On behalf of our client FX Primus Ltd., Kehoe Law Firm is pleased to announce that today the court granted final approval to the $23,630,000 settlement in the FX indirect purchaser litigation. The lawsuit against various Wall Street banks, alleges that defendants conspired to fix the prices of foreign currency instruments causing settlement class members to be overcharged when directly purchasing from or directly selling to a retail foreign exchange dealer (“RFED”) an FX instrument, where that RFED transacted in an FX instrument directly with a defendant.​

Defendants include entities related to Citigroup, MUFG Bank Ltd., Bank of America Corporation, Barclays Bank PLC, BNP Paribas, Credit Suisse AG, Deutsche Bank AG, Goldman Sachs, HSBC Bank PLC, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Morgan Stanley, RBC Capital Markets, LLC, The Royal Bank of Scotland PLC (now known as NatWest Markets PLC), and UBS AG. The settlements include statewide settlement classes from New York, Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and North Carolina.​

The defendants collectively paid $23,630,000 of settlements into a fund to be disbursed to the members of the settlement classes. You must file a valid and timely claim to get money from the settlements. You may get a Claim Form by visiting www.FXIndirectAntitrustSettlement.com or by contacting the Settlement Administrator toll-free number: 1-844-245-3777.

For more information about Kehoe Law Firm and its involvement in this matter, please contact John A. Kehoe at [email protected] or call (215) 792-6676.

Kehoe Law Firm proudly announces that today plaintiffs moved for final approval of a $23,600,000 settlement with various Wall Street banks, including entities related to Citigroup, MUFG Bank Ltd., Bank of America Corporation, Barclays Bank PLC, BNP Paribas, Credit Suisse AG, Deutsche Bank AG, Goldman Sachs, HSBC Bank PLC, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Morgan Stanley, RBC Capital Markets, LLC, The Royal Bank of Scotland PLC (now known as NatWest Markets PLC), and UBS AG.​

KLF represents FX Primus Ltd. In this action, in which lead counsel spent over 11,427 hours prosecuting the case. Discovery in this case was extensive, involving terabytes of transactional data and hundreds of thousands of pages of interbank chat transcripts from defendants that they produced in a related action. Managing and organizing this data required collaborating with Plaintiffs’ expert economist, Dr. Janet S. Netz, to analyze the contents of the data for each defendant transactional data production and prepare questions to Defendants to ensure that all required data fields were included in the productions and standardized across all Defendant productions. 

Class Counsel also consulted with an industry expert and former FX trader to analyze and identify deficiencies in Defendants’ data productions and to prepare questions to Defendants. He also assisted Class Counsel with interpreting the jargon and code words that dealer bank traders used to conceal their unlawful conduct in the voluminous interbank dealer chat transcripts produced by Defendants. 

While discovery was ongoing, class counsel had extensive settlement negotiations, and reached a tentative settlement with the Citigroup defendants, then with MUFG Bank Ltd., including cash payments and reasonable cooperation in the continued litigation.  Thereafter, the remaining defendants agreed to settle.

We believe the settlements were negotiated at arm’s length, and the relief obtained is fair, reasonable, and adequate. The proposed pro-rata method of allocating the settlement fund amongst the members of the settlement classes ensures that they will be treated equitably relative to each other. The Total Settlement Amount of $23,630,000 is well within the range of reasonableness, especially considering the complexity of the litigation, and the risks of establishing liability, aggregate damages, and class wide impact.​

Considering the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, the Court has scheduled the Final Fairness Hearing to occur telephonically on November 17, 2020, at 11:30 am. 

For more information about Kehoe Law Firm and its involvement in this matter, please contact John A. Kehoe at [email protected] or call (215) 792-6676.

Today, the Kehoe Law Firm filed a class action lawsuit against Magellan Health, Inc. alleging the inadequate safeguarding of personally identifiable information (PII) and protected health information (PHI) of its current and former employees, as well as health plan participants. Magellan Health recently experienced a targeted cyberattack and data breach, resulting in the reported compromise of PII and PHI for plaintiffs and over 365,000 class members.​

The compromised information, including names, contact details, employee ID numbers, W-2 or 1099 information, Social Security Numbers, taxpayer identification numbers, treatment details, health insurance account information, member IDs, and other health-related data, is now alleged to be in the hands of cyberthieves. The complaint further alleges that Magellan Health’s reckless and negligent maintenance of this sensitive information on its computer network left it vulnerable to cyberattacks. 

Michael Yarnoff of the Kehoe Law Firm emphasized the significance of personal information and the responsibility of corporations to protect it, stating, “In an era where personal data is increasingly under threat, corporations must prioritize the protection of sensitive information. The allegations against Magellan Health underscore the importance of robust cybersecurity measures to safeguard personal and health-related details.” 

