CAR_Public/081117.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

           Monday, November 17, 2008, Vol. 10, No. 228

                            Headlines

AMERICAN INT'L: Siskinds LLP Files CDN550M Investor Litigation
ARTHUR J. GALLAGHER: April '09 Hearing Set for Settlement Appeal
CA INC: Briefing on Wyly Litigants' Appeals to Settlement Ended
CONSTELLATION ENERGY: Charles H. Johnson Files ERISA Litigation
FAXTON-ST. LUKE'S: Faces ERISA, FLSA Violations Lawsuit in N.Y.

FIFTH THIRD: Settles Ill. Lawsuit Over Fees on Closing Mortgages
GENERAL ELECTRIC: Faces N.Y. Suit Over Sept. 25 Conference Call
GENERAL ELECTRIC: To Defend Shareholders' Securities Lawsuits
HARTFORD FINANCIAL: Faces Conn. Suit Alleging ERISA Violations
LOUISIANA CITIZENS: Board Approves Paying $35M Suit Settlement

MEDICIS PHARMACEUTICAL: Firm Sets Dec. 2 Lead Plaintiff Deadline
N.Y. HOSPITALS: Crouse, St. Joesph Hourly Workers File Lawsuit
NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL: Settles Calif. Policy Owner's Suit for $92M
NOVASTAR FINANCIAL: Firms File Motion to Dismiss 401(k) Lawsuit
OMNICARE INC: Arguments on Appeal to Junked Suit Held in Sept.

ORACLE CORP: Ninth Circuit Reverses Ruling in "Sullivan" Lawsuit
TERIS LLC: Ariz. Court Affirms Ruling in Suit Over 2005 Accident
WACHOVIA CORP: Directors Face Ehrenhaus Breach Complaint in N.C.
WACHOVIA CORP: Evergreen Units Face Mass. Fund Investors' Suits
WACHOVIA CORP: Faces Suits Over Sale of Auction Rate Securities

WACHOVIA CORP: Jan. 2009 Settlement Fairness Hearing Set in Pa.


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

ANADIGICS INC: Federman & Sherwood Announces Securities Filing
ANADIGICS INC: Izard Nobel LLP Announces Securities Suit Filing
CONSTELLATION ENERGY: Charles H. Johnson Announces Suit Filing
ELAN CORP: Scott+Scott LLP Files Securities Fraud Litigation
NOAH EDUCATION: Dyer & Berens Files Securities Fraud Litigation



                           *********

AMERICAN INT'L: Siskinds LLP Files CDN550M Investor Litigation
--------------------------------------------------------------
    LONDON, ON, Nov. 13, 2008 -- The law firm of Siskinds LLP
today announced that it has filed a proposed CDN550 million
class action against American International Group, Inc. ("AIG"),
AIG Financial Products Corp. ("AIGFP"), and various current and
former directors and officers of AIG and AIGFP.  The proposed
class action has been filed under Ontario's investor protection
law, Part XXIII.1 of the Ontario Securities Act.

    The AIG class action arises out of AIGFP's credit default
swaps and the crippling decline in AIG's stock price when the
true effect of those credit default swaps became known to the
investing public.  The AIG disclosures out of which the class
action arises are currently the subject of investigation by law
enforcement authorities, and are alleged in the class action to
have caused massive losses to Canadian investors.

    Dimitri Lascaris, a Siskinds lawyer prosecuting the AIG
class action, stated "for many years, Canadian corporations have
had to confront the long arm of America's justice system.  But
with the enactment of Part XXIII.1 of the Ontario Securities
Act, Canadian investors can finally pursue remedies in our own
Courts against American corporations that fail to respect
Canada's securities laws. Canadian investors are entitled to
have Canadian Courts hear their claims."

    The AIG class action is brought on behalf of all persons and
entities resident in Canada who acquired AIG securities during
the period from November 10, 2006 to and including September 16,
2008.


ARTHUR J. GALLAGHER: April '09 Hearing Set for Settlement Appeal
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey will hear
on April 20, 2009, an appeal challenging the final approval of a
US$28 million settlement of a Multi-District Litigation
proceeding pending that names Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. as one
of the defendants.

On Oct. 19, 2004, Gallagher was joined as a defendant in a
purported class action suit originally filed in August 2004 in
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by
OptiCare Health Systems Inc. against various large insurance
brokerage firms and commercial insurers.  The suit is "OptiCare
Health Systems Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., et al.,
Case No. 04 CV 06954 (DC))."

An amended complaint alleges that the defendants used the
contingent commission structure of placement service agreements
in a conspiracy to deprive policyholders of "independent and
unbiased brokerage services, as well as free and open
competition in the market for insurance."

Since the fourth quarter of 2004, nine other similar purported
class actions have been filed alleging claims similar to those
alleged by the plaintiff in the OptiCare litigation and such
cases have been included in the MDL proceeding before the U.S.
District Court for the District of New Jersey.

On Dec. 29, 2006, Gallagher reached an agreement to resolve all
claims in the MDL and related matters.  Gallagher admitted no
wrongdoing, but chose to conclude its involvement, rather than
prolong what could have been a costly and burdensome lawsuit.

On April 17, 2007, the court granted preliminary approval of the
Gallagher Settlement.

On Sept. 4, 2007, the court granted final approval of the
Gallagher Settlement.

The Settlement provides for Gallagher to distribute US$28
million to current and former clients and others that purchased
retail insurance through Gallagher or other brokers named as
defendants in the MDL during the period beginning on Aug. 26,
1994, and ending on Dec. 31, 2005.  Gallagher also agreed to pay
up to US$8.9 million in attorney fees.

A notice of appeal was filed challenging the final approval of
the Settlement. (Class Action Reporter, Aug. 11, 2008)

A hearing on the appeal is scheduled to be heard on April 20,
2009, according to the company's Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter
ended Sept. 30, 2008.

Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. -- http://www.ajg.com/-- is engaged
in providing insurance brokerage, risk management, and related
services to clients in the U.S. and abroad.  Its principal
activity is the negotiation and placement of insurance for its
clients.


CA INC: Briefing on Wyly Litigants' Appeals to Settlement Ended
---------------------------------------------------------------
Briefing on the appeals by Sam Wyly and certain related parties
from the court-approved settlement of stockholder class-action
lawsuits filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of New York is complete, according to CA, Inc.'s Oct.
30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008.

The company, its former Chairman and CEO Charles B. Wang, its
former Chairman and CEO Sanjay Kumar, its former Chief Financial
Officer Ira Zar, and its Vice Chairman and Founder Russell M.
Artzt were defendants in one or more stockholder class action
lawsuits filed in July 1998, February 2002, and March 2002 in
the Federal Court, alleging, among other things, that a class
consisting of all persons who purchased the Company's Common
Stock during the period from Jan. 20, 1998 until July 22, 1998
were harmed by misleading statements, misrepresentations, and
omissions regarding the Company's future financial performance.

In addition, in May 2003, a class-action lawsuit captioned,
"John A. Ambler v. Computer Associates International, Inc., et
al.," was filed in the Federal Court.

The complaint in this matter, a purported class action on behalf
of the CA Savings Harvest Plan (the CASH Plan) and the
participants in, and beneficiaries of, the CASH Plan for a class
period from March 30, 1998 through May 30, 2003, asserted claims
of breach of fiduciary duty under the federal Employee
Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).

The named defendants were the Company, the Company's Board of
Directors, the CASH Plan, the Administrative Committee of the
CASH Plan, and certain current or former employees and/or former
directors of the Company: Messrs. Wang, Kumar, Zar, Artzt, Peter
A. Schwartz, and Charles P. McWade; and various unidentified
alleged fiduciaries of the CASH Plan.

The complaint alleged that the defendants breached their
fiduciary duties by causing the CASH Plan to invest in Company
securities and sought damages in an unspecified amount.

On Aug. 25, 2003, the Company announced the settlement of the
class-action lawsuits against the Company and certain of its
present and former officers and directors, alleging misleading
statements, misrepresentations, and omissions regarding the
Company's financial performance, as well as breaches of
fiduciary duty.

As part of the class action settlement, which was approved by
the Federal Court in December 2003, the Company agreed to issue
a total of up to 5.7 million shares of Common Stock to the
stockholders represented in the three class action lawsuits,
including payment of attorneys' fees.

The Company has completed the issuance of the settlement shares
as well as payment of US$3.3 million to the plaintiffs'
attorneys in legal fees and related expenses.

On Dec. 7, 2004, a motion to vacate the Order of Final Judgment
and Dismissal entered by the Federal Court in December 2003 in
connection with the settlement of the 1998 and 2002 stockholder
lawsuits was filed by the Wyly Litigants.

The motion sought to reopen the settlement to permit the moving
stockholders to pursue individual claims against certain present
and former officers of the Company.  The motion stated that the
moving stockholders did not seek to file claims against the
Company.

In a memorandum and order dated Aug. 2, 2007, the Federal Court
denied all of the 60(b) Motions and reaffirmed the 2003
settlements.  On Aug. 24, 2007, the Wyly Litigants filed notices
of appeal of the August 2 decision.  On Aug. 16, 2007, the
Special Litigation Committee filed a motion to amend or clarify
the August 2 decision, and the Company joined that motion.  On
Sept. 12 and Oct. 4, 2007, the Federal Court issued opinions
denying the motions to amend or clarify.  On Sept. 18, 2007, the
Wyly Litigants filed notices of appeal of the September 12
decision.  The Company filed notices of cross-appeal of the
September 12 and October 4 decisions on Nov. 2, 2007.

On July 28, 2008, the Wyly Litigants served their opening
briefs. On Sept. 11, 2008, the Company filed its brief in
opposition to the Wyly Litigants' appeals.  Also on Sept. 11,
2008, current CA director The Honorable Alfonse M. D'Amato and
former CA directors Richard Grasso, Shirley Strum Kenny, Jay
Lorsch, Roel Pieper, Lewis Ranieri, Walter Schuetze, Willem F.P.
de Vogel and Charles Wang filed briefs in opposition to the Wyly
Litigants' appeals.  On Oct. 9, 2008, the Wyly Litigants filed a
reply brief in support of their appeals in the class actions.

Islandia, N.Y.-based CA, Inc. -- http://www.ca.com/-- provides
tools for managing networks, databases, applications, storage,
security, and other systems.


CONSTELLATION ENERGY: Charles H. Johnson Files ERISA Litigation
---------------------------------------------------------------
     MINNEAPOLIS, Nov. 13, 2008 -- Charles H. Johnson &
Associates announces that a class action has been commenced
against Constellation Energy Group, Inc. ("Constellation")
(NYSE:CEG) for violations of the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974, as amended ("ERISA").

     The Complaint was filed in the United States District Court
for the District of Maryland on behalf of a class of all persons
who were participants in or beneficiaries of the Employee
Savings Plan and the Represented Employee Savings Plan for Nine
Mile Point (the "Plans") between January 30, 2008 and the
present (the "Class Period") and whose Plan accounts included
investments in Constellation common stock.

     The Complaint alleges that certain Defendants, each having
certain responsibilities regarding the management and investment
the of Plans' assets, breached their fiduciary duties to the
Plans and proposed Class by failing to prudently and loyally
manage the Plans' investment in Company securities by:

       -- continuing to offer Constellation common stock as an
          investment option when it was imprudent to do so;

       -- failing to provide complete and accurate information
          to the Plans participants regarding the Company's
          financial condition and the prudence of investigating
          in Company stock; and

       -- maintaining the Plans' pre-existing investments in
          Constellation stock when Company stock was no longer a
          prudent investment for the Plans.

