260206.mbx

260206.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Friday, February 6, 2026, Vol. 28, No. 27 Headlines 7TABZ RETAIL: Z.B. Sues Over Deceptive Scheme and Concealment A ALERT COURIER: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Wheaton Alleges ADTALEM GLOBAL: Shields Sues Over Deceptive and Unfair Practices AGRI STATS INC: Adams Suit Removed to M.D. Alabama AGRI STATS INC: Anglin Suit Removed to M.D. Alabama ALDI FOODS: Faces Fried Suit Over Mislabeled Juice Beverages ALL WEB LEADS INC: Hafizi Files TCPA Suit in E.D. New York ANCHORAGE NEIGHBORHOOD: Hunt Suit Removed to D. Alaska ANGEL SPEECH: Concepcion Suit Removed to S.D. Florida ANSIRA PARTNERS: Amashta Sues to Recover Overtime Wages ARLOZOROV9 INC: Sawer Suit Transferred to S.D. New York ASHIMARY INTERNATIONAL: Miniefield Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Texas ASHLEY GLOBAL RETAIL: Fenton Files Suit in Pa. Ct. of Common Pleas AUNT MARTHA'S HEALTH: Davis Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM: Jordan Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. AZ & G INC: Samines Files FLSA Suit in S.D. New York AZ & G INC: Samines Seeks Unpaid Minimum Wages Under FLSA, NYLL BABE'S OLD: Alonzo Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages BAYERISCHE MOTOREN: Eiger Balks at Defective Engine Oil Filters BESPOKE COLOR: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Henry Claims BEYOND MEAT: Aljendan Sues Over Exchange Act Violation BLOOMBERG LP: Breaches Fiduciary Duty Under ERISA, Rajappan Says BRIGGS & RILEY: Martinez Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website BWW RESOURCES: Humphreys Removed from State Court to W.D. Wash. CARLISLE CONSTRUCTION: Ponder Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct. CARVAJAL PHARMACY: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Thomas Alleges CERNER CORPORATION: Strength Files Suit in W.D. Oklahoma CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEES: Armstrong Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct. COMMERCIAL METALS: Bartley Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages CRESCENT HEIGHTS: Hearn Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. DABELLA EXTERIORS: Littman TCPA Suit Removed to W.D. Washington DOLAN NORTHWEST: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Hippe Claims DOLLAR GENERAL: Lehman Suit Removed to W.D. Wash. FLOWERS FOODS: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Williams Says FRESPET INC: Miller Suit Seeks Unpaid OT Wages Under FLSA FRICK COLLECTION: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Herrera Says G.P.K. RESTAURANT: Papanikolaou Seeks Unpaid Wages, OT Under FLSA GEICO CASUALTY: Faces Kane Class Suit Over Policy Premiums GENERAL MOTORS: Class Members Appeal Suit's Reconsideration Order GENERAL MOTORS: Farah Appeals Court Orders in Chevrolet Litigation GENERAL MOTORS: Manookian Appeals Reconsideration Order to 6th Cir. GERRESHEIMER GLASS: Teamer Seeks Unpaid Minimum Wages Under FLSA GOLDEN HEARTS: Faces Mackenzie Over Casino Operation Shutdown GROUP ROSSIGNOL: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Tesch Says HELLO CAKE: Discloses Personal Health Info, Mitchell Says HIMS & HERS: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Jenkins Alleges HUMANA INC: Deidun Balks at Wiretapping of Patients' Health Info IHEARTMEDIA INC: Appeals Denied Harris Suit Dismissal to 9th Cir. K2 HEALTH: Products Not Hypoallergenic, Pitre Suit Alleges KENTUCKY INDUSTRIAL: Morgan Balks at Termination Without Notice KNEW CONSCIOUS: McBee Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages Under FLSA LATHROP LOGISTICS: Sanchez Suit Removed to E.D. California LAYLO INC: Bender Files TCPA Suit in C.D. California LEES ACCU-TECH SERVICE: Landeros Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. LINE 5 LLC: Abramson TCPA Suit Transferred to M.D. Pennsylvania LOS ANGELES, CA: Griffin Appeals Judgment Order to 9th Circuit LUNA ROOFTOP: Faces Jarvis Suit Over Misappropriation of Tips M & A BROTHERS: Commercial Property Violates ADA, Pardo Alleges MDL 2741: Dressel v. Monsanto Transferred to N.D. Cal. MDL 2741: Kelly-Leppert v. Monsanto Suit Remanded to E.D. Mo. MDL 2873: Panel Denies Transfer of 3 Cases to AFFF Liability Row META PLATFORMS: Dawson Sues Over Breach of WhatsApp Users' Privacy MIETHNER CREATIVE: Faces Menendez Over Unsolicited Text Messages MINTED LLC: Dalton Files Suit Over Blind-Inaccessible Website NEW JERSEY: Seward Appeals Civil Rights Suit Dismissal to 3rd Cir. NEW YORK, NY: Minor Suit Removed from State Court to S.D.N.Y. NOVO NORDISK: Faces Suit Over Liraglutide Injection Pen Monopoly O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE: Hatfield Balks at Unfair Tobacco Surcharges P.M. RESTAURANT: Quintanilla Seeks Unpaid OT Wages Under FLSA PANT SAGGIN: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Martinez Alleges PERSONIFY HEALTH: Faces Blalock Suit Over Illegal Data Trackers PRO FORM: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Tanchico Alleges PRYM CONSUMER: Hampton Suit Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website RELX INC: Knobler Files Suit Over NY Comic Con's Hidden Ticket Fees RIVIAN AUTOMOTIVE: Faces Isted Suit Over Genetic Information SAFELITE GROUP: Winston Sues Over Data Privacy Violations SMARTFOODS INC: Popcorn Products Contain Maltodextrin, Flexer Says SNAP INC: Ted Entertainment Sues Over Copyright Infringement SONESTA INTERNATIONAL: Isaacson Balks at Room Rates' False Ads SUPERIOR AIR-GROUND: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to March 23 SUSHI VIDA: Faces Ferreira Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y. SYNDICATE ENERGY: Hallouz Seeks FLSA Conditional Certification TAPESTRY INC: Class Cert Bid in Merrell Suit Stricken TARGET CORP: Rodriguez Appeals Reconsideration Order to 2nd Circuit TENNESSEE JACKS: Dillon Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages TIMEX.COM INC: Discloses Customers' Personal Info, Lutge Says TIREHUB LLC: Nelson Employment Suit Removed to C.D. Calif. TOPPS COMPANY: Adoni Sues Over False and Misleading Practices TRANSPORTATION CONCEPTS: Palacio Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. TYLER TECHNOLOGIES: Hardy-Gerena Seeks to Hold Class Cert Deadline UNITED STATES: Appeals Court Order in Ovando Suit to 10th Circuit UNITED STATES: Sued Over Detention Center's Inhumane Conditions UPPER EAST SIDE FOOD: Flores Sues Over Unpaid Compensations VITAS HOSPICE: Walton Suit Removed to C.D. California WAYFAIR LLC: Faces Prakash Suit Over False Ads & Misleading Pricing WE PACK IT ALL: Mantilla Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. WENDY NICHOLS: McBride Files Suit in M.D. Pennsylvania WESTMORELAND ROSEBUD: Harris Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages Under FLSA WHAT WE MAKE: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Bennett Alleges X.AI CORP: Doe Suit Alleges Harm From AI Deepfake Images YESHIVAT SHAARE: Beras Sues Over Unpaid Minimum and Overtime Wages Asbestos Litigation ASBESTOS UPDATE: JM Eagle Sues Law Firm Over Bogus Asbestos Cases ********* 7TABZ RETAIL: Z.B. Sues Over Deceptive Scheme and Concealment ------------------------------------------------------------- Z.B., T.M. and. R.A., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. 7TABZ RETAIL, LLC, a Florida Corporation, 7TABZ DISTRIBUTION, LLC, a Florida Corporation, and DOES 1-20, inclusive, Case No. 3:26-cv-00440-JLS-DDL (S.D. Cal., Jan. 23, 2026), is brought arising from the Defendants' deliberate and deceptive scheme to exploit ordinary consumers' desire for natural wellness, mental clarity, and safe relief while concealing the truth about the dangerous and addictive nature of their supplements, sold under the 7Tabz brand (the "Products"). The Defendants marketed the Products using representations such as "pure extract" and "leaf extract," prominently displaying plant imagery and natural flavor descriptors, conveying to reasonable consumers that the Products are natural, safe, and suitable for ingestion. Yet Defendants concealed the fact that these Products are inherently dangerous because their main ingredient, kratom, is an unregulated, highly potent, and addictive psychoactive substance, consumption of which mimics opioid and stimulant effects, carrying serious risks of dependence, withdrawal, overdose like toxicity, and even death. The Defendants' omission was material. Because the Products are intended for ingestion, reasonable consumers would consider information concerning addiction potential, withdrawal symptoms, and serious adverse health outcomes essential to their purchasing decisions. By omitting these serious risks while emphasizing the Products' natural qualities, Defendants created a false and misleading impression of safety. The Plaintiffs and other reasonable consumers reasonably relied on Defendants' deceptive omissions and misleading marketing in purchasing these Products. Had Defendants disclosed the truth, Plaintiffs would not have purchased the Products at all — or would have paid significantly less. Defendants' unlawful conduct caused economic harm to consumers and allowed Defendants to reap unjust profits and gain an unfair competitive advantage, says the complaint. The Plaintiffs purchased Defendants' Products. 7Tabz Retail owns and operates the website www.pop7tabz.com, and markets, distributes and sells its Products in California and throughout the United States.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Yana Hart, Esq. Bryan P. Thompson, Esq. CLARKSON LAW FIRM, P.C. Shireen M. Clarkson (SBN 237882) 22525 Pacific Coast Highway Malibu, CA 90265 Phone: (213) 788-4050 Fax: (231) 788-4070 Email: sclarkson@clarksonlawfirm.com yhart@clarksonlawfirm.com bthompson@clarksonlawfirm.com A ALERT COURIER: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Wheaton Alleges ----------------------------------------------------------- JAZMYN WHEATON; JOHN DANIEL HARVEY; ALFREDO NORONHA; RAYMOND SLATE; and TUSHAR PATEL, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. A ALERT COURIER SERVICES INCORPORATED, alias, MATRIX LOGISTICS INCORPORATED, alias, PAUL FIGUEIREDO, an individual; and NICOLE VINCI, Defendants, Case No. 1:26-cv-10307 (D. Mass., Jan. 23, 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. The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as drivers. A Alert Courier Services Incorporated specializes in providing courier services and specialized medical logistics solutions. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Olayiwola O. Oduyingbo, Esq. Geneva A. Litz, Esq. ODU LAW FIRM, LLC 888 Reservoir Avenue, Floor 2 Cranston, RI 02910 Telephone: (401) 209-2029 Facsimile: (401) 217-2299 Email: Odu@odulawfirm.com glitz@odulawfirm.com ADTALEM GLOBAL: Shields Sues Over Deceptive and Unfair Practices ---------------------------------------------------------------- Nalexus Shields, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. ADTALEM GLOBAL EDUCATION, INC., and ADTALEM GLOBAL HEALTH, INC. d/b/a AMERICAN UNIVERSITY OF THE CARIBBEAN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, Case No. 1:26-cv-20504-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Jan. 26, 2026), is brought seeking damages against AGE and AUC for deceptive and unfair practices in the promotion of AUC to potential students. The Defendants have and continue to lure potential students with false assurances of passing the United States Medical Licensing Examination ("USMLE"), a multi-step examination that medical students must pass before obtaining their medical license. Typically, and as marketed by Defendants, students complete two years of coursework and then take the USMLE Step 1, followed by an additional two years of clinical work and the USMLE Step 2. Students must pass both the USMLE Step 1 and 2 to earn a medical degree. Defendants specifically advertised that "AUC School of Medicine's curriculum is designed to prepare students to succeed on all parts of the USMLE." Throughout the Class Period, Defendants heavily promoted a 93% to a 96% first-time time passage rate on the USMLE Step 1 exam by AUC students. They touted these results on AUC's website, social media pages, online advertisements, and in direct communications with consumers. The effect of this was to suggest that virtually every student at AUC passes the USMLE Step 1 on their first attempt and that the passage rate is a testament to the quality of the AUC education. What Defendants do not disclose is that only about 20% of the students who enroll at AUC ever sit for the USMLE Step 1 exam because they either drop out of the program or because Defendants--in an effort to make their exam passage percentages appear higher--bar students from taking the exam by requiring them to obtain a certain score on an AUC administered pretest (or third-party pretest) also referred to as "Comp," something not disclosed to students prior to enrollment. These representations communicate to students that paying significant money to attend AUC will be worth the risk because at AUC, they are near certain to pass the USMLE. But both AUC and AGE know that most of the students who enroll will not make it through even the first half of the USMLE and even those who do will only do so after paying for repeat courses, says the complaint. The Plaintiff enrolled at AUC in January 2020. The Defendants operate a for profit medical school in the Caribbean called The American University of the Caribbean which is in turn owned and controlled by Adtalem Global Education, Inc.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Seth Miles, Esq. David M. Buckner, Esq. Brett E. von Borke, Esq. Jonathan E. Kobrinski, Esq. BUCKNER + MILES 2020 Salzedo Street, Ste. 302 Coral Gables, FL 33134 Phone: (305) 964-8003 Fax: (786) 523-0585 Email: seth@bucknermiles.com david@bucknermiles.com vonborke@bucknermiles.com jkobrinski@bucknermiles.com AGRI STATS INC: Adams Suit Removed to M.D. Alabama -------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Alexis Bianca Adams, et al., and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. AGRI STATS, INC., et al., Case No. 25CUB00670 was removed from the Circuit Court of Barbour County, Alabama Clayton Division, to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama on Jan. 23, 2026, and assigned Case No. 2:26-cv-00050. The Plaintiffs' Complaint purports to state eight Alabama claims that share this underlying theme: the Defendant chicken processors colluded unlawfully to fix the wages paid to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs support their theory by claiming Defendants engaged in a data and information-sharing scheme to suppress wages and restrain trade. Despite Plaintiff's attempt to plead-around federal antitrust law, this is, necessarily and practically, a federal antitrust action dressed-up as an Alabama tort suit.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: John G. Smith, Esq. BALCH & BINGHAM LLP 445 Dexter Avenue, Suite 8000 Montgomery, AL 36104 Phone: (334) 834-6500 Facsimile: (866) 830-1504 Email: jgsmith@balch.com - and - R. Pepper Crutcher, Jr., Esq. BALCH & BINGHAM LLP 188 E. Capitol Street, Suite 1400 Jackson, MS 39201 Phone: (601) 965-8158 Facsimile: (601) 961-4466 Email: pcrutcher@balch.com - and - Chuck Burkhart, Esq. Jack Surber, Esq. BALCH & BINGHAM LLP 1901 Sixth Avenue North, Suite 1500 Birmingham, AL 35203 Phone: (205) 251-8100 Facsimile: (205) 226-8799 Email: cburkhart@balch.com jsurber@balch.com AGRI STATS INC: Anglin Suit Removed to M.D. Alabama --------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Jeanette Daniels Anglin, et al., and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. AGRI STATS, INC., et al., was removed from the Circuit Court of Barbour County, Alabama Clayton Division, to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama on Jan. 23, 2026, and assigned Case No. 2:26-cv-00054. The Plaintiffs' Complaint purports to state eight Alabama claims that share this underlying theme: the Defendant chicken processors colluded unlawfully to fix the wages paid to the Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs support their theory by claiming the Defendants engaged in a data and information-sharing scheme to suppress wages and restrain trade. Despite the Plaintiff's attempt to plead-around federal antitrust law, this is, necessarily and practically, a federal antitrust action dressed-up as an Alabama tort suit.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: John G. Smith, Esq. BALCH & BINGHAM LLP 445 Dexter Avenue, Suite 8000 Montgomery, AL 36104 Phone: (334) 834-6500 Facsimile: (866) 830-1504 Email: jgsmith@balch.com - and - R. Pepper Crutcher, Jr., Esq. BALCH & BINGHAM LLP 188 E. Capitol Street, Suite 1400 Jackson, MS 39201 Phone: (601) 965-8158 Facsimile: (601) 961-4466 Email: pcrutcher@balch.com - and - Chuck Burkhart, Esq. Jack Surber, Esq. BALCH & BINGHAM LLP 1901 Sixth Avenue North, Suite 1500 Birmingham, AL 35203 Phone: (205) 251-8100 Facsimile: (205) 226-8799 Email: cburkhart@balch.com jsurber@balch.com ALDI FOODS: Faces Fried Suit Over Mislabeled Juice Beverages ------------------------------------------------------------ ALBERT FRIED, on behalf of himself, all others similarly situated, and the general public, Plaintiff v. ALDI FOODS INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:26-cv-00439-JLS-KSC (S.D. Cal., January 23, 2026) is an action on behalf of the Plaintiff, similarly-situated Class Members, and the general public, to enjoin Defendant from deceptively marketing its private-label brand, "Nature's Nectar," juice products, and to recover compensation for injured Class Members. Through its private-label brand, the Defendant markets and sells a variety of purported "100%" juice beverages, including at least Apple, Cranberry, Mango Tangerine, Grape, White Grape, and Mango Passion Juices. The Defendant represents the products are pure juice because that claim appeals to a significant segment of consumers who prefer pure juice products to juice products made with additional, fortifying ingredients. The Plaintiff and other consumers purchased the products believing, based on Defendant's labeling, that they were 100%, pure juice. In truth, the products are made with additional ingredients, including fortifying ingredients, rendering any labeling or marketing claim that the products are "100% Juice" literally false, and misleading, says the Plaintiff. Aldi Foods Inc. operates as a supermarket. The Company offers groceries, meat, fresh produce, wine, beer, beverages, and other home products.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jack Fitzgerald, Esq. Melanie R. Monroe, Esq. Trevor Flynn, Esq. Allison Ferraro, Esq. Daniel E. Sachs, Esq. FITZGERALD MONROE FLYNN PC 2341 Jefferson Street, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92110 Telephone: (619) 215-1741 E-mail: jfitzgerald@fmfpc.com mmonroe@fmfpc.com tflynn@fmfpc.com aferraro@fmfpc.com dsachs@fmfpc.com ALL WEB LEADS INC: Hafizi Files TCPA Suit in E.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against All Web Leads, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Umid Hafizi, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. All Web Leads, Inc.; AWL Insurance Agency, Inc. d/b/a Auto Quote Guide; AWL, Inc., Case No. 1:26-cv-00504 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 28, 2026). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. All Web Leads -- https://awl.com/ -- is an online lead generation company that sells the highest-quality sales leads to top insurance producers.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Philip Lawrence Fraietta, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 50 Main Street, Suite 475 White Plains, NY 10606 Phone: (646) 837-7150 Email: pfraietta@bursor.com ANCHORAGE NEIGHBORHOOD: Hunt Suit Removed to D. Alaska ------------------------------------------------------ The case captioned as Jacob Hunt, Steven Alexander, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Anchorage Neighborhood Health Center, Inc., Case No. 3AN-25-11122 CI was transferred from the State of Alaska, 3rd Judicial District, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska on Jan. 27, 2026. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:26-cv-00048-SLG to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Med. Malpractice. Anchorage Neighborhood Health Center -- https://www.anhc.org/ -- is a community health center.[BN] The Plaintiff appears pro se. Whitney Power Wilson, Esq. POWER AND POWER LAW 10950 O'Malley Centre Dr., Suite C Anchorage, AK 99515 Phone: (907) 222-9990 Fax: (888) 887-1146 Email: wpower@akpowerlaw.com The Defendant is represented by: Scott J. Gerlach, Esq. JERMAIN, DUNNAGAN & OWENS 111 W. 16th Avenue, Suite 203 Anchorage, AK 99501 Phone: (907) 563-8844 Fax: (907) 563-7322 Email: sgerlach@jdolaw.com ANGEL SPEECH: Concepcion Suit Removed to S.D. Florida ----------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Alejandro Concepcion, and other similarly situated individuals v. ANGEL SPEECH AND THERAPY SERVICES, INC, et al., Case No. 2026-000060-CA-01 was removed from the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit, in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida, to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida on Jan. 28, 2026, and assigned Case No. 1:26-cv-20580-XXXX. This civil action involves claims by Plaintiff under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"). Plaintiff claims Defendants "ow[e] wages compensation and other relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act ('FLSA'). The Plaintiff asserts four counts: Count I – Recovery of Wage and Hour Federal Statutory Violation, Count II – Angel Speech & Therapy Services, Inc.'s Federal Statutory Violation, Count III – Wage & Hour Federal Statutory Violation, Count IV – Osmel Matos Lambert's Federal Statutory Violation.[BN] The Defendant is represented by: Daniel L. Leyton, Esq. KRAVITZ, TALAMO & LEYTON 7600 West 20th Avenue; Suite 213 Hialeah, FL 33016 Phone: (305) 558-5300 Facsimile: (305) 557-1934 Email: leyton@ktl-law.com ANSIRA PARTNERS: Amashta Sues to Recover Overtime Wages ------------------------------------------------------- Charles Amashta, individually and for others similarly situated v. ANSIRA PARTNERS, LLC, Case No. 4:26-cv-00102 (E.D. Mo., Jan. 23, 2026), is brought to recover overtime wages and other damages from the Defendant under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"). The Plaintiff and other workers like him regularly worked for in excess of 40 hours each week. But these workers never received overtime as required by the FLSA. Instead, the Defendant improperly classified Plaintiff and those similarly situated workers as exempt employees and paid them a salary with no overtime compensation. The Plaintiff brings this collective action to recover unpaid overtime and other damages, says the complaint. The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant as an Advertising Specialist on April 2021 until July 2025. Ansira Partners, LLC is a marketing and advertising services company that provides technology-driven solutions and professional services to companies across the United States.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Carl A. Fitz, Esq. FITZ LAW PLLC 3730 Kirby Drive, Ste. 1200 Houston, TX 77098 Phone: (713) 766-4000 Email: carl@fitz.legal ARLOZOROV9 INC: Sawer Suit Transferred to S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Sharika Sawer, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated v. Arlozorov9, Inc. doing business as: Alma, Case No. 5:25-cv-02588 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on Jan. 28, 2026. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:26-cv-00732-JMF to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury. Arlozorov9, Inc. doing business as Alma -- https://secure.helloalma.com/ -- is a New York-based mental healthcare technology company founded in 2018 that simplifies access to in-network therapy.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Philip Lawrence Fraietta, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor New York, NY 10019 Phone: (646) 837-7150 - and - Scott Robert Drury, Esq. DRURY LEGAL, LLC 6 Carriage Lane Highwood, IL 60040 Phone: (312) 358-8225 The Defendant is represented by: Edgar F. Navarrete, Esq. MULLEN COUGHLIN LLC 500 Capitol Mall, Suite 2350 Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: (267) 930-1529 ASHIMARY INTERNATIONAL: Miniefield Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Texas ---------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Ashimary International Trading, LLC. The case is styled as Lakeisha Miniefield, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Ashimary International Trading, LLC, Case No. 3:26-cv-00184-S (N.D. Tex., Jan. 23, 2026). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Ashimary International Trading, LLC -- https://www.ashimaryhair.com/ -- offers top quality 100% human hair wigs with affordable price.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew J. Shamis, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE, PA 2626 Cole Avenue, Suite 300 Dallas, TX 75204 Phone: (305) 479-2299 Fax: (786) 623-0915 Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com ASHLEY GLOBAL RETAIL: Fenton Files Suit in Pa. Ct. of Common Pleas ------------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Ashley Global Retail, LLC. The case is styled as Heidi Fenton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Ashley Global Retail, LLC, Case No. 2026-55 (Pa. Ct. of Common Pleas, Elk Cty., Jan. 28, 2026). The case type is stated as "Other – Civil Tort." Ashley Global Retail -- https://www.ashleyfurniture.com/ -- is the largest furniture store brand in North America.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Nicholas A. Colella, Esq. 1133 Penn Ave., 5th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15222 AUNT MARTHA'S HEALTH: Davis Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages -------------------------------------------------------- Asia Davis, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. AUNT MARTHA'S HEALTH AND WELLNESS, INC., Case No. 1:26-cv-00774 (N.D. Ill., Jan. 23, 2026), is brought to recover unpaid wages, liquidated damages, interest, attorney's fees, costs, and other relief as appropriate under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and the common law claim of unjust enrichment. On September 2019, the Defendant hired Plaintiff as an hourly non-exempt employee. The Plaintiff originally worked at Defendant's Olympia Fields, Illinois office location and then switched and worked remotely from her home in Lemont, Illinois. The Plaintiff's most recent base hourly rate of pay was $17.85. As non-exempt employees, Defendant's hourly employees were entitled to full compensation for all overtime hours worked at a rate of 1.5 times their regular rate of pay. The Defendant knew or should have known that all of Plaintiff's hourly work was compensable under the FLSA. Likewise, Defendant knew or should have known that its rounding policies and practices violated the FLSA. As a matter of common business policy, Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff and the putative Collective members for all work performed as set forth in this Complaint. They were not paid their promised hourly wage for all work performed, and they were not paid overtime, as required by the FLSA, in weeks in which they worked more than 40 hours, says the complaint. The Plaintiff worked for Defendant as a DCFS Care Coordinator and Behavioral Health Referral Specialist from September 2019 through September 30, 2024. The Defendant is a community health care support non-profit with 19 locations in Illinois.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jesse L. Young, Esq. SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C. 141 E. Michigan Avenue, Suite 600 Kalamazoo, MI 49007 Phone: (269) 250-7500 Email: jyoung@sommerspc.com - and - Jonathan Melmed, Esq. Meghan Higday, Esq. MELMED LAW GROUP, P.C. 1801 Century Park E., Suite 850 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Phone: (310) 824-3828 Email: mh@melmedlaw.com jm@melmedlaw.com AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM: Jordan Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Avis Rent A Car System, LLC. The case is styled as Kenyel Jordan, Christian Darnell Gage, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Avis Rent A Car System, LLC, Case No. 26STCV02798 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Jan. 28, 2026). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." Avis Car Rental, LLC -- https://www.avis.com/en/home -- is a Global car rental company headquartered in Parsippany, New Jersey.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jessica L. Campbell, Esq. AEGIS LAW FIRM 9811 Irvine Center Dr., Ste. 100 Irvine, CA 92618 Phone: 949-379-6250 Fax: (949) 379-6251 Email: jcampbell@aegislawfirm.com AZ & G INC: Samines Files FLSA Suit in S.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against AZ & G Inc., et al. The case is styled as Sergio Ismael Samines, Vilma Sebastiana Saquic Morales, Victor Daniel Eduardo Cucsamines, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. AZ & G Inc. doing business as: Nikushou Sakai, Chunzi Gu, Dan Chen, Case No. 1:26-cv-00751 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 28, 2026). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act for Denial of Overtime Compensation. AZ & G Inc. doing business as Nikushou Sakai -- https://nikushousakai.com/ -- is a popular and affordable all-you-can-eat yakiniku restaurant that offers a variety of delicious meats, side dishes, drinks, and desserts.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Michael Antonio Faillace, Esq. MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510 New York, NY 10165 Phone: (212) 317-1200 Fax: (212) 317-1620 Email: michael@faillacelaw.com AZ & G INC: Samines Seeks Unpaid Minimum Wages Under FLSA, NYLL --------------------------------------------------------------- SERGIO ISMAEL LUIS SAMINES CUC, VILMA SEBASTIANA SAQUIC MORALES, and VICTOR DANIEL EDUARDO CUC SAMINES, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. AZ & G INC. (D/B/A NIKUSHOU SAKAI), CHUNZI GU, and DAN CHEN, Case No. 1:26-cv-00511 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2026) seeks to recover unpaid minimum wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and New York Labor Law. The Plaintiffs seek certification of this action as a class action under Rule 23 and seek certification of this action as a collective action on behalf of themselves individually and all other similarly situated employees and former employees of Defendants pursuant to 29 U.S.C. Section 216(b). However, the buzzers were required to spend a considerable part of their work day performing non-tipped duties, including but not limited to cleaning the restaurant at the end of the shift, carrying delivered items and accommodating them in the basement, bringing up items from the basement, transporting items from a warehouse to the restaurant and cleaning the bathroom hereafter the (non-tipped duties), says the suit. The Plaintiffs worked for Defendants without appropriate minimum wage compensation for the hours that they worked. Rather, the Defendants failed to maintain accurate recordkeeping of their hours worked, and failed to pay Plaintiffs appropriately for any hours worked, at the straight rate of pay. The Plaintiffs are former employees of Defendants who worked as buzzers. AZ & G INC. owns and operates a Japanese restaurant located at 133-33 39th Avenue, FH19, Flushing, New York City.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Michael Faillace, Esq. MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510 New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 317-1200 Facsimile: (212) 317-1620 BABE'S OLD: Alonzo Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages ----------------------------------------------------------- Jose Alonzo, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. BABE'S OLD FASHIONED FOODS, INC. d/b/a MILANO ON WURZBACH and BABE'S OLD FASHIONED FOOD, TONY OBEID, TONY OBEID JR., and TARA OBEID WANEK, Case No. 5:26-cv-00397 (W.D. Tex., Jan. 23, 2026), is brought to recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"). Because Defendants take a tip credit under the FLSA for their Tip Credit Employees, Defendants must meet all statutory requirements for counting a portion of tips received by their employees as satisfying the statutory minimum wage. The Defendants do not meet these statutory requirements for claiming a tip credit towards the minimum wage. The Plaintiff and the other hourly-paid, non-management employees were not paid for all the hours they worked, including all the hours they worked over 40 hours in a workweek. Rather than pay all overtime wages owed to Plaintiff and other hourly-paid, non management employees of Defendants, Defendants routinely disregarded the records that showed these employees working over 40 hours in a work week and entered a number of hours less than the total number of hours these employees worked in Defendants' payroll system to avoid paying these employees' proper overtime wages, says the complaint. The Plaintiff began working for Defendants at their Milano on Wurzbach restaurant in San Antonio from May of 2023 through December of 2025. The Defendants own and operate several restaurants in and around the San Antonio, Texas area.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Don J. Foty, Esq. FOTY LAW GROUP, P.C. 2 Greenway Plaza, Suite 250 Houston, TX 77046 Phone: (713) 523-0001 Facsimile: (713) 523-1116 Email: dfoty@fotylawgroup.com - and - David W. Garrison, Esq. Joshua A. Frank, Esq. Nicole A. Chanin, Esq. BARRETT JOHNSTON MARTIN & GARRISON, PLLC 200 31st Avenue North Nashville, TN 37203 Phone: (615) 244-2202 Facsimile: (615) 252-3798 Email: dgarrison@barrettjohnston.com jfrank@barrettjohnston.com nchanin@barrettjohnston.com BAYERISCHE MOTOREN: Eiger Balks at Defective Engine Oil Filters --------------------------------------------------------------- AARON EIGER, KENDRA CHERRY and KELLY HALEY FUCILLO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT and BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 2:26-cv-00753-JKS-MAH (D.N.J., January 23, 2026) seeks injunctive relief, monetary damages, including multiple damages where applicable, court costs and attorney fees against each of the respective BMW entities based upon their breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, and violation of consumer protection laws of Illinois, North Carolina and California. According to the complaint, the Class engine oil filter housing 1s reasonably expected by Defendants, proposed Class representatives and proposed Class members to last the serviceable life of the vehicle that is in excess of 150,000 miles. But the class engine oil filter housing often fails at less than 50% of their reasonably expected useful life. Proposed Class representatives' Class vehicles experienced premature engine oil filter housing failure. These Class engine oil filter housing failures cost vehicle owners between $2,000 and upwards of $3,500 to repair depending on the class vehicle. Individuals who own or have owned class vehicles also sustained diminution of the resale value of their class vehicles since knowledge of problems with class engines became public information. Because of the oil filter housing defects, Class vehicles are not reliable and owners of these vehicles have lost confidence 1n the ability of Class vehicles to perform the function of safe reliable transportation, says the suit. Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft, trading as BMW Group, is a German multinational conglomerate manufacturer of luxury vehicles and motorcycles headquartered in Munich, Germany.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Gary S. Graifman, Esq. Daniel C. Edelman, Esq. KANTROWITZ, GOLDHAMER & GRAIFMAN, P.C. 135 Chestnut Ridge Road, Suite 200 Montvale, NJ 07645 Telephone: (201) 391-7000 E-mail: geraifman@kgglaw.com dedelman@kgglaw.com - and - Thomas P. Sobran, Esq. THOMAS P. SOBRAN, P.C. 7 Evergreen Lane Hingham, MA 02043 Telephone: (781) 741-6075 BESPOKE COLOR: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Henry Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- CONSTANCE HENRY, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Bespoke Color Company, LLC, Case No. 1:26-cv-00950 (N.D. Ill., Jan. 28, 2028) alleges that the Defendant failed to design, construct, maintain, and operate their website, https://www.mainecottage.com, to be fully accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. According to the complaint, the website contains significant access barriers that make it difficult if not impossible for blind and visually-impaired customers to use the website. The access barriers make it impossible for blind and visually-impaired users to even complete a transaction on the website. The Defendant is denying blind and visually impaired persons throughout the United States with equal access to the goods and services the Defendant provides to their non-disabled customers through its website, the suit contends. The Defendant provides to the public a wide array of the goods, services, price specials and other programs.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Alison Chan, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC 68-29 Main Street Flushing, NY 11367 Telephone: (844) 731-3343 Facsimile: (630) 478-0856 E-mail: Achan@ealg.law BEYOND MEAT: Aljendan Sues Over Exchange Act Violation ------------------------------------------------------ Mustafa Omar Aljendan, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. BEYOND MEAT, INC., ETHAN BROWN, and LUBI KUTUA, Case No. 2:26-cv-00742 (C.D. Cal., Jan. 23, 2026), is brought on behalf of a class consisting of all persons and entities other than Defendants that purchased or otherwise acquired Beyond Meat securities between February 27, 2025 and November 11, 2025, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"), seeking to recover damages caused by Defendants' violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, against the Company and certain of its top officials, As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's securities. Throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: the book value of certain of Beyond Meat's long-lived assets exceeded their fair value, making it highly likely that the Company would be required to record a material, non-cash impairment charge; the foregoing was likely to impair Beyond Meat's ability to timely file its periodic filings with the SEC; and as a result, Defendants' public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. The truth began to emerge on October 24, 2025, when, during pre market hours, Beyond Meat filed a current report on Form 8-K with the SEC, reporting the Company's preliminary financial results for the third quarter ("Q3") of 2025. Therein, Defendants revealed that the Company "expects to record a non cash impairment charge for the three months ended September 27, 2025, related to certain of its long-lived assets," which it "expected to be material." On this news, Beyond Meat's stock price fell $0.655 per share, or 23.06%, to close at $2.185 per share on October 24, 2025. Then, on November 11, 2025, during post-market hours, Beyond Meat hosted a conference call with investors and analysts to discuss its financial results for Q3 2025. During the call, the Company's Chief Financial Officer ("CFO") and Treasurer Defendant Lubi Kutua ("Kutua" and, collectively with Defendant Brown, the "Individual Defendants") disclosed, in relevant part, that "the total impairment amount of $77.4 million was allocated to PP&E, operating lease ROU assets and prepaid lease costs on our balance sheet." On this news, Beyond Meat's stock price fell an additional $0.105 per share, or 8.61%, to close at $1.115 per share on November 12, 2025, says the complaint. The Plaintiff acquired Beyond Meat securities at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period. Beyond Meat operates in the food industry, developing, manufacturing, marketing, and selling plant-based meat products under the "Beyond" brand name in the U.S. and internationally.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jennifer Pafiti, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 1100 Glendon Avenue, 15th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90024 Phone: (310) 405-7190 Email: jpafiti@pomlaw.com BLOOMBERG LP: Breaches Fiduciary Duty Under ERISA, Rajappan Says ---------------------------------------------------------------- RAJKUMAR RAJAPPAN, individually and as a representative of a class of similarly situated persons, and on behalf of the BLOOMBERG L.P. 401(K) PLAN v. BLOOMBERG L.P., THE INVESTMENT COMMITTEE and its members, THE RETIREMENT PLAN COMMITTEE and its members, and JOHN DOES 1–30, Case No. 1:26-cv-00785 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2026) arises from breaches of fiduciary duty under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act by the fiduciaries of the Bloomberg L.P. 401(k) Plan. The Defendants are the fiduciaries of the Plan who breached their duty. As fiduciaries, the Bloomberg Defendants have an obligation to select prudent investment options for the Plan so that its participants can build savings to sustain them during their so-called golden years of retirement. The Plan's participants, who are typically current or former Bloomberg employees, may earmark their retirement plan contributions only for the investment options that the Bloomberg Defendants select for the Plan. The Bloomberg Defendants also must continually monitor and reassess each individual investment option on its own merits and remove ones that no longer meet their investment objectives. They have kept two serially underperforming funds—the Harbor Capital Appreciation Fund (the Harbor Fund) and the Parnassus Core Equity Fund in the Plan for over 10 years, says the suit. The Defendants' decision not to remove either the Harbor Fund or the Parnassus Fund breached their fiduciary responsibilities to act with a singular focus on the needs of the Plan's participants and beneficiaries. The Bloomberg Defendants seemingly ignored clear warning signals, keeping the Challenged Funds in the Plan." Bloomberg L.P. is an American privately-held financial, software, data, and media company headquartered in Midtown Manhattan, New York.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Russell Kornblith, Esq. Charles Field, Esq. SANFORD HEISLER SHARP MCKNIGHT, LLP 17 State Street, Suite 3700 New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (646) 402-5650 Facsimile: (646) 402-5651 E-mail: rkornblith@sanfordheisler.com cfield@sanfordheisler.com BRIGGS & RILEY: Martinez Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ------------------------------------------------------------- Judith Adela Fernandez Martinez, on behalf of herself and all other persons similarly situated v. BRIGGS & RILEY TRAVELWARE, LLC, Case No. 1:26-cv-00706 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 28, 2026), is brought against the Defendant (or "Dose Daily"), for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons. The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and therefore denial of its products and services offered thereby, is a violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"). Because Defendant's interactive website, https://www.briggs-riley.com/, including all portions thereof or accessed thereon (collectively, the "Website" or "Defendant's Website"), is not equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, it violates the ADA. Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that Defendant's Website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. By failing to make its Website available in a manner compatible with computer screen reader programs, Defendant deprives blind and visually-impaired individuals the benefits of its online goods, content, and services--all benefits it affords nondisabled individuals--thereby increasing the sense of isolation and stigma among those persons that Title III was meant to redress, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who requires screen-reading software to read website content using the computer. BRIGGS & RILEY TRAVELWARE, LLC, operates the Briggs-Riley online retail store, as well as the Briggs-Riley interactive Website and advertises, markets, and operates in the State of New York and throughout the United States.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq. Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq. Michael A. LaBollita, Esq. GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES 150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR New York, N.Y. 10003-2461 Phone: (212) 228-9795 Fax: (212) 982-6284 Email: Jeffrey@gottlieb.legal Danalgottlieb@aol.com Michael@Gottlieb.legal BWW RESOURCES: Humphreys Removed from State Court to W.D. Wash. --------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit captioned as BRIDGET HUMPHREYS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, v. KATHERINE D. JASPON, an individual and their marital community; PAUL J. BROWN, an individual and their marital community; BWW RESOURCES, LLC; and DOES 1-20, inclusive, Case No. 25-2-37995-7, Filed Dec. 17, 2025) was removed from the Superior Court of the State of Washington, in and for the County of King, to the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle on Jan. 30, 2026. The Western District of Washington Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:26-cv-00354 to the proceedings. The complaint sets three causes of action failure to compensate for noncompliant meal and rest periods, failure to compensate for off-the-clock work based and failure to pay overtime wages based. The Plaintiff defines the putative class as: "all current and former hourly-paid employees who worked for any one or more of the Defendants at any location in Washington State at any time from three years prior to the filing of the Complaint through the date of the Court's order certifying the Class." BWW Resources, Inc. owns, operates, manages, and/or staffs employees to work at various restaurant locations and facilities in Washington State and across the U.S. Katherine D. Jaspon serves as the Company's manager.