CAR_Public/121003.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

             Wednesday, October 3, 2012, Vol. 14, No. 196

                             Headlines

ARENA PHARMACEUTICALS: Awaits Order on Bid to Dismiss Class Suit
BANK OF AMERICA: Settles Securities Class Action for $2.425 Bil.
BP: Oil Spill Claims Process Faces Problems
CARDIONET INC: West Palm Beach Suit Settlement Approved in June
DEL MONTE: Recalls Fresh-Cut Fruit Packages Containing Mangoes

DEL POSTO: Settles Ex-Employees' Class Action for $1.15 Million
DUN & BRADSTREET: Discovery in "Martin" Class Suit Ongoing
EDELMAN FINANCIAL: Defends Class Suit Over Proposed Lee Merger
EXELON CORP: Continues to Defend Class Suits vs. Constellation
EXELON CORP: Motion to Dismiss Zion Station Suit Pending

FOSTER FARMS: Recalls 16,576 Pounds of Corn Dog Products
FREDDIE MAC: Judge Dismisses Securities Fraud Class Action
GRAND BK: Recalls 7 oz. Packs of Black & Mix Crisp and Crisp Mix
GUAM: Opposes Six Months Tax Refund Time Fame Proposal
HARRY AND DAVID: Recalls Peanut Butter and Spread Products

INTERSECTIONS INC: Appeal in Insurance Suit Dismissed in June
INTERSECTIONS INC: Awaits Orders on Calif. Suit Dismissal Bids
JER'S CHOCOLATES: Recalls Gourmet Peanut Butter Bars and Squares
JUSTIN'S: Recalls Peanut Butter Jars and Squeeze Packs
LEHMAN BROTHERS: Lismore City Council Entitled to Compensation
MEETME INC: Bid to Dismiss "Kaffko" Suit Pending in Florida

METHODIST UNIVERSITY: Dismissed Students Can Pursue Courses
NETWORK ENGINES: Faces Class Suits Over Proposed UNICOM Merger
NORDIC NATURALS: Sued Over False Advertising on Fish Oil
OREGON ICE: Recalls Alden's Organic & Cascade Glacier Ice Cream
PUBLIX SUPERMARKETS: Recalls 10 Oz. Bags of Hearts of Romaine

QUEST SOFTWARE: Still Defends Merger-Related Class Action Suits
SCHWEGEL'S FOOD: Requests More Time to Respond to Class Action
SKECHERS USA: Awaits Approval of "Grabowski" Suit Settlement
SKECHERS USA: Awaits Approval of "Morga" Class Suit Settlement
SKECHERS USA: Awaits Okay of Toning Shoes Suit Deal in Kentucky

STATE FARM: Faces RICO Class Action Over Alleged Insurance Fraud
STOP & SHOP: Recalls Late July Peanut Butter Sandwich Crackers
SUNLAND INC: Expands Recall of Almond Butter and Peanut Butter
TRI COUNTIES: Settles Assistant Branch Managers' Class Action
UNITED STATES: Judge Okays $42.6MM FEMA Class Action Settlement

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: To Settle Pepper-Spray Class Action
VALVE: Has Until Oct. 10 to Respond to Desist Order Over EULA
VISA: NYACS Opposes Antitrust Class Action Settlement
WHOLE FOODS: Recalls Peanut Butter Chews and Treasure Trove Mix
XL FOODS: FSIS Expands Health Alert for Imported Canadian Beef

VIVUS INC: Judge Dismisses Qnexa Shareholder Class Action


                          *********

ARENA PHARMACEUTICALS: Awaits Order on Bid to Dismiss Class Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Arena Pharmaceuticals, Inc., is awaiting a court decision on its
motion to dismiss a consolidated stockholder class action lawsuit,
according to the Company's August 9, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
June 30, 2012.

Beginning on September 20, 2010, a number of complaints were filed
in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
against the Company and certain of its current and former
employees and directors on behalf of certain purchasers of its
common stock.  The complaints have been brought as purported
stockholder class actions, and, in general, include allegations
that the Company and certain of its current and former employees
and directors violated federal securities laws by making
materially false and misleading statements regarding its
lorcaserin program, thereby artificially inflating the price of
its common stock.  The plaintiffs are seeking unspecified monetary
damages and other relief.  On November 19, 2010, eight prospective
lead plaintiffs filed motions to consolidate, appoint a lead
plaintiff, and appoint lead counsel.  The Court took the motions
to consolidate under submission on January 14, 2011.  On August 8,
2011, the Court consolidated the actions and appointed a lead
plaintiff and lead counsel.  On November 1, 2011, the lead
plaintiff filed a consolidated amended complaint.  On
December 30, 2011, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the
consolidated amended complaint.  The motion to dismiss has been
fully briefed and the Court took the motion to dismiss under
submission on April 13, 2012.  In addition to the class actions, a
complaint involving similar legal and factual issues has been
brought by at least one individual stockholder and is pending in
federal court.  On December 30, 2011, the Company filed a motion
to dismiss the stockholder's complaint.  The motion to dismiss has
been fully briefed and the Court took the motion to dismiss under
submission on April 13, 2012.

The Company says it intends to defend against the claims advanced
and to seek dismissal of these complaints.  Due to the early stage
of these proceedings, the Company is not able to predict or
reasonably estimate the ultimate outcome or possible losses
relating to these claims.


BANK OF AMERICA: Settles Securities Class Action for $2.425 Bil.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendant Bank of America Corporation ("BAC") has agreed to pay
$2.425 billion in cash and to implement significant corporate
governance improvements to resolve a federal securities class-
action lawsuit arising out of its acquisition of Merrill Lynch &
Co., Inc., announced on September 15, 2008 and completed on
January 1, 2009.  The Action, In re Bank of America Corp.
Securities, Derivative, and Employee Retirement Income Security
Act (ERISA) Litigation, Master File No. 09 MDL 2058, is currently
pending in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York before Judge P. Kevin Castel.

The Class Representatives are the State Teachers Retirement System
of Ohio, the Ohio Public Employees Retirement System, the Teacher
Retirement System of Texas, Stichting Pensioenfonds Zorg en
Welzijn, represented by PGGM Vermogensbeheer B.V., and Fjarde AP-
Fonden.  Lead Plaintiffs alleged that BAC, Merrill Lynch, and
certain current and/or former officers and directors of BAC or
Merrill Lynch violated the federal securities laws by making a
series of materially false statements and omissions in connection
with the Merrill Lynch acquisition regarding billions of dollars
of losses which Merrill Lynch had suffered before the pivotal
shareholder vote and an undisclosed agreement allowing Merrill
Lynch to pay up to $5.8 billion in bonuses before the acquisition
closed, despite these losses.  Not privy to these material facts,
BAC shareholders voted on December 5, 2008 to approve the
acquisition.  BAC's stock price plunged when the true facts were
revealed in a series of disclosures in January of 2009.
The Settlement was reached after almost four years of litigation
with a trial set to begin on October 22, 2012.  The Settlement
covers the Class previously certified by the Court on February 6,
2012.  The settlement discussions were conducted with the
assistance of a mediator, former United States District Judge Layn
R. Phillips.

The Settlement is, by a wide margin, the single largest securities
class action settlement ever resolving a Section 14(a) claim --
the federal securities provision designed to protect investors
against misstatements in connection with a proxy solicitation. In
addition, the settlement amount is one of the four largest ever
funded by a single corporate defendant for violations of the
federal securities laws to date, and the single largest settlement
of a securities class action in which there was neither a
financial restatement involved nor a criminal conviction related
to the alleged misconduct.

"This precedent-setting settlement reflects our commitment to do
everything in our power to protect our teachers' and public
employees' pension funds and to recover their lost assets," said
Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine.  "Not only did we accomplish an
excellent financial recovery, but other companies will look at the
result here and think twice about not fully disclosing all
necessary information to their shareholders."

"We believe the Settlement represents a landmark recovery for BAC
shareholders who voted on the acquisition without complete and
accurate information," said Eloy Lindeijer, Chief Investment
Management of PGGM Investments in the Netherlands.  "The
settlement sends a strong message to all companies concerning the
paramount importance of conducting a fully-informed shareholder
vote on corporate acquisitions and mergers."

"We are very pleased that the Settlement will recoup a substantial
portion of the losses incurred by BAC shareholders," added Brian
Guthrie, the Executive Director of Teacher Retirement System of
Texas.  "Also, the magnitude of the recovery reinforces the
important role that pension funds play when they serve as lead
plaintiffs in securities actions."

"This is a settlement of historic proportions for BAC investors
who were denied their fundamental right to vote on an informed
basis on significant corporate transactions or who purchased in
the open market without full information," said Mats Andersson,
CEO of Fjarde AP-Fonden in Sweden.

The settlement, if approved, is to be paid in addition to the $150
million recovered by the SEC from BAC for the same misconduct, and
demonstrates the continuing need for private litigation to
supplement government enforcement actions.

Lead Plaintiffs were represented in the Action by co-lead counsel
Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP; Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer
LLP; and Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP.

STRS Ohio

STRS Ohio is a public pension fund organized for the benefit of
current and retired educators in the State of Ohio, serving
approximately 458,000 active, inactive, and retired Ohio public
educators.

Ohio PERS

Ohio PERS is a public pension fund organized for the benefit of
approximately 936,000 current and retired public employees
throughout the State of Ohio who are not covered by another state
or local retirement system.

TRS

TRS delivers retirement and related benefits authorized by the
Texas Legislature, and manages a $110 billion trust fund
established to finance member benefits.  It is the seventh largest
public pension plan in the U.S. and among the 20 largest funds in
the world.  More than 1.3 million public education and higher
education employees and retirees participate in the system.

Pensioenfonds Zorg en Welzijn

PFZW is responsible for the pension policy and pension assets of
2.5 million current and former employees in the Dutch care and
welfare sector.  The pension fund is the owner of the pension
assets, which amounted to EUR118.6 billion at the end of June,
2012.  The fund is governed by representatives of employee and
employer organizations.  The Board of Trustees is accountable to
the Pension Council, which consists of fund members, pensioners
and employers.  The Pension Council is also the co-determination
body and issues recommendations on proposed decisions.  PFZW has
outsourced the administration of the pension scheme and the
management of the pension assets to PGGM.

PGGM

PGGM is a leading Dutch pension fund service provider offering
pension management, integrated asset management, management
support and policy advice to its institutional clients.  PGGM
currently works on behalf of six pension funds, managing about
EUR125 billion of pension assets of 2.5 million people. As a
cooperative organization, PGGM helps its over 570,000 members to
secure a valuable future.  PGGM works independently or with
strategic partners to develop innovative future benefit solutions
combining pensions, care, accommodation and employment.

Fjarde AP-Fonden (AP4)

AP4's brief is to contribute to the stability of the national
pension system through managing Fund capital with the aim of
generating the best possible return over time.  AP4 is a
governmental authority whose operations are regulated in the
Swedish National Pension Funds Act (2000:192).  AP4 is one of five
buffer funds in the Swedish national pension system.  The income
pension system is a distribution system in which pension
contributions paid in by the gainfully employed during the year
are used to pay out pensions to pensioners the same year.


BP: Oil Spill Claims Process Faces Problems
-------------------------------------------
David Hammer, writing for WWLTV.com, reports that the court
settlement between BP and thousands of private oil spill claimants
set up a new claims facility on June 2, and it offered a smoother,
more generous process than the one Ken Feinberg ran for BP for 18
months.

But with a Nov. 1 deadline looming for claimants to opt out of the
settlement, the court-appointed claims administrator, Patrick
Juneau, is feeling the pressure -- and running into some of the
same problems in paying claims that vexed Mr. Feinberg.

At Mr. Juneau's urging, BP and the class action lawyers have
agreed to ease some documentation requirements.

Chiefly, BP agreed to waive any and all license requirements for
businesses and individuals claiming they lost wages because of the
spill.

"The big boy in the fence is the licensed requirement," Mr. Juneau
said. "This is where people had to go get licensed over multiple
years -- business license, variances license -- and that's a hard
thing to obtain."

And other criteria were relaxed as well because Mr. Juneau was
running into a documentation road block with many claimants.

"We are pleased that BP has agreed to a number of changes that
will speed up the processing of claims, and get the people and
businesses of the Gulf paid quicker," lead class counsel Steve
Herman and Jim Roy said in a statement.  "We expect the pace of
checks sent to claimants to pick up as we work to ensure that all
spill victims are paid the entirety of what they are owed in a
timely manner."

A quick comparison with Mr. Feinberg, who was appointed by BP and
the White House and paid by BP: In his first two months of paying
fully reviewed claims in 2011, Mr. Feinberg paid out $700 million
to 17,000 claimants, a sixth of everyone seeking a full-review
final payment at that time.

In the two months since Mr. Juneau started cutting checks under
the court settlement, and he has paid out $26 million, serving a
little over 1 percent of the 45,000 claims he's received to date.
Mr. Juneau said the comparison is "apples to oranges" because
Mr. Feinberg's documentation requirements and methodology were not
as clear and transparent as his.  And, in fairness, about half of
the claims Mr. Juneau's gotten are ones that were unresolved or
even rejected by Mr. Feinberg, so they are clearly not the low-
hanging fruit.

Mr. Juneau's payments have been slightly more generous on average.
Mr. Feinberg earliest full-review final payments averaged $41,000.
Mr. Juneau's have been about $50,000 on average.

Still, the documentation issues are very similar.  On Sept. 5,
Mr. Juneau reported to the court: "We are becoming concerned . . .
about the numbers of incomplete claims we are seeing in our
reviews."

In that report, Mr. Juneau said that 40 percent of claims reviewed
so far are missing at least one document required to make them
eligible.

About half of those deficient claimants already had a claim in
with Mr. Feinberg and more than half are represented by a lawyer.

"If we don't have those documents, we can't process the claim, so
we need help," Mr. Juneau said.  "We need the people filing these
claims to help us do our job."

The problem is especially bad for commercial fishermen and seafood
harvesters.  The settlement requires them to submit either trip
tickets or some other documentation showing revenues from the
catch they bring to dock.  Half of the 3,300 vessel-owner and
boat-captain claims had trip tickets, but the other half did not
and not one of them had sufficient alternate documentation to
justify their claim.

After paying $7 billion in claims in the first two years after the
April 2010 oil spill, BP estimates the court-supervised settlement
will require it to pay another $7.8 billion in claims.

As of Sept. 4, Mr. Juneau had offered 3,347 claims a total of $138
million, an average of $41,386 per claim.

The Seafood Compensation Program is capped at $2.3 billion.
Mr. Juneau has found 102 of the 5,802 seafood program claims
eligible for a total of $8.5 million, an average of $83,771 per
claim. So far, one seafood claimant has been paid $40,972.

The largest single group of claims under the settlement are for
Individual Economic Loss -- mostly from people who work for
businesses in coastal communities.  There are 15,000 of those
claims.

Only one of them has been ruled eligible two months after
settlement payments began.  That person has accepted a $2,572
settlement and had not been paid as of Sept. 4, the most recent
data available.

Business Economic Loss payments have been almost as slow.  Less
than half of 1 percent of the 10,000 claims in that category have
received offers . . . none have been paid.

There may be new hope for another group of fishermen, mostly in
the Vietnamese communities, whose families subsist on part of
their catch.  Mr. Feinberg negotiated for months with subsistence
claimants and never managed to pay more than a handful.  The court
settlement didn't change that immediately.

More than 3,800 subsistence claims have been filed and none have
been ruled eligible yet.

Mr. Juneau said the first determination letters for those
subsistence claims should be mailed Sept. 30.

He said he's acutely aware of the importance of the Nov. 1 opt-out
date and promised that some big-ticket settlements will be paid in
the next 30 days.

Both Messrs. Juneau and Feinberg have been special masters or
claims administrators in some of the largest, most complex
litigation settlements.  But both say they were taken aback by
just how unwieldy and massive this BP oil spill case is.

"All others pale in comparison to the complexity of this case,"
Mr. Juneau said.


CARDIONET INC: West Palm Beach Suit Settlement Approved in June
---------------------------------------------------------------
CardioNet, Inc. disclosed in its August 9, 2012, Form 10-Q filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter
ended June 30, 2012, that its $7.25 million settlement of a class
action lawsuit filed by West Palm Beach Police Pension Fund was
approved in June 2012.

On December 12, 2011, the Company announced that it had reached a
preliminary agreement to settle the West Palm Beach Police Pension
Fund putative class action litigation filed in California Superior
Court, San Diego County, which asserted claims against the Company
for violations of Sections 11, 12 and 15 of the Securities Act of
1933.  On June 22, 2012, the court approved the settlement of
$7,250,000, of which, the Company previously paid $1,250,000 on
March 31, 2012, and the remainder was covered by insurance.

