CAR_Public/090318.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Wednesday, March 18, 2009, Vol. 11, No. 54

                           Headlines

APPLE INC: N.Y Judge Dismisses iPhone Resellers' Antitrust Suit
BEMIS CO: Defends Consolidated Federal Suit Over Price Fixing
BEMIS CO: To Defend Lawsuits Over Price Fixing in Various States
CELLCOM ISRAEL: Faces Subscribers' Suit Over Commercial Messages
DBSI INC: Judge to Appoint Independent Examiner in Idaho Case

MONACO COACH: Berger & Montague Files WARN Violations Litigation
ODYSSEY RE: Defends Amended Consolidated Securities Suit in N.Y.
PFIZER INC: Faces N.Y. Suit Over Risks of Lexapro, Celexa Drugs
PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL: Appeals in ERISA Litigation Remain Pending
PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL: Consolidated Brokers' Suit Remains Pending

PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL: Defends Remaining Suits in Investment Case
PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL: Faces "Garcia" Suit Over Death Benefits
ROYAL BANK: Plaintiff Seeks Lead Status in N.Y. Subprime Lawsuit
SONUS NETWORKS: June 16 Hearing Set For $9.5M Mass. Lawsuit Deal
VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: N.Y. Judge Denies Motions in Stock Fraud Suit

ZIMMER HOLDINGS: Faces Amended "Dewald" Complaint in Indiana
ZIMMER HOLDINGS: Hip and Knee Replacements Suit Pending in N.Y.
ZIMMER HOLDINGS: Motion to Dismiss Securities Fraud Suit Pending


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

BARCLAYS BANK: Coughlin Stoia Announces Securities Suit Filing
CENTURY ALUMINUM: Izard Nobel Announces Securities Suit Filing
CORUS BANKSHARES: Brualdi Law Firm Announces Stock Suit Filing
INTREPID POTASH: Coughlin Stoia Files Securities Fraud Lawsuit
OPPENHEIMER CHAMPION: The Shuman Law Firm Files Securities Suit

OPPENHEIMER FUNDS: Abraham Fruchter Announces Stock Suit Filing
PERRIGO CO: Brower Piven Announces Securities Fraud Suit in N.Y.
PERRIGO CO: Dyer & Berens Files Securities Fraud Suit in N.Y.
STEEL DYNAMICS: Bernard M. Gross Files Securities Fraud Lawsuit


                           *********

APPLE INC: N.Y Judge Dismisses iPhone Resellers' Antitrust Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Leonard D. Wexler of the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of New York dismissed a purported class-action
suit by a group of iPhone purchasers who intended to resell
their phones for profit, Law360 reports.

Law360 reported that the putative class-action suit is alleging
price discrimination and other antitrust-related claims in
connection with Apple's decision to slash the price of the
phones just months after first releasing the product to
consumers.

In a ruling issued on March 16, 2009, Judge Wexler dismissed the
plaintiffs' entire complaint and ordered the case closed,
according to the Law360 report.


BEMIS CO: Defends Consolidated Federal Suit Over Price Fixing
-------------------------------------------------------------
Bemis Co., Inc., and its wholly owned subsidiary, Morgan
Adhesives Co., continue to defend a consolidated federal class-
action suit over alleged price fixing in the U.S. District Court
for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.

The company and Morgan Adhesives have been named as defendants
in 13 civil lawsuits related to an investigation that was
initiated and subsequently closed by the U.S. Department of
Justice without any further action.

Six of these lawsuits purport to represent a nationwide class of
labelstock purchasers, and each alleges a conspiracy to fix
prices within the self-adhesive labelstock industry.  The first
of these lawsuits was filed on May 27, 2003.

In these lawsuits, the plaintiffs seek actual damages for the
period of the alleged conspiracy (Jan. 1, 1996 through July 25,
2003) trebled, plus an award of attorneys' fees and costs.

On Nov. 5, 2003, the Judicial Panel on MultiDistrict Litigation
issued a decision consolidating all of the federal class actions
for pretrial purposes in the U.S. District Court for the Middle
District of Pennsylvania, before the Honorable Chief Judge
Vanaskie.

On Nov. 20, 2007, the Court granted plaintiffs' motion for class
certification.

On March 6, 2008, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals denied
Defendant's petition for leave to appeal the district court's
decision granting class certification.

On June 24, 2008, the Court in the consolidated federal class
actions issued a decision dismissing the Company from those
actions.

On Jan. 27, 2009, the defendants filed a motion to decertify the
class based on new case law in the Third Circuit.

At this time, a discovery cut-off has been set for Dec. 21,
2009.  However, no trial date has been set, according to the
company's Feb. 27, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
Dec. 31, 2008.

Bemis Co., Inc. -- http://www.bemis.com/-- is a manufacturer of
flexible packaging products and pressure sensitive materials,
which sells its products to customers throughout the U.S.,
Canada, South America and Europe, as well as Asia Pacific and
Mexico.  It operates in two segments: Flexible Packaging and
Pressure Sensitive Materials.


BEMIS CO: To Defend Lawsuits Over Price Fixing in Various States
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bemis Co., Inc., and its wholly owned subsidiary, Morgan
Adhesives Co., intend to defend the state class-action suits
alleging price fixing in the self-adhesive labelstock industry,
according to the company's Feb. 27, 2009 Form 10-K filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year
ended Dec. 31, 2008.

The Company and Morgan Adhesives have been named in three
lawsuits filed in the California Superior Court in San
Francisco.  These three lawsuits, which have been consolidated,
seek to represent a class of all California indirect purchasers
of labelstock and each alleges a conspiracy to fix prices within
the self-adhesive labelstock industry.

The Company has also been named in:

   -- one lawsuit in Vermont, seeking to represent a class of
      all Vermont indirect purchasers of labelstock,

   -- one lawsuit in Nebraska seeking to represent a class of
      all Nebraska indirect purchasers of labelstock,

   -- one lawsuit in Kansas seeking to represent a class of all
      Kansas indirect purchasers of labelstock, and

   -- one lawsuit in Tennessee, seeking to represent a class of
      purchasers of labelstock in various jurisdictions.

