/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/011015.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Monday, October 15, 2001, Vol. 3, No. 201
Headlines
AKAMAI TECHNOLOGIES: Wolf Popper Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. NY
AMAZON.COM: Keller Rohrback Initiates Securities Suit in W.D. WA
CLARENT CORPORATION: Wolf Popper Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
CRITICAL PATH: Keller Rohrback Initiates Securities Suit in N.D. CA
DQE INC.: Cauley Geller Initiates Securities Suit in W.D. Pennsylvania
HARTMARX CORPORATION: Kenneth Moll Initiates N.D. IL Securities Suit
HARTMARX CORPORATION: Katz Randall Initiates N.D. IL Securities Suit
INFOSPACE INC.: Keller Rohrback Commences Securities Suit in W.D. WA
INTERNET SECURITY: Keller Rohrback Considers WA Securities Suit
LOOKSMART LTD.: Marc Henzel Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. NY
MARIMBA INC.: Marc Henzel Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. New York
MASSACHUSETTS: More People Expected To Join Bristol County Access Suit
MIAMI: Circuit Court Judge Prevents "Vice Cars'" Seizure
MUSE TECHNOLOGIES: Wolf Popper Initiates Securities Suit in MA Court
NATIONAL STEEL: Michigan Residents File Suit Due To Polluted Air
NEULEVEL INC.: Judge Expected To Stop Roll-out of ".biz" Domain Names
NICOR GAS: Settles Illinois Mercury Spills Suit For $2.25 Million
NORTEL NETWORKS: Keller Rohrback Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. NY
ONYX ACCEPTANCE: Completes Settlement For California Consumer Suit
ONYX ACCEPTANCE: Court Dismisses Securities Suit With Prejudice in CA
ONYX SOFTWARE: Schiffrin Barroway Initiates Securities Suit in WA
ORACLE CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Initiates Securities Suit in N.D. CA
PROTON ENERGY: Wolf Popper Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. NY
SHOPKO STORES: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit in E.D. WI
TELECORP PCS: Sued For Breach of Fiduciary Duty Due To AT&T Merger
TICKETS.COM: Wolf Popper Commences Securities Suit in S.D. New York
VICINITY CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. NY
*********
AKAMAI TECHNOLOGIES: Wolf Popper Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Popper LLP commenced a securities class action suit on behalf of
purchasers of Akamai Technologies, Inc. (Nasdaq: AKAM) common stock during
the period October 28, 1999 through April 3, 2001, inclusive.
The suit, filed in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York, names as defendants:
(1) Akamai Technologies, Inc.,
(2) Morgan Stanley Dean Witter,
(3) Salomon Smith Barney, Inc.,
(4) Thomas Weisel Partners, LLC,
(5) Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Securities Corp., and
(6) certain of Akamai's senior officers.
The complaint alleges violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) 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.
In October 1999, the Company commenced an initial public offering of 9
million shares of common stock, at an offering price of $26.00 per share.
The complaint alleges that the prospectus for the initial offering was
materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other
things, that:
(i) the underwriters had solicited and received excessive and
undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for
allocations of Company shares in the offering; and
(ii) these underwriters had entered into agreements to allocate
Company shares to customers in exchange for which the
customers agreed to purchase additional Company shares in the
aftermarket at pre-determined prices
By virtue of this manipulation, the underwriters were able to inflate the
trading price of the Company shares after the initial offering.
For further details, contact Robert C. Finkel by Mail: 845 Third Avenue, New
York, NY 10022-6689 by Telephone: (212) 451-9620 or (212) 759-4600 by Phone:
1-877-370-7703 (toll-free) by Fax: (212) 486-2093
by E-Mail: rfinkel@wolfpopper.com or irrep@wolfpopper.com or visit the
firm's Website: www.wolfpopper.com
AMAZON.COM: Keller Rohrback Initiates Securities Suit in W.D. WA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Keller Rohrback L.L.P. commenced a securities class action on behalf of
purchasers of the securities of Amazon.com, Inc. (NASDAQ:AMZN) between
February 2, 2000, and March 9, 2001, inclusive.
The complaint names as defendants the Company and officers:
(1) Jeffrey P. Bezos,
(2) Joseph Galli, Jr.,
(3) Warren C. Jenson
The suit alleges that the defendants violated federal securities laws by
disseminating to the investing public false and misleading financial
statements in SEC filings and press releases.
These statements concern the Company's revenues, investments in joint
ventures, earnings, cash flow as well as its overall financial condition and
future prospects.
In particular, defendants touted the Company's investments in joint ventures
called Amazon Commerce Network Partners (ACNs) and the purported high margin
revenue stream created by such ventures.
The defendants allegedly failed to disclose until the end of the class
period that:
(i) the ACN investments were losing millions of dollars;
(ii) much of the purported revenue recorded appeared to investors
as cash, but was actually in the form of highly speculative
equity investments; and
(iii) the revenues recognized under the ACN agreements concealed the
magnitude of the losses and distorted the Company's reported
cash flow.
It is further alleged that Jeffrey Bezos sold more than one million shares
of his Amazon common stock holdings at artificially inflated prices, for
proceeds of more than $30 million.
Cases have been consolidated in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Washington and assigned to the Honorable Robert S.
Lasnik.
