Source: http://www.bankrupt.com/CAR_Public/130605.mbx
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 21:01:39+00:00

Document:
APPLE INC: Faces Class Action Over iPad 3 "Planned Obsolescence"
White and Nicole Carroll, Plaintiffs, v. 14051 Manchester, Inc.
States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division.
Plaintiffs in the Rule 23 class action.
Commission for the quarter ended March 31, 2013.
a corporation) ("Merger Sub") and Transatlantic Holdings, Inc.
filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
with the merger, among other allegations.
paid, or cause to be paid, by TransRe.
amended on September 15, 2010 and on December 17, 2010.
omissions in a registration statement filed in January 2010.
upon which relief could be granted.
Appeals heard oral argument on May 11, 2012.
En Banc, asking the Court of Appeals to reconsider its decision.
must be filed by June 13, 2013.
Trust III, Inc. and American Realty Capital Properties, Inc.
quarter ended March 31, 2013.
transactions contemplated under the Merger Agreement.
behalf of the alleged class of ARCT III stockholders.
reasonableness and adequacy of the settlement.
this matter are not determinable.
and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended March 31, 2013.
against Anadarko and certain of its officers.
related to the Deepwater Horizon events.
plaintiffs claim has made the 3rd generation iPad obsolete.
annual product release cycle, amounts to "planned obsolescence"
that harms customers who purchased the iPad 3.
units sold in the country.
REIT Six, Inc.'s May 6, 2013, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
the consolidated matter to be In re Apple REITs Litigation.
Company was previously named as a party in the Kronberg, et al. v.
lawsuit, which was filed on June 20, 2011.
directors and certain officers, and David Lerner Associates, Inc.
Laurie Brody v. David Lerner Associates, Inc., et al., Case No.
only), and for violation of New Jersey's state securities laws.
completed on July 13, 2012.
Exchange Commission for the quarter ended March 31, 2013.
corporation, challenging the proposed transaction.
Global Investors, Inc., et al., Case No. 8347-VCL, Waldner v.
Artio Global Investors Inc., et al., No. 8376 and Hunt v.
al., No. 650625/2013 and Dart Seasonal Products Retirement Plan v.
Robert Jackson, et al., No. 650713/2013.
Subsidiary aided and abetted such breaches.
in the plaintiffs' view, omitted certain material information.
merits and a customary release of defendants.
A putative class action lawsuit, Harris v. Associated Bank, N.A.
the court on July 26, 2012.
claimed in some of the cases range into the billions of dollars.
believes "hadn't even been certified for trial."
-- or $9 a year -- for a service that isn't available.
customers if that service isn't available.
local governments," he said in an e-mail.
action lawsuit in the Northwest Territories.
be corrected in our view."
to the Supreme Court of Canada.
contract with Bell before April 13, 2010.
Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
people with a common interest in a matter to sue as a group.
whose firm is representing the plaintiffs.
chemical dispersants had been injected into the Gulf of Mexico.
individuals with respect to filing class action lawsuits.
Carl Barbier in New Orleans.
sentenced to pay 4.5 billion dollars in penalties and fines.
to wind its way through the courts.
predecessor Felipe Calderon (2006-December 2012) failed to do so.
The government's lawsuit will fall under MDL-2179.
environment, the coastline, and local estuaries.
related to the disaster, the state governments argued.
said. "The Mexican state has not been very participative.
spills in the southeast state of Tabasco.
occurs under the U.S. justice system.
in this country's Gulf of Mexico waters.
"It is an aberration," Mr. Preciado remarked.
Superior Court in San Francisco.
to plead the same four causes of action pled in the Amador action.
being handled by the same judge.
the Court entered a final judgment on the settlement.
not subject to the Amador settlement.
San Francisco County Superior Court entitled Andrade, et al. v.
class members, and therefore not subject to the Amador settlement.
18, 2013, new counsel filed a complaint entitled Coleman, et al.
appear to be persons who opted out of the class action settlement.
None of these four suits are being prosecuted as a class action.
of the repealed California Education Code.
their claims. 80 of these plaintiffs are represented by counsel.
represented by counsel and 4 pro per plaintiffs.
On February 11, 2008, a class action complaint Lilley, et al. v.
complaints on September 5, 2008 and September 24, 2010.
fraudulent misrepresentation and fraudulent omission.
misrepresented the transferability of credits.
2010. This class consists of approximately 2,300 members.
for the quarter ended March 31, 2013.
added two claims for money damages: fraud and breach of contract.
to salaries they could expect to earn after graduation.
which included individual and class allegations by Nathan Surrett.
certain fees paid in connection with their enrollment at WCI.
