CAR_Public/050202.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

             Wednesday, February 2, 2005, Vol. 7, No. 23


                           Headlines

ALFA LEISURE: Recalls 88 Founder Motor Homes Due To Fire Hazard
AMERICAN HONDA: Recalls 36,046 Motorcycles Due To Crash Hazard
ARTHUR J. GALLAGHER: Faces IL, NY Brokerage Antitrust Lawsuits
ASHWORTH INC.: CA Court Approves Securities Lawsuit Settlement
ASTRAZENECA PLC: Shareholders File Securities Fraud Suit in MA

B&H TOWING: WV Homeowners Launch Damage Suit Over Barge Accident
BECTON DICKSON: Recalls Urine Processing Kits For Product Defect
CANADA: Attorney Urges Court To Certify Suit V. B.C. Government
CANADA: British Columbia Lawsuits Filed Over Celebrex, Zxprexa
CROSSROADS: Recalls 5,890 Trailers Due To Injury, Death Hazard

DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION: Recalls Pick-ups Due to Injury Risk
DEUTSCHE TELEKOM: Cautious About U.S. Shareholder Settlement
EPIX PHARMACEUTICALS: Shareholders Launch Securities Suit in MA
GENERAL MOTORS: Conducts Safety Campaign on 98,221 Vehicles
JAYCO INC.: Recalls Motor Homes Due To Cable Defect, Fire Hazard

KIA MOTORS: Recalls 89,238 Kia Sedona Cars Due To Crash Hazard
LEINER HEALTH: Recalls 13,000 Multivitamins Due To Injury Hazard
MARSH & MCLENNAN: Reaches $850M Price-Fixing Settlement in NY
MORGAN COOPER: SEC Initiates Suit V. Officers Over Stock Sales
SIPEX CORPORATION: Shareholders File Securities Suits in N.D. CA

SPARTAN CHASSIS: Recalls 490 Motor Homes Because of Crash Risk
THUNDER VALLEY: Former Employees Commence Harassment Suit in CA
WALONG MARKETING: Recalls Cooked Dry Peas Due To Microorganisms


                Meetings, Conferences & Seminars

* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
* Online Teleconferences


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

51JOB INC: Lerach Coughlin Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in NY
51JOB INC.: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Fraud Lawsuit in NY
ATHEROGENICS INC.: Shepherd Finkelman Lodges GA Securities Suit
CITADEL SECURITY: Vianale & Vianale Lodges Securities Suit in TX
DIRECT GENERAL: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in TN

DIRECT GENERAL: Schatz & Nobel Files Securities Fraud Suit in TN
GANDER MOUNTAIN: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Suit in MN
GANDER MOUNTAIN: Reinhardt Wendorf Lodges Securities Suit in MN
GANDER MOUNTAIN: Schatz & Nobel Lodges Securities Suit in MN
OFFICEMAX INC.: Lerach Coughlin Lodges IL Securities Fraud Suit

SUPPORTSOFT INC.: Roy Jacobs Sets Lead Plaintiff Deadline

                         *********

ALFA LEISURE: Recalls 88 Founder Motor Homes Due To Fire Hazard
---------------------------------------------------------------
Alfa Leisure, Inc. is cooperating with the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) by voluntarily recalling
88 Alfa Founder motorhomes, model 2005.

On certain motor homes, a plastic fitting used to test the
refrigerator's liquid propane gas (LPG) system was not removed
and replaced with a brass fitting.  Over time, the plastic
fitting may not seal correctly, allowing LPG to leak.  If
leakage occurs, there is a potential for a fire.

Dealers will replace the plastic fitting with a brass fitting.
The recall began January 10,2005.  Owners should contact the
Company by Phone: 1-800-373-3372 or the NHTSA's auto safety
hotline: 1-888-DASH-2-DOT (1-888-327-4236).


AMERICAN HONDA: Recalls 36,046 Motorcycles Due To Crash Hazard
--------------------------------------------------------------
American Honda Motor Co. is cooperating with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) by voluntarily
recalling 36,046 motorcycles, namely:

     (1) HONDA / CBR1100XX, model 2002-2003

     (2) HONDA / ST1300, model 2003-2004

     (3) HONDA / ST1300A, model 2003-2004

     (4) HONDA / VFR800, model 2002-2004

     (5) HONDA / VFR800A, model 2003-2004

Certain motorcycles equipped with the combined-brake systems
have a proportioning control valve (PCV) that mechanically
proportions brake force when the rear brake is applied.  A seal
in some PCVs is improperly shaped and brake fluid leakage may
occur.

If the motorcycle continues to be used after a leak occurs, the
rear brake would eventually become inoperative.  A loss of rear
brake force could increase the risk of a crash.

Dealers will inspect the rear brake for leakage.  If leakage is
confirmed, the dealer will replace the PCV.  The recall is
expected to begin on February 3,2005.  For more details, contact
the Company by Phone: 866-784-1870 or the NHTSA's auto safety
hotline: 1-888-DASH-2-DOT (1-888-327-4236).


ARTHUR J. GALLAGHER: Faces IL, NY Brokerage Antitrust Lawsuits
--------------------------------------------------------------
Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. was named as a defendant along with
the nine other U.S. insurance brokers and four commercial
insurers in four class actions, alleging that the defendants
used the contingent commission structure of placement service
agreements in a conspiracy to deprive policyholders of
"independent and unbiased brokerage services, as well as free
and open competition in the market for insurance."

On October 19, 2004, the Company was joined as a defendant in a
purported class action, originally filed in August 2004, in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by
OptiCare Health Systems Inc., styled "OptiCare Health Systems
Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., et al., Case No. 04 CV
06954 (DC))."

In fourth quarter 2004, three other purported class actions were
filed in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois and in the Circuit Court of Madison County,
Illinois, alleging claims based on allegations that are similar
to those alleged by the plaintiff in the OptiCare litigation.

The suit pending in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York is styled "Opticare Health
Systems, Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. et al, case
no. 1:04-cv-06954-DC," filed under Judge Denny Chin.  Law firm
for the plaintiffs is Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP
(NYC), One Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, NY 10119, Phone:
(212) 594-5300, Fax: (212) 868-1229, E-mail:
jguglielmo@milbergweiss.com or ekallas@milbergweiss.com.

The two class actions pending in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Illinois are styled:

     (1) Lewis v. Marsh & McLennan Co, et al, case no. 1:04-cv-
         07847, filed under Judge Matthew F. Kennelly

     (2) Preuss v. Marsh & McLennan Co, et al, case no. 1:04-cv-
         07853, filed under Judge Ronald A. Guzman

The law firms for the plaintiffs in the Illinois litigation are:

     (i) Wolf, Haldenstein, Adler, Freeman & Herz LLC, 656 West
         Randolph Street, Suite 500W, Chicago, IL 60661, Phone:
         (312) 466-9200

    (ii) Mager White & Goldstein, LLP, 2825 University Drive,
         Suite 350, Coral Springs, FL 33065, Phone: (954)-341-
         0844

   (iii) Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Hertz LLP, 270 Madison
         Avenue, Tenth Floor, New York, NY 10016, Phone: (212)
         545-4600


ASHWORTH INC.: CA Court Approves Securities Lawsuit Settlement
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of
California granted final approval to the settlement of the
securities class action filed against Ashworth, Inc. on behalf
of purchasers of the Company's common stock during the period
between September 4, 1997 and July 15, 1998.

The action was subsequently consolidated with two similar suits
and plaintiffs filed their Amended and Consolidated Complaint on
December 17, 1999.  Upon the Company's motion, the court
dismissed the Complaint with leave to amend on July 18, 2000.
On September 18, 2000, plaintiffs served their Second
Consolidated Amended Complaint.  On November 6, 2000, the
Company filed its motion to dismiss the Second Amended
Complaint, which the court granted, in part, and denied, in
part.

The remaining portions of the Second Amended Complaint alleged
that, among other things, during the class period and in
violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Company's
financial statements, as reported, did not conform to generally
accepted accounting principles with respect to revenues and
inventory levels.  It further alleged that certain Company
executives made false or misleading statements or omissions
concerning product demand and that two former executives engaged
in insider trading.

On November 8, 2004, the Court entered a Final Approval of
Settlement.  Under the settlement, all claims will be dismissed
and the litigation will be concluded in exchange for a payment
of $15.25 million, approximately 82% of which will be paid by
Ashworth's insurance carriers.  As part of the settlement,
Ashworth also agreed to adopt modifications to certain corporate
governance policies.

The suit is styled "In Re: Ashworth, Inc. Securities Litigation,
case no 99-CV-00121," filed in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California, under Judge M. James
Lorenz.  The plaintiff firms in this litigation are:

     (1) Berger & Montague, P.C., 1622 Locust Street,
         Philadelphia, PA, 19103, Phone: 800.424.6690, Fax:
         215.875.4604, E-mail: investorprotect@bm.net

     (2) Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbin (San
         Francisco), 100 Pine Street, Suite 2600, San Francisco,
         CA, 94111, Phone: 415.288.4545, Fax: 415.288.4534, E-
         mail: info@lerachlaw.com

     (3) Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins (San
         Diego), 401 B Street, Suite 1700, San Diego, CA, 92101,
         Phone: 619.231.1058, Fax: 619.231.7423, E-mail:
         info@lerachlaw.com

     (4) Olsen Law Firm, 2121 K Street, N.W. Suite 80,
         Washington, DC, 20037, Phone: 703.351.5199,


ASTRAZENECA PLC: Shareholders File Securities Fraud Suit in MA
--------------------------------------------------------------
AstraZeneca PLC faces a securities class action filed in the
United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
on behalf of purchasers of the Company's securities from April
2,2003 to October 11,2004.

