/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/010711.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Wednesday, July 11, 2001, Vol. 3, No. 134 Headlines AETHER SYSTEMS: Wolf Haldenstein Files Shareholder Suit in S.D. NY BABCOCK & WILSON: Settles Age Discrimination Suit With Workers CELLCOM: Court Awards NIS 7.1 Million to Talkman Users DELTATHREE.COM INC: Scott & Scott File Securities Suit in PA DRKOOP.COM INC: Settles Securities Suit For $4.25 Million Cash DRUGSTORE.COM INC: Schiffrin & Barroway File Suit in S.D. NY ECI TELECOM: Marc Henzel Files Shareholder Suit in E.D. Virginia E.PIPHANY INC: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY EXTREME NETWORKS: Schiffrin & Barroway File Plaint in S.D. NY FORD MOTOR: AARP Joins the Fray FORD MOTOR: Considers Changes to Performance Evaluation System GADZOOX NETWORKS: Scott & Scott Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY INFOSPACE INC: Rabin & Peckel File WA Shareholder Suit INFOSPACE INC: Scott & Scott Files Shareholder Suit in Washington LEAD PAINT LITIGATION: NAACP Plans to Sue Industry MARCONI PLC: Berger & Montague Files Suit in W.D. Pennsylvania MARCONI PLC: Alfred Yates Files Complaint for ADR Buyers NEW FOCUS: Schiffrin & Barroway File S-holder Suit in S.D. NY NEXT LEVEL: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY ONE.TEL: Suit to Recover $600M Unlikely to Continue ONVIA.COM INC: Marc Henzel Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY ONVIA.COM INC: Wolf Haldenstein Files S-holder Suit in S.D. NY PORTAL SOFTWARE: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY ***** AETHER SYSTEMS: Wolf Haldenstein Files Shareholder Suit in S.D. NY ------------------------------------------------------------------ On July 6, 2001, Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP commenced a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of purchasers of Aether Systems, Inc. (NASDAQ: AETH) between October 20, 1999 and December 6, 2000, inclusive, against defendants Aether, certain of its officers and directors, and its underwriters. The case name and index number are Toennesmann v. Aether Systems, Inc. et al, (01-CV-6136). A copy of the complaint filed in this action is available from the Court, or can be viewed on the Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP website at www.whafh.com. The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities laws by issuing and selling Aether common stock pursuant to the October 20, 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. Specifically, the complaint alleges that in exchange for the excessive commissions, defendants allocated Aether shares to customers at the IPO price. To receive the allocations (i.e., the ability to purchase shares) at the IPO price, 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 Aether stock rocketed upward, a practice known on Wall Street as "laddering", was intended to drive Aether's share price up to artificially high levels. This artificial price inflation enabled both the underwriters and their customers to reap enormous profits by buying stock at the IPO price and then selling it later for a profit at inflated aftermarket prices. Buyers of Aether securities during the class period may request for court appointment as lead plaintiff by August 20, 2001. For more information, contact Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP at 270 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016, by telephone at (800) 575-0735 (Fred Taylor Isquith, Esq., Gustavo Bruckner Esq., Thomas Burt, Esq., Michael Miske, or George Peters), via e-mail at classmember@whafh.com or visit the firm's website at http://www.whafh.com.Your e-mail should refer to Aether. BABCOCK & WILSON: Settles Age Discrimination Suit With Workers -------------------------------------------------------------- A federal judge in Ohio recently approved the settlement of a lawsuit filed against Babcock & Wilson by 36 former nuclear plant workers, all over 40 years old, who claimed they lost their jobs because of their age after the company, in 1997, took over operation of the plant from EG&G Mound Applied Technologies, where the workers had worked between 21 and 31 years , according to an Associated Press report written by James Hannah. Under the settlement, eligible former workers will receive lump-sum retirement benefits based on age and service. They also will get $200 a month supplemental pension payments up to $23,800 to help pay for health insurance; the workers will be allowed to buy health insurance at the same lower rates as current Mound workers. In addition, Babcock & Wilson will place $300,000 in a trust fund to help the workers cover the cost of carrying on the lawsuit. As part of the settlement, the workers agreed not to pursue any future discrimination claims against the company and to drop the lawsuit without making it a class action. The workers had originally asked the court to allow the lawsuit to represent what they said were more than 100 former workers in a similar situation. Daniel Beerck, an attorney for the workers, said "We believe the settlement is fair and adequate to meet their needs and concerns." "I'm not satisfied with it at all," said Gary Young, 55, of Gernantown, as he estimated his retirement benefits will be 30% lower --or more than $100,000 less -- than what they would have been had he been able to keep his job. In settlement documents, Babcock & Wilson denied any wrongdoing or liability. The company said that studies by statistician Sharon Kelly demonstrated there was no discriminatory impact in its hiring practices. "The settlement, which was for less than the anticipated cost of defending the litigation, demonstrates what we've