260127.mbx

260127.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Tuesday, January 27, 2026, Vol. 28, No. 19 Headlines 2325 STEMMONS: Property Inaccessible to Disabled People, Lea Says AAA COOPER: "Constantine" Protective Order Partially Granted ABRI CREDIT: Faces Hladky Suit Over Inadequate Data Security AIR CANADA: Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Flight Delays ALEX AND ANI: Class Cert Bid Filing in Hassid Extended to April 30 AMERICAN EXPRESS: Must File Class Cert Response by Feb. 13 AMTRAK: Class Cert. Bid Filing in Niles Due Feb. 2 APPALACHIAN COMMUNITY: Bay Sues Over Alleged Private Data Breach APPLE INC: Seeks Leave to Submit Class Cert Response ARCHITECTURAL GRAPHICS: Faces Castro Class Suit in E.D. Va. AUDIBLE INC: Class Cert Bid Filing in Hollis Due March 13 BEES WRAP: Court Stays Morris Class Certification Bid BERKELEY OUTFITTERS: Website Not Accessible to the Blind, Ford Says CARNIVORE SNAX: Knowles Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind CAROLINA ARTHRITIS: Agrees to Settle Data Breach Suit for $600,000 CELESTIAL SEASONINGS: Faces Class Action Over Herbal Tea Claims CEMEX INC: Vasquez Labor Suit Removed to E.D. Calif. CENTER FOR TRANSITIONAL: More Time to File Class Cert OK'd CENTRIA HEALTH: Biru Labor Suit Removed to N.D. Calif. CHARMING MEDICAL: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Appointment Set Feb. 17 CROWELL MASONRY: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Hall Alleges CURATIVE HEALTH: Fails to Pay Overtime Premiums, Collier Suit Says CV ENTERPRISES: Property Inaccessible to Disabled, Ingram Alleges DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Court Certifies Student with Disability Class DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: K.Y. Bid to Certify Class Tossed DIVA FAM: Recalls True Sea Moss Gel Superfood Due to Botulism Risk DREAM GAMES: Class Cert Bid Filing in Schudde Due March 5, 2027 DRIVESMART AUTO: Parties Must Submit Proposed Discovery Plan DXC TECHNOLOGY: $47.5MM Class Settlement to be Heard on June 11 FIVE BELOW: Himes Suit Seeks to Certify Class Action FLUX POWER: $1.75MM Class Settlement to be Heard on April 2 FULLBEAUTY BRANDS: Class Cert Bid Filing Due Jan. 8, 2027 GOODYEAR TIRE: Faces Kiles Suit Over ERISA Violations GOOGLE INC: Plaintiffs Seek Rule 23 Class Certification GULSHAN MANAGEMENT: Ceja Sues Over Unprotected Private Info GULSHAN MANAGEMENT: Christopher Sues Over Data Security Failure HEALTHCARE HD: Lewis Must File Class Cert Bid by April 16 HERTZ CORPORATION: Maharaj Seeks to Modify Class Cert Hearing Date HESS BAKKEN: Penman Suit Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification HOWMET AEROSPACE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Linthicum Says HUMANA INC: Kousiry Suit Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Bid INOTIV INC: $2.49MM Class Settlement to be Heard on March 18 INOVA HEALTH: Agrees to Settle Data Tracking Suit for $3,147,390 INTERMOUNTAIN HEALTH: Judge Recommends Class Certification IQVIA INC: Seeks Leave to File Certain Docs Under Seal IRHYTHM TEC: Feb. 9 Deadline to File Reply Sought IRIS RESTAURANT: Hyman Sues Over Unlawful Tip Pool Policy JAPAN VILLAGE INC: Herard Files FCRA Suit in E.D. New York JARED HOY: Huber Suit Seeks to Certify Classes KENDAL NUTRICARE: Gutierrez Suit Removed to E.D. California LANNETT COMPANY: $5.75MM Class Settlement to be Heard on April 16 LENS.COM INC: Seeks to Strike Untimely Disclosed Expert Witness LEVAIN BAKERY: Time for March 26 Settlement Hearing Changed LIBBEY GLASS: Pena Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages LODI HOSPITALITY: Nguyen Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. LUCAS BOLDEN: Harris Suit Seeks to Certify Class LUXURBAN HOTELS: ZCAP Seeks to Certify Class of Stock Buyers LUXURY MANAGEMENT: Lekuntwane Suit Alleges CUFTA Violations MACY'S RETAIL: Rheinor Suit Removed to N.D. California MANHATTAN COLLEGE: Class Settlement in Beck Suit Gets Final Nod MARQUIS SOFTWARE: Faces Garcia Class Suit in E.D. Tex. MDL 3035: Carmichael Seeks Reconsideration of Class Cert. Order MDL 3035: Jackson Seeks Reconsideration of Class Cert Order MERANI HOSPITALITY: Court Certifies FLSA Collective MERCURY SYSTEMS: $32.5MM Class Settlement to be Heard on May 12 MESHKI LLC: McCormick Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct. META FLOW LTD: Scotch Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. META PLATFORMS: Seeks Leave to File Class Cert. Sur-Reply METRO ONE: Hager Suit Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification MONROE UNIVERSITY: Inadequately Safeguards Private Info, Ortiz Says MONSANTO COMPANY: Fuller Sues Over Wrongful Sale of Herbicide MONSANTO COMPANY: Greening Sues Over Negligent Sale & Advertising MONSANTO COMPANY: Mickey Sues Over Wrongful Herbicide Distribution MONSANTO COMPANY: Nelson Sues Over Negligent Sale of Herbicide MONSANTO COMPANY: Puerto Sues Over Wrongful Herbicide Distribution NATIONAL TENANT: Class Certification Bid Deadlines Stayed NCAA: Patterson Prelim. Injunction Bid Tossed NEXUS T-SQUARED: Campos and Weiss Suit Allege Labor Law Breaches NIKE INC: Bid for Leave to File Renewed Class Cert Tossed NOAH'S ARK: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Hernandez Alleges NORLITE LLC: Court Extends Time to File Response/Reply OFFICE DEPOT: Seek Denial of Yount Class Cert Bid OFFICE DEPOT: Yount Suit Seeks to Certify Class OFRA COSMETICS: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Hippe Alleges OHANA MILITARY: Camp Bid for Class Cert Tossed w/o Prejudice OMAR SRHIR: Initial Disclosures in Amazon Suit Due Feb. 27 ORLANDO HEALTH: Seeks Oral Argument in W.W. Class Lawsuit PAUL PERRY: Hearing on Class Cert Bid Set for Feb. 18 PIERCE COUNTY, WA: Stay of Summary Judgment Consideration Sought PNC FINANCIAL: Faces Fredrick Suit Over ERISA Violations PROGRESSIVE PREFERRED: Must File Class Cert Response by Feb. 6 QINGDAO NETWORK: Bid to Vacate Prelim. Injunction in Lashify Tossed ROUNDPOINT MORTGAGE: Court Amends Class Cert Scheduling Order SAFEMOON LLC: Combs Seeks Prelim. Approval of Class Settlement SANTA MONICA: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Lott Alleges SAVANNAH, GA: Faces Harris Class Suit in Ga. Super. SIMULATIONS PLUS: Rosen Law Probes Potential Securities Claims TMC HEALTH: Class Cert Bid Filing in Williams Due August 3 TROY MEINK: Watts Wins Bid for Class Certification UNITED STATES: Doherty Suit Seeks to Certify Two Classes VERADIGM INC: Agrees to Settle 2024 Data Breach Suit for $10.5MM VUORI INC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Ho Suit Alleges WALTER KIDDE: Faces Class Suit Over Ionization-Only Smoke Detector WELLS FARGO: Briefing on Class Certification Sought ********* 2325 STEMMONS: Property Inaccessible to Disabled People, Lea Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- JAMES LEA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 2325 STEMMONS HOTEL PARTNERS, LLC; and TPG HOTELS AND RESORTS, INC., Defendants, Case 3:26-cv-00061-L (N.D. Tex., Jan. 10, 2026) alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendants' hotel known as the Hilton Garden Inn Dallas / Market Center located at 2325 North Stemmons Freeway, Dallas, TX 75207, is not accessible to mobility-impaired individuals in violation of ADA. 2325 Stemmons Hotel Partners, LLC business includes operating public hotels and motels. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James Crewse, Esq. CREWSE LAW FIRM, PLLC 5919 Vanderbilt Ave. Dallas, TX 75206 Telephone: (214) 394-2856 Email: jcrewse@crewselawfirm.com - and - Brandon Rotbart, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF BRANDON A. ROTBART, P.A. 11098 Biscayne Boulevard Suite 401-18 Miami, FL 33161 Telephone: (305) 350-7400 Email: rotbart@rotbartlaw.com AAA COOPER: "Constantine" Protective Order Partially Granted ------------------------------------------------------------ In the case captioned as Alexander Constantine, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. AAA Cooper Transportation, Defendant, No. 3:24-cv-2925-K (N.D. Tex.), United States Magistrate Judge David L. Horan of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff Alexander Constantine's Expedited Motion for Protective Order and Other Relief, on January 19, 2026. The Plaintiff sought an order declaring any agreements obtained by the Defendant to be null and void, prohibiting Defendant from soliciting additional agreements or otherwise communicating with putative class members regarding the lawsuit, requiring Defendant to immediately provide to Plaintiff's counsel a copy of all agreements and other written communications with putative class members, permitting a corrective notice to be issued to notify putative class members that any agreements signed by them are null and void, and awarding Plaintiffs their reasonable attorneys' fees and costs associated with this motion. The Court found the letter sent to putative class member Giovanni Lewis qualified as misleading because it failed to provide sufficient information regarding damages. The letter informed Mr. Lewis that this lawsuit asserts a single claim for unpaid overtime on behalf of a putative collective of hostlers employed by ACT in Texas. However, this skeletal description of the claims at issue did not provide a sufficient disclosure of what putative collective members may be giving up by releasing their claims. The letter then described the lawsuit as likely to be disruptive to the business, a statement that did not seem to be litigation-neutral. The Court declined to declare agreements obtained by ACT null and void, noting that the Court did not have before it evidence that any former or current employee signed such an agreement. The Court also declined to authorize a corrective notice at this time. The Court entered a protective order mandating that ACT cannot have direct contact with potential opt-in plaintiffs regarding the substance of this case or prior payments (or nonpayment) of overtime or send any settlement agreements or releases or waivers of FLSA claims or any communications like the Cover Letter and Settlement Agreement and Release of Claims sent to Mr. Lewis. The Court ordered that ACT must, by February 3, 2026, turn over to Plaintiffs' counsel copies of the attachments to any signed Settlement Agreement and Release of Claims that is sent to its current or former hostlers as well as copies of any unsigned Settlement Agreement and Release of Claims that ACT sent out to its current or hostlers. The Court ordered under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)(3) that ACT and its counsel of record in this case (or their law firm) are required to pay, jointly and severally, the reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred for Plaintiffs' counsel to draft and file their Expedited Motion for Protective Order and Other Relief and reply and appendices in support. The Court directed Plaintiffs' counsel and ACT's counsel to confer about the reasonable amount of the attorneys' fees and costs to be awarded. By no later than February 3, 2026, the parties must file a joint report notifying the Court of the results of the conference. A copy of the Court's decision is available at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=QfxY09 from PacerMonitor.com Defendant AAA Cooper Transportation Represented By John Ellis Sheppard Mullin 415-774-2912 jellis@sheppardmullin.com Paul Cowie Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP 650-815-2648 pcowie@sheppardmullin.com Amanda Leigh Cottrell Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP 469-391-7432 acottrell@sheppardmullin.com Plaintiff Alexander Constantine Represented By Matthew R McCarley Forester Haynie PLLC 214-210-7493 mccarley@foresterhaynie.com Andrew Ross Frisch Morgan & Morgan PA 954-327-3013 afrisch@forthepeople.com Charles Ryan Morgan Morgan & Morgan PA 407-420-1414 rmorgan@forthepeople.com ABRI CREDIT: Faces Hladky Suit Over Inadequate Data Security ------------------------------------------------------------ SANDRA HLADKY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ABRI CREDIT UNION, Defendant, Case No. 1:26-cv-00327 (N.D. Ill., January 12, 2026) arises from Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard Plaintiff's and similarly situated Class Members' sensitive personally identifiable information, which was stolen by cybercriminals in a foreseeable, preventable data breach. In early May 2024, cybercriminals hacked into Defendant's network systems and stole Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive PII, causing widespread injuries and damages to Plaintiff and Class Members. Accordingly, the Plaintiff seeks to recover for the data breach's harms and brings claims for negligence, negligence per se, breach of implied contract, and unjust enrichment, to address Defendant's inadequate safeguarding of private information. Headquartered in Romeoville, IL, Abri Credit Union is a credit union that provides personal banking and financial services. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeff Ostrow, Esq. KOPELOWITZ OSTROW P.A. One West Las Olas Blvd., Suite 500 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 525-4100 E-mail: ostrow@kolawyers.com AIR CANADA: Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Flight Delays --------------------------------------------------------- Sheila Reid of Toronto Star reports that a Montreal judge has authorized a class action lawsuit against Air Canada that seeks compensation for passengers who experienced flight disruptions due to staffing constraints that the airline classified as safety issues. The Quebec Superior Court ruled on Jan. 13 that the case brought by Slater Vecchio LLP can proceed, seeking compensation for passengers who arrived three or more hours late to a final destination on an Air Canada flight between Dec. 15, 2019 and Aug. 7, 2022. Some of the main legal issues identified by the court are whether staffing constraints and crew shortages are within the control of an airline and whether Air Canada implemented a corporate policy to classify those shortages as safety-related disruptions. [GN] ALEX AND ANI: Class Cert Bid Filing in Hassid Extended to April 30 ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as MILAN HASSID, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. ALEX AND ANI, LLC, a Rhode Island corporation; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Case No. 2:25-cv-00679-FMO-JC (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order extending the deadline to file Plaintiff's motion for class certification from Jan. 27, 2026 to April 30, 2026. The Plaintiff's counsel called the Defendant's counsel1 on the morning of January 14, 2026, before filing this Application. The Defendant did not indicate whether it would oppose this Application by the time of filing. The requested extension to April 30, 2026, is reasonable and narrowly tailored. The Plaintiff simply eeks additional time to obtain the Court's ruling on the motion to compel, to allow compelled discovery (and any associated depositions) to be completed, and to permit the parties to conduct the Court-required in-person meet and confer and joint briefing process in an orderly manner, the suit says. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 14, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Hs1fb5 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Tauler, Esq. Jaymie Parkkinen, Esq. TAULER SMITH LLP 626 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 550 Los Angeles, CA 90017 rtauler@taulersmith.com jparkkinen@taulersmith.com Telephone: (213) 927-9270 AMERICAN EXPRESS: Must File Class Cert Response by Feb. 13 ---------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Debra Duke, v. American Express Company, Case No. 4:23-cv-00125-RM-LCK (D. Ariz.), the Hon. Judge Kimmins entered an order granting the Joint Motion to Continue Schedule. The Court further entered an order that the Court's scheduling deadlines are modified as follows: Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification is due Feb. 13, 2026. The Plaintiff's Reply in support of class certification is due March 6, 2026. Initial expert disclosures are due by Feb. 6, 2026. General rebuttal expert disclosures are due by March 6, 2026. All discovery must be completed by March 31, 2026. Mediation is to be completed on or before March 31, 2026. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Xu5iBf at no extra charge.[CC] AMTRAK: Class Cert. Bid Filing in Niles Due Feb. 2 -------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as GENE NILES, v. NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION a/k/a AMTRAK, Case No. 3:25-cv-01470-BJD-SJH (M.D. Fla.), the Hon. Judge Davis entered a case management and scheduling order and referral to mediation: Mandatory initial disclosures: Feb. 2, 2026 Move for class certification: Feb. 2, 2026 Motions to add Parties or to amend pleadings: Mar. 30, 2026 Discovery deadline: Mar. 1, 2027 Motions in limine: July 7, 2027 Final Pretrial Conference: July 20, 2027 The Defendant is A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=QbPUmk at no extra charge.[CC] APPALACHIAN COMMUNITY: Bay Sues Over Alleged Private Data Breach ---------------------------------------------------------------- MICHELLE BAY, on behalf of herselfnand all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. APPALACHIAN COMMUNITY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, Defendant, Case No. 2:26-cv-00007 (E.D. Tenn., January 12, 2026) arises from Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard the personally identifiable information that it collected and maintained as part of its regular business practices. On October 7, 2025, the Defendant learned that it had been the subject of a cyberattack. The Russian ransomware group Qilin accessed Defendant's IT Network and exfiltrated at least 75GB, totaling over 76,000 internal files of private information belonging to individuals, including the Plaintiff. On or around December 30, 2025, Defendant began to send Plaintiff and Class Members individualized Notices of data event informing them that their private information was exfiltrated in the data breach. Accordingly, the Plaintiff now seeks to remedy the injuries that resulted from Defendant's conduct and asserts claims for negligence, negligence per se, unjust enrichment, invasion of privacy, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of implied contract, and for declaratory judgment. Appalachian Community Federal Credit Union is a not-for-profit financial cooperative headquartered in Kingsport, TN. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq. Grayson Wells, Esq. STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY PLLC The Freedom Center 223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200 Nashville, TN 37203 Telephone: (615) 254-8801 E-mail: gstranch@stranchlaw.com gwells@stranchlaw.com - and - Leanna A. Loginov, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A. 14 NE 1st Ave, Suite 705 Miami, FL 33132 Telephone: (305) 479-2299 E-mail: lloginov@shamisgentile.com APPLE INC: Seeks Leave to Submit Class Cert Response ---------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JANE DOE, by and through next friend JOHN DOE, RICHARD ROBINSON, YOLANDA BROWN, JONATHAN LEBLOND, PATRICIA ORRIS, ANGELA STEVENS, JESSICA JACKSON, MELISSA OATMAN, JUSTIN REVELO, AND TAYLOR VALL on behalf of themselves and all other persons similarly situated, known and unknown, v. APPLE INC., Case No. 3:20-cv-00421-NJR (S.D. Ill.), the Defendant asks the Court to enter an order granting motion for leave to submit a response to the Plaintiffs' supplemental authority regarding the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification. Apple Inc. seeks leave to file this response to Plaintiffs' submission of Svoboda v. Amazon.com Inc., No. 25-1361, 2025 WL 3654053 (7th Cir. Dec. 17, 2025) as supplemental authority for their motion for class certification. Svoboda does not support class certification here. The case is readily distinguishable and confirms that no class can be certified. Unlike in Svoboda, individualized issues predominate over any common ones, and Plaintiffs cannot support their claims with common proof. Thus, Svoboda supports Apple's opposition, not the Plaintiffs' motion. In Svoboda, the Seventh Circuit determined that consent was a common question because users received uniform prompts and disclosures when opting into Amazon’s virtual try-on feature. That is not the case here where consent depends entirely on what each individual knew, read, saw, or encountered when taking photos or using People album or iCloud Photos. Because the evidence here shows that individualized issues predominate, Svoboda does not support certification, but instead demonstrates why none of Plaintiffs’ proposed classes can satisfy Rule 23. A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Q4BEst at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendant is represented by: Purvi G. Patel, Esq. Katie Viggiani, Esq. MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 707 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 6000 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 892-5200 E-mail: ppatel@mofo.com kviggiani@mofo.com ARCHITECTURAL GRAPHICS: Faces Castro Class Suit in E.D. Va. ----------------------------------------------------------- A class action has been filed against Architectural Graphics, Inc., captioned as RAMIL CASTRO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ARCHITECTURAL GRAPHICS, INC., Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-00782-RBS-LRL (E.D. Va., Dec. 8, 2025). The case is assigned to Judge Rebecca Beach Smith and referred to Magistrate Judge Lawrence R. Leonard. Architectural Graphics Inc. manufactures and distributes advertising. The Company produces and maintains interior and exterior sign systems. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Seth R Carroll, Esq. COMMONWEALTH LAW GROUP 3311 West Broad Street Richmond, VA 23230 Telephone: (804) 999-9999 Email: scarroll@hurtinva.com - and - Christopher Eduardo Torres, Esq. EKSM LLP 4200 Montrose Blvd Suite 200 Houston, TX 77006 Telephone: (888) 350-3931 Facsimile: (888) 376-3455 Email: service@eksm.com AUDIBLE INC: Class Cert Bid Filing in Hollis Due March 13 --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JONATHAN HOLLIS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. AUDIBLE, INC., Case No. 2:24-cv-01999-TL (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Lin entered an order setting the following case schedule through class certification. Event Date Substantial completion of pre-certification Jan. 23, 2026 document production: Completion of pre-certification fact Feb. 20, 2026 depositions: The Plaintiff's motion for class Mar. 13, 2026 certification: Response in opposition to class Apr. 10, 2026 certification: Reply ISO class certification: Apr. 24, 2026 A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=M24YQE at no extra charge.[CC] BEES WRAP: Court Stays Morris Class Certification Bid ----------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ZACHARY MORRIS, v. BEES WRAP, LLC, Case No. 2:25-cv-02031-PP (E.D. Wis.), the Hon. Judge Pepper entered an order granting the Plaintiff's motion to stay class certification and for relief from automatic briefing schedule. The court grants the Plaintiff's Rule 7(h) motion to stay proceedings on the motion for class certification, for relief from memorandum, supporting documents and automatic briefing requirements. On Dec. 23, 2025, the plaintiff filed a class action complaint. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=DffW3r at no extra charge.