/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/050628.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

             Tuesday, June 28, 2005, Vol. 7, No. 126


AMERICAN HEARING: MD AG Reaches Consumer Fraud Suit Settlement
AMERICAN VINYL: IL Attorney General Sues For Home Repair Fraud
BERKELEY PREMIUM: IL Attorney General Files Consumer Fraud Suit
BERKELEY PREMIUM: NC AG Moves To Stop Sale of False Diet Pills
BROADCOM CORPORATION: Settles CA Securities Litigation For $150M

CREDIT CARDS: Australian Bank Warned FBI of Risk of Data Theft
DRDGOLD LIMITED: Shareholders Launch Securities Fraud Lawsuits
EL PASO: NV To Participate in Natural Gas Antitrust Suit Pact
FACE NATIONAL: NC AG Cooper Shuts Down Fraudulent Modeling Firm
FLORIDA: Men Launch Federal Privacy Suit V. Reality TV Series

GUAM: EITC Suit Parties To Meet For Status Conference Next Week
HILB ROGAL: Shareholders Launch Securities Lawsuits in E.D. VA
HONESTY LLC: Former Owner To Settle MO AG Consumer Fraud Lawsuit
HYTRIN LITIGATION: ME Consumers To Get Share in Antitrust Pact
IGA MANAGEMENT: ME AG Warns Residents V. Canadian Lottery Scam

INTEGRITY INVESTMENT: NC AG Files Suit To Stop Real Estate Fraud
LA DOVA: MD AG Issues Cease-And-Desist Order V. 2 Homebuilders
NEW JERSEY: AG Harvey Files Consumer Fraud Suit V. 3 Contractors
QWEST COMMUNICATIONS: Settles U.S. West Shareholders' Suit in NY
SECOND CHANCE: AZ AG Urges State Law Enforcement To Replace Vest

SOUTH CAROLINA: Workers Launch Suit Over Retirement Plan Changes
TARGET CORPORATION: Recalls 230,000 Candles Due to Fire Hazard
TE MORTGAGE: MO AG Gets Court Order For No-Call Law Violations
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FIRMS: Three Groups Oppose Big Telco Mergers
TRIBUNE COMPANY: IL Securities Suit Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set

UNITED KINGDOM: Railtrack Shareholders' Lawsuit to be Heard Soon
UNUM LIFE: To Pay $1.3 Mil To Settle MA AG Consumer Fraud Suit
VAIL PRODUCTS: Recalls "Enclosed" Bed Systems Due to Injury Risk
VOLKSWAGEN: Recalls 44T Touran Vans Worldwide For Clutch Problem

                 New Securities Fraud Cases

CONAGRA FOODS: Marc S. Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in TX
CYBERONICS INC.: Marc S. Henzel Lodges Securities Lawsuit in TX
GUIDANT CORPORATION: Scott + Scott Lodges Securities Suit in IN
HILB ROGAL: Marc S. Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Lawsuit in VA
LAZARD LIMITED: Schiffrin & Barroway Files Securities Suit in NY

MBNA CORPORATION: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges ERISA Lawsuit in DE
NAVARRE CORPORATION: Baron & Budd Lodges Securities Suit in MN
PEMSTAR INC.: Marc S. Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in MN
UNITED AMERICAN: Baron & Budd Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in MI


AMERICAN HEARING: MD AG Reaches Consumer Fraud Suit Settlement
Maryland Attorney General J. Joseph Curran, Jr.'s Consumer
Protection Division reached a settlement earlier this month with
American Hearing Centers, Inc., a now defunct chain of hearing
aid stores that sold hearing aids to Maryland consumers from
locations throughout Maryland.  Under the settlement, the
Company's former owner, Mitchell Stein of Olney, Maryland,
agreed to refund more than $20,000 to consumers who had
cancelled their purchases of hearing aids and were not refunded
their payments.

Under the Maryland Hearing Aid Sales Act, consumers who purchase
hearing aids have 30 days from the date of the delivery of their
hearing aids to cancel their purchases and receive most of their
money back. If a company offers a refund period that exceeds 30
days, the company must provide a refund if the consumer cancels
within that longer period. The Division alleged that Stein and
his company failed to pay refunds to consumers who lawfully
cancelled their orders.

The settlement requires Mr. Stein to make full restitution to
all consumers who properly cancelled their hearing aid
purchases, but have not received refunds of the payments they
made for their hearing aids.  The settlement also requires Mr.
Stein to make full restitution to all consumers who made
payments and had HMO coverage or insurance coverage that
provided that American Hearing Centers, Inc. had to accept the
insurance payment as payment in full, less any applicable co-pay
or deductible. Also, for all consumers with insurance policies
that allowed American Hearing Centers, Inc. to charge the
consumer the difference between the amount of the insurance
payment and American Hearing Centers, Inc.'s charge, the
settlement requires Mr. Stein to make full restitution to
consumers of amounts paid by them that exceeded that difference.

The Division is aware of consumers who are owed refunds that
total more than $20,000.  Mr. Stein also agreed to post $20,000
in security for future claims before operating a hearing aid
business and to pay the Division $1,000 for its costs. Stein
also agreed to fully comply with the Hearing Aid Sales Act.

"Buying a hearing aid can be difficult and expensive," Attorney
General Curran said. "Hearing aid sellers must honor consumers'
cancellation rights and issue refunds promptly as required by

Consumers who believe they are entitled to restitution under the
Attorney General's settlement with Mitchell Stein may contact
the Consumer Protection Division by Phone: (410) 528-1840.

AMERICAN VINYL: IL Attorney General Sues For Home Repair Fraud
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan filed suit against two
Madison County home remodelers for allegedly failing to perform
or complete home repair and remodeling jobs promised to
homeowners on both sides of the river in the St. Louis
metropolitan area.

Since December 2003, Attorney General Madigan's Consumer Fraud
Bureau has received a dozen complaints against David Smith and
James Triplett, doing business as American Vinyl Touch of
Edwardsville. They now apparently do business as Crystal Clear
Exteriors and have relocated to East Carondelet.

The complaint charges Mr. Smith and Mr. Triplett with violations
of both the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business
Practices Act and the Home Repair and Remodeling Act. Because
some of the victims are over the age of 65, the Attorney General
said Mr. Smith and Ms. Triplett could face additional civil

Consumers in Madison and St. Clair Counties who have filed
complaints with Ms. Madigan's office allegedly have lost
approximately $10,525 in down payments or full payments on
contracts.  Missourians in St. Louis and Montgomery Counties
have lost an estimated $8,043.  With the exception of one
complainant, Ms. Madigan said all calls to the defendants have
gone unanswered and requests for refunds have been ignored.
Additional complaints have been lodged against the pair with the
Better Business Bureau of Eastern Missouri and Southern

"Home repair scams are among the most common type of fraud,
causing serious losses for homeowners who are simply trying to
improve their property," the Attorney General said.

The complaint, filed in Madison County Circuit Court, reveals
that all contracts were signed while Smith or Triplett were in
customers' homes. The Consumer Fraud Act affords consumers the
right to cancel such contracts within three business days. In
addition, they must be provided with a copy of the home repair
consumer's rights pamphlet and, if the contract exceeds $1,000,
both the consumer and the contractor must sign an
acknowledgement that the pamphlet was provided prior to the
start of work. The complaint alleges the defendants failed to
comply with these requirements.

Seven homeowners complained to Attorney General Madigan's office
that work never began on their projects after they paid deposits
ranging from $600 to $2,000. Four other consumers, including
those who prepaid entire contracts that ranged from $2,000 to
$4,000, complained of incomplete or inferior workmanship. One
other consumer reached a settlement with American Vinyl.

In two cases, according to the Attorney General's complaint, Mr.
Smith and Mr. Triplett contracted with consumers for roof repair
or replacement even though they are not licensed by the State of
Illinois as roofing contractors. One homeowner paid in full a
contract for $1,700 but has been unsuccessful in getting them to
return to her home to fix a still-leaking roof. Another
homeowner said leaks soon developed in a roof installed by Mr.
Smith and Mr. Triplett at a cost of more than $13,000. Unable to
reach the defendants to seek repairs, the consumer incurred
additional costs to have the leak repaired by another company.
Last October, another consumer was informed that a supplier had
placed a mechanic's lien on her home after Mr. Smith and Mr.
Triplett allegedly failed to pay for the materials used on her

Attorney General Madigan said Mr. Smith and Mr. Triplett did not
just target high-end contracts. One senior citizen planned to
replace one window at a time at her home and paid $200 for the
first job. To date, no window has been installed and calls to
Mr. Smith and Mr. Triplett have not been answered.

The suit seeks a permanent injunction against the defendants
from engaging in the home repair and remodeling business and
from further violations of Illinois' consumer protection laws.
The suit also seeks restitution, a civil penalty of $50,000 and
an additional $50,000 per violation found to be committed with
the intent to defraud. In addition, Attorney General Madigan is
asking the court to impose a civil penalty of $10,000 per
violation committed against victims who are 65 or older.

Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Meyer is handling the case
for Madigan's Consumer Fraud Bureau. For more details, contact
Melissa Merz by Phone: 312-814-3118 or 877-844-5461 (TTY) or by
E-mail: mmerz@atg.state.il.us.

BERKELEY PREMIUM: IL Attorney General Files Consumer Fraud Suit
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan and Illinois Department
of Public Health Director Dr. Eric E. Whitaker filed a lawsuit
to stop a businessman and his five allegedly fraudulent
companies from continuing to sell pills they falsely claim could
improve a variety of health problems, including poor night
vision, high cholesterol and obesity.

The suit, filed on June 15,2005 in Sangamon County Circuit Court
in Illinois, charges Steve Warshak, of Cincinnati, Ohio, and his
firms Berkeley Premium Nutraceuticals, Inc., Lifekey, Inc.,
Warner Health Care, Inc., Boland Naturals, Inc., and Wagner
Nutraceuticals, Inc., with violations of the Illinois Consumer
Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act and the Illinois Food
Drug and Cosmetic Act.

The Attorneys General of Arkansas, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon
and Texas also filed lawsuits against Mr. Warshak and his
companies, whose commercials include the character Smilin' Bob.
The lawsuits were filed after more than 6,400 consumers
nationwide filed complaints about the products, with 34 consumer
complaints lodged in Illinois with Attorney General Madigan's
Consumer Protection Division. Most of the complaints were
received in Ohio, where the companies are based, by that state's
Attorney General's Office and Better Business Bureau.

"Consumers across the country have seen advertisements on
television offering free trials of pills that could help cure
them of medical conditions," the Attorney General said. "In
reality, the companies couldn't back up their claims with actual
scientific evidence and the consumers' credit cards were being
charged for additional pills they never ordered."

"This company has made false promises to vulnerable people who
are hoping to cure their ailments or just feel better," said Dr.
Whitaker. "However, there is no evidence that these pills can
help improve one's health. For that reason, I felt we needed to
take action. We are living in a time when the integrity of
medicine and science has been called into question. This action
will help to reaffirm the public's trust in the medical

Attorney General Madigan and Dr. Whitaker's suit claims that Mr.
Warshak's companies, which have sold at least 15 different
products around the nation, made unsubstantiated claims about
their products' powers.  Berkeley and the other companies
described their products as "the best natural supplements to
help improve your health" and called them "nutraceuticals." In
reality, the companies allegedly did not have competent and
reliable scientific evidence to back up their claims.

