/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/090611.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Thursday, June 11, 2009, Vol. 11, No. 114 Headlines AMC ENTERTAINMENT: "Bateman" Case Remains Stayed Pending Appeal AVX CORP: Property Damage Suit Remains Pending in South Carolina CALLWAVE INC: Reached Deal on Stockholder Litigation Last May 28 CHEMICAL COS: Pennsylvania Judge Mulls Deal in Price-Fixing MDL DE BEERS: JVC Seeks to Uphold Approval of Diamond Settlement DOLLAR FINANCIAL: Announces Expected Settlement in Ontario Case FINANCIAL SECURITY: Consolidated Antitrust Breach Suit Pending FINANCIAL SECURITY: Defends Suit Over Jefferson County's Debts FORD MOTOR: Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of "Kearns" Lawsuit GENERAL MILLS: Calif. Judge Dismisses Suit Over "Cap'n Crunch" INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES: Final Settlement Hearing Set for July 29 INTEGRATED DEVICE: Consolidated SRAM Antitrust Suit in Discovery KBR INC: Faces Tex. Lawsuit Over Burn Pits in Iraq, Afghanistan MARVELL TECHNOLOGY: Reaches Settlement in Shareholder Lawsuit MONTEREY COUNTY: Faces Calif. Lawsuit Over Public Records Fees RBS GLOBAL: Units Face 12 Lawsuits Over Crimp Fittings Failure SAVE MART: Settles Calif. Suit Over Customers' Credit Card Forms TEXAS WINDSTORM: Faces Fraud Suit Over Insurance Policy Reversal THINKORSWIM GROUP: Ill. Consolidated Amended Suit Deal Pending THINKORSWIM GROUP: Settlement of Bordeleau Suit Pending Approval UNITED PARCEL: Wins Dismissal of Canadian Suit Over Duties, Fees YTB INT'L: Ill. Court Dismisses Most Claims in Agents' Lawsuit * Mo. Judge's Ruling Fuels Meltdown in Organic Dairy Industry New Securities Fraud Cases POPULAR INC: Izard Nobel Announces Securities Fraud Suit Filing ********* AMC ENTERTAINMENT: "Bateman" Case Remains Stayed Pending Appeal --------------------------------------------------------------- The lawsuit styled "Michael Bateman v. American Multi-Cinema, Inc. Case No. CV07-00171," which names as defendant AMC Entertainment, Inc., remains stayed pending the plaintiff's appeal on the denial of his renewed motion for class certification of the case. The suit was filed in January 2007, before the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, alleging violations of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act. FACTA provides in part that neither expiration dates nor more than the last five numbers of a credit or debit card may be printed on electronic receipts given to customers. It imposes significant penalties upon violators where the violation is deemed to have been willful. Otherwise damages are limited to actual losses incurred by the cardholder. The plaintiff is seeking an order certifying the case as a class action as well as statutory and punitive damages in an unspecified amount. On Oct. 31, 2007, the District Court denied the plaintiff's motion for class certification without prejudice pending the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit's decision in an appeal from a denial of certification in a similar FACTA case. On June 3, 2008, the President of the United States of America signed the FACTA reform bill. The bill specifies that if a company printed the expiration date on credit card receipts, but otherwise complied with FACTA, it did not willfully violate the law. The legislation does not specifically address the situation where more than five digits of the credit card are printed on a receipt. The Ninth Circuit appeal was subsequently dismissed after the parties reached a settlement. On Oct. 24, 2008, the District Court denied plaintiff's renewed motion for class certification. Plaintiff has appealed this decision. The case is stayed pending this appeal, according to the company's May 20, 2009 Form 10-Q/A filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Jan. 1, 2009. The suit is "Michael Bateman v. Regal Cinemas Inc. et al., Case No. 2:07-cv-00052-GAF-FMO," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Judge Gary A. Feess, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs are: Gregory N. Karasik, Esq. (greg@spirmoss.com) Ira Spiro, Esq. (ira@spiromoss.com) Spiro Moss Barness 11377 West Olympic Boulevard, 5th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90064 Phone: 310-235-2468 Representing the defendants is: David E. Novitskim, Esq. Thelen Reid Brown Raymans and Steiner 333 South Hope Street, Suite 2900 Los Angeles, CA 90071-3048 Phone: 213-576-8097 Fax: 213-576-8080 AVX CORP: Property Damage Suit Remains Pending in South Carolina ---------------------------------------------------------------- A purported class-action lawsuit over the alleged migration of certain pollutants from AVX Corp.'s South Carolina factory to neighboring properties remains pending, according to the company's May 20, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009. The suit was filed in the South Carolina State Court on Nov. 27, 2007, by certain individuals seeking certification as a class- action suit, which has not yet been determined. In essence, the suit claims that property value had been negatively impacted by alleged migration of certain pollutants from the company's property (Class Action Reporter, Jan. 9, 2009). The suit was removed to the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina. AVX Corp. -- http://www.avx.com/-- is a worldwide manufacturer and supplier of a line of passive electronic components and related products. Virtually all types of electronic devices use the Company's passive component products to store, filter or regulate electric energy. AVX's passive electronic component products include ceramic and tantalum capacitors, film capacitors, varistors and non-linear resistors manufactured in its facilities throughout the world and passive components manufactured by Kyocera Corp. of Japan (Kyocera), its majority stockholder, which owns approximately 71% of AVX's outstanding common stock. The Company also manufactures and sells electronic connectors and inter-connect systems, and distributes and sells certain electronic connectors manufactured by Kyocera. The Company has three segments: Passive Components, Kyocera Electronic Devices Resale and Connectors. CALLWAVE INC: Reached Deal on Stockholder Litigation Last May 28 ---------------------------------------------------------------- CallWave, Inc., on May 28, 2009, reached an agreement in principle with the plaintiffs in two putative class-action suits filed against the company and members of its Board of Directors in the Superior Court in and for Santa Barbara County, California. The complaint in the first action, "Flynn v. Cavins, et. al.," filed on May 14, 2009, as S.B. Superior Court Case No. 1337321, alleges, among other things, that the members of CallWave's Board of Directors violated their fiduciary duties in connection with the proposal to deregister and delist CallWave's common stock and take CallWave private. The complaint in the second action, "Sobel v. CallWave, et. Al," filed on May 18, 2009, as S.B. Superior Court Case No. 1337358, also alleges, among other things, that the members of CallWave's Board of Directors violated their fiduciary duties arising out of their attempt to deregister and delist CallWave's common stock and take CallWave private. Those two actions, together, are referred to as the "Stockholder Litigation." On May 28, 2009, CallWave reached an agreement in principle with the plaintiffs regarding the settlement of the Stockholder Litigation. In connection with the settlement contemplated by that agreement in principle, the lawsuits and all claims asserted therein will be dismissed. According to its May 29, 2009 Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, as part of the settlement, the defendants deny all allegations of wrongdoing. The terms of the settlement contemplated by that