/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/010629.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Friday, June 29 2001, Vol. 3, No. 127 Headlines 724 SOLUTIONS: Schiffrin Barroway Files Securities Suit In S.D. NY AOL TIME: Woman Initiates Suit In Maryland Over 'Explicit' Records CHASE MANHATTAN: Faces Suit In FL For Wrongful Assessment Of Late Fees COMPUSERVE: Sued In Florida Over Late Payments Of Promised Rebates DELTATHREE INC.: Schiffrin Barroway Files Securities Suit In S.D. NY DRUGSTORE.COM: Stull Stull Commences Securities Suit In S.D. New York EUGENE CITY:Easement Suit Versus City Expands To Involve 179 Projects EXXON MOBIL: Australian Unit Found Liable For '98 Gas Plant Explosion GUNTHER INTERNATIONAL: Settles Shareholders Suit For $250,000 HAVAS ADVERTISING: Faces Suit Filed By Circle.com Shareholders In DE INFOSPACE INC.: Stull Stull Files Securities Suit In W.D. Washington INTERVOICE-BRITE: Marc Henzel Brings Securities Suit In N.D. Texas MOTIENT CORPORATION: Delaware Court Consolidates 16 Securities Suits PALM INC.: Milberg Weiss Starts Securities Suit In S.D. New York PUBLISHERS CLEARING: Settles 26-State Deceptive Mail Suit For $34M RAMP NETWORK: Shareholders File Suit Over Manipulation Of Statements ROBOTIC VISION: Schiffrin Barroway Files Securities Suit In MA TIVO INC.: Schiffrin Barroway Begins Securities Suit In S.D. New York TRANSMETA CORPORATION: Savett Frutkin Files Securities Suit In N.D. CA VALUE AMERICA: Schiffrin Barroway Files Securities Suit In S.D. NY ********* 724 SOLUTIONS: Schiffrin Barroway Files Securities Suit In S.D. NY ------------------------------------------------------------------ Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of 724 Solutions, Inc. (Nasdaq: SVNX) from January 27, 2000 through December 6, 2000, inclusive. For further details, contact: Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP through Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Stuart L. Berman, Esq. by Mail: Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 1-888-299-7706 (toll free) or 1-610-667-7706 or by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com AOL TIME: Woman Initiates Suit In Maryland Over 'Explicit' Records ------------------------------------------------------------------ AOL-Time Warner is facing a class action lawsuit in Maryland over its latest release of Trick Daddy's Thugs Are Us, the Daily Hip-Hop News reported. A woman in Maryland initiated the suit after she bought a clean version of the record for her 11-year old son and still found some "explicit" lyrics on some of the songs. Lawyer Jon Pels, who is representing the woman in the suit, claims he bought additional copies of the clean versions, and all had the same content. The lawsuit adds fuel to Congressional fire, where a new bill similar to Senator Lieberman's is making it's way through Congress, the report said. Senator Lieberman recently wrote President Bush, who all but came right out and supported the senator. The letter Lieberman sent contends that the entertainment industry has been "targeting heavily violent content meant for adults directly to our children" and that legislation needs to be put into place to help. "Although we've just been served with the lawsuit, it is clear on its face that the plaintiffs misunderstand the RIAA guidelines on parental labels," a Warner spokeswoman said of the Maryland suit. "If record companies and artists can be sued just because one parent or judge believes that an album was improperly labeled, then that discourages all record companies from labeling," she added. CHASE MANHATTAN: Faces Suit In FL For Wrongful Assessment Of Late Fees ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Chase Manhattan Mortgage is facing a consumer class action suit in Palm Beach County, Florida. According to a report by ConsumerAffairs.com, the suit alleges that the mortgage company improperly assesses late charges payments even if these were, in fact, received on time. In the suit, Dale A. Porcher contends that he sent his mortgage payments to Chase Manhattan in a timely manner. He charges that the mortage company held the payments and posted them to his account after the due date and then slapped him with late payment fees and penalties. The case seeks class action status, the report said. COMPUSERVE: Sued In Florida Over Late Payments Of Promised Rebates ------------------------------------------------------------------ CompuServe is facing a suit in Florida filed by a couple claiming it failed to pay rebates on time and, in some cases, never made the promised payments, according to a recent report by ConsumerAffairs.com. The suit is seeking class action status against the company, which is owned by AOL Time Warner. According to the report, Michael and Melissa Stone of Niceville bought a Compaq Presario computer in Fort Walton Beach and signed up