CardioNet, Inc. -- http://www.cardionet.com/-- is a Delaware
corporation that provides continuous, real-time ambulatory
outpatient management solutions for monitoring relevant and timely
clinical information regarding an individual's health.  In
September 1999, the Company began its focus on helping physicians
more rapidly diagnose and more effectively manage therapy for
patients with cardiovascular disease.  The Company began
developing its product platform in April 2000.  The Company then
spent seven years developing a proprietary integrated patient
management platform that incorporates a wireless data transmission
network, internally developed software, Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) cleared algorithms and medical devices, and a
24-hour digital monitoring service center.  The Company is
currently focused on the diagnosis and monitoring of cardiac
arrhythmias, or heart rhythm disorders, through its core Mobile
Cardiac Outpatient Telemetry(TM), event and Holter services.


DEL MONTE: Recalls Fresh-Cut Fruit Packages Containing Mangoes
--------------------------------------------------------------
In cooperation with the FDA's warning not to consume mangos from
Agricola Daniella in Mexico, Del Monte Fresh Produce N.A., Inc, is
initiating a voluntary recall of a limited quantity of certain
fresh-cut fruit packages containing mangos distributed to retail
outlets due to the potential risk that the mangos may contain
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.  This recall is associated with the
Coast Distributors, Inc. mangos sourced from Agricola Daniella in
Mexico.  This limited recall does not involve any product grown in
Del Monte owned farms.

Product was distributed by retailers in the states of Alabama,
Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi,
Missouri, North Carolina, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, and
Tennessee.  The products being recalled are in clear plastic bowls
and are listed in the table below.

Brand and                                    Pack    Best By
Pack Type                    Product         Size      Date
---------                    -------         ----    -------
Del Monte, bowl              Mango Slices    32 oz   9/27/2012
UPC: 7-62357-07532-1
Included States: GA, NC, SC, TN

Del Monte, bowl              Mango Slices    32 oz   9/28/2012
UPC: 7-62357-07532-1
Included States: FL

Del Monte,                   Mango Slices    16 oz   9/26/2012
rectangular bowl
UPC: 7-17524-71902-7
Included States: FL, GA

Del Monte, square bowl       Mango Slices    32 oz   9/26/2012
UPC: 7-17524-72503-5
Included States: GA, NC, SC, TN

Del Monte, square bowl       Mango Slices    32 oz   9/26/2012
UPC: 7-17524-72503-5
Included States: FL

Del Monte, square bowl       Mango Slices     8 oz   9/26/2012
UPC: 7-17524-72506-6
Included States: FL

Del Monte, square bowl       Mango Slices    32 oz   9/27/2012
UPC: 7-17524-72503-5
Included States: FL

Del Monte, square bowl       Mango Slices    32 oz   9/27/2012
UPC: 7-17524-72503-5
Included States: GA, NC, SC, TN

Del Monte, square bowl       Mango Slices    32 oz   9/27/2012
UPC: 7-17524-72503-5
Included States: AR, FL, GA, PR, SC

Del Monte, round cup         Tropical Fruit  16 oz   9/26/2012
                              Medley
UPC: 7-17524-77649-5
Included States: FL

Del Monte, square bowl       Tropical Fruit  28 oz   9/26/2012
                              Bowl
UPC: 7-17524-77651-8
Included States: FL

Del Monte, bowl              Tropical Fruit  64 oz   9/26/2012
                              Bowl
UPC: 7-17524-77834-5
Included States: FL

Del Monte, square bowl       Seasonal Blend  32 oz   9/27/2012
UPC: 7-17524-77604-4
Included States: FL, GA

Del Monte, rectangular bowl  Mango Slices    16 oz   9/27/2012
UPC: 7-17524-71902-7
Included States: FL, GA

Del Monte, round cup         Mango Chunks     7 oz   9/26/2012
Lot Number: 05262101
Included States: FL

Del Monte, round cup         Tropical Blend  16 oz   9/27/2012
UPC: 7-17524-77868-7
Included States: FL, GA, AR, AL, NC, SC, MS

Del Monte, rectangular bowl  Mango Slices     8 oz   9/26/2012
UPC: 7-17524-72506-6
Included States: GA

Del Monte, rectangular bowl  Mango Slices     8 oz   9/26/2012
UPC: 7-17524-72506-6
Included States: FL

Del Monte, round cup         Tropical Blend   7 oz   9/27/2012
Lot Number: 05262101
Included States: FL

Del Monte, round cup         Mango Slices     8 oz   9/26/2012
UPC: 7-17524-72506-6
Included States: FL

Del Monte, round cup         Mango Slices     8 oz   9/26/2012
UPC: 7-17524-72506-6
Included States: GA

7 Eleven Fresh To Go,        Mango Chunks     6 oz   9/28/2012
rectangular cup

UPC: 0-52548-52070-0
Included States: FL

7 Eleven Fresh To Go,        Seasonal Blend  16 oz   9/27/2012
swirl bowl

UPC: 7-17524-77647-1
Included States: FL

7 Eleven Fresh To Go         Pineapple/       6 oz   9/28/2012
rectangular cup              Mango/Grape

UPC: 0-52548-51986-5
Included States: FL

7 Eleven Fresh To Go,        Strawberry/      6 oz   9/28/2012
rectangular cup              Kiwi/Mango

UPC: 0-52548-51979-7
Included States: FL

7 Eleven Fresh To Go,        Mango Chunks     6 oz   9/29/2012
rectangular cup

UPC: 0-52548-52070-0
Included States: FL

7 Eleven Fresh To Go,        Seasonal Blend  16 oz   9/29/2012
swirl bowl

UPC: 7-17524-77647-1
Included States: FL

7 Eleven Fresh To Go,        Pineapple/       6 oz   9/29/2012
rectangular cup              Mango/Grape

UPC: 0-52548-51986-5
Included States: FL

7 Eleven Fresh To Go,        Strawberry/      6 oz   9/29/2012
rectangular cup              Kiwi/Mango

UPC: 0-52548-51979-7
Included States: FL

7 Eleven Fresh To Go,        Mango Chunks     6 oz   9/29/2012
rectangular cup

UPC: 0-52548-52070-0
Included States: FL

7 Eleven Fresh To Go,        Seasonal Blend   6 oz   9/29/2012
swirl bowl

UPC: 7-17524-77647-1
Included States: FL

7 Eleven Fresh To Go,        Pineapple/       6 oz   9/29/2012
rectangular cup              Mango/Grape

UPC: 0-52548-51986-5
Included States: FL

7 Eleven Fresh To Go,        Strawberry/      6 oz   9/29/2012
rectangular cup              Kiwi/Mango

UPC: 0-52548-51979-7
Included States: FL

Generic label                Seasonal Blend  10 oz   9/26/2012
sold at Wal-Mart,
square bowl

UPC: 7-17524-77815-4
Included States: AL, AR, KY, LA, MO, MS, TN

Generic label                Seasonal Blend  16 oz   9/26/2012
sold at Wal-Mart,
square bowl

UPC: 7-17524-77603-7
Included States: AL, AR, KY, LA, MO, MS, TN

Generic label                Seasonal Blend  32 oz   9/26/2012
sold at Wal- Mart,
square bowl

UPC: 7-17524-77604-4
Included States: AL, AR, KY, LA, MO, MS, TN

Generic label                Apple Blend     16 oz   9/26/2012
sold at Wal-Mart,
square bowl

UPC: 7-17524-77626-6
Included States: AL, AR, KY, LA, MO, MS, TN

Generic label                Fruit Bowl      48 oz   9/26/2012
sold at Wal-Mart,
round bowl

UPC: 7-17524-77687-7
Included States: AL, AR, KY, LA, MO, MS, TN

There have been no reported illnesses attributed to the items
listed in this recall.  Del Monte Fresh Produce N.A., Inc. has
notified the retailers who have received the recalled product and
directed them to remove it from their store shelves.  Consumers
who purchased affected products listed in the table should not
consume them and should destroy or discard them.  Consumers with
questions may contact the company's 24 hour consumer hotline at 1-
800-659-6500 or e-mail Del Monte Fresh at Contact-US-Executive-
Office@freshdelmonte.com.


DEL POSTO: Settles Ex-Employees' Class Action for $1.15 Million
---------------------------------------------------------------
Eater reports that Mario Batali and Joe Bastianich have reached a
settlement in a class action lawsuit by current and former Del
Posto employees that claims the restaurateurs cheated them out of
wages.  The Wall Street Journal reports that Messrs. Batali and
Bastianich's agreement with the group includes a $1.15 million
settlement, in addition to expanded sick days and vacation time, a
formal promotions policy, and sensitivity training for managers at
the restaurant.  The 31 employees are part of an advocacy group
called the Restaurant Opportunities Center.

Messrs. Batali and Bastianich have now paid out almost $6.5
million to aggrieved employees this year, after settling a
separate lawsuit for $5.25 million back in March.  That one
started as a suit related to Babbo but then grew to the point that
it included the entire group.  Together, this is why Mr.
Bastianich has declared they'll never open another New York
restaurant.


EDELMAN FINANCIAL: Defends Class Suit Over Proposed Lee Merger
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Edelman Financial Group Inc. is defending a class action
lawsuit arising from its proposed merger with a subsidiary of Lee
Equity Partners, LLC, according to the Company's August 9, 2012,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended June 30, 2012.

On April 16, 2012, the Company entered into an Agreement and Plan
of Merger (the "Merger Agreement") with Summer Holdings II, Inc.
("Parent") and Summer Merger Sub, Inc., ("Merger Sub") pursuant to
which Merger Sub will merge with and into the Company, with the
Company surviving the merger as a wholly owned subsidiary of
Parent.  Parent and Merger Sub were formed by Lee Equity Partners,
LLC.  Pursuant to the Merger Agreement, shareholders will be paid
$8.85 per share of TEFG common stock.  The proposed transaction is
expected to close in the third quarter of 2012.

On April 20, 2012, a putative class action lawsuit was filed in
the District Court in Harris County, Texas, purportedly on behalf
of a class of shareholders of the Company or alternatively,
derivatively on behalf of the Company, docketed as Lax v. Ball et
al., Case No. 2012-23137 (the "Lax Complaint").  The Lax Complaint
names as defendants the Company, all of the Company's directors
and Parent and Merger Sub.  The Lax Complaint seeks certification
of a class of the Company's shareholders and alleges, inter alia,
that the members of the Board breached fiduciary duties owed to
the Company's shareholders by failing to engage in a fair sales
process in connection with the proposed transaction, by agreeing
to an inadequate price, and by agreeing to certain deal protection
provisions, among other claims and that Lee Equity Partners, LLC
("Lee Equity"), Parent, and Merger Sub aided and abetted the
alleged breach of fiduciary duties.  The Lax Complaint seeks,
among other relief, an injunction prohibiting the transactions
contemplated by the merger agreement, rescission in the event such
transactions are consummated, compensatory damages, and attorneys'
fees and costs of the action.

On June 6, 2012, a first amended complaint was filed.  The amended
complaint seeks the same relief and asserts the same claims as the
Lax Complaint.


DUN & BRADSTREET: Discovery in "Martin" Class Suit Ongoing
----------------------------------------------------------
Discovery is ongoing in the class action lawsuit styled Nicholas
Martin v. Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. and Convergys Customer Management
Group, Inc., No. 12 CV 215 (USDC N.D. III.), according to The Dun
& Bradstreet Corporation's August 9, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
June 30, 2012.

On January 11, 2012, Nicholas Martin filed a lawsuit against Dun &
Bradstreet, Inc. and Convergys Customer Management Group, Inc. in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois.  The complaint alleges that Defendants violated the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA") (47 U.S.C. Section 227)
by placing a call to Plaintiff's cell phone using an automatic
telephone dialing system.  Plaintiff seeks to bring this action as
a class action on behalf of all persons who received a call on
their cell phone which was initiated by Defendant(s) using an
automatic telephone dialing system, where the Defendant(s)
obtained the cell phone number from some source other than
directly from the called party, during the period January 11,
2010, to the present.  Both D&B and Convergys answered the
complaint on March 2, 2012.  Plaintiff has filed a motion for
class certification.  Discovery has commenced and at this point
the court has not set a discovery cut-off date.  The court has
ordered Dun & Bradstreet to comply with all outstanding written
discovery on August 15, 2012, unless Dun & Bradstreet and
plaintiff's counsel agree on another date.

Due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation, the Company says
it cannot accurately predict the ultimate outcome of the matter.
No amount in respect of any potential judgment in this matter has
been accrued in the Company's consolidated financial statements.


EXELON CORP: Continues to Defend Class Suits vs. Constellation
--------------------------------------------------------------
Exelon Corporation continues to defend a consolidated securities
class action lawsuit against Constellation Energy Group, Inc.,
according to the Company's August 9, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
June 30, 2012.

On March 12, 2012, Constellation Energy Group, Inc. merged into
Exelon with Exelon continuing as the surviving corporation
pursuant to the transactions contemplated by the Agreement and
Plan of Merger (the "Merger Agreement").  As a result of the
merger transaction, Exelon Generation Company, LLC includes the
former Constellation customer supply and generation businesses.
Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, formerly Constellation's
regulated utility subsidiary, is now a subsidiary of Exelon.

Three federal securities class action lawsuits were filed in the
United States District Courts for the Southern District of New
York and the District of Maryland between September 2008 and
November 2008 against Constellation.  The cases were filed on
behalf of a proposed class of persons who acquired publicly traded
securities, including the Series A Junior Subordinated Debentures
(Debentures), of Constellation between January 30, 2008, and
September 16, 2008, and who acquired Debentures in an offering
completed in June 2008.  The securities class actions generally
allege that Constellation, a number of its former officers or
directors, and the underwriters violated the securities laws by
issuing a false and misleading registration statement and
prospectus in connection with Constellation's
June 27, 2008 offering of Debentures.  The securities class
actions also allege that Constellation issued false or misleading
statements or was aware of material undisclosed information which
contradicted public statements, including in connection with its
announcements of financial results for 2007, the fourth quarter of
2007, the first quarter of 2008 and the second quarter of 2008 and
the filing of its first quarter 2008 Form 10-Q.  The securities
class actions seek, among other things, certification of the cases
as class actions, compensatory damages, reasonable costs and
expenses, including counsel fees, and rescission damages.

The Southern District of New York granted the defendants' motion
to transfer the two securities class actions filed in Maryland to
the District of Maryland, and the actions have since been
transferred for coordination with the securities class action
filed there.  On June 18, 2009, the court appointed a lead
plaintiff, who filed a consolidated amended complaint on September
17, 2009.  On November 17, 2009, the defendants moved to dismiss
the consolidated amended complaint in its entirety.  On August 13,
2010, the District Court of Maryland issued a ruling on the motion
to dismiss, holding that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim
with respect to the claims of the common shareholders under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and limiting the lawsuit to those
persons who purchased Debentures in the June 2008 offering.  In
August 2011, plaintiffs requested permission from the court to
file a third amended complaint in an effort to attempt to revive
the claims of the common shareholders.  Constellation filed an
objection to the plaintiffs' request for permission to file a
third amended complaint and, on March 28, 2012, the District Court
of Maryland denied the plaintiffs' request for permission to
revive the claims of the common shareholders.

Given that limited discovery has occurred, that the court has not
certified any class and the plaintiffs have not quantified their
potential damage claims, Exelon is unable at this time to provide
an estimate of the range of possible loss relating to these
proceedings or to determine the ultimate outcome of the securities
class actions or their possible effect on its financial results.


EXELON CORP: Motion to Dismiss Zion Station Suit Pending
--------------------------------------------------------
A motion to dismiss a class action lawsuit related to Zion Station
decommissioning is pending in Illinois, Exelon Corporation said in
its August 9, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2012.

On September 1, 2010, Exelon Generation Company, LLC completed an
Asset Sale Agreement (ASA) with EnergySolutions Inc. and its
wholly owned subsidiaries, EnergySolutions, LLC (EnergySolutions)
and ZionSolutions under which ZionSolutions has assumed
responsibility for decommissioning Zion Station, which is located
in Zion, Illinois, and ceased operation in 1998.  On July 14,
2011, four people filed a purported class action lawsuit in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
naming ZionSolutions and Bank of New York Mellon as defendants and
seeking, among other things, an accounting for use of Nuclear
Decommissioning Trust (NDT) funds, an injunction against the use
of NDT funds, the appointment of a trustee for the NDT funds, and
the return of NDT funds to customers of ComEd to the extent
legally entitled thereto.  If the plaintiffs prevail on the merits
of their claims, some or all of the NDT funds may no longer be
available to ZionSolutions for decommissioning Zion Station, in
which case, the contractual arrangement would require
ZionSolutions to utilize a line of credit to complete the
decommissioning.  In addition, the appointment of a NDT fund
trustee in this matter could impact Generation's future
decommissioning activities at other stations by setting a
precedent for the appointment of trustees for NDT funds.  On July
20, 2012, ZionSolutions and Bank of New York Mellon filed a motion
to dismiss the amended complaint for failing to state a claim.
The matter is currently under review by the court.


