Dec 11, 2017 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation, d/b/a Marriott Vacation Club – Class Action Filed
On December 7, 2017, a class action lawsuit was filed in United States District Court, Central District of California, seeking damages and other available legal or equitable remedies resulting from alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) by Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation, d/b/a Marriott Vacation Club.
According to the class action complaint, Defendant Marriott Vacations Worldwide Corporation, d/b/a Marriott Vacation Club, “a business engaged in the sale of vacation timeshares and other hospitality services,” began in or around October 2017 contacting the Plaintiff’s cellular telephone in effort to solicit the Plaintiff to purchase the services of Marriott Vacations. Allegedly, the Plaintiff, who received numerous solicitation calls from Marriott Vacations in a 12-month period, revoked consent to call her cellular telephone on or about October 25, 2017 “by expressly requesting Defendant to cease soliciting [Marriott Vacations’] services through calling Plaintiff on her cellular telephone.”
Marriott Vacations, according to the complaint, used an automatic telephone dialing system to contact the Plaintiff to solicit Marriott Vacations’ services from, among others, telephone number (407) 903-6130. Further, Marriott Vacations did not have the Plaintiff’s prior express consent to receive telephone calls utilizing an automatic dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice. Additionally, the Plaintiff’s cellular telephone number was added to the National Do-Not-Call Registry on or about August 9, 2003.
The proposed TCPA class action lawsuit was brought on behalf of all persons in the United States who received any solicitation/telemarketing telephone calls from Marriott Vacations to such person’s cellular telephone made through the use of any automatic telephone dialing system, or an artificial or prerecorded voice, and such person had not previously consented, or had revoked any prior express consent, to receive such calls within the four years prior to the filing of the class action complaint.
The proposed TCPA class action lawsuit also was brought on behalf all persons in the United States registered on the National Do-Not-Call Registry for at least 30 days who did not grant Defendant Marriott Vacations prior express consent, did not have a prior established business relationship, or who revoked consent and any prior established business relationship, and received more than one call made by or on behalf of the Defendant that promoted Defendant Marriott Vacations’ products or services, within any 12-month period, within four years prior to the filing of the class action complaint.
Have You Received Unsolicited or Unwanted Telemarketing Telephone Calls, Autodial Calls (“Robocalls”) or Text Messages?
If you have received unwanted, unsolicited or harassing telemarketing telephone calls, autodial calls (“robocalls”) or text messages and would like to speak privately with an attorney to learn more about your potential legal rights, please complete the form to the right or contact Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected]; John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected]; or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, negligence, false claims, deception, data breaches or whose rights to minimum wage and overtime compensation under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage and hour laws have been violated.
Dec 8, 2017 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
A class action lawsuit was filed in United States District Court, Central District of California, on behalf OSI Systems (“OSI Systems” or “OSI”) securities investors, asserting claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Investors who purchased or otherwise acquired OSI Systems securities between August 21, 2013 and December 6, 2017, inclusive (the “Class Period”), are encouraged to contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. to discuss their potential legal rights.
The class action complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, OSI Systems Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about OSI Systems’ business, operations, and prospects.
Specifically, OSI Systems Defendants allegedly failed to disclose that: (1) OSI Systems acquired the Albania concession through bribery or other illicit means; (2) OSI transferred 49% of its project company associated with the Albania concession, S2 Albania SHPK, an entity purportedly worth millions, for consideration of less than $5.00; (3) OSI engaged in other illegal acts, including improper sales and cash payments to government officials; (4) these practices caused OSI Systems to be vulnerable to potential civil and criminal liability, and adverse regulatory action; and (5) as a result, OSI Systems Defendants’ statements about OSI’s business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and/or misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
On December 6, 2017, Muddy Waters Research published a report on OSI entitled “OSIS: Rotten to the Core.” In the report, Muddy Waters Research alleges that there was corruption in the 2013 award of OSI’s Albania concession. Muddy Waters Research claims that while the concession “has an estimated top line lifetime value of $150 million to $250 million,” OSI “likely bribed somebody by giving half of it away for $4.50.” Further, Muddy Waters Research reported that “[t]here was an unannounced transfer of 49% of OSIS’s project company, S2 Albania SHPK, to a holding company owned by an Albanian doctor, for consideration of less than $5.00.”
