CAR_Public/051129.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Tuesday, November 29, 2005, Vol. 7, No. 236

                          Headlines

ACE CASH: Consumer Fraud Litigation Removed To S.D. CA Court
ACE CASH: TX Managers Launch FLSA Violations Lawsuit in E.D. TX
CALIFORNIA: District Refutes Teachers' Retirement Litigation
COMPUTER ASSOCIATES: Notice Issued Regarding Restitution Fund
CONNECTICUT: Audit Finds Monitors Receive Disparate Compensation

CYBERSOURCE CORPORATION: Final Fairness Hearing Set April 2006
DANKA BUSINESS: TN Court Yet To Rule on Lawsuit Summary Judgment
DOLE FOOD: FDA Bares October Warning Against Pre-packaged Salads
ENRON CORPORATION: ERISA Settlement Hearing Set Dec. 20, 2005
EQUITY RESIDENTIAL: FL Court Mulls Appeal of $1.6Mil Suit Ruling

ETHNIC INTERNATIONAL: Recalls Apricots For Undeclared Sulfites
FRUIT COMPANIES: FDA Issues Warning For Unproven Health Claims
GENTA INC.: NJ Court Dismisses Securities Fraud Lawsuit in Part
GUIDANT CORPORATION: Plaintiffs Withdraw Securities Suits in IN
GUIDANT CORPORATION: Plaintiffs File Amended ERISA Lawsuit in IN

GUIDANT CORPORATION: JPML Mulls Consolidation of Injury Lawsuits
GUIDANT CORPORATION: 70 Former Employees File Age Bias Lawsuit
HORMONE THERAPIES: FDA Warns 16 Firms Over False Health Claims
INTERLAND INC.: Asks PA Court To Dismiss TCPA Violations Lawsuit
INTERNATIONAL TRUCK: Recalls 989 Trucks Due to Crash Hazard   

MICROSOFT CORPORATION: ND School District Amasses $276T Windfall
NEW YORK: Court Rejects County's Appeal in Strip Search Lawsuit
NUI CORPORATION: Suit Settlement Hearing Set January 20, 2006
POLYMEDICA CORPORATION: Discovery Continues in MA Stock Lawsuit
SPX CORPORATION: Certification Sought For Stock, ERISA Lawsuits

STAKTEK HOLDINGS: Asks NM Court To Dismiss Securities Fraud Suit
STARWAY INC.: Recalls Sweetpotato Strips For Undeclared Sulfites
TENNESSEE GAS: KS Court Mulls Gas Royalties Suits Certification
TENNESSEE GAS: Faces Two Hurricane Injury Lawsuits in E.D. LA
VOLKSWAGEN OF AMERICA: Recalls 1,530 Vehicles For Injury Hazard   

VOLVO CARS: Recalls 10,259 Various Vehicles Due to Crash Hazard   

                 New Securities Fraud Cases

BLOCKBUSTER INC.: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Suit in TX
GREAT WOLF: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in WI
HELEN OF TROY: Charles J. Piven Lodges TX Securities Fraud Suit
TEMPUR-PEDIC INTERNATIONAL: Lerach Coughlin Lodges Suit in KY
UNIVERSAL AMERICAN: Charles J. Piven Files Securities Suit in NY


                            *********


ACE CASH: Consumer Fraud Litigation Removed To S.D. CA Court
------------------------------------------------------------
Ace Cash Express, Inc. and its franchisee Your Financial
Resource, Inc. removed the class action filed against them to
the United States District Court for the Southern District of
California.

Perseveranda Goins, Marie Aficial and Antonia Torres filed a
lawsuit in the Superior Court of the State of California for the
County of San Diego on June 1, 2005, alleging, among other
things, that the Company and its franchisee violated various
California state law requirements with respect to the making of
short-term consumer loans to the plaintiffs by, among other
things, failing to make proper disclosures to the plaintiffs and
assessing plaintiffs' insufficient funds fees in excess of the
statutory cap.

On July 1, 2005, the defendants removed the lawsuit to the
United States District Court for the Southern District of
California.

The suit is styled "Goins, et al v. Your Financial, et al., case
no. 3:05cv1340," filed in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of California, under Judge Thomas J.
Whelan.  Representing the plaintiffs is Frank J. Fox, Majors and
Fox LLP, 401 West A Street, Suite 2350, San Diego, CA 92101-
7921, Phone: (619)234-1000.  Representing the Company is Michael
L. Kirby, Post Kirby Noonan and Sweat, 600 West Broadway, Suite
1100, San Diego, CA 92101-3302, Phone: (619)231-8666.


ACE CASH: TX Managers Launch FLSA Violations Lawsuit in E.D. TX
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ace Cash Express, Inc. faces a class action filed in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas,
Marshall Division, alleging violations of the Fair Labor
Standards Act (FLSA).

Rebecca Webb and Pamela List filed the suit on June 13, 2005,
seeking to recover overtime wages allegedly due to "center
managers" and "managers-in-training" regularly being required to
work in excess of 45 hours per week.

The suit is styled "Webb et al v. Ace Cash Express, Inc., case
no. 2:05-cv-00254-LED," filed in the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division,
under Judge Leonard Davis.  Representing the Company is John
Gray Harrison, Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart - Dallas,
8117 Preston Rd, 700 Preston Commons, Dallas, TX 75225-4324,
Phone: 214/987-3800, Fax: 12149873927, E-mail:
john.harrison@odnss.com.  Representing the plaintiffs is John
Dale Sloan, Jr., Sloan & Monsour, P O Drawer 2909, 101 East
Whaley St, Longview, Tx 75606, Phone: 903/757-7000, Fax:
19037577574, E-mail: jsloan@sloanmonsour.com.


CALIFORNIA: District Refutes Teachers' Retirement Litigation
------------------------------------------------------------
In its response to litigation brought by two of its teachers,
the Ontario-Montclair School District in California denies that
it had a legal obligation to reimburse the employees for lost
retirement contributions, The Inland Valley Daily Bulletin
reports.

Attorneys for the school district seek to have a class action
complaint dismissed. That complaint was filed against the
district after employee retirement contributions went missing
last year.

In the November 17 response, which cites various legal and
technical flaws with the original complaint, the district's
attorneys contend, "Plaintiffs have failed to state facts
sufficient to constitute a cause of action for breach of
fiduciary duty."

The Ohio-based company which handled the contributions,
NEBSonline, is in bankruptcy proceedings after its chief
financial officer allegedly pilfered millions of dollars before
committing suicide. Collectively, school districts in San
Bernardino County were one of NEBS' largest customers. Teachers
in Ontario-Montclair asked the district earlier this year to
reimburse their lost contributions and pursue claims against
NEBS.

Rick McClure, vice president of the Ontario-Montclair Teachers
Association, hopes the school board, with two new members
elected last November 8, will reconsider its position. He told
The Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, "They've simply failed their
employees here. Their position they've taken all along is that
they've been concerned about money, and here they're spending
all this money on lawyers instead of doing the right thing."

One of the ousted board members, James Downs, wanted the
district to reimburse the affected employees, however, a motion
to that effect failed earlier this year.   The district's
response indicates its employees were sent forms and
instructions on how to file a claim against NEBS on their own
behalf. Ontario-Montclair was the only of 16 San Bernardino
County school districts not to reimburse its employees after
NEBS declared bankruptcy in November 2004.

