case 3:16-cv-00940-mmh-pdb document page pageld · case 3:16-cv-00940-mmh-pdb document 1 filed...

Case 3:16-cv-00940-MMH-PDB Document 1 Filed 07/22/16 of 16 PagelD 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

JENNIFER SWEAT,on behalf of herself andall others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

.1l.P Ov4140 -NI- 34 ek)sbCase. No.:V.

c......,c, r-

NBTY, INC., 71 cr.

r. F.n-F:7 r--....f._ —71

Defendant. r-r---, ripi

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT ri-1-.2-1.-1--4, C. "I,7)CD -.1

c...›

This class action stems from defendant's marketing and selling oftg-ter-t and

other vitamin supplements with an unqualified representation of "Made in USA,

when the products contain substantial ingredients sourced from foreign countries.

Plaintiff brings this class action under the laws of Florida and the similar laws of

eight other states on her own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated.

I.

Introduction

1. In determining whether a product may bear a label with the unqualified

statement "Made in the USA" without violating the Florida Deceptive and Unfair

Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA), Florida law directs that the Court look to federal

law under the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA), including the regulations and

1


federal court decisions applying the FTCA. Fla. Code 501.204 ("due consideration

and great weight shall be given to the interpretations of the Federal Trade

Commission and the federal courts relating to 5(a)(1) of the Federal Trade

Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 45(a)(1)"). The statute further states that lap

substantive rules promulgated under this part must not be inconsistent with the rules,

regulations, and decisions of the Federal Trade Commission and the federal courts"

construing the FTCA. Id. 501.205.

2. The FTC regulations divide domestic-source representations into two

types: qualified and unqualified. Qualified statements typically say something like

"Made in the USA from domestically and foreign-sourced ingredients." Unqualified

statements, on the other hand, simply say "Made in America" or "Made in the USA"

without any further explanation, and so invite a higher level of scrutiny. The Federal

Trade Commission has defined the unqualified term "Made in the USA" to mean

that the product is "all or virtually all" made in the United States. The phrase "all or

virtually all" means, according to the FTC, that "all significant parts and processing

that go into the product must be of U.S. origin, that is the products should contain

no--or negligible--foreign content." Even if foreign-sourced parts or ingredients

constitute only a small percentage of a product, according to the FTC a company

cannot make an unqualified claim ofU.S. origin ("Made in the USA") if those parts

or ingredients are significant parts or ingredients. In such a case, it is only

2


permissible to make any claim of domestic-source if it is accurately qualified, such

as "Made in the USA from domestic and foreign ingredients."

3. A sterling example of this principle is contained in a November 20,

2015 FTC staff letter to an attorney representing Niall Luxury Goods, a watch-

manufacturer that made an unqualified claim that its watches were made in the U.S.

The Niall watches contained a movement manufactured in Switzerland, and the

movement was a small percentage of the overall product in terms of content and

price. The FTC confirmed that an unqualified representation of domestic origin was

impermissible in these circumstances, reasoning: "In this case, though the cost of a

Swiss movement may be small relative to Niall's overall U.S. manufacturing costs,

without a movement, a watch cannot tell time. Therefore, movements are essential

to the function of a watch." The FTC concluded that the remedial steps taken by

Niall, which were to change the domestic-source representation from unqualified to

qualified, were sufficient and no further action was needed:

Accordingly, to avoid deceiving consumers, Niall implemented a

remedial action plan to qualify its representations. This plan included:

(1) updating claims on watch dials and bezels to clarify that the watchescontain Swiss parts;

(2) updating websites and social media; and

(3) adopting new compliance measures, including legal review of futuremarketing materials and a coordinated media plan.

3


Based on your actions and other factors, the staff has decided not to

pursue this investigation any further.