All these suits allege a conspiracy to fix prices within the
self-adhesive labelstock industry.

Bemis Co., Inc. -- http://www.bemis.com/-- is a manufacturer of
flexible packaging products and pressure sensitive materials,
which sells its products to customers throughout the U.S.,
Canada, South America and Europe, as well as Asia Pacific and
Mexico.  It operates in two segments: Flexible Packaging and
Pressure Sensitive Materials.


CELLCOM ISRAEL: Faces Subscribers' Suit Over Commercial Messages
----------------------------------------------------------------
     NETANYA, Israel, March 17 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Cellcom
Israel Ltd. (NYSE: CEL) (TASE: CEL) (hereinafter: the
"Company"), announced that a purported class action lawsuit was
filed against the Company, its chief executive officer and some
of its directors, in the District Court of Central Region, by a
plaintiff alleging to be a subscriber of the Company.  The
plaintiff alleges that the Company unlawfully sent its
subscribers commercial messages.

     If the lawsuit is certified as a class action, the total
amount claimed from the Company is estimated by the plaintiff to
be approximately NIS 800 million.

     At this preliminary stage, the Company is unable to assess
the lawsuit's chances of success.


DBSI INC: Judge to Appoint Independent Examiner in Idaho Case
-------------------------------------------------------------
A federal bank judge has agreed to appoint an independent
examiner to look into a securities case against DBSI, Inc.,
which involves investors nationwide, Montana's News Station
reports.

The Idaho Business Review previously reported that DBSI, Inc. is
still facing a purported class-action lawsuit alleging that it
took in $500 million in illegal profits since October 2003 as a
result of securities fraud, banking fraud and tax fraud,
including $160 million personally siphoned to president and
chief executive officer (Class Action Reporter, Jan. 19, 2009).

The suit specifically names as defendants the company; its
president and chief executive officer, Douglas L. Swenson; and
several others.

Doug Swenson and Simon Shifrin of the Idaho Business Review
previously reported that the suit was filed on Oct. 27, 2008 in
Idaho's Fourth Judicial District Court by a California trust on
behalf of tenant-in-common investors (Class Action Reporter,
Nov. 25, 2008).

It claims that DBSI:

       -- treated some securities as real estate transactions to
          avoid disclosures;

       -- induced investors to violate the federal tax code;

       -- reneged on promises not to sell fractional ownership
          interests to third parties;

       -- created a "Ponzi" scheme in which the proceeds from
          the marked-up sale of new properties were used to pay
          investors on existing properties; and

       -- intentionally concealed fair market values of
          properties it sold to investors, among other things.

In particular, the lawsuit says that two separate DBSI
affiliates, DBSI Securities LLC and For 1031 LLC, treated nearly
identical transactions differently - as securities or real
estate.

According to court papers obtained by the Idaho Business Review
treating tenant-in-commons (TIC) solely as real estate requires
minimal disclosure and constitutes fraud.

The suit seeks $2 billion on behalf of all TIC investors since
October 2003 and dissolution or reorganization of the company,
reports the Idaho Business Review.


MONACO COACH: Berger & Montague Files WARN Violations Litigation
----------------------------------------------------------------
     PHILADELPHIA, March 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Berger &
Montague, P.C. has filed a class action lawsuit in the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, "Rieke, et
al. v. Monaco Coach Corporation, Civil Action No. 09-50444-KJC,"
on behalf of 2,600 employees who were laid off by Monaco Coach
Corporation in December 2008 and thereafter without receiving
any notice.

     Monaco Coach Corporation, the manufacturer of luxury
recreational vehicles headquartered in Coburg, Oregon, and
traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol MNC until
trading was suspended on March 3, 2009, filed for Chapter 11
bankruptcy protection on March 5, 2009.

     The lawsuit claims that Monaco violated the Worker
Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (the "WARN Act")
which provides that employers must give sixty days notice to
employers prior to a plant closing or mass layoff.  The lawsuit
seeks sixty days wages and benefits in lieu of the notice.

     The lead plaintiffs, Randy Rieke, Cary Rieke, Gary Betts,
Joyce Betts, Michael Dager, Angel Dager, Diana Hensley, and
Jenny Ossthun, were all employed by Monaco at its headquarters
in Coburg, Oregon.  However, the lead plaintiffs filed this
lawsuit on behalf of all employees who were part of the layoffs,
including those who worked at Monaco's facilities located in
Milford, Indiana, Wakarusa, Indiana, and Warsaw, Indiana.

     "The WARN Act provides for sixty days advance notice of
plant closings and mass layoffs to affected employees, and
Monaco Coach Corporation has admitted publicly that it did not
give such notice," said Shanon Carson of Berger & Montague,
P.C., an attorney for the plaintiffs.  "We will vigorously seek
just compensation for our clients and their co-workers and ask
simply that the company comply with the federal laws passed by
Congress to protect employees from being abruptly terminated
without notice, which substantially impacts their ability to
find substitute work and support their families."  Mr. Carson
also noted that some of the lead plaintiffs and other affected
workers are doubly impacted because they are husband and wife.

For more details, contact:

          Shanon Carson, Esq. (scarson@bm.net)
          Berger & Montague, P.C.
          Phone: (215) 875-4656
          Web site: http://www.bergermontague.com/


ODYSSEY RE: Defends Amended Consolidated Securities Suit in N.Y.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Odyssey Re Holdings Corp. continues to defend an amended
consolidated securities class-action complaint in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York.

On Feb. 8, 2007, the company was added as a co-defendant in an
amended and consolidated complaint in an existing action against
its majority shareholder, Fairfax Financial Holdings Limited,
and certain of Fairfax's officers and directors, who include
certain of the company's current and former directors.