for three years of Internet service through CompuServe as part of a $400 rebate offer. The Stones claim they mailed their rebate form to CompuServe on Aug. 26, 2000, and did not receive their rebate until Feb. 19, 2001, nearly six months later, more than twice as long as the 2 1/2 months CompuServe promises on its Web site, the report said. The suit is pending in Broward County Circuit Court. CompuServe offers $100 and $400 rebate plans when customers purchase a computer and sign up for its online service. The $400 rebate is for a three-year Internet access plan at $21.95 per month, which would cost the consumer $790.20 over the full three-year term. The $100 rebate is for a one-year plan. DELTATHREE INC.: Schiffrin Barroway Files Securities Suit In S.D. NY -------------------------------------------------------------------- Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of deltathree.com, Inc. (Nasdaq: DDDC) from November 23, 1999 through December 6, 2000, inclusive. For more information, contact: Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP through Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Stuart L. Berman, Esq. by Mail: Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 1-888-299-7706 (toll free) or 1-610-667-7706 or by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com DRUGSTORE.COM: Stull Stull Commences Securities Suit In S.D. New York --------------------------------------------------------------------- Stull, Stull & Brody filed Wednesday a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of purchasers of Drugstore.com, Inc. (NASDAQ:DSCM) common stock between July 28, 1999 and June 15, 2001, inclusive. The complaint alleges that the following defendants violated the federal securities laws by issuing and selling Drugstore.com common stock pursuant to the July 28, 1999 IPO without disclosing to investors that some of the underwriters in the offering, including the lead underwriters, had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors: (i) Drugstore.com, Inc., (ii) Peter M. Neupert, (iii) David E. Rostov, (iv) Jeffrey P. Bezos, (v) Brook H. Byers, (vi) L. John Doerr, (vii) William D. Savoy, (viii) Howard Schultz and (ix) Jed A. Smith The complaint alleges that, in exchange for the excessive commissions, members of the underwriting group Morgan Stanley & Co., Incorporated, Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette and Thomas Weisel Partners LLC allocated Drugstore.com shares to customers at the IPO price of $18.00 per share. To receive the allocations (i.e., the ability to purchase shares) at $18.00, the underwriters' brokerage customers had to agree to purchase additional shares in the aftermarket at progressively higher prices. The requirement that customers make additional purchases at progressively higher prices as the price of Drugstore.com stock rocketed upward (a practice known on Wall Street as "laddering") was intended to (and did) drive Drugstore.com's share price up to artificially high levels. This artificial price inflation, the complaint alleges, enabled both the underwriters and their customers to reap enormous profits by buying stock at the $18.00 IPO price and then selling it later for a profit at inflated aftermarket prices, which rose as high as $50 during its first day of trading and subsequently reached a peak price of $67.50 on August 27, 1999. Rather than allowing their customers to keep their profits from the IPO, the complaint alleges, the underwriters required their customers to "kick back" some of their profits in the form of secret commissions. These secret commission payments were sometimes calculated after the fact based on how much profit each investor had made from his or her IPO stock allocation. The complaint further alleges that defendants violated the Securities Act of 1933 because the Prospectus distributed to investors and the Registration Statement filed with the SEC in order to gain regulatory approval for the Drugstore.com offering contained material misstatements regarding the commissions that the underwriters would derive from the IPO transaction and failed to disclose the additional commissions and "laddering" scheme discussed above. For more information, contact: Tzivia Brody, Esq. at Stull, Stull & Brody by calling toll-free 1-800-337-4983, or by e-mail at SSBNY@aol.com, or by fax at 212/490-2022, or by writing to Stull, Stull & Brody, 6 East 45th Street, New York, NY 10017. EUGENE CITY:Easement Suit Versus City Expands To Involve 179 Projects ---------------------------------------------------------------------- A lawsuit filed by a developer against Eugene City, Oregon has ballooned into a class action that could involve as many as 179 projects since 1994, The Register-Guard reported Wednesday. According to the report, Lane County Circuit Court Judge Jack Billings has certified the lawsuit of multimillionaire