Plaintiffs contend that Magellan Health failed to provide timely and adequate notice of the unauthorized access, exposing them to the risk of identity theft and fraud. The lawsuit seeks various remedies, including compensatory damages, reimbursement of out-of-pocket costs, restitution, and injunctive relief. The latter includes demands for enhancements to the defendant’s data security systems, annual audits, and funded credit monitoring services. 

The legal claims against Magellan Health include negligence, negligence per se, breach of implied contract, unjust enrichment, violation of the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act, violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law, violation of Missouri’s Merchandising Practices Act, violation of New York’s General Business Law § 349, violation of Pennsylvania’s Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, violation of Virginia’s Personal Information Breach Notification Act, and violation of Wisconsin’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act. 

For more information about Kehoe Law Firm and its involvement in this matter, please contact Michael Yarnoff at [email protected] or call (215) 792-6676.

Allegations of cracked aluminum wheels in Chevrolet Corvettes have given rise to a class action lawsuit, claiming that certain models suffer from rims that crack and bend, leading to tire leaks and blowouts.​

The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, specifically targets 2015 to present Chevy Corvette Z06 and 2017 to present Corvette Grand Sport cars. The lawsuit asserts that these vehicles are equipped with rims made from a less durable cast material rather than forged, potentially compromising their structural integrity. 

California resident Richard Barrington, one of the plaintiffs, purchased a new 2018 Chevrolet Corvette Grand Sport, only to discover a right rear tire leak within one or two months. Technicians confirmed that the rear wheel was cracked in three places, necessitating replacement. Subsequently, Barrington faced a similar issue with the driver-side rear wheel, allegedly denied warranty coverage by General Motors (GM). Despite driving the Corvette normally, Barrington claims to have spent approximately $3,000 replacing six cracked wheels. 

The lawsuit contends that GM knowingly used cheaper cast aluminum and reduced material to save weight, making the rims insufficiently robust for regular driving conditions. This alleged issue has persisted since the cars were first sold, with GM purportedly aware of the problem but insisting that the rims are not defective. Corvette owners seeking warranty-covered wheel repairs are reportedly denied, leading them to shoulder the financial burden of replacing allegedly cracked wheels. 

Citing a Car and Driver magazine report titled “Wheel Woes,” the lawsuit alleges evidence of the widespread nature of the cracked wheel problem. The report includes a review of a 2017 Chevrolet Corvette Grand Sport that experienced three bent wheels, incurring a $1,119 repair bill.

Michael Yarnoff, Partner with the Kehoe Law Firm, expressed satisfaction with the filing of the complaint, stating, “We believe the claims are meritorious, and we are very pleased with the progress of the case.” 

Kehoe Law Firm remains committed to representing the interests of the affected consumers and seeks a fair resolution for those impacted by the alleged defects. 

For more information about Kehoe Law Firm and its involvement in this matter, please contact Michael Yarnoff at [email protected] or call (215) 792-6676.

The United States District Court for the Central District of California has granted final approval to the securities litigation class action filed against NantHealth, Inc. and certain of its executives and directors. The suit alleged violations of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.​

Initiated on June 26, 2017, the case saw the Southern Pennsylvania Transit Authority appointed as lead plaintiff with the Kehoe Law Firm appointed co-lead counsel. The lawsuit claimed that NantHealth and its officers and directors misled investors by overstating the market demand for NantHealth’s genetic sequencing services. The lawsuit also claimed that NantHealth made false statements or omitted material information from its financial statements and in other public statements. NantHealth and its officers and directors deny they did anything wrong.​

The Court granted class certification on July 30, 2019, and on January 31, 2020, preliminarily approved the settlement. The approved settlement establishes a $16,500,000.00 common fund for investors, less attorney fees and expenses.​

The Court found the proposed pro rata distribution fair and adequate, especially considering the absence of objections from class members. The requested attorneys’ fees of 25% were deemed presumptively reasonable given the complexity of the case. Additionally, the court granted SEPTA a $5,000.00 incentive award for its substantial efforts in the case.​

John Kehoe, lead counsel from the Kehoe Law Firm, remarked, “This settlement is a testament to the diligent efforts of all involved parties. The approved terms reflect a fair and just resolution for the class members. We are pleased with the Court’s decision and believe it underlines the strength of our case.”​

For more information, visit www.NantHealthSecuritiesLitigation.com, call 1-844-975-1779, or write to the Settlement Administrator, NantHealth, Inc. Securities Litigation, c/o JND Legal Administration, PO Box 91125, Seattle, WA 98111.​

For more information about Kehoe Law Firm and its involvement in this matter, please contact John A. Kehoe at [email protected] or call (215) 792-6676.