CAR_Public/090605.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

             Friday, June 5, 2009, Vol. 11, No. 110

                           Headlines

AMBAC FINANCIAL: Bid to Dismiss N.Y. Securities Lawsuit Pending
AMBAC FINANCIAL: Bid to Dismiss "Tolin" Securities Suit Pending
AMERICAN BEVERAGE: Ontario Suit Settlement Approved Last Jan. 13
AMERICAN COMMERCIAL: Still Facing Suits Over July 23 Oil Spill
AMERICAN EXPRESS: Faces Calif. Suit Over "Sexist" LPGA Campaign

ATHLETICS INVESTMENT: Aug. 7, 2009 Hearing Set for "Rava" Deal
BLUE CROSS: Faces Ga. Suit Over Out-of-Network Surgical Claims
CELLCYTE GENETICS: Disputing Consolidated Stockholder Complaint
CHARTER COMMS: Faces Securities Fraud Litigation in Arkansas
CINCINNATI INSURANCE: Ill. Court Give Preliminary OK to Deal

CITY OF PHILADELPHIA: July 14 Hearing Set for Suit Settlement
CORUS BANKSHARES: Faces Suits Over Violations of Securities Laws
DISH DBS: Antitrust Suit Over Bundled Channel Offerings Pending
DISH DBS: Lawsuits by Retailers Remain Ongoing in Colorado
GAIGE & CO: Oct. 19, 2009 Hearing Set for "Chapman" Settlement

IMMUCOR INC: Faces Pa. Antitrust Litigation Over Blood Reagents
MEDIS TECHNOLOGIES: Defending Appeal to Junked Securities Suit
NATIONWIDE MUTUAL: July 27, 2009 Hearing Set for Suit Settlement
PRUDENTIAL PLC: Suits v. Jackson Over Insurance Products Pending
RIVER VALLEY: Settlement of "Means" Suit Approved Last Jan. 23

ROCKIES REGION: Settlement Gets Final Court Approval on April 7
SMITH BARNEY: Consolidated ARS Suit Remains Pending in New York
SMITH BARNEY: Motion to Remand ECA Acquisitions' Lawsuit Pending
SMITH BARNEY: Salomon Analyst Metromedia Suit Dismissed in Feb.
SUNYOUNG INC: Aug. 31 Hearing Set for Calif. Lawsuit Settlement

WALT DISNEY: Faces Fla. Litigation Alleging ADA Violations


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

BIDZ.COM INC: Barroway Topaz Files Calif. Securities Fraud Suit
OPPENHEIMER PENNSYLVANIA: Bronstein Gewirtz Announces Filing


                        Asbestos Alerts

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Exposure Suits Ongoing v. Manitowoc Company
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Colfax Records $324.9M Liability at April 3
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 34,421 Claims Pending v. Colfax at April 3
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Colfax Records $353.3MM Reserves at April 3
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Colfax Records $4.6Mil Expenses at April 3

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Digital Realty Has $1.5M March 31 Liability
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Sealed Air Facing Claims From Cryovac Deal
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Sealed Air Unit Has Thundersky Injury Suit
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Stay in Cases Involving Sealed Air Extended
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Trane Inc. Still Engage in Coverage Actions

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ingersoll-Rand Records $1.179Bil Liability
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Alamo Reserves $277T for Gradall's Facility
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ballantyne Still Has Stehman Case in Calif.
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: SCC Affiliates Still Facing Asarco Actions
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 2 3rd-Party Payor Cases Ongoing v. Liggett

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Supreme Court OKs Board Ruling in Webb Case
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Argo Reserves $162.6Mil for A&E at March 31
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: United America Unit Cleared in Suit in 2008
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cabot Unit Still Party to AO Exposure Cases
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Thomas Properties Accrues $900T for Cleanup

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: PREIT Cites $10M Insurance Cleanup Coverage
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ampco Cites $180.67M Liability at March 31
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ampco Facing 9,402 Open Claims at March 31
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: California Water Subject to Exposure Suits
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Great Lakes, NATCO Facing Pending Lawsuits

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cases v. Park-Ohio Drop to 260 at March 31
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: CBL Cites $2.6M Potential Cleanup Liability
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: FutureFuel Chem. Subject to Exposure Cases
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Houston Wire Still Faces Claims in 3 States
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ohio Court OKs Ruling in Goulds Pump Action

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Travelers Favored in Skinner Engine Action
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ruling Reversed in Thurston's Action v. CSX
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Report on Construction Guidance Finalized
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Litigation Conference Set for Sept. 14 - 16
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Alleman Seeks Information on Medical Center

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: $100T Estimated for Mass. Theater's Cleanup
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ore. Developer to Appear in Court in August
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Miss. Jury Denies Westrope's Injury Action
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: N.Y. Whistleblower Arrested for Trespassing
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hazard Present in 450 of Manitoba's Schools

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Grupo Mexico Places $2.9Bil Bid for Asarco
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Council Rock School Resolves EPA Complaint
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 13 Suits Filed During May 11-15 in Madison
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Leleux Suit Filed v. 49 Defendants in Texas
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Exposure Lawsuits Ongoing v. Mueller Units

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Liability Actions Still Ongoing v. Bucyrus
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hexion Still Subject to Liability Lawsuits
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Katy Ind. Faces 11 Ala. Cases w/ 325 Claims
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Katy Ind. Records 2700 Sterling Fluid Cases
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: LaBour Facing 130 Active Actions at April 3

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: VWR Funding Still Subject to Product Claims
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Precision Castparts Named in Injury Actions
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: STERIS Still Involved in Exposure Lawsuits
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Deere Still Subject to Liability Lawsuits
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Graham Still Involved in Exposure Lawsuits

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Met-Pro Facing 61 Pending Cases at April 30
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Corning, Calif., Denies Safety Allegations
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cleanup Costs of Plymouth Bldg. at $220,445
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Inquest Rules on Royal Navy Worker's Death
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Otford Resident's Death Linked to Exposure

ASBESTOS ALERT: Certified Environmental Accused of Cleanup Fraud


                           *********

AMBAC FINANCIAL: Bid to Dismiss N.Y. Securities Lawsuit Pending
---------------------------------------------------------------
A motion to dismiss the consolidated amended securities fraud
class-action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York is pending, according to Ambac
Financial Group Inc.'s May 18, 2009 Form 10-Q filed with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
March 31, 2009.

Initially, a suit, entitled "Reimer v. Ambac Financial Group,"
was filed on Jan. 16, 2008.  It was brought on behalf of buyers
of Ambac's shares from Oct. 19, 2005, to Nov. 26, 2007.  The
complaint charges Ambac and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of
1934.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that during the Class
Period, the defendants issued materially false and misleading
statements regarding the company's business and financial
results related to its insurance coverage on collateralized debt
obligations contracts.

According to the complaint, the true facts, which were known by
the defendants but concealed from the investing public during
the Class Period, were:

       -- that the company lacked requisite internal controls to
          ensure that the company's underwriting standards and
          its internal rating system for its CDO contracts were
          adequate, and, as a result, the company's projections
          and reported results issued during the Class Period
          were based upon defective assumptions and
          manipulated facts;

       -- that the company's financial statements were
          materially misstated due to its failure to properly
          account for its mark-to-market losses;

       -- that, given the deterioration and the increased
          volatility in the mortgage market, the company would
          be forced to tighten its underwriting standards
          related to its asset-backed securities, which would
          have a direct material negative impact on its premium
          production going forward;

       -- that the company had far greater exposure to
          anticipated losses and defaults related to its CDO
          contracts containing subprime loans, including even
          highly rated CDOs, than it had previously disclosed;

       -- that the company had far greater exposure to a
          potential ratings downgrade from one of the credit
          ratings agencies than it had previously disclosed; and

       -- that defendants' Class Period statements about the
          company's selective underwriting practices during the
          2005 through 2007 timeframe related to its CDOs backed
          by subprime assets were patently false, as the
          company's underwriting standards were at best
          aggressive and at a minimum were completely
          inadequate.

Three other suits were later filed, making substantially the
same allegations as the Reimer action.  These suits are:

     1. "Babic v. Ambac Financial Group Inc., et al." (filed on
        or about Feb. 7, 2008, in the U.S. District Court for
        the Southern District of New York, Case No. 08-CV-1273);

     2. "Parker v. Ambac Financial Group, Inc., et al." (filed
        on or about Feb. 22, 2008, in the U.S. District Court
        for the Southern District of New York, Case No. 08-CV-
        1825); and

     3. "Minneapolis Firefighters' Relief Association v. Ambac
        Financial Group, Inc., et al." (filed on Feb. 26, 2008,
        in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
        of New York, Case No. 08-CV-1918).

In March 2008, certain plaintiffs filed motions for appointment
as lead plaintiff, approval of their selection of counsel as
lead counsel for the class, and consolidation of the four class
action suits.

On May 9, 2008, the court appointed as lead plaintiff the "U.S.
Public Pension Funds," which consists of the Public Teachers'
Pension & Retirement Fund of Chicago, the Arkansas Teacher
Retirement System, and the Public Employees' Retirement System
of Mississippi.  The court also appointed Bernstein Litowitz
Berger & Grossman LLP and Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP as lead
co-counsel for the class.  The class action lawsuits were also
consolidated.

On July 25, 2008, another suit, Painting Industry Insurance and
Annuity Funds v. Ambac Assurance Corporation, et al., case No.
08 CV 6602, was filed in the U.S. District for the Southern
District of New York.

On or about Aug. 22, 2008, a consolidated amended complaint was
filed in the consolidated action.  The consolidated amended
complaint includes the allegations presented by the original
four class actions, the allegations presented by the Painting
Industry action, and additional allegations.

The consolidated amended complaint purports to be brought on
behalf of purchasers of Ambac's common stock from Oct. 25, 2006
to April 22, 2008, on behalf of purchasers of Ambac's Directly-
Issued Subordinated Capital Securities ("DISCS"), issued in
February 2007, and on behalf of purchasers of equity units and
common stock in Ambac's March 2008 offerings.

The suit names as defendants the company, the underwriters for
the three offerings, KPMG and certain present and former
directors and officers of the company.

The complaint alleges, among other things, that the defendants
issued materially false and misleading statements regarding
Ambac's business and financial results and guarantees of CDO and
MBS transactions and that the Registration Statements pursuant
to which the three offerings were made contained material
misstatements and omissions in violation of the securities laws.

On Oct. 21, 2008, the company and the individual defendants
named in the consolidated securities action moved to dismiss the
consolidated amended complaint.

The suit is "In re Ambac Financial Group, Inc. Securities
Litigation, Case No. 1:08-cv-00411-NRB," filed in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York, Judge
Naomi Reice Buchwald, presiding.

Representing the plaintiffs are:

         David Avi Rosenfeld, Esq. (drosenfeld@csgrr.com)
         Coughlin, Stoia, Geller, Rudman & Robbins, LLP
         58 South Service Road, Suite 200
         Melville, NY 11747
         Phone: 631-367-7100
         Fax: 631-367-1173

         Jill Sharyn Abrams, Esq. (jabrams@abbeyspanier.com)
         Abbey Spanier Rodd Abrams & Paradis, LLP
         212 East 39th Street
         New York, NY 10016
         Phone: 212-889-3700
         Fax: 212-684-5191

              - and -

         Aviah Cohen-Pierson, Esq. (acohenpierson@kaplanfox.com)
         Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP
         850 Third Avenue
         14th Floor
         New York, NY 10022
         Phone: 212-687-1980
         Fax: 212-687-7714

Representing the defendants is:

         Peter C. Hein, Esq. (PCHein@wlrk.com)
         Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz
         51 West 52nd Street
         New York, NY 10019
         Phone: 212-403-1237
         Fax: 212-403-2000


AMBAC FINANCIAL: Bid to Dismiss "Tolin" Securities Suit Pending
---------------------------------------------------------------
A motion to dismiss a putative class-action suit, entitled,
"Stanley Tolin et al. v. Ambac Financial Group, Inc. et al.," is
pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
New York.

On Dec. 24, 2008, a complaint in the putative class-action suit
asserting alleged violations of the federal securities laws was
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
New York against Ambac Financial Group, Inc., and one former
officer and director and one current officer, Case No. 08 CV
11241.

An amended complaint was subsequently filed on Jan. 20, 2009.

This action is brought on behalf of all purchasers of Structured
Repackaged Asset-Backed Trust Securities, Callable Class A
Certificates, Series 2007-1, STRATS(SM) Trust for Ambac
Financial Group, Inc. Securities 2007-1 ("STRATS") from June 29,
2007 through April 22, 2008.

The STRATS are asset-backed securities that were allegedly
issued by a subsidiary of Wachovia Corporation and are allegedly
collateralized solely by Ambac's DISCS.

The complaint alleges, among other things, that the defendants
issued materially false and misleading statements regarding
Ambac's business and financial results and Ambac's guarantees of
CDO and MBS transactions, in violation of the securities laws.

On April 15, 2009, the company and the individual defendants
named in Tolin moved to dismiss the amended complaint, according
to Ambac Financial Group Inc.'s May 18, 2009 Form 10-Q filed
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter
ended March 31, 2009.

Ambac Financial Group, Inc. -- http://www.ambac.com/-- is a
primarily a holding company.  The company, through its
subsidiaries, provides financial guarantees and financial
services to clients in both the public and private sectors
worldwide.  Ambac's activities are divided into two business
segments. The Financial Guarantee segment provides financial
guarantees (including credit derivatives) for public finance,
structured finance and other obligations.


AMERICAN BEVERAGE: Ontario Suit Settlement Approved Last Jan. 13
----------------------------------------------------------------
A settlement agreement in an Ontario class action lawsuit
against American Beverage Corporation and Labatt Brewing Company
Limited was approved on Jan. 13, 2009, according to the
company's May 18, 2009 Form 20-F filed with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2008.

In June 2007, Labatt and AmBev were named in an Ontario class
action lawsuit seeking damages and injunctive relief in
connection with changes to retiree health care benefits.

AmBev consented to joint representation with Labatt.

Prior to motions for class certification, the parties explored
dispute resolution alternatives.  The parties reached an
agreement in principle to settle the matter, which settlement
agreement was subsequently approved by the Court on Jan. 13,
2009.  The settlement includes cost-sharing of health benefits
through payment of deductibles by retirees.

American Beverage Corporation -- http://www.ambev.com--
produces bottled cocktail mixes, fruit drinks and bottled water.
The company is made up of two divisions: Daily's (fruit drinks
and mixers) and Twin Mountain (bottled water).  Its fruit-drink
brand names include Hugs, Too Tarts, Liquid Lizard, Big Burst,
Big Juicy, and Fruit Stand; its water brands include Glacial Ice
and Twin Mountain. American Beverage also produces Sauza
cocktail mixers, as well as a licensed brand-name mixer for
Carlson Restaurants Worldwide's T.G.I. Friday's.  American is  a
subsidiary of Dutch food giant Koninklijke Wessanen and has
operations in New Hampshire and Pennsylvania.


AMERICAN COMMERCIAL: Still Facing Suits Over July 23 Oil Spill
--------------------------------------------------------------
American Commercial Lines, Inc., continues to face purported
class-action lawsuits over an incident at the Mississippi River
that resulted in an oil discharge, according to the company's
May 8, 2009 Form 10-Q filed with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the quarter ended March 31, 2009.

The company has been notified that it has been named as a
defendant in the following class action lawsuits, filed in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Louisiana against the company and American Commercial Lines LLC
(ACLLLC), an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of the company:

       * "Austin Sicard et al. on behalf of themselves and
         others similarly situated vs. Laurin Maritime
         (America) Inc., Whitefin Shipping Co. Limited, D.R.D.
         Towing Company, LLC, American Commercial Lines, Inc.
         and the New Orleans-Baton Rouge Steamship Pilots
         Association, Case No. 08-4012," filed on July 24,
         2008;

       * "Stephen Marshall Gabarick and Bernard Attridge, on
         behalf of themselves and others similarly situated vs.
         Laurin Maritime (America) Inc., Whitefin Shipping Co.
         Limited, D.R.D. Towing Company, LLC, American
         Commercial Lines, Inc. and the New Orleans-Baton Rouge
         Steamship Pilots Association, Case No. 08-4007," filed
         on July 24, 2008;

       * "George C. McGee, and Sherral Irvin, and all others
         similarly situated vs. Laurin Maritime (America) Inc.,
         Whitefin Shipping Co., Ltd., DRD Towing Co, LLC,
         American Commercial Lines, LLC and New Orleans Baton
         Rouge Steamship Pilots Association, Case No. 08-4025,"
         filed on July 25, 2008;

       * "Bernadette Glover, on behalf of herself and all
         others similarly situated vs. Laurin Maritime
         (America) Inc., Whitefin Shipping Co. Limited, DRD
         Towing Company, LLC, and American Commercial Lines,
         Inc., Case No. 08-4031," filed on July 25, 2008;

       * "James Roussell, Daniel Hingle, and Prince Seals on
         behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated
         vs. Laurin Maritime (America) Inc., Whitefin Shipping
         Co. Limited, D.R.D. Towing Company, LLC, American
         Commercial Lines, Inc. and the New Orleans-Baton Rouge
         Steamship Pilots Association, Case No. 08-4058," filed
         on July 29, 2008;

       * "James Joseph, on behalf of himself and all others
         similarly situated vs. Laurin Maritime (America) Inc.,
         Whitefin Shipping Co. Limited, D.R.D. Towing Company,
         LLC, American Commercial Lines, Inc. and the New
         Orleans-Baton Rouge Steamship Pilots Association, Case
         No. 08-4059," filed on July 29, 2008;

       * "Jefferson Magee and Acy J. Cooper, Jr. vs. American
         Commercial Lines, Inc., DRD Towing Co., LLC, M/V Mel
         Oliver in rem, M/V Tintomara in rem, Whitefin Shipping
         Co. Ltd. and Laurin Maritime AB, Case No. 08-4055,"
         filed on July 29, 2008;

       * "Vincent Grillo and Anthony Buffinet vs. American
         Commercial Lines, Inc., DRD Towing Co., LLC, M/V Mel
         Oliver in rem, M/V Tintomara in rem, Whitefin Shipping
         Co. Ltd. and Laurin Maritime AB, Case No. 08-4060,"
         filed on July 29, 2008;

       * "Donetta Cheramie vs. American Commercial Lines, Inc.,
         D.R.D. Towing Company, LLC, M/V Mel Oliver in rem, M/V
         Tintomara in rem, Whitefin Shipping Co. Ltd. And Laurin
         Maritime AB, Case No. 08-4317," filed on Aug. 29, 2008;
         and

       * "Tri Native Contractors, Inc., Russell Easley d/b/a K
         and R Pipeline Services and Brandon Cavallier v.
         American Commercial Lines, Inc., DRD Towing Co. LLC, M/
         V Mel Oliver in rem, M/V Tintomara in rem, Whitefin
         Shipping Co. Ltd., and Laurin Maritime AB, Case No.
         08-4505," filed on Sept. 30, 2008.

