CAR_Public/131108.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Friday, November 8, 2013, Vol. 15, No. 222

                             Headlines


AEROPOSTALE INC: Court Denies Bid to Dismiss Securities Suit
APPLE INC: "Hilton" Class Action Moved to C.D. Calif.
ARIAD PHARMA: Suspends Sales of Iclusiq Over Blood Clot Risks
BALLY TECHNOLOGIES: Faces Lawsuit Over Plan to Acquire SHFL
BIOSYNTECH INC: Directors Facing Class Suit in Quebec Court

BUCKEYE TECHNOLOGIES: Shareholder Litigation Now Dismissed
CHINA GREEN AGRICULTURE: Settles Securities Suit for $2.5-Mil.
CONAGRA FOODS: Dec. 11 Final Approval Hearing in Alexia Settlement
CONTANGO OIL: Faces Lawsuit Over Planned Merger With Crimson
DELL INC: Court Denies Expedited Discovery in Suit Over Merger

DELL INC: Faces Alleged Securities Violations Suit in Texas Court
DFC GLOBAL: Canadian Unit Wants Arbitration in "Usury" Lawsuit
DFC GLOBAL: NMM Wants Arbitration in Suit Over Short-Term Loans
DYCOM INDUSTRIES: Reported $0.5-Mil Pre-Tax Settlement Charge
DYCOM INDUSTRIES: Former Employee Sues UtiliQuest Unit in Calif.

ENVIVIO INC: Lawsuits Over IPO Still Pending
FLEETMATICS GROUP: Seeks Dismissal of Suit Over Phone Recording
G4S SECURE: Settlement Reached in Wrongful Termination Suit
HAIN CELESTIAL: NY Court Dismisses Suit by Morrison and Kist
INDEPENDENT SAVINGS: Bifurcation Bid in "Lankhorst" Suit Denied

INTUIT INC: Settlement Reached in "Smith" and "Quildon" Cases
J. CREW GROUP: Faces Complaint for Sending Unwanted Advertisements
JOHN B. SANFILIPPO: Accord in "Cardenas" Approved on Final Basis
JOHNS HOPKINS: Settlement Negotiations to Begin Before Year-End
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Agrees to Pay $2.2MM to Settle Kickback Claims

K12 INC: Virginia Court Approves Settlement of Hoppaugh Suit
KEYUAN PETROCHEMICALS: Suit by Rosen Law Firm in Discovery
LULULEMON ATHLETICA: Facing Several Suits Over Sheer Luon Issue
LULULEMON ATHLETICA: Awaits Approval of Settlement in Labor Suit
MERACORD LLC: "Lomax" Class Action Transferred to W.D. Wash.

MERCK SHARP: Dec. 13 Hearing on $32 Million Vioxx Settlement
MICHAELS STORES: Settles Suit Over "Collection" of Personal Info
NATIONAL TECHNICAL SYSTEMS: Named Defendant in Merger Litigation
ROSS STORES: Employment Lawsuits Pending as of August 3
RUE21 INC: Court Tosses Suit Over Merger With Apax Unit

SCAVONE PLUMBING: Faces Charges Over Improper Asbestos Disposal
TILLY'S INC: Court Narrows "Christiansen" Class Suit
TILLY'S INC: Appeals Order Denying Arbitration Bid in "Rebolledo"
TILLY'S INC: Briefing Set on Class Cert. Bid in "Lyddy" Suit
ULTA SALON: Faces Suit Alleging California Labor Law Violations

WEIGHT WATCHERS: "Burke" Class Action Dismissed Without Prejudice

* CPSC Mulls Rules to Ban Magnetic Toy Balls From U.S. Market


                        Asbestos Litigation


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Lawsuit Trends Research Headlines Chamber Summit
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Toxic Dust Found in Burned Arizona Hotel Rubble
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Weirton Fibro Abatement Passed
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Gwydir Mayor Responds to Alleged Fibro Dumping
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Skegness Hotel Fined GBP39K Over Fibro Exposure

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Department of Energy Fined for Removal Violations
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Former Parmatown Mall Gets $2MM for Fibro Removal
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Clinical Tests to Control Mesothelioma Cancer
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Belfast Trust Fined for Fibro Failings
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Warning for NSW Bushfire Zones

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Abatement Needed at Expo Pool
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Family Blames Mother's Lung Cancer to Fibro
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Woman Blames Fibro Exposure for Cancer
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Courthouse Fibro Forces Murder Trial Move
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Toxic Dust Danger in Gas Masks, Warns MP

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Removal Part of $78MM Renovation
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Toxic Dust Closes 3 Turcot Work Sites
ASBESTOS UPDATE: GTAC Said Fibro Claim Jumping to 'Conclusions'
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Halts Roof Work at Ottawa Museum
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Black River Board Hires Firm for Abatement Work

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Complaint Exposes Tension in Benton County
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Over-Sensitivity to Fibro May Have Led to Death
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Pupils Kept Off U.K. School in Fibro Leak Fears
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Toxic Dust Removed From Jezzine Barracks Site
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro-Contaminated St. Peter's Coolangatta Closes

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Historic Marlow Rowing Club to be Demolished
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Found at SEW Building Site in Frankston
ASBESTOS UPDATE: AAT Warns of Potential Ticking Timebomb
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Monroe Couple Fined for Improper Fibro Handling
ASBESTOS UPDATE: EPA Fines Former Winchester Hotel Owner

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fla. Court Upholds Verdict v. Union Carbide
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Calif. Court Dismisses Claims v. Parker Hannifin
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Company Charged Over Christchurch Hospital Fibro
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Contractor Accused of Dumping Fibro in Cellar
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Center Urges Auto Mechanics to Call for Meso Info

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Pauses Georgetown Clean-up
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Wash. Court Remands Suit v. Crane Co.
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Md. Court Allows "Every Exposure" Testimony
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Deadly Dust in Warwick Student Bedrooms
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Hurdle in NBN Broadband Rollout

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Forces North Oxford Church to Close
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 177 Cases Consolidated With NY Inmates Class Suit
ASBESTOS UPDATE: La. Court Denies Bids to Dismiss Widow's Suit
ASBESTOS UPDATE: "McMann" Suit Remanded to Wash. State Court
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Calif. Court Affirms Ruling in "Pfeifer" Suit

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ruling in Cleaver-Brooks Insurance Suit Affirmed
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Quigley Attys' Final Fee Applications Allowed
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Petition for Writ of Mandate in PI Suit Denied
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ruling on Taxing Expert Witness Fees Affirmed
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Quigley Company's Plan Declared Effective

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Specialty Products Must Have PI Claims Deadline


                             *********


AEROPOSTALE INC: Court Denies Bid to Dismiss Securities Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
A U.S. court on March 25, 2013, denied a motion to dismiss a class
action lawsuit alleging violations of the federal securities laws
against Aeropostale, Inc., according to the Company's Form 10-Q
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarterly period ended August 3, 2013.

In October 2011, Aeropostale, Inc. and senior executive officers
Thomas P. Johnson and Marc D. Miller were named as defendants in
an action amended in February 2012, City of Providence v.
Aeropostale, Inc., et al., No. 11-7132, a class action lawsuit
alleging violations of the federal securities laws. The lawsuit
was filed in New York federal court on behalf of purchasers of
Aeropostale securities between March 11, 2011 and August 18, 2011.
The lawsuit alleges that the defendants made materially false and
misleading statements regarding the Company's business and
prospects and failed to disclose that Aeropostale was experiencing
declining demand for its women's fashion division and increasing
inventory. A motion to dismiss was denied on March 25, 2013. In
the opinion of management, disposition of this matter is not
expected to have a material effect on the Company's financial
positions, results of operations or cash flows. We are vigorously
defending this matter.

Also in October 2011, Aeropostale directors and/or senior
executive officers Julian R. Geiger, Ronald R. Beegle, Robert B.
Chavez, Michael J. Cunningham, Evelyn Dilsaver, John Haugh, Karin
Hirtler-Garvey, John D. Howard, Thomas P. Johnson, and David B.
Vermylen were named as defendants in Bell v. Geiger, et al., No.
652931/2011, a shareholder derivative lawsuit filed in New York
state court seeking relief derivatively on behalf of Aeropostale.
The action alleges that the defendants breached their fiduciary
duties to Aeropostale between February 3, 2011 and August 3, 2011
by failing to establish and maintain internal controls that would
have prevented the Company from disseminating allegedly false and
misleading and inaccurate statements and other information to
shareholders, and to manage and oversee the Company. As a result,
plaintiff alleges that the defendants exposed the Company to
potential liability in the federal securities class action
lawsuit.

In February 2012, current and former Aeropostale directors and/or
senior executive officers Mindy Meads, Bodil Arlander, Julian
Geiger, Karin Hirtler-Garvey, Ronald Beegle, Robert Chavez,
Michael Cunningham, Evelyn Dilsaver, John Haugh, John Howard,
Thomas Johnson, Arthur Rubinfeld, and David Vermylen were named as
defendants in The Booth Family Trust v. Meads, et al., No.
650594/2012, a shareholder derivative lawsuit filed in New York
state court, seeking relief derivatively on behalf of Aeropostale.
As in Bell, this action alleges that the defendants breached their
fiduciary duties to Aeropostale by failing to establish and
maintain internal controls that would have prevented the Company
from disseminating allegedly false and misleading and inaccurate
statements and other information to shareholders, and to manage
and oversee the Company. As a result, and as in Bell, plaintiff
alleges that the defendants have exposed the Company to losses and
damages, including civil liability from the securities class
action suit described above.

On April 24, 2012, the New York Supreme Court, New York County,
issued an Order consolidating and staying the Bell and Booth
Actions pending a ruling on the motion to dismiss filed in the
City of Providence federal securities class action. Following
denial of the motion to dismiss in the federal securities class
action, plaintiff filed an amended complaint in the consolidated
Bell/Booth action. Defendants have moved to dismiss that
complaint.

In January 2012, Sajid Karsan, who identifies himself as a
stockholder of Aeropostale, demanded that the Aeropostale Board of
Directors conduct a thorough investigation concerning possible
claims for breach of fiduciary duty, insider trading, abuse of
control, gross mismanagement, and unjust enrichment against the
following current and former directors and officers: Thomas P.
Johnson, Marc D. Miller, Julian R. Geiger, Ronald R. Beegle,
Robert B. Chavez, Michael J. Cunningham, Evelyn Dilsaver, John
Haugh, Karin Hirtler-Garvey, John D. Howard, David B. Vermylen,
Ross Citta, Mindy Meads, Mary Pile, Barbara Pindar, and Edward
Slezak, and that a lawsuit be filed on behalf of Aeropostale
against each of the named individuals, if warranted. On May 2,
2012, the outside, non-management directors on Aeropostale's Board
determined to refuse the demand that a lawsuit be filed against
these individuals.