According to a press release dated January 27, 2005, a class
action lawsuit has been commenced on behalf of purchasers of
AstraZeneca PLC publicly-traded securities, including investors
who purchased or acquired AstraZeneca securities on foreign
markets and/or who purchased AstraZeneca's American Depositary
Receipts. The complaint charges AstraZeneca and certain of its
officers and directors with violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. AstraZeneca is a pharmaceutical research
company specializing in research and development of drugs to
treat cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, neuroscience, oncology,
respiratory and inflammation and infection disorders.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants issued
numerous materially false and misleading statements concerning
the results of the clinical trials of the Company's
investigational oral anticoagulant Exanta, and the status and
likelihood of the approval of the New Drug Application for
Exanta. These statements caused the Company's stock/ADR prices
to rise until September 9, 2004, when staffers at the U.S. Food
& Drug Administration ("FDA") posted briefing documents on the
FDA's website which raised previously unheard-of problems with
Exanta. Then, on October 11, 2004 the Company issued a press
release stating, in relevant part, that they received an Action
Letter from the FDA for Exanta. The release stated that "the US
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) did not grant approval for
the investigational oral anticoagulant EXANTA(R)
(ximelagatran)." On news of the conclusion reached in the FDA's
action letter, the Company's stock price declined to $38 per
share, erasing millions of dollars in market capitalization from
the Class Period high of $51.20 per share reached on March 9,
2004 on the NYSE, GBP 2,894 per share reached on October 28,
2003 on the London Stock Exchange, and SEK 380.50 per share
reached on October 29, 2003 on the Stockholm exchange.

The suit is styled "Raymond Tyler, et al. v. AstraZeneca PLC, et
al."  The plaintiff firm in this litigation is Lerach Coughlin
Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (NY), 200 Broadhollow Road,
Suite 406, Melville, NY, 11747, Phone: 631-367-7100, Fax:
631-367-1173.


B&H TOWING: WV Homeowners Launch Damage Suit Over Barge Accident
----------------------------------------------------------------
B&H Towing Co., of Paducah, Kentucky, American Electric Power
Corp. and AEP Memco L.L.C face a lawsuit filed by West Virginia
homeowners along a 42-mile stretch of the Ohio River, due to a
barge accident. The accident caused a drop in the river's water
level, allegedly damaging their property, the Associated Press
reports.

On January 6, three loaded coal barges slammed into the
Belleville Lock and Dam on Jan. 6 after breaking loose from a
12-barge tow.  A fourth barge sank near the dam.  The barges
jammed open the gates that regulate the pool above the dam, and
the water has fallen about 14 feet below normal.

The lawsuit alleges that as the water receded in a stretch of
the Ohio and its tributaries, riverbanks battered by earlier
flooding began eroding and collapsing.  One homeowner has said
he has lost a 25-by-75-foot section of his yard, according to
AP.  The dropping water level also has halted river traffic
between Belleville and the Willow Island Lock and Dam, about 21
miles above Parkersburg, stranding more than 290 barges and
costing an estimated $4.5 million a day in economic damages.
The towboat is owned by Memco and leased to B & H Towing.

AEP spokesman Pat D. Hemlepp told AP Monday the utility and
Memco had not seen the lawsuit and could not comment.  B & H
Towing General Manager Keith Lay was not immediately available
for comment.


BECTON DICKSON: Recalls Urine Processing Kits For Product Defect
----------------------------------------------------------------
BD (Becton, Dickinson and Company) (NYSE:BDX) has executed a
voluntary product recall of certain lots of Urine Processing
Kits, Catalog #440454. This field corrective action included
notification to customers worldwide by telephone and by letter.

The Urine Processing Kit is designed to remove amplification
inhibitors for testing urine specimens with Chlamydia
trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae amplified DNA assays.
These two organisms are common causes of sexually transmitted
infections in both men and women.

The recall was initiated on January 10, 2005 after complaints
were received regarding an increased level of indeterminate
results from urine specimens stored with a urine-processing
pouch (UPP) at refrigerated temperatures. The impacted lots of
UPPs were distributed between February and August 2004.

BD also found an increased risk of false negative results if the
Amplification Control (AC) was not used during testing. Patients
with false negative results who were not treated for these
sexually transmitted infections may either unknowingly remain
infected or experience continued symptoms. In addition, there is
an increased risk of transmitting these infections to
unprotected sexual partners.

A root cause has been identified and BD has adopted additional
quality inspection and testing to assure that all other product
performs acceptably.

The lots were distributed in the United States and Europe, with
smaller amounts distributed to Australia and Canada. BD
continues to work with the impacted customers, as patient safety
and the efficacy of our products are BD's first priorities.

BD has notified the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and other
worldwide health agencies as necessary, and is working with them
to coordinate recall activities. Laboratories and/or physicians
with questions can contact BD at 1-800-638-8663 in the U.S. and
the appropriate BD representatives in Europe, Canada, and
Australia.

BD is a medical technology company that serves healthcare
institutions, life science researchers, clinical laboratories,
industry and the general public. BD manufactures and sells a
broad range of medical supplies, devices, laboratory equipment
and diagnostic products. For the fiscal year ended September 30,
2004, BD reported total revenues of $4.935 billion.


CANADA: Attorney Urges Court To Certify Suit V. B.C. Government
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class-action lawsuit against the British Columbia government
should be allowed to proceed since the Province has effectively
accepted responsibility for years of abuse at the center,
according to an attorney who wants a judge to certify the suit,
the Canadian Press reports.

In a hearing before a B.C. Supreme Court judge, Jim Poyner
pointed out that the government's apology for the sexual and
physical abuse to former residents of the Woodlands Institute
and an inquiry report "provide the basis in fact" needed to have
the case certified, the Canadian Press reports.

The government had asked Dulcie McCallum, a former provincial
ombudsman, to investigate allegations of past abuse at the
institution. When she found evidence of systemic abuse, the
government issued a formal apology to former residents and their
families.  Though the government opposed the certification, its
lawyers didn't present arguments on the first day of the
hearing, which is scheduled to run for quite some time.

In the wake of the discovery of systematic abuse at the center,
the province has set up a $2 million trust fund to provide
support and counseling to former residents at Woodlands and
three other centers across B.C.

The institute, which operated in suburban New Westminster for
more than 100 years before it was closed in 1996, was estimated
by the government to have had as many as 1,700 residents from
1969 to 1996, who are still alive. The lawsuit has been launched
on behalf of 1,500 former residents.

Gary Hill, 56, a former resident and chairman of the Woodlands
School Survivors, attended the hearing along with about a dozen
other former residents.


CANADA: British Columbia Lawsuits Filed Over Celebrex, Zxprexa
----------------------------------------------------------------
Two more prescription drugs have become the subject of British
Columbia class action law suits, with victims claiming that the
pharmaceutical companies involved "knew or ought to have known"
that these products, proposed to treat certain conditions, had
disastrous side effects.

The new suits concern:

     (1) CELEBREX, a non-steroidal, anti-inflammatory drug --
         specifically a "COX-2 inhibitor" -- which is prescribed
         to relieve pain and swelling. Since its 1999
         introduction in Canada, it has typically been used to
         treat arthritis, acute pain, acute migraine headaches
         and menstrual pain and discomfort. Celebrex is
         manufactured by Pfizer Inc.

     (2) ZYPREXA, manufactured by Eli Lilly and Company, and
         distributed in Canada since 1996, is among a group of
         drugs called the "atypical antipsychotic drugs"
         prescribed for the treatment of certain disorders,
         including schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. It blocks
         the action of serotonin and dopamine, producing a
         tranquilizing and antipsychotic effect.

Both suits were filed recently in the Supreme Court of British
Columbia by the law firm of Poyner Baxter of North Vancouver,
which works predominantly in the field of class action suits.

These actions follow in the wake of last fall's Vioxx
controversy (also the subject of a Poyner Baxter action on
behalf of British Columbia victims). Merck and Company recalled
Vioxx because of the significantly increased risk to patients of
cardiovascular events, including strokes and heart attacks. This
worldwide attention cast the spotlight on Pfizer's Celebrex, a
drug prescribed for the same conditions for which Vioxx had been
used.

Subsequently, similar alarming information has come forward from
both scientists and patients concerning Celebrex. The Poyner
Baxter statement of claim says, in part: "Celebrex has been
associated with an increased risk of serious adverse
cardiovascular complications, including but not limited to,
heart attack, stroke, angina pectoris, atrial fibrillation,
bradycardia, hematoma, irregular heartbeat, palpitation,
premature ventricular contraction, tachycardia, venous
insufficiency, cerebrovascular accident, congestive heart
failure, deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, transient
ischemic attack, unstable angina, and occlusion."

