CAR_Public/051026.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Wednesday, October 26, 2005, Vol. 7, No. 212


                            Headlines

AMERICAN AIRLINES: Court Grants Summary Judgment in Fraud Suit
AMERICAN AIRLINES: Travel Agents File Antitrust Suit in S.D. NY
AMERICAN AIRLINES: Faces Flight Attendant Suit V. April 2003 CBA
AMERICAN AIRLINES: Sued For Disclosing Passenger Info in NY, TX
AMERICAN AIRLINES: Faces Consumer Fraud Lawsuits in OK, NY, MA

ANDRX CORPORATION: Shareholder File Securities Suit in S.D. FL
BARRIER THERAPEUTICS: Shareholders Launch Fraud Lawsuits in NJ
BAY MEADOWS: CA Judge OKs $12.65M Shareholders' Suit Settlement
CALIFORNIA: Armenian Descendants Settles AXA Lawsuit For $17M
CANADA: Trial Begins In Abuse Victims Negligence Suit V. Gov't

CANADA: Angry Canadian Parents Join Suit v. BC Teachers' Strike
CASH AMERICA: Payday Loans Suit Remand To GA State Court Sought
CINCINNATI BELL: OH Judge Approves Settlement of Consumer Suit
DOW CHEMICAL: To Block Foreman's Testimony in Rocky Flats Suit
DILLARD'S INC.: Faces New Racial Profiling Lawsuit in AR Court

GULF SOUTH: Faces Two Hurricane Katrina Damage Suits in E.D. LA
GULF SOUTH: Plaintiffs To Convert LA Suits To Individual Actions
HAWAII: ACLU Sues State Over Problematic Youth Prison in Kailua
HIRZEL CANNING: Recalls Spaghetti Sauce Due to Undeclared Cheese
IAN'S NATURAL: Recalls Meat, Poultry For Listeria Contamination

LERNOUT & HASPIE: Officers, Directors Face MA Securities Suits
LITHIA MOTORS: WA Auto Dealerships Sued over B&O Tax Collection
LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES: Retirees File NJ Suit Over Health Benefits
MAYTAG CORPORATION: Triton Merger Falls Through, DE Suit "Moot"
MAYTAG CORPORATION: Pension Fund Launches Investor Suit in Iowa

MAYTAG CORPORATION: Faces Securities Fraud Lawsuit in S.D. Iowa
MISSION PETROLEUM: AL Court Junks March 30 Chemical Spill Suit
OHIO: Inmates File Abuse Suit V. Brown County Sheriff, Officials
OREGON: 30,000+ Parishioners Part of Suit Over Parish Property
RAILTRACK PLC: Shareholders Won't Appeal Dismissal of Byers Suit

REFCO INC.: U.S. Firm Targets Austrian Bank in Securities Suit
REFCO INC.: Shareholders Commence Securities Fraud Lawsuits
RELIANT RESOURCES: Suit Settlement Hearing Set January 5, 2006
TAG-IT PACIFIC: Shareholders Launch Securities Fraud Suit in CA
UNITED STATES: Fairness Act to be Discussed at DC Conference

UNITED TECHNOLOGIES: Faces Elevator Manufacturers Antitrust Suit
US TELEMARKETERS: To Pay $415T To Settle Credit Card Fraud Suits
VASO ACTIVE: Settlement Hearing Scheduled For December 14, 2005



             Meetings, Conferences & Seminars

* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
* Online Teleconferences

                 New Securities Fraud Cases

ABERCROMBIE & FITCH: Scott + Scott Provides Update on Litigation
IMMUCOR INC.: Murray Frank Sets October Lead Plaintiff Deadline
PIXAR ANIMATION: Brian M. Felgoise Files Securities Suit in CA
PIXAR ANIMATION: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Suit in CA
PIXAR ANIMATION: Schatz & Nobel Files Securities Suit in N.D. CA

                         *********


AMERICAN AIRLINES: Court Grants Summary Judgment in Fraud Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Central District of
California, Western Division granted summary judgment in
American Airlines, Inc.'s favor in the suit, styled "Westways
World Travel, Inc. v. AMR Corporation, et al."  The suit names
as defendants the Company and:

     (1) AMR Corporation,

     (2) AMR Eagle Holding Corporation,

     (3) Airlines Reporting Corporation, and

     (4) the Sabre Group Holdings, Inc.

The lawsuit alleges that requiring travel agencies to pay debit
memos to the Company for violations of American's fare rules (by
customers of the agencies):

     (i) breaches the Agent Reporting Agreement between American
         and AMR Eagle and the plaintiffs;

    (ii) constitutes unjust enrichment; and

   (iii) violates the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
         Organizations Act of 1970 (RICO)

The certified class includes all travel agencies who have been
or will be required to pay money to American for debit memos for
fare rules violations from July 26, 1995 to the present.  The
plaintiffs seek to enjoin American from enforcing the pricing
rules in question and to recover the amounts paid for debit
memos, plus treble damages, attorneys' fees, and costs.

On February 24, 2005, the court decertified the class.  In
September 2005, the Court granted Summary Judgment in favor of
the Company and all other defendants.  The time for plaintiffs
to file a notice of appeal has not yet run.

The suit is styled "Westway World Travel v. AMR Corp, et al,
case no. 99-cv-07689-WDK-AIJ," filed in the United States
District Court for the Central District of California, under
Judge William D. Keller.

Representing the defendants are Chad S. Hummel, Manatt Phelps &
Phillips, 11355 W Olympic Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90064-1614,
Phone: 310-312-4000; and William A. Wargo, Gibson Dunn &
Crutcher, 333 S Grand Ave, 45th Fl, Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197,
Phone: 213-229-7000.  Representing the plaintiffs are
Linda S. Platisha, Linda S. Platisha Law Offices, 21520 Yorba
Linda Blvd, Ste G-560 Yorba Linda, CA 92887, Phone: 714-694-
1542; and Dean Browning Webb, Dean Browning Webb Law Offices
8002 NE Hwy 99, Ste B Vancouver, WA 98665-8833, Phone: 503-629-
2176, Fax: 503-629-9527.


AMERICAN AIRLINES: Travel Agents File Antitrust Suit in S.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------
American Airlines, Inc. continues to face an amended class
action filed against it and other airlines in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, styled
"Power Travel International, Inc. v. American Airlines, Inc., et
al."  The suit also names as defendants:

     (1) Continental Airlines,

     (2) Delta Air Lines,

     (3) United Airlines, and

     (4) Northwest Airlines

The suit alleges that the Company and the other defendants
breached their contracts with the agency and were unjustly
enriched when these carriers at various times reduced their base
commissions to zero.  The as yet uncertified class includes all
travel agencies accredited by the Airlines Reporting Corporation
"whose base commissions on airline tickets were unilaterally
reduced to zero by" the defendants.  The case is stayed as to
United Airlines, since it filed for bankruptcy.

The suit is styled "Power Travel Intl. v. American Airlines, et
al., case no 1:02-cv-07434-RWS," filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, under
Judge Robert W. Sweet.  Representing the Company is Richard M.
Goldstein and Carla M. Miller of Proskauer Rose LLP, 1585
Broadway, New York, NY 10036-8299, Phone: (212) 969-3000.
Representing the plaintiffs are Craig L. Briskin, Lawrence
Paskowitz of Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP, 100 Park
Avenue, New York, NY 10017, Phone: 212-907-0854, Fax:
212-883-7054, E-mail: cbriskin@labaton.com.


AMERICAN AIRLINES: Faces Flight Attendant Suit V. April 2003 CBA
----------------------------------------------------------------
American Airlines, Inc. continues to face a consolidated class
action filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of New York, styled "Ann M. Marcoux, et al. v. American
Airlines, Inc., et al."  The suit also names as defendant the
Association of Professional Flight Attendants (APFA), the Union
which represents the Company's flight attendants.

The suit seeks on behalf of all of the Company's flight
attendants or various subclasses to set aside, and to obtain
damages allegedly resulting from, the April 2003 Collective
Bargaining Agreement referred to as the Restructuring
Participation Agreement (RPA).  The RPA was one of three labor
agreements the Company successfully reached with its unions in
order to avoid filing for bankruptcy in 2003.

In a related case, styled "Sherry Cooper, et al. v. TWA
Airlines, LLC, et al.," also filed in the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of New York, the court denied a
preliminary injunction against implementation of the RPA on June
30, 2003.  The suit alleges various claims against the Union and
the Company relating to the RPA and the ratification vote on the
RPA by individual Union members, including: violation of the
Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) and the
APFA's Constitution and By-laws, violation by the Union of its
duty of fair representation to its members, violation by the
Company of provisions of the Railway Labor Act through improper
coercion of flight attendants into voting or changing their vote
for ratification, and violations of the Racketeer  Influenced
and Corrupt Organizations Act of 1970 (RICO).

The suit is styled "Marcoux et al v. American Airlines Inc. et
al, case no. 1:04-cv-01376-NG-KAM," filed in the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of New York, under Judge
Nina Gershon.

Representing the Company are Thomas Edward Reinert, Jr., Melissa
C. Rodriguez, Sam Scott Shaulson of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius,
LLP, 101 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10178, Phone: 212-309-6000,
Fax: 212- 309-6273, E-mail: treinert@morganlewis.com,
mcrodriguez@morganlewis.com, sshaulson@morganlewis.com.
Representing the plaintiffs are:

     (1) Emily Maruja Bass, Law Offices of Emily Bass, 25
         Washington Street, Suite 305 Brooklyn, NY 11201, Phone:
         718-522-9705, Fax: 718-522-9707, E-mail: eb@basslaw.us

     (2) Martin Garbus and Mark J. Rachman, Davis & Gilbert,
         LLP, 1740 Broadway, 21st floor, New York, NY 10019
         Phone: 212-468-4800, Fax: 212-468-4888, E-mail:
         mgarbus@dglaw.com or mrachman@dglaw.com


AMERICAN AIRLINES: Sued For Disclosing Passenger Info in NY, TX
---------------------------------------------------------------
American Airlines, Inc. faces four class actions, arising from
the disclosure of passenger name records by a vendor of the
Company.  The cases are:

     (1) Kimmell v. AMR, et al., filed in the United States
         District Court in Texas,

     (2) Baldwin v. AMR, et al., filed in the United States
         District Court in Texas,

     (3) Rosenberg v. AMR, et al., filed in the United States
         District Court in New York

     (4) Anapolsky v. AMR, et al., filed in the United States
         District Court in New York

The Kimmell suit was filed in April 2004. The Baldwin and
Rosenberg cases were filed in May 2004.  The Anapolsky suit was
filed in September 2004.  The suits allege various causes of
action, including but not limited to, violations of the
Electronic Communications Privacy Act, negligent
misrepresentation, breach of contract and violation of alleged
common law rights of privacy.  In each case plaintiffs seek
statutory damages of $1000 per passenger, plus additional
unspecified monetary damages.  The Court dismissed the cases but
allowed leave to amend, and the Kimmell and Rosenberg cases have
been re-filed.


AMERICAN AIRLINES: Faces Consumer Fraud Lawsuits in OK, NY, MA
--------------------------------------------------------------
American Airlines, Inc. faces three purported class actions,
arising from allegedly improper failure to refund certain
governmental taxes and fees collected by the Company upon the
sale of nonrefundable tickets when such tickets are not used for
travel.  The suits are:

     (1) Coleman v. American Airlines, Inc., No. 101106, filed
         December 31, 2002, pending (on appeal) before the
         Supreme Court of Oklahoma.  The Coleman Plaintiffs seek
         actual damages (not specified) and interest;

     (2) Hayes v. American Airlines, Inc., No. 04-3231, pending
         in the United States District Court for the Eastern
         District of New York, filed July 2, 2004.  The Hayes
         Plaintiffs seek unspecified damages, declaratory
         judgment, costs, attorneys' fees, and interest.

     (3) Harrington v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., et. al., No. 04-
         12558, pending in the United States District Court for
         the District of Massachusetts, filed November 4, 2004.
         The Harrington plaintiffs seek unspecified actual
         damages (trebled), declaratory judgment, injunctive
         relief, costs, and attorneys' fees.

The suits assert various causes of action, including breach of
contract, conversion, and unjust enrichment.


ANDRX CORPORATION: Shareholder File Securities Suit in S.D. FL
--------------------------------------------------------------
Andrx Corporation and its chief executive officer faces several
securities class actions filed in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Florida, on behalf of persons
who purchased the Company's securities from March 9,2005 to
September 5,2005.

The Complaints charge defendants Andrx Corp. and the Chief
Executive Officer of the Company with violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The Complaints allege that
defendants were aware of and failed to disclose the fact that
their manufacturing facilities did not comply with all
applicable good manufacturing practices (``cGMP'') regulations
and that Andrx was facing serious regulatory sanctions as a
result of its cGMP violations including a sanction that would
preclude the Food and Drug Administration (``FDA'') approval of
Andrx's pending and future drug applications. On September 6,
2005, defendants shocked the market when they announced that the
FDA had recently placed a halt on approving Andrx's drug
applications. In response to this press release, Andrx stock
dropped from a closing price of $17.94 on September 5, 2005 to
$14.89 on September 6, 2005 on heavy trading volume.

