CAR_Public/070627.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Wednesday, June 27, 2007, Vol. 9, No. 126

                           Headlines
     

AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE: Borrowers Accuse Founder of Abetting Fraud
APOLLO GOLD: Still Faces WARN Act Violations Lawsuit in Montana
APPLE COMPUTER: In Talks to Settle Suit Over 65W Power Adapters
APPLE COMPUTER: Still Faces "Euro Tec" Litigation in Calif.
APPLE COMPUTER: Still Faces Suit Over MacBook Case Discoloration

CALIFORNIA: Employers File $75M Suit Against Insurance Fund
DICK'S SPORTING: Mediation Session Set for FLSA Litigation
COLORADO: High Court Trashes Mold Suit Against Denver Airport
DOG KENNELS: Dog Breeders Sued in Fla. for Selling Sick Puppies
ELI LILLY: Zyprexa Victims in NZ Might Join U.S. Lawsuits

FAT FREE: Accused of Violating Employment Laws in Florida
GATEWAY PAINTING: Fla. Suit Aims to Claim Unpaid Overtime Wages
HANSEN NATURAL: Faces Consolidated Securities Lawsuit in Calif.
HELEN OF TROY: Ruling on Bid to Junk Securities Suit Pending
HOME DEPOT: Files Motion to Dismiss ERISA Violations Lawsuit

LM ERICSSON: Still Faces Suits Over Mobile Phone Health Risks
MAGMA DESIGN: Still Faces Securities Fraud Litigation in Calif.
NAPLES KITCHEN: Accused of Denying Overtime Payment to Workers
OKLAHOMA: Judge Certifies Suit Over Access to Public Records
PALM CITY: Fla. Lawsuit Alleges Employment Law Violations

PETSMART INC: Continues to Face Labor-Related Lawsuits in Calif.
PETSMART INC: Faces Litigation in Minn. Over Tainted Animal Food
RAILROADS: Face Antitrust Lawsuit Over Rail Fuel Surcharges
RED ROBIN: Seeks Consolidation of Calif. Labor Violations Suits
RED ROBIN: Sept. 28 Hearing Set for "Andropolis" Suit Settlement

RICCARDI’S LP: Waiters Commence Tex. Suit Over Illegal Tip Pool
SAKS INC: Still Faces Breach of Contract Litigation in Ala.
SEARS HOLDINGS: Faces Consolidated Securities Fraud Suit in N.Y.
U-HAUL: Appeals Ruling Declaring Reservation Policy as Deceptive
UNITED KINGDOM: Ex-pupils Sue County for Neglect, Physical Abuse

VESTIN REALTY: Still Faces Litigation Over Vestin Fund I Merger
VESTIN REALTY: Still Faces Litigation Over Vestin Fund II Merger
WILLOUGH HEALTHCARE: Fla. Lawsuit Alleges Labor Code Violations


                 Meetings, Conferences & Seminars

* Online Teleconferences
* Scheduled Events for Class Action Professionals


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

PLEXUS CORP: Lerach Coughlin Files Wis. Securities Fraud Suit


                            *********


AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE: Borrowers Accuse Founder of Abetting Fraud
---------------------------------------------------------------
In a motion to amend a complaint filed against Ameriquest Mortgage Co. in
federal court in Chicago, the plaintiffs urged a judge to add the company’s
founder as defendant in the suit, E. Scott Reckard of Los Angeles Times
reports.

The lawsuit, which is a consolidation of 20 others, seeks class-action status
and charges Ameriquest and its founder Ronald Arnall of deceiving borrowers
who are already heavily in debt.

Mr. Arnall is accused of getting involved in setting the policies and making
the decisions that resulted in overcharging of customers, especially the
risky borrowers.

The motion for amendment claims Mr. Arnall exhausted the company of its
earnings hiding the money from the plaintiffs, and then virtually shut down
the company as the sub-prime industry imploded amid rising interest rates and
cutthroat competition.

Apart from Ameriquest, its parent company ACC Capital Holdings Corp., several
various subsidiaries and agents are also named defendants in the suit.

One of the private attorneys said that Ameriquest customers would collect
more damages if they decline to get involved the class-action and instead
join in private lawsuits that seek to represent groups of borrowers.


APOLLO GOLD: Still Faces WARN Act Violations Lawsuit in Montana
---------------------------------------------------------------
Apollo Gold Corp. continues to face a purported class action filed May 2006
in U.S. District Court Missoula Division of Montana by 14 former employees at
the company's Montana Tunnels mine.

The suit alleges violations of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining
Notification Act of 1988 and the Montana Wage Act and breach of contract.

The allegations relate to the termination of the employees following the
cessation of mining in October 2005.  

Specifically, the plaintiffs allege that the company gave deficient WARN Act
notice and are seeking damages for back pay and benefits.

The company reported no new development in the matter in its May 14, 2007
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarterly period ended March 31, 2007.

The suit is "Clements et al. v. Apollo Gold, Inc. et al., Case No. 9:06-cv-
00084-DWM-JCL," filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana
under Judge Donald W. Molloy with referral to Jeremiah C. Lynch.

Representing the plaintiff is:

         Brian C. Bramblett, Esq.
         Meloy Law Firm
         P.O. Box 1241, 80 South Warren
         Helena, MT 59624
         Phone: 406-442-8670
         Fax: 406-442-4953
         E-mail: bbramblett@centurytel.net

Representing defendant are:

         Edward John Butler, Esq.
         Sherman & Howard L.L.C.
         90 South Cascade Avenue, Suite 1500
         Colorado Springs, CO 80903
         Phone: 719-448-4052
         Fax: 719-635-4576
         E-mail: ebutler@sah.com

              - and -

         William Sasz, Esq.
         Sherman & Howard, L.L.C.
         90 South Cascade Ave., Suite 1500
         Colorado Springs, CO 80920
         E-mail: wsasz@sah.com


APPLE COMPUTER: In Talks to Settle Suit Over 65W Power Adapters
---------------------------------------------------------------
Apple Computer, Inc. is in negotiations to settle a purported consumer fraud
class action over problems with its 65W Power Adapters for its iBooks and
Powerbooks.

The suit is "Gordon v. Apple Computer, Inc.," and was filed on Aug. 31, 2006
in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf
of a purported nationwide class of consumers who purchased 65W Power Adapters
for iBooks and Powerbooks between November 2002 and the present.  

The complaint alleges various problems with the 65W Adapter, including
fraying, sparking and premature failure.  Plaintiffs allege violations of
California Business & Professions Code Section 17200 (unfair competition),
the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act and
breach of warranties.  

The complaint seeks damages and equitable relief.  The Company filed an
answer on Oct. 20, 2006 denying the material allegations and asserting
numerous affirmative defenses.  A mediation session was set March 13, 2007.

The litigation has been suspended pending ongoing settlement discussions,
according to the company’s May 9, 2007 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended March 31,
2007.

The suit is “Gordon v. Apple Computer Inc., Case No. 5:06-cv-05358-JW,” filed
in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California under
Judge James Ware with referral to Judge Howard R. Lloyd.

Representing the plaintiffs is:

         Mel E. Lifshitz, Esq.
         Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP
         10 East 40th Street, 22nd Floor
         New York, NY 10016
         Phone: 212-779-1414
         Fax: 212-779-3218
         E-mail: lifshitz@bernlieb.com

Representing the defendants is:

         Andrew David Muhlbach, Esq.
         Morrison & Foerster
         425 Market Street, 32nd Floor
         San Francisco, CA 94105-2482
         Phone: (415) 268-7000
         Fax: (415) 268-7522
         E-mail: AMuhlbach@MoFo.com


APPLE COMPUTER: Still Faces "Euro Tec" Litigation in Calif.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Apple Computer, Inc. continues to face a purported copyright infringement
class action in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
California.

The suit, "Euro Tec Enterprises, Inc. et al. v. Apple Computer, Inc. et al.,"
was filed on May 16, 2006 by certain independent music publishers against the
company and several other defendants for allegedly failing to secure a
compulsory license for copyrighted musical compositions being sold as
downloads.  

Plaintiffs' complaint seeks an injunction, damages and other relief.  The
company filed an answer on July 28, 2006 denying all material allegations and
asserting numerous affirmative defenses.

The case is in discovery and is set for trial on Nov. 13, 2007 if no class is
certified or on June 10, 2008 if a class is certified.  

Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on Oct. 23, 2006 and the company filed
an amended answer on Nov. 28, 2006 denying all material allegations and
asserting numerous affirmative defenses.

The company reported no material development in the matter in its May 9, 2007
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarterly period ended March 31, 2007.

The suit is “Euro Tec Enterprises Inc et al v. Apple Computer Inc et al.,
Case No. 2:06-cv-03012-VBF-MAN,” filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California under Judge Valerie Baker Fairbank with
referral to Judge Margaret A. Nagle.