developer John Hammer as a class action case. Hammer had charged the city last year with forcing developers to sign over to the city property easements in return for minor planning approvals. This is contrary to the federal Constitution and the landmark 1994 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Dolan vs. City of Tigard, the suit claimed. Hammer's complaint seeks just $2,401 plus interest for the segments of land he had to assign to the city in exchange for splitting into two a 3.3-acre tract at Bailey Hill and Stewart roads. In 1998, Hammer sought permission to split the last three acres that he owned in order to sell off half. According to his lawsuit, the city told him that to get the partition, he had to dedicate to the city a 2.2-foot-wide easement along Bailey Hill, a roughly 300-square-foot easement at the corner of Bailey Hill and Stewart, and a square block of land totaling 530 square feet alongside Bailey Hill. The city wanted the easements for long-range projects, including widening Bailey Hill, improving the Bailey Hill/Stewart intersection and placing electrical equipment. The Register-Guard reported that the certification has electrified many Eugene property developers who believe the city strong-arms them into making concessions to secure project approvals. Hammer is a heavyweight in the real estate community, the report said. He's an experienced developer with property holdings worth tens of millions of dollars, including two golf courses, industrial buildings and land. EXXON MOBIL: Australian Unit Found Liable For '98 Gas Plant Explosion --------------------------------------------------------------------- A jury found guilty Esso Australia Ltd. on all 11 charges related to the explosion at its Longford gas processing plant in September 1998, the Reuters News Agency reported Thursday. Esso, a unit of Exxon Mobil Corporation, had pleaded not guilty to the charge. Each charge carries a maximum penalty of A$250,00 under the Occupational Health and Safety Act of the State of Victoria. Victoria Supreme Court Justice Philip Cummins said a separate hearing is scheduled today to set the penalty on the charges after a jury returned guilty verdicts on the 11 charges. The explosion at the Longford plant killed two employees, left the state of Victoria almost totally without gas for about two weeks and cut crude oil production for several months, the news agency said. The Victorian WorkCover Authority filed the suit against Esso after an inquiry revealed it failed to adequately train its workers. Esso also faces a class action hearing in the Supreme Court, where damages totaling at least A$1 billion are expected to be sought. GUNTHER INTERNATIONAL: Settles Shareholders Suit For $250,000 ------------------------------------------------------------- Gunther International has resolved a class action lawsuit filed by shareholders almost three years ago, the Associated Press reported recently. The tech company based in Norwich, Connecticut also settled an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission without a fine, the report added. The settlement of the shareholders suit involved payment by the company of $250,000. "We are delighted to be done with these distractions. We can now concentrate fully on running the business," said company President Mark Perkins about the settlement. Gunther reported operating income of $574,141 for its just-ended fiscal year, and announced it has reached a re-capitalization plan with its chief investors that will bring in an estimated $7 million to $8 million in new capital and restore black ink to its bottom line by September, the report said. Gunther manufactures a line of mailing, document finishing and ink jet printing systems that analysts agree are among the best in the industry, although management problems kept it in the red for its first two decades. The worst problems came in 1998 when the company announced it was restating its earnings reports, from it discovered accounting errors that turned what was originally announced as a slight profit over the last two-and-a-half fiscal years into more than $5.5 million in losses. HAVAS ADVERTISING: Faces Suit Filed By Circle.com Shareholders In DE -------------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit was filed recently in the Delaware Chancery Court against Snyder Communications, Havas Advertising and each director of the Company. The suit, filed last June 4 by two holders of Circle.com common stock, sought preliminary and permanent injunction, or, alternatively, monetary damages. The lawsuit alleges that Havas Advertising and the board of directors of Snyder Communications breached their fiduciary duties owed to the Circle.com stockholders when considering and negotiating the proposed merger of Snyder Communications with a subsidiary of Havas Advertising. This was done accordingly