Unlike Vioxx, which was recalled, Celebrex continues to be sold,
although, in December, 2004, Health Canada revoked approval for
the drug for certain conditions and advised patients who were on
long term 400 mg. daily doses to look for alternate medications.

The Poyner Baxter action claims that Pfizer was aware of these
concerns as early as 2000 but continued to vigorously promote
the drug, emphasizing its positive attributes to both physicians
and patients, and either failing to disclose or minimizing any
negative side effects. The patient who is named in this class
action proceeding was prescribed Celebrex to treat muscle cramps
in his calves and feet during 2003. Less than a year later, the
lawsuit claims, he suffered the amputation of a toe, gangrene of
the lower leg and subsequent surgery to repair a blood vessel.

The Zyprexa action filed in British Columbia alleges a direct
link between Zyprexa and diabetes. The Plaintiff, a resident of
a home for mentally disabled people, alleges that his use of
Zyprexa resulted in diabetes. Options available to this patient
for the treatment of the original mental condition are now
egregiously limited because of the Zyprexa-induced diabetes.

There were 6 million prescriptions for Zyprexa in Canada over
the 12 months ending October 2003. Total sales in Canada were
valued at $223 million in 2002 and over $4 billion worldwide in
2003. Zyprexa has been associated with an increased risk of
developing diabetes, hyperglycemia, pancreatitis, ketoacidosis
and other injuries. In an October 16, 2003 press release, Eli
Lilly disclosed a Health Canada order directing it to include
updated information on hyperglycemia and diabetes on the labels
of their antipsychotics.

This statement of claim reads, in part "Eli Lilly purposefully
minimized and understated health hazards and risks associated
with Zyprexa. Eli Lilly, through literature and oral statements,
deceived potential users of Zyprexa and their physicians by
relaying positive information, including testimonials from
satisfied users and by manipulating statistics to suggest
widespread acceptability, while downplaying the known adverse
and serious health effects of the drug. Eli Lilly falsely and
fraudulently withheld relevant information from potential users
of Zyprexa."

According to Jim Poyner, "Once again we have more evidence of
what is becoming epidemic, and that is the pharmaceutical
industry's irresponsible promotional zeal, unashamedly
downplaying or ignoring evidence that might be injurious to
their marketing goals. We hope that all British Columbians who
feel they have suffered as a consequence of taking either
Celebrex or Zyprexa will visit our web site and make sure that
they complete our web form."

Under B.C.'s "Class Proceedings Act," a suit is brought in the
name of one individual as "representative of a class." Each of
these actions cites the case of one person, but if certified by
the Supreme Court, they will represent and potentially benefit
everyone in the province who has suffered the negative
consequences of using either Celebrex or Zyprexa.


CROSSROADS: Recalls 5,890 Trailers Due To Injury, Death Hazard
--------------------------------------------------------------
Crossroads is cooperating with the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA) by voluntarily recalling 5,890
trailers, namely:

     (1) CROSSROADS / CROSS TERRAIN, model 2001-2005

     (2) CROSSROADS / CROSSROADS, model 2001-2005

     (3) CROSSROADS / CRUISER, model 2001-2005

     (4) CROSSROADS / PARADISE POINTE, model 2001-2005

     (5) CROSSROADS / SILVERADO, model 2001-2005

Certain travel and fifth wheel trailers have improperly
installed furnace exhaust vents.  Improper installation or lack
of the furnace exhaust vent will allow the exhaust fumes,
containing combustion products, including high concentrations of
carbon monoxide gas, to enter into the recreational vehicle and
could result in injury or death to the occupants of the trailer.

Owners/dealers will inspect the furnace exhaust vent and, if not
properly installed, the dealers will repair the exhaust vent.
Owners are being instructed not to use the furnace until the
exhaust vent has been inspected and is properly repaired.  The
recall is expected to begin during late January or early
February 2005.  For more details, contact the Company by Phone:
260-593-2866 or contact the NHTSA's auto safety hotline:
1-888-DASH-2-DOT (1-888-327-4236).


DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION: Recalls Pick-ups Due to Injury Risk
----------------------------------------------------------------
DaimlerChrysler Corporation is cooperating with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) by voluntarily
recalling 1,142 Dodge Dakota pick-up trucks, model 2005.

On certain pickup trucks equipped with the optional side curtain
air bag, the curtain fasteners may not have been properly
tightened.  This could result in an improper side air bag
curtain deployment in certain side crash conditions, which can
increase the risk of injury to vehicle occupants.

Dealers will tighten the side air bag curtain fasteners to the
proper specification.  The recall began on January 17,2005.  For
more details, contact the Company by Phone: 1-800-853-1403 or
contact the NHTSA's auto safety hotline: 1-888-327-4236.


DEUTSCHE TELEKOM: Cautious About U.S. Shareholder Settlement
------------------------------------------------------------
Deutsche Telekom, the largest phone company in Europe, stated
that a recent settlement with shareholders in the United States
might not lead to a similar accord with investors in Germany,
Bloomberg News reports.

According to the Bonn-based company, it had agreed to settle for
$120 million a U.S. class-action lawsuit that alleged Company
officers made misleading statements in a share offering. That
deal though, the Company stated, must first be approved by a
judge before it can actually push through.

About 15,000 investors are suing Deutsche Telekom in Germany on
a similar complaint. Andreas Leigers, a spokesman for Deutsche
Telekom, said by phone to Bloomberg News, "We have always said
in the past that we won't settle the lawsuits in Germany, and I
don't see how this agreement would change anything. These are
two different lawsuits in two different jurisdictions. There is
no connection between the two."

Shareholders in the suits claim the phone company inflated the
value of assets before a share sale of ?13 billion, or $16.9
billion, in 2000, contributing to an 86 percent fall in the
stock price.

Klaus Rotter, a Munich lawyer who represents German shareholders
in the lawsuits, said the agreement was "good news" for the
investors. The Munich lawyer said in an e-mail to Bloomberg
News, "The settlement may increase pressure on Deutsche Telekom
in the German proceedings because German shareholders may ask
themselves why they are treated differently than American
investors."

However, Juergen Kurz, a spokesman for the Germany's biggest
shareholder group, DSW, cautioned that the settlement will now
make it impossible for German investors to use the U.S.'s
broader disclosure rules to obtain internal documents and other
evidence, Bloomberg reports.

The German suit, grouped into about 2,100 claims, may occupy the
courts for years as lawyers debate the value of more than 30,000
properties, according to Ralf Plueck, a lawyer representing more
than 6,000 of the plaintiffs. The investors are seeking a total
of about ?100 million in compensation.  Further compounding the
suits speedy resolution is the fact that Germany lacks a class-
action system, meaning that individual claims must be considered
separately.

The settlement also does not affect a criminal investigation by
the Bonn prosecutor, Fred Apostel, a spokesman for the
prosecutor's office told Bloomberg.


EPIX PHARMACEUTICALS: Shareholders Launch Securities Suit in MA
---------------------------------------------------------------
EPIX Pharmaceuticals, Inc. faces a securities class action filed
in the United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts on behalf of purchasers of the Company's
securities from July 10, 2003 to January 14, 2005.

The complaint charges EPIX and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. EPIX (formerly known as EPIX Medical Inc.) is a developer
of targeted contrast agents that are designed to improve the
diagnostic quality of images produced by magnetic resonance
imaging ("MRI"). MRI is an imaging technology for a range of
applications, including the identification and diagnosis of a
variety of medical disorders.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that, by the start of the
Class Period, defendants became aware of clinical quality issues
with the underlying data for their MS-325 Phase III program. MS-
325 is designed to provide visual imaging of the vascular system
through a type of MRI known as magnetic resonance angiography.
These issues, including the generation of unintelligible imaging
scans, made difficult, if not impossible, the proper control of
their clinical test results and statistical analysis of the data
and results. On December 16, 2003, defendants announced the
submission of their New Drug Application ("NDA") for MS-325.
Defendants continued to conceal the serious problems with their
clinical program, specifically the poor quality of the
underlying clinical data and problems with the statistical
analysis. Defendants instead made positive and encouraging
remarks about their "extensive scientific and clinical
development" activities and prospects for product approval.

Moreover, on or around January 14, 2005, the Company reported
shocking news about the MS-325 submission. Although defendants
sought to place a positive spin on their receipt of an
"approvable" action letter from the U.S. Food & Drug
Administration ("FDA") for MS-325, the news was far from
positive. The FDA had determined that problems with the Phase
III clinical trials were so serious that it was impossible for
them to come to a conclusion about the efficacy of MS-325.
Worse, the FDA noted problems with the underlying data itself,
problems that could not be resolved simply on the basis of re-
analysis of the data. Thus, defendants delivered a serious
setback to investors and, as a result, the price of EPIX stock
plunged 27%, to $10.67, for a loss of $3.98 per share, on volume
of 11 million shares.