said all along," said company president Peyton Bake"; "Babcock & Wilson acted properly in its hiring practices when it took over the site." The plant, which is located in suburban Miamisburg, began operation in 1949, producing triggers for nuclear weapons. Production ended in 1994 and cleanup of radioactive and hazardous material became the primary activity at the 306-acre site. CELLCOM: Court Awards NIS 7.1 Million to Talkman Users ----------------------------------------------------- Cellcom will pay NIS 7.1 million to 2.3 million subscribers after Tel Aviv District Court accepted a class action against the company. Assaf Bergerfreund, writing for Ha'aretz, reports that the class action suit claimed Cellcom had broken the terms of its license and raised the cost of calls for its Talkman subscribers before receiving the necessary approval. The class action was filed by Haim Keren. The 2.3 million who will benefit from the lawsuit are made up of current subscribers as well as those who have left the company. The former subscribers will get compensation of approximately NIS 2.5 each, and the remainder will be distributed among current subscribers through reductions in monthly bills. The parties also agreed out of court for the company to pay NIS 1.2 million to be divided between the petitioner and his attorney, Ha'aretz reports. DELTATHREE.COM INC: Scott & Scott File Securities Suit in PA ------------------------------------------------------------ The Connecticut based law firm of Scott & Scott, LLC, announced a class action lawsuit was filed on June 26, 2001, on behalf of purchasers of the securities of deltathree.com, Inc. (Nasdaq: DDDC) between November 23, 1999 and December 6, 2000, inclusive. The action is pending in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, against the following defendants: * deltathree.com * Lehman Brothers, Inc. * Merrill Lynch, Fenner & Smith Incorporated * Bear, Stearns & Co., Inc. * Goldman Sachs & Co. * Amos Sela, and * Mark J. Hirschhorn. 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 November 23, 1999, deltathree commenced an initial public offering of 6,000,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $15 per share. In connection therewith, deltathree filed a registration statement, which incorporated a prospectus (the "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) Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, Bear Stearns and Goldman Sachs had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, Bear Stearns and Goldman Sachs allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of deltathree shares issued in connection with the deltathree IPO; and (ii) Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, Bear Stearns and Goldman Sachs had entered into agreements with customers whereby Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, Bear Stearns and Goldman Sachs agreed to allocate deltathree shares to those customers in the deltathree IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional deltathree shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices. Buyers of the securities of deltathree between November 23, 1999 and December 6, 2000 may, no later than August 14, 2001, request court appointment as lead plaintiff. For more information, contact David R. Scott, Esq. or Neil Rothstein, Esq. at 800/404-7770 or e- mail at nrothstein@scott-scott.com. DRKOOP.COM INC: Settles Securities Suit For $4.25 Million Cash -------------------------------------------------------------- drkoop.com Inc. (OTCBB:KOOP) said that it has reached a tentative agreement to settle the consolidated securities class action lawsuit filed against the company and certain former officers and directors and one current director of the company in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, as well as a shareholder's derivative lawsuit filed against certain former officers and directors of the company in the same court. Under the terms of the settlement, which is subject to the preparation and execution of definitive settlement documents and court approval, all claims against the company and all defendants will be dismissed in their entirety without admission of liability or wrongdoing by any party. The cash component of the settlement, $4.25 million, will be funded entirely with proceeds from the company's directors' and officers' liability insurance. As such, the cash settlement payment will have no adverse effect on the company's financial position. The settlement will also include an equity component consisting of 4 million warrants, priced at $2.50 per share, to purchase the company's common stock. Richard Rosenblatt, CEO and co-chairman of drkoop.com, commented, "We believe that our decision to settle the consolidated class action and the derivative suit is in the best interest of our shareholders because, among other things, it will remove the uncertainty, expense and distraction of continuing litigations. This will enable us to concentrate on driving growth and profitability in our operations." About drkoop.com Founded in 1997, drkoop.com is a publicly traded company that is committed to the tradition of excellence established by the former U.S. Surgeon General. drkoop.com is a trusted source for consumers seeking quality health and wellness information, products and services that empower people across the health spectrum to make informed lifestyle choices. drkoop.com products and services are designed to empower every individual to improve and maintain a healthy lifestyle. drkoop.com and its subsidiary drDrew.com have more than 2 million registered users. For more information, visit www.drkoop.com. DRUGSTORE.COM INC: Schiffrin & Barroway File Suit