChico@dykema.com
UNITED STATES: Molina Class Cert Bid Tossed w/o Prejudice
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSE ESCOBAR MOLINA, et
al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, et al., Case No.
1:25-cv-03417-BAH (D.D.C.), the Hon. Judge Howell entered an
order:
-- The Plaintiffs' Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, to Stay,
and for Provisional Class Certification is granted in part,
denied in part as to the Plaintiffs' request for a stay.
-- The Plaintiffs' motion for class certification is denied
without prejudice.
The plaintiffs' motion to enjoin preliminarily defendants from
continuing any policy or practice of conducting warrantless civil
immigration arrests in the District without making individualized
probable cause determinations as to each arrestee's risk of escape,
as required by 8 U.S.C. section 1357(a)(2), is granted, and a final
decision on the requested certification of a class and both
subclasses will be reserved for a later time.
The Defendants are preliminarily enjoined from enforcing their
policy of conducting warrantless civil immigration arrests without
probable cause to believe that the arrestee is likely to escape
before an administrative warrant can be obtained; and only
plaintiffs' proposed Unassessed Escape Risk Class is provisionally
certified.
The case arises in the wake of a publicly declared emergency in our
Nation's Capital explained by the current president, in part, to
ensure that "this city will no longer be a sanctuary for illegal
alien criminals," and in the midst of public announcements by other
federal officials that "criminal aliens are a public safety threat,
and there should be no place for sanctuary policies that place
crime over the community."
The Plaintiffs allege that defendants have instituted a new "arrest
first, ask questions later" policy of making warrantless civil
immigration arrests without probable cause to believe someone is
both in the United States unlawfully and an escape risk.
José Escobar Molina was born in El Salvador and has lived in the
United States since 1998. He successfully applied, in 2001, for
Temporary Protected Status ("TPS"), which protects him from
detention and deportation because of his immigration status.
The Plaintiffs propose and seek certification of one over-arching
class and two subclasses. Escobar Molina, B.S.R., N.S., and R.S.M.
seek to represent the following class:
Warrantless Arrests Class:
"All persons who, since Aug. 11, 2025, have been or will be
arrested in this District for alleged immigration violations
without a warrant and without a pre-arrest, individualized
assessment of probable cause that the person is in the United
States unlawfully and that the person poses a flight risk."
Escobar Molina seeks to represent the following subclass:
Immigration Status Subclass:
"All persons who, since Aug. 11, 2025, have been or will be
arrested in this District for alleged immigration violations
without a warrant and without a pre-arrest, individualized
assessment of probable cause that the person is in the United
States unlawfully."
Escobar Molina, B.S.R., N.S., and R.S.M. seek to represent the
following subclass:
Unassessed Escape Risk Subclass:
"All persons who, since Aug. 11, 2025, have been or will be
arrested in this District for alleged immigration violations
without a warrant and without a pre-arrest, individualized
assessment of probable cause that the person poses an escape
risk." (with original name "Flight Risk Subclass" modified
herein to "Unassessed Escape Risk Subclass").
The Plaintiffs filed the instant suit on Sept. 25, 2025, alleging
that "[d]efendants have a policy and practice of making mass civil
immigration arrests in Washington, D.C., without a warrant and
without the probable cause findings that are required by Congress
under federal statute," which "policy and practice are tied to the
President's promise to carry out mass immigration arrests and
deportations."
The Department of Homeland Security is a federal executive
department established to protect the United States from threats
like terrorism, natural disasters, and cyberattacks.
A copy of the Court's memorandum opinion dated Dec. 2, 2025, is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=EJTlUD
at no extra charge.[CC]
UNITED STATES: Ramos Seeks Leave to File Supplemental Briefing
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WILSON OMAR RAMOS PAZ, v.
ANTONE MONIZ, Superintendent, Plymouth County Correctional
Facility, PATRICIA HYDE, Field Office Director, TODD LYONS, Acting
Director U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, KRISTI NOEM,
U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security, and PAMELA BONDI, U.S.
Attorney General, Case No. 1:25-cv-12715-DJC (D. Mass.), the
Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting motion for
leave to file supplemental briefing.
Petitioner, through undersigned counsel, moves this court to for
leave to file supplemental briefing in this case, concerning the
petitioner's membership in the recently certified class in
Maldonado Bautista v. Santacruz, as well as an order granting
partial summary judgment in this case.
The certification and order for partial summary judgment were
issued on November 25th, 2025 and November 20th, 2025,
respectively, after the conclusion of briefing in this case.
Petitioner subsequently filed a motion for custody redetermination
in immigration court, and a hearing was set for December 8th, 2025.