Representing the plaintiffs is:

         Maxwell M. Blecher, Esq.
         Blecher and Collins
         611 West Sixth Street, 20th Floor
         Los Angeles, CA 90017
         Phone: 213-622-4222
         E-mail: mblecher@blechercollins.com

Representing the defendants is:

         Jennifer Renate Blair, Esq.
         Latham & Watkins
         633 W 5th St., Ste. 4000
         Los Angeles, CA 90071-2007
         Phone: 213-485-1234
         E-mail: jennifer.blair@lw.com


APPLE COMPUTER: Still Faces Suit Over MacBook Case Discoloration
----------------------------------------------------------------
Apple Computer, Inc. continues to face a purported class action over
discoloration of the MacBook case.

The suit, "Greaves v. Apple Computer, Inc.," was filed on June 30, 2006 in
the San Diego Superior Court on behalf of a purported class of California
purchasers alleging discoloration of the MacBook case.

Plaintiff asserts claims under California Business & Professions Code Section
17500 (false advertising), California Business & Professions Code Section
17200 (unfair competition), the Consumer Legal Remedies Act and
misrepresentation.  Plaintiff's complaint seeks damages and equitable relief.

Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint on Aug. 16, 2006.  The company
filed an answer on Oct. 3, 2006 denying all allegations and asserting
numerous affirmative defenses.

The company reported no material development in the matter in its May 9, 2007
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarterly period ended March 31, 2007.

Apple Inc., -- http://www.apple.com/-- formerly Apple Computer, Inc.,  
designs, manufactures and markets personal computers and related software,
services, peripherals and networking solutions.  It also designs, develops
and markets a line of portable digital music players along with accessories,
including the online sale of third-party audio and video products.  


CALIFORNIA: Employers File $75M Suit Against Insurance Fund
-----------------------------------------------------------
The State Compensation Insurance Fund and several of its top former
executives have been hit with a class action in Los Angeles Superior Court
accusing them of "self-dealing" and for "improperly diverting" funds.

The law firm of Pearson, Simon, Soter, Warshaw & Penny, LLP in Sherman Oaks
is asking the court to certify the case as a class action and they are
seeking $25 million in compensatory damages and $50 million in punitive
damages for all California employers who purchased workers' compensation
policies from the company.

The lead plaintiff in the case is Acro Constructors Inc., a Burbank
contractor, which accuses State Fund top managers of conflicts of interest
and misappropriating funds that belonged to policyholders. Papers have been
served on former president James Tudor, former vice president Renee Koren,
former vice president for legal Charles Savage, former board members Kent
Dagg and Frank DelRe and against SCIF itself.

In particular, the suit accuses Tudor and Koren of improperly authorizing
payments to Dagg and DelRe, who operate State Fund safety groups, which earn
millions of dollars a year in administrative fees a year from the insurer.
Questions have been raised about how some safety groups handled and disbursed
group dividends paid in lump sums by SCIF to the group administrators.

"This was money taken out of the pockets of the policyholders, and if it
hadn't been for this improper conduct, the money would have been returned to
the holders in the form of premium credits or dividends," says Gary Soter of
Pearson Simon Soter. "This is truly a case of public interest ... [and] is a
story that's going to get some play."

The potential class size is 250,000 California employers and any damages won
would be split among them depending on the amount of premium each company
paid, Soter says.

None of the defendants or their counsels have responded to the suit,
according to Soter, who said that the list of defendants is likely to grow.
Plaintiff Javier Primera, president of Acro Constructors, and all defendants
declined comment for this story.

Plaintiffs’ counsel be reached at:

          Pearson, Simon, Soter, Warshaw & Penny, LLP
          15165 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 400
          Sherman Oaks, California 91403
          Phone: 818-788-8300
          Fax: 818-788-8104
          Website: http://www.psswplaw.com


DICK'S SPORTING: Mediation Session Set for FLSA Litigation
----------------------------------------------------------
An August 2007 mediation session is scheduled for one of several Fair Labor
Standards Act violations lawsuits against Dick's Sporting Goods, Inc.

The company is accused of failing to pay overtime wages as required by FLSA
and applicable state labor law.

The cases, which were filed in May and November of 2005, and
April of 2006, are:

      -- "Tamara Barrus v. Dick's Sporting Goods, Inc., and
         Galyan's Trading Company, Inc. (Barrus)," filed in the
         U.S. District Court for the Western District of New
         York;

      -- "Daniel Parks v. Dick's Sporting Goods, Inc. (Parks),"
         filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western
         District of New York; and

      -- "James Premick v. Dick's Sporting Goods, Inc.
         (Premick)," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
         Western District of Pennsylvania.

Because until September 2006 none of these cases were certified as class
actions, the company deemed them to be claims that were incidental to its
business.

In September and October 2006, respectively, a magistrate judge for the U.S.
District Court for the Western District of New York conditionally certified
classes for notice purposes under the FLSA in the Barrus and Parks cases.

The company has appealed these conditional certifications by the magistrate
judge.  The court has denied the company's appeal as to conditional class
certification in the Barrus case.

The parties and the court agreed to stop the actions pending an attempt to
resolve all claims through mediation.  

A mediation session was held in April 2007 resulting in the parties agreeing
to hold a second mediation session in August 2007.

The parties to the Parks case will meet in July or August 2007 to negotiate a
schedule for the remainder of the case.  

All proceedings against the Company in the Premick case have been dismissed,
and the Company is finalizing a settlement.

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania-based Dick's Sporting Goods, Inc. --
http://www.dickssportinggoods.com/-- is a full-line sporting goods retailer  
that offers an assortment of brand name sporting goods equipment, apparel and
footwear in a specialty store environment.


COLORADO: High Court Trashes Mold Suit Against Denver Airport
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Colorado Supreme Court dismissed a class action over mold and fungi
contamination at Denver International Airport, Denver Post’s Howard Pankratz
reports.

According to the ruling, the lead plaintiffs in the suit failed to file their
notice of claim with Denver on time.  They had 180 days to do so under the
Colorado Governmental Immunity Act.

The court added that the plaintiffs failed to include any illnesses suffered
within the time frame.

The suit was originally filed in 2003 in the Denver District Court claiming
that travelers and employees at DIA have been exposed to severe mold and
fungi contamination causing a variety of recurring respiratory problems.

The suit alleged that since 1995, thousands of employees and travelers,
especially those using Concourse B, have been exposed to the problems, caused
by what the lawsuit described as "severe environmental conditions" such as
recurring raw sewage leaks and emissions of toxic gases.

The lawsuit asked for unspecified monetary damages from the city of Denver.

Two named plaintiffs were United Airlines employees Terri Crandall and Joann
Hubbard.  The suit claimed that after having spent a considerable time at the
airport, they have begun to develop various respiratory difficulties and
other ailments that are consistent with toxic exposure.

The action sought:

     1) an injunction to abate the alleged contamination and to          
        force the airport to "take all precautions necessary to
        protect the health of the plaintiffs and class members;

     2) for the city of Denver to institute safeguards at the
        airport to find any adverse health effects caused by the
        allegedly hazardous environment; and

     3) to establish a fund to administer a medical surveillance
        program allowing the plaintiffs to have periodic medical
        screening for early detection and treatment of health
        problems (Class Action Reporter, July 04, 2003).

According to plaintiff lawyer John Fognani, they were extremely disappointed
with the ruling and would have to review the opinion and decide what to do
next.

Ms. Hubbard left DIA in February 2002, while Ms. Crandall still continues to
work at the airport.

Based on court documents, Ms. Hubbard left because she suffered a severe skin
disease and had to seek medical attention.

Plaintiff counsel’s contact information:

          John D. Fognani, Esq.
          Fognani & Faught, PLLC
          1700 Lincoln Street, Suite 2222
          Denver, Colorado 80203
          Phone: 303-382-6200
          Fax: 303-382-6210


DOG KENNELS: Dog Breeders Sued in Fla. for Selling Sick Puppies
---------------------------------------------------------------
Florida dog breeders James and Gilda Anderson face a class-action complaint
filed June 18 in the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit, in and for
Broward County, Florida, accusing them of selling “gravely sick” puppies and
refusing to reimburse buyers who paid thousands of dollars for puppies that
died, the CourtHouse News Service reports.

The complaint claims puppies sold by the Andersons had a “myriad of serious
health problems, including genetic defects, congenital defects, internal
parasites, contagious diseases and cancerous tumors.”

The Andersons own:

          -- Celebrity Kennels,
          -- Dog Breeder Kennel,
          -- Puppies for Sale,
          -- Wizard of Claws, also called Wizard of Cl’Oz,
          -- Holiday Center Plaza Puppies and
          -- Top Puppies.

