Active Cases

This page lists the active class action settlements for which Heffler Claims Group is the Settlement Administrator and, when relevant, links to their settlement websites where you can find more information. Still have questions? Check out our FAQs for class members.

Please note: legal information, claim forms, case deadlines, and more will be found on the specific case website linked below. This tool does not include inactive cases.

Austin v. Kiwi Energy NY, LLC.

The lawsuit alleges that Kiwi Energy made misleading representations, contrary to its obligations under applicable laws. Plaintiffs also allege that Kiwi’s rates did not comply with its customer contracts. Class members include: any person or entity in New York and/or Ohio who had an account with Kiwi at any time from August 8, 2011 to the June 26, 2019 and paid Kiwi for electricity and/or natural gas supply services; and/or any person or entity in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and/or New Jersey who had an account with Spring at any time from August 8, 2011 to the June 26, 2019 and paid Spring for electricity and/or natural gas supply services.

Becker v. Bank of New York Mellon, et al.

Case No. 11-cv-06460-JS, Eastern District of Pennsylvania. There is no settlement website for this case.

Birmingham Retirement and Relief System v S.A.C. Capital Advisers L.P.

Case number 1:13-cv-02459, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. There is no settlement website for this case.

Bloom v. Jenny Craig Inc.

Plaintiff alleged weight loss company Jenny Craig violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by sending text messages without prior written consent. A settlement was reached in 2018, and class members who incorrectly received a text message were entitled to monetary relief. The deadline for filing a claim form has passed.

Blue Buffalo Co. Ltd., Marketing and Sales Practices

Case No. 2562, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. There is no settlement website for this case.

Bray et al v. GameStop Corporation

Plaintiff alleged the Defendant failed to implement or maintain adequate data security measures for customer information, including credit card information. According to settlement documents, this resulted in a massive data breach which directly caused injuries to plaintiffs and the class. The class was comprised of all people who used a debit or credit card to make a purchase on the GameStop website between August 2016 and February 2017. The deadline for filing a claim form has passed.

Brian Warner v. Toyota Motor Sales

Plaintiffs alleged that the frames of certain Toyota Tacoma, Tundra, and Sequoia vehicles lack adequate rust protection, resulting in premature rust corrosion of vehicles' frames. If you own or lease, or previously owned or leased, certain Toyota Tacoma, Tundra, or Sequoia vehicles you may be eligible to get benefits from a class action settlement.

Cabiness v. Educational Financial Solutions

Plaintiffs alleged that Campus Debt Solutions (CDS) placed advertising calls for student loan consolidation and loan forgiveness services using an automated telephone dialing system, without written consent from class members to receive those phone calls, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).

Certainteed Corp. Roofing Shingles Product Liability

MDL Docket No. 1817, Eastern District of Pennsylvania. There is no website for this case.

Cobell et. al. v Salazar et. al.

This settlement resolves a class action lawsuit that claims the federal government violated its duties by mismanaging trust accounts and individual Indian trust lands. The class includes anyone alive on Sept.30, 2009 who had an IIM account recorded in currently available electronic data in federal government systems from approximately 1985 to Sept. 30, 2009 and can demonstrate ownership in trust land or land in restricted status. Or, the estate (or heirs) of any deceased landowner or IIM account holder whose account was open or whose trust assets had been in probate according to the federal government’s records as of Sept. 30, 2009.

Dashnaw, et al. v. New Balance Athletics

Plaintiffs alleged New Balance Athletics, Inc. violated California consumer protection laws by advertising that some of its shoes are "Made in USA" when they are made from up to 30% non-domestic content. If you purchased any of the New Balance "Made in USA" labeled shoes listed on the case settlement website from December 27, 2012 through January 24, 2019, you may be a class member. The deadline for filing a claim has passed.

Daugherty v. The University of Chicago

Plaintiffs allege various claims related to the operation of the Contributory Retirement Plan (CRP) and the Retirement Income Plan for Employees (ERIP). n particular, Plaintiffs claim that the University should not have selected and maintained the CREF Stock Account and TIAA Real Estate Account as investment options in the Plans. Plaintiffs also claim that the Plans paid higher record keeping and administrative fees than necessary to the Plans’ record keepers. If you were a participant in the University of Chicago’s 403(b) Retirement Plans at any time from May 18, 2011 through May 23, 2018 you may benefit from this class action settlement.

