CAR_Public/120905.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Wednesday, September 5, 2012, Vol. 14, No. 176

                             Headlines

AMAZON.COM INC: Faces N.Y. Class Suit for Copyright Infringement
ANTO PEKIC: Accused of Not Paying Interest on Tenants' Deposits
APPLEILLINOIS LLC: Must Compensate Servers for Non-Tipped Work
APRIA HEALTHCARE: Judge Broadens Class in FLSA Suit
ASSURANT INC: Field Staff Adjusters File Overtime Class Action

AU OPTRONICS: Kansans Eligible for Reimbursement in LCD Settlement
BI-LO: Recalls Daniella Brand Mangoes Due to Possible Health Risk
BROWN-FORMAN: Louisville Residents Sue Over Whiskey Fungus
CANADA: Class Suit Over Legionnaires' Disease Outbreak Mulled
CANADA: Quebec Students Launch Class Action Over Strikes

CANADA: Prisoners File Class Action v. AG Over T-Shirt Ban
CAPITAL ONE: AGs Can Use Private Attorneys to Pursue Claims
CHECKSMART FINANCIAL: Sued Over Illegal Recording of Phone Calls
CLOROX CO: Judge Partially Grants Bid to Dismiss Fresh Step Suit
COCA-COLA CO: Faces Class Action Over Spam Text Messages

EQUINIX INC: Securities Suit Dismissal Bid Hearing on Sept. 21
EVERGREEN ULTRA: December 5 Settlement Fairness Hearing Set
F&S PRODUCE: Recalls Expired Products With Fresh-cut Mango
GLADSTONE PORTS: Sick Fish Class Action Likely to Drag On
INTERNET INITIATIVE: Appeals From Class Deal Approval Dismissed

JAMAICA PUBLIC: To Dispute $24-MM Payment Sought in Class Suit
KABA ILCO: Faces Class Action Over Pushbutton Combination Locks
LITHIA MOTORS: Oct. 11 Final Hearing on "McClintic" Suit Deal Set
LITHIA MOTORS: "Neese" Opt-Out Claimants' Suit Pending in Alaska
LKQ CORP: Class Suit vs. 2 Product Suppliers Still Pending

MANNA ORGANICS: Recalls Soybean Sprouts and Tofu Products
MANPOWER INC: Awaits Final Okay of Vacation Pay Suit Settlement
MARICOPA COUNTY, AZ: App. Court Reinstates Civil Suit v. Sheriff
NATIONAL PENN: "Reyes" Suit Dismissed in First Quarter
NEW ORIENTAL: Faruqi & Faruqi Files Class Action in New York

OLD REPUBLIC: RMIC Continues to Face RESPA Violations Suits
OLD REPUBLIC: Second "Campion" Class Suit Dismissed in July
PACIFIC COAST: Recalls 6-8-Lb. Bags of Deli Styled Fruits Salads
PITNEY BOWES: Awaits Ruling on Bid to Dismiss "NECA-IBEW" Suit
PPG INDUSTRIES: Judge Refuses to Dismiss Overtime Class Action

QUALITY FEED: Recalls Milk Replacer Due to Salmonella Health Risk
RAMTRON INT'L: Faces "Dent" Stockholder Class Suit in Colorado
READY PAC: Recalls Fresh Cut Fruit Products Containing Mangoes
REAL FOODS: Recalls Products Containing Daniella Brand Mangos
SMART METERS: Tribunal Allows Claimants to Amend Complaint

SOMERSAULT SNACK: Recalls 6 oz. Packages of Pacific Sea Salt
ST. JOE CO: Appeal From Dismissal of Securities Suit Pending
ST. JOE CO: Hearing on Settlement of Oil Spill Claims on Nov. 8
STOP & SHOP: Stops Sale of Daniella Mangos Due to Recall
SYNGENTA CROP: Kaua'i County Dep't. of Water Joins Settlement

TAYLOR FARMS: Recalls Products Containing Daniella Brand Mangoes
TREX COMPANY: Mold Claims in Defective Products Suit Pending
TREX COMPANY: Defends Defective Products Suits in 4 States
WINN-DIXIE: Recalls Cut Fruit Produced By Renaissance Food
WORLD FOODS: Recalls Cut Fruit and Salsa Products With Mangoes

YRC WORLDWIDE: Bid to Dismiss Securities Suit Remains Pending


                          *********

AMAZON.COM INC: Faces N.Y. Class Suit for Copyright Infringement
----------------------------------------------------------------
A purported class action complaint was commenced by Norman Blagman
against Amazon.com Inc. in July 2012 for copyright infringement in
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York,
according to the Company's July 27, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
June 30, 2012.

The complaint alleges, among other things, that the Company sells
digital music in its Amazon MP3 Store obtained from defendant
Orchard Enterprises and other unnamed "digital music aggregators"
without obtaining mechanical licenses for the compositions
embodied in that music.  The complaint seeks certification as a
class action, statutory damages, attorneys' fees, and interest.
The Company disputes the allegations of wrongdoing and intends to
vigorously defend itself in the matter.

Headquartered in Seattle, Washington, Amazon.com, Inc. --
http://wwww.amazon.com/-- operates as an online retailer in North
America and internationally.  It operates retail Websites, such as
amazon.com and amazon.ca.  The Company serves consumers through
its retail Web sites and focuses on selection, price, and
convenience.  It also offers programs that enable sellers to sell
their products on Company's Web sites, and their own branded
Websites.  The Company manufactures and sells the Kindle e-reader.
It was founded in 1004.


ANTO PEKIC: Accused of Not Paying Interest on Tenants' Deposits
---------------------------------------------------------------
Christina Olubode, individually and as representative of a class
of similarly situated persons v. Anto Pekic, Case No. 2012-CH-
32978 (Ill. Cir. Ct., Cook Cty., August 30, 2012) is brought on
behalf of all tenants in Chicago of buildings owned by Anto Pekic.

The lawsuit seeks redress for violations of the Chicago
Residential Landlord Tenant Ordinance by Anto Pekic.  Ms. Olubode
contends that the Defendant violates the Ordinance by failing to
pay interest on the security deposits of tenants.

Ms. Olubode is a resident of Chicago, Illinois.  She entered into
a rental agreement for a dwelling unit in a multiple-unit
residential apartment building owned by the Defendant and located
at 1025 W. Hollywood Ave., #419, in Chicago, Illinois.

The Defendant is the owner and "landlord" of Hollywood building in
Chicago, Illinois.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael D. Spinak, Esq.
          SPINAK & BABCOCK, P.C.
          134 N. LaSalle, Suite 700
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Telephone: (312) 346-1337


APPLEILLINOIS LLC: Must Compensate Servers for Non-Tipped Work
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lorraine Bailey at Courthouse News Service reports that an
Applebee's franchise must compensate servers and bartenders for
services like dishwashing that they had to perform outside of
their normal tipped work, a federal judge ruled.

AppleIllinois LLC operates 34 Applebee's Neighborhood Bar & Grill
restaurants in Illinois.

It faces a federal class action from servers, bartenders and
hostesses who claim that they often had to perform non-tipped
work, such as dishwashing and cleaning.  Though these activities
sometimes accounted for 20 percent of a shift, AppleIllinois did
not pay the workers minimum wage for the time spent on these
duties.

The workers also claimed they had to contribute 2.5 percent of
sales per shift to a tip pool, which often exceeded 15 percent of
total tips actually received.

U.S. District Judge Geraldine Brown certified the class in March
2010, and reaffirmed certification after the Supreme Court's
decision in Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes, finding that the class met
the new standard for commonality.

Judge Brown sided with the Applebee's workers again on Aug. 27 in
a ruling for partial summary judgment.

"The evidence demonstrates that AppleIllinois employees working at
tip credit rates did those duties for much longer periods of time
than can be fairly characterized as occasional, incidental or
insignificant," the 50-page decision states.  "Rather, employees
working at tip credit rates were regularly used instead of minimum
wage workers to do those tasks."

"AppleIllinois' executives themselves recognize that some tasks
are plainly outside a tipped occupation," Judge Brown added.  "For
example, both [Curtis] Smith, the president of AppleIllinois, and
[Scott] Cortner, its vice-president of human relations, stated
that tipped employees should 'never' mop floors or clean
bathrooms."

However, "it is striking how often the current employees (in
declarations that were submitted by AppleIllinois) describe their
regular duties as including the very things that the executives
state should not be done by tipped employees: cleaning bathrooms
including toilets, sinks, mirrors and urinals; wiping down walls;
polishing paneling with Pledge or lemon oil; mopping or scrubbing
floors; and loading the dishwasher," the decision states.

"In addition, they report doing other tasks that are so far
removed from a tipped occupation that they cannot be reasonably
regarded as 'related' duties as that term is used in the dual jobs
regulation, for example: washing windows; cleaning chandeliers;
picking up trash in the parking lot; taking out garbage;
restocking bathrooms; and dumping and refilling the 'sani'
bucket," Judge Brown wrote.

"The court concludes that plaintiffs have demonstrated that, as a
regular practice, AppleIllinois employed its tipped workers in
'dual jobs,' that is, in both tipped and non-tipped occupations,"
she added.

"Contrary to AppleIllinois' fears, enforcing the dual jobs
regulation does not prohibit 'a team-oriented approach to serving
customers.'  It simply requires that when tipped employees are
also required to perform the work of minimum wage workers, they
get paid the minimum wage."

A copy of the Memorandum Opinion and Order in Driver, et al. v.
AppleIllinois, LLC d/b/a Applebee's Neighborhood Grill & Bar, et
al., Case No. 06-cv-06149 (N.D. Ill.), is available at:

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/08/29/applebees.pdf


APRIA HEALTHCARE: Judge Broadens Class in FLSA Suit
---------------------------------------------------
Dan Packel, writing for Law360, reports that a Pennsylvania
federal judge on Aug. 30 broadened a conditionally certified class
in a lawsuit over off-the-clock work against Apria Healthcare
Inc., allowing workers with six more different job titles to be
part of the class.

U.S. District Judge Jan Dubois determined the six additional
positions were substantially similar to that of plaintiff Connie
Titchenell, a customer service specialist who worked for the home
health care provider until 2010.  The judge issued conditional
certification to a class of customer service specialists in
November 2011.


ASSURANT INC: Field Staff Adjusters File Overtime Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that Assurant stiffed field staff
adjusters for overtime for 3 years, a class action claims in
Federal Court.

A copy of the Complaint in Locke v. Assurant, Inc., Case No. 12-
at-00574 (E.D. Calif.), is available at:

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/08/31/Assurant.pdf

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Melissa Grant, Esq.
          Valerie Kincaid, Esq.
          Arnab Banerjee, Esq.
          INITIATIVE LEGAL GROUP APC
          1800 Century Park East, 2nd Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (310) 556-5637
          E-mail: mgrant@initiativelegal.com
                  vkincaid@initiativelegal.com
                  abanerjee@initiativelegal.com


AU OPTRONICS: Kansans Eligible for Reimbursement in LCD Settlement
------------------------------------------------------------------
Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt on Aug. 27 disclosed that
Kansans who purchased flat panel televisions or computer monitors
may be eligible for reimbursement from a class-action settlement.

Kansas consumers who purchased liquid-crystal display (LCD) panels
incorporated in televisions, monitors and/or laptop computers
between January 1, 1999, and December 31, 2006, are among those
who may be eligible.

Although the State of Kansas was not a party to the litigation,
Mr. Schmidt's office closely monitored the case to ensure that
Kansas consumers would be eligible to apply for reimbursement as
part of any settlement.  The case was brought in 2011 by eight
other states as well as private class counsel.  The settlement
resolves allegations of an illegal conspiracy to fix the price of
LCD flat panels, resulting in overcharges to consumers who bought
these products.

Schmidt said Kansas consumers can find more information on the
settlement and how to file a claim by visiting the Attorney
General's Web site at http://www.ag.ks.govor by calling the
Consumer Protection Division at 1-800-432-2310.


BI-LO: Recalls Daniella Brand Mangoes Due to Possible Health Risk
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BI-LO announced an immediate voluntary recall on whole Daniella
brand mangoes sold with a universal product code (UPC) of 0-00000-
04051 in stores between July 12 and August 27, 2012.  The recalled
mangoes, a product of Mexico, were sold as individual fruit and
can be identified by the Daniella brand sticker.  The product is
being recalled in the states of Georgia, North Carolina, South
Carolina and Tennessee due to a potential health risk from
possible contamination with Salmonella Braenderup.

A picture of the recalled products is available at:

         http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm317868.htm

Salmonella is an organism which can cause serious and sometimes
fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly people, and
others with weakened immune systems.  Healthy persons infected
with Salmonella often experience fever, diarrhea (which may be
bloody), nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain.  In rare
circumstances, infection with Salmonella can result in the
organism getting into the bloodstream and producing more severe
illnesses such as arterial infections (i.e., infected aneurysms),
endocarditis and arthritis.

Out of an abundance of caution for customer safety and as a
service to the general consuming public at large, the Daniella
brand mangoes are being recalled in consultation with the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA).  The Company has received no reports of
illness associated with product consumption.

"We encourage consumers in possession of the recalled item to
immediately discard the product or bring it back to their local
BI-LO," said Brian Wright, BI-LO's senior director of
communications.  "As part of the company's Satisfaction Guarantee,
customers who have purchased the product may visit their
neighborhood store to request a full refund."

Consumers are advised not to eat the mangoes and to either discard
or return them to BI-LO for a refund.  To receive the refund,
individuals must present proof of purchase through a receipt.

Customers with questions about the recalled mangoes may contact
BI-LO's consumer relations department at 1-800-862-9293. Hours of
operation are Monday-Friday from 8:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m., and
Saturday from 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time.  Consumers who
may have purchased mangoes without sticker information are urged
to consult the store for sourcing information.

                           About BI-LO

Headquartered in Mauldin, South Carolina, BI-LO operates 206
supermarkets in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and
Tennessee, employing approximately 16,995 people.  Founded in
1961, the Company provides shoppers substantial savings without
sacrificing quality or freshness through its BI-LO BONUSCARD(R)
and other exclusive programs.  A committed corporate citizen, BI-
LO has raised more than $63 million through its BI-LO Charities
efforts to organizations across the Company's footprint since
1984.  For more information, visit http://www.bi-lo.com/


BROWN-FORMAN: Louisville Residents Sue Over Whiskey Fungus
----------------------------------------------------------
The Huffington Post reports that a black, sooty gunk is at the
heart of a new class-action lawsuit filed against five major
bourbon whiskey distilleries by residents and business owners in
and around Louisville, Kentucky.