The first identified complaint in the litigation is styled
"Jerry Lowry, et al. v. Andrx Corporation, et al., case no. 05-
CV-61640," filed in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Florida, under Judge William P.
Dimitrouleas.  The plaintiff firms in the litigation are:

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

     (2) Federman & Sherwood, 120 North Robinson, Suite 2720,
         Oklahoma City, OK, 73102, Phone: 405-235-1560, E-mail:
         wfederman@aol.com

     (3) Law Offices of Bernard M. Gross, 1515 Locust Street,
         2nd Floor, Philadelphia, PA, 19102, Phone: 215-561-
         3600, Fax: 215-561-3000, E-mail:
         bmgross@bernardmgross.com

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


BARRIER THERAPEUTICS: Shareholders Launch Fraud Lawsuits in NJ
--------------------------------------------------------------
Barrier Therapeutics, Inc. and certain of its officers and
directors face several securities class actions filed in the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on
behalf of purchasers of the Company's securities from April
29,2004 to June 29,2005.

The complaints charge the Company and certain of its officers
and directors with violations of the Securities Act of 1933 and
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Barrier is a biopharmaceutical
company, engaged in the discovery, development, and
commercialization of pharmaceutical products in the field of
dermatology.

The complaints allege that Barrier made a series of materially
false and misleading statements concerning the Company's
business and products under development. In particular, the
Complaint alleges that these statements were materially false
and misleading because they failed to disclose and
misrepresented the following adverse facts:

     (1) that the Company had failed to perform its clinical
         trials in conformity with FDA guidelines as they had
         failed to disclose that they had secretly substituted
         the petroleum base within Zimycan, the effect of which
         was to substantially lessen the likelihood that the
         drug could achieve FDA approval;

     (2) that Hyphanox did not have a better safety or efficacy
         profile than fluconazole/Diflucan and, in fact, as
         investors ultimately learned, Hyphanox was
         significantly less effective than fluconazole/Diflucan;
         and

     (3) as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked any
         reasonable basis for their positive statements about
         Barrier.

The complaints further allege that on or around June 29, 2005,
Barrier shocked the market when it announced, among other
adverse facts, that the Company's drug trials failed to
demonstrate that Hyphanox worked as well as fluconazole. In
response to this announcement, the price of Barrier stock
plummeted over $6.75 per share - - a decline of over 45% - - to
below $8.00 per share on extremely heavy trading volume.

The lawsuits have been filed on behalf of all persons who
purchased the common stock of Barrier Therapeutics, Inc. between
April 29, 2004, and June 29, 2005, inclusive. Also included are
those who purchased Barrier pursuant and/or traceable to the
Company's Initial Public Offering ("IPO") on or about April 29,
2004 and/or in its Secondary Offering on or about February 9,
2005.

The first identified complaint is styled "Midtown Partners,
Inc., et al. v. Barrier Therapeutics, Inc., et al.," filed in
the United States District Court in New Jersey.  The plaintiff
firms in the litigation are:

     (i) Abraham, Fruchter & Twersky, One Pennsylvania Plaza,
         Suite 1910, New York, NY, 10119, Phone: 212.279.5050,
         Fax: 212.279.3655, E-mail:
         JFruchter@FruchterTwersky.com

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

   (iii) Federman & Sherwood, 120 North Robinson, Suite 2720,
         Oklahoma City, OK, 73102, Phone: 405-235-1560, E-mail:
         wfederman@aol.com

    (iv) Goldman Scarlato & Karon PC, Phone: 888-753-2796,

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

    (vi) Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP
         (Melville), 200 Broadhollow, Suite 406, Melville, NY,
         11747, Phone: 631.367.7100, Fax: 631.367.1173, E-mail:
         info@lerachlaw.com

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

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

    (ix) The Rosen Law Firm P.A., 232 Madison Avenue, Suite 906,
         New York, NY, 10016, Phone: 212.686.1060, Fax:
         212.202.3827, E-mail: info@rosenlegal.com


BAY MEADOWS: CA Judge OKs $12.65M Shareholders' Suit Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------
Some former and current employees of the Bay Meadows Race Course
will be splitting $12.65 million in a legal settlement of a
class action lawsuit against a former racetrack owner, The San
Francisco Examiner reports.

U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker recently approved the
settlement of the employees' suit against Wyndham International,
a company that had merged with Patriot American Hospitality and
which was recently sold to the Blackstone Group.

Court records show that the plaintiffs were all shareholders in
the California Jockey Club, the track's owner before merging
with Patriot American in 1997. Doris Johnson, a woman who worked
at the track for 49 years and filed suit in 1999.  Ms. Johnson
along with the other plaintiffs alleged that Patriot misled the
shareholders of the California Jockey Club during the time
leading to the merger with Patriot, a then-high-flying hotel
company. In addition, they also alleged that Patriot proposed
the merger to take advantage of a unique tax break available to
the California Jockey Club as part of a grandfathered-in tax
clause, and then deliberately engaged in risky debt acquisition
that eventually resulted in huge stock losses. Defendants though
denied the charges.

According to plaintiff's attorney Mark Molumphy of the
Burlingame firm Cotchett, Pitre & Simon, the shareholders lost
ownership of both the track and much of the value of their
stock. He estimated that the shareholders collective losses were
at around $25 million.

Commenting on the recently approved deal, Mr. Molumphy told The
San Francisco Examiner, "I think it's a very good settlement
given the risks involved in the case. These people will be
splitting substantial checks. It's been a long, long fight."

There were approximately 2,000 to 3,000 shareholders eligible to
share in the class action lawsuit of which 40 percent to 60
percent submitted claims, according to Mr. Molumphy. They will
share the $12.65 million based on the number of shares each
owned, minus 20 percent for attorneys' fees, he added.


CALIFORNIA: Armenian Descendants Settles AXA Lawsuit For $17M
-------------------------------------------------------------
Descendants of victims of the 1915 Armenian Genocide will share
a $17 million settlement in a class action lawsuit brought
against French insurance giant AXA for unpaid life insurance
benefits. (Kyurkjian, et. al. v. AXA, Case No: CV 02-01750, and
Ouzounian, et. al. v. AXA, Case No: CV 05-02596, U.S. District
Court, Central District of California).

The class includes Armenians living in the United States and
abroad who are descendants and heirs of policyholders who
perished in what is considered the first genocide of the 20th
century. The settlement, subject to court approval, will be
administered in France, which was one of the first countries to
recognize the Armenian Genocide. AXA is headquartered in France
and does business in the United States through various
subsidiaries.

Under the terms of the $17 million settlement, AXA will donate a
minimum of $3 million to various France-based Armenian
charitable organizations and will contribute $11 million towards
a fund designed to pay, under procedures to be determined later,
valid claims of heirs of policyholders and beneficiaries of
policies issued by AXA Group subsidiaries that did business in
the Turkish Ottoman Empire prior to 1915. Certain of these
policyholders and beneficiaries were among the 1.5 million
Armenians who perished and were unable to obtain their insurance
proceeds in the ensuing chaos.

The suit is the second of its kind. Class Counsel Vartkes
Yeghiayan, Brian S. Kabateck and Mark J. Geragos -- all of
Armenian descent -- are internationally representing Armenian
descendants in similar cases. Earlier this year in another class
action (Martin Marootian, et al. v. New York Life Insurance
Company), New York Life agreed to pay $20 million to descendants
of Armenian policyholders killed during the genocide. Attorneys
representing the class against AXA also represented class
members in the New York Life case.

Class Counsel praised the efforts of U.S. District Court Judges
Christina Snyder and Dickran Tevrizian for their assistance in
fostering the dialogue that ultimately led to the settlement and
also praised AXA for dealing in a transparent and responsible
manner in bringing this matter to a successful conclusion.

"This is an example where dead men can't speak but they can file
lawsuits," said Vartkes Yeghiayan of Yeghiayan & Associates. "It
writes another chapter about persistence and hope. The
resolution of the case helps the healing process."

"The AXA and New York Life settlements are important building
blocks not only toward seeking financial recovery for the losses
resulting from the Armenian Genocide but also in our ultimate
goal, which is for Turkey and the U.S. to officially acknowledge
the genocide," said Mr. Geragos of Geragos & Geragos. "These
cases are historical because they are the only cases ever
brought on behalf of genocide survivors."

"My grandparents lost their entire families in the genocide. Our
continued legal efforts to bring attention to the terrible
events of 90 years ago honor their memories," said Mr. Kabateck
of Kabateck Brown Kellner. "Today, AXA made the right decision
by agreeing to establish a claims fund for the heirs of those
killed in the Armenian Genocide."

For more details, contact Brian S. Kabateck of Kabateck Brown
Kellner, LLP, Phone: 011 33 67 459-8328 Hotel le Bristol: 33 1
53 43 43 00 or Pascal Sevag, Phone: 33 01 46 07 41 08.


CANADA: Trial Begins In Abuse Victims Negligence Suit V. Gov't
--------------------------------------------------------------
A Canadian judge began hearing an application for a class action
lawsuit on behalf of dozens of people who allege that the
Alberta government failed to protect them against abuse as
children and then denied them legal services so they could sue
those responsible, The Canadian Press reports.

The case involves more than 140 people who were once under the
supervision of Alberta's child welfare department. Lawyers for
the victims are arguing that since their cases are similar, they
should be heard as a group under a new Alberta law that allows
class actions lawsuits.

The suit's lead plaintiff, a Calgary woman now in her 30s, said
she hopes the action will help others avoid the kind of
childhood she had. Known only by the initials, T.L., the woman
told reporters outside court that her stepfather physically and
sexually abused her from the age of seven. With tear filled eyes
the woman recounted a nightmarish existence of beatings, forced
sex and fear, which only ended when she ran away from home at
the age of 15. She said that police were called to the home
repeatedly and her many scars testified to her suffering. She
adds that the abuse also extended to her sister.

According to T.L., throughout that time, child welfare workers
dealt with the family regularly. She also told reporters, "They
knew about all of it, and they never tried to remove us from the
home."

After she left home, T.L. laid a criminal sexual assault charge
against her stepfather, who was later sentenced to six months
less a day in jail. T.L. claims that had she known that she
could make a civil claim against the child welfare department or
its staff, she might have been able to pay for more of the
psychological counseling she so desperately needed.

A team of lawyers including Robert Lee of Edmonton and David
Klein, a class action specialist from Vancouver, is spearheading
the case. They argue that Child Welfare was duty bound to take
reasonable steps to obtain compensation for any of its clients
who had suffered harm, or at least advise them when they turned
18 that they could seek such compensation.

According to the statement of claim, "Child Welfare is aware
that they have and had a legal obligation as a guardian of a
child to sue for children in their care." It goes on to state,
"Child Welfare is intentionally using their decision-making
authority over the provision of legal services to children in
care to deny the legal services to children in care as a defense
tactic in the lawsuit."

It's not yet known how many defendants might be involved should
the case be certified as a class action. If it is, the lawyers
plan to seek out people who might have similar claims, and Mr.
Lee has estimated they could number in the thousands. Arguments
in the case are expected to take up to three days.


CANADA: Angry Canadian Parents Join Suit v. BC Teachers' Strike
---------------------------------------------------------------
A number of angry Canadian parents joined a class action against
the B.C. Teachers' Federation (BCTF) over its illegal strike,
CKNW.com reports.

The 38,000 members of the B.C. Teachers' Federation walked off
the job on October 7, 2005.  BC Supreme Court Justice Brenda
Brown will announce on Friday how much - if anything - the BCTF
will be fined for violating the back-to-work orders.

The Canadian Taxpayers' Federation (CTF) filed the suit,
alleging negligence by the striking teachers, their union and
their union president. The suit accuses teachers, their union
and Jinny Sims, their leader of going on strike despite
legislation and legal decisions that declare their actions as
being illegal.  The statement of claim also contends that their
negligence includes the failure to instruct union members to
return to work and a lack of effort to maintain essential
service levels, an earlier Class Action Reporter story (October
14, 2005) reports.

Within 24 hours of the CTF's launch of a website, BC Director
Sara McInrtyre said up to five hundred people have responded,
claiming they've suffered financial hardship because of the
strike.  "I believe it's people from all across the province,:
Ms. McIntyre told CKNW.com. "People on the Island here, parents
on the Island, as well as parents on the Mainland and in the
Interior. I know the Okanagan as well. I mean, it's a province-
wide strike, so individuals and parents are going to be impacted
across the province."


CASH AMERICA: Payday Loans Suit Remand To GA State Court Sought
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court in Georgia has yet to rule on
plaintiff's motion to remand of a class action filed against
Cash America International, Inc. and Georgia Cash America, Inc.
(together "Cash America") to the State Court of Cobb County,
Georgia.

James E. Strong filed the suit in Georgia state court on August
6, 2004.  The suit also names as defendants Daniel R. Feehan,
and several unnamed officers, directors, owners and
"stakeholders" of Cash America.  The lawsuit alleges many
different causes of action, among the most significant of which
is that Cash America has been making illegal payday loans in
Georgia in violation of Georgia's usury law, the Georgia
Industrial Loan Act and Georgia's Racketeer Influenced and
Corrupt Organizations Act.  Community State Bank has for some
time made loans to Georgia residents through Cash America's
Georgia operating locations.