The amended and consolidated complaint has been filed in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by the
lead plaintiffs, who seek to represent a class of all purchasers
and acquirers of securities of Fairfax between May 21, 2003 and
March 22, 2006, inclusive, and allege, among other things, that
the defendants violated U.S. federal securities laws by making
material misstatements or failing to disclose certain material
information.

The amended and consolidated complaint seeks, among other
things, certification of the putative class, unspecified
compensatory damages, unspecified injunctive relief, reasonable
costs and attorneys' fees and other relief.

These claims are at a preliminary stage.

Pursuant to the scheduling stipulations, the various defendants
filed their respective motions to dismiss the amended and
consolidated complaint, the lead plaintiffs filed their
opposition thereto, and the defendants filed their replies to
those oppositions; the motions to dismiss were argued before the
Court in December 2007.  The Court has not yet issued a ruling
on these motions, according to the company's Feb. 27, 2009 Form
10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for
the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008.

Odyssey Re Holdings Corp. -- http://www.odysseyre.com/--
incorporated on March 21, 2001, is an underwriter of
reinsurance, providing a full range of property and casualty
products on a worldwide basis.  It offers both treaty and
facultative reinsurance to property and casualty insurers and
reinsurers. OdysseyRe also writes insurance business, primarily
focused on liability lines, in the United States and London.
The business is organized across four operating divisions:
Americas, EuroAsia, London Market and United States insurance.
The reinsurance operations primarily consist of businesses, such
as casualty, property, marine and aerospace, and surety and
credit. The insurance operations comprise medical malpractice,
professional liability, non-standard personal and commercial
automobile, specialty liability, and property and package.


PFIZER INC: Faces N.Y. Suit Over Risks of Lexapro, Celexa Drugs
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pfizer, Inc., Forest Laboratories, Inc., and Warner-Lambert Co.
have been hit with a proposed class-action suit accusing them of
coordinating a scheme to mask suicide risks associated with
antidepressants Lexapro and Celexa in pediatric patients while
simultaneously offering doctors kickbacks to prescribe the drugs
for younger patients, Law360 reports.

The New Mexico UFCW Union's and Employers' Health and Welfare
Trust Fund filed the putative class-action suit on March 15,
2009 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New
York under the caption, "New Mexico UFCW Union's and Employer's
Health and Welfare Trust Fund v. Forest Laboratories, Inc. et
al., Case No. 1:2009-cv-01033," according to the Law360 report.


PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL: Appeals in ERISA Litigation Remain Pending
----------------------------------------------------------------
Appeals from the dismissed claims against Prudential Financial,
Inc. in the matter tagged, "In re Employee Benefit Insurance
Brokerage Antitrust Litigation," are still pending in the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, according to Prudential
Financial, Inc.'s Feb. 26, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
Dec. 31, 2008.

Purported class-action lawsuits brought by private plaintiffs
have been consolidated in the multidistrict litigation in the
U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.

In August and September 2007, the court dismissed the anti-trust
and Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act claims.

In January 2008, the court dismissed the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act claims with prejudice.

In February 2008, the court dismissed the state law claims
without prejudice.

The Plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit. (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 21, 2008)

Newark, N.J.-based Prudential Financial, Inc. is a financial
services company with operations in United States, Asia, Europe
and Latin America.  Through its subsidiaries and affiliates, it
offers an array of financial products and services, including
life insurance, annuities, mutual funds, pension and retirement-
related services and administration, investment management, real
estate brokerage and relocation services, and, through a joint
venture, retail securities brokerage services.


PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL: Consolidated Brokers' Suit Remains Pending
----------------------------------------------------------------
A multidistrict litigation is pending in the U.S. District Court
for the Central District of California, accusing Prudential
Financial, Inc. of improperly classifying stockbrokers as exempt
employees under state and federal wage and hour laws.

The suits -- recently consolidated in California for coordinated
trial proceedings -- also name as defendants Prudential
Securities, Inc. and Prudential Equity Group LLC.

Two of the complaints -- "Janowsky v. Wachovia Securities, LLC,
and Prudential Securities Incorporated," and "Goldstein v.
Prudential Financial, Inc." -- were filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York.

The Goldstein complaint purports to have been filed on behalf of
a nationwide class.  The Janowsky complaint alleges a class of
New York brokers.

Three complaints were filed in the California Superior Court and
purport to have been brought on behalf of classes of California
brokers.  These suits are captioned:

       1. "Dewane v. Prudential Equity Group, Prudential
          Securities Incorporated, and Wachovia Securities LLC;"

       2. "DiLustro v. Prudential Securities Incorporated,
          Prudential Equity Group, Inc. and Wachovia
          Securities;" and

       3. "Carayanis v. Prudential Equity Group LLC and
          Prudential Securities Inc."

The Carayanis complaint was subsequently withdrawn without
prejudice in May 2006.

In June 2006, a purported New York state class action complaint
was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
New York, captioned "Panesenko v. Wachovia Securities, et al."

The Panesenko complaint is alleging that the company failed to
pay overtime to stockbrokers in violation of state and federal
law and that improper deductions were made from the
stockbrokers' wages in violation of state law.

In September 2006, Prudential Securities was sued in "Badain v.
Wachovia Securities, et al.," a purported nationwide class-
action suit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of New York.

The complaint alleges that Prudential Securities failed to pay
overtime to stockbrokers in violation of state and federal law
and that improper deductions were made from the stockbrokers'
wages in violation of state law.

In December 2006, all cases were transferred to the U.S.
District Court for the Central District of California by the
Judicial Panel on multidistrict litigation for coordinated or
consolidated pre-trial proceedings.

The complaints seek back overtime pay and statutory damages,
recovery of improper deductions, interest, and attorneys' fees.
(Class Action Reporter, Nov. 21, 2008)

No further developments in the consolidated matter were
disclosed in the company's Feb. 26, 2009 Form 10-K filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year
ended Dec. 31, 2008.

