Find money you may be owed.

Wage & Hour · Pending — Automatic Payment

Current Status

There is no claim form and no claim deadline. Each class member is to be paid a pro rata share of the $825,000 settlement automatically, calculated from the City of Springfield's payroll records, and the notice says the payment should be mailed in approximately January 2027. The court has not ruled. The Palmer District Court may hold a fairness hearing at 2:00 p.m. on October 27, 2026, though the settlement agreement leaves it to the court whether to schedule one at all, and no final approval order has been entered. October 24, 2026 is the deadline to object, by postmark. The notice gives class members two options — object or do nothing — and describes no procedure for excluding yourself from the class.

What Changed Recently?

The case and its settlement arrived together. The complaint in Cornet v. City of Springfield, Civil Action No. 2643-cv-196, was filed in the Palmer District Court in Hampden County, Massachusetts, and the executed Class Action Settlement Agreement and Release was filed on June 16, 2026. Notice has since gone out to the class and the settlement website is live. That structure is why there is no litigation record to read: the parties exchanged documents and payroll data informally under the Massachusetts Public Records Law, negotiated, and brought the resolution to the court rather than litigating first.

The dispute is about how student police officers were paid. The complaint asserted class claims under Massachusetts wage and hour law, and the notice describes the case as being about whether Springfield violated wage and hour laws relating to the payment of wages. The release names the Massachusetts Wage Act, M.G.L. c. 149, §§ 148 and 150, among the statutes covered, and describes the underlying theory as claims that the plaintiff and class members were underpaid wages while working as student officers.

Those are allegations. The City of Springfield denies the allegations, disputes that it is liable to anyone on any basis, and denies engaging in unlawful conduct or wrongdoing. The agreement records the city's position that it complied at all times with applicable law and that class members were properly compensated for all time worked, and states that the city agreed to settle to avoid the burden, expense and uncertainty of litigating. No court has found that the city did anything unlawful.

Who Qualifies?

The class, as the mailed notice and the proposed preliminary approval order define it, is all persons who are or were employed by the City of Springfield and worked as student police officers from March 24, 2022 through May 10, 2026. The notice puts the class at approximately 147 people. Membership is not something a person applies for: the city produces a class list from its personnel and payroll records, so anyone who received the mailed notice is a class member, and someone who believes they belong on the list but did not receive one can raise that with the settlement administrator.

One version of the notice adds that five individuals who previously settled and released their claims are excluded from the settlement class.

The paperwork does not agree with itself on where the class period ends. Section 2 of the settlement agreement ends the class period on May 10, 2025 rather than 2026, and the payment formula in section 4.6 runs its calculation period through the payroll period that includes May 10, 2025. The notice, the settlement website and the preliminary approval order all say May 10, 2026. A class member whose service falls between those two dates has a reason to contact the administrator before the objection deadline rather than wait for a check.

Data Breach · Claims Open

Current Status

Claims are open. The deadline to file is October 26, 2026, online or by email by that date and postmarked by it if the form is mailed, and the notice does not specify a timezone. The deadline to exclude yourself or to object is earlier, on October 9, 2026. The final approval hearing is set for December 17, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. Central Time by Zoom before the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, and the court has not ruled on final approval. No payment date has been announced. Nothing here is paid automatically — every benefit requires a claim form, and the online form is opened with a LoginID and PIN from the notice.

What Changed Recently?

The claim process opened under a proposed settlement in Cox v. Muscatine Power and Water, Case No. 07701 CVCV027276, in the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County. Muscatine Power and Water is the municipal utility for Muscatine, Iowa, supplying electricity, water and communications service to the city, so the class here is drawn almost entirely from one community rather than from customers scattered across the country.

The settlement agreement describes a data security incident carried out by a criminal entity on or around January 26, 2024, during which there was unauthorized access to the utility's computer network. Muscatine Power and Water disclosed the incident in or around March 2024, and the petition was filed on March 18, 2024. The utility moved to dismiss twice; on January 23, 2025 the court granted the motion in part and denied it in part, allowing most of the claims to proceed while dismissing the statutory ones. The parties then exchanged information informally and mediated on September 11, 2025. That session did not resolve the case, but negotiations continued and the agreement was signed in the spring of 2026.

The petition alleged negligence, invasion of privacy, breach of implied contract and unjust enrichment, along with the two Iowa statutory claims the court dismissed. Muscatine Power and Water denies each of the claims and contentions alleged against it, denies all charges of wrongdoing or liability, and the agreement states expressly that it is settling to avoid the cost and uncertainty of continued litigation rather than as an admission. No court has found that the utility did anything unlawful.

Who Qualifies?

The court has defined the class as all persons Muscatine Power and Water identified as being among those individuals impacted by the data incident, including everyone who was sent a notice of the data breach. The settlement agreement puts the class at approximately 36,995 people.

Membership therefore turns on whether the utility's own records place you in the affected group, not on whether you were a customer at any particular moment. A mailed or emailed notice is the clearest sign of membership, and it is also what carries the credentials needed to file online.

The class excludes the judge in the case together with the judge's family and staff; Muscatine Power and Water and its officers, directors and related companies; and anyone who validly excludes themselves from the settlement.

How Much Can You Get?

Muscatine Power and Water will pay $525,000 into an interest-bearing escrow account, and the agreement caps its liability at that figure. Court-approved attorneys' fees and costs, a service award for the class representative, and the cost of administering the settlement come out of the fund before anything is paid to class members. What is left is the net settlement fund, and it pays the three benefits below. The documents do not estimate a per-person payment, and neither the notice nor the agreement states what administration will cost, so no reliable estimate can be drawn from them.

Case No. 1:23-cv-09219-DEH | United States District Court for the Southern District of New York

You may submit your claim up until October 26, 2026 at 11:59 p.m.

Enter the Claim ID and PIN from the notice you received to begin. Each Claim ID may be used for one claim only.

Can’t find your Claim ID? Contact the Settlement Administrator .

Settlement Information

The Court has adjourned the Final Approval Hearing due to a scheduling conflict. The hearing is now scheduled for November 13, 2026 at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 905, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007.

A settlement has been reached in a class action lawsuit against TED Foundation Inc. (“TED” or “Defendant”). The class action lawsuit claims that TED allegedly disclosed users’ personally identifiable information to third-party service providers, without users’ informed, written consent, in violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act (“VPPA”), 18 U.S.C. § 2710. The VPPA defines PII to include information which identifies a person as having requested or obtained specific video materials or services from a video tape service provider. Defendant denies that it engaged in any wrongful conduct or violated any law, and the Court has not decided who is right. The parties have agreed to settle the lawsuit to avoid the uncertainties and expenses associated with continuing the case.

You are included in the Settlement if you are a person in the United States who, between October 19, 2021 and July 14, 2026, was a TED account holder and watched a pre-recorded video on the website TED.com or on TED’s iOS or Android mobile applications (“Settlement Class Member(s)”).

Persons included in the Settlement will be eligible to automatically receive two free months of TED Membership (the “TED Membership Benefit,” estimated to have at least a $10.00 value), subject to their agreement to activate the TED Membership Benefit. However, each Settlement Class Member may instead file a Claim Form that will, if approved by the Settlement Administrator, entitle him or her the option to select in lieu of the TED Membership Benefit either (i) a cash payment for $5.00, subject to a pro rata reduction as explained below, or (ii) a donation option, whereby a Settlement Class Member agrees that their cash payment from the Settlement will be remitted as a donation to TED Foundation Inc. See Question 6 for details. For those Settlement Class Members who select the cash payment option, if approved by the Court, Defendant will make available up to $350,000.00 under the Settlement to pay all valid claims submitted by the Settlement Class (the “Settlement Fund”). In no event shall the amount Defendant pays in cash to said Settlement Class Members exceed $350,000.00.

Read the Notice carefully. Your legal rights are affected whether you act, or don’t act.

Your Legal Rights and Options in This Settlement

You will automatically receive the TED Membership Benefit (subject to your activation of the benefit). Selecting this option will give up your rights to sue Defendant about the claims in this case.

By submitting a claim form, you will have the option to receive a cash payment or donate your cash payment to TED. Selecting this option will give up your rights to sue Defendant about the claims in this case.

If you opt out of the settlement class, you will receive no benefits from the Settlement, but you will retain any rights you currently have to sue Defendant about the claims in this case.

If you remain in the settlement class but don’t like the Settlement, you can write to the Court explaining why you don’t like the Settlement.

If you remain in the settlement class and have objected to the Settlement, you can ask to speak in Court about your opinion of the Settlement.

Your rights and options— and the deadlines to exercise them —are explained in the Notice .

Frequently Asked Questions

For detailed information about eligibility requirements and how to file a claim, visit our FAQ page. Learn More

Auto Insurance · Claims Open

Current Status

Claims are open. A claim form must be postmarked, or submitted online by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time, no later than October 26, 2026. There is an earlier and easily missed date: September 14, 2026 is the deadline to exclude yourself, to object, or to file a notice of intent to appear. The Court granted preliminary approval and scheduled a fairness hearing for October 12, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. in a virtual courtroom, two weeks before claims close. What changed recently: as of October 20, 2026, the official settlement website had not posted a final approval order or any other ruling, its Key Dates page still listed the October 12, 2026 hearing, and no payment date had been announced.

What Changed Recently?

The Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida, preliminarily approved the settlement and authorized notice to the class, which is what opened the claim window and put the October 12, 2026 fairness hearing on the calendar. The case is Maxim Kharevich v. Star Casualty Insurance Company, Case No. 2023-013380-CA-01.

The underlying dispute is narrow and mechanical, which is part of why the payments are small and predictable rather than pro rata. The lawsuit alleges Star Casualty breached its Florida auto policies and applicable law in two ways: by failing to pay title transfer fees and tag transfer fees as part of the actual cash value of vehicles it declared a total loss, and by improperly deducting excess storage and towing charges from those actual cash value payments.

Star Casualty denies the allegations. It maintains that it complied with the terms of its insurance policies and with applicable law, and denies that it acted wrongfully or unlawfully. The Court has not decided who is right; the parties agreed to settle instead of litigating to judgment. Florida total loss disputes of this shape have produced their own settlements elsewhere — the Progressive total loss settlement and the Tennessee Farmers Mutual total loss settlement both turned on what an insurer owes beyond the vehicle's base value.

Who Qualifies?

You are a Settlement Class Member if, between March 22, 2018 and June 26, 2026, all three of the following are true:

• You were insured under a Florida automobile insurance policy issued by Star Casualty;
• You submitted a first-party claim that was adjusted as a total loss and settled by Star Casualty on an actual cash value basis; and
• You either did not receive the full amount of the title transfer fees and tag transfer fees, or had excess storage or towing charges deducted from your actual cash value payment, or both.

Note the "first-party" limit: this covers claims you made on your own Star Casualty policy, not claims made against a Star Casualty insured by someone else.

The class excludes Star Casualty itself along with its parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, directors, employees and their immediate family members; the Settlement Administrator, Class Counsel and Defense Counsel; the presiding judge, the judge's staff and immediate family; anyone whose total loss payment already included the full title and tag transfer fees and had no excess storage or towing deduction; anyone who submits a timely and valid request for exclusion; and anyone whose first-party property damage claim was already in or through appraisal, arbitration or a lawsuit when the Settlement Agreement was filed.

How Much Can You Get?

This settlement pays a calculated amount rather than a share of a fund, so the arithmetic is knowable in advance. A class member who submits a valid and timely claim receives:

• Up to $79.85 in unpaid transfer fees — a $75.25 title transfer fee plus a $4.60 tag transfer fee; and/or
• Repayment of any improper excess storage and towing deductions applied to the actual cash value payment, capped at $25 per day for up to 8 days , or $200 maximum; plus
• Prejudgment interest on the unpaid amounts.

Consumer Protection · Pending — Automatic Payment

Current Status

There is no claim form in this settlement and no claim deadline. Costa Del Mar, Inc. has agreed to fund a $23,900,000 Settlement Fund, and every Settlement Class Member who does nothing is scheduled to receive a pro rata cash payment for each qualifying repair. The only dates that require action are the exclusion and objection deadlines, both October 26, 2026; the notice states them as calendar dates and does not specify a timezone.