On June 29, 2001, the court appointed Moussa Peykar, Edward Ingeneri, Lena
Govberg, Richard A. Yahr and Emil Panait as lead plaintiffs and the law firm
of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes and Lerach LLP as lead counsel.
CLARENT CORPORATION: Wolf Popper Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Popper LLP initiated a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of
Clarent Corporation (NASD: CLRN) common stock on the open market during the
period April 20, 2001 through August 31, 2001.
The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California charging the Company, Jerry Shaw-Yau Chang, Chairman
and Simon Wong, Chief Financial Officer with violations of the United States
securities laws.
The complaint charges the defendants with issuing false and misleading
financial results for the first two quarters of 2001, which caused the
Company's shares to trade at artificially inflated prices.
In September 2001, the Company shocked the financial markets by admitting
that it:
(i) would be required to restate its previously reported financial
results for the first and second quarters of fiscal 2001,
including reported revenue, income and certain balance sheet
items;
(ii) had formed a special committee to investigate the transactions
bringing rise to the improper accounting, and
(iii) had placed three executives on leave, including Defendant
Chang.
NASDAQ halted trading in the Company's stock pending the release of
additional information from the Company.
For more information, contact James A. Harrod or Michael D'Amato by Mail:
845 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10022-6689 by Phone: 212-451-9642,
212-451-9625, 1-877-370-7703 (toll-free) by Fax: 877-370-7704 (toll free) or
212-486-2093 by E-mail: jharrod@wolfpopper.com or irrep@wolfpopper.com or
visit the firm's Website: www.wolfpopper.com
CRITICAL PATH: Keller Rohrback Initiates Securities Suit in N.D. CA
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keller Rohrback L.L.P. commenced a securities suit (NASDAQ:CPTH) on behalf
of all persons who purchased shares of Critical Path common stock between
April 20, 2000 and February 1, 2001, inclusive.
The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California against the Company and:
(1) Douglas Hickey, Chief Executive Officer and Director,
(2) David Thatcher, President,
(3) William Rinehart, Vice President of Worldwide Sales, and
(4) Mark Rubash, Chief Financial Officer/Executive Vice President.
The Complaint alleges that the Company violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing materially false and
misleading statements with regard to the Company's revenue and net earnings.
In January 2001, the Company disclosed that it would report a loss for the
Fourth Quarter 2000, as opposed to positive earnings, which it had been
touting for months.
Then, in February 2001, the Company revealed that the Fourth Quarter 2000
results had been "materially misstated," and that the Company's Board of
Directors formed a special committee to conduct an investigation into the
Company's revenue recognition practices.
The Company then placed David Thacher and William Rinehart on administrative
leave.
As a result, the NASDAQ stock market halted trading of the Company's shares.
For more information, contact Keller Rohrback, LLP by Mail: 1201 Third
Avenue Suite 3200, Seattle Washington 98101-3052 by Phone: 800/776-6044
(toll-free) or (206) 623-1900 by Fax: (206) 623-3384 by E-mail:
investor@kellerrohrback.com or visit the firm's Website:
www.SeattleClassAction.com
DQE INC.: Cauley Geller Initiates Securities Suit in W.D. Pennsylvania
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP commenced a securities class action on
behalf of purchasers of DQE, Inc. (NYSE: DQE) publicly traded securities
during the period between December 6, 2000 and April 30, 2001, inclusive.
The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western
District of Pennsylvania against the Company and David Marshall and alleges
violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The Company allegedly issued a series of material misrepresentations to the
market between December 6, 2000 and April 30, 2001, thereby artificially
inflating the price of their securities.
The Company allegedly issued positive statements concerning the significant
and positive impact that DQE Enterprises, Inc., the company's investment
subsidiary, was having on their financial results.
During this time, the market for initial public offerings had dramatically
slowed down.
Accordingly, the ability of the companies in DQE Enterprises' investment
portfolio to go public was substantially impaired.
Defendants, however, issued a stream of positive statements concerning the
Company's operations and prospects.
They failed to disclose the impaired nature of DQE Enterprises' investments
and that the Company would not realize the investment gains that defendants
had caused the market to expect.
As a result, defendants' estimates, projections and opinions as to the
Company's operations, products, earnings and income were knowingly lacking
in a reasonable basis at all relevant times.
This information finally became publicly known in April 2001, when the
Company reported its earnings for the first quarter of 2001 and revised its
earnings outlook for the full year, based in part, on the weakened outlook
for DQE Enterprises.
In response to this negative announcement, the price of the Company's common
stock dropped from $30.43 per share to $23.75 per share on extremely heavy
trading volume.
For more information, contact Jackie Addison, Sue Null or Charlie Gastineau
by Mail: Investor Relations Department, P.O. Box 25438, Little Rock, AR
72221-5438 by Phone: 1-888-551-9944 by E-mail: info@classlawyer.com or visit
the firm's Website: www.classlawyer.com
HARTMARX CORPORATION: Kenneth Moll Initiates N.D. IL Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Kenneth B. Moll & Associates, Ltd. commenced a securities class action on
behalf of investors who purchased Hartmarx Corporation (NYSE: HMX) publicly
traded securities between August 13, 2001 and October 1, 2001, inclusive.
The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois against:
(1) The Lincoln Company LLC,
(2) The Tom James Company,
(3) Spencer Hays and
(4) A. Robert Abboud
The suit charges defendants with violations of the Securities Act of 1934.