As alleged in the complaint, Berkeley and the other companies
hooked customers with advertisements promising "free" 30-day
trials of their products. When consumers called the companies'
toll-free numbers or visited their Web sites to order the pills,
they were asked to provide credit or debit card information to
pay shipping and handling charges. But the companies failed to
tell consumers that they would automatically bill them for
additional shipments of pills. When consumers tried to stop the
automatic payments for what the companies called their
"continuity program" or "home delivery plan," Mr. Warshak's
companies often made it difficult to cancel the subscriptions or
obtain refunds.

Berkeley's practices also have attracted the attention of
federal authorities. In March, agents from the U.S. Postal
Inspection Service, Federal Bureau of Investigations, Internal
Revenue Service and Food and Drug Administration raided
Berkeley's headquarters. A federal judge has frozen $24 million
in Mr. Warshak's bank accounts relating to a federal

The lawsuit asks the court to prohibit the defendants from
conducting business in Illinois and order the defendants to pay
full restitution to consumers. The lawsuit also seeks a civil
penalty of $50,000 and additional penalties of $50,000 per
violation found to be committed with the intent to defraud.

Assistant Attorney General Karen Winberg-Jensen is handling the
case for Attorney General Madigan's Consumer Protection
Division.  For more details, contact Melissa Merz by Phone: 312-
814-3118 or 877-844-5461 (TTY).

BERKELEY PREMIUM: NC AG Moves To Stop Sale of False Diet Pills
North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper filed a complaint to
stop a company from selling pills that it falsely claimed could
improve a variety of health problems including boosting night
vision, lowering cholesterol.  The suit was filed in the Wake
County Superior Court in North Carolina against Steve Warshak of
Ohio and his firms Berkeley Premium Nutraceuticals, Lifekey,
Inc., Boland Naturals, Inc., Warner Health Care, and Wagner

The suit alleges the Company deceived its North Carolina
consumers about its products.  Attorney General Cooper is asking
the court to permanently stop these companies from doing
business in North Carolina and order them to pay refunds.

"Consumers got lured in with the promise of a free trial offer
but soon found themselves paying for shipments of pills they
hadn't ordered," said the Attorney General. "Just like the snake
oil salesman of old these companies made claims about their
pills they couldn't back up."

The suit claims that Mr. Warshak's companies, which have sold 15
different products around the nation, made unsubstantiated
claims about their products' powers.  Berkeley and the other
companies described their products as "the best natural
supplements to help improve your health" and called them
"nutraceuticals."  In reality, the companies did not have
competent and reliable scientific evidence to back up their
claims, nor had the dietary supplements been approved by the U.
S. Food and Drug Administration.

As alleged in the complaint, Berkeley and the other companies
hooked customers with advertisements promising "free" 30-day
trials of their products. When consumers called the companies'
toll-free numbers or visited their websites to order the pills
they were asked to provide credit or debit card information to
pay shipping and handling charges.  The companies failed to tell
consumers that they would automatically bill them for additional
shipments of pills. When consumers tried to stop the automatic
payments for what the companies called their "continuity
program" or "home delivery plan," Mr. Warshak's companies often
made it difficult for people to cancel their automatic shipments
or get their money back.

Attorneys General in Oregon, Ohio, Arkansas, Illinois, and Texas
also filed suit against Berkeley and the other companies.  In
addition Berkeley's practices have caught the attention of
federal authorities.  In March, agents from the U.S. Postal
Inspection Service, FBI, IRS and FDA raided Berkeley's
headquarters and a federal judge has frozen $24 million in Mr.
Warshak's bank accounts relating to a federal investigation.

"Outfits that take advantage of consumers need to take their own
bitter medicine," said Attorney General Cooper. "And consumers
need to be wary of companies that make claims about their
products they can't back up."

For more details, contact Noelle Talley by Phone: 919/716-6413.

BROADCOM CORPORATION: Settles CA Securities Litigation For $150M
Broadcom Corporation (Nasdaq: BRCM) reached an agreement in
principle to settle the securities class action litigation
currently pending against the company and certain of its current
and former officers and directors.

The class action was brought on behalf of persons and entities,
which bought or acquired shares of Broadcom's common stock, or
options on such shares, between July 31, 2000 and February 26,
2001. The proposed settlement remains subject to the
satisfaction of various conditions, including negotiation and
execution of a final stipulation of settlement, approval by the
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
following notice to members of the class, and a commitment by
the company's insurance carriers to fund a portion of the
settlement payments.

Under the proposed settlement, the class action litigation will
be dismissed in exchange for an aggregate cash payment of $150
million. Broadcom expects that approximately $40 million of that
amount will be paid by its insurance carriers, with the balance
of approximately $110 million to be paid by the company. The
company expects to record its estimated portion of the
settlement payment as a one-time charge in its statement of
operations for the second quarter of 2005 and to pay that amount
in cash into escrow in the third quarter of 2005.

Terms for distribution of the settlement fund to class members
after final court approval of the settlement, and other terms of
settlement, will be disclosed in a notice to be sent to class
members after preliminary court approval. The court's
preliminary approval hearing is scheduled for June 27, 2005.

The Company and the other defendants have steadfastly maintained
that the claims raised in the class action litigation were
without merit, and have vigorously contested those claims. As
part of the settlement, the company and other defendants
continue to deny any liability or wrongdoing.

"We have agreed to settle this lawsuit so that we may put this
longstanding matter behind us and focus Broadcom's energies and
resources on our business objectives and the many market
opportunities before us," said David A. Dull, Broadcom's Senior
Vice President and General Counsel. "We have vigorously fought
these charges for over four years, and we were fully prepared to
take this matter to a trial on the merits. We believe we would
have prevailed at trial. But, given the strength of our balance
sheet and our future prospects, we concluded that this
settlement provides a reasonable opportunity to avoid the
continuing costs and distraction of this litigation, and
eliminates the chance, however slight, of a substantially
greater financial exposure that is inherent in a jury trial."

For more details, contact Bill Blanning, Vice President, Public
Relations, Phone: 949-926-5555, E-mail: blanning@broadcom.com OR
T. Peter Andrew, Sr. Director, Investor Relations, Phone:
949-926-5663, E-mail: andrewtp@broadcom.com.

CREDIT CARDS: Australian Bank Warned FBI of Risk of Data Theft
Australia's largest bank reportedly warned about theft of data
from credit and debit cards by hackers in the United States and
relayed the warning to the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI), Australia's ranking finance minister said, according to
the Bank Systems and Technology News.

On June 17,2005, MasterCard International issued a statement
notifying its member financial institutions of a breach of
payment card data, which potentially exposed more than 40
million cards of all brands to fraud, of which approximately
13.9 million are MasterCard-branded cards.

The Company's team of security experts identified that the
breach occurred at Tucson-based CardSystems Solutions, Inc., a
third-party processor of payment card data.  Third party
processors process transactions on behalf of financial
institutions and merchants.  The security breach occurred after
CardSystems inappropriately held onto card data for "research
purposes" rather than deleting it.  Forty million accounts were
exposed, and records pertaining to at least 200,000 are known to
have been stolen, primarily MasterCard and Visa cards.

Through the use of MasterCard fraud-fighting tools that
proactively monitor for fraud, MasterCard was able to identify
the processor that was breached. Working with all parties,
including issuing banks, acquiring banks, the processor and law
enforcement, MasterCard immediately launched an investigation
into the breach, and worked with CardSystems to remediate the
security vulnerabilities in the processor's systems. These
vulnerabilities allowed an unauthorized individual to infiltrate
their network and access the cardholder data.

The credit card giant said in its statement that CardSystems
already took steps to improve the security of its system, but it
was still giving CardSystems a limited amount of time to
demonstrate compliance with MasterCard security requirements.
The Company also immediately notified its customer banks of
specific card accounts that may have been subject to compromise
so they can take the appropriate measures to protect their

Australia's Treasurer Peter Costello told parliament he and
Justice Minister Chris Ellison only became aware of the fraud
through media reports this week.   He said Visa had told the
federal treasury that a major Australian bank had raised the
alarm months earlier.

"Visa has informed the treasury it was the National Australian
Bank that discovered this fraud out of all of the domestic and
international banks of the world and reported it to Mastercard
and Visa in September 2004," Mr. Costello told parliament.  "The
FBI was notified and commenced an extensive investigation and on
June 1, 2005, declared it a crime scene."

"During this investigation, organizations were told by the FBI
not to say anything publicly and the FBI only allowed public
comment on Thursday or Friday last week," he added, according to
the Bank Systems and Technology News.  He said fewer than 2
percent of the MasterCards effected were issued by banks in the
Pacific region, including Australia.

DRDGOLD LIMITED: Shareholders Launch Securities Fraud Lawsuits
DRDGOLD, Limited, the fourth-largest gold producer in South
Africa faces several shareholder class actions in the United
States, The Business Day of South Africa reports.

The suits accuses DRDGOLD of failing to fully inform investors
of the problems it was having with its North West operations,
whose mines were put into provisional liquidation in March after
several quarters of loss making and an earthquake, which damaged
infrastructure. When DRDGOLD published its results for the
December quarter, it revealed that its auditors had been
concerned that the two mines in question, which are near
Klerksdorp, South Africa, might not be able to remain in

According to the company, the class action alleged that DRDGOLD
had made "certain false and misleading statements between
October 23 2003 and February 24 2005."  A suit was initially
filed on June 13, which was followed by two more suits.  The
Company told Business Day that it expects to face three or more
class action lawsuits that are likely to be consolidated and
would proceed as a single case. The suits were filed in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York against
DRDGOLD CE Mark Wellesley-Wood, finance director Ian Murray and
the company itself.

DRDGOLD told Business Day that it denied the claims and believed
the suits to be entirely without merit and intended to
"vigorously defend against the allegations of the lawsuits".

Additionally, Mr. Wellesley-Wood told Business Day that in his
understanding, class actions "are not claimant-led. These are
contingency fee lawyers, who work on a success basis" and adds
that the legal case would provide work for "a gaggle of lawyers"
as more and more people sought a piece of the action. He
stresses though that as the class action's period ended in
February "there is no link to the liquidation of March 23".

"They say that between October 2003 and our results announcement
on February 24, Ian Murray and I lied about the situation at
North West, and we vigorously deny that," he said.

An analyst familiar with the situation pointed out to Business
Day that DRDGOLD would be likely to defend itself by pointing
out that the fortunes of its South African operations were
strongly dependent on the strength of the rand, and it was well
reported that the strong currency was having a devastating
effect on marginal gold miners. DRDGOLD has positioned itself in
South Africa as a marginal miner, and has made an investment
case on that basis.

However, if there is a fall in the value of the rand, the
company's profitability could be expected to surge. Mr.
Wellesley-Wood told Business Day that the more recent value of
gold of R95000/kg meant profits had improved.

EL PASO: NV To Participate in Natural Gas Antitrust Suit Pact
Nevada Attorney General Brian Sandoval and Consumer Advocate
Adriana Escobar Chanos, Chief of the Attorney General's Bureau
of Consumer Protection, announced the distribution of the final
payment from a multi-million dollar settlement reached with El
Paso Corporation earlier this month.

The settlement resolved a lawsuit filed late last year in Clark
County against several energy companies alleging the companies
conspired to fix natural gas prices. This violated the Nevada
Unfair Trade Practices Act.  The lawsuit named several
defendants, including El Paso Corporation, Sempra Energy,
Southern California Gas Company and San Diego Gas and Electric.
It alleged the energy companies engaged in an elaborate
conspiracy to manipulate the supply of natural gas in Southern
Nevada and refrain from competing against each other causing
tremendous price spikes for both natural gas and electricity.

