CAR_Public/110330.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Wednesday, March 30, 2011, Vol. 13, No. 63

                             Headlines

ABBOTT LABS: May Face Class Action Over Depakote Birth Injury
BEST BUY: Faces Class Action Over Non-Payment of Overtime Wages
CAMPBELL SOUP: Sued Over Misleading Claims on "Low Sodium" Soup
CHINA MEDIAEXPRESS: April 5 Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set
COMDATA CORP: Court Allows Monopoly Class Action to Advance

GENERAL MOTORS: "Dex-Cool" Vehicle Owners May Get Compensation
LIFE PARTNERS: Class Action Lead Plaintiff Deadline Nears
LOCKHEED MARTIN: Faces Discrimination Class Action in New Jersey
MEDIFAST INC: Goldfarb Branham Mulls Shareholder Class Action
MODINE MANUFACTURING: Gavers Foundation Gets Share in Settlement

MONEY MART: Deadline Set for Mogo Settlement Claims
NATIONAL GRID: Judges Junks $360-Mil. KeySpan Class Action
PAN PHARMA: Government Settles Class Action for $67.5 Million
PRUDENTIAL REAL: Sued Over Phony "Administration Fee"
SALINE COUNTY, AR: Faces Class Action Over Illegal Exaction

SECURITIES AMERICA: In Negotiation with Class Action Plaintiffs
SPI ELECTRICITY: Wants Bushfire Class Action Thrown Out
STILLWATER CAPITAL: Rosen Law Firm Files Investor Class Action
SHENGDATECH INC: Rosen Law Firm Files Shareholder Class Action
U.S. DRUG STORES: May Face Claims Over Generic Medical Foods


                             *********

ABBOTT LABS: May Face Class Action Over Depakote Birth Injury
-------------------------------------------------------------
As new studies begin to link the epilepsy drug Depakote to
potential birth defects such as spina bifida, Depakote attorneys
advise families of children born with birth defects that they may
qualify for a Depakote class action lawsuit when litigation is
filed (The Teratogenicity of Anticonvulsant Drugs Lewis B. Holmes,
M.D., N Engl J Med 2001; 344:1132-1138, April 12, 2001).  Depakote
Birth Injury Resources provides online access to reputable
Depakote lawyers via a free, no-obligation case evaluation form.

Families seeking representation for a Depakote lawsuit case are
encouraged to complete the form to determine if they qualify for a
Depakote lawsuit.

Depakote is an anticonvulsant drug used to treat seizure
conditions like epilepsy and psychological disorders like the
manic phase of bipolar disorder.  The drug is also commonly used
in the off-label treatment of migraine headaches and in the
treatment of aggression in the elderly. Depakote has been approved
for use in the United States since 1983 and has a number of brand
name and generic equivalents, including: Depakote ER, Depakote
Sprinkles, Depakene, valproate sodium and valproic acid among
others.

Depakote lawsuit activity centers around recent allegations that
the manufacturer of Depakote, Abbott Laboratories, may have
intentionally left the birth defect risk of Depakote off of the
box label warning for the drug.  This alleged omission may have
left many medical practioners in the dark about the risks of
Depakote during pregnancy.  As a result, many women continued to
take the drug during their pregnancies, allegedly causing birth
defects in their children (Reference: St. Clair County Circuit
Court Case No. 10-L-651 & 11-L-27).

Alleged birth defects from Depakote include a wide spectrum of
disabilities and malformations, ranging from craniofacial defects
such as cleft palate to neural tube defects such as spina bifida.
Spina bifida is one of the most severe alleged Depakote side
effects and one of the most disabiling of the possible birth
injuries.  Additional Depakote side effect injuries include growth
malformation, skeletal defects, hydranencephaly, iniencephaly,
fetal valproate syndrome and fetal death (The Teratogenicity of
Anticonvulsant Drugs, Lewis B. Holmes, M.D., N Engl J Med 2001;
344:1132-1138, April 12, 2001).

In January 2011 a group of 26 women filed a lawsuit versus Abbott
Laboratories out of St. Clair County, Wisconsin (Reference: St.
Clair County Circuit Court Case No. 10-L-651 c).  This is one of
the first Depakote awsuit in the United States and Depakote
lawyers expect that with the recent exposure of the alleged
potential for Depakote birth defects, more lawsuits may soon
follow.

Depakote Birth Injury Resources (DBIR) provides an online resource
center for women and families seeking more information about the
specific birth defects that may be related to Depakote during
pregnancy. DBIR connects these women and their families with
reputable legal resources who can represent them in a potential
class action lawsuit or individual Depakote lawsuit against Abbott
Laboratories.

For more information on how to contact a Depakote lawyer for a
birth injury lawsuit, visit http://DepakoteBirthInjury.com/and
complete the free case evaluation form or call 800.340.1100.


BEST BUY: Faces Class Action Over Non-Payment of Overtime Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that Best Buy stiffs workers for
wages and overtime, a class action filed in Los Angeles Superior
Court claims.


CAMPBELL SOUP: Sued Over Misleading Claims on "Low Sodium" Soup
---------------------------------------------------------------
Four New Jersey housewives sued Campbell Soup in a national class
action charging that the labels on Campbell's low sodium tomato
soup products were misleading in that the "low sodium" soups
actually contained approximately as much sodium as Campbell's
regular tomato soup.  They claim they were misled into paying for
more expensive soup even though it did not contain less sodium
than the cheaper alternative, which was identical for their
purposes.

In his decision, United States District Judge Jerome B. Simandle
said, "Plaintiffs allege that they were misled into thinking that
the more expensive less-sodium soups contained significantly less
sodium that the cheaper regular tomato soup because of the labels
on each less-sodium soup bought . . . and were therefore willing
to pay more for the less-sodium soup . . . . It is a plausible
inference from the facts alleged that it was reasonable for
Plaintiffs to expect that the soups they were receiving had 25%-
30% less sodium than the regular tomato soup, when the soups in
fact had approximately the same amount of sodium."