This FTC letter, published for guidance, is entirely consistent with other guidance

published by the FTC. See, e.g., Spray Pal Closing Letter, (Oct 1, 2015) (unqualified

claim deceptive for diaper cleaning device because clip which held diaper to device

was imported, noting that "although the cost of the clip may be small relative to the

overall manufacturing costs, the clip is essential to the function of the Spray Pal

product."); Gorilla Glue Closing Letter (June 5, 2015) (unqualified claim deceptive

for glue because "key raw material in the product that gives it its adhesive quality is

sourced overseas."); Leggett & Platt, Inc. Closing Letter (Feb 25, 2016) (unqualified

claim deceptive on adjustable desk because "the imported motor and electronics are

essential to the desks function."); Weiss Watch Co., Inc. Closing Letter (Dec. 7,

2015) (unqualified claim deceptive where "though the cost of the Swiss parts may

be small relative to Weiss's overall U.S. manufacturing costs, the imported parts

constitute the key parts of the watches' movement, and are essential to the watches'

function."); Hawke Enterprises Inc. Closing Letter (Nov. 14, 2012) (unqualified

claim for floor cleaners deceptive where they contained Mexican motors.). In the

same way that a watch cannot be a watch without a movement, glue cannot be glue

without its adhesive ability, an adjustable desk cannot be an adjustable desk without

its adjustment mechanism, a diaper cleaner cannot be a diaper cleaner without its

essential clip, and a floor cleaner cannot be a floor cleaner without its essential

4


motor, a vitamin supplement cannot be a vitamin supplement without the vitamins

it is supposed to contain.

4. Defendant makes an unqualified representation that its products are

domestically-sourced. Its labels say "Made in USA" without qualification and carry

an American flag. The labels also make an affirmative representation of the specific

vitamins and the RDA percentage of those vitamins that are contained in the

products. The defendant's supplements, contrary to this unqualified Made in USA

representation, contain at least one essential ingredient that it represents it contains,

Vitamin C, which is foreign-sourced (and as plaintiffalleges herein, more likely than

not other essential ingredients that are foreign-sourced). The defendant's unqualified

representations that its vitamin supplements are domestically sourced violate the

FTCA, as interpreted by the FTC, and therefore violate Florida law. The most the

law would permit a company to do in these circumstances is to make a qualified

representation such as "Made in the USA of foreign and domestically sourced

ingredients." Labeling these supplements "Made in USA" without qualification is a

serious issue because it deceives purchasers who are rightly concerned about the

safety of imported food ingredients, and because it gives defendant an unfair

advantage over its competitors.

5


Parties, Jurisdiction, and Venue

5. Plaintiff is an adult resident citizen of Lake Butler, Florida, which is

within this district and division.

6. Defendant NBTY, Inc., ("NBTY") is a Delaware corporation with its

principal place of business in Ronkonkona, New York

7. Because there is diversity between plaintiff and the defendant, and

because the aggregate amount in controversy for the class claims exceeds

$5,000,000, exclusive of interest and costs, diversity jurisdiction exists under 28

U.S.C. 1332, as amended by the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005.

8. Defendant NBTY is the manufacturer of the Ester-C brand ofvitamins,

including, without limitation, Immune CHARGE Gummies, Immune CHARGE

Quick Dissolve, 1000mg Tablets, Gummies 1000 mg, Ester-C Plus Probiotics, Ester-

C To Go, 500mg Tables, and Ester-C with Vitamin D3.

9. Defendant sold, and plaintiff bought, the defendant's products in this

district and division, so venue is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(2) as a

substantial part of the conduct giving rise to this action occurred in this district and

division.

6


Factual Background

10. On several occasions within the applicable limitations period, Plaintiff

bought Defendant's Ester-C 500mg Tablets for personal and household use. Plaintiff

made these purchases throughout 2015 and afterwards. She purchased the

Defendant's vitamins at a Wal-Mart store in Union County, Florida. The vitamins

she purchased contained on their back label an American flag and the words "Made

in USA, which is an unqualified country-of-origin representation under the FTC

guidelines.

11. The labels of Defendant's other Ester-C and other products also have

an American flag on the back label above the words "Made in USA, which, again,

is an unqualified country-of-origin representation.

