CAR_Public/040909.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Thursday, September 9, 2004, Vol. 6, No. 179

                          Headlines

AUSTRALIA: John Farnham Cleared of Deceptive Advertising Charges
AUSTRALIA: Homeowners Launch Damage Lawsuit Over 2003 Bushfires
BAXTER INTERNATIONAL: Pomerantz Haudek Sets Plaintiff Deadline
BIOLASE TECHNOLOGY: Pomerantz Haudek Sets Lead Plaintiff Cut-Off
BONZI SOFTWARE: Settles Deceptive Software Advertising Charges

CANADIAN IMPERIAL: $16.5M Settlement Presented To Toronto Court
CONNECTICUT: Monitors' Report Says DCF Making Reform Progress
CP SHIPS: Shareholders Launch Securities Suit in Canadian Court
FLORIDA: 2 Residents Plead Guilty To Illegal Drugs Distribution
FORD MOTOR: Recalls About 40T Minivans Due To Various Defects

FORT DODGE: Recalls ProHeartr6 Due To Adverse Drug Experiences
GENERAL MOTORS: Lawyers Seek More Info For MI Piston Slap Suit
GOLF EMPORIUM: SEC Initiated Proceedings V. Former President/CEO
HAMILTON COUNTY: Homeowner Files Suit Over Limited Publication
HOLLINGER INTERNATIONAL: Canada Investors Lodge Stock Fraud Suit

KENTUCKY: Youth Center Residents Launch Sexual Abuse Suits
LEK SECURITIES: SEC Sets Aside PHLX Action Over AUTOM Orders
LEXMARK INTERNATIONAL: Recalls 39,431 Printers For Injury Hazard
MUTUAL FUNDS: Firms Face Consolidated Shareholders Lawsuit in MD
OLYMPIA BUSINESS: Investors Sue Accountant For Fraudulent Report

RED HAT: Investors Reminded of CA Suit Lead Plaintiff Deadline
STERLING FOSTER: SEC Initiates Proceedings V. Ex-Representatives
TOBACCO LITIGATION: Judge Denies Motion To Postpone $280B Trial


                  New Securities Fraud Cases

CERIDIAN CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Suit in MN
EXPRESS SCRIPTS: Wolf Haldenstein Files Securities Lawsuit in MO
KVH INDUSTRIES: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in RI
LIGAND PHARMACEUTICALS: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in CA
NEKTAR THERAPEUTICS: Charles J. Piven Lodges CA Securities Suit

NETFLIX INC.: Marc Henzel Files Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA
NEKTAR THERAPEUTICS: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Lawsuit in CA
NETOPIA INC.: Marc Henzel Files Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA
PRIMUS TELECOMMUNICATIONS: Marc Henzel Lodges Stock Suit in VA
RED HAT: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Lawsuit in E.D. NC

VISTACARE INC.: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in AZ
WIRELESS FACILITIES: Cohen Milstein Lodges Securities Suit in CA
ZIX CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. TX
ZIX CORPORATION: Brian M. Felgoise Lodges Securities Suit in TX
ZIX CORPORATION: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Suit in TX

ZIX CORPORATION: Schatz & Nobel Files Securities Suit in N.D. TX


                            *********


AUSTRALIA: John Farnham Cleared of Deceptive Advertising Charges
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC)
cleared singing star John Farnham of deceptive advertising
charges filed by a disgruntled fan who thought he had seen the
last of the singing icon nicknamed "Whispering Jack" in a tour
which spanned 2002 and 2003, news.com.au reports.

Singer Farnham recently announced plans to tour with Tom Jones
in February next year.  Fan Sam Christie then lodged a complaint
with the ACCC, saying that they were unfairly believed that Mr.
Farnham's "The Last Time" tour was the singer's last, and that
he would only be seen in small venues.

Mr. Christie believed fans could launch a class action for
ticket refunds, the Daily Telegraph reported.  The Last Time
Tour played 95 shows to more than 430,000 fans.  Mr. Christie
told the Daily Telegraph, "These statements might be viewed as
bait advertising as they were calculated to ensure massive
ticket and CD sales, by making the public believe Farnham was
going into retirement, and this was the last time they could see
him in a huge concert venue."

The ACC told news.com.au it will not take action against the
iconic singer after a fan complained about the Last Time tour.
"We received one call as of yesterday to my knowledge," ACCC
spokeswoman Lin Enright said.  "We reviewed it and no further
action (will be taken)."

Ms. Enright disagreed with Mr. Christie's charges.  "Dame Nellie
Melba . went on doing farewells for years," she said.  "The
point being that one of the things we have to examine is
consumer detriment and what is the consumer detriment?  The
consumer detriment is that he is now available to some of his
fans at smaller venues."

Despite his The Last Time tour, Mr. Farnham has continually said
he had not retired.  In February, he re-signed with record label
BMG Australia and promised to deliver five new albums over the
next 10 years.


AUSTRALIA: Homeowners Launch Damage Lawsuit Over 2003 Bushfires
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Victorian Government in Australia faces a potential class
action over the devastation caused by last year's bushfires,
which burnt out more than 1.3 million hectares in East Gippsland
and north-east Victoria, news.com.au reports.

The Stretton Group intends to file the unprecedented suit,
alleging that it was government negligence, rather than an act
of nature, that caused the fires' extensive damage.  The group,
made up of landowners, community groups and fire experts, is
seeking "declaratory relief," potentially through the Federal
Court, which would include a damages payout to people affected
by last year's fires.

Spokesman Tony Cutcliffe said the number of plaintiffs involved
would be "mind-boggling" and the trial comparable to a royal
commission in what it uncovered, news.com.au reports.  He said
the agencies to be named in the action included the Department
of Sustainability and Environment, Parks Victoria and the
Country Fire Authority.


BAXTER INTERNATIONAL: Pomerantz Haudek Sets Plaintiff Deadline
--------------------------------------------------------------
According to Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP, which
filed a class action lawsuit against Baxter International, Inc.
("Baxter" or the "Company") (NYSE:BAX) and certain of its
officers, on behalf of investors who purchased the securities of
Baxter during the period between April 19, 2001 through July 21,
2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"), investors have until
September 27, 2004 to seek appointment by the Court as one of
the lead plaintiffs in this action.

The lawsuit charges that Baxter issued materially false and
misleading statements that had the effect of artificially
inflating the market price of the Company's securities. It is
alleged that defendants failed to disclose and misrepresented
the following material adverse facts, which were known to
defendants or recklessly disregarded by them:

     (1) that the Company's financial results during the Class
         Period were materially overstated;

     (2) that the overstatement occurred because the Company
         improperly and "incorrectly" recognized $40 million in
         revenues and maintained inadequate and "incorrect"
         provisions for bad debts relating to its Brazilian
         operations;

     (3) that as a result of this, the Company's financial
         results were in violation of Generally Accepted
         Accounting Principles ("GAAP");

     (4) that the Company lacked adequate internal controls; and

     (5) that as a result of the above, the Company's financial
         results, including its net income figures, were
         materially and artificially inflated at all relevant
         times.

On July 22, 2004, Baxter announced that it planned to restate
its financial results for the years 2001 through 2003, and for
the first quarter of 2004. The restatement was primarily the
result of incorrect revenue recognition and inadequate
provisions for bad debts in Brazil during that period, which
would result in a decrease in net income over the reinstatement
period by an amount expected to be no more than $40 million, or
$0.07 per diluted share. News of this shocked the market. Shares
of Baxter fell $1.48 per share, or 4.59 percent, to close at
$30.79 per share on unusually heavy trading volume.

For more details, contact Andrew G. Tolan, Esq. of Pomerantz
Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP by Phone: (888) 476-6529
((888) 4-POMLAW) or by E-mail: agtolan@pomlaw.com


BIOLASE TECHNOLOGY: Pomerantz Haudek Sets Lead Plaintiff Cut-Off
----------------------------------------------------------------
According to Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP, which
has filed a class action lawsuit against Biolase Technology,
Inc. ("Biolase" or the "Company") (Nasdaq:BLTI) and two of the
Company's senior officers, on behalf of investors who purchased
the securities of Biolase during the period between October 29,
2003 through July 16, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"),
investors have until Tuesday October 5, 2004 to seek appointment
as one of the lead plaintiffs in this action.

The lawsuit charges that Biolase made material omissions and
misrepresentations concerning the company's financial
performance, causing Biolase's financial results to be inflated.
As a result of this inflation, the Company was able to complete
a secondary stock offering of 2.8 million shares in February
2004 at $18.80 per share. Thereafter, on July 16, 2004, after
the close of the market, Biolase reported preliminary results
for the second quarter of 2004, which were below analysts'
expectations. As a result of this news, the Company's stock
declined to $8.78.