Aeropostale, Inc., is a mall-based, specialty retailer of casual
apparel and accessories, principally targeting 14 to 17 year-old
young women and men through its Aeropostale stores and 4 to 12
year-old kids through its P.S. from Aeropostale stores. P.S. from
Aeropostale products can be purchased in P.S. from Aeropostale
stores, in certain Aeropostale stores, and online at www.ps4u.com.
As of January 28, 2012, it operated 986 Aeropostale stores,
consisting of 918 stores in 50 states and Puerto Rico, 68 stores
in Canada, as well as 71 P.S. from Aeropostale stores in 20
states. In addition, pursuant to a licensing agreement, it
operated 14 Aeropostale and P.S. from Aeropostale stores in Middle
East and South East Asia. In November 2012, the Company acquired
online women's fashion footwear and apparel retailer GoJane.com
(GoJane).


APPLE INC: "Hilton" Class Action Moved to C.D. Calif.
-----------------------------------------------------
District Judge Edward M. Chen issued an order transferring to the
Central District of California the case captioned DEBRA HILTON, on
Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v.
APPLE INC., Defendant, NO. C-13-2167 EMC, (C.D. Cal.).

The Court issued an order granting-in-part Defendant Apple Inc.'s
Motion to Dismiss or Stay Proceedings on October 1, 2013. The
Court concluded that the first-to-file rule applied. Specifically,
the Court concluded that the case of Missaghi v. Apple Inc., et
al., No. 13-cv-2003-GAF, currently proceeding before Judge Gary
Feess in the Central District of California, is an earlier filed
action which encompasses the subject matter and parties of the
instant case. However, the Court indicated that it was inclined to
transfer this action rather than dismiss or stay the case pending
resolution of Missaghi. Accordingly, the Court issued an order to
show cause as to why this action should not be transferred to the
Central District of California. On October 10, 2013, the parties
filed a joint case management statement which included their
responses to the order to show cause.  The Plaintiff opposed
transfer arguing, among other things, that Missaghi likely will be
dismissed in the coming weeks and that the parties have already
agreed to attend private mediation in December 2013.

According to Judge Chen's October 15, 2013 Order available at
http://is.gd/I54CJCfrom Leagle.com, the first to file rule was
developed to "serve[] the purpose of promoting efficiency" and to
"avoid placing an unnecessary burden on the federal judiciary."
The Court finds that these principles would be best served by
transferring the action to the Central District of California
where it may be able to give this case coordinated treatment with
Missaghi. Even if Missaghi is dismissed in the near future without
leave to amend, this action would still be before a court which
has gained experience with the allegations relating to the iPhone
4 and 4S and the applicable legal principles involved by virtue of
ruling on two substantive motions to dismiss, Judge Chen said.
Accordingly, judicial efficiency is served by transfer, he said.


ARIAD PHARMA: Suspends Sales of Iclusiq Over Blood Clot Risks
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Associated Press reports that Ariad Pharmaceuticals is
suspending sales of its leukemia drug Iclusig because of
heightened concerns that patients could suffer from life-
threatening blood clots.

The Cambridge, Mass., company said on Oct. 31 that the Food and
Drug Administration asked it to stop marketing the drug on
Oct. 30.  The FDA says 48 percent of patients treated with the
drug in an early-stage trial and 24 percent who took the drug in a
mid-stage trial have suffered serious side effects, including
heart attacks and strokes, and some patients died as a result.

"At this time, FDA cannot identify a dose level or exposure
duration that is safe," the agency said in a press release.  The
FDA some patients' serious side effects occurred as little as two
weeks after patients started taking Iclusig.

Shares of Ariad Pharmaceuticals Inc. have lost three-quarters of
their value, trading at their lowest level in three years, since
concerns about an increased rate of side effects were disclosed
earlier this month.  The stock lost another $1.55, or 39 percent,
to $2.41 on Oct. 31.

Araid said it wants to resume selling the drug, and it's
negotiating with the FDA about changes to prescribing information
and new ways to manage risks.  But Citi Investment Research
analyst Jonathan Eckard said he thinks Iclusig will be off the
market for several months, if not longer.  He said Iclusig's
market will be very limited if Ariad is able to resume sales.

The FDA said it can't say how many of the side effects are related
to treatment with Iclusig because those trials did not compare the
drug to an alternative treatment.  But the rising rate of side
effects and their pattern suggests that many of them are connected
to Iclusig, the FDA said.

In December the FDA approved Iclusig as a treatment for two rare
types of leukemia.  It's a daily pill and Ariad's only approved
product and brought in $13.9 million in sales in the second
quarter.

On Oct. 9 the company disclosed a higher rate of side effects from
Iclusig related to blood clots.  Ariad said that after two years
of research in a study, 11.8 percent of patients treated with the
drug suffered a serious blood clot in an artery, worsening from
the 8 percent rate after 11 months.  The FDA halted enrollment of
patients in new studies, and on Oct. 18 Ariad said it is ending a
late-stage trial of the drug because of those side effects.


BALLY TECHNOLOGIES: Faces Lawsuit Over Plan to Acquire SHFL
-----------------------------------------------------------
A number of putative class actions and shareholder derivative
actions challenging a transaction to acquire SHFL entertainment,
Inc. have been filed against Bally Technologies, Inc., according
to Bally's Aug. 28, 2013, Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2013.

On July 16, 2013, the Company entered into a definitive agreement
to acquire SHFL entertainment at a per share price of $23.25 in
cash for total consideration of approximately $1.3 billion.  The
transaction is subject to approval by SHFL's shareholders,
required regulatory and other approvals and customary closing
conditions.  The Company has obtained committed financing to
complete the acquisition and the transaction is not subject to a
financing contingency.

A number of putative class actions and shareholder derivative
actions challenging the transaction have been filed against Bally
Technologies, Inc., Manhattan Merger Corp., SHFL, and SHFL's
directors in various jurisdictions that generally allege breach of
fiduciary duties and that the entity defendants aided and abetted
those alleged breaches, and seek, among other relief, declaratory
judgment and an injunction against the transaction.

The outcome of these lawsuits cannot be predicted with any
certainty. An adverse judgment for monetary damages could have a
material adverse effect on the operations and liquidity of the
Company. A preliminary injunction could delay or jeopardize the
completion of the transaction, and an adverse judgment granting
permanent injunctive relief could indefinitely enjoin completion
of the transaction. The Company believes that the claims asserted
against it in the lawsuits are without merit and is defending
against them vigorously. Additional lawsuits arising out of or
relating to the transaction may be filed in the future.


BIOSYNTECH INC: Directors Facing Class Suit in Quebec Court
-----------------------------------------------------------
Eight individuals, who were members of the Board of Directors of
BioSyntech Inc., were named as defendants in a class action
commenced by Vincent Blais.  The individual defendants are Joyce
Tsang, Karen Hong, Eric Linsley, Somesh Sharma, Jeanne Bertonis,
Rudy Huber, Andre Archimbaud, and Jean-Pierre Desmarais.

The lawsuit, filed on May 13, 2013, with the Superior Court of the
Province of Quebec, District of Montreal, defines the class as
follows:

    All natural persons and legal persons which, in the 12 months
previous to May 13 2013, had fewer than 50 employees, who held
securities of BioSyntech Inc. on May 12, 2010, except the
Respondents, ProQuest Investments LLP, Fonds de Solidarite des
Travailleurs du Quebec, Pappas Ventures, Nicholas Piramal India
Limited, and Highland Capital Management;

According to the lawsuit, the Board oversaw a troubling pattern of
negligence that resulted in the hurried sale of its intellectual
property and subsequent bankruptcy of the company when it was on
the verge of disclosing pivotal, stage III, clinical results for
BST-Cargel, its promising, flagship medical device to repair
damaged knee cartilage.

Piramal Healthcare Ltd., a shareholder in BioSyntech Inc. with a
representative on the Board, purchased the company's intellectual
property for just over 4.5 million dollars.

The class action seeks compensation for the damages that
securities holders in BioSyntech Inc. suffered as a result of the
faults of the Board members. These faults have deprived class
members of their right to share in the profits of what Piramal
Healthcare Ltd. now calls a billion dollar global market for BST-
Cargel.

The law firm of Trudel & Johnston represents Mr. Blais.

On Sept. 24, 2013, the Superior Court issued a Summons requiring
Ms. Tsang to appear before the Court within 30 days upon
publication of the notice.  Otherwise, the Court said a default
judgment may be rendered against her.


BUCKEYE TECHNOLOGIES: Shareholder Litigation Now Dismissed
----------------------------------------------------------
The Consolidated Complaint In re Buckeye Technologies, Inc.
Shareholders Litigation, Consolidated Case No. 8519-CS has been
dismissed without prejudice, according to the company's Aug. 28,
2013, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2013.

On May 1, 2013, a putative shareholder class action complaint was
filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, or the
Delaware Court, captioned James Beckett, Jr. v. Buckeye
Technologies Inc., et. al., Case No. 8519-CS, or the Beckett
Action. On May 7, 2013, a putative shareholder class action
complaint was filed in the Delaware Court, captioned Richard
Oliver v. John Crowe, et. al., Case No. 8534-CS, or the Oliver
Action.

Pursuant to an order granted in the Delaware Court on May, 9,
2013, the Beckett Action and the Oliver Action were consolidated
into a single action, all future actions filed in Delaware related
to the same subject matter are to become part of the consolidated
action and counsel to Mr. Beckett and Mr. Oliver were appointed as
the lead counsel for the putative shareholder class.

On May 13, 2013, the plaintiffs in the consolidated action filed a
consolidated amended class action complaint, captioned In re
Buckeye Technologies, Inc. Shareholders Litigation, Consolidated
Case No. 8519-CS, or the Consolidated Complaint. The plaintiffs
also filed a motion for expedited proceedings and a motion for a
preliminary injunction. The Consolidated Complaint named as
defendants Buckeye, each member of the Board, or the Individual
Defendants, Georgia-Pacific and the GP Cellulose Group LLC.

The Consolidated Complaint generally alleged that the Individual
Defendants breached their fiduciary duties and that Buckeye,
Georgia-Pacific and GP Cellulose Group LLC aided and abetted these
purported breaches of fiduciary duties. On May 21, 2013, a
telephonic hearing was held in the Consolidated Complaint on the
plaintiffs' motion to expedite proceedings and to set a hearing
for preliminary injunction.

The Delaware Court ruled that the plaintiffs had failed to set
forth a colorable basis for expedited proceedings and denied the
plaintiffs' motion. On June 19, 2013, the Consolidated Complaint
was dismissed without prejudice pursuant to a Stipulation and
Order of Dismissal, or the Order, filed by the parties and entered
by the Delaware Court. The Order stipulates that each party to the
Consolidated Complaint will bear its own costs and that no
compensation has passed or been promised from any of the
defendants to the plaintiffs or plaintiffs' counsel.


