/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/020219.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Tuesday, February 19, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 35 Headlines ALASKA: Puts Revised Sex Offender List Back Online, Asks For Review AMERITRADE HOLDING: Sued For Fraudulent Business Practices in Nebraska AUCTION HOUSES: Over A Thousand Collectors, Dealers Want To Join Suit CALIFORNIA: San Diego Settles Retirement Suit Filed By Ex-Employees ELI LILLY: Former Contract Workers To Sue Over Background Check Policy LONDON LIFE: 900,000 Clients Waiting To Collect Settlement Payouts MEXICAN BRACEROS: US, Mexico Ask Court To Dismiss "Braceros" Suit MONTANA: Prisoners File Suit Over Inadequate Public Defender System TOMMY HILFIGER: To Settle Suit Alleging Abuse of Saipan Factory Workers Securities Fraud ACTRADE FINANCIAL: Shapiro Haber Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. NY ADVANCED LIGHTING: Will Vigorously Defend V. Securities Suits in Ohio DIGITAL ISLAND: Leo Desmond Initiates Securities Suit in Delaware Court ENRON CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Chosen Lead Plaintiff in 401(k) Suits GLOBAL CROSSING: Cauley Geller Commences Securities Suit in W.D. NY HA-LO INDUSTRIES: Holzer Holzer Initiates Securities Suit in N.D. IL HOMESTORE.COM: Hoffman Edelson Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA HOOVERS INC.: Mounting Vigorous Defense V. Securities Suit in S.D. NY IMCLONE SYSTEMS: Hoffman Edelson Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY IMMERSION CORPORATION: Sued For Securities Violations in S.D. New York IRVINE SENSORS: Stull Stull Initiates Securities Fraud Suit in C.D. CA JP MORGAN: Shareholders Sue For Securities Violations in S.D. New York KEYNOTE SYSTEMS: Proceedings Stayed in Securities Suit in NY NATIONAL GOLF: Cauley Geller Initiates Securities Suit in C.D. CA OPLINK COMMUNICATIONS: Sued For Securities Act Violations in S.D. NY PNC FINANCIAL: Goodkind Labaton Commences Securities Suit in W.D. PA REGENERATION TECHNOLOGIES: Abbey Gardy Lodges Securities Suit in FL SYNSORB BIOTECH: Leo Desmond Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. New York TALX CORPORATION: Leo Desmond Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY TYCO INTERNATIONAL: Wechsler Harwood Commences Securities Suit in NY TYCO INTERNATIONAL: Schatz Nobel Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY VAN WAGONER: Much Shelist Commences Securities Suit in E.D. Wisconsin WESTELL TECHNOLOGIES: Sued For Federal Securities Violations in N.D. OH WILLIAMS COMPANIES: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in N.D. OK ********* ALASKA: Puts Revised Sex Offender List Back Online, Asks For Review ------------------------------------------------------------------- The State sex offender registry recently returned online with 3,000 fewer names listed, the Associated Press recently reported. The State had temporarily blocked public access from a Web site version of the list in response to a January 18 federal court ruling. Under the order by US District Senior Judge Russel Holland, the State is prohibited from posting names of offenders convicted of crimes committed before August 10, 1994. "Workers with the Department of Public Safety worked very hard to get the list back up as quickly as possible," said Chief Assistant Attorney General Dean Guaneli. "They know the public is very interested in the registry and wanted to provide as much access as legally possible under the court order." The list of 4,300 names was trimmed by 70 percent. The revised version contains slightly more than 1,300 names, according to Tim DeSpain, a spokesman for the Alaska State Troopers. Alaska's sex-offender law, modeled after New Jersey's pioneering "Megan's Law," allows the public to track known sex offenders. All states have some version of a sex offenders law. When it was passed in August 1994, Alaska's law was made retroactive 10 years. That prompted several class action suits in state and federal courts, challenging the law as unconstitutional. In April of 200l, a three-judge panel of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled in a case involving two convicted sex offenders who sued Alaska. The Appellate Court said the burden of registering retroactively was too harsh. The panel then sent the case back to the lower court. Mr. Guaneli said the January ruling was in response to a more recent class action lawsuit that argues the same issue. The State has asked the US Supreme Court to review the April ruling, Mr.Guaneli said. Sex offender files removed from the new list have been retained, should the Court side with the State, he said. State officials say the recent Court action doesn't change the way the State now handles sex offense cases. Convicted offenders whose crimes were committed on or after the August 1994 cutoff date still must register with the State. AMERITRADE HOLDING: Sued For Fraudulent Business Practices in Nebraska ---------------------------------------------------------------------- A Nebraska state court has granted Ameritrade Holding Corporation's motion for summary judgment in the class action filed against them in September 1998, alleging the Company was not able to handle the volume of subscribers to its internet brokerage services. The suit, filed in the District Court of Douglas County, Nebraska, alleges the Company engaged in fraudulent and misleading practices and seeks injunctive and equitable relief compelling the Company to increase capacity, and unspecified compensatory damages. In May 2001, the Company filed a motion for summary judgment in the matter, which the plaintiffs opposed. The court granted summary judgment for the Company on January 2, 2002. The plaintiffs have filed a notice of appeal. The Company believes it has adequate legal defenses respecting the suit and does not believe that any such matters, either individually or in the aggregate, will materially affect its results of operations or its financial position. AUCTION HOUSES: Over A Thousand Collectors, Dealers Want To Join Suit --------------------------------------------------------------------- Lawyers preparing a class action suit over an alleged illegal price- fixing cartel operated by Sotheby's and Christie's in Britain, claimed recently that more than a thousand collectors and dealers have contacted them so far, only a week after they officially took on the case, The Times of London recently reported. Class Law Solicitors are planning to ask for hundreds of millions of pounds in compensation for people who bought and sold objects at the two auction houses between 1993 and 1999, the period in which they are alleged to have colluded over commission charges paid by clients. This move in Britain follows a $512 million compensation payment by the two auction houses last year to settle an American class-action lawsuit. Class Law, a British firm specializing in financial group actions, says it is receiving about ten calls an hour from people wanting to become involved in the case. While the American courts dealt only with cases within the United States, Class Law will apply to the High Court within the next three weeks for a group litigation order on behalf of people who traded through the British salesrooms. Class Law is preparing its case with Cohen Milstein Hausfeld & Toll, one of the American law firms involved in the United States claim. Stephen Alexander, a partner at Class Law, said that anyone who either sold or bought items through Sotheby's and Christie's between 1993 and 1999 may have a claim for damages, but, he added, it is not the purpose of the lawsuit to destroy the auction houses. Compensation could involve "some cash" and a credit arrangement. "A lot will depend on their attitude," he said. Christie's declined to comment. CALIFORNIA: San Diego Settles Retirement Suit Filed By Ex-Employees ------------------------------------------------------------------- San Diego Superior Court approved the agreement proposed by the San Diego County to settle three class actions filed by its former county employees, seeking new retirement benefits, SignOnSanDiego reports. The suits alleged that the County should have considered factors such as payment for unused vacation time in calculating the final pension of an employee. In December, the County and its former employees reached a settlement, which calls the county to make various improvements to its pension plans, affecting 30,000 current and former employees. With the settlement approved, the County Board of Supervisors will vote on the improvements on February 26. If approved then, the pension plans will take effect March 8, 2002. ELI LILLY: Former Contract Workers To Sue Over Background Check Policy ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Contract workers of pharmaceutical firm Eli Lilly and Company are contemplating a class action suit, after the Company instituted new regulations for workplace security after the September 11 terrorist attacks. The Company has insisted on clean records for their employees, doing background checks to discover prior law offenses. Before the September 11 attacks, the Company allowed outside vendors to conduct their own background checks. Presently, the Company is using ChoicePoint, an Georgia firm, to do the screenings. Mike Crose of Lafayette, and 40 others who have been doing contract work for the Company claim they have lost the opportunity for work, due to the Company's strict background check. Mr. Crose spent 2-1/2 years of his 4-year union apprenticeship at the Company's facilities, but prior to that, served 71/2 months in jail in Bellingham, Wash., after pleading guilty to four misdemeanor crimes, including assault and permitting a minor to consume alcohol. He told the Journal and Courier Online, "People who have worked there for up to 30 years building the plants have been let go.Before that time and since that time, I've never had any run-ins with the law. (Lilly's) own employees haven't been subject to a new background check since 9-11. They definitely separate the way they treat outside contractors as they do employees." Don Ireland, Business Manager of International Union of Painters and Allied Trades Local 47 in Indianapolis, also told the Journal and Courier that about 10 Local 47 members have been discharged from working at Lilly for failing background checks, including one who had several traffic violations and a check deception conviction. Mr. Crose and union leader, Jim Ogden, say they have heard of as many as seven contract employees fired from Company subsidiary Tippecanoe Labs, plus anywhere from 40 to 70 others who have lost access, and their jobs, at Lilly sites in Indianapolis and Clinton. According to Ogden, some allegedly lost their jobs for bouncing a check, child support problems, even a speeding ticket, the Journal and Courier reported. Vince Kochert, Public Affairs Administrator at Tippecanoe Laboratories, said the people who lost their contracted jobs following the screenings have other employment opportunities. He asserts "These individuals can still work for the vendor, they just can't work at a Lilly site.All of our employees go through background checks. There's no difference between the requirements for our employees and contractors who work for our vendors. We think it makes good standard business practice," according to the Journal and Courier. Mr. Crose also asserted in a letter written to Company officials "I do fully believe my debt for these crimes has been repaid.I'm kind, generous and dedicated to my family and friends." He said he is willing to take his complaint against the Company to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Indiana Civil Liberties Union. LONDON LIFE: 900,000 Clients Waiting To Collect Settlement Payouts ------------------------------------------------------------------- Nearly 900,00 current and former policyholders of London Life Insurance Company are waiting to collect their small share of a $240 million class-action settlement, but their wait may have been shortened when an application for appeal by a policyholder unhappy with the settlement's terms was quashed before it could be heard, The Toronto Star recently reported. Company spokesperson Marlene Klassen said recently that the Company must wait another two months, however, before it begins the lengthy process of contacting eligible policyholders. "Clearly London Life will move as quickly as possible to implement the settlement, but we will have a better sense of the timing once the Court approval is final," she said. Nearly five years have passed since lawyers in three provinces first sued on behalf of clients who bought participating, whole-life insurance policies during the years 1980 to 1995. Many of these clients were shown company-produced illustrations that indicated their policy dividends would be sufficient to offset the cost of premiums within a few years. However, these sales illustrations generally proved to be invalid - dividend rates, which were not guaranteed, fell as interest rates fell and the period to premium offset was extended by many years. The settlement reached by the parties will provide some minimal enhancements to most policyholders, while some who can present evidence that they were misled will receive exactly what they originally expected. The courts approved agreement terms in Quebec, British Columbia and Ontario last September and October. However, an attempt to appeal the settlement was instituted by Dianna Holmes, daughter of the Chair of the Canadian Life Insurance Policyholders Association, Anne Holmes of Uxbridge. One of her objections was that the cost of enhancements was being wrongly deducted from an account reserved for participating policyholders. Her argument that policyholders in effect were paying for their compensation under the deal had been rejected last fall by Ontario Superior Court Justice Peter Cumming. Ms. Holmes' lawyer Michael Deverett said the three judges on the panel at Ontario's Court of Appeal merely found that his client did not have standing to bring an appeal. He said he has not been able to confer with her about whether to take additional action. Anne Holmes, Chair of Canadian Life Insurance Policyholders Association, who is a London Life policyholder, and has been challenging the insurer and others for years, predicted that many policyholders will be dissatisfied with the settlement. Anne Holmes says that major life insurers have been conspiring to silence her. "Do you think it is a coincidence that 10 people from Investors Group (a sister company of London Life) crashed on my property in a hot air balloon last June?" she asked. Anne Holmes has asked the Company to supply her with internal files on her family's policies in order to gauge how well they would be treated under the settlement. She doubts that she will accept the settlement and said she is contemplating further legal action. She said that many clients, like herself, were persuaded without adequate disclosure to give up older policies that now would be worth more than the newer premium-offset policies they were sold. Information booklets regarding three levels of settlement, global, enhanced and individually adjudicated, will be distributed over the next several months. Clients who originally indicated that they wanted dividends to offset premiums within a few years will automatically qualify for enhanced benefits. The Company will add half a percentage point to their dividend rate for three years instead of one year like everyone else. It is estimated that enhancements will be worth about $180 million in addition to about $60 million in benefits that already have been provided by the Company. A further $20 million will go to administration costs and legal fees. MEXICAN BRACEROS: US, Mexico Ask Court To Dismiss "Braceros" Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------- The US and Mexican governments have asked a San Francisco Federal Court to dismiss the class action suit filed against them on behalf of Mexican farm workers who worked in California fields more than fifty years ago. A treaty between the governments allowed around 300,000 workers, known as "braceros," to fill in temporary jobs in the US from 1942 to 1949. Under the terms of the treaty, 10% of the workers' salaries will be automatically deducted and sent to Mexican banks to serve as a savings account. The workers were to receive the money when they returned to Mexico. However, many of the ex-braceros say they never got their money, according to a Fresnobee report. The suit, which also names Wells Fargo Bank and three Mexican banks as defendants, seeks an accounting for all the sums withheld for the purported savings fund and any interest. Last week, about 100 supporters rallied in downtown Fresno, encouraging US and Mexican officials to support the aging workers or their descendants, the Fresnobee reports. US District Judge Charles Breyer has scheduled the hearings on the motions to dismiss for August 2,2002, to give both sides enough time to prepare their arguments. MONTANA: Prisoners File Suit Over Inadequate Public Defender System ------------------------------------------------------------------- The State of Montana faces a class action filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), in the US District Court in Montana on behalf of seven criminal defendants, alleging that the State's public defender system was deeply "flawed." The suit alleges that people accused of crimes in Montana can't count on adequate legal representation unless they have enough money to hire their own attorneys, according to a Montana Forum report. The suit names as defendants State Gov. Judy Martz, the Montana Supreme Court and the commissioners of the counties of: (1) Butte-Silver Bow, (2) Flathead, (3) Glacier, (4) Missoula, (5) Lake, (6) Ravalli, and (7) Teton The ACLU charged that the State failed to address concerns of people who can't afford to have their own lawyers to defend them. It also asserted that the State had known about the inadequacies in their public defender system since 1976, but failed to make the appropriate changes. Vincent Warren, an attorney with the ACLU's New York office, said Montana is one of 18 states that funds its public defender system at a level of less than half what the system requires, the Montana Forum reports. He said that while many people associate poor public defender programs with rural Southern states, Montana is a classic example of a system that has created overworked public defenders with too few resources to fairly represent their clients. He adds, "Indigent defense in Montana is fundamentally unfair.the State does not guarantee full funding for indigent defenders." Lawyers for the plaintiffs say they want to see two changes in the public defender system, an increase in funding at the state level and a comprehensive policy telling the defendant counties how to run the public defender system, the Montana Forum reports. Scott Crichton, Executive Director of the ACLU in Montana said "The State has failed to provide the counties with the funding and guidance needed to administer an indigent defense program adequately.Under these circumstances, even the most diligent attorneys cannot provide competent representation." Attorney General Mike McGrath, whose office probably would defend the suit, told the Forum he hadn't seen the complaint and so had no comment. TOMMY HILFIGER: To Settle Suit Alleging Abuse of Saipan Factory Workers ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Garment manufacturer, Tommy Hilfiger Corporation, has entered into settlement agreements with the plaintiffs in two suits generally alleging that the Company and other garment manufacturers and retailers using the Saipan factories engaged in unlawful practices relating to the recruitment and employment of foreign workers. The two suits also name other garment manufacturers as defendants. As part of these agreements, the Company specifically denies any wrongdoing or any liability with regard to the claims made in the suits. The settlement agreement provides for a monetary payment, in an amount that is not material to the Company's financial position, results of operations or cash flows, to a class of plaintiffs in the federal action, as well as the creation of a monitoring program for factories in Saipan. The suit brought in San Francisco Superior Court (the State action), was filed by a union and three public interest groups. It alleges the Company and others engaged in unfair competition and false advertising. The other suit, initially filed in the US District Court for the Central District of California and subsequently transferred to the US District Court in Hawaii (the federal action), was brought on behalf of an alleged class consisting of the Saipanese factory workers. The defendants include both companies selling goods purchased from factories located on the island of Saipan and the factories themselves. This complaint alleges claims under Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, the Alien Tort Claims Act, federal anti- peonage and indentured servitude statutes and state and international law. The Federal Court and a class of certified plaintiffs must approve the settlement. The suit has been transferred to the Federal Judge in Saipan. Plaintiffs are presently challenging the transfer order. The Judge in Saipan scheduled the settlement approval hearing and preliminary class certification for February 14, 2002. Securities Fraud ACTRADE FINANCIAL: Shapiro Haber Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. NY --------------------------------------------------------------------- Shapiro Haber and Urmy LLP commenced a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Actrade Financial Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: ACRT) and certain of its officers and directors. The suit was filed on behalf of all persons who purchased the Company's common stock during the period March 11, 1999 through February 8, 2002, inclusive. The suit alleges that the defendants violated section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, by issuing a series of press releases and public filings containing materially false or misleading statements representing that the Company provided short-term loans to businesses to finance commercial transactions. The suit alleges that these statements were false and misleading because defendants knew, or recklessly disregarded, that the Company had also loaned millions of dollars to individuals for non-commercial purposes, defrauded its sureties into providing coverage for these loans, and had overstated its financial results based on these fraudulent lending practices. The suit further alleges that defendants' actions artificially inflated the price of the Company's common stock during the class period. For more information, contact Ted Hess-Mahan or Liz Hutton by Mail: 75 State Street, Boston, MA 02109, (800) 287-8119 by Fax: (617) 439-0134, or by E-mail: cases@shulaw.com. ADVANCED LIGHTING: Will Vigorously Defend V. Securities Suits in Ohio --------------------------------------------------------------------- Shareholders of Advanced Lighting Corporation charged certain of the Company's officers and directors of breach of fiduciary duty in several securities class actions pending in Ohio Federal and State Courts. The first two of these suits were commenced in December 2001 by separate shareholders of the Company allegedly on behalf of the Company, derivatively, against officers and directors of the Company. The allegations in the two cases are substantially similar, and the State case has been removed to the United States District Court, Northern District of Ohio, where the two cases are pending. The Company is a nominal defendant in these actions. One of the suits names as defendants: (1) Wayne R. Hellman, the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board, who is also beneficial owner of more than 5% of the outstanding common stock of the Company, (2) Alan J. Ruud, former Chief Operating Officer and Vice Chairman of the Board, who is also beneficial owner of more than 5% of the outstanding common stock of the Company, (3) Francis H. Beam, director, (4) John E. Breen, director, (5) John R. Buerkle, director, (6) Theodore A. Filson, director, (7) Louis S. Fisi, director, (8) Thomas K. Lime, director, and (9) Gordon Tunstall, director The second complaint names the same defendants, but also names Steven C. Potts, who is Chief Financial Officer and is a director. The suits allege breaches of duties by the defendants relating to the matters which are the subject of the litigation, to alleged insider trading by certain directors, to a loan made to Mr. Hellman and to the sale of certain fixture facilities to an investment group led by Mr. Ruud. In January 2002, an additional lawsuit was filed in the Common Pleas Court of the County of Cuyahoga, Ohio, by a shareholder of the Company allegedly on behalf of the Company, derivatively, against officers and directors of the Company. The allegations in the case are substantially similar to the above suits. The suit names the same defendants as the suits mentioned above, with the Company as a nominal defendant. The Company and the defendants believe that these claims lack merit and intends to vigorously defend this action. DIGITAL ISLAND: Leo Desmond Initiates Securities Suit in Delaware Court ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Leo W. Desmond lodged a securities class action on behalf of shareholders who acquired Digital Island, Inc. (Nasdaq:ISLD) securities between May 14, 2001 and August 30, 2001, inclusive, in the US District Court in Delaware. It is alleged that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10(b)(5) promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements to the market throughout the class period which statements had the effect of artificially inflating the market price of the Company's securities. For more details, contact Leo W. Desmond by Mail: 2161 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 204, West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 by Phone: 888-337-6663 by E-mail: Info@SecuritiesAttorney.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.SecuritiesAttorney.com. ENRON CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Chosen Lead Plaintiff in 401(k) Suits ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Controversial high-profile law firm Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach was chosen to act as the lead plaintiff in the class action suit filed against fallen energy trader Enron Corporation over losses in several institutions 401(k) plans. The firm represents the University of California (UC) retirement system, which was also chosen as lead plaintiff. The system lost $145 million in their 401(k) plans, due to investments in the Company's stock, which plummeted shortly before its bankruptcy filing. The UC retirement bested several other State retirement systems, who also lost due to their investment in the Company, most notably the Florida state retirement system. Florida lost more money than the UC system, but Florida's state retirement system is locked in a dispute with its investment management firm, Alliance Capital Management of New York. Florida is asserting that Alliance had a conflict of interest when it invested state funds in Enron, because one of Alliance's managing directors was an Enron board member. However, lead plaintiff status is basically ceremonial according to an Associated Press report. It is still unclear how and when the plaintiffs can recover from the Company after its bankruptcy, as there is a long line of creditors waiting for the settlement of claims. However, the appointment is a big vindication for Milberg Weiss, which recently made headlines, when Los Angeles federal investigators announced they were investigating the Company for alleged irregularities in plaintiff solicitations for securities suit. The firm, and high profile partner William Lerach, are known to have filed hundred of securities suits in the wake of the dot.com bust. Associated Press also reports the firm was also recently removed as lead counsel in a shareholder case against Copper Mountain Networks Inc. of Palo Alto after a judge found that other law firms would litigate the case for lower fees. "This civil litigation is essential to right the wrongs and recover the losses suffered by millions of Americans," said Bill Lerach, a partner at Milberg Weiss, in a prepared statement. Other pension funds have filed suits against the Company's former directors and executives, including ex-chief executive Kenneth Lay, alleging that they issued misleading financial statements to artificially inflate the Company's stock price and reap more than $1 billion for themselves. GLOBAL CROSSING: Cauley Geller Commences Securities Suit in W.D. NY ------------------------------------------------------------------- Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York on behalf of purchasers of Global Crossing, LTD. (NYSE:GX) (OTCBB:GBLXQ) common stock during the period between April 29, 1999 and October 4, 2001, inclusive. The class period is being expanded to include purchases of publicly traded securities between February 14, 1999 and October 4, 2001, inclusive. The suit charges certain of the Company's officers and directors violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Due to its recent bankruptcy filing, the Company is not named as a defendant in the action. The suit charges that during the class period, defendants issued false and misleading statements, press releases, and SEC filings concerning the Company's financial condition, as well as its ability to generate sufficient cash revenue from new revenue sources considering the failing market for broadband access. Prior to the disclosure of the Company's true financial condition, the individual defendants and other insiders sold holdings of the Company's common stock for proceeds of more than $149 million. In addition, during the class period defendants caused the Company to sell notes on favorable terms to itself, which generated $1 billion in investor capital. On October 4, 2001, the Company announced that cash revenues in the third quarter would be approximately $1.2 billion, $400 million less than the $1.6 billion expected by analysts and forecast several times earlier in the year by defendants. In addition, the Company and the defendants stated that they expected recurring adjusted EBITDA to be "significantly less than $1000 million" compared to forecasts of $400 million made several times earlier in the year. Following this series of announcements, the Company's share price plummeted nearly 50% to $1.07 per share on extremely heavy trading volume. Subsequently, with its stock trading at well under a dollar per share of common stock, the Company filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy protection on January 28, 2002 after becoming unable to service its debt. For more information, contact Jackie Addison, Sue Null or Shelly Nicholson by Mail: P.O. Box 25438, Little Rock, AR 72221-5438 by Phone: 888-551-9944 or by E-mail: info@classlawyer.com HA-LO INDUSTRIES: Holzer Holzer Initiates Securities Suit in N.D. IL -------------------------------------------------------------------- Holzer & Holzer lodged a securities class action on behalf of purchasers of the securities of HA-LO Industries Inc., (NYSE:HMK) between February 18, 1999 and November 23, 2001 inclusive, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, against defendants: (1) Lou Weisbach, (2) John R. Kelley Jr., (3) Marc S. Simon and (4) Gregory J. Kilrea. The Company has filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code and is not a defendant in this lawsuit. The suit alleges that defendants violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of materially false statements to the market between February 18, 1999 and November 23, 2001, concerning its financial performance for the Company's fiscal years 1998, 1999 and 2000 and the first quarter of 2001. Throughout the class period, as alleged in the Complaint, defendants issued press releases positively portraying the Company's quarterly and year-end financial performance, and filed reports confirming such performance with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. The suit further alleges that these statements were materially false and misleading because the Company had, throughout the class period, improperly recognized revenues, thereby inflating its reported sales and earnings. On November 23, 2001, the Company issued a press release announcing the restatement of its previously filed financial statements for the period 1998 to 2000, and that the Company "may also restate its first quarter 2001 Form 10-Q." According to the press release, the restatement will have the effect of decreasing its reported class period pretax income by a total of $15 million, including $1.2 million if the restatement includes the first quarter of 2001. For more information, contact Michael I. Fistel, Jr. by Phone: 404-847-0085, if in Atlanta or (888) 508-6832, if outside Atlanta or by E-mail: michaelfisteljr@msn.com HOMESTORE.COM: Hoffman Edelson Commences Securities Suit in C.D. CA ------------------------------------------------------------------- Hoffman & Edelson LLC initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of purchasers of Homestore.com, Inc. (Nasdaq: HOMS) common stock during the period between July 20, 2000 and December 21, 2001. The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. On July 19, 2000 (after the close of the market), the Company issued a release of its positive 2Q 00 results, causing its stock price to soar by more than $7 (or 25%) the following trading day. The suit alleges that as part of their effort to boost the price of Company stock, defendants misrepresented the Company's true prospects in an effort to conceal its improper acts until they were able to sell at least $16 million of their own stock. In order to overstate revenues and assets in 2nd to 4th Quarter 2000 and 1st to 3rd quarter 2001, the Company violated generally accepted accounting principles and SEC rules by engaging in improper "roundtrip" transactions. These transactions had the effect of dramatically overstating revenues and assets. This came to an end (though unbeknownst to the public) in the Company's 3rd Quarter 2001 as its main roundtrip partner stopped doing these transactions with it. Following the release of the Company's 3rd Quarter 2001 results, the Company also slashed its revenue projections for 2002 from $563 million to $375-$425 million as a result of a material decline in its business with its main "roundtrip" partner. On this news the Company's shares plummeted by more than 50% the following trading day. Then, on December 21, 2001 (after the close of the market), the Company partially admitted that its past accounting for its prior results was inaccurate. On this news the Company's shares were halted and have not traded since. For more information, contact Jerold B. Hoffman by Mail: 45 W. Court Street, Doylestown, PA 18901 by Phone: 877-537-6532 (toll free) by Fax: 215-230-8735 or by E-mail: jhoffman@hofedlaw.com. HOOVERS INC.: Mounting Vigorous Defense V. Securities Suit in S.D. NY --------------------------------------------------------------------- Hoovers, Inc. denies the allegations in a securities class action pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, against the Company, certain of its current and former officers and directors, and one of the investment banks that was an underwriter of the Company's July 1999 initial public offering. The suit purports to be on behalf of purchasers of the Company's stock during the period from July 20, 1999 through December 6, 2000. The suit alleges that the underwriter defendants agreed to allocate stock in the Company's initial public offering to certain investors in exchange for excessive and undisclosed commissions and agreements by those investors to make additional purchases of stock in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices. The suit further alleges that the Prospectus for the Company's initial public offering was false and misleading in violation of the securities laws because it did not disclose these arrangements. The Company and its current and former officers and directors intend to vigorously defend the actions. The action is being coordinated with over 300 other nearly identical actions filed against other companies. No date has been set for any response to the complaints. IMCLONE SYSTEMS: Hoffman Edelson Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY --------------------------------------------------------------------- Hoffman & Edelson LLC filed a securities class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of ImClone Systems, Inc. (Nasdaq:IMCL) between June 28, 2001 and December 28, 2001, inclusive, in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York. The suit names as defendants the Company and: (1) Samuel D. Waksal, (2) Harlan W. Waksal, (3) Robert F. Goldhammer, (4) John Mendelsohn, (5) William R. Miller, (6) Paul B. Kopperl, (7) David M. Kies and (8) Richard Barth The suit alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by issuing materially false and misleading statements to the market. Throughout the class period, defendants issued multiple press releases highlighting the successful progress of its "Fast-Track" application to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for approval of IMC-C225, its blockbuster drug used for the treatment of colorectal cancer and also known as Erbitux, and the positive impact that the drug's approval would have on the Company's revenues. As alleged in the suit, these statements were materially false and misleading because, among other things: (i) defendants failed to comply with the FDA's requirements for filing the "Fast Track" application for approval of Erbitux; and (ii) as such, defendants knew, or should have known, that their deficient application would be rejected and would thus negatively impact the Company's future earnings. The suit further alleges that defendants filed their application, despite lacking the skill and expertise to make a proper filing, in order to convince Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. to purchase at least $1 billion in Company stock, of which approximately $150 million was tendered by Company insiders, including the individual defendants, and to persuade Bristol-Myers to make an additional $1 billion cash investment in the Company. On December 28, 2001, the Company disclosed that the FDA had refused to accept its deficient and defective application for approval of Erbitux, confirming almost two weeks of speculation that had already driven down the price of Company stock by 21%, from a class period high of $73.83 per share on December 5, 2001 to $55.25 per share at the close of regular trading on December 28, 2001. Immediately following this shocking revelation, however, Company shares dropped precipitously, falling $5.25 per share in after hours trading, or 9.5%, to close that session at $50 per share. The price of its stock has since continued to fall sharply. For further details, contact Jerold B. Hoffman by Mail: 45 W. Court Street, Doylestown, PA 18901 by Phone: 877-537-6532 by Fax: 215-230-8735 or by E-mail: jhoffman@hofedlaw.com. IMMERSION CORPORATION: Sued For Securities Violations in S.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Plaintiffs' Executive Committee in In re: Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation, 21 MC 92 (SAS) initiated a securities class action on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Immersion Corp. (NASDAQ: IMMR) between November 12, 1999 and December 6, 2000, inclusive, in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, against the Company and: (1) Louis Rosenberg, CEO, President and Chairman, (2) Victor Viegas, CFO, (3) Bruce Schena, Chief Technology Officer, and Director and (4) FleetBoston Robertson Stephens Inc. and (5) Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc. The suit 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. In November 1999, the Company commenced an initial public offering of 4,250,000 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 SEC. The suit further alleges that the prospectus was materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that: (i) the underwriter defendants 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 shares issued in connection with the IPO; and (ii) the underwriter defendants had entered into agreements with customers whereby they 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 Steven G. Schulman or Samuel H. Rudman by Mail: One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl. New York, NY, 10119-0165 by Phone: 800-320-5081 by E-mail: immersioncase@milbergNY.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.milberg.com IRVINE SENSORS: Stull Stull Initiates Securities Fraud Suit in C.D. CA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Stull Stull and Brody commenced a securities class action in in United States District Court for the Central District of California, Southern Division on behalf of purchasers of Irvine Sensors Corporation (NASDAQ:IRSN), common stock between January 6, 2000 and September 15, 2001, inclusive. The suit alleges that the Company and certain of its officers and directors violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Company purports to be a developer of proprietary technologies to produce compact packages of solid state micro-circuitry. Silicon Film Technologies, Inc. (SFI) was a majority owned subsidiary of the Company whose primary purpose was to design and market the Electronic Film System or "EFS-1." EFS-1 purportedly interfaced with a conventional camera to enable the camera to take digital pictures. During the class period, defendants repeatedly promised the investing community that the EFS-1 was near completion and would be ready for release shortly. These promises never materialized because defendants, knew but did not disclose to the public, among other things, that EFS-1 suffered from serious and insurmountable technical design flaws. On September 15, 2001, after nearly two years of touting the EFS-1 technology, the Company announced that SFI had suspended operations and was considering bankruptcy, sounding the death-knell of the EFS-1 project. Due to defendants' deceptive and illegal conduct, plaintiff and the other class members purchased Company securities at inflated prices. Had plaintiff and the other class members been aware of the truthful condition of the Company and the adverse impact that defendants' statements and omissions were having on the Company, they would not have purchased their shares, or at least not at artificially inflated prices. For more information, contact Marc L. Godino by Phone: 888-388-4605 or by E-mail: at info@secfraud.com or on the firm's Web site: http://www.secfraud.com. JP MORGAN: Shareholders Sue For Securities Violations in S.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------------------------- JP Morgan Chase and Co, Inc. faces a securities class action filed by law firm Glancy and Binkow LLP in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of the Company's shareholders for allegedly violating federal securities laws. The suit alleges that the Company made "material omissions" and disseminated "materially false and misleading statements" between Nov 28, 2001 and Jan 28, 2002, which caused its stock price to become artificially inflated. The suit noted a public statement issued by JP Morgan in which did not fully disclose its risk and loss exposure related to its transactions and dealings with Enron Corporation. At the time, JP Morgan listed its total Enron exposure at approximately $900 million. The company later announced that its total Enron related exposure was actually about $2.6 billion, or almost three times the earlier figure, the law firm said. Shortly thereafter, JP Morgan wrote down $1.13 billion in non-performing assets, specifically related to losses generated by its dealings with Enron, according to an Ananova report. KEYNOTE SYSTEMS: Proceedings Stayed in Securities Suit in NY ------------------------------------------------------------ Keynote System, Inc. labels "without merit" several securities class action pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against the Company, certain of its officers and the underwriters of its initial public offering. The suit came from identical "laddering" lawsuits, which were filed on behalf of those who purchased the Company's publicly traded securities between September 24, 1999 and August 19, 2001. The suits alleged that the underwriters of the Company's initial public offering allocated shares in exchange for agreements by investors to buy additional shares in the aftermarket at a higher price or to buy shares in other companies with higher than normal commissions. The suits also allege that the prospectus for the Company's initial public offering was false and misleading in violation of federal securities laws because it did not disclose these alleged arrangements. The complaints have been consolidated into a single action with cases brought against over three hundred other issuers and their underwriters that make similar allegations regarding the initial public offerings of those issuers. The proceedings against the issuers, including the Company, have been stayed pending an outcome in the proceedings against the underwriters. The Company intends to defend the actions vigorously. However, these claims, even if not meritorious, could be expensive and divert management's attention from operating the Company. NATIONAL GOLF: Cauley Geller Initiates Securities Suit in C.D. CA ----------------------------------------------------------------- Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP commenced a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of purchasers of National Golf Properties, Inc. (NYSE: TEE) common stock during the period between April 1, 1999 and November 14, 2001, inclusive (including all purchases in or pursuant to the Company's May 17, 2001 secondary offering). The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Specifically, the suit alleges that David G. Price misappropriated funds from a publicly traded company and funneled them to himself via a scheme of complicated financial dealings involving National Golf and a variety of Price-controlled entities. Price-controlled entities conduct substantial business with National Golf, to the detriment of National Golf's shareholders. Mr. Price's plan culminated in a May 2001 secondary offering that generated over $31 million from plaintiff and other Class members which went to a Price-controlled entity, Oaks Christian High School. Defendants allegedly violated the Securities Act of 1933 by issuing a false and misleading Registration Statement and Prospectus, which became effective May 17, 2001, and included materially false and misleading financial statements, and other false and misleading statements, pursuant to which 1.175 million shares of the Company were sold to plaintiff and other members of the class. Defendants allegedly violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making a series of materially false and misleading statements concerning the business and financial operations of the Company with the intent and having the effect of substantially inflating the trading price of its common stock. For more information, contact Jackie Addison, Sue Null or Shelly Nicholson by Mail: P.O. Box 25438, Little Rock, AR 72221-5438 by Phone: 888-551-9944 or by E-mail: info@classlawyer.com OPLINK COMMUNICATIONS: Sued For Securities Act Violations in S.D. NY -------------------------------------------------------------------- Oplink Communications, Inc. faces a securities class action pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against the Company, certain of its officers and directors, and certain of its IPO underwriters, alleging violations of federal securities laws. The suit alleges that the Company's IPO registration statement and prospectus contained untrue statements of material fact or omitted material facts regarding the compensation to be received by, and the stock allocation practices of, the IPO underwriters. The Company made note that similar complaints have been filed in the same court against numerous public companies that conducted IPOs of their common stock since the mid-1990s. The Company also stated that the suit will likely divert the efforts and attention of management and, if determined adversely to the Company, could have a material impact on its business. PNC FINANCIAL: Goodkind Labaton Commences Securities Suit in W.D. PA -------------------------------------------------------------------- Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP initiated a securities class action pursuant to Section 21D(a)(3)(A)(i) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, on behalf of all persons and entities who acquired the common stock of The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. (NYSE:PNC) during the period of July 19, 2001 to January 29, 2002, inclusive. The suit is pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania against the Company, and officers Robert L. Haunschild and James E. Rohr. The suit charges defendants with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b(5) promulgated thereunder by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The suit alleges that during the period of July 19, 2001 to January 29, 2002 inclusive, defendants issued a series of material misrepresentations to the market in press releases and SEC filings thereby artificially inflating the price of Company securities. Specifically, the complaint charges that defendants issued quarterly press releases and filed reports with the SEC, which contained false and misleads results. On January 29, 2002, PNC announced that it would be restating certain 2001 quarterly results, which would reduce its net income by $155 million for the year ended December 31, 2001. For further details, contact Emily Komlossy or Henry Young by Mail: 100 Park Avenue, 12th Floor, New York NY 10017-5563 by Phone: 212-907-0700 by E-mail: ekomlossy@glrslaw.com or hyoung@glrslaw.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.glrslaw.com. REGENERATION TECHNOLOGIES: Abbey Gardy Lodges Securities Suit in FL ------------------------------------------------------------------- Abbey Gardy LLP initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida, Gainesville Division, on behalf of all person who acquired common stock of Regeneration Technologies, Inc (RTI) (Nasdaq:RTIX) during the period between July 25, 2001 and January 31, 2002, inclusive. The suit alleges that the Company and certain of its officers violated the federal securities laws by issuing false and misleading statements concerning its business and financial condition. Specifically, the suit alleges that defendants made highly positive statements regarding the Company's financial results. The Company reported quarter after quarter of "record" financial results and strong revenue growth, which caused the price of Company securities to trade as high as $12.82 per share during the class period. These statements were allegedly false and misleading because the Company failed to take a charge against earnings to recognize worthless inventory. On February 2, 2002, the Company shocked the market by announcing that it was delaying its fourth quarter and year-end results for fiscal year 2001 while "management completes its evaluation of certain inventory issues." The Company also announced that its Chief Financial Officer, Richard Allen, and Vice President of Marketing and Sales, James Abraham, are leaving the Company effective immediately. The Company further announced that it is "evaluating whether these issues may affect RTI's previously reported financial results" and although "RTI's annual results have not been finalized, company officials expect to report a loss for both the quarter and the year." In response to the news the price of Company stock plunged more than 50% from $10.15 on January 31, 2002 to $5.19 on February 1, 2002. For more information, contact Nancy Kaboolian or Jennifer Haas by Phone: 800-889-3701 or by E-mail: JHaas@abbeygardy.com or nkaboolian@abbeygardy.com SYNSORB BIOTECH: Leo Desmond Initiates Securities Suit in S.D. New York ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Leo W. Desmond commenced a securities class action on behalf of shareholders who acquired Synsorb Biotech Inc. (NASDAQ:SYBB) securities between April 4, 2001 and December 10, 2001, inclusive, in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. The suit alleges that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10(b)(5) promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements to the market throughout the class period which statements had the effect of artificially inflating the market price of the Company's securities. For more information, contact Leo W. Desmond by Mail: 2161 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 204, West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 by Phone: 888-337-6663 by E-mail: Info@SecuritiesAttorney.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.SecuritiesAttorney.com. TALX CORPORATION: Leo Desmond Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Law Offices of Leo W. Desmond initiated a securities class action on behalf of shareholders who acquired TALX Corporation (Nasdaq:TALX) securities between July 18, 2001 and October 1, 2001, inclusive, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. It is alleged that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10(b)(5) promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements to the market throughout the class period which statements had the effect of artificially inflating the market price of the Company's securities. For further details, contact Leo W. Desmond by Mail: 2161 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., Suite 204, West Palm Beach, Florida 33409 by Phone: 888-337-6663 by E-mail: Info@SecuritiesAttorney.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.SecuritiesAttorney.com. TYCO INTERNATIONAL: Wechsler Harwood Commences Securities Suit in NY -------------------------------------------------------------------- Wechsler Harwood Halebian & Feffer LLP lodged a securities class action on behalf of all persons who purchased the common stock of Tyco International Ltd. (NYSE: TYC) between February 1, 2000 through February 1, 2002, inclusive, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The suit alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market during the class period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the Company's common stock. The complaint alleges that the Company's representations were rendered false and misleading by defendants' failure to disclose: (1) that the Company would achieve its earnings targets only through undisclosed acquisitions; (2) that the individual defendants sold in excess of $100,000,000 of their individual stock holdings to the company; and (3) that the Company's management procedures were to make large payments to insiders, including a $20,000,000 payment to one director and his charity for furthering the interests of the Company. The suit further alleges that external rule changes required the Company to cease its allegedly aggressive revenue recognition practices and recognize the revenues from its security contracts only as the monies thereunder were received. Throughout the class period, defendants were allegedly aware that the adverse financial effect of the rule change by the Securities and Exchange Commission would be approximately $1,000,000,000. However, defendants allegedly failed to disclose this adverse financial effect until partial disclosure was made in October 2001. As defendants belatedly announced portions of the foregoing material facts between October 2001 and January 2002, Company stock fell allegedly by more than 40 plus percent. For more information, contact David Leifer by Mail: 488 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10022 by Phone: 877-935-7400 or by E-mail: dleifer@whhf.com. TYCO INTERNATIONAL: Schatz Nobel Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY --------------------------------------------------------------------- Schatz and Nobel PC initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons who purchased the common stock of Tyco International, Ltd. (NYSE: TYC) between February 1, 2000 and February 1, 2002, inclusive. The suit alleges that the Company and two of its top corporate officers misled the investing public during the Class Period regarding Tyco's financial condition. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that defendants' failed to disclose that: (1) the Company would achieve its earnings targets only through undisclosed acquisitions; (2) the individual defendants sold in excess of $100,000,000 of their individual stock holdings to the company; and (3) the Company's management procedures were to make large payments to insiders, including a $20,000,000 payment to one director and his charity for furthering the interests of the Company. The suit further alleges that a rule change by the SEC required the Company to cease its allegedly aggressive revenue recognition practices and recognize the revenues from its security contracts only when the money due under the contracts was actually received. Throughout the class period, it is alleged that the defendants were aware that the adverse effect of this rule change would be approximately $1,000,000,000. Nevertheless, the defendants only partially disclosed this information in October, 2001, and thereafter belatedly announced portions of the adverse information through January, 2002, while the price per share of Company stock fell by more than 40 plus percent. For more information, contact Andrew M. Schatz, Patrick A. Klingman, Wayne T. Boultonm or Nancy A. Kulesa by Phone: (800) 797-5499 by E- mail: sn06106@aol.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.snlaw.net VAN WAGONER: Much Shelist Commences Securities Suit in E.D. Wisconsin --------------------------------------------------------------------- Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein, PC initiated a securities class action in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin on behalf of investors who, between April 28, 2000 and June 30, 2001, purchased shares of any of the following Van Wagoner funds: (1) Van Wagoner Emerging Growth Fund (Nasdaq:VWEGX), (2) Van Wagoner Technology Fund (Nasdaq:VWTKX), (3) Van Wagoner Mid-Cap Growth Fund (Nasdaq:VWMDX), (4) Van Wagoner Post Venture Fund (Nasdaq:VWPVX) and (5) Van Wagoner Micro-Cap Growth Fund (Nasdaq:VWMCX). The suit alleges that during the class period, defendants filed a registration statement and annual report with the Securities and Exchange Commission that purported to report the Funds' net asset value (NAV) and performance. These representations, however, were materially false and misleading because defendants had materially overvalued certain private companies held by the Funds, thereby inflating their NAV and causing the price of their shares to be artificially inflated throughout the Class Period. The suit further alleges that Ernst & Young, LLP failed to follow generally accepted accounting practices and generally accepted auditing standards by specifically approving the valuations of net assets utilized by Van Wagoner between the end of 1999 and the end of 2000. On June 30, 2001, defendants' gross overvaluation of the private placement investments was disclosed when Van Wagoner Funds, Inc. filed its Semi-Annual Report for the year 2001. The Semi-Annual Report revealed that defendants revalued nine such private placement investments that they originally valued at $28.6 million on December 31, 2000 to a total of $9.00 and marked down an additional 2 holdings by precisely 50% or 75%. Following the revaluations of the private placement investments, the Funds' per share prices all experienced a severe decline with particular Funds losing as much as 40% of their per share value. For further details, contact Carol V. Gilden, Michael J. Freed or Michael E. Moskovitz by Phone: (800) 470-6824 by E-mail: cgilden@muchlaw.com, mfreed@muchlaw.com or mmoskovitz@muchlaw.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.muchlaw.com. E-mail should refer to Van Wagoner Funds. WESTELL TECHNOLOGIES: Sued For Federal Securities Violations in N.D. OH ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Westell Westell Technologies, Inc. faces a consolidated securities class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The suit, which also names as defendants certain of the Company's officers and directors, alleges violations of federal securities laws. The defendants allegedly violated the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws by allegedly issuing material false and misleading statements and/or allegedly omitting material facts necessary to make the statements made not misleading thereby inflating the price of the Company's stock in the second quarter of fiscal 2001. The suit further alleges that the defendants reassured analysts that the Company's sales were on track to meet forecasts for the second quarter of fiscal 2001, when they knew that the Company was experiencing a substantial shortfall in second quarter modem sales due to decreased orders from a major customer. Starting April 2001, four derivative actions were also commenced in the same Court. The Court later consolidated the suits, which made the same allegations as the consolidated suit mentioned above. In January 2002, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated derivative action. There has been no ruling yet on the motion to dismiss. The case is set for trial on November 3, 2003. In the opinion of the Company, although the outcome of any legal proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty, the liability of the Company in connection with its legal proceedings could have a material effect on its financial position. WILLIAMS COMPANIES: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in N.D. OK -------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma on behalf of investors who purchased Williams Companies, Inc. (NYSE: WMB) and Williams Communications Group, Inc. (NYSE: WCG) securities between July 24, 2000 and January 29, 2002, inclusive. The suit charges defendants with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint alleges that defendants issued materially false and misleading statements and failed to disclose material information to their shareholders regarding the spin-off of WCG from WMB, the accounting and financial impact of the contingent liabilities retained by WMB, and the nature of the assets and liabilities of WCG, causing the common stock of both companies to trade at artificially inflated prices. For further information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: Marc S. Henzel, 273 Montgomery Ave, Suite 202 Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004-2808 by Phone: (888) 643-6735 or (610) 660-8000 by Fax: (610) 660-8080 by E- mail: Mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's Web site: 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 2002. 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 * * *