Lester L. Levy, of Wolf Popper LLP, who represents the homemakers,
said, "Consumers should not have to read the back of the soup can
to be sure the information on the front is truthful."

The case is being prosecuted by Wolf Popper LLP, a New York City
law firm and Cohn, Lifland, Pearlman, Herrmann & Knopf LLC, a
Saddlebrook, New Jersey law firm.

Contact: Lester L. Levy, Esq.
         Wolf Popper, LLP
         New York, NY
         Telephone: (212) 451-9606
         E-mail: llevy@wolfpopper.com


CHINA MEDIAEXPRESS: April 5 Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set
-------------------------------------------------------
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. is representing shareholders in the
securities class action arising from allegations that China
MediaExpress Holdings, Inc. fraudulently misstated its revenue.
The class action is on behalf of purchasers of China MediaExpress
stock during the period from May 14, 2010 through March 11, 2011.
If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no
later than April 5, 2011.

NO CLASS HAS YET BEEN CERTIFIED IN THE ABOVE ACTION.  UNTIL A
CLASS IS CERTIFIED, YOU ARE NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL UNLESS YOU
RETAIN ONE.  YOU MAY CHOOSE TO DO NOTHING AT THIS POINT AND REMAIN
AN ABSENT CLASS MEMBER.

To join the China MediaExpress class action, visit the Rosen Law
Firm's website at http://www.rosenlegal.com/or call Laurence
Rosen, Esq. or Jonathan Horne, Esq., toll-free, at 866-767-3653;
you may also email lrosen@rosenlegal.com or jhorne@rosenlegal.com
for information on the class action.

The Complaint alleges violations of the Securities Exchange Act
against China MediaExpress and its Chief Executive Officer, Zheng
Cheng.  The Complaint alleges that (1) the Company misrepresented
the number of buses in its advertising network; (2) the Company
misrepresented the nature and extent of its business
relationships; and (3) the Company overstated its revenue.

On March 11, 2011, trading in China MediaExpress shares was halted
pending an announcement.  On March 14, 2011, China MediaExpress's
auditor, Deloitte Touche & Tomatsu resigned, claiming it could no
longer rely on the Company's management, and advising the Company
to create an independent committee to review allegations of fraud.
On March 18, 2011, C.V. Starr, China MediaExpress's largest
investor, sued the Company for securities fraud in an individual
action.

A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of
other class members in directing the litigation.  If you wish to
join the litigation, or to discuss your rights or interests
regarding this class action, please contact Laurence Rosen, Esq.
or Jonathan Horne, Esq. of The Rosen Law Firm, toll-free, at 866-
767-3653, or via e-mail at lrosen@rosenlegal.com or
jhorne@rosenlegal.com

You may also visit the firm's Web site at
http://www.rosenlegal.com/

The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation.

CONTACT: Laurence Rosen, Esq.
         Jonathan Horne, Esq.
         The Rosen Law Firm P.A.
         275 Madison Avenue, 34th Floor
         New York, New York 10016
         Telephone: (212) 686-1060
         Weekends Telephone: (917) 797-4425
         Toll Free: 1-866-767-3653
         E-mail: lrosen@rosenlegal.com
                 jhorne@rosenlegal.com
         Web site: http://www.rosenlegal.com/


COMDATA CORP: Court Allows Monopoly Class Action to Advance
-----------------------------------------------------------
U.S. District Court Judge James Knoll Gardner of the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania issued an order on March 24 denying in
large part the motions by Comdata Corporation, the dominant issuer
of trucker fleet cards used by trucking fleets and accepted at
truck stops throughout the United States, and other defendants, to
dismiss a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of a proposed class
of thousands of independent truck stops across the country.

"With the Court's order, independent truck stop owners have
cleared a significant hurdle in their effort to hold Comdata and
truck stop chains accountable," stated plaintiffs' attorney Eric
L. Cramer -- ecramer@bm.net -- a shareholder of the law firm of
Berger & Montague, P.C. in Philadelphia.  The plaintiffs are also
represented by Joseph R. Saveri, Esq. -- jsaveri@lchb.com -- of
the law firm of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP and Steven
Neuwirth, Esq. -- stephenneuwirth@quinnemanuel.com -- and Dale
Oliver, Esq. -- daleoliver@quinnemanuel.com -- of the law firm of
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP.

The complaint charges that Comdata has used its market dominance
to impair the ability of rival card issuers to challenge Comdata's
monopoly, resulting in independent truck stops having to pay
millions of dollars in excessive fees.  Mr. Saveri described the
predicament that the conduct challenged in this case has created
for the nation's independent truck stops: "The anti-competitive
practices alleged in this case have reduced competition, and cost
independent truck stops millions of dollars in excessive fees.
These higher fees are bad for the independent truck stops and bad
for consumers and the economy more generally."

Comdata is based in Brentwood, Tennessee, and is a subsidiary of
Minneapolis-based Ceridian Corporation.  Ceridian is named as a
defendant in the lawsuit, along with chain truck stop companies
that allegedly conspired with Comdata: Travel Centers of America
Holding Company LLC, Petro Shopping Centers, L.P., Pilot Travel
Centers LLC, and Love's Travel Stops & Country Stores, Inc.

The alleged scheme involves a two-tiered pricing system in which
Comdata charged the chain truck stop defendants significantly
lower fees for processing the cards than independent truck stops.
In exchange, the complaint alleges, the chain truck stop
defendants agreed to erect artificial barriers to the entry and
expansion of rival card issuers, which allowed Comdata to maintain
its monopoly and continue charging inflated fees to the
independent truck stops without losing market share.

All defendants moved to dismiss plaintiffs' complaint.  The Court
denied the motions to dismiss by Ceridian, Pilot, and Love's in
their entirety.  For Comdata, the Court denied its motion to
dismiss in substantial part.  For Travel Centers of America, the
Court denied in part, and granted in part, its motion to dismiss.
The Court granted plaintiffs leave to amend their complaint to
remedy any deficiencies.  Plaintiffs will file an amended
complaint by April 25, 2011 to address these issues.

Discovery is underway and plaintiffs' counsel are preparing the
case for trial.

The lawsuit seeks treble damages for the overcharges paid by the
plaintiffs and the proposed class of independent truck stops, and
an injunction to prevent the ongoing anticompetitive conduct.

Source/Contact: Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP
                275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
                San Francisco, CA 94111-3339
                Telephone: (415) 956-1000

                Berger & Montague, P.C.
                Telephone: (215) 875-3009

                Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP
                Telephone: (213) 443-3000


GENERAL MOTORS: "Dex-Cool" Vehicle Owners May Get Compensation
--------------------------------------------------------------
David Shepardson, writing for Detroit News Washington Bureau,
reports that more than 10,000 owners of General Motors vehicles
covered under a class-action lawsuit may finally get reimbursed
for some of their losses.

Most of the claims associated with the lawsuit were paid before GM
went into bankruptcy in 2009.

In 2008, GM agreed to pay up to $800 to owners of up to 35 million
GM vehicles that had a factory coolant that was linked to engine
failures or cooling system problems.

GM began using "Dex-Cool" in 1995 model vehicles and received
thousands of complaints from owners for engine and radiator
problems.  In 2003, a series of class-action lawsuits were filed.

Two courts gave final approval to the class action settlement by
October 2008, and GM paid lawyers for the owners $24 million in
fees and to cover expenses.

GM received 68,154 claims and paid $6.1 million to settle about
40,000 of the claims.

The claims of "Dex-Cool" owners remained in bankruptcy as part of
"old GM" now known as Motors Liquidation Co. Old GM has received
11,300 claims.

Of those, it has approved claims totaling $1.3 million for 6,685
owners and must still review another 4,614 claims.

Under a proposed settlement, the "Dex-Cool" owners will get a
$2.2 million claim as one of the many debtors.

The owners will get stock in new GM that will be sold for cash to
cover the claims.  It's not clear how much the stock will cover of
the claims.

That won't be known until the bankruptcy court formally approves
the liquidation plan and sets a date for the transfer of stock to
GM creditors.

The suit covers many vehicles from the 1995-2004 model years that
GM long since stopped building, including the Pontiac Aztec, Grand
Am and Grand Prix.


LIFE PARTNERS: Class Action Lead Plaintiff Deadline Nears
---------------------------------------------------------
Saxena White P.A., which has filed a class action lawsuit in the
United States District Court for the Western District of Texas on
behalf of all investors who purchased Life Partners Holdings, Inc.
securities during the period between May 29, 2007 and January 19,
2011, inclusive, reminds investors that the deadline to serve as
lead plaintiff is Monday, April 4, 2011.  If you wish to serve as
a lead plaintiff, please contact Saxena White as soon as possible
for more information.

Life Partners Holdings is a specialty financial services company
and the parent company of Life Partners, Inc.  LPI is the oldest
and one of the most active companies in the United States engaged
in the secondary market for life insurance known as "life
settlements."  LPI facilitates the sale of life settlements
between sellers and purchasers, without taking actual possession
or control of the policies, by offering purchasers the ability to
acquire the policies at a discount to their face value.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Defendants
issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the
Company's business and financial results.  Throughout the class
period, Life Partners Holdings failed to disclose to investors
that it was shortening the estimated life expectancies of insured
individuals.  As a result, the Company was making the policies
covering these individuals more attractive to potential investors,
as the potential "payout" from the policies maturing (when the
insureds died) would occur in a shorter period of time.  Had the
Company used accurate and appropriate estimated life spans, Life
Partners Holdings would not have been able to sell as many
policies to investors and earn the additional and increased
transaction fees for these insurance policies.

On Dec. 21, 2010, The Wall Street Journal reported that Life
Partners Holdings "has made large fees from its life-insurance
transactions while often significantly underestimating the life
expectancies" of insured individuals.  On Jan. 20, 2011, a
Company-issued press release confirmed that the Securities and
Exchange Commission is conducting an investigation into the
business of Life Partners, Inc., causing the stock to close at
$12.42, a decline of over 17% from the prior day's closing price
of $14.99.

You may obtain a copy of the complaint and join the class action
at http://www.saxenawhite.com/

If you purchased LPS stock between May 29, 2007 and January 19,
2011, you may contact Joe White or Greg Stone at Saxena White P.A.
to discuss your rights and interests:

          Joseph E. White, III, Esq.
          Greg Stone, Esq.
          Saxena White P.A.
          2424 North Federal Highway, Suite 257
          Boca Raton, FL 33431
          Telephone: (561) 394-3399
          E-mail: jwhite@saxenawhite.com
                  gstone@saxenawhite.com
          Web site: http://www.saxenawhite.com/

If you purchased Life Partners Holdings, Inc. shares during the
Class Period and wish to apply to be the lead plaintiff in this
action, a motion on your behalf must be filed with the Court no
later than April 4, 2011.  You may contact Saxena White P.A. to
discuss your rights regarding the appointment of lead plaintiff
and your interest in the class action.  Please note that you may
also retain counsel of your choice and need not take any action at
this time to be a class member.

Saxena White P.A., which has offices in Boca Raton, Boston and
Montana, specializes in prosecuting securities fraud and complex
class actions on behalf of institutions and individuals.
Currently serving as lead counsel in numerous securities fraud
class actions nationwide, the firm has recovered hundreds of
millions of dollars on behalf of injured investors and is active
in major litigation pending in federal and state courts throughout
the United States.


LOCKHEED MARTIN: Faces Discrimination Class Action in New Jersey
----------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that a federal class action
accused Lockheed Martin of discriminating against women in pay and
promotions, particularly to top management, and not posting such
jobs when they open up.

A copy of the Complaint in Sosa v. Lockheed Martin Corporation,
Case No. 11-cv-_____, docketed as Doc. 1352 in Case No. 33-av-
00001 on March 24, 2011 (D. N.J.), is available at:

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/03/25/Lockheed.pdf

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Andrew L. Mackerer, Esq.
          Carol A. Mager, Esq.
          Stephen G. Console, Esq.
          Laura C. Mattiacci, Esq.
          CONSOLE LAW OFFICES LLC
          1525 Locust Street, 9th Floor
          Philadelphia, PA 19102
          Telephone: 215-545-7676
          E-mail: mager@consolelaw.com
                  console@consolelaw.com
                  mattiacci@consolelaw.com
                  mackerer@consolelaw.com

               - and -

          Martha J. Fessenden, Esq.
          DOFFERMYRE SHIELDS CANFIELD & KNOWLES, LLC
          1355 Peachtree Street, Suite 1600
          Atlanta, GA 30309
          Telephone: 404-881-3008
          E-mail: mfessenden@dsckd.com

               - and -

          Darnley D. Stewart, Esq.
          11 Broadway Street, Suite 1250
          New York, NY 1004
          Telephone: 212-500-5106
          E-mail: dstewart@gslawny.com


MEDIFAST INC: Goldfarb Branham Mulls Shareholder Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------------
Upon news that Medifast, Inc. is delaying its fiscal 2010 annual
fiscal results, Goldfarb Branham LLP is investigating possible
violations of shareholder protection laws by the company's board.
If you are a Medifast, Inc. shareholder or have information about
these allegations, contact Hamilton Lindley at 877-583-2855 or at
hlindley@goldfarbbranham.com

"As a result, the lawsuit alleges that Medifast's financial
results were materially false and misleading.  Our proposed suit
seeks to ensure that stockholder's rights are maximized and
adequate internal and financial controls are placed to increase
Medifast's future profitability."

"According to a class action lawsuit, the company failed to
disclose improperly recognized company expenses beginning in
March 2010," said securities lawyer Hamilton Lindley.  "As a
result, the lawsuit alleges that Medifast's financial results were
materially false and misleading.  Our proposed suit seeks to
ensure that stockholder's rights are maximized and adequate
internal and financial controls are placed to increase Medifast's
future profitability."

Goldfarb Branham's lawyers have significant experience
representing individual and institutional investors in over 100
shareholder class action cases. A firm securities lawyer, Hamilton
Lindley, can be reached at hlindley@goldfarbbranham.com or toll-
free at 877-583-2855 to discuss, at no cost or obligation, the
impact of these allegations on Medifast shareholders.

Contacts: Hamilton Lindley, Esq.
          Goldfarb Branham LLP
          Telephone: 214-583-2233
          Toll Free: 877-583-2855
          E-mail: hlindley@goldfarbbranham.com
          Telephone: http://www.goldfarbbranham.com/


MODINE MANUFACTURING: Gavers Foundation Gets Share in Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Gavers Community Cancer Foundation is set to get at least
$400,000 in unclaimed funds from a settlement in the McCullom Lake
brain cancer lawsuits.

A U.S. District Court order divides $815,099 plus interest among
five McHenry-area nonprofit agencies.  The money comes from $1.5
million paid by Modine Manufacturing Co. to settle a class-action
lawsuit accusing it of causing a brain cancer cluster by polluting
air and groundwater.

Steve Gavers, a cancer survivor who founded the charity in 1999 to
promote cancer awareness and raise research funds, had trouble
containing his excitement over the news.  His volunteer-run
foundation has donated more than $2.5 million to Centegra Health
System, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, and other groups.

"You never know what's going to happen.  I couldn't believe what
[board members] were telling me.  It's huge.  Anybody could have
gotten it," Mr. Gavers said.  "Man, can you believe this?"

Mr. Gavers said the foundation would reveal later next month what
it planned to do with the donation.

Three former McCullom Lake next-door neighbors diagnosed with
brain cancer sued Modine and chemical manufacturer Rohm and Haas
in 2006, claiming that decades of air and groundwater pollution
from their plants in neighboring Ringwood caused their illnesses.
Another family filed a class-action lawsuit to seek medical
monitoring and damages for other McCullom Lake residents.

Thirty-two individual lawsuits now allege that carcinogenic vinyl
chloride from the Rohm and Haas and Modine plants caused brain and
pituitary tumors in McCullom Lake and the neighboring Lakeland
Park subdivision in McHenry.  Racine, Wis.-based Modine denies any
culpability, but settled the class action by setting up a medical
monitoring and property fund and settled with individual
plaintiffs for undisclosed sums.

Philadelphia-based Rohm and Haas, now a subsidiary of Dow Chemical
Co., continues to fight the cases in court.

Twenty percent of the remaining settlement, or about $160,000,
will go to the McHenry County Community Foundation, established in
2001 to grant seed or expansion money for "unmet" county social,
cultural, educational and charitable needs.

Two school foundations that raise funds for Johnsburg District 12
and McHenry High School District 156 will get 10%, or about
$80,000 each, but must first prove to the court that they are
registered as charities with the Illinois Attorney General's
Office.  Mary Kay Losch, a board member with the McHenry High
School District 156 Foundation, called the award great news.

