CAR_Public/041012.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

             Tuesday, October 12, 2004, Vol. 6, No. 202

                          Headlines

AMERICAN RICE: Ex-Officers Found Guilty Of Bribery in DOJ Action
APLICACION DE ORO: TX A.G. Abbot Sues Over Legal Services Scheme
BALDWIN DAIRY: WI Justice Department Settles Environmental Suit
CAPITAL CANDY: VT A.G. Sorrell Sues Over Contraband Cigarettes
DARDEN RESTAURANTS: Discovery Proceeds in CA Overtime Wage Suits

DELL INC.: Recalls 999,000 AC Adapters Due To Fire, Shock Hazard
DYNEGY INC.: TX Judge Diminishes Scope of Shareholders' Lawsuit
ERNST & YOUNG: Former Seven Fields Investors Commence Suit in PA
FORD MOTOR: Judge Orders Inquiry Into Dealer's "Opt Out" Letters
ILLINOIS: Judgments Entered V. Defendants in Trading Scheme

INVESCO FUNDS: Ex-Executive Settles SEC Market Timing Charges
ISRAEL: Tel Aviv 25 Player Files Lawsuit Over Histadrut's Strike
JAPAN: Toray Industries, Toho Tenax Settle CA Price Fixing Suits
KRISPY KREME: SEC Begins Formal Probe Into Accounting Practices
MARKET-TIMING: SEC Lodges Fraud Complaint V. Adviser, Principal

MERCK & CO.: Brian M. Felgoise Lodges PA Consumer Suit V. VIOXX
MERCK & CO.: Emerson Poynter Initiates ERISA Fraud Investigation
MERCK & CO.: Keller Rohrback Initiates ERISA Act Investigation
MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN: WI Attorney General Files Pollution Suit
MONACO COACH: Recalls 44 Motor Homes For Defect, Accident Hazard

MUTUAL FUNDS: IFG, AIM ADVISORS, ADI Settle Market Timing Suits
MUTUAL SAVINGS: Court Asked To Approve $11.6 M Bias Settlement
NABI BUS: Recalls 297 Transit Buses For Defect, Accident Hazard
NEW YORK: EU Official Backs U.S.-Style Private Antitrust Suits
PENNEXX FOODS: Glancy Binkow Defeats Motions To Dismiss PA Suits

SALTON INC.: Antitrust Pact Distributed To TX Diabetes Program
SUBARU: Recalls Passenger Cars, SUVs Due To Defect, Fire Hazard
TEXAS: A.G. Abbott Inks Settlement With 3 Telemarketing Firms
TEXAS: A.G. Abbott Files Settlement With 2 Insurance Companies
UNITED STATES: Government Pressured To Settle Jewish WWII Claims

VIOXX LITIGATION: FDA Charged With Blocking New Vioxx Findings
WAL-MART STORES: WA Court Grants Certification To Overtime Suit
WASHINGTON HOSPITAL: Uninsured Lodges Suit Over Unfair Billing
WORLD AMAZING: FSIS Detains Canned Meat, Poultry From Ukraine
YAMAHA MOTOR: Recalls 3,620 Motorcycles, Scooters For Crash Risk

                  New Securities Fraud Cases

CONVERIUM HOLDING: Schiffrin & Barroway Files NY Securities Suit
INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES: Schiffrin & Barroway Files CA Stock Suit
INTERACTIVECORP: Glancy Binkow Files Securities Fraud Suit in NY
INTERACTIVECORP: Wechsler Harwood Files Securities Lawsuit in NY
KONGZHONG CORPORATION: Bernstein Liebhard Files Stock Suit in NY

KVH INDUSTRIES: Marc S. Henzel Files Securities Fraud Suit in RI
NETOPIA INC.: Schatz & Nobel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in CA
PRIMUS TELECOMMUNICATIONS: Lerach Coughlin Lodges VA Stock Suit
US UNWIRED: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Securities Lawsuit in LA
WET SEAL: Marc S. Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in C.D. CA


                         *********


AMERICAN RICE: Ex-Officers Found Guilty Of Bribery in DOJ Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
A federal jury in Houston, Texas, found defendants Douglas
Murphy and David Kay, former officers of American Rice, Inc., a
Houston-based rice company, guilty of authorizing over $500,000
in bribes to Haitian customs officials during 1998 and 1999 to
illegally reduce American Rice's import taxes, in violation of
the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.  The jury also found
defendant Murphy guilty of obstruction of justice in connection
with a parallel civil investigation of the bribery payments by
the Securities and Exchange Commission.  Murphy, a resident of
Texas, was American Rice's president at the time of the
violations.  Kay, also a resident of Texas, was an American Rice
vice president of operations and reported to Murphy.  The
defendants are to be sentenced on January 6.  This criminal
action, brought by the Department of Justice, arose out of a
joint investigation with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.

According to the indictments against Murphy and Kay, filed in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Texas, in advance of certain rice shipments to Haiti between
January 1998 and October 1999, Kay directed an American Rice
employee to prepare false shipping records that underreported
the tonnage of rice on the relevant vessels.  Haitian customs
officials used the false records to clear the American Rice
vessels through customs.  After the vessels cleared customs, Kay
allegedly directed American Rice employees in Haiti pay cash
bribes to certain customs officials.  To hide the payments, Kay
then directed American Rice's controller in Haiti to improperly
record the bribery payments as routine business expenditures.
American Rice employees made at least 12 bribery payments
totaling approximately $500,000.  In exchange, American Rice
illegally avoided approximately $1.5 million in Haitian import
taxes.  The indictments further allege that Murphy knew about
the bribery scheme, but took no action to stop the payments.

The Securities and Exchange Commission has also filed a civil
action against Murphy and Kay in the Southern District of Texas.
The Commission's complaint alleges that Murphy and Kay violated
the civil provisions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act,
Section 30A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and aided
and abetted American Rice's violations of the bookkeeping and
internal controls provisions of the Exchange Act, Sections
13(b)(2)(A) and (B), relating to falsely recording the bribery
payments in American Rice's books and records.  The complaint
also alleges that another individual; Lawrence Theriot aided and
abetted Murphy and Kay's violations of the Foreign Corrupt
Practices Act.  The Commission's civil action has been stayed
pending the outcome of the criminal trial. The action is titled,
U.S. v. David Kay and Douglas Murphy, C.R. No. H-01-914 (S.D.
Texas); SEC v. Douglas A. Murphy, David G. Kay and Lawrence H.
Theriot, Civil Action H-02-2908 (S.D. Texas)] (LR-18925).


APLICACION DE ORO: TX A.G. Abbot Sues Over Legal Services Scheme
----------------------------------------------------------------
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott filed a lawsuit against
Midland-based Aplicaci˘n de Oro and its owners, Marcelino and
Hilda ArmendarĄz, for their alleged involvement in a scheme that
provided unauthorized legal services to at least 200 consumers.

In a legal action filed in a Midland state district court,
Attorney General Abbott said some consumers paid Aplicaci˘n de
Oro up to thousands of dollars each to have their immigration
cases handled by the company. Aplicaci˘n de Oro, however, is not
authorized to provide legal services or immigration consulting
services, the Attorney General said.

"I have made it very clear that I will strictly enforce the laws
of Texas and will vigorously pursue any person deceiving the
immigrant community. Legal issues must be handled by properly-
trained, licensed attorneys, not scam artists seeking to profit
at the expense of those who are unfamiliar with our complex
legal system," said AG Abbott in a statement.

Although the Office of Attorney General warned Aplicaci˘n de Oro
several times that its practices were unlawful, the company
continued to violate the law by consulting with immigrant
clients. Its services included applying for benefits on behalf
of consumers, particularly those seeking permanent residency and
work visas before the U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Service
(USCIS). During a recent scheduled visit by an Attorney
General's investigator to Aplicaci˘n de Oro's offices, Mr. and
Mrs. ArmendarĄz met with several clients and advised them about
their immigration cases, in full view of the investigator.

The lawsuit seeks an injunction preventing the company from
providing immigrant consulting services and seeks to freeze the
company's assets. It also asks that Hilda ArmendarĄz be
prevented from continuing to act as a notary public. Texas law
specifically forbids a notary public from performing immigration
services unless he or she holds a separate license to practice
law. Neither of the owners is an attorney.

Texas law regulating notaries public was amended in 2001 as a
result of the common misunderstanding between the term "notary
public" and the similar-sounding term "notario pŁblico" in
Spanish. While in Texas a notary public commission simply
authorizes the bearer to act as an official witness during the
signing of certain documents, in Mexico the term "notario
pŁblico" is used to address certain highly experienced
attorneys.

Scam artists in Texas have long exploited this mistranslation to
give Spanish-speaking clients the mistaken impression that they
are dealing with an attorney. Aplicaci˘n de Oro's business cards
used the term "notario pŁblico," which is also a violation of
the law. Furthermore, the company's advertisements and
letterhead tout Aplicaci˘n de Oro's "immigration consultant"
services.

In Texas, only licensed attorneys or non profit agencies
accredited by the U.S. Department of Justice's Board of
Immigration Appeals are authorized to charge for consulting with
clients about immigration matters.

Any person who believes he or she was scammed by Aplicaci˘n de
Oro or a similar business should report it to the Office of the
Attorney General at 1-800-252-8011.


BALDWIN DAIRY: WI Justice Department Settles Environmental Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Wisconsin Department of Justice settled an environmental
lawsuit against a St. Croix County dairy operation for
violations of state water pollution laws, Attorney General Peg
Lautenschlager announced in a statement.

The state's lawsuit, filed in St. Croix County in March 2003 at
the request of the Department of Natural Resources, charged
Baldwin Dairy with violating the manure management requirements
of its Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (WPDES)
permit.

According to the Department of Justice's complaint, Baldwin
Dairy owns and operates a concentrated animal feeding operation
near Emerald, Wisconsin.   The complaint alleges that on March
13-16, 2002, Baldwin Dairy violated the terms of its permit by
spreading liquid manure on frozen and snow-covered ground in
such a manner that the manure ran off the site, filling roadside
ditches and culverts and running into nearby Girards Creek, as
well as settling in neighboring wetlands.   The complaint also
alleges that the liquid manure was spread in waterways, in
violation of the permit.

"This dairy operation violated Wisconsin's water pollution
control laws and created a situation that compromised our clean
water goals," AG Lautenschlager said.  "This settlement includes
both a reasonable financial penalty and a commitment by Baldwin
Dairy to improve its manure management and to avoid future
discharges."

Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Baldwin Dairy will
pay penalties of $27,000 for the violations, and will also pay
$15,000 to the University of Wisconsin Discovery Farms for
projects that advance environmentally sound manure management
practices.  In addition, in order to keep manure pollutants out
of Wisconsin's surface waters, Baldwin Dairy will increase its
manure storage capacity and will cease spreading liquid manure
on frozen or snow-covered ground.

