/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/040708.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Thursday, July 8, 2004, Vol. 6, No. 134 Headlines ALLIANCE GAMING: Shareholders Lodge Securities Fraud Suits in NV ALLOY INC.: Reaches Tentative Settlement For NY Securities Suit BRINKER RESTAURANT: Faces Food Poisoning Lawsuit in N.D. IL CERNER CORPORATION: MO Court Dismisses Securities Fraud Lawsuit DUNCAN-WILLIAMS: Shareholders Launch Securities Fraud Suit in TN eBAY INC.: Faces Sellers' Suit Over Billing System in CA Court J.W. BARCLAY: SEC Bars, Fines Ex-Representative Guilty Of Fraud LEHMAN BROTHERS: NY Judge Rejects Certification For Bias Lawsuit MERIX CORPORATION: Shareholders Lodge Securities Lawsuits in OR MORGAN STANLEY: Poised To Defend V. Sex Discrimination Charges MOVING SOLUTIONS: Faces Civil Suit Over Defective Patient Lifts RIVERS EDGE: Recalls 78T Hunting Tree Stands Due To Injury Risk ROTHMAN'S BENSON: Smokers Launch Personal Injury Suit in Quebec ROTHMAN'S BENSON: Quebec Health Council Commences Smokers' Suit SHAW GROUP: Shareholders Lodge Securities Fraud Suits in E.D. LA SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES: Settlement Hearing Set September 23, 2004 SYNOVIS LIFE: Stockholders Lodge Securities Fraud Lawsuits in MN TEXAS: A.G. Abbott Shuts Down Rio Grande Immigrant Fraud Scheme TIDEL TECHNOLOGIES: Reaches $3M Securities Settlement in S.D. TX UNITED STATES: Senate Urged To Consider, Pass Class Action Bill VICURON PHARMACEUTICALS: Shareholders File Fraud Lawsuits in PA VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: NY Court Dismisses Claim in Securities Suit WAL-MART STORES: Seeks Review of Sex Bias Lawsuit Certification WELLMAN INC.: Justice Department Seeks Price Fixing Indictment WILLIAMS COMPANIES: FERC Okays Settlement of CA Natural Gas Suit WORLDCOM: Former CEO, 18 Executives Reach $51M Suit Settlement New Securities Fraud Cases CARDINAL HEALTH: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. OH COMMERCE BANCORP: Brodsky & Smith Files Securities Lawsuit in NJ COMMERCE BANCORP: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Lawsuit in NJ INTRABIOTICS PHARMACEUTICALS: Charles Piven Lodges CA Fraud Suit INTRABIOTICS PHARMACEUTICALS: Schatz & Nobel Files CA Fraud Suit LEHMAN ABS: Brodsky & Smith Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY SHAW GROUP: Stull Stull Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. LA YUKOS OIL: Brodsky & Smith Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY YUKOS OIL: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY YUKOS OIL: Lerach Coughlin Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY ********* ALLIANCE GAMING: Shareholders Lodge Securities Fraud Suits in NV ---------------------------------------------------------------- Alliance Gaming Corporation and certain of its officers and directors face several securities class actions filed in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Alliance Gaming is a diversified, worldwide gaming company that designs, manufactures and distributes gaming machines and computerized monitoring systems for gaming machines. The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants caused Alliance Gaming's shares to trade at artificially inflated levels through the issuance of false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business prospects, which: (1) allowed the Company to consummate stock-for-stock acquisitions with inflated stock valued at $16 million; (2) allowed certain defendants to sell $3.6 million worth of their own shares at artificially inflated prices; and (3) permitted Alliance Gaming to grow and benefit economically from the wrongful course of conduct. As a result, the Company's shares traded at inflated prices, topping $34 during the Class Period. The complaint further alleges that On June 8, 2004, the Company issued a press release updating the Company's guidance for fiscal year 2004 to 'the range of $0.96 to $1.00 per share, compared to the prior guidance of $1.04,' and for fiscal year 2005 to 'a range of $1.20 to $1.30' compared to prior guidance of $1.40. On this news, the Company's shares plunged $5.24 to close at $16.15 per share. According to the complaint, the defendants actively concealed from the public that: (i) the Company was experiencing massive problems/delays associated with the Company's Wide Area Progressive games in Nevada due to regulatory hold-ups; (ii) the Company was experiencing massive delays in its approval and deployment of New York VLT game revisions; (iii) the Company's margins were being slashed by increased costs associated with the Company's central and traditional determination products; (iv) the Company's acquisition of Sierra Design Group was suffering from massive integrative problems; (v) the Company was losing its competitive position and experiencing problems in its game unit (video product); and (vi) as a result of the above, defendants' forecasts for fiscal year 2004 of $1.04 and fiscal year 2005 of $1.40 per share, were grossly inflated. The first identified complaint is styled "Tyler, et al. v. Alliance Gaming Corporation, et al." The class period in the suit is from January 15,2004 to June 7,2004. The plaintiff firms are: (1) Lerach Coughlin Stoia & Robbins LLP (San Francisco) Mail: 100 Pine Street, Suite 2600, San Francisco, CA, 94111 Phone: 415-288-4545 Fax: 415-288-4534 or E-mail: info@lcsr.com; (2) Geller Rudman, PLLC Mail: 197 South Federal Highway, Suite 200, Boca Raton, FL, 33432 Phone: 561-750-3000 Fax: 888-262-3131 E-mail: info@geller-rudman.com ALLOY INC.: Reaches Tentative Settlement For NY Securities Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- Alloy, Inc. reached a tentative settlement for the putative class action filed against it and certain of its directors in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, entitled In Re Alloy, Inc. Securities Litigation, 03 CV 1597 (WHP). The complaint purportedly was filed on behalf of persons purchasing the Company's common stock between May 14, 1999 and December 6, 2000 and alleges violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, an earlier Class Action Reporter story (June 8,2004) states. The settlement, if approved by the court after notice to the class members and a hearing, is in an amount that is covered by Alloy's applicable directors and officers insurance policies. Also on June 28, 2004, Alloy reached a tentative settlement in the related derivative action entitled Yeung Chan v. Diamond, et al., 03 Civ. 8494 (S.D.N.Y.) (WHP) that was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against the then directors of Alloy in October, 2003. That tentative settlement does not require the Company to make any payment except to the extent legal fees are awarded to plaintiff's counsel by the court. BRINKER RESTAURANT: Faces Food Poisoning Lawsuit in N.D. IL ----------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit was filed against Brinker Restaurant Corporation, the owner of the Vernon Hills Chili's restaurant where hundreds were sickened a year ago as a result of eating contaminated food. The complaint, which was filed in US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Case number 04C 4462), seeks punitive damages on behalf of named plaintiff David Straza, and all other Chili's outbreak victims who ate food at or from the restaurant between June 23 and June 30, 2003. According to the complaint, "the number of possible class members could easily exceed one-thousand" due to possible underreporting of cases by people who got sick but did not contact the health department or seek medical care. The class action lawsuit was filed jointly by Marler Clark, LLP and Salvi Schostok & Pritchard, PC. These two law firms represent the largest number of persons injured in the Chili's outbreak, and have already filed a total of seven lawsuits so far, with several more planned in the coming weeks. "This is an unusual lawsuit, but this is an unusual case," said Denis Stearns, the partner at Marler Clark, LLP handling the Chili's outbreak litigation. "Rather than seeking to punish the company for its behavior on a case-by-case basis, in individual lawsuits, this class-action will resolve the punitive damages issue in one lawsuit, on behalf of everyone injured by what is alleged to be Chili's conscious disregard of the public's safety." The complaint alleges that the "decision to remain open and operate without hot water one day, and without any water the following day, and to achieve sales and profits that would have been lost had the restaurant closed, was an intentional, knowing, likely financially motivated decision that put the public safety at risk, and