CAR_Public/050801.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

             Monday, August 1, 2005, Vol. 7, No. 150

                         Headlines

BAYTRIL LITIGATION: Enrofloxacin Causes Bacterial Resistance
BIOGEN IDEC: MA Court Yet To Rule on Move To Consolidate Suits
CITIGROUP INC.: NJ Law Firm Files Suit Over Missing Data Tapes
COLORADO: Companies Will Pay $32.5M to Settle Suit Over Windows
COSI INC.: NY Court Dismisses IPO Securities Fraud Litigation

CRYOLIFE INC.: Reaches Settlement For Securities Suit in N.D. GA
eBAY INC.: CA Court Partially Dismisses Consumer Fraud Lawsuit
eBAY INC.: Enters Mediation For CA "Shill Bidding" Fraud Lawsuit
eBAY INC.: Enters Mediation For NY Lawsuit For RICO Violations
E.I. DUPONT: Six Women Launch Suit Over Teflon's Harmful Effects

GOLDEN OAKS: PA AG Corbett Launches Home Builder Fraud Lawsuit
GUIDANT CORPORATION: Climaco Firm Lodges Suit Over Faulty ICDs
HIENERGY TECHNOLOGIES: Plaintiffs File Second Amended Stock Suit
ILLINOIS: Disabled Residents File ADA Suit V. State Officials
INTERSTATE BAKERIES: Recalls Rolls Due to Undeclared Ingredient

KENTUCKY: Ex-Grant County Inmates Launch Abuse Suit V Jailers
MUELLER INDUSTRIES: Faces Copper Tube Fraud Suits in TN, CA, MA  
NATIONAL CHECK: FTC Wins $10.2M Ruling in FDCPA Violations Suit
NDCHEALTH CORPORATION: GA Court Dismisses Securities Fraud Suit
NEW YORK: Willie Gary Leads Civil Servants' Racial Bias Lawsuit

R.A. HANEY: PA AG Corbett Commences Suit For Home Builder Fraud
RJ REYNOLDS: VT AG Spearheads Eclipse False Advertising Lawsuit
ROYAL CARIBBEAN: Cabin Stewards Initiate "Tips" Lawsuit in FL
ROYAL CARIBBEAN: Faces Deceptive Trade Suit For Shore Excursions
SOUTH CAROLINA: CAMP KEMO Receives Taxol Suit Settlement Share

SPORTCRAFT LTD.: Recalls 12T Treadmills Due to Injury Hazard
SUNOCO INC.: To Pay $3.6M Over Damages Caused By 2000 Oil Spill
T. ROWE PRICE: IL Court Refuses To Amend Investor Suit Dismissal
TALISMAN ENERGY: Still Subject to "Alien Tort Claims Act" Suit  
TENNESSEE: Court Favors Reversal of Ronald Harries Death Penalty

TEXAS: AG Praises $500,000 Verdict V. Man For Immigration Fraud
TRIPATH TECHNOLOGY: Reaches Settlement For CA Securities Lawsuit
UNITED KINGDOM: Lawsuit Being Prepared Over Inheritance Taxes
WORLDCOM INC.: NY Judge OKs Settlements of Remaining Defendants

                  New Securities Fraud Cases

MOLINA HEALTHCARE: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Suit in CA
MOLINA HEALTHCARE: Goodkind Labaton Lodges Securities Suit in CA
MOLINA HEALTHCARE: Marc S. Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in CA
MOLINA HEALTHCARE: Paskowitz & Associates Files Stock Suit in CA
MOLINA HEALTHCARE: Schatz & Nobel Lodges Securities Suit in CA

RENAISSANCERE HOLDINGS: Charles J. Piven Lodges Stock Suit in NY
RENAISSANCERE HOLDINGS: Goldman Scarlato Lodges Stock Suit in NY
RENAISSANCERE HOLDINGS: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in NY
RENAISSANCERE HOLDINGS: Schatz & Nobel Lodges Stock Suit in NY

                          *********

BAYTRIL LITIGATION: Enrofloxacin Causes Bacterial Resistance
------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Lester
Crawford announced the Agency's final decision to no longer
allow distribution or use of the antimicrobial drug enrofloxacin
for the purpose of treating bacterial infections in poultry.
This ruling does not affect other approved uses of the drug.
This animal drug belongs to a class of drugs known as
fluoroquinolones and is marketed under the name Baytril by Bayer
Corporation.

The FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) began proceedings
to withdraw use of this animal drug in poultry because of
scientific data that showed that the use of enrofloxacin in
poultry caused resistance to emerge in Campylobacter, a
bacterium that causes foodborne illness. Chickens and turkeys
normally harbor Campylobacter in their digestive tracts without
causing poultry to become ill. Enrofloxacin does not completely
eliminate Campylobacter from the birds' intestinal tracts, and
those Campylobacter bacteria that survive are resistant to
fluoroquinolone drugs. These resistant bacteria multiply in the
digestive tracts of poultry and persist and spread through
transportation and slaughter, and are found on chicken carcasses
in slaughter plants and retail poultry meats.

Campylobacter bacteria are a significant cause of foodborne
illness in the U.S. Antimicrobial treatment is recommended for
people with severe illness as well as the very young, the
elderly, and people with certain medical conditions.
Complications of such infections can include reactive arthritis
and, more rarely, blood stream infections. Early treatment can
mitigate symptoms and may decrease the risk of complications.
Fluoroquinolones used in humans are ineffective if used to treat
Campylobacter infections that are resistant to them. This
failure can significantly prolong the duration of the infections
and may increase the risk of complications. The proportion of
Campylobacter infections that are resistant to fluoroquinolones
has increased significantly since the use of enrofloxacin in
poultry was approved in the U.S.

Bayer Corporation has 60 days from the date of the decision to
appeal the withdrawal to a U.S. Court of Appeals. The Final Rule
withdrawing approval of the antimicrobial drug enrofloxacin for
the purpose of treating bacterial infections in poultry will be
effective on September 12, 2005.  To view the Final Decision,
visit the Website: www.fda.gov/oc/antimicrobial/baytril.pdf.  To
view the Federal Register documents, visit the Website:
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets.


BIOGEN IDEC: MA Court Yet To Rule on Move To Consolidate Suits
--------------------------------------------------------------
Parties asked the United States District Court for the District
of Massachusetts to consolidated the securities class actions
filed against Biogen Idec, Inc., William H. Rastetter, its
Executive Chairman, and James C. Mullen, its Chief Executive
Officer.

A purported class action, styled "Brown v. Biogen Idec Inc., et
al.," was initially filed in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Massachusetts.  The complaint alleges violations of
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.  The action is
purportedly brought on behalf of all purchasers of our publicly-
traded securities between February 18, 2004 and February 25,
2005.  

The plaintiff alleges that the defendants made materially false
and misleading statements regarding potentially serious side
effects of TYSABRI in order to gain accelerated approval from
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the product's
distribution and sale. The plaintiff alleges that these
materially false and misleading statements harmed the purported
class by artificially inflating the Company's stock price during
the purported class period and that company insiders benefited
personally from the inflated price by selling Company stock.  
The plaintiff seeks unspecified damages, as well as interest,
costs and attorneys' fees.

Substantially similar actions, captioned "Grill v. Biogen Idec
Inc., et al." and "Lobel v. Biogen Idec Inc., et al.," were
filed on March 10, 2005 and April 21, 2005 in the same court by
other purported class representatives. By court orders dated
April 6, 2005 and May 27, 2005, defendants are not required to
respond to the complaints until at least 35 days after the later
of the Court's selection of a lead plaintiff pursuant to the
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act or the date on which a
consolidated amended complaint, if any, is served upon the
defendants.  On May 2, 2005, four motions were filed to
consolidate the actions, to appoint lead plaintiffs and to
approve the selection of lead counsel.  The Court has not yet
ruled on those motions.

The first identified complaint in the litigation is styled
"Charles Brown, et al. v. Biogen Idec Inc., et al.," filed in
the United States District for the District of Massachusetts,
under Judge Reginald Lindsay.  The plaintiff firms in this
litigation are:

     (1) Brodsky & Smith, LLC, 11 Bala Avenue, Suite 39, Bala
         Cynwyd, PA, 19004, Phone: 610.668.7987, Fax:
         610.660.0450, E-mail: esmith@Brodsky-Smith.com

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

     (3) Dyer & Shuman, LLP, 801 East 17th Avenue, Denver, CO,
         80218-1417, Phone: 303.861.3003, Fax: 800.711.6483, E-
         mail: info@dyershuman.com

     (4) Gilman & Pastor, Stonehill Corporate Center 999
         Broadway Suite 500, Saugus, MA, 01906, Phone:
         781.231.7850, Fax: 781.231.7840,

     (5) Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP, 275 Madison Ave 34th Flr,
         New York, NY, 10016, Phone: 212.682.1818, Fax:   
         212.682.1892, E-mail: email@rabinlaw.com

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

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

     (8) 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


CITIGROUP INC.: NJ Law Firm Files Suit Over Missing Data Tapes
--------------------------------------------------------------
A Mount Laurel, New Jersey law firm initiated a class action
lawsuit against New York-based Citigroup Inc. and United Parcel
Service nine days after the bank began to notify almost 4
million customers that account and personal history information
was lost in transit, The Courier-Post reports.

Court documents indicate that UPS had a contract to ship
computer data tapes from Weehawken to a Texas office of a credit
agency.  According to letters previously mailed to Citigroup
customers, a cardboard box containing those tapes was lost
between May 2 and May 24. The cardboard box is still missing
despite a request made by Citigroup on May 27 to the U.S. Secret
Service to help track the package.  Information included in the
personal financial records included the Social Security numbers
of customers of Citifinancial Branch Network and customer
payment histories.  In its May 28 letter, Citifinancial told
customers they could enroll by a toll-free number with a free
credit monitoring service. That offer would be good for 90 days
of credit reports.

Norman Black, director of media relations for UPS at its
Atlanta, Ga., headquarters, told The Courier-Post that there is
"no evidence whatsoever of any type of identity theft or fraud
being perpetrated in the case of the contents of this missing
box." He even said that UPS had not been notified of the lawsuit
or of any intent to file the complaint.

The suit, filed by Norman Shabel and Stephen P. De-Nittis,
seeks, among other things, full reimbursement to banking
customers of the cost of regular credit reports.  The lawsuit
whose sole named plaintiff is identified only as a Burlington
County woman, include specific counts namely: violation of the
New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, breach of contract, breach of
warranty, and negligence by both Citifinancial and UPS.


COLORADO: Companies Will Pay $32.5M to Settle Suit Over Windows
---------------------------------------------------------------
Companies involved in the manufacture and sale of allegedly
hazardous windows have agreed to pay a combined total of $32.5
million to settle a class action lawsuit, The Denver Post
reports.

According to Denver lawyer Scott Sullan, who represents Colorado
homeowners Merrill F. and Mary Jean Rowe and other members of
the class, the suit, which was filed in 1999 in Douglas County
District Court, was settled piecemeal with the final agreement
being reached only recently.