For more details, contact:

          Neal Eisenbraun, Esq. (cjohnsonlaw@gmail.com)
          Charles H. Johnson & Associates
          2599 Mississippi Street
          New Brighton, MN 55112
          Phone: (651) 633-5685


FAXTON-ST. LUKE'S: Faces ERISA, FLSA Violations Lawsuit in N.Y.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Faxton-St. Luke's Healthcare faces a purported class-action
lawsuit in New York generally alleging violations of the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and the Fair
Labor Standards Act, Joleen Ferris of WKTV reports.

The suit was filed by Dawn Hamelin, Julie Flint, and Rakiesha
Griffin in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
New York on Nov. 13, 2008.  It was brought on behalf of 89
current and former employees of the healthcare provider.

Captioned, "Hamelin et al v. Faxton-St. Luke's Healthcare et
al., Case No. 6:08-cv-01219-DNH-GJD," the suit is claiming that
the healthcare organization's payroll system automatically and
repeatedly deducted 30 minutes for lunch periods that the busy
healthcare workers never took, according to WKTV.

The suit is "Hamelin et al v. Faxton-St. Luke's Healthcare et
al., Case No. 6:08-cv-01219-DNH-GJD," filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of New York, Judge David N.
Hurd, presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs are:

          J. Nelson Thomas, Esq.
          (nthomas@theemploymentattorneys.com)
          Dolin, Thomas Law Firm
          693 East Avenue
          Rochester, NY 14607
          Phone: 585-272-0540
          Fax: 585-272-0574

  
FIFTH THIRD: Settles Ill. Lawsuit Over Fees on Closing Mortgages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fifth Third Mortgage Co. settled a purported class-action suit
that was filed in the Madison County Circuit Court by The Lakin
Law Firm, Steve Korris of The Madison County Record reports.

The lawsuit was filed in 2003, as one of about 30 proposed
class-action lawsuits over fees that lenders charged when
closing mortgages.  It was filed by Michael Stevens and Helen
Stevens, whom Fifth Third Mortgage charged $100 for a credit
report.

On Nov. 7, 2008, the plaintiffs dismissed a claim that Fifth
Third charged them more for a credit report than the report
cost, according to The Madison County Record report.

The Madison County Record reported that at a hearing in 2007,
Mark Brown of the Lakin firm told Circuit Judge David Hylla his
clients could recover damages if Fifth Third added one cent to
the cost of the report.

Judge Hylla ruled that Mr. Brown's clients could pursue claims
of unjust enrichment and breach of contract, but they did not
pursue the claims.

The case remained idle until the parties reached agreement.  The
stipulation of settlement that they presented to Judge Hylla did
not reveal terms, The Madison County Record reported.


GENERAL ELECTRIC: Faces N.Y. Suit Over Sept. 25 Conference Call
---------------------------------------------------------------
A purported class-action suit naming General Electric Co. as
defendant, as well as GE's chief executive officer and chief
financial officer is at the earliest stage, according to the
company's Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept.
30, 2008.

In October 2008, shareholders filed the purported class-action
suit under the federal securities laws in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York.

The complaint alleges that during a conference call with
analysts on Sept. 25, 2008, defendants made false and misleading
statements concerning:

   (i) the state of GE's funding, cash flows, and liquidity and

  (ii) the question of issuing additional equity, which caused
       economic loss to those shareholders who purchased GE
       stock between Sept. 25, 2008 and Oct. 2, 2008, when GE
       announced the pricing of a common stock offering.

The case seeks unspecified damages.

Conn.-based General Electric Co. -- http://www.ge.com/-- is a
diversified technology, media and financial services company.
With products and services ranging from aircraft engines, power
generation, water processing and security technology to medical
imaging, business and consumer financing, media content and
industrial products, it serves customers in more than 100
countries.


GENERAL ELECTRIC: To Defend Shareholders' Securities Lawsuits
-------------------------------------------------------------
General Electric Co. intends to defend itself in lawsuits filed
by shareholders under the federal securities laws, according to
the company's Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept.
30, 2008.

In July and September 2008, shareholders filed two purported
class-action lawsuits under the federal securities laws in the
U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut naming GE as
defendant, as well as GE's chief executive officer and chief
financial officer.

The complaints allege that GE and GE's chief executive officer
made false and misleading statements that artificially inflated
GE's stock price between March 12, 2008 and April 10, 2008, when
GE announced that its results for the first quarter of 2008
would not meet GE's previous guidance and GE also lowered its
full year guidance for 2008.

In addition, shareholders have filed two purported derivative
actions in New York State court against GE's chief executive
officer and chief financial officer, the members of GE's board
and GE (as nominal defendant) for alleged breach of fiduciary
duty and other claims in connection with these events.

These four cases, which seek unspecified damages, are in their
earliest stages.

Conn.-based General Electric Co. -- http://www.ge.com/-- is a
diversified technology, media and financial services company.
With products and services ranging from aircraft engines, power
generation, water processing and security technology to medical
imaging, business and consumer financing, media content and
industrial products, it serves customers in more than 100
countries.


HARTFORD FINANCIAL: Faces Conn. Suit Alleging ERISA Violations
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Hartford Financial Services Group Inc. is facing a purported
class-action lawsuit in Connecticut, alleging violations of the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act, Diane Levick of The
Hartford Courant reports.

The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District
of Connecticut, and assigned to Judge Peter C. Dorsey.  It was
filed by by employees, who, according to The Hartford Courant,
have lost hundreds of millions of dollars in their retirement
savings plan by investing in the company's stock.