On June 23, 2008, a putative class action lawsuit Vasquez, et al.
of Culinary Arts, Inc. and Career Education Corporation.
admissions process during the alleged class period.
approximately 1,000 former students entitled Banks, et al. v.
al. v. California School of Culinary Arts; Arechiga, et al. v.
California School of Culinary Arts; Anderson, et al., v.
action consolidating all eight of the separate actions.
consolidated and the parties are now engaged in discovery.
earliest version signed by certain of the plaintiffs.
approximately 1,052 active plaintiffs in the consolidated action.
International Academy of Merchandising & Design, Inc.
enrichment, and breach of fiduciary duty.
school, and relevant student loan information.
and Orlando, Florida campuses during an undetermined time period.
until it decides whether to refer the case for arbitration.
was the same as in Houck.
motion to strike the plaintiffs' punitive damages claims.
response to defendants' motion to compel arbitration.
On January 14, 2013, a putative class action was filed in the U.S.
and also seek declaratory and injunctive relief.
Class Action Complaint previously filed in Kishia Houck, et al. v.
for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
as of April 30, 2013.
The Court granted defendants' motion in Danielle Brainard, et al.
the quarter ended March 31, 2013.
unjust enrichment, and breach of fiduciary duty.
recover damages and also seek declaratory and injunctive relief.
On October 18, 2012, plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint.
plaintiffs and a claim for civil conspiracy.
March 11, 2013 and the case is stayed pending arbitration.
the company's May 6, 2013, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Design, Inc, d/b/a IADT Online.
punitive damages and also seek declaratory and injunctive relief.
answer to plaintiff's complaint on November 13, 2012.
and who did not provide prior express consent for such calls."
class action complaint on February 25, 2013.
Representative based in Minnesota, filed a complaint in the U.S.
Admissions Representative Supplemental Compensation Plan.
Representatives who also were affected by termination of the plan.
States District Court, D. Idaho.
takes the finished product to Darigold customers.
claim of willful violation under the FLSA.
is available at http://is.gd/pcX7Wmfrom Leagle.com.
Adrian Barnes, Esq., represented the Plaintiffs and Respondents.
conditionally certify the collective action.
Bank on July 26, 2012.
implemented on February 21, 2013.
action status was filed on June 4, 2010 in Missouri state court.
claims as an individual plaintiff.
acquisition and unjust enrichment of Merrimac's directors.
were due to be submitted on or before January 15, 2013.
case on the following terms, which are subject to Court approval.
Company's alleged failure to properly remediate the site.
2,443 plaintiffs, in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois.
Company's sirens were defective and unreasonably dangerous.
Appellate Court reversed the trial court's certification order.
final decision from the Appellate Court on this issue.
In connection with the announcement of Fisher Communications, Inc.
Communications, Inc., et al., Case No. 13-2-17171-6 SEA.
and the payment of plaintiff's attorneys' fees and costs.
certified class in another jurisdiction.
exclude persons who were part of the class in the parallel U.S.
defense counsel's assertion that once satisfied that the U.S.
of comity, automatically grant the order requested.
Instead, in determining whether to recognize the conditional U.S.
previously set out by the Ontario Court of Appeal in Currie v.
Having determined that it was appropriate to recognize the U.S.
to amend the Ontario class to give effect to the recognized U.S.
the Ontario class proceeding would not promote access to justice.
apparent, and real, in a cross-border class action.
set a dangerous precedent as it would encourage "reverse auctions"
for the lowest amount possible in order to earn counsel fees."
they are able to achieve."
already been found by the U.S. court to be fair and reasonable.
and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended March 29, 2013.
amended by the Junk Fax Prevention Act of 2005 ("TCPA").
unsolicited fax advertisements from the Company.
own unique set of facts and circumstances.
million to the settlement, which was included in "Other expense"
Prejudice and the Citiline Action was concluded.
FCX/MMR merger into one single suit In re McMoRan Exploration Co.
for the Parish of Orleans of the State of Louisiana: Langley v.
Moffett et al., No. 2012-11904.
claims against FCX and PXP derivatively on behalf of McMoRan.
Arizona, County of Maricopa (the "Arizona Superior Court").
permanent stay of the Arizona action.
FCX/MMR merger and the FCX/PXP merger.
stockholders, damages, and attorneys' fees and costs.
The MMR plaintiffs have filed a motion for preliminary injunction.
DAYSON, Plaintiff, v. PATRICIA CARUSO et al., Defendants, Case No.
Division, for failure to state a claim.
Bolden, former Deputy Director of the MDOC; and Corizon Health.
