CAR_Public/091021.mbx             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

          Wednesday, October 21, 2009, Vol. 11, No. 208
  
                            Headlines

ALLSCRIPTS-MISYS: Defends Local Union No. 630's Suit in Illinois
AMERICAN RESIDENTIAL: Calif. Suit Alleges Labor Law Violations
AUDIOVOX CORP: Suits Over Cell Phone Radiation Remain Pending
BLUE RIDGE PAPER: Paper Plant Owner Disputes Pollution Claims
COCA-COLA CO: Calif. Lawsuit Claims False Brain Juice Advertising

COMCAST CORP: Sued in Mass. for Misclassifying Installers
FIRST BANKS: Securities Lawsuit v. CFHI Dismissed in May 2009
FLOTEK INDUSTRIES: Faces Stockholder Securities Suit in Texas
FRITO-LAY: Charged by Route Salesperson with Labor Law Violations
GAMING PARTNERS: Second Amended "Kaplan" Lawsuit Pending in Nev.

GREENHOUSE: Consumers Sue Trendy Manhattan Club for Racial Bias
HARRAH'S ENTERTAINMENT: Suit Over Debt Plan Dismissed in June
HEALTHMARKETS INC: Nov. 23 Final Settlement Fairness Hearing Set
HEALTHMARKETS INC: Discovery in Consolidated FLSA Suit Ongoing
INTERNATIONAL GAME: Trial in Brochu v. Loto Quebec Suit Ongoing

INTERNATIONAL GAME: Faces IBEW Securities Fraud Suit in Nevada
LEAR CORP: Consolidated Securities Fraud Suit Resolved in June
NOVA SCOTIA: Students Threaten to Sue If Strike Not Resolved
ON2 TECHNOLOGIES: Defends Suits Google Merger Agreement Lawsuit
PEROT SYSTEMS: Another Lawsuit Challenges Dell Transaction

PUBLIC STORAGE: Review Bid in "Brinkley" Suit Pending in Calif.
REPUBLIC WASTE: Fla. Ct. Certifies Cecos Site Plaintiff Class
SCORES HOLDING: Discovery in "Diaz" Wage and Hour Suit Ongoing
SUR LA TABLE: Retailer Sued for Alleged Labor Law Violations
T-MOBILE: Sued, with MSFT & Danger, Over Sidekick in N.D. Calif.

WEIGHT WATCHERS: "Sabatino" Labor Law Case Removed to N.D. Calif.

                            *********

ALLSCRIPTS-MISYS: Defends Local Union No. 630's Suit in Illinois
----------------------------------------------------------------
Allscripts-Misys Healthcare Solutions, Inc., is defending
Plumbers and Pipefitters Local Union No. 630 Pension-Annuity
Trust Fund, et al v. Allscripts-Misys Healthcare Solutions, Inc.,
et al., Case No. 09-cv-04726 (N.D. Ill.) (Castillo, J.), a
purported stockholder class-action complaint on behalf of
stockholders who purchased Allscripts common stock between May 8,
2007 and Feb. 13, 2008, according to the company's Oct. 13, 2009,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended Aug. 31, 2009.

The complaint alleges that during the class period, the Company,
Glen Tullman and William Davis made materially false and
misleading statements regarding the Company's financial condition
and prospects, and on that basis the complaint asserts violations
of federal securities laws.

The plaintiff seeks to recover the price declines in Allscripts'
common stock that occurred on Nov. 8, 2007, when the company
released its third quarter 2007 financial results, and on Feb.
13, 2008, when the company released full year 2007 results.

On Oct. 5, 2009, David Robb moved for appointment as Lead
Plaintiff and for approval of selection of lead and liaison
counsel.

Allscripts-Misys is represented by:

          Walter C. Carlson, Esq.
          James Wallace Ducayet, Esq.
          SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
          One South Dearborn Street
          Chicago, IL 60603
          Telephone: (312) 853-7000

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Lori Ann Fanning, Esq.
          Marvin Alan Miller, Esq.
          MILLER LAW LLC
          115 South LaSalle Street, Suite 2910
          Chicago, IL 60603
          Telephone: (312) 332-3400

               - and -  

          Brian O. O'Mara, Esq.
          Debra J. Wyman, Esq.
          LERACH COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN & ROBBINS
          655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 231-1058

Allscripts-Misys Healthcare Solutions, Inc. --
http://www.allscripts.com/-- formerly Allscripts Healthcare  
Solutions, Inc., is a provider of clinical software, services,
information and connectivity solutions used by the physicians and
other health care providers. The company's businesses provide
solutions that inform physicians with just right, just in time
information, connect physicians to each other and to the entire
community of care, and transforming healthcare. Allscripts
provide various clinical software applications, including
Electronic Health Records (EHR), practice management, revenue
cycled management, clearinghouse services, electronic
prescribing, Emergency Department Information System (EDIS),
hospital care management and discharge management solutions,
document imaging solutions, and a range of solutions for home
care and other post-acute facilities. The company operates in two
business segments: clinical solutions and health solutions.


AMERICAN RESIDENTIAL: Calif. Suit Alleges Labor Law Violations
--------------------------------------------------------------
Louis Magee, Jr., individually and on behalf of other members of
the general public similarly situated, sued American Residential
Services, LLC, and ARS Acquisition Holdings LLC, Docket No.
BC423798 (Calif. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty.), on Oct. 15, 2009,
for labor law violations.  The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Monica Balderrama, Esq.
          Shawn Westrick, Esq.
          Christian Counts, Esq.
          INITIATIVE LEGAL GROUP
          1800 Century Park East, 2nd Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: 310-556-5637



AUDIOVOX CORP: Suits Over Cell Phone Radiation Remain Pending
-------------------------------------------------------------
Certain consolidated class actions transferred to a Multi-
District Litigation Panel of the U.S. District Court of the
District of Maryland against Audiovox Corp. and other suppliers,
manufacturers and distributors of hand-held wireless telephones
are still pending.

The suits are generally alleging damages relating to exposure to
radio frequency radiation from hand-held wireless telephones.

No further development in the matter were reported in the
company's Oct. 13, 2009 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended Aug. 31,
2009.

Audiovox Corp. -- http://www.audiovox.com/-- is an
international distributor and value added service provider in
the accessory, mobile and consumer electronics industries.