The county office of education revealed that approximately 2,400
employees in the county lost $1.4 million when NEBS went under.
According to the teacher's union, Ontario-Montclair teachers,
staff and administrators who contributed lost between $25 to
$1,600 each.

Cathie Fields, lawyer for the district, said earlier this month
that the district believed the suit was without merit and would
defend itself. A court hearing date to dismiss the motion has
been slotted for January 9, 2006.


COMPUTER ASSOCIATES: Notice Issued Regarding Restitution Fund
-------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New
York issued a summary notice of claims process for the
distribution of the Restitution Fund in the matter, "United
States of America v. Computer Associates International, Inc.,
Docket Number CR 04-837 (ILG) (EDNY)."

The $225,000,000 Restitution Fund will benefit all persons or
entities that purchased or transacted in the common stock of
Computer Associates International, Inc. (CA) or call or put
options in CA common stock during the period January 20, 1998
through and including February 25, 2002 and who were damaged
thereby. The notice reminds all interested parties that that
they must submit a Proof of Claim to the Fund Administrator no
later than January 31, 2006.

For more details, contact In re: Computer Associates Restitution
Fund c/o Kenneth R. Feinberg, Fund Administrator, P.O. Box
808072, Phone: (800) 316-2110.


CONNECTICUT: Audit Finds Monitors Receive Disparate Compensation
----------------------------------------------------------------
Connecticut Governor M. Jodi Rell is calling for greater
uniformity in the compensation paid to court-appointed monitors
overseeing some troubled state agencies, after a new report
showed those officials received anywhere between $15,000 to $1.4
million a year, The Associated Press Reports.

Governor Rell, a Republican, suggested recently that the state
should go back to the federal courts and renegotiate
compensation plans. In addition, she also questioned whether
some monitors are still needed, because the state has met
improvement goals set by the courts.

In a written statement, Governor Rell said, "It is critical that
every available tax dollar be put toward direct care and
services for those whom court protection was sought, not toward
administrative costs associated with court monitors, special
masters or other overseers."

Monitors and special masters are typically appointed by federal
judges to oversee state agencies, often as conditions of court
settlements. Usually, the state often has no say in the
compensation arrangements and is simply forced to foot the bill.  
The governor's comments comes as an Office of Policy and
Management audit that released recently revealed that
compensation ranges from $1.4 million paid last fiscal year to
D. Ray Sirry, the former federal monitor who watched over the
Department of Children and Families to $15,000 a year paid to
each member of an expert advisory panel to the Department of
Education. In one case, the governor's office set the
compensation rate, according to the audit.

The audit, requested by Governor Rell in light of an
investigation into Dr. Sirry's compensation package, found that
five agencies have monitors of some sort overseeing court-
ordered improvements.  At DCF, Dr. Sirry was appointed in May
2000 as a result of a lawsuit challenging the agency's care of
abused and neglected children. Dr. Sirry had presented a budget
and periodic bills to the federal court, which also approved his
rate of compensation.

Dr. Sirry left in August because of health reasons and was
replaced in October by Ray Mancuso. That same month, the court
also appointed a special master, U.S. Magistrate Holly
Fitzsimmons, to report on the state's progress toward exiting
the court decree. State officials believe the court will cover
her expenses. A federal court is currently investigating
allegations that Dr. Sirry was overpaid.

Another court monitor oversees conditions and practices at youth
detention centers. Under the settlement, the state pays Dr.
Robert Carl Jr. $125 an hour, including travel time and
reasonable expenses. The state also covers the cost of a mental
health consultant to review mental health services at the
facilities.  George Hayes Jr. works through the Office of the
Child Advocate and monitors operations at the Connecticut
Juvenile Training School in Middletown. Last fiscal year, he
earned $62,800 plus $1,800 in expenses. His compensation is set
by the governor's office.

The Department of Education is paying an expert panel of four,
$1,000 apiece for each meeting they attend, for a total of
$15,000 annually. They're advising the state on how to increase
the percentage of students with mental retardation or
intellectual disability who are placed in regular classes. That
panel stems from a case filed in 1991 by five school-age
children with mental retardation and their families. It was
certified as a class action lawsuit on December 13, 1993, and
the federal court approved a settlement on May 22, 2002.

Governor Rell has already asked a federal judge to remove a
special master, David Ferleger, who is overseeing improvements
at Southbury Training School. Mr. Ferleger was recently
disciplined in Pennsylvania for practicing law without a
license. Since August 1997, the Department of Mental Retardation
has deposited about $2.9 million into an account for the special
master. Those funds cover Mr. Ferleger's salary, some overhead
and the cost of consultants he has hired. DMR estimates that Dr.
Ferleger earns about $260 an hour. The agency has asked the
federal court for more detailed payments to the attorney, who is
based in Pennsylvania.


CYBERSOURCE CORPORATION: Final Fairness Hearing Set April 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------
Final fairness hearing for the settlement of the consolidated
securities class action filed against Cybersource Corporation,
its chairman and chief executive officer, a former officer and
four brokerage firms that served as underwriters in its initial
public offering, is set for April 24,2006 in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York.

In July and August 2001, various class action lawsuits were
filed on behalf of persons who purchased the Company's stock
issued pursuant to or traceable to the initial public offering
during the period from June 23, 1999 through December 6, 2000.
The action alleges that the Company's underwriters charged
secret excessive commissions to certain of their customers in
return for allocations of the Company's stock in the offering.
The two individual defendants are alleged to be liable because
of their involvement in preparing and signing the registration
statement for the offering, which allegedly failed to disclose
the supposedly excessive commissions.

On December 7, 2001, an amended complaint was filed in one of
the actions to expand the purported class to persons who
purchased the Company's stock issued pursuant to or traceable to
the follow-on public offering during the period from November 4,
1999 through December 6, 2000.  The lawsuit filed against the
Company is one of several hundred lawsuits filed against other
companies based on substantially similar claims. On April 19,
2002, a consolidated amended complaint was filed to consolidate
all of the complaints and claims into one case. The consolidated
amended complaint alleges claims that are virtually identical to
the amended complaint filed on December 7, 2001 and the original
complaints.  

In October 2002, the Company's officer and a former officer that
were named in the amended complaint were dismissed without
prejudice. In July 2002, the Company, along with other issuer
defendants in the case, filed a motion to dismiss the
consolidated amended complaint with prejudice. On February 19,
2003, the court issued a written decision denying the motion to
dismiss with respect to the Company and the individual
defendants.

On July 2, 2003, a committee of the Company's Board of Directors
conditionally approved a proposed partial settlement with the
plaintiffs in this matter. The settlement would provide, among
other things, a release of the Company and of the individual
defendants for the conduct alleged in the action to be wrongful
in the Amended Complaint. The Company would agree to undertake
other responsibilities under the partial settlement, including
agreeing to assign away, not assert, or release certain
potential claims it may have against its underwriters. Any
direct financial impact of the proposed settlement is expected
to be borne by the Company's insurers.  The committee agreed to
approve the settlement subject to a number of conditions,
including the participation of a substantial number of other
Issuer Defendants in the proposed settlement, the consent of the
Company's insurers to the settlement, and the completion of
acceptable final settlement documentation.  

On August 31, 2005, the court issued a formal preliminary
approval for the settlement and set a final approval hearing
date for April 24, 2006. While there can be no assurances as to
the outcome of the lawsuit, the Company does not presently
believe that an adverse outcome in the lawsuit would have a
material effect on its financial condition, results of
operations or cash flows.