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jamie K. Serb, Esq. Zachary M. Crosner, Esq. CROSNER LEGAL, P.C. 92 Lenora Street, No. 179 Seattle, WA 98121 Telephone: (866) 276-7637 Facsimile: (310) 510-6429 E-mail: jamie@crosnerlegal.com zach@crosnerlegal.com The Defendant is represented by: Derek A. Bishop, Esq. LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. One Union Square 600 University Street, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101-3122 Telephone: (206) 623-3300 Facsimile: (206) 447-6965 E-mail: debishop@littler.com CARLISLE CONSTRUCTION: Ponder Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct. --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Carlisle Construction Materials, LLC. The case is styled as Danny Ponder, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. Carlisle Construction Materials, LLC, Case No. 601940/2026 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Nassau Cty., Jan. 27, 2026). The nature of suit is stated as Other Torts (Labor Law). Carlisle Construction Materials LLC (CCM) -- https://www.carlisleconstructionmaterials.com/ -- is a diversified manufacturer and supplier of premium building products and related technologies.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Brett R. Cohen, Esq. LEEDS BROWN LAW, P.C. 1 Old Country Rd Ste 347 Carle Place, NY 11514-1851 Phone: 516-873-9550 Fax: 516-747-5024 Email: bcohen@leedsbrownlaw.com CARVAJAL PHARMACY: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Thomas Alleges ------------------------------------------------------------ PAMELA THOMAS; KIMBERLY THOMAS; MARY ANN THOMAS; and MARILYN DIETZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. CARVAJAL PHARMACY LTC LLC; CARVAJALS, INC.; and MATTHEW FELAN, Defendants, Case No. 5:26-cv-00395 (W.D. Tex., Jan. 23, 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. The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as delivery drivers. Carvajal Pharmacy LTC LLC is a long term care pharmacy servicing numerous retirement centers, nursing homes, hospices, group homes, agency shelters, mental health clinics, and various other businesses across the state of Texas. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Douglas B. Welmaker, Esq. WELMAKER LAW, PLLC 409 N. Fredonia, Suite 118 Longview, TX 75601 Telephone: (512) 799-2048 Email: doug@welmakerlaw.com - and - Josef F. Buenker, Esq. THE BUENKER LAW FIRM P.O. Box 10099 Houston, TX 77206 Telephone: (713) 868-3388 Facsimile: (713) 683-9940 Email: jbuenker@buenkerlaw.com CERNER CORPORATION: Strength Files Suit in W.D. Oklahoma -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Cerner Corporation, et al. The case is styled as Brandi Strength, Christine Abbott, individually, on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Cerner Corporation doing business as: Oracle Health Inc.; Integris Health Inc, Case No. 5:26-cv-00123-G (W.D. Okla., Jan. 26, 2026). The nature of suit is stated as Other Statutory Actions for Account Receivable. Cerner Corporation doing business as Oracle Health -- https://www.oracle.com/ -- is a US-based, multinational provider of health information technology platforms and services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher Hamner, Esq. HAMNER LAW OFFICES, APLC 26565 Agoura Rd., Ste. 200 Calabasas, CA 91302-1990 Phone: 888-416-6654 Email: chamner@hamnerlaw.com CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEES: Armstrong Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct. -------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against The Civil Service Employees Association, Inc. The case is styled as John Armstrong, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. The Civil Service Employees Association, Inc., Case No. 901107-26 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Albany Cty., Jan. 28, 2026). The nature of suit is stated as Other Torts (Data Breach). The Civil Service Employees Association is a labor union in the state of New York that represents employees in state and local government, as well as school districts, child care, and the private sector.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Ralph Jimenez, Esq. BRYSON HARRIS SUCIU DEMAY 201 Sevilla Ave., Ste. 200 Coral Gables, FL 33134-6629 Phone: 866-252-0878 COMMERCIAL METALS: Bartley Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages ------------------------------------------------------- Daniel Bartley, individually and for others similarly situated v. COMMERCIAL METALS COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, Case No. 3:26-cv-00186-B (N.D. Tex., Jan. 23, 2026), is brought to recover unpaid wages and other damages from the Defendant for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"). The Plaintiff and the other Hourly Employees regularly work more than 40 hours in a week. But the Defendant does not pay Bartley and its other Hourly Employees for all hours worked, including overtime hours. Instead, the Defendant requires Bartley and its other Hourly Employees to put on and take off and store safety gear necessary to perform their job duties and attend safety and production meetings before and after their shifts, while on the Defendant's premises, "off the clock" (the Defendant's "pre/post shift off the clock policy"). The Defendant does not pay Bartley and the other Hourly Employees for the time they spend donning and doffing required gear and attending safety and production meetings, "off the clock," before and after their shifts. And the Defendant pays Bartley and the other Hourly Employees non-discretionary bonuses, including production, sign-on, referral, and safety bonuses, that it excludes from their regular rates of pay for overtime purposes (the Defendant's "bonus pay scheme"). The Defendant's pre/post shift off the clock policy and bonus pay scheme violate the FLSA by depriving Bartley and the other Hourly Employees of overtime wages, says the complaint. The Bartley was employed by the Defendant as a Strand Tender and Fabricator from October 2023 until April 2025 in its Knoxville, Tennessee facility. CMC touts that it "creates products or provides the metal used by other manufacturers in a wide variety of industries all over the globe and has grown into a Fortune 500 company with hundreds of facilities and more than 10,000 employees."[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael A. Josephson, Esq. Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq. Travis J. Grefenstette, Esq. JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LAW FIRM 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050 Houston, TX 77046 Phone: 713-352-1100 Facsimile: 713-352-3300 Email: mjosephson@mybackwages.com adunlap@mybackwages.com tgrefenstette@mybackwages.com - and - Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq. BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025 Houston, TX 77046 Phone: (713) 877-8788 Facsimile: 713-877-8065 Email: rburch@brucknerburch.com CRESCENT HEIGHTS: Hearn Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against CRESCENT HEIGHTS. The case is styled as Joshua Hearn, individually, and on behalf of other similarly situated employees v. CRESCENT HEIGHTS; CRESCENT HEIGHTS SERVICES-CA II LLC; CRESCENT HEIGHTS SERVICES-CA LLC, Case No. 26STCV02900 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Jan. 28, 2026). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." Crescent Heights, Inc. -- https://www.crescentheights.com/ -- is a privately held American real estate development company based in Miami, Florida.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Barbara Duvan-Clarke, Esq. BLACKSTONE PC 8383 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 745 Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2442 Phone: 310-361-0599 Email: BDC@blackstonepc.com DABELLA EXTERIORS: Littman TCPA Suit Removed to W.D. Washington --------------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Ron Littman, on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated v. DaBella Exteriors LLC, Does 1-10, was removed from the Pierce County Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on Jan. 28, 2026. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:26-cv-05081 to the proceeding. The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. DaBella -- https://dabella.us/ -- is one of the nation's fastest-growing home improvement leaders.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Peter Schneider, Esq. NORTHWEST DEBT RESOLUTION LLC 10900 NE 4th St., Ste. 2300 Bellevue, WA 98004 Phone: (206) 800-6000 Fax: (206) 800-6015 Email: peter@nwdebtresolution.com The Defendant is represented by: Benjamin C. Woodruff, Esq. SNELL & WILMER LLP (WA) 600 University St., Ste. 310 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: (206) 741-1421 Email: bwoodruff@swlaw.com DOLAN NORTHWEST: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Hippe Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- XINYUE HIPPE, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Dolan Northwest, LLC, Case No. 2:26-cv-140 (E.D. Wisc., Jan. 28, 2028) alleges that the Defendant failed to design, construct, maintain, and operate their Website https://www.destinationlighting.com, to be fully accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. According to the complaint, the website contains significant access barriers that make it difficult if not impossible for blind and visually-impaired customers to use the website. The access barriers make it impossible for blind and visually-impaired users to even complete a transaction on the website. The Defendant is denying blind and visually impaired persons throughout the United States with equal access to the goods and services the Defendant provides to their non-disabled customers through its website, the suit contends. The Defendant provides to the public a wide array of the goods, services, price specials and other programs.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David B. Reyes, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC 68-29 Main Street, Flushing, NY 11367 Telephone: (844) 731-3343 Facsimile: (630) 478-0856 E-mail: Dreyes@ealg.law DOLLAR GENERAL: Lehman Suit Removed to W.D. Wash. ------------------------------------------------- The case styled as CHANTALE LEHMAN, an individual, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DOLLAR GENERAL CORPORATION, DG STRATEGIC VII, LLC, and DOES 1-20, Defendants, Case No. 25-2-39329-1, was removed from the Superior Court of the State of Washington for the County of King to the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington on January 26, 2026. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:26-cv-00286 to the proceeding. This is a class action lawsuit to remedy Defendants' alleged business practice of illegally restricting, restraining, and prohibiting low-wage workers from engaging in lawful professions, trades, and businesses and from accepting or transacting business with customers in violation of the Washington Noncompetition Act. The Plaintiff alleges that Dollar General prohibits its hourly Washington workers from working second jobs and/or moonlighting. Dollar General Corporation is an American chain of discount stores headquartered in Goodlettsville, Tennessee.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Michael Scoville, Esq. MCGUIREWOODS LLP 16631 6th Ave SW Burien, WA 98166 Telephone: (206) 718-2343 E-mail: mscoville@mcguirewoods.com - and - Amy Morrissey Turk, Esq. MCGUIREWOODS LLP World Trade Center 101 West Main Street, Suite 9000 Norfolk, VA 23510-1655 Telephone: (757) 640-3711 E-mail: aturk@mcguirewoods.com - and - Paul M. Chappell, Esq. MCGUIREWOODS LLP 2601 Olive Street, Suite 2100 Dallas, TX 75201 Telephone: (214) 932-6400 E-mail: pchappell@mcguirewoods.com FLOWERS FOODS: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Williams Says --------------------------------------------------------------- EDWIN WILLIAMS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FLOWERS FOODS, INC., FLOWERS BAKERIES, LLC, DAVE'S KILLER BREAD, INC., and SIMPLE MILLS, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:26-cv-00649 (S.D.N.Y., January 26, 2026) is an action against the Defendants for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, the New York City Human Rights Law, and the New York State Civil Rights Law, arising from their failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate their websites, www.daveskillerbread.com and www.simplemills.com, in a manner that is fully accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind and visually impaired individuals. The Plaintiff attempted to use Defendants' websites from his home in New York County, New York, on three separate occasions: November 3, 2025; November 4, 2025; and December 10, 2025. Each attempt was made on his personal computer with NVDA enabled, for the purpose of researching specific baked goods, snack products, and pantry items and completing purchases for himself and his family. Across all three visits, when attempting to navigate to checkout or store locator functions, the Plaintiff encountered unlabeled form fields announced only as "edit box," inaccessible buttons, and broken links. These barriers directly prevented him from completing transactions despite his clear intent and ability to pay, says the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction requiring Defendants to revise their corporate policies, practices, and procedures to ensure that their websites become and remain fully accessible to blind and visually impaired users. Flowers Foods, Inc. operates and control the websites that offer baked goods, snack products, and pantry items.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Schonfeld, Esq. JOSEPH & NORINSBERG, LLC 825 Third Avenue, Suite 2100 New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 227-5700 Facsimile: (212) 656-1889 E-mail: rschonfeld@employeejustice.com FRESPET INC: Miller Suit Seeks Unpaid OT Wages Under FLSA --------------------------------------------------------- SINNA MILLER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. FRESPET, INC., Case No. 2:26-cv-00915 (Jan. 29, 2026) seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, the Defendant failed to properly calculate the Plaintiff's Bonus Pay and other non-discretionary remuneration into regular rate for proper overtime calculations. The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant from July 19, 2021, through Sept. 18, 2025, as Machine Operator. Freshpet is an American pet food company. Its cat food and dog food products are marketed as fresh and need to be kept refrigerated.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Nicholas Conlon, Esq. BROWN LLC 111 Town Square Place, Suite 400 Jersey City, NJ 07310 Telephone: (877) 561-000 E-mail: nicholasconlon@jtblawgroup.com - and - Jason J. Thompson, Esq. SOMMMERS SCHWARTZ, PC One Town Square, 17th Floor Telephone: (248) 355 0300 E-mail: jthompson@somerspc.com FRICK COLLECTION: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Herrera Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- EDERY HERRERA, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THE FRICK COLLECTION, Case No. 1:26-cv-00813 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2026) alleges that the Defendant failed to design, construct, maintain, and operate its interactive website, https://www.frick.org, to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Because Defendant's interactive website, including all portions thereof or accessed thereon, is not equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, it violates the ADA. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that Defendant's Website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. By failing to make its Website available in a manner compatible with computer screen reader programs, Defendant deprives blind and visually-impaired individuals the benefits of its online goods, content, and services -- all benefits it affords nondisabled, says the suit. The Defendant offers the commercial website to the public. The Website offers features which should allow all consumers to access the goods and services offered by Defendant and which Defendant ensures delivery of such goods and services throughout the United States including New York State.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael A. LaBollita, Esq. Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq. Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq. GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC 150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR New York, NY 10003 Telephone: (212) 228-9795 Facsimile: (212) 982-6284 E-mail: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal Dana@Gottlieb.legal Michael@Gottlieb.legal G.P.K. RESTAURANT: Papanikolaou Seeks Unpaid Wages, OT Under FLSA ----------------------------------------------------------------- KONSTANTINOS PAPANIKOLAOU v. G.P.K. RESTAURANT ENTERPRISES CORP. d/b/a SEVEN SEAS RESTAURANT, G.P.K. RESTAURANT ENTERPRISES CORP. d/b/a PAROS GRILLE, and DEMETRIOS TSOLIS, Case No. 2:26-cv-00532 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 30, 2026) is a class action seeking to recover unpaid wages and overtime compensation he has been deprived of, plus interest pre-judgment and post-judgment, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. During the course of the last six years, the Defendants carried out an unlawful payroll policy and practice by failing to pay Plaintiff and all others similarly situated for all hours worked including overtime compensation as required by federal and state law, says the suit. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants in the State of New York during the period of in or about April 2015 through February 4, 2023, at Seven Seas when it closed for renovations. G.P.K. RESTAURANT ENTERPRISES CORP. owns and operates a restaurant in New York.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Emanuel Kataev, Esq. SAGE LEGAL LLC 18211 Jamaica Avenue Jamaica, NY 11423-2327 Telephone: (718) 412-2421 E-mail: emanuel@sagelegal.nyc GEICO CASUALTY: Faces Kane Class Suit Over Policy Premiums ---------------------------------------------------------- ALLISON KANE, for herself and all others similarly situated v. GEICO CASUALTY COMPANY, Case No. 6:26-cv-00225 (M.D. Fla., Jan. 28, 2026) is brought by the Plaintiff individually and for all other similarly situated insureds who have suffered increases to their policy premiums due to GEICO adding unrequested individuals to their policies. According to the complaint, GEICO uses a standard practice of obtaining information from third-party sources to find licensed or permitted drivers to add them for an additional premium to insureds’ GEICO policies even when the added drivers are strangers to the insureds. GEICO issued Plaintiff and the putative class members substantially similar insurance policies. The Form Policy issued by GEICO to Plaintiff and all putative class members are virtually identical in all material aspects, says the suit. The terms in the Policy are applicable and like the terms applicable to Plaintiff and all putative class members. Like Plaintiff, the putative class members were insureds on a GEICO automobile insurance policy and had unrequested drivers added to their policies without GEICO confirming -- or even conducting a reasonable investigation -- that the people added to the policies actually lived at the insureds' addresses. The Plaintiff and the putative class members were improperly charged more than they owed due to GEICO's addition of unrequested drivers to their insurance policies, the suit alleges. The Defendant is an American vehicle insurance company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Rachel Dapeer, Esq. DAPEER LAW, P.A. 520 South Dixie Hwy, No. 240 Hallandale Beach, FL 30090 Telephone: (786) 963-5165 E-mail: rachel@dapeer.com GENERAL MOTORS: Class Members Appeal Suit's Reconsideration Order ----------------------------------------------------------------- INDIVIDUAL CLASS MEMBERS STRATEGIC LEGAL PRACTICES APC are taking an appeal from a court order denying their motion for reconsideration in the lawsuit entitled Robin Altobelli, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. General Motors, LLC, et al., Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-13256, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, this suit is brought against the Defendants for failure to disclose a uniform and widespread defect in the lithium-ion battery of the Chevrolet Bolt vehicles. On Aug. 16, 2024, Individual Class Members filed a motion to allow electronic opt outs. On July 10, 2025, Movants Susan Nina Spadaro, et al. filed a motion to treat opt-out requests as valid or, alternatively, to extend opt-out deadline. On Oct. 31, 2025, Movants filed a motion for reconsideration regarding the motion to treat opt-out requests as valid or, alternatively, to extend opt-out deadline. On same day, Manookian Individual Class Members also filed a motion for reconsideration. On Nov. 18, 2025, Individual Class Members Strategic Legal Practices APC filed a motion for reconsideration on Oct. 17 Orders referring other matters to Magistrate Judge Curtis Ivy, Jr. and regarding Movants' motions challenging determination of invalidity of requests for exclusion. On Dec. 22, 2025, Judge Terrence G. Berg entered an Order granting in part and denying in part Manookian Individual Class Members' motion for reconsideration and denying Movants' and Individual Class Members Strategic Legal Practices APC's motions for reconsideration. The appellate case is styled as Robin Altobelli, et al. v. General Motors, LLC, et al., Case No. 26-1078, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, filed on January 23, 2026. [BN] GENERAL MOTORS: Farah Appeals Court Orders in Chevrolet Litigation ------------------------------------------------------------------ YOUSEF ABED FARAH, et al. are taking an appeal from court orders in the lawsuit entitled Robin Altobelli, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. General Motors, LLC, et al., Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-13256, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, this suit is brought against the Defendants for failure to disclose a uniform and widespread defect in the lithium-ion battery of the Chevrolet Bolt vehicles. On Aug. 16, 2024, individual class members filed a motion to allow electronic opt-outs, which Judge Terrence G. Berg denied on Oct. 28, 2024. On Oct. 17, 2025, Judge Berg entered an Order granting in part and denying in part Movants' motions challenging determination of invalidity of requests for exclusion. The appellate case is styled as Robin Altobelli, et al. v. General Motors, LLC, et al., Case No. 26-1079, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, filed on January 23, 2026. [BN] Plaintiffs-Appellants YOUSEF ABED FARAH, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, are represented by: Jordan G. Cohen, Esq. 800 Parkview Drive North El Segundo, CA 90245 Telephone: (831) 234-3266 Defendants-Appellees GENERAL MOTORS, LLC, et al. are represented by: Archis Ashok Parasharami, Esq. MAYER BROWN 1999 K. Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006 Telephone: (202) 263-3000 - and - Andrew S. Rosenman, Esq. MAYER BROWN 71 S. Wacker Drive, Suite 44-42 Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 782-0600 - and - Mark S. Mester, Esq. LATHAM & WATKINS 330 N. Wabash Avenue, Suite 2800 Chicago, IL 60611 Telephone: (312) 876-7700 - and - A. Michael Palizzi, Esq. MILLER CANFIELD 150 W. Jefferson Avenue, Suite 2500 Detroit, MI 48226 Telephone: (313) 963-6420 GENERAL MOTORS: Manookian Appeals Reconsideration Order to 6th Cir. ------------------------------------------------------------------- MANOOKIAN INDIVIDUAL CLASS MEMBERS are taking an appeal from a court order granting in part and denying in part their motion for reconsideration in the lawsuit entitled Robin Altobelli, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. General Motors, LLC, et al., Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-13256, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, this suit is brought against the Defendants for failure to disclose a uniform and widespread defect in the lithium-ion battery of the Chevrolet Bolt vehicles. On Aug. 16, 2024, Individual Class Members filed a motion to allow electronic opt outs. On July 10, 2025, Movants Susan Nina Spadaro, et al. filed a motion to treat opt-out requests as valid or, alternatively, to extend opt-out deadline. On Oct. 31, 2025, Movants filed a motion for reconsideration regarding the motion to treat opt-out requests as valid or, alternatively, to extend opt-out deadline. On same day, Manookian Individual Class Members also filed a motion for reconsideration. On Dec. 22, 2025, Judge Terrence G. Berg entered an Order granting in part and denying in part Manookian Individual Class Members' motion for reconsideration and denying Movants' motion for reconsideration. The Plaintiffs' unopposed motion for final approval of class action settlement and their motion for attorneys' fees, expenses and service awards are granted. The appellate case is styled as Robin Altobelli, et al. v. General Motors, LLC, et al., Case No. 26-1081, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, filed on January 23, 2026. [BN] Movants-Appellants MANOOKIAN INDIVIDUAL CLASS MEMBERS are represented by: Erik H. Johnson, Esq. Patrick C. Lannen, Esq. STINAR LANNEN 280 W. Maple, Suite 230 Birmingham, MI 48009 Telephone: (248) 565-2690 Defendants-Appellees GENERAL MOTORS, LLC, et al. are represented by: Archis Ashok Parasharami, Esq. MAYER BROWN 1999 K. Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006 Telephone: (202) 263-3000 - and - Andrew S. Rosenman, Esq. MAYER BROWN 71 S. Wacker Drive, Suite 44-42 Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 782-0600 - and - Mark S. Mester, Esq. LATHAM & WATKINS 330 N. Wabash Avenue, Suite 2800 Chicago, IL 60611 Telephone: (312) 876-7700 - and - A. Michael Palizzi, Esq. MILLER CANFIELD 150 W. Jefferson Avenue, Suite 2500 Detroit, MI 48226 Telephone: (313) 963-6420 GERRESHEIMER GLASS: Teamer Seeks Unpaid Minimum Wages Under FLSA ---------------------------------------------------------------- SEAN TEAMER, individually, and on behalf of others similarly situated v. GERRESHEIMER, GLASS INC., Case No. 1:26-cv-00912 (D.N.J., Jan. 29, 2026) seeks to recover unpaid minimum wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. The Plaintiffs worked for the Defendant as non-exempt hourly employee from Sept. 21, 2021, to June 1, 2024. The Defendant is a manufacturer of specialty glass and plastic products for the pharmaceuticals, biotech, cosmetics, and food and beverage industries.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Nicholas Conlon, Esq. BROWN LLC 111 Town Square Place, Suite 400 Jersey City, NJ 07310 Telephone: (877) 561-000 E-mail: nicholasconlon@jtblawgroup.com - and – Jason J. Thompson, Esq. SOMMMERS SCHWARTZ, PC One Town Square, 17th Floor Telephone: (248) 355 0300 E-mail: jthompson@somerspc.com GOLDEN HEARTS: Faces Mackenzie Over Casino Operation Shutdown ------------------------------------------------------------- DONALD MACKENZIE, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. GOLDEN HEARTS GAMES, INC., Case No. 1:26-cv-10442 (D. Mass., Jan. 28, 2026) seeks to recover their losses, as well as costs and attorneys' fees, and an injunction shutting down operation of the website. Golden Hearts owns and operates the popular online casino website, www.goldenheartsgames.com, where visitors can and do bet real money on slots, blackjack, and other games of chance. According to the complaint, the Defendant's website has been shut down by state authorities in several states for offering "online gambling games, " operating without "a casino gaming license," and for being "illegal, dangerous, and seriously ruining people's finances." But it still continues to operate illegally in this state, and in most states. Golden Hearts describes its website as the "best free-to-play casino," and is accessible and available to Massachusetts residents and other players across the United States, says the suit. However, by operating its online casino, the Defendant has violated Massachusetts law, which governs Plaintiff's and the Class's claims, and the Defendant has illegally profited from tens of thousands of consumers, the suit alleges.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joel D. Smith, Esq. SMITH KRIVOSHEY, PC 867 Boylston Street 5th Floor No. 1520 Boston, MA 02116 Telephone: (617) 377-4704 Facsimile: (888) 410-0415 E-Mail: joel@skclassactions.com - and - Yeremey O. Krivoshey, Esq. SMITH KRIVOSHEY, PC 166 Geary Str STE 1500-1507 San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 839-7077 Facsimile: (888) 410-0415 E-Mail: yeremey@skclassactions.com - and - Alec M. Leslie, Esq. Julian C. Diamond, Esq. Philip L. Fraietta, Esq. Matthew A. Girardi, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (646) 837-7150 Facsimile: (212) 989-9163 E-mail: aleslie@bursor.com pfraietta@bursor.com GROUP ROSSIGNOL: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Tesch Says -------------------------------------------------------------- ASHLEY TESCH, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated Plaintiff v. Group Rossignol USA, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 3:26-cv-00089 (N.D. Ind., January 23, 2026) is a civil rights action against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website https://us.daleofnorway.com, to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired individuals in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. On October 10, 2025, while searching online for high-quality wool apparel, the Plaintiff discovered Defendant's website. While browsing the website's product offerings, the Plaintiff identified apparel she was interested in purchasing and decided to proceed with an order. However, while navigating the website using her screen reader, the Plaintiff encountered multiple accessibility barriers that impeded her ability to complete the transaction. Specifically, different images of the same product contained similar and poorly descriptive alternative text, preventing Plaintiff from obtaining meaningful information about the product and its distinguishing features. As a result of these accessibility barriers, the Plaintiff was unable to proceed to the shopping cart and checkout. Plaintiff Tesch seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's policies, practices, and procedures so that its 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. Group Rossignol USA, Inc. operates the website that retails Norwegian knitwear and wool garments, including sweaters, cardigans, jackets, and related accessories.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jason B. Marshall, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC 68-29 Main Street Flushing, NY 11367 Telephone: (463) 777-4196 E-mail: jmarshall@ealg.law HELLO CAKE: Discloses Personal Health Info, Mitchell Says --------------------------------------------------------- WAYNE MITCHELL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. HELLO CAKE, INC., Case No. 2:26-at-00172 (E.D. Cal., Jan. 29, 2026) is a class action brought on behalf of all patients who accessed and used www.hellocake.com to purchase prescription and over-the-counter sexual health medication and related products. According to the complaint, information concerning an individual's healthcare and prescription medication is protected by state and federal law. Despite these protections, and unbeknownst to Plaintiff and Class Members, this sensitive, personal information communicated through the Website was intercepted by some of the largest advertising and social media companies in the country, including Meta Platforms, Inc. The Defendant disclosed this protected information through tracking technology embedded on the Website, including software development kits and tracking pixels. The protected information disclosed by Defendant was not aggregated or deidentified nor was Facebook prohibited from using this information for its own benefit, says the suit. The Plaintiff and Class Members provided their personal information, including prescription information, to Defendant with the expectation that this information would remain confidential and private. The Defendant's disclosure of this information without explicit consent constitutes an extreme invasion of Plaintiff’s and Class Members' privacy. The Plaintiff brings this action for legal and equitable remedies resulting from these illegal actions. Plaintiff Mitchell is a California citizen who resides in Sacramento, California. On or about March 21, 2025, the Plaintiff was prescribed and ordered erectile dysfunction medication through the Website. The Defendant offers patients convenient and discrete access to sexual wellness medications and products, including medications for erectile disfunction.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: L. Timothy Fisher, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 1990 North California Blvd., 9th Floor Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Telephone: (925) 300-4455 Facsimile: (925) 407-2700 E-mail: ltfisher@bursor.com HIMS & HERS: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Jenkins Alleges --------------------------------------------------------------- ANGEL JENKINS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. HIMS & HERS HEALTH, INC., Case No. 1:26-cv-00838 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 30, 2026) alleges that the Defendant has failed to ensure that its websites, www.hims.com and www.forhers.com, are accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals, including Plaintiff, in violations of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. For individuals like Ms. Jenkins, who is currently adapting to permanent visual impairment and relies on assistive technology like the NVDA screen reader, and/or JAWS, these websites must provide clear, labeled pathways. However, when Ms. Jenkins attempted to navigate the Defendant's websites, she was met with widespread accessibility barriers. The sites lack accessible navigation and fail to comply with basic digital inclusion standards, preventing her from independently managing her health needs, alleges the suit. The Defendant owns, operates, and controls the commercial websites which serve as the exclusive platforms through which the company markets, sells, and distributes its proprietary products and telehealth services throughout the United States, including to consumers in the State of New York.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Schonfeld, Esq. JOSEPH & NORINSBERG, LLC 825 Third Avenue, Suite 2100 New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 227-5700 Facsimile: (212) 656-1889 E-mail: rschonfeld@employeejustice.com HUMANA INC: Deidun Balks at Wiretapping of Patients' Health Info ---------------------------------------------------------------- NICOLE DEIDUN, ELLIOT GORLIN, KELLY JEWELL, NANCY MACINTYRE, and MARY PAYNE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. HUMANA INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:26-cv-00054-GNS (W.D. Ky., January 23, 2026) is a class action against the Defendant for violations of the Federal Wiretap Act, and breach of fiduciary duty, intrusion upon seclusion, and unjust enrichment under Kentucky common law. According to the complaint, the Defendant wiretapped Plaintiffs and other insureds in an invasive betrayal of trust. The Defendant harvested highly sensitive health-related information from its insureds using hidden tracking tools and secretly disseminated this private data to third parties. The Plaintiffs were not notified of Defendant's hidden tracking and harvesting of their private information, which began as soon as Plaintiffs loaded Defendant's website. Nor were Plaintiffs provided any opportunity to limit or consent to Defendant's tracking and harvesting of their protected health information, says the suit. The Plaintiffs seek damages and injunctive relief to redress Defendant's unlawful interception and misuse of their private health-related information. Humana Inc. is a publicly traded health insurance company.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Jerome Prather, Esq. GARMER & PRATHER, PLLC 141 North Broadway Lexington, KY 40507 Telephone: (859) 254-9351 E-mail: jprather@garmerprather.com - and - Andrew D. Schlichter, Esq. Alexander L. Braitberg, Esq. Chen Kasher, Esq. Cort VanOstran, Esq. SCHLICHTER BOGARD LLC 100 South Fourth Street, Suite 1200 St. Louis, MO 63102 Telephone: (314) 621-6115 Facsimile: (314) 621-5934 E-mail: aschlichter@uselaws.com abraitberg@uselaws.com ckasher@uselaws.com cvanostran@uselaws.com IHEARTMEDIA INC: Appeals Denied Harris Suit Dismissal to 9th Cir. ----------------------------------------------------------------- IHEARTMEDIA, INC. is taking an appeal from a court order denying its motion to transfer case, compel arbitration, or dismiss in the lawsuit entitled Trevor Harris, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. iHeartMedia, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 5:25-cv-06038-EKL, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The suit is brought against the Defendant for alleged violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Act. On Oct. 10, 2025, the Defendant filed a motion to transfer case, compel arbitration, or dismiss. On Jan. 6, 2026, Judge Eumi K. Lee entered an Order denying the Defendant's motion to compel arbitration and motion to transfer. On Jan. 27, 2026, the Defendant appealed the Jan. 6 Order. On Jan. 29, 2026, Judge Lee entered an Order denying the Defendant's motion to dismiss. The appellate case is captioned Harris v. iHeartMedia, Inc., Case No. 26-590, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, filed on January 29, 2026. The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that: -- Appellant's Mediation Questionnaire was due on February 3, 2026; -- Appellant's Appeal Transcript Order is due on February 10, 2026; -- Appellant's Transcript is due on March 12, 2026; -- Appellant's Opening Brief is due on April 21, 2026; and -- Appellee's Answering Brief is due on May 21, 2026. [BN] Plaintiff-Appellee TREVOR HARRIS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, is represented by: Joshua Wilner, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, PA 1990 N. California Boulevard, Suite 940 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 - and - Max Stuart Roberts, Esq. Philip Lawrence Fraietta, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, PA 50 Main Street, Suite 475 White Plains, NY 10606 Defendant-Appellant IHEARTMEDIA, INC. is represented by: Jeffrey G. Landis, Esq. ZWILLGEN, PLLC 1900 M. Street, NW, Suite 250 Washington, DC 20036 K2 HEALTH: Products Not Hypoallergenic, Pitre Suit Alleges ---------------------------------------------------------- YOLANDA PITRE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. K2 HEALTH PRODUCTS LLC D/B/A INSPIRE, Case No. 3:26-cv-00931-SK (N.D. Cal., Jan. 29, 2026) is a class action on behalf of the Plaintiff and all similarly situated consumers who purchased the Defendants' "Body Wipes for Adult Bathing" and "Inspire Adult Premium Washcloths." According the complaint, the Defendant markets the Products as being "hypoallergenic." However, unbeknownst to reasonable consumers, the Products contain fragrance -- a chemical allergen that dermatologists and toxicologists widely recognize as a common cause of allergic contact dermatitis. In each event, the inclusion of this known allergen renders the Defendant's "hypoallergenic" claims false and misleading. The Defendant deceptively and misleadingly concealed material facts about the Products, including the true nature of the Products' ingredients and that the Products contain fragrance chemicals commonly known to be allergens, sensitizers, and/or irritants, says the suit. The Plaintiff brings claims against Defendant for violations of California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act, California's Unfair Competition Law, and California's False Advertising Law. The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a), (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3). The proposed classes are defined below as: Nationwide Class: "All persons in the United States who, during the maximum period of time permitted by law, purchased Defendant's Products for their personal use." Multi-State Consumer Protection Subclass: "All persons who, during the maximum period of time permitted by law, purchased Defendants Products in Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming." Multi-State Warranty Subclass: "All persons who, during the maximum period of time permitted by law, purchased Defendant's Products in Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming." California Subclass: "All persons in California who, during the maximum period of time permitted by the law, purchased Defendant's Products for their personal use." K2 Health Products LLC manufactures medical products.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Adrian Gucovschi, Esq. Nathaniel Haim Sari, Esq. GUCOVSCHI LAW FIRM, PLLC. 165 Broadway, Fl. 23 New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 884-4230 Facsimile: (212) 884-4230 E-Mail: adrian@gucovschilaw.com nathaniel@gucovschilaw.com KENTUCKY INDUSTRIAL: Morgan Balks at Termination Without Notice --------------------------------------------------------------- KAREN MORGAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. KENTUCKY INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS, INC. and RUSSELLVILLE ENGINEERED CASTINGS, INC., Case No. 1:26-cv-00013-GNS (W.D. Ky., Jan. 29, 2026) is a class action on behalf of the Plaintiff and other similarly situated former employees who worked for Defendants and were terminated as part of the foreseeable mass lay off or plant closing ordered by Defendants on or around Aug. 22, 2025 and within 90 days of that date and who were not provided 60 days' advance written notice of their terminations by Defendants, as required by the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees should have received the full protection afforded by the WARN Act. The effects of the Defendants' unceremonious layoffs on the Russellville, Kentucky community cannot be understated. Many employees spent their entire careers working for Defendants, only to be terminated without notice as part of this mass layoff and without a backup plan. The Russellville community will bear the brunt of Defendants' failure to provide proper notice, says the suit. The Plaintiff is and was a member of the Class (as defined Plaintiff Karen Morgan is a citizen of the United States and a resident of Russellville, Kentucky. She was employed by Defendants at all relevant times at the Russellville Facility. She was employed over six months and is an "aggrieved employee" within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. Section 2104(a)(7). She was terminated without cause and did not receive 60-day notice. The Defendants ran a manufacturing plant that specializes in aluminum casings for the automotive and other industries. The plant has been operational since 1956, when it was originally used as a captive die caster for Rockwell Corp.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew E. Mize, Esq. J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq. Michael C. Iadevaia, Esq. STRANCH, JENNINGS, & GARVEY, PLLC 223 Rosa Parks Ave. Suite 200 Nashville, TN 37203 Telephone: (615) 254-8801 Facsimile: (615) 255-5419 E-mail: amize@stranchlaw.com gstranch@stranchlaw.com miadevaia@stranchlaw.com KNEW CONSCIOUS: McBee Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages Under FLSA -------------------------------------------------------------- NAVA MCBEE, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. KNEW CONSCIOUS COLLECTIVE INC. and LEAH HAGEMANN, Case No. 1:26-cv-00375 (D. Colo., Jan. 30, 2026) seeks recovery against Defendants for their violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Colorado Overtime and Minimum Pay Standards Order. According to the complaint, the Defendants carried out an unlawful payroll policy and practice by failing to pay Plaintiff for all worked hours as required by law and, inter alia, misclassifying Plaintiff and others as independent contractors to evade minimum wage and/or overtime obligations. The Plaintiff has commenced this action on behalf of herself, and all others similarly situated to recover unpaid wages they have been deprived of, plus interest (pre-judgment and post-judgment), liquidated damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants in the State of Colorado during the period of May 2023 through February 2024. The Defendant is an art gallery and social club.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Emanuel Kataev, Esq. SAGE LEGAL LLC 18211 Jamaica Avenue Jamaica, NY 11423-2327 Telephone: (718) 412-2421 E-mail: emanuel@sagelegal.nyc LATHROP LOGISTICS: Sanchez Suit Removed to E.D. California ---------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Irene Sanchez, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. LATHROP LOGISTICS LLC; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2025-15227 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of San Joaquin, to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California on Jan. 23, 2026, and assigned Case No. 2:26-at-00151. The Plaintiff's FAC alleges 7 purported causes of action for: failure to pay all minimum, regular, and overtime wages; failure to provide meal periods; failure to permit rest periods; failure to provide accurate itemized wage statements; failure to pay all wages due during employment and upon separation of employment; unfair and unlawful business practices; and enforcement of the California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act ("PAGA").[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Matthew C. Kane, Esq. Amy E. Beverlin, Esq. Kerri H. Sakaue, Esq. BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP 1900 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2700 Los Angeles, CA 90067-4508 Phone: 310.820.8800 Facsimile: 310.820.8859 Email: mkane@bakerlaw.com abeverlin@bakerlaw.com ksakaue@bakerlaw.com - and - Sylvia J. Kim, Esq. BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP Transamerica Pyramid 600 Montgomery Street, Suite 3100 San Francisco, CA 94111-2806 Phone: 415.659.2600 Facsimile: 415.659.2601 Email: sjkim@bakerlaw.com LAYLO INC: Bender Files TCPA Suit in C.D. California ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Laylo, Inc. The case is styled as Celeste Bender, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Laylo, Inc., Case No. 8:26-cv-00167 (C.D. Cal., Jan. 23, 2026). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Laylo -- https://laylo.com/ -- is a privately-held company that helps creators connect with and monetize their super fans through live ticketed digital experiences.