CAR_Public/040616.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Wednesday, June 16, 2004, Vol. 6, No. 117

                          Headlines

AETNA INC.: FL Court to Hold Settlement Hearing on July 20, 2004
ALLEN ORGAN: Recalls 1,757 Wooden Organ Benches For Injury Risk
AMERICAN NATIONAL: Settlement Reached in Race-Bias Pricing Suit
ANTITRUST: High Court Blocks Foreign Firms From Suing in the US
AUTOMOTIVE REFINISHING: Settlement Hearing Set September 1, 2004

BOEING CO.: WA Federal Jury Dismisses Racial Discrimination Suit
CALIFORNIA: CA Court Certifies San Francisco Strip Search Suit
CALIFORNIA: Deaf, Hard-of-Hearing File Suit V. Burbank Airport
CATHOLIC CHURCH: Vatican Faces Sexual-Abuse Lawsuit in W.D. KY
CHATHAM FOREST: Appeals Court Favors Residents in Pollution Suit

CHINA LIFE: Sidley Austin To Defend Firm In NY Securities Suit
CRAYFISH COMPANY: Suit Settlement Hearing Set For July 28,2004
DEL GLOBAL: SEC Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. New York
DENNY'S RESTAURANT: Minorities Lodge Race Discrimination Lawsuit
DOMPERIDONE PRODUCTS: FDA Warns Of Unapproved Lactation Drug

ENTROPIN INC.: CA Court Grants Motion For Suit Summary Judgment
FIDELITY CAPITAL: SEC Launches, Settles Securities Fraud Charges
FLORIDA: Church Apologizes For Turning Away Black Women in 1964
GODADDY SOFTWARE: E-Publisher Launches AS Suit Over Harassment
J.P. MORGAN: Workers Lodge Overtime Law Violations Suit in Texas

JUST FOR FEET: SEC Launches Complaint V. Former Officials in AL
KEY ENERGY: Shareholders Launch Securities Fraud Suit in W.D. TX
MASTER GRAPHICS: SEC Lodges Accounting Fraud Lawsuit in W.D. TN
MEASUREMENT SPECIALITIES: Settlement Hearing Set July 20, 2004
MEAT PACKERS: SD Court Allows Price-fixing Lawsuit To Proceed

MISSISSIPPI: High Court Considering Class Action Litigation Rule
MOTORCAR PARTS: SEC Announces the Sentencing of Former Executive
ONEOK INC.: Court Moves Gas Explosion Suit To Wyandotte County
PAYPAL: To Settle CA Consumer Fraud Lawsuit For $9.25 Million
RAYOVAC CORPORATION: Settlement Hearing Set For July 22, 2004

ROYAL BANK: Consumers Sue Over Software Glitch, Paycheck Errors
ROYAL FOOD: Recalls Raw Almonds Due To Salmonella Contamination
SAHADI FINE: Recalls Raw Almonds Due To Salmonella Contamination
SECURITY COMPANIES: Montgomery McCracken Lodges Civil Suit in CA
SHELL OIL: Reaches $20M Settlement on Canadian Consumer Lawsuit

SPECIALTY LABORATORIES: Reaches Settlement For Securities Suit
SUNSHINE SPROUTS: Recalls Sprouts For Salmonella Contamination
TIDEL TECHNOLOGIES: TX Court Grants Certification To Stock Suit
TOWRY LAW: Investors Launch Lawsuit To Recover Hedge Fund Losses
TREX COMPANY: NJ Court Grants Certification To Consumer Lawsuit

TRI-STATE CREMATORY: Court Grants Approval to $39.5 Million Pact
UNITED STATES: Senator Postpones Submission of Class Action Bill
UNITED STATES: High Court Dismisses $33Bln Tehran Hostages Suit
VITAMIN ANTITRUST: Opt-out Notices Sent To Class Members in Suit
VOLKSWAGEN OF AMERICA: FL Spoiler Suit Certified as Class Action

                  Meetings, Conferences & Seminars

* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
* Online Teleconferences

                   New Securities Fraud Cases

BEA SYSTEMS: Schatz & Nobel Lodges Securities Lawsuit in N.D. CA
BEA SYSTEMS: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. CA
KRISPY KREME: Marc S. Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in M.D. NC
ODYSSEY HEALTHCARE: Bernstein Liebhard Files Stock Lawsuit in TX
OMNIVISION TECHNOLOGIES: Charles Piven Lodges CA Securities Suit

                           *********

AETNA INC.: FL Court to Hold Settlement Hearing on July 20, 2004
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of
Florida - Miami Division will hold a fairness hearing for the
proposed settlement for the class action filed against Aetna,
Inc. on behalf of all dentists who provided covered services to
any individual enrolled in or covered by an Aetna dental care
plan at any time between August 15, 1995 and April 23, 2004.

The court has scheduled a fairness hearing to consider the
proposed settlement and other matters, which will take place on
July 20, 2004, at 2:30 pm at The U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Florida, 301 N. Miami Ave., Miami, Florida.

For more details, contact D. Brian Hufford, Esq. & Robert J.
Axelford, Esq., of Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross, LLP
by Mail: 100 Park Ave., New York, NY 10017-5516 by Phone:
(212) 661-1100 by Fax: (212) 661-8665 by E-Mail:
dbhufford@pomlaw.com or rjaxelrod@pomlaw.com or visit any of the
following: www.pomerantzlaw.com or www.aetna.com or www.ada.org
OR Managed Care Litigation c/o Berdon Claims Administration, LLC
by Mail: P.O. Box 9014, Jericho, NY 11753-8914 by Phone:
(800) 766-3330 by Fax: (516) 931-0810 or visit:
www.berdonllp.com/claims


ALLEN ORGAN: Recalls 1,757 Wooden Organ Benches For Injury Risk
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Allen Organ Company of Macungie, PA is cooperating with the
United States Consumer Product Safety Commission by voluntarily
recalling about 1,757 wooden organ benches.

The wooden bench may collapse because not enough glue was used
during assembly. Four incidents have been reported involving
loose joints for the legs of the organ bench. No injuries have
been reported.

The recalled wooden organ bench is sold primarily to churches
and theaters as part of a package that also includes an organ,
console, pedal board, and speaker cabinets. A very small number
of the wooden organ benches were sold separately. The wooden
organ bench measures 26 inches high, 12 inches wide, and 48
inches long. The benches are made of oak, red oak, and walnut
colored wood.

Music retailers nationwide from April 1999 through November 1999
and from December 2002 through January 2004 sold the benches.

For more details, call your dealer/retailer to schedule an
appointment to repair your wooden organ bench or call the Allen
Organ Company Service Department by Phone: (610) 966-2203
between 8 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. ET Monday through Friday or by e-
mail: allenservice@allenorgan.com


AMERICAN NATIONAL: Settlement Reached in Race-Bias Pricing Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Texas Commissioner Jose Montemayor of the Texas Department of
Insurance (TDI) announced that the American National Insurance
Co. has agreed to pay more than $3 million in settlements to
thousands of black and Hispanic consumers nationwide whose
policies were affected by race-based pricing, reports the Tyler
Morning Telegraph.

"This settlement is another step in correcting past practices
that were just plain wrong," Montemayor said. "The restitution
will help restore the value that otherwise would have been
available without consideration of race."

The American National after the announcement of the settlement
denied that it violated insurance laws or regulations.

According to TDI the settlement applies to policies with a face
amount of $1,000 or less issued between 1936 and 1939 to blacks
and Hispanics and between 1948 and 1964 to blacks and where a
surrender or death benefit was paid since Dec. 31, 1959.

As part of the settlement the company also has agreed to fund a
national campaign to try to notify additional policyholders who
are eligible to participate in the settlement.

Other states that signed onto the settlement include California,
Louisiana, Oklahoma and Georgia. TDI said besides Texas, those
states had the greatest number of affected policies.


ANTITRUST: High Court Blocks Foreign Firms From Suing in the US
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Supreme Court ruled that foreign companies
can't automatically press claims of international price-fixing
in American courts, the Associated Press reports.

The high court ruled in the suit styled "F. Hoffmann-La Roche
Ltd. v Empagran, 03-724," filed against F. Hoffmann-La Roche
Ltd., Aventis, which was Rh“ne-Poulenc Inc. when the lawsuit
suit was filed in 2000; and several other manufacturers and
distributors of vitamins for use by humans and animals.

Some of the companies earlier pleaded guilty to criminal
antitrust charges in the United States, paying federal fines of
$900 million, paid civil penalties imposed by the European Union
and individual foreign countries and settled other lawsuits, all
related to the vitamin price fixing.

The five plaintiffs, representing a class of all foreign
purchasers of the defendants' vitamins, are in Australia,
Ecuador, Panama and Ukraine.  They are seeking triple damages
based on their purchases outside the United States.

The Federal District Court dismissed the suit on the grounds
that "persons injured abroad in transactions otherwise
unconnected with the United States" could not invoke the Sherman
Antitrust Act.  The United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit, in a January 2003 ruling,
reinstated the suit.  It held that as long as "someone, even if
not the foreign plaintiff who is before the court" can claim
injury from a defendant's antitrust violation in the United
States, foreign plaintiffs can also sue that defendant for the
purely foreign effects of its conduct as well. The case has not
yet gone to trial.

By a vote of 8-0, the high court overturned the appellate court
decision, which could have opened large drug manufacturers to
new lawsuits over their participation in a vitamin cartel.  The
cartel set prices for vitamins bought by commercial farmers,
food makers and others around the world.

The ruling, however, does not end the case.  Justice Stephen
Breyer wrote that vitamin purchasers can still press an
alternative legal theory in lower U.S. courts, AP reports.  Five
other justices agreed with him fully, while Justices Antonin
Scalia and Clarence Thomas agreed with the outcome of the case.
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor did not take part, presumably
because she holds stock in several drug companies.


AUTOMOTIVE REFINISHING: Settlement Hearing Set September 1, 2004
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania will hold a fairness hearing for the proposed
settlement in the Automotive Refinishing Paint Antitrust
Litigation on behalf of all parties involved in the class
action.

The Court has scheduled a hearing to approve the proposed
settlement, which will occur on September 1, 2004 at 2:00pm, in
Courtroom 8A at the United States Courthouse, 601 Market Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106.

