CAR_Public/050720.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Wednesday, July 20, 2005, Vol. 7, No. 142


                            Headlines

AGILE SOFTWARE: Settlement Fairness Hearing Set January 9,2006
AIRSTREAM INC.: Recalls Motor Homes Due To Brake System Problems
ALLIED AVIATION: EEOC Files Racial Discrimination Lawsuit in TX
ARIZONA: Law Firms Sue Over Blindness Resulting From Viagra Use
ARKANSAS: Residents to Receive Windfall from Cardizem Settlement

ARNOLD VENDING: Recalls Biscuits Due to Undeclared Whole Eggs
AMERUS LIFE: FL Law Firm Files Suit Over Equity-Indexed Annuity
BIOGEN IDEC: NC Law Firm Initiates Tysabri Marketing Campaign
CALIFORNIA: Judge Approves Entertainment Industry Settlement
CALIFORNIA: Judge OKs $1M Settlement For LAPD Officers' Lawsuit

CANADA: Gov't To Start Same-Sex Pensions Despite Court Battle
CROCUS INVESTMENT: Lawyer Says Suit Resolution Could Take Years
CRYO-CELL INTERNATIONAL: FL Court Approves Stock Suit Settlement
EUNIVERSE INC.: Suit Settlement Hearing Set September 19, 2005
EXXONMOBIL: Groups Seek Boycott, Payment To Oil Spill Victims

GAP INC.: In-House Report Reveals Overseas Factories Violations
GOLDEN TASTE: Recalls Lox Salads Due to Listeria Contamination
IRWIN UNION: Plaintiffs Appeal Settlement For PA RESPA Lawsuit
KIA MOTORS: Recalls 4,641 Sportage SUVs For Crash, Injury Hazard
MAZDA NORTH: Recalls 56,000 RX8 Cars For Fuel Leakage, Fire Risk

MCDONALD'S CORPORATION: Hindu Paper To Use Award For Circulation
NABISCO FOODS: Recalls Oreo Cookies Due to Undeclared Ingredient
NEW FLYER: Recalls 321 D30LF, D40LF Busses Due to Fire Hazard
NISSAN NORTH: Recalls 125,466 Murano SUVs Due To Crash Hazard
NORTH DAKOTA: Legal Aid Agency Gets Windfall From Insurance Suit

PRICESMART INC.: Final Fairness Hearing Set August 18,2005 in CA
RAFFLES TOWN: Appeals $5M Damage Award in Club Members Lawsuit
RESIDENTIAL CAPITAL: Subsidiary Faces Consumer Fraud Suit in CA
RESIDENTIAL FUNDING: Appeals Court Dismisses Claims in IL Suit
RESIDENTIAL FUNDING: IL Court Nixes Stay of Interest Act Lawsuit

RESIDENTIAL LOAN: IL Consumer Fraud, Interest Act Lawsuit Stayed
RHODE ISLAND: Groups Urge Governor to Approve Pro-Consumer Bill
THOMAS H. LEE: French Lawyer Files International Fraud Lawsuit
UNITED STATES: Black Farmers Miss Chance To Appeal Settlement
WAL-MART STORES: Black Truck Drivers File Race Bias Suits in AR

WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION: White Employees Support Race Bias Claims
WEST VIRGINIA: Lakin Law Firm Founder Barred From Practicing
WYETH-AYERST: CA Court Certifies Class in Premarin(R) Lawsuit


                 Meetings, Conferences & Seminars

* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
* Online Teleconferences


                  New Securities Fraud Cases

BROCADE COMMUNICATIONS: Scott + Scott Provides Litigation Update
MAJESCO ENTERTAINMENT: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Suit in NJ
POSSIS MEDICAL: Emerson Poynter Sets Lead Plaintiff Deadline
STARTEK INC.: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Securities Suit in CO
TREX COMPANY: Federman & Sherwood Lodges Securities Suit in VA

                          *********


AGILE SOFTWARE: Settlement Fairness Hearing Set January 9,2006
--------------------------------------------------------------
The final fairness hearing for the settlement of the
consolidated securities class action filed against Agile
Software Corporation, Bryan D. Stolle and Thomas P. Shanahan and
others including underwriters Morgan Stanley and Deutsche Bank
Securities, is set for January 9,2006 in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York.  The case
is now captioned "In re Agile Software, Inc. Initial Public
Offering Securities Litigation, 01 CIV 9413 (SAS)," related to
"In re Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation, 21 MC 92
(SAS)."

On April 19, 2002, plaintiffs electronically served an amended
complaint. The amended complaint is brought purportedly on
behalf of all persons who purchased the Company's common stock
from August 19, 1999 through December 6, 2000.  It names as
defendants the Agile Defendants; and several investment banking
firms that served as underwriters of the Company's initial
public offering and secondary offering.

The complaint alleges liability under Sections 11 and 15 of the
Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, on the grounds that the
registration statement for the offerings did not disclose that:

     (1) the underwriters had agreed to allow certain customers
         to purchase shares in the offerings in exchange for
         excess commissions paid to the underwriters; and

     (2) the underwriters had arranged for certain customers to
         purchase additional shares in the aftermarket at
         predetermined prices.

The amended complaint also alleges that false analyst reports
were issued. No specific damages are claimed.

The Company is aware that similar allegations have been made in
other lawsuits filed in the Southern District of New York
challenging over 300 other initial public offerings and
secondary offerings conducted in 1999 and 2000.  Those cases
have been consolidated for pretrial purposes before the
Honorable Judge Shira A. Scheindlin. On July 15, 2002, the Agile
Defendants (as well as all other issuer defendants) filed a
motion to dismiss the complaint. On February 19, 2003, the Court
ruled on the motions to dismiss. The Court denied the motions to
dismiss claims under the Securities Act of 1933 in all but 10 of
the cases. In the case involving the Company, these claims were
dismissed as to the initial public offering, but not the
secondary offering.

The Court denied the motion to dismiss the claim under Section
10(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the Company
and 184 other issuer defendants, on the basis that the amended
complaints in these cases alleged that the respective issuers
had acquired companies or conducted follow-on offerings after
the initial public offerings.  As a consequence, the Court
denied the motion to dismiss the Section 20(a) claims against
the individual defendants.  The motion to dismiss the Section
10(a) claims was granted with prejudice as to the individual
defendants.

The Company has decided to accept a settlement proposal
presented to all issuer defendants. In this settlement,
plaintiffs will dismiss and release all claims against the Agile
Defendants, in exchange for a contingent payment by the
insurance companies collectively responsible for insuring the
issuers in all of the IPO cases, and for the assignment or
surrender of control of certain claims the Company may have
against the underwriters.  The Agile Defendants will not be
required to make any cash payments in the settlement, unless the
"pro rata" amount paid by the insurers in the settlement exceeds
the limits of the insurance coverage, a circumstance which the
Company does not believe will occur.  The settlement will
require approval of the Court, which cannot be assured, after
class members are given the opportunity to object to the
settlement.

On February 15, 2005, the Court issued an order providing
preliminary approval of the settlement except insofar as the
settlement would have cut off contractual indemnification claims
that underwriters may have against securities issuers, such as
the Company.

The suit is styled "In re Agile Software, Inc. Initial Public
Offering Securities Litigation, 01 CIV 9413 (SAS)," related to
"In re Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation, Master
File No. 21 MC 92 (SAS)," filed in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York under Judge Shira A.
Scheindlin.  The plaintiff firms in this litigation are:

     (1) Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz LLP (New York, NY), 10 E.
         40th Street, 22nd Floor, New York, NY, 10016, Phone:
         800.217.1522, E-mail: info@bernlieb.com

     (2) Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, LLP (New York,
         NY), One Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, NY, 10119-1065,
         Phone: 212.594.5300,

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

     (4) Sirota & Sirota, LLP, 110 Wall Street 21st Floor, New
         York, NY, 10005, Phone: 888.759.2990, Fax:
         212.425.9093, E-mail: Info@SirotaLaw.com

     (5) Stull, Stull & Brody (New York), 6 East 45th Street,
         New York, NY, 10017, Phone: 310.209.2468, Fax:
         310.209.2087, E-mail: SSBNY@aol.com

     (6) Wolf, Haldenstein, Adler, Freeman & Herz LLP, 270
         Madison Avenue, New York, NY, 10016, Phone:
         212.545.4600, Fax: 212.686.0114, E-mail:
         newyork@whafh.com


AIRSTREAM INC.: Recalls Motor Homes Due To Brake System Problems
----------------------------------------------------------------
Airstream, Inc. is cooperating with the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA) by voluntarily recalling 213
motorhomes, namely:

     (1) AIRSTREAM / LAND YACHT, models 2003-2005

     (2) AIRSTREAM / SKY DECK, models 2003-2005

These motor homes, built on Workhorse chassis and equipped with
Actia Corporate Instrument Clusters, fail to comply with the
requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS)
Nos. 101 "Controls and Displays" and 105 "Hydraulic and Electric
Brake Systems."  The incorrect software programmed into the
instrument panel cluster such that certain driver warnings
required by FMVSS 101 and 105 are not displayed.  As a result of
this incorrect software, the instrument panel cluster may fail
to illuminate warning lamps indicating brake system failure
codes.  Drivers would not be warned of brake system failures.

The Company is working with Workhorse to notify owners and have
the repair performed on their vehicles.  For more details,
contact the Company by Phone: 1-877-596-6505 or contact
Workhorse by Phone: 1-877-246-7731, contact the NHTSA auto
safety hotline: 1-888-327-4236; (TTY: 1-800-424-9153); or visit
the Website: http://www.safercar.gov.


ALLIED AVIATION: EEOC Files Racial Discrimination Lawsuit in TX
---------------------------------------------------------------
Allied Aviation Services, Inc. faces a lawsuit filed in the
United States District Court in Dallas, Texas by the United
States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, alleging it
discriminated against black and Hispanic workers and failing to
stop white employees from routinely using racial slurs in the
work place, the Associated Press reports.

The suit was filed on behalf of three employees at the Company's
facility at the Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, namely
Eric Mitchel, Francisco Ocho and Christopher DiGiorgio.  The
suit alleges that black and Hispanic employees are held to
higher performance standards and overlooked for promotions and
pay raises.  The EEOC is seeking back pay for workers who lost
their jobs, plus compensation for emotional pain and
humiliation, and unspecified punitive damages.

Mr. Mitchel, who is black, is still employed as a manager at
Allied.  Mr. Ochoa, who is Hispanic, was also promoted to
manager but has been on leave since January due to cancer. Mr.
DiGiorgio, who is white, was fired in June 2004 after
complaining about treatment of minorities, the EEOC charged in
the lawsuit, AP reports.

Black employees said whites forced them to ride in the back of
company buses, and a Hispanic manager said his boss kept a
cartoon that depicted the manager tied down in "the Mexican gas
chamber," AP reports.

"I've never been treated like this," Mr. Ochoa said in an
interview with Associated Press Tuesday. "This was a totally
out-of-control, hostile environment."

Mr. Mitchel said he was hired in 2000 and almost immediately
heard white employees casually addressing blacks with the n-word
and using other slurs for Hispanics.  "It was a plantation
environment," he told AP. "I couldn't understand in a modern-day
society how this could go on."