It is alleged in the Complaint that defendants knew that Biolase
was not performing nearly as well as represented. It is further
alleged that defendants concealed from investors that,

     (1) Waterlase was not gaining market share and demand for
         the product was not increasing at the rates represented
         by defendants;

     (2) Biolase had introduced a lower priced entry level laser
         which was cannibalizing sales such that Biolase's
         reported earnings were false and misleading;

     (3) defendants were concealing this decreasing demand by
         granting extended payment terms and price breaks; and

     (4) Biolase would not achieve the earnings growth
         forecasted.

For more details, contact Andrew G. Tolan, Esq. of Pomerantz
Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP by Phone: (888) 476-6529
((888) 4-POMLAW) or by E-mail: agtolan@pomlaw.com


BONZI SOFTWARE: Settles Deceptive Software Advertising Charges
--------------------------------------------------------------
Internet company Bonzi Software agreed to settle the Federal
Trade Commission's deceptive advertising charges against its
InternetALERT software product, internetnews.com reports.

Bonzi's InternetALERT software costs $49/year and is advertised
through banner, button and pop-up ads and on the Company's
website.  The ads warned consumers that hackers could "Steal
your Credit Card & Personal Information; Read Your E-Mail; Plant
a Virus or Worm; or Steal Online Banking Information!"  The ads
promised that InternetALERT could provide consumers with the
"comfort and security of knowing that no one from the internet
can access (their) computer(s) without (their) knowledge or
pemission."

However, the FTC alleged that the software failed to deliver on
its promises and that it did not significantly reduce the risk
of unauthorized access into computers and information stored in
them.  InternetALERT allegedly provided only limited protection
for computers against intrusions by hackers, viruses, worms,
spyware, and other Internet threats, and completely lacked virus
protection and a block on unauthorized outgoing file transfers.

Under the settlement, the Company agreed to tone down its claims
and offer existing customers a partial refund.   The proposed
agreement, which may be finalized or amended based on public
comment, bars the Company from overstating how much any software
can detect and reduce the risk of Internet attacks or enhance
security or privacy.  The Company would have to notify current
InternetALERT subscribers and let them cancel their service and
receive a prorated refund.  They also would have to send a copy
of the order to third parties advertising or selling
InternetALERT.

In 2003, the company settled a consumer class action suit over
Bonzi Buddy, a "surfing companion" that suggested sites to
visit. The suit claimed Bonzi tricked users into visiting its
portal by running pop-up ads that mimicked the Windows messenger
feature with "message alert," security alert," or "warning."
When users clicked okay, instead of closing the box, they were
taken to Bonzi's promotional site. Bonzi paid $170,000
attorneys' fees and agreed to stop running misleading ads, but
didn't pay any damages.  Bonzi removed a feature from the
software that saved the user's keyword searches, and it no
longer asks for personal information at registration,
internetnews.com reports.

Bonzi Software owners Jay and Joe Bonzi could not be reached for
comment, according to internetnews.com.


CANADIAN IMPERIAL: $16.5M Settlement Presented To Toronto Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce's $16.5 million settlement
with cardholders in response to allegations that it didn't
disclose its markup on foreign exchange transactions is set to
be approved by Toronto court next month, the Toronto Star
reports.

The bank, which denied any wrongdoing, stated that it settled to
avoid further litigation with cardholders. The bank also agreed
to shell out $3 million for legal costs to the Windsor law firm
Sutts Strosberg, which started the case seven years ago.

According to Harvey Strosberg, the suit arose from complaints by
cardholders, who were going to Detroit to buy something and end
up giving it back on the same day since the debits and credits
were not the same. Mr. Strosberg further adds, "The bank was
adding a 1.5 per cent administration charge, even if the goods
were returned."

Mr. Strosberg also stated that the CIBC lawsuit was settled
because "we didn't think we'd be successful if it continued. In
some periods, we didn't have a good case."


CONNECTICUT: Monitors' Report Says DCF Making Reform Progress
-------------------------------------------------------------
Connecticut's Department of Children and Families (DCF) has made
"solid forward progress" in complying with a federal court order
to improve its operations, a monitor reported late last week,
according to Boston.com.  However, the agency has yet to achieve
many of its goals.

The agency faced a class action filed in 1989, charging it with
violating federal laws by not adequately protecting children.
The agency later agreed to meet 22 specific goals by November
2006 to get out from under federal court supervision.

The monitor's report says that the state DCF has sufficiently
reduced the caseloads of its social workers to required levels
for the first time since the monitoring began.  The monitor
called that result a "critical foundation standard" for meeting
the other goals.  The report stated that the agency also met
standards for reducing maltreatment of children in foster homes,
minimizing multiple placements of children, and foster parent
training.

"This report documents solid forward progress toward exit,
probably as much as could be expected given the magnitude of the
changes required," the monitor said, according to Boston.com.
The report also praised Gov. M. Jodi Rell for her efforts, which
include hiring nearly 150 social workers in the two months since
she took office.

However, the agency still has to work on several goals including
completing timely child abuse investigations, adoptions,
transferring guardianship and reducing the number of children in
residential treatment, according to the report.

Martha Stone, the lead lawyer for the plaintiffs in the civil
lawsuit against DCF, applauded the agency for meeting the
caseload requirements.  However, she said the report shows that
serious deficiencies in the agency remain, boston.com reports.

She said the department still lags in the recruitment and
retention of foster homes, has failed to provide children with
adequate access to behavioral health care, and hasn't developed
a quality-assurance system.  "You can have all the case workers
in the world but until you fix these three issues, you are not
going to assure the needs of the children are being met," she
said. "Fifteen years after the lawsuit was filed, 50 percent of
these kids aren't getting their needs met."

D. Ray Sirry, the court monitor, urged patience.  "External
frustration with the pace of change may lead some to think the
quick fix is to divide DCF into several agencies," Sirry wrote,
according to Boston.com.  "There is no question that this would
further delay compliance."


CP SHIPS: Shareholders Launch Securities Suit in Canadian Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
Quebec, Canada law firm Siskinds Desmeules filed a securities
class action against CP Ships Ltd. in the Quebec Superior Court
of Justice, The Globe and Mail reports.  The suit also named as
defendants:

     (1) Company chairman Ray Miles,

     (2) chief executive officer Frank Halliwell and

     (3) chief financial officer Ian Webber

The suit, filed on behalf of a Company shareholder, is the
latest in a series of legal actions filed against the London-
based firm, after it disclosed that it uncovered "accounting
deficiencies" that slashed its previously reported profit dating
back to 2002, on August 9,2004.  Numerous U.S. law firms
announced plans for class actions against CP Ships last month
after the company's shares tumbled on news that it needed to
erase $41-million (U.S.) in profit that it previously reported
from 2002 through the first quarter of 2004.

The firm filed the suit on behalf of clients for an amount yet
to be specified from the Company for allegedly misleading
investors.  The Quebec lawsuit details news releases issued in
the past by CP Ships, and alleges that the company didn't
properly disclose its financial statements, the Globe and Mail
reports.


FLORIDA: 2 Residents Plead Guilty To Illegal Drugs Distribution
---------------------------------------------------------------
Two Florida residents pleaded guilty to charges of operating a
drug ring that illegally distributed drugs - including
controlled substances - without requiring prescriptions, the
United States Food and Drug Administration stated in its news
digest.

Vineet K. Chhabra, also known as Vincent K. Chhabra, age 33, of
Golden Beach, Florida, and Sabina S. Faruqui, also known as
Sabina K. Chhabra, age 30, of Weston, Florida, pled guilty today
before the Honorable Leonie M. Brinkema, United States District
Judge, to conspiracy to distribute controlled substances.
According to the terms of the plea agreement, Vincent Chhabra
faces a sentence of 33 months incarceration when sentenced on
December 3, 2004.  Sabina Faruqui, his sister, was sentenced to
12 months probation after entering her plea.

Two corporations affiliated with Vincent Chhabra's business also
pled guilty to conspiracy to launder money.  Mr. Chhabra serves
as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Chhabra Group,
LLC, and as manager of VKC Consulting, LLC.  All these
defendants agreed to forfeit all proceeds of their illegal
activity.