The companies included in the suit are the now-bankrupt Oldach
Window Corporation of Colorado Springs, as well as window
sealant maker Morton International of Indiana and distributor
Smalley and Co. of Colorado.  The suit claims that homes with
Tiltmaster 2000 windows suffered various damages. Mr. Sullan
told The Denver Post, owners eligible to file a claim are in the
process of being notified.


COSI INC.: NY Court Dismisses IPO Securities Fraud Litigation
-------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York dismissed with prejudice class action lawsuits brought
against it by shareholders who participated in the sandwich shop
chain's initial public offering, The Reuters.com reports.

As previously reported in the April 7, 2004 edition of the Class
Action Reporter, Cosi, Inc. had asked the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York to dismiss the
consolidated securities class action filed against it, styled In
re Cosi, Inc. Securities Litigation.

The suit alleges that the Company and various of its officers
and directors and the underwriter of its IPO violated Sections
11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended,
by misstating, and by failing to disclose, certain financial and
other business information.  The suit was filed on behalf of a
purported class of purchasers of Company stock allegedly
traceable to the Company's November 22, 2002 IPO, that:

     (1) at the time of the IPO, the Company's offering
         materials failed to disclose that the funds raised
         through the IPO would be insufficient to implement the
         Company's expansion plan;

     (2) it was improbable that the Company would be able to
         open 53 to 59 new restaurants in 2003;

     (3) at the time of the IPO, the Company had negative
         working capital and therefore did not have available
         working capital to repay certain debts; and

     (4) the principal purpose for going forward with the IPO
         was to repay certain existing shareholders and members
         of the Board of Directors for certain debts and to
         operate the Company's existing restaurants.

The plaintiffs in the Securities Act Litigation generally sought
to recover recessionary damages, expert fees, attorneys' fees,
costs of Court and pre- and post-judgment interest.  The
underwriter is seeking indemnification from the Company for any
damages assessed against it in the Securities Act Litigation.

The defendants filed motions to dismiss the second consolidated
amended complaint in the Securities Act Litigation.  Plaintiffs
filed their opposition to defendants' motion to dismiss and the
defendants filed reply briefs on November 12, 2003.


CRYOLIFE INC.: Reaches Settlement For Securities Suit in N.D. GA
----------------------------------------------------------------
CryoLife, Inc. (NYSE: CRY), a biomaterials and biosurgical
device company, reached an agreement in principle to settle the
securities class action lawsuit pending in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Georgia arising out
of allegedly inadequate disclosures prior to the FDA's August
2002 tissue recall. The settlement will resolve all claims
asserted against the Company and the individual defendants in
this case.

The terms of the settlement, which must be approved by the court
following notice to the class, include a total settlement of
$23.25 million, approximately $11.5 million of which is expected
to be paid from insurance proceeds. The remainder is expected to
be comprised of a cash payment from the Company of approximately
$8.0 million, expected to be made in the third or fourth
quarter, and common stock with a stipulated value of
approximately $3.75 million. Based on a stock price of $7.90,
the Company expects that the settlement will include
approximately 475,000 shares of CryoLife common stock. The
actual number of common shares issued will depend on the stock
price at the time of distribution. Management expects to record
a pre-tax charge of approximately $11.75 million in the second
quarter of 2005 for the combined value of the cash and common
stock.

The Company and the individual defendants have denied any
wrongdoing and liability whatsoever, and the settlement does not
contain any admission of liability. While the court previously
dismissed a number of plaintiffs' claims in a ruling on the
Company's motion for summary judgment, the court also ruled that
several claims could proceed to trial. Plaintiffs intended to
seek damages at trial in excess of $150 million. Although the
Company believes plaintiffs' claims lacked merit, in light of
the inherent risks and uncertainties of litigation as well as
defense costs, the Company determined to resolve the matter
short of trial rather than expose the Company and its current
shareholders to these costs and the risk of a potentially
catastrophic award at trial.

As previously disclosed, the Company has been in settlement
discussions regarding a shareholder derivative action filed in
the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia. The terms of the
proposed settlement, which must be approved by the court,
include a cash payment of $3.5 million, which the Company
expects to recover from the insurance carriers. As part of the
proposed settlement, the Company and its management have also
agreed to several changes in corporate governance, including the
identification and appointment of a new director with regulatory
experience and the formation of a regulatory affairs and quality
assurance committee. In the first quarter of 2005, the Company
recorded $3.5 million in accrued expenses and other liabilities,
and recorded $3.5 million in other receivables, representing
amounts the Company expects to recover from the insurance
carriers.

Steven G. Anderson, President and CEO of CryoLife, Inc., said:
"We are pleased to now have these matters behind us. We believe
these settlements will be in the best interest of the Company
and its shareholders and will enable us to preserve adequate
liquidity for CryoLife's operations. CryoLife has worked very
hard over the last three years to strengthen its processes and
resolve the regulatory issues from 2002 and subsequent FDA
activity. As we look to the future, we are focused on enhancing
our leadership position in processing and preserving human
tissues, which improve health and quality of life."


eBAY INC.: CA Court Partially Dismisses Consumer Fraud Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa
Clara sustained certain portions of eBay, Inc.'s demurrer to the
second amended class action filed against it, alleging it
engaged in improper billing practices as the result of problems
with the rollout of a new billing software system in the second
and third quarters of 2004.

Two eBay users filed the suit in July 2004, seeking damages and
injunctive relief.  An amended complaint was filed in January
2005, dropping one plaintiff, changing the capacity of the other
plaintiff to that of representative plaintiff, and adding seven
additional eBay users as plaintiffs.  The amended complaint
expanded its claim to include numerous alleged improper billing
practices from September 2003 until the present.

In February 2005, the Company filed a motion to strike and a
demurrer seeking to dismiss the complaint.  In April 2005, the
court sustained portions of the demurrer, but granted the
plaintiffs leave to amend their complaint.  The plaintiffs filed
a second amended complaint, dropping the last original plaintiff
and again adding new plaintiffs.  The Company filed a motion to
strike and a demurrer regarding the plaintiffs' second amended
complaint.  In July 2005, the court again sustained a portion of
the demurrer and again granted the plaintiffs leave to amend
their complaint.


eBAY INC.: Enters Mediation For CA "Shill Bidding" Fraud Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
eBay, Inc. entered mediation with the plaintiffs in a class
action filed against it in the Superior Court of the State of
California, County of Santa Clara, charging the Company with
"shill bidding."

The suit was initially filed in February 2005, alleging that
certain bidding features of the Company's site constitute "shill
bidding" for the purpose of artificially inflating bids placed
by buyers on the site.  The complaint alleges violations of
California's Auction Act, California's Consumer Remedies Act,
and unfair competition.  The complaint seeks injunctive relief,
damages, and a constructive trust.

In April 2005, the Company filed a demurrer seeking to dismiss
the complaint.  The Company has agreed to stay the demurrer and
participate in mediation with the plaintiffs.


eBAY INC.: Enters Mediation For NY Lawsuit For RICO Violations
--------------------------------------------------------------
eBay, Inc. agreed to enter mediation with plaintiffs in the
class action filed against it and PayPal in the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

In March 2005, the Company, PayPal, and an eBay seller were sued
in Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Kings in a
purported class action alleging that certain disclosures
regarding PayPal's Buyer Protection Policy, users' chargeback
rights, and the effects of users' choice of funding mechanism
are deceptive and/or misleading.  The complaint alleged
misrepresentation on the part of eBay and PayPal, breach of
contract and deceptive trade practices by PayPal, and that
PayPal and eBay have jointly violated the civil Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute (18 U.S.C.
Section 1961(4)).

In April 2005, the Company and PayPal removed the case to the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New
York and the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, repeating
the allegations of the initial complaint but dropping the civil
RICO allegations.  The complaint seeks injunctive relief,
compensatory damages, and punitive damages. The parties have
agreed to stay further proceedings pending a mediation hearing,
which will take place in the third quarter of 2005.

The suit is styled "Steele et al v. Paypal, Inc. et al., case
no. 1:05-cv-01720-ILG-VVP," filed in the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of New York, under Judge I. Leo
Glasser.  Representing the plaintiffs is Marina Trubitsky,
Marina Trubitsky & Associates, PLLC, 11 Broadway, Ste. 861, New
York, NY 10004 Phone: 212-732-7707 E-mail:
dtcassociates@yahoo.com.  Representing the Company are Benjamin
Chapman, Angela Dunning, Laura C. Pierri; Lori R.E. Ploeger and
Michael G. Rhodes of Cooley Godward LLP, 4401 Eastgate Mall San
Diego, CA 92121-1909 Phone: 858-550-6000, and Amy W. Schulman of
DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary US LLP, 1251 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10020-1104 Phone: (212) 835-6108 Fax: 212-835-6001
E-mail: amy.schulman@piperrudnick.com.


E.I. DUPONT: Six Women Launch Suit Over Teflon's Harmful Effects
----------------------------------------------------------------
A national debate over the alleged danger of nonstick pans will
play out partly in Iowa through a federal class action lawsuit,
which was filed by a Des Moines law firm, alleging that the
makers of Teflon failed to warn consumers about chemicals that
can be released when food is cooked in the pans, The Des Moines
Register reports.

The local case, which names six central Iowa women as
plaintiffs, mirrors lawsuits filed in eight states earlier this
week against E.I. DuPont Nemours & Co.  Like the other cases,
the Iowa suit seeks reimbursement for anyone who has purchased
Teflon-coated products, plus the creation of separate funds to
monitor consumers' health and to study the potential for adverse
health effects.

Court papers allege that Teflon at temperatures of 464 degrees
has been shown to emit toxic particles that "can cause extreme
lung damage to rats within 10 minutes of exposure." Accoridng to
the suit, the products were sold "even though DuPont knew or
reasonably should have known that Teflon can release harmful and
dangerous substances."

A DuPont spokesman previously stated that Teflon-coated products
are safe and do not contain the suspected carcinogen, known as
perfluorooctanoic acid.

Kimberley Baer, of Wandro, Baer and Appel, the law firm that
filed the Iowa suit, told The Des Moines Register it mirrors the
larger cases filed in Florida earlier this week. Accoridng to
her, "We just looked at the lawsuits and said, 'Gosh, nobody's
doing anything to protect the people in Iowa.' So we filed our
own lawsuits."


GOLDEN OAKS: PA AG Corbett Launches Home Builder Fraud Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Pennsylvania Attorney General Tom Corbett filed a lawsuit
against three residential developers accused of shoddy work and
failing to construct the promised clubhouse, gardens, lake,
walking trails, drugstore, market and assisted living facilities
that were advertised as exclusive features for those purchasing
land/home packages in a Carbon County development. The suit
follows complaints from more than 30 predominantly older
Pennsylvanians who bought homes in the development because of
the promised amenities.

The legal action, filed in Monroe County Court, seeks consumer
restitution, civil penalties and an injunction barring the
defendants from doing business in the Commonwealth until
restitution and fines are paid.