contributed to and exacerbated the Chili's Salmonella outbreak." "Since the Supreme Court has ruled there is a limit to the amount of punitive damages a company can be forced to pay for bad behavior, a number of federal courts have certified class actions on the basis of there being a limited-fund," explained Mark Senak, a partner with Salvi Schostok & Pritchard, PC. "That's why we filed this lawsuit, so that all the people injured in the outbreak can together hold Chili's responsible for what it did." For more details, contact Denis Stearns of Marler Clark, LLP by Phone: 1-206-346-1888 or 1-800-884-9840 by Fax: 1-206-346-1898 by E-mail: dstearns@marlerclark.com or visit their Web site: http://www.marlerclark.com/OR Mark Senak of Salvi Schostok & Pritchard, PC by Mail: 181 West Madison, Suite 3800, Chicago, IL 60602 by Phone: (312) 372-1227 or (877) 372-1227 by Fax: (312) 372-372 by E-mail: msenak@salvilaw.com or visit their Web site: http://www.salvilaw.com/ CERNER CORPORATION: MO Court Dismisses Securities Fraud Lawsuit --------------------------------------------------------------- The United States District Court of Kansas City, Missouri granted Cerner Corporation's motion to dismiss the consolidated securities class action filed against it, alleging it misled investors about the health of the company in 2002 and 2003. The suit also named as defendants five of its officers. Several lawsuits were filed after a decline in the Company's stock price following the Company's announcement on April 3, 2003 that the Company would not meet revenue and earnings estimates for the first quarter of 2003. On August20, 2003, the Court ordered that all of the lawsuits be consolidated under Case No.03-CV-00296-DW and appointed Phil Crabtree as Lead Plaintiff. On December 1, 2003, the Lead Plaintiff filed a Consolidated suit, an earlier Class Action Reporter story (June 1,2004) reports. In general, the consolidated complaint alleges that, during a class period commencing as of July 17, 2002 and ending April 2, 2003, the Company and individual named defendants misrepresented or failed to disclose certain factors, which they allege impacted the Company's business and anticipated revenue and earnings, all allegedly in violation of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. On February 9, 2004, the Company and the individual defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the consolidated Complaint. U.S. District Judge Dean Whipple threw out the suit, saying that the plaintiffs didn't detail the fraud alleged in the lawsuit. "Conspicuously absent from these generalized allegations is the name of a single customer Cerner lost to a competitor," Judge Whipple said in his order, according to the Kansas City Star. "Plaintiff also fails to even approximate the number of customers Cerner lost to competition or the amount of revenue Cerner lost as a result." DUNCAN-WILLIAMS: Shareholders Launch Securities Fraud Suit in TN ---------------------------------------------------------------- Duncan-Williams, Inc. faces a securities class action filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee on behalf of purchasers of the Company's common stock. The class consists of individuals and entities that purchased Capstone Series 2000 Municipal bonds from Duncan Williams. The lawsuit alleges that Duncan Williams misrepresented and failed to disclose material facts in connection with the sale of Capstone bonds to plaintiffs and other purchasers. The lawsuit further alleges that Duncan Williams failed to discharge properly its duties as underwriter of the bond issue in question. The suit alleges that Duncan Williams' conduct violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and SEC Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, the Tennessee Securities Act, and the common law of Tennessee. The suit is styled "[Unknown Plaintiff], et al. v. Duncan- Williams, et al." Law Firm for the plaintiffs is Falls & Veach, P.L.C. Mail: 3422 Woodmont Boulevard, Nashville, TN, 37215 Phone: 615-242-1800 eBAY INC.: Faces Sellers' Suit Over Billing System in CA Court -------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Fazio & Micheletti LLP initiated a class-action lawsuit against eBay, Inc., on behalf of a proposed class comprising all eBay sellers who had entered into an eBay User Agreement as of January 2004, alleging that they failed to address problems with a billing tool that overcharged individuals selling items on its site, the ZDWire Plus reports. Serving as class representatives are Robert Cerreta of Florida and Nancy Spaulding of Ohio, both of whom have used eBay's services extensively and who have experienced problems with eBay's new billing system for several months. The suit, filed in California Superior Court, contends that the online auction host double-billed their user accounts after launching a new payment processing system in February. According to the complaint, Cerreta and Spaulding were charged twice the amount they actually owed eBay for handling auctions of goods they were selling. The eBay users assert that the funds were then inappropriately drawn from bank accounts and credit cards they had registered with the company. In addition, the two customers said that eBay threatened to suspend their user accounts over the disputed charges. eBay representatives did not immediately return calls regarding the lawsuit, but company executives have already apologized publicly for the billing issue. The billing problem was first aired in the company's own online user forums. eBay's billing team eventually posted messages to the discussion area, pledging to fix the issue and help customers address any mistakes. While neither Cerreta nor Spaulding was charged large amounts of money as a result of the glitch--each was overcharged about $20- -the customers maintain that eBay's payment system also rounds up the dollar amounts it charges sellers without telling them it does so. For instance, they said, eBay now rounds a bill of $30.78 up to $30.80. Despite the fact that the system tacks on only a few cents to each transaction, the customers said the additional charges add up over time. In the suit, Spaulding also said she was threatened with jail when she attempted to protest outside the user conference, which was held in New Orleans. For more details, contact Jeffrey L. Fazio or Dina E. Micheletti of Fazio & Micheletti LLP by Mail: 1900 South Norfolk Street, Suite 350, San Mateo, CA 94403 by Phone: 650-577-2380 by Fax: 650-240-4420 by E-mail: jlf@fazmiclaw.com or dem@fazmiclaw.com or visit their Web site: http://www.fazmiclaw.com/eBay.html J.W. BARCLAY: SEC Bars, Fines Ex-Representative Guilty Of Fraud --------------------------------------------------------------- The Securities and Exchange Commission sanctioned Edgar B. Alacan, a former registered representative of J.W. Barclay & Co., Inc., a former broker-dealer, based on findings that Alacan violated antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws through unauthorized and unsuitable trading in customer accounts during 1997 and 1998. Mr. Alacan was barred from association with any broker or dealer; ordered to cease and desist from committing or causing any violation or future violation of the antifraud provisions he was found to have violated; and ordered to pay a $110,000 civil money penalty and to disgorge his illegal profits with interest. The Commission found that Alacan defrauded a number of customers over an extended period, causing significant losses. According to the Commission, Alacan repeatedly put his interests ahead of those of his customers, in contravention of the securities laws and the obligations owed by a securities professional to his customers. LEHMAN BROTHERS: NY Judge Rejects Certification For Bias Lawsuit ---------------------------------------------------------------- The United States District Court in New York ruled that Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc., which was sued by investors for allegedly issuing biased research reports about RealNetworks Inc., does not have to defend the suit as a class action, the LA Times reports. The ruling by U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff of Manhattan means the case will not proceed as a group suit for all RealNetworks investors but only for several named investors. Judge Rakoff said the investors' lawyers had failed to show that analyst statements had a "measurable impact" on all investors in the market. MERIX CORPORATION: Shareholders Lodge Securities Lawsuits in OR --------------------------------------------------------------- Merix Corporation (MERX) faces several securities class actions filed in the United States District