Baudoinia, a type of fungus recently identified by scientists, is
everywhere in Louisville.  Although the stuff has had a ubiquitous
presence for decades, plaintiffs recently filed a suit in June
claiming the distilleries -- Brown-Forman (Jack Daniels), Diageo
(Bulleit), Heaven Hill, Buffalo Trace and Jim Beam -- were
negligent and are responsible for significant property damage
throughout the area.

The New York Times reports that the naturally-occurring Baudoinia
thrives on ethanol, a clear alcohol that can evaporate during
fermentation, "making the area around whiskey-aging warehouses a
prime breeding ground."  Distillers call the ethanol released into
the environment the "angel's share," but plaintiffs says the stuff
coats cars, houses and everything in between and is expensive and
difficult to remove.

William F. McMurry, the lawyer representing the plaintiffs in
Louisville, plans to file a similar suit in Scotland, where
Baudoinia is also a common problem.  Mr. McMurry told the Times
that he wants the distillers ordered to "stop off-gasing ethanol,"
adding, "This is not going to affect their bottom line and the
flavor of whiskey."

In a joint statement, Brown-Forman, Diageo and Heaven Hill
countered that they're not responsible for a natural growth:

"While we are sympathetic to the concerns of the plaintiffs, the
blackening of some buildings and other structures is due to a
naturally occurring common mold that is found widely throughout
the environment, including in areas unrelated to the production of
whiskey . . . The companies involved do not believe that they have
caused any harm to the plaintiffs or their property, and we will
vigorously contest these claims."

The remaining two distilleries did not comment.

The 2007 study identifying the fungus revealed that Baudoinia was
"reported originally from the walls of buildings near brandy
maturation warehouses in Cognac, France" and are the result of
"large diurnal temperature shifts, episodic high relative humidity
and wetting, and ambient airborne ethanol."


CANADA: Class Suit Over Legionnaires' Disease Outbreak Mulled
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Canadian Press reports that the Quebec government has ordered
a public inquiry into an outbreak of legionnaires' disease that
has killed nine people.

The Aug. 30 announcement came hours before public health officials
announced the number of overall cases of the disease in Quebec
City had jumped to 151 from 141.

Cooling systems in two building towers are believed to be the
source of the current outbreak. Local authorities have disinfected
the cooling systems in more than 100 buildings.

Inspectors are currently revisiting about 30 of them to look at
the water and to make sure building owners have complied with
clean-up directives.

A grieving relative held a news conference on Aug. 30 with her
lawyer, with whom she has discussed the possibility of a class-
action lawsuit.

Lawyer Jean-Pierre Menard, an expert on class actions in the
health field, says legal action is not being considered yet but
that he wants to know more about what happened.

Mr. Menard was accompanied at the news conference by Solange
Allen, whose husband Claude Desjardins died of the illness on
Aug. 19.

The woman said her husband was dead less than a week after the
first symptoms showed up.

"My husband fell ill and had the shivers and a fever during the
night Monday and we thought it was just a regular flu," she said.

"He went to work.  But then on Wednesday (Aug. 15) his condition
worsened."

Ms. Allen said Mr. Desjardins went to a local clinic Thursday and
was rushed to hospital, where blood samples were taken.

"What I don't understand is that the doctor never talked to us
about legionnaires' disease," she said.

Mr. Desjardins returned home but then had to be rushed to the
emergency room of a local hospital where he died on the Sunday,
just before noon.

"It was fast and during all that time, I never heard anyone talk
about legionnaires' disease -- never, ever," she said.

"My husband was the fourth death and there was really criminal
negligence there."

Mr. Menard said he has plenty of questions about what went wrong.

"We can't help wondering what happened -- was there a failure
somewhere in the system?" he told the news conference.

"We are dealing with public health.  The public has a right to
expect, and expects, a very high degree of attention, competence
and action when necessary, from the public authorities who handle
these issues."

Public Security Minister Robert Dutil said he consulted Quebec
coroners who agreed with him that it was necessary to go further
than just holding a coroner's inquest.

"Under the circumstances, we want a public inquiry because there's
an obligation to testify and it allows us to get deeper into
things to avoid it happening in the future," he said in an
interview.

Mr. Dutil said he will let public health officials do their work
and try to find out the cause of the illness so that the epidemic
stops.

"We don't know the cause, but it's not up to me to get involved."

The deadly bacteria grow in the stagnant water of cooling systems,
spreading in little droplets through air conditioning.

Heavy smokers and people with weak immune systems are most at risk
of catching the disease, which is not contagious.

Symptoms include persistent fever, coughing and difficulty
breathing.

It can be treated with antibiotics.  There has never been a
documented case of drug-resistant legionella.


CANADA: Quebec Students Launch Class Action Over Strikes
---------------------------------------------------------
The Canadian Press reports that a class-action lawsuit is being
organized by young Quebecers frustrated because they say they were
hurt by the province's student strikes.

The motion to sue 25 universities and junior colleges, as well as
the Quebec government, was announced on Aug. 30 by students and
their lawyers.

The plaintiffs say not enough was done to let them have access to
their classrooms and complete their courses.

One says she will get her nursing diploma six months late, which
will cost her financially.

"I incurred losses and I'm just asking for a reimbursement," said
the nursing student, Kim Laganiere.  "This will delay my entry
into the job market by six to 12 months."

The group's lawyer is not setting a figure on the amount
requested, saying the financial impact varies from one person to
the next.

The damage includes loss of salary, lost work experience, lost
tuition fees and lost summer jobs, according to lawyer Michel
Savonitto.

"These amounts aren't necessarily very big in some cases but if
you add them up it becomes astronomical . . .  A court will
evaluate the amount of the damages at the appropriate moment."

The case may wind up determining whether the right to strike, as
laid out in the Labour Code, applies to students.  Mr. Savonitto
said he will argue that there must be some distinction made
between the rights of workers and those of students.

The Charest government's Bill 78 was designed to force classrooms
to be reopened and, in most cases, classes are indeed carrying on.
But students in a minority of faculties are continuing to strike,
and the law is being ignored in some cases.

The issue was expected to dominate the current provincial
election, but has played only a minor role.

The Coalition party's Francois Legault pushed it closer to the
forefront during a radio interview on Aug. 30, where he referred
to some of the protesters as "thugs."


CANADA: Prisoners File Class Action v. AG Over T-Shirt Ban
----------------------------------------------------------
Curtis Rush, writing for The Record.com, reports that with so many
of their rights restricted, Canadian prisoners are fighting to
hang on to one: they want to wear T-shirts with an upside down
maple leaf.

Some 150 inmates have filed a C$1.25 million class-action lawsuit
against the Attorney General of Canada to wear the T-shirts on
Prisoners Justice Day.  The shirt also shows two hands grasping
jail bars.

The prisoners in Joyceville Institution, 20 kilometers northeast
of Kingston, brought the shirts into the prison two years ago, but
they were banned shortly after Public Safety Minister Vic Toews
condemned the "misuse" of Canada's national symbol.

Mr. Toews said the design "dishonours those who have upheld
Canadian laws in the line of duty and fought in support of
Canadian values at home and abroad."

Inmates wore the shirts on Prisoners Justice Day, Aug. 10, 2010,
to demonstrate that Canada is in a state of "political and social
distress," the lawsuit states.

Their lawyers, Shane Martinez and Davin Charney, say the
government's ban violates the inmates' freedom of expression,
among other abuses.

"It's critical for people who aren't incarcerated to know and
remember that people do not -- and should not -- automatically
lose all their rights simply because they are incarcerated," Mr.
Martinez said.

"Those rights can only be restricted in a way that is reasonable
and justified in a free and democratic society.  People's ability
to engage in free expression is very important."

The lawyers filed the class-action lawsuit Aug. 17 and served the
papers to the office of the Attorney General of Canada in downtown
Toronto on Aug. 30.

Mr. Charney is well known in Waterloo Region.

He had numerous run-ins with police while leading public protests
over issues including poverty, homelessness and youth harassment.
He then went back to school to become a lawyer and has since
launched numerous lawsuits, both here and in Toronto, alleging
police misconduct.

Mr. Martinez said turning the maple leaf upside down has symbolic
importance.  For instance, it indicates distress at sea.

However, Mr. Toews has said the inmates have no excuse for their
action.

"Any distress felt by inmates at Joyceville Institution pales in
comparison to the real trauma felt by law-abiding Canadians who
have been victimized by those incarcerated there," he said in a
2010 published report.

Mr. Martinez argues prisoners wanted to express their opposition
to the federal government's law-and-order agenda, specifically
Bill C-10 which is expected to put more people in prison.

The lawyers say prisoners deserve the same rights as anyone else,
and suggest that a more informal means to resolve the issue has
been met with roadblocks.

"This (class action) promotes access to justice," Mr. Martinez
said.  "What we're dealing with is a vulnerable group of people
who are incarcerated and have difficulties accessing lawyers as
easily as the rest of us."

Each federal prison's T-shirt design has an approval process, but
just where the process broke down remains unclear.

Prisoners Justice Day has been celebrated by federal inmates since
1976 to remember those who have died in penitentiaries and other
penal institutions.

The lawsuit's representative plaintiffs are serving life terms on
murder convictions: Jason Lauzon, 41, for second-degree murder in
1997 and John Chaif, 57, for first-degree murder in 1983.

The lawsuit's claims have not been proven in court.

The Attorney General of Canada has 20 days to file a statement of
defense.


CAPITAL ONE: AGs Can Use Private Attorneys to Pursue Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------
John O'Brien, writing for Legal Newsline, reports that a federal
judge has ruled that the attorneys general of Mississippi and
Hawaii can pursue their claims against Capital One Bank and use
private attorneys to do so.

Capital One had challenged the contingency fee agreements between
Golomb & Holnik of Philadelphia and the two AGs -- Mississippi's
Jim Hood and Hawaii's David Louie.  The firm was involved in a
private class action settlement reached by Capital One in 2010,
then was hired by the AGs to pursue state claims.

U.S. District Judge Virginia Hernandez Covington ruled Aug. 22
against Capital One, which asked her to enter an injunction
against the state lawsuits and sanction the law firm. She called
the requests "inappropriate."

"The court's order approving the settlement and closing this case
did not bind the states of Mississippi and Hawaii," she wrote.
"The attorneys general of Mississippi and Hawaii were not defined
as class members and did not have an opportunity to participate in
the litigation or opt out of the class."

Judge Covington wrote that granting the injunctions would usurp
the claims of two sovereign states.

Capital One wrote that it did not matter if the attorneys general
weren't parties to the settlement because the customers they are
representing were.  It also said plaintiffs' attorney Richard
Golomb agreed to effectuate the settlement agreement.

"The settlement agreement and final approval order expressly
released any claims under 'the unfair and deceptive acts and
practices statutes of any of the states,'" the company wrote
Aug. 3.

"Golomb was certainly aware that this included claims under
(Hawaii's and Mississippi's consumer protection laws).
Additionally, Golomb collected nearly a quarter million dollars in
attorneys' fees for its efforts in securing the settlement.

"Now, despite agreeing not to 'attempt to void this Agreement in
any way,' Golomb has represented parties in two different suits
against Capital One for the same claims released in the Spinelli
settlement.  Golomb's actions exhibit willful disobedience of the
order approving settlement and should be penalized."

The lawsuits against Capital One concern its payment-protection
products that carry monthly fees.

West Virginia Attorney General Darrell McGraw settled a similar
case in January.  He did not use the Golomb firm, but hired it for
a case against nine other companies.


CHECKSMART FINANCIAL: Sued Over Illegal Recording of Phone Calls
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jordan Grays individually and on behalf of a class and subclass of
similarly situated individuals v. Checksmart Financial, LLC, a
Delaware Limited Liability Company doing business in the State of
California; and Does 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. MSC12-01830
(Calif. Super. Ct., Contra Costa Cty., July 30, 2012) arises out
of the Defendants' unlawful practice of recording calls to
Checksmart's customer service line without first obtaining consent
of the customers and employees.

The Defendants' policy and practice of recording telephone
conversations without caller consent violates the California's
Invasion of Privacy Act, Mr. Grays contends.  As a result of the
Defendants' violations, he argues, all individuals that engaged in
a conversation with Checksmart employees through the 1-800 number
or through direct branch contact in California and all employees
of Checksmart who participated in the recorded calls are entitled
to an award of statutory damages and injunctive relief.

Mr. Grays is a resident of the City of Antioch, County of Contra
Costa, California.

Checksmart is a Delaware corporation headquartered in Dublin.
Ohio.  The Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities
of the Doe Defendants.

Checksmart removed the lawsuit on August 29, 2012, from the
Superior Court of the state of California, County of Contra Costa,
to the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California.  The Company argues that the removal is proper because
the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $5,000,000.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:12-cv-04532 to the
proceeding.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Scott A. Miller, Esq.
          Bonnie Fong, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT A. MILLER
          A Professional Corporation
          16133 Ventura Blvd., Suite 645
          Encino, CA 91436
          Telephone: (818) 788-8081
          E-mail: SMiller@CaliforniaWageLawAttorney.com

               - and -

          Kelly Ann Buschman, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT A. MILLER
          A Professional Corporation
          1300 Autumn Hills Drive
          Reno, NV 89511
          Telephone: (818) 605-2759

The Defendants are represented by:

          H. Sinclair Kerr, Jr., Esq.
          Michael von Loewenfeldt, Esq.
          KERR & WAGSTAFFE LLP
          100 Spear Street, 18th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94105-1528
          Telephone: (415) 371-8500
          Facsimile: (415) 371-0500
          E-mail: kerr@kerrwagstaffe.com
                  mvl@kerrwagstaffe.com


CLOROX CO: Judge Partially Grants Bid to Dismiss Fresh Step Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip A. Janquart at Courthouse News Service reports that Clorox
survived a challenge to its claim that cats "like" its Fresh Step
litter, but a federal judge said the commercials could be
misleading in other ways.

The consolidated class action in San Francisco stems from a series
of consumer complaints filed since January 2012.  Though a Clorox
competitor, Church & Dwight, won an injunction against the Fresh
Step commercials around that time, it quickly dismissed its claims
with prejudice after settling privately with Clorox.

Consumers say that Fresh Step commercials make misleading claims
about how well the product removes litter-box odors.

Clorox moved to dismiss the complaint, but U.S. District Judge
Samuel Conti upheld most claims.

"The complaint clearly alleges that the challenged representations
are false," Judge Conti wrote on Aug. 24.  "The plaintiffs do more
than allege that there is no competent scientific evidence to
support Clorox's claims; they allege that the competent scientific
evidence shows that Clorox's claims are objectively false."

Clorox did thwart claims concerning supposed cat preferences in
litter, with Conti finding that some of its promotion amounted to
nonactionable puffery.  Though consumers said the commercials gave
the impression of scientific testing, Conti found that
dramatizations of cats stepping into boxes do not meet the grade.

"Contrary to plaintiffs' assertion, the depiction of four or five
cats choosing to playfully jump into a litter box of Fresh Step
rather than a litter box of the competitor's brand does not give
the impression of scientific testing -- especially since this
demonstration follows several videos of cats playing with boxes,"
the 23-page decision states.

"The overall message of the commercials is that cats prefer Fresh
Step because they are 'smart enough to choose the litter with less
odors,'" Judge Conti added.  "No reasonable consumer would
consider such a message to be a statement of fact."

As such, the consumers cannot advance claims over statements that
cats "like" or "are smart enough to choose Fresh Step," the court
found.

Though Judge Conti dismissed that claim with prejudice, he said
the consumers could amend a breach of warranty claim that failed
for vagueness.

Some of the lead plaintiffs in this action live out of state, but
Judge Conti found that it would be premature to strike the
nationwide class and subclass allegations.

"Since the parties have yet to develop a factual record it is
unclear whether applying different state consumer protection
statutes could have a material impact on the viability of
plaintiffs' claims," the decision states.

Precedent holds that out-of-state parties can invoke California
statutory remedies when they are harmed by wrongful conduct
occurring in California.

"Here, plaintiffs have alleged that Clorox conducts substantial
business in California and has its principal place of business and
corporate headquarters in the state, decisions regarding the
challenged representations were made in California, Clorox's
marketing activities were coordinated at its California
headquarters, and a significant number of class members reside in
California," Judge Conti wrote.  "Thus, plaintiffs have
sufficiently pled that Clorox's conduct originated in or had
strong connections to California."

A copy of the Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Motion to
Dismiss in In Re Clorox Consumer Litigation, Case No. 12-cv-00280
(N.D. Calif.), is available at:

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/08/29/clorox.pdf


COCA-COLA CO: Faces Class Action Over Spam Text Messages
--------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that Coca-Cola bombards customers'
cell phones with spam text messages "long after they have opted
out" from its so-called "rewards" program, a class action claims
in Federal Court.

A copy of the Complaint in Missaghi v. The Coca-Cola Company, Case
No. 12-cv-07472 (C.D. Calif.), is available at:

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/08/31/CocaCola.pdf

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Sean P. Reis, Esq.
          EDELSON MCGUIRE LLP
          30021 Tomas Street, Suite 300
          Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688
          Telephone: (949) 459-2124
          E-mail: sreis@edelson.com


EQUINIX INC: Securities Suit Dismissal Bid Hearing on Sept. 21
--------------------------------------------------------------
A California federal court is set to convene a hearing on
September 21, 2012, to hear Equinix Inc.'s motion to dismiss a
second amended securities class action complaint, according to the
Company's July 27, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2012.

On March 4, 2011, an alleged class action entitled Cement Masons &
Plasterers Joint Pension Trust v. Equinix, Inc., et al., No. CV-
11-1016-SC, was filed in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, against Equinix and two of its
officers.  The suit asserts purported claims under Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for allegedly
misleading statements regarding the Company's business and
financial results.  The suit is purportedly brought on behalf of
purchasers of the Company's common stock between July 29, 2010 and
October 5, 2010, and seeks compensatory damages, fees and costs.
Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on November 7, 2011. On March
2, 2012, the court granted defendants' motion to dismiss without
prejudice and gave plaintiffs 30 days in which to amend their
complaint. Pursuant to stipulation and order of the court entered
on March 16, 2012, the parties agreed that plaintiffs would have
up to and through May 2, 2012 to file a Second Amended Complaint.
On May 2, 2012 plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint
asserting the same basic allegations as in the prior complaint. On
June 15, 2012, defendants moved to dismiss the Second Amended
Complaint. The hearing on defendants' motion to dismiss the Second
Amended Complaint is currently scheduled for September 21, 2012.


EVERGREEN ULTRA: December 5 Settlement Fairness Hearing Set
-----------------------------------------------------------
Cohen, Placitella & Roth, PC, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP,
and Evangelista & Associates LLC, on Aug. 31 disclosed that a
hearing will be held on December 5, 2012, at 3:30 p.m., before the
Honorable Nathaniel M. Gorton, at the United States District Court
for the District of Massachusetts, One Courthouse Way, Boston, MA
02210, for the purpose of determining: (1) whether the proposed
settlement of In Re Evergreen Ultra Short Opportunities Fund
Securities Litigation for the sum of $25,000,000.00 in cash should
be approved by the Court as fair, reasonable and adequate; (2)
whether, thereafter, this Litigation should be dismissed with
prejudice against the Defendants as set forth in the Stipulation
of Settlement dated as of June 22, 2012; (3) whether the Plan of
Allocation of settlement proceeds is fair, reasonable and adequate
and therefore should be approved; and (4) the reasonableness of
the application of Lead Counsel for the payment of attorneys' fees
and expenses incurred in connection with this Litigation, together
with interest thereon and the award to Lead Plaintiffs for
representing the Class.

ALL PERSONS WHO PURCHASED SHARES OF EVERGREEN ULTRA SHORT
OPPORTUNITIES FUND ("FUND") BETWEEN OCTOBER 28, 2005 AND JUNE 18,
2008, INCLUSIVE.

If you purchased shares of the Fund between October 28, 2005 and
June 18, 2008, inclusive, your rights may be affected by this
Litigation and the settlement thereof.  If you have not received a
detailed Notice of Proposed Settlement of Class Action and a copy
of the Claim Information Form, you may obtain copies by writing to
Evergreen Ultra Short Opportunities Fund Securities Litigation,
Claims Administrator, c/o Heffler Claims Administration, P.O. Box
59000, Philadelphia, PA 19102-9000, or by downloading this
information at http://www.evergreenultrashortlitigation.com

If you are a Class Member, in order to share in the distribution
of the Net Settlement Fund, you must submit a Claim Information
Form no later than November 21, 2012, establishing that you are
entitled to a recovery.  You will be bound by any Judgment
rendered in the Litigation unless you request to be excluded, in
writing, to the above address, postmarked by November 5, 2012.

Any objection to any aspect of the settlement must be filed with
the Clerk of the Court no later than November 5, 2012, and
received by the following no later than November 5, 2012:

          Jack Reise, Esq.
          ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
          120 East Palmetto Park Road, Suite 500
          Boca Raton, FL 33432

          Stuart J. Guber, Esq.
          COHEN, PLACITELLA & ROTH, P.C.
          Two Commerce Square, Suite 2900
          Philadelphia, PA 19103

          Lead Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs

          Thomas L. Allen, Esq.
          REED SMITH LLP
          225 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1200
          Pittsburgh, PA 15222

          Robert G. Jones, Esq.
          ROPES & GRAY LLP
          Prudential Tower
          800 Boylston St.
          Boston, MA 02199-3600

          Counsel for Defendants

PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE COURT OR THE CLERK'S OFFICE REGARDING
THIS NOTICE.


F&S PRODUCE: Recalls Expired Products With Fresh-cut Mango
----------------------------------------------------------
F&S Produce Co., Inc. of Rosenhayn, New Jersey, is initiating a
voluntary recall of a limited quantity of expired products that
contain fresh-cut mangoes, with a code date that is on or before
August 28, 2012, as a result of a FDA recall by Splendid Products
because Daniella brand mangoes distributed by this firm may be
contaminated with Salmonella.  Products containing fresh-cut mango
products that were affected by this recall were distributed to
grocery and convenience store customers in the Northeast.
Products were processed between 8/9/2012 to 8/19/2012, and
utilized mangoes sourced from Mexico that are associated with this
current outbreak.  Products produced with Use-by or Sell-By dates
of August 29 or later, have been processed using mangoes sourced
from Brazil, and are not associated with this recall.

Salmonella is an organism which can cause serious and sometimes
fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly people, and
others with weakened immune systems.  Healthy persons infected
with Salmonella often experience fever, diarrhea (which may be
bloody), nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain.  In rare
circumstances, infection with Salmonella can result in the
organism getting into the bloodstream and producing more severe
illnesses such as arterial infections (i.e., infected aneurysms),
endocarditis and arthritis.

There have been no reported illnesses attributed to the items
listed in this recall.  F&S Produce is issuing this voluntary
recall linked to Splendid Product's Daniella Brand Mangoes to
minimize risk to the public health.  A list of the items with
corresponding brands and code dates associated with the recall are
provided in the table below.

F&S Produce has directly notified its customers who received the
recalled product and requested removal from store shelves.
Consumers who have purchased any of these fresh-cut mango
products, that have a code date that is on or before August 28,
should not consume the mangoes and should discard them.  The code
date can be found on the label on the top or the bottom of the
plastic bowls, cups, or trays.  Consumers with questions may
contact the Company at 1-856-391-7100, Monday through Friday,
except on holidays, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard
Time.

   ------------------------------------------------------------
                 Brand: Delish! Plant code P-006
   ------------------------------------------------------------
                             Pack                      Included
   Product                   Size    Code Date Range    States
   -------                   ----    ---------------   --------
   Mango Spears              5 oz    Enjoy: 8/28/12     NY, NJ
   UPC: 0.49022-53700.2                    & before

   Cantaloupe, Mango,        5 oz    Enjoy: 8/28/12     NY, NJ
   Pineapple Spears                        & before
   UPC: 0.49022-53701.9

   Fruit Burst               10 oz   Enjoy: 8/28/12    NY, NJ
   UPC: 0.49022-55862.5                    & before

   Tropical Medley           10 oz   Enjoy: 8/28/12    NY, NJ
   UPC: 0.49022-53699.9                    & before

   Mango and Berry Mix       10 oz   Enjoy: 8/28/12    NY, NJ
   UPC: 0.49022-63779.5                    & before

   Mango Spears              1 lb    Enjoy: 8/28/12    NY, NJ
   UPC: 0.49022-58823.3                    & before

   ------------------------------------------------------------
             Brand: Garden Highway Plant code P-006
   ------------------------------------------------------------
                             Pack                      Included
   Product                   Size    Code Date Range    States
   -------                   ----    ---------------   --------
   Mango Medley              1 lb    Best if Sold by:     PA
   UPC: 8.26766-21437.2              8/28/12 & before

   Tropical Mango            7 oz    Best if Sold by:     NH
   Spinach Salad                     8/28/12 & before
   UPC: 8.26766-80185.5

   ------------------------------------------------------------
                       Brand: Garden Pure
   ------------------------------------------------------------
                             Pack                      Included
   Product                   Size    Code Date Range    States
   -------                   ----    ---------------   --------
   Mango Chunks              5 lb    Best by: 8/28/12   DE, MA,
   UPC: NONE                         & before           MD, ME,
                                                        NH, NJ,
                                                        PA

   Mango                     9 oz    Best by: 8/28/12   DE, MA,
   UPC: 6.01172-20149.5              & before           MD, ME,
                                                        NH, NJ,
                                                        PA

  Fruit Medley               3 lb    Best by: 8/28/12   MA, ME,
  UPC: 6.01172-00248.1               & before           NH

  Seasonal Fruit Bowl        4 lb    Best by: 8/28/12   MA, ME,
  UPC: 6.01172-00264.1               & before           NH

   ------------------------------------------------------------
       Brand: Signature Cafe  Sold at Safeway, Genuardi's
   ------------------------------------------------------------
                             Pack                      Included
   Product                   Size    Code Date Range    States
   -------                   ----    ---------------   --------
   Fruit Basket Medley       30 oz   Use by: 08/28/12   DC, DE,
   UPC: 21130-06918                  & Before           MD, NJ,
                                                        PA, VA

   ------------------------------------------------------------
                       Brand: Trader Joe's
   ------------------------------------------------------------
                             Pack                      Included
   Product                   Size    Code Date Range    States
   -------                   ----    ---------------   --------
   Tropical Fruit Medley     1 lb    Best by: 8/28/12   CT, DE,
   UPC: 0094-9361                    & before           MA, MD,
                                                        ME, NH,
                                                        NY, NJ,
                                                        PA, RI,
                                                        DC,
                                                        Northern
                                                        VA

   ------------------------------------------------------------
          Brand: Generic Label Sold at Wal-Mart Stores
   ------------------------------------------------------------
                             Pack                      Included
   Product                   Size    Code Date Range    States
   -------                   ----    ---------------   --------
   Mango Spears              1 lb    Best if Sold by:     FL
   UPC: 8.26766-25561.0              8/25/12 & before


GLADSTONE PORTS: Sick Fish Class Action Likely to Drag On
---------------------------------------------------------
ABC News reports that the independent Member for Gladstone says a
compensation claim against the Gladstone Ports Corporation over
diseased fish is likely to drag on, after the Planning and
Environment Court refused an application to hear the case.

About 60 people in Gladstone's seafood industry launched the class
action, blaming dredging for the outbreak of sick fish.

The seafood industry says wholesalers and processors should be
paid out but the court found they do not fit the definition of a
"commercial fishing operator".

MP Liz Cunningham says she cannot see the issue going away.

"It's been a jurisdictional ruling, it hasn't thrown the issue out
altogether," she said.

"I'm sure for those families that have been struggling financially
it's just not something they wanted to hear.

"This whole issue has been dragging on now for two years or more."

Ms. Cunningham says it is a blow for the industry.

"Since all this occurred we've had one retail outlet closed, then
the wholesalers they closed," she said.

"Now that's a multi-million dollar processing plant, huge facility
being built up over a decade.

"The families involved in that business have suffered as far as
their health is concerned, as well as economically."

The Gladstone Ports Corporation says there is no evidence to
suggest dredging caused the outbreak.


INTERNET INITIATIVE: Appeals From Class Deal Approval Dismissed
---------------------------------------------------------------
All appeals from a final court approval of a settlement resolving
a securities class action complaint against Internet Initiative
Japan Inc. has either been dismissed or settled, according to the
Company's July 27, 2012, Form 20-F filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2012.