Decking Settlement

Plaintiffs alleged that certain Cross Timbers Decking, Duralife Decking, and Railway Railings were prone to splitting, warping, swelling, shrinking, or surface decay and developed pervasive mold, mildew, fungal or other growth. This is specific to decking manufactured or sold from January 1, 2001 through December 31, 2012 by Defendant or Elk; and Railways manufactured or sold by Defendant or Elk from January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2012. The deadline for filing a claim form has passed.

Delgado et al v. Ocwen Loan Servicing

Plaintiffs alleged that Ocwen Loan Servicing (Ocwen) and Cross Country Home Services (CCHS) unlawfully enrolled certain customers in home warrant and service plans. The suite alleges the Defendants mailed customer checks for low sums that looked like refunds or rebates. However, Plaintiffs claim that when customers cashed the checks, they were enrolled in CCHS's home warranty or service plans and charged monthly.

Domestic Drywall Antitrust Litigation

Plaintiffs alleged the defendant conspired to raise, fix, maintain, or stabilize the price of drywall in violation of federal antitrust laws resulting in higher prices. If you purchased drywall indirectly for end use and not for resale between January 1, 2012 and January 5, 2018, a settlement of a class action or distributions of several prior class action settlements may affect you. The deadline for filing a claim has passed.

Eric S. Weiss v Law Offices of Frederic I. Weinberg & Assoc.

Case no. 1:16-cv-01679, U.S. District Court of New Jersey. There is no settlement website for this case.

George v. Keurig Dr. Pepper Inc.

In several original lawsuits, Plaintiffs alleged Canada Dry Ginger Ale was mislabeled with the words “Made from Real Ginger,” arguing the claim values the products at a higher cost when the products only contain less than two parts per million of ginger flavor extract and other flavors. Members of the certified class were permitted to submit a claim for a per product unit refund, with a maximum of 100 product units per household or up to 100 product units with proof of purchase. Class members without a proof of purchase were eligible for a smaller amount per household. The deadline for filing a claim form has passed.

Gerstenhaber v. Galleria Fitness Club, LLC

Plaintiffs alleged Galleria Fitness Club violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act by sending text messages to consumers without express written consent. The settlement includes people who received a text message from the Defendants between June 16, 2017 through March 12, 2019. The deadline for filing a claim has passed.

Green v. Mitchell L. Morgan Management

Plaintiffs alleged Mitchell L. Morgan Management overcharged class members and violated the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act by allegedly including $400 attorney's fees into leases. Class members include all tenants of properties, a list of which can be found on the settlement website, who were charged a legal fee for an eviction from September 28, 2007 until the earlier of the date on which the defendant stopped managing those properties, or August 2, 2016.

Hameed-Bolden v. Forever 21 Retail Inc.

Case No. 2:18-cv-03019, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

Henhaffer v Simeone & Raynor, LLC

Case No. 1:15cv8022, U.S. District of New Jersey. There is no settlement website for this case.

In re Dental Supplies Antitrust Litigation

Plaintiffs allege that the largest distributors of dental supplies and equipment in the United States entered an alleged agreement not to compete on sale prices and coordinated fix gross margins for dental products. You may be a member of the settlement class and eligible to file a claim, object, or exclude yourself from the settlement if you or your company purchased dental supplies from Henry Schein, Patterson, Benco, Burkhart Dental Supply Company Inc. or any combination thereof.

Jordan Docter et al. vs Fairmont Hotels & Resorts (U.S.) Inc.

Case No. STK-CV-UBT-2019-0000147, California Superior Courts. There is no settlement website for this case.

Lowery v. Rhapsody International, Inc

Plaintiffs alleged that Rhapsody International infringed on their exclusive rights to reproduce and distribute their music works by streaming the work without voluntary or compulsory licenses. You may be a class member if you are the owner of mechanically distributed and/or reproduced rights in Qualifying Registered Works that were made available or played on the Rhapsody music service in the United States from March 7, 2013 to March 21, 2019 and Qualifying Unregistered Works that were not registered with the U. S. Copyright office.

Mohamed v. American Motor Company LLC and Off Lease Only Inc.

Plaintiffs alleged the American Motor Company sent text messages to class members without their prior express consent, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). If you received a text message from the defendant sent on behalf of Off Lease Only, Inc. you may be entitled to benefits under a class action settlement. The deadline for filing a claim has passed.

Murphy v Gospel for Asia, Inc.

If you donated money to Gospel for Asia between January 1, 2009 and March 22, 2019, you could receive money from a class action settlement.  The proposed settlement of a class action lawsuit may affect your rights.  Read the information contained on this website carefully because it explains decisions and actions you must take now.