in S.D. NY ------------------------------------------------------------ The Law Firm of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, located at 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of drugstore.com, inc. (Nasdaq: DSCM) from July 27, 1999 through December 6, 2000, inclusive. On or about July 27, 1999, drugstore.com commenced an initial public offering of 5,000,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $18 per share. In connection therewith, drugstore.com filed a registration statement, which incorporated a prospectus, with the SEC. The complaint alleges that the Prospectus was materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that: (i) Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which Morgan Stanley allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of drugstore.com shares issued in connection with the drugstore.com IPO; and (ii) Morgan Stanley had entered into agreements with customers whereby Morgan Stanley agreed to allocate drugstore.com shares to those customers in the drugstore.com IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional drugstore.com shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices. As alleged in the complaint, the SEC is investigating underwriting practices in connection with several other initial public offerings. Members of the class described above may, not later than August 27, 2001, move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff of the class. For more information, contact Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Stuart L. Berman, Esq. of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP, Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, toll free at 1-888-299-7706 or 1-610- 667-7706, or via e-mail at info@sbclasslaw.com. ECI TELECOM: Marc Henzel Files Shareholder Suit in E.D. Virginia ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law offices of Marc S. Henzel filed a securities class action lawsuit on behalf of all persons who acquired ECI Telecom Ltd. (Nasdaq: ECIL) common stock between May 2, 2000 and February 14, 2001. The case is pending in the Eastern District of Virginia. The following are named as defendants in the complaint: * ECI Telecom * Doran Inbar, ECI Telecom's President * Avi Ben- Assayaq, ECI Telecom's Chief Financial Officer * Jonathan B. Kolber, ECI Telecom's Chairman. The Complaint charges defendants with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The complaint alleges, among other things, that the defendants issued materially false and misleading information that misrepresented the Company's financial condition and prospects. The complaint alleges that starting on May 7, 2000, defendants portrayed ECI Telecom as a growing Company which would continue to have increased demand for its products. On August 2, 2000 defendants announced ECI Telecom's second quarter results, again touting demand for the Company's products. Defendants announced the Company's third quarter results on November 7, 2000 and again emphasized the demand for the Company's products. Again, on February 14, 2001 the last day of the class period, defendants announced that the Company's previously announced financial performance restatement was expected to move $38 million in revenue from 1999's financial statement to 2000 and $61 million from 2000 to 2001. ECI Telecom also announced that it anticipated an operating loss for the first fiscal quarter of 2001. Defendants' misrepresentations caused the price of ECI Telecom common stock securities to be artificially inflated throughout the Class Period. Members of the class described above have until August 11, 2001 to participate in the case and ask for court appointment as one of the lead plaintiffs for the Class. For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel, Esq. of 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. E.PIPHANY INC: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY ------------------------------------------------------------ The law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP filed a class action lawsuit on July 9, 2001, on behalf of purchasers of the securities of E.piphany, Inc. (NASDAQ: EPNY) between September 21, 1999 and December 6, 2000, inclusive. A copy of the complaint filed in this action is available from the Court, or can be viewed on Milberg Weiss' website at: http://www.milberg.com/epiphany/ The action is pending in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, located at 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007, against the following defendants: * E.piphany * Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation * Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Incorporated * BancBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc. * Roger S. Siboni * Kevin J. Yeaman, and * Eliot L. Wegbreit. On or about September 21, 1999, E.piphany commenced an initial public offering of 4,150,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $16 per share. In connection therewith, E.piphany 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) Credit Suisse, Merrill and Robertson Stephens had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which Credit Suisse, Merrill and Robertson Stephens allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of E.piphany shares issued in connection with the E.piphany IPO; and (ii) Credit Suisse, Merrill and Robertson Stephens had entered into agreements with customers whereby Credit Suisse, Merrill and Robertson Stephens agreed to allocate E.piphany shares to those customers in the E.piphany IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional E.piphany shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices. As