CAR_Public/090804.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Tuesday, August 4, 2009, Vol. 11, No. 152
  
                           Headlines

AMERICA SERVICE: Sept. 30 Mediation Session Set for Tenn. Case
AMERICAN INT'L: Faces W.Va. Litigation Over Retirement Accounts
APPLE INC: Faces Mo. Lawsuit Over Multimedia Messaging Service
APPLEBEE'S INT'L: Faces Suit Over Fat, Calorie Content of Foods
ARAMARK SPORTS: Reaches $1.5M Settlement in Fenway Workers' Suit

BLUE CROSS: Sued Over Payments in Hospital Non-Contracted Claims
CBS BROADCASTING: Deal Reached in Suit Over CSI Fingerprint Kits
DOW CHEMICAL: Mich. High Court Reverses Ruling in Dioxin Lawsuit
FEDERAL DEPOSIT: Judge Mulls Consolidation of WaMu Execs' Suits
INTERNATIONAL RECTIFIER: Settles Calif. Securities Fraud Lawsuit

METRO GANG: Faces Minn. Litigation Alleging Racial Profiling
MICROSOFT CORP: Faces Ill. Suit Over Xbox 360 "Design Defect"
NATIONAL CITY: Lawyers Awarded $400,000 in Del. Investors' Suit
PACIFIC GAS: Calif. Judge Approves $17.25M Deal in Overtime Case
STERLING JEWELERS: Still Faces N.Y. Sex Discrimination Lawsuit

SUN CAPITAL: Third Circuit Rules in Jevic Transportation Lawsuit
TATA AMERICA: Ninth Circuit Denies Motion in Calif. Litigation
WELLS FARGO: Faces Racial Discrimination Lawsuit in California

                   New Securities Fraud Cases

INTERNATIONAL GAME: Izard Nobel Announces Nev. Stock Suit Filing
INTERNATIONAL GAME: Kendall Law Group Announces Lawsuit Filing
GENZYME CORP: Izard Nobel LLP Announces Securities Suit Filing
MEDAREX INC: Harwood Feffer Files Securities Fraud Suit in N.J.
SKILLED HEALTHCARE: Catanzarite Law Files Securities Fraud Suit

                           *********

AMERICA SERVICE: Sept. 30 Mediation Session Set for Tenn. Case
--------------------------------------------------------------
The parties in the consolidated securities fraud class-action
lawsuit against America Service Group, Inc., told Judge William
J. Haynes, Jr., of the U.S. District Court for the Middle
District of Tennessee that they have scheduled a mediation
session for Sept. 30, 2009, E. Thomas Wood at the Nashville Post
reports.

The lawsuit was brought on behalf of purchasers of America
Service Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: ASGR) stock between Sept. 24, 2003,
and March 16, 2006 (Class Action Reporter, July 17, 2009).  

The complaint alleges that that America Service Group and its
top executive officers engaged in accounting fraud and violated
the federal securities laws by misleading investors and failing
to disclose that the company:

       -- was not charging its customers in accordance with
          its contracts;

       -- failed to properly credit customers with discounts,
          rebates, and price concessions;

       -- failed to provide customers with appropriate credits
          for returned pharmaceutical products; and

       -- inappropriately established and utilized reserves to
          help it more closely meet budgeted results.

The complaint further alleges that after the markets closed, on
March 15, 2006, America Service Group announced that as a result
of the findings of an internal investigation, it would restate
earnings for the years ended Dec. 31, 2001, through Dec. 31,
2004 and for the first six months of 2005 and issue refunds of
$3.6 million, plus interest, to customers for instances in which
it failed to credit them with discounts, rebates or price
savings to which they were entitled.  On this news about the
lawsuit, the price America Service Group, Inc.'s common stock
fell $5.65, or almost 29%, to close at $13.95 per share.


AMERICAN INT'L: Faces W.Va. Litigation Over Retirement Accounts
---------------------------------------------------------------
     Cheryl Dougherty has filed a purported class-action lawsuit
against American International Group, Inc.; its subsidiaries,
including VALIC; a litany of individual "agents" comprised of
former school administrators, coaches, legislators, and
community leaders recruited by AIG; and the West Virginia
Consolidated Public Retirement Board.

     Harry Bell, Jr., Esq., at Bell & Bands, PLLC --
http://www.belllaw.com-- in Charleston, West Virginia, filed  
the lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Kanawha County.  The action
is captioned Dougherty v. Cerra, et al., CA No. 08-C-2080, and
is assigned to Judge Tod Kaufman (Class Action Reporter, March
27, 2009).

     Mr. Bell said, "Considering AIG's financial state and the
astronomical federal bailout funds it received, its decision to
pay over $165,000,000 in bonuses to a select group of top
executives who are responsible for over $40 billion in losses is
absolutely insane, reckless and totally reprehensible."

     In regard to the West Virginia teachers' suit, Mr. Bell
said, "Over 14,000 teachers and school service personnel in West
Virginia are deeply interested in the debacle that is their
retirement accounts.  Their individual financial well-being was
and continues to be placed at risk due to highly-leveraged,
high-risk credit default swaps of collateralized debt
obligations by AIG.  That is bad enough, but the recent bonus
payments show a total disconnect from reality on the part of
AIG."

     Mr. Bell went on to point out some of the facts of the
situation.  He said, "Here you have AIG being a large part of
the problem for the credit financial meltdown in the country
over the last year and a half, yet they have the audacity to
believe that their senior management is entitled to millions of
dollars in bonuses."

     Mr. Bell added, "Instead of offering to make good on
promises to ensure the retirement future of West Virginia
teachers and school service personnel, who we now know were
taken advantage of by AIG, because those promises were false, by
paying some of that unbelievably huge amount of bonus money to
those who are far more deserving, victims of a scam, AIG has
chosen to handsomely reward its own personnel for what the
entire country knows is a 'job undone.'"