In its order granting partial summary judgment for the
plaintiff-petitioners, the Court found that "[8 U.S.C.] § 1226(a)
is the appropriate governing authority over Petitioners'
detention." Order Granting Petitioners' Motion for Partial Summary
Judgment and Denying Request to Enter Final Judgment, Maldonado
Bautista v. Santacruz, No. 5:25-CV-01873-SSS BFM, at 14 (C.D. Cal.
Nov. 20, 2025).
In its order granting the plaintiff petitioners’ motion for class
certification, the court certified a class defined as:
"All noncitizens in the United States without lawful status
who (1) have entered or will enter the United States without
inspection; (2) were not or will not be apprehended upon
arrival; and (3) are not or will not be subject to detention
under 8 U.S.C. section 1226(c), section 1225(b)(1), or section
1231 at the time the Department of Homeland Security makes an
initial custody determination" and extended the declaratory
relief granted to the petitioner-plaintiffs to the class as a
whole.
Petitioner seeks to submit the attached supplemental brief
asserting membership in this class, and therefore moves this court
to accept it.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 2, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=QmI8Aw at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Stephen M. Born, Esq.
MILLS & BORN, LLC
33 Chelsea St.
Everett, MA 02149
Telephone: (781) 321-1402
E-mail: sborn@millsandborn.com
WEL COMPANIES INC: Lamb Files Suit in E.D. Wisconsin
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against WEL Companies, Inc.
The case is styled as Russell Lamb, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. WEL Companies, Inc., Case No.
1:25-cv-01874 (E.D. Wis., Nov. 25, 2025).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.
WEL Companies -- https://www.welcompanies.com/ -- provides top-tier
transportation solutions.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN LLC
227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60606
Phone: (866) 252-0878
Email: gklinger@milberg.com
WEST BEND: Agrees to Settle Nonmaterial Depreciation Class Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Tracy Bagdonas of ClassAction.org reports that West Bend Mutual has
agreed to settle a class action lawsuit that alleged that the
insurance company wrongfully deducted "nonmaterial depreciation"
from structural loss claims on both personal and commercial
property policies in certain states.
The West Bend Mutual class action settlement received preliminary
approval from the court on September 9, 2025 and covers
policyholders who had personal or commercial insurance policies,
made a structural loss claim in one of the Class States (listed
below) during the relevant time periods, received an "Xactimate"
estimate to determine their actual cash value (ACV) payment, and
were issued an ACV payment that improperly counted for "Nonmaterial
Depreciation," causing its value to drop.
According to the settlement agreement, the Class States and
applicable time periods covered by the class action settlement
include:
-- Dates of loss between March 29, 2020 and June 30, 2022 for
policyholders with structural loss claims in Illinois, Kentucky,
Ohio, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin; and
-- Dates of loss between March 29, 2012 and June 30, 2022 for
policyholders with structural loss claims in Missouri.
Importantly, the agreement explains that "nonmaterial depreciation"
refers to the depreciation of labor costs, overhead and other
non-material items calculated within the estimating software, and
"structural loss" refers to physical damage to a building or
structure covered by West Bend Mutual’s property insurance
policies.
The court-approved website for the West Bend Mutual settlement can
be found at https://NoJokeDepreciationSettlement.com/.
According to the settlement website, West Bend Mutual settlement
class members who submit a valid, timely claim form are eligible to
receive a one-time cash payment calculated based on the state in
which a policy was held and whether nonmaterial depreciation was
paid.
Class members with policies issued in Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri,
Ohio or Tennessee and who submit a valid claim form are eligible to
receive up to 100 percent of the nonmaterial depreciation West Bend
Mutual allegedly withheld and failed to pay (or the amount that a
respective class member would have received if the nonmaterial
depreciation had not pushed their loss below the deductible), plus
a five-percent interest rate per year starting from the date they
were issued their final ACV payment through July 1, 2025.
Class members with policies issued in Virginia or Wisconsin and who
submit a valid claim form are eligible to receive 80 percent of the
nonmaterial depreciation West Bend Mutual allegedly withheld (or
the amount that a respective class member would have received if
the nonmaterial depreciation had not pushed their loss below the
deductible), plus a five-percent interest rate per year starting
from the date they were issued their final ACV payment through July
1, 2025.