12. This unqualified representation of the USA as the country of origin is

deceptive because Defendant's Ester-C products contain ingredients sourced in

foreign countries. These foreign-sourced ingredients include vitamins, such as,

without limitation, vitamin C. Because vitamins in commercial products are

normally purchased as "packs, or groups ofassorted vitamins, there is a high degree

of likelihood that any product containing vitamin C also contains other foreign

sourced vitamins 1 in addition to the foreign sourced vitamin C. Because

manufacturers normally purchase various vitamin packs from the same supplier

there is a high degree of likelihood that other vitamin packs purchased from the same

7


supplier contained foreign sourced vitamins. Foreign sourced vitamins are an

essential part of the products at issue in this case. Therefore the use of the unqualified

phrase "made in USA" on the labels is deceptive.

13. Defendant placed these misleading and inaccurate labels on their

products with the intention that plaintiff and other consumers rely on them.

14. Plaintiff is an unsophisticated consumer who purchased the products

for household use.

15. Plaintiff is also a patriotic Americans who prefers to purchase goods

sourced in the United States rather than goods containing essential imported

ingredients, and is willing to pay a premium for wholly American-sourced goods. In

this regard, plaintiff is similar to other American consumers who are willing to pay

more for domestically-sourced goods, particularly when those goods are foods and

health-related products. When an American consumer buys something to put in his

or her mouth, that consumer would prefer that all of the ingredients being consumed

come from the U.S. rather than China or other foreign countries.

16. Plaintiff saw the misleading labels prior to purchasing the items and

relied upon them, ibelieving that the flag and "made in USA" label meant that the

items met the legal standard to bear such labels.

Iv.

The Applicable Law

8


19. The Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act provides:

(1) Unfair methods of competition, unconscionable acts or practices,and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or

commerce are hereby declared unlawful.

(2) It is the intent of the Legislature that, in construing subsection (1),due consideration and great weight shall be given to the interpretationsof the Federal Trade Commission and the federal courts relating to s.

5(a)(1) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. s. 45(a)(1) as

ofJuly 1, 2001.

Fla. Code 501.204.

17. The federal law governing country-of-origin claims is contained in the

Federal Trade Commission's ("FTC") Enforcement Policy Statement on U.S. Origin

Claims. According to the FTC, for an unqualified express claim of domestic origin

to be legal and not deceptive, the product must be "all or virtually all" made in the

United States. The phrase "all or virtually all" means that all significant parts and

processing that go into the product must be of U.S. origin. The foreign sourced

vitamins used by defendant are not only "significant, but essential. Without

vitamins they would not be vitamins. Defendant's Made in USA labeling and use of

the American Flag are thus forbidden by federal law, and therefore Florida law.

21. Plaintiff has suffered damages because she paid more for the products

than they were actually worth. Plaintiff also suffered damages because she did not

receive the benefit of her bargain, since she intended to purchase goods made and

sourced in the U.S.A.

9


22. Defendant sells other dietary supplements that, like Ester-C 500mg

Tablets, are labeled with the unqualified country-of-origin representation "Made in

USA" but contain ingredients manufactured and sourced in foreign countries. These

products include, but are not limited to, Defendant's Ester-C brand lines. The

foreign-sourced ingredients they contain include, without limitation, vitamin C.

Those products also were not "all or virtually all" made in the USA. Like the

products Plaintiff purchased, those products contained significant ingredients

sourced outside the USA. To make an unqualified claim that these products were

domestically-sourced in deceptive as a matter of law.

23. Plaintiff will continue to be damaged by Defendant's false marketing

and labeling ofproducts with the false unqualified representation that they are made

in the USA. According to its website, NBTY owns at least 19 brands which market

and sell an array of consumer products. Plaintiff, as unsophisticated consumers,

does not even know all of the brands owned by Defendant. Because of Defendant's

misrepresentations, Plaintiff cannot know whether labels with the unqualified claim

of made in the USA are accurate on any of these products.

24. Without injunctive relief, Plaintiff could easily fall prey to such

deceptive marketing tactics in the future.

V.