The settlement is not final. Judge Roy B. Dalton, Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida has set the Final Approval Hearing for December 14, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. in Orlando. No final approval order had been entered and no payment date had been announced as of August 27, 2026. Costa denies any wrongdoing or liability, and the Court has not decided the merits of the claims or Costa's defenses.

What Changed Recently?

The Court certified this lawsuit as a class action in 2025 and notice went out then to tell class members the case existed. A second round of notice is going out now for a different reason: the parties reached a settlement, and it puts real dates on the calendar for the first time — an October 26, 2026 exclusion and objection deadline and a December 14, 2026 Final Approval Hearing.

If you received a Costa notice years ago and assumed the matter was resolved, it was not. An earlier settlement that combined three Costa lawsuits, including Smith v. Costa Del Mar, Inc., Case No. 3:18-cv-1011, was vacated on appeal in Smith v. Miorelli, 93 F.4th 1206 (11th Cir. 2024). The settlement website for this case confirms that the Smith settlement is no longer in effect. The agreement described on this page is a separate, later deal reached in the Reed case.

The Smith case did not disappear either. It was re-filed in Florida state court and settled again in 2026, this time for $4,095,000, over a different fee — what Costa charged to repair sunglasses damaged by a manufacturer's defect, the repairs its “Lifetime Warranty” was supposed to cover. Two Costa settlements are therefore live at once, with separate funds, classes and deadlines, and one person can be covered by both. See our page on the Costa Del Mar $4.095M sunglasses warranty fee settlement for that one.

Who Qualifies?

You are a Settlement Class Member if you are a citizen of the United States, you purchased nonprescription, non-promotional Costa sunglasses before January 1, 2018, and Costa charged you a fee between April 3, 2015 and January 28, 2026 to repair or replace components of those sunglasses that Costa determined were damaged by accident, normal wear and tear, or misuse.

Two limits matter. First, the repair fee must have exceeded $11.95 — a repair billed at or below that figure does not qualify. Second, the class excludes Florida residents, who the notice says are covered by a settlement in a separate lawsuit, Haney v. Costa Del Mar, Inc. That $21.75 million Florida settlement also pays Floridians automatically for repairs over $11.95, and lets Floridians who bought Costa sunglasses from July 2013 to January 2018 claim a share by January 11, 2027. Also excluded are Costa itself along with its controlled affiliates and specified related persons, and judicial staff assigned to the case.

Prescription lenses and promotional pairs are outside the class definition, as are repairs Costa performed under a different arrangement than the damage categories above. If you are not sure whether a repair you paid for qualifies, the official settlement website is the place to check.

Biometric Privacy · Pending — Automatic Payment

Current Status

There is no claim form: class members identified in the defendants' records will be mailed a check automatically if the court approves the settlement. The court in Lake County, Illinois has granted preliminary approval, and the final approval hearing is set for November 4, 2026 at 9:30 a.m. The deadline to opt out, to object, or — for workers who never received a notice — to submit a Verification Form is October 26, 2026. No payment date had been announced as of September 30, 2026.

What Changed Recently?

Thermoflex Corp. and Thermoflex Waukegan, LLC, together with staffing agencies TempsNow Employment and Placement Services, LLC and M.M.D., Inc. d/b/a The AllStaff Group, agreed to a $9 million settlement to resolve claims under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA). The parties signed the settlement agreement at the end of July 2026, and the court's preliminary approval opened the notice period that runs through October 26, 2026.

The lawsuit, Johnson v. Thermoflex Corp., et al., was filed in July 2020 in the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit in Lake County. Plaintiffs allege that workers at Thermoflex's Waukegan facility had to scan their fingerprints on a NOVAtime timeclock to record their hours, without first receiving the written disclosures and signing the written consent BIPA requires. The defendants contest those claims and deny violating BIPA, and the settlement is not an admission of wrongdoing.

The case was paused for well over a year while Illinois courts decided several questions that shaped every workplace BIPA case — whether workers' compensation law bars these claims, which statute of limitations applies, and when a BIPA claim accrues. After the stay lifted in March 2023, the parties litigated the pleadings, exchanged discovery that included more than a dozen depositions, and mediated twice, in January 2025 and April 2026, before reaching the deal.

Who Qualifies?

The settlement class is everyone who performed work for Thermoflex in the State of Illinois and used a finger-scanning device at any time from July 27, 2015 to September 3, 2020. That includes workers placed at Thermoflex through a staffing agency; the notice describes the class as people who scanned during their work placement at Thermoflex.

Class members were identified through the defendants' records, and those people were sent a notice. Anyone who fits the definition but did not receive one can still join the payment by submitting a Verification Form (see below).

How Much Can You Get?

The $9 million fund works out to a gross payment of $1,532.18 per class member. That figure is reduced by settlement administration costs, attorneys' fees of up to 40% of the fund plus costs, and a service award of up to $10,000 for the class representative, all of which the court still has to approve. The notice estimates the net payment at approximately $900 per person.

The $900 figure is an estimate. The final amount depends on what the court awards in fees and costs. Checks expire and become void 180 days after they are issued.

A similar workplace timeclock case, the ZK Technology BIPA settlement for Alliance Ground workers, is also paying Illinois workers who clocked in with a finger or face scan, but it requires a claim form.

What Proof or Notice ID Is Required?

Workers who received a notice need to do nothing — no claim form, no ID and no documents. The check is mailed automatically after final approval.

Workers who did not receive a notice must prove they belong in the class by completing a Verification Form, either online through the official settlement website or on a downloadable paper form. The settlement website does not describe what documentation, if any, the form asks for, so have your dates of work at Thermoflex and the staffing agency that placed you, if any, on hand. Anyone who received a notice should not file a Verification Form.

Employment · Pending — Automatic Payment

Current Status

There is no claim form; class members are paid automatically unless they opt out. The deadline to opt out, object, or choose a digital payment instead of a mailed check is October 26, 2026. The court granted preliminary approval on August 17, 2026, and the final approval hearing is set for January 15, 2027, at 1:30 p.m. The settlement has not received final approval, and no payment date has been announced as of October 2, 2026.

What Changed Recently?

King County Superior Court preliminarily approved the settlement in Spencer v. Gosiger Machine Tools, LLC, et al. on August 17, 2026, and authorized Simpluris, Inc. to send notice to class members. The complaint was filed December 23, 2025.

The lawsuit claims that Gosiger Machine Tools, LLC, which does business as Gosiger, posted Washington job openings without the wage scale or salary range required by the pay transparency provision of the Washington Equal Pay and Opportunities Act, RCW 49.58.110. Gosiger denies liability, contends it did not violate any law, and agreed to settle to avoid the cost and risk of continued litigation. The settlement is not an admission of wrongdoing, and the court has not decided who would have won.

The case is one of many Washington pay-transparency settlements involving job applicants; open and recently closed cases are tracked on the Washington job posting settlements hub.

Who Qualifies?

The settlement class covers everyone who, from January 1, 2023 through August 17, 2026, applied for a job opening in Washington with Gosiger where the posting did not disclose the wage scale or salary range, or did not include a general description of the benefits and other compensation offered to a hired applicant.

Class members are identified from Gosiger’s application records, and the people those records identify were sent notice. The settlement agreement states that Gosiger represented the class at 69 people; if more class members turn up, the fund increases proportionally.

How Much Can You Get?

Every class member who does not opt out receives an equal share of the class fund. The settlement website estimates each share at $1,841.27. That figure is an estimate, not a guaranteed amount.

The class fund is what remains of the $241,500 common fund after court-approved deductions. Class counsel will ask for $80,500 in attorneys’ fees (about one-third of the fund) plus up to $15,000 in costs, a $15,000 service award for the class representative, and administration costs capped at $15,500. The court may award less, and any amount not awarded goes back into the class fund. Shares that belong to people who opt out are also reallocated to everyone else.

What Proof or Notice ID Is Required?

None to get paid. There is no claim form, and class members do not have to submit anything to receive a payment. The Login ID and PIN printed on the notice are used only to choose a digital payment method on the settlement website, which is optional.

Applicants who think they were wrongly left out, or who dispute the information used to calculate their payment, have 30 days from the date notice was sent to raise it with the settlement administrator. Gosiger’s records control unless the applicant has documents showing they belong in the class.

What Is the Deadline?

October 26, 2026 is the last day to opt out, to object, and to choose a digital payment. The official sources give a date only, with no time zone.

An opt-out request must be a signed, dated letter to the settlement administrator with the class member’s full name, address and a statement asking to be excluded, postmarked by October 26, 2026; the mailing address is listed on the official settlement website. Requests by phone or email are not accepted, and each person must opt out individually. Anyone who opts out receives no payment and keeps the right to sue Gosiger on their own.

A State Court authorized this Settlement Website

A settlement has been reached with Olinsky & Associates, PLLC (“Olinsky” or “Defendant”) in a class action lawsuit (“Settlement”). This case concerns Plaintiffs’ allegations regarding the cyberattack on Olinsky's computer systems that occurred in January 2025 (the “Data Incident”). Olinsky determined personally identifiable information and protected health information were potentially impacted during the Data Incident. The potentially impacted information was different for each individual and included: names, addresses, Social Security numbers, account information, financial information, medical records or disability-payment information, driver’s license numbers, financial information, and health insurance information. Some of the information was truncated, only exposing the last four or five digits of the social security number or bank account information.

The lawsuit is called Leon-Roman v. Olinsky & Associates, PLLC , Case No. 5:25-cv-000462-ECC-CBF (the “Litigation”), which is pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York. In the Litigation, the Plaintiff brings claims for negligence, breach of implied contract, and unjust enrichment and seeks damages and injunctive relief concerning the Data Incident. Olinsky denies that it did anything wrong and would assert defenses to the claims if the Litigation were not settling. The Court has not decided who is right. The parties have agreed to settle the Litigation to avoid the expected massive costs of litigating through trial, the inherent risk that either party will lose before or at trial, and the potential damage to Olinsky associated with prolonged litigation; and to achieve a final resolution for the Settlement Class and Olinsky as to all issues raised in the Litigation.

If you received notice, Olinsky's records indicate that you are a Class Member and are entitled to benefits under the Settlement. You may have received a previous notice directly from Olinsky.

Under the Settlement Agreement , Class Members will automatically receive a Credit Monitoring activation code for 3 years of CyEx’s Financial Shield Complete, and a Settlement check of $40.00 mailed to their last known mailing address. A Class Member may update their check mailing address or elect to receive this payment digitally, by Zelle, PayPal, Venmo, Mastercard or ACH, by completing the Payment Election form here .

If you were identified as a member of the Settlement Class, your rights are affected whether you act or don’t act. Please read the Notice carefully and completely.

Automatically receive benefits

Settlement Class Members will automatically receive an Enrollment Code for CyEx Financial Shield Complete which will become active to use once the Settlement is finally approved.

Additionally, if the Settlement is finally approved, Class Members will be mailed a check for a $40.00 cash payment.

Opt Out of the Settlement

You can choose to opt out of the Settlement and receive no benefit or payment. This option allows you to sue, continue to sue, or be part of another lawsuit against Defendant related to the legal claims resolved by this Settlement. You can hire your own lawyer at your own expense.

For more detailed information, see Question 15 .

Object to the Settlement and/or attend a hearing

If you do not opt out of the Settlement, you may object to it by writing to the Court about why you don’t like the Settlement. You may also ask the Court for permission to speak about your objection at the Final Approval Hearing.

For more detailed information, see Question 16 .

Unless you opt out of the Settlement, you are automatically part of the Settlement. If you do nothing, you will automatically receive benefits or payments from this Settlement and you will give up the right to sue, continue to sue, or be part of another lawsuit against the Defendant related to the legal claims resolved by this Settlement.