The complaint in this lawsuit claims that Community State Bank
is not the true lender with respect to the loans made to Georgia
borrowers and that its involvement in the process is "a mere
subterfuge."  Based on this claim, the suit alleges that Cash
America is the "de facto" lender and is illegally operating in
Georgia.  The complaint seeks unspecified compensatory damages,
attorney's fees, punitive damages and the trebling of any
compensatory damages.

Cash America removed the case to federal court and filed a
motion to compel the plaintiff to arbitrate his claim, in
addition to denying the plaintiff's allegations and asserting
various defenses to his claim. The plaintiff has filed a motion
to remand the case to Georgia state court.

The suit is styled "Strong v. Georgia Cash America Inc. et al.,
case no. 1:04-cv-02611-WSD," filed in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Georgia, under Judge William
S. Duffey, Jr.  Representing the Company are Claudia Callaway,
John Garrett Parker, and Sabrina Rose Smith of Paul Hastings
Janofsky & Walker, 1299 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Tenth Floor,
Washington, DC 20004-2400, Phone: 202-508-9500, E-mail:
claudiacallaway@paulhastings.com, johnparker@paulhastings.com,
sabrinarosesmith@paulhastings.com.  Representing the plaintiffs
are Roy E. Barnes, Jennifer Auer Jordan and John Frank Salter,
Jr. of The Barnes Law Group, LLC, P.O. Box 489, Marietta, GA
30061, Phone: 770-419-8505, Fax: 770-590-8958, E-mail:
roy@barneslawgroup.com, jennifer@barneslawgroup.com,
john@barneslawgroup.com.


CINCINNATI BELL: OH Judge Approves Settlement of Consumer Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Robert Ruehlman of the Court of Common Pleas in Hamilton
County, Ohio approved a class action settlement against
Cincinnati Bell Wireless for alleged billing problems that have
resulted in the wrongful assessment of local roaming charges to
customers on behalf all subscribers, according to company
officials, The ChannelCincinnati.com reports.

The settlement, which more than $6 million worth, will allow
subscribers who were wrongfully charged for roaming services to
get up to $50 in vouchers for certain Cincinnati Bell services.

In addition, the settlement also allows customers who can
demonstrate that they had been wrongfully billed roaming charges
in excess of $100 to receive up to half of the money they paid
in cash, instead of the $50 voucher.

The suit claims that Cincinnati Bell Wireless illegally charged
its subscribers for wrongful roaming charges in a scheme to
defraud consumers through its billing practices. It also claims
that Cincinnati Bell has known about these roaming mistakes for
more than a year. The law firm of Ulmer & Berne LLP was one of
two law firms who filed the class action lawsuit, an earlier
Class Action Reporter story (October 6, 2004) reports.

For more details, visit http://www.checkyourcellbill.com/


DOW CHEMICAL: To Block Foreman's Testimony in Rocky Flats Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Attorneys for Rockwell International Corporation and Dow
Chemical Co., the operators of the former Rocky Flats nuclear
weapons plant in Colorado, recently made court filings in a
multimillion-dollar class action lawsuit that seeks to prevent
testimony by the foreman of a 1992 grand jury, which voted to
indict officials over contamination at the site, The Associated
Press reports.

In the filings, defense attorneys stated that Wes McKinley, now
a member of the state Legislature, was expected to testify about
his experiences on the grand jury and about a bill he proposed
to warn of potential lingering contamination at the site 10
miles northwest of Denver. They pointed out that Mr. McKinley,
who previously said that he hopes to be able to testify, refused
to answer questions on those subjects during a deposition,
citing grand jury secrecy rules.

According to the attorneys, "It is obvious that what plaintiffs
want McKinley to tell the jury is: `The cleanup effort at Rocky
Flats is flawed and there are continuing health risks at Rocky
Flats, but because of (secrecy rules) I cannot tell you why I
believe this.'"

They also stated in the filings, "Plaintiffs and Mr. McKinley
should not be allowed to disclose matters occurring before the
grand jury when they believe it to be in their interests to do
so, and not disclose such matters when doing so would be adverse
to their interests."

In a federal trial that is expected to last through December,
residents who owned property near the site, claim that Dow,
which operated Rocky Flats from the 1950s through 1975, and
Rockwell, which took over in 1975 and operated the plant until
it was shut down in 1989, improperly stored or otherwise
mishandled plutonium-laced waste, resulting in contamination of
soil and groundwater. According to the suit, both firms operated
the plant under a Department of Energy contract, an earlier
Class Action Reporter story (October 11, 2005) reports.

Those residents, who are the named plaintiffs in the protracted
federal class action suit, claim that large fires at the plant
and windstorms and other natural events helped to spread the
waste outside the plant's boundaries. That contamination, plus
what the property owners said was a stigma attached to houses
near the plant, resulted in plummeting property values, an
earlier Class Action Reporter story (October 11, 2005) reports.

Thus, the plaintiffs about 13,000 strong are seeking damages
that defense attorneys estimate, could reach up to $500 million.

U.S. District Judge John Kane has not ruled on motions by
Rockwell and Dow to prevent testimony not only from Mr.
McKinley, who had been scheduled to testify recently, but also
from Jon Lipsky, a former FBI agent who led a raid at Rocky
Flats in 1989. During his deposition, Mr. Lipsky refused to
answer some questions about his investigation, citing a letter
from the FBI "urging him to follow certain confidentiality
obligations related to his prior employment," defense attorneys
said.

Mr. McKinley told The Associated Press that he hoped his
testimony and that of Mr. Lipsky's would raise public awareness
of lingering contamination he believes exists at Rocky Flats. He
pointed out, "In another 10 or 15 years it'll pretty much be
forgotten. People should have the opportunity to know what went
on out there. It's kind of our duty. There's not a personal
thing in it, it's just the fact that some things you really hate
to see happening."

The suit is styled, "Cook, et al v. Rockwell Intl. Corp., Case
No. 1:90-cv-00181-JLK," filed in the United States District
Court for the District of Colorado, under Judge John L. Kane.
Representing the Plaintiff/s are:

     (1) Gary B. Blum of Silver & DeBoskey, P.C., 1801 York St.,
         Denver, CO 80206, U.S.A, Phone: 303-399-3000, Fax: 303-
         399-2650, E-mail: blumg@s-d.com;

     (2) Stanley M. Chesley of Waite, Schneider, Bayless &
         Chesley Co., L.P.A., 1513 Fourth and Vine Tower, One
         West Fourth St., Cincinnati, OH 45202, U.S.A, Phone:
         513-621-0268;

     (3) Merrill Gene Davidoff, Jennifer E. MacNaughton, Peter
         B. Nordberg, Ellen T. Noteware, Bernadette M. Rappold,
         Stanley B. Siegel and David F. Sorensen of Berger &
         Montague, P.C., 1622 Locust St., Philadelphia, PA
         19103, U.S.A, Phone: 215-875-3084, 215-875-3000 and
         215-875-3051, Fax: 215-875-4671, 215-875-4604 and 215-
         875-5707, E-mail: mdavidoff@bm.net,
         jmacnaughton@bm.net, pnordberg@bm.net,
         enoteware@bm.net and dsorensen@bm.net;

     (4) Bruce H. DeBoskey of Silver & Deboskey, P.C., 1801 York
         St. #700, Denver, CO 80206-5607, U.S.A, Phone: 303-399
         -3000;

     (5) Kenneth A. Jacobsen of Jacobsen Law Offices, LLC, 12
         Orchard Lane, Wallingford, PA 19086, U.S.A., Phone:
         610-566-7930, Fax: 610-566-7940;

     (6) David Evans Kreutzer of Colorado Department of Law,
         1525 Sherman St., 5th Floor, Denver, CO 80203, U.S.A,
         Phone: 303-866-5667, Fax: 303-866-3558, E-mail:
         david.kreutzer@state.co.us;

     (7) Louise M. Roselle of Waite, Schneider, Bayless &
         Chesley Co., L.P.A., 1513 Fourth and Vine Tower, One
         West Fourth St., Cincinnati, OH 45202, U.S.A, Phone:
         513-621-0267, Fax: 513-381-2375, E-mail:
         louiseroselle@wsbclaw.com;

     (8) Clisham, Satriana & Biscan, LLC, 1512 Larimer St., #400
         Denver, CO 80202, U.S.A, Phone: 303-468-5403, Fax: 303-
         942-7290, E-mail: satrianad@csbattorneys.com;

     (9) Holly Brons Shook of Silver & DeBoskey, P.C., 1801 York
         St., Denver, CO 80206, U.S.A, Phone: 303-399-3000, Fax:
         303-399-2650, E-mail: shookh@s-d.com;

    (10) Ronald Simon of Simon & Associates, 1707 N. St., N.W.
         Washington, DC 20036, U.S.A, Phone: 202-429-0094, Fax:
         202-429-0075, E-mail: ron@1707law.com; and

    (11) John David Stoner of Chimicles & Tikellis, L.L.P., 361
         West Lancaster Ave., One Haverford Centre, Haverford,
         PA 19041-0100, U.S.A

Representing the Defendant/s are:

     (i) Joseph John Bronesky and Christopher Lane of Sherman &
         Howard, L.L.C.- 17th St., Denver, CO, United States
         District Court Box 12, 633 Seventeenth St., #3000
         Denver, CO 80202, U.S.A, Phone: 303-299-8450 and 303-
         299-8422, Fax: 303-298-0949 and 303-298-0940, E-mail:
         jbronesk@sah.com and clane@sah.com;

    (ii) Wendy S. White, Timothy P. Brooks, Patrick M. Hanlon,
         Amy Horton, Franklin D. Kramer and Edward J. Naughton
         Of Goodwin Procter, LLP-DC, 1800 Massachusetts Ave.,
         N.W. #800, Washington, DC 20036, U.S.A, Phone:  202-
         828-2000, Fax: 828-2000;

   (iii) Michael K. Isenman of Goodwin Procter, LLP-DC, 901 New
         York Ave., NW #700, Washington, DC 20001, U.S.A, Phone:
         202-346-4000, Fax: 202-346-4444, E-mail:
         misenman@goodwinprocter.com;

    (iv) Lester C. Houtz of Bartlit, Beck, Herman, Palenchar &
         Scott-Colorado, 1899 Wynkoop St., #800 Denver, CO
         80202, U.S.A., Phone: 303-592-3177, Fax: 303-3140, E-
         mail: lester.houtz@bartlit-beck.com;

     (v) Douglas J. Kurtenbach, S. Jonathan Silverman, Mark S.
         Lillie and David M. Bernick of Kirkland & Ellis, LLP-
         Illinois, 200 East, Randolph Drive, #5400 Chicago, IL
         60601, U.S.A, Phone: 312-861-2225, 312-861-2089 and
         312-861-2248, Fax: 861-2200, 312-660-0452 and 312-861-
         2200, E-mail: mlillie@kirkland.com and
         dbernick@kirkland.com;

    (vi) Douglas M. Poland of LaFollette, Godfrey & Kahn, P.O.
         Box 2719, One East Main St., Madison, WI 53703-2719,
         U.S.A, Phone: 608-257-3911, Fax: 608-257-0609, E-mail:
         dpoland@gklaw.com; and

   (vii) Louis W. Pribila of Dow Chemical Company, 2030 Dow
         Center, Midland, MI 48674, U.S.A, Phone: 517-638-9511,
         Fax: 638-9410.


DILLARD'S INC.: Faces New Racial Profiling Lawsuit in AR Court
--------------------------------------------------------------
A new lawsuit was initiated against Arkansas-based department-
store chain Dillard's Inc. accusing it of engaging in racial
profiling in an effort to thwart shoplifters, The Associated
Press reports.

The suit, which names eight plaintiffs, was filed in U.S.
District Court in Little Rock claiming that that the chain
wrongfully accused black customers of shoplifting at stores in
Arkansas, Tennessee and Florida.  The suit specifically alleges
that Dillard's employees or security workers questioned the
plaintiffs when they were in the stores and accused them of
stealing merchandise.

As far back as the early 1990s, Dillard's has been the target of
lawsuits that alleged the company discriminated against blacks.
All those suits in one form or another alleged that black
customers were unreasonably searched, questioned or denied
service. Dillard's though vehemently denied those allegations.

Earlier this year, Dillard's was the target of a federal class
action suit that accused its hair salons of using a dual pricing
system, one for blacks and another for whites and similar
groups. Debbie Deavers Sturvisant, an Alabama resident said a
Dillard's in Tuscaloosa charged her $35 to have her hair washed
and set, while white customers were charged $20 for the same
service. The case was filed in the U.S. District Court in
Birmingham.


GULF SOUTH: Faces Two Hurricane Katrina Damage Suits in E.D. LA
---------------------------------------------------------------
Gulf South Pipeline Company LP, along with at least eight other
interstate pipelines and major natural gas producers, face
Hurricane Katrina-related class action lawsuits seeking
unspecified amount of damages, filed in the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.

The lawsuits allege that the dredging of canals, including
pipeline canals for the purpose of installing natural gas
pipelines, throughout the marshes of Southeastern Louisiana, and
the failure to maintain such canals, caused damage to the
marshes and that undamaged marshes would have prevented all, or
almost all, of the loss of life and destruction of property
caused by Hurricane Katrina.