The suit is styled "H.D. Yorston, et al. v. EPIX
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al."  The plaintiff firm in this
litigation is Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP
(NY), 200 Broadhollow Road, Suite 406, Melville, NY, 11747,
Phone: 631-367-7100, Fax: 631-367-1173


GENERAL MOTORS: Conducts Safety Campaign on 98,221 Vehicles
-----------------------------------------------------------
General Motors Corporation is cooperating with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) by voluntarily
recalling 98,221 vehicles, namely:

     (1) CHEVROLET / C/K PICKUPS, model 2000

     (2) CHEVROLET / SILVERADO, model 2000

     (3) CHEVROLET / SUBURBAN, model 2000

     (4) GMC / SAVANA, model 2000

     (5) GMC / SIERRA, model 2000

     (6) GMC / YUKON XL, model 2000

Some pick-up trucks, vans and sport utility vehicles equipped
with a hydraulic pump driveshaft that can fracture, resulting in
immediate loss of hydraulic power steering assist.  On certain
vehicles equipped with hydro-boost power brakes, the same
condition can result in loss of power assist for braking after
the reserve pressure is depleted.

An inoperative pump can cause increased steering effort, and in
hydro-boost equipped vehicles also increased braking effort, but
does not completely eliminate the ability to steer or slow the
vehicle.

Dealers will replace the hydraulic pump.  The campaign is
expected to begin on February 2005.  For more details, contact
Chevrolet by Phone: 1-800-630-2438 or GMC by Phone:
1-866-996-9463.

This action, labeled GM CAMPAIGN NO. 05001, is deemed a safety
improvement campaign and is not being conducted under the safety
act.  The company has informed NHTSA that it will provide the
modifications described above free of charge.


JAYCO INC.: Recalls Motor Homes Due To Cable Defect, Fire Hazard
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jayco, Inc. is cooperating with the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration by voluntarily recalling 688 motor homes,
namely:

     (1) JAYCO / ESCAPADE, model 2005

     (2) JAYCO / GRANITE RIDGE, model 2005

     (3) JAYCO / GREYHAWK, model 2005

     (4) STARCRAFT / AMBIENT, model 2005

On certain motor homes, the battery cable may have been routed
too close to the exhaust manifold.  This could cause the cable
to melt, creating an electrical short, which could result in a
fire.

Dealers will inspect and reroute and/or replace the battery
cable.  The recall is expected to begin February 2005.  For more
details, contact the Company by Phone: 574-825-5861 or visit the
NHTSA's auto safety hotline: 1-888-327-4236.


KIA MOTORS: Recalls 89,238 Kia Sedona Cars Due To Crash Hazard
--------------------------------------------------------------
Kia Motors America, Inc. is cooperating with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) by voluntarily
recalling 89,238 Kia Sedonas, models 2002-2003.

On certain vehicles, during assembly, the throttle cable would
twist itself out of position.  This can permit the cable to be
hung up, which could result in a crash.

Dealers will replace the throttle cable.  Vehicles produced from
March 20,2001 through November 7,2001 will have a guide clip
installed on the throttle body assembly in order to ensure that
the tension force cable does not move out of position.  Vehicles
manufactured beginning on November 8,2001, already have the
extended guide, which accomplishes the same objective.  The
recall is expected to begin at the end of February 2005.  For
more details, contact the Company by Phone: 1-800-333-4542 or
the NHTSA's auto safety hotline: 1-888-327-4236.


LEINER HEALTH: Recalls 13,000 Multivitamins Due To Injury Hazard
----------------------------------------------------------------
Leiner Health Products, of Carson, California is cooperating
with the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission by
voluntarily recalling about 13,000 Long's Central-Vite
Multivitamins.

The vitamins, which contain iron that can cause serious injury
or death if ingested by children, do not have child-resistant
packaging as required by the Poison Prevention Packaging Act. No
injuries or incidents have been reported.

The recalled Central Vite multivitamins were sold in a value
size container of 500 tablets. The plastic white pill bottle is
labeled "Advanced Formula Central Viter with Lycopene" and
"Value Size."

Manufactured in the United States, the multivitamins were sold
at all Long's retail stores nationwide from March 2004 through
December 2004 for about $16.

Consumers should keep this product out of reach of children and
return the product to the nearest Long's retail store for a
refund or replacement.

Consumer Contact: Call Leiner Health Products at (800) 421-1168
between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. PT Monday through Friday. Consumers
may visit http://www.leiner.comfor information about this
recall.


MARSH & MCLENNAN: Reaches $850M Price-Fixing Settlement in NY
-------------------------------------------------------------
Marsh & McLennan Companies $850 million agreement to settle
price-fixing charges with the New York attorney general's office
heralds a new start for the Company, Chief Executive Officer
Michael G. Cherkasky stated, according to the NU Online News
Service reports.

Though MMC admitted no guilt, Mr. Cherkasky in a letter of
apology announcing the settlement called the conduct those
executives involved "shameful."  He further stated at the press
conference, "I can't say this is a day of great rejoicing in
MMC, but I think it is a day of relief, and it is a day that we
will mark as a beginning. We look forward to the future."

In its settlement with Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's office
and the New York State Insurance Department, New York-based MMC
will set up a fund from which it will pay clients restitution
for contingency fees the Company received over a three-year
period from 2001 through 2004, which is actually the period when
members of the Company's Marsh brokerage subsidiary were accused
by Mr. Spitzer's office in a civil suit of rigging bids with
insurers and steering commercial insurance business their way in
exchange for contingency fees that served as kickbacks.

The payments into the fund, to total $850 million, will be made
beginning June 1, with a $255 million payment, followed by
another $255 million payment in 2006, and a $170 million payment
in both 2007 and 2008.

According to Mr. Cherkasky, the bulk of the payments, $131
million will go to clients in California, followed by New York
with $94 million, Pennsylvania with $58 million, Texas at $55
million, and Illinois at $45 million. The amount depended upon
the number of corporate headquarters in the state, he said. He
also adds that the money will be paid directly to clients, who
will be contacted by MMC and who will also be offered an opt-in
or opt-out agreement. Payments out of the pool will be based on
the number of participants, but those who will be opting-in
would agree not to take any legal action, Mr. Cherkasky
explained, the NU News Online reports.

Under the agreement, there will be no fines or other costs paid
to the state, or an admission of guilt and that there will also
be no criminal prosecution. Mr Cherkasky said. The agreement
also lays out terms for future disclosure to clients and
transparency of the brokerage transaction that Mr. Cherkasky
said would make MMC a leader in the industry.

MMC issued a letter of apology to the attorney general, which is
attached to the online press announcement from the attorney
general and Insurance Department offices.

Though the agreement does not settle any civil litigation or
other inquiries by other state attorneys general or insurance
regulators, Mr. Cherkasky is hopeful that the structure of the
settlement, that benefits clients, would stop their suits and
other regulators from pursuing their own litigation.

In a related development, civil actions continue to mount
against MMC, the latest of which occurred in the U.S. District
Court Southern District of New York, where Judge Shirley W. Kram
ordered the consolidation of a securities fraud class action
suit led by state pension funds.

The class members are The Public Employees Retirement System of
Ohio, State Teachers Retirement System of Ohio, the Ohio Bureau
of Workers' Compensation, and the State of New Jersey-Department
of Treasury-Division of Investment. The suit charges MMC
inflated its earnings through bid-rigging and other abuses. The
plaintiffs claim they lost $100 million when the stock faltered
after the abuse was uncovered.

The investment community reacted positively to the news. Brian
Meredith of Banc of American Securities told NU News Online, the
settlement agreement is "a big positive," reducing strains on
the Company.  Vinay Saqi with Morgan Stanley told NU News Online
the settlement "is very manageable" for the Company and would
help it manage the cash flow. Since there is no fine or penalty
involved, he said the amount might be tax deductible. He however
warned that other states could still press for settlements of
their own. Morgan Stanley estimates the total cost in the end,
from other states and civil action, could end up costing the
company $2 billion.


MORGAN COOPER: SEC Initiates Suit V. Officers Over Stock Sales
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission reported the filing of a
civil action against Morgan Cooper, James J. Caprio and Jeffrey
G. Nunez in the U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia.

The Commission alleges in its complaint that in 1999, Cooper
retained Caprio and another individual, now deceased, to sell
stock for his company, Morgan Cooper, Inc. (MCII).  According to
the complaint, Caprio and the other individual, with the
assistance of Nunez, sold hundreds of thousands of MCII shares,
raising approximately $1.2 million for the company, without
registering those sales with the Commission. The complaint also
alleges that Cooper disseminated a number of false and
misleading statements in press releases touting MCII.
Additionally, Cooper and Caprio failed to file the required
reports on Schedule 13D to disclose their ownership interests in
MCII, which exceeded 5% of outstanding shares. Cooper also
failed to file reports on Forms 3, 4 and 5 to disclose his
acquisition and transfer of shares in the company as required of
an officer and director.

The Commission alleges in its complaint that Cooper violated
Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933 (Securities Act) and
Sections 10(b), 13(d) and 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (Exchange Act) and Rules 10b-5, 13d-1, 13d-2 and 16a-3
thereunder. The Commission also alleges that Caprio violated
Section 5 of the Securities Act and Section 13(d) of the
Exchange Act and Rules 13d-1 and 13d-2 thereunder. Moreover, the
Commission alleges that Nunez violated Section 5 of the
Securities Act.  The Commission seeks permanent injunctions
against and civil penalties from Cooper, Caprio and Nunez; an
accounting, disgorgement of illegal gains and prejudgment
interest from Caprio and Nunez; and, from Cooper only, an
officer and director bar.