Shareholder Litigation · Pending Final Approval

Current Status

There is no claim form and no claim deadline in this settlement — eligible shareholders are paid automatically if the Court approves it. The Court preliminarily approved the $60,000,000 settlement on July 1, 2026 and set a settlement hearing for November 10, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. in Oklahoma County. Final approval has not been granted, and no payment date has been announced. Class members who want to object, or to speak at the hearing, must have their written objection received by October 26, 2026. The window to exclude yourself from the Class closed on April 23, 2026 under the earlier class notice, so opting out is no longer available.

What Changed Recently?

The parties signed a term sheet on April 14, 2026, weeks before a trial that was set to begin on May 4, 2026, and executed the final settlement agreement on June 18, 2026. On July 1, 2026, the District Court of Oklahoma County preliminarily approved the settlement, authorized notice to the Class, and scheduled the hearing at which it will decide whether to grant final approval. The notice to class members is dated July 16, 2026.

The defendants deny all allegations of wrongdoing, fault, liability, or damage, and say they acted properly and in good faith at all relevant times. They state they agreed to settle solely to avoid the burden, expense, and distraction of continued litigation. No court has found that anyone did anything wrong.

What Was the Continental Resources Lawsuit About?

Continental Resources is an Oklahoma City-based oil and gas producer founded by Harold Hamm. In October 2022, Hamm and his affiliates moved to take the company private, and on November 22, 2022 a tender offer closed that bought out the company's remaining public shareholders at $74.28 per share in cash. Continental's stock stopped trading publicly after that.

The consolidated case, In re Continental Resources, Inc. Shareholder Litigation, Case No. CJ-2022-4162, was filed in the District Court of Oklahoma County, Oklahoma. The plaintiffs alleged that Hamm, his affiliates, and several Continental directors and officers breached their fiduciary duties in connection with that buyout. Specifically, the petition alleged that the minority shareholders were cashed out for inadequate consideration after an unfair process; that Hamm and his affiliates engaged in insider trading before the take-private offer was publicly announced; and that other individual defendants breached their duties by approving or recommending the transaction. Those are allegations, and the two remaining defendants — Hamm and former chief executive Bill Berry — deny them.

The case went nearly the full distance. The Court denied a partial motion to dismiss in October 2023, certified the Class in July 2024, and oversaw roughly two years of discovery that included more than 150,000 documents and over 40 depositions. In December 2025 the Court granted summary judgment to two individual defendants, dismissing them from the case, and granted in part and denied in part a summary judgment motion on the insider trading count. A December 2025 mediation failed; the case settled in April 2026 on a mediator's proposal, about three weeks before trial.

Who Qualifies?

The Court certified a Class consisting of former record holders and beneficial owners of Continental Resources common stock who held or owned that stock at any time from October 17, 2022 through November 22, 2022 — the Class Period — including their legal representatives, trustees, executors, administrators, estates, and heirs.

Excluded are the defendants and former defendants, their immediate family members, affiliates, subsidiaries, legal representatives, heirs, estates, successors and assigns, any entity in which a defendant or former defendant has or had a controlling interest, and anyone who validly excluded themselves from the Class under the earlier class notice.

FN Logistics LLC has agreed to pay a $5.56 million class action settlement to resolve claims it violated California’s labor laws.

The FN Logistics settlement benefits current and former hourly, non-exempt employees who worked for FN Logistics in California between Jan. 13, 2019, and Dec. 31, 2024, as well as temporary workers from Adecco, Bluecrew, Personal HR, Randstad, Next Level Staffing, IWC, Compliant Care Staffing, Driven Talent and Eastridge during the same period.

The class action settlement also benefits the same class of workers under the California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) between Oct. 2, 2021, and Dec. 31, 2024.

FN Logistics is a supply chain management company that offers warehousing, distribution, transportation and other services. FN Logistics serves as the logistics and distribution arm of Fashion Nova, a fast-fashion retailer.

According to a class action lawsuit against FN Logistics, the company violated California labor laws by failing to pay employees all wages and overtime wages at the required rates, provide minimum wages, timely pay wages during employment or upon termination, reimburse work-related expenses, provide required meal periods and rest breaks, and issue accurate, itemized wage statements. The lawsuit also alleges that FN Logistics failed to provide required sick days and sick pay, suitable seating and suitable workplace temperatures.

FN Logistics has not admitted any wrongdoing but agreed to pay $5.56 million to resolve the alleged wage and hour violations and other violations under California’s labor laws.

Under the terms of the FN Logistics settlement, class members can receive a cash payment based on the number of workweeks they worked during the class period. Class members who worked a higher number of workweeks will receive a larger share of the net settlement fund. Class members may also receive a PAGA payment based on the number of pay periods they worked during the PAGA period.

Class members may receive a combined payment that includes both a class payment and a PAGA payment.

The deadline for exclusion and objection is Oct. 26, 2026.

The final approval hearing for the FN Logistics settlement is scheduled for Dec. 1, 2026.

If you received direct notice of the settlement by mail, you do not need to submit a claim. If you did not receive notice but believe you are a qualifying class member, you may submit a claim form to request a cash payment no later than Oct. 26, 2026.

The class action settlement benefits current and former hourly, non-exempt employees who worked for FN Logistics LLC or its predecessor, FN Logistics Inc., in California from Jan. 13, 2019, to Dec. 31, 2024, as well as temporary employees who worked for FN Logistics at any of their California locations during the class period and were hired or placed through temporary or staffing agencies. The settlement also includes a PAGA group of employees who worked for FN Logistics and its predecessor from Oct. 2, 2021, to Dec. 31, 2024.

Class members can challenge the number of workweeks and/or pay periods credited to them by sending copies of pay stubs or other records to the settlement administrator no later than Oct. 26, 2026.

NOTE: If you do not qualify for this settlement do NOT file a claim.

Remember: you are submitting your claim under penalty of perjury . You are also harming other eligible Class Members by submitting a fraudulent claim. If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other open class action settlements you may be eligible for.

FN Logistics class action settlement, Case No. 22STCV26948, in the California Superior Court for Los Angeles County

FNLogisticsClassAction.com

FN Logistics $5.57M California Wage and Hour Settlement

Individuals who worked as hourly, nonexempt employees for FN Logistics LLC or its predecessor, FN Logistics Inc., in California between Jan. 13, 2019, and Dec. 31, 2024, or as temporary employees a staffing agency placed at FN Logistics during that time may be eligible to claim a cash payment from a class action settlement .

FN Logistics agreed to pay $5.57 million to settle a class action lawsuit alleging violations of California wage-and-hour laws, including claims of unpaid overtime, missed meal and rest breaks, unreimbursed expenses and other labor code violations.

Who are the class members?

• All current and former hourly, nonexempt employees who worked for FN Logistics or its predecessor in California at any time from Jan. 13, 2019, through Dec. 31, 2024
• All temporary employees who worked for FN Logistics or its predecessor at any California location during the same period and whom any temporary or staffing agency hired or placed

There is a also a Private Attorney General Act class, which includes all class members who worked for FN Logistics LLC or its predecessor at any California location at any time from Oct. 2, 2021, through Dec. 31, 2024.

How much are settlement payments?

Class members can receive one or more of the following payments:

• Class fund: Eligible class members can receive a pro rata cash payment form the net settlement fund. The settlement administrator will determine the payment amount by the number of workweeks the class member worked during the class period.
• PAGA payment: The settlement administrator will split the $200,000 PAGA settlement fund with 25% ($50,000) to qualifying class members and 75% ($150,000) to the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency. The settlement administrator will determine the payment amount by the number of pay periods the class member worked during the PAGA period.

How to claim a class action payment

If a class member received a notice by mail, they do not need to take any action. If they did not receive a mailed notice but believe they are a class member, they must file a claim to participate. They may do this by using the online claim form ; downloading, printing and completing the PDF claim form ; or requesting a paper claim form from the settlement administrator.

Settlement administrator’s mailing address: Bucio v. FNL Settlement, P.O. Box 26170, Santa Ana, CA 92799

Settlement administrator's email address: info@BuciovFNLogisticsClassAction.com

Settlement administrator's phone number: 833-647-9068

The claim deadline is Oct. 26, 2026.

Is proof or documentation required to submit a claim?

Claimants who did not receive a mailed notice must provide copies of pay stubs or other records that prove the number of workweeks they worked during the class period.

Payout options

• Paper check mailed to the address on file

$5.57 million settlement fund breakdown

The $5,565,000 settlement fund includes:

• Settlement administration costs: Up to $32,000
• Attorneys’ fees: Up to $1,947,750
• Attorneys’ expenses: Up to $52,250
• Service awards to class representatives: Up to $10,000 each ($40,000 total)
• PAGA LWDA penalties and payments to class members: $200,000
• Class fund payments to eligible class members: Remaining settlement funds

Important dates

• Deadline to file a claim: Oct. 26, 2026
• Deadline to opt out: Dec. 1, 2026
• Final approval hearing: Dec. 1, 2026

When is the FN Logistics payout date?

The settlement administrator will issue checks to eligible class members after the court resolves any appeals and grants final approval of the settlement.

Why is there a class action settlement?

The lawsuit alleged FN Logistics and its staffing agencies violated California labor laws by failing to:

• Provide meal and rest breaks
• Issue accurate wage statements

The plaintiffs also sought civil penalties under PAGA for these alleged violations.

Fort Wayne Medical Education Program Data Breach Settlement

Editor & Community Manager

September 3, 2026 3:56 PM

Individuals whose private information the December 2024 Fort Wayne Medical Education Program data breach compromised may qualify to submit a claim for up to $5,500 plus other benefits from a class action settlement .

Fort Wayne Medical Education Program agreed to settle a class action lawsuit regarding a targeted cyberattack on its computer systems. The complaint alleges the December 2024 data breach exposed personally identifiable information and protected health information belonging to 29,485 individuals.

Who can file a claim for a data breach payout?

Class members are individuals whose private information the December 2024 FWMEP data breach potentially compromised and whom the settlement class list includes.

There are two groups of class members:

• Group 1: Individuals whose Social Security numbers the breach potentially compromised
• Group 2: Individuals whose Social Security numbers the breach did not compromise but whose other private information it affected

How much are settlement payments?

Class members have the following benefit options:

• Reimbursement for ordinary out-of-pocket losses: All class members can claim up to $500 for documented expenses related to the data breach that occurred between Dec. 12, 2024, and Oct. 27, 2026. This may include credit monitoring fees, ID replacement costs and postage.
• Reimbursement for lost time: All class members can claim up to four hours at $20 per hour for time spent responding to the breach for a maximum of $80. This includes time spent researching the incident, changing passwords or investigating suspicious accounting activity. The $500 ordinary loss cap includes lost-time claims.
• Reimbursement for extraordinary out-of-pocket losses: All class members can claim up to $5,000 for documented losses from identity theft or fraud that occurred between Dec. 12, 2024, and Oct. 27, 2026, and are traceable to the data breach.
• Alternative cash payment: Class members who do not submit a claim for credit or medical monitoring, ordinary or extraordinary out-of-pocket losses, or lost time can submit a claim to receive a one-time $40 cash payment.
• Credit monitoring services: Group 1 class members can elect to receive two years of CyEx Financial Shield Complete, which includes $1 million in financial fraud insurance and monitoring for identity theft, unauthorized transactions and high-risk activity.
• Medical monitoring services: Group 2 class members can elect to receive two years of CyEx Medical Shield Complete, which includes $1 million in medical identity theft insurance and monitoring for health care ID exposure, medical record number exposure and unauthorized HSA spending.

How to claim a class action rebate

To receive a settlement payment, class members can file a claim online or print and complete the PDF claim form and mail or email it to the settlement administrator.

Settlement administrator's mailing address: FWMEP Data Incident Settlement, c/o Settlement Administrator, P.O. Box 25226, Santa Ana, CA 92799-9958

Settlement administrator's email address: info@FWMEPDataSettlement.com

The claim deadline is Oct. 27, 2026.

Required proof and claim information

• Online claims require the login ID and PIN from the settlement notice the class member received.
• Ordinary and extraordinary out-of-pocket losses claims require supporting documentation, which may include r eceipts, bank or credit card statements or other proof of identity theft or fraud.
• Lost time claims require a brief description of how the class member spent their time dealing with the data breach.