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott A. Edelsberg, I, Esq. EDELSBERG LAW PA 1925 Century Park E, Suite 1700 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Phone: (305) 975-3320 Email: scott@edelsberglaw.com LEES ACCU-TECH SERVICE: Landeros Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. -------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lees Accu-Tech Service, Inc. The case is styled as Miguel Landeros, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated and current and former aggrieved employees v. Lees Accu-Tech Service, Inc., California Efficiency Group Inc., Case No. 26STCV02617 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Jan. 26, 2026). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." Lees Accu-Tech Service, Inc. -- https://leesair.com/ -- provides top-quality HVAC and plumbing services in Fresno and Sacramento.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David Lavi, Esq. E&L, LLP 8889 W. Olympic Blvd., 2nd Floor Beverly Hills, CA 90211 Phone: 213-213-0000 Fax: 213-213-0025 Email: dlavi@ebralavi.com LINE 5 LLC: Abramson TCPA Suit Transferred to M.D. Pennsylvania --------------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Stewart Abramson, individually and on behalf of a class of all persons and entities similarly situated v. Line 5, LLC, Headstart Warranty Group LLC, MLB Global, LLC doing business as: Benchmark Warranty, Case No. 2:25-cv-00288 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania on Jan. 23, 2026. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:26-cv-00155-KMN to the proceeding. The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Line 5, LLC -- https://www.line5.com/ -- is a finance company which offers financing to consumers for automotive products and services such as extended warranties and service contracts.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Anthony I. Paronich, Esq. PARONICH LAW, P.C. 350 Lincoln St., Suite 2400 Hingham, MA 02043 Phone: (615) 485-0018 Email: anthony@paronichlaw.com - and - Jeremy C. Jackson, Esq. BOWER LAW ASSOCIATES, PLLC 403 South Allen Street, Suite 210 State College, PA 16801 Phone: (814) 234-2626 Fax: (814) 237-8700 Email: jjackson@bower-law.com The Defendants are represented by: Brit J. Suttell, Esq. BARRON & NEWBURGER, P.C. 6100 219th St. SW, Suite 480 Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043 Phone: (484) 999-4232 Email: britjsuttell@bn-lawyers.com - and - Andrew Michael Schwartz, Esq. MESSER STRICKLER BURNETTE, LTD 935 E. Lancaster Ave, #1003 Downingtown, PA 19335 Phone: (320) 434-9664 Fax: (312) 334-3474 Email: aschwartz@messerstrickler.com - and - Barry Guaglardi, Esq. GUAGLARDI & MELITI, LLP 365 West Passaic Street, Suite 130 Rochelle Park, NJ 07662 Phone: (201) 947-4100 Email: jbonetti@adgmlaw.com LOS ANGELES, CA: Griffin Appeals Judgment Order to 9th Circuit -------------------------------------------------------------- JUDY GRIFFIN, et al. are taking an appeal from court orders in the lawsuit entitled Judy Griffin, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. City of Los Angeles, Defendant, Case No. 2:24-cv-06312-RGK-MAR, in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit contends that the Defendant failed to ensure that its parks and park facilities are constructed, altered, and maintained so that they are readily accessible to and usable by people with disabilities, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. On Oct. 20, 2025, the Defendant filed a motion for judgment as a matter of law, which the Plaintiffs opposed on Oct. 24, 2025. On Nov. 13, 2025, Judge R. Gary Klausner entered an Order denying the Defendant's motion for judgment. The Court finds that the Plaintiffs established Article III standing and met their burden of proof for liability and relief. On Nov. 20, 2025, the Court entered judgment for the Plaintiffs. The parties shall meet and confer and file a joint proposed form of injunction to the Court within 45 days of the date of this Order. The appellate case is entitled Griffin, et al. v. City of Los Angeles, Case No. 26-496, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, filed on January 23, 2026. [BN] Plaintiffs-Appellants JUDY GRIFFIN, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, are represented by: Andrew P. Lee, Esq. Linda M. Dardarian, Esq. DARDARIAN HO KAN & LEE 155 Grand Avenue, Suite 900 Oakland, CA 94612 - and - Scott Lewis Gordon, Esq. Jameelah Najieb, Esq. DISABILITY RIGHTS ADVOCATES 2001 Center Street, 3rd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 - and - Guy B. Wallace, Esq. Jennifer Bybee, Esq. Mark T. Johnson, Esq. SCHNEIDER WALLACE COTTRELL KIM LLP 2000 Powell Street, Suite 1400 Emeryville, CA 94608 Defendant-Appellee CITY OF LOS ANGELES is represented by: Edith Sanchez Shea, Esq. BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP 444 S. Flower Street, 40th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 - and - Evan Louis Miller, Esq. MARTORELL LAW, APC 6100 Center Drive Los Angeles, CA 90045 - and - Gabriel Dermer, Esq. Los Angeles Office of the City Attorney 200 N. Main Street Los Angeles, CA 90012 LUNA ROOFTOP: Faces Jarvis Suit Over Misappropriation of Tips ------------------------------------------------------------- JULIA JARVIS, individually and for others similarly situated v. LUNA ROOFTOP, LLC and RODRIGO JARDON AYALA, Case No. 1:26-cv-00180 (W.D. Tex., January 23, 2026) seeks to recover misappropriated tips, unpaid wages, and other damages from the Defendants under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff Jarvis worked for Luna Rooftop as a bottle server from approximately October 2025 until November 2025. The complaint alleges that Luna Rooftop uniformly failed to pay the Plaintiff and Putative Class Members for misappropriated tips. By failing to pay Jarvis and the Putative Class Members for the misappropriated tips, the Defendant violated (and continues to violate) the FLSA's requirement that an employer may not keep tips received by its employees for any purpose. As a result of the Defendant's uniform policies and practices, Plaintiff Jarvis and the Putative Class Members do not receive all tips earned as required by the FLSA, says the suit. Luna Rooftop owns and operates a nightclub in Austin, Texas.[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 E-mail: carl@fitz.legal M & A BROTHERS: Commercial Property Violates ADA, Pardo Alleges --------------------------------------------------------------- NIGEL FRANK DE LA TORRE PARDO v. M & A BROTHERS REALTY NO 20 INC. and FERIGLE GROUP CORPORATION D/B/A MARATHON, Case No. 1:26-cv-20562 (S.D. Fla., Jan. 28, 2026) is a class action seeking injunctive relief, attorneys' fees, litigation expenses, and costs pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. According to the complaint, the Defendant owns, operates, and oversees a gas station at 2735 NW 7th Street, Miami, Florida 33125. The Plaintiff contends that the he found the commercial property and commercial mini mart business located within the commercial property to be rife with ADA violations. He encountered architectural barriers at the commercial property and commercial mini mart business located within the commercial property and wishes to continue his patronage and use of the premises.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Anthony J. Perez, Esq. ANTHONY J. PEREZ LAW GROUP, PLLC 7950 W. Flagler Street, Suite 104 Miami, FL 33144 Telephone: (786) 361-9909 Facsimile: (786) 687-0445 E-Mail: ajp@ajperezlawgroup.com jr@ajperezlawgroup.com MDL 2741: Dressel v. Monsanto Transferred to N.D. Cal. ------------------------------------------------------ Judge Karen K. Caldwell, Chairperson of the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation has entered an order transferring the case styled as "Dressel v. Monsanto Company, et al.," C.A. No. 0:25−61689 (S.D. Fla.) to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California and, with the consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable Vince Chhabria for inclusion in the coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings in the multi-district action captioned "In Re: Roundup Products Liability Litigation," MDL No. 2741. Dressel moved to vacate this order, arguing that his pending motion for remand to state court should be decided before transfer, while defendant Monsanto Company opposes the motion. The actions in the MDL involve common questions of fact arising out of allegations that Monsanto's Roundup herbicide, particularly its active ingredient, glyphosate, causes non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Like the plaintiffs in the MDL, the Dressel case asserts product liability claims against Monsanto and alleges that exposure to Roundup causes non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and share multiple factual issues with the cases already in the MDL. The panel insists that jurisdictional objections generally do not present an impediment to transfer. Dressel contends that Monsanto improperly removed the action from state court to delay trial, and thus transfer would be unjust and inefficient. The panel, however, lacks the authority to assess the merits of defendant's bases for removal. "We also note that transfer is not likely to result in significant delay with respect to the adjudication of plaintiff's remand motion," rules the panel. "The transferee court has decided numerous remand motions in this MDL, generally in an expeditious fashion. Furthermore, if defendant is, as plaintiff contends, employing questionable removal tactics to delay cases, the transferee court is best placed to recognize and address any problematic removal practices." A full-text copy of the court's December 11, 2025 Transfer Order is available at https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-2741-Transfer_Order-12-25.pdf MDL 2741: Kelly-Leppert v. Monsanto Suit Remanded to E.D. Mo. ------------------------------------------------------------- In the multi-district action captioned "In Re: Roundup Products Liability Litigation," MDL No. 2741, Judge Karen K. Caldwell, Chairperson of the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation has entered an order remanding the case styled as "Kelly−Leppert v. Monsanto Company," C.A. No. 3:21-02910 from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. Consuela E. Kelly-Leppert, who is proceeding pro se, moved to vacate the order that conditionally remanded her case to said court. No party responded to the motion. The panel found that remand of this case is warranted as the transferee judge supervising the litigation's pretrial proceedings suggested remand due to plaintiff's allegations that her deceased husband "was diagnosed with colorectal cancer rather than non-Hodgkin's lymphoma." "This non-NHL diagnosis means that there is little to be gained from adjudicating this case in this MDL," holds the panel. In opposition to remand, the plaintiff argues that decedent's "clinical presentation" supports a diagnosis of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, rather than colorectal cancer and challenges the accuracy of diagnosis. The panel, however, is neither well-situated nor inclined to weigh the merits of decedent's medical history. A full-text copy of the court's December 11, 2025 Transfer Order is available at https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-2741-Remand_Order-12-25.pdf MDL 2873: Panel Denies Transfer of 3 Cases to AFFF Liability Row ---------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Karen K. Caldwell, Chairperson of the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation denied the move to transfer three cases from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia and one each from the Eastern District of Missouri and the District of New Jersey for inclusion in the product liability litigation captioned "In re: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation," MDL NO. 2873. Defendant 3M Company moved to transfer the case, while the Plaintiffs opposed transfer of their respective actions. Said multi-district litigation involves allegations that aqueous film-forming foams (AFFFs) used at airports, military bases, or other locations to extinguish liquid fuel fires caused the release of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and/or perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA; collectively, these and other per- or polyfluoroalkyl substances are referred to as PFAS) into local groundwater and contaminated drinking water supplies. Plaintiffs in the Blymer case allege that they were injured by PFAS releases from Solvay Specialty Polymer's Thorofare Facility, a chemical plant that did not manufacture AFFFs. Because the plaintiffs do not allege injury due to AFFF manufacture, use, or disposal, 3M "bears a significant burden to persuade the panel that transfer is appropriate and will not undermine the efficient progress of the AFFF MDL," notes the panel. The panel concludes that that transfer of the Blymer action is inappropriate. Though 3M argues otherwise as the said action involves the same water supply that is at issue in two cases pending in the MDL, the District of New Jersey, however, is overseeing a consolidated litigation relating to alleged injuries caused by PFAS discharged from Solvay's Thorofare Facility (as well as DuPont's Chambers Works plant), despite having a potential overlap with claims being litigated in the MDL. The consolidated litigation has reached the expert discovery phase with respect to the first-filed actions, with discovery focusing on the Thorofare Facility and its alleged discharges of PFAS. There appears to be ample scope to achieve efficiencies through the consolidated proceeding underway in the District of New Jersey. As for the rest of the cases that 3M moved to transfer, plaintiffs in these actions allege that they or their decedents were injured by exposure to PFAS contained in personal protective equipment and "turnout gear" for firefighters. The panel previously held that transfer is warranted for actions by firefighters who allege "direct exposure" to AFFF through the course of their firefighting duties. None of these plaintiffs, however, alleges exposure to AFFF, but only to PFAS contained in their turnout gear. A full-text copy of the court's December 11, 2025 order is available at https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-2873-Order_Denying_Transfer-12-25.pdf META PLATFORMS: Dawson Sues Over Breach of WhatsApp Users' Privacy ------------------------------------------------------------------ EMMA DAWSON, MICHAEL DAWSON, LUIZ FILHO, ALKA GAUR, DAMIAN REYEZ JAQUEZ, YOLISA MKELE, and FERNANDA TATTO, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. META PLATFORMS, INC. and WHATSAPP, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 3:26-cv-00751-LB (N.D. Cal., January 23, 2026) is a class action brought by the Plaintiffs for Defendants' violations of the Wiretap Act, the California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, the California Invasion of Privacy Act, and the California's Unfair Competition Law. This lawsuit seeks to expose the fundamental privacy violations and fraud Meta is perpetrating against the billions of people worldwide who have used WhatsApp messaging app believing their communications would be private from everyone, even from WhatsApp and Meta. Like other members of the Class, the Plaintiffs are WhatsApp users whose end-to-end encrypted communications have been stored by and accessible to WhatsApp and Meta, notwithstanding WhatsApp's and Meta's assurances to the contrary. The Plaintiffs bring this action to enforce their privacy rights and seek damages and other relief for the harm WhatsApp and Meta have caused them by willfully misrepresenting to them that their private communications were just that -- private and inaccessible even to WhatsApp and Meta. In fact, WhatsApp and Meta have access to all WhatsApp users' encrypted communications in their entirety, alleges the suit. Meta Platforms, Inc. is an American multinational technology company headquartered in Menlo Park, California. Meta owns and operates several social media platforms and communication services, including Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, Messenger, Threads and Manus.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Adam Wolfson, Esq. Stephen A. Broome, Esq. Kevin Teruya, Esq. Valerie Roddy, Esq. Lauren B. Lindsay, Esq. QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP 865 South Figueroa Street, 10th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 443-3000 Facsimile: (213) 443-3100 E-mail: adamwolfson@quinnemanuel.com stephenbroome@quinnemanuel.com kevinteruya@quinnemanuel.com valerieroddy@quinnemanuel.com laurenlindsay@quinnemanuel.com - and - Warren Postman, Esq. Ashley Keller, Esq. J.J. Snidow, Esq. KELLER POSTMAN, LLC 1101 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 1100 Washington, D.C. 20036 Telephone: (833) 633-0118 E-mail: wdp@kellerpostman.com ack@kellerpostman.com jj.snidow@kellerpostman.com - and - Jay W. Barnett, Esq. BARNETT LEGAL, PLLC 3404 NW 135th Street Oklahoma City, OK 73120 Telephone: (405) 456-9343 E-mail: jay@barnettlegal.net MIETHNER CREATIVE: Faces Menendez Over Unsolicited Text Messages ---------------------------------------------------------------- CHELLE MENENDEZ, individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated v. MIETHNER CREATIVE GROUP, LLC D/B/A TRAVEL CAT, Case No. 3:26-cv-00612-GPC-DDL (S.D. Cal., Jan. 30, 2026) contends that the Defendant promotes and markets its merchandise, in part, by sending unsolicited text messages to wireless phone users, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The Plaintiff brings this lawsuit as a class action on behalf of Plaintiff individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated persons pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23. The class that Plaintiff seeks to represent is defined as: "All persons in the United States who from four years prior to the filing of this action through the date of class certification (1) Defendant, or anyone on Defendant's behalf, (2) placed more than one marketing text message within any 12-month period; (3) where such marketing text messages were initiated before the hour of 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m. (local time at the called party's location)." The Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to halt Defendant's unlawful conduct which has resulted in intrusion into the peace and quiet in a realm that is private and personal to Plaintiff and the Class members. Miethner is a creative agency specializing in social media, community building, and event production to help brands engage audiences, particularly millennials.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Gerald D. Lane Jr., Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI 1515 NE 26th Street Wilton Manors, FL 33305 Telephone: (754) 444-7539 E-mail: gerald@jibraellaw.com MINTED LLC: Dalton Files Suit Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ------------------------------------------------------------- Julie Dalton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Minted, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 0:26-cv-00811-JMB-SGE (D. Minn., January 29, 2026) arises because Defendant's Website (www.minted.com) is not fully and equally accessible to people who are blind or who have low vision in violation of both the general non-discriminatory mandate and the effective communication and auxiliary aids and services requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") and its implementing regulations. The complaint relates that the Defendant owns, operates, and/or controls its Website and is responsible for the policies, practices, and procedures concerning the Website's development and maintenance. As a consequence of her experience visiting Defendant's Website, including in the past year, and from an investigation performed on her behalf, Plaintiff found Defendant's Website has a number of digital barriers that deny screen-reader users like Plaintiff full and equal access to important Website content. The Plaintiff and the putative class have been, and in the absence of injunctive relief will continue to be, injured, and discriminated against by Defendant's failure to provide its online Website content and services in a manner that is compatible with screen reader technology, says the suit. In addition to her claim under the ADA, Plaintiff also asserts a companion cause of action under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA). The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction requiring a change in Defendant's corporate policies to cause its online store to become, and remain, accessible to individuals with visual disabilities. The Plaintiff, on behalf of herself and others who are similarly situated, seeks relief including an injunction requiring Defendant to make its Website accessible to Plaintiff and the putative class; and requiring Defendant to adopt sufficient policies, practices, and procedures, the details to ensure that Defendant's Website remains accessible in the future. Plaintiffs also seek an award of statutory attorney's fees and costs, damages, a damages multiplier, a civil penalty, and such other relief as the Court deems just, equitable, and appropriate. Plaintiff Julie Dalton is legally blind and has been a resident of Minnesota. Defendant Minted, LLC is a California Company that offers custom stationary, art, and office supplies for sale including, but not limited to, custom cards, stationary, art prints, custom calendars, invitations, journals, gift wrap, and more.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Chad A. Throndset, Esq. Patrick W. Michenfelder, Esq. Jason Gustafson, Esq. THRONDSET MICHENFELDER, LLC 80 S. 8th Street, Suite 900 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (763) 515-6110 E-mail: chad@throndsetlaw.com pat@throndsetlaw.com jason@throndsetlaw.com NEW JERSEY: Seward Appeals Civil Rights Suit Dismissal to 3rd Cir. ------------------------------------------------------------------ BARRY SEWARD, et al. are taking an appeal from a court order dismissing their lawsuit entitled Barry Seward, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Constance Ludden, et al., Defendants, Case No. 3:24-cv-06295, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. The complaint is brought against the Defendants for civil rights violations. On Aug. 29, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint against the Defendants. On May 16, 2025, the Defendants filed motions to dismiss the amended complaint, which Judge Zahid N. Quraishi granted on Dec. 31, 2025. The Court dismissed Counts I and II of the amended complaint with prejudice and Counts III, IV, V, VI, VII, and VIII without prejudice. The appellate case is entitled Barry Seward, et al. v. Constance Ludden, et al., Case No. 26-1158, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, filed on January 26, 2026. [BN] Plaintiffs-Appellants BARRY SEWARD, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, are represented by: Mark R. Scirocco, Esq. 143 Washington Street Morristown, NJ 07960 Telephone: (973) 691-1188 Defendants-Appellees CONSTANCE LUDDEN, in her official capacity as tax collector for the City of Trenton, et al. are represented by: John W. Bartlett, Esq. MURPHY ORLANDO 494 Broad Street, 5th Floor Newark, NJ 07102 Telephone: (973) 760-0720 - and - Joseph M. Casello, Esq. COLLINS VELLA & CASELLO 2430 Route 34 B12 Manasquan, NJ 08736 Telephone: (732) 751-1766 - and - Jonathan B. Peitz, Esq. James J. Robinson, Esq. Office of Attorney General of New Jersey 25 Market Street Hughes Justice Complex Trenton, NJ 08625 Telephone: (609) 376-2892 (609) 376-2889 - and - M. James Maley, Jr., Esq. MALEY GIVENS 1150 Haddon Avenue, Suite 210 Collingswood, NJ 08108 Telephone: (856) 854-1515 NEW YORK, NY: Minor Suit Removed from State Court to S.D.N.Y. ------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit captioned as LISA MINOR, individually and on behalf of all similarly situated former and current women employees of the New York City Department of Correction, v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Case No. 165420/2025 (Filed by Nov. 25, 2025) was removed from the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on Jan. 30, 2026. The Southern District of New York Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:26-cv-00843 to the proceeding.