Additionally, Muddy Waters Research reported that “[t]o be clear, this company (S2 Albania SHPK) is the company to which all rights and obligations under the turnkey contract award belong, so 49% of the company is presumably worth many millions of dollars. It appears to [Muddy Waters Research] that [OSI’s] accounts do not reflect the transfer – there are no deductions for non-controlling interests in the income statement, and February 2017 bond offering documents appear to show the subsidiary as 100% owned by [OSI].”
Muddy Waters Research also reported that “[b]eyond the turnkey contracts, investigators’ interviews with former employees yielded numerous anecdotes indicating [OSI] is rotten to the core. Former employees alleged a list of rot they experienced at Rapiscan, including their concern about possibly going to prison, knowledge of improper sales, cash payments to government officials, fraud in a significant contract, and that [OSI] had narrowly avoided being debarred from doing business with the U.S. government.”
On this news, OSI’s stock price fell $24.55 per share, or 29.2%, to close at $59.52 per share on December 6, 2017, on unusually heavy trading volume.
Have You Purchased or Acquired OSI Systems Shares?
If you purchased or otherwise acquired OSI Systems shares and would like to speak privately with a securities attorney to learn whether you may have legal claims, please complete the form to the right or contact John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected] or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, false claims, deception or data breaches. Together, the partners of Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. have spent more than 30 years prosecuting precedent-setting securities and financial fraud cases in federal and state courts on behalf of institutional and individual clients.
Dec 8, 2017 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
Bumble Bee Premium Select Medium Red Smoked Salmon Subject of Class Action Lawsuit
Medium Red Smoked Salmon – Not High-Quality, Not Wild-Caught – Complaint Alleges
On December 6, 2017, a class action complaint was filed in United States District Court, Southern District of California, against Bumble Bee Foods, LLC accusing the “well-known purveyor of canned fish,” including the Bumble Bee product “Premium Select Medium Red Smoked Salmon Filets in Oil,” of misleading practices concerning the nature and quality of its canned Medium Red Smoked Salmon food product.
According to the class action complaint, brought to enjoin Bumble Bee’s misleading practices and to recover restitution and damages for the class:
Through various labeling statements and design elements, Bumble Bee falsely suggests that [Bumble Bee] Medium Red Smoked Salmon is high-quality, wild-caught salmon, when it is actually low-quality, farm-raised Chilean salmon that has been colored. Bumble Bee also falsely and unlawfully represents that the product is smoked salmon, when it is actually unsmoked salmon to which smoke flavor has been added.
By making these false, misleading, and unlawful representations, Bumble Bee is able to charge a significant price premium compared to what it could charge for low-quality, colored, smoke-flavored, farm-raised salmon.
The complaint alleges that the “Plaintiff purchased the [Bumble Bee] Medium Red Smoked Salmon believing he was purchasing high-quality, smoked wild-caught Alaskan salmon, and was injured as a result of Bumble Bee’s misrepresentations because he received a product worth less than he paid.”
Consumers Have False Impression About Medium Red Smoked Salmon
The impression, according to the class action complaint, with which consumers are left regarding the Medium Red Smoked Salmon “. . . is false, because the [Bumble Bee] Medium Red Smoked Salmon is not high-quality, wild-caught salmon, but low-quality, farm-raised salmon, which has been colored via feed to look like wild salmon.”
According to the complaint, “[i]n reality, the fish in the [Bumble Bee] Medium Red Smoked Salmon is not wild Alaskan Coho salmon, but farm-raised Chilean Coho salmon (which is later canned in Thailand), also sometimes referred to as ‘Silverfish.’”