Payout options

• Paper check mailed to the address provided

Settlement fund breakdown

The settlement fund will include:

• Settlement administration costs : To be determined
• Attorneys' fees and costs: Up to $475,000
• Service awards to class representatives: $2,500 each ($17,500 total)

AMN Healthcare has agreed to a $4.5 million class action settlement to resolve claims it violated California privacy laws by recording and monitoring language interpretation sessions without consent.

The AMN Healthcare settlement benefits individuals who were physically present in California and whose communications were monitored and/or recorded by AMN Healthcare, AMN Healthcare Language Services, or other AMN employees, contractors, agents or persons acting on AMN Healthcare’s behalf without obtaining prior consent.

AMN Healthcare is a healthcare staffing company that provides services such as telehealth, workforce solutions, clinical services and more. AMN Healthcare Language Services provides interpretation and translation services to healthcare providers.

According to a class action lawsuit, AMN Healthcare violated the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) by recording and/or monitoring calls or videos interpreted by AMN in California without the knowledge or consent of plaintiffs and other patients.

AMN Healthcare has not admitted any wrongdoing but agreed to a $4.5 million class action settlement to resolve the alleged privacy violations.

Under the terms of the AMN Healthcare settlement, class members can receive a cash payment based on the number of claims filed with the settlement.

Class members who submit a valid claim form will be paid a proportionate share of the net settlement fund. The net settlement fund will be calculated by subtracting the service award payments to plaintiffs, the costs of administering the settlement and attorneys’ fees and costs from the gross settlement fund of $4.5 million.

No payment estimates are available at this time.

AMN Healthcare also agreed to implement business practice changes to ensure compliance with the CIPA. The company instructed relevant employees to cease recording interpretation sessions in January 2024 and all monitoring of interpretation sessions in November 2024.

The deadline for exclusion and objection to the settlement terms is Oct. 27, 2026.

The final approval hearing for the AMN Healthcare settlement is scheduled for Dec. 18, 2026.

To receive a settlement payment, class members must submit a valid claim form by Oct. 27, 2026.

The class action settlement benefits individuals who were physically present in California and whose communications were monitored or recorded by AMN Healthcare, its employees, contractors, agents or other persons acting on its behalf without obtaining prior consent between Dec. 4, 2022, and Aug. 7, 2026.

NOTE: If you do not qualify for this settlement do NOT file a claim.

Remember: you are submitting your claim under penalty of perjury . You are also harming other eligible Class Members by submitting a fraudulent claim. If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other open class action settlements you may be eligible for.

Carrero, et al. v. AMN Healthcare Inc., et al. , Case No. 37-2023-00052448-CU-NP-CTL, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Diego

Carrero v. AMN Healthcare c/o Kroll Settlement Administration LLC P.O. Box 225391 New York, NY 10150-5391 833-319-1317

Jerusalem F. Beligan Leah M. Beligan BELIGAN LAW GROUP LLP

Jonathan Shub Benjamin F. Johns Samantha E. Holbrook SHUB JOHNS & HOLBROOK LLP

Wynter L. Deagle Anne-Marie D. Dao Mark Ratway SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• $21.5M New York City Central Booking class action settlement
• American Consumer Credit Counseling data breach class action settlement
• $3.75M HireVue Illinois BIPA class action settlement
• $685,000 Equinox data breach class action settlement

LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE

NAR $120M Homebuyer Antitrust Class Action Settlement

Editor & Community Manager

Individuals who purchased a home listed on a multiple listing service anywhere in the United States and paid a commission to any brokerage as part of their transaction during the relevant class period may qualify to submit a claim for a cash payment from a class action settlement .

The National Association of Realtors and several major real estate brokerages agreed to pay $120,334,500 to settle a class action lawsuit. The complaint alleged these companies engaged in anticompetitive conduct that kept broker commissions artificially high, which plaintiffs claim led to inflated home prices and reduced service quality for homebuyers.

Who can file a claim for a homebuyer settlement payout?

Class members must meet the following criteria:

• They purchased a home that listed on an MLS anywhere in the United States.
• They paid a commission in connection with the transaction.
• They purchased the home during a qualifying class period for the state and brokerage involved.

The class periods vary depending on the state and the defendant:

• The class periods for At World Properties LLC, Baird & Warner Inc., Real Estate One Inc., Silvercreek Realty Group LLC, Equity Realtors LLC (d/b/a Equity Real Estate), NextHome Inc., Realty Executives International Services LLC, Shorewest Realtors Inc., Side Inc., Engel & Volkers Americas Inc. and Engel & Volkers GmbH, The Keyes Co., Illustrated Properties LLC, The Real Brokerage Inc., Real Broker LLC, Vanguard Properties Inc., Fathom Realty LLC, HomeSmart International LLC, Realty ONE Group Inc., Kempa and Associates d/b/a Realty ONE Group Excel and Umro Realty Corp d/b/a The Agency are the following:
• Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming: Dec. 8, 2017, through June 25, 2026
• Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky and Missouri: Dec. 8, 2018, through June 25, 2026
• All other states: Dec. 8, 2019, through June 25, 2026
• The class periods for Anywhere Real Estate Inc., Compass Inc., eXp World Holdings Inc., HomeServices of America Inc., BHH Affiliates LLC, HSF Affiliates LLC, Hanna Holdings Inc., United Real Estate Holdings LLC d/b/a United Real Estate Group, Douglas Elliman Inc. and the National Association of Realtors are the following:
• Puerto Rico: Jan. 25, 2006, through June 25, 2026
• Rhode Island and Louisiana: Jan. 25, 2011, through June 25, 2026
• Wyoming: Jan. 25, 2013, through June 25, 2026
• Alabama, Connecticut, Hawaii, Indiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont and Wisconsin: Jan. 25, 2015, through June 25, 2026
• Arkansas, Kentucky, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, Utah and West Virginia: Jan. 25, 2016, through June 25, 2026
• Arizona, California, Washington D.C., Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina and Virginia: Jan. 25, 2017, through June 25, 2026
• Alaska, Colorado, Kansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Washington: Jan. 25, 2018, through June 25, 2026
• Texas and all other states: Jan. 25, 2019, through June 25, 2026

Who is excluded from the class?

Individuals who are class members in a settlement reached in one or more of the home seller lawsuits (Burnett, Gibson, Keel or Hooper) do not qualify to participate in the homebuyer settlement.

How much are settlement payments?

Pro rata cash payment: Class members can submit a claim to receive a pro rata cash payment. The settlement administrator will determine the final payment amount by the number of qualifying properties purchased, the amount of commissions paid and the total number of claims filed.

How to claim a class action rebate

To receive a settlement payment, class members can file a claim online or print the PDF claim form to complete and mail to the settlement administrator.

Data Breach · Claims Open

Current Status

Claims are open. A Claim Form must be submitted online by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on October 28, 2026, or mailed so that it is postmarked by that date. The separate deadline to opt out or to object is a month earlier, September 28, 2026. The court has authorized notice to the class but has not yet decided whether to approve the settlement: the final approval hearing is scheduled for November 16, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. Mountain Time in Phoenix, and the notice warns the date and time may change without further notice. No payments have been issued and no payment date has been announced. If you were sent a notice about the On Q data security incident, the step to take now is to file — nothing in this settlement is paid automatically, so a class member who does nothing receives nothing and is still bound by the release.

What Changed Recently?

A settlement was reached with On Q Financial, LLC, the court authorized notice to the settlement class, and the claim process opened with an October 28, 2026 deadline. That is what is new here — this page covers a settlement that has just become claimable, not a later development in one. The case is Feathers et al. v. On Q Financial, LLC, No. CV2025-037770, in the Maricopa County Superior Court in Arizona.

On Q denies all of the plaintiffs' claims and maintains that it did not do anything wrong. The notice states that the court did not decide in favor of either side, and that the parties agreed to settle to avoid the costs and risks of a trial. No court has found On Q liable.

What Is This Settlement About?

On Q Financial is an Arizona-based residential mortgage lender. According to the court-approved notice, on or around February 20, 2024 the company received notification that a vulnerability was present in the product of a software and IT management provider, and later discovered that a threat actor had exploited that vulnerability and potentially accessed files containing clients' Private Information. The notice describes that information as clients' names and Social Security numbers.

On or around March 29, 2024, On Q began notifying potentially impacted individuals. Public breach-notification filings at the time reported that the incident affected roughly 211,650 people. That figure comes from the company's regulatory breach reporting rather than from the settlement documents, which do not state a class size.

The settlement notice does not name the software vendor whose product was involved. The date it gives lines up with the disclosure window of a widely exploited authentication-bypass flaw in ConnectWise's ScreenConnect remote-management software, catalogued as CVE-2024-1709, which ConnectWise disclosed on February 19, 2024 and which CISA added to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog on February 22, 2024. Because the settlement documents do not identify the product, treat that as timeline context rather than a confirmed link.

The plaintiffs allege injuries arising from the incident. A name paired with a Social Security number is the combination that makes a breach durable — an address or a card number can be changed, and a Social Security number generally cannot — which is why the settlement's non-cash benefit is monitoring rather than a one-time fix.

OCA tracks mortgage and lending breaches closely. The NJ Lenders data breach settlement is a closely comparable case, and every open breach claim window we follow is listed on the data breach settlements tracker.

Who Qualifies?

The settlement class consists of individuals whose Private Information may have been compromised in the data security incident on or around February 20, 2024. Membership turns on whether your information may have been involved, not on whether you can show you were harmed — and in practice the administrator worked from the notice list, which is why a Class Member ID is what unlocks the online filing process.

Data Breach · Claims Open

What Changed Recently?

The settlement reached the stage where it matters to you: notice went out, the claims period opened, and the window is now inside its final month. The opt-out and objection deadlines came and went on September 28, 2026, which is why the only decision left for most class members is whether to file.

The lawsuit was filed in 2024 in the Circuit Court of Calhoun County, Alabama, and consolidated claims brought on behalf of people notified of the breach. The parties negotiated a settlement, the court granted preliminary approval, and the administrator began notifying the class. The claims period runs ninety days from the date notice was issued, which is how the October 28 deadline was set.

None of this is a finding against anyone. Highland Health denies that it did anything wrong, the court has not decided who is right, and the parties say they settled to avoid the costs, risks, disruptions and uncertainties of continuing the litigation.

What Happened in the Breach

Highland Health Systems is a behavioral health provider based in Anniston, Alabama. The settlement documents describe a targeted cyberattack on its computer systems in July 2023, discovered on or about July 3, 2023, in which certain files containing private information were accessed.

The categories of data involved are unusually broad for a breach of this size. According to the court-approved notice, the files may have contained full names, addresses, telephone numbers and email addresses, together with dates of birth, Social Security numbers, account numbers, payment card numbers and payment card PINs, email addresses and passwords, medical information and health insurance information, tax IDs, routing numbers, and driver's licence or state ID numbers.

That combination is worth taking seriously. A breach that pairs a Social Security number with a bank routing number, a payment card PIN and a reusable password gives an attacker more than one route, and the medical and health-insurance element is what the settlement's monitoring benefit is built around.

The lawsuit alleged that the breach happened because of inadequate data security. The settlement agreement records that Highland Health has adopted, paid for and implemented certain information-security changes, described to class counsel in a confidential affidavit rather than filed publicly. Those changes are expressly not injunctive relief, and the agreement states that no class member has standing to enforce them.

Who Qualifies?

The settlement class is all persons residing in the United States whose private information was exposed to unauthorized third parties as a result of the data breach Highland Health discovered on or about July 3, 2023. The settlement agreement puts the class at approximately 83,543 people, identified from Highland Health's own records.