Court in Oregon, alleging violations of federal securities laws on behalf of all purchasers of its common stock between July 1, 2003 and May 13, 2004, inclusive. The complaint charges defendants with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint alleges that defendants failed to disclose or indicate the following: (1) that the Company over relied, in their financial projections, on the customers' future demand for premium-priced and reduced-lead-time products, which had previously accounted for 50% of the Company sales; (2) that the Company failed to adequately insulate itself from the softening demand, specifically with regard to supply needs of a major networking customer; (3) that the Company failed to appreciate the market conditions, which did not support the Company's aggressive growth; and (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company and their earnings projections. The complaint further alleges that on May 13, 2004, after the close of the market, Merix revised guidance for the fourth quarter of fiscal 2004, ending May 29, 2004. News of this shocked the market. Shares of Merix fell $4.64 per share or 30.29 percent on May 14, 2004, to close at $10.68 per share. The suit is styled " [Unknown Plaintiff], et al. v. Merix Corporation, et al." and is pending in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. Lawyers for the plaintiffs are Geller Rudman, PLLC. For more details, contact the law firm by Mail: 197 South Federal Highway, Suite 200, Boca Raton, FL, 33432 by Phone: 561-750-3000 by Fax: 888-262-3131 or by E-mail: info@geller-rudman.com. MORGAN STANLEY: Poised To Defend V. Sex Discrimination Charges -------------------------------------------------------------- The sexual discrimination trial against Wall Street investment firm Morgan Stanley will start next week before the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the first time such a case against a brokerage was brought to trial, Bulgarian News Network reports. The suit, filed on September 10,2001, alleges that the brokerage denied women promotions, allowed sexual groping, office strip shows and other forms of sexual harassment. The suit, filed on behalf of more than 300 women who have worked in the firm's institutional equities division since 1995, focuses on salary and promotion issues. Jury selection in Manhattan federal court is set to be completed on Wednesday with opening statements to follow. The case will likely last about three weeks. The suit brings comparison with a case against Smith Barney that was settled in 1997. Smith Barney's male workers allegedly harassed and intimidated women and engaged in fraternity-house antics at what was known as the "Boom-Boom Room" at the firm's Long Island, New York, branch. Following that case, New York's then attorney general held a public hearing on sexual discrimination on Wall Street where women complained of groping, co-workers exposing their penises and threats of physical violence. Discrimination lawyers say the suit shows the securities industry, despite a flood of negative publicity, still lags in the field of gender equality, the Bulgarian News Network reports. "Wall Street still believes that women are inferior, that men are better, more competent ... more interested in advancing their careers," said Linda Friedman, a Chicago lawyer specializing in discrimination. "They have made strides, but there is still an enormous amount of work to be done." Morgan Stanley, one of the nation's largest securities firms, could face tens of millions of dollars in damages if found liable. The firm denies wrongdoing and says it is committed to providing a bias-free workplace. MOVING SOLUTIONS: Faces Civil Suit Over Defective Patient Lifts --------------------------------------------------------------- Federal authorities filed a civil lawsuit to seize approximately 26 Faaborg Patient Lifts, Models PL, VL and Solution/Nordic Series, at Moving Solutions, Inc., in Downers Grove, Illinois, because the lifts can break and pose a serious risk to patients. Moving Solutions is the U.S. distributor of the lifts, which are manufactured by Faaborg Rehab Technic Aps, of Denmark. The action by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Marshal's Service came just after the United States filed a complaint Friday in Federal Court to seize and condemn the allegedly faulty devices, which allegedly violate the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, announced today. The patient lifts to be seized from Moving Solutions, located at 905-09 Ogden Ave., Downers Grove, are mechanical sling-like devices used to lift and move patients from one place to another, as from a bed to a wheelchair. Approximately 850 of these patient lifts have been distributed to hospitals, nursing homes and private homes throughout the United States. According to the lawsuit and reports received by FDA, one patient has died and another was seriously injured when the bolt that supports the hanger bar and the patient sling broke, dropping the patients. Moving Solutions allegedly failed to report the patient death to the FDA. "Moving Solutions" alleged failure to report the death associated with use of the device and its failure to establish procedures for implementing corrective actions for the faulty patient lifts are serious violations of the law," said Dr. Lester M. Crawford, Acting FDA Commissioner. "FDA's regulations require that companies meet certain standards to ensure that the finished product is safe and effective. Failure to comply with these regulations puts patients in jeopardy." The device allegedly fails as a result of excessive wear of the main bolt, which secures the lift arm to the main frame of the patient lift. If the bolt breaks, the lift arm falls, dropping the patient and sometimes falling on top of the patient. An FDA inspection of Moving Solutions Inc., revealed that, in addition to distributing a product with a faulty bolt, the company failed to report the patient death to the FDA, and violated FDA's Quality System regulations by lacking procedures to handle complaints, and failing to verify that servicing of the product met specified requirements. Moving Solutions notified user facilities of a problem with the device in November 2001. In March 2004, the firm sent another notice to customers about a continuing problem with the bolt on the arm and included a plastic washer with their letter, instructing facilities to insert the washer between the hanger bar bolt and the sling spreader. The FDA is continuing its investigation and is working with the firm on corrective action. However, the agency is not assured that the replacement of the washer and the bolt is adequate to correct the problem. The government is being represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney Donald Lorenzen. RIVERS EDGE: Recalls 78T Hunting Tree Stands Due To Injury Risk --------------------------------------------------------------- Rivers Edge/Ardisam, Inc., of Cumberland, Wisconsin is cooperating with the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission by voluntarily recalling about 78,000 Big Foot Series and Lite Foot Series hunting tree stands. Rivers Edge/Ardisam, Inc. has received three reports of consumers falling when their stands detached. Two of these consumers reportedly suffered serious injuries, including broken bones. If the strap mounting bracket loosens or rotates, the strap hook can release, causing the tree stand to detach from the tree. If this occurs, the consumer could fall to the ground. The recalled Big Foot and Lite Foot Series hunting tree stands are "hang-on" stands that can be identified by a yellow warning label affixed to the stand that reads: "Rivers Edge Hunting Products." These tree stands have dual post seat uprights and a gold-colored strap hook bracket. Only these model tree stands with the gold-colored bracket are included in this recall. The tree stands were made in the U.S.A. and sold at Hunting stores and catalogs nationwide beginning in January 1998 for between $60 and $120. The tree stands were manufactured from January 1998 though July 2001. Consumers should contact Rivers Edge/Ardisam, Inc. to receive free replacement hardware for self-installation. For more details contact Rivers Edge/Ardisam, Inc. by Phone: (800) 204-7435 or visit their Web site: http://www.ardisam.com ROTHMAN'S BENSON: Smokers Launch Personal Injury Suit in Quebec --------------------------------------------------------------- Rothman's, Benson & Hedges Inc. continues to face the motion filed in the Qu�bec Superior Court in Canada seeking court authorization to institute a class action against it, Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited and JTI-Macdonald Corporation. The claimants claim to represent a class consisting of all persons residing in Qu�bec who are or have been addicted to the nicotine contained in cigarettes manufactured by the respondents, as well as the legal heirs of the persons included in the group but deceased. In addition to seeking an order certifying the action as a class action, the claimants are seeking on behalf of themselves and each class member $5,000 in exemplary damages and general damages to be assessed. ROTHMAN'S BENSON: Quebec Health Council Commences Smokers' Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- Rothman's, Benson & Hedges Inc. faces a motion filed by the Qu�bec Council of Smoking and Health seeking court authorization to institute a class action against it, Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited and JTI-Macdonald Corporation on behalf of all persons who have allegedly suffered certain diseases as a result of smoking cigarettes manufactured by the respondents. The claims are based on allegations of failure to warn, addiction, nicotine manipulation, advertising directed at young people, false advertising and inadequate warnings. The claimant is seeking unspecified general and exemplary damages and the establishment of a fund with the object of limiting cigarette consumption, supporting medical research into tobacco linked illnesses and reimbursing the Province of Qu�bec for certain health care costs incurred by it in treating these illnesses. SHAW GROUP: Shareholders Lodge Securities Fraud Suits in E.D. LA ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Shaw Group, Inc. faces several securities class actions filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana on behalf of purchasers of the Company's securities from October 19,2000 to June 10,2004. The complaint alleges that the company misrepresented its financial outlook between the class period. During that period, company insiders sold Shaw shares at inflated prices, the complaint alleges, garnering proceeds in excess of $80 million. The complaint alleges that the company also sold $490 million of convertible zero coupon liquid option notes during that period. The company's revenue and earnings were inflated, the complaint says, because Shaw improperly established and drew on reserve accounts set up in connection with the acquisition of Stone & Webster Inc. and IT Group in 2002. More specifically, the complaint alleges that such results were not prepared or reported in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and deceived investors as to the Company's true performance, thereby artificially inflating the price of Shaw securities during the Class Period. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the defendants artificially inflated the Company's reported revenues and earnings by improperly establishing and drawing on reserve accounts established in connection with a series of large acquisitions, including the acquisition of Stone & Webster Inc. in July 2000 and the acquisition of The IT Group in May 2002. The complaint further alleges that defendants prematurely recognized revenue in violation of Shaw's own purported policies and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, and that defendants failed to disclose the extent to which Shaw was vulnerable to changes in power generation market conditions. The complaint further alleges that the truth about the company's performance emerged after the market closed on June 10, 2004 when Shaw announced that it had been notified by the SEC that the SEC was conducting an inquiry that appeared to focus on the Company's accounting for acquisitions. On this news, Shaw stock, which had traded at a class period high of $62.37, fell 12.4% from a closing price of $12.28 on June 10, 2004 to a closing price of $10.75 on the next trading day (June 14, 2004) on more than four times normal volume. During the class period, Company insiders sold Shaw shares at prices artificially inflated by defendants' materially false and misleading statements. The suits are filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, under docket number 04-CV-1685. Plaintiff Law Firms are: (i) CHARLES J. PIVEN Mail: World Trade Center-Baltimore,401 East Pratt Suite 2525, Baltimore, MD, 21202 Phone: 410-332-0030 E-mail: pivenlaw@erols.com; (ii) MILBERG WEISS BERSHAD & SCHULMAN LLP Mail: One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor, New York, NY, 10119 by Phone: 212-594-5300 by Fax: 212-868-1229 by E-mail: info@milbergweiss.com (iii) GELLER RUDMAN, PLLC Mail: 197 South Federal Highway, Suite 200, Boca Raton, FL, 33432 Phone: 561-750-3000 Fax: 888-262-3131 E-mail: info@geller-rudman.com SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES: Settlement Hearing Set September 23, 2004 -------------------------------------------------------------- The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York will hold a fairness hearing for the proposed $102 million settlement for the class action filed against Symbol Technologies, Inc. (IN RE SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. Case No. 02- CV-1383 (LDW) LITIGATION) on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or acquired the Company's common stock during the period beginning on February 15, 2000 through and including October 17, 2002. A settlement fairness hearing is scheduled for September 23, 2004 at 11:00 a.m., before the Honorable Leonard D. Wexler in the Long Island Courthouse, 100 Federal Plaza, Central Islip, New York, 11722. For more details, contact In re Symbol Technologies, Inc. Litigation c/o A.B. Data, Ltd. by Mail: P.O. Box 170500 Milwaukee, WI 53217-8041 or by Phone: (866) 893-1052 or visit their Web site: http://www.symbolsettlement.com/OR Daniel L. Berger, Esq. or Victoria O. Wilheim, Esq. of BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP by Mail: 1285 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10019 by Phone: (800) 380-8496 or visit their Web site: http://www.blbglaw.comOR Jeffrey C. Block, Esq. or Michael T. Matraia, Esq. of BERMAN DEVALERIO PEASE TABACCO BURT & PUCILLO by Mail: One Liberty Square, Boston, MA 02109 by Phone: (800) 516-9926 or visit their Web site: http://www.bermanesq.com SYNOVIS LIFE: Stockholders Lodge Securities Fraud Lawsuits in MN ---------------------------------------------------------------- Synovis Life Technologies, Inc. and certain of its officers and directors face several securities class actions filed in the United States District Court in Minnesota, alleging violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The suit was filed on behalf of purchasers of the Company's common stock from October 16,2003 to May 18,2004. Synovis is a diversified medical device company that develops, manufacturers and markets products for the surgical and interventional treatment of disease. More specifically, the complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants issued a series of materially false and misleading statements about the Company's business and prospects which artificially inflated the price of the Company's securities. The true facts, which were known by the defendants, but concealed from the investing public, included: (1) the Company's surgical business was not on track for year-to-year growth but was actually declining; (2) the Company's Peri-Strips were actually losing market share to a competing device made by Gore-Medical; (3) even defendants' explanations for 'why' the Company's Peri-Strips sales fell short were grossly false and misleading, as defendants claimed that sales fell due to capacity constraints, i.e., the number of surgeons qualified to perform procedures had declined, taking sales down as well, which claim was false for several reasons, including that Peri-Strips are only used in 25% of gastric by-pass procedures and therefore growth would track with market acceptance; and even if the number of gastric by-pass procedures did decline, the medical communities' conversion to the 'laproscopic' method (which uses S-12 Peri-Strips) from the 'open' method (which used 103 Peri-Strips), would have stemmed this decline in the Company's Peri-Strips sales; (4) the Company's 'interventional' side had little to zero growth prospects; and (5) as a result of the above, the Company's projections of fiscal 2004 EPS of $.56-$.60 and revenues of $75-$79 million were false and misleading. The complaint further alleges that on May 19, 2004, before the market opened, Synovis drastically cut its guidance for fiscal 2004 in a press release which stated, in pertinent part: 'At the halfway point of the year, we have fallen behind our own expectations and have clearly not