The defendants allegedly published a series of manipulative and deceptive
press releases and Tender Offer Statements in connection with a purported
tender offer to acquire all outstanding shares of common stock in Hartmarx
for a cash price of $4.50 per share.
The alleged false, manipulative and deceptive statements, issued between
August to October, include:
(i) that Lincoln had secured all of the necessary financing
required to effectuate its $4.50 per share tender offer, when
in fact Lincoln did not have financing commitments;
(ii) that Lincoln had previously provided evidence of its financial
ability to complete the $4.50 per share tender offer to the
Hartmarx's board of directors, when in fact Lincoln had not
done so;
(iii) that Lincoln had financing in place sufficient to complete the
proposed $4.50 per share tender offer, when in fact it did
not; and
(iv) that defendants failed to commence a tender offer for the
purchase of Hartmarx's common stock within a reasonable period
of time after Lincoln's initial announcement to the public-at-
large on August 13, 2001 of its intention to acquire all
outstanding shares of Hartmarx's stock at a cash price of
$4.50 per share.
For more information, contact Hal J. Kleinman at Kenneth B. Moll &
Associates, Ltd. by Mail: Three First National Plaza, 54th Floor, Chicago,
Illinois 60602 by Phone: 888.882.3453 by E-mail: lawyers@kbmoll.com or visit
the firm's Website: www.kbmoll.com
HARTMARX CORPORATION: Katz Randall Initiates N.D. IL Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Katz Randall Weinberg & Richmond commenced a securities class action on
behalf of investors who purchased Hartmarx Corporation (NYSE: HMX) publicly
traded securities between August 13, 2001 and October 1, 2001, inclusive.
The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois against:
(1) The Lincoln Company LLC,
(2) The Tom James Company,
(3) Spencer Hays and
(4) A. Robert Abboud
The suit charges defendants with violations of the Securities Act of 1934.
The defendants allegedly published a series of manipulative and deceptive
press releases and Tender Offer Statements in connection with a purported
tender offer to acquire all outstanding shares of common stock in Hartmarx
for a cash price of $4.50 per share.
The alleged false, manipulative and deceptive statements, issued between
August to October, include:
(i) that Lincoln had secured all of the necessary financing
required to effectuate its $4.50 per share tender offer, when
in fact Lincoln did not have financing commitments;
(ii) that Lincoln had previously provided evidence of its financial
ability to complete the $4.50 per share tender offer to the
Hartmarx's board of directors, when in fact Lincoln had not
done so;
(iii) that Lincoln had financing in place sufficient to complete the
proposed $4.50 per share tender offer, when in fact it did
not; and
(iv) that defendants failed to commence a tender offer for the
purchase of Hartmarx's common stock within a reasonable period
of time after Lincoln's initial announcement to the public-at-
large on August 13, 2001 of its intention to acquire all
outstanding shares of Hartmarx's stock at a cash price of
$4.50 per share.
For more information, contact Jeffrey Bunn at Katz Randall Weinberg &
Richmond by Address: 333 West Wacker Drive, Suite 1800, Chicago, Illinois
60606 by Phone: (312) 807-3800 or by E-mail: jbunn@krw.com
INFOSPACE INC.: Keller Rohrback Commences Securities Suit in W.D. WA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Keller Rohrback LLP initiated a securities fraud class action brought 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.
The complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Western
District of Washington against the Company and its founder and chairman
Naveen Jain.
The suit alleges that the defendants violated federal securities laws by
misrepresenting InfoSpace's results from operations and expected financial
performance for the fiscal years 1999-2001.
Specifically, it is alleged that between January 2000 and January 2001
defendants mislead the investing public to believe:
(1) that the Company was experiencing strong revenue growth during
the fourth quarter 1999, and Full Year 2000; and
(2) that the Company would continue to post strong revenue growth
through Full Year 2001
As a result of these false and misleading statements, the complaint argues,
Jain sold millions of dollars of his own shares at artificially inflated
prices.
The defendants were allegedly able to complete a series of acquisitions
using shares of artificially inflated stock as currency including the
October 2000 acquisition of Go2Net.
In January 2001, defendants disclosed that, contrary to their previous
representations, the Company would report no revenue growth or EPS for Full
Year 2001, but rather would report declining revenue and a significant loss
for the year.
For more information, contact Keller Rohrback, LLP by Mail: 1201 Third
Avenue Suite 3200, Seattle Washington 98101-3052 by Phone: 800/776-6044
(toll-free) or (206) 623-1900 by Fax: (206) 623-3384 by E-mail:
investor@kellerrohrback.com or visit the firm's Website:
www.SeattleClassAction.com
INTERNET SECURITY: Keller Rohrback Considers WA Securities Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Keller Rohrback L.L.P. is currently investigating securities fraud claims on
behalf of shareholders of Internet Security Systems, Inc. (NASDAQ:ISSX) who
purchased the Company's common stock between April 5, 2001 and July 2, 2001,
inclusive.
Shareholders allege that the Company and certain of its officers and
directors violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of materially
false and misleading statements.
These statements artificially inflated the market price of the Company's
stock.
Shareholders allege that the Company announced in April that it "expects to
achieve revenues in the range of $64-$67 million and earnings in the range
of $0.15 to 0.16 per diluted share" for the quarter ending June 30, 2001,
even though defendants knew that the Company could not meet these
expectations.