Mr. Corbett identified the defendants as Golden Oaks Village
Inc., with a business office located in East Stroudsburg, Monroe
County, and its operators, Michael Berardi, RD #5, Box 5199,
East Stroudsburg, John Herman, 3701 Perkiomen Ave., Reading,
Berks County, and Thomas Feeser, 1130 Schuylkill Mountain Rd,
Schuylkill Haven, Schuylkill County. The suit alleges violations
of the state's Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection
Law.

Investigators with Mr. Corbett's Bureau of Consumer Protection
said the defendants beginning in 2000 advertised the sale of
properties in Golden Oaks Village, Kidder Township, Carbon
County, in various newspapers, magazines and sales materials
that were provided to prospective buyers.

The ads, sales materials and verbal representations all claimed
that Golden Oaks Village residents would enjoy and have access
to a 10,000 square foot clubhouse to include a restaurant, bar,
library, craft room, exercise facilities, heated indoor/outdoor
swimming pool, as well as tennis and shuffle board courts. The
developers also promised that Golden Oaks Village would include
a man-made lake, walking trails and gardens along with an
adjoining drugstore, convenience store and professional offices.

The majority of homeowners told Mr. Corbett's office that one of
the biggest selling points for moving into the development was
the construction of assisted living facilities. The prospective
buyers were predominantly retirement age residents who were
planning for their future.

"Those interested in Golden Oaks Village paid between $140,000
and $300,000 for their homes and property," Mr. Corbett said. "A
significant purchase for any buyer, but particularly important
for the majority of residents who viewed this purchase as
securing not only their future housing needs but also their
retirement lifestyle. These defendants misled residents who have
been waiting five years for construction to begin on any of the
promised amenities. Without all or some of these features, many
said they would have purchased a home elsewhere."

Mr. Corbett said the complaint also accuses the defendant of
failing to correct serious ongoing problems with some of the
homes, including insufficient water pressure, exterior drainage
problems, foundation cracks, poorly constructed driveways,
incomplete or shoddy interior construction, incomplete
landscaping and failure to complete roadways as promised.  
Additionally, the lawsuit claims that the defendants
misrepresented expenses that were to be included in the purchase
of their land/home packages. For example, homeowners were
falsely told that:

     (1) The defendants would subsidize individual homeowners
         for their costs related to landscaping and snow
         removal.

     (2) $1,500 from each sale would be placed in escrow to be
         paid toward the costs of furnishing the promised
         clubhouse.

     (3) $1,000 from each sale would be used to fund a property
         owners association.

The complaint asks the court to require the defendants to:

     (i) Pay restitution and/or reimbursements to Golden Oaks
         Village residents who failed to receive promised
         repairs or amenities.

    (ii) Pay civil penalties of more than $164,000.

   (iii) Establish a strict timetable for the completion of
         roadways and all promised amenities.

    (iv) Return monies paid by consumers for the creation of a
         property owners association.

     (v) Relinquish control of property owners association and
         turn over control to Golden Oaks Village residents.

    (vi) Pay the Commonwealth's investigation costs.

   (vii) Permanently forfeit their right to conduct business in
         the Commonwealth until restitution and/or consumer
         reimbursements are paid.

The case is being litigated by Senior Deputy Attorney General
J.P. McGowan of Corbett's Bureau of Consumer Protection Office
in Scranton.  For more details, contact Pennsylvania Office of
Attorney General, by Mail: Strawberry Square, Harrisburg, PA
17120, by Phone: 717-787-3391 or visit the Website:
http://www.attorneygeneral.gov/.


GUIDANT CORPORATION: Climaco Firm Lodges Suit Over Faulty ICDs
--------------------------------------------------------------  
John R. Climaco, founding principal of Cleveland-based Climaco,
Lefkowitz, Peca, Wilcox & Garofoli Co., L. P. A., recently
stated that the firm filed a national Class Action lawsuit
against Guidant Corporation on behalf of individuals who have
defective implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). The
case, Watts, et al. v. Guidant Corporation was filed in Federal
District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern
Division and assigned to Judge Dan Polster, Case No. 1:05CV1880.

The case was filed on behalf of all individuals who received the
defective defibrillators and seeks the recovery of monetary
damages as well as medical monitoring for people who have not
replaced them.

The devices were recalled by Guidant Corporation on June 16,
2005 as a result of several occurrences of malfunctions which
have caused at least two deaths. Approximately 100,000
individuals are affected by the recall. The following is a list
of defibrillators, which are subject to the recall:

     (1) Ventak Prizm 2 DR, Model 1861, manufactured before
         4/16/02

     (2) Contak Renewal, Model H135, manufactured on or before
         8/26/04

     (3) Contak Renewal 2, Model H155, manufactured before
         8/26/04

     (4) Ventak Prizm AVT

     (5) Vitality AVT

     (6) Renewal AVT

     (7) Contak Renewal 3

     (8) Contak Renewal 4

     (9) Renewal 3 AVT

    (10) Renewal 4 AVT

    (11) Renewal RF

Climaco Lefkowitz is nationally known for representing
individuals seeking to recover damages in class action and mass
tort litigation including asbestos, welding fumes, defective
pharmaceuticals and other products.

For more details, contact John R. Climaco of Climaco, Lefkowitz,
Peca, Wilcox & Garofoli Co., L.P.A., Phone: +1-216-621-8484.


HIENERGY TECHNOLOGIES: Plaintiffs File Second Amended Stock Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs filed a second amended securities class action
against Hienergy Technologies, Inc. and certain of its officers
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
California.

In January 2005, the Company was served with a Summons and Class
Action Complaint For Violations of Federal Securities Laws.  The
Complaint named the Company, its Chairman, among other named
defendants on behalf of a class of persons who acquired the
stock of the Company during the period from February 22, 2002
through July 8, 2004.  In February 2005, plaintiff's counsel
filed a First Amended Complaint entitled and styled, "In re:
HiEnergy Technologies, Inc. Securities Litigation," Master File
No. 8:04-CV-01226-DOC (JTLx), alleging various violations of the
federal securities laws, generally asserting the same claims
involving Philip Gurian, Barry Alter, and the Company's failure
to disclose their various securities violations including,
without limitation, allegations of fraud.  The First Amended
Complaint seeks, among other things, monetary damages,
attorney's fees, costs, and declaratory relief.

On Friday, March 25, 2005, the Company timely filed responsive
pleadings as well as Motions to Dismiss the Plaintiffs' First
Amended Complaint arguing that the Complaint failed to state a
claim upon which relief can be granted.  On June 17, 2005, the
Court issued an Order Granting the Motions to Dismiss (the
"Order"), finding that the First Amended Complaint failed to
allege causation of loss resulting from any alleged omissions
and/or misrepresentations of the Company or Dr. Maglich, to
sustain a cause of action for securities fraud under ss.10(b) of
the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC), that the Plaintiffs had failed to plead actual
reliance on any allegedly false or misleading filings of the
Company to sustain a claim under ss.18 of the Exchange Act, and
that the Plaintiffs had failed to allege a primary violation of
any securities laws to sustain a claim for a violation of
ss.20(a) of the Exchange Act.

On July 5, 2005, the Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint
in compliance with the Court's Order, as anticipated. Company
counsel will respond to the allegations in any further pleading
with appropriate challenges to its legal sufficiency to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted.  

The suit is styled "In re: HiEnergy Technologies, Inc.
Securities Litigation," Master File No. 8:04-CV-01226-DOC
(JTLx)," filed in the United States District Court for the
Central District of California, under Judge David O. Carter.  
The plaintiffs are represented by Kenneth J Catanzarite and Jim
T. Tice, Catanzarite Law Offices 2331 W Lincoln Ave Anaheim, CA
92801 Phone: 714-520-5544 E-mail: kcatanzarite@catanzarite.com,
jtice@catanzarite.com; and Laurence M. Rosen, Rosen Law Firm 350
Fifth Avenue, Suite 5508 New York, NY 10118 Phone: 212-686-1060
E-mail: lrosen@rosenlegal.com.  The Company is represented by
Jason D. Annigian, Robert J. Feldhake, Daniel M. Hawkins, and
Lisa A. Roquemore, Feldhake and Roquemore, 19900 MacArthur
Boulevard, Suite 850 Irvine, CA 92612 Phone: 949-553-5000 E-
mail: jannigian@far-law.com, rfeldhake@far-law.com; and C.
William Kircher, Jr., C William Kircher Jr Law Offices 2 Park
Plaza, Ste 300 Irvine, CA 92614-8513 Phone: 949-474-2310 Fax:
949-261-1085.


ILLINOIS: Disabled Residents File ADA Suit V. State Officials
-------------------------------------------------------------
Fifteen years after Congress enacted the landmark Americans with
Disabilities Act and six years after the Supreme Court of the
United States held that unnecessary institutionalization is
discrimination under the ADA, nine Illinois residents with
developmental disabilities sued Illinois state officials,
seeking an order that would require the state to provide
services within a smaller community setting, instead of
segregating people in large private institutions. The class-
action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court of Illinois
charges that by warehousing persons with developmental
disabilities in large institutions, the state deprives them of
their fundamental right to pursue meaningful and productive
lives.

"I want to live with friends in a small house or apartment and
have my own room," says plaintiff Stanley Ligas. "I can do a lot
of things on my own, and I want to be able to cook for myself."
Instead, he has been forced to live in a large institution for
the past 12 years in order to receive Medicaid services, despite
his repeated requests to move into the community.

"I removed my son Isaiah from a private facility after his
safety was put at risk and the facility was cited for medical
neglect," says Lutricia Fair, mother and guardian of plaintiff
Isaiah Fair. "By refusing to provide community services to my
son, the state has abandoned me and many other families who do
not want their adult children to be served in institutional
settings. I hope this case will help my son and all the other
people with developmental disabilities who want to live in the
community."

According to the complaint, Illinois currently ranks 49th among
states in its efforts to place individuals with developmental
disabilities in small integrated community settings. Instead,
Illinois' antiquated policies channel them into a system of
approximately 250 large, privately run congregate care
institutions where more than 6000 of Illinois' developmentally
disabled residents are currently housed. According to the
plaintiffs, most of those 6000 individuals could thrive in small
community-based residential homes. The complaint alleges that
Illinois' failure to provide meaningful opportunities for
community-based services violates the Americans with
Disabilities Act as well as other federal statutes.

The plaintiffs are represented by four public interest agencies,
Equip for Equality, Access Living, the American Civil Liberties
Union of Illinois and the Public Interest Law Center of
Philadelphia, and the law firm Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal
LLP, which is working in this case as trial counsel on a pro
bono basis.

"For far too long, the state of Illinois has relied upon large
congregate settings to serve people with developmental
disabilities and has refused to develop sufficient community
living options," says Barry C. Taylor, legal advocacy director
at Equip for Equality. "Because of the clear benefits of
community living, the ADA mandates that people with disabilities
live in the most integrated setting. This litigation was filed
to force the state to do what it has failed to do voluntarily:
comply with federal law and fulfill its obligations to the
disability community." Equip for Equality is a private, not-for-
profit entity designated in 1985 by the governor to administer
the federally-mandated protection and advocacy system for
safeguarding the rights of people with physical and mental
disabilities in Illinois.

The nine named plaintiffs, who are from various parts of the
state, are asking the court to order Illinois officials to make
community settings readily available to people who want and need
them. "Federal law mandates that the state develop a plan that
effectively helps people with developmental disabilities move
into and thrive in the community while receiving the support and
services they are entitled to. Despite the fact that Illinois is
the 10th wealthiest state in the union, the state ranks at the
very bottom in terms of its efforts towards providing community-
based services for individuals with developmental disabilities,"
says John Grossbart, the partner at Sonnenschein leading that
firm's efforts.

The individual plaintiffs named in the suit are Stanley Ligas,
Lorene Bierman, David Childers, Isaiah Fair, Adam Kulig, Jamie
McElroy, Tiffany McFadden, Alex Tyner and Jennifer Wilson. Five
of the plaintiffs--Ligas, Bierman, Childers, McFadden and Tyner-
-currently live in institutions, despite repeated requests to be
placed in small community residential homes. Plaintiffs Fair,
Kulig, McElroy and Wilson live at home with parents or other
family members, foregoing necessary services in order to avoid
being institutionalized because the state of Illinois does not
provide sufficient community alternatives.

"The actions of the state result in the unnecessary and
unconscionable segregation of persons who deserve and would
benefit from life in the community," says Benjamin Wolf, the
associate legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union
of Illinois.

Marca Bristo, president & CEO of Access Living, says, "As an
organization comprised of people with disabilities, we know
firsthand that community integration allows people to maintain
relationships with their families, work, study, make friends,
and share in the rights and responsibilities of American life."
She adds, "Segregation in large institutions not only denies
people with disabilities these opportunities, but also
stigmatizes them and reinforces the false notion that they are
not worthy or able to participate in society. As President
George H.W. Bush said upon the signing of the ADA, it is time
for 'the shameful wall of exclusion' to 'finally come tumbling
down.'"

For more details, visit: http://www.equipforequality.org.


INTERSTATE BAKERIES: Recalls Rolls Due to Undeclared Ingredient
---------------------------------------------------------------
Interstate Bakeries Corporation is voluntarily recalling two
varieties of Meritar Harvest Ridge rolls sold in northern
Florida and central Alabama that do not list whey in the
ingredient statement on the package label. People who have an
allergy or severe sensitivity to whey or milk protein run the
risk of serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if they
consume the product.

The packaging error was limited in scope. A total of only 228
packages of the mislabeled products were distributed on July 25
and July 26. The company also noted that a number of these
product were not purchased and have been removed from stores. No
other MERITA Harvest Ridge products are part of this recall.

The company has not received any complaints or reports of
illness related to this mislabeling. People who do not have milk
protein allergies can eat the product without concern.

The products being recalled are:
     
     (1) Meritar Harvest Ridge 6 Grain Hoagie Rolls UPC 12200
         04449

     (2) Meritar Harvest Ridge Brown N Serve French Club Rolls
         UPC 12200 04486

The packages of recalled rolls have either a blue or green
colored Kwik Lok closure device.

A new product formulation had just been implemented when it was
discovered that the whey used in the new formulation was not
listed on the package ingredient statements.

Consumers who purchased these rolls and who are known to be
allergic to milk proteins should contact Interstate Bakeries
Consumer Affairs Office at 800-483-7253 for a refund. It is not
necessary for customers without a milk protein allergy to return
already purchased product.


KENTUCKY: Ex-Grant County Inmates Launch Abuse Suit V Jailers
-------------------------------------------------------------
Two former inmates are launching a lawsuit seeking class action
status against the Grant County Detention Center over what they
called abuse at the hands of jailers, The Associated Press
reports.

James R. Turner of Lexington and a Northern Kentucky woman who
claims female inmates at the jail sexually assaulted her filed
the suit in U.S. District Court in Lexington, which brings to
six the number of civil rights suits pending against the jail.

According to the pair's attorney, Don Nageleisen, the jail
failed to properly segregate and guard inmates to prevent
violent inmate attacks. He also states that inmates' health
needs were not met because infectious diseases were allowed to
spread, people were given the wrong medications and serious
injuries from fights went untreated for hours or days.

The Justice Department, which made similar allegations about the
jail, gave it until this month to adopt 13 recommendations to
improve medical care and supervision of inmates.  However, five
similar suits have been settled this summer for hundreds of
thousands of dollars.  In addition, the U.S. Justice Department
unsealed a report earlier this month concluding that conditions
at the jail appeared to violate the civil rights of inmates.


MUELLER INDUSTRIES: Faces Copper Tube Fraud Suits in TN, CA, MA  
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mueller Industries, Inc. has been named as a defendant in
several purported class action complaints brought by direct and
indirect purchasers alleging anticompetitive activities with
respect to the sale of copper plumbing tubes in the United
States.  

Two such purported class actions were filed in the United States
District Court for the Western District of Tennessee (the
Federal Actions), four were filed in the Superior Court of the
State of California, County of San Francisco (the California
Actions), one was filed in the Circuit Court for Shelby County,
Tennessee (the Tennessee Action), and one was filed in the
Superior Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, County of
Middlesex (the Massachusetts Action, and with the Federal
Actions, the California Actions and the Tennessee Action - the
Actions).  

Wholly owned Company subsidiaries, WTC Holding Company, Inc.,
Deno Holding Company, Inc., and Mueller Europe Ltd. are named in
all of the Actions, and Deno Acquisition Eurl is named in two of
the Actions.  All of the Actions, which are similar, seek
declaratory (except for the Massachusetts Action) and monetary
relief.  

Plaintiffs' motions to consolidate and for appointment of lead
counsel in the Federal Actions and plaintiffs' motion to
consolidate the California Actions have been granted.  On July
6, 2005, a motion to dismiss the Federal Actions for failure to
state a claim was granted as to WTC Holding Company, Inc. and
Deno Holding Company, Inc. and denied as to Mueller Industries,
Inc.  Mueller Europe's motion to dismiss the Federal Actions for
lack of personal jurisdiction is pending.  The Company has not
yet been required to respond to the complaints in the
California, Tennessee, and Massachusetts Actions.  


NATIONAL CHECK: FTC Wins $10.2M Ruling in FDCPA Violations Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Federal Trade Commission won a $10.2 million judgment
against a debt- collection operation, National Check Control,
and its principals - the estimated amount of consumer injury
they caused. The amount represents the largest judgment in FTC
history for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
(FDCPA). In addition, a federal district court judge has
permanently banned the defendants from engaging in debt
collection in the future.

In a complaint filed in May 2003, the FTC alleged that the
defendants violated the FDCPA by harassing and threatening
consumers with claims that they owed money for checks returned
for insufficient funds. The defendants made repeated phone
calls, sent threatening letters, and falsely threatened that
consumers could face civil or criminal charges if they did not
pay the debts. The FTC alleged that, in many cases, the
consumers did not owe the money, or owed far less than the
defendants claimed. At that time, the court entered a temporary
restraining order freezing the defendants' assets.

In addition to the ban on debt-collection activities and the
$10,204,445 judgment, the court has banned the defendants from
violating the FDCPA in the future, including harassing consumers
with repeated phone calls, obscene language, or threats of legal
action; misrepresenting the amount a consumer owes; failing to
notify consumers of their right to dispute the debt; and
misrepresenting that the person contacting the consumer is a
lawyer. The defendants are further barred from selling or
transferring any consumer accounts. In order to satisfy the
monetary judgment, the court ordered the defendants to turn over
all of their assets. It is not yet clear how much money actually
will be available for redress.

The final order for judgment and permanent injunction was
entered in the U.S. District Court for the District of New
Jersey on July 15, 2005.

The FTC received substantial assistance in pursuing this matter
from Postal Inspectors from the North Jersey/Caribbean Division;
the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of New Jersey; and
the New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety. In addition,
the FTC would like to thank the following states for their
invaluable assistance in investigating this matter and bringing
the complaint: Colorado, Idaho, Maine, Minnesota, North Dakota,
Washington, and West Virginia.

Copies of the final order are available from the FTC's Web site
at http://www.ftc.govand also from the FTC's Consumer Response  
Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington,
D.C. 20580. The FTC works for the consumer to prevent
fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices in the
marketplace and to provide information to help consumers spot,
stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish
(bilingual counselors are available to take complaints), or to
get free information on any of 150 consumer topics, call toll-
free, 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357), or use the complaint form
at http://www.ftc.gov. The FTC enters Internet, telemarketing,  
identity theft, and other fraud-related complaints into Consumer
Sentinel, a secure, online database available to hundreds of
civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and
abroad.  For more details, contact Claudia Bourne Farrell by
Phone: 202-326-2181 or contact Gregory A. Ashe or Seena Gressin
by Phone: 202-326-3719 or 202-326-2717 or visit the Website:
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2005/07/nationalcheck.htm.


NDCHEALTH CORPORATION: GA Court Dismisses Securities Fraud Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Northern District of
Georgia dismissed the securities class action filed against
NDCHealth Corporation (NYSE: NDC) and certain of its officers
and advisors.

The suit, styled "Garfield v. NDCHealth Corp. et al., was filed
on behalf of all purchasers of the Company's common stock during
the period October 1, 2003 through March 31, 2004.  The suit
alleged that the Company employed improper revenue recognition
practices in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles, an earlier Class Action Reporter story (October
4,2004) reports.

The Complaint was filed shortly after the Company's April 1,
2004 announcement that it would delay the release of its fiscal
third quarter financial results pending the completion of a
special independent review of the timing of recognition of
revenue related to sales of the Company's physician practice
management systems through value added resellers.

On August 9, 2004, the Complaint was amended to extend the
putative class period to include the period from August 21, 2002
through April 19, 2004 and to add additional claims related to
the timing of the Company's write-down of its investment in
MedUnite.  On September 1, 2004, the Complaint was amended
further to include Charles W. Miller, David H. Shenk, James W.
FitzGibbons and Lee Adrean, each an officer of the Company, and
Ernst & Young LLP, the Company's independent registered public
accounting firm, as additional defendants.

As amended, the Complaint asserts violations of Section 10(b) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act.  
The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages, attorney's fees and
costs, and prejudgment interest.

The complaint was originally filed on April 7, 2004.  The
Company's motion to dismiss the second amended complaint was
filed on October 13, 2004, and that motion was granted yesterday
by order of the Honorable William S. Duffey Jr., United States
District Court Judge for the Northern District of Georgia.  The
plaintiffs have 30 days from the entry of the order within which
they may file a third amended complaint.


NEW YORK: Willie Gary Leads Civil Servants' Racial Bias Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Prominent attorney Willie E. Gary recently stated that he would
spearhead the legal team in a class action discrimination
lawsuit against the State of New York, on behalf of members of
African American and Hispanic civil servants.