Mr. Mitchel and Mr. Ochoa said complaints to the company's New
York headquarters accomplished nothing.  Mr. Mitchel approached
a private law firm, and the EEOC became involved and conducted
an 18-month investigation.  Lawyers said they have heard similar
complaints from Allied workers at Kennedy Airport in New York,
AP reports.


ARIZONA: Law Firms Sue Over Blindness Resulting From Viagra Use
---------------------------------------------------------------
As more Viagra complaints and plaintiffs come in through
http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com,Zimmerman Reed P.L.L.P and
Greg Jones & Associates file a major class action lawsuit
against the maker of Viagra, Pfizer.

With a key plaintiff suffering from blindness, Zimmerman Reed
P.L.L.P goes to jury trial on behalf of similarly situated
persons in Arizona. Seven counts are brought against Pfizer,
which include fraudulent concealment, products liability, fraud
and misrepresentation, and negligence, claiming that Pfizer
failed to "use care in designing, developing, manufacturing,
marketing, distributing, testing, warranting, and/or selling
Viagra so as to avoid posing unnecessary health risks to users
of such health products."

http://www.lawyersandsettlements.comcontinues to receive
complaints and potential cases from Viagra users nationwide.
With over 23 million men prescribed Viagra (Sildenafil)
worldwide, there are a growing number of cases of alleged loss
of vision due to a condition called nonarteritic anterior
ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION). NAION is the leading cause of
sudden vision loss in people over the age of 50 and affects
approximately 6,000 people each year. Vision loss caused by
NAION can be temporary, but it usually leads to permanent
blindness.

On June 6, 2005, a similar class action lawsuit was filed
against Pfizer by the law offices of Ronnie Penton and Greg
Jones & Associates on behalf of Texas residents suffering from
NAION allegedly caused by Viagra.

Pfizer is the largest research based Pharmaceutical company in
the world with $52 billion in 2004 revenues. Alongside Viagra,
Pfizer's other multi-million dollar products include Lipitor,
Zoloft, Celebrex, Neurontin, and Norvasc.

For more details, visit
https://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/case/viagra_blindness_clas
s_action.


ARKANSAS: Residents to Receive Windfall from Cardizem Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------
More than 1,200 Arkansans will receive refund checks as part of
a nationwide settlement with manufactures of the prescription
drug Cardizem CD, the Arkansas News Bureau reports.

In a recent news release Arkansas Attorney General Mike Beebe
said that 1,249 Arkansas residents who qualified under the
settlement would get an average refund of $360. A total of
$449,903 was disbursed within the state.  Previously, attorneys
general from all 50 states, Puerto Rico and the District of
Columbia sued four makers of Cardizem CD, which is used to treat
high blood pressure and chest pain.

The suit alleged the companies conspired to keep generic
versions of Cardizem off the market, thus maintaining a higher
price for consumers.

Those receiving checks, which will be mailed starting this week,
paid all or part of the purchase price for Cardizem or its
generic version between January 1, 1998, and January 29, 2003,
and chose not to opt out of the class-action lawsuit.  According
to the news release, nationally an estimated 76,417 people filed
claims resulting in more than $24 million in refunds.


ARNOLD VENDING: Recalls Biscuits Due to Undeclared Whole Eggs
-------------------------------------------------------------
Arnold Vending Co. Inc. of Tiffin, OH is recalling its Arnold
Vending brand 'Sausage Gravy & Biscuit', 8 ounce size packages,
containing an expiration date of 7-19-05, because the product
contains undeclared whole eggs. If consumed, people who have
allergies to egg run the risk of a serious of life-threatening
allergic reaction.

The 'Sausage Gravy & Biscuit' product was distributed to 120
industrial and institutional companies located within a 40 mile
radius of Tiffin, OH, and is sold from Arnold Vending Cold Food
vending machines located within these facilities.

No illnesses have been reported to date in connection to the
problem.

Arnold Vending representatives visited all 120 customers on
7/14/05, and placed an ingredient sticker on all remaining
product in the vending machines, which identifies that the
product contains whole eggs.

The missed declaration was a result of a supplier ingredient
change. All future disbursements of Arnold Vending's 'Sausage
Gravy & Biscuit' will show the corrected ingredient declaration.

Customers who have purchased 8oz. packages of 'Sausage Gravy &
Biscuit' can return them to Arnold Vending for a full refund.
Customers with questions may contact the company at
1-800-227-2848.


AMERUS LIFE: FL Law Firm Files Suit Over Equity-Indexed Annuity
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Gordon Hargrove & James P.A. initiated a class
action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle
District of Florida, Orlando Division, on behalf Dorothy L. Eddy
and other Florida senior citizens against AmerUs Life Insurance
Co., a subsidiary of AmerUs Group Co. (NYSE:AMH).

The complaint alleges that AmerUs Life Insurance Co. designed a
scheme to manipulate Florida senior citizens into purchasing
equity-indexed annuities. Eddy, a Brevard County resident, and
other seniors purchased equity-indexed annuities believing the
products would provide retirement income and other benefits.
However, in many cases the maturity dates of the annuities were
well beyond the seniors' life expectancies.

"We've seen too many people in Florida fall victim to
unscrupulous salespeople who are pushing an investment product
that makes absolutely no sense for most seniors," said John
Hargrove, senior shareholder of Gordon Hargrove & James.
"Equity-indexed annuities tie up retirees' nest eggs for 10, 15
and in some cases 20 years and carry high penalties and
forfeitures for early withdrawal."

This is the second class-action lawsuit filed in Florida by
Gordon Hargrove & James against a national annuity producer
alleging wrongful annuity sales and marketing practices
involving seniors.

For more details, contact Gordon Hargrove & James P.A., 201 S.
Orange Ave., Suite 1090, Orlando, FL, 32801, Phone:
407-317-9117, Fax: 407-317-9114.


BIOGEN IDEC: NC Law Firm Initiates Tysabri Marketing Campaign
-------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Jones & Associates, a North Carolina-based law firm, in
association with http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com,launched
a marketing campaign to increase awareness of the Multiple
Sclerosis drug, Tysabri.

Makers of Tysabri, Biogen Idec Inc. and Elan Pharmaceuticals
Inc., have recently taken the drug off the market and sent out
warnings to doctors.  In November 2004, Biogen Idec and Elan
Corporation received approval from the FDA to market and
distribute Tysabri (natalizumab).  Only four months later,
February 2005, the drug was quickly removed from the market
after the FDA received several reports of severe illness and
death in patients prescribed Tysabri and Avonex.  In several
cases, the patient or corpse was allegedly diagnosed with
Progressive Multifocal Leukoencephalopathy (PML), a rare brain
infection that directly affects the central nervous system.
Symptoms of PML are similar to a stroke: headaches, memory loss,
speech and vision difficulties, limb weakness, and partial
paralysis; the disease leads to coma then to death.

To date, approximately 8,000 patients have been involved in
clinical trials or prescribed Tysabri for multiple sclerosis,
Crohn's disease and rheumatoid arthritis. Biogen Idec and Elan
Pharmaceuticals hope to redistribute the drug after extensive
evaluations of Tysabri and the possible link to PML.

Biogen merged with IDEC Pharmaceuticals in 2003, creating the
billion-dollar company, Biogen Idec, which is based in
Cambridge, Massachusetts. Biogen Idec also has another MS drug
in the news: the bread-winning drug, Avonex, the most widely
prescribed Multiple Sclerosis drug in the world with revenues of
$1.4 billion in 2004 has recently been linked to increased risk
of liver damage and liver failure.

Greg Jones & Associates is urging patients that have had adverse
side effects with the prescription drugs Tysabri or Avonex, to
have their case reviewed at the Website:
http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com;each case will be
evaluated by a lawyer at no charge.  For more details about this
product recall and potential class action lawsuit, visit the
Website: http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/case/tysabri.
For more details, contact Tracy Laxdal by Phone: 604-608-3435.


CALIFORNIA: Judge Approves Entertainment Industry Settlement
------------------------------------------------------------
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Carl J. West granted
preliminary approval to a $5,348,000 settlement of class action
litigation involving disputed payroll practices in the
entertainment industry in California.

The settlement provides for additional training for industry
payroll accountants, as well as monetary compensation for
industry employees. Some employers will also institute changes
to their pay stubs, permitting employees to more readily
determine details regarding their pay.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Victoria Chaney acted as
Settlement Mediator in these complex cases.  Alan Harris of
Harris & Ruble and Maxwell Blecher and Donald Pepperman of
Blecher & Collins represented plaintiffs.  For more details,
visit http://www.motionpicturesettlement.com.


CALIFORNIA: Judge OKs $1M Settlement For LAPD Officers' Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Carl J. West granted
preliminary approval to a $1,000,000 settlement of class action
claims brought by current and former Officers of the Los Angeles
Police Department who provide security and traffic control
services on location for the entertainment industry in
California. Finding the proposed settlement to be fair and
reasonable, Judge West's Order deals with disputed claims for
overtime pay made by current and retired LAPD officers who work
in excess of twelve hours per day.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Victoria Chaney acted as
Settlement Mediator in these complex cases.  Alan Harris of
Harris & Ruble and Maxwell Blecher and Donald Pepperman of
Blecher & Collins represented plaintiffs.  For more details,
visit http://www.motionpicturesettlement.com.


CANADA: Gov't To Start Same-Sex Pensions Despite Court Battle
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Canadian government will begin paying widowed same-sex
partners survivor benefits, even if it is fighting their claims
in court, 365Gay.com reports.

In 2000, the federal government passed legislation recognizing
same-sex relationships under the Canada Pension Plan and made it
retroactive to January 1, 1998.  However, gays filed a class
action, charging that the pensions should have been backdated to
April 1985, when gays and lesbians were granted equality under
Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  The suit seeks to
recover the unpaid benefits due an estimated 1,500 survivors,
many of whom became widowed at the height of the AIDS crisis.

In November 2004, the Ontario Supreme Court ruled that denying
retroactive same-sex benefits to widowed gays and lesbians
violates their rights and is unconstitutional.   The government
appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court of Canada and the case
is expected to be heard later this year.  Between the case in
Ontario and others across the country as much as $140 million
dollars in retroactive pension benefits could be involved,
365Gay.com reports.

The case was brought to court by gay activist George Hislop, 77,
(pictured) a longtime Canadian gay activist who relied on his
partner, Ron Shearer, to bring home a steady paycheck.  Mr.
Shearer, an art director for a lighting company, died in 1986,
sparking Mr. Hislop's fight for survivor benefits.   After Mr.
Hislop began his suit, it was expanded to cover all other
survivors between 1985 and 1998.

"I am thrilled that the pensions will finally be paid," Mr.
Hislop said in a statement issued through his lawyer, 365Gay.com
reports. "I am 78 years old, my health is not great, and I could
sure use the money. I know that there are other folks who need
the pension just as much as me."

Paul Vickery, a lawyer with the federal Justice Department, said
the government agreed to make the payments on a "without
prejudice" basis, pending resolution of the Supreme Court case.
"We're doing it to try to avoid undue difficulty for people,"
Mr. Vickery told 365Gay.com.  "We're aware that a portion of the
class that is affected are elderly, some of them are ill, and it
was felt that the best approach would be to make the payments."


