CAR_Public/060118.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

           Wednesday, January 18, 2006, Vol. 8, No. 13

                            Headlines

ALLIANCE PHARMACEUTICAL: Settlement Hearing Set February 25,2006
ALHAMBRA SCHOOL: Facing $865,000 Claim for Attorneys' Fees
ALTON MEMORIAL: Management Conference Set for Overcharging Suit
BENNETT & DELONEY: Averts Eight Potential Class Actions
CANADA: Alberta to Pay Multi-million Social Benefits Claim

CANADA: Class Suit Planned for Hospital-Exposure Related Deaths
CANON INC.: Rivals Could Face Parallel Suits Over Faulty Cameras
COTTON YARN: Antitrust Settlement Hearing Set February 14, 2006
DUPONT: Failed to Warn of C8 Groundwater Contamination
FAIR ISAAC: Faces Consumer Suit in CA, Alleges CROA Violations

FAIR ISAAC: Faces Consumer Suit in GA, Alleges CROA Violations
FITOTERAPICOS: FDA Warns Consumers Against Brazilian Diet Pills
FLAT GLASS: Antitrust Settlement Hearing set February 3, 2006
HARSCO CORPORATION: Jury Awards $30M in CA Carson Roof Collapse
INDEVUS PHARMACEUTICALS: Enters Into Agreement Regarding Redux

LOUISIANA: Resident Sues Federal, State Agencies for Negligence
LOUSIANA: Legislators File Suit Over August 2005 Confrontation
LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES: Faces Gender Discrimination Suit in C.D. CA
MERCK & CO.: Jury Trial Scheduled in "VIOXX Death" Case
MICHIGAN: Cemeteries Facing Suit Over Alleged Illegal Practices

MOTHERS WORK: Working To Resolve CT Employee Overtime Wage Suit
NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS: Settlement Hearing set February 17, 2006
RELIANCE GROUP: Securities Settlement Hearing set March 21, 2006
RESOURCE AMERICA: Discovery Continues in NY Property Owners Suit
ROYAL AHOLD: Notification Program Begins for $1.1B Settlement

SOUTH CAROLINA: Inmate Denied Health Care Wins Damages
TEMPUR-PEDIC: Judge Instructs Shareholders to Consolidate Claims
TRANSACTION SYSTEMS: Discovery Continues in NE Securities Suit
UNITED STATES: Three Groups Defend OHV Use on Public Lands
UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI: Opens Scholarship Program as Settlement

              Meetings, Conferences & Seminars

* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals
* Online Teleconferences

                New Securities Fraud Cases    

SFBC INTERNATIONAL: Ann D. White Files FL Securities Fraud Suit


                          *********


ALLIANCE PHARMACEUTICAL: Settlement Hearing Set February 25,2006
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York will hold a fairness hearing for the proposed
$4,750,000 settlement regarding, "In re Alliance Pharmaceutical
Corp. Securities Litigation, Case No. 01-CV-1674 (SCR)." The
case was brought on behalf of all persons and entities which
exchanged the common stock of Molecular Biosystems, Inc. (MBI)
for the common stock of Alliance Pharmaceutical Corp. pursuant
to a merger of MBI and a subsidiary of Alliance on or about
December 29, 2000.

The hearing will be held on February 25, 2006, at 3:00 p.m. in
the United States District Courthouse, 300 Quarropas St., White
Plains, NY 10601.

Deadline for submitting a proof of claim is on April 14, 2006.
Any objections to the settlement must be filed by February 1,
2006.

For more details, contact Berdon Claims Administration, LLC,
P.O. Box 9014, Jericho, NY 11753-8914, Phone: (800) 766-330,
Telecopier: (516) 931-0818 or Wechsler Harwood, LLP, 488 Madison
Ave., 8th Floor, New York, NY 10022, Phone: (877) 935-7400, Web
site: http://www.whesq.com.  


ALHAMBRA SCHOOL: Facing $865,000 Claim for Attorneys' Fees
----------------------------------------------------------
Lawyers of the plaintiffs in the gender discrimination lawsuit
against Alhambra School District have filed a motion requesting
$865,000 in attorneys' fees, according to the Pasadena Star-
News.

The case is a Title IX lawsuit launched by four female Alhambra
High athletes against the school district, the city and the
school board in 2004.  The students, through lead plaintiff
Lauren Cruz, 17, who plays softball, are demanding equal sports
facilities and equipment for boys and girls from school
administrators.  It later was revised to include all present
female students.

"We are going to vigorously defend ourselves against that," said
Harold Standerfer, deputy superintendent for the Alhambra
Unified School District. "It strikes us as a very high payment
for something that did not go to trial."  The city will also
defend itself against the motion.

The school district's legal representation costs are covered by
insurance, but the plaintiff's attorneys' fees are not.  The
school district may bear the brunt of the fees, the report said.  
A judge will determine how the costs will be apportioned.

The case was settled in December and given preliminary approval
by a judge.  The settlement provides for the city to contribute
$500,000 to construct two new softball fields at Moor Field, and
the district augmenting it with $3.5 million, and an $18,000-
per-year monitoring fee until 2011.

A hearing on the fairness of the settlement will be held at the
U.S. District Court in Los Angeles on Jan. 31, before it becomes
binding, according to the report.

Lawyers from the California Women's Law Center in Los Angeles
and the Legal Aid Society - Employment Law Center in San
Francisco represented the plaintiffs in the class action suit.  
Together, they are claiming more than 2,000 hours of service,
with five lawyers billing at an hourly rate ranging from $275 to
$470, the report said. Lawyer Vicky Barker represents the class.

The deadline to file the opposition was set for Jan. 17, 2006,
but the city and district are requesting more time to review the
1,000-page motion.

The suit is styled, "Lauren M. Cruz et al. v. Alhambra School
District et al., Case No. 2:04-cv-01460-DT-Mc," filed in the
United States District Court for the Central District of
California, under Judge Dickran Tevrizian with referral to Judge
James W. McMahon.  Representing the Plaintiff/s are, Vicky L.
Barker and Nancy M. Solomon, California Women Law Center, 3460
Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1102, Los Angeles, CA 90010, Phone:
213-637-9900; and Claudia Center, Elizabeth Kristen and Patricia
A. Shiu, Legal Aid Society-Employment Law Ctr., 600 Harrison St,
Ste. 120, San Francisco, CA 94107, Phone: 415-864-8848, E-mail:
ekristen@las-elc.org.  Representing the Defendant/s are:

     (1) John W. Allen, Gary R. Gibeaut and Nancy Ann Mahan-Lamb
         of Gibeaut Mahan and Briscoe, 6701 Center Drive West,
         Suite 611, Los Angeles, CA 90045, Phone: 310-410-2020,
         Fax: 310-410-2010;

     (2) Elizabeth R. Feffer and Joseph M. Montes of Burke
         Williams and Sorensen, 444 South Flower St., Suite
         2400, Los Angeles, CA 90071-2953, Phone: 213-236-0600,
         Fax: 213-236-2700, E-mail: jmontes@bwslaw.com;

     (3) Harold W Potter of Jones & Mayer, 3777 N. Harbor Blvd.,
         Fullerton, CA 92835, Phone: 714-446-1400, Fax:
         714-446-1448.


ALTON MEMORIAL: Management Conference Set for Overcharging Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action suit filed by Robert Honke against Alton
Memorial Hospital is set for a case management conference after
several failed attempts, according to The Madison St. Clair
Record.  The lawsuit, which alleges the hospital overcharged Mr.
Honke for medical services in comparison to insured patients,
has been dormant since it was scheduled for CMC on Oct. 26,
2005.  Madison County Circuit Judge Daniel Stack continued the
hearing for another 60 days after neither side showed.

Mr. Honke, who is represented by Lanny Darr of Alton and Evan
Schaeffer of Godfrey, filed the suit on August 2, according to
The Madison County Record. In his suit he claims that he
sustained an injury and went to the hospital for a surgical
procedure.  According to the complaint, AMH was to only charge
Mr. Honke reasonable and customary rates for healthcare services
and he would only be obligated to pay reasonable charges for the
services he received.

However, the complaint states, "When Honke and other uninsured
patients received treatment from AMH, the hospital deceptively
failed to advise or intentionally concealed from its patients
that they would be charged for healthcare at rates which were
unreasonable." It adds, "There was no justifiable basis to
charge Honke significantly more than what was and is
reasonable."  Mr. Honke claims AMH's conduct resulted in
financial harm to him and others as it collected or attempted to
collect amounts greater than reasonable and necessary.

Mr. Honke claims that members of the class are so numerous that
joining them is not practicable and believes there are hundreds
or thousands of members whose identities can be easily
ascertained from hospital records.  According to Mr. Honke,
common questions of law and fact predominate over any questions
affecting only individual members of the class which include
whether the hospital:

     (1) failed to inform its patients that they will be charged
         at a higher rate than in reasonable and customary;

     (2) violated the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act;

     (3) is entitled to assert a lien and seek to recover from
         personal injury settlements for an amount greater than
         what is reasonable and customary; and

     (4) is entitled to charge higher rates for services to its
         patients who do not have insurance than those patients
         who have insurance benefits.

Additionally, the complaint states that "[a]ll Illinois patients
of AMH who did not have insurance and who the hospital sought to
receive payment from for an amount greater than what can be
considered reasonable, either by initiating collection activity,
garnishment or asserting a lien on personal injury settlements
or verdicts" are eligible for class inclusion.

Mr. Honke, claims that AMH arbitrarily overcharged him in an
attempt to influence reimbursement rules from third parties not
associated with this litigation and deceptively added amounts to
its uninsured patients' charges for medical care that served no
purpose other than to increase the hospital's profit, as they
"bore no relation to the true and actual costs and value of the
healthcare services."  His complaint also states that AMH's
alleged actions were unconscionable, unfair, and discriminatory
to the uninsured.

Mr. Honke, who states that he does not criticize the patient
care rendered by AMH and is not asserting a claim for any harm
or damages arising from patient care, is seeking along with the
class damages under $75,000 per class member and a grand total
not to exceed $5 million.


BENNETT & DELONEY: Averts Eight Potential Class Actions
-------------------------------------------------------
Utah-based Midvale law firm Bennett & DeLoney said it settled
out of court proposed class actions over its alleged attempts to
collect excessive bad check settlements using threats.  The
company denied wrongdoing, and attorney Michael Bennett refused
to reveal financial details of the settlement.

The law firm faced eight potential class actions over its debt
collection strategy.  Six of the planned suits were filed over
the past couple of years, and two were filed recently in the
U.S. District Court.