BLUE RIDGE PAPER: Paper Plant Owner Disputes Pollution Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
In Haynes, et al. v. Blue Ridge Products, Inc., Case No.
09-cv-00321 (W.D.N.C., filed Aug. 17, 2009) (Reidinger, J.),
landowners complain that chemicals dumped into the Pigeon River
have turned it brown, caused an odor and made it foam.  The
Plaintiffs say the pollution has hurt their quality of life and
prevented them from using their property, according to a report
by Jon Ostendorff at the Asheville Citizen-Times available at
http://is.gd/4qD6t

Evergreen Packaging, Inc., based in Memphis, Tenn., which owns
the paper plant, reportedly says it will fight the legal action.  

"Water from the mill that is put back into the Pigeon River is
among the best and cleanest from any paper mill in the world,"
Evergreen said in a written statement last week about the
lawsuit, Mr. Ostendorff reports, adding that Blue Ridge has spent
$25 million since 1999 on limiting air and water pollution.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          William Gordon Ball, Esq.
          BALL & SCOTT
          550 West Main Street, Suite 601
          Knoxville, TN 37902
          Telephone: 865-525-7028

               - and -  

          Glen C. Shults, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF GLEN C. SHULTS
          P.O. Box 18687
          Asheville, NC 28814
          Telephone: 828-251-9676

Blue Ridge Paper Products, Inc., is represented by:

          Stephen Lacy Cash, Esq.
          William Clarke, Esq.
          ROBERTS & STEVENS
          P.O. Box 7647
          One West Pack Square, Suite 1100
          Asheville, NC 28802
          Telephone: 828-252-6600


COCA-COLA CO: Calif. Lawsuit Claims False Brain Juice Advertising
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jordan Dunn, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated purchasers of Minute Maid "Nourish Your Brain" Fruit
Juice Beverage, sued The Coca-Cola Company, Docket No. BC423721
(Calif. Super Ct., Los Angeles Cty.), on Oct. 13, 2009.  The
plaintiff says Coca-Cola's advertising of the product is false
and misleading.  The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Paul D. Stevens, Esq.
          Ryan J. Clarkson, Esq.
          MILSTEIN, ADELMAN & FREGER, LLP
          2800 Donald Douglas Loop North
          Santa Monica, CA 90405
          Telephone: 310-396-9600


COMCAST CORP: Sued in Mass. for Misclassifying Installers
---------------------------------------------------------
As a cable-television installer in Massachusetts, Cari Tuna at
The Wall Street Journal reports, Fritz Elienberg drove a van and
wore a shirt emblazoned with "Comcast."  He installed equipment
from Comcast Corp., and customers paid the cable provider for his
work.  Mr. Elienberg wasn't a Comcast employee, Ms. Tuna
explains, but a so-called independent contractor working for a
separate company.  This month, he sued both companies, for
allegedly depriving him and other contractors of overtime pay and
benefits by not considering them employees.

The lawsuit is Elienberg v.      Comcast Corporation/Comcast of
Massachusetts, Inc., and TriWire Engineering Solutions, Case No.
09-cv-11653 (D. Mass.) (O'Toole, J.).  In the Comcast lawsuit,
Mr. Elienber is represented by:

          Harold L. Lichten, Esq.
          LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
          100 Cambridge Street, 20th Floor
          Boston, MA 02114
          Telephone: 617-994-5800
          Fax: 617-994-5801
          E-mail: hlichten@llrlaw.com

Ms. Tuna notes that Mr. Elienberg filed a similar class-action
suit against cable provider RCN Corp. earlier this year.  That
lawsuit is Elienberg v. RCN Corp., RCN Telecom Services of
Massachusetts, Inc., and Custom Cable Concepts, Inc., Case No.
09-cv-10912 (D. Mass.) (Saris, J.).  In the RCN lawsuit:

Mr. Elienberg is represented by:

          Harold L. Lichten, Esq.
          Shannon E. Liss-Riordan, Esq.
          LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
          100 Cambridge Street, 20th Floor
          Boston, MA 02114
          Telephone: 617-994-5800
          Fax: 617-994-5801
          E-mail: hlichten@llrlaw.com

               - and -  

          Ian O. Russell, Esq.
          PYLE, ROME LICHTEN, EHRENBERG & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
          18 Tremont Street, Suite 500
          Boston, MA 02108
          Telephone: 617-994-5800
          Fax: 617-994-5801
          E-mail: irussell@llrlaw.com

RCN Corp. and RCN Telecom are represented by:

          Jeffrey M. Burns, Esq.
          Terence P. McCourt, Esq.
          GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP
          One International Place
          Boston, MA 02110
          Telephone: 617-310-6248
          Fax: 617-897-0948
          E-mail: burnsj@gtlaw.com

Custom Cable is represented by:

          Paul A. Manoff, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF PAUL A. MANOFF
          47 Winter Street, 4th Floor
          Boston, MA 02108
          Telephone: 617-542-4620
          E-mail: trialawyer@yahoo.com

Mr. Elienberg tells Ms. Tuna that TriWire, Comcast's contractor,
fired him after managers found out about the RCN suit and he
questioned his employment status, and he remains unemployed.

Comcast spokesman John Demming tells Ms. Tuna that Mr. Elienberg
was never a Comcast employee, adding that both his shirt and his
van identified him as a Comcast contractor. "We strongly disagree
with the suit and will defend ourselves vigorously," Mr. Demming
says. "We require all of the companies we contract with to comply
with all state and federal laws."  RCN declined to comment.


FIRST BANKS: Securities Lawsuit v. CFHI Dismissed in May 2009
-------------------------------------------------------------
A securities class action complaint against First Banks, Inc.'s
wholly owned subsidiary holding company, Coast Financial
Holdings, Inc., was dismissed in May 2009, according to the
company's Aug. 13, 2009, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30,
2009.

Prior to acquisition by First Banks, CFHI and certain of its
present and former officers were named as defendants in three
purported class action complaints filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division (the
Court) alleging violations of the federal securities laws, the
first of which was filed with the Court on March 20, 2007 (the
Securities Actions).

On June 22, 2007, the Court entered an order pursuant to which
the Court: (i) consolidated the Securities Actions, with the
matter proceeding under the docket for "Grand Lodge of
Pennsylvania v. Brian P. Peters, et al., Case No. 8:07-cv-429-T-
26-EAJ;" and (ii) appointed Troy Ratcliff and Daniel Altenburg
(the Lead Plaintiffs) as lead plaintiffs pursuant to the
provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of
1995.

Subsequent to the disposition of certain preliminary motions
filed by plaintiffs and defendants, on April 2, 2008, the Lead
Plaintiffs and an additional plaintiff, St. Denis J. Villere &
Co., LLC, filed a second consolidated amended class action
complaint (the Amended Complaint).

The Amended complaint named as defendants (i) certain former
officers and members of CFHI's board of directors, (ii) the
underwriters of CFHI's October 5, 2005 public offering of common
stock, and (iii) CFHI's external auditors.

The Amended Complaint was brought on behalf of a putative class
of purchasers of CFHI's common stock between Jan. 21, 2005 and
Jan. 22, 2007.

In general, the Amended Complaint alleges that CFHI's U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission filings and public statements
contained misstatements and omissions regarding its residential
construction-to-permanent lending operations and, more
specifically, regarding a home builder and its affiliates, and
also alleges that CFHI's financial statements violated U.S.
generally accepted accounting principles.

The Amended Complaint asserts claims under Sections 11 and 15 of
the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder.

On Aug. 30, 2007, the Lead Plaintiffs filed a notice with the
Court voluntarily dismissing their claims against Anne V. Lee
and Justin D. Locke without prejudice.

On Feb. 17, 2009, CFHI and the plaintiffs entered into an
agreement for the settlement of the Securities Actions.
Pursuant to the agreement, CFHI and its insurer will pay an
amount in settlement of the claims, and CFHI, the former officer
and director defendants, and the underwriter defendants will be
released and dismissed with prejudice from the action.  In
accordance with the agreement, on March 16, 2009, CFHI paid its
allocation of the settlement in the amount of $750,000, which
was recorded as other expense in the consolidated statement of
operations for the year ended Dec. 31, 2008.

Among other terms and conditions, the settlement is subject to
approval by the Court and will not be consummated if the Court
fails to grant approval.

On May 29, 2009, the settlement was approved by the Court and all
claims were dismissed.

First Banks, Inc. -- http://www.firstbanks.com-- keeps it in
the family. The holding company for First Bank is owned by
chairman James Dierberg and his family, and a number of its
branches and ATMs are located in Dierbergs Markets, a Missouri-
based grocery chain owned by relatives of the chairman.  First
Bank has about 215 branches in California, Florida, Illinois,
Missouri, and Texas, with a concentration in metropolitan
markets such as Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Los Angeles, St.
Louis, San Diego, San Francisco, and Tampa. The bank offers
standard services like deposit products, mortgages, and business
and consumer loans in addition to brokerage, insurance, trust,
private banking, and institutional money management services.


FLOTEK INDUSTRIES: Faces Stockholder Securities Suit in Texas
-------------------------------------------------------------
Flotek Industries, Inc., faces a stockholder class action suit
seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934.

On Aug. 7, 2009, a class action suit was commenced in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Texas on behalf of
purchasers of the common stock of the company between May 8, 2007
and Jan. 23, 2008, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that, throughout the time period indicated,
Flotek failed to disclose material adverse facts about the
Company's true financial condition, business and prospects.  

Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants failed to
disclose the following adverse facts, among others:

   (i) the company was experiencing weakness in its Rocky
       Mountain sales region due to its decision to not cut
       prices to the level of its competitors;

  (ii) the company's operating profit margins were being
       negatively impacted as customers increasingly opted to
       rent equipment instead of purchasing it;

(iii) sales in the company's chemicals division were declining
       due to a decrease in fracing activity; and

  (iv) as a result of the foregoing, defendants' positive
       statements concerning the company's guidance and
       prospects were lacking in a reasonable basis at all
       relevant times.

Since Aug. 7, 2009, several other class action suits have been
commenced by others concerning the foregoing matters.  At this
time and due to the recent filing of the lawsuits the company is
unable to provide further details, according to its Aug. 13,
2009, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2009.

Flotek Industries, Inc. -- http://www.flotekind.com/home.php--  
is supplying drilling and production related products and
services to the energy and mining industries.  The company's core
focus is oilfield specialty chemicals and logistics, downhole
drilling tools and downhole production tools.  Flotek offers its
products primarily through its sales organizations, as well as
through independent distributors and agents.  The company's
reportable segments are Chemical and Logistics, Drilling Products
and Artificial Lift.  All three segments market products
domestically and internationally.  The company acquired the
assets of Teledrift Inc., which designs and manufactures wireless
survey and measurement while drilling tools, on Feb. 14, 2008.


FRITO-LAY: Charged by Route Salesperson with Labor Law Violations
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jose Uitz, individually and on behalf of other persons similarly
situated, sued Frito-Lay, Inc., and Rolling Frito-Lay Sales, LP,
Docket No. BC424017 (Calif. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty.), on
Oct. 15, 2009.  The complaint accuses the snack food manufacturer
and distributor of not paying what's owed to route salespeople.  
The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gregory N. Karasik, Esq.
          SPIRO MOSS LLP
          11377 W. Olympic Blvd., 5th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90064-1683
          Telephone: 310-235-2468


GAMING PARTNERS: Second Amended "Kaplan" Lawsuit Pending in Nev.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gaming Partners International Corp. continues to face a second
amended complaint in the purported class action suit entitled,
"Robert J. Kaplan v. Gerard P. Charlier, Melody J. Sullivan
a/k/a Melody Sullivan Yowell, David Grimes, Charles T.
McCullough, Eric P. Endy, Elisabeth Carrette and Gaming Partners
International Corporation."

On June 27, 2007, a putative class action complaint alleging
violations of federal securities laws based on alleged
misstatements and omissions by the company, entitled, "Robert J.
Kaplan v. Gerard P. Charlier, Paul S. Dennis, Eric P. Endy,
Alain Thieffry, Elisabeth Carrette, Robert J. Kelly, Charles R.
Henry, Laura McAllister Cox and Gaming Partners International
Corporation, Case No. 2:07-cv-00849-LDG-GWF," was filed in the
U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada, under.

Mr. Kaplan has been designated by the court as lead plaintiff.

On Feb. 12, 2008, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint,
deleting several of the originally named defendants, and adding
three others.  The action is now captioned, "Robert J. Kaplan v.
Gerard P. Charlier, Melody J. Sullivan a/k/a Melody Sullivan
Yowell, David Grimes, Charles T. McCullough, Eric P. Endy,
Elisabeth Carrette and Gaming Partners International
Corporation."