The settlement agreement was approved by St. Croix County
Circuit Court Judge Scott Needham.  Assistant Attorney General
Lorraine Stoltzfus represented the state.


CAPITAL CANDY: VT A.G. Sorrell Sues Over Contraband Cigarettes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell filed a civil suit
against Capital Candy Company, Inc. in Chittenden Superior Court
over the sale of contraband cigarettes.  The suit alleges that
the Barre-based distributor of tobacco products sold Double
Diamond brand cigarettes to Vermont retailers in violation of
Vermont law. Double Diamond cigarettes are manufactured by GTC
Industries, Ltd. (GTC) of Mumbai, India.

The present action arises from legislation passed in 2003 that
directed the Attorney General to publish a directory of all
tobacco product manufacturers whose products are approved for
sale in Vermont.  The law prohibits anyone from stamping or
selling any tobacco products manufactured by companies not
listed on the Directory.  Because of past violations of Vermont
law, GTC's products have not been approved for sale in Vermont
since the Directory was published October 1, 2003.

AG Sorrell alleges that Capital Candy sold the cigarettes to
retailers in Fairfield, Cambridge and Hancock, Vermont.  The
cigarettes were identified in a retail outlet last November and
seized by the Department of Liquor Control.  Further
investigation by the Attorney General established that Capital
Candy had illegally sold and distributed the product on seven
separate occasions last fall.

"Distributors of tobacco products have had ample advance notice
of the ban on selling cigarettes not listed on the Directory,"
said AG Sorrell in a statement.  "This lawsuit reflects our
commitment to enforce this law strictly and aggressively."

This lawsuit is the first action brought under the 2003
legislation that enhances enforcement of Vermont's tobacco
reporting and escrow laws.  The laws are intended to prevent
tobacco companies which have not signed the 1998 Master
Settlement Agreement from deriving large, short-term profits
from the sale of their product without ensuring that the State
will have a source of recovery if the companies are later proven
to have acted culpably.  The lawsuit seeks injunctive relief,
civil penalties and disgorgement of any profits from the sale of
contraband cigarettes.

For more details, contact the Atty. General's office by Mail:
109 State Street, Montpelier VT 05609-1001 by Phone:
(802) 828-3171 or by Fax: (802) 828-5341


DARDEN RESTAURANTS: Discovery Proceeds in CA Overtime Wage Suits
----------------------------------------------------------------
Discovery is proceeding in two class actions filed against
Darden Restaurants, Inc. in the California Superior court of
Orange County by its current and former hourly restaurant
employees.

The suits allege violations of California labor laws with
respect to providing meal and rest breaks.  The lawsuits seek
penalties under Department of Labor rules providing a one
hundred dollar penalty per violation per employee, plus
attorney's fees on behalf of the plaintiffs and other purported
class members.

One of the cases was removed to the Company's mandatory
arbitration program, although the Court retained the authority
to permit a sample of class-wide discovery.  The other case
remains pending in the California Superior Court of Orange
County.

In September 2003, three former employees in Washington State
filed a similar purported class action in Washington State
Superior Court in Spokane County alleging violations of
Washington labor laws with respect to providing rest breaks.
The Court stayed the action, and ordered the plaintiffs into the
Company's mandatory arbitration program; the plaintiffs' motion
for reconsideration was not granted, and their motion for
modification of the appellate decision is pending.


DELL INC.: Recalls 999,000 AC Adapters Due To Fire, Shock Hazard
----------------------------------------------------------------
Dell Inc., of Round Rock, Texas and Delta Electronics Inc., of
Taipei, Taiwan are cooperating with the United States Consumer
Product Safety Commission by voluntarily recalling about 999,000
AC adapters used with notebook personal computers.

The adapters can overheat, posing a risk of fire and electrical
shock hazards to consumers. Dell has received seven reports of
incidents of adapters overheating, though no injuries have been
reported.

The recalled AC adapters were used with Dell LatitudeT,
PrecisionT, and InspironT notebook-style personal computers. The
notebook computers have the following model numbers, which can
be found either screened onto the surface of the computer or
printed on a label on the bottom of the computer:

     (1) Latitude: CP, CPi, CPiA, CPtC, CPiR, CPxH, CPtV, CS,
         CSx, CPxJ, CPtS, C500, C510, C600, C610, C800, C810,
         V700, C-Dock, C-Port.

     (2) Inspiron: 2500, 2600, 3700, 3800, 4000, 4100, 4150,
         5000, 5000e, 7500, 7550, 8000, 8100, Advanced Port
         Replicator, Docking Station.

     (3) Precision: M40

The recalled adapters have the words "DELL" and "P/N 9364U," P/N
7832D" or "P/N 4983D" printed on the back of the unit.

Manufactured in China, the computers with adapters were sold at
Dell's Web site and customer service center from September 1998
through February 2002 for about $1,500 to about $3,200. The
adapters also were sold separately for between $30 and $70. The
advanced port replicators and docking stations sold for between
$300 and $600.

Consumers with these adapters should immediately contact Dell to
determine if they are included in this recall. Not all adapters
listed above are being recalled. Do not use any recalled
adapters. Dell will send consumers with recalled adapters a free
replacement adapter.

Consumer Contact: Consumer should call Dell at (800) 418-8590
between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. CT Monday through Friday, log on to
Dell's Web site at http://www.delladapterprogram.comor write to
the company at Dell Inc., 9701 Metric Blvd., Austin, TX 78758,
Attn: Adapter Program


DYNEGY INC.: TX Judge Diminishes Scope of Shareholders' Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. District Court Judge Sim Lake narrowed the scope of a
pending class-action lawsuit against Dynegy Inc. (NYSE: DYN) and
its former executives, bankers and accountants, but still left
shareholders with plenty of deep pockets to pursue, the Houston
Chronicle reports.

According to an order issued by the judge, Dynegy will still
face civil claims that it issued new stock and debt in 2001
using material misstatements or omissions from financial
statements from 1999 through 2001. The order further decrees
that the company must also will face claims it misled investors
about a deal called Project Alpha and improper accounting for
round-trip trades.

The former Dynegy executives along with former Chairman and CEO
Chuck Watson and former president Stephen Bergstrom had many and
in some cases, all claims against them dismissed. However, both
the former Mr. Watson and Mr. Bergstrom must still face
negligence claims related to the 2001 stock issues. Plus Mr.
Bergstrom will also be facing claims related to the improper
accounting of round-trip trades. Former Chief Financial Officer
Robert Doty will still be facing the stock claims, as well as
claims related to Project Alpha and insider trading.

Citigroup and its affiliates were dismissed from the suit, but
Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, ABN Amro, Commerzbank Capital
Markets, Credit Suisse First Boston and Arthur Andersen remain.
Among Dynegy's current and former board members, only Michael
Capellas, Jerry Johnson and H. John Riley Jr. were dismissed.
Claims against former executives Matthew Schatzman and Louis
Dorey were also dismissed completely, while former Controller
Michael Mott will still face a stock registration claim.

The lawsuit is a consolidation of suits filed by Dynegy
shareholders in 2002 that claim the company, its executives,
accountants and bankers used various means to make the company
appear to be "a fast-growing, energy-trading and communications
company with rapidly growing earnings and a strong balance
sheet."

The shareholders focused on two transactions, Black Thunder, an
off-balance-sheet deal with Citigroup that shareholders allege
was an $850 million loan disguised as an equity investment and
Project Alpha, a transaction shareholders allege was a $300
million loan from Citigroup disguised as cash flow as well as a
number of allegedly illegal accounting maneuvers surrounding
natural gas and power trades and contracts.

In his ruling, the judge dismissed all Black Thunder-related
charges, as well as claims relating to shareholders who invested
in debt issued in 2002. In the case of Mr. Watson and his
dealings with Black Thunder, Project Alpha and his personal
stock sales, the judge ruled that the plaintiffs failed to show
that he acted with knowledge that the transactions were improper
and thus must dismiss the claims.

On the other hand, the judge ruled that Mr. Bergstrom must
remain on the hook for the false accounting claims, largely due
to comments he made to the Wall Street Journal for a May 9,
2002, story where he said round-trip trades with CMS Energy were
made to "fulfill a customer requirement" and to "stress test"
Dynegy's online trading platform. An allegation that according
to the judge is strong enough to warrant the continuation of the
lawsuit.

Furthermore, the judge ruled that the claims against Mr. Doty in
connection to Project Alpha remain, in part, because of
testimony during the criminal trial of former Dynegy executive
Jamie Olis, wherein former executive Gene Foster said he and Mr.
Olis told Mr. Doty they would need to hide information about
Alpha from the firm's accountants.

The suit was filed on behalf of Pirelli Armstrong Tire Corp.
Retiree Medical Benefits Trust, the University of California
Board of Regents and others.


ERNST & YOUNG: Former Seven Fields Investors Commence Suit in PA
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed in Butler County Court on
behalf of the 2,600 or so investors in Seven Fields Development
Corp., the company that resulted from the bankruptcy of four
other firms that had been founded by Thomas Reilly, who went to
jail in connection with a Ponzi scheme that became known as the
Seven Fields Development scam, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
reports.

The lawsuit contends the investors regained so little of their
original investments, not because they were defrauded by the
four original companies that went bankrupt, but because an
accounting firm had undervalued those four companies during
bankruptcy proceedings in the 1980s.

The suit was filed by attorney Victor Pribanic and named as
defendant the multinational accounting firm Ernst & Young whose
officials are being accused of making false testimonies during
bankruptcy proceedings that the Mr. Reillys' Earned Capital Inc.
and three sister firms were in debt when, in reality, Earned
Capital had at least $200 million in assets.

The companies had gone under because of a Ponzi scheme by
company officials who were using new "investment" dollars to pay
dividends to previous investors. Ultimately, the scheme and the
companies crumbled.

Thomas Reilly, who was convicted of federal tax crimes, had
maintained during the bankruptcy proceedings that the value of
his company was understated. Not long after he was released from
jail, he filed suit, in January 1997, against Ernst & Young.

Mr. Pribanic argued successfully in that suit that Mr. Reilly's
company should never have been found insolvent. But with Ernst &
Young's testimony that the companies were in debt, the
bankruptcy court ordered all four companies dissolved and Seven
Fields Development Corp. formed in their stead.

The stockholders of the new company would be the defrauded
investors, and the corporation was charged with developing, then
selling the land that makes up what is now Seven Fields Borough.

Proceeds from the property sales would be divided among the
investors. All the property has since been sold and the Seven
Fields Development Corp. dissolved. Investors received only a
fraction of their original investment.

The class action suit contends the misinformation from Ernst &
Young led to the financial loss suffered by the Seven Fields
investors.