CHINA GREEN AGRICULTURE: Settles Securities Suit for $2.5-Mil.
--------------------------------------------------------------
China Green Agriculture, Inc., on March 7, 2013, entered into an
agreement in principle to settle the case alleging Securities
Exchange Act violations for payment of $2.5 million in exchange
for a release of all claims against all defendants, according to
the Company's Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2013.

The Company disclosed: "On October 15, 2010, a class action
lawsuit was filed against us and certain of our current and former
officers in the United States District Court for the District of
Nevada (the "Nevada Federal Court") on behalf of purchasers of our
common stock between November 12, 2009 and September 1, 2010. The
current version of the complaint alleges that we and certain of
our current and former officers and directors violated Sections
10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
Sections 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, by making material misstatements and omissions in our
financial statements, securities offering documents, and related
disclosures during the class period. On October 7, 2011, the
defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint and to strike
portions of it.

"On November 2, 2012, the Nevada Federal Court issued an order
dismissing the claims for violation of sections 11, 12(a)(2) and
15 of the Securities Act of 1933 as to all defendants and
dismissing certain individual defendants from the complaint and
allowing the claims for violations of section 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to continue with respect to
the Company and certain of the individual defendants. The Nevada
Federal Court also denied the defendants' motion to strike.

"The parties to the securities class action held a mediation on
March 7, 2013, which led to an agreement in principle to settle
the case for a payment of $2.5 million by our insurers in exchange
for a release of all claims against all defendants. The parties
are currently in the process of documenting the settlement."

China Green Agriculture, Inc. is engaged in the research,
development, production and sale of various types of fertilizers
and agricultural products in the People's Republic of China though
its wholly owned Chinese subsidiaries, Shaanxi Tech Team Jinong
Humic Acid Product Co., Ltd. (Jinong), Xi'an Jintai Agriculture
Technology Development Company (Jintai), Xi'an Hu County Yuxing
Agriculture Technology Development Co., Ltd. (Yuxing), Beijing
Gufeng Chemical Products Co., Ltd. (Gufeng) and Beijing Tianjuyuan
Fertilizer Co., Ltd. (Tianjuyuan). The Company has four segments:
fertilizer products (Jinong), fertilizer products (Gufeng and
Tianjuyuan), agricultural products (Jintai) and research and
development (Yuxing).Through Jintai, it develops and produces
agricultural products, such as fruits, vegetables, flowers and
colored seedlings. On July 2, 2010, the Company acquired Gufeng
and its wholly-owned subsidiary Tianjuyuan.


CONAGRA FOODS: Dec. 11 Final Approval Hearing in Alexia Settlement
------------------------------------------------------------------
A proposed nationwide Settlement has been reached in a class
action lawsuit, where Plaintiffs claimed that certain Alexia
frozen potato products, advertised as "natural" or "all natural,"
should not have been advertised as such because they contained the
ingredient disodium dihydrogen pyrophosphate to retain the color
of the potatoes.  ConAgra denies that it falsely advertised its
products or did anything wrong.  However, ConAgra has chosen to
provide its customers with settlement benefits rather than spend
additional money on litigation.

You are included in the Settlement if you purchased any of the
included Alexia frozen potato products in the United States
between December 6, 2007 and July 10, 2013.  The included products
are:

     * Saute Reds
     * Mashed Potatoes Yukon Gold Potatoes & Sea Salt
     * Mashed Potatoes Red Potatoes with Garlic & Parmesan
     * Waffle Fries
     * Harvest Saute
     * Italian Saute
     * Saute Sweets and
     * Potato Bites

If the Settlement is approved, ConAgra will pay up to $3,200,000,
consisting of a Cash Settlement Fund in an amount up to $2,500,000
as well as a Voucher Settlement Fund in the amount of $700,000.

Members who submit valid Claim Forms have the choice to receive
a cash payment, vouchers, or a combination of cash payments and
vouchers for up to 10 Alexia frozen potato product purchases.
Those included in the Settlement will be eligible to receive
either a cash payment of up to $35 (in the form of a check) or
alternatively food product vouchers for up to $75 in retail value
for Alexia products. The amount of beneifts you may receive will
be based on the amount of products you purchased.

ConAgra also has agreed to pay, from a total settlement fund of
up to $3,200,000, attorneys' fees and expenses up to $800,000,
subject to the approval of the Court.  Any awards will cover the
fees and expenses for the attorneys in the consolidated case
filed against ConAgra and will be paid by ConAgra and will be
deducted from the amount available to pay benefits to Class
Members.  ConAgra has also agreed not to oppose requests that
the Class Representatives be paid up to $5,000 each for helping
Class Counsel on behalf of the whole Class.

                         Important Dates:

Submit a Claim Form                Postmarked by Nov. 27, 2013
Exclude Yourself from the Class    Postmarked by Nov. 27, 2013
Object to or Comment on
   the Settlement                  Postmarked by Nov. 27, 2013
Final Approval Hearing             Dec. 11, 2013 at 9:00 a.m.

The claim form can be found at http://www.AlexiaSettlement.com/or
by calling 1-855-793-1365

The case is known as In re Alexia Foods, Inc. Litigation, No.
11-cv-06119.  Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton of the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of California is overseeing the case.

The Settlement Administrator is:

     Rust Consulting
     P.O. Box 3023
     Faribault, MN 55021-2623
     info@AlexiaSettlement.com
     Tel: 855-793-1365

Class Counsel is:

     Mark Pifko, Esq.
     BARON & BUDD, P.C.
     1999 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 3450
     Los Angeles, CA 90067

          - and -

     Nadeem Faruqi, Esq.
     Farqui & Faruqi, LLP
     10866 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1470
     Los Angeles, CA 90024

Counsel for Defendants:

     Robert B. Hawk, Esq.
     HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP
     525 Univeristy Avenue, 4th Floor
     Palo Alto, CA 94301
     E-mail: Robert.hawk@hoganlovells.com

          - and -

     Douglas M. Schwab, Esq.
     Benjamin T. Diggs, Esq.
     HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP
     4 Embarcadero Ctr, 22nd Floor
     San Francisco, CA 94111
     E-mail: Douglas.schwab@hoganslovells.com
             Benjamin.diggs@hoganlovells.com


CONTANGO OIL: Faces Lawsuit Over Planned Merger With Crimson
------------------------------------------------------------
Several class action lawsuits have been brought by Crimson
stockholders challenging a proposed merger agreement (the "Merger
Agreement") of Contango Oil & Gas Company with Crimson Exploration
Inc. and seeking, among other things, injunctive relief to enjoin
the defendants from completing the Merger on the agreed-upon
terms, compensatory damages, and costs and disbursements relating
to the lawsuits, according to Contango's Aug. 29, 2013, Form 10-K
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
fiscal year ended June 30, 2013.

Various combinations of Crimson, Contango, members of Crimson's
board of directors, and members of Crimson management have been
named as defendants in these lawsuits. It is possible that
additional similar lawsuits may be filed.

The known plaintiffs in these lawsuits, based on the most current
information provided by Crimson, collectively own a very small
percentage of the total outstanding shares of Crimson common
stock. The lawsuits allege, among other things, that Crimson's
board of directors failed to take steps to obtain a fair price,
failed to properly value Crimson, failed to protect against
alleged conflicts of interest, failed to conduct a reasonably
informed evaluation of whether the transaction was in the best
interests of stockholders, failed to fully disclose all material
information to stockholders, acted in bad faith and for improper
motives, engaged in self-dealing, discouraged other strategic
alternatives, took steps to avoid competitive bidding, and agreed
to allegedly unreasonable deal protection mechanisms, including
the no-shop and fiduciary-out provisions and termination fee. The
lawsuits also allege that Contango aided and abetted the other
defendants in violating duties to the Crimson stockholders. The
lawsuits seek damages and injunctive relief.

Contango and Crimson believe that these lawsuits are without merit
and intend to contest them vigorously.


DELL INC: Court Denies Expedited Discovery in Suit Over Merger
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Delaware Court of Chancery denied a motion for expedited
discovery in support of a motion for a preliminary injunction to
enjoin the consummation of a merger of Dell Inc., according to the
company's Aug. 28, 2013, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
Aug. 2, 2013.

Prior to and shortly following the announcement on February 5,
2013 of the execution of an original merger agreement, pursuant to
which it would be acquired by Denali Holding Inc., twenty-five
lawsuits challenging the proposed acquisition of Dell Inc. were
filed, of which twenty-one were filed in the Delaware Court of
Chancery and four were filed in the District Court of Travis
County in Texas.

The Delaware actions have been consolidated as In re Dell, Inc.
Shareholder Litigation (C.A. No. 8329-CS), and the complaint in
one of the actions, City of Roseville Employees Retirement System
v. Dell, Inc. et al., was designated as the operative complaint
(the "Delaware litigation).  Three of the Texas lawsuits were
voluntarily dismissed, without prejudice, and the remaining
action, Nelson v. Dell Inc. et al. (Cause No. D-1-GN-13-000220),
was stayed by the Texas court on April 4, 2013.

The Delaware litigation is a putative class action filed on behalf
of the stockholders of Dell Inc. other than the defendants and
their affiliates. The operative complaint, which names as
defendants Dell Inc., its directors, Silver Lake Partners, L.P.,
Silver Lake Technology Investors III, L.P., Silver Lake Partners
III, L.P., Silver Lake Partners IV, L.P., the MSDC Investor,
Parent, Intermediate and Merger Sub, alleges that the Dell
directors breached their fiduciary duties in connection with their
approval of the merger agreement and that the entity defendants
aided and abetted those breaches.

The complaint seeks, among other relief, declaratory and
injunctive relief enjoining the merger, and compensatory damages
in an unspecified amount. The stayed Texas action makes similar
allegations on behalf of the same putative class.

On June 19, 2013, the Delaware Court of Chancery denied
plaintiffs' motion in the Delaware litigation for expedited
discovery in support of a motion for a preliminary injunction to
enjoin the consummation of the merger.


DELL INC: Faces Alleged Securities Violations Suit in Texas Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A putative class action was filed on May 30, 2013, in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Texas,
captioned John Michael Van Buiten et al. v. Dell Inc. et al.
(Docket No. 13-cv-01585), according to the company's Aug. 28,
2013, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended Aug. 2, 2013.

The action names as defendants Dell Inc., its directors, Silver
Lake Partners L.P., and the Parent Parties, and asserts disclosure
claims under Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 as well as state common law claims for breach of
fiduciary duties and aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary
duties. The complaint seeks, among other remedies, injunctive
relief enjoining the merger.


DFC GLOBAL: Canadian Unit Wants Arbitration in "Usury" Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
DFC Global Corp.'s wholly owned indirect Canadian subsidiary,
National Money Mart Company (NMM), is evaluating an appeal to the
Supreme Court of Canada of the dismissal of its motion to compel
arbitration and to stay the actions filed against it over alleged
usurious transactions, according to DFC's Aug. 29, 2013, Form
10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2013.