The defendants, on April 16, 2008, filed a motion to dismiss the
complaint.

Defendants' Motion to Dismiss was thereafter granted and an
Order was entered dismissing the Amended Complaint without
prejudice on Nov. 18, 2008.  Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended
Complaint on Jan. 9, 2009.  Defendants Motion to Dismiss the
Second Amended Complaint was filed on Feb. 27, 2009, and remains
pending, according to the company's Aug. 13, 2009, Form 10-Q
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarter ended June 30, 2009.

Gaming Partners International Corp. -- http://www.gpigaming.com/
-- manufactures and supplies casino table game equipment.  The
Company's business activities include the manufacture and/or
supply of gaming chips, table layouts, wheels, playing cards,
dice, gaming furniture and miscellaneous table accessories,
which are used in conjunction with casino table games, such as
blackjack, poker, baccarat, craps and roulette.  It has three
subsidiaries: Gaming Partners International USA, Inc. (GPI USA),
Gaming Partners International SAS (GPI SAS) and GPI Mexicana
S.A. de C.V. (GPI Mexicana).  GPIC's products are sold to
licensed casinos primarily in the United States and Canada,
under the brand names Paulson, Bourgogne et Grasset (B&G), Bud
Jones and T-K.  The Company has existing production facilities
in Las Vegas, Nevada; San Luis Rio Colorado, Mexico, and Beaune,
France.


GREENHOUSE: Consumers Sue Trendy Manhattan Club for Racial Bias
---------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Feeney at the New York Daily News reports that fiction
author Teri Woods invited 175 people to party at the trendy SoHo
Greenhouse nightclub to celebrate her new book, but ended up in
tears when she found almost her entire guest list being kept
outside the club's notorious velvet rope.

Now a $1 billion class-action suit says the partygoers were
denied entry because they were black.

"They should have just put up a sign that said, 'No Coloreds
Allowed,'" fumed Kashan Robinson, 39, of the Bronx, one of the
plaintiffs.  "There was no reason for them to not allow us into
that club, except for the color of our skin."

Club owner Barry Mullineaux declined to discuss what had happened
to Ms. Woods' party beyond calling charges of racism "all pretty
much bogus."

Mr. Feeney's full report is available at http://is.gd/4qOYi


HARRAH'S ENTERTAINMENT: Suit Over Debt Plan Dismissed in June
-------------------------------------------------------------
A purported class-action suit by two bondholders against Harrah's
Entertainment, Inc., in the Delaware court was dismissed in June
2009.

The suit was filed on Jan. 9, 2009, in the U.S. District Court
for the District of Delaware by S. Blake Murchison and Willis
Shaw.

Named as defendants in the case are:

       -- Harrah's Entertainment Inc.,
       -- Harrah's Operating Company Inc.,
       -- Charles L. Atwood,
       -- Jeffrey Benjamin,
       -- David Bonderman,
       -- Anthony Civale,
       -- Jonathan Coslet,
       -- Kelvin Davis,
       -- Jeanne P. Jackson,
       -- Gary W. Loveman,
       -- Karl Peterson,
       -- Eric Press,
       -- Marc Rowman,
       -- Lynn C. Swann, and
       -- Christopher J. Williams.

The two bondholders claim that the recent debt-exchange deal
engineered by Harrah's benefited some big corporate bondholders
while placing other classes of bondholders in jeopardy, should
Harrah's default on its debt or file for bankruptcy protection,
reports The Las Vegas Sun.

Harrah's is "on the verge of bankruptcy, debt default and other
events of insolvency," the lawsuit charges.

According to the suit, a copy of which was obtained by The Las
Vegas Sun, "In an effort to ensure that only a limited class of
individuals and entities reap the rewards of their debt
investments in Harrah's to the detriment of other investors,
defendants have completed bond tender offers that benefit those
select individuals and entities to the exclusion of all others.
Without any lawful justification for cherry-picking among its
investors, defendants' bond tender offers have allowed those
elite individuals and entities to obtain newly-issued bonds that
will take priority over and otherwise subordinate previously-
issued bonds of the exact same category."

It charges, "Plaintiffs' bond holdings have been subordinated to
the newly-issued bonds and, as a result, have been likely
rendered worthless as the specter of Harrah's insolvency
approaches," according to The Las Vegas Sun report.

On April 30, 2009, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the
amended complaint.

Prior to responding to the motion to dismiss, the defendants
stipulated to the plaintiff's request to dismiss the lawsuit,
without prejudice, which the court entered on June 18, 2009.  
Both sides have reserved the right to request the court to award
attorneys fees, according to the company's Aug. 13, 2009, Form
10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for
the quarter ended June 30, 2009.  

The suit is Murchison, et al v. Harrah's Entertainment Inc., et
al., Case No. 09-cv-00020 (D. Del.) (Robinson, J.).

Representing the plaintiffs is:

          Joseph A. Rosenthal, Esq.
          ROSENTHAL, MONHAIT & GODDESS, P.A.
          Mellon Bank Center, Suite 1401
          P.O. Box 1070
          919 Market Street
          Wilmington, DE 19899-1070
          Phone: (302) 656-4433
          E-mail: jrosenthal@rmgglaw.com

Representing the defendants is:

          Kelly E. Farnan, Esq.
          RICHARDS, LAYTON & FINGER, PA
          One Rodney Square
          920 N. King Street
          Wilmington, DE 19801
          Phone: (302) 651-7705
          E-mail: farnan@rlf.com


HEALTHMARKETS INC: Nov. 23 Final Settlement Fairness Hearing Set
----------------------------------------------------------------
A Nov. 23, 2009 settlement fairness hearing has been set for a
putative class action against Mid-West National Life Insurance
Company of Tennessee, a principal insurance subsidiary of
HealthMarkets, Inc.

The lawsuit, filed on Nov. 7, 2008, in the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of Ohio, is styled Cynthia Hrnyak, on
behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Mid-West
National Life Insurance Company of Tennessee, Case No.
1:08CV2642.

Plaintiff has alleged several causes of action, including breach
of contract, unjust enrichment and violation of the Ohio Revised
Code Annotated Section 3918.08, arising from the alleged failure
to refund unearned premium on credit insurance policies issued
by Mid-West in connection with automobile loans when such loans
terminated early.

Plaintiff seeks an order certifying the suit as a nationwide
class action, compensatory and punitive damages and injunctive
relief.

The parties have agreed on the terms of a proposed settlement.

On June 24, 2009, the Court signed a preliminary order approving
such terms; however, any final settlement of this matter is
subject to a fairness hearing scheduled for Nov. 23, 2009.  

The company believes that any final settlement of this matter
will be on terms that do not have a material adverse effect on
its consolidated financial condition and results of operations,
according
to its Aug. 13, 2009, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2009.

HealthMarkets, Inc. -- http://www.healthmarkets.com/-- is a
holding company conducting its insurance businesses through the
Company's indirect, wholly owned insurance company subsidiaries,
The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company (MEGA), Mid-West
National Life Insurance Company of Tennessee (Mid-West), and The
Chesapeake Life Insurance Company (Chesapeake).


HEALTHMARKETS INC: Discovery in Consolidated FLSA Suit Ongoing
--------------------------------------------------------------
Discovery in the consolidated collective action filed against
HealthMarkets, Inc., under the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act
is ongoing.

HealthMarkets is a party to three separate FLSA collective
actions filed on May 26, 2005, in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division:

   -- Sherrie Blair et al., v. Cornerstone America et al., Civil
      Action No. 4:04-CV-333-Y;

   -- Norm Campbell et al., v. Cornerstone America et al., Civil
      Action No. 4:05-CV-334-Y; and

   -- Joseph Hopkins et al., v. Cornerstone America et al.,
      Civil Action No. 4:05-CV-332-Y.

On Dec. 9, 2005, the Court consolidated all of the actions and
made the Hopkins suit the lead case. In each of the cases,
plaintiffs, for themselves and on behalf of others similarly
situated, seek to recover unpaid overtime wages alleged to be due
under section 16(b) of the FLSA.

The complaints allege that the named plaintiffs (consisting of
former district sales leaders and regional sales leaders in the
Cornerstone America independent agent hierarchy) were employees
within the meaning of the FLSA and are therefore entitled, among
other relief, to recover unpaid overtime wages under the terms of
the FLSA.

The parties filed motions for summary judgment on Aug. 1, 2006.

On March 30, 2007, the Court denied HealthMarkets and Mid-West's
motion and granted the plaintiffs' motion.

On Aug. 2, 2007, the District Court granted HealthMarkets and
Mid-West's motion for interlocutory appeal but denied requests to
stay the litigation.

In September 2007, the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals
granted HealthMarkets' and Mid-West's petition to hear the
interlocutory appeal and, in October 2008, affirmed the trial
court's ruling in favor of plaintiffs on the issue of their
status as employees under the FLSA and remanded the case to the
trial court for further proceedings.

On March 23, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court denied HealthMarkets'
and Mid-West's petition for writ of certiorari.

A court-approved notice to prospective participants in the
collective action was mailed in April 2008, providing prospective
participants with the ability to file "opt-in" elections.

The company is in the process of evaluating the impact that these
matters may have on its relationships with agentss, according to
its Aug. 13, 2009, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2009.

HealthMarkets, Inc. -- http://www.healthmarkets.com/-- is a
holding company conducting its insurance businesses through the
Company's indirect, wholly owned insurance company subsidiaries,
The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company (MEGA), Mid-West
National Life Insurance Company of Tennessee (Mid-West), and The
Chesapeake Life Insurance Company (Chesapeake).


INTERNATIONAL GAME: Trial in Brochu v. Loto Quebec Suit Ongoing
---------------------------------------------------------------
Trial is ongoing in the class action styled, Brochu v. Loto
Quebec, according to International Game Technology's Aug. 13,
2009, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2009.

Loto Quebec commenced an action in warranty against VLC, Inc., a
wholly-owned subsidiary of IGT, and another manufacturer of
video lottery machines in October 2003, in the Superior Court of
the Province of Quebec, District of Quebec, seeking
indemnification for any damages that may be awarded against Loto
Quebec in a class action suit, also filed in the Superior Court
of the Province of Quebec.

The class action claim against Loto Quebec, to which neither IGT
nor any of its affiliates are parties, was filed by Jean Brochu
on behalf of himself and a class of other persons who allegedly
developed pathological behaviors through the play of video
lottery machines made available by Loto Quebec in taverns and
other public locations.

In this action, the plaintiff seeks to recover on behalf of the
class damages of approximately CAD$578.7 million, representing
CAD$4,863 per class member, and CAD$119.0 million in punitive
damages. Loto Quebec filed its Plea in Defense in the main
action in February 2006.

On Aug. 1, 2008, Loto Quebec filed a discontinuance of the
action in warranty against VLC.  Notwithstanding the
discontinuance, Loto Quebec may still pursue the claims it
asserted, or could have asserted, in the action in warranty
through arbitration against VLC.

The trial of the class action against Loto Quebec commenced on
Sept. 15, 2008 and is ongoing.

International Game Technology -- http://www.igt.com/-- is a
global gaming company specializing in the design, manufacture,
and marketing of electronic gaming equipment and network
systems, as well as licensing and services.  The Company
maintains an array of entertainment-inspired gaming product
lines.  In addition to its United States production facilities
in Nevada, it manufactures gaming products in the United Kingdom
and through a third-party manufacturer in Japan.  The Company
derives its revenues from the distribution of electronic gaming
equipment and network systems, as well as licensing and
services.  Gaming operations generate recurring revenues by
providing customers with its proprietary gaming equipment and
network systems, as well as licensing, services, and component
parts.  Its product sales include the sale of gaming equipment
and network systems, as well as licensing, services, and
component parts.  In January 2009, it acquired certain operating
assets of Progressive Gaming International Corp.


INTERNATIONAL GAME: Faces IBEW Securities Fraud Suit in Nevada
--------------------------------------------------------------
A putative securities fraud class action, IBEW Local 697 Pension
Fund v. International Game Technology, et al., is pending in the
U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada.

On July 30, 2009, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Local 697 filed a putative securities fraud class action in the
U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada, alleging causes
of action under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act against IGT and certain of its officers, one of whom
is a director.  

The complaint alleges that between Nov. 1, 2007 and Oct. 30,
2008, the defendants inflated IGT's stock price through a series
of materially false and misleading statements or omissions
regarding IGT's business, operations, and prospects.  

Plaintiff's counsel issued a press release on July 30, 2009,
announcing the lawsuit's pendency, the claims asserted, the
purported class period, and the right of any class member to seek
lead plaintiff status.  

This press release initiated the 60-day statutory period for
shareholders to file a motion to seek lead-plaintiff status,
according to International Game Technology's Aug. 13, 2009, Form
10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for
the quarter ended June 30, 2009.

International Game Technology -- http://www.igt.com/-- is a
global gaming company specializing in the design, manufacture,
and marketing of electronic gaming equipment and network
systems, as well as licensing and services.  The Company
maintains an array of entertainment-inspired gaming product
lines.  In addition to its United States production facilities
in Nevada, it manufactures gaming products in the United Kingdom
and through a third-party manufacturer in Japan.  The Company
derives its revenues from the distribution of electronic gaming
equipment and network systems, as well as licensing and
services.  Gaming operations generate recurring revenues by
providing customers with its proprietary gaming equipment and
network systems, as well as licensing, services, and component
parts.  Its product sales include the sale of gaming equipment
and network systems, as well as licensing, services, and
component parts.  In January 2009, it acquired certain operating
assets of Progressive Gaming International Corp.


LEAR CORP: Consolidated Securities Fraud Suit Resolved in June
--------------------------------------------------------------
A consolidated securities fraud class-action suit against Lear
Corp., was resolved in June 2009.

A former Lear employee filed the purported class-action suit in
April 2006 before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Michigan against the company, certain members of its
board of directors, members of its Employee Benefits Committee,
and certain members of its human resources personnel.

The suit alleges violations of the Employment Retirement Income
Security Act with respect to the company's retirement savings
plans for salaried and hourly employees.

In the second quarter of 2006, the company was served with three
additional purported class action ERISA lawsuits, each of which
contained similar allegations against it, the members of its
Board, members of its EBC and certain members of its senior
management and its human resources personnel.

The court subsequently consolidated the four lawsuits as "In re:
Lear Corp. ERISA Litigation."  The plaintiffs filed a
consolidated complaint, which alleges breaches of fiduciary
duties substantially similar to those alleged in the four
individually filed lawsuits.  The consolidated complaint
continued to name the same defendants, but added certain other
current and former members of the EBC.

The consolidated complaint generally alleges that the defendants
breached their fiduciary duties to plan participants in
connection with the administration of Lear's retirement savings
plans for salaried and hourly employees.

The fiduciary duty claims are largely based on allegations of
breaches of the fiduciary duties of prudence and loyalty and of
over-concentration of plan assets in the company's common stock.

The plaintiffs purport to bring these claims on behalf of the
plans and all persons who were participants in or beneficiaries
of the plans from Oct. 21, 2004, to the present and seek to
recover losses allegedly suffered by the plans.  The complaints
do not specify the amount of damages sought.

During the fourth quarter of 2006, the defendants asked to have
all defendants and all counts in the consolidated complaint
dismissed.  The court denied this dismissal motion during the
second quarter of 2007.

On Aug. 8, 2007, the court ordered that discovery be completed
by April 30, 2008.

During the first quarter of 2008, the parties exchanged written
discovery requests, the defendants filed with the court a motion
to compel the plaintiffs to provide more complete discovery
responses, which was granted in part and denied in part, and the
plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification.

In mid-April 2008, the parties entered into an agreement to stay
all matters pending mediation.  The mediation took place on May
12, 2008, but has not resulted in a settlement to date.

The defendants took the named plaintiffs' depositions in June
2008.  Discovery closed on June 23, 2008, and the defendants
filed their opposition to the plaintiffs' motion for class
certification on July 7, 2008.

The plaintiffs have requested additional time for discovery, and
the court has not yet ruled on that request.

On Sept. 25, 2008, the parties informed the court that they had
reached a settlement in principle.  The parties currently are
negotiating the terms of the full settlement agreement and class
notification, court approval and other related filings.

On March 6, 2009, the parties executed a class action settlement
agreement.  The settlement agreement provides, among other
things, for the payment of $5.3 million into a settlement fund
in exchange for a release of all defendants from any and all of
plaintiffs' claims, whether known or unknown, based upon
investment in the Company's common stock or the Lear Corporation
Stock Fund by or through the plans from Oct. 21, 2004 through
March 6, 2009.

The court preliminarily certified the class and preliminarily
approved the settlement agreement during a hearing on March 23,
2009.

The court entered its final order certifying the class and
approving the settlement agreement on June 22, 2009, and this
matter has now been resolved other than routine administration of
the settlement, according to the company's Aug. 13, 2009, Form
10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for
the quarter ended June 30, 2009.

The suit is Malloy v. Lear Corp., et al., Case No. 06-cv-11735
(E.D. Mich.) (O'Meara, J.)

Representing the plaintiffs is:

          Stephen F. Wasinger, Esq.
          STEPHEN F. WASINGER, PLC
          32121 Woodward Avenue
          300 Balmoral Centre
          Royal Oak, MI 48073-0999
          Phone: 248-554-6306
          E-mail: sfw@sfwlaw.com

Representing the defendant is:

          Thomas G. McNeill, Esq.
          DICKINSON WRIGHT
          500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 4000
          Detroit, MI 48226-3425
          Phone: 313-223-3500
          E-mail: TMcNeill@dickinsonwright.com


NOVA SCOTIA: Students Threaten to Sue If Strike Not Resolved
------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Gooding, writing for the Amherst Daily News, reports
that With time slipping away toward a strike by the staff and
faculty of Nova Scotia Community Colleges across the province,
students of the Cumberland campus took charge of their fate and
launched a media campaign announcing they will seek out legal
action if the province doesn't agree to binding arbitration.

In between cell-phone calls to media outlets and lawyers, Mr.
Gooding relates, Ruby Hunter and Charlene Woods met with fellow
students, Springhill mayor Allen Dill and Gary Brown,
representing federal Liberal candidate Jim Burrows, on Friday.
Their goal, the human resource students say, is for the province
and the Nova Scotia Teachers Union to avoid a strike and
disruption of classes.  Otherwise, the province could be facing a
class-action suit with 25,000 NSCC students listed as the
plaintiffs.

Mr. Gooding's complete report is available at:

     http://www.amherstdaily.com/index.cfm?sid=295561&sc=58


ON2 TECHNOLOGIES: Defends Suits Google Merger Agreement Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
On2 Technologies, Inc., is defending two purported class action
complaints filed in relation to the merger agreement with Google
Inc., according to the company's Aug. 12, 2009, Form 10-Q filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter
ended June 30, 2009.