On various Web sites, such as wizardofclaws.com, the Andersons said they get
their toy breeds from “reputable breeders” who must meet “very high
standards,” the plaintiffs say.

The kennels claim to be “totally against puppy mills,” but the defendants
systematically sell dogs from inferior breeders, the lawsuit states.

The plaintiffs say the Andersons and their kennels “rudely rejected” buyers’
request to be reimbursed for veterinary bills and the cost of expensive
puppies that died.

Buyers seek damages for alleged violations of the Puppy Lemon Law.

The suit is "Shari Lepage et al. v. Wizard of Claws, Inc. et al.," filed in
the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit, in and for Broward County,
Florida.

Representing plaintiffs are:

          Edward Soto
          Christopher R. Pace
          Jodi E. Samuels
          Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
          1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1200
          Miami, Florida 33131
          Phone: (305) 577-3100
          E-mail: edward.soto@weil.com or
                  christopher.pace@weil.com and
                  jodi.samuels@weil.com

          - and -


          Paul A. Ferrillo, Esq.
          Martin C. Geagan, Esq.
          Deborah A. Maher, Esq.
          Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
          767 Fifth Avenue
          New York, New York 10153
          Phone: (212) 310-8000


ELI LILLY: Zyprexa Victims in NZ Might Join U.S. Lawsuits
---------------------------------------------------------
Australian personal injury lawyer Simon Harrison is exploring the possibility
of seeking compensation for New Zealand patients injured by U.S.'s Eli
Lilly's anti-psychotic medication Zyprexa, Ruth Hill of The Dominion Post
reports.

Mr. Harrison is representing 32-year-old Austalian Jonathon Austin who lodged
a claim with the Supreme Court of New South Wales seeking damages of AU$4
million.  Mr. Austin was found to have pancreatitis after taking Zyprexa for
eight years, according to the report.

After several other Australian claimants came forward, Mr. Harrison said his
firm was exploring the possibility of "piggy-backing" on a class action in
the U.S., according to Ms. Hill's report.

"Because of New Zealand's no-blame system, there is no scope for personal
injury claims.  A class action in the U.S. would be New Zealand claimants
only chance to get compensation," he said.

Zyprexa is prescribed in New Zealand for the treatment of mental illness,
including schizophrenia and bi-polar disorder, over the last decade.

Since April 1997, the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration has had
reports of 40 deaths and 1231 adverse reactions among people taking Zyprexa.

                       Zyprexa Litigation

According to the company’s May 3, 2007 regulatory filing, the company was
named as a defendant in a large number of Zyprexa product liability lawsuits
in the U.S. and have been notified of many other claims of individuals who
have not filed suit.

The lawsuits and unfiled claims allege a variety of injuries from the use of
Zyprexa, with the majority alleging that the product caused or contributed to
diabetes or high blood-glucose levels.  The claims seek substantial
compensatory and punitive damages and typically accuse the company of
inadequately testing for and warning about side effects of Zyprexa.

Many of the claims also allege that the company improperly promoted the drug.
Almost all of the federal lawsuits are part of a Multi-District Litigation
(MDL) proceeding before The Honorable Jack Weinstein in the Federal District
Court for the Eastern District of New York (MDL No. 1596).

Since June 2005, the company has entered into agreements with various
claimants’ attorneys involved in U.S. Zyprexa product liability litigation to
settle a substantial majority of the claims.  The agreements cover a total of
approximately 28,500 claimants, including a large number of previously filed
lawsuits and other asserted claims.  The two primary settlements were:

     -- In June 2005, the company reached an agreement in
        principle (and in September 2005 a final agreement) to
        settle more than 8,000 claims for $690.0 million plus
        $10.0 million to cover administration of the settlement.
        That settlement is being administered by special
        settlement masters appointed by Judge Weinstein.

     -- In January 2007, we reached agreements with a number of
        plaintiffs’ attorneys to settle more than 18,000 claims
        for approximately $500 million.

The 2005 settlement totaling $700.0 million was paid during 2005. The January
2007 settlements were recorded in other current liabilities in our December
31, 2006 consolidated balance sheet and will be paid during 2007.

The U.S. Zyprexa product liability claims not subject to these agreements
include approximately 400 lawsuits in the U.S. covering approximately 1,300
plaintiffs and an additional 350 claims of which the company is aware.  In
addition, the company has been served with a lawsuit seeking class
certification in which the members of the purported class are seeking refunds
and medical monitoring.

In early 2005, the company was served with four lawsuits seeking class-action
status in Canada on behalf of patients who took Zyprexa.  One of these four
lawsuits has been certified for residents of Quebec, and a second has been
certified in Ontario and includes all Canadian residents, except for
residents of Quebec and British Columbia. The allegations in the Canadian
actions are similar to those in the litigation pending in the U.S.

The company anticipates that trials in one or more cases in the Eastern
District of New York will begin in the second quarter of 2007.

Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly and Co. discovers, develops, manufactures, and
sells products in one significant business segment – pharmaceutical products.
It manufactures and distributes products through owned or leased facilities
in the U.S., Puerto Rico, and 25 other countries.


FAT FREE: Accused of Violating Employment Laws in Florida
---------------------------------------------------------
Fat Free Systems, Inc. is facing a class-action complaint filed June 19 in
the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, CourtHouse News
Service reports.

Named plaintiff Gerald Hopewell alleges denial of overtime compensation, a
violation of the Labor Code.

The suit is “Hopewell v. Fat Free Systems, Inc., Case No. 2:07-cv-00400-MMH-
SPC,” filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida,
under Judge Marcia Morales Howard, with referral to Judge Sheri Polster
Chappell.

Representing plaintiffs is:

          Richard Bernard Celler
          Morgan & Morgan
          7450 Griffin Rd., Suite 230
          Davie, FL 33314
          Phone: 954/318-0268
          Fax: 954/333-3515
          E-mail: rceller@forthepeople.com


GATEWAY PAINTING: Fla. Suit Aims to Claim Unpaid Overtime Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Gateway Painting of the Treasure Coast, Inc. is facing a class-action
complaint filed June 20 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of Florida, the CourtHouse News Service reports.

Named plaintiff Jesus Cruz is accused of denying overtime compensation, a
violation of the Labor Code.

The suit is “Cruz v. Gateway Painting of the Treasure Coast, Inc., Case No.
2:07-cv-14188-JEM,” filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of Florida, under Judge Jose E. Martinez, with referral to Judge
Frank J. Lynch, Jr.

Representing plaintiffs is:

          Andrew Ross Frisch
          Rosenthal & Levy PA
          1645 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, Suite 350
          West Palm Beach, FL 33401
          Phone: 561-478-2500
          Fax: 561-478-3111


HANSEN NATURAL: Faces Consolidated Securities Lawsuit in Calif.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Hansen Natural Corp. faces a consolidated securities fraud class action in
the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

From November 2006 through December 2006, several plaintiffs filed
shareholder class actions in the U.S. District Court for the Central District
of California against Hansen and certain of its employees, officers and
directors, entitled:

      -- “Hutton v. Hansen Natural Corp., et al. (No. 06-   
         07599),”

      -- “Kingery v. Hansen Natural Corp., et al. (No. 06-
         07771),”

      -- “Williams v. Hansen Natural Corp., et al. (No. 06-
         01369),”

      -- “Ziolkowski v. Hansen Natural Corp., et al. (No. ED 06-
         01403),” and

      -- “Walker v. Hansen Natural Corp., et al. (No. 06-
         08229).”  

On Feb. 27, 2007, the Class Actions were consolidated by the District Court
and styled as “In re Hansen Natural Corporation Securities Litigation (CV06-
07599 JFW (PLAx)).”  

The Court appointed Jason E. Peltier as lead plaintiff and approved lead
counsel.  Lead Plaintiff filed a consolidated class action complaint on April
30, 2007.  

The consolidated class-action complaint supersedes all previously filed class-
action complaints and is the operative complaint to which the Company must
respond.

Lead Plaintiff alleges, on behalf of all persons who purchased Hansen common
stock during the period beginning Nov. 12, 2001 through Nov. 9, 2006, that
Hansen and the individual defendants made misleading statements and omissions
of material fact which artificially inflated the market price of Hansen
common stock throughout the Class Period.  

Plaintiffs further allege that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder by misrepresenting or failing to disclose that defendants
incorrectly dated stock option grants, that the Company’s internal controls
were inadequate, and that, as a result, defendants engaged in improper
accounting practices.  Plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of damages.

