Hey, this is an English text. I want you to translate it into the Tunisian dialect. Please follow these steps:
1. Translate step by step and highlight differences between Tunisian dialect and Modern Standard Arabic.
2. Highlight sections you are confident translating into the Tunisian dialect.
Translate this text into the Tunisian dialect, focusing on capturing the essence of the language nuances:

A class-action lawsuit says the Minnesota Department of Commerce designed a system to collect unclaimed property and money that benefits government coffers but leaves rightful property owners in the dark. The suit, filed this week in Ramsey County District Court, says “Minnesota’s policy of taking possession of property it knows it does not own and then selling, keeping, or otherwise benefiting from” the property — valued at more than $600 million — “violates the due process clauses of the United States and Minnesota constitutions.” The suit was filed by Timothy Hall Jr., who claims he didn’t get a final paycheck after he left a retail job and never got notice it was available. He was alerted to his unclaimed property by his father, who found it on missingmoney.com, the website the state uses to help people track their property, the lawsuit said. Hall’s attorney, Dan Hedlund of the firm Gustafson Gluek in Minneapolis, said his client pursued a class-action suit because “he wasn’t pleased with the situation of people not getting their money back. And he was surprised to find out that he had money owed to him that he hadn’t received notice about.” The lawsuit’s main points: — The state has made great efforts to collect unclaimed property, which includes money and personal items, but has made little effort to notify property owners who can claim what belongs to them. — The unclaimed money goes into the state’s general fund, meaning the “state has profited enormously,” the suit asserts. The class action asks the court to determine whether the state’s seizure of unclaimed property without notifying owners constitutes a “taking” — in violation of the Fifth Amendment, which requires “just compensation” if private property is taken for public use. It also asks for a ruling on whether the state’s use of a website where people can search for their names is adequate notification. Unclaimed property in Minnesota is overseen by the state Department of Commerce and regulated by the state’s Unclaimed Property Act, which was enacted in 1969 and has been amended several times. Before the court weighs in on the issues, the Unclaimed Property Act could change again. Rep. Joe Atkins, DFL-Inver Grove Heights, has introduced a bill that addresses the same concerns as the lawsuit. It is awaiting a floor vote in the House, Atkins said. Atkins proposes adding three requirements: — Publication of property owners’ names in a newspaper. — Proactive efforts to notify owners they have unclaimed property being held. — Providing names of property owners to legislators, who would conduct their own outreach to constituents on the list. “We have a lot of other people’s money that belongs to them, not us, and we ought to be doing a better job of getting it back to the rightful owners,” Atkins said. Atkins said the state ramped up efforts about 10 years ago to collect unclaimed assets from insurance companies and other financial institutions, which resulted in huge increases to the funds. The value of