---

            C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Monday, June 14, 2004, Vol. 6, No. 116

                         Headlines

AETNA CORPORATION: Physicians' Foundation Receives $10M Share
ANTHROPOLOGIE INC.: Employees Launch Overtime Wage Lawsuit in CA
APPLE VALLEY: Recalls Raw Almonds For Salmonella Contamination
AUSTRALIAN FINANCE: Faces Consumer Fraud Suit in Australia Court
BARRICK GOLD: TX Stock Suit To Proceed Only On Specific Claims

BROWN SHOE: Plaintiffs Seek New Trial in CO Redfield Site Suit
CANADIAN SUPERIOR: Shareholders Launch Stock Fraud Suits in NY
CANNACORD CAPITAL: Named as Defendant in Jitec Securities Suits
CHATTEM INC.: Stock Suit Settlement Hearing Set August 26, 2004
CHOLESTECH CORPORATION: IL Consumers Lodge Unsolicited Fax Suit

CROSSROADS SYSTEMS: Appeals Court Refuses To Review Suit Ruling
CYBERSURF CORPORATION: Reaches Settlement For 2 Consumer Suits
DESCARTES SYSTEMS: Shareholders Launch Fraud Lawsuit in S.D. NY
EASYHOME LTD.: Settlement Negotiations For Consumer Suit Begins
EASYHOME LTD.: Faces Consumer Fraud Suit Pending in Canada Court

FAR EAST: Recalls 500 Kiddie Cruisers For Injury, Accident Risk
FEDERATED DEPARTMENT: Plaintiffs File Amended Stock Suit in NY
FLORIDA: DMV Employees, Head Face Lawsuit Over Drivers' Records
FORD MOTOR: VT A.G. Sorrell Reaches Leasing Program Pact
FORESTRY FIRMS: Consumers Lodge Price-Fixing Lawsuit in CT Court

GERBER SCIENTIFIC: SEC Commences Civil Fraud Lawsuit in S.D. NY
HOUSEHOLD FINANCE: Discovery Begins in IL Securities Fraud Suit
HOUSEHOLD FINANCE: Discovery Begins in ERISA Lawsuit in N.D. IL
HOUSEHOLD FINANCE: Asks IL Court To Dismiss Beneficial Lawsuit
i2 TECHNOLOGIES: SEC Files, Settles Cease-And-Desist Proceedings

IVES HEALTH: SEC Settles Civil Injunctive Suit V. Ex-President
LEATHER EXPERTS: Finishes Settlement Payments For Overtime Suit
LOEHMANN'S HOLDINGS: Shareholders File DE Fiduciary Duty Suits
LORSIN INC.: SEC Declares Final Decision To Impose Sanctions
MARTHA STEWART: Seeks New Trial Due to Witness Perjury

MEDICAL SAVINGS: FL Hospitals Claim Antitrust Lacks Evidence
MICROSOFT CORPORATION: South Korean Watchdog Raids Local Office
MICROSOFT CORPORATION: Reaches $64M Pact For TN Antitrust Suit
MITSUBISHI MOTORS: Ex-Officer Over Auto Defects Cover-up Scandal
NORSE SKOG: Faces Magazine Paper Market Antitrust Lawsuit in US

NORTEL NETWORKS: Shareholders Launch 27 Stock Lawsuits in NY, TN
PORTAL SOFTWARE: Plaintiffs Lodge Consolidated Stock Suit in CA
OXYCONTIN LITIGATION: OH High Court Mulls Lawsuit Certification
RR DONNELLEY: High Court Reverses Appellate Ruling on Bias Suit
SEACHANGE INTERNATIONAL: Plaintiffs Appeal MA Lawsuit Dismissal

SEARS CANADA: Card Holders Launch Lawsuit Over Late Payment Fees
SKILLSOFT PUBLIC: Reaches Settlement For Securities Fraud Suit
SMC MARKETING: Recalls 2.2 Oscillating Fans Due To Fire Hazard
TEXAS LOTTERY: Residents Launch Consumer Fraud Suit Over Games
THETA CORPORATION: PA Residents Sue, Blame Operations for Floods

ULTIMATE ELECTRONICS: Asks CO Court To Dismiss Securities Suit
UNION GAS: Canadian Customers File Suit Over Late Payment Fees
UTI WORLDWIDE: Named in Gulf War Veterans Injury Lawsuit in TX
WISDOM INDUSTRIES: Starts Inspection Program For Gravitron Ride

                    New Security Fraud Cases


ABATIX CORPORATION: Patton Haltom Lodges Stock Suit in E.D. TX
BISYS GROUP: Squitieri & Fearon Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY
BISYS GROUP: Scott + Scott Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
BUSINESS OBJECTS: Schatz & Nobel Launches Securities Suit in CA
GENTA INC.: Pomerantz Haudek Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in NJ

KRISPY KREME: Weiss & Yourman Lodges Securities Suit in M.D. NC
LEHMAN ABS: Barrack Rodos Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY
OMNIVISION TECHNOLOGIES: Lerach Coughlin Lodges Stock Suit in CA
OMNIVISION TECHNOLOGIES: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Suit in CA
POZEN INC.: Charles J. Piven Launches Securities Suit in M.D. NC

POZEN INC.: Squitieri & Fearon Files Securities Suit in M.D. NC
POZEN INC.: Lasky & Rifkind Commences Securities Suit in M.D. NC


                            *********


AETNA CORPORATION: Physicians' Foundation Receives $10M Share
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Physicians' Foundation for Health Systems Excellence, Inc.,
received an accelerated $10 million contribution from Aetna,
Foundation Board Chairman Tim Norbeck announced in a statement.

The Foundation was created as a result of a May 2003 settlement
of a class action lawsuit between 19 state and local medical
societies and Aetna. The Foundation's mission is to provide
physicians with the tools to improve practice management,
facilitate physician education and promote patient safety.

The $10 million installment, which represents half of the total
$20 million contribution to the Foundation to be made by Aetna,
was received ahead of schedule and stimulated reaction from the
Foundation leadership. "We commend Aetna, not only for
recognizing the importance of improving relationships between
the insurer and the physician community, but also for making it
possible for the Foundation to begin its work earlier than we
had expected," said Norbeck.

Aetna transferred the funds early "to expedite the Foundation's
mission to improve health care quality in this country," said
John W. Rowe, M.D., chairman and CEO of Aetna. The payment
follows an earlier $200,000 contribution, also ahead of
schedule, that allowed the societies to obtain legal status for
the foundation and begin preliminary administrative functions.


ANTHROPOLOGIE INC.: Employees Launch Overtime Wage Lawsuit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Anthropologie, Inc. faces a class action filed by an employee in
the Superior Court of California for Orange County, seeking
unspecified monetary damages and equitable relief.  The
complaint alleges that, under California law, the plaintiff and
certain other employees were misclassified as employees exempt
from overtime.  The suit additionally seeks recovery of unpaid
wages, penalties and damages.

The Company believes the claim is frivolous and without merit,
it stated in a disclosure to the Securities and Exchange
Commission.


APPLE VALLEY: Recalls Raw Almonds For Salmonella Contamination
--------------------------------------------------------------
Apple Valley Natural Foods is conducting a voluntary recall on
its distribution of raw whole almonds packaged as Almonds-Whole
Raw Natural due to the possibility of contamination with
Salmonella Enteritidis. The recalled almonds are packed in one
pound packages under the Apple Valley Vegetarian Foods Emporium
label, with product codes 3214 thru 4154.

Salmonella is an organism that can cause serious and sometimes
fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly people, and
others with weakened immune systems. Healthy persons infected
with Salmonella often experience fever, diarrhea (which may be
bloody), nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain. In rare
circumstances, infection with Salmonella can result in the
organism getting into the bloodstream and producing more severe
illnesses such as arterial infections (i.e, infected aneurysms),
endocarditis and arthritis.

Apple Valley Natural Foods distributes this product in Michigan
and Illinois.

This recall is in follow-up to a voluntary recall announced in
mid-May by Paramount Farms of California of whole and diced raw
almonds based on over 20 possible cases of illnesses associated
with the almonds. The cases were reported in California,
Arizona, Oregon, Washington, Utah, New Mexico, Arkansas,
Tennessee, Massachusetts and Michigan. We are working with FDA
to assure that all potentially contaminated almonds are removed
from the marketplace and that consumers are notified of the
recall.

The raw almonds should not be consumed but rather returned to
the store of purchase for a full refund. For further information
call Apple Valley Market between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 9:00
p.m. at (269) 471-3131


AUSTRALIAN FINANCE: Faces Consumer Fraud Suit in Australia Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
Australian Finance Directed Limited (AFD), a Hanover Group
subsidiary, faces a writ filed by the Law firm of Slater and
Gordon in the Supreme Court of Victoria, Asian Intelligence Wire
reports.

The Company supplied loans for students of Melbourne property
investment spruiker Henry Kaye's National Investment Institute
(NII).  Mr. Kaye's NII group, which has gone into liquidation,
charged participants thousands of dollars to take part in real
estate investment courses and claimed to have Australian
Securities Investment Commission (ASIC) approval.

Slater and Gordon have initiated the class action against AFD on
behalf of lead plaintiff Daniel Hall, a dissatisfied former
student of one of Mr Kaye's property investment courses. Slater
and Gordon partner Rob Lees said 100 people had already joined
the action and thousands more were expected to sign up. He said
the action had been brought as AFD was pursuing students of Mr
Kaye's courses for fees they had borrowed for the courses,
despite the students seeking refunds.  The plaintiffs allege
that as a linked credit provider, AFD is liable for
misrepresentations that NII made to students.

"Each of the victims was told that the course that NII was
conducting was approved by ASIC when in fact it wasn't," Mr.
Lees told the Asia Intelligence Wire.  "Secondly they were told
they could get their money back at any time if they were
dissatisfied with the course; that was false as well."

He added the amount AFD was sued for could reach up to $60
million.

Real estate consumer advocate Neil Jenman, an outspoken critic
of Henry Kaye who is supporting the class action, said AFD could
be considered a co-conspirator with NII in a corporate crime.
"They gave their finance documents to crooked people, knowing
full well that they were crooked people." Mr. Jenman told Asia
Intelligence Wire. Confident that the class action against AFD
could return money to former students, Mr. Jenman confided that
it was doubtful that Henry Kaye would ever be brought to
justice.


BARRICK GOLD: TX Stock Suit To Proceed Only On Specific Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action against Barrick Gold Corporation and Bre-X
Minerals Ltd. will proceed only with respect to specific claims
of the plaintiffs in the suit, not on behalf of a class in the
United States District Court for the Eastern Distri9ct of Texas,
Texarkana Division.  The suit also names as defendants certain
of Bre-X's directors and officers or former directors.

The class action alleges, among other things, that statements
made by the Company in connection with its efforts to secure the
right to develop and operate the Busang gold deposit in East
Kalimantan, Indonesia were materially false and misleading and
omitted to state material facts relating to the preliminary due
diligence investigation undertaken by us in late 1996.

On July 13, 1999, the Court dismissed the claims against the
Company and several other defendants on the grounds that the
plaintiffs had failed to state a claim under United States
securities laws.  On August 19, 1999, the plaintiffs filed an
amended complaint restating their claims against the Company and
certain other defendants and on June 14, 2000 filed a further
amended complaint, the Fourth Amended Complaint.  On March 31,
2001, the Court granted in part and denied in part the Company's
Motion to Dismiss the Fourth Amended Complaint.  As a result,
the Company remains a defendant in the case.

Discovery in the case has been stayed by the Court pending the
Court's decision on whether or not to certify the case as a
class action.  On March 31, 2003, the Court denied all of the
Plaintiffs' motions to certify the case as a class action.
Plaintiffs have not filed an interlocutory appeal of the Court's
decision denying class certification to the Fifth Circuit Court
of Appeals.  On June 2, 2003, the Plaintiffs submitted a
proposed Trial and Case Management Plan, suggesting that the
Plan would cure the defects in the Plaintiffs' motions to
certify the class.  The Court has taken no action with respect
to the proposed Trial and Case Management Plan.


BROWN SHOE: Plaintiffs Seek New Trial in CO Redfield Site Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs asked the Colorado District Court for the City and
County of Denver to grant a new trial for the class action filed
against Brown Shoe Co., Inc., related to its owned site in
Colorado.

The Company is remediating, under the oversight of Colorado
authorities, the groundwater and indoor air at the facility,
also known as the Redfield site and residential neighborhoods
adjacent to and near the property that have been affected by
solvents previously used at the facility.

Plaintiffs alleged claims for:

     (1) trespass,

     (2) nuisance,

     (3) strict liability,

     (4) unjust enrichment,

     (5) negligence and

     (6) exemplary damages arising from the alleged release of
         solvents contaminating the groundwater and indoor air
         in the areas adjacent to and near the site.

In December 2003, the jury hearing the claims returned a verdict
finding the Company's subsidiary negligent and awarded the class
plaintiffs $1.0 million in damages.

The court has not yet ruled on the request for a new trial.
Several other post-trial motions are still pending before the
trial court and the ultimate outcome and cost to the Company may
vary.


CANADIAN SUPERIOR: Shareholders Launch Stock Fraud Suits in NY
--------------------------------------------------------------
Canadian Superior Energy, Inc. and certain of its directors and
officers face several securities class actions filed in the
United States District Court, Southern District of New York on
behalf of purchasers of the Company's securities during varied
class periods between October 22,2003 and March 11,2004.

The complainants allege violations by the named defendants of
Section 10(b) and Rule 10(b)-5, and Section 20(a) of the United
States Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.  Specifically the
complainants allege that the named defendants made materially
false and misleading statements to the public with regard to the
cost and results of the Company's drilling operations offshore
Nova Scotia causing investors to suffer damages.

The Company has not been served with any statements of claim in
this regard and views these U.S. actions and allegations by U.S.
driven plaintiff lawyers to be groundless, frivolous and a
misuse of the United States legal system, the Company said in a
disclosure to the Canadian Securities and Exchange Commission.
It is the Company's opinion that these actions amount to
jockeying by various United States legal counsels to determine
who, if any, will represent a plaintiff, if one exists, against
the Company.


CANNACORD CAPITAL: Named as Defendant in Jitec Securities Suits
---------------------------------------------------------------
Cannacord Capital, Inc. has been named as a defendant in two
class actions filed in the Superior Court of Quebec relating to
Jitec Inc. (now Avantage Link Inc.)

The suits are class action proceedings in which the plaintiffs,
who were shareholders of Jitec, claim that the principal
defendant, Benoit Laliberte, the president and chief executive
officer of Jitec, maintained the volume and share price of Jitec
at an artificially high level by issuing false press releases,
not filing trading reports and using a nominee who traded Jitec
shares through the Company, CIBC World Markets Inc. and Leduc
and Associates Securities (Canada) Ltd.  Each of these
investment dealers has been named as a defendant in the actions.

In addition, the actions allege that the Company was negligent
in the performance of certain due diligence conducted in
connection with the reverse take-over by Jitec of Altavista
Mines Inc. and the related $9 million private placement for
which Canaccord acted as underwriter.  This private placement
was completed on July 13, 2000.

One of the Jitec actions has been certified as a class action.
A petition for certification has been filed in the second
action but certification has not yet been granted.  The extent
of the classes and the quantification of damages are yet to be
determined.


CHATTEM INC.: Stock Suit Settlement Hearing Set August 26, 2004
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Western District of
Washington will hold a settlement hearing for the proposed
settlement for the class action filed against Chattem, Inc. on
behalf of all persons who have suffered a hemorrhagic stroke, an
ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction (heart attack), seizure,
transient ischemic attack or hypertensive crisis that was caused
by the ingestion of a Dexatrimr Product on or before December
21, 1998.

The Court will hold a Fairness Hearing at 10:00 a.m. on August
26, 2004, at the United States District Court for the Western
District of Washington at Seattle.

For more details, contact Seeger Weiss LLP by Mail: One William
Street, New York, NY 10004 by Phone: 1(877) 539-4125 or
212/584-0700 OR The Chattem Settlement Claims Administrator by
Mail: P.O. Box 1776, Richmond, VA 23218-1776 by Phone:
1-866-866-1729 or visit their Web Site:
www.chattemsettlement.com


CHOLESTECH CORPORATION: IL Consumers Lodge Unsolicited Fax Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Cholestech Corporation faces a class action filed in the Circuit
Court of Cook County, Illinois, styled "captioned Northshore
Dermatology Center, S.C. v. Cholestech Corporation, and Does 1-
10, Case No.04CH05342."

The complaint alleges that the Company violated the federal
Telephone Consumer Protection Act and various Illinois state
laws by sending unsolicited advertisements via facsimile
transmission to residents of Illinois.  The complaint seeks
class certification and statutory damages of $500 to $1,500 on
behalf of a class that would include all residents of Illinois
who received an unsolicited facsimile advertisement from us.


CROSSROADS SYSTEMS: Appeals Court Refuses To Review Suit Ruling
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals denied
plaintiffs' request for a rehearing of its decision affirming in
part the dismissal of the consolidated securities class action
filed against Crossroads Systems, Inc. and several of its
officers and directors.

The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Texas on behalf of purchasers of the
Company's common stock during various periods ranging from
January 25, 2000 through August 24, 2000.  On February 24, 2003,
the Court entered a final judgment in the defendant's favor.

Plaintiff's appealed the decision.  On April 14, 2004, the Fifth
Circuit issued an opinion, which affirmed in part and vacated in
part the district court's ruling.  The remaining claims were
remanded to the district court.


CYBERSURF CORPORATION: Reaches Settlement For 2 Consumer Suits
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cybersurf Corporation reached a settlement for two of three
class actions filed against it and Canada Post Corporation in
Ontario, B.C., and Quebec.  The suit alleges that the Company
misled consumers relative to certain advertisements offering
"Free Internet for Life".

A settlement agreement involving a consumer refund offer has
been entered into and implemented with Ontario and B.C. counsel
resolving two of the three actions.  The Ontario courts approved
the certification of a national class excluding British Columbia
but including Quebec.  Based on the Ontario ruling, the
defendants in the Quebec class action will be arguing this
precludes the continuation of the Quebec lawsuit.


DESCARTES SYSTEMS: Shareholders Launch Fraud Lawsuit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Descartes Systems Group, Inc. faces a securities class
action filed in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York, styled "Brij Walia v. The
Descartes Systems Group Inc., et al."

The suit was filed on behalf of purchasers of our common stock
between June 4, 2003 and May 6, 2004.  The complaint also names
as defendants two of our former officers.  The complaint
alleges, among other things, that the defendants made
misstatements to the investing public between June 4, 2003 and
May 6, 2004 regarding the Company financial condition.

It is possible that one or more additional complaints making
substantially similar allegations may follow, the Company said
in a disclosure to the Canadian Securities and Exchange
Commission.


EASYHOME LTD.: Settlement Negotiations For Consumer Suit Begins
---------------------------------------------------------------
easyhome Ltd. entered settlement negotiations for the class
action filed against it in the Province of Quebec (Montreal
Superior Court) in November 1997.

The plaintiffs were authorized by the Court in July 1999 to
proceed with a class action against the Company on behalf of all
persons who contracted with the Company in the Province of
Quebec for the lease or purchase of one or more items destined
for personal use in their home.

The plaintiffs allege that the Company's rental contracts do not
properly comply with the requirements of the Consumer Protection
Act (Quebec).  They are seeking the cancellation of their
contracts, or the reduction of their obligations and the
reimbursement of all or a portion of the amounts paid by the
members of the class to the Company, as well as exemplary
damages in the amount of $200 per contract.

If this class action proceeds to trial, the Company believes it
has substantive defenses to the plaintiffs' allegations.  The
Company has taken a reserve on its books in an amount it
considers to be adequate to cover the amount of any currently
reasonably possible liability of the Company in relation to this
matter, the Company said in a disclosure to the Canadian
Securities and Exchange Commission.


EASYHOME LTD.: Faces Consumer Fraud Suit Pending in Canada Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
easyhome Ltd. and its wholly-owned subsidiary, RTO Asset
Management Inc., faces a class action filed by Lawrence William
Nantais, a customer of the Company in Canadian Court.

The Plaintiff seeks an order pursuant to the Class Proceedings
Act, 1992, S.O. 1992 c.6, as amended, certifying the action as a
class proceeding and appointing him as the representative of the
class.  The Plaintiff asserts that, to the extent a member of
the class acquires ownership of merchandise offered by easyhome,
the Company's rental agreement is an agreement or arrangement
for credit advanced and the aggregate of all charges and
expenses under the rental agreement amounts to interest charged
at rates in excess of those allowed by law and that the rental
agreements are void and unenforceable.  The Statement of Claim
states that the members of the class will seek to recover such
charges and expenses, as well as, damages, costs and interest.


FAR EAST: Recalls 500 Kiddie Cruisers For Injury, Accident Risk
---------------------------------------------------------------
Far East Brokers and Consultants, Inc. is cooperating with the
United States Consumer Product Safety Commission by voluntarily
recalling about 500 Kiddie Car Cruisers.

The Kiddie Car Cruiser can continue to run when the accelerator
is no longer depressed, which could result in the rider losing
control of the car.  The Company has received 10 reports of the
Kiddie Car Cruiser continuing to run when the accelerator was
not depressed.  No injuries have been reported.

The Kiddie Car Cruiser is a battery-operated ride-on toy car
that measures about 27 inches high by 30 inches wide and 44
inches long. "Turbo" and "Cruiser" are printed on labels on the
side of the ride-on toys.

Big Y Stores in Massachusetts and Connecticut sold these items
from May 6 to May 13, 2004 for about $100 with a Big Y Express
savings card and about $300 without a savings card.

For additional questions, contact the Company by Phone:
(877) 332-9006 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through
Friday. Known purchasers are being sent direct mail notification
of this recall.


FEDERATED DEPARTMENT: Plaintiffs File Amended Stock Suit in NY
--------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs file a second amended consolidated securities class
action against Federated Department Stores, Inc. and certain
members of its senior management were named defendants in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York.

The suit was filed on behalf of persons who purchased shares of
the Company between February 23, 2000 and July 20, 2000, and is
captioned "In Re Federated Department Stores, Inc. Securities
Litigation, Case No. 00-CV-6362 (RCC)."

The complaint alleged violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder,
on the basis of claims that the Company, among other things,
made false and misleading statements regarding its financial
condition and results of operations and failed to disclose
material information relating to the credit delinquency problem
at the Company's former subsidiary, Fingerhut Companies, Inc.
("Fingerhut").  The plaintiffs sought unspecified amounts of
compensatory damages and costs, including legal fees.

The Company filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint on January
22, 2002, and on March 11, 2004, the court dismissed the
Complaint without prejudice.  The Company anticipates that it
will file a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint.


FLORIDA: DMV Employees, Head Face Lawsuit Over Drivers' Records
----------------------------------------------------------------
Florida's Department of Motor Vehicles faces a class action
filed in the U.S. District Court in Miami by four individuals,
claiming violations of federal privacy law, the Associated Press
reports.  The suit named Executive Director Fred Dickinson and
seven other employees as defendants.

The defendants allegedly compiled drivers' personal information
into mailing lists and sold the lists to third parties.  The
suit seeks $2,500 for every time a plaintiff's information
was/is released without consent and is filed on behalf of anyone
whose personal information was distributed in violation of the
federal Driver Privacy Protection Act.  A 1999 amendment to that
law requires that drivers give consent before the state can
release or sell their personal information.

Beginning October 1, Florida law concerning drivers' privacy
will change to conform with federal law, which states that
personal information on motor vehicle records is private unless
drivers consent to share it.


FORD MOTOR: VT A.G. Sorrell Reaches Leasing Program Pact
--------------------------------------------------------
Vermont Attorney General William H. Sorrell reached a settlement
with Ford Motor Credit, over complaints of unfair and deceptive
practices in the Company's "Red Carpet" leasing program, his
office announced in a press release.

Atty. General Sorrell joined with consumer protection law
enforcement officers from thirty-seven other states to reach the
settlement, which impacts more than 150,000 Ford consumers in
those states.

The settlement is the result of an effort by the multi-state
group that began when investigators discovered that early
termination of vehicle leases by consumers purchasing their
leased cars resulted in charges that were sometimes higher than
the actual balance owed on the leases.  Dealers would discharge
the lease obligation to Ford Credit, but would keep the extra
amount charged to consumers, who were usually unaware of any of
this because Ford's credit arm had the dealers provide the
payoff figure to the consumers, rather than the financing
company.

Attorney General Sorrell was pleased with the cooperation of
Ford Credit and the participating Ford and Lincoln Mercury
dealers, the statement said.  Ford Credit consumers who may have
been victims of the practice will each receive restitution
checks from Ford Credit for $100.00.  In addition, dealers
participating in the settlement will repay the states more than
$6 million for the costs associated with the investigation and
resolution of the matter.  Eight Ford and Lincoln Mercury
dealers in Vermont are participating in the settlement and will
pay the state a total of $30,500.

During the course of the investigation and pursuant to the
settlement, Ford has also agreed that it will provide purchase
price quotation information directly to its customers rather
than only through its dealers and will change its Red Carpet
lease contract to clearly explain a consumer's rights when
terminating a vehicle lease early.  The change involves not only
Ford Credit branches but also the practices at the Ford and
Lincoln Mercury stores.

Eligible Vermont consumers who terminated Ford Motor Credit
leases between 1991 and 1994 will automatically receive packets
from the settlement administrator that they must complete and
return in order to qualify for the $100.00 restitution payment.
All consumers who terminated leases since that time may also
qualify for restitution but will receive settlement packets only
if they request them from the administrator.  Consumers need not
be current Ford Credit customers to qualify for restitution.

The specific claims addressed by the settlement and the terms of
the agreement between the states, Ford, and the dealers, are
described in further detail in a complaint and stipulated
consent decree filed today by Attorney General Sorrell and the
defendants in Washington Superior Court in Montpelier, Vermont.

All consumers who wish to request settlement packets in order to
claim their $100.00 checks, or who have other questions about
the settlement are encouraged to call the settlement
administrator by Phone: 1-800-221-3312 or access the Website:
http://www.gilardi.com/fordcreditrclagsettlement.

There are deadlines for submission of consumer claims, which the
administrator can describe.  Vermont consumers who are not
finding what they need directly with the settlement
administrator or who have additional questions can contact the
Attorney General's Consumer Assistance Program (CAP) in
Burlington by Phone: (802) 656-3183 or (800) 649-2424, or by E-
mail: consumer@uvm.edu.


FORESTRY FIRMS: Consumers Lodge Price-Fixing Lawsuit in CT Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
Several forestry firms, including International Paper Co. (IP)
and UPM-Kymmene Corporation (UPM), face a class action filed by
American buyers of magazine paper and related products, the Dow
Jones Business News reports.

Charles J. Gardella, Jr., on behalf of the U.S. buyer stated
that the companies forced their client and other unnamed buyers
to purchase paper at "at inflated and supracompetitive prices"
from January 1990 to the present.  The lawsuit, filed in the
U.S. District Court in Bridgeport, Connecticut, asks for damages
from 20 companies "in an amount presently undetermined."

The lawsuit comes after last month's surprise raids against many
of the same companies by European Union anti-cartel officials
looking for evidence of price-fixing in the forestry products
sector.


GERBER SCIENTIFIC: SEC Commences Civil Fraud Lawsuit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed civil fraud charges
in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
against Frederick David Jones (Jones) and Mark Godden (Godden)
for engaging in insider trading in the securities of Gerber
Scientific, Inc. (Gerber).

In its complaint, the Commission alleged that Jones, age 57, was
the Group Managing Director of Gerber's Spandex PLC (Spandex)
subsidiary and that Godden, age 47, was the vice-president of
marketing with Spandex. The Commission further alleged that in
early June 1999, Jones learned that Gerber had decided to
acquire the assets of Graphic-Cal, Australia's largest sign
making materials supplier. On the basis of this information and
before the acquisition was made public, Jones, on June 11, 1999,
purchased 5,000 shares of Gerber stock. Following the
announcement of the acquisition on Sept. 13, 1999, Gerber's
stock price increased and Jones made a profit of $5,250 from his
trading in advance of the announcement of the Graphic-Cal
acquisition.

The Commission further alleged that shortly before March 15,
2000, Jones received additional material, nonpublic information
indicating that Gerber and its subsidiaries would have
significantly worse financial results than previously expected.
On the basis of this information, Jones, on March 15, 2000, sold
5,000 shares of Gerber stock. On April 26, 2000, Gerber
announced that its results for the fourth quarter of fiscal year
2000 likely would be lower than expected. Gerber's stock price
closed that day at $11.50 per share, down $3.63 from the prior
day's closing price. Jones thus avoided losses of $47,500.

In its complaint, the Commission alleged that Godden also
received material, nonpublic information about Gerber and its
subsidiaries prior to the April 26, 2000, announcement. Among
other things, Godden learned of product problems that a Gerber
subsidiary was experiencing and that the subsidiary's operating
income for February 2000 was below budget. Godden further
learned that Gerber's fourth quarter results would be worse than
expected. On the basis of this information and on the first day
when he could trade in his recently opened brokerage account,
Godden, on April 18, 2000, sold 10,000 shares of Gerber stock.
By trading in advance of Gerber's April 26, 2000, announcement,
Godden avoided losses of $64,375.

The Commission alleged in its complaint that, as a result of
their misconduct, Jones and Godden each violated Section 10(b)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act), Exchange
Act Rule 10b-5, and Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933.
The Commission is seeking a final judgment enjoining Jones and
Godden from violating these provisions, compelling each of them
to pay monetary penalties, requiring each of them to disgorge
his profits and/or the losses avoided from their unlawful
trading, with prejudgment interest thereon.

In addition to the relief sought in the complaint, the
Commission today also sought a temporary freeze of assets of Mr.
Jones sufficient to pay disgorgement plus prejudgment interest
thereon and penalties that the Court may order. The Court
granted the Commission's request, entered an order freezing
$300,000 of assets of Mr. Jones until otherwise ordered by the
Court, and scheduled a hearing for June 16, 2004, for Mr. Jones
to show cause why the Court should not enter an order extending
the asset freeze until there is a final adjudication of the
case.

The suit is styled "SEC v. Frederick David Jones and Mark
Godden, No. 04 CV 4385 (RWS)."


HOUSEHOLD FINANCE: Discovery Begins in IL Securities Fraud Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Discovery has begun in the consolidated securities class action
filed against Household Finance Corporation, its directors,
certain officers and former auditors in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

The suit alleges violations of federal securities laws, and
seeks to recover damages in respect of allegedly false and
misleading statements about the Company's common stock.  The
suit is styled "Jaffe v. Household International, Inc., et al.,
No. 02 C 5893."

The amended complaint purports to assert claims under the
federal securities laws, on behalf of all persons who purchased
or otherwise acquired the Company's securities between October
23, 1997 and October 11, 2002, arising out of alleged false and
misleading statements in connection with the Company's sales and
lending practices, the 2002 state settlement agreement referred
to above, the restatement and the Hongkong Shanghai Banking
Corporation (HSBC) merger.  The amended complaint, which also
names as defendants Arthur Andersen LLP, Goldman, Sachs & Co.,
and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., fails to
specify the amount of damages sought.

In May 2003, the Company, and other defendants, filed a motion
to dismiss the complaint.  On March 19, 2004, the Court granted
in part, and denied in part the defendant's motion to dismiss
the complaint.  The Court dismissed all claims against Merrill
Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. and Goldman Sachs & Co.  The
Court also dismissed certain claims alleging strict liability
for alleged misrepresentation of material facts based on statute
of limitations grounds.

The claims that remain against some or all of the defendants
essentially allege the defendants knowingly made a false
statement of a material fact in conjunction with the purchase or
sale of securities, that the plaintiffs justifiably relied on
such statement, the false statement(s) caused the plaintiffs'
damages, and that some or all of the defendants should be
liable for those alleged statements.


HOUSEHOLD FINANCE: Discovery Begins in ERISA Lawsuit in N.D. IL
---------------------------------------------------------------
Discovery has commenced in the consolidated securities class
action filed against Household Finance Corporation in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois,
which purports to assert claims under the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act (ERISA).

The suit was filed on behalf of participants in the Company's
Tax Reduction Investment Plan, and is styled "In re Household
International, Inc. ERISA Litigation, Master File No. 02 C
7921."  The suit also names as defendants William Aldinger and
individuals on the Administrative Investment Committee of the
plan.

The consolidated complaint purports to assert claims under
ERISA, alleging that the defendants breached their fiduciary
duties to the plan by investing in Company stock and failing to
disclose information to Plan participants.

A motion to dismiss the complaint was filed in June 2003.  On
March 30, 2004, the Court granted in part, and denied in part,
the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint.  The Court
dismissed all claims alleging that some or all of the
defendants:

     (1) breached their co-fiduciary obligations;

     (2) misrepresented the prudence of investing in Company
         stock;

     (3) failed to disclose nonpublic information regarding
         alleged accounting and lending improprieties; and

     (4) failed to provide other defendants with non-public
         information

The claims that remain essentially allege that some or all of
the defendants failed to prudently manage plan assets by
continuing to invest in, or provide matching contributions of,
Household stock.


HOUSEHOLD FINANCE: Asks IL Court To Dismiss Beneficial Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Household Finance Corporation asked the Chancery Division of the
Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois to dismiss a class action
filed against Beneficial Corporation, which was merged into a
subsidiary of the Company, styled "West Virginia Laborers
Pension Trust Fund v. Caspersen, et al., case number 03CH10808."

This purported class action names as defendants the directors of
Beneficial Corporation at the time of the 1998 merger of
Beneficial Corporation into a subsidiary of Household, and
claims that those directors' due diligence of the Company at the
time they considered the merger was inadequate.

The Complaint claims that as a result of some of the securities
law and other violations, the Company's common shares lost
value.  Under the merger agreement with Beneficial Corporation,
the Company assumed the defense of this litigation.

Plaintiffs conducted limited discovery relating to the
jurisdictional issues raised in the defendants' motion to
dismiss. Briefs for that motion are being prepared.


i2 TECHNOLOGIES: SEC Files, Settles Cease-And-Desist Proceedings
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission instituted cease-and-
desist proceedings against i2 Technologies, Inc., a Dallas-based
developer and marketer of enterprise supply chain software and
management solutions, and simultaneously accepted i2's offer of
settlement in which it consented, without admitting or denying
the Commission's substantive findings, to an order to cease and
desist from future violations of the antifraud, internal
controls, record-keeping and reporting provisions of the federal
securities laws (Order). i2 also has undertaken to continue
cooperating with the Commission's ongoing investigation.

The Commission also filed a civil complaint against i2 in the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas
Division, seeking a $10 million civil penalty and nominal $1
disgorgement against i2. Without admitting or denying the
Commission's allegations, i2 has consented to pay these amounts.
As provided in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the penalty
amount will become part of a disgorgement fund for the benefit
of injured i2 investors.

The Commission finds in the Order, and alleges in its civil
complaint, that i2 committed securities fraud in connection with
its accounting for certain software license agreements and in
connection with four "barter" transactions. As a result, for the
four years ended Dec. 31, 2001, and the first three quarters of
2002, i2 misstated approximately $1 billion of software license
revenues, including over $125 million of revenues it should
never have recognized. According to the Commission, i2's
periodic filings with the Commission and press releases during
this period were materially false and misleading.

The suit is styled "SEC v. i2 Technologies, Inc., Civil Action
No. 3:04-CV-1250, USDC, NDTX (Dallas Division)."


IVES HEALTH: SEC Settles Civil Injunctive Suit V. Ex-President
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission settled its civil
injunctive action against M. Keith Ives, former president of
Ives Health Co., for his participation in a scheme to manipulate
the stock of Ives Health Co.

The Commission's complaint, filed in July 2001, alleged that he
violated the registration, reporting and antifraud provisions of
the securities laws, by among other things, promoting the stock
of Ives Health on the basis of a supposed treatment for HIV,
known as T-Factor. Press releases promoting Ives Health falsely
claimed that the effectiveness of T-Factor had been proven in
tests conducted by an immunologist, in affiliation with the
World Health Organization, according to the Commission's
complaint.

In a parallel criminal action, Ives was charged with securities
fraud, wire fraud, and conspiracy to defraud the United States
by marketing an unapproved drug. He pled guilty and was
sentenced to 51 months in prison and to three years of
supervised release. In addition, Ives was ordered to pay
restitution of $1,252,907 million to victims of his securities
fraud, and $548 to purchasers of T-Factor. United States v. M.
Keith Ives, and Ives Health Co., 01 Cr. 691 (RCC) (S.D.N.Y.).
Ives is currently incarcerated.

The final judgment in the Commission's action, to which Ives
consented, permanently enjoins him from violating the
registration, reporting and antifraud provisions of the
securities laws, and permanently bars Ives from acting as an
officer or director of a public company.

The suit is styled "SEC v. Ives Health Co. Inc., M. Keith Ives,
Michael Harrison and James Kosta, Civil Action No. 01-CV-6999
(GEL) SDNY."


LEATHER EXPERTS: Finishes Settlement Payments For Overtime Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Wilsons, The Leather Experts, Inc. finished paying for the
entire settlement of the class action filed against it on behalf
of current and former store managers of the Company in
California regarding their classification as exempt from
overtime pay.

In July 2003, the Company reached a confidential settlement of
the class action through mediation.  A charge of $1.9 million
related to this settlement was taken during the second quarter
of 2003. The California State Court granted final approval of
the settlement on January 30, 2004.


LOEHMANN'S HOLDINGS: Shareholders File DE Fiduciary Duty Suits
--------------------------------------------------------------
Loehmann's Holdings, Inc. faces two class actions file din the
Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle
County.  The suits also name as defendants the Company's
directors.

On April 27, 2004, Davidco Investments filed a lawsuit in the
Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle
County on behalf of the Company's stockholders.  The complaint
alleges, among other things, that the members of the board of
directors of the Company breached their fiduciary duties to the
Company's stockholders by approving the terms of the proposed
sale of the Company for $23.00 per share.  The complaint seeks,
among other things, injunctive relief (including enjoining the
proposed sale or rescission if the proposed sale is consummated)
and compensatory and/or rescissory damages.

On April 29, 2004, a complaint was filed by Bernard Shatz in the
Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle
County.  The second complaint is substantially similar to the
first complaint but also names Crescent Capital Investments,
Inc. as a defendant.


LORSIN INC.: SEC Declares Final Decision To Impose Sanctions
------------------------------------------------------------
The Initial Decision in Lorsin, Inc., Initial Decision Rel. No.
250 (May 11, 2004), has become the final decision of the
Commission with respect to Lorsin, Inc., Loretta M. Lockhart,
Craig K. Hjalmarson, Russell Management, Inc., George R.
Siembida, and Harold Engel, Jr. The Commission has ordered the
Respondents to cease and desist from to cease and desist from
committing or causing any violation or future violations of
Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act of 1933.

The Commission also orders Respondents to pay disgorgement and
prejudgment interest as follows: Lorsin, Inc., Loretta M.
Lockhart, and Craig K. Hjalmarson must disgorge jointly and
severally $1,920; Russell Management, Inc. and George R.
Siembida must disgorge jointly and severally $3,390.40; and
Harold Engel, Jr. must disgorge $8,167.50.


MARTHA STEWART: Seeks New Trial Due to Witness Perjury
------------------------------------------------------
Domestic maven Martha Stewart asked United States District Judge
Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum for a new trial, after a grand jury
convicted a government witness of falsely testifying that he
carried out tests on a key document in the trial, Reuters
reports.

A grand jury earlier indicted U.S. Secret Service laboratory
director Larry Stewart for falsely testifying in the trial.  Ms.
Stewart contended that her guilty verdict was "corroded" by Mr.
Stewart's testimony.  Mr. Stewart is no relation to Ms. Stewart,
who was convicted on March 5 of conspiring with her stockbroker
to lie about a suspicious stock trade.

In a much anticipated motion, Ms. Stewart's lawyers said "the
government's election to call Larry Stewart as a witness and to
present his testimony at trial produced error of constitutional
dimension in several respects, requiring that the convictions be
vacated and a new trial ordered," AP reports.  The papers
charged that other Secret Service officials in the courtroom
during Mr. Stewart's testimony were aware of the perjury but
said nothing about it.

Ms. Stewart's sentencing has been delayed for three weeks to
allow time for the motion for a new trial to be filed and for
U.S. District Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum to review it.
"Their silence is scandalous and not the way we expect the
government to conduct itself," the lawyers, Robert Morvillo and
John Tigue, said in an accompanying statement, according to an
AP report.

If the request is denied, Judge Cedarbaum will decide on July 8
whether the celebrity homemaker will go to prison for conspiring
with her broker Peter Bacanovic to cover up the reasons behind a
suspicious stock sale of ImClone Systems Inc., a biotech company
run by a friend.

The Secret Service lab director has not entered a plea on
charges that he gave false testimony.


MEDICAL SAVINGS: FL Hospitals Claim Antitrust Lacks Evidence
------------------------------------------------------------
Lee Memorial Health System and other hospitals have filed
motions seeking to dismiss an antitrust lawsuit filed against
them. The lawsuit accuses the hospitals of using their trade
association to bypass antitrust regulations and charge high
prices, The Daily Naples News reports.

In their motions, the hospitals and the Florida Hospital
Association argue that the federal lawsuit filed by Medical
Savings Insurance Co., an Oklahoma corporation that specializes
in high-deductible health savings accounts, was based largely on
circumstantial data drawn mostly from public records.

An attorney for Lee Memorial Health System said the suit should
be thrown out because it lacks any evidence of specific
instances in which hospitals plotted to set extremely high
prices.

The litigation began when Lee Memorial filed a class-action
lawsuit against Medical Savings after the company refused to pay
the prices that various hospitals charged in May 2003 Lee
Memorial officials said the company owed $334,000. But a judge
dismissed that lawsuit in February 2004, citing technical
grounds in throwing out one of the main charges.

In March, Medical Savings filed its antitrust lawsuit in the
Fort Myers federal district court. In their suit Medical Savings
claims that prices at local hospitals were so high that Medical
Savings could not keep the promise to its customers that it
would pay only reasonable prices.

But the motions filed this week say that type of evidence is not
enough to validate a lawsuit accusing hospitals of price-fixing.

"The Complaint does not suggest when or where the conspiracy was
formed, who formed it, how the various participants were brought
into it, or the contours of the agreement or agreements
allegedly reached," Lee Memorial's motion says.


MICROSOFT CORPORATION: South Korean Watchdog Raids Local Office
---------------------------------------------------------------
Local regulators searched Microsoft Corporation's South Korean
offices, in connection with an investigation of charges that the
American software giant violated trade regulations by tying its
instant messenger software to its Windows operating system, the
Associated Press reports.

South Korea's Fair Trade Commission earlier raided the Company's
office in February, after suspecting that the Company violated
the monopoly law, particularly by attaching overly restrictive
conditions to deals with computer makers.  Microsoft said it had
already dropped a controversial provision of those contracts but
was cooperating with authorities.

The FTC said it will conduct onsite investigations of Microsoft
Korea through next Wednesday.  An FTC official, speaking on
condition of anonymity, told AP the probe was related to a 2001
complaint by Daum Communications Corporation, a South Korean
Internet portal that controls 10 percent of the nation's instant
messaging market.  He could not provide other details of the
investigation.

Seo Min-seog, a public relations manager at Microsoft Korea,
said the company will cooperate with the commission's
investigation.  "We believe we operated in accordance with
Korean laws," Seo said, AP reports.


MICROSOFT CORPORATION: Reaches $64M Pact For TN Antitrust Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
A Nashville judge is set to approve a proposed antitrust
settlement by Microsoft Corporation, which can award an
estimated $64 million worth of vouchers to be shared among
Tennessee residents who purchased Microsoft products from 1994
to 2002, the Nashville City Paper reports.

The state's class action suit against Microsoft heads to final
approval at a 9 a.m. hearing before Davidson County Circuit
Court Judge Walter Kurtz.  If the settlement is approved,
consumers can apply for vouchers worth between $5 and $10 to buy
computer-related products. A portion of unclaimed coupons would
go to the state's public schools to fund items such as Internet
access and software.

The Tennessee suit, which was filed by Daniel Sherwood, a
computer sciences graduate student of Vanderbilt University and
Sheila and Roy Coggins, owners of Microfilm Services, a digital
imaging company, brought the class-action claims against the
software giant.

They represent state residents who purchased specified Microsoft
operating systems or software from a third party between Dec.
21, 1995 and Dec. 31, 2002. Such purchases would include buying
a computer that had Windows 98, for instance, and Microsoft's
Office Suite already installed.

Tennessee is among 20 states that filed anti-trust lawsuits
claiming the software giant overcharged indirect purchasers of
its operating systems and software applications, said Ted Carey,
one of the attorneys for the Tennessee plaintiffs.  Since filing
suits in 1999, the states have been individually settling them
with Microsoft, which admits no wrongdoing.

For more details on the settlement, visit the Website:
http://www.microsoftproductsettlement.com/Tennessee


MITSUBISHI MOTORS: Ex-Officer Over Auto Defects Cover-up Scandal
----------------------------------------------------------------
Tokyo police arrested the former president of scandal-plagued
Mitsubishi Motors Corporation, on charges relating to a cover-up
of auto defects suspected in a fatal accident in October 2002,
the Japanese automaker said, the Associated Press reports.

Former president Katsuhiko Kawasoe resigned in 2000, to take
responsibility for the scandal which centers on an accident with
a Mitsubishi-made truck, which lost its brakes, causing the
driver to die.

The automobile giant has instituted a series of recalls, since
four years ago when it first admitted it had systematically
hidden auto defects and announced a massive recall.  In addition
to the October 2002 accident, the Company also acknowledged two
other accidents involving injuries linked to a defect that
causes clutch covers to crack and could lead to brake failure.
A cracked cover could cause a propeller shaft, which distributes
power from the engine to the wheels, to fall off and sever a
brake hose, AP reports.

Mr. Kawasoe resigned although he was not personally implicated
in the scandal.  He denied any knowledge of the cover-up system
in the Company.

Mitsubishi Motors President Yoichiro Okazaki apologized for the
case, saying "We take this matter very seriously and intend to
fully cooperate in investigations," AP reports.

Police confirmed there had been an arrest in the Mitsubishi
Motors cover-up on charges of professional negligence resulting
in death.  Mitsubishi has said there may be more recalls, and
executives - shown almost by the day on televised news and
newspapers bowing their heads deeply - expect sales in coming
months to fare worse than the nearly 60 percent plunge reported
in May on-year in Japan.


NORSE SKOG: Faces Magazine Paper Market Antitrust Lawsuit in US
---------------------------------------------------------------
Norwegian forest industry group Norske Skogindustrier ASA (Norse
Skog) faces an antitrust class action filed in United States
District Court, alleging antitrust violations in the magazine
paper market, the Europe Intelligence Wire reports.  The suit
also names other paper companies as defendants.

Norske Skog said that the class action lawsuit appeared to be
based on the investigations initiated by the EFTA Surveillance
Authority, European Commission and various other competition
authorities in Europe on 25 May 2004.  The company said that it
had not yet been served the court motion, but expects it will
happen in the near future.


NORTEL NETWORKS: Shareholders Launch 27 Stock Lawsuits in NY, TN
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nortel Networks Corporation faces 27 class actions filed
subsequent to its March 10, 2004 announcement in which the
Company indicated it was likely that it would need to revise its
previously announced unaudited results for the year ended
December 31, 2003, and the results reported in certain of its
quarterly reports for 2003, and to restate its previously-filed
financial results for one or more earlier periods.

The suits are pending in the United States District Court in the
Southern District of New York and one Employee Retirement Income
Security Act (ERISA) class action complaint has been filed in
the United States District Court for the Middle District of
Tennessee (Nashville).

The complaints variously allege that, in connection with the
comprehensive review and analysis of Nortel Networks assets and
liabilities, the defendants made materially false and misleading
statements in violation of U.S. securities laws.  The named
defendants in most of the actions also include Frank Dunn,
Douglas Beatty and Michael Gollogly.

The ERISA class action is brought on behalf of the Nortel
Networks Long-Term Investment Plan and the Plan participants and
beneficiaries whose retirement accounts held Nortel Networks
common shares from at least December 23, 2003 through and
including the date of the complaint.  The complaint alleges that
these Plan participants and beneficiaries suffered losses to
their respective Plan retirement accounts due to the defendants'
breaches of fiduciary duty.  The named defendants are Nortel
Networks, Frank Dunn and the Nortel Networks board of directors
(excluding newly appointed board members Dr. Manfred Bischoff
and the Hon. John Manley).


PORTAL SOFTWARE: Plaintiffs Lodge Consolidated Stock Suit in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs filed a consolidated securities class action against
Portal Software, Inc. and certain of its officers and directors
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California.

The lawsuit claims to be on behalf of all persons who purchased
Company shares from May 20, 2003 through November 13, 2003.  A
lead plaintiff and lead plaintiff's counsel were appointed on
March 25, 2004.

The suit alleges violations of Section 10(b) and Section 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, arising from
allegations that during the Class Period Portal recognized
revenue improperly and failed to disclose declining demand for
its products and services.  The consolidated amended complaint
seeks damages in an unspecified amount.  The Company is
scheduled to respond to the consolidated amended complaint on
July 6, 2004.


OXYCONTIN LITIGATION: OH High Court Mulls Lawsuit Certification
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Ohio Supreme Court heard oral arguments for and against the
class certification for a personal injury suit filed against the
makers and manufacturers of the powerful prescription drug
OxyContin, the Knight-Ridder / Tribune Business News reports.

Ladonna Howland filed the suit in July 2001, alleging that she
obtained a legal prescription for OxyContin, became addicted and
then was arrested for forging prescriptions to continue
receiving the drug.

Lawyers representing the OxyContin manufacturers in the
potentially massive class action lawsuit originating in Butler
County argued the case's class action status should be dropped,
since Ohio law does not allow for a product liability case like
this one to be certified as a class action.

Butler County's Common Pleas Court and the 12th District Court
of Appeals in Middletown have already granted class action
status to the suit thus clearing the way for more than 1,000
Ohioans to join it.


RR DONNELLEY: High Court Reverses Appellate Ruling on Bias Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Supreme Court reversed an appellate court's
ruling allowing a race discrimination class action filed against
R.R. Donnelley & Sons to proceed.

The suit was filed on November 25, 1996, against the Company in
the United States District Court in Chicago, Illinois, on behalf
of current and former African-American employees, alleging that
the Company racially discriminated against them in violation of
the Civil Rights Act of 1871, as amended, and the U.S.
Constitution, an earlier Class Action Reporter story (November
11,2003) reports.

The complaint seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, and
asks for actual, compensatory, consequential and punitive
damages in an amount not less than $500 million.  The company
settled that portion of Jones, et al. v. R.R. Donnelley & Sons
Co., relating to claims arising in locations other than
the closure of the Chicago catalog operations in 1993 without
any admission of wrongdoing by the company.

The issue remaining in the Jones case affects two classes
certified by the trial court: a class consisting of African-
American employees discharged in connection with the shutdown of
the Chicago catalog operations, and a class consisting of
African-American employees of the Chicago catalog operations
after November 1992 who were other than permanent employees.

On September 16, 2002, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals
overturned a ruling by the trial court and held that a two year
statute of limitations applies to the claims of these classes,
which absent any other ruling would result in dismissal of the
claims on the basis of timeliness.  On May 19, 2003, the United
States Supreme Court agreed to review the issue of the
appropriate statute of limitations to apply and set the matter
for argument in the 2003 term.

On February 24, 2004, the matter was argued before the high
court.  On May 3, 2004, the Supreme Court reversed the circuit
court ruling, held that a four-year statute of limitations
applies to the claims of the two classes and remanded the case
for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court's
opinion.


SEACHANGE INTERNATIONAL: Plaintiffs Appeal MA Lawsuit Dismissal
---------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal of the consolidated securities
class action filed in the United States District Court for the
District of Massachusetts against SeaChange International, Inc.
and:

     (1) Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated,

     (2) Thomas Weisel Partners LLC,

     (3) RBC Dain Rauscher, Inc.,

     (4) William Styslinger, III,

     (5) William Fiedler,

     (6) Martin R. Hoffmann,

     (7) Thomas F. Olson and

     (8) Carmine Vona

The suit, styled "In re SeaChange International, Inc., et al.
Securities Litigation, Civil Action No. 02-12116-DPW," alleges
that the defendants violated Sections 11 and/or 12(2) of the
Securities Act of 1933, and in the case of the individual
defendants Section 15 of the Securities Act, in connection with
the stock offering that SeaChange completed on January 31, 2002.
The Complaint seeks damages in an unspecified amount, together
with interest thereon, recissory damages, reimbursement of costs
and expenses, and further relief that the court may determine to
be appropriate.

On July 18, 2003, the Company and the individual defendants
filed a motion to dismiss all claims in their entirety, with
prejudice.  The lead plaintiff's opposition to the motion to
dismiss was filed on September 12, 2003, and the defendants;
reply memorandum was filed on October 8, 2003.  A hearing on the
motion to dismiss took place on January 16, 2004.  On February
6, 2004, Judge Woodlock of the United States District Court for
the District of Massachusetts issued a memorandum granting the
motion to dismiss all claims asserted against the Company
and the individual defendants, and an order of dismissal was
entered by the court on February 9, 2004.  The plaintiffs then
appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the First
Circuit.


SEARS CANADA: Card Holders Launch Lawsuit Over Late Payment Fees
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sears Canada, Inc. faces two separate class actions pursuant to
Quebec law in relation to the Sears credit card issued by its
wholly owned subsidiary Sears Canada Bank.

In one action, the petitioner seeks to represent all holders of
the Sears Card who have paid interest on a balance owing since
July 1, 1997.  That action alleges that the interest rate
charged by Sears Bank on unpaid monthly balances of users of the
Sears Card is contrary to Quebec law.

The Company has agreed with the petitioner's counsel to hold
this matter in abeyance, without prejudice to the petitioner's
interest, pending the outcome of a similar class action case
involving another credit card issuer.  On a preliminary basis,
the Company has evaluated the allegations and believes they are
without merit, the Company stated in a disclosure to the
Canadian Securities and Exchange Commission.

In the other action, the petition alleges that the Company,
along with other credit card issuers who are also named as
defendants, have not given their credit cardholders the required
21 day grace period to pay off their obligations without
attracting credit charges in accordance with Quebec law.


SKILLSOFT PUBLIC: Reaches Settlement For Securities Fraud Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
SkillSoft Public Limited Co. reached a settlement for the
consolidated securities class action filed against it and
certain of its current and former officers and directors
relating to November 19, 2002 restatement of the SmartForce
financial statements for 1999, 2000, 2001, and the first two
quarters of 2002.  The suit is pending in the United States
District Court for the District of New Hampshire.

The suit alleged that the Company misrepresented or omitted to
state material facts in its SEC filings and press releases
regarding our revenues and earnings and failed to correct such
false and misleading SEC filings and press releases, which are
alleged to have artificially inflated the price of the Company's
American Depositary Shares (ADSs).

The court consolidated the suit under the caption "In re
SmartForce Securities Litigation," Civil Action No. 02-544-B,
appointed as lead plaintiffs the Teacher's Retirement System of
Louisiana and the Louisiana Sheriff's Pension & Relief Fund, and
approved the lead plaintiffs' choice of lead counsel and local
counsel.  On October 31, 2003, lead plaintiffs filed two amended
complaints in this consolidated action:

     (1) on behalf of a purported class of purchasers of the
         Company's ADSs between April 27, 1999 through November
         18, 2002, naming as defendants SkillSoft PLC, Gregory
         M. Priest, Patrick E. Murphy, David C. Drummond and
         Jack Hayes; and

     (2) on behalf of a purported class of SkillSoft Corporation
         shareholders who acquired its ADSs in connection with
         the merger, naming as defendants SkillSoft PLC, Gregory
         M. Priest, Patrick E. Murphy, Ronald C. Conway, John M.
         Grillos, James S. Krzywicki, Patrick J. McDonough, Dr.
         Ferdinand von Prondzynski, Stewart K.P. Gross, William
         T. Coleman, P. Howard Edelstein and Charles E. Moran,
         as well as some additional entities

The suit alleges that the Company misrepresented or omitted to
state material facts, which are alleged to have artificially
inflated the price of its ADSs.

In March 2004, the Company reached a settlement, subject to
court approval, of this litigation for total settlement
payments of $30.5 million, with one-half to be paid soon after
preliminary approval by the court and the balance one year
later.  The Company is in discussions with its insurers to
determine how much, if any, of this settlement amount will be
paid by them.


SMC MARKETING: Recalls 2.2 Oscillating Fans Due To Fire Hazard
--------------------------------------------------------------
SMC Marketing Corporation and Home Depot USA, Inc. are
cooperating with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
(CPSC) by voluntarily recalling about 2.2 million "SMC" brand
oscillating floor fans.  The electric power cord can be damaged
by the oscillation motion of the fan.  The damage to the cord
can result in a short circuit and possible ignition of the
plastic case, posing a fire hazard.

CPSC is aware of 31 incidents in which the cord on these fans
was damaged, which resulted in smoke and fires.  At least nine
of these incidents resulted in substantial property damage.

The recall includes 18-inch, pedestal floor fans with model
number SR-18 or SP-18. The model number is on the back of the
fan beside the on/off button. All of the recalled fans are white
with the brand name, "SMC," written on the face plate of the
front grill. The Home Depot sold these fans from January 1997
through October 2001 for about $20. The recalled fans also were
sold at other retailers, some of which have gone out of
business.
Consumers should stop using the recalled fans immediately and
either return them to the Home Depot for a store credit, or
contact SMC Marketing Corp. for instructions on receiving a
refund. The Home Depot will accept all recalled fans.

For information on receiving a refund, contact the Company by
Phone: (800) 527-3675 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. CT Monday
through Friday or contact Home Depot by Phone: (800) 553-3199
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday.  Recall
information also is available at the Home Depot's Web site:
http://www.homedepot.com.


TEXAS LOTTERY: Residents Launch Consumer Fraud Suit Over Games
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Texas Lottery Commission, Gtech and Scientific Games
Interntional face a class action pending in Corpus Christi Court
in Texas, the Knight-Ridder / Tribune Business News reports.
The two companies manufacture and run the lottery games under
lucrative contracts with the state.

The suit was filed on behalf of everyone who bought a scratch
off ticket in Texas since 1999.  The suit was originally filed
in Nueces County Court in Texas last year but was refiled this
week to incorporate the conspiracy claim after other legal
theories Clark had advanced were shot down charges, that a
"civil conspiracy" exists among the TLC, Gtech and Scientific
Games because all three have an interest in selling as many
scratch-off tickets as possible.

"People buy the scratch-off games to win the prize (shown) in
the big pretty pictures on the card, but end up with something
else, since the advertised prizes have been claimed," lawyer
Mitchell Clark of Corpus Christi, who filed the suit on behalf
of a Nueces County resident, told the Tribune Business News.

He added that this case is about the TLC and its contractors and
retailers cheating the consuming public.  "They are not allowing
a game of chance to be a game of chance.  For some consumers
there is no chance, and that's not right," he said.

Among scratch off games now advertised on the TLC Web site are
Monte Carlo, with a $250,000 top prize; Corvette Cash, with an
"instant win car," and 10 Times Lucky with a $25,000 prize.
According to the suit, the TLC will sell tickets for these games
even after it knows all those top prizes have been claimed.
The lottery commission is immune from being sued, but the
lawsuit names it a "co-conspirator."


THETA CORPORATION: PA Residents Sue, Blame Operations for Floods
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Theta Corporation and seven other individuals face a class
action filed by property owners in Jermyn, Pennsylvania,
claiming that they were responsible for the damage done by
September floods, which could have been prevented, the WYOU.COM
reports.

Owners alleged that timbering operations, on land owned by
Theta, channeled extra rainwater into the Rushbrook Creek that
was not cleaned and could not handle the rushing water.  The
lawsuit wants the defendants to pay for all the damage done to
Jermyn property by the flood, which could total millions of
dollars.


ULTIMATE ELECTRONICS: Asks CO Court To Dismiss Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ultimate Electronics, Inc. asked the United States District
Court for the District of Colorado to dismiss the consolidated
securities class action filed against it and three of its
officers and directors, styled "In re Ultimate Electronics, Inc.
Securities Litigation."

The suit was filed on behalf of purchasers of the company's
common stock during the period between March 13, 2002 and August
8, 2002.  The suit seeks damages for alleged violations of
Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, Section
10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, Rule
10b-5 promulgated under the Exchange Act, and Section 20(a) of
the Exchange Act.

On May 30, 2003, the company moved to dismiss all claims
asserted in the complaint.  The Alaska Electrical Pension Fund
(AEPF), which had been appointed as the lead plaintiff to
represent the putative plaintiff class, responded to the
company's Motion to Dismiss by filing an amended complaint on
August 11, 2003.

In the amended complaint, AEPF asserts claims against the
company and all of the company's directors during the relevant
period for alleged violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of
the Securities Act.  AEPF asserts that the prospectus, dated
April 30, 2002, for the company's 2002 public offering of common
stock failed to disclose material facts that were required to be
disclosed and contained false and misleading statements.  The
amended complaint seeks to recover unspecified monetary damages,
an award of rescission or rescissory damages and an award of
attorneys' fees, costs and prejudgment and post-judgment
interest.


UNION GAS: Canadian Customers File Suit Over Late Payment Fees
--------------------------------------------------------------
Union Gas Limited faces a class action in Canadian Court
seeking, among other things, a declaration that the late payment
fee paid by the Company's customers since January 1, 1994, is
interest that exceeds sixty percent and that by collecting the
late payment fee the Company has been unjustly enriched.

An Order is sought requiring that the Company disgorge the total
late payment fee collected since January 1, 1994.  The Company
is currently assessing the claim but anticipates that there will
be no material financial impact on the Company, the Company
stated in a disclosure to the Canadian Securities and Exchange
Commission.


UTI WORLDWIDE: Named in Gulf War Veterans Injury Lawsuit in TX
--------------------------------------------------------------
UTi Worldwide, Inc. is one of approximately 83 defendants named
in a consolidated class action filed in the District Court of
Brazaria County, Texas (23rd Judicial District) where it is
alleged that various defendants sold chemicals that were
utilized in the 1992 Gulf War by the Iraqi army which caused
personal injuries to U.S. armed services personnel and their
families, including birth defects.

The lawsuits were brought on behalf of the military personnel
who served in the 1992 Gulf War and their families and the
plaintiffs are seeking in excess of $1 billion in damages.  To
date, the plaintiffs have not obtained class certification.

The Company believes it is a defendant in the suit because an
entity that sold the Company assets in 1993 is a defendant.  The
Company believes it will prevail in this matter because the
alleged actions giving rise to the claims occurred prior to its
purchase of the assets.  The Company further believes that it
will ultimately prevail in this matter since it never
manufactured chemicals and the plaintiffs have been unable to
thus far produce evidence that the Company acted as a freight
forwarder for cargo that included chemicals used by the Iraqi
army, the Company stated in a disclosure to the Securities and
Exchange Commission.


WISDOM INDUSTRIES: Starts Inspection Program For Gravitron Ride
---------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and Wisdom
Industries Ltd., of Sterling, Colo., are announcing a revised
safety inspection program for all types of Gravitron amusement
rides.

The Gravitron amusement ride is a whirling cylinder which uses
centrifugal force to hold riders to their seats as the seats
rise, giving the illusion that the floor is dropping out.  The
ride is also called the Starship, Old Blue, and Trip to Mars.
There are approximately 190 such rides in the U.S. and Canada.

On April 2, 2004, at the Miami-Dade County Fair and Exposition
in Florida, a wall panel of the Gravitron ride gave way,
ejecting three riders.  Seven people were injured, including two
bystanders who were hit by debris.  Injuries included broken
bones, concussions, and bruises.  A 16-year-old girl ejected
from the ride was critically injured.

CPSC's investigation of this incident and its work with the ride
manufacturer, Wisdom Industries Ltd., resulted in a revised
safety inspection program to prevent future incidents. In brief,
some of the elements of the inspection program include:

     (1) Inspect welds and steel components for cracks or
         breaks;

     (2) Inspect platform hinges for cracks or wear;

     (3) Inspect platform hinge bolts for wear;

     (4) Check tire air pressure;

     (5) Measure wing sag to make sure it is level with main
         table;

     (6) Inspect the underwing alignment bolts for bending and
         wear;

     (7) Inspect condition of fiberglass at lower end of the
         panel for wear.

These new safety guidelines have been sent to all owners of
Gravitron rides, state inspectors and amusement ride insurers to
help improve maintenance of the rides.

CPSC and Wisdom Industries announced a modification program to
improve the safety of the Gravitron rides in 1992. That program
included the installation of corner pin reinforcement plates,
which were in place on the ride involved in the recent incident.
The revised safety inspection program should be performed in
addition to the previous modification program. Contact the
Company by Phone: (970) 522-7515 or visit their Website:
http://www.wisdomrides.com.


                    New Security Fraud Cases


ABATIX CORPORATION: Patton Haltom Lodges Stock Suit in E.D. TX
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Patton, Haltom, Roberts, McWilliams & Greer, LLP
initiated a class action lawsuit filed in the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Texarkana
Division, on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Abatix
Corporation (Nasdaq:ABIX) between 5:05 p.m. EST on April 14,
2004 and 9:26 a.m. EST on April 16, 2004, inclusive.

The Complaint, filed in case number 5:04-CV-116, alleges that as
a result of the announcement on April 14, 2004, at 5:05 p.m.
EST, that Abatix had entered into an agreement with Goodwin
Group LLC ("Goodwin LLC") for the exclusive rights to distribute
Goodwin LLC's RapidCoolT line of products worldwide, the price
of Abatix common stock skyrocketed from $5.31 to $16.70.
However, the NASDAQ Stock Market halted the trading of Abatix
common stock as of 9:26 a.m. EST on April 16, 2004, while NASDAQ
investigated Abatix's agreement with Goodwin LLC.

On April 21, 2004, Abatix issued a press release at 8:24 a.m.
EST. In the press release, Abatix disclosed that Abatix had not
verified

     (1) the proprietary nature of the products in the
         RapidCoolT line;

     (2) whether any patents relating to RapidCoolT products in
         the name of another party have been assigned to Goodwin
         LLC and

     (3) whether any patent applications had been filed with
         respect to the product line.

Claims in the April 14, 2004 release as to the efficacy and
uniqueness of the products were based on representations made by
Goodwin LLC and had not been verified by Abatix. Prior to its
agreement with Goodwin LLC, the Company was able to perform only
limited due diligence and had not been able to perform an in-
depth analysis of the sales potential of the products, pricing,
marketing strategy, and competitive products. As of April 14,
2004, there had been no sales of the product by either Abatix or
by Goodwin LLC. Therefore, on April 21, 2004, once trading of
Abatix stock resumed, the price of Abatix stock plummeted from
$16.70 per share to close at $9.77.

For more details, contact Patton, Haltom, Roberts, McWilliams &
Greer, LLP by Mail: Century Bank Plaza - Suite 400, 2900 St.
Michael Drive, Texarkana, Texas 75503 by Phone:
1-866-546-9959 x404 or E-Mail: mcosta@pattonhaltom.com


BISYS GROUP: Squitieri & Fearon Files Securities Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Squitieri & Fearon, LLP has initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York on behalf of persons who purchased
or otherwise acquired securities of The Bisys Group,
Inc.("Bisys" or the "Company") (NYSE:BSG) during the period from
October 23, 2000 through May 17, 2004.

The lawsuit charges that defendants violated the federal
securities laws by issuing a series of materially false and
misleading statements to the market throughout the Class Period,
which artificially inflated the price of the Company's
securities.

For more details, contact Stephen J. Fearon, Jr. of Squitieri &
Fearon, LLP by Mail: 32 East 57th Street, 12th Floor, New York,
NY 10175 by Phone: (212) 421-6492 or by E-Mail:
Stephen@sfclasslaw.com


BISYS GROUP: Scott + Scott Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
Scott + Scott, LLC initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York on behalf of purchasers of Bisys Group, Inc. (NYSE: BSG)
securities during the period between October 23, 2000 and May
17, 2004.

This is an action on behalf of purchasers of The BISYS Group,
Inc. ("BISYS" or the "Company") publicly traded securities
during the period from October 23, 2000 to May 17, 2004 (the
"Class Period"). BISYS supports more than 20,000 financial
institutions and corporate clients with products and services.
The Investment Services group provides an array of investment
services, including mutual fund, hedge fund, private equity fund
and retirement plan services. The Insurance and Education
Services group provides an overall solution for life insurance
and commercial property/casualty insurance distribution, as well
as financial services education and licensing automation.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
caused BISYS's shares to trade at artificially inflated levels
through the issuance of false and misleading financial
statements. As a result of this inflation, BISYS was able to
raise $250 million in a convertible note offering while the
individual defendants were able to reap more than $25 million in
insider trading proceeds.

On May 17, 2004, the Company issued a press release entitled
"BISYS Provides Update on Fiscal Third Quarter Results - Delays
Filing of Third Quarter Form 10-Q; Will Restate Results of
Certain Prior Periods; Reaffirms Guidance for Fourth Fiscal
Quarter." The release stated in part:

BISYS, a leading provider of business process outsourcing
solutions for the financial services sector, today provided an
update on its previously reported results of operations for the
quarter ended March 31, 2004.

Based upon a continuing review and analysis of commissions
receivable in its Life Insurance division, BISYS has determined
that the previously reported adjustment of $24.7 million ($15.5
million net of tax) to commissions receivable in its Life
Insurance division will be increased to approximately $70
million to $80 million (approximately $44 million to $50 million
net of tax).

BISYS has also determined that the adjustment requires a
restatement of its financial results for each of the fiscal
years ended June 30, 2003, 2002 and 2001, as well as its interim
results for fiscal 2004, to reflect the impact of the adjustment
on each of the periods presented. The Company intends to file
its Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2004, as
soon as practicable.

According to Jim Fox, BISYS' executive vice president and CFO,
"The adjustment to commissions receivable in our Life Insurance
division is larger than we had previously anticipated, and after
further analysis requires that we restate our previously
reported results to appropriately reflect the impact of the
adjustment on prior periods. We look forward to presenting our
restated historical financial results as soon as practicable,
and expect the substantial majority of the final adjustment,
including the $24.7 million previously reported in our third
fiscal quarter of 2004, to relate to fiscal years prior to
2003."

Upon this news, the stock dropped below $13 per share. Plaintiff
seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of Bisys
securities during the Class Period.

For more details, contact attorney Neil Rothstein by Mail: 108
Norwich Avenue, Colchester, CT 06415 by Phone: 1-800-332-2259 or
860/537-3818 by Fax: 860/537-4432 by Mail:
nrothstein@scott-scott.com


BUSINESS OBJECTS: Schatz & Nobel Launches Securities Suit in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schatz & Nobel, P.C., initiated a securities
class action in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of California on behalf of all persons who
purchased the publicly traded securities of Business Objects SA
(Nasdaq: BOBJ) between April 23, 2003 and April 30, 2004,
inclusive.  Also included are all those who acquired Business
Objects' shares through its acquisition of Crystal Decisions.

The Complaint alleges that Business Objects, a worldwide
provider of business intelligence solutions, and certain of its
officers and directors issued materially false statements
concerning the Company's financial condition. Specifically,
defendants failed to disclose that:

     (1) the Company's integration of Crystal Decisions was
         actually damaging its financial results;

     (2) many of the company's customers were confused about the
         synchronization of pricing and new solutions bundles
         and consequently, were delaying purchases or foregoing
         them entirely;

     (3) Business Objects' market share and demand for its
         Enterprise 6 products was being eroded by Cognos and
         Microsoft; and

     (4) Business Objects' financial results were inflated due
         to improper recognition of deferred revenues, or
         backlog, from the acquisition of Crystal Decisions.

On April 30, 2004, shares of Business Objects plunged as much as
22% after its first quarter profit fell missing analyst
forecasts.

For more details, contact Schatz & Nobel by Phone:
(800) 797-5499 by E-Mail: sn06106@aol.com or visit their Web
Site: www.snlaw.net


GENTA INC.: Pomerantz Haudek Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in NJ
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP
initiated a securities class action against Genta Inc.
(Nasdaq:GNTA) and two of the Company's senior officers, on
behalf of all persons or entities who purchased the securities
of Genta during the period between September 10, 2003 through
May 3, 2004, inclusive.  The case was filed in the United States
District Court for the District of New Jersey.

The complaint alleges that Genta, a biopharmaceutical company
focused on anticancer therapy, and the Company's Chairman
Raymond P. Warrell, Jr., and President Loretta M. Itri, violated
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
by misrepresenting the potential and effectiveness of its
developmental cancer drug, Genasense, which artificially
inflated the price of Genta's stock.

As alleged in the Complaint, throughout the Class Period,
defendants repeatedly touted positive clinical trial results for
Genasense and emphasized that the Food & Drug Administration
("FDA") was reviewing it for approval on an expedited basis.
However, defendant's statements about the efficacy and safety of
Genasense were without any reasonable basis in fact, such that
there was no likelihood of FDA approval. It is alleged that the
veracity and methodology of the testing were highly suspect.

On April 30, 2004, the market began to learn about the true
picture when Reuters reported that an FDA Advisory Committee
questioned the veracity and reliability of Genta's data
regarding the effectiveness of Genasense. More revelations
followed on May 3, 2004 about the problems with the Company's
testing of the drug. In reaction to this announcement, Genta
shares fell from $14.43 to $5.11 in the two trading days from
April 30, 2004 to May 3, 2004 on very heavy volume.

For more details, contact Andrew G. Tolan, Esq. of Pomerantz
Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP by Mail: 100 Park Avenue, New
York, NY 10017-5516 by Phone:(888) 476-6529 ((888) 4-POMLAW) by
Fax: (212) 661-8665 by E-Mail: agtolan@pomlaw.com or visit their
Web Site: www.pomerantzlaw.com


KRISPY KREME: Weiss & Yourman Lodges Securities Suit in M.D. NC
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Weiss & Yourman, has commenced a class action
lawsuit against Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Inc. ("Krispy Kreme")
(NYSE:KKD) and its officers in the United States District Court,
Middle District of North Carolina, on behalf of purchasers of
Krispy Kreme securities between August 21, 2003 and May 7, 2004.

The complaint charges the defendants with violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, alleging that defendants issued
false and misleading statements during the August 21, 2003 to
May 7, 2004 Class Period.

This action seeks to recover damages on behalf of defrauded
investors who purchased Krispy Kreme securities.

For more details, contact David C. Katz, Moshe Balsam, or James
E. Tullman of Weiss & Yourman by Mail: The French Building, 551
Fifth Avenue, Suite 1600, New York, New York 10176 by Phone:
(888) 593-4771 or (212) 682-3025 or by E-Mail: info@wynyc.com


LEHMAN ABS: Barrack Rodos Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Barrack, Rodos & Bacine, commenced a securities
class action in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of
Corporate Backed Trust Certificates, Verizon New York Debenture-
Backed Series 2004-1 issued by Lehman ABS Corporation (NYSE:
CCG) between January 5, 2004 and May 11, 2004, inclusive.

The complaint charges defendants Lehman ABS Corp. ("LABS") and
Lehman Brothers, Inc. with violations of the Securities Act of
1933 (the "Securities Act"). The complaint alleges that in
January 2004, LABS created the Verizon New York Debenture-Backed
Series 2004-1 Trust by depositing $150,144,000 of 7 3/8%
Debentures, Series B, due 2032 issued by Verizon New York, Inc.
("Debenture") LABS had purchased on the open market. LABS
subsequently deposited an additional $55,144,000 of Debentures
into the Trust later in January 2004. Pursuant to a Registration
Statement, Prospectus and Prospectus Supplement, the Trust
issued and offered to the investing public, through LABS,
8,205,760 Certificates representing a proportionate undivided
beneficial ownership interest in the Trust. The Certificates
were sold for $25 per Certificate and paid a 6.20% interest
rate. The Securities and Exchange Commission maintains rules
governing sales of corporate debt backed trust certificates such
as the Certificates that are the subject of this class action
and only permits the sale of such certificates when the issuer
of the underlying securities files certain periodic reports with
the SEC. If the issuer of the underlying securities decides not
to file those reports, any corporate backed trust relating to
those securities must be liquidated.

On May 7, 2004, LABS announced that Verizon New York, Inc.
("Verizon NY"), the issuer of the Debentures underlying the
Certificates had elected to suspend the required reports and
that the Trust must be terminated. This announcement triggered
an event of default under the terms of the Trust, requiring the
liquidation of the Trust assets. The price of the Certificates
closed at $22 on May 11, 2004, the day that the Trustee
announced that it would liquidate the Debentures and the last
day of trading for the Certificates.

The Complaint alleges that the Prospectus was materially false
and misleading because it omitted to state material information
that the defendants had an obligation to disclose, including the
material fact that Verizon, the parent of Verizon NY, had
previously elected to suspend filing periodic SEC reports for
six of its domestic operating telephone subsidiaries in February
2003; that Verizon NY, one of 16 operating companies owned by
Verizon that filed reports with the SEC; and that Verizon had
established a plan in early 2003 to change its funding
procedures, which plan included the possible deregistration of
the public debt of its domestic operating telephone
subsidiaries, including Verizon NY.

For more details, contact Maxine Goldman, Shareholder Relations
Manager at Barrack, Rodos & Bacine, by Mail: 3300 Two Commerce
Square, 2001 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103 by Phone:
215-963-0600 by Fax: 215-963-0838 or by E-Mail:
mgoldman@barrack.com


OMNIVISION TECHNOLOGIES: Lerach Coughlin Lodges Stock Suit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Lerach Coughlin Stoia & Robbins LLP initiated a
securities class action in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of California on behalf of purchasers of
OmniVision Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ:OVTI) publicly traded
securities during the period between February 19, 2003 and June
8, 2004, inclusive.

The complaint charges OmniVision and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. OmniVision designs, develops and markets high-performance,
cost-efficient semiconductor image sensor devices.
The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
caused OmniVision's shares to trade at artificially inflated
levels through the issuance of false and misleading financial
statements. As a result of this inflation, OmniVision was able
to complete a secondary offering of its stock raising $113
million in net proceeds and the three individual defendants were
able to sell 1,322,950 shares of their OmniVision stock for
proceeds exceeding $30 million.

On June 9, 2004, OmniVision delayed the release of its 4thQ FY
2004 results and admitted it may have to restate results due to
the timing of revenue recognition during the first three
quarters of FY 2004, and possibly FY 2003. The Company also
reduced earnings guidance for the 1stQ FY 2005. In response to
this announcement, the Company's shares plummeted to as low as
$17.34 per share, before closing at $17.63 on enormous volume of
40.1 million shares. This was a reduction in OmniVision's stock
price of nearly 50% from the Class Period high of $33.39 per
share.

For more details, contact William Lerach or Darren Robbins of
Lerach Coughlin Stoia & Robbins LLP by Phone: 800/449-4900 by E-
Mail: wsl@lcsr.com or visit their Web Site:
http://www.lcsr.com/cases/omnivision/


OMNIVISION TECHNOLOGIES: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Suit in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a securities
class action in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California on behalf of all purchasers of
the common stock of OmniVision Technologies, Inc. (Nasdaq: OVTI)
from June 11, 2003 through June 8, 2004, inclusive.

The complaint charges OmniVision, Shaw Hong, H. Gene McCowan,
and John T. Rossi with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder. The complaint alleges that defendants, during the
Class Period, issued a series of material misrepresentations to
the market concerning the Company's financial condition thereby
artificially inflating the price of OmniVision's common stock.

More specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Company failed
to disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse
facts, which were known to defendants or recklessly disregarded
by them:

     (1) that the Company knew or recklessly disregarded the
         fact that the Company was losing customers to larger
         rivals such as Micron Technologies, Inc., Texas
         Instruments Inc., and National Semiconductor
         Corporation;

     (2) that the Company knew or recklessly disregarded that
         its surging growth was hitting a plateau, due to the
         decline in the customer base;

     (3) that the defendants, in order to mask the decline in
         growth, manipulated the Company's financial results
         through improper revenue recognition, which was in
         violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles;
         and

     (4) that as a result, the Company's financial results were
         materially inflated and inaccurate at all relevant
         times.

On June 9, 2004, OmniVision announced, before the market opened,
that it had rescheduled the release of its fiscal 2004 fourth-
quarter and year-end results to June 23, 2004, after the close
of the market, from the previously announced date of June 9,
2004. Additionally, OmniVision announced that it was considering
the restatement of financial results for certain quarters of
fiscal 2004 and, possibly, fiscal 2003. News of this shocked the
market. Shares of OmniVision fell $7.84 per share or 30.78
percent on June 9, 2004, to close at $17.63 per share, on
unusually high volume.

For more details, contact Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Stuart L.
Berman, Esq. of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP by Mail: Three Bala
Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA  19004 by Phone:
1-888-299-7706 or 1-610-667-7706 or by E-Mail:
info@sbclasslaw.com


POZEN INC.: Charles J. Piven Launches Securities Suit in M.D. NC
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities
class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted,
exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of POZEN, Inc.
(Nasdaq:POZN) between July 31, 2003 and May 28, 2004, inclusive
(the "Class Period").

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Middle District of North Carolina against defendant POZEN and
one or more of its officers and/or directors.

The action charges that defendants violated federal securities
laws 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.

No class has yet been certified in the above action.

For more details, contact the Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven,
P.A. by Mail: The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt
Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202 by Phone:
410/986-0036 or by E-Mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com


POZEN INC.: Squitieri & Fearon Files Securities Suit in M.D. NC
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Squitieri & Fearon, LLP has initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Middle District of North Carolina on behalf of persons who
purchased or otherwise acquired securities of Pozen Inc.
("Pozen" or the "Company") (Nasdaq:POZN) during the period from
July 31, 2003 through May 28, 2004.

The lawsuit charges that defendants violated the federal
securities laws by issuing a series of materially false and
misleading statements to the market about the Company's drugs
called MT-100 and MT-300 which artificially inflated the price
of the Company's securities.

For more details, contact Stephen J. Fearon, Jr. of Squitieri &
Fearon, LLP by Mail: 32 East 57th Street, 12th Floor, New York,
NY 10175 by Phone: (212) 421-6492 or by E-Mail:
Stephen@sfclasslaw.com


POZEN INC.: Lasky & Rifkind Commences Securities Suit in M.D. NC
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Lasky & Rifkind, Ltd., initiated a securities
class action in the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, on behalf of persons who purchased
or otherwise acquired publicly traded securities of POZEN Inc.
(NASDAQ:POZN) between July 31, 2003 and May 28, 2004, inclusive.
The lawsuit was filed against POZEN, John R. Plachetka, Matthew
E. Czajkowski and John R. Barnhardt ("Defendants").

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. Specifically, the complaint alleges that
Defendants failed to disclose that Defendants knew or recklessly
disregarded the fact that MT-100 and MT-300, proprietary drug
formulations used to treat migraines, were unsafe and
ineffective. Despite allegedly knowing these facts, the Company
entered into various licensing agreements to book revenues, and
that as a result of booking these revenues, Defendants were able
to allegedly inflate the Company's stock price and attain large
bonuses, which were tied to the stock price rather that the
Company's product pipeline. Additionally the complaint alleges
with respect to MT-300, Defendants knew or recklessly
disregarded that the drug formulation resulted in higher
incidences of nausea and vomiting as compared to a placebo and
failed to show statistical superiority with regard to
controlling the symptoms of migraines. Lastly with respect to
MT-100, the complaint alleges that Defendants knew the chances
of MT-100's being approved by the Food & Drug Administration
("FDA") were slim, as the drug failed to meet its primary
endpoint.

On June 1, 2004, the Company announced that it had received a
non-approvable letter from the FDA on May 28, 2004, concerning
the Company's NDA for MT-100 for the acute treatment of
migraine. The letter cited the lack of superiority of MT-100
over naproxen for sustained pain relief, which was the primary
endpoint for its two component studies. This non-approvable
letter followed a non-approvable letter in October 20, 2003, for
the Company's MT-300 formulation, where it did not achieve
statistical significance vs. placebo. In response to the June 1,
2004 announcement, shares of POZEN reacted negatively, falling
$3.69 per share, or 37.2% to close at $6.23 per share on very
high volume.

For more details, contact Lasky & Rifkind, Ltd., by Phone:
(800) 495-1868 by E-Mail: investorrelations@laskyrifkind.com or
visit their Web Site: http://laskyrifkind.com/contact.htm


                            *********


A list of Meetings, Conferences and Seminars appears in each
Wednesday's edition of the Class Action Reporter. Submissions
via e-mail to carconf@beard.com are encouraged.

Each Friday's edition of the CAR includes a section featuring
news on asbestos-related litigation and profiles of target
asbestos defendants that, according to independent researches,
collectively face billions of dollars in asbestos-related
liabilities.

                            *********


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., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Frederick, Maryland
USA.   Glenn Ruel Se¤orin, Aurora Fatima Antonio and Lyndsey
Resnick, Editors.

Copyright 2004.  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  * * *