Ms. Escobar-Chanos says the settlement with El Paso allowed
consumers to receive either payment over a 20-year period or an
accelerated payment plan at a discount. El Paso chose to
accelerate payments and has now distributed the final payment to
the State of Nevada.  This method maximizes efficiency and
return for residential ratepayers. In total, Nevada's consumers
have received more than $34 million from this settlement

"Distribution of funds to Southern Nevada's ratepayers will be
in the form of a credit to the deferred energy account balances
of Southern Nevada's utilities," said Ms. Escobar Chanos. "This
method is administratively efficient since it does not require
the issuance of thousands of individual checks and crediting the
deferred energy balances reduces the ongoing carrying costs of
these accounts, resulting in an even greater return to Nevada's
electricity and natural gas ratepayers."

The settlement also requires El Paso to cooperate with other
investigations and actions regarding market manipulation or
other misconduct by energy companies.  Additionally, El Paso
must restructure its pipeline system in order to eliminate an
artificial market constraint that currently contributes to
higher natural gas prices. The restructuring costs are estimated
to total $200 million.

"Redesign of the pipeline system will provide a long term
benefit to Nevada's consumers potentially of greater ultimate
value than the direct cash distributions," Ms. Escobar Chanos

The State Consumer Advocate represents the public interest
before the Public Utilities Commission of Nevada (PUC), federal
utility regulatory agencies, courts and all other forums with
jurisdiction over Nevada public utilities.

For more details, contact Adriana Escobar Chanos by Phone:
(702) 486-3420 or Nicole Moon by Phone: (775) 684-1114 or
(775) 230-3360 (mobile) or by E-mail: njmoon@ag.state.nv.us

FACE NATIONAL: NC AG Cooper Shuts Down Fraudulent Modeling Firm
North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper shut down the
Charlotte-based Face National Models, and ordered it to pay
$135,000 in refunds to customers.

The Company is barred from taking customers' money to provide
them with modeling work and must pay refunds to consumers,
Attorney General Roy Cooper announced in a statement released
June 6,2005.

"This so-called modeling agency was more interested in taking
people's money than in helping them find work," said
Attorney General Cooper. "They told nearly every modeling
hopeful they had `the look' because they were looking to sign up
as many paying clients as possible. Now people have a chance to
get money back."

Under terms of a consent judgment signed by Wake County Superior
Court Judge Donald W. Stephens, Face National Models & Talent of
Charlotte and its managers Jennifer Lynn Gill and Chad E.
Johnson are permanently barred from conducting their modeling
business. The defendants are prohibited from collecting any
money for photography services and offering paid modeling

The Company has also agreed to pay $135,000 in refunds to
consumers in North Carolina and other states. The Attorney
General's office will attempt to contact all of Face's estimated
512 North Carolina customers to give them an opportunity to
claim their refund. Consumers may also contact the office toll-
free at 1-877-5-NO SCAM. Refund claims must be filed with the
Attorney General's office within 60 days. The amount of the
refund will depend on the Traditional modeling agencies make
money by taking commissions from income earned by their models.

The Company made its money by selling photography contracts. As
alleged in the complaint against Face, Ms. Gill and Mr. Johnson
began recruiting models in cities across the country in May
2001.  Through radio and newspaper advertisements, Face invited
modeling hopefuls to attend a screening at a local hotel where
they were asked to demonstrate their runway walk and told that
they would make good models.  When participants called back the
following day, nearly all were told they made the cut, asked to
sign a contract with the Company and scheduled for a photo

The Company charged consumers approximately $600 for the photo
shoot. They promised a high-fashion shoot with experienced
photographers, make-up artists, and hairstylists, but consumers
who filed complaints with the Attorney General's office say that
the actual shoots were disorganized and unprofessional.
Potential models were then told to purchase at least $388 worth
of composite or "comp" cards, photographs of a model in several
different poses, to send to prospective employers.  The actual
cost of producing these comp cards is less than $40.

Attorney General Cooper contends that the Company led consumers
to believe that it would land them traditional modeling jobs in
print and runway work at salaries of $150 per hour. Instead, the
Company signed up approximately 8,000 customers who wanted to be
models and found them less than 800 jobs, generally promotional
work handing out product samples at events for $15 per hour less
the Company's commission. A model doing promotional work at $15
an hour would have to work more than 60 hours to recoup the
almost $1,000 he or she paid the Company for the photography
session and comp cards.

"Instead of looking for the next cover girl, most of these model
search companies are really looking to take your money," said
Attorney General Cooper. "Don't even think about attending a
screening offered by a modeling agency without checking the
company out thoroughly."

For more details, contact Ms. Noelle Talley by Phone:

FLORIDA: Men Launch Federal Privacy Suit V. Reality TV Series
Two central Florida men launched a federal suit seeking class
action status against the producers of the reality TV series
"Trauma: Life in the E.R.," claiming that their privacy rights
were violated when they were filmed while they were being
treated for injuries suffered in motor vehicle accidents, The
Associated Press reports.

Jack Dosch and Angel Marrero told AP that they want their suit
turned into a class action so that others filmed by The Learning
Channel series nationwide could join it. In their suit the men
are claiming that they were commercially exploited when they
were most vulnerable during their treatment at Orlando Regional
Medical Center's emergency room in 2002.  The suit was filed
against the producers, NYT Television, which is owned by The New
York Times Co., The Learning Channel and its owner, Discovery
Communications and the hospital's parent company.

Brandon Peters, the attorney that represents the two men, told
AP, "Americans pay for the greatest health care service in the
world, and they pay a premium. As such, patients deserve to be
treated as dignitaries and not laboratory rats." Mr. Peters also
said that he doesn't question the right to broadcast the
material, but the filming and production process saying, "We
have concerns about the methods employed by the New York Times
(television company) to obtain consent from these people."

Mr. Peters alleges in his clients' that the film crews
misrepresented themselves to patients and wore medical garb to
blend in with nurses and physicians and failed to fully explain
the nature of their work. The suit also alleges that the
companies sold raw video footage to other production companies
and have since marketed a compilation of the most critical

However, David McCraw, an attorney for the New York Times Co.,
told AP that the patients or, if they were incapable, their next
of kin, signed consent forms allowing the videotaping and added
that anyone who refused to sign was not taped.  Mr. McCraw also
added that the Florida suit was filed because a New Jersey state
judge refused to make a similar suit there a national class

In addition, hospital spokesman Joe Brown also told AP that
every Orlando Regional patient who was taped only appeared in
the series after signing consent forms by saying, "My
understanding has always been from the trauma and ER people,
that anybody who came in and who was videoed and was a
participant of the program had to give consent." Mr. Brown said
hospital lawyers have not yet reviewed the suit, but he defended
the work done by the film crews as professional documentarians.
He told AP, "The approach was to provide information about the
workings of a trauma-care center and how it was provided. I
don't think there was any illusion that there was anything other
than that."

The show is no longer in production and such filming would be
difficult today under a law protecting patients' privacy that
came into effect in 2003, the Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act.

GUAM: EITC Suit Parties To Meet For Status Conference Next Week
Parties in the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) class action
filed against the government in Guam are set to appear before
the District Court in Guam on July 5,2005 for a status
conference related to the settlement of the suit, Kuam.com

Julie Santos, represented by attorney Mike Phillips, filed a
class-action lawsuit in February 2004 to force the government to
pay up and to resume yearly payments of the EITC, which was
suspended by the government since 1998.  Last week, the parties
reached a $90 million settlement for the suit, agreeing to pay
the EITC for tax years 1995-2004.  Under that settlement, the
local government would have been required to put aside $20
million to pay 2004 tax credits in full, and will continue to do
so in future years. Taxpayers will not see that money until
after the tax filing season next year, which ends April 15, an
earlier Class Action Reporter story (June 15,2005) states.

Governor Felix Camacho, Attorney Mike Phillips (who represents
Julie Babauta Santos and the class), along with the attorneys
for the department of Revenue & Taxation and the Department of
Administration signed the agreement earlier this week.  Attorney
General Douglas Moylan has indicated he opposes the settlement
agreement, believing the district court judge has already ruled
the Government of Guam owes 100% EITC to eligible residents.

HILB ROGAL: Shareholders Launch Securities Lawsuits in E.D. VA
Hilb Rogal & Hobbs Co. and certain of its present and former
executive officers face several purported shareholder class
action lawsuits filed in the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of Virginia, on behalf of purchasers of the
Company's common stock from February 14,2002 to May 26,2005.

Specifically, the complaints alleges that defendants violated
the federal securities laws by issuing a series of false and
misleading statements in its quarterly and annual filings with
the Securities and Exchange Commission.  Plaintiff specifically
alleges that defendants violated the federal securities laws by
failing to disclose that:

     (1) the Company was paying or receiving the equivalent of
         kickbacks when placing its clients' insurance business;

     (2) the Company's contingent and override commissions were
         designed to steer its business to insurance carriers
         who provided kickbacks;

     (3) the Company's business practices were against the
         interests of its clients, were fraudulent and illegal,
         and could potentially result in civil and/or criminal
         liability; and

     (4) a substantial portion of the Company's revenues were
         derived from kickbacks and improper commissions, making
         the Company's financial statements substantially
         inflated throughout the Class Period.

The complaints further allege that on or around May 26, 2005,
the Company announced that its Chief Operating Officer had
resigned following an internal review of business practices.
This review discovered that the Company made improper payments
out of Hilb Rogal's Hartford offices related to the placement of
insurance policies. In reaction to this revelation, Hilb Rogal's
share price fell $4.51 on May 27, 2005, down nearly 12 percent
from its prior closing price, thereby damaging plaintiff and the

The first identified class action in the litigation is styled
"Iron Workers Local 16 Pension Fund, et al. v. Hilb Rogal &
Hobbs Co., et al., case no. 05-CV-735," filed in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.  The
plaintiff firms in this litigation are:

     (1) Charles J. Piven, World Trade Center-Baltimore,401 East
         Pratt Suite 2525, Baltimore, MD, 21202, Phone:
         410.332.0030, E-mail: pivenlaw@erols.com;

     (2) Finkelstein, Thompson & Loughran, 1050 30th Street, NW,
         Washington, DC, 20007, Phone: 202.337.8000, Fax:
         202.337.8090, E-mail: contact@ftllaw.com

     (3) Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP, 100 Park
         Avenue, New York, NY, 10017, Phone: 212.907.0700, Fax:
         212.818.0477, E-mail: info@glrslaw.com

     (4) Schatz & Nobel, P.C., 330 Main Street, Hartford, CT,
         06106, Phone: 800.797.5499, Fax: 860.493.6290, E-mail:

HONESTY LLC: Former Owner To Settle MO AG Consumer Fraud Lawsuit
The former owner of a Branson travel club that allegedly made
unrealistic promises and employed high-pressure sales tactics to
sell memberships will pay $42,544 in restitution and reimburse
the state $5,000 in attorney's fees in an agreement with
Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon.

In a consent judgment filed in Taney County Circuit Court, Gary
Snadon of Branson agreed to pay restitution to 14 individuals
who purchased memberships in Travel Service Network, which were
sold by Honesty LLC.  As part of the judgment, Mr. Snadon can no
longer do business in any capacity with Honesty LLC or do
business under that name.

"When consumers make a purchase, they have the right to get what
they paid for and if not, they deserve a refund," Attorney
General Nixon said. "Through this agreement, 14 individuals will
get money back in their pockets, and we have sent a clear
message that we are serious about enforcing Missouri's consumer
protection laws."