A few points decide most eligibility questions:

• Membership comes from Highland Health's records, not from where you live now. The class is defined by exposure in the breach; "United States" in the agreement covers all fifty states, the District of Columbia and all territories.
• You do not need to have suffered identity theft. Nothing in the class definition or the pro rata cash option turns on harm — the flat payment is available to any class member who files.
• Many class members were already told. Highland Health sent its own breach notice at the time, and the settlement administrator has since mailed and emailed the court-approved notice; receiving either is a strong signal you are on the list.
• Anyone who opted out by September 28, 2026 is excluded, as are the defendants, entities they control, Highland Health's officers, directors, legal representatives, successors, subsidiaries and assigns, and any judicial officer presiding over the case along with their immediate families and staff.

FinWise Bank, FinWise Bancorp and American First Finance agreed to a $2.8 million class action settlement to resolve claims they failed to prevent a 2024 data breach that compromised sensitive consumer information.

The FinWise Bank settlement benefits individuals whose private information was affected by the FinWise Bank data breach on or around May 31, 2024, including those who received a notice of the data breach.

The FinWise Bank data breach allegedly compromised sensitive consumer information, such as names, birth dates, Social Security numbers and account numbers. Consumers took legal action against FinWise Bank, FinWise Bancorp and American First Finance following the breach, arguing the companies could have prevented the data breach through reasonable cybersecurity measures.

FinWise Bank is a financial institution based in Utah that offers personal loans, business loans and other financial services.

The defendants in the data breach class action lawsuit have not admitted any wrongdoing but agreed to resolve the allegations with a $2.8 million class action settlement.

Under the terms of the FinWise Bank settlement, class members can receive a cash payment for documented losses or a proportional share of the settlement fund.

Class members who experienced documented losses as a result of the data breach can receive up to $5,000 in reimbursement. Eligible losses could include unreimbursed fraud, identity theft, credit monitoring expenses, credit report costs and other documented expenses. Class members must provide documentation of these losses with their claim form.

Class members who did not experience documented losses can receive a proportional share of the class action settlement fund. These payments will vary depending on the number of claims filed with the settlement.

California class members may be entitled to additional relief under California’s privacy laws. These class members can receive up to two times the cash fund payment compared to non-California residents.

All class members are eligible for two years of free credit monitoring services. To receive this benefit, class members must select the credit monitoring option on their claim form.

The deadline for exclusion and objection is Sept. 29, 2026.

The final approval hearing for the FinWise Bank settlement is scheduled for Dec. 10, 2026.

To receive settlement benefits, class members must submit a valid claim form by Oct. 29, 2026.

The class action settlement benefits individuals whose private information was affected by the FinWise Bank data breach on or around May 31, 2024, including those who received a notice of the data breach.

Up to $5,000 in documented losses or a pro rata cash payment, up to double for California residents

Receipts, invoices, bank letters, account statements, tax forms, police reports and other documentation of data breach-related losses

NOTE: If you do not qualify for this settlement do NOT file a claim.

Remember: you are submitting your claim under penalty of perjury . You are also harming other eligible Class Members by submitting a fraudulent claim. If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other open class action settlements you may be eligible for.

Minter v. FinWise Bank, et al. , Case No. 2:25-cv-00569-JNP-CMR, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah

FinWiseDataSettlement.com

FinWise Data Incident Settlement Administrator P.O. Box 4390 Portland, OR 97208-4390 info@FinWiseDataSettlement.com 877-419-3877

Andrew W. Ferich AHDOOT & WOLFSON P.C.

Marc H. Edelson EDELSON LECHTZIN LLP

Tyler J. Bean SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP

Max E. Kaplan COZEN O’CONNOR

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• $21.5M New York City Central Booking class action settlement

Pork producers agreed to pay more than $117 million in a class action settlement to resolve claims they conspired together to raise the price of pork products.

The pork settlement benefits consumers who purchased raw pork bacon or one or more of the following types of raw pork (fresh or frozen) made from bellies, loins, shoulder, ribs or pork chops from Agri Stats, Clemens, Hormel, JBS, Seaboard, Smithfield, Triumph, Tyson or other co-conspirators in certain states between June 28, 2014, and June 30, 2018.

States included in the settlement are Arizona, California, the District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah and West Virginia.

Plaintiffs in the pork price-fixing lawsuit accused pork producers of working together to raise and fix the price of pork products. As a result of this scheme, consumers allegedly paid more for pork products than they otherwise would have in a competitive market.

Clemens, Hormel, JBS, Seaboard, Smithfield, Triumph and Tyson sell pork products to grocery stores, restaurants and other businesses. Agri Stats is a data sharing and consulting company that collects and distributes pricing data to processors and meat buyers.

The pork producers have not admitted any wrongdoing but agreed to a $117.065 million class action settlement to resolve the price-fixing allegations. This settlement is in addition to previous settlements with JBS and Smithfield, which totaled $95 million.

Under the terms of the pork price-fixing settlement, class members can receive a cash payment based on the amount they paid for pork products during the class period. Class members who purchased more products will receive a larger share of the net settlement fund. Exact payments will vary.

The deadline for exclusion and objection is Oct. 29, 2026.

The final approval hearing for the pork price-fixing class action settlement is scheduled for Dec. 11, 2026.

To receive settlement benefits, class members must submit a valid claim form by Oct. 29, 2026.

SETTLEMENT ALERT: Did you purchase eligible pork products between 2014 and 2018? DM us “YES” to see if you can claim your share. #SettlementMoney #ClassActionSettlement #PorkSettlement #Pork #ConsumerAlert

The class action settlement benefits consumers who purchased raw pork bacon or one or more types of raw pork (fresh or frozen) made from bellies, loins, shoulders, ribs or pork chops from defendants or co-conspirators between June 28, 2014, and June 30, 2018, in the following states: Arizona, California, District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah and West Virginia.

Receipts, invoices or other documentation of purchases

NOTE: If you do not qualify for this settlement do NOT file a claim.

Remember: you are submitting your claim under penalty of perjury . You are also harming other eligible Class Members by submitting a fraudulent claim. If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other open class action settlements you may be eligible for.

In re: Pork Antitrust Litigation , Case No. 0:18-cv-01776-JRT-JFD, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota

Consumer Indirect Pork Litigation c/o Settlement Administrator P.O. Box 4000 Portland, OR 97208-4000 admin@OverchargedForPork.com 888-287-5434

Daniel E. Gustafson Daniel C. Hedlund GUSTAFSON GLUEK PLLC

Shana E. Scarlett Steve W. Berman Breanna Van Engelen HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP

Daniel E. Laytin Christa C. Cottrell KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP

Consumer · Building Products

What Is This Settlement About?

This settlement resolves In re: CertainTeed Corporation Roofing Shingles Products Liability Litigation, a class action consolidated as MDL No. 1817 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The lawsuit alleged that organic asphalt shingles manufactured by CertainTeed from July 1, 1987 through 2005 are prone to premature failure — including cracking, blistering, splitting, and curling — and otherwise do not perform in line with the reasonable expectations of property owners.

CertainTeed denied any wrongdoing and no longer manufactures organic shingles — every shingle it has sold since 2005 is fiberglass and is not at issue. To resolve the litigation, the company agreed to a settlement that provides enhanced warranty compensation to eligible property owners. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held its final approval hearing on June 8, 2010, and the settlement's effective date was October 2, 2010. This is a claims-made settlement, so each valid claim is paid under fixed formulas regardless of how many claims are filed — there is no capped fund that runs out. Because the benefit is structured around each roof's warranty, the claims program has remained open for years rather than closing on a single short deadline.

Who Qualifies?

You are a class member if, as of December 15, 2009, you owned a home or other building in the United States or Canada on which the organic shingles were or had been installed; or you owned such a building before that date but kept the right to claim through a valid documented assignment when you sold it; or you settled a warranty claim for the organic shingles with CertainTeed between August 1, 2006 and the settlement's effective date. The covered shingles were sold under organic product lines including Hallmark Shangle, Independence Shangle, Horizon Shangle, Custom Sealdon, Custom Sealdon 30, Sealdon 20, Sealdon 25, Hearthstead, Solid Slab, Master Slab, Custom Saf-T-Lok, Saf-T-Lok, and Custom Lok 25. Several of those brand names were sold in both organic and fiberglass versions — only the organic ones are covered.

Being a class member is not the same as qualifying for a payment. To be paid, your shingles must show "Damage" as the settlement defines it — blistering, clawing, cracking, curling, cold-weather curling, fishmouthing, or spalling — the damage must occur before the warranty period ends, and it must be caused by a product defect rather than improper installation or maintenance. Do not file if your shingles are fine, or if they have been on the building past the end of the warranty period.

CertainTeed's records show more than 90% of these organic shingles were sold in Iowa, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, Nebraska, South Dakota, and Wisconsin, with limited Canadian sales in parts of Ontario and in Winnipeg, Manitoba — so if you are outside those areas, it is less likely your shingles are the ones at issue. Because warranty terms varied by product and installation date, the best way to confirm whether your roof is still eligible is to check the official settlement website.

How Much Can You Get?

There is no flat cash amount. Payments are calculated per "square" — a roofing term meaning 100 square feet of shingles — and are prorated based on how much of the original warranty period remains. Proration means the payment is reduced in proportion to the years of use you have already gotten from the shingles. The notice's example: on a 30-year (360-month) warranty claimed exactly 12 years after installation, 216 of 360 months remain, so the payment is multiplied by 60%.

For an original purchaser (or a subsequent owner whom the warranty still covers) with a valid, in-warranty claim:

• Within 10 years of installation: $40 per square (not prorated), plus $34 per square prorated for years of actual use.

Consumer Protection · Claims Open

Current Status

Claims are open. The deadline to submit a claim is October 29, 2026, according to the NYC Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) claim page and claim form; neither gives a time of day or timezone. This is a city agency settlement, not a court case, so there is no approval hearing to wait on. DCWP reviews claims in the order it receives them and pays refunds until the fund is used up or the deadline passes, whichever comes first, so the fund can run out before October 29.

What Changed Recently?

DCWP settled with Rocket Tax in April 2025. The agency said Rocket Tax, a paid tax preparer with several Brooklyn offices, failed to disclose its fees to customers. Under the settlement, Rocket Tax was required to pay $36,000 in restitution for customers and $22,000 in civil penalties.

On December 11, 2025, DCWP said $28,000 of the Rocket Tax restitution money was still unclaimed. It listed the fund among nearly $380,000 in unclaimed restitution from several recent consumer cases. DCWP has not published a newer balance.

Who Qualifies?

DCWP's claim form sets two conditions, and a claimant has to meet both:

• They were a Rocket Tax customer between December 1, 2023 and May 1, 2025.
• Rocket Tax failed to disclose its fees to them.

For this settlement, "Rocket Tax" means the businesses owned and operated by its two owners, Demetress Corporation, Rocket Tax Service Inc. and Rocket Tax Inc. The claim form lists five Brooklyn offices, on Livonia Avenue, Pitkin Avenue, Crescent Street, Linden Boulevard and Church Avenue, and asks claimants to check each location they used. Rocket Tax is a separate business from the Rocket Money budgeting app and from Rocket Mortgage.

How Much Can You Get?

There is no set payment amount. Claimants report on the form how much Rocket Tax charged them, and DCWP decides how much each approved claimant is refunded. The form says the refund cannot include money for insurance, incidental costs or pain and suffering.

The fund is small. Rocket Tax was required to pay $36,000 in restitution, and $28,000 of it was unclaimed as of December 11, 2025. Because DCWP pays claims in the order they arrive, a claim filed after the money runs out may not be paid, even if it is filed before the deadline.

What Proof Is Required?

Proof is required. The claim form asks for documents showing that Rocket Tax did not disclose its tax preparation fees. It lists these options:

• Receipts or fee statements from Rocket Tax
• Copies of tax returns filed at Rocket Tax
• Proof of the tax refund deposit amount for the years filed at Rocket Tax, such as a bank statement or a copy of the check
• Other documents, described by the claimant

DCWP warns that it may not be able to process a claim without these documents. No notice ID or claim number is needed. The form also asks for the approximate dates of service, when the claimant found out about the fees and how. Claimants affirm the information under penalty of perjury.

What Is the Deadline?