Merton Simpson, one of the class representatives and president
of the upstate/Albany Chapter of Blacks in Government, civic
leaders and civil servants joined Mr. Gary and his law partners,
CK Hoffler and Maria Sperando and associate attorney Mary Diaz
of the Florida- based law firm of Gary, Williams, Parenti,
Finney, Lewis, McManus, Watson and Sperando, P.L. Gary and his
team have joined forces with New York attorney Michael Sussman
in an effort to expose the discriminatory actions that were
taken by New York State that may potentially impact tens of
thousands of African American and Hispanic state employees.

The press conference was held on the steps of City Hall in New
York, Thursday, July 28, 2005, at 9:00 a.m., to highlight Mr.
Gary's joining the legal team and to discuss what actions will
be taken. Attending the press conference were the Honorable
Arthur O. Eve, Former Deputy Speaker of NY State Assembly and
member of the Assembly for 36 years and current President /
Founder, Freedom, Justice and Hope, Inc., Assemblyman Peter
Rivera, Rev. Al Sharpton, National Action Network, members of
Blacks in Government (BIG), the NAACP, Urban League, Rainbow
PUSH and other civic groups. The press conference preceded
Simpson's testimony for Assemblyman Peter M. Rivera's Assembly
Hearings on the same topic, which focused on the unfair testing
practices of the New York State Battery Test and under
representative of African Americans and Hispanics in New York
State Government agencies.

The charges levied against the state's Battery Test, used as an
indicator in a broad range of supervisory and managerial
positions, is that the test has a disparate impact on African
Americans and Hispanics and does not meet the validity criteria
under EEOC's Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection
Procedures. New York is not the only state that has a "battery"
test. There may be as many as 18 other states that have
implemented some form of a battery test similar to New York.

Plaintiffs won a major victory on July 8, 2005, when District
Judge David N. Hurd of the Northern District of New York
certified the class allowing African Americans and Hispanics
victimized by New York State's Testing Program to sue the State
as a Class rather than as individuals.

"Years of compensation have been affected and families have
suffered undue hardship because of these unfair tests," says
Willie E. Gary. "It is unfathomable that something like this
could happen in today's society," Mr. Gary adds. "Since the days
of Dr. King, our nation has come so far in the area of race
relations. It just goes to show that there is much more work to
be done. This type of oppression forces us to reflect on the
values of this country and the civil rights Dr. King and Rosa
Parks fought for, and we seek justice. It's about doing what's
right and recognizing that everyone is equal. It is our hope
that the State of New York will do the right thing and bring
justice to the many people who were negatively affected."

Gary's legal team is noted for winning a $240 million jury
verdict in Orange County against the Walt Disney Corporation for
their clients who alleged Disney stole their idea for a sports
theme park. They were also awarded $18.28 million against the
media conglomerate Gannett Company for the false portrayal of
their client in a series of newspaper articles, one of the
largest verdicts against a media outlet in the southeastern
United States. In 2001, a jury awarded Gary a $139.6 million
verdict for the Maris Distributing Company against Anheuser
Busch. In addition, Gary was given a half-billion dollar verdict
in Jackson, Mississippi, against the Loewen Group, a large
Canadian funeral home chain. Mr. Gary also serves as legal
counsel for pop entertainer Michael Jackson and boxing promoter
Don King.

For more details, contact Renee E. Warren, Stella Brown or
Noelle-Elaine, Media, of Law Offies of Gary, Williams & Parenti,
Phone: +1-646-424-9750 or +1-646-344-2630.


R.A. HANEY: PA AG Corbett Commences Suit For Home Builder Fraud
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pennsylvania Attorney General Tom Corbett filed a civil lawsuit
against a Northampton County home improvement contractor accused
of performing shoddy or incomplete work and using illegal sales
contracts, illegal telephone solicitations and an illegal
lottery drawing to attract customers to his window, siding and
home security system businesses.

The suit follows an investigation through 2004 into dozens of
complaints from consumers located in Berks, Lackawanna, Lehigh,
Luzerne, Monroe, Montgomery, Northampton and Wyoming counties.  
Mr. Corbett identified the defendants as Rodney A. Haney and his
business R.A. Haney Inc., 2442 Emrick Blvd., Bethlehem,
Northampton County.  The lawsuit accuses Mr. Haney of violating
Pennsylvania's Consumer Protection Law, Plain Language Consumer
Contract Act, Home Improvement Finance Act and the Telemarketing
Registration Act.

According to agents with Mr. Corbett's Bureau of Consumer
Protection, Mr. Haney engaged in numerous deceptive and
misleading sales tactics to attract customers to his business.
In many cases, he failed to perform the promised contracted work
or refund consumers who were left with poor construction and/or
incomplete projects.

Investigators said Mr. Haney indirectly promoted his business by
providing homeowners with various flyers that encouraged
consumers to obtain a free copy of the new "Consumer Advisory
Report."  The flyers do not identify Mr. Haney as the source of
the material. Some of the flyers state "HOMEOWNERS BEWARE" and
"PROTECT YOURSELF" against "HOME IMPROVEMENT RIP OFFS" or "SAVE
THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS" on home improvements by reading the report
before buying new windows, doors, siding, roofing, or security
and solar systems. The flyers include a toll-free telephone
number for consumers to call before a certain date to obtain the
report at no cost. The flyer claims that the "Consumer Advisory
Report" retails for as much as $19.95. In reality, the report
was available for free regardless of the deadline given, and it
is not an objective independently produced brochure but a sales
piece put together by Mr. Haney to lure consumers to his
business.

Mr. Haney, through 2004 allegedly contacted consumers by
telephone to confirm that they received the flyers and "Consumer
Advisory" or a similar sales piece that was referred to as a
"Consumer Awareness Report." Consumers allegedly received calls
from the defendant who failed to check if they were on the
state's "Do Not Call" list.  Mr. Haney is accused of failing to
purchase Pennsylvania's "no call" registry before conducting his
telemarketing activities to promote his sales.

The lawsuit claims that Mr. Haney failed to properly inform
consumers of their right to cancel the contracts and used
language that was confusing or misleading. Consumers complained
that they were misinformed about when the clock started on their
right to cancel the contract. In addition, some consumers said
when they cancelled the contract the defendant attempted to lure
them into another contract by offering different terms or
changing the terms.

Those who received the "Consumer Advisory Report" said the
packet included an offer by the defendant to qualify for a
monthly lottery drawing to receive one or more products valued
at $1,000. The contest claimed that at the end of the year, the
winners would also have an opportunity to win a house full of
windows, a solar or home security system, sunroom or full
siding. The suit claims that the defendant never conducted the
promised homeowner lottery drawing. A separate daily drawing for
thousands of dollars in cash and free home improvements was
similarly promised by the defendant but never held. The state
lottery statute makes it illegal for a person to setup or
maintain any lottery game or publish any advertisement of any
lottery game.

Mr. Corbett's office learned that Mr. Haney, in his sales
materials, claimed that homeowners who contacted him for an
estimate on work would receive $200 worth of grocery coupons
plus be included in the monthly lottery drawings. The complaint
claims that the offer violates the Home Improvement Finance Act
which states that gifts, bonus awards, merchandise or other
inducements to enter into a home improvement installment
contract are strictly prohibited.

According to the lawsuit, Mr. Haney's contracts included
deceptive and illegal language that required the consumer to
relinquish his or her rights even if the defendant failed to
honor the terms. The alleged illegal language included
declarations that if the consumer defaulted on the contract he
or she would be subject to "the most drastic and powerful
remedies of the law," including liens against their homes and
sales of real estate and personal property without a court
hearing. This "confession of judgment" clause is prohibited
under state law because it waives the consumers' right to assert
a legal defense to an action.

In addition, Mr. Haney is accused of violating the Plain
Language Consumer Contract Act by using unintelligible language
and insufficient sized type that confused and deceived
homeowners. The complaint claims that the contracts were also
illegal by stating that a consumer cannot transfer the titles to
their homes until payment is made in full and that the equity in
their homes will be considered security for the contracts. The
contracts further seek to eliminate Mr. Haney's liability should
his services result in any interior or exterior damage to the
consumers' property.

"Rarely has my office handled a single case that involves so
many alleged illegal business practices," Mr. Corbett said.
"This defendant is accused of subjecting consumers to deceptive
sales tactics, illegal telemarketing calls, strictly prohibited
contract terms and in many cases finished products that were, at
best, unacceptable."

Mr. Corbett said the lawsuit asks the court to require the
defendants to:

     (1) Pay full restitution to consumers who filed complaints
         plus pay restitution to those who come forward with
         proof of similar harm.

     (2) Pay civil penalties of $1,000 per violation and $3,000
         for each violation involving a consumer age 60 or
         older.

     (3) Forfeit all profits derived as a result of the alleged
         illegal business practices.

     (4) Pay the Commonwealth's investigation costs.

     (5) Cease operating in the Commonwealth until restitution,
         civil penalties and investigation costs are paid.

Consumers who wish to file a complaint in this case are asked to
contact Mr. Corbett's Bureau of Consumer Protection by Phone:
1-800-441-2555 or visit his Website:
http://www.attorneygeneral.gov.  

Corbett thanked the Lehigh Valley Division of the Better
Business Bureau of Eastern Pennsylvania for assisting in the
investigation. The lawsuit was filed in Northampton County
Court. The case is being litigated by Senior Deputy Attorney
General John M. Abel of Mr. Corbett's Bureau of Consumer
Protection in Allentown.


RJ REYNOLDS: VT AG Spearheads Eclipse False Advertising Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell's office sued R.J.
Reynolds Tobacco Company for using false and misleading
advertising to promote its "Eclipse" brand of cigarettes.

The lawsuit charges that the Company's advertising, which claims
smoking Eclipse cigarettes is less harmful than smoking other
brands of cigarettes, violates Vermont's consumer protection
statutes. The lawsuit also claims that the Company's advertising
violates the 1998 "Master Settlement Agreement," in which it and
other tobacco companies promised not to make material
misrepresentations regarding the health consequences of using a
tobacco product.

According to the lawsuit, the Company's advertising for Eclipse
makes the following misleading and unsubstantiated claims:

     (1) "Scientific studies show that, compared to other
         cigarettes, Eclipse may present less risk of cancer,
         chronic bronchitis, and possibly emphysema."

     (2) "Eclipse responds to concerns about certain smoking-
         related illnesses. Including cancer."

     (3) "The best choice for smokers who worry about their
         health is to quit. The next best choice is Eclipse."

"There is no second-best choice to quitting," said Mr. Sorrell,
"and there is no evidence that Eclipse is any less harmful than
any other brand of cigarettes available on the market. By
suggesting that Eclipse is a safer cigarette, R.J. Reynolds is
misleading smokers, former smokers and non-smokers about the
health consequences of smoking Eclipse."