Starting in July 2001, Honesty LLC allegedly sold memberships in
a travel club for fees that ranged from $750 to $6,500, plus a
$159 annual renewal fee. According to the lawsuit Mr. Nixon
filed in July 2004, the company misrepresented to consumers the
nature of the travel club's relationship with various airlines,
hotels, cruise lines, auto rental companies and other travel
related services.

The lawsuit also alleged that Honesty LLC falsely promised to
consumers that as members of Travel Service Network they could
obtain discounted rates on travel services, including cruises,
hotels, rental cares and airfares, and further alleged that the
company employed high pressure sales tactics to induce consumers
to purchase such memberships.

The judgment involves Mr. Snadon only, and not Honesty LLC. Mr.
Snadon gave up his ownership interest in the company in
September 2001.

For more details, contact Press Secretary Jim Gardner by Phone:
573-751-8844 by Fax: 573-751-5818 or by E-mail:

HYTRIN LITIGATION: ME Consumers To Get Share in Antitrust Pact
Consumers who purchased the brand-name prescription medication
Hytrin are eligible for refunds from a $30.7-million settlement
agreement, Maine Attorney General Steven Rowe announced in a
statement published June 3,2005.  The refunds to consumers and
health plans in 18 states will be paid by two companies which,
the complaint alleged, conspired to engage in anticompetitive
conduct that delayed the availability of a more affordable
generic version of the medication.

Hytrin, which is used in the treatment of hypertension and
enlarged prostate, is manufactured by Abbott Laboratories, and
the generic version (called "terazosin") is produced by Geneva
Pharmaceuticals. According to a federal lawsuit, Abbott
wrongfully paid Geneva to delay introduction of its generic
version of Hytrin and took other steps to delay competition from
lower-priced generic versions of its product. This illegal
activity harmed consumers.

Under the settlement agreement, which is still subject to final
court approval, Abbott and Geneva would provide $28.7 million
for consumers and health plans in Maine and 17 other states. The
most direct way for consumers to obtain claims forms is through
the settlement website, http://www.terazosinlitigation.com.
Claims forms must be mailed to the settlement administrator no
later than July 15, 2005.

The settlement will benefit consumers who purchased terazosin
products between October 15, 1995, and March 7, 2005, and
amounts of refunds will depend on how many consumers file claims
against the settlement fund. The settlement applies to consumers
and health plans in Alabama, California, Florida, Illinois,
Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, New
Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota,
Tennessee, West Virginia and Wisconsin.

Between 1999 and 2001, a number of consumers filed lawsuits
against Abbott and Geneva. The cases were consolidated into a
single lawsuit in federal court in the Southern District of
Florida. After conducting their own investigations, the states
of Florida, Kansas and Colorado filed their own lawsuit in the
same court. The settlement establishes a separate $2 million
fund to reimburse state agency claims and litigation costs
incurred by Florida, Kansas and Colorado.

Consumers may obtain a claims form from the settlement website:
http://www.terazosinlitigation.com;by Phone: 1-877-886-0283; or
by Mail: In re Terazosin Hydrochloride Antitrust Litigation, c/o
Complete Claim Solutions, Inc., P.O. Box 24607, West Palm Beach,
FL 33416.  For more information, contact Christina Moylan,
Assistant Attorney General by Phone: 207-626-8838 or visit the
Website: http://www.state.me.us/ag/

IGA MANAGEMENT: ME AG Warns Residents V. Canadian Lottery Scam
Professional con artists are using the pretense of a Canadian
lottery to bilk Mainers out of thousands of dollars, with a new
twist: they send a cashiers check, state Attorney General Steven
Rowe warned residents in a statement.

"IGA Management Payment Systems," which claims to do business
from Ottawa, is mailing letters to Maine residents announcing
that they have won the "North American Prize Pool."  Recipients
of the letter are told that they have won over three hundred
thousand dollars in cash.  Recipients are told that before the
winnings can be sent to them, they must pay a certain amount for
"taxes and charges."  An authentic looking four thousand dollar
"cashier's check" that appears to be drawn on a Texas bank is
enclosed with an explanation that it is being sent to help the
recipient pay for the "taxes and charges."  The recipient is
encouraged to "keep this award from public notice" and to call a
"lottery claim agent" at an Ottawa phone number to "finalize the
payment process."  If the recipient calls, he/she is asked to
provide identifying information and to provide his/her bank
account and routing information so that the alleged "lottery
winnings" can be deposited.  The recipient is then instructed to
deposit the check in his/her bank account and to wire transfer
the remaining several thousand dollars in "taxes and charges" to
IGA.  Of course, the four thousand dollar check is worthless,
but that news often comes only after recipients have disclosed
their bank account information and may have sent money to IGA.

Canadian law enforcement officials have received 45 complaints
against IGA Management between April 15, 2005 and June 6, 2005.
Of these 45 complaints received, 4 are victims with a total loss
of $15,503.  Canadian authorities also received 65 complaints
about North American Prize Pool between May 3, 2000, and June 3,
2005.  Of these 65, 13 are actual victims with a total dollar
loss of $36,041.

The Attorney General also recently learned of an identical scam
operating out of Vancouver, British Columbia using the name
Coral Management Payment Systems using fake checks that appear
to be drawn on a Texas bank as well.

"If you receive a mailing advising you that you have won a
lottery prize but that you must pay a fee or disclose personal
financial information such as bank account information before
collecting the prize, don't be fooled," warned Attorney General
Rowe.  "The letter and enclosed check may look real, but they
are not.  They are a sham, pure and simple.  My advice is to
throw them away."

If you or someone you know has fallen victim to this scheme,
contact the Maine Office of the Attorney General by Phone:
1-800-436-2131 or by E-mail: www.consumer.mediation@maine.gov.
You can also contact Canadian authorities by Phone:
1-888-495-8501 or by E-mail: info@phonebusters.com.

INTEGRITY INVESTMENT: NC AG Files Suit To Stop Real Estate Fraud
A real estate operation that used a complicated land trust
scheme to deceive home sellers and buyers has been ordered to
stop doing business, Attorney General Roy Cooper announced in a
statement dated June 17,2005.

"Integrity failed to live up to its name by misleading its
customers at every turn," said Attorney General Cooper. "The
company and its owner led homeowners to the brink of foreclosure
rather than helping them sell their homes quickly as promised."

Wake County Superior Court Judge Kenneth Titus agreed with
Attorney General Cooper and the North Carolina Real Estate
Commission's request to temporarily stop Integrity Investment
Properties, LLC of Wake County also known as Mi Casa, LLC and
its manager Steven D. Gray from doing business while Cooper's
case against the company goes forward.  The Attorney General
filed the suit against the Company for unfair and deceptive
trade practices and operating as a real estate broker without a
license. He is asking the court to permanently stop the
Company's illegal real estate business and order it to cancel
all contracts with consumers and pay them refunds.

According to the complaint, Mr. Gray incorporated Integrity in
March of 2002 and began pitching the company's real estate
services online, in local newspapers and on Spanish-language
radio stations in July of that year.  Advertisements claimed
that the company could help buyers purchase a home in twenty-
four hours without credit, a mortgage application or even going
to the bank.  The Company also sent letters to homeowners who
were trying to sell their homes claiming to be a real estate
investment company interested in buying homes in the Triangle

Attorney General Cooper alleges that rather than buying and
selling homes legally, the Company ran an elaborate scheme
through which it placed the title to homes in a trust and then
leased the homes while leaving the actual owners responsible for
the existing mortgage.  The Company leased the homes to people
who wanted to purchase them, collecting large "down payments"
and requiring tenants to secure financing to buy the home within
three years or forfeit all payments they had made.  Because the
Company priced the homes above their actual market value, it was
highly unlikely that any tenant would be able to find the
financing needed to actually purchase one of the homes.
Although the Company promised to pay the mortgages on homes it
"bought" from sellers, it never assumed responsibility for the
mortgages and sometimes failed to make payments, putting
homeowners at risk of foreclosure.

According to one typical homeowner's story, the Company promised
to purchase her home and make payments on the mortgage until
they found a buyer for her house.  The Company claimed that it
would take only a few months to sell the home and that she would
be able to go ahead with the purchase of a new home.  However,
she was unable to get a loan for a new home because despite the
Company's claim to the contrary, she remained responsible for
the mortgage on her old home.  The Company leased her home and
collected rent from the tenant but sometimes failed to use the
money to make timely payments on her mortgage, placing the
homeowner in jeopardy of losing her home to foreclosure.

A total of 16 consumers complained to Attorney General Cooper's
office about Integrity's practices. Other consumers who wish to
file a complaint about the Company can contact the Attorney
General's Consumer Protection Division by Phone:

A bill that would provide additional safeguards for homeowners
who wish to sell their homes through real estate resale dealers
is currently pending in the North Carolina General Assembly. The
measure, House Bill 725 sponsored by Representative Deborah
Ross, would require resale dealers to make disclosures to
customers and obtain a bond that could be used to pay refunds if

"A home is the most important purchase most people will ever
make," said Attorney General Cooper. "If you're in the market to
buy or sell your home, watch out for companies whose claims
sound too good to be true."

For more details, contact Noelle Talley by Phone: 919/716-6413.

LA DOVA: MD AG Issues Cease-And-Desist Order V. 2 Homebuilders
Maryland Attorney General J. Joseph Curran, Jr.'s Consumer
Protection Division issued a cease and desist order requiring
two related home builders and their principals to pay $140,203
in restitution for taking deposits and payments from consumers,
failing to complete construction or refund the payments, and
misusing a home builder registration number.

According to charges filed by the Division, LaDova Heights, LLC
and Rehco Company, Inc. of Bethesda, Maryland are owned by
Robert Hahn and David Hahn.  The Division's order found that
LaDova Heights, LLC, an unregistered builder, entered into
contracts with consumers to construct homes in Prince George's
County, accepted payments from those consumers, and promised to
complete the homes.  To date, however, LaDova Heights, LLC has
not completed the homes or refunded the monies paid. The charges
further allege that LaDova Heights used the registration number
of Rehco Company, Inc. in its contracts with consumers.

The Division found that LaDova Heights, LLC violated the
Maryland New Home Deposits Act by failing to place deposits and
payments into an escrow account or having a surety bond to cover
the deposit, and violated the Home Builder Registration Act by
acting as a new home builder while not registered as required by
law and by fraudulently using the registration number of another
builder. The Division also found that Rehco Company, Inc.
fraudulently allowed its registration number to be used.

"Under Maryland law, home builders must be registered before
they can enter into contracts to build homes for consumers, and
they must protect a customer's deposit until the house is
completed or they refund the deposit," said Attorney General
Curran.  He urged consumers to check with the Home Builder
Registration Unit of his office before putting down a deposit on
a home.

The Division's ex parte cease and desist order immediately bars
LaDova Heights, LLC, Rehco Company, Inc., Robert Hahn, and David
Hahn from acting or offering to act as a home builder in the
State of Maryland, and orders them to pay restitution and costs.
At a hearing in August, the Division will ask for an order
requiring LaDova Heights, LLC, Rehco Company, Inc., and their
principals, Robert Hahn and David Hahn to pay a $1,000 civil
penalty per day of unlawful practice.

The public hearing on the charges will be held at the Maryland
Office of Administrative Hearings, 11101 Gilroy Road, Hunt
Valley, Md., on August 26, 2005. Consumers who may have had
problems with LaDova Heights, LLC, Rehco Company, Inc., Robert
Hahn, or David Hahn should call the Home Builder Registration
Unit immediately: (410) 576-6573 or toll-free 1-877-259-4525.