by failing to create an independent negotiating structure, failing to seek truly independent advice, concealing of material information from the Circle.com stockholders, and unfairly timing the proposed merger to the disadvantage of the Circle.com stockholders. Subsequent to the filing of the lawsuit, the purported representatives of the purported Circle.com stockholder class withdrew their application for a preliminary injunction and expedited discovery. In turn, Havas Advertising agreed to waive any objection to jurisdiction it may otherwise assert under French law, and, in the event the court enters a judgment for money damages in favor of Circle.com stockholders, to waive any right Havas Advertising may have under French law to assert that such judgment is not enforceable against it and any defendant indemnified by Havas Advertising. Snyder Communications, Havas Advertising and the directors of Snyder Communications and Havas Advertising deny all liability with respect to the claims alleged in the complaint and believe those claims to be without merit. INFOSPACE INC.: Stull Stull Files Securities Suit In W.D. Washington -------------------------------------------------------------------- Stull, Stull & Brody filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the securities, and/or who sold the put options of InfoSpace, Inc. (NASDAQ:INSP) between January 26, 2000 and January 30, 2001, inclusive. The complaint charges InfoSpace and its founder and Chairman, Naveen Jain, with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. For more information, contact: Tzivia Brody, Esq. at Stull, Stull & Brody by calling toll-free 1-800-337-4983, or by e-mail at SSBNY@aol.com, or by fax at 212/490-2022, or by writing to Stull, Stull & Brody, 6 East 45th Street, New York, NY 10017. INTERVOICE-BRITE: Marc Henzel Brings Securities Suit In N.D. Texas ------------------------------------------------------------------ The law offices of Marc S. Hensel filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division on behalf of all purchasers of InterVoice-Brite, Inc. (Nasdaq: INTV) securities between October 12, 1999 and June 6, 2000. The defendants named in the suit are the following: (i) InterVoice, Daniel D. Hammond (Chairman of the Board of InterVoice and until June 2000, CEO of the Company), (ii) Rob-Roy J. Graham (Chief Financial Officer), (iii) David W. Brandenburg (a director of the Company and since June 2000, CEO of the Company), (iv) Gordon H. Givens (Senior Vice President-Business Systems), (v) Michael J. Polcyn (Vice President-Packaged Products Line of Business), (vi) David A. Berger (President and Chief Operating Officer), Dwain (vii) H. Hammond (Senior Vice President-Engineering), (viii) Harold D. Brown (Vice President- Human Resources), and (ix) M. Gregory Smith (Senior Vice President-Business System Sales and Marketing Communications). The complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. For more information, contact: The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel, 210 West Washington Square, Third Floor Philadelphia, PA 19106, by telephone at 888-643-6735 or 215-625-9999, by facsimile at 215-440- 9475, by e-mail at Mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's website at http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182. MOTIENT CORPORATION: Delaware Court Consolidates 16 Securities Suits -------------------------------------------------------------------- A Delaware court has ordered recently the consolidation of the sixteen lawsuits filed against Motient Corporation into one purported class action, In re Rare Medium Group, Inc. Shareholders Litigation, C.A. No. 18897 NC. According to the Company, the order was issued on June 22, 2001 in a hearing. Under the terms of the order, Ram Yariv was added as an additional party plaintiff. The law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP was designated as plaintiffs' lead counsel, and the law firm of Rosenthal Monhait Gross & Goddess, P.A. was designated as plaintiffs' Delaware liaison counsel. The following law firms were designated as plaintiffs' Committee of the Whole: (1) Abraham and Paskowitz; (2) Bull & Lifshitz, LLP; (3) Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz LLP; (4) Kirby McInerney & Squire LLP; (5) Stull, Stull & Brody; (6) Weiss & Yourman; Wolf Popper LLP; (7) Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP; (8) Law Offices of Peter Fischbein; (9) Law Offices of Bernard M. Gross, P.C.; (10) Berger & Montague, P.C.; (11) Barrack, Rodos & Bacine; (12) Schiffrin & Barroway LLP; (13) Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko LLP; (14) Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP; (15) Law Office of Alfred G. Yates, Jr.; and (16) Rabin & Peckel LLP The complaint in Loeffelbein, et al. v. Stasior, et al., C.A. No. 18939 NC was designated as the complaint