The suits also name as defendants:

     (1) BP Corporation N.A., Inc.

     (2) Chevron Corporation

     (3) Columbia Gulf Transmission Co.

     (4) Exxon Mobil Corporation

     (5) Koch Pipeline Company, L.P.

     (6) Shell Oil Co.,

     (7) Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co.

     (8) Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Corp.

The first suit is styled "Villa et al v. Columbia Gulf
Transmission Co. et al, case no. 2:05-cv-04569-MLCF-DEK," filed
in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Louisiana, under Judge Martin L.C. Feldman.  Representing the
plaintiffs is Richard Paul Bullock, Brent Coon & Associates,
1515 Poydras Street, Suite 800, New Orleans, LA 70112, Phone:
504-566-1704, E-mail: rbullock829@aol.com.

The second suit is styled "Barasich et al v. Columbia Gulf
Transmission Company et al., case no. 2:05-cv-04161-HGB-DEK,"
filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Louisiana, under Judge Helen G. Berrigan.
Representing the plaintiffs is Conrad S. P. Williams, III of St.
Martin & Williams, 4084 Highway 311, P. O. Box 2017, Houma, LA
70361-2017, Phone: 985-876-3891, E-mail: duke525@msn.com.


GULF SOUTH: Plaintiffs To Convert LA Suits To Individual Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs intend to convert the class actions, filed against
Gulf South Pipeline Company LP related to its natural storage
caverns in Napoleonville, Louisiana in Louisiana state court, to
individual suits.

On December 24, 2003, natural gas leaks were observed at the
surface near two natural storage caverns that were being leased
and operated by the Company for natural gas storage in
Napoleonville, Louisiana.  The Company commenced remediation
efforts immediately and has ceased using those storage caverns.
Two class action lawsuits have been filed to date relating to
this incident; a declaratory judgment action has been filed and
stayed against the Company by the lessor of the property, and
several individual actions have been filed against the Company
and other defendants by local residents and businesses.

The Company has been informed by plaintiff's counsel in the two
class action lawsuits that they intend to convert the class
actions lawsuits into individual actions.  Pleadings to
institute such a change in status have been circulated in one of
the cases.


HAWAII: ACLU Sues State Over Problematic Youth Prison in Kailua
---------------------------------------------------------------
The American Civil Liberties Union initiated a lawsuit against
the state of Hawaii claiming that it failed to protect inmates
at a youth prison where teens were abused and kept in
overcrowded, unsanitary conditions.

According to Lois Perrin, legal director for the ACLU of Hawaii,
the suit, which seeks class action status, asks for a federal
court-ordered expert to "design, implement and oversee policies
and procedures" at the Hawaii Youth Correctional Facility.  She
told The Associated Press, "The state has been aware for over
two years of a multitude of problems. The state should be
embarrassed that this lawsuit is necessary."

After an ACLU report in 2003 revealed that young inmates were
abused and harassed, the prison's two top administrators were
removed and the attorney general's office launched an
investigation.  In August, the U.S. Justice Department released
its own critical report, saying the young inmates'
constitutional and federal statutory rights were being violated
and describing the Kailua facility as "existing in a state of
chaos."

Despite the suit's filing, Attorney General Mark Bennett's
office told The Associated Press that it "essentially restates
issues" raised by the Department of Justice, and the state has
worked to address the problems.  Since the federal
investigation, the state instituted a new detailed incident-
reporting system, created a new housing unit and hired
consultants and additional guards, state officials told The
Associated Press.


HIRZEL CANNING: Recalls Spaghetti Sauce Due to Undeclared Cheese
----------------------------------------------------------------
Hirzel Canning Company announced that it is voluntarily
recalling Prima Qualita brand Meatless Spaghetti Sauce from
distribution in Iowa, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Illinois, due
to mislabeling of product packaged in 106 oz. cans of spaghetti
sauce containing undeclared cheese.  People who have allergies
to dairy products run the risk of serious allergic reaction if
they consume these products.

The spaghetti sauce in question packed on August 30 and
September 3 of this year, are labeled "Prima Qualita brand
Meatless Spaghetti Sauce" and bear the code 5242X 1SGSA or 5246Y
1SGSA embossed on one of the container ends. No other cases of
this product have been affected.

The company has since found and corrected the problem that
caused the mislabeling to occur.

No illnesses have been reported from consumption of the suspect
product.

The company has notified its distributors in the affected areas
and is taking this action as a precautionary measure in
cooperation with the Federal Food and Drug Administration.

Consumers who have purchased 106 oz. cans of Prima Qualita
Spaghetti Sauce with either of the 2 codes should return them
unopened to the place of purchase for replacement.


IAN'S NATURAL: Recalls Meat, Poultry For Listeria Contamination
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ian's Natural Foods, a Revere, Massachusetts, firm, is
voluntarily recalling approximately 11,200 pounds of ready-to-
eat meat and poultry products that may be contaminated with
Listeria monocytogenes, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's
Food Safety and Inspection Service announced.

The products subject to recall are:

     (1) 12-ounce packages of "TRADER JOE-SAN TERIYAKI CHICKEN
         WITH BASMATI RICE." Each package bears the
         establishment number "P-19011" inside the USDA seal of
         inspection and the sell by date, "10-23-05," "10-24-
         05," "10-25-05," "10-27-05," "10-29-05," "10-30-05" or
         "10-31-05."

     (2) 12-ounce packages of "TRADER GIOTTO'S ITALIAN STYLE
         MEATBALLS, MADE WITH COLEMAN NATURAL BEEF." Each
         package bears the establishment number "EST. 19011"
         inside the USDA seal of inspection and the sell by
         date, "10-30-05," "10-31-05," "11-1-05," "11-2-05" or
         "11-3-05."

     (3) 12-ounce packages of "TRADER JOE'S CHIPOTLE LIME
         CHICKEN STRIPS, GRILLED CHICKEN STRIPS MARINATED WITH
         SOUTHWESTERN-STYLE SPICES." Each package bears the
         establishment number "P-19011" inside the USDA seal of
         inspection and the sell by date, "10-23-05," "10-24-
         05," "10-25-05," "10-26-05," "10-27-05," "10-29-05,"
         "10-30-05" or "10-31-05."

     (4) 16-ounce packages of "TRADER JOE'S JUST CHICKEN, WHITE
         MEAT CHICKEN CHUNKS, GREAT FOR SALADS SOUPS AND
         ENTRES." Each package bears the establishment number
         "P-19011" inside the USDA seal of inspection and the
         sell by date, "10-20-05," "10-21-05," "10-22-05," "10-
         23-05," "10-24-05," "10-26-05," "10-27-05" or "10-28-
         05."

     (5) 12-ounce packages of "TRADER GIOTTO'S BAKED CHICKEN
         PARMESAN, BREAST OF CHICKEN COVERED IN A MARINARA
         SAUCE, THEN TOPPED WITH A BLEND OF FLAVORFUL CHEESES."
         Each package bears the establishment number "P-19011"
         inside the USDA seal of inspection and the sell by
         date, "10-23-05," "10-24-05" or "10-26-05."

     (6) 28-ounce packages of "TRADER JACQUES" QUICHE LORRAINE,
         TRADITIONAL RECIPE WITH UNCURED BACON AND SWISS
         CHEESE." Each package bears the establishment number
         "EST.19011" inside the USDA seal of inspection and the
         sell by date, "10-23-05," "10-24-05," "10-25-05," "10-
         29-05," "10-30-05" or "10-31-05."

     (7) 10-ounce packages of "TRADER MING'S SZECHUAN STYLE
         CHICKEN, WITH WHITE MEAT." Each package bears the
         establishment number "P-19011" inside the USDA seal of
         inspection and the sell by date, "10-23-05," "10-24-
         05," "10-25-05," "10-26-05," "10-29-05" or "10-30-05."

     (8) 16-ounce packages of "TRADER JOE'S JUST CHICKEN WITH
         PANKO BREAD CRUMBS." Each package bears the
         establishment number "P-19011" inside the USDA seal of
         inspection and the sell by date, "10-20-05," "10-21-
         05," "10-22-05," "10-23-05" or "10-24-05."

The products were produced on various dates between Oct. 12 and
18 and were shipped to a Trader Joe's warehouse in Massachusetts
for further retail distribution. The problem was discovered
through company microbiological sampling. FSIS has received no
reports of illnesses associated with consumption of the product.

Consumption of food contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes can
cause listeriosis, an uncommon but potentially fatal disease.
Healthy people rarely contract listeriosis. However, listeriosis
can cause high fever, severe headache, neck stiffness and
nausea. Listeriosis can also cause miscarriages and stillbirths,
as well as serious and sometimes fatal infections in those with
weakened immune systems, such as infants, the elderly and
persons with HIV infection or undergoing chemotherapy.

Consumers with questions about the recall should contact company
Vice-President for Marketing Jeff Canner at (978) 989-0601.
Media with questions about the recall should contact company
Vice-President for Operations Anil Wassan at (781) 284-1999.
Consumers with food safety questions can call the toll-free USDA
Meat and Poultry Hotline at (888) 674-6854. The hotline is
available in English and Spanish and can presently be reached 24
hours a day.


LERNOUT & HASPIE: Officers, Directors Face MA Securities Suits
--------------------------------------------------------------
Certain of Lernout & Haspie Speech Products NV's former officers
and directors, auditors and financial institutions face a
securities class action filed in the United States District
Court for the District of Massachusetts, styled "Unknown
Plaintiff, et al. v. Lernout & Hauspie Speech Products, N.V., et
al.," on behalf of the purchasers of the Company's securities
from April 28,1998 to November 8,2000.

The lawsuit is pending in the United States District Court for
the District of Massachusetts against various former officers
and directors of the Company, the Company's auditors, and
certain financial institutions (collectively, the "Defendants")
for violations of the federal securities laws.  It is the only
United States class action filed on behalf of purchasers of L&H
securities on the EASDAQ stock market.

The complaint alleges that the Defendants engaged in a massive
accounting fraud, at the direction of its Senior Officers, which
resulted in the overstatement of L&H's publicly reported
revenues from its first quarter of fiscal year 1998 through its
first two quarters of fiscal year 2000, by a total of US$377
million (64% higher than its actual earnings). The complaint
states that L&H engaged in numerous illegal accounting
irregularities ranging from back-dating contracts to prematurely
recording revenue, to swapping goods with customers and
recording the swap as revenue, to recording revenue even when
the sales contract was not yet negotiated or signed, to giving
customers side-agreements and the right to return the product.

In addition, L&H, along with Dexia Bank Belgium (formerly known
as Artesian Banking Corp. S.A.), set up 30 companies which
allegedly licensed millions of dollars worth of software from
L&H. L&H improperly recorded all the purported revenue it
received from these companies, the purpose of which was to "pump
up" L&H's publicly reported revenues and benefit L&H's major
shareholders -- FLV, Mercator and the Company's officers. The
complaint goes on to allege that L&H could not have perpetrated
this massive accounting fraud without the collaboration of its
auditors, including KPMG, and its banks, including Dexia.

The complaint further alleges that on or around August 8, 2000,
The Wall Street Journal revealed the wide-spread fraud that had
allegedly been concealed by L&H and KPMG and others. The August
8, 2000 article disclosed that the revenues, and the resulting
net income and earnings per share that L&H had reported in the
fourth quarter of 1999 and first quarter of 2000 were
overstated. On this news, the Company's common stock declined
dramatically by 19% from the previous day's close of US$37 per
share to US$29-13/16 per share, trading as low as US$26-3/4 per
share. Then, after months of denials, on November 9, 2000, L& H
issued a press release announcing that as a result of past
accounting "errors and irregularities" the Company would need to
restate the most recent 2-1/2 years of financial statements. The
Company also warned that its third quarter 2000 revenues would
"be at least US$40 million below its previously published range
of US$165 to US$185 million." The Company further announced that
KPMG's mid-term audit would not be completed by November 14,
2000. In reaction to theses disclosures, on November 9, 2000,
both NASDAQ and EASDAQ suspended trading of L&H securities.
Prior to the suspension, the price of L&H securities on the
NASDAQ market fell as low as US$6.22 and the price of the common
stock on EASDAQ fell to as low as US$ 3.70.

The suit is styled "[Unknown Plaintiff], et al. v. Lernout &
Hauspie Speech Products, N.V., et al."  The plaintiff firms in
this litigation are Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C.
(Washington, DC), 1100 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 500, West
Tower, Washington, DC, 20005, Phone: 202.408.4600, Fax:
202.408.4699, E-mail: lawinfo@cmht.com; and Spector, Roseman &
Kodroff (Philadelphia) 1818 Market Street; Suite 2500,
Philadelphia, PA, 19103 Phone: 215.496.0300, Fax: 215.496.6610,
E-mail: classaction@srk-law.com.


LITHIA MOTORS: WA Auto Dealerships Sued over B&O Tax Collection
---------------------------------------------------------------
A Spokane County auto dealership group was recently sued for
collecting business-and-occupation (B&O) taxes directly from
customers, The Spokesman-Review reports.