The Chicago law firm of Horwitz, Horwitz and Associates filed
the most recent of the complaints, with Salt Lake City attorney
Lester Perry named as local counsel.  One of the plaintiffs in
the recent suits is Mary Hastings of Baton Rouge.  She alleged
she was threatened by court action unless she pays $161.07 for
what she remembered as a debt of $13.07 for a pizza.  Another
suit was filed on behalf of Raymond and Heidi Brumbelow of
Atlanta, who wrote a $12 check for household items.

The plaintiffs argued that the settlements demanded violated
both state law and the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices
Act.


CANADA: Alberta to Pay Multi-million Social Benefits Claim
----------------------------------------------------------
The province of Alberta is preparing to distribute up to $100
million to the poor and disabled as part of a court-approved
settlement of a class action agreed to last month.  Authorities
plan to inform people receiving Assured Income for the Severely
Handicapped (AISH), social assistance and widows pension how to
file claims next month, according to Gwen Vanderdeen-Paschke of
Alberta Human Resources.  Claimants will have until January 2007
to file for compensation.

The Edmonton Sun said about 15,000 to 30,000 Albertans are
expected to recover their money, which was illegally deducted
from their allowance payments, or totally withheld.  The
government is using the system to recover overpayments resulting
from deficient social programs decades ago.  The errors cost the
government more than US$35 million annually, said Philip
Tinkler, the lawyer who filed the suit.  Recipients of the money
launched a class action in September 2004.

Minimum payments have been set at about $700 for widows, $1,100
for people on social assistance and $2,300 for AISH recipients.  
However, Mr. Tinkler said the average overpayment was about
$5,500.  Depending on when it occurred, the settlement could be
as much as seven times the given amounts, according to the
report.

Contact the claims administrator at:
http://www.incomesupportsettlement.caor Phone: 1-877-507-7706  
(toll-free).


CANADA: Class Suit Planned for Hospital-Exposure Related Deaths
---------------------------------------------------------------
Quebec lawyer Jean Pierre Mendard is planning to file a class
action on behalf of families whose relatives die after catching
deadly infections while receiving care in hospitals, according
to CTV.ca News. Mr. Mendard is hoping the action will spur
changes in the cleanliness standard of Canadian hospitals.

CTV says a 2003 study published in the American Journal of
Infection Control said more than 8,000 Canadians die each year
from hospital-acquired infections.  About 200,000 Canadians in
total contract an infection, including antibiotic-resistant
"super bugs" like C. difficile, Staphylococcus aureus and
Enterococcus.  Experts say many of these deaths can be avoided.
  

CANON INC.: Rivals Could Face Parallel Suits Over Faulty Cameras
----------------------------------------------------------------
Several well-known manufacturers of digital cameras are refusing
to issue a broad recall of their defective products due to fears
of bad publicity.  A report from Consumer Affairs.com, citing
industry sources, says they were reluctant to do so because it
would have a negative impact on sales during the busy holiday
season.  The companies are Sony, Canon, Konica Minolta, Ricoh,
Fuji, Nikon and Olympus.  They are reported to have sold cameras
with chips supplied by Sony that is prone to fail in hot and
humid environments.

The defect in the chips affects cameras, camcorders and hand-
held computers sold by the companies during the past three
years.  Sony says it stopped manufacturing the chip in March
2004, but agreed it may still be in use by cameras that remained
unsold.  Canon is already facing a class action in New York
under Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum.  Similar actions could
follow, according to attorneys familiar with the situation.  
Cannon is represented in the case by Chicago lawyer Richard
Doherty.

The camera models with the defective chip includes:

Fujifilm:
FinePix A303
FinePix F410 Zoom
FinePix F700
FinePix S2 Pro

Konica Minolta (affected models were released prior to the
merger with Konica, and hence carry only the Minolta brand
name):

DiMAGE A1
DiMAGE 7i
DiMAGE 7Hi
DiMAGE Xi
DiMAGE Xt
DiMAGE X20
DiMAGE S414
DiMAGE F300

Nikon:
Coolpix SQ
Coolpix 3100
Coolpix 5700

Ricoh:
Caplio RR30
Caplio 300G
Caplio G3
Caplio G3 model M
Caplio G3 model S
Caplio ProG3
Caplio G4
Caplio G4 wide
Caplio 400G wide
Caplio RX

Olympus:
Camedia C-5050 Zoom
Camedia C-730 Ultra Zoom


COTTON YARN: Antitrust Settlement Hearing Set February 14, 2006
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Middle District of
North Carolina, Greensboro Division, will hold a fairness
hearing for the proposed $7,800,000 settlement in the matter,
"In re: Cotton Yarn Antitrust Litigation, Civil Action No.
1:04MD1622." The case was brought on behalf of all persons
(excluding governmental agencies, Defendants, their parents,
predecessors, subsidiaries and affiliates) who purchased Cotton
Yarn in the U.S., or from facilities located in the U.S.,
directly from any of the Defendants or any of their
predecessors, subsidiaries and/or affiliates, at any time during
the period from October 1, 2000 to June 15, 2001.

The hearing will be held on February 14, 2006, at 10:00 a.m., at
the Hiram H. Ward Federal Building, 251 North Main St., Winston-
Salem, NC 27101.

Defendants named in the action are:

     (1) Parkdale America, LLC;

     (2) Parkdale Mills, Inc.;

     (3) Frontier Spinning Mills, LLC;

     (4) Frontier Spinning Mills, Inc.;

     (5) Frontier, Inc.;

     (6) Avondale Mills, Inc.; and

     (7) Avondale Inc.

For more details, contact STEVEN A. ASHER of WEINSTEIN
KITCHENOFF & ASHER, LLC, 1845 WALNUT ST., STE. 1100,
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103, Phone: 215-545-7200, Fax: 215-545-6535;
ANTHONY J. BOLOGNESE of BOLOGNESE & ASSOCIATES, LLC, 1617 JFK
BLVD., STE. 650, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103, Phone: 215-814-6750;
STEVEN A. KANNER of MUCH SHELIST FREED DENENBERG AMENT &
RUBENSTEIN, PC, 191 N. WACKER DR., STE. 1800, CHICAGO, IL 60606-
1615, Phone: 312-521-2000; and JOSEPH C. KOHN of KOHN SWIFT &
GRAF, P.C., ONE S. BROAD ST., STE. 2100, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107,
Phone: 215-238-1700.


DUPONT: Failed to Warn of C8 Groundwater Contamination
------------------------------------------------------
North Carolinians and researchers from the Environmental Working
Group are expressing concern that residents near DuPont's
Fayetteville plant may be at the start of a pollution saga
similar to one at DuPont's West Virginia plant.  DuPont's
pollution in West Virginia has led to two federal investigations
and a federal lawsuit resulting in the largest penalty of its
kind, a class action lawsuit and entire towns being supplied
with bottled water for drinking, cooking and bathing.

A conference call to ask state and federal authorities to
carefully monitor DuPont's pollution at Fayetteville now, to
prevent the widespread contamination suffered by neighbors of
DuPont's Parkersburg, WV plant was held Jan. 17, 2006. A
statement announcing the conference said that documents to be
discussed on the call show that DuPont failed to tell the public
or state officials that it was polluting groundwater with its
indestructible chemical C8.  This chemical, which can be found
in the blood of nearly every American, is made at DuPont's
Fayetteville plant.


FAIR ISAAC: Faces Consumer Suit in CA, Alleges CROA Violations
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Isaac Corporation continues to face a putative consumer
class action lawsuit that is pending in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California.

In the suit styled, "Slack v. Fair Isaac Corporation et al.,
Case No. 3:05-cv-00257-MHP," plaintiffs claim that the Company
sold credit score-related products in violation of the Credit
Repair Organizations Act (CROA).  Plaintiffs are seeking
unspecified damages, attorneys' fees and costs.  The plaintiffs
are also seeking class action certification.  

The suit is styled, "Slack v. Fair Isaac Corporation et al.,
Case No. 3:05-cv-00257-MHP," filed in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California, under Judge
Marilyn H. Patel.  Representing the Plaintiff/s are, Sabrina S.
Kim, Michael C. Spencer and Jeff S. Westerman of Milberg Weiss
Bershad & Schulman, LLP, Phone: 213-617-1200, 212-594-5300 and
213-617-1200, Fax: 213-617-1975, 212-868-1229 and 213-617-1975,
E-mail: skim@milbergweiss.com and jwesterman@milbergweiss.com.  
Representing the Defendants are, Frederick Brown and Rebecca
Justice Lazarus of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, LLP, One Montgomery
St., Montgomery Tower, Suite 3100, San Francisco, CA 94104,
Phone: 415-393-8204 and 415-393-8296, E-mail:
fbrown@gibsondunn.com and rjustice@gibsondunn.com.


FAIR ISAAC: Faces Consumer Suit in GA, Alleges CROA Violations
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Isaac Corporation faces a putative consumer class action
lawsuits, one of which is pending in the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of Georgia.

The case is styled, "Robbie Hillis v. Equifax Consumer Services,
Inc. and Fair Isaac, Inc., Case No. 1:04-cv-03400-BBM." It was
filed on November 19, 2004, and asserts that defendants have
jointly sold the Company's Score Power credit score product in
violation of certain procedural requirements under the Credit
Repair Organizations Act (CROA).  Plaintiff contends that
Equifax Consumer Services and the Company are "credit repair
organizations" under CROA and that the transaction by which he
purchased Score Power was in violation of CROA and fraudulent.
Plaintiff seeks certification of a class on behalf of all
individuals who purchased such services from defendants within
the five-year period prior to the filing of the complaint.  
Plaintiff seeks unspecified damages, attorneys' fees and costs.

On May 23, 2005, the District Court denied defendants' partial
motions to dismiss the case and the defendants have answered,
denying all liability or wrongdoing.  

The suit is styled "Hillis v. Equifax Consumer Services, Inc. et
al., case no. 1:04-cv-03400-BBM," filed in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, under Judge
Beverly B. Martin.  Representing the Plaintiff/s are:

     (1) Michael Lee McGlamry, Charles Neal Pope, Wade H.
         Tomlinson, Pope McGlamry Kilpatrick Morrison & Norwood,
         925 The Pinnacle, P.O. Box 191625, 3455 Peachtree Road,
         N.E., Atlanta, GA 31119-1625, Phone: 404-523-7706, E-
         mail: efile@pmkm.com;  

     (2) Arthur R. Miller, Arthur R. Miller, P.C., Areeda Hall
         225, Cambridge, MA 02138, Phone: 617-495-1278; and

     (3) Michael C. Spencer or Melvyn I. Weiss, Milberg Weiss
         Bershad & Schulman, One Pennsylvania Plaza, 48th Floor,
         New York, NY 10119-0165, Phone: 212-594-5300.