CROCUS INVESTMENT: Lawyer Says Suit Resolution Could Take Years
---------------------------------------------------------------
A lawyer for the plaintiffs in the class action filed against
Manitoba, Canada's Crocus Investment Fund says it could take
years before shareholders receive their compensation for
securities fraud, the Canadian Press reports.

Lawyer Harvin Pitch, who represents some of the 34-thousand
shareholders, told the Canadian Press class actions usually last
three to five years.  He said he is willing to talk about a
settlement with the 23 defendants, but even a settlement can
take a long time to work out.  The first step is to get a judge
to approve the lawsuit as a class-action claim.  The suit is
seeking around US$200 million in damages

According to an earlier Class Action Reporter story (July 13,
2005), the Crocus fund, which had 34,000 investors, suddenly
halted trading last December as questions arose about the true
value of the fund's assets. The fund had issued a $15-million
writedown in its value weeks earlier, and soon announced a
further writedown of $46 million. Shares that were sold for more
than $15 were suddenly estimated to be worth $7.

A report by Manitoba's Auditor-General, Jon Singleton, stated
that the fund's directors misled shareholders by overstating the
fund's value. The Manitoba Securities Commission and police are
now investigating the fund, which is currently in receivership.
Police and the Manitoba Securities Commission are currently
investigating Crocus, which was set up by the Manitoba
government as a labor-sponsored investment fund in the early
1990s.


CRYO-CELL INTERNATIONAL: FL Court Approves Stock Suit Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Middle District of
Florida approved the settlement of the consolidated securities
class action filed against Cryo-Cell International, Inc.,
certain of its current and former officers and directors and two
accounting firms who previously audited the Company's
consolidated financial statements.

Ten complaints were initially filed, alleging violations of
federal securities laws, including improper recognition of
revenue in the consolidated financial statements presented in
certain public reports of the Company.  On October 22, 2003, all
ten complaints were consolidated (Case No. 03-CV-1011).  On
February 17, 2004, the court appointed lead plaintiffs.  On
April 27, 2004, the lead plaintiffs filed an amended complaint.
The amended complaint generally seeks, among other things,
certification of a class of persons who purchased the Company's
common stock between March 16, 1999 and May 20, 2003 and
unspecified damages.

The parties have signed a formal stipulation of settlement to
settle the litigation. The settlement fairness hearing was held
on February 25, 2005.  The proposed settlement, which totals $7
million, includes a payment of $4 million, which would be paid
by the carrier of the Company's former auditors, subject to its
applicable deductible.  In addition, the Company's insurance
carrier would pay $3 million on the Company's behalf under its
directors' and officers' insurance policy, subject to its
maximum deductible of $175,000.

The suit is styled "Heller, et al v. Walton, et al., case no.
8:03-cv-01011-EAK-EAJ," filed in the United States District
Court for the Middle District of Florida under Judge Elizabeth
A. Kovachevich.  Representing the Company are Brian Albritton
and Tracy A. Nichols of Holland & Knight LLP, P.O. Box 1288, 100
N. Tampa St., Suite 4100, 33602-3644, Tampa, FL 33601-1288,
Phone: 813/227-8500, Fax: 813/229-0134 or E-mail:
brian.albritton@hklaw.com.  Representing the plaintiffs are
Keith M. Fleischman and Mel E. Lifschitz, Bernstein Liebhard &
Lifshitz, LLP, 10 E. 40th St., 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10016,
Phone: 212/779-1414; and Kenneth J. Vianale, Vianale & Vianale
LLP, 2499 Glades Road, Suite 112 Boca Raton, FL 33431, Phone:
561/392-4750, ext 107, Fax: 561/392-4775, E-mail:
e-file@vianalelaw.com.


EUNIVERSE INC.: Suit Settlement Hearing Set September 19, 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Central District of
California, Western Division will hold a fairness hearing for
the proposed settlement in the matter: Douglas Sands, et al. v.
eUniverse, Inc., et al., Case No. 2:03cv3272, on behalf of all
persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of
the Company (Now known as Intermix Media, Inc.) from May 14,
2002 through May 5, 2003.

The hearing will be held on September 19, 2005, at 9:30 a.m., at
the United States District Court for the Central District of
California, 255 East Temple St., Los Angeles, CA, 90012.

For more details, contact eUniverse Litigation, c/o Berdon
Claims Administration, LLC, P.O. Box 9014, Jericho, NY, 11753-
8914, Phone: (800) 766-3330, Fax: (516) 931-0810, Web site:
http://www.berdonllp.com/claims.


EXXONMOBIL: Groups Seek Boycott, Payment To Oil Spill Victims
-------------------------------------------------------------
Environmentalists called for a boycott of oil giant ExxonMobil
last week, saying the oil giant still had to pay Alaska
residents several billion dollars in compensation for the March
1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill, Convenience Store News reports.

On March 1989, the Exxon Valdez tanker ran aground on a well-
charted reef and spilled 11 million gallons of crude oil onto
Prince William Sound.  Since then, the Company has spent $2.1
billion on a cleanup and paid more than $1 billion in fines,
criminal restitutions or civil settlements to the state and
federal governments.

A number of lawsuits, including class actions, were brought in
various courts against the Company and certain of its
subsidiaries relating to the accidental release of crude oil
from the tanker Exxon Valdez in 1989.  The vast majority of the
compensatory claims have been resolved.  All of the punitive
damage claims were consolidated in the civil trial that began in
May 1994.

In that trial, on September 24, 1996, the United States District
Court for the District of Alaska entered a judgment in the
amount of $5 billion in punitive damages to a class composed of
all persons and entities who asserted claims for punitive
damages from the corporation as a result of the Exxon Valdez
grounding.  The Company appealed the judgment.

On November 7, 2001, the United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit vacated the punitive damage award as being
excessive under the Constitution and remanded the case to the
District Court for it to determine the amount of the punitive
damage award consistent with the Ninth Circuit's holding.  The
Ninth Circuit upheld the compensatory damage award which has
been paid.

On December 6, 2002, the District Court reduced the punitive
damage award from $5 billion to $4 billion.  Both the plaintiffs
and ExxonMobil appealed that decision to the Ninth Circuit.  The
Ninth Circuit panel vacated the District Court's $4 billion
punitive damage award without argument and sent the case back
for the District Court to reconsider in light of the recent U.S.
Supreme Court decision in Campbell v. State Farm.  On January
28, 2004, the District Court reinstated the punitive damage
award at $4.5 billion plus interest.  The Company and the
plaintiffs have appealed the decision to the Ninth Circuit.  The
corporation has posted a $5.4 billion letter of credit, an
earlier Class Action Reporter story (August 21,2004) reports.
The Company's appeal is pending.

According to the Anchorage Daily News, the "Exxpose Exxon"
campaign - endorsed by a dozen groups, including the Alaska
Coalition, MoveOn.org, and the Sierra Club - alleges that the
Company has distinguished itself from other major oil companies
by spurning renewable energy investment and funding "junk
science" to try to cloud the debate on global warming. It is
also the only major oil company that is still giving money to
Arctic Power, the lobby working to convince Congress to open the
Arctic refuge to oil development.  The groups called for a
boycott of the Company, seeking compensation for the residents
of Prince William Sound and opposing the Company's plans to open
the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling.  The
campaign is asking drivers to boycott Exxon stations, investors
not to buy Exxon stock and job seekers to look elsewhere.

The mercury was pushing 90 degrees in Washington Tuesday
morning, and John Passacatando, director of Greenpeace USA, was
standing with a score of activists in "Exxpose Exxon" T-shirts
in front of a Capitol Hill Exxon station, Convenience Store News
reports.  "Anybody hot?" he asked. "It's going to get hotter
thanks to Exxon Mobil," he added, "thanks to them more than any
other company on the planet."

"Americans have a right to demand of their large corporations
that they be good corporate citizens," Roger Schlickeisen told
the Daily News.  Exxon's public relations office did not return
a phone call to the Daily News.

The Company has said it has been punished enough and that the
award is excessive.  Courts have adjusted the award amount,
which now stands at $4.5 billion, not counting the interest of
5.9 percent a year, Convenience Store News reports.

"It's time for ExxonMobil to be a good corporate citizen and pay
what it owes and to quit stiffing the fishermen and the Natives
and the people of Alaska for their damages," Debbie Sease,
legislative director for the Sierra Club, told Convenience Store
News.


GAP INC.: In-House Report Reveals Overseas Factories Violations
---------------------------------------------------------------
Clothing retailer Gap, Inc.'s continuing investigation on labor
abuses in its overseas factories uncovered hundreds of plants
engaged in a wide range of labor violations, including excessive
overtime, paltry wages and fining workers who wanted to quit
their jobs, the Associated Press reports.

92 inspectors were sent to scrutinize all but a handful of 2,672
factories approved to manufacture the Company's clothes last
year.  According to the Company's second annual social
responsibility report, the Company allegedly still contracts
with hundreds of overseas factories that mistreated its workers.

The abuses are most prevalent in China, where Gap products are
made at 423 factories.  Between 25 percent and 50 percent of
those Chinese companies don't fully comply with local labor
laws, Gap said, and 10 percent to 25 percent of them pay below
the minimum wage.  The company ended its business relationship
with 18 Chinese factories last year - less than 5 percent of its
suppliers in that country, AP reports.

The Persian Gulf, where Gap contracts with 29 factories, caused
another major headache. More than half the factories inspected
there imposed work weeks of more than 60 hours per week.  In
three cases in Egypt, Morocco and Vietnam, Gap flagged factories
that required their workers to pay them if they resigned before
a contract ended. Gap required all three factories to stop the
practice.

Spurred by the most egregious violations, the Company severed
ties with 70 factories last year, down from 136 in 2003, in AP.
The company rejected 15 percent of the new factories seeking to
make its clothes in 2004 compared with 16 percent in 2003.

By publicly acknowledging its role in the recurring labor
problems at factories often derided as "sweatshops," the Company
hopes to prod its entire industry to embrace reforms and
establish more rigorous standards to improve the working
conditions.

"To quote U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, we believe
that a `bright light is the best disinfectant,'" Gap wrote in
the 58-page report, AP reports. "The more open and honest we can
be about conditions and challenges, the more helpful we can be
in addressing them."

Since Gap first owned up to the troubles at its overseas
factories last year, shoe manufacturer Nike Inc. also has
launched a similar social responsibility report examining the
conduct in its overseas factories.

"The good news is that more companies are turning the corner in
acknowledging that a problem exists," Bob Jeffcott, policy
analyst for the Maquila Solidarity Network, a workers' rights
group in Toronto, told AP.

The increased attention will likely make it appear as if things
are getting worse before they get better, Gap warned, simply
because its inspectors are likely to become progressively better
at rooting at violations as time goes on.  The Company
acknowledged it has contributed to some of the labor problems by
making last-minute production demands that prod overseas
contractors into exploiting their workers. The company has vowed
to phase out its "inefficient purchasing practices," AP reports.

Mr. Jeffcott believes Gap and other retailers who rely on
overseas factories could make a huge difference by agreeing to
pay more for their products - a daunting commitment to make
because it could erode profits or result in price increases that
alienate customers.  "No one is dealing with the fundamental
question on how much you should be paying these suppliers so
they can afford to pay their workers better wages," Mr. Jeffcott
told AP.