in the consolidated action. The complaints allege that the defendants purportedly breached duties allegedly owed to the holders of Rare Medium common stock in connection with the merger agreement. Specifically, the complaints allege, among other things, that: (i) the holders of Rare Medium preferred stock, engaged in self- dealing in the proposed merger, and (ii) the Rare Medium board allegedly breached its fiduciary duties by agreeing to distribute the merger consideration differently among its common and preferred shares. Some complaints allege that Motient aided and abetted the supposed breaches of fiduciary duties. Plaintiffs seek, among other things, (a) a declaration that the complaints are properly maintainable as a class action; (b) injunctive relief; (c) monetary damages; (d) attorneys' fees, costs and expenses; and (e) other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. Rare Medium and Motient plan to vigorously contest these lawsuits, as well as any other similar lawsuits that may be filed. PALM INC.: Milberg Weiss Starts Securities Suit In S.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------------------- Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP filed Wednesday a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Palm Inc., (NASDAQ:PALM) between March 1, 2000 and December 6, 2000, inclusive. The action, numbered 01-CV-5888, captioned Joel Abrams v. Palm Inc., Goldman Sachs & Co., Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc., FleetBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc., Salomon Smith Barney Inc, Carl J. Yankowski, and Judy Bruner, is pending in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York. The complaint alleges violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. On or about March 1, 2000 Palm commenced an initial public offering of 23,000,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $38.00 per share. In connection therewith, Palm filed a registration statement, which incorporated a prospectus, with the SEC. The complaint further alleges that the Prospectus was materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that: (i) the Underwriter Defendants (Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, Robertson Stephens and Salomon Smith Barney) had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which the Underwriter Defendants allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of Palm shares issued in connection with the Palm IPO; and (ii) the Underwriter Defendants had entered into agreements with customers whereby the Underwriter Defendants agreed to allocate Palm shares to those customers in the Palm IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional Palm shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices. For further details, contact: Steven G. Schulman or Samuel H. Rudman One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl. New York, NY, 10119-0165 by Phone: (800) 320-5081 by Email: palmcase@milbergNY.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.milberg.com PUBLISHERS CLEARING: Settles 26-State Deceptive Mail Suit For $34M ------------------------------------------------------------------- Publishers Clearing House settled Tuesday a lawsuit that accused it of using deceptive mailing practices to dupe the elderly, the Associated Press reported. Twenty-six states, including Wisconsin, inked the settlement involving $34 million in customer refunds, legal expenses and administrative costs to the states. Wisconsin, the only state that took the case to trial, will get about $2 million, including more money in legal fees than other states, and $750,000 in compensation for victims who haven't yet come forward, Wisconsin Attorney General James Doyle said. Doyle said the state has already identified about 1,400 people eligible for refunds, though some collected in a private class action lawsuit settled for $30 million in February last year. Under the agreement, the sweepstakes company is also required to stop what the state called false and deceptive practices to sell products in the 26 states and will no longer be allowed to say "You are a winner!" on mailings or on the Internet. "It also will be banned from using simulated checks or saying that its 'Prize Patrol' is coming to the recipient's house," the report said. Company spokesman Christopher Irving said settling the suit was in the company's best interest. Wisconsin sued the company in 1999 in Columbia County Circuit Court, alleging that it illegally targets the elderly with its mass mailings urging people to buy magazines and other consumer goods such as a video about World War II. The other states that participated in the settlement were: Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Iowa, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont and West Virginia. RAMP NETWORK: Shareholders File Suit Over