In December 2001, a class action complaint alleging violations of
the federal securities laws in the United States of America was
filed against IIJ, naming IIJ, certain of its officers and
directors and underwriters of IIJ's initial public offering as
defendants. Similar complaints have been filed against over 300
other issuers that have had initial public offerings since 1998
and such actions have been included in a single coordinated
proceeding in the Southern District of New York. An amended
complaint was filed on April 24, 2002 alleging, among other
things, that the underwriters of IIJ's initial public offering
violated the securities laws (i) by failing to disclose in the
offering's registration statement certain alleged compensation
arrangements entered into with the underwriters' clients, such as
undisclosed commissions or tie in agreements to purchase stock in
the aftermarket, and (ii) by engaging in manipulative practices to
artificially inflate the price of IIJ's stock in the aftermarket
subsequent to the initial public offering. On July 15, 2002, IIJ
joined in an 'omnibus' motion to dismiss the amended complaint
filed by the issuers and individuals named in the various
coordinated cases. On February 19, 2003, the Court ruled on the
motions to dismiss. The Court granted IIJ's motion to dismiss the
claims against it under Rule 10b-5 promulgated under the Exchange
Act due to the insufficiency of the allegations against IIJ.  The
motions to dismiss the claims under Section 11 of the Securities
Act were denied for virtually all of the defendants in the
consolidated cases, including IIJ. In June 2003, IIJ conditionally
approved a proposed partial settlement with the plaintiffs in this
matter. IIJ, along with the settling issuer defendants, filed a
motion seeking the court's preliminary approval of the settlement.
The settlement would have provided, among other things, a release
of IIJ and of the individual officer and director defendants for
the alleged wrongful conduct in the amended complaint in exchange
for a guarantee from IIJ's insurers regarding recovery from the
underwriter defendants and other non-monetary consideration from
IIJ. While the partial settlement was pending approval, the
plaintiffs continued to litigate against the underwriter
defendants. The District Court directed that the litigation
proceed with a number of "focus cases" rather than all of the 310
cases that had been consolidated. IIJ's case is not one of these
focus cases.

On October 13, 2004, the District Court certified the focus cases
as class actions in the ongoing litigation. The underwriter
defendants appealed that ruling, and on December 5, 2006, the
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the District
Court's class certification decision. On April 6, 2007, the Second
Circuit denied the plaintiffs' petition for rehearing, and on May
18, 2007, the Second Circuit denied the plaintiffs' petition for
rehearing en banc. In light of the Second Circuit opinion, liaison
counsel for all issuer defendants, including IIJ, informed the
District Court that the settlement could not be approved, because
the defined settlement class, like the litigation class, could not
be certified. On June 25, 2007, the District Court entered an
order terminating the proposed settlement. On August 14, 2007, the
plaintiffs filed their second consolidated amended complaints
against the six focus cases and on September 27, 2007, again moved
for class certification. On November 12, 2007, certain of the
defendants in the focus cases moved to dismiss the second
consolidated amended class action complaints. On March 26, 2008,
the District Court denied the motions to dismiss except as to
Section 11 claims raised by those plaintiffs who sold their
securities for a price in excess of the initial offering price and
those who purchased outside the previously certified class period.
The motion for class certification was withdrawn without prejudice
on October 10, 2008.

On February 25, 2009, liaison counsel for the plaintiffs informed
the District Court that a settlement had been agreed to in
principle, subject to formal approval by the parties, and
preliminary and final approval by the District Court. On April 2,
2009, a stipulation and agreement of settlement among the
plaintiffs, issuer defendants and underwriter defendants was
submitted to the District Court for preliminary approval. This
global settlement requires no financial contribution from IIJ. The
District Court granted the plaintiffs' motion for preliminary
approval and preliminarily certified the settlement classes on
June 10, 2009. The settlement fairness hearing was held on
September 10, 2009. On October 6, 2009, the District Court entered
an opinion granting final approval to the settlement which
required no financial obligation from the Company and directing
that the Clerk of the Court close the cases.

Appeals of the opinion granting final approval were filed, all of
which have been dismissed or settled by January 2012.
Consequently, there is not a reasonable possibility that a loss
may be incurred for the class action lawsuit.


JAMAICA PUBLIC: To Dispute $24-MM Payment Sought in Class Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Barbara Gayle, writing for Go-Jamaica, reports that the Jamaica
Public Service Company (JPS) says it will be disputing a $24
million payment being sought by the claimants who brought a class
action suit challenging the company's exclusive license.

In July, in making his ruling in favor of the claimants, Supreme
Court judge Bryan Sykes had also awarded legal costs to the
claimants.

The JPS has since filed an appeal against the Supreme Court ruling
that its exclusive license is invalid and on Aug. 30, the
respondents: Dennis Meadows, Betty Ann Blaine and Cyrus Rousseau
filed a counter-notice of appeal.

In its counter appeal, the claimants state that Justice Sykes
correctly held that the minister had no power under the Electric
Lighting Act to grant an exclusive license to the JPS for the
supply of electricity but failed to hold that the said license was
illegal, null and void.

The respondents who are being represented by attorneys-at-law Hugh
Wildman and Marvalyn Taylor-Wright are asking the Court of Appeal
to find that the judge erred in holding that the minister was
empowered under the Act, to grant a license to the JPS for the
supply of electricity over the entire island.

No date has been set for the appeal.

In the meantime, JPS president & CEO, Kelly Tomblin, says the
light and power company will continue discussions with the
Government and other stakeholders on the best way forward for the
energy sector.

She says the JPS recognizes that the energy landscape is evolving,
and it is prepared to play its part in facilitating structured
changes that are in the best interest of all.


KABA ILCO: Faces Class Action Over Pushbutton Combination Locks
---------------------------------------------------------------
Lorraine Bailey at Courthouse News Service reports that federal
class actions in three states claim Kaba pushbutton combination
locks can be opened with a magnet.

Lead plaintiff Yosef Davis in Chicago sued Kaba and seven
affiliates, including its Swiss corporate parent.  Similar class
actions were filed in Greenbelt, Md., and in Ohio.

Kaba makes pushbutton combination locks that do not require keys,
and "is the leader in the mechanical pushbutton lock segment of
the access control market," Mr. Davis said in his complaint.
"Over a period of forty years, pushbutton locks have evolved to
become the industry standard for 'keyless entry' in standalone
locks."

The company advertises its locks as "'durable,' 'reliable,'
'dependable,' providing 'security,' being a 'tried and true way to
protect assets' and providing 'unparalleled strength,'" the
complaint states.

But Mr. Davis says, "The locks contain a serious design flaw.  In
particular, the locks can be opened by affixing a magnet to the
outside of the locks, which manipulates the lock's internal
mechanism -- the combination chamber -- and allows the lock to be
opened with ease and, most importantly, without inputting the
necessary or correct combination."

Mr. Davis adds: "The size of the requisite magnet is small enough
to fit in the palm of the hand, thus allowing any petty criminal
or other interested person easy access to any area whose access is
supposed to be restricted by the locks."

Mr. Davis claims Kaba has been aware of the defect since 2010, but
"took no action to inform suppliers or end-users of the locks, or
of the risk of unwanted entry by use of a magnet, until being sued
and having numerous related actions consolidated for pretrial
purposes by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation in the
Northern District of Ohio."

Mr. Davis seeks class damages for breach of implied warranty.

A copy of the Complaint in Davis v. KABA Ilco Corp., et al., Case
No. 12-cv-06962 (N.D. Ill.), is available at:

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/08/31/Locks.pdf

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Hunter J. Shkolnik, Esq.
          NAPOLI BERN RIPKA SHKOLNIK
          350 Fifth Avenue
          New York, NY 10118
          Telephone: (212) 267-3700
          E-mail: hunter@napolibern.com

               - and -

          Steven M. Aroesty, Esq.
          NAPOLI BERN RIPKA SHKOLNIK
          241 North Main Street
          Edwardsville, IL 62025
          Telephone: (618) 364-8176
          E-mail: saroesty@napolibern.com


LITHIA MOTORS: Oct. 11 Final Hearing on "McClintic" Suit Deal Set
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A Washington court is set to convene a hearing on October 11,
2012, to consider final approval of a settlement resolving a
consumer class action complaint asserting text messaging claims
against Lithia Motors, Inc., according to the Company's July 27,
2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2012.

In April 2011, a third party vendor assisted the Company in
promoting a targeted "0% financing on used vehicles" advertising
campaign during a limited sale period. The marketing included
sending a "Short Message Service" communication to cell phones (a
"text message") of the Company's previous customers. The message
was sent to over 50,000 cell phones in 14 states. The message
indicated that the recipients could "Opt-Out" of receiving any
further messages by replying "STOP," but, due to a technical
error, some recipients who responded requesting to be unsubscribed
nonetheless may have received a follow-on message.

On or about April 21, 2011, a Complaint for Damages, Injunctive
and Declaratory Relief was filed against the Company (Kevin
McClintic vs. Lithia Motors, 11-2-14632-4 SEA, Superior Court of
the State of Washington for King County) alleging the text
messaging activity violated State of Washington anti-texting and
consumer protection laws and the federal Telephone Consumer
Protection Act, and seeking statutory damages of $500 for each
violation, trebled, plus injunctive relief and attorney fees.  The
suit seeks class action designation for all similarly situated
entities and individuals.  The suit has been removed to the U.S.
District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle.

On July 5, 2011, the Company participated in a mediation of the
McClintic case and subsequently entered into a settlement
agreement with the plaintiffs, which is subject to final court
approval.  Under the settlement agreement, the Company agreed to
pay a total of $2.5 million, all of which such amounts will be
reimbursed by the vendor pursuant to contractual indemnification.
On June 11, 2012, the court preliminarily approved the settlement.
The court set a final approval hearing for
October 11, 2012.  No assurances can be given that the court will
grant final approval of the settlement.

On July 5, 2011, a complaint was filed alleging nearly identical
claims, also seeking class action designation (Dan McLaren vs.
Lithia Motors, Civil # 11-810, U.S. District Court of Oregon,
Portland Division).  Subsequently, the complaint was amended to
include claims against the vendor.  The class representative in
the McLaren case attempted to intervene in the McClintic case.
This intervention motion was denied on October 19, 2011.

The McLaren case was stayed pending the outcome of the McClintic
matter by order of the court on or about October 11, 2011; the
stay was lifted on or about June 19, 2012, following the
preliminary settlement approval in the McClintic case.  Now that
McClintic has been granted preliminary approval, the defendants
have moved the court to dismiss the McLaren case.  No assurances
can be given that the court will dismiss the McLaren case.


LITHIA MOTORS: "Neese" Opt-Out Claimants' Suit Pending in Alaska
----------------------------------------------------------------
In December 2006, a suit was filed against the Company (Jackie
Neese, et al vs. Lithia Chrysler Jeep of Anchorage, Inc, et al,
Case No. 3AN-06-13341 CI, and in April 2007, a second case (Jackie
Neese, et al vs. Lithia Chrysler Jeep of Anchorage, Inc, et al,
Case No. 3AN-06-4815 CI) (now consolidated)), in the Superior
Court for the State of Alaska, Third Judicial District at
Anchorage.  In the suits, plaintiffs alleged that the Company,
through its Alaska dealerships, engaged in three practices that
purportedly violate Alaska consumer protection laws: (i) charging
customers dealer fees and costs (including document preparation
fees) not disclosed in the advertised price, (ii) failing to
disclose the acquisition, mechanical and accident history of used
vehicles or whether the vehicles were originally manufactured for
sale in a foreign country, and (iii) engaging in deception,
misrepresentation and fraud by providing to customers financing
from third parties without disclosing that the Company receives a
fee or discount for placing that loan (a "dealer reserve").  The
suit seeks statutory damages of $500 for each violation (or three
times plaintiff's actual damages, whichever is greater), and
attorney fees and costs and the plaintiffs sought class action
certification.  Before and during the pendency of these suits, the
Company engaged in settlement discussions with the State of Alaska
through its Office of Attorney General with respect to the first
two practices enumerated above. As a result of those discussions,
the Company entered into a Consent Judgment subject to court
approval and permitted potential class members to "opt-out" of the
proposed settlement.  Counsel for the plaintiffs attempted to
intervene and, after various motions, hearings and an appeal to
the state Court of Appeals, the Consent Judgment became final.

Plaintiffs then filed a motion in November 2010 seeking
certification of a class (i) for the 339 customers who "opted-out"
of the state settlement, (ii) for those customers who did not
qualify for recovery under the Consent Judgment but were allegedly
eligible for recovery under the Plaintiffs' broader interpretation
of the applicable statutes, and (iii) arguing that since the
State's suit against the Company's dealerships did not address the
loan fee/discount (dealer reserve) claim, for those customers who
arranged their vehicle financing through the Company.  On June 14,
2011, the Trial Court granted Plaintiffs' motion to certify a
class without addressing either the merits of the claims or the
size of the classes.

The Company intends to defend the claims vigorously and do not
believe the novel "dealer reserve" claim has merit.

The ultimate resolution of these matters cannot be predicted with
certainty, and an unfavorable resolution of any of the matters
could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations,
financial condition or cash flows.

No further updates were reported in the Company's July 27, 2012,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended June 30, 2012.


LKQ CORP: Class Suit vs. 2 Product Suppliers Still Pending
----------------------------------------------------------
LKQ Corporation's lawsuit against two aftermarket product
suppliers remains pending, according to the Company's July 27,
2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2012.

The Company is a plaintiff in a class action lawsuit against
several aftermarket product suppliers.  In January 2012, the
Company reached a settlement agreement with certain of the
defendants, under which it recognized a gain of $8.3 million.
Additionally, in April 2012, the class action lawsuit against
certain other defendants was settled, under which the Company
recognized a gain of $8.4 million. These gains were recorded as a
reduction of Cost of Goods Sold during the six months ended
June 30, 2012.

The class action is still pending against two defendants, the
results of which are not expected to be material to the Company's
results of operations or cash flows. If there is a class
settlement with (or a favorable judgment entered against) each of
the remaining defendants, the Company will recognize the gains
from such settlement or judgment when substantially all
uncertainties regarding their timing and amount are resolved and
realization is assured.


MANNA ORGANICS: Recalls Soybean Sprouts and Tofu Products
---------------------------------------------------------
Manna Organics, Inc. of Newark, New Jersey, is recalling various
soybean sprouts and tofu products listed in the table below
because they have the potential to be contaminated with Listeria
monocytogenes, an organism which can cause serious and sometimes
fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly people, and
others with weakened immune systems.  Although healthy individuals
may suffer only short-term symptoms such as high fever, severe
headache, stiffness, nausea, abdominal pain and diarrhea, listeria
infection can cause miscarriages and stillbirths among pregnant
women.

The recalled products were distributed to various restaurants,
retailers, and distributors in NY, NJ, PA, MA, VA, MD, CT, GA, IL,
and TX on or after July 17, 2012.

The Jinga Firm and Soft, SooNyeoWon Firm and Soft Tofu are
packaged in a square 16-ounce white plastic container with the
label sealed on top with UPC Codes: 0 28346 09112 4, 0 28346 09111
7, 0 28346 07812 5 and 0 28346 07814 9.  Expiration date of
September 9, 2012, or later is printed in black on top of the
label.

The 5 pieces and 10 pieces tofu are packaged in a white plastic
bucket.  The 5 pieces and 10 pieces are lidded and labeled in
Korean "Healthy Tofu" with UPC Codes 0 28346 09125 4 and 0 28346
09129 2.  Affected products have an expiration date of July 25,
2012, or later.

The Soy Milk is packaged in a 1.3 gallon white plastic pail.

The Large Tofu Bucket(30 pieces), Soon tofu, and Small Tofu are
packaged in a large, white plastic pail enclosed in a plastic bag
labeled TOFU with the Company name, address, and nutritional
information listed directly below.  Affected products have an
expiration date of July 25, 2012, or later.

SooNyeoWon Silken Tofu is packaged in a small 14-ounce square
plastic container with the label sealed on top.  It has a UPC Code
of 0 28346 09113 1.  There is an expiration date printed in black
on top of the label.  Affected products have an expiration date of
September 9, 2012, or later.

The Soybean Sprouts 16-ounce products come in a clear plastic
sealed bag colored in red or green with the labels SOONYEOWON
SOYBEAN SPROUTS or SOONYEOWON HEALTHY SOYBEAN SPROUTS with UPC
Codes 0 28346 07121 8 and 0 28346 07140 9.  The Soybean Sprouts
10lbs. and 5 lbs. bags come in a clear hand tied plastic poly bag
labeled SPROUTS with the Company info directly beneath it.

                       Package                      Expiration
Name                    Size     UPC Code             Date
----                  -------    --------          ----------
Soonyeowon Soybean     16 oz.    0 28346 07121 8       N/A
Sprouts

Soybean Sprouts        10 lbs.        N/A              N/A

Soybean Sprouts        5 lbs.         N/A              N/A

Soonyeowon Healthy     16 oz.    0 28346 07140 9       N/A
Soybean Sprouts

Jinga Firm Tofu        16 oz.    0 28346 09112 4   09/09/2012
                                                    or Later

Jinga Soft Tofu        16 oz.    0 28346 09111 7   09/09/2012
                                                    or Later

Soonyeowon Firm Tofu   16 oz.    0 28346 07812 5   09/09/2012
                                                    or Later

Soonyeowon Soft Tofu   16 oz.    0 28346 07814 9   09/09/2012
                                                    or Later

Soonyeowon Silken      14 oz.    0 28346 09113 1   09/09/2012
Tofu                                               or Later

Tofu Large Bucket      5 gal.         N/A          07/25/2012
(30 pcs.)                                          or Later

10 pcs. Tofu           1.3 gal.  0 28346 09129 2   07/25/2012
                                                    or Later

5 pcs. Tofu            2.5 l     0 28346 09125 4   07/25/2012
                                                    or Later

Soon Tofu              5 gal.         N/A          07/25/2012
                                                    or Later

Soy Milk               1.3 gal.       N/A              N/A

Small Tofu             5 gal.         N/A          07/25/2012
                                                    or Later

No illnesses have been reported to date in connection with this
problem.

The potential for contamination was noted after random testing by
the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets revealed
the presence of Listeria monocytogenes in a 16-ounce package of
SOONYEOWON SOYBEAN SPROUTS.  As a PRECAUTION, a product wide
recall is being initiated.

The production has been suspended while FDA and the Company
continue to investigate the source of the problem.

Consumers who have purchased any of the items listed are urged to
return them to the place of purchase for a full refund.  Consumers
with questions may contact the Company at 1-862-267-3400.  Hours
of operation are 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time,
Monday through Friday.


MANPOWER INC: Awaits Final Okay of Vacation Pay Suit Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------
Manpower Inc. is awaiting final court approval of its settlement
of a class action lawsuit regarding its vacation pay policies in
Illinois, according to the Company's August 3, 2012, Form 10-Q
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarter ended June 30, 2012.

For the three and six months ended June 30, 2012, the Company
recorded legal costs of $10.0 million in the U.S. for various
legal matters, the majority of which was related to the Company's
entry into a settlement agreement in connection with a purported
class action lawsuit involving allegations regarding its vacation
pay policies in Illinois.  Under the settlement agreement, which
is still subject to final court approval, the Company agreed to
pay $8.0 million plus certain related taxes and administrative
fees.  The Company maintains that its vacation pay policies were
appropriate and it admits no liability or wrongdoing, but it
believes that settlement is in its best interest to avoid the
costs and disruption of ongoing litigation.


MARICOPA COUNTY, AZ: App. Court Reinstates Civil Suit v. Sheriff
----------------------------------------------------------------
Josh Israel, writing for ThinkProgress, reports that Joe Arpaio,
the infamous Sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, is facing more
legal trouble.  Already facing a class action lawsuit and a U.S.
Department of Justice legal complaint, he can again add "federal
civil rights and conspiracy lawsuit" to his docket, after a
federal appeals court reinstated a suit against him.

A three judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
reinstated a lawsuit filed by Phoenix New Times owners Mike Lacey
and Jim Larkin against Sheriff Arpaio, rejecting his claims of
immunity.  Messrs. Lacey and Larkin were arrested after the paper
published information about extensive subpoenas they received
following a story in which they published Sheriff Arpaio's home
address.

In July, federal trial began, focused on allegations of racial
profiling by Sheriff Arpaio's police force.  The judge is still
considering the class action complaint.

Last December, the U.S. Department of Justice released the
findings of a three-year investigation into Sheriff Arpaio's
practices.  In May, the DOJ filed a formal legal complaint against
Sheriff Arpaio for "a pattern or practice of unlawful
discriminatory police conduct directed at Latinos in Maricopa
County and jail practices that unlawfully discriminate against
Latino prisoners with limited English language skills."  The
complaint included accusations that Sheriff Arpaio and his staff
forced women to sleep in their own menstrual blood, assaulted
pregnant women, ignored rape, and criminalized being a Latino.

When not busy dealing with these legal actions, Sheriff Arpaio
uses taxpayer funds to pursue a "birther" investigation against
President Obama.  An honorary chairman for Mitt Romney's 2008
campaign, Sheriff Arpaio declined Mr. Romney's request for a
primary endorsement in the 2012 race.

Sheriff Arpaio is seeking re-election this November against former
Phoenix police sergeant Paul Penzone.


NATIONAL PENN: "Reyes" Suit Dismissed in First Quarter
------------------------------------------------------
During the first quarter of 2012, all claims against National Penn
Bancshares, Inc. were dismissed in the putative class action
lawsuit filed by Reynaldo Reyes against multiple defendants in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania (Case No. 2:10-cv-00345), alleging the defendants
were part of a fraudulent telemarketing scheme, according to the
Company's August 3, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30,
2012.


NEW ORIENTAL: Faruqi & Faruqi Files Class Action in New York
------------------------------------------------------------
Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP has filed a class action lawsuit in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York, Case No. 1:12-cv-6619-JGK, on behalf of all persons who
purchased or otherwise acquired New Oriental Education &
Technology Group, Inc. American Depository Shares ("ADSs") and/or
purchased or sold EDU options contracts between July 21, 2009 and
July 23, 2012, inclusive and suffered damages as a result.

If you wish to obtain information concerning this action or view a
copy of the complaint, you can do so by clicking here:
http://www.faruqilaw.com/EDU

There is no cost or obligation to you.

EDU and its executives are charged with violations of Section
10(b) and/or 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule
10b-5 promulgated thereunder.  Specifically, the complaint alleges
that defendants knew or recklessly failed to inform investors
that:  (1) the Company improperly consolidated the earnings of a
variable interest entity into its financial statements; (2) a
significant number of the Company's schools and learning centers
were not company-owned, but were instead operated by independent
franchisees; (3) upfront franchise and other fees had artificially
inflated the Company's cash balances; and (4) the Company lacked
adequate internal and financial controls and as a result of the
foregoing, EDU's financial statements were materially false and
misleading.

On July 17, 2012, the Company disclosed that the Securities and
Exchange Commission "had issued a formal order of investigation"
as to whether the Company appropriately consolidated the earnings
of Beijing New Oriental Education & Technology (Group) Co., Ltd.,
a variable interest entity of the Company, and its wholly-owned
subsidiaries.  On this news, the price of EDU's ADSs plummeted by
$7.64 or more than 34%, to close at $14.62 on July 17, 2012.

On July 18, 2012, independent securities research firm Muddy
Waters, LLC issued an analyst report predicting that the Company
"will have a significant restatement, and that its auditor will
resign."  On this news, the price of EDU's ADSs declined by an
additional $5.12 or more than 35%, to close at $9.50 on July 18,
2012.

Plaintiff now seeks to recover damages on behalf of himself and
all other individual and institutional investors who purchased or
otherwise acquired EDU ADSs and/or purchased or sold EDU options
contracts between July 21, 2009 and July 23, 2012, excluding
defendants and their affiliates, and were damaged thereby.
Plaintiff is represented by Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP, a law firm with
extensive experience in prosecuting class actions and actions
involving corporate fraud.

If you purchased or sold EDU option contracts and/or purchased or
otherwise acquired EDU ADSs during the Class Period and were
damaged thereby, you may, not later than September 21, 2012, move
the court to serve as lead plaintiff of the class, if you so
choose.  In order to discuss this action, or if you have any
questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests,
please contact:

    ATTN: Richard Gonnello, Esq.
          Francis P. McConville, Esq.
          Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP
          369 Lexington Avenue, 10th Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          E-mail: rgonnello@faruqilaw.com
                  fmcconville@faruqilaw.com
          Toll Free: (877) 247-4292
          Telephone: (212) 983-9330


OLD REPUBLIC: RMIC Continues to Face RESPA Violations Suits
-----------------------------------------------------------
Old Republic International Corporation's subsidiaries continue to
face class action lawsuits alleging violations of the Real Estate
Settlement Procedures Act, according to the Company's August 3,
2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2012.

Eight purported class action lawsuits alleging RESPA violations
have been filed in the Federal District Courts, one in the Central
District of California, one in the Eastern District of California,
four in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and two in the
Western District of Pennsylvania, respectively, between December
9, 2011, and May 31, 2012.  The lawsuits target J.P. Morgan Chase
Bank, N.A., the PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. as successor to
National City Bank, N.A., Citibank, N.A., HSBC Bank USA, N.A.,
Bank of America, N.A., Fifth Third Bank, N.A., Flagstar Bank, FSB,
and First Tennessee Bank, N.A., each of their wholly-owned captive
insurance subsidiaries and most or all of the mortgage guaranty
insurance companies, including the Company's mortgage insurance
subsidiaries, Republic Mortgage Insurance Company and Republic
Mortgage Insurance Company of North Carolina (together "RMIC").
The lawsuits are (Samp, Komarchuk, Whitaker v. J.P. Morgan Chase
Bank, N.A., et al.; White, Hightower v. The PNC Financial Services
Group, Inc., et al.; Menichino v. Citibank, N.A., et al.; McCarn
v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., et al.; Riddle v. Bank of America, et al.;
Manners v. Fifth Third Bank, et al.; Hill, et al. v. Flagstar
Bank, FSB. et al.; and Barlee v. First Tennessee Bank, N.A., et
al.)  The lawsuits, filed by the same law firms, are substantially
identical in alleging that the mortgage guaranty insurers had
reinsurance arrangements with the defendant banks' captive
insurance subsidiaries under which payments were made in violation
of the anti-kickback and fee splitting prohibitions of Sections
8(a) and 8(b) of RESPA.  Each of the lawsuits seeks unspecified
damages, costs, fees and the return of the allegedly improper
payments.  A class has not been certified in any of the lawsuits.

Old Republic International Corporation is among U.S.'s 50 largest
publicly held insurance organizations, with a substantial interest
in major segments of the industry.  The Company is primarily a
commercial lines underwriter, serving many of America's leading
industrial and financial services companies as valued customers.
The Company is headquartered in Chicago, Illinois.


OLD REPUBLIC: Second "Campion" Class Suit Dismissed in July
-----------------------------------------------------------
Old Republic International Corporation disclosed in its August 3,
2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2012, that a second
national class action lawsuit filed against its subsidiaries was
dismissed in July 2012.

On March 6, 2009, a national class action lawsuit was filed
against the Company's subsidiary, Old Republic Home Protection
("ORHP"), in the California Superior Court, San Diego, (Campion v.
Old Republic Home Protection) on behalf of all persons who had
made a claim under an ORHP home warranty contract since March 6,
2003.  The lawsuit alleges breach of contract, breach of the
implicit covenant of good faith and fair dealing, violations of
certain California consumer protection laws, and misrepresentation
arising out of ORHP's alleged failure to adopt and implement
reasonable standards for the prompt investigation and processing
of claims under its home warranty contracts.  The lawsuit seeks
unspecified damages consisting of the rescission of the class
members' contracts, restitution of all sums paid by the class
members, punitive damages, and declaratory and injunctive relief.
ORHP removed the action to the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of California on April 13, 2009.  On January 6,
2011, the Court denied plaintiff's motion for class certification,
and on June 25, 2012, it denied plaintiff's motion to remand the
case back to state court.  Plaintiff has not appealed either
decision.  Barring a successful appeal, this case has become an
immaterial, single plaintiff claim dispute.

On January 27, 2012, a second purported national class action
lawsuit was filed in the Federal District Court, Northern District
of California, Oakland Division by the same plaintiff and the same
law firm.  This second lawsuit named as defendants the Company and
five of its subsidiaries (Campion v. Old Republic International
Corporation, Old Republic Home Protection Company, Inc., Old
Republic National Title Insurance Company, Mississippi Valley
Title Insurance Company, American Guaranty Title Insurance
Company, Republic Mortgage Insurance Company).  The lawsuit
alleged unfair, unlawful and fraudulent business practices in
violation of California's Business & Professions Code --
substantially similar to the allegations in plaintiff's lawsuit
against ORHP -- and the payment of commissions and kickbacks in
violation of the California Insurance Code and RESPA.  The lawsuit
sought declaratory and injunctive relief, restitution and treble
damages in unspecified amounts, and costs and fees.

On July 10, 2012, the Court dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice
as to all claims other than those under the California Business &
Professional Code against ORHP, which were dismissed without
prejudice.

Old Republic International Corporation is among U.S.'s 50 largest
publicly held insurance organizations, with a substantial interest
in major segments of the industry.  The Company is primarily a
commercial lines underwriter, serving many of America's leading
industrial and financial services companies as valued customers.
The Company is headquartered in Chicago, Illinois.


PACIFIC COAST: Recalls 6-8-Lb. Bags of Deli Styled Fruits Salads
----------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific Coast Fruit Company, of Portland, Oregon, is voluntarily
recalling multiple types of fresh cut processed items based on the
potential contamination of Salmonella Braenderup, an organism
which can cause serious and sometimes life-threatening for
infants, older people, pregnant woman and people with weakened
immune systems.  The most common symptoms of Salmonella are
diarrhea, abdominal cramps and fever, which develop within eight
to 72 hours of eating contaminated food.  The illness usually
lasts 4 to 7 days and most people recover without treatment.

Pacific Coast Fruit utilized a portion of the mangoes that were
recalled by Splendid Products LLC marked with the Daniella Label
in some of the Company's fresh cut processed items.

Pacific Coast Fruit recalled products were distributed to various
retailer groceries in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Alaska.

The recalled deli styled items is packed in 6 lbs - 8 lbs salads
bags.

There have been NO reported illnesses associated with this recall.
This voluntary recall is being conducted with the knowledge of the
U.S Food and Drug Administration.

Consumers who have purchased this product should not consume it
and are urged to return it to the place of purchase or destroy the
product.  Consumer with questions can contact Pacific Coast Fruit
at 503-234-6411 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. Pacific
Standard Time Monday through Friday.

    UPC Code     Item #                Description
  -----------    ------   ------------------------------------
  20728 70006     70006   VA Kit New Gourmet Fruit Salad 7.75#,
                          Best if Used By July 26 to August 30

  20728 71784     71784   Mango & Cucumber Salsa,
                          Best if Used By July 30 to September 3


PITNEY BOWES: Awaits Ruling on Bid to Dismiss "NECA-IBEW" Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Pitney Bowes Inc. is awaiting a court decision on its motion to
dismiss a class action lawsuit initiated by NECA-IBEW Health &
Welfare Fund, according to the Company's August 3, 2012, Form 10-Q
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarter ended June 30, 2012.

In October 2009, the Company and certain of its current and former
officers were named as defendants in NECA-IBEW Health & Welfare
Fund v. Pitney Bowes Inc. et al., a class action lawsuit filed in
the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut.  The
complaint asserts claims under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
on behalf of those who purchased the common stock of the company
during the period between July 30, 2007, and October 29, 2007,
alleging that the company, in essence, missed two financial
projections.  Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in September
2010.  After briefing on the motion to dismiss was completed, the
plaintiffs filed a new amended complaint on February 17, 2012.
The Company has moved to dismiss this new amended complaint.
Based upon the Company's current understanding of the facts and
applicable laws, it does not believe there is a reasonable
possibility that any loss has been incurred.  The Company expects
to prevail in this legal action; however, as litigation is
inherently unpredictable, there can be no assurance in this
regard.  If the plaintiffs do prevail, the results may have a
material effect on the Company's financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.


PPG INDUSTRIES: Judge Refuses to Dismiss Overtime Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
Matt Fair, writing for Law360, reports that a Pennsylvania federal
judge refused on Aug. 30 to dismiss a class action brought by PPG
Industries Inc. sales staff against the paint and chemical
company, after ruling that PPG's settlement offer in the overtime
pay case was not greater than the maximum amount the class could
potentially recover.


QUALITY FEED: Recalls Milk Replacer Due to Salmonella Health Risk
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Quality Feed, Inc. of Dousman, Wisconsin, is recalling milk
replacer that was shipped between January 31, 2012, and March 31,
2012, because it has the potential to be contaminated with
Salmonella.  Salmonella can affect animals eating the products and
there is risk to humans from handling contaminated milk replacer,
especially if they have not thoroughly washed their hands after
having contact with the products or any surfaces exposed to these
products.

Healthy people infected with Salmonella should monitor themselves
for some or all of the following symptoms: nausea, vomiting,
diarrhea or bloody diarrhea, abdominal cramping and fever.
Rarely, Salmonella can result in more serious ailments, including
arterial infections, endocarditis, arthritis, muscle pain, eye
irritation, and urinary tract symptoms.  Consumers exhibiting
these signs after having contact with this product should contact
their healthcare providers.

Animals with Salmonella infections may be lethargic and have
diarrhea or bloody diarrhea, fever, and vomiting.  Some animals
will have only decreased appetite, fever and abdominal pain.
Infected but otherwise healthy animals can be carriers and infect
other animals or humans.  If your animals have consumed the
recalled product and have these symptoms, please contact your
veterinarian.

Quality Feed, Inc. was just notified late this week by one of its
suppliers, that six 40lb. bags out of 1,026 bags purchased back in
January 2012 were suspect for salmonella contamination.  As a
precaution, Quality Feed, Inc. has immediately put on recall
notice all feed that had any of this load of raw material in its
formulation.  To date there have been no known illnesses
associated with any of the milk replacer in question.

The milk replacer was distributed throughout Minnesota, Wisconsin,
Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York under the name
Quality Feed, Inc., Dairy Princess, Peachey's or Yo-momma.  The
recalled feed can be identified by the last four digits in the lot
number on the bag ending in 0131 through 0323.

Customers who have purchased any of this milk replacer are urged
to return it to the place of purchase for a full refund.
Customers with questions may contact Quality Feed, Inc. at 262-
965-5400 between 7:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday
Central Time.


RAMTRON INT'L: Faces "Dent" Stockholder Class Suit in Colorado
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ramtron International Corporation is facing a stockholder class
action lawsuit commenced by Paul Dent, according to the Company's
August 3, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2012.

In June 2012, Paul Dent ("Plaintiff"), a purported Ramtron
stockholder, filed a putative class action complaint against the
Company and certain of its officers and directors (the "Individual
Defendants" or, collectively with the Company, the "Defendants"),
in the District Court for El Paso County, Colorado, captioned Dent
v. Ramtron International Corporation, et al., Docket No. 44906737.
Plaintiff purports to bring this action as a class action on
behalf of himself and other similarly situated Ramtron
stockholders.  The complaint alleges that Defendants breached
their fiduciary duties in connection with the June 12, 2012
proposal by Cypress Semiconductor Corporation ("Cypress"),
pursuant to which Cypress would acquire all of the outstanding
shares of the Company for $2.48 in cash.  Specifically, the
complaint alleges that the Individual Defendants violated their
fiduciary duties by rejecting all approaches by Cypress and
refusing to engage in any negotiations with Cypress or by failing
to seek any higher offer that could be achieved through
negotiations.  The complaint seeks, among other things, injunctive
relief as follows: an order declaring the action to be properly
maintainable as a class action, a declaration that Defendants have
breached their fiduciary duties to the Plaintiff and the class, an
order directing Defendants to consider and respond in good faith
to acquisition offers that would maximize value to the Plaintiff
and the class, an order permanently enjoining the Defendants from
initiating any further defensive measures that may render the
acquisition of the company unduly burdensome or expensive for a
potential acquirer, an order directing the Individual Defendants
to account to the Plaintiff and the class for all damages suffered
as a result of the Individual Defendants' wrongdoing, and an award
of attorneys' fees and costs.  The Company believes the lawsuit is
without merit and intends to defend it vigorously.


READY PAC: Recalls Fresh Cut Fruit Products Containing Mangoes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ready Pac Foods, Inc. of Irwindale, California, is voluntarily
recalling, out of an abundance of caution, packaged fruit products
containing mangoes, distributed through August 30th 2012, with
Use-by Dates as listed below since they contain Daniella Brand
mangoes, which have been recalled by supplier Splendid Products,
due to potential contamination with Salmonella Braenderup.

Salmonella is an organism which can cause serious and sometimes
fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly people, and
others with weakened immune systems.  Healthy persons infected
with Salmonella often experience fever, diarrhea (which may be
bloody), nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain.  In rare
circumstances, infections with Salmonella can result in the
organism getting into the bloodstream and producing more severe
illnesses such as arterial infections (i.e., infected aneurysms),
endocarditis and arthritis.

No illnesses have been reported specific to the Ready Pac products
that are the subject of this voluntary, precautionary recall.

The voluntary recall extends only to the products with the Use-by
Dates listed below and sold in the following states: Alaska,
Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut,
Delaware, District of Columbia, Washington D.C., Florida, Georgia,
Hawaii, Iowa, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri,
Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey,
New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio,
Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina,
South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Vermont,
Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming, and Canada.

No other Ready Pac products, other than those listed below, are
included in the recall.

Consumers who may have purchased the affected product are asked to
record the Use -by Date and/or UPC code number, immediately
dispose of the product, and contact the Ready Pac Consumer Affairs
Department, toll-free at (800) 800-7822, Monday - Friday, 8:00
a.m. to 5:00 p.m. (Pacific Time) to obtain a full refund.  Please
visit the Company's Web site at http://www.readypac.com/for a
copy of this release.

Retailers should check their inventories and store shelves to
confirm that none of the products are present or available for
purchase by consumers or in warehouse inventories.

Ready Pac Foods, Inc. has earned an outstanding safety record for
over 40 years and has taken immediate precautionary measures to
protect public health by issuing this voluntary recall.  Ready Pac
customer service representatives have already contacted all
customers impacted and are in the process of confirming that the
recalled products are not in the stream of commerce.  Consumers
with questions may contact Ready Pac directly at 1-800-800-7822
Mondays - Friday 8:00 a.m. - p.m. Pacific Daylight Time.

                                   Pack                Affected
Brand         Product             Size   Use-by Date   States
-----         -------             ----   -----------  --------
Dining In(R)  Super FruitMedley  10.5oz   9/06/2012   CA
               UPC: 11225-08396

Dining In(R)  Mango              10.5oz   9/07/2012   CA
               UPC: 11225-08640

Ready Pac(R)  Super Fruit Blend    6 oz   9/08/2012   CT, MA, MD
               UPC: 77745-23076           or earlier   MN, NJ, NY
                                                       OH, VA

Ready Pac(R)  Super Fruit Blend    6 oz   9/06/2012   CA, CO,
               UPC: 77745-23076           & 9/7/2012   OR, WA

Ready Pac(R)  Fruit Tray Bien(R)  907 g   9/08/2012   Canada
               UPC: 77745-23415

Ready Pac(R)  Fruit Tray Bien(R)  32 oz    9/8/2012   DE, MD, NJ
               UPC: 77745-21606           or earlier   PA, VA

Ready Pac(R)  Fruit &             40 oz    9/6/2012   AZ, CA, HI
               ChocolatePlatter           & 9/7/2012   NV, OR
               UPC: 77745-23673

Ready Pac(R)  Super FruitMedley  10.5oz    9/8/2012   DE, MD, NJ
               UPC: 77745-23746           or earlier   PA, VA

Ready Pac(R)  Super FruitMedley  10.5oz    9/6/2012   AZ, CA, HI
               UPC: 77745-23746           & 9/7/2012   NV, OR

Ready Pac(R)  Sliced Mango       10.5oz    9/8/2012   DE, MD, NJ
               UPC: 77745-23751           or earlier   PA, VA

Ready Pac(R)  Sliced Mango       10.5oz    9/6/2012   AZ, CA, HI
               UPC: 77745-23751           & 9/7/2012   NV, OR

Ready Pac(R)  Super FruitMedley   298 g    9/8/2012   Canada
               UPC: 77745-24023           or earlier

Ready Pac(R)  Super FruitMedley   298 g    9/8/2012   Canada
               UPC: 77745-24023

Ready Pac(R)  Sliced Mango        32 oz    9/6/2012   AZ, CA, CO
               UPC: 00000-88356           & 9/7/2012   MT, NM, NV
                                                       UT

Ready Pac(R)  Sliced Mango        32 oz    9/8/2012   DE, MD, NJ
               UPC: 77745-22859           or earlier   PA, VA

Ready Pac(R)  Sliced Mango        32 oz    9/6/2012   AZ, HI, NV
               UPC: 77745-22859           & 9/7/2012   OR, CA

Ready Pac(R)  MangoFandango(TM)   32 oz    9/8/2012   NJ, PA, DE
               UPC: 77745-24099           or earlier   MD, VA

Ready Pac(R)  MangoFandango(TM)   32 oz    9/6/2012   AZ, HI, NV
               UPC: 77745-24099           & 9/7/2012   OR, CA

Ready Pac(R)  Gourmet FruitBowl   64 oz    9/9/2012   CT, DE, MA
               UPC: 77745-22620           or earlier   MN, NH, NJ
                                           OH, IA, IL, IN, KS, MI
                                               MO, NE, NY, VT, WI

Ready Pac(R)  Gourmet FruitBowl   64 oz    9/7/2012   AZ, CA, CO
               UPC: 77745-22620           & 9/8/2012   MT, NM, NV
                                                       UT

Ready Pac(R)  Sweet Sunshine(TM)  37 oz    9/8/2012   DE, MD, NJ
               Platter                    or earlier   PA, VA
               UPC: 77745-24204

Ready Pac(R)  Sweet Sunshine(TM)  37 oz    9/6/2012   AZ, CA, HI
               Platter                    & 9/7/2012   NV, OR
               UPC: 77745-24204

Ready Pac(R)  Seasons Choice(TM)  32 oz    9/8/2012   DE, MD, NJ
               UPC: 77745-24276           or earlier   PA, VA

Ready Pac(R)   Seasons Choice(TM)  32 oz    9/7/2012   AZ, CA, HI
               UPC: 77745-24276           & 9/8/2012   NV, OR

Starbucks(R)  Seasonal             6 oz   8/22/2012   AL, CT, DC
               HarvestFruit Blend         - 9/7/2012   DE, FL, GA
               UPC: 62111-71390                        IA, IL, IN
                                           KY, KS, LA, NA, MD, ME
                                           MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, NE
                                           NH, NJ, NY, OH, PA, RI
                                           SC, TN, VA, VT, WI, WV

Starbucks(R)  Seasonal              6 oz   9/4/2012   AK, AZ, AR
               HarvestFruit Blend         & 9/5/2012   CA, CO, ID
               UPC: 62111-71390            MT, ND, NM, NV, OK, OR
                                               SD, TX, UT, WA, WY

Walmart(R)     Super Fruit Blend   10 oz   9/6/2012   AZ, CA, CO
                                          & 9/7/2012   HI, ID, MT
                UPC: 77745-23327               NM, NV, TX, UT, WY

Walmart(R)     Seasonal Blend      16 oz   9/6/2012   AZ, CA, CO
                UPC: 77745-23761          & 9/7/2012   HI, ID, MT
                                                       NM, NV, TX
                                                       UT, WY

Walmart(R)     Seasonal Blend      32 oz   9/6/2012   AZ, CA, CO
                UPC: 77745-23765          & 9/7/2012   HI, ID, MT
                                               NM, NV, TX, UT, WY

Wawa(R)        Mango                8 oz   9/6/2012   DE, MD, NJ
                UPC: 26191-06437          or earlier   PA, VA

Wawa(R)        Chicken &          9.7 oz   9/1/2012   DE, MD, NJ
                MangoSalsa Salad          or earlier   PA, VA
                UPC: 26191-02827

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:

         http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm317953.htm


REAL FOODS: Recalls Products Containing Daniella Brand Mangos
-------------------------------------------------------------
Triple B Corporation of Seattle, Washington, dba Real Foods Kent
WA. and Charlie's Produce of Anchorage, Alaska, is recalling 1336
cases of the products listed below because they contain Daniella
brand mango that were recalled because it has the potential to be
contaminated with Salmonella braenderup.

Salmonella is an organism which can cause serious and sometimes
fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly people, and
others with weakened immune systems.  Healthy persons infected
with Salmonella often experience fever, diarrhea (which may be
bloody), nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain.  In rare
circumstances, infection with Salmonella can result in the
organism getting into the bloodstream and producing more severe
illnesses such as arterial infections (i.e., infected aneurysms),
endocarditis and arthritis.

This product was used in retail stores and Deli in Washington and
Alaska.

Shelf life of the product is 5-7 days

Real Foods Product Use by Date 7/12/2012 to 8/29/2012

Item #     Label      Item Description    Size   Container Type
------     -----      ----------------    ----   --------------
027-01480  Haggen     CUT, TROPICAL       8 oz   Rigid Plastic
                       MIXED FRUIT(T/H)           Cup

027-06055  Costco     FRUIT TRAY,MANGO/   5 lbs  Rigid Plastic
                       CUT PEARS (COSTCO)         Tray

028-00165  Metro-     CUT,MANGO/PAPAYA    10 oz  Rigid Plastic
            Politan    W/LIME (MET MKT)           Cup
            Market

028-00172  Metro-     CUT, SEASONAL       20 oz  Rigid Plastic
            Politan    MIX (MET MKT)              Cup
            Market

028-00173  Metro-     CUT, SEASONAL       10 oz  Rigid Plastic
            Politan    MIX (MET MKT)              Cup
            Market

028-06037  Charlie's  CUT, SEASONAL       10 oz  Rigid Plastic
                       FRUIT MIX                  Cup

028-06454  Charlie's  CUT, SEASONAL       20 oz  Rigid Plastic
                       FRUIT MIX                  Cup

028-07323  Charlie's  CUT,MIXED            8 oz  Rigid Plastic
                       FRUIT TROPICAL (NL)        Cup

--------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Location
Item #      UPC           Use-By Date Range   of UB Date
------      ---           -----------------   ----------
027-01480  045009014801   7/21/12 - 8/29/12   Center of product
                                               label

027-06055  045009060556   7/21/12 - 8/29/12   Outer case label

028-00165  045009001658   7/21/12 - 8/29/12   Bottom of product
                                               cup

028-00172  045009001726   7/21/12 - 8/29/12   Bottom of product
                                               Cup

028-00173  045009001733   7/21/12 - 8/29/12   Bottom of product
                                               cup

028-06037  045009060372   7/23/12 - 8/31/12   Bottom of product
                                               cup

028-06454  045009064547   7/23/12 - 8/31/12   Bottom of product
                                               cup

028-07323  045009073235   7/23/12 - 8/31/12   Bottom of product
                                               cup

Charlie's Alaska Product Anchorage Use By Date 7/21/2012

                                                      Location
Label   Item Description   Size   Use-By Date Range  of UB Date
-----   ----------------   ----   -----------------  ----------
Alaska  Seasonal Berries   8 oz   7/21/12 - 8/31/12   Bottom of
Carrot  (Walmart)                                     product
         Container: Rigid Plastic Cup                  cup
         UPC: 045009020178

Alaska  Seasonal Berries   16oz  7/21/12 - 8/31/12    Bottom of
Carrot  (Walmart)                                     product
         Container: Rigid plastic Cup                  cup
         UPC: 045009020635

Alaska   Seasonal Fruit    40oz  7/21/12 - 8/31/12    Bottom of
Carrot   Bowl(Walmart)                                product
          Container: Rigid Plastic Bowl                Bowl
          UPC: 045009064806

Alaska   Gourmet Fruit     64oz  7/21/12 - 09/05/12   Bottom of
Carrot   Blow (Costco)                                Product
          Container: Rigid Plastic                     Bowl
          UPC: 697327066934


Alaska   Fruit Cup         4oz   8/22/12 - 9/01/12    Outside
Carrot   Mango/Red Grape                              case Box
          Container: Rigid Plastic Tray
          UPC: 045009071408

The recall was initiated after it was discovered by Triple B Corp.
that Daniella brand mangos were used in some of the product that
is being recalled by the supplier due to the potential
contamination with Salmonella braenderup.

Out of an abundance of caution, as a service to the general
consuming public at large, all products are being recalled in
consultation with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

Consumers who have purchased any product with Daniella brand
mangos in them are urged to return them to the place of purchase
for a full refund.  Consumers with questions may contact the
Company at 206-625-1412


SMART METERS: Tribunal Allows Claimants to Amend Complaint
----------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mui, writing for 24 Hours, reports that B.C. Human Rights
Tribunal has asked an anti-Smart Meters group to come back with an
amended "class action" style complaint after ruling the group's
submission as overly broad on Aug. 28.

Citizens for Safe Technology Society represents a number of
individuals who claim doctors have advised them to stay away from
the digital devices because of potential harms.

The tribunal will only hear cases of those "allegedly diagnosed"
with electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS), which BC Hydro said
isn't accepted as a disability in B.C., or elsewhere, according to
the tribunal decision.

The society, meanwhile, describes EHS as an "environmental
sensitivity resulting in an inability to be well while residing in
a residence . . . in which a wireless smart meter has been
installed."


SOMERSAULT SNACK: Recalls 6 oz. Packages of Pacific Sea Salt
------------------------------------------------------------
Somersault Snack Co., LLC, in cooperation with the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) is voluntarily recalling a limited
number of packages of Somersaults Pacific Sea Salt 6oz. that were
inadvertently mispackaged -- limited quantities of Somersaults
Santa Fe Salsa flavored product were inadvertently commingled with
Somersaults Pacific Sea Salt flavored product in packages labeled
as Somersaults Pacific Sea Salt 6oz.  The inadvertent commingling
of these two products introduced another allergen (milk) to the
Somersaults Pacific Sea Salt 6oz. packages, and that allergen
(milk) is not listed on the packaging as either an ingredient or
an allergen.

   Somersaults Pacific Sea Salt 6oz.
   Sell By Date: MAR1113 G6 / UPC Product Code: 8-98403-00201-7
   (Sell By Date is located on the back of the package, in the
   middle, above the sunflower graphics, and the UPC Product Code
   is located below the UPC bar code.)

People who have an allergy or severe sensitivity to milk run the
risk of an allergic reaction if they consume the affected product.
The product was distributed to retail stores nationwide.  No
allergic reactions have been reported.

Somersault Snack Co. has taken the precautionary measure of
notifying the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and is
voluntarily recalling approximately 418 cases of the product
shown.

Somersault Snack Co. will work with retail customers to ensure
that the recalled products are removed from store shelves.  In the
event that consumers believe they have purchased products affected
by this voluntary recall, they should return the product to the
store where it was purchased for a full refund.  Consumers or
customers with questions may call 415-275-1247 for more
information.  Pictures of the recalled products are available at:

         http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm317993.htm


ST. JOE CO: Appeal From Dismissal of Securities Suit Pending
------------------------------------------------------------
An appeal from the dismissal of a consolidated class action
lawsuit against The St. Joe Company remains pending, according to
the Company's August 3, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30,
2012.

On November 3, 2010, and December 7, 2010, two securities class
action complaints were filed against the Company and certain of
its current and former officers and directors in the Northern
District of Florida.  These cases have been consolidated in the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida and are
captioned as Meyer v. The St. Joe Company et al. (No. 5:11-cv-
00027).  A consolidated class action complaint was filed in the
case on February 24, 2011.

The complaint was filed on behalf of persons who purchased the
Company's securities between February 19, 2008, and October 12,
2010, and alleged that the Company and certain of its current and
former officers and directors, among others, violated the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act") and the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act")
by making false and/or misleading statements and/or by failing to
disclose that, as the Florida real estate market was in decline,
the Company failed to take adequate and required impairments and
accounting write-downs on many of the Company's Florida-based
properties and as a result, the Company's financial statements
materially overvalued the Company's property developments.  The
plaintiff also alleged that the Company's financial statements
were not prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles, and that the Company lacked adequate internal and
financial controls, and as a result of the foregoing, the
Company's financial statements were materially false and
misleading.  The complaint sought an unspecified amount in
damages.  On April 5, 2011, at the request of the plaintiff, the
court dismissed the claims under the Securities Act and dismissed
the current and former director defendants from the case.  The
Company filed a motion to dismiss the case on April 6, 2011.

On January 12, 2012, the Court granted the motion to dismiss with
prejudice and entered judgment in favor of the Company and the
individual defendants.  On February 9, 2012, plaintiff filed a
motion to alter or amend the judgment, which the Court denied on
February 14, 2012.  On March 15, 2012, plaintiff filed a notice of
appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh
Circuit and that appeal is currently pending.

The St. Joe Company -- http://www/joe.com/-- together with its
subsidiaries, operates as a real estate development company in
Florida.  The company operates in four segments: Residential Real
Estate, Commercial Real Estate, Rural Land Sales, and Forestry.
The Company owns approximately 573,000 acres of land concentrated
primarily in northwest Florida.  It has a strategic alliance with
Southwest Airlines Co. to facilitate the commencement of low-fare
air service to the northwest Florida Beaches International
Airport.  It was founded in 1936 and is headquartered in
WaterSound, Florida.


ST. JOE CO: Hearing on Settlement of Oil Spill Claims on Nov. 8
---------------------------------------------------------------
A final approval hearing of a settlement resolving certain of The
St. Joe Company's oil spill-related claims is scheduled for
November 8, 2012, according to the Company's August 3, 2012, Form
10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for
the quarter ended June 30, 2012.

As a result of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the Company has
incurred significant expenses and the Company's properties,
results of operations and stock price have been negatively
impacted.  The Company pursued certain claims and is currently
exploring funds that may be available through the Gulf Coast
Claims Facility to reimburse the Company for some of these losses
and have received interim compensation without releasing the
Company's claims.  In addition, the Company has filed claims
against those parties it believes are responsible for its damages
in the consolidated Multi-District Litigation (MDL) actions
presently pending in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Louisiana.  That court has preliminarily
approved a proposed class settlement that includes portions of the
Company's claims.  A final approval hearing is scheduled for
November 8, 2012.  St. Joe retains additional damages claims in
the MDL that are not included in that settlement, which the
Company is continuing to pursue.

The St. Joe Company -- http://www/joe.com/-- together with its
subsidiaries, operates as a real estate development company in
Florida.  The company operates in four segments: Residential Real
Estate, Commercial Real Estate, Rural Land Sales, and Forestry.
The Company owns approximately 573,000 acres of land concentrated
primarily in northwest Florida.  It has a strategic alliance with
Southwest Airlines Co. to facilitate the commencement of low-fare
air service to the northwest Florida Beaches International
Airport.  It was founded in 1936 and is headquartered in
WaterSound, Florida.


STOP & SHOP: Stops Sale of Daniella Mangos Due to Recall
--------------------------------------------------------
The Stop & Shop Supermarket Company, LLC, following a voluntary
recall by Splendid Products, announced it removed from sale
Daniella mangos due to possible salmonella contamination.

The following product, purchased between July 12 and August 24,
2012, is included in this recall:

   * Daniella mangos, PLU 4959

Stop & Shop is aware of illnesses reported in Canada and
associated with this recall.  Customers who have purchased the
product should discard any unused portions and bring their
purchase receipt to Stop & Shop for a full refund.

Consumption of food contaminated with Salmonella can cause
salmonellosis, one of the most common bacterial foodborne
illnesses.  Salmonella infections can be life-threatening,
especially to those with weak immune systems, such as infants, the
elderly and persons with HIV infection or undergoing chemotherapy.
The most common manifestations of salmonellosis are diarrhea,
abdominal cramps, and fever within eight to 72 hours.  Additional
symptoms may be chills, headache, nausea and vomiting that can
last up to seven days.

Customers may call Stop & Shop Customer Service at (800) 767-7772
Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. for more
information.  Customers can also visit the Stop & Shop Web site at
http://www.stopandshop.com/.

                        About Stop & Shop

The Stop & Shop Supermarket Company employs approximately 62,000
associates and operates more than 400 stores throughout
Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, New York,
and New Jersey.  The Company helps support local communities fight
hunger, combat childhood cancer and promote general health and
wellness -- with emphasis on children's educational and support
programs.  In its commitment to be a sustainable company, Stop &
Shop is a member of the U.S. Green Building Council and EPA's
Smart Way program; has been awarded LEED (EB) certifications for
50 of its existing stores; and has been recognized by the EPA for
the superior energy management of its stores.  Stop & Shop is an
Ahold company.  To learn more about Stop & Shop, visit
http://www.stopandshop.com/


SYNGENTA CROP: Kaua'i County Dep't. of Water Joins Settlement
-------------------------------------------------------------
Laurent Canalejas, writing for The Garden Island, reports that
Kaua'i County Department of Water convened on Aug. 28 to discuss a
board approval to join as a class member in the class action case
City of Greenville v. Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc and Syngenta
AG.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit allege "Syngenta manufactured
atrazine and sold it to farmers knowing it had a great potential
to run off of crop land and into bodies of water."

Atrazine is a powerful, economical chemical compound used to
eradicate weeds.  It is also used on agricultural sites that grow
corn, sugarcane, guava, hay, macadamia nuts and pasture and can
enter and contaminate drinking water sources.

The five board members present voted in favor of a settlement with
Syngenta rather than pursue a lawsuit against the Swiss-based
company.  The settlement was between $5,000 and $10,000, according
to Department of Water's Attorney Andrea Suzuki.  The lawsuit
money goes back to the department to recoup the losses incurred
from water testing.

The class action was brought about after atrazine was detected in
the county water.  The claim states that any trace amount calls
for a class action and qualifies for settlement.

Secretary Randall Nishimura expressed concerns as to how the
council will be able to act in the future by settling now.

"I'm most concerned by the limitations of future actions," he
said.  "It looks like the action is in favor of Syngenta."