Plaintiffs Brian Mohr and Javad Samadi filed the suit, styled
"In Re CyberSource Corp. Initial Public Offering Securities
Litigation, Docket no. 01 Civ. 7000 (Sas)," related to "IN RE
INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERING SECURITIES LITIGATION, Master File No.
21 MC 92 (SAS)."

The plaintiffs executive committee is composed of:

     (1) Melvyn I. Weiss, Ariana J. Tadler, Peter G.A.
         Safirstein of Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP,
         One Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, New York 10119-0165,
         Phone: (212) 594-5300

     (2) Stanley D. Bernstein, Robert Berg, Rebecca M. Katz,
         Danielle Mazzini- Daly of BERNSTEIN LIEBHARD &
         LIFSHITZ, LLP, 10 East 40th Street, New York, New York
         10016, Phone: (212) 779-1414

     (3) Richard S. Schiffrin, David Kessler, Darren J. Check of
         SCHIFFRIN & BARROWAY, LLP, Three Bala Plaza East, Suite
         400, Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania 19004, Phone: (610) 667-
         7706

     (4) Jules Brody and Aaron Brody, STULL STULL & BRODY, 6
         East 45th Street, New York, New York 10017, Phone:
         (212) 687-7230

     (5) Daniel W. Krasner, Fred Taylor Isquity, Thomas H. Burt
         and Brian Cohen, WOLF HALDENSTEIN ADLER FREEMAN & HERZ
         LLP, 270 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016,
         Phone: (212) 545-4600

     (6) Howard Sirota, Rachell Sirota, Saul Roffe, John P.
         Smyth, Halona N. Patrick, SIROTA & SIROTA LLP, 110 Wall
         Street, 21st Floor, New York, New York 10005, Phone:
         (212) 425-9055


DANKA BUSINESS: TN Court Yet To Rule on Lawsuit Summary Judgment
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Middle District of
Tennessee has yet to rule Danka Business Systems, PLC's petition
to grant summary judgment in its favor in the putative class
action complaint titled "Stephen L. Edwards, et al., Plaintiffs
vs. Danka Industries, Inc., et al., including American Business
Credit Corporation, Defendants."  The suit alleges claims of
breach of contract, fraud/intentional misrepresentation, unjust
enrichment, violation of the Florida Deception and Unfair Trade
Protection Act and injunctive relief.  

The claim was filed in the state court in Tennessee, and the
Company has removed the claim to the United States District
Court for Middle District of Tennessee for further proceedings.
The plaintiffs have filed a motion to certify the class, which
the Company has opposed. The Company has filed a motion for
summary judgment, which plaintiffs have opposed.

The suit is styled "Edwards v. Danka Industries Inc, et al.,
case no. 3:03-cv-00575," filed in the United States District
Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, under Judge John T.
Nixon.  Representing the plaintiffs is Charles P. Yezbak, III,
144 Second Avenue North, Suite 200, Nashville, TN 37201, Phone:
(615) 250-2000, Fax: (615) 250-2020, E-mail:
yezbak@yezbaklaw.com.  Representing the Company are:

     (1) Thomas B. Hatch, Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi, 2800
         LaSalle Plaza, Minneapolis, MN 55402-2015, Phone: (612)
         349-8500

     (2) Andrew J. Pulliam, Wyatt, Tarrant & Combs, 2525 West
         End Avenue, Suite 1500, Nashville, TN 37203-1423,
         Phone: (615) 244-0020, E-mail: apulliam@wyattfirm.com


DOLE FOOD: FDA Bares October Warning Against Pre-packaged Salads
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing a nationwide
warning to consumers against eating certain pre-packaged Dole
salad products because these products have been associated with
an outbreak of E. coli O157:H7 in Minnesota. The affected
products include three brand names and are labeled with "best-
if-used by" dates, as listed below, and a production code
beginning with "B250."

Illnesses have been associated with consumption of Dole salad
products purchased from a single grocery store chain, Rainbow
Foods, in its Minnesota locations. However, salad products
containing the affected production codes are also distributed
nationwide.

The three prepackaged salad products involved are:

     (1) Classic Romaine - with a "best-if-used-by (BIUB)" date
         of September 23, 2005 and a production code beginning
         with "B250."

     (2) American Blend - with a "best-if-used-by (BIUB)" date
         of September 23, 2005 and a production code beginning
         with "B250."

     (3) Greener Selection - with a "best-if-used-by (BIUB)"
         date of September 22, 2005, and a production code
         beginning with "B250."

The "best-if-used-by" code date can be located in the upper
right hand corner of the front of the bag. While it is unlikely
that stores still have this product on their shelves, consumers
may have product in their refrigerators. Consumers who have any
of the three packaged salads listed should dispose of the
product.

"Given the severity of this illness, FDA believes an urgent
warning to consumers is needed. FDA is working closely with the
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and our
state partners to further identify the source of the problem and
its scope," said Dr. Robert Brackett, Director of the FDA's
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.

At this time, no other Dole salad products are involved and Dole
Food Company has issued a recall for the implicated salad
products. Dole is working cooperatively with the FDA to minimize
any further risk to consumers.

E. coli O157:H7 infection often causes severe bloody diarrhea
and abdominal cramps; sometimes the infection causes non-bloody
diarrhea or no symptoms. Usually little or no fever is present,
and the illness resolves in five to ten days. Although most
healthy adults can recover completely within a week, in some
persons, particularly children under five years of age and the
elderly, the infection can also cause a complication called
hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS). This condition can lead to
serious kidney damage and even death.

To date there have been reports of eleven cases of illness
attributed to E. coli O157 in Minnesota. Of these eleven cases,
two individuals have been hospitalized. The latest reported
illness was September 19, 2005.

Individuals who may have experienced any of the above symptoms
after eating these salad products should contact their physician
or local department of health.


ENRON CORPORATION: ERISA Settlement Hearing Set Dec. 20, 2005
-------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of
Texas will hold a fairness hearing for the proposed settlement
in the matter, "In re: Enron Corporation ERISA Litigation, Case
No. H-01-3913 (Consolidated Cases)," on behalf of all persons
who were participants or beneficiaries in the Enron Corporation
Savings Plan (401K), the Enron Corporation Stock Ownership Plan
(ESOP) and/or the Enron Corporation Cash Balance Plan and any
and all predecessors and successors to such plans during the
period from January 1, 1995, through the Effective Date of the
settlement.

The Courts will hold a hearing in the case, "In re Enron
Corporation ERISA Litigation, Case No. H-01-3913," at 2:00 p.m.,
Central Standard Time, December 20, 2005.

For more details, call 1-866-560-4043, or visit
http://www.enronerisa.com,http://www.erisafraud.comor  
http://www.hbsslaw.com.


EQUITY RESIDENTIAL: FL Court Mulls Appeal of $1.6Mil Suit Ruling
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Palm Beach County Court in Florida has yet to rule on Equity
Residential's appeal of the court's decision, granting $1.6
million in damages in favor of the plaintiffs in the class
action filed against it, regarding certain charges made to
residents who terminated their leases early or failed to provide
sufficient notice of intent to vacate.

In December 2004, the Court issued a Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law holding those fees legally uncollectible
under Florida law.  In recognition of the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law, which awarded damages and interest to the
class in the amount of approximately $1.6 million, the Company
established a reserve of approximately $1.6 million and
correspondingly recorded this as a general and administrative
expense.  Due to pending appeals, the award is neither final nor
enforceable.