     The claims against the West Virginia Consolidated Public
Employees Retirement Board are being defended by a policy of
insurance purchased through the West Virginia State Board of
Risk and administered and handled by AIG.  In this regard, Mr.  
Bell said, "Does anyone find it terribly ironic that AIG, which
in large part caused this mess, nationally and locally, is also
providing a defense to the State of West Virginia and the State
Auditor who participated in this fiasco regarding teachers'
retirement funds?  Rather than stepping forward, either as a
named individual entity or in providing the insurance coverage
for the Auditor and Retirement Board to attempt to fix the
situation, AIG is instead continuing to claim it did nothing
wrong in the way these retirement accounts have been handled,
while at the same time paying these exorbitant, unearned bonuses
with government bail-out money."

     Mr. Bell stated, "West Virginia teachers and school service
personnel get ripped off, AIG gets paid fees by the State for
providing a defense on behalf of the Auditor and the Retirement
Board, and it also pays thousands of dollars to defend itself.
Then it obtains government bailout funds and pays out hundreds
of millions to internal cronies.  I cannot wait to see this case
heard by a jury and have AIG executives from Wall Street come to
West Virginia to try to defend their actions."


APPLE INC: Faces Mo. Lawsuit Over Multimedia Messaging Service
--------------------------------------------------------------
Apple, Inc. and AT&T Mobility, LLC are facing a purported class
action lawsuit alleging that their 3G iPhone does not deliver on
advertised promises, Joe Harris at Courthouse News Service
reports.

The suit was filed on July 29, 2009, in the Circuit Court of St.
Louis County, Missouri, and is captioned, Meredith Goette and
Raymond Bolourtchi v. Apple, Inc., and AT&T Mobility, LLC, Case
No. 09SL-CC03270.  A free copy of the complaint is available at:

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/07/31/AppleATTMo.pdf

The plaintiffs claim that they get error messages when they try
to send a picture to another cell phone through the advertised
Multimedia Messaging Service.  They tried to upload the
defendants' free software update but it didn't work, according
to the complaint, according to Courthouse News.

The suit states that AT&T's towers in North America were not
upgraded to support Multimedia Messaging Service, though Apple
and AT&T continue to advertise that the phone has such
capabilities.

The suit covers all Missourians who bought a 3G or 3G-S iPhone
from Apple or AT&T between July 1, 2008 and the day of final
judgment in the suit.  It seeks actual and punitive damages,
Courthouse News reported.

The plaintiffs are represented by:

          Joel Schwartz, Esq.
          Rosenblum, Schwartz, Rogers & Glass, P.C.
          Clayton Center, Suite 130
          120 S. Central Avenue
          St. Louis, MO 63105
          Phone: (314) 862-4332
          E-mail: jschwartz@rsrglaw.com

              - and -

          Timothy A. Engelmeyer, Esq.
          Anthony M. Pezzani, Esq.
          Engelmeyer & Pezzani, LLC
          13321 N. Outer Forty Road, Suite 300
          Chesterfield, MO 63017
          Phone: (636) 532-9933
          E-mail: tim@epfirm.com
                  tony@epfirm.com


APPLEBEE'S INT'L: Faces Suit Over Fat, Calorie Content of Foods
---------------------------------------------------------------
Applebee's International, Inc., DineEquity, Inc. and Weight
Watchers, International, Inc. are facing a purported class
action lawsuit accusing them of inaccurately stating the amount
of fat and calorie counts on the restaurants diet-conscious
menu, Cincinnati.com reports.

The suit was filed on July 20, 2009 in the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of Ohio by Pamela Curry.  The lawsuit
is captioned Curry v. Applebee's International, Inc. et al.,
Case No. 1:2009-cv-00505.

The plaintiff claims the "Cajun Lime Tilapia" from the Weight
Watchers section on Applebee's menu had more Weight Watchers
"points" and fat then what was advertised on the menu, as
reported by Cincinnati.com.

Ms. Curry is suing the national restaurant chain and Weight
Watchers on grounds of fraud, negligence, breach of contract,
and conspiracy to conceal the accurate nutritional information
from consumers.

She claims she became a victim of fraud when she ordered
Applebee's Cajun Lime Tilapia containing 14 grams of fat which
is twice the amount of fat shown on the on the menu.  In
addition, the Teriyaki Steak 'N Shrimp Skewers had 100 more
calories then the 350 calories stated on the menu, reports
Cincinnati.com.

The class-action lawsuit is asking for undisclosed damages on
behalf of thousands of affected consumers, according to
Cincinnati.com.  

According to the lawsuit, both companies knowingly sold the
deceptive dietary menu options advertised in the restaurants and
diet programs press releases and advertising campaigns.  The
defendants marketed their diet conscious menu as a healthy
option for "weight conscious consumers" and as a "credible and
healthy way to enjoy great-tasting food while dining out,"
Cincinnati.com reported.

Ms. Curry is represented by:

          Joseph J. Braun, Esq.
          Strauss & Troy
          The Federal Reserve Building
          150 E. Fourth Street, 4th Floor
          Cincinnati, OH 45202-4018
          Phone: 513-621-2120
          E-mail: jjbraun@strausstroy.com


ARAMARK SPORTS: Reaches $1.5M Settlement in Fenway Workers' Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Aramark Sports reached a settlement for a purported class-action
lawsuit filed by Fenway Park food service workers who accused
the ballpark's concessionaire of pocketing their tips and
service charges, David Abel at The Boston Globe reports.

The $1.5 million settlement, if approved by a federal judge,
would provide a minimum of $100 to short-term employees and tens
of thousands of dollars to those who have worked for the company
the longest, according to the Globe.

The lawsuit was brought on February 2008 in the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, Suffolk by Michael Hayes, a bartender at the
ballpark and Brian Hickey, the other named plaintiff, the Globe
reports.  

Courthouse News Service reported that the suit also names The
Boston Red Sox and Aramark as defendants.  It was brought under
statutory and common law challenging the failure of defendants
to distribute all service charges and gratuities to food service
employees who work at Fenway Park, as well as other wage
violations by Aramark, including failure to pay proper overtime
compensation and failure to pay all wages fully and timely
(Class Action Reporter, Feb. 20, 2008).

Workers say the Red Sox add a gratuity or service charge for
food and drink purchased at Fenway Park, but do not pass it
along to the employees.