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: CIVIL RIGHTS CONSORTIUM 411 Theodore Fremd Avenue Rye, NY 10580 - and - DESHA JACKSON LAW GROUP, LLC 4400 Route 9 South, Suite 1000 Freehold, NJ 07728 The Defendant is represented by: Katheirne A. Dunayevich, Esq. URIEL GOODE-TRUFANT 100 Church Street, 2nd Floor New York, NY 10007 Telephone: (212) 356-1955 E-mail: kdunayev@law.nyc.gov NOVO NORDISK: Faces Suit Over Liraglutide Injection Pen Monopoly ---------------------------------------------------------------- J M SMITH CORPORATION d/b/a SMITH DRUG COMPANY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. NOVO NORDISK INC.; and NOVO NORDISK A/S, Defendants, Case No. 1:26-cv-00420 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 23, 2026) alleges violation of the Sherman Act. According to the complaint, the Defendants manufactured and sold Victoza, a branded, pre-filled, multi-dose liraglutide injection pen that is self-administered by patients as indicated to: (i) improve glycemic control in patients 10 years or older with type 2 diabetes; and (ii) reduce the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease. However, the Defendant is engaged in the anticompetitive monopolization scheme by the Defendant to unlawfully prolong Victoza (liraglutide) monopoly and shield Victoza's first-generation GLP-1 blockbuster profits from AB-rated generic competition. This monopolization scheme substantially impaired generic competition for Victoza, and caused significant anticompetitive effects that far outweigh any procompetitive justifications for the conduct, says the suit. Novo Nordisk Inc. provides health care services. The Company offers diabetes and emergency care, hemophilia treatment, patient assistance programs, and other related services. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Dan Litvin, Esq. GARWIN GERSTEIN & FISHER LLP 88 Pine Street, 28th Floor New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 398-0055 Email: bgerstein@garwingerstein.com dlitvin@garwingerstein.com - and - David F. Sorensen, Esq. Caitlin G. Coslett, Esq. Andrew Curley, Esq. Laurel Boman, Esq. BERGER MONTAGUE PC 1818 Market Street, Suite 3600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 875-3000 Email: dsorensen@bergermontague.com ccoslett@bergermontague.com acurley@bergermontague.com lboman@bergermontague.com - and - Peter Kohn, Esq. Joseph Lukens, Esq. FARUQI & FARUQI LLP 1617 JFK Blvd, Suite 1550 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 277-5770 Email: pkohn@faruqilaw.com jlukens@faruqilaw.com - and - Bradley J. Demuth, Esq. FARUQI & FARUQI LLP 685 Third Avenue New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (212) 983-9330 Email: bdemuth@faruqilaw.com - and - Stuart Des Roches, Esq. Dan Chiorean, Esq. Thomas Maas, Esq. Caroline Hoffmann, Esq. ODOM & DES ROCHES LLC 650 Poydras Street, Suite 2020 New Orleans, LA 70130 Telephone: (504) 522-0077 Email: stuart@odrlaw.com dchiorean@ordlaw.com tmaas@ordlaw.com choffmann@odrlaw.com - and - Susan Segura, Esq. David C. Raphael, Esq. SMITH SEGURA RAPHAEL & LEGER LLP 221 Ansley Blvd. Alexandria, LA 71303 Telephone: (318) 445-4480 Email: ssegura@ssrllp.com draphael@ssrllp.com - and - Steven L. Bloch, Esq. Johnathan Seredynski, Esq. SILVER GOLUB & TEITELL LLP One Landmark Square, 15th Floor Stamford, CT 06901 Telephone: (203) 325-4491 Email: sbloch@sgtlaw.com jseredynski@sgtlaw.com - and - Russell A. Chorush, Esq. Christopher M. First, Esq. Kyle Ruvolo, Esq. HEIM PAYNE & CHORUSH LLP 609 Main St., Suite 3200 Houston, TX 77002 Telephone: (713) 221-2000 Email: rchorush@hpcllp.com cfirst@hpcllp.com kruvolo@hpcllp.com O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE: Hatfield Balks at Unfair Tobacco Surcharges ---------------------------------------------------------------- JOHN HATFIELD, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE, INC., Defendant, Case No. 6:26-cv-03030-JAM (W.D. Mo., January 23, 2026) challenges Defendant's unlawful practice of charging a "tobacco surcharge" under the O'Reilly Employee Benefits Plan in a manner that violates the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and the implementing regulations. According to the complaint, the Defendant imposes a discriminatory tobacco surcharge without making available, or notifying participants of, a reasonable alternative standard that provides those who satisfy it with the full reward that non-smokers received, violating federal regulations and depriving employees of benefits to which they are entitled under ERISA. Further, the Defendant imposes the surcharge on employees unless all the members of their household are also tobacco free, conditioning employees' premium payments on another person's health status. At the same time, the Defendant fails to disclose in all Plan materials that participants may qualify for the full reward or that they have the right to a physician-directed alternative, says the suit. The Plaintiff was an employee of O'Reilly who paid the unlawful tobacco surcharge to maintain health insurance coverage under the Plan. This surcharge imposed an additional financial burden on Plaintiff and continues to impose such a burden on those similarly situated. O'Reilly Automotive, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Springfield, Missouri. O'Reilly sponsored, maintained, and administered the Plan.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael D. Pospisil, Esq. POSPISIL SWIFT, LLC 1600 Genessee St., Ste. 340 Kansas City, MO 64102 Telephone: (816) 895-6440 Facsimile: (816) 895-9161 E-mail: mdp@pslawkc.com - and - Oren Faircloth, Esq. William H. Payne, Esq. 745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500 New York, NY 10151 Telephone: (929) 677-5181 E-mail: ofaircloth@sirillp.com wpayne@sirillp.com P.M. RESTAURANT: Quintanilla Seeks Unpaid OT Wages Under FLSA ------------------------------------------------------------- ALEJANDRO QUINTANILLA, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated V. PHILIP MARCARIO and P.M. RESTAURANT ENTERPRISES, INC. d/b/a PHIL'S RESTAURANT, Case No. 2:26-cv-00505 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 28, 2026) seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. The Plaintiff was employed by Defendants as a cook from in or about 1999, to on or about Nov. 20, 2025. The Plaintiff performed non-exempt duties for the Defendants including preparing and cooking food. Phil's Restaurant was and still is a domestic business corporation that operates a restaurant located at 1856 Wading River Manor Road, Wading River, New York City.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: ROMERO LAW GROUP PLLC Matthew J. Farnworth, Esq. 490 Wheeler Road, Suite 277 Hauppauge, New York 11788 Telephone: (631) 257-5588 E-mail: mfarnworth@romerolawny.com PANT SAGGIN: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Martinez Alleges ---------------------------------------------------------------- JUDITH ADELA FERNANDEZ MARTINEZ, on behalf of herself and all other persons similarly situated v. PANT SAGGIN LLC, Case No. 1:26-cv-00814 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 30, 2026) alleges that the Defendant failed to design, construct, maintain, and operate its interactive website, https://www.psd.com/, to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. By failing to make its Website available in a manner compatible with computer screen reader programs, the Defendant deprives blind and visually-impaired individuals the benefits of its online goods, content, and services -- all benefits it affords nondisabled individuals – thereby increasing the sense of isolation and stigma among those persons that Title III was meant to redress. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that Defendant's Website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually impaired consumers. The Defendant operates the PSD online retail store, as well as the PSD interactive website and advertises, markets, and operates in the State of New York and throughout the United States.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq. Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq. Michael A. LaBollita, Esq. GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC 150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR New York, NY 10003 Telephone: (212) 228-9795 Facsimile: (212) 982-6284 E-mail: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal Dana@Gottlieb.legal Michael@Gottlieb.legal PERSONIFY HEALTH: Faces Blalock Suit Over Illegal Data Trackers --------------------------------------------------------------- WENDY BLALOCK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. PERSONIFY HEALTH, INC., a Rhode Island corporation; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Case No. 1:26-cv-00755-FRS (E.D. Cal., Jan. 29, 2026) alleges that the Defendant covertly configured Website to do much more by embedding third-party tracking technology designed to identify visitors and convert their browsing activity into commercially useful intelligence. According to the complaint, the third party is 6sense, a data broker. A "data broker" is a business that profits by collecting and combining consumer personal data across contexts and using it for commercial or other purposes, often outside the consumer's awareness or control. Allegedly, the Defendant embedded 6sense's "anonymous visitor identification" tracking software (the Tracking Beacon) on the Website. 6sense markets this technology as a way for businesses to identify visitors who do not submit forms or otherwise reveal their identity during a visit -- i.e., visitors who wish to remain anonymous through ordinary web browsing. The Defendant operates the commercial website, https://www.personifyhealth.com that invites consumers to browse information about Defendant's healthcare coverage and services in California and throughout the United States.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jaymie Parkkinen, Esq. Camrie Ventry, Esq. TAULER SMITH LLP 626 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 550 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 927-9270 E-mail: jparkkinen@taulersmith.com cventry@taulersmith.com PRO FORM: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Tanchico Alleges ----------------------------------------------------- RENZO TANCHICO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PRO FORM PHYSICAL THERAPY, P.C.; and SAM HANNA, Defendant, Case No. 1:26-cv-00428 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 23, 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 Tanchico was employed by the Defendants as a physical therapist. Pro Form Physical Therapy, P.C. physical therapy services provider. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: John J.P. Howley, Esq. THE HOWLEY LAW FIRM P.C. 1345 Avenue of the Americas, 2nd Floor New York, NY 10105 Telephone: (212) 601-2728 PRYM CONSUMER: Hampton Suit Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ---------------------------------------------------------------- PHYLLIS HAMPTON, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Prym Consumer USA Inc., Case No. 1:26-cv-0099 (N.D. Ill., Jan. 28, 2025) alleges that Violet failed to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website, https://handicraft.com, to be fully accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons in violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act. According to the complaint, the website contains significant access barriers that make it difficult if not impossible for blind and visually-impaired customers to use the website. The Plaintiff is legally blind and a member of a protected class under the ADA. The Defendant provides to the public a wide array of the goods, services, price specials and other programs.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Ohrenberger, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP PLLC 68-29 Main Street Flushing, NY 11367 Telephone: (718) 914-9694 E-mail: mohrenberger@ealg.law RELX INC: Knobler Files Suit Over NY Comic Con's Hidden Ticket Fees ------------------------------------------------------------------- IRA KNOBLER, MURIEL HICKEY, and JAMES PRATER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. RELX, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:26-cv-00786 (S.D.N.Y., January 29, 2026) is a class action against the Defendant for misleadingly and deceptively obscuring the itemization of the extra charges it adds to its ticket prices. The complaint relates that for over three years, the Defendant has been nickel and diming visitors of its New York Comic Con on its website in violation of the New York Arts and Cultural Affairs Law. Whenever a consumer selects an admission ticket on the website https://www.newyorkcomiccon.com/en-us.html he is quoted a fee-less price, only to be ambushed by a non-delineated "Service Fee" at checkout after clicking through the various screens required to make a purchase -- all while a clock is ticking down for the consumer to complete the transaction. Because New York is a busy place, and because these fees are only flashed after a consumer selects his ticket, Defendant can plausibly put its customers on a shot clock and tell them they need to decide quick, because Defendant cannot hold their spots open forever. This cheap trick has enabled Defendant to swindle substantial sums of money from their customers. Moreover, such misleading and deceptive fee disclosures have also independently actionable under New York General Business Law ("GBL"). For these reasons, the Plaintiffs seek relief in this action individually, and on behalf of all other ticket purchasers for Defendant's place of entertainment, New York Comic Con, for statutory and/or actual damages, reasonable attorneys' costs and fees, and injunctive relief under New York Arts and Cultural Affairs Law and New York General Business Law. Plaintiffs Ira Knobler, Muriel Hickey, and James Prater are residents of New York who purchased admission tickets to the New York Comic Con through Defendant's website, https://www.newyorkcomiccon.com/en-us.html. Defendant RELX, Inc. is a Delaware corporation. RX USA is the division of the Defendant corporation that operates the New York Comic Con and its website, https://www.newyorkcomiccon.com/en-us.html. RX USA is located at 401 Merrit 7, Norwalk, Connecticut 06851.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Philip L. Fraietta BURSOR & FISHER, P.A 50 Main Street, Suite 475 White Plains, NY 10606 Telephone: (914) 874-0708 Facsimile: (914) 206-3656 E-mail: pfraietta@bursor.com - and - Stefan Bogdanovich BURSOR & FISHER, P.A 1990 N. California Blvd., 9th Floor Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Telephone: (925) 300-4455 Facsimile: (925) 407-2700 E-mail: sbogdanovich@bursor.com - and - Eleanor R. Grasso BURSOR & FISHER, P.A 1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (646) 837-7150 Facsimile: (212) 989-9163 E-mail: egrasso@bursor.com RIVIAN AUTOMOTIVE: Faces Isted Suit Over Genetic Information ------------------------------------------------------------ BRIDGET LOGSDON-ISTED and MARILYN BYARS individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. RIVIAN AUTOMOTIVE, INC. and RIVIAN AUTOMOTIVE, LLC, Case No. 1:26-cv-01046-JEH-RLH (C.D. Ill., Jan. 30, 2026) seeks to redress and curtail the Defendants' unlawful solicitation and receipt of Plaintiffs' and similarly situated individuals' sensitive and proprietary genetic information in violations of the Illinois Genetic Information Privacy Act. As a condition of employment, the Defendants require employees, including Plaintiffs, to undergo physical exams during which they are required to disclose genetic information, including their family medical histories, the lawsuit says. In requiring workers, such as Plaintiffs, to disclose their family medical histories, the Defendants have violated Plaintiffs' and the other putative Class members' statutory right to genetic privacy. The Defendants chose to disregard Illinois' genetic privacy laws by asking their workers to provide genetic information in the form of family medical histories to assist them in making employment decisions, the suit alleges. The Defendants operate the Rivian vehicle manufacturing plant located at 100 N. Rivian Motorway in Normal, Illinois.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Ryan F. Stephan, Esq. James B. Zouras, Esq. Teresa M. Becvar, Esq. STEPHAN ZOURAS, LLC 222 W. Adams St., Suite 2020 Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 233-1550 Facsimile: (312) 233-1560 E-mail: rstephan@stephanzouras.com jzouras@stephanzouras.com tbecvar@stephanzouras.com SAFELITE GROUP: Winston Sues Over Data Privacy Violations --------------------------------------------------------- MICHAEL WINSTON; and DAVID BUEHLER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. SAFELITE GROUP, INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:26-cv-00739 (N.D. Cal., Jan. 23, 2026) alleges violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Act. The Plaintiffs allege in the complaint that contrary to users' express rejection of cookies and tracking technologies, the Defendant caused cookies, including the Third Parties' cookies, to be sent to the Plaintiffs and other visitors' browsers, stored on their devices, and transmitted to the Third Parties along with user data. These cookies permitted the Third Parties to track and collect data in real time regarding Website visitors' behaviors and communications, including their browsing history, visit history, website interactions, user input data, demographic information, interests and preferences, shopping behaviors, device information, referring URLs, session information, user identifiers, and geolocation data—including whether a user is located in California, says the suit. Safelite Group Inc. repairs and replaces auto glass. The Company also provides window tinting, and installs windshield wipers and truck backslider windows. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Seth A. Safier, Esq. Marie A. McCrary, Esq. Todd Kennedy, Esq. GUTRIDE SAFIER LLP 100 Pine Street, Suite 1250 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 639-9090 Facsimile: (415) 449-6469 Email: seth@gutridesafier.com marie@gutridesafier.com todd@gutridesafier.com SMARTFOODS INC: Popcorn Products Contain Maltodextrin, Flexer Says ------------------------------------------------------------------ ALYSSA FLEXER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. SMARTFOODS, INC. and PEPSICO, INC., Case No. 1:26-cv-00475 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 28, 2026) contends that the Defendants representation to consumers through its packaging that the Products contain "NO ARTIFICIAL COLORS OR FLAVORS" and "NO ARTIFICIAL PRESERVATIVES" are false because the Products do contain a synthetic non-natural flavoring and preservative ingredient: maltodextrin. According to the complaint, the Defendants make these claims in order to capitalize on consumers' preference for natural foods that do not contain synthetic ingredients. The Plaintiff has purchased the Products. Now, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, she asserts claims for violations of New York General Business Law sections 349 and 350, and for breach of express warranty. Smartfoods, Inc. formulate, manufactures, advertises, and sell Smartfood Popcorn in all of its various varieties throughout the United States, including in New York.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joshua D. Arisohn, Esq. ARISOHN LLC 94 Blakeslee Rd. Litchfield, CT 06759 Telephone: (646) 837-7150 E-mail: josh@arisohnllc.com SNAP INC: Ted Entertainment Sues Over Copyright Infringement ------------------------------------------------------------ TED ENTERTAINMENT, INC.; MATT FISHER; and GOLFHOLICS, INC., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. SNAP INC., Defendant, Case No. 2:26-cv-00754 (C.D. Cal., Jan. 23, 2026) alleges violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The Plaintiffs allege in the complaint that the Defendant is engaged in unlawful circumvention of technological measures to access and scrape millions of copyrighted videos from the online video viewing platform, YouTube, in order to feed, train, improve, and commercialize a large-scale generative artificial intelligence model. Snap Inc. provides technology and social media services. The Company develops mobile camera application products and services that allow users to send and receive photos, drawings, text, and videos. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Rom Bar-Nissim, Esq. HEAH BAR-NISSIM LLP 1801 Century Park East, Suite 2400 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 432-2836 Email: Rom@HeahBarNissim.com - and - Jarrett Lee Ellzey, Esq. Tom Kherkher, Esq. Leigh S. Montgomery, Esq. Natischa Volpe, Esq. ELLZEY KHERKHER SANFORD MONTGOMERY LLP 4200 Montrose Street, Suite 200 Houston, TX 77006 Email: JEllzey@EKSM.com TKherkher@EKSM.com LMontgomery@EKSM.com NVolpe@EKSM.com SONESTA INTERNATIONAL: Isaacson Balks at Room Rates' False Ads -------------------------------------------------------------- JACKSON ISAACSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SONESTA INTERNATIONAL HOTELS CORPORATION, Defendant, Case No. 1:26-cv-10351 (D. Mass., January 26, 2026) is a class action under the Massachusetts General Law to stop the Defendant from falsely advertising hotel room rates and to force it to pay back the tens of millions of dollars in unlawful junk fee revenues it has taken from Plaintiff and other consumers together with statutory penalties and punitive damages. Starting around 2021, Sonesta International began systemically cheating consumers each year by falsely advertising its hotel room rates. Rather than disclosing the full cost of its hotel rooms upfront, Sonesta instead advertised a certain rate, then added on last-minute "destination fees," "resort fees," and other similar charges that were really part of the nighty room rate. As a direct and proximate result of Sonesta's deceptive actions, the Plaintiff and the Class members have been harmed and have lost money or property in the amount of the undisclosed, extra-contractual mandatory fees that they paid to Sonesta, says the suit. Sonesta International Hotels Corporation is a multinational hospitality company that owns, manages, and franchises a broad portfolio of hotels and lodging facilities throughout the United States and abroad. It is incorporated in Maryland and headquartered in Newton, Massachusetts.