ETHNIC INTERNATIONAL: Recalls Apricots For Undeclared Sulfites
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ethnic International Holding, Inc., 4 Corporate Drive, Cranbury,
NJ is recalling YORUK BRAND DRIED APRICOT because it may
contained undeclared sulfites. People who have severe
sensitivity to sulfites run the risk of serious or life
threatening reactions if they consume this product.

The recalled Yoruk brand Dried Apricots are distributed in
uncoded 0.5 lb. plastic bags. The product was distributed in New
York State.

The recall was initiated after routine sampling by New York
State Department of Agriculture and Markets Food Inspectors and
subsequent analysis of the product by Food Laboratory personnel
revealed the presence of undeclared sulfites on the label. The
consumption of 10 milligrams of sulfites per serving has been
reported to elicit severe reactions in some asthmatics.
Anaphylactic shock could occur in certain sulfite sensitive
individuals upon ingesting 10 milligrams or more of sulfites. No
illnesses have been reported to date in connection with this
problem.

Consumers who have purchased Yoruk Brand Dried Apricots should
return it to the place of purchase. Consumers with questions may
contact the company at 609-395-8513.


FRUIT COMPANIES: FDA Issues Warning For Unproven Health Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued on October 24,2005
Warning Letters to 29 companies that manufacture, market, or
distribute products made from cherries or other fruits.  The
Warning Letters told the firms to stop making unproven claims on
the firms' web sites and product labels that their fruit
products treat or prevent disease.

The companies cited are marketing dried fruit, fruit juice, and
juice concentrate for treating or preventing of a variety of
diseases, including cancer, heart disease, and arthritis.

The Warning Letters state that if the firms fail to take prompt
corrective measures, they may face FDA enforcement action
without further notice. Actions could include FDA seizure of the
products, as well as injunctions or criminal sanctions.

Copies of the FDA Warning Letters are available at the Website:
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/chrylist.html.  


GENTA INC.: NJ Court Dismisses Securities Fraud Lawsuit in Part
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
granted in part Genta, Inc.'s motion to dismiss the consolidated
securities class action filed against it and certain of its
principal officers on behalf of purported classes of the
Company's shareholders who purchased Company securities during
several class periods.  

The consolidated suit alleges that the Company and certain of
its principal officers violated the federal securities laws by
issuing materially false and misleading statements regarding
Genasense, for the treatment of melanoma that had the effect of
artificially inflating the market price of the Company's
securities.  The shareholder class action complaint in the
various actions seeks monetary damages in an unspecified amount
and recovery of plaintiffs' costs and attorneys' fees.

In addition, three shareholder derivative actions have been
filed against the directors and certain officers of the Company
in New Jersey State and Federal courts. Based on facts
substantially similar to those asserted in the shareholder class
actions, the derivative plaintiffs claim that defendants have
breached their fiduciary duties to the shareholders and other
violations of New Jersey law.

On September 30, 2005, the court granted in part and denied in
part the Company's motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' complaint.  
The court dismissed plaintiffs' claim that the defendants
engaged in a scheme or artifice to defraud plaintiffs, but
allowed plaintiffs' claims to proceed with respect to their
allegations that defendants issued false and misleading public
statements about Genasense.  On October 17, 2005, defendants
filed an answer to the complaint and will soon commence pre-
trial discovery.

The suit is styled "In re Genta, Inc. Securities Litigation,
case no. 2:04-cv-02123-JAG-GDH," filed in the United States
District Court in New Jersey, under Judge Joseph A. Greenaway,
Jr.  Representing the plaintiffs are Melvyn I. Weiss,
MILBERG, WEISS, BERSHAD & SCHULMAN, ESQS., One Pennsylvania
Plaza, New York NY 10119 Phone: 212-594-5300; and Patrick Louis
Rocco, SHALOV STONE & BONNER LLP 163 Madison Avenue PO Box 177
Morristown, NJ 07962-1277 Phone: (973) 775-8997 E-mail:
procco@lawssb.com.  Representing the Company are Thomas A.
Cunniff, Jack L. Kolpen FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP Princeton Pike
Corporate Center 997 Lenox Drive Building 3, Lawrenceville NJ
08648-2311 Phone: (609) 896-3600 Email:
tcunniff@foxrothschild.com or jkolpen@foxrothschild.com.


GUIDANT CORPORATION: Plaintiffs Withdraw Securities Suits in IN
---------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed four securities class actions
filed against Guidant Corporation and several of its officers in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Indiana.

The suits were filed beginning in late June 2005, alleging that
the defendants concealed adverse information about the Company's
defibrillators and sold stock in violation of federal securities
laws. The complaints seek class certification, monetary damages,
and injunctive relief.  On October 24, 2005, these complaints
were voluntarily dismissed without prejudice.

The suits were filed in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Indiana, under Judge John Daniel Tinder.  
The suits are styled:

     (1) YEROUSHALMI v. GUIDANT CORPORATION et al., case no.
         1:05-cv-00951-JDT-TAB
  
     (2) MANNING v. GUIDANT CORPORATION et al., case no. 1:05-
         cv-00985-JDT-TAB  

     (3) MURRAY v. GUIDANT CORPORATION et al., case no. 1:05-cv-      
         01078-JDT-TAB

     (4) HODGSON v. GUIDANT CORPORATION et al., case no. 1:05-
         cv-01174-JDT-TAB  


GUIDANT CORPORATION: Plaintiffs File Amended ERISA Lawsuit in IN
----------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended class action against
Guidant Corporation and its directors on behalf of participants
in the Company's employee pension benefit plans in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.

The suit was filed in July 2005, charging the Company with
breaches of fiduciary duty under the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. Section 1132.  Specifically, the
complaint alleges that Company fiduciaries concealed adverse
information about the Company's defibrillators and imprudently
made contributions to the Company's 401(k) plan and employee
stock ownership plan in the form of Company stock. The complaint
seeks class certification, declaratory and injunctive relief,
monetary damages, the imposition of a constructive trust, and
costs and attorneys' fees.

A second, similar complaint has been filed and is expected to be
consolidated with the initial complaint.

The suit is styled "HARZEWSKI v. GUIDANT CORPORATION et al.,
case no. 1:05-cv-01009-LJM-TAB," filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, under Judge
Larry J. McKinney.  Representing the Company is John R.
Schaibley, III, BAKER & DANIELS, 300 North Meridian Street,
Suite 2700, Indianapolis, IN 46204, Phone: (317)237-1283, Fax:
(317)237-1000, E-mail: jrschaib@bakerd.com.


GUIDANT CORPORATION: JPML Mulls Consolidation of Injury Lawsuits
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation conducted a
hearing in September 2005 to determine the sole issue of the
location for consolidating the lawsuits filed against Guidant
Corporation, following the Company's recent implantable
defibrillator and pacemaker systems field actions.

Approximately forty-five product liability class action lawsuits
and approximately fifty individual lawsuits have been filed in
various state and federal jurisdictions against the Company.  
The majority of these cases are pending in federal court.  An
additional six lawsuits have been filed in Canada. The
complaints in these product liability lawsuits generally allege
strict liability, negligence, warranty and other common law
and/or statutory claims. The majority of claimants alleges no
physical injury, but is suing for medical monitoring and
anxiety. The complaints generally seek class certification,
monetary damages and injunctive relief.