agreement in principle require that CallWave make certain additional disclosures related to the proposed going private transaction. The parties also agreed that plaintiffs may seek attorneys' fees and costs up to and including the amount of $165,000, if such fees and costs are approved by the Court. There will be no other payment in connection with the proposed settlement. The agreement in principle further contemplates that the parties will enter into a stipulation of settlement, which will be subject to customary conditions, including Court approval following notice to CallWave's stockholders. CallWave, Inc. -- http://www.callwave.com/-- is an Internet telephony company bridging the gap between the mobile telephone, desktop computer and traditional fax line. The company offers several on-demand Web telephony services and virtual fax services. Its Phone Companion Software (PCS)-based services are delivered on its Enhanced Services Platform, which allows subscribers to manage calls across their existing landline, mobile and Internet networks. Its services enable subscribers to receive, respond and manage calls or faxes on communications devices without requiring them to purchase or install additional hardware, purchase additional telecommunications services, change their phone number, or switch their service provider. CHEMICAL COS: Pennsylvania Judge Mulls Deal in Price-Fixing MDL --------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Timothy J. Savage of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania will soon consider whether to give preliminary approval to a nearly $1 million proposed class- action settlement in multidistrict litigation accusing chemical companies of involvement in a conspiracy to fix and inflate the prices of methyl methacrylate and polymethyl methacrylate, Law360 reports. In an order On June 9, 2009, Judge Savage said he would hold a hearing for preliminary approval to the case, according to the Law360 report. DE BEERS: JVC Seeks to Uphold Approval of Diamond Settlement ------------------------------------------------------------ On June 8, 2009, the Jewelers Vigilance Committee (JVC) filed a brief and motion in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, seeking "friend of the court" status. The brief and motion urge the court to uphold the order approving the settlement of the class action lawsuit filed by jewelers and consumers against De Beers. A small number of consumers, claiming minimal amounts of damages, have appealed the court- approved settlement, thereby substantially delaying the payment of claims. The original claims in the lawsuit that was brought by representatives of consumers and resellers alleged that De Beers acted in a monopolistic manner to control diamond prices. The defendants have not admitted to any such conduct in settling this case. Consumer-appellants claimed a number of procedural defects in reaching the settlement, and challenged the size of the attorney fees granted by the court. JVC does not take any position regarding the specific claims raised by appellants. Suzan Flamm, JVC’s assistant general counsel, was instrumental in the drafting of the brief and motion. JVC filed the brief and motion in response to the harsh economic climate jewelry retailers and manufacturers face. The appeals filed by a small number of consumers who seek minimal damages delays payment of millions in claims to resellers, which could act as an economic stimulus in the jewelry industry. No payments to thousands of consumers and resellers will be made on eligible claims until all appeals are resolved. The class action lawsuit against De Beers was filed on behalf of three classes of purchasers who bought diamonds during the class period: (1) direct purchasers of diamonds — gem- quality rough and polished — who bought from De Beers, or any of its companies or mining competitors, (2) indirect purchasers of gem-quality diamonds for resale and (3) consumers who purchased gem-quality diamonds. Cecilia Gardner, JVC's president, chief executive officer (CEO) and general counsel, said, "Delay in settling the De Beers class action lawsuit can harm JVC members, the jewelry industry and ultimately consumers. While JVC does not take any position regarding the specific claims raised by appellants, it does urge the court to finalize prompt approval of the class action settlement, which will provide much-needed economic stimulus to an industry that is reeling from a distressed economy. Current financial conditions make it very difficult for many jewelers to remain in business. The speedy payment of claims can help JVC members — and many others — to recover at least some of what they allegedly lost as a result of the conduct set out in the lawsuit. The settlements rightfully due jewelry companies and individuals are expected to make a difference at this crucial time. Further delay in payment can cause additional hardship." Eli Haas, JVC's chairman of the board, commented, "As the legal guardian of integrity in the jewelry industry, JVC is eager for the speedy settlement of the De Beers class action lawsuit. JVC's brief and motion cite the challenging economic times jewelers continue to face, and outline for the court the critical need for capital to stimulate the jewelry industry at this time. JVC urges the court to approve the settlement so that the process of calculating claims and distributing funds will not be delayed." Check JVC's website, www.jvclegal.org, to view a copy of the brief and motion filed by JVC and for further information regarding the De Beers class action lawsuit. DOLLAR FINANCIAL: Announces Expected Settlement in Ontario Case --------------------------------------------------------------- Dollar Financial Corp. (NASDAQ: DLLR), a leading international financial services company serving unbanked and under-banked consumers, commented today on the expected settlement of its Ontario class action litigation, in which the plaintiffs claimed that the business model used by the Company's Canadian subsidiary, National Money Mart Company (NMMC), resulted in the collection of fees in excess of the statutory limit for the payday loans made since 1997 to a group of NMMC's customers. In connection with this settlement, Jeff Weiss, the Company's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer stated, "The Government of Ontario is expected to implement balanced regulation in 2009, with National Money Mart already being one of the first companies in Ontario to be licensed under the Payday Loans Act of 2008. Now is a prudent time to put the past behind us and focus management attention on the new business model we expect to implement under the new Act, and the potential future opportunities this Act should provide." Mr. Weiss continued, "While we admit no wrong doing and are comfortable that our Canadian payday loan business model operates within the guidelines of all legal jurisdictions, this settlement will allow us to avoid the continuing substantial litigation expense that would be expected, as well as the significant drain on management resources being devoted in defense of this claim. We also expect that the defaulted debt forgiveness and transaction credits will be welcomed by customers, allowing them access to NMMC's full suite of needed financial products. This would include many customers who may not have been using NMMC services recently, as a result of outstanding historical indebtedness to the company that will now be forgiven." The Summary Settlement Agreement includes: 1. Periodic payments over the next two years aggregating C$27.5 million in cash, consisting of: a. C$7.5 million paid to Plaintiff’s counsel in trust upon signing the Summary Settlement Agreement, b. C$2.5 million upon final approval of the settlement by the Court, c. C$10.0 million to be paid on July 15, 2010, and d. C$7.5 million to be remitted on July 15, 2011. 