Oh V. Cavalry Spv I, Llc Et Al

Case No. 2:16cv5127, U.S. District of New Jersey, Newark.

OmniVision Tech, Inc. Securities Litigation

Case No.: 5:11-cv-05235-RMW, U.S. District Court Northern District of California. There is no settlement website for this case.

PA Public School Employees’ Retirement System v Bank of America Corp.

Case number 1:11-cv-00733, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. There is no settlement website for this case.

Pettit v. Procter & Gamble Co.

Plaintiffs in two suits alleged packaging on Freshmates wipes states wipes are "flushable," 'septic safe," and "safe for sewer and septic systems" despite the fact that wipes are no safe for flushing down a toilet and routinely damage or clog plumbing systems. If you are a purchaser of Charmin Freshmates Flushable Wipes between April 6, 2011 and November 26, 2018 you may be eligible to receive benefits from this settlement. The deadline for filing a claim has passed.

Power Pressure Cooker Settlement

Plaintiffs alleged there were several defects on the Defendant's Power Pressure Cooker, including sudden steam and lid malfunctions. If you purchased a Power Pressure Cooker for personal use between March 1, 2013 and January 19, 2018 you may be eligible. The deadline for filing a claim has passed.

Public Employees’ Retirement System of Mississippi v. Roadrunner Transportation Systems, Inc., et al.

Case No. 2:17-cv-00474, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. There is no settlement website for this case.

Raden v. Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia

Plaintiffs alleged Martha Steward Living Omnimedia, Inc. violated the Michigan's Preservation of Personal Privacy Act by disclosing information related to their customers' magazine subscriptions to third parties. If you purchased a subscription to Martha Stewart Living Magazine or Martha Stewart Weddings Magazine between July 31, 2010 and July 31, 2016, you may be a member of this class action settlement.

Rhonda Hutton v. National Board of Examiners

Case No 17-1506, US Circuit Court of Appeals - 4th Circuit. There is no settlement website for this case.

Robbins v. Gencor Nutrients Inc.

Plaintiffs alleged Gencor Nutrients violated consumer protection and warranty laws concerning products containing the ingredient Testofen®. The lawsuit contends that clinical studies do not support the marketing claims associated with products containing Testofen®. If you purchased between January 1, 2010 and May 14, 2018 you may be eligible for a benefit from a class action settlement. The deadline for filing a claim has passed.

Rodriguez, et al. v. It’s Just Lunch, et al.

Case No. 07-CV-9227, Southern District of New York The Plaintiffs allege that It’s Just Lunch fraudulently induced clients who joined on or after October 15, 2001 into signing a membership contract. The Plaintiffs also allege that, in charging greater than $1,000 for one year’s worth of services in New York, It’s Just Lunch has (i) committed deceptive or unfair practices in violation of New York General Business Law §§ 349 and 394-c on or after October 15, 2001; and (ii) unjustly enriched itself by charging clients greater than $1,000 in New York. The certified class includes all IJL clients or former clients who signed a membership contract and joined It’s Just Lunch on or after October 15, 2001, if the clients did not obtain a refund of their payments to It’s Just Lunch and if they fall within certain time limits set by law. The certified class also includes all IJL clients in the State of New York who signed a membership contract on or after October 15, 2001 and who paid more than $1,000 for a year’s worth of services at the time of initial contracting and who did not obtain a refund of the amounts paid to It’s Just Lunch.

Sanchez, et al. v. CalPERS

Plaintiffs brought suit against the California Public Employee's Retirement System (CalPERS) sale of long term care insurance to the class. The partial settlement only impacted the claims asserted against Towers Watson Co., Towers Perrin and Tillinghast-Towers Perrin (Towers) and there is currently no settlement with CalPERS. The lawsuit generally alleges that it was improper for CalPERS to impose an 85% rate increase. The lawsuit also alleges that the Towers Defendants negligently performed actuarial services for CalPERS relating to rate-setting at the inception of the program in 1995 and that this contributed to the 85% premium increase implemented by CalPERS 20 years later. The deadline for filing a claim form has passed. All outstanding checks as of January 12, 2019 will be voided.

Schreiber v Ally Financial Inc.