GOLDEN TASTE: Recalls Lox Salads Due to Listeria Contamination
----------------------------------------------------------------
Golden Taste, Inc., 45 S. Central Avenue, Spring Valley, New
York 10977 is recalling its Golden Taste Nova Lox Salad in 7.5
oz. and 3.5 oz. and 5 lb. plastic containers because they may be
contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes, an organism which can
cause serious and sometimes fatal infections in young children,
frail or elderly people and others with weakened immune systems.
Although healthy persons may suffer only short-term symptoms
such as high fever, severe headache, stiffness, nausea,
abdominal pain and diarrhea, listeria infection can cause
miscarriages and stillbirths among pregnant women.

The recalled Golden Taste Nova Lox Salad was distributed to
retail stores throughout New York State and New Jersey. The
product is coded 8/18/05.

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

The contamination was discovered after sampling by New York
State Department of Agriculture and Markets Food Inspectors and
subsequent analysis of Food Laboratory personnel revealed the
presence of Listeria monocytogenes in the Golden Taste Nova Lox
Salad. Production of the product has been suspended.

Consumers who have purchased Golden Taste Nova Lox Salad coded
8/18/05 are urged to return them to the place of purchase for a
full refund. Consumers with questions may contact the company at
845-356-4133.


IRWIN UNION: Plaintiffs Appeal Settlement For PA RESPA Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Seven plaintiffs appealed the settlement of the consolidated
class action filed against Irwin Union Bank and Trust Co.,
alleging that the plaintiffs obtained second-lien mortgage loans
from either Community Bank of Northern Virginia or Guaranty
National Bank of Tallahassee and that they were charged interest
rates and fees violating the Pennsylvania Secondary Mortgage
Loan Act.

Six cases were initially filed.  Plaintiffs additionally claim
that the banks were not the actual lenders on the loans, but
rather that the banks "rented" their banking charters to
affiliates for the purpose of facilitating the assessment of
"illegal" fees and that the affiliates either split the fees or
kicked back the fees in violation of Real Real Estate Settlement
Procedures Act (RESPA).  Plaintiffs sought to hold the Company's
subsidiary liable primarily on the basis that the subsidiary was
an assignee of the mortgage loans.

In December 2003, the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of Pennsylvania gave its final approval to a proposed
$41.1 million settlement for all six cases, inclusive of
attorney's fees. The settlement represents payment to
approximately 44,000 borrowers nationwide. A group of seven
plaintiffs' class action counsel appealed the settlement on
various grounds.  Oral arguments in those appeals occurred in
February 2005 and the court's decision is pending.

The suit is styled "DAVIS, et al v. COMMUNITY BANK OF NO, et
al., case no. 2:02-cv-01201-GLL," filed in the United States
District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania under
Judge Gary L. Lancaster.  Representing the Company is Larry K.
Elliott of Cohen & Grigsby, 11 Stanwix Street, 15th Floor,
Pittsburgh, PA 15222-1319, Phone: (412) 297-4900.  Representing
the plaintiffs are:

     (1) Eric G. Calhoun, Lawson, Fields, McCue, Lee & Campbell,
         14135 Midway Road, Suite 250, Addison, TX 75001, Phone:
         (972) 490-0808

     (2) Michael E. McCarthy, 2500 Lawyers Building, Pittsburgh,
         PA 15219, Phone: (412) 281-1288

     (3) R. Hoyt Rowell, III, Ness, Motley, Loadholt, Richardson
         & Poole, P.O. Box 1792, Mt. Pleasant, SC 29465, Phone:
         (843) 216-9471


KIA MOTORS: Recalls 4,641 Sportage SUVs For Crash, Injury Hazard
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kia Motors America, Inc. is cooperating with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) by voluntarily
recalling 4,641 Kia Sportage sport utility vehicles (SUV), model
2005.

On these vehicles, the parking brake lever ratchet pawl was not
properly manufactured and may damage the teeth of the parking
brake lever ratchet.  Damaged parking brake lever ratchet teeth
may prevent the parking brake from engaging or may allow the
parking brake to release after it has been engaged.  The
inability to engage, or the inadvertent release of the parking
brake lever may allow your vehicle to roll while it is parked
and may result in a crash.

Dealers will replace the parking brake lever assembly.  The
recall is expected to begin in August 2005.  For more details,
contact the Company by Phone: 1-800-333-4542, contact the NHTSA
auto safety hotline: 1-888-327-4236 (TTY 1-800-424-9153), or
visit the Website: http://www.safercar.gov.


MAZDA NORTH: Recalls 56,000 RX8 Cars For Fuel Leakage, Fire Risk
----------------------------------------------------------------
Mazda North America Operations is cooperating with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration by voluntarily recalling
56,000 Mazda RX8 cars, models 2004-2005.

If these cars are parked and the engine is operated at high
rpm's for an excessive length of time, some of the parts around
the exhaust system can melt and produce a variety of
malfunctions.  Problems caused by the excessive heat build-up
can range from inoperative oxygen sensor, neutral switch and
back-up lights, problems with the parking brakes, malfunctions
of the gas gauge and/or possible fuel leaks resulting from heat
damage to the fuel tank.  Fuel leakage, in the presence of an
ignition source, could result in a fire.

Dealers will inspect and replace parts.  The recall is expected
to begin during August 2005.  For more details, contact the
Company by Phone: 1-800-222-5500, contact the NHTSA auto safety
hotline: 1-888-327-4236 (TTY: 1-800-424-9153); or visit the
Website: http://www.safercar.gov.


MCDONALD'S CORPORATION: Hindu Paper To Use Award For Circulation
----------------------------------------------------------------
A periodical on Hinduism based in Kauai, Hawaii vows to use the
windfall from a fast-food chain class action lawsuit settlement
to increase its subscription in perpetuity by at least 1,000, or
subsidize even more subscriptions, The Pacific News Service
reported.

According to a press release from the Hindu Heritage Endowment,
who are the publishers of the quarterly Hinduism Today, they
received a check of $254,773.19 from fast-food giant McDonald's
as part of a $10-million court ordered settlement following a
lawsuit that accused the Oakbrook, Illinois-based restaurant
chain of misleading consumers with its "vegetarian fries" that
contained beef extract.

The release added that the endowment had decided to use the
entire proceeds to promote subscription of the magazine. It
explained, "None of the principal will be touched, so this will
be a perpetual source for funding outright 1,000 or more
subscriptions a year forever, or subsidize a larger number. In
short, their supersized endowment will educate Americans,
especially youth, about the merits of a veggie lifestyle, which
has been a Hindu ideal for 6,000 years or more."

The original lawsuit, which was brought by Seattle, Washington-
based attorney Harish Bharti after he read an article on the
subject in India-West, accused McDonald's of misleading Hindus
and vegetarians. Soon after Sikhs, Jews, Muslims, and vegans
joined the fray, the Jews joined because the beef flavoring was
not kosher and the Muslims because it wasn't halal.

Consequently, the $10 million settlement been disbursed among a
diverse array of groups and institutions. Vegetarian
organizations got 60 percent, Hindu/Sikh groups 20 percent,
Kosher groups 10 percent, and children's groups 10 percent.

Additionally, the endowment also said in the press release that
they were "humbled" to be counted among some of America's most
respected educational institutions. However, it alleged that
McDonald's continued to use animal extract in its fries. The
release added, "Hindu vegetarians around the world may wish to
take note of the little-publicized fact that McDonald's made no
changes in their fries, which are still beef-flavoring
saturated. Sure, the oil is vegetable. But make no mistake about
it. There is meat in those luscious Golden Arches french fries."

Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami founded Hinduism Today in 1979.


NABISCO FOODS: Recalls Oreo Cookies Due to Undeclared Ingredient
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nabisco Foods, a Kraft Foods company of East Hanover, NJ, is
recalling approximately 838,000 of the 7.5 oz. boxes of Pure
Milk Chocolate Covered Oreo Sandwich Cookies with the UPC
product code number of 44000 01094 and "Best When Used By" dates
through 05NOV05 because some boxes may contain cookies with
peanut butter cr確e filling, rather than the vanilla cr確e
filling depicted on the front label. People who have an allergy
or severe sensitivity to peanuts run the risk of serious or
life-threatening allergic reaction if they consume these
products.

The recalled product has been distributed to retail stores
nationwide in the United States.

The product is packaged in a dark brown box and is prominently
labeled Pure Milk Chocolate Covered Oreo Sandwich Cookies. The
UPC product code number of 44000 01094 is printed on the back of
the box and the "Best When Used By" date is printed on the side
flap of the box. The back of the box does contain allergy
information indicating the product was manufactured on equipment
that also processes peanut products and may contain peanuts.
However, the cookie may contain peanut butter cr確e filling,
rather than the vanilla cr確e filling depicted on the front
label.

No illnesses or allergic reactions have been reported to date.
No other Oreo, Fudge Covered Oreo, or Nabisco Pure Chocolate
Covered cookie products are part of the recall, and there is no
health risk for consumers who are not allergic to peanuts.

The Company learned of the error when a consumer in South
Carolina, who purchased Pure Milk Chocolate Covered Oreo
Sandwich Cookies, reported finding cookies with peanut butter
cr確e filling rather than the vanilla cr確e filling depicted on
the front label. The packaging error was limited in scope and no
other Oreo, Fudge Covered Oreo or Nabisco Pure Milk Chocolate
Covered cookie products are part of the recall.

Consumers and retailers that purchased the Pure Milk Chocolate
Covered Oreo Sandwich Cookies with the UPC product code number
of 44000 01094 may return the product to the store where
purchased for a full refund. Consumers with questions about the
recall should call 1-800-464-8264 or visit the firm's Web site:
http://www.kraft.com/specialreport/PureMilkChocolateCoveredOreo/


NEW FLYER: Recalls 321 D30LF, D40LF Busses Due to Fire Hazard
-------------------------------------------------------------
New Flyer Industries, Ltd. in cooperation with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Office of Defects
Investigation (ODI) is voluntarily recalling about 321 units of
1997-2001 New Flyer / D30LF and 1997-2001 New Flyer / D40LF
busses due to fire hazard. NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID Number: 05V320000.

According to the ODI, on certain transit buses equipped with
Detroit Diesel series 40 engines, the turbocharger can fail
allowing lubricating oil to spill onto the engine. This can
result in a fire in the engine compartment.

As a remedy, dealers will inspect and replace the turbocharger
to prevent the possibility of an engine compartment fire.

For more details, contact Detroit Diesel by Phone: 313-592-3708
or New Flyer by Phone: 1-204-982-8400 the NHTSA Auto Safety
Hotline: 1-888-327-4236 or 1-800-424-9153, Web site:
http://www.safecar.gov.


NISSAN NORTH: Recalls 125,466 Murano SUVs Due To Crash Hazard
-------------------------------------------------------------
Nissan North America, Inc. is cooperating with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) by voluntarily
recalling 125,466 Nissan Murano sport utility vehicles (SUVs),
models 2003-2005.

On these vehicles, there is a possibility that a wire breaking
inside the alternator could stop the battery from charging.  If
this happens the charger warning and brake warning lamps will
immediately come on and the battery will begin to discharge.
After a short time, the engine will go into a "fall safe
condition," which limits vehicle speed.  The engine will stop
running, which could result in a crash.