The new suit, which seeks class action status, was filed against
the Camp dealerships in Spokane, which include Chevrolet,
Cadillac, Subaru and BMW. According to plaintiffs' attorneys, it
will apply to many more dealerships around the state of
Washington.  Additionally, the new lawsuit also names Camp's
Medford, Oregon parent, Lithia Motors, which owns dealerships in
a number of states across the country, including 15 in
Washington.

A ruling by The Washington Court of Appeals in Spokane, which
stated that the Appleway dealerships in Spokane Valley
improperly pass their B&O taxes to customers as line items on
bills for vehicles, parts and service, formed the basis for the
new lawsuit, which was filed by Seattle attorney Kim Stephens.
According to Mr. Stephens, although the new lawsuit specifically
names only the Lithia dealerships, it includes all dealerships
in the state that tack B&O taxes onto customers' bills. Other
dealerships will be brought into court as they are identified,
the attorney said.  Spokane County residents Theron and Marcia
Johnson are the named plaintiffs in the new suit, filed on
behalf of all affected car buyers.


LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES: Retirees File NJ Suit Over Health Benefits
---------------------------------------------------------------
Claiming the company failed to maintain health care benefits for
retirees as required by law, two Lucent Technologies retirees
initiated a lawsuit against their former employer, The
Associated Press reports.

The plaintiffs, who are members of the "Lucent Retirees
Organization," are seeking to have the case certified as a class
action lawsuit on behalf of 235,000 retirees and dependents. The
retirees' group told The Associated Press that the claim was
filed in U.S. District Court in Camden. Most of the retirees
worked for, and retired from, corporate predecessors of Lucent,
which was spun off from AT&T in 1996.

In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs claim that in 1998, Lucent was
required to maintain all retire benefits at their previous
levels through September 2003. However, they claim that the
Company did not keep that promise when the company raised co-
payments, deductibles and retiree contributions for coverage
between January 1, 2001 and January 1, 2003.

Ken Raschke, president of the Lucent Retirees Organization, told
The Associated Press that employees who retired before March 1,
1990 from any of the companies that eventually became part of
Lucent are not affected and could not join the lawsuit if it is
granted class action status.

Alan M. Sandals, a lawyer for the retirees, told The Associated
Press that because the Company did wrong before September 30, it
was also violating tax laws for other, bigger changes that came
after that date. Those changes include moves Lucent made since
2004, to stop subsidizing health care for dependents of workers
who retired with salaries of more than $65,000.


MAYTAG CORPORATION: Triton Merger Falls Through, DE Suit "Moot"
---------------------------------------------------------------
Maytag Corporation believes the consolidated amended class
action filed against it in the Delaware Court of Chancery for
New Castle County, in connection with Ripplewood Holding's
proposed takeover of the Company, is rendered moot after the
merger failed to materialize.

Between May 20 and 31, 2005, plaintiffs Market Street
Securities, Inc., Herbert Resnik, David Roitman, Hindie Silver,
Louis Rubinstein, David Birnbaum and Morris Gurt, filed seven
class actions on their own behalves and on behalf of an alleged
class of the Company's stockholders, against the Company and its
directors:

     (1) Barbara Allen,

     (2) Howard Clark, Jr.,

     (3) Lester Crown,

     (4) William Kerr,

     (5) Ralph Hake,

     (6) Wayland Hicks,

     (7) James McCaslin,

     (8) Bernard Rethore,

     (9) W. Ann Reynolds,

    (10) Neele Stearns, Jr., and

    (11) Fred Steingraber

These actions were thereafter consolidated into one action, and
a consolidated and amended class action complaint was filed on
July 15, 2005.  The amended complaint alleges, among other
things, that the merger consideration to be paid to the
Company's stockholders in the Ripplewood merger is inadequate
and unfair.  The amended complaint further alleges that the
Company's directors violated their fiduciary duties to the
Company's stockholders by, among other things, failing to
maximize stockholder value, by failing to complete a "meaningful
market-check" of the Company's value before entering into the
merger agreement with Ripplewood, and by agreeing to a merger
agreement that contained a $40 million termination fee "designed
to deter more competitive offers for the Company."  The amended
complaint seeks, among other relief, certification of the
alleged class, preliminary and permanent injunctive relief
against consummation of the merger (or rescinding the merger if
it is completed prior to the receipt of such relief), an order
directing the disclosure of all material information,
compensatory and/or rescissory damages to the class, and an
award of attorneys' fees and expenses.

On August 5, 2005, plaintiffs in these actions filed a motion
for preliminary injunction seeking to enjoin the Triton merger,
but withdrew the motion on August 10, 2005. The Company has
answered the amended complaint by denying all allegations of
wrongdoing and asserting various affirmative defenses, including
the mootness of the action in light of the termination of the
merger agreement with Triton.


MAYTAG CORPORATION: Pension Fund Launches Investor Suit in Iowa
---------------------------------------------------------------
Maytag Corporation faces a stockholder class action filed in
Iowa District Court in Jasper County, styled "Sheet Metal
Workers Local #218(S) Pension Fund v. Maytag Corporation."

On May 26, 2005, Sheet Metal Workers Local #218(S) Pension Fund
filed a complaint on its own behalf and on behalf of an alleged
class of the Company's stockholders against the Company and its
directors:

     (1) Barbara Allen,

     (2) Howard Clark, Jr.,

     (3) Lester Crown,

     (4) William Kerr,

     (5) Ralph Hake,

     (6) Wayland Hicks,

     (7) James McCaslin,

     (8) Bernard Rethore,

     (9) W. Ann Reynolds,

    (10) Neele Stearns, Jr., and

    (11) Fred Steingraber

The complaint alleges, among other things, that the directors
violated their fiduciary duties to the Company's stockholders
by, among other things, agreeing to sell the Company at an
"artificially depressed" price before the impact of the
Company's recent restructuring efforts was reflected in its
stock price, by causing the Company to enter into agreements
that provide severance benefits to the Company's officers in the
event that they are terminated following a change of control,
and failing to disclose non-pubic information concerning the
value of the Company to stockholders.  The complaint seeks,
among other relief, certification of the alleged class, an
injunction preventing completion of the merger (or rescinding
the merger if it is completed prior to the receipt of such
relief), the imposition of a constructive trust in plaintiff's
favor upon any benefits improperly received by defendants, and
an award of attorneys' fees and expenses.


MAYTAG CORPORATION: Faces Securities Fraud Lawsuit in S.D. Iowa
---------------------------------------------------------------
Maytag Corporation, Chief Executive Officer Ralph Hake, and
Chief Financial Officer George C. Moore, face a securities class
action filed in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Iowa, styled "Barry Yellen, et al. v.
Maytag Corp., et al."

On July 5, 2005, Barry Yellen filed a complaint for alleged
violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. The complaint,
brought on behalf of a purported class of purchasers of the
Company's common stock between March 7, 2005 and April 21, 2005,
alleges, among other things, that the defendants knowingly or
recklessly made materially false statements in a press release
and at an investor conference on March 7, 2005 regarding the
Company's expected earnings range in 2005, and that defendants
made such statements seeking to inflate the price of the
Company's shares in conjunction with ongoing negotiations to
sell the Company to Ripplewood Holdings.  The complaint seeks,
among other relief, certification of the alleged class,
unspecified compensatory damages, and an award of attorneys'
fees and expenses.

The suit is styled "Barry Yellen, et al. v. Maytag Corp., et
al., case no. 05-CV-00388," filed in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Iowa.  Representing the
plaintiffs is Shalov Stone & Bonner LLP (New York), 485 Seventh
Avenue, Suite 1000, New York, NY, 10018, Phone: (212) 239-4340,
Fax: (212) 239-4310, E-mail: lawyer@lawssb.com.


MISSION PETROLEUM: AL Court Junks March 30 Chemical Spill Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court in Mobile, Alabama dismissed
the class actions filed against Mission Petroleum Carriers of
Texas, accusing it of negligence in a chemical spill on
Interstate 10, the Mobile Register reports.  The court also
remanded the suit to Mobile County Circuit Court.

On March 30, 2005, one of the Company's tractor-trailers
overturned as it was exiting Interstate 10 in Tillman's Corner.
According to authorities, as much as 100 gallons of
epichlorohydrin, a toxic and explosive chemical, bound for the
Degussa Corporation, escaped from the overturned tanker, an
earlier Class Action Reporter story (April 26,2005) reports.

Homeowner Yvette Lockwood and Heavenly H2O owner Anthony Burgman
filed the suit, seeking financial damages for all of the
residents who were forced to evacuate and all of the businesses
that had to close.  The lawsuit also states that residents
suffered mental anguish and emotional distress as a result of
the crash, and that businesses lost profits due to the forced
closings.  Several weeks later, four employees of businesses
that temporarily closed as a result of the March 30 accident
filed their own suit.  Both lawsuits sought class action status
on behalf of all wage earners, businesses and homeowners who
were harmed by the spill and resulting evacuation order.


OHIO: Inmates File Abuse Suit V. Brown County Sheriff, Officials
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action complaint filed in U.S. District Court in Ohio
states that three former inmates of Brown County Adult Detention
Center are seeking $3 million, claiming they were beaten on a
regular basis, forced to live in unsanitary conditions and
denied medical attention during their stay in jail, The
Georgetown News Democrat reports.

Filed by James Worthington of Georgetown, Garrett Gardner of Mt.
Orab and Heather Phillips of Maysville, Kentucky, the suit named
Brown County Sheriff Dwayne Wenninger, Deputies Richard Haney,
Tom Ackley, Charles Crawford and four John Does, as well as
Brown County Commissioners Kirby Cornett, Perry Ogden and Dale
Reynolds as defendants.

Sheriff Wenninger feels the lawsuit is absurd and will only
result in the unnecessary spending of county dollars. He told
The Georgetown News Democrat, "It's absolutely frivolous. They
(three former inmates) talk about a better place to live. Well,
first off, it's not a place to live. This is a jail and it's for
punishment. I do not mistreat anybody here at the jail."

Court records show that Mr. Worthington was incarcerated at
Brown County Adult Detention Center from April of 2003 to March
of 2004 while awaiting trial after being charged in the rape of
an adult female. He was later acquitted of the charge.

According to the lawsuit, Mr. Worthington was allegedly
assaulted and beaten by Deputy Haney on October 20, 2003, as
retribution for a verbal incident that took place between Deputy
Haney's wife, who was employed as corrections officer at Brown
County Adult Detention Center at the time. The lawsuit also
alleged that Deputy Haney was not assigned to the Brown County
Adult Detention Center during that time, but was allowed by
Sheriff Wenninger and corrections officers to gain access to the
housing area for inmates, with intentions of getting to Mr.
Worthington "in particular."

The suit said that "Defendant Crawford hit and physically abused
Worthington on a number of occasions throughout his
incarceration, including an incident when Crawford, in the
presence of four other corrections officers, pinned
Worthington's arm behind his back and proceeded to physically
abuse him."

Mr. Worthington claimed his cell door was purposely left open by
sheriff department employees at times it should have been
closed, in order to allow other violent inmates to access Mr.
Worthington to inflict physical harm and violent inmates were
often encouraged by sheriff department employees to beat him.

In addition, Mr. Worthington alleged that he was denied food of
sufficient quantity or quality, was forced to sleep on a
concrete block with one blanket, was forced to live in a cell
filled with raw sewage for two or three days and was denied
adequate medical care during his 11-month stay at Brown County
Jail. He also alleged to have been beaten an estimated 16 times
during his incarceration.

Sheriff Wenninger told the Georgetown News Democrat that the
accusations made by Mr. Worthington about being beaten in jail
are false. He also said inmates - hoping to be moved from a cell
or to cause problems - use their clothes and blankets to clog up
their toilets, causing their cells to flood with sewage.

Mr. Gardner was incarcerated at the Brown County Jail from
October 9, 2003 to January 5, 2004. He was charged with failure
to comply with a specification as a result of an incident where
he fled from officers and caused harm to a person or a property.
According to Mr. Gardner, sheriff department employees allowed
an inmate by the name of Eric Gay, known for his violent
disposition, to enter his cell and proceeded to beat him after
Mr. Gay had mistaken him for his cellmate. The lawsuit also
alleged that Mr. Gardner and other inmates were denied private
meetings with their legal counsel to prepare for trial, a
violation of the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The third named plaintiff, Ms. Phillips was incarcerated at the
Brown County Jail from August 18, 2004 to September 17, 2004.
She was charged with involuntary manslaughter and child
endangerment for causing the death of an infant. Ms. Phillips
pleaded guilty and was sentenced to five years of community
control. The lawsuit alleged that Ms. Phillips was denied
outdoor recreation time, did not enjoy a healthy diet and had to
deal with inhospitable living conditions at Brown County Jail.

According to the suit, the named defendants in the case also
refused to provide Phillips with feminine hygiene products
during her menstrual cycle.

The suit claims, "The pain and suffering, humiliation and cruel
inhumane punishment and torture endured by James Worthington,
Garrett Gardner and Heather Phillips were unconscionable."
Attorney Anthony Sammons of Woodward, Hobson and Fulton Law
Offices, in Lexington, Kentucky, along with along Nicholas Ring
and Stan Purdy, of Purdy and Ring Law Offices in Georgetown,
represents the three former inmates.