Newark, N.J.-based Prudential Financial, Inc. is a financial
services company with operations in United States, Asia, Europe
and Latin America.  Through its subsidiaries and affiliates, it
offers an array of financial products and services, including
life insurance, annuities, mutual funds, pension and retirement-
related services and administration, investment management, real
estate brokerage and relocation services, and, through a joint
venture, retail securities brokerage services.


PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL: Defends Remaining Suits in Investment Case
----------------------------------------------------------------
Prudential Financial, Inc. remains a defendant in pending
actions in the consolidated class-action proceeding, "In re:
Mutual Fund Investment Litigation," in the U.S. District Court
for the District of Maryland.

In October 2004, the company and Prudential Securities were
named as defendants in several class actions brought on behalf
of purchasers and holders of shares in a number of mutual fund
complexes.

The actions are consolidated as part of a multi-district
proceeding, "In re: Mutual Fund Investment Litigation," pending
in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.

The complaints allege that the purchasers and holders were
harmed by dilution of the funds' values and excessive fees,
caused by market timing and late trading, and seek unspecified
damages.

In August 2005, the company was dismissed from several of the
actions, without prejudice to repleading the state claims, but
remains a defendant in other actions in the consolidated
proceeding, according to its Feb. 26, 2009 Form 10-K filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year
ended Dec. 31, 2008.

Newark, N.J.-based Prudential Financial, Inc. is a financial
services company with operations in United States, Asia, Europe
and Latin America.  Through its subsidiaries and affiliates, it
offers an array of financial products and services, including
life insurance, annuities, mutual funds, pension and retirement-
related services and administration, investment management, real
estate brokerage and relocation services, and, through a joint
venture, retail securities brokerage services.


PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL: Faces "Garcia" Suit Over Death Benefits
-------------------------------------------------------------
Prudential Financial, Inc. faces a purported nationwide class-
action suit, "Garcia v. Prudential Insurance Company of
America," filed in November 2008, in the U.S. District Court for
the District of New Jersey.

The complaint, which is brought on behalf of beneficiaries of
Prudential policies whose death benefits were placed in retained
asset accounts, alleges that by investing the death benefits in
these accounts, Prudential wrongfully delayed payment and
improperly retained undisclosed profits.

It alleges claims of breach of the contract of insurance, breach
of contract with regard to the retained asset accounts, breach
of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment.

The suit seeks an accounting, disgorgement, injunctive relief,
attorneys' fees, and prejudgment and post-judgment interest,
according to the company's Feb. 26, 2009 Form 10-K filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year
ended Dec. 31, 2008.

Newark, N.J.-based Prudential Financial, Inc. is a financial
services company with operations in United States, Asia, Europe
and Latin America.  Through its subsidiaries and affiliates, it
offers an array of financial products and services, including
life insurance, annuities, mutual funds, pension and retirement-
related services and administration, investment management, real
estate brokerage and relocation services, and, through a joint
venture, retail securities brokerage services.


ROYAL BANK: Plaintiff Seeks Lead Status in N.Y. Subprime Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Kosseff, an investor in stock offered by the Royal Bank of
Scotland Group PLC, has asked a federal court to appoint him
lead plaintiff in a class-action suit related to the bank's
subprime mortgage market exposure, Law360 reports.

In a motion filed on March 16, 2009 in the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of New York, Mr. Kosseff asked the
court to appoint him lead plaintiff, arguing that his suit
should not be consolidated with similar suits because it
contains more specific allegations brought on behalf of a
specific group of investors, according to the Law360 report.


SONUS NETWORKS: June 16 Hearing Set For $9.5M Mass. Lawsuit Deal
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts will
hold a fairness hearing on June 16, 2009 at 2:00 p.m. for the
proposed $9,500,000 settlement in the matter, "In Re Sonus
Networks Securities Litigation, Case No. 1:02-cv-11315-MLW."

The hearing will be held before the Honorable Mark L. Wolf, at
the United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts, John Joseph Moakley U.S. Courthouse, 1 Courthouse
Way, Boston, Massachusetts 02210, Courtroom 10 (fifth floor).

Beginning in July 2002, several purchasers of the company's
common stock filed complaints before the U.S. District Court for
the District of Massachusetts against the company, certain of
its officers and directors, and a former officer under Sections
10(b) and 20(a) and Rule 10b-5 of the Exchange Act (Class Action
Reporter, Sept. 23, 2009).

The purchasers seek to represent a class of persons who
purchased the company's common stock between Dec. 11, 2000, and
Jan. 16, 2002, and seek unspecified monetary damages.

The class-action complaints were essentially identical and
alleged that the company made false and misleading statements
about its products and business.

These cases were subsequently consolidated, and on March 3,
2003, the plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint.  In
April 2003, the company filed a motion to dismiss the
consolidated amended complaint on various grounds.

On May 11, 2004, the court held oral argument on the company's
dismissal motion, and later denied the request.

The plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification on July
30, 2004.  This motion was granted by the court and a class
representative was then appointed.  The court also appointed the
law firm of Moulton & Gans as lead counsel.

After the court requested additional briefing on the adequacy of
the class representative, the class representative withdrew.
The lead counsel then filed a motion to substitute a new
plaintiff as the class representative.  On May 19, 2005, the
court held a hearing on the motion and took the matter under
advisement.

On Aug. 15, 2005, the court issued an order decertifying the
class and requiring the parties to submit a joint report
informing the court whether the cases have been settled and
whether the defendants would be seeking to recover attorney's
fees from the plaintiffs.

On Sept. 30, 2005, the plaintiffs filed motions to voluntarily
dismiss their complaints with prejudice.  On Oct. 5, 2005, the
court entered an order dismissing the cases.

However, on June 26, 2006, the court issued an order denying the
company's motion for recovery of attorneys' fees.

On Jan. 6, 2006, a purchaser of the company common stock filed a
complaint with the U.S. District Court for the District of
Massachusetts that is essentially identical to the Consolidated
Amended Complaint previously filed against the defendants.