Consumers of Bumble Bee Premium Select Medium Red Smoked Salmon
If you purchased Bumble Bee Premium Select Medium Red Smoked Salmon and would like to speak privately with an attorney to learn more about your potential legal rights, please complete the form to the right or contact Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected]; John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected]; or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, negligence, false claims, deception, data breaches or whose rights to minimum wage and overtime compensation under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage and hour laws have been violated.
Dec 7, 2017 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
CFPB Takes Action Against Citibank, N.A. For Student Loan Servicing Failures That Harmed Borrowers
Action Against Citibank, N.A. For Deceiving Borrowers About Tax Benefits, Incorrectly Charging Late Fees and Interest, Sending Misleading Monthly Bills and Incomplete Notices
On November 21, 2017, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) announced that the CFPB
. . . took action against Citibank, N.A. for student loan servicing failures that harmed borrowers. Citibank misled borrowers into believing that they were not eligible for a valuable tax deduction on interest paid on certain student loans. The company also incorrectly charged late fees and added interest to the student loan balances of borrowers who were still in school and eligible to defer their loan payments. Citibank also misled consumers about how much they had to pay in their monthly bills and failed to disclose required information after denying borrowers’ requests to release loan cosigners. The [CFPB] is ordering Citibank to end these illegal servicing practices, and to pay $3.75 million in redress to consumers and a $2.75 million civil money penalty.
The CFPB found that “[f]or the student loan accounts that Citibank was servicing . . . Citibank misrepresented important information on borrowers’ eligibility for a valuable tax deduction, failed to refund interest and late fees it erroneously charged, overstated monthly minimum payment amounts in monthly bills, and sent faulty notices after denying borrowers’ requests to release a loan cosigner.”
Specifically, the CFPB found that Citibank:
Misled borrowers about their tax-deduction benefits: Federal law allows some borrowers to deduct up to $2,500 in student loan interest paid on “qualified education loans” annually. On its website and periodic account statements, Citibank made statements that suggested borrowers had not paid qualified interest, or that the borrowers were not eligible for the qualified interest tax deduction. Consequently, borrowers did not seek this tax benefit, even though they may have been able to benefit from it.
Incorrectly charged late fees and interest on loan balances to students still in school: Current students are eligible for in-school deferments, which postpone repayment until six months after they are no longer enrolled in school. Citibank erroneously canceled in-school deferments for certain borrowers based on inaccurate information about their enrollment status. In doing so, Citibank charged late fees when the borrowers did not make payments, even though payments should not have been due. Citibank also erroneously added interest to the loan principal, and failed to refund late fees and erroneously charged interest after discovering that in-school deferments had been terminated in error.
Overstated the minimum monthly payment due on account statements: Citibank serviced some loans for “mixed-status borrowers,” who had multiple student loans with Citibank, some of which were in repayment status, while other loans were in deferment status. While loans were in deferment, no payment was required, though borrowers had the option to make payments on those loans. For mixed-status borrowers with student loans in or approaching repayment, Citibank overstated the minimum amount due on the mixed-status account statements.
Failed to disclose required information after refusing to release a cosigner: Many consumers applied for student loans from Citibank with a cosigner to help guarantee the loan. Some of these borrowers later requested that these cosigners be released for some or all of their student loans with Citibank. When Citibank received an application from a student loan borrower to release a cosigner and place the loan in the borrower’s name only, Citibank would make a determination based on information in the borrower’s credit report and score. When Citibank denied a cosigner release application, it failed to provide the borrower with all of the information required under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
CFPB Enforcement Action Against Citibank, N.A.
According to the CFPB:
Under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the [CFPB] has the authority to take action against institutions violating consumer financial laws, including engaging in unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices. The CFPB’s order requires Citibank to:
Refund $3.75 million to harmed consumers: The [CFPB’s] order requires Citibank to pay $3.75 million in restitution to harmed consumers who were charged erroneous interest or late fees, paid an overstated minimum monthly payment, or received inadequate notices as a result of Citibank’s faulty servicing.