met the expectations of the market .... while the interventional business showed significant sequential improvement during the second quarter, it is not yet back to fiscal 2003 levels. In the surgical business, several factors affecting the gastric bypass market evolved during the second quarter, constraining recent Peri-Strips sales growth and near-term growth prospects for Peri-Strips use in gastric bypass surgery. The magnitude of the revenue shortfall in the interventional business, combined with changes in the gastric bypass market, significantly reduce the likelihood of the strong year-over-year growth we expected in fiscal 2004.' On this news, Synovis stock fell from a close of $14.65 on May 18, 2004 to a close of $9.25 on May 19, 2004, for a single-day decline of more than 36% on very heavy trading volume. The first identified complaint is styled "Mabry, et al. v. Synovis Life Technologies, Inc., et al." The plaintiff firms are: (i) Charles J. Piven Mail: World Trade Center-Baltimore,401 East Pratt Suite 2525, Baltimore, MD, 21202 Phone: 410-332-0030 E-mail: pivenlaw@erols.com; (ii) Lerach Coughlin Stoia & Robbins LLP (Los Angeles) Mail: 355 S. Grand Avenue, Suite 4170, Los Angeles, CA, 90071 Phone: 213-617-9007 by Fax: 213-617-9185 E-mail: info@lcsr.com; (iii) Lerach Coughlin Stoia & Robbins LLP (Philadelphia) Mail: 1845 Walnut St., Suite 945, Philadelphia, CA, 19103 Phone: 215-988-9546 Fax: 215-988-9885 E-mail: info@lcsr.com; (iv) Lerach Coughlin Stoia & Robbins LLP (San Diego) Mail: 401 B Street, Suite 1700, San Diego, CA, 92101 by Phone: 619-231-1058 by Fax: 619-231-7423 by E-mail: info@lcsr.com; (v) Lerach Coughlin Stoia & Robbins LLP (San Francisco) Mail: 100 Pine Street, Suite 2600, San Francisco, CA, 94111 Phone: 415-288-4545 Fax: 415-288-4534 by E-mail: info@lcsr.com; (vi) Lerach Coughlin Stoia & Robbins LLP (Washington D.C.) Mail: 1100 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 730, Washington, DC, 20036 Phone: 202-822-6762 by Fax: 202-828-8528 by E-mail: info@lcsr.com TEXAS: A.G. Abbott Shuts Down Rio Grande Immigrant Fraud Scheme --------------------------------------------------------------- Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott successfully shut down a long-running scam that defrauded numerous immigrants in the Rio Grande Valley and obtained a court judgment of nearly $200,000 in penalties. Martha Uresti, who operated Brownsville-based Uresti Immigration/Notary Services, was ordered by a Cameron County State District Court to pay fines and attorneys' fees for illegally representing herself as a lawyer who could help consumers process immigration cases before federal authorities. Criminal charges remain pending. "This is another victory in our mission to rid Texas of unscrupulous individuals and businesses who attempt to amass fortunes on the backs of hardworking immigrants," said Attorney General Abbott in a statement. "Scam artists like Ms. Uresti exploit the dreams millions have for a better life in America, charging thousands of dollars and providing little or nothing in return." Ms. Uresti sometimes charged in excess of $3,000 to individual families, promising that she would obtain immigration benefits for them, including work permits and permanent residency. Often, she did little or no work to move a client's case forward. As part of her scheme, Ms. Uresti obtained a notary public commission from the Texas Secretary of State and then used it to present herself to Spanish-speaking clients as a "notario p.o." a title used in Latin America for a highly experienced attorney and a misrepresentation specifically forbidden by Texas law. Though the Spanish and English terms are similar sounding, notaries in Texas can provide immigration services only if they hold a separate license to practice law. Ms. Uresti does not have such a license. Attorney General Abbott filed a civil complaint against Ms. Uresti in February and provided the Cameron County District Attorney information on her activities. Subsequently, she was arrested by the Department of Public Safety in February of this year; she was released on bond and her criminal case remains pending. TIDEL TECHNOLOGIES: Reaches $3M Securities Settlement in S.D. TX ---------------------------------------------------------------- Tidel Technologies, Inc. (Other OTC: ATMS) reached an agreement in principle to settle the securities class action lawsuits that have been consolidated under the caption George Lehocky v. Tidel Technologies, Inc., James T. Rash, Mark K. Levenick, James L. Britton III and Jerrell G. Clay; Civ. Act. No. H-01-3741 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. The settlement is subject to a definitive agreement and court approval. The shareholder class will receive a cash payment of $3 million, which will be funded by Tidel's directors and officers liability insurance, and a stock payment of two million shares of Tidel common stock. In the agreement, Tidel and the officers and directors named in the lawsuits continue to deny any and all allegations of wrongdoing, and they will receive a full release of all claims asserted in the litigation. "While we were prepared to mount a vigorous defense, management concluded that settlement was in the best financial interest of the Company," said James T. Rash, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. UNITED STATES: Senate Urged To Consider, Pass Class Action Bill --------------------------------------------------------------- The United States Chamber of Commerce called upon the members of the Senate to quickly consider and pass the Class Action Fairness Act (S. 2062), a bill aimed at curbing class action lawsuit abuse in state courts. Senate debate on the bill begins today. "It is possible to forge consensus on a moderate and reasonable legal reform bill that protects consumers and is fair to business," said Thomas J. Donohue, Chamber President and CEO. "This common-sense legislation, which has broad, bipartisan support, should be quickly passed by the Senate without amendment." The legislation would curb class action lawsuit abuse in state courts by allowing greater scrutiny of settlements that provide coupons or something else of little or no value to consumers, but return millions in legal fees to class action attorneys. In addition, the bill would stop the rampant practice of venue shopping of large national class actions by allowing federal courts to hear more national class action lawsuits involving plaintiffs and defendants from multiple states. Last November, a bipartisan group of Senators negotiated a legislative compromise on class action lawsuit abuse. That compromise ensures genuine local class action lawsuits remain in state courts where they belong, and that legal fees in coupon settlements be determined as a percentage of the actual coupons redeemed or the number of hours the lawyers actually worked. "Our country's employers and workers have waited long enough for this legislation. This is a sensible bill that serves the best interests of the American people, not trial lawyers seeking jackpot justice," continued Donohue. "Passage of this bill this year is the only responsible course of action for the Senate." The mission of the Institute for Legal Reform is to make America's legal system simpler, fairer and faster for everyone. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is the world's largest business federation, representing more than three million businesses and organizations of every size, sector and region. VICURON PHARMACEUTICALS: Shareholders File Fraud Lawsuits in PA --------------------------------------------------------------- Vicuron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. faces several securities class actions filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on behalf of purchasers of the Company's common stock from January 6,2003 to May 24,2004. The Complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants artificially inflated the price of Vicuron stock by concealing negative material information concerning both the safety and efficacy of Anidulafungin, Vicuron's intravenous treatment of fungal infections which is the subject of late-stage clinical trials for the treatment of esophageal candidiasis, invasive aspergillosis, and invasive candidiasis/candidemia. Defendants concealed key adverse information regarding the development and commercialization of Anidulafungin, which raised serious concerns about the FDA's future approval of the drug. The partial disclosure of the contents of an FDA letter, dated Monday, May 24, 2004, detailing the failure of Vicuron to supply data necessary to support its claim that Anidulafungin can be used to treat