The court has appointed as lead plaintiff the Public Employees'
Retirement System of Mississippi, which filed an amended
consolidated complaint.

In April 19, 2007, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss this
amended consolidated complaint.  The court held a hearing on the
motion on Sept. 18, 2008, according to the company's Form 10-Q
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarter ended June 30, 2008.

The suit is "In Re Sonus Networks Securities Litigation, Case
No. 1:02-cv-11315-MLW," filed before the U.S. District Court for
the District of Massachusetts, Judge Mark L. Wolf, presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs are:

         Robert J. Berg, Esq.
         Michael S. Bigin, Esq.
         Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP
         10 East 40th Street, 22nd Floor
         New York, NY 10016
         Phone: 212-779-1414

              - and -

         Richard H. Weiss, Esq.
         Milberg, Weiss, Bershad, Hynes & Lerach
         One Penn Plaza
         New York City, NY 10002
         Phone: 212-594-5300
         Fax: 212-868-1229

Representing the company are:

         Daniel W. Halston, Esq. (daniel.halston@wilmerhale.com)
         Michelle D. Miller, Esq.
         (michelle.miller@wilmerhale.com)
         Jeffrey B. Rudman, Eqs. (jeffrey.rudman@wilmerhale.com)
         Peter A. Spaeth, Esq. (peter.spaeth@wilmerhale.com)
         Wilmer Hale
         60 State Street
         Boston, MA 02109
         Phone: 617-526-6654
         Fax: 617-526-5000


VIVENDI UNIVERSAL: N.Y. Judge Denies Motions in Stock Fraud Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Richard J. Holwell of the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York denied motions for partial summary
judgment by two former executives of Vivendi Universal SA in the
long-standing securities fraud class-action suit alleging that
they and their former employer made false and misleading
statements that caused the company's securities to trade at
artificially inflated prices, Law360 reports.

In an order issued on March 16, 2009 Judge Holwell denied
requests by defendants Jean-Marie Messier and Guillaume Hannezo
according to the Law360 report.


ZIMMER HOLDINGS: Faces Amended "Dewald" Complaint in Indiana
----------------------------------------------------------------
Zimmer Holdings, Inc. faces an amended complaint in the
putative class-action suit styled, "Dewald v. Zimmer Holdings,
Inc., et al.," in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Indiana.

On Nov. 20, 2008, a complaint was filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of Indiana, "Dewald v. Zimmer
Holdings, Inc., et al.," naming the company and certain of its
current and former directors and employees as defendants.

The complaint relates to a putative class-action suit on behalf
of all persons who were participants in or beneficiaries of the
company's U.S. or Puerto Rico Savings and Investment Programs
("plans") between Oct. 5, 2007 and the date of filing and whose
accounts included investments in Zimmer's common stock.

The complaint alleges, among other things, that the defendants
breached their fiduciary duties in violation of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, by
continuing to offer Zimmer stock as an investment option in the
plans when the stock purportedly was no longer a prudent
investment and that defendants failed to provide plan
participants with complete and accurate information sufficient
to advise them of the risks of investing their retirement
savings in Zimmer stock.

The plaintiff seeks an unspecified monetary payment to the
plans, injunctive and equitable relief, attorneys' fees, costs
and other relief.

On Jan. 23, 2009, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint that
alleges the same claims and clarifies that the class period is
Oct. 5, 2007 through Sept. 2, 2008.

The defendants are not required to respond to the amended
complaint until March 23, 2009, according to the company's Feb.
27, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008.

Zimmer Holdings, Inc. -- http://www.zimmer.com-- designs,
develops, manufactures and markets reconstructive orthopaedic
implants, including joint and dental, spinal implants, trauma
products and related orthopaedic surgical products.  The
Company's products include joint and dental reconstructive
orthopaedic implants, spinal implants, trauma products, and
related orthopaedic surgical products.  Its related orthopaedic
surgical products include surgical supplies and instruments
designed to aid in orthopaedic surgical procedures and post-
operation rehabilitation.  Orthopaedic surgeons and
neurosurgeons use spinal implants in the treatment of
degenerative diseases, deformities and trauma.  Trauma products
are used primarily to reattach or stabilize damaged bone and
tissue to support the body's natural healing process.


ZIMMER HOLDINGS: Hip and Knee Replacements Suit Pending in N.Y.
---------------------------------------------------------------
A purported class-action lawsuit filed against Zimmer Holdings,
Inc., and two subsidiaries, in connection with hip and knee
replacements, remains pending in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York.

The complaint was filed on April 24, 2008, before the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York, entitled,
"Thorpe v. Zimmer, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:2008-cv-03888,"
naming the company and two of its subsidiaries as defendants.

The complaint relates to a putative class action suit on behalf
of certain residents of New York who had hip or knee implant
surgery involving Zimmer products during an unspecified period.

The complaint alleges that the company's relationships with
orthopaedic surgeons and others violated the New York deceptive
practices statute and unjustly enriched the company.

The plaintiff requests actual damages or $50.00, whichever is
greater, on behalf of each class member, a permanent injunction
from the company engaging in allegedly improper practices in the
future and restitution in an unspecified amount.

No further developments in the matter were disclosed in the
company's Feb. 27, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
Dec. 31, 2008.