Class Allegations

10


25. Plaintiff brings this action on her own behalf and on behalf of others

similarly situated as a multi-state class action pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure. The class which Plaintiff seeks to represent is composed

of and defined as:

All persons residing in states which have enacted the UniformDeceptive Trade Practices Act, The Florida Deceptive and Unfair TradePractices Act, or any act similar in substance, who, within the

applicable limitations period, have purchased dietary supplementsmanufactured and marketed by defendant and labeled "Made in theUSA, featured an American Flag, or otherwise labeled or marketedwith an unqualified representation of domestic sourcing.

The Florida law in question is Fla. Code 501.204. The other states with similar if

not identical law are California, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New

Jersey, New York, and Washington. See Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17200, et seq.;

815 ILCS 510/2, et seq.; Mich. Stat. §445.901 et seq.; Minn. Stat. §§325F.68-

325F.70; Mo. Rev. Stat 407.010 et seq.; N.J. Stat. Ann. 56:8-1 et seq.; N.Y. Gen.

Bus. Law 349 et seq.; and Wash. Rev. Code §19.86.010 et seq.

26. Alternatively, if the Court does not certify the above class, Plaintiff seeks

to represent the following Florida-only class:

All persons residing in Florida who, within the applicable limitationsperiod, have purchased dietary supplements manufactured andmarketed by Defendant and labeled "Made in the USA, featured an

American Flag, or otherwise labeled or marketed with an unqualifiedrepresentation of domestic sourcing.

11


27. This action has been brought and may be properly maintained as a class

action pursuant to the provisions of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,

and satisfies the numerosity, commonality, typicality, adequacy, and superiority

requirements thereof.

28. Defendant markets its dietary supplements in major retail stores

throughout the United States as well as on the Internet. Therefore, the plaintiff class

is so numerous that the individual joinder of all members is impracticable. The class

meets the numerosity requirement of Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 23(a)(1).

29. Common questions of law and fact, including whether defendant's

dietary supplements contain ingredients manufactured and sourced from foreign

countries, exist in this case. The class meets the commonality requirement of Fed.

R. Civ. Proc. 23(a)(2).

30. Plaintiff's claims are typical of the claims of the members of the class

under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(3). The plaintiff and all members of the class sustained

damages arising out of defendant's course of conduct in violation of the law as

complained herein. The losses of each member of the class were caused directly by

defendant's wrongful conduct in violation of the law as alleged herein.

31. The plaintiff named herein will fairly and adequately protect the

interests of the class as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(4). Plaintiffhas no interests

which are adverse to the interests of absent class members. Plaintiff, like all class

12


members, purchased dietary supplements falsely labeled with the unqualified

country-of-origin representation "Made in USA."

32. A class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and

efficient adjudication of this controversy under Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 23(b) because

individual joinder of all class members is impracticable. Furthermore, because the

damages suffered by each individual member of the class may be relatively small,

the expense and burden of individual litigation would make it difficult or impossible

for individual class members to redress the wrongs done to them. Individual

litigation would likewise burden the court system to a much greater degree than a

class action, and would present the potential for inconsistent or contradictory

judgments. By contrast, the conduct of this action as a class action presents far fewer

management difficulties, conserves the resources ofthe parties and the court system,

and protects the rights of each class member.

VI.

Claim for Relief

Count One: Violation of Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act

33. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-32 of this Complaint

as if fully set forth herein.

34. Defendant violated FDUTPA 501.204, which incorporates FTC

interpretations, by labeling and marketing their dietary supplements with the

13


unqualified country-of-origin claim that they were made in the USA when, in fact,

they contained essential foreign-sourced ingredients.

35. Defendant has violated this section repeatedly and willfully,

intentionally using "Made in the USA" labels to confuse and defraud shoppers.

36. Plaintiff, and the class he represents, are entitled to declaratory relief,

injunctive relief, actual damages, attorneys' fees and expenses, and costs under

FDUTPA 501.211.

Count Two: Violation of the Similar Statutes of Other States

37. Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-36 of this Complaint

as if fully set forth herein.

38. Other states have deceptive trade practices acts which, as they apply to

the facts at issue here, are in substance the same as the Acts referenced in Counts 1

and 2, prohibiting the conduct detailed herein. The other states with similar if not

identical law are California, Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey,

New York, and Washington. See Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17200, et seq.; Fla. Stat.