The deadline is October 29, 2026. That is the date on DCWP's live claim page and on the claim form itself; neither names a time of day. DCWP's December 11, 2025 announcement gave October 26, 2026, three days earlier, so a claim sent before October 26 meets both dates.

How Do You Take Action?

There is no online claim portal. The DCWP Rocket Tax restitution page links to the claim form in English and Spanish. The completed form and supporting documents go to DCWP by email or by mail, using the contact details on that page. The form has four sections, and every one must be completed: general information, the Rocket Tax fees, an affirmation, and a consumer release.

EmblemHealth, City of New York $53M Senior Copay Settlement

September 4, 2026 3:47 PM

Medicare-eligible retired New York City employees or Medicare-eligible dependents enrolled in the EmblemHealth-administered GHI Senior Care plan at any time from Jan. 1, 2022, through Jan. 31, 2023, may be eligible to claim a cash payment from a class action settlement .

EmblemHealth Inc. and the City of New York agreed to pay up to $53,000,000 to settle a class action lawsuit alleging they improperly implemented $15 copays for medical services under the GHI Senior Care plan during 2022 and early 2023. The lawsuit claimed the plan's contract did not authorize these copays and that the defendants did not properly disclose them.

Who can file a claim?

Class members must be Medicare-eligible retired New York City employees or Medicare-eligible dependents enrolled in the EmblemHealth-administered GHI Senior Care plan at any time between Jan. 1, 2022, and Jan. 31, 2024.

The settlement administrator identified class members using EmblemHealth’s records and sent them a notice and customized claim form listing the dates of service, providers and potential copay amounts based on EmblemHealth’s data.

• Those who received a claim form are eligible to claim reimbursement for the copays listed on their form.
• Those who did not receive a claim form are still class members bound by the settlement but are not eligible for reimbursement unless they can show they paid a copay during the class period.

How much can class members receive?

The amount class members can claim depends on the number and type of copays they paid during the class period and whether they have documentation.

• Class members who submit proof of payment for a listed copay may receive up to the full $15 per copay.
• Class members who do not have proof of payment but attest that they paid the copay may receive up to 40% of the copay amount up to a total of $100 for all undocumented claims.

If total valid claims exceed the net settlement fund, the settlement administrator will reduce payments proportionally (pro rata).

How to claim a settlement payout

Class members must file a claim online using their unique claimant ID and GHI Senior Care member ID or complete the claim form they received and mail it to the settlement administrator.

Settlement administrator's mailing address: Senior Care Co-Pay Settlement, c/o Atticus Administration, PO Box 64053, St. Paul, MN 55164

What proof or documentation is necessary to submit a claim?

To receive full reimbursement, class members must submit proof of payment for each copay. Acceptable proof includes:

• Bank or credit card statements
• A signed letter from your provider confirming payment (a template is available on the settlement website)

Those who do not have documentation may still claim up to 40% of the copay amount (up to $100 total for all undocumented claims) by signing an affirmation that they paid the co-pay.

Payout options

• For online submissions : PayPal, Venmo, Zelle, direct deposit or a mailed check
• For mail submissions: Mailed paper check

$53 million settlement fund breakdown

The $53,000,000 settlement fund will include:

• Settlement administration costs: To be determined
• Attorneys' fees: $9,900,000
• Attorneys' expenses: Up to $100,000
• Service awards to class representatives: Up to $25,000 ($5,000 each for five representatives)
• Payments to eligible class members: Remaining net settlement fund after above deductions

Important dates

• Deadline to opt out: Oct. 15, 2026
• Deadline to file a claim: Oct. 30, 2026
• Final approval hearing: Mar. 24, 2027

When is the senior care copay settlement payout date?

The settlement administrator will issue payments after the court resolves any appeals and grants final approval to the settlement.

Insurance Antitrust · Claims Open

Current Status

Claims are open. A Claim Form must be postmarked or submitted online by October 30, 2026; the notice gives that date without a timezone, so treat it as a hard date and file early. The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey preliminarily certified the settlement class and preliminarily approved this partial settlement in an order dated May 19, 2026. The Fairness Hearing is set for October 23, 2026 at 12:00 p.m. Eastern Time, and no final approval order has been entered, so no payment date has been announced. Note that the hearing falls a week before the claim deadline, which is unusual but is what the notice sets out — the hearing date does not shorten your time to file.

What Changed Recently?

The court entered its preliminary approval order on May 19, 2026, preliminarily certifying a settlement class and putting the claim process in motion. A.B. Data, Ltd. began sending notice, the settlement website went live, and the claim window now runs through October 30, 2026. Five Lloyd's syndicates — Nos. 727, 1003, 2003, 2020 and 2791 — agreed to pay a combined $3,570,000 to resolve the claims against them.

The underlying case is old. It was filed on July 13, 2007 in the Southern District of Florida and transferred to New Jersey in December 2007, where it sat under a stay for roughly five years. The plaintiffs assert claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, plus civil conspiracy and unjust enrichment, alleging that the defendants took part in a deceptive scheme to conceal an alleged lack of competition in the Lloyd's market. Discovery ran to millions of pages and dozens of depositions; the defendants moved to dismiss the operative February 2016 complaint and the court denied that motion in August 2017, after which mediation produced the first round of settlements.

The settling defendants deny the allegations made against them, and no court has found any of them liable. Under the notice, the settlement resolves the claims against them without any adjudication of the merits. Earlier partial settlements resolved the case against other groups of syndicates, including a settlement announced in 2023 covering Syndicates 510, 1084, 1096 and 1245. The case continues against Syndicate 2488, the one defendant that has not settled.

Who Qualifies?

The settlement class is, with limited exceptions, all persons and entities in the United States and its territories who, during the period January 1, 1997 through April 15, 2025, purchased or renewed a Contract of Insurance with any Lloyd's syndicate named as a defendant in the lawsuit. That January 1997 start date is not a typo — the class period runs more than 28 years.

Two definitional points decide most eligibility questions:

• A Contract of Insurance means an insurance policy, not reinsurance. A reinsurance contract with a defendant syndicate does not put you in the class.
• The class is defined by the defendant syndicates generally, not only the five that are settling. Claim payments under this settlement, however, are calculated from premium paid to the settling defendants.

Because Lloyd's coverage in the United States is usually placed through a broker or a coverholder rather than sold direct, many class members are businesses, professionals and property owners who may not think of themselves as Lloyd's customers. If a policy of yours was underwritten at Lloyd's, the syndicate numbers generally appear on the policy documents or the declarations page, and a broker can confirm them.

Excluded from the class are the Released Defendants, defendants formerly named in the action, all Lloyd's syndicates, anyone who requests exclusion, and the judges presiding over the case together with their immediate families.

How Much Can You Get?

No per-person figure has been published, and none can be until claims are in. What the settlement fixes is the method, not the amount.

Product Defect · Claims Open

Current Status

Claims are open. The deadline to file is October 30, 2026, and online claims must be submitted by 11:59:59 p.m. Central Time that day; mailed claim forms must be postmarked no later than the same date. The court has authorized notice to the class, but it has not yet decided whether to approve the settlement — a fairness hearing is set for November 20, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. Central Time in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. No payments have been issued and no payment date has been announced, because payments cannot be distributed until the court grants final approval and any appeals are resolved. If you bought a qualifying Bestway pool from a retailer, the action to take now is to file a claim before October 30.

What Changed Recently?

The claim window has opened. A $15,000,000 settlement was reached with Bestway (USA) Inc., Bestway Inflatables & Material Corp. and Bestway (Hong Kong) International Ltd., the court authorized notice to the class, and the official settlement website is now taking claims through October 30, 2026 — the same date that governs exclusion requests and objections.

This pool settlement is separate from the Bestway AirJet and HydroJet spa pump settlement, a different case in federal court in Arizona whose claim deadline passed on October 5, 2026. A side-by-side comparison of the two Bestway settlements shows which products each one covers.

The case follows a recall announced on July 21, 2025. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission announced that Bestway, Intex and Polygroup were recalling certain above-ground pools 48 inches and taller because the compression strap wrapping the outside of the pool legs can create a foothold that lets a small child climb into the pool, even with the ladder removed. About 5 million of the recalled pools were sold in the United States across all three brands, and CPSC reported nine child drowning deaths between 2007 and 2022 involving children who used the strap to get in. The recall remedy is a free repair kit that replaces the compression strap with a rope.

The complaint alleges that the pools were defective and that the recall was inadequate because it offered no monetary remedy. Those remain allegations. Bestway denies that its pools are defective and denies any wrongdoing or liability, the court has not decided who is right, and the Notice states that the companies agreed to settle to avoid the risk, cost and time of continuing the case.

One point matters more than the dollar figure: the Notice says the settlement does not release claims for personal injury, bodily injury, emotional distress or wrongful death, and does not limit any rights under the recall. Filing a claim here is not a trade-off against either of those.

Who Qualifies?

The Settlement Class covers people in the United States, its territories and the District of Columbia who purchased, for personal use and not for resale, a Bestway-branded pool 48 inches in height or taller with compression straps located outside the support poles, sold from 2008 through 2024. The Notice names Power Steel, Steel Pro and Coleman Power Steel among the covered model lines.

Three conditions in that definition are easy to miss:

• The pool has to be 48 inches or taller, and the straps have to run outside the vertical support legs. Shorter pools and pools with straps routed inside the legs are not Class Products.
• You must have bought it from a retailer, not second-hand. Second-hand purchasers are expressly excluded.
• The purchase has to have been made before May 4, 2026, and any Valid Proof of Purchase must show a purchase on or before that date.

Only one claim is allowed per Settlement Class Household — defined as a Settlement Class Member together with everyone sharing the same residential address — so a household with two qualifying pools, or two adults who each bought one, still files a single claim.

Health Privacy · Claims Open

Current Status

Claims are open. The deadline to file, to opt out, and to object is October 30, 2026, and the notice states the date without naming a timezone. The final approval hearing is scheduled for January 15, 2027 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 8A of the Sacramento County Superior Court, with a Zoom option available. No final approval order has been entered and no payment date has been announced. Anyone who received a notice with a LoginID and PIN can file now; anyone who did not can still mail a printed claim form by the same date.

What the Lawsuit Says Happened

American Well Corp., the telehealth company that operates as Amwell and runs LiveHealth Online, has agreed to settle a class action over how its appointment booking tool handled patient data. The complaint alleges that Amwell let the Heap API and other tracking, analytics and advertising technologies on the LiveHealth Online website and mobile apps collect users' medical information and confidential communications and transmit them to third parties without permission. The claims are pleaded under the federal Wiretap Act, the California Invasion of Privacy Act, the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, the California Constitution and common law. Amwell denies that it violated any law, and the court has not decided who is right.

The case is captioned Polk v. American Well Corp., Case No. 25CV026746, in the Superior Court of California for the County of Sacramento. The parties mediated in October 2025 and reached terms after about eight hours; an amended settlement agreement was signed in May 2026 following a court order directing changes to the original. The court then granted preliminary approval and authorized the notice that class members are receiving now, which is what opened the claim window.

Who Qualifies for the LiveHealth Online Settlement?

The Settlement Class is every person in the United States who used the appointment booking tool between October 2024 and August 2025 on any of the following:

• the LiveHealth Online website, livehealthonline.com;
• the LiveHealth Online iOS app; or
• the LiveHealth Online Android app.

The class is nationwide even though most of the statutes pleaded are California laws, so residency outside California is not a barrier. Excluded are the judge presiding over the case and their family, Amwell and its parents, subsidiaries and predecessors and their officers, directors, agents, attorneys and employees, anyone who validly opts out, and the legal representatives or assigns of those excluded people. Amwell's records put the class at roughly 252,478 people, and the Settlement Administrator emailed or mailed each of them a notice carrying a LoginID and PIN.

The trigger is the booking tool, not the appointment. Someone who started to book and never completed a visit is still in the class, and someone who used LiveHealth Online during the class period without going through the booking tool is not.

How Much Is the Payment?