On Aug. 10, 2009, the company was served with two complaints, one
filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware and
another filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York,
County of Queens.

Both complaints generally allege, among other things, that the
members of the company's board of directors breached their
fiduciary duties to the stockholders of the company in connection
with negotiating and entering into the previously disclosed
merger agreement with Google Inc., and that Google and the
company aided and abetted in such alleged breaches of the
directors' duties.  

Both complaints seek, among other things, declaratory and
injunctive relief and the Delaware complaint also seeks damages
in an unspecified amount.  

On2 Technologies, Inc. -- http://www.on2.com/-- is a developer  
of video compression technology and technology that enables the
creation, transmission, and playback of multimedia in resource-
limited environments, such as cellular networks transmitting to
battery operated mobile handsets or high definition (HD) video
transmitted over the Internet.


PEROT SYSTEMS: Another Lawsuit Challenges Dell Transaction
----------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that Perot Systems shareholders
say the company is selling itself too cheaply to Dell computers
because Dell has arranged for Perot directors to rake in $64
million from the deal. Shareholders say Dell's $30 per share
offer is too low, and that a $130 million "no shop" penalty
prevents the Perot board from seeking a better deal.
     
The deal, which is expected to be closed by January, compels
Perot Systems to tell Dell if a third party makes a better offer,
so that Dell can match it.  This "discourage(s) bidders from
making a competing bid," the class claims.
     
Shareholders say the defendant companies are profiting unfairly
from the nation's economic meltdown.  Perot Systems increased its
earnings by 4 percent in the first quarter of 2009 over the first
quarter of 2008, illustrating that the $3.9 billion offer does
not reflect the company's actual worth, according to the
complaint.
     
Lead plaintiff Delores Lawrie says Perot Systems' SEC filing
leaves shareholders in the dark: it does not state how much Dell
has paid Goldman Sachs for past services, nor how much Goldman
Sachs is getting for advising Perot Systems on this sale, a
possible conflict of interest.
     
The class wants the sale enjoined, or rescinded if it is
completed before the court decides the case.

A copy of the Complaint in Lawrie v. Altabef, et al., Cause No.
296-03947-2009 (Tex. Dist. Ct., __ J. Dist., Collin Cty.), is
available at:

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/10/19/DellPerot.pdf

Ms. Lawrie is represented:

          Willie Briscoe, Esq.
          THE BRISCOE LAW FIRM, LLP
          8117 Preston Road, Suite 300
          Dallas, TX 75225
          Telephone: 214-706-9314

               - and -  

          Joseph Levi, Esq.
          Juan E. Monteverde, Esq.
          LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
          30 Broad Street, 15th Floor
          New York, NY 10004
          Telephone: 212-363-7500

Coverage of Booth Family Trust v. Perot Systems Inc., et al.,
Cause No. DC-09-13538 (Tex. Dist. Ct., Dallas Cty.), also
claiming that the $3.9 billion Dell Inc., is offering to Perot
shareholders is inadequate, filed on Oct. 5, 2009, appeared in
the Class Action Reporter on Oct. 13, 2009.


PUBLIC STORAGE: Review Bid in "Brinkley" Suit Pending in Calif.
---------------------------------------------------------------
A petition for review of the rulings in the purported class
action suit, Brinkley v. Public Storage, Inc., remains pending,
according to Public Storage Properties, Ltd.'s Aug. 13, 2009,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended June 30, 2009.  

The complaint was filed in April 2005 in the Superior Court of
California for Los Angeles County.

The plaintiff sued the company on behalf of a purported class of
California non-exempt employees based on various California wage
and hour laws and seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief.

In May 2006, a motion for class certification was filed seeking
to certify five subclasses. Plaintiff sought certification for
alleged meal period violations, rest period  violations, failure
to pay for travel time, failure to pay for mileage reimbursement,
and for wage statement violations.

In October 2006, the Court declined to certify three out of the
five subclasses. The Court did, however, certify subclasses based
on alleged meal period and wage statement violations.  
Subsequently, the company filed a motion for summary judgment
seeking to dismiss the matter in its entirety.

On June 22, 2007, the Court granted the company's summary
judgment motion as to the causes of action relating to the
subclasses certified and dismissed those claims.  The only
surviving claims are those relating to the named plaintiff.  

The plaintiff has filed an appeal to the Court's June 22, 2007
summary judgment ruling.  On Oct. 28, 2008, the Court of Appeals
sustained the trial court's ruling.  

The plaintiff filed a petition for review with the California
Supreme Court, which was granted but further action in this
matter was deferred pending consideration and disposition of a
related issue in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court,
which is pending before the California Supreme Court.

Public Storage Properties, Ltd. was established to engage in the
business of developing and operating self-storage facilities for
personal and business use.  The Partnership is the owner and
operator of self-storage facilities.  The Partnership manages
over 2,100 self-storage facilities located in 38 United States
states and seven western European nations with approximately 135
million net rentable square feet.  Through one of its affiliates,
PS Business Parks, the Partnership has an equity interest in
approximately 19 million net rentable square feet of commercial
and industrial space located in eight states.  Self-storage
facilities in which the Partnership has invested consist of 3 to
7 buildings containing an aggregate of between approximately 250
to 1,100 storage spaces, most of which have between 25 and 400
square feet and an interior height of approximately 8 to 12 feet.


REPUBLIC WASTE: Fla. Ct. Certifies Cecos Site Plaintiff Class
-------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Anderson at The Advocate reports that District Judge Ernest
Drake in Florida's 21st Judicial District Court has certified a
plaintiff class consisting of everybody living within the a six-
mile radius of the Cecos hazardous waste site (now owned by
Republic Waste) between 1977 and 1990.  

The Plaintiffs' lawyers:

          Lewis O. Unglesby, Esq.
          UNGLESBY & MARIONNEAUX
          246 Napoleon Street
          Baton Rouge, LA 70802
          Telephone: (225) 387-0120

               - and -  

          Calvin C. Fayard, Jr., Esq.
          FAYARD & HONEYCUTT
          519 Florida Avenue Southwest
          Denham Springs, LA 70726
          Telephone: (225) 664-0304
          
tell Mr. Anderson that thousands of people are included in the
class definition.  Mr. Anderson's full report is available at
http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/64713967.html  


SCORES HOLDING: Discovery in "Diaz" Wage and Hour Suit Ongoing
--------------------------------------------------------------
A purported class-action suit, Diaz v. Scores Holding Company,
Inc. et al., is in discovery, according to the company's Aug. 13,
2009, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2009. .

