Premier Nutrition Corporation settles class action lawsuit relating to protein content of ready-To-Drink Protein Shake Products

A settlement has been reached resolving a class action lawsuit related to the marketed protein content of certain Premier Protein Ready-To-Drink Protein Shake Products. The lawsuit argued that Premier Protein shakes did not include as much protein as their product labeling and advertising indicate.

The settlement, if approved by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, would provide $9,000,000 to pay (1) Class Members who submit eligible claims, (2) attorneys’ fees and expenses, (3) a service award to the Class Representative, and (4) notice and claims administration costs.

You are a Class Member if you purchased any of the following Premier Protein Ready-To Drink Shake products in the United States from August 8, 2011 through October 12, 2018: Vanilla, Chocolate, Strawberries & Cream, Banana & Cream, Peaches & Cream, Cookies & Cream, Mixed Berry, Organic Chocolate, Organic Vanilla and Caramel flavors (the “Products”)

Information regarding the settlement can be found at


Bank of America pays $5.5 million to settle class action lawsuit over failure to properly report debt discharged in bankruptcy

Bank of America has agreed to pay $5.5 million to settle a class action lawsuit alleging it failed to update credit report information for credit card accounts sold to third parties where the account holder’s debts were discharged in Chapter 7 bankruptcy after they were sold.

According to the lawsuit BOA’s failure to update credit card information when the account holder’s debts were sold meant that the trade lines did not indicate that the debts were included in bankruptcy. The trade lines allegedly continued to reflect that the debts were sold, charged off and $0 balance.

If you had a Bank of America credit card and your debts were discharged in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, you may be entitled to payment.

The deadline to opt out of or object to the Bank of America class action settlement is Jan. 30, 2018.  More information can be found at the settlement website.

 Endo Health Solutions settles class action lawsuit for shorting the fluoride in Multi-Vitamin with Fluoride Chewable Tablets

A proposed $15,500,000 settlement has been reached with Endo Health Solutions, Inc.; Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in a class action lawsuit involving the Multi-Vitamin with Fluoride Chewable Tablets

The lawsuit claims that Defendants misrepresented the amount of fluoride contained in the Chewable Tablets from a period beginning October 31, 2007 through December 31, 2015, manufacturing the Chewable Tablets with only approximately 44% of the fluoride ion claimed on the label and package insert.

You are included if you or your company paid for Chewable Tablets branded “Qualitest Pharmaceuticals,” “Vintage Pharmaceuticals,” or “Physicians Total Care,” purportedly containing doses of fluoride of 1.0 mg, 0.5 mg, or 0.25 mg between October 31, 2007 and December 31, 2015.

For more information visit:

Hyundai settles engine defect class action


This settlement resolves lawsuits that were filed against Hyundai Motor America and Hyundai Motor Company alleging that an engine defect caused stalling, engine noise, or oil lamp illumination in the 2011-2014 Hyundai Sonata with a 2.0 liter or 2.4 liter gasoline direct injection engine.

The settlement extends the Powertrain Warranty for the engine short block assembly. It also provides cash reimbursements for certain repairs and repair-related expenses, such as rental cars and towing. The settlement also provides cash reimbursement for certain trade-ins and sales of unrepaired vehicles.

To qualify you must have bought or leased a “Class Vehicle,” which are 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 model year Hyundai Sonatas with a Theta II 2.0 liter or 2.4 liter gasoline direct injection engine.

To file a claim or get additional information, visit the settlement website at

Garmin Ltd. settles a class action lawsuit over allegations that its Forerunner 610 watch and watchband are defective


According to the complaint Garmin marketed the Forerunner 610 watch as “not just a pretty face… [but] stands up to rain [and] sweat.” However, the wristband allegedly fell apart on three separate occasions and needed to be repaired.

The lawsuit alleged the company made false advertising claims about the sport watch including that the device could be used to help consumers “be the best [they] can be in preparation for a marathon.”

Class Members include all U.S. residents who purchased or owned a Garmin Forerunner 610 watch between April 2011 and July 2014.

Class members are eligible for a variety of awards including cash and a 12 month consumer warranty. For more information please visit

HSBC Settles Class Action Lawsuit Over Overdraft Fees


The class action lawsuit claimed that as a regular practice, HSBC allowed customers to use their debit cards to make purchases when their accounts were insufficient in order to charge an overdraft fee of $35. In addition, the plaintiffs alleged that HSBC used a software program to re-order transactions automatically which would lead to more overdraft

The HSBC class action settlement include all HSBC customers in the U.S. who incurred one or more overdraft fees on their HSBC account as a result of posting transactions that included at least one debit card or point-of-sale transaction from highest to lowest dollar amount.