Hansen Natural Corp. -- http://www.hansens.com/-- is a holding company and  
carry on no operating business except through direct wholly owned
subsidiaries, Hansen Beverage Co. (HBC).  HBC has two segments, Direct Store
Delivery and Warehouse.  The Company develops, markets, sells and distributes
alternative beverage category natural sodas, fruit juices, energy drinks and
energy sports drinks, fruit juice smoothies and, functional drinks, sparkling
lemonades and orangeades, non-carbonated ready-to-drink iced teas, lemonades,
juice cocktails, children's multi-vitamin juice drinks and non-carbonated
lightly flavored energy waters under the Hansen's brand name.  Hansen also
develops markets, sells and distributes energy drinks under the Monster
Energy, Lost Energy, Rumba and Joker Mad Energy brand names.  It also
markets, sells and distributes natural sodas, sodas with supplements, organic
natural sodas, seltzer waters and energy drinks under the Blue Sky brand name.


HELEN OF TROY: Ruling on Bid to Junk Securities Suit Pending
------------------------------------------------------------
Helen of Troy, Ltd. continues to seek to dismiss a securities fraud class
action filed against it in the U.S. District Court for the Western District
of Texas.

Class actions have been filed and consolidated into one action against the
company, Gerald J. Rubin, the company's Chairman of the Board, President and
Chief Executive Officer, and Thomas J. Benson, the company's Chief Financial
Officer, on behalf of purchasers of publicly traded securities of the company.

The company understands that the plaintiffs allege violations of Sections 10
(b) and 20(a) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
Rule 10b-5 thereunder, on the grounds that the company and the two officers
engaged in a scheme to defraud the company's shareholders through the
issuance of positive earnings guidance intended to artificially inflate the
company's share price so that Mr. Rubin could sell almost 400,000 of the
company's common shares at an inflated price.

The plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages, interest, fees, costs, an
accounting of the insider trading proceeds, and injunctive relief, including
an accounting of and the imposition of a constructive trust and/or asset
freeze on the defendants' insider trading proceeds.  The class period stated
in the complaint was Oct. 12, 2004 through Oct. 10, 2005.

The lawsuit was brought in the U.S. District Court for the Western District
of Texas and is still in the preliminary stages.  

On May 15, 2006 the company filed a motion to dismiss the aforementioned
lawsuit citing numerous deficiencies with the claims it asserted.  

On June 29, 2006, the plaintiffs filed with the court their opposition to the
motion to dismiss.  On July 17, 2006 the company filed a reply rebutting the
plaintiffs' June 29th opposition.

On March 20, 2007, the court heard the plaintiffs’ and the company’s
arguments regarding its motion to dismiss, according to the company’s May 14,
2007 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for
the fiscal year ended Feb. 28, 2007.

The suit is "In Re: Helen of Troy, Ltd., Securities Litigation,
Case No. 3:05-cv-00431-DB," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of Texas under Judge David Briones.

Representing the plaintiffs are:

         Ariel Acevedo, Esq.
         Tower One, 5200 Town Center Circle, #600
         Boca Raton, FL 33486
         Phone: (561) 361-5000

              - and -

         Daniel R. Malone, Esq.
         The Malone Law Firm
         300 East Main, #1100
         El Paso, TX 79901
         Phone: (915) 533-5000
         Fax: 915/533-5009

Representing the defendants are:

         Nicholas Even, Esq.
         Noel M. Hensley, Esq.
         Haynes Boone, LLP
         901 Main St., Ste. 3100
         Dallas, TX 75202-3789
         Phone: (214) 651-5000
         Fax: 214/651-5940 and 214/200-0470
         E-mail: nick.even@haynesboone.com

              - and -

         H. Christopher Mott, Esq.
         Krafsur Gordon Mott, PC
         4695 North Mesa Street
         El Paso, TX 79912-6103
         Phone: (915) 545-1133
         Fax: 915/545-4433
         E-mail: cmott@gordonmottpc.com


HOME DEPOT: Files Motion to Dismiss ERISA Violations Lawsuit
------------------------------------------------------------
Home Depot, Inc. is seeking to dismiss a purported class action alleging
violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 by the
company.

Initially, three class actions were filed by former employees of the Company
that allege breach of fiduciary duty in violation of ERISA in connection with
the Company’s return-to-vendor and stock option practices.  

In the first quarter of fiscal 2007, the plaintiffs joined together in one
case and voluntarily dismissed the other two cases.  

In March 2007, the three original plaintiffs and two additional former
employees filed a joint amended complaint seeking certification as a class
action, unspecified damages, costs, attorneys’ fees and equitable and
injunctive relief.

The defendants have filed a motion to dismiss the joint amended complaint,
according to its June 6, 2007 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended April 29, 2007.

The Home Depot, Inc. -- http://www.homedepot.com-- is home improvement  
retailer.  As of Jan. 28, 2007, it operated 2,147 stores, most of which are
The Home Depot stores.  It operates in two segments, Retail and HD Supply.  
The Home Depot stores sell an assortment of building materials, home
improvement and lawn and garden products and provide a number of services.  
In addition to its retail stores, its business includes HD Supply, which
distributes products and sells installation services primarily to business-to-
business customers, including home builders, professional contractors,
municipalities and maintenance professionals.


LM ERICSSON: Still Faces Suits Over Mobile Phone Health Risks
-------------------------------------------------------------
LM Ericsson Telephone Co. continues to face two purported class actions,
where plaintiffs alleged that adverse health effects could be associated with
the use of mobile phones.

Together with most of the mobile communications industry, the company was
initially named as a defendant in six class actions in the U.S.

In 2006, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed four of those lawsuits.  

The two remaining cases are currently pending in the U.S. District Court for
the District of Maryland and the Superior Court of the District of Columbia,
according to the company’s June 7, 2007 Form 20-F filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the period ended Dec. 31, 2006.

Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson -- http://www.ericsson.com-- is a Sweden-
based company that offers a portfolio of telecommunication and data
communication systems and services covering a range of technologies.  It
offers end-to-end solutions for all major mobile communication standards.


MAGMA DESIGN: Still Faces Securities Fraud Litigation in Calif.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Magma Design Automation, Inc. continues to face a purported shareholder class
action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

On June 13, 2005, The Cornelia I. Crowell GST Trust filed a putative
shareholder class action against:

      -- Magma Design Automation, Inc.,
      -- Rajeev Madhavan,
      -- Gregory C. Walker, and
      -- Roy E. Jewell.

The complaint alleges that defendants failed to disclose information
regarding the risk of Magma infringing intellectual property rights of
Synopsys, Inc., in violation of Section 10(b) of the U.S. Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and prays for unspecified damages.

In March 2006, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated amended
complaint.  Plaintiff filed a further amended complaint in June 2006, which
defendants have again moved to dismiss.  

Defendants' motion was granted in part and denied in part by an order dated
Aug. 18, 2006, which dismissed claims against several of the defendants.  The
case is now proceeding on the remaining claims.

The company reported no new development in the matter in its June 6, 2007
Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
fiscal year ended April 1, 2007.

The suit is "Cornelia I. Crowell GST Trust v. Magma Design
Automation, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:05-cv-02394-CRB," filed in the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of California under Judge Charles R.
Breyer.

Representing the plaintiffs are:

         Elizabeth P. Lin, Esq.
         Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman, LLP
         One California Plaza, 300 S. Grand Avenue, Suite 3900
         Los Angeles, CA 90071
         Phone: 213/617-1200
         Fax: (213) 617-1975
         E-mail: elin@milbergweiss.com

         Eric J. Belfi, Esq.
         Labaton Sucharow & Rudoff, LLP
         100 Park Avenue
         New York, NY 10017
         Phone: 212-907-0878
         Fax: 212-818-0477
         E-mail: ebelfi@labaton.com

              - and -

         Lionel Z. Glancy, Esq.
         Glancy & Binkow, LLP
         1801 Avenue of The Stars, Suite 311
         Los Angeles, CA 90067
         Phone: 310-201-9150
         Fax: 310-201-9160
         E-mail: info@glancylaw.com

Representing the defendant is:

         Dale M. Edmondson, Esq.
         O'Melveny & Myers
         2765 Sand Hill Road
         Menlo Park, CA 94025
         Phone: 650/473-2632
         Fax: 650/473-2601
         E-mail: dedmondson@omm.com


NAPLES KITCHEN: Accused of Denying Overtime Payment to Workers
--------------------------------------------------------------
Naples Kitchen and Bath, Inc. is facing a class-action complaint filed June
19 in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, CourtHouse
News Service reports.

Named plaintiff John C. Sochor alleges denial of overtime compensation, a
violation of the Labor Code.

The suit is Sochor v. Naples Kitchen and Bath, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:07-cv-
00402-MMH-DNF,” filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of
Florida, under Judge Marcia Morales Howard, with referral to Judge Douglas N.
Frazier.