FOSTER FARMS: Recalls 16,576 Pounds of Corn Dog Products
--------------------------------------------------------
Foster Farms, a Demopolis, Alabama, establishment is recalling
approximately 16,576 pounds of corn dog products because of
misbranding and an allergen, milk, that is not declared on the
label.

The products subject to recall include:

   * 2.67-lb. pound, 16-count packages of "Foster Farms Honey
     Crunchy Corn Dogs."

The products subject to recall bear the establishment number "P-
7322" ink-jetted on each box and a use-by date of "July 2, 2013,"
and a time stamp between 06:30 and 08:30.  The products were
produced on July 2, 2012, and were shipped to retail stores in the
southeast United States.  When available, the retail distribution
list(s) will be posted on FSIS' Web site at:

  http://www.fsis.usda.gov/FSIS_Recalls/Open_Federal_Cases/index.asp

The problem was discovered as a result of a customer complaint
about the product being mislabeled and may have occurred as a
result of the product being placed in the incorrect package.  FSIS
and the company have received no reports of allergic reactions to
milk due to consumption of these products.  Anyone concerned about
a reaction should contact a healthcare provider.

FSIS routinely conducts recall effectiveness checks to verify
recalling firms notify their customers of the recall and that
steps are taken to make certain that the product is no longer
available to consumers.

Consumers with questions about the recall should contact the
company's consumer affairs manager, Teresa Lenz, at (209) 394-
6914, ext. 4369.  Media with questions about the recall should
contact the Company's media representative, Lorna Bush at (510)
759-9528.

Consumers with food safety questions can "Ask Karen," the FSIS
virtual representative available 24 hours a day at AskKaren.gov or
via smartphone at m.askkaren.gov.  "Ask Karen" live chat services
are available Monday through Friday from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
Eastern Time.  The toll-free USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline 1-888-
MPHotline (1-888-674-6854) is available in English and Spanish and
can be reached from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. (Eastern Time) Monday
through Friday.  Recorded food safety messages are available 24
hours a day.

        FSIS Lists Stores That Received Recalled Products

The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection
Service disclosed that certain stores in various states received
2.67-lb. pound, 16-count packages of "Foster Farms Honey Crunchy
Corn Dogs" products that have been recalled by Foster Farms.

The FSIS says the list of store locations may not include all
retail locations that have received the recalled product or may
include retail locations that did not actually receive the
recalled product.  Therefore, the FSIS says, it is important that
consumers use the product-specific identification information
available at http://is.gd/GkFF5O,in addition to the list of
retail stores, to check meat or poultry products in the consumers'
possession to see if they have been recalled.

    Nationwide, State-Wide, or Area-Wide Distribution
    -------------------------------------------------
    Retailer Name      Location
    -------------      --------
    Kroger             Southeastern United States
    Walmart            Southeastern United States
    Food Lion          Southeastern United States


FREDDIE MAC: Judge Dismisses Securities Fraud Class Action
----------------------------------------------------------
Ronald D. Orol, writing for MarketWatch, reports that a New York
judge has dismissed a class-action lawsuit against government-
seized housing giant Freddie Mac that alleged securities fraud,
Freddie Mac said on Sept. 27.  The U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York rejected investor claims that
Freddie Mac's public disclosures between November 2007 to
September 2008 were materially false or misleading.  In April
2011, the court had dismissed an earlier version of the lawsuit
but at the time allowed the investors to re-file an amended
complaint, which it now found to be "legally defective."


GRAND BK: Recalls 7 oz. Packs of Black & Mix Crisp and Crisp Mix
----------------------------------------------------------------
Grand BK of Maspeth, New York, is recalling 7 oz units of Black &
Mix Crisp and Crisp Mix packaged in a plastic container, because
it may contain peanuts.  People who have an allergy or severe
sensitivity to peanut run the risk of serious or life threatening
allergic reaction if they consume these products.

The Black Mix Crisp and the Crisp Mix were distributed to retail
stores in New York and New Jersey.

The product has a transparent, plastic, 7ounce container (ts24,),
with the brand name 'goodies by nature.'  The item names are
'black mix crisp' and 'crisp mix.'  There are multiple expiration
dates associated with this product.  All product sold prior to
July 27, 2012, is subject to this recall.  Pictures of the
recalled products' labels are available at:

         http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm321759.htm

The recall was initiated after it was discovered that the peanut-
containing product was consumed by a customer who had an allergic
reaction to the product.

There has been only one incident associated with this product to
this date.

This recall was initiated after the labeling on the product did
not correctly include the peanut ingredient.  The manufacturer did
not inform labeling department of their ingredient change which
caused them to mislabel the product.

Consumers who have purchased 'goodies by nature' brand before July
27, 2012, are urged to return it to the place of purchase for a
full refund.  Consumers with questions may contact the Company at
718-417-5607.


GUAM: Opposes Six Months Tax Refund Time Fame Proposal
------------------------------------------------------
Mindy Aguon, writing for KUAM News, reports that the Government of
Guam doesn't think six months is a reasonable time frame to pay
out tax refunds from the time they are filed.  The proposal was
one of several included in the plaintiff's proposed permanent
injunction in the ongoing tax refund class action lawsuit.  The
government filed its objections to the proposed injunction.

Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Orcut says six months isn't
reasonable even if the government were caught up with paying
refunds.  The biggest concern is that the proposed injunction
fails to address Guam's obligations to pay $30-40 million owed in
tax returns that are already filed much less the $105 million
projected shortfall for the payment of 2012 tax returns.  Concerns
were also expressed that paying interest when refunds cannot be
paid would give taxpayers less interest than the compounded
interest provided in the internal revenue code.

The government stressed that the public interest does not support
the permanent injunction and imposing the proposed plan would
leave the government unable to provide critical services to the
community.

The judge has yet to decide on the government's motion to extend
the time to file a proposed permanent injunction.


HARRY AND DAVID: Recalls Peanut Butter and Spread Products
----------------------------------------------------------
Harry and David, LLC is taking the precautionary measure of
voluntarily recalling its 12 oz. jars of Harry & David(R) Crunchy
Almond and Peanut Butter, Harry & David(R) Creamy Banana Peanut
Spread, and Harry & David(R) Creamy Raspberry Peanut Spread with
"Best By" dates of 01MAY13 through 24SEPT13, as well as the
following multi-component food items which included the above-
named peanut butter products as components: Harry & David(R) Apple
Snack Box, Wolferman's(R) Bee Sweet Gift Basket, Wolferman's(R)
Hearty Snack Gift Basket, Wolferman's(R) All-Day Assortment Gift
Basket, and Wolferman's(R) Father's Day Basket.  The "Best By"
date is located on the upper part of the peanut butter product jar
near the lid.  The recalled peanut butter products were produced
by Sunland, Inc.

This voluntary recall was initiated by Harry and David, LLC upon
learning that Sunland, Inc. had recalled products, including the
above-named Harry & David brand peanut butter products,
manufactured between May 1, 2012, and September 24, 2012, due to
possible Salmonella contamination.  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 who believe they have contracted a
Salmonella infection should contact a healthcare provider.

Products subject to this recall were sold nationwide through Harry
& David and Wolferman's catalogs and Web sites, as well as through
Harry & David stores, between May 1, 2012, and September 25, 2012.
Individual jars of the recalled peanut butter products sold
through Harry & David stores have UPC numbers of 8099473871,
8099473872, or 8099473873 printed on the Bar Code.  The recalled
multi-component food items have lot code numbers of 1212M through
2372M, 1212H through 2372H, or 1212C through 2372C.

This recall is being conducted in cooperation with the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration (FDA).  To date, there have been no
illnesses or injuries reported in connection with the Harry &
David brand recalled products, and no other Harry & David products
are being recalled at this time.

Consumers with recalled product are urged not to eat the product,
and to dispose of it or return it to any Harry & David retail
store for a full refund.  Consumers with questions about the
recalled products may phone the Harry & David Customer Service
division at 800-233-1101, 5:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight
Time.


INTERSECTIONS INC: Appeal in Insurance Suit Dismissed in June
-------------------------------------------------------------
Intersections Inc. disclosed in its August 9, 2012, Form 10-Q
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarter ended June 30, 2012, that plaintiffs in a class action
lawsuit over the sale of an accidental death and disability
program, voluntarily dismissed in June 2012 their appeal from the
dismissal of their lawsuit in California.

On July 19, 2011, a putative class action complaint was filed
against Intersections Inc., Intersections Insurance Services Inc.
and Bank of America in Los Angeles Superior Court alleging various
claims based on the sale of an accidental death and disability
program.  The case was removed to the United States District Court
for the Central District of California, and an amended complaint
was filed.  All defendants responded to the amended complaint by
filing motions to dismiss.  On January 30, 2012, the District
Court dismissed all claims against Intersections Inc.,
Intersections Insurance Services Inc., and Bank of America with
prejudice and entered judgment.

On February 29, 2012, the plaintiffs appealed the District Court's
order to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.  On June 7, 2012,
plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their appeal.


INTERSECTIONS INC: Awaits Orders on Calif. Suit Dismissal Bids
--------------------------------------------------------------
Intersections Inc. is awaiting court decisions on motions to
dismiss a class action lawsuit pending in California, according to
the Company's August 9, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30,
2012.

On May 14, 2012, a putative class action complaint was filed
against Intersections Insurance Services Inc. and Bank of America
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California alleging various claims based on the sale of an
accidental death and disability program.  This action is
substantially similar to a dismissed action against the same
defendants.  Intersections Insurance Services Inc. and Bank of
America moved to dismiss the claims and to transfer the action to
the United States District Court for the Central District of
California.  Hearing on these motions were scheduled on
August 10, 2012.


JER'S CHOCOLATES: Recalls Gourmet Peanut Butter Bars and Squares
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jer's(TM) Chocolates announced that it has taken the precautionary
measure of issuing a voluntary limited recall of some of its
Gourmet Peanut Butter Bars and Gourmet Jer's Squares produced from
July 9, 2012, to September 24, 2012.

The voluntary recall was initiated upon learning that SUNLAND,
Inc., the supplier of the peanut butter used in the production of
Jer's(TM) Chocolates, has recalled all peanut butter product from
May 1, 2012 - September 24, 2012, because of potential
contamination 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.

For more specific information regarding the SUNLAND recall, please
visit the manufacturer's Web site by viewing:
http://www.sunlandinc.com/788?html/pdfs/SunlandRecall.pdf

SUNLAND, Inc. has stated that twenty-nine people have reported
Salmonella Bredeney PFGE matching illnesses in approximately 18
states.  These illnesses were associated with Almond Butter,
Peanut Butter, Cashew Butter, Tahini and Roasted Blanched Peanut
Products produced by Sunland, Inc.

Jer's(TM) Gourmet Peanut Butter Bars and Jer's(TM) Squares HAVE
NOT been associated with any of the reported illnesses and ALL of
Jer's Chocolates products have passed its internal quality control
tests and procedures

"Our customers' health and safety is paramount. This precautionary
step is to protect our customers and their families from any, even
if remote, possible risk", says Jerry Swain, Founder/CEO of Jer's
Chocolates.

All other products, including Jer's Chocolates Gift Boxes and
Peanut Brittle Bites from the California plant, are not affected
by the voluntary recall.

Customers who have purchased these items are urged not to eat the
products, and to dispose of them or return them to the retailer
for a full refund.

Items Recalled are specific lot numbers Jer's Squares 4 oz and 16
oz Gable Boxes and 3 oz Peanut Butter Bars that were distributed
from July 9, 2012, through September 24, 2012.

Best-if-Used-By-Dates: Between July 9, 2013 - September 24, 2013
----------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Lot # (Printed Under
UPC             Product Description        Expiration Date)
---             -------------------      --------------------
837305005023    Peanut Butter Bars       12262, 12261, 12206
                 3.0 oz - Original

837305005030    Peanut Butter Bars       12265, 12261, 12206
                 3.0 oz - Pretzo

837305005054    Peanut Butter Bars       12206
                 3.0 oz - Toffee

837305005047    Peanut Butter Bars       12206
                 3.0 oz - Caramella

Best-if-Used-By-Dates: Between July 9, 2013 - September 24, 2013
----------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Lot # (Printed Under
UPC             Product Description        Expiration Date)
---             -------------------      --------------------
837305006136    Jer's Squares            12249, 12250, 12248,
                 16 oz Gable Box -        12243, 12242, 12240,
                 Original/Pretzo          12235, 12234, 12233,
                                          12230, 12229, 12220,
                                          12213, 12212, 12208,
                                          12207, 12206, 12205,
                                          12201, 12200, 12199,
                                          12198, 12194, 12193

Best-if-Used-By-Dates: Between July 9, 2013 - September 24, 2013
----------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Lot # (Printed Under
UPC             Product Description        Expiration Date)
---             -------------------      --------------------
837305005795    Jer's Squares Gable Box    12257, 12215
                 4.0 oz - Original

837305005771    Jer's Squares Gable Box    12257, 12215
                 4.0 oz - Pretzo

837305005757    Jer's Squares Gable Box    12215
                 4.0 oz - Toffee

837305005733    Jer's Squares Gable Box    12215
                 4.0 oz - Caramella

Pictures of the recalled products' labels are available at:

         http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm321765.htm

Please call Monday - Friday 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time
with any questions. (858) 792-2287.


JUSTIN'S: Recalls Peanut Butter Jars and Squeeze Packs
------------------------------------------------------
Justin's announced a voluntary recall of certain lots of its
Classic Peanut Butter 16 oz jars and Honey Peanut Butter 1.15 oz
and .5 oz single-serve squeeze packs (see associated Best By dates
below).  This voluntary recall is in response to Sunland Inc.
voluntarily recalling nut butter products.  For more information
on the Sunland recall, please see the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration's Web site (http://www.fda.gov/)or read Sunland's
official statement at:
http://www.sunlandinc.com/788/html/pdfs/SunlandRecall.pdf

The below lots of Justin's Classic Peanut Butter 16 oz jars and
Honey Peanut Butter 1.15 oz and .5 oz single-serve squeeze packs
are being voluntarily recalled because peanuts used in the
production of these identified products have the potential to be
contaminated with Salmonella, an organism that can cause serious
and sometimes fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly
people, and those 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.

No Justin's almond butter, hazelnut butter, peanut butter cups or
candy bars are involved in this recall.  These products were
manufactured using nuts not sourced from Sunland Inc.

Justin's was just notified by the Company's contract manufacturer,
Fresca Foods, Inc. located in Louisville, Colorado, that Sunland
peanuts were used in production of certain peanut butter products
in the past, therefore Justin's is voluntarily participating in
the recall.

The products were distributed nationally to numerous supermarket
chains and were available for purchase on the Internet from
7/14/12 to 9/26/12.

The specifics of the affected products are:

                                       Package
UPC            Product Description      Size    Best By Dates
---            -------------------    -------   -------------
855188003004   Classic Peanut          16 oz    08-07-13
                Butter Jars

855188003042   Honey Peanut Butter   1.15 oz    07-24-13,
                Squeeze Packs                    07-25-13

894455000391   Honey Peanut Butter    0.5 oz    07-14-13,
                0.5 oz Squeeze Pack           08-10-13, 08-13-13,
                                              08-14-13, 08-15-13

Best By dates can be located for the jars to the left of the UPC
code, and for the squeeze packs on the back, top seal.

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:

         http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm321546.htm

Sunland reports that between June 11, 2012, and September 2, 2012,
twenty-nine people reported Salmonella Bredeney PFGE matching
illnesses in approximately 18 states, including Washington,
California, Arizona, Texas, Louisiana, Missouri, Illinois,
Minnesota, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode
Island, North Carolina, Virginia, Connecticut, New Jersey and
Maryland.

Consumers who purchased these items are urged to return them to
the place of purchase for a full refund.  They can bring in a
receipt in place of product and discard the product at home.
Retailers should destroy all corresponding products with the above
lot information.

Anyone with questions may contact the company at 303-449-9559 or
comments@justinsnutbutter.com, or visit
http://www.justinsnutbutter.com/. Phone lines are staffed from
9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Mountain Standard Time Monday through
Friday.


LEHMAN BROTHERS: Lismore City Council Entitled to Compensation
--------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Parks, writing for Northern Rivers Echo, reports that Lismore
City Council was one of 72 councils, churches and charities
involved in a class action against the defunct investment bank
Lehman Brothers the Federal Court ruled they were entitled to
compensation.

Justice Steven Rares found that Grange Securities (which was
bought by Lehman Brothers Australia in 2007), had not properly
advised their clients of the risks involved in highly complex
financial products.

Justice Rares said councils had been particularly targeted by sub-
prime mortgage-related derivatives or collateralized debt
obligations (CDOs) prior to the crash in the American housing
sector.  He said councils were targeted because they had access to
large sums of money for investment.

Lismore council had approximately AUD1.4 million invested with
Lehman Brothers Australia.

The class action was led by Wingecarribee Shire Council, which
stood to lose AUD21.4 million.

The ruling by Justice Rares means Lismore Council will be amongst
the creditors with their hands out when Grange Securities assets
are sold.

It is expected creditors will receive somewhere in the vicinity of
30 cents in the dollar of their investments.

Lismore mayor Jenny Dowell said the ruling was a "good victory"
and vindication for council and its staff.

"There have been many questions in the community about whether
council did things by the book. I think the actions of the court
vindicate council staff," she said.


MEETME INC: Bid to Dismiss "Kaffko" Suit Pending in Florida
-----------------------------------------------------------
MeetMe, Inc. said in its August 9, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June
30, 2012, that the United States District Court for the District
of Florida has delayed consideration of its motions to dismiss and
for summary judgment in the class action lawsuit filed by Michelle
Kaffko.

On August 3, 2011, Michelle Kaffko (the "Plaintiff") filed a class
action lawsuit against the Company in the United States District
Court for the District of Nevada.  The Company filed a motion to
transfer the case to the Southern District of Florida and the
Court granted that motion.  On March 30, 2012, the Plaintiff filed
an amended complaint in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Florida to add two additional defendants to
the case.  The amended complaint alleges that the Company and the
other defendants sent unauthorized text messages to thousands of
consumers by using equipment that had the capacity to generate
random telephone numbers.  The Plaintiff is seeking, for herself
and on behalf of the members of the class, $500 for each alleged
violation.  The Company has investigated the Plaintiff's claims
and believes they have no merit with respect to the Company.
Accordingly, the Company has filed motions to dismiss and for
summary judgment; the Court has delayed consideration of these
motions pending the conduct of discovery.


METHODIST UNIVERSITY: Dismissed Students Can Pursue Courses
-----------------------------------------------------------
Yaa Gyamfi, writing for myjoyonline.com, reports that about a
thousand four hundred students who were dismissed from the
Methodist University for having deficient admission qualifications
may just be re-instated.

This follows a ruling by the Human rights court in Accra that they
should be allowed to pursue their various courses until a final
determination of a substantive class action suit seventy-nine of
them filed in court.

The students are praying the court to declare their withdrawal
illegal and a violation on their rights to education.

There was wild jubilation amongst the students once news got to
them that the court had granted their application.

In the courtroom, the judge Justice Essel Kofi Mensah after the
lawyers had argued ruled that the students who got to know of
their dismissal during vacation be allowed back when school
reopens early next month.

They had been dismissed after they were found to have entered with
grades below the admission requirements set by NAB.

The students however insist they fulfilled the requirements as set
out by the university and so cannot be made to suffer.

Counsel for the students Gary Nimako Marfo announced in court on
Sept. 26 the number of students involved in the class action suit
had gone up to 97 from the original 79.

Some students who spoke to Joy News said they were happy they
would be joining their colleagues when school reopens on October
5.  The case had been adjourned to November 29.


NETWORK ENGINES: Faces Class Suits Over Proposed UNICOM Merger
--------------------------------------------------------------
Network Engines, Inc. is facing class action lawsuits related to
its proposed merger with UNICOM Systems, Inc., according to the
Company's August 9, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30,
2012.

On June 25, 2012, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in
the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, by Terry Hull, an
alleged stockholder of the Company (Hull v. Network Engines, Inc.
et al., Transaction ID 44992327, C.A. No. 7650).  The lawsuit sets
forth several allegations related to that certain Agreement and
Plan of Merger, dated as of June 18, 2012, by and among UNICOM
Systems, Inc., a California corporation ("UNICOM"), Unicom Sub
Two, Inc., a Delaware corporation and wholly-owned subsidiary of
UNICOM ("Merger Sub"), and the Company (the "Merger Agreement"),
pursuant to which UNICOM will acquire all of the outstanding
shares of the Company for $1.45 per share in cash, without
interest, and pursuant to which Merger Sub will be merged with and
into the Company with the Company continuing as the surviving
corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of UNICOM (the
"Merger").  These allegations include:  (i) that the members of
the Company's board of directors breached fiduciary duties they
allegedly owed in negotiating and approving the Merger Agreement,
that the members of the Company's board of directors breached
fiduciary duties they allegedly owed in approving the potential
transaction bonuses payable by the Company to Mr. Shortell and Mr.
Bryant (the "Transaction Bonus Agreements"), that the Merger
consideration negotiated in the Merger Agreement improperly values
the Company, that the Company's stockholders will not likely
receive adequate or fair value for their Network Engines' common
stock in the Merger, and that the terms of the Merger Agreement
impose improper deal protection devices that will preclude
competing offers, and (ii) that UNICOM and Merger Sub aided and
abetted the purported breaches of fiduciary duty.  The lawsuit
seeks, among other things, an injunction against the consummation
of the Merger and rescission in the event that the Merger has
already been consummated prior to the entry of the court's final
judgment, an award of damages and costs and expenses, including
attorneys' and experts' fees and expenses.

On June 25, 2012, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in
the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, by Matt Lefever,
an alleged stockholder of the Company (Lefever v. Network Engines,
Inc. et al., Transaction ID 44996002, C.A. No. 7653).  The lawsuit
alleges: (i) that the members of the Company's board of directors
breached fiduciary duties they allegedly owed in negotiating and
approving the Merger Agreement, that the members of the Company's
board of directors breached fiduciary duties they allegedly owed
in approving the Transaction Bonus Agreements with Mr. Shortell
and Mr. Bryant, that the Merger consideration negotiated in the
Merger Agreement improperly values the Company, that the Company's
stockholders will not likely receive adequate or fair value for
their Network Engines' common stock in the Merger, and that the
terms of the Merger Agreement impose improper deal protection
devices that will preclude competing offers, and (ii) that UNICOM
and Merger Sub aided and abetted the purported breaches of
fiduciary duty.  The lawsuit seeks, among other things, an
injunction against the consummation of the Merger and rescission
in the event that the Merger has already been consummated prior to
the entry of the court's final judgment, an award of damages and
costs and expenses, including attorneys' and experts' fees and
expenses.

On June 25, 2012, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in
the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, by Rajinder
Bansal, an alleged stockholder of the Company (Bansal v. Network
Engines, Inc. et al., Transaction ID 44993557, C.A. No. 7654).
The lawsuit alleges: (i) that the members of the Company's board
of directors breached fiduciary duties they allegedly owed in
negotiating and approving the Merger Agreement, that the members
of the Company's board of directors breached fiduciary duties they
allegedly owed in approving the Transaction Bonus Agreements with
Mr. Shortell and Mr. Bryant, that the Merger consideration
negotiated in the Merger Agreement improperly values the Company,
that the Company's stockholders will not likely receive adequate
or fair value for their Network Engines' common stock in the
Merger, and that the terms of the Merger Agreement impose improper
deal protection devices that will preclude competing offers, and
(ii) that UNICOM and Merger Sub aided and abetted the purported
breaches of fiduciary duty.  The lawsuit seeks, among other
things, an injunction against the consummation of the Merger and
rescission in the event that the Merger has already been
consummated prior to the entry of the court's final judgment, an
award of damages and costs and expenses, including attorneys' and
experts' fees and expenses.

On June 26, 2012, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in
Suffolk County Superior Court in the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, by Sajjan G. Shiva, an alleged stockholder of the
Company (Shiva v. Network Engines, Inc. et al., Civil Action No.
12-2392).  The lawsuit alleges: (i) that the members of the
Company's board of directors breached fiduciary duties they
allegedly owed in negotiating and approving the Merger Agreement,
that the members of the Company's board of directors breached
fiduciary duties they allegedly owed in approving the Transaction
Bonus Agreements with Mr. Shortell and Mr. Bryant, that the Merger
consideration negotiated in the Merger Agreement improperly values
the Company, that the Company's stockholders will not likely
receive adequate or fair value for their Network Engines' common
stock in the Merger, and that the terms of the Merger Agreement
impose improper deal protection devices that will preclude
competing offers, and (ii) that UNICOM and Merger Sub aided and
abetted the purported breaches of fiduciary duty.  The lawsuit
seeks, among other things, an injunction against the consummation
of the Merger and rescission in the event that the Merger has
already been consummated prior to the entry of the court's final
judgment, an award of damages and costs and expenses, including
attorneys' and experts' fees and expenses.

On June 28, 2012, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in
the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, by Joseph Yud, an
alleged stockholder of the Company (Yud v. Network Engines, Inc.
et al., Transaction ID 45065809, C.A. No. 7661). The lawsuit
alleges: (i) that the members of the Company's board of directors
breached fiduciary duties they allegedly owed in negotiating and
approving the Merger Agreement, that the members of the Company's
board of directors breached fiduciary duties they allegedly owed
in approving the Transaction Bonus Agreements with Mr. Shortell
and Mr. Bryant, that the Merger consideration negotiated in the
Merger Agreement improperly values the Company, that the Company's
stockholders will not likely receive adequate or fair value for
their Network Engines' common stock in the Merger, and that the
terms of the Merger Agreement impose improper deal protection
devices that will preclude competing offers, and (ii) that UNICOM
and Merger Sub aided and abetted the purported breaches of
fiduciary duty.  The lawsuit seeks, among other things, an
injunction against the consummation of the Merger and rescission
in the event that the Merger has already been consummated prior to
the entry of the court's final judgment, an award of damages and
costs and expenses, including attorneys' and experts' fees and
expenses.

The Company says additional lawsuits pertaining to the Merger
could be filed in the future.  The Company is unable to determine
the outcome of these lawsuits or the estimated range of liability,
if any, and as a result, no amounts have been accrued as of June
30, 2012.

Networks Engine Inc., as a system integrator, designs and
manufactures application platforms and appliance solutions on
which software applications are applied to both enterprise and
telecommunications networks.  The Company markets its application
platform solutions and services to original equipment
manufacturers, or OEMs, and independent software vendors, or ISVs,
that then deliver their software applications in the form of a
network-ready hardware or software platform.


NORDIC NATURALS: Sued Over False Advertising on Fish Oil
-------------------------------------------------------
Hugh Morley, writing for NorthJersey.com, reports that an
Englewood attorney is pushing a fishy tale about consumer fraud in
the dietary supplement business.

Harold M. Hoffman, in a class action lawsuit filed in U.S.
District Court in Newark, says he bought a fatty acid fish oil
supplement known as Nordic Naturals Ultima Omega in an effort to
"slow the progression" of osteoarthritis and reduce pain.

Advertisements said it contained omega-3/omega-9 fatty acids,
which consumers buy because they believe it delivers "a number of
heart-healthy effects," the suit claims.  Yet the product, made by
Nordic Naturals Inc. of Watsonville, Calif., also contained an
excessive concentration of omega-9 oleic acid, which is
"associated with increased risk of certain cancers as well as
respiratory distress syndrome," says the suit, which alleges
Nordic Naturals' advertising inaccurately stated its
concentration.

"The allegations contained in this complaint are inaccurate and
without merit," said Keri Marshall, Nordic Naturals chief medical
officer.


OREGON ICE: Recalls Alden's Organic & Cascade Glacier Ice Cream
---------------------------------------------------------------
Out of the utmost concern for its consumers, Oregon Ice Cream
Company is initiating a voluntary recall of Alden's Peanut Butter
'n Chip, 48 oz and Cascade Glacier Chocolate Peanut Butter, 3
gallon that contain peanut butter associated with the Sunland,
Inc. recall.  The peanut butter used in this product has the
potential to be contaminated with Salmonella.

As the consumers may have heard, to date Sunland, Inc. has
recalled 75 products after learning that twenty-nine people
reported Salmonella Bredeneye PFGE matching illnesses in
approximately 18 states.  These products are distributed
nationally to a number of large supermarket chains.

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.

There have been no reported illnesses attributed to these two
recalled items.  Oregon Ice Cream Company is issuing this
voluntary recall linked to the supplier's Peanut Butter recall to
minimize the risk to the public health.

A list of the recalled production lots is identified in the table
below.  The Alden's product is packaged in a 48 oz container with
prominent label identification.  The five-digit production code
date is either printed or stamped onto the bottom of the
container.  The Cascade Glacier product is packaged in a 3 gallon
tub container with a blue sticker label identifying the flavor,
UPC, and the five-digit production code date.

Anyone who has the recalled product in their possession should not
consume it and should destroy or discard the product.  Consumers
with questions may contact the company at 1-800- 282-2202 Monday -
Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. (Pacific Time).

This recall is being made with the knowledge of the Food and Drug
Administration.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation in this regard.
Please feel free to contact us should you require additional
information or assistance.

Recalled Products and Production Code Dates

                                        Pack
Brand               Description        Size    Code Date Range
-----               ------------       ----    ---------------
Alden's Organic     Peanut Butter      48 oz    12195 - 12261
                     'n Chip
UPC: 0 72609 74191 2

Cascade Glacier     Chocolate Peanut   3 gal.   12223
                     Butter
UPC: 0 72609 60082 0


PUBLIX SUPERMARKETS: Recalls 10 Oz. Bags of Hearts of Romaine
-------------------------------------------------------------
Publix Supermarkets is issuing a voluntary recall for 10 ounce
plastic bags of Publix Hearts of Romaine (Chopped Hearts of
Romaine) due to the fact that they may be adulterated with
Lysteria monocytogenes.  Ready Pac is the private supplier of the
private label product for the Company.  The UPC found on the back
right hand corner of the package is 41415 03886.

Publix recieved notification of the contmination from the US Food
and Drug Administration after a routine sample collection.
Product was distributed to Publix stores between September 8,
2012, through September 20, 2012, in select Florida counties,
Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, and Tennessee.  The following
Florida Counties are affected by the recall: Alachua, Baldwin,
Bay, Beaufort, Bryan, Camden, Chatham, Clay, Coffee, Columbia,
Dougherty, Duval, Escambia, Flagler, Glynn, Houston, Jasper, Lee,
Leon, Lowndis, Marion, Nassau, Okaloosa, Putnam, Santa Rosa, St.
Johns, Suwannee, Thomas, Tift, Volusia and Walton.

Consumption of a product containing Listeria Monocytogenes can
cause serious and sometimes fatal infection 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 headaches, stiffness, nausea, abdominal
pain and diarrhea, Listeria infection can cause miscarriages and
stillbirths among pregnant women.

"While the product is no longer available on store shelves we have
issued a voluntary recall because of out commitment to food safety
and to advise our customers who may still have this product at
home," said Maria Borus, Publix media and community relations
director.  "No illnesses have been reported up to date in
connection withthe hearts of romaine.  Consumers who have
purchased the products in question may return the product to their
local store for a full refund.  Publix customers with additional
questions may call out Customer Care Center at 1-800-242-1227 or
by visit the Company's Web sites at http://www.publix.com/.
Customers can also contact the US Food and Drug Administration at
1-888-SAFEFOOD (1-800-723-3366)."

Publix is privately owned and operated by its 153,000 employees,
with 2011 sales of $27.0 billion.  Currently Publix has 1,061
stores in Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama and Tenessee.
The Company has been named one of FORTUNE's "100 Best Companies to
Work For in America" for 15 cosecutive years.  In addition,
Publix's dedication to superior quality and customer service is
recognized as tops in the grocery business, most recently by an
American Customer Satisfaction Index survey.  For more
information, visit the Company Web site, http://www.publix.com/.


QUEST SOFTWARE: Still Defends Merger-Related Class Action Suits
---------------------------------------------------------------
Quest Software, Inc. continues to defend itself from merger-
related class action lawsuits, according to the Company's August
9, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2012.

On June 30, 2012, the Company entered into an Agreement and Plan
of Merger (the "Merger Agreement") with Dell Inc., a Delaware
corporation ("Dell"), and Diamond Merger Sub, Inc. a Delaware
corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of Dell, pursuant to which
Dell will acquire all of the outstanding shares of the Company's
common stock for a purchase price of $28.00 per share in cash.
For terms of the Merger Agreement, including circumstances under
which the Merger Agreement can be terminated and the ramifications
of such a termination, as well as other terms and conditions.

Effective June 30, 2012, the Company and affiliates of Insight
Venture Management, LLC ("Insight") and Vector Capital (together
with Insight, the "Buyout Group") agreed to terminate (the "Mutual
Termination") the previously announced Agreement and Plan of
Merger, dated March 8, 2012, as amended on June 19, 2012 (the
"Prior Merger Agreement"), among the Company and the Buyout Group.
The terms and conditions of the Mutual Termination are set forth
in Exhibit 10.3 to the Company's Current Report on Form 8-K filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 2, 2012.  In
connection with the Mutual Termination the Company paid $37.0
million in termination fees and expenses to Insight.  This $37.0
million is reflected on the statement of operations as the primary
component of Transaction fees-pending merger for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2012.