Amwell is funding $2,037,751.46, and the fund is non-reversionary, meaning none of it returns to the company. Every valid claim receives an equal pro rata share of what remains after settlement administration expenses, attorneys' fees and costs, and a service award to the class representative are deducted. The notice estimates that share at $51.14 to $102.29 per class member. That is an estimate, not a guaranteed amount: the final figure moves with the number of valid claims filed and with what the court awards in fees.

Class Counsel may ask the court for no more than one third of the fund, which is $679,250.48, and the court can award less. The class representative may request up to $5,000 as a service award, also subject to the court's decision.

Bestway has agreed to a $15 million class action settlement to resolve claims that its above-ground pools are defective and pose a drowning hazard.

The Bestway settlement benefits consumers who purchased a Bestway-branded pool that is 48 inches or taller (including Power Steel and Steel Pro models) with compression straps located outside of the support poles, sold between 2008 and 2024 .

According to the class action lawsuit resolved by this settlement, Bestway above-ground pools are defective and pose a drowning hazard. The company allegedly knew about the defect but failed to warn consumers before a July 2025 recall .

Bestway is a pool company that sells inflatable pools, above-ground pools, pool accessories and other outdoor products.

Bestway has not admitted any wrongdoing but agreed to this $15 million class action settlement to resolve allegations.

Under the terms of the Bestway settlement, class members can receive a cash payment based on whether they have proof of purchase for Bestway above-ground pools.

With proof of purchase, class members can receive 10% of the actual price paid for their pool or 10% of the average retail price of their pool if no actual purchase price is available. Without proof of purchase, class members can receive a flat payment of $40.

The deadline for exclusion and objection is Oct. 30, 2026.

The final approval hearing for the settlement is scheduled for Nov. 20, 2026.

To receive a class action settlement payment, class members must submit a valid claim form by Oct. 30, 2026.

If you do not wish to participate in the class action settlement but your family was affected by a recalled pool, you may still qualify for an above-ground pool lawsuit investigation .

The class action settlement benefits consumers who purchased a Bestway-branded pool that is 48 inches or taller in height (including Power Steel and Steel Pro models) with compression straps located outside of the support poles, sold from 2008 through 2024.

Up to $40 without proof of purchase or 10% of the purchase price with proof

Receipt, order confirmation or other documentation that reflects the model number, purchase price and date of purchase

NOTE: If you do not qualify for this settlement do NOT file a claim.

Remember: you are submitting your claim under penalty of perjury . You are also harming other eligible Class Members by submitting a fraudulent claim. If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other open class action settlements you may be eligible for.

In re: Bestway Above-Ground Pools Litigation , Case No. 1:25-cv-09570, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

Bestway Settlement Administrator P.O. Box 1869 Baton Rouge, LA 70821 info@PoolSettlementBW.com 855-789-5948

Kevin Laukaitis LAUKAITIS LAW LLC

Rachel Soffin PEARSON WARSHAW LLP

Leslie Pescia SIRI GLIMSTAD LLP

Nick Suciu BRYSON HARRIS SUCIU & DEMAY PLLC

Charles D. Moore REESE LLP

Jason Sultzer SULTZER & LIPARI PLLC

Alec Schultz HILGERS GRABEN PLLC

Jeffrey Margulies NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• $21.5M New York City Central Booking class action settlement
• American Consumer Credit Counseling data breach class action settlement
• $3.75M HireVue Illinois BIPA class action settlement
• $685,000 Equinox data breach class action settlement

LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE

Various Trademarks held by their respective owners

This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.

TransUnion agreed to pay $8.31 million as part of a class action settlement to resolve claims that it sold inaccurate consumer reports that contained bankruptcy remarks despite there being no public record of a bankruptcy filing.

The TransUnion settlement benefits consumers who were sold a TransUnion consumer report that included a bankruptcy remark but did not include a reference to a bankruptcy record in the public record section of the report between Jan. 6, 2020, and Jan. 31, 2023, for consumers for whom there is no government-held public record of a bankruptcy filing within 10 years prior to the date of the report.

The settlement includes a “No Bankruptcy Group” of around 21,000 class members who have no locatable record of a bankruptcy filing and an “Aged Bankruptcy Group” of around 36,000 class members whose public record searches only identified bankruptcies that were filed more than 10 years before the date of the TransUnion report.

According to a class action lawsuit, TransUnion sold consumer reports that contained inaccurate credit report information about bankruptcies. Plaintiffs in the case say that TransUnion included bankruptcy remarks on consumer reports even when there was no public record of a bankruptcy filing, violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).

TransUnion is one of three major credit reporting agencies in the United States. TransUnion collects and sells information about consumers to lenders, landlords and other third parties who want to assess a consumer’s creditworthiness.

TransUnion has not admitted any wrongdoing but agreed to an $8.31 million class action settlement to resolve the allegations.

Under the terms of the TransUnion settlement, class members can receive a cash payment based on their group membership. Class members in the No Bankruptcy Group who do not exclude themselves from the settlement will receive an automatic payment of $100. Class members in this group who submit a claim form can receive a higher payment of around $1,000.

Class members in the Aged Bankruptcy Group can receive around $350 but must submit a claim form to receive these payments.

The deadline for exclusion and objection is Oct. 30, 2026.

The final approval hearing for the TransUnion settlement is scheduled for Dec. 2, 2026.

To receive settlement benefits, class members must submit a valid claim form by Oct. 30, 2026.

The TransUnion class action settlement benefits all persons residing in the United States and its territories to whom TransUnion sold a consumer report to a third party from Jan. 6, 2020, to Jan. 31, 2023, that included a bankruptcy remark on a tradeline but with no reference to a bankruptcy record in the public record section of the same report, and for whom there is no government-held public record of a bankruptcy filing within 10 years prior to the date of the report. Included are those for whom public record searches identified only bankruptcies that were filed more than 10 years before the date of the TransUnion credit report.

NOTE: If you do not qualify for this settlement do NOT file a claim.

Remember: you are submitting your claim under penalty of perjury . You are also harming other eligible Class Members by submitting a fraudulent claim. If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other open class action settlements you may be eligible for.

Brooks v. TransUnion LLC , Case No. 2:22-cv-00048-KSM, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

BrooksBankruptcyClassAction.com

Brooks v. TransUnion LLC c/o Settlement Administrator P.O. Box 16 West Point, PA 19486 questions@brooksbankruptcyclassaction.com 888-279-4003

James A. Francis Lauren KW Brennan FRANCIS MAILMAN SOUMILAS P.C.

Elizabeth L. McKeen Danielle N. Morris O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP

Wage & Hour · No Claim Form

Current Status

There is no claim form and no claim deadline on this settlement — the class is drawn from FedEx Ground's own payroll records, and the Notice of Settlement describes a payment going to every settlement class member. A Final Approval Hearing was scheduled for June 26, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. at the federal courthouse in Baltimore. The official settlement website is the authoritative source for the current stage, and the section below on what we could not verify says exactly where the gaps are.

What Changed Recently?

The case is Minton v. FedEx Ground Package System, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-01224, in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. It was filed on April 25, 2024, the parties reached a settlement, and a Final Approval Hearing was placed on the calendar for June 26, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. at the federal courthouse in Baltimore. The official settlement website is Minton FedEx MD.com, which class members log into to see their own information.

A hearing appearing on a calendar is not the same as an order being entered, and this page does not treat it as one. What happens after a final approval order in a case like this is standard: the settlement becomes effective once the appeal window closes, and the administrator then distributes payments on the schedule set by the settlement agreement. If checks are moving, that sequence is the reason.

FedEx Ground denies the allegations. The case settled rather than being tried, so no court has decided whether the claims are true, and a class settlement is an agreement to resolve claims rather than an admission of wrongdoing.

Who Qualifies?

The settlement class is all hourly or non-exempt employees who worked at FedEx Ground's package handling facilities in Maryland between April 25, 2021 and October 31, 2025. That is the entire test. It does not matter whether you still work there, and there is nothing to prove — FedEx Ground's payroll and timekeeping records determine who is on the list.

Two consequences follow from that. First, if you worked at a FedEx facility outside Maryland, this particular settlement does not cover you, no matter how similar your experience was. Second, if you left the company years ago and moved, the address on file may be stale — an old address is the single most common reason a class member never sees a payment they were entitled to.

How Much Can You Get?

FedEx Ground's total settlement payment is $9,000,000. Individual amounts come out of a two-part formula described in the Notice of Settlement.

• A $10 base payment. Every settlement class member receives it, regardless of how long they worked.

• A points allocation by week. Each full-time week — 40 hours or more — is allocated 2 points. Each non-full-time week, under 40 hours, is allocated 1 point.

The practical effect is that the payment tracks time on the clock much more closely than anything else. A seasonal hire who worked six part-time weeks in late 2021 sits near the base payment. Someone who worked full time across most of the four-and-a-half-year class period accumulates several hundred points and lands far higher. This is the ordinary structure for wage-and-hour class settlements, and it is why two people who worked at the same building can receive very different amounts.

Current Status

Claims are open. Online claims are due by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on October 30, 2026, and mailed claims must be postmarked by the same date. The court granted preliminary approval on July 20, 2026, and the final approval hearing is scheduled for January 11, 2027. No payment date has been announced; payments depend on final approval and the completion of claims processing.

What Changed Recently?

WM Technology, Inc., which operates the Weedmaps cannabis marketplace and trades on Nasdaq under the ticker MAPS, and the individual defendants named in the case agreed to pay $7.5 million to resolve Ishak v. WM Technology, Inc., a securities class action in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The parties signed a Stipulation of Settlement on May 14, 2026, and Judge Otis D. Wright II granted preliminary approval on July 20, 2026, which started the notice and claims process run by Strategic Claims Services.

The complaint alleges that WM Technology misrepresented the growth of active users on its Weedmaps website and app, that those statements inflated the price of its securities, and that the price fell when the alleged truth came out. The defendants deny each claim and any wrongdoing, and the case did not go to trial.

Who Qualifies?

The settlement class is everyone who purchased or otherwise acquired WM Technology Securities between May 25, 2021 and September 24, 2024, both dates inclusive. That definition covers two sets of publicly traded securities:

• Silver Spike Acquisition Corp. common stock and warrants bought from May 25, 2021 through June 15, 2021, before the blank-check company combined with the Weedmaps business and took the WM Technology name.
• WM Technology common stock and warrants bought from June 16, 2021 through September 24, 2024.

Excluded are people who suffered no compensable loss; the defendants; WM Technology’s present and former officers and directors at all relevant times; their immediate families, legal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns; any entity in which WM Technology or an excluded person has or had a majority ownership interest; and anyone who submits a valid request for exclusion. Shares or warrants received by gift, inheritance or operation of law are not treated as purchases, and the covering purchase of a short sale is not eligible.

How Much Can You Get?

Each authorized claimant receives a pro rata share of the net settlement fund — the $7.5 million plus interest, minus court-approved fees, expenses and administration costs. The notice estimates an average recovery of about $0.072 per allegedly damaged security before deductions, across roughly 104.6 million securities, and about $0.047 per security after the requested fees and expenses. Those are averages; individual payments depend on when the securities were bought and sold, the prices paid, and how many valid claims are filed.

The plan of allocation assigns per-share inflation by purchase date. For common stock it is $1.59 for purchases from May 25, 2021 to August 9, 2022, $0.67 from August 10, 2022 to November 7, 2022, and $0.02 from November 8, 2022 to September 24, 2024. Warrants use $0.35, $0.15 and $0.01 for the same windows. A claimant’s recognized loss is generally the lesser of the inflation lost and the actual trading loss, with the federal 90-day look-back limit applied to securities held after the class period: a mean closing price of $1.03 per share for common stock and $0.03 per warrant for September 25 through December 23, 2024. Purchases and sales are matched first-in, first-out. No payment is made on a claim worth less than $10.00.

Lead Counsel, The Rosen Law Firm, will ask the court for attorneys’ fees of up to one-third of the fund ($2.5 million) plus interest, up to $100,000 in litigation expenses, and an award to the plaintiffs of no more than $15,000 in total, all paid from the settlement fund.