The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York against Scores Holding Co., Inc., formerly
Adonis Energy, Inc.

On Oct. 9, 2007, former Go West bartender Siri Diaz filed the
purported class action suit and collective action on behalf of
all tipped employees against the company and other defendants
alleging violations of federal and state wage/hour laws.

The suit is captioned, "Siri Diaz et al. v. Scores Holding
Company, Inc.; Go West Entertainment, Inc. a/k/a Scores West
Side; and Scores Entertainment, Inc., a/k/a Scores East Side,
Case No. 07 Civ. 8718," which was filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York.

On Nov. 6, 2007, the plaintiffs served an amended purported
class-action and collective action complaint, naming dancers and
servers as additional plaintiffs and alleging the same
violations of federal and state wage and hour laws.

On or about Feb. 21, 2008, the plaintiffs served a second
amended complaint adding two additional party defendants, but
limiting the action to persons employed in the New York Scores'
clubs.  The amended complaint alleges that the defendants are
"an integrated enterprise" and that the company jointly employ
the plaintiffs, subjecting all of the defendants to liability
for the alleged wage/hour violations.

On April 18, 2008, co-defendant Go West filed for bankruptcy.

On behalf of Scores Holding and the other defendants, the
company filed a motion to dismiss that portion of the complaint
that asserted state law class action allegations.  The company
also moved to dismiss the claims of two of the named plaintiffs
for failure to appear for depositions.

At the same time, the plaintiffs moved for conditional
certification under the federal law for a class of the servers,
bartenders and dancers.

On May 9, 2008, the court issued its decision, denying the
motion to dismiss and granting conditional certification for a
class of servers, cocktail waitresses, bartenders and dancers
who have worked at Scores East since October 2004.

The case is stayed as against Go West pursuant to the bankruptcy
law.  The court directed that notice be sent to all potential
class members.

Discovery into both the procedural and substantive issues is
ongoing, as are settlement negotiations.

The suit is Diaz v. Scores Holding Company, Inc. et al., Case
No. 07-cv-08718 (SDNY) (Berman, J.)

Representing the plaintiffs is:

         Tammy Marzigliano, Esq.
         OUTTEN & GOLDEN LAW FIRM
         3 Park Avenue, 29th Floor
         New York, NY 10016
         Phone: 212-245-1000
         Fax: 212-977-4005
         E-mail: tm@outtengolden.com

Representing the defendants is:

         Jerrold Foster Goldberg, Esq.
         GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
         200 Park Avenue
         New York, NY 10166
         Phone: 212-801-9209
         Fax: 212-805-9209
         E-mail: GoldbergJ@gtlaw.com


SUR LA TABLE: Retailer Sued for Alleged Labor Law Violations
-----------------------------------------------------------
Shane Upson, individually and on behalf of members of the general
public similarly situated, sued Sur La Table, Inc., Docket No.
BC424012 (Calif. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty.), on Oct. 15, 2009.  
The Plaintiff says the 76-store national retailer violated labor
laws.  The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Matthew Righetti, Esq.
          John Glugoski, Esq.
          RIGHETTI LAW FIRM, PC
          456 Montgomery Street, Suite 1400
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: 415-983-0900

               - and -  

          Edwin Aiwazian, Esq.
          Ghazaleh Hekmatjah, Esq.
          THE AIWAZIAN LAW FIRM
          410 W. Arden Avenue, Suite 203
          Glendale, CA 91203
          Telephone: 818-265-1020


T-MOBILE: Sued, with MSFT & Danger, Over Sidekick in N.D. Calif.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Eli Mapstead v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., et al, Case No. 09-cv-04901
(N.D. Calif.), accuses T-Mobile USA, Inc., Danger, Inc., and
Microsfot Corporation, of misrepresenting and concealing material
information in their marketing, advertising and sale of Sidekick
services.  The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ira P. Rothken, Esq.
          ROTHKEN LAW FIRM
          3 Hamilton Landing, Suite 280
          Novato, CA 94949
          Telephone: 415-924-4250
          E-mail: ira@techfirm.com

               - and -  

          Seth R. Lesser, Esq.
          KLAFTER OLSEN & LESSER LLP
          Two International Drive, Suite 350
          Rye Brook, NY 10573
          Telephone: 914-934-9200
          E-mail: seth@kalfterolsen.com

Information about a similar Sidekick suit, Thompson v. T-Mobile
USA, Inc., et al., Case No. 09-cv-04854 (N.D. Calif.) (Lloyd,
M.J.), appeared in the Oct. 16, 2009, edition of the Class Action
Reporter.


WEIGHT WATCHERS: "Sabatino" Labor Law Case Removed to N.D. Calif.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Weight Watchers North America, Inc., removed Elaine Sabatino's
class action lawsuit alleging labor law violations on behalf of a
class of at least 1,000 individuals from state to federal court
on Oct. 16, 2009.   

The state court proceeding is Sabatino v. Weight Watchers North
America, Inc., Docket No. CGC-09-492651 (Calif. Super. Ct., San
Francisco Cty., filed Sept. 17, 2009).  The federal court
proceeding is Sabatino v. Weight Watchers North America, Inc.,
Case No. 09-cv-4926 (N.D. Calif.).  

Weight Watchers says it "denies any liability in this case" and
"intends to vigorously oppose class certification."

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Arthur A. Navarette, Esq.
          C. Zane Becker, Esq.
          NAVARETTE LAW FIRM
          1625 The Alameda, Suite 700
          San Jose, CA 95126
          Telephone: 408-275-9500

               - and -  

          Steven G. Zeiff, Esq.
          Kenneth J. Sugarman, Esq.
          RUDY, EXELROD, ZIEFF & LOEW, LLP
          351 California St., Suite 700
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: 415-434-9800

Weight Watchers is represented by:

          Christopher J. Martin, Esq.
          Rachel S. Brass, Esq.
          GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
          666 Mission Street, Suite 3300
          San Francisco, CA 94105-2933
          Telephone: 415-393-8200

               - and -  

          Jesse A. Cripps, Jr., Esq.
          GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
          333 South Grand Avenue
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: 213-229-7000

                            *********

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.  Gracele D. Canilao, Leah Felisilda 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  * * *