Shareholders also allege that Company insiders took advantage of their
insider status and sold off more than $18 million worth of Company stock.
Rather than reaching the expectations of the April report, the Company
issued a July press release where it lowered its expected revenues to
between $50- $52 million and expected to suffer losses of up to $0.02 per
share.
As a result of this announcement the Company's stock price fell by more than
40%.
For more information, contact Jen Veitengruber or Attorneys Lynn Sarko, Juli
Farris and Elizabeth Leland by Phone: 800/776-6044 (toll-free) by E-mail:
investor@kellerrohrback.com or visit the firm's Website:
www.SeattleClassAction.com
LOOKSMART LTD.: Marc Henzel Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Office of Marc S. Henzel commenced a class action lawsuit on behalf
of purchasers of the securities of LookSmart, LTD. (NASDAQ: LOOK) between
August 19, 1999 and December 6, 2000, inclusive.
The action is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York against defendants Goldman Sachs & Co. and BancBoston
Robertson Stephens, Inc.
The complaint alleges violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.
On or about August 19, 1999, the Company commenced an initial public
offering of 7,700,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering price of
$12 per share.
In connection therewith, the Company filed a registration statement, which
incorporated a prospectus with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The complaint further alleges that the prospectus was materially false and
misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that:
(i) defendants had solicited and received excessive and
undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for
which defendants allocated to those investors material
portions of the restricted number of shares issued in
connection with the IPO; and
(ii) defendants had entered into agreements with customers whereby
defendants agreed to allocate shares to those customers in the
IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase
additional shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices.
For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 210 West Washington
Square, Philadelphia, PA 19106 by Phone: (215) 625-9999 or 888.643.6735 by
Fax: 215.440.9475 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's Website:
http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182
MARIMBA INC.: Marc Henzel Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Office of Marc S. Henzel commenced a class action lawsuit on behalf
of purchasers of the securities of Marimba, Inc. (NASDAQ: MRBA) between
April 30, 1999 and March 27, 2000, inclusive.
The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York against defendants:
(1) Marimba, Inc.,
(2) Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated,
(3) Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation,
(4) Bear Stearns & Co., Inc.,
(5) Kim K. Polese,
(6) Fred M. Gerson and
(7) Arthur A. Van Hoff
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 April 1999, the Company commenced an initial public offering of 4 million
of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $20 per share.
In connection therewith, the Company filed a registration statement, which
incorporated a prospectus with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The complaint further alleges that the prospectus was materially false and
misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that:
(i) the underwriters had solicited and received excessive and
undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for
which they allocated to those investors material portions of
the restricted number of Company shares issued in connection
with the IPO; and
(ii) the underwriters had entered into agreements with customers
whereby they agreed to allocate Company shares to those
customers in the IPO in exchange for which the customers
agreed to purchase additional shares in the aftermarket at
pre-determined prices
For more details, contact the Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 210
West Washington Square, Philadelphia, PA 19106 by Phone: (215) 625-9999 or
(888) 643-6735 by Fax: (215)440-9475 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit
the firm's Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel82
MASSACHUSETTS: More People Expected To Join Bristol County Access Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
More people are expected to join the access suit filed against Bristol
County, Massachusetts by people who could not take part in court proceedings
because of physical disabilities.
Taunton attorney Joseph DeMello filed the suit in Boston federal court last
Tuesday, alleging that he couldn't practice law properly as he has muscular
dystrophy and couldn't climb courthouse stairs.
Plymouth attorney Miles Herman, who is confined to a wheelchair also joined
the suit along with Christine Dias, who had to wait for two hours in the
Taunton District Court parking lot until her case was resolved.
Dias is confined to a wheelchair and unable to climb stairs, which prevents
her from entering eight of Bristol County's 10 courthouses.
"Court officers had to come outside and huddle around me," Dias said, in an
AP report. "I felt embarrassed. It felt like no one cared about me."
DeMello said he planned to continue practicing law as long as he was
mentally able but "...with the situation as it is now, I will soon be
physically unable to practice because the buildings aren't accessible."
"The county might as well hang a sign that reads 'Disabled do not enter.'"
DeMello and Herman seek an immediate order that requires the county or the
state to make the courthouses accessible, compensatory damages and legal
fees.
Neither deMello, Herman nor Philips would estimate the amount of legal fees
or possible compensatory damages, although both offered a hint as to the
financial hardships they have faced.
"There have been many cases I have been asked to try in Bristol County that
I have refused because I can't enter the county's buildings," Herman said.
"By now I would say there are at least a dozen."
Bristol County District Attorney Paul F. Walsh Jr supported the lawsuit
saying, "It's crazy that we build these courthouses to provide justice and
protect people, yet everyone is not free to enter."
County Commissioner Maria Lopes said the county has tried to make repairs,
but there is no money available in the budget.
Chief Justice of Administration and Management at the Administrative Office
of the state Trial Court Barbara A. Dortch-Okara declined comment.
MIAMI: Circuit Court Judge Prevents "Vice Cars'" Seizure
---------------------------------------------------------
Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Celeste Muir required Miami City to stop
impounding "vice cars", cars used during a drug or prostitution offense.
Sidney Wellman and Nadine Theodore filed the class action suit against the
city, challenging a 1997 ordinance allowing it to impound any vehicle used
during a drug or prostitution offense.