Plaintiffs alleged that Defendant Ally Financial Inc. (Ally) violated the legal rights of consumers by charging or permitting dealerships to charge impermissible documentary or dealer fees in connection with lease-end vehicle purchases surrounding option provisions in consumer leases. Ally agreed to pay each class member who returned a completed claim form in a timeline matter up to 100% of the documentary, dealer, or similar fee that was charged. The deadline for filing a claim form has passed.

Shabestari v MS Services LLC, Bank of the West

Case No. 34-2017-00210831, Sacramento Superior Court. There is no settlement website for this case.

Shaw, et al. v. AMN Services, LLC

Plaintiffs allege AMN and Kaiser failed to pay traveling nurses at the Kaiser Foundation Hospitals in California for all the time they worked before and after their scheduled shifts, such as time spent charting and other work-related activities. If you worked as a traveling nurse for AMN in one or more Kaiser facilities in California at any time between September 11, 2013 through December 27, 2018 you may be eligible for benefits.

Short et al v. Brown University

Case No. 1:17-cv-00318, U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island. Please visit the settlement website for more information.

Simerlein v. Toyota Motor Corporation

Plaintiffs alleged the sliding doors on certain Sienna vehicles are defective. If you own or lease, or previously owned, purchased, or leased certain Toyota Sienna vehiles, you could get benefits from a class action settlement.

Spaude v Phillips Murrah

Plaintiffs alleged Quantum Emery LLC engaged in a fraudulent investment scheme resulting in financial losses to investors. All investors, including any and all of their respective successors-in-interest, who have invested in any Quantom or Quaneco offering on or after October 5, 2005 are eligible for class membership. The deadline for filing a claim has passed.

Spinedex Physical Therapy USA v. United Healthcare of AZ

Plaintiffs alleged United Healthcare of Arizona and associated Defendants failed to comply with the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) and the terms of various private sector-sponsored group health plans when processing claims for physical therapy befits and nonsurgical spinal decompression therapy, regardless of weather the decompression therapy was performed by a physical therapist. The deadline for filing a claim has passed.

State of California v j2 Global, Inc.

You are an eligible recipient that can participate in this Judgment if (a) you are a California consumer (an individual consumer with a California billing zip code) who enrolled in a paid subscription with, and/or at any time between April 2012 and November 2016, (b) were charged for at least one automatically-renewed cycle, without sending or receiving a fax using, and/or and (c) have not previously received a refund for payment for, and/or services.

Stern v Leaning Tree Chute LLC & Reside Living

Plaintiffs alleged Defendants violated the Chicago Residential Landlord and Tenant Ordinance (RLTO) by failing to attach to leases and renewals required RLTO Summary and/or Separate Summary containing the security deposit interest rates pursuant to RLTO Section 5-12-170. Class members include any persons who entered into a lease or a renewal at any property in Chicago owned and/or managed by the Defendants on or after December 28, 2015. The deadline for filing a claim has passed.

Thomas v. Sherwin P. Robin and Associates

Plaintiffs alleged the Defendants committed violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) by overstating the amount of post-judgment interest owed by consumers in documents the Defendants filed with the courts and sent to consumers and third parties.

Venieris v. PVH Retail Stores LLC

The lawsuit alleges that PVH Retail engaged in false, misleading and/or deceptive acts and/or practices in connection with the sale and/or advertisement of merchandise sold by PVH Retail at Arizona Tommy Hilfiger Outlet Stores in violation of Arizona’s Consumer Fraud Act, A.R.S. §§ 44-1521, et seq. The lawsuit also alleges that PVH Retail omitted, failed to disclose, and actively concealed that merchandise offered for sale at Arizona Tommy Hilfiger Outlet Stores was unique to Arizona Tommy Hilfiger Outlet Stores and not discounted from an original price. All individuals not otherwise excluded who, between August 30, 2017 and May 21, 2019, purchased one or more items from any Arizona Tommy Hilfiger Outlet Store which was not returned by you, on your behalf, or otherwise.

Yahoo! Inc. Customer Data Security Breach Litigation Settlement

This case involves multiple data breaches occurring at Yahoo in 2013 through 2016, as well as data security intrusions occurring in early 2012.  If you had a Yahoo account between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2016, you are a settlement class member. If you received an emailed notice from the settlement administrator about this class action settlement addressed to you, then the settlement administrator has already determined that you are a settlement class member.


Subscribe to our blog

[eBook]: Tools for Navigating the Class Action Settlement Process

Find Out More

[On-Demand Webinar] Navigating the Settlement Administration Process from Start to Finish

Find Out More

New to Class Action Litigation? Start With Our Free Resources

Find Out More