Representing the Defendant/s are, Craig Edward Bertschi, Audra
Ann Dial, Cindy Dawn Hanson, Kilpatrick Stockton, 1100 Peachtree
Street, Suite 2800, Atlanta, GA 30309-4530, Phone: 404-815-6500,
E-mail: cbertschi@kilpatrickstockton.com,
adial@kilpatrickstockton.com, chanson@kilpatrickstockton.com;
and Kenneth M. Kliebard and Todd L. McLawhorn, Howrey, LLP,
Suite 3400, 321 North Clark Street, Chicago, IL 60610, Phone:
312-595-2255, Fax: 312-264-0362, E-mail: kliebardk@howrey.com or
mclawhornt@howrey.com.  


FITOTERAPICOS: FDA Warns Consumers Against Brazilian Diet Pills
---------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is warning consumers
not to use two unapproved drug products that are being marketed
as dietary supplements for weight loss.  Emagrece Sim Dietary
Supplement, also known as the Brazilian Diet Pill and Herbathin
Dietary Supplement may contain several active ingredients,
including controlled substances, found in prescription drugs
that could lead to serious side effects or injury.

Both products are made in Brazil by Fitoterapicos (also spelled
Fytoterapicos) and Phytotherm Sim.  FDA has increased its
efforts to prevent the importation of these products by issuing
an alert to its field personnel.  Import Alerts are used to
advise FDA field personnel about certain imported products that
should not enter the United States.

Consumers are advised not to use the Emagrece Sim and Herbathin
products and to return them to the suppliers.  There may be
other manufacturers or suppliers of imported Emagrece Sim and
Herbathin, and consumers should exercise caution in using any of
these imported products.

"There are dangers to consumers who purchase diet pills that
contain drugs of unknown origin and quality," said Dr. Steven
Galson, Director of FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research.  "These products are not approved by FDA and if people
experience side effects, it is difficult to trace problems and
for physicians to treat them."

Emagrece Sim and Herbathin are labeled as "dietary supplements",
but they contain prescription drugs, including several
controlled substances that, if not used properly as prescribed
by a physician, can be harmful.  They contain chlordiazepoxide
HCl (the active ingredient in Librium), and fluoxetine HCl (the
active ingredient in Prozac).  Chlordiazepoxide HCl (Librium) is
used to relieve anxiety and to control the symptoms of alcohol
withdrawal. It may be habit forming, and can cause drowsiness
and dizziness and impair the ability to drive.  Fluoxetine HCl
(Prozac) is an anti-depressant medication used to treat
obsessive-compulsive disorder, panic disorder, and bulimia.  It
has been linked to several serious drug interactions and certain
serious adverse events, including suicidal thinking and
behaviors in pediatric patients, anxiety and insomnia, and
abnormal bleeding.  These drugs should only be taken by patients
who are under the supervision of a health care provider.

Emagrece Sim and Herbathin were also found to contain
Fenproporex, a stimulant that is not approved for marketing in
the United States.  Fenproporex is converted in the body to
amphetamine, and as a result has been noted to show up in
urinalysis as a positive test for amphetamines.

Emagrece Sim and Herbathin are sold in packages containing one
bottle of Formula 1 capsules and one bottle of Formula 2
capsules.  Both products are available in five levels (Levels 1-
5), and the product labels instruct consumers to begin with
Level 1 and continue to the higher levels until they lose the
desired amount of weight.  Emagrece Sim also has a "Weight
Stabilizer" package containing Formula 1 and Formula 2 capsules,
to be used after the desired weight loss has been achieved.

The products are offered for sale on the Internet.  They are
also imported and distributed by Emagrece Sim Laboratories,
Inc., Miami, FL., and Herbathin, Inc. (dba EMIEX Corp), Miami,
Florida. FDA is aware of commercial imports of these products
and individuals importing them for personal use.

FDA urges consumers, health care providers, and caregivers to
cease using and dispose of these products and report any adverse
events related to these products to MedWatch, the FDA's
voluntary reporting program at 1-800-FDA-1088; by FAX at
1-800-FDA-0178; by mail to MedWatch, Food and Drug
Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD, 20857-9787; or
at http://www.fda.gov/medwatch/report.htm.


FLAT GLASS: Antitrust Settlement Hearing set February 3, 2006
-------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Western District of
Pennsylvania will hold a fairness hearing for the proposed
$61,700,000 settlement in the matter, "In re: Flat Glass
Antitrust Litigation, Master Docket Misc. No. 97-550." The case
was brought on behalf of all persons who purchased Flat Glass
products in the U.S. from one or more of the defendants listed
herein during the period from August 1, 1991 through December
31, 1995.

The hearing will be held before thee Honorable Donetta W.
Ambrose on February 3, 2006 at 1:00 p.m., in the United States
Courthouse, 7th Ave. and Grant St., Pittsburgh, PA 15219.

Defendants named in the action are:

     (1) PPG Industries, Inc.;

     (2) Libbey-Owens-Ford-Co.;

     (3) Pilkington, plc;

     (4) AFG Industries, Inc.;

     (5) Guardian Industries Corp.; and

     (6) Ford Motor Company.
   
For more details, contact Michael D. Hausfeld of Cohen,
Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, 1100 New York Avenue, N.W. West
Tower, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20005-3934, Phone:
(202) 408-4600; Robert N. Kaplan of Kaplan, Kilsheimer & Fox,
805 Third Ave., 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10022, Phone:
(212) 687-1980, E-mail: rnkaplan@kaplanfox.com; and Eugene A.
Spector of Spector, Roseman & Kodroff, 1818 Market St., Suite
2500, Philadelphia, PA 19103, Phone: (215) 496-0300.


HARSCO CORPORATION: Jury Awards $30M in CA Carson Roof Collapse
---------------------------------------------------------------
A Los Angeles Superior Court jury (Compton Division) awarded on
Jan. 13 a grand total of $30 million to 12 plaintiffs in a
negligence lawsuit in which Harsco Corporation (NYSE: HSC) and
DYK, Inc. were both found liable for an October 2001 Carson, CA.
roof collapse construction accident.  In that accident, some
plaintiffs plunged six stories into a tank filled with rebar,
metal and wet concrete and while other plaintiffs were left
clinging to rebar, suspended 50 feet above the ground until they
were rescued.  The damages phase of the trial began on September
15, 2005 and the case went to the jury on November 18, 2005.  
The Hon. Rose Hom presided over both the liability phase and
damages phase of the trial. "Gonzalo Castillo v. Quality Shoring
and Scaffold, Inc., Case No. TC015917 (lead case)."

Plaintiffs Martin and Irma Garcia recovered $16.1 million and
were represented by Irvine, CA. attorney Orlando J. Castano, Jr.
and Browne Greene with the Santa Monica, CA. law firm of Greene
Broillet & Wheeler, LLP, who was associated in to co-try the
damages phase of the trial with Mr. Castano.  Independently, Mr.
Castano and Franklin Casco, Jr. represented Ignacio and Anelica
Tejada, who recovered $1.35 million, and Alex Morales, who
recovered $550,000.

"Our clients have waited six months through the liability and
damages phases of this trial to see that civil justice is
served," explained Orlando J. Castano, Jr. "It's been a long
road, but the jury's verdict has vindicated their patience.  The
trial may be over, but we must always remember that what lies
ahead for our clients is a lifetime of misery because of the
Defendants' negligence which money can never assuage.  We
sincerely thank the jury for its time and for putting the lion's
share of responsibility for the accident on Harsco Corporation
and DYK, Inc. where it rightfully belongs."

"We are grateful to the jury for its fair compensation," said
Browne Greene, "and for taking Harsco Corporation, DYK, Inc. and
the other defendants to task for failing to provide safe
equipment by allowing defective shoring to be used on the Carson
job site.  Yet, no amount of money can ever compensate Martin
Garcia and his family for a life shattered and ruined.  Harsco's
negligence was egregious and we can only hope that the greater
lesson learned from this tragedy is that construction companies
will make it a priority to put worker safety above company
profits."

On Oct. 4, 2001, Martin Garcia was employed as a laborer by
Kiewit Pacific and was among more than 40 people pouring
concrete on the roof form of Tank No. 19 on the job site at the
Joint Water Pollution Control Plant at 24102 South Figueroa in
Carson, CA.  He was standing on the plywood deck supported by
aluminum shoring almost 6 stories above the floor of the tank.  
At 8:30 AM that morning, after about 60-70% of the roof had been
poured, the shoring gave way and the roof collapsed, causing Mr.
Garcia and more than seven workers to fall 6 stories into the
bottom of Tank No. 19. Mr. Garcia sustained injuries to his head
and brain along with other severe and permanent injuries.

Plaintiffs filed suit on June 13, 2002, alleging negligence,
strict products liability and products liability negligence,
among other claims.  The trial was bifurcated, with the
liability phase of the trial starting on June 20, 2005 and going
to the jury on Aug. 12, 2005.  On Aug. 17, 2005, the jury
rendered its verdict and found that all of the Defendants were
negligent.  In particular, the jury determined that Harsco
provided the shoring material used on Tank No. 19, and further
found the shoring material to be damaged and inadequate, and
that there were defective and cracked welds on many of the
shoring frames.  The jury apportioned responsibility for
Defendants' liability as:

     (1) 75% to Harsco Corporation of Camp Hill, PA;

     (2) 15% to DYK, Inc. of El Cajon, CA;

     (3) 7% to Quality Shoring and Scaffold, Inc. (now owned by
         DYK, Inc.); and

     (4) 3% to Dave Gowers Engineering, LLC of Selma, OR.

Prior to the start of the trial's damages phase, the lawsuits
brought by Gonzalo Castillo (lead case) and Ruben Gutierrez were
both settled for confidential amounts by their attorney,
Geoffrey S. Wells with Greene Broillet & Wheeler, LLP.

For information, contact Irvine, CA. attorney Orlando J.
Castano, Jr., Phone: 949.852.3570; Browne Greene of the Santa
Monica, CA law firm of Greene Broillet & Wheeler, LLP, Phone:
310.576.1200.

Defendant Harsco Corporation (http://www.harsco.com;Phone:  
717.763.7064) is based in Camp Hill, PA, and was represented by
Dana Alden Fox with the Los Angeles office of Lynberg & Watkins,
Phone: 213.624.8700.  Via merger, Harsco acquired defendants SGB
Construction Services, Inc., SSGB, Inc., and Patent Construction
Systems.  Harsco was the provider of shoring material to the
Carson construction site.