GUIDANT CORPORATION: 70 Former Employees File Age Bias Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Approximately seventy former employees have filed charges
against Guidant Corporation, alleging that the Company
discriminated against the former employees on the basis of their
age when the Company terminated their employment in August 2004
in conjunction with the Company's reduction in force.

The litigation was filed with the United States Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC).  Most of the charges were filed
in the Minneapolis Area Office.  The EEOC has not yet rendered a
decision on the charges.


HORMONE THERAPIES: FDA Warns 16 Firms Over False Health Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has taken action against
a number of firms marketing unapproved "Alternative Hormone
Therapies" because the products these firms are selling are
unapproved new drugs that have not been found safe and effective
to treat or prevent certain serious or life-threatening diseases
or conditions.

FDA issued Warning Letters to 16 dietary supplement and hormone
cream marketers who are making unproven claims that tout the
benefits of their "alternative hormone therapy" products in
treating or preventing serious diseases, including cancer, heart
disease, and osteoporosis, and in affecting the structure or
function of the body. These alternative therapies are often
promoted as "natural" or "safer" treatments that can be used in
place of approved hormone treatments. Marketers have 15 days to
respond to FDA. The companies are:

     (1) All Natural Pain Relief Inc.

     (2) Bio-Health

     (3) BuyInnovations.com

     (4) CHS International Research Ltd.

     (5) ComCore 21 Corporation

     (6) Greatest Herbs on Earth

     (7) HMS Crown, Inc.

     (8) Healthworks 2000

     (9) Healthy Days, Inc.

    (10) HebaT Laboratories, LLC

    (11) Herbal Fields Supplements

    (12) Nutriteam, Inc.

    (13) One Life USA

    (14) Suzanne's Natural Foods

    (15) The Way Up

    (16) Tip Top Vitamins


"[The] FDA takes seriously its responsibility to protect
consumers from products promoted with unproven claims. It's
particularly troublesome when these claims provide false hope to
patients with serious or life-threatening conditions," said
Margaret O'K. Glavin, FDA's Associate Commissioner for
Regulatory Affairs.

In the Warning Letters, FDA advises the firms that, under the
federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), a product is
considered to be a drug if it claims to diagnose, cure,
mitigate, treat or prevent disease or, for products other than
foods and dietary supplements, if it claims to affect the
structure or function of the body. The Warning Letters further
state that FDA considers these products to be "new drugs" that
require FDA approval before marketing.

Examples of the unproven claims cited in the Warning Letters
include:

-reversing osteoporosis-related bone loss and increasing bone   
  density
-reducing, arresting, or inhibiting the growth of cancer cells
-protecting against fibroids, ovarian, and endometrial cancers
-treating various forms of arthritis

The FDA letters also advise the marketers that advertising
claims are governed by the FTC Act and other laws enforced by
the FTC.

As part of the joint effort, FTC is also issuing letters
notifying 34 websites that are promoting "alternative hormone
therapy" products with similar claims that the FTC is unaware of
any competent and reliable scientific evidence to support the
claims. As stated in these letters, the FTC Act prohibits unfair
or deceptive acts and practices, including false and
unsubstantiated advertising claims. For more information, visit
the FTC website at www.ftc.gov.


INTERLAND INC.: Asks PA Court To Dismiss TCPA Violations Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Interland, Inc. asked the Allegheny County State Court in
Pennsylvania to dismiss the claims in the class action filed
against it, alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act (TCPA).

A competing web hosting company, PairNetworks, filed this case
in December 2001 as a putative class action, claiming that the
Company's distribution of a facsimile on November 15, 2001 to
market domain name registration services violated the TCPA.
Several years later, two additional plaintiffs joined in the
action.  

The plaintiffs have conceded that all of the putative class
members were customers of the Company. Federal Communications
Commission regulations in effect at the time provided that the
distribution of facsimiles to persons with whom the sender had
an "established business relationship" did not amount to a
violation of the TCPA.  The Company has asked the court to deny
class certification and a ruling on that motion is pending as
well as a motion for summary judgment on the named plaintiffs'
claims.  If the court denies class certification, the Company's
damages, if it were liable, cannot exceed $1,500 for each of the
three named plaintiffs.  

In addition, the Company has filed a motion seeking to dismiss
all of the claims against it on the grounds that the facsimile
at issue did not violate the TCPA because it satisfied all of
the requirements of applicable Federal Communications Commission
regulations in effect at the time the fax was sent. Congress has
expressly extended those regulations through the Junk Fax Act of
2005.  The Company' motion has been briefed and argued to the
court and the parties are awaiting a ruling.


INTERNATIONAL TRUCK: Recalls 989 Trucks Due to Crash Hazard   
-----------------------------------------------------------
International Truck & Engine Corporation in cooperation with the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Office of
Defects Investigation (ODI) is voluntarily recalling about 989
units of 2005-06 INTERNATIONAL / CF500 and 2005-06 INTERNATIONAL
/ CF600 trucks due to crash hazard. NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID Number:
05V523000.

According to the ODI, on certain trucks, the cab entry steps
were manufactured incorrectly causing them to have lower
material strength properties than designed. These lower material
strength properties can allow the step tread to fracture and
separate from the vehicle under normal usage. Step tread's
separation while a person is entering or exiting the cab, may
result in property damage or personal injury.

As a remedy, dealers will install reinforced metal brackets on
both cab entry platforms. The recall is expected to begin on
November 28, 2005.

For more details, contact International, Phone: 1-800-448-7825
OR the NHTSA Auto Safety Hotline: 1-888-327-4236 or
1-800-424-9153, Web site: http://www.safecar.gov.


MICROSOFT CORPORATION: ND School District Amasses $276T Windfall
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Grand Forks School District in North Dakota will receive
$276,000 as its share in a settlement, which should bring
millions of dollars to state schools, of a class action lawsuit
against Microsoft Corporation, The Grand Forks Herald reports.

Superintendent Mark Sanford told The Grand Forks Herald that
half of the amount is earmarked for general use and the other
for software for schools in which 50 percent of the students are
eligible for free and reduced lunches. He added that the money
could also be credited for purchases the district has made since
the 2003 school year, which adds to the flexibility of how the
money can be used.

Mr. Sanford explains to The Grand Fold Herald that one way in
which the money could be used is to pay for the technology
needed to do online assessments, in which students take tests
online and their scores immediately can be matched against
school district and state standards. According to him, having
immediate personalized results and testing comparisons is
important for teachers to have when they are planning their
classroom instruction.

Microsoft faced a flurry of lawsuits back in 2000 for using its
market power to force customers to pay higher prices for its
Windows operating system. Those federal cases were later
consolidated in the United States District Court for Maryland.
These cases allege that the Company competed unfairly and
unlawfully monopolized alleged markets for operating systems and
certain software applications, and they seek to recover alleged
overcharges for these products. To date, courts have dismissed
all claims for damages in cases brought against the Company by
indirect purchasers under federal law and in 17 states. Nine of
those state court decisions have been affirmed on appeal. An
appeal of one of those state rulings is pending. There was no
appeal in four states.  Claims under federal law brought on
behalf of foreign purchasers have been dismissed by the U.S.
District Court in Maryland as have all claims brought on behalf
of consumers seeking injunctive relief under federal law, an
earlier Class Action Reporter story (November 2, 2005) reports.