In a related enforcement action announced this week, the
Commission also instituted administrative proceedings against
MCII pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Exchange Act to determine
whether the registration of the Company's securities should be
suspended or revoked. In the Commission's Order, the Division of
Enforcement alleges that MCII failed to comply with Section
13(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder
by failing to file any quarterly reports with the Commission
since Nov. 30, 2000, and any annual reports since April 19,
2000. The action is entitled, SEC v. Morgan Cooper et al.,
1:05CV00207 (D.D.C.) (LR-19057).


SIPEX CORPORATION: Shareholders File Securities Suits in N.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sipex Corporation faces several securities class actions filed
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California, on behalf of purchasers of the Company's securities
from April 10, 2003 to January 20, 2005.

The complaints charge Sipex and certain key officers and
director 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 Complaints allege 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 inappropriately recognized revenue on
         sales for which price protection, stock rotation and/or
         return rights were granted;

     (2) that the Company's financial results were in violation
         of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP");

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

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

Further, on or around January 20, 2005, Sipex announced that the
Company may restate its financial statements for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2003 and the fiscal quarters ended April 3,
2004, July 3, 2004 and October 2, 2004 due to the possible
improper recognition of revenue during these periods on sales
for which price protection, stock rotation and/or return rights
may have been granted. The news shocked the market. As a result,
shares of Sipex fell $0.90 per share, or 23.44 percent, on
January 21, 2005 to close at $2.94 per share, on unusually high
volume.

The first identified complaint is styled "Barbara Keller, et al.
v. Sipex Corporation, et al., case no. 05-CV-0392."  The suits
are filed in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California, under Judge Marilyn H. Patel.
Plaintiff firms in this litigation are:

     (1) Law Offices of Brian M. Felgoise, P.C., Esquire at 261
         Old York Road, Suite 423, Jenkintown, PA, 19046, Phone:
         215.886.1900, E-mail: securitiesfraud@comcast.net

     (2) Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP (New York), One
         Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor, New York, NY, 10119,
         Phone: 212.594.5300, Fax: 212.868.1229, E-mail:
         info@milbergweiss.com

     (3) Schatz & Nobel, P.C., 330 Main Street, Hartford, CT,
         06106, Phone: 800.797.5499, Fax: 860.493.6290, E-mail:
         sn06106@AOL.com

     (4) Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP, 3 Bala Plaza E, Bala Cynwyd,
         PA, 19004, Phone: 610.667.7706, Fax: 610.667.7056, #-
         mail: info@sbclasslaw.com


SPARTAN CHASSIS: Recalls 490 Motor Homes Because of Crash Risk
--------------------------------------------------------------
Spartan Chassis, Inc. is cooperating with the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) by voluntarily recalling
490 motor homes, namely:

     (1) SPARTAN / MG, model 2005

     (2) SPARTAN / MM, model 2005

On certain motor homes, the slack adjusters in the front axles
were not adjusted properly.  The driver may experience a feeling
of softening in the braking function.  Reduction in brake force
could cause a crash.

Dealers will adjust the front axle brake.  The manufacturer has
not yet provided an owner notification schedule.  For more
details, contact the Company by Phone: 517-543-6400 or the
NHTSA's auto safety hotline: 1-888-327-4236.


THUNDER VALLEY: Former Employees Commence Harassment Suit in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
In a court challenge that pits individual workers' rights
against an Indian tribe's sovereignty, seven former employees of
Auburn Indian Community-owned Thunder Valley Casino have filed a
civil suit alleging sexual harassment, age and sex
discrimination and wrongful termination, GamblingMagazine.com
reports.

According to attorneys for both sides, the case, which was filed
in Sacramento Superior Court, could hinge on the tribe's
contention that its status as a sovereign nation exempts it from
most state and federal anti-discrimination laws.

The seven plaintiffs, all women had worked in a variety of jobs
at the casino. Their class-action suit covers a broad range of
employment issues, but the most provocative allegations deal
with sexual harassment.

In the lawsuit, one plaintiff alleges that a casino executive,
Curtis Broome, twice forced himself on her sexually. The woman,
a 40-year-old mother of four, said she quit her job to avoid
him. Another plaintiff claims that Mr. Broome, the casino's
director of information technology, fondled and forcefully
kissed her, after she complained about his conduct to her
supervisor, according to the suit, she was transferred and
eventually fired.  In addition to Mr. Broome, the suit names as
defendants the tribe, the casino, Station Casinos, which has a
management contract to operate Thunder Valley, and other,
unnamed parties.

Contacted by The Sacramento Bee, Mr. Broome declined to comment
on the lawsuit or the allegations. Tribal Chairwoman Jessica
Taveras, through her spokesman, Doug Elmets, also declined to
comment, as did Lesley Pittman, spokeswoman for Station Casinos.
Howard Dickstein, the tribe's lead attorney, said the tribe and
casino had conducted their own investigation and found the
charges to be "without merit."

However, the merits of the suit may never be heard in Superior
Court because the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that tribes, as
sovereign nations, have the right to establish their own laws
and are generally immune from civil lawsuits.

For decades, tribes' sovereign immunity seldom came into play,
as outsiders rarely ventured onto Indian reservations and
rancherias. But as Indian casinos have sprouted across
California, a growing number of patrons, employees and
contractors who feel they've been wronged are running into a
wall of sovereign immunity when they sue in civil court. Dozens
of civil lawsuits have been filed against casino tribes across
the country, only to be thrown out because the courts say they
have no jurisdiction.

Mr. Dickstein said the tribe is further investigating the
allegations, but he said, the Auburn Indian Community like
California's other 106 Indian nations has sovereign immunity
from this type of civil suit. Whether Mr. Broome and other
casino employees are protected by sovereign immunity is less
clear. "There's not a lot of case law on this question," Mr.
Dickstein further said.

Robert Monterrosa, a Sacramento attorney who specializes in
workplace law, represents the seven women and Mr. Dickstein's
legal opponent agrees with him on that point, at least.  He told
the Sacramento Bee that he respects the tribe's sovereign right
to govern itself, but he noted that this complaint involves non-
Indian employees who work in a commercial enterprise that caters
to non-Indian customers, he is thus accusing the tribe of
"hiding behind sovereign immunity."

Mr. Monterrosa acknowledges the tribe is a formidable opponent,
but says his research shows the sexual harassment and
discrimination issues raised in the case seldom have been tested
in court.

The suit states that Plaintiff Cheryl Dalton, 56, formerly the
assistant to the director of marketing reported her concerns
about age discrimination to the casino's human resources
department but that nothing was done. The casino atmosphere was
such that, "If you complained to your immediate supervisor,
you'd be fired on the spot," she said.

Furthermore, the suit states that plaintiff Cynthia Walden was
fired from her job as a clerk with no explanation. "I asked why
I was being fired," she said, "and I was told: 'We don't have to
tell you why. We're a sovereign nation.'"

Another plaintiff, Sundi Lyons alleges in the lawsuit that Mr.
Broome forced himself on her sexually and that she reported it
to Rich Randolph, lead investigator for the tribe's gaming
commission. The suit claims Mr. Randolph assured her he would
investigate and told her to tell no one else. In an interview
with the Sacramento Bee, she said she did not file criminal
charges against Mr. Broome because she believed Mr. Randolph was
obligated to report the allegation.

Plaintiff Aramissa Dillyhon claims in the suit she complained to
her supervisor that Mr. Broome was sexually harassing her and
also says she reported Broome's conduct to Mr. Randolph.

Though Mr. Randolph, who was reached by phone, declined to
comment, Mr. Dickstein said that Mr. Randolph and the tribe's
gaming commission have no authority to investigate employee
complaints: "They protect the integrity of gaming, they don't
supervise employees." Furthermore, he pointed out that the tribe
when it learned the former employees had filed complaints with
the state Department of Fair Employment and Housing and the
federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission did an
investigation that found the charges to be "without merit." Mr.
Dickstein said the former employees still could avail themselves
of the tribe's internal remedies. If the former employees are
not happy with the outcome, he said, they could go to the state
and claim the tribe isn't honoring its compact as it relates to
treatment of workers.

Nevertheless, Mr. Monterrosa hopes, a Superior Court judge will
give the plaintiffs their day in court. The tribe has 30 days to
respond.


WALONG MARKETING: Recalls Cooked Dry Peas Due To Microorganisms
---------------------------------------------------------------
Walong Marketing, Inc. of Buena Park, CA is recalling its 6-
ounce canned "Temple Brand Cooked Dry Peas" because Food and
Drug Administration sample results indicate that the product has
the potential to provide an environment for growth of harmful
microorganisms. Consumers are warned not to use the product even
if it does not look or smell spoiled.

The recalled Temple brand Dry Green Peas were distributed
nationwide in retail stores and through direct delivery.