For more details, contact Warren Rubin or Tine Moukoulis of the
law offices of Bernard M. Gross, PC by Mail: 1515 Locust Street,
2nd Floor, Philadelphia, PA 19102 by Phone: (215) 561-3600 OR
Gerald Rodos or Mark Rosen of Barracks Rodos & Bacine by Mail:
3300 Two Commerce Square, Philadelphia, PA 19103 by Phone:
(215) 963-0600 OR Joseph Kohn or Douglas Abrahams of Kohn Swift
& Graf, PC by Mail: One South Broad Street, Suite 2100,
Philadelphia, PA 19107 by Phone: (215) 238-1700


BOEING CO.: WA Federal Jury Dismisses Racial Discrimination Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
A Washington federal jury rejected the claims of former and
current Boeing Co. employees that the Company systematically
discriminated against workers from a collection of Middle
Eastern and Asian nations, SeattlePI.com reports.

The suit dates back to 1999, when nine individuals alleged that
they were subjected to harassment, retaliation and
discrimination because of their Asian backgrounds.  The suit
covers 1,850 former and current Boeing employees in Washington
state and focuses on pay practices.

The Plaintiff's lawyers sought to prove that patterns and
systems existed within Boeing that discriminated against the
group, made up of workers from Afghanistan, Cambodia, Vietnam,
India, Pakistan, the Philippines and Iran.

A key lawyer of the Plaintiff, Attorney Harish Bharti vowed to
appeal the ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals,
arguing that the jury received flawed instructions that raised
the threshold of proof too high. Bharti complained that U.S.
District Judge Robert Lasnik's jury instructions made it
impossible for the plaintiffs to win. The judge told jurors to
ignore Boeing's business practices unless they were
intentionally discriminatory.

"My clients did not have a prayer based on the erroneous jury
instruction telling jurors to ignore Boeing's conduct even if
Boeing's compensation practices were unfair, incorrect or
unwise," Mr. Bharti said.  Judge Lasnik still must rule whether
Boeing's employment practices adversely affected the class,
whether the disparities were intentional or not. This doesn't
involve a jury.

After the verdict was read, Boeing spokesman Ken Mercer
reiterated that: "Boeing is firmly committed to a workplace
where employees are treated fairly and are provided opportunity
to build a successful career within the company."


CALIFORNIA: CA Court Certifies San Francisco Strip Search Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court in San Francisco, California
granted class certification to a lawsuit filed against the San
Francisco County jail, over its former policy of strip-searching
inmates, the Daily Breeze (Torrance, CA) reports.

In an effort to meet state legal standards, the county tightened
its strip-search and safety policies in January 2003.  The
policy gave guards considerable authority to decide when a new
inmate should be strip-searched.  Such searches were also
required for everyone confined to "safety cells," which could be
based on a guard's assessment that an inmate was acting
bizarrely.

Some inmates complained that they were strip-searched because
they were crying and uncooperative.  Many inmates were left
naked in safety cells and denied food, water or blankets for
extensive periods.

Judge Charles Breyer allowed the suit to proceed on behalf of a
large number of inmates who were arrested for relatively minor
crimes and were strip-searched without evidence that they were
hiding drugs or weapons.  The suit will also include inmates who
were strip-searched before being placed in barren "safety cells"
for their own protection.

Judge Breyer has not ruled on the legality of the former policy,
which will be determined when the case is tried.  The ruling
rejected the city's argument that inmates' claims should be
decided individually because guards relied on a variety of
factors to justify each search, the Associated Press reports.


CALIFORNIA: Deaf, Hard-of-Hearing File Suit V. Burbank Airport
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Bob Hope Airport in Burbank, California faces a class action
filed on behalf of deaf and hard-of-hearing travelers using the
airport, alleging it fails to provide basic access to them, the
Merced Sun Star reports.

The Greater Los Angeles Agency on Deafness said the plaintiffs
have been shut out of the exchange of critical information at
the airport due to a lack of TTY telephones and monitors
displaying boarding and paging information.

"The 30 million people living in this country who are either
deaf or have experienced some degree of hearing loss are tired
of waiting for institutions such as airports, which serve the
general public, to voluntarily provide the equal access that is
required under the law," attorney Kevin Knestrick told the
Merced Sun Star.

Lawyer for the plaintiffs Sid Wolinsky told the Sun Star that
the airport was among the worst when it came to adequate
services and infrastructure to assist hearing-impaired
travelers.  He added that deaf and hearing-impaired people often
miss flights because the frequent changes in takeoff times and
gate assignments are only announced audibly and not displayed on
video monitors.

Airport officials told the Sun Star they had not yet seen the
suit but are willing to work with Disability Rights Advocates,
the nonprofit law firm leading the suit.


CATHOLIC CHURCH: Vatican Faces Sexual-Abuse Lawsuit in W.D. KY
--------------------------------------------------------------
Law firm William F. McMurry & Associates filed a federal lawsuit
seeking class action status in U.S. District Court for the
Western District of Kentucky against the Vatican on behalf of
three man alleging abuse as far back as 1928 filed, The Courier-
Journal reports.  The suit has been assigned to Judge John G.
Heyburn II.

William F. McMurry accused the leaders of the Roman Catholic
Church of orchestrating a cover-up of priests who allegedly
molested thousands of American children.  He is seeking
unspecified monetary damages from the Vatican, and requesting
that:

     (1) a federal judge supervise the Vatican's conduct for 10
         years and that

     (2) injunctions be issued requiring the Vatican to "cease
         its violations of the internationally recognized human
         rights of children" and "to report all allegations of
         childhood sexual abuse" in the United States.

The suit if granted class action is considered to be the first
ever class-action suit against the Vatican regarding sexual
abuse as well as the first sexual-abuse lawsuit to name the
Vatican as the sole defendant.  Other sexual-abuse lawsuits have
named the Vatican only as a co-defendant with dioceses and
religious orders in cases that have been dismissed or are
pending.

According to legal experts, Mr. McMurry, who last year
represented 243 victims in reaching a $25.7 million settlement
with the Archdiocese of Louisville is facing insurmountable
obstacles in this new suit, which singles out the Vatican.

Mark Chopko, general counsel for the U.S. Conference of Catholic
Bishops, called McMurry's suit a "long shot" that likely will be
dismissed. Chopko also questioned McMurry's decision to sue on
behalf of plaintiffs who already settled with dioceses. "They
have already had their day in court. "

For more details, contact William F. McMurry of William F.
McMurry & Associates by Mail: 4801 Olympia Park Plaza, Suite
4800, Louisville, Kentucky 40241 (Jefferson Co.) by Phone:
502-326-9000 by Fax: 502-326-9001


CHATHAM FOREST: Appeals Court Favors Residents in Pollution Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
A three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
allowed the class action filed against Chatham Forest Product
Mills, by New York residents, alleging the Company would add
unacceptable levels of air pollution to an area that already has
higher-than-normal cancer rates, the Knight-Ridder / Tribune
Business News reports.

In a 16-page decision, the panel stated that the original class
action filed by the residents near the planned site of the
oriented strand board mill is valid under the federal Clean Air
Act.  The original case, which had been dismissed on a defense
motion, was to be reinstated and was sent back by Judge Thomas
J. Meskill to the U.S. District Court in Syracuse for further
deliberation.

Last fall, U.S. District Court Judge Frederick A. Scullin Jr. of
Syracuse threw out the class action suit, ruling that the state
Department of Environmental Conservation properly issued a
"synthetic minor source" air permit to Chatham. In such an
agreement a facility voluntarily agrees to limit its emission of
certain chemicals to less than 100 tons a year.

On Friday, Judge Meskill wrote that Judge Scullin erred in
ruling that the neighbors failed to state a cause of action
against Chatham, which has argued that private entities are
immune from lawsuits by citizens under section 304(a)(3) of the
Clean Air Act.


CHINA LIFE: Sidley Austin To Defend Firm In NY Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
China Life Insurance has chosen law firm Sidley Austin Brown &
Wood to defend it in a class action filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf
of its shareholders, thelawyer.com reports.

Prominent American firm Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman filed
the suit on behalf of the Company's independent shareholders,
charging the Company and some of its directors with violations
of federal securities laws.  The breaches included an alleged
failure by China Life to disclose financial irregularities
relating to the insurance giant's state-owned parent, which
artificially inflated its share price.

The law firm beat US rival Shearman & Sterling for the post.  As
well as beating Shearman, which was also invited to pitch for
the work, Sidley Austin's appointment will be a blow for China
Life's new adviser Debevoise & Plimpton, which was ignored by
the company on the class action, thelawyer.com reports.

However, it is likely that Debevoise, which represented China
Life for the first time on the flotation, missed out because of
a potential conflict.  One source told thelawyer.com, "The key
issue in the case is going to be the adequacy of the due
diligence carried out by the company's underwriters and legal
advisers."

A Debevoise source said, "It's not unusual for clients to have
separate advisers for corporate and contentious work. The firm
still advises China Life on corporate matters."


CRAYFISH COMPANY: Suit Settlement Hearing Set For July 28,2004
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York will hold a fairness hearing for the proposed $9
million settlement for the class action filed against the
Crayfish Company, Ltd. on behalf of all persons who purchased
the American Depository Shares ("ADSs") of the Company between
March 8, 2000 and including November 21, 2000.

The court has scheduled a fairness hearing to approve the
proposed settlement, which will occur on July 28, 2004, at 2:30.

For more details, contact Stanford P. Dumain, Esq. of Milberg
Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP by Mail: One Pennsylvania Plaza,
New York, NY 10119 OR Ralph M. Stone, Esq. of Shalov Stone &
Bonner LLP by Mail: 485 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1000, New York, NY
10018 or by by Phone: (212) 239-4340 OR Gilardi & Co. LLC,
Claims Administrator by Mail: P.O. Box 8040, San Rafael, CA
94912-8040 or visit their Web site: http://www.gilardi.com


DEL GLOBAL: SEC Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a Complaint in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
against Del Global Technologies Corp., Inc. (Del), a company
headquartered in Valhalla, New York, and five of its former
officers and directors.  The Commission charged Del, Leonard A.
Trugman, Del's former chairman and chief executive officer,
Michael H. Taber, Del's former chief financial officer, David
Engel, Del's former executive vice president and chief financial
officer, Seymour Rubin, a former Del executive and director, and
David Michael, a former Del director and former chairman of
Del's audit committee, with participating in a multi-year
accounting fraud at Del between 1997 and 2000. As detailed
below, defendants Del, Taber, Engel and Rubin have agreed to
settle this matter without admitting or denying the allegations
in the Commission's complaint.

The Commission's complaint alleges, among other things, that
Trugman orchestrated, and Taber, Engel and Rubin carried out a
financial fraud at Del that resulted in Del materially
overstating its reported revenues and caused Del to make
numerous material misrepresentations in Commission filings and
in press releases. According to the complaint, Del routinely
engaged in improper revenue recognition when it held open
quarters, prematurely shipped products to third-party
warehouses, and recorded sales on products that Del had not yet
manufactured. The complaint also alleges that Del improperly
accounted for inventory by recording obsolete inventory at full
value and overstating certain engineering work in process
values. In addition, the complaint alleges that Del improperly
characterized certain ordinary expenses as capital expenditures.
As alleged in the complaint, these actions contravened Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles and resulted in the overstatement
of Del's reported pre-tax income by at least $3.7 million (110%)
in fiscal year 1997, $5.2 million (161%) in fiscal year 1998,
and $7.9 million (466%) in fiscal year 1999 - and allowed Del to
represent that its' performance was on par with internal and
external expectations in the first three quarters of fiscal year
2000, when in fact those expectations outpaced the company's
actual performance by a wide margin.

The complaint further alleges that the Defendants engaged in a
cover-up to prevent Del's outside auditors from discovering the
fraud. Del kept two sets of books (one set for its auditors and
one correct set) and falsified documents such as shipping logs,
quality control records, and accounts receivable documents to
hide its fraudulent accounting practices from its outside
auditors. The complaint alleges that defendants Rubin and
Michael participated in some of these practices. Specifically,
the complaint alleges that in October 2000, they submitted phony
invoices to Del to support Taber's attempt to improperly
capitalize costs related to a Del acquisition. Michael was
previously suspended from appearing or practicing as an
accountant before the Commission, pursuant to Rule 102(e) of the
Commission's Rules of Practice. See In the Matter of Michael,
Adest & Blumenkrantz, et al., Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Rel. No. 41284, Accounting and Auditing Enforcement Rel. No.
1125 (April 14, 1999).

The Commission's complaint alleges that by engaging in the
foregoing conduct:

     (1) defendant Del violated the antifraud provisions of
         the federal securities laws (Section 17(a) of the
         Securities Act of 1933(Securities Act), Section 10(b)
         of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange  Act)
         and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5), as well as the reporting,
         books and records, and internal controls provisions of
         the Exchange  Act (Sections 13(a), 13(b)(2)(A) and
         13(b)(2)(B), and Exchange Act Rules 12b-20, 13a-1, and
         13a-13);

     (2) defendants Trugman, Engel, Taber and Rubin violated
         the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws
         (Section 17(a) of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of
         the Exchange  Act and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5), the
         internal control and books and records provisions of
         the Exchange Act (Section 13(b)(5) and Exchange  Act
         Rule 13b2-1), and the provisions of the Exchange Act
         that prohibit an officer or  director from making
         misleading statements to accountants (Exchange Act
         Rule 13b2-2), and

     (3) defendant Michael violated  the  internal control and
         books and records provisions of the Exchange Act
         Section 13(b)(5) and Exchange Act Rule 13b2-1), as well
         as the provisions of the Exchange Act that prohibit an
         officer or director from making misleading statements
         to accountants (Exchange Act Rule 13b2-2).

The complaint additionally charges Trugman with

     (i) aiding and abetting Del's violations of Sections 10(b),
         13(a), 13(b)(2)(A) and 13(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange
         Act, and Exchange Act Rules 10b-5, 12b-20, 13a-1, and
         13a-13, and

    (ii) acting as a control person of Del, pursuant to Exchange
         Act Section 20(a).

Defendants Del, Engel, Taber and Rubin have consented to the
entry of final judgments against them, without admitting or
denying the allegations in the Commission's complaint. The
Commission expects the penalties from the settling defendants to
be distributed pursuant to the Fair Fund provisions of Section
308(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

The settlement terms are subject to court approval. Del
consented to entry of a final judgment against the company that
permanently enjoins it from further violations of Section 17(a)
of the Securities Act, Sections 10(b), 13(a), 13(b)(2)(A), and
13(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act, and Exchange Act Rules 12b-20,
13a-1, and 13a-13. Del will also pay a civil penalty of $400,000
and $1 in disgorgement. The $400,000 civil penalty was imposed,
in part, because the company, upon the discovery of the
fraudulent accounting scheme by the firm's auditors,
commissioned an internal investigation that sought to shield the
architect of the fraud, former Del Chairman and CEO defendant
Leanord A. Trugman (Trugman), from liability. For example, Del's
Audit Committee hired Trugman's close personal friend to conduct
the investigation.

Moreover, during the internal investigation, Trugman and his
associate were permitted to speak to (and intimidate) witnesses
prior to their interviews.  After the Commission commenced its'
inquiry in this matter, Del hired independent outside counsel
who cooperated with the staff's investigation.

Taber, Engel and Rubin consented to entry of final judgments
against them that permanently enjoin them from further
violations of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act, Sections
10(b) and 13(b)(5) of the Exchange Act, and Exchange Act Rules
13b2-1 and 13b2-2 -- and permanently bar each of them from
acting as an officer or director of a public company.

Additionally, Engel has agreed to pay $50,000 in disgorgement of
ill-gotten gains, $15,940 in prejudgment interest thereon, and a
$50,000 civil penalty. Rubin has agreed to pay $32,162.97 in
disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, $8,941.69 in prejudgment
interest thereon, and a $75,000 civil penalty. Taber has also
agreed to entry of a Commission order, pursuant to Rule 102(e)
of the Commission's Rules of Practice that will bar him from
appearing or practicing before the Commission as an accountant.

The judgment against Taber waives his disgorgement obligation
and does not impose a civil penalty, based on Taber's sworn
statement of financial condition and other information furnished
to the Commission.

With respect to the two remaining defendants -- Trugman and
Michael  --  the Commission's complaint seeks a final judgment
permanently enjoining them from future violations of the federal
securities laws, barring them from serving as officers or
directors of a public company, and ordering them to pay civil
penalties. The complaint also seeks to have Trugman disgorge his
ill-gotten gains obtained from the foregoing conduct, and
prejudgment interest thereon.

The suit is styled "SEC v. Del Global Technologies Corp., Inc.,
Leonard A. Trugman, Michael H. Taber, David Engel, Seymour
Rubin, and David Michael, 04 CV 4092."


DENNY'S RESTAURANT: Minorities Lodge Race Discrimination Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Denny's Restaurant Corporation faces a petition filed in Greene
County Court, Illinois by 53 African-Americans, alleging that
they were forced to leave a Springfield, Illinois location
because of their race, the Springfield News-Leader Online
reports.

Alonzo and Annette Hilton and their relatives filed the suit,
alleging that Denny's employees called them racial epithets as
they left the 2823 N. Glenstone Ave. restaurant on July 11,
2002.  The plaintiffs mostly residents of Madison County,
Illinois, in the St. Louis area claim that they suffered
humiliation and emotional distress from the alleged incident,
their Springfield attorney Eric Jensen told the News-Leader.

While the petition sought compensatory and punitive damages
against Denny's, Mr. Jensen said his clients were motivated more
by principle than financial gain.  "I think they are just so
outraged that they would be treated that way in 2002. It's not
1957 Alabama," he said.

Attorney Curtis Hogue, who represents Denny's, told the News-
Leader, "The Denny's store did everything it could to
accommodate these people with a limited evening staff, and
evidence shows that."


DOMPERIDONE PRODUCTS: FDA Warns Over Unapproved Lactation Drug
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued
letters to pharmacies that compound products containing
domperidone, an unapproved drug used to increase milk production
(lactation).  The FDA also issued letters to firms that supply
domperidone for use in compounding, and is warning breastfeeding
women not to use the product because of safety concerns.

The Agency also is issuing an Import Alert which alerts FDA
field personnel to be on the lookout for attempts to import this
drug so that it can be detained and refused admission into the
U.S. if appropriate.

FDA took these actions because it has become aware that some
women who breastfeed and/or pump breast milk are purchasing this
drug, domperidone, from compounding pharmacies and from sources
in foreign countries to increase breast milk production.
Domperidone may increase the secretion of prolactin, a hormone
that is needed for lactation.

Although domperidone is approved in several countries outside
the U.S. to treat certain gastric disorders, it is not approved
in any country, including the U.S., for enhancing breast milk
production in lactating women and is also not approved in the
U.S. for any indication.

The agency is concerned with the potential public health risks
associated with domperidone. There have been several published
reports and case studies of cardiac arrhythmias, cardiac arrest,
and sudden death in patients receiving an intravenous form of
domperidone that has been withdrawn from marketing in a number
of countries. In several countries where the oral form of
domperidone continues to be marketed, labels for the product
contain specific warnings against use of domperidone by
breastfeeding women and note that the drug is excreted in breast
milk that could expose a breastfeeding infant to unknown risks.
Because of the possibility of serious adverse effects, FDA
recommends that breastfeeding women not use domperidone to
increase milk production.

The FDA recognizes the immense health benefits that breast milk
provides for a nursing infant and is taking these actions today
not to discourage women from breastfeeding but rather to warn
them not to use this particular drug while they are
breastfeeding.

The letters issued by FDA today stated that all drug products
containing domperidone (whether compounded or not) violate the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act) because they are
unapproved new drugs and misbranded. In addition, distribution
within the U.S., or importation of domperidone-containing
products, violates the law. FDA informed the warning letter
recipients that further violations of the Act may result in
enforcement actions including seizure and injunction.


ENTROPIN INC.: CA Court Grants Motion For Suit Summary Judgment
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Superior Court of the State of California for the County of
Riverside granted Entropin, Inc.'s (OTC Bulletin Board: ETOP)
motion for summary judgment and is expected to enter a judgment
in favor of the Company in the class action filed against the
Company and several of its officers and the directors.

The suit claims that the Company made false and misleading
statements in publicly disseminated press releases, registration
statements and other filings with the SEC and that one of its
directors sold stock for personal gain, an earlier Class Action
Reporter story (September 24,2003) story states.

"We are extremely happy with the court's decision to grant our
motion for summary judgment and dismiss the case. We have always
believed that we would ultimately prevail. Unfortunately, the
process of defending against the class action lawsuit was costly
and time consuming. We are pleased to put this matter behind us,
and continue focusing our energy on the future of the Company,"
commented Dr. Thomas G. Tachovsky, Entropin's President and
Chief Executive Officer, in a statement.

For more details, contact Thomas Tachovsky, Ph.D., President and
CEO or Patricia Kriss, CFO and VP, Finance & Administration by
Phone: (760) 775-8333 by E-mail: info@Entropin.com or visit the
firm's Website: http://www.Entropin.com.


FIDELITY CAPITAL: SEC Launches, Settles Securities Fraud Charges
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission issued an order
instituting and settling administrative proceedings (Order)
pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(Exchange Act) against Fidelity National Capital Investors,
Inc., a registered broker-dealer, for failing to supervise one
of its registered representatives who aided and abetted a Ponzi
scheme operated by Mark Drucker (Drucker).

The Order makes findings that from approximately June 1998
through September 1999, Drucker operated a Ponzi scheme out of a
Fidelity brokerage account in his name where he day-traded
options and equities.  Drucker raised approximately $6.3 million
and solicited investors by representing that they would receive
returns on their investments of 50% or more in ninety days or
less. The Order also makes findings that Drucker consistently
lost money from his trading and was dependent on new money from
investors to keep his Ponzi scheme from crashing.

The Order makes findings that Fidelity failed reasonably to
supervise Drucker's registered representative because it failed
to establish an adequate system to implement procedures
reasonably designed to detect and prevent violations of the
securities laws. The Order also makes findings that Fidelity
failed reasonably to supervise the activities of Drucker's
registered representative with a view to preventing his
willful aiding and abetting violations of Section 17(a) of the
Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and
Rule 10b-5 thereunder.


FLORIDA: Church Apologizes For Turning Away Black Women in 1964
---------------------------------------------------------------
A St. Augustine Florida church apologized for turning away two
black women in 1964, saying it regretted its action, the
Associated Press reports.

In 1964, an elderly white woman walked Audrey Willis and Janice
Boles, both child civil rights activists, to the First United
Methodist Church.  A church leader told the woman the girls were
not welcome.

"The deacon said, 'You can come in, but the little monkeys have
to stay outside,'" Ms. Boles said, AP reports.  "I would like to
say to all of you that I forgive you because I am a Christian."

Ms. Willis described being arrested when she tried to enter the
church.  "If I had it to do over again, I would," she said.

"We regret our actions," said Pastor Pat Turner-Sharpton of
First United Methodist Church said Sunday at a "service of
reconciliation," AP reported.  "We regret the hurt we caused
you.  We ask your forgiveness."

The church voted to accept all worshippers shortly after the
girls' arrests, but the memory of that incident has resurfaced
yearly, Pastor Turner-Sharpton said.  "If we could, we'd go back
and undo it."


GODADDY SOFTWARE: E-Publisher Launches AS Suit Over Harassment
--------------------------------------------------------------
GoDaddy Software faces a possible class action to be filed by
AIS, a major e-publisher with more than 300 developed content
sites and owner of more than 1,000 domain names, alleging
harassment and unfair treatment, the Knight-Ridder / Tribune
Business News reports.

AIS accused the Scottsdale-based Internet domain name registrar,
of being overzealous in enforcing its anti-spam policy.  AIS
also accused the Company of threatening domain name owners and
imposing "heavy fees" to allow owners to keep their Web site
names.

At one of their Internet news sites, the Company denied that it
has sent unsolicited e-mail messages, commonly called "spam."
Instead AIS accuses GoDaddy of trying to impose its moral values
on Web content.  The company points out that GoDaddy founder Bob
Parsons once led Parsons' Technology, which developed Quick
Verse Bible Software.

AIS further alleged that, "GoDaddy is the only registrar that is
trying to be judge/jury/executioner in their quest to clean up
the net, Other registrars clearly state they must get court
orders to act before they delete or terminate any domain names
for abuse, which can be spam related or morally questionable
content," the Tribune Business News reports.

An attorney for GoDaddy dismissed such charges and stated that
the company will continue its policy of investigating spam
complaints against its registrants.


J.P. MORGAN: Workers Lodge Overtime Law Violations Suit in Texas
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruckner Burch PLLC has filed a lawsuit in a Houston federal
court on Tuesday claiming that call center employees for J.P.
Morgan Chase & Co. are forced to work off the clock to keep
costs down and productivity up.

The suit alleges that workers are paid for the time they are on
the phone answering customer questions, but they are not paid
for the time spent logging on and off their computers, reading
management e-mail and gathering the necessary paperwork to take
the calls.

The suit further alleges that call center staffers are not paid
for the time it takes to send e-mail updates to management and
file their paperwork at the end of the workday, said Rex Burch,
an attorney for the workers.  Mr. Burch estimates that the call
center workers spend between 20 and 40 minutes each day
performing their required but unpaid duties.

The lawsuit seeks to represent the tens of thousands of Chase
workers in Houston, San Antonio and Arlington, as well as in
Pennsylvania, Arizona, Missouri, Massachusetts, Ohio, Colorado,
Florida, Delaware and Illinois.  It does not cover Chase
employees in New York.  A separate class action has been filed
on behalf of those employees

For more details, contact Rex Burch of Bruckner Burch, PLLC by
Mail: 5847 San Felipe St, Houston, TX 77057 by Phone:
(713) 877-8788 or by E-Mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com


JUST FOR FEET: SEC Launches Complaint V. Former Officials in AL
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a complaint in the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama against
Eric Tyra, Scott Wynne, and Peter Berman of Birmingham, Alabama,
and Scott Carey of Tarpon Springs, Florida, in connection with
the 1998 financial statements of Just for Feet, Inc., a large
shoe and sports apparel retailer formerly headquartered in
Birmingham, Alabama.

Tyra was an Executive Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer
for the company; Wynne was a Vice-President of Operations and
subsequently the President of the company's Superstore Division;
Berman was the company's Controller. Carey was Strategic Account
Manager for the Southeastern United States for Nike, Inc., a
shoe and sportswear company that was a major supplier for Just
for Feet.

The complaint alleges that from 1997 through 1999 defendants
Tyra, Wynne and Berman engaged in a number of schemes which were
undertaken in an effort to fraudulently bolster revenue
reporting for the company, including improper accounting for
advertising expenses and inventory. The complaint also alleges
that in the spring of 1999, Tyra, Wynne, and Berman, aided and
abetted by Carey, were instrumental in the acquisition and
presentation to outside auditors of fraudulent confirmations
used to allegedly confirm the validity of unearned receivables
Just for Feet had recognized from its vendors. The complaint
further alleges that the overstatement of income and assets
resulting from the misconduct was reflected on Just for Feet's
financial statements included in its Form 10-K filed for fiscal
year 1998, Forms 10-Q filed for the first and second quarters of
fiscal year 1999, and in its registration statements on Forms S-
8 and S-4 filed in May and June of 1999, respectively.

The complaint seeks a permanent injunction enjoining the
defendants from further violations of the securities laws. It
also seeks awards of disgorgement and prejudgment interest
thereon against Tyra, Wynne and Berman, and civil penalties
against all the defendants. Finally, the complaint further seeks
an order permanently prohibiting Tyra, Wynne and Berman from
acting as officers or directors.

The suit is styled "SEC v. Eric Tyra, Scott Wynne, Peter Berman,
and Scott Carey, Civil Action No. CV-04-P-1052-S."


KEY ENERGY: Shareholders Launch Securities Fraud Suit in W.D. TX
----------------------------------------------------------------
Key Energy Services, Inc. faces a securities class action filed
in the United States District Court for the Western District of
Texas, on behalf of its shareholders, the Compliance Reporter
states.

Prominent law firm Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Schulman
launched the suit, alleging that the Company's officers
knowingly disseminated reports that contained false information
that resulted in artificially inflated statements of assets.

According to the suit, a series of disclosures led to a drop in
share price. Disclosures included: that the company would miss
the extended deadline for filing its 10-K, that a $78 million
write down of assets was required and should have been reported
in previous years, and that "certain irregularities" were
uncovered in a division of the company that involved
misappropriation of funds and diversion of assets.

All the while, according to the complaint, the defendant senior
executives touted the "fundamental strength" of the company-
until finally the CEO was replaced and defendants withdrew Key's
earnings forecast for the year.  The suit charges the executives
were able to control this flow of misinformation but failed to
do so.


MASTER GRAPHICS: SEC Lodges Accounting Fraud Lawsuit in W.D. TN
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a complaint in the
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee
against Lance Turner Fair and Paul Melvin Henson, Jr.  Fair is
the former Chief Financial Officer and Henson the former Chief
Accounting Officer of Master Graphics, Inc., a Tennessee-based
printing company that was publicly traded on the NASDAQ National
Market System, but is now defunct. The complaint alleges that,
in the spring of 1999, Fair, Henson and Master Graphics'
Chief Executive Officer implemented a scheme to fraudulently
overstate the company's net income to meet analysts'
expectations. Pursuant to the plan, the company fraudulently
reclassified rent and salary expenses that Master Graphics had
already paid to its division presidents in the first quarter to
assets on the company's balance sheet, thus reducing expenses
and increasing income.  According to the complaint, this scheme
fraudulently overstated Master Graphics' net income by 628%, 46%
and 10% in the first, second and third quarter financial
statements, respectively, that the company filed with the
Commission in 1999.

The complaint alleges that Henson and Fair violated the
antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws (Section
17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934  (Exchange Act) and Exchange Act
Rule 10b-5), as well as the books and records and internal
controls provisions of the Exchange Act (Section 13(b)(5) and
Exchange Act Rule 13b2-1).  Without admitting or denying the
allegations of the complaint, Henson and Fair have consented to
a final judgment that imposes a $25,000 civil penalty against
each defendant.

Fair and Henson previously consented to cease and desist orders
finding that, based on the same conduct discussed herein, they
violated not only the provisions cited above but, also caused
Master Graphics to violate the reporting and books and records
provisions of the Exchange Act (Sections 13(a) and 13(b)(2)(A)
of the Exchange Act and Exchange Act Rules 12b-20 and 13a-13).

The suit is styled "SEC v.  Paul Melvin Henson, Jr. and Lance
Turner Fair, Case No. 04-2394 DP."


MEASUREMENT SPECIALITIES: Settlement Hearing Set July 20, 2004
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
will hold a fairness hearing for the proposed settlement for the
class action filed against Measurement Specialties, Inc. on
Behalf of all persons who purchased the common stock of the
Company during the period July 26, 2000 through and including
October 31, 2002.

The Court has scheduled a fairness hearing that will be held on
July 20, 2004, at 11:00 am, before the Honorable Katherine S.
Hayden at the Martin Luther King, Jr. Federal Building, 50
Walnut St., Newark, NJ 07101.

For more details, contact Frederic S. Fox or Christine M. Fox of
the law offices of Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer, LLP by Mail: 805
Third Avenue, 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10022


MEAT PACKERS: SD Court Allows Price-fixing Lawsuit To Proceed
-------------------------------------------------------------
South Dakota Circuit Court granted class certification to the
lawsuit filed by cattle producers against the nation's four
largest meatpackers, Aberdeen American News reports.  The suit
names as defendants:

     (1) Tyson Fresh Meats,

     (2) Excel Corporation,

     (3) Swift Beef Co. and

     (4) National Beef Packing Co.

In April 2001, the Agriculture Department began publishing boxed
beef prices, as required by the Livestock Mandatory Reporting
Act of 1999.  Six weeks later, the USDA discovered the prices
reported up to that point for choice and select beef had been
incorrect due to software problems.  Prices reported were lower
than actual prices.  Boxed beef refers to vacuum-sealed sections
of beef weighing about 78 pounds. Boxed beef is the main product
packers sell to their customers, who in turn sell beef to the
public.

Herman Schumacher of Herreid and others filed the suit, alleging
the packers knowingly used the inaccurately reported prices to
negotiate lower prices for producers.

U.S. Circuit Court Judge Charles Kornmann of Aberdeen filed the
class-action order Monday.  A jury will be asked to decide if
the packers owe producers money due to incorrect price reports
about three years ago.

In his order, Judge Kornmann wrote, "Because the defendants
purchase more than 80 percent of the cattle in this country,
individual cattle producers would have a disincentive to come
forward and sue the defendants. Most cattle producers cannot
risk losing their only buyers should defendants choose not to do
business with them any longer."

Arguing against class action certification last month, packers'
attorneys argued before Judge Kornmann that cattle producers who
bought feeder cattle from other producers during the six weeks
may have benefited from the inaccurate price reports.

But that's irrelevant to the case at hand, Kornmann's order
says: "We have a 'So-what?' situation. If some producers sold
cattle too cheap so as to unjustly enrich other producers, the
sellers can file a lawsuit to seek recovery."


MISSISSIPPI: High Court Considering Class Action Litigation Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Mississippi Supreme Court spent more than six hours Monday
discussing with a panel of lawyers and judges whether the High
Court should adopt a rule allowing class action litigation, the
Associated Press reports.

Supreme Court Justice Jess H. Dickinson assembled the panel,
which includes plaintiff lawyers who have pursued class action
litigation and defenses lawyers who have represented clients who
have been sued in class actions.  There were also
representatives of two corporations who have been sued in class
actions, three state trial judges and a law professor on the
panel.

Several panelists argued that a class action rule could be used,
among other things, in consumer litigation to benefit plaintiffs
with small claims but who could not afford to bring suit alone.

Lexington plaintiff attorney Don Barrett said Mississippi needs
to add a class action rule.  "For a wrong, there must be a
remedy," he said, AP reports. "We have a situation now where
there are wrongs without a remedy."

However, defense attorney Keith Raulston of Jackson said,
"adopting a class action rule in state court would be fraught
with problems," AP reports.  He urged the court not to create
new litigation, but to manage the litigation already on the
books.

Chief Justice James W. Smith Jr. told the Associated Press the
"court has had this matter under consideration for a few months,
along with a few other possible rule changes."  However, he said
there won't be quick action by the court.


MOTORCAR PARTS: SEC Announces the Sentencing of Former Executive
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Central
District of California announced that on May 20, Peter Bromberg
was sentenced to 10 months, including five months of
incarceration and five months of home detention, for his role in
a financial fraud at Motorcar Parts & Accessories, Inc. Bromberg
was Motorcar's CFO from 1994 until he resigned in May 1999.
Bromberg is a certified public accountant currently living in
Wellington, Florida.

Motorcar Parts and Accessories, Inc., now known as Motorcar
Parts of America, Inc., is a Torrance, California public
company that remanufactures automotive alternators and starters.
Motorcar's stock previously traded on Nasdaq and now trades on
the over-the-counter market.

In September 2002, the U.S. Attorney's Office charged that
Bromberg knowingly made false and misleading statements about
Motorcar's financial condition and performance in its 1997 and
1998 Forms 10-K filed with the SEC. Bromberg pled guilty to
these charges. Also in September 2002, the SEC filed civil fraud
charges against Motorcar and Bromberg, and both defendants
settled the SEC's action without admitting or denying the
complaint's allegations. Bromberg consented to the entry of a
judgment that ordered payment of $76,275 in disgorgement plus
prejudgment interest but waived all but $50,000 of this amount
and did not order a civil penalty based on his sworn
representations in his Statement of Financial Condition and
other documents submitted to the SEC.

In December 2003, the SEC and U.S. Attorney's Office brought
actions against Richard Marks, Motorcar's former President and
Chief Operating Officer.  Marks agreed to plead guilty to the
criminal charges, and will be sentenced on August 9. In
settlement of the SEC's civil fraud action, Marks paid over $1.2
million and was permanently barred from serving as an officer or
director of a public company.

The SEC's complaint and the Justice Department's criminal
charges alleged that the defendants engaged in fraudulent
accounting practices and falsified Motorcar's books and records,
thereby causing Motorcar to issue false and misleading financial
information to the investing public. The Commission's complaint
alleged that Motorcar overstated the company's pre-tax earnings
for fiscal year 1997 by $3,391,000 (59.8%) and for fiscal year
1998 by $3,576,000 (49.6%), that the overstated earnings figures
were reported to the public in Motorcar's annual reports on Form
10-K filed with the SEC for the fiscal years ended March 31,
1997, and 1998, and that Motorcar included its false 1997
financial statements in a registration statement filed with the
SEC in October 1997, for an offering that raised $19.8 million..

The suit is styled "SEC v. Motorcar Parts & Accessories, Inc.
and Peter Bromberg, USDC CDCA, Civil Action No. CV02-7269 DT
(SHx)."


ONEOK INC.: Court Moves Gas Explosion Suit To Wyandotte County
--------------------------------------------------------------
Reno County District Court in Kansas Judge Richard Rome moved
the class action filed against ONEOK Inc. to Wyandotte County
Court and set the trial to begin July or August 2004, the
Associated Press reports.

The suit was filed over the January 2001 gas explosions here
that killed two people.  Gas escaping from ONEOK's Yaggy storage
field northwest of Hutchinson is believed to be responsible for
a series of explosions that destroyed several businesses and
killed two people in Hutchinson.

The suit makes claims on behalf of all persons who own a
business or property in the county, with attorneys contending
that a gas leak and deadly explosions in 2001 devalued all those
properties. The lawsuit seeks $80 million for lost property
values and business.

Earlier this month, Judge Rome ruled that intense pretrial
publicity would make it hard for the Company to get an impartial
jury in Reno County.  He also noted that because landowners are
part of the lawsuit and thus disqualified from being jurors, it
would be difficult to find "a fair cross-section of the
community" to sit on the jury, AP reports.  Plaintiffs'
attorneys said they agreed with the judge's action, but ONEOK's
attorneys said they didn't have room on their schedules for a
summer trial.


PAYPAL: To Settle CA Consumer Fraud Lawsuit For $9.25 Million
-------------------------------------------------------------
PayPal, eBay's online payment system, agreed to settle for $9.25
million a consumer class action filed in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California, USA
Today reports.

Several PayPal customers filed the suit, charging the Company
with not appropriately communicating about customer transactions
and not appropriately processing limits that were placed on some
customer accounts.  The suit was filed on behalf of individuals
and businesses that had a PayPal account during the period from
October 1, 1999 through January 31, 2004, excluding PayPal users
in European Union member countries.

If the settlement is approved, the federal case and a similar
case pending in California State Court, will be dismissed.
PayPal, which was purchased by eBay in October 2002, did not
acknowledge that any of the plaintiffs' allegations are true.
"We're simply doing this to put the case behind us and to focus
on more productive aspects of our business," PayPal spokeswoman
Amanda Pires told Reuters.

Plaintiffs attorneys have asked the court for $3.3 million in
fees and $135,000 in costs that, if approved, would be deducted
from the settlement fund, Ms. Pires said.


RAYOVAC CORPORATION: Settlement Hearing Set For July 22, 2004
-------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for The Western District of
Wisconsin will hold a fairness hearing for the proposed
settlement for the class action filed against Rayovac Corp. and
its officers on behalf of all persons and entities, who
purchased or otherwise acquired the shares and common stock of
the Company between April 21, 2001 and September 19, 2001.

The Court has scheduled a fairness hearing to approve the
proposed settlement, which will take place in July 22, 2004, at
8:30 am, before the Honorable Barbara B Crabb, United States
District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, 120 North
Henry St., Madison, Wisconsin.

For more details, contact S. Gene Cauley, J. Allen Carney or
Randall K. Pulliam of Cauley Bowman Carney & Williams by Mail:
11001 Executive Center Drive, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72211
by Phone: (501) 312-8500 or (888) 551-9944 or (501) 312-8505 or
by E-Mail: gcauley@cauleybowman.com or acarney@cauleybowman.com
or rpulliam@cauleybowman.com OR Claims Administration - Rayovac
Corp. Securities Litigation by Mail: P.O. Box 170200, Milwaukee,
WI 53217-8016


ROYAL BANK: Consumers Sue Over Software Glitch, Paycheck Errors
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Royal Bank of Canada faces a class action filed in Montreal
Court, over a computer software glitch that occurred last week,
causing paychecks not to make it into its customers' bank
accounts, the Financial Post reports.

The Post's Theresa Tedesco further stated that, as a result of
the glitch, a domino effect occurred of unpaid rent, mortgages,
credit lines and other vital financial transactions.