The ruling on injunctive relief and the ruling dismissing the
federal claims of indirect purchasers are currently on appeal to
the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, as is
a ruling denying certification of certain proposed classes of
U.S. direct purchasers. Courts in eleven states have ruled that
indirect purchaser cases may proceed as class actions, while
courts in two states have denied class certification. In 2003,
we reached an agreement with counsel for the California
plaintiffs to settle all claims in 27 consolidated cases in that
state, an earlier Class Action Reporter story (November 2, 2005)
reports.

Under the settlement, class members will be able to obtain
vouchers that entitle the class members to be reimbursed up to
the face value of their vouchers for purchases of a wide variety
of platform-neutral computer hardware and software. The total
value of vouchers issued will depend on the number of class
members who make a claim and are issued vouchers. Two-thirds of
the value of vouchers unissued or unredeemed by class members
will be made available to certain schools in California in the
form of vouchers that also may be redeemed for cash against
purchases of a wide variety of platform-neutral computer
hardware, software, and related services.  The Company also
reached similar agreements to settle all claims in a number of
other states. The settlements in these states are structured
similarly to the California settlement, except that, among other
differences, one-half of the value of vouchers unissued to class
members will be made available to certain schools in the
relevant states. The maximum value of vouchers to be issued in
these settlements, including the California settlement, is
approximately $1.9 billion. The actual costs of these
settlements will be less than that maximum amount, depending on
the number of class members and schools who are issued and
redeem vouchers, an earlier Class Action Reporter story
(November 2, 2005) reports.

The settlements in Arizona, California, the District of
Columbia, Florida, Kansas, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana,
New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota,
Tennessee, Vermont, and West Virginia have received final court
approval. The Company estimates the total cost to resolve all of
these cases will range between $1.3 billion and $1.6 billion,
with the actual cost dependent upon many unknown factors such as
the quantity and mix of products for which claims will be made,
the number of eligible class members who ultimately use the
vouchers, the nature of hardware and software that is acquired
using the vouchers, and the cost of administering the claims
process, the Company said in a disclosure to the Securities and
Exchange Commission, an earlier Class Action Reporter story
(November 2, 2005) reports.


NEW YORK: Court Rejects County's Appeal in Strip Search Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Officers at the Montgomery County jail won't be allowed to strip
search people detained for minor offenses, according to a recent
ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, The
Associated Press reports.

In essence, the court's ruling rejected Montgomery County's
appeal in a class action lawsuit initiated on behalf of former
Fort Plain, New York resident Paul Marriott, who was forced to
undergo a strip search after allegedly not feeding his horses.

Back in March, a U.S. district court judge granted a preliminary
injunction to stop the strip searches. Members of the class
action lawsuit, which was filed back in April 29, 2003, included
those who were admitted into the Montgomery County jail between
April 29th, 2000, and March 25th, 2005, after being charged with
a misdemeanor, violation, probation or parole violation, traffic
infraction or other minor offense.

The suit is styled, "Marriott v. County of Montgomery, et al,
Case No. 5:03-cv-00531-DNH-DEP," filed in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of New York, under
Judge David N. Hurd with referral to Judge David E. Peebles.
Representing the Defendant/s are, Thomas W. Hyland of Wilson,
Elser Law Firm - NY Office, 150 East 42nd St., New York, NY
10017-5639, Phone: 212-490-3000, Fax: 212-490-3038, E-mail:
hylandt@wemed.com and Theresa B. Marangas of Wilson, Elser Law
Firm - Albany Office, 677 Broadway - 9th Floor, Albany, NY
12207-2996, Phone: 518-449-8893, Fax: 518-465-2548, E-mail:
marangast@wemed.com. Representing the plaintiff/s are:

     (1) Elmer R. Keach, III of Office of Elmer R. Keach, III,
         1040 Riverfront Center, P.O. Box 70, Amsterdam, NY
         12010, Phone: 518-434-1718, Fax: 518-770-1558, E-mail:
         bobkeach@keachlawfirm.com;

     (2) Gary E. Mason and Charles A. Schneider of Mason Law
         Firm, 1225 19th St., N.W. Suite 500, Washington, DC
         20036, Phone: 202-429-2290, Fax: 202-429-2294, E-mail:
         gmason@masonlawdc.com and cschneider@masonlawdc.com;
         and

     (3) Bruce E. Menken and Jason J. Rozger of Beranbaum,
         Menken Law Firm, 3 New York Plaza, New York, NY 10004,
         Phone: 212-509-1616, Fax: 212-509-8088, E-mail:
         bmenken@bmbblaw.com and jrozger@bmbblaw.com.


NUI CORPORATION: Suit Settlement Hearing Set January 20, 2006
-------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
will hold a fairness hearing for the proposed $3,500,000
settlement in the matter, "In re: NUI Securities Litigation,
Civil Action No. 02-5220 (MLC)." The case was filed on behalf of
all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired securities of
NUI Corporation between November 8, 2001 and October 17, 2002.

The hearing will be held before the Honorable Mary L. Cooper on
January 20, 2006, at 10:00 a.m. in the United States District
Courthouse, 402 East State St., Trenton, NJ 08608.

For more details, contact In re NUI Securities Litigation, c/o
The Garden City Group, Inc., Claims Administrator, P.O. Box 9000
#6322, Merrick, NY 11566-9000, Phone: 1-800-294-3992 or Katherin
M. Ryan, Esq. or Kay E. Sickles, Esq. of Schiffrin & Barroway,
LLP by Mail: 280 King of Prussia Road, Radnor, PA 19087 or by
Phone: (610) 667-7706.


POLYMEDICA CORPORATION: Discovery Continues in MA Stock Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Discovery continues in the securities class action filed against
PolyMedica Corporation and Steven J. Lee, the Company's former
Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board in the United
States District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

On November 27, 2000, Richard Bowe SEP-IRA filed a purported
class action lawsuit on behalf of himself and purchasers of
common stock. The lawsuit seeks an unspecified amount of
damages, attorneys' fees and costs and claims violations of
Sections 10(b), 10b-5, and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, alleging various statements were misleading with
respect to the Company's revenue and earnings based on an
alleged scheme to produce fictitious sales.

Several virtually identical lawsuits were subsequently filed in
the United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts against the Company.  On July 30, 2001, the Court
granted the plaintiffs' motion to consolidate the complaints
under the caption "In re: PolyMedica Corp. Securities
Litigation, Civ. Action No. 00-12426-REK."

Plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint on October 9,
2001.  The consolidated amended complaint extended the class
period to October 26, 1998 through August 21, 2001, and named as
defendants the Company, Liberty Medical Supply, Inc., and
certain of the Company's former officers.  Defendants moved to
dismiss the consolidated amended complaint on December 10, 2001.
Plaintiffs filed their opposition to this motion on February 11,
2002, and defendants filed a reply memorandum on March 11, 2002.
The Court denied the motion without a hearing on May 10, 2002.
On June 20, 2002, defendants filed answers to the consolidated
amended complaint.

On January 28, 2004, plaintiffs filed a motion for class
certification to which defendants filed an opposition on
February 27, 2004. Plaintiffs filed a reply memorandum on April
12, 2004 followed by additional briefing by the parties. The
Court heard oral argument on the motion on June 2, 2004.  On
September 8, 2004, the court allowed the plaintiffs' motion and
certified the class. On September 21, 2004, the defendants filed
a petition requesting that they be permitted to appeal the
decision to the First Circuit Court of Appeals. The plaintiffs
filed a response to the defendants' petition on October 7, 2004
opposing defendants' request to appeal the class certification.
Also on October 7, 2004, the Court stayed sending notice of the
class action pending a ruling on defendants' appeal of class
certification.