Defendant DYK, Inc. (http://www.dyk.com,Phone: 619.440.8181) is  
based in El Cajon, CA. was represented by Jeffrey Lyddan with
the San Francisco, CA. law firm of Carroll, Burdick & McDonough
LLP, Phone: 415.989.5900.  Via a purchase on July 30, 2001, DYK,
Inc. bought defendant Quality Shoring and Scaffold, Inc. DYK,
Inc. was charged with erecting shoring for digester tanks the
Carson construction site.


INDEVUS PHARMACEUTICALS: Enters Into Agreement Regarding Redux
--------------------------------------------------------------
Indevus Pharmaceuticals Inc. entered into an Indemnity and
Release Agreement with Wyeth, formerly American Home Products
Corporation (AHP), pursuant to which Wyeth agreed to indemnify
the Company against certain classes of product liability cases
related to Redux.

The Company's indemnification covers plaintiffs who initially
opted out of Wyeth's national class action settlement of diet
drug claims and claimants alleging primary pulmonary
hypertension.  In addition, Wyeth agreed to fund all future
legal costs related to the Company's defense of Redux-related
product liability cases.  The agreement also provides for Wyeth
to fund certain additional insurance coverage to supplement the
Company's existing product liability insurance.

The Company believes this total insurance coverage is sufficient
to address its potential remaining Redux product liability
exposure. Up to the date of the AHP indemnity and release
agreement, the Company's defense costs were paid by, or subject
to reimbursement from the its product liability insurers.  To
date, there have been no Redux-related product liability
settlements or judgments paid by the Company or its insurers.

In exchange for the indemnification, defense costs, and
insurance coverage provided to the Company by Wyeth, Indevus
agreed to dismiss its suit against Wyeth filed in January 2000,
its appeal from the order approving Wyeth's national class
action settlement of diet drug claims and its cross-claims
against Wyeth related to Redux product liability legal actions.

On September 15, 1997, the Company announced a market withdrawal
of the prescription product, the weight loss medication Redux
(dexfenfluramine hydrochloride capsules) C-IV, which had been
launched by Wyeth, Indevus' licensee, in June 1996.  The
withdrawal of Redux was based on a preliminary analysis by the
FDA of potential abnormal echocardiogram findings associated
with certain patients taking Redux or the combination of
fenfluramine with phentermine. These observations, presented to
the Company in September 1997, indicated an incidence of
abnormal echocardiogram findings in approximately 30% of such
patients. Although these observations reflected a preliminary
analysis of pooled information and were difficult to evaluate
because of the absence of matched controls and pretreatment
baseline data for these patients, the Company believed it was
prudent, in light of this information, to withdraw Redux from
the market.

Since the withdrawal of Redux, the Company has been named along
with other pharmaceutical companies, as a defendant in several
thousand product liability legal actions, some of which purport
to be class actions, in federal and state courts relating to the
use of Redux and other weight loss drugs.  As of late, there
have been no judgments against the Company, nor has it paid any
amounts in settlement of any of these claims.


LOUISIANA: Resident Sues Federal, State Agencies for Negligence
---------------------------------------------------------------
Edward E. Cherrie, Jr., a resident of Orleans Parish, Louisiana,
is suing state and federal agencies over their alleged failure
to document and track medical evacuees taken into custody in the
wake of Hurricane Katrina.

The suit was filed in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Louisiana, New Orleans Division.  It names
as defendants:

     (1) Federal Emergency Agency Management Agency (FEMA);

     (2) Kenyon International Emergency Services, Inc.;   

     (3) State of Louisiana;

     (4) Dr. Louis Cataldie, State Emergency Medical Director,
         State of Louisiana; and

     (5) Federal Disaster Mortuary Operations Rescue Team or
         DEMORT.

According to court documents, Mr. Cherrie brought the suit on
behalf of all persons who were transported to the New Orleans
Convention Center or the Louisiana Superdome, who became ill and
were subsequently transported to the medical triage facility at
Louis Armstrong International Airport and died therein, or were
shipped to other facilities, or homes for the aged, who, as a
consequence of the individual and combined negligence of
defendants, and in spite of Herculean efforts, have not been
located by their surviving relatives in referral hospitals or,
institutions or the Morgue at St. Gabriel.

Court documents also revealed that Mr. Cherrie's mother was one
of those persons who could not be located after receiving
medical attention at the triage facility.  He is his mother's
only surviving heir and as such is entitled to assert a personal
injury claims for damages in her behalf if she is alive and
unable top represent herself and alternatively, to bring a
survival action and wrongful death action in his own behalf in
the event that his mother died while in the defendants' custody.

The suit alleges that the loved ones of the plaintiff, and those
of the class, were placed in the custody and control of
defendant and, while in their possession and control,
disappeared.  Accordingly, defendants are presumed to have been
negligent.  In the alternative, plaintiffs allege in court
documents that defendants were negligent:  

     (i) in failing to document the identity of patients taken
         on helicopters at the Louisiana Superdome of the New
         Orleans Convention Center;

    (ii) in failing to place standard patient bracelets on
         patients with their name, birth date, and social
         security number, upon arrival at the triage facility of
         at Louis Armstrong International Airport;

   (iii) in failing to log by name, address, date of birth, and
         social security number incoming and outgoing patients
         at the Louis Armstrong International Airport triage
         facility;

    (iv) in failing and refusing to attempt to match DNA taken
         from the plaintiff and members of the class with
         patients transferred to other institutions and sent to         
         the Morgue in St. Gabriel.

Plaintiffs are seeking punitive damages and attorney fees as a
result of the defendants' "reckless, wanton egregious and
reprehensible conduct."  They are also seeking a trial by jury.

The suit is styled, "Cherrie v. United States of America et al.,
Case No. 2:05-cv-06313-CJB-KWR," filed in the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, under
Judge Carl Barbier with referral to Judge Karen Wells Roby.  
Representing the Plaintiff/s are, Karen Wiedemann, Karl
Wiedemann and Lawrence D. Wiedemann of Wiedemann & Wiedemann,
821 Baronne St., New Orleans, LA 70113, Phone: (504) 581-6180.


LOUSIANA: Legislators File Suit Over August 2005 Confrontation
--------------------------------------------------------------
Two state legislators initiated a federal lawsuit against the
city of Gretna and its police department over an August 31,
2005, confrontation during which officers turned back evacuees
from flooded New Orleans after they crossed over on a
Mississippi River bridge, The Associated Press reports.

In the suit, Sen. Cleo Fields, D-Baton Rouge, and Rep. Cedric
Richmond, D-New Orleans, told The Associated Press that officers
used "unreasonable, unnecessary and excessive force while
refusing plaintiffs to travel through" the city, thereby
violating their rights. The suit was filed in the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, New
Orleans Division.

Gretna Mayor Ronnie Harris and Police Chief Arthur Lawson
defended the action as a protective measure during a desperate
crisis.  Mayor Harris even pointed out that the city "stands by
its actions, and we will take the appropriate legal action
necessary for its defense."

Chief Lawson earlier stated that the city was overwhelmed with
its own problems related to Hurricane Katrina at the time, such
as flooded neighborhoods, a barge that damaged the Mississippi
River levee and the daily task of feeding 800 city employees and
other emergency personnel.  The evacuees, according to him,
"actually would have been better off where they were, because we
didn't have anything."

In November 2005, an investigator for the state attorney general
told a state Senate committee that Gretna police fired three
shots. It is unclear where the blockade actually took place.
Some evacuees though told The Associated Press that officers
confronted them in New Orleans.

The plaintiffs in the suit, Tracy and Dorothy Dickerson, are
former New Orleans residents who recently relocated to Houston,
Texas.  The Dickersons, according to Rep. Richmond, crossed the
Crescent City Connection with their elderly neighbor, who was
using a walker, and her husband. Gretna police turned them
around at an exit in Algiers, which is part of Orleans Parish,
Rep. Richmond said.

Rep. Richmond told The Associated Press, "This was an ongoing
event, not just one particular time.  It is absolutely un-
American to deny people who are in dire straits access to safe
ground."

The suit is styled, "Dickerson et al. v. Gretna City et al.,
Case No. 2:05-cv-06667-MVL-ALC," filed in the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, under
Judge Mary Ann Vial Lemmon with referral to Judge Alma L.
Chasez.  Representing the Plaintiffs are, Cleo Fields of The
Fields Law Firm, 2147 Government St., Baton Rouge, LA 70806,
Phone: 225-343-5377, E-mail: cdecuir@bellsouth.net; and Cedric
L. Richmond of Richmond & Associates, 5437 Crowder Blvd., New
Orleans, LA 70127, Phone: 504-248-9942.


LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES: Faces Gender Discrimination Suit in C.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Lucent Technologies, Inc. continues to face a class action
lawsuit filed in the United States District Court in the Central
District of California, styled "EEOC v. Lucent Technologies,
Inc."

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed the
suit, alleging gender discrimination in connection with the
provision of service credit to a class of present and former
Lucent employees who were out of work because of maternity prior
to 1980 and seeks the restoration of lost service credit prior
to April 29, 1979, together with retroactive pension payment
adjustments, corrections of service records, back pay and
recovery of other damages and attorneys fees and costs.

The suit is styled "Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v.
Lucent Technologies, Case No. 2:04-cv-08168-RSWL-CT," filed in
the United States District Court for the Central District of
California, under Judge Ronald S.W. Lew with referral to Judge
Carolyn Turchin.  Representing the EEOC are, Elizabeth Esparza-
Cervantes, Marcia L. Mitchell, Jonathan T. Peck and William R.
Tamayo, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, San Francisco
District Office, 350 The Embarcadero, Suite 500, San Francisco,
CA 94105, Phone: 415-625-5658.  Representing the Company are
Sarah N. Chomiak, William J. Dritsas, Allegra R. Rich of
Seyfarth Shaw, 55 E Monroe St, Ste 4200, Chicago, IL 60603-5803,
Phone: 312-269-8924. Representing the Defendant/s are, Sarah N.
Chomiak, William J. Dritsas and Allegra R. Rich of Seyfarth
Shaw, 55 East Monroe St., Suite 4200, Chicago, IL 60603, Phone:
312-269-8259, 415-397-2823 and 312-269-8924.


MERCK & CO.: Jury Trial Scheduled in "VIOXX Death" Case
-------------------------------------------------------
Merck & Co., Inc. will conduct a vigorous defense in the product
liability lawsuit, Garza v. Heart Clinic, Evans, Posada and
Merck & Co., Inc., which is scheduled to go to trial before a
jury on Jan. 24, 2006, in the 229th Judicial District Court of
Starr County, Texas.  The company believes the evidence in this
case will show that VIOXX did not cause the unfortunate heart
attack of Leonel Garza, Sr.