Representing plaintiffs is:

          Richard Bernard Celler
          Morgan & Morgan
          7450 Griffin Rd., Suite 230
          Davie, FL 33314
          Phone: 954/318-0268
          Fax: 954/333-3515
          E-mail: rceller@forthepeople.com


OKLAHOMA: Judge Certifies Suit Over Access to Public Records
------------------------------------------------------------
Oklahoma County District Judge Bryan Dixon granted class-action status to a
suit regarding access to the city’s public records, according to the
Associated Press.

Elisa LeFlore, represented by Mike Gassaway, originally filed the suit
against Oklahoma City in April 2006, alleging the city violated the Oklahoma
Open Records Act by collecting payments from citizens who wanted copies of
law enforcement records.

The law stipulates that fees are only applicable when the request for copies
is "solely for commercial purpose" or if it would create “excessive
disruption” in the government’s critical operations.

Deputy City Attorney Diane Lewis says members of the class still need to be
determined.
    

PALM CITY: Fla. Lawsuit Alleges Employment Law Violations
---------------------------------------------------------
Palm City Donuts, LLC is facing a class-action complaint filed June 20 in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, the CourtHouse News
Service reports.

Named plaintiff Dianne Garland is accused of denying overtime compensation, a
violation of the Labor Code.

The suit is “Garland v. Palm City Donuts, LLC. et al., Case No. 2:07-cv-14189-
KMM,” filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida,
under Judge K. Michael Moore, with referral to Judge Frank J. Lynch, Jr.

Representing plaintiffs is:

          Lee James Baggett
          Lewis Mortell Lewis & Baggett
          1115 E Ocean Boulevard
          Stuart, FL 34996
          Phone: 772-286-7861
          Fax: 288-2013 (fax)
          E-mail: leebagg@aol.com


PETSMART INC: Continues to Face Labor-Related Lawsuits in Calif.
----------------------------------------------------------------
PetSmart, Inc. still faces two labor-related class actions in the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of California.

In October 2006, two lawsuits were filed against the company in California
State Court, on behalf of putative classes of current and former California
employees.

The first suit, “Sorenson v. PetSmart, was filed on Oct. 3, 2006,” and the
plaintiff, a former dog groomer, alleges claims against us ostensibly on
behalf of other non-exempt hourly workers as to whether she and other
employees received their required meal and rest breaks.  

The second suit, “Enabnit v. PetSmart, was filed on Oct. 12, 2006,” and the
plaintiff seeks principally to represent employees providing pet grooming
services, for alleged meal and rest period violations, and to represent a
class of employees whose paychecks were allegedly not compliant with the
California Labor Code.

The plaintiff seeks compensatory damages, penalties under the California
Labor Code, restitution, attorney fees, costs, and prejudgment interest.

In November 2006, the company removed both actions to the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of California, where they are currently in the early
stages of litigation.

PetSmart, Inc. -- http://www.petsmart.com/-- is a specialty provider of  
products, services and solutions for pets in North America.  The Company has
identified a group of pet owners that the Company calls pet parents, who are
committed to their pets and consider their pets family members.  The Company
opened 82 net new stores in the fiscal year ended Jan. 28, 2007 (fiscal
2006), and at the end of the fiscal year 2006, operated 908 retail stores in
North America.  PetSmart stores typically range in size from 19,000 to 27,000
square feet, and carry a selection of pet supplies at everyday low prices.  
The Company offers more than 13,400 items, including nationally recognized
brand names, as well as a selection of private brands across a range of
product categories.


PETSMART INC: Faces Litigation in Minn. Over Tainted Animal Food
----------------------------------------------------------------
PetSmart, Inc. has been named as a co-defendant in “Rozman v. Menu Foods
Midwest Corp., et al.,” which is now pending in the United States District
Court for the District of Minnesota, according to the company’s June 4, 2007
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarterly period ended April 29, 2007.

The suit is seeking the court’s approval of a class action and an award of
damages on behalf of pet owners as a result of injuries to and/or deaths of
pets arising from the alleged consumption of animal food tainted with
melamine.

PetSmart, Inc. -- http://www.petsmart.com/-- is a specialty provider of  
products, services and solutions for pets in North America.  The Company has
identified a group of pet owners that the Company calls pet parents, who are
committed to their pets and consider their pets family members.  


RAILROADS: Face Antitrust Lawsuit Over Rail Fuel Surcharges
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ferraro Foods of North Carolina, LLC filed an antitrust class-action
complaint on June 22 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
accusing railroads of fixing freight prices.

Named defendants in the complaint are:

          -- Association of American Railroads,
          -- BNSF Railway Co.,
          -- CSX Transportation, Inc.
          -- Kansas City Southern Railway Co.,
          -- Norkfolk Southern Railway Co.,
          -- Union Pacific Railroad Co.

Plaintiff brings this antitrust class action alleging that defendants
conspired to fix, raise, maintain or stabilize prices of unregulated rail
freight transportation services sold in the U.S. imposing agreed upon "Rail
Fuel Surcharges" on rail freight shipments from July 1, 2003 to the present,
in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Rail fuel surcharge is a separate fee charged to shippers by the defendant
railroads for agreed-upon freight transportation, ostensibly to compensate
for unforeseen increases in the cost of fuel.

Plaintiff alleges that defendants computed the Rail Fuel Surcharges as a
percentage of the customers' base freight rate and agreed upon the use of
common indices and trigger points for adjusting the percentages monthly.
Defendants also published Rail Fuel Surcharges on the internet to facilitate
coordination and the detection of any deviation from collusive pricing, the
suit claims.

Plaintiff wants the court to rule:

     (a) whether defendants conspired, contracted or combined
         with others, for the purpose of and with the effect of
         raising, fixing, maintaining, pegging, or stabilizing
         the price of rail fuel surcharges applied to
         unregulated rail freight transportation services
         purchased by the class;

     (b) whether defendants' conduct violated the federal
         antitrust laws; and

     (c) whether defendants' conduct caused injury to the
         business and property of plaintiff and the class, and
         if so, the proper measure of damages.

Plaintiff prays for the relief as follows:

     -- that the court determine that this action may be
        maintained as a class action under Rules 23(b)(2) and
        (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that
        plaintiff be denominated as class representative, and
        that plaintiff's counsel be appointed as counsel for the
        class;

     -- that the unlawful contract, combination and conspiracy
        alleged be adjudged and decreed to be an unreasonable
        restraint of trade or commerce in violation of Section 1
        of the Sherman Act;

     -- that plaintiff and the class recover compensatory
        damages, as provided by law, determined to have been
        sustained as to each of them, and that judgment be
        entered against defendants on behalf of plaintiff and
        each and every member of the class;

     -- that each of the defendants' respective officers,
        directors, agents and employees, and all other persons
        acting on behalf of or in concert with them, be
        permanently enjoined and restrained from, directly or
        indirectly, continuing or maintaining the combination,
        conspiracy, or agreement alleged in the case;

     -- that plaintiff and the class recover treble damages, as
        provided by law;

     -- that plaintiff and the class recover their costs of the
        suit, including attorney's fees, as provided by law; and

     -- for such further relief as the court may deem just and
        proper.

The suit is “Ferraro Foods of North Carolina, LLC v. Association of American
Railroads et al., Case No. 1:07-cv-01121-PLF,” in the U.S. District Court for
the District of Columbia, under Judge Paul L. Friedman.

Representing plaintiffs is:

          Benjamin D. Brown
          Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, PLLC
          1100 New York Avenue, NW
          Suite 500, West Tower
          Washington, DC 20005
          Phone: (202) 589-2288
          E-mail: bbrown@cmht.com


RED ROBIN: Seeks Consolidation of Calif. Labor Violations Suits
---------------------------------------------------------------
Robin International, Inc. is seeking to consolidate two labor-related class
actions that were filed in California state court and in the U.S. District
Court for the Central District of California.

The federal suit is "Huggett v. Red Robin International, Inc." It was
originally filed in the Superior Court of the State of California on January
2006.

The suit is related to an alleged failure of the company to comply with
California wage and hour regulations, including those governing meal and rest
periods, payment of wages upon termination and provision of itemized
statements to employees, as well as unlawful business practices and unfair
competition.  

The complaint states claims for damages, including punitive and exemplary
damages, and injunctive relief.   

The company filed an answer to the Huggett complaint and removed the case to
the U.S. District Court for the Central District of  
California.   

On March 13, 2006, plaintiff in "Huggett" filed a motion to remand the case
to the California state court.  On June 9, 2006, the court denied the motion
to remand.

In December 2006, the Company was served with two additional purported class
actions alleging claims similar to the Huggett matter.

The suits – both filed in the Superior Court of California -- are:

      -- “William Harper v. Red Robin International, Inc.;” and

      -- “Marie Hill vs. Red Robin International, Inc.”