2. NMMC will release approximately C$43.0 million of defaulted indebtedness of class members that has built up since 1997, and which is still outstanding as of the date the settlement is approved by the Court. NMMC will take steps to notify all such class members that, as a result of this defaulted debt amnesty program, they will be returned to a status in good standing at any Money Mart location throughout Canada. 3. NMMC will provide C$30.0 million in transaction credits for this broad group of customers, which can be applied in C$5.00 increments to future product transactions on most of NMMC's products. The settlement agreement still requires final Court approval and there can be no assurance that this agreement and the proposed settlement terms will receive such approval. The Company expects to record a charge of C$27.5 million associated with the scheduled cash payments, and an additional amount that will be based on the expected value of the transaction credits utilized under the settlement provisions. For financial statement purposes, the Company’s loss provisioning policy requires that defaulted debt over six months of age is fully provisioned against in the Company's financial statements. Dollar Financial Corp. -- http://www.dfg.com-- is a leading diversified international financial services company serving unbanked and under-banked consumers. Its customers are typically service sector individuals who require basic financial services but, for reasons of convenience and accessibility, purchase some or all of their financial services from the Company rather than from banks and other financial institutions. To meet the needs of these customers, the Company provides a range of consumer financial products and services primarily consisting of check cashing, short-term consumer loans, pawn lending, Western Union money order and money transfer products, currency exchange, reloadable VISA® and MasterCard® branded debit cards, electronic tax filing, and bill payment services. At March 31, 2009, the Company’s global store network consisted of 1,264 stores, including 1,078 company-operated financial services stores and 186 franchised and agent locations in the United States, Canada, Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom. The financial services store network is the largest network of its kind in each of Canada and the United Kingdom and the second-largest network of its kind in the United States. The Company’s customers, many of whom receive income on an irregular basis or from multiple employers, are drawn to the convenient neighborhood locations, extended operating hours and high- quality customer service. The Company’s financial products and services, principally check cashing, money transfer, and short- term consumer loan programs, provide immediate access to cash for living expenses or other needs. FINANCIAL SECURITY: Consolidated Antitrust Breach Suit Pending -------------------------------------------------------------- A consolidated class-action complaint against Financial Security Assurance Holdings, Ltd. for alleged violations of antitrust laws in connection with the bidding of municipal guaranteed investment contracts and derivatives remains pending, according to the company's May 20, 2009 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended March 31, 2009. Between March and July 2008, seven putative class-action suits were filed in federal court alleging antitrust violations in the municipal derivatives industry; an eighth was filed later in July 2008. Five of these cases name both the Company and FSA: -- "Hinds County, Mississippi et al. v. Wachovia Bank, N.A. et al., Case No. 08 CV 2516," filed on March 12, 2008, before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York; -- "Fairfax County, Virginia et al. v. Wachovia Bank, N.A., et al., Case No. 08-cv-00432," filed on March 12, 2008, before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia; -- "Central Bucks School District, Pennsylvania v. Wachovia Bank N.A.," filed on June 4, 2008 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Case No. 1:08-cv- 956, transferred to the S.D.N.Y. as Case No. 1:08-cv- 6342; -- "Mayor & City Counsel of Baltimore, Maryland v. Wachovia Bank N.A.," filed on July 3, 2008 in the S.D.N.Y., Case No. 1:08-cv-6142; and -- "Washington County, Tennessee v. Wachovia Bank N.A.," filed on July 14, 2008 in the S.D.N.Y., Case No. 1:08- cv-6304. Three of the cases name the Company only: -- "City of Oakland, California, v. AIG Financial Products Corp.," filed on April 23, 2008 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Case No. 3:08-cv-2116, transferred to the S.D.N.Y. as Case No. 1:08-cv-6340; -- "County of Alameda, California v. AIG Financial Products Corp.," filed on July 8, 2008 in the N.D. Cal., Case No. 3:08-cv-3278, transferred to the S.D.N.Y. as Case No. 1:08-cv-7034; and -- "City of Fresno, California v. AIG Financial Products Corp.," filed on July 17, 2008, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, Case No. 1.08-cv-1045, transferred to the S.D.N.Y. as Case No. 1:08-cv-7355. These cases have been coordinated and consolidated for pretrial proceedings in the S.D.N.Y. as "In re Municipal Derivatives Antitrust Litigation, Case No. 1:08-cv-2516 (MDL 1950)." Interim lead counsel for the MDL 1950 plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint in August 2008 alleging violations of the federal antitrust laws. Defendants filed motions to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint. The Plaintiffs Oakland, Alameda, and Fresno also allege violations under California law, and the MDL 1950 court has determined that it will handle federal claims alleged in the Consolidated Complaint before addressing state claims. The complaints in these lawsuits generally seek unspecified monetary damages, interest, attorneys' fees and other costs. In April 2009, the MDL 1950 court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss on the federal claims, but granted leave for the plaintiffs to file a second amended complaint. New York-based Financial Security Assurance Holdings, Ltd. -- http://www.fsa.com/-- through its subsidiary, Financial Security Assurance, Inc. provides guaranty insurance on municipal bonds and asset-backed obligations. The company insures new issues and those already trading in the secondary market; it also writes portfolio insurance for securities held by investment funds. The company is licensed as a guaranty insurer in the U.S. and in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands; it also operates in Europe and the Pacific Rim. FINANCIAL SECURITY: Defends Suit Over Jefferson County's Debts -------------------------------------------------------------- Financial Security Assurance Holdings, Ltd. continues to defend a class action complaint relating to Jefferson County, Alabama's problems meeting debt obligations, according to the company's May 20, 2009 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended March 31, 2009. In August 2008, a number of financial institutions and other parties, including FSA, were named as defendants in a civil action brought in the circuit court of Jefferson County, Alabama relating to the County's problems meeting its debt obligations on its $3.2 billion sewer debt: Charles E. Wilson vs. JPMorgan Chase & Co et al (filed on or about Aug. 8, 2008 in the Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Alabama), Case No. 01-CV-2008- 01907.00, a putative class action. The action was brought on behalf of rate payers, tax payers and citizens residing in Jefferson County, and alleges conspiracy and fraud in connection with the issuance of the County's debt. The complaint in this lawsuit seeks unspecified monetary damages, interest, attorneys' fees and other costs. New