According to a letter received from Mr. Sammons, Mr. Purdy's
only involvement in the case was to sign the complaint in order
for it to be filed with the U.S. District Court. Mr. Purdy could
not avoid his law firm's obligation to its clients because he
was in a political campaign.

Sheriff Wenninger felt the filing of frivolous lawsuits would
stop if law offices such as Purdy and Ring and their clients
would be forced to pay if the suits are found to be frivolous by
the courts. He also told The Georgetown News Democrat that he
couldn't blame lawyers for taking on cases against government
entity because county lawyers are most likely going to conclude
that it would be cheaper to offer the plaintiffs a small
settlement rather than taking part in a lengthy legal battle. He
adds, "Even though the government entity is right, it's free
money in the lawyer's pocket. What do they have to lose?
Nothing."

The suit is styled, "Worthington et al v. Brown, County of et
al, Case No. 1:05-cv-00655-SJD," filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, under Judge
Susan J. Dlott. Representing the Plaintiff/s are: Stanley Kay
Purdy of Purdy & Potts - 1 318 West State St., Georgetown, OH
45121, Phone: 937-378-4119, Fax: 937-378-4119, E-mail:
purdyring@siscom.net; and Anthony Sammons of Woodward, Hobson, &
Fulton, LLP, 200 W. Vine St., Fifth Floor, Lexington, KY 40507,
Phone: 859/244-7100, Fax: 859/244-7111.


OREGON: 30,000+ Parishioners Part of Suit Over Parish Property
--------------------------------------------------------------
All but about 280 of the nearly 40,000 Roman Catholic
parishioners in Western Oregon are part of a class action
seeking to determine who owns parish churches, schools and
cemeteries within the Archdiocese of Portland, beliefnet.com
reports.

The rare defendant class action was filed against the parish and
the parishioners, because of the archdiocese's argument that
they - not the archdiocese - are the true owners of an estimated
$500 million to $600 million in parish property.  Parishioners
had until October 3 to bail out of the suit, and about 280 filed
the necessary paperwork.

The ownership question is crucial to the 15-month-old bankruptcy
of the Portland archdiocese, and is being closely watched for
legal ramifications involving church properties nationwide. If
the parishes and parishioners are found to be the true owners,
the property becomes off-limits to priest sexual-abuse claimants
who are suing the archdiocese for hundreds of millions of
dollars in damages.  If the archdiocese is found to be the
owner, the parish property becomes fair game for paying off
claims, beliefnet.com reports.

One who remains part of the class action told a judge at a
recent hearing that she wasn't happy about it. "Innocent
parishioners in reality have no choice about being part of this
class action," said Julie Bryan Maack, a parishioner at Our Lady
of the Lake Parish in Lake Oswego, beliefnet.com reports.


RAILTRACK PLC: Shareholders Won't Appeal Dismissal of Byers Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Shareholders in collapsed British railroad operator Railtrack
PLC will not appeal a court ruling dismissing their GBP 157
million compensation claim against the government, Reuters
reports.

Railtrack was created in Britain's rush to privatise state
industries in the 1980s and 1990s and many small investors
snapped up its shares, which made their debut on the London
Stock Exchange in 1996.  The government forced Railtrack out of
business in October 2001 by withdrawing funding after a fatal
crash in 2000 at Hatfield, north of London.

The shareholders had accused former transport secretary Stephen
Byers of misfeasance in public office over his controversial
move in putting Railtrack into administration in 2001. They
insisted that the firm was solvent and that his actions amounted
to renationalization without full compensation, an earlier Class
Action Reporter story (April 22,2005) reports.

The High Court ruled against the claim last week, finding the
government not guilty of acting in bad faith prior to
Railtrack's slide into administration in 2001.  In a decision
that dismissed an almost three-year legal battle to win
compensation from the British government for the company's
collapse in 2001, Justice John Lindsay said that the Railtrack
was headed for a financial "crisis." He pointed out in the
decision that, "There were plainly ample and sound policy
reasons for the government wishing to be rid of Railtrack and
for the railway assets to be passed into the control of others"
an earlier Class Action Reporter story (October 22,2005) states.

"The rightness of our case has been proved but this judge's
ruling does not allow strong grounds for appeal," the Railtrack
Private Shareholders Group, which represents 49,000
shareholders, said in a statement, Reuters reports.


REFCO INC.: U.S. Firm Targets Austrian Bank in Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Austrian bank Bawag, may now face millions of pounds in
penalties from a class action being brought against the failed
group, according to a U.S.-based law firm, The Evening Standard
reports.

The law firm Shalov Stone and Bonner, which already sued Refco
on behalf of investors, stated that it is now setting its sights
on Bawag.  Refco collapsed into bankruptcy after its British-
born chief Phillip Bennett was charged with fraud over $430
million (242.9 million) he allegedly hid from investors.
According to Bawag, Mr. Bennett borrowed $418.8 million (236.9
million) and is said to have used the money to pay down the $430
million.

The Austrian government has ordered an inquiry into the matter
and Deputy Chancellor Hubert Gorbach promises "consequences for
the management." The probe by Austria's financial watchdog FMA
got under way over the weekend and will focus on whether Bawag
followed proper rules in lending Mr. Bennett the money.

The head of the FMA, Kurt Pribil, said on Austrian state radio
that the bank's statement was not sufficient for the watchdog
and summoned Bawag chief executive Johann Zwettler and other
senior executives involved in the loan. "The supervisory board's
statement has raised more questions than it answered," says Mr.
Pribil.

The class action by Shalov Stone and Bonner is one of several
being taken against the company, and the firm is calling for
anyone who purchased Refco stock or bonds to join the action.


REFCO INC.: Shareholders Commence Securities Fraud Lawsuits
-----------------------------------------------------------
Several purported shareholder class action lawsuits have been
filed against Refco, Inc. and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Act and the Exchange
Act.  The Company provides execution and clearing services for
exchange-traded derivatives; and brokerage services in the fixed
income and foreign exchange markets in the United States,
Bermuda, and the United Kingdom.

The Company went public via an initial public offering in August
2005. A mere three months later, on October 10, 2005, the
Company announced that its Chief Executive Officer ("CEO") and
Chairman and controlling shareholder, was being placed on a
leave of absence and that the Company had discovered,
purportedly through an internal review, a receivable of $430
million owed by the CEO to the Company. The Company also
announced that based on the undisclosed related party
transaction, its prior financial statements should not be relied
upon.

According to the complaint, on or about August 10, 2005, the
Company filed with the SEC a Form S-1/A Registration Statement
(the "Registration Statement"), for the IPO. On or about August
11, 2005, the Prospectus (the "Prospectus") with respect to the
IPO, which forms part of the Registration Statement, became
effective and 26.5 million of its common stock were sold to the
public, thereby raising approximately $583 million. According to
the complaint, the Prospectus issued in connection with the IPO
was materially false and misleading for several reasons. As
detailed in the complaint, the Company has now admitted that
those financial statements should no longer be relied upon and
will likely be restated. This amounts to an admission that those
financial statements were materially false and misleading when
issued. In a section entitled "Certain Relationships And Related
Transactions", the Prospectus purported to detail all of the
related party transactions concerning its business. The
Prospectus, however, failed to disclose the related-party loan
of $430 million to an entity controlled by the CEO.

As a result of this news, the price of Refco common stock
declined precipitously falling from $28.56 per share to $15.60
per share on extremely heavy trading volume.

The first identified complaint in the litigation is styled
"Joseph Mazur, et al. v. Refco, Inc., et al.," filed in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York.  The plaintiff firms in this litigation are:

     (1) Abraham, Fruchter & Twersky, One Pennsylvania Plaza,
         Suite 1910, New York, NY, 10119, Phone: 212.279.5050,
         Fax: 212.279.3655, E-mail:
         JFruchter@FruchterTwersky.com

     (2) Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (MA), One
         Liberty Square, Boston, MA, 2109, Phone: 617.542.8300,
         Fax: 617.230.0903, E-mail: info@bermanesq.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) Federman & Sherwood, 120 North Robinson, Suite 2720,
         Oklahoma City, OK, 73102, Phone: 405-235-1560, E-mail:
         wfederman@aol.com

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

     (6) Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP
         (Melville), 200 Broadhollow, Suite 406, Melville, NY,
         11747, Phone: 631.367.7100, Fax: 631.367.1173, E-mail:
         info@lerachlaw.com

     (7) Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San
         Diego), 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA,
         92101, Phone: 619.231.1058, Fax: 619.231.7423,

     (8) Lockridge, Grindal, Nauen P.L.L.P., Suite 301, 660
         Pennsylvania Avenue Southeast, Washington, DC, 20003-
         4335, Phone: 202.544.9840, Fax: 202.544.9850,

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

    (10) Paskowitz & Associates, Phone: 800.705.9529, E-mail:
         classattorney@aol.com

    (11) Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP, 100 Park
         Avenue, 26th Floor, New York, NY, 10017-5516, Phone:
         212.661.1100, Fax: 212.661.8665, E-mail:
         info@pomerantzlaw.com

    (12) Sarraf Gentile LLP, 485 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1005,
         New York, NY, 10018, Phone: 212.868.3610, Fax:
         212.918.7967,

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

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

    (15) Scott & Scott LLC, P.O. Box 192, 108 Norwich Avenue,
         Colchester, CT, 06415, Phone: 860.537.5537, Fax:
         860.537.4432, E-mail: scottlaw@scott-scott.com

    (16) Shalov Stone & Bonner LLP (New York), 485 Seventh
         Avenue, Suite 1000, New York, NY, 10018, Phone: (212)
         239-4340, Fax: (212) 239-4310, E-mail:
         lawyer@lawssb.com

    (17) Wechsler Harwood LLP, 488 Madison Avenue 8th Floor, New
         York, NY, 10022, Phone: 212.935.7400, E-mail:
         info@whhf.com

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

    (19) Wolf Popper, LLP, 845 Third Avenue, New York, NY,
         10022-6689, Phone: 877.370.7703, Fax: 212.486.2093,
         E-mail: IRRep@wolfpopper.com


RELIANT RESOURCES: Suit Settlement Hearing Set January 5, 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of
Texas, Houston Division will hold a fairness hearing for the
proposed settlement in the matter: Reliant Resources Securities
Litigation, Civil Action No. H-02-1810 (CONSOLIDATED), under
Judge Ewing Werlein, Jr., on behalf of all persons or entities
who purchased common shares of Reliant Resources, Inc. in the
Initial Public Offering on April 30, 2001, or traceable thereto,
pursuant to Reliant Resources, Inc. registration statement and
prospectus dated April 20, 2001, for the period from April 30,
2001, through May 14, 2002, and who suffered injury in the form
of losses from such purchases.

The hearing will be held on January 5, 2006, at 10 A.M., before
the Honorable Ewing Werlein, Jr., at the United States District
Court, Southern District of Texas, United States District
Courthouse, 515 Rusk Avenue, Houston, Texas 77002, for the
purpose of determining:

     (1) whether the proposed Settlement of the above Action for
         the principal amount of Seventy-Five Million Dollars
         ($75,000,000) cash, plus accrued interest, should be
         approved by the Court as fair, reasonable and adequate;

     (2) whether an Order of Dismissal and Final Judgment
         approving the Settlement and dismissing this Action on
         the merits and with prejudice should be entered;

     (3) whether the proposed Plan of Allocation is a fair and
         reasonable method to allocate settlement proceeds;

     (4) whether the application of Plaintiffs' Lead Counsel for
         an award of attorneys' fees and expenses is reasonable
         and should be approved; and

     (5) whether any of the Lead Plaintiffs should be awarded a
         Stipend (not to exceed $15,000 per Lead Plaintiff) to
         compensate each Lead Plaintiff for reasonable time,
         effort and expense relating to the prosecution of this
         Action.

For more details, contact Reliant Resources Securities
Litigation, Claims Administrator, c/o A.B. Data, Ltd., P.O. Box
170200, Milwaukee, WI 53217, Phone: (800) 952-0581; and Michael
J. Pucillo, Esq., Wendy H. Zoberman, Esq. and Jay W. Eng, Esq.
of Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo, Esperante
Building, 222 Lakeview Ave., Suite 900, West Palm Beach, FL
33401, Phone (561) 835-9400.


TAG-IT PACIFIC: Shareholders Launch Securities Fraud Suit in CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
Tag-it Pacific Corporation faces a class action alleging that
its officers and directors caused the Company to issue numerous
press releases and file quarterly and annual reports with the
SEC, materially misstating its financial condition, accounts
receivable and inventory, and falsely stating that the Company,
notwithstanding the loss of its largest customers, was expanding
its customer base, continuing sales growth, and improving gross
margins.

Unbeknownst to investors, as a result of the loss of its largest
customers in 2003, millions of dollars in inventory became
obsolete and millions of dollars in accounts receivable became
uncollectible.

The complaint further alleges that on or around August 15, 2005,
Tag-It stunned the market when it revealed its true financial
condition, informing investors that the Company was going to
report a "significant operating loss" due to an increase in
reserves for accounts receivable and inventory. On this news,
Tag-It's share price plummeted 41.38% to $1.36 from the prior
days closing of $2.32. On August 22, 2005, the Company further
disclosed that it was required to increase its reserve for
doubtful accounts by $6.4 million and increase its reserve for
inventory obsolescence by $1.55 million.