[CC] BERKELEY OUTFITTERS: Website Not Accessible to the Blind, Ford Says ------------------------------------------------------------------- SANDRA FORD, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BERKELEY OUTFITTERS LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:26-cv-00248 (N.D. Ill., Jan. 9, 2026) alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web site, https://liveferal.com, is not fully or equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the Plaintiff, in violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. Berkeley Outfitters LLC sells used outdoor gear and clothing. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Ohrenberger, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC 68-29 Main Street, Flushing, NY 11367 Telephone: (844) 731-3343 Facsimile: (716) 281-5496 Email: mohrenberger@ealg.law CARNIVORE SNAX: Knowles Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind ---------------------------------------------------------------- CARLTON KNOWLES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CARNIVORE SNAX LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:26-cv-00175 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 9, 2026) alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web site, www.carnivoresnax.com, is not fully or equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the Plaintiff, in violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. Carnivore Snax LLC is an e-commerce platform that sells meat-based snacks and chips. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael A. LaBollita, Esq. Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq. Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq. GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC 150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR New York, NY 10003 Tel: (212) 228-9795 Fax: (212) 982-6284 Email: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal Dana@Gottlieb.legal Michael@Gottlieb.legal CAROLINA ARTHRITIS: Agrees to Settle Data Breach Suit for $600,000 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Tracy Bagdonas of ClassAction.org reports that Carolina Arthritis Associates has agreed to a $600,000 settlement to resolve a class action lawsuit that claimed the North Carolina medical provider failed to safeguard the sensitive patient information stored on its systems from a targeted cyberattack in September 2024. The Carolina Arthritis Associates class action settlement received preliminary approval from the court on November 10, 2025 and covers all individuals whose private information was potentially compromised as a result of the September 2024 data breach. The court-approved website for the Carolina Arthritis Associates data breach settlement can be found at https://CAADataSettlement.com/. According to the website, Carolina Arthritis Associates settlement class members who submit a valid, timely claim form have multiple options for reimbursement. Those who submit with their claim form documented proof of out-of-pocket losses are eligible to receive a cash payment of up to $5,000, referred to as "Cash Payment A" in all court documents. Reimbursable documented losses, the agreement explains, must have been incurred between September 27, 2024 and February 23, 2026 as a result of the data breach, and include expenses related to identity theft, fraud, fees for credit reports, credit monitoring, freezing credit, and ID replacement. In lieu of a documented-loss payment, class members may instead file a claim form for an alternative one-time, pro-rated cash payment of approximately $100, referred to as "Cash Payment B" in all court documents. The final amount of each class member's payout under this reimbursement option will be based on the total number of valid claims filed and how much remains in the net settlement fund after the payment of attorneys' fees, lead plaintiff service awards, settlement administration costs, and all other primary benefits, the agreement outlines. In addition to either monetary settlement benefit, all class members with a valid claim form are also eligible to enroll in two free years of CyEx Medical Shield Complete, which includes one-bureau credit monitoring, dark web scanning, identity theft insurance, and access to fraud resolution agents. Finally, as part of the class action settlement, Carolina Arthritis Associates has agreed to implement certain business practice changes intended to enhance the data security of its systems and mitigate future data breaches. To submit a Carolina Arthritis Associates data breach claim form online, class members can head to this page and enter the class member ID and PIN provided on their copy of the settlement notice. Consumers who believe they may be a Carolina Arthritis Associates settlement class member but did not receive a notice can contact the settlement administrator to confirm their identity and receive their login details. Alternatively, class members may download a PDF of the claim form from the settlement website to print, fill out, and return by mail to the address of the settlement administrator listed on the second page of the document. All Carolina Arthritis Associates claim forms must be submitted online or by mail by February 23, 2026. The court will determine whether to grant final approval to the Carolina Arthritis Associates settlement at a hearing on March 10, 2026. Compensation will begin to be distributed to class members only after final approval is granted and any appeals are resolved. The Carolina Arthritis Associates class action lawsuit argued that the Wilmington-based healthcare practice failed to implement reasonable data security measures, which allegedly allowed cybercriminals to initiate a ransomware attack on its network between September 26 and September 30, 2024. Per court documents, the private information potentially compromised as a result of the data breach included names, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, diagnoses, medical history, health insurance information and medical claim forms. [GN] CELESTIAL SEASONINGS: Faces Class Action Over Herbal Tea Claims --------------------------------------------------------------- Top Class Actions reports that five consumers filed a class action lawsuit against Celestial Seasonings Inc. Why: The plaintiffs allege Celestial Seasonings falsely advertises its herbal tea products as containing only all-natural ingredients. Where: The Celestial Seasonings class action lawsuit was filed in Colorado federal court. AA new class action lawsuit accuses Celestial Seasonings of falsely advertising its herbal tea products as containing only all-natural ingredients. Lead plaintiff Michelle Carpenter filed the class action complaint against Celestial Seasonings Inc. on Jan. 8 in Colorado federal court, alleging violations of state and federal consumer laws. According to the class action lawsuit, Celestial Seasonings falsely advertises its herbal teas as "naturally flavored" and free from artificial ingredients, even though they contain synthetic citric acid. "Defendant's misrepresentations are intended to convey to consumers exactly what they say -- that the teas only contain natural flavors, not synthetic ones," the lawsuit says. Celestial Seasonings tea class action alleges synthetic citric acid added as flavoring agent The plaintiffs allege that the Celestial Seasonings tea products at issue include Lemon Zinger Herbal Tea, Peach + Probiotics Herbal Tea, Country Peach Passion Herbal Tea, Jammin' Lemon Ginger Herbal Tea and Wild Berry Zinger Herbal Tea. The front label of each of these products states that the tea is "naturally flavored with other natural flavors" and that the company uses "no artificial flavors or colors," the Celestial Seasonings class action lawsuit claims. The plaintiffs argue that these claims are false because the teas contain citric acid, which is synthetically produced and not derived from natural sources. The plaintiffs claim Celestial Seasonings adds citric acid as a flavoring agent to enhance the tartness of the teas, rather than as a preservative. They claim that this misleads consumers into believing that the teas are all-natural and free from artificial flavorings. They argue that they relied on the tea's packaging when making their purchasing decisions, believing that they were buying a product that contained only natural ingredients. They claim they would not have purchased the teas or paid a premium price for them if they had known about the synthetic citric acid. The plaintiffs seek to represent a nationwide class of consumers who purchased the Celestial Seasonings herbal teas, as well as subclasses for consumers in Illinois, Washington, Minnesota and New York. They are suing for violations of state and federal consumer laws and seek certification of the class action, damages, fees, costs and a jury trial. Meanwhile, acai brand Oakberry also faced a similar class action lawsuit alleging it falsely advertised its products as all natural and preservative-free when they allegedly contain citric acid. The plaintiffs are represented by Kenneth A. Wexler, Kara A. Elgersma and Andrew D. Yoder of Wexler Boley & Elgersma LLP and Mark R. Miller, Julia Ozello and Matthew J. Goldstein of Wallace Miller. The Celestial Seasonings class action lawsuit is Carpenter, et al. v. Celestial Seasonings Inc., Case No. 1:26-cv-00086, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. [GN] CEMEX INC: Vasquez Labor Suit Removed to E.D. Calif. ---------------------------------------------------- The case styled JESUS JOSEPH VASQUEZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CEMEX INC., a Louisianna corporation, CEMEX TRUCKING INC., a California corporation and DOES 1 through 50 inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 25CV029803, was removed from the the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Sacramento, to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California on January 12, 2026. The Clerk of Court for the Eastern District of California assigned Case No. 2:26-cv-00081-WBS-AC to the proceeding. The case alleges violation of overtime pay and seeks penalties under the overtime requirements of California Labor Code Section 510. Headquartered in Houston, TX, Cemex Inc. manufactures cement and ready-mixed concrete. [BN] The Defendants are represented by: Dorothy S. Liu, Esq. Emily J. Leahy, Esq. HANSON BRIDGETT LLP 425 Market Street, 26th Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: (415) 777-3200 Facsimile: (415) 541-9366 E-mail: dliu@hansonbridgett.com ELeahy@hansonbridgett.com CENTER FOR TRANSITIONAL: More Time to File Class Cert OK'd ---------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Michaud v. Center for Transitional Living L.L.C. et al., Case No. 3:25-cv-00481 (D. Conn., Filed March 25, 2025), the Hon. Judge Omar A. Williams entered an order granting the Plaintiff's consent motion for extension of time to move for class certification. Accordingly, the Plaintiff's anticipated class certification motion shall be due on or before Aug. 28, 2026. The scheduling order remains otherwise unchanged. In their 26(f) report, the parties asked for a discovery deadline of March 31, 2026, and for this case to be referred to a magistrate judge for a settlement conference. Both requests were granted, and a settlement conference was set for Jan. 9, 2026. The nature of suit states Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). CTL provides mental health services, elderly care, and private care.[CC] CENTRIA HEALTH: Biru Labor Suit Removed to N.D. Calif. ------------------------------------------------------ The case styled BERSABEH BIRU, individually, on behalf of all similarly situated, the State of California, and other aggrieved employees, Plaintiff v. CENTRIA HEALTH CARE, LLC, a limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 24CV089770, was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on January 12, 2026. The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of California assigned Case No. 3:26-cv-00302 to the proceeding. The case arises from Defendant's alleged violations of the California Labor Code and the California Business and Professions Code. Headquartered in Farmington, Hills, MI, Centria Health Care is a healthcare provider specialized in Applied Behavior Analysis therapy for children with autism. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Shiva Shirazi Davoudian, Esq. LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 2049 Century Park East, 5th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90067.3107 Telephone: (310) 553-0308 Facsimile: (800) 715-1330 E-mail: sdavoudian@littler.com CHARMING MEDICAL: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Appointment Set Feb. 17 ----------------------------------------------------------------- The Portnoy Law Firm advises Charming Medical Limited, ("Charming Medical" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: MCTA) investors off a class action on behalf of investors that bought securities between October 21, 2025, and November 12, 2025, inclusive (the "Class Period"). Charming Medical investors have until February 17, 2026 to file a lead plaintiff motion. Investors are encouraged to contact attorney Lesley F. Portnoy, by phone 844-767-8529 or email: lesley@portnoylaw.com, to discuss their legal rights, or join the case via https://portnoylaw.com/charming-medical-limited. The Portnoy Law Firm can provide a complimentary case evaluation and discuss investors' options for pursuing claims to recover their losses. Charming is a medical company that claims to "enhance the quality of life from the inside out by integrating Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) wellness practices with modern technology." Specifically, by "combining customized TCM-inspired constitution-regulating plans and modern wellness therapies, we provide comprehensive wellness and beauty services and products for women and TCM-inspired therapies tailored for men." The Company's stock trades on NASDAQ under the symbol "MCTA." The complaint alleges that Defendants violated provisions of the Securities Act arising from the suspension of Charming's stock in November 2025, following a dramatic yet illusory run-up orchestrated by a fraudulent stock promotion scheme. In the weeks leading up to November 12, 2025, Charming's share price surged from the initial public offering price ("IPO") of $4.00 to an all-time high of $29.36 per share, despite no fundamental news from the Company justifying such a spike. Investigations and public reports have revealed that Charming's stock became the subject of an illicit social-media-based promotion scheme that artificially inflated its price. These reports detail how impersonators claiming to be legitimate financial advisors touted Charming in online forums, chat groups, and through social media posts with sensational, but baseless, claims to create a buying frenzy among retail investors. The Portnoy Law Firm represents investors in pursuing claims caused by corporate wrongdoing. The Firm's founding partner has recovered over $5.5 billion for aggrieved investors. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. Lesley F. Portnoy, Esq. Tel: (310) 692-8883 E-mail: lesley@portnoylaw.com [GN] CROWELL MASONRY: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Hall Alleges -------------------------------------------------------- ANGELO HALL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CROWELL MASONRY LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:26-cv-00097-SBP (D. Colo., Jan. 9, 2026) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff Hall was employed by the Defendant as a mason. Corbell Masonry Inc. was founded in 1977. The company's line of business includes providing masonry and other stonework. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Carl A. Fitz, Esq. FITZ LAW PLLC 3730 Kirby Drive, Ste. 1200 Houston, TX 77098 Telephone: (713) 766-4000 Email: carl@fitz.legal CURATIVE HEALTH: Fails to Pay Overtime Premiums, Collier Suit Says ------------------------------------------------------------------ JENNIFER COLLIER, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CURATIVE HEALTH HOLDINGS, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:26-cv-00067 (W.D. Tex., January 12, 2026) accuses the Defendant of violating the Fair Labor Standards Act. Defendant Curative employed Plaintiff Collier as a utilization review nurse from December 1, 2022, through September 10, 2025. Allegedly, Collier and the similarly situated workers were subjected to the pay provisions in which they frequently worked more than 50 hours per week but were not paid any overtime premiums for such hours. Curative Health Holdings, Inc. is a health insurance company based in Austin, TX. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Douglas B. Welmaker, Esq. WELMAKER LAW, PLLC 409 N. Fredonia, Suite 118 Longview, TX 75601 Telephone: (512) 799-2048 E-mail: doug@welmakerlaw.com - and - Josef F. Buenker, Esq. THE BUENKER LAW FIRM Houston, TX 77206 Telephone: (713) 868-3388 Facsimile: (713) 683-9940 E-mail: jbuenker@buenkerlaw.com CV ENTERPRISES: Property Inaccessible to Disabled, Ingram Alleges ----------------------------------------------------------------- MARCUS INGRAM, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CV ENTERPRISES OF ATHENS II, LLLP, Defendant, Case 3:26-cv-00003-TES (M.D. Ga., Jan. 9, 2026) alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"). The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's commercial establishment located at 126 Alps Road, Athens, GA, is not accessible to mobility-impaired individuals in violation of ADA. CV Enterprises of Athens II, LLLP is a quaint shopping center nestled in the heart of Athens, GA, offering a variety of retail and dining options for visitors and locals alike. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Pete M. Monismith 1000 Main Street, #2016 Pittsburgh, PA 15215 Telephone: (724) 610-1881 Email: pete@monismithlaw.com DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Court Certifies Student with Disability Class ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CRYSTAL ROBERTSON, on behalf of herself and her minor child D.R.; ELIZABETH DAGGETT, on behalf of herself and her minor child H.D.; JOANN MCCRAY, on behalf of herself and her minor child J.C.; VERONICA GUERRERO, on behalf of herself and her minor child A.F.; MARCIA CANNON-CLARK AND DAVID CLARK, on behalf of themselves and their minor child B.R.C.; and THE ARC OF THE UNITED STATES, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Case No. 1:24-cv-00656-PLF-MJS (D.D.C.), the Hon. Judge Friedman entered an order granting the Plaintiffs' motion to certify class as amended by the Plaintiff supplemental brief on class certification. The action is certified to proceed as a class action pursuant to Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Plaintiff class shall consist of: "All student with disabilities aged 3-22 who, from March 7, 2022, until judgment is issued in this case, require transportation from the District of Columbia to attend school and gave experienced and transportation services from the District of Columbia." A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=JfmHXE at no extra charge.[CC] DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: K.Y. Bid to Certify Class Tossed ------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as K.Y., et al., v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-03056-CJN (D.D.C.), the Hon. Judge Carl J. Nichols entered an order denying K.Y. and D.J.'s Motion to Certify a Class. The Court further entered an order that the Parties shall meet and confer and file a Joint Status Report on or before Jan. 30, 2026, proposing next steps in this case. Among other topics, the Parties shall address the status of the Motion for Preliminary Injunction, in light of the Court's denial of the Motion to Certify a Class. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=GXwvbe at no extra charge.[CC] DIVA FAM: Recalls True Sea Moss Gel Superfood Due to Botulism Risk ------------------------------------------------------------------ Top Class Actions reports that Diva Fam Inc. is recalling all lots and flavors of its True Sea Moss Gel Superfood, affecting numerous units nationwide. Why: The recall is due to potential foodborne illness risks, specifically botulism, linked to inadequate regulatory authorization and temperature monitoring. Where: The recall is effective across the United States. Diva Fam has initiated a recall of its True Sea Moss Gel Superfood products due to potential health risks. The Diva Fam recall affects various flavors of the product, distributed nationwide, as they may pose a risk of botulism due to improper manufacturing practices. The recall, announced on Jan. 9 and published on the Food and Drug Administration website on Jan. 12, applies to all flavors and batch numbers of the Sea Moss Gel Superfood, packaged in 16 fl oz glass jars, manufactured before January 9, 2026. The affected flavors include Mango, Pineapple, Wildcrafted, Apple and Cinnamon, Elderberry, Passion Fruit, Blue Spirulina and Raspberry, Strawberry, Cherry, Mango and Pineapple, 5 Blends in 1, Soursop, Lemon Pie and Orange. The recall was prompted by a California Department of Public Health inspection, which highlighted issues with regulatory authorization and production records. These deficiencies could lead to microbial growth, including botulism-causing organisms. Botulism is a severe illness that can impact the nervous system, with symptoms ranging from weakness and dizziness to difficulty breathing. "PH-controlled food products that are not manufactured in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements may present a potential risk of microbial growth," the recall notice states. Consumers urged to stop using Sea Moss Gel Superfood The recall notice advises consumers to immediately discontinue use of the affected Sea Moss Gel Superfood products. "Consumers who have purchased the affected Sea Moss Gel Superfood products should discontinue use of the product and follow the instructions provided by the place of purchase regarding product return or disposal," the recall notice says. The products were distributed through various channels, including select retail locations and online platforms, such as trueseamoss.com. Diva Fam is cooperating with regulatory authorities to address the issue. The company has initiated the recall as a precautionary measure to ensure compliance with regulatory standards. Consumers seeking more information can contact Diva Fam at support@divafam.com or by calling (818) 751-3882 during business hours. Diva Fam states that no illnesses or adverse health events have been reported in connection with the recalled products so far. The company is not currently facing legal action over the recall, but Top Class Actions monitors recalls closely as they sometimes lead to class action lawsuits. Meanwhile, Diva Fam is facing allegations that it offered an unlawful automatic renewal service to California consumers in violation of the state's Automatic Renewal Law. [GN] DREAM GAMES: Class Cert Bid Filing in Schudde Due March 5, 2027 --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JANNA SCHUDDE, v. DREAM GAMES TEKNOLOJI ANONIM SIRKETI, Case No. 2:24-cv-01215-RSM (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Martinez entered an order Class certification discovery cut-off: Sept. 18, 2026 Deadline for the Plaintiffs to file motion Mar. 5, 2027 for class certification: Opposition to motion to certify class: April 23, 2027 Reply in Support of Motion to Certify Class: May 1, 2027 Hearing on Motion to Certify Class: To be set by the Court after briefing completed A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=0LreVr at no extra charge.[CC] DRIVESMART AUTO: Parties Must Submit Proposed Discovery Plan ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as JAY CONNOR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. DRIVESMART AUTO CARE INC., Case No. 3:25-cv-12171-ZNQ-JTQ (D.N.J.), the Hon. Judge Justin Quinn entered an order directing the parties to submit the following proposed discovery plan: Fact discovery shall be completed by March 31, 2026. Any dispositive motions, including motions for class certification shall be filed no later than Aug. 14, 2026. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5OKOQm at no extra charge.[CC] The Parties are represented by: Nicholas A. Moschella, Jr., Esq. THE LAW OFFICE OF NICHOLAS A. MOSCHELLA, JR. 278 Brick Blvd. Brick Township, NJ 08723 Telephone: (732) 451-2283 E-mail: nam@moschellalaw.com - and - Anthony Paronich, Esq. PARONICH LAW, P.C. 350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400 Hingham, MA 02043 Telephone: (617) 485-0018 Facsimile: (508) 318-8100 E-mail: anthony@paronichlaw.com - and - Marc Jonas Block, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF MARC JONAS BLOCK, PC 40 River Road, Suite 19H New York, NY 10044 Telephone: (646) 821-6886 E-mail: mblock@mjblocklaw.com DXC TECHNOLOGY: $47.5MM Class Settlement to be Heard on June 11 --------------------------------------------------------------- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, Girard Sharp LLP, and The Hall Firm, Ltd. issued a statement regarding the DXC Technology Co. Merger Litigation: SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA In re HPE ENTERPRISE SERVICES-DXC TECHNOLOGY CO. MERGER LITIGATION This Document Relates To: ALL ACTIONS. Lead Case No. 19CV353132 CLASS ACTION SUMMARY NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION TO: ALL PERSONS WHO ACQUIRED DXC TECHNOLOGY COMPANY ("DXC") COMMON STOCK IN DIRECT EXCHANGE FOR COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION, INC. ("CSC") SECURITIES IN THE APRIL 1, 2017 MERGER BETWEEN CSC AND THE ENTERPRISE SERVICES BUSINESS SEGMENT OF HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE COMPANY ("HPE") A CALIFORNIA COURT AUTHORIZED THIS NOTICE. THIS IS NOT A SOLICITATION FROM A LAWYER. PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY AND IN ITS ENTIRETY. YOUR RIGHTS MAY BE AFFECTED BY A CLASS ACTION CASE PENDING IN COURT. YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that a hearing will be held on June 11, 2026, at 1:30 p.m., before the Honorable Charles F. Adams at the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, Department 7, 191 N. First Street, San Jose, CA 95113, to determine whether: (1) the proposed settlement (the "Settlement") of the action as set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement ("Stipulation")1 for $47,500,000.00 in cash should be approved by the Court as fair, reasonable, and adequate; (2) the Judgment as provided under the Stipulation should be entered; (3) to award Plaintiffs' Counsel attorneys' fees and expenses out of the Settlement Fund (as defined in the Notice of Proposed Settlement of Class Action ("Notice"), which is discussed below) and, if so, in what amounts; (4) to pay Plaintiffs an incentive award for representing the Class out of the Settlement Fund and, if so, in what amount; and (5) the Plan of Allocation should be approved by the Court as fair, reasonable, and adequate. This Action is a consolidated securities class action lawsuit pending in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara (the "Court"), against DXC, HPE, Rishi Varma, Timothy C. Stonesifer, Jeremy K. Cox, Mukesh Aghi, Amy E. Alving, David Herzog, Sachin Lawande, J. Michael Lawrie, Julio A. Portalatin, Peter Rutland, Manoj P. Singh, Margaret C. Whitman, and Robert F. Woods (collectively, "Defendants"). In April 2017, HPE spun off its Enterprise Services business segment and merged it with CSC, forming DXC (the "April 1, 2017 Merger Exchange" or the "Merger"). Plaintiffs allege that in connection with the Merger, DXC issued approximately 140 million new shares of common stock pursuant to a materially false and misleading registration statement and prospectus. Plaintiffs allege that these purportedly false and misleading statements resulted in damage to Class Members. Defendants expressly deny all of Plaintiffs' allegations. IF YOU ACQUIRED DXC COMMON STOCK IN THE APRIL 1, 2017 MERGER EXCHANGE, YOUR RIGHTS MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE SETTLEMENT OF THIS ACTION. To share in the distribution of the Net Settlement Fund, you must establish your rights by submitting a Proof of Claim and Release form ("Proof of Claim"), along with the required supporting documentation, by mail (postmarked, or received if no postmark, no later than April 6, 2026) or online (no later than April 6, 2026). Your failure to submit your Proof of Claim by April 6, 2026, will subject your claim to rejection and preclude you from receiving any of the recovery in connection with the Settlement of this Action. If you are a member of the Class and did not request exclusion therefrom, you will be bound by the Settlement and any judgment and release entered in the Action, including, but not limited to, the Judgment, whether or not you submit a Proof of Claim. If you have not received a copy of the Notice, which more completely describes the Settlement and your rights thereunder, and a Proof of Claim, you may obtain these documents, as well as a copy of the Stipulation (which, among other things, contains definitions for the defined terms used in this Summary Notice) and other settlement documents, online at www.DXCLitigation.com, or by writing to: DXC Technology Co. Merger Litigation Claims Administrator c/o Verita Global P.O. Box 301170 Los Angeles, CA 90030-1170 The pleadings and other records in this litigation, including the Stipulation, may also be examined (a) online on the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara's Electronic Filing and Service Website at www.scscourt.org, or through the Santa Clara Superior Court Portal at https://portal.scscourt.org; or (b) in person at Records, Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, 191 N. First Street, San Jose, California 95113, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday and 8:30 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. on Friday, excluding Court holidays and closures. Inquiries should NOT be directed to Defendants, the Court, or the Clerk of the Court. Inquiries, other than requests for the Notice or for a Proof of Claim, may be made to Plaintiffs' Counsel: ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP James I. Jaconette 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: 1-800-449-4900 settlementinfo@rgrdlaw.com GIRARD SHARP LLP Adam E. Polk 601 California Street, Suite 1400 San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: 1-415-981-4800 apolk@girardsharp.com THE HALL FIRM, LTD. David W. Hall One Embarcadero Center, Suite 1200 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: 1-415-426-5648 dhall@hallfirmltd.com If you are a Class Member, you have the right to object to the Settlement, the Plan of Allocation, the request by Plaintiffs' Counsel for an award of attorneys' fees and expenses, and/or the payment to Plaintiffs for their representation of the Class. Any objections must be submitted to the Court and sent to Plaintiffs' Counsel and Defendants' Counsel so that they are received by May 21, 2026, in the manner and form explained in the Notice. DATED: December 15, 2025 BY ORDER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA THE HONORABLE CHARLES F. ADAMS The Stipulation can be viewed and/or obtained at www.DXCLitigation.com. All capitalized terms used herein have the same meaning as the terms defined in the Stipulation. FIVE BELOW: Himes Suit Seeks to Certify Class Action ---------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as HIMES v. FIVE BELOW, INC. et al., (RE FIVE BELOW, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION), Case No. 2:24-cv-03638-GAM (E.D. Pa.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order, pursuant to Rules 23(a), 23(b)(3), and 23(g) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: 1. Certifying a class action on behalf of the following Class: "All persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of Five Below, Inc. from Dec. 1, 2022 through July 16, 2024, inclusive (the "Class Period"), and were damaged thereby." Excluded from the Class are: (i) Defendants; (ii) any directors and officers of Five Below during the Class Period and members of their immediate families; (iii) the subsidiaries and affiliates of Five Below; (iv) any firm, trust, corporation or other entity in which Five Below has or had a controlling interest; and (v) the legal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns of any such excluded party. 2. Appointing ATRS and APERS as the Class Representatives; and 3. Appointing Co-Lead Counsel Berger Montague PC and Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP as Class Counsel. sA copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=trWlMA at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Dell'Angelo, Esq. Andrew D. Abramowitz, Esq. Jon J. Lambiras, Esq. Alex B. Heller, Esq. BERGER MONTAGUE PC 1818 Market Street, Suite 3600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 875-3000 E-mail: mdellangelo@bergermontague.com aabramowitz@ bergermontague.com jlambiras@bergermontague.com aheller@bergermontague.com - and - Hannah Ross, Esq. James A. Harrod, Esq. Timothy G. Fleming, Esq. Sarah Schmidt, Esq. Kelly Hogan, Esq. BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP 1251 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 Telephone: (212) 554-1400 Facsimile: (212) 554-1444 E-mail: hannah@blbglaw.com jim.harrod@blbglaw.com timothy.fleming@blbglaw.com sarah.schmidt@blbglaw.com kelly.hogan@blbglaw.com FLUX POWER: $1.75MM Class Settlement to be Heard on April 2 ----------------------------------------------------------- The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. announced that the United States District Court for the Southern District of California has approved the following announcement of a proposed class action settlement that would benefit purchasers Flux Power Holdings, Inc. publicly traded common stock (NASDAQ: FLUX): SUMMARY NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT TO: ALL PERSONS WHO PURCHASED THE PUBLICLY TRADED COMMON STOCK OF FLUX POWER HOLDINGS, INC. ("FLUX POWER") FROM NOVEMBER 15, 2021 THROUGH FEBRUARY 14, 2025, BOTH DATES INCLUSIVE. YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to an Order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, that a hearing will be held on April 2, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. PT before the Honorable Jinsook Ohta, United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California, Edward J. Schwartz United States Courthouse, Courtroom 4C, 221 West Broadway, San Diego, CA 92101, or by telephonic or videoconference means as directed by the Court, for the purpose of determining: (1) whether the proposed Settlement of the claims in the Action for consideration including the sum of $1,750,000 ("Settlement Amount") should be approved by the Court as fair, reasonable, and adequate; (2) whether the proposed plan to distribute the Settlement proceeds is fair, reasonable, and adequate; (3) whether the application of Lead Counsel for an award of attorneys' fees of up to one-third of the Settlement Amount, reimbursement of expenses of not more than $75,000, and an award of no more than $15,000 in total to Plaintiffs should be approved; and (4) whether this Action should be dismissed with prejudice as set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement, dated August 27, 2025 ("Stipulation"). If you purchased publicly traded Flux Power common stock during the period from November 15, 2021 through February 14, 2025, both dates inclusive, your rights may be affected by this Settlement, including the release and extinguishment of claims you may possess relating to your ownership interest in Flux Power common stock. You may obtain copies of the detailed Notice of Pendency and Proposed Settlement of Class Action ("Long Notice") and the Proof of Claim and Release Form ("Proof of Claim") by writing to or calling Flux Power Securities Litigation, c/o Strategic Claims Services, 600 N. Jackson St., Ste. 205, P.O. Box 230, Media, PA 19063; (Tel) (866) 274-4004; (Fax) (610) 565-7985; info@strategicclaims.net, or going to the website, www.strategicclaims.net/FLUX. If you are a member of the Settlement Class, in order to share in the distribution of the Net Settlement Fund, you must submit a properly completed Proof of Claim electronically or postmarked no later than March 3, 2026, to the Claims Administrator, establishing that you are entitled to recovery. Unless you submit a written exclusion request, you will be bound by any judgment rendered in the Action whether or not you make a claim. If you desire to be excluded from the Settlement Class, you must submit a request for exclusion in the manner and form explained in the Long Notice to the Claims Administrator so that it is received no later than March 12, 2026. All members of the Settlement Class who have not requested exclusion from the Settlement Class will be bound by any judgment entered in the Action. Any objection to the Settlement, Plan of Allocation, or Lead Counsel's request for an award of attorneys' fees and reimbursement of expenses and an award to Plaintiffs must be in the manner and form explained in the Long Notice and received no later than March 12, 2026, by each of the following: Clerk of the Court United States District Court Southern District of California 333 West Broadway Suite 420 San Diego, CA 92101 LEAD COUNSEL: THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A. Phillip Kim 275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor New York, NY 10016 COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS: WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI, P.C. Caz Hashemi 650 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 94304 WILSON ELSER MOSKOWITZ EDELMAN & DICKER LLP David Aveni 401 W. A Street, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 If you have any questions about the Settlement, you may call or write to Lead Counsel: THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A. Phillip Kim 275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor New York, NY 10016 Tel: 212-686-1060 PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE COURT OR THE CLERK'S OFFICE REGARDING THIS NOTICE. Dated: December 10, 2025 BY ORDER OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA FULLBEAUTY BRANDS: Class Cert Bid Filing Due Jan. 8, 2027 --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JULIE ANNE KEMPF, v. FULLBEAUTY BRANDS OPERATIONS LLC, Case No. 2:25-cv-01141-RSM (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Martinez entered an order: Class certification discovery cut-off: Dec. 9, 2026 Deadline for the Plaintiffs to file motion Jan. 8, 2027 for class certification: Opposition to motion to certify class: Jan. 22, 2027 Reply in Support of Motion to Certify Class: Jan. 29, 2027 Hearing on Motion to Certify Class: To be set by the Court after briefing completed A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=WOOi7l at no extra charge.[CC] GOODYEAR TIRE: Faces Kiles Suit Over ERISA Violations ----------------------------------------------------- TABITHA KILES, individually and as a representative of a Class of Participants and Beneficiaries of The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company Health and Welfare Plan for Salaried Employees and The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company Health and Welfare Plan for Hourly Employees, Plaintiff v. THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 2:26-cv-00027-EAS-EPD (N.D. Ohio, Jan. 9, 2026) alleges violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. According to the complaint, the Defendant's Plan materials, as required by the wellness plan safe-harbor, do not provide the required notice of the scope and nature of the nicotine surcharge program available to Goodyear employees. Because Goodyear has not complied with the requirement that it provide notice of the availability and scope of the reasonable alternative standard in all of the Plans' communications by which a Plan participant could avoid the tobacco surcharge, including through a recommendation by a personal physician, the Defendant's nicotine surcharge program is unlawful and the surcharge assessed to the Plaintiff and Class must be returned to them for the entire Class Period, says the suit. The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company develops, distributes, and sells tires. The Company manufactures and markets rubber and rubber-related chemicals. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert R. Sparks, Esq. Richard S. Wayne, Esq. STRAUSS TROY CO. LPA Federal Reserve Building 150 E. 4th Street, 4th Floor Cincinnati, OH 45202 Telephone: (513) 621-2120 Email: rrsparks@strausstroy.com rswayne@strausstroy.com - and - Paul M. Secunda, Esq. WALCHESKE & LUZI, LLC 235 N. Executive Dr., Suite 240 Brookfield, WI 53005 Telephone: (414) 828-2372 Facsimile: (262) 565-6469 Email: psecunda@walcheskeluzi.com - and - Tulio D. Chirinos, Esq. CHIRINOS LAW FIRM, PLLC 20283 State Road 7, Suite 592 Boca Raton, PL 33498 Telephone: (561) 299-6334 Email: tchirinos@chirinoslawfinn.com GOOGLE INC: Plaintiffs Seek Rule 23 Class Certification ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned Re: Google Inc. Cookie Placement Consumer Privacy Litigation, Case No. 1:12-md-02358-JDW (D. Del.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting their motion for class certification. The Plaintiffs propose to certify the following Class under Rule 23(b)(2): "All persons in the United States who used the Apple Safari web browser, who visited a website from which Google's doubleclick.net cookies were deployed, and whose default Safari browser settings were enabled from June 1, 2011, Through Feb. 15, 2012." The Plaintiffs propose to certify the following Class under Rule 23(b)(3): "All persons within the State of California who used the Apple Safari web browser, who visited a website from which Google's doubleclick.net cookies were deployed, and whose default Safari browser settings were enabled from June 1, 2011 through Feb. 15, 2012." The case arises out of Defendant Google LLC's intentional and surreptitious circumvention of the default cookie blocking settings on the Safari web browser in order to serve targeted ads to internet users without their knowledge or consent. After months of discovery and the completion of depositions, in late October 2025, the Plaintiffs discovered that Google did in fact possess data associated with the tracking cookies at issue in this case, which Plaintiffs' expert believes could have been used to identify Class members. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=vXsZvW at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Brian Russell Strange, Esq. STRANGE LLP 12100 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1550 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Telephone: (310) 207-5055 E-mail: brian@strangellp.com - and - James P. Frickleton, Esq. BARTIMUS, FRICKLETON, ROBERTSON, RADER, P.C. 4000 W. 114th Street, Suite 310 Leawood, KS 66211 Telephone: (913) 266-2300 E-mail: jimf@bflawfirm.com - and - Stephen G. Grygiel, Esq. GRYGIEL LAW, LLC 127 Coventry Place Clinton, NY 13323 Telephone: 407-505-9463 E-mail: stephengrygiel122@gmail.com GULSHAN MANAGEMENT: Ceja Sues Over Unprotected Private Info ----------------------------------------------------------- ANA CEJA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GULSHAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC., Defendant, Case No. 4:26-cv-00200 (S.D. Tex., January 12, 2026) arises from Defendant's failure to properly safeguard and protect Plaintiff's and Class members' personal information. On or around September 27, 2025, Gulshan Management Services, Inc. (GMS) became aware of suspicious activity on its computer network, indicating a data breach. Based on a subsequent forensic investigation, GMS determined that cybercriminals infiltrated this inadequately secured network and gained access to its files beginning on or around September 17, 2025. Accordingly, the Plaintiff now seeks redress for Defendant's misconduct and asserts claims for negligence, breach of third-party beneficiary contract, unjust enrichment, and for declaratory judgment/injunctive relief. Headquartered in Sugar Land, TX, GMS manages IT, point-ofsale systems, and other operations for convenience stores chains across the country. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: A. Brooke Murphy, Esq. MURPHY LAW FIRM 4116 Will Rogers Pkwy, Suite 700 Oklahoma City, OK 73108 Telephone: (405) 389-4989 E-mail: abm@murphylegalfirm.com GULSHAN MANAGEMENT: Christopher Sues Over Data Security Failure --------------------------------------------------------------- BRIAN CHRISTOPHER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GULSHAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC., Defendant, Case No. 4:26-cv-00202 (S.D. Tex., January 12, 2026) arises from Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard private information provided by and belonging to individual's and failure to provide timely notice of the data breach. On or around September 27, 2025, the Defendant discovered that an unauthorized third party had gained access to its information systems. In response, the Defendant launched an investigation which determined that the unauthorized access came from a successful phishing attack on September 17, 2025. However, the Defendant only issued notice of public disclosure about the data breach on or around January 5, 2026. Accordingly, the Plaintiff now brings this action against Defendant for negligence, negligence per se, unjust enrichment, and breach of implied contract. Headquartered in Austin, TX, Gulshan Management Services, Inc. is a gas station and convenience store management company based in Texas. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joe Kendall, Esq. KENDALL LAW GROUP, PLLC 3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 825 Dallas, TX 75219 Telephone: (214) 744-3000 Facsimile: (214) 744-3015 E-mail: jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com - and - John J. Nelson, Esq. MILBERG, PLLC 280 S. Beverly Drive-Penthouse Suite Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone: (858) 209-6941 E-mail: jnelson@milberg.com HEALTHCARE HD: Lewis Must File Class Cert Bid by April 16 --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Robert Lewis Jr., on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, v. Healthcare HD LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-02756-AT (N.D. Ga.), the Hon. Judge Totenberg entered an order granting the joint motion to extend deadline to move for class certification. The Plaintiff will have until Apr. 16, 2026, to move for class certification. The Defendant is a medical equipment supplier. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 13, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ZTYKgM at no extra charge.[CC] HERTZ CORPORATION: Maharaj Seeks to Modify Class Cert Hearing Date ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as ZABEENA MAHARAJ, an individual; RODOLFO SCHULZ, an individual, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated and other aggrieved employees, v. THE HERTZ CORPORATION, Case No. 3:23-cv-04726-JSC (N.