Manipulation Of Statements -------------------------------------------------------------------- Shareholders of Ramp Networks have filed a securities suit charging the Company of colluding with distributors to take possession of its merchandise and then counting those goods as sold to inflate its financial results. According to a recent report by Interactive Week, the suit has claimed that Ingram Micro and Tech Data agreed to store Ramp's products and then remove shrink-wrap packaging and return the goods as defective. The suit also alleged that Ramp agreed to ship merchandise knowing that it would be returned after a financial reporting period ended, the report said. In November, Ramp changed its accounting practices and restated its financial results for the first nine months of 2000, increasing a net loss by $1.3 million to $27 million. "On occasion, Ramp would make 'sweetheart deals' to keep Ramp products with Ingram Micro rather than agree to process them as returns," the class action suit against Ramp charges. Lionel Glancy, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said major distributors such as Ingram often cooperate with manufacturers to inflate their financial returns. The practice is known as "channel stuffing," he said. The company has denied the allegations. ROBOTIC VISION: Schiffrin Barroway Files Securities Suit In MA -------------------------------------------------------------- Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of Robotic Vision Systems, Inc. (Nasdaq: ROBV) from January 27, 2000 through May 15, 2001, inclusive. The complaint charges Robotic Vision and certain of its officers and directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning its business and financial condition. For additional information, contact: Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP through Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Stuart L. Berman, Esq. by Mail: Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 1-888-299-7706 (toll free) or 1-610-667-7706 or by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com TIVO INC.: Schiffrin Barroway Begins Securities Suit In S.D. New York --------------------------------------------------------------------- Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of Tivo, Inc. (Nasdaq: TIVO) from September 29, 1999 through December 6, 2000, inclusive. For further details, contact: Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP through Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Stuart L. Berman, Esq. by Mail: Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 1-888-299-7706 (toll free) or 1-610-667-7706 or by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com TRANSMETA CORPORATION: Savett Frutkin Files Securities Suit In N.D. CA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Savett Frutkin Podell & Ryan, P.C. filed Tuesday a class action complaint on behalf of a class of persons who purchased the securities of Transmeta Corporation (NASDAQ:TMTA) between November 7, 2000 and June 20, 2001 and who were damaged thereby. The complaint was filed against Transmeta, and certain of its officers and directors in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The Complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 11, 12(a) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. For more information, contact: Savett Frutkin Podell & Ryan, P.C. through Robert P. Frutkin, Barbara A. Podell or Renee C. Nixon by Phone: 215/923-5400 or 800/993-3233 by E-mail: mail@savettlaw.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.savettlaw.com/ VALUE AMERICA: Schiffrin Barroway Files Securities Suit In S.D. NY ------------------------------------------------------------------ Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of Value America, Inc. (Nasdaq: VUSQE) from April 8, 1999 through December 6, 2000, inclusive. For further details, contact: Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP through Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Stuart L. Berman, Esq. by Mail: Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 1-888-299-7706 (toll free) or 1-610-667-7706 or by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com ********* S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Trenton, New Jersey, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C. Enid Sterling, Larri-Nil Veloso and Lyndsey Resnick, Editors. Copyright 2001. All rights reserved. ISSN 1525-2272. This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior written permission of the publishers. Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but is not guaranteed. The CAR subscription rate is $575 for six months delivered via e-mail. Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof are $25 each. For subscription information, contact Christopher Beard at 301/951-6400. * * * End of Transmission * * *