Mr. Garza, 71, died of a heart attack on April 21, 2001,
following 23 years of cardiovascular disease and a prior heart
attack. Approximately one month before his death, Mr. Garza was
given a one-week supply of VIOXX 25 mg samples for arm pain.

"There is no reliable scientific evidence that VIOXX caused Mr.
Garza's heart attack," said Ted Mayer of Hughes Hubbard & Reed,
outside counsel for Merck. "At the time of Mr. Garza's heart
attack, he exhibited numerous major risk factors for coronary
artery disease. His autopsy report lists acute myocardial
infarction as the cause of his death and notes evidence of
severe atherosclerotic disease in all of Mr. Garza's coronary
arteries. We are confident that any fair jury will find that
VIOXX had nothing to do with the unfortunate passing of Mr.
Garza since there is no reliable scientific evidence that short-
term use of VIOXX increases cardiovascular risk."

Texas State District Court Judge Alex W. Gabert will preside
over the case.

A separate VIOXX product liability case, Plunkett v. Merck, is
scheduled to be retried before a jury in New Orleans before
Federal District Court Judge Eldon Fallon on Feb. 6, 2006.
Jurors in the original trial, held in Houston in December, were
unable to reach a verdict, resulting in a mistrial.

"We intend to defend these cases individually over many years,"
said Kenneth C. Frazier, senior vice president and general
counsel of Merck. "Merck acted responsibly - from researching
VIOXX prior to approval in clinical trials involving almost
10,000 patients - to monitoring the medicine while it was on the
market - to voluntarily withdrawing the medicine when it did."

The company voluntarily withdrew VIOXX in September 2004 in
response to a Merck-sponsored study, called APPROVe. In that
study, there was an increased relative risk of thrombotic events
in patients taking VIOXX continuously for 18 months compared to
patients taking a sugar pill. That increased relative risk did
not appear to be statistically significant until 30 months or
more of continuous use, and there was no detectable difference
in risk for patients taking VIOXX for a short duration.

Merck & Co., Inc. -- http://www.merck.com-- is a global  
research-driven pharmaceutical company dedicated to putting
patients first. Established in 1891, Merck currently discovers,
develops, manufactures and markets vaccines and medicines to
address unmet medical needs. The Company devotes extensive
efforts to increase access to medicines through far-reaching
programs that not only donate Merck medicines, but also help
deliver them to the people who need them. Merck also publishes
unbiased health information as a not-for-profit service.  Media
contact: Kent Jarrell, Phone: 202-230-1833; Casey Stavropoulos,
Phone: 908-423-5125; Investor Relations: Graeme Bell, Phone:
908-423-5185.


MICHIGAN: Cemeteries Facing Suit Over Alleged Illegal Practices
---------------------------------------------------------------
Monument retailers filed a suit in the U.S. District Court in
Detroit against the operator of the state's more than 2,000
cemeteries for anti-competitive and predatory practices,
according to Crains Detroit.  Judge George Caram Steeh is
handling the case, but a hearing was not yet scheduled, the
report said.

Defendants include Birmingham-based Elmwood Cemetery
Association, Troy-based White Chapel Association, and the
Michigan Cemetery Association.  The plaintiffs include Detroit-
based Simpson Granite, Ann Arbor-based Arnet's Inc., and Durand-
based Michigan division of the Monument Builders of North
America.  According to the report, they alleged the cemeteries
are illegally tying sales of monuments with other services,
conspiring to restrain competition and monopolize trade, and
violating the Michigan Prepaid Funeral and Cemetery Sales Act.  
The monument retailers filed eight claims against the
cemeteries, seeking unspecified amount of treble damages and a
court order to prevent the cemeteries from conducting the
practices and even selling monuments, at least until the trial.

Howard Iwrey, attorney with Dykema P.L.L.C., represents Elmwood
Cemetery Association.  David R. Krall is corporate counsel for
based White Chapel Association.  Barbara Kramer is attorney for
Kramer & Kramer L.L.P.  Peter Jensen, from Miller, Canfield,
Paddock and Stone plc is attorney for the Michigan Cemetery
Association.

The suit is styled, "Michigan Division - Monument Builders of
North America et al v. Michigan Cemetery Association et al.,
Case No. 2:05-cv-74721-GCS-PJK," filed in the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, under Judge
George Caram Steeh with referral to Judge Paul J. Komives.  
Representing the Plaintiff/s are, Barbara H. Kramer of Kramer
and Kramer (Ann Arbor), 24 Frank Lloyd Wright Road, Lobby D.
Ann Arbor, MI 48104, US, Phone: 734-930-5452, Fax: 734-665-8788
and David A. Nacht of Nacht Assoc. (Ann Arbor), 101 N. Main St.,
Suite 555, Ann Arbor, MI 48104, Phone: 734-663-7550, E-mail:
dnacht@nachtlaw.com.  Representing the Defendant/s are, Howard
B. Iwrey of Dykema Gossett (Detroit), 400 Renaissance Center,
Detroit, MI 48243-1668, Phone: 313-568-6800, Fax: 313-568-6525,
E-mail: hiwrey@dykema.com; and Anthony J. Rusciano of Plunkett &
Cooney (Bloomfield Hills), 38505 Woodward Ave., Suite 2000,
Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304-5097, 248-901-4000, E-mail:
arusciano@plunkettcooney.com.


MOTHERS WORK: Working To Resolve CT Employee Overtime Wage Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mothers Work, Inc. is working to resolve the class action filed
in the United States District Court for the District of
Connecticut against it, alleging that under applicable federal
and state law, certain former and current employees should have
received overtime compensation.  The plaintiffs in this case are
seeking unspecified actual damages, penalties and attorneys'
fees.

The suit is styled "Gillmore v. Mothers Work Inc. et al., case
no. 3:03-cv-01900-JCH," filed in the United States District
Court for the District of Connecticut, under Judge Janet C.
Hall.  Representing the Plaintiff/s is Anthony J. Pantuso, III
of Hayber & Pantuso, 221 Main St., Ste. 400 Hartford, CT 06106,
Phone: 860-522-8888, Fax: 860-240-7945, E-mail:
apantuso@hayberandpantuso.com.  Representing the Defendant/s
are, Howard K. Levine and Ann H. Rubin of Carmody & Torrance,
195 Church St., P.O. Box 1950, 18th Floor, New Haven, CT 06509-
1950, Phone: 203-784-3102, Fax: 203-784-3199, E-mail:
hlevine@carmodylaw.com or arubin@carmodylaw.com.


NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS: Settlement Hearing set February 17, 2006
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas will hold a fairness
hearing for the proposed settlement in a class action lawsuit
brought against Nextel Communications, Inc., where in Plaintiffs
claim that the Company improperly removed Extra Bonus Minutes
from customers' accounts in or about the summer and fall of
2003. The case was brought on behalf of all persons, who were
Nextel Customers and had an Extra bonus Minutes removed from
their account as part of a removal program.

The hearing will be held at the Philadelphia Court of Common
Pleas, City Hall, Philadelphia, PA 19107, on February 17, 2006
in Courtroom 246 at 9:30 a.m.

Any objections to the settlement must be filed by January 23,
2006.

For more details, contact Nextel Communications, Inc.
Settlement, P.O. Box 1327, Blue, Bell, PA 19422, Phone: 10877-
637-7223; and Peter R. Kahana of Berger & Montague, Phone:
(215) 875-4629, E-mail: pkahana@bm.net.


RELIANCE GROUP: Securities Settlement Hearing set March 21, 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York will hold a fairness hearing for the proposed
$15,000,000 settlement in the matter, "In re: Reliance Group
Holdings, Inc. Securities Litigation, Master File No. 00-CV-4653
(TPG)." The case was brought on behalf of all persons who
purchased the Company's common stock, Reliance 9% Senior Notes
due November 15, 2000 and/or Reliance 9.75% Senior Subordinated
Debentures due November 15, 2003, during the period from
February 8, 1999 through and including December 6, 2000.

The hearing will be held before the Honorable Thomas P. Griesa
in the United States Courthouse for the Southern District of New
York, 500 Pearl St., New York, NY 10007, at 4:30 p.m., on March
21, 2006.

Deadline for submitting a proof of claim is on March 31, 2006.
Any objections to the settlement must be filed by February 13,
2006.

For more details, contact Reliance Group Holdings, Inc.
Securities Litigation Settlement, c/o Analytics Inc., Claims
Administrator, P.O. Box 2007, Chanhassen, MN 55317-2007, Phone:
866-314-5811, Website: http://www.realiancegrouplitigation.com;
Robert A. Wallner, Esq. of Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman,
LLP, One Pennsylvania Plaza, New York NY 10119-0165, Phone:
(212) 594-5300; and Sherrie R. Savett, Esq. of Berger Montague,
P.C., 1622 Locus St., Philadelphia, PA 19103, Phone:
(205) 875-3000.        


RESOURCE AMERICA: Discovery Continues in NY Property Owners Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Discovery continues in the class action filed against Resource
America, Inc. in the New York Supreme Court, Chautauqua County,
by individuals, putatively on their own behalf and on behalf of
similarly situated individuals, who leased property to the
Company.

The complaint alleges that the Company is not paying landowners
the proper amount of royalty revenues derived from the natural
gas produced from the wells on leased property.  The complaint
seeks damages in an unspecified amount for the alleged
difference between the amount of royalties actually paid and the
amount of royalties that allegedly should have been paid.  
Plaintiffs were certified as a class in December 2003, but an
appeal of that certification is pending.


ROYAL AHOLD: Notification Program Begins for $1.1B Settlement
-------------------------------------------------------------
A multi-national notification program began on Jan. 17, as
ordered by the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, to alert investors, brokers, financial institutions
and other nominees who bought or received as a dividend Royal
Ahold N.V. common stock and/or American Depository Receipts
(ADRs) from July 30, 1999 through February 23, 2003 about a $1.1
billion settlement of a class action lawsuit against Royal Ahold
and numerous co-defendants.

On February 24, 2003, Royal Ahold announced that it had inflated
earnings by at least $500 million based on conduct at Ahold's
wholly-owned U.S. Foodservice, Inc. subsidiary.  On February 24,
2003, Ahold also informed investors that Ahold would restate
previously announced revenues that it improperly consolidated
from certain joint ventures.  Following Ahold's February 24,
2003 announcement, the value of Ahold common stock and ADRs
declined in value by more than 60%.