Dealers will inspect and replace the alternator with a new
version, modified to prevent coil movement.  The recall is
expected to begin on August 3,2005.  For more details, contact
the Company by Phone: 1-800-647-7261, contact the NHTSA auto
safety hotline: 1-888-327-4236
(TTY: 1-800-424-9153); or visit the Website:
http://www.safercar.gov.


NORTH DAKOTA: Legal Aid Agency Gets Windfall From Insurance Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
North Dakota's legal aid agency is benefiting from the
resolution of a lawsuit filed against two insurance companies
for their pricing of nursing home coverage, The Associated Press
reports.

Legal Services of North Dakota got a $1,761 check last week to
provide legal help for the elderly, said the agency's director,
James Fitzsimmons. After the group received the money, Mr.
Simmons told The Associated Press, "Even a small amount of money
like that does help. We do so much work for the elderly."

According to Tim Purdon, one of the Bismarck attorneys who
handled the case, the money was left over after claims had been
paid from a class action lawsuit against United Equitable
Insurance Co. of Chicago and Standard Life and Accident
Insurance Co. of Galveston, Texas.


PRICESMART INC.: Final Fairness Hearing Set August 18,2005 in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of
California will hold a final fairness hearing for the settlement
of the consolidated securities class action filed against
PriceSmart, Inc. and certain of its officers on August 18,2005.

On November 17, 2003, the first in a series of seven federal
securities fraud class action lawsuits were filed against the
Company and certain of its former and present officers and
directors, now consolidated as "In re PriceSmart, Inc.
Securities Litigation, Lead Case No. 03cv02260L (LSP)."  Six of
the complaints asserted claims against the Company, its former
President and Chief Executive Officer Gilbert Partida, and its
former Chief Financial Officer Allan C. Youngberg.

On behalf of a proposed class of persons who purchased the
Company's common stock between December 20, 2001 and November 7,
2003, plaintiffs asserted claims under Section 10(b) and Section
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and SEC Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder, based on the allegation that defendants
made material misstatements and omissions in connection with the
financial statements that were the subject of a financial
restatement.  Plaintiffs seek damages on behalf of the proposed
class.

The seventh federal securities fraud complaint, styled
"Performance Capital L.P. v. PriceSmart, Inc., Case No.
03cv02561 JAH (S.D. Cal)," was filed by investors who purchased
the Company's Series A Preferred Stock in January 2002, as well
as on behalf of a class of common stock purchasers, and added a
breach of fiduciary duty claim against every then-current member
of the Company's current Board of Directors, as well as a claims
under Section 12(a)(2) and Section 15 of the Securities Act of
1933 relating to plaintiffs' purchase of Series A Preferred
Stock.  The Company refers to this litigation as the Performance
Capital lawsuit.  Plaintiffs sought damages on behalf of the
proposed class as well as rescission of their contracts with the
Company regarding the Series A Preferred Stock.

All of the federal securities actions were consolidated before
The Honorable John Houston in an order dated September 9, 2004,
which also appointed a lead plaintiff on behalf of the proposed
class of common stock purchasers.  The lead plaintiff filed a
consolidated complaint on November 29, 2004, with an expanded
proposed class period of November 1, 2001 to December 16, 2003.

Defendants and the plaintiffs who brought the Performance
Capital lawsuit entered into a Stipulation of Settlement dated
September 3, 2004, which was preliminarily approved by Judge
Houston on September 30, 2004.  On September 30, 2004, Judge
Houston also approved a stipulation appointing the plaintiffs in
the Performance Capital lawsuit as lead plaintiff for a proposed
sub-class made up of certain purchasers and holders of the
Company's Series A Preferred Stock, which the Company refers to
as the Series A Preferred Sub-Class.  On November 8, 2004,
following notice to members of the Series A Preferred Sub-Class,
a settlement with the Series A Preferred Sub-Class was approved
and judgment was entered.  Pursuant to the settlement, the
Performance Capital lawsuit has been dismissed and the Court
entered an order releasing claims that were or could have been
brought by the Series A Preferred Sub-Class arising out of or
relating to the purchase or ownership of the Company's Series A
Preferred Stock. As a term of the settlement, members of the
Series A Preferred Sub-Class were offered the opportunity to
exchange their Series A Preferred Stock for shares of the
Company's common stock at a conversion price of $10.00 per
share, and all members of the Series A Preferred Sub-Class
accepted this offer.  The Company paid attorney's fees and costs
to counsel for the Performance Capital plaintiffs in the amount
of $325,000, which was covered by the Company's insurance
carrier.

Defendants and the parties to the remaining class action
lawsuits entered into a Stipulation of Settlement dated as of
May 12, 2005, which sets forth the terms of a settlement of all
claims, and is subject to final court approval. On May 27, 2005
Judge Houston issued an Order preliminarily approving the
settlement and setting August 18, 2005 as the date for a court
hearing as to whether the settlement shall be approved. Under
the proposed settlement, in exchange for a full release of all
claims plaintiffs would receive $2,350,000 (of which the
Company's directors and officers insurance carrier would pay 80%
and the Company would pay 20%, as the Company and the carrier
have agreed that effective as of March 1, 2005 the Company
satisfied the $1,000,000 retention on its insurance policy).

The suit is styled "IN re PriceSmart, Inc. Securities
Litigation, case no. 03-CV-2260," filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of California, under
Judge John A. Houston.  Representing the Company is Julia Parry
of Latham and Watkins LLP, West Broadway, Suite 1800, San Diego,
CA 92101-8197 Phone: (619)236-1234.  The plaintiff firms in this
litigation are Glancy and Binkow, 1801 Avenue of the Stars,
Suite 311, Los Angeles, CA, 90067, Phone: 310-201-9150, E-mail:
info@glancylaw.com; and 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.


RAFFLES TOWN: Appeals $5M Damage Award in Club Members Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Singapore's Raffles Town Club filed an appeal with Singapore's
Court of Appeal, opposing the $5 million in damages it was
ordered to pay its members earlier this year, Channel News Asia
reports.

In 2002, 5,000 RTC members filed the class action after learning
the so-called "exclusive and premier" club actually had almost
19,000 members.  The suit, which was the largest class action
suit in Singapore, accuses the Company of misrepresentation and
breach of contract, an earlier Class Action Reporter story
(September 22,2004) states.

Though they lost the initial case, the Court later ruled in
favor of the members, saying there was no misrepresentation but
there was a substantial breach of contract.  The members were
awarded $1,000 each for the loss of use and enjoyment of the
club, after it was found to have 17,000 members, instead of
7,000 as claimed.  However, both sides had decided to appeal the
ruling.

Acting for the Raffles Town Club, lawyer K Shanmugan conceded
the club did breach its contract, but argued that having more
members actually benefitted the rest as it prevented the club
from going bankrupt, a situation similar clubs faced during that
period, Channel News Asia reports.  However, lawyers
representing the members said they bought the right to enjoy an
exclusive club, and demanded for compensation of between $3,000
to $15,000 each.

About a hundred members turned up in court for the hearing.
Judgement is expected in the next few months, Channel News Asia
reports.


RESIDENTIAL CAPITAL: Subsidiary Faces Consumer Fraud Suit in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
One of Residential Capital Corporation's subsidiaries faces a
putative class action filed in the Superior Court of California
in San Diego County, California in December 2004, alleging
misleading and wrongful conduct in connection with its servicing
of residential mortgage loans.

This complaint reflects numerous similar actions filed against
other industry participants.  Specifically, plaintiffs allege
that the Company's subsidiary imposed unwarranted and improper
fees, intentionally or recklessly failed to credit payments in a
timely fashion, misapplied payments in order to improperly
benefit itself, referred accounts prematurely to collections and
foreclosure, wrongfully force placed insurance, and failed to
provide borrowers with timely or clear information about the
timing and amount of payments owed.  Plaintiffs seek to certify
a nationwide class consisting of all borrowers serviced by the
Company's subsidiary from December 2000 to present, demanding
declaratory and injunctive relief and damages.


RESIDENTIAL FUNDING: Appeals Court Dismisses Claims in IL Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed
several claims in the class action filed against Residential
Funding Corporation, alleging violations of the Illinois
Interest Act.

The suit was filed in October 2003 in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Illinois, alleging that the
originator of the mortgage loan at issue, Mortgage Capital
Resources, violated the Illinois Interest Act by assessing fees
that were impermissible and unreasonable, and the plaintiffs
seek two times the amount of interest, discount and charges
assessed the borrowers. In addition, plaintiffs allege the
excessive fees caused finance charges to be understated and they
seek to rescind the mortgage loans under the Truth in Lending
Act. Plaintiffs are attempting to hold the Company liable as the
assignee of the mortgage loans, seeking a nationwide class,
exclusive of Missouri.

The Company filed a motion to dismiss the suit asserting that,
among other things, plaintiffs' claim under the Illinois
Interest Act was impliedly repealed by a subsequent amendment to
this statute. Although the trial court denied this motion, the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reversed this
denial and granted the motion to dismiss with regard to the
Illinois Interest Act claims. The trial court subsequently
denied class certification with regard to the remaining claims.

The suit is styled "Reiser, et al v. Residential Funding
Corporation, case no. 3:03-cv-00619-DRH," filed in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois,
under Judge David R. Herndon.  Representing the plaintiffs are
Eric G. Calhoun of Lawson, Fields et al., Generally Admitted,
14135 Midway Road, Suite 250 Addison, TX 75001, Phone: 972-490-
0808, E-mail: ecalhoun@lfclaw.com; and Richard J. Pradarits,
Jr., Attorney at Law, 14135 Midway Rd., Suite 250, Addison, TX
75001, Phone: 972-490-0808, Fax: 972-490-9545, E-mail:
rpradarits@lfclaw.com.  Representing the Company are Thomas L.
Allen, Roy W. Arnold, Nina M. Faber, and Peter J. Kennedy of
Reed Smith, 435 Sixth Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15219-1886, Phone:
412-288-3169, E-mail: tallen@reedsmith.com,
rarnold@reedsmith.com, nfaber@reedsmith.com, and
pkennedy@reedsmith.com; and Richard K. Hunsaker, Robert H.
Shultz, Jr. and James A. Telthorst, Heyl, Royster et al. -
Edwardsville, Generally Admitted, 103 West Vandalia Street, P.O.
Box 467, Edwardsville, IL 62025, Phone: 618-656-4646, E-mail:
rhunsaker@hrva.com, rshultz@hrva.com,  jtelthorst@hrva.com.


RESIDENTIAL FUNDING: IL Court Nixes Stay of Interest Act Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Circuit Court of St. Clair County in Illinois refused to
stay the class action filed against Residential Funding
Corporation.

This case asserts the identical Illinois Interest Act claims
alleged in "Reiser, et al v. Residential Funding Corporation,
case no. 3:03-cv-00619-DRH," filed in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Illinois, but in state rather
than federal court.  Specifically, this statewide class action
lawsuit alleges that all loans originated by Mortgage Capital
Resources in Illinois violate the Illinois Interest Act and
Illinois Consumer Fraud Act.  Plaintiffs seek damages from the
Company as the assignee of the loans, in the amount of two times
the amount of interest payable over the life of the loans, plus
all fees and charges assessed to the borrowers.