York-based Financial Security Assurance Holdings, Ltd. -- http://www.fsa.com/-- through its subsidiary, Financial Security Assurance, Inc. provides guaranty insurance on municipal bonds and asset-backed obligations. The company insures new issues and those already trading in the secondary market; it also writes portfolio insurance for securities held by investment funds. The company is licensed as a guaranty insurer in the U.S. and in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands; it also operates in Europe and the Pacific Rim. FORD MOTOR: Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of "Kearns" Lawsuit --------------------------------------------------------------- O'Melveny & Myers LLP achieved a significant victory on behalf of Ford Motor Company on June 8, 2009 when the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a class action brought against automaker. Newport Beach partner Thomas Riordan and counsel Molly Magnuson were the principal architects of the brief and arguments. They were assisted by associate Jillian Allen, paralegal Charmy Harker, and legal assistant Terry Grossman. The lawsuit, "Kearns v. Ford," was brought by a purchaser of a Certified Pre-Owned (CPO) Ford vehicle who alleged that Ford promoted and advertised the CPO program by claiming that CPO vehicles received a more rigorous inspection than typical used vehicles, and therefore were more reliable, more roadworthy, and safer than other used vehicles. According to the plaintiff, these statements were misleading because CPO vehicles were purportedly no different than other used vehicles, yet Ford and its "co-conspirator" dealers charged a premium for CPO vehicles. Plaintiffs asserted two claims, one under California's Business and Professions Code and the other under California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act. The plaintiff originally filed in California State Court, but O'Melveny removed the case to federal court for diversity jurisdiction. The plaintiff sought remand back to state court under the "local controversy exception" of the Class Actions Fairness Act of 2005, but in one of the earliest federal court decisions to address this exception, the district court denied remand. The trial court dismissed the plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint for failing to meet the heightened pleading standards of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b). The Ninth Circuit affirmed on those grounds, stating that in federal court any claims that "sound in fraud" – and these include UCL and CLRA claims – must be plead with sufficient particularity if they are based on a fraud theory. For more details, contact: Thomas Riordan, Esq. (triordan@omm.com) Molly Magnuson, Esq. (mmagnuson@omm.com) 610 Newport Center Drive, 17th Floor Newport Beach, CA 92660 Phone: +1-949-823-7167 or +1-949-823-6907 Fax: +1-949-823-6994 Web site: http://www.omm.com/ GENERAL MILLS: Calif. Judge Dismisses Suit Over "Cap'n Crunch" -------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Morrison England of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California dismissed a lawsuit filed by a San Diego woman who said she ate Cap'n Crunch cereal for years thinking "crunchberries" were real fruit, according to a posting at http://www.attorneyatlaw.com. Janine Sugawara sued General Mills, the maker of Cap'n Crunch, for fraud for claiming the colored balls of sugary cereal sprayed with strawberry juice concentrate were fruit. She claims in her suit that she only noticed the true nature of the cereal after eating it for four years. On May 21, 2009, Judge England dismissed Ms. Sugawara's suit ruling that she had failed to prove her legal case against General Mills, a posting at http://www.attorneyatlaw.comstates. In his ruling, the judge states, "A reasonable consumer would not be deceived into believing that the product in the instant case contained a fruit that does not exist. So far as this Court has been made aware, there is no such fruit growing in the wild or occurring naturally in any part of the world." The judge also ruled that Ms. Sugawara's suit, which had sought class-action status to seek damages on behalf of all others who were similarly tricked, had failed to establish that she relied on General Mills' fraudulent claims in eating Cap'n Crunch thinking it contained real fruit. "Plaintiff did not explain why she could not reasonably have figured this out at any point during the four years she alleged she bought Cap'n Crunch with Crunchberries in reliance on defendant's fraud," according to the judge. INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES: Final Settlement Hearing Set for July 29 ---------------------------------------------------------------- A final hearing on the proposed settlement of a securities law class action captioned Mallozzi v. Industrial Enterprises of America, Inc., et al., Case No.: 07- CV-10321, is scheduled for July 29, 2009. The company was named as a defendant in a securities law class action brought in the federal court for the Southern District of New York in November 2007. The case was filed by a purported class of persons who purchased the company's common stock during the period Dec. 4, 2006 through Nov. 7, 2007. Plaintiffs allege that the company and its co-defendants (several of the company's officers who are no longer with IEA) made fraudulent misrepresentations and omissions about its financial condition that caused the plaintiffs to purchase the company's stock and to suffer damages. The company filed a motion to dismiss those claims, and prior to a Court ruling on the motion to dismiss, the parties agreed to settle the case for $3.8 million, with the proceeds of the settlement being paid to plaintiffs by the Company's insurer. On April 16, 2009, the Southern District of New York preliminarily approved that settlement and directed that notice of the settlement be sent to class members. On May 1, 2009, the company filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 11 of the Federal Bankruptcy Code, according to its May 29, 2009 Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. New York-based Industrial Enterprises of America, Inc. (IEA) is a holding company that operates through four wholly owned subsidiaries: EMC Packaging, Inc. (EMC), Unifide Industries Limited Liability Company (Unifide), Todays Way Manufacturing, LLC (Todays Way) and Spinwell Holding Company, LLC (Spinwell). In April 2007, the company acquired Hi-Tach Oil, Co., Inc. INTEGRATED DEVICE: Consolidated SRAM Antitrust Suit in Discovery ---------------------------------------------------------------- The consolidated case captioned, "In re Static Random Access Memory (SRAM) Antitrust Litigation," is in discovery, according to Integrated Device Technology, Inc.'s May 20, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended March 29, 2009. On Oct. 24, 2006, the company was served with a civil antitrust complaint filed by Reclaim Center, Inc., as plaintiffs in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the Company and 37 other entities on behalf of a purported class of indirect purchasers of Static Random Access Memory (SRAM) products. The Complaint alleges that the Company and other defendants conspired to raise the prices of SRAM, in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, the California Cartwright Act, and several other states' antitrust, unfair competition, and consumer protection statutes. Shortly thereafter, a number of other plaintiffs filed similar complaints. Given the similarity of the complaints, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation transferred the cases to a single judge in the Northern District of California and consolidated the cases for pretrial proceedings in February 2007. The consolidated cases are captioned, "In re Static Random