FORD MOTOR: Judge Orders Inquiry Into Dealer's "Opt Out" Letters
----------------------------------------------------------------
Belleville Circuit Judge Lloyd A. Cueto ordered an inquiry into
a letter sent by a Springfield, Illinois, Ford dealership to law
enforcement agencies across the state that have filed suit
claiming Ford police cruisers are unsafe, The St. Louis Post-
Dispatch reports.

The judge warns that the inquiry could lead to civil or criminal
contempt proceedings and to action by the Illinois Registration
and Disciplinary Commission, a state agency that disciplines
attorneys.

During the trial, which started its fifth week in circuit court
in Belleville, is scheduled to end Friday, Judge Cueto put
Landmark Ford's fleet sales manager, Lyle Snow, under oath and
grilled him about a letter dated September 23 to local sheriffs
and police chiefs. It suggests they "opt out" of the suit and
keep buying from Landmark, an option that had already expired
last December 15.

According to court documents, the Landmark letters included "opt
out" forms that were startlingly similar to those sent to
Illinois police agencies last year in preparation for trial,
which Landmark is a defendant.

Mr. Snow acknowledged he had talked to the dealership's
attorney, Edward T. "Ted" Graham, before sending the letter.
Judge Cueto was not pleased with the revelation and told Mr.
Graham he should have known that contact with opposing parties
in the suit was improper.

Among those receiving letters from Landmark were St. Clair
County Sheriff Mearl J. Justus and Centreville Police Chief
Curtis McCall, whose departments are the lead plaintiffs in the
case.  Patricia Murphy, the plaintiff's attorney, said some
agencies had were infuriated by the letters and promptly sent
back angry responses.

The Illinois case is a statewide class action suit over whether
Ford should pay $62 million to install better fire protection on
about 14,000 Crown Victoria Police Interceptors driven by
hundreds of police agencies.  The suit contends the Interceptor
can erupt in flames if hit from behind because the gas tank is
behind the rear axle. Plaintiffs say at least 21 officers have
burned to death across the country.

A Ford attorney was in the courtroom when the judge ordered the
inquiry into Landmark's action. Judge Cueto questioned Mr. Snow
about whom he had talked to at Ford Motor Co. before sending the
letter, which he promptly replied to by saying that the only
Ford representative he contacted had refused to talk to him
because of the suit.

After the cross-examination of Mr. Snow, the judge authorized
plaintiff lawyers in the case to take sworn statements from Mr.
Graham, the attorney for Landmark, and others who might have
been involved in preparing and sending the letter.


ILLINOIS: Judgments Entered V. Defendants in Trading Scheme
-----------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission obtained through the
Honorable John W. Darrah, United States District Court Judge for
the Northern District of Illinois, Final Judgments against
defendants Stanley Awdisho, Michael Kundrat and Kristopher
Smolinski in connection with a manipulative trading scheme. The
Final Judgments, to which the defendants consented without
admitting or denying the allegations of the Commission's
Complaint, permanently enjoin Awdisho, Kundrat and Smolinski
from future violations of Sections 9(a)(2) and 10(b)(5) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, the
antimanipulation and antifraud provisions of the Exchange Act.
The Final Judgments also order Awdisho and Kundrat each to pay a
$10,000 civil penalty and order Smolinski to pay a $20,000 civil
penalty.

The Commission's Complaint alleges that approximately 75 times
between September and December of 1999, Awdisho, Kundrat and
Smolinski each manipulated the price of stock options by
engaging in a scheme commonly referred to as "small lot
baiting."  Small lot baiting or "spoofing" involves an order
placed by a market participant with the intention of briefly
triggering a market movement from which the participant or
others may benefit by trading the opposite side of the original
manipulative order.  The Complaint further alleges that to carry
out the scheme, Awdisho, Kundrat and Smolinski placed limit
orders for a small number of options contracts on one options
exchange to artificially raise or lower that exchange's quoted
bid or offer.  Awdisho, Kundrat and Smolinski then purchased or
sold much larger opposite positions on other exchanges that
matched the artificially raised or depressed price displayed at
the first exchange.  After their larger orders were executed,
Awdisho, Kundrat and Smolinski immediately sent an order to
cancel the initial bait order.  The Complaint alleges that, as a
result of the scheme, Awdisho, Kundrat and Smolinski unfairly
profited at least $25,000 by obtaining execution of their larger
orders at more favorable prices than otherwise available in the
market.  The action is titled, SEC v. Stanley Awdisho, Michael
Kundrat and Kristopher Smolinski, Civil Action No. 04 C 6125,
N.D. Ill.] (LR-18926).


INVESCO FUNDS: Ex-Executive Settles SEC Market Timing Charges
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission issued an Order
instituting administrative and cease-and-desist proceedings,
Making Findings, and Imposing Remedial Sanctions and a
Cease-and-Desist Order pursuant to Section 15(b)(6) of
Securities Exchange Act, Sections 203(f) and 203(k) of the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and Sections 9(b) and
9(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (Order) against
Raymond R. Cunningham. Mr. Cunningham was formerly the president
and chief executive officer of Invesco Funds Group, Inc. (IFG),
the Denver-based registered investment adviser to the Invesco
mutual fund complex.  The Order finds that, from 2001 through
July 2003, Cunningham was responsible for and approved IFG's
program whereby IFG entered into agreements with select
investors allowing them to market time the Invesco funds. These
agreements financially benefited IFG but were detrimental to the
funds' shareholders.  Furthermore, by entering into these
agreements, IFG breached its fiduciary duty to the funds. The
agreements also contravened the funds' prospectus disclosures
which stated that shareholders could make up to four exchanges
out of each fund per twelve-month period.  Through his actions,
Cunningham willfully aided and abetted and caused IFG's
violations of Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the Investment
Advisers Act and willfully violated Section 34(b) of the
Investment Company Act.

Based on the above, the Commission ordered Cunningham to cease
and desist from committing or causing any violations or any
future violations of Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the
Investment Advisers Act and Section 34(b) of the Investment
Company Act, prohibited him from associating with an investment
adviser, broker, dealer, or an investment company for a period
of two years, and prohibited him from serving as an officer or
director of an investment adviser, broker, dealer, or an
investment company for a period of five years.  The Order also
required Cunningham to pay a civil penalty in the amount of
$500,000 and disgorgement in the amount of $1.  Cunningham
consented to the issuance of the Order without admitting or
denying any of the findings.

In a related matter, the Commission also instituted and
simultaneously settled administrative and cease-and-desist
proceedings against IFG. The Commission filed a civil injunctive
action against IFG and its former president on December 2, 2003.


ISRAEL: Tel Aviv 25 Player Files Lawsuit Over Histadrut's Strike
----------------------------------------------------------------
An NIS 8.3 million ($1.9 million) class-action lawsuit was filed
in the Tel Aviv District Court against the Histadrut (General
Federation of Labor in Israel), the Globes [Online] reports.

The suit alleges that Tel Aviv 25 index option players suffered
damages when the Histadrut contravened an injunction by the
National Labor Court by prolonging its strike on September 22,
2004.

The Histadrut had originally declared a general strike on
September 21, 2004. The economic was shut down until 12:00 noon
the following day, despite the National Labor Court's decision
ordering the workers back to their jobs no later than 8:00 AM on
September 22.

Cukierman and Co. investment banker Michael Azoulay, who trades
in Tel Aviv 25 options, alleges that the Histadrut's violation
of the Labor Court injunction caused irreversible damage to
options holders. Mr. Azoulay asserts that because trading did
not take place on September 22, holders of securities that
expired on September 24 lost NIS 8.3 million.

According to Mr. Azoulay, the Labor Court's decision was
unequivocal. Despite legitimate expectations that securities
trading would take place, the Histadrut deliberately and
insolently delayed the return of workers to their place of
employment, thereby causing unnecessary monetary damages to the
entire economy, including options holders.


JAPAN: Toray Industries, Toho Tenax Settle CA Price Fixing Suits
----------------------------------------------------------------
Toray Industries Inc. and Toho Tenax Co. settled a U.S. class
action lawsuit over alleged price fixing of their carbon fiber
products, according to Toray officials and a statement by Toho
Tenax, the Kyodo News International reports.

According to Toho Tenax's statement it and its wholly owned U.S.
subsidiary, Toho Carbon Fibers Inc., have agreed to pay a total
of $7.75 million to the U.S. plaintiffs, which are corporate
users of the companies' carbon fiber products.

Massachusetts-based Thomas & Thomas Rodmakers Inc. and the other
plaintiffs filed the class action lawsuit at the federal
district court in California, which named the Japanese companies
of Toho, Toray and Mitsubishi Rayon Co. along with four U.S.-
based companies that manufactured carbon fiber.

In their suit, the plaintiffs alleged that the defendants
collaborated in the 1990s in fixing the prices of carbon fiber
products, specifically lightweight reinforcing material for use
in fishing rods and other sporting equipment, Formula One racing
cars, aircraft and spacecraft. According to the plaintiffs, the
practice had the effect of forcing an upsurge in the carbon
fiber product prices that resulted in higher material costs.

In 1999, the U.S. Department of Justice started an investigation
into the price-fixing allegation, but it gave up filing charges
against the defendants in January this year.  Though no official
statements have been released, officials for the Toray group did
confirm that they too have agreed to pay a total of $11 million
to settle with the plaintiffs.  Meanwhile, Mitsubishi Rayon is
considering what course of action to take in light of payment
decisions by the other defendants.


KRISPY KREME: SEC Begins Formal Probe Into Accounting Practices
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission commenced a formal
investigation into Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Inc.'s accounting
practices, the Company announced last week, according to the
Associated Press.

In late August, the Company reported a sharp decline in second-
quarter earnings and forecast a gloomy picture for the rest of
the year, attributing its decreasing sales to the rising
popularity of low-carb diets.  After the announcement, several
shareholders launched class actions in the United States
District Court in North Carolina, alleging violations of federal
securities laws.

The SEC is looking into how the Company recorded its repurchase
of several franchise locations.  The news sent Krispy Kreme's
shares plunging in pre-market activity, falling 12 percent, or
$1.57, to $11.50 on the New York Stock Exchange.


MARKET-TIMING: SEC Lodges Fraud Complaint V. Adviser, Principal
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a complaint in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
Georgia against Market-Timing Technologies, LLC (Market-Timing)
and David A. Perry (Perry).   Market-Timing is a Georgia Limited
Liability Company based in Atlanta.   Perry, who resides in
Atlanta, is the president of Market-Timing.