NEW JERSEY: AG Harvey Files Consumer Fraud Suit V. 3 Contractors
New Jersey Attorney General Peter C. Harvey filed a lawsuit
against three Union County home improvement contracting
companies alleging they engaged in multiple violations of New
Jersey's home improvement regulations, during the course of
advertising, selling and performing home remodeling services, on
June 7,2005.

New Jersey's six-count complaint, filed in Union County Superior
Court by Attorney General Harvey and New Jersey Division of
Consumer Affairs Acting Director Kimberly Ricketts, names as

     (1) State Remodeling, Inc. (d/b/a/ The Window Factory,

     (2) the Window Factory of New Jersey and
         www.stateremodeling.com and United Remodeling Group,
         Inc., both of Union, and

     (3) Neighborhood Preservation Program, Inc., of Rahway

The defendants advertise and offer home improvement services,
such as siding installation, window replacement and roof repair,
through various media including telemarketing, direct mail and
Web site listings. Each company has either conducted business
from or maintains a business address at 95 Progress St., Union.

"For most people, home ownership is the biggest investment they
will make in their lifetime," Attorney General Harvey said. "New
Jersey residents invest large sums in home improvements, and
they are entitled to nothing short of a fair and honest deal. We
will continue to enforce our consumer protection laws by
bringing actions against unscrupulous contractors who take money
from homeowners but don't perform the work they promise."

"More than 3,400 homeowners complained to Consumer Affairs last
year about problems they were having with home improvement
contractors, making this the No. 1 area of complaints for
consumers," Ms. Ricketts said. "When a homeowner hires a
contractor to do work around the house, there's a great deal of
trust on the part of the consumer that the contractor will do
what he or she has been hired to do. When contractors fail to
make good on their promises and cheat the consumer, they've not
only violated the consumer's trust, they've also broken the

The suit alleges that in addition to violating the State's
Consumer Fraud Act and home improvement regulations, the
defendants violated the New Jersey Do Not Call Law by making
unsolicited residential telemarketing calls to New Jersey
consumers without being registered with Consumer Affairs and by
calling people whose telephone numbers are included on the
federal Do Not Call registry.

The suit also alleges that the defendants, among other things:

     (i) misrepresented in home improvement contracts that it is
         the consumer's responsibility to notify the defendants
         if work has not been started and/or completed within
         the time period specified in the home improvement

    (ii) failed to begin or complete work on the date or within
         the time period specified in the home improvement

   (iii) failed to honor warranties on labor services as
         provided in the consumers' home improvement contracts;

    (iv) failed to honor a three-day right of recission, as
         provided in the consumers' home improvement contracts;

     (v) failed to provide consumers with refunds for work that
         was never started and/or completed;

The suit alleges that the defendants operated under the name
Neighborhood Preservation Program, Inc., and forwarded flyers to
consumers that contained statements implying that they were a
branch of or affiliated with the New Jersey Department of
Community Affairs' Division of Housing and Community Resources,
which administers the Neighborhood Preservation Program. The
Division of Housing and Community Resources' program provides
grants to eligible municipalities which, in turn, provide
financial assistance to communities and homeowners for home
improvement and preservation projects. The defendants are not
authorized by the Division of Housing and Community Resources to
reference the Neighborhood Preservation Program in any of their

Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Armstrong of the Division of
Law is handling this case for the State.  For more details,
contact Genene Morris or Jeff Lamm by Phone: 973-504-6327.

QWEST COMMUNICATIONS: Settles U.S. West Shareholders' Suit in NY
Qwest Communications International Inc. agreed to a $50 million
settlement for a class action lawsuit that accuses it of
improperly avoiding the payment of $273 million quarterly
dividend to investors who held shares of U.S. West before the
companies merged in 2000, The Sioux Falls Argus Leader reports.

According to court records, Denver District Judge John Coughlin
approved a preliminary agreement last week and scheduled a final
settlement conference on August 30.

Spokesman Bob Toevs told the Leader that Qwest denies the
allegations but agreed to settle to avoid the possibility of a
large verdict and to avoid spending more money in defending the
case. He added, "We believe that Qwest's conduct and the conduct
of the others involved in this case was legal and in the best
interests of shareholders."

Court documents show that in 2000, New York City shareholder
Adele Brody sued Qwest claiming that U.S. West had said in a
June 5, 2000, announcement that shareholders of record as of
June 30, 2000, would receive a dividend of 53.5 cents per share.
Two days later, the company said the dividend would be payable
to shareholders of record as of July 10 - after the merger - and
Qwest planned to slash the dividend to 5 cents per share, the
lawsuit said.

U.S. West stockholders as of the June 30, 2000, merger date will
receive portions of about two-thirds of the $50 million

SECOND CHANCE: AZ AG Urges State Law Enforcement To Replace Vest
Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard urged Arizona Law
Enforcement Officials to replace their bullet-proof vests
manufactured by Second Chance Body Armor, Inc. following the
company's announcement declaring Zylon, the material used to
make the vests, unsafe.

The Company issued "Safety Notices" this week concerning three
of the body armor vests it manufactured. Second Chance advised
customers that "due to a potential for serious personal injury
or death" it is recommended that they take "immediate steps to
replace" the products. The products are: All Tri-Flex vests and
all Ultima and the Ultimax vests, including those with Second
Chance "Performance Pacs."

"This announcement confirms what we have been saying about the
safety of these vests for the last year and a half," Attorney
General Goddard said.  "Peoples' lives are at stake. Arizona
officers wearing any Second Chance vests containing Zylon are in
danger. My concern at this time is ensuring that all law
enforcement officers replace these vests as soon as possible."

The Attorney General's office filed a consumer fraud lawsuit
against the Company in January 2004 based on its advertisement
and sale of bullet-resistant vests made with a "Zylon" fiber,
including the Ultima, the Ultimax, and the Tri-Flex vests. The
lawsuit alleges that the Company defrauded consumers by failing
to disclose that the Zylon fibers used in the manufacturing of
the vests may degrade prematurely and not provide the warranted
level of protection.

The Company stopped selling the Ultima and Ultimax vests in
September 2003, but failed to provide officers with a viable
replacement of the vests. The Company offered officers the
option to purchase a non-Zylon insert to the Ultima and Ultimax
vests called a Performance Pac, but failed to offer any
replacement options for officers who purchased TriFlex vests.
Yesterday's announcement included warnings about the TriFlex
vests and the Performance Pac inserts.

"Some officers may still be using these vests based on
assurances made by the Company that they were safe," Attorney
General Goddard said. "We are lucky there hasn't been a loss of
life, and it is important that these vests are replaced as soon
as possible to ensure officer safety."

SOUTH CAROLINA: Workers Launch Suit Over Retirement Plan Changes
Four state employees of the Teacher and Employee Retention
Incentive, or TERI program initiated a lawsuit seeking class
action status claiming changes approved this year to South
Carolina's retirement system shortchange them of pay, The
Associated Press reports.

The TERI program allows employees to return to work after
retirement and earn both pension benefits and a salary without
contributing to the retirement system.  Under the new law, which
is being disputed by the plaintiffs, workers will be required to
chip in 6.25 percent of their paycheck starting Friday.

The workers filed the suit on June 13 alleging the state broke
its contract with TERI workers and have asked a judge to
temporarily stop the state from deducting the money from their
paychecks. In their suit, which could potentially include 13,670
TERI workers, the plaintiffs claim that requiring them to pay
into the system but denying the credit for extra service, which
would increase their pension, is like a sudden pay cut.

Cam Lewis, an attorney for the workers, told AP, "It's like the
government is raising money by calling it something other than a
tax. It's taking their (TERI workers) money."

However, Bobby Stepp, the state's attorney in the lawsuit, told
AP that the state must have some leeway to make its retirement
system financially sound for its 89,000 current and 181,000
future retirees. He also pointed out, "I certainly understand
the point of view of the TERI employees, but the general issue
is broader than that. It involves the actuarial stability of the
entire retirement system."

Dick Harpootlian, who is also representing the workers, said the
issue is whether the change is legal. "A deal is a deal," he
told AP.

Nancy Layman, 63, an attorney for the Department of Health and
Environmental Control, told AP that she would lose about $4,200
in pay in the next year, if the changes push through. She earned
$67,560 last year before retiring in May after 28 years. She
also pointed out, "That was one of the inducements to sign -
that they would no longer be taking the 6 percent out because,
in effect, I was retired."

According to Rep. Herb Kirsh, D-Clover, who helped change the
TERI law this year, the change will bring in an extra $45
million to support the retirement system. He adds that the
system needs more money fast or it may not meet 30-year federal
guidelines for solvency. Besides, Mr. Kirsh told AP, the TERI
workers would get benefits for the cash they'll pay into the
system, a life insurance policy and cost-of-living increases in
their pension. He also pointed out that the state would not have
been able to pay a 3.4 percent cost-of-living adjustment to
63,000 state employees without the changes to the TERI program.

TARGET CORPORATION: Recalls 230,000 Candles Due to Fire Hazard
In cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
(CPSC), Target Corp., Minneapolis, Minnesota is voluntarily
recalling about 230,000 units of Birch and Bark Candles.

The birch and bark surrounding the candles can ignite, posing a
fire and burn hazard. There have been 18 reports of the birch
and bark candles catching fire and five reports of property
damage. No injuries have been reported.

The recalled candles were sold individually wrapped in a ribbon
on a plate. The candles are cream in color and were sold in
sizes 3-by-3 inches, 3-by-6 inches, 4-by-6 inches and 6-by-6

Manufactured in China, the candles were sold at all Target
stores nationwide from September 2004 through January 2005
between $6 and $15.

Consumers should return the candles to the nearest Target store
to receive a gift card from Target in the amount of $15, plus
applicable state taxes.

Consumer Contact: For additional information, contact Target at
(800) 440-0680 between 8 a.m. and 7 p.m. ET Monday through
Friday, or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.target.com.

TE MORTGAGE: MO AG Gets Court Order For No-Call Law Violations
Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon obtained a temporary
restraining order against a Springfield-based mortgage services
company for allegedly calling Missouri residents who have
registered for the state No Call list.

The lawsuit, filed in the City of St. Louis Circuit Court,
alleges that TE Mortgage Corporation, 1540 W. Battlefield,
formerly known as Liberty Financial, has made at least 300
telemarketing calls soliciting the sale of mortgage services to
households on the state's No Call list.  In issuing the
restraining order, the court ordered the Company to refrain from
calling residential telephone numbers on the list, and the
company is prohibited from blocking phone numbers from
residential caller identification systems.

"For more than four years, Missouri has been at the forefront in
protecting the privacy of residents that do not want to be
annoyed by telemarketing calls," Attorney General Nixon said.
"Our aggressive enforcement efforts have made that possible, and
we will continue to enforce No Call to the fullest extent of the

The lawsuit names TE Mortgage and its president, Terry E.
Elliott of Ozark, as defendants.  Attorney General Nixon is
asking the court to order the Company to pay civil penalties of
up to $5,000 per call, plus attorney's fees and all court costs.

Missouri residents not yet on the list can have their numbers
included or can file a complaint regarding a No Call violation
via the Attorney General's Web site: http://www.ago.state.mo.us
or by Phone: 1-866-NOCALL1.

TELECOMMUNICATIONS FIRMS: Three Groups Oppose Big Telco Mergers
Three consumer groups asked the Department of Justice (DOJ)
Antitrust Division and the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) to reject the merger applications of SBC/AT&T and
Verizon/MCI, calling both deals irreparably anti-competitive and
harmful to consumers, ConsumerAffairs.com reports.