The lawsuit comes after an investigation that started over a
year and a half ago, when the Attorney General's office issued a
civil investigative subpoena to Reynolds, directing the company
to produce documents about its claims and the scientific and
consumer research supporting those claims. Though Vermont is the
first state to file suit against Reynolds over its advertising
for Eclipse, the offices of Attorneys General across the country
-- including California, Connecticut, the District of Columbia,
Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, New York, and Tennessee -- have
actively participated in the investigation leading up to this
action and will continue to assist Vermont in the litigation.
Last March, attorneys general from thirty-seven states and the
District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the
Northern Mariana Islands gave written notice to Reynolds of the
intention of one or more States to sue if the company did not
stop its current advertising for Eclipse.

"Thirty years after the tobacco companies made `light'
cigarettes leading sellers by promising smokers a healthier
alternative to `regular' cigarettes, we now know these light
brands weren't any healthier at all," said Mr. Sorrell. "We
encourage the tobacco companies to develop less harmful tobacco
products, but until they do - and until they can scientifically
demonstrate that new cigarette designs will reduce the risks of
smoking - we cannot tolerate misleading health claims about any
cigarette product."

Paul Harrington, Executive Vice President of the Vermont Medical
Society, applauded the efforts of the Attorney General. "For
over twenty-five years, the Vermont Medical Society has strongly
supported all efforts to publicize the fact that smoking is
hazardous to health. The VMS commends Attorney General Sorrell
for his work to end any misleading advertising by R.J. Reynolds
regarding the health consequences of Eclipse cigarettes," said
Mr. Harrington.

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


ROYAL CARIBBEAN: Cabin Stewards Initiate "Tips" Lawsuit in FL
-------------------------------------------------------------
Royal Caribbean Cruises, Inc. and one of its cruise brands face
a purported class action lawsuit filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

The suit alleges that the Company's Celebrity Cruises improperly
requires its cabin stewards to share guest gratuities with
assistant cabin stewards.  The suit seeks payment of damages,
including penalty wages under 46 U.S.C. Section 10113 of U.S.
law and interest.  


ROYAL CARIBBEAN: Faces Deceptive Trade Suit For Shore Excursions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Royal Caribbean Cruises, Inc. faces a class action filed in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of
Florida alleging that the Company improperly profit from shore
excursions offered to its guests by third party shore excursion
operators in violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade
Practices Act.  

The suit seeks payment of damages, including the difference
between what the Company collects from its guests for shore
excursions and what the Company pays to the shore excursion
operators.   The Company is not able at this time to estimate
the impact of this proceeding on it, it asserted in a disclosure
to the Securities and Exchange Commission.  


SOUTH CAROLINA: CAMP KEMO Receives Taxol Suit Settlement Share
--------------------------------------------------------------
South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster visited with
campers and staff from CAMP KEMO, and presented the Palmetto
Health Foundation with a check for $25,000.  The money is part
of a multi-state settlement the Attorney General's Office
reached with Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. in a federal antitrust
case surrounding the cancer drug Taxol.

The states alleged that the drug company enforced patents on the
drug that were obtained fraudulently in an effort to delay the
entry of generic competitors into the market.  According to the
settlement, the funds were to be distributed to a charitable
organization with express conditions that the funds be used to
benefit cancer victims or their families.

Mr. McMaster visited the CAMP KEMO campers while they were away
from camp, on a trip to the Pine Island Club on Lake Murray.  
Amy Colquitt, an assistant to Mr. McMaster, has a daughter who
is a camper and the inspiration for the gift.

"It is with heartfelt gratitude for the many people associated
with the CAMP KEMO program that we present this gift today,"
said Mr. McMaster.  "I hope that the proceeds from this
settlement can help ease the recovery of these brave boys and
girls."

Contributions to CAMP KEMO programs support the week long camp
for pediatric cancer patients and their siblings, a weekend
retreat for families with newly diagnosed patients, the Lasting
Impressions support group for teens with cancer and Camp New
Horizons, a weekend bereavement camp for children who have lost
siblings to cancer.  This year, the camp (located at Camp
Kinard, near Batesburg-Leesville) is being held July
25-30 and will host more than 125 campers.  The camp is made
possible by the support of statewide patrons whose donations and
in-kind services allow the children to attend CAMP KEMO at no
charge.

For more information about CAMP KEMO, sponsored by The
Children's Center for Cancer and Blood Disorders at Palmetto
Health Children's Hospital, and other cancer programs for
children, visit:
http://www.palmettohealth.com/facilities/cancer/Help/help_childr
en.html.


SPORTCRAFT LTD.: Recalls 12T Treadmills Due to Injury Hazard
------------------------------------------------------------
In cooperation with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
(CPSC), Sportcraft Ltd., of Mt. Olive, N.J. is voluntarily
recalling about 12,000 units of Tredex 6.0, TX 440 and TX 550
Treadmills.

According to the recall, the treadmill can unexpectedly
accelerate and cause users to fall and sustain injuries.
Sportcraft has received 110 reports of unexpected acceleration,
14 of which resulted in minor injuries, including sprains and
bruises.

This recall includes Sportcraft Tredex 6.0, TX 440 and TX 550
treadmills. These 155- to 170-pound motorized treadmills are
gray in color and can be folded upright for storage. The name
"Sportcraft" and product identification of "Tredex 6.0", "TX
440" or "TX 550" are printed on the control console of the
treadmill.

Manufactured in China and Taiwan, the treadmills were sold at
all discount department and other retail stores nationwide from
December 2002 through April 2005 for between $350 and $600.

Consumers should stop using the recalled treadmills immediately
and contact Sportcraft to receive a free repair kit.  Consumer
Contact: For additional information, contact Sportcraft at
(800) 526-0244 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through
Friday, or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.sportcraft.com.


SUNOCO INC.: To Pay $3.6M Over Damages Caused By 2000 Oil Spill
---------------------------------------------------------------
Sunoco, Inc. will pay about $3.6 million to the United States
government, to settle a lawsuit over a massive oil spill that
leaked 192,000 gallons of crude oil into a pond and surrounding
wetlands in February 2000 at the John Heinz National Wildlife
Refuge, the Associated Press reports.

The 1,000-acre refuge straddles Philadelphia and Delaware County
and is home to numerous wildlife species, including the
threatened red-bellied turtle and southern leopard frog.  The
2000 oil spill, caused by a crack in the Company's pipeline,
fouled plants and animals at the refuge.

"Sunoco worked closely with the government to reach a fair and
equitable settlement," company spokesman Gerald Davis told AP.  
The Company agreed to a penalty of more than $2.7 million for
violating the Clean Water Act and $865,000 for damaging natural
resources, according to a consent decree filed in federal
district court.


T. ROWE PRICE: IL Court Refuses To Amend Investor Suit Dismissal
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of
Illinois refused to alter or amend its ruling dismissing the
class action filed against T. Rowe Price International Funds,
Inc., styled "T.K. Parthasarathy,et al., including Woodbury, v.
T. Rowe Price International Funds, Inc., et al.  The suit also
names as defendants T. Rowe Price International and the T. Rowe
Price International Funds with respect to the T. Rowe Price
International Stock Fund.

The suit was initially filed in the Circuit Court for the Third
Judicial Circuit in Madison County, Illinois.  The basic
allegations in the case were that the T. Rowe Price defendants
did not make appropriate value adjustments to the foreign
securities of the T. Rowe Price International Stock Fund prior
to calculating the Fund's daily share prices, thereby allegedly
enabling market timing traders to trade the Fund's shares in
such a way as to disadvantage long-term investors.  The
plaintiffs sought monetary damages.

The case was moved on April 22, 2005 to the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of Illinois, which dismissed the case
on May 27, 2005.  The plaintiff's motion to alter and/or amend
the order of dismissal was denied on July 7, 2005.

The suit is styled "Parthasarathy et al v. T Rowe Price
International Funds Inc et al, case no. 3:05-cv-00302-DRH,"
filed in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Illinois, under Judge David R. Herndon.  
Representing the plaintiffs are:

     (1) Klint L. Bruno, Ellison, Nielsen et al., Generally
         Admitted, 100 West Monroe Street, 18th Floor, Chicago,
         IL 60603, Phone: 312-855-8391

     (2) Robert L. King, Swedlow & King - Chicago, 70 West
         Madison Street, Suite 660, Three First National Plaza,
         Chicago, IL 60602, Phone: 314-621-4002, Fax: 314-621-
         2586, E-mail: robertlking@charter.net

     (3) Stephen M. Tillery, Korein Tillery - Swansea, 10
         Executive Woods Court, Swansea, IL 62226-2030, Phone:
         618-277-1180, E-mail: stillery@koreintillery.com

     (4) George A. Zelcs, Korein Tillery - Chicago, 70 West
         Madison Street, Suite 660, 3 First National Plaza,
         Chicago, IL 60602, Phone: 312-641-9750, Fax: 312-641-
         9751, E-mail: gzelcs@koreintillery.com  

Representing the Company are Glenn E. Davis, Frank N. Gundlach
and Lisa M. Wood of Armstrong Teasdale - St. Louis, One
Metropolitan Square, 211 North Broadway, Suite 2600, St. Louis,
MO 63102-2740, by Phone: 314-621-5070 or by E-mail:
gdavis@armstrongteasdale.com, fgundlach@armstrongteasdale.com,
lwood@armstrongteasdale.com; and Martin I. Kaminsky, Edward T.
Mcdermott, Daniel A. Pollack and Anthony Zaccaria of Pollack &
Kaminsky, 114 West 47th Street, Suite 1900, New York, NY 10036-
8295, Phone: 212-575-4700, E-mail:
mikaminsky@pollacklawfirm.com, etmcdermott@pollacklawfirm.com,
dapollack@pollacklawfirm.com, azaccaria@pollacklawfirm.com.   


TALISMAN ENERGY: Still Subject to "Alien Tort Claims Act" Suit  
--------------------------------------------------------------
Talisman Energy Inc. (TSX: TLM) (NYSE: TLM) continues to be
subject to a lawsuit brought by the Presbyterian Church of Sudan
and others commenced in November 2001 under the Alien Tort
Claims Act in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York, according to the Company's report on its
second quarter operating and financial results.

The lawsuit alleges that the Company conspired with, or aided
and abetted, the Government of Sudan to commit violations of
international law in connection with the Company's now disposed
of interest in oil operations in Sudan.

On March 25, 2005, the Court refused to certify the lawsuit as a
class action. On June 13, 2005, the plaintiffs filed papers re-
defining the proposed class and seeking certification of the
lawsuit as a new class action. The Company continues to oppose
the certification of the lawsuit as a class action.

On June 13, 2005, the Court denied Talisman's motion for
judgment on the pleadings, which sought dismissal of the lawsuit
on the grounds that the Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction
to hear the lawsuit.

The Company has sought Court approval to appeal. To date, no
decision has been rendered by the Court in respect to the filing
of a Statement of Interest by the U.S. Department of Justice,
expressing the U.S. Government's view that the lawsuit
interferes with U.S.-Canada relations. Talisman believes the
lawsuit is entirely without merit and is continuing to
vigorously defend itself. Talisman does not expect the lawsuit
to have a material adverse effect on it.