Current Status

Claims are open. On August 26, 2026 Judge Sunil R. Harjani granted preliminary approval to the $34 million Butterball settlement and the $37.5 million Hormel and Jennie-O Turkey Store settlement, approved the claims process, and set a schedule that starts notice on September 15, 2026 and closes claim forms on October 30, 2026. A fairness hearing is set for November 24, 2026.

The administrator published the new notice on the official settlement website on schedule, and the Claim Filing section of that site is now accepting online submissions. It had read "Online Claims Filing Coming Soon" earlier in the day. Filing online requires the Unique ID and PIN printed on the notice the administrator mailed or emailed, so the portal is a faster route for a class member who has a notice in hand rather than an alternative for one who does not. A class member holding the pre-printed paper claim form can still file that way instead.

This claims process covers $93,575,000 across six settlements — Cooper Farms and Farbest Foods at $1,687,500 each, House of Raeford at $3,700,000, Prestage at $15,000,000, Hormel/Jennie-O at $37,500,000 and Butterball at $34,000,000. It does not cover the earlier Tyson and Cargill funds — $4,625,000 and $32,500,000 — which are held up pending a Seventh Circuit appeal of the Cargill final approval order and were claimed under a separate, already-closed process.

Three of the settlements in this notice put no money into the fund at all, and it is worth knowing which. Agri Stats pays nothing: its settlement is conduct relief, binding it for five years to make extensive changes to its turkey reports if it ever restarts them, which it stopped doing after this suit was filed. Foster Farms and Perdue pay nothing either — they won summary judgment in July 2026, and their settlements are mutual walk-aways in which neither side pursues the case further or seeks fees or costs from the other.

The single most important thing on this page: a new claim form is required. Filing in the earlier Cargill and Tyson round does not carry forward. The court certified the litigation class in January 2025 with a narrower definition of "turkey" than the Cargill and Tyson settlement classes used, so every prior claim form was built on the wrong product definition for these six settlements. The administrator is sending a pre-printed claim form with each class member's purchases already calculated under the certified definition.

There is no opportunity to opt out. The court certified the class on January 22, 2025, the exclusion deadline passed in May 2025, and the August 26 order expressly declines to reopen it — reasoning that letting class members exclude themselves after summary judgment would invite opt-out decisions based on how the rulings came down. October 30 is a claim and objection deadline, not an exclusion deadline.

This is a direct purchaser class, not a consumer class. It covers the businesses that bought turkey straight from the processors — wholesalers, distributors and large retailers — rather than shoppers who bought a bird at a supermarket. The class is small: the administrator is mailing notice to about 3,357 potential class members and emailing about 351, with four weeks of banner advertising on Supermarket News and Nation's Restaurant News to reach the rest.

The Court-Ordered Schedule

These are the dates as the court set them in its August 26, 2026 order. The two that matter most to a class member are highlighted.

Hormel and Jennie-O filed confirmation of notice to government regulators under the Class Action Fairness Act.

Butterball filed its own confirmation of CAFA notice to regulators.

Settlement administrator commences direct mail and email notice, and begins the publication notice plan.

Co-lead counsel file their motion for attorneys' fees, reimbursement of expenses and class representative service awards.

Employment · Pending — Automatic Payment

Current Status

There is nothing to file. Alaska Airlines has agreed to pay $500,000 to resolve claims that its pilots did not accrue vacation during military leaves lasting between 31 and 60 consecutive days, and class members are paid from the airline's own employment records without submitting anything. The court granted preliminary approval on August 17, 2026 and notices have been mailed to the 163 people Class Counsel identified as class members. A class member who wants to leave the settlement or object to it must act by October 31, 2026. The final approval hearing is scheduled for 11:00 a.m. on December 10, 2026 before Judge Robert S. Lasnik in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington; no final approval order has been entered and no payment date had been announced as of September 20, 2026.

What Changed Recently?

This is a new claim process on a case that has been running since December 2018, and it reached settlement only after the claims in it were cut down twice. On March 13, 2026, the court granted part of Alaska Airlines' second summary judgment motion and denied the rest, which left a single claim alive: that pilots should have accrued vacation during military leaves lasting between 31 and 60 consecutive days. The parties then negotiated and executed a settlement agreement on June 17, 2026, and the court granted preliminary approval on August 17, 2026.

Alaska Airlines denies that it violated the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act and denies any wrongdoing or liability. The agreement states the airline is settling to avoid the cost, disruption and uncertainty of continued litigation, and that nothing in it may be treated as a finding against the airline.

Who Qualifies?

The court certified a settlement class of current and former Alaska Airlines pilots who took military leave lasting between 31 and 60 consecutive days at any time from October 10, 2004 through March 31, 2026, and who did not accrue vacation during those leaves. People who previously settled with Alaska or obtained a judgment against it that resolved or released these same claims are excluded.

Class Counsel identified 163 people who meet that definition from data Alaska produced in the case, and each of them was mailed a notice. Membership is determined by the airline's records rather than by anything a pilot does, so a pilot who never received the notice is still in the class if the records show a qualifying leave.

Two groups of pilots who followed this case will not see money from it. The sick-time accrual claim is gone, and so is the vacation claim for military leaves of 61 to 90 days — both fell out at summary judgment before the settlement was negotiated.

How Much Can You Get?

Payments are pro rata and keyed to time, not to salary. Under the proposed Plan of Allocation, each class member's share is the number of monthly bid periods in which that pilot did not accrue vacation because of a qualifying military leave, divided by 666 — the total number of such months across all 163 class members — multiplied by whatever is left in the fund. An individualized statement showing the number of non-accrual months and an estimated award was included with each mailed notice, and that statement is the figure to rely on.

What comes out of the $500,000 first: Court-approved attorneys' fees, which Class Counsel has agreed not to request above $247,500; reimbursement of litigation expenses; the costs of administering the settlement; any taxes owed by the fund; and a service award to the class representative of no more than $5,000. No part of the fund reverts to Alaska Airlines.

Government Restitution · Claims Open

Current Status

Claims are open, and the deadline has been extended to October 31, 2026, according to the New York Attorney General’s Alba information sheet, most recently revised on October 1, 2026. No time of day is stated. This is a government restitution program, not a class action: it comes from an Assurance of Discontinuance between Alba and the Attorney General, so there is no court approval stage. The Attorney General says payments are made on a rolling basis; no fixed payment date has been announced.

What Changed Recently?

The claim deadline has been extended to October 31, 2026. The settlement itself was announced by Attorney General Letitia James on October 21, 2025, after an investigation that began in 2022 on a referral from Construction & General Building Laborers’ Local 79.

According to the Attorney General’s office, its investigation found that between 2016 and 2024 Alba failed to report hundreds of workplace injuries to the Workers’ Compensation Board, discouraged injured employees from filing claims, retaliated against workers who did file, and did not adequately address sexual harassment reported by employees. In the signed agreement, Alba neither admits nor denies those findings. Alba agreed to pay $1.5 million and to change its workplace practices under the Attorney General’s monitoring.

Who Qualifies?

Current and former workers of Alba Services Inc. or its related companies may be eligible if either of the following applies:

• They were injured on the job between 2016 and 2024 and reported the injury to Alba.
• They were sexually harassed on the job between 2016 and 2025.

The covered employers are Alba Services Inc., Alba Carting & Demolition, Alba Environmental, Alba Core & Shell, Alba Electric Corp., Arc Contracting Inc., Caledonia Carting Services, CSC Services Corp., Gurteen Business Solutions, Volk Industrial Services Corp. and Alba Management Inc., along with owner Andrew Horan. The Attorney General has compiled a list of current and former employees who qualify and shared it with the settlement administrator.

How Much Can You Get?

No per-worker amount has been published. Under the agreement, the Attorney General has sole discretion to decide which employees are eligible and how much each receives, and none of the money returns to Alba. Of the $1.5 million total, up to $100,000 covers administration and the cost of locating eligible workers; anything not spent on those costs is added to the workers’ fund, so at least $1.4 million goes to workers.

The Attorney General described the fund as compensation for workers who may have lost wages, faced medical expenses, had medical treatment delayed, were deterred from filing a workers’ compensation claim, or faced retaliation after a workplace injury. The office estimated that more than 700 workers were affected. Payments are issued by check, Venmo, Zelle, eMastercard or ACH transfer.

What Proof or Notice ID Is Required?

Eligible workers receive a notice by mail, email or text message that includes a unique claim ID number. To file online, the worker enters that claim ID and their last name on the settlement website’s claim form. The paper claim form can instead be mailed or emailed to the administrator, but the claim is still tied to the worker’s notice.

A worker who believes they qualify but did not receive a notice or claim ID is directed by the Attorney General to contact Atticus Administration through the official settlement website.

What Is the Deadline?

Claims must be submitted by October 31, 2026. The Attorney General’s information sheet gives the date only; it does not state a time of day or time zone, or whether a mailed form must be postmarked or received by that date.

Denny’s $440,000 Unpaid Wages Class Action Settlement

Editor & Community Manager

September 4, 2026 11:44 AM

Current and former employees who worked at a Denny’s restaurant in New York between Jan. 1, 2019, and April 30, 2026, that Top Line Restaurants or Reveille Management operated may qualify to submit a claim for unpaid wages from a class action settlement .

Top Line Restaurants Inc. and Reveille Management LLC agreed to pay $440,000 to settle claims that they failed to pay certain required wages to employees. The Office of the New York State Attorney General found these companies did not consistently pay “spread of hours” pay, which is an extra hour of pay at the minimum wage rate for each day an employee’s workday exceeded 10 hours, including all breaks and split shifts.

Who can file a claim?

Current or former employees must meet the following criteria:

• They worked at one of the 23 Denny’s franchise locations in New York operated by Top Line Restaurants or Reveille Management between Jan. 1, 2019, and April 30, 2026.
• They worked at least one day where the total time from start to finish, including all breaks, meal periods and split shifts, was more than 10 hours.
• They did not receive an additional hour of pay at the then-applicable minimum wage for those qualifying days, which is known as “spread of hours” pay.

How much are settlement payments?

Cash payment: Eligible individuals can submit a claim to receive a cash payment. The settlement administrator will determine the payment amount by the number of qualifying shifts the class member worked during the period and the minimum wage in effect. The settlement considers payments wages, and claimants will receive an IRS W-2 form with their payment.

If a worker owes money for New York child support or other judgments, the state will subtract that amount from their settlement payment. If this occurs, the worker will receive a notice from the appropriate New York agency and have 14 days to respond.

How to claim an unpaid wages payment

To receive settlement payment, eligible workers can file a claim online or complete the claim form they received with their notice and mail it to the settlement administrator.

Settlement administrator's mailing address: NY Denny’s Settlement, c/o Atticus Administration, PO Box 64053, St. Paul MN 55164

The claim deadline is Oct. 31, 2026.

Required claim information

• Online claims require the claimant ID from the settlement notice the worker received.

Payout options

• Paper check mailed to the address provided

Settlement fund breakdown

The settlement fund will include

• Settlement administration costs: Up to $40,000
• Payments to approved claimants: $400,000

Important dates

• Assurance of Discontinuance effective date: July 29, 2026
• Deadline to file a claim: Oct. 31, 2026

When is the Denny’s settlement payout date?

The settlement administrator will issue payments to eligible workers on a rolling basis within 15 to 30 days after it receives a valid claim.

Why is there a settlement?

The New York Attorney General's office investigated Top Line Restaurants Inc. and Reveille Management LLC, and found that, between Jan. 1, 2019, and April 30, 2026, the restaurants did not pay some employees at the companies' 23 Denny’s franchise locations in New York the required “spread of hours” pay. The companies also failed to provide proper notice of this right and did not include these payments on wage statements.

The OAG concluded that these failures violated Executive Law §63(12), the Hospitality Industry Wage Order (12 NYCRR §146-1.6) and New York Labor Law §195(3). The companies agreed to pay unpaid wages, implement new wage-and-hour policies, revise their employee handbook, update wage statements and provide additional training and protections for workers.

• Settlement website FAQ page
• Assurance of Discontinuance (settlement document)

Settlement Open for Claims