These claims stem from the incident on July 23, 2008, involving
one of ACLLLC's tank barges that was being towed by DRD Towing
Company, L.L.C., an independent towing contractor.

The tank barge was involved in a collision with the motor
vesselTintomara, operated by Laurin Maritime, at Mile Marker 97
of the Mississippi River in the New Orleans area.  It was
carrying approximately 9,900 barrels of # 6 oil.  The tank barge
was damaged in the collision and partially sunk, while there was
no damage to the towboat.  There were no injuries reported to
the crews of either vessel in the incident.

The Timtomara incurred minor damage.  The amount of oil
discharged from the barge is unknown at this time.

The actions include various allegations of adverse health and
psychological damages, destruction and loss of use of natural
resources, and seek unspecified economic and compensatory
damages for claims of negligence, strict liability, trespass,
nuisance, and claims under Oil Pollution Act of 1990.

American Commercial Lines, Inc. -- http://www.aclines.com/-- is
a marine transportation and service company.  ACL provides barge
transportation and related services, and manufactures barges,
towboats and other vessels, including ocean-going liquid tank
barges.  Barge transportation accounts for the majority of the
Company's revenues, and includes the movement of grain, coal,
steel, liquids and other bulk products in the U.S.  ACL operates
in two primary business segments: transportation and
manufacturing.  ACL's transportation segment includes barge
transportation operations in North America, and domestic
fleeting facilities that provide fleeting, shifting, cleaning
and repair services at various locations along the inland
waterways.  The manufacturing segment constructs marine
equipment for external customers, as well as for the company's
transportation segment.


AMERICAN EXPRESS: Faces Calif. Suit Over "Sexist" LPGA Campaign
---------------------------------------------------------------
American Express Co., the Ladies Professional Golf Association,
the National Golf Course Owners Associations and others faces a
purported class-action lawsuit alleging discrimination, The
Courthouse News Service reports.

The lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, claims that
defendants discriminate in a "sexist" campaign to push June as
"Women's Golf Month," with special prices for lessons, rounds
and equipment for women, according to The Courthouse News
Service report.


ATHLETICS INVESTMENT: Aug. 7, 2009 Hearing Set for "Rava" Deal
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Superior Court of the State of California for the County of
Alameda will hold a fairness hearing on Aug. 7, 2009 at 11:00
a.m. for the proposed settlement in the matter, "Rava v.
Athletics Investment Group, LLC, at al., Case No. RG 06268693."

The hearing will be held at the Superior Court of the State of
California for the County of Alameda located at 1221 Oak St.,
Oakland, California 94612.

According to a settlement notice, the defendants entered into a
sponsorship agreement in 2004 to promote various events,
including awareness of and fund raising for the fight against
breast cancer, and events and tributes to honor mothers on
Mother's Day weekend.  Among these events were in-stadium
tributes to "moms" and in-game announcements honoring all moms
in attendance, a breast cancer awareness and fund raising
program, free mammograms to underserved women in the Bay Area,
including a 5K Fun Run before the game, in which all net
proceeds were donated to the Carol Franc Buck Breast Cancer
Center at UCSF, and which included inter alia, a floppy hat
giveaway "to the first 7,500 moms" in attendance at an A's
baseball game at the Oakland Coliseum on May 8, 2004, as a
tribute to mothers on Mother's Day weekend.

On May 8, 2006, plaintiff filed a proposed class-action lawsuit
against the defendants in the Alameda County Superior Court in
the State of California on behalf of himself and all males
similarly situated who attended the A's baseball game at Oakland
Coliseum on May 8, 2004.

The plaintiff alleges that defendants discriminated against
males by failing to provide reversible bucket hats to males who
attended the baseball game on May 2, 2004.

The plaintiff seeks damages and other relief on behalf of
himself and the members of the class under the California Unruh
Civil Rights Act (Civil Code sections 51 and 51.5, et seq.), and
the City of Oakland Municipal Code section 9.44, et seq.

The complaint sought recovery of actual damages, statutory
damages, restitution, penalties, interest, attorneys' fees and
costs, declaratory relief, and injunctive relief.

For more details, contact:

          A's / Macy's Claims Administrator
          c/o Simpluris, Inc.
          3176 Pullman St., Suite 123
          Costa Mesa, CA 92626
          Phone: 1(888) 428-6571

               - and -

          Gregory L. Cartwright, Esq.
          The Cartwright Law Group, APLC
          550 West C. Street, Suite 1710,
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Phone: (619) 233-0126


BLUE CROSS: Faces Ga. Suit Over Out-of-Network Surgical Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
     A class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of Georgia surgery
centers against Blue Cross Blue Shield of Georgia (BCBSGa)
claims the state's largest health benefits provider has
discouraged visits to out-of-network providers by reimbursing
procedures at a tiny fraction of "usual and customary" charges.

     The class of plaintiffs is represented by Butler, Wooten
and Fryhofer, with offices in Atlanta and Columbus, Georgia, and
J. Tom Morgan of Decatur.

     The suit was filed against Blue Cross Blue Shield
Healthcare Plan of Georgia, Inc. and Blue Cross and Blue Shield
of Georgia, Inc.  According to the suit, BCBSGa health plan
members paid higher premiums in exchange for the flexibility to
receive coverage for care from providers who are not part of the
plan's preferred network.

     The suit alleges that BCBSGa has targeted these out-of-
network providers, including outpatient non-hospital providers
of surgical services, known as ambulatory surgery centers, for a
drastic and unprecedented slash in reimbursement to a mere
fraction of usual and customary charges. These actions violate
federal and state laws protecting patients and providers, as
well as Blue Cross Blue Shield's own contracts, according to the
suit.

     The lawsuit seeks monetary damages for BCBSGa's failure to
pay the contracted reimbursement rate and injunctive relief to
require BCBSGa to honor its agreements.  It was filed in the
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, Macon
Division.  The case is pending before Judge Ashley Royal.


CELLCYTE GENETICS: Disputing Consolidated Stockholder Complaint
---------------------------------------------------------------
CellCyte Genetics Corp. is disputing the basis for the
consolidated stockholder lawsuit alleging that the company made
misleading statements.

In January 2008, three stockholder lawsuits were filed against
the company in the U.S. federal court for the Western District
of Washington:

   -- Armbruster v. Cellcyte Genetics Corporation, et. al, No.
      C08-0047;

   -- Tolerico v. Cellcyte Genetics Corporation, et. al., No.
      C08-0163; and

   -- Pruitt v. Cellcyte Genetics Corporation, et. al., No. C08-
      0178.

An amended complaint consolidating the three lawsuits has been
filed and the amended consolidated complaint alleges, inter
alia, that the company and its officers and directors filed
misleading statements with the Securities and Exchange
Commission regarding its products, and that the company posted
misleading information regarding an officer on its website.

The lawsuits claim that investors purchased the company's stock
based on the alleged misleading statements and seek monetary
relief.

The lawsuit has not been certified for class action status as of
May 18, 2009, the date of the company's Form 10-K filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year
ended Dec. 31, 2008.

CellCyte Genetics Corp. -- http://www.cellcyte.com-- is an
exploration stage company engaged in the acquisition and
exploration of mineral properties with a view to exploiting any
mineral deposits the company discovered.  Prior to the year
ended Dec. 31, 2006, CellCyte owned a 100% beneficial interest
in one mineral claim known as the CB-1 claim.  On March 30,
2007, the company completed the acquisition of CellCyte.  As a
result of the acquisition of CellCyte, the company is involved
in the research and development of stem cell enabling
therapeutic products and medical devices for cell production.
In addition, CellCyte has purchased a cell expansion technology
as a complementary addition to its therapeutic portfolio.  The
company's initial focus is on the development of certain
therapeutic product candidates licensed from the United States
Department of Veterans Affairs.


CHARTER COMMS: Faces Securities Fraud Litigation in Arkansas
------------------------------------------------------------
     An investor in Charter Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ: CHTRQ)
has filed a proposed securities class-action lawsuit in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Arkansas on behalf of purchasers of Charter securities between
October 23, 2006, and February 12, 2009 against Charter
Communications and others over alleged violations of Federal
Securities Laws.

     According to the complaint the plaintiff alleges that
Charter Communications and certain of its officers and directors
violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing between
October 23, 2006, and February 12, 2009 materially false and
misleading statements regarding Charter's ability to service its
debt, its potential for mergers, and the value of its stock.

     Among other things, so the lawsuit, the defendants issued
misleading statements about Charter's potential for mergers.  As
a result of defendants' false and misleading statements,
Charter's securities traded at artificially inflated prices
during the Class Period, reaching a high of $ 4.800 on July 19,
2007, so the lawsuit.


CINCINNATI INSURANCE: Ill. Court Give Preliminary OK to Deal
------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Barbara Crowder of Madison County Circuit Court gave
preliminary approval to a settlement of class action suit
against a Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) owned by The
Cincinnati Insurance Company and Cincinnati Casualty Company,
Amelia Flood of The St. Clair Record reports.

Judge Crowder signed a preliminary approval order in the case on
June 3, 2009.  A "fairness hearing" is set for Sept. 3, 2009,
according to The St. Clair Record report.

The suit, brought by chiropractor Frank Bemis as class
representative, alleges that the PPO network wrongfully
discounted medical bills.  It also alleges that the company took
PPO deductions it was not legally entitled to and failed to
channel patients to participating physicians, reports The St.
Clair Record.

Mr. Bemis' original complaint alleged the company was guilty of
consumer fraud, unjust enrichment and civil conspiracy theories
of relief.

The suit had been removed to federal court after the company
argued that an amended complaint added new claims such as breach
of contract.  The amended complaint modified the class
definition and added common law theories of relief, The St.
Clair Record reported.

In 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
Illinois ruled that the company failed to prove its case
qualified under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) and sent
the case back to Madison County, The St. Clair Record reports.

For more details, contact:

          LakinChapman, LLC
          300 Evans Ave.
          P.O. Box 229
          Wood River, Illinois 62095
          Phone: 618-208-4240 or 866-839-2021
          Web site: http://www.lakinlaw.com/


CITY OF PHILADELPHIA: July 14 Hearing Set for Suit Settlement
-------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania will
hold a fairness hearing on July 14, 2009 at 10:00 a.m. for the
proposed settlement in the matter, "Kathleen Kerrigan, Anthony
Holiday, Michael J. McShea, Tariq Mangum, Renee Crosby, and
Carolyn Davenport, et al., v. The City of Philadelphia, Margaret
Tartaglione, Anthony Clark, and Joseph J. Duda in their official
capacities as Philadelphia City Commissioners; Pennsylvania
Department of State and Pedro A. Cortes, in his official
capacity as Secretary of the Commonwealth, Case No. 07-cv-687"

The hearing will be held at the U.S. Courthouse, 601 Market St.,
Philadelphia, PA 19106 in Courtroom 17B.

The lawsuit claimed that the City of Philadelphia and the City
Commissioners (City Defendants) violated federal laws by failing
to maximize the number of polling places accessible to voters
with mobility disabilities.  The suit also claimed that the
Pennsylvania Department of State and the Secretary of the
Commonwealth violated federal laws by not taking appropriate
steps to assure that the City Defendants maximized the number of
accessible polling places.

For more details, contact:

          Robert W. Meek, Esq.
          Disability Rights Network
          1315 Walnut St., Suite 400,
          Philadelphia, PA 19107
          Phone: 215-238-8070
          Web site: http://www.drnpa.org


CORUS BANKSHARES: Faces Suits Over Violations of Securities Laws
----------------------------------------------------------------
Corus Bankshares, Inc. faces four purported securities class-
action lawsuits filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois.
      
During the first quarter of 2009, Corus and Mr. Robert J.
Glickman, the company's former Chief Executive Officer, were
named as defendants in a purported class action lawsuit filed in
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
alleging violations of federal securities laws.

In April 2009, a second purported securities class action
lawsuit was filed in the Northern District of Illinois against
Corus and Mr. Glickman and adding as additional defendants Tim
H. Taylor and Michael E. Dulberg.

Later in April 2009, two additional securities class actions
were filed in the Northern District of Illinois against Corus
and Messrs. Glickman, Taylor, and Dulberg.  One of the two most
recent lawsuits also added as additional defendants members of
the company's Board of Directors, specifically Messrs. Joseph P.
Glickman, Robert J. Buford, Kevin R. Callahan, Rodney D.
Lubeznik, Michael J. McClure, and Peter C. Roberts.

These lawsuits, brought on behalf of shareholders who purchased
the company's common stock between Jan. 25, 2008 and Jan. 30,
2009, allege primarily that the defendants violated the federal
securities laws by disseminating materially false and misleading
statements during that period.

The lawsuits seek unspecified damages.
      
Corus and the individual defendants filed an unopposed motion to
reassign the related, second-filed case to the judge assigned to
the first-filed lawsuit, and that motion has been granted.
Corus expects that the third-filed and fourth-filed cases will
also be reassigned to this judge.  Once all related cases are
before the same judge, a lead plaintiff and counsel will be
selected for these lawsuits and an amended complaint is then
likely to be filed combining all four lawsuits.  Defendants will
have 45 days after the amended complaint is filed to answer or
move to dismiss the complaint, according to the company's May
18, 2009 Form 10-Q filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended March 31, 2009.

Corus Bankshares, Inc. -- http://www.corusbank.com/-- is a bank
holding company.  Corus through its wholly owned banking
subsidiary, Corus Bank, N.A., is primarily focused on commercial
real estate lending and deposit gathering.  The third, and the
smaller, business is servicing the check cashing industry.
Corus' other activities include investments in the common stocks
of financial industry companies, as well as participations in
certain of the Bank's larger commercial real estate loans.  The
company's lending focuses on condominium projects.  The
company's lending activities are focused in various metropolitan
areas in Florida and California, as well as Atlanta,Las Vegas,
New York City and the District of Columbia. With respect to
retail banking, the Bank has 11 branches in the Chicago
metropolitan area.


DISH DBS: Antitrust Suit Over Bundled Channel Offerings Pending
---------------------------------------------------------------
DISH DBS Corp. continues to defend an antitrust action filed by
a purported class of cable and satellite subscribers, according
to the company's May 15, 2009 Form 10-Q filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended March
31, 2009.

On Sept. 21, 2007, a purported class of cable and satellite
subscribers filed an antitrust action against the company in the
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

The suit also names as defendants DirecTV, Comcast, Cablevision,
Cox, Charter, Time Warner, Inc., Time Warner Cable, NBC
Universal, Viacom, Fox Entertainment Group, and Walt Disney
Company.

The suit alleges, among other things, that the defendants
engaged in a conspiracy to provide customers with access only to
bundled channel offerings as opposed to giving customers the
ability to purchase channels on an "a la carte" basis.

The company filed a motion to dismiss, which the Court denied in
July 2008.

DISH DBS Corp. (formerly known as EchoStar DBS Corp.), a holding
company and an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of DISH Network
Corporation, provides direct broadcast satellite services to
subscribers through its Dish Network segment.  The Company is
based in Englewood, Colo.


DISH DBS: Lawsuits by Retailers Remain Ongoing in Colorado
----------------------------------------------------------
DISH DBS Corp. continues to defend several class-action lawsuits
filed by retailers in Colorado state and federal courts,
according to the company's May 15, 2009 Form 10-Q filed with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
March 31, 2009.

During 2000, lawsuits were filed by retailers in Colorado state
and federal courts attempting to certify nationwide classes on
behalf of certain of the company's retailers.

The plaintiffs are requesting the Courts declare certain
provisions of, and changes to, alleged agreements between the
company and the retailers invalid and unenforceable, and to
award damages for lost incentives and payments, charge backs,
and other compensation.  The company has asserted a variety of
counterclaims.

The federal court action has been stayed during the pendency of
the state court action.

The company has filed a motion for summary judgment on all
counts and against all plaintiffs.  The plaintiffs filed a
motion for additional time to conduct discovery to enable them
to respond to the company's motion.  The state court granted
limited discovery, which ended during 2004.  The plaintiffs
claimed the company did not provide adequate disclosure during
the discovery process.  The state court agreed, and denied the
company's motion for summary judgment as a result.

In April 2008, the state court granted plaintiff's class
certification motion and in January 2009, the state court
entered an order excluding certain evidence that the company can
present at trial based on the prior discovery issues.  The state
court also denied plaintiffs' request to dismiss the company's
counterclaims.

DISH DBS Corp. (formerly known as EchoStar DBS Corp.), a holding
company and an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of DISH Network
Corporation, provides direct broadcast satellite services to
subscribers through its Dish Network segment.  The Company is
based in Englewood, Colo.