The complaint alleges that from at least November 2002 to
September 2004, the defendants actively solicited investment
advisory clients through Internet Web sites that advertised
eight different asset management programs.  The programs used
models that, based on short term market trends, identified when
Market-Timing and Perry should shift clients' investments among
various mutual funds within a fund family.  The complaint
alleges that although the Web sites represented that the models
produced historical average annual returns between 9% and 91.4%,
the Web sites failed to disclose that these return rates were
based primarily on hypothetical investments, rather than actual
results.  The complaint, also alleged that Market-Timing failed
to maintain records required by the Investment Advisers Act of
1940 (Advisers Act), such as ledgers reflecting its assets,
liabilities and other accounts and copies of all written
communications to customers. The complaint alleges further
violations of the books and records provisions of the Advisers
Act because, during a recent examination by the Commission
staff, Perry declined to produce documentation substantiating
the accuracy of the performance representations in the Web
sites.

The complaint alleges that Market-Timing violated Section 10(b)
of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder and
Sections 204, 206(1), (2) and (4) of the Advisers Act and Rules
204-2(a)(2), 204-2(a)(7), 204-2(a)(16) and 206(4)-1(a)(5)
thereunder, and that Perry violated  Section 10(b) of the
Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and aided and abetted
Market-Timing's violations of Sections 204, 206(1), (2) and (4)
of the Advisers Act and Rules 204-2(a)(2), 204-2(a)(7), 204-
2(a)(16) and 206(4)-1(a)(5) thereunder.  The action is titled,
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Market-Timing
Technologies, LLC and David A. Perry, Civil Action No. 1:04-CV-
2933 (N.D.GA. October 6, 2004) (LR-18927).


MERCK & CO.: Brian M. Felgoise Lodges PA Consumer Suit V. VIOXX
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Brian M. Felgoise, P.C. has been retained to
represent individuals who have suffered injuries as a result of
the drug Vioxx.  The case is pending in the Court of Common
Place of Philadelphia County Pennsylvania.

VIOXX - also known as CEOXX in some countries - has been
prescribed for the relief of arthritic and other acute pain.
Merck & Company withdrew it from the market worldwide on
September 28, 2004 after studies demonstrated a significantly
increased risk to patients of cardiovascular events, including
strokes and heart attacks. Trials, which commenced in 2000,
involved 2,600 patients. Conclusive results concerned those who
used the drug for 18 months or more, but Merck claimed evidence
did not indicate increased risk for those whose usage was of
less duration.

VIOXX, with annual sales of $US 2.5 billion worldwide, has been
used by 84 million patients since it was introduced in 1999. It
has been the 10th best selling drug in Canada with 2003 sales of
$200 million.

The suit alleges that Merck defrauded consumers by marketing
Vioxx as a safe, breakthrough pain medication, for which they
charged a premium, when in fact the drug wasn't significantly
better than existing pain relief medications and posed a much
greater health risk.

For more details contact, the Law Offices of Brian M. Felgoise,
P.C. by Mail: 261 Old York Road, Suite 423 Jenkintown, PA 19046
by Phone: 215-886-1900 or by E-mail: FelgoiseLaw@aol.com


MERCK & CO.: Emerson Poynter Initiates ERISA Fraud Investigation
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Emerson Poynter LLP commenced an investigation
regarding Merck & Co., Inc. ("Merck" or the "Company")
(NYSE:MRK) for violations of the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"). This retirement plan
investigation focuses on investments in Company stock by the
Merck & Co., Inc. Employee Savings and Security Plan and the
Merck & Co., Inc. Employee Stock Purchase and Savings Plan (the
"Plans").

Emerson Poynter's investigation focuses on concerns that Merck
and other fiduciaries for the Plans may have breached their
ERISA-mandated fiduciary duties of loyalty and prudence by


     (1) failing to prudently and loyally manage the Plans'
         assets by investing a significant amount of the Plans'
         assets in Merck stock when it no longer was a prudent
         investment for participants' retirement savings;

     (2) failing to monitor and provide fiduciary appointees
         with information that the appointing fiduciaries knew
         or should have known that the monitored fiduciaries
         needed in order to prudently manage the Plans' assets;

     (3) failing to provide complete and accurate information to
         participants and beneficiaries regarding Merck's
         business prospects and financial performance as a
         result of among other problems, the safety of VIOXX;
         and

     (4) breaching their duty to avoid conflicts of interest.

For more details, contact Charles Gastineau, Tanya Autry or
Michelle Raggio of Emerson Poynter LLP by Phone: (800) 663-9817
or by E-mail: shareholder@emersonfirm.com


MERCK & CO.: Keller Rohrback Initiates ERISA Act Investigation
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Keller Rohrback LLP commenced an investigation
against Merck & Co., Inc. ("Merck" or the "Company") (NYSE:MRK)
for violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of
1974 ("ERISA"). The investigation focuses on investments in
Company stock by the Merck & Co., Inc. Employee Savings and
Security Plan and the Merck & Co., Inc. Employee Stock Purchase
and Savings Plan (the "Plans") between August 12, 1999 through
the present (the "Class Period").

Keller Rohrback's investigation focuses on concerns that Merck
and other fiduciaries for the Plans may have breached their
ERISA-mandated fiduciary duties of loyalty and prudence by

     (1) failing to prudently and loyally manage the Plans'
         assets by investing a significant amount of the Plans'
         assets in Merck stock when it no longer was a prudent
         investment for participants' retirement savings;

     (2) failing to monitor and provide fiduciary appointees
         with information that the appointing fiduciaries knew
         or should have known that the monitored fiduciaries
         needed in order to prudently manage the Plans' assets;

     (3) failing to provide complete and accurate information to
         participants and beneficiaries regarding Merck's
         business prospects and financial performance as a
         result of among other problems, the safety of VIOXX;
         and

     (4) breaching their duty to avoid conflicts of interest.

For more details, contact Jennifer Tuato'o, Derek Loeser or Lynn
Sarko by Phone: 800/776-6044 or by E-mail:
investor@kellerrohrback.com


MILWAUKEE METROPOLITAN: WI Attorney General Files Pollution Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Wisconsin Attorney General Peg Lautenschlager's office intends
to file a civil environmental lawsuit in Milwaukee County
against the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) and
31 defendants and 29 municipalities which discharge their sewage
into MMSD's collection system for the 4.6 billion gallons of
sewage overflows which occurred during a period of wet weather
this spring.

"The lawsuit will charge MMSD and most of the contributing
communities with violating their state water pollution control
permits by causing approximately 500,000,000 gallons of sanitary
sewer overflows (SSOs) into Milwaukee County streams, rivers and
Lake Michigan," AG Lautenschlager said.

The lawsuit also alleges that those SSOs and the 4.1 billion
gallons of combined sewer overflows (CSOs) which occurred in the
City of Milwaukee and the Village of Shorewood during the same
period constitute a public nuisance.   The lawsuit will seek a
court order requiring the defendants to take steps to eliminate
all SSOs and to take reasonably practical measures to minimize
CSOs.

AG Lautenschlager said that the SSOs, the large scale CSOs and
the flooding of basements with sewage which will be referred to
in the lawsuit have raised widespread public concerns, not only
about public health, but also about the general welfare and
economy of the area in terms of protecting municipal,
recreational, industrial and agricultural water uses.

She intends to file the lawsuit later this year, after certain
required waiting periods expire.  State statutes gives
municipalities 120 days after receiving formal notices that they
have violated their wastewater permits to either settle the
matter or issue a disallowance of the claimed violation.
Ordinarily the state may not sue until such a disallowance is
issued or the 120-day waiting period has expired, Lautenschlager
said.  The DNR served such notices of claims on many of the
municipalities in early August, she said, and none of the
potential defendants have yet settled with the state.

The complaint in the lawsuit will also reserve the right to
request civil penalties for the defendants' violations of their
wastewater permits, but Lautenschlager emphasized that penalties
will not be her primary objective in the case.  She hopes the
lawsuit will provide a means for bringing the parties together
to identify solutions and to commit to undertaking measures
necessary to eliminate SSOs and minimize CSOs.

Lautenschlager also emphasized, in response to the publicized
concerns expressed by some municipal leaders that they have been
wrongly selected for prosecution, that both she and the DNR
recognize that the record of performance of each one of these
communities is different.  Some certainly have done more than
others, she said, but all need to do at least something more if
the problem of sewer overflows in the Milwaukee area is going to
be solved.

In developing the state's position as to what each community
should be required to do in the future, and what if any
penalties it should pay for past violations, she will take that
history into consideration, just as she expects a court would do
if the matter ever goes to trial.

"We intend to be fair to the communities, but we will insist on
significant improvements to their sewage systems," AG
Lautenschlager said.  "All the communities and MMSD will need to
work together if this problem is going to be solved."

To that end, Lautenschlager invited all of the defendants to
contact her office if they wish to discuss the possibility of an
agreed-upon settlement before the lawsuit is filed.  "It is my
hope that all parties will sit down and work out a plan for
taking the necessary actions," she said.

The Attorney General said any such agreement would require court
approval.  If an agreement is not reached before the case is
filed, the state will proceed with litigation and ask the courts
for appropriate relief, she said.  The Department of Justice
brings the case at the request of the DNR.   Assistant Attorney
General Tom Dosch will represent the state.


MONACO COACH: Recalls 44 Motor Homes For Defect, Accident Hazard
----------------------------------------------------------------
Monaco Motor Corporation is cooperating with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration by voluntarily recalling
44 motor homes, namely:

     (1) HOLIDAY RAMBLER / IMPERIAL, model 2003-2004

     (2) HOLIDAY RAMBLER / SCEPTER, model 2005

     (3) MONACO / CAMELOT, model 2005

     (4) MONACO / WINDSOR, model 2003-2005

     (5) SAFARI / GAZELLE, model 2005

On certain motor homes manufactured with optional aqua hot
hydronic heaters, the exhaust termination for the heater was
located under the bedroom slide out, when it should have been
placed beyond the periphery of the vehicle.  This makes it
possible for fumes to enter the coach and possibly allow carbon
monoxide fumes to vent into the motor home, which could result
in serious injury or death to the passengers.

For the 2003 motor homes, dealers will use the existing pipe
from the aqua hot hydronic heater and repair it so that the end
termination will be to the passenger side of the motor home.
For the 2004 and 2005 motor homes, dealers will add an exhaust
pipe to the existing exhaust system from the aqua hot hydronic
heater.  The additional pipe will be installed so that the end
termination will also be to the passenger side of the motor
home.  The recall is expected to begin during October 2004.

For more details, contact the Company by Phone: 1-800-685-6545
or contact the NHTSA's auto safety hotline: 1-888-DASH-2-DOT
(1-888-327-4236).


MUTUAL FUNDS: IFG, AIM ADVISORS, ADI Settle Market Timing Suits
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission issued an Order
instituting administrative and cease-and-desist proceedings,
making findings, and imposing remedial sanctions and a
cease-and-desist Order pursuant to Section 15(b)(6) of the
Securities Exchange Act, Sections 203(f) and 203(k) of the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and Sections 9(b) and
9(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (Order) against
Invesco Funds Group, Inc. (IFG), AIM Advisors, Inc. (AIM
Advisors), and AIM Distributors, Inc. (ADI).  IFG, a
registered investment advisor to the Invesco Funds; AIM
Advisors, a registered investment advisor to AIM Funds; and ADI,
a registered broker-dealer to AIM Funds, are wholly-owned
subsidiaries of AMVESCAP LLP, a United Kingdom holding company.

With respect to the Invesco fund complex, the Order finds that,
from at least 2001 through July 2003, IFG entered into
undisclosed market timing agreements with over 40 individuals
and entities which allowed them to market time certain Invesco
funds, while representing to other shareholders that it did not
permit frequent trading in those funds.  During this time
period, the market timers' excessive exchanges and redemptions
totaled approximately $58 billion.  Furthermore, some of the
timing agreements were entered into with the understanding that
the market timer would make long-term investments, so-called
"sticky assets," in certain non-timed Invesco funds.  Because
these agreements financially benefited IFG and IFG had reason to
believe the market timers' assets could be traded in a manner
detrimental to the Invesco funds, IFG had a conflict of interest
with the funds.  However, IFG breached its fiduciary duty by
failing to disclose that conflict of interest to the funds'
board of directors or shareholders.  The agreements also
contravened the funds' prospectus disclosures which stated that
shareholders could make up to four exchanges out of each fund
per twelve-month period.

With respect to the AIM fund complex, the Order finds that,
between January 2001 and September 2003, AIM Advisors and ADI
entered into 10 undisclosed agreements to allow market timing in
certain AIM funds by permitting exchanges in excess of the limit
set forth in the AIM Funds' prospectus disclosure, while
aggressively enforcing against other shareholders the prospectus
exchange limit.  One of these agreements included a sticky
assets arrangement.  Although AIM Advisors and ADI were well
aware that market timing and excessive trading could harm fund
performance - and thus AIM Funds' shareholders - no one within
AIM management performed sufficient analysis to determine
whether the agreements were in fact harming the performance of
AIM Funds.  Because these agreements financially benefited AIM
Advisors and ADI and because AIM Advisors had reason to believe
that the approved market timer' assets could be traded in a
manner detrimental to the AIM funds, AIM Advisors had a conflict
of interest with the AIM Funds and breached its fiduciary duty
by failing to disclose that conflict to the AIM Funds' board of
trustees or shareholders.

The Order states, through their respective actions, IFG and AIM
Advisors willfully violated, and ADI aided and abetted AIM
Advisors' violations of, Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the
Advisers Act, and all three entities willfully violated Section
17(d) of the Investment Company Act and Rule 17d-1 thereunder.
IFG and AIM Advisors also willfully violated Section 34(b) of
the Investment Company Act. Furthermore, based on the above, the
Order requires IFG to pay $225 million in disgorgement and $110
million in civil penalties.  The Order also requires AIM
Advisors and ADI to pay, jointly and severally, $20 million in
disgorgement, and requires AIM Advisors and ADI to pay, in the
aggregate, $30 million in civil penalties.


MUTUAL SAVINGS: Court Asked To Approve $11.6 M Bias Settlement
--------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit against Mutual Savings Life
Insurance Co. that accuses the company of racially biased
business practices are waiting for a judge's approval of an
$11.6 million settlement, the Decatur Daily reports.

Plaintiff Ida Johnson alleges in the lawsuit that the Decatur
insurance company violated policyholders' civil rights by
"knowingly and intentionally charging racial minorities more for
the policies than the company charged similarly situated
Caucasians." Furthermore, the suit also alleges that minority
policies paid inferior benefits as compared to similar benefits
paid to whites, according to the settlement filed in the U.S.
District Court of the Northern District of Alabama.

Allegations related to the settlement, which was reached in June
involved certain policies issued before Dec. 31, 1986.

Court records indicated Mutual Savings agreed to the settlement
after considering the substantial benefits available to the
plaintiffs it also revealed that the company had weighed the
risks and uncertainty of litigation and the desire to promptly
provide effective relief to policyholders.


NABI BUS: Recalls 297 Transit Buses For Defect, Accident Hazard
---------------------------------------------------------------
NABI Bus Industries is cooperating with the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration by voluntarily recalling 297
transit buses, model 40LFW, model 2003-2004.

On certain transit buses, the hydraulic system that provides
power to the radiator cooling fan and power steering system is
subject to becoming unstable.  When this occurs, the driver will
be subjected to hard turning of the steering wheel and loss of
power assist in the steering system, increasing the risk of a
crash.

NABI is conducting the owner notification and Eaton Corporation
will perform the remedy for this campaign.  Eaton will inspect
and repair the hydraulic system.  The recall is expected to
begin on October 15,2004.  Owners should contact Eaton by Phone:
952-967-7168 or NABI by Phone: 1-888-424-5844.  Customers can
also contact the NHTSA's auto safety hotline: 1-888-DASH-2-DOT
(1-888-327-4236).


NEW YORK: EU Official Backs U.S.-Style Private Antitrust Suits
--------------------------------------------------------------
The European Union should mull over allowing U.S.-style private
lawsuits to help it enforce antitrust laws, according to
European Competition Commissioner Mario Monti, Bloomberg
reports.

Mr. Monti, whose term as president officially ends on the 31st
of October, pointed out that almost 90 percent of antitrust
enforcement in the U.S. is through private civil suits, compared
with almost none in the European Union.  He further points out
that litigation in the U.S. by customers has forced companies
such as Microsoft Corp., the world's largest software maker, to
settle claims and allowed businesses such as Coca-Cola Co. to
win damages for price-fixing violations.

However, the European Competition Commissioner did reiterate
that the EU must avoid some aspects of the U.S. system, such as
excessive class action suits.

He also acknowledged a possible conflict between seeking to
encourage private litigation and simultaneously promoting
whistle blowing and leniency programs that encourage companies
to produce incriminating information that may subsequently lead
to a lawsuit.

Currently in New York to attend an antitrust conference at
Fordham University School of Law, Mr. Monti told Bloomberg that
to encourage litigation, the European Commission may have to
provide more access to its files to potential litigants although
"there will have to be limitations."


PENNEXX FOODS: Glancy Binkow Defeats Motions To Dismiss PA Suits
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP successfully
defeated defendants' motions to dismiss plaintiffs' Amended
Complaint, thereby permitting shareholder plaintiffs to pursue
securities claims against Pennexx Foods, Inc. ("Pennexx") (Pink
Sheets:PNNX) and Smithfield Foods, Inc., as well as former
Pennexx officers and directors Michael Queen, Thomas McGreal,
Joseph W. Luter, IV, and Michael H. Cole.

Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP and Chimicles & Tikellis LLP were
previously appointed Co-Lead Counsel in the Class Action lawsuit
filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania on behalf of shareholders.

According to a FORM 10-Q for the quarterly period ended October
26, 2003, the complaint alleges violations of federal securities
laws and state common law and seeks unspecified compensatory
damages in connection with the Company's foreclosure on
Pennexx's assets.

For more details, contact Michael Goldberg, Esq., of Glancy
Binkow & Goldberg LLP by Mail: 1801 Avenue of the Stars, Suite
311, Los Angeles, CA 90067 by Phone: (310) 201-9150 or
(888) 773-9224 by E-mail: info@glancylaw.com or visit their Web
site: http://www.glancylaw.com


SALTON INC.: Antitrust Pact Distributed To TX Diabetes Program
--------------------------------------------------------------
Texas's share of a multi-state $8 million antitrust settlement
with Salton Inc. over its marketing of George Foreman Grills
will provide $585,000 to the Texas Department of Health Services
for its renowned child diabetes prevention program, Texas
Attorney General Greg Abbott announced in a statement.

The program, known as Coordinated Approach to Child Health, or
CATCH, will use the funds to educate children and parents in
proper nutritional habits to prevent childhood diseases such as
diabetes. The CATCH program, developed by the University of
Texas School of Public Health, has as its goal the promotion of
healthy school environments through increased physical
activities and improved nutrition.

"This program has excelled in the creation of an alliance of
parents, teachers, child nutrition experts and community
partners to teach children and their families how to be healthy
for a lifetime," said Attorney General Abbott. "I can't think of
a more worthy use of these settlement dollars."

The settlement involving set-aside funds for health education
programs stems from a multi-state antitrust action filed in May
2003 against Salton Inc., a Lake Forest, Illinois, distributor
of small appliances marketed under a variety of names.

The states alleged that Salton pressured several chain stores to
enter into illegal resale price maintenance agreements if they
stocked George Foreman Grills, violations of both state and
federal antitrust laws. Such pricing agreements unlawfully
require the retailer to place an item on sale only when the
distributor or manufacturer gives it permission to do so.

The company agreed to an injunction preventing it from engaging
in price maintenance in the future. It also agreed to pay $8
million to the states for funding of health education programs.

George Foreman Grills are marketed to consumers based on their
nutritional value. Accordingly, the states agreed that the
distribution of these illegally obtained funds by Salton should
benefit health programs. Foreman, the former heavyweight boxing
champion who endorses the grills, was not part of the legal
action or settlement.


SUBARU: Recalls Passenger Cars, SUVs Due To Defect, Fire Hazard
---------------------------------------------------------------
Subaru is cooperating with the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) by voluntarily recalling 26 passenger and
sport utility vehicles, namely:

     (1) Subaru Baja, model 2004

     (2) Subaru Forester, model 2004

     (3) Subaru Impreza, model 2004

The units were manufactured by Genie Manufacturing, Inc.  On
certain passenger and sport utility vehicles, the cover bolts
for the engine oil control valve may not be sufficiently
tightened, allowing oil to leak from around the cover gasket.
If leaking oil contacts components operating at high
temperatures, a fire could result in the engine compartment.

Dealers will inspect and retighten the oil-flow control valve
cover bolts.  The recall began on October 10,2004.  For more
details, contact the Company by Phone: 1-800-782-2783 or contact
the NHTSA's auto safety hotline: 1-888-DASH-2-DOT
(1-888-327-4236).


TEXAS: A.G. Abbott Inks Settlement With 3 Telemarketing Firms
-------------------------------------------------------------
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott won three settlements with
telemarketers that made sales calls to consumers in violation of
the "Texas No-Call" law.

"Consumers who signed up for the Texas No-Call list have the
right to enjoy peace and quiet in their homes and not be
disturbed by annoying telemarketing calls," said Attorney
General Abbott in a statement.  "We will continue to use this
important law to defend the rights of consumers and bring legal
action against those who choose to ignore it."