The suit is "Thorpe et al. v. Zimmer, Inc. et al., Case No.
1:2008-cv-03888," filed before the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York, Judge Colleen McMahon, presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs are:

          Andres F. Alonso, Esq. (aalonso@yourlawyer.com)
          Parker Waichman & Alonso, LLP
          111 Great Neck Road
          Great Neck, NY 11021
          Phone: 516-466-6500
          Fax: 516-466-6665

          Stuart George Gross, Esq. (sgross@shearman.com)
          Shearman & Sterling LLP
          599 Lexington Avenue
          New York, NY 10022
          Phone: 212-848-4527
          Fax: 646-848-4527

          Steven N. Williams, Esq. (swilliams@cpmlegal.com)
          Cotchett, Pitre, Simon & McCarthy
          840 Malcolm Road
          Burlingame, CA 94010
          Phone: 650-697-6997
          Fax: 650-697-0577

Representing the defendant is:

          Theodore Grossman, Esq. (tgrossman@jonesday.com)
          Jones Day
          North Point, 901 Lakeside Avenue
          Cleveland, OH 44114
          Phone: 216-586-7268
          Fax: 216-579-0212

  
ZIMMER HOLDINGS: Motion to Dismiss Securities Fraud Suit Pending
----------------------------------------------------------------
The motion to dismiss a purported securities fraud class-action
lawsuit in Indiana remains pending, according to Zimmer
Holdings, Inc.'s Feb. 27, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
Dec. 31, 2008.

On Aug. 5, 2008, a complaint was filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of Indiana, entitled, "Plumbers
and Pipefitters Local Union 719 Pension Fund v. Zimmer Holdings,
Inc., et al.," naming the company and two of its executive
officers as defendants.

The complaint relates to a putative class-action suit on behalf
of persons who purchased the Company's common stock between Jan.
29, 2008 and July 22, 2008.

The complaint alleges that the company and two of its executive
officers engaged in violations of the U.S. Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended, by issuing false and misleading
statements concerning its business and financial results during
the relevant time period.

The plaintiff seeks unspecified damages and interest, attorneys'
fees, costs and other relief.

On Dec. 24, 2008, the lead plaintiff filed a consolidated
complaint that alleges the same claims and relates to the same
time period.  The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the
consolidated complaint on Feb. 23, 2009, which is pending with
the court.

Zimmer Holdings, Inc. -- http://www.zimmer.com-- designs,
develops, manufactures and markets reconstructive orthopaedic
implants, including joint and dental, spinal implants, trauma
products and related orthopaedic surgical products.  The
Company's products include joint and dental reconstructive
orthopaedic implants, spinal implants, trauma products, and
related orthopaedic surgical products.  Its related orthopaedic
surgical products include surgical supplies and instruments
designed to aid in orthopaedic surgical procedures and post-
operation rehabilitation.  Orthopaedic surgeons and
neurosurgeons use spinal implants in the treatment of
degenerative diseases, deformities and trauma.  Trauma products
are used primarily to reattach or stabilize damaged bone and
tissue to support the body's natural healing process.


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

BARCLAYS BANK: Coughlin Stoia Announces Securities Suit Filing
--------------------------------------------------------------
     March 16, 2009 03:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time -- SAN DIEGO
-- (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP
(http://www.csgrr.com/cases/barclayspfdseries4/)announced that
a class action has been commenced in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all
persons who acquired Barclays Bank Plc ("Barclays Bank") Non-
cumulative Callable Dollar Preference Shares, Series 4
("Preferred Stock") (NYSE:BCS-PC) sold in the form of American
Depository Shares ("ADSs") pursuant and/or traceable to a false
and misleading registration statement and prospectus issued in
connection with the Company's December 2007 offering of the
Preferred Stock (the "Offering").

     The complaint charges Barclays Bank, certain of its
officers and directors, Barclays Plc ("Barclays"), the
underwriters of the Offering and Barclays' auditor with
violations of the Securities Act of 1933.

     Barclays Bank is a major global financial services provider
engaged in retail and commercial banking, credit cards,
investment banking, wealth management and investment management
services.

     The complaint alleges that defendants consummated the
Offering pursuant to a false and misleading Registration
Statement and Prospectus (collectively, the "Registration
Statement"), selling 40 million shares at $25 per share for
proceeds of $1 billion.  Barclays ultimately announced huge
multi-billion dollar impairment charges associated with its
exposure to mortgage-related securities, causing the price of
Barclays Bank's Preferred Stock issued in the Offering to
decline.

     According to the complaint, the true facts that were
omitted from the Registration Statement were:

       -- Barclays' portfolio of mortgage-related securities was
          impaired to a much larger extent than had been
          disclosed;

       -- defendants failed to properly record losses for
          impaired assets;

       -- Barclays' internal controls were inadequate to prevent
          the Company from improperly reporting its mortgage-
          related investments; and

       -- Barclays was not as well capitalized as represented
          and would have to continually raise additional
          capital, which would dilute current holders and those
          investors purchasing Preferred Stock in the Offering.

     Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf all persons
who acquired Barclays Bank Preferred Stock pursuant and/or
traceable to the Registration Statement issued in connection
with the Company's December 2007 Offering.

For more details, contact:

         David A. Rosenfeld, Esq. (djr@csgrr.com)
         Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP
         Phone: 800-449-4900 or 619-231-1058
         Web site: http://www.csgrr.com/cases/barclayspfdseries4


CENTURY ALUMINUM: Izard Nobel Announces Securities Suit Filing
--------------------------------------------------------------
     Updated 2:41 p.m. PT, Mon., March. 16, 2009 -- MarketWire
2009 -- HARTFORD, CT - 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 Northern District of California on behalf of those
who purchased or acquired shares of Century Aluminum Company
("Century Aluminum" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: CENX) pursuant
and/or traceable to the Company's January 28, 2009 Secondary
Offering (the "Secondary Offering").

     The Complaint charges that Century Aluminum and certain of
its officers, directors, and underwriters violated federal
securities laws by issuing a materially false registration
statement and prospectus ("Registration Statement") in
connection with the Secondary Offering.

     Specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Registration
Statement failed to disclose that the Company had reported cash
flows associated with the termination of forward financial sales
contracts by issuing $929 million of Series A Convertible
Preferred Stock in July 2008 on a net basis, as an operating
activity, when the transaction should have been reported on a
gross basis as both an operating activity and a financing
activity to reflect the cash receipts and disbursements
associated with the transaction.

     On March 2, 2009, Century Aluminum filed an interim 8-K
which reported that the financial statements reported in the
Form 10-Q for three quarters in 2008 should no longer be relied
upon.  On this news, the price of Century Aluminum fell over 24%
to close at $1.67 per share.