GAIGE & CO: Oct. 19, 2009 Hearing Set for "Chapman" Settlement
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County, will hold a
fairness hearing on Oct. 19, 2009 at 2:00 p.m. for the proposed
$130,000 settlement in the matter, "Chapman, et al., v. Gaige &
Co., LLC, at al., Case No. VC2008-009238."

The hearing will be held before Judge John A. Buttrick in the
Superior Court of Arizona, Courtroom 704, 201 West Jefferson
St., Phoenix, Arizona 85003.

The settlement involves all persons who since June 1, 2007,
dealt with Robbi (CLEO) Kelldorf in connection with the
solicitation and/or administration of their consignment of
personal property to Gaige & Co., and who were not paid their
sales proceeds and/or did not have returned to them all of their
property that did not sell at auction.

For more details, contact:

          Kathryn Jann, Esq.
          Bonnett, Fairbourn, Friedman & Balint, P.C.
          2901 North Central Ave., Suite 1000,
          Phoenix, Arizona 85012
          Phone: (800) 847-9094 or (602) 274-1100


IMMUCOR INC: Faces Pa. Antitrust Litigation Over Blood Reagents
---------------------------------------------------------------
Immucor, Inc., Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Inc., and Johnson &
Johnson Health Care Systems, Inc. are facing a purported
antitrust class-action lawsuit accusing them of conspired to fix
the prices of blood reagents and allocate customers, Peter R.
Bortner of The Republican & Herald reports.

The suit was filed on June 2, 2009 in the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, under the caption,
"Schuylkill Medical Center - East Norwegian Street et al v.
Immucor, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:2009-cv-02491."

Listed as plaintiffs in the suit are Schuylkill Medical Center-
East Norwegian Street and Schuylkill Medical Center-South
Jackson Street, who alleged that they overpaid for the reagents,
which are organic compounds used in tests performed prior to
blood transfusions, according to The Republican & Herald report.

The two Pottsville-based hospitals asked the court to allow
their lawsuit to proceed as a class-action, which will allow
them and their lawyers to represent thousands of companies they
say also were victims of the alleged conspiracy, reports The
Republican & Herald.

They also asked the court to declare defendants' actions to be
an unlawful restraint of trade that violates antitrust law,
allow recovery of triple the actual damages they and other
possible class members suffered, and award them costs and
attorneys' fees.  They also demanded a jury trial of the case,
The Republican & Herald reported.


MEDIS TECHNOLOGIES: Defending Appeal to Junked Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Medis Technologies, Ltd. is defending the plaintiffs' appeal to
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York's
dismissal of a securities fraud class-action lawsuit against the
company, according to its May 8, 2009 Form 10-Q filed with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
March 31, 2009.

The suit was filed on April 23, 2007, against the company and,
among others, the company's chief executive officer.  It alleged
that the company issued a false and misleading press release on
April 13, 2007, regarding sales of the company's "24/7" fuel
cell power packs to a major international company by overstating
the importance of those sales, which resulted in the company's
common stock being artificially inflated.

The litigation sought relief under Rule 10b-5 against all the
defendants, and under Section 20(a) of the U.S. Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 against the company's chief executive
officer.

Thereafter, on Sept. 10, 2007, the plaintiffs filed the first
amended class action complaint, which essentially alleges that
the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the U.S.
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing a false and
misleading press release on April 13, 2007, stating that the
company had begun "commercial sales" of "Microsoft-Branded"
Power Packs to Microsoft.  The announcement is alleged to have
caused a temporary fluctuation in the stock price, causing the
stock to trade from $18.29 to as high as $24.10 per share before
closing at $20.32 per share.

The plaintiffs contend that the April 13 Press Release was
misleading because it failed to specifically state that the sale
to Microsoft was for a small quantity and that Microsoft
intended to use the Power Packs as give-aways.  Moreover, the
plaintiffs state, the units were not Microsoft branded.

However, the April 13 Press Release explicitly conveyed the
landmark importance of the sale to the company and the fuel cell
industry, and the company has vigorously denied any allegations
of wrongdoing, standing by the truth of the April 13 Press
Release.

The plaintiffs' putative class includes those who "purchased the
common stock, call options, and/or sold put options of Medis for
the time period April 13, 2007 through April 17, 2007."

On Nov. 20, 2007, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the
amended complaint, arguing that the first amended complaint
failed as a matter of law because it did not allege "scienter,"
i.e., that the defendants acted with a culpable intent.  They
argued, among other things, that the plaintiffs could not allege
any reason why the defendants would seek to temporarily inflate
the company's stock price.

On Aug. 19, 2008, the company issued a press release announcing
that Judge Paul A. Crotty of the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York, has granted defendants' motion to
dismiss the putative class-action lawsui, and ordered the case
to be closed.

On Sept. 10, 2008, plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal of the
District Court's order to the U.S. District Court of Appeals for
the Second Circuit.  Plaintiffs-Appellants' filed their moving
brief on Nov. 20, 2008.  Defendants-Appellee's filed their
opposition brief on Jan. 15, 2009 and Plaintiffs-Appellants'
filed their reply brief on Feb. 13, 2009.

The suit is "Kou v. Medis Technologies, Ltd., et al., Case No.
1:07-cv-03230-PAC," filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York, Judge Paul A. Crotty, presiding.

Representing the plaintiff is:

         Phillip C. Kim, Esq. (pkim@rosenlegal.com)
         The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
         350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5508
         New York, NY 10118
         Phone: 212-686-1060
         Fax: 212-202-3827

Representing the defendant is:

         Deborah Hilarie Renner (drenner@sonnenschein.com)
         Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP
         1221 Avenue of the Americas
         New York, NY 10020
         Phone: 212-768-6896
         Fax: 212-768-6800


NATIONWIDE MUTUAL: July 27, 2009 Hearing Set for Suit Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Circuit Court of Miller County, Arkansas will hold a
fairness hearing on July 27, 2009 for the proposed settlement in
the matter, "Alexander v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co., Case
No. CV-2009-120-3."

In general, the suit alleges that Nationwide Mutual and certain
affiliates improperly withheld payments of general contractor's
overhead and profit from amounts paid on claims for structural
losses under home owner's policies.

For more details, contact:

         Alexander v. Nationwide Claims
         P.O. Box 6659,
         Portland, Oregon 97229
         Phone: 1-8880287-1333
         Web site: http://www.AlexanderClassActionSettlement.com


PRUDENTIAL PLC: Suits v. Jackson Over Insurance Products Pending
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jackson Federal Bank, which is owned by the Jackson National
Life Insurance Co., a subsidiary of British insurance company,
Prudential plc, is involved as a defendant in class action
litigation relating to its insurance products.

The action is substantially similar to class action litigation
pending against many life insurance companies that allege:

     -- misconduct in the sale and administration of insurance
        Products; and

     -- class action litigation that alleges violation of law
        forbidding unsolicited mass facsimile transmission.

Jackson with respect to pending litigation generally accrues a
liability for legal contingencies once management determines
that the contingency is probable and estimable.

Accordingly, at April 30, 2009, Jackson had recorded an accrual
of $31.0 million for class action litigation, according to
Prudential plc's May 18, 2009 Form 20-F filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
Dec. 31, 2008.

Prudential plc -- http://www.prudential.co.uk-- is an
international retail financial services group.  Its products
include retail products, which include annuities, corporate
pensions, with-profits and unit-linked bonds, savings and
investments, protection, equity release and health insurance,
and wholesale products, which include bulk annuities and annuity
back-books.  The company's primary segments are long-term
business, banking, and broker-dealer and fund management.


RIVER VALLEY: Settlement of "Means" Suit Approved Last Jan. 23
--------------------------------------------------------------
The settlement of Cecilia Means' putative class-action complaint
against River Valley Bancorp's subsidiary, River Valley
Financial Bank (the Bank), was given final court approval on
Jan. 23, 2009.

On April 27, 2007, Cecilia Means filed a putative class-action
complaint in the Marion County Superior Court, Marion County,
Indiana, on behalf of herself and others who paid funds into a
pre-need trust for burial services and merchandise from
Grandview Memorial Gardens, against the Bank, a former trustee
of the Pre-Need Trust; three other banks that serve or have
served as trustees of the Pre-Need Trust; and the current and
former owners of Grandview Memorial Gardens.

The complaint alleges that the Bank and other trustees did not
properly account for funds placed in the Pre-Need Trust and did
not properly verify the legitimacy of disbursements from the
Pre-Need Trust in violation of certain state statutes and in
breach of the trustees' alleged fiduciary duties.

The complaint is not specific as to the amount of damages sought
but states that the plaintiff believes that the Pre-Need Trust
has an estimated US$4 million in unfunded liabilities.

The Bank denies the plaintiffs' allegations but along with the
other trustee defendants, has agreed to terms for a settlement
of the plaintiffs' claims.  The settlement has been submitted to
the court for approval, and the court has signed a preliminary
approval order.

At a final hearing on the approval on Jan. 23, 2009, the court
entered a final judgment approving the class action settlement.
The judgment was not appealed.

The Bank has no further obligations under the settlement
agreement and has been released by the class members from all
claims relating to the Pre-Need Trust, according to the
company's May 15, 2009 Form 10-Q filed with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended March 31, 2009.

River Valley Bancorp -- http://www.rvfbank.com-- was formed for
the primary purpose of purchasing all of the issued and
outstanding common stock of River Valley Financial Bank.  The
activities of the Holding Company have been limited to holding
the stock of the Bank, which provides banking services in a
single significant business segment.  The Bank conducts
operations from its seven full-service office locations in
Jefferson and Clark Counties, Indiana, and Carroll County,
Kentucky, and offers a range of deposit and lending services to
consumer and commercial customers.  The Bank has concentrated
its lending activities on the origination of loans secured by
first mortgage liens for the purchase, construction, or
refinancing of one- to four-family residential real property.


ROCKIES REGION: Settlement Gets Final Court Approval on April 7
---------------------------------------------------------------
The settlement of a consolidated class-action complaint in
Colorado against Petroleum Development Corp. (PDC), the Managing
General Partner (MGP) of Rockies Region 2007 Limited
Partnership, was given final court approval on April 7, 2009.

On May 29, 2007, Glen Droegemueller, individually and as
representative plaintiff on behalf of all others similarly
situated, filed a class action complaint against PDC in the
District Court, Weld County, Colorado alleging that the MGP
underpaid royalties on gas produced from wells operated by the
Managing General Partner in the State of Colorado.  The
plaintiff seeks declaratory relief and to recover an unspecified
amount of compensation for underpayment of royalties paid by the
MGP pursuant to leases.  The MGP moved the case to Federal Court
on June 28, 2007, and on July 10, 2007, it filed its answer and
affirmative defenses.

A second similar Colorado class-action suit was filed against
the MGP in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
on Dec. 3, 2007, by Ted Amsbaugh, et al.

On Dec. 31, 2007, the plaintiffs in this second action filed a
motion to consolidate the case with the Droegemueller action.
On Jan. 28, 2008, the Court granted the plaintiff's motion to
consolidate the action with the Droegemueller Action.

The court approved a stay in proceedings until Sept. 22, 2008,
while the parties pursued mediation of the matter.  Although
Rockies Region was not named as a party in the suit, the lawsuit
states that it relates to all wells operated by the MGP, which
includes a majority of the company's 75 wells in the Wattenberg
field.  On Oct. 10, 2008, the court issued preliminary approval
of a settlement agreement.

According to its March 31, 2009 Form 10-K filing in the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
Dec. 31, 2008, the portion of the proposed settlement related to
the company's wells for all periods through Dec. 31, 2008 is
$78,105.  This amount, plus legal costs of $7,863, were recorded
to fully accrue for the settlement through Dec. 31, 2008.  In
November 2008, the MGP paid into an escrow account, on behalf of
the company, amounts due under the settlement.  These amounts
will be deducted from future Partnership distributions.

Notice of the settlement was mailed to members of the class-
action suit in the fourth quarter 2008.

The final settlement was approved by the court on April 7, 2009.
Distributions from the escrow to the royalty owners are expected
on or before June 7, 2009, unless the court approval of the
settlement is appealed, according to the company's May 18, 2009
Form 10-Q filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended March 31, 2009.

Bridgeport, W.Va.-based Rockies Region 2007 Limited Partnership
engages in the exploration and development of oil and natural
gas properties.  The company was organized as a limited
partnership on May 22, 2007, in accordance with the laws of the
State of W.Va.  Upon completion of a private placement of its
securities, the company was funded and commenced business
activities on Aug. 31, 2007.


SMITH BARNEY: Consolidated ARS Suit Remains Pending in New York
---------------------------------------------------------------
A consolidated putative securities class-action suit, captioned
"In Re Citigroup Inc. Auction Rate Securities Litigation" is
pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
New York, according to Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund
L.P.'s May 15, 2009 Form 10-Q filed with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the quarter ended March 31, 2009.

Beginning in March 2008, Citigroup, its affiliates and certain
current and former officers, directors, and employees, have been
named as defendants in several individual and putative class-
action lawsuits related to Auction Rate Securities (ARS).

The putative securities class-action lawsuits have been
consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York as "In Re Citigroup Inc. Auction Rate
Securities Litigation."

Several individual ARS actions also have been filed in state and
federal courts, asserting, among other things, violations of
federal and state securities laws.

Citigroup has moved the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation to transfer all of the individual ARS actions pending
in federal court to the Southern District of New York for
consolidation or coordination with "In Re Citigroup Inc. Auction
Rate Securities Litigation."

On Jan.15, 2009, defendants filed motions to dismiss the
complaints in "Mayor & City Council Of Baltimore, Maryland v.
Citigroup Inc., et al.," and "Mayfield v. Citigroup Inc., et
al."

New York-based Citigroup Global Diversified Futures Fund L.P.,
formerly Salomon Smith Barney Global Diversified Futures Fund
L.P., is a limited partnership organized under the laws of the
State of New York on June 15, 1998 to engage, directly and
indirectly, in the speculative trading of a diversified
portfolio of commodity interests, including futures contracts,
options, swaps and forwards.

New York-based Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund L.P. is a
limited partnership that was organized under the partnership
laws of the State of New York on Aug. 13, 1993 to engage,
directly or indirectly, in the speculative trading of a
diversified portfolio of commodity interests including futures
contracts, options, swaps and forward contracts.

Citigroup Managed Futures LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability
Company, acts as the General Partner of the Partnership.  The
Partnership's commodity broker is Citigroup Global Markets Inc.,
an affiliate of the General Partner.  The General Partner is
wholly owned by Citigroup Global Markets Holdings Inc. (CGMHI),
which is the sole owner of CGM.  CGMHI is a wholly owned
subsidiary of Citigroup Inc.


SMITH BARNEY: Motion to Remand ECA Acquisitions' Lawsuit Pending
----------------------------------------------------------------
A motion to remand a putative class-action lawsuit filed by ECA
Acquisitions, Inc. and Norbert Weissberg against Mat Three LLC
is pending, according to Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund
L.P.'s May 15, 2009 Form 10-Q filed with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the quarter ended March 31, 2009.

The class-action suit styled, "ECA Acquisitions, Inc. et al. v.
MAT Three LLC, et al.," was filed by investors in MAT One LLC,
MAT Two LLC, and MAT Three LLC.

Defendants removed the putative class action to the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York on Jan. 21,
2009.

Plaintiffs filed a motion for remand on Feb. 27, 2009.

New York-based Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund L.P. is a
limited partnership that was organized under the partnership
laws of the State of New York on Aug. 13, 1993 to engage,
directly or indirectly, in the speculative trading of a
diversified portfolio of commodity interests including futures
contracts, options, swaps and forward contracts.

Citigroup Managed Futures LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability
Company, acts as the General Partner of the Partnership.  The
Partnership's commodity broker is Citigroup Global Markets Inc.,
an affiliate of the General Partner.  The General Partner is
wholly owned by Citigroup Global Markets Holdings Inc. (CGMHI),
which is the sole owner of CGM.  CGMHI is a wholly owned
subsidiary of Citigroup Inc.


SMITH BARNEY: Salomon Analyst Metromedia Suit Dismissed in Feb.
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class-action suit tagged, "In Re Salomon Analyst Metromedia
Litigation," was dismissed on Feb. 27, 2009, according to Smith
Barney Diversified Futures Fund L.P.'s May 15, 2009 Form 10-Q
filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarter ended March 31, 2009.

Since May 2002, Citigroup Global Markets and certain executive
officers and current and former employees have been named as
defendants in numerous alleged class action complaints,
individual actions, and arbitration demands by purchasers of
various securities alleging that they violated federal
securities law, including Sections 10 and 20 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and certain state laws for
allegedly issuing research reports without a reasonable basis in
fact and for allegedly failing to disclose conflicts of interest
with companies in connection with published investment research,
including Global Crossing, Ltd., AT&T Corp., Level 3
Communications, Inc., Metromedia Fiber Network, Inc., XO
Communications, Inc., Williams Communications Group Inc., and
Focal Communications, Inc.

The alleged class actions relating to research of these
companies are pending before a single judge in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York for coordinated
proceedings.  The court has consolidated these actions into
separate proceedings corresponding to the named companies.

On Dec. 2, 2004, the court granted in part and denied in part
the Citigroup-related defendants' motions to dismiss the claims
against it in the AT&T, Level 3, XO and Williams actions.

On Jan. 6, 2005, the court granted in part and denied in part
Citigroup's motion to dismiss the claims against it in the
Metromedia action.

On Sept. 30, 2008, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
vacated the district court's order granting class certification
in the matter In Re Salomon Analyst Metromedia Litigation.