The Harper matter is alleging failure by the Company to provide meal and rest
breaks in compliance with California wage and hour regulations.

In the Hill case, a former employee alleges failure to comply with California
wage and hour regulations including failure to pay overtime,
misclassification of managers, and failure to pay for or provide meal and
rest breaks.  An answer was filed and the case was removed to the U.S.
District Court for the Central District of California.

The Company filed a notice of related case with the Court in the Huggett case
stating that the purported classes of plaintiffs were the same and that the
case should be consolidated, according to the company’s June 1, 2007 Form 10-
Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly
period ended April 22, 2007.

The federal suit is "Matthew Huggett v. Red Robin International Inc., et al.,
Case No. 8:06-cv-00181-JVS-RNB," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California under Judge James V. Selna with referral to
Judge Robert N. Block.   

Representing the plaintiffs are:  

         Heather K. Rowell, Esq.
         Richard E. Quintilone, II, Esq.
         Devin R. Lucas, Esq.
         Quintilone and Associates
         15 Studebaker, Suite 100
         Irvine, CA 92618-2013
         Phone: 949-458-9675
  
              - and -

         Mike M. Arias, Esq.
         J. Paul Gignac, Esq.
         Mark A. Ozzello, Esq.
         Arias Ozzello & Gignac
         6701 Center Dr. W., Ste. 1400,
         Los Angeles, CA 90045-1558
         Phone: 310-670-1600
         Fax: 310-670-1231
         E-mail: jpgignac@aogllp.com

Representing the defendants are:

         J. Kevin Lilly, Esq.
         Darren E. Nadel, Esq.
         Fermin H. Llaguno, Esq.
         Elizabeth Staggs-Wilson, Esq.
         James E. Hart, Esq.
         Littler Mendelson
         2049 Century Park E, 5th Fl.
         Los Angeles, CA 90067-3107
         Phone: 310-553-0308
         Fax: 310-553-5583
         E-mail: klilly@littler.com


RED ROBIN: Sept. 28 Hearing Set for "Andropolis" Suit Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado will hold a final
fairness hearing on Sept. 28, 2007 for a proposed settlement of the
consolidated shareholder class action filed against Red Robin Gourmet Burgers
Inc., its former chief executive officer and former chief financial officer.

On Aug. 15, 2005, Andre Andropolis filed the suit on behalf of himself and
all other purchasers of the company's common stock during the putative class
period of Nov. 8, 2004 through Aug. 11, 2005.  

On Sept. 30, 2005, Mark Baird filed a similar purported class action
complaint in the same court on behalf of himself and the same class of
stockholders as defined in the Andropolis Complaint.  

Both complaints allege that the company and defendants Michael J. Snyder and
James P. McCloskey violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the U.S. Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10(b)(5) adopted pursuant to the U.S. Exchange
Act by disseminating false and misleading financial reports on behalf of the
company, by withholding adverse financial information on behalf of the
company from the class, and the individual defendants were control persons
who caused the company to engage in such acts for their own benefit.

The plaintiffs further allege that, because of the actions of the company's
former chief executive officer and former chief financial officer, the
company's stock price became inflated between Nov. 8, 2004 and Aug. 11, 2005,
and on Aug. 12, 2005, the company's stock price fell sharply following their
departures from their positions with the company.

The class has not been certified and no discovery has occurred. Lead counsel
and lead plaintiff were appointed and have received an extension to Feb. 28,
2006 to file a consolidated complaint.

On Feb. 28, 2006, the lead plaintiff, City of Philadelphia Board of Pensions
and Retirement, filed a consolidated complaint.  In addition to the
allegations in the initial Andropolis complaint against the company and the
company's former chief executive officer and former chief financial officer,
the consolidated compliant:

     -- alleges that the company and the company's current chief  
        executive officer and current chief financial officer  
        violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the U.S. Exchange  
        Act in connection with the company's announcement on  
        Jan. 10, 2006 that it was lowering its guidance for the  
        quarter ended Dec. 25, 2005; and

     -- alleges claims against the company's former controller  
        and alleges violations of Section 14(a) of the U.S.  
        Exchange Act.  

The consolidated complaint seeks damages on behalf of a putative class of
purchasers of the company's common stock during the putative class period of
Aug. 13, 2004 and Jan. 9, 2006, inclusive.

All defendants have filed motions to dismiss the consolidated complaint
(Class Action Reporter, Sept. 19, 2006).

On Jan. 2, 2007, the Court granted the defendants’ motions to dismiss all
claims with prejudice. Final judgment was entered on Jan. 17, 2007 and
plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal on Feb. 14, 2007.

After a mediation session the parties to the Andropolis matter reached an
agreement to settle, subject to approval by the Court.

The proposed settlement involves a payment of $1.5 million, covered by
insurance, to the putative class and its counsel.  

The Court preliminarily approved the agreement on May 31, 2007. The parties
will provide notice to the class and payment to those members who timely
submit a claim pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement filed with
the Court.  

After the bar date to submit a claim, the Court will hold a hearing on final
approval of the settlement.

The hearing for final approval is scheduled for Sept. 28, 2007, according to
the company’s June 1, 2007 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended April 22, 2007.

The suit is "Andropolis v. Red Robin Gourmet Burgers, Inc., et al., Case No.
1:05-cv-01563-EWN-BNB," filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of
Colorado under Judge Edward W. Nottingham with referral to Judge Boyd N.
Boland.

Representing the plaintiffs are:  

         Gerald L. Bader, Jr., Esq.
         Renee Beth Taylor, Esq.
         Bader & Associates, P.C.
         14426 East Evans Avenue #200
         Denver, CO 80014-1160
         Phone: 303-534-1700
         Fax: 303-534-1701
         E-mail: gbader@bader-associates.com
                 rtaylor@bader-associates.com

              - and -

         F. James Donnelly, Esq.
         The Law Offices of F. James Donnelly, P.C.
         6076 South Chester Way
         Greenwood Village, CO 80111
         Phone: 720-493-9814
         Fax: 720-493-9815
         E-mail: fjamesdonnelly@comcast.net.

Representing the defendants are:  

         Andrew Ryan Shoemaker, Esq.
         Thomas Lee Strickland, Esq.
         Coates Lear, Esq.
         Hogan & Hartson, LLP
         Phone: 720-406-5360, 303-899-7300 and 303-454-2479
         Fax: 720-406-5301 and 899- 7333
         E-mail: arshoemaker@hhlaw.com
                 tlstrickland@hhlaw.com
                 CLear@hhlaw.com

              - and -

         Rachel M. Vorbeck, Esq.
         Katten Muchin Rosenman, LLP
         525 West Monroe Street #1600
         Chicago, IL 60661-3693
         Phone: 312-902-5200
         Fax: 902-1061
         E-mail: rachel.vorbeck@kattenlaw.com


RICCARDI’S LP: Waiters Commence Tex. Suit Over Illegal Tip Pool
---------------------------------------------------------------
Italian restaurant Riccardi’s LP is facing a class-action complaint file
dJune 22 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District Court of Texas,
reports say.

Named plaintiff Marcus L. McDowell accuses Riccardi’s of requiring employees
to participate in an illegal tip pool.  Many restaurants require servers to
put their tips in a pool that's then parceled out to the staff at the end of
the night, Teresa Gubbins of Pegasus News reports. This practice helps
equalize pay and sometimes creates a more collaborative environment, but it
penalizes servers who are big performers.

A manager at the restaurant said he couldn't comment on the lawsuit,
according to Ms. Gubbins.

The suit is “McDowell v. Riccardi's LP, Case No. 3:07-cv-01118,” filed in the
U.S. District court for the Northern District of Texas under Judge Ed
Kinkeade.

Representing plaintiffs are:

          Robert R. Debes, Jr.
          Debes Law Firm
          17 South Briar Hollow Lane, Suite 302
          Houston, TX 77027
          Phone: 713/623-0900
          Fax: 713/623-0951 (fax)
          E-mail: bdebes@debeslaw.com


SAKS INC: Still Faces Breach of Contract Litigation in Ala.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Saks, Inc. remains a defendant in a purported class action filed in the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Alabama over allegations of
breach of contract.

Adamson Apparel, Inc. filed the suit on Dec. 8, 2005.  The plaintiff alleges
that the company improperly assessed chargebacks, timely payment discounts,
and deductions for merchandise returns against members of the plaintiff
class.  

The lawsuit seeks compensatory and incidental damages and restitution.

The company reported no material development in the matter in its June 6,
2007 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for
the quarterly period ended May 5, 2007.

The suit is "Adamson Apparel, Inc. v. Saks Inc., Case No. 2:05 cv-02514-SLB,"
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama under
Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn.   