Access Memory (SRAM) Antitrust Litigation," (Class Action Reporter, Sept. 6, 2007). In August 2007, direct purchasers of SRAM and indirect purchasers of SRAM filed separate Consolidated Amended Complaints. The company was not named as a defendant in either complaint. Pursuant to tolling agreements with the indirect and direct purchaser plaintiffs, the statute of limitations was tolled until Jan. 10, 2009 as to potential claims against the company. The tolling agreements have now expired and the statute of limitations is running on potential claims against the company. Both cases are in the discovery stage. Integrated Device Technology, Inc. -- http://www.idt.com/-- designs, develops, manufactures and markets a range of semiconductor solutions for the advanced communications and computing industries. The company operates in three business segments: Networking, Timing and Memory Interface, and Standard Products and Other. The Networking segment includes network search engines (NSEs), switching solutions, integrated communications processors, flow-control management (FCM) devices, first-in/first out (FIFOs), and multi-ports. The Timing and Memory Interface segment includes clock management, dual in-line memory modules (DIMM) support and other timing solution products. The Standard Products and Other segment include high-speed static random access memory (SRAM), military applications, digital logic products, telecommunications and video products. On July 31, 2006, the company acquired the PC Audio business from SigmaTel, Inc. KBR INC: Faces Tex. Lawsuit Over Burn Pits in Iraq, Afghanistan --------------------------------------------------------------- KBR, Inc., Kellogg Brown & Root LLC, Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc., and Halliburton Co. are facing a purported class-action lawsuit filed by six people from Texas, including some soldiers, who claim they were poisoned by toxins and emissions from burn pits at U.S. camps in Iraq and Afghanistan, The San Antonio Express reports. The suit, moved to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas from state court on May 29, 2009 was filed on behalf of Robert Cain of San Marcos; Craig Henry of San Antonio; Francis Jaeger of Haltom City; David McMenomy of Lampasas; Mark Posz of San Antonio; and El Kevin Sar of Houston. Captioned, "Cain et al v. KBR, Inc. et al., Case No. 5:2009-cv- 00435," it alleges the companies operated the large war-zone pits and burned waste since 2004 that included trucks, tires, plastic water bottles, medical waste, hazardous materials, animal carcasses, and even human corpses, according to The San Antonio Express report. Generally, the suit claims burning the waste in open pits — with no safety controls — may have released toxins that harmed at least 100,000 people, including U.S. troops, contractors and civilians, The San Antonio Express reported. Attorneys for the plaintiffs are seeking to make the case a class-action lawsuit, citing evidence that many others are having symptoms or medical conditions that include severe respiratory ailments, asthma, sleep apnea, heart problems, tumors, lymphoma, and leukemia, reports The San Antonio Express. The six plaintiffs exhibited symptoms ranging from acute abdominal pains, chronic respiratory infections, burning sensations in the lungs and persistent cold-like symptoms. Mr. McMenomy had a football-size tumor removed from his hip suspected of being caused by fumes from a burn pit at Camp Al Taji, Iraq, according to the suit, according to The San Antonio Express. For more details, contact: David Ayers Werner Ayers LLP 2000 W. Loop South Suite 1550 Houston, TX 77027 Phone: 713-626-2233 Fax: 713-626-9708 - and - Richard C. Danysh, Esq. (richard.danysh@bgllp.com) Bracewell & Giuliani LLP 800 One Alamo Center 106 S. St. Mary's St. San Antonio, TX 78205-3603 Phone: (210)299-3475 Fax: (210) 299-0106 MARVELL TECHNOLOGY: Reaches Settlement in Shareholder Lawsuit ------------------------------------------------------------- Marvell Technology Group Ltd. (NASDAQ: MRVL) , a world leader in storage, communications and consumer silicon solutions, announced that it had entered into an agreement to resolve a shareholder class action lawsuit filed on August 16, 2007 against Marvell and certain of its former and current officers and directors relating to Marvell's historic stock option granting practices. The settlement provides for a payment by Marvell to the class of $72 million. The agreement was entered into after the end of the first quarter of fiscal 2010, ended May 2, 2009. However, since the litigation existed during the first quarter of fiscal 2010, results for the first quarter have been updated from what was previously reported on May 28, 2009 to adjust for this settlement. The impact of the settlement, recorded as general and administrative expense, changes the GAAP net loss to $111.5 million, or $0.18 per share (diluted), which is a decrease of $0.12 per share (diluted) compared to what was previously reported. Marvell does not typically include one-time litigation settlements when it reports its non-GAAP results, and as a result this expense will not impact Marvell's non-GAAP results of operations previously reported. Included with this release are updated financial tables. This class action settlement is subject to preliminary and then, following notice to class members, final approval by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Final approval of this settlement and the settlement of the shareholder derivative lawsuit announced previously would mark the end of all shareholder litigation involving Marvell related to its historic stock option granting practices. Marvell Technology (NASDAQ: MRVL) -- http://www.marvell.com-- is a global leader in the development of storage, communications and consumer silicon solutions. Marvell's diverse product portfolio includes switching, transceiver, communications controller, wireless, and storage solutions that power the entire communications infrastructure, including enterprise, metro, home, and storage networking. As used in this release, the term "Marvell" refers to Marvell Technology Group Ltd., and its subsidiaries. MONTEREY COUNTY: Faces Calif. Lawsuit Over Public Records Fees -------------------------------------------------------------- The Monterey County Clerk's Office is facing a purported class- action lawsuit for allegedly violating the state Public Records Act, Virginia Hennessey of the Monterey County Herald reports. Attorneys for California Public Records Research Inc. say state law allows local agencies to charge only the actual costs of copying public records, including real estate records maintained by county clerks, according to the Monterey County Herald report. In their class-action lawsuit, filed on June 4, 2009 in Monterey County Superior Court, Clifton Hodges and Donald Ricketts maintain those costs amount to no more than 10 cents per page, reports the Monterey County Herald report. But when they asked for copies of the county's fee schedule, ordinances establishing the fees and any analyses done to determine those costs, they were told the 186 related pages would cost $372, or $2 a page, the Monterey County Herald reported. County Counsel Charles McKee and Clerk-Recorder Steve Vagnini, who is named in the suit, told the Monterey County Herald that when it comes to copying public documents, records in the clerk's and assessor's offices fall under different statutes than the Public Records Act. Mr. McKee further explains that those documents often are not standard 8-by-10-inch records, and the costs to copy them include costs for research, retrieval, and the physical copy. The lawsuit, which also alleges the Board of Supervisors established the copy fees without a required public hearing, asks the court to compel the county to turn