On Oct. 1, 2008, the parties reached a settlement pursuant to
which Citigroup will pay $35 million to members of the
settlement class that purchased or otherwise acquired Metromedia
Fiber Network, Inc. securities during the class period.  The
settlement was preliminarily approved on Nov. 19, 2008.  The
proposed settlement amount is covered by existing litigation
reserves.

On Feb. 27, 2009, the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York approved the class action settlement in the
matter In Re Salomon Analyst Metromedia Litigation, and entered
a final judgment dismissing the action with prejudice.

New York-based Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund L.P. is a
limited partnership that was organized under the partnership
laws of the State of New York on Aug. 13, 1993 to engage,
directly or indirectly, in the speculative trading of a
diversified portfolio of commodity interests including futures
contracts, options, swaps and forward contracts.

Citigroup Managed Futures LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability
Company, acts as the General Partner of the Partnership.  The
Partnership's commodity broker is Citigroup Global Markets Inc.,
an affiliate of the General Partner.  The General Partner is
wholly owned by Citigroup Global Markets Holdings Inc. (CGMHI),
which is the sole owner of CGM.  CGMHI is a wholly owned
subsidiary of Citigroup Inc.


SUNYOUNG INC: Aug. 31 Hearing Set for Calif. Lawsuit Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Orange County Superior Court, State of California will hold
a fairness hearing on Aug. 31, 2009 at 8:30 a.m. for the
proposed $187,000 settlement of a purported class-action suit
against Sunyoung, Inc. d/b/a Foothill Ranch Auto Spa and Lake
Forest Car Wash Corp. d/b/a Harv's Express Car Wash, under Case
No. 07CC01252.

The hearing will be held the Orange County Superior Court, State
of California located at 751 West Santa Ana Blvd., Santa Ana,
California 92701.

In general, the suit alleges that the defendant did not properly
provide required meal and/or rest breaks to its employees, did
not pay regular and/or overtime wages, failed to indemnify
employees for expenditures in discharge of their duties and/or
unlawfully collected wages due, failed to pay split shift wages,
failed to provide accurate wage statements and/or maintain
required records, failed to pay minimum wage, and failed to pay
all wages due to discharged or quitting employees.

For more details, contact:

          Claims Administrator
          CPT Group
          16630 Aston St.,
          Irvine, California 92606
          Phone: 310-218-5500


WALT DISNEY: Faces Fla. Litigation Alleging ADA Violations
----------------------------------------------------------
Walt Disney World Co. is facing a purported class-action lawsuit
in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida
over a policy that affects owners of Segway(R) Personal
Transporter products.

The suit, captioned, "Mahala Ault et al. v. Walt Disney World
Co.," alleges that the policy of Walt Disney World Co. not to
permit two-wheeled vehicles violates the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA).


                   New Securities Fraud Cases

BIDZ.COM INC: Barroway Topaz Files Calif. Securities Fraud Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
     The law firm of Barroway Topaz Kessler Meltzer & Check, LLP
filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California on behalf of purchasers
of securities of Bidz.com, Inc. (Nasdaq: BIDZ) between August
13, 2007 and November 27, 2007 inclusive.

     The Complaint charges Bidz.com and certain of its officers
and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934.

     Bidz.com is an online retailer of jewelry, featuring a live
auction format.

     More specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Company
failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material
adverse facts which were known to defendants or recklessly
disregarded by them:

       -- that the Company engaged in a practice known as "shill
          bidding" which artificially raised the auction price
          of its products;

       -- that the Company was not forthright with its customers
          regarding "retail value" or "appraised value" of its
          products;

       -- that the Company lacked adequate internal and
          financial controls;

       -- that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company's
          financial statements were materially false and
          misleading at all relevant times; and

       -- that, as a result of the foregoing, the Company's
          statements about its financial well-being and future
          business prospects were lacking in any reasonable
          basis when made.

     On November 26, 2007, a Citron Research article appeared on
the website, Stocklemon.com, which revealed a number of problems
with the Company's business model.  Among other things, the
article exposed the Company's questionable bidding and appraisal
practices.  Then, on November 28, 2007, a second Citron article
was published providing additional details regarding the
Company's questionable bidding practices including the practice
known as "shill bidding" in order to drive up the price of items
up for auction.  The article disclosed that certain items were
bid on hundreds of times by the same few bidders.

     On the negative news regarding the Company's business
practices, the Company's stock dropped from a closing price of
$19.94 per share on Friday, November 23, 2007, to a low of
$10.10 per share on Wednesday, November 28, 2007, for a loss of
nearly 50 percent on unusually heavy trading volume.

     Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of class
members.

     A request for lead plaintiff status must satisfy certain
criteria and be made on or before July 6, 2009.

For more details, contact:

          Darren J. Check, Esq.
          David M. Promisloff, Esq.
          Barroway Topaz Kessler Meltzer & Check, LLP
          280 King of Prussia Road
          Radnor, PA 19087
          Phone: 1-888-299-7706 or 1-610-667-7706
          e-mail: info@btkmc.com


OPPENHEIMER PENNSYLVANIA: Bronstein Gewirtz Announces Filing
------------------------------------------------------------
     Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC announces that a class
action lawsuit has been filed in the United States District
Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on behalf of
those who purchased or otherwise acquired the Oppenheimer
Pennsylvania Municipal Fund (NASDAQ: OPATX) (NASDAQ: OPABX)
(NASDAQ: OPACX) between November 28, 2005 and November 28, 2008,
inclusive.

     The complaint alleges that the Fund's Registration
Statements and Prospectuses misled investors about the fund's
objectives and underlying risk by describing the Fund as seeking
a "high level of current interest income... as is consistent
with preservation of capital." By failing to disclose the Funds
over concentration in lower rated bonds and bonds that had not
been rated by any independent rating agency and by portfolio
concentration in high risk securities including, Tobacco Bonds,
Dirt Bonds, and derivative instruments known as "inverse
floaters," the Fund lost over 28% of its net asset value ("NAV")
during the Class Period.

     No class has yet been certified in the above action.

     A request for lead plaintiff status must satisfy certain
criteria and be made on or before June 29, 2009.

For more details, contact:

          Peretz Bronstein, Esq.
          Eitan Kimelman (eitan@bgandg.com)
          Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC
          Phone: 212-697-6484
          Web site: http://www.bgandg.com/


                        Asbestos Alerts

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Exposure Suits Ongoing v. Manitowoc Company
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Manitowoc Company, Inc. continues to be a party in asbestos-
related lawsuits in which it is one of numerous defendants,
according to the Company's quarterly report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on May 11, 2009.

Based in Manitowoc, Wis., The Manitowoc Company, Inc. is a
multi-industry, capital goods manufacturer in two principal
markets: Cranes and Related Products and Foodservice Equipment.
For the year ended Dec. 31, 2008, the Company had net sales of
about US$4.5 billion.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Colfax Records $324.9M Liability at April 3
----------------------------------------------------------------
Colfax Corporation's long-term asbestos liability was
US$324,905,000 as of April 3, 2009, compared with US$328,684,000
as of Dec. 31, 2008.

The Company's current accrued asbestos liability was
US$28,417,000 as of April 3, 2009, compared with US$28,574,000
as of Dec. 31, 2008.

The Company's long-term asbestos insurance asset was
US$15,100,000 as of April 3, 2009, compared with US$16,113,000
as of Dec. 31, 2008.

The Company's current asbestos insurance asset was US$26,326,000
as of April 3, 2009, compared with US$26,473,000 as of Dec. 31,
2008.

The asbestos insurance receivable was US$36,901,000 as of April
3, 2009, compared with US$36,371,000 as of Dec. 31, 2008.

Asbestos liability and defense costs were US$1,645,000 during
the three months ended April 3, 2009, compared with US$278,000
during the three months ended March 28, 2008.

Asbestos coverage litigation expenses were US$2,966,000 during
the three months ended April 3, 2009, compared with US$3,139,000
during the three months ended March 28, 2008.

Based in Richmond, Va., Colfax Corporation produces fluid-
handling solutions and manufactures positive displacement
industrial pumps and valves used in global oil & gas, power
generation, marine, naval and a variety of other industrial
applications.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 34,421 Claims Pending v. Colfax at April 3
----------------------------------------------------------------
Colfax Corporation had 34,421 unresolved asbestos claims during
the three months ended April 3, 2009, compared with 37,632
claims during the three months ended March 28, 2008.

The Company faced 35,357 unresolved asbestos claims during the
year ended Dec. 31, 2008, compared with 37,554 claims during the
year ended Dec. 31, 2007. (Class Action Reporter, April 3, 2009)

During the three months ended April 3, 2009, the Company noted
953 claims filed and 1,889 claims resolved. During the three
months ended March 28, 2008, the Company noted 1,406 claims
filed and 1,328 claims resolved.

Two of the Company's subsidiaries are each one of many
defendants in a large number of lawsuits that claim personal
injury as a result of exposure to asbestos from products
manufactured with components that are alleged to have contained
asbestos.

Those components were acquired from third-party suppliers, and
were not manufactured by any of the subsidiaries nor were the
subsidiaries producers or direct suppliers of asbestos. The
manufactured products that are alleged to have contained
asbestos generally were provided to meet the specifications of
the subsidiaries' customers, including the U.S. Navy.

In most instances, the subsidiaries settle asbestos claims for
amounts management considers reasonable given the facts and
circumstances of each claim. To date, the majority of settled
claims have been dismissed for no payment.

Total insurance proceeds received were US$7,248,000 during the
three months ended April 3, 2009, compared with US$2,648,000
during the three months ended March 28, 2008.

Based in Richmond, Va., Colfax Corporation produces fluid-
handling solutions and manufactures positive displacement
industrial pumps and valves used in global oil & gas, power
generation, marine, naval and a variety of other industrial
applications.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Colfax Records $353.3MM Reserves at April 3
----------------------------------------------------------------
Colfax Corporation has established reserves of US$353.3 million
as of April 3, 2009 and US$357.3 million as of Dec. 31, 2008 for
the probable and reasonably estimable asbestos-related liability
cost it believes the subsidiaries will pay through the next 15
years.

The Company has also established recoverables of US$300.4
million as of April 3, 2009 and US$304 million as of Dec. 31,
2008 for the insurance recoveries that are deemed probable
during the same time period.

Net of these recoverables, the Company's expected cash outlay on
a non-discounted basis for asbestos-related bodily injury claims
over the next 15 years was US$52.9 million as of April 3, 2009
and US$53.3 million as of Dec. 31, 2008. In addition, the
Company has recorded a receivable for liability and defense
costs it had previously paid in the amount of US$36.9 million as
of April 3, 2009 and US$36.4 million as of Dec. 31, 2008 for
which insurance recovery is deemed probable.

The expense related to these liabilities and legal defense was
US$1.6 million, net of estimated insurance recoveries, for the
three months ended April 3, 2009, compared with US$300,000 for
the three months ended March 28, 2008.

Legal costs related to the subsidiaries' action against their
asbestos insurers was US$3 million for the three months ended
April 3, 2009, compared with US$3.1 million for the three months
ended March 28, 2008.

Based in Richmond, Va., Colfax Corporation produces fluid-
handling solutions and manufactures positive displacement
industrial pumps and valves used in global oil & gas, power
generation, marine, naval and a variety of other industrial
applications.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Colfax Records $4.6Mil Expenses at April 3
----------------------------------------------------------------
Colfax Corporation recorded asbestos-related expenses of US$4.6
million during the three months ended April 3, 2009, compared
with US$3.4 million during the three months ended March 28,
2008.

Asbestos-related expense includes all asbestos-related costs and
is comprised of projected indemnity cost, changes in the
projected asbestos liability, changes in the probable insurance
recovery of the projected asbestos-related liability, changes in
the probable recovery of asbestos liability and defense costs
paid in prior periods, and actual defense costs expensed in the
period.

It also includes legal costs related to the actions against two
of the Company's subsidiaries' respective insurers and a former
parent company of one of the subsidiaries.

Asbestos liability and defense costs were US$1.6 million for the
three months ended April 3, 2009, compared with US$300,000 for
the three ended March 28, 2008. The increase in asbestos
liability and defense costs for the quarter ended April 3, 2009
relates primarily to receipt of US$900,000 in the quarter ended
March 28, 2008, from an insurer previously considered insolvent,
which resulted in a gain in that period.

Legal costs related to the subsidiaries' action against their
asbestos insurers were US$3 million for the three months ended
April 3, 2009, compared with US$3.1 million for the three months
ended March 28, 2008.

Based in Richmond, Va., Colfax Corporation produces fluid-
handling solutions and manufactures positive displacement
industrial pumps and valves used in global oil & gas, power
generation, marine, naval and a variety of other industrial
applications.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Digital Realty Has $1.5M March 31 Liability
----------------------------------------------------------------
Digital Realty Trust, Inc. recorded asbestos retirement
obligations of US$1.5 million as of March 31, 2009 and Dec. 31,
2008.

The equivalent asset is recorded at US$1.3 million as of March
31, 2009 and Dec. 31, 2008, net of accumulated depreciation.

The amount of asset retirement obligations relates primarily to
estimated asbestos removal costs at the end of the economic life
of properties that were built before 1984.


COMPANY PROFILE:
Digital Realty Trust, Inc.
560 Mission Street, Suite 2900
San Francisco, Calif. 94105
Tel. No.: (415) 738-6500

Description:
Digital Realty Trust, Inc. is a real estate investment trust
(REIT) that owns data centers, Internet and data communications
hubs, and technology office and manufacturing properties.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Sealed Air Facing Claims From Cryovac Deal
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sealed Air Corporation, since the beginning of 2000, has been
served with lawsuits alleging that, as a result of the Cryovac
transaction, it is responsible for alleged asbestos liabilities
of W. R. Grace & Co. and its subsidiaries, some of which were
also named as co-defendants in some of these actions.

Among the liabilities retained by Grace are liabilities relating
to asbestos-containing products previously manufactured or sold
by Grace's subsidiaries prior to the Cryovac transaction,
including its primary U.S. operating subsidiary, W. R. Grace &
Co.-Conn., which has operated for decades and has been a
subsidiary of Grace since the Cryovac transaction.

The Cryovac transaction agreements provided that, should any
claimant seek to hold the Company or any of its subsidiaries
responsible for liabilities retained by Grace or its
subsidiaries, including the asbestos-related liabilities, Grace
and its subsidiaries would indemnify and defend the Company.

Since the beginning of 2000, the Company has been served with a
number of lawsuits alleging that, as a result of the Cryovac
transaction, the Company is responsible for alleged asbestos
liabilities of Grace and its subsidiaries, some of which were
also named as co-defendants in some of these actions.

Among these lawsuits are several purported class actions and a
number of personal injury lawsuits. Some plaintiffs seek damages
for personal injury or wrongful death, while others seek medical
monitoring, environmental remediation or remedies related to an
attic insulation product.

Neither the former Sealed Air Corporation nor Cryovac, Inc. ever
produced or sold any of the asbestos-containing materials that
are the subjects of these cases. None of these cases has reached
resolution through judgment, settlement or otherwise.

Based in Elmwood Park, N.J., Sealed Air Corporation's largest
product segment, Food Packaging, produces Cryovac shrink films,
absorbent pads, and foam trays used by food processors and
supermarkets to protect meat and poultry. The Company's
Protective Packaging segment produces Bubble Wrap, Instapak
foam, Jiffy envelopes, and Fill-Air inflatable packaging
systems.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Sealed Air Unit Has Thundersky Injury Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sealed Air Corporation's Canadian subsidiary Sealed Air (Canada)
Co./Cie, since November 2004, has been a defendant in the case
of Thundersky v. The Attorney General of Canada, et al. (File
No. CI04-01-39818), pending in the Manitoba Court of Queen's
Bench.

W. R. Grace & Co. and W. R. Grace & Co.-Conn. are also named as
defendants.

The claim was brought as a putative class proceeding and seeks
recovery for alleged injuries suffered by any Canadian resident,
other than in the course of employment, as a result of Grace's
marketing, selling, processing, manufacturing, distributing and
delivering asbestos or asbestos-containing products in Canada
prior to the Cryovac Transaction.

Another proceeding was filed in January 2005 in the Manitoba
Court of The Queen's Bench naming the Company and specified
subsidiaries as defendants.

The latter proceeding, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the
Province of Manitoba v. The Attorney General of Canada, et al.
(File No. CI05-01-41069), seeks the recovery of the cost of
insured health services allegedly provided by the Government of
Manitoba to the members of the class of plaintiffs in the
Thundersky proceeding.

In October 2005, the Company learned that six additional
putative class proceedings had been brought in various
provincial and federal courts in Canada seeking recovery from
the Company and its subsidiaries Cryovac, Inc. and Sealed Air
(Canada) Co./Cie, as well as other defendants including Grace
and W. R. Grace & Co.-Conn., for alleged injuries suffered by
any Canadian resident, other than in the course of employment
(except with respect to one of these six claims), as a result of
Grace's marketing, selling, manufacturing, processing,
distributing and delivering asbestos or asbestos-containing
products in Canada prior to the Cryovac transaction.

Grace and W. R. Grace & Co.-Conn. have agreed to defend,
indemnify and hold harmless the Company and its affiliates in
respect of any liability and expense, including legal fees and
costs, in these actions.

Based in Elmwood Park, N.J., Sealed Air Corporation's largest
product segment, Food Packaging, produces Cryovac shrink films,
absorbent pads, and foam trays used by food processors and
supermarkets to protect meat and poultry. The Company's
Protective Packaging segment produces Bubble Wrap, Instapak
foam, Jiffy envelopes, and Fill-Air inflatable packaging
systems.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Stay in Cases Involving Sealed Air Extended
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Superior Court of Justice, Commercial List, Toronto
(Canadian Court) has entered an order extending the stay in
actions involving Sealed Air Corporation until Oct. 1, 2009.