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order modifying the hearing date on motion for class certification. The Plaintiffs' counsel currently has a case set for trial starting on Jan. 20, 2026, and will be in trial during the currently scheduled class certification hearing on Jan. 22, 2026. Given this conflict, the Plaintiffs' counsel requested to continue the class certification hearing to a date after the trial concludes. On January 13 and 14 of 2026 the Parties met and conferred and agreed pursuant to Local Rule 6-1(b) to continue the class certification hearing to mutually agreeable date of March 5, 2026, at 10:00 A.M. The stipulated briefing and hearing schedule will not otherwise affect any deadlines currently set by the Court or other applicable rules imposed upon the Parties. On July 9, 2025, the Plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification noticing the hearing for Sept. 18, 2025. On Sept. 22, 2025. Christopher Crosman, Matthew Isaac, and Katherine Farr of Seyfarth Shaw LLP made appearances as counsel for the Defendant. Hertz is a global car rental company. A copy of the Parties' motion dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=C4fAGN at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Joshua H. Haffner, Esq. Alfredo Torrijos, Esq. Vahan Mikayelyan, Esq. HAFFNER LAW PC 15260 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1520 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Telephone: (213) 514-5681 Facsimile: (213) 514-5682 E-mail: jhh@haffnerlawyers.com at@haffnerlawyers.com vh@haffnerlawyers.com The Defendant is represented by: Christopher A. Crosman, Esq. Matthew Isaac, Esq. Katherine R. Farr, Esq. SEYFARTH SHAW LLP 2029 Century Park East, Suite 3500 Los Angeles, CA 90067-3021 Telephone: (310) 201-1528 Facsimile: (310) 201-5219 E-mail: ccrosman@seyfarth.com misaac@seyfarth.com kfarr@seyfarth.com HESS BAKKEN: Penman Suit Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification ---------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as RONALD PENMAN AND ADELANTE OIL & GAS, LLC, on behalf of themselves and a Class of similarly situated royalty owners, v. HESS BAKKEN INVESTMENTS II, LLC, Case No. 1:22-cv-00097-DLH-CRH (D.N.D.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting class certification pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Hess operates numerous oil and gas wells in North Dakota. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=W0TtqH at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Stacy A. Burrows, Esq. George A. Barton, Esq. BARTON AND BURROWS, LLC 5201 Johnson Drive, Ste. 110 Mission, KS 66205 Telephone: (913) 563-6253 E-mail: stacy@bartonburrows.com george@bartonburrows.com -and- - and - Joseph A. Kronawitter, Esq. Taylor P. Foye, Esq. HORN AYLWARD & BANDY, LLC 2600 Grand Boulevard, Suite 1100 Kansas City, MO 64108 Telephone: (816) 421-0700 Facsimile: (816) 421-0899 E-mail: jkronawitter@hab-law.com tfoye@hab-law.com HOWMET AEROSPACE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Linthicum Says ----------------------------------------------------------- JOHN LINTHICUM, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HOWMET AEROSPACE INC., Defendant, Case No. 2:26-cv-00039 (W.D. Pa., Jan. 9, 2026) seeks to recover from the Defendant unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff Linthicum was employed by the Defendant as a staff. Howmet Aerospace Inc. offers engines, fasteners, and structures, as well as forged wheels. Howmet Aerospace serves the aerospace and commercial transportation industries. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew J.P. Coffman, Esq. Adam C. Gedling, Esq. Tristan T. Akers, Esq. COFFMAN LEGAL, LLC 1550 Old Henderson Rd. Suite #126 Columbus, OH 43220 Telephone: (614) 949-1181 Facsimile: (614) 386-9964 Email: mcoffman@mcoffmanlegal.com agedling@mcoffmanlegal.com takers@mcoffmanlegal.com HUMANA INC: Kousiry Suit Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Bid --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Fares Kousiry, v. Humana Inc., Case No. 6:25-cv-01663-JSS-DCI (M.D. Fla.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order modifying the scheduling order and extending the deadline to file the Plaintiff's motion for class certification to Nov. 30, 2026. The Plaintiff filed the class action complaint on Aug. 28, 2025. On Oct. 22, 2025, the Parties filed a joint case management report proposing a discovery deadline of Oct. 22, 2026, and a class certification deadline of Jan. 4, 2027. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Z4DEND at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: James S. Wertheim, Esq. THE HQ FIRM, P.C. 7533 S. Center View Ct. #4424 West Jordan, UT 84084 Telephone: (385) 440-4121 E-mail: jim@thehqfirm.com INOTIV INC: $2.49MM Class Settlement to be Heard on March 18 ------------------------------------------------------------ The United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, on January 7, 2026, issued an order providing for preliminary approval of the proposed settlement of the consolidated derivative action pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, captioned In re Inotiv Stockholder Derivative Litigation, Case No. 4:22-cv-64-PPS-AZ, and the consolidated derivative litigation pending in the State of Indiana Tippecanoe County Circuit Court, captioned Whitfield v. Gregory C. Davis, et al., Case No. 79C01-2304-PL-000048. Inotiv, Inc. is named as a nominal defendant in the Derivative Actions. The terms of the Proposed Derivative Settlement are set forth in a Stipulation of Settlement, dated December 18, 2025. The Court has scheduled the final approval hearing in respect of the Proposed Derivative Settlement for March 18, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. Subject to final approval of the Proposed Derivative Settlement by the Court, the Stipulation will fully resolve the Derivative Actions, including all claims against the individual defendants and the Company as a nominal defendant. The Proposed Derivative Settlement includes the institution and maintenance of certain corporate governance measures by the Company, as well as a payment for the benefit of the Company, funded by available insurance, in an amount of $2,490,000, which the Company will use as part of a payment to the members of the putative class in connection with the proposed settlement of a securities class action lawsuit against the Company. Plaintiffs in the Derivative Actions will, in addition, seek attorneys' fees in an amount not to exceed $2,250,000, subject to court approval. The Company expects any award of attorneys' fees to be fully funded by available insurance. The Stipulation contains no admission of liability by the defendants or the Company. INOVA HEALTH: Agrees to Settle Data Tracking Suit for $3,147,390 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Olivia DeRicco of ClassAction.org reports that Inova Health Care Services has agreed to a $3,147,390 settlement to resolve a class action lawsuit that alleged the healthcare provider implemented tracking pixels on its website to share the personal information of Inova MyChart accountholders to third parties without their knowledge or consent. The Inova MyChart class action settlement received preliminary court approval on December 17, 2025, and covers all individuals with an Inova MyChart account who visited a public Inova website any time between April 29, 2022 and April 29, 2024, and whose private information may have been exposed to third parties. The court-approved website for the Inova MyChart pixel settlement can be found at HealthPixelSettlement.com. Per court documents, Inova settlement class members who submit a timely, valid claim form are eligible to receive a one-time, pro-rated cash payment from what remains in the net settlement fund after the payment of attorneys' fees, lead plaintiff service awards and any administrative expenses As part of the settlement, Inova has also agreed to implement remedial measures to ensure its website complies with the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. To submit an Inova MyChart settlement claim form online, class members can head to this page and enter the unique ID and PIN as found on their copy of the settlement notice. Alternatively, class members can download a PDF of the claim form to print, complete, and return by mail to the settlement administrator. All Inova MyChart settlement claim forms must be submitted online or postmarked by April 6, 2026. The court will decide whether to grant final approval of the Inova Health Care settlement at a hearing on April 16, 2026. Compensation will begin to be distributed to class members only after final approval is granted and any appeals are resolved. The Inova MyChart class action lawsuit alleged that the healthcare company used tracking pixels on its website to covertly transmit private health information from patients' MyChart accounts to third parties such as Meta and Google without consent to do so. [GN] INTERMOUNTAIN HEALTH: Judge Recommends Class Certification ---------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as KERRI SHEEHY, DEAN BEACOM, and TAYLOR ARCHULETA, on their own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. INTERMOUNTAIN HEALTH CARE, INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-00914-RMR-SBP (D. Colo.), the Hon. Judge Prose recommended that the Plaintiffs' unopposed motion for certification of class action as supplemented be granted. The Cour further recommended that the District Judge enter an Order certifying the following class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3) for Counts I and II only: "All current and former hourly employees of the Defendant who were classified by the Defendant as non-exempt and were paid on an hourly basis, excluding pharmacists, who worked both overtime hours and hours eligible for holiday premium pay in the same workweek, and who worked in Colorado between Feb. 14, 2019, and Sept. 2, 2024." In their First Amended Complaint, the Plaintiffs allege that, from February 14, 2019, to September 2, 2024, the Defendant maintained uniform, company-wide policies that (1) excluded Holiday Premium Pay from the regular rate used to calculate overtime compensation, and (2) excluded hours paid at the Holiday Premium rate from the count of hours toward overtime eligibility. These policies allegedly violated the Colorado Minimum Wages of Workers Act, as implemented by COMPS Order 7 CCR 1103-1, and the Colorado Wage Claim Act. The Plaintiffs Kerri Sheehy, Dean Beacom, and Taylor Archuleta are current hourly nurses employed by Defendant Intermountain Health Care, Inc. in Colorado. A copy of the Court's report and recommendation dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=z8gV3R at no extra charge.[CC] IQVIA INC: Seeks Leave to File Certain Docs Under Seal ------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as BRIAN J. LYNGAAS, D.D.S., P.L.L.C., individually and as the representative of a class of similarly-situated persons, v. IQVIA INC., Case No. 2:20-cv-02370-NIQA (E.D. Pa.), the Defendant asks the Court to enter an order granting motion for leave to file under seal (1) certain portions of IQVIA's Opposition to the Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, (2) certain portions of IQVIA's Opposition to the Plaintiff's renewed motion for class certification, and (3) certain exhibits attached to the declaration of Tiffany Cheung. Accordingly, certain portions of IQVIA's Filings contain confidential information regarding IQVIA's proprietary trade secrets, business methods, and strategy and/or confidential personal identity information of putative class members. Certain exhibits IQVIA seeks to file in support of its Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment and Opposition to Renewed Motion for Class Certification are native Excel files that the Clerk instructed should not be filed under seal via email. IQVIA operates as a healthcare information technology and pharma clinical research company. A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=lX8o9V at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendant is represented by: Tiffany Cheung, Esq. Melody E. Wong, Esq. William Frentzen, Esq. MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94105-2482 Telephone: (415) 268-7000 E-mail: TCheung@mofo.com MelodyWong@mofo.com WFrentzen@mofo.com - and - Joe Nguyen, Esq. STRADLEY RONON STEVENS & YOUNG, LLP 2005 Market Street, Suite 2600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 564-8000 E-mail: JNguyen@stradley.com - and - Edward Eberspacher, Esq. MEYER LAW GROUP, LLC 30 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1410 Chicago, IL 60602 Telephone: (312) 265-0565 E-mail: TEberspacher@meyerlex.com IRHYTHM TEC: Feb. 9 Deadline to File Reply Sought ------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as GLAZING EMPLOYERS AND GLAZIERS' UNION LOCAL No. 27 PENSION AND RETIREMENT FUND, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, v. IRHYTHM TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al., Case No. 3:24-cv-00706-JSC (N.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order regarding page limitations and filing deadline for plaintiff's reply in support of motion for class certification: The page limit for Lead Plaintiff's Reply shall be no more than 25 pages; and The deadline for Lead Plaintiff to file its Reply shall be Monday, February 9, 2026. Because the deadline for Lead Plaintiff to file the reply in the pretrial order falls on a Saturday, the Lead Plaintiff further requests, and the Defendants do not oppose, that the Court clarify that Lead Plaintiff may file the Reply on the following business day, Monday, Feb. 9, 2026. on July 9, 2025, the Court entered the Pretrial Order No. 1: Case Schedule, which set forth several case deadlines, including those for the briefing of Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification. On Nov. 3, 2025, pursuant to the Pretrial Order, Lead Plaintiff filed its Notice of Motion and Motion for Class Certification and Appointment of Class Representatives and Class Counsel. iRhythm develops and manufactures heart monitoring devices designed to diagnose abnormalities in the timing or pattern of a patient's heartbeat, known as arrhythmias. A copy of the Parties' motion dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=j9hOeE at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Katherine M. Sinderson, Esq. John J. Rizio-hamilton, Esq. Thomas Z. Sperber, Esq. Abby Kritta, Esq. Jonathan D. Uslaner, Esq. BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP 1251 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 Telephone: (212) 554-1400 Facsimile: (212) 554-1444 E-mail: johnr@blbglaw.com katiem@blbglaw.com thomas.sperber@blbglaw.com abygail.kritta@blbglaw.com jonathanu@blbglaw.com The Defendants are represented by: Kristin Tahler, Esq. Christopher Porter, Esq. Jesse Bernstein, Esq. Brenna Nelinson, Esq. Amy Shehan, Esq. QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP 865 South Figueroa Steet, 10th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 443-3000 Facsimile: (213) 443-3100 E-mail: kristintahler@quinnemanuel.com chrisporter@quinnemanuel.com jessebernstein@quinnemanuel.com brennanelinson@quinnemanuel.com amyshehan@quinnemanuel.com IRIS RESTAURANT: Hyman Sues Over Unlawful Tip Pool Policy --------------------------------------------------------- MARK HYMAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. IRIS RESTAURANT GROUP, LLC, and J. KELLY ENGLISH, individually, Defendants, Case No. 2:26-cv-02040 (W.D. Tenn., January 12, 2026) arises from Defendants' unlawful practice of permitting management employees to receive a portion of employee tips, and from Defendants' retaliation against Plaintiff for complaining about that practice. Plaintiff Mark Hyman was employed by Defendants at Swamp Bar as a bartender from approximately August 5, 2025 through December 5, 2025. The Plaintiff questioned and complained to management about the legality of management's participation in the tip pool. However, after Plaintiff raised concerns about Defendants' tip practices, the Defendants terminated his employment. Accordingly, the Plaintiff seeks redress for Defendants' unlawful conduct and asserts claims for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Iris Restaurant Group, LLC is a Tennessee limited liability company doing business as Swamp Bar in Memphis, TN. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Philip E. Oliphant, Esq. THE ROLWES EMPLOYMENT LAW FIRM 254 Court Avenue, Suite 305 Memphis, TN 38103 Telephone: (901) 519-9135 Facsimile: (901) 979-2499 E-mail: poliphant@rolweslaw.com JAPAN VILLAGE INC: Herard Files FCRA Suit in E.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Japan Village Inc., et al. The case is styled as Jean Herard, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Japan Village Inc., Tadao Yoshida, Takuya Yoshida, Case No. 1:26-cv-00123 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 9, 2026). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Japan Village -- https://www.japanvillage.com/ -- is a one-of-a-kind Japanese culinary experience located in Brooklyn's Industry City.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Laurence I. Cohen, Esq. SANDERS LAW GROUP 333 Earle Ovington Blvd., Suite 402 Uniondale, NY 11553 Phone: (516) 203-7613 Fax: (516) 282-7878 Email: lcohen@sanderslaw.group JARED HOY: Huber Suit Seeks to Certify Classes ---------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROBERT HUBER, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. JARED HOY, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Corrections and GARY BOUGHTON, in his official capacity as Warden of the Wisconsin Secure Program Facility, Case No. 3:24-cv-00404-wmc (W.D. Wis.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order certifying a class under Rule 23(a) and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Plaintiff moves to certify the following classes of persons: a. The Hardware Class – This class would apply to: "All persons who were inmates in the State of Wisconsin who purchased a "SCORE" tablet supplied by Advanced Technology Group prior to Feb. 14, 2024." b. The Media Class – This class would apply to: "All persons who were inmates in the State of Wisconsin who purchased any media or content for a "SCORE" tablet supplied by Advanced Technology Group prior to Feb. 14, 2024. The Plaintiff seeks relief on behalf of himself and the Classes, and request that the Court find him to be an adequate Class Representative for each class. The Plaintiff further requests and seeks the appointment of Cade Law Group LLC as Class Counsel for both classes pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g). The proposed class meets all of the requirements of Rule 23 necessary to certify classes that will allow these individuals to recover monies lost due to an inability to use their tablets as well as access the purchased content and media. In the absence of a class, it is highly unlikely that the class members will ever recover their damages. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=9XZAuT at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Nathaniel Cade, Jr., Esq. Annalisa Pusick, Esq. CADE LAW GROUP LLC Milwaukee, WI 53217 Telephone: (414) 255-3802 Facsimile: (414) 255-3804 E-mail: nate@cade-law.com annalisa@cade-law.com KENDAL NUTRICARE: Gutierrez Suit Removed to E.D. California ----------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Alana Gutierrez, individually, and on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals v. KENDAL NUTRICARE USA LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 25CV3092 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of El Dorado, to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California on Jan. 9, 2026, and assigned Case No. 2:26-cv-00073-DJC-JDP. The Plaintiff brings this Class Action Complaint for: Violation of California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act ("CLRA"); Violation of California's Unfair Competition Law; Violation of California's False Advertising Law; Common Law Fraud, Deceit, and/or Misrepresentation; Unjust Enrichment.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Albert Tong, Esq. James J. Hockel, Esq. MAYNARD NEXSEN LLP 201 California Street, Suite 400 San Francisco, CA 94111 Phone: 415.704.7433 Facsimile: 205.254.1999 Email: atong@maynardnexsen.com jhockel@maynardnexsen.com LANNETT COMPANY: $5.75MM Class Settlement to be Heard on April 16 ----------------------------------------------------------------- IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JOHN UTESCH, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff(s), v. LANNETT COMPANY, INC., ARTHUR P. BEDROSIAN, and MARTIN P. GALVAN, Defendants Civil Action No. 2:16-cv-05932-WB Judge Wendy Beetlestone CLASS ACTION SUMMARY NOTICE OF (I) PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT; (II) SETTLEMENT HEARING; AND (III) MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND LITIGATION EXPENSES TO: All persons and entities who purchased or acquired the publicly traded common stock of Lannett Company, Inc. during the period from July 15, 2014 and October 31, 2017, inclusive, and who were damaged thereby (the "Settlement Class"): PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY. YOUR RIGHTS MAY BE AFFECTED BY A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT PENDING IN THIS COURT. YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and an Order of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (the "Court"), that the litigation (the "Action") is pending in the Court. YOU ARE ALSO NOTIFIED that the plaintiffs in this Action, University of Puerto Rico Retirement System and Ironworkers Locals 40, 361 & 417 Union Security Funds (together, "Plaintiffs"), have reached a proposed settlement of the Action for $5,750,000 in cash on behalf of the Settlement Class, that, if approved, will resolve all claims in the Action. A hearing will be held on April 16, 2026 at 12:30 p.m. Eastern Time, before the Honorable Wendy Beetlestone, either in person at the James A. Byrne United States Courthouse, 601 Market Street, Courtroom 10-A, Philadelphia, PA 19106, or by telephone or videoconference (at the discretion of the Court). At the hearing, the Court will determine (i) whether the proposed Settlement should be approved as fair, reasonable, and adequate; (ii) whether the Action should be dismissed with prejudice against Defendants, and the Releases specified and described in the Amended Stipulation of Settlement dated December 4, 2025 (and in the Long Notice) should be granted; (iii) whether the proposed Plan of Allocation should be approved as fair and reasonable; and (iv) whether Plaintiffs' Counsel's application for an award of attorneys' fees not to exceed one-third of the Settlement Amount, after the deduction of Court-awarded litigation expenses, and for payment of their expenses in an amount not to exceed $1,375,000, plus interest on such fees and expenses at the same rate as may be earned by the Settlement Fund, and awards to Plaintiffs that in the aggregate will not exceed $30,000, should be approved. If you are a member of the Settlement Class (a "Settlement Class Member"), your rights will be affected by the pending Action and the Settlement, and you may be entitled to share in the Settlement Fund. If you have not yet received the Long Notice and Claim Form, you may obtain copies of these documents by contacting the Claims Administrator, A.B. Data, at Utesch v. Lannett Company, Inc., et al., c/o A.B. Data, P.O. Box 173112, Milwaukee, WI 53217, 1-877-316-0186. Copies of the Long Notice and Claim Form can also be downloaded from the website maintained by the Claims Administrator at www.LannettSecuritiesSettlement.com. If you are a Settlement Class Member, to be eligible to receive a payment under the proposed Settlement, you must submit a Claim Form postmarked (if mailed), or online, no later than April 2, 2026, in accordance with the instructions set forth in the Claim Form. If you are a Settlement Class Member and do not submit a proper Claim Form, you will not be eligible to share in the distribution of the net proceeds of the Settlement but you will nevertheless be bound by any releases, judgments, or orders entered by the Court in the Action. If you are a Settlement Class Member and wish to exclude yourself from the Settlement Class, you must submit a request for exclusion such that it is postmarked no later than March 13, 2026, in accordance with the instructions set forth in the Long Notice. If