In August 2004, the trial court granted class certification. In
light of the decision in the "Reiser" case, and the pending
"Clark" case at the Illinois Supreme Court, the Company sought a
stay of the suit until the Illinois Supreme Court has ruled in
"Clark," a motion which the court denied.


RESIDENTIAL LOAN: IL Consumer Fraud, Interest Act Lawsuit Stayed
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois stayed the putative
statewide class action filed against Residential Loan Centers of
America, alleging violations of the Illinois Interest Act and
the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act.

The putative statewide class action was filed in July 2004.
Plaintiffs allege that the Company violated the Illinois
Interest Act and Illinois Consumer Fraud Act on first-lien loans
originated with interest rates exceeding 8% when it assessed
fees and charges on such loans in excess of 3% of the loan
amount.  Plaintiffs seek damages in the amount of two times the
amount of interest payable over the life of the loans, plus all
fees and charges.

The Company asserts that it relied on federal law to preempt the
Illinois Interest Act at the time of origination. This case has
been stayed until the Illinois Supreme Court renders a decision
in a similar lawsuit.


RHODE ISLAND: Groups Urge Governor to Approve Pro-Consumer Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the nation's leading public interest groups are urging
Rhode Island Governor Donald Carcieri to sign a bipartisan
measure known as the Model Fair Consumer Contracts Act, which
stops corporations from stripping consumers of the right to sue
the companies in class action lawsuits, the ConsumerAffairs.Com
reports.

Passed in both houses of the state legislature by wide margins,
the bill would prevent corporations from slipping class action
waivers into the fine print of their standard form contracts,
where consumers are unlikely to see them or may have no choice
but to accept their prejudicial terms.

In the past few years, corporations are increasingly inserting
clauses in contracts for everything from credit cards to car
purchases that prohibit consumers from banding together in a
class action lawsuit when they are victims of fraudulent and
abusive business practices.

According to the groups who are urging the governor to approve
the bill, class actions level the playing field by allowing
consumers whose individual claims are too small to warrant the
expense of going to court to sue a corporation with far greater
financial resources. Without this mechanism, corporations can
break the law with virtual impunity, knowing that consumers will
have no meaningful way to hold them legally accountable.

Rep. Charlene Lima introduced the bill to solve this problem. In
essence the bill, rebalances the scales of justice that were
steeply tipped in favor of big business by a 1968 Rhode Island
law shielding industries subject to state regulation from
consumer lawsuits.

The groups pointed out that repealing this provision would
restore the ability of individuals to take the corporations that
harm them to court. Additionally, the groups claim that the bill
would restore consumer class actions as a powerful deterrent
against corporate wrongdoing.

Consumer advocates previously applauded passage of the
legislation, holding it up as a model for other state
legislatures seeking ways to protect their citizens from
coercive consumer contracts. A coalition of large corporations
though is heavily lobbying Governor Carcieri to kill the bill.

Commenting on the bill, Joan Claybrook, president of Public
Citizen told ConsumerAffairs.Com, "When corporations cheat
consumers or break consumer protection law, they should not be
able to avoid accountability by prohibiting consumers from
joining together to challenge them."

Ira Rheingold, executive director of the National Association of
Consumer Advocates also told to ConsumerAffairs.Com, "This is a
matter of basic fairness. Corporations want to put themselves
beyond the reach of the law by blocking the courthouse doors to
injured consumers. American citizens have certain fundamental
rights that they should not be forced to give up."

Also commenting on the bill is, Ed Mierzwinski, national
consumer program director of Rhode Island Public Interest
Research Group (RIPIRG), who told ConsumerAffairs.Com, "This
bipartisan consumer bill restores the right of the little guys,
the men and women and families of Rhode Island, to hold big
corporations accountable when they break the law. So on behalf
of our members and all Rhode Islanders we urge Governor Carcieri
to sign it into law."

While another supporter, Michael Foreman, deputy director of
legal programs for the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under
Law told ConsumerAffairs.Com, "Big Business uses these stealth
waivers to strip away the rights of victims of consumer and
civil rights violations. The bill is a step in the right
direction to allow the everyday person to level the playing
field."


THOMAS H. LEE: French Lawyer Files International Fraud Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas H. Lee Partners, the world's second largest buyout firm,
and Refco, the world's largest independent futures broker, both
together with their legal representatives Mr. Thomas H. Lee, Mr.
Scott A. Schoen & Mr. Phillip Bennett, are the target of a
criminal complaint filed on June 30, 2005 with the Paris High
Court.

"They did not disclose in their SEC filings several major
lawsuits, including criminal proceedings in Paris, and a major
pending claim in New York," the French lawyer Ma荊re Jean-Marc
Descoubes said in a press release.

The head of the plaintiff's lawyers team is Ma荊re Frederik-
Karel Canoy, who just launched the first class action lawsuit in
France to recover losses which small French shareholders
incurred when telecoms and media group Vivendi Universal nearly
collapsed in 2002, and whose legal actions sent its former
President Mr. Meyssier into custody.

Mr. Canoy said that Refco filed with the SEC an IPO project
without mentioning a major pending claim of $1.02 billion filed
in the New York State Supreme Court and several civil and
criminal proceedings in Paris, with claims of approximately 90
million euros.  Mr. Thomas H. Lee and Mr. Scott A. Schoen were
directors in Refco Group Ltd. LLC. at the time of the filings,
and some of the affiliates of Thomas H. Lee Partners hold a
majority stake in this company.

Mr. Canoy said, "The Refco case is an international fraud, and
false financial statements have apparently been filed with the
French regulators, the Banque de France and the AMF, and with
the SEC. They just did not disclose at all in their French,
English and U.S. consolidated financial statements the risks
associated with a $1.02 billion pending claim regarding several
business torts and unjust enrichment, and major others risks,
including several ongoing criminal investigations, while the
President of Refco Securities S.A. in Paris was questioned by
the Police on December 2004 . Refco's & Lee Partners'
management, Mr. Thomas H. Lee, Mr. Scott A. Schoen and Mr.
Phillip R. Bennett definitely need to be taught a lesson in
Courts."

The plaintiff is a French business contributor, Gerard G.
Sillam, who has enabled the futures commission merchant Refco to
develop its new securities business in Europe, after the
merger/takeover of Refco HL Securities SNC by Refco S.A. at the
end of 2000, which resulted in the set up of Refco Securities
S.A., now the REFCO Group's subsidiary in France.

The plaintiff's claim of $500 million for unjust enrichment is
still pending in the New York State Supreme Court, County of New
York, against defendants Refco Group Ltd. LLC. and Refco's
President & CEO Mr. Phillip R. Bennett (index n 602925/04).
There are currently in the Refco case 3 other criminal probes.

For more details, contact Ma荊re Frederik-Karel Canoy, Attorney
at Law by Phone: +33 (0)6 13 80 22 21 or +33 (0)1 43 98 96 36,
by Fax: 01 43 98 23 18 or by E-mail:
http://www.marketwire.com/mw/emailprcntct?id=7E644117F9FC455E


UNITED STATES: Black Farmers Miss Chance To Appeal Settlement
-------------------------------------------------------------
Black farmers who missed deadlines for appealing discrimination
claims against the government can't have another chance at
compensation, a federal appeals court ruled, The Associated
Press reports.

Advocates for the farmers say that the ruling is another sign
that legal options have been exhausted and Congress needs to
intervene.  John Boyd, a Virginia farmer and president of the
National Black Farmers Association told The Associated Press,
"I'm hopeful that the fact people know we're running out of
avenues in court would push Congress on a fast track."

At issue is the 1999 settlement of a class action lawsuit by
black farmers who alleged the Agriculture Department had
routinely denied them loans because of their race. In that
settlement, the department agreed to pay $50,000 to any farmer
who could show that he or she was discriminated against and in
extreme cases the department even agreed to unlimited payments.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia ruled against about 300 farmers who sought
claims, but had missed the deadline for appeals.  The farmers
argued that they missed the deadlines either because of mistakes
by their lawyers or because they were not notified of the appeal
deadline. U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman ruled against the
farmers in June 2003 and March 2004.  The appeals panel upheld
Judge Friedman's ruling, pointing out that the court had already
provided relief from filing deadlines. Judges David B. Sentelle
and Karen LeCraft Henderson ruled against the farmers, while
Judge Judith W. Rogers dissented in part.

Congress has held hearings on a related issue in the case that
claims from tens of thousands of black farmers were dismissed
because they missed the original deadline on July 14, 2000.
According to the government of the 65,951 late claims, 63,820
were rejected.

Thomas Burrell, president of the Black Farmers and
Agriculturalists Association, called the settlement a failure.
He told the Associated Press, "The courts, the guardians of the
Constitution, have left their posts when it comes to the rights
of African Americans, and unless Congress acts, the Constitution
(is) null and void for us."

To date, the government has paid nearly $684 million to 13,730
black farmers. Under the settlement, an independent arbitrator
reviews claims and a monitor reviews appeals.


WAL-MART STORES: Black Truck Drivers File Race Bias Suits in AR
---------------------------------------------------------------
Two black truck drivers filed class actions against retail giant
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. in the United States District Court in
Arkansas, alleging that the Company discriminated against them
by denying them jobs because of their race, Indystar.com
reported.

The discrimination claims are the latest employment-related
legal problems confronting the company. It is in the process of
contesting a sex discrimination class-action suit filed in 2001.
In March, Wal-Mart agreed to pay a record $11 million to settle
accusations that it employed hundreds of illegal immigrants to
clean stores.  A Wal-Mart spokesman said the firm would not
comment on the lawsuits.


WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION: White Employees Support Race Bias Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
According to a Complaint filed in the United States District
Court for the Middle District of Tennessee (Case No. 3-03-cv-
1250), Fifteen African-American employees of Whirlpool's La
Vergne, Tennessee facility have filed a race discrimination
class action alleging severe racial hostility, which disrupts
its workforce on a daily basis.

The employees filed their lawsuit in December 2003 and Attorney
David Sanford of Sanford, Wittels & Heisler, LLP, announced the
support of twelve white employees who witnessed the racial
hostility first hand.  Mr. Sanford stated that twelve white
employees of Whirlpool have supplied statements describing an
environment in which other white employees, including managers
and supervisors, routinely bully their black co-workers
referring to them as "n-----" or "monkey," tell racists jokes,
make racist slurs and comments on a regular basis, and write
racist graffiti on the walls of the plants.  Mr. Sanford further
stated that some employees have supplied sworn written
statements describing hearing jokes about the assassination of
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.; others tell of KKK meetings; still
others describe an environment awash with Confederate flag pins
on shirts and Confederate flags on vehicles.

Attorney Grant Morris says that the evidence amassed to date is
overwhelming, saying "We have photos of racist graffiti and
racist tape-recorded messages to provide the jury." Nashville
attorney Kevin Sharp, co-counsel in this case for the
plaintiffs, stated that "the conditions in the Whirlpool
facility constitute systematic racial discrimination that can no
longer be tolerated in a civilized society."

One current white employee, Lynette Barrett, says that Whirlpool
supervisors and managers routinely hear and participate in the
telling of racial jokes, and regularly utter racial slurs. Ms.
Barrett and 11 other white employees acknowledge that the work
environment at Whirlpool is extremely hostile to African-
American and minority employees.