esophageal candidasis, caused Vicuron shares to plummet $8.86 to $13.04, a loss of over 40% from the previous trading day and a loss of over 45% from its Class Period high of $23.90. The suit is filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, under docket number 04-CV- 2627. The plaintiffs' law firms are: (1) CHARLES J. PIVEN Mail: World Trade Center-Baltimore,401 East Pratt Suite 2525, Baltimore, MD, 21202 Phone: 410-332-0030 E-mail: pivenlaw@erols.com; (2) MURRAY FRANK & SAILER LLP Mail: 275 Madison Ave 34th Flr, New York, NY, 10016 by Phone: 212-682-1818 by Fax: 212-682-1892 by E-mail: email@rabinlaw.com; (3) SCHATZ & NOBEL, PC Mail: 330 Main Street, Hartford, CT, 06106 by Phone: 800-797-5499 by Fax: 860-493-6290 by E- mail: sn06106@AOL.com VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: NY Court Dismisses Claim in Securities Suit -------------------------------------------------------------- The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York granted Vivendi Universal, S.A.'s motion to dismiss one claim in the consolidated securities class action filed against it, Chief Executive Officer Jean-Marie Messier and Guillame Hannezo, styled "In re Vivendi Universal Securities Litigation (Master File No. 02 CV 5571)." The consolidated suit alleges violations of the Securities Act of 1933 (the Securities Act) and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) against the Company, Mr. Messier and Mr. Hannezo. The 1933 Act allegations relate to allegedly false and materially misleading statements or omissions in the registration and proxy statements that were issued at the time of the merger transactions involving Vivendi, S.A., Canal Plus, S.A. ("Canal Plus") and The Seagram Company Limited ("Seagram"). Those false "statements" are primarily alleged to be violations of French or US GAAP which caused the financial statements of Vivendi Universal to be wrong. The Exchange Act allegations relate to allegedly false or materially misleading statements or omissions in certain public statements of the Company, such as press releases and financial statements, which purportedly failed to disclose Vivendi Universal's true financial condition. Plaintiffs seek damages from all three defendants in an unspecified amount. The alleged classes of plaintiffs pleaded in the consolidated complaint include all purchasers of the Company's American Depositary Shares (ADSs) and common stock from October 30, 2000, to August 14, 2002, as well as all holders of the common stock of Seagram that was exchanged for Vivendi Universal stock in the merger transactions with Seagram and Canal Plus, and those shareholders of Vivendi Universal or Seagram who were entitled to vote on the merger transactions (excluding certain specified holders). The Court has not yet certified those classes. On November 6, 2003, the Court issued an Opinion and Order granting defendants' motions to dismiss with respect to plaintiffs' claims under Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act (on behalf of purchasers who acquired Vivendi Universal ADSs pursuant to a registration statement on Form F-6 not alleged to be misleading by plaintiffs) and Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act, but otherwise denying defendants' motions to dismiss. As part of its Opinion and Order, the Court gave plaintiffs leave to re-plead their claim against Vivendi Universal under Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act. In November 2003, both plaintiffs and defendants filed motions seeking reconsideration of certain aspects of the Court's Opinion and Order. A decision on those motions remains pending. On November 24, 2003, plaintiffs served Vivendi Universal with their First Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint, containing their re-pleaded claim under Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act. On April 1, 2004, the Court granted Vivendi Universal's motion to dismiss plaintiffs' Section 14(a) claim and denied plaintiffs leave to re-plead. On November 26, 2003, plaintiffs served defendants with their First Request for the Production of Documents. That First Request sought production, inter alia, of Vivendi Universal's previous document productions to the SEC and the French Autorit� des March�s Financiers (the AMF, formerly, the Commission des Op�rations de Bourse) as well as documents produced or collected in the context of the pending French proceedings involving the French public prosecutor's office and the Association des Petits Porteurs Actifs (APPAC). On January 29, 2004, the Court issued a decision denying in part, and granting in part, plaintiffs' motion to compel production. Pursuant to that decision, Vivendi Universal is required to produce documents produced to or collected by the SEC, AMF or in the APPAC proceedings only where those documents are responsive to properly particularized document requests served by plaintiffs seeking documents properly relevant to claims or defenses at issue in the securities class action litigation. Vivendi Universal is further required to ask the SEC to produce the transcripts of the depositions conducted by the SEC of current Vivendi Universal employees, which it has done. On January 16, 2004, plaintiffs served defendants with their Second Request for the Production of Documents. That request is extremely broad in scope. Following the Court's April 1, 2004, decision on Vivendi Universal's motion to dismiss plaintiffs' Section 14(a) claim, pretrial discovery (including document production) has now commenced in the securities class action litigation. WAL-MART STORES: Seeks Review of Sex Bias Lawsuit Certification --------------------------------------------------------------- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. asked the United States Ninth District Court of Appeals to review a lower court ruling granting class certification to a sex discrimination class action filed against them, Reuters reports. The suit, styled "Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. No. C-01-2252 MJJ," The women charge that Wal-Mart, including its Sam's Club division, systematically discriminates against its female hourly and salaried employees across the nation by denying them promotions and equal pay, an earlier Class Action Reporter story (June 24,2004) states. In late June, United States District Judge Martin Jenkins allowed some 1.6 million women who worked for the Company's U.S. Stores since December 26,1998 to join the suit, making it the largest private civil suit in history. The world's largest retailer has denied discrimination and argued the number of men in management reflected the higher number of men who apply for those jobs. The Bentonville, Arkansas - based company faces dozens of lawsuits claiming violations of work laws, but analysts think this one in particular could prove costly. The Wal-Mart request maintained that the case, if allowed to proceed, would strip "both absent class members and Wal-Mart of basic due process rights," The New York Times reports. Lawyers for the retailer argued that it the sex discrimination suit was unfairly expanded to include as many as 1.6 million employees. "We are not asking for special treatment," a Wal-Mart spokesman said. "We just want to be subject to the same rules and laws as everyone else." The Company also released a handful of sworn statements from employees who are women, attesting to their successful efforts to be promoted to management positions. The company's lawyers also said that on a store-by-store measure "there is no statistically significant evidence of discrimination at the vast majority of its stores," which should have undermined any finding of common discrimination among women employed by Wal- Mart. "Plaintiffs elected not to present a store-by-store analysis, and instead used a statistical analysis that aggregated data on a nationwide or regional basis," the Wal-Mart lawyers wrote in their brief, according to the New York Times. "This ruling's necessary, and unlawful, consequence is that female employees who have suffered no discrimination will presumptively be able to claim back pay and punitive damages based on a class-wide liability determination that ignores the actual facts." Carolyn Short, a partner and employment-discrimination specialist with the firm of Reed Smith in Philadelphia, told the Times the arguments presented by Wal-Mart had merit. "This is a case that is monetarily driven, and there is too little commonality among all the claims," she said. "This court seems to say that the discretionary power afforded local managers is basically a policy in support of discrimination by the company, and I think that's a huge leap and it cannot