Chemist Andy Canavan, who works for Kaua'i County Department of
Water, was asked to state his findings about atrazine in public
water.

"Atrazine was found is very small quantities, only trace amounts
that are not harmful to humans and were well below EPA standards,"
Mr. Canavan said.

The EPA standard is 3.2 parts per billion.  "Atrazine is used
worldwide,"" Mr. Canavan added.


TAYLOR FARMS: Recalls Products Containing Daniella Brand Mangoes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Taylor Farms New Jersey is voluntarily recalling specific code
dates of the following products due to containing Daniella Brand
mangoes or potentially being processed on common equipment with
the Daniella Brand mangoes.  Daniella Brand mangoes were
identified by the CFIA as having the potential to be contaminated
with Salmonella Braenderup, and are subject to a prior recall
posted by CFIA and FDA.  All products are packaged in rigid
plastic trays and can be identified with the following
information:

The only products affected by this action have BOTH the following
Julian codes and sell by dates:

  Product Name               Julian Code      Sell By Date
  ------------               -----------      ------------
  Wawa Mango 8oz.            237 or earlier   8/30/12 or earlier

  Wawa Pineapple,            237 or earlier   8/30/12 or earlier
  Strawberries, Mango 9oz

  Wawa Pineapple Snack 7oz   237 or earlier   8/30/12 or earlier

  Wawa Melon Mix 11oz        237 or earlier   8/30/12 or earlier

  Wawa Large Mixed Fruit     237 or earlier   8/30/12 or earlier
  12oz

  Wawa Watermelon 8 oz       237 or earlier   8/30/12 or earlier

  Wawa Small Mixed Fruit     237 or earlier   8/30/12 or earlier
  7.5oz

  Wawa Mixed fruit           237 or earlier   8/30/12 or earlier
  with kiwi 9.7oz

  Wawa Mango and Yogurt      236 or earlier   9/03/12 or earlier
  Parfait 7.5oz

**Product not bearing a Julian code is not affected by this action
and is manufactured by another supplier

These products were distributed to Wawa retail stores in the
following states:

   * New Jersey
   * Maryland
   * Delaware
   * Pennsylvania

Salmonella is an organism which can cause serious and sometimes
fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly people, and
others with weakened immune systems.  Healthy persons infected
with Salmonella often experience fever, diarrhea (which may be
bloody), nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain.  In rare
circumstances, infection with Salmonella can result in the
organism getting into the bloodstream and producing more severe
illnesses such as arterial infections (i.e., infected aneurysms),
endocarditis and arthritis.

Consumers are advised not to consume these specific products with
the Julian code & code dates listed, and may return them to the
place of purchase for refund or discard them.


TREX COMPANY: Mold Claims in Defective Products Suit Pending
------------------------------------------------------------
Trex Company, Inc. continues to defend itself against pending
class actions asserting mold claims in California, according to
the Company's July 27, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30,
2012.

On January 19, 2009, a purported class action case was commenced
against the Company in the Superior Court of California, Santa
Cruz County, by the lead law firm of Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann &
Bernstein, LLP and certain other law firms on behalf of Eric Ross
and Bradley S. Hureth and similarly situated plaintiffs. These
plaintiffs generally allege certain defects in the Company's
products, and that the Company has failed to provide adequate
remedies for defective products.  On February 13, 2009, the
Company removed the case to the United States District Court,
Northern District of California. On January 21, 2009, a purported
class action case was commenced against the Company in the United
States District Court, Western District of Washington by the law
firm of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP on behalf of Mark Okano
and similarly situated plaintiffs, generally alleging certain
product defects in the Company's products, and that the Company
has failed to provide adequate remedies for defective products.
This case was transferred by the Washington Court to the
California Court as a related case to the Lieff Cabraser Group's
case.

On July 30, 2009, the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California preliminarily approved a settlement of the
claims of the lawsuit commenced by the Lieff Cabraser Group
involving surface flaking of the Company's product, and on March
15, 2010, it granted final approval of the settlement. On April
14, 2010, the Hagens Berman Firm filed a notice to appeal the
District Court's ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit. On July 9, 2010, the Hagens Berman Firm
dismissed their appeal, effectively making the settlement final.
On March 25, 2010, the Lieff Cabraser Group amended its complaint
to add claims relating to alleged defects in the Company's
products and alleged misrepresentations relating to mold growth.
The Hagens Berman firm has alleged similar claims in its original
complaint. In its Final Order approving the surface flaking
settlement, the District Court consolidated these pending actions
relating to the mold claims, and appointed the Hagens Berman Firm
as lead counsel in this case. The Company believes that these
claims are without merit, and will vigorously defend this lawsuit.


TREX COMPANY: Defends Defective Products Suits in 4 States
----------------------------------------------------------
Trex Company, Inc. continues to defend itself against class action
complaints alleging defective products filed in Kentucky, Indiana,
Michigan and New Jersey, according to the Company's July 27, 2012,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended June 30, 2012.

On December 15, 2010, a purported class action case was commenced
against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of Kentucky, by the lead law firm of Cohen & Malad, LLP
on behalf of Richard Levin and similarly situated plaintiffs, and
on June 13, 2011, a purported class action was commenced against
the Company in the Marion Circuit/Superior Court of Indiana by
Cohen & Malad on behalf of Ellen Kopetsky and similarly situated
plaintiffs. On June 28, 2011, the Company removed the Kopetsky
case to the United States District Court, Southern District of
Indiana. On August 11, 2011, a purported class action was
commenced against the Company in the 50th Circuit Court for the
County of Chippewa, Michigan on behalf of Joel and Lori Peffers
and similarly situated plaintiffs. On August 26, 2011, the Company
removed the Peffers case to the United States District Court,
Western District of Michigan. On April 4, 2012, a purported class
action was commenced against the Company in Superior Court of New
Jersey, Essex County on behalf of Caryn Borger, M.D. and similarly
situated plaintiffs. On May 1, 2012, the Company removed the
Borger case to the United States District Court, District of New
Jersey. The plaintiffs in these purported class actions generally
allege certain defects in the Company's products and alleged
misrepresentations relating to mold growth.

The Company believes that these claims are without merit, and will
vigorously defend these lawsuits.


WINN-DIXIE: Recalls Cut Fruit Produced By Renaissance Food
----------------------------------------------------------
Winn-Dixie announced an immediate voluntary recall of select cut
fruit produced by Renaissance Food Group.  The products are being
recalled as a precaution because they contain a mango ingredient
that has the potential of being contaminated with Salmonella
braenderup.  This recall is associated with Daniella Brand Mangoes
distributed by Splendid Products.

Salmonella is an organism which can cause serious and sometimes
fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly people, and
others with weakened immune systems.  Healthy persons infected
with Salmonella often experience fever, diarrhea (which may be
bloody), nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain.  In rare
circumstances, infection with Salmonella can result in the
organism getting into the bloodstream and producing more severe
illnesses such as arterial infections (i.e., infected aneurysms),
endocarditis and arthritis.

Specific products recalled include Garden Highway-brand Tropical
Salsa, and Fruit Burst and Island Medley varieties of cut fruit
sold under the Winn-Dixie name.  The recalled products will have a
plant number of P-009 on the product label that will be located to
the left of the universal product code (UPC).  Winn-Dixie has
received no reports of any issues associated with consumption of
the cut fruit products.

Out of an abundance of caution for its customers, Winn-Dixie is
immediately recalling this cut fruit produced by Renaissance Food
Group from the shelves of select Florida stores.  The recall is
not companywide, but only for product sold in central and south
Florida stores from the following counties: Brevard, Broward,
Charlotte, Collier, DeSoto, Flagler, Hardee, Hendry, Hernando,
Highlands, Hillsborough, Indian River, Lake, Lee, Manatee, Marion,
Martin, Miami-Dade, Monroe, Okeechobee, Orange, Osceola, Palm
Beach, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk, Saint Lucie, Sarasota, Seminole,
Sumter and Volusia.

   Recalled Item         UPC      Size        Sell-By Dates
   -------------    -----------   ----    ---------------------
   Garden Highway   82676642210   11 oz   08/31/12 and 09/10/12
   Tropical Salsa
   Cut Fruit

   Fruit Burst      2114001701    16 oz   08/30/12 and 08/31/12
   Cut Fruit

   Fruit Burst      2114001707    24 oz   08/30/12 and 08/31/12
   Cut Fruit

   Island Medley    2114001696    16 oz   08/30/12 and 08/31/12
   Cut Fruit

"We encourage guests in possession of any of the recalled items to
immediately discard the product or bring it back to their store,"
said Brian Wright, Winn-Dixie's senior director of communications.
"Guests who have purchased the products may visit their
neighborhood Winn-Dixie to request a full refund, no questions
asked."

To receive the refund, guests may present proof of purchase
through a receipt or the product packaging label.

Consumers with questions about the recalled product may contact
the Winn-Dixie Guest Service Center toll free at 1.866.WINN-DIXIE
(866.946.6349), Mon - Fri, 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Eastern Standard
Time; Sat, 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.

                        About Winn-Dixie

Winn-Dixie is a subsidiary of BI-LO Holding, which is the ninth-
largest traditional supermarket chain in the United States.  Under
the banner names of BI-LO and Winn-Dixie, the Company employs
63,000 team members who serve customers in 687 grocery stores and
493 in-store pharmacies throughout the eight southeastern states
of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North
Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee.  BI-LO and Winn-Dixie are
well-known and well-respected regional brands with deep heritages,
strong neighborhood ties, proud histories of giving back, talented
and loyal team members, and strong commitments to providing the
best possible quality and value to customers.  For more
information, please visit http://www.bi-lo.com/and
http://www.winn-dixie.com/


WORLD FOODS: Recalls Cut Fruit and Salsa Products With Mangoes
--------------------------------------------------------------
World Foods, LLC is initiating a voluntary, precautionary recall
on various products it distributes to retail supermarkets that
contain mangoes associated with the Splendid Products recall of
Daniella Brand Mangoes with the potential to be contaminated with
Salmonella.

Salmonella, is an organism which can cause serious and sometimes
fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly people, and
others with weakened immune systems.  Healthy persons infected
with Salmonella often experience fever, diarrhea (which may be
bloody), nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain.  In rare
circumstances, infection with Salmonella can result in the
organism getting into the bloodstream and producing more severe
illnesses such as arterial infections (i.e., infected aneurysms),
endocarditis and arthritis.

There have been no reported illnesses attributed to the recalled
items.  World Foods, LLC, Florida is issuing this voluntary recall
linked to Daniella Brands Mangoes to minimize risk to the public
health.

A list of the brands, products, pack sizes and affected area of
distribution is provided in the table below.

                                                         Affected
Brand       Product                         Code Date    Area
-----       -------                         ---------  ---------
Garden      Tropical Salsa, 11 oz           8/31/2012  Central &
Highway     UPC 8.26766-42210.4                        South FL

Garden      Tropical Salsa, 11 oz           9/01/2012  Central &
Highway     UPC: 8.26766-42210.4                       South FL

Generic/    Fresh Island Medley, 1 lb       8/30/2012  Central &
Winn-Dixie  UPC: 0.21140-01696.6                       South FL
Stores

Generic/    Fresh Island Medley, 1 lb       8/31/2012  Central &
Winn-Dixie  UPC: 0.21140-01696.6                       South FL
Stores

Generic/    Fresh Fruit Burst Bowl, 1 lb    8/30/2012  Central &
Winn-Dixie  UPC: 0.21140-01701.7                       South FL
Stores

Generic/    Fresh Fruit Burst Bowl, 1 lb    8/31/2012  Central &
Winn-Dixie  UPC: 0.21140-01701.7                       South FL
Stores

Generic/    Fresh Fruit Burst Bowl, 1.5 lb  8/30/2012  Central &
Winn-Dixie  UPC: 0.21140-01707.9                       South FL
Stores

Generic/    Fresh Fruit Burst Bowl, 1.5 lb  8/31/2012  Central &
Winn-Dixie  UPC: 0.21140-01707.9                       South FL
Stores

Affected products contain a plant code P-009 on the label adjacent
to the UPC bar code.

No other World Foods, LLC, Florida products or code dates are
affected by this recall.  The Company is cooperating with the FDA.

The Company has directly notified all customers who received the
recalled product and requested removal from store shelves.

Anyone who has the recalled product in their possession should not
consume it and should destroy or discard it.  Consumer with
questions may contact the Company at 1-407-851-4504, Monday
through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Eastern Time.


YRC WORLDWIDE: Bid to Dismiss Securities Suit Remains Pending
-------------------------------------------------------------
YRC Worldwide Inc.'s motion to dismiss the amended complaint of a
securities class action lawsuit remains pending, according to the
Company's August 3, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30,
2012.

On February 7, 2011, a putative class action was filed by Bryant
Holdings LLC in the U. S. District Court for the District of
Kansas on behalf of purchasers of the Company's securities between
April 24, 2008, and November 2, 2009, inclusive (the "Class
Period"), seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended.  The complaint alleges that, throughout
the Class Period, the Company and certain of its current and
former officers failed to disclose material adverse facts about
the Company's true financial condition, business and prospects.
Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants' statements
were materially false and misleading because they misrepresented
and overstated the financial condition of the Company and caused
shares of the Company's common stock to trade at artificially
inflated levels throughout the Class Period.  Bryant Holdings LLC
seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of the
Company's securities during the Class Period.  The Company
believes the allegations are without merit and intends to
vigorously defend the claims.

On April 8, 2011, an individual (Stan Better) and a group of
investors (including Bryant Holdings LLC) filed competing motions
seeking to be named the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit.  The Court
appointed them as co-lead plaintiffs in the lawsuit on August 22,
2011.  Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on October 21, 2011,
which contains allegations consistent with the original complaint.
The Company has filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint,
which is pending before the Court.

No further updates were reported in the Company's latest SEC
filing.

The Company says the ultimate outcome of this case is not
determinable.  Therefore, the Company has not recorded any
liability for this matter.

Headquartered in Overland Park, Kansas, YRC Worldwide Inc. --
http://www.yrcw.com/-- through its subsidiaries, provides various
transportation services worldwide.  The Company was formerly known
as Yellow Roadway Corporation and changed its name to YRC
Worldwide Inc. in January 2006.

                           *********

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.  Noemi Irene
A. Adala, Joy A. Agravante, Ivy B. Magdadaro, Psyche A. Castillon,
Julie Anne L. Toledo, Christopher Patalinghug, Frauline Abangan
and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2012.  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 Peter Chapman
at 240/629-3300.





                 * * *  End of Transmission  * * *