Two companies agreed to a binding "assurance of voluntary
compliance."  These are Mortgage Investors Corporation dba
Amerigroup Mortgage Corporation of St. Petersburg, Florida; and
Barry Hicks dba A to Z Movers of Dallas.  In addition, the
Attorney General obtained an agreed final judgment and permanent
injunction against William H. Marra dba On Wheels Computer
Repair Service of Dallas.

Commissioner Julie Parsley of the Texas Public Utility
Commission said the coordinated enforcement efforts with
Abbott's office "is one example of the growing commitment in
Texas to enforcing the law against violators in the
telecommunications and electric industries. We will continue to
work with the Attorney General to ensure compliance."

Dozens of consumers complained about On Wheels Computer Repair
Service, which admitted to obtaining the Texas No-Call list, but
continued to make these calls from August to December 2003, even
after the Attorney General issued a warning.  The company agreed
to pay the state a $10,000 civil penalty, and $3,000 to the
Attorney General for recovery of attorneys' fees and
investigative costs.

Mortgage Investors Corp., which admitted no liability, has
nevertheless agreed to comply with the law and to pay $7,500 in
civil penalties and $7,500 in attorneys' fees and investigative
costs.

A to Z Movers utilized an automated telephone dialing system to
deliver a prerecorded message to consumers when they answered
their phones, including many consumers whose names were
registered on the Texas No-Call list. A to Z Movers ceased
making telemarketing calls in September 2003. The Company will
pay civil penalties of $5,000 and reimburse the Attorney General
for attorneys' fees in the amount of $2,000.

Under the terms of the settlement, the companies are prohibited
from making telemarketing calls to consumers whose names appear
on the Texas or federal No-Call lists. They must also maintain
updated lists for reference.  Attorney General Abbott obtained
settlements with eight telemarketers in July, most of which
conduct business in the Dallas and Houston areas. The Consumer
Protection Division continues to investigate other companies for
Texas No-Call violations.

The first Texas No-Call list of consumers became mandatory for
telemarketers to purchase in April 2002. Beginning in July 2002,
they were prohibited from calling consumers whose names appeared
on the lists.


TEXAS: A.G. Abbott Files Settlement With 2 Insurance Companies
--------------------------------------------------------------
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott filed court-approved
settlements with two major auto insurers to refund more than
$3.4 million to Texas policyholders who paid more out of pocket
on claims for auto repairs in certain years than their policies
required.

Progressive County Mutual Insurance Co. agreed to pay $2.35
million, including interest, in refunds to about 11,000
policyholders who had repair claims from January 1996 through
May 1999.

Old American County Mutual Fire Insurance Co. will pay refunds
of $1.07 million to an estimated 4,500 policyholders. This
refund period covers claims for vehicle repairs from January
1996 to September 2001. Any Old American policyholder who
believes he or she may be entitled to a refund under this
settlement may request a claim form by calling 866/233-7091
(ext. 970), or 214/561-1970.

"Consumers who made legitimate vehicle insurance claims
following traffic accidents have expectations that they will be
treated fairly," said Attorney General Abbott. "Likewise, they
deserve refunds from companies that used deceptive means to take
money from them through such schemes as this. That's not the way
the standard auto policies in Texas work, and I'm seeing to it
that these companies return money to these consumers."

The companies, along with others in the industry, engaged in the
unlawful practice known as "betterment," in which they claimed
that the use of better or newer parts to repair the vehicle
increased its value. Companies then charged the amount of this
supposed "increased value" to the policyholders, thus reducing
the amount the company paid for the repairs. Policyholders were
then forced to make up the difference, in addition to their
deductible, to the repair shop.

The Attorney General has successfully settled 17 betterment
cases since 2000, alleging that insurance companies merely
increased the value of the replaced part, and not the entire
vehicle. Texas law does not permit such a charge or deduction,
and auto insurance policies require that the companies fully pay
for the repair, less the deductible, even if the parts used were
better than the ones they replaced.

Under the terms of the agreement announced today, the companies,
which have stopped the practice, agreed not to engage in this
practice and will refund the total amount of overcharges, plus
interest, to customers who had auto repair claims involving
betterment deductions in the periods described. Eligible
policyholders who have not yet been identified will be mailed a
claim form in the coming months by these companies.

Since 2000, the Texas Attorney General's office has obtained
betterment settlements with Home State County Mutual Insurance
Co., Consumers County Mutual Insurance Co., Farmers, Texas Farm
Bureau, Trinity, State Farm, Nationwide, USAA, Geico, Travelers,
Safeco, Sentry, Liberty Mutual, Allstate and CNA for an
estimated $16.4 million in total auto repair refunds to date.
Two lawsuits against State and County Mutual Insurance Co. and
Maryland Casualty Insurance Co. are pending.


UNITED STATES: Government Pressured To Settle Jewish WWII Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bipartisan political pressure is building for the Bush
Administration to settle a lawsuit by Hungarian Jews, who claim
that the U.S. Army plundered family riches seized by Nazis in
the waning days of World War II, the Associated Press reports.

Fred Fielding, the attorney who is mediating the dispute as a
federal judge in Miami considers a renewed Justice Department
attempt to scuttle the class-action lawsuit declined to
characterize the tenor of the closed-door sessions and instead
stated that "It's encouraging that the talks haven't shut down,
but that's about all I could say. As long as the parties are
talking there's a chance of a solution everybody can live with."

The seized riches is reportedly worth an estimated $50 million
to $120 million, which were shrouded in official secrecy until
the Presidential Advisory Commission on Holocaust Assets
detailed it in a 1999 draft report.

A hearing is set Wednesday before U.S. District Judge Patricia
Seitz in Miami on legal issues that need to be decided to
determine whether the suit goes to trial. She ruled against the
Justice Department once before and last year accused higher-ups
in the government of "dragging their feet."

According to Sam Dubbin, an attorney for the families suing the
government, both political parties don't seem pleased with the
way the government is treating Holocaust survivors. He further
stated "This administration had the ability to settle this case
and hasn't."

Looted goods were deemed officially unidentifiable even though
many items were in their original trunks, suitcases and baskets
listing the names and addresses of owners, and some families
still have their receipts. Nazis, Hungarians and Austrians stole
from the train along the way, but the families contend the rest
improperly disappeared from U.S. hands instead of being
returned.

The Justice Department said last summer that the United States,
"bears neither the legal nor the moral responsibility" for the
losses. The government acknowledged "the immeasurable and tragic
losses" suffered by Jews in the Holocaust but minimized the
property that wound up with the Army.

While the legal issues are dominated by treaties and Hungarian,
military and federal law, the lawsuit seeking up to $10,000 each
for as many as 30,000 Hungarian Jews and their survivors is
about "this nation honoring its laws, honoring its obligations,"
Mr. Dubbin said.


VIOXX LITIGATION: FDA Charged With Blocking New Vioxx Findings
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Food Drug Administration (FDA) reportedly
blocked the findings of one of its drug experts regarding safety
concerns related to the arthritis drug Vioxx, the Chairman of
the Senate Finance Committee said last week, the Associated
Press reports.

Dr. David J. Graham, associate director for science in the FDA
Drug Center's Office of Drug Safety, raised safety concerns
about Vioxx weeks before Merck & Co. recalled the drug due to
increased risks for heart attack and strokes.  Dr. Graham told
Senate investigators he faced stiff resistance within the
regulatory agency to his findings.

In a statement, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, stated that "Dr.
Graham described an environment where he was 'ostracized,'
'subjected to veiled threats' and 'intimidation.'"  Dr. Graham
told The Associated Press that Sen. Grassley's characterization
was accurate.  Raising safety concerns within the agency is
"extremely difficult," the 20-year employee said, declining
further comment.

Dr. Graham was the lead author on a research project that
scrutinized the record of 1.39 million Kaiser Permanente
patients, including 40,405 treated with Pfizer's Celebrex and
26,748 treated with Vioxx.  The study concluded that high doses
of Vioxx, known as rofecoxib, tripled risks of heart attacks and
sudden cardiac death, AP reports.  The research team's original
conclusion said that high doses of Vioxx should not be
prescribed or used.

Dr. Graham was scheduled to present these findings in late
August at an epidemiology conference in France, but ran into
resistance when the FDA reviewed his abstract.  In an email
written on August 12, Anne E. Trontell, deputy director of the
FDA's office of drug safety stated that the recommendation of
the study was unnecessary and particularly problematic, since
"FDA funded this study and David's travel to France to present
it."

Sen. Grassley released the internal e-mail exchange, where Ms.
Trontell suggested Dr. Graham defer his presentation in favor of
a journal article so dissenting scientists - including within
the FDA - could comment, AP reports.  She also recommended that
Merck should be alerted before the findings were made public,
"so they can be prepared for extensive media attention that this
will likely provoke."

Several others thought Dr. Graham's conclusion was too strong,
given that the FDA had not added such warnings to Vioxx labels.
"I've gone about as far as I can without compromising my deeply
held conclusions about this safety question," Dr. Graham replied
in an August 13 e-mail, AP reports.

His conclusion was later revised as saying "This and other
studies cast serious doubt on the safety of Vioxx doses higher
than 25 mg. per day."  The FDA has stated that Dr. Graham
decided to revise his abstract "voluntarily," AP states.

The FDA said such discussions are typical before scientific
findings are published.  In a prepared statement, the FDA said
it "values open discussion and frank exchange about scientific
and medical issues" and subjects its scientists to "more
rigorous" scrutiny than typical scientific peer reviews.

The Government Accountability Office, an investigative arm of
Congress, already has been asked to look into whether the FDA
muzzled another staffer who linked antidepressants to raising
the odds of children suffering suicidal tendencies.  When Merck
voluntarily pulled Vioxx from the market on September 30, the
GAO was asked to roll the FDA's handling of that controversy
into its inquiry.

That report is not expected for months.  Sen. Grassley's
committee is one of three in Congress also scrutinizing the
FDA's actions.  A "picture is emerging of an agency that can't
see the forest for the trees," he said, according to AP.  "Merck
knew it had trouble on its hands and took action. At the same
time, instead of acting as a public watchdog, the Food and Drug
Administration was busy challenging its own expert and calling
his work 'scientific rumor.'"


WAL-MART STORES: WA Court Grants Certification To Overtime Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
A King County Superior Court Judge in Washington ruled that a
class action lawsuit against Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. in the State
of Washington may proceed, opening the way for some 40,000
current and former employees to participate in the lawsuit,
plaintiffs' law firm Tousley Brain Stephens PLLC said in a
statement.

The lawsuit alleges that Wal-Mart has "engaged in a systematic
scheme of wage abuse against its hourly paid employees in the
State of Washington."  The illegal abuses include off-the-clock
work for which employees were never paid, missed meal and rest
breaks and altered time records.