According to the class action lawsuit, Ahold eventually
announced restatements exceeding $24 billion in revenues and
$1.1 billion in income. The lawsuit alleged that the defendants'
conduct presented a misleading financial picture of Ahold to
investors, and artificially inflated the price of Ahold's common
stock and ADRs during the period from July 30, 1999 through
February 23, 2003.

The Court defined "Class Members" in the Settlement to include
all people and entities who bought or received as a dividend
Royal Ahold N.V. common stock and/or ADRs from July 30, 1999
through February 23, 2003, regardless of where such people live
or purchased their shares of Royal Ahold.

Notices informing Class Members about their legal rights will be
mailed, and are scheduled to appear in publications in
approximately 24 countries and 14 languages, leading up to a
hearing on June 16, 2006, when the Court will consider whether
to approve the Settlement.

In November 2003, the Court appointed the law firm of Entwistle
& Cappucci LLP, of New York, NY to represent the Class. That
firm has been litigating this case known as In re Royal Ahold
Securities and "ERISA" Litigation, MDL 1539 since that time, and
they negotiated the Settlement.

Those affected by this Settlement can send in a claim form to
ask for a payment, or they can ask to be excluded from, or
object to, the Settlement and its terms. The deadline for
exclusions and objections is May 12, 2006.

Payment amounts will depend on the number of valid claim forms
that Class Members send in, how many shares of Ahold stock they
bought or received as a dividend, and when they bought and sold
them. The deadline to file claims is August 18, 2006.

The lawsuit stems from a 2003 accounting scandal that forced the
Company to restate earnings by $1.1 billion over three years.
Most of the problems were related to inflated earnings at the
company's U.S. Foodservice subsidiary in Columbia. It maintained
that Ahold NV misled investors by presenting an inaccurate
financial picture of the Company to stockholders and inflating
the price of its common stock. The Company though denies any
wrongdoing in the settlement.

It alleged claims against Ahold and Ahold USA, Inc., Ahold USA
Holdings, Inc., U.S. Foodservice, Inc., Cees Van der Hoeven,
Michiel Meurs, Henny de Ruiter, Cor Boonstra, James L. Miller,
Mark Kaiser, Michael Resnick, Tim Lee, Robert G. Tobin, William
J. Grize, Roland Fahlin, Jan G. Andreae, ABN AMRO Rothschild,
Goldman Sachs International, Merrill Lynch International, ING
Bank N.V., Rabo Securities N.V., and Kempen & Co. N.V. based
upon the matters that Ahold first announced on February 24,
2003, an earlier Class Action Reporter story (November 30, 2005)
reports.

The Colorado Public Employees' Retirement Association ("Colorado
PERA") and Generic Trading of Philadelphia, LLC are the Court-
appointed Lead Plaintiffs in the consolidated securities class
action styled, "In re Royal Ahold N.V. Securities & ERISA
Litigation," which is pending before Judge Blake in a federal
court in Maryland. The settlement was arrived at after extensive
negotiation between the parties under the supervision of retired
United States District Court Judge Nicholas Politan, an earlier
Class Action Reporter story (November 30, 2005) reports.

The settlement resolves all securities law claims against Ahold,
and all other defendants, other than Deloitte & Touche entities.
The settlement is global in nature and is designed to provide a
recovery to all persons who purchased Ahold common stock and/or
American Depository Receipts from July 30, 1999 through February
23, 2003, regardless of where such persons live or purchased
their Ahold shares, an earlier Class Action Reporter story
(November 30, 2005) reports.

Court documents revealed that the settlement fund would be
divided into two parts. Fund A, which represents about 90
percent of the fund or 655 million shares, is for shares bought
or sold during the time period. Fund B, which makes up about 10
percent of the fund or 276 million shares, is for shares bought
during the time period but sold at a loss, court documents
further revealed shares, an earlier Class Action Reporter story
(January 10, 2006) reports.

The Company previously said that the lawsuit is one of the last
major legal obstacles it faces from the accounting scandal and
the settlement allows it to get on with the business of
rebuilding. Since the scandal, the Company has shook up senior
management and divested many of its businesses. It recently
announced several restructuring changes at U.S. Foodservice,
including splitting the food distributor into two divisions to
cut administrative costs and eliminating 700 jobs throughout the
company. U.S. Foodservice is the second-largest food distributor
in the United States, an earlier Class Action Reporter story
(January 10, 2006) reports.

The suit is styled, "In re Royal Ahold N.V. Securities
Litigation, Case No. 1:03-md-01539-CCB," filed in the United
States District Court for the District of Maryland under Judge
Catherine C. Blake. Representing the Plaintiff/s are:

     (1) Andrew J. Entwistle of Entwistle and Cappucci, 299 Park
         Ave., New York, NY 1171, Phone: 12128947200, Fax:
         12128947251, E-mail: aentwistle@entwistle-law.com;

     (2) Daniel L. Berger of Bernstein Litowitz Berger and
         Grossmann, 1285 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY
         10019, Phone: 12125541406, Fax: 12125541444, E-mail:
         dan@blbglaw.com;

     (3) Conor R. Crowley of Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament
         and Rubenstein PC, 191 N. Wacker Dr., Ste. 1800,
         Chicago, IL 60606, Phone: 13125212725, Fax:
         13125212100, E-mail: ccrowley@muchshelist.com;  

     (4) Seth D. Goldberg of Seth D. Goldberg PC, 5335 Wisconsin
         Ave. NW Ste. 440, Washington, DC 20015, Phone:
         12022430594, Fax: 12026865517;

     (5) Robert Ira Harwood of Wechsler Harwood, LLP, 488
         Madison Ave., Suite 801, New York, NY 10022, Phone:
         12129357400, Fax: 12127533630, E-mail:
         rharwood@whesq.com;

     (6) Fred Taylor Isquith of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman
         and Herz, LLP, 270 Madison Ave., New York, NY 10016,
         Phone: 12125454600, Fax: 12125454653;

     (7) Andrew J. Levander of Dechert, LLP, 30 Rockefeller
         Plz., New York, NY 10112, Phone: 12126983500, Fax:
         12126983599, E-mail: andrew.levander@dechert.com;

     (8) Lester Levy of Wolf, Popper, Ross, Wolf & Jones,
         845 Third Ave., New York, NY 10022

     (9) Christopher Lometti and Frank R Schirripa of Schoengold
         and Sporn, PC, 19 Fulton St., Ste. 406, New York, NY
         10038, Phone: 12129640046, Fax: 12122678137;

    (10) Charles J. Piven of Charles J. Piven, PA, The World
         Trade Center, 401 E. Pratt St., Ste. 2525, Baltimore,
         MD 21202, Phone: 14103320030, Fax: 14106851300, E-mail:
         piven@pivenlaw.com;

    (11) Jonathan M. Plasse of Goodkind Labation Rudoff and
         Sucharow, LLP, 100 Park Ave., New York, NY 10017-5563,
         Phone: 12129070863, Fax: 12128837063

    (12) Ronald B. Rubin of Rubin and Rubin Chtd, One Church
         St., Ste. 301, Rockville, MD 20850, Phone: 13016109700,
         Fax: 13016109716, E-mail: rrubin@rrubin.com;

    (13) Samuel Howard Rudman of Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller
         Rudman and Robbins, LLP, 200 Broadhollow Rd., Ste. 406,
         Melville, NY 11747, Phone: 16313677100, Fax:
         16313671173, E-mail: srudman@lerachlaw.com;

    (14) Robert S. Schachter of Zwerling Schachter and Zwerling,
         LLP, 41 Madison Ave., New York, NY 10010, Phone:
         12122233900, Fax: 12123715969, E-mail:
         rschachter@zsz.com;

    (15) Steven G Schulman of Milberg Weiss Bershad and Schulman
         LLP, One Pennsylvania Plz., 49th Fl., New York, NY
         10119-0165, Phone: 12125945300, Fax: 12128681229, E-
         mail: sschulman@milbergweiss.com;

    (16) Steven Donald Silverman of Silverman and Thompson, 201
         N. Charles St., 26th Fl., Baltimore, MD 21201, Phone:
         14103852225, Fax: 14105472432, E-mail:
         ssilverman@mdattorney.com;

    (17) Ralph M. Stone of Shalov Stone and Bonner, LLP, 485
         Seventh Ave., New York, NY 10018, Phone: 12122394340;
         and

    (18) Steven J. Toll of Cohen Milstein Hausfeld and Toll,
         PLLC, 1100 New York Ave., NW West Tower, Ste. 500,
         Washington, DC 20005, Phone: 12024084600, Fax:
         12024084699, E-mail: stoll@cmht.com.

Representing the Defendant/s are:

     (i) John Arak Freedman of Arnold and Porter, 555 12th St.,
         NW Washington, DC 20004-1202, Phone: 12029425000, Fax:
         12029425999, E-mail: john_freedman@aporter.com;

    (ii) Gerard J Gaeng of Rosenberg Martin Funk and Greenberg,
         LLP, 25 S. Charles St., Ste. 2115, Baltimore, MD 21201-
         3305, Phone: 14107276600, Fax: 14107271115, E-mail:
         ggaeng@rosenbergmartin.com;

   (iii) Glenn M. Kurtz of White and Case, LLP, 1155 Avenue of
         the Americas, New York, NY 10036, Phone: 12128198200,
         Fax: 12123548113, E-mail: gkurtz@whitecase.com;

    (iv) Richard A. McGuirk and Carolyn G. Nussbaum of Nixon
         Peabody, LLP, Clinton Sq., P.O. Box 31051, Rochester,
         NY 14603, Phone: 15852631000, Fax: 15852631600, E-mail:
         rmcguirk@nixonpeabody.com and
         cnussbaum@nixonpeabody.com;

     (v) Charles P. Scheeler of DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary US,
         LLP, 6225 Smith Ave., Baltimore, MD 21209-3600, Phone:
         14105803000, Fax: 14105803001, E-mail:
         charles.scheeler@dlapiper.com; and

    (vi) Alexandre de Gramont of Crowell and Moring, LLP, 1001
         Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20004-2595, Phone:
         12026242500, Fax: 12026285116, E-mail:
         adegramont@crowell.com;

Notices, claim forms, the Plan of Allocation and the Settlement
Agreement are available at http://www.AholdSettlement.com.  
Those affected may also write to Ahold Claims Administrator, PO
Box 9000 #6378, Merrick, NY 11566-9000, USA.