As previously reported in the November 9, 2001 edition of the
Class Action Reporter, the Canadian oil company, which holds a
25% stake in Sudan's only major oil-producing project, which
pumps out more than 200,000 barrels of oil a day, faces a $1
billion class action that was filed by a U.S. anti-slavery group
in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New
York.

The American Anti-Slavery Group charges the Company with
violating "international law for participating in the ethnic
cleansing of black and non-Muslim Minorities in southern Sudan."

International human rights organizations and church groups
severely criticized the Company, whose operations, they say,
helps fund Sudan's Khartoum government's civil war against
Christian and tribal rebels south of the impoverished country.

The suit further alleges, "Talisman, in an effort to protect its
oil fields in Sudan, aided and abetted the fundamentalist
Islamic government in its ongoing and self-proclaimed `jihad' -
a campaign that has resulted in massive civilian displacement;
the burning of villages, churches and crops; and the murder and
enslavement of innocent civilians."

Board member and attorney Carey D'Avino, and another lawyer,
Stephen Whinston filed the suit on behalf of plaintiffs that
include the Presbyterian Church of Sudan and two individuals.


TENNESSEE: Court Favors Reversal of Ronald Harries Death Penalty
----------------------------------------------------------------
The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a decision to set
aside the death sentence of Ronald Harries, a convicted murderer
who spurred the state of Tennessee to change conditions on death
row, The Tennessean reports.

Specifically, the court upheld the 2002 decision of U.S.
District Judge John T. Nixon that vacated Mr. Harries' death
sentence. Mr. Harries, 54, was sentenced to die for the 1981
murder of Kingsport convenience store clerk Rhonda Green during
a robbery earlier that year.

In its written opinion, the court faulted Mr. Harries' lawyers
for failing to investigate his background thoroughly or to
present evidence of his troubled background for the jury to
consider in sentencing. The opinion further states, "Here, had
counsel conducted an adequate investigation, they would have
discovered evidence of Mr. Harries's traumatic childhood,
including the significant physical abuse Mr. Harries suffered at
the hands of his mother, stepmother, and grandmother."

The court cited evidence of mental illness and violence that
extended to other family members, including the rape of his
sister by a stepfather and the beatings his mother suffered by
both his father and stepfather. It also court noted that "the
likelihood that the mitigating evidence available in this case
would have influenced the jury is 'sufficient to undermine
confidence in the outcome' reached at Mr. Harries's sentencing."

Barring an appeal to a higher court, a new sentencing hearing
will be held in Sullivan County. Neither Judge Nixon nor the
federal appellate court overturned the murder conviction.

Nashville lawyer Bill Redick told The Tennessean, "Ron Harries
had a very strong case to present at the trial and it wasn't
presented." He adds, "The federal courts have now heard this
case, and if this decision by the 6th Circuit stands, then he
will have an opportunity to present his case (at sentencing)."

Previously, Mr. Harries came within two days of dying in the
electric chair in 1984 after giving up all appeals, saying he
preferred to die than to live on Tennessee's death row, where
inmates were locked up in cramped quarters for 23 hours a day.

However, Judge Nixon stayed the execution indefinitely, after
lawyers sued on his behalf arguing that cruel and inhumane
conditions on death row made the defendant incompetent to decide
his fate.

Mr. Harries and other death row inmates joined in a class action
suit against the state, prompting Judge Nixon to declare
conditions on Tennessee's death row unconstitutional. Thus, the
state improved conditions for condemned inmates as a result of
the case.


TEXAS: AG Praises $500,000 Verdict V. Man For Immigration Fraud
---------------------------------------------------------------
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott praised a more than $500,000
verdict against a fraudulent immigration consultant who swindled
several Collin and Hood county families out of tens of thousands
of dollars.  A Hood County jury imposed the penalties and
restitution against Carlos Carvajal after the Attorney General
presented evidence of 36 violations under the Texas Deceptive
Trade Practices Act (DTPA).  

"This judgment sends so-called `immigration consultants' a
strong message that this kind of fraudulent activity will not be
tolerated in Texas," said Mr. Abbott in a statement. "Consumers
can face devastating consequences if they place their future in
the hands of someone who falsely claims to be an attorney or
legal expert. I will continue to pursue scams that prey on those
simply wanting to call Texas home."

Mr. Abbott sued Mr. Carvajal in January, alleging that he
charged several families hundreds of dollars per person to
provide unauthorized legal advice and illegally prepare
immigration documents out of his Plano home from 2002 to 2003.
He continued to offer the fraudulent services after he moved to
Hood County in 2003.  Mr. Carvajal also falsely represented
himself to consumers as a former immigration judge, and
maintained he had connections with the Bureau of Citizenship and
Immigration Services.   In Texas, only licensed attorneys and
nonprofit organizations specifically accredited by the U.S.
Department of Justice's Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) can
charge fees to advise and represent clients in immigration
matters. Carvajal does not have BIA accreditation.

Since assuming office in December 2002, Mr. Abbott has shut down
two dozen operations statewide for providing unauthorized legal
advice on immigration matters. For additional information, or to
file a complaint against a suspected unauthorized immigration
consulting operation, consumers can contact the Office of the
Attorney General by Phone: 1-800-252-8011. Assistance is
available in Spanish and English.


TRIPATH TECHNOLOGY: Reaches Settlement For CA Securities Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Tripath Technology, Inc. reached a settlement for the
consolidated securities class action filed against it and
certain of its officers and directors in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California.

Four suits were initially filed, alleging that the Company and
certain of its officers and/or directors violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Exchange Act.  Plaintiffs purport to represent
a putative class of shareholders who purchased or otherwise
acquired Company securities between January 29, 2004 and October
22, 2004. The complaints contain varying allegations, including
that the Company and the individual defendants made materially
false and misleading statements with respect to the Company's
financial results and with respect to its business, prospects
and operations in the its filings with the SEC, press releases
and other disclosures.  The complaints sought unspecified
compensatory damages, attorneys' fees, expert witness fees,
costs and such other relief as may be awarded by the Court.

On December 22, 2004, the Court entered a stipulation and order
consolidating all of these complaints and ordering that the
defendants need not respond to any of these complaints until
after plaintiffs file a consolidated complaint.  On January 4,
2005, plaintiffs filed motions for the appointment of lead
plaintiff. The Court, by Order dated January 28, 2005, appointed
Robert Poteet as the sole lead plaintiff and approved Milberg
Weiss Bershad & Schulman LLP as lead counsel.

On July 11, 2005, the Company entered into a Stipulation and
Settlement Agreement, which was filed with the Court on July 12,
2005.  The settlement class consists of all persons who
purchased the securities of the Company between January 29, 2004
and June 13, 2005, inclusive.  Under the terms of the
Stipulation, the parties agreed that the class action will be
dismissed in exchange for a payment of $200,000 in cash by the
Company and the issuance of 2.45 million shares of Company
common stock which shall be exempt from registration pursuant to
Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act of 1933. The Stipulation
remains subject to the satisfaction of various conditions,
including without limitation (1) final approval of the
Stipulation by the Court, including a finding that the 2.45
million shares of the Company's common stock to be issued are
exempt from registration pursuant to Section 3(a)(1) of the
Securities Act of 1933 and (2) notification to members of the
settlement class in the Class Action.

The suit is styled "Goldberg v. Tripath Technology, Inc., case
no. 4:04-cv-04681-SBA," filed in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California (Oakland) under
Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong.  Representing the plaintiffs is
Robert S. Green, Green Welling LLP, 595 Market Street, Suite
2750, San Francisco, CA 94105 Phone: 415/477-6700, Fax:
415-477-6710, Email: RSG@CLASSCOUNSEL.COM.  Representing the
Company is Gilbert R. Serota, Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady
Falk, Three Embarcadero Center, 7th Floor, San Franciso, CA
94111-4065, Phone: 415-434-1600, Fax: 415-217-5910, E-mail:
gserota@hrice.com.


UNITED KINGDOM: Lawsuit Being Prepared Over Inheritance Taxes
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action suit is being prepared to recover millions of
dollars in inheritance taxes paid by British gays and lesbians
when their partners died, The 365Gay.com reports.

Though same-sex couples will be able enter into civil unions
where their relationships will treated like those of married
couples allowing them to avoid the tax this coming December some
gays and lesbians are contending that they should have been
exempted from the tax in October 2000 when the Human Rights Act
came into force.

Lawyer Clive Margrave-Jones and Financial Planners Ltd. are
preparing a suit against the Blair government to recover the
taxes on behalf of gay widows and widowers. The attorney told
365Gay.com, "We are claiming that these people who have lived
together for a long time have not been given the opportunity to
register their relationship for tax purposes, which is an
infringement on their human rights."

One of those affected by the tax is Trevor Bentham, the
surviving partner of Nigel Hawthorne, the star of the British
sitcom "Yes Minister". Mr. Bentham was forced to pay nearly
$700,000 in death duties when Mr. Hawthorne died.

In a related matter, the Supreme Court of Canada will hear a
similar class action suit later this year. That one involves
survivor pensions and could cost the Canadian government as much
as $140 million dollars.

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 argued it should
have been backdated to April 1985, when gays and lesbians were
granted equality under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms,
and began a class action suit to recover the unpaid benefits due
an estimated 1,500 survivors, many of whom became widowed at the
height of the AIDS crisis.

Earlier this month the Canadian government told 500 of the
oldest litigants in the case that it will begin paying the
benefits even though it is continuing to fight their claims in
court.


WORLDCOM INC.: NY Judge OKs Settlements of Remaining Defendants
---------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. District Judge Denise Cote granted preliminary approval to
a settlement under which former WorldCom finance chief Scott
Sullivan will forfeit his ornate Florida mansion and his
retirement account to settle suit by investors who lost billions
when the telecom company was toppled by a fraud scandal.

The settlement, which will leave Mr. Sullivan almost penniless,
came just two weeks before he is likely to be sentenced to
prison for his role in the $11 billion WorldCom, Inc. fraud.
Specifically, the deal forces Mr. Sullivan to sell the Boca
Raton mansion and turn over the proceeds to WorldCom investors.

In addition, the judge also gave the OK to settlements with two
other former WorldCom executives, controller David Myers and
accounting director Buford Yates, who were the final defendants
in a class action suit that has netted more than $6 billion for
investors. However, those two have so little money left, lawyers
for the plaintiffs did not seek any money from them.

New York state Comptroller Alan Hevesi, the lead plaintiff in
the investor suit, previously told The Associated Press that
investors will get about $5 million from the home after broker
fees and outstanding liens are settled.

The settlement will also require, Mr. Sullivan to liquidate his
WorldCom 401(k) retirement fund and turn over that money as
well, which is about $200,000 in an account heavy with WorldCom
stock that was once worth much more.

Sean Coffey, a lawyer for Mr. Hevesi, told the judge, "We have
taken substantially all of his assets." He also said that Mr.
Sullivan has signed a contract to sell the house but noted the
buyers could back out. He did not disclose the sale price
though.