Named plaintiff Michael Hayes alleges that in failing to
distribute all service charges and gratuities as required by
law, the defendants have violated Mass. Gen. L. c. 149 Section
152A and are also liable under Massachusetts common law for:

     -- quantum meruit,
     -- unjust enrichment,
     -- breach of implied contract,
     -- interference with contractual and advantageous
        relations.

In addition, Mr. Hayes alleges that Aramark has violated Mass.
Gen. L. c. 149 Section 148 and Mass. Gen. L. c. 151 Sections 1A
and 1B.

In this action, Mr. Hayes seeks restitution for himself and all
other employees who did not receive all gratuities or service
charges to which they are entitled, as well as restitution for
unpaid wages and overtime.

Mr. Hayes requests that the court order:

     -- restitution for all gratuities or service charges that
        were not remitted to eligible employees;

     -- restitution for all wages and overtime owed;

     -- interest on late payments of wages, overtime,
        gratuities, and service charges;

     -- statutory trebling of all damages;

     -- attorneys' fees and costs; and

     -- any other relief to which the plaintiffs may be
        entitled.

On April 25, 2008, the suit was transferred to the U.S. District
Court for the District of Massachusetts, and is docketed as
Hayes, et al. v. Aramark, et al., Case No. 1:2008-cv-10700.

Mr. Hayes is represented by:

          Shannon E. Liss-Riordan, Esq.
          Lichten & Liss-Riordan, P.C.
          100 Cambridge Street, 20th Floor
          Boston, MA 02114
          Phone: 617-994-5800
          Fax: 617-994-5801
          E-mail: sliss@llrlaw.com


BLUE CROSS: Sued Over Payments in Hospital Non-Contracted Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
     Health law firm Hooper, Lundy & Bookman, Inc., filed
complaints in state and federal court charging that Blue Cross
of California and Anthem Blue Cross Life & Health Insurance used
faulty data and systems to calculate inadequate reimbursement
rates to Methodist Hospital of Southern California for out-of-
network emergency care, authorized post-stabilization care and
other medical services provided to Blue Cross' HMO, PPO, and
Blue Card members, and to beneficiaries of self-insured plans.
(Case Nos. CV09-5612-JSC (U.S. District Court) and BC418873 (Los
Angeles Superior Court)).

     "Blue Cross has repeatedly underpaid Methodist Hospital for
emergency and post-stabilization claims submitted after
Methodist's contract terminated in December 2007," said
Methodist Co-Counsel Daron Tooch. "We believe these
underpayments are in great part the result of flawed internal
data and payment systems Blue Cross uses to determine out-of-
network reimbursement rates."

     Because of the low payment rates and onerous terms in
proposed hospital contracts, hospitals are increasingly deciding
that they cannot afford to renew their contracts with health
plans.  Hospitals are nevertheless required to provide emergency
care to patients, regardless of the patients' ability to pay.  
After patients' emergency condition was stabilized, Blue Cross
often chose not to transfer the patients to in-network
facilities, yet paid Methodist Hospital's claims as though the
patients chose to have their care at a non-contracted facility.

     "If Blue Cross wanted to pay lower contracted rates for
health care services provided to its stabilized members, then it
should have transferred them to in-network facilities for their
post-stabilization care," said Methodist Co-counsel Glenn
Solomon.  "Having voluntarily opted to have its members receive
their post-stabilization care at Methodist Hospital, Blue Cross
has an obligation to pay the bills rather than leaving that
burden with its members."

     The California suit filed charges Blue Cross with failure
to adequately compensate Methodist Hospital for non-contracted
emergency, post-stabilization, and continuity of care services,
by using flawed data and/or improperly manipulating the data.

     The federal complaint makes similar allegations with
respect to Blue Card and self-insured plans, and includes
charges that the defendants have violated ERISA and the
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).

     "Blue Cross' failure to adequately reimburse California
hospitals for vital services has resulted in great financial
stress for California hospitals and the patients they serve,"
said Mr. Tooch.  "Blue Cross should not be permitted to
manipulate reimbursement rates that result in inadequate payment
to providers."

For more details, contact:

          Hooper, Lundy & Bookman, Inc.
          1875 Century Park East, Suite 1600
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Phone: 310-551-8111
          Fax: 310-551-8181
          Web site: http://www.health-law.com


CBS BROADCASTING: Deal Reached in Suit Over CSI Fingerprint Kits
----------------------------------------------------------------
     Public Justice and the Asbestos Disease Awareness
Organization announced that a proposed settlement of a
nationwide class action against CBS Broadcasting, Inc., and
major toy retailers, if approved, will give cash refunds to
consumers and effectively implement a nationwide recall of toy
science kits, based on the popular "CSI" television drama
series, that may contain asbestos.  Requests for claim forms may
be submitted at http://www.csitoyssettlement.com.

     The toy kits -- the CSI: Crime Scene Investigation
Fingerprint Examination Kit (CSI Exam Kit) and the CSI: Crime
Scene Investigation Forensic Lab Kit (CSI Lab Kit) -- were made
by now-bankrupt Planet Toys, Inc., and licensed by the
television giant CBS.  Tests conducted by the Asbestos Disease
Awareness Organization (ADAO) in 2007 of the white fingerprint
powder in the toy kits found tremolite, one of the deadliest
forms of asbestos.

     The settlement, which is subject to court approval,
provides cash refunds to consumers throughout the U.S. who
bought, or received as a gift, one or more CSI Exam Kits or Lab
Kits sold by CBS, Toys "R" Us, Hammacher Schlemmer, Walgreens,
Amazon.com, Buy.com, Sears, Kmart, and QVC.  Consumers seeking
refunds must submit a claim form to a claims administrator by
January 14, 2010, and have the option of sending the toy kits to
the claims administrator at no cost.

     Planet Toys, the kits' manufacturer, is not part of the
settlement because it filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection
in March 2009.

     "We urge everyone to get these products out of your homes
and away from children, and to send in your claim form to get a
refund," said Public Justice's Victoria Ni, Esq., co-counsel in
the case.