In 2003 and 2006, purported class actions were brought against ,
the Company's wholly owned indirect Canadian subsidiary, National
Money Mart Company ("NMM") and Dollar Financial Group, Inc. in the
Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta, Canada on behalf of a class of
consumers who obtained short-term loans from NMM in Alberta,
alleging, among other things, that the charge to borrowers in
connection with such loans was usurious under Canadian federal law
(the "Alberta Litigation").

The actions seek restitution and damages, including punitive
damages. In April 2010, the plaintiffs in both actions indicated
that they would proceed with their claims. Demands for arbitration
were served on the plaintiff in each of the actions, and NMM has
filed motions to enforce the arbitration clause and to stay the
actions. NMM's motions to compel arbitration and to stay the
actions were dismissed. Money Mart appealed those decisions and in
July 2013, the Court of Appeal dismissed NMM's appeal. NMM is
evaluating an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. To date,
neither case has been certified as a class action. The Company is
defending these actions vigorously.


DFC GLOBAL: NMM Wants Arbitration in Suit Over Short-Term Loans
---------------------------------------------------------------
DFC Global Corp.'s wholly owned indirect Canadian subsidiary,
National Money Mart Company (NMM), is evaluating an appeal against
an order denying arbitration for a suit filed on behalf of a
purported class of consumers who obtained short-term loans from
NMM, according to DFC's Aug. 29, 2013, Form 10-K filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2013.

In 2004, an action was filed against NMM in Manitoba on behalf of
a purported class of consumers who obtained short-term loans from
NMM. In early February 2012, a separate action was filed against
NMM and Dollar Financial Group, Inc. in Manitoba on behalf of a
purported class of consumers which substantially overlaps with the
purported class in the 2004 action.

In April 2013, NMM filed a motion to enforce the
arbitration/mediation terms in the second action. In July 2013,
the Court denied the motion to compel arbitration. The Company is
evaluating an appeal to the appellate court. The allegations in
each of these actions are substantially similar to those in the
Alberta Litigation and, to date, neither action has been certified
as a class action. The Company intends to defend these actions
vigorously.

As of June 30, 2013, an aggregate of approximately CAD 31.7
million is included in the Company's accrued liabilities relating
to the purported Canadian class action proceedings pending in
Alberta and Manitoba and for the settled class actions in Ontario,
British Columbia, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland that
were settled by the Company in 2010. The settlements in those
class action proceedings consisted of a cash component and
vouchers to the class members for future services.

The component of the accrual that relates to vouchers is
approximately CAD 21.5 million, the majority of which is expected
to be non-cash. Although the company believes that it has
meritorious defenses to the claims in the purported class
proceedings in Alberta and Manitoba and intend vigorously to
defend against such remaining pending claims, the ultimate cost of
resolution of such claims may exceed the amount accrued at June
30, 2013 and additional accruals may be required in the future.


DYCOM INDUSTRIES: Reported $0.5-Mil Pre-Tax Settlement Charge
-------------------------------------------------------------
In its Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended July 27, 2013, Dycom
Industries, Inc., reported that costs of earned revenues increased
to $1,300.4 million during fiscal 2013 compared to $968.9 million
during fiscal 2012.  The increase was primarily due to a higher
level of operations during fiscal 2013, including costs of the
businesses acquired in fiscal 2013.  The primary components of the
total increase was a $235.8 million aggregate increase in direct
labor and independent subcontractor costs, a $41.2 million
increase in direct material costs, and an aggregate $54.5 million
increase in other direct costs, including a pre-tax $0.5 million
charge for a wage and hour class action settlement.

Dycom Industries, Inc., is a provider of specialty contracting
services. These services are provided throughout the United States
and include engineering, construction, maintenance and
installation services to telecommunications providers, underground
facility locating services to various utilities, including
telecommunications providers, and other construction and
maintenance services to electric and gas utilities and others.
Dycom also provides services on a limited basis in Canada. During
the fiscal year ended July 30, 2011 (fiscal 2011), revenue by
customer type from telecommunications, underground facility
locating, and electric and gas utilities and other customers, was
approximately 82.1%, 14.0%, and 3.9%, respectively. On November
19, 2010, it acquired certain assets and assumed certain
liabilities of Communication Services, Inc. (Communication
Services). On December 23, 2010, it acquired NeoCom Solutions,
Inc. (NeoCom), based in Woodstock, Georgia.


DYCOM INDUSTRIES: Former Employee Sues UtiliQuest Unit in Calif.
----------------------------------------------------------------
In its Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended July 27, 2013, Dycom
Industries, Inc., reported that in October 2012, a former employee
of UtiliQuest, LLC ("UtiliQuest"), a wholly-owned subsidiary of
the Company, commenced a lawsuit against UtiliQuest in the
Superior Court of California (the "California Superior Court").
The lawsuit alleges that UtiliQuest violated the California Labor
Code, the California Business & Professions Code and the Labor
Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 by failing to pay for
all hours worked (including overtime) and failing to provide meal
breaks and accurate wage statements.  The plaintiff seeks
unspecified damages and other relief on behalf of himself and a
putative class of current and former employees of UtiliQuest who
worked as locators in the State of California in the four years
preceding the filing date of the lawsuit.  In January 2013,
UtiliQuest removed the case to the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California (the "District Court") and
the plaintiff subsequently filed a Motion to Remand the case back
to the California Superior Court.  In April 2013, the parties
exchanged initial disclosures and in July 2013, the District Court
granted plaintiff's Motion to Remand.  An initial case management
conference took place in August 2013.

The Company said it is too early to evaluate the likelihood of an
outcome to this matter or estimate the amount or range of
potential loss, if any.  The Company intends to vigorously defend
itself against this lawsuit.

Dycom Industries, Inc. (Dycom) is a provider of specialty
contracting services. These services are provided throughout the
United States and include engineering, construction, maintenance
and installation services to telecommunications providers,
underground facility locating services to various utilities,
including telecommunications providers, and other construction and
maintenance services to electric and gas utilities and others.
Dycom also provides services on a limited basis in Canada. During
the fiscal year ended July 30, 2011 (fiscal 2011), revenue by
customer type from telecommunications, underground facility
locating, and electric and gas utilities and other customers, was
approximately 82.1%, 14.0%, and 3.9%, respectively. On November
19, 2010, it acquired certain assets and assumed certain
liabilities of Communication Services, Inc. (Communication
Services). On December 23, 2010, it acquired NeoCom Solutions,
Inc. (NeoCom), based in Woodstock, Georgia.


ENVIVIO INC: Lawsuits Over IPO Still Pending
--------------------------------------------
Envivio, Inc., is a defendant in lawsuits alleging that the
registration statement for an initial public offering contained
materially false or misleading statements, according to the
Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarterly period ended July 31, 2013.

The company disclosed that: "On October 5, 2012 a complaint
captioned Wiley v. Envivio, Inc., et al. CIV-517185 was filed in
the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo, naming as
defendants the Company, each of our directors, our chief executive
officer, our chief financial officer, and certain underwriters of
our IPO. The lawsuit purports to be a class action on behalf of
purchasers of shares issued in the IPO and generally alleges that
the registration statement for the IPO contained materially false
or misleading statements. The complaint purports to assert claims
under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and seeks
unspecified damages and other relief."

On October 19, 2012 a similar complaint captioned Toth v. Envivio,
Inc. et al. CIV-517481 was filed in the same court.  On November
2, 2012 defendants removed the cases to the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California where they were
assigned case numbers 12-cv-05637-CRB and 12-cv- 05636-CW.  A
similar complaint was filed in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California on December 20, 2012
entitled Thomas v. Envivio, Inc., et al. C 12-06464.

The Company said that, at this time, it is unable to assess
whether any loss or adverse effect on its financial condition is
probable or remote or to estimate the range of potential loss, if
any.

Envivio, Inc. is a provider of Internet protocol (IP) video
processing and distribution solutions, which enable the delivery
of video to consumers. The Company's solution is designed to
enable service providers and content providers to offer video
anytime, anywhere across a range of video formats, networks,
consumer devices and operating systems. Its software-based
solution runs on industry-standard hardware and includes encoders,
transcoders, network media processors all controlled through its
network management system. It enables service providers and
content providers to deliver linear broadcast and on-demand video
services to their customers through multiple screens, such as
tablets, mobile handsets, netbooks, laptops, personal computers
(PCs) and televisions. Its customers include mobile and wireline
telecommunications service providers, cable multiple system
operators (MSOs), direct broadcast satellite service providers
(DBSs) and content providers.


FLEETMATICS GROUP: Seeks Dismissal of Suit Over Phone Recording
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fleetmatics Group PLC's motion to dismiss a complaint seeking
certification of a putative class of all individuals and
businesses who had their telephone conversations recorded without
consent or advance notice, is pending before the court, according
to the Company's Form F-1 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on September 12, 2013.

The Company states: "On August 14, 2012, a putative class action
complaint was filed in the Sixth Judicial Circuit in Pinellas
County, Florida, entitled U.S. Prisoner Transport, et al. v.
Fleetmatics USA, LLC, et al., Case No. 1200-9933 CI-20. We removed
the case to the United States District Court for the Middle
District of Florida on September 13, 2012, U.S. Prisoner
Transport, et al. v. Fleetmatics USA, LLC, et al., Case No. 8:12-
CV-2079. We moved to dismiss the complaint on September 20, 2012.
Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on October 4, 2012 and
changed the case caption to Brevard Extraditions, Inc., d/b/a U.S.
Prisoner Transport, et al. v. Fleetmatics USA, LLC, et al. The
amended complaint alleges that we intercepted, recorded,
disclosed, and used thousands of telephone calls in violation of
Florida Statutes Section 934.03. The amended complaint seeks
certification of a putative class of all individuals and
businesses residing in Florida who spoke with any representatives
of our offices in Florida on the telephone and had their telephone
conversations recorded without their consent or advance notice,
from the date of the earliest recording by us through the present.
The amended complaint seeks statutory damages, injunctive relief,
attorney fees, costs and interest. Florida Statutes Section 934.10
permits an aggrieved person to recover "liquidated damages
computed at the rate of $100 a day for each day of violation or
$1,000, whichever is higher." We moved to dismiss the amended
complaint on October 18, 2012; plaintiffs filed an opposition on
November 1, 2012; and we filed a reply on June 4, 2013, after the
court granted leave to do so. Our motion to dismiss is pending
before the court. Given the early procedural stages of this matter
and the inherent uncertainties of litigation, we are unable to
estimate a reasonably possible range of loss, if any, at this
time, but there can be no assurance that this matter will not have
a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition,
operating results, and cash flows."

In addition, from time to time, the Company has been and may
become involved in legal proceedings, claims and litigation
arising in the ordinary course of its business.