The Consumers Union (CU), the U.S. Public Interest Research
Group (U.S. PIRG) and the Consumer Federation of America said
that specifice, effective and enforceable merger conditions
could not be devised.  The groups based their argument on a
detailed analysis of the merger applications that the groups
simultaneously submitted to both agencies, titled "Broken
Promises and Stifled Competition: The Record of Baby Bell
Mergers and Market Opening Behavior."

"We urge regulators to consider both merger applications in the
context of these companies' documented track record of flagrant
disregard of their own promises to compete, as well as their
consistent self-serving, contradictory statements as to the
existence of competition in the industry," said Janee
Briesemeister, CU Senior Policy Analyst, in a statement.

"While we do suggest some actions the Federal Communications
Commission and the Department of Justice can take to blunt the
mergers' harmful impact on consumers and markets, we emphasize
that the record of misleading actions and broken promises to
regulators established by these companies bodes poorly for their
future compliance with FCC and/or DOJ regulations. These deals
present so many complex problems that enforcement of any merger
conditions seems impossible," Ms. Briesemeister said.

Mark Cooper, CFA Director of Research noted that, should the
mergers be approved, the newly formed telecommunications giants
will attain about a 90 percent market share in residential local
wireline, 70 percent in long distance, and 40-50 percent in
wireless, ConsumerAffairs.com reports.  "After a decade of
market opening, the two firms being acquired account for three-
quarters of the competition in telephone markets. These are
mergers between the number one and a number two or three sellers
of retail local and long distance, residential and business
service, as well as wholesale switching, transport and Internet
backbone services," Mr. Cooper said.

As a result, he concluded, "The remaining competitors would be
minuscule in comparison, lacking the size and geographic reach
to provide a competitive check on the two dominant firms. If
approved, these mergers will destroy the already feeble
competition for telecom facilities that are necessary to provide
a wide range of services, including access to the high-speed

"The FCC and the DOJ cannot bury their heads in the sand and
ignore the destructive impact these simultaneous mergers would
have on an already highly concentrated industry," asserted Ed
Mierzwinski, U.S. PIRG Consumer Program Director, Consumer
Affairs.com reports.  "The merging parties offer regulators
highly selective data purporting to show that telecommunications
markets are competitive. However, the finding that local markets
are open to competition was based on the survival of competitors
that the merging companies have now swallowed up. In addition to
profiting from an already highly concentrated marketplace, these
phone companies make matters worse by employing an anti-
competitive `bundling' tactic to ensure that Voice Over Internet
Protocol (VoIP), offered by smaller competitors, can never
effectively compete with their basic local voice services."

"Should regulators somehow decide that the mergers could produce
public benefits, they must act aggressively to repair the
competitive damage that they would do to an already uneven
playing field," argued Attorney General Cooper. "They must
require the divestiture of all overlapping in-region assets of
the acquired companies, and impose rigorous, specific conditions
of non-discrimination for access to vertically integrated, in-
region assets."

"Any promises by these companies to adhere to such regulations
would, however, be highly suspect," said Ms. Briesemeister.
"These corporations have consistently flip-flopped to support
their immediate goals. The track record of the baby Bells since
the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 shows a
persistent pattern of bad acts, broken promises and a failure to
compete. There are only so many times the Bells may be allowed
to cry wolf."

Recently, Verizon was citing AT&T and MCI as vigorous
competitors because that supported their arguments for
deregulation. As Ivan Seidenberg, CEO of Verizon, put it in
October 2004, "My view is we are both serving lots of overlap in
the same market."  Now, Verizon says the opposite: "The
combination of Verizon's and MCI's complementary assets and
expertise will strongly promote the public interest. At the
level of network assets, the two companies are an almost perfect

Arguing to eliminate the availability of unbundled network
elements for enterprise customers, SBC has declared, "It is
difficult to see how the Commission could find any [competitive]
impairment at all - for any customers, anywhere, at any capacity
- without access to ILEC dedicated transport and high-capacity
loops or subloops, including dark fiber."

Now, seeking to acquire the largest, unaffiliated supplier of
such services, SBC changes its tune: "We have come to realize
that acquisition of a firm that has the strengths and resources
we lack is far more prudent than incurring the massive
investment and time that would be required to develop them

TRIBUNE COMPANY: IL Securities Suit Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set
The law firm of Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP, representing the
shareholders of Tribune Company, announced on June 16, 2005 that
there are 15 days remaining to move to be a lead plaintiff in
the shareholder lawsuit. All persons and institutions who
purchased securities of Tribune Company ("Tribune" or the
"Company") (NYSE:TRB) between January 24, 2002 and July 15,
2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"), may move the Court not
later than July 1, 2005, to serve as lead plaintiff.

The Complaint, filed in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois, charges Tribune and certain of
the Company's executive officers with violations of federal
securities laws. Tribune, a media company, conducts operations
in television, publishing, radio stations and interactive
ventures. The Complaint alleges that defendants intentionally
overstated the circulation of several Tribune publications,
including Newsday and the Spanish-language publication Hoy, in
order to fraudulently extract higher incentive payments from the
papers' advertisers. These fraudulently inflated circulation
numbers were reported to investors and the market on a regular
basis, and the wrongfully obtained proceeds based on these
circulation figures artificially inflated Tribune's financial

The Complaint alleges defendants failed to disclose material
adverse facts, including that:

     (1) since at least fiscal 2001, defendants were inflating
         the circulation of Hoy and Newsday;

     (2) as a result, the Company's financial results during the
         Class Period were artificially inflated and its
         liabilities were understated;

     (3) the Company's revenue and income were overstated by
         millions of dollars;

     (4) defendants had knowingly established extremely weak
         circulation controls which allowed for the circulation
         overstatements; and

     (5) as a result of the above, defendants' ability to
         continue to achieve future earnings-per-share and
         revenue growth would be severely threatened, and would
         and did result in $95 million in costs, fines, refunds
         and investigation expenditures.

In June 2004 Tribune reported that NewsDay and Hoy had inflated
circulation figures since 2001. Tribune also came under
increased scrutiny by the Audit Bureau of Circulations, a non-
profit, private entity which monitors the accuracy of
circulation numbers for publications nationwide. As a result of
this increasing pressure, Tribune finally admitted on July 15,
2004, that its reported circulation numbers for Hoy and Newsday
were overstated. Tribune eventually announced it was conducting
an internal investigation and that it may refund to advertisers
all amounts they had been overcharged.

On June 15, 2005, The Wall Street Journal reported that three
former executives at Tribune newspapers -- Edward Smith, Robert
Garcia and Richard Czark -- were arrested June 14 for their
alleged involvement in circulation schemes to get advertisers to
pay millions of dollars in inflated fees at Newsday and Hoy. All
three were charged with conspiracy to commit fraud, according to
a Justice Department spokesman.

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

UNITED KINGDOM: Railtrack Shareholders' Lawsuit to be Heard Soon
United Kingdom's largest ever class action trial is set to start
soon as approximately 50,000 shareholders of collapsed rail
operator Railtrack take a $287 million (157 million) claim
against the government to court, The Scotsman reports.

According to individuals familiar with the matter, a former
Cabinet minister and other senior government figures will be
called as witnesses during the four-week High Court trial, which
will determine whether shareholders should be compensated for
Railtrack's slide into administration in 2001. If the
shareholders win, a second trial to determine damages could take
up to a year.

As previously reported in the April 22, 2005 edition of the
Class Action Reporter, the class action was on the brink of
collapse after a high court ruling, which left the group facing
an estimated $1.73 million (900,000) shortfall in funds.  The
case suffered what could be a fatal blow when a judge ruled that
shareholders must pay about $4.32 million (2.25 million) into
court to cover the government's costs in the event of their

Leaders of the Railtrack private shareholders' action group
admitted that they had insufficient money and that the decision
was likely to mean the end of their three-year battle unless a
"white knight" offered cash to top up their coffers.

The shareholders had accused former transport secretary Stephen
Byers of misfeasance in public office over his controversial
move in putting Railtrack into administration in 2001. They
insist that the firm was solvent and that his actions amounted
to renationalization without full compensation.

The shareholders, many of them pensioners with small
shareholdings, are accusing the government of "misfeasance of
justice", a little-used claim which suggests the accused acted
within in the law but in bad faith. Essentially, the
shareholders are suing the government for the difference between
the average price of Railtrack shares and what they were offered
when the government bought the business to pass on to Network

The case was brought in the name of a single shareholder,
Geoffrey Weir, who said: "This is a very disappointing outcome
and it could be the end of our claim." Mr. Weir also said that
the judge's ruling made it difficult for any group of citizens
to challenge the government, as the amount needed to cover a
possible defeat was out of reach.

A middle-ranking Railtrack executive, Andrew Chalklen, who urged
shareholders to donate 10p for every share they held, formed the
action group. It recruited law firm Edwin Coe and a leading
barrister, Michael Crystal QC.

According to advisers of the group, it's fighting fund peaked at
$4.61 million (2.4 million) but it has already spent $384,000
(200,000), and if it gives up it will be liable for the
government's costs to date of $2.88 million (1.5 million). The
advisers also said that unless a benefactor came forward, all
55,000 supporters would have to donate between 40 and 50 to
proceed to a full hearing.

Though the Department for Transport declined to comment, it
previously defended Mr. Byers' actions by pointing out that
shareholders ended up with a cash settlement of 250p a share -
not far short of the 280p at which the company was put into
administration.   However, in spite of the setbacks the case has
pushed through and to date, Mr. Byers is scheduled to appear
next month on behalf of the government.

The government forced Railtrack out of business in October 2001
by withdrawing funding after a fatal crash in 2000 at Hatfield.
State-backed Network Rail has since replaced Railtrack.

UNUM LIFE: To Pay $1.3 Mil To Settle MA AG Consumer Fraud Suit
A major life insurance company and insurance consulting firm
will pay $1.3 million to resolve allegations that the insurer
brokered a lucrative deal involving hundreds of thousands of
dollars in undisclosed commissions in violation of contracts
with the state, Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly
announced in a statement dated June 13,2005.

The excessive incentives, Attorney General Reilly said, were in
clear violation of the Group Insurance Commission's "no
commissions" policy put in place to protect against financial
conflicts of interest that can drive up costs for the

The complaint and settlements, filed in Suffolk Superior Court,
name O'Neill, Finnegan & Jordan (OFJ), a Boston insurance
brokerage firm hired by the GIC in 2000 to help select a life
insurance carrier, and Unum Life Insurance Company, the company
ultimately chosen to provide group term life insurance to state
employees and retirees.  O'Neill, Finnegan & Jordan was then
part of Hobbs Group, LLC, which has since been acquired by Hilb,
Rogal & Hobbs (HRH), a national insurance broker based in Glen
Allen, Virginia.  Unum Life is part of UnumProvident
Corporation, a Tennessee-based insurance company.

"This case highlights the inherent conflict of interest when a
consultant or broker takes money from insurers for placing
business with them, and never reveals the financial incentives
that they stand to gain," Attorney General Reilly said. "In this
case, the GIC paid a fee for objective advice, and sought to
protect itself by prohibiting these payments, yet these
companies ignored the contract, and placed their own interests
before their obligations to the state."