alleged in the complaint, the SEC is investigating underwriting practices in connection with several other initial public offerings. Buyers of the securities of E.piphany between September 21, 1999 and December 6, 2000 may, no later than September 7, 2001, request court appointment as lead plaintiff. For more information, contact the following attorneys: Steven G. Schulman or Samuel H. Rudman, of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP, One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl. New York, NY, 10119-0165, Phone number: (800) 320-5081, Email: Epiphanycase@milbergNY.com, Website: http://www.milberg.com EXTREME NETWORKS: Schiffrin & Barroway File Plaint in S.D. NY ------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Firm of 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 Extreme Networks, Inc. (Nasdaq: EXTR) from April 8, 1999 through December 6, 2000, inclusive. On or about April 8, 1999, Extreme Networks commenced an initial public offering of 7,000,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $17 per share. In connection therewith, Extreme Networks filed a registration statement, which incorporated a prospectus, with the SEC. The complaint alleges that the Prospectus was materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that: (i) Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc., BancBoston Robertson Stephens Inc. and Lehman Brothers Inc. had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which the defendants allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of Extreme Networks' shares issued in connection with the Extreme Networks IPO; and (ii) the defendants had entered into agreements with customers whereby the defendants agreed to allocate Extreme Networks shares to those customers in the Extreme Networks IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional Extreme Networks shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices. Members of the class described above may, not later than September 4, 2001, move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff of the class. For more information on this action, contact Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Stuart L. Berman, Esq. of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP, Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, toll free at 1-888- 299-7706 or 1-610-667-7706, or via e-mail at info@sbclasslaw.com. FORD MOTOR: AARP Joins the Fray ------------------------------- Leading U.S. advocacy group for retired and older workers AARP announced Friday it was throwing its weight behind a lawsuit against Ford Motor Co., Reuters reported. AARP Foundation Litigation spokesman Tom Osborne told Reuters, "We have proposed to join the suit and will be joining it. We have agreed with the counsel for the plaintiffs that we will participate." Foundation Litigation is the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP)'s Washington-based legal arm, and will reportedly act as co-counsel in the case. The lawsuit, which alleges that the company discriminates against older white collar employees by using a 2-year-old employee grading system to rid itself of older management-level staff, was filed in a Wayne County Circuit Court in Detroit. The system grades mid- level managers A, B, or C for their annual job performance. Managers who get a grade of C for 2 years may end up getting fired or demoted, Reuters reports. Ford spokeswoman Kathleen Vokes told Reuters, "Competition in this day and age is tough. We need to keep the best talent. It's a fair system, and we do not discriminate against anyone in any way, shape or form." FORD MOTOR: Considers Changes to Performance Evaluation System -------------------------------------------------------------- Ford Motor Co [F] management is considering changes to its white- collar performance evaluation system, a report in the Wall Street Journal's online edition for Monday said. The report said the changes are to be announced this week. The review of the personnel policies comes before a two-day directors meeting that begins on Wednesday. GADZOOX NETWORKS: Scott & Scott Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY ---------------------------------------------------------------- Scott & Scott, LLC (scottlaw@scott-scott.com), a Connecticut- based law firm with offices in the Philadelphia area announced a class action lawsuit was filed on June 6, 2001, on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Gadzoox Networks, Inc. (Nasdaq: ZOOX) between July 19, 1999 and December 6, 2000, inclusive. The action is pending in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, l against the following defendants: * Gadzoox * Credit Suisse First Boston Corp. * BancBoston Robertson Stephens * Bill Sickler * Christine E. Munson, and * Alistair Black. On or about July 19, 1999, Gadzoox commenced an initial public offering of 3,500,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $21.00 per share. In connection therewith, Gadzoox 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) Credit Suisse and Robertson Stephens had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which Credit Suisse and Robertson Stephens allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of Gadzoox shares issued in connection with the Gadzoox IPO; and (ii) Credit Suisse and Robertson Stephens had entered into agreements with customers whereby Credit Suisse and Robertson Stephens agreed to allocate Gadzoox shares to those customers in the Gadzoox IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional Gadzoox shares in the aftermarket at pre- determined prices. Purchasers of the securities of Gadzoox between July 19, 1999 and December 6, 2000 may, no