The Class Action Clause Samples

The Class Action. The case is called ▇▇▇▇▇▇, et al. ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ & Company, Inc., et al, Case No. 1:19-cv-01466- GHW-SN (S.D.N.Y.) (the “Class Action” or “lawsuit”). It has been pending since February 15, 2019. The Court supervising the case is the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The individual who brought this lawsuit is called the Class Representative, and the entities he sued are called Defendants. The Class Representative, ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, is a former participant in the Plans. The Defendants are McKinsey, MIO, and certain unidentified individuals (“Doe Defendants”) with fiduciary functions relating to the Plans. The Class Representative’s claims are described below, and additional information those claims is available at [▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇].

The Class Action. The case is called ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ et al. ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇ University et al., No. 16-cv-2920 (N.D. Ga.) (the “Class Action”). The Court supervising the case is the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The individuals who brought this suit are called Class Representatives, and the entities they sued are called the defendants. The Class Representatives are current and former participants in the Plans. The Defendants are Emory University and certain affiliates and individuals. The Class Representatives’ claims are described below, and additional information about them is available at ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇.

The Class Action. The case is called ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, et al., ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ University, et al, Case No. 16-cv-6525 (S.D.N.Y.) (the “Class Action”). The Court supervising the case is the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The individuals who brought this suit are called Class Representatives, and the entity and individuals they sued are called the Defendants. The Class Representatives are current and former participants in the Plans. The Defendants are Cornell University, the Retirement Plan Oversight Committee, and ▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇. The Class Representatives’ claims are described below, and additional information about them is available at ▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇.

The Class Action. The case is called ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, et al. v. Reliance Trust, et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-4444-MHC (N.D. Ga.) (the “Class Action”). The Court supervising the case is the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The individuals who brought this suit are called Class Representatives, and the entity and individuals they sued are called the Defendants. The Class Representatives are current and former participants in the Plan. The Defendants are Reliance Trust Company, Insperity, Inc., Insperity Holdings, Inc., and Insperity Retirement Services, L.P. The Class Representatives’ claims are described below, and additional information about them is available at ▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇.

The Class Action. The case is called ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, et al. v. Massachusetts Financial Services Company d/b/a MFS Investment Management, et al., Case No. 1:17-CV-11249 (D.Mass) (the “Class Action” or “lawsuit”). It has been pending since July 7, 2017. The Court supervising the case is the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The individuals who brought this lawsuit are called Class Representatives, and the persons they sued are called Defendants. The Class Representatives, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, are Current Participants or Former Participants in the Plans. The Defendants are MFS, the MFS Retirement Committee, and the MFS Retirement Investment Committee. The Class Representatives’ claims are described below, and additional information about them is available at [▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇].

The Class Action. The case is called ▇▇▇▇▇▇, et al. v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, et al., Case No. 1:16-cv-11620 (D. Mass.) (the “Class Action”). The Court supervising the case is the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The individuals who brought this suit are called Class Representatives, and the entity and individuals they sued are called the Defendants. The Class Representatives are current and former participants in the Plan. The Defendants are Massachusetts Institute of Technology and certain individuals. The Class Representatives' claims are described below, and additional information about them is available at ▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇.

The Class Action. On or after September 7, 2007, a class action, G▇▇▇▇▇ v. ▇▇▇▇▇ Online, Inc., et al., Civ. No. 07-CV-00785-WO-PTS (the “Action”), was filed in this Court on October 18, 2007 as a class action alleging on behalf of purchasers of Smart Online securities during a defined period of time violations of the federal securities laws. The suit seeks relief on behalf of a class consisting of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the publicly traded securities of Smart Online, Inc. (“Smart Online” or the “Company”) during the Class Period and who were damaged thereby. The class action seeks remedies under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. §78j, and Securities & Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5, 17 C.F.R. §240.10b-5, thereunder arising out of the Defendants’ alleged misconduct. By Order dated June 24, 2008, the Court appointed M▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ as Lead Plaintiff and approved her selection of K▇▇▇ S▇▇▇▇ & F▇▇▇ LLC2 and B▇▇▇▇▇ Piven, a Professional Corporation as Lead Counsel for the Class and S. Ranchor H▇▇▇▇▇, III as Liaison Counsel for the Class.

The Class Action. The case is called In re M&T Bank Corporation ERISA Litigation, Case No. 1:16-cv-375 (W.D.N.Y.) (the “Class Action” or “lawsuit”). It has been pending since May 11, 2016. The Court supervising the case is the United States District Court for the Western District of New York. The individuals who brought this lawsuit are called the Class Representatives and the persons they sued are called Defendants. The Class Representatives, ▇▇’▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇, and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ are current or former participants in the Plan. The Defendants are M&T Bank Corporation, Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company, Wilmington Trust Investment Advisors, Wilmington Funds Management Corporation, Wilmington Trust Corporation, M&T Bank Employee Benefit Plans Committee, ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇, ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇., ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ W.E. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇.▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇., ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇, and ▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇. The Class Representatives’ claims are described below, and additional information about them is available at [▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇].

The Class Action. On March 27, 2020, ▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ filed a class action in Los Angeles Superior Court against Defendants Kellytoy (USA), Inc., ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇, and ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇, Case No. 20STCV12539. The operative complaint ("Complaint #1") alleges claims against Defendants Kellytoy (USA), Inc., ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇, and ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ by Plaintiffs Barco and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of themselves, and all persons who have either been, or currently are, employed by Defendants Kellytoy (USA), Inc. in California as non-exempt employees ("Class") during the period of March 27, 2016 to the present. On June 5, 2020, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ filed a class action in Los Angeles Superior Court against Defendant Kellytoy Worldwide, Inc., Case No. 20STCV21917. The operative complaint ("Complaint #2") alleges claims against Defendant Kellytoy Worldwide, Inc. by Plaintiff ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ on behalf of himself, and all persons who have either been, or currently are, employed by Defendant Kellytoy Worldwide, Inc. in California as non-exempt employees ("Class") during the period of June 5, 2016 to the present.