Make changes to their servicing practices: The [CFPB’s] order requires Citibank to provide accurate information regarding student loan interest paid, implement a policy to reverse erroneously assessed interest or late fees, and to provide borrowers who were denied a cosigner release with their credit scores, the phone number of the credit reporting agency that generated the credit report, and disclosure language confirming that the credit reporting agency did not make the decline decision.
Pay a $2.75 million fine: The [CFPB’s] order requires Citibank to pay a $2.75 million penalty to the CFPB’s Civil Penalty Fund.
A copy of the CFPB’s Consent Order can be viewed by clicking CFPB_Citibank_Consent Order.
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, negligence, false claims, deception, data breaches or whose rights to minimum wage and overtime compensation under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage and hour laws have been violated.
Dec 7, 2017 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
Otsuka Holdings Co., Ltd. (OTSKY)
On October 12, 2017, CNN.com published an article, “The little red pill being pushed on the elderly,” which described the marketing efforts of Otsuka’s subsidiary, Avanir Pharmaceuticals (“Avanir”), with respect to Nuedexta, a treatment for pseudobulbar affect.
According to the article:
The maker of a little red pill intended to treat a rare condition is raking in hundreds of millions of dollars a year as it aggressively targets frail and elderly nursing home residents for whom the drug may be unnecessary or even unsafe, a CNN investigation has found.
And much of the money is coming straight from the federal government.
The pill, called Nuedexta, is approved to treat a disorder marked by sudden and uncontrollable laughing or crying — known as pseudobulbar affect, or PBA. This condition afflicts less than 1% of all Americans, based on a calculation using the drugmaker’s own figures, and it is most commonly associated with people who have multiple sclerosis (MS) or ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease.
Nuedexta’s financial success, however, is being propelled by a sales force focused on expanding the drug’s use among elderly patients suffering from dementia and Alzheimer’s disease, and high-volume prescribing and advocacy efforts by doctors receiving payments from the company, CNN found.
The CNN.com article further reported that “[s]oon after Nuedexta hit the market in 2011, doctors, nurses and family members began filing reports of potential harm – – ranging from rashes, dizziness and falls to comas and death.”
On October 19, 2017, CNN.com reported that Los Angeles City Attorney Mike Feuer had “launched an investigation” into Avanir, stating that “his office is seeking information and tips from the public to help determine whether state or federal laws have been broken in the sale, marketing or prescribing of Nuedexta.”
On December 4, 2017, CNN.com published an article, “Drugmaker paid doctors with problem records to promote its pill,” which reported that Avanir “paid nearly 500 doctors to speak or consult on its drug, Nuedexta, between 2013 and 2016, according to government data” and that “[t]hrough a review of the top prescribers and top paid physicians in this group, CNN identified a dozen who have been disciplined by state medical boards. These offenses included the harmful treatment of nursing home residents and ‘grossly negligent acts’ involving the inappropriate prescribing of dangerous and addictive drugs – – resulting in probation, suspension, fines and revoked licenses.”
On this news, Otsuka’s American Depositary Receipt (OTSKY) price declined sharply during intraday trading on December 5, 2017.
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is a multidisciplinary, plaintiff–side law firm dedicated to protecting investors and consumers from corporate fraud, negligence, and other wrongdoing. Driven by a strong and principled sense of social responsibility and obtaining justice for the aggrieved, Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. represents plaintiffs seeking to recover investment losses resulting from securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, corporate wrongdoing or malfeasance, those harmed by anticompetitive practices, and consumers victimized by fraud, false claims, deception or data breaches. Together, the partners of Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. have spent more than 30 years prosecuting precedent-setting securities and financial fraud cases in federal and state courts on behalf of institutional and individual clients.