On February 15, 2005, the First Circuit Court of Appeals granted
defendants' petition for leave to appeal the class certification
decision.  Defendants-appellants filed their brief on March 15,
2005, and plaintiffs-appellees filed an opposition on April 15,
2005. Defendants-appellants filed a reply brief on April 25,
2005.  The First Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral argument on
May 4, 2005 and took the matter under advisement.  

The suit is styled "Bowe et al v. Polymedica Corp., case no.
1:00-cv-12426-REK," filed in the United States District Court
for the District of Massachusetts under Judge Robert E. Keeton.  

Law firm for the defendants is Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and
Dorr LLP, 60 State Street, Boston, MA 02109, Phone: 617-526-
6145, Fax: 617-526-5000.  The plaintiff firms are Hale & Dorr,
60 State Street, Boston, MA, 2109, Phone: 617.526.6167 and
Moulton & Gans LLP, 133 Federal Street, Boston, MA, 2110, Phone:
617.369.7979.


SPX CORPORATION: Certification Sought For Stock, ERISA Lawsuits
---------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs asked the United States District Court for the
Western District of North Carolina to certify the consolidated
class actions filed against SPX Corporation and certain of its
current and former executive officers.

Beginning in March 2004, multiple class action complaints
seeking unspecified monetary damages were filed or announced by
certain law firms representing or seeking to represent
purchasers of the Company's common stock during a specified
period, alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The plaintiffs generally allege
that the Company made false and misleading statements regarding
the forecast of the Company's 2003 fiscal year business and
operating results in order to artificially inflate the price of
Company stock. These complaints have been consolidated into a
single amended complaint against the Company and its former
Chairman, CEO and President.  On September 20, 2004, the Company
filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated action in its
entirety.

Additionally, on April 23, 2004, an additional class action
complaint was filed in the same court, alleging breaches of the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) by the
Company, its then general counsel and the Administrative
Committee regarding one of the Company's 401(k) defined
contribution benefit plans arising from the plan's holding of
Company stock.  On June 10, 2005 a first amended Complaint was
filed in the ERISA suit, adding as defendants certain current
and former directors and Administrative Committee members, and
conforming the complaint to the allegations in the Securities
Class Action.  On July 25, 2005, the Company filed a motion to
dismiss the amended ERISA complaint in its entirety.  That
motion is fully briefed for ruling by the District Court.  On
September 8, 2005, the plaintiffs moved the Court to certify the
proposed class in the ERISA suit.  The Company opposed that
motion and it is fully briefed for ruling by the District Court.

The litigation is styled "Belafey et al v. SPX Corporation, et
al, case no. 3:04cv99," filed in the United States District
Court for the Western District of North Carolina, under Judge H.
Brent McKnight.  Representing the Company are David C Wright,
III and Julian H. Wright of Robinson, Bradshaw & Hinson, PA,
Mail: 101 No Tryon St Suite 1900, Charlotte, NC 28246 USA,
Phone: 704-377-2536; and Ross B. Bricker, Anton R. Valukas and
Ronald L. Malmer of Jenner & Block, One IBM Plaza, Chicago, IL
60611-3608 Phone: 312/ 923-4524.  The plaintiff firms in this
litigation are:

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

     (2) Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman, LLP (New York),
         200 Broadhollow, Suite 406, Melville, NY, 11747, Phone:
         631.367.7100, Fax: 631.367.1173,

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

     (4) 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

     (5) Faruqi & Faruqi LLP, 320 East 39th Street, New York,
         NY, 10016, Phone: 212.983.9330, Fax: 212.983.9331, E-
         mail: Nfaruqi@faruqilaw.com

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

     (7) Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, LLP (Boca Raton,
         FL), 5355 Town Center Road - Suite 900, Boca Raton, FL,
         33486, Phone: 561.361.5000, Fax: 561.367.8400,

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

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

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

    (11) 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


STAKTEK HOLDINGS: Asks NM Court To Dismiss Securities Fraud Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Staktek Holdings, Inc. asked the United States District Court
for the District of New Mexico to dismiss a securities class
action filed against it and two of its executive officers.

The plaintiff claims that the defendants failed to disclose to
the public an anticipated shortage of computer memory chips and
that they knew or recklessly disregarded that the anticipated
shortage would have a materially adverse impact on the Company's
revenue and earnings. In addition, the plaintiff claims that the
defendants failed to disclose to investors that the industry's
transition to a new generation of higher-capacity memory chips
was causing computer makers to stockpile supplies of older
memory chips, increasing the shortage. The suit covers
individuals who purchased Company stock between November 26,
2003 and May 19, 2004.

In April 2005, the case was transferred to federal district
court in Austin, Texas, and in June the plaintiff amended her
complaint, adding the Company's chairman of the board as a
defendant.  In July 2005, the Company filed a motion to dismiss
the amended complaint.


STARWAY INC.: Recalls Sweetpotato Strips For Undeclared Sulfites
----------------------------------------------------------------
Starway Incorporated, located at 137 Grattan Street, Brooklyn,
NY, 11237, is recalling Min Yue Foods Brand Sweetpotato Strip
because the product contains undeclared sulfites. People who
have severe sensitivity to sulfites run the risk of serious or
life-threatening reactions if they consume this product.

The recalled Min Yue Foods Brand Sweetpotato Strip, a product of
China, is distributed in coded 6920824900390 and heat-sealed 16
oz. plastic bags. The product was distributed in New York State.

The recall was initiated after routine sampling by NYS Dept. of
Agriculture & Markets Food Inspectors and subsequent analysis of
the product by Food Laboratory personnel revealed the presence
of undeclared sulfites in Min Yue Foods Brand Sweetpotato Strip
in packages which did not declare sulfites on the label. The
consumption of 10 milligrams of sulfites per serving has been
reported to elicit severe reactions in some asthmatics.
Anaphylactic shock could occur in certain sulfite sensitive
individuals upon ingesting 10 milligrams or more of sulfites. No
illnesses have been reported to date in connection with this
problem.

Consumers who have purchased the packages of Min Yue Foods Brand
Sweetpotato Strip should return it to the place of purchase.
Consumers with questions may contact the company at
718-417-1788.


TENNESSEE GAS: KS Court Mulls Gas Royalties Suits Certification
---------------------------------------------------------------
The District Court of Stevens County, Kansas has yet to rule on
motions for class certification of two lawsuits filed against
Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co., a number of its affiliates and other
natural gas companies.

The first suit, styled "Will Price, et al. v. Gas Pipelines and
Their Predecessors, et al.," alleges that the defendants
mismeasured natural gas volumes and heating content of natural
gas on non-federal and non-Native American lands and seek to
recover royalties that they contend they should have received
had the volume and heating value of natural gas produced from
their properties been differently measured, analyzed, calculated
and reported, together with prejudgment and postjudgment
interest, punitive damages, treble damages, attorneys' fees,
costs and expenses, and future injunctive relief to require the
defendants to adopt allegedly appropriate gas measurement
practices.  No monetary relief has been specified in this case.

Plaintiffs' motion for class certification of a nationwide class
of natural gas working interest owners and natural gas royalty
owners was denied in April 2003. Plaintiffs were granted leave
to file a Fourth Amended Petition, which narrows the proposed
class to royalty owners in wells in Kansas, Wyoming and Colorado
and removes claims as to heating content.  A second class action
petition has since been filed as to the heating content claim.  
Motions for class certification have been briefed and argued in
both proceedings, and the parties are awaiting the court's
ruling.