501.201 et seq.; Mich Stat. §445.901 et seq.; Minn Stat. §§325F.68-325F.70; Mo.

Rev. Stat 407.010 et seq.; N.J. Stat. Ann. 56:8-1 et seq.; N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law

349 et seq.; and Wash. Rev. Code §19.86.010 et seq. On behalfof the plaintiff class,

Plaintiff asserts claims under those statutes as well for class members residing in

those states.

14


39. On behalf of the out-of-state class members, Plaintiff seeks actual

damages, punitive damages, attorney's fees, and costs.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff prays for the following relief:

A) An order certifying this as a statewide class action pursuant to Rule 23 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;

B) An order appointing plaintiff's counsel as Class Counsel to represent the

interests of the class;

C) After trial, a declaration that defendant has violated the law as alleged

herein, and an injunction ordering defendant to stop their violations of law

as alleged herein;

D) After trial, an award of actual damages;

E) An award of reasonable attorneys' fees and expense, and costs; and

F) Such further or different relief as the Court may deem appropriate.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands trial by struck jury on all counts.

Respectfully Submitted,

/s/ Kristan B. RiversKristan B. RiversOne Attorney for PlaintiffFL Bar #107214DAVIS & NORRIS LLP2154 Highland Avenue South

15


Birmingham, Alabama 35205PH: [email protected]

OF COUNSEL:DAVIS & NORRIS LLP

[email protected]@[email protected]@[email protected]

16

Foreten L ountrv

KIAIUIF,

44 (Rev. lidsgase 3:16-cv-00940-MMH-Pefvfiotuailk,Fritd/07/22/14 Paw41 _PjaviV Hee)The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor suppkment the tiling and service of pleadings or other papc as required by law, c!xcept asprovided by local rules of court. •his fon% approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use f thc Clerk ot Court tor theput-pose orinitiating the civil docket sheet. MYINSTRUCTIONS ON NE.17P-IGE OF THIS FORt1,

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTSJennifer Sweatt NBTY, INc.

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff Union County, FL County of Residence of First Listed Defendant Suffolk, NYefaCEPT IN US PLTINTIFY tASESI UN CS PLAINTIFF GM!. MITI

NOM: IN LAND CONDEMNNHON CASES, USE 11W LOCATION OE111E TRACIOF LAND INVOLVED.

(e) Attorneys (Firm Nanw. Arldress, and Telephon• Numb(-r) Attorneys al Known'Davis & Norris, LLP2154 Highland Ave. S.Birmingham, AL 35205 205-930-9900

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Mee an -X-in One Ilax On1.0 III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIE$ (Place-an -X- inane Hat forPlairea)(For Thoerairn Cal•.^ Onlo 1 and One Box la 117.7endanti

1 i CS. Government 1 1 Ecder-11 Question PTE. DEF I PTE DEEPlaintiff ICS Gawrinnent Nat li Paro Citizen anis State +11C: 1 1 Incorporated ca nrecipai Place rt 4 1 4

of Business I Ibis State

1 2 1 .S. Goy ernment IC 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State 1 2 1 2 Incorporated,n4 pr,neirai Place 1 5 AC 5Detendant dadware Cni:ensirrp,,i Aatie., m lien: ilii of Business It Another State

Citizen or Subject of a 1 1 1 3 Foreign Nation 1 6 n 0

I V. NATURE OF SUIT inare an "X.. m One Box OnhiCON"CRACT I TflDT I NIDCOMM MC16t

T•II

o glOVII.••••^•Mit

I !it) Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY .1 625 Drug Related Seizure 1 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 1 375 False Claims Act1 :20 Marine n 310 Airplane 1 365 Personal Injury of Property 2! USC 881 1 423 Withdrawal 1 376 Qui Tam (3: USC.1 130 Miller Act 1 315 Airplane Product Product Liability 1 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729tart1 :40 Negotiable Instrument Liability 1 167 Health Care/ I 400 State Reapportionment1 150 Recovery of Overpaymem 1 320 Assault. Libel & Pharmaceutkal PROPERTY RIGHTS 1 410 Antitrust