you properly exclude yourself from the Settlement Class, you will not be bound by any judgments or orders entered by the Court in the Action and you will not be eligible to share in the proceeds of the Settlement. Any objections to the proposed Settlement, the proposed Plan of Allocation, Plaintiffs' Counsel's Fee and Expense Application, or any application for awards to Plaintiffs, must be filed with the Court, with copies of such materials served on Class Counsel and Defendants' Counsel, no later than March 13, 2026, in accordance with the instructions set forth in the Long Notice. Please do not contact the Court, the Clerk's office, Defendants, or their counsel regarding this notice. All questions about this notice, the proposed Settlement, or your eligibility to participate in the Settlement should be directed to Class Counsel or the Claims Administrator. Inquiries, other than requests for the Long Notice and Claim Form, should be made to the below Class Counsel: ABRAHAM, FRUCHTER & TWERSKY, LLP Mitchell M.Z. Twersky, Esq. Lawrence D. Levit, Esq. 450 Seventh Avenue, 38th Floor New York, NY 10123 Tel: (212) 279-5050 mtwersky@aftlaw.com llevit@aftlaw.com Requests for the Long Notice and Claim Form should be made to: Utesch v. Lannett Company, Inc., et al. c/o A.B. Data P.O. Box 173112 Milwaukee, WI 53217 1-877-316-0186 www.LannettSecuritiesSettlement.com By Order of the Court LENS.COM INC: Seeks to Strike Untimely Disclosed Expert Witness --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICKEY MARTIN, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, v. LENS.COM, INC., Case No. 0:24-cv-60489-DSL (S.D. Fla.), the Defendant asks the Court to enter an order: (1) striking the Plaintiff's untimely disclosed class certification expert witness, (2) precluding the Plaintiff from relying on his untimely disclosed class certification expert witness in his reply to the Defendants opposition to the Plaintiff's motion for class certification, and (3) awarding Lens.com its reasonable expenses and attorneys' fees under Rule 37(c). Accordingly, because the Plaintiff knew of the need to obtain affirmative expert testimony in support of class certification and knowingly failed to exercise proper diligence in securing such expert testimony, his conduct cannot be deemed substantially justified and Heffner's opinions must be stricken. Finally, there is no way to cure the substantial prejudice to Defendant without materially disrupting the existing deadlines in the Court’s Scheduling Order. The Court would need to reopen and extend the class discovery deadline to allow Lens.com to engage in additional discovery, including deposing Heffner and retaining its own expert to rebut Heffner’s flawed opinions. Additionally, the Court would need to permit new or supplemental briefing on Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification, further delaying the Court’s ruling on that motion and creating a cascading domino effect on the remaining deadlines in this case, including the trial date. Lens.com operates as a specialty online retailer. A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=VjBgMJ at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendant is represented by: James W. Lee, Esq. Laselve E. Harrison, Esq. BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP 100 SE Second Street, Suite 2800 Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 539-8400 E-mail: jwlee@bsfllp.com lharrison@bsfllp.com - and - Mark M. Bettilyon, Esq. Jed H. Hansen, Esq. Joseph M. Harmer, Esq. THORPE NORTH & WESTERN, LLP The Walker Center 175 S. Main Street, Suite 900 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Telephone: (801) 566-6633 E-mail: mark.bettilyon@tnw.com hansen@tnw.com joseph.harmer@tnw.com LEVAIN BAKERY: Time for March 26 Settlement Hearing Changed ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as DOUGLASS v. LEVAIN BAKERY COOKIE COMPANY, LLC, Case No. 2:25-cv-01722 (W.D. Pa., Filed Nov. 4, 2025), the Hon. Judge Maureen P. Kelly entered an order that the Motion to Certify Class for Settlement Purposes and for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement Hearing previously set for Marc 26, 2026 at 10:00 AM is reset for March 26, 2026 08:30 AM in Courtroom 9C before Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly. The nature of suit states American with Disabilities Act. Levain is a privately-held company that operates in the restaurants industry.[CC] LIBBEY GLASS: Pena Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages ---------------------------------------------------------- Gliset Cespedes Pena, an individual, and Tabatha Snoderly, an individual, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated v. LIBBEY GLASS LLC, Case No. 3:26-cv-00062 (N.D. Ohio, Jan. 9, 2026), is brought to challenge the Defendant's policies and practices that violate the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), and the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act ("OMFWSA"), as a result of the Defendant's failure to pay overtime wages. The Plaintiffs were required to arrive approximately 8-15 minutes before their scheduled shifts in order to receive their work assignment for the day, discuss the previous shift's work and what needed to be done in the next shift, and begin working. The Plaintiffs were required to stay at their workstation for approximately 5-7 minutes past their scheduled shifts in order to wait for the worker on the next shift to arrive, discuss the previous shift's work and what needed to be done in the next shift, and begin working. The Plaintiffs were not paid any amount for this pre- and post-shift work and such time was not counted as hours worked for purposes of computing overtime. The Plaintiffs performed this unpaid work every workday, and it constituted a part of their fixed and regular working time. As a result of Plaintiffs not being paid for all hours worked, they were not paid overtime compensation for all the hours they worked over 40 each workweek, says the complaint. The Plaintiffs were and/or are employed by Defendant as non-exempt hourly production employees. The Defendant owns and operates a glass manufacturing company in Ohio.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Adam M. Lubow, Esq. Robi J. Baishnab, Esq. Nicholas A. Boggs, Esq. NILGES DRAHER LLC 700 W. St. Clair Ave., Suite 320 Cleveland, OH 44113 Phone: (234) 401-9371 Facsimile: (330) 754-1430 Email: alubow@ohlaborlaw.com rbaishnab@ohlaborlaw.com nboggs@ohlaborlaw.com LODI HOSPITALITY: Nguyen Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lodi Hospitality II LLC, et al. The case is styled as Maianh Nguyen, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Lodi Hospitality II LLC, Diede Construction Inc., Lodi Hospitality LLC, Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2026-0000183 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Joaquin Cty., Jan. 12, 2026). The case type is stated as "Unlimited Civil Other Employment." Lodi Hospitality II LLC doing business as Fairfield Inn & Suites By Marriot Lodi is a value brand from Marriotts Bonvoy suite of properties.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Fawn F. Bekam, Esq. ABRAMSON LABOR GROUP 1700 W Burbank Blvd. Burbank, CA 91506-1313 Phone: 213-493-6300 Fax: 213-336-3704 Email: fawn@abramsonlabor.com LUCAS BOLDEN: Harris Suit Seeks to Certify Class ------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as Robert Wayne Harris v. Sheriff Lucas Bolden, Lucas et al., Case No. 3:26-cv-00006-wmc (W.D. Wis.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting motion to certify Rule 23 class and appoint counsel. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ivv50D at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff appears pro se. LUXURBAN HOTELS: ZCAP Seeks to Certify Class of Stock Buyers ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as ZCAP EQUITY FUND LLC and ROSS MARCHETTA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. LUXURBAN HOTELS INC., BRIAN FERDINAND, and SHANOOP KOTHARI, Case No. 1:24-cv-01030-PAE (S.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order: 1. Certifying the following Class: "All persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired publicly traded common stock of LuxUrban Hotels, Inc. ("LuxUrban") between May 9, 2023 and May 13, 2024, both dates inclusive, and were damaged thereby." Excluded from the Class are (i) the Defendants and any affiliates or subsidiaries thereof; (ii) present and former officers and directors of LuxUrban and their immediate family members (as defined in Item 404 of SEC Regulation S K, 17 C.F.R. section 229.404, Instructions (1)(a)(iii) & (1)(b)(ii)); (iii) the Defendants' liability insurance carriers, and any affiliates or subsidiaries thereof; (iv) any entity in which any Defendant had or has had a controlling interest; (v) LuxUrban's employee retirement and benefit plan(s); (vi) any trust of which the Defendant Brian Ferdinand or the Defendant Shanoop Kothari is the settler or which is for the benefit of Ferdinand or Kothari and/or member(s) of the immediate family of either Ferdinand or Kothari; and (vii) the legal representatives, heirs, estates, agents, successors, or assigns of any person or entity described in the preceding categories. 2. Appointing Lead Plaintiffs zCap Equity Fund LLC and Ross Marchetta as Class Representatives; and 3. Appointing Lead Counsel Pomerantz LLP as Class Counsel. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=xwQKIj at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq. Jonathan D. Park, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 661-1100 Facsimile: (212) 661-8665 E-mail: jalieberman@pomlaw.com jpark@pomlaw.com - and - Lesley F. Portnoy, Esq. PORTNOY LAW FIRM 1800 Century Park East, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 692-8883 E-mail: lesley@portnoylaw.com LUXURY MANAGEMENT: Lekuntwane Suit Alleges CUFTA Violations ----------------------------------------------------------- KEFILWE LEKUNTWANE, MADUO JIM and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. CARLA FOOTE, LUXURY MANAGEMENT LLC, LUXURY HOMECARE CONNECTIONS, LLC, MARY ANN CIAMBRIELLO, ALZHEIMER'S & DEMENTIA CARE, LLC and, DOES 1-10, Defendants, Case No. ______ (Conn. Sup., January 12, 2026) accuses the Defendants of violating the Connecticut Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (CUFTA). Plaintiff Ciambriello the owner, officer and managing member of Help at Home CT, LLC, Homecare Connections, LLC, and A&D Care transferred her Homecare Business to her daughter, Carla Foote, in December 2022 through April 2023, after Plaintiffs' claims arose, after the filing of the Class action lawsuit and after Ciambriello agreed to a settlement of the Class action lawsuit and reneged on her agreement. Moreover, the transfer prevents Plaintiffs from acquiring a judicial lien otherwise than under sections 52-552a to 52-552l. Among other things, the Plaintiffs assert that transfer was concealed in that it was not done as required under the Connecticut corporations law for transferring assets of a limited liability company. Headquartered in Fairfield, CT, Luxury Management LLC provides home care services to seniors. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Nitor Egbarin, Esq. 100 Pearl Street, 14th Floor Hartford, CT 06103 Telephone: (860) 249-7180 Facsimile: (860) 408-1471 Mobile: (860) 680-1448 E-mail: NEgbarin@aol.com MACY'S RETAIL: Rheinor Suit Removed to N.D. California ------------------------------------------------------ The case captioned as Nicole Rheinor, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. MACY'S RETAIL HOLDINGS, LLC, an Ohio limited liability corporation; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Case No. C25-03450 was removed from the Superior Court of California for the County of Contra Costa, to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on Jan. 9, 2026, and assigned Case No. 3:26-cv-00285. The Plaintiff alleges class claims for failure to pay minimum wages, failure to pay all wages earned, failure to pay overtime wages, failure to provide meal periods, failure to provide rest periods, failure to provide accurate itemized wage statements, failure to pay all wages due upon separation of employment, and violation of the state Unfair Competition Law.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Michael C. Christman, Esq. MACY'S LAW DEPARTMENT 11477 Olde Cabin Road, Suite 400 St. Louis, MO 63141 Phone: (314) 342-6334 Facsimile: (314) 342-6366 Email: michael.christman@macys.com MANHATTAN COLLEGE: Class Settlement in Beck Suit Gets Final Nod --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CZIGANY BECK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, V. MANHATTAN COLLEGE, Case No. 1:20-cv-03229-LLS (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Louis Stanton entered an order granting the Plaintiff's unopposed motion for final approval of class action settlement. The Court confirms the appointment of Czigany Beck as Settlement Class Representative. The Court confirms the appointment of the law firms of Poulin, Willey, Anastopoulo, LLC and Toptani Law as Class Counsel. The Court confirms the appointment of Kroll as Settlement Administrator. It shall perform the duties and responsibilities set forth in the Settlement Agreement with respect to the distribution of the Settlement Fund. on Sept. 4, 2025, the Court entered an Order Granting Preliminary Approval of the Settlement, Directing Notice to the Class, Setting a Hearing on Final Approval and Provisionally Certifying the Settlement Class ("Preliminary Approval Order"), which, inter alia: (i) preliminarily approved the Settlement; (ii) preliminarily determined that, for purposes of the Settlement only, the Action should proceed as a class action, pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act, on behalf of the Settlement Class defined as: "All full-time students enrolled as undergraduate students during the Spring 2020 semester. Excluded from the Settlement Class are students who enrolled for classes at the beginning of the Spring 2020 semester, who paid no tuition or fees, or who left Manhattan College prior to March 1, 2020; the Defendant; the Defendant's officers, directors, agents, trustees, representatives, employees, principals, servants, partners, joint venturers, and/or entities under Defendant's control. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Yw2UW0 at no extra charge.[CC] MARQUIS SOFTWARE: Faces Garcia Class Suit in E.D. Tex. ------------------------------------------------------ JESUS GARCIA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MARQUIS SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS, INC., and WESTERRA CREDIT UNION, Defendants, Case No. 4:25-cv-01360-ALM (E.D. Tex., Dec. 8, 2025). The case is assigned to Judge Amos L Mazzant. Marquis Software Development, Inc. provides software services. The Company develops community supervison, inmate, healthcare and jail management software, as well as offers data warehousing, database conversion, server-side programming services. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Leigh Skye Montgomery, Esq. EKSM, LLP 4200 Montrose Boulevard Suite 200 Houston, TX 77006 Telephone: (888) 350-3931 Facsimile: (888) 276-3455 Email: lmontgomery@eksm.com MDL 3035: Carmichael Seeks Reconsideration of Class Cert. Order --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CARMICHAEL, JR. et al v. HARRIS et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-01127 (W.D. Tenn.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order reconsidering the limited portions of the Class Certification Order. Specifically, the Plaintiffs request that the Court reconsider: 1. Whether the damages model offered by the Plaintiffs' experts, Martin Dirks and Harris Devor, satisfies Rule 23(b)(3) predominance and Comcast's "fit" requirement as to three specific, discrete breaches of fiduciary duty by the Defendants Dr. Jerome V. Harris and Robert Eaton; and 2. Whether classwide damages for certain of the non-civil-conspiracy claims may be measured through common, transaction-specific, non-expert methodologies independent of the Dirks/Devor model, such that those claims likewise satisfy predominance under Rule 23(b)(3). The Plaintiffs do not seek reconsideration of the Court's rulings concerning commonality, nor of the Court’s determination that common questions predominate with respect to Plaintiffs’ civil conspiracy claim. Reconsideration is appropriate to correct clear error and to prevent manifest injustice and granting this limited relief will not delay trial or prejudice any party. Any additional class notice necessitated by reconsideration can be accomplished efficiently through a supplemental notice process well in advance of trial. The Carmichael suit is consolidated in AME Church Employee Retirement Fund Litigation (MDL 3035). The MDL 3035 concerns the mismanagement of the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church's pension funds, with court documents like transfer orders, opinions, and orders available as PDFs on government sites like GovInfo and court portals for case details. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Jan. 12, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ulKFEt at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew E. Lee, Esq. LEE SEGUI PLLC 900 W. Morgan Street Raleigh, NC 27603 Telephone: (855) 496-7500 E-mail: mlee@leesegui.com - and - Gregorio A. Francis, Esq. OSBORNE & FRANCIS LAW FIRM, PLLC 2707 E. Jefferson Street Orlando, FL 32803 Telephone: (561) 293-2600 Facsimile: (561) 923-8100 E-mail: gfrancis@realtoughlawyers.com - and - J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq. STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC 223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200 Nashville, TN 37203 Telephone: (615) 254-8801 Facsimile: (615) 255-5419 E-mail: gstranch@stranchlaw.com - and - Susan L. Meter, Esq. KANTOR & KANTOR LLP 19839 Nordhoff Street Northridge, CA 91324 Telephone: (818) 886-2525 Facsimile: (818) 350-6274 E-mail: smeter@kantorlaw.net - and - Kenneth S. Byrd, Esq. LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 222 2nd Ave S Nashville, TN 37210 Telephone: (615) 313-9000 Facsimile: (615) 313-9965 E-mail: kbyrd@lchb.com - and - Dhamian Blue, Esq. BLUE LLP Raleigh, NC 27602 Telephone: (919) 833-1931 Facsimile: (919) 833-8009 E-mail: dab@bluellp.com - and - Richard Schulte, Esq. WRIGHT & SCHULTE LLC 865 S. Dixie Dr. Vandalia, OH 45377 Telephone: (937) 435-9999 Facsimile: (937) 435-7511 E-mail: rschulte@yourlegalhelp.com - and - Julie Nepveu, Esq. AARP FOUNDATION 601 E Street, NW Washington, DC 20049 Telephone: (202) 434-2075 Facsimile: (202) 434-6424 E-mail: jnepveu@aarp.org MDL 3035: Jackson Seeks Reconsideration of Class Cert Order ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jackson v. Newport Group, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:22-cv-02174 (W.D. Tenn.), .), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order reconsidering the limited portions of the Class Certification Order. Specifically, the Plaintiffs request that the Court reconsider: 1. Whether the damages model offered by the Plaintiffs' experts, Martin Dirks and Harris Devor, satisfies Rule 23(b)(3) predominance and Comcast's "fit" requirement as to three specific, discrete breaches of fiduciary duty by the Defendants Dr. Jerome V. Harris and Robert Eaton; and 2. Whether classwide damages for certain of the non-civil-conspiracy claims may be measured through common, transaction-specific, non-expert methodologies independent of the Dirks/Devor model, such that those claims likewise satisfy predominance under Rule 23(b)(3). The Plaintiffs do not seek reconsideration of the Court's rulings concerning commonality, nor of the Court’s determination that common questions predominate with respect to Plaintiffs’ civil conspiracy claim. Reconsideration is appropriate to correct clear error and to prevent manifest injustice and granting this limited relief will not delay trial or prejudice any party. Any additional class notice necessitated by reconsideration can be accomplished efficiently through a supplemental notice process well in advance of trial. The Jackson suit is consolidated in AME Church Employee Retirement Fund Litigation (MDL 3035). The MDL 3035 concerns the mismanagement of the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church's pension funds, with court documents like transfer orders, opinions, and orders available as PDFs on government sites like GovInfo and court portals for case details. Newport operates as retirement services firm. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 12, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ubNx2B at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew E. Lee, Esq. LEE SEGUI PLLC 900 W. Morgan Street Raleigh, NC 27603 Telephone: (855) 496-7500 E-mail: mlee@leesegui.com - and - Gregorio A. Francis, Esq. OSBORNE & FRANCIS LAW FIRM, PLLC 2707 E. Jefferson Street Orlando, FL 32803 Telephone: (561) 293-2600 Facsimile: (561) 923-8100 E-mail: gfrancis@realtoughlawyers.com - and - J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq. STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC 223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200 Nashville, TN 37203 Telephone: (615) 254-8801 Facsimile: (615) 255-5419 E-mail: gstranch@stranchlaw.com - and - Susan L. Meter, Esq. KANTOR & KANTOR LLP 19839 Nordhoff Street Northridge, CA 91324 Telephone: (818) 886-2525 Facsimile: (818) 350-6274 E-mail: smeter@kantorlaw.net - and - Kenneth S. Byrd, Esq. LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 222 2nd Ave S Nashville, TN 37210 Telephone: (615) 313-9000 Facsimile: (615) 313-9965 E-mail: kbyrd@lchb.com - and - Dhamian Blue, Esq. BLUE LLP Raleigh, NC 27602 Telephone: (919) 833-1931 Facsimile: (919) 833-8009 E-mail: dab@bluellp.com - and - Richard Schulte, Esq. WRIGHT & SCHULTE LLC 865 S. Dixie Dr. Vandalia, OH 45377 Telephone: (937) 435-9999 Facsimile: (937) 435-7511 E-mail: rschulte@yourlegalhelp.com - and - Julie Nepveu, Esq. AARP FOUNDATION 601 E Street, NW Washington, DC 20049 Telephone: (202) 434-2075 Facsimile: (202) 434-6424 E-mail: jnepveu@aarp.org MERANI HOSPITALITY: Court Certifies FLSA Collective --------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Fabiano v. Merani Hospitality, Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-00894 (W.D.N.Y., Filed Sept. 18, 2025), the Hon. Judge Lawrence J. Vilardo entered an order granting motion to certify class of Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Collective filed by Brenda Fabiano. -- Responses due by Feb. 17, 2026. The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Merani is an independent hotel management company in the Niagara Frontier Region.