The suit is styled " [Unknown Plaintiff], et al. v. Tag-It
Pacific, Inc., et al., case no 05-CV-7352," filed in the United
States District Court for the Central District of California, on
behalf of the purchasers Company's securities from November
14,2003 to August 12,2005.  The plaintiff firms in this
litigation are Schatz & Nobel, P.C., 330 Main Street, Hartford,
CT, 06106, Phone: 800.797.5499, Fax: 860.493.6290, E-mail:
sn06106@AOL.com; and Wolf Popper, LLP, 845 Third Avenue, New
York, NY, 10022-6689, Phone: 877.370.7703, Fax: 212.486.2093, E-
mail: IRRep@wolfpopper.com.


UNITED STATES: Fairness Act to be Discussed at DC Conference
------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah will be a keynote speaker as
leading plaintiff and insurance lawyers gather to examine the
impact of the recently passed "Class Action Fairness Act of
2005." How has the litigation landscape changed? Will the law
achieve the goals its proponents hoped for? Will there be a
seismic shift as new tactics are tested, new approaches
identified?

A "who's who" of the class action world will be in attendance at
the American Bar Association Tort Trial & Insurance Practice
Section program, "The Future of Class Action Litigation in
America," November 9-11 at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Washington
D.C. Hatch will speak Thursday morning, Nov. 10 at 8:30 a.m.

Dean Edward F. Sherman, Moise F. Steeg Jr., Professor of
Negotiations at Tulane University Law School and chair of the
ABA Task Force on Federal Class Action Legislation, will give
the daily program overview on Thursday; and Professor Martin H.
Redish, professor of law and public policy at Northwestern
University School of Law, will provide Friday's overview.

Nationally recognized experts and practitioners will address
trends and hot topics in the following sessions:

     (1) An Overview of the "Class Action Reform Act of 2005."
         U.S. District Court Judge Jed Saul Rakoff of the
         Southern District of New York will participate in this
         discussion with Marci A. Eisenstein, Chicago.

     (2) State v. Federal Jurisdiction: Multi-State Class
         Actions, State Class Actions, Representative Claims and
         Aggregation.  Panelists include Professor Samuel
         Issacharoff, Columbia University School of Law; Russ
         M. Herman, New Orleans; John H. Beisner, Washington,
         D.C.; and Edith M. Kallas, New York.

     (3) Notice Issues, Opt Ins & Outs, Class Management.
         Speakers will be Dawn Barrios, New Orleans; Joseph B.G.
         Fay, Philadelphia; Professor Laura J. Hines, University
         of Kansas School of Law; and Katherine M. Kinsella,
         president, Kinsella Communications, Ltd.

     (4) Post-Bazzle Class-Wide Arbitrations and Use of
         Arbitration.  Associate General Counsel Neal S.
         Berinhout of Cingular Wireless will join retired U.S.
         District Court Judge Fern M. Smith of San Francisco,
         Professor David Schawarts of the University of
         Wisconsin Law School and F. Paul Bland Jr. of Trial
         Lawyers for Public Justice.

     (5) Class Actions Without Borders: Foreign Plaintiffs in
         U.S. Courts and U.S. Defendants in Foreign Courts.
         Canadians J. J. Camp Q.C. of Vancouver and Professor
         Garry D. Watson of Osgoode Hall Law School at York
         University will join Charles F. Rysavy of Newark, N.J.,
         for a discussion of the challenges facing cross-border
         classes.

     (5) Recent Developments from the Judiciary/Case Law Update.
         Federal judges D. Brock Hornby of the U.S. District
         Court for the District of Maine and Lee H. Rosenthal of
         the Southern District of Texas are featured in this
         discussion.

     (6) Settlements, Class Actions, Fees and Ethics.  Speakers
         for this segment include Professor Howard M. Erichson
         of Seton Hall University; Joe R. Whatley Jr. of
         Birmingham, Ala.; G. Edward Pickle Jr., senior
         government affairs counsel at Shell Oil Company; and
         Richard H. Redfern, president, Rust Consulting, Inc.

     (7) Preclusion, Due Process and Adequacy of Representation.
         Discussing constitutional issues will be Professor
         Tobias B. Wolff, University of California Davis Law
         School; William H. Narwold, Hartford, Conn.; Steven R.
         Brock, Uniondale, N.Y.; and Professor Richard A.
         Nagareda, Vanderbilt University School of Law.

     (8) Bankruptcy and Class Actions; Settlement Funds and
         Related Issues. Bankruptcy is often a result of class
         actions.  Addressing this very current and important
         issue will be Michael S. Etkin, Roseland, N.J.; Allan
         Kanner, New Orleans; and Peter A. Antonucci, New York.

     (9) Class Actions and MDLs - Hot Topics in Class Actions.
         Plaintiff and defense lawyers will join a federal judge
         and consultant in this roundtable discussion that will
         focus on multi-district litigation. Participants
         include Craig C. Corbitt, San Francisco; Karen Barth
         Menzies, Los Angeles; Richard J. Arsenault, Alexandria,
         La.; David B. Tulchin, New York; U.S. District Judge
         Eldon Fallon, Eastern District of Louisiana; and Todd
         D. Menenberg, managing director, Navigant Consulting,
         Inc.

The ABA Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Section is the only
national professional group to bring together plaintiffs'
lawyers, defense lawyers and insurance and corporate counsel for
the exchange of information and ideas. The section has more than
36,000 members and 34 general committees that focus on
substantive and procedural matters in areas including aviation
and space law, fidelity and surety law, medical malpractice,
transportation law and others.

With more than 400,000 members, the American Bar Association is
the largest voluntary professional membership organization in
the world. As the national voice of the legal profession, the
ABA works to improve the administration of justice, promotes
programs that assist lawyers and judges in their work, accredits
law schools, provides continuing legal education, and works to
build public understanding around the world of the importance of
the rule of law in a democratic society.

For more details, contact Deborah Weixl of ABA Division for
Media Relations and Communication Services, Phone: 312/988-6126,
E-mail: weixld@staff.abanet.org.


UNITED TECHNOLOGIES: Faces Elevator Manufacturers Antitrust Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
United Technologies Corporation, Otis Elevator Co. and other
elevator and escalator manufacturers face a consolidated class
action filed in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York.  The suit alleges a worldwide
agreement among elevator and escalator manufacturers to fix
prices in violation of the Sherman Act.  The lawsuit does not
specify the amount of damages claimed.

The suit is styled "In re Elevator Antitrust Litigation, case
no. 1:04-cv-01178-TPG," filed in the United States District
Coiurt for the Southern District of New York, under Judge Thomas
P. Griesa.  Representing the plaintiffs are:

     (1) Mary Jane Fait, Frederick Taylor Isquith, Sr., Stuart
         S. Saft, Wolf, Haldenstein, Adler, Freeman & Herz,
         L.L.P., 270 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, Phone:
         (212) 545-4600, E-mail: fait@whafh.com,
         isquith@whafh.com;

     (2) Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP, 401
         B Street, Suite 1700, San Diego, CA 92101 USA, Phone:
         619-231-7423

     (3) Nadeem Faruqi, Beth Ann Keller, Anthony Vozzolo, Faruqi
         & Faruqi, LLP, 320 East 39th Street, New York, NY
         10016, Phone: (212)983-9330, Fax: (212) 983-9331, E-
         mail: nfaruqi@faruqilaw.com, bkeller@faruqilaw.com,
         avozzolo@faruqilaw.com

Representing the Company is Deborah M. Buell, Cleary Gottlieb
Steen & Hamilton, LLP, 1 Liberty Plaza, New York, NY 10006,
Phone: 212-225-2000, Fax: 212-225-3499, E-mail:
maofiling@cgsh.com.


US TELEMARKETERS: To Pay $415T To Settle Credit Card Fraud Suits
----------------------------------------------------------------
A group of U.S. and Canadian telemarketers will pay $415,000 to
settle Federal Trade Commission (FTC) charges they were selling
nonexistent credit cards to U.S. consumers, the agency announced
today.  The defendants are banned from selling credit-related
products through telemarketing and must stop their attempts to
deceive consumers into giving out their personal financial
information.

According to the Commission, the defendants targeted consumers
with poor credit, offering major credit cards with a $2,500
limit for an advance fee of $197 to $300. The telemarketers
claimed to have information showing that the consumers recently
had been denied credit, and pitched the credit card offer as a
means of improving their credit rating. Implying that they were
merely verifying data, the defendants requested information
about the consumer's bank accounts, such as account numbers,
routing numbers, and the account holder's name, as well as
personal identifying information, such as date of birth,
mother's maiden name, and Social Security number. They also
allegedly misrepresented that they had the ability and authority
to issue major credit cards.

Consumers who paid the fees never received credit cards. At
best, some got a package containing a credit repair book with
coupons, a list of banks that issue credit cards, and other
materials with little or no value.

The defendants, who ran their operation from Palm Beach,
Florida, and Montreal, Canada, are three Florida corporations
(Sun Spectrum Communications Organization, Inc.; North American
Communications Organization, Inc.; and WWCI2002, Inc.) and their
principals, William H. Martell and Tracey A. Bascove, and one
Canadian corporation (9106-7843 Quebec, Inc.) and its
principals, Mitchel Kastner, Ronald Corber, and Jason Kastner.
When calling consumers, the defendants used fictitious business
names, including "Royal Credit Solutions," "Imperial Consumer
Services," and "Beneficial Client Care."

As part of the settlement, the defendants are banned from
telemarketing credit-related products and from assisting others
involved in the industry. They also are prohibited from using
false or misleading statements when marketing any product and
from violating any provision of the FTC's Telemarketing Sales
Rule. The Court's order also prohibits the defendants from
violating the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act by using false
representations to get consumers to divulge personal financial
information. The defendants will pay more than $415,000 in
consumer redress, which is based on their ability to pay. They
also are subject to a suspended judgment of just over $9
million, the total amount of consumer injury in this case, which
they will be responsible for if it is later found they
misrepresented their financial status. Finally, the defendants
cannot sell or transfer their lists of customers. The order
contains standard monitoring and record-keeping provisions.

The FTC points to this case as another example of effective
cooperation and coordination among U.S. federal, state, and
local law enforcement agencies and Canadian authorities. Over
the course of its investigation, the FTC worked with Competition
Bureau Canada, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), and
Project COLT, a cross-border law enforcement task force that
operates out of RCMP headquarters in Montreal with the
participation of the RCMP, the Quebec Provincial Police, the
Montreal City Police Service, Competition Bureau Canada, the
FBI, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Office of
Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the U.S. Postal Inspection
Service, and the FTC. In the United States, the FTC worked with
Bureau of Financial Investigations of the Florida Office of
Financial Regulation in West Palm Beach, the United States
Postal Service in West Palm Beach, and the Better Business
Bureau of Southeast Florida. Information and assistance provided
by each of these agencies was crucial in the successful
conclusion of this case.

The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the stipulated
final order against all defendants except William H. Martell was
4-0. The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the
stipulated final order for Martell was 3-1. Commissioner Jon
Leibowitz concurred in part and dissented in part, writing in a
statement that, "the Commission should have pursued further
monetary relief from [defendant Martell], including possibly
using the recently enacted bankruptcy laws to trump this
defendant's efforts to shield assets in his Florida homestead."
The stipulated final order for permanent injunction was filed in
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on
October 3, 2005.

Copies of the stipulated 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, DC 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
Jacqueline Dizdul, Office of Public Affairs by Phone:
202-326-2472 or contact Robert Schoshinski, Bureau of Consumer
Protection, Phone: 202-326-3219 or visit the Website:
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2005/10/sunspectrum.htm.


VASO ACTIVE: Settlement Hearing Scheduled For December 14, 2005
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts will hold a fairness haring for the proposed
settlement in the matter: Vaso Active Pharmaceuticals Securities
Litigation on behalf of all persons and entities who purchased
or otherwise acquired Vaso Class A common stock on the open
market during the period December 9, 2003 through March 31,
2004; and all persons and entities who purchased or otherwise
acquired shares of Vaso Class A common stock in connection with
the Initial Public Offering on or about December 9, 2003; and
all current shareholders of Vaso Class A common stock.

The hearing for the Securities Settlement will be on December
14, 2005, at 3:00 p.m., before the United States District Judge
Reginald C. Lindsey, at the United States Courthouse, 1
Courthouse Way, Room 2300, Boston, Massachusetts, the Court will
determine:

     (1) whether the settlement of claims in the Securities
         Action in the amount of One Million One Hundred Twenty-
         Five Thousand Dollars ($1,125,000) in cash, plus Seven
         Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($750,000) face amount
         of two year 5% subordinated callable notes convertible
         at $1.75 per share (with full dilution protection),
         plus accrued interest (collectively, the "Settlement
         Fund"), should be approved as fair, reasonable and
         adequate to all the Settling Parties;

     (2) whether the proposed Plan of Allocation is fair,
         reasonable and adequate;

     (3) whether the Securities Action should be dismissed with
         prejudice as set forth in the Stipulation and Agreement
         of Settlement dated September 21, 2005, and filed with
         the Court; and

     (4) whether the application of Lead Counsel in the
         Securities Action for an award of attorneys' fees and
         expenses should be approved.