To the Company's knowledge, there is no pending litigation against
the Merger Agreement.  Following the March 9, 2012 announcement
that the Company had entered into the Prior Merger Agreement,
purported stockholder class actions were filed in the Superior
Court of California, County of Orange (the "California Actions")
and the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (the "Delaware
Actions").  In each case, the plaintiff alleges that members of
the Company's Board of Directors breached their fiduciary duties
to Quest's stockholders in connection with the Prior Merger
Agreement and that Quest and Insight aided and abetted the
directors' breaches of fiduciary duties.  The complaints claim
that the Prior Merger Agreement involves an unfair price, an
inadequate sales process, and unreasonable deal protection
devices.  Following the April 12, 2012 filing of a preliminary
proxy statement on Schedule 14A (the "Proxy Statement") related to
the pending Merger, certain plaintiffs added claims that the
Company's disclosures regarding the pending Merger in the Proxy
Statement were inadequate.

In the Delaware Actions, plaintiffs moved for expedited
proceedings and filed competing motions to consolidate the
Delaware Actions and for appointment of lead counsel.  Defendants
opposed expedited proceedings as premature, but did not take a
position with regard to the competing motions for consolidation
and appointment of lead counsel.  On April 25, 2012, the Chancery
Court consolidated the Delaware Actions into a single action
captioned, In re Quest Software, Inc. Shareholders Litigation,
Consol. C.A. No. 7357-VCG, but declined to grant expedited
discovery.  At a status conference on May 9, 2012, the Chancery
Court ordered limited expedited document production, but declined
to order expedited proceedings. At further status conferences on
May 18, May 29, and June 21, 2012, the Chancery Court declined to
order expedited proceedings or additional expedited discovery.  At
a status conference on July 27, 2012, plaintiffs indicated they
would voluntarily dismiss the complaint and seek attorney's fees
rather than challenge the Merger Agreement.  On August 3, 2012,
plaintiffs filed a Stipulation and Proposed Order of Dismissal,
dismissing their claims brought on behalf of the purported class
of stockholders without prejudice.

In the California Actions, on April 20, 2012, Defendants filed a
motion to stay the California Actions in favor of the Delaware
Actions.  On May 3, 2012, in response to plaintiffs' unopposed
motion for consolidation, the Court consolidated the California
Actions into a single action captioned In re Quest Software, Inc.
Shareholder Litigation, Lead Case No. 30-2012-00552957-CU-BT-CXC.
On May 21, 2012, the Court granted Defendants' motion to stay and
scheduled a further case management conference for September 18,
2012.  Defendants do not anticipate further developments in this
California Action until that time.

The Prior Merger Agreement has been terminated, and neither Dell
nor its affiliates are named as defendants in any of the lawsuits.

Although the Company cannot know or predict with certainty the
outcome of any claim or proceeding or the effect such outcomes may
have on it, it believes that any liability resulting from the
resolution of any of these matters, individually, or in the
aggregate, to the extent not otherwise provided for or covered by
insurance, will not have a material adverse effect on the
Company's financial position, results of operations or liquidity.


SCHWEGEL'S FOOD: Requests More Time to Respond to Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
Christina Stueve Hodges, writing for The Madison St. Clair Record,
reports that an Alton grocery store being sued by an Illinois
woman for charging too much when cashing her check has requested
more time to respond to the lawsuit.

Julie Wheeler claims she cashed a check for $68.80 at defendant
Schwegel's Food Markets on April 23.  Schwegel's allegedly charged
her a 75 cent check cashing fee, according to the complaint filed
Aug. 20 in Madison County Circuit Court.

Ms. Wheeler claims Illinois state law does not allow for check
cashing fees of more than 50 cents or one percent of the face
value of the check.  Schwegel's did the same thing to numerous
other Illinois residents, the complaint says.

Schwegel's Food Markets and Robert Schwegel filed a motion for
extension of time to file a responsive pleading on Sept. 20.

The defendants have forwarded tender letters to insurance carriers
and want to obtain responses prior to filing pleadings if
possible, according to the motion.

Ms. Wheeler is requesting the court to certify her complaint as a
class action lawsuit and is seeking more than $50,000.

She will be represented by Peter J. Maag of Maag Law Firm in Wood
River.

Joseph Brown of Lucco, Brown, Threlkeld and Dawson in Edwardsville
represent the defense.

Madison County Chief Judge Ann Callis is assigned to the case.


SKECHERS USA: Awaits Approval of "Grabowski" Suit Settlement
------------------------------------------------------------
Skechers U.S.A., Inc. is awaiting court approval of its settlement
of a class action lawsuit initiated by Tamara Grabowski, according
to the Company's August 9, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30,
2012.

On June 18, 2010, Tamara Grabowski filed an action against the
Company in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of California, Tamara Grabowski v. Skechers U.S.A., Inc.,
Case No. 10 CV 1300 JM (MDD), on her behalf and on behalf of all
others similarly situated.  The complaint, as subsequently
amended, alleges that the Company's advertising for Shape-ups
violates California's Unfair Competition Law and the California
Consumers Legal Remedies Act, and constitutes a breach of express
warranty (the "Grabowski action").  The complaint seeks
certification of a nationwide class, damages, restitution and
disgorgement of profits, declaratory and injunctive relief,
corrective advertising, and attorneys' fees and costs.  On
March 7, 2011, the Court stayed the action on the ground that the
outcomes in pending appeals in two unrelated actions will
significantly affect whether a class should be certified.  On
January 13, 2012, the plaintiff filed a motion to lift the stay,
which the Company opposed.  On April 16, 2012, this action was
transferred to the multidistrict litigation proceeding pending in
the United States District Court for the Western District of
Kentucky, entitled In re Skechers Toning Shoe Products Liability
Litigation, MDL No. 2308.  On May 16, 2012, the plaintiff in
Grabowski, her counsel, and counsel for the plaintiff in Morga
filed a motion for preliminary approval of the class action
settlement reached as part of the global settlement of
advertising-related claims.  The Court held hearings on the motion
for preliminary approval of the class action settlement on July 24
and August 3, 2012, and a further hearing was scheduled for August
10, 2012.

If the Court grants preliminary and final approval of the class
action settlement, and the Court's decision is affirmed in the
event of an appeal, the settlement will resolve all domestic civil
claims concerning the Company's advertising of its toning shoes
that were or could have been brought by the class of consumers, as
defined in the settlement agreement, including the class claims
asserted in the Stalker, Morga, Tomlinson, Lovston, Hochberg,
Loss, Boatright and Scovil actions.  While the Company expects the
Court to grant preliminary and final approval of the class action
settlement, there are multiple class actions in several
jurisdictions and the Company cannot predict the final outcome of
the approval motions.  If the motions to grant preliminary and
final approval of the class action settlement are denied or
approval is reversed on appeal, the Company cannot predict the
outcome of the remaining advertising class actions or a reasonable
range of potential losses or whether the outcome of the remaining
advertising class actions would have a material adverse impact on
its results of operations or financial position in excess of the
existing $50 million settlement.

                    About Skechers USA, Inc.

SKECHERS USA, Inc., based in Manhattan Beach, California, designs,
develops and markets a diverse range of footwear for men, women
and children under the SKECHERS name.  SKECHERS footwear is
available in the United States via department and specialty
stores, Company-owned SKECHERS retail stores and its e-commerce
Web site, and over 100 countries and territories through the
Company's global network of distributors and subsidiaries in
Canada, Brazil, Chile, Japan and across Europe, as well as through
joint ventures in Asia.  For more information, please visit
http://www.skechers.com/,and follow the Company on Facebook
(http://www.facebook.com/SKECHERS/)and Twitter
(http://twitter.com/SKECHERSUSA/)


SKECHERS USA: Awaits Approval of "Morga" Class Suit Settlement
--------------------------------------------------------------
Skechers U.S.A., Inc. is awaiting court approval of its settlement
of the class action lawsuit initiated by Venus Morga, according to
the Company's August 9, 2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30,
2012.

On August 25, 2010, Venus Morga filed an action against the
Company in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of California, Venus Morga v. Skechers U.S.A., Inc., Case
No. 10 CV 1780 JM (MDD), on her behalf and on behalf of all others
similarly situated.  The complaint, as subsequently amended,
alleges that the Company's advertising for Shape-ups violates
California's Unfair Competition Law and the California Consumer
Legal Remedies Act, and constitutes a breach of express warranty.
The complaint seeks certification of a nationwide class, damages,
restitution and disgorgement of profits, declaratory and
injunctive relief, corrective advertising, and attorneys' fees and
costs.  On March 7, 2011, the Court stayed the action on the
ground that the outcomes in pending appeals in two unrelated
actions will significantly affect whether a class should be
certified.  On January 13, 2012, the plaintiff filed a motion to
lift the stay, which the Company opposed.  On April 16, 2012, this
action was transferred to the multidistrict litigation proceeding
pending in the Western District of Kentucky, entitled In re
Skechers Toning Shoe Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2308.
On May 16, 2012, the plaintiff in the actions filed by Tamara
Grabowski, her counsel, and counsel for the plaintiff in Morga
filed a motion for preliminary approval of the class action
settlement reached as part of the global settlement of
advertising-related claims.  The Court held a hearing on the
motion for preliminary approval of the class action settlement on
July 24, 2012, and August 3, 2012, and a further hearing was
scheduled for August 10, 2012.

If the Court grants preliminary and final approval of the class
action settlement, and the Court's decision is affirmed in the
event of an appeal, the settlement will resolve all domestic civil
claims concerning the Company's advertising of its toning shoes
that were or could have been brought by the class of consumers, as
defined in the settlement agreement, including the class claims
asserted in the Grabowski, Stalker, Tomlinson, Lovston, Hochberg,
Loss, Boatright and Scovil actions.  While the Company expects the
Court to grant preliminary and final approval of the class action
settlement, there are multiple class actions in several
jurisdictions and it cannot predict the outcome of the approval
motions.  If the motions to grant preliminary and final approval
of the class action settlement are denied or approval is reversed
on appeal, the Company cannot predict the outcome of the remaining
advertising class actions or a reasonable range of potential
losses or whether the outcome of the remaining advertising class
actions would have a material adverse impact on the Company's
results of operations or financial position in excess of the
existing $50 million settlement.

                    About Skechers USA, Inc.

SKECHERS USA, Inc., based in Manhattan Beach, California, designs,
develops and markets a diverse range of footwear for men, women
and children under the SKECHERS name.  SKECHERS footwear is
available in the United States via department and specialty
stores, Company-owned SKECHERS retail stores and its e-commerce
Web site, and over 100 countries and territories through the
Company's global network of distributors and subsidiaries in
Canada, Brazil, Chile, Japan and across Europe, as well as through
joint ventures in Asia.  For more information, please visit
http://www.skechers.com/,and follow the Company on Facebook
(http://www.facebook.com/SKECHERS/)and Twitter
(http://twitter.com/SKECHERSUSA/)


SKECHERS USA: Awaits Okay of Toning Shoes Suit Deal in Kentucky
---------------------------------------------------------------
Skechers U.S.A., Inc. is awaiting preliminary approval of the
settlement of a nationwide consumer class action relating to
toning shoes in Kentucky, according to the Company's August 9,
2012, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2012.

The Company's claims and advertising for its toning products
including for its Shape-ups are subject to the requirements of,
and routinely come under review by regulators including the U.S.
Federal Trade Commission ("FTC"), states' Attorneys General and
government and quasi-government regulators in foreign countries.
The Company is currently responding to requests for information
regarding its claims and advertising from regulatory and quasi-
regulatory agencies in several countries and is fully cooperating
with those requests.  While the Company believes that its claims
and advertising with respect to its core toning products are
supported by scientific tests, expert opinions and other relevant
data, and while the Company has been successful in defending its
claims and advertising in several different countries, it has
discontinued using certain test results and it periodically
reviews and updates its claims and advertising.  The regulatory
inquiries may conclude in a variety of outcomes, including the
closing of the inquiry with no further regulatory action,
settlement of any issues through changes in its claims and
advertising, settlement of any issues through payment to the
regulatory entity, or litigation.

As the Company disclosed in previous periodic SEC filings, the FTC
and Attorneys General for 44 states and the District of Columbia
("SAGs") had been reviewing the claims and advertising for Shape-
ups and the Company's other toning shoe products.  The Company
also disclosed that it has been named as a defendant in multiple
consumer class actions challenging its claims and advertising for
its toning shoe products, including Shape-ups.  As the Company
disclosed in its annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2011, and in its quarterly report on Form 10-Q for
the quarter ended March 31, 2012, the Company recorded a charge of
$50 million during the fourth quarter ended December 31, 2011, to
reserve for costs and potential other exposures relating to the
existing litigation and regulatory matters.

On May 16, 2012, the Company announced that it had settled all
domestic legal proceedings relating to advertising claims made in
connection with the marketing of its toning shoe products.  Under
the terms of the global settlement -- without admitting any fault
or liability, with no findings being made that the Company had
violated any law, and with no fines or penalties being imposed --
the Company made payments in the aggregate amount of $45 million
and expects to pay up to $5 million in class action attorneys'
fees to settle the domestic advertising class lawsuits and related
claims brought by the FTC and the SAGs.  The FTC Stipulated Final
Judgment was approved by the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Ohio on July 12, 2012.  Consent judgments in
44 of the 45 SAG actions have been approved and entered by courts
in those jurisdictions.  The Company is currently awaiting
preliminary approval of the nationwide consumer class action
settlement by the United States District Court for the Western
District of Kentucky.

The toning footwear category, including the Company's Shape-ups
products, has also been the subject of some media attention
arising from a number of consumer complaints and allegations of
injury while wearing Shape-ups.  The Company believes its products
are safe and is defending itself from these media stories and
injury allegations.  It is too early, however, to predict the
outcome of the ongoing inquiries relating to safety and whether
such an outcome will have a material effect on the Company's
advertising, promotional claims, business, results of operations
or financial position.

                    About Skechers USA, Inc.

SKECHERS USA, Inc., based in Manhattan Beach, California, designs,
develops and markets a diverse range of footwear for men, women
and children under the SKECHERS name.  SKECHERS footwear is
available in the United States via department and specialty
stores, Company-owned SKECHERS retail stores and its e-commerce
Web site, and over 100 countries and territories through the
Company's global network of distributors and subsidiaries in
Canada, Brazil, Chile, Japan and across Europe, as well as through
joint ventures in Asia.  For more information, please visit
http://www.skechers.com/,and follow the Company on Facebook
(http://www.facebook.com/SKECHERS/)and Twitter
(http://twitter.com/SKECHERSUSA/)


STATE FARM: Faces RICO Class Action Over Alleged Insurance Fraud
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bethany Krajelis, writing for The Madison St. Clair Record,
reports that three plaintiffs from Avery v. State Farm have filed
a new class action lawsuit, claiming that the insurance company
acted as the hub of an enterprise designed to defraud millions of
policyholders out of a $1 billion judgment.

Mark Hale, Todd Shadle and Carly Vickers Morse, all of whom live
out-of-state and were class members to the unsuccessful 1997 class
action suit against State Farm, brought their complaint in May in
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.

The trio's lawsuit, which remains pending, names State Farm;
William Shepherd, an attorney at the insurance company; Ed
Murnane, president of the Illinois Civil Justice League; and
Justice Lloyd Karmeier's campaign committee, Citizens for
Karmeier, as defendants.

On Sept. 26, Chief Judge David Herndon dismissed Citizens for
Karmeier as a defendant.

The plaintiffs filed notice to voluntarily dismiss the committee,
acknowledging in the footnote of a recently filed motion that
Citizens for Karmeier should be dismissed because it dissolved as
a political association several years ago.

In their class action suit that seeks damages, the plaintiffs
claim that State Farm and the other defendants violated the
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).

From 2003 to the present, they claim that the defendants created a
RICO enterprise "to enable State Farm to evade payment of a $1.05
billion judgment affirmed in favor of approximately 4.7 million
State Farm policyholders by the Illinois Appellate Court."

The defendants' scheme, the lawsuit asserts, was implemented in
two phases, the first of which involved recruiting, financing and
electing a candidate to the Supreme Court who would vote to
overturn the billion dollar judgment once elected.

They achieved their first goal, the complaint states, when Justice
Karmeier beat out Gordon Maag in the 2004 race for the Supreme
Court and nine months later, voted in favor of overturning the
judgment against State Farm.

According to the lawsuit, the defendants then turned to the second
phase of their scheme.

This, the suit states, occurred in 2005 and 2011, when State Farm
used the U.S. mail to file misrepresentations to the Supreme
Court.

In 2005, the plaintiffs asked the justices to vacate their
decision overturning the billion dollar judgment, claiming that
Justice Karmeier should have recused himself from the case based
on $350,000 in campaign donations he received from State Farm
employees.

The court refused and last year, a group of attorneys petitioned
the justices to vacate their decision because State Farm
"deliberately lied and misled this court."

In their 2011 petition, which was also unsuccessful, the attorneys
claimed an investigation revealed that Justice Karmeier's campaign
committee actually received more than $3 million in support from
State Farm.

They came to that figure by including $1 million that State Farm
allegedly funneled to Justice Karmeier through the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce and by treating the ICJL and its political action
committee, JUSTPAC, as components of Justice Karmeier's campaign.

The Madison County Record is owned by the Chamber's Institute for
Legal Reform.

The plaintiffs contend that when State Farm responded to the 2005
and 2011 filings, the company misrepresented its role in Justice
Karmeier's campaign, as well Messrs. Murnane and Shepherd's
involvement.

"To carry out and conceal this elaborate and covert scheme,
defendants created and conducted a continuing pattern and practice
of activity through an association-in-fact Enterprise consisting
of" the ICJL, the ICJL's executive committee led by Shepherd,
JUSTPAC and the Chamber of Commerce, the suit asserts.

Although these groups were not named as defendants, the plaintiffs
claim that they acted as State Farm's "vehicle" to recruit Justice
Karmeier, direct his campaign and ensure it was well-funded.

"Led by Murnane and Shepherd, the ICJL and its executive committee
were the 'glue' that held together the many pieces of State Farm's
judicial campaign contribution network," the complaint alleges.

From its inception, the complaint contends, class members in Avery
v. State Farm "were the targets of and ultimate victims of the
racketeering acts and the RICO enterprise -- stripped of hundreds
or even thousands of dollars each, seized of a class-wide judgment
totaling $1.05 billion which compensated them for their losses ---
as a proximate result of defendants' actions and the actions of
the enterprise participants."

The three plaintiffs filed their lawsuit on behalf of all of the
class members of Avery v. State Farm, which consisted of about 4.7
million State Farm policyholders.

The original class action suit was brought in Williamson County
and accused the insurance company of providing inferior parts for
vehicle repairs.

Jurors there sided with the plaintiffs and Williamson County
Circuit Judge John Speroni entered a judgment of slightly more
than $1 billion against State Farm.

The Fifth District Appellate Court affirmed and in 2005, the
Supreme Court reversed, overturning Judge Speroni's judgment.

According to the plaintiffs' suit, typical damage to an individual
class member in Avery v. State Farm ranged from several hundred
dollars to $2,500.

They asked the federal court in their new class action complaint
to award class members three times their actual damages on one or
both of their RICO claims, as well as attorneys' fees and
litigation costs and expenses.

Tennessee attorney W. Gordon Ball, who serves on the plaintiffs'
legal team, said his clients' RICO suit is very simple: "Shepherd,
State Farm and Murnane used the Illinois Civil Justice League as
an enterprise to basically buy an Illinois Supreme Court justice."

Saying that the Avery v. State Farm case "does have a life of its
own," Mr. Ball said the fate of his clients' complaint now rests
in the hands of Judge Herndon, who will eventually have to rule on
the defendants' motions to dismiss.

In addition to Mr. Ball, the plaintiffs are represented by
Tennessee attorney Charles Barrett and Louisiana attorney Patrick
Pendley.

Mr. Shepherd filed a motion to dismiss in July, offering several
reasons for dismissal.

One reason, Mr. Shepherd's motion states, is that federal district
courts don't have jurisdiction to review final civil judgments of
state courts.

"Plaintiffs' claims are 'inextricably intertwined' with the
Illinois Supreme Court decision in Avery and would impermissibly
require this Court to review that decision and hold that it was
improperly reached," Mr. Shepherd's motion contends.

Mr. Shepherd also claims that the plaintiffs failed to state a
claim and bring it in a timely manner.

According to his motion to dismiss, the plaintiffs' RICO claims
accrued in either 2005, when the Illinois Supreme Court vacated
the judgment, or in 2006, when the U.S. Supreme Court denied the
plaintiff's petition for certiorari.

As such, Mr. Shepherd asserts that the plaintiffs' claims were
time barred in either 2009 or 2010.

State Farm made similar arguments in its motion to dismiss.

Phil Supple, a spokesman for State Farm, noted that both the
Illinois and U.S. supreme courts have refused the plaintiffs'
previous attempts to reopen Avery v. State Farm.

"We feel confident in our legal position in court," he said,
adding that State Farm has until mid-October to respond to the
plaintiffs' opposition to the motions to dismiss.

Mr. Murnane, president of the ICJL, said the lawsuit "doesn't seem
to be any different from those that have already been rejected by
several courts," but declined to comment any further on the suit.

He was served with the complaint this month and said last week
that attorneys at Sidley Austin in Chicago will represent him in
the matter.

Court records show that Chicago attorneys Joseph Cancila Jr., J.
Timothy Eaton and James Gaughan, as well as Edwardsville attorney
Patrick Cloud, represent State Farm.

Belleville attorneys Russell Scott and Laura Oberkfell represent
Mr. Shepherd and St. Louis attorney Tony Martin represented the
now-dismissed Citizens for Karmeier.


STOP & SHOP: Recalls Late July Peanut Butter Sandwich Crackers
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Stop & Shop Supermarket Company, following a recall by Late
July Organic Snacks, announced it removed from sale organic mini
peanut butter sandwich crackers due to possible salmonella
contamination in the peanut butter.

The following products, with sell by dates of May 19, 2013,
through July 11, 2013, are included in this recall:

   * Late July Organic Snacks Mini Peanut Butter Sandwich
     Crackers, UPC 89044400070, 5 oz.;

   * Late July Organic Snacks Mini Peanut Butter Sandwich
     Crackers, UPC 89044400071, 1.125 oz.; and

   * Late July Organic Snacks Mini Peanut Butter Sandwich
     Crackers, UPC 89044400072, 9 oz.

No illnesses have been reported to date.  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.

Consumers looking for additional information on the recall may
call Late July Organic Snacks customer service at 888-857-6225.
In addition customers may call Stop & Shop Customer Service at
(800) 767-7772 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/


SUNLAND INC: Expands Recall of Almond Butter and Peanut Butter
--------------------------------------------------------------
Sunland, Inc. announced a voluntary recall of its Almond Butter
and Peanut Butter, which it has now expanded to include its Cashew
Butter, Tahini and Roasted Blanched Peanut Products.  This recall
is limited to products manufactured between May 1, 2012, and
September 24, 2012.  These products may be contaminated with
Salmonella, an organism that can cause serious and sometimes fatal
infections in young children, frail or elderly people, and those
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.

The voluntary recall was initiated after learning that between
June 11, 2012, and September 2, 2012, twenty-nine people reported
Salmonella Bredeney PFGE matching illnesses in approximately 18
states, including Washington, California, Arizona, Texas,
Louisiana, Missouri, Illinois, Minnesota, Michigan, Pennsylvania,
Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, North Carolina, Virginia,
Connecticut, New Jersey and Maryland, according to a report issued
on September 22, 2012, by the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC).

"There is nothing more important to us than the health and safety
of our customers, particularly the many families who enjoy our
peanut butter everyday.  While FDA, CDC, and State Health Agencies
investigate to confirm the cause of illnesses reported, as a
precautionary step, we have decided to voluntarily recall our
Almond Peanut and Cashew Butters, Tahini and Roasted Blanched
Peanut products manufactured between May 1, 2012 and
September 24, 2012.  If you purchased these products, do not eat
them. Please return the product to your supermarket for a full
refund or dispose of it," said Jimmie Shearer, President and CEO
of Sunland, Inc., in a statement.

The recall is being conducted in cooperation with the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration (FDA).  No other Sunland products are
affected by this recall.

The products were distributed nationally to numerous large
supermarket chains and were available for purchase on the
internet.

The specifics of the affected products are as follows: The UPC is
located on the side of the jar's label below the bar code.

UPC            Type of product                         Jar Size
---            ---------------                         --------
8523902334     Archer Farms Creamy Almond Butter         16 oz

8523902333     Archer Farms Peanut Butter with Flax      16 oz
                Seeds

3377610090     Earth Balance Natural Almond Butter       16 oz
                and Flaxseed

051379022518   fresh & easy Crunchy Almond Butter        16 oz

20003357       fresh & easy Organic Creamy Peanut        16 oz
                Butter with Sea Salt

20003364       fresh & easy Creamy Peanut Butter         18 oz

20003388       fresh & easy Organic Crunchy Peanut       16 oz
                Butter with Sea Salt

051379026431   fresh & easy Creamy Peanut Butter         40 oz

20003395       fresh & easy Creamy Almond Butter         16 oz

20003357       fresh & easy Organic Creamy Peanut        16 oz
                Butter with Sea Salt

20003371       fresh & easy Crunchy Peanut Butter        18 oz

2060140048     heinen's All Natural Peanut Butter,       16 oz
                Creamy

2060140047     heinen's All Natural Peanut Butter,       16 oz
                Crunchy

2060140046     heinen's Organic Peanut Butter, Creamy    16 oz

2060140045     heinen's Organic Peanut Butter, Crunchy   16 oz

3307915073     Joseph's Salt-Free No Sugar Added New     18 oz
                Crunchy Valencia Peanut Butter

3307915072     Joseph's Salt-Free No Sugar Added New     18 oz
                Creamy Valencia Peanut Butter

910053         Natural Value Creamy Peanut Butter/Salt   15 lb

910060         Natural Value Crunchy Peanut Butter/Salt  15 lb

5859500020     Naturally More Organic Peanut Butter      16 oz

5859500019     Naturally More Almond Butter              16 oz

5859500033     Naturally More Peanut Butter Crunchy      16 oz

5859500055     Naturally More Peanut Butter,             26 oz
                Gluten Free Vegan

5859500050     Naturally More Peanut Butter,             16 oz
                Gluten Free Vegan

7989311202     Open Nature Crunchy Peanut Butter         16 oz

7989311201     Open Nature Old Fashioned Creamy          16 oz
                Peanut Butter

5855200003     Peanut Power Butter, Original Formula     16 oz

5855200007     Peanut Power Butter, Original Formula      4 lb

4792100442     Serious Food, Silly Prices Almond         12 oz
                Butter Creamy

4792100439     Serious Food, Silly Prices Organic        16 oz
                No-Stir Peanut Butter, Crunchy

4792100438     Serious Food, Silly Prices Organic        16 oz
                No-Stir Peanut Butter, Creamy

4792100436     Serious Food, Silly Prices Organic        16 oz
                Peanut Butter, Creamy

4792100435     Serious Food, Silly Prices,               16 oz
                No-Stir Peanut Butter, Crunchy

4792100434     Serious Food, Silly Prices,               16 oz
                No-Stir Peanut Butter, Creamy

4792100432     Serious Food, Silly Prices,               16 oz
                Peanut Butter, Creamy

8506000004     Snaclite Power PB                         16 oz

7487500334     Sprouts Farmers Market Creamy             16 oz
                Peanut Butter, No Salt

7487500335     Sprouts Farmers Market Crunchy            16 oz
                Peanut Butter, No Salt

7487500336     Sprout's Creamy Peanut Butter             16 oz

7487500337     Sprout's Crunchy Peanut Butter            16 oz

7487500433     Sprout's Creamy Almond Butter             16 oz

7487500434     Sprout's Crunchy Almond Butter            16 oz

7487500431     Sprout's Creamy Peanut Butter             16 oz

4868787906     Sunland Natural Peanut Butter Crunchy     16 oz
                Valencia No Stir

4868786906     Sunland Natural Peanut Butter Creamy      16 oz
                Valencia No Stir

4868722906     Sunland Natural Peanut Butter Creamy      16 oz
                Salt Free Valencia

4868709915     Sunland Creamy Peanut Butter with         40 oz
                Sea Salt

4868726910     Sunland Creamy Peanut Butter              12 oz

062725         Sunland Dark Roast Creamy Peanut Butter   40 lb

4868730725     Sunland Organic Creamy Peanut Butter      40 lb

029725         Sunland Pecan Deluxe Creamy               40 lb
                Peanut Butter

028725         Sunland Pecan Deluxe Crunchy              40 lb
                Peanut Butter

26570          Sunland Creamy Dark Roast Peanut Butter  500 lb

4868726909     Sunland Creamy Peanut Butter              18 oz

4868767909     Sunland Natural Creamy Peanut Butter      18 oz

4868785920     Sunland Valencia Peanut Sauce             36 oz

22725          Sunland Creamy Peanut Butter              40 lb

22704          Sunland Creamy Peanut Butter               5 lb

4868722715     Sunland Organic Creamy Peanut Butter      40 lb

4868721722     Sunland Crunchy Peanut Butter             15 lb

48687009704    Sunland Natural Creamy Peanut Butter       5 lb

4868790301     Sunland Creamy Natural Stabilizer         50 lb
                Peanut Butter

87725          Sunland Crunchy Natural Stabilized        40 lb
                Peanut Butter

4868786724     Sunland Creamy Peanut Butter              35 lb

4868786704     Sunland Creamy No Stir Peanut Butter       5 lb

4868784301     Sunland Extra Stabilized Organic          50 lb
                Creamy Peanut Butter

21705          Sunland Crunchy Peanut Butter             40 lb

25704          Crunchy Sugar Butter                       5 lb

26704          Creamy Sugar Butter                        5 lb

072704         Sunland Almond Butter                      5 lb

003050         Dogsbutter RUC with Flax PB               16 oz

4868772906     Sunland Natural Almond Butter,            16 oz
                Creamy Roasted Almond

00989275       Trader Joe's Valencia Peanut Butter
                with Roasted Flaxseeds, Crunchy and Salted

00971119       Trader Joe's Valencia Creamy Salted       16 oz
                Peanut Butter with Sea Salt

00940795       Trader Joe's Almond Butter with           16 oz
                Roasted Flaxseeds, Crunchy & Salted

Updated to include the following products:

8523902336     Archer Farms Almond, Peanut &             16 oz
                Cashew Butter

8523920335     Archer Farms Creamy Cashew Butter         16 oz

051379022525   fresh & easy Creamy Cashew Butter         16 oz

003248         Fresh & Easy Creamy Peanut Butter Cups  72/2 oz

051379041625   fresh & easy goodness valencia Creamy      12/8
                Peanut Butter                       1.1 oz cups
                                                    in a carton

8099473873     Harry & David Crunchy Almond and          12 oz
                Peanut Butter

8099473871     Harry & David Creamy Banana               12 oz
                Peanut Spread

8099473872     Harry & David Creamy Raspberry            12 oz
                Peanut Spread

4792100444     Serious Food Silly Prices Tahini          12 oz

047730         Sunland Creamy Peanut Butter              30 lb

41330          Sunland Organic Valencia Roasted and      30 lb
                Blanched Peanuts

4868763325     Sunland Roasted and Blanched Runner       30 lb
                Peanuts

4868763326     Sunland Roasted and Blanched Bar          30 lb
                Ready Runner Peanuts

4868771725     Sunland Sesame Tahini                     40 lb

41323          Sunland Valencia Roasted Blanched         30 lb
                Salted

4868757906     Sunland Natural Mixed Nut Butter,         16 oz
                Crunchy Almonds and Peanuts

4868760906     Sunland Natural Peanut Butter, Creamy     16 oz
                Banana Spread

4868773906     Sunland Natural Peanut Butter, Creamy     16 oz
                Chocolate Spread

4868761906     Sunland Natural Peanut Butter, Creamy     16 oz
                Raspberry Spread

4868771906     Sunland Natural Tahini, Creamy Roasted    16 oz
                Sesame

4868732810     Sunland Organic Valencia Peanut Butter,   12 oz
                Creamy

4868731810     Sunland Organic Valencia Peanut Butter,   12 oz
                Crunchy

4868755810     Sunland Organic Valencia Peanut Butter,   12 oz
                Creamy Cherry Vanilla

4868754810     Sunland Organic Valencia Peanut Butter,   12 oz
                Creamy Dark Chocolate

4868747810     Sunland Organic Valencia Peanut Butter,   12 oz
                Crunchy Chipotle Chile

Picture of the Dogsbutter recalled products is available at:

         http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm321760.htm

Best-If-Used-By Dates: This recall applies to the above products
with Best-If-Used-By Dates between May 1, 2013, and September 24,
2013.  (Stamped on the side of the jar's label below the lid of
the jar.)

Consumers who have purchased Sunland's Almond Butter, Peanut
Butter, Cashew Butter, Tahini and Roasted Blanched peanut products
with the above UPC and Best-If-Used-By-Dates are urged to discard
the product immediately.  Consumers can contact the company at 1-
866-837-1018, which is operational 24 hours a day, for information
on the recall.  In addition, a consumer services representative is
available Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and
5:00 p.m. Mountain Time at (575) 356-6638.

Media representatives should contact Ms. Katalin Coburn, Vice
President for Media Relations, Sunland, Inc., at 805-796-3368.


TRI COUNTIES: Settles Assistant Branch Managers' Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------------
TriCo Bancshares on Sept. 27 disclosed that its principal
subsidiary, Tri Counties Bank, has entered into a tentative
settlement with a former employee who filed a class action lawsuit
against the Bank in the Superior Court of California, Kern County
on behalf of herself and a putative class of current and former
Bank employees serving as assistant branch managers seeking
undisclosed damages, alleging that the Bank improperly classified
its assistant branch managers as exempt employees under California
laws.  The lawsuit alleges claims for: failure to pay overtime
compensation; failure to provide meal periods; failure to provide
rest periods; failure to provide accurate wage statements; failure
to provide suitable seating; declaratory relief; accounting; and
unfair business practices in violation of Business and Professions
Code section 17200.

On September 26, 2012, after efforts to mediate the claim, the
Bank and the former employee agreed to settle the case in an
amount ranging from $2,039,500 to $2,500,000, depending primarily
on the number of class participants who file claims, and pending
approval by the court, including determination of the method to
allocate settlement payments among current and former employees
who are members of the defined settlement class, and the portion
of the total settlement allocable to attorney's fees and costs to
plaintiff's counsel.  On September 26, 2012, the Bank recorded a
$2,090,000 expense and accrued liability in anticipation of
approval of this settlement by the court and estimated related
payroll taxes.


UNITED STATES: Judge Okays $42.6MM FEMA Class Action Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Kunzelman, writing for The Associated Press, reports that
a federal judge gave his final approval on Sept. 27 to a $42.6
million class-action settlement between companies that made and
installed government-issued trailers after hurricanes in 2005 and
Gulf Coast storm victims who claim they were exposed to hazardous
fumes while living in the shelters.

U.S. District Judge Kurt Engelhardt ruled from the bench after
hearing from attorneys who brokered a deal resolving nearly all
remaining court claims over elevated levels of formaldehyde in
trailers provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency
following hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

Roughly 55,000 residents of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and
Texas will be eligible for shares of $37.5 million paid by more
than two dozen manufacturers.  They also can get shares of a
separate $5.1 million settlement with FEMA contractors that
installed and maintained the units.

Gerald Meunier, a lead plaintiffs' attorney, said the deal
provides residents with "somewhat modest" compensation but allows
both sides to avoid the expense and risks of protracted
litigation.

"Dollar amounts alone do not determine whether a settlement is
fair and reasonable," he said.

Jim Percy, a lawyer for the trailer makers, said Judge Engelhardt
would have had to try cases individually or transfer suits to
other jurisdictions if the settlement wasn't reached.

"It was not going to end quickly, and it was going to be even more
monumental for all the parties concerned," he said.

Formaldehyde, a chemical commonly found in building materials, can
cause breathing problems and is classified as a carcinogen.
Government tests on hundreds of trailers in Louisiana and
Mississippi found formaldehyde levels that were, on average, about
five times what people are exposed to in most modern homes.

FEMA isn't a party to the settlements and had downplayed
formaldehyde risks for months before those test results were
announced in February 2008. As early as 2006, trailer occupants
began reporting headaches, nosebleeds and difficulty breathing.

Only three plaintiffs have opted out of the settlement with the
trailer makers.  Judge Engelhardt opened the floor to objections
during the Sept. 27 hearing, but nobody spoke up.  The judge said
he didn't receive any formal, written objections, either.

But that doesn't mean the deal isn't a disappointment for many
residents who blame their illnesses on the cramped trailers they
occupied for months on end.

"We were told not to look for much," said Anthony Dixon, a New
Orleans resident who says he developed asthma while living in a
FEMA trailer for two years.

Dixon, 58, attended the hearing with his wife and mother to learn
more about the deal.

"We're glad to get it over with," he added.

Judge Engelhardt noted he received a letter from a woman whose 66-
year-old mother, Agnes Mauldin, of Mississippi, died of leukemia
in 2008 after living in a FEMA trailer.  Ms. Mauldin's daughter,
Lydia Greenlees, said the settlement offers "very little" for what
her family considers to be a wrongful death case.

"I am saddened about the settlement in that I feel like it makes a
mockery of my mother's life," Ms. Greenlees wrote.  "I don't want
anyone to think for one second that I view this settlement as a
fair trade for my mother's life. I do not."

Dan Balhoff, a court-appointed special master, will determine the
plaintiffs' awards. Up to 48 percent of the total settlement money
will be deducted for attorneys' fees and costs.  Payments are
expected to go out late this year or early next year.

Judge Engelhardt presided over three trials for claims against
FEMA trailer manufacturers and installers after he was picked in
2007 to oversee hundreds of consolidated lawsuits.  The juries in
all three trials sided with the companies and didn't award any
damages.

Plaintiffs' lawyers have accused the trailer makers of using
shoddy building materials and methods in a rush to meet FEMA's
unprecedented demand for temporary housing.

Mr. Meunier, however, said it was difficult for plaintiffs'
attorneys to prove a link between formaldehyde exposure and
residents' health problems because many trailers couldn't be
tested until months or even years after the fact.  Many residents
never sought treatment for their symptoms, he added.

"It was both challenging in the legal and factual sense," he said.

A group of companies that includes Gulf Stream Coach Inc., Forest
River Inc., Vanguard LLC and Monaco Coach Corp. will pay $20
million of the $37.5 million settlement with the trailer makers.

Shaw Environmental Inc., Bechtel Corp., Fluor Enterprises Inc. and
CH2M Hill Constructors Inc. are among the FEMA contractors that
agreed to pay shares of the separate $5.1 million settlement.

Only a handful of formaldehyde-related claims are still pending,
including those against FEMA by a group of Texas residents.


UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: To Settle Pepper-Spray Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------------
Fox2now reports that the University of California is offering to
pay $30,000 to each of 21 plaintiffs who were pepper-sprayed by a
police officer on the Davis campus last year, according to a
proposed settlement of a class-action lawsuit announced on Sept.
26.

A federal court hasn't yet approved the preliminary settlement, a
statement from the university president's office said.

The state's higher education system would also pay a total of
$250,000 to the plaintiffs' attorneys and would set aside $100,000
to pay up to $20,000 each to any individual who joins the class-
action suit and can prove he was pepper-sprayed or arrested during
incident in November, the university said.

The money would come from the school system's general liability
risk program, a self-insured fund, the president's office said.

The campus police officer who pepper-sprayed the protesters seated
at an Occupy encampment was no longer working at the school as of
late July, a university spokeswoman said this past summer.

She declined to specify whether the officer, Lt. John Pike, quit
or was let go.

"We can confirm he is no longer employed as of [Wednes]day . . .
but we cannot confirm anything else because of privacy
guidelines," said Claudia Morain, news service director at U.C.
Davis.

Video footage of Lt. Pike spraying student demonstrators with the
irritant at close range went viral, provoking widespread criticism
of school authorities and making him a target of Internet
ridicule.

The group of about a dozen protesters had sat down on a path with
their arms interlocked as police moved in to clear out the Occupy
encampment.  Officers forcibly removed the demonstrators after
they had been sprayed.

The demonstrators were protesting university privatization,
tuition increases and treatment of other demonstrators at the
University of California at Berkeley, according to the proposed
settlement.  But the Davis campus police declared the assembly
unlawful.

The plaintiffs alleged their civil rights were violated by being
subjected to unlawful arrest and excessive force, according to a
copy of settlement papers filed in court.

U.C. Davis placed Lt. Pike, a second officer and Campus Police
Chief Annette Spicuzza on administrative leave after the incident.

The pepper-spraying was an "objectively unreasonable" use of force
by campus police, a 190-page report by a University of California
task force said in April.

The report also accused Lt. Pike of misusing his now iconic
weapon.  The bright red pepper-spray canister he brandished to the
crowd before discharging was "not an authorized weapon" under
campus police guidelines and "is a higher pressure type of pepper
spray than what officers normally carry on their utility belts."

It was designed to be used at a distance of at least 6 feet.  "And
Lt. Pike did not use it correctly," the report found.

The task force also blamed members of the U.C. Davis leadership,
citing "systemic and repeated failures" among campus
administrators that "put officers in the unfortunate situation in
which they found themselves."

It described the campus police command structure as "very
dysfunctional," with Police Chief Spicuzza's lieutenants refusing
to follow orders and getting into "heated exchanges" with the
chief during the protests.

But Lt. Pike was primarily responsible for the "objectively
unreasonable decision" to pepper-spray the demonstrators, it
concluded.

Pranksters across the Internet have inserted the image of the
helmeted policeman into famous paintings, photos and movie scenes,
while the hacking collective Anonymous published Lt. Pike's home
and cell phone numbers online.


VALVE: Has Until Oct. 10 to Respond to Desist Order Over EULA
-------------------------------------------------------------
Sinan Kubba, writing for Joystiq, reports that Valve must respond
by October 10 to a desist order from the Federation of German
Consumer Organizations, otherwise the company faces a potential
lawsuit.  The Federation of German Consumer Organizations, or
VZBV, wants Valve to change Steam's recently updated end-user
license agreement (EULA), which prevents customers from bringing
class-action lawsuits against the service.

As Cinema Blend reports, the VZBV argues that users are coerced
into agreeing to the updated EULA, because if they don't they lose
access to their Steam accounts.  The VZBV also wants Valve to
enforce the European Court of Justice's ruling made in July, which
states that authors cannot oppose their 'used' digital download
software being resold.

Cinema Blend notes a suspicion that Steam's updated EULA is
designed to protect Valve from class-action lawsuits related to
the EU ruling.  The VZBV originally gave Valve until September 26
to respond to its desist order, but the organization later
extended the ultimatum to October 10.


VISA: NYACS Opposes Antitrust Class Action Settlement
-----------------------------------------------------
CSP Daily News reports that the New York Association of
Convenience Stores (NYACS) has added its voice to the growing list
of national, regional and state-level retailer organizations
opposing the proposed settlement of the retail industry's
longstanding antitrust litigation against major credit-card
companies.

"We whole-heartedly agree with the National Association of
Convenience Stores that the settlement, as proposed, fails to
resolve the core issues that gave rise to the class-action
lawsuit," said James Calvin, NYACS president. "This fight is about
infusing real competition and transparency into credit-card rate
setting and rule-making. Neither is addressed in this deal."

He added, "It's gratifying that the card companies want to pay
back some of the billions they've overcharged retailers.  But
there would be no long-term relief for retailers or consumers from
escalating swipe fees or unfair credit-card network rules in the
future.  Lacking such meaningful changes, this settlement is
unacceptable."

Based in Albany, NYACS is a private, not-for-profit organization
representing the interests of all 7,700 neighborhood mini-marts
and convenience stores across New York State.

Separately, the National Restaurant Association issued a statement
expressing opposition to the terms contained within a proposed
swipe-fee antitrust settlement:

"After careful and deliberative considerations, the National
Restaurant Association board of directors' executive committee
decided unanimously to reject the proposed settlement agreement on
interchange swipe fees," said Dawn Sweeney, president and CEO of
the National Restaurant Association.  "There is strong concern
that the proposed settlement agreement will not achieve the
litigation's most critical goal -- to fundamentally change a
broken marketplace in which swipe fees are set."

She added, "Without meaningful reform, there is concern that
restaurateurs -- many of whom are small businesses -- will
continue to be negatively impacted by the unfair, nontransparent
system that exists today."

The National Restaurant Association is one of 19 named class
plaintiffs, which includes six trade associations and 13
individual companies in In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and
Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation.  On July 13, the proposed
settlement agreement between the plaintiffs and defendants (Visa,
MasterCard and large U.S. banks) was announced and filed in
federal district court.

"The current payments system is so convoluted, the average
restaurateur has no idea exactly what they are paying and why they
are paying large amounts to accept credit and debit cards, which
are necessary in today's marketplace.  The proposed settlement
does not address those issues," said Ms. Sweeney.  "Restaurateurs
also have no ability to negotiate fees or terms of card
acceptance, and after digging into the details of the proposed
agreement, we have serious concerns that rather than correct those
fundamental flaws, it cements those flaws for decades to come."

Over the past few years, the National Restaurant Association has
worked to foster a fairer payments system for restaurateurs.
There have been significant achievements, with increased
transparency of card network rules and rates, and the passage of
federal legislation in 2010 that included debit-card fee reforms;
however, the association continues to pursue changes that will
create a fairer, more transparent system.

Founded in 1919, the National Restaurant Association is the
leading business association for the restaurant industry, which
comprises 970,000 restaurant and foodservice outlets and a
workforce of nearly 13 million employees.


WHOLE FOODS: Recalls Peanut Butter Chews and Treasure Trove Mix
---------------------------------------------------------------
Whole Foods Market is recalling Peanut Butter Power Chews and
Treasure Trove Mix, both sold as bulk items, in seven stores in
Florida and one store in southern California due to possible
Salmonella contamination.  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.

Below is a list of Whole Foods Market stores that were affected,
and the recalled products that were sold at those locations:

Whole Foods Market
Store Name       Address                   Recalled Product
----------       -------                   ----------------
Coral Gables     6701 Red Road             Treasure Trove Mix,
                  Coral Gables, FL          Bulk, PLU 6922

Coral Springs    810 University Drive      Treasure Trove Mix,
                  Coral Springs, FL         Bulk, PLU 6922

Naples           9101 Strada Place         Treasure Trove Mix,
                  Naples, Florida           Bulk, PLU 6922

Palm Beach       11701 Lake Victoria       Treasure Trove Mix,
Gardens          Gardens                   Bulk, PLU 6922
                  Palm Beach Garden, FL

Sarasota         1451 1st Street           Treasure Trove Mix,
                  Sarasota, Florida         Bulk, PLU 6922

Tampa            1548 N Dale Mabry Blvd.   Treasure Trove Mix,
                  Tampa, Florida            Bulk, PLU 6922

El Segundo       760 S Sepulveda Blvd.     Bulk Sweets Mix
                  El Segundo, California    (containing peanut
                                            butter power chews)
                                            PLU 9663

These products were sold from self-serve bulk bins and have no
label.  The recalled items were sold between May 1st and September
27th in the Florida and California Whole Foods Market stores
listed above.

No illnesses have been reported related to the bulk bin items.
This recall is in response to a recall by Sunridge Farms/Falcon
Trading who was supplied peanut butter by Sunland, Inc which has
been connected to 30 illnesses in 18 states.

Signs are posted in Whole Foods Market stores to notify customers
of this recall.  Consumers who have purchased bulk Treasure Trove
Mix or Bulk Sweets Mix containing peanut butter power chews in the
stores listed above should discard them, and may bring their
receipt to the place of purchase for a full refund.  Consumers
with questions may contact 512-542-0060 Monday to Friday 9:00 a.m.
to 5:00 p.m. Central Daylight Time.


XL FOODS: FSIS Expands Health Alert for Imported Canadian Beef
--------------------------------------------------------------
The USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is expanding
the Public Health Alert for XL Foods Inc. (Canadian Establishment
038) to include all beef and beef products produced on August 24,
27, 28, 29 and September 5.  FSIS was notified this evening that
XL Foods has expanded their recall to include all beef and beef
products produced on the above dates.

                    Information for Consumers

Because FSIS has been informed that all beef and beef
products produced on the above dates are being recalled by
XL Foods, the Agency is using this public health alert to make the
public aware that these products are considered adulterated and
should be returned to the place of purchase or destroyed.
Products subject to the recall include, but are not limited to,
steaks, roasts, mechanically tenderized steaks and roasts, and
ground beef.

Additional information for consumers and an updated retail
distribution list are posted on FSIS' Web site at:

  http://www.fsis.usda.gov/FSIS_Recalls/Open_Federal_Cases/index.asp

                    Information for Industry

FSIS has reason to believe, based on information provided by the
Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), that beef from cattle
slaughtered during the period associated with the recall was
produced under insanitary conditions that resulted in a high event
period (a period when the trim from carcasses exhibited an
unusually high frequency of positive findings for the possible
presence of E. coli O157:H7).  Therefore, all products produced on
the affected dates are considered adulterated and must be either
destroyed or verified as having received a full lethality
treatment.

CFIA is overseeing the effectiveness of the recall in Canada and
FSIS is overseeing the effectiveness in the United States.  FSIS
continues to verify that all receivers of affected beef from the
Canadian-initiated recall have been notified and have removed
product from commerce, and will take appropriate action if
prohibited activity is found.  FSIS will update the retail
consignee list as FSIS verifies information received during the
recall effectiveness verification process.

