/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/100325.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Thursday, March 25, 2010, Vol. 12, No. 59 Headlines CLEARWIRE CORP: Suit on Unlawful Phone Calls Pending in Wash. CLEARWIRE CORP: Amended Complaint Dismissed in February FRESENIUS MEDICAL: Suits Over Fraudulent Merger Remain Stayed FRESENIUS MEDICAL: Suit Over RCG Acquisition Pending in Tenn. JPMORGAN CHASE: Securities Suits v. Bear Stearns Pending in N.Y. JPMORGAN CHASE: Bid to Junk ERISA Suit v. Bear Stearns Pending JPMORGAN CHASE: Bear Stearns Defends Suit Over Securities Breach JPMORGAN CHASE: Ruling in Bear Stearns Litigation on Appeal JPMORGAN CHASE: Merged Municipal Derivatives Action Pending JPMORGAN CHASE: Continues to Defend Sewer Ratepayers Suit JPMORGAN CHASE: Expert Discovery in Interchange Suit Ongoing JPMORGAN CHASE: Mortgage-Backed Securities Litigation Ongoing JPMORGAN CHASE: Continues to Defend Mortgage Underwriting Suits JPMORGAN CHASE: Defending Suits Over 3rd Party MBS Offerings JPMORGAN CHASE: Auction-Rate Securities Suit Pending in N.Y. JPMORGAN CHASE: Still Faces Two Antitrust Suits in N.Y. JPMORGAN CHASE: 4 Securities Lending Suits v. JPMorgan Pending JPMORGAN CHASE: Defends Suits by 401(k) Plan Participants JPMORGAN CHASE: Appeal to Approved IPO Suit Deal Pending KEYSPAN CORP: Accused in N.Y. of Deceptive Business Practices LOS ANGELES: Calif. Suit Complains About Wrongful Incarceration NCL CORP: Defending Crew Members' Suit Over Wage Deductions ORMAT TECHNOLOGIES: Accused in Nevada of Misleading Shareholders PERSHING ELEMENTARY: Principal Potentially Liable for Sex Abuse ROTO-ROOTER: Accused of Discriminating Against Women Employees SUPPLEMENTS TOGO: Sued for Deceptive Advertising Practices TRAVELCENTERS OF AMERICA: Consolidated "Hot Fuel" Suit Pending TRAVELCENTERS OF AMERICA: Defends Truck Stop Owners' Suit U.S. STEEL: Antitrust Suit Over Products Ongoing in Illinois ********* CLEARWIRE CORP: Suit on Unlawful Phone Calls Pending in Wash. ------------------------------------------------------------- Clearwire Corp. continues to face a purported class action lawsuit alleging it placed unlawful telephone calls using automatic dialing and announcing devices, according to the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. On Sept. 1, 2009, the company served with a purported class action lawsuit filed in King County Superior Court. The complaint alleges the company placed unlawful telephone calls using automatic dialing and announcing devices. The complaint seeks declaratory, injunctive, and/or equitable relief and statutory damages under federal and state law. On Oct. 1, 2009, the company removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. On Oct. 22, 2009, the court issued a stipulated order granting plaintiff until Oct. 29, 2009 to file an Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint on Oct. 29, 2009, dropping the pre-existing state law claims and adding a new state law claim. The parties further stipulated to allow a Second Amended Complaint, which plaintiffs filed on Dec. 23, 2009. The company filed a motion to dismiss, which was fully briefed on Jan. 15, 2010. Prior to the Court ruling on the motion to dismiss, plaintiff moved the Court for leave to file a further amended complaint. On Feb. 22, 2010, the Court granted the company's motion to dismiss in part, dismissing certain claims with prejudice and granting plaintiff 20 days to amend the complaint. The Court dismissed plaintiff's motion for leave to amend as moot. Clearwire Corporation -- http://www.clearwire.com/-- builds and operates wireless broadband networks that enable Internet communications. Its wireless broadband networks cover entire communities and deliver a high-speed Internet connection that not only creates a new communications path into the home or office, but also provides a broadband connection anytime and anywhere within its coverage area. It offers services in both domestic and international markets. The company's services consist primarily of providing wireless broadband connectivity, but in some of its domestic markets, it also offers voice-over Internet protocol (VoIP) telephony services. As of Dec. 31, 2008, the company operated its networks in 51 markets in the United States and Europe covering approximately 18.2 million people, and as of Dec. 31, 2008, it had approximately 475,000 wireless broadband subscribers. The company's networks in the United States were deployed in 47 markets and covered an estimated 15.3 million people. CLEARWIRE CORP: Amended Complaint Dismissed in February ------------------------------------------------------- A purported class action lawsuit against Clearwire Corp. in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington was dismissed in February 2010, according to the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. On April 22, 2009, a purported class action lawsuit was filed against the company in Superior Court in King County, Washington by a group of five plaintiffs from Hawaii, Minnesota, North Carolina and Washington. The lawsuit generally alleges that: -- the company disseminated false advertising about the quality and reliability of its services; -- imposed an unlawful early termination fee; and -- invoked unconscionable provisions of its Terms of Service to the detriment of customers. Among other things, the lawsuit seeks: -- a determination that the alleged claims may be asserted on a class-wide basis; -- an order declaring certain provisions of the company's Terms of Service, including the early termination fee provision, void and unenforceable; -- an injunction prohibiting the company from collecting early termination fees and further false advertising; -- restitution of any early termination fees paid by the company's subscribers; -- equitable relief; and -- an award of unspecified damages and attorneys' fees. On May 27, 2009 an Amended Complaint was filed and served, adding seven additional plaintiffs, including individuals from New Mexico, Virginia and Wisconsin. On June 2, 2009, plaintiffs served the Amended Complaint. The company removed the action to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. On July 23, 2009, the company filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. Briefing was complete Sept. 18, 2009; the company awaits a ruling from the court. The Court has stayed discovery pending its ruling on the motion. The Court granted the company's motion to dismiss in its entirety on Feb. 2, 2010. Plaintiffs have 30 days to move the Court for leave to amend the complaint. Clearwire Corporation -- http://www.clearwire.com/-- builds and operates wireless broadband networks that enable Internet communications. Its wireless broadband networks cover entire communities and deliver a high-speed Internet connection that not only creates a new communications path into the home or office, but also provides a broadband connection anytime and anywhere within its coverage area. It offers services in both domestic and international markets. The company's services consist primarily of providing wireless broadband connectivity, but in some of its domestic markets, it also offers voice-over Internet protocol (VoIP) telephony services. As of Dec. 31, 2008, the company operated its networks in 51 markets in the United States and Europe covering approximately 18.2 million people, and as of Dec. 31, 2008, it had approximately 475,000 wireless broadband subscribers. The company's networks in the United States were deployed in 47 markets and covered an estimated 15.3 million people. FRESENIUS MEDICAL: Suits Over Fraudulent Merger Remain Stayed ------------------------------------------------------------- Class action suits against Fresenius Medical Care Holdings, Inc., the holding company for Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA's North American operations, remain stayed. Prior to and after the commencement of the Grace Chapter 11 Proceedings, class action complaints were filed against W.R. Grace & Co. and FMCH by plaintiffs claiming to be creditors of W.R. Grace & Co.-Conn., and by the asbestos creditors' committees on behalf of the W.R. Grace & Co. bankruptcy estate in the Grace Chapter 11 Proceedings, alleging among other things that the Merger was a fraudulent conveyance, violated the uniform fraudulent transfer act and constituted a conspiracy. All such cases have been stayed and transferred to or are pending before the U.S. District Court as part of the Grace Chapter 11 Proceedings. No further updates regarding the cases were disclosed in the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 20-F Filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA -- http://www.fmc-ag.com/-- provides dialysis services and manufacturing and distributing products and equipment for the treatment of end-stage renal disease (ESRD). In the United States, the company also performs clinical laboratory testing. The company is based in Bad Homburg, Germany. FRESENIUS MEDICAL: Suit Over RCG Acquisition Pending in Tenn. ------------------------------------------------------------- An amended complaint, Indiana State District Council of Laborers and Hod Carriers Pension Fund v. Gary Brukardt et al., remains pending, according to the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 20-F Filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. Renal Care Group, Inc. was named as a nominal defendant in a second amended complaint filed Sept. 13, 2006, in the Chancery Court for the State of Tennessee Twentieth Judicial District at Nashville against former officers and directors of RCG. The complaint purports to constitute a class action and derivative action relating to alleged unlawful actions and breaches of fiduciary duty in connection with the company's acquisition of RCG (the "RCG Acquisition") and in connection with alleged improper backdating and/or timing of stock option grants by RCG. The complaint sought damages against defendant and its former officers and directors but did not state a claim for money damages directly against RCG. As of Aug. 24, 2009, appellate proceedings that reversed the trial court's dismissal of the complaint had concluded. The litigation is accordingly proceeding toward trial in the Chancery Court. Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA -- http://www.fmc-ag.com/-- provides dialysis services and manufacturing and distributing products and equipment for the treatment of end-stage renal disease (ESRD). In the United States, the company also performs clinical laboratory testing. The company is based in Bad Homburg, Germany. JPMORGAN CHASE: Securities Suits v. Bear Stearns Pending in N.Y. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Purported class actions against The Bear Stearns Companies Inc. remain pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co.'s Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. In 2008, JPMorgan Chase merged with Bear Stearns. Various shareholders of Bear Stearns have commenced purported class actions against Bear Stearns and certain of its former officers and/or directors on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired common stock of Bear Stearns between Dec. 14, 2006 and March 14, 2008 (the "Class Period"). The actions, originally commenced in several federal courts, allege that the defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding Bear Stearns' business and financial results and that, as a result of those false statements, Bear Stearns' common stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period. In connection with these allegations, the complaints assert claims for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Separately, several individual shareholders of Bear Stearns have commenced or threatened to commence arbitration proceedings and lawsuits asserting claims similar to those in the putative class actions. The actions were transferred and joined for pre-trial purposes before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. A motion to dismiss has been filed in the purported securities class action. JPMorgan Chase & Co. -- http://www.jpmorganchase.com-- is a financial holding company. JPMorgan Chase's principal bank subsidiaries are JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, a national banking association with United States branches in 23 states, and Chase Bank USA, National Association, a national banking association that is the Firm's credit card-issuing bank. JPMorgan Chase's principal nonbank subsidiary is J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., its United States investment banking firm. Its activities are organized into six business segments: Investment Bank, Retail Financial Services, Card Services, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management. Its wholesale businesses comprise the Investment Bank, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management segments. Its consumer businesses comprise the Retail Financial Services and Card Services segments. JPMORGAN CHASE: Bid to Junk ERISA Suit v. Bear Stearns Pending -------------------------------------------------------------- A motion to dismiss the Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA") action against The Bear Stearns Companies Inc. is pending, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co.'s Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. In 2008, JPMorgan Chase merged with Bear Stearns. Bear Stearns and certain of its former officers and/or directors have also been named as defendants in a number of purported class actions commenced in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York seeking to represent the interests of participants in the Bear Stearns Employee Stock Ownership Plan ("ESOP") during the time period of December 2006 to March 2008. These actions allege that defendants breached their fiduciary duties to plaintiffs and to the other participants and beneficiaries of the ESOP by: (a) failing to manage prudently the ESOP's investment in Bear Stearns securities; (b) failing to communicate fully and accurately about the risks of the ESOP's investment in Bear Stearns stock; (c) failing to avoid or address alleged conflicts of interest; and (d) failing to monitor those who managed and administered the ESOP. In connection with these allegations, each plaintiff asserts claims for violations under various sections of the ERISA and seeks reimbursement to the ESOP for all losses, an unspecified amount of monetary damages and imposition of a constructive trust. The actions were transferred and joined for pre-trial purposes before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. JPMorgan Chase & Co. -- http://www.jpmorganchase.com-- is a financial holding company. JPMorgan Chase's principal bank subsidiaries are JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, a national banking association with United States branches in 23 states, and Chase Bank USA, National Association, a national banking association that is the Firm's credit card-issuing bank. JPMorgan Chase's principal nonbank subsidiary is J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., its United States investment banking firm. Its activities are organized into six business segments: Investment Bank, Retail Financial Services, Card Services, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management. Its wholesale businesses comprise the Investment Bank, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management segments. Its consumer businesses comprise the Retail Financial Services and Card Services segments. JPMORGAN CHASE: Bear Stearns Defends Suit Over Securities Breach ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Bear Stearns Companies Inc. defends an amended complaint asserting purported class action claims for violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co.'s Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. In 2008, JPMorgan Chase merged with Bear Stearns. Bear Stearns, former members of Bear Stearns' Board of Directors and certain of Bear Stearns' former executive officers have been named as defendants in two purported shareholder derivative suits, subsequently consolidated into one action, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Plaintiffs are asserting claims for breach of fiduciary duty, violations of federal securities laws, waste of corporate assets and gross mismanagement, unjust enrichment, abuse of control and indemnification and contribution in connection with the losses sustained by Bear Stearns as a result of its purchases of subprime loans and certain repurchases of its own common stock. Certain individual defendants are also alleged to have sold their holdings of Bear Stearns common stock while in possession of material nonpublic information. Plaintiffs seek compensatory damages in an unspecified amount and an order directing Bear Stearns to improve its corporate governance procedures. Plaintiffs later filed a second amended complaint asserting, for the first time, purported class action claims for violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as well as new allegations concerning events that took place in March 2008. The actions were transferred and joined for pre-trial purposes before the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. A motion to dismiss has been filed in the shareholders' derivative action and the ERISA action. JPMorgan Chase & Co. -- http://www.jpmorganchase.com-- is a financial holding company. JPMorgan Chase's principal bank subsidiaries are JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, a national banking association with United States branches in 23 states, and Chase Bank USA, National Association, a national banking association that is the Firm's credit card-issuing bank. JPMorgan Chase's principal nonbank subsidiary is J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., its United States investment banking firm. Its activities are organized into six business segments: Investment Bank, Retail Financial Services, Card Services, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management. Its wholesale businesses comprise the Investment Bank, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management segments. Its consumer businesses comprise the Retail Financial Services and Card Services segments. JPMORGAN CHASE: Ruling in Bear Stearns Litigation on Appeal ----------------------------------------------------------- The summary judgment ruling in a consolidated putative class action lawsuit, In re Bear Stearns Litigation, is on appeal, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co.'s Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. In 2008, JPMorgan Chase merged with The Bear Stearns Companies Inc. Seven putative class actions (five that were commenced in New York and two that were commenced in Delaware) were consolidated in New York State Court in Manhattan under the caption In re Bear Stearns Litigation. Bear Stearns, as well as its former directors and certain of its former executive officers, were named as defendants. JPMorgan Chase was also named as a defendant. The actions allege, among other things, that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties and obligations to Bear Stearns' shareholders by agreeing to the proposed merger. JPMorgan Chase was alleged to have aided and abetted the alleged breaches of fiduciary duty; breached its fiduciary duty as controlling shareholder/controlling entity; tortiously interfered with the Bear Stearns shareholders' voting rights; and to have been unjustly enriched. Plaintiffs initially sought to enjoin the proposed merger and enjoin JPMorgan Chase from voting certain shares acquired by the Firm in connection with the proposed merger. The plaintiffs subsequently informed the Court that they were withdrawing that motion, but amended the consolidated complaint to pursue claims, which included a claim for an unspecified amount of compensatory damages. In December 2008, the court granted summary judgment in favor of all the defendants. Plaintiffs have filed a notice of appeal. JPMorgan Chase & Co. -- http://www.jpmorganchase.com-- is a financial holding company. JPMorgan Chase's principal bank subsidiaries are JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, a national banking association with United States branches in 23 states, and Chase Bank USA, National Association, a national banking association that is the Firm's credit card-issuing bank. JPMorgan Chase's principal nonbank subsidiary is J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., its United States investment banking firm. Its activities are organized into six business segments: Investment Bank, Retail Financial Services, Card Services, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management. Its wholesale businesses comprise the Investment Bank, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management segments. Its consumer businesses comprise the Retail Financial Services and Card Services segments. JPMORGAN CHASE: Merged Municipal Derivatives Action Pending ----------------------------------------------------------- JPMorgan Chase & Co. and The Bear Stearns Companies Inc. continue to face a consolidated lawsuit alleging antitrust violations in the markets for financial instruments related to municipal bond offerings ("municipal derivatives"). Purported class action lawsuits and individual actions have been filed against JPMorgan Chase and Bear Stearns, as well as numerous other providers and brokers. The Municipal Derivatives Actions have been consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, and defendants have moved to dismiss the consolidated class action complaint. The court has stayed discovery pending disposition of the motion to dismiss Certain plaintiffs asserting class and individual claims under federal and California state law declined to join in the consolidated class action complaints and have filed separate complaints, which defendants have also moved to dismiss, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co.'s Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. JPMorgan Chase & Co. -- http://www.jpmorganchase.com-- is a financial holding company. JPMorgan Chase's principal bank subsidiaries are JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, a national banking association with United States branches in 23 states, and Chase Bank USA, National Association, a national banking association that is the Firm's credit card-issuing bank. JPMorgan Chase's principal nonbank subsidiary is J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., its United States investment banking firm. Its activities are organized into six business segments: Investment Bank, Retail Financial Services, Card Services, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management. Its wholesale businesses comprise the Investment Bank, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management segments. Its consumer businesses comprise the Retail Financial Services and Card Services segments. JPMORGAN CHASE: Continues to Defend Sewer Ratepayers Suit --------------------------------------------------------- JPMorgan Chase & Co. and numerous other defendants continue to face a putative class action was filed on behalf of sewer ratepayers (the "Wilson Action"). JPMorgan Chase moved to dismiss the claims for lack of standing. The plaintiff in the Wilson Action recently filed a fifth amended complaint, which JPMorgan Chase also moved to dismiss for lack of standing. Both motions remain pending, according to the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. JPMorgan Chase & Co. -- http://www.jpmorganchase.com-- is a financial holding company. JPMorgan Chase's principal bank subsidiaries are JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, a national banking association with United States branches in 23 states, and Chase Bank USA, National Association, a national banking association that is the Firm's credit card-issuing bank. JPMorgan Chase's principal nonbank subsidiary is J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., its United States investment banking firm. Its activities are organized into six business segments: Investment Bank, Retail Financial Services, Card Services, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management. Its wholesale businesses comprise the Investment Bank, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management segments. Its consumer businesses comprise the Retail Financial Services and Card Services segments. JPMORGAN CHASE: Expert Discovery in Interchange Suit Ongoing ------------------------------------------------------------ Expert discovery in a second amended consolidated class action complaint against JPMorgan Chase & Co. is ongoing. A group of merchants have filed a series of putative class action complaints in several federal courts. The complaints allege that VISA and MasterCard, as well as certain other banks and their respective bank holding companies, including Chase Bank USA, N.A., and JPMorgan Chase, conspired to set the price of credit card interchange fees and enacted respective association rules in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, and engaged in tying/bundling and exclusive dealing. All cases have been consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York for pretrial proceedings. The amended consolidated class action complaint extended the claims beyond credit to debit cards. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss all claims that predated Jan. 1, 2004. The Court granted the motion to dismiss these claims. Plaintiffs then filed a second amended consolidated class action complaint. The basic theories of the complaint remain the same, and defendants again filed motions to dismiss. The Court has not yet ruled on the motions. Fact discovery has closed, and expert discovery in the case is ongoing. The plaintiffs have filed a motion seeking class certification, and the defendants have opposed that motion. The Court has not yet ruled on the class certification motion, according to the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. JPMorgan Chase & Co. -- http://www.jpmorganchase.com-- is a financial holding company. JPMorgan Chase's principal bank subsidiaries are JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, a national banking association with United States branches in 23 states, and Chase Bank USA, National Association, a national banking association that is the Firm's credit card-issuing bank. JPMorgan Chase's principal nonbank subsidiary is J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., its United States investment banking firm. Its activities are organized into six business segments: Investment Bank, Retail Financial Services, Card Services, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management. Its wholesale businesses comprise the Investment Bank, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management segments. Its consumer businesses comprise the Retail Financial Services and Card Services segments. JPMORGAN CHASE: Mortgage-Backed Securities Litigation Ongoing ------------------------------------------------------------- Purported class action suits relating to mortgage-backed securities ("MBS") offerings are pending, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co.'s Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. JPMC and affiliates, heritage-Bear and affiliates and heritage WaMu affiliates have been named as defendants in a number of cases relating to various roles they played in MBS offerings. These cases are generally purported class action suits, actions by individual purchasers of securities, or actions by insurance companies that guaranteed payments of principal and interest for particular branches. Although the allegations vary by lawsuit, these cases generally allege that the offering documents for the securitization trusts contained material misrepresentations and omissions, including statements regarding the underwriting standards pursuant to which the underlying mortgage loans were issued, the ratings given to the tranches by rating agencies, and the appraisal standards that were used. JPMorgan Chase & Co. -- http://www.jpmorganchase.com-- is a financial holding company. JPMorgan Chase's principal bank subsidiaries are JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, a national banking association with United States branches in 23 states, and Chase Bank USA, National Association, a national banking association that is the Firm's credit card-issuing bank. JPMorgan Chase's principal nonbank subsidiary is J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., its United States investment banking firm. Its activities are organized into six business segments: Investment Bank, Retail Financial Services, Card Services, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management. Its wholesale businesses comprise the Investment Bank, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management segments. Its consumer businesses comprise the Retail Financial Services and Card Services segments. JPMORGAN CHASE: Continues to Defend Mortgage Underwriting Suits --------------------------------------------------------------- Purported class actions are pending against JPMorgan Chase & Co., heritage Bear Stearns, and certain of their current and former employees in the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York. Heritage Washington Mutual affiliates, WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp. and WaMu Capital Corp.; are defendants in two purported class action cases, pending in the Western District of Washington. In addition to allegations as to mortgage underwriting standards and ratings, plaintiffs in these cases also allege that defendants failed to disclose Washington Mutual Bank's alleged coercion of or collusion with appraisal vendors to inflate appraisal valuations of the loans in the pools. Motions to dismiss have been filed in one of the cases, according to the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. JPMorgan Chase & Co. -- http://www.jpmorganchase.com-- is a financial holding company. JPMorgan Chase's principal bank subsidiaries are JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, a national banking association with United States branches in 23 states, and Chase Bank USA, National Association, a national banking association that is the Firm's credit card-issuing bank. JPMorgan Chase's principal nonbank subsidiary is J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., its United States investment banking firm. Its activities are organized into six business segments: Investment Bank, Retail Financial Services, Card Services, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management. Its wholesale businesses comprise the Investment Bank, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management segments. Its consumer businesses comprise the Retail Financial Services and Card Services segments. JPMORGAN CHASE: Defending Suits Over 3rd Party MBS Offerings ------------------------------------------------------------ JPMorgan Chase & Co. and certain other heritage entities continue to defend other purported class actions for their roles an underwriter or depositor of third party mortgage-backed securities ("MBS") offerings. JPMorgan Chase is indemnified in these other litigations, according to the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. JPMorgan Chase & Co. -- http://www.jpmorganchase.com-- is a financial holding company. JPMorgan Chase's principal bank subsidiaries are JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, a national banking association with United States branches in 23 states, and Chase Bank USA, National Association, a national banking association that is the Firm's credit card-issuing bank. JPMorgan Chase's principal nonbank subsidiary is J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., its United States investment banking firm. Its activities are organized into six business segments: Investment Bank, Retail Financial Services, Card Services, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management. Its wholesale businesses comprise the Investment Bank, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management segments. Its consumer businesses comprise the Retail Financial Services and Card Services segments. JPMORGAN CHASE: Auction-Rate Securities Suit Pending in N.Y. ------------------------------------------------------------ JPMorgan Chase & Co. remains subject to a putative securities class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and a number of individual arbitrations and lawsuits in various forums, brought by institutional and individual investors, relating to the company's sales of auction-rate securities. One action is brought by an issuer of auction-rate securities. The actions generally allege that JPMorgan Chase and other firms manipulated the market for auction-rate securities by placing bids at auctions that affected these securities' clearing rates or otherwise supported the auctions without properly disclosing these activities. Some actions also allege that the company misrepresented that auction-rate securities were short-term instruments. Plaintiffs filed an amended consolidated complaint, and defendants' responses to the complaint are due on March 3, 2010, according to the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. JPMorgan Chase & Co. -- http://www.jpmorganchase.com-- is a financial holding company. JPMorgan Chase's principal bank subsidiaries are JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, a national banking association with United States branches in 23 states, and Chase Bank USA, National Association, a national banking association that is the Firm's credit card-issuing bank. JPMorgan Chase's principal nonbank subsidiary is J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., its United States investment banking firm. Its activities are organized into six business segments: Investment Bank, Retail Financial Services, Card Services, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management. Its wholesale businesses comprise the Investment Bank, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management segments. Its consumer businesses comprise the Retail Financial Services and Card Services segments. JPMORGAN CHASE: Still Faces Two Antitrust Suits in N.Y. ------------------------------------------------------- JPMorgan Chase & Co. remains named in two putative antitrust class actions in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, according to the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. The actions allege that the company, in collusion with numerous other financial institution defendants, entered into an unlawful conspiracy in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. JPMorgan Chase & Co. -- http://www.jpmorganchase.com-- is a financial holding company. JPMorgan Chase's principal bank subsidiaries are JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, a national banking association with United States branches in 23 states, and Chase Bank USA, National Association, a national banking association that is the Firm's credit card-issuing bank. JPMorgan Chase's principal nonbank subsidiary is J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., its United States investment banking firm. Its activities are organized into six business segments: Investment Bank, Retail Financial Services, Card Services, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management. Its wholesale businesses comprise the Investment Bank, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management segments. Its consumer businesses comprise the Retail Financial Services and Card Services segments. JPMORGAN CHASE: 4 Securities Lending Suits v. JPMorgan Pending -------------------------------------------------------------- JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. continues to defend putative class actions related to JPMorgan Chase & Co.'s securities lending business. JPMorgan has been named as a defendant in four putative class actions asserting Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA") and non-ERISA claims pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York related to JPMorgan Chase's securities lending business. Three of the pending actions relate to losses of plaintiffs' money (i.e., cash collateral for securities loan transactions) in medium-term notes of a structured investment vehicle known as Sigma Finance Inc. The fourth action concerns losses of money invested in Lehman Brothers medium-term notes, as well as asset-backed securities offered by nine other issuers, according to the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. JPMorgan Chase & Co. -- http://www.jpmorganchase.com-- is a financial holding company. JPMorgan Chase's principal bank subsidiaries are JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, a national banking association with United States branches in 23 states, and Chase Bank USA, National Association, a national banking association that is the Firm's credit card-issuing bank. JPMorgan Chase's principal nonbank subsidiary is J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., its United States investment banking firm. Its activities are organized into six business segments: Investment Bank, Retail Financial Services, Card Services, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management. Its wholesale businesses comprise the Investment Bank, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management segments. Its consumer businesses comprise the Retail Financial Services and Card Services segments. JPMORGAN CHASE: Defends Suits by 401(k) Plan Participants --------------------------------------------------------- JPMorgan Chase & Co. continues to defend a putative class action on behalf of its employees who participated in the company's 401(k) plan. The plaintiffs asserted claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act for alleged breaches of fiduciary duties and negligence by JPMorgan Chase, its directors and named officers. Plaintiffs' motion for class certification and the company's motion for judgment on the pleadings are both fully briefed, according to the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. JPMorgan Chase & Co. -- http://www.jpmorganchase.com-- is a financial holding company. JPMorgan Chase's principal bank subsidiaries are JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, a national banking association with United States branches in 23 states, and Chase Bank USA, National Association, a national banking association that is the Firm's credit card-issuing bank. JPMorgan Chase's principal nonbank subsidiary is J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., its United States investment banking firm. Its activities are organized into six business segments: Investment Bank, Retail Financial Services, Card Services, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management. Its wholesale businesses comprise the Investment Bank, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management segments. Its consumer businesses comprise the Retail Financial Services and Card Services segments. JPMORGAN CHASE: Appeal to Approved IPO Suit Deal Pending -------------------------------------------------------- An appeal to the approved settlement of putative class action lawsuits related to JPMorgan Chase & Co.'s initial public offerings is pending, according to the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. JPMorgan Chase and certain of its securities subsidiaries were named, along with numerous other firms in the securities industry, as defendants in a large number of putative class action lawsuits filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York alleging improprieties in connection with the allocation of securities in various public offerings, including some offerings for which a JPMorgan Chase entity served as an underwriter. They also claim violations of securities laws arising from alleged material misstatements and omissions in registration statements and prospectuses for the initial public offerings ("IPOs") and alleged market manipulation with respect to aftermarket transactions in the offered securities. Bear, Stearns & Co., Inc. is named as a defendant in a little less than a third of the pending IPO securities cases. Antitrust lawsuits based on similar allegations have been dismissed with prejudice. A settlement was reached in the securities cases, which the District Court approved; the company's share of the settlement is approximately $62 million. Appeals and a petition for leave to appeal have been filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit seeking reversal of the decision approving the settlement. JPMorgan Chase & Co. -- http://www.jpmorganchase.com-- is a financial holding company. JPMorgan Chase's principal bank subsidiaries are JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, a national banking association with United States branches in 23 states, and Chase Bank USA, National Association, a national banking association that is the Firm's credit card-issuing bank. JPMorgan Chase's principal nonbank subsidiary is J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., its United States investment banking firm. Its activities are organized into six business segments: Investment Bank, Retail Financial Services, Card Services, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management. Its wholesale businesses comprise the Investment Bank, Commercial Banking, Treasury & Securities Services and Asset Management segments. Its consumer businesses comprise the Retail Financial Services and Card Services segments. KEYSPAN CORP: Accused in N.Y. of Deceptive Business Practices ------------------------------------------------------------- Jeff Gorman at Courthouse News Service reports that Morgan Stanley and KeySpan Corp. conspired to inflate Consolidated Edison customers' electric bills by $160 million, a class action claims in Bronx County Court. The class claims Keyspan and Morgan Stanley used "a complex financial derivative 'swap' transaction" to do so, and that the Department of Justice fined Keyspan $12 million for it. Con Ed is not named as a defendant. Named plaintiff Liszeida Perez claims that on Jan. 18, 2006, "Keyspan and Morgan executed a complex financial derivative 'swap' transaction, which ensured that KeySpan could continue to big the highest permissible price for its electrical capacity, notwithstanding the fact that additional market capacity being supplied by KeySpan's competitors should have resulted in greater competition and lower prices. ... "The KeySpan/Morgan Stanley swap increased prices for retail electrical suppliers that purchase electrical generation capacity, which, in turn, led to ConEd customers paying artificially high prices for electricity during the period May 2006 through February 2008," according to the complaint. Ms. Perez says that the Department of Justice's $12 million fine is "only a de minimis amount of the artificially inflated charges and fees that ConEd customers paid for electricity as a result of KeySpan and Morgan Stanley's unfair and deceptive business practices." The class seeks damages for unjust enrichment, fraud, conspiracy, and business law violations. Copies of the Summons and the Complaint in Perez v. KeySpan Corporation, et al., Index No. 302208-2010 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Bronx Cty.), are available at: http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/03/22/Keyspan.pdf The Plaintiff is represented by: David J. Meiselman, Esq. Jeffrey I. Carton, Esq. MEISELMAN, DENLEA, PACKMAN, CARTON & EBERZ P.C. 1311 Mamaroneck Ave. White Plains, NY 10605 Telephone: 914-517-5000 LOS ANGELES: Calif. Suit Complains About Wrongful Incarceration --------------------------------------------------------------- Elizabeth Banicki at Courthouse News Service reports that Los Angeles and San Bernardino County Sheriff's Departments arrest, re-arrest and incarcerate the wrong people because they refuse to use "readily available information and existing identification systems to accurately identify the subjects of warrants," a class action claims in Federal Court. The class also sued the presiding judge and executive officer of the L.A. Superior Court. Named plaintiff Santiago Ibarra Rivera says he was wrongfully arrested twice on a warrant issued for someone else, and jailed for more than a month. After his second arrest he spent a month in jail because L.A. County and its Superior Court "refused to record ... that fact that plaintiff Ibarra had been exonerated as not being the warrant's subject," according to the complaint. Mr. Ibarra says the identification numbers in state and federal databases showed that he was not the subject of the warrant, but L.A. County refused to, or was too incompetent or indifferent to use them. The ID numbers include "CII numbers" based on fingerprints, from the California Department of Justice; the "rap sheet" based on the CII number; FBI numbers; LA Main numbers; and Livescan numbers. After his first arrest, the Superior Court acknowledged that Ibarra's fingerprints and identification numbers did not match those of the warrant's real subject, but the warrant database information was never undated to exonerate him, Mr. Ibarra says. After his second arrest he was jailed for a month and hauled into court three times in before the court determined that he was the wrong man. Mr. Ibarra says that if authorities had simply merely checked the identification numbers it would have been clear that he was not the suspect. "Had L.A. County personnel, including the public defender assigned to represent plaintiff's interest, bothered to utilize the readily available information available from California Department of Justice, plaintiff would have been released much sooner," according to the complaint. He seeks an injunction and damages for false imprisonment and wrongful arrest. A copy of the Complaint in Ibarra v. County of Los Angeles, et al., Case No. 10-cv-01861 (C.D. Calif.) (Gutierrez, J.), is available at: http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/03/22/LAWarrants.pdf The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Mann, Esq. Donald W. Cook, Esq. MANN & COOK LAW OFFICES 3435 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 2900 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Telephone: 213-252-9444 NCL CORP: Defending Crew Members' Suit Over Wage Deductions ----------------------------------------------------------- NCL Corp. Ltd. Continues to defend a purported class action complaint alleging inappropriate wage deductions, according to the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 20-F Filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. In July 2009, a class action complaint was filed against NCL (Bahamas) Ltd. in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida on behalf of a purported class of crew members alleging inappropriate deductions of their wages pursuant to the Seaman's Wage Act and wrongful termination resulting in a loss of retirement benefits. Miami-based NCL Corp. Ltd. -- http://www.ncl.com-- operates cruise ship with a variety of itineraries focused on North America, Hawaii, Alaska, Caribbean, Europe and South America and has the largest cruise operation in Antarctica. It operates under three brands: Norwegian Cruise Line, NCL America, and Orient Lines. ORMAT TECHNOLOGIES: Accused in Nevada of Misleading Shareholders ---------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that Ormat Technologies, a geothermal power company, inflated its share price through false and misleading statements, a class action claims in Reno Federal Court. A copy of the Complaint in Stebelton v. Ormat Technologies, Inc., et al., Case No. 10-cv-00156 (D. Nev.), is available at: http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/03/22/SCA.pdf The Plaintiff is represented by: Curtis B. Coulter, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF CURTIS B. COULTER, P.C. 403 Hill St. Reno, NV 89501 Telephone: 775-324-3380 - and - D. Seamus Kaskela, Esq. David M. Promisloff, Esq. Steven D. Resnick, Esq. BARROWAY TOPAZ KESSLER MELTZER & CHECK, LLP 280 King of Prussia Rd. Radnor, PA 19087 Telephone: 610-667-7706 - and - Ramzi Abadou, Esq. Erik D. Peterson, Esq. BARROWAY TOPAZ KESSLER MELTZER & CHECK, LLP 580 California St., Suite 1750 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: 415-400-3000 PERSHING ELEMENTARY: Principal Potentially Liable for Sex Abuse --------------------------------------------------------------- Avery Fellow at Courthouse News Service reports that an elementary school principal must stand trial for allegedly telling parents that a band teacher who later admitted to molesting students had only been touching the girls to help them keep time in music class, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled. Karen Grindle, the principal at Pershing Elementary School when the abuse came to light, claimed she couldn't be sued for due process and equal protection violations because the alleged victims and their parents failed to show that a clearly established right had been violated. But Judge Joel Flaum of the Chicago-based court said Ms. Grindle's "deliberate indifference" to the evidence of abuse makes her potentially liable for constitutional violations. The abuse first came to light in 2001, after the school hosted a presentation for students on inappropriate touching. Three girls wrote a letter to the presenter confessing that their band teacher, Robert Sperlik, rubbed their legs and backs. "Grindle told the parents about the girls' letter, but refused to let them see it, instead telling them that their daughter had attended a 'good touch, bad touch' seminar that had led her to overreact and write the letter," Judge Flaum wrote. "Grindle also told the parents that [the band teacher] had innocently touched their daughter on her shoulder and legs to help her keep time with the music." The principal received two more complaints in 2002, including one from a parent whose daughter said she felt uncomfortable when Mr. Sperlik put his fingers over hers while demonstrating proper technique. Ms. Grindle reported this incident to the district superintendent, but characterized the first complaint -- the girls' letter -- as a "pedagogical issue" over teaching methods, rather than possible sexual harassment. In 2005, one of the girls who wrote the letter told her mother that Mr. Sperlik used to bind her with duct tape in class. Her mother called police, who launched an investigation. Other victims came forward, claiming Mr. Sperlik bound them with duct tape, presenting it as a "game," and rubbed their thighs or touched their breasts. "Sperlik has since pleaded guilty to multiple counts of aggravated kidnapping and aggravated criminal sexual abuse, admitting that he abused his students for sexual gratification based on his interest in bondage pornography," the ruling states. The alleged victims and their parents said Ms. Grindle knew about the abuse and was deliberately trying to cover it up by misleading parents, the superintendent and other administrators. The district court rejected Ms. Grindle's bid for qualified immunity, and the federal appeals court agreed that Ms. Grindle is not shielded from liability. "[A] jury could conclude that by attempting to convert claims about sexual abuse by Sperlik into complaints about teaching methods, Grindle treated the girls' complaints differently because of their sex," Judge Flaum wrote, allowing the equal protection claims to proceed. Ms. Grindle also argued that the plaintiffs failed to prove that she had "reasonable notice" that her actions violated the students' "due process right to bodily integrity." "[A] reasonable school principal would have concluded that she could be held liable for turning a blind eye to and affirmatively covering up evidence of child sexual abuse by one of her teachers," Judge Flaum concluded. A copy of the decision in Sandra T.E., et al. v. Grindle, No. 09-2920 (7th Cir.), is available at: http://ResearchArchives.com/t/s?5b90 ROTO-ROOTER: Accused of Discriminating Against Women Employees -------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that Roto-Rooter discriminates against women, a class action claims in Cincinnati Federal Court. A copy of the Complaint in Ring v. Roto-Rooter Services Company, Case No. 10-cv-00179 (S.D. Ohio) (Dlott, J.), is available at: http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/03/22/EmployRoto.pdf The Plaintiff is represented by: Mark Kitrick, Esq. KITRICK, LEWIS & HARRIS CO., L.P.A. 515 East Main St., Suite 515 Columbus, OH 43215 Telephone: 614-224-7711 - and - John Campbell, Esq. Erich Vieth, Esq. THE SIMON LAW FIRM 701 Market St., Suite 1450 St. Louis, MO 63101 Telephone: 314-241-2929 - and - Michael J. Fagras, Esq. LAMPIN, KELL, FAGRAS, LINSON, CUSTER & BUEHLER 5770 Mexico Rd. St. Peters, MO 63376 Telephone: 636-498-4000 SUPPLEMENTS TOGO: Sued for Deceptive Advertising Practices ---------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that Supplements Togo Management's and World Class Nutrition's "Erection MD" drug (60 pills for $66.98) doesn't measure up to its ads, a class action claims in Bergen County Court, N.J. A copy of the Complaint in Hoffman v. Supplements Togo Management, LLC, et al., Docket No. BER-L-2428-10 (N.J. Super. Ct., Bergen Cty.), is available at: http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/03/22/Erection%20Fraud.pdf The Plaintiff is represented by: Harold M. Hoffman, Esq. 240 Grand Ave. Englewood, NJ 07631 Telephone: 201-569-0086 TRAVELCENTERS OF AMERICA: Consolidated "Hot Fuel" Suit Pending -------------------------------------------------------------- A consolidated class action lawsuit filed by retail purchasers who purchased motor fuel that was greater than 60 degrees Fahrenheit at the time of sale against TravelCenters of America, LLC remains pending before the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas. Beginning in mid December 2006, and continuing to the present, a series of class action complaints have been filed against numerous companies in the petroleum industry, including TravelCenters of America, Inc., or its subsidiaries, in U.S. District Courts in at least 23 states. Major petroleum companies and significant retailers in the industry have been named as defendants in one or more of these lawsuits. The company has been named in at least seven cases to date, including cases in California, Alabama, New Mexico, Nevada and Missouri. The plaintiffs in the lawsuits generally allege that they are retail purchasers who purchased motor fuel that was greater than 60 degrees Fahrenheit at the time of sale. There are two primary theories upon which the plaintiffs seek recovery in these cases. The first theory alleges that the plaintiffs purchased smaller quantities of motor fuel than the amount for which defendants charged them because the defendants measured the amount of motor fuel they delivered in non-standard gallons, which, at higher temperatures, contain less energy. The "temperature" cases seek, among other relief, an order requiring the defendants to install temperature-correcting equipment on their retail motor fuel dispensing devices, damages, and attorneys' fees. The second theory alleges that fuel taxes are calculated in temperature adjusted 60 degree gallons and are collected by the government from suppliers and wholesalers, who are reimbursed in the amount of the tax by the defendant retailers before the fuel is sold to consumers. The "tax" cases allege that when the fuel is subsequently sold to consumers at temperatures above 60 degrees, the retailers sell a greater volume of fuel than the amount on which they paid tax, and therefore reap a windfall because the customers pay more tax than the retailer paid. The plaintiffs in theses cases seek, among other relief, recovery of excess taxes paid and punitive damages. These cases have been consolidated for pretrial purposes with the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas pursuant to multidistrict litigation procedures. Plaintiffs have moved for certification of their respective classes, which motions are pending. Discovery is not yet completed, according to the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K Filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. TravelCenters of America, LLC -- http://www.tatravelcenters.com- - operates and franchises travel centers primarily along the U.S. interstate highway system. The Company was formed as a wholly owned subsidiary of Hospitality Properties Trust. Its customers include long haul trucking fleets and their drivers, independent truck drivers and motorists. As of Dec. 31, 2007, TravelCenters of America's business included 236 travel centers located in 41 states in the United States and the province of Ontario, Canada. Its travel centers include 167 that are operated under the TravelCenters of America (TA) brand names, including 144 that it operates and 23 that franchisees operate. Sixty-nine are operated under the Petro brand name, 45 of which are operated by the Company and 24 by the franchisees. On Jan. 31, 2007, the Company added one TA franchised location. TRAVELCENTERS OF AMERICA: Defends Truck Stop Owners' Suit --------------------------------------------------------- TravelCenters of America, LLC, opposes efforts to amend to add the company as a defendant in a proposed amended purported class action lawsuit filed by truck stop owners. On April 6, 2009, five independent truck stop owners, who are plaintiffs in a purported class action suit against Comdata Network, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, filed a motion to amend their complaint to add us as a defendant. The proposed amended complaint also seeks to add as defendants Ceridian Corporation, Pilot Travel Centers LLC, and Love's Travel Stops & Country Stores, Inc. Comdata markets fuel cards which are used as a form of payment by trucking companies at truck stops. The proposed amended complaint alleges antitrust violations arising out of Comdata's contractual relationships with truck stops in connection with its fuel cards. The plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages and injunctive relief. According to the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K Filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009, it believes that the plaintiffs' claims are similar to claims asserted, and subsequently dismissed voluntarily, by proposed classes of independent truck stop owners against TravelCenters' predecessor in 2007. On April 23, 2009, the company filed an opposition to the plaintiffs' efforts to amend their complaint to add TravelCenters as a defendant in this ongoing action. In response to that opposition, on May 21, 2009, plaintiffs filed a second action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against us and the other companies that the plaintiffs sought to add as defendants with their previously pending action seeking the same relief they sought from us and the other defendants in the preexisting case. The complaint in this second action contains the same allegations and claims as the proposed amended complaint in the first action. The company has moved to dismiss the second action and continue to oppose the plaintiffs' efforts to add it as a defendant in the first action. Despite the pendency of the company's motions, the Court has ordered the parties, including TravelCenters, to begin discovery. TravelCenters says there are substantial factual and legal defenses to the plaintiffs' claims against the company. TravelCenters of America, LLC -- http://www.tatravelcenters.com- - operates and franchises travel centers primarily along the U.S. interstate highway system. The Company was formed as a wholly owned subsidiary of Hospitality Properties Trust. Its customers include long haul trucking fleets and their drivers, independent truck drivers and motorists. As of Dec. 31, 2007, TravelCenters of America's business included 236 travel centers located in 41 states in the United States and the province of Ontario, Canada. Its travel centers include 167 that are operated under the TravelCenters of America (TA) brand names, including 144 that it operates and 23 that franchisees operate. Sixty-nine are operated under the Petro brand name, 45 of which are operated by the Company and 24 by the franchisees. On Jan. 31, 2007, the Company added one TA franchised location. U.S. STEEL: Antitrust Suit Over Products Ongoing in Illinois ------------------------------------------------------------ U.S. Steel Corp. continues to face several purported antitrust class-action lawsuits in Illinois over steel products, according to the company's Feb. 24, 2010, Form 10-K Filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended Dec. 31, 2009. In a series of lawsuits filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois beginning Sept. 12, 2008, individual direct or indirect buyers of steel products have asserted that eight steel manufacturers, including U. S. Steel, conspired in violation of antitrust laws to restrict the domestic production of raw steel and thereby to fix, raise, maintain or stabilize the price of steel products in the United States. The cases are filed as class-action lawsuits and claim treble damages for the period 2005 to present, but do not allege any damage amounts. U.S. Steel Corp. -- http://www.ussteel.com-- is an integrated steel producer with production operations in North America and Central Europe. The company has an annual raw steel production capability of 24.3 million net tons (tons) in the North America and 7.4 million tons in Central Europe. U. S. Steel is also engaged in several other business activities, most of which are related to steel manufacturing. These include the production of coke in both in North America and Central Europe, and the production of iron ore pellets from taconite, transportation services (railroad and barge operations), real estate operations and engineering and consulting services in North America. During the year ended Dec. 31, 2006, the company had three operating segments: Flat-rolled Products (Flat-rolled), U. S. Steel Europe (USSE) and Tubular Products (Tubular). ********* 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, Joy A. Agravante, Ronald Sy and Peter A. Chapman, Editors. Copyright 2010. 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 * * *