over the requested 186 pages for no more than 10 cents per page, an injunction prohibiting the county from seeking excessive fees in the future, and unspecified financial damages, the Monterey County Herald reports. RBS GLOBAL: Units Face 12 Lawsuits Over Crimp Fittings Failure -------------------------------------------------------------- RBS Global, Inc.'s subsidiaries, Zurn Pex, Inc. and Zurn Industries, LLC (formerly known as Zurn Industries, Inc.), as of May 29, 2009, have been named as defendants in twelve lawsuits, brought between July 2007 and April 2009, in various U.S. federal courts (MN, ND, CO, NC, MT, AL, VA, LA and NM). The plaintiffs in these suits seek to represent a class of plaintiffs alleging damages due to the alleged failure or anticipated failure of the Zurn brass crimp fittings on the PEX plumbing systems in homes and other structures. The complaints assert various causes of action, including but not limited to negligence, breach of warranty, fraud, and violations of the Magnuson Moss Act and certain state consumer protection laws, and seek declaratory and injunctive relief, and damages (including punitive damages) in unspecified amounts. The suits were transferred to a multi-district litigation docket in the District of Minnesota for coordinated pretrial proceedings. The company is being provided a defense by its insurance carrier, according to the company's May 29, 2009 Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009. RBS Global, Inc. -- http://www.rexnord.com/-- is a diversified, multi-platform industrial company. Its business is comprised of two platforms: Power Transmission (PT) and Water Management (WM). Its PT product portfolio includes gears, industrial bearings, flattop chain and modular conveyor belts, couplings, aerospace bearings and seals, industrial chain. The products are either incorporated into products sold by original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) or sold to end users through industrial distributors as aftermarket products. The company's PT products are used in the plants and equipment of companies in diverse end-market industries, including aerospace, cement and aggregates, construction, energy, food and beverages and forest and wood products. RBS Global's WM platform is focused on non- residential construction market for water management products. On Feb. 7, 2007, the company acquired the Zurn plumbing products business of Jacuzzi Brands, Inc. from an affiliate of Apollo Management, L.P. SAVE MART: Settles Calif. Suit Over Customers' Credit Card Forms ---------------------------------------------------------------- Save Mart Supermarkets settled a purported class-action lawsuit charging that the chain asked customers filling out credit card forms to include their telephone numbers -- a violation of California civil law aimed at curtailing identity theft, The Modestor Bee reports. Save Mart reportedly was unaware of the law, according to The Modesto Bee report, and while the chain acknowledged the violation, it denied any wrongdoing and contended no member of the class was injured. However, Save Mart decided it was best to settle the suit quickly, the newspaper reported. A Superior Court judge is scheduled to make a decision on the proposed settlement on June 24, 2009. Under the settlement, Save Mart will give away $20 gift cards up to a total of $3.5 million to customers who indicate they used a credit card to purchase merchandise from a Save Mart store between July 2003 and July 2004, without the need to supply receipts or any other proof, The Modesto Bee reported. TEXAS WINDSTORM: Faces Fraud Suit Over Insurance Policy Reversal ---------------------------------------------------------------- Texas Windstorm Insurance Association faces a purported class- action suit that was filed by four Galveston County residents who claim that TWIA, which is the insurer of last resort for 14 coastal counties, committed fraud in the wake of Hurricane Ike, Ned Hibberd of MyFoxHouston.com reports Plaintiffs' attorney Tony Buzbee, Esq., said that TWIA issued a memo two months after the storm, reversing its policy on roofs with non-visible damage, according to the MyFoxHouston.com report. "That basically said that unless there is visible damage -- that is, shingles missing -- they will not pay for the repair of the roof," Mr. Buzbee tells . According to Mr. Buzbee, his clients sustained roof damage when their shingles lost their adhesive seal during Ike. He pointed out that these unadhered shingles void the roof warranty and can lead to leakage, MyFoxHouston.com reported. Mr. Buzbee estimates 80-percent of Galveston County homes sustained such non-visible damage and he is asking the judge to certify his lawsuit as a class-action, potentially including thousands of plaintiffs, reports MyFoxHouston.com. THINKORSWIM GROUP: Ill. Consolidated Amended Suit Deal Pending -------------------------------------------------------------- thinkorswim Group Inc. and TD AMERITRADE Holding Corporation's settlement agreement of a consolidated amended class action complaint in Illinois filed following the announcement of a planned merger is pending court approval. On May 28, 2009, TD AMERITRADE and thinkorswim entered into a memorandum of understanding with the plaintiffs in certain class action lawsuits filed on behalf of thinkorswim's stockholders regarding the settlement of those class action lawsuits that were filed following the announcement of the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of Jan. 8, 2009, between thinkorswim, TD AMERITRADE, Tango Acquisition Corporation One, a wholly-owned subsidiary of TD AMERITRADE ("Merger Sub One"), and Tango Acquisition Corporation Two, a wholly-owned subsidiary of TD AMERITRADE ("Merger Sub Two"). Two purported class-action lawsuits were filed on behalf of thinkorswim's stockholders in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois docketed as "Jonathan Simons v. Tom Sosnoff, et al., Case No. 09CH02970," and "Jim Burns v. thinkorswim Group Inc., et al., Case No. 09CH03435." The complaints name each of the members of thinkorswim's board of directors, thinkorswim, TD AMERITRADE and Merger Sub One as defendants. The lawsuits allege, among other things, that the members of thinkorswim's board of directors breached their fiduciary duties to thinkorswim's stockholders by entering into a merger agreement with TD AMERITRADE for an unfair price and pursuant to an unfair sale process. They also allege that thinkorswim's directors are attempting to obtain personal financial benefits at the expense of thinkorswim's stockholders. The complaints further allege that TD AMERITRADE and Merger Sub One aided and abetted the directors of thinkorswim in the alleged breaches of their fiduciary duties. The complaints were consolidated by court order dated Feb. 25, 2009. On March 5, 2009, plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint. The amended complaints include additional allegations that the Proxy Statement/Prospectus does not disclose certain material information. The consolidated amended complaint also alleges, among other things, that the disclosures regarding the proposed stock option exchange program were insufficient and/or unclear and that the company should have provided separate votes on the two components of the stock option exchange program. The amended complaint seeks, among other relief, certification of a class of all common stockholders of thinkorswim who allegedly were harmed by the defendants' actions challenged in the complaint, preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting consummation of the merger, rescission or damages if the merger is consummated prior to entry of the court's final judgment and payment of the plaintiff's costs and expenses. On May 7, 2009, plaintiff Jonathan Simons voluntarily dismissed