For class members with policies in either group and whose
nonmaterial deductions were initially withheld from ACV payments
but were subsequently paid, their settlement payout is based on the
following schedule:
-- Nonmaterial depreciation amounted to $1 to $5,000.99: $25
-- Nonmaterial depreciation amounted to $5,001 to $10,000.99: $50
-- Nonmaterial depreciation amounted to $10,001 to $20,000.99:
$100
-- Nonmaterial depreciation amounted to $20,001 to $40,000.99:
$200
-- Nonmaterial depreciation amounted to $40,001 to $60,000.99:
$300
-- Nonmaterial depreciation amounted to $60,001 to $80,000: $400
-- Nonmaterial depreciation amounted to over $80,000: $500
To submit a West Bend Mutual settlement claim form online, class
members can head to this page and enter the class member ID and pin
found on their copy of the settlement notice. Consumers who believe
they may be a class member but did not receive a settlement notice
should contact the settlement administrator to confirm their
identity and receive their login ID.
Alternatively, class members may download a PDF of the claim form
to print, fill out, and return by mail to the address listed near
the bottom of the document.
All West Bend Mutual class action settlement claim forms must be
submitted online or by mail by February 6, 2026.
The court will determine whether to grant final approval to the
West Bend Mutual settlement at a hearing on January 7, 2026.
Compensation will begin to be distributed to class members only
after final approval is granted and any appeals are resolved.
The West Bend Mutual class action lawsuit alleged that the
insurance provider unlawfully depreciated nonmaterial costs like
labor, overhead, and profit when paying ACV on structural loss
claims and supposedly withheld money from consumers. [GN]
WPP PLC: Faces Teamsters Suit Over 18% Decline of ADRs' Price
-------------------------------------------------------------
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 456 ANNUITY FUND, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. WPP PLC, MARK READ, JOANNE
WILSON, and BRIAN D. LESSER, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-09930
(S.D.N.Y., November 28, 2025) is a class action against the
Defendants for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder.
According to the complaint, the Defendants made materially false
and misleading statements regarding WPP's business, operations, and
prospects in order to trade WPP American Depositary Receipts
("ADRs") at artificially inflated prices between February 22, 2024
and July 8, 2025. Specifically, the Defendants failed to disclose
that: (1) WPP did not have a coherent strategy to execute the
simplification and transformation of WPP, particularly WPP Media;
(2) the company's strategy to transform and simplify WPP Media led
to significant internal disruptions; (3) such internal disruptions
rendered WPP unable to effectively generate new business and
resulted in an exodus of large clients of WPP; and (4) as a result
of the above, the Defendants' positive statements about the
company's business, operations, and prospects were materially false
and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant
times.
When the truth emerged, the price of WPP ADRs fell $6.48 per ADR,
or about 18 percent, from a closing price of $35.82 per ADR on July
8, 2025, to a closing price of $29.34 per ADR on July 9, 2025. As a
result of the Defendants' wrongful conduct, the Plaintiff and the
other members of the Class suffered damages in connection with
their purchases of the company's ADRs during the Class Period.
WPP PLC is a provider of advertising, media management,
consultancy, public relations, and branding and identity services,
with its principal executive offices in London, United Kingdom.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Marco A. Duenas, Esq.
SAXENA WHITE P.A.
10 Bank Street, Suite 882
White Plains, NY 10606
Telephone: (914) 437-8551
Facsimile: (888) 631-3611
Email: mduenas@saxenawhite.com
- and -
Maya Saxena, Esq.
Lester R. Hooker, Esq.
7777 Glades Road, Suite 300
Boca Raton, FL 33434
Telephone: (561) 394-3399
Facsimile: (561) 394-3382
Email: msaxena@saxenawhite.com
lhooker@saxenawhite.com
WRAY INC: Visually Impaired Can't Access Website, Alexandria Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ERIKA ALEXANDRIA, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. WRAY, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-09866 (S.D.N.Y., November 26, 2025) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, the New York City Human Rights Law, and
declaratory relief.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website, www.wray.nyc,
contains access barriers which hinder the Plaintiff and Class
members to enjoy the benefits of its online goods, content, and
services offered to the public through the website. The
accessibility issues on the website include but not limited to:
missing alt-text, hidden elements on web pages, incorrectly
formatted lists, unannounced pop ups, unclear labels for
interactive elements, and the requirement that some events be
performed solely with a mouse.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain
accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals.
Wray, Inc. is a company that sells online goods and services, doing
business in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
*********
S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N
Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania,
USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA. Rousel Elaine T.
Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche A. Castillon, Julie Anne L.
Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.
Copyright 2025. All rights reserved. ISSN 1525-2272.
This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior
written permission of the publishers.
Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to
be reliable, but is not guaranteed.
The CAR subscription rate is $775 for six months delivered via
e-mail. Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same
firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof
are $25 each. For subscription information, contact
Peter A. Chapman at 215-945-7000.
*** End of Transmission ***