later than August 6, 2001, request court appointment as lead plaintiff. For more information, contact: David R. Scott, Esq. or Neil Rothstein, Esq. at 800/404-7770 or e- mail at scottlaw@scott-scott.com. INFOSPACE INC: Rabin & Peckel File WA Shareholder Suit ------------------------------------------------------ The law firm of Rabin & Peckel LLP filed a class action complaint in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased InfoSpace Incorporated (NASDAQ: INSP) common stock during the period from January 26, 2000 through and including January 30, 2001, both dates inclusive. The complaint was brought against InfoSpace and Naveen Jain (founder and Chairman of the Board, as well as the former CEO and President). The case is numbered C01-992P. The Complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making a series of materially false and misleading statements about the company's actual fiscal year 1999 and 2000 financial performance and defendants' expectations concerning InfoSpace's fiscal year 2001 revenue and earnings. Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants' public representations were the result of their efforts to manipulate the reported earnings and expected fiscal year 2001 performance of InfoSpace and were designed to allow defendant Jain to sell millions of dollars of his own InfoSpace shares at artificially inflated prices. The complaint also alleges that the defendants' misstatements permitted InfoSpace to complete a series of acquisitions using InfoSpace's artificially inflated stock as currency (including the October 2000 acquisition of Go2Net). As the truth began to come out concerning defendants' conduct, InfoSpace's shares fell to less than $6 a share, a decline of 95% from their Class Period high. Buyers of InfoSpace common stock during the Class Period described above may, no later than August 20, 2001, request court appointment as lead plaintiff. For more information, contact plaintiff's counsel, Rekha M. Carozza and Maurice Pesso, Rabin & Peckel LLP, 275 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, by telephone at (800) 497- 8076 or (212) 682-1818, by facsimile at (212) 682-1892, or by e- mail at email@rabinlaw.com. INFOSPACE INC: Scott & Scott Files Shareholder Suit in Washington ----------------------------------------------------------------- Scott & Scott, LLC (scottlaw@scott-scott.com), a Connecticut-based law firm with offices outside of Philadelphia, filed a class action that has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington on behalf of all purchasers of InfoSpace, Inc. (Nasdaq: INSP) common stock during the period from January 26, 2000 through January 30, 2001. The complaint charges InfoSpace and its founder and Chairman Naveen Jain with violations of the federal securities laws. Specifically, plaintiffs have brought claims under sections 10(b) and 20 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint charges InfoSpace and its founder and Chairman, Naveen Jain, with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint alleges that between January 2000 and January 2001, Defendants disseminated false and misleading information concerning InfoSpace's actual FY 1999 and 2000 financial performance and Defendants' expectations concerning InfoSpace's FY 2001 revenue and earnings. In fact, neither InfoSpace's reported FY 1999 and FY 2000 results nor its projected FY 2001 performance were accurate. Defendants' public representations were the result of Defendants' efforts to manipulate InfoSpace's reported earnings and expected FY 2001 performance and were designed to (and did) allow: (i) Jain to sell millions of dollars of his own InfoSpace shares at artificially inflated prices; and (ii) allow Defendants to complete a series of acquisitions using shares of InfoSpace's artificially inflated stock as currency, including the October 2000 acquisition of Go2Net. On January 30, 2001, after Defendants had completed several acquisitions using inflated InfoSpace shares as currency, Defendants disclosed that, contrary to the representations made by them during 2000 that InfoSpace was experiencing strong revenue growth during 4Q99, and FY 2000 and that InfoSpace would continue to post strong revenue growth through FY 2001, InfoSpace would report no revenue growth or EPS for FY 2001, but rather would report declining revenue and a significant loss for the year. As Defendants began to reveal some of their improper conduct, including the fact that Defendants' projected revenues and earnings estimates were false, InfoSpace's shares fell to less than $6 per share, a 95% decline from their Class Period high of $138-1/2 per share. Persons who wish to serve as lead plaintiffmay request for court appointment by August 18, 2001. For more information on this actionn, contact David R. Scott, Esq. or Neil Rothstein, Esq. at 800/404-7770 or e-mail at nrothstein@scott-scott.com. LEAD PAINT LITIGATION: NAACP Plans to Sue Industry -------------------------------------------------- NAACP president Kweisi Mfume (pronounced Kwah-EE-see Oom-FOO-may) said Sunday the civil rights organization is planning to sue the lead paint industry, the Associated Press reports. The planned lawsuit will try to hold the industry accountable for health problems linked to lead in paint. The AP report said Mfume announced more details would be released later during the 92nd annual convention of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, which started Saturday, July 7, 2001 and ends Friday, July 13. Mfume told AP, "For us it's a civil rights issue because you ought to have every reasonable expectation that as an American, you have the right to grow up in an environmentally safe situation, where