Recent enforcement actions against national brokers such as
Marsh & McClennan have brought the issue of contingent
commissions to the forefront, raising concerns about conflicts
between the best interests of brokers and their clients.
According to the complaint, the transactions between Unum and
OFJ highlight that conflict of interest, and just how lucrative
the contingent commission arrangements can be.  Although OFJ's
total consulting fee from GIC was $59,885, the placement of
GIC's business with Unum could have resulted in more than $1
million in commissions under the deal between Unum and OFJ,
according to the complaint, if the GIC had not discovered the

To protect against conflicts of interest and avoid paying
unnecessary marketing costs, GIC's contract with OFJ, signed in
2000, prohibited the receipt of "direct or indirect" commissions
from insurance carriers. GIC's contract with Unum,  which called
for annual premiums of more than $25 million, also banned the
payment of "commissions or finder fees" to O'Neill, Finnegan &
Jordan.  Despite these contractual prohibitions, Unum paid
O'Neill, Finnegan & Jordan hundreds of thousands of dollars
after landing the GIC contract.  Today's complaint alleges that
Unum paid OFJ $456,000 in incentive compensation directly
related to the GIC policy during 2001 alone. Two years later,
when GIC learned of these payments, Unum and OFJ explained that
these financial incentives were paid as part of a "Special
Producer Agreement," which the companies contended were
different than "commissions."

"What is most distressing about this case is that it has
poisoned the atmosphere between us and the consultants we hire
to help us with our procurements," GIC Executive Director
Dolores L. Mitchell said. "We have had a long tradition of trust
and respect for our consultants, and have always assumed that
they were working in our best interests instead of their own.
Betraying that trust has made it more difficult for all of the
consultants, and has put a cloud on the professional
relationship we have enjoyed for so long."

She added, "I hope this case will alert purchasers and
consultants alike that you cannot expect to walk both sides of
the street at once."

According to Attorney General Reilly's complaint, Unum and OFJ
violated the Massachusetts False Claims Law, which authorizes
the state Attorney General to recover triple damages resulting
from false claims and fraudulent conduct involving state funds.
As a result of the lawsuit, the companies will pay $1.3 million,
which reflects the Attorney General's claim seeking damages for
the $456,000 in commissions paid to OFJ by Unum as well as a
$59,000 consulting fee paid by the state to OFJ.

The Attorney General also alleged in the complaint that in
addition to violating the no commissions clause, OFJ improperly
steered the GIC group life contract to Unum by giving the
carrier detailed information on another finalist's bid, which
also violated their contract.

The complaint also alleges that in the middle of the procurement
process - while OFJ was making its insurance recommendations to
GIC - Unum and OFJ negotiated their "Special Producer
Agreement," which significantly increased the compensation
payable to OFJ if Unum won GIC's business.  When GIC learned of
that agreement between the companies, Unum agreed to "recoup"
the money from OFJ.  Instead, the complaint alleges, the
companies submitted misleading records and statements to GIC,
showing that the payments had been "recouped" when they had not.

The Massachusetts Group Insurance Commission is one of New
England's largest purchasers of group term life insurance,
administering more than $3 billion in life insurance for
Massachusetts employees and retirees.

This case was handled by Assistant Attorney General Chris Barry-
Smith of AG Reilly's Consumer Protection and Antitrust Division
and Assistant Attorney General Glenn Kaplan, chief of AG
Reilly's Insurance Division.  For more details, contact Sarah
Nathan by Phone: (617) 727-2543.

VAIL PRODUCTS: Recalls "Enclosed" Bed Systems Due to Injury Risk
The United States Food and Drug Administration is notifying
consumers that Vail Products, Inc., Toledo, Ohio, is initiating
a nationwide recall of approximately 5,000 "enclosed" bed
systems. The Vail Products enclosed bed systems have been found
to cause patient entrapments, resulting in severe neurological
damage or death due to asphyxiation.

Under the terms of the recall, the Company has sent new
instruction manuals and warning labels to every customer
informing them of FDA's advice to stop using the bed system,
move patients to alternative beds systems if possible and
consult with their physician. If, after consulting with their
physician, it is determined that no alternative bed systems are
available for a particular patient, users are advised to follow
the safety precautions contained in the new instruction manuals
and warning labels to help minimize risk of injury (also
available on FDA's website, see below.)

Vail enclosed bed systems are canopy-like padded beds covered
with nylon netting that is zipped into place to enclose the
patient. They are used for at-risk patients with cognitive
impairment, unpredictable behavior, spasms, seizures and other
disorders. The beds are an alternative to physical or drug
restraint to reduce falls or other injury to patients.

The bed systems pose a hazard in that patients can become
entrapped between the side-rail and the mattress or between the
canopy and mattress. Due to the presence of the canopy, if their
head is entrapped, the patient may experience asphyxiation,
which can result in permanent neurological injury or death. FDA
is aware of approximately 30 entrapments, of which at least 8
resulted in death.

"FDA is making every effort to make sure that patients and
healthcare providers are aware of this problem and are given the
information needed to help minimize risk," said Dr. Daniel
Schultz, Director of FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological

FDA first issued a Public Health Notification on March 25, 2005
about the potential risk posed by these bed systems. FDA further
updated its Public Health Notification (available at
http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/safety/032505-vail.html)to reflect the
latest information on this problem.

On June 23 and 24, 2005, Vail Products mailed corrected
instruction manuals and labeling, including warning labels to
all users of its Vail 500, Vail 1000, and Vail 2000 enclosed bed

Vail Products publicly stated on June 16, 2005, that it is
permanently ceasing the manufacture, sale and distribution of
all Vail enclosed bed systems. Vail Products will no longer be
available to provide accessories, replacement parts, or retrofit
kits. Users who have not received a copy of the corrected
instruction manual may attempt to contact Vail Products at

The FDA encourages individual users to report any adverse events
related to Vail enclosed bed systems to MedWatch, the FDA's
voluntary reporting program at 1-800-FDA-1088; by FAX at
1-800-FDA-0178; by mail to MedWatch, Food and Drug
Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857-9787; or
online at http://www.fda.gov/medwatch/report.htm.Consumers can
also report directly to MedWatch.

VOLKSWAGEN: Recalls 44T Touran Vans Worldwide For Clutch Problem
Volkswagen is recalling 44,000 of its Touran vans worldwide to
fix a clutch problem, Newsday.com reports.

The six-speed gearbox on two-liter TDI models of the
multipurpose vehicle can develop excessive wear, leading to
noise, damage and eventual failure, the German carmaker said in
a statement.  The Company didn't indicate how much the recall,
which affects vans manufactured in 2004 and 2005, would cost the

The Company is counting on new models such as the Touran, the
Touareg sports-utility vehicle and a new version of its Golf
compact to offset fierce price competition in the United States,
Newsday.com reports.

                 New Securities Fraud Cases

CONAGRA FOODS: Marc S. Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in TX
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of
Nebraska on behalf of purchasers of ConAgra Foods, Inc. (NYSE:
CAG) common stock during the period between September 18, 2003
and June 7, 2005 (the "Class Period").

The complaint charges ConAgra and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. ConAgra is a packaged food company serving a wide variety
of food customers.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
made materially false and misleading statements regarding the
Company's business and prospects and issued false and misleading
financial statements. On March 24, 2005, the Company announced
it would be restating its financial statements for fiscal 2002
through the first half of fiscal 2005 due to improper accounting
for income taxes. ConAgra stock fell to around $26 per share on
this news. Then, on June 7, 2005, the Company announced that its
fiscal 2005 fourth quarter would be lower than expected
primarily due to continued weak profitability in the packaged
meats operations. On this news the stock fell further to $24.32
per share.

According to the complaint, as a result of defendants' false
statements, ConAgra's stock traded at inflated levels as high as
$30 per share during the Class Period, which allowed its top
officers to reap tens of millions of dollars in ill-gotten
bonuses. The true facts, which were concealed from the investing
public during the Class Period, included the following:

     (1) the Company lacked requisite internal controls, and, as
         a result, the Company's projections and reported
         results were based upon defective assumptions and/or
         manipulated facts;

     (2) contrary to defendants' claims of fourth quarter 2005
         and/or fiscal year 2005 profitability, the Company was
         actually on track to report losses;

     (3) the Company's income was overstated due to improper tax
         accounting; and

     (4) as a result of the above, the Company's projections for
         fiscal year 2005 were grossly inflated.

For more details, contact the Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel, 273
Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004, Phone:
610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735, Fax: 610-660-8080, E-mail:

CYBERONICS INC.: Marc S. Henzel Lodges Securities Lawsuit in TX
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Texas on behalf of the purchasers of Cyberonics,
Inc. (Nasdaq: CYBX) securities during the Class Period between
June 15, 2004, through October 1, 2004, inclusive (the "Class").

Cyberonics engages in the design, development, and
commercialization of medical devices, which claim to provide
therapy, Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS), for the treatment of
epilepsy and other debilitating neurological and psychiatric
disorders. Plaintiff alleges that defendants violated the
federal securities laws (Securities Exchange Act of 1934) during
the Class Period by failing to disclose and misrepresenting
material adverse facts known to defendants or recklessly
disregarded by them, including that defendants were engaged in
serious violative manufacturing and quality practices that would
have a serious negative impact on prospects for the Company's
VNC product approval and that, while well aware of true nature
of the serious issues facing FDA approval of the VNC system for
the depression indication, Company insiders sold over $1.98
million of Company stock during the Class Period. As a result,
the Complaint alleges, the value of the Company's stock was
materially and artificially inflated during the Class Period.

For more details, contact the Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel, 273
Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004, Phone:
610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735, Fax: 610-660-8080, E-mail:

GUIDANT CORPORATION: Scott + Scott Lodges Securities Suit in IN
The law firm of Scott + Scott, LLC, initiated a class action in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Indiana on behalf of purchasers of Guidant Corporation (NYSE:
GDT) securities during the period between December 15, 2004 and
June 17, 2005, inclusive (the "Class Period").

The Complaint charges Guidant and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. The Company develops, manufacturers, and markets products
that focus on the treatment of cardiac arrhythmias, heart
failure, and coronary and peripheral disease, including
implantable defibrillator systems. The implantable defibrillator
systems are used to detect and treat abnormally fast heart
rhythms that could result in sudden cardiac death.

On December 15, 2004, Guidant management entered into a $24.5
billion merger deal with Johnson & Johnson. While the Company
pointed to its defibrillator business as a key component of that
deal, the Complaint alleges, it concealed from investors
significant un-addressed product defect and liability issues of
the Company's implantable defibrillator product lines. Although
life-threatening, defendants knew or consciously disregarded the
fact that these mechanical problems were difficult to
characterize and observe in implanted patients, making unlikely
that any temporary physical disablement in patients would be
attributed to device malfunction.

On June 17, 2005, the FDA issued a nationwide recall
notification, impacting Guidant's implantable defibrillators and
cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators. Within that
notification, the FDA advised the public that the malfunction of
Guidant's devices could lead to a serious, life-threatening
event for a patient. On this news, the Company's shares fell
$3.36, losing 4.5% percent of their value over the two trading
days following the FDA recall, closing at $70.33, on a combined
volume of over 25 million shares. As a result, Guidant investors
lost over $1.09 billion in the value of their shares as a result
of the surprise announcement of the FDA recall. Guidant's stock
price closed today at $63.90 on tremendous volume exceeding 49
million shares on further news and Company warnings concerning
problems with another of Guidant's implantable heart devices.

The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Guidant knew
and concealed:

     (1) the serious health issues encountered by patients
         caused by the malfunctioning and defective nature of
         the defective devices;

     (2) the overwhelming threat to the deal Guidant had forged
         with Johnson & Johnson for the sale of the Company,
         including the threat to the ability of insiders to
         profit as a result of stock sales during the Class

     (3) the lack and insufficiency of communications to
         healthcare providers and patients regarding the
         defective nature of the Company's defibrillator
         products, even when adequate communications were
         essential to protect the lives of its implant patients;

     (4) the troubling decision to await overwhelming negative
         media accounts before taking affirmative actions
         regarding the Company's defibrillator products.