be applied in this way." She predicted that the appeals court would review the decision. WELLMAN INC.: Justice Department Seeks Price Fixing Indictment -------------------------------------------------------------- As part of an ongoing investigation, the Department of Justice seeking an indictment against Wellman Inc. (WLM) into allegations of conspiracy to fix prices of polyester staple fiber, the Dow Jones Business News reports. The polyester products maker told Dow Jones Business News that two of Wellman's employees may also be named as targets of the investigation. According to a letter received by Wellman, lawyers from the Dallas field office of the Justice Department's antitrust division are seeking to present an indictment to a grand jury to charge Wellman in connection with the alleged price-fixing scheme. Wellman, along with other polyester makers, is facing a purported class-action lawsuit as part of ongoing federal grand- jury investigation into the pricing practices of the polyester staple fiber industry. The company first received a subpoena in connection with the probe in January 2001. In November 2002, Wellman competitor KoSa pleaded guilty to price-fixing charges. However, Wellman told Dow Jones Business News that it continues to categorically deny that it or any of its employees engaged in price fixing. WILLIAMS COMPANIES: FERC Okays Settlement of CA Natural Gas Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Williams Companies, Inc. (NYSE: WMB) said that action by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) puts an end to nearly all of the company's natural gas issues and power refund liabilities related to California markets from May 2000 through June 2001. The FERC on July 2 approved Williams' Feb. 25 settlement with three California utilities. At least one additional market participant has stated that it will opt in to the settlement. Certain market participants, collectively representing the remaining 3 percent of Williams' refund obligation during the period covered by the settlement, have until July 12 to opt in to the settlement. As a result of the settlement, Williams expects by July 26 to receive approximately $108 million for power it sold during the settlement period. That amount largely offsets the company's recent repurchase of receivables it sold to a third party. Williams' financial results already reflect the expected earnings impact of the settlement. The FERC's approval of the settlement also resolves the Commission's investigations into physical and economic withholding. It also resolves any claims by the settling parties regarding those issues. In a related action, Williams on July 2 received a final court order approving a civil class action settlement. That settlement was first entered into as a part of the company's November 2002 settlement with the states of California, Oregon and Washington. WORLDCOM: Former CEO, 18 Executives Reach $51M Suit Settlement -------------------------------------------------------------- Former WorldCom CEO Bernie Ebbers and 18 other ex-WorldCom executives reached a $51m settlement in a lawsuit by employees who lost billions of dollars when the telecoms group, now called MCI, collapsed amid a huge accounting scandal, the Financial Times reports. Lawyers representing employees of WorldCom made the announcement about the proposed settlement, which must still be approved by a US District Court hearing the case. The other defendants in the class-action suit brought by the law firm of Keller Rohrback, LLP, included Bert Roberts, the former WorldCom chairman and the estate of John Sidgmore, a former vice-chairman, who died last year, as well as officials who administered the employee benefit plan. The employees sued WorldCom and the former officers in an attempt to recover billions of dollars that were lost because their 401(k) pension plan continued to hold 46m WorldCom shares while the stock plunged ahead of the bankruptcy filing. WorldCom shares dropped from $8.27 in March 2002 to 9 cents the day before it filed for bankruptcy court protection in July 2002. Under the terms of the tentative agreement, MCI would pay about $19.5m as part of the settlement, according to the law firm representing the employees. Mr Ebbers would pay as much as $4m, depending on how much in loans he eventually repays to MCI. If approved, the agreement would leave Merrill Lynch Trust, the trustee of WorldCom's 401K pension fund, as the only sole defendant in the case. For more details, contact Keller Rohrback L.L.P. by Mail: 1201 Third Avenue, 32nd Floor, Seattle, Washington 98101-3052 by Phone: 206-623-1900 by Fax: 206-623-3384 by E-mail: info@kellerrohrback.com or visit their Web site: http://www.kellerrohrback.com/hmpage.htm New Securities Fraud Cases CARDINAL HEALTH: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. OH ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of Cardinal Health, Inc. (NYSE:CAH) between October 24, 2000 through June 30, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. 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 COMMERCE BANCORP: Brodsky & Smith Files Securities Lawsuit in NJ ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law offices of Brodsky & Smith, LLC initiated a securities class action lawsuit on behalf of shareholders who purchased the common stock and other securities of Commerce Bancorp, Inc. ("Commerce" or the "Company") (NYSE:CBH), between June 1, 2002 and June 28, 2004 inclusive (the "Class Period"). The class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The Complaint alleges that defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market during the Class Period, thereby artificially inflating the price of Commerce securities. No class has yet been certified in the above action. For more details, contact Evan J. Smith, Esq. of Brodsky & Smith, LLC by Mail: Two Bala Plaza, Suite 602, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 877-LEGAL-90 or by E-mail: clients@brodsky-smith.com COMMERCE BANCORP: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Lawsuit in NJ --------------------------------------------------------------- The law offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of Commerce Bancorp (NYSE:CBH) between June 1, 2002 and June 28, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The case is pending in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey against defendant Commerce 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 INTRABIOTICS PHARMACEUTICALS: Charles Piven Lodges CA Fraud Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of IntraBiotics Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Nasdaq:IBPI) between September 5, 2003 through June 22, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. 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 INTRABIOTICS PHARMACEUTICALS: Schatz & Nobel Files CA Fraud Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 IntraBiotics Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Nasdaq: IBPI) ("IntraBiotics") between September 5, 2003 and June 22, 2004 inclusive (the "Class Period"). Also included are all those who acquired IntraBiotics' shares in its offerings on October 10, 2003 and May 5, 2004. Present and former employees who purchased stock through IntraBiotics' Retirement Savings Plans are also included. The Complaint alleges that IntraBiotics, a biopharmaceutical company, and certain of its officers and directors issued materially false statements concerning the Company's drug iseganan. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose: (1) that iseganan was not safe and well-tolerated at therapeutically relevant doses when administered to the oral cavity; (2) that the drug caused a higher rate of ventilator - associated pneumonia ("VAP") and mortality as compared to placebo; (3) that despite knowing and/or recklessly disregarding the aforementioned facts, the defendants nevertheless raised capital through offerings of its common stock in order to portray to the market that iseganan was a viable marketable product that was on the "fast track" to FDA approval; and (4) that as a result of the above, the defendants statements concerning iseganan were lacking in any reasonable basis. On June 23, 2004, the Company announced that an independent data monitoring committee recommended to IntraBiotics that it discontinue its pivotal trial of iseganan for the prevention of VAP based on an interim analysis of the data. On this news, IntraBiotics fell $9.45 per share or 69%, to close at $4.23 per share. For more details, contact Schatz & Nobel by Phone: (800) 797-5499 by E-mail: sn06106@aol.com or visit their Web site: http://www.snlaw.net LEHMAN ABS: Brodsky & Smith Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law offices of Brodsky & Smith, LLC initiated a securities class action lawsuit on behalf of all purchasers of Corporate Backed Trust Certificates, Verizon New York Debenture-Backed Series 2004-1 ("Certificates") between January 5, 2004 and May 11, 2004 inclusive (the "Class Period"). The class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The suit named as defendants Lehman ABS Corp., U.S. Bank Trust National Association, Corporate Backed Trust Certificates Verizon New York Debenture-Backed Series 2004-1 Trust, Lehman Brothers Inc., RBC Dain Rauscher And Banc Of America Securities LLC, alleging violations of Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933. The Complaint alleges that a January 2004 Prospectus was materially misleading because it omitted to state material information that defendants had an obligation to disclose. No class has yet been certified in the above action. For more details, contact Marc L. Ackerman, Esq. or Evan J. Smith, Esq. of Brodsky & Smith, LLC by Mail: Two Bala Plaza, Suite 602, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 877-LEGAL-90 or by E- mail: clients@brodsky-smith.com SHAW GROUP: Stull Stull Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. LA --------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Stull, Stull & Brody initiated a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, on behalf of purchasers of the securities for The Shaw Group, Inc. ("Shaw" or the "Company") (NYSE:SGR) between October 19, 2000 and June 10, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"), seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"), against defendants Shaw, Tim Barfield Jr., J.M. Bernhard, Jr., Richard F. Gill and Robert Belk. Shaw describes itself as a provider of complete piping systems and comprehensive engineering procurement and construction services to the power industry. The complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants' publicly disseminated results of Shaw's operations and financial condition contained artificially inflated earnings and revenues, assets and income. Such results were not prepared or reported in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and deceived investors as to the Company's true performance, thereby artificially inflating the price of Shaw securities during the Class Period. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the defendants artificially inflated the Company's reported revenues and earnings by improperly establishing and drawing on reserve accounts established in connection with a series of large acquisitions, including the acquisition of Stone & Webster Inc. in July 2000 and the acquisition of The IT Group in May 2002. The complaint further alleges that defendants prematurely recognized revenue in violation of Shaw's own purported policies and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, and that defendants failed to disclose the extent to which Shaw was vulnerable to changes in power generation market conditions. The truth emerged after the market closed on June 10, 2004 when Shaw announced that it had been notified by the SEC that the SEC was conducting an inquiry that appeared to focus on the Company's accounting for acquisitions. On this news, Shaw stock, which had traded at a class period high of $62.37, fell 12.4% from a closing price of $12.28 on June 10, 2004 to a closing price of $10.75 on the next trading day (June 14, 2004) on more than four times normal volume. During the class period, Company insiders sold Shaw shares at prices artificially inflated by defendants' materially false and misleading statements, for proceeds in excess of $80 million. Additionally, during the Class Period, Shaw sold $490 million convertible zero coupon, liquid yield option notes. For more details, contact Aaron Brody, Esq. of Stull, Stull & Brody by Mail: 6 East 45th Street, New York, NY 10017 by Phone: 1-800-337-4983 by Fax: 212/490-2022 by E-mail: SSBNY@aol.com or visit their Web site: http://www.ssbny.com YUKOS OIL: Brodsky & Smith Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY --------------------------------------------------------------- The law offices of Brodsky & Smith, LLC initiated a securities class action lawsuit on behalf of shareholders who purchased the common stock and other securities of Yukos Oil Company ("Yukos Oil" or the "Company") (Other OTC:YUKOF) (Pink Sheets:YUKOY), between February 13, 2003 and October 25, 2003 inclusive (the "Class Period"). The class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The Complaint alleges that defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market during the Class Period, thereby artificially inflating the price of Yukos Oil securities. No class has yet been certified in the above action. For more details, contact Marc L. Ackerman, Esq. or Evan J. Smith, Esq. of Brodsky & Smith, LLC by Mail: Two Bala Plaza, Suite 602, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 877-LEGAL-90 or by E- mail: clients@brodsky-smith.com YUKOS OIL: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A. commenced a securities class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired ADRs of Yukos Oil Company (Other OTC:YUKOY; YUKOF) (Russia:YUKO.RTS) between February 13, 2003 and October 25, 2003, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against defendant Yukos, one or more of its officers and/or directors, and its accounting advisors. 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 YUKOS OIL: Lerach Coughlin Lodges Securities Lawsuit in S.D. NY --------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Lerach Coughlin Stoia & Robbins commenced a class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Yukos Oil Company ("Yukos") (Pink Sheets:YUKOF) (Pink Sheets:YUKOY) (Russia:YUKO) between February 13, 2003 and October 25, 2003 (the "Class Period"). The complaint charges Yukos, certain of its officers and directors and its accounting advisors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Yukos is one of Russia's leading vertically-integrated oil companies, and one of the world's largest non-state owned oil companies. The complaint alleges that defendants created a complex network of shell companies to evade taxes on the production, refining and sale of oil and oil products. These shell companies were registered in territories with preferential tax treatment to enable these companies to receive special tax exemptions in order to minimize Yukos' tax liability. Since these shell companies were not separate legal entities, as Yukos maintained control over the operations of these companies, Yukos was required to recognize the full amount of the receipts associated with these transactions for its own tax purposes and was not entitled to the preferential tax treatment these shell companies were granted. Accordingly, Yukos' tax liability was materially understated and its earnings were materially overstated in violation of GAAP. Defendants' scheme began to unravel in October 2003 when the market learned that Russian authorities had arrested the Company's largest shareholder and CEO, defendant Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and had charged him with fraud, embezzlement and evading taxes on hundreds of millions of dollars that was owed to the government. At this time, the Russian authorities also announced that they would pursue criminal prosecutions against other senior Yukos officials. Ultimately, Yukos, which has been audited by the Tax Ministry of Russia for its fiscal year 2000 tax returns, will be required to pay approximately $3.3 billion for 2000 alone due to its understatement of its tax liability, including interest and penalties. The Tax Ministry intends to audit Yukos' books for 2001-2003 based upon the same charges. Yukos could ultimately be expected to pay upwards of $10 billion to the Tax Ministry for defendants' involvement in the illegal tax evasion scheme. As a result of the revelation of defendants' wrongdoing, investors have suffered massive damages as the price of Yukos' securities plummeted. Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of purchasers of Yukos' securities during the Class Period (the "Class"). The plaintiff is represented by Lerach Coughlin Stoia & Robbins LLP, which has expertise in prosecuting investor class actions and extensive experience in actions involving financial fraud. For more details, contact Darren Robbins of Lerach Coughlin Stoia & Robbins LLP by Phone: 800-449-4900 by E-mail: wsl@lcsr.com or visit their Web site: http://www.lcsr.com/cases/yukos/ ********* 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 * * *