FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS Sample Clauses

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS. Xxxxxxx and the Development of the Business Models Used to Provide Them

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS. Opana ER is an opioid drug whose label contained “black box” warnings of serious risks from taking the drug, such as addiction and respiratory depression, which can lead to death.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS. A. Friends of the 57th Xxxx Democrats fails to file a required 2017 Cycle 3 campaign finance report with the Board of Ethics

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS. 12. At all relevant times, either the water deluge system or the liquid oxygen tank at the facility acted as a “point source” of a “discharge” of “pollutants” to wetlands bordering the facility as follows. The deluge water discharged to the surrounding wetlands is considered an industrial process wastewater. The wetlands bordering the facility are “navigable waters” as defined in the CWA Section 502(7) and thus “waters of the United States.” The wetlands are adjacent to and have a continuous surface connection to the Rio Grande river, which is a traditionally navigable water within the meaning of Section 502 of the CWA, 33 U.S.C. § 1362, and 40 C.F.R. § 122.2. 13. Because Respondent owned or operated a facility that acted as a point source of discharges of pollutants to waters of the United States, Respondent and the facility were subject to the CWA and the TPDES. 14. Respondent did not have a TPDES Permit (permit) issued under Section 402 of the CWA, 33 U.S.C. § 1342. At all relevant times, Respondent was not authorized to discharge pollutants from the facility to waters of the United States. 15. On August 25, 2023, EPA transmitted, via e-mail, an information request letter pursuant to Section 308 of the CWA. The letter, signed on August 23, 2023, requested information regarding known unauthorized discharges from the facility to the wetlands bordering the facility. 16. On March 13, 2024, EPA issued Administrative Order CWA-06-2024-1746 citing information on known unauthorized discharges from the facility. EPA asked for information regarding launches in November 2023, March 2024, and June 2024. 17. Responses to the Information Request, Administrative Order, and information gathered from other sources identified unauthorized discharges from 2022 to 2024, including, but not limited to: a. On July 11, 2022, Respondent had a liquid oxygen spill which discharged 36,000 gallons of liquid oxygen to the wetlands. b. On July 28, 2023, Respondent conducted the first full-up test of the launch pad water deluge system. An estimated 114,000 gallons of water was used in the test. Approximately 45,300 gallons of the deluge water discharged to the wetlands bordering the launch pad. c. On August 6, 2023, Respondent conducted a static fire test of the starship super heavy booster utilizing the water deluge system. An estimated 194,500 gallons of water were used in the test. An estimated 78,500 gallons were not captured. 41,500 gallons of the 78,500 gallons were vaporized by...

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS. Solutia owns and operates a resin production facility at 0000 Xxxx Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxxxx, Xxxxxxxx (Facility). At its Facility, Solutia processes and emits vinyl acetate, acetaldehyde, and methanol, HAPs listed in Section 112(b) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(b), and other VOCs (e.g., ethanol and ethyl acetate).

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS. Savory maintained, owned, or licensed PII, including payment card information of Colorado residents because Savory collected customer payment card information on its checkout webpage and transferred the information to its third-party payment processor to complete online transactions.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS. 16. Equifax has collected and stored personal and credit information from Class members, including Plaintiffs. 17. Equifax owed a duty to Plaintiffs and the Classes, who entrusted Defendants with their private information, to use reasonable care to protect their PII from unauthorized access by third parties and to detect and stop data breaches, to comply with laws implemented to preserve the privacy of this information, and to notify them promptly if their information was disclosed to an unauthorized third party. 18. Equifax knew or should have known that their failure to meet this duty would cause substantial harm to Plaintiffs and the Classes, including serious risks of credit harm and identity theft for years to come. 19. As Equifax was well-aware, or reasonably should have been aware, the PII collected, maintained and stored in its systems is highly sensitive, susceptible to attack, and could be used for wrongful purposes by third parties, such as identity theft and fraud. It is well known and the subject of many media reports that PII is highly coveted and a frequent target of hackers. Prior to May 2017, Equifax had experienced at least three major cybersecurity incidents in which consumers’ personal information was compromised and accessed by unauthorized third parties. 20. Despite the frequent public announcements of data breaches of corporate entities, including Equifax itself, Equifax maintained an insufficient and inadequate system to protect the PII of Plaintiffs and Class members, in breach of their duties to Plaintiffs and the Classes. Given the Company’s history of cyberattacks and their reputation as an industry leader in data breach security, Equifax could have and should have invested more money and resources into ensuring the security of their data. 21. Because Equifax negligently failed to maintain adequate safeguards, unauthorized third parties managed to exploit a weakness in Equifax’s US website application to gain access to sensitive data for roughly two months, beginning in mid-May 2017. The information accessed included names, Social Security numbers, birth dates, addresses, and, in some cases, driver’s license numbers. In addition, credit card numbers for approximately 209,000 U.S. consumers, and certain dispute documents with personal identifying information for approximately 182,000 U.S. consumers, were accessed. 22. Equifax was, or reasonably should have been, aware of the vulnerability in their system as early as March 2017. I...

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS. Sprint provides wireless telephone service to Claimant and the Class at a specific monthly recurring price, depending, inter alia, on the number of minutes of wireless service a customer chooses to use during a one-month period.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS. 10 9. This is a consolidated class action brought under California Rule of Civil Procedure 11 Section 382 seeking compensation for, among others: (i) failing to provide members of the Class 12 with wages, including minimum wages and overtime wages; (ii) failing to provide members of 13 the Class with lawful meal periods; (iii) failing to provide members of the Class with lawful rest 14 periods; (iv) failing to indemnify the Class with necessary business expenses; (v) failing to 15 furnish accurate wage statements; (vi) waiting time penalties; and (vii) unlawful business 16 practices. Plaintiffs are also seeking injunctive and other equitable relief, interest, and reasonable 17 attorneys’ fees and costs, under California Labor Laws and IWC Wage Order 5-2001. Plaintiffs, 18 on behalf of themselves and the Class, also seek injunctive relief and restitution of all benefits 19 Defendant has enjoyed from its violations of these laws. 20 10. Throughout the statutory period, Defendant failed to pay Plaintiffs for all hours 21 worked (including minimum and overtime wages), failed to provide Plaintiffs with uninterrupted 22 meal periods, failed to authorize and permit Plaintiffs to take uninterrupted rest periods, failed 23 to indemnify Plaintiffs for necessary business expenses, failed to timely pay all final wages to 24 Plaintiffs when Defendant terminated Plaintiffs’ employment, and failed to furnish accurate 25 wage statements to Plaintiffs. As discussed below, Plaintiffs’ experience working for Defendant 26 was typical and illustrative. 27 11. Throughout the statutory period, Defendant maintained a policy and practice of not 28 paying Plaintiffs and the Class and the Aggrieved Employees for all hours worked, including all DocuSign Envelope ID: AC9F757F-60E8-4E69-A505-9939CD2B121B DocuSign Envelope ID: FC72CF2A-EA75-4CC3-A926-11AB3E1EE1FE 1 overtime wages. Defendant regularly use a system of time rounding in a manner that resulted, 2 over a period of time, in failing to compensate Plaintiffs and the Class and the Aggrieved 3 Employees properly for all the time they have actually worked, even though the realities of

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS