CAR_Public/081209.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

           Tuesday, December 9, 2008, Vol. 10, No. 244

                            Headlines

AMERICAN CORRECTIVE: Calif. Court Certifies Class in "Del Campo"
APPLE INC: Faces Lawsuit in Calif. Over Data Speed of iPhone 3G
AT&T CORP: Seeks Dismissal of N.D. Suit Over Underground Cables
BEAR STEARNS: N.Y. Court Dismisses Lawsuit Over JPMorgan Merger
BLUEHIPPO FUNDING: Faces Okla. Lawsuit Alleging FDCA Violations

CANADIAN IMPERIAL: Certification in Overtime Suit to be Heard
CVS CAREMARK: Faces Illinois Suit Over "AirShield" Cold Medicine
EMBARQ CORP: Court Allows 7 Counts in Retirement Benefits Suit
FEDEX GROUND: Agrees to $27M Judgment in "Estrada" Litigation
IDEAVILLAGE PRODUCTS: Faces Lawsuit Over "NutaMist Immune Boost"

INFINITE ENERGY: Faces $5M Litigation From Ga. Drycleaners
KAHALA HOTEL: Faces Customers' Lawsuit in Hawaii Over Tip Money
KBR INC: Faces Lawsuit Over Unsafe Water, Food, Hazardous Fumes
LA-Z-BOY INC: Utah Court Rejects Class Certification Request
LONDON LIFE: Faces Lawsuits Over Withdrawn Policyholders' Money

ORSU METALS: Announces Update on Pending Litigation in U.K.
PETLAND INC: Faces Former Franchisees' Litigation in Ohio
STARBUCKS CORP: Reaches Settlement in Mileage Expenses Lawsuit
SOVEREIGN BANK: Mass. Court Begins Hearing Testimony in "Fine"
TRAILER MANUFACTURERS: Lawyers Seek Certification of La. Lawsuit


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

ARACRUZ CELULOSE: Brualdi Law Firm Announces Stock Suit Filing
KV PHARMACEUTICAL: Brualdi Law Firm Announces Stock Suit Filing
KV PHARMACEUTICAL: Dyer & Berens Announces Stock Lawsuit Filing
KV PHARMACEUTICAL: Izard Nobel LLP Announces Stock Suit Filing


                           *********


AMERICAN CORRECTIVE: Calif. Court Certifies Class in "Del Campo"
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
granted class-action status to the matter, "Elena Del Campo v.
American Corrective Counseling, Case No. 5:01-cv-21151-JW,"
Howard Mintz of Mercury News reports.

The lawsuit -- filed in Dec. 11, 2001 -- generally accuses
company officials of intimidating people with the phony threat
of jail, and charging them exorbitant fees to clear their debts
(Class Action Reporter, Feb. 8, 2008).

On Dec. 4, 2008, Judge James Ware attached class action status
to a long-running lawsuit, which opened the door for hundreds of
thousands of people to press claims that they were victimized by
the private debt collection company, which was used by Santa
Clara and dozens of other counties to collect on bad checks,
according to Mercury News.

With the ruling, an estimated 900,000 plaintiffs are eligible to
collect damages if they prevail in the case.  The order makes a
plaintiff of anybody in California who received bad check
warnings from American Corrective Counseling Services from 1997
to the present, reports Mercury News.

The suit is "Elena Del Campo v. American Corrective Counseling,
Case No. 5:01-cv-21151-JW," filed in the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of California, Judge James Ware presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs are:

          Paul Arons, Esq.
          Law Office of Paul Arons
          685 Spring Street # 104
          Friday Harbor, WA 98250
          Phone: 360-378-6496
          e-mail: lopa@rockisland.com

               - and -

          Deepak Gupta, Esq.
          Public Citizen Litigation Group
          1600 20th Street, NW
          Washington, DC 20009
          Phone: 202-588-1000
          Web site: http://www.citizen.org/

Representing the defendants are:

          Shawn Marie Harpen, Esq. (sharpen@jonesday.com)
          Jones Day
          3 Park Plaza, Suite 1100
          Irvine, CA 92614
          Phone: 949-553-7518
          Fax: 949-553-7539

               - and -

          Timothy P. Irving, Esq. (tirving@rdblaw.com)
          Ross, Dixon & Bell
          550 West B Street, Suite 400
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Phone: 619-235-4040
          Fax: 619-231-8796


APPLE INC: Faces Lawsuit in Calif. Over Data Speed of iPhone 3G
---------------------------------------------------------------
Apple, Inc. is facing a purported class-action lawsuit in
California claiming it misrepresented the data speed of its
iPhone 3G.

The suit was filed on Nov. 26, 2008 in the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of California by James Pittman who
charges Apple with various complaints.

Mr. Pittman's lawsuit claims the iPhone 3G had been rushed to
market in a defective state and does not perform as Apple
claims.  The suit claims a defective chipset and/or firmware are
responsible for the iPhone not maintaining 3G speeds.

Mr. Pittman also claims that when in 3G mode, the voice service
becomes unreliable.  The type of unreliable voice service quoted
in the lawsuit are dropped calls.

In order to get an iPhone 3G, users had to sign a multi-year
contract with AT&T.  Because of that Mr. Pittman is seeking
class action status for the suit.

Among the charges made in Mr. Pittman's lawsuit are:

       -- Negligent Misrepresentation,
       -- Violation of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act,
       -- Violation of the Consumer Legal Remedies Act,
       -- Unjust Enrichment, and
       -- Unfair Competition in Violation of Business and
          Professions Code.

The suit is "Pittman v. Apple, Inc., Case No. 5:08-cv-05375-JW,"
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California, Judge James Ware, presiding.

Representing the plaintiff is:

          Gordon M. Fauth, Jr., Esq. (gmf@classlitigation.com)
          Litigation Law Group
          1801 Clement Ave.
          Suite 1801
          Alameda, CA 94501
          Phone: (510) 238-9610
          Fax: (510) 337-1431

Representing the defendant is:

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


AT&T CORP: Seeks Dismissal of N.D. Suit Over Underground Cables
---------------------------------------------------------------
AT&T Corp. and AT&T Communications-East Inc. are seeking for the
dismissal of the purported class-action suit, entitled, "Gerber
et al. v. AT&T Corporation et al., Case No. 1:2008cv00080,"
KFYR-TV reports

The suit was filed on Sept. 22, 2008 in the U.S. District Court
for the District of North Dakota by landowner Don Gerber.  It
contends that AT&T did not obtain the proper permission from
landowners when it laid underground cable on private property in
North Dakota, including on land for which state, county or
township governments have easements for roads.

The lawsuit seeks financial damages of more than $75,000, a
minimum set by the court.

Mr. Gerber's attorneys want the judge to grant the lawsuit class
action status, meaning it could potentially involve hundreds of
state residents.

AT&T though has opposed the class certification request, arguing
that it does not meet the requirements for a class-action
lawsuit.  It has also argued that its telecommunications cable
buried underground in North Dakota road ditches was put there
legally, according to KFYR-TV.

The suit is "Gerber et al v. AT&T Corporation et al., Case No.
1:08-cv-00080-DLH-CSM," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
District of North Dakota, Judge Daniel L. Hovland, presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs is:

          Daniel E. Phillips, Esq. (dphillips@solberglaw.com)
          Solberg Stewart Miller Johnson Tjon Kennelly Ltd.
          P.O. Box 1897
          Fargo, ND 58107-1897
          Phone: 701-237-3166

Representing the defendants are:

          Douglas S. Dove, Esq. (ddove@tehayes.com)
          Timothy E. Hayes & Associates L.C.
          231 S. Bemiston Ave., Suite 950
          St. Louis, MO 63105
          Phone: 314-726-6767
          Fax: 314-726-6765

               - and -

          W. Todd Haggart, Esq. (thaggart@vogellaw.com)
          Vogel Law Firm
          218 NP Avenue
          PO Box 1389
          Fargo, ND 58107-1389
          Phone: 701-356-6359
          Fax: 701-237-0847


BEAR STEARNS: N.Y. Court Dismisses Lawsuit Over JPMorgan Merger
---------------------------------------------------------------
Justice Herman Cahn of the New York State Supreme Court
dismissed a shareholder class-action lawsuit against The Bear
Stearns Cos. Inc.'s officers and directors challenging its
merger with JPMorgan Chase & Co., Erin Yerke of Investments News
reports.

The lawsuit charged that the $10-per-share stock-for-stock deal
was inadequate.  It sought damages from Bear Stearns directors
for "violation of their fiduciary duties" and from JPMorgan for
its "tortious conduct."

In a 44-page ruling, Justice Cahn rejected the consolidated
class-action lawsuit, saying that the decision to merge was
protected by the "business judgment rule," meaning that the
board of directors made an informed decision in what it believed
was the best interest of the company and therefore were not
liable, Investments News reported.

The merger was brokered by the Federal Reserve to prevent a
bankruptcy at Bear Stearns, "an event with potentially
cataclysmic consequences for the broader economy as well as for
the shareholders," Justice Cahn wrote.


BLUEHIPPO FUNDING: Faces Okla. Lawsuit Alleging FDCA Violations
---------------------------------------------------------------
BlueHippo Funding, LLC and BlueHippo Capital, LLC are facing a
purported class-action lawsuit in Oklahoma alleging violations
of the Fair Debt Collection Act, The Oklahoman reports.

The suit captioned, "Robbins v. BlueHippo Funding, LLC et al.,
Case No. 4:07-cv-00145-TCK-SAJ," was filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma on March 7, 2007 by
Shawna Robbins.

Ms. Robbins, of Ottawa County in northeast Oklahoma, claimed in
court documents that money was withdrawn from her bank account,
even though she didn't order a computer from the company.

The suit states that Ms Robbins told a BlueHippo representative
in May 2006 she wanted to think about the purchase, and the
salesperson asked for her account information to speed up the
process in case she decided to call back.

Ms. Robbins has not received a computer and her money has not
been refunded.

Her attorney, Bill Federman of Oklahoma City, couldn't say
exactly how much money she had lost or how much money he is
seeking in the lawsuit.

Mr. Federman reported back to the judge recently that settlement
negotiations are still pending after more than a year.

About 40 or 50 people are now part of the case, Mr. Federman
tells The Oklahoman.  He explains, "A number of the people we're
dealing with, believe it or not, don't have a Best Buy in their
town, they don't have the credit that they think they need to
buy a computer at Best Buy or they're not well educated ... and
there's a lot of convenience in using BlueHippo.  They prey on
those people."

The suit is "Robbins v. BlueHippo Funding, LLC et al., Case No.
4:07-cv-00145-TCK-SAJ," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Oklahoma, Judge Terence Kern presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs are:

          Cornelius P. Dukelow, Esq. (cdukelow@abingtonlaw.com)
          Abington Intellectual Property Law Group, PC
          10026-A S Mingo Rd Ste 240
          Tulsa, OK 74133-5700
          Phone: 918-588-3400

               - and -

         William Bernard Federman, Esq. (wfederman@aol.com)
         Federman & Sherwood
         10205 N Pennsylvania
         Oklahoma City, OK 73120
         Phone: 405-235-1560
         Fax: 405-239-2112

Representing the defendants is:

         John N. Hermes, Esq. (john.hermes@mcafeetaft.com)
         McAfee & Taft
         211 N Robinson 10th Fl
         Oklahoma City, OK 73120
         Phone: 405-235-9621
         Fax: 405-235-0439


CANADIAN IMPERIAL: Certification in Overtime Suit to be Heard
-------------------------------------------------------------
    TORONTO, Dec. 5, 2008 -- A multi-million dollar national
class action brought by bank teller Dara Fresco against Canadian
Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC) for unpaid overtime has reached
the crucial stage of certification.

     At stake in the hearing is whether the lawsuit will be
allowed to proceed as a class action on behalf of thousands of
current and former tellers, personal bankers and other front
line workers in retail branches of the CIBC across Canada.

     Class counsel had originally estimated that they would be
representing approximately 10,000 individuals, however the CIBC
has suggested that the class could include over 30,000 current
and former employees.

     The hearing to decide whether this action will be certified
as a class action will be heard next week on December 8, 2008.

     At this stage, the Court will determine the threshold
questions relating to whether the proceeding is appropriate for
a class action.

     The motion will be heard before Justice Lax over the course
of five days.  During the five-day period, time will be fairly
evenly divided between class counsel and counsel for the
defendant.  As is the custom in cases of this size and
complexity, it is expected that the judge will reserve her
decision.

     This is the first major national class action for unpaid
overtime to reach the certification stage on a contested basis.
Although such cases have been relatively rare in Canada so far,
they have been common in the United States.

     The law firms of Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP ("SGM") and
Roy Elliott O'Connor LLP ("REO") will be representing the class
in this action.


CVS CAREMARK: Faces Illinois Suit Over "AirShield" Cold Medicine
----------------------------------------------------------------
CVS Caremark Corp. is facing a purported class-action suit that
was filed in St. Clair County Circuit Court on Dec. 1, 2008 over
its cold medicine, Kelly Holleran of The Madison County Record
reports.

The case alleges the pharmacy engaged in unfair and deceptive
practices designed to mislead the public in selling its
"AirShield" products.

Class plaintiff Jean M. Finley of Madison County alleges CVS
misled the public into believing that AirShield protects against
illness and boosts the immune system, reports The Madison County
Record.

According to the complaint, "CVS' AirShield product is designed
to piggyback on the increasing popularity and recognition of
'health care products' and in particular - Airborne."

The two-count suit claims CVS's "unfair and/or deceptive
practices" have caused her and the class to incur damages.

Ms. Finley is asking that the case be certified as class action,
be certified as a statutory fraud count, and be certified as an
unjust enrichment claim and that the court award her and the
class damages no more than $75,000 for each class member, costs
of the suit, attorneys' fees and other relief the court deems
just, according to The Madison County Record.

Representing Ms. Finley in the case are attorneys Paul M. Weiss
and George K. Lang of Freed and Weiss in Chicago, Richard J.
Burke of St. Louis and Kevin T. Hoerner and Brian T. Kreisler of
Becker, Paulson, Hoerer and Thompson in Belleville.


EMBARQ CORP: Court Allows 7 Counts in Retirement Benefits Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas has ruled
that most of seven counts in a class-action lawsuit against
Embarq Corp., and Sprint Nextel Corp. involving alleged benefits
changes and age discrimination remain in the case, but she
dismissed parts of two of the counts brought in the suit, The
Kansas City Business Journal reports.

Judge Kathryn Vratil of the U.S. District Court for the District
of Kansas made the ruling in response to defendants' motion to
dismiss six of the suit's seven counts.

The Kansas City Business Journal reported that the suit's class
includes all those whose medical, prescription drug and life
insurance benefits were adversely affected by benefit reductions
and terminations announced by Sprint in November 2005 and Embarq
on July 26, 2007.

It alleges that the defendants "repeatedly misrepresented
retirement benefits to plaintiffs" from 1977 to 2007 and that,
after Sprint spun off Embarq in May 2006, the benefits were
reduced or eliminated.

The suit also names as a defendant, Randall T. Parker, the plan
administrator for many of the employee benefit plans at issue in
the suit, reports the Kansas City Business Journal.

The counts that survived the motion involve plaintiffs'
allegations that:

       -- Their retiree benefit plans gave them a vested right
          to company-sponsored and company-paid medical,
          prescription drug and life insurance benefits.

       -- The defendants breached fiduciary duties under the
          Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 by
          failing to provide clear and accurate plan summaries
          and misrepresenting benefits to participants.

       -- Defendants violated the Age Discrimination in
          Employment Act of 1967 and age discrimination laws in
          Ohio, Oregon and Tennessee.

Judge Vratil dismissed parts of two counts in which plaintiffs
sought declaratory judgment that they are entitled to reinstated
benefits equal to those they received when they retired, and in
which they sought ADEA claims regarding medical and prescription
drug benefits, according to the Kansas City Business Journal.


FEDEX GROUND: Agrees to $27M Judgment in "Estrada" Litigation
-------------------------------------------------------------
     LOS ANGELES, Dec 05, 2008 -- Putting an end to a nearly
decade-long, landmark legal battle, FedEx Ground/Home Delivery
has agreed to a $27 million Court judgment that includes payment
of $14.5 million to 203 California drivers who were
misclassified by the company as independent contractors.

     FedEx will also be paying $12.5 million in full attorney
fees and most costs of the case that was the first to challenge
and eventually expose the shipping giant's independent
contractor scheme.  Final court approval of the stipulated
judgment is expected soon.

     The case of "Estrada vs. FedEx Ground Package System, Inc."
went to trial before California Superior Court Judge Howard
Schwab (ret.) in 2004.  He ruled that the drivers were legally
employees and entitled to be reimbursed for all the expenses
they were illegally required to pay by the company.

     In August 2007, the California Court of Appeals affirmed
the judgment that the drivers were employees and doubled the
damages awarded to the drivers in a published decision.

     That decision has sparked nationwide litigation against
many large corporations that have misused the independent
contractor concept to the detriment of American workers and the
U.S. Treasury which has lost billions in unpaid payroll taxes.

     Approximately 27,000 FedEx drivers nationwide have a multi-
district lawsuit against the company for misclassification
pending in South Bend, Indiana.

     As in the California Estrada case, the drivers are asking
the court to find that FedEx treats them like employees and rule
that they are entitled to the same legal rights of employees.

     Lynn Rossman Faris, Esq., of Leonard Carder, LLP, of
Oakland, California, lead counsel for the California drivers,
and co-lead in the nationwide class action, hailed the ruling.
"FedEx has claimed for several years that it would eventually
win on appeal.  That fantasy is finally over.  The 203 drivers
will receive damages ranging from $2000 up to $280,000, with an
average recovery of about $70,000.  If the 27,000 FedEx drivers
in our nationwide case achieve similar results, FedEx could be
facing a multi-billion dollar judgment.  Everything that has
been achieved is a result of the incredible strength and
fortitude of two unsung American hard-working heroes - drivers
Tony Estrada and Jeff Morgan - who simply would not accept
injustice and unfairness by this huge corporation."

     Tony Estrada and Jeff Morgan were thrilled that their long,
hard fight was finally over. "We always knew that we were being
treated like employees and that FedEx was getting away with
murder and was laughing all the way to the bank on the backs of
its drivers.  Why should big companies like FedEx be allowed to
use tax loopholes like phony independent-contractor labels to
exploit middle-class truck drivers, making them pay the
company's half of social security and providing no benefits?  We
are grateful that Judge Schwab had the wisdom, judgment and
courage to do the right thing. We hope that the IRS finally does
its job and gets FedEx to pay for its drivers' social security
the way UPS does."

     The IRS is still auditing the company for 2002 and 2004-
2006 tax liability resulting from the misclassification of its
pickup and delivery drivers.


IDEAVILLAGE PRODUCTS: Faces Lawsuit Over "NutaMist Immune Boost"
----------------------------------------------------------------
IdeaVillage Products Corp. is facing a purported class-action
lawsuit that was filed in St. Clair County Circuit Court on Dec.
1, 2008 over its cold medicine, Kelly Holleran of The Madison
County Record reports.

The suit alleges that the company engaged in unfair and
deceptive practices in selling its "NutaMist Immune Boost"
products.

Class plaintiff Aaron C. Durkee of Fairview Heights claims the
public was misled into believing that the product protects
against and prevents colds and boosts the immune system, reports
The Madison County Record.

The complaint states, "Defendant has no scientific or otherwise
legitimate basis for making any of its health efficacy claims,
and such claims are thus unfair, unjust and deceptive."

Mr. Durkee claims Ideavillage Products "unfair and/or deceptive
practices" have caused him and the class to incur damages.

"Such benefits constitute unjust enrichment for Defendant and it
would be inequitable under the circumstances for it to retain
the benefits received," according to the suit.

In the two-count suit, Mr. Durkee is asking that the case be
certified as class action and be certified as an unjust
enrichment claim and that the court award him and the class
damages, prejudgment interest, costs of the suit, attorneys'
fees and other relief the court deems just, according to The
Madison County Record.

Representing Ms. Finley in the case are attorneys Paul M. Weiss
and George K. Lang of Freed and Weiss in Chicago, Richard J.
Burke of St. Louis and Kevin T. Hoerner and Brian T. Kreisler of
Becker, Paulson, Hoerer and Thompson in Belleville.


INFINITE ENERGY: Faces $5M Litigation From Ga. Drycleaners
----------------------------------------------------------
Infinite Energy, Inc. is facing a purported $5,000,000 class-
action lawsuit filed by a group of Atlanta dry cleaners who are
claiming that the energy provider tried to fleece them by
locking them into three-year contracts with artificially
inflated rates after Hurricane Katrina.

Jason Hicks of American Drycleaner reported that drycleaners
Byung Ho Cheoun, Shiraz Kurani, and Hae Sook Chung have filed a
federal lawsuit seeking class-action status on behalf of more
than 600 Korean-American and other drycleaners, alleging natural
gas provider Infinite Energy defrauded the businesses through
exorbitant prices locked into three-year contracts signed
following Hurricane Katrina.

The suit, "Cheoun et al v. Infinite Energy Inc.," was filed in
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.  The
plaintiffs asked that the case be granted class action status
for members of the Korean Cleaners' Association of Atlanta
(KCAA), among others, as all drycleaners in Atlanta are
dependent on the use of natural gas for their business.

The plaintiffs contend that the Infinite Energy fraudulently
coerced customers into long-term contracts immediately after
Hurricane Katrina, which disrupted the drilling, refining and
transportation of natural gas and resulted in a short-term spike
in its cost, American Drycleaner reports.

The suit charges that Infinite Energy is still attempting to
hold them to those rates three years after natural gas prices
restabilized.

In addition, the complaint states that the company has tried to
hold all members of the KCAA to the higher rates despite the
plaintiffs' formal attempts to renegotiate the contract and
despite the fact that many members never agreed to the new rate.

The suit seeks more than $5 million in damages, as well as
punitive damages and a permanent injunction.  It seeks damages
for all customers that were billed inflated prices under the
post-Katrina contract, according to American Drycleaner.

According to the Atlanta Business Chronicle, the plaintiffs'
attorney is David Pardue of the Atlanta law firm Hartman,
Simons, Spielman & Wood LLP (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 20,
2008).

For more details, contact:

          David L. Pardue, Esq. (dpardue@hssw.com)
          Hartman, Simons, Spielman & Wood LLP
          6400 Powers Ferry Rd.,
          N.W., Suite 400
          Atlanta, GA 30339
          Phone: (770) 226-1347
          Fax: (770) 858-1095


KAHALA HOTEL: Faces Customers' Lawsuit in Hawaii Over Tip Money
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Kahala Hotel and Resort in Hawaii is facing a purported
class-action lawsuit over what happened to some tip money, KGMB9
News reports.

The suit was filed by Jason Kawakami, an Oahu resident and a
former hotel guest, who says the hotel broke the law, over
thousands of dollars he paid for his wedding.

In July 2007, Mr. Kawakami had his wedding banquet at the
Kahala.  According to the suit, he paid the Kahala the usual 19
percent service fees for his reception, which totaled nearly
$5,200, reports KGMB9 News.

Under Hawaii law, the hotel must distribute the service charge
directly to its employees as tip. If not, the hotel must let the
customer know beforehand.

However, Mr. Kawakami says that's not what happened.  Through
his attorneys, he says he feels misled.

According to attorney John Perkin, Esq., "He was not told that
the hotel was going to keep some or all of that and the law
specially requires the hotel to disclose if they are going to do
it.  The short and sweet of it is, they didn't disclose it."

The suit asks for a full refund of the service charge.  The
plaintiff would also be entitled to three times what he paid for
that charge, according to KGMB9 News.


KBR INC: Faces Lawsuit Over Unsafe Water, Food, Hazardous Fumes
---------------------------------------------------------------
KBR, Inc., Kellogg, Brown & Root LLC, and Halliburton Co. are
facing a purported class-action lawsuit in Texas that was filed
by Georgia man who is claiming that the companies exposed
everyone at Joint Base Balad in Iraq to unsafe water, food and
hazardous fumes from the burn pit there, Kelly Kennedy of Army
Times reports.

The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of Texas on Nov. 26, 2008 by Joshua Eller, who worked
as a civilian computer-aided drafting technician with the 332nd
Air Expeditionary Wing.

According to Mr. Eller, military personnel, contractors, and
third-country nationals may have been sickened by contamination
at the largest U.S. installation in Iraq, home to more than
30,000 service members, Defense Department civilians, and
contractors.

The lawsuit states, "Defendants promised the United States
government that they would supply safe water for hygienic and
recreational uses, safe food supplies and properly operate base
incinerators to dispose of medical waste safely."  It adds,
"Defendants utterly failed to perform their promised duties."

Mr. Eller and his attorneys -- Werner Ayers, LLP, of Houston,
and Burk O'Neil LLC of Washington, D.C. -- are seeking to have
the matter declared as a class-action lawsuit.

Mr. Eller filed his claim after he deployed in February 2006 for
10 months.  The lawsuit claims he developed skin lesions that
subsequently spread, filled with fluid and burst.  He said they
went away, then reappeared, followed by blisters on his feet
that made it painful for him to walk.  He said they healed, but
continue to return every three to four months.

Then, Mr. Eller said he experienced vomiting, cramping and
diarrhea, and continues to suffer severe abdominal pain, Army
Times reported.

The lawsuit states, "Plaintiff witnessed the open air burn pit
in operation at Balad Air Force Base."  It adds, "On one
occasion, he witnessed a wild dog running around base with a
human arm in its mouth.  The human arm had been dumped on the
open air burn pit by KBR."  Mr. Eller said he still has
nightmares and has been diagnosed with adjustment disorder.

The lawsuit states that KBR was required to comply with military
standards for clean water, and monitor it.  Mr. Eller accused
KBR of not performing water quality tests and of not properly
treating or chlorinating water, and said an audit by the Defense
Department backs up his claim.

The lawsuit states there was no formalized training for KBR
employees in proper water operations, and the company maintained
insufficient documentation about water safety.  It also states
that the swimming pools at Balad were also filled with unsafe
water.

Mr. Eller also accused KBR of serving spoiled, expired and
rotten food to the troops, as well as dishes that may have been
contaminated with shrapnel.

According to the lawsuit "Defendants knowingly and intentionally
supplied and served food that was well past its expiration date,
in some cases over a year past its expiration date."  It also
states, "Even when it was called to the attention of the KBR
food service managers that the food was expired, KBR still
served the food to U.S. forces."

The food included chicken, beef, fish, eggs and dairy products,
which caused cases of salmonella poisoning, the lawsuit states.

The lawsuit also accuses KBR of shipping ice in mortuary trucks
that "still had traces of body fluids and putrefied remains in
them when they were loaded with ice. This ice was served to U.S.
forces."

Mr. Eller also accuses KBR of failing to maintain a medical
incinerator at Joint Base Balad, which has been confirmed by two
surgeons in interviews with Military Times about the Balad burn
pit.

Instead, according to the lawsuit and the physicians, medical
waste, such as needles, amputated body parts and bloody bandages
were burned in the open-air pit.

The lawsuit also states that the contractors burned old lithium
batteries in the pits, "causing noxious and unsafe blue smoke to
drift over the base."

Military regulations stipulate that medical waste must be burned
in an incinerator to prevent anyone from breathing hazardous
fumes.

Army Times reported that the lawsuit asks that the plaintiffs
receive monetary compensation for physical injuries, emotional
distress, fear of future disease, and need for continued medical
treatment and involvement.  It also asks that defendants be
stripped of all revenue and profits earned "from their pattern
of constant misconduct and callous disregard to the welfare of
Americans serving and working in Iraq."

The suit is "Eller v. KBR Inc et al., Case No. 4:2008-cv-03495,"
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
Texas, Judge Lynn N. Hughes, presiding.

Representing the plaintiff is:

          Philip Werner, Esq. (pwerner@wernerayers.com)
          Werner Ayers LLP
          2000 W Loop S
          Suite 1550
          Houston, TX 77027
          Phone: 713-626-2233
          Fax: 713-626-9708


LA-Z-BOY INC: Utah Court Rejects Class Certification Request
------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the District of Utah has rejected a
request by seven former employees of La-Z-Boy, Inc. to expand
their wrongful-termination case into a class-action lawsuit,
Pamela Manson of The Salt Lake Tribune reports.

In addition, according to the report, Judge Tena Campbell split
the lawsuit into seven separate legal actions, ruling that the
circumstances of each worker were different enough to require
separate trials.

The employees filed litigation in 2004 alleging they lost their
jobs because they were injured and filed for workers'
compensation.

Specifically, the legal action claims that La-Z-Boy harassed
workers who were injured on the job, then either fired them or
put them in a position that forced them to quit (Class Action
Reporter, April 22, 2008).

In April 2008, they asked for class-action status, which would
allow other former employees with similar claims to join in.

According to an earlier report by The Salt Lake Tribune, the
number of potential plaintiffs is unknown, but nearly 30 have
filed affidavits alleging they were unfairly discharged after
suffering on-the-job injuries and asking to be part of the suit.

Lauren Scholnick, Esq., a Salt Lake City attorney for the
workers, told The Salt Lake Tribune that claims were "horribly
mishandled" by the company.

Court briefs obtained by The Salt Lake Tribune allege that La-Z-
Boy, which was self-insured, was telling its third-party
adjuster to deny claims and refuse treatment.  Workers allege
they were discouraged from applying for benefits and assigned
tasks they were physically unable to perform so they could be
fired.

Moreover, the former workers contended that their injuries were
caused by an unsafe work environment.  Many claim they were
discouraged from reporting industrial injuries and taking off
enough time to fully recover.

The Salt Lake Tribune previously reported that the proposed
class would include those employees whose employment was severed
from April 2000 to the present and within one year of exercising
or attempting to exercise their rights under the Utah Workers'
Compensation Act.  The number of potential plaintiffs among the
approximately 700 former workers is unknown.


LONDON LIFE: Faces Lawsuits Over Withdrawn Policyholders' Money
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ontario courts have certified two class-action lawsuits alleging
London Life Insurance Co. and Great-West Life Assurance Co.
unlawfully removed CDN220 million from accounts reserved for 1.8
million participating policyholders, James Daw of The Toronto
Star reports.

A trial is scheduled to begin in September 2009 in London, if no
settlement is negotiated first.

The legal dispute erupted after Great-West Life bought London
Life's parent company in 1997.  Participating policyholders are
disputing Great-West's legal right to withdraw money from
accounts reserved for them, after they had paid to participate
in their insurer's profits through dividends, bonus additions or
other benefits, reports The Toronto Star.

The insurers have argued the policyholders would benefit from
savings and efficiency gains.

Formal legal notices of the action have been published in 32
newspapers across Canada, according to The Toronto Star.

In September 2008, the insurers failed to persuade judges of an
Ontario appeal court to overturn a certification ruling granted
last February 2008.

The representative plaintiffs appointed by the courts are
actuaries James Jeffery and D'Alton (Bill) Rudd and businessman
John Douglas McKittrick, all of London.

However, anyone who has held a participating policy in the
period since November 1997 stands to benefit, unless they mail a
form to opt out, reports The Toronto Star.

For more details, contact:

          Harrison Pensa LLP
          Barristers & Solicitors
          450 Talbot Street
          London, ON N6A 4K3
          Phone: 888-282-7217
          Fax: 519-667-3362
          e-mail: info@parpolicyclassaction.com
          Web site: http://www.parpolicyclassaction.com/


ORSU METALS: Announces Update on Pending Litigation in U.K.
-----------------------------------------------------------
     LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM, Dec. 5, 2008 Orsu Metals
Corporation ("Orsu", or the "Company") (TSX:OSU)(AIM:OSU)
announces that further to an update on October 31, 2008 relating
to the previously announced class action claim, Orsu advises
that the original claim has been effectively replaced by a new
claim similar in nature, by a new plaintiff.  This claim has
today been served on the Company.

     As previously announced the Company's directors believe
that the claim is without merit and have appointed legal counsel
to defend and vigorously dispute it.

     Previously, Orsu Metals Corporation (TSX:OSU)(AIM:OSU) has
been served by Bernard Szuszkiewicz -- as a proposed
representative plaintiff on behalf of persons who acquired
securities of European Minerals Corporation during the period
from May 16, 2007, until March, 31, 2008 -- with a Statement of
Claim filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Class
Action Reporter, Sept. 23, 2008).

     The plaintiffs are claiming general and special damages in
the amount of CND$50,000,000 and punitive damages in the amount
of CND$5,000,000.  The Claim relates to the announcement by EMC
on March 31 that it was reviewing its accounting for derivatives
to ensure compliance with certain provisions of the CICA
Handbook and that it anticipated that such review would result
in a restatement of EMC's interim financial statements for the
first three fiscal quarters of 2007.

     The Company's directors have appointed legal council and
are currently preparing their defense.  The claim has not yet
been certified as a class action and Orsu believes that the
Claim is without merit and intends to vigorously dispute the
Claim.

For more information, contact:

          Tania Tchedaeva
          Orsu Metals Corporation
          Company Secretary
          Phone: +44 (0) 20 7518 3999
          Fax: +44 (0) 20 7513 3998

          Gavin Dallas
          Orsu Metals Corporation
          Investor Relations
          Phone: +44 (0) 20 7518 3999
          Fax: +44 (0) 20 7513 3998
          e-mail: info@orsumetals.com
          Web site: http://www.orsumetals.com/

          Ryan Gaffney
          Canaccord Adams Limited
          Phone: +44 (0) 20 7050 6500

               - and -

          Keith Schaefer
          Vanguard Shareholder Solutions
          Phone: 604-608-0824


PETLAND INC: Faces Former Franchisees' Litigation in Ohio
---------------------------------------------------------
Petland, Inc. is facing a purported class-action lawsuit in Ohio
that was filed by some former franchisees that accused it of
questionable business practices, Columbus Business First
reports.

The suit, entitled, "Jones et al v. Petland Inc et al., Case No.
2:08-cv-01128-JDH-TPK," was filed in the U.S. District Court for
the Southern Ohio District on Nov. 26, 2008.

The lawsuit was filed by Luper Neidenthal & Logan and two firms
out of New York on behalf of Robert Hyde and Veronica R. Jones,
a pair of Tennessee Petland franchise owners, who went out of
business.  They are claiming the company persuaded them to open
franchise stores even though the chain was aware they could not
succeed.

Among the major contentions in the lawsuit, Columbus Business
First reported, was that franchisees claimed pets supplied to
the stores by vendors used by Petland were sick or, in some
cases, dying.  Once the first of those animals were sold to the
public, the plaintiffs claimed, their stores were doomed to
failure.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit, who are pursuing a class-action
status that would apply to all franchise stores since November
1993, are seeking $20 million in financial relief and
cancellation of franchise agreements.

Luper Neidenthal & Logan attorney Greg Melick, who is
representing the plaintiffs in the case, told Columbus Business
First more than 40 franchisees have been contacted by the firms
to inquire about participation in the suit.

The suit is "Jones et al v. Petland Inc et al., Case No. 2:08-
cv-01128-JDH-TPK," in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
Ohio District, Judge John D. Holschuh, presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs is:

          Gregory H. Melick, Esq. (gmelick@lnlattorneys.com)
          Luper Neidenthal & Logan
          50 West Broad Street, Suite 1200
          Columbus, OH 43215
          Phone: 614-221-7663
          Fax: 866-345-4948


STARBUCKS CORP: Reaches Settlement in Mileage Expenses Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Starbucks Corp. settled the purported class-action suit, "Lewis
v. Starbucks Corporation, Case No. 2:07-cv-00490-MCE-DAD," which
was by a retail manger in California who was not paid mileage
expenses for business-related trips in their own vehicles, Denny
Walsh of The Sacramento Bee reports.

The suit was filed in March 14, 2007 by Jonelle Lewis, who
worked in all three retail management positions at a Starbucks
in the Amador County community of Martell.

According to court papers, during Ms. Lewis' 15 months there,
she often used her personal vehicle to perform work-related
duties.

The court papers obtained by The Sacramento Bee states that
managers "regularly drive their own vehicles to perform work-
related tasks, such as making bank deposits, getting supplies
(from vendors) and attending meetings."

However, the papers say, on various occasions when Ms. Lewis and
others requested reimbursement for mileage, they were "always
advised that, as a matter of company policy, Starbucks does not
reimburse employees for mileage expenses."

The settlement calls for Starbucks to fork over up to $3 million
for back payment of mileage expenses incurred by managers,
assistant managers, and shift supervisors in specialty coffee
emporiums throughout the state, The Sacramento Bee reported.

After deducting attorneys' fees and other costs, the net
settlement proceeds will be used to pay an average of $86 to
approximately 6,000 people who joined the class-action lawsuit
and filled the three types of retail manager positions in
California stores between March 12, 2003, and March 19, 2008.

On the other hand, Ms. Lewis will receive $5,000 of the
settlement funds for acting as representative plaintiff on
behalf of the class.

U.S. District Judge Morrison C. England Jr. approved the
settlement on Dec. 5, 2008, reports The Sacramento Bee.

Representing the plaintiffs is:

          Gregory N. Karasik, Esq. (greg@spiromoss.com)
          Spiro Moss Barness Harrison and Barge, LLP
          11377 West Olympic Boulevard
          5th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90064
          Phone: (310) 235-2468
          Fax: (310) 235-2456

Representing the defendants is:

          Catherine A. Conway, Esq. (cconway@akingump.com)
          Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP
          2029 Century Park East, Suite 2400
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Phone: 310-552-6435
          Fax: 310-552-6746


SOVEREIGN BANK: Mass. Court Begins Hearing Testimony in "Fine"
--------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts has
began hearing testimony in a lawsuit against Sovereign Bank that
involves victims of Brad Bleidt, a confessed swindler who is
serving an 11-year prison term for defrauding 125 clients over
two decades, The Boston Herald reports.

Donna B. Lawrence choked back tears as she told jurors how she
learned that Mr. Bleidt, her financial adviser confessed to
stealing more than $31 million from his clients.

Ms. Lawrence, 63, was the first victim to testify in a purported
class-action lawsuit that pits four former clients of Brad
Bleidt against Sovereign Bank, according to The Boston Herald.

In opening arguments, David Fine, Esq., the plaintiff's lawyer,
argued that Sovereign was negligent and should have noticed that
Mr. Bleidt was depositing third-party checks intended for
investment into his checking account.

Mr. Fine contends that Mr. Bleidt's misuse of bank accounts to
deposit and illegally use clients' funds for his personal
pursuits -- including his purchase of the WBIX 1060-AM radio
station and skiing trips to Colorado -- should have raised red
flags among bank officials that could have detected his scheme,
The Boston Herald reported.

However, Patrick Voke, Sovereign's lawyer, said no one at the
bank branch where Mr. Bleidt made his deposits was aware of his
activities.

The Boston Herald reported that the trial is expected to last
until Christmas.  The plaintiffs, who lost more than $3.2
million, are seeking unspecified monetary damages.

The purported class-action lawsuit, entitled, "Fine et al v.
Sovereign Bank, Case No. 1:06-cv-11450-NG," was filed in the
U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Aug.
17, 2006.


TRAILER MANUFACTURERS: Lawyers Seek Certification of La. Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs' attorneys asked a federal judge in Louisiana to
certify a class-action lawsuit against the U.S. government and
some manufacturers over trailers used after 2005 Gulf Coast
hurricanes, The Associated Press reports.

Critics say some residents were subjected to potentially
dangerous fumes while living in the emergency shelters.

On Dec. 2, 2008, Judge Kurt Engelhardt of the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana heard testimony from
scientific experts about formaldehyde.  The preservative can be
found in some construction materials, The Associated Press
reported.

Attorneys for storm victims say a class-action suit would
resolve cases from Louisiana, Texas, Mississippi, and Alabama
that Judge Engelhardt is presiding over in New Orleans.

However, attorneys for the government and the trailer makers say
the cases must be handled individually because they involve
different states, firms and types of claims.

Judge Engelhardt though didn't immediately rule, according to
The Associated Press report.

Hurricane Katrina slammed the Gulf coast in August 2005.  Rita
made landfall the next month.


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

ARACRUZ CELULOSE: Brualdi Law Firm Announces Stock Suit Filing
--------------------------------------------------------------
     NEW YORK, Dec. 5, 2008 -- The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C.
announces that a lawsuit has been commenced in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Florida on behalf of
purchasers of Aracruz Celulose S.A. ("Aracruz" or "the Company")
common stock during the period between April 7, 2008 and October
2, 2008 (the "Class Period") for violations of federal
securities laws.

     The Complaint accuses the defendants of violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by virtue of the Company's
failure to disclose during the Class Period that it had entered
into hedging contracts as protection against foreign interest
rate volatility that violated Company policy in that they were
far larger than necessary to hedge normal business operations.
According to the Complaint, on October 3, 2008, after credit
rating agencies downgraded Aracruz, the value of Aracruz's stock
declined significantly.

For more details, contact:

          Sue Lee, Esq. (slee@brualdilawfirm.com)
          The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C.
          29 Broadway, Suite 2400
          New York, New York 10006
          Phone: (877) 495-1187 or (212) 952-0602
          Web site: http://www.brualdilawfirm.com


KV PHARMACEUTICAL: Brualdi Law Firm Announces Stock Suit Filing
---------------------------------------------------------------
     NEW YORK, Dec. 5, 2008 -- The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C.
announces that a lawsuit has been commenced in the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri on behalf of
purchasers of KV Pharmaceutical Company ("KV" or the "Company")
Class A Common Stock (NYSE:KV-A), Class B Common Stock (NYSE:KV-
B) and 7% cumulative convertible Preferred Stock (Symbol: KVPHP
or CUSIP: 482740305) during the period between February 15, 2008
and November 12, 2008 (the "Class Period") for violations of the
federal securities laws.

     The Complaint alleges that, during the Class Period,
defendants made false and misleading statements about KV's
compliance with federal regulations and its financial prospects,
resulting in the artificial inflation of the prices for its
publicly-traded securities.

     For example, defendants allegedly failed to disclose that:
KV's manufacturing facilities were in disarray resulting in the
manufacture of unsafe drug products that would have to be
recalled; KV's management improperly failed to recall the
Company's unsafe drug products; KV's manufacturing facilities
failed to comply with federal regulations, including FDA "Good
Manufacturing Practices;" manufacturing disruptions and
inefficiencies were resulting in a material backlog of unshipped
orders; the Company failed to write off at least $24 million in
inventories of discontinued products; KV's post-January 2008
sales of generics were being negatively impacted by material
price erosion following the expiration of the Company's
exclusive sales period for one of its drugs; KV's financial
statements failed to comply with GAAP; and as a result of the
foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their
statements about KV's financial prospects.

     Then, on November 13, 2008, KV announced that it would be
unable to file its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
2008 due to a continuing investigation by the Company's Audit
Committee into allegations of management misconduct. In
response, the price of KV common stock plummeted nearly 59% on
extremely heavy volume.

For more details, contact:

          Sue Lee, Esq. (slee@brualdilawfirm.com)
          The Brualdi Law Firm, P.C.
          29 Broadway, Suite 2400
          New York, New York 10006
          Phone: (877) 495-1187 or (212) 952-0602
          Web site: http://www.brualdilawfirm.com


KV PHARMACEUTICAL: Dyer & Berens Announces Stock Lawsuit Filing
---------------------------------------------------------------
     DENVER, Dec. 5, 2008 -- Dyer & Berens LLP today announced
that it has commenced a class action lawsuit in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri on
behalf of purchasers of KV Pharmaceutical Company ("KV" or the
"Company") Class A Common Stock (NYSE:KV-A), Class B Common
Stock (NYSE:KV-B) and 7% cumulative convertible Preferred Stock
(Symbol: KVPHP or CUSIP: 482740305) during the period between
February 15, 2008 and November 12, 2008 (the "Class Period").

     In the class action complaint, the plaintiff alleges that,
during the Class Period, defendants made false and misleading
statements about KV's compliance with federal regulations and
its financial prospects, resulting in the artificial inflation
of the prices for its publicly-traded securities.

     For example, defendants allegedly failed to disclose that:
KV's manufacturing facilities were in disarray resulting in the
manufacture of unsafe drug products that would have to be
recalled; KV's management improperly failed to recall the
Company's unsafe drug products; KV's manufacturing facilities
failed to comply with federal regulations, including FDA "Good
Manufacturing Practices;" manufacturing disruptions and
inefficiencies were resulting in a material backlog of unshipped
orders; the Company failed to write off at least $24 million in
inventories of discontinued products; KV's post-January 2008
sales of generics were being negatively impacted by material
price erosion following the expiration of the Company's
exclusive sales period for one of its drugs; KV's financial
statements failed to comply with GAAP; and as a result of the
foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their
statements about KV's financial prospects.

     Then, on November 13, 2008, KV announced that it would be
unable to file its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
2008 due to a continuing investigation by the Company's Audit
Committee into allegations of management misconduct.  In
response, the price of KV common stock plummeted nearly 59% on
extremely heavy volume.

     Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of purchasers
of KV securities during the Class Period.

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


KV PHARMACEUTICAL: Izard Nobel LLP Announces Stock Suit Filing
--------------------------------------------------------------
     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 Eastern District of Missouri on behalf of those who
purchased KV Pharmaceutical Company ("KV" or the "Company")
Class A Common Stock (NYSE: KV-A), Class B Common Stock (NYSE:
KV-B) and 7% cumulative convertible Preferred Stock (Symbol:
KVPHP or CUSIP: 482740305) during the period between February
15, 2008 and November 12, 2008 (the "Class Period").

     The Complaint charges that KV and certain of its officers
and directors violated federal securities laws. Specifically,
defendants failed to disclose: (i) that KV's facilities were in
disarray resulting in the manufacture of unsafe drug products
that would have to be recalled due to the fact that they may
contain oversized tablets with more than the intended levels of
the active drug ingredient; (ii) that KV failed to recall unsafe
drug products; (iii) that KV's manufacturing facilities failed
to comply with FDA requirements; (iv) that manufacturing
disruptions were resulting in a material backlog of unshipped
customer orders; (v) that KV failed to write off at least $24
million in discontinued products, seized by the U.S. Attorney
for the Eastern District of Missouri; and (vi) that KV's post-
January 2008 sales of generics declined following the expiration
of KV's exclusive sales period for the drug metoprolol
succinate.

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


                            *********

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  * * *