"This successful investigation and prosecution shows that FDA
and the Department of Justice will aggressively pursue anyone
who attempts to undermine the important safeguards that have
been established to protect patient safety," said Dr. Lester M.
Crawford, Acting FDA Commissioner. "Prescription drugs,
particularly controlled substances, can only be used safely and
effectively when administered under the careful supervision of a
patient's physician."

Paul J. McNulty, United States Attorney for the Eastern District
of Virginia, and Peter Keisler, Assistant Attorney General for
the Civil Division, Department of Justice, brought this case on
behalf of FDA. Prosecuting this case for the United States were
Assistant United States Attorneys Brian D. Miller and Karen
Taylor, and Linda Marks and Jill Furman from the Consumer
Litigation Section of the Justice Department's Civil Division.
The case was brought as a result of investigations conducted by
FDA's Office of Criminal Investigations and the Federal Bureau
of Investigation.

In his guilty plea, Vincent Chhabra admitted to running a
business that operated websites and toll-free numbers through
which he unlawfully distributed and dispensed controlled
substances. He and his conspirators illegally distributed and
dispensed millions of pills, including phendimetrazine, a weight
loss stimulant sold by its brand name Bontril. Other
prescription drugs illegally distributed and dispensed included
Viagra, Xenical, Propecia, and Celebrex.

Contrary to law, these illegal websites did not require
customers to present a valid prescription before receiving the
controlled substances and other drugs. Instead, customers filled
out an on-line questionnaire and chose the type, quantity, and
dosage they desired to purchase. The prescriptions were
dispensed under the authorizations of conspirators through
pharmacies owned by other conspirators. Vincent Chhabra was also
a partner in the websites get-it-on.com, cybrx.com,
cybrxpress.com, rxclinic.com, eprescribe.com., rxleader.com,
choicerx.com, and privacyrx.com.  For a prescription to be
valid, it must be issued for a legitimate medical purpose by a
licensed medical practitioner acting in the lawful course
professional practice.


FORD MOTOR: Recalls About 40T Minivans Due To Various Defects
-------------------------------------------------------------
According to Ford Motor Company spokesman, Glenn Ray the
automaker is recalling about 40,000 minivans because their wheel
hubs may develop cracks. The recall affects 35,401 Ford Freestar
minivans and 4,630 Mercury Montereys, both from the 2004 model
year, Reuters reports.

The second-largest U.S. automaker recalled about 24,000 Freestar
and Monterey minivans from the same model year last November,
due to defective power steering pressure lines.

Mr. Ray also said, that Ford is recalling about 1,700 of its
2004 model-year F-150 pickup trucks because of defective fuel
tanks. The pickups are being recalled because of the possibility
of a fuel leak through the seams of the tank. The trucks were
built between March 4 and May 26, 2004. This is the second
recall involving the 2004 model-year F-150s since Ford recalled
about 400 of the vehicles in April citing the same defect,
according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.


FORT DODGE: Recalls ProHeartr6 Due To Adverse Drug Experiences
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fort Dodge Animal Health, of Overland Park, Kansas, at FDA's
request, has agreed to immediately cease production and recall
its heartworm medication ProHeartr6 from the market until the
FDA's concerns about adverse reaction reports associated with
the product can be resolved. The FDA is requesting that the firm
continue to conduct research to determine the cause of related
adverse reactions and develop a strategy to help prevent such
problems in the future before the product is marketed again. The
FDA will convene an independent scientific advisory committee to
thoroughly evaluate all available data.

ProHeartr6 is an approved injectable sustained-release heartworm
prevention product for dogs. Heartworm disease is a serious and
potentially fatal condition of dogs, cats, and other species of
mammals. The parasite that causes heartworm disease is
transmitted through the bite of a mosquito.

FDA is also advising veterinarians to avoid administering this
product to dogs until further notice. Pet owners should consult
their veterinarians regarding their pet's health care needs.

Since the product was approved in June 2001, Fort Dodge Animal
Health has cooperated with FDA to investigate numerous adverse
event reports. As a result, Fort Dodge has voluntarily changed
the label to include post approval safety information including
rare reports of death and a caution to practitioners that dogs
should have a negative test for heartworm before administration.

Despite these label changes, FDA is still receiving unexplained
adverse event reports, some of them severe. FDA's concern is
based on voluntary self-reporting to FDA by veterinarians and
owners whose dogs have suffered adverse drug experiences (ADEs)
to ProHeartr6 (which contains the drug moxidectin) as well as
the mandatory reporting of adverse events by Fort Dodge Animal
Health.

Fort Dodge Animal Health has agreed to recall any product that
has already been distributed to veterinarians.

As of August 4, 2004, FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM)
had received 5,552 adverse event reports for ProHeartr6. The
actual number of adverse events is likely even higher because
studies show that only a fraction of actual ADEs are reported.

The Agency has observed an increase in the number of cases
associated with liver and bleeding abnormalities followed in
some cases by death.

For more details, contact the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
by Phone: 301-827-6242 (Media Inquiries) or 888-INFO-FDA
(Consumer Inquiries)


GENERAL MOTORS: Lawyers Seek More Info For MI Piston Slap Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lawyers for plaintiffs in the lawsuits filed against automobile
giant General Motors Corporation over allegedly defective
engines, accused the company of withholding important documents,
Detroit News reports.

Law firm Charfoos & Christensen filed the suit last October in
the United States District Court in Detroit Michigan, alleging
that the Company produced defective engines used in about
800,000 1999-2002 pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles.  The
suit alleges the vehicles were plagued by loud knocking noise
known as "piston slap," caused when the pistons knock against
the side of the cylinder because the clearance between the
piston and cylinder is too wide.

The law firm has started running newspaper ads soliciting new
information for the suit.  The ads, which began running Tuesday
in The Detroit News and Detroit Free Press, ask GM employees or
others for information or documents that would help the lawsuit
against the automaker.

"We need GM to produce documents," J.D. Peters, an attorney at
Charfoos & Christensen told the Detroit News. "We don't trust GM
to produce the documents."  He added that the firm's telephones
were "ringing all day" as a result of the ads, which will run
"as long as we keep getting results."

GM denounced Peters' accusations that the automaker would
destroy or withhold evidence.  "It's reprehensible for him to
even suggest that," GM spokeswoman Brenda Rios told the Detroit
News. "The ad speaks volumes about their case in that they have
to advertise in the newspaper for evidence to support their
claims."

The Company has called the engine problem a "tick" and said it
"disappears after about 5 to 30 seconds as the engine warms up."
In a statement, the Company asserted that the problem has been
reported by a small percentage of owners with 4.8 liter, 5.3
liter and 6.0 liter displacement engines.

The Detroit lawsuit has been combined with similar suits filed
in Oklahoma, Florida and Massachusetts. The lawsuits are seeking
class action status.  The plaintiffs are asking for damages and
for GM to replace the engines or buy back the vehicles.

A spokesman for the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration told the Detroit News the agency does not track
consumer complaints for piston slap since it is not a safety
issue.


GOLF EMPORIUM: SEC Initiated Proceedings V. Former President/CEO
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission issued an Order
Instituting Public Administrative Proceedings Pursuant to
Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Order)
against Frederick Tropeano (Tropeano), a resident of Brooklyn,
New York. In the Order, the Division of Enforcement (Division)
alleges that the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York has issued a permanent injunction against
Tropeano, and found him liable for using fraudulent
misrepresentations and omissions of material fact to induce
investors to invest in a purported private placement of the
stock of Golf Emporium Corporation (Golf), a now dissolved New
York corporation of which Tropeano was President and CEO. The
Complaint alleged that Tropeano's misrepresentations included,
but were not limited to, claims that (a) Golf was about to
commence an Initial Public Offering (IPO) that would cause the
price of Golf stock to increase to many times the $2 per share
private placement price; (b) Golf had meetings with the
Commission's staff about the Golf IPO and about listing Golf
stock on the NYSE or NASDAQ; and (c) Golf had registered the IPO
with the Commission. Through his fraudulent conduct, Tropeano
raised approximately $3,427,160 from 225 investors in Golf's
purported private placement.

The Division alleges that on Sept. 12, 2000, a Final Judgment By
Default was entered against Tropeano, permanently enjoining him
from future violation of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of
1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(Exchange Act) and Rule 10b-5 promulgated under the Exchange
Act, in the civil action entitled SEC v. Golf Emporium
Corporation and Frederick Tropeano, Civil Action No. 99 Civ.
10259 (JSR), in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York. In addition, the Division alleges
that on Feb. 11, 2000, Tropeano pleaded guilty to one felony
count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud and one felony
count of wire fraud before the United States District Court for
the Southern District of New York, in United States v. Frederick
Tropeano, et al., 99 Cr. 01024 (S.D.N.Y.)(SAS). On May 24, 2000,
a criminal judgment was entered against Tropeano, sentencing him
to a prison term of 38 months followed
by three years of supervised release.