In April 2001, Grace Canada, Inc. had obtained an order of the
Canadian Court, recognizing the Chapter 11 actions in the United
States of America involving Grace Canada, Inc.'s U.S. parent
corporation and other affiliates of Grace Canada, Inc., and
enjoining all new actions and staying all current proceedings
against Grace Canada, Inc. related to asbestos under the
Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act. That order has been
renewed repeatedly.

In November 2005, upon motion by Grace Canada, Inc., the
Canadian Court ordered an extension of the injunction and stay
to actions involving asbestos against the Company and its
Canadian affiliate and the Attorney General of Canada, which had
the effect of staying all of the Canadian actions.

A global settlement of these Canadian actions, save and except
for claims against the Canadian government, has been finalized
and will be funded entirely by Grace (Canadian Settlement). The
Canadian Settlement will, unless amended, become null and void
if a confirmation order in the Grace U.S. bankruptcy proceeding
is not granted prior to Oct. 31, 2009.

The Canadian Court issued an Order on Oct. 17, 2008 approving
the Canadian Settlement, and released its detailed reasons for
that order on Oct. 23, 2008.

The Company does not have any positive obligations under the
Canadian Settlement, but is a beneficiary of the release of
claims. The release in favor of the Grace parties (including the
Company) will become operative upon the effective date of a plan
of reorganization in Grace's U.S. Chapter 11 bankruptcy
proceeding.

Based in Elmwood Park, N.J., Sealed Air Corporation's largest
product segment, Food Packaging, produces Cryovac shrink films,
absorbent pads, and foam trays used by food processors and
supermarkets to protect meat and poultry. The Company's
Protective Packaging segment produces Bubble Wrap, Instapak
foam, Jiffy envelopes, and Fill-Air inflatable packaging
systems.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Trane Inc. Still Engage in Coverage Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ingersoll-Rand Company Limited says that its subsidiary, Trane
Inc., continues to be in litigation against certain carriers
whose policies it believes provide coverage for asbestos claims.

The insurance carriers named in this suit have challenged
Trane's right to recovery. Trane filed the action in April 1999
in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Middlesex County, against
various primary and lower layer excess insurance carriers,
seeking coverage for environmental claims (NJ Litigation).

The NJ Litigation was later expanded to also seek coverage for
asbestos-related liabilities from 21 primary and lower layer
excess carriers and underwriting syndicates. The environmental
claims against most of the insurers in the NJ Litigation have
been settled.

On Sept. 19, 2005, the court granted Trane's motion to add
claims for insurance coverage for asbestos-related liabilities
against 16 additional insurers and 117 new insurance policies to
the NJ Litigation. The court also required the parties to submit
all contested matters to mediation.

Trane engaged in its first mediation session with the NJ
Litigation defendants on Jan. 18, 2006 and has engaged in active
discussions since that time.

Trane has now settled with a substantial number of its insurers,
collectively accounting for about 80 percent of its recorded
asbestos-related liability insurance receivable as of Jan. 31,
2009.

More specifically, effective Aug. 26, 2008, Trane entered into a
coverage-in-place agreement (August 26 Agreement) with the
following five insurance companies or groups: 1) The Hartford
Financial Services Group, Inc.; 2) The Travelers Companies,
Inc.; 3) The Allstate Corporation (solely in its capacity as
successor-in-interest to Northbrook Excess & Surplus Insurance
Company); 4) Dairyland Insurance Company; and 5) American
International Group, Inc.

The August 26 Agreement provides for the reimbursement by the
insurer signatories of a portion of Trane's costs for asbestos
bodily injury claims under specified terms and conditions and in
exchange for certain releases and indemnifications from Trane.

In addition, on Sept. 12, 2008, Trane entered into a settlement
agreement with Mt. McKinley Insurance Company and Everest
Reinsurance Company, both members of the Everest Re group,
resolving all claims in the NJ Litigation involving policies
issued by those companies (Everest Re Agreement).

The Everest Re Agreement contains a number of elements,
including policy buy-outs and partial buy-outs in exchange for a
cash payment along with coverage-in-place features similar to
those contained in the August 26 Agreement, in exchange for
certain releases and indemnifications by Trane.

More recently, on Jan. 26, 2009, Trane entered into a coverage-
in-place agreement with Columbia Casualty Company, Continental
Casualty Company, and Continental Insurance Company in its own
capacity and as successor-in-interest to Harbor Insurance
Company and London Guarantee & Accident Company of New York (CNA
Agreement). The CNA Agreement provides for the reimbursement by
the insurer signatories of a portion of Trane's costs for
indemnification from Trane.

Trane remains in settlement negotiations with the insurer
defendants in the NJ Litigation not encompassed within the
August 26 Agreement, Everest Re Agreement, and the CNA
Agreement.

Once concluded, the Company said it believes the NJ Litigation
will resolve coverage issues with respect to about 95 percent of
Trane's recorded insurance receivable in connection with
asbestos-related liabilities.

Based in Hamilton, Bermuda, Ingersoll-Rand Company Limited
provides products, services and solutions to enhance the quality
and comfort of air in homes and buildings, transport and protect
food and perishables, secure homes and commercial properties,
and increase industrial productivity and efficiency. Business
segments consist of Air Conditioning Systems and Services,
Climate Control Technologies, Industrial Technologies and
Security Technologies.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ingersoll-Rand Records $1.179Bil Liability
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ingersoll-Rand Company Limited's liability for asbestos related
matters was US$1.179 billion at March 31, 2009, compared with
US$1.195 billion at Dec. 31, 2008.

The Company's asset for probable asbestos-related insurance
recoveries totaled US$421 million at March 31, 2009, compared
with US$423.8 million at Dec. 31, 2008.

During the three months ended March 31, 2009, the Company
recorded US$2.2 million as costs associated with the settlement
and defense of asbestos related claims after insurance
recoveries.

During the three months ended March 31, 2008, the Company
recorded US$4.6 million as income associated with the settlement
and defense of asbestos related claims after insurance
recoveries.

The Company records certain income and expenses associated with
its asbestos liabilities and corresponding insurance recoveries
within discontinued operations, as they relate to previously
divested businesses, primarily Ingersoll-Dresser Pump, which was
sold in 2000.

Income and expenses associated with Trane Inc.'s asbestos
liabilities and corresponding insurance recoveries are recorded
within continuing operations.

Based in Hamilton, Bermuda, Ingersoll-Rand Company Limited
provides products, services and solutions to enhance the quality
and comfort of air in homes and buildings, transport and protect
food and perishables, secure homes and commercial properties,
and increase industrial productivity and efficiency. Business
segments consist of Air Conditioning Systems and Services,
Climate Control Technologies, Industrial Technologies and
Security Technologies.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Alamo Reserves $277T for Gradall's Facility
----------------------------------------------------------------
Alamo Group Inc. has a reserve of US$277,000 over a potential
asbestos issue at its Gradall facility in New Philadelphia,
Ohio, according to the Company's quarterly report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on May 8, 2009.

At Dec. 31, 2008, the Company had an environmental reserve in
the amount of US$1,608,000 related to the acquisition of
Gradall's facility in Ohio.  Three specific remediation projects
that were identified prior to the acquisition are in process of
remediation with a remaining reserve balance of US$143,000.

The balance of the reserve, US$1,188,000, is mainly for
potential ground water contamination/remediation that was
identified before the acquisition and believed to have been
generated by a third party company located near the Gradall
facility.

Certain other assets of the Company contain asbestos that may
have to be remediated over time.

Based in Seguin, Tex., Alamo Group Inc. designs, manufactures,
distributes, and services high quality equipment for right-of-
way maintenance and agriculture. The Company's products include
tractor-mounted mowing and other vegetation maintenance
equipment, street sweepers, excavators, vacuum trucks, snow
removal equipment, pothole patchers, agricultural implements and
related aftermarket parts and services.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ballantyne Still Has Stehman Case in Calif.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ballantyne of Omaha, Inc. continues to be a defendant in an
asbestos case entitled Larry C. Stehman and Leila Stehman v.
Asbestos Corporation, Limited and Ballantyne of Omaha, Inc.
individually and as successor in interest to Strong
International, Strong Electric Corporation and Century Projector
Corporation, et al.

The case was filed on Dec. 8, 2006 in the Superior Court of the
State of California, County of San Francisco.

The case was scheduled for trial to commence on May 26, 2009.

Based in Omaha, Nebr., Ballantyne of Omaha, Inc. manufactures,
distributes, and is a service provider for the theatre
exhibition industry. The Company also designs, develops,
manufactures and distributes lighting systems to the worldwide
entertainment lighting industry. The Company has two primary
reportable core operating segments: theatre and lighting.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: SCC Affiliates Still Facing Asarco Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Southern Copper Corporation's direct and indirect parent
corporations, including Americas Mining Corporation and Grupo
Mexico S.A.B. de C.V., still are parties to various litigation
(including asbestos-related) involving Asarco LLC.

In August 2002, the U.S. Department of Justice brought a claim
alleging fraudulent conveyance in connection with AMC's then-
proposed purchase of the Company from a subsidiary of Asarco.
That action was settled under a Consent Decree dated Feb. 2,
2003. In March 2003, AMC purchased its interest in the Company
from Asarco.

In October 2004, AMC, Grupo Mexico, Mexicana de Cobre S.A. de
C.V. and other parties, not including the Company, were named in
a lawsuit filed in New York State court in connection with
alleged asbestos liabilities, which lawsuit claims that AMC's
purchase of the Company from Asarco should be voided as a
fraudulent conveyance. The lawsuit filed in New York State court
was stayed as a result of the August 2005 Chapter 11 bankruptcy
filing by Asarco.

However, on Nov. 16, 2007, this lawsuit after being removed to
federal court was transferred to the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Texas in Brownsville, Tex., for resolution
in conjunction with a new lawsuit filed by Asarco's creditors.

In 2005, certain subsidiaries of Asarco filed bankruptcy
petitions in connection with alleged asbestos liabilities. In
July 2005, the unionized workers of Asarco commenced a work
stoppage. As a result of various factors, including the above-
mentioned work stoppage, in August 2005 Asarco filed a voluntary
petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code
before the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Corpus Christi, Tex.

Asarco's bankruptcy case is being joined with the bankruptcy
cases of its subsidiaries. Asarco's bankruptcy could result in
additional claims being filed against Grupo Mexico and its
subsidiaries, including the Company, Minera Mexico or its
subsidiaries.

Based in Phoenix, Ariz., Southern Copper Corporation produces
and sells copper. In the process of producing copper, a number
of valuable metallurgical by-products are recovered, such as
molybdenum, zinc, silver, lead and gold, which it also produces
and sells.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 2 3rd-Party Payor Cases Ongoing v. Liggett
----------------------------------------------------------------
Vector Group Ltd.'s subsidiary, Liggett Group LLC, as of March
31, 2009, still faced two Third-Party Payor Actions, according
to the Company's latest quarterly report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.

Third-Party Payor Actions typically have been filed by insurance
companies, union health and welfare trust funds, asbestos
manufacturers and others.

In Third-Party Payor Actions, plaintiffs seek damages for
funding of corrective public education campaigns relating to
issues of smoking and health; funding for clinical smoking
cessation programs; disgorgement of profits from sales of
cigarettes; restitution; treble damages; and attorneys' fees.

Although no specific amounts are provided, it is possible that
requested damages against cigarette manufacturers in these cases
might be in the billions of dollars.

Based in Miami, Vector Group Ltd. is a holding company that
manufactures and sells cigarettes in the United States through
Liggett Group LLC, develops reduced risk cigarette products
through Vector Tobacco Inc., and acquires more operating
companies and real estate properties through New Valley LLC.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Supreme Court OKs Board Ruling in Webb Case
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New
York, upheld a July 24, 2007 ruling of the Workers' Compensation
Board, which ruled that Jerry Webb's death was causally related
to occupational illness.

The case is styled In the Matter of the Claim of Muriel Webb, as
Widow of Jerry Webb, Deceased, Respondent v. Cooper Crouse Hinds
Company, Appellant. Workers' Compensation Board, Respondent.

Judges Thomas E. Mercure, John A. Lahtinen, Bernard J. Malone
Jr., and E. Michael Kavanagh entered judgment in the case on
March 5, 2009.

In 1997, Mr. Webb was found to have a permanent partial
disability, which was apportioned 75 percent to an occupational
lung disease and 25 percent to noncompensable causes. He was
hospitalized in June 2005 in connection with his ongoing history
of upper respiratory infection and fainting spells.

Mr. Webb's treating physician, Robert Newman, indicated that
while Mr. Webb had a history of prostate cancer, a prostate
specific antigen test ruled out a recurrence or metastasis of
the cancer.

Mr. Webb was discharged in August 2005 with diagnoses of spinal
abscess, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, post-
radiation status for prostate cancer, gastroparesis and candida
esophagitis. He was then admitted into hospice care, and he died
in October 2005.

Mr. Webb's death certificate listed the cause of death as
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, due to or as a
consequence of asbestosis.

Following hearings, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge
(hereinafter WCLJ) Muriel Webb, Mr. Webb's wife, death benefits,
finding that Mr. Webb's death was causally related to his
occupational disease.

The Board affirmed, prompting this appeal by the employer,
Cooper Crouse Hinds Company. The Supreme Court affirmed the
Board's ruling.

Wolff, Goodrich & Goldman, L.L.P., Syracuse (Robert E. Geyer
Jr., Esq., of counsel), represented Cooper Crouse Hinds Company.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, New York (Steven Segall,
Esq., of counsel), represented the Workers' Compensation Board.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Argo Reserves $162.6Mil for A&E at March 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
Argo Group International Holdings, Ltd.'s gross loss reserves
for asbestos and environmental claims were US$162.6 million as
of March 31, 2009, compared with US$154.1 million as of March
31, 2008.

The Company's gross loss reserves for A&E claims were US$143.3
million as of Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$157.72 million as
of Dec. 31, 2007. (Class Action Reporter, March 27, 2009)

The Company's net loss reserves for A&E claims were US$122.3
million as of March 31, 2009, compared with US$138.5 million as
of March 31, 2008.

The Company's net loss reserves for A&E claims were US$125.4
million as of Dec. 31, 2008, compared with US$141.4 million as
of Dec. 31, 2007. (Class Action Reporter, March 27, 2009)

Losses and loss adjustment expenses (LAE) for the three months
ended March 31, 2009 was US$900,000 in favorable loss reserve
development, including US$5 million of unfavorable loss reserve
development in the Run-off Lines segment primarily driven by
US$6.1 million of reserve strengthening in asbestos and
environmental lines.

Based in Pembroke, Bermuda, Argo Group International Holdings,
Ltd. is an underwriter of specialty insurance and reinsurance
products in the property and casualty market.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: United America Unit Cleared in Suit in 2008
----------------------------------------------------------------
One of United America Indemnity, Ltd.'s insurance companies, in
2008, was dismissed from an asbestos lawsuit seeking coverage
from it and other unrelated insurance companies, according to
the Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on May 11, 2009.

The suit involved issues related to about 3,900 existing
asbestos related bodily injury claims and future claims. The
dismissal was the result of a settlement of a disputed claim
related to accident year 1984.

The settlement is conditioned upon certain legal events
occurring which will trigger financial obligations by the
insurance company.

Management will continue to monitor the developments of the
litigation to determine if any additional financial exposure is
present.

Based in George Town, Cayman Islands, United America Indemnity,
Ltd. is a specialty property and casualty insurer, which
provides its insurance products across a full distribution
network - binding authority, program, brokerage and reinsurance.
The Company manages the distribution of these products in two
segments: (a) Insurance Operations and (b) Reinsurance
Operations.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cabot Unit Still Party to AO Exposure Cases
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cabot Corporation continues to be party to cases, including
asbestos-related, in connection with a safety respiratory
products business that a subsidiary acquired from American
Optical Corporation (AO) in an April 1990 asset purchase
transaction.

The subsidiary manufactured respirators under the AO brand and
disposed of that business in July 1995.

In connection with its acquisition of the business, the
subsidiary agreed, in certain circumstances, to assume a portion
of AO's liabilities, including costs of legal fees together with
amounts paid in settlements and judgments, allocable to AO
respiratory products used prior to the 1990 purchase by the
Company subsidiary.

The Company's respirator liabilities involve claims for personal
injury, including asbestosis, silicosis and coal worker's
pneumoconiosis, allegedly resulting from the use of AO
respirators that are alleged to have been negligently designed
or labeled.

As of March 31, 2009, there were about 54,000 claimants in
pending cases asserting claims against AO in connection with
respiratory products.

The Company has a reserve to cover its expected share of
liability for existing and future respirator liability claims.
The book value of the reserve is being accreted up to the
undiscounted liability through interest expense over the
expected cash flow period, which is through 2052, and, at March
31, 2009, is about US$13 million on a discounted basis (or about
US$23 million on an undiscounted basis).

Cash payments related to this liability have been about US$1
million in the first six months of both fiscal 2009 and fiscal
2008.

Based in Boston, Cabot Corporation produces carbon black, a
reinforcing and pigmenting agent used in tires, inks, cables,
and coatings. The Company also holds its own as a maker of fumed
metal oxides like fumed silica and fumed alumina, which are used
as anti-caking, thickening, and reinforcing agents in adhesives
and coatings.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Thomas Properties Accrues $900T for Cleanup
----------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Properties Group, Inc., as of March 31, 2009, accrued
US$900,000 for estimated future costs of asbestos removal or
abatement at its City National Plaza property, according to the
Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on May 11, 2009.

The Company continues to remove or abate asbestos-containing
materials from various areas of the building structures.