Representing the plaintiff are:

         Richard T. Dorman, Esq.
         Cunningham Bounds Yance Crowder & Brown
         P.O. Box 66705
         Mobile, AL 36660
         Phone: 1-251-471-6191
         E-mail: rtd@cbycb.com

         Rachel J. Geman, Esq.
         Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP
         780 Third Avenue, 48th Floor
         New York, NY 10017
         Phone: 212-355-9500
         Fax: 212-355-9592
         E-mail: rgeman@ichb.com

              - and -

         David J. Guin, Esq.
         Tammy McClendon Stokes, Esq.
         Donaldson & Guin, LLC
         The Financial Ctr., 505 20th Street, North Suite 1000
         Birmingham, AL 35203
         Phone: 205-503-4505
         Fax: 205-226-2357
         E-mail: davidg@dglawfirm.com
                 tstokes@dglawfirm.com

Representing the defendant is:

         Andrew J. Sinor, Jr., Esq.
         Hand Arendall, LLC
         1200 Park Place Tower, 2001 Park Place North
         Birmingham, AL 35203
         Phone: 205-324-4400
         Fax: 205-397-1310
         E-mail: dsinor@handarendall.com


SEARS HOLDINGS: Faces Consolidated Securities Fraud Suit in N.Y.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sears Holdings Corp. faces a consolidated securities fraud class action in
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

In May and July 2006, two putative class action lawsuits, which each name as
defendants Sears Holdings Corp. and Edward Lampert, were filed in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York, purportedly on behalf
of a class of persons that sold shares of Kmart Holding Corp. stock on or
after May 6, 2003 through June 4, 2004.

The plaintiffs in each case allege that Kmart’s Plan of Reorganization and
Disclosure Statement filed on Jan. 24, 2003 and amended on Feb. 25, 2003
misrepresented Kmart’s assets, particularly its real estate holdings, as
evidenced by the prices at which Kmart subsequently sold certain of its
stores in June 2004 to Home Depot and Sears.  

The plaintiffs seek damages for alleged misrepresentations.

On Dec. 19, 2006, the Court consolidated the actions.  Plaintiffs have filed
their consolidated complaint and Sears’ response is due on July 20, 2007,
according to the company’s May 31, 2007 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended May 5, 2007.

Sears Holdings Corp. -- http://www.searsholdings.com-- is a broadline  
retailer with approximately 2,300 full-line and 1,100 specialty retail stores
in the U.S.


U-HAUL: Appeals Ruling Declaring Reservation Policy as Deceptive
----------------------------------------------------------------
An equipment rental giant is appealing a California judge’s decision last
year saying it engaged in “unlawful and fraudulent business practices,” Los
Angeles Times’ Myron Levin and Alan C. Miller report.

Santa Cruz County Superior Court Judge Samuel S. Stevens condemned U-Haul’s
system of booking reservations for trucks and trailers.

The judge’s ruling last year vindicated all U-Haul customers who got
aggravated over their spoiled reservations with the company.

Judge Stevens refused to award monetary damages to the complainants.

However, he told U-Haul to refrain from advertising “confirmed reservations”
for one-way moves in the state.  He said the company used "the
words 'confirmed reservation' in order to lock up customers as soon as
possible and minimize the chances that customers are going to shop around."

The complaint alleged that the company kept on taking reservations without
even verifying if the equipment is available by the time the customer needs
it.

Customers often used to wait a long time before their equipment arrives or
worse, they had to pick it up somewhere.

U-Haul said in a statement it fulfills about 98% of all reservations and has
never had "a practice to accept reservations that could not be filled."  It
added that its policy has always been fair to customers.

The firm started to make changes after the court’s ruling, which includes the
word “finalized” instead of “confirmed.”

But plaintiffs’ lawyer Tom Cohen still finds the policy deceptive.


UNITED KINGDOM: Ex-pupils Sue County for Neglect, Physical Abuse
----------------------------------------------------------------
Former pupils of Ellindon Special School in Bretton, U.K. were back in court
to face Cambridgeshire County Council in a hearing, Asha Mehta of The Evening
Telegraph reports.

They are suing the council for negligence.  These 123 complainants allege
they suffered excessive physical abuse from the staff between 1980 and late
1990s.

Based on the report, nine of them won payouts for GBP5,100 last May in a
possibly GBP2 million class action.

The plaintiffs have previously appealed to the Huntingdon County Court to
make the school release the personnel and disciplinary files of staff members
who allegedly punished them.

The court has scheduled the next hearing on August, which will be held at
Cambridge Crown Court.

A Cambridgeshire County Council spokesperson said although they have settled
some cases, no one admitted any of the allegations.

According to Solicitor Andrew Grove “The claimants asked the local authority
again to admit liability for mismanaging Ellindon and to get on with the job
of compensating them properly.”

Mr. Grove leads the compensation claim.


VESTIN REALTY: Still Faces Litigation Over Vestin Fund I Merger
---------------------------------------------------------------
Vestin Realty Mortgage I, Inc. (VRM I) and Vestin Mortgage, Inc. remain
defendants in a breach of contract action filed in San Diego Superior Court
by certain plaintiffs who allege, among other things, that they were
wrongfully denied appraisal rights in connection with the merger of Vestin
Fund I into VRM I.

The action is being brought as a purported class action on behalf of all
members of Vestin Fund I who did not vote in favor of the merger.

The company reported no material development in the matter in its May 11,
2007 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for
the quarterly period ended March 31, 2007.

Vestin Fund III LLC reported no material development in the matter in its May
11, 2007 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2007.

Las Vegas, Nevada-based Vestin Realty Mortgage I, Inc. --
http://www.vestinrealtymortgage1.com/-- formerly Vestin Fund I, LLC, is a  
real estate investment trust.  The Company primarily invests in loans secured
by first and second trust deeds on real property. The loans categories
include raw and unimproved land, acquisition and development, construction,
commercial and residential.  The Company had loans in various states, such as
Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas,
Washington and Wisconsin.  The Company's manager is Vestin Mortgage, Inc.
(Vestin Mortgage), which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Vestin Group, Inc.


VESTIN REALTY: Still Faces Litigation Over Vestin Fund II Merger
----------------------------------------------------------------
Vestin Realty Mortgage II, Inc. and Vestin Mortgage, Inc. remain defendants
in a breach of contract suit filed in San Diego Superior Court in California
by certain plaintiffs who allege, among other things, that they were
wrongfully denied appraisal rights in connection with the merger of Vestin
Fund II into Vestin Realty Mortgage II, Inc.

The action is being brought as a purported class action on behalf of all
members of Vestin Fund II who did not vote in favor of the merger.  

Defendants believe that the allegations are without merit and that they have
adequate defenses.  They intend to undertake a vigorous defense.  

The terms of the company's management agreement and Vestin Fund II's
Operating Agreement contain indemnity provisions whereby Vestin Mortgage and
Michael V. Shustek may be eligible for indemnification by the company with
respect to the above action.

Vestin Fund III LLC reported no material development in the matter in its May
11, 2007 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2007.

Las Vegas, Nevada-based Vestin Realty Mortgage II, Inc. (VRM II) --
http://www.vestinrealtymortgage2.com/-- operates as a real estate investment  
trust (REIT).  It was organized for the sole purpose of effecting a merger
with Vestin Fund II, LLC (Fund II). Fund II is engaged in investing in real
estate loans.  On March 31, 2006, Fund II merged into VRM II.  It invests in
loans secured by real estate through deeds of trust or mortgages.  As of Dec.
31, 2006, its loans were made in states, which included Arizona, California,
Hawaii, Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas and Washington.  As of Dec.
31, 2006, approximately 73% of its assets, net of allowance for loan losses,
are classified as investments in real estate loans.  The Company primarily
invests in loans that are secured by first or second trust deeds on real
property.  Such loans fall into categories, which include raw and unimproved
land, acquisition and development, construction, commercial and residential
loans.  Its manager is Vestin Mortgage, Inc. (Vestin Mortgage).


WILLOUGH HEALTHCARE: Fla. Lawsuit Alleges Labor Code Violations
---------------------------------------------------------------
Willough Healthcare, Inc. is facing a class-action complaint filed June 19 in
the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, CourtHouse News
Service reports.

Named plaintiff Michael Cymbalski alleges denial of overtime compensation, a
violation of the Labor Code.

The suit is “Cymbalski v. Willough Healthcare, Inc., Case No. 2:07-cv-00398-
MMH-DNF,” filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of
Florida, under Judge Marcia Morales Howard, with referral to Judge Douglas N.
Frazier.