A hearing will be scheduled before an administrative law judge
to determine whether the allegations contained in the Order are
true, to provide Tropeano an opportunity to dispute these
allegations, and to determine what, if any, remedial sanctions
against Tropeano are appropriate and in the public interest
pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Exchange Act. The Commission
directed that an administrative law judge issue an initial
decision in this matter within 210 days from the date of service
of the Order Instituting Proceedings.


HAMILTON COUNTY: Homeowner Files Suit Over Limited Publication
--------------------------------------------------------------
Tennessee's weekly publication The Hamilton County Herald faces
a class action filed in state Chancery Court by a Tennessee
homeowner, alleging that the newspaper's limited publication
allows the sale of foreclosed properties without the owner being
notified, the Chattanoogan.com reports.

James L. Coulter filed the suit, which seeks millions in damages
and also names as defendants:

     (1) Wilson & Associates attorneys,

     (2) Foreclosure Placement Services,

     (3) Robert M. Wilson Jr.,

     (4) William F. Rector Jr.,

     (5) Cade L. Cox and

     (6) Don Bona

Mr. Coulter was formerly married to Linda G. Coulter and they
lived at 1826 Morris Hill Road.  He told the Chattanoogan.com
two other houses are on the property, and the entire homeplace
was worth about $180,000.  He said he was divorced in 2001 and
moved to Catoosa County, Georgia.

The suit says the couple had taken out a $74,500 loan on the
property in 2001.  The loan went into arrears without the
knowledge of Mr. Coulter and the mortgage was turned over to
Wilson & Associates.  It says a letter about a foreclosure was
sent to the Morris Hill Road address, but was returned
unaccepted.  The suit says the property was sold at a
foreclosure sale on September 15, 2003, and bought in for the
amount of the loan - $78,600.

Mr. Coulter alleges he learned about the foreclosure sale when a
relative called and said the people who had bought the property
were there putting up surveyor markers.  He said he had an
excellent credit rating, but his credit was damaged because of
the foreclosure.  Mr. Coulter said he learned that Wilson &
Associates had billed $260 as a placement fee for Foreclosure
Placement Services. He said the attorneys could have placed the
ad themselves without having to incur that fee.

The suit says Wilson & Associates on November 1, 2002, ceased
placing foreclosure ads in the Chattanooga Times Free Press and
started using the Herald.  It says three-fourths of the ads in
the Herald are placed by Wilson & Associates.  The complaint
says just 362 copies of the Herald are printed each week.

The suit says, "Clearly, the Herald cannot be regarded as a
newspaper for the purpose of complying with statutory
publication requirements and thereby notifying the community
that certain property is to be sold at a trustee's sale."  It
says by no longer using the daily newspaper the defendants "did
and continue to intentionally, recklessly, or negligently
disregard the near-elimination of the possibility that the
Coulters and other property owners would receive publication
notice of foreclosure sales," the Chattanoogan.com reports.


HOLLINGER INTERNATIONAL: Canada Investors Lodge Stock Fraud Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Former Hollinger, Inc. chief executive Conrad Black, his wife
and associates face class actions filed in Saskatchewan and
Ontario, Canada courts this week, seeking to recover $4 billion
in investment losses for the Company's shareholders, CBC News
reports.

Regina lawyer Tony Merchant filed the suit, on behalf of Company
shareholders, including small investors, pension, insurance and
mutual-fund companies.  The suit alleges that the drop in the
stock market price of the Hollinger Companies might be connected
to the controversies involving Mr. Black's management and
allegations he and associates took hundreds of millions of
dollars they weren't entitled to.

No dollar figure has been fixed, but the cases seek to recover
market losses, lawyer Tony Merchant said in a release.  He said
he expects the courts will allow the class to include
shareholders in Hollinger Inc., a holding company, and Hollinger
International Inc., a newspaper publisher.  Mr. Black controls
Hollinger Inc., which controls Hollinger International, CBC News
reports.

Hollinger Inc. and other related Lord Black companies are
located in Canada and "many of the questionable transactions"
took place in Canada, Mr. Merchant said.   Saskatchewan allows
quick court access.  "Early protection of shareholder rights may
be profoundly significant if these companies experience ongoing
negative pressure as further discoveries of wrongdoing emerge,"
Mr. Merchant told CBC News.


KENTUCKY: Youth Center Residents Launch Sexual Abuse Suits
----------------------------------------------------------
A former resident of The Morehead Youth Development Center in
Kentucky launched a class action filed in the United States
District Court in Frankfort, Tennessee, alleging that her civil
rights were violated through repeated sexual assaults by a male
staff member, The Courier-Journal reports.

The suit names as defendants former youth worker Guy Nantell and
the center's former superintendent Steven Wells.  Mr. Nantell
was fired in December last year, after he admitted to having sex
with a teenage girl at the center, according to state
investigators.  He was later charged with two felony counts over
charges that he sexually abused two girls at the facility.  He
has pleaded not guilty.  His trial is set for January 4, 2005.

State Justice Cabinet officials also ordered Mr. Wells to resign
in May for mismanagement.  According to state records, Mr. Wells
had been aware of allegations that Mr. Nantell was abusing girls
dating back to 2002.

The plaintiff, now 17, was not one of the girls who was
allegedly abused, attorney Hans G. Pope told The Courier-
Journal.  Mr. Pope filed the suit along with lawyer David A.
Friedman, on behalf of many current and former residents who
lawyers believe were sexually victimized.  "We anticipate there
will be dozens," Mr. Poppe said.

The suit specifically alleged that Mr. Wells, who became
superintendent in 2002, ignored allegations of sexual abuse.
"Nantell was able to sexually abuse and assault all class
members because of Wells' deliberate indifference to their need
for protection," the lawsuit said.

Mr. Nantell began work at the center in 2000. In January 2002,
he was accused of improper sexual contact with a resident, but
state investigators found the allegation unsubstantiated,
according to records obtained by The Courier-Journal.   He was
subsequently accused in another 15 complaints of alleged abuse
of residents, none of which were initially substantiated by
state investigators.

The lawsuit said public defenders who represent the girls had
complained about the problem several times to Mr. Wells since
2002.  The lawsuit also alleges that Mr. Wells violated the
civil rights of residents by debriefing them after they met
privately with the public defenders and threatening residents
with sanctions if they continued to meet with their lawyers.

Mr. Nantell has declined to comment on the case.  He referred
questions to his lawyer, Grover Carrington, who could not be
reached for comment yesterday.  Mr. Wells yesterday declined to
comment, saying he didn't know anything about the lawsuit, The
Courier Journal states.


LEK SECURITIES: SEC Sets Aside PHLX Action Over AUTOM Orders
------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission has set aside action of
the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (PHLX) against Lek
Securities Corp. (LSC) and its chief executive officer, Samuel
F. Lek. The PHLX had found that, during the summer of 2000, LSC
and Lek improperly sent agency orders for broker-dealer
customers to the Exchange's Automated Options Market (AUTOM)
system, in violation of PHLX Rule 1080(b). LSC and Lek were
censured and fined $1,000.

At all relevant times, PHLX Rule 1080(b) provided generally that
only "agency orders" could be entered into AUTOM. The PHLX had
interpreted the term "agency orders" to include orders for
public customers, but not orders for broker-dealers. LSC and Lek
argued that this interpretation was erroneous, and that the term
"agency orders" plainly encompassed orders executed by a member
acting as an agent for broker-dealer customers. The Commission
considered the language and history of PHLX Rule 1080(b), and
found it was unclear that AUTOM was limited to public customer
orders. The Commission determined that the term "agency orders"
was too ambiguous a term to warrant the PHLX's findings that LSC
and Lek violated PHLX Rule 1080(b). Accordingly, the findings of
violations and sanctions imposed by the PHLX were set aside.


LEXMARK INTERNATIONAL: Recalls 39,431 Printers For Injury Hazard
----------------------------------------------------------------
Lexmark International Inc., of Lexington, Kentucky is
cooperating with the United States Consumer Product Safety
Commission by voluntarily recalling about 39,431 Lexmark, Dell
and IBM Laser Printers

These printers can short-circuit, posing an electrical shock
hazard to consumers. So far no incidents/injuries have been
reported. This recall is being conducted to prevent the
possibilities of incidents or injury.