As of Dec. 31, 2008, the Company accrued US$1 million for
estimated future costs of asbestos removal or abatement at its
City National Plaza property. (Class Action Reporter, March 27,
2009)

Based in Los Angeles, Thomas Properties Group, Inc. is a full-
service real estate operating company that owns, acquires,
develops and manages primarily office, as well as mixed-use and
residential properties on a nationwide basis. The Company
conducts its business through its Operating Partnership, of
which the Company owns 65 percent as of March 31, 2009 and has
control over the major decisions of the Operating Partnership.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: PREIT Cites $10M Insurance Cleanup Coverage
----------------------------------------------------------------
Pennsylvania Real Estate Investment Center has insurance
coverage for certain environmental claims (including asbestos)
up to US$10 million per occurrence and up to US$10 million in
the aggregate.

The Company had insurance coverage for certain environmental
claims, including asbestos, up to US$5 million per occurrence
and up to US$5 million in the aggregate. (Class Action Reporter,
Nov. 28, 2008)

The Company is aware of certain environmental matters at some of
its properties, including ground water contamination and the
presence of asbestos containing materials.

In the past, the Company performed remediation of such
environmental matters, and it is not aware of any significant
remaining potential liability relating to these environmental
matters. The Company may be required in the future to perform
testing relating to these matters.

Based in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Real Estate Investment
Trust's primary business is owning and operating shopping malls
and strip and power centers. It has 56 properties in 13 states,
including 38 shopping malls, 14 strip and power centers and four
properties under development.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ampco Cites $180.67M Liability at March 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ampco-Pittsburgh Corporation's long-term asbestos liability was
US$180,670,000 as of March 31, 2009, compared with
US$187,014,436 as of Dec. 31, 2008.

The Company's current asbestos liability was US$20 million as of
both March 31, 2009 and Dec. 31, 2008.

The Company's long-term asbestos insurance receivable was
US$117,550,000 as of March 31, 2009, compared with
US$122,175,929 as of Dec. 31, 2008.

The Company's current asbestos insurance receivable was US$14
million as of both March 31, 2009 and Dec. 31, 2008.

Based in Pittsburgh, Ampco-Pittsburgh Corporation manufactures
metal products. Its forged and cast steel rolls unit makes
hardened-steel rolls for the steel and aluminum industries. The
air and liquid processing segment includes Buffalo Pumps;
Aerofin; and Buffalo Air Handling.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ampco Facing 9,402 Open Claims at March 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ampco-Pittsburgh Corporation faced 9,402 open asbestos claims
during the three months ended March 31, 2009, according to the
Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on May 11, 2009.

During the three months ended March 31, 2009, the Company noted
237 claims dismissed. The gross settlement and defense costs
were US$6,270,000.

The Company faced 9,354 open asbestos-related claims for the
year ended Dec. 31, 2008, compared with 8,335 claims for the
year ended Dec. 31, 2007. (Class Action Reporter, April 17,
2009)

Claims have been asserted alleging personal injury from exposure
to asbestos-containing components historically used in some
products of certain of the Company's operating subsidiaries
(Asbestos Liability) and of an inactive subsidiary and another
former division of the Company. Those subsidiaries, and in some
cases the Corporation, are defendants (among a number of
defendants, typically over 50) in cases filed in various state
and federal courts.

Certain of the Company's subsidiaries and the Corporation have
an arrangement (Coverage Arrangement) with insurers responsible
for historical primary and some umbrella insurance coverage for
Asbestos Liability (Paying Insurers). Under the Coverage
Arrangement, the Paying Insurers accept financial
responsibility, subject to the limits of the policies and based
on fixed defense percentages and specified indemnity allocation
formulas, for a substantial majority of the pending claims for
Asbestos Liability.

The claims against the inactive subsidiary of the Company, about
334 as of March 31, 2009, are not included within the Coverage
Arrangement. The one claim filed against the former division
also is not included within the Coverage Arrangement.

The Coverage Arrangement includes an acknowledgment that Howden
Buffalo, Inc. is entitled to coverage under policies covering
Asbestos Liability for claims arising out of the historical
products manufactured or distributed by Buffalo Forge, a former
subsidiary of the Company (Products).

The Coverage Arrangement does not provide for any prioritization
on access to the applicable policies or monetary cap other than
the limits of the policies, and, accordingly, Howden may access
the policies at any time for any covered claim arising out of a
Product.

In general, access by Howden to the policies covering the
Products will erode the coverage under the policies available to
the Corporation and the relevant subsidiaries for Asbestos
Liability alleged to arise out of not only the Products but also
other historical products of the Company and its subsidiaries
covered by the applicable policies.

Based in Pittsburgh, Ampco-Pittsburgh Corporation manufactures
metal products. Its forged and cast steel rolls unit makes
hardened-steel rolls for the steel and aluminum industries. The
air and liquid processing segment includes Buffalo Pumps;
Aerofin; and Buffalo Air Handling.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: California Water Subject to Exposure Suits
----------------------------------------------------------------
California Water Services Group, from time to time, has been
named as a co-defendant in several asbestos related lawsuits,
according to the Company's quarterly report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on May 11, 2009.

The Company has been dismissed without prejudice in several of
these cases.

In other cases, the Company's contractor and the Company's
insurance policy carriers have settled the cases with no effect
on the Company's financial statements.

Based in San Jose, Calif., California Water Service Group is a
holding company that provides water utility and other related
services in California, Washington, New Mexico and Hawaii
through its wholly-owned subsidiaries.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Great Lakes, NATCO Facing Pending Lawsuits
----------------------------------------------------------------
Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Corporation and its former subsidiary
NATCO Limited Partnership continue to face pending asbestos-
related lawsuits.

The Company and NATCO are named as defendants in 263 lawsuits,
the majority of which were filed between 1989 and 2000. In these
lawsuits, the plaintiffs allege personal injury, primarily
fibrosis or asbestosis, from exposure to asbestos on the
Company's vessels.

Most of these lawsuits have been filed in the Northern District
of Ohio and a few in the Eastern District of Michigan. All of
the cases filed against the Company prior to 1996 were
administratively dismissed in May 1996 and any cases filed since
that time have similarly been administratively transferred to
the inactive docket.

Plaintiffs in these cases could seek to reinstate the cases at a
future date without being barred by the statute of limitations.

However, to date, no plaintiffs with claims against the Company
have sought reinstatement, and one additional case was filed
against the Company in 2008.

Based in Oak Brook, Ill., Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Corporation
provides dredging services in the United States. In addition,
the Company is the only U.S. dredging contractor with
significant international operations, which represented 27
percent of its dredging revenues for the first quarter of 2009
compared with the Company's three year average of 30 percent.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cases v. Park-Ohio Drop to 260 at March 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
Park-Ohio Holdings Corp., at March 31, 2009, was a co-defendant
in 260 cases asserting claims on behalf of 1,750 plaintiffs
alleging personal injury as a result of exposure to asbestos.

At Dec. 31, 2008, the Company was a co-defendant in 315 cases
asserting claims on behalf of about 4,500 plaintiffs alleging
personal injury as a result of exposure to asbestos. (Class
Action Reporter, April 17, 2009)

These asbestos cases generally relate to production and sale of
asbestos-containing products and allege various theories of
liability, including negligence, gross negligence and strict
liability and seek compensatory and, in some cases, punitive
damages.

In every asbestos case in which the Company is named as a party,
the complaints are filed against multiple named defendants. In
substantially all of the asbestos cases, the plaintiffs either
claim damages in excess of a specified amount, typically a
minimum amount sufficient to establish jurisdiction of the court
in which the case was filed (jurisdictional minimums generally
range from US$25,000 to US$75,000), or do not specify the
monetary damages sought. To the extent that any specific amount
of damages is sought, the amount applies to claims against all
named defendants.

There are four asbestos cases, involving 23 plaintiffs, which
plead specified damages. In each of the four cases, the
plaintiff is seeking compensatory and punitive damages based on
a variety of potentially alternative causes of action.

In three cases, the plaintiff has alleged compensatory damages
in the amount of US$3 million for four separate causes of action
and US$1 million for another cause of action and punitive
damages in the amount of US$10 million.

In the other case, the plaintiff has alleged compensatory
damages in the amount of US$20 million for three separate causes
of action and US$5 million for another cause of action and
punitive damages in the amount of US$20 million.

Based in Cleveland, Ohio, Park-Ohio Holdings Corp. is an
industrial Total Supply Management and diversified manufacturing
business, operating in three segments: Supply Technologies,
Aluminum Products and Manufactured Products.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: CBL Cites $2.6M Potential Cleanup Liability
----------------------------------------------------------------
CBL & Associates Properties, Inc. has recorded in its financial
statements a liability of US$2.6 million related to potential
future asbestos abatement activities at its Properties.

Based in Chattanooga, Tenn., CBL & Associates Properties, Inc.
is a self-managed, self-administered, fully integrated real
estate investment trust that is engaged in the ownership,
development, acquisition, leasing, management and operation of
regional shopping malls, open-air centers, community centers and
office properties.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: FutureFuel Chem. Subject to Exposure Cases
----------------------------------------------------------------
FutureFuel Corp.'s subsidiary, FutureFuel Chemical Company, and
its operations may be parties to, or targets of, lawsuits,
claims, investigations and proceedings, including asbestos.

No other asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the
Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on May 11, 2009.

Based in Clayton, Mo., FutureFuel Corp. develops, manufactures,
and markets products for two business units: Biofuels and
Specialty Chemicals.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Houston Wire Still Faces Claims in 3 States
----------------------------------------------------------------
Houston Wire & Cable Company, along with many other defendants,
is still named in a number of lawsuits in the state courts of
Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota alleging that certain
wire and cable which may have contained asbestos caused injury
to the plaintiffs who were exposed to this wire and cable.

These lawsuits are individual personal injury suits that seek
unspecified amounts of money damages as the sole remedy. It is
not clear whether the alleged injuries occurred as a result of
the wire and cable in question or whether the Company, in fact,
distributed the wire and cable alleged to have caused any
injuries. The Company maintains general liability insurance that
has applied to these claims.

To date, all costs associated with these claims have been
covered by the applicable insurance policies and all defenses of
these claims have been handled by the applicable insurance
companies.

In addition, the Company did not manufacture any of the wire and
cable at issue, and the Company would rely on any warranties
from the manufacturers of such wire and cable if it were
determined that any of the wire or cable that the Company
distributed contained asbestos which caused injury to any of
these plaintiffs.

In connection with ALLTEL Corporation's sale of the Company in
1997, ALLTEL provided indemnities with respect to costs and
damages associated with these claims that the Company said it
believes it could enforce if its insurance coverage proves
inadequate.

Based in Houston, Houston Wire & Cable Company distributes
specialty wire and cable and related services to the U.S.
electrical distribution market. The Company serves its 3,200
customers in over 8,600 individual locations, including
virtually all of the top 200 electrical distributors in the U.S.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ohio Court OKs Ruling in Goulds Pump Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Supreme Court of Ohio upholds the Court of Appeals'
judgment, which denied asbestos appeals in a consolidated action
involving Goulds Pumps, Inc.

The cases are styled Louden, Exr., Appellant, et al. v. A.O.
Smith Corporation et al.; Goulds Pumps, Inc. et al., Appellees
and Border, Exr., Appellant v. AEP Ohio et al.; Goulds Pumps,
Inc. et al., Appellees.

Judges Evelyn Lundberg Stratton, Thomas J. Moyer, Maureen
O'Connor, Terrence O'Donnell, Robert R. Cupp, Paul E. Pfeifer,
and Judith Ann Lanzinger entered judgment in Case Nos. 2007-1819
and 2007-1821 on Feb. 4, 2009. Judge Pfeifer dissented. Judge
Lanzinger concurred in part and dissented in part.

In two separate civil actions, a surviving spouse alleged a
worker had contracted an asbestos-related disease in the
workplace. The actions were consolidated. The Court of Common
Pleas, Cuyahoga County, granted summary judgment to employers.
Surviving spouses electronically transmitted notices of appeal
to clerk of courts for the trial court, clerk did not forward
those notices to Court of Appeals, and more than two months
later the surviving spouses filed paper copies of notices of
appeal with the clerk, which were forwarded to the Court of
Appeals.

The Court of Appeals sua sponte dismissed the notices of appeal
as untimely. Discretionary appeal was accepted.

The issue before the Supreme Court was whether a trial court's
case-management order that required parties in asbestos cases to
file trial court documents electronically also authorized those
same parties to file a notice of appeal electronically.

The Supreme Court held that filing an appeal requires an
appellant to present a paper copy of the notice of appeal to the
clerk of the trial court, unless a rule of appellate procedure
expressly permits the notice of appeal to be filed
electronically.

In the instant case, the Appeals Court had not adopted any rule
permitting such electronic filing. Because appellants did not
timely file paper copies of their notices of appeal to the
clerk, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the court of
appeals dismissing appellants' appeals.

John I. Kittel, Esq. of Mazur & Kittel, P.L.L.C., Bryan M.
Frink, Esq., and Paul W. Flowers, Esq., of Paul W. Flowers Co.,
L.P.A. in Cleveland, Ohio, represented appellants.

Gallagher Sharp, Esq., John A. Valenti, Esq., Timothy J.
Fitzgerald, Esq., and Holly M. Olarczuk-Smith, Esq., in
Cleveland, Ohio, represented appellees.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Travelers Favored in Skinner Engine Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of
Pennsylvania, on May 26, 2009, issued a favorable ruling for
Travelers Casualty and Surety Company and other insurers
involved in the Skinner Engine Co. bankruptcy case, according to
a Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP press release.

The Court's ruling is significant in its rejection of joint
efforts by a debtor and counsel for asbestos claimants to bind
insurers to a collusive settlement of asbestos claims in the
context of a Chapter 11 plan.

The Skinner decision arose after repeated, failed attempts by
Skinner and asbestos claimants to propose plans of
reorganization designed to circumvent insurance provisions,
particularly those regarding the insurer's right to defend and
settle claims, cooperation clauses, and consent-to-settlement
provisions.

In the latest attempt, Skinner and the claimants proposed a plan
that sought to install a "trustee" to oversee the distribution
of insurance proceeds to claimants in accordance with a
"settlement" between Skinner and the asbestos claimants.

This so-called "settlement" embodied in Skinner's "Fifth Plan"
established a bizarre procedure whereby insurers would have
limited ability to contest a claimant's demand for compensation
and ultimately would be required to participate in a "baseball"
arbitration to resolve any disputes on a record consisting
exclusively of only evidence submitted by each claimant.

This Fifth Plan further provided for the debtors to collect a 20
percent "surcharge" from every payment made to asbestos
claimants by Skinner's insurers, thereby incentivizing the
debtor to "sabotage its own defense or, more aptly, the
Insurers' defense" of asbestos claims.

On behalf of Travelers, Simpson Thacher argued that the
disclosure statement for this proposed Fifth Plan should not be
approved because the plan abrogated Travelers' contractual
rights to control the defense and settlement of claims, breached
the cooperation clause, and violated the Bankruptcy Code. Other
insurers raised similar arguments.

The Court agreed with the insurers' position, denied Skinner's
motion to approve the disclosure statement for the Fifth Plan,
concluded that the debtor and asbestos claimants were unable to
effectuate a confirmable plan within a reasonable period of time
and, on the Court's own motion, converted the case to one under
Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code.

The Court found that the "settlement" embodied in the Fifth Plan
was collusive, unreasonable, and not entered into in good faith,
and that the Fifth Plan, if confirmed, would breach the
insurers' rights to control the settlement and defense of the
asbestos claims thereby voiding coverage.

The Simpson Thacher team was comprised of partner Andrew Amer,
Esq., senior counsel Elisa Alcabes, Esq., and Kathrine McLendon,
Esq., and associates Marsha Yee, Esq., Chad Atlas, Esq., and
Donald Conklin, Esq.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ruling Reversed in Thurston's Action v. CSX
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Supreme Court overturned a decision to award railroad
worker Thurston Hensley US$5 million for alleged exposure to
asbestos, the Mesothelioma Cancer News reports.

The court decided 7-2 that Mr. Hensley, who sued CSX Corporation
alleging he feared developing cancer from the exposure, was not
entitled to the large sum due to an error in instruction to the
jury by a trial judge.

The lower court reportedly denied requests by CSX's attorneys to
instruct the jury to weigh the validity of Mr. Hensley's cancer
fears and seriousness.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Report on Construction Guidance Finalized
----------------------------------------------------------------
The World Bank has finalized a report on construction guidance
that would drastically decrease the use of asbestos in new
construction projects, according to a May 21, 2009 press release
by Congressman Dennis Kucinich's (D-OH) office.

This follows a letter of inquiry spearheaded by Congressman
Kucinich and co-signed by four other Members of Congress.

Originally commissioned in 2006, the report was technically
reviewed in 2008 but stalled awaiting final administrative
approval. In March 2009, Congressman Kucinich sent a letter to
World Bank President Robert Zoellick questioning the delay.

Congressman Kucinich stated, "Asbestos is a highly toxic
material that has no place in construction projects here or
anywhere else, especially when viable alternatives are
available. This guidance will reduce exposure and permanent lung
damage to citizens and workers around the world."

The guidance states, "Health hazards from breathing asbestos
dust include asbestosis, a lung scarring disease, and various
forms of cancer ... Mesothelioma, a signal tumor for asbestos
exposure, occurs among workers' family members from dust on the
workers' clothes and among neighbors of asbestos air pollution
point sources. Some experimental animal studies show that high
inhalation exposures to all forms of asbestos for only hours can
cause cancer."

Congressman Kucinich added, "Global asbestos use is on the rise
at the very time it should be eliminated. This report is a
necessary first step toward reversing that trend."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Litigation Conference Set for Sept. 14 - 16
----------------------------------------------------------------
A premier Asbestos Litigation Conference is taking place in San
Francisco on Sept. 14, 2009 to Sept. 16, 2009, according to a
Perrin Conferences, LLC press release dated June 2, 2009.