The hearing for the Derivative Settlement will be on December
14, 2005, at 3:00 p.m., before the United States District Judge
Reginald C. Lindsey, at the United States Courthouse, 1
Courthouse Way, Room 2300, Boston, Massachusetts, the Court will
determine:

     (i) whether the corporate governance remedies as proposed
         in the settlement of the Derivative Action are fair,
         reasonable and adequate;

    (ii) whether a Final Judgment approving the proposed
         Settlement in the Derivative Action should be entered;
         and

   (iii) whether the application of Derivative Counsel in the
         Derivative Action for an award of attorneys' fees and
         expenses should be approved.

For more details, contact Vaso Active Pharmaceuticals Securities
Litigation, Claims Administrator, c/o A.B. Data, Ltd., P. O. Box
170200, Milwaukee, WI 53217, Web site:
http://www.abdatalawserve.com;Kay E. Sickles, Esq. of Schiffrin
& Barroway, LLP, Phone: +1-610-667-7706; and Douglas S.
Johnston, Jr., Esq. and Timothy L. Miles, Esq. of Barrett,
Johnston & Parsley, Phone: +1-615-244-2202.




              Meetings, Conferences & Seminars


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


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

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

October 26-27, 2005
PREVENTING AND DEFENDING WAGE & HOUR CLAIMS & CLASS ACTIONS
American Conferences
Sheraton Fisherman's Wharf Hotel, San Francisco, CA
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com;877-927-1563

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

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

October 28, 2005
PREVENTING AND DEFENDING EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS &
LITIGATION
American Conferences
Sheraton Fisherman's Wharf Hotel, San Francisco, CA
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com;877-927-1563

October 28, 2005
DRUG AND MEDICAL DEVICE LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Mandalay Bay Resort & Casino, Las Vegas
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

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

November 3-4, 2005
MANUFACTURER'S LIABILITY CONFERENCE: LEGAL PROTECTIONS CRUCIAL
TO YOUR BOTTOM LINE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Coconut Grove, Miami
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

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

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

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

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

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

November 9, 2005
C-8/PFOA SCIENCE, RISKS & LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Four Seasons Resort, Santa Barbara, CA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

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

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

November 15-16, 2005
12TH ADVANCED NATIONAL FORUM ON LITIGATING BAD FAITH AND
PUNITIVE DAMAGES
American Conferences
Fontainebleau Resort, Miami, FL, United States
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com;877-927-1563

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

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

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

October 26-27, 2005
PREVENTING AND DEFENDING WAGE & HOUR CLAIMS & CLASS ACTIONS
American Conferences
Sheraton Fisherman's Wharf Hotel, San Francisco, CA
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com;877-927-1563

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

December 5-6, 2005
ADVANCED NATIONAL FORUM ON ENVIRONMENTAL INSURANCE COVERAGE AND
CLAIMS
American Conferences
The Waldorf Astoria, New York, NY
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com;877-927-1563

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

December 7, 2005
ASBESTOS INSURANCE CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton New York, Battery Park
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 12-14, 2005
10TH ANNUAL DRUG & MEDICAL DEVICE LITIGATION
American Conferences
The Waldorf Astoria, New York, NY, United States
Contact: http://www.americanconference.com;877-927-1563

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

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

January 23-24, 2005
ADVANCED INSURANCE COVERAGE ISSUES
Mealey Publications
The Four Seasons Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

April 5-8, 2006
INSURANCE INSOLVENCY AND REINSURANCE ROUNDTABLE
Mealey Publications
The Fairmont Scottsdale Princess, Scottsdale, AZ
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

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

May 25-26, 2006
INSURANCE COVERAGE 2006: CLAIM TRENDS & LITIGATION
Practising Law Institute
New York
Contact: 800-260-4PLI; 212-824-5710; info@pli.edu

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


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

October 01-31, 2005
HBA PRESENTS: AUTOMOBILE LITIGATION: DISPUTES AMONG
CONSUMERS, DEALERS, FINANCE COMPANIES AND FLOORPLANNERS
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

October 01-31, 2005
CONSTRUCTION DISPUTES: TEXAS RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION DEFECT
LIABILITY
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

October 01-31, 2005
HBA PRESENTS: ETHICS IN PERSONAL INJURY
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

October 01-31, 2005
IN-HOUSE COUNSEL AND WRONGFUL DISCHARGE CLAIMS:
CONFLICT WITH CONFIDENTIALITY?
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

October 01-31, 2005
BAYLOR LAW SCHOOL PRESENTS: 2004 GENERAL PRACTICE INSTITUTE --
FAMILY LAW, DISCIPLINARY SYSTEM, CIVIL LITIGATION, INSURANCE
& CONSUMER LAW UPDATES
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com


October 26, 2005
WORKPLACE MISCONDUCT LITIGATION
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 01, 2005
REAL WORLD APPLICATION OF ADDITIONAL INSURED CLAIMS
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 02, 2005
VIOXX(R) THE ERNST JURORS SPEAK
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 16, 2005
HRT
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 17, 2005
FOOD LIABILITY--ADVERTISING PRACTICES
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 17, 2005
ASBESTOS BANKRUPTCY TUTORIAL
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 30, 2005
PESTICIDES
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 30, 2005
ASBESTOS SCREENINGS
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 6, 2005
WELDING RODS
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 7, 2005
PERCHLORATE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 8, 2005
SSRI's TELECONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 14, 2005
FINITE RISK REINSURANCE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 14, 2005
CLASS CERTIFICATION--HOW TO GET A CLASS CERTIFIED OR DEFEAT
CERTIFICATION
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 15, 2005
D&O TELECONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

December 15, 2005
PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY ISSUES
Mealey Publications
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

RECOVERIES
Big Class Action
Contact: seminars@bigclassaction.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


                    New Securities Fraud Cases


ABERCROMBIE & FITCH: Scott + Scott Provides Update on Litigation
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Scott + Scott, LLC, which represents
shareholders in a securities class action filed in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio against
Abercrombie & Fitch Co. ("Abercrombie") (NYSE: ANF - News) and
individual defendants (Case No. 2:05-cv-00959-MHW-TPK), is
providing an update regarding the litigation. Purchasers of
Abercrombie securities between June 2, 2005 and August 16, 2005,
inclusive (the "Class Period") are putative class members.
Abercrombie, headquartered in New Albany, Ohio, operates as a
specialty retailer of casual apparel in the United States.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Abercrombie
and certain of its officers and directors violated federal
securities laws (Securities Exchange Act of 1934) by making
false and misleading statements causing the Company's stock
price to become artificially inflated. According to the
complaint, while the Company was unabashedly positive in its
public statements, the defendants knew but failed to reveal that
material indicators of the Company's true financial condition
would be lower than expected in its 2005 second fiscal quarter,
as compared to the second quarter of 2004. One such example is
the Company's June 2, 2005 report announcing a May denim sales
increase by 166%. Abercrombie common stock soared on this news.

As later noted, however, by The Wall Street Journal in its
August 29, 2005 "Heard on the Street: Abercrombie Stock Sales
Draw Concern" column, this new denim figure was reported as part
of an effort to calm investors' worries after analysts noted a
glut of high-priced denim at stores like Abercrombie. Vick
Khoboyan, vice president at hedge fund Willowbrook Asset
Management, is quoted in this article as stating that
Abercrombie "didn't even give a full picture to investors." In
fact, as is alleged, this bullish report on denim sales served
to buoy investor confidence.

The complaint also alleges that this information was known to
top Abercrombie management, including defendant Michael S.
Jeffries ("Jeffries"), who was at all relevant times the
Company's Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer.
Shortly after positive statements were announced, defendant
Jeffries sold approximately 1.5 million shares of Abercrombie
stock in July 2005, reaping approximately $110 million in
proceeds. Soon after Jeffries' sales, the Company announced, on
August 4, 2005, weaker than expected sales for the month of
July. The price of the Company's stock moderately declined after
this announcement, however, on August 16, 2005, after the
Company released its Q2 05 financial results, Abercrombie stock
plummeted from $63.55 on August 15, 2005, to close at $58.85 on
August 17, 2005, on over 13 million share volume.

For more details, contact Neil Rothstein of Scott + Scott,
Phone: 800/332-2259, ext. 22 or cell 619/251-0887, E-mail:
nrothstein@scott-scott.com.


IMMUCOR INC.: Murray Frank Sets October Lead Plaintiff Deadline
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Murray, Frank & Sailer, LLP, reminds those who
purchased or otherwise acquired the securities of Immucor, Inc.
("Immucor" or the "Company") (Nasdaq:BLUDE), between January 7,
2005 and August 29, 2005, inclusive (the "Class Period"), that
they have until Monday, October 31, 2005, to move for lead
plaintiff appointment. The class action lawsuit was filed in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
Georgia.

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange
Act"), and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. During the Class
Period, the complaint claims that Defendants misrepresented that
Immucor's financial statements and disclosures fairly and
accurately reflected the Company's results of operations as
required by Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP")
and the Exchange Act. The Complaint also charges that
Defendants' Sarbanes-Oxley certifications during the Class
Period were also false and misleading, as the Company, knowingly
or with severe recklessness, lacked adequate internal controls
and failed to keep proper books and records in violation of
their well publicized Code of Corporate Conduct.

The nature of Defendants' fraud began to come to light on August
26, 2005 when the Company was forced to announce that the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") had launched a
formal investigation into payments made by its Italian unit and
its president, Defendant De Chirico, in October 2003 to a
physician connected with a hospital with which the Company was
doing business. After the market closed on August 29, 2005, the
Company revealed further that its Chief Financial Officer had
resigned, that it would be revising its previously issued
results for at least two quarters in order to account for a
previously unrecorded accrued bonus, and that its Form 10-K for
fiscal year 2005 would be further delayed due to additional
accounting and auditing procedures the Company claimed was
necessary to properly reflect the accrued bonus and to render
the internal controls report required by Section 404 of Sarbanes
Oxley.

In response to this news, the price of BLUD common stock dropped
from a closing price of $28.61 on August 25, 2005 before the
market learned of the SEC's formal investigation to close at
$24.00 per share on August 30, 2005. A staggering 6 million
shares of BLUD common stock were traded on August 30, 2005
alone. This volume is nearly ten times the average daily volume.

During the first six months of 2005, Immucor insiders sold
approximately 186,000 shares for proceeds of about $4,970,000.
During this time, Defendants led the market to believe that the
internal control issue involving the Italian subsidiary was "an
isolated event" that was not expected to lead to more than a
$350,000 fine and increased investigation expenses that had
already been factored into the Company's bottom line. In fact,
however, the opposite was true. Immucor's internal control
problems, as the market later learned, were not confined to its
Italian subsidiary and did not center solely around this alleged
"isolated event."

For more details, contact Eric J. Belfi Christopher S. Hinton of
Murray, Frank & Sailer, LLP, Phone: (800) 497-8076 or
(212) 682-1818, Fax: (212) 682-1892, E-mail:
info@murrayfrank.com.


PIXAR ANIMATION: Brian M. Felgoise Files Securities Suit in CA
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Brian M. Felgoise, P.C., filed a securities
class action on behalf of shareholders who acquired Pixar
Animation Studios (NASDAQ: PIXR) securities between January 18,
2005 and June 30, 2005, inclusive (the Class Period).

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, against the company and certain
key officers and directors.

The action charges that defendants violated the 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 Brian M. Felgoise, Esq., 261 Old York
Road, Suite 423, Jenkintown, PA 19046, Phone: (215) 886-1900, E-
mail at FelgoiseLaw@verizon.net.


PIXAR ANIMATION: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Suit in CA
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A., filed a securities
class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted,
exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of Pixar
Animation Studios (NASDAQ: PIXR) between January 18, 2005 and
June 30, 2005, inclusive (the "Class Period").

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California against defendant Pixar and one
or more of its officers and/or directors. 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.


PIXAR ANIMATION: Schatz & Nobel Files Securities Suit in N.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Schatz & Nobel, P.C., filed a lawsuit seeking
class action status in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California on behalf of all persons who
purchased the publicly traded securities of Pixar Animation
Studios (Nasdaq:PIXR) between January 18, 2005 and June 30, 2005
(the "Class Period").

The Complaint alleges that Pixar violated federal securities
laws by making false or misleading public statements.
Specifically, the Complaint alleges that Pixar made improper
projections concerning the expected sales of "The Incredibles"
videos given recent trends in the home video market. On June 30,
2005, Pixar lowered its 2Q05 earnings guidance to $0.10 per
diluted share from $0.15, as a result of disappointing sales of
"The Incredibles" home video units and an increase in Pixar's
reserves for video returns. On this news, Pixar stock fell from
a close of $50.05 per share on June 30, 2005, to close at $43.06
per share on July 1, 2005. On August 26, 2005, Pixar announced
that the SEC had commenced an investigation in connection with
Pixar's reported sales of "The Incredibles" videos.

For more details, contact Wayne T. Boulton or Nancy Kulesa of
Schatz & Nobel, 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  * * *