The recall includes Lexmark, Dell and IBM brand laser printers.
The brand name and model number for the Lexmark and IBM laser
printers can be found on the front of the printer. For Dell
laser printers, the brand name is on the front of the printer
and the model number is inside the front cover. The recall
includes the following model numbers: Lexmark E232, E232t, E330,
E332n, E332tn; IBM Infoprint 1412, 1412n; Dell 1700 and 1700n.

Manufactured in China, these Lexmark printers were sold directly
through distributors, and at electronic, office supply and
computer stores. IBM printers were sold directly through
authorized distributors and resellers and via IBM's web site.
Dell printers were sold directly through the firm's Web site.
These laser printers were sold from May 2004 through August 2004
for about $200.

Consumers should immediately stop using the laser printer,
unplug it, and contact their corresponding laser printer company
to register their product to receive a free replacement laser
printer.

For more details, contact Lexmark through their Web site at
http://recall.lexmark.comor toll-free at (877) 877-6218 between
9 a.m. and 9 p.m. ET Monday through Friday or between Noon and 6
p.m. ET on Saturday; Dell Web site at http://www.1700printer.com
or toll-free at Dell (888) 245-3959 between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. CT
Monday through Friday; or IBM Web site at
http://www.printers.ibm.comor toll-free at (800) 426-7378
anytime OR (Media Contacts) Julane Hamon, Lexmark International
at (859) 232-1536, or jhamon@lexmark.com OR Don Canfield, IBM at
(303)924-4644 or doncan@us.ibm.com OR Jennifer Richard, Dell, at
(512) 723-3309 or Jennifer_Richard@dell.com


MUTUAL FUNDS: Firms Face Consolidated Shareholders Lawsuit in MD
----------------------------------------------------------------
After settling SEC market-timing investigations, mutual-fund
firms, Invesco Funds Group and Janus Capital Group, are still
facing class-action litigation from shareholders, the Denver
Post reports.

The two firms are among the handful named in more than 100
private lawsuits being consolidated in a federal court in
Maryland. The other firms named in the suit are Alliance Capital
Management, Bank of America, Bank One, Strong Capital Management
and Putnam Investments.

According to experts it will take a year or so to resolve the
cases, which are currently handled by a panel of four federal
judges with a potential cost of up to $1 billion to the
companies.

In Colorado alone, several law firms have represented individual
shareholders in at least 14 lawsuits against Invesco and its
parent, Amvescap Plc, in the U.S. District Court for Colorado of
which have been transferred to the Maryland court.

Denver attorney Randall Livingston of Bailey & Peterson, who
represents an individual Invesco investor in a lawsuit, had the
case transferred to Maryland in April. He said, "the class-
action procedure is available because there are often incidences
where a single claim makes no economic sense. It will cost more
to file the suit than the actual damages."

Commenting on the soon to be consolidated cases, University of
Colorado law professor Ted Fiflis said that the settlement
between Invesco and regulators isn't likely to affect the class-
action litigation. He further adds that the settlement won't be
allowed as evidence and that the plaintiffs' attorneys won't be
able to mention it.


OLYMPIA BUSINESS: Investors Sue Accountant For Fraudulent Report
----------------------------------------------------------------
Investors of fallen Barrie, Canada office supply company Olympia
Business Machines (Canada), Ltd. are attempting a lawsuit
against the Company's accountant, to recover an estimated $6
million in losses, plus $2 million in damages, The Toronto Star
reports.

In their statement, the investors allege they lent money to the
Company in 2000 and 2001, based on a projection of sales and
profits prepared by BDO Dunwoody LLP accountant Edward
Reiterowski and presented to Company president James Peter Emms.
The report was distributed to potential purchasers of promissory
notes paying high rates of interest, which were allegedly
secured by specific office copiers leased to Company clients.
Mr. Reiterowski has since been found guilty of professional
misconduct and fined $5,000 by the Institute of Chartered
Accountants of Ontario for his lack of care in preparing the
report.

Retired Orillia farmer Ed Murphy is spearheading the lawsuit
against the accounting firm.  Mr. Murphy lost an investment of
$300,000 in the Company.

Harry Kopyto, a former lawyer who helped to prepare the lawsuit
filed last week in Toronto, told The Toronto Star there is no
legal precedent in Canada for what the investors are trying to
do.  He said there is no chance of the investors recovering
money from Olympia or Mr. Emms, who is fighting off a bid in the
courts to put him and his inactive company into bankruptcy.  Mr.
Emms is also facing charges of fraud unrelated to Olympia's
solicitation of funds from private investors.

Mr. Reiterowski and a lawyer representing the company both said
yesterday they had not seen the statement of claim.  "I think
the facts are that many people did not see our report," Mr.
Reiterowski told the Star.  "Our report had nothing to do with
them investing."


RED HAT: Investors Reminded of CA Suit Lead Plaintiff Deadline
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein,
P.C. reminds purchasers of the securities of Red Hat, Inc. ("Red
Hat" or the "Company") (Nasdaq:RHAT) between June 19, 2001 and
July 13, 2004, inclusive ("Class Period") that the deadline to
move for lead plaintiff in a securities fraud class action
brought by Much Shelist against Red Hat and certain of its
officers and directors is on September 13, 2004.

The class action is currently pending in the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.

The Complaint alleges that defendants (Red Hat, Matthew Szulik,
Kevin B. Thompson, Mark Webbink, Timothy Buckley and Paul
Cormier) violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.
Throughout the Class Period, in each Form 10-Q and Form 10-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"),
defendants falsely reported that they properly recognized
revenue from subscriptions. In fact, as the market learned on
July 13, they did not. Instead, defendants recognized
subscription revenue on a monthly, rather than a daily, basis.
For example, if a subscription agreement was signed on the last
day of a month, a full month's revenue would be recognized on
that day, rather than one day's worth of revenue. After the
PriceWaterhouseCooper's auditor was rotated, the new auditor
required recognition from subscriptions on a daily basis as
required by Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP").
This change in accounting practice resulted in the restatement
of Red Hat's financial results for fiscal years 2002, 2003 and
the first quarter of 2004. Defendants admitted that the
restatement "is expected to result in significant percentage
differences in certain items such as quarterly operating profit
and net income."

During the class period, defendants Buckley and Szulik sold over
$34 million and $37 million respectively of Red Hat securities,
while the other defendants collectively sold an additional $8
million. As a result of defendants' allegedly fraudulent scheme,
the price of Red Hat's securities was artificially inflated,
allowing insiders to sell Red Hat securities for millions of
dollars in proceeds and causing plaintiff and other class
members to suffer damages.

The Company also announced that the SEC has made an inquiry into
the Company's results as filed in their Form 10-K. On Monday,
June 14, 2004, Red Hat unexpectedly announced that its Chief
Financial Officer ("CFO") was resigning "to pursue other
interests." The Company claims that its restatement is unrelated
to its former CFO's resignation. The price of Red Hat stock
plummeted $4.62 or 22.7% per share, losing $600 million in
market capitalization to close at $15.73 per share.

For more details, contact Carol V. Gilden or Conor R. Crowley of
Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein, P.C. by Phone:
1-800-470-6824 or by E-mail: investorhelp@muchshelist.com


STERLING FOSTER: SEC Initiates Proceedings V. Ex-Representatives
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission issued an Order
Instituting Administrative Proceedings and Notice of Hearing
Pursuant to Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(Order) against David Abish, Christopher Betts, Mark Charvat,
James Corcoran, Paul Feeny, Robert Pratt, Mario Rodriguez, Scott
Siegel, Andrew Tursi, and David Weeks (collectively, the
Respondents), all of whom are former registered representatives
of Sterling Foster & Company, Inc. (Sterling Foster).

During February and March 2000, the U.S. Attorney's Office for
the Southern District of New York charged each of the
Respondents with defrauding investors through the use of
fraudulent sales practices while at Sterling Foster. The
Division of Enforcement alleges that between June 2000 and May
2002, each of the Respondents was either found guilty or entered
guilty pleas in those criminal matters.

A hearing before an administrative law judge will be scheduled
to determine whether the allegations in the order are true, to
provide the Respondents an opportunity to dispute these
allegations, and to determine what remedial action, if any, is
appropriate in the public interest.

The Order directed the Administrative Law Judge to issue an
initial decision within 210 days from the date of service of the
Order.


TOBACCO LITIGATION: Judge Denies Motion To Postpone $280B Trial
---------------------------------------------------------------
After Judge Gladys Kessler rejected their final attempt to
postpone a landmark $280 billion racketeering trial, the
country's largest tobacco companies and the federal government
are set to square off in court on September 21, the Financial
Times reports.