Co-Chairs are W. Mark Lanier, Esq., of Lanier Law Firm and John
B. Manning, Esq., of Cooley Manion Jones, LLP. Sixty of the
foremost litigators, judges, in-house counsels, and doctors
working in the field of Asbestos related cases will be speaking.

Mr. Lanier was named one of the Top 10 Trial Attorneys in 1998
and 2006 by The National Law Journal. He is credited with
winning the largest asbestos verdict in U.S. history. Mr.
Manning represents dozens of companies in litigation throughout
the country and coordinates the defense of over 200,000 asbestos
lawsuits pending in all 50 states.

The Asbestos Litigation Conference, organized by Perrin
Conferences, provides a comprehensive National Overview
discussing all recent litigation, providing powerful information
for Asbestos Plaintiffs, Defendants, and Insurers by organizing
the top talent in the industry to discuss the most current
trends affecting litigation and assessments on future trends.

Featuring an In-house Counsel Roundtable Discussion with Edward
Lowenberg, Sr. Counsel Exxon Mobile and five other prominent
attorneys, recommendations on resolving asbestos liability will
be offered.

Adding the viewpoint from the judiciary, a Judge's panel
features four distinguished judges: Hon. Mark Davidson, 11th
Civil District Court of Texas, Hon. Lee Edmon, Asst. Presiding
Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court, Hon. James McBride, Presiding
Judge, San Francisco Superior Courts, and Hon. Daniel Stack,
Madison County Circuit Courts, Edwardsville, Ill.

The Asbestos Litigation Conference taking place merges the
foremost knowledgeable litigators with the companies most
impacted by asbestos litigation.

Lynnsey Perrin Hee, with over 10 years of experience in the
Legal industry and as a conference organizer, is bringing
together a vast network of the top talent to provide information
of value to all interested parties affected by asbestos
litigation.

For more information, please see www.PerrinConferences.com or
contact Lynnsey Perrin Hee at 610-804-6165.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Alleman Seeks Information on Medical Center
----------------------------------------------------------------
John Alleman's legal team, which represents an unnamed
Williamson County man whose wife had worked at VA Medical Center
in Marion, Ill., seeks information on the presence of asbestos
contamination at the facility, The Southern reports.

The petition was filed on May 28, 2009 at Judge J. Phil
Gilbert's docket with the U.S. District Court at Benton, Ill.

The petition specifically requests all information connected to
reports of asbestos contamination at the facility; protocols,
plans and programs for testing, monitoring and treatment of
families members to facility employees; plans and specifications
for the installation, maintenance and abatement of asbestos at
the facility; and a listing of all employees, non-employees,
contractors and others who may have knowledge of asbestos
exposure.

Mr. Alleman said the government disclosed recent testing results
done in 2009 that shows extreme levels of contamination by
asbestos at the VA Center. His client has basis under medical
science for believing he was secondarily exposed to asbestos
that was inadvertently brought into the family home by his
spouse, according to Mr. Alleman's petition.

Mr. Alleman said the petition could be the basis for an eventual
class-action law suit involving up to 200 employees and an
undetermined number of people affected by secondary exposure.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: $100T Estimated for Mass. Theater's Cleanup
----------------------------------------------------------------
The town of Ware, Mass., received an estimate from a private
company stating that for about US$100,000 the Casino Theatre
(located on Main Street) could undergo asbestos abatement and be
demolished, Mesothelioma.com reports.

According to Ware Town Manager Steven C. Boudreau, members of
the town council are preparing a motion to force the owner of
the theater to either make the building safe, or have it
destroyed. The theater is owned by Western Massachusetts
Theatres Inc.

The town's survey board examined the building back in April
2009, and the town building inspector subsequently ordered that
the property be torn down or repaired by May 20, 2009. Now that
deadline has passed, and many residents of the town are not
pleased. The Survey Board concluded that the theater's interior
is "unsafe" and its exterior safety is "seriously in question."

At the time of the survey, board members were concerned that the
town's Memorial Day festivities might be hampered by the
dangerous building.

To prevent any issues, Ware firefighters and Knight of Columbus
members kept the public away from the building during Memorial
Day activities by placing a chain link fence around the
property.

The theater is 100 years old, and some townspeople hope that the
historic theater can be saved.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ore. Developer to Appear in Court in August
----------------------------------------------------------------
Dan Desler, a developer from Eugene, Ore., faces asbestos-
related felony charges and will appear in court in August 2009,
Mesothelioma & Asbestos Awareness Center reports.

On May 28, 2009, Mr. Desler appeared in Linn County Circuit
Court and was granted the August 2009 continuance.

Meanwhile, federal officials are preparing to clean up the
asbestos-contaminated site using U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Superfund money. The cleanup is expected to begin this
summer. The property in question is a former mill located in
Sweet Home.

Mr. Desler was arrested earlier 2009 and charged with felony air
pollution crimes. He had been under investigation for months by
both the Oregon State Police and the EPA. He has now been
charged with seven felony counts of first-degree unlawful air
pollution, three misdemeanor counts of second-degree unlawful
air pollution, a felony count of supplying false information to
the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality.

The charges are based on Mr. Desler's involvement in a
demolition project in Sweet Home where the demolition of old
mills buildings caused asbestos to be spread around the
property.

Dan Heister of the EPA's Emergency Response Unit in Portland,
Ore., has visited the Sweet Home property on numerous occasions
to take samples. The asbestos at the site is located in both
roofing materials and the concrete rubble scattered around the
property.

Mr. Heister has confirmed that the asbestos present at the site
is the type that can be easily broken down into small particles
that can become airborne.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Miss. Jury Denies Westrope's Injury Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
A jury in Claiborne County, Miss., ruled that three companies do
not owe Eugene Westrope of Hazlehurst, Miss., anything for his
claims that he suffered from silicosis after using their
products, ClaimsJournal.com reports.

Lawyers for the 73-year-old Mr. Westrope asked jurors for US$4.5
million in damages, saying he had contracted the lung disease
after using cleaning products containing asbestos supplied by
the companies between 1964 through 1995.

The jury found that Clemco Industries Corp., Precision Packaging
and Lone Star Industries Inc. owed nothing to Mr. Westrope, who
originally sued 18 companies. He has settled claims with 15 of
those companies before trial.

Washington, Mo.-based Clemco manufactures air-powered blast
cleaning equipment, and Little Rock, Ark.-based Precision
Packaging is a packaging services company. The Lone Star
Industries Inc. supplied blasting sand.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: N.Y. Whistleblower Arrested for Trespassing
----------------------------------------------------------------
Eugene Roos, a whistleblower who admitted taking asbestos
samples from a Long Island, N.Y., elementary school, has been
arrested on trespassing charges, the Associated Press reports.

Mr. Roos surrendered on May 28, 2009 and was released on a
US$200 bail.

The arrest follows a vote by Patchogue-Medford school board to
pursue legal action.

Mr. Roos took samples of asbestos insulation and shot video of
school interiors, then gave them to a local cable news channel.
School officials said collecting the asbestos could have
released dangerous fibers.

Ruth Pollack, Esq., says Mr. Roos is not guilty and was simply
trying to document hazards.

The school board says because of the allegations, it will retest
air quality in all 11 local schools in the district.

If convicted, Mr. Roos could face three months in jail.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hazard Present in 450 of Manitoba's Schools
----------------------------------------------------------------
According to a list provided by the Province of Manitoba,
Canada, to a Conservation Member of Legislative Assembly, about
450 schools (two-thirds) in Manitoba contain asbestos materials,
the Winnipeg Free Press reports.

However, on May 28, 2009, Education Minister Peter Bjornson said
parents should not panic.

Health Canada has stated buildings containing asbestos do not
pose a health risk as long as the material is encapsulated,
Minister Bjornson said. He added that what's critical is that
renovation crews are aware of which schools contain the
substance.

Normally, these renovations are done when students are not in
school.

Ron Schuler, the Conservative MLA for Springfield, asked for the
list of schools several weeks ago.

Minister Bjornson said he is not surprised at the large number
of schools that contain the dangerous material.

For the past decade, the government has spent between CAD1
million and CAD1.5 million in asbestos remediation work in
schools, Minister Bjornson told Mr. Schuler.

For the current fiscal year, the budget is a little over CAD1
million. Remediation work tends to be done when school
renovations are needed. School divisions are required to keep
records of which schools contain asbestos.

In 2009, asbestos abatement work is being carried out in 16
Manitoba schools.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Grupo Mexico Places $2.9Bil Bid for Asarco
----------------------------------------------------------------
Grupo Mexico S.A.B. de C.V., on June 2, 2009, said it is
offering US$2.9 billion to take its U.S.-based copper unit,
Asarco LLC, out of Chapter 11 bankruptcy, The Wall Street
Journal reports.

In the 1930s, Grupo Mexico acquired control of the massive
Cananea open-pit mine in Sonora, Mexico, after the Mexican
government forced Asarco, the mine's U.S. owner, to sell its
Mexican interests to a local operator. Sixty years later, Grupo
Mexico outbid larger mining companies to complete a US$1 billion
takeover of Asarco.

On June 2, 2009, a unit of Grupo Mexico said that the Company's
US$2.9 billion bid to reorganize Asarco is worth US$500 million
more than a competing plan from Vedanta Resources PLC, which
Asarco's current management prefers.

The bid comes a week after Grupo Mexico's announcement that it
had placed US$1.3 billion in an escrow account to "demonstrate
the seriousness of its intentions to regain control of its
subsidiary," despite the challenge from Vedanta, a London-based
mining conglomerate with most of its assets in India.

Grupo Mexico said the balance of the US$2.9 billion it would pay
Asarco's creditors would come from a US$250 million settlement
with asbestos claimants, who are classified as creditors in the
bankruptcy case, plus cash Asarco already has on hand.

The US$250 million Grupo Mexico has earmarked for asbestos
claims suggests that the Mexican company may have locked in the
approval of the claimants, a key constituency in the Asarco
bankruptcy case. They have argued they are owed compensation for
decades of asbestos contamination left by Asarco before Grupo
Mexico bought it in 1999.

In the decade since the acquisition, Grupo Mexico has been
accused of looting Asarco by slicing off the U.S. unit's rich
assets in Peru.

Critics claim the Company later forced Asarco into bankruptcy,
before parties alleging environmental damage by the U.S. copper
giant could receive funds to clean up dozens of contaminated
sites across the West.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Council Rock School Resolves EPA Complaint
----------------------------------------------------------------
The mid-Atlantic office of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, on June 2, 2009, announced that the Council Rock School
District has settled violations of a federal law on the
management of asbestos materials at Council Rock South High
School, 2002 Rock Way, Holland, Pa., and Rolling Hills
Elementary School, 340 Middle Holland Road, Holland, Pa.,
according to an EPA press release dated June 2, 2009.

The Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) requires
local education agencies like the Council Rock School District
to develop a management plan for asbestos-containing materials,
detailing procedures to prevent asbestos release, for each
building used as a school building.

The management plans must be available at each school, with
annual notification to parent, teacher and employee
organizations of the plan and any asbestos abatement activities.

During an April 2008 inspection, EPA found that Council Rock
South High School did not have a management plan and at the
Rolling Hills Elementary School, a complete and updated copy of
the management plan was not available.

Additionally, the Council Rock School District failed to
annually notify in writing parent, teacher, and employee
organizations of the availability of the management plans for
each of the facilities.

The EPA calculated the civil penalty to be US$16,483. Since the
school district spent US$216,528 to come into compliance, there
is a zero penalty amount.

The settlements announced on June 2, 2009 are part of EPA's
ongoing efforts to work throughout the Mid-Atlantic States to
reduce asbestos hazards in schools.

EPA offers compliance assistance for public, private, charter
and parochial schools, and has conducted outreach at educational
conferences.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 13 Suits Filed During May 11-15 in Madison
----------------------------------------------------------------
During the week of May 11, 2009 through May 15, 2009, about 13
new asbestos lawsuits were filed in Madison County Circuit
Court, Ill., The Madison St. Clair Record reports.

These suits are:

-- (Case No. 09-L-497) Frank and Barbara Anne Autry of
   California claim Mr. Autry developed mesothelioma after his
   work as a plumber, water well driller and welder. The Autrys
   claim Mr. Autry also performed home reconstruction work and
   worked at a shipyard for Oakland Naval Supply. Elizabeth V.
   Heller, Esq., and Robert Rowland, Esq., of Goldenberg,
   Heller, Antognoli and Rowland in Edwardsville, Ill.,
   represent the Autrys.

-- (Case No. 09-L-485) Jorge Cardenas of New Jersey claims his
   deceased wife, Raysa Cardenas, developed mesothelioma after
   her work as a gate agent at Continental Airlines. The suit
   says that Mrs. Cardenas was also secondarily exposed to
   asbestos through her father, who worked at a local auto parts
   store. Randy L. Gori, Esq., and Barry Julian, Esq., of Gori,
   Julian and Associates in Alton, Ill., represent Mr. Cardenas.

-- (Case No. 09-L-418) Edna Cordy claims her deceased husband,
   Lee L. Cordy, developed mesothelioma after his work as an
   apprentice operating crane engineer, residential construction
   worker and auto mechanic worker. Randy L. Gori, Esq., of
   Gori, Julian and Associates in Alton, Ill., represents Mrs.
   Cordy. W. Mark Lanier, Esq., Patrick N. Haines, Esq., R.
   Craig Bullock, Esq., Erik P. Karst, Esq., and Sara A. Morton,
   Esq., of The Lanier Law Firm in Houston will serve of
   counsel.

-- (Case No. 09-L-494) William Downey of Kentucky, an operator
   and factory worker, claims lung cancer. Robert Phillips,
   Esq., Perry J. Browder, Esq., and Rosalind M. Robertson,
   Esq., of SimmonsCooper in East Alton, Ill., represent Mr.
   Downey.

-- (Case No. 09-L-484) Joseph and Amalia Horvath of Ohio claim
   Mr. Horvath developed mesothelioma after his work as a box
   assembler, laborer, maintenance worker, roofer and tool and
   dye worker. He says he also conducted his own home and auto
   maintenance repairs. Randy L. Gori, Esq., and Barry Julian,
   Esq., of Gori, Julian and Associates in Edwardsville, Ill.,
   represent the Horvaths.

-- (Case No. 09-L-495) Ralph W. Millsaps of Colorado, a
   handyman, farmer, meatcutter, machinist, sheet metal worker,
   welder, heavy equipment mechanic, maintenance man, freelance
   auto mechanic and handyman, claims mesothelioma. Randy L.
   Gori, Esq., of Gori, Julian and Associates in Alton, Ill.,
   represents Mr. Millsaps. W. Mark Lanier, Esq., Patrick N.
   Haines, Esq., R. Craig Bullock, Esq., and J. Kyle Beale,
   Esq., of The Lanier Law Firm in Houston will serve of
   counsel.

-- (Case No. 09-L-481) Carleties Mitchell of Illinois, a
   laborer, mechanic and truck driver, claims lung cancer. Myles
   L. Epperson, Esq., of SimmonsCooper in East Alton, Ill.,
   represents Mr. Mitchell.

-- (Case No. 09-L-482) Jean Nagy of Michigan claims her deceased
   father, John Bunjac, developed mesothelioma after his work as
   a design engineer. Randy S. Cohn, Esq., of SimmonsCooper in
   East Alton, Ill., represent Mrs. Nagy.

-- (Case No. 09-L-492) Paul Post, a welder from Arkansas, claims
   mesothelioma. Robert Phillips, Esq., Perry J. Browder, Esq.,
   and Rosalind M. Robertson, Esq., of SimmonsCooper in East
   Alton, Ill., represent Mr. Post.

-- (Case No. 09-L-493) Robert E. Shelton of Arkansas, a laborer
   at various locations, claims lung cancer. Robert Phillips,
   Esq., Perry J. Browder, Esq., and Rosalind M. Robertson,
   Esq., of SimmonsCooper in East Alton, Ill., represent Mr.
   Shelton.

-- (Case No. 09-L-496) Donna Teague of Kentucky claims her
   deceased father, Isaac Moore, developed lung cancer after his
   work as a laborer and mechanic. Randy L. Gori, Esq., and
   Barry Julian, Esq., of Gori, Julian and Associates in
   Edwardsville, Ill., represent Mrs. Teague.

-- (Case No. 09-L-491) Vera Jean Trammell-Wallace of Montana
   claims her deceased husband, Russell Wallace, developed
   mesothelioma after his work as a rigger, coppersmith and
   pipefitter. Robert Phillips, Esq., Perry J. Browder, Esq.,
   and Rosalind M. Robertson, Esq., of SimmonsCooper in East
   Alton, Ill., represent Mrs. Wallace.

-- (Case No. 09-L-488) John Zeller, a nurse and administrator
   from Florida, claims mesothelioma. Brian J. Cooke, Esq., of
   SimmonsCooper in East Alton, Ill., represents Mr. Zeller.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Leleux Suit Filed v. 49 Defendants in Texas
----------------------------------------------------------------
Alicia Kay Prichard, on behalf of Clevines Leleux, filed an
asbestos-related lawsuit against 49 defendant corporations in
Jefferson County District Court, Tex., on May 28, 2009, The
Southeast Texas Record reports.

Ms. Prichard claims that Mr. Leleux developed an asbestos-
related disease during the course of his work as an insulator,
painter, and laborer.

Defendants include A.O. Smith Corp., American Cyanamid, American
Optical Corporation, AMETEK Inc., Anco Insulations, A.W.
Chesterton Co., Bacock Borsig Power, Bayer Cropscience AG,
Bechtel Corp., CBS Corporation, Crane Co., Fluor Enterprises,
Foster Wheeler AG, General Electric Company, Ingersoll-Rand
Company Limited, Uniroyal, Goodrich Tire, and Zurn Industries.