Fleetmatics Group PLC, is a provider of fleet management solutions
delivered as software-as-a-service (SaaS). The Company offers Web-
based and mobile application solutions, which provide fleet
operators with visibility into vehicle location, fuel usage, speed
and mileage and other insights into their mobile workforce. The
Company offers fleet management software solutions. The Company's
FleetMatics-branded solutions sold under the FleetMatics or
SageQuest names. Its solutions are accessed through a Web browser
or mobile application and provide its customers with actionable
business intelligence. Its SaaS offering consists of the easy-to-
use components: Tracking Alerts, Route Replay, Geofencing and
Landmarks, FleetTracking Dashboard, Fleet Reports, Mobile App,
Speed Limits, Panoramic Reporting and Benchmarking. Effective
August 8, 2013, Fleetmatics Group PLC a unit of Fleetmatics
Investor Holdings LP, acquired Connect2Field Holdings Pty Ltd.


G4S SECURE: Settlement Reached in Wrongful Termination Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
A hearing was held Oct. 28, 2013, in the Circuit Court of Marshall
County, West Virginia Civil Action 13-C-16 H WILLIAM BROOKS,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, V. G4S SECURE SOLUTIONS (USA) INC., Defendant, over
the fairness of the proposed class action settlement reached in
the case.  The Honorable David W. Hummel, Jr., Judge, presides
over the case.  The Proposed Class Action Settlement Agreement is
dated July 25, 2013, and the purpose of the hearing was to
consider whether the deal is fair, reasonable, and adequate.

The Parties have agreed to the following Class definition: "All
individuals who were employed by G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc.,
and involuntarily discharged at any time between January 29, 2008
to July 11, 2013, who have not opted out of this Class Action and
who were not paid their final wages within 72 hours and therefore,
have or may have wage payment claims arising under the West
Virginia Wage Payment and Collection Act as more fully set forth
in the Complaint."

Under West Virginia's Wage Payment and Collection Act, when an
employer involuntarily discharges, or fires, an employee, it shall
pay that employee's final wages in full within 72 hours of the
employee's termination.  If an employer fails to pay all final
wages to an employee within the required time period established
by the Wage Payment and Collection Act, the employer is liable to
the employee for liquidated damages equal to three times the
amount of the employee's final pay, plus interest, attorney fees
and costs.

As set forth in the Proposed Class Action Settlement Agreement,
the Defendant has agreed to pay a Gross Settlement amount to all
Class Members who timely complete and return a Claim Form.  Class
members consists of approximately 23 former employees who were
involuntarily terminated by G4S Secure Solutions and not paid
their final wages within 72 hours. These individuals shall each
receive three times the amount of his or her gross, final
paycheck, plus interest calculated at the rates set by the Supreme
Court of Appeals of West Virginia from the fourth day following
their termination until the date of the final approval hearing. In
exchange for this settlement, the Class will release all claims as
more fully detailed in the Proposed Class Action Settlement
Agreement. The settlement payment to Mr. Brooks will include
additional compensation for his service as a Class Representative.

The Defendant has also agreed to pay Class Counsel's Fees and
Expenses, for work performed and expenses incurred in filing,
handling and litigating this claim, as well as administering the
settlement. The Defendant has stipulated to the reasonableness of
Class Counsel's Fees and Expenses in the amount of $11,500 for
fees and $300 for expenses. The Defendant has also agreed to incur
all costs associated with publication expenses of the Notice to
the Class, and all costs associated with searching for valid
addresses for the Class Members.

Class Counsel's Fees and Expenses are in excess of the liquidated
damages and interest each Class Member will receive and in no way
reduce the individual damages to be paid to each Class Member. If
there are any unclaimed monies remaining in the Gross Settlement
Amount after the payment of all timely and properly submitted
Claim Forms, these monies shall be retained by the Defendant.

On approval of the Proposed Class Action Settlement Agreement by
the Court, Defendant will be dismissed from the case with
prejudice and a final Judgment will be entered.

Class Counsel are:

     Frank X. Duff, Esq.
     Yolonda G. Lambert, Esq.
     Sandra K. Law, Esq.
     SCHRADER, BYRD & COMPANION, PLLC
     The Maxwell Centre, Suite 500
     32 20th Street
     Wheeling, WV 26003


HAIN CELESTIAL: NY Court Dismisses Suit by Morrison and Kist
------------------------------------------------------------
The Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Nassau
dismissed the suit Morrison and Kist. v. The Hain Celestial Group,
Inc. et. al, according to Hain's Aug. 29, 2013, Form 10-K filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2013.

On October 11, 2012, a putative class action lawsuit, titled
Morrison and Kist. v. The Hain Celestial Group, Inc. et al, was
filed against the Company and each of its directors in the Supreme
Court of the State of New York, County of Nassau.

Plaintiffs alleged that the board of directors breached its
fiduciary duties in respect of the proxy statement disclosure
relating to the proposals for the advisory vote regarding
executive compensation and the amendment to the Amended and
Restated 2002 Long Term Incentive and Stock Award Plan.

The complaint sought injunctive relief and damages.  On November
14, 2012, the Court denied plaintiffs' motion for a temporary
restraining order relating to the Company's Annual Meeting of
Stockholders, finding that plaintiffs failed to establish that the
allegedly non-disclosed information was material and that
plaintiffs could not show any irreparable harm. On December 12,
2012, plaintiffs moved to amend their complaint and, on January
15, 2013, the Company and the directors moved to dismiss the
lawsuit. On June 20, 2013, the Court dismissed the lawsuit with
prejudice.


INDEPENDENT SAVINGS: Bifurcation Bid in "Lankhorst" Suit Denied
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the case, Jason and Rachalle Lankhorst, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v.
Independent Savings Plan Company, d/b/a ISPC, Defendant, CIVIL NO.
11-CV-390, (M.D. Fla.), Defendant ISPC asked the Court to
bifurcate or, alternatively, for an order staying discovery.  The
litigation arises out of the sale and financing of water treatment
equipment.  Plaintiffs allege, among other things, that ISPC
violated the Truth in Lending Act and Two and the Florida
Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act.

In an October 17, 2013 Memorandum and Order available at
http://is.gd/GY6jGIfrom Leagle.com, District Judge Paul A.
Magnuson denied the motion saying ISPC has failed to establish
that bifurcation is appropriate or that a stay of discovery is
warranted.   The parties have 30 days from the date of the Order
to conduct any and all discovery on the issue of damages, said
Judge Magnson.


INTUIT INC: Settlement Reached in "Smith" and "Quildon" Cases
-------------------------------------------------------------
Intuit Inc. has reached an agreement subject to court approval to
resolve all claims raised in the Smith and Quildon matters for an
amount that was accrued by the Company in the second quarter of
fiscal 2013, according to the Company's Form 10-K filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
July 31, 2013.

On January 13, 2012, two putative class actions were filed against
Intuit Inc. in connection with the Company's TurboTax income tax
preparation software: Smith v. Intuit Inc. (U.S. District Court,
Northern District of California) and Quildon v. Intuit Inc.
(California Superior Court, Santa Clara County).  The plaintiffs
in both cases had asserted that the fees charged for the refund
processing service offered within TurboTax are "refund
anticipation loans" and the disclosures about those fees do not
comply with California and federal laws.  The Smith case was
brought in federal court on behalf of a proposed nationwide class
and subclasses; the Quildon case was brought in state court on
behalf of a proposed California class and subclasses.  In January
2013, for the purposes of settlement and without any admission of
wrongdoing or liability, Intuit reached an agreement in principle
to resolve all claims raised in the Smith and Quildon matters for
an amount that is not material to the Company's consolidated
financial statements. The Company accrued that amount in the
second quarter of fiscal 2013. The terms of the proposed
settlement are subject to the approval of the court, which could
approve, reject, or suggest modifications to those terms. Intuit
currently believes that the likelihood of a material change to the
proposed settlement amount is remote.

Intuit Inc. provides business and financial management solutions
for small businesses, consumers, accounting professionals and
financial institutions.  The Company organizes its portfolio of
businesses into four principal categories: Small Business Group,
Tax, Financial Services and Other Businesses. Small Business Group
include seven segments: financial management solutions, employee
management solutions, payment solutions, consumer tax, accounting
professionals, financial services and other businesses. Tax
include two segment: Consumer Tax and Accounting Professionals.
Financial Services: This segment consists of digital (online and
mobile) banking solutions and Other Businesse segment includes its
global businesses. In June 2013, Intuit Inc acquired Elastic
Intelligence Inc. Effective August 8, 2013, Intuit Inc acquired
GoodApril, a provider of online tax planning services. Effective
October 24, 2013, Intuit Inc acquired Level Up Analytics Inc.


J. CREW GROUP: Faces Complaint for Sending Unwanted Advertisements
------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Crew Group, Inc., on June 20, 2013, was named a defendant in a
complaint filed on behalf of a class of customers claiming that
the Company used collected ZIP code data to obtain customers'
addresses for purposes of mailing them unwanted advertising
material, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period
ended August 3, 2013.

On June 20, 2013, a purported class action complaint was filed in
the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
by an individual claiming that the Company collected her ZIP code
unlawfully in connection with a retail purchase she made at a
Massachusetts store. That action, captioned Miller v. J.Crew
Group, Inc., 13-cv-11487 (the "Miller Action"), purports to be
brought on behalf of a class of customers whose ZIP codes were
collected and recorded at Company stores in Massachusetts in
connection with credit card purchases, and claims that the company
used the collected ZIP code data to obtain customers' addresses
for purposes of mailing them unwanted advertising material. The
Miller Action seeks money damages pursuant to a claim under
Chapter 93A of the General Laws of Massachusetts and a claim for
unjust enrichment. The Company believes the complaint is without
merit and intends to defend against the Plaintiff's claims.
However, it is reasonably possible that the Company may incur a
loss in connection with the Miller Action. The amount of such
loss, if any, cannot be estimated at the date of this report.

J. Crew Group is a retailer known for its preppy fashions,
including jeans, khakis, and other basic (but pricey) items sold
to young professionals through its catalogs, websites, and more
than 360 retail and factory stores in the US (and now Canada)
under the J. Crew, crewcuts (for kids), and Madewell banners.
Madewell is a women's-only collection of hip, casual clothes. CEO
Millard "Mickey" Drexler, recruited from The Gap to revive J.
Crew's ailing fortunes, has led a renaissance at the firm, capped
by a public offering in 2006. In 2011, the company was taken
private by TPG Capitaland Leonard Green & Partners.


JOHN B. SANFILIPPO: Accord in "Cardenas" Approved on Final Basis
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
issued a final approval for the Settlement Agreement in Cardenas
et. al. v John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc., according to the
company's Aug. 28, 2013, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended  June 27, 2013.

In fiscal 2010, a class action wage and hour lawsuit was filed
against the company  in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois (the "District Court") under the Illinois
Minimum Wage Law ("IMWL") and the Fair Labor Standards Act
("FLSA").

The plaintiffs claimed damages under the IMWL in an amount equal
to all unpaid back pay alleged to be owed to the plaintiffs,
prejudgment interest on the back pay, punitive damages, attorneys'
fees and costs, and an injunction precluding the Company from
violating the IMWL.

The plaintiffs additionally claimed damages under the FLSA in an
amount equal to all back pay alleged to be owed to the plaintiffs,
prejudgment interest on the back pay, liquidated damages equal to
the amount of unpaid back wages, and attorneys' fees and costs. In
fiscal 2011, the plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint in
which they alleged that the Company maintained and maintains a
practice regarding the rounding of employees' time entries which
violates the IMWL and the FLSA.

Following mediation during fiscal 2011 in order to cover an
expanded scope of wage and hour claims, plaintiffs and facilities,
the company  agreed in principle to a $2,600 settlement (the
"Settlement Agreement"). In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2011, the
Settlement Agreement was finalized and preliminarily approved by
the District Court which included a provision allowing for a
reverter payment if all or some class members do not submit claim
forms. The company  recorded an accrual of $1,950 in fiscal 2011
for the class action wage and hour lawsuit which was the company's
best estimate of the payout to class members who submitted claim
forms, net of any estimated reverter payout to the Company and
other agreed upon payouts pursuant to the settlement agreement.

During the first quarter of fiscal 2012, the Court issued a final
approval of the Settlement Agreement which did not have a material
impact on earnings during fiscal 2012. The case was closed and
formally dismissed by the Court during the fourth quarter of
fiscal 2012. Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement,
the company paid $2,600 to the claims administrator during the
first quarter of fiscal 2012 and received a reverter payment for
unclaimed settlement funds of approximately $665 during the fourth
quarter of fiscal 2012.


JOHNS HOPKINS: Settlement Negotiations to Begin Before Year-End
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jessica Gresko, writing for The Associated Press, reports that
thousands of women who visited a Baltimore gynecologist who
secretly photographed and videotaped patients will be allowed to
join together for settlement talks in a class action lawsuit
against Johns Hopkins Hospital, which employed him.

Lawyers for both the patients who filed the class action lawsuit
against Hopkins and the hospital itself asked a judge earlier this
week to sign papers that will let the parties move forward with
settlement negotiations.  The judge signed the papers on Oct. 30,
and a lawyer for the patients said on Nov. 1 he would expect
settlement negotiations to begin before the end of the year.

Hospital officials began investigating Dr. Nikita Levy in February
of this year after an employee reported suspecting him of
photographing patients.  The employee said Levy wore what looked
like a pen around his neck, but she believed it was a camera.
Hopkins security questioned Levy on Feb. 5 and barred him from
contact with patients. Hopkins notified Baltimore City police the
day after, and police ultimately seized a large amount of evidence
including multiple servers from Levy's home.

Dr. Levy, 54, later committed suicide.  A graduate of Cornell
University's medical school, he had worked at Johns Hopkins since
1988.

According to the documents signed on Oct. 30 by a Baltimore City
Circuit Court judge, anyone who was a patient of Dr. Levy's would
be covered by settlement talks.  The lawsuit filed earlier this
year says 9,000 or more women were patients. Lawyers currently
represent some 3,800 women.  The lawsuit claims the hospital knew
or should have known that Dr. Levy was photographing and
videotaping patients without their consent and that officials
failed to discover, stop and report his actions.  Women will not
have to prove that they were photographed or videotaped to be
covered by the settlement discussions.

Jonathan Schochor, one of the lawyers leading negotiations for the
patients along with Howard Janet, said the fact that Johns Hopkins
lawyers joined in asking the judge to let settlement negotiations
move forward signals a willingness to "end this disaster for
everyone."

Johns Hopkins said in a statement on Nov. 1 that the hospital
believes "attempting to resolve the claims without protracted
litigation is in the best interests" of patients.  The hospital
said it "sincerely hopes" that moving forward will "facilitate a
fair resolution of all claims."


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Agrees to Pay $2.2MM to Settle Kickback Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Perrone and Pete Yost, writing for The Associated Press,
report that Johnson & Johnson has agreed to pay more than $2.2
billion to resolve criminal and civil allegations that the company
promoted powerful psychiatric drugs for unapproved uses in
children, seniors and disabled patients, the Department of Justice
announced on Nov. 4.

The agreement is the third-largest settlement with a drugmaker in
U.S. history, and the latest in a string of actions against drug
companies allegedly putting profits ahead of patients.

Justice Department officials alleged that J&J used illegal
marketing tactics and kickbacks to persuade physicians and
pharmacists to prescribe Risperdal and Invega, both antipsychotic
drugs, and Natrecor, which is used to treat heart failure.

"J&J's promotion of Risperdal for unapproved uses threatened the
most vulnerable populations of our society -- children, the
elderly and those with developmental disabilities," said
Zane Memeger, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania.

The settlement amount includes $1.72 billion in civil payments to
federal and state governments as well as $485 million in criminal
fines and forfeited profits.

The Nov. 4 action is the latest example of regulators cracking
down on aggressive pharmaceutical marketing tactics, namely trying
to increase sales by pushing medicines for unapproved, or "off-
label," uses.  While doctors are allowed to prescribe medicines
for any use, drugmakers cannot promote them in any way that is not
approved by FDA.


K12 INC: Virginia Court Approves Settlement of Hoppaugh Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
On July 25, 2013, the court approved the final settlement of the
securities class-action lawsuit captioned David Hoppaugh et al. v.
K12 Inc. et. al., that had been filed against the Company and two
of its officers in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Virginia, Case No. I:12-CV-00103-CMH-IDD,
according to the company's Aug. 29, 2013, Form 10-K filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year
ended June 30, 2013.

None of the terms in the final settlement agreement changed from
those preliminarily approved by the court on March 22, 2013.
Additionally, all parties in a federal stockholder derivative
action that was pending against the Company, Jared Staal v. Andrew
H. Tisch, et. al., Case No. I:12-cv-00365-SLR, filed in the United
States District Court for the District of Delaware, filed a
stipulation of settlement and petitioned the court to dismiss the
matter with prejudice.

On July 29, 2013, the court granted its preliminary approval of
the settlement, subject to a notice period during which
stockholders have the opportunity to comment on the settlement
terms prior to the final hearing.


KEYUAN PETROCHEMICALS: Suit by Rosen Law Firm in Discovery
----------------------------------------------------------
In its Aug. 29, 2013 Amendment No. 1 to its Form 10-K for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission, Keyuan Petrochemicals, Inc. disclosed that on
November 15, 2011, the Rosen Law Firm filed a class action suit in
the United States District Court for the Central District of
California, alleging the company had violated federal securities
laws by issuing materially false and misleading statements and
omitting material facts with regard to disclosure of related party
transactions and effectiveness of internal controls in past public
filings.  The case is currently at the discovery stage and the
company believes there is no basis to the suit filed by the Rosen
Law Firm and intend to contest the case vigorously.


LULULEMON ATHLETICA: Facing Several Suits Over Sheer Luon Issue
---------------------------------------------------------------
lululemon athletica inc. is a defendant in lawsuits asserting
causes of action under the 1934 Securities Exchange Act relating
to the March 2013 sheer luon issue, according to the Company's
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarterly period ended August 4, 2013.

On July 2, 2013, plaintiff Houssam Alkhoury filed a putative
shareholder class action entitled Alkhoury v. lululemon athletica
inc., et al., No. 13-CV-4596 (S.D.N.Y.) against lululemon, a
certain director and a certain officer of the Company. The lawsuit
asserts causes of action under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 based on certain public
disclosures made by the Company relating to the March 2013 sheer
luon issue, the Company's announcement that its CEO intends to
resign, and certain stock trades executed by the Company's
Chairman prior to the Company's announcement regarding its CEO. On
September 3, 2013, plaintiff Houssam Alkhoury and putative
plaintiff Louisiana Sheriffs' Pension & Relief Fund moved to be
appointed as lead plaintiff in the lawsuit. The Company believes
there is no merit to this suit and the Company intends to defend
vigorously.

On August 12, 2013, plaintiff Thomas Canty filed a shareholder
derivative action entitled Canty v. Day , et al., No. 13-CV-5629
(S.D.N.Y.). that names as defendants current and former directors
and certain officers of the Company.  lululemon is named as a
nominal defendant in this lawsuit.  Similar to the Alkhoury class
action, the complaint challenges certain public disclosures and
conduct relating to the March 2013 sheer luon issue, the Company's
announcement that its CEO intends to resign, and certain stock
trades executed by certain defendants prior to the Company's
announcement regarding its CEO.  The claim asserts causes of
action against the defendants for alleged violations of Section
14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act and for breach of fiduciary
duty, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, and gross
mismanagement.  The Company believes there is no merit to this
suit and the Company intends to defend vigorously.

On August 23, 2013, plaintiff Tammy Federman filed a shareholder
derivative action entitled Federman v. Day, et al., No. 13-CV-5977
(S.D.N.Y.). that names as defendants current and former directors
and certain officers of the Company.  lululemon is named as a
nominal defendant in this lawsuit.  Similar to the Alkhoury class
action, the complaint challenges certain public disclosures and
conduct relating to the March 2013 sheer luon issue, the Company's
announcement that its CEO intends to resign, and certain stock
trades executed by certain defendants prior to the Company's
announcement regarding its CEO. The claim asserts causes of action
against the defendants for breach of fiduciary duty, unjust
enrichment, and abuse of control. The Company believes there is no
merit to this suit and the Company intends to defend vigorously.

On May 3, 2013, plaintiff Hallandale Beach Police Officers and
Firefighters Personnel Retirement Fund filed a books-and-records
action entitled Hallandale Beach Police Officers and Firefighters'
Personnel Retirement Fund v. lululemon athletica inc., No. 8522
(Del. Ch.). under 7 Del. C. Sec. 220 based on a demand letter it
sent to the Company on April 17, 2013 to request certain lululemon
records relating to the March 2013 sheer luon issue and recent
revisions to the Company's executive bonus plan. The Company moved
to dismiss the complaint on May 28, 2013. On June 14, 2013,
plaintiff sent a supplemental demand letter that requested
additional records from the Company relating to the Company's
announcement that its CEO intends to resign, and certain stock
trades executed by the Company's Chairman prior to the Company's
announcement regarding its CEO.  On July 1, 2013, plaintiff filed
an amended complaint to incorporate allegations relating to the
June 14, 2013 supplemental demand letter.  The Company moved to
dismiss the amended complaint on August 15, 2013, and the
dismissal motion remains pending.  The Company believes there is
no merit to this action and the Company intends to continue to
defend vigorously.

lululemon athletica inc. is a designer and retailer of technical
athletic apparel operating primarily in North America and
Australia. The Company's yoga-inspired apparel is marketed under
the lululemon athletica brand name. The Company offers a range of
performance apparel and accessories for women, men and female
youth. Its apparel assortment, including items, such as fitness
pants, shorts, tops and jackets, is designed for healthy lifestyle
activities such as yoga, running and general fitness. The
Company's fitness-related accessories include an array of items,
such as bags, socks, underwear, yoga mats, instructional yoga
digital versatile discs (DVDs) and water bottles. As of January
29, 2012, its branded apparel was principally sold through 174
stores that are located in Canada, the United States, Australia
and New Zealand.