"We are always looking for ways to find dollars to support our
purpose to enhance the education process that isn't paid for by
our taxes," Ms. Losch said.

The remaining 10% will go to Neighbors Helping Neighbors, a group
co-founded in 2009 by McCullom Lake Village President Terry
Counley to pair village residents who need help with home and
property maintenance with volunteers willing to help.
Ms. Counley, who called the monetary gift "absolutely awesome,"
said the group is about 60 days away from getting its nonprofit
tax status.

"We have a lot of things pending -- a lot of people have applied
for assistance, and there are a lot of things in the village
waiting to be done," Ms. Counley said.

The three groups have until the end of the year to prove their
status to the court -- any money unclaimed will go to the Gavers
foundation, according to the court order signed on March 23.
Illinois law requires that nonprofits be registered with the
Attorney General's Office in order to receive unclaimed settlement
funds.

More than 700 eligible people applied for vouchers good for up to
$2,024 in medical monitoring costs, but only 114 had been used by
the time the first deadline expired in August 2009.  Two of the 32
plaintiffs were diagnosed through the voucher program.

The federal judge in March 2010 denied certification for the
class-action lawsuit against Rohm and Haas to go to a civil trial.
Her decision is on appeal in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals.

A Philadelphia state judge hearing the first of the 32 individual
lawsuits abruptly ended the first trial in October and dismissed
the jury five weeks into the case.  He cited concerns over
"changes" in the expert report of a plaintiffs' epidemiologist,
who concluded that a cluster of deadly glioblastoma multiforme
brain cancer exists in the McCullom Lake area.

The state judge is deciding whether to grant the plaintiff's
motion for a mistrial or Rohm and Haas' motion to dismiss.

By the Numbers

$815,099 is available for disbursement from a settlement in the
McCullom Lake brain cancer class-action lawsuit, not including
interest.

50% is going to the Gavers Community Cancer Foundation.

20% is going to the McHenry County Community Foundation.

10% each is going to three area nonprofits, provided that they
show proof of registry with the Attorney General by year's end.

32 plaintiffs are alleging in lawsuits that exposure to industrial
waste gave them brain and pituitary tumors.

To learn more about the Gavers Community Cancer Foundation, visit
http://www.gavers.org/


MONEY MART: Deadline Set for Mogo Settlement Claims
---------------------------------------------------
CTV News reports that several class action suits related to payday
loans that affect thousands of Albertans are working their way
through the courts.

They all allege that payday lenders collected more money from
borrowers than they should have and seek to have that money
returned to the borrowers.

One case against payday company Mogo alleges that Mogo made payday
loans in a way that violated the Criminal Code.

The company settled the case three months ago without admitting
any wrongdoing.

Anyone who borrowed money from this company or from another
company, Payroll Loans, before Nov. 1, 2009, may be eligible to
receive up to 100% of the brokerage fees paid plus interest.  The
Mogo settlement claims form can be found online.

But you must submit your claim before April 9 to the Vancouver law
firm that filed this class action on behalf of B.C. and Alberta
residents.

The Vancouver firm has also filed several similar class actions
against other payday loans companies, including Cash Store,
Instaloans, Money Mart and Cash Money.

Each suit alleges that these companies charged payday loan fees in
violation of the Criminal Code on loans made before March 1, 2010.

If you took out loans with any of these companies before that
date, you may want to be registered to be kept in the loop and
share in any recovery the firm may win on your behalf.

The registration form can be found online.

March 1, 2010 was the last day these allegedly illegal loans were
made.

It was the day the federal government set a limit on how much
payday lenders could charge.

By law, borrowers can only be charged a maximum of $23 for every
$100 they borrow.

That includes all interest and any other costs the payday lenders
might charge.

There are also provincial regulations that protect consumers who
take out payday loans.

Under Alberta's 2009 payday loans regulations, there is a two-day
cooling off period for consumers.  That means within two days of
signing a loan agreement you can still cancel the loan and return
the money without paying additional fees.

Also, payday lenders can no longer permit roll-over loans, meaning
companies cannot allow consumers to pay off previous loans at an
extra cost.

More information can be found in Service Alberta's consumer tip
sheet.


NATIONAL GRID: Judges Junks $360-Mil. KeySpan Class Action
----------------------------------------------------------
Larry Rulison, writing for Times Union, reports that National Grid
had a thorn in its side removed earlier last week when a $360
million class-action lawsuit filed against it was dismissed by a
federal judge.

The lawsuit, brought against National Grid's KeySpan subsidiary by
a customer of Consolidated Edison in New York City, was originally
filed last summer following the announcement that National Grid
had settled with federal regulators over questionable energy
trading deals with a Wall Street investment bank.

But on March 22, U.S. Judge Shira Scheindlin in the Southern
District of New York dismissed the case on several grounds, many
of them related to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's
authority over such trading.

National Grid's law firm, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom
LLP, issued a memo on March 23 calling the dismissal a "sweeping
victory" for its client.

National Grid's legal defense of the KeySpan trading issue is not
over.  The company also faces a similar class action lawsuit in
state Supreme Court in Bronx County.

In February, another federal judge approved a $12 million
antitrust settlement between National Grid and the U.S. Department
of Justice over the trading scandal, which dated back to 2006 and
allegedly cost New Yorkers $300 million in higher electric prices.
It also resulted in $49 million in profits for KeySpan, which was
acquired by National Grid in 2007.

The Justice Department, which filed the case against KeySpan last
year, alleged that in January 2006, KeySpan entered into a complex
derivatives contract with Morgan Stanley in a deal that
essentially gave it a financial stake in its largest competitor
for wholesale electricity sales in the New York City area, the
Astoria power plant in Queens.