For more details, contact Neil Rothstein or Amy K. Saba of Scott
+ Scott, LLC, Phone: +1-619-251-0887, E-mail:
nrothstein@scott-scott.com or asaba@scott-scott.com, Web site:

HILB ROGAL: Marc S. Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Lawsuit in VA
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, on behalf of shareholders who purchased or
otherwise acquired the publicly traded securities of Hilb Rogal
& Hobbs Co. (NYSE:HRH) between February 14, 2002 and May 26,
2005, inclusive, (the "Class Period"). The lawsuit was filed
against Hilb Rogal, Andrew L. Rogal, Martin L. Vaughan III,
Timothy J. Korman, Carolyn Jones, Robert W. Blanton Jr. and
Robert B. Lockhart ("Defendants").

The complaint alleges that Defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder. Specifically, Defendants are alleged to
have issued a series of false and misleading statements during
the Class Period, which failed to disclose that:

     (1) the Company was paying or receiving the equivalent of
         kickbacks or bribes in connection with placing its
         clients' insurance business;

     (2) the Company's contingent and/or override commissions
         were designed to allow the Company to steer its flow of
         business to those insurance carriers which agreed to
         pay it kickbacks;

     (3) the Company's business practices were in direct
         conflict of interest with its customers, were
         fraudulent and illegal, and could open the Company up
         to civil and criminal liability, lost future revenues,
         tarnished reputation, potential inability to borrow,
         and potential loss of customers; and

     (4) a substantial portion of the Company's revenues were
         derived from the improper commissions, so that the
         Company's financial statements were materially inflated
         at all relevant times.

On May 26, 2005, the Company announced that its Chief Operating
Officer, Defendant Robert B. Lockhart, had resigned following a
review of the Company's business practices. The internal
inquiry, which was commenced in response to numerous states'
attorneys general and other legal and regulatory bodies
investigations, found that the Company made improper payments
out of its Hartford offices in connection with the placement of
insurance policies. Shares of Hilb Rogal reacted negatively to
the news, falling from $38.20 per share on May 26, 2005 to
$33.69 per share on May 27, 2005, on heavy trading volume.

For more details, contact the Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel, 273
Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004, Phone: 610-
660-8000 or 888-643-6735, Fax: 610-660-8080, E-mail:

LAZARD LIMITED: Schiffrin & Barroway Files Securities Suit in NY
The law firm of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York on behalf of all securities
purchasers of Lazard Ltd. (NYSE: LAZ) ("Lazard" or the
"Company") between May 4, 2005 through May 12, 2005, inclusive
(the "Class Period").

The complaint charges Lazard, Bruce Wasserstein, Steven J.
Golub, Charles G. Ward III, William M. Lewis, Michael J.
Castellano and Goldman Sachs & Co., with violations of Sections
11, 12(a) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. More specifically, the
Complaint alleges that the Company failed to disclose and
misrepresented the following material adverse facts, which were
known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them:

     (1) that Goldman Sachs, in order to create the illusion of
         demand for Lazard's shares, arranged to sell millions
         of shares to hedge funds that immediately flipped the
         shares back to Goldman, which already received a
         substantial underwriting fee;

     (2) that a market for an IPO priced at $25 did not exist;

     (3) that Lazard's Registration Statement/Prospectus did not
         comply with S-K Item 505;

     (4) that the IPO price was inflated so Bruce Wasserstein
         could fund the acquisition of David-Weill's stake in
         the Company solely with the proceeds of the IPO; and

     (5) that the Company failed to disclose that Gerardo
         Braggiotti, the Company's deputy Chairman in Europe, a
         major contributor of new business for the Company, was
         likely to leave and/or cause turmoil within the
         organization as he opposed the IPO and the purchase of
         David-Weill's shares.

On May 9, 2005, Barron's published an article entitled "King's
Ransom For Lazard." The article stated that there were "numerous
negatives associated with the Lazard deal." According to author
Andrew Bary ("Bary"), Lazard's shares were overvalued due to the
Company's negative book value and junk-grade bond ratings from
two major credit-rating agencies. Additionally, Bary criticized
Lazard for having a high cost structure and "a bevy of
marginally productive investment bankers." By May 12, 2005, the
price of Lazard dipped below $22 per share, the price originally
championed by bankers because of the weak demand. On May 23,
2005, Goldman filed Form 4 with the SEC detailing that between
May 5, 2005, and May 10, 2005, Goldman purchased 3,007,580 of
Lazard's shares for between $22.89 and $25 per share. On May 26,
2005, The New York Post published an article entitled "IPO
Backlash-Goldman Took $15M Bath on Lazard Offering." The article
revealed that "investors dumped the [Lazard] stock and forced
Goldman to spend $15 million of its own cash to keep Lazard's
stock from tanking, according to SEC filings."

For more details, contact Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Darren J.
Check, Esq. of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP, Mail: 280 King of
Prussia Road, Radnor, PA 19087, Phone: 1-888-299-7706 or
1-610-667-7706, E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com, Web site:

MBNA CORPORATION: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges ERISA Lawsuit in DE
The law firm of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP filed
an ERISA class action lawsuit in the United States District
Court for the District of Delaware, on behalf of all
participants and beneficiaries of the MBNA Corporation 401K Plus
Savings Plan (the "Plan") established by MBNA Corporation
("MBNA" or the "Company") (NYSE: KRB), between January 7, 2005
and April 20, 2005, inclusive (the "Class Period"), and whose
accounts included investments in MBNA Stock, against Defendant
MBNA, certain officers and directors of the Company, the Pension
& 401K Plan Committee, and Dwight Asset Management Company, the
Plan's Investment Manager.

The case name is Cannon v. MBNA Corporation, et al. The
Complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Defendants
breached their fiduciary duties owed to Plan participants and
beneficiaries. The Defendants failed to act in the interests of
Plan participants and beneficiaries and with reasonable care,
skill, or diligence in offering MBNA Stock as an investment
option, purchasing MBNA Stock for the Plan, holding MBNA stock
in the Plan, monitoring the Plan's investment in MBNA Stock, and
communicating information concerning MBNA's financial
performance to Plan participants and beneficiaries.

The Complaint further alleges that MBNA Stock was an
inappropriate Plan investment as:

     (1) it traded at artificially high prices during the Class
         Period due to, among other things, misinformation
         distributed by the Defendants concerning MBNA's
         earnings growth, overstatement of MBNA's interest-only
         strip receivable, understatement of the first quarter
         2005 restructuring charge, failure to timely disclose
         higher customer credit card payments, and unjustified
         statements that MBNA would phase out zero percent
         marketing to boost profitability;

     (2) the credit card business, MBNA's primary business, was
         experiencing an industry-wide slowdown that made MBNA
         Stock an imprudent investment as a significant portion
         of a retirement portfolio;

     (3) the Company's accounting practices, particularly its
         failure to accurately set forth the value of its
         interest-only strip receivable, violated GAAP's
         requirement that financial reporting be useful to
         present and potential investors and creditors and other
         investors, and these accounting violations contributed
         to the artificially high price of MBNA Stock during the
         Class Period; and

     (4) the Company lacked adequate internal controls and was
         therefore unable to ascertain the true financial
         condition of the Company.

For more details, contact Mark C. Rifkin, Esq., Jeremy M.
Weintraub, Esq., or Derek Behnke, of Wolf Haldenstein Adler
Freeman & Herz LLP, Phone: 1-800-575-0735 or +1-212-545-4600, E-
mail: classmember@whafh.com, Web site: http://www.whafh.com.

NAVARRE CORPORATION: Baron & Budd Lodges Securities Suit in MN
The law firm of Baron & Budd, P.C. initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of
Minnesota on behalf of purchasers of Navarre Corporation
(Nasdaq:NAVR)("Navarre" or the "Company") securities during the
period between July 23, 2002 and May 31, 2005, inclusive (the
"Class Period").

Navarre Corporation has allegedly violated federal securities
laws by issuing false or misleading information and that the
Company failed to disclose and misrepresented the following
material adverse facts which were known to defendants or
recklessly disregarded by them. Specifically, the Complaint
alleges that the Company's reported income was materially
inflated due to the failure to properly account for expenses
relating to executive deferred compensation, that the Company's
apparent success was due to accounting shenanigans, and that the
Company's financial results, as reported in press releases and
SEC filings, were not prepared according to Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles ("GAAP").

May 31, 2005, Navarre issued a press release stating that the
results of its fourth quarter and fiscal year 2005 would be
delayed pending an accounting review focused on the recognition
of deferred compensation expenses and the classification of
fiscal 2005 tax items.

This news shocked the market and the Company's stock fell $0.98
per share from its May 31, 2005 closing price of $9.00 to its
close on June 1, 2005 at $8.02.

For more details, contact Randall K. Pulliam, Esq. or Max Jodry
of Baron & Budd, P.C., Phone: 1-800-222-2766, E-mail:
info@baronbudd.com, Web site: http://www.securitiesactions.com.

PEMSTAR INC.: Marc S. Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in MN
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of
Minnesota on behalf of all persons who purchased the publicly
traded securities of PEMSTAR, Inc. (Nasdaq: PMTR) between
January 29, 2003 to January 24, 2005, inclusive (the "Class

The Complaint alleges that PEMSTAR and certain of its officers
and directors violated federal securities laws. Specifically,
defendants misrepresented the Company's business condition.
Throughout the Class Period, PEMSTAR suffered from extensive
liquidity constraints that inhibited PEMSTAR's ability to
achieve the necessary gross margin expansion that was required
for the Company to create and sustain accounting profits. The
Complaint alleges that defendants failed to disclose that the
Company needed gross margins of at least 9% in order to achieve
profitability, a level which defendants knew it was years away
from attaining. Additionally, defendants understated the
liabilities associated with its Mexican facilities and
overstated the Company's accounts receivables which had become
materially impaired.

On January 24, 2005, PEMSTAR issued a press release announcing
that it was revising its outlook for the fiscal 2005 third
quarter, implementing additional cost-reduction initiatives and
restating its financial results for its fiscal year ended March
31, 2004, due to accounting discrepancies at its Mexico
facility. By the time PEMSTAR made this disclosure, its common
stock had declined nearly 70% from its Class Period high.

For more details, contact the Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel, 273
Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004, Phone:
610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735, Fax: 610-660-8080, E-mail:

UNITED AMERICAN: Baron & Budd Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in MI
The law firm of Baron & Budd, P.C. initiated a class action
lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Michigan on behalf of purchasers of United American Healthcare
Corporation (Nasdaq:UAHC) ("United American" or the "Company")
securities during the period between May 26, 2000 and April 22,
2004, inclusive (the "Class Period").

The Complaint alleges that the Defendants violated Sections
10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act by failing to
disclose United American's improper business and financial
relationship with a legislator having oversight of the Company's
Healthplan. The Complaint states that the relationship with the
legislator was in violation of United American's contract with
Tennessee and has caused the State of Tennessee to place United
American's Healthplan under administrative supervision. Because
of this relationship, investors could not correctly assess the
extent to which the Company's financial results were dependent
upon the improper political payments being made.

For more details, contact Randall K. Pulliam, Esq. or Max Jodry
of Baron & Budd, P.C., Phone: 1-800-222-2766, E-mail:
info@baronbudd.com, Web site: http://www.securitiesactions.com.


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

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


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 Senorin, Aurora Fatima Antonio and Lyndsey
Resnick, Editors.

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

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

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

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

                  * * *  End of Transmission  * * *