The Hartford Courant reported that the plan had total assets of
$3.04 billion at the end of 2007, and current and former
employees had $650.9 million, or 21.4 percent, of that invested
in The Hartford's stock.  However, since Dec. 31, 2007 the stock
price has plummeted 88 percent, from $87.19 to $10.46 a share,
as investors reacted to soured investments, depressed variable
annuity profits and a disappointing 2009 outlook.

Robert A. Izard, a partner in the Hartford law firm Izard Nobel
told The Hartford Courant, "The losses certainly have been
dramatic over the past year; a lot of people have lost a lot of
money."  Mr. Izard and his firm is local counsel for the civil
suit proposed as a class action.

The allegations in the suit include mismanagement of the 401(k)
retirement plan and failure to disclose the company's true
financial condition to participants.

The suit says employees weren't warned about The Hartford's
"excessively risky investment practices" and trouble in the
annuity business.

It alleges that the defendants failed to prudently manage or
oversee the plan as required by the federal Employee Retirement
Income Security Act.


LOUISIANA CITIZENS: Board Approves Paying $35M Suit Settlement
--------------------------------------------------------------
The board of Louisiana Citizens Insurance Corp. approved paying
up to $35 million to settle a class-action lawsuit, alleging
that the firm took too long to pay off policyholders' claims
after the 2005 hurricanes, The Associated Press reports.

The board of Louisiana's last-resort insurance company vote
decision means that the settlement could get its final approval
in a hearing Dec. 15, 2008 from state District Judge Kern Reese
in New Orleans, according to The Associated Press.

The roughly 30,000 claimants could get up to $1,000 each,
depending on how many are approved to join the class-action
lawsuit, The Associated Press reported.


MEDICIS PHARMACEUTICAL: Firm Sets Dec. 2 Lead Plaintiff Deadline
----------------------------------------------------------------
     NEW YORK, Nov. 13, 2008 -- Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman
& Gross LLP ("Pomerantz" or the "Firm") remind investors of
Medicis Pharmaceutical Corporation ("Medicis" or the "Company")
that December 2, 2008 is the deadline to request that the Court
appoint you as Lead Plaintiff in the class action.

     Pomerantz filed an action against the company and certain
officers of the Company on behalf of purchasers of Medicis'
common stock during the period from October 30, 2003 to
September 23, 2008, both dates inclusive, (the "Class Period").

     The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court,
District of Arizona for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

     Medicis develops and markets products for the treatment of
dermatological, aesthetic, and podiatric conditions.  The
complaint alleges that during the class period, defendants
issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the
Company's business and financial results. Specifically,
defendants overstated the Company's revenues and earnings by
failing to properly account for returns in accordance with
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP").

     The complaint specifically alleges that on September 24,
2008, the Company announced that its Audit Committee concluded
that the Company's financial statements for fiscal years 2003
through 2007 and the first and second quarters of 2008, would
need to be restated due to improper return reserve calculations.
Medicis admitted that it had improperly "accrued returns at
replacement cost rather than deferring the gross sales price,"
and that it would have to revise "its reserve calculations to
defer the gross sales value of the returned product."

     On this news, Medicis' stock dropped $2.34 per share to
close at $15.58 per share, a one-day decline of 13%.  As a
result of the challenged statements Medicis' common stock traded
at artificially inflated prices throughout the Class Period,
resulting in damage to class members who had purchased at prices
inflated by defendants' materially false and misleading
statements.

For more details, contact:

          Teresa L. Webb (tlwebb@pomlaw.com)
          Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP
          Phone: 888.476.6529


N.Y. HOSPITALS: Crouse, St. Joesph Hourly Workers File Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Crouse and St. Joseph's hospitals are named in a class-action
lawsuit filed in a New York court, which accuses them of failing
to pay hourly employees for missed lunch breaks while they were
caring for patients, WSYR-TV reports.

According to WSYR-TV, the firm that filed the lawsuit says a
software program used to manage workers hours automatically
deducted a half an hour for a lunch break, even if it was missed
or interrupted.

If you worked at Crouse or St. Joseph's as an hourly employee
anytime in the past six years, you may be able to participate in
the suit, WSYR-TV reported.

In response to the suit, Crouse told WSYR-TV that their payroll
policies and practices have been found by the Department of
Labor to be in full compliance.

To get more information go to http://www.hospitalovertime.com.


NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL: Settles Calif. Policy Owner's Suit for $92M
----------------------------------------------------------------
Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Co. has agreed to pay up to
$92 million to settle a class-action lawsuit accusing it of
failing to pay dividends on certain term life policies and using
improper sales and marketing practices, Paul Gores of The
Journal Sentinel reports.

The case was filed in Los Angeles, California in 2004 by a
customer who alleged the sales material used by the Milwaukee-
based insurer misled him about whether dividends would be paid
on term life and disability insurance.

In the litigation, plaintiff Nicholas Papadakis alleged fraud,
deceptive marketing and sales practices, breach of fiduciary
duties, breach of contract and unfair competition by the
company, according to The Journal Sentinel.

The Journal Sentinel reported that the proposed settlement
covers about 1.3 million current and 1.6 million former policy
owners who purchased term life or disability coverage since
1981.

The $92 million will settle the term life dividend issue in the
lawsuit, while the suit's concerns about disability dividends
will be settled by distribution of a brochure that explains how
Northwestern Mutual develops its dividends.

Checks with the term life settlement payouts are expected to be
mailed next spring if the agreement receives final approval from
California Superior Court in Los Angeles next month.  The
settlement is scheduled for a final hearing Dec. 24, 2008,
according to The Journal Sentinel report.


NOVASTAR FINANCIAL: Firms File Motion to Dismiss 401(k) Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
     NEW YORK, Nov. 13, 2008 -- Stull, Stull & Brody and Gainey
& McKenna have filed a Class Action Complaint for Violations of
the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (the "Complaint")
against NovaStar Financial, Inc. ("NovaStar" or the "Company")
(Pink Sheets:NOVS) and certain individuals who are believed to
have been fiduciaries of the NovaStar Financial, Inc. 401(k)
Plan (the "Plan") during the period May 4, 2006 through November
15, 2007, inclusive (the "Class Period").

     The Complaint alleges that Defendants allowed the imprudent
investment of the Plan's assets in NovaStar common stock
throughout the Class Period despite the fact that they knew or
should have known that such investment was unduly risky and
imprudent due to the Company's serious mismanagement and
improper business practices.

     The Complaint further alleges that the Plan's fiduciaries
also failed to disclose information about NovaStar to the Plan's
participants in violation of ERISA.

     On November 12, 2008, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss
the Complaint, arguing that, among other things, the current
named plaintiff is not a proper party to bring claims on behalf
of the Plan and the Plan's participants.  The deadline for
opposing this motion is November 24, 2008.

For more details, contact:

          Edwin J. Mills, Esq.
          Michael J. Klein, Esq.
          Stull, Stull & Brody
          6 East 45th Street,
          New York, NY 10017
          Phone: 1-800-337-4983
          Fax: 212-490-2022
          e-mail: SSBNY@aol.com

               - and -

          Gainey & McKenna, Esq.
          Thomas J. McKenna, Esq.
          Gainey & McKenna
          295 Madison Avenue
          4th Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Phone: (212) 983-1300
          Fax: (212) 983-0383
          e-mail: tjmckenna@gaineyandmckenna.com


OMNICARE INC: Arguments on Appeal to Junked Suit Held in Sept.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Oral argument on the plaintiffs' appeal from their dismissed
consolidated putative class action lawsuit was held on Sept. 18,
2008, according to Omnicare, Inc.'s Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008.

On Feb. 2, 2006, a putative class-action lawsuit entitled,
"Indiana State Dist. Council of Laborers & HOD Carriers Pension
& Welfare Fund v. Omnicare, Inc., et al., No. 2:06cv26" was
filed against Omnicare and two of its officers in the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky.

On Feb. 13, 2006, a substantially similar putative class action
lawsuit was filed, entitled, "Chi v. Omnicare, Inc., et al., No.
2:06cv31."

The suits purport to assert claims for violation of Section
10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule
10b-5 promulgated thereunder, and seek, among other things,
compensatory damages and injunctive relief.

The complaints, which purported to be brought on behalf of all
open-market purchasers of Omnicare common stock from Aug. 3,
2005 through Jan. 27, 2006, alleged that Omnicare had
artificially inflated its earnings by engaging in improper
generic drug substitution and that defendants had made false and
misleading statements regarding the company's business and
prospects.

On April 3, 2006, plaintiffs in the HOD Carriers case formally
moved for consolidation and the appointment of lead plaintiff
and lead counsel under the Private Securities Litigation Reform
Act of 1995.  On May 22, 2006, that motion was granted, the
cases were consolidated, and a lead plaintiff and lead counsel
were appointed.

On July 20, 2006, plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended
complaint, adding a third officer as a defendant and new factual
allegations primarily relating to revenue recognition, the
valuation of receivables and the valuation of inventories.

On Oct. 31, 2006, plaintiffs moved for leave to file a second
amended complaint, which was granted on Jan. 26, 2007, on the
condition that no further amendments would be permitted absent
extraordinary circumstances. Plaintiffs then filed their second
amended complaint on Jan. 29, 2007.

The second amended complaint:

(i) expands the putative class to include all purchasers of
(ii)Omnicare common stock from Aug. 3, 2005 through July 27, 2006,

(iii) names two members of the company's board of directors
(iv)as additional defendants,

(v) adds a new plaintiff and a new claim for violation of
(vi)Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 based on alleged false
and misleading statements in the registration
(vii)statement filed in connection with the company's December 2005
public offering,

(viii) alleges that the company failed to timely disclose its
(ix)contractual dispute with UnitedHealth, and

(x) alleges that the company failed to timely record certain
(xi)special litigation reserves.

The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the second amended
complaint on March 12, 2007, claiming that plaintiffs had failed
adequately to plead loss causation, scienter or any actionable
misstatement or omission.  That motion was fully briefed at May
1, 2007.

In response to certain arguments relating to the individual
claims of the named plaintiffs that were raised in defendants'
pending motion to dismiss, plaintiffs filed a motion to add, or
in the alternative, to intervene an additional named plaintiff,
Alaska Electrical Pension Fund, on July 27, 2007.

On Oct. 12, 2007, the court issued an opinion and order
dismissing the case and denying plaintiffs' motion to add an
additional named plaintiff.

On Nov. 9, 2007, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal with
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit with respect to
the dismissal of their case.

The suit is "Indiana State District Council of Laborers and HOD
Carriers Pension and Welfare Fund, et al. v. Omnicare, Inc., et
al., Case No. 2:06-cv-00026-WOB," filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, Judge William O.
Bertelsman.

Representing the plaintiff are:

         Richard A. Maniskas, Esq. (rmaniskas@sbclasslaw.com)
         Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP
         280 King of Prussia Road
         Radnor, PA 19087
         Phone: 610-667-7706
         Fax: 610-667-7056

              - and -

         Kevin L. Murphy, Esq. (kmurphy@graydon.com)
         Graydon, Head & Ritchey, LLP
         2500 Chamber Center Drive, Suite 300, P.O. Box 17070
         Ft. Mitchell, KY 41017
         Phone: 859-344-0330
         Fax: 859-344-0886


Representing the defendant is:

         Richard W. Reinthaler, Esq. (lpmco@dbllp.com)
         Dewey Ballantine LLP
         1301 Avenue of the Americas
         New York, NY 10019-6092
         Phone: 212-258-8000
         Fax: 212-259-6333


ORACLE CORP: Ninth Circuit Reverses Ruling in "Sullivan" Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a
summary judgment ruling in the matter, "Donald Sullivan et al v.
Oracle Corporation et al., Case No. 8:05-cv-00392-AHS-MLG,"
according to Mondaq News Alerts.

The plaintiffs, three non-residents of California, brought a
putative class-action lawsuit against their employer, software
giant Oracle Corp., for failing to pay overtime as required by
California law.

The plaintiffs, Donald Sullivan, Deanna Evich, and Richard
Burkow, were employed as "Instructors" who traveled to
California and other locations throughout the U.S. to provide
software support and training, according to Mondaq News Alerts.

Two of the three were residents of Colorado which has its own
state overtime law, and the third was a resident of Arizona,
where the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is the
governing wage-hour law.

According to Mondaq News Alerts, the plaintiffs mostly worked in
their home states; their annual employment in California ranged
only from 5 to 33 days.  Though Oracle paid these employees
overtime in accordance with Colorado law and the FLSA
respectively, due to the enhanced benefits provided under the
California Labor Code, the plaintiffs earned less overtime pay
under these statutes than they would have under California law.

Believing they were entitled to overtime pay under the
California Labor Code for days worked in California, plaintiffs
filed a complaint in California state court in which (among
other things) they sought to recover the overtime to which they
would have been entitled under the California Labor Code.

After removing the case to the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California, Oracle Corp. obtained summary
judgment, according to Mondaq News Alerts.

On appeal, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit unanimously
reversed.  They held that the California Labor Code extends to
non-resident employees who perform work in California, even when
that work is performed only on a temporary basis, according to
Mondaq News Alerts.

The suit os "Donald Sullivan et al v. Oracle Corporation et al.,
Case No. 8:05-cv-00392-AHS-MLG," filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Central District of California, Judge Alicemarie
H. Stotler, presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs are:

          Robert Walter Thompson, Esq.
          (robert_thompson@cmwlaw.net)
          Callahan McCune & Willis
          111 Fashion Lane
          Tustin, CA 92780-3397
          Phone: 714-730-5700

Representing the defendants are:

          Stephen L. Berry, Esq. (stephenberry@paulhastings.com)
          Paul Hastings Janofsky & Walker
          695 Town Ctr. Dr.
          17th Fl.
          Costa Mesa, CA 92626-1924
          Phone: 714-668-6200


TERIS LLC: Ariz. Court Affirms Ruling in Suit Over 2005 Accident
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's decision in
a class-action lawsuit against Teris LLC, Op-Tech Environmental
Services Inc. and CSX Transportation Inc. over an evacuation
after a 2005 explosion and chemical fire in El Dorado, The
Associated Press reports.

In a recently issued decision, justices affirmed a Union County
judge's ruling allowing those suing the defendants to name who
could join their lawsuit.  Under the terms, any adult from a
home or business forced to evacuate from certain areas around
the Teris facility could join the suit.

The companies appealed the judge's decision.  However, justices'
dismissed the companies' claims that the definition of who could
join the suit was too broad and other issues, according to The
Associated Press report.

The Associated Press reports that nearly 2,500 people were
evacuated Jan. 2, 2005, after an explosion at the Teris
hazardous-waste storage warehouse.  No one was injured and the
evacuees were allowed to return to their homes and businesses a
day later.  The fire smoldered for days after firefighters chose
not to fight it for fear that water would react dangerously with
some of the stored chemicals.


WACHOVIA CORP: Directors Face Ehrenhaus Breach Complaint in N.C.
----------------------------------------------------------------
A purported class-action complaint captioned, "Irving Ehrenhaus
v. John D. Baker, et al.," was filed on Oct. 8, 2008, according
to Wachovia Corp.'s Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept.
30, 2008.

The complaint, filed in the Superior Court for the County of
Mecklenburg in the State of North Carolina, names as defendants
Wachovia, Wells Fargo, and the directors of Wachovia.

The complaint alleges that the Wachovia directors breached their
fiduciary duties in approving the merger with Wells Fargo at an
allegedly inadequate price, and that the Wells Fargo directors
aided and abetted the alleged breaches of fiduciary duty.

The action seeks to enjoin the Wells Fargo merger, or to recover
compensatory or rescissory damages if the merger is consummated,
as well as an award of attorneys' fees and costs.

The plaintiffs have asked the Court for expedited discovery and
to set a hearing date for a preliminary injunction motion to
enjoin the shareholder vote and the closing of the transaction.

Wachovia Corp. -- http://www.wachovia.com/-- is a financial
holding company and a bank holding company.  It provides
commercial and retail banking, and trust services through full-
service banking offices in Alabama, Arizona, California,
Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois,
Kansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, New York,
North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas,
Virginia and Washington, D.C.  It also provides various other
financial services, including mortgage banking, investment
banking, investment advisory, home equity lending, asset-based
lending, leasing, insurance, international and securities
brokerage services, through other subsidiaries.  The company's
retail securities brokerage business is conducted through
Wachovia Securities, LLC, and operates in 49 states.


WACHOVIA CORP: Evergreen Units Face Mass. Fund Investors' Suits
---------------------------------------------------------------
Various Evergreen Investment entities are facing three purported
class-action lawsuits filed in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Massachusetts, according to Wachovia Corp.'s Oct.
30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008.

Evergreen Investments is the brand name under which Wachovia
conducts its investment management business.

The suits are:

   -- Keefe v. EIMCO , et al.;
   -- Krantzberg v. Evergreen Fixed Income Trust, et al.; and
   -- Mierzwinski v. EIMCO , et al.

All suits relate to the same events.