TENNESSEE GAS: Faces Two Hurricane Injury Lawsuits in E.D. LA
-------------------------------------------------------------
Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co. faces two class action petitions for
damages filed in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Louisiana, styled "George Barasich, et al.
v. Columbia Gulf Transmission Company, et al." and "Charles
Villa Jr., et al. v. Columbia Gulf Transmission Company, et al."  
The suits also name as defendants all oil and gas pipeline and
production companies that dredged pipeline canals, installed
transmission lines or drilled for oil and gas in the marshes of
coastal Louisiana.

The suits assert that the defendants caused erosion and land
loss that destroyed critical protection against hurricane surges
and winds and was a substantial cause of the loss of life and
destruction of property. The first lawsuit alleges damages
associated with Hurricane Katrina. The second lawsuit alleges
damages associated with Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.


VOLKSWAGEN OF AMERICA: Recalls 1,530 Vehicles For Injury Hazard   
---------------------------------------------------------------
Volkswagen of America, Inc. in cooperation with the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Office of Defects
Investigation (ODI) is voluntarily recalling about 1,530 units
of 2006 AUDI / A8, 2006 AUDI / A8 L, 2006 AUDI / A8 L W12
passenger vehicles due to injury hazard. NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID
Number: 05V522000.

According to the ODI, on certain passenger vehicles a wiring
harness condition exists that may deactivate the passenger side
frontal air bag even under circumstances when it should remain
activated. If this condition occurs, both the air bag warning
light in the instrument cluster and the "Passenger Air Bag Off"
telltale in the center of the instrument panel will properly
illuminate. Consequently, the passenger side frontal air bag
would not deploy in the case on a frontal crash.

As a remedy, dealers will modify the wiring harness. The recall
is expected to begin on November 30, 2005.

For more details, contact Audi, Phone: 1-800-822-2834 OR the
NHTSA Auto Safety Hotline: 1-888-327-4236 or 1-800-424-9153, Web
site: http://www.safecar.gov.


VOLVO CARS: Recalls 10,259 Various Vehicles Due to Crash Hazard   
---------------------------------------------------------------
Volvo Cars of North America, LLC in cooperation with the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Office of
Defects Investigation (ODI) is voluntarily recalling about
10,259 units of 2005 VOLVO / S80 and 2005 VOLVO / XC90 vehicles
due to crash hazard. NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID Number: 05V529000.  

According to the ODI, on certain passenger and sports utility
vehicles, due to an error in the factory assembly instruction,
the B+TERMINAL may be in conflict with the starter motor
solenoid. If this occurs, the conflict between the B+TERMINAL
and the starter motor solenoid may develop into a short circuit
of the battery cable to ground. Smoke may appear from under the
hood and it may be impossible to start the car. If the short
circuit happens during driving, electrical power could be lost
resulting in the warning lamps being deactivated. An electrical
short could result in a fire.

As a remedy, dealers will inspect and increase distance between
the B+TERMINAL and the starter motor solenoid by adjusting the
terminal. The recall is expected to begin early December.

For more details, contact Volvo, Phone: 1-800-458-1552 OR the
NHTSA Auto Safety Hotline: 1-888-327-4236 or 1-800-424-9153, Web
site: http://www.safecar.gov.


                 New Securities Fraud Cases

BLOCKBUSTER INC.: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Suit in TX
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities
class action on behalf of all those who acquired shares of
Blockbuster, Inc. ("Blockbuster" or the "Company") (NYSE: BBI)
pursuant to the Company's exchange offer of Viacom, Inc. stock
for 144 million common shares of Blockbuster, and on behalf of
those who purchased, converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired
the common stock of Blockbuster in the open market between
September 8, 2004 and August 9, 2005, inclusive (the "Class
Period").

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas against defendant Blockbuster,
Viacom, Inc., National Amusements, Inc. (Viacom's controlling
shareholder) and certain of Viacom's and Blockbuster's 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.


GREAT WOLF: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in WI
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities
class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted,
exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of Great Wolf
Resorts, Inc. (NASDAQ: WOLF) between December 14, 2004 and July
28, 2005, inclusive (the "Class Period").

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Wisconsin. 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, and the 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.


HELEN OF TROY: Charles J. Piven Lodges TX Securities Fraud Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a class
action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted,
exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of Helen of
Troy, Ltd. (NASDAQ: HELE) between October 12, 2004 and October
10, 2005, inclusive (the "Class Period").

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Texas, El Paso Division, against defendant
Helen of Troy, Ltd. and one or more of its officers. 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.


TEMPUR-PEDIC INTERNATIONAL: Lerach Coughlin Lodges Suit in KY
-------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins,
LLP, initiated a class action in the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky on behalf of
purchasers of Tempur-Pedic International, Inc. ("Tempur-Pedic")
(NYSE:TPX) publicly traded securities during the period between
April 22, 2005 and September 19, 2005 (the "Class Period").

The complaint charges Tempur-Pedic and certain of its officers
and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. Tempur-Pedic engages in the manufacture, marketing, and
distribution of advanced visco-elastic products under the TEMPUR
and Tempur-Pedic brands worldwide.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
made false and misleading statements regarding the Company's
business and prospects. Then, on September 19, 2005, after
defendants had sold $8.3 million worth of their own shares,
Tempur-Pedic issued lower guidance for 2005, sending the
Company's shares plummeting, falling 28% in one day, from $16.38
per share on September 19, 2005 to $11.70 on September 20, 2005.

According to the complaint, defendants knew, but concealed from
the investing public during the Class Period, the following
adverse material facts:

     (1) that Tempur-Pedic's market share in the visco-elastic
         market was declining, eliminating the Company's
         prospects for the 2005 growth defendants had projected;

     (2) that even by July 21, 2005, when the Company was
         publicly faced with the fact that increased
         competition was rumored to have already negatively hurt
         the Company's business, defendants reiterated positive
         guidance, despite clear signals that such guidance was
         even more unattainable than it was when it was first
         issued;

     (3) that the Company's strength vis-a-vis its retail
         channel and its visco-elastic product line was not
         expanding as defendants claimed;

     (4) that the Company's "worldwide leadership position" was
         not "continu(ing) to grow" as defendants repeatedly
         claimed;

     (5) that the Company was not on track to meet its goal of
         increasing sales in its retail channel by 30%-35%;

     (6) that the Company's offerings and marketing strategy
         were cannibalizing the Company's other products; and
    
     (7) that as a result of the above, the Company's FY 2005
         projections of $880-$890 million in revenue and $1.10-
         $1.13 earnings per share were grossly overstated.

For more details, contact William Lerach of Lerach Coughlin
Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins, LLP, Phone: 800-449-4900, E-mail:
wsl@lerachlaw.com, Web site:
http://www.lerachlaw.com/cases/tempur/.


UNIVERSAL AMERICAN: Charles J. Piven Files Securities Suit in NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities
class action on behalf of all those who purchased securities of
Universal American Financial Corporation ("Universal American"
or the "Company") (NASDAQ: UHCO) between February 16, 2005 and
October 28, 2005, inclusive (the "Class Period").

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York against defendant Universal
American and certain 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.



                            *********


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  * * *