The ordinance also allows the city to charge the defendant $1,000 to recover
the vehicle, whether found guilty or not.
Last April, Muir ruled that the ordinance is constitutional if the driver is
the sole owner of the vehicle.
However, she said that the city had to prove that a co-owner or lessor of
the vehicle knew it would be used during a drug or prostitution purchase.
The plaintiffs appealed her decision.
Ronald S. Guralnick, attorney for the plaintiffs said that the ruling was
the right thing to do. "The only way to stop people from being harmed was to
declare injunctive relief."
City Attorney Alejandro Vilarello could not be reached for comment.
According to the Miami Herald, the city collects at least $1.4 million each
year in impoundment fees, money primarily spent to pay for the officers who
enforce drug and prostitution laws.
Between August 1997 and March 2001, more than 10,500 cars were impounded,
and the city collected more than $8.67 million.
Guralnick said Wellman, 81, brought the case after he was arrested for
soliciting a prostitute while using his wife's car.
MUSE TECHNOLOGIES: Wolf Popper Initiates Securities Suit in MA Court
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Muse Technologies, Inc. (OTC: MUZE) has been charged with violations of
federal securities laws by a client of Wolf Popper LLP in the U.S. District
Court for the District of Massachusetts.
The suit was filed on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired
Muse securities in the open market during the period January 24, 2000
through February 21, 2001.
The suit names the Company and certain of its officers and directors as
defendants.
The defendants allegedly issued materially false and misleading statements
and omitted material facts that should be publicly disclosed throughout the
class period.
Allegedly, the defendants reported that none of the Company's assets
consisted of securities when, in fact, a significant portion of the
Company's current assets had secretly been invested in high-risk securities,
which ultimately lost more than 85% of their value.
For more information, contact Chet B. Waldman or Carl L. Stine by Mail: 845
Third Avenue, New York, NY 10022-6689 by Phone: (212) 451-9624 or
(212)451-9631 or 1-877-370-7703 (toll-free) by Fax: (212) 486-2093 by
E-Mail: cwaldman@wolfpopper.com or cstine@wolfpopper.com.
NATIONAL STEEL: Michigan Residents File Suit Due To Polluted Air
----------------------------------------------------------------
Residents of Detroit, Ecorse and River Rouge filed a civil lawsuit against
industrial titan National Steel Corporation, saying that the Company was
fouling their neighborhoods with airborne metals.
The suit, filed in Wayne Circuit Court, alleges that the Company's Great
Lakes Division releases zinc, copper, chromium and other heavy metals into
the air.
These metals eventually wind up as residue on houses, cars and children's
yard toys. The suit however, did not claim health damages.
Lawyers for residents believe that as many as 40,000 people may be affected
by the plant's emissions of "toxins, metals, and air particulates."
They are attempting to certify the suit as a class action, which means all
those affected would be considered plaintiffs and could share in any
remedies. A court decision on certification is expected in December. River
Rouge Mayor Greg Joseph said that the suit was a "quality of life" issue.
In an interview with the Detroit News, Joseph said "River Rouge depends on
National Steel for taxable income. We don't want to do them any harm. We
just want them to conform to the law."
A 1987 study by the National Wildlife Foundation rated the Company as the
second-worst company on a list of the nation's 500 most serious polluters.
However, in recent years, the company has dealt successfully with some
emissions problems, and made progress on a U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency polluters list.
Tracing pollution to an individual plant in a Downriver industrial sector of
chemical, steel and other manufacturing plants also poses questions.
Lawyers for residents have hired independent firms to test air and soil
samples in an attempt to tie vagrant heavy metals to National Steel.
"Air flow models are going to show just how far this pollution is
traveling," said David A. Bower, River Rouge's city attorney.
Kevin S. Hendrick, a lawyer for National Steel, declined to comment on the
suit.
NEULEVEL INC.: Judge Expected To Stop Roll-out of ".biz" Domain Names
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Anthony Mohr is expected to prevent
internet company NeuLevel, Inc. from continuing the roll-out of a large part
of the .biz domain.
Judge Mohr will rule this morning after yesterday's hearing for preliminary
injunction in a class action complaint brought by representative plaintiff
David Smiley.
A person present in the hearing said in a Computerwire.com report that the
judge said he was "inclined" to grant some manner of ruling against the
Company.
The judge also instructed the plaintiffs to bring a detailed description of
their requests into the court for a hearing on the morning of October 12.
The suit was filed by disgruntled applicants for the ".biz" domain, saying
that the Company was conducting an illegal lottery in distributing desirable
names.
They alleged that the Company's application process encourages hopefuls to
submit multiple applications, at an average cost of $5 each, in order to
increase their odds of winning.
NeuLevel has been accepting "applications" for .biz registrations at $2 each
for several weeks.
It is currently processing those applications in a batch fashion to decide
which names will be assigned to which registrants. If more than one person
has applied for the same name, a winner will be picked randomly.
Two weeks ago, the same court ruled against part of Smiley's request for an
injunction, after NeuLevel modified its roll-out slightly.
The company decided to split its batch of applications into two parts. Group
1, which is larger, contained all unique applications that are not the
subject of potential trademark claims, while the smaller Group 2 contained
all the duplicate applications.