his action without prejudice. According to its May 29, 2009 Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, thinkorswim and TD AMERITRADE continue to believe the lawsuits to be without merit. Nevertheless, without admitting any liability or wrongdoing, thinkorswim and TD AMERITRADE have agreed in principle to settle the lawsuits in order to avoid the potential cost and distraction of continued litigation and to eliminate any risk of any delay to the closing of the merger posed by these lawsuits. Such settlement is subject to execution and delivery of definitive documentation, the closing of the merger and court approval. If the settlement becomes effective, the lawsuits will be dismissed with prejudice. thinkorswim Group Inc., -- https://www.thinkorswim.com -- formerly Investools Inc., operates in two segments: Brokerage Services and Investor Education. The company offers online brokerage, investor education and brokerage and related financial products and services for self-directed investors and traders. THINKORSWIM GROUP: Settlement of Bordeleau Suit Pending Approval ---------------------------------------------------------------- thinkorswim Group Inc. and TD AMERITRADE Holding Corporation's settlement agreement of a purported class-action lawsuit styled, "James A. Bordeleau v. thinkorswim Group, Inc., et al." is pending approval. On May 28, 2009, TD AMERITRADE and thinkorswim entered into a memorandum of understanding with the plaintiffs in certain class action lawsuits filed on behalf of thinkorswim's stockholders regarding the settlement of those class action lawsuits that were filed following the announcement of the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of Jan. 8, 2009, between thinkorswim, TD AMERITRADE, Tango Acquisition Corporation One, a wholly-owned subsidiary of TD AMERITRADE ("Merger Sub One"), and Tango Acquisition Corporation Two, a wholly-owned subsidiary of TD AMERITRADE ("Merger Sub Two"). A purported class-action lawsuit was filed on behalf of thinkorswim's stockholders in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, docketed as "James A. Bordeleau v. thinkorswim Group, Inc., et al." The complaint names each of the members of thinkorswim's board of directors and thinkorswim as defendants. The lawsuit alleges, among other things, that the members of thinkorswim's board of directors breached their fiduciary duties to thinkorswim's stockholders by entering into a merger agreement with TD AMERITRADE for an unfair price and pursuant to an unfair sale process. It also alleges that thinkorswim's directors are attempting to obtain personal financial benefits at the expense of thinkorswim's stockholders. The plaintiff filed an amended complaint on March 5, 2009. The amended complaint include additional allegations that the Proxy Statement/Prospectus does not disclose certain material information. The amended complaint seeks, among other relief, certification of a class of all common stockholders of thinkorswim who allegedly were harmed by the defendants' actions challenged in the complaint, preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting consummation of the merger, rescission or damages if the merger is consummated prior to entry of the court's final judgment and payment of the plaintiff's costs and expenses. The defendants have filed a motion to dismiss or stay the New York complaint on the ground that the claims asserted are the subject of the prior, consolidated class action filed in the Illinois court. According to its May 29, 2009 Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, thinkorswim and TD AMERITRADE continue to believe the lawsuits to be without merit. Nevertheless, without admitting any liability or wrongdoing, thinkorswim and TD AMERITRADE have agreed in principle to settle the lawsuits in order to avoid the potential cost and distraction of continued litigation and to eliminate any risk of any delay to the closing of the merger posed by these lawsuits. Such settlement is subject to execution and delivery of definitive documentation, the closing of the merger and court approval. If the settlement becomes effective, the lawsuits will be dismissed with prejudice. thinkorswim Group Inc., -- https://www.thinkorswim.com -- formerly Investools Inc., operates in two segments: Brokerage Services and Investor Education. The company offers online brokerage, investor education and brokerage and related financial products and services for self-directed investors and traders. UNITED PARCEL: Wins Dismissal of Canadian Suit Over Duties, Fees ---------------------------------------------------------------- United Parcel Service Inc. won dismissal of a lawsuit filed by Canadian customers who complained they were improperly charged duties on parcels coming from abroad, Joe Schneider of Bloomberg reports. The suit is captioned, "Robert MacFarlane v. United Parcel Service Canada Ltd., File No. S066788," filed in the Supreme Court of British Columbia. Judge Richard Goegel threw out the plaintiffs' request to certify the case as a class-action lawsuit, or group suit, saying the claim is "doomed to fail" because the issues had been settled in an earlier, unsuccessful, suit against FedEx Corp., known as the Blackman case, according to Bloomberg report. In a June 4, 2009 ruling, Judge Goegel wrote, "I have concluded that the Blackman decision is fatal to the certification application. It is not appropriate nor is there any utility in initiating a class proceeding and subjecting the parties and the court to the costs, delays and complexity of such a proceeding, having regard to the likely outcome," reports Bloomberg. Bloomberg reported that UPS was sued over duties and fees it charges for bringing items across the Canadian border after Robert MacFarlane was charged a total of C$41.09, after having paid on the Internet for an amplification device for telephones from an Arizona-based company. The charges included C$28.30 in customs fees, a C$5.85 disbursement fee and a C$4.25 cash-on- delivery fee. The plaintiff said he wasn't aware he'd be required to pay the charges as a condition of receiving the device, the judge wrote. Just as FedEx did, UPS discloses a lot of information about the requirements that must be met to obtain border clearance, Judge Goegel wrote, according to the Bloomberg report. YTB INT'L: Ill. Court Dismisses Most Claims in Agents' Lawsuit -------------------------------------------------------------- An Illinois federal court granted parts of a motion to dismiss filed by YTB International, Inc. a.k.a. YourTravelBiz in a class-action suit brought against the multilevel marketing travel company by former referring travel agents, who charged that YTB operates as an illegal pyramid scheme, Nadine Godwin of http://www.travelweekly.comreports. The court though did not dismiss the litigation outright. It essentially, dismissed allegations against YTB subsidiary Rezconnect and its CEO, Michael Brent, on grounds that the court did not have jurisdiction over the New Jersey-based business, according to a report by http://www.travelweekly.com. * Mo. Judge's Ruling Fuels Meltdown in Organic Dairy Industry ------------------------------------------------------------- A slowdown in the sales of organic milk and dairy products, attributed in recent articles by the New York Times and other media outlets to the weakened economy, has organic dairy farmers from coast to coast at or near financial collapse. But a worsening scandal in the industry might be doing more to economically injure organic family farmers than the flattening of demand for organic dairy products. Since 2005, a handful of giant factory farms, each milking thousands of cows, have been accused of skirting strict federal organic regulations and creating a surplus of cheap "phony" organic milk flooding the market and driving