[CC] MERCURY SYSTEMS: $32.5MM Class Settlement to be Heard on May 12 --------------------------------------------------------------- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP and Grant & Eisenhofer P.A. issued a statement regarding the Mercury Securities Litigation: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS NORTH COLLIER FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT FIREFIGHTERS' PENSION PLAN, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, vs. MERCURY SYSTEMS, INC., et al., Defendants. No. 1-23-cv-13065-WGY CLASS ACTION SUMMARY NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION TO: ALL PURCHASERS AND ACQUIRERS OF MERCURY SYSTEMS, INC. ("MERCURY") COMMON STOCK BETWEEN FEBRUARY 3, 2021 AND FEBRUARY 6, 2024, INCLUSIVE ("CLASS" OR "CLASS MEMBERS") THIS NOTICE WAS AUTHORIZED BY THE COURT. IT IS NOT A LAWYER SOLICITATION. PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY AND IN ITS ENTIRETY. YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that a hearing will be held on May 12, 2026, at 2:00 p.m., before the Honorable William G. Young, at the United States District Court, District of Massachusetts, John Joseph Moakley U.S. Courthouse, Courtroom 18, 1 Courthouse Way, Boston, MA 02210, to determine whether: (1) the proposed settlement (the "Settlement") of the Litigation as set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement ("Stipulation") for $32.5 million in cash should be approved by the Court as fair, reasonable, and adequate; (2) the Judgment as provided under the Stipulation should be entered dismissing the Litigation with prejudice; (3) to award Lead Counsel attorneys' fees and expenses out of the Settlement Fund (as defined in the Notice of Pendency and Proposed Settlement of Class Action ("Notice"), which is discussed below) and, if so, in what amounts; (4) to award Plaintiffs pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §78u-4(a)(4) in relation to their representation of the Class out of the Settlement Fund and, if so, in what amount; and (5) the Plan of Allocation should be approved by the Court as fair, reasonable, and adequate. It is possible that the Court may decide to change the date and/or time of the Settlement Hearing, conduct the Settlement Hearing by video or telephonic conference, or otherwise allow Class Members to appear at the hearing by telephone or videoconference, without further written notice to the Class. To determine whether the date and time of the Settlement Hearing have changed, or whether Class Members must or may participate by telephone or video, it is important that you monitor the Court's docket and the website, www.MercurySecuritiesSettlement.com, for any update before making any plans to attend the Settlement Hearing. IF YOU PURCHASED OR ACQUIRED MERCURY COMMON STOCK BETWEEN FEBRUARY 3, 2021 AND FEBRUARY 6, 2024, INCLUSIVE, YOUR RIGHTS MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE SETTLEMENT OF THIS LITIGATION. To share in the distribution of the Net Settlement Fund, you must establish your rights by submitting a Proof of Claim and Release form ("Proof of Claim") by mail (postmarked no later than April 8, 2026) or electronically via the website (no later than April 8, 2026). Failure to submit your Proof of Claim by April 8, 2026, will subject your claim to rejection and preclude you from receiving any of the recovery in connection with the Settlement of this Litigation. If you purchased or acquired Mercury common stock during the period between February 3, 2021 and February 6, 2024, inclusive, and do not request exclusion from the Class, you will be bound by the Settlement and any judgment and release entered in the Litigation, including, but not limited to, the Judgment, whether or not you submit a Proof of Claim. The Notice, which more completely describes the Settlement and your rights thereunder (including your right to object to the Settlement), the Proof of Claim, the Stipulation (which, among other things, contains definitions for the defined terms used in this Summary Notice), and other important documents, may be accessed online at www.MercurySecuritiesSettlement.com, or by writing to or calling: Mercury Securities Settlement Claims Administrator c/o Verita Global P.O. Box 301171 Los Angeles, CA 90030-1171 1-888-808-8981 Inquiries should NOT be directed to Defendants, the Court, or the Clerk of the Court. Inquiries, other than requests for the Notice or for a Proof of Claim, may be made to Lead Counsel: ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP Ashley Price 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: 1-800-449-4900 settlementinfo@rgrdlaw.com IF YOU DESIRE TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE CLASS, YOU MUST SUBMIT A REQUEST FOR EXCLUSION SUCH THAT IT IS POSTMARKED BY APRIL 21, 2026, IN THE MANNER AND FORM EXPLAINED IN THE NOTICE. ALL CLASS MEMBERS WILL BE BOUND BY THE SETTLEMENT EVEN IF THEY DO NOT SUBMIT A TIMELY PROOF OF CLAIM. IF YOU ARE A CLASS MEMBER, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO OBJECT TO THE SETTLEMENT, THE PLAN OF ALLOCATION, THE REQUEST BY LEAD COUNSEL FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES, AND/OR THE REQUEST FOR AWARD(S) TO PLAINTIFFS IN CONNECTION WITH THEIR REPRESENTATION OF THE CLASS. ANY OBJECTIONS MUST BE FILED WITH THE COURT AND SENT TO LEAD COUNSEL AND DEFENDANTS' COUNSEL BY APRIL 21, 2026, IN THE MANNER AND FORM EXPLAINED IN THE NOTICE AVAILABLE AT WWW.MERCURYSECURITIESSETTLEMENT.COM. DATED: December 16, 2025 BY ORDER OF THE COURT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS MESHKI LLC: McCormick Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct. ------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Meshki, LLC. The case is styled as Grace McCormick, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Meshki, LLC, Case No. 800468/2026E (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Bronx Cty., Jan. 9, 2026). The nature of suit is stated as Other Torts (Discrimination). Meshki, LLC -- https://www.meshki.us/ -- offers affordable Luxe Women's Fashion and unique exclusive designs.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Robert Leonard Schonfeld, Esq. JOSEPH & NORINSBERG LLC 1 World Trade Center, 85th Fl New York, NY 10007 Phone: 866-569-1619 Email: info@employeejustice.com META FLOW LTD: Scotch Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. --------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Meta Flow, Ltd. The case is styled as Lisa Scotch, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Meta Flow, Ltd., Case No. 26CV163898 (Cal. Super. Ct., Alameda Cty., Jan. 9, 2026). The nature of suit is stated as Fraud (No Contract). Meta Flow, Ltd. -- https://metaflow.org/ -- is an Israeli-based health technology startup founded in 2013-2014 by Avi Smila and Daniel Mor.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Sophia Gold, Esq. KALIELGOLD 490 43rd St., Ste. 122 Oakland, CA 94609-2138 Phone: 202-350-4783 Email: sgold@kalielgold.com META PLATFORMS: Seeks Leave to File Class Cert. Sur-Reply --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned Re Meta Pixel Tax Filing Cases, Case No. 5:22-cv-07557-PCP (N.D. Cal.), the Defendant asks the Court to enter an order granting administrative motion for leave to file sur-reply to the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification. Because Meta has "not yet had an opportunity to address Plaintiffs' new class definition[s]," it requests leave to file the attached sur-reply to do so. The Plaintiffs' case initially focused on allegations that Meta's Pixel code was configured by certain tax-filing websites to transmit their "sensitive financial information" to Meta. The complaint proposed a nationwide class of: "All people in the United States whose tax filing information was obtained by Meta from an online tax preparation provider such as H&R Block, TaxAct, or TaxSlayer," and corresponding state subclasses. In their class-certification motion, the Plaintiffs proposed much broader classes of: ""All individuals" in the United States or California "who visited the website H&RBlock.com from Jan. 15, 2019 to June 30, 2023," or "who visited the website TaxAct.com from Aug. 25, 2015 to June 30, 2023"—whether or not they provided (or Meta received) any "tax filing information."" Meta owns and operates several prominent social media platforms and communication services, including Facebook, Instagram, Threads, Messenger and WhatsApp. A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=FcOMOJ at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendant is represented by: Darcy C. Harris, Esq. Lauren R. Goldman, Esq. Elizabeth K. Mccloskey, Esq. Abigail A. Barrera, Esq. Jonathan C. Bond, Esq. GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166-0193 Telephone: (212) 351-4000 Facsimile: (212) 351-4035 E-mail: lgoldman@gibsondunn.com dharris@gibsondunn.com emccloskey@gibsondunn.com abarrera@gibsondunn.com jbond@gibsondunn.com - and - Melanie M. Blunschi, Esq. Kristin I. Sheffield-Whitehead, Esq. Dianne Kim, Esq. Marissa Alter-Nelson, Esq. Jessica Stebbins Bina, Esq. LATHAM & WATKINS LLP 505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 395-8129 Facsimile: (415) 395-8095 E-mail: melanie.blunschi@lw.com kristin.whitehead@lw.com dianne.kim@lw.com marissa.alter-nelson@lw.com jessica.stebbinsbina@lw.com METRO ONE: Hager Suit Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as DENNIS HAGER, individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated, v. METRO ONE LOSS PREVENTION SERVICES GROUP, INC., a Maryland corporation; METRO ONE LOSS PREVENTION SERVICES GROUP (WEST COAST), INC.; and METRO ONE LOSS PREVENTION SERVICES GROUP (GUARDS), Case No. 3:25-cv-05164-JHC (W.D. Wash.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order: -- Certifying proposed Classes pursuant to Rule 23; -- Appointing Dennis Hager as representative of the Classes; and -- Appointing James B. Pizl and Entente Law PLLC as counsel for the Classes. Accordingly, Plaintiff requests that the Court certify the following Classes: Nondisparagement Class. "All individuals who were hired on or after June 9, 2022, and who are or were employed by Defendants in Washington State at any time thereafter.” Noncompete Class. "All individuals who were hired on or after Jan. 1, 2020, and who are or were employed by Defendants in Washington State on or after Jan. 27, 2022, and paid annualized compensation of less than $101,390 in 2021, less than $107,301.04 in 2022, less than $116,593.18 in 2023, less than $120,559.99 in 2024, and/or less than $123,394.17 in 2025." The case presents a textbook example of a matter suitable for class adjudication under Rule 23. The Plaintiff Dennis Hager, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, seeks certification of two classes of Washington employees to challenge the legality of Defendants Metro One Loss Prevention Services Group, Inc.'s, Metro One Loss Prevention Services Group (West Coast), Inc.'s, and Metro One Loss Prevention Services Group standardized employment agreements. Mr. Hager was hired by Metro One on March 10, 2023, as an Account Manager "based out of Seattle/Tacoma, WA" with annual compensation of $80,000. On Jan. 21, 2024, Hager received a promotion with the new title of Performance Manager, with annual compensation of $85,000. Hager's employment with Metro One ended on Feb. 13, 2025. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=OapoJl at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Bailey C. Wilson, Esq. ENTENTE LAW PLLC 315 Thirty-Ninth Ave SW, Suite 13 Puyallup, WA 98373-3690 Telephone: (253) 446-7668 Facsimile: (253) 251-1276 E-mail: bailey@ententelaw.com The Defendants are represented by: Jessica S. Kang, Esq. Michael W. Meredith, Esq. Joby Celoza, Esq. Brent D. Hockaday, Esq. K&L GATES LLP 925 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2900 Seattle, WA 98104 Telephone: (206) 370-5776 Facsimile: (206) 370-6028 E-mail: jess.kang@klgates.com michael.meredith@klgates.com joby.celoza@klgates.com brent.hockaday@klgates.com MONROE UNIVERSITY: Inadequately Safeguards Private Info, Ortiz Says ------------------------------------------------------------------- CARLOS ORTIZ II, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MONROE UNIVERSITY, LTD., Defendant, Case No. 1:26-cv-00446 (S.D.N.Y., January 16, 2026) is a class action against seeking to hold Defendant responsible for the harms it caused Plaintiff and similarly situated persons in the preventable data breach of Defendant's inadequately protected computer network. The complaint relates that as part of its business, and in order to gain profits, Defendant obtained and stored the personal information of its students, applicants, and faculty, including the personal information of Plaintiff and Class members. By taking possession and control of Plaintiff's and Class members' personal information, Defendant assumed a duty to securely store and protect it. However, the Defendant breached this duty and betrayed the trust of Plaintiff and Class members by failing to properly safeguard and protect their personal information, thus enabling cybercriminals to access, acquire, appropriate, compromise, disclose, encumber, exfiltrate, release, steal, misuse, and/or view it. Specifically, Monroe experienced a data breach between December 9, 2024, and December 23, 2024, wherein unauthorized cybercriminals infiltrated Defendant's inadequately secured computer network and stole files containing the sensitive personal information of approximately 320,973 individuals. According to Monroe, the personal information accessed by cybercriminals involved a wide variety of personally identifiable information ("PII"), including but not limited to names, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, driver's license numbers, passport numbers, medical and health insurance data, financial information, and student records. The complaint alleges that the Defendant's misconduct - failing to implement adequate and reasonable measures to protect Plaintiff's and Class members' Personal Information, failing to timely detect the Data Breach, failing to take adequate steps to prevent and stop the Data Breach, failing to disclose the material facts that it did not have adequate security practices in place to safeguard the Personal Information, and failing to provide timely and adequate notice of the Data Breach - caused substantial harm and injuries to Plaintiff and Class members across the United States. The Plaintiff brings this class action lawsuit to hold Defendant responsible for its grossly negligent failure to use statutorily required or reasonable industry cybersecurity measures to protect Class members' Personal Information. Plaintiff Plaintiff Carlos Ortiz II is a citizen and resident of Bronx County, New York. Defendant Monroe University, Ltd. is a higher education institution, offering academic degrees in a variety of disciplines.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Alyssa Tolentino, Esq. Tyler J. Bean, Esq. SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP 745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500 New York, NY 10151 Telephone: (212) 532-1091 E-mail: atolentino@sirillp.com E-mail: tbean@sirillp.com - and - A. Brooke Murphy, Esq. MURPHY LAW FIRM 4116 Will Rogers Pkwy, Suite 700 Oklahoma City, OK 73108 Telephone: (405) 389-4989 E-mail: abm@murphylegalfirm.com MONSANTO COMPANY: Fuller Sues Over Wrongful Sale of Herbicide ------------------------------------------------------------- Glen Fuller, and other similarly situated victims v. MONSANTO COMPANY and BAYER CROPSCIENCE LP, Case No. N26C-01-248 MON (Del. Super. Ct., Jan. 12, 2026), is brought for personal injuries sustained by exposure to Roundup containing the active ingredient glyphosate and the surfactant polyethoxylated tallow amine ("POEA"), as well as many, many other proven, probable, and/or suspected carcinogens. This is an action for damages suffered by Plaintiff as a direct and proximate result of Defendant's negligent and wrongful conduct in connection with the design, development, manufacture, testing, packaging, promoting, marketing, advertising, distribution, labeling, and/or sale of the herbicide Roundup, containing the active ingredient glyphosate. The Plaintiff maintains that Roundup and/or glyphosate is defective, dangerous to human health, unfit and unsuitable to be marketed and sold in commerce, and has lacked, at all relevant times, proper warnings and directions as to the dangers associated with its use, says the complaint. The Plaintiff developed Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma as a direct and proximate result of being exposed to Roundup. The Defendants advertise and sell goods, specifically Roundup, throughout the United States, including in Delaware.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Raeann Warner, Esq. COLLINS PRICE WARNER & WOLOSHIN 8 East 13th Street Wilmington, DE 19801 Phone: (302) 655-4600 Email: raeann@cpwwlaw.com - and - Emily T. Acosta, Esq. Madison Donaldson, Esq. WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM 940 North Lincoln Street Denver, CO 80203 Phone: Tel: (303) 376-6360 Fax: (888) 875-2889 Email: eacosta@wagstafflawfirm.com mdonaldson@wagstafflawfirm.com MONSANTO COMPANY: Greening Sues Over Negligent Sale & Advertising ----------------------------------------------------------------- Stacey Greening, and other similarly situated victims v. MONSANTO COMPANY and BAYER CROPSCIENCE LP, Case No. N26C-01-247 MON (Del. Super. Ct., Jan. 12, 2026), is brought for personal injuries sustained by exposure to Roundup containing the active ingredient glyphosate and the surfactant polyethoxylated tallow amine ("POEA"), as well as many, many other proven, probable, and/or suspected carcinogens. This is an action for damages suffered by Plaintiff as a direct and proximate result of Defendant's negligent and wrongful conduct in connection with the design, development, manufacture, testing, packaging, promoting, marketing, advertising, distribution, labeling, and/or sale of the herbicide Roundup, containing the active ingredient glyphosate. The Plaintiff maintains that Roundup and/or glyphosate is defective, dangerous to human health, unfit and unsuitable to be marketed and sold in commerce, and has lacked, at all relevant times, proper warnings and directions as to the dangers associated with its use, says the complaint. The Plaintiff developed Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma as a direct and proximate result of being exposed to Roundup. The Defendants advertise and sell goods, specifically Roundup, throughout the United States, including in Delaware.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Raeann Warner, Esq. COLLINS PRICE WARNER & WOLOSHIN 8 East 13th Street Wilmington, DE 19801 Phone: (302) 655-4600 Email: raeann@cpwwlaw.com - and - Emily T. Acosta, Esq. Madison Donaldson, Esq. WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM 940 North Lincoln Street Denver, CO 80203 Phone: Tel: (303) 376-6360 Fax: (888) 875-2889 Email: eacosta@wagstafflawfirm.com mdonaldson@wagstafflawfirm.com MONSANTO COMPANY: Mickey Sues Over Wrongful Herbicide Distribution ------------------------------------------------------------------ Anne Mickey, and other similarly situated victims v. MONSANTO COMPANY and BAYER CROPSCIENCE LP, Case No. N26C-01-254 MON (Del. Super. Ct., Jan. 12, 2026), is brought for personal injuries sustained by exposure to Roundup containing the active ingredient glyphosate and the surfactant polyethoxylated tallow amine ("POEA"), as well as many, many other proven, probable, and/or suspected carcinogens. This is an action for damages suffered by Plaintiff as a direct and proximate result of Defendant's negligent and wrongful conduct in connection with the design, development, manufacture, testing, packaging, promoting, marketing, advertising, distribution, labeling, and/or sale of the herbicide Roundup, containing the active ingredient glyphosate. The Plaintiff maintains that Roundup and/or glyphosate is defective, dangerous to human health, unfit and unsuitable to be marketed and sold in commerce, and has lacked, at all relevant times, proper warnings and directions as to the dangers associated with its use, says the complaint. The Plaintiff developed Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma as a direct and proximate result of being exposed to Roundup. The Defendants advertise and sell goods, specifically Roundup, throughout the United States, including in Delaware.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Raeann Warner, Esq. COLLINS PRICE WARNER & WOLOSHIN 8 East 13th Street Wilmington, DE 19801 Phone: (302) 655-4600 Email: raeann@cpwwlaw.com - and - Emily T. Acosta, Esq. Madison Donaldson, Esq. WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM 940 North Lincoln Street Denver, CO 80203 Phone: Tel: (303) 376-6360 Fax: (888) 875-2889 Email: eacosta@wagstafflawfirm.com mdonaldson@wagstafflawfirm.com MONSANTO COMPANY: Nelson Sues Over Negligent Sale of Herbicide -------------------------------------------------------------- Daniel Nelson, and other similarly situated victims v. MONSANTO COMPANY and BAYER CROPSCIENCE LP, Case No. N26C-01-239 MON (Del. Super. Ct., Jan. 12, 2026), is brought for personal injuries sustained by exposure to Roundup containing the active ingredient glyphosate and the surfactant polyethoxylated tallow amine ("POEA"), as well as many, many other proven, probable, and/or suspected carcinogens. This is an action for damages suffered by Plaintiff as a direct and proximate result of Defendant's negligent and wrongful conduct in connection with the design, development, manufacture, testing, packaging, promoting, marketing, advertising, distribution, labeling, and/or sale of the herbicide Roundup, containing the active ingredient glyphosate. The Plaintiff maintains that Roundup and/or glyphosate is defective, dangerous to human health, unfit and unsuitable to be marketed and sold in commerce, and has lacked, at all relevant times, proper warnings and directions as to the dangers associated with its use, says the complaint. The Plaintiff developed Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma as a direct and proximate result of being exposed to Roundup. The Defendants advertise and sell goods, specifically Roundup, throughout the United States, including in Delaware.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Raeann Warner, Esq. COLLINS PRICE WARNER & WOLOSHIN 8 East 13th Street Wilmington, DE 19801 Phone: (302) 655-4600 Email: raeann@cpwwlaw.com - and - Emily T. Acosta, Esq. Madison Donaldson, Esq. WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM 940 North Lincoln Street Denver, CO 80203 Phone: Tel: (303) 376-6360 Fax: (888) 875-2889 Email: eacosta@wagstafflawfirm.com mdonaldson@wagstafflawfirm.com MONSANTO COMPANY: Puerto Sues Over Wrongful Herbicide Distribution ------------------------------------------------------------------ Juan Puerto, and other similarly situated victims v. MONSANTO COMPANY and BAYER CROPSCIENCE LP, Case No. N26C-01-240 MON (Del. Super. Ct., Jan. 12, 2026), is brought for personal injuries sustained by exposure to Roundup containing the active ingredient glyphosate and the surfactant polyethoxylated tallow amine ("POEA"), as well as many, many other proven, probable, and/or suspected carcinogens. This is an action for damages suffered by Plaintiff as a direct and proximate result of Defendant's negligent and wrongful conduct in connection with the design, development, manufacture, testing, packaging, promoting, marketing, advertising, distribution, labeling, and/or sale of the herbicide Roundup, containing the active ingredient glyphosate. The Plaintiff maintains that Roundup and/or glyphosate is defective, dangerous to human health, unfit and unsuitable to be marketed and sold in commerce, and has lacked, at all relevant times, proper warnings and directions as to the dangers associated with its use, says the complaint. The Plaintiff developed Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma as a direct and proximate result of being exposed to Roundup. The Defendants advertise and sell goods, specifically Roundup, throughout the United States, including in Delaware.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Raeann Warner, Esq. COLLINS PRICE WARNER & WOLOSHIN 8 East 13th Street Wilmington, DE 19801 Phone: (302) 655-4600 Email: raeann@cpwwlaw.com - and - Emily T. Acosta, Esq. Madison Donaldson, Esq. WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM 940 North Lincoln Street Denver, CO 80203 Phone: Tel: (303) 376-6360 Fax: (888) 875-2889 Email: eacosta@wagstafflawfirm.com mdonaldson@wagstafflawfirm.com NATIONAL TENANT: Class Certification Bid Deadlines Stayed --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROGERS v. NATIONAL TENANT NETWORK, INC., et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-00585 (D.N.J., Filed Jan. 16, 2025), the Hon. Judge Karen M. Williams entered an order that deadlines for expert discovery and class certification motions are stayed pending the status conference scheduled for March 2, 2026, at 12:00 p.m. Counsel shall utilize the following dial-in instructions for the conference: 1-856-210-8988, Conference ID: 284 715 040. The suit alleges violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. National Tenant provides resident screening services.