Representing plaintiffs is:

          Richard Bernard Celler
          Morgan & Morgan
          7450 Griffin Rd., Suite 230
          Davie, FL 33314
          Phone: 954/318-0268
          Fax: 954/333-3515
          E-mail: rceller@forthepeople.com


                 Meetings, Conferences & Seminars




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

July 11-13, 2007
CIVIL PRACTICE AND LITIGATION TECHNIQUES IN FEDERAL AND STATE COURTS
ALI-ABA
Santa Fe, New Mexico
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

July 13, 2007
MEALEY'S AVANDIA® LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

July 18-19, 2007
DRUG AND MEDICAL DEVICE ON TRIAL
American Conference Institute
New York
Contact: https://www.americanconference.com; 1-888-224-2480

July 19-20, 2007
REPRESENTING ESTATE AND TRUST BENEFICIARIES AND FIDUCIARIES
ALI-ABA
Boston
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

September 24-25, 2007
MEALEY'S BAD FAITH LITIGATION CONFERENCE
COMPLETE ANATOMY OF A BAD FAITH CASE: SHARPEN YOUR TRIAL SKILLS, CITE-WORTHY
CASE ANALYSIS, WINNING STRATEGIES
Mealeys Seminars
The Rittenhouse Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 25, 2007
LEXISNEXIS® WOMEN IN THE LEGAL PROFESSION SUMMIT: RAINMAKING, NEGOTIATING AND
COLLABORATIVE DEVELOPMENT
Mealeys Seminars
The Rittenhouse Hotel, Philadelphia
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

September 26-27, 2007
Positioning The Class Action Defense For Early Success
American Conference Institute
Phoenix
Contact: https://www.americanconference.com; 1-888-224-2480

September 26-28, 2007
MEALEY'S NATIONAL ASBESTOS LITIGATION SUPERCONFERENCE: EMERGING ISSUES, TRIAL
SKILLS, INSURANCE, MEDICINE, BANKRUPTCY AND

FINANCIAL & RISK MANAGEMENT
Mealeys Seminars
The Fairmont Scottsdale Princess, Scottsdale, AZ
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

October 1-2, 2007
MEALEY'S SUBPRIME MORTGAGE INSURANCE LITIGATION CONFERENCE
Mealeys Seminars
The InterContinental Chicago
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

October 11-12, 2007
ASBESTOS LITIGATION IN THE 21ST CENTURY
ALI-ABA
New Orleans
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

October 17-18, 2007
MEALEY'S INTERNATIONAL ASBESTOS CONFERENCE
Mealeys Seminars
London, UK
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

October 18-20, 2007
2ND ANNUAL LEXISNEXIS CIC CONFERENCE
Mealeys Seminars
Sheraton Atlanta Hotel, Downtown
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 7-9, 2007
MEALEY'S CONSTRUCTION DEFECT SUPERCONFERENCE
Mealeys Seminars
The Westin Casuarina Las Vegas
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

November 8-9, 2007
CONFERENCE ON LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PRODUCTS: CURRENT SECURITIES, TAX,
ERISA, AND STATE REGULATORY AND COMPLIANCE ISSUES
ALI-ABA
Washington, D.C.
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614

November 14-15, 2007
MEALEY'S GLOBAL REINSURANCE FORUM
Mealeys Seminars
Elbow Beach, Bermuda
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

February 14-16, 2008
LITIGATING MEDICAL MALPRACTICE CLAIMS
ALI-ABA
San Diego
Contact: 215-243-1614; 800-CLE-NEWS x1614


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

July 1-31, 2007
HBA PRESENTS: AUTOMOBILE LITIGATION: DISPUTES AMONG
CONSUMERS, DEALERS, FINANCE COMPANIES AND FLOORPLANNERS
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

July 1-31, 2007
CONSTRUCTION DISPUTES: TEXAS RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION DEFECT LIABILITY
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

July 1-31, 2007
HBA PRESENTS: ETHICS IN PERSONAL INJURY
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

July 1-31, 2007
IN-HOUSE COUNSEL AND WRONGFUL DISCHARGE CLAIMS:
CONFLICT WITH CONFIDENTIALITY?
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

July 1-31, 2007
BAYLOR LAW SCHOOL PRESENTS: 2004 GENERAL PRACTICE INSTITUTE --
FAMILY LAW, DISCIPLINARY SYSTEM, CIVIL LITIGATION, INSURANCE
& CONSUMER LAW UPDATES
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

July 1-31, 2007
HBA PRESENTS: "HOW TO CONSTRUE A CONTRACT IN BOTH CONTRACT AND TORT CASES IN
TEXAS"
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

July 1-31, 2007
CONSTRUCTION DISPUTES: TEXAS RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION DEFECT LIABILITY
CLEOnline.Com
Contact: 512-778-5665; info@cleonline.com

June 27, 2007
MEALEY'S INSURANCE TELECONFERENCE SERIES: REINSURANCE ARBITRATION
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

July 24, 2007
LEXISNEXIS WOMEN IN THE LAW TELECONFERENCE SERIES: RETENTION, WORK-LIFE
BALANCE & DIVERSITY ISSUES FOR WOMEN IN THE LEGAL

PROFESSION
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

July 24, 2007
MEALEY'S TELECONFERENCE: ORTHO EVRA® LITIGATION UPDATE
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

July 25, 2007
LEXISNEXIS® ETHICS TELECONFERENCE SERIES: CONTINGENCY FEE RELATIONSHIPS IN
LIGHT OF THE SANTA CLARA V. ATLANTIC RICHFIELD

COMPANY CASE
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

July 26, 2007
LEXISNEXIS MED SCHOOL FOR LAWYERS: TOXICOLOGY & EXPOSURE DETERMINATION FOR
CAUSAL ASSESSMENT
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

July 31, 2007
MEALEY'S TELECONFERENCE: CONTACT LENS SOLUTION LITIGATION UPDATE
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

July 31, 2007
MEALEY'S TELECONFERENCE: ADVANCED REINSURANCE ARBITRATION: UK AND US
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

August 2, 2007
MEALEY'S TOXIC TORT TELECONFERENCE SERIES: NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGES
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

August 2, 2007
MEALEY'S TELECONFERENCE: PROCEDURAL ISSUES IN REINSURANCE DISPUTES
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

August 7, 2007
MEALEY'S ASBESTOS INSURANCE TELECONFERENCE: WHERE WE STAND IN LIGHT OF
KEASBEY
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

August 8, 2007
MEALEY'S WRAP INSURANCE TELECONFERENCE
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

August 9, 2007
MEALEY'S TOXIC TORT TELECONFERENCE SERIES: VAPOR INTRUSION
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

August 9, 2007
MEALEY'S TELECONFERENCE: MANAGING INSURANCE LITIGATION COSTS
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

August 9, 2007
MEALEY'S TELECONFERENCE SERIES: INSURANCE ISSUES REGARDING SUBPRIME MORTGAGES
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

August 14, 2007
INSURANCE TELECONFERENCE SERIES: PUNITIVE DAMAGES
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.com

August 15, 2007
MEALEY'S TELECONFERENCE: D&O
Mealeys Seminars
Contact: 1-800-MEALEYS; 610-768-7800; mealeyseminars@lexisnexis.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


PLEXUS CORP: Lerach Coughlin Files Wis. Securities Fraud Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP commenced a class action on
behalf of an institutional investor in the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Wisconsin on behalf of purchasers of Plexus Corp. who
purchased the publicly traded securities of Plexus between January 25, 2006
and July 27, 2006, inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.

The complaint charges Plexus and certain of its officers and directors with
violations of the Exchange Act. The Company, together with its subsidiaries,
operates in the electronics manufacturing services industry.

According to the complaint, Defendants issued a series of materially false
and misleading statements concerning Plexus, its business, operations and
prospects. Unbeknownst to shareholders, the true facts were that the Company
was experiencing softness in its defense market segment and was not
performing according to internal expectations and that the Company's United
Kingdom operations were in decline and would have to be reorganized. Prior to
the disclosure of the true facts about the Company, Company insiders sold
more than $26 million dollars of their personally-held shares to the
unsuspecting public.

On July 26, 2006, after the markets closed, Plexus announced lower than
expected financial results for its 2006 fiscal third quarter and reduced the
Company's earnings guidance for its 2006 fiscal fourth quarter.

In response to this announcement, the price of Plexus common stock fell
$10.71 per share, or approximately 32%, to close at $22.89 per share, on
extremely heavy trading volume.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all those who purchased the
publicly traded securities of Plexus between January 25, 2006 and July 27,
2006.

For more information, contact:

          Samuel H. Rudman
          David A. Rosenfeld
          Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP
          Phone: 800/449-4900 or 619/231-1058
          E-mail: wsl@lerachlaw.com
          Website: http://www.lerachlaw.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, Ma. Cristina Canson, and Janice Mendoza, and Mary
Grace Durana, Editors.

Copyright 2007.  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  * * *