The Justice Department alleges in its suit that from 1953 the
companies engaged in a "massive, 50-year scheme to defraud the
public", by misleading people over the dangers of smoking. The
department named as defendants; Altria's Philip Morris; RJ
Reynolds and Brown & Williamson - which recently merged to form
Reynolds American; Loews Corporation's Lorillard and Vector
Group's
Liggett.

The companies denied the allegations and said that they did not
hide in any way the health risks associated with smoking. The
cigarette companies also pointed out that marketing restrictions
put in place by the $246 billion Master Settlement Agreement in
1998, which ended lawsuits brought by the 50 US states, have
changed the way the industry operates.

The cigarette makers filed a motion to postpone the trial until
January 10, to allow time for an appeal to be heard over a pre-
trial motion they filed aimed at limiting the government's $280
billion claim, a motion, which Judge Kessler ultimately denied.


                  New Securities Fraud Cases


CERIDIAN CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Suit in MN
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP initiated a
class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the securities
of Ceridian Corporation. ("Ceridian" or the "Company") (NYSE:
CEN) between April 17, 2003 and July 19, 2004, inclusive, (the
"Class Period"), seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act").

The action is pending in the United States District Court for
the District of Minnesota, against defendants Ceridian, Ronald
L. Turner (President, CEO, Chairman), John R. Eickhoff (Chief
Financial Officer) and Loren D. Gross (Controller).

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period defendants
artificially inflated the price of Ceridian stock by issuing
financial statements that were materially false and misleading
for the following reasons:

     (1) the Company had been capitalizing software costs
         instead of expensing such costs at its U.S. Human
         Resource Solutions business;

     (2) as a result of inappropriately capitalizing costs,
         Ceridian's reported earnings and assets were
         artificially inflated;

     (3) contrary to defendants' express representations, the
         Company's reported financial statements were not made
         in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting
         Principles and did not fairly present the Company's
         results and financial condition; and

     (4) the Company's seeming success was, in fact,
         attributable in material part to defendants' accounting
         manipulations.

On July 19, 2004, Ceridian issued a press release announcing
that it had launched an internal investigation examining the
Company's capitalization and expensing of costs. According to
the press release, the Company would not issue financial results
until the review was completed, noting that the outcome may
impact Ceridian's financial statements for the second quarter of
2004 and prior periods. Ceridian's stock price declined sharply
in response to this disclosure, falling from $20.34 per share on
July 19, 2004 to $18.21 per share on July 20, 2004, a one day
drop of 10.4%, on unusually heavy trading volume of over 6.8
million shares. During the Class Period, defendants Eickhoff,
the Company's CFO, sold a total of 165,298 shares of Ceridian
common stock for proceeds of $2,961,607, while defendant Turner,
the Company's CEO, sold 51,000 shares for proceeds of
$1,014,560.

For more details, contact Steven G. Schulman, Peter E. Seidman
or Andrei V. Rado by Mail: One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl., New
York, NY 10119-0165 by Phone: (800) 320-5081 by E-mail:
sfeerick@milbergweiss.com or visit their Web site:
http://www.milbergweiss.com


EXPRESS SCRIPTS: Wolf Haldenstein Files Securities Lawsuit in MO
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP filed
a class action lawsuit in the US District Court for the Eastern
District of Missouri, on behalf of all persons who purchased the
securities of Express Scripts Inc between 29 Oct 2003 and 3 Aug
2004, inclusive against defendants Express Scripts and certain
officers and directors of the company.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal
securities laws by issuing materially false and misleading
statements throughout the Class Period that had the effect of
artificially inflating the market price of the company's
securities. Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants
failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material
adverse facts which were known to defendants or recklessly
disregarded by them: that Express Scripts artificially inflated
the cost of generic drugs; that millions of dollars worth of
rebates that belonged to its participating customers were
diverted to the company itself; that the company caused, through
fraud and deception, physicians to replace patients' prescribed
drug with another for which Express Scripts was rewarded with
money from the substituted drug's manufacturer; that the
aforementioned deceitful practices were in violation of
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles; that the company
lacked adequate internal controls; and that as result of the
foregoing, Express Scripts' financial results were materially
inflated at all relevant times.

On 28 Jul 2004, Express Scripts announced 2Q 2004 net income of
$65.4 M. On 4 Aug 2004, New York Attorney General's office
announced that it filed a lawsuit against Express Scripts
alleging that the company conducted elaborate schemes that
inflated the costs of prescription drugs by millions of dollars
to New York State's largest employee health plan, the Empire
Plan.


KVH INDUSTRIES: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in RI
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the District of
Rhode Island on behalf of purchasers of KVH Industries, Inc.
(Nasdaq: KVHI) publicly traded securities during the period
between January 6, 2004 and July 2, 2004.

The complaint charges KVH and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. KVH describes itself as a designer, manufacturer and
marketer of mobile satellite communications products for the
automotive/recreational vehicle/marine markets and navigation,
guidance and stabilization products for defense markets.

The complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period,
defendants issued materially false and misleading statements
regarding KVH's increasing financial results and the strong
demand for its newly developed TracVision A5 and G8 satellite TV
systems (the "TracVision systems").  As alleged in the
complaint, these statements were materially false and misleading
because they failed to disclose, among other things:

     (1) that defendants had "stuffed" the retail channels with
         overpriced TracVision systems;

     (2) that the Company's revenues were not growing by
         millions of dollars per quarter and the purported
         growth trends in the Company's revenues could not be
         sustained; and

     (3) that KVH had not realized any material cost reduction
         in the manufacture of its TracVision systems and would
         be forced to write-down its inventory of manufactured
         goods by millions of dollars.

The complaint further alleges that defendants failed to disclose
these adverse facts in order to complete a public offering of
KVH common stock, raising more than $51.5 million in much needed
capital.

On or about July 6, 2004, before the market opened for trading,
KVH stunned the investing public by announcing that it was
slashing the retail price of its TracVision systems by more than
34% and taking a multi-million dollar write down of vendor
purchase commitments and on-hand inventories to reflect the true
value of KVH's TracVision systems sales. In pre-opening market
trading, KVH common stock declined more than 19%, to open at
$9.51 per share on July 6, 2004, a 49% decline from the public
offering price just 4 months prior.

For more details, contact The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel by
Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by
Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by
E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


LIGAND PHARMACEUTICALS: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of California on behalf of all securities purchasers of
Ligand Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Nasdaq: LGND) from March 3, 2004
through August 2, 2004, inclusive.

The complaint charges Ligand, David E. Robinson, and Paul V.
Maier with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Ligand discovers, develops and markets drugs that address
patients' medical needs in the areas of cancer, pain, men's and
women's health or hormone-related health issues, skin diseases,
osteoporosis and metabolic, cardiovascular and inflammatory
diseases.

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

     (1) that defendants knew or recklessly disregarded the fact
         that inventory de-stocking, at the wholesale level, was
         occurring because the Company was unloading Avinza
         inventory, which was set to expire, onto wholesalers in
         order to show strong demand for Avinza and to meet
         sales expectations that they had set;

     (2) that overall demand of the Company's products,
         including Avinza, was down because of inventory de-
         stocking by wholesalers;

     (3) that Medicaid prescriptions were increasing and thereby
         causing the Company to pay excessive amounts of rebates
         to Medicaid;

     (4) that the defendants knew or recklessly disregarded the
         fact that increases in Medicaid rebates were not a one-
         time occurrence but were a trend that was going to
         continue to have a negative effect on the overall sales
         of Avinza; and

     (5) that as a result of the above, the Company's positive
         statements concerning its financial outlook was lacking
         in any reasonable basis when made.

On August 3, 2004, Ligand made two separate and shocking
announcements - that its second-quarter loss widened, missing
analysts' expectations by a huge margin, and that its
independent auditor resigned after a four-year relationship.
News of this shocked the market. Shares of Ligand plunged almost
40 percent, or $5.405 per share, to close at $8.175 per share on
unusually high trading volume on August 3, 2004.

For more details, contact The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel by
Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by
Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by
E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


NEKTAR THERAPEUTICS: Charles J. Piven Lodges CA Securities 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 Nektar
Therapeutics (Nasdaq: NKTR) between March 4, 2004 and August 4,
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, MD 21202 by Phone: 410/986-0036
by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com


NETFLIX INC.: Marc Henzel Files Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the District of
Northern California on behalf of all purchasers of the common
stock of Netflix, Inc. (Nasdaq: NFLX) from October 1, 2003
through July 15, 2004, inclusive.