FSIS testing of raw boneless beef trim product from Canadian
Establishment 038, XL Foods, Inc., confirmed positive for E. coli
O157:H7 on September 3, 2012.  After alerting the CFIA of the
positive results, the agencies launched an investigation including
additional testing, and CFIA announced a recall by XL Foods, Inc.
of a variety of ground beef products on September 16.  FSIS also
issued a Public Health Alert (PHA) on September 20, 2012, provided
updated information on September 21 and September 26, 2012.  On
September 28, 2012, the CFIA notified FSIS that XL Foods is
recalling all product produced on August 24, 27, 28, 29 and
September 5.  This Public Health Alert applies to all beef and
beef products produced by Canadian Establishment 038, XL Foods,
Inc. on these dates.

                       General Information

FSIS issues Public Health Alerts to make the public aware of a
public health hazard.  FSIS is not announcing a recall at this
time because the goal of such an action is to have the
establishment most directly associated with producing adulterated
product remove the product from commerce.  In this case, the
establishment was XL Foods, Inc., a Canadian firm, and that recall
has been initiated in Canada.

E. coli O157:H7 is a potentially deadly bacterium that can cause
bloody diarrhea, dehydration, and in the most severe cases, kidney
failure.  The very young, seniors and persons with weak immune
systems are the most susceptible to foodborne illness.

FSIS advises all consumers to safely prepare their raw meat
products, including fresh and frozen, and only consume ground beef
that has been cooked to a temperature of 160 degrees F.  The only
way to confirm that ground beef is cooked to a temperature high
enough to kill harmful bacteria is to use a food thermometer that
measures internal temperature.

Consumers with food safety questions can "Ask Karen," the FSIS
virtual representative available 24 hours a day at AskKaren.gov.
The toll-free USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline 1-888-MPHotline (1-
888-674-6854) is available in English and Spanish and can be
reached from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. (Eastern Time) Monday through
Friday.  Recorded food safety messages are available 24 hours a
day.

       FSIS Updates Lists of Stores With Recalled Products

The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection
Service disclosed that certain stores in various states received
raw boneless beef trim products imported from Canada that have
been recalled by XL Foods Inc.

The FSIS says the list of store locations may not include all
retail locations that have received the recalled product or may
include retail locations that did not actually receive the
recalled product.  Therefore, the FSIS says, it is important that
consumers use the product-specific identification information
available at http://is.gd/f0JjbU,in addition to the list of
retail stores, to check meat or poultry products in the consumers'
possession to see if they have been recalled.

    Nationwide, State-Wide, or Area-Wide Distribution
    -------------------------------------------------
    Retailer Name      Location
    -------------      --------
    Albertson's        All locations in Oregon and Washington
                       State

    Baker's            Stores in Nebraska

    City Market        Stores in Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and
                       Wyoming

    Dillon's           Stores in Kansas and Missouri

    Food 4 Less        Stores in California, Illinois and
                       Indiana

    Foods Co.          Stores in California

    Fred Meyer         Nationwide

    Fry's              Stores in Arizona

    Gerbes             Stores in Kansas and Missouri

    Haggen NW Fresh    Stores in Washington and Oregon

    Hilander           Stores in Illinois and Indiana

    Jay C              Stores in Illinois and Indiana

    King Soopers       Stores in Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and
                       Wyoming

    Kroger             Stores in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia,
                       Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana,
                       Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, North
                       Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee,
                       Texas, Virginia and West Virginia

    Owen's             Stores in Illinois and Indiana

    Pay Less           Stores in Illinois and Indiana

    QFC                Nationwide

    Ralph's            Stores in California

    Safeway            Locations in Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and
                       Washington State

    Sam's Club         Locations in Alaska, Arizona, California,
                       Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada,
                       New Mexico, South Dakota, Texas, Utah,
                       Washington, and Wyoming

    Scott's            Stores in Illinois and Indiana

    Smith's Stores     Nationwide

    TOP Food and Drug  Stores in Washington and Oregon

    Specific Store-Wide Distribution (Stores and Location)
    ------------------------------------------------------
    Retailer      City and State
    --------      --------------
    Walmart       Sterling, Colorado
    Walmart       Chiefland, Florida
    Walmart       Beville Rd., Daytona Beach, Florida
    Walmart       Nova Rd., Daytona Beach, Florida
    Walmart       Dunnellon, Florida
    Walmart       13th St., Gainesville, Florida
    Walmart       12th Ave., Gainesville, Florida
    Walmart       Homosassa, Florida
    Walmart       Inverness, Florida
    Walmart       San Jose Blvd., Jacksonville, Florida
    Walmart       Normandy Blvd., Jacksonville, Florida
    Walmart       103rd St., Jacksonville, Florida
    Walmart       13490 Beach Blvd., Jacksonville, Florida
    Walmart       8808 Beach Blvd., Jacksonville, Florida
    Walmart       Lem Turner Rd., Jacksonville, Florida
    Walmart       Hutchinson Park Dr., Jacksonville, Florida
    Walmart       Phillips Hwy., Jacksonville, Florida
    Walmart       City Square Dr., Jacksonville, Florida
    Walmart       Shops Ln., Jacksonville, Florida
    Walmart       Atlantic Blvd., Jacksonville, Florida
    Walmart       Lake City, Florida
    Walmart       Live Oak, Florida
    Walmart       Macclenny, Florida
    Walmart       Middleburg, Florida
    Walmart       New Smyrna Beach, Florida
    Walmart       19th Avenue Rd., Ocala, Florida
    Walmart       Silver Springs Blvd., Ocala, Florida
    Walmart       SW Highway 200, Ocala, Florida
    Walmart       Blanding Blvd., Orange Park, Florida
    Walmart       County Road 220, Orange Park, Florida
    Walmart       Ormond Beach, Florida
    Walmart       Palatka, Florida
    Walmart       Palm Coast, Florida
    Walmart       Perry, Florida
    Walmart       Port Orange, Florida
    Walmart       St. Augustine, Florida
    Walmart       Starke, Florida
    Walmart       Summerfield, Florida
    Walmart       The Villages, Florida
    Walmart       Yulee, Florida
    Walmart       Baxley, Georgia
    Walmart       Brunswick, Georgia
    Walmart       Douglas, Georgia
    Walmart       Hazlehurst, Georgia
    Walmart       Hinesville, Georgia
    Walmart       Jesup, Georgia
    Walmart       Pooler, Georgia
    Walmart       Rincon, Georgia
    Walmart       Saint Marys, Georgia
    Walmart       Montgomery Xrd., Savannah, Georgia
    Walmart       Ogeechee Rd., Savannah, Georgia
    Walmart       Abercorn St., Savannah, Georgia
    Walmart       Statesboro, Georgia
    Walmart       Swainsboro, Georgia
    Walmart       Norman Dr., Valdosta, Georgia
    Walmart       Inner Perimeter Rd., Valdosta, Georgia
    Walmart       Vidalia, Georgia
    Walmart       Waycross, Georgia
    Albertson's   Coeur d'Alene, Idaho
    Albertson's   Hayden, Idaho
    Albertson's   Lewiston, Idaho
    Walmart       Council Bluffs, Iowa
    Walmart       Denison, Iowa
    Walmart       Le Mars, Iowa
    Walmart       Sioux Center, Iowa
    Walmart       Singing Hills Blvd., Sioux City, Iowa
    Walmart       Floyd Blvd., Sioux City, IA-Iowa
    Walmart       Spencer, Iowa
    Walmart       Spirit Lake, Iowa
    Walmart       Storm Lake, Iowa
    Walmart       Colby, Kansas
    Walmart       Concordia, Kansas
    Walmart       Dodge City, Kansas
    Walmart       Garden City, Kansas
    Walmart       Goodland, Kansas
    Walmart       Great Bend, Kansas
    Walmart       Hays, Kansas
    Walmart       Liberal, Kansas
    Walmart       Dilworth, Minnesota
    Walmart       Marshall, Minnesota
    Walmart       Montevideo, Minnesota
    Walmart       Redwood Falls, Minnesota
    Walmart       Worthington, Minnesota
    Walmart       Beatrice, Nebraska
    Walmart       Bellevue, Nebraska
    Walmart       Blair, Nebraska
    Walmart       Chadron, Nebraska
    Walmart       Columbus, Nebraska
    Walmart       Crete, Nebraska
    Walmart       Fairbury, Nebraska
    Walmart       Fremont, Nebraska
    Walmart       No. Diers Ave., Grand Island, Nebraska
    Walmart       S Locust St., Grand Island, Nebraska
    Walmart       Gretna, Nebraska
    Walmart       Hastings, Nebraska
    Walmart       Kearney, Nebraska
    Walmart       Lexington, Nebraska
    Walmart       N 27th St., Lincoln, Nebraska
    Walmart       Andermatt Dr., Lincoln, Nebraska
    Walmart       N 85th St., Lincoln, Nebraska
    Walmart       Mccook, Nebraska
    Walmart       Norfolk, Nebraska
    Walmart       North Platte, Nebraska
    Walmart       N 99th St., Omaha, Nebraska
    Walmart       Wright St., Omaha, Nebraska
    Walmart       S 72nd St., Omaha, Nebraska
    Walmart       W Maple Rd., Omaha, Nebraska
    Walmart       L St., Omaha, Nebraska
    Walmart       Papillion, Nebraska
    Walmart       Seward, Nebraska
    Walmart       Sidney, Nebraska
    Walmart       South Sioux City, Nebraska
    Walmart       York, Nebraska
    Walmart       Fredonia, New York
    Walmart       Hamburg, New York
    Walmart       Lakewood, New York
    Walmart       Rock Island PI, Bismarck, North Dakota
    Walmart       Skyline Blvd., Bismarck, North Dakota
    Walmart       Bottineau, North Dakota
    Walmart       13th Ave. S, Fargo, North Dakota
    Walmart       55th Ave. S, Fargo, North Dakota
    Walmart       Grand Forks, North Dakota
    Walmart       Jamestown, North Dakota
    Walmart       Minot, North Dakota
    Walmart       Wahpeton, North Dakota
    Walmart       Akron, Ohio
    Walmart       Alliance, Ohio
    Walmart       Ashland, Ohio
    Walmart       Ashtabula, Ohio
    Walmart       Aurora, Ohio
    Walmart       Austintown, Ohio
    Walmart       Avon, Ohio
    Walmart       Bedford, Ohio
    Walmart       Cambridge, Ohio
    Walmart       Atlantic Blvd. NE, Canton, Ohio
    Walmart       Tuscarawas St. W, Canton, Ohio
    Walmart       Chardon, Ohio
    Walmart       Brookpark Rd., Cleveland, Ohio
    Walmart       Steelyard Dr., Cleveland, Ohio
    Walmart       Mayfield Rd., Cleveland Heights, Ohio
    Walmart       Cortland, Ohio
    Walmart       Coshocton, Ohio
    Walmart       East Liverpool, Ohio
    Walmart       Eastlake, Ohio
    Walmart       Elyria, Ohio
    Walmart       Fairlawn, Ohio
    Walmart       Kent, Ohio
    Walmart       Lorain, Ohio
    Walmart       Macedonia, Ohio
    Walmart       Madison, Ohio
    Walmart       Marietta, Ohio
    Walmart       Massillon, Ohio
    Walmart       Medina, Ohio
    Walmart       Middlefield, Ohio
    Walmart       Millersburg, Ohio
    Walmart       New Philadelphia, Ohio
    Walmart       North Canton, Ohio
    Walmart       North Olmsted, Ohio
    Walmart       Norwalk, Ohio
    Walmart       Oberlin, Ohio
    Walmart       Parma, Ohio
    Walmart       Port Clinton, Ohio
    Walmart       Ravenna, Ohio
    Walmart       Saint Clairsville, Ohio
    Walmart       Salem, Ohio
    Walmart       Sandusky, Ohio
    Walmart       Steubenville, Ohio
    Walmart       Stow, Ohio
    Walmart       Streetsboro, Ohio
    Walmart       Strongsville, Ohio
    Walmart       Wadsworth, Ohio
    Walmart       Wooster, Ohio
    Walmart       Doral Dr., Youngstown, Ohio
    Walmart       Goldie Rd., Youngstown, Ohio
    Walmart       Maple Ave., Zanesville, Ohio
    Walmart       Maysville Pike, Zanesville, Ohio
    Walmart       Ada, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Altus, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Anadarko, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Ardmore, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Chickasha, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Duncan, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Durant, Oklahoma
    Walmart       El Reno, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Elk City, Oklahoma
    Walmart       NW Sheridan Rd., Lawton, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Quannah Parker Trl., Lawton, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Madill, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Midwest City, Oklahoma
    Walmart       501 SW 19th St., Moore, Oklahoma
    Walmart       640 SE 4th St., Moore, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Mustang, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Newcastle, Oklahoma
    Walmart       333 N Interstate Dr., Norman, Oklahoma
    Walmart       601 12th Ave. NE, Norman, Oklahoma
    Walmart       5401 Tinker Diagonal St., Oklahoma City, OK
    Walmart       6100 W Reno Ave, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
    Walmart       100 East I-240 Service Rd., Oklahoma City, OK
    Walmart       1500 SW 59th St., Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
    Walmart       6000 NW 23rd St., Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
    Walmart       911 SW 104th St., Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
    Walmart       9011 NE 23rd St., Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
    Walmart       2217 NW 23rd St., Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
    Walmart       4420 S Western Ave., Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Pauls Valley, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Purcell, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Sulphur, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Weatherford, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Yukon, Oklahoma
    Walmart       Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Belle Vernon, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Butler, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Carnegie, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Clarion, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Corry, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Cranberry, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Cranberry Twp, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Delmont, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Edinboro, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Downs Dr., Erie, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       W 23rd St., Erie, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       2711 Elm St., Erie, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Gibsonia, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Greensburg, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Greenville, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Harborcreek, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Hermitage, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Kittanning, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Meadville, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Monaca, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Natrona Heights, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       New Castle, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       North Huntingdon, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       North Versailles, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Tarentum, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Titusville, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Uniontown, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Warren, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Washington, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Waynesburg, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       West Mifflin, Pennsylvania
    Walmart       Aguadilla, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Barceloneta, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Carr 177, Bayamon, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Carr 167, Bayamon, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Rafael Cordero Ave., Caguas, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Centro Comercial Plaza, Caguas, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Carr Pr 52 And Pr 156, Caguas, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Canovanas, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Caparra, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Parque Escorial, Carolina, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Monserrate Ste. 1, Carolina, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Cayey, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Ceiba, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Coamo, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Corozal, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Dorado, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Guayama, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Santa Ana, Guaynabo, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Plaza Guaynabo, Guaynabo, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Hatillo, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Humacao, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Juncos, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Levittown, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Luquillo, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Manati, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Intersection Pr-2 & Pr-52, Ponce, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       #333 Carr #14, Ponce, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Rio Grande, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       San Patricio, Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Carr 176 Cupey, Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Gran Bulevar, Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Salinas, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       San Lorenzo, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Santa Isabel, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Toa Alta, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Trujillo Alto, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Utuado, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Vega Alta, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Villalba, Puerto Rico
    Walmart       Beaufort, South Carolina
    Walmart       Hardeeville, South Carolina
    Walmart       Hilton Head, South Carolina
    Walmart       Aberdeen, South Dakota
    Walmart       Brookings, South Dakota
    Walmart       Huron, South Dakota
    Walmart       Mitchell, South Dakota
    Walmart       Pierre, South Dakota
    Walmart       Louise Ave., Sioux Falls, South Dakota
    Walmart       Arrowhead Pkwy., Sioux Falls, South Dakota
    Walmart       Vermillion, South Dakota
    Walmart       Watertown, South Dakota
    Walmart       Yankton, South Dakota
    Walmart       Childress, Texas
    Walmart       Gainesville, Texas
    Walmart       Pampa, Texas
    Walmart       Vernon, Texas
    Walmart       Greenbriar Rd., Wichita Falls, Texas
    Walmart       Central Fwy., Wichita Falls, Texas
    Walmart       Lawrence Rd., Wichita Falls, Texas
    Walmart       Clarksburg, West Virginia
    Walmart       Fairmont, West Virginia
    Walmart       Mason, West Virginia
    Walmart       Four H Camp Rd., Morgantown, West Virginia
    Walmart       University Town Ctr, Morgantown, West Virginia
    Walmart       Moundsville, West Virginia
    Walmart       New Martinsville, West Virginia
    Walmart       Parkersburg, West Virginia
    Walmart       Ripley, West Virginia
    Walmart       Spencer, West Virginia
    Walmart       Summersville, West Virginia
    Walmart       Triadelphia, West Virginia
    Walmart       Vienna, West Virginia
    Walmart       Weirton, West Virginia
    Walmart       Weston, West Virginia


VIVUS INC: Judge Dismisses Qnexa Shareholder Class Action
---------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that a federal judge dismissed a
shareholder complaint alleging that Vivus misrepresented the
prospects of its proposed obesity drug, Qnexa.

A copy of the Order Granting Motion to Dismiss in Kovtun, et al.
v. Vivus, Inc., et al., Case No. 10-cv-04957 (N.D. Calif.), is
available at:

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/09/28/obesity.pdf


                           *********

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  * * *