you're not put at risk." He added, "This affects everybody. This is not a black problem in the ghetto or in white suburbia, it's everywhere these houses exist." Lead-based paint was widely used in homes throughout the 1950s and 1960s until being banned in 1978. High levels, lead can cause kidney damage, seizures, coma and death. Children are most commonly exposed to lead by inhaling lead-paint dust or eating paint flakes. MARCONI PLC: Berger & Montague Files Suit in W.D. Pennsylvania -------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Berger & Montague, P.C., (http://www.investorprotect.com)filed a class action suit on behalf of an investor against Marconi, PLC (Nasdaq: MONI) and two of its principal officers in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased Marconi, PLC American Deposit Receipts during the period from April 11, 2001 through July 4, 2001, inclusive. The complaint charges defendants with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for falsely reassuring investors during the class period that its revenues would rise this year, claiming that its geographic and business mix left it relatively immune from the economic downturn, and that it saw no need to change its guidance. For example, on April 11, 2001, in reaction to analysts' concerns about the impact the economic downturn was having on the Company's industry, Defendants falsely assured the investing community that Marconi did not need to change its earning guidance because "the end demand is still there." However, less than three months later, on July 4, 2001, Marconi belatedly issued a profit warning, finally disclosing that tougher trading conditions in the three months to June meant that sales for the year would be 15 percent lower than last year. In addition, operating profit would be down by 50 percent for the year ending March 2002. The disclosure of Marconi's true financial condition was devastating to shareholders. Marconi ADR's, which hit a class period high of $12.50 on May 2, 2001, and had closed at $7.03 on July 3, 2001, dropped by over fifty percent when trading resumed, and closed on July 5, 2001 at only $3.35 per share. The complaint alleges that as a result of defendants' conduct, plaintiff and other members of the Class suffered damages. The lawsuit seeks to recover losses suffered by individual and institutional investors who purchased the Company's ADR's during the Class Period at artificially inflated prices. Buyers of Marconi, PLC ADR's during the period from April 11, 2001 through July 4, 2001, inclusive may, no later than September 7, 2001 move to be appointed as a Lead Plaintiff. For more information on this case, contact Sherrie R. Savett, Esquire or Stuart J. Guber, Esq., or Kimberly A. Walker, Investor Relations Manager, Berger & Montague, P.C., 1622 Locust Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103, Phone: 888-891-2289 or 215-875-3000, Fax: 215-875-5715, Website: http://www.investorprotect.com,e-mail: InvestorProtect@bm.net. MARCONI PLC: Alfred Yates Files Complaint for ADR Buyers -------------------------------------------------------- The Law Office of Alfred G. Yates, Jr. commenced a class action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on behalf of purchasers of Marconi plc (Nasdaq: MONI) publicly traded American Depository Receipts during the period between April 11, 2001 and July 4, 2001, inclusive. The complaint charges Marconi plc, George Simpson, John Mayo and Steve Hare with violating Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Marconi supplies advanced communication solutions and key technologies for the Internet. The complaint alleges that at the beginning of the Class Period, defendants represented that Marconi would meet expectations for 2001. Defendants assured investors that Marconi would achieve growth in the telecom equipment sector, there was increasing demand by businesses and consumers for communications services, it was confident its performance in 2002 would improve and the there was demand for European orders of optical networking. However, defendants' statements were materially false and misleading because Marconi's customers were reviewing their budgets for decreased spending, Marconi's competitors were experiencing a severe downturn in customer spending, Marconi was experiencing a significant falloff in European orders, and positive growth for Marconi for fiscal 2002 was unrealistic. On July 4, 2001, Marconi revealed that, contrary to prior assurances by defendants of Marconi's continuing growth, yearly sales would be down 15% and operating profit would be down 50% for the year ending 2002. This disclosure shocked the market, causing Marconi's American Depository Receipts, which hit a class period high of $12.50 on May 2, 2001, and had closed at $7.03 on July 3, 2001, to drop by over fifty percent when trading resumed, and closed on July 5, 2001 at only $3.35 per share. This class action lawsuit is available to all individual and institutional investors who purchased American Depository Receipts during the period between April 11, 2001 and July 4, 2001, inclusive. Members of this class may, no later than 60 days from July 9, 2001, move the court to serve as a lead plaintiff of the class. For more information, contact: Alfred G. Yates Jr, Esq., 519 Allegheny Building, 429 Forbes Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219, telephone toll free at 800-391-5164, or 412-391-5164, or via e-mail at yateslaw@aol.com or fax at 412-471-1033. NEW FOCUS: Schiffrin & Barroway File S-holder Suit in S.D. NY ------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, located at 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of New Focus, Inc. (Nasdaq: NUFO) from May 18, 2000 through December 6, 2000, inclusive. On or about May 18, 2000, New Focus commenced an initial public offering of 5,000,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $20 per share. In connection therewith, New Focus filed a registration statement, which incorporated a prospectus, with the SEC. The complaint alleges that the Prospectus was materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that: (i) Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation, FleetBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc. and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which Credit Suisse, Robertson Stephens and Merrill Lynch allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of New Focus shares issued in connection with the New Focus IPO; and (ii) Credit Suisse, Robertson Stephens and Merrill Lynch had entered into agreements with customers whereby Credit Suisse, Robertson Stephens and Merrill Lynch agreed to allocate New Focus shares to those customers in the New Focus IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional New Focus shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices. As alleged in the complaint, the SEC is investigating underwriting practices in connection with several other initial public offerings. Members of the class described above may, not later than August 27, 2001, move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff of the class. For more information, contact Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Stuart L. Berman, Esq. of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP, Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, toll free at 1-888-299-7706 or 1-610- 667-7706, or via e-mail at info@sbclasslaw.com. NEXT LEVEL: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY ---------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP filed a class action lawsuit on July 9, 2001, on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Next Level Communnications, Inc. (NASDAQ: NXTV) between November 9, 1999 and December 6, 2000, inclusive. A copy of the complaint filed in this action is available from the Court, or can be viewed on Milberg Weiss' website at: http://www.milberg.com/nextlevel/ The action is pending in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, located at 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007, against the following defendants: * Next Level * Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Incorporated * Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation * Lehman Brothers, Inc. * BancBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc. * Peter W. Keeler, and * James T. Wandrey. On or about November 9, 1999, Next Level commenced an initial public offering of 8,500,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $20 per share. In connection therewith, Next Level 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) Merrill, Credit Suisse, Lehman and Robertson Stephens had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which Merrill, Credit Suisse, Lehman and Robertson Stephens allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of Next Level shares issued in connection with the Next Level IPO; and (ii) Merrill, Credit Suisse, Lehman and Robertson Stephens had entered into agreements with customers whereby Merrill, Credit Suisse, Lehman and Robertson Stephens agreed to allocate Next Level shares to those customers in the Next Level IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional Next Level shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices. As alleged in the complaint, the SEC is investigating underwriting practices in connection with several other initial public offerings. Buyers of the securities of Next Level between November 9, 1999 and December 6, 2000 may, no later than August 31, 2001, request court appointment as lead plaintiff. For more information, contact attorneys Steven G. Schulman or Samuel H. Rudman of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP, One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl. New York, NY, 10119-0165, Phone number: (800) 320-5081, Email: NextLevelcase@milbergNY.com, Website: http://www.milberg.com ONE.TEL: Suit to Recover $600M Unlikely to Continue --------------------------------------------------- The class action to recover $600 million arising out of the collapse of Australia's One.Tel is unlikely to proceed, according to a recent report in the Australasian Business Intelligence:The Australian Financial Review. The announcement was made by representatives from the two law firms representing the plaintiffs, Slater & Gordon and Maurice Blackburn Cashman, both class action specialists. They explained that continuing with the action would be very expensive, time-consuming and unlikely to return the lost money to creditors. Nick Styant-Browne, of the firm Slater & Gordon, does not rule out a plaintiff action in the future; he added, however, that the matter of commencing a class action in the future is not presently under consideration. ONVIA.COM INC: Marc Henzel Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY ----------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel filed a securities class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf all persons who acquired Onvia.com, Inc. (Nasdaq: ONVI) securities between March 1, 2000 and December 6, 2000. The following are named as defendants in the complaint: * Onvia * Glenn S. Ballman * Mark T. Calvert * Credit Suisse First Boston Corp. * Chase Securities, Inc., and * Fleet Boston Robertson Stephens, Inc. Credit Suisse, Chase, and Fleet Boston are co-lead underwriters of the Company's initial public offering