LULULEMON ATHLETICA: Awaits Approval of Settlement in Labor Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Former hourly employees of lululemon athletica inc. on October 12,
2012, filed a class action lawsuit in the Superior Court of the
State of California entitled Rebakah Geare et al v. lululemon
athletica inc.  The lawsuit alleges the Company violated various
U.S. labor codes by failing to provide meal and rest breaks,
failing to pay minimum wage, failing to pay overtime, failing to
pay certain wages, failing to provide reasonable seating and
failing to provide unpaid vacation times as wages at time of
termination.  The Company and the plaintiffs have reached a
tentative agreement on settlement terms.  The parties must now
gain approval from the court and go through the process of
obtaining final approval, according to the Company's Form 10-Q
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarterly period ended August 4, 2013.

lululemon athletica inc. is a designer and retailer of technical
athletic apparel operating primarily in North America and
Australia. The Company's yoga-inspired apparel is marketed under
the lululemon athletica brand name. The Company offers a range of
performance apparel and accessories for women, men and female
youth. Its apparel assortment, including items, such as fitness
pants, shorts, tops and jackets, is designed for healthy lifestyle
activities such as yoga, running and general fitness. The
Company's fitness-related accessories include an array of items,
such as bags, socks, underwear, yoga mats, instructional yoga
digital versatile discs (DVDs) and water bottles. As of January
29, 2012, its branded apparel was principally sold through 174
stores that are located in Canada, the United States, Australia
and New Zealand.


MERACORD LLC: "Lomax" Class Action Transferred to W.D. Wash.
------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Stanley R. Chesler transferred to the United States
District Court for the Western District of Washington the case
captioned REGINA LOMAX, on behalf of herself and others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. MERACORD LLC, and JOHN DOES 1-5,
Defendants, CIVIL ACTION NO. 13-1945 (SRC), (D. N.J.).

This putative class action arises out of Ms. Lomax's subscription
to the "Debt Settlement System" offered by third party P&E
Solutions and her agreement to receive the payment processing
services of Meracord in connection therewith.  Ms. Lomax is a
resident of New Jersey. Meracord is Delaware limited liability
company, whose sole member is a citizen of the State of
Washington. Meracord maintains its principal place of business in
Washington. The Plaintiff initiated her lawsuit on November 7,
2012, in New Jersey state court, asserting three causes of action
pursuant to New Jersey statutes. She filed it as a putative class
action, on behalf of other New Jersey residents.

The motion to transfer was filed by Meracord. Ms. Lomax opposed
the request.

Judge Chesler concluded that a transfer of the action to the
Western District of Washington would promote the convenience of
the parties and serve the interests of justice.  Meracord has
demonstrated that a transfer pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a)
is warranted, he added.

A copy of the District Court's October 16, 2013 Opinion is
available at http://is.gd/zMOgfTfrom Leagle.com.


MERCK SHARP: Dec. 13 Hearing on $32 Million Vioxx Settlement
------------------------------------------------------------
There is a Settlement with Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., formerly
known as Merck & Co., about the prescription anti-inflamatory
drug, Vioxx.  This class action Settlement is subject to court
approval.

The lawsuit claims that Merck falsely advertised the drug Vioxx as
having greater benefits than less expensive pain medicines, which
contradicted the drug's Food and Drug Administration approved
labeling.  The lawsuit does not include claims for personal
injuries or wrongful death.

Merck has agreed to pay a total of up to $23 million to settle
this lawsuit, including all costs and attorneys' fees. Merck
denies any liability for the claims in the lawsuit, but it is
settling to avoid the costs and distraction of further litigation.

Class members who submit valid claims can get up to $50 in cash or
reimbursement for up to the actual out of pocket expenses paid for
Vioxx and up to $75 for certain other losses.

Claim Forms must be submitted to the claims administrator with
supporting proof postmarked by May 6, 2014.

Objections to the settlement are due Nov. 9, 2013.

The Court will hold a hearing on Dec. 13, 2013, to consider
approval of the settlement as well as attorney's fees and expenses
of up to 32% of the maximum $32 million settlement amount or up to
$7.36 million.

The case is In re Vioxx Products Liability Litigation, No. 05-md-
01657 (E.D. La.).  A copy of the settlement agreement is available
at http://is.gd/h15azC

Class counsel are:

     Russ Herman, Esq.
     HERMAN, HERMAN & KATZ, LLC
     820 O'Keefe Avenue
     New Orleans, LA 70113

          - and -

     LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
     275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
     San Francisco, CA 94111

Defense counsel is:

     Douglas R. Marvin, Esq.
     WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY, LLP
     725 Twelfth Street, N.W.
     Washington, D.C. 20005

The Claims administrator is BrownGreer Plc:

     BrownGreer PLC
     250 Rocketts Way
     Richmond, VA 23231
     Tel: 804-521-7200
     E-mail: information@browngreer.com


MICHAELS STORES: Settles Suit Over "Collection" of Personal Info
----------------------------------------------------------------
Michaels Stores, Inc. reached a settlement in a suit related to
its alleged practice of collecting personal identification
information in connection with credit card transactions, according
to the company's Aug. 30, 2013, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
Aug. 3, 2013.

Relying in part on the California Supreme Court decision, an
additional purported class action lawsuit was filed on May 20,
2011 against the Company: Melissa Tyler v. Michaels Stores, Inc.
in the U.S. District Court-District of Massachusetts, alleging
violation of a Massachusetts statute regarding the collection of
personally identification information in connection with a credit
card transaction.

On March 11, 2013, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled
on certified questions on the interpretation of the statute and
remanded the case to the U.S. District Court for further
proceedings.  Following the Judicial Court's decision, an
additional purported class action lawsuit asserting the same
allegations in Tyler was filed in the U.S. District Court,
District of Massachusetts by Susan D'Esposito, and the two cases
have been consolidated.  On August 12, 2013, a tentative
settlement that is subject to Court approval was reached for an
amount that will not have a material effect on the company's
Consolidated Financial Statements.


NATIONAL TECHNICAL SYSTEMS: Named Defendant in Merger Litigation
----------------------------------------------------------------
A putative stockholder class action was filed on August 23, 2013,
against National Technical Systems, Inc., asserting generally that
the members of the Company's board of directors breached their
fiduciary duty by agreeing to a proposed merger and by failing to
provide adequate information it, according to the Company's Form
10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for
the quarterly period ended July 31, 2013.

The stockholder class action lawsuit is entitled Elias v. National
Technical Systems, Inc., Case No. BC519271, and filed in the
Superior Court of the State of California, Los Angeles County,
against the Company, the members of the Company's board of
directors, Aurora Capital Group, Nest Parent, Inc. and Nest Merger
Sub, Inc.  The lawsuit asserts generally that the members of the
Company's board of directors breached their fiduciary duty to
maximize the value of the Company and its shares of common stock
by agreeing to a proposed merger at a "woefully inadequate" price
and by failing to provide adequate information about the proposed
merger. The lawsuit further asserts that the Company, Aurora
Capital Group, Nest Parent, Inc. and Nest Merger Sub, Inc. aided
and abetted those alleged breaches of fiduciary duty. The lawsuit
seeks, among other relief, an order enjoining the consummation of
the merger, damages in an unspecified amount and an award of
attorneys' fees and expenses of litigation. Defendants believe
that the lawsuit is without merit and intend to defend it
vigorously.

National Technical Systems, Inc. (NTS) is an independent provider
of testing and certification services (T&C) in the United States.
NTS serves clients in the aerospace, defense, telecommunications,
automotive, energy, consumer products, commercial and industrial
products and medical markets. NTS operates through a network of 22
testing laboratories in the United States and three international
cities, serving more than 4,000 clients. This geographically
diverse footprint puts Company facilities in close proximity to
its clients, making it convenient and accessible for clients. On
November 8, 2012, the Company purchased the 49.9% minority
interest in Unitek Technical Services, Inc. On April 17, 2012, the
Company acquired Garwood Laboratories, Inc., with testing
facilities in Pico Rivera and San Clemente, CA.


ROSS STORES: Employment Lawsuits Pending as of August 3
-------------------------------------------------------
As of August 3, 2013, class action lawsuits against Ross Stores,
Inc., alleging employment violations are pending, according the
Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarterly period ended August 3, 2013.

Like many California retailers, the Company has been named in
class action lawsuits alleging violation of wage and hour and
other employment laws. Class action litigation remains pending as
of August 3, 2013.

In the opinion of management, the resolution of pending class
action litigation and other currently pending legal and regulatory
proceedings is not expected to have a material adverse effect on
the Company's financial condition, results of operations, or cash
flows.

Ross Stores, Inc., along with its subsidiaries, operates two
brands of off-price retail apparel and home fashion stores. As of
January 28, 2012, the Company operated a total of 1,125 stores, of
which 1,037 were Ross Dress for Less (Ross) locations in 29
states, the District of Columbia, and Guam, and 88 were dd's
DISCOUNTS stores in seven states: 48 in California, 19 in Texas,
12 in Florida, four in Arizona, two in Georgia, two in Nevada, and
one in Maryland. Ross focuses on customers primarily from middle
income households, while dd's DISCOUNTS focuses on customers from
more moderate income households. During the fiscal year ended
January 28, 2012 (fiscal 2012), it opened 59 new Ross stores and
closed ten existing stores. During fiscal 2011, it opened 21 new
dd's DISCOUNTS stores. The average approximate dd's DISCOUNTS
store size is 23,900 square feet. In April 2011, it purchased a
449,000 square foot warehouse for packaway storage in Riverside,
California.


RUE21 INC: Court Tosses Suit Over Merger With Apax Unit
-------------------------------------------------------
The Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, on behalf
of itself and a putative class of public stockholders of the
Company, on May 30, 2013, filed a complaint in the Court of
Chancery in the State of Delaware against rue21, inc., the
directors of the Company, Apax and several funds affiliated with
Apax (collectively hereafter, "Apax") and Apax-affiliated entities
participating in the proposed Merger pursuant to the Merger
Agreement (the "Apax Entities").

On May 23, 2013, rue21 entered into an Agreement and Plan of
Merger with Rhodes Holdco, Inc., a Delaware corporation
("Parent"), and Rhodes Merger Sub, a newly formed Delaware
corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of Parent ("Merger
Sub"), providing for the merger (the "Merger") of Merger Sub with
and into the Company, with the Company surviving the Merger as a
wholly owned subsidiary of Parent.  Parent and Merger Sub are
affiliates of Apax Partners L.P. ("Apax"). The merger
consideration is $42.00 per share in cash, without interest. The
transaction will be supported through financing to be obtained by
affiliates of Apax.