Royal's customers in Quebec, led by Nicole Bergeron, are not
satisfied with the mea culpa and the bank's pledge to credit
their monthly service charges.  Ms. Bergeron and those who
joined her cause do not just want to be compensated for indirect
costs, such as having to hire a babysitter or nanny to take care
of the kids while they stood in long bank lines, the Post
reported.  They want that and more - $500 for each person who
had the potential to be inconvenienced by Royal's technical
difficulties.


ROYAL FOOD: Recalls Raw Almonds Due To Salmonella Contamination
---------------------------------------------------------------
Royal Food International is conducting a voluntary recall on its
distribution of raw whole almonds labeled as Almond Raw due to
the possibility of contamination with Salmonella Enteritidis.
The recalled almonds are packed in 5#, 10# and 25# boxes.

Salmonella is an organism, which 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.

Royal Food International distributes these products to retail
stores, cafes and delis in NY and NJ.

This recall action 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 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 of a full refund. For further information,
call Royal Food International at 718-392-3355 between 08:00 AM
and 06:00 PM.


SAHADI FINE: Recalls Raw Almonds Due To Salmonella Contamination
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sahadi Fine Foods, Inc. is conducting a voluntary recall on its
distribution of raw whole almonds packaged as Shelled Almonds
due to the possibility of contamination with Salmonella
Enteritidis. The recalled almonds are packed in 25-pound
packages under the Regina Brand with item code of 60280.

Salmonella is an organism, which 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.

Sahadi Fine Foods, Inc. distributes this product nationally to
retailers.

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 the
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 place of purchase for a full refund. For further
information, please contact Sahadi Fine Foods, Inc. by Mail:
4215 1st Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11232 by Phone: 718.369.0100 by Fax:
718.369.0800 or by e-mail: mail@sahadifinefoods.com (From Monday
to Friday at 8AM - 4PM)


SECURITY COMPANIES: Montgomery McCracken Lodges Civil Suit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Montgomery, McCracken, Walker & Rhoads on
Wednesday initiated a class action civil suit in California
against Titan Corp and CACI International, two U.S. security
companies that supplied interpreters and interrogators to the
Pentagon, accusing them of conspiring with unnamed government
officials in the torture and humiliation of Iraqi prisoners in
order to boost their profits, the UK Financial Times reports.

The Center for Constitutional Rights, a Washington-based legal
foundation who is represented by the law firm of Montgomery,
McCracken, Walker & Rhoads, filed the civil suit on behalf of
nine Iraqis, which called for the companies to halt such
activities, and to pay millions of dollars in compensation to
the victims.

It also lists as defendants a former Titan employee, Adel
Nakhla, who was stationed at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, as well
as two CACI employees, Stephen Stefanowicz and John Israel.

According to the suit the companies abused prisoners, because
they were intent on providing intelligence of any quality to the
military in order to meet quotas and win new assignments in the
lucrative private interrogation business. The suit further
claims that rape, electrocution of genitals and other forms of
abuse separate from those incidents already leaked to the public
were used.

"In order to meet quotas and crank out information, they simply
violated human rights," said Susan Burke, a lawyer at
Montgomery, McCracken, Walker & Rhoads, who is representing the
plaintiffs.

The complaint though offered no specific details to prove the
conspiracy allegation especially the identity of U.S. government
officials said to have taken part in such an illegal activity.


SHELL OIL: Reaches $20M Settlement on Canadian Consumer Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Shell Oil Co. reached a $20 million settlement of the class
action filed against it on behalf of Canadians with leaking
polybutylene plastic plumbing or heating systems, the Canadian
Press reports.

Another defendant, E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Co., previously
settled in the case.   Canadian courts approved DuPont's $30-
million settlement in May, with DuPont agreeing to pay 25 per
cent of replacement costs.  The faulty systems contain grey
plastic pipes made of polybutylene and grey acetal plastic
insert fittings.

"This has been a major problem - especially in areas like
British Columbia, Alberta and Quebec," James Poyner of the legal
firm Poyner Baxter said Friday in a release.  "Both Shell Oil
Co. and E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Co. have done the right thing
and put the interests of Canadian consumers first."

Members of the class can now apply for compensation from the
settlement.  For more details on claims, including all relevant
forms, contact the Claims administrator by Phone: 1-866-348-0333
or visit the Website: http://www.polypipes.ca.


SPECIALTY LABORATORIES: Reaches Settlement For Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Specialty Laboratories, Inc. reached an agreement to settle the
consolidated securities class action filed in the United States
District Court for the Central District of California, styled
"In re Specialty Laboratories Securities Litigation."

Subject to approval by the District Court, the settlement calls
for payment of $12 million, the entirety of which will be paid
by Specialty's insurance carriers, to resolve all claims
asserted against Specialty and the individual defendants in this
case.

"Although Specialty was fully prepared to defend the litigation,
the Company decided to settle in order to put the matter behind
us, and allow management to focus on running the business and
attending to the needs of our clients," commented Nicholas R.
Simmons, Specialty's vice-president and general counsel, in a
statement.

The litigation was brought on behalf of a class of investors who
purchased the Company's stock in the open market between
December 8, 2000 and April 15, 2002 based on allegedly
misleading disclosures regarding Specialty's state and federal
regulatory issues, which were resolved in 2002 with a finding of
compliance. Specialty denied the claims in the litigation, and
the settlement provides that Specialty does not admit any
liability.

For more details, contact Greg Mann by Phone: 310-586-7261 or by
E-mail: gmann@specialtylabs.com


SUNSHINE SPROUTS: Recalls Sprouts For Salmonella Contamination
--------------------------------------------------------------
Sunshine Sprouts of Medford, OR is recalling its 5 oz. packages
and 6 lb. bulk trays of Sunshine brand Alfalfa Sprouts and its 5
oz. packages of Sunshine brand Spicy Sprout Mix because they
have the potential to be contaminated with Salmonella
Bovismorbificans, an organism which 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.

The Sunshine brand Alfalfa Sprouts and Sunshine brand Spicy
Sprout Mix were distributed through retail stores in southern
Oregon and northern California.

The alfalfa sprouts come in a 5 oz. clear plastic clam shell and
6 lb. bulk tray and the spicy sprout mix comes in a 5 oz. clear
plastic clam shell. The products are not coded but could have
been purchased up through and including June 10, 2004.

To date, one case of Salmonella Bovismorbificans possibly linked
to the consumption of Sunshine brand raw alfalfa sprouts has
been reported.

FDA is working closely with state officials and the company to
determine the cause of this problem and what steps can be taken
to combat it.

Consumers who have purchased the 5 oz. packages of alfalfa
sprouts or spicy sprout mix, or purchased bulk alfalfa sprouts
are urged to return product to the place of purchase for a full
refund. Consumers with questions may contact the company at
541-951-3721.


TIDEL TECHNOLOGIES: TX Court Grants Certification To Stock Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of
Texas - Houston Division has issued a summary notice of pendency
of class action to all persons who purchased the common stock of
Tidel Technologies, Inc. ("TIDEL") between January 14, 2000
through February 8, 2001.

The Summary notice was issued to inform all parties that the
lawsuit against Tidel Technologies, Inc. has been certified to
proceed as a class action.

For more details, contact Tidel Technologies, Inc. Securities
Litigation by Mail: c/o The Garden City group, Inc., P.O. Box
9000 #6235 Merrick, NY 11566-9000 by Phone: 800 363-4075


TOWRY LAW: Investors Launch Lawsuit To Recover Hedge Fund Losses
----------------------------------------------------------------
Australian financial investment firm Towry Law International
faces a class action filed on behalf of its aggrieved investors
who lost millions of dollars by investing in at least two Cayman
Island hedge funds aggressively and exclusively sold as low-risk
investments by the Company's advisors, the Sydney Morning Herald
reports.

British firm Class Law Solicitors filed the suit, as many
members of the class are United Kingdom expatriates.  The suit
could include tens of millions of dollars in damages to cover
losses by investors from countries as far flung as Hong Kong,
Cyprus, Bahrain and Japan.  According to various overseas
reports, the losses cost Hong Kong customers as much as $HK400
million ($75 million) when the funds were liquidated in 2002.

In the Company's parent HHG's inaugural annual meeting, chief
executive Roger Yates said there were "some outstanding client
issues specifically related to products distributed by Towry Law
International," the Morning Herald stated.  "We are working with
the relevant regulators on these issues but we do not anticipate
that there will be a material financial impact on HHG."

According to the demerger explanatory memorandum, its Towry Law
International subsidiary was formed in 1990 in Hong Kong
targeting mainly UK expatriates who work in the international
business centers of Asia and the Middle East as well as wealthy
locals.  The business had about 80 advisers last year but was
closed to new business last month.  On page 155 of the demerger
memo, AMP says Hong Kong's Securities and Futures Commission was
investigating whether Towry Law employees were guilty of any
misconduct in relation to the funds.

HHG's more recent annual report lists "existing claims for
compensation and customer complaints" relating to the matter as
a contingent liability.  "These complaints are being fully
investigated, some of which may potentially give rise to a
requirement to pay appropriate compensation to the customers
concerned, where legal liability is proven," the report stated.


TREX COMPANY: NJ Court Grants Certification To Consumer Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Superior Court of New Jersey certified a nationwide class
action in a case originally filed in 2000 against Trex Company,
Inc. (NYSE: TWP) and ExxonMobil Corp. (NYSE: XOM), alleging that
the TREX product is defective.

The Court certified a nationwide class of consumers spanning the
twelve- year period from 1992 through 2004 on a claim that the
warranty issued by Trex and ExxonMobil in conjunction with the
sale and distribution of composite lumber products is
unconscionable and must be reformed. In addition, a class of New
Jersey consumers will be certified for the same twelve-year
period on claims that the sale, marketing and distribution of
allegedly defective Trex lumber products (and its predecessor
product Timbrex) violated the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and
breached express and implied warranties. Damages under the New
Jersey Consumer Fraud Act are trebled as a matter of law. In
connection with the nationwide reformation of warranty claim,
the Court observed that "[t]his issue has already been argued
before the Appellate Division in this case and their decision is
controlling."

The complaint alleges that the Trex and Timbrex products rot,
splinter and degrade as a result of inherent defects in the
manufacturing process. The defects are allegedly inconsistent
with claims in the marketing materials distributed by the
Company. In addition, although the Company claims that the
product does not need sealants, after the product exhibits mold,
the Company allegedly recommends that consumers apply sealants.
Plaintiffs also seek to reform the Company's warranty to, inter
alia, include costs of repair and replacement of allegedly
defective product, cover costs of sealants and eliminate the
exclusive remedy of providing replacement product.
On the New Jersey class action claims for violation of the New
Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and breach of express and implied
warranties, Plaintiffs seek money damages. In certifying the
Class, the Court noted that the damages theory in the case could
be supported by evidence that Trex's allegedly false advertising
campaign allows them to charge a price of fifteen (15%) percent
higher than alternative pressure-treated lumber products.
According to the Court, the New Jersey classes "will serve the
purpose of a 'test case' but on a much larger scale."

Marc B. Kramer, attorney for the Class, said, "We are obviously
gratified that the Court certified a nationwide class in this
important consumer protection case." While the amount of damages
must await further discovery, Kramer explained that "over the
past twelve years, Trex and ExxonMobil have sold allegedly
defective products nationwide to hundreds of thousands of
consumers. Those people did not get what they paid for."

For more details, contact the Law Offices of Marc B. Kramer by
Mail: 150 JFK Parkway, Suite 100, Short Hills, NJ (Essex Co.)


TRI-STATE CREMATORY: Court Grants Approval to $39.5 Million Pact
----------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Smalley, plaintiffs lawyer in the Tri-State Crematory
fraud case has announced that the court has given final approval
to a $39.5 million settlement in a class-action lawsuit brought
on behalf of 1,600 relatives of people whose bodies were sent to
the crematory between 1988 and 2002 from funeral homes in
Georgia, Tennessee and Alabama, the Gwinnett Daily Post reports.

The final approval came on Friday in settlements by 22 funeral
homes that sent bodies to the Tri-State Crematory. Families have
until June 18 to file claims for a piece of that money.

The 22 funeral homes are among more than 50 who have agreed to
the settlement. But there are still some funeral homes who are
awaiting final approval this include several uninsured funeral
homes and those agreed to by the insurance company of the family
of the former crematory operator, Ray Brent Marsh.

Marsh still faces 787 state criminal charges stemming from
accusations that he dumped 334 bodies that he was supposed to
cremate and passed off cement dust as ashes to the families.
The corpses were instead found strewn across the grounds of the
crematory. March's criminal trial is scheduled to start Oct. 11.


UNITED STATES: Senator Postpones Submission of Class Action Bill
----------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., decided to postpone
submitting a Republican bill, seeking to put limits on class
actions, the Electronic Accountant reports.

The bill seeks to move class actions from state courts to
federal courts and would cover all types of suits, including
securities litigations.  In state courts, juries often find for
the plaintiffs in large award amounts as compared to federal
courts where awards typically are smaller.

Several Democrats opposed the measure, saying that it would
easier for businesses to sidestep judgments and that large
awards are needed to ensure businesses follow the rules.  In the
fall, Republicans failed to achieve the 60-vote mandate, but
have now garnered several supporters from the other side of the
aisle, including Charles Schumer of New York and Christopher
Dodd of Connecticut.

Sen. Frist said the decision was made following a number of
requests from Democratic senators, who had agreed to give the
GOP the required 60 votes to get a "filibuster-proof" majority
on the legislation.


UNITED STATES: High Court Dismisses $33Bln Tehran Hostages Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Supreme Court dismissed the $33 billion
lawsuit filed against Iran on behalf of Americans taken hostage
during the 1979 Islamic revolution, BBC News reports.

The Americans were held at the US embassy in Tehran for 444
days.  The Algiers Accords was forged to ensure their release,
which also ruled out future legal action.  The crisis largely
cost Jimmy Carter the 1980 US presidential election.

The US Congress earlier passed bills allowing former hostages to
pursue lawsuits in a bid to bypass the accord and Tehran
hostages filed a class action in 2000.  Last year, the US Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled the
accords remained in effect because Congress had not been clear
enough in its actions.

The Supreme Court did not comment on its decision but US
officials have said the Algiers Accords remain in force, BBC
News reports.  The state department also called for the lawsuit
to be dropped because of the legal action ban contained in the
accords.

Lawyer for the plaintiffs Laurence Tribe told BBC that Congress
had sought to "provide a meaningful remedy for the terrible
ordeal that the (former hostages) and their families endured."


VITAMIN ANTITRUST: Opt-out Notices Sent To Class Members in Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Opt-out notices for participants in the multi-million dollar
class action against Aventis, Roche and BASF Group vitamin
companies was published in all Australian capital city daily
newspapers, Brooke Davie, a lawyer from the Australian law firm
Maurice Blackburn Cashman announced, the Asia Intelligence Wire
reports.

According to Ms. Davie, the notices were a required court
procedure, which would further define the applicant group in the
case.  "It's a notice which says to the public this class action
is on foot, if you don't want to be in it opt out now," Ms.
Davie said.  "It's significant in the sense that the action is
progressing and we are going through these usual procedures."

The Australian class action, which started in 1999 involving
multinational firms fixing prices and carving up the world
market for vitamins A,C,E, B2, B5 and betacarotene drinks,
foodstuffs, pharmaceutical companies and animal feed.

Late last year, lawyers mounting the action reduced the breadth
of the case by refining the terms of applicants to take in
producers of animal feed only. Ms Davie said it was not known
how many producers of animal nutrition feed would be bound by
the class action. "There's lots and lots of those companies -
it's difficult to say how many.


VOLKSWAGEN OF AMERICA: FL Spoiler Suit Certified as Class Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Miami-Dade Circuit Court in Florida granted class
certification to a lawsuit filed Volkswagen of America, alleging
a design flaw in 1999-2002 Jettas, the Miami Herald reports.

In their 2000 lawsuit, owners who named Volkswagen of America
and South Motors of Dade County, which owns the South Motors VW
dealership as Defendants. They claim that the front-end spoilers
on 1999-2002 Jettas catches on parking lot curb stops and can be
partially or completely yanked from the vehicle's bumper
assembly. Typically costing around $150 to $300 to repair.

Judge Amy Steele Donner granted the certification, opening the
door for other Jetta owners in Florida to join the suit.

Coral Gables lawyer Juan P. Bauta II said that his clients are
demanding that Volkswagen pay for the repairs.  Mr. Butta
estimates that the total number of plaintiffs can reach the
thousands now that the lawsuit has been certified as a class
action.  He also expects the filing of similar lawsuits in other
states, the Miami Herald states.

Volkswagen of America plans to appeal Donner's ruling and
emphatically denies the allegations made in the lawsuit,
according to its New York lawyer.


                  Meetings, Conferences & Seminars


* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
-------------------------------------------------

June 16, 2004
BUSINESS INTERRUPTION INSURANCE CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Pentagon City
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 17, 2004
E-DISCOVERY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Pentagon City
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 17-18, 2004
LITIGATING BRAIN AND SPINAL CORD INSURANCE CLAIMS
American Conferences
Chicago
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

June 21-22, 2004
REINSURANCE CLAIMS AND COLLECTION
American Conferences
New York
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

June 22, 2004
E-DISCOVERY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Hotel Crescent Court, Dallas
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 22-23, 2004
NATIONAL MOLD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Grande Lakes Resort, Orlando, FL
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 24-25, 2004
FEN-PHEN LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

July 16, 2004
PRODUCTS LIABILITY
ALI-ABA
Chicago
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

July 22-23, 2004
ASBESTOS LITIGATION 101 CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Chicago River North, Chicago
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 20-21, 2004
REINSURANCE SUMMIT
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Boston Common, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 20-21, 2004
NATIONAL ASBESTOS LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 21, 2004
E-DISCOVERY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 21, 2004
PARALEGALS CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin City Center, Dallas
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 27-28, 2004
BAD FAITH CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 27-28, 2004
REINSURANCE ARBITRATIONS
American Conferences
New York
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

September 29-30, 2004
CONSUMER FINANCE CLASS ACTIONS
American Conferences
New York
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

October 4-5, 2004
INSURANCE COVERAGE DISPUTES CONCERNING CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS
CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Chicago River North, Chicago
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

October 7-8, 2004
WELDING ROD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, West Palm Beach
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

October 21, 2004
PARALEGALS CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Peachtree Plaza, Atlanta
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

October 25-26, 2004
SILICA LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, New Orleans
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

October 26, 2004
PVC LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, New Orleans
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 4-5, 2004
CK039
CONFERENCE ON LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRODUCTS: CURRENT
SECURITIES,
TAX, ERISA, AND STATE REGULATORY ISSUES
ALI-ABA
Washington, D.C.
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

November 8, 2004
ALL SUMS: REALLOCATION & SETTLEMENT CREDITS CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 8, 2004
HRT LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Huntington Hotel & Spa, Pasadena, CA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 8-9, 2004
CALIFORNIA SECTION 17200 CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Huntington Hotel & Spa, Pasadena, CA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 9, 2004
ZYPREXA LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Huntington Hotel & Spa, Pasadena, CA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 9, 2004
ARTHRITIS DRUG LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Huntington Hotel & Spa, Pasadena, CA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 9, 2004
ANTI-SLAPP CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Huntington Hotel & Spa, Pasadena, CA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 11-12, 2004
ASBESTOS LITIGATION IN THE 21ST CENTURY
ALI-ABA
New Orleans
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

December 2-3, 2004
TRIAL EVIDENCE IN THE FEDERAL COURTS: PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS
ALI-ABA
New York
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

December 9-10, 2004
ASBESTOS PREMISES LIABILITY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Huntington Hotel & Spa, Pasadena, CA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 9-10, 2004
CONSTRUCTION DEFECT & MOLD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Lake Las Vegas, Las Vegas
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

January 19-21, 2005
CIVIL PRACTICE AND LITIGATION TECHNIQUES IN FEDERAL AND STATE
COURTS
ALI-ABA
San Juan, Puerto Rico
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

March 3-5, 2005
LITIGATING MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CLAIMS
ALI-ABA
Scottsdale, Arizona
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

March 9-11, 2005
CIVIL PRACTICE AND LITIGATION TECHNIQUES IN FEDERAL AND STATE
COURTS
ALI-ABA
Maui, Hawaii
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

May 12-13, 2005
OPINION AND EXPERT TESTIMONY IN FEDERAL AND STATE COURTS
ALI-ABA
Boston Tuition
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

May 19-20, 2005
DIGITAL DISCOVERY AND ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
ALI-ABA
Chicago Tuition $
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614



TBA
FAIR LABOR STANDARDS CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

TBA
AIRLINE BANKRUPTCY LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

TBA
FASTFOOD INDUSTRY LIABILITY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com



* Online Teleconferences
------------------------

June 05-30, 2004
DAMAGES IN TEXAS INSURANCE LITIGATION:
EVALUATING, PLEADING, AND PROVING
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

June 05-30, 2004
NBI PRESENTS "EMERGING ISSUES IN CALIFORNIA
INDOOR AIR QUALITY AND TOXIC MOLD LITIGATION
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

June 05-30, 2004
NBI PRESENTS "LITIGATING THE CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT IN FLORIDA
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

ADVERSARIAL PROCEEDINGS IN ASBESTOS BANKRUPTCIES
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Online Streaming Video
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

ASBESTOS BANKRUPTCY - PANEL OF CREDITORS COMMITTEE MEMBERS
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Online Streaming Video
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

EXPERT WITNESS ADMISSIBILITY IN MOLD CASES
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Online Streaming Video
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

INTRODUCTION TO CLASS ACTIONS AND LARGE RECOVERIES
Big Class Action
Contact: seminars@bigclassaction.com

NON-TRADITIONAL DEFENDANTS IN ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

PAXIL LITIGATION
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS INVOLVING BAYCOL
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

RECOVERIES
Big Class Action
Contact: seminars@bigclassaction.com

SELECTION OF MOLD LITIGATION EXPERTS: WHO YOU NEED ON YOUR TEAM
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

SHOULD I FILE A CLASS ACTION?
LawCommerce.Com / Law Education Institute
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

THE EFFECTS OF ASBESTOS ON THE PULMONARY SYSTEM
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

THE STATE OF ASBESTOS LITIGATION: JUDICIAL PANEL DISCUSSION
Online Streaming Video
LawCommerce.Com/Mealey's
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

TRYING AN ASBESTOS CASE
LawCommerce.Com
Contact: customerservice@lawcommerce.com

THE IMPACT OF LORILLAR ON STATE AND LOCAL REGULATION OF TOBACCO
SALES
AND ADVERSTISING
American Bar Association
Contact: 800-285-2221; abacle@abanet.org

________________________________________________________________
The Meetings, Conferences and Seminars column appears in the
Class Action Reporter each Wednesday.  Submissions via e-mail to
carconf@beard.com are encouraged.


                   New Securities Fraud Cases


BEA SYSTEMS: Schatz & Nobel Lodges Securities Lawsuit in N.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schatz & Nobel, P.C. initiated a lawsuit seeking
class action status in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California on behalf of all persons who
purchased the publicly traded securities of BEA Systems, Inc.
(Nasdaq: BEAS) ("BEA") between November 13, 2003 and May 13,
2004, inclusive (the "Class Period").

The Complaint alleges that BEA, a provider of application
infrastructure software, and certain of its officers and
directors issued materially false statements concerning BEA's
business condition. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose
that:

     (1) BEA was experiencing material sales execution problems
         in its licensing division, resulting in license reserve
         being down in the comparable quarter and the sequential
         quarter;

     (2) that during the preceding quarter, BEA's sales staff
         and management were attempting to reorganize; however,
         in so doing, BEA's sales were disrupted;

     (3) BEA's WebLogic 8.1 Platform was far from
         "revolutionary" and was not selling as defendants had
         claimed;

     (4) coverage of small and medium-size businesses was
         transferred to the General Accounts Team which,
         disrupted the Company's North American reserves; and

     (5) BEA was experiencing weakness, not strength, in its
         telecom vertical business.

On May 13, 2004, BEA announced disappointing first quarter
results, citing the difficult sales environment and sales
execution issues. On this news, shares of BEA plummeted 30% to
$8.00 per share.

For more details, contact Nancy A. Kulesa of Schatz & Nobel by
Phone: (800) 797-5499 or by e-mail: sn06106@aol.com or visit
their Web site: www.snlaw.net


BEA SYSTEMS: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. has commenced a
securities class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased,
converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of
BEA Systems, Inc. (Nasdaq:BEAS) between November 13, 2003 and
May 13, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period").

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California against defendant BEA 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


KRISPY KREME: Marc S. Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in M.D. NC
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina on behalf of purchasers of the
securities of Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Inc. (NYSE: KKD) between
August 21, 2003 and May 7, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"),
seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the "Exchange Act").

The complaint alleges that Krispy Kreme is a specialty retailer
of doughnuts and charges Krispy Kreme and certain of its
officers and directors of violating the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934. The complaint alleges that, during the Class Period,
Krispy Kreme touted its strong operational growth, reporting
substantial increases in revenues, income and earnings per share
and representing that the Company would continue to grow. The
complaint further alleges that, unbeknownst to investors,
defendants failed to disclose that, as a result of the trend
toward low-fat, low carbohydrate diets, such as the South Beach
and Atkins diets, Krispy Kreme had been suffering from
increasingly poor sales performance. The complaint alleges that
there were other undisclosed reasons for the Company's poor
performance: While the opening of new Krispy Kreme stores
created initial consumer excitement and a corresponding surge in
sales, sales at those newly-opened stores quickly tapered off.
This was especially damaging to the Company in smaller markets
with a limited number of potential new customers. Rather than
cultivate a base of steady customers, the Company instead
attempted to capitalize on Krispy Kreme's "fad appeal" and
adopted a business model and strategy for increasing sales that
was predicated on the perpetual addition of new stores and the
hyping of the Company's entry into new markets -- a tactic that
resulted in unsustainable surges in sales that fell off once the
hype ceased and the novelty of the new store wore off. The
complaint further alleges that the Company's strategy of
offsetting slowing retail sales with wholesale shipments to
supermarkets was not working because the Company's wholesale
business was more expensive to operate and, therefore, resulted
in a lower profit margin than in-store sales and because the
Company's wholesale business was saturating the market with
Krispy Kreme products, cannibalizing the company's retail
operations, perhaps undermining them as well, and decreasing the
Company's overall profit margin.

On May 7, 2004, defendants issued a news release in which they
announced that Krispy Kreme's expected fiscal 2005 diluted
earnings per share from continuing operations, excluding
charges, to be 10% lower than previously announced, and that
Krispy Kreme was closing certain company-owned stores and
reducing plans to open new ones. Krispy Kreme also announced
that it was closing its Montana Mills bread stores, an operation
that it had bought a year ago, and that it was going to write-
off as much as $40 million on the venture; as recently as mid-
April, defendants had said they intended to refine and expand
the operation.

On this news, shares of Krispy Kreme fell $9.29, or 29%, to
close at $22.51, a new 52-week low and more than 50% below
Krispy Kreme's 52-week high of $49.74. The trading volume was
20.5 million shares, the largest ever for Krispy Kreme and
amounting to a third of the shares outstanding.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel, Esq. of The Law
Offices of Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave, Suite 202
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004-2808 by Phone: (888) 643-6735 or
(610) 660-8000 by Fax: (610) 660-8080 by e-mail:
Mhenzel182@aol.com or visit their Web site:
http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182


ODYSSEY HEALTHCARE: Bernstein Liebhard Files Stock Lawsuit in TX
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP initiated a
securities class action lawsuit in the United States District
Court for the District of Texas on behalf of all persons who
purchased or acquired securities of Odyssey HealthCare, Inc.
(NASDAQ: ODSY) ("Odyssey HealthCare" or the "Company") between
May 5, 2003 through February 23, 2004, inclusive (the "Class
Period"), seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act").

The complaint charges Odyssey HealthCare and certain of its
officers and directors with violations of the Exchange Act of
1934. The complaint alleges that during the Class Period,
Odyssey HealthCare touted its strong operational growth,
reporting substantial increases in revenues, income and earnings
per share and representing that the Company would continue to
grow organically and through acquisitions. However, unbeknownst
to members of the class, the Company's rapid growth had come at
a steep price. As investors learned after the end of the Class
Period, Odyssey HealthCare's rapid expansion was achieved, in
part, from savings earned by providing a level of care and
service that did not meet applicable guidelines, and through an
overly-aggressive admissions policy that violated Medicare
requirements. Unbeknownst to investors, the Company billed
Medicare for amounts that exceeded amounts they were entitled to
receive under applicable guidelines and exceeded the "Medicare
cap," which is highly unusual in the industry and considered a
breach of accepted practices by the Centers for Medicare and
Medicaid Services. Throughout the Class Period, Odyssey
HealthCare insiders sold a total of 1,545,661 Odyssey HealthCare
shares at artificially inflated prices for gross proceeds of
over $50.8 million.

On February 23, 2004, after the close of ordinary trading,
Odyssey HealthCare announced its results for the fourth quarter
and year 2003 and reported that the Company's 2004 earnings per
share expectations were below analysts' estimates. In a follow-
up conference call, the Company disclosed that it would have to
reduce its revenue in the quarter by an amount equal to the
amount that exceeded the Medicare cap, and that it had
experienced an increase in day sales outstanding due to Medicare
reimbursements being held up for regulatory issues. In reaction
to the press release and conference call, the price of Odyssey
HealthCare common stock plummeted, falling from $27.43 per share
on February 23, 2004 to $20.32 per share on February 24, a one
day drop of 26% on unusually heavy trading volume (12.9 million
shares). On April 12, 2004, Barron's issued an article titled,
"Troubled Odyssey: Questions arise about hospice company's
patient care, level of Medicare," questioned whether the
Company's results reflected cost- cutting at the expense of
patient care and an overly-aggressive admissions policy.

For more details, contact the Shareholder Relations Department
of Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP by Mail: 10 East 40th St.,
New York, New York 10016 by Phone: (800) 217-1522 or
(212) 779-1414 or by e-mail: ODSY@bernlieb.com


OMNIVISION TECHNOLOGIES: Charles Piven Lodges CA Securities Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. has commenced a
securities class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased,
converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of
OmniVision Technologies, Inc. (Nasdaq:OVTI) between February 19,
2003 through and including June 8, 2004 (the "Class Period"),
including those who purchased shares in the secondary offering
on July 16, 2003.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California against defendant OmniVision 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


                            *********


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  * * *