The product comes in a 6 oz can marked with can code of TDP
12504 on the top with an expiration date 10/2006 stamped on the
side.

No illnesses have been reported to date in connection with this
problem.

Consumers who have purchased Temple brand Dry Green Peas should
return it to the place of purchase. Retailers who have this
product should pull the product from store shelves until further
instruction by Walong Marketing, Inc. Consumers and retailers
with questions may contact the company at 714-670-8899.



Meetings, Conferences & Seminars



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

February 10-11, 2005
ACCOUNTANTS' LIABILITY
ALI-ABA
Scottsdale, Arizona
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

February 10-11, 2005
CLINICAL TRIALS
American Conferences
New York, NY
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

February 14-15, 2005
REINSURANCE 101 CONFERENCE: LITIGATION & ARBITRATION
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Pentagon City, Washington, DC
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

February 14-15, 2005
ASBESTOS LITIGATION 101
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Pentagon City, Washington, DC
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

February 17-19, 2005
INSURANCE COVERAGE LITIGATION COMMITTEE MEETING
American Bar Association
Phoenix, AZ
Contact: 800-285-2221; abasvcctr@abanet.org

February 22-23, 2005
INSURANCE COVERAGE 2005: CLAIM TRENDS & LITIGATION
New York, NY
Practising Law Institute
Contact: 800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu

February 28, 2005
LEXISNEXIS PRESENTS WALL STREET FORUM: ASBESTOS
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Battery Park, New York City
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

February 28 - March 1, 2005
REINSURANCE ARBITRATIONS
American Conferences
New York, NY
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

February 28 - March 1, 2005
INSURANCE LITIGATION 101
Mealey Publications
The Rittenhouse Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 1, 2005
INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTION EXPOSURES
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Battery Park, New York City
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 3-4, 2005
TRANSPORTATION MEGACONFERENCE VII
American Bar Association
New Orleans, LA
Contact: 800-285-2221; abasvcctr@abanet.org

March 3-4 , 2005
LITIGATING DISABILITY INSURANCE CLAIMS
American Conferences
Coral Gables
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

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

March 7-8, 2005
INSURANCE LITIGATION 101
Mealey Publications
Hotel Crescent Court, Dallas
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 7-8, 2005
CLASS ACTIONS
American Conferences
San Francisco
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

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

March 14-15, 2005
WELDING ROD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz Carlton Phoenix, Phoenix AZ
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 17-18, 2005
Mass Torts Made Perfect
The Plaza New York, New York
Mass Torts Made Perfect
Contact: 1-800-320-2227; 850-436-6094

March 18, 2005
CONFERENCE ON INSURANCE AND FINANCIAL SERVICES LITIGATION
American Bar Association
New York
Contact: 800-285-2221; abasvcctr@abanet.org

March 21, 2005
FAMILY LAW CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Wyndham Franklin Plaza Hotel, PA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 21, 2005
MOTOR VEHICHLE LIABILITY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Wyndham Franklin Plaza Hotel, PA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

March 21-22, 2005
AIRLINE RESTRUCTURING
American Conferences
New York
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

March 31-April 1, 2005
THE 4TH INTERNATIONAL ADVANCED FORUM ON RUN-OFF AND COMMUTATIONS
American Conferences
The Warwick New York Hotel, New York, NY
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

April 4-5, 2005
MANAGED CARE LIABILITY
Mealey Publications
The Four Seasons Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

April 7-8, 2005
THE 4TH NATIONAL ADVANCED GUIDE TO CONSUMER FINANCE LITIGATION
AND CLASS
ACTIONS
American Conferences
Le Meridien , Chicago, IL
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

April 11-12, 2005
BAD FAITH AND PUNITIVE DAMAGES
American Conferences
San Francisco
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

April 13-16, 2005
INSURANCE INSOLVENCY AND REINSURANCE ROUNDTABLE
Mealey Publications
The Fairmont Scottsdale Princess, Scottsdale AZ
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

April 18-19, 2005
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Four Seasons Hotel, Houston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

May 2005
INTERNATIONAL ASBESTOS CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
London, England
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

May 11, 2005
BROKER AND INSURANCE COMPANY PRACTICES AND LIABILITIES
CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

May 12-13, 2005
ADDITIONAL INSURED CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

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

May 16-17, 2005
RUN-OFFS SEMINAR
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

May 16-17, 2005
ADDITIONAL INSURED CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Huntington Hotel & Spa, Pasadena CA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

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

June 9-10, 2005
NURSING HOME LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Amelia Island
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 9-10, 2005
ASBESTOS BANKRUPTCY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Chicago
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 13-14, 2005
PPA & EPHEDRA LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, New Orleans
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 13-14, 2005
DRUG LITIGATION 101
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, New Orleans
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 13-14, 2005
MOLD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Marina Del-Ray, CA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

June 27-28, 2005
LITIGATING EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION & SEXUAL HARASSMENT CLAIMS
2005
Practising Law Institute
New York, NY
Contact: 800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu


JulY 28 - 29, 2005
CLASS ACTION LITIGATION: PROSECUTION & DEFENSE STRATEGIES 2005
Practising Law Institute
New York, NY
Contact: 800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu

August 18-19, 2005
PRODUCTS LIABILITY
ALI-ABA
San Francisco
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

September 8-9, 2005
CLASS ACTION LITIGATION: PROSECUTION & DEFENSE STRATEGIES 2005
Practising Law Institute
Chicago, IL
Contact: 800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu

September 26-27, 2005
REINSURANCE SUMMIT
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 27, 2005
ARBITRATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

October 2005
INTERNATIONAL ASBESTOS CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
London, England
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

October 6-7, 2005
ASBESTOS LITIGATION IN THE 21ST CENTURY
ALI-ABA
Chicago
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

November 3-4, 2005
CONFERENCE ON LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRODUCTS
ALI-ABA
Washington DC
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614
TBA
FAIR LABOR STANDARDS CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

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

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



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

February 01-28, 2005
HBA PRESENTS: AUTOMOBILE LITIGATION: DISPUTES AMONG
CONSUMERS, DEALERS, FINANCE COMPANIES AND FLOORPLANNERS
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

February 01-28, 2005
CONSTRUCTION DISPUTES: TEXAS RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION DEFECT
LIABILITY
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

February 01-28, 2005
HBA PRESENTS: ETHICS IN PERSONAL INJURY
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

February 01-28, 2005
IN-HOUSE COUNSEL AND WRONGFUL DISCHARGE CLAIMS:
CONFLICT WITH CONFIDENTIALITY?
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

February 01-28, 2005
BAYLOR LAW SCHOOL PRESENTS: 2004 GENERAL PRACTICE INSTITUTE --
FAMILY LAW, DISCIPLINARY SYSTEM, CIVIL LITIGATION, INSURANCE
& CONSUMER LAW UPDATES
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

June 27-28, 2005
LITIGATING EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION & SEXUAL HARASSMENT CLAIMS
2005
Practising Law Institute
Contact: 800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu

TORTS PRACTICE: 18TH ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS #1
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

TORTS PRACTICE: 18TH ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS #2
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

TORTS PRACTICE: 18TH ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS #3
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444


TORTS PRACTICE: 19TH ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

CIVIL LITIGATION PRACTICE: 21ST ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS #1
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

CIVIL LITIGATION PRACTICE: 21ST ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS #2
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

CIVIL LITIGATION PRACTICE: 21ST ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS #3
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

CIVIL LITIGATION PRACTICE: 22ND ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

PUNITIVE DAMAGES: MAXIMIZING YOUR CLIENT'S SUCCESS OR MINIMIZING
YOUR
CLIENT'S EXPOSURE
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

EFFECTIVE DIRECT AND CROSS EXAMINAITON
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

STRATEGIC TIPS FOR SUCCESSFULLY PROPOUNDING & OPPOSING WRITTEN
DISCOVERY
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

CACI: CALIFORNIA'S NEW CIVIL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

RECOVERIES
Big Class Action
Contact: seminars@bigclassaction.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

51JOB INC: Lerach Coughlin Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in NY
-------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins
LLP ("Lerach Coughlin") initiated a class action lawsuit in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York on behalf of purchasers of 51job, Inc. ("51job")
(NASDAQ:JOBS) American Depositary Receipts ("ADRs") during the
period between November 4, 2004 and January 14, 2005 (the "Class
Period").

The complaint charges 51job and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. 51job describes itself as the "leading provider of
integrated human resource services in China with a strong focus
on recruitment related services."

The complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants
reported the Company's operating results for the third quarter
of 2004 and made positive statements regarding its outlook for
the fourth quarter of 2004. In truth and in fact, however,
51job's financial statements for the third quarter of 2004 were
artificially inflated as a result of the Company's premature
recognition of revenue in its online services segment, which
also violated Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP")
and its own revenue recognition policies. In addition,
defendants knowingly or recklessly made positive statements,
which were lacking in any reasonable basis, about the Company's
outlook for the fourth quarter of 2004. Specifically, the
Company estimated that total revenues for the fourth quarter of
2004 would be in the range of RMB140 million to RMB145 million
and diluted earnings per share would be between RMB0.42 and
RMB0.44. On January 18, 2005, the Company drastically cut its
estimates for its revenues and earnings per share by
approximately 17% and 40%, respectively. The Company now expects
to earn total revenues of RMB117 and RMB121 million and earnings
per common share of between RMB0.24 and RMB0.27.