The cases generally allege that investors in the Evergreen Ultra
Short Opportunities Fund suffered losses as a result of:

   (i) misleading statements in the Fund's prospectus,

  (ii) the failure to accurately price securities in the Fund at
       different points in time, and

(iii) the failure of the Fund's risk disclosures and
description
       of its investment strategy to inform investors adequately
       of the actual risks of the fund.

Wachovia Corp. -- http://www.wachovia.com/-- is a financial
holding company and a bank holding company.  It provides
commercial and retail banking, and trust services through full-
service banking offices in Alabama, Arizona, California,
Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois,
Kansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, New York,
North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas,
Virginia and Washington, D.C.  It also provides various other
financial services, including mortgage banking, investment
banking, investment advisory, home equity lending, asset-based
lending, leasing, insurance, international and securities
brokerage services, through other subsidiaries.  The company's
retail securities brokerage business is conducted through
Wachovia Securities, LLC, and operates in 49 states.


WACHOVIA CORP: Faces Suits Over Sale of Auction Rate Securities
---------------------------------------------------------------
Wachovia Corp. is a facing three new purported class-action
suits relating to its sale of auction rate securities, according
to the company's Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept.
30, 2008.

The action styled, "Baytide Petroleum v. Wachovia Securities,
LLC, et al.," was filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Oklahoma.

The other two cases, "Mayfield v. Wachovia Securities, LLC, et
al. and Mayor and City of Baltimore v. Wachovia Securities, LLC,
et al.," were both filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York and allege identical antitrust
related claims.

On Aug. 15, 2008, the company announced it had reached
settlements in principle with the Secretary of State for the
State of Missouri (as the lead state in the North American
Securities Administrators Association task force investigating
the marketing and sale of auction rate securities), with the New
York State Attorney General's Office and with the SEC of their
respective investigations of sales practice and other issues
related to the sales of ARS by certain affiliates and
subsidiaries of Wachovia.

Wachovia Corp. -- http://www.wachovia.com/-- is a financial
holding company and a bank holding company.  It provides
commercial and retail banking, and trust services through full-
service banking offices in Alabama, Arizona, California,
Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois,
Kansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, New York,
North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas,
Virginia and Washington, D.C.  It also provides various other
financial services, including mortgage banking, investment
banking, investment advisory, home equity lending, asset-based
lending, leasing, insurance, international and securities
brokerage services, through other subsidiaries.  The company's
retail securities brokerage business is conducted through
Wachovia Securities, LLC, and operates in 49 states.


WACHOVIA CORP: Jan. 2009 Settlement Fairness Hearing Set in Pa.
---------------------------------------------------------------
A fairness hearing on the settlements of two putative class-
action lawsuits filed against Wachovia Corp. is scheduled for
January 2009, according to the company's Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008.

On Feb. 17, 2006, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania filed a civil fraud complaint against a
former Wachovia Bank, N.A. customer, Payment Processing Center.

PPC was a third party payment processor for telemarketing and
catalogue companies.

On April 12, 2007, a civil class-action suit, "Faloney et al. v.
Wachovia," was filed against Wachovia in the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by a putative class of
consumers who made purchases through telemarketer customers of
PPC.

The suit alleges that between April 1, 2005 and February 21,
2006, Wachovia conspired with PPC to facilitate PPC's purported
violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
Act.

On Feb. 15, 2008, a second putative class-action suit, "Harrison
v. Wachovia," was filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania by a putative class of
consumers who made purchases through telemarketing customers of
three other third party payment processors which banked with
Wachovia.

On Aug. 14, 2008, Wachovia reached agreements to settle the
Faloney and Harrison class-action lawsuits.  The settlements
have received preliminary approval from the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

Wachovia Corp. -- http://www.wachovia.com/-- is a financial
holding company and a bank holding company.  It provides
commercial and retail banking, and trust services through full-
service banking offices in Alabama, Arizona, California,
Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois,
Kansas, Maryland, Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, New York,
North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas,
Virginia and Washington, D.C.  It also provides various other
financial services, including mortgage banking, investment
banking, investment advisory, home equity lending, asset-based
lending, leasing, insurance, international and securities
brokerage services, through other subsidiaries.  The company's
retail securities brokerage business is conducted through
Wachovia Securities, LLC, and operates in 49 states.


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

ANADIGICS INC: Federman & Sherwood Announces Securities Filing
--------------------------------------------------------------
     OKLAHOMA CITY, OK, Nov 13, 2008 -- On November 11, 2008, a
class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District
Court for the District of New Jersey against Anadigics, Inc.

     The complaint alleges violations of federal securities
laws, Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and Rule 10b-5, including allegations of issuing a series
of material misrepresentations to the market which had the
effect of artificially inflating the market price.  The class
period is from July 25, 2007 through February 12, 2008.

     Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of the Class.

For more details, contact:

          William B. Federman, Esq. (wfederman@aol.com)
          Federman & Sherwood
          10205 North Pennsylvania Avenue
          Oklahoma City, OK 73120
          Web site: http://www.federmanlaw.com


ANADIGICS INC: Izard Nobel LLP Announces Securities Suit Filing
---------------------------------------------------------------
     HARTFORD, CT., Nov. 13, 2008 -- The law firm of Izard Nobel
LLP, which has significant experience representing investors in
prosecuting claims of securities fraud, announces that a lawsuit
seeking class action status has been filed in the United States
District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf of those
who purchased the common stock of Anadigics, Inc. ("Anadigics"
or the "Company") between July 25, 2007 and February 12, 2008,
inclusive (the "Class Period").

     The Complaint charges that Anadigics and certain of its
officers and directors violated federal securities laws.
Specifically, defendants failed to disclose the following:

       -- the Company was experiencing manufacturing
          inefficiencies associated with increased production
          levels and would not be able to meet its stated
          guidance;

       -- Anadigics was at risk of losing customers due to its
          inability to meet demand; and

       -- as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a
          reasonable basis for their positive statements about
          the Company and its prospects.