& Enforcement ofludgment Slander Personal Injury 1 820 Copyrights 1 410 Banks and Banking1 ;5 t medicare Ae: 1 110 Federal Employers' Product Liability 1 830 Patent 1 450 Cornmtrce1 152 Recoy cry of Iklisulted Liability 1 308 Asbestos Personal 1 840 Dademark 1 460 Deportation

Student I 0411, :1 340 Marine Injury Product 1 470 Racketeer Influenced and(Fxdudes Veterans) 1 145 Marine Product Liability. LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY I Corrapt Organizations

1 i 5; Recovery of Overpayment Liability. PERSONAL PROPERTY I 710 Fair Labor Standards 1 861 IIIA (1395M 1 480 Consumer Creditof Veteran's Benetits ;-1 350 Motor Vehicle g 370 Other Fraud Act 1 862 Black Lung 1923) 1 490 Cable/Sat TV

1 100 Stockholders' Suits ri 355 Motor Vehicle 1 371 Truth in Lending 1 720 Labor/Management 1 863 1)IWC/D1WW 1405(g) 1 850 Securiti&Commoditi,1 190 Other Contract Product Liability 1 380 Other Personal Relations 1 so-1 SS1D title XVI Exchange1 :95 Contract Product Liability 1 360 Other Personal Property Dalnage 1 740 Rail% ay Labor Act 1 865 RS11405(0/ 1 890 Other Statutory Actions1 196 Franchise Injury 1 385 Property Dannige n 751 Family and Medical 1 891 Agricultural Acts

1 362 Personal In)ury Produet Liability Leave Act 1 893 Environmental MattersMedical Malpractice 1 79(1 Other Labor Litigation 1 895 Freedom of-Information

I REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGRTS PRISONER PETITIONS 1 791 Employee Retirement FEDERAL TAX SUITS, Act1 21 0 Land Condemnation rt 440 Other Civ il Rights Habeas Corpus: Income Security Act 1 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff I 896 Arbitration1 220 Foreclosure n 441 Voting 1 463 Alien Detainee or Defendant) 1 899 Administrative Procedure1 230 Rem Lease & Ejectment 1 442 Employment n :tit) Minions to Vacate 1 87! 1RS—Third Party Act/Review or Appeal of1 240 Torts to Land n 443 Housing, Sentence 26 USC 7609 Agency Decision1 245 -Fort Product Liability Accommodations 1 7'30 General 1 950 Constitutionality of1 290 All Othet Real Property n 445 Amer. w/Dbiabilities 1 535 Death Penally IMMIGRATION State Statutes

Employment Other: 1 462 Naturalization Application1 446 Amer. ssiliiobilities 1 540 Mandamus & other 1 465 Other Immigration

Other 1 550 Civil Rights Actions.1 448 Education 1 555 Prison Condition

1 560 Civil DetaineeConditions of

Confinement.V. ORIGIN d'lace an "X.' in One liar MOX 1 Original 1 2 Removed from 1 3 Remanded from 1 4 Reinstated or 1 3 Transferred from 1 6 MultidiStriet

Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigatian!speril,i)

(015tbial) titAtItyy iiii4 64,.ithraftiatiiiard(rit die jurhdirtional stalilles unless diversity): 1IVI. CAUSE OF ACTION,

'C'dhtliftWiriftlegated to country of origin claims1

VII. REQUESTED IN t/r CI1ECK IF TIIIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND S CHECK YES onb, if demanded in complaint:COMPLAINT: IINDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. JURY DEMAND: ®Yes &go

VIII. RELATED CASE(S) 1i

IF ANY ftiee ansata'noniiJUDGE 1)0CKET NUMBER i

DA-IT SYs;:iN num tii,I.C.I.ORNFY OF RIVORD i07/19/2016 si Anstan ao. Ilivers

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

iRECEIPT a AMOUNT 0° APPLYING In' JUDGE 3I4. MAG ril:(+00.dA4604? 4

case 3:16-cv-00940-mmh-pdb document page pageld · case 3:16-cv-00940-mmh-pdb document 1 filed...

Documents