Upon this news, shares of the Company's ADRs fell more than 35%,
or $15.50 per share, to close at $28.32 per share, on extremely
high trading volume.

For more details, contact Samuel H. Rudman or David A. Rosenfeld
of Lerach Coughlin by Phone: 800-449-4900 or 619-231-1058 or by
E-mail: wsl@lerachlaw.com or visit their Web site:
http://www.lerachlaw.com/cases/51job/.


51JOB INC.: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Fraud Lawsuit in NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP initiated a
class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the securities
of 51job, Inc. ("51job" or the "Company") (Nasdaq: JOBS) between
November 4, 2004 and January 14, 2005, inclusive, (the "Class
Period") seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act").

The action, numbered 05-CV-0974, is pending in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York against
defendants 51job, Rick Yan (CEO, Pres.), Kathleen Chien (CFO),
and Donald L. Lucas (Chairman). A copy of the complaint filed in
this action is available from the Court, or can be viewed on
Milberg Weiss's website at: http://www.milbergweiss.com.

The complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period,
defendants made highly positive statements concerning its
business and reported to the market that its business would
continue to accelerate, issuing highly positive earnings and
revenue projections. Such statements were allegedly false and
misleading when made for the following reasons:

     (1) the Company improperly recognized advertising revenue,
         such that its real revenues in the third fiscal quarter
         were materially less than the RMB135.0 million (US$16.3
         million) in total revenues and RMB128.1 million
         (US$15.5 million) that the Company reported in its
         press release;

     (2) defendants failed to disclose that the Company's
         business was experiencing a material downturn in
         advertising revenue;

     (3) the Company failed to adjust its aggressively positive
         earnings announcements even in light of the sharp
         downturn in business, which was well known to
         defendants;

     (4) as a result of the foregoing, 51job's Class Period
         statements about the Company's historical results and
         expected growth were lacking in any basis and deceived
         investors.

The truth began to be revealed on January 18, 2005. On that
date, before the market opened, 51job issued a press release
announcing that sales declined in December 2004 and lowered its
guidance for the fourth quarter of 2004. In addition, defendants
announced that 51job would revise its third quarter online
recruitment advertising revenue, reducing it by RMB2 million to
RMB3 million.

In response to these disclosures, the price of 51job shares
plummeted, falling from $43.82 per share on January 15, 2005 to
$28.32 per share on January 18, 2005, the next trading day, a
one-day drop of 35%, on unusually heavy trading volume of 7.4
million shares.

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


ATHEROGENICS INC.: Shepherd Finkelman Lodges GA Securities Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLC filed a
lawsuit seeking class action status in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta
Division, on behalf of all persons (the "Class") who purchased
the securities of AtheroGenics, Inc. ("AtheroGenics" or the
"Company") (NasdaqNM: AGIX -- News) on September 27, 2004 in
after hours trading, following the Company's announcement of its
interim study results, through and including December 31, 2004
(the "Class Period").

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. The class period begins on September 27,
2004 after Defendants announced the interim results of the CART
2 study of the AGI-1067 drug. The Complaint alleges, among other
things, that the Company's statements regarding the CART 2 study
of AGI-1067 in the September 27, 2004 press release and
conference call and in the September 28, 2004 interview that
Defendant Medford gave were false and misleading because the
interim results were incomplete, misleading and resulted from
manipulation of the study. Plaintiffs claim that Defendants were
motivated to manipulate the study to produce results that would
induce a major pharmaceutical company to partner with it to
complete the development and commercialization of AGI-1067. In
response to Defendants' hyping of the misleading interim
results, Plaintiff charges, AtheroGenics' stock price
skyrocketed, rising 71% in unusually heavy after hours trading
on September 27, 2004.

On November 22, 2004, Defendants were forced to admit that the
percentage of regression of plaque in patients using AGI-1067
was only slightly more than half as much as had been reported in
the interim results Defendants had announced two months earlier.
In addition, Defendants revealed that the Phase IIb results,
though based on twice the patient population, showed that the
relative difference between treatment with AGI-1067 and Standard
of Care regime was not statistically significant. The market was
stunned, and the stock price dropped precipitously. Then, on
January 3, 2005, the Company announced that it had decided to
increase the number of patients in the Phase III study for the
drug from 4000 to 6000 patients, that the study would be longer
in duration, and that the Company needed to raise more cash to
fund the study. On this news, the Company's stock fell again,
this time 20% to close at $18.72 on unusually heaving trading.
On January 5, 2005, the Company disclosed in a SEC filing that
the SEC and NASD had commenced informal inquiries into the
Company's September 27, 2004 announcement of interim results of
the study.

For more details, contact James E. Miller, Esq. by Phone:
866-540-5505 or by E-mail: jmiller@classactioncounsel.com OR
James C. Shah, Esq. by Phone: 877-891-9880 or by E-mail:
jshah@classactioncounsel.com.


CITADEL SECURITY: Vianale & Vianale Lodges Securities Suit in TX
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Vianale & Vianale LLP commenced a securities
fraud class action lawsuit on in Dallas federal court on behalf
of purchasers of the securities of Citadel Security Software,
Inc. ("Citadel") (NASDAQ: CDSS) between February 12, 2004 and
December 16, 2004, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
made false and misleading statements about the Company's
business and prospects. Defendants concealed a lack of "growing
demand" for the Company's Hercules products in the public and
commercial sectors and maintained the false appearance of growth
to induce third parties to finance the Company's operations and
to allow Company executives to sell their own shares at
artificially inflated prices. As a result, the Company's
business prospects and projections for 2004 revenue of $18.5-$21
million and net income during the second half of 2004 of $1.0-
$2.0 million were grossly exaggerated.

On December 17, 2004, after Citadel executives Steven Solomon
and Richard Connelly had reaped nearly $3 million in insider
trading proceeds, Citadel disclosed that full year 2004 revenue
would be between $15.2 million and $16.0 million, well below
previous guidance of $18.5 to $21 million. The Company also
announced it would not meet its previously released net income
guidance for the second half of 2004 of $1.0 million to $2.0
million. Citadel shares plummeted over 40% on the news, to close
at $2.49 per share.

For more details, contact Vianale & Vianale by Phone:
888-657-9960 or visit their Web site: http://www.vianalelaw.com.


DIRECT GENERAL: Milberg Weiss Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in TN
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP initiated a
class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the securities
of Direct General Corp. ("Direct General" or the "Company")
(NASDAQ: DRCT) between August 11, 2003, through January 26,
2005, inclusive, (the "Class Period"), seeking to pursue
remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
"Exchange Act").

The action is pending in the United States District Court for
the Middle District of Tennessee against defendants Direct
General Corp., William Adair, Jr., Barry Elkins, Brian Moore,
Jacqueline Adair, and Tammy Adair. The complaint alleges that
throughout the Class Period, Defendants issued, or caused to be
issued, false and misleading statements to artificially inflate
the value of Direct General Stock. Specifically, Defendants
concealed from the investing public the negative effect a change
in the Florida Personal Injury Protection scheme would have on
the Company's business operations. The Company also failed to
properly reserve for its insurance losses as a result of the
change in the Florida statute. While the stock's value was just
a few dollars from its Class Period high, and almost $15 from
its current price, Defendants and other insiders sold over 3.3
million shares for net proceeds of $108 million. On January 26,
2005, the Company admitted that its current reserves were
inadequate and disclosed for the first time the substantial
impact the revised Florida PIP Statute was having on its
operations.

For more details, contact Steven G. Schulman by Mail: One
Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl., New York, NY 10119-0165 by Phone:
(800) 320-5081 or by E-mail: sfeerick@milbergweiss.com OR Maya
Saxena or Joseph E. White by Mail: 5355 Town Center Road, Suite
900, Boca Raton, FL 33486 by Phone: (561) 361-5000 by E-mail:
msaxena@milbergweiss.com or jwhite@milbergweiss.com or visit
their Web site: http://www.milbergweiss.com.


DIRECT GENERAL: Schatz & Nobel Files Securities Fraud Suit in TN
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schatz & Nobel, P.C. initiated a lawsuit seeking
class action status has been filed in the United States District
Court for the Middle District of Tennessee on behalf of all
persons who purchased the publicly traded securities of Direct
General Corp. (NasdaqNM: DRCT) ("Direct General") between August
11, 2003 and January 26, 2005 (the "Class Period").

The Complaint alleges that Direct General violated federal
securities laws by issuing false or misleading public
statements. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that Direct
General improperly concealed the negative effect that changes in
the Florida Personal Injury Protection ("PIP") system would have
on its business and failed to properly reserve for such a
contingency. Moreover, the Complaint alleges that certain
corporate insiders sold $108 million worth of their personal
holdings of Direct General stock before the substantial impact
of the PIP changes was disclosed on January 26, 2005.