Despite all of the assets confiscated, Mr. Sullivan's wife, who
is seriously ill, will be allowed to keep some money in a trust
fund for medical expenses and for the couple's 4-year-old
daughter.

The investor lawsuit claimed WorldCom executives and board
members, its auditing firm and investment banks that underwrote
WorldCom securities should have stopped or at least detected the
fraud.

Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Myers and Mr. Yates face sentencing in the
next two weeks after pleading guilty to criminal fraud charges.



                  New Securities Fraud Cases


MOLINA HEALTHCARE: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Suit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities
class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted,
exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of Molina
Healthcare, Inc. (NYSE: MOH) between November 3, 2004 and July
20, 2005, inclusive (the "Class Period").

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

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


MOLINA HEALTHCARE: Goodkind Labaton Lodges Securities Suit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP filed a
class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Central District of California, on behalf of persons who
purchased or otherwise acquired publicly traded securities of
Molina Healthcare, Inc. ("Molina Healthcare" or the "Company")
(NYSE:MOH) between November 3, 2004 and July 20, 2005,
inclusive, (the "Class Period"). The lawsuit was filed against
Molina Healthcare, J. Mario Molina, and John C. Molina
("Defendants").

The complaint alleges that Defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder. Specifically, the complaint alleges that
Defendants issued a series of false and misleading statements
regarding Molina Healthcare's operating condition, and failed to
disclose:

     (1) The Company was experiencing rising costs;

     (2) State-approved payments associated with the Company's
         Medicaid contracts were insufficient to cover rising
         medical-care costs; and,

     (3) As a result, the Company's financials would be
         materially and adversely impacted.

On July 20, 2005, Molina Healthcare announced that for the
second quarter 2005, it would report a loss per diluted share of
$(0.15) to $(0.20). The Company also announced it was revising
its earnings guidance for fiscal year 2005 to $0.73 to $0.80 per
share from its previously issued guidance of $2.40 to $2.45 per
share, and net income of $20.6 million to $22.6 million, from
its previously announced guidance of $67.0 million to $69.0
million. The sudden and dramatic reduction in guidance comes
after the Company had reiterated its guidance three times in
2005 and after it postponed on May 18, 2005, an equity offering
primarily on behalf of the Molina Family Trusts. News of this
shocked the market, sending the shares $20 per share lower, to
trade at $26.00, or a one-day decline of 43 percent in reaction
to the news.

For more details, contact Christopher Keller, Esq. of Goodkind
Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow, LLP, Phone: (800) 321-0476, Web site:
http://www.glrslaw.com/get/?case=Molina.


MOLINA HEALTHCARE: Marc S. Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in CA
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Central
District of California on behalf of all persons who purchased
the publicly traded securities of Molina Healthcare, Inc. (NYSE:
MOH) between November 3, 2004 and July 20, 2005 (the "Class
Period").

The Complaint alleges that Molina violated federal securities
laws in connection with the sudden and dramatic revision of its
financial forecasts and the disclosure of previously concealed
material problems. On July 20, 2005, Molina announced that it
was revising its earnings guidance for fiscal year 2005 to $0.73
to $0.80 per share from its previously issued guidance of $2.40
to $2.45 per share, and setting net income of $20.6 million to
$22.6 million, from its previously announced guidance of $67.0
million to $69.0 million. On this news, Molina's stock fell from
a close of $46 per share on July 20, 2005, to close at $26.00
per share on July 21, 2005.

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


MOLINA HEALTHCARE: Paskowitz & Associates Files Stock Suit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law offices of Paskowitz & Associates initiated a lawsuit
seeking class action status in the United States District Court
for the Central District of California on behalf of all persons
who purchased the publicly traded securities of Molina
Healthcare, Inc. (NYSE: MOH - News; "Molina") between November
3, 2004 and July 20, 2005 (the "Class Period").

The Complaint alleges that Molina violated federal securities
laws in connection with the sudden and dramatic revision of its
financial forecasts and the disclosure of previously concealed
material problems. On July 20, 2005, Molina announced that it
was revising its earnings guidance for fiscal year 2005 to $0.73
to $0.80 per share from its previously issued guidance of $2.40
to $2.45 per share, and setting net income of $20.6 million to
$22.6 million, from its previously announced guidance of $67.0
million to $69.0 million. On this news, Molina's stock fell from
a close of $46 per share on July 20, 2005, to close at $26.00
per share on July 21, 2005.

For more details, contact the law offices of Paskowitz &
Associates, Phone: 800-705-9529, E-mail: classattorney@aol.com.


MOLINA HEALTHCARE: Schatz & Nobel Lodges Securities Suit in CA
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schatz & Nobel, P.C. initiated a lawsuit seeking
class action status in the United States District Court for the
Central District of California on behalf of all persons who
purchased the publicly traded securities of Molina Healthcare,
Inc. (NYSE: MOH) ("Molina") between November 3, 2004 and July
20, 2005 (the "Class Period").

The Complaint alleges that Molina violated federal securities
laws in connection with the sudden and dramatic revision of its
financial forecasts and the disclosure of previously concealed
material problems. On July 20, 2005, Molina announced that it
was revising its earnings guidance for fiscal year 2005 to $0.73
to $0.80 per share from its previously issued guidance of $2.40
to $2.45 per share, and setting net income of $20.6 million to
$22.6 million, from its previously announced guidance of $67.0
million to $69.0 million. On this news, Molina's stock fell from
a close of $46 per share on July 20, 2005, to close at $26.00
per share on July 21, 2005.

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


RENAISSANCERE HOLDINGS: Charles J. Piven Lodges Stock Suit in NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities
class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted,
exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of
RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd. (NYSE: RNR) between January 24, 2002
and July 25, 2005, inclusive (the "Class Period").

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

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


RENAISSANCERE HOLDINGS: Goldman Scarlato Lodges Stock Suit in NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Goldman Scarlato & Karon, P.C. initiated a class
action in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York, on behalf of persons who purchased or
otherwise acquired publicly traded securities of RenaissanceRe
Holdings Ltd. ("RenRe" or the "Company") (NYSE:RNR) between
January 24, 2002 and July 25, 2005, inclusive, (the "Class
Period"). The lawsuit was filed against RenRe, James Standard,
Michael W. Cash, William Riker, John M. Lummis and Martin J.
Merritt ("Defendants").

The complaint alleges that Defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule
10b-5. Specifically, the complaint alleges that Defendants
issued a series of false and misleading statements regarding the
Company's financial condition. The complaint further alleges
that these statements were false and misleading because:

     (1) In 2001, RenRe entered into various contracts with
         Inter-Ocean, which were used by Defendants to smooth
         and manipulate the earnings of the Company in the years
         2001 through 2003;

     (2) RenRe failed to properly account for the timing of the
         recognition of reinsurance recoverables, which had the
         impact of misstating net income by as much as 12% in a
         given year;

     (3) RenRe failed to properly account for the timing of the
         recognition of premium on multi-year ceded reinsurance
         contracts in the first three quarters of 2004;

     (4) As a result, the Company's financial reports were not
         prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted
         Accounting Principles ("GAAP").

Beginning in mid-2004, a number of companies involved in the
reinsurance industry began receiving subpoenas regarding their
business practices, and inquiring about their use and sale of
reinsurance contracts. On February 22, 2005, RenRe announced
that it planned to restate its financial statements for 2001,
2002 and 2003 to correct "accounting errors associated with
reinsurance ceded by the Company." In addition, RenRe announced
that it "had discovered an error in the timing of the
recognition of premium on multi-year ceded reinsurance contracts
for the first three quarters of 2004." On July 11, 2005, the
Company issued a press release announcing that it had received
and accepted the resignation of Michael W. Cash, Senior Vice
President of Specialty Reinsurance for the Company, after he
voluntarily refused to accept the subpoenas of the SEC calling
for his testimony in its investigation of the Company's
restatement. On July 25, 2005, the Company announced that
Defendant Standard had received a "Wells Notice" from the SEC in
regard to the agency's investigation of the Company's financial
statements. In reaction, shares of RenRe dropped $4.25 per share
to close at $42.98, from its close of $47.23 on July 22, 2005,
on extraordinarily heavy volume.

For more details, contact the law firm of Goldman Scarlato &
Karon, P.C., Phone: (888) 753-2796, E-mail:
scarlato@gsk-law.com.


RENAISSANCERE HOLDINGS: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York on behalf of all persons who purchased the
publicly traded securities of RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd. (NYSE:
RNR) between January 24, 2002 and July 25, 2005 (the "Class
Period").

The Complaint alleges that RenaissanceRe violated federal
securities laws by issuing improper financial results. On
February 22, 2005, RenaissanceRe announced that it planned to
restate its financial statements for 2001, 2002 and 2003 to
correct "accounting errors associated with reinsurance ceded by
the Company." RenaissanceRe also announced that it "had
discovered an error in the timing of the recognition of premium
on multi-year ceded reinsurance contracts for the first three
quarters of 2004." On July 11, 2005, RenaissanceRe announced
that it had received and accepted the resignation of Michael W.
Cash, Senior Vice President of Specialty Reinsurance, after he
voluntarily refused to accept the subpoenas of the SEC for
testimony concerning this restatement. On July 25, 2005,
RenaissanceRe announced that its CEO had received a "Wells
Notice" from the SEC. On this news, shares of RenaissanceRe
dropped from a close of $47.23 on July 22, 2005, to close at
$42.27 on July 25, 2005 (the next trading day).

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


RENAISSANCERE HOLDINGS: Schatz & Nobel Lodges Stock Suit in NY
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schatz & Nobel, P.C. initiated a lawsuit seeking
class action status in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons who
purchased the publicly traded securities of RenaissanceRe
Holdings Ltd. (NYSE: RNR) ("RenaissanceRe") between January 24,
2002 and July 25, 2005 (the "Class Period").

The Complaint alleges that RenaissanceRe violated federal
securities laws by issuing improper financial results. On
February 22, 2005, RenaissanceRe announced that it planned to
restate its financial statements for 2001, 2002 and 2003 to
correct "accounting errors associated with reinsurance ceded by
the Company." RenaissanceRe also announced that it "had
discovered an error in the timing of the recognition of premium
on multi-year ceded reinsurance contracts for the first three
quarters of 2004." On July 11, 2005, RenaissanceRe announced
that it had received and accepted the resignation of Michael W.
Cash, Senior Vice President of Specialty Reinsurance, after he
voluntarily refused to accept the subpoenas of the SEC for
testimony concerning this restatement. On July 25, 2005,
RenaissanceRe announced that its CEO had received a "Wells
Notice" from the SEC. On this news, shares of RenaissanceRe
dropped from a close of $47.23 on July 22, 2005, to close at
$42.27 on July 25, 2005 (the next trading day).

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


                            *********


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

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

                            *********


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

Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Frederick, Maryland
USA.   Glenn Ruel 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  * * *