     In November 2007, ADAO publicly released findings from an
18-month study it commissioned that tested over 250 commonly
found consumer products for asbestos.  Three independent,
government-certified laboratories participating in the study
confirmed the presence of asbestos in the white fingerprint
powder of the CSI Exam Kit.  ADAO is a nonprofit organization
founded in 2004 and dedicated to raising public awareness about
the dangers of asbestos exposure and often deadly asbestos-
related disease.

     "We were aghast to find asbestos in a children's toy," said
ADAO Executive Director and co-founder Linda Reinstein.  "Even
though the dangers of asbestos have been well-documented for
more than 100 years, we're still finding asbestos in common
household products.  That's simply unacceptable."

     With Public Justice as counsel, ADAO met with
representatives from CBS and Planet Toys in December 2007 to
discuss its findings about the fingerprint powder. As a result,
Planet Toys asked retailers to stop sales of the CSI Exam Kit
pending further investigation.  But the company refused to stop
sales of the CSI Lab Kit, which contained the same fingerprint
powder, and refused to voluntarily recall the products from
consumers' homes.

     The ADAO test results also helped spark action by the
Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection (DCP), which
commissioned its own testing and confirmed the presence of
asbestos in the white fingerprint powder in the CSI Exam Kit.  
The DCP announced a recall and embargo of the product statewide
in mid-December 2007.  The DCP told Connecticut consumers to
return the product for a refund or store credit and encouraged
any consumer not satisfied with retailer response to file a
complaint.

     The proposed class action settlement provides that, in
addition to paying for consumer refunds and the cost of shipping
for returned toys, the companies will pay the costs of notice
and claims administration, and a $30,000 cy pres award to ADAO.

     If approved, the settlement would resolve the class action
pending in New York and a related lawsuit filed in California
state court citing violations of a state law known as "Prop 65."  
Prop 65 requires businesses to give a "clear and reasonable
warning" to California consumers if a product contains a
chemical known to cause cancer or birth defects, such as
asbestos.

     The settlement was given preliminary approval by a New York
federal court in May, and awaits final approval.

     There is no known safe level of asbestos exposure. If
inhaled, microscopic asbestos particles can penetrate lung
tissue and stay there permanently, causing serious, even deadly,
respiratory illnesses or cancer than might not manifest until
decades after initial exposure.

Additional information about the settlement is available at
http://www.csitoyssettlement.com/and  
http://www.publicjustice.net/


DOW CHEMICAL: Mich. High Court Reverses Ruling in Dioxin Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Michigan Supreme Court ordered a lower court to reconsider
its decision to grant class-action status to a lawsuit against
Dow Chemical Co. over dioxin pollution near its Midland plant,
The Associated Press reported.

On July 31, 2009, the court said that a Saginaw County circuit
judge may have misinterpreted the rules when allowing some 2,000
landowners in the Tittabawassee River floodplain to jointly sue
the chemical giant, according to The AP.

In a divided opinion, the Michigan Court of Appeals upheld
class-action status for the purported plaintiffs (Class Action
Reporter, Jan. 28, 2008).  Dow Chemical appealed that ruling to
the Michigan Supreme Court (Class Action Reporter, March 5,
2009).  The recently reformulated Michigan Supreme Court heard
Dow's appeal of the cases class action status.  Dow argued that
the group should not be designated as a class because the
individual properties have different levels of dioxin
contamination.

Freeland couple Gary and Kathy Henry filed the suit in Saginaw
County Circuit Court seeking recovery of the value of their home
and property, which they believe has been made worthless by
dioxin contamination.  The couple soon was joined by hundreds of
others who signed onto the action.

In October 2005, Saginaw Circuit Judge Leopold Borrello
certified the class.  He said that without joining all residents
in one class in one suit, courts would be clogged by individual
lawsuits.

But Dow asked the Michigan Court of Appeals to reverse the
ruling of Judge Borrello saying that residents claiming property
damage because of historic dioxin releases from Dow Chemical Co.
should be handled separately -- that each has its own issues
with which to contend (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 17, 2005).

Dow argued that each plaintiff should present and prove his or
her case separately because each is contaminated with varied
levels of dioxin, if at all, and therefore the impact on
property value and the impact on property owners' use varies.

In a ruling dated Jan. 24, 2008, Justice Karen M. Fort Hood
wrote that the previous Circuit Court ruling did not err in
allowing plaintiffs' class-action status.

Justice Patrick M. Meter wrote that a class action is
appropriate in regard to liability but that individual
proceedings are best to determine damages.

Justice Kirsten Frank Kelly dissented, noting some plaintiffs
had no dioxin contamination on their properties.

The class-action participants would include people who owned
property as of Feb. 1, 2002, in the 100-year flood plain
downstream from Dow's Midland plant, court records show.

The covered area generally is bounded on the west and south by
River and Stroebel, and the east and north by Midland, St.
Andrews and Michigan, documents said.


FEDERAL DEPOSIT: Judge Mulls Consolidation of WaMu Execs' Suits
---------------------------------------------------------------
A judge will consider this week whether to consolidate several
lawsuits -- filed by former Washington Mutual executives against
Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. -- into a class-action
proceeding, Chris Ingalls at KING 5 News reports.

Nearly 100 former WaMu executives have filed lawsuits demanding
the government pay them millions of dollars after they were
fired.  Of those suits about 20 were filed by former WaMu vice-
presidents and other mid-to-senior level executives, according
to KING 5 News.

Drew DeSilver of The Seattle Times previously reported that five
former WaMu executives claim that under their written employment
agreements they are owed "change in control" payments, equal to
one-and-a-half times their regular pay, after the thrift was
seized and its banking assets sold off (Class Action Reporter,
May 7, 2009).

KING 5 News reported that it was nearly a year ago that federal
regulators seized WaMu's operations, fearing the bank was on the
brink of financial collapse.

Executives were fired when the government transferred the bank
to JPMorgan Chase.  According to Bill Keller, Esq. an attorney
for 20 former WaMu executives the transfer triggered the "change
of control" agreement in executives' WaMu contracts, entitling
them to lump sum payments of up to twice their annual salary.