At the time, KeySpan was the largest electric generator in the
city through its Ravenswood power plant, which is also in Queens.
The Astoria plant had just begun operating, becoming a major
competitor that could take away revenues. National Grid has since
sold off the Ravenswood plant as a condition of its acquisition of
KeySpan.

"With the court approval of the settlement with Department of
Justice we now consider the matter fully resolved," said National
Grid spokesman Alberto Bianchetti.  "We believe the private class
actions lack merit and we will continue to act accordingly."

The chief executive officer of KeySpan at the time of the Morgan
Stanley transactions was Robert Catell, who has since retired from
National Grid but remains a major energy policy adviser to the
state.  He is a member of the board of the New York State Energy
Research and Development Authority and was also named to Gov.
Andrew Cuomo's energy transition board.

Mr. Catell, who was never accused of wrongdoing, did not return a
call seeking comment about the dismissal of the federal lawsuit
Thursday.


PAN PHARMA: Government Settles Class Action for $67.5 Million
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Australian Associated Press reports that the federal
government will pay $67.5 million in compensation to Pan
Pharmaceuticals' customers and service providers who lost money
because of the company's closure.

The settlement, approved by Federal Court Justice Geoffrey Flick
on March 25, follows a $50 million payout by the government to Pan
chief executive Jim Selim in 2008.

The settlement was negotiated without admissions of wrongdoing by
the government said Andrew Thorpe, legal adviser to the class
action of 170 members who claimed their businesses suffered loss
and damage.

"However, it does end an eight-year saga that commenced on 28
April 2003, when the government shut down Pan Pharmaceuticals
without notice," he told reporters outside court.

"On that day, hundreds of people lost their jobs, $350 million was
wiped off the Sydney stock exchange and scores of business,
customers and service providers of Pan were very badly affected."

In March 2003, the government's Therapeutic Goods Administration
(TGA) suspended the license of Pan and urged a recall of all its
products after excessive amounts of some ingredients were found in
its Travacalm tablets.

Eighty-seven people suffered adverse reactions to Travacalm,
including hallucinations, and 19 were admitted to hospital.

The company collapsed soon after the recall.

Criminal charges were laid against Pan's chief executive, the late
Jim Selim, but a Supreme Court judge directed an acquittal in
April 2007 and an appeal court upheld that direction in September
2007.

The following year Mr. Selim successfully sued the government for
$50 million, claiming the TGA had acted negligently and outside
the limits of its statutory powers.

Mr. Thorpe said on March 25 it was Mr. Selim's "courage and
resilience which opened the door to this class action", launched
in December 2008 by sponsors, creditors, distributors and
retailers of its products.

"I think it's fair to say that the industry descended into a state
of chaos from which it's never fully recovered," he said, adding
that Mr. Selim, who died in 2010, would have been delighted with
the result.

"Compensation can now be delivered back to customers and service
providers of Pan for what they have had to endure.

"This was one of the prime reasons he settled his case when he
did, to enable other people to take steps before the limitation
period cut in and operated to prevent them from doing it."

In a joint statement, the parties said the settlement sum was made
up of $32.5 million for the class members' alleged loss and
damage, $30 million for interest on that amount, and $5 million
for costs.


PRUDENTIAL REAL: Sued Over Phony "Administration Fee"
-----------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that Prudential Real Estate
Affiliates add a "junk charge" of up to $275 for "administration"
in real estate transactions, a class action claims in Burlington
County Court.

A copy of the Complaint in Blasini, et al. v. Prudential Real
Estate Affiliates, et al., Case No. 989-11 (N.J. Super. Ct.,
Burlington Cty.), is available at:

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/03/25/CCA.pdf

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Stephen P. DeNittis, Esq.
          Joseph Osefchen, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF SHABEL & DENITTIS, P.C.
          5 Greentree Centre, Suite 302
          Route 73 South & Lincoln Drive
          Marlton, NJ 08053
          Telephone: (856) 797-9951


SALINE COUNTY, AR: Faces Class Action Over Illegal Exaction
-----------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that a federal class action claims
Saline County and the City of Bryant force people to pay an
illegal fee of $50 if they are arrested, and refuse to release
them until they pay it.

A copy of the Complaint in Wilson v. Hutcherson, et al., Case No.
11-cv-00264 (E.D. Ark.) (Holmes, J.), is available at:

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/03/25/Govt.pdf

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Luther Oneal Sutter, Esq.
          HARRILL & SUTTER, P.L.L.C.
          Post Office Box 2012
          Benton, AR 72018
          Telephone: (501) 315-1910


SECURITIES AMERICA: In Negotiation with Class Action Plaintiffs
---------------------------------------------------------------
Diana Britton, writing for Registered Rep., reports that
Securities America met with plaintiff's attorneys on March 24 to
negotiate a resolution to investor claims against the company
related to its sale of allegedly fraudulent private placements.
The outcome of the mediation was unknown at press time, as key
players involved didn't return phone calls.  Other media outlets
have not reported on the results.

The proceedings, held in Chicago and mediated by Retired U.S.
District Judge James M. Rosenbaum, were aimed at reaching a
financial settlement between the independent broker/dealer and
investors in a class action suit.  On March 18, a judge denied the
firm's request to bundle several arbitration claims and class
action suits into one $21 million settlement agreement.  The firm
now faces individual arbitrations as well as class actions against
it.

It has been highly debated whether Ameriprise Financial, SAI's
parent company, will bail it out and how much the firm will
contribute.  In its annual report, Ameriprise said it set aside
$40 million in legal reserves to cover litigation related to the
private placements.  The report also said the IBD was on the hook
for about $400 million in outstanding obligations.

"While Ameriprise Financial has no obligation to participate in
Securities America's settlement discussions, we have reached out
to Securities America to determine if we can help the parties find
a reasonable resolution for all constituents," Ameriprise said in
a statement to investors on March 21.  "As we work to help the
parties come to a reasonable resolution, we will balance the best
interests of all Ameriprise constituents."

While it's still unclear how the mediation will play out, it draws
attention the dangers of working for a sinking broker/dealer.
Securities America was certainly not the only b/d involved with
these bad investments, and others are likely to continue to
struggle with the fallout.  Philip Palaveev, president of Fusion
Advisor Network, offers some tipsfor dealing with an imploding
broker/dealer.

The situation also points to the importance of knowing how much
excess capital your b/d has.  According to Ameriprise's annual
report, Securities America's excess capital was down to $2 million
at the end of 2010.

It also raises questions of whether the pendulum will swing
towards demonizing an entire asset class -- private placements --
that may have a place in certain kinds of client portfolios.
While there have been a few bad apples, namely Medical Capital and
Provident Royalties, this has drawn negative attention to the
asset class, causing investors and b/ds to be increasingly
skeptical and focus on the risks of these investments.  These
private placements are also key to the asset formation of the
companies that file them with the SEC.


SPI ELECTRICITY: Wants Bushfire Class Action Thrown Out
-------------------------------------------------------
Selma Milovanovic, writing for The Age, reports that a power
company and state government agencies being sued in Victoria's
largest class action over the Black Saturday bushfires want the
case thrown out of court after revelations that a law firm filed
the lawsuit in a survivor's name without his permission.

The Supreme Court heard this was the second time in two months
Oldham Naidoo Lawyers launched an unauthorized bushfire class
action.  The Age revealed earlier last week the firm admitted
abuse of process for lodging a group claim over the 2003 alpine
bushfires in the name of a Melbourne doctor without his authority.

The Black Saturday case -- over the Kilmore East-Kinglake fire
that claimed 119 lives -- can go ahead even if Justice Jack
Forrest decides to dismiss the current class action as the law
permits a fresh case to be launched.  But if this happened and the
class action eventually succeeded, bushfire victims would be out
of pocket for two years' interest accrued since the original claim
was lodged.

The action covering more than 1000 people, exposes a potential
liability in the hundreds of millions of dollars.  It alleges SPI
Electricity failed to monitor and maintain a power line that
caused the blaze.

Australia's largest class action law firm, Maurice Blackburn,
which joined the case in May 2009, recently discovered the
irregularity and informed the defendants and the court.

Maurice Blackburn is now leading the class action, after new lead
plaintiff Carol Matthews, whose son died in the fire, sacked
Oldham Naidoo.

Ten days after Black Saturday, Oldham Naidoo lodged the lawsuit in
the name of Leo Keane, who had registered his property loss with
the firm, the court heard.

A solicitor emailed her boss Daniel Oldham, telling him she had
spoken to Mr. Keane but did not tell him he was lead plaintiff.

Mr. Oldham replied: "Just tell him he is named and we'll write
further once we're able to confirm numbers and costs, just like
2003."

The next day, Mr. Keane found out he was lead plaintiff from the
media.  He asked to be removed as lead plaintiff, which Oldham
Naidoo did not do.

When the firm asked Maurice Blackburn to jointly run the case, it
said nothing of how it had treated Mr. Keane.

Maurice Blackburn eventually replaced Mr. Keane as lead plaintiff
with Ms. Matthews in 2010, as it thought she would be a better
representative of the group claim.

When allegations about the alpine bushfire case surfaced, Maurice
Blackburn chairman Bernard Murphy later investigated Oldham
Naidoo's early conduct in the Black Saturday case and discovered
what had happened to Mr. Keane.

Justice Forrest reserved his decision.


STILLWATER CAPITAL: Rosen Law Firm Files Investor Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. has filed a class action lawsuit on
behalf of investors who exchanged their Stillwater Funds
investments for shares of Gerova Financial Group in a share
exchange transaction on January 20, 2010.

The lawsuit alleges violations of the federal securities laws and
breaches of fiduciary duty against Stillwater Capital Partners,
Gerova Financial Group and certain of their current and former
officers and directors for failing to disclose material adverse
facts, including related party transactions, in connection with
the Share Exchange, resulting in substantial losses for Stillwater
Funds' investors.

If you exchanged your investment in any of the Stillwater Funds
for Gerova stock you may participate in the class action at no
out-of-pocket cost to you.

For further information, please contact Laurence Rosen, Esq., or
Jonathan Horne, Esq. of The Rosen Law Firm toll free at 866-767-
3653 or via e-mail at lrosen@rosenlegal.com or
jhorne@rosenlegal.com

The Stillwater Funds included in the class action are:

   -- Stillwater Asset Backed Fund, , LP,

   -- Stillwater Asset Backed Fund II, LP, a Delaware Partnership

   -- Stillwater Real Estate Fund, LP, a Delaware Partnership

   -- Stillwater WPB Venture Partners, LP, a Delaware Partnership

   -- Stillwater WPB Venture Partners II, LP, a Delaware
      Partnership

   -- Stillwater Market Neutral Fund, LP, a Delaware Partnership

   -- Stillwater Market Neutral Fund II, LP, a Delaware
      Partnership

   -- Stillwater Market Neutral Fund III, a Cayman Islands
      exempted company

   -- Stillwater Matrix Fund, LP, a Delaware Partnership

   -- Stillwater Loan Opportunities Fund LLC, a Delaware
      Partnership

   -- Stillwater Loan Opportunities Fund SPC, a Cayman Islands
      exempted company

   -- Stillwater Asset-Backed Offshore Fund, a Cayman Islands
      exempted company

   -- Stillwater Asset-Backed Fund SPV, A Cayman Islands exempted
      company

   -- Stillwater Asset-Backed Fund II Onshore SPV, a Cayman
      Islands exempted company

   -- Stillwater Trade Capital, LLC

The lawsuit is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of New York.  If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you
must move the Court no later than May 24, 2011.  A lead plaintiff
is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members
in directing the litigation.