Judge Mohr decided that NeuLevel could go ahead and assign Group 1 names on
1 October, since there was be no element of chance involved, but decided he
needed more information before deciding on Group 2 names.
It is the fate of Group 2 assignations on which Mohr will rule this morning.
A preliminary injunction, if granted, could halt the roll out of a
substantial part of the .biz domain, which would be a serious setback for
NeuLevel and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, which
is also named in the complaint. Thousands of potential domain name
registrants would be affected.
NeuLevel, which won the contract to run .biz after a highly competitive
bidding process run by ICANN last November, denies it is breaking the law,
and claims that its roll-out system is the most "fair and equitable" way to
assign names.
It also claims a number of defenses including protection under commerce
clauses of the US constitution. The company declined to comment until the
court has issued its decision.
NICOR GAS: Settles Illinois Mercury Spills Suit For $2.25 Million
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Nicor Gas settled for $2.25 million a class action suit brought about by its
role in mercury leaks and improper disposal of gas regulators in Illinois.
Chicago Judge Paul B. Biebel, Jr. approved the settlement last Wednesday.
The Illinois attorney general and residents from Cook, Dupage and Will
counties filed the suit, which alleged that mercury leaked and tracked
throughout homes when the Company replaced old meters.
According to an AP report, mercury contamination was detected at 1,068
Illinois household and at several industrial and commercial sites.
Exposure to even small amounts of mercury over a long period can cause
damage to the brain, kidneys, lungs and developing fetuses.
Under the settlement, Nicor Gas will pay $1.85 million over the next four
years to fund environmental projects in the state and affected counties.
The company also will reimburse the state $400,000 for the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency's costs in monitoring its mercury inspection
and repair program after the mercury releases were discovered in July 2000.
Both parties expressed satisfaction over the settlement. In a statement,
Illinois Attorney General Jim Ryan said, "After it became clear there was
the potential for a real public health threat, Nicor got down to business
with us and others to address the situation."
Russ M. Strobel, senior vice president for the Company, said they were
pleased to be able to reach a fair settlement in the best interest of all
parties.
Nicor Gas serves 2 million customers in much of the northern third of
Illinois, excluding the city of Chicago.
NORTEL NETWORKS: Keller Rohrback Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Keller Rohrback L.L.P. commenced a securities class action in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers
of Nortel Networks Corp. (NYSE:NT) common stock between November 1, 2000 and
February 15, 2001, inclusive.
The complaint charges that the Company and certain of its officers and
directors violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.
The complaint alleges that the defendants Nortel and certain of its officers
and directors violated federal securities laws by making a series of
materially false and misleading statements and material misrepresentations
during the class period. Specifically, the complaint alleges that
defendants misrepresented the level of demand for its products from its
customers.
Defendants knew at the time they made these statements that, in fact, the
Company was experiencing a substantial shortfall in first quarter sales and
earnings due to decreased orders from its customers. As a result of these
false and misleading statements, the complaint charges, Nortel's stock price
was artificially inflated throughout the class period.
For more information, contact Keller Rohrback, LLP by Mail: 1201 Third
Avenue Suite 3200, Seattle Washington 98101-3052 by Phone: 800/776-6044
(toll-free) or (206) 623-1900 by Fax: (206) 623-3384 by E-mail:
investor@kellerrohrback.com or visit the firm's Website:
www.SeattleClassAction.com
ONYX ACCEPTANCE: Completes Settlement For California Consumer Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Onyx Acceptance Corporation settled a consumer class action filed in 1999 in
the Orange County Superior Court in the State of California for an
undisclosed amount.
The state court has already approved the settlement in the suit, which
alleged that the Company sent defective post-repossession notices to certain
California borrowers following the repossession or voluntary surrender of
their vehicles.
Under the terms of the settlement, the Company refunded certain amounts
collected on deficiencies related to class members' accounts (in some
instances, with interest). The Company also paid a certain portion of the
plaintiff's counsel fees and other amounts.
Pursuant to the settlement, the monies from refund checks not cashed by
the class members cannot be returned to the Company.
According to the terms of the settlement, these amounts were paid:
(1) one-half to the plaintiff's counsel up to a negotiated cap, as
an additional attorney's fee award, and
(2) one-half to a non-profit youth soccer organization in Orange
County, California where the Company's headquarters are
Located
John Hall, the Company's President and Chief Executive Officer, has also
volunteered in certain capacities in this organization.
The Company admitted no liability in this case, but entered the settlement
to avoid the burden of extended litigation.
ONYX ACCEPTANCE: Court Dismisses Securities Suit With Prejudice in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California dismissed
with prejudice the amended securities class action against Onyx Acceptance
Corporation.
The suit was commenced in January 2000 in against the Company and certain of
our officers and directors alleging violations of Section 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.
The violations allegedly arose from the Company's use of the cash-in method
of measuring and accounting for credit enhancement assets in our
financial statements.
The Company asserted that the abovementioned accounting method was
consistent with then current generally accepted accounting principles and
accounting practices of other finance companies.
As required by a Financial Accounting Standards Board special report dated
December 1998 and related statements made by the staff of the Securities and
Exchange Commission, the Company retroactively changed the method of
measuring and accounting for credit enhancement assets to the cash-out
method.
The Company also restated their financial statements for 1996, 1997 and the
first three fiscal quarters of 1998.
Plaintiffs in the case have appealed the court's decision.
ONYX SOFTWARE: Schiffrin Barroway Initiates Securities Suit in WA
------------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin and Barroway, LLP commenced a class action lawsuit on behalf of
all purchasers of the common stock of ONYX Software Corp. (NASDAQ:ONXS) from
January 10, 2001 through August 10, 2001, inclusive.
The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the District of
Washington against the Company and certain of its officers and directors.
The complaint charges the defendants with issuing false and misleading
statements concerning its business and financial condition.
The Company is a supplier of customer relationship management enterprise
applications that are designed to connect a company's sales, marketing and
service organizations with customers, prospects and partners.
On January 2001, the Company announced the acquisition of Revenue Lab and,
after the close of the market, hosted a conference call to discuss the
acquisition and the Company's business and prospects. Later, the Company
reported favorable, but false, financial results.
The complaint alleges that during the class period, the Company made
misleading statements about its business and issued false and misleading
financial results, causing its stock to be artificially inflated.
As a result of this inflation, the Company was able to complete a secondary
offering of 2.5 million shares at $13.50 per share, raising net proceeds of
$31.5 million on Feb. 7, 2001.
Then, just weeks after this offering was completed, the Company revealed
that its 1st quarter results would be sharply lower than the market had been
led to expect with revenues of only $26-$27 million and a large loss. The
stock dropped below $3 per share on this news.
Later, in August 2001, defendants revealed that the Company's fourth quarter
results for the year 2000 results had been materially misstated and would
have to be restated.
After this announcement, the Company's stock price dropped to as low as
$3.70 compared to the class period high of $17.25.
For more information, contact Marc A. Topaz and Stuart L. Berman 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
ORACLE CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Initiates Securities Suit in N.D. CA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Office of Marc S. Henzel commenced a securities class action on
behalf of purchasers of Oracle Corp. (Nasdaq: ORCL) publicly traded
securities during the period between Dec. 15, 2000 and March 1, 2001
The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California charges the Company and Chief Executive Officer Lawrence J.
Ellison with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The Company supplies software for enterprise information management.
The complaint alleges that at the beginning of the class period, the
defendants represented that the Company would have sequential EPS growth of
9%, or $0.12, and revenue of over $2.9 billion for the 3rd Quarter, 2001.
Defendants assured investors that Oracle's new 11i Suite required no
programming systems integration to implement the product and that using the
product internally saved the Company $1 billion.
However, defendant Ellison actually knew that the Suite was fraught with
massive technical problems, including giant gaps in its CRM modules, and
required expensive systems integration work to implement.
Ellison also knew that Oracle's so-called billion dollar savings was not the
result of the synergies created by Oracle's 11i product, but rather, his
decision to terminate more than 2,000 employees, many of whom would
"support" Oracle's new software.
Throughout January and February 2001, defendants repeatedly stated that:
(1) Oracle's Q3 2001 estimates were easily achievable,
(2) Oracle's pipeline was "never stronger;"
(3) its applications growth was "accelerating;"
(4) its database and application sales were rapidly growing; and
(5) the slowing economy was showing no impact on Oracle's 2001 3rd
quarter performance.
During this period defendant Ellison sold nearly $900 million worth of his
own shares at prices as high as $32 per share, or 50% higher than the price
to which shares dropped as Oracle's true prospects began to reach the
market.
In March 2001, the Company revealed that, contrary to prior assurances by
defendants, the Company would post a major revenue shortfall and EPS
declines, sending shares into a free fall.
This disclosure shocked the market, causing Oracle's stock to decline to
less than $17 per share before closing at $16.88 per share on March 2, 2001,
on record volume of more than 221 million shares.
For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 210 West Washington
Square, Philadelphia, PA 19106 by Phone: (215) 625-9999 or (888) 643-6735 by
Fax: (215) 440-9475 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182
PROTON ENERGY: Wolf Popper Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Popper LLP commenced a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of
Proton Energy Systems (NASD: PRTN) common stock from September 28, 2000 to
December 6, 2000, inclusive.
The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York and names as defendants:
(1) Proton Energy Systems, Inc.,
(2) Morgan Stanley Dean Witter,
(3) Credit Suisse First Boston Corp.,
(4) Salomon Smith Barney, and
(5) certain of Proton Energy Systems's senior officers
The complaint alleges violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) 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.
In September 2000, the Company commenced an initial public offering of
8,050,000 shares of common stock (including 1,050,000 shares pursuant to the
underwriters' over-allotment option) at an offering price of $17.00 per
share.
The complaint alleges that the prospectus issued in connection with the
offering was materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose,
among other things, that:
(i) the underwriters had solicited and received excessive and
undisclosed commissions from investors in exchange for
allocations of Proton Energy shares issued in the offering;
and
(ii) these underwriters had entered into agreements with customers
to allocate Proton Energy shares in exchange for agreements to
purchase additional Proton Energy shares in the aftermarket.
By virtue of this manipulation, the underwriters were able to inflate the
trading price of Proton Energy's shares after the initial offering.
For more information, contact Robert C. Finkel by Mail: 845 Third Avenue,
New York, NY 10022-6689 by Phone: (212) 451-9620 or (212) 759-4600 or
1-877-370-7703 (toll-free) by Fax: 212/486-2093 by E-Mail:
rfinkel@wolfpopper.com or irrep@wolfpopper.com or visit the firm's Website:
www.wolfpopper.com
SHOPKO STORES: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit in E.D. WI
------------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities class action
on behalf of purchasers of the securities of ShopKo Stores, Inc. (NYSE: SKO)
between March 9, 2000 and November 9, 2000, inclusive.