The complaint charges Netflix, Reed Hastings and W. Barry
McCarthy Jr. with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. More specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Company
failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material
adverse facts known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by
them:

     (1) that the Company knew or recklessly disregarded the
         fact that the Company's growth was adversely affected
         by substantial customer attrition;

     (2) that in order to camouflage the high rate of customer
         attrition, defendants manipulated the Company's churn
         rate; and

     (3) that as a consequence of the foregoing, defendants
         lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements
         about the Company's growth and progress.

On July 15, 2004, Netflix reported results for the second
quarter ended June 30, 2004. The press release disclosed the
true number of customer cancellations suffered by the Company.
Following the announcement, shares of Netflix fell $8.98 per
share or 28.06 percent, on July 16, 2004, to close at $23.02 per
share.

For more details, contact The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel by
Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by
Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by
E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


NEKTAR THERAPEUTICS: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Lawsuit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California on behalf of all securities purchasers of
Nektar Therapeutics (Nasdaq: NKTR) from March 4, 2004 through
August 4, 2004 inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants Nektar, Ajit Gill, J.
Milton Harris, and Robert B. Chess violated Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market between March 5, 2004 and
August 4, 2004.  Nektar is a drug delivery products based
company that provides a portfolio of technologies that will
enable it and its pharmaceutical partners to improve drug
performance throughout the drug development process.

More specifically, the complaint alleges that the defendants'
statements were materially false and misleading because they
failed to disclose and/or misrepresented the following adverse
facts, among others:

     (1) that the defendants knew or recklessly disregarded the
         fact that Aventis, one of its main partners in Exubera,
         prematurely filed an application for marketing approval
         of Exubera in the European Union with the European
         Medicines Agency for the sole purpose of fending off a
         takeover bid;

     (2) that the defendants knew or recklessly disregarded the
         fact that Exubera was plagued by ongoing safety
         concerns, including decreases in lung function and
         build-up of antibodies that could potentially affect
         drug absorption;

     (3) that as a result of these safety concerns, the
         application for marketing approval of Exubera in the
         European Union was likely to be rejected; and

     (4) that despite knowing these facts, defendants approved
         of the filing because Nektar's revenues and growth
         prospectuses, which are largely based on royalties and
         manufacturing payments, are entirely dependent on the
         success of its partners, who are responsible for
         clinical development and marketing and because the
         Company was highly leveraged and needed the European
         Union filing in order to complete a $199.5 million
         offering.

On August 5, 2004, Reuters published an article entitled "EU
experts have concerns over Exubera drug-report." Citing a French
medical online news service, Reuters stated an unnamed source
heard that European regulatory officials wondered whether the
drug could win approval. The original story, from Agence de
Presse Medicale, also points to official notes from an April
meeting of British regulators that mentioned a certain unnamed
diabetes drug up for approval was being met with objections. It
is believed that drug is Exubera. News of this shocked the
market. Shares of Nektar fell $6.14 per share or 37.01 percent
on August 5, 2004, to close at $10.45 per share.

For more details, contact The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel by
Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by
Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by
E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


NETOPIA INC.: Marc Henzel Files Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initited a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California on behalf of purchasers of Netopia, Inc.
(NASDAQ:NTPA) common stock during the period between November 5,
2003 and August 16, 2004.

The complaint charges Netopia and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. Netopia develops, markets and supports broadband and
wireless products and services.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
caused Netopia's shares to trade at artificially inflated levels
through the issuance of false and misleading financial
statements.  Specifically, the complaint alleges that during the
Class Period, defendants knew, but concealed from the investing
public, the following material adverse facts:

     (1) the Company was experiencing weaker than claimed gross
         margins due to higher component costs (including
         shipping and surcharges);

     (2) the Company was actually experiencing decreases in
         average selling prices to its key carrier customers;

     (3) certain of the Company's top customers were declining
         to participate in the Company's roll out of its 802.11g
         launch;

     (4) the Company's receivables (and earnings) were
         overstated by virtue of the fact that the Company's
         clients were not even capable of paying for prior
         shipments;

     (5) the Company's largest customers were, early on,
         altering their purchasing mix, which defendants were
         keenly aware would result in dramatically lower average
         selling prices;

     (6) the Company's European customers had changed delivery
         standards resulting in a pushing out of potential
         revenue into future quarters; and

     (7) as a result of the above, the Company was not on track
         to achieve stated projections and, moreover, the
         Company's accounting was false and misleading.

On August 17, 2004, the Company issued a press release
announcing that "it will file today a Form 12b-25 with the
United States Securities and Exchange Commission with notice of
late filing of the Report on Form 10-Q for the third fiscal
quarter ended June 30, 2004. As Netopia previously announced on
July 22, 2004, Netopia's Audit Committee has initiated an
inquiry into Netopia's accounting and reporting practices,
including the appropriateness and timing of revenue recognition
of software license fees in two transactions with a single
software reseller customer."

For more details, contact The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel by
Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by
Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by
E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


PRIMUS TELECOMMUNICATIONS: Marc Henzel Lodges Stock Suit in VA
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia on behalf of purchasers of PRIMUS
Telecommunications Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: PRTL) publicly traded
securities during the period between November 11, 2003 and July
29, 2004.

The complaint charges PRIMUS and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. PRIMUS is a global facilities-based telecommunications
services provider offering an integrated portfolio of
international and domestic voice, Internet, voice-over-Internet
protocol, data and hosting services to business and residential
retail customers and other carriers located primarily in the
United States, Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and Europe.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, PRIMUS's
shares traded at inflated levels due to materially false and
misleading statements issued by defendants to the investing
public regarding the Company's business and prospects. The true
facts, which were known by each of the defendants but concealed
from the investing public during the Class Period, were as
follows:

     (1) the Company was experiencing massive pricing pressures
         on its standalone international long distance business
         and the Company's minutes of use were not growing, but
         actually declining;

     (2) contrary to its projections, the Company, on a
         consolidated basis, would actually lose money for the
         second half of 2004 and even the Company's second
         quarter projections were grossly overstated;

     (3) the Company's business model was incredibly weak and,
         as a result, combined with the Company's second quarter
         2004 revelations and the fact that the Company was
         already highly leveraged ($580 million), its ability to
         raise the necessary monies for capital expenditures to
         achieve even the newly projected results was severely
         hampered if not taken away altogether;

     (4) contrary to defendants' statements, the Company was
         drowning in competition; and

     (5) as a result, the value of the Company as an enterprise
         was actually less than the Company's debt.

As a result of these false statements, PRIMUS's shares traded at
inflated prices during the Class Period, increasing to as high
as $13.15 on January 26, 2004, whereby the Company's top
officers and directors completed a $240 million note offering.
On July 29, 2004, after the market closed, PRIMUS issued a press
release announcing its second quarter results, posting a loss of
$14.9 million, or $0.17 per share, which reversed the year-ago
profit of $18.7 million, or $0.21 per share. The numbers fell
far short of Wall Street's expectations. Defendants had forecast
earnings of $.10 per share on revenue of $348 million. The
Company blamed the industry-wide price war for its troubles and
said it would push to roll out more integrated services in an
effort to defend its turf. PRIMUS shares dropped $1.70 to $1.52
per share -- a 50% drop in a single day.

For more details, contact The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel by
Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by
Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by
E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


RED HAT: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Lawsuit in E.D. NC
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of North Carolina on behalf of all persons who
purchased or otherwise acquired the securities of Red Hat, Inc.
(NasdaqNM: RHAT) between December 19, 2003 and July 13, 2004,
inclusive and who were damaged thereby.  The action, is also
pending:

     (1) Matthew Szulik (CEO),

     (2) Kevin B. Thompson (CFO),

     (3) Mark Webbink (General Counsel),

     (4) Timothy Buckley (former COO) and

     (5) Paul Cormier (Exec. VP)

The complaint charges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder. Throughout the Class Period, in each
Form 10-Q and Form 10-K filed with the SEC, Defendants falsely
reported that they "ratably" recognized revenue from
subscriptions.

In fact, as the market learned on July 13, it did not. Instead,
Defendants recognized revenue from subscriptions on a monthly
basis, rather than on a daily basis. For example, if a
subscription was signed on the last day of a month, a full
month's revenue would have been recognized on that day, rather
than a day's worth of revenue. After the auditor within
PriceWaterhouse Cooper rotated, the new auditor required
recognition of revenue from subscriptions on a daily basis as
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP") requires. This
change in accounting practice resulted in Red Hat's having to
restate its financial results for fiscal years 2002, 2003 and
the first quarter of 2004.  The restatement, Defendants have
admitted, "is expected to result in significant percentage
differences in certain items such as quarterly operating profit
and net income."