Ms. Prichard alleges the defending companies failed to
adequately warn Mr. Leleux of the dangers of asbestos exposure,
according to the lawsuit.

Ms. Prichard claims the companies also negligently failed to
test the products to determine hazards associated with them and
failed to remove their products from the market.

Ms. Prichard seeks unspecified actual and exemplary damages,
plus costs, pre- and post-judgment interest and other relief to
which she is entitled.

Bryan O. Blevins Jr., Esq., and Colin D. Moore, Esq., of Provost
Umphrey Law Firm in Beaumont, Tex., represent Ms. Prichard.

Case No. E184-168 has been assigned to Judge Donald Floyd, 172nd
District Court.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Exposure Lawsuits Ongoing v. Mueller Units
----------------------------------------------------------------
Some of Mueller Water Products, Inc.'s subsidiaries continue to
be defendants in asbestos-related lawsuits.

No other asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the
Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on May 11, 2009.

Based in Atlanta, Mueller Water Products, Inc. operates in three
business segments: Mueller Co., U.S. Pipe and Anvil. Mueller
makes and sells fire hydrants, valves and related products. U.S.
Pipe makes and sells ductile iron pipe, restrained joint
products, fittings and other products. Anvil makes and sells
pipe fittings, couplings, pipe hangers, pipe nipples and related
products.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Liability Actions Still Ongoing v. Bucyrus
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bucyrus International, Inc. is still a co-defendant in numerous
personal injury liability cases alleging damages due to exposure
to asbestos and other substances, according to the Company's
quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on May 11, 2009.

The Company has insurance covering most of these cases and has
various limits of liability depending on the insurance policy
year in question. At the time a liability associated with a case
becomes probable and can be reasonably estimated, the Company
accrues for the liability by a charge to earnings.

For all other cases, an estimate of the costs associated with
the matters cannot be made due to the inherent uncertainties in
the litigation process.

Based in Milwaukee, Bucyrus International, Inc. designs and
manufactures high productivity mining equipment for the
extraction of coal, copper, oil sands, iron ore and other
minerals in mining centers throughout the world. The Company
also provides the aftermarket replacement parts and service for
this equipment.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Hexion Still Subject to Liability Lawsuits
----------------------------------------------------------------
Hexion Specialty Chemicals, Inc. is still involved in asbestos-
related product liability lawsuits.

No other asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the
Company's latest quarterly report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission.

Based in Columbus, Ohio, Hexion Specialty Chemicals, Inc.
produces thermosetting resins, or thermosets. Thermosets are an
ingredient for paints, coatings, glues and other adhesives
produced for consumer or industrial uses.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Katy Ind. Faces 11 Ala. Cases w/ 325 Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Katy Industries, Inc. has been named as a defendant in 11
asbestos lawsuits filed in state court in Alabama by a total of
325 individual plaintiffs.

There are over 100 defendants named in each case. In all 11
cases, the Plaintiffs claim that they were exposed to asbestos
in the course of their employment at a former U.S. Steel plant
in Alabama and, as a result, contracted mesothelioma,
asbestosis, lung cancer or other illness.

The plaintiffs claim that they were exposed to asbestos in
products in the plant that were manufactured by each defendant.
In nine of the cases, Plaintiffs also assert wrongful death
claims.

Based in Bridgeton, Mo., Katy Industries, Inc. manufactures,
imports, and distributes commercial cleaning and storage
products. Its commercial cleaning products are sold to
janitorial/sanitary and foodservice distributors that supply
restaurants, hotels, healthcare facilities and schools. Its
storage products are sold through home improvement and mass
market retail outlets.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Katy Ind. Records 2700 Sterling Fluid Cases
----------------------------------------------------------------
Katy Industries, Inc. says that Sterling Fluid Systems (USA) has
tendered about 2,700 asbestos cases to the Company for defense
and indemnification.

These cases are pending in Michigan, New Jersey, New York,
Illinois, Nevada, Mississippi, Wyoming, Louisiana, Georgia,
Massachusetts, Missouri, Kentucky, and California.

With respect to one case, Sterling has demanded that the Company
indemnify it for a US$200,000 settlement. Sterling bases its
tender of the complaints on the provisions contained in a 1993
Purchase Agreement between the parties whereby Sterling
purchased the LaBour Pump business and other assets from the
Company. Sterling has not filed a lawsuit against the Company in
connection with these matters.

The tendered complaints all purport to state claims against
Sterling and its subsidiaries. The Company and its current
subsidiaries are not named as defendants. The plaintiffs in the
cases also allege that they were exposed to asbestos and
products containing asbestos in the course of their employment.

Each complaint names as defendants many manufacturers of
products containing asbestos, apparently because plaintiffs came
into contact with a variety of different products in the course
of their employment.

Plaintiffs claim that LaBour Pump Company, a former division of
an inactive subsidiary of the Company, and Sterling may have
manufactured some of those products.

With respect to many of the tendered complaints, including the
one settled by Sterling for US$200,000, the Company has taken
the position that Sterling has waived its right to indemnity by
failing to timely request it as required under the 1993 Purchase
Agreement. With respect to the balance of the tendered
complaints, the Company has elected not to assume the defense of
Sterling in these matters.

Based in Bridgeton, Mo., Katy Industries, Inc. manufactures,
imports, and distributes commercial cleaning and storage
products. Its commercial cleaning products are sold to
janitorial/sanitary and foodservice distributors that supply
restaurants, hotels, healthcare facilities and schools. Its
storage products are sold through home improvement and mass
market retail outlets.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: LaBour Facing 130 Active Actions at April 3
----------------------------------------------------------------
Katy Industries, Inc. says that LaBour Pump Company had about
130 asbestos cases, which remain active as of April 3, 2009,
according to the Company's quarterly report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on May 14, 2009.

LaBour had 120 active asbestos cases as of Dec. 31, 2008. (Class
Action Reporter, April 3, 2009)

LaBour, a former division of an inactive subsidiary of the
Company, has been named as a defendant in about 400 of New
Jersey cases tendered by Sterling Fluid Systems (USA).

The Company has elected to defend these cases, the majority of
which have been dismissed or settled for nominal sums.

Based in Bridgeton, Mo., Katy Industries, Inc. manufactures,
imports, and distributes commercial cleaning and storage
products. Its commercial cleaning products are sold to
janitorial/sanitary and foodservice distributors that supply
restaurants, hotels, healthcare facilities and schools. Its
storage products are sold through home improvement and mass
market retail outlets.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: VWR Funding Still Subject to Product Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
VWR Funding, Inc. is still involved in litigation resulting from
the alleged prior distribution of products containing asbestos
by certain of the Company's predecessors or acquired companies.

No other asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the
Company's quarterly report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on May 14, 2009.

Based in West Chester, Pa., VWR Funding, Inc. provides
distribution services. Products distributed include chemicals,
glassware, equipment, instruments, protective clothing,
production supplies and other assorted laboratory products. The
Company has operations in more than 20 countries and process
about 50,000 order lines daily from more than 20 strategically
located distribution centers.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Precision Castparts Named in Injury Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Precision Castparts Corp. is still a defendant in lawsuits
alleging personal injury as a result of exposure to chemicals
and particulates, including asbestos, integrated into its
premises and processes and certain historical products.

The particulates at issue are no longer incorporated in any
currently manufactured products, and the Company has implemented
safety protocols to reduce exposure to chemicals and remaining
particulates in the workplace.

To date, the Company has been dismissed from a number of these
suits and has settled a number of others, according to the
Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on May 28, 2009.

Based in Portland, Ore., Precision Castparts Corp. manufactures
complex metal components and products, provides high-quality
investment castings, forgings and fasteners/fastener systems for
critical aerospace and industrial gas turbine (IGT)
applications.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: STERIS Still Involved in Exposure Lawsuits
----------------------------------------------------------------
STERIS Corporation is and will likely continue to be involved in
legal proceedings and claims concerning asbestos-related product
exposure.

No other asbestos matters were disclosed in the Company's annual
report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May
29, 2009.

Based in Mentor, Ohio, STERIS Corporation develops,
manufactures, and markets infection prevention, contamination
control, microbial reduction, and surgical and critical care
support products and services for healthcare, pharmaceutical,
scientific, research, industrial, and governmental Customers.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Deere Still Subject to Liability Lawsuits
----------------------------------------------------------------
Deere & Company continues to be subject to various unresolved
legal actions, which arise in the normal course of its business,
the most prevalent of which relate to product liability
(including asbestos-related liability), retail credit, software
licensing, patent and trademark matters.

No other asbestos-related matters were disclosed in the
Company's latest quarterly report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission.

Based in Moline, Ill., Deere & Company makes farm equipment. The
Company also produces construction, forestry, industrial, and
lawn-care equipment.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Graham Still Involved in Exposure Lawsuits
----------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Corporation continues to be a defendant in certain
lawsuits alleging personal injury from exposure to asbestos
contained in products made by the Company, according to the
Company's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on June 2, 2009.

The Company is a co-defendant with numerous other defendants in
these lawsuits. The claims are similar to previous asbestos
suits that named the Company as defendant, which either were
dismissed when it was shown that the Company had not supplied
products to the plaintiffs' places of work or were settled for
minimal amounts below the expected defense costs.

Based in Batavia, N.Y., Graham Corporation designs and
manufactures custom-engineered ejectors, vacuum systems,
condensers, liquid ring pump packages and heat exchangers.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Met-Pro Facing 61 Pending Cases at April 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
A total of 61 asbestos cases are pending against Met-Pro
Corporation, as of April 30, 2009, compared with 55 cases that
were pending as of Jan. 31, 2009.

Most of the cases as of April 30, 2009 are pending in New York,
Mississippi, and Maryland.

Beginning in 2002, the Company and one of its business units
began to be named as one of many defendants in asbestos-related
lawsuits filed predominantly in Mississippi on a mass basis by
large numbers of plaintiffs against a large number of industrial
companies including those in the pump and fluid handling
industries.

The complaints filed against the Company and this business unit
have been vague, general and speculative, alleging that the
Company, and the business unit, along with the numerous other
defendants, sold unidentified asbestos-containing products and
engaged in other related actions which caused injuries
(including death) and loss to the plaintiffs. More recent cases
typically allege more serious claims of mesothelioma.

The Company's insurers have hired attorneys who are defending
these cases. The Company and the business unit have been
dismissed from or settled a number of these cases. The sum total
of all payments through April 30, 2009 to settle these cases was
US$355,000, all of which has been paid by the Company's insurers
including legal expenses, except for corporate counsel expenses,
with an average cost per settled claim, excluding legal fees, of
about US$24,000.

For the three-month period ended April 30, 2009, ten new cases
were filed against the Company, and the Company was dismissed
from four cases.

Most of the pending cases have not advanced beyond the early
stages of discovery, although a number of cases are on schedules
leading to, or are scheduled for trial.

Based in Harleysville, Pa., Met-Pro Corporation manufactures and
sells product recovery and pollution control equipment for
purification of air and liquids, fluid handling equipment for
corrosive, abrasive and high temperature liquids, and filtration
and purification products.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Corning, Calif., Denies Safety Allegations
----------------------------------------------------------------
The City of Corning, Calif., in a press release dated June 1,
2009, denied allegations that the Kauffman building on 712 Fifth
St., and demolished in 2007, contained asbestos, the Daily News
reports.

The City conducted an investigation over the building's
demolition after resident Dean Cofer asked for one at the May
26, 2009 City Council meeting.

As part of the investigation, Building Official Terry Hoofard
contacted former Building Official Jack Alexander and Tehama
County Air Resources Board Inspector Joe Sunday.

The original charges that the building, also the former
Alcoholics Anonymous building, contained asbestos date back to a
complaint from the owner of a nearby business, the release said.

A May 29, 2009 letter from Alan Abbs, Tehama County air
pollution control officer, said Mr. Sunday had inspected the
premises at the time and found no building materials containing
asbestos.

The release said Tehama County Environmental Health is notified
of all attempts to dispose of contaminated building material at
the Tehama County Landfill and that all loads, including fill
dirt, are inspected before coming into the landfill.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Cleanup Costs of Plymouth Bldg. at $220,445
----------------------------------------------------------------
Asbestos abatement costs for the 1820s Courthouse at Plymouth
County, Mass., are estimated at US$220,445, give or take
US$44,000, the GateHouse News Service reports.

An environmental assessment of the Courthouse property and the
Plymouth County Commissioner's building estimates it would cost
US$626,360 (plus or minus US$60,000) to clean up both
properties.

The costs of asbestos abatement for the commissioner's building
is estimated at US$82,420 (give or take US$16,000).

Atlantic Environmental Technologies Inc., of New Bedford, Mass.,
estimates the total cost of environmental restoration of the
Courthouse at US$391,945 (plus or minus US$44,000) and the total
cost of restoring the commissioner's building at US$234,415
(plus or minus US$16,000).

Plymouth Redevelopment Authority Executive Director Laura
Schaefer said "due diligence" has revealed that the cost of
restoring the two buildings is greater than anticipated. They
are in good shape structurally, she added, but three underground
storage tanks need to be removed and the amount of asbestos and
lead detected far exceeds expectations.

Ms. Schaefer recommends, on behalf of herself and the Plymouth
Redevelopment Authority, the town offer no more than US$810,000
for the property based on an appraisal.

Ms. Schaefer said the presence of asbestos in caulking and tiles
and wrapped around heating elements was expected, but asbestos
found in all the plaster in the 1962 Courthouse addition, in the
small courtroom in the commissioner's building, and in the dirt
floor area of the Courthouse was not.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Inquest Rules on Royal Navy Worker's Death
----------------------------------------------------------------
An inquest at Bradford Coroner's Court heard that the death of
83-year-old Walter Wain, a widower and a former World War II
Royal Navy hero, was linked to exposure to asbestos, the
Telegraph & Argus reports.

Mr. Wain died on March 12, 2009 at the Sherrington House Nursing
Home in Heaton Road, Bradford, England, after suffering
pneumonia caused by breathing in asbestos fibers and dust 50
years ago.

Mr. Wain, who had been present at the allied victory
celebrations following the defeat of the Japanese, contracted
mesothelioma after working for Empire Stores.

Mr. Wain had been employed as a manager in the Company's
warehouse and had been exposed to "snow showers" of the material
while visiting colleagues in its boiler room, the inquest heard.

In a statement given before his death, Mr. Wain said he
remembered contractors, wearing white suits and masks, clearing
asbestos from the warehouse boiler room.

Coroner Roger Whittaker said, "He (Mr. Wain) describes how
frequently he would go down to talk to the people in the boiler
room and clearly, he would have been exposed to asbestos because
of that."

In the statement, Mr. Wain said, "Sometimes we had to wait while
the dust settled until we could see each other to have a
conversation. There was a snow shower of dust." He was also
exposed to smaller amounts of asbestos in the Navy.

The court heard Mr. Wain and other servicemen used to hang their
hammocks from an asbestos-clad pipe, causing dust to escape into
the air, according to a statement by his sister Frances Moran.

A post mortem examination carried out by Dr. Faisal Ali on March
16, 2009 showed damage caused by asbestos fibers on Mr. Wain's
left lung.

The cause of death was pneumonia as a result of malignant
mesothelioma, an industrial disease caused by asbestos exposure,
Dr. Ali said.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Otford Resident's Death Linked to Exposure
----------------------------------------------------------------
A May 28, 2009 inquest at Tunbridge Wells Coroners Court heard
that the death of 77-year-old Eric Prosser, a pensioner from
Otford, Kent, England, was linked to exposure to asbestos,
thisiskent.co.uk reports.

Mr. Prosser worked in the construction industry for more than 20
years. He died at Hospice in the Weald on Feb. 18, 2009 after
being diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma in November 2008.

Deputy Coroner Christopher Sutton-Mattocks said on the balance
of probabilities Mr. Prosser's death was a result of industrial
disease.

Mr. Prosser, a retired quantity surveyor, suffered from high
blood pressure and gout but was otherwise in good health. His
wife explained it was in July 2007 that they first became aware
of his illness.

The couple was at their French holiday home when Mr. Prosser
called for his wife. She found him lying breathless on the
floor, unable to get up. Mr. Prosser was taken to hospital and
told he had suffered a collapsed lung. He was then asked if he
had much exposure to asbestos.

Mr. Prosser was discharged from hospital in France but became
lethargic, sleepy and breathless. Mrs. Prosser said, "He lost a
terrific amount of weight. It was obvious something was the
matter."

When the diagnosis was made in November 2008, Mr. Prosser was
told he was not strong enough for chemotherapy.


ASBESTOS ALERT: Certified Environmental Accused of Cleanup Fraud
----------------------------------------------------------------
Certain employees of Certified Environmental Services, Inc., on
May 28, 2009, have been indicted of falsifying laboratory
results on asbestos cleanup across Central New York, the
Observer-Dispatch reports.

The 16-count indictment names Barbara DuChene as the "owner" of
CES, the Company's vice president of laboratory operations and
laboratory manager.

The indictment accuses Ms. DuChene, four employees of CES, and a
supervisor for an asbestos abatement company of conspiring to
violate several government regulations and to commit mail fraud
from 1999 to 2007.

According to the indictment, by allegedly creating false air-
test reports, employees of the CES air-monitoring company misled
the owners of homes, schools and businesses into believing that
their buildings would be safe to occupy. In some cases, asbestos
debris was actually left behind and not properly disposed of.

Ms. DuChene is named in an allegation in one paragraph of the
indictment, which accuses her and other CES employees of
conspiring to allow air-sample tests to be conducted by analysts
who were not fully trained.

Ms. DuChene has yet to be arraigned on the charges in U.S.
District Court in Syracuse, N.Y.


                            *********

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  * * *