The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Wisconsin against defendants the Company and William J. Podany.
The Complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.
The defendants allegedly issued a series of material misrepresentations to
the market between March 9, 2000 and November 9, 2000, thereby artificially
inflating the price of Company securities.
Throughout the class period, as alleged in the complaint, defendants issued
statements concerning the integration of Pamida Holding Corp., the Company's
financial results and prospects.
These statements were allegedly false and misleading because they failed to
disclose that the Company was experiencing significant shipping and
inventory control problems at Pamida's distributions centers.
The Company issued a November 2000 press release reporting a loss of ($0.23)
per share - far below the $.02 to $.07 per share previously represented by
the Company.
The Company also revealed that it was experiencing problems at Pamida's
distribution centers and that those problems accounted for the Company's
reduced earnings.
For more information, contact Steven G. Schulman or Samuel H. Rudman, by
Phone: (800) 320-5081 by E-mail: Shopkocase@milbergNY.com or visit the
firm's Website: www.milberg.com
TELECORP PCS: Sued For Breach of Fiduciary Duty Due To AT&T Merger
------------------------------------------------------------------
Shareholders filed five securities class action suits against Telecorp PCS,
Inc. relating to their definitive merger agreement with AT&T Wireless, Inc.
and entered last week. The suit, which was filed in Delaware State Court,
also names as defendants certain Company directors and AT&T Wireless, Inc.
The suit alleges that the Company breached fiduciary duties and certain
other duties with shareholders by entering into the merger agreement.
Specifically, Company management allegedly forced shareholders to sell their
equity interest in the Company at an unfair price.
The suit further alleges the company didn't take adequate measures to ensure
that the interests of the Company's shareholders were properly protected
from overreaching.
The plaintiffs also charged AT&T Wireless of breaching fiduciary duty and
timing its offer to take advantage of the decline in the market price of the
Company's stock.
The offer has the effect of capping the market for Company stock to
facilitate AT&T Wireless's plan to obtain the public interest in the Company
as cheaply as possible.
Telecorp has denied the allegations in the suit.
TICKETS.COM: Wolf Popper Commences Securities Suit in S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Popper LLP has filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of
Tickets.com, Inc. (NASD: TIXX) common stock during the period November 3,
1999 through December 6, 2000 inclusive.
The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York and names these defendants:
(1) Tickets.com, Inc.,
(2) Morgan Stanley Dean Witter,
(3) Credit Suisse First Boston Corp.,
(4) SG Cowen Securities Corp. and
(5) certain of Tickets.com's senior officers
The complaint alleges violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) 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.
In November 1999, the Company commenced an initial public offering of
7,193,889 shares of common stock (including 938,333 shares pursuant to the
underwriters' over-allotment option) at an offering price of $12.50 per
share.
In connection therewith, the Company filed a registration statement, which
incorporated a prospectus with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The complaint alleges that the prospectus was materially false and
misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that:
(i) the Underwriters had solicited and received excessive and
undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for
which these underwriters allocated to those investors material
portions of Tickets.com shares issued in connection with the
Tickets.com IPO; and
(ii) these underwriters had entered into agreements with customers
whereby the underwriters agreed to allocate Tickets.com shares
to those customers in the Tickets.com IPO in exchange for
which the customers agreed to purchase additional Tickets.com
shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices
By virtue of this alleged manipulation, the underwriters were able to
inflate the trading price of Company shares after the initial offering to an
intra-day trading high of $32.00 per share on November 4, 1999.
For more details, contact Robert C. Finkel by Mail: 845 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10022-6689 by Phone: (212)451-9620 or (212)759-4600 or
1-877-370-7703 (toll-free) by Fax: (212) 486-2093 by E-Mail:
rfinkel@wolfpopper.com or irrep@wolfpopper.com or visit the firm's Website:
www.wolfpopper.com
VICINITY CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Office of Marc S. Henzel commenced a securities class action lawsuit
on behalf all persons who acquired Vicinity Corporation (NASDAQ:VCNT)
securities between February 9, 2000 and December 6, 2000.
The suit, commenced in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York, names as defendants the Company and:
(1) Emerick M. Woods,
(2) David Seltzer,
(3) Herbert M. Dwight, Jr.,
(4) J.P. Morgan Securities, Inc.,
(5) Bear Stearns & Co., Inc. and
(6) U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray, Inc.
The complaint charges defendants with violations of the Securities Act of
1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The defendants allegedly issued a registration statement and prospectus that
contained materially false and misleading information and failed to disclose
material information.
The prospectus was issued in connection with Vicinity's initial public
offering of 7 million shares of common stock at $17.00 per share that was
completed on or about February 9, 2000.
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 Vicinity 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 Vicinity shares in the
aftermarket at pre- determined prices
For more information, contact the Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 210
West Washington Square, Philadelphia, PA 19106 by Phone: (215) 625-9999 or
(888) 643-6735 by Fax: (215)440-9475 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or
visit the firm's Website: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182
*********
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, Aurora Fatima Antonio
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 240/629-3300.
* * * End of Transmission * * *