denied Plaintiff's request for class certification.
Antitrust Litigation, Case No. 1:10-MDL-02196 filed in the U.S.
2011, on behalf of a class of indirect purchasers.
Canadian Class action, Hi ! Neighbor Floor Covering Co. Limited v.
Murphy Oil USA, Inc., is a defendant in eight of these cases.
of tax from consumers than they paid on the same gallon of fuel.
disclosures, but deferred ruling on any class for damages.
United States Supreme Court decision.
court has continued to deny certification of a damages class.
temperature and its effect on the energy content of motor fuel.
(NGG) (RLM), United States District Court, E.D. New York.
the appeal are complete and a decision is pending.
potential outcomes at this time.
alleged misuse of their personal information.
careful about what you promise.
to use the information it gathered.
commissions to anyone who set up a domain name using its database.
hundreds, if not thousands, of other dating websites.
The lesson here is pretty simple. If you want to avoid a "date"
with a judge, better be careful about what you promise.
potential government claims that may arise.
California Attorney General and certain other District Attorneys.
required by the settlement agreement.
statements regarding the write-down of goodwill.
company's common stock from October 26, 2006 to February 27, 2008.
On January 6, 2011, the Court denied the motion to dismiss.
Kansas: UFCW Local 23 and Employers Pension Fund, et al. v.
al., filed on November 1, 2012.
foreign exchange transactions with State Street from 1998 to 2009.
law and a breach of the duty of loyalty.
foreign exchange transactions with State Street from 1998 onward.
damages, disgorgement of profits, and other equitable relief.
asset-backed commercial paper conduit program.
On April 9, 2013, the first of seven actions, captioned Altman v.
Sterling Bancorp, et al., Index No. 651263/2013 (Sup. Ct., N.Y.
Provident New York Bancorp ("Provident").
that the claims are without merit.
contract terms with the Company.
minimize the costs of defense.
increased risk of bladder cancer.
patients have been taking it for between one and two years.
in Australia over the past four years, Medicare figures show.
year may be associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer".
2011 to just over 378,800 in 2012.
protection as other first world countries," he said.
links between Avandia and heart attacks.
explaining the link with bladder cancer.
discussed by patients with their doctor.
Eli Lilly Australia has been contacted for comment.
respect to the Yield Plus Fund. The lawsuit is captioned Ross v.
Reserve Management Company, Inc. et al. and is pending in the U.S.
class action brought against UPS res judicata or chose jugee.
explanation of Justice Fraiberg's landmark decision.
importation of goods to Canada (the "Gauthier Motion").
himself heard and dismissed the Leblanc Motion.
unsolicited brokerage services rendered by UPS.
is a member of a different class from Mr. Leblanc's."
damages and for the same legal reasons.
practice, before dropping out of the file for unexplained reasons.
judgment of October 1, 2012.
conclusion as to abuse of process.
does to those that grant it. The rule cannot just go one way.
The present judgment was not appealed by Mr. Gauthier.
after the last dismissal judgment invoked against them.
Boudreau (Montreal), Antonio Di Domenico (Toronto) and Robin P.
alleged flawed database previously maintained by Ingenix, Inc.
members of Aetna and WellPoint.
Company is vigorously defending these suits.
lawsuit involving Cigna and its members.
individual lawsuits and 2 class actions relating to the outbreak.
certain relevant legal questions before the Nevada Supreme Court.
The Company is vigorously defending these lawsuits.
Tennille amended complaint and the Smet complaint.
Financial Services, Inc. as a defendant.
stay request. Both companies appealed the decision.
Court preliminarily approved on January 3, 2013.
vigorously defend themselves against both lawsuits.
the company's May 3, 2013, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
coal companies in the U.S. District Court in Mississippi.
claims on public and private nuisance, trespass and negligence.
in a massive class action.
Judge Stanton's summary judgment dismissal in 2010.
too much to manage, he says.
remark about a "Frankenstein monster posing as a class action."
resourcefulness is flattering, but unrealistic."
over the normal one-by-one adjudications of copyright cases."
Infringement Class" and a "Music Publisher Class."
claims, better dealt with separately."
think about their options," including an appeal.
12-0332-PHX-JAT, United States District Court, D. Arizona.
10, 2014, established by the Rule 16 Scheduling Order.
pay a minimum wage or a premium for overtime.
and Gordon. Registrations are still open.
on top of withdrawal fees.
clients they thought they would achieve.
Fair Play on Fees incorrectly assumed had no cost, he said.
indicator the fees were fair.

References: v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v.

 v.

 v.

 v. 
 v.

 v.

 v.

 v. 
 v.

 v.

 v.

 v.

 v.

 v. 
 v.

 v.

 v.

 v.