Mr. Sanford says that the damages suffered by both black and
white employees as a result of the racist environment at
Whirlpool are extensive.  He said, "We will ask a jury in
Nashville to award the class of African-Americans in excess of
50 million dollars."

Whirlpool is the world's leading manufacturer and marketer of
major home appliances, with annual sales of over $13 billion and
68,000 employees. The La Vergne, Tennessee manufacturing
facility produces room air conditioners, built-in refrigerators,
air purifiers and dehumidifiers.

The legal team for plaintiffs and the class includes David
Sanford of the Washington, D.C. firm of Sanford, Wittels &
Heisler; Grant Morris of the Law Offices of Grant Morris; and
Kevin Sharp of Drescher & Sharp in Nashville, Tennessee. Mr.
Sanford, as the media contact, can be reached by phone at
202-942-9124 or 202-276-4028 in Washington, D.C. or by email at
dsanford@nydclaw.com. Mr. Morris can be reached at 202-486-0678
or by email at grantemorris@gmail.com. Mr. Sharp can be reached
at 615-320-0323 or by email at ksharp@drescherandsharp.com.  The
Website is http://www.nydclaw.com.


WEST VIRGINIA: Lakin Law Firm Founder Barred From Practicing
------------------------------------------------------------
Lakin Law Firm founder Thomas Lakin was barred from practicing
law in West Virginia for a year and the Wood River plaintiff's
firm also is facing sanctions, according to a recently issued
report by the Illinois Civil Justice League.  A West Virginia
Appeals Court barred Mr. Lakin on June 24 claiming that he
improperly solicited another lawyer's clients.

Appeals Court Judge Larry Starcher believes the Lakin Law Firm
also should have been barred from practicing law in West
Virginia. In a dissenting opinion on July 13, Judge Starcher
wrote, "When Governor Joe Manchin said 'West Virginia's Open for
Business, I do not think he meant that out-of-state lawyers were
free to come into West Virginia and attempt to steal the clients
of our State lawyers while violating our Rules of Professional
Conduct."

Ed Murnane, president of the Illinois Civil Justice League,
indicated that Lakin's conduct in West Virginia is consistent
with a pattern of "misusing" the legal system. He told the
Madison County Record, "We've known that it is a very aggressive
law firm and at times it has conducted itself in ways that have
caused eyebrows to be raised." He adds, "West Virginia has been
known as a friendly legal environment just as Madison County."

According to an ICJL report, "One of the most aggressive
attorneys in America - the one credited with creating the
Madison County class action phenomenon - has been barred from
practicing law by a West Virginia Appeals Court for improperly
soliciting another lawyer's clients. L. Thomas Lakin, founder of
the Lakin Law Firm from Madison County, has been barred from
practicing law in West Virginia for one year and his firm is
facing sanctions, according to documents discovered by the
Illinois Civil Justice League."

One Appellate Judge thinks Lakin got off too lightly from the
ordeal, stating in his dissent, "When Governor Joe Manchin said
"West Virginia's Open for Business," I do not think he meant
that out-of-state lawyers were free to come into West Virginia
and attempt to steal the clients of our State lawyers while
violating our Rules of Professional Conduct . I concur with the
majority's decision to prohibit Mr. Lakin, individually, from
practicing law in this State for a period of twelve months.
However, I vigorously dissent to the "empty sanctions" placed
upon Mr. Lakin's law firm . I would have placed the same
sanctions on the Lakin Law Firm that this Court placed on Mr.
Lakin individually."

The complaints stem from two personal injury clients represented
by West Virginia attorney Menis Ketchum. The clients, who had
been injured in separate accidents in 1997, were then solicited
by agents and attorneys of the Lakin Law Firm.  The first client
was told that Ketchum "would 'sell him out' and that (he) could
get more money from the accident if he hired the Lakin Law Firm.
The client also "received a telephone call from Howard Pederson,
the chief investigator for the Lakin Law Firm, who allegedly
attempted to solicit him as a client for the Firm."

A former Lakin client "arranged a meeting" with the second
client. In that meeting, the client met with "attorneys Brad
Lakin and Charles Armbruster of the Lakin Law Firm at (the
clients) home." The client said "he probably told Brad Lakin and
Charles Armbruster during the meeting that he was already
represented by counsel." According to the court opinion, Lakin
went back the clients home, but he "would not answer the door."
Both clients continued to be represented by Ketchum.

Count III of the Statement of Charges states that "The foregoing
actions on the part of the Lakin Law Firm, L. Thomas Lakin and
the attorney members and employees of that firm reflect a
pattern and practice of improper solicitation of . residents of
the State of West Virginia, all in violation of the West
Virginia Rules of Professional Conduct."  The opinion was filed
on June 24, 2005, with Judge Starcher's dissent filed on July
13, 2005.

The Lakin firm is known for its aggressive -- some have
described it as reckless -- activity. In 2003, Brad Lakin, son
of L. Thomas Lakin and the current managing partner of the Lakin
Law Firm, issued subpoenas to four civil justice reform
advocates following a news conference they conducted on the
steps of the Madison County Courthouse. The presidents of the
U.S. Chamber of Commerce, American Tort Reform Association,
Illinois Chamber of Commerce and Illinois Civil Justice League
had called for reform in the judicial system in Madison County
and were presented with subpoenas by Mr. Lakin's firm
immediately following. The firm withdrew the subpoenas in the
face of calls for sanctions against them by several of the
organizations, including the ICJL.

Former Illinois Appellate Judge Gordon Maag, who was voted off
the Appellate Court last November, is a member of the Lakin Law
Firm."


WYETH-AYERST: CA Court Certifies Class in Premarin(R) Lawsuit
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Firms of Wexler Firm LLP, Heins Mills & Olson PLC,
Hoffman & Edelson, LLC, Miller Faucher and Cafferty LLP and
Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP announces the certification of a
California Class of Consumers and Third Party Payors who
purchased or paid for Premarin(R) dispensed pursuant to
prescriptions.

According to court ordered legal notices, all purchasers of that
paid for or reimbursed for the purchase of the prescription drug
Premarin(R) in California since March 24, 1999, you may be
affected by the class action lawsuit, which is pending in the
Superior Court of California for the County of San Francisco
styled Elizabeth Blevins v. Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories, Inc. and
American Home Products Corp., Case No. 324380.

The Notice is to inform all parties involved of the Court's
certification of a Plaintiff Class, the nature of plaintiff's
claims, and their right to participate in, or exclude themselves
from the action.

Premarin(R) is a conjugated estrogens product prescribed by
doctors to relieve the symptoms associated with menopause and to
prevent osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Wyeth-Ayerst
Laboratories, Inc. and American Home Products Corporation
manufacture Premarin(R) and are Defendants in this case.
Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants violated California's
antitrust and unfair competition laws by engaging in anti-
competitive and exclusionary conduct that blocked consumer
access to Cenestin(R), which was an alternative to Premarin(R).
Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that Wyeth's contracts with
third-party payors violate state antitrust and unfair
competition laws. Plaintiff does not challenge the safety or
efficacy of Premarin(R). Defendants deny Plaintiff's allegations
and contend that their conduct was legal. The Court has not yet
determined whether Plaintiff's or Defendants' contentions are
correct. No trial date has been scheduled.

Two types of persons or entities may be affected by this
litigation: consumers and third-party payors of Premarin(R).

Consumer plaintiffs are individuals who paid for some or all of
the price of the prescription drug Premarin(R) in California at
any time since March 24, 1999.

Third-party payor plaintiffs are entities such as insurance
companies, union health and welfare benefit plans and other
organizations that paid for or reimbursed for all or part of the
cost of a member's Premarin(R) prescription in California since
March 24, 1999.

Excluded from the Class are all persons who obtained Premarin(R)
through the MediCal Prescription Drug Program, the Defendants
(along with their parents, subsidiaries, or affiliates), all
governmental entities, and all persons or entities that
purchased Premarin(R) directly from the Defendants or for
purposes of resale. Consumers and third-party payors who
suffered no economic loss as a result of allegedly
anticompetitive conduct by Wyeth are also excluded from the
Class.

The Court appointed Elizabeth Blevins as class representative
for all claims. The Court designated and appointed the following
law firms as Class Counsel: The Wexler Firm LLP, Heins Mills &
Olson PLC, Hoffman & Edelson, LLC, Miller Faucher and Cafferty
LLP, and Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP.

For more details, contact Premarin Class Action, c/o Complete
Claim Solutions, Inc., P.O. Box 24634, West Palm Beach, FL,
33416, Web site: http://www.premarinclassaction.com.



                 Meetings, Conferences & Seminars




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

July 21-22, 2005
ASBESTOS LITIGATION 101 CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, New Orleans
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

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

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

August 25-26, 2005
CLASS ACTION FAIRNESS ACT OF 2005 AND OTHER EMERGING CLASS
ACTION ISSUES
ALI-ABA
Chicago
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

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

September 19-20, 2005
NATIONAL ASBESTOS LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Four Seasons Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 26-27, 2005
CONSUMER FINANCE LITIGATION & CLASS ACTIONS
American Conferences
New York
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

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

September 26-27, 2005
WATER CONTAMINATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Marina del Rey Los Angeles
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 26-27, 2005
BAD FAITH LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

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

September 27-28, 2005
PREPARING FOR THE FUTURE OF FINITE AND STRUCTURED RISK
(RE)INSURANCE
American Conferences
New York
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com

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

October 2005
LAW CLIENT DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

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

October 7, 2005
REINSURANCE LAW & PRACTICE 2005: NEW LEGAL & BUSINESS
DEVELOPMENTS IN A CHANGING ENVIRONMENT
Practising Law Institute
New York, NY
Contact: 800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu

October 17-18, 2005
BENZENE LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz Carlton, Phoenix
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

October 17-18, 2005
INSURANCE COVERAGE DISPUTES CONCERNING CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS
Mealey Publications
The Ritz Carlton, New Orleans
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

October 27-28, 2005
RETAIL LIABILITY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Mandalay Bay Resort & Casino,Las Vegas
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 3-4, 2005
CONFERENCE ON LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRODUCTS
ALI-ABA
Washington DC
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

November 3-4, 2005
NATIONAL MANUFACTURING CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Coconut Grove, Miami
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 7, 2005
ALL SUMS: REALLOCATION & SETTLEMENT CREDITS CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton, Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 7-8, 2005
LEXISNEXIS PRESENTS: COPYRIGHT - FROM TRADITIONAL CONCEPTS TO
THE DIGITAL AGE
Mealey Publications
Downtown Conference Center at Pace University, New York City
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 7-8, 2005
CONSTRUCTION DEFECT & MOLD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz Carlton Phoenix, Phoenix
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 7-8, 2005
FUNDAMENTALS OF REINSURANCE LITIGATION & ARBITRATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Downtown Conference Center at Pace University, New York City
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 9, 2005
CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION DEFECT LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Four Seasons Resort, Santa Barbara
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 10-11, 2005
CALIFORNIA SECTION 17200 CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Four Seasons Resort Santa Barbara
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 14-15, 2005
SILICA LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton, New Orleans
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 17-18, 2005
ASBESTOS LIABILITY FORUM
Mealey Publications
London, England
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 17-18, 2005
Mass Torts Made Perfect Seminar
MassTortsMadePerfect.Com
Las Vegas, Nevada
Contact: 800-320-2227; 850-436-6094 (fax)

December 1-2, 2005
REINSURANCE GENERAL COUNSEL'S CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Fairmont Scottsdale Princess
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 5-6, 2005
ASBESTOS BANKRUPTCY CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton New York, Battery Park
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 6, 2005
ASBESTOS INSURANCE CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton New York, Battery Park
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 12-13, 2005
VIOXX LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Caesars Palace, Las Vegas
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 12-13, 2005
LEAD LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Pentagon City, Washington DC
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

February 16-17, 2006
ACCOUNTANTS' LIABILITY
ALI-ABA
Coral Gables, Miami, Florida
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

September 28-30, 2006
LITIGATING MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CLAIMS
ALI-ABA
Boston
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614


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

July 01-30, 2005
HBA PRESENTS: AUTOMOBILE LITIGATION: DISPUTES AMONG
CONSUMERS, DEALERS, FINANCE COMPANIES AND FLOORPLANNERS
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

July 01-30, 2005
CONSTRUCTION DISPUTES: TEXAS RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION DEFECT
LIABILITY
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

July 01-30, 2005
HBA PRESENTS: ETHICS IN PERSONAL INJURY
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

July 01-30, 2005
IN-HOUSE COUNSEL AND WRONGFUL DISCHARGE CLAIMS:
CONFLICT WITH CONFIDENTIALITY?
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

July 01-30, 2005
BAYLOR LAW SCHOOL PRESENTS: 2004 GENERAL PRACTICE INSTITUTE --
FAMILY LAW, DISCIPLINARY SYSTEM, CIVIL LITIGATION, INSURANCE
& CONSUMER LAW UPDATES
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

July 21, 2005
HEART DEVICE LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

July 28-29, 2005
CLASS ACTION LITIGATION: PROSECUTION & DEFENSE STRATEGIES 2005
(VIDEOCONFERENCE)
Practising Law Institute
Contact: 800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

RECOVERIES
Big Class Action
Contact: seminars@bigclassaction.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


                 New Securities Fraud Cases


BROCADE COMMUNICATIONS: Scott + Scott Provides Litigation Update
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Scott + Scott LLC is proving an update on
previously filed a securities fraud class action in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California
against Brocade Communications Systems, Inc. (Nasdaq: BRCDE) on
behalf of client shareholders who purchased the common stock or
other securities of Company between February 21, 2001 and May
15, 2005, inclusive (the "Class Period") are members of the
purported class.

On June 10, 2005, the Securities and Exchange Commission opened
a formal investigation into the Company's accounting of stock
options. This has caused the Company to miss various filings
with the SEC as required and the Company will restate its
earnings from the end of fiscal year 2002 through at least
fiscal year 2004. On June 30, 2005, the Company filed a Form 8-K
with the SEC announcing further delays in its required quarterly
and annual filings.

For more details, contact Neil Rothstein or Amy K. Saba of Scott
+ Scott, LLC, Phone: +1-800-332-2259, +1-619-251-0887 or
+1-800-332-2259, E-mail: nrothstein@scott-scott.com or
asaba@scott-scott.com.


MAJESCO ENTERTAINMENT: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Suit in NJ
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP initiated a
class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the securities
of Majesco Entertainment Company ("Majesco" or the "Company")
(NASDAQ: COOL) between December 8, 2004 to July 12, 2005,
inclusive (the "Class Period") seeking to pursue remedies under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act").

The action, captioned Central Laborers' Pension Fund v. Majesco
Entertainment Company, is pending in the United States District
Court for the District of New Jersey against defendants Majesco,
Carl Yankowski (CEO, Chairman), Jan E. Chason (CFO) and Jesse
Sutton (President).

The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period,
defendants represented that the Company's revenue and income
would continue to grow over its impressive 2004 and first half
of 2005 results in its fiscal year 2005, even as the Company
increased its investment in product development and marketing.
According to defendants, the Company expected $175-$185 million
in net revenues and operating income of $16-$18 million in 2005,
representing strong growth over Majesco's 2004 results.
Unbeknownst to investors, however, Majesco's strong reported
growth resulted, in material part, from the Company having
inundated its retailers with product that defendants knew was in
excess of end-user demand. Defendants representations regarding
the Company's expected 2005 revenues and earnings lacked any
basis and deceived investors about the true state of Majesco's
business and prospects. As defendants knew or recklessly
disregarded, the Company's strong growth was unsustainable
because retailers would either return a material quantity of
unsold products or would meet 2005 demand by selling off excess
inventory instead of ordering new products. In addition,
unbeknownst to investors, but known to or recklessly disregarded
by defendants, two of the Company's new video game titles
flopped, and the Company could not meet its earnings
expectations without the success of these new titles. Defendants
were motivated to engage in the wrongdoing alleged herein so
that Majesco's planned secondary offering, which allowed many
large stockholders, mostly institutions, to sell their
personally held Majesco shares, would be priced higher than it
would have been had investors known the truth about the
Company's business.

On July 12, 2005, after the close of regular trading, Majesco
issued a press release announcing a dramatic reduction in its
expected 2005 results. Rather than earning $16-$18 million in
2005, defendants announced that the Company would swing to a
loss of $16-$19 million on revenues of $120 to $125 million. The
Company attributed this astounding reversal to: substantially
weaker demand for all of the Company's products; a glut of
Majesco products sitting on retailers' shelves or in their
stockrooms; and weak reorders. Majesco also announced that
defendant Yankowski had resigned his positions as Majesco's
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. In response to this
announcement, the price of Majesco common stock plummeted,
falling by 48% in one day, from $6.89 per share on July 12, 2005
to $3.56 per share on July 13, 2005, earning it the dubious
distinction of being the largest percentage loser on the Nasdaq
for the day.

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


POSSIS MEDICAL: Emerson Poynter Sets Lead Plaintiff Deadline
------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Emerson Poynter LLP said that the deadline for
shareholders to move for appointment as Lead Plaintiff is on
August 2, 2005 for the class action lawsuit filed on behalf of
purchasers of Possis Medical, Inc.'s ("Possis") (Nasdaq:POSS)
common stock during the period between September 25, 2002 and
August 24, 2004 (the "Class Period").

The complaint, filed in the United States District Court for the
District of Minnesota, charges Possis and certain of its
officers and directors with violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. Possis engages in the development,
manufacture, and marketing of medical devices. The complaint
further alleges that during the Class Period, defendants made
false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business
and prospects, including about the capabilities and safety of
its primary product, the AngioJet system. As a result of
defendants' false statements, Possis stock traded at inflated
levels during the Class Period, whereby the Company's top
officers and directors arranged for the sale of more than $1.2
million worth of Company shares.

Then, in August 2004, Possis reported its results from its 480
patient, post-marketing study called AiMI. The study used the
Company's AngioJet catheter for removing thrombus prior to
balloon angioplasty and stinting in acute myocardial
infarctions. The primary endpoint of the trial was the final
infarct size at 14-28 days. The results of the trial not only
showed that the primary endpoint was not achieved, but that the
control arm had statistically significant, smaller infarcts than
the AngioJet arm. These revelations sent the Company's shares
into a free-fall. The complaint alleges that Possis had led
investors to believe that the AiMI study would show that there
was a clear benefit from prophylactic use in all "heart attack"
patients and this would convince the medical community that this
should become the standard of care in such cases.

Once this news was released, Possis stock collapsed 40 percent
from $30.76 to $18.53 per share on volume of 14.8 million
shares. According to the complaint, the true facts, which were
concealed from the investing public during the Class Period,
were as follows:

     (1) defendants' claims relating to the utility of the
         AngioJet catheter were materially false, as the study
         cited as a basis for these claims was, like defendants'
         projections, manipulated and/or simply manufactured,
         since the study proved what defendants already knew --
         there was no statistically significant difference;

     (2) defendants' study was manipulated and/or manufactured,
         as the August 2004 revelations suggest that the control
         group was different at baseline than the AngioJet arm;

     (3) the AngioJet system was not more effective than
         existing alternatives, nor did the AngioJet system
         reduce significant procedural complications or
         significantly increase positive benefits such as
         improved blood flow or other similar effects; and

     (4) the Company's clarifications relating to the benefits
         of the AngioJet issued during the Class Period were not
         based on fact or scientifically based assumptions, but
         rather on defendants' own fabricated "guess work."

For more details, contact Charlie Gastineau, Tanya Autry, or
Michelle Raggio of Emerson Poynter LLP, Phone: 800-663-9817 or
501-907-2555, Fax: 501-907-2556, E-mail:
epllp@emersonpoynter.com.


STARTEK INC.: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Securities Suit in CO
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP, initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
District of Colorado on behalf of all securities purchasers of
StarTek, Inc. (NYSE: SRT) ("StarTek" or the "Company") between
February 26, 2003 and May 5, 2005, and all persons who bought
pursuant to the Company's secondary offering on June 9, 2004,
inclusive (the "Class Period").

The complaint charges A. Emmet Stephenson, Jr., William E.
Meade, Jr., Michael W. Morgan, Eugene L. McKenzie, Jr., Toni E.
Stephenson and Pamela S. Oliver with violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. More specifically, the
Complaint alleges that the Company failed to disclose and
misrepresented the following material adverse facts, known to
defendants or recklessly disregarded by them:

     (1) that the Company's restructuring plan, designed to fix
         the severe problems the Company experienced in 2000-
         2001, had not been implemented and the severe problems
         continued to plague the Company;

     (2) that there was insufficient demand for StarTek's
         products to support the Company's newly expanded
         capacity, which grew by the opening of six new
         facilities during the Class Period; and

     (3) that the Company was experiencing problems with its
         sales force, resulting in a complete revamp of its
         sales force.

On February 18, 2005, StarTek unexpectedly ousted William E.
Meade Jr. as chief executive of the Company. On this news,
shares of StarTek fell $6.15 per share, or 23.88 percent, on
February 22, 2005, to close at $19.60 per share. On May 6, 2005,
StarTek announced that its profits had declined. On this news,
shares of StarTek fell another $2.80 per share, or 18.42
percent, on May 6, 2005, to close at $12.40 per share.

For more details, contact Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Darren J.
Check, Esq. of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP, 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:
http://www.sbclasslaw.com.


TREX COMPANY: Federman & Sherwood Lodges Securities Suit in VA
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Federman & Sherwood initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia against Trex Company, Inc. (NYSE: TWP).

The complaint alleges violations of federal securities laws,
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and Rule 10b-5, including allegations of issuing a series of
material misrepresentations to the market which had the effect
of artificially inflating the market price. The class period is
from October 25, 2004 through June 22, 2005.

For more details, contact William B. Federman of Federman &
Sherwood, 120 N. Robinson, Suite 2720, Oklahoma City, OK, 73102,
Phone: (405) 235-1560, Fax: (405) 239-2112, E-mail:
wfederman@aol.com, Web site: http://www.federmanlaw.com.


                            *********


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

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

                            *********


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

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

Copyright 2005.  All rights reserved.  ISSN 1525-2272.

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

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

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

                  * * *  End of Transmission  * * *