The Class period is between Dec. 17, 2004 and June 30, 2010 for consumer accounts and between Dec. 17, 2004 and Nov. 30, 2011 for business accounts.

Additional information can be found at

Superfish agrees to pay $1 million to settle a class-action privacy lawsuit


The class action lawsuit was brought on behalf of consumers who purchased Lenovo notebooks in late 2014 and early 2015 and alleges that Lenovo bundled Superfish’s “VisualDiscovery” ad-serving software with notebooks which contained security flaws.

Superfish is a program that inserts ads into a variety of Web pages including secure HTTPS pages. To do so, Superfish tinkers with Windows’ cryptographic security, according to numerous reports. But breaking encryption also paves the way for hackers to intercept sensitive data, including passwords and online banking credentials.

Lumos Labs, makers of Lumosity, settles with FTC over allegations of deceptive advertisement

lumosity big


The creators and marketers of the Lumosity “brain training” program have agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges alleging that they deceived consumers with unfounded claims that Lumosity games can help users perform better at work and in school, and reduce or delay cognitive impairment associated with age and other serious health conditions.

As part of the settlement, Lumos Labs, the company behind Lumosity, will pay $2 million in redress and will notify subscribers of the FTC action and provide them with an easy way to cancel their auto-renewal to avoid future billing.

According to the FTC’s complaint, the Lumosity program consists of 40 games purportedly designed to target and train specific areas of the brain. The company advertised that training on these games for 10 to 15 minutes three or four times a week could help users achieve their “full potential in every aspect of life.” The company sold both online and mobile app subscriptions, with options ranging from monthly ($14.95) to lifetime ($299.95) memberships.

Lumosity has been widely promoted though TV and radio advertisements on networks including CNN, Fox News, the History Channel, National Public Radio, Pandora, Sirius XM, and Spotify. The defendants also marketed through emails, blog posts, social media, and on their website,, and used Google AdWords to drive traffic to their website, purchasing hundreds of keywords related to memory, cognition, dementia, and Alzheimer’s disease, according to the complaint.

The complaint alleges that the defendants claimed training with Lumosity would 1) improve performance on everyday tasks, in school, at work, and in athletics; 2) delay age-related cognitive decline and protect against mild cognitive impairment, dementia, and Alzheimer’s disease; and 3) reduce cognitive impairment associated with health conditions, including stroke, traumatic brain injury, PTSD, ADHD, the side effects of chemotherapy, and Turner syndrome, and that scientific studies proved these benefits.

Unfortunately for consumers, Lumoisty did not have the science to back up its ads.

The proposed stipulated federal court order requires the company and the individual defendants, co-founder and former CEO Kunal Sarkar and co-founder and former Chief Scientific Officer Michael Scanlon, to have competent and reliable scientific evidence before making future claims about any benefits for real-world performance, age-related decline, or other health conditions.

The order also imposes a $50 million judgment against Lumos Labs, which will be suspended due to its financial condition after the company pays $2 million to the Commission. The order requires the company to notify subscribers who signed up for an auto-renewal plan between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2014 about the FTC action and to provide a means to cancel their subscription


Securitas Security Services settles class action alleging violations of California labor laws


The lawsuit, which involves former and current security guards employed by Securitas, alleged the Securitas violated state and federal statutes by not providing employees with vacation pay. Guards were given sums of money, however, in the form of lump-sum payments once per year as compensation for vacation time.

The complaint asserts that the payment provided by Securitas was, in effect, a nondiscretionary retention bonus based on the number of hours worked, yet not dependent on vacation time taken. Not only was the lump sum payment denied to guards having left the employ of Securitas prior to their employment anniversary, it was also not included in overtime calculations, as required under the FLSA.

As part of the settlement Securitas agreed to pay $2.5 million


Groupon settles class action over expiration of vouchers


Groupon agreed to pay $8.5 million to settle a class action lawsuit alleging that expiration of vouchers violated the law.

Aggrieved customers who purchased Groupons between November 1, 2008 and December 1, 2011 can receive 130% of the purchase price of their unredeemed Groupons — in the form of credits toward future Groupons.

To receive the settlement consumers will need to present the bar code of the voucher that was never used.

Additional information can be found at