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Katherine M. Aizpuru, Esq. Hassan A. Zavareei, Esq. Robert M. Devling, Esq. TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP 2000 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Suite 1010 Washington, D.C. 20006 Telephone: (202) 973-0900 Facsimile: (202) 973-0950 E-mail: kaizpuru@tzlegal.com hzavareei@tzlegal.com rdevling@tzlegal.com - and - F. Peter Silva II, Esq. TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP 333 H Street, Suite 5000 Chula Vista, CA 91911 Telephone: (510) 254-6810 Facsimile: (202) 973-0950 E-mail: psilva@tzlegal.com SUPERIOR AIR-GROUND: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to March 23 --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Bernstein v. Superior Air-Ground Ambulance Service of Wisconsin Inc., Case No. 2:24-cv-00892 (E.D. Wisc., Filed July 16, 2024), the Hon. Judge entered an order that the time for the Plaintiff to file her motion for class certification is extended until the end of the day on March 23, 2026. The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Defendant provides comprehensive emergency medical transportation.[CC] SUSHI VIDA: Faces Ferreira Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y. --------------------------------------------------------- ALEXIS FERREIRA, Plaintiff v. SUSHI VIDA 146 LLC, SUSHI VIDA INC., BOCADITOS BISTRO AND ESPRESSO BAR LLC, CARMEN SUSANA OSORIO, individually, Defendants, Case No. 1:26-cv-00644 (S.D.N.Y., January 25, 2026) is a class action arising from the Defendants' alleged unlawful labor practices in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New York Labor Law, the Wage Theft Prevention Act, and related provisions from Title 12 of New York Codes, Rules, and Regulations. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants knowingly and willfully failed to pay the required minimum and overtime wages in violation of the FLSA and NYLL; failed to provide notice at time of hiring; and failed to furnish accurate wage statements. The Plaintiff was employed as a cook from July 17, 2024 until January 17, 2026, a period of approximately 18 months. Sushi Vida 146 LLC is engaged in the restaurant business in New York.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Lina Stillman, Esq. STILLMAN LEGAL, P.C. 42 Broadway, 12th Floor New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (212) 203-2417 SYNDICATE ENERGY: Hallouz Seeks FLSA Conditional Certification -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as AHMED HALLOUZ and ALEXANDER WOODMAN, Individually and For Others Similarly Situated v. SYNDICATE ENERGY SERVICES, LLC and ROUND TABLE CONSULTANTS, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-00238-DLH-CRH (D.N.D.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting their motion for Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) conditional certification and issuance of Court-authorized notice. The Plaintiffs request the Court preliminarily certify the Plaintiffs' FLSA claims as a collective action and authorize notice to be sent to the following group of employees: "All current and former employees of Defendants who were paid a day rate and no overtime at any time during the past three (3) years through the present." The Putative Collective Members comprise all of Syndicate Energy Services, LLC and Round Table Consultants, LLC's current and former employees paid a day-rate during the relevant time period. The Plaintiffs readily meet their lenient evidentiary burden at this stage to conditionally certify this case as a collective action under 29 U.S.C. section 216(b), the result of which is merely sending notice to inform the recipients of their rights under the FLSA. To facilitate the remedial purposes of the FLSA's collective action provisions, the Plaintiffs request the Court expeditiously grant this Motion and: (1) conditionally certify the proposed collective of employees; (2) order Defendants to produce a complete and up-to-date list of the names, job titles, last-known mailing addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, dates of employment, and locations worked for the Putative Collective Members within fourteen (14) days of the Court’s order in a computer- readable electronic format, such as Microsoft Excel spreadsheet; (3) authorize a sixty (60) day notice period for Putative Collective Members to join the case if they so choose; (4) approve the notice and consent forms attached to their supporting brief; (5) authorize Plaintiffs’ Counsel to send notice to Putative Collective Members via mail, email, and text message with a text message reminder; and (6) authorize Plaintiffs' Counsel to contact Putative Collective Members by telephone if their mailed or emailed notice and consent forms are returned as undeliverable. Syndicate provides oilfield services in Waterford City, North Dakota. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Jan. 28, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=a8oWR9 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Michael A. Josephson, Esq. Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq. Alyssa J. White, Esq. JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 352-1100 Facsimile: (713) 352-3300 E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com adunlap@mybackwages.com awhite@mybackwages.com - and - Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq. BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 877-8788 Facsimile: (713) 877-8065 E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com TAPESTRY INC: Class Cert Bid in Merrell Suit Stricken ----------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICHARD PAUL MERRELL v. TAPESTRY INC., Case No. 5:25-cv-02510-RGK-MAR (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge R. Gary Klausner entered an order that the following documents be stricken for failure to comply with the Court's Local Rules, General Orders, and/or Case Management Order, as indicated: -- Application to Seal and Motion to Certify Class -- Memorandum lacks word count certification in violation of L.R. 11−6.2 -- Memorandum lacks a word count certificate in violation of L.R. 11−6.2 and is mooted by the striking of the Motion to Certify; Tapestry is a company which designs and markets luxury accessories and lifestyle brands. A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 28, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=4lSegm at no extra charge.[CC] TARGET CORP: Rodriguez Appeals Reconsideration Order to 2nd Circuit ------------------------------------------------------------------- ISAAC RODRIGUEZ is taking an appeal from a court order denying his motion for reconsideration in the lawsuit entitled Carnella Times, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Target Corporation, Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-2993, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The suit is brought against the Defendant for alleged violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. On Dec. 19, 2019, Judge Debra C. Freeman entered an Order conditionally granting final approval of the class action settlement, attorneys' fees and costs, and service award. On Dec. 3, 2024, former class member Isaac Rodriguez filed a motion for relief regarding the Dec. 19 Order. On Dec. 4, 2024, Mr. Rodriguez filed a motion to enforce judgment regarding the Dec. 19 Order and a motion for production of documents. On Apr. 10, 2025, Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein entered an Order denying Mr. Rodriguez's motions for relief, enforce judgment, and production of documents. On Dec. 22, 2025, Mr. Rodriguez filed a motion for reconsideration pursuant to Rule 54 (b), which Judge Gorenstein denied on Dec. 29, 2025. The Court concludes that Rule 54(b) does not provide a source for relief. Mr. Rodriguez has no standing to challenge any aspect of the settlement because he is not a Plaintiff to this action and cannot become one now. The appellate case is captioned Times v. Target Corporation, Case No. 26-203, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, filed on January 30, 2026. [BN] Plaintiff-Appellant ISAAC RODRIGUEZ appears pro se. Defendant-Appellee TARGET CORPORATION is represented by: Joseph George Schmitt, Esq. NILAN JOHNSON LEWIS PA 120 South Sixth Street, Suite 400 Minneapolis, MN 55402 TENNESSEE JACKS: Dillon Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages ---------------------------------------------------------- KIMBERLY DILLON, individually, and on behalf of herself and all other similarly situated current and former employees, Plaintiff v. TENNESSEE JACKS, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 3:26-cv-00031 (E.D Tenn., January 23, 2026) is a class action against the Defendant as a multi-Plaintiff action under the Fair Labor Standards Act to recover unpaid minimum wages, overtime compensation, and other damages owed to Plaintiff and other similarly situated current and former employees of Defendant. The complaint asserts that the Defendant has employed and continues to employ Plaintiff and those similarly situated who are classified as "tipped employees" but who routinely perform non-tip-producing tasks and, thereby, are deprived of the opportunity to earn tips during a significant portion of their respective shifts. The Plaintiff and those similarly situated are entitled to recover at least the applicable FLSA minimum wage rate of pay, and any applicable FLSA overtime compensation rates of pay, for all hours performing such "dual occupation" non-tip producing "side work" duties within weekly pay periods during all times material herein, the complaint asserts. The Plaintiff and similarly situated tipped employees are current or former employees (servers and bartenders) of Defendant during all times pertinent to this action. Tennessee Jacks, LLC owns and operates the Tennessee Jacks restaurant in the Morristown, Tennessee area.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Gordon E. Jackson, Esq. J. Russ Bryant, Esq. J. Joseph Leatherwood, IV, Esq. JACKSON, SHIELDS, HOLT OWEN & BRYANT 262 German Oak Drive Memphis, TN 38018 Telephone: (901) 754-8001 Facsimile: (901) 754-8524 E-mail: gjackson@jsyc.com rbryant@jsyc.com jleatherwood@jsyc.com TIMEX.COM INC: Discloses Customers' Personal Info, Lutge Says ------------------------------------------------------------- TREVOR LUTGE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. TIMEX.COM, INC., Case No. 3:26-cv-00960 (N.D. Cal., Jan. 30, 2026) is a class action lawsuit brought on behalf of all U.S. residents who accessed and navigated www.timex.com and whose electronic communications were intercepted or recorded by advertising technology provided by third parties, including Klaviyo, Inc. According to the complaint, when consumers visit the Website, they are presented with the opportunity to opt out of third-party tracking technologies including those which Defendant uses for targeted advertising and website performance. Unbeknownst to its customers, and contrary to its express assurance that customers have control over the sale and sharing of their personal information, Defendant intercepts and discloses its customers personally identifiable information and product purchase information to unknown third parties -- including, but not limited to, Klaviyo -- even when customers affirmatively disable the tracking technologies. The Defendant aids, agrees with, employs, or otherwise enables third parties, including Klaviyo, to eavesdrop on communications sent and received by Plaintiff and Class Members on the Website that Defendant owns and operates, including communications that contain PII. By failing to procure consent -- and continuing to allow the third parties tracking even after consumers reject the tracking technologies -- the Defendant violated the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and the California Invasion of Privacy Act, alleges the suit. The Plaintiff has visited the Defendant's Website multiple times to purchase various timepieces. For example, on or around February 13, 2025, Plaintiff accessed Defendant's Website -- while in California -- and purchased a Men's Timex Waterbury Traditional G.M.T. 39mm Tan Leather Strap Watch on Defendant's Website. Despite Defendant's representations of confidentiality, the Plaintiff's communications during this visit were intercepted and disclosed to third parties, including Klaviyo, through the tracking technologies, including communications that contained Plaintiff's identity and information about his purchases. Neither Defendant nor Klaviyo procured the Plaintiff's consent prior to these interceptions, nor was Plaintiff on notice of the fact that such interceptions were occurring—in fact, Plaintiff expressly rejected such tracking. Such disclosures are a violation of Plaintiff's privacy and were done intentionally for targeted advertising purposes. The Plaintiff was unaware that Defendant intercepted and disclosed his communications until just prior to filing this lawsuit. Timex is an American watch manufacturer. Timex uses its website as an online marketplace, where consumers can browse, and purchase various timepieces.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Philip L. Fraietta, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 50 Main Street, Suite 475 White Plains, NY 10606 Telephone: (914) 874-0710 Facsimile: (914) 206-3656 E-Mail: pfraietta@bursor.com TIREHUB LLC: Nelson Employment Suit Removed to C.D. Calif. ---------------------------------------------------------- The case styled KRIS NELSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. TIREHUB, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive Defendants, Case No. 30-2025-01529219-CU-OE-CXC, was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange, to the United States District Court for the Central District of California on January 26, 2026. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 8:26-cv-00190 to the proceeding. In the complaint, Plaintiff alleges, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, eight total causes of action, seven of which are for various violations of the California Labor Code and one of which is for "Unfair Competition" under the California Business and Professions Code. TireHub, LLC operates as tire wholesaler company. The Company offers tires and automotive products. TireHub serves customers in the United States.[BN] The Defendant is represented by: Penny Chen Fox, Esq. Zain Zubair, Esq. K&L GATES LLP 10100 Santa Monica Blvd., 8th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 552-5000 Facsimile: (310) 552-5001 E-mail: penny.fox@klgates.com zain.zubair@klgates.com TOPPS COMPANY: Adoni Sues Over False and Misleading Practices ------------------------------------------------------------- Aiton Adoni, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. THE TOPPS COMPANY, INC., Case No. 0:26-cv-60187-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Jan. 23, 2026), is brought against the Defendant to recover injury-in-fact caused by the false, fraudulent, unfair, deceptive, and misleading practices. Specifically, Topps produced the "2025-26 Topps NBA Chrome Basketball Trading Card Mega Box" ("Mega Box") and sold the Mega Box online and in brick-and-mortar retail stores across the country, including a Target store in Broward County, Florida. Based on Topps' representation on the outside of the box, consumers, like Plaintiff, purchased the Mega Box with the reasonable belief that they have a chance to obtain a Blue X Fractor card with resale value. However, on or around January 13, 2026, Topps revealed there is zero chance a consumer will obtain a Blue X-Fractor in the Mega Box. Topps disclosed this in an email to its customers and subscribers. Initially, Topps initially told consumers some Mega Boxes did not contain any Blue X-Fractor cards due to a printing error. Thereafter, Topps confessed that no Mega Boxes include Blue X-Fractor cards, despite Topps' prior representation to the contrary. The Plaintiff and each member of the proposed Class suffered an injury-in-fact caused by the false, fraudulent, unfair, deceptive, and misleading practices set forth herein, lost the benefit of their bargains with Topps, and seek all relief allowed by law, including damages, equitable relief, attorneys' fees, and costs, says the complaint. The Plaintiff purchased the Mega Box in store from his local Target on December 22, 2025. Topps manufactures, advertises, and sells Topps-branded sports and entertainment trading cards, sports memorabilia, and digital collectibles for personal collection and/or for commrcial resale.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeff Ostrow, Esq. Andrew Hausdorff, Esq. KOPELOWITZ OSTROW, P.A. 1 West Las Olas Blvd., Suite 500 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: (954) 525-4100 Email: ostrow@kolawyers.com hausdorff@kolawyers.com TRANSPORTATION CONCEPTS: Palacio Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. -------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Transportation Concepts, Inc. The case is styled as Towana Palacio, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Transportation Concepts, Inc., Case No. 26STCV02717 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Jan. 26, 2026). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." Transportation Concepts, Inc. -- https://tcitransportation.com/ -- operate full-service facilities in locations all across the country and boast a fleet of more than 2500 trucks, tractors, and trailers.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher Hamner, Esq. HAMNER LAW OFFICES, APLC 26565 Agoura Rd., Ste. 200 Calabasas, CA 91302-1990 Phone: 888-416-6654 Email: chamner@hamnerlaw.com TYLER TECHNOLOGIES: Hardy-Gerena Seeks to Hold Class Cert Deadline ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as GIORDANO HARDY-GERENA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. TYLER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-04345-CJN (D.D.C.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting its motion to hold the class certification deadline in abeyance pending the Court's resolution of the Defendant's motion to dismiss. In the event this case proceeds, the parties will confer regarding renewed deadlines for class certification briefing and include their proposal(s) in their LCvR 16.3(c) Report filed with the Court. Pursuant to LCvR 23-I(b), the deadline to file for class certification is currently Feb. 16, 2026. However, it is impracticable for the Plaintiff to move for class certification by this date, as the Defendant has filed a motion to dismiss, which remains pending. It is thus unlikely any meaningful class certification discovery will occur before the current deadline, as discovery will not commence until resolution of the Defendant's motion and the parties have an opportunity to confer pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f). Tyler is a provider of proprietary software to the United States public sector. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 28, 2026, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=zLREyg at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Randolph T. Chen, Esq. Jason S. Rathod, Esq. Nicholas A. Migliaccio, Esq. MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD LLP 412 H St., NE, Suite 302 Washington, DC 20002 Telephone: (202) 470-3520 Facsimile: (202) 800-2730 E-mail: rchen@classlawdc.com UNITED STATES: Appeals Court Order in Ovando Suit to 10th Circuit ----------------------------------------------------------------- KRISTI NOEM, in her official capacity as Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), et al. are taking an appeal from a court order granting the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification and motion for a preliminary injunction in the lawsuit entitled Refugio Ramirez Ovando, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Kristi Noem, in her official capacity as Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), et al., Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-03183-RBJ, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. The case arises from the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) alleged practice in Colorado of arresting individuals suspected of being unlawfully present without a warrant and without making the individualized flight-risk determination. On Oct. 9, 2025, the Plaintiffs filed motions for a preliminary injunction and provisional class certification. On Nov. 25, 2025, Judge R. Brooke Jackson entered an Order granting the Plaintiffs' motion to certify class and granting in part and denying in part their motion for a preliminary injunction. The appellate case is captioned Refugio Ramirez Ovando, et al. v. Kristi Noem, in her official capacity as Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), et al., Case No. 26-1027, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, filed on January 26, 2026. [BN] Plaintiffs-Appellants REFUGIO RAMIREZ OVANDO, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, are represented by: Anna I. Kurtz, Esq. Emma K. Mclean-Riggs, Esq. Sara R. Neel, Esq. Scott Charles Medlock, Esq. Timothy R. Macdonald, Esq. ACLU of Colorado 303 East 17th Avenue, Suite 350 Denver, CO 80203 Telephone: (720) 402−3137 (720) 248−8848 (720) 402−3107 (720) 248−0553 (720) 402−3151 Email: akurtz@aclu−co.org emcleanriggs@aclu−co.org sneel@aclu−co.org smedlock@aclu−co.org tmacdonald@aclu−co.org - and - Bianca Elan Miyata, Esq. Sean C. Grimsley, Esq. Kenzo Sunao Kawanabe, Esq. OLSON GRIMSLEY KAWANABE HINCHCLIFF & MURRAY LLC 700 17th Street, Suite 1600 Denver, CO 80202 Telephone: (970) 535−3226 (303) 535−5191 Email: bmiyata@olsongrimsley.com sgrimsley@olsongrimsley.com kkawanabe@olsongrimsley.com - and - Hans Christopher Meyer, Esq. THE MEYER LAW OFFICE, PC P.O. Box 40394 1547 North Gaylord Street Denver, CO 80204 Telephone: (303) 831−0817 Facsimile: (720) 210−9858 Email: hans@themeyerlawoffice.com Defendants-Appellees KRISTI NOEM, in her official capacity as Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), et al. are represented by: Brad E. Leneis, Esq. Logan P. Brown, Esq. Nicholas Albert Deuschle, Esq. U.S. Attorney's Office District of Colorado 1801 California Street, Suite 1600 Denver, CO 80202 Telephone: (303) 454−0100 Email: brad.leneis2@usdoj.gov logan.brown@usdoj.gov Nick.Deuschle@usdoj.gov UNITED STATES: Sued Over Detention Center's Inhumane Conditions --------------------------------------------------------------- L.T., SEVAK MESROBIAN, JOSE MAURO SALAZAR GARZA, AND J.M., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated; COALITION FOR HUMANE IMMIGRANT RIGHTS, Plaintiffs v. U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT; TODD M. LYONS, Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; JAIME RIOS, Acting Director of Los Angeles Field Office, Enforcement and Removal Operations, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; KRISTI NOEM, Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Defendants, Case No. 5:26-cv-00322 (C.D. Cal., January 26, 2026) seeks to end the alleged inhumane and illegal conditions faced by Plaintiffs and other immigrants detained at Adelanto ICE Processing Center -- one of the largest immigration detention centers in the United States. According to the complaint, the Defendants target immigrants at a breakneck pace, through a vicious pipeline of incarceration and oppression: first, by racially profiling them and aggressively seizing them off the street; then, by imprisoning them in a squalid, cramped temporary holding facility known as B-18, located in the basement of a federal building in downtown Los Angeles; and finally, by transferring them to Adelanto, where they are left to endure intolerable conditions as they await their immigration case -- or agree to deportation. These abusive practices seek to force detained immigrants to surrender important statutory and constitutional rights and send a message to other immigrants to "self-deport." The Defendants' actions at Adelanto are part of a policy and practice that seeks to degrade, dehumanize, and demonize immigrants, stripping them of dignity in the process, says the suit. The Plaintiffs are four detained individuals who seek to represent a class of all people who are or will be detained at Adelanto, and an organization that defends and advocates on behalf of and with immigrants. They ask this Court to end the unlawful and unconstitutional conditions at Adelanto, prohibit Defendants from violating their civil, constitutional, and human rights, and require Defendants to provide lawfully adequate conditions. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is a component agency of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The ICE is responsible for the criminal and civil enforcement of immigration laws, including the detention and removal of immigrants.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Rebecca Brown, Esq. Sophia Wrench, Esq. Amelia Piazza, Esq. Vanessa Rae Young, Esq. Elizabeth Hercules-Paez, Esq. 610 S. Ardmore Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90005 Telephone: (213) 385-2977 E-mail: rbrown@publiccounsel.org swrench@publiccounsel.org apiazza@publiccounsel.org vyoungviniegra@publiccounsel.org eherculespaez@publiccounsel.org - and - Alvaro M. Huerta, Esq. Alison Steffel, Esq. Carson Adrianna Scott, Esq. IMMIGRANT DEFENDERS LAW CENTER 634 S. Spring St., 10th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90014 Telephone: (213) 634-0999 E-mail: ahuerta@immdef.org asteffel@immdef.org cscott@immdef.org - and - Carl Bergquist, Esq. Adam Reese, Esq. COALITION FOR HUMANE IMMIGRANT RIGHTS 2351 Hempstead Road Ottawa Hills, OH 43606 Telephone: (310) 279-6025 E-mail: cbergquist@chirla.org areese@chirla.org - and - Nicholas Reddick, Esq. Alyxandra Vernon, Esq. Jacob Karim, Esq. WILKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP 333 Bush St., 34th Floor San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 858-7400 E-mail: nreddick@willkie.com avernon@willkie.com jkarim@willkie.com UPPER EAST SIDE FOOD: Flores Sues Over Unpaid Compensations ----------------------------------------------------------- Jorge Flores, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all similarly situated employees v. UPPER EAST SIDE FOOD CORP., EAST SIDE PIZZA CORP. (D/B/A LA MIA PIZZA), HESHAM ATTIA and RICHARD ATTIA, individually, Case No. 1:26-cv-00667 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 26, 2026), is brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), the New York Labor Law ("NYLL") as amended by the Wage Theft Prevention Act ("WTPA"), and related provisions from Title 12 of the New York Codes, Rules, and Regulations ("NYCRR") to recover, inter alia, unpaid minimum and overtime wage compensation for Plaintiff. The Defendants were required, under the FLSA and NYLL to pay Plaintiff overtime compensation at one and one-half times his regular rate for all hours worked in excess of 40 per week. Plaintiff worked approximately 54 hours per week (9 hours daily, 6 days per week) throughout his employment. The Defendants were required, under the FLSA and NYLL, to compensate Plaintiff with overtime pay at one and one-half times the regular rate for work in excess of 40 hours per workweek. However, despite such mandatory pay obligations, Defendants knowingly and willfully failed to pay Plaintiff his lawful overtime pay at one and one-half times the regular rate for work in excess of 40 hours per week for the period, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed as a full-time employee by Defendants. The Defendants owned and operated UPPER EAST SIDE FOOD CORP. and EAST SIDE PIZZA CORP. (D/B/A LA MIA PIZZA), corporate entities principally engaged in the restaurant business.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Lina Stillman, Esq. STILLMAN LEGAL, P.C. 42 Broadway, 12t Floor New York, NY 10004 Phone: (212) 203-2417 Web: www.StillmanLegalPC.com VITAS HOSPICE: Walton Suit Removed to C.D. California ----------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Frankie Walton, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. VITAS HOSPICE SERVICES, LLC, and DOES 1-100, Case No. 30-2025-01533254-CU-BT-CXC was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of Orange, to the United States District Court for the Central District of California on Jan. 23, 2026, and assigned Case No. 8:26-cv-00170. The Plaintiff is a patient of Vitas Hospice Services who alleges that Vitas Hospice Services failed to safeguard the individual identifiable medical information associated with Plaintiff and other Vitas Hospice Services patients. She brings a putative class action alleging a claim for violations of the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, California Civil Code; California Consumer Privacy Act, California Civil Code; California Privacy Rights Act, California Civil Code; and California Unfair Competition Law, California Business and Professions Code. The Complaint seeks injunctive relief, actual and statutory damages, punitive damages, attorneys' fees, expenses, pre-judgment interest, post-judgment interest, and costs.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Spencer S. Persson, Esq. Mark C. Burnside, Esq. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 350 South Grand Avenue, 27th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Phone: (213) 633-6800 Facsimile: (213) 633-6899 Email: spencerpersson@dwt.com markburnside@dwt.com WAYFAIR LLC: Faces Prakash Suit Over False Ads & Misleading Pricing ------------------------------------------------------------------- POOJA PRAKASH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. WAYFAIR LLC, Case No. 2:26-cv-00263-DAD-CKD (E.D. Cal., Jan. 30, 2026) arises from the Defendant's false advertising and misleading pricing in violation of the California's False Advertising Law, California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act and California’s Unfair Competition. The Plaintiff purchased Products from the Defendant at prices that purported to represent discounts off of falsely represented strikethrough prices. Based on Defendant's unlawful conduct. The Defendant's business model relies heavily on price-comparison advertising to sell products. The products in question in this case are those that Defendant advertises for sale on its Website at prices listed alongside higher strikethrough prices, with representations that the listed price represents a limited-time "sale" or a substantial percentage-off discount (e.g., "34% Off") from the purportedly regular strikethrough price (the "Products"). In reality, however, the Defendant does not regularly sell, and has not recently sold, the Products at the higher strikethrough prices that it lists on its Website alongside the purported "sale" or percentage-based discounted prices for these Products. Rather, Products sold on Defendant's Website are either always or almost always offered at the purported "sale" or discounted prices, and either never or almost never at the strikethrough prices. The strikethrough prices listed for Defendant's Products are thus false reference points intended to make the Products appear like unusually good, limited-time bargains at the advertised "sale" or discounted prices, alleges the suit. Wayfair sells furniture, mattresses, home décor, lighting, rugs, bedding, kitchen products, and other home furnishings through its e-commerce website, www.wayfair.com, and mobile applications.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Adrian Gucovschi, Esq. Nathaniel Haim Sari, Esq. GUCOVSCHI LAW FIRM, PLLC 140 Broadway, 46th Floor New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 884-4230 E-Mail: adrian@gucovschilaw.com nathaniel@gucovschilaw.com - and - Frank S. Hedin, Esq. HEDIN LLP 1395 Brickell Ave., Suite 610 Miami, FL 33131-3302 Telephone: (305) 357-2107 Facsimile: (305) 200-8801 E-Mail: fhedin@hedinllp.com WE PACK IT ALL: Mantilla Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against We Pack It All, LLC. The case is styled as Beatriz Mantilla, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated v. We Pack It All, LLC, Case No. 26STCV02468 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Jan. 23, 2026). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." WePackItAll -- https://www.wepackitall.com/ -- is a leading contract packaging and service company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David Lavi, Esq. E&L, LLP 8889 W. Olympic Blvd., 2nd Floor Beverly Hills, CA 90211 Phone: 213-213-0000 Fax: 213-213-0025 Email: dlavi@ebralavi.com WENDY NICHOLS: McBride Files Suit in M.D. Pennsylvania ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Wendy Nichols. The case is styled as Amy McBride, and all others similarly situated v. Wendy Nichols, Superintendent of SCI-Muncy, Case No. 4:26-cv-00162-MWB-MP (M.D. Pa., Jan. 23, 2026). The nature of suit is stated as Prisoner Civil Rights. Wendy Nichols is the Superintendent of State Correctional Institution – Muncy (SCI Muncy) which is a Pennsylvania Department of Corrections prison for women in Clinton Township, Lycoming County, near Muncy.[BN] The Plaintiff appears pro se. WESTMORELAND ROSEBUD: Harris Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages Under FLSA --------------------------------------------------------------- DYLAN HARRIS, individually and for others similarly situated v. WESTMORELAND ROSEBUD MINING LLC, Case No. 1:26-cv-00347 (D. Colo., Jan. 28, 2026) seeks to recover unpaid wages and other damages from Westmore in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, Westmoreland pays the Plaintiff and the other hourly employees by the hour. Plaintiff Harris and the other hourly employees regularly work more than 40 hours, but Westmoreland does not pay them for all their hours worked, including overtime hours. Instead, Westmoreland requires the Plaintiff and the other hourly employees to put on safety gear and equipment necessary to perform their job duties and participate in safety and production meetings, while on Westmoreland's premises, "off the clock," says the suit. Plaintiff Harris was employed by the Defendant as a welder from June 2018 until September 2025. Westmoreland owns and operates the Rosebud Mine in Colstrip, Montana, a major surface coal mine providing fuel to the nearby Colstrip Power Plant. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael A. Josephson, Esq. Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq. Alyssa J. White, Esq. JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLC 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 352-1100 Facsimile: (713) 352-3300 E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com adunlap@mybackwages.com awhite@mybackwages.com - and - Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq. BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025 Houston, Texas 77046 Telephone: (713) 877-8788 Facsimile: (713) 877-8065 E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com WHAT WE MAKE: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Bennett Alleges ------------------------------------------------------------------ LIVINGSTON BENNETT, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. What We Make, Inc., Case No. 1:26-cv-01067 (N.D. Ill., Jan. 29, 2026) alleges that the Defendant failed to design, construct, maintain, and operate its Website https://wwmake.com/, to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff See and other blind or visually-impaired individuals. The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who requires screen-reading software to read website content using his computer. He uses the terms "blind" or "visually impaired" to refer to individuals who meet the legal definition of blindness, in that they have a visual acuity with correction of less than or equal to 20 x 200. Some individuals who meet this definition have limited vision; others have no vision. The Defendant is denying blind and visually impaired individuals throughout the United States equal access to the goods and services Defendant provides to their non-disabled customers through the website. The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and therefore denial of its products and services offered, and in conjunction with its physical locations, is a violation of Plaintiff See's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, says the suit. The Defendant operates the website that provides to the public a wide array of the goods, services, price specials, and other programs.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Alison Chan, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC 68-29 Main Street Flushing, NY 11367 Telephone: (463) 777-4196 E-mail: Achan@ealg.law X.AI CORP: Doe Suit Alleges Harm From AI Deepfake Images -------------------------------------------------------- JANE DOE, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. X.AI CORP. and X.AI LLC, Defendants, Case No. 5:26-cv-00772 (N.D. Cal., January 23, 2026) is a class action against the Defendants over xAI's product Grok, a generative artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot that humiliates and sexually exploits women and girls by undressing them and posing them in sexual positions in deepfake images publicly posted on X social networking site. A deepfake is a video, image, etc. in which a person's face, body, or voice has been digitally altered so that they appear to be someone else or to be doing something they did not actually do, typically used maliciously or to spread false information. AI companies like xAI are familiar with these dangers to women and girls that their technology enables. xAI, however, has chosen instead to capitalize on the internet's seemingly insatiable appetite for humiliating non-consensual sexual images. xAI's product Grok has not only failed to conform to industry standards, but it has also aggressively touted its noncompliance as a selling point. xAI's comes with a "spicy" mode known for generating revealing and sexualized deepfakes, alleges the suit. The Plaintiff asserts that xAI's conduct is despicable and has harmed thousands of women who were digitally stripped and forced into sexual situations that they never consented to and who now face the very real risk that those public images will surface in their lives where viewers may not be able to distinguish whether they are real or fake. xAI Corp. owns the generative AI chatbot known as Grok and maintains offices in San Francisco, California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Sophia M. Rios, Esq. BERGER MONTAGUE PC 8241 La Mesa Blvd., Suite A La Mesa, CA 91942 Telephone: (619) 489-0300 E-mail: srios@bergermontague.com - and - E. Michelle Drake, Esq. BERGER MONTAGUE PC 1229 Tyler Street NE, Suite 205 Minneapolis, MN 55413 Telephone: (612) 594-5999 E-mail: emdrake@bergermontague.com - and - James Hannaway, Esq. BERGER MONTAGUE PC 1001 G Street, NW Suite 400 East Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: (202) 559-9740 E-mail: jhannaway@bergermontague.com YESHIVAT SHAARE: Beras Sues Over Unpaid Minimum and Overtime Wages ------------------------------------------------------------------ Gregorio Beras, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all similarly situated employees v. YESHIVAT SHAARE TORAH, INC., Case No. 1:26-cv-00437 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 26, 2026), is brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), the New York Labor Law ("NYLL") as amended by the Wage Theft Prevention Act ("WTPA"), and related provisions from Title 12 of the New York Codes, Rules, and Regulations ("NYCRR") to recover, inter alia, unpaid minimum and overtime wage compensation for Plaintiff. The Defendant was required, under relevant New York State law, to pay Plaintiff overtime compensation at one and one-half times his regular rate for all hours worked in excess of 40 per week. The Defendant was required, under relevant New York State law, to compensate Plaintiff with overtime pay at one and one half the regular rate for work in excess of 40 hours per work week. The Defendants maintained a policy and practice of requiring Plaintiff to work without providing the overtime compensation required by federal and state law and regulations. Upon information and belief, Defendants' conduct extended to other similarly situated employees, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was hired by Defendant on August 15, 2021, and his employment ended on December 31, 2025. The Defendants owned and operated YESHIVAT SHAARE TORAH INC, a corporate entity operating a Yeshiva with food service operations in Brooklyn, New York.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Lina Stillman, Esq. STILLMAN LEGAL, P.C. 42 Broadway, 12t Floor New York, NY 10004 Phone: (212) 203-2417 Web: www.StillmanLegalPC.com Asbestos Litigation ASBESTOS UPDATE: JM Eagle Sues Law Firm Over Bogus Asbestos Cases ----------------------------------------------------------------- Laurence Darmiento, writing for LAtimes.com, reports that a Los Angeles pipe manufacturer that has been sued thousands of times for allegedly causing asbestos-related disease in workers handling its products is accusing a leading law firm of filing fraudulent cases. J-M Manufacturing, which does business as JM Eagle, filed a federal RICO lawsuit Wednesday in Illinois alleging the Gori Law Firm in Edwardsville, Ill., brought sham lawsuits against it as part of a strategy to reach costly mass settlements. The lawsuit alleges the law firm's plaintiffs — who might suffer from lung cancer or mesothelioma, a rare aggressive organ cancer caused by asbestos — were coached by trained attorneys to identify the company's pipe as the source of their exposure, even when that was demonstrably false. It accuses the law firm of a "systematic scheme of fraud operating beneath the surface of ostensibly ordinary asbestos litigation." The company said it learned of the alleged fraud after a former firm attorney came forward. "We are outraged by these ridiculous claims from an asbestos company. These scare tactics will not stop us from fighting for justice for our clients who are hurt by manufacturers like J-M Manufacturing Co.," the firm said in response to the lawsuit. Asbestos is a mined fibrous silicate that was widely used in home insulation, automobiles and other applications through the 1970s until its use was slowly phased out as its health impacts became widely known. JM Eagle is a large producer of plastic and PVC pipe, a business it got into in 1982 after purchasing those operations from Johns-Manville Corp., which went bankrupt because of asbestos claims. It is privately held by Los Angeles billionaire Walter Wang, chairman and chief executive, and has about $2 billion in annual revenue. The company also supplied asbestos-cement pipe from 1983 to 1988 used by municipal water systems, sewer systems and other customers. The company contends the pipe poses no health threat unless improperly handled, such as by cutting it with a power saw or drill. This is the second RICO, or Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, lawsuit filed by JM Eagle against big plaintiff firms, which advertise widely for clients suffering from asbestos-related illnesses and then file cases against makers of products containing the mineral. The federal lawsuits, which originally targeted organized crime, are commonly filed in big civil disputes because they allow for triple damages. However, they are complex to litigate since a conspiracy must be proven among the defendants in addition to any wrongdoing. The first lawsuit was brought in May 2024 against Simmons Hanly Conroy, an Alton, Ill., firm JM Eagle says filed more than 430 cases against it since 2001. It similarly accused the law firm of coaching patients with asbestos diseases to incorrectly identify the company as the source of their exposure. The firm's website says it has recovered over $10.7 billion for its clients. JM Eagle said in its lawsuit that it became aware of the alleged fraud after a former Simmons attorney hired to handle asbestos cases was terminated and filed a lawsuit accusing the firm of unlawful and unethical conduct. The law firm and its former employee later reached a private settlement. JM Eagle alleges that it conducted reviews of past Simmons and Gori cases and found ones that were blatantly bogus, such as those involving plaintiffs who had stopped working before the company supplied its asbestos pipe. It alleges the cases were filed in plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions and used as "bargaining chips" by the firms, which would agree to dismiss them in negotiating a settlement. A judge dismissed the Simmons lawsuit last year, ruling JM Eagle had failed to properly allege a conspiracy as required under RICO law. However, the company amended the lawsuit in November by adding a second firm it said fed leads to Simmons. John Storino, an attorney representing Simmons and other defendants, called the amended lawsuit a "recycled version of claims the court has already rejected." It is estimated by ratings agency A.M. Best that insurers have spent more than $100 billion paying asbestos-related claims since the 1970s. The cases are ongoing, with plaintiffs also filing claims against the trusts of companies bankrupted by the litigation. Payouts to mesothelioma victims can top $1 million. Consulting firm KCIC found that the number of cases filed in the first half of last year rose 4% to more than 4,300. Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen, a Washington, D.C.-based consumer group, characterized the JM Eagle litigation as dismissive of even legitimate asbestos claims, noting victims suffer a "horrible, painful early death" by the tens of thousands even today. "It is 100% true that law firms advertise for asbestos victims and help them identify who might have exposed them to asbestos and develop the cases. They're doing a public service by doing it and helping victims realize if they're sick, there's compensation available to them," he said. Weissman, an attorney, said that if law firms are filing bogus cases, defendants can seek sanctions from judges, who take such allegations "incredibly seriously" rather than filing a "powerful" RICO case with triple damages. "Even if this case is ultimately dismissed, it is intended to deter others from bringing these cases, and will for sure deter or prevent individuals who have legitimate asbestos exposure claims for bringing their cases forward," he said. The company said it has tried to raise the fraud issue in individual cases but has not been successful. It also defended its use of the RICO statute as appropriate. In its Simmons litigation, JM Eagle alleges the fraud was shown through the comparison of multiple cases in which plaintiffs make specific claims about the source of their asbestos exposure — JM Eagle's pipes — while being unable to recall much else, making it hard to dispute the allegations. ********* 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 ***