The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder litigation.

Contact Information: Laurence Rosen, Esq.
                     Jonathan Horne, Esq.
                     The Rosen Law Firm P.A.
                     275 Madison Avenue 34th Floor
                     New York, NY 10016
                     Telephone: (212) 686-1060
                     Weekends Telephone: (917) 797-4425
                     Toll Free: 1-866-767-3653
                     Web site: http://www.rosenlegal.com/


SHENGDATECH INC: Rosen Law Firm Files Shareholder Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. disclosed that it has filed a class
action lawsuit on behalf of investors who purchased the common
stock of ShengdaTech, Inc. during the period from March 15, 2010
through March 15, 2011, seeking to recover damages for violations
of federal securities laws.

To join the ShengdaTech class action, visit the firm's website at
http://www.rosenlegal.com/or call Laurence Rosen, Esq. or Phillip
Kim, Esq., toll-free, at 866-767-3653; you may also email
lrosen@rosenlegal.com or pkim@rosenlegal.com for information on
the class action.  The case filed by the Rosen Law Firm is pending
in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

NO CLASS HAS YET BEEN CERTIFIED IN THE ABOVE ACTION.  UNTIL A
CLASS IS CERTIFIED, YOU ARE NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL UNLESS YOU
RETAIN ONE.  YOU MAY CHOOSE TO DO NOTHING AT THIS POINT AND REMAIN
AN ABSENT CLASS MEMBER.

The Complaint asserts violations of the federal securities laws
against ShengdaTech and its officers and directors for
misrepresenting the true financial condition of the Company and
its internal controls.  Particularly, the Complaint alleges that
serious discrepancies in ShengdaTech's financial records and
internal control over financial reporting resulted in the issuance
of materially false and misleading financial information to
investors.  On March 15, 2011, the Company announced the formation
of a special committee of the Board of Directors to investigate
potentially serious discrepancies and unexplained issues relating
to the Company's financial records.  As a result, trading in the
Company's stock was halted.

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no
later than May 24, 2011.  A lead plaintiff is a representative
party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the
litigation. If you wish to join the litigation, or to discuss your
rights or interests regarding this class action, please contact
Laurence Rosen, Esq. or Phillip Kim, Esq. of The Rosen Law Firm,
toll-free, at 866-767-3653, or via e-mail at lrosen@rosenlegal.com
or pkim@rosenlegal.com

You may also visit the firm's Web site at
http://www.rosenlegal.com/

The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation.

CONTACT: Laurence Rosen, Esq.
         Phillip Kim, Esq.
         The Rosen Law Firm P.A.
         275 Madison Avenue
         34th Floor New York, NY 10016
         Telephone: (212) 686-1060
         Weekends Telephone: (917) 797-4425
         Toll Free: 1-866-767-3653
         E-mail: lrosen@rosenlegal.com
                 pkim@rosenlegal.com
         Web site: http://www.rosenlegal.com/


U.S. DRUG STORES: May Face Claims Over Generic Medical Foods
------------------------------------------------------------
Class Action.org is alerting consumers to reports that pharmacies
have been substituting certain prescription medical foods with
generic products which may not be therapeutically equivalent.
Metanx, Deplin, Cerefolin, CerefolinNAC, Neevo and Neevo DHA are
among the branded prescription products allegedly being replaced
with nonequivalent medical food generics by pharmacists.  If you
were prescribed one of these medical foods and instead dispensed a
medical food generic, you may be entitled to financial
compensation, as the generic alternatives may not be
therapeutically equivalent to the prescription product. Visit
http://www.classaction.org/medical-food-generics.html/and
complete the free case evaluation form to find out if you have
legal recourse to recover the cost of your product.

Allegedly, pharmacies have been dispensing Enfolast-N as a
CerefolinNAC generic; Enfolast as a Cerefolin generic; PNV-DHA
Plus as a Neevo DHA generic; PNV Iron as a Neevo generic;
LMethylfolate Calcium Tablets as a Deplin generic; and Folast,
Neurpath-B and Duleek-Met as a Metanx generic.  The prescription
medical foods are said to contain a unique formula of folate and
certain B vitamins, whereas the products being dispensed as their
generics reportedly do not contain this specific formulation.
Pharmacies were sent alerts indicating that the labels of the
generic substitutes do not imply or state that they are generic
version or therapeutically equivalent to the branded, prescription
products.  Still, some pharmacies have continued to substitute the
prescription products with the generic medical foods previously
mentioned.

If you were prescribed Cerefolin, CerefolinNAC, Neevo, Neevo DHA,
Deplin, or Metanx and were instead dispensed an alleged medical
food generic, you may be able to recover the cost of the product.
Visit Class Action.org and complete the free case evaluation form
to find out if you are eligible.  The attorneys working with Class
Action.org are providing this online case review at no cost and
remain committed to protecting the rights of consumers and
patients.

                      About Class Action.org

Class Action.org is dedicated to protecting consumers and
investors in class actions and complex litigation throughout the
United States. Class Action.org keeps consumers informed about
product alerts, recalls, and emerging litigation and helps them
take action against the manufacturers of defective products,
drugs, and medical devices. Information about consumer fraud
issues and environmental hazards is also available on the site.
Visit http://www.classaction.org/today for a no cost, no
obligation case evaluation and information about your consumer
rights.

Contact Information: ClassAction.org
                     Tara Nagel
                     Telephone: 800-449-1970


                            *********

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.  Leah
Felisilda, Neil U. Lim, Rousel Elaine Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante,
Ronald Sy, Christopher Patalinghug, Frauline Abangan and Peter A.
Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2011.  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  * * *