Wal-Mart has a strict No Overtime policy, which it enforces by
disciplining employees who work more than 40 hours per week
without prior authorization.  Understaffing of the stores,
however, leaves employees with too much work to complete in 40
hours.  As a result, thousands of employees work for free (off
the clock) and miss meal and rest breaks rather than risk losing
their jobs, the statement asserted.

Plaintiff Georgie Hartwig worked for the Colville, Washington
Wal-Mart store for six years, and estimates that she worked from
2 to 5 hours over her "clocked in" time every week, doing work
for which she was never compensated.  In addition, her workload
was so heavy that she was often not able to take her meal and
rest breaks.  She also had time "disappear" when Wal-Mart
manipulated her time records.  Ms. Hartwig's story has been
echoed by many other current and former Wal-Mart employees.

Seattle attorney Beth Terrell (from the firm Tousley Brain
Stephens) blames Wal-Mart's "bottom-line culture that encourages
managers to treat their workers illegally. Wal-Mart's managers
have financial incentives to suppress store expenses - and they
do so on the backs of their hourly workers."

Employees report attending mandatory meetings and performing
computer-based training while off the clock.  Hourly managers,
too, are often not paid for work they do.  They are encouraged
not to record their time actually worked, and to forgo rest and
lunch breaks in order to keep costs down.  According to attorney
Terrell, "Wal-Mart hides behind written policies that purport to
forbid these illegal labor practices, while at the same time
fostering a culture in which these unlawful labor practices
necessarily occur."

Ms. Terrell continues, "Perhaps most disturbing was our analysis
of Wal-Mart's time-keeping records, which revealed a number of
ways that Wal-Mart manipulated its employees' time, depriving
them of wages they had earned."

Unlike other class action lawsuits that require class members to
join, the order signed by King County Superior Judge Terry
Lukens creates a class that automatically includes all current
and former hourly paid employees.  The Court appointed Tousley
Brain Stephens PLLC and Lieff Cabraser Heimann and Bernstein as
counsel for the class.

For more details, contact Tousley Brain Stephens PLLC by Phone:
1-800-299-8219, or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.tousley.com.


WASHINGTON HOSPITAL: Uninsured Lodges Suit Over Unfair Billing
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Washington Hospital Center, a nonprofit hospital system
faces a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in
Washington that accuses it of overcharging uninsured patients
and profiting through unfair billing practices, the Washington
Times reports.

The lawsuit was filed by District-based lawyer Kathy Krieger on
behalf of Kisha Wright, of Seat Pleasant, who claims she was
sued by the hospital over a $12,556.78 bill for a Caesarean
section in 2001, even though she earned $18,000 a year and did
not have health coverage. A second plaintiff in the case, Paul
Peterkin, also claims that the hospital sued him over nonpayment
of an $8,265.61 bill after he was kept overnight for a procedure
in which he received stitches on his nose.

The lawsuit among other things, also accuses the District's
largest nonprofit hospital, of charging higher rates for
services for uninsured patients. Furthermore, the suit alleges
that the 907-bed hospital at 110 Irving Street NW has been
"unjustly enriched" because it has charged "excessive and
discriminatory prices" despite receiving millions of dollars in
tax exemptions.

Mississippi lawyer Richard F. Scruggs, who successfully sued the
tobacco industry in the 1990s, has been helming a nationwide
effort to file against nonprofit health systems earlier this
year. So far, Mr. Scruggs' team of lawyers has filed 49 lawsuits
affecting more than 300 hospitals across the country.

However, a spokesman for Mr. Scruggs' legal team told the
Washington Times that the team has not sued Washington Hospital
Center. According to Mr. Scruggs' spokesman Robert Siegfried the
Washington Hospital Center case is a "copycat lawsuit" filed
after the Scruggs team announced its litigation in June.

Supporters of the various lawsuits against the hospital systems
say that despite their tax-exempt status, nonprofit hospitals
have become big moneymaking businesses that often overpay
executives, reap profits and use harassing collection
techniques.

But critics argue that the lawsuits will only harm patient care
since most hospitals are either losing money or are barely
breaking even. They further said that opportunistic lawyers
trying to cash in on the industry's woes head the litigation.


WORLD AMAZING: FSIS Detains Canned Meat, Poultry From Ukraine
-------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and
Inspection Service is detaining an undetermined amount of canned
meat and poultry products that entered the country from Ukraine.
Ukraine is not eligible to export meat, poultry or egg products
into the U.S.  New World Amazing International Inc., a Buffalo
Grove, Illinois, importing firm, is also voluntarily recalling
the product.

The products being detained and recalled are various weight cans
of:

     (1) "Pork Stew, Pork Stew in its own Juice."

     (2) "Liver Spread, Liver Spread in Oil."

     (3) "Liver Spread, Liver Spread in Pork Fat."

     (4) "Chicken Meat, Baby Chicken Meat."

     (5) "Kasha, Rice with Beef."

     (6) "Kasha, Buckwheat with Beef."

     (7) "Beef Stew, Beef Stew in its Own Juice."

These labels were printed in Cyrillic and can be viewed at the
FSIS' website: http://www.fsis.usda.gov.

FSIS has received no reports of illnesses associated with
consumption of this product. However, these products could
present a health hazard to consumers because Ukraine is not
among the countries that are approved to export meat and poultry
into the U.S. As such, these products have not been inspected by
FSIS. Anyone concerned about an illness should contact a
physician.

FSIS has taken immediate steps to remove this product from
commerce and continues to investigate whether any unlawful
actions have occurred. Consumers who have purchased any meat or
poultry product imported from Ukraine are urged not to eat it
but to return it to the place of purchase.  The products were
distributed to Eastern European specialty food and gourmet
markets in Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio
and Wisconsin.

For more details, contact Milana Grosfiler, company manager, by
Phone: (847) 537-1337.  Consumers with food safety questions can
phone the toll-free USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline at
l-888-MPHotline. The hotline can be reached from l0 a.m. to 4
p.m. (Eastern Time) Monday through Friday, and recorded food
safety messages are available 24 hours a day.


YAMAHA MOTOR: Recalls 3,620 Motorcycles, Scooters For Crash Risk
----------------------------------------------------------------
Yamaha Motor Corporation is cooperating with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration by voluntarily recalling
3,620 motorcycles and scooters, namely:

     (1) YAMAHA / VIRAGO 250, model 2005

     (2) YAMAHA / XT225T, model 2005

     (3) YAMAHA / XT225TC, model 2005

     (4) YAMAHA / XV250T, model 2005

     (5) YAMAHA / XV250TC, model 2005

     (6) YAMAHA / YW50T, model 2005

     (7) YAMAHA / ZUMA, model 2005

On certain motorcycles and scooters, the rear brake shoe
material could separate due to improper adhesive curing.  If
such separation occurs during operation, braking ability with
the rear wheel will be reduced or lost, which could cause a
crash.

Dealers will replace the rear brake shoes.  The recall is
expected to begin during October 2004.

For more details, contact the Company by Phone: 1-800-889-2624
or contact the NHTSA's auto safety hotline: 1-888-DASH-2-DOT
(1-888-327-4236).


                New Securities Fraud Cases


CONVERIUM HOLDING: Schiffrin & Barroway Files NY Securities Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York on behalf of all securities
purchasers of Converium Holding AG (NYSE: CHR) ("Converium" or
the "Company") from December 11, 2001 through July 20, 2004,
inclusive (the "Class Period").

The complaint charges Converium, Dirk Lohmann, and Martin Kauer
with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. More
specifically, the complaint alleges that the Company failed to
disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse
facts, which were known to defendants or recklessly disregarded
by them:

     (1) that Converium maintained inadequate loss reserves in
         its Converium North America subsidiary;

     (2) that the Company, contrary to representations, did not
         establish adequate loss reserves to cover claims by
         Converium North America policy holders;

     (3) that reserve increases announced by the Company during
         the Class Period were materially insufficient; and

     (4) as a consequence of the understatement of loss
         reserves, Converium's earnings and assets were
         materially overstated at all relevant times.

On July 20, 2004, Converium announced that second quarter
results would be impacted by a reserve strengthening for US
casualty business and subsequent asset impairments on the
balance sheet of Converium Reinsurance. News of this shocked the
market. Shares of Converium fell $11.12 per share, or 44.44
percent, on July 20, 2004, to close at $13.90 per share. On
August 31, 2004, Converium announced that the Company had
completed external actuarial review of Converium's reserves. On
September 2, 2004, Converium announced that following the
announcement of the external reserve review's outcome and
resulting capital measures, Standard & Poor's and A.M. Best have
lowered their ratings on Converium and its subsidiaries. On this
news, shares of Converium fell an additional $1.04 per share, or
10.51 percent, to close at $8.86 per share.

For more details, contact Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Darren J.
Check, Esq. of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP by Phone:
1-888-299-7706 or 1-610-667-7706 by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com


INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES: Schiffrin & Barroway Files CA Stock Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California on behalf of all securities
purchasers of Infineon Technologies AG (NYSE: IFX) ("Infineon"
or the "Company") from March 13, 2000 through September 15, 2004
inclusive (the "Class Period").


The complaint charges Infineon, Ulrich Schumacher, Peter Bauer,
and Peter J. Fischl with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder. More specifically, the complaint alleges
that the Company failed to disclose and misrepresented the
following material adverse facts, which were known to defendants
or recklessly disregarded by them:

     (1) that the Company entered into and engaged in a
         combination and conspiracy in the United States and
         elsewhere to suppress and eliminate competition by
         fixing the prices of Dynamic Random Access Memory
         ("DRAM") to be sold to original manufacturers of
         personal computers and servers;

     (2) that as a result of the price fixing, the Company was
         able to maintain higher profit margins;

     (3) that as a consequence of the foregoing, the Company's
         announced financial results were in violation of
         generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP"); and

     (4) that the Company's financial results were materially
         inflated at all relevant times.

On September 15, 2004, Infineon announced that it had reached an
agreement with the United States Department of Justice -
Antitrust Division ("DoJ") to plead guilty to a single and
limited charge related to the violation of US antitrust laws in
connection with the pricing in its DRAM business between July 1,
1999 and June 15, 2002. Under the terms of the agreement,
Infineon had agreed to pay a fine of $160 million, an amount
fully covered by the Company's recent third quarter accrual. On
this news, shares of Infineon fell $.21 per share, or 2.04
percent, on September 15, 2004, to close at $10.07 per share.

For more details, contact Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Darren J.
Check, Esq. of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP by Phone:
1-888-299-7706 or 1-610-667-7706 by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com


INTERACTIVECORP: Glancy Binkow Files Securities Fraud Suit in NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York on behalf of a class (the "Class")
consisting of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise
acquired securities of InterActiveCorp ("IAC" or the
"Company")(Nasdaq:IACI) between March 19, 2003 and August 4,
2004, inclusive (the "Class Period").