Country         Toll Free Number

                    Australia       0011 800 1020 4060
                    Austria         00 800 1020 4060
                    Belgium         00 800 1020 4060
                    Canada          1 888 410 0027
                    Denmark         00 800 1020 4060
                    England         00 800 1020 4060
                    Finland         00 800 1020 4060
                    France          00 800 1020 4060 (France  
                                                      Telecom)
                                    40 800 1020 4060 (TELE 2)
                                    50 800 1020 4060 (Omnicom)
                                    70 800 1020 4060 (Le 7
                                                      Cegetel)
                                    90 800 1020 4060 (9 Telecom)
                    Germany         00 800 1020 4060
                    Hong Kong       00 800 1020 4060
                    Ireland         00 800 1020 4060
                    Italy           00 800 1020 4060
                    Japan           00 800 1020 4060
                    Liechtenstein   809 2288, then when prompted
                                     enter 800 467 8208
                    Luxembourg      00 800 1020 4060
                    Netherlands     00 800 1020 4060
                    Norway          00 800 1020 4060
                    Portugal        00 800 1020 4060
                    Scotland        00 800 1020 4060
                    Singapore       001 800 1020 4060 (Singtel  
                                                       IDD)
                                    002 800 1020 4060 (MobileONE  
                                                       IDD)
                                    008 800 1020 4060 (Starhub
                                                       IDD)
                                    013 800 1020 4060 (Singtel
                                                       Budget   
                                                       Call)
                                    018 800 1020 4060 (Starhub
                                                       I-Call)
                                    019 800 1020 4060 (Singtel
                                                       V019)
                    Spain           00 800 1020 4060
                    Sweden          00 800 1020 4060
                    Switzerland     00 800 1020 4060
                    United States   1 888 410 0027

From any other country, Class Members may place a toll call to
the Claims Administrator in the U.S. by calling +1-941-906-4864.

Press contact: Class Counsel, Andrew J. Entwistle, Entwistle &
Cappucci LLP, +1-212-894-7200.


SOUTH CAROLINA: Inmate Denied Health Care Wins Damages
------------------------------------------------------
A Clarendon County, South Carolina jury awarded $825,000 dollars
in actual damages to inmate Jason Bynum, ruling against the
South Carolina Department of Corrections. Mr. Bynum's negligence
claim alleged he failed to receive appropriate and timely
medical care while battling a life-threatening infection during
incarceration at the Turbeville Correctional Center, in
Turbeville, South Carolina.

This verdict follows a recent Sumter County, South Carolina case
in which $28.5 million was awarded to the family of Rev. Ronel
Huggins, who died in prison from diabetic shock and medical
neglect.

On January 9, 2002, while in the custody of the Turbeville
Correctional Center, Mr. Bynum was seen in the infirmary and
diagnosed with a very serious mouth infection.  Beginning as an
abscessed tooth, the untreated infection had progressed to
Ludwig's Angina, which without immediate medical care can lead
to death by suffocation due to a swelling of the throat.  
According to plaintiff's counsel, Edward Bell of the Bell Legal
Group, his painful and serious condition had been noted by
nurses, but ignored by prison management and doctors.

After a couple of weeks of suffering, Mr. Bynum complained of
breathing troubles and was admitted to the hospital on January
23.  The infection had continued to rage in his upper body,
nearly filling his lungs with pus.  According to Carter Elliott,
head of the Police and Jail Misconduct Division for the Bell
Legal Group, hospital doctors where appalled with the inhumane
treatment of Mr. Bynum. One expert witness, a professor at a
Maryland Medical School, identified this case as the worst
example of medical neglect he had seen in his entire career.

Following multiple surgeries and several weeks in the hospital
on a ventilator, Mr. Bynum still suffers from nerve damage, a
speech impediment and problems swallowing food and drinks as a
result of his mistreated infection.

Attorneys J. Edward Bell, III and C. Carter Elliott, Jr., of the
Bell Legal Group, Georgetown, South Carolina and Sam Floyd and
Ashley Boyd of Kingstree, South Carolina, represented Mr. Bynum.  
The Bell Legal Group is serving as counsel in two similar cases
regarding healthcare neglect and police misconduct, which are
currently being tried.

For more information about this verdict, contact J. Edward Bell,
III or Rachel Ridgeway of the Law Offices of J. Edward Bell at
843-546-2408 or visit http://www.belllegalgroup.com;or Cirque  
Communications Alison Van Horn, 843-697-0251


TEMPUR-PEDIC: Judge Instructs Shareholders to Consolidate Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Six shareholders of Lexington-based Tempur-Pedic International
lodged securities fraud suit against the company and its top
executives, according to Kentucky.com.  They are claiming
insider trading in at least $8.3 million worth of stocks last
summer, and manipulation of stock price.  The company, in court
filings, dismisses the suit as baseless.

The plaintiffs, which include five individuals and an
institutional investor, filed the suit last fall in the U.S.
District Court in Lexington.  They are acting in behalf of
purchasers of Tempur-Pedic shares from April 22 to Sept. 19.  In
a Dec. 28 order, Judge Joseph M. Hood instructed the plaintiff
to apply for the consolidation of the claims.  He also
designated San Diego-based Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman &
Robbins LLP as lead counsel for the stockholders.  It designated
the institutional investor, the Massachusetts Laborers' Annuity
Fund, as the lead plaintiff in the new case.

Plaintiff firms involved in this or similar cases are:
    
     (1) Brodsky & Smith, LLC, 11 Bala Ave., Suite 39, Bala
         Cynwyd, PA, 19004, Phone: 610.668.7987, Fax:
         610.660.0450, E-mail: esmith@Brodsky-Smith.com;

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

     (3) Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (LA), 1801 Ave. of the
         Stars, Suite 311, Los Angeles, CA, 90067, Phone: (310)
         201-915, Fax: (310) 201-916, E-mail:
         info@glancylaw.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, Fax:
         pivenlaw@erols.com;

     (5) 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;

     (6) 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;

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

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

     (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) Smith & Smith, LLP, 3070 Bristol Pike, Suite 112,
         Bensalem, PA, 19020, Phone: 215.638.4847, Fax:
         215.638.4867; and

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


TRANSACTION SYSTEMS: Discovery Continues in NE Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Discovery continues in the consolidated securities class action
filed against Transaction Systems Architects, Inc. and certain
individuals in the United States District Court for the District
of Nebraska.

In November 2002, two class action complaints were filed,
alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.
Pursuant to a Court order, the two complaints were consolidated
as "Desert Orchid Partners v. Transaction Systems Architects,
Inc., et al.," with Genesee County Employees' Retirement System
designated as the Lead Plaintiff.

The First Amended Consolidated suit, filed on June 30, 2003,
alleges that during the purported class period, the Company and
the named defendants misrepresented the Company's historical
financial condition, results of operations and its future
prospects, and failed to disclose facts that could have
indicated an impending decline in the Company's revenues.  The
Consolidated Complaint seeks unspecified damages, interest,
fees, costs and rescission.  The class period alleged in the
Consolidated Complaint is January 21, 1999 through November 18,
2002.  

The Company and the individual defendants filed a motion to
dismiss the Consolidated Complaint.  In response, on December
15, 2003, the Court dismissed, without prejudice, Gregory
Derkacht, the Company's President and Chief Executive Officer,
as a defendant, but denied the motion to dismiss with respect to
the remaining defendants, including the Company.  On February 6,
2004, the Court entered a mediation reference order requiring
the parties to mediate before a private mediator.  The parties
held a mediation session on March 18, 2004, which did not result
in a settlement of the matter.  On July 1, 2004, lead plaintiff
filed a motion for class certification wherein, for the first
time, lead plaintiff sought to add an additional class
representative, Roger M. Wally.  On August 20, 2004, defendants
filed their opposition to the motion. On March 22, 2005, the
Court issued an order certifying the class. Discovery is
continuing.

The suit is styled "Desert Orchid Partners v. Transaction
Systems Architects et al, case no. 8:02-cv-00553-JFB-TDT," filed
in the United States District Court in Nebraska, under Judge
Joseph F. Bataillon. Representing the plaintiffs are:

     (1) Gerald L. Friedrichsen of FITZGERALD, SCHORR LAW FIRM,
         13220 California Street, Suite 400, Omaha, NE 68154-
         5228, Phone: (402) 342-1000, Fax: (402) 342-1025,
         Email: gfriedrichsen@fitzlaw.com;

     (2) Louis Gottlieb of GOODKIND, LABATON LAW FIRM - NEW
         YORK, 100 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10017, Phone: (212)
         907-0872, Fax: (212) 883-7072, Email:
         lgottlieb@glrslaw.com;

     (3) Marc I. Gross of POMERANTZ, HAUDEK LAW FIRM, 100 Park
         Avenue, 26th Floor, New York, NY 10017, Phone: (212)
         661-1100, Fax: (212) 661-8665, Email:
         migross@pomlaw.com;  

     (4) David W. Rowe, KINSEY, RIDENOUR LAW FIRM, P.O. Box
         85778, Lincoln, NE 68501-5778, Phone: (402) 438-1313,
         Fax: (402) 438-1654, Email: drowe@krbklaw.com;

     (5) Emily C. Komlossy, GOODKIND, LABATON LAW FIRM -
         FLORIDA, 2455 East Sunrise Boulevard, Suite 813, Fort
         Lauderdale, FL 33304, Phone: (954) 630-1000, Fax: (954)
         565-1312 Email: ekomlossy@glrslaw.com; and

     (6) Jonathan M. Plasse of GOODKIND, LABATON LAW FIRM -
         FLORIDA, 2455 East Sunrise Boulevard, Suite 813, Fort
         Lauderdale, FL 33304, Phone: (212) 907-0863, Fax: (212)
         883-7063 Email: jplasse@glrslaw.com.

Representing the defendant/s are, Elizabeth L. Yingling and Joel
Held of BAKER, MCKENZIE LAW FIRM, 2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 2300
Dallas, TX 75201, Phone: (214) 978-3000, Fax: (214) 978-3099,
Email: elizabeth.l.yingling@bakernet.com or
joel.held@bakernet.com and Thomas J. Culhane of ERICKSON,
SEDERSTROM LAW FIRM, 10330 Regency Parkway Drive, Suite 100
Omaha, NE 68114, Phone: (402) 397-2200, Fax: (402) 390-7137,
Email: tculh@eslaw.com.


UNITED STATES: Three Groups Defend OHV Use on Public Lands
------------------------------------------------------------
The Motorcycle Industry Council, the Specialty Vehicle Institute
of America, and BlueRibbon Coalition took action recently to
protect traditional off-highway vehicle use currently allowed in
approximately three-dozen units of the National Park System. The
three groups, representing the off-highway vehicle industry and
enthusiasts, have filed to intervene in pending litigation aimed
at barring this use.