[CC] NCAA: Patterson Prelim. Injunction Bid Tossed --------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as LANGSTON PATTERSON, et al., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION, Case No. 3:25-cv-00994 (M.D. Tenn.), the Hon. Judge William Campbell, Jr. entered an order denying motion for Preliminary Injunction. In summary, at this juncture and on a limited record, the Court finds the Plaintiffs have not shown a likelihood of success on the merits of their antitrust claim. A failure to establish a likelihood of success on the merits "'is usually fatal' to a plaintiff's quest for a preliminary injunction." The Plaintiffs are five student-athletes who have competed during four consecutive seasons of NCAA Division I football at various colleges. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Fsr25B at no extra charge.[CC] NEXUS T-SQUARED: Campos and Weiss Suit Allege Labor Law Breaches ---------------------------------------------------------------- ANA CAMPOS and JONATHAN WEISS, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. NEXUS T-SQUARED SOCIAL NY LLC, d/b/a T-SQUARED SOCIAL, Defendants, Case No. 1:26-cv-00254 (S.D.N.Y., January 12, 2026) arises out of Defendant's alleged tip theft and other wage-and-hour violations of federal and New York law. Plaintiff Ana Campos has worked for Defendant as a bartender at T-Squared Social from November 2024 to the present. Plaintiff Jonathan Weiss worked for Defendants as a bartender at T-Squared Social from mid-2023 until mid-2025. Allegedly, the Defendant did not give Plaintiffs paystubs that identified the tip credit that Defendant was taking against the minimum wage owed Plaintiff, in violation of New York Labor Law. In addition, the Defendant willfully, regularly and repeatedly failed to pay Plaintiffs at the required overtime rates for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek, says the suit. Nexus T-Squared Social NY LLC owns and operates a restaurant called T-Squared Social in midtown Manhattan. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: D. Maimon Kirschenbaum JOSEPH & KIRSCHENBAUM LLP 45 Broadway, Suite 320 New York, NY 10006 Telephone: (212) 688-5640 Facsimile: (212) 981-9587 NIKE INC: Bid for Leave to File Renewed Class Cert Tossed --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as KELLY CAHILL, et al., individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. NIKE, INC., an Oregon Corporation, Case No. 3:18-cv-01477-AB (D. Or.), the Hon. Judge Amy M. Baggio entered an order denying the Plaintiffs' motion for leave to file a renewed motion for class certification. The case has been pending since August 9, 2018 -- almost seven and a half years. In November 2022, Magistrate Judge Russo issued a Findings and Recommendation, recommending that the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification be denied for lack of commonality. A year-long lag with no request to revisit class certification, including while the case was prepared for trial and even more so while all actual claims in the case reported as settled, with only a court-courtesy of allowing the case to remain open to permit the parties to try and settle the putative class claims, weighs toward a finding of a lack of due diligence by the Plaintiffs. Even apart from the year of unreasonable delay between the most recent of this allegedly "new" evidence and the filing of Plaintiffs' motion, the greater context of the seven plus years this case has been pending makes plain that the Plaintiffs' request should be denied considering the potential impact on this judicial proceeding. While the Court can alter or amend an order regarding class certification, the Court chooses not to do so, nor requires the Defendant to engage in briefing beyond the current record. A copy of the Court's opinion & order dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=dqXZm3 at no extra charge.[CC] NOAH'S ARK: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Hernandez Alleges -------------------------------------------------------- FREDY PAPALOTZI HERNANDEZ; JAVIER AMARO LARA; and SULIS ESTEFANI HERNANDEZ OSORIO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. NOAH'S ARK BAGELS CORP. d/b/a ARK BAGELS; ARK BAGELS & CAFE INC.; NOAH ABDO MOSLEH; MOHAMED ABDO MOSLEH; and SAM MOHAMED ALSAHARI, Defendants, Case No. 1:26-cv-00184 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 9, 2026) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiffs Hernandez, Lara, and Osorio were employed by the Defendants as baker, food service worker, and cashier, respectively. Noah's Ark Bagels Corp. d/b/a Ark Bagels operates as a cafe. The Company provides sandwiches, coffees, and other food. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Roman Avshalumov, Esq. Helen F. Dalton & Associates, P.C. 80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601 Kew Gardens, NY 11415 Telephone: (718) 263-9591 NORLITE LLC: Court Extends Time to File Response/Reply ------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as Hill, et al., v. Norlite, LLC, et al., Case No. 1:21-cv-00439 (N.D.N.Y., Filed April 16, 2021), the Hon. Judge Elizabeth C. Coombe entered an order granting motion for extension of time to file response/Reply as follows: Motion to Certify Class filed by Donna Durivage, Margaret Franklin, Audrey Anna Gallardo, Debra Hill, Jennifer Malinowski, Andrea McGurn, John McGurn, Brittany McNair, David Olivencia, Ford Oxaal, Kenneth Ryer, Jr, Edward Sokol, Sr, Chelsea Sturtevant,110 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Donna Durivage, Margaret Franklin, Jennifer Malinowski, Andrea McGurn, John McGurn, Brittany McNair, David Olivencia, Ford Oxaal, Kenneth Ryer, Jr, Edward Sokol, Sr, and Chelsea Sturtevant. Motion for Summary Judgment as to Nuisance Claims, Trespass Claims, and Medical Monitoring Remedy filed by Norlite, LLC, Tradebe Environmental Services, LLC, Tradebe Treatment and Recycling Northeast, LLC,114 MOTION for Summary Judgment on Statute of Limitations Grounds filed by Norlite, LLC, Tradebe Environmental Services, LLC, Tradebe Treatment and Recycling Northeast, LLC, Motion to Exclude the Expert Testimony and Reports of Plaintiffs' Experts Timothy R. McAuley, M.S., PH.D. and John D. Meyer, M.D., M.P.H. filed by Norlite, LLC, Tradebe Environmental Services, LLC, Tradebe Treatment and Recycling Northeast, LLC: -- Response to Motions due by Feb. 6, 2026. -- Reply to Response to Motions due by Feb. 23, 2026 -- No further extensions of the briefing deadlines will be granted absent good cause shown. The nature of suit states Real Property -- Torts to Land. Norlite specializes in the production of expanded shale aggregate, a lightweight material used in various construction applications.[CC] OFFICE DEPOT: Seek Denial of Yount Class Cert Bid ------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as NICOLE YOUNT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. OFFICE DEPOT, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company doing business as OFFICE DEPOT; THE OFFICE CLUB, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company doing business as OFFICE DEPOT; and DOES 1-20, Case No. 2:24-cv-00392-RSL (W.D. Wash.), the Defendants ask the Court to enter an order granting Office Depot's Motion, denying class certification, and striking Yount's class allegations. This lawsuit is one of hundreds of Washington Equal Pay and Opportunities Act (EPOA), putative class actions filed since January 2023 by Plaintiff’s counsel. In her Complaint, Ms. Yount defines the putative class as: "All individuals who, from Jan. 1, 2023 through the date notice is provided to the Class, applied for a job opening in Washington State with one or more of the Defendants, where the job posting did not disclose the wage scale or salary range for the position." Ms. Yount alleges Office Depot violated the EPOA by failing to disclose the pay range for a position to which she allegedly applied. Yet, Office Depot has had a policy of complying with the Pay Transparency Law since it was enacted on January 1, 2023. Moreover, Ms. Yount did not apply to the position she claims but instead applied to two different positions—one of which disclosed the pay range and benefits. The Defendant is an office supply retailer. A copy of the the Defendants' motion dated Jan. 13, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=r13P8K at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Timothy W. Emery, Esq. Patrick B. Reddy, Esq. Paul Cipriani, Esq. Hannah M. Hamley, Esq. Calum Bryant, Esq. EMERY | REDDY, PC 600 Stewart Street, Suite 1100 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 442-9106 Facsimile: (206) 441-9711 E-mail: emeryt@emeryreddy.com reddyp@emeryreddy.com paul@emeryreddy.com hannah@emeryreddy.com calum@emeryreddy.com - and - Rebecca L. Solomon, Esq. TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC 1200 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1700 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 682-5600 Facsimile: (206) 682-2992 E-mail: rsolomon@tousley.com The Defendants are represented by: Breanne Sheetz Martell, Esq. Derek Bishop, Esq. Janene Sohng, Esq. LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. One Union Square 600 University St., Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101.3122 Telephone: (206) 623-3300 Facsimile: (206) 447-6965 E-mail: bsmartell@littler.com debishop@littler.com jsohng@littler.com OFFICE DEPOT: Yount Suit Seeks to Certify Class ----------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as NICOLE YOUNT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. OFFICE DEPOT, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company doing business as OFFICE DEPOT; THE OFFICE CLUB, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company doing business as OFFICE DEPOT; and DOES 1-20, Case No. 2:24-cv-00392-RSL (W.D. Wash.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order: -- Certifying the Plaintiff's proposed class, -- Appointing Plaintiff Nicole Yount as class representative, and -- Appointing Emery | Reddy and Tousley Brain Stephens as class counsel. The Plaintiff moves to certify the following Class: "All individuals who, from Jan. 1, 2023, through July 26, 2025, applied for a job opening in Washington State with Office Depot, LLC, where the job posting did not disclose the wage scale or salary range for the position." Because the Plaintiff's claim arises from the same deprivation of statutorily-required information in postings for employment with Office Depot, this case may be most efficiently tried as a class action and the Court should certify the above-defined class, the suit says. On Feb. 16, 2024, the Plaintiff Yount filed this action in King County Superior Court alleging violations of RCW 49.58.110. The Defendant is an office supply retailer. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 13, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=EkZoix at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Timothy W. Emery, Esq. Patrick B. Reddy, Esq. Paul Cipriani, Esq. Hannah M. Hamley, Esq. Calum Bryant, Esq. EMERY | REDDY, PC 600 Stewart Street, Suite 1100 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 442-9106 Facsimile: (206) 441-9711 E-mail: emeryt@emeryreddy.com reddyp@emeryreddy.com paul@emeryreddy.com hannah@emeryreddy.com calum@emeryreddy.com - and - Rebecca L. Solomon, Esq. TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC 1200 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1700 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 682-5600 Facsimile: (206) 682-2992 E-mail: rsolomon@tousley.com OFRA COSMETICS: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Hippe Alleges ------------------------------------------------------------------ XINYUE HIPPE, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Ofra Cosmetics, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 2:26-cv-00083 (E.D. Wis., January 18, 2026) is a civil rights action against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its Website, https://ofracosmetics.com, to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Hippe and other blind or visually-impaired individuals, in violation of Hippe's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act. According to the complaint, Hippe browsed and intended to make an online purchase of a skin care set on the Website. Despite her efforts, however, Hippe was denied a shopping experience like that of a sighted individual due to the Website's lack of a variety of features and accommodations. On several separate occasions, Hippe has been denied the full use and enjoyment of the facilities, goods and services offered to the general public, on Defendant's Website in Milwaukee County. These access barriers that Hippe encountered have caused a denial of Hippe's full and equal access multiple times in the past, and now deter Hippe on a regular basis from accessing the Defendant's Website in the future, says the suit. Hippe seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in 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. Plaintiff Xinyue Hippe is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who requires screen-reading software to read website content using the computer. Defendant Ofra Cosmetics, LLC provides to the public the Website, which provides consumers access to an array of goods and services, including, the ability to purchase a wide range of beauty products. These products include makeup for the face, eyes, lips, and brows, as well as skincare items such as cleansers, toners, serums, masks, moisturizers, and more. The Plaintiff is represented by: David B. Reyes, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC 68-29 Main Street, Flushing, NY 11367 Office: 844-731-3343 Direct: 718-554-0237 E-mail: Dreyes@ealg.law OHANA MILITARY: Camp Bid for Class Cert Tossed w/o Prejudice ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARTHA JENNIFER CAMP, ADAM CAMP, WILLIAM E. THOMPSON, AND JUANITA THOMPSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, v. OHANA MILITARY COMMUNITIES, LLC, HUNT MH PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, LLC, DOE DEFENDANTS 1-20, Case No. 1:24-cv-00184-LEK-KJM (D. Haw.), the Hon. Judge Kobayashi entered an order: -- Denying without prejudice the camp Plaintiffs' motion for class certification; denying as moot Powell's joinder to the motion; and ordering the submission of a joint statement, or alternatively further briefing, regarding rule 23(c)(4) class certification The Camp Plaintiffs' motion for class certification, filed May 8, 2025, is denied without prejudice. Powell's joinder in the Camp Plaintiffs' motion for class certification, filed May 12, 2025, is denied as moot. The parties are ordered to submit a joint statement, or in the alternative, further briefing by Jan. 30, 2026. The joint statement or further briefing should identify the liability issues that should be certified pursuant to Rule 23(c)(4), if any exist. The Court finds that the Camp Plaintiffs' proposed Class and Subclass cannot satisfy the predominance requirement under Rule 23(b)(3). The Camp Plaintiffs allege that the Landlord Defendants acquired and sold contaminated water from the United States Department of the Navy through the Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam Water System. They further allege that the Landlord Defendants provided the contaminated water to the Camp Plaintiffs. The Camp Plaintiffs define their proposed class as: "All persons authorized to reside within an Ohana Military Communities, LLC property managed by Hunt MH Property Management, LLC from Nov. 20, 2021, to March 31, 2022 [("the Class")]." The Camp Plaintiffs define their proposed subclass as: "All persons who entered into a contract with [the Landlord] Defendants and paid lease rent on a housing unit entitled to receive potable water distributed by Ohana Military Communities, LLC or Hunt MH Property Management, LLC effective between Nov. 20, 2021, and March 31, 2022 ("the Subclass")" A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=4cNymr at no extra charge.[CC] OMAR SRHIR: Initial Disclosures in Amazon Suit Due Feb. 27 ---------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as AMAZON.COM INC et al., v. OMAR SRHIR et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-00412-TL (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Lin entered an order regarding initial disclosures, joint status report, and early settlement. Deadline for FRCP 26(f) Conference: Feb. 13, 2026 Initial Disclosures Pursuant to FRCP 26(a)(1): Feb. 27, 2026 Combined Joint Status Report and Discovery Mar. 13, 2026 Plan as Required by FRCP 26(f) and Local Civil Rule 26(f): All Counsel and any pro se Parties are directed to confer and provide the Court with a combined Joint Status Report and Discovery Plan (the "Report") by March 13, 2026. If settlement is achieved, Counsel shall immediately notify Kadya Peter, Courtroom Deputy, at kadya_peter@wawd.uscourts.gov. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=P4pqzZ at no extra charge.[CC] ORLANDO HEALTH: Seeks Oral Argument in W.W. Class Lawsuit --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as W.W., v. Orlando Health, Inc., Case No. 6:24-cv-01068-JSS-RMN (M.D. Fla.), the Defendant asks the Court to enter an order granting request for oral argument. The Defendant requests oral argument on the Plaintiff's motion for class certification, appointment of class representative, appointment of class counsel, and supporting memorandum of law. Oral argument would benefit the Court because this case raises novel questions under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the Florida Security of Communications Act, and common law. The Defendant estimates that oral argument will take approximately two hours. A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=yvSldK at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendant is represented by: Julie Singer Brady, Esq. Yameel L. Mercado Robles, Esq. BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP 200 South Orange Avenue, Suite 2300 Orlando, FL 32801 Telephone: (407) 649-4000 Facsimile: (407) 841-0168 E-mail: jsingerbrady@bakerlaw.com ymercadorobles@bakerlaw.com PAUL PERRY: Hearing on Class Cert Bid Set for Feb. 18 ----------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as BRAYAN LOPEZ SARMIENTO, et. al., v. PAUL PERRY, et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-01644-AJT-WBP (E.D. Va.), the Hon. Judge Trenga entered an order re Parties' Joint Proposed Briefing Schedule: -- As to Petitioners' second amended complaint and motion for preliminary injunction, Federal Respondents' opposition and/or responsive pleading be due Jan. 23, 2026. -- As to Petitioners' Motion for class certification, Federal Respondents' opposition be due Feb. 2, 2026. -- The Court will hold a hearing on the remaining issues in the Second Amended Complaint, the motion for preliminary injunction, and the motion for class certification on Feb. 18, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. -- Any Reply by Petitioners be due in compliance with Local Rule 7(F)(1). A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=slA1Br at no extra charge.[CC] PIERCE COUNTY, WA: Stay of Summary Judgment Consideration Sought ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ECHOTA C. WOLFCLAN and ZAKERY BONDS, on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated individuals, v. PIERCE COUNTY, et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-05399-TSZ-SKV (W.D. Wash.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting motion in the alternative to stay consideration of the Defendants' summary judgment motion. After the class is certified, the Court’s ruling on those motions for summary judgment would have a definitive, class-wide effect. This procedure is consistent with the Court's Scheduling Order, will be more efficient for the Court, and will not prejudice the parties. The Defendants' Motion is premature because it effectively seeks a ruling on both Plaintiffs’ individual and class claims. But both Plaintiffs and Defendants have an interest in the fundamental liability issues in this case being decided across the class. As such, the interests of fairness, efficiency, and judicial economy all support briefly staying consideration of Defendants’ Motion, consistent with the Court’s Scheduling Order. The Plaintiffs request that the Court deny Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. In the alternative, however, the Plaintiffs request that this Court hold Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment in abeyance until the Court has had an opportunity to decide Plaintiffs' pending Motion for Class Certification, at which time Plaintiffs will file a class-wide motion for summary judgment as a matter of law and injunctive relief. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Jan. 19, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=9F07D4 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Scott Pritchard, Esq. Jenna M. Poligo, Esq. Michael P. Rubin, Esq. Sara J. Wadsworth, Esq. Alissa Harris, Esq. Gabrielle K. Lindquist, Esq. STOEL RIVES LLP 600 University Street, Suite 3600 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: 206-624-0900 Facsimile: 206-386-7500 E-mail: scott.pritchard@stoel.com jenna.poligo@stoel.com michael.rubin@stoel.com sara.wadsworth@stoel.com ali.harris@stoel.com gabrielle.lindquist@stoel.com - and - Mark P. Walters, Esq. Mitchell D. West, Esq. LOWE GRAHAM JONES PLLC 1325 Fourth Avenue, Suite 1130 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 381-3300 Facsimile: (206) 381-3301 E-mail: walters@lowegrahamjones.com west@lowegrahamjones.com PNC FINANCIAL: Faces Fredrick Suit Over ERISA Violations -------------------------------------------------------- KIMBERLY J. FREDRICK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THE PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC., Defendant, Case No. 2:26-cv-00042 (W.D. Pa., Jan. 9, 2026) alleges violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. According to the complaint, the Defendant is engaged in unlawful practice of charging a "tobacco surcharge" under the PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. Group Benefit Plan (the "Plan") in a manner that violates ERISA and the implementing regulations. The Defendant imposes a discriminatory tobacco surcharge without providing participants with a reasonable alternative standard and fails to provide notice of the availability of a reasonable alternative standard, violating federal regulations and depriving employees of benefits to which they are entitled under ERISA. PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. is a diversified financial services organization. The Company provides regional banking, wholesale banking, and asset management services nationally and in the Company's primary regional markets. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joel R. Hurt, Esq. Ruari McDonnell, Esq. FEINSTEIN DOYLE PAYNE & KRAVEC, LLC 429 Fourth Avenue Law & Finance Building, Suite 1300 Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Telephone: (412) 281-8400 Facsimile: (412) 281-1007 Email: jhurt@fdpklaw.com mcdonnell@fdpklaw.com - and - Oren Faircloth, Esq. William H. Payne, Esq. SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP 745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500 New York, NY 10151 Telephone: (212) 532-1091 Email: ofaircloth@sirillp.com wpayne@sirillp.com PROGRESSIVE PREFERRED: Must File Class Cert Response by Feb. 6 -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Rodriguez v. Progressive Preferred Insurance Company, Case No. 1:25-cv-01086 (D. Colo., Filed April 7, 2025), the Hon. Judge entered an order granting Joint Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. The Defendant shall respond to the Motion for Class Certification on or before Feb. 6, 2026. The Plaintiff's reply shall be filed on or before April 7, 2026. The nature of suit states Diversity-Breach of Contract. The Defendant provides insurances services.