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/centuryaluminumcompany/


CORUS BANKSHARES: Brualdi Law Firm Announces Stock Suit Filing
--------------------------------------------------------------
     March 16, 2009 (Datamonitor via COMTEX) -- The Brualdi Law
Firm has commenced a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois on behalf of purchasers of Corus
Bankshares common stock during the period from January 25, 2008
to January 30, 2009 for violations of the federal securities
laws.

     The complaint alleged that Corus's press releases,
Securities and Exchange Commission filings and other public
statements during the period from January 25, 2008 to January
30, 2009 were false and misleading for failing to disclose that
Corus was failing to recognize losses on its condominium loans
as required by accounting rules.

     The lawsuit also alleged that Corus was purchasing
condominiums in developments Corus had financed in an attempt to
inflate the appraised values of condominiums to delay having to
recognize losses on financing for such condominiums; inflate
developers' sales figures to increase the likelihood of
successful future sales; and create the illusion of successful
sales histories in order to inflate appraisal values for the
condominiums to ensure inflated future prices for the
condominiums.

     No class has yet been certified in the above action.

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


INTREPID POTASH: Coughlin Stoia Files Securities Fraud Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
     NEW YORK, Mar 16, 2009 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Coughlin Stoia
Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP ("Coughlin Stoia")
(http://www.csgrr.com/cases/intrepid/)announced that a class
action has been commenced in the United States District Court
for the District of Colorado on behalf of purchasers of the
securities of Intrepid Potash, Inc. ("Intrepid" or the
"Company")(NYSE:IPI) in or traceable to the Company's April 21,
2008 Initial Public Offering (the "IPO" or the "Offering"),
seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Act of 1933 (the
"Securities Act").

     The complaint charges Intrepid and certain of its officers
with violations of the Securities Act. Intrepid engages in the
production and marketing of muriate of potash in the United
States.

     On April 21, 2008, the Company completed its IPO. In
connection therewith, Intrepid issued a Registration Statement
and Prospectus (collectively, the "Registration Statement").
The IPO was a financial success for the Company, as it enabled
the Company to raise net proceeds of $1.033 billion by selling
approximately 34.5 million shares of stock to the public at a
price of $32.00 per share.

     According to the complaint, in connection with the
Company's IPO, defendants, in the Registration Statement, failed
to disclose or indicate the following:

       -- that the Company's President and Chief Operating
          Officer ("COO") did not receive a B.A. degree from the
          University of Colorado or an M.S. degree from Loyola
          Marymount University, as represented in the
          Registration Statement; and

       -- that the Company's President and COO had
          misrepresented his academic credentials in violation
          of the Company's Code of Business Conduct.

     On February 11, 2009, investors were exposed to a report on
the Company issued by the Fraud Discovery Institute revealing
that the Company's President and COO had affirmatively lied and
misrepresented his educational credentials in the Company's
Registration Statement.

     In response to this news, shares of the Company's stock
declined $1.52 per share to close at $22.00 per share on
February 11, 2009. This closing price of Intrepid shares
represented a cumulative loss of $10.00, or approximately
31.25%, of the value of the Company's shares at the time of its
IPO just months earlier.

     Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all
purchasers of Intrepid securities in or traceable to the
Company's IPO (the "Class").

For more details, contact:

         David A. Rosenfeld, Esq. (djr@csgrr.com)
         Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP
         Phone: 800-449-4900 or 619-231-1058
         Web site: http://www.csgrr.com/cases/intrepid/


OPPENHEIMER CHAMPION: The Shuman Law Firm Files Securities Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
     BOULDER, Colo., March 16, 2009 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The
Shuman Law Firm announced that it has filed a lawsuit seeking
class action status in the United States District Court for the
District of Colorado on behalf of a proposed class (the "Class")
consisting of all persons or entities who purchased or held
shares in the following Oppenheimer Champion Income Funds (the
"Fund"): A Shares (Nasdaq:OPCHX), B Shares (Nasdaq:OCHBX), C
Shares (Nasdaq:OCHCX), N Shares (Nasdaq:OCHNX) and Y Shares
(Nasdaq:OCHYX) between August 7, 2006 to December 9, 2008,
inclusive (the "Class Period"), including in connection with its
August 7, 2006, January 26, 2007 and January 25, 2008 stock
offerings.

     The lawsuit alleges defendants marketed and sold the Fund
as a conservative high-income fund, portraying it as diversified
and higher yielding. Plaintiff claims the Fund's managers failed
to disclose the true risk of the Fund, which took gambles on
mortgage-backed securities and illiquid derivatives that
ultimately led to the Fund's collapse.  Beginning in July 2008,
shares declined as the credit crunch exposed the volatility and
collapse of the Fund's mortgage-related investments.  The Fund
experienced an 82 percent drop compared to other high-yield
funds that averaged a drop of 32 percent in 2008.  Overall, the
Fund experienced an almost $2 billion drop in assets in 15
months.

For more information, contact:

          Kip B. Shuman, Esq. (kip@shumanlawfirm.com)
          Rusty E. Glenn, Esq. (rusty@shumanlawfirm.com)
          The Shuman Law Firm
          885 Arapahoe Avenue
          Boulder, CO 80203
          Phone: 866-974-8626
          Fax: 303-484-4886
          Web site: http://www.shumanlawfirm.com/


OPPENHEIMER FUNDS: Abraham Fruchter Announces Stock Suit Filing
---------------------------------------------------------------
     NEW YORK, NY--(Marketwire - March 16, 2009) - Abraham,
Fruchter & Twersky, LLP has been retained to file a class action
lawsuit against Oppenheimer Funds on behalf of purchasers of the
Rochester National Municipals Fund ("Rochester" or the "Fund")
(NASDAQ: ORNAX) (NASDAQ: ORNBX) (NASDAQ: ORNCX) from March 13,
2006 through October 21, 2008 (the "Class Period").  A lawsuit
has already been filed in the United States District Court for
the District of Colorado.