The Complaint charges IAC and certain of the Company executive
officers with violations of federal securities laws. Plaintiff
claims that defendants' omissions and material
misrepresentations concerning IAC's business operations and
performance artificially inflated the Company's stock price,
inflicting damages on investors. IAC (formerly "USA Networks")
is a multi-brand interactive commerce Company whose segments
include, among others, Expedia, Hotels.com, Ticketmaster and
Lending Tree. The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period
defendants failed to disclose material adverse facts about the
Company's operations, prospects and financial performance,
including:

     (1) that the Company knew or recklessly disregarded that
         its profits were being adversely impacted by the
         decreases in available discounted inventory, such as
         discount hotel rooms and airline tickets;

     (2) that IAC had to expend additional resources in order to
         market its products and brands in the maturing Internet
         industry and was facing increased Internet competition;

     (3) that the favorable performance of IAC's Expedia and the
         Hotels.com division were largely dependent on the
         improper booking of revenue; and

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

On August 3, 2004, after the market closed, the Company reported
decreased revenue, operating income and earnings per share for
second quarter 2004, and disclosed that the Company was facing
increased Internet competition, which was impacting its
performance. This news shocked the market, and shares of IAC
dropped $4.23 per share, or 15.65 percent, on August 4, 2004, to
close at $22.80 per share.

For more details, contact Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP by Phone:
(310) 201-9150 or (888) 773-9224 by E-mail: info@glancylaw.com
or visit their Web site: http://www.glancylaw.com


INTERACTIVECORP: Wechsler Harwood Files Securities Lawsuit in NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Wechsler Harwood LLP initiated a federal
securities fraud class action suit on behalf of all purchasers
of the common stock of IAC/InteractiveCorp ("IAC" or the
"Company") (NASDAQ:IACI) between March 19, 2003 and August 4,
2004, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period").

The action, entitled Berman v. IAC/InterActiveCorp., et al.,
Case No. 04-cv-07899, is pending in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York, and names as
defendants, the Company, its Chief Executive Offer, and
Chairman, Barry Diller, its Chief Financial Officer and
Executive Vice President, Dara Khosrowshahi, its Executive Vice
President, General Counsel and Chief of Business Operations,
Julius Genachowski, its Founder, President and Chief Executive
Officer of Expedia and director of IAC, Richard N. Barton, and
its Vice Chairman of the IAC Board of Directors, Victor A.
Kaufman.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder. Specifically, the complaint alleges that
Defendants began to artificially inflate IAC's share price in
order to decrease the amount of stock IAC would eventually issue
to acquire the remaining outstanding shares of Expedia and
Hotels.com it did not already own in order to eliminate further
dilution from defendants own interests in IAC. Moreover, the
complaint alleges that Defendants' statements made in connection
with the announcement of the acquisitions of Expedia, Hotels.com
and LendingTree.com and with its financial reports were false
and misleading because they did not disclose that some of the
Company's on-line customers were being double billed, that some
hotel chains were threatening to stop participating due to slow
payment by the Company, that web customers were being charged
rates exceeding the hotel's published public prices, that the
Company's web sites indicated rooms were sold out when they
actually were not.

On August 4, 2004, IAC issued its second quarter 2004 earnings
that were below expectations and lowered its forward-looking
guidance. The reason cited for the shortfall was that the
Company was being provided less rooms and airline seats to sell.
Shares reacted negatively to this announcement, falling from
$27.03 per share to $22.80, representing a decline of 15.6% on
volume of nearly 90 million shares.

For more details, contact Craig Lowther of Wechsler Harwood
Shareholder Relations Department by Mail: 488 Madison Avenue,
8th Floor, New York, NY 10022 by Phone: (877) 935-7400 or by E-
mail: clowther@whesq.com


KONGZHONG CORPORATION: Bernstein Liebhard Files Stock Suit in NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP iniitated
securities class action lawsuit in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all
persons who purchased or acquired securities of KongZhong
Corporation ("KongZhong" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: KONG)
between July 9, 2004 and August 17, 2004, inclusive (the "Class
Period").

The complaint alleges that the IPO prospectus (the "Prospectus")
was materially false and misleading because it failed to
disclose that KongZhong had violated the content rules in its
agreement with China Mobile, China's largest mobile services
provider, in June 2004 -- well before the Prospectus became
effective on July 9, 2004. The Prospectus, though warning of
potential risks relating to the breach of China Mobile's content
rules, failed to disclose that, in fact, the Company had been in
violation of China Mobile's content rules at the time of the
IPO.

On August 18, 2004, KongZhong issued a press release announcing
that it had received a "notice of sanction" from China Mobile as
a result of the Company's breach of China Mobile's content rules
in June 2004. The penalty imposed was dire: China Mobile
suspended approval of the Company's new product application
until the end of 2004, and suspended approval of the Company's
applications to operate in new platforms until June 30, 2005. In
response to this announcement, the price of KongZhong common
stock fell 16.5% in one day, from $6.39 per ADS on August 17,
2004, to $5.33 per ADS on August 18, 2004. The closing price of
$5.33 per ADS represents a 46% decrease from the Offering price
of $10 per ADS.

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


KVH INDUSTRIES: Marc S. Henzel Files Securities Fraud Suit in RI
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a class action
lawsuit 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 "Class Period").

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 Marc S. Henzel, Esq. of the law
offices of Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave, Suite 202
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004-2808 by Phone: (888) 643-6735 or
(610) 660-8000 by Fax: (610) 660-8080 by E-mail:
Mhenzel182@aol.com or visit their Web site:
http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182


NETOPIA INC.: Schatz & Nobel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schatz & Nobel, P.C., initiated a lawsuit
seeking class action status in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California (Case No. 04-3364RMW,
before Judge Ronald M. Whyte) on behalf of all persons who
purchased the publicly traded securities of Netopia, Inc.
(Nasdaq: NTPA) ("Netopia") between November 6, 2003 and July 6,
2004, inclusive (the "Class Period").

The Complaint alleges that Netopia and certain of its officers
and directors knowingly or recklessly made a series of material
misrepresentations concerning Netopia's earnings, product costs,
and sales to its largest customer. Moreover, Defendants and
employees of Netopia profited handsomely from those
misrepresentations, selling over $9 million of Netopia stock
during the Class Period. Netopia is a company that, among other
things, develops, markets and supports broadband and wireless
(Wi-Fi) products and services, as well as produces server
software products that enable remote support and centralized
management of installed broadband gateways.

For more details, contact Wayne T. Boulton or Justin S. Kudler
of Schatz & Nobel, P.C. by Phone: (800) 797-5499 by E-mail:
sn06106@aol.com or visit their Web site: http://www.snlaw.net


PRIMUS TELECOMMUNICATIONS: Lerach Coughlin Lodges VA Stock Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins
LLP ("Lerach Coughlin") initiated a class action in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on
behalf of purchasers of PRIMUS Telecommunications Group, Inc.
("PRIMUS") (NASDAQ:PRTL) publicly traded securities during the
period between November 11, 2003 and July 29, 2004 (the "Class
Period").

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 William Lerach or Darren Robbins of
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP by Phone:
800-449-4900 by E-mail: wsl@lerachlaw.com or visit their Web
site: http://www.lerachlaw.com/cases/primus/


US UNWIRED: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Securities Lawsuit in LA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
District of Louisiana on behalf of all securities purchasers of
US Unwired, Inc. (OTC Bulletin Board: UNWR) ("US Unwired" or the
"Company") from May 23, 2000 through August 13, 2002, inclusive
(the "Class Period").

The complaint charges US Unwired, William L. Henning Jr., Robert
W. Piper, and Jerry E. Vaughn with violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. US Unwired holds direct or indirect
ownership interests in five Sprint PCS affiliates: Louisiana
Unwired, Texas Unwired, Georgia PCS, IWO Holdings and Gulf Coast
Wireless. More specifically, the Complaint alleges that the
Company failed to disclose and misrepresented the following
material adverse facts, which were known to defendants or
recklessly disregarded by them:

     (1) the Company was increasing its subscriber base by
         signing up high-credit-risk customers;

     (2) that accounting changes implemented by the Company were
         done in order to conceal the Company's declining
         revenues;

     (3) that the Company had been experiencing high involuntary
         disconnections related to its high-credit- risk
         customers;

     (4) that the Company experienced lower subscription growth
         as a result of its policy that required credit-
         challenged customers to pay substantial deposits upon
         the initiation of services; and

     (5) that the Company was engaged in a dispute with Sprint
         PCS regarding its business relationship with Sprint PCS
         and Sprint PCS was pressuring the Company.

On August 13, 2002, US Unwired announced in a press release the
financial results for the second quarter period ended June 30,
2002. The Company revealed that it experienced lower
subscription growth as a result of its policy that required
credit-challenged customers to pay substantial deposits upon the
initiation of services. In response to this string of negative
announcements, on August 13, 2002, the price of US Unwired
common stock closed at $.90 per share, down 94.8% from its Class
Period high of $17.25 per share.

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


WET SEAL: Marc S. Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in C.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Central
District of California on behalf of all securities purchasers of
The Wet Seal, Inc. (Nasdaq: WTSLA) from January 7, 2004 through
August 19, 2004 inclusive (the "Class Period").

The complaint charges Wet Seal, Peter D. Whitford, Joseph E.
Deckop, and Irving Teitelbaum with violations of Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder. 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's strategic initiatives plan was not
         strengthening the Company's corporate standing. In
         fact, the Company's strategic initiatives plan was a
         complete and total disaster that was leading the
         Company into financial ruin;

     (2) that demand for the Company's products was based on
         deep-discounting and that without deep-discounting its
         products, demand for such was at an all time low; and

     (3) that as a result of the above, the Company's
         projections, outlooks, and positive statements, were
         lacking in any reasonable basis when made.

On August 19, 2004, Wet Seal, after the market closed, shocked
the market by reporting that net loss from continuing operations
of $3.20 per share for the second quarter ended July 31, 2004.
Following this post-market announcement, shares of Wet Seal shed
$1.25 per share, or 59.52 percent, to close at $0.85 per share
on unusually high trading volume on August 20, 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 by E-
Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com

                            *********


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

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

                            *********


S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Frederick, Maryland
USA.   Glenn Ruel Se¤orin, Aurora Fatima Antonio and Lyndsey
Resnick, Editors.

Copyright 2004.  All rights reserved.  ISSN 1525-2272.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without
prior written permission of the publishers.

Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed
to be reliable, but is not guaranteed.

The CAR subscription rate is $575 for six months delivered via
e-mail.  Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same
firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof
are $25 each.  For subscription information, contact Christopher
Beard at 240/629-3300.

                  * * *  End of Transmission  * * *