[CC] QINGDAO NETWORK: Bid to Vacate Prelim. Injunction in Lashify Tossed ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as LASHIFY, INC., v. QINGDAO NETWORK TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. a/k/a QINGDAO FOLLOW THE TREND NETWORK TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. a/k/a QINGDAO MARS CULTURE MEDIA CO., LTD d/b/a UCOOLME and VIVICUTE LIMITED, Case No. 1:25-cv-04183-LJL (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Liman entered an order denying the motion to vacate the preliminary injunction. Accordingly, the Court has already rejected Defendants' specification disclaimer argument in the course of claim construction. The Court's decision to issue a preliminary injunction was carefully considered. The Court concluded that Plaintiff had demonstrated that Defendants' infringing activities, if permitted to continue, would cause Plaintiff irreparable harm because Defendants are direct competitors of Plaintiff in the same market, have amassed a substantial social media following, and sell their products at a substantially lower price point. A copy of the Court's opinion and order dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=2DXCDS at no extra charge.[CC] ROUNDPOINT MORTGAGE: Court Amends Class Cert Scheduling Order ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as GARY VENTLING, in his own right and as representative of a class of persons similarly situated, v. ROUNDPOINT MORTGAGE SERVICING LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-00158-SWS (D. Wyo.), the Hon. Judge Scott P. Klosterman entered an order granting joint motion to amend the class certification scheduling order: The parties request the Court stay all further dates and deadlines set by the Class Certification Scheduling Order pending resolution of Plaintiff's forthcoming Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint. The Plaintiff indicates that new discovery has provided him with a basis to amend his complaint, but that Defendant will oppose the amendment. Accordingly, the Court finds there is good cause to GRANT the parties’ Motion. The Plaintiff shall have up to and including Jan. 15, 2026, to file his motion for leave to file an amended complaint. The Defendant shall have up to and including Feb. 19, 2026, to file a response. The Plaintiff shall have up to and including March 12, 2026, to file a reply. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=YBLfWR at no extra charge.[CC] SAFEMOON LLC: Combs Seeks Prelim. Approval of Class Settlement -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARK COMBS, VLAD IACOB, and BENJAMIN NORTHEY, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. SAFEMOON LLC, SAFEMOON US, LLC, SAFEMOON CONNECT, LLC, TANO LLC, SAFEMOON LTD, SAFEMOON PROTOCOL LTD, SAFEMOON MEDIA GROUP LTD, BRADEN JOHN KARONY, JACK HAINES-DAVIES, HENRY “HANK” WYATT, JAKE PAUL, KYLE NAGY, DeANDRE CORTEZ WAY, BEN PHILLIPS, MILES PARKS McCOLLUM, THOMAS SMITH and DANIEL M. KEEM, Case No. 2:22-cv-00642-DBB-JCB (D. Utah), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting request in connection with the settlement proceedings, which will: (i) preliminarily approve of the proposed Settlement; (ii) approve the proposed form and manner of providing notice to the Class; (iii) schedule the Settlement Fairness Hearing to consider the fairness, reasonableness, and adequacy of the Settlement, and the proposed Plan of Allocation; (iv) appoint Stretto, Inc., under the Direction of the Trustee, as the Claims Administrator; and (v) grant such other and further relief as the Court may deem fair and proper. The Parties have reached a global resolution to resolve this securities class action as well as related claims in the Debtor Defendant's Chapter 7 proceeding for an estimated initial payment of $12,000,000 into the Settlement Fund for the benefit of Class Members. SafeMoon was a cryptocurrency and blockchain company based in Pleasant Grove, Utah that was created in March 2021. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=hQbuKs at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: John T. Jasnoch, Esq. Sean T. Masson, Esq. SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP 600 W. Broadway, Suite 3300 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 233-4565 Facsimile: (619) 233-0508 E-mail: jjasnoch@scott-scott.com smasson@scott-scott.com - and - Brent O. Hatch, Esq. HATCH LAW GROUP 22 E 100 S STE 400 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Telephone: (801) 869-1919 E-mail: hatch@hatchpc.com SANTA MONICA: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Lott Alleges ----------------------------------------------------- KADEEJAH LOTT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SANTA MONICA OPERATIONS, LLC; SAVANT SENIOR LIVING, LLC; SAVANT SENIOR LIVING MANAGEMENT LLC; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 25STCV35828 (Cal. Sup., Los Angeles Cty., Dec. 8, 2025) is an action against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum wages, overtime compensation, authorize and permit meal and rest periods, provide accurate wage statements, and reimburse necessary business expenses. Plaintiff Lott was employed by the Defendants as a caregiver and medical technician. Savant Senior Living Management LLC provide supportive services to individuals who can function independently in most areas of activity, but need assistance and monitoring to assure safety and well being. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Seung L. Yang, Esq. Tiffany Hyun, Esq. Sean Hardy, Esq. THE SENTINEL FIRM, APC 355 S. Grand Ave., Suite 1450 Los Angeles, California 90071 Telephone: (213) 985-1150 Facsimile: (213) 985-2155 Email: seung.yang@thesentinelfirm.com tiffany.hyun@thesentinelfirm.com sean.hardy@thesentinelfirm.com SAVANNAH, GA: Faces Harris Class Suit in Ga. Super. --------------------------------------------------- A class action has been filed against The Mayor and Aldermen of The City of Savannah, captioned as ANITA HARRIS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THE MAYOR AND ALDERMEN OF THE CITY OF SAVANNAH, Case No. SPCV25-01647-WA (Ga. Super., Chatham Cty., Dec. 8, 2025). The case is assigned to Judge Timothy Walmsley. City of Savannah is the fifth largest city in Georgia, at the northern end of the state's coast. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James Everett Shipley, Jr., Esq. John Bell Manly, Esq. Manly Shipley, LLP 301 Habersham St. Savannah, GA 31401 Tel: (912) 495-5360 SIMULATIONS PLUS: Rosen Law Probes Potential Securities Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, continues to investigate potential securities claims on behalf of shareholders of Simulations Plus, Inc. (NASDAQ: SLP) resulting from allegations that Simulations Plus may have issued materially misleading business information to the investing public. SO WHAT: If you purchased Simulations Plus securities you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement. The Rosen Law Firm is preparing a class action seeking recovery of investor losses. WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the prospective class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=42476 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action. WHAT IS THIS ABOUT: On July 15, 2025, during market hours, Benzinga published an article entitled "Simulations Plus Sees Weaker Demand Persist, Outlook Softens." The article stated that Simulations Plus shares had declined "following the release of [Simulations Plus'] third-quarter 2025 earnings report." The article stated that Simulations Plus had reported sales of $20.4 million, representing a 10% year-over-year increase, but this fell short of the consensus estimate of $20.9 million." Further, "[t]his miss followed preliminary third-quarter sales figures released in June, which were already lower than expectations at $19 million to $20 million, compared to a consensus of $22.78 million." On this news, Simulations Plus stock fell 25.75% on July 15, 2025. WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not actually litigate securities class actions. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company at the time. At the time Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers. Contact Information: Laurence Rosen, Esq. Phillip Kim, Esq. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. 275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor New York, NY 10016 Tel: (212) 686-1060 Toll Free: (866) 767-3653 Fax: (212) 202-3827 case@rosenlegal.com www.rosenlegal.com [GN] TMC HEALTH: Class Cert Bid Filing in Williams Due August 3 ---------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as George Williams, et al., v. TMC Health, Case No. 4:23-cv-00434-SHR (D. Ariz.), the Hon. Judge Rash entered a scheduling order as follows: The parties shall exchange initial disclosures under Rule 26(a)(1) no later than Jan. 28, 2026. The parties are given until April 14, 2026, for leave to move to join additional parties or to move to amend pleadings. The Plaintiffs shall file their Motion for Class Certification and Disclosure of the Plaintiffs' Class Certification Experts no later than Aug. 3, 2026. The Defendant shall file its Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification, Disclosure of Defendant's Class Certification Experts, and Daubert Motions Challenging Plaintiffs' Experts no later than Oct. 2, 2026. The Plaintiffs shall file their Reply to Opposition to Class Certification, Response to Defendant's Daubert Motions, and Plaintiffs' Daubert Motions Challenging Defendant's Experts no later than Oct. 30, 2026. The Defendant shall file its response to Plaintiffs' Daubert Motions no later than Nov. 13, 2026. Fact and Expert Discovery on class certification issues must be completed by Nov. 13, 2026. The Court will hold a hearing on class certification on Wednesday, Dec. 9, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 15, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=8hquhZ at no extra charge.[CC] TROY MEINK: Watts Wins Bid for Class Certification -------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as KATHLEEN WATTS, ET AL, ON BEHALF OF THEMSELVES AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, v. TROY MEINK, SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE, Case No. 1:25-cv-01093-MSN-IDD (E.D. Va.), the Hon. Judge Michael Nachmanoff entered an order granting the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification and appointment of class counsel. The Court further entered an order that: -- The Plaintiffs Kathleen L. Watts, Robert Newman, and Ryan G. Miller are appointed as Class Representatives and Plaintiffs' counsel of the National Veterans Legal Services Program and the law firm Perkins Coie LLP are appointed as Class Counsel. -- Within seven days of the entry of this Order, the parties shall confer and jointly propose a class definition consistent with the Court's instructions made in open court. -- The parties shall confer and jointly propose a schedule for proceeding with litigation in this matter. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=gPkrQw at no extra charge.[CC] UNITED STATES: Doherty Suit Seeks to Certify Two Classes -------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Nathan P. Doherty, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, v. John C. Phelan, Secretary of the Navy, United States of America, in his official capacity, Case No. 1:26-cv-00101-LJV (W.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order certifying two classes: The Interim LOD Class: "All Navy Reservist who were identified as having a potentially unfitting condition but were denied an Interim Line of Duty determination within seven days by JAGMAN section 0224." The 12301(h) Class: "All Navy Reservist who were denied medical retention orders under 10 USC section 12301(h) based on the "temporal locality" of the injury in relation to their orders." A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=9H4uvL at no extra charge. The Plaintiff appears pro se.[CC] VERADIGM INC: Agrees to Settle 2024 Data Breach Suit for $10.5MM ---------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Alder of The HIPAA Journal reports that the healthcare technology company Veradigm Inc. (formerly Allscripts) has agreed to settle a class action lawsuit that was filed in response to a 2024 data breach that compromised sensitive patient data. The Illinois-based company provides software tools to healthcare organizations, including electronic medical record software and practice management tools. In December 2024, cybercriminals accessed its network and potentially obtained patient data belonging to its healthcare clients. More than 2 million patients were affected. Data compromised in the incident included names, contact information, dates of birth, health record information, insurance claim data, payment information, and other identifiers, such as Social Security numbers and copies of their driver's licenses. The first class action lawsuit in response to the data breach was filed in June 2025 by plaintiffs Tony Goodrum and Jason Mixton, individually and on behalf of similarly situated individuals. A second class action lawsuit was subsequently filed, and the two actions were consolidated into a single action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, since they had overlapping claims. The consolidated lawsuit -- Goodrum, et al. v. Veradigm Inc. -- alleged that the data breach was the result of negligence, and could have been prevented had reasonable and appropriate cybersecurity measures been implemented. In addition to negligence, the lawsuit asserted claims for negligence per se, breach of implied contract, unjust enrichment, declaratory judgment, and injunctive relief. Veradigm denies all claims of wrongdoing and liability; however, shortly after the two lawsuits were filed, the company explored the prospect of early resolution. Following mediation after the consolidated lawsuit was filed, an agreement in principle was reached to settle the litigation, with no admission of liability or wrongdoing. Class counsel and the class representatives believe the negotiated settlement is fair and in the best interests of the class members. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Veradigm has agreed to establish a $10,500,000 settlement fund to cover claims for benefits for the class members, settlement administration costs, and attorneys' fees and costs, as approved by the court. Class members are entitled to submit a claim for up to $5,000 as reimbursement of documented, unreimbursed losses due to the data breach or, alternatively, may claim a cash payment, which is expected to be $50, but will be adjusted based on the number of valid claims received. Regardless of the option chosen, class members are also entitled to claim a two-year membership to a medical data monitoring product. Further information on what may be claimed can be found on the settlement website: https://veradigmdatasettlement.com/ The deadline for objection and opting out of the settlement is February 17, 2026. Claims must be submitted by March 3, 2026, and the final fairness hearing has been scheduled for March 18, 2026. [GN] VUORI INC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Ho Suit Alleges ----------------------------------------------------- MAYELI HO; and KATIE FELIX, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. VUORI, INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:26-cv-00123-GPC-DEB (S.D. Cal., Jan. 9, 2026) seeks to recover from the Defendant unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendant as sales associates. Vuori, Inc. provides online apparel products. The Company offers men's and women's shorts, pants, tops, jackets, hoodies, hats, bottoms, joggers, leggings, jumpsuits, accessories, and related products. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Yeremey O. Krivoshey, Esq. SMITH KRIVOSHEY, PC 28 Geary Street Suite 650 #1507 San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 839-7000 E-mail: yeremey@skclassactions.com - and - Joel D. Smith, Esq. Aleksandr Litvinov, Esq. SMITH KRIVOSHEY, PC 867 Boylston Street, 5th Floor, Ste. 1520 Boston, MA 02116 Telephone: (617) 377-7404 E-mail: joel@skclassactions.com sasha@skclassactions.com WALTER KIDDE: Faces Class Suit Over Ionization-Only Smoke Detector ------------------------------------------------------------------ Tracy Bagdonas of ClassAction.org reports that a proposed class action lawsuit claims that smoke alarm manufacturers Kidde Safety Equipment and First Alert have failed to warn consumers that their ionization-only smoke detectors are technologically incapable of detecting slow-moving, smoldering fires in real-world settings. According to the 55-page false advertising lawsuit, Walter Kidde Portable Equipment and BRK Brands, which manufactures First Alert smoke detectors, are well aware of the shortcomings of ionization-only smoke alarms, particularly in comparison to photoelectric smoke alarms capable of more quickly detecting smoke from a smoldering fire, a leading cause of residential fire deaths. The class action lawsuit summarizes that because ionization-only devices are not suited to, and cannot, timely warn of real-world smoldering fires -- a "particularly common and dangerous type of home fire," the suit points out—the devices cannot truthfully and accurately be advertised and sold as a "smoke alarm." In particular, in the event of a smoldering fire, ionization-only devices "do not sound or sound too late," often as a fire is in the process of transitioning into a flaming fire, the complaint says. Cited in the case are decades of studies that show that modern photoelectric smoke alarms are more proficient at detecting quick-burning, flaming fires and slow, smoldering fires over ionization-only smoke detectors. Though industry standards still recommend consumers install both types of smoke detectors, the complaint argues that the manufacturers have preyed on buyers by promoting their products as sufficiently reliable smoke alarms. "Defendants have known about the failures of ionization-only devices for many years," the complaint says. "Each Defendant began manufacturing and selling ionization-only devices decades ago, and they became able to mass-produce them cheaply. Consequently, the majority of U.S. homes are equipped with ionization-only devices." The case takes issue with the manner in which Kidde and First Alert package and advertise their products, citing numerous different smoke alarm devices and the way both brands allegedly obscure from consumers the true safety specifications and recommendations. Specifically, the filing says, the recommendation that consumers use both ionization- and photoelectric-detecting alarms is typically hidden on the bottom panel of the box, or underneath other large labeling and fonts more likely to catch a consumer's attention. Moreover, the suit points out that how the smoke alarms are displayed in stores also plays a part in consumers' purchasing decisions. "Defendants' ionization-only devices were typically sold in the same display racks as photoelectric devices or hybrid products, with the pricing lower for ionization-only devices, making them the most attractive option to consumers," the case states. As a result, "it was difficult for a reasonable consumer to understand the critical and potentially life-saving differences between the different types of products," the suit continues. According to the lawsuit, ionization technology, developed in the 1930s, relies on a radioactive source to detect small particles in the air, like smoke, which alters the mobility of the internal ionization current and causes an alarm to trigger. In the 1970s, the case explains, photoelectric technology was developed to detect smoke using light sensors from a broader range of fires, like smoldering fires, which are more common in residential settings. Per the complaint, Kidde and First Alert are both subject to new 2025 standards from Underwriters Laboratory, and the ionization smoke alarms at issue have not, and cannot, meet the new threshold. Although the defendants have been forced to discontinue making the smoke detectors at issue due to the new 2025 Underwriters standard, millions of the products have been sold via deceptive and misleading advertising for decades, the lawsuit stresses. "Today, tens of millions of American families are immediately at risk that a fire that begins as a smoldering fire in their home will not be detected in time, even though they bought an ionization-only 'smoke alarm' they thought was protecting them," the case charges. The plaintiffs, Washington state residents, bought the Kidde and First Alert smoke detectors at issue and came to their purchasing decision based on the product's packaging and description, the filing relays. The plaintiffs feel as that even if they had "carefully examined all parts of the package -- something that a reasonable consumer under the circumstances would not do -- they would still reasonably be unaware that the ionization-only device inside would not timely detect and warn of the presence of smoke from a smoldering fire." The ionization smoke alarm class action lawsuit looks to cover all individuals in the United States (excluding California) who purchased a product labeled as a "smoke alarm" made by Kidde or First Alert with ionization technology as its only means of detecting smoke. [GN] WELLS FARGO: Briefing on Class Certification Sought --------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as LANCE BAIRD, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. WELLS FARGO & COMPANY; and WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Case No. 3:25-cv-05959-VC (N.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order setting the briefing on the Plaintiff's motion for class certification, per the Court's instructions at the Jan. 9, 2026 scheduling conference. The Plaintiff to Serve Expert Report Aug. 28, 2026 re Class Certification: Wells Fargo to Serve Expert Report Sept. 25, 2026 re Class Certification: The Plaintiff's motion for class certification: Nov. 4, 2026 The Defendants' Opp. to motion for class Dec. 4, 2026 certification: The Plaintiff's reply to motion for class Dec. 18, 2026 certification: Hearing on motion for class certification: Jan. 14, 2027 at 10:00 am A copy of the Parties' motion dated Jan. 16, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=oXsGWT at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Brian S. Kabateck, Esq. Anastasia K. Mazzella, Esq. Annie Martin-McDonough, Esq. KABATECK LLP 633 West Fifth Street, Suite 3200 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 217-5000 Facsimile: (213) 217-5010 E-mail: bsk@kbklawyers.com am@kbklawyers.com amm@kbklawyers.com - and - D. Joshua Staub, Esq. James C. D. Carr, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF D. JOSHUA STAUB 13015 Washington Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90066 Telephone: (424) 216-1776 E-mail: josh@djoshuastaub.com james@carrlawgrp.com The Defendants are represented by: Mark D. Lonergan, Esq. Rebecca S. Saelao, Esq. Erik Kemp, Esq. Elizabeth C. Farrell, Esq. STINSONLLP 595 Market Street, Suite 2600 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: (415) 398-3344 Facsimile: (415) 956-0439 E-mail: mark.lonergan@stinson.com rebecca.saelao@stinson.com erik.kemp@stinson.com elizabeth.Farrell@stinson.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 2026. 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 ***