     The complaint filed charges Oppenheimer, the Fund and
certain of its Trustees with violations of the Securities Act of
1933.  The suit claims that the registration statements and
prospectuses used to sell shares in the Fund contained
materially false and misleading statements about the risks of
investing in the Fund.  The lawsuit identified the following
funds as affected: A Shares (ORNAX), B Shares (ORNBX) and C
Shares (ORNCX).

     On October 21, 2008, Rochester filed a Prospectus
Supplement which alerted investors of the true liquidity risks
of the Fund's investments.  The Fund closed at $6.59 per share
later that day, representing a 49% decline from the Class Period
high of $13.00 per share.

     Plaintiffs seek to recover damages on behalf of all those
who purchased shares of Rochester National Municipals Fund from
March 13, 2006 through October 21, 2008.

For more details, contact:

          Jeffrey S. Abraham, Esq. (jabraham@aftlaw.com)
          Abraham, Fruchter & Twersky, LLP
          One Penn Plaza, Suite 2805
          New York, N.Y. 10119
          Phone: (212) 279-5050
          Fax: (212) 279-3655


PERRIGO CO: Brower Piven Announces Securities Fraud Suit in N.Y.
----------------------------------------------------------------
     Updated 8:10 p.m. PT, Fri., March 13, 2009 -- MarketWire
2009 -- BALTIMORE, Md. - Brower Piven, A Professional
Corporation announces that a class action lawsuit has been
commenced in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York on behalf of purchasers of the common stock
of Perrigo Company ("Perrigo" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: PRGO)
during the period between November 6, 2008 and February 2, 2009,
inclusive (the "Class Period").

     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 the Company's
report on November 6, 2008 that the fair value of Auction Rate
Securities ("ARSs") it had purchased from an undisclosed source
was $14,500,000 was inconsistent with the impact of Lehman
Brothers Holdings, Inc. ("Lehman"), the entity from which the
Company purchased the ARSs, having filed for bankruptcy almost 3
weeks earlier on September 15, 2008.  According to the
complaint, on February 3, 2009, after the Company announced it
was writing off the entire value of its ARSs, the value of
Perrigo's stock declined significantly.

     No class has yet been certified in the above action.

For more details, contact:

          Charles J. Piven, Esq. (hoffman@browerpiven.com)
          Brower Piven
          The World Trade Center-Baltimore
          401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525
          Baltimore, Maryland 21202
          Phone: 410/332-0030
          Web site: http://www.browerpiven.com


PERRIGO CO: Dyer & Berens Files Securities Fraud Suit in N.Y.
-------------------------------------------------------------
     March 16, 2009: 11:58 AM ET -- Marketwire -- Dyer & Berens
LLP (www.DyerBerens.com) 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 investors of Perrigo
Company ("Perrigo" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: PRGO) who
purchased or otherwise acquired the Company's common stock
between November 6, 2008 and February 2, 2009, inclusive (the
"Class Period"). The complaint charges Perrigo and certain of
its officers and directors with violations of federal securities
laws.

     The complaint alleges that during the Class Period,
defendants made false statements and failed to disclose adverse
facts to investors regarding $18 million of Auction Rated
Securities held by Perrigo, causing investors to purchase its
stock at artificially inflated prices.  Investors suffered
losses when the material facts were disclosed on February 2,
2009, resulting in Perrigo stock plummeting 18% that day.

     Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of Perrigo
investors.

For more details, contact:

          Jeffrey A. Berens, Esq. (jeff@dyerberens.com)
          682 Grant Street
          Denver, CO 80203
          Dyer & Berens LLP
          Phone: (888) 300-3362 or (303) 861-1764
          Web site: http://www.DyerBerens.com


STEEL DYNAMICS: Bernard M. Gross Files Securities Fraud Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
     Updated 12:25 p.m. PT, Mon., March. 16, 2009 --
PHILADELPHIA, March 16, 2009 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Law Offices
Bernard M. Gross, P.C. commenced a class action lawsuit in the
United States District Court, Northern District of Indiana,
09cv0066, on behalf of common stock purchasers of the Steel
Dynamics, Inc. ("SDLD" or the "Company") (Nasdaq:STLD) between
January 26, 2009 and March 11, 2009, inclusive (the "Class
Period"), seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.  The action is pending before the
Honorable James T. Moody.

     The complaint charges STLD and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the federal securities laws by
making false and misleading statements regarding the Company's
business and financial results.

Defendants failed to disclose that:

       -- demand for STLD's products showed continuing weakness
          in Q1 2009;

       -- STLD's inventories in its Flat Roll Division were at
          excessive levels and were materially impaired by
          approximately $70 million;

       -- given the continuing weakness in demand for STLD's
          products in Q1 2009, and in the absence of any
          existing facts to indicate or exhibit a reversal in
          that adverse trend, as well as the impaired value of
          inventories in STLD's Flat Roll Division, defendants
          lacked a reasonable basis in fact for their earnings
          guidance for Q1 2009; and

       -- Defendant Bates engaged in unusual insider selling and
          realized proceeds of in excess of $30 million.

     When defendants disclosed the truth to the market on March
11, 2009, the price of STLD's common stocked dropped 15% to
close at $7.25, on volume of more than 33 million shares, many
times the average trading day volume for STLD common stock.

     Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all persons
who purchased the common stock of STLD (Nasdaq:STLD) between
January 26, 2009 and March 11, 2009, inclusive.

For more information, contact:

          Susan R. Gross, Esq. (susang@bernardmgross.com)
          Deborah R. Gross, Esq. (debbie@bernardmgross.com)
          Law Offices Bernard M. Gross, P.C.
          John Wanamaker Building, Suite 450
          Philadelphia, PA 19107
          Phone: 866-561-3600 or 215-561-3600
          Web site: http://www.bernardmgross.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 2009.  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  * * *