"If they continued to work with the new group but were laid off
or fired within the next two years, they would have their
compensation triggered with this change of control, which would
either pay them a certain amount.  It could be a year of salary
plus bonus or 18 months or two years," Mr. Keller told KING 5
News.

The executives are suing the FDIC, since it still holds some of
WaMu's assets.  If they can't get the money from that fund, Mr.
Keller tells KING 5 News that they may seek damages directly
from the taxpayer funded FDIC.  If the case is certified as a
class-action case, taxpayers could be on the hook.

The FDIC though has argued that the "change of control"
provision does not cover a bank seizure, according to KING 5
News.


INTERNATIONAL RECTIFIER: Settles Calif. Securities Fraud Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
     International Rectifier Corporation (NYSE: IRF) announced
that it has reached an agreement in principle to settle a
securities class action lawsuit pending against the Company and
certain of its former officers or directors, entitled Edward R.
Koller v. International Rectifier Corporation, et. al., Civil
Action No. 07-02544-JFW (VBKx), in the United States District
Court for the Central District of California.  The Litigation
was originally filed against the Company and certain of its
former officers and directors in April 2007.  The putative class
consists of purchasers of Company stock during the period from
July 31, 2003, through February 11, 2008.

     The settlement is subject to negotiation and execution of a
formal settlement agreement and is dependent upon final approval
by the United States District Court for the Central District of
California.  The proposed settlement would resolve all class
members' claims against the Company and certain of its former
officers and directors.  It would provide for a payment to the
plaintiffs of $90 million, of which $45 million is to be paid by
the Company's insurance carriers and $45 million by the Company.

     Class members will receive notice and have a right to
object to or opt out of the settlement.  Final consummation of
the settlement will occur upon the entry of final judgment by
the court approving the settlement as fair to all class members.  
The timing of approval process is dependent on the court's
calendar.  The Company expects that the approval process will be
completed before the end of the calendar year 2009.

     "The proposed settlement of this class action lawsuit is a
significant step in our efforts to resolve the legacy legal
issues of the Company," said Oleg Khaykin, President and Chief
Executive Officer of International Rectifier.  "We are pleased
to have an agreement in principle so we can focus our time and
efforts on core activities and the growth of our business."

International Rectifier Corp. (NYSE: IRF) -- http://www.irf.com
-- is a world leader in power management technology.  IR's
analog, digital, and mixed signal ICs, and other advanced power
management products, enable high performance computing and save
energy in a wide variety of business and consumer applications.  
Leading manufacturers of computers, energy efficient appliances,
lighting, automobiles, satellites, aircraft, and defense systems
rely on IR's power management solutions to power their next
generation products.


METRO GANG: Faces Minn. Litigation Alleging Racial Profiling
------------------------------------------------------------
Metro Gang Strike Force is facing a purported class-action suit
in Minnesota that is accusing the group of racial profiling,
KSTP-TV reports.

The suit was filed on July 30, 2009, in the U.S. District Court
for the District of Minnesota by Zelaido Rivera Garcia, Maura
Gonzalez Salinas, Adrian Ramirez-Cuevas, Camerina Cuevas Lopez,
Kathleen Yankovic and John Yankovic, and the lawsuit is
captioned, Garcia, et al. v. Metro Gang Strike Force, et al.,
Case No. 0:2009-cv-01996.

The complaint states people were targeted by the agency based on
their heritage, race, and color of their skin.  The complaint
also claims Caucasians and U.S. citizens were just as equally
"targeted and victimized," according to KSTP-TV.

According to plaintiffs' attorney Randy Hooper, Esq., at
Zimmerman and Reed, representing the plaintiffs, "the Metro Gang
Strike Force has clearly operated contrary to [law] by depriving
several hundred of our citizens of their Constitutional and
Civil Rights and by engaging in unjust taking of their money and
property."

The lawsuit goes on to claim that the Strike Force deliberately
used their authority as police officers to "extort cash and
property from people," reports KSTP-TV.

KSTP-TV reports that the plaintiffs are seeking monetary damages
and restitution for property -- such as cash and jewelry -- they
claim was stolen by Strike Force members.

For more details, contact:

          Robert R. Hopper, Esq.
          Zimmerman Reed, PLLP
          651 Nicollet Mall Ste 501
          Minneapolis, MN 55402-4123
          Phone: 612-341-0400
          Fax: 612-341-0844
          E-mail: robert.hopper@zimmreed.com


MICROSOFT CORP: Faces Ill. Suit Over Xbox 360 "Design Defect"
-------------------------------------------------------------
Microsoft Corp. is facing a purported class-action lawsuit
claiming that it sold several of its Xbox 360 video game
consoles with a "design defect" that causes the system to stop
working, Michael Gilbert at The Orland Park Prairie reports.

The suit was filed on July 17, 2009 in the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of Illinois by Thomas W. Toolis and is
docked as Case No. 1:2009-cv-04302.

Mr. Toolis, 37, of Oak Forest, said he purchased an Xbox 360 for
$299 in September 2007, and less than 15 months later the system
would not power on or play any games, according to Mr. Gilbert.

In order to have his Xbox 360 fixed, Mr. Toolis had to shell out
$99 because his one-year warranty when he purchased the system
had expired three months earlier, he said.  His Xbox 360 was
replaced six weeks later with a refurbished model.  However,
just three months after receiving the system it too suffered the
same fate as the other one and stopped working, he said.

Mr. Toolis said he paid another $99 to have the system fixed.  
He is waiting to receive a special shipping box from Microsoft
and then he will send his system back, he said.

The suit is seeking "actual damages and equitable relief,
including the refund of the $99 repair or replacement fee, the
replacement or recall of the Xbox 360 Game Consoles, civil
penalties, costs and expanses of litigation, including
attorneys' fee, and all further relief available," the newspaper
reports.  It also requests that Microsoft establish a $5 million
fund to be distributed to Xbox 360 owners who could prove they
experienced similar problems as he did.

Mr. Toolis is represented by:

          Christopher Michael Jahnke, Esq.
          Jahnke & Toolis
          9031 W. 151st Street, #203
          Orland Park, IL 60462
          Phone: (708) 349-9333
          E-mail: cmj@jtlawllc.com


NATIONAL CITY: Lawyers Awarded $400,000 in Del. Investors' Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The attorneys in a class-action lawsuit against National City
Corp. will receive $400,000 in fees, according to a settlement
reached in a Delaware state court, Steve Wartenberg, writing for
The Columbus Dispatch reports.

The lead attorneys for the plaintiffs, Rigrodsky & Long of
Wilmington, Del., had previously asked for $1.2 million (Class
Action Reporter, March 10, 2009).

In making his decision, Chancellor William B. Chandler III said
the attorneys for the plaintiffs received an amount
"commensurate with the benefit obtained for the shareholder
class and the amount of effort plaintiffs' counsel actually
expended," the daily newspaper reported.

PNC Financial Services Group, which now owns National City, will
pay the legal bill, Mr. Wartenberg relates.  

According to court documents obtained by The Columbus Dispatch,
the proposed deal, filed in a state court in Delaware, would
resolve a lawsuit brought by shareholders across the country
that alleged that National City's merger with PNC Financial
Services Group was made at a significant discount and was unfair
to shareholders.

The shareholders, including The Dispatch Printing Co., the owner
of The Columbus Dispatch, would be unable to opt out of the
settlement, which would bar them from taking other legal action
related to the merger.

The Columbus Dispatch reported that PNC made a deal to buy
National City in October 2008.  By that time, National City's
share price had collapsed from more than $38 in October 2007, to
$2.75 in late October, as the company dealt with its exposure to
subprime mortgages.  Pittsburgh-based PNC paid $2.23 per share,
or $5.58 billion.

Shareholders saw more than $16 billion of equity value evaporate
in the year between the disclosure about National City's
exposure to subprime mortgages and the sale to PNC.


PACIFIC GAS: Calif. Judge Approves $17.25M Deal in Overtime Case
----------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco Superior Court Judge John K. Stewart gave final
approval to a settlement reached in a purported class-action
lawsuit filed by a group of current and former Pacific Gas &
Electric Co. workers, Tracy Seipel at San Jose Mercury News
reports.

The plaintiffs, who waged a nine-year legal battle against the
company for overtime pay, will receive $17.25 million from the
settlement.  The final settlement will not only compensate the
roughly 700 workers for their back pay and attorneys' fees, but
also requires that PG&E pay most of the workers in the suit
overtime pay in the future, according to San Jose Mercury News.

The case, styled, Conley v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co., was
originally filed in March 2000 by PG&E employees John Conley,
Coy Wiggins, Hall Hackney and Jeff Brewer, sought compensation
for unpaid overtime hours worked.

San Jose Mercury News reported that the workers -- represented
by Jonathan H. Siegel, Esq. -- alleged that they were improperly
classified as exempt from overtime, were denied overtime
compensation and were paid a salary rather than on an hourly
basis.

After years of legal back-and-forth, the case was set to go to
trial this year but the two parties settled, reports San Jose
Mercury News.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Jonathan H. Siegel, Esq.
          Siegel & Lewitter
          1939 Harrison St., Suite 307
          Oakland, CA 94612
          Phone: (510) 452-5000
          Fax: (510) 452-5004
          Web site: http://www.sl-employmentlaw.com/


STERLING JEWELERS: Still Faces N.Y. Sex Discrimination Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Sterling Jewelers, Inc., continues to face a purported class-
action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York, alleging sex discrimination in promotions
and salaries, according to Cleveland Plain Dealer reporter
Alison Grant.

Last year, Ms. Magazine reported that the suit was filed under
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 USC Section
2000(e), et seq., and alleges that female retail employees were
"denied promotional opportunities for which they were qualified,
and [were] paid less than men performing the same work," (Class
Action Reporter, Oct. 20, 2008).  The plaintiffs brought the
action to challenge a pattern and practice of sex discrimination
in promotion and compensation committed against current and
former female employees of Sterling.

Sterling's promotion and compensation policies and practices
allegedly caused female employees with retail sales
responsibilities, which includes store-based employees up to and
including district managers to be denied promotional
opportunities for which they were qualified and paid less than
men performing the same work.  Allegedly, the employment
policies and practices of Sterling have had the effect and have
been undertaken with the purpose of denying promotional
opportunities and equal compensation to qualified female
employees because of their gender.

The Plaintiffs want the court to rule on:

     (a) whether Sterling's common operating practices and
         procedures discriminate against its female employees;

     (b) whether Sterling's policies have had an adverse impact
         upon the class, and if so, whether such impact can be
         justified by business necessity;

     (c) whether Sterling has acted intentionally to deny equal
         opportunities to female employees to obtain promotions
         into and within management jobs and to compensate
         female employees less than similarly situated male
         employees in violation of Title VII;

     (d) whether Sterling invests its managers with excessive
         discretion in making promotion and compensation
         decisions; and

     (e) whether the class may obtain an award of damages and
         obtain injunctive and other equitable remedies.

The Plaintiffs ask the court to:

     -- declare that the practices described in the complaint
        exist at Sterling and that they are unlawful;

     -- grant certification of this action as a class action on
        behalf of the proposed class and designation of
        plaintiffs as representatives of the class and their
        counsel of record as class counsel;

     -- grant certification of this action as a collective
        action and designation of plaintiffs as representatives
        of the class and their counsel of record as class
        counsel;

     -- issue a permanent mandatory injunction requiring that
        defendant adopt employment practices in conformity with
        the requirements of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
        1964, 42 USC Section 2000e, et seq.;

     -- award liquidated damages pursuant to 29 USC Section 201,
        et seq.;

     -- award back pay and other job benefits sufficient to make
        the plaintiffs and the class whole;

     -- award compensatory and punitive damages appropriate to
        the proof at trial;

     -- award reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, including
        expert fees, pursuant to 42 USC Section 2000e and 42 USC
        Section 201 et seq;

     -- award monetary damages and any other relief sufficient
        to make plaintiffs whole; and

     -- order such other and further relief as the court deems
        just and proper.

The suit, entitled, Laryssa Jock et al. v. Sterling Jewelers,
Inc., Case No. 08 CV 02875, was filed in the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of New York.

Counsel to the plaintiffs is:

          Lynda J. Grant
          Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, PLLC
          150 East  52nd Street, 30th Floor
          New York, NY 10022
          Phone: (212) 838-7797
          Fax: (212) 838-7745
          E-mail: lgrant@cmht.com


SUN CAPITAL: Third Circuit Rules in Jevic Transportation Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that Sun
Capital Partners Inc. can remove a class-action lawsuit filed by
laid-off employees of trucking company Jevic Transportation
Inc., which Sun owns, to federal court even though Jevic is
bankrupt, Law360 reports.

On July 31, 2009, Judge Thomas Hardiman of the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that the Class Action
Fairness Act allows Sun to remove the case, according to Law360.

A full-text copy of the Third Circuit's decision is available at
no charge at http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/084789p.pdf


TATA AMERICA: Ninth Circuit Denies Motion in Calif. Litigation
--------------------------------------------------------------
     In a unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel of the Ninth
Circuit Court of Appeals denied the motion of Tata America
International Corporation and its parent corporations Tata
Consultancy Services, Ltd., and Tata Sons, Ltd., to compel
arbitration in India and dismiss a nationwide class action
lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco.  Lead
plaintiff Gopi Vedachalam, a former employee of Tata America
International Corporation, alleges in the complaint that Tata
denied him and other workers earned overtime and unjustly
enriched itself by requiring all of its non-U.S.-citizen
employees to endorse and sign over their federal and state tax
refund checks to Tata.

     "The Ninth Circuit properly rejected efforts by one of
India's largest corporations to force its American-based
employees to arbitrate claims brought under California and
American law 8,000 miles away, in Mumbai, India," stated Kelly
M. Dermody of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, co-lead
counsel for plaintiffs.  "The Court's ruling ensures that
plaintiffs and the thousands of workers they seek to represent
will have their day in court in the United States before a
neutral judge knowledgeable about American labor laws, and not
in India in front of a private arbitrator of Tata's choosing."

"The decision upholds the principle that a company cannot force
any employee working in the United States to give up the right
to have his or her claims heard in a United States court without
a clear and mutual agreement that these claims would be heard
elsewhere," stated Steven M. Tindall of Rukin Hyland Doria &
Tindall, co-lead counsel for plaintiffs.  "Thousands of workers
seeking wrongfully withheld payment for their work are closer to
obtaining justice."

     The complaint claims that Tata has paid its employees less
than promised; has failed to pay its employees overtime pay and
has misclassified them as exempt from overtime; and has failed
to compensate employees for earned but unused vacation pay. The
complaint alleges further that Tata required its non-U.S.-
citizen employees to sign power of attorney agreements
delegating an outside agency to calculate and submit each
employee's tax return to state and federal authorities. Tata
then required its non-U.S.-citizen employees who received tax
refunds from state and federal tax authorities to endorse the
tax refund checks and send them back to Tata.

     One of India's largest business conglomerates, the Tata
Group reported revenues in the last fiscal year of nearly $62.5
billion.  The proposed class consists of thousands of current
non-U.S. citizen employees of Tata working in the United States,
plus former Tata employees dating back to 2000.  Plaintiffs seek
compensation and damages for current and former employees who
were not paid what they were promised and who were deprived of
their tax refunds.

For more details about the lawsuit, visit:

          http://www.lieffcabraser.com/lawsuitagainsttata.htm

The lawyers representing the plaintiffs are:

          Kelly M. Dermody, Esq.
          Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP   
          Embarcadero Center West
          275 Battery Street, Suite 3000
          San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
          Phone: 415-956-1000

               - and -

          Steven M. Tindall, Esq.
          Rukin Hyland Doria & Tindall LLP
          100 Pine Street, Suite 725
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Phone: 415-421-1800 ext. 207

Michael Rubin, Esq., of Altshuler Berzon LLP worked with
plaintiffs' counsel on the appeal.  


WELLS FARGO: Faces Racial Discrimination Lawsuit in California
--------------------------------------------------------------
Wells Fargo faces a purported class-action lawsuit in California
that accuses the San Francisco-based lender of racial
discrimination in how it sets rates and fees, Andrew Stern of
Reuters reports.

The suit was filed by two black Chicago homeowners on July 27,
2009 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California.  It seeks class-action status, according to Reuters.

A separate lawsuit, captioned The People of the State of
Illinois v Wells Fargo and Company; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.; and
Wells Fargo Financial Illinois Inc., No. 09CH26434, was filed by
Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan in Cook County, Illinois,
on July 31, 2009.  



                   New Securities Fraud Cases

INTERNATIONAL GAME: Izard Nobel Announces Nev. Stock Suit Filing
----------------------------------------------------------------
     The law firm of Izard Nobel LLP, which has significant
experience representing investors in prosecuting claims of
securities fraud, announces that a lawsuit seeking class action
status has been filed in the United States District Court for
the District of Nevada on behalf of those who purchased the
common stock of International Game Technology (NYSE: IGT)
between November 1, 2007 and October 30, 2008.

     The Complaint charges that IGT, a global gaming company,
and certain of its officers and directors violated federal
securities laws by issuing materially false and misleading
statements regarding the Company's business prospects.

     Specifically, defendants misrepresented and/or failed to
disclose the following adverse facts:

       -- that defendants had diverted substantial funds to the
          development of IGT's SB and AVP gaming platforms,
          which materially compromised the Company's growth
          prospects and undermined defendants' optimistic
          statements;

       -- that IGT was unable to develop and market its SB and
          AVP gaming platforms within the time frame that
          defendants had represented to investors due to
          increasingly challenging market conditions and
          mounting costs;

       -- that defendants' positive representations concerning
          the Company's shift to non-machine based operations
          were undermined by a slowdown in the gaming industry,
          the impact of which defendants minimized; and

       -- as a result of the foregoing, it was not likely that
          IGT would achieve or exceed its earnings guidance.

     A request for lead plaintiff status must satisfy certain
criteria and be made on or before Sept. 28, 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/internationalgametechnology/


INTERNATIONAL GAME: Kendall Law Group Announces Lawsuit Filing
--------------------------------------------------------------
     Kendall Law Group, led by a former federal judge and US
Attorney, announced that a lawsuit has been filed against
International Game Technology (NYSE: IGT) for investors who
purchased stock that was artificially inflated between November
1, 2007 and October 30, 2008.

     According to the complaint, filed in the District of
Nevada, defendants failed to disclose that they had problems
associated with gaming platforms, thereby undermining their
optimistic statements.  Defendants also failed to disclose that
IGT was unable to develop and market its SB and AVP gaming
platforms within the time frame that defendants had represented
to investors due to increasingly challenging market conditions
and mounting costs.  The complaint further alleges that the
company failed to adequately and timely record losses for its
impaired loans, causing its financial results to be false.
Defendants also issued misleading positive statements concerning
the company's shift to non-machine based operations.  As a
result, it was unlikely that IGT would achieve or exceed its
earnings guidance.

     A request for lead plaintiff status must satisfy certain
criteria and be made on or before Sept. 28, 2009.

For more details, contact:

          Hamilton Lindley, Esq. (hlindley@kendalllawgroup.com)
          Kendall Law Group
          3232 McKinney, Ste. 700
          Dallas, TX 75204
          Phone: (214) 744-3000 or (877) 744-3728
          Fax: (214) 744-3015
          Web site: http://www.kendalllawgroup.com


GENZYME CORP: Izard Nobel LLP Announces Securities 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 Massachusetts on behalf of those who purchased
the common stock of Genzyme Corporation (NASDAQ: GENZ) between
June 26, 2008 and July 21, 2009, inclusive.

     The Complaint charges that defendants violated federal
securities laws.  Specifically, the complaint alleges that
defendants concealed deficiencies at two of its manufacturing
facilities, which caused a shortage in one of its top-selling
products (a drug called Myozyme) and delayed approval of a new
formulation of that product (a drug known as Lumizyme).  The
manufacturing problems also forced Genzyme to halt production of
two other top-selling products (drugs called Cerezyme and
Fabrazyme) due to contamination at one of the manufacturing
facilities.

     On July 22, 2009, Genzyme slashed its earnings and revenue
forecasts for 2009, including its revenue projections for
Myozyme, Cerezyme and Fabrazyme, due to the impact of the
facility shutdown.  During the class period, Genzyme's stock has
fallen over 35%, resulting in a loss of over $8 billion to
investors.

     A request for lead plaintiff status must satisfy certain
criteria and be made on or before Sept. 28, 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/genzyme/


MEDAREX INC: Harwood Feffer Files Securities Fraud Suit in N.J.
---------------------------------------------------------------
     The law firm of Harwood Feffer LLP announces that it filed
a Federal class action lawsuit on July 31, 2009 on behalf of the
current shareholders of the common stock of Medarex, Inc.
(Nasdaq: MEDX) in connection with a tender offer by Bristol-
Myers Squibb Company.  The action is pending in United States
District Court for the District of New Jersey.

     The complaint alleges that defendants violated Section
14(e) of the 1934 Act, inter alia, by issuing a false and
misleading Offer to Purchase and Schedule 14D-9 which fail to
apprise Medarex shareholders of the true bases of Medarex's
financial valuation.  The complaint also alleges that defendants
breached their fiduciary duties, or aided and abetted the breach
of fiduciary duties, by recommending an unfairly low tender
offer to Medarex shareholders.  The complaint names as
defendants the directors of Medarex, Bristol-Myers, and Puma
Acquisition Company, Bristol-Myers' wholly-owned subsidiary.  
The complaint seeks injunctive and monetary relief.

     A request for lead plaintiff status must satisfy certain
criteria and be made on or before Sept. 30, 2009.

For more details, contact:

          Robert I. Harwood, Esq. (rharwood@hfesq.com)
          James G. Flynn, Esq. (jflynn@hfesq.com)
          Harwood Feffer LLP
          488 Madison Avenue
          New York, New York 10022
          Phone: 877-935-7400
          Website: http://www.hfesq.com


SKILLED HEALTHCARE: Catanzarite Law Files Securities Fraud Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
     Catanzarite Law Corporation announced it has filed a class
action lawsuit on behalf of all purchasers of Skilled Healthcare
Group, Inc. (NYSE: SKH) common stock during the period from May
14, 2007 through June 9, 2009, inclusive.  The lawsuit alleges
violations of the federal securities laws and seeks to recover
losses for Skilled Healthcare shareholders.

     The complaint, pending in the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California, charges Skilled Healthcare and
certain of its officers and directors violated the federal
securities laws by misrepresenting the true amount of its income
in its IPO prospectus and in other SEC filings and public
communications.  In an announcement dated June 9, 2009, Skilled
Healthcare announced that the Company's prior financial
statements for the annual and quarterly periods between January
1, 2006 and March 31, 2009 should no longer be relied upon and
that the Company expected to restate those financial statements.  
According to the announcement, Skilled Healthcare discovered
errors relating to its accounting for reserves on its accounts
receivable.  The Company estimated that the cumulative charges
against after-tax earnings in the aggregate would be between $8
million and $9 million.  The Complaint alleges that this adverse
disclosure caused the value of Skilled Healthcare's stock to
fall, damaging investors.

     Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all
purchasers of Skilled Healthcare common stock during the Class
Period, including purchasers of Skilled Healthcare's common
stock in the IPO on or about May 14, 2007.

     A request for lead plaintiff status must satisfy certain
criteria and be made on or before Sept. 22, 2009.

For more details, contact:

          Ken Catanzarite, Esq. (kcatanzarite@catanzarite.com)
          Jenifer de Vera (jdevera@catanzarite.com)
          Catanzarite Law Corporation
          2331 West Lincoln Avenue
          Anaheim, CA 92801
          Phone: 714-520-5544


                            *********

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, 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  * * *