For more details, contact:

          Nancy A. Kulesa, Esq.
          Wayne T. Boulton, Esq.
          Izard Nobel LLP
          Phone: (800) 797-5499
          e-mail: firm@izardnobel.com
          Web site: http://www.izardnobel.com


CONSTELLATION ENERGY: Charles H. Johnson Announces Suit Filing
--------------------------------------------------------------
     MINNEAPOLIS, Nov. 13, 2008 -- Charles H. Johnson &
Associates announces that a class action has been commenced in
the United States District Court for the District of Maryland on
behalf of purchasers of Constellation Energy Group, Inc.
("Constellation" or the "Company") publicly traded securities
during the period January 30, 2008 through September 16, 2008
(the "Class Period").

     The suit alleges that during the Class Period,
Constellation Energy issued materially false and misleading
statements regarding the Company's operations and financial
performance.  Defendants failed to disclose that the Company's
financial results were inflated by questionable accounting
practices.

     In addition, the Company concealed the extent of its credit
exposure to failing trading partners, particularly Lehman
Brothers Holding Inc., which would affect the Company's ability
to engage in energy-related trades.  As a result of Defendants'
false statements and omissions during the Class Period,
Constellation Energy common shares traded at artificially
inflated prices.

     In August 2008, Constellation Energy's share prices
softened as analysts began to question certain aspects of the
Company's accounting, particularly the Company's questionable
characterizations of depreciation, cash flow and mark-to-market
adjustments.

     Shortly thereafter, on September 15, 2008, Lehman Brothers,
a key trading partner of Constellation Energy, filed for Chapter
11 bankruptcy protection.  On that day, investors were stunned
as Constellation's business exposure to the Lehman bankruptcy
was revealed. By the close of the Class Period, the Company's
shares traded at $24.77 per share, a 75% loss from the Class
Period high.

For more details, contact:

          Neal Eisenbraun, Esq. (cjohnsonlaw@gmail.com)
          Charles H. Johnson & Associates
          2599 Mississippi Street
          New Brighton, MN 55112
          Phone: (651) 633-5685


ELAN CORP: Scott+Scott LLP Files Securities Fraud Litigation
------------------------------------------------------------
     NEW YORK, Nov. 13, 2008 -- Scott+Scott LLP filed a class
action lawsuit against Elan Corporation, plc ("Elan" or the
"Company") and certain officers and directors of the Company in
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
The action is on behalf of those purchasing American Depository
Receipts ("ADRs") of Elan during the period beginning June 17,
2008 through July 29, 2008, inclusive (the "Class Period''), for
violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

     According to the complaint, during the Class Period, Elan
issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the
Phase II clinical results of the Company's investigational
treatment for Alzheimer's disease, bapineuzumab.  As a result of
defendants' false statements and omissions during the Class
Period, Elan ADRs traded at artificially inflated prices.

     Specifically, Elan failed to disclose unfavorable results
from the bapineuzumab trial in a June 17, 2008 press release
regarding the study, misrepresenting the safety and efficacy of
the drug to investors and analysts.

     As a result of the press release, Elan ADRs surged upward
nearly 11% in one day. However, when the detailed Phase II
results were finally disclosed, the Company's prior
representations on the safety and efficacy of bapineuzumab were
shown to be overblown.  On that day, the price of Elan's ADRs
plunged from $33.75 to $19.63.

For moee details, contact:

          Scott+Scott, LLP
          108 Norwich Avenue
          P.O. Box 192
          Colchester, CT 06415
          Phone: (800) 404-7770 or (860) 537-5537
          e-mail: scottlaw@scott-scott.com


NOAH EDUCATION: Dyer & Berens Files Securities Fraud Litigation
---------------------------------------------------------------
     DENVER, Nov. 13, 2008 -- Dyer & Berens LLP today announced
that it has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf
of certain investors of Noah Education Holdings, Ltd. ("Noah
Education" or the "Company") (NYSE:NED) who purchased the
American Depositary Shares ("ADSs") of Noah Education in or
traceable to the Company's initial public offering on or about
October 19, 2007 (the "IPO") to November 19, 2007.  The
complaint charges Noah Education and the lead underwriters for
the IPO with violations of the federal securities laws.

     The class action complaint alleges that the public filings
made in connection with the IPO were false and misleading and
failed to disclose to the market certain material facts about
the Company's business operations and financial performance.

     According to the complaint, the defendants were responsible
for the content and dissemination of these public filings, which
positively described the Company's business and its abilities in
managing raw materials supplies.

     Contrary to these statements, by the time of the IPO, Noah
Education had completed its first fiscal quarter and the Company
was already experiencing an increase in raw materials costs
which had negatively impacted its earnings.

     As a result of these alleged omissions, the ADSs offered in
connection with the IPO were artificially inflated and allowed
the Company to raise more than $137 million.

     On November 19, 2007, Noah Education revealed to the public
that its gross profit margins had dramatically declined due to
an increase in the purchasing cost of certain raw material
components.

     In response to this disclosure, the price of Noah Education
ADSs declined substantially from $12.46 per ADS to $6.72 per
ADS.

     Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of certain
purchasers of Noah Education ADSs pursuant and/or traceable to
the IPO.

For more details, contact:

          Jeffrey A. Berens, Esq. (jeff@dyerberens.com)
          682 Grant Street
          Denver, CO 80203
          Dyer & Berens LLP
          (888) 300-3362
          (303) 861-1764
          Web site: http://www.DyerBerens.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 research,
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 S. Senorin, Stephanie T. Umacob, Gracele D.
Canilao, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2008.  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  * * *