down profit margins for legitimate industry participants. The Cornucopia Institute estimates that as much as 30-40% of organic milk is now coming from giant industrial operations, milking as many as 7000 cows each. Last week, a judge in federal district court in St. Louis, rejected 19 class-action lawsuits filed by consumers who are claiming fraud in the sale of "organic" milk coming from one of the giant operations. In 2007, federal investigators found the Aurora Dairy had "willfully" violated 14 different federal organic regulations. Consumers in 40 states sued, alleging fraud in the manufacture of organic milk sold as storebrands in Wal-Mart, Target, Safeway, Costco and other national chains served by Aurora. Lawyers representing consumers involved with the class- action lawsuits vow that they will appeal the judge's initial ruling, especially in light of a recent Supreme Court decision that clearly gives citizens the right to sue corporations that allegedly act illegally even though federal regulatory agencies provide statutory authority over certain industries. According to Mark Kastel, the Senior Farm Policy Analyst for The Cornucopia Institute, the dismissal was particularly distressing "because Bush Administration officials had substantially softened USDA penalties recommended by enforcement staff for Aurora’s organic transgressions." Cornucopia first alerted the USDA to Aurora’s violations by filing formal legal complaints with the agency. "The very essence of the checks and balances system in our three branches of government provides for citizens to seek remedy, when regulatory agencies fail to enforce laws passed by Congress" said Gary Cox, a Columbus, Ohio-based attorney with experience in the organic industry. "It is our contention that a judicial review of the alleged misconduct by these giant corporations, and the lack of enforcement by the USDA, is not only appropriate but imperative" The outcome of the pending suits will not only impact consumers but many organic dairy farmers whose livelihoods are now threatened by the giant corporate dairy marketers. A glut of organic milk on the market now has the nation's organic processors attempting to reduce their supply and cutting prices paid to farmers. Dean Foods, the nation's largest milk processor, and owner of the Horizon Organic brand, and H.P. Hood, a giant Boston-based milk bottler, that controls the Stonyfield milk label, have both terminated contracts with farmers or allegedly attempted to strong arm some of them out of business. "I have invested my life in building this dairy farm, and Hood encouraged many dairy producers to make major investments and ramp-up for organic production, now my entire livelihood and the financial future of my family is at risk" said Kevin Poetker who milks 200 cows near Waterloo, IL, 24 miles SE of St. Louis. Even Organic Valley, the farmer-owned cooperative that is second only to Dean Foods in organic milk sales, has cut prices to their members and asked them to reduce their milk production by 7%. "Farmers who build their herds make long-term financial and management decisions, and just shutting off even 7% of their milk is no easy task" Kastel said. Thousands of letters, mostly from organic farmers, have been sent to president Obama and USDA secretary Tom Vilsack asking them to immediately intervene and undertake aggressive enforcement of organic regulations, something lacking during the past administration. The USDA's handling of the Aurora violations is not the only instance where its enforcement actions have gone awry. Other alleged violations have gone uninvestigated by agency staff. Cornucopia has filed several additional complaints, based upon direct observation of practices employed on other huge feedlot dairies owned by Aurora and Dean Foods. "Either the USDA refused to investigate or, when they actually found violations, they have allowed illegal activities to continue" Kastel lamented. "We are now appealing to the Obama administration for a more ethical approach to enforcement in these matters. Congress gave the USDA the responsibility of overseeing the organic industry and now we are happy that some on Capitol Hill are considering launching an investigation into, seemingly, favorable treatment for some corporate players" If there is good news for consumers, it's that they have alternatives in the marketplace. "Consumers seeking authentic, nutritionally superior organic milk have many choices and we hope they will support the family farmers, the heroes who built the organic industry" stated Ronnie Cummins of the Organic Consumers Association. A multi-year research study by The Cornucopia Institute created a scorecard, posted on its website (www.cornucopia.org), rating all 110 organic brands based on their ethical and legal approach to milk production. The study indicates that 90% of organic milk, cheese, butter and yogurt marketers are clearly subscribing to both the "spirit and letter of the organic regulations" "These giant factory farms are a bad aberration. Unfortunately they are associated with a couple of the largest participants in the industry. We need consumers to step up and make careful choices in the supermarket so they reward the true heroes in this industry and send a strong message to the bad actors" Kastel said. "Some organic farmers out there desperately need the help and support of consumers" New Securities Fraud Cases POPULAR INC: Izard Nobel Announces Securities Fraud Suit Filing --------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Izard Nobel LLP, which has significant experience representing investors in prosecuting claims of securities fraud, announces that a lawsuit seeking class action status has been filed in the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico on behalf of those who purchased the securities of Popular, Inc. (NASDAQ: BPOP) between January 23, 2008 and January 22, 2009, inclusive. The Complaint charges that Popular and certain of its officers and directors violated federal securities laws. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that defendants failed to disclose the following material adverse facts, among others: -- that the Company's deferred tax assets related to its U.S. operations were materially overstated; -- that Popular was experiencing increasing loan losses in Puerto Rico and the U.S. construction sectors; -- that the quality of the Company's remaining mortgage- related loans in its U.S. mainland portfolios and other assets were deteriorating and were materially overstated; -- that Popular was experiencing a higher percentage of non-performing loans; -- that the Company's new loan originations were declining; and -- as a result of the foregoing, the Company would soon be facing liquidity concerns and would be forced to cut or eliminate paying a dividend to shareholders. A request for lead plaintiff status must satisfy certain criteria and be made on or before July 13, 2009. For more details, contact: Nancy A. Kulesa, Esq. Wayne T. Boulton, Esq. Izard Nobel LLP Phone: (800) 797-5499 e-mail: firm@izardnobel.com Web site: http://www.izardnobel.com/ ********* A list of Meetings, Conferences and Seminars appears in each Wednesday's edition of the Class Action Reporter. Submissions via e-mail to carconf@beard.com are encouraged. Each Friday's edition of the CAR includes a section featuring news on asbestos-related litigation and profiles of target asbestos defendants that, according to independent research, collectively face billions of dollars in asbestos-related liabilities. ********* S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Frederick, Maryland USA. Glenn Ruel S. Senorin, Stephanie T. Umacob, Gracele D. Canilao, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors. Copyright 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 * * *