During the short seven month class period, Defendants Buckley
and Szulik sold over $34 million and $37 million respectively,
while the other defendants collectively sold an additional $8
million in Red hat securities. As a result of defendants'
allegedly fraudulent scheme, the price of Red Hat's securities
was artificially inflated, allowing insiders to sell Red Hat's
securities for millions of dollars in proceeds, and causing
plaintiff and other class members to suffer damages.

The Company also announced that the SEC has made an inquiry into
the Company's results as filed in their Form 10-K. On Monday,
June 14, 2004, Red Hat announced unexpectedly that its Chief
Financial Officer ("CFO") was resigning "to pursue other
interests." The Company claims that its restatement is unrelated
to its former CFO's resignation. Red Hat stock plummeted $4.62
or 22.7% per share, losing $600 million in market capitalization
to close at $15.73 per share.

For more details, contact The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel by
Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by
Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by
E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


VISTACARE INC.: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in AZ
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the District of
Arizona on behalf of purchasers of VistaCare, Inc. (NASDAQ:
VSTA) publicly traded securities during the period between
November 6, 2003 and August 5, 2004.

The complaint charges VistaCare and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. VistaCare is a provider of hospice services in the United
States through interdisciplinary teams of physicians, nurses,
home healthcare aides, social workers, spiritual and other
counselors and volunteers.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
caused VistaCare's shares to trade at artificially inflated
levels through the issuance of false and misleading financial
statements.  Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants
concealed from the investing public during the Class Period,
that the Company had manipulated the Company's EPS during the
Class Period by understating the Company's Medicare reserves;
and that the Company's mix of patients requiring shorter
hospital stays was declining, forcing the Company to increase
reserves beyond the Medicare credit of $18,661 per patient, the
equivalent of approximately 150 days.

On August 5, 2004, after the close of trading, the Company
issued a press release announcing second quarter financial
results for the quarter ending June 30, 2004. The press release
stated that results for the quarter were impacted by the
Company's decision to accrue $6.2 million in the quarter for its
Medical annual per-beneficiary payment cap reserve. This news
caused a dramatic decline in VistaCare's share price, from a
closing price of $18.72 on August 5, 2004 to $15.28 on August 6,
2004, for a total one day decline of 18%.

For more details, contact The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel by
Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by
Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by
E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


WIRELESS FACILITIES: Cohen Milstein Lodges Securities Suit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C.
initiated a lawsuit in the Southern District of California on
behalf of its client seeking class action status on behalf of
persons who purchased publicly traded securities of Wireless
Facilities, Inc. ("Wireless") (Nasdaq:WFIIE), between April 26,
2000 and August 4, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period').
Included in the class are those persons who acquired shares of
Wireless through its acquisitions of Questus, Davis Bay, Defense
Systems, High Technology Solutions, Telia Academy and Telia
Contracting.

The complaint alleges that Wireless, an independent provider of
outsourced communications and security for the wireless
communications industry, and certain of its officers and
directors issued materially false statements concerning the
company's financial condition. Specifically, the Complaint
alleges that Wireless failed to disclose and misrepresented the
following material adverse facts:

     (1) that Wireless had materially underreported its
         burgeoning foreign tax burden;

     (2) that as a consequence of the foregoing, Wireless
         materially inflated its net income by 3% to 8% or $10-
         12 million; and

     (3) that Wireless lacked adequate internal controls and was
         therefore unable to ascertain its true financial
         condition.

On August 4, 2004, Wireless reported results for the second
quarter of fiscal 2004. It also announced that it intends to
restate its financial results filed on Form 10-K for the years
2001 through 2003 to accrue for certain foreign tax
contingencies. On this news, shares of Wireless plummeted to
$5.02 per share, representing a decline of approximately 28%.

For more details, contact Steven J. Toll, Esq. or Kari Fiore of
Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C. by Mail: 1100 New
York Avenue, N.W. West Tower - Suite 500, Washington, D.C. 20005
by Phone: (888) 240-0775 or (202) 408-4600 or by E-mail:
stolldc@cmht.com or kfiore@cmht.com


ZIX CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. TX
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas on behalf of purchasers of Zix
Corporation (NASDAQ: ZIXI) common stock during the period
between October 30, 2003 and May 4, 2004.

The complaint charges Zix and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934.  Zix is a global provider of e-messaging protection and
transaction services.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
disseminated materially false and misleading statements
regarding the Company's business and prospects.  The defendants
concealed from the investing public the following facts during
the Class Period:

     (1) the Company was experiencing sluggish doctor adoption
         to e-prescribing;

     (2) the Company's claim that it would achieve 1,000
         deployed active doctors by the end of Q4 2003 was false
         and misleading because physicians would be required to
         reconfigure their patient data, obtain wireless
         coverage and implement a wireless LAN, which were
         severely undercutting physician acceptance and
         deployment;

     (3) the Company's claim it had 4,000 deployments already on
         order was false because, at the time of claim, the
         physicians' sites had not even been surveyed to
         evaluate wireless/LAN needs, all of which would
         drastically impact not only the timing of these
         "ordered" deployments but also whether these so-called
         ordered deployments would ever be truthfully ordered
         and deployed; and

     (4) new offerings from its Elron acquisition were delayed
         as a result of integration problems.

As a result of the defendants' false statements, Zix's stock
traded at inflated levels during the Class Period, increasing to
as high as $17.33 on April 12, 2004, whereby the Company's top
officers and directors sold more than $4.6 million worth of
their own shares and raised an additional $10 million through
the conversion of warrants.

On May 4, 2004, the Company announced its results for Q1 2004,
including larger loss than market expectations. On this news,
the Company's shares were sent into a freefall, tumbling 50% in
the following trading days to below $7 per share.

For more details, contact The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel by
Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by
Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by
E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


ZIX CORPORATION: Brian M. Felgoise Lodges Securities Suit in TX
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law offices of Brian M. Felgoise, P.C. initiated a
securities class action on behalf of shareholders who acquired
Zix Corporation (NASDAQ: ZIXI) securities between October 30,
2003 and May 4, 2004, inclusive (the Class Period).

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas, against the company and certain key
officers and directors.

The action charges that defendants violated the federal
securities laws by issuing a series of materially false and
misleading statements to the market throughout the Class Period
which 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 Brian M. Felgoise, Esq. by Mail: 261
Old York Road, Suite 423, Jenkintown, PA 19046 by Phone:
(215) 886-1900 by E-mail: securitiesfraud@comcast.net


ZIX CORPORATION: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Suit in TX
--------------------------------------------------------------
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 Zix
Corporation (Nasdaq:ZIXI) between October 30, 2003 and May 4,
2004, inclusive (the "Class Period").

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas against defendant Zix 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, MD 21202 by Phone: 410/986-0036
by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com


ZIX CORPORATION: Schatz & Nobel Files Securities Suit in N.D. TX
----------------------------------------------------------------
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 Texas on behalf of all persons who
purchased the securities of Zix Corporation (Nasdaq: ZIXI)
("Zix") between October 30, 2003 and May 4, 2004 (the "Class
Period").

The Complaint alleges that Zix disseminated materially false and
misleading statements regarding its business and prospects. In
particular, the Complaint alleges that Zix concealed the fact
that it was experiencing sluggish doctor adoption to "e-
prescribing." The Complaint further alleges that claims that Zix
would achieve 1,000 deployed active doctors by the end of Q4
2003 was false and misleading because physicians would be
required to reconfigure their patient data, obtain wireless
coverage and implement a wireless network, severely undercutting
physician acceptance and deployment. Furthermore, the Complaint
alleges that Zix's claim that it had 4,000 deployments already
on order was false because, at the time of claim, the
physicians' sites had not been surveyed to evaluate
wireless/LANseeds. Finally, the Complaint alleges that new
offerings from Zix's Elron acquisition were delayed as a result
of integration problems.

On May 4, 2004, Zix announced its results for Q1 2004 which
included a larger than expected loss. On this news, Zix shares
fell from an opening of $14.25 per share on May 4, 2004 to close
at $8.89 per share on May 6, 2004.

For more details, contact Nancy Kulesa or Wayne T. Boulton by
Phone: (800) 797-5499 by E-mail: sn06106@aol.com or visit their
Web site: http://www.snlaw.net


                            *********


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  * * *