of 8,000,000 shares of common stock at $21.00 per share on February 29, 2000. The complaint charges defendants with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder) and Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, for issuing a Registration Statement and Prospectus that contained material misrepresentations and/or omissions. The Prospectus was issued in connection with the Onvia IPO. The complaint alleges that the Prospectus was false and misleading because it failed to disclose (i) the Underwriter Defendants' agreement with certain investors to provide them with significant amounts of restricted Onvia shares in the IPO in exchange for exorbitant and undisclosed commissions; and (ii) the agreement between the Underwriter Defendants and certain of its customers whereby the Underwriter Defendants would allocate shares in the IPO to those customers in exchange for the customers' agreement to purchase Onvia shares in the after-market at pre-determined prices. For more information concerning this case, contact: Marc S. Henzel, Esq. of 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. ONVIA.COM INC: Wolf Haldenstein Files S-holder Suit in S.D. NY -------------------------------------------------------------- Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of purchasers of Onvia.com, Inc. (Nasdaq: ONVI) between March 1, 2000 and December 6, 2000, inclusive, against defendants Onvia, certain of its officers and directors, and its underwriters. The case name and index number are Stoddard v. Onvia.com, Inc. et al, (01-CV-6182). A copy of the complaint filed in this action is available from the Court, or can be viewed on the Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP website at http://www.whafh.com. The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities laws by issuing and selling Onvia common stock pursuant to the March 1, 2000 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. Specifically, the complaint alleges that in exchange for the excessive commissions, defendants allocated Onvia shares to customers at the IPO price. To receive the allocations (i.e., the ability to purchase shares) at the IPO price, 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 Onvia stock rocketed upward (a practice known on Wall Street as "laddering") was intended to (and did) drive Onvia's share price up to artificially high levels. This artificial price inflation enabled both the underwriters and their customers to reap enormous profits by buying stock at the IPO price and then selling it later for a profit at inflated aftermarket prices. Buyers of Onvia securities during the class period may request that court appointment as lead plaintiff by August 13, 2001. For more information on this action, contact Fred Taylor Isquith, Esq., Gustavo Bruckner Esq., Thomas Burt, Esq., Michael Miske, or George Peters of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP at 270 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016, by telephone at (800) 575-0735, via e-mail at classmember@whafh.com or visit the firm's website at http://www.whafh.com.Your e-mail should refer to Onvia. PORTAL SOFTWARE: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY --------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP announces that a class action lawsuit was filed on July 9, 2001, on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Portal Software, Inc. (NASDAQ: PRSF) between May 5, 1999 and December 6, 2000, inclusive. A copy of the complaint filed in this action is available from the Court, or can be viewed on Milberg Weiss' website at: http://www.milberg.com/portalsoftware/ The action is pending in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, located at 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007, against the following defendants: * Portal Software * Goldman Sachs & Co. * Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation * BancBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc. * John E. Little, and * Jack L. Acosta. On or about May 5, 1999, Portal Software commenced an initial public offering of 4,000,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $14 per share. In connection therewith, Portal Software 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) Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse and Robertson Stephens had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse and Robertson Stephens allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of Portal Software shares issued in connection with the Portal Software IPO; and (ii) Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse and Robertson Stephens had entered into agreements with customers whereby Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse and Robertson Stephens agreed to allocate Portal Software shares to those customers in the Portal Software IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional Portal Software shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices. As alleged in the complaint, the SEC is investigating underwriting practices in connection with several other initial public offerings. Buyers of the securities of Portal Software between May 5, 1999 and December 6, 2000 may, no later than September 7, 2001, request court appointment as lead plaintiff. For more information on this action, contact the following attorneys: Steven G. Schulman or Samuel H. Rudman of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP, One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl. New York, NY, 10119-0165, Phone number: (800) 320-5081, Email: PortalSoftwarecase@milbergNY.com, Website: http://www.milberg.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 * * *