In November, plaintiffs led by the Bluewater Network filed suit
in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., alleging that
National Park Service actions to allow these uses are illegal.
The suit named the Department of the Interior and the National
Park Service as defendants. The MIC, SVIA, and BRC sought to
intervene on the side of the federal agencies and defend OHV use
on these public lands. Allegations by the plaintiffs disregard
the law, history, and the facts about regulated OHV use.

Currently established laws, rules, and management plans allow
carefully regulated off-highway vehicle use in a variety of
National Park System units, and allow park visitors from Florida
to Massachusetts to Alaska to enjoy these traditional uses. The
MIC, SVIA and BRC believe it is important that public lands are
managed in a way that both preserves and protects the land,
while taking into account the growing popularity of OHV
recreation and the opportunity for OHV enthusiasts to enjoy the
outdoors in an environmentally responsible manner. For these
reasons, it was necessary to come to the table in support of the
National Park Service and OHV enthusiasts nationwide.

There is a long history of recreational OHV use in many areas
under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service. In many
cases, OHV use in these areas predated the designation of the
area as a unit of the National Park Service and the designations
were made with the understanding that OHV use would continue to
be allowed.

In Massachusetts, OHV enthusiasts who frequent the beaches
primarily to go surf fishing helped lead the effort to designate
the Cape Cod National Seashore and were assured that these
traditional uses would continue. In Alaska, native villagers
were given the right by law to continue to use OHVs in many
areas for subsistence hunting and fishing. Overall, the National
Park Service carefully regulates these uses to assure that
natural resources including fish and wildlife are conserved.

The MIC, SVIA and BRC support the National Park Service, OHV
enthusiasts, and the continuation of carefully regulated use in
areas with a long-standing history of OHV recreation. The
Motorcycle Industry Council is a not-for-profit, national trade
association representing manufacturers and distributors of
motorcycles, scooters, motorcycle/ATV parts and accessories and
members of allied trades, located in Irvine, California.

Since 1983, the Specialty Vehicle Institute of America(R) has
promoted the safe and responsible use of All-Terrain Vehicles
through rider training programs, public awareness campaigns, and
state legislation. The SVIA also serves as a resource for ATV
research, statistics, and vehicle standards. The SVIA, based in
Irvine, California, is a not-for-profit trade association
sponsored by Arctic Cat, Bombardier, Bush Hog, Honda, John
Deere, Kawasaki, Patriot, Polaris, Suzuki, Tomberlin, and
Yamaha.


UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI: Opens Scholarship Program as Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------
Staring Jan. 16, the University of Missouri System is accepting
applications for a scholarship established as part of a class
action settlement it faced over educational fees.

A May 20, 2005 Class Action Reporter story says the university
set aside $10 million in a scholarship fund to settle a class
action lawsuit's claims that it illegally charged undergraduate
students in-state tuition.

According to The Associated Press, a St. Louis County judge
tentatively approved the settlement, thus resolving the lawsuit,
which was filed on behalf of three students who argued that
Missouri law did not allow the four-campus system to charge
tuition during their time in the university system.

Roughly 104,000 current and former students, their spouses and
children may qualify for scholarships, the university said. It
adds that eligible students include anyone that attended any of
the four campuses: Columbia, St. Louis, Kansas City or Rolla, as
in-state undergraduates between January 1995 and August 2001 and
were above the age of 16 and below the age of 22. The university
also said that after 25 years, any remaining money would be
placed in the university's general scholarship fund.  
Notification of affected students would not begin until after
the deal is formally approved by St. Louis County Circuit Judge
Kenneth Romines, who ruled against the university in December
2002, the university explains.

In a press statement, Elson Floyd, the university system's
president said, "The University of Missouri is pleased that this
matter is close to being resolved. We look forward to a final
determination of the court."

The university system also tentatively agreed to pay $1 million
to Bob Herman, the attorney behind the lawsuit, plus an
additional $17,000 for out-of-pocket expenses. Meanwhile, the
three plaintiffs also share $27,000, with the university
agreeing to pay other, unspecified administrative costs not to
exceed $100,000. Additional details, including the amount of
each scholarship, have not yet been finalized though.

The case stems from a 1998 class action lawsuit accusing the
university system of charging in-state students "fees" that
amounted to tuition, violating an 1872 state law mandating free
education for Missouri's homegrown at any of the four campuses.

The university though argued that its "fees" for in-state
undergraduates were legal. However, in December 2002, Judge
Romines ruled that the university violated state law between
1986 and 2001, when the 1872 statute was overturned by charging
what amounted to tuition for students ages 17 to 21. The 1872
law, the judge pointed out, stated that all Missourians at least
16 years old "shall be admitted to all the privileges and
advantages of the various classes of all the departments of the
University of the State of Missouri without payment of tuition."

For decades, Mr. Herman contended, undergraduates were charged a
nominal flat fee, no matter the number of credit hours taken. In
1986 it began charging an "educational fee" by the credit hour,
a change that Judge Romines ultimately ruled a violation of the
1872 statute. Over time, Mr. Herman further contended, the per-
credit fee increased from $20 to more than $150.




                  Meetings, Conferences & Seminars



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


January 18-19, 2006
REGULATORY COMPLIANCE FOR THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY
American Conference Institute
New York
Contact: 1-888-224-2480 or customercare@americanconference.com

January 19-20, 2006
LPL / LEGAL MALPRACTICE
American Conference Institute
Miami
Contact: 1-888-224-2480 or customercare@americanconference.com

January 21, 2005
TORTS PRACTICE: 21ST ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
CEB
Doubletree Hotel, Sacramento
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

January 21, 2005
TORTS PRACTICE: 21ST ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
CEB
San Diego County Bar Association,  San Diego
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

January 23-24, 2006
EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES LIABILITY INSURANCE
American Conference Institute
New York
Contact: 1-888-224-2480 or customercare@americanconference.com

January 23-24, 2005
4TH ANNUAL ADVANCED INSURANCE COVERAGE ISSUES
Mealey Publications
The Four Seasons Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

January 24, 2005
TORTS PRACTICE: 21ST ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
CEB
PLI California Center, San Francisco
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

January 25, 2006
CONCRETE LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton, Laguna Niguel, Dana Point, CA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

January 26-27, 2006
DEFENSE STRATEGIES IN PHARMACEUTICAL LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton, Laguna Niguel, Dana Point, CA
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

January 26-27, 2006
AUTO INSURANCE CLAIMS AND LITIGATION
American Conference Institute
Las Vegas
Contact: 1-888-224-2480 or customercare@americanconference.com

January 28, 2005
TORTS PRACTICE: 21ST ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
CEB
Santa Clara Convention Center, Santa Clara
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

January 28, 2005
TORTS PRACTICE: 21ST ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
CEB
Sheraton Anaheim, Anaheim
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

February 2-3, 2006
SOLVENT SCHEMES OF ARRANGEMENT CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Battery Park, New York
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

February 9, 2006
LEXISNEXIST PRESENTS WALL STREET FORUM: ASBESTOS Mealey
Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Battery Park New York
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

February 13-14, 2006
FUNDAMENTALS OF ASBESTOS CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Hotel Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

February 13-14, 2006
FUNDAMENTALS OF INSURANCE
Mealey Publications
The Westin Hotel Philadelphia
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

February 23-24, 2006
LITIGATING DISABILITY INSURANCE CLAIMS
American Conference Institute
Miami
Contact: 1-888-224-2480 or customercare@americanconference.com

February 27-28, 2006
REINSURANCE AGREEMENTS
American Conference Institute
New York
Contact: 1-888-224-2480 or customercare@americanconference.com

March 9-10, 2006
TOXIC TORT UPDATE: TEXAS
Mealey Publications
Las Colinas Four Seasons, Dallas, Texas
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

March 23-24, 2006
FUNDAMENTALS OF REINSURANCE LITIGATION & ARBITRATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
The Ritz-Carlton Boston
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

March 30, 2006
EMAIL DISCOVERY & RETENTION POLICIES CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Grand Hyatt, New York
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

March, 2006
BIRTH CONTROL PATCH LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealey Publications
Dallas, TX
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

April 5-8, 2006
13TH INSURANCE INSOLVENCY AND REINSURANCE ROUNDTABLE
Mealey Publications
The Fairmont Scottsdale Princess, Scottsdale, AZ
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800;
mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com  

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
------------------------

January 02-31, 2006
HBA PRESENTS: AUTOMOBILE LITIGATION: DISPUTES AMONG
CONSUMERS, DEALERS, FINANCE COMPANIES AND FLOORPLANNERS
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

January 02-31, 2006
CONSTRUCTION DISPUTES: TEXAS RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION DEFECT
LIABILITY
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

January 02-31, 2006
HBA PRESENTS: ETHICS IN PERSONAL INJURY
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

January 02-31, 2006
IN-HOUSE COUNSEL AND WRONGFUL DISCHARGE CLAIMS:
CONFLICT WITH CONFIDENTIALITY?
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

January 02-31, 2006
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

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

CIVIL LITIGATION PRACTICE: 22ND ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
(2004)
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

CIVIL LITIGATION PRACTICE: 23RD ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
(2005)
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

EFFECTIVE DIRECT AND CROSS EXAMINATION
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

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

SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND OTHER DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

TORTS PRACTICE: 19TH ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS (2004)
CEB Online
Contact: customer_service@ceb.ucop.edu or 1-800-232-3444

TORTS PRACTICE: 20TH ANNUAL RECENT DEVELOPMENTS (2005)
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    

SFBC INTERNATIONAL: Ann D. White Files FL Securities Fraud Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ann D. White Law Offices, P.C. initiated a class action in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of
Florida, on behalf of a class of persons who purchased the
securities of SFBC International Inc. (NASDAQ:SFCC) between
February 17, 2004 and December 15, 2005, against SFBC and
certain of its officers.

The action concerns alleged violations of the federal securities
laws.  It is alleged that during the Class Period, defendants
misrepresented SFBC's ability to perform large-scale drug trials
on behalf of pharmaceutical companies.  Rather than conduct
those trials in an ethical and proper manner, SFBC allegedly
coerced immigrants to participate in its trials, lacked adequate
quality controls to ensure the safety of participants in its
trials and failed to advise test participants on the risks
involved.  Most of the participants were immigrants in Florida.  
The SEC and U.S. Senate have commenced investigations concerning
these allegations.

The truth regarding SFBC's business practices began to trickle
into the market on November 2, 2005, through the end of the
Class Period on December 15, 2005.  During this time, SFBC's
stock price fell from $41.49 per share to $15.78, or 62%.

For more information, contact Ann D. White Law Offices, P.C.,
Phone: 866-389-0274 (toll free); E-mail: awhite@awhitelaw.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, Teena Canson and Lyndsey Resnick,
Editors.

Copyright 2006.  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  * * *