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


GANDER MOUNTAIN: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Suit in MN
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities
class action on behalf of shareholders who acquired shares of
Gander Mountain Company (Nasdaq:GMTN) ("Gander Mountain" or the
"Company") between April 20, 2004 (the date of the Company's
initial public offering) and January 13, 2005 (the "Class
Period").

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
District of Minnesota. The action charges that defendants
violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of
materially false and misleading statements to the market
throughout the Class Period, which statements had the effect of
artificially inflating the market price of the Company's
securities. No class has yet been certified in the above action.

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


GANDER MOUNTAIN: Reinhardt Wendorf Lodges Securities Suit in MN
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Reinhardt Wendorf & Blanchfield initiated a
class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
District of Minnesota on behalf of purchasers of Gander Mountain
Company ("Gander Mountain" or "the Company") (Nasdaq:GMTN)
common stock pursuant to the Company's Initial Public Offering
("IPO") and on the open market during the period between April
20, 2004 and January 13, 2005 (the "Class Period").

The complaint charges Gander Mountain and certain of its
officers and directors with violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and the Securities Act of 1933. Gander
Mountain is a specialty retailer offering an assortment of
merchandise that caters to outdoor lifestyle enthusiasts, with a
particular focus on hunting, fishing and camping. The complaint
alleges that prior to going public (and even afterward) Gander
Mountain was controlled by the Erickson family (including
certain of the defendants named in the complaint) through their
individual ownership in the Company as well as their holdings in
the Company's major shareholders. Defendants knew that unless
the Company went public, their shares in the Company would
remain illiquid, and virtually worthless. Further, defendants
were also keenly aware that unless the Company went public prior
to revelations of lowered earnings expectations in November 2004
and January 2005, the Company would be prevented from going
public altogether. This possibility would not only jeopardize
defendants' ability to infuse value and liquidity into their
shares via the IPO, but also would jeopardize the Company's
ability to repay a $9.8 million debt owed to a company owned by
the Erickson family.

On April 26, 2004, Gander Mountain closed its IPO of 6,583,750
shares of its common stock and converted existing preferred
stock to common stock, raising in excess of $105 million. On
November 9, 2004, the Company announced it had "lowered its
stock outlook for pretax income for fiscal 2004 to a range of $8
million to $13 million, compared with the company's prior
guidance of $16 million to $21 million." Then, on January 14,
2005, the Company issued a press release lowering its outlook
for pretax income for fiscal 2004 even further, "to a range of
$2.0 million to $4.0 million, compared with the company's prior
guidance of $8 million to $13 million." On this news, the
Company's shares plunged to an all time low of $9.30 per share,
more than a 60% drop from the Class Period high of $24.65 on
June 7, 2004.

According to the complaint, the true facts, which were known to
each of the defendants during the Class Period and concealed
from the public, were as follows:

     (1) the Company's co-branded credit card program was
         faltering;

     (2) the value of the Company's inventory was overstated,
         requiring massive reductions and causing the Company's
         future margins to be negatively impacted as a result;

     (3) the Company's debt capacity was jeopardized and was
         inconsistent with the defendants' own growth plans;

     (4) the Company was actually experiencing average trends
         with respect to its sales; and

     (5) as a result of the above, defendants' own projections
         of positive comparable sales growth of 3% - 5% and
         pretax income of $8-$13 million were materially false
         and misleading.

For more details, contact Garrett D. Blanchfield of REINHARDT
WENDORF & BLANCHFIELD by Phone: (800) 465-1592 or (651) 287-2100
by Fax: (651) 287-2103 or by E-mail:
g.blanchfield@rwblawfirm.com or visit their web site:
http://www.rwblawfirm.com.


GANDER MOUNTAIN: Schatz & Nobel Lodges Securities Suit in MN
------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schatz & Nobel, P.C. initiated a lawsuit seeking
class action status has been filed in the United States District
Court for the District of Minnesota on behalf of all persons who
purchased the common stock of Gander Mountain Company (NasdaqNM:
GMTN) ("Gander Mountain") between April 20, 2004 and January 13,
2005 (the "Class Period"). Also included are those who purchased
pursuant to the Company's Initial Public Offering ("IPO").

The Complaint alleges that Gander Mountain violated federal
securities laws by issuing false and misleading statements.
Specifically, defendants failed to disclose that:

     (1) the Company's co-branded credit card program was
         faltering;

     (2) the value of the Company's inventory was overstated,
         causing the Company's future margins to be negatively
         impacted;

     (3) the Company's debt capacity was jeopardized and was
         inconsistent with defendants' growth plans;

     (4) the Company was experiencing average trends with
         respect to its sales; and

     (5) defendants' projections of positive comparable sales
         growth of 3%-5% and pretax income of $13 million were
         materially misleading.

On November 9, 2004, Gander Mountain announced it had "lowered
its outlook for pretax income for fiscal 2004 to a range of $8
million to $13 million, compared with the company's prior
guidance of $16 million to $21 million." On January 14, 2005,
the Company issued a press release lowering its outlook for
pretax income for fiscal 2004 even further, "to a range of $2.0
million to $4.0 million, compared with the company's prior
guidance of $8 million to $13 million." On this news, Gander
Mountain's shares plummeted to a close of $9.43. During the
Class Period, Gander Mountain traded as high as $24.65.

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


OFFICEMAX INC.: Lerach Coughlin Lodges IL Securities Fraud Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins
LLP ("Lerach Coughlin") initiated a class action filed in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois has been extended to include both the purchasers of
OfficeMax Inc.'s ("OfficeMax") (NYSE:OMX) and Boise Cascade
Corp.'s ("Boise") publicly traded securities during the period
between December 1, 2003 and January 11, 2005 (the "Class
Period").

The complaint charges OfficeMax and certain of its current and
former officers and directors with violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. OfficeMax, known as Boise Cascade until
October 2004, is a multinational contract and retail distributor
of office supplies and paper, technology products and office
furniture.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
made false and misleading statements regarding the Company's
earnings. 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) that for a period of at least two years, millions of
         dollars worth of the Company's sales were fraudulently
         booked as legitimate sales;

     (2) that the Company was using (and manipulating its use
         of) "vendor allowances" (monies paid by suppliers for
         promotions, prime shelf space, discounts and rebates)
         in order to manipulate the Company's earnings and
         timing of revenue recognition;

     (3) that the Company's Q4 2004 results and those beyond
         were being eroded by the Company's internal
         investigation costs and the halting of the Company's
         abusive vendor allowance scheme;

     (4) that the Company lacked the necessary internal controls
         to insure all revenue reported complied with generally
         accepted accounting principles; and

     (5) that the Company had entered into a long-term paper
         supply contract with Boise Cascade, LLC, which,
         unbeknownst to investors, was not commensurate with the
         market rate.

As a result of defendants' false statements, OfficeMax shares
traded at inflated levels during the Class Period, permitting
the Company's top officers and directors to obtain shareholder
approval of the OfficeMax acquisition, to obtain tens of
millions of dollars in severance and golden parachute payments,
to cash out millions of dollars worth of stock options and
restricted stock, to sell stock at inflated prices, and to
arrange to sell nearly $1.5 billion worth of the Company's
notes.

On January 12, 2005, OfficeMax announced that its chief
financial officer had resigned and that it would postpone the
release of its earnings for the fourth quarter and full year
2004, pending the conclusion of an internal investigation into
issues relating to its accounting for vendor income.

For more details, contact William Lerach or Darren Robbins of
Lerach Coughlin by Phone: 800-449-4900 or 619-231-1058 or by E-
mail: wsl@lerachlaw.com or visit their Web site:
http://www.lerachlaw.com/cases/officemaxinc/.


SUPPORTSOFT INC.: Roy Jacobs Sets Lead Plaintiff Deadline
---------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Roy Jacobs & Associates reminds investors that
there is only one week left for purchasers of Supportsoft, Inc.
(Nasdaq:SPRT) to move for lead plaintiff in this securities
fraud class action on behalf of individuals who purchased or
otherwise acquired publicly traded securities of SPRT between
January 20, 2004 and October 1, 2004, inclusive, (the "Class
Period") and wish to be a lead plaintiff in the case you must
move to serve as a lead plaintiff by filing a motion in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
California no later than February 7, 2005.

It is alleged that Defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 by issuing
a series of false and misleading positive statements to the
investing public which touted the Company and its continuing
financial performance, but failed to disclose material business
problems.

While the defendants were making these positive statements,
defendants Radha R. Basu, the Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer, and Brian M. Beattie, the Chief Financial Officer were
selling their own Supportsoft shares for proceeds of millions of
dollars.

Having previously predicted revenues of $16.7 to $17.7 million
for the Third Quarter of 2004, on October 4, 2004, the Company
was forced to admit that actual revenues would be far below
those figures, in the range of $11.9 million to $12.3. On this
news, the Company's share price dropped from $9.62 per share to
$6.21 per share, representing a drop of 35.4% on extremely heavy
trading volume. Accordingly, millions of dollars of shareholder
value has been lost as a result of the wrongful conduct alleged.
The Company's share price has not recovered.

For more details, contact Roy L. Jacobs, Esq. of Roy Jacobs &
Associates by Phone: (888) 884-4490.


                            *********


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 2005.  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  * * *