The Merger is subject to the approval by (i) at least a majority
of all outstanding shares of common stock and (ii) a majority of
the then-outstanding shares not beneficially owned, directly or
indirectly, by Parent, Merger Sub, certain Apax entities, SKM
Equity Fund II, L. P. and SKM Investment Fund II (together, the
"SKM Funds") or certain other specified parties, receipt of
regulatory approvals, and other customary closing conditions,
including, among others, the absence of any order, judgment,
injunction, award, decree or writ restraining, enjoining,
prohibiting or otherwise preventing consummation of the Merger.
The Company has received notice from the Federal Trade Commission
granting early termination of the mandatory waiting period under
the Hart-Scott Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, as
amended, receipt of which was a condition to consummation of the
proposed Merger.

Concurrently with the execution and delivery of the Merger
Agreement, the SKM Funds, which collectively own approximately 30%
of the outstanding shares of the Company entered into a support
agreement with the Company and Apax to vote their shares in favor
of the transaction with Apax.

The proposed Merger is expected to close before the end of the
2013 calendar year, subject to approval by the majority of
stockholders unaffiliated with the SKM funds as well as customary
closing conditions.

The complaint alleged, among other things, that the Company and
its directors breached their fiduciary duties to the Company's
public stockholders by authorizing the Merger for inadequate
consideration, without a reasonable independent process and
without a fair opportunity to seek and secure the best sale price
for stockholders; that Apax, Apax affiliated members of the
Company's board of directors and the Company's chief executive
officer breached their duty of loyalty and entire fairness to the
Company through causing or supporting the Merger which plaintiff
alleged does not include a fair price and was not the result of
fair dealing; and that the Apax Entities aided and abetted the
other defendants' alleged breaches of fiduciary duty.

The plaintiff was seeking, among other things, a judgment
determining that the action is a proper class action and that the
plaintiff is a proper class representative; to enjoin the
defendants from taking steps to implement the acquisition of the
Company at a price that is not fair and equitable and under terms
presently proposed; to rescind the Merger (or awarding damages to
the class) in the event of its consummation prior to the entry of
final judgment; to enjoin any material transactions or changes to
the Company's business and assets until a proper process is
conducted to evaluate strategic alternatives; and the award of
compensatory damages and fees, expenses and costs of attorneys and
experts.

The suit was dismissed without prejudice on July 30, 2013, with
each party bearing its own costs, according to the Company's Form
10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for
the quarterly period ended August 3, 2013.

rue21, inc. (rue21) is a specialty apparel retailer. As of January
28, 2012, the Company operated 713 stores in 46 states throughout
the United States. It offers a line of apparel and accessories for
girls and guys, including graphic t-shirts, denim, dresses,
shirts, hoodies, belts, jewelry, handbags, footwear, intimate
apparel and other accessories. Its apparel and accessory brands
include rue21 (Girls apparel), rue21 etc! (Girls accessories),
tarea by rue21 (Girls intimate apparel), Carbon and CJ Black (Guys
apparel), and Carbon Elements (Guys accessories). In addition, the
Company sells its own line of fragrances under names of rue by
rue21, revert eco rue21, CJ Black, sparkle rue21, Pink Ice by
rue21, MetroBlack rue21, tarea by rue21, twentyone black, runway21
by rue21, Carbon Elements, Intense by rue21, and rue21 etc!. In
October 2013, rue21, inc and Apax Partners, a global private
equity firm, announced the completion of the acquisition of rue21
by funds advised by Apax Partners.


SCAVONE PLUMBING: Faces Charges Over Improper Asbestos Disposal
---------------------------------------------------------------
Gary V. Murray, writing for Telegram & Gazette, reports that the
owner of a local plumbing and heating company has been charged
with improperly removing and disposing of asbestos from a
Worcester home.

Francis J. Scavone III, the 27-year-old owner of Scavone Plumbing
& Heating, was arraigned on Oct. 28 in Worcester Superior Court on
five counts of violating the state's Clean Air Act.

Accompanied by his lawyer, Robert J. Hennigan Jr., Mr. Scavone
pleaded not guilty to the charges and was released on personal
recognizance by Judge James R. Lemire.  His case has been
continued to Dec. 5.

Prosecutors from the office of Attorney General Martha Coakley
allege that Mr. Scavone's company failed to file the proper
notification of asbestos removal with the state Department of
Environmental Protection while removing an old heating system from
a Worcester house in November of last year.  Mr. Scavone is
further alleged to have failed to follow the proper procedures for
asbestos removal and to have disposed of part of the asbestos
waste in an unpermitted location, namely a crawl space in the
basement of the house.

"We allege that the defendant is responsible for the improper
removal and disposal of asbestos, a hazardous material, therefore
putting the homeowner and workers at risk," the attorney general
said in a press release.

"Companies and individuals must adhere to strict guidelines
relating to asbestos removal in order to prevent people from being
exposed to this dangerous toxin," she said.

"Plumbing and heating contractors are well aware that asbestos is
a known carcinogen because they encounter asbestos-containing
materials routinely in their line of work.  The removal and
disposal must be done by licensed and trained asbestos
professionals in accordance with the regulations and with the
required work practices to protect workers, the general public and
the environment," said DEP Commissioner Kenneth Kimmel.

The Environmental Crimes Strike Force began an investigation last
December, after the matter was referred by the Massachusetts
Emergency Management Agency and the work was initially inspected
by investigators from the DEP's Central Regional Office, according
to the attorney general.

Assistant Attorney General Daniel Licata of the attorney general's
Environmental Crimes Strike Force is prosecuting the case, with
assistance from environmental police assigned to the attorney
general's office, the DEP and MEMA.


TILLY'S INC: Court Narrows "Christiansen" Class Suit
----------------------------------------------------
In June 2013, a U.S. court granted Tilly's, Inc.' motion to strike
portions of a complaint against the Company alleging violations of
California Civil Code Section 1747.08, according to the Company's
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarterly period ended August 3, 2013.

Kristin Christiansen and Shellie Smith, on behalf of themselves
and all others similarly situated vs. World of Jeans & Tops,
Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento, Case No. 34-
2013-00139010. On January 29, 2013, the plaintiffs in this matter
filed a putative class action lawsuit against the Company alleging
violations of California Civil Code Section 1747.08, which
prohibits requesting or requiring personal identification
information from a customer paying for goods with a credit card
and recording such information, subject to exceptions. In June
2013, the Court granted the Company's motion to strike portions of
the plaintiffs' complaint and granted plaintiffs leave to amend.
Plaintiffs amended to add a new named plaintiff, which the Court
struck on the Company's motion. The Company has denied the
allegations of the complaint and intends to defend this case
vigorously.

Tilly's, Inc. is a specialty retailer of West Coast apparel,
footwear and accessories. The Company has brands in action sports,
music, art and fashion. The Company's stores are designed to be an
extension of its teen and young adult consumers' lifestyles with a
balance of guys and juniors merchandise. As of April 30, 2011, the
Company operated 126 stores in 11 states, averaging approximately
7,800 square feet. Out of a total of 126 stores as of April 30,
2011, it operated 72 stores in California, 17 stores in Arizona,
six stores in Nevada and 16 stores in Florida. The Company also
sells its products through its e-commerce Website, www.tillys.com.
The Company's stores feature third-party brands, including
Billabong, Element, Hurley, Levi's, LRG, Neff, RVCA, Uggs and
Volcom. The Company's brands include RSQ, Full Tilt, Blue Crown
and Infamous.


TILLY'S INC: Appeals Order Denying Arbitration Bid in "Rebolledo"
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the case, Maria Rebolledo, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated and on behalf of the general public vs.
Tilly's, Inc.; World of Jeans & Tops, Superior Court of the State
of California, County of Orange, Case No. 30-2012-00616290-CU-OE-
CXC, the plaintiff on December 5, 2012, filed a putative class
action lawsuit against the Company alleging violations of
California's wage and hour, meal break and rest break rules and
regulations, and unfair competition law, among other things. An
amended complaint was filed on February 28, 2013, to include
enforcement of California's private attorney general act. The
complaint seeks an unspecified amount of damages and penalties. In
April 2013, the Company filed a motion to compel arbitration,
which was denied in May 2013.

Tilly's, Inc., disclosed in its recent Form 10-Q filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period
ended August 3, 2013, that the Company has appealed the denial of
the motion to compel arbitration. The Company intends to defend
this case vigorously.

Tilly's, Inc. is a specialty retailer of West Coast apparel,
footwear and accessories. The Company has brands in action sports,
music, art and fashion. The Company's stores are designed to be an
extension of its teen and young adult consumers' lifestyles with a
balance of guys and juniors merchandise. As of April 30, 2011, the
Company operated 126 stores in 11 states, averaging approximately
7,800 square feet. Out of a total of 126 stores as of April 30,
2011, it operated 72 stores in California, 17 stores in Arizona,
six stores in Nevada and 16 stores in Florida. The Company also
sells its products through its e-commerce Website, www.tillys.com.
The Company's stores feature third-party brands, including
Billabong, Element, Hurley, Levi's, LRG, Neff, RVCA, Uggs and
Volcom. The Company's brands include RSQ, Full Tilt, Blue Crown
and Infamous.


TILLY'S INC: Briefing Set on Class Cert. Bid in "Lyddy" Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
In the case, Deborah Lyddy v. World of Jeans & Tops and Tilly's,
Inc., Superior Court of California, County of San Diego (37-2011-
00098812-CU-BT-CTL), the plaintiff in October 2011 filed a
putative class action lawsuit against the Company alleging various
causes of action based on its California gift card redemption
policies.  The state court sustained the original demurrer to the
complaint but granted plaintiff leave to amend.  The amended
complaint survived demurrer and the court has now set a briefing
schedule for a hearing on plaintiff's motion for class action
treatment of the lawsuit.

The Company intends to defend this case vigorously, Tilly's
disclosed in its recent Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended August 3,
2013.

Tilly's, Inc. is a specialty retailer of West Coast apparel,
footwear and accessories. The Company has brands in action sports,
music, art and fashion. The Company's stores are designed to be an
extension of its teen and young adult consumers' lifestyles with a
balance of guys and juniors merchandise. As of April 30, 2011, the
Company operated 126 stores in 11 states, averaging approximately
7,800 square feet. Out of a total of 126 stores as of April 30,
2011, it operated 72 stores in California, 17 stores in Arizona,
six stores in Nevada and 16 stores in Florida. The Company also
sells its products through its e-commerce Website, www.tillys.com.
The Company's stores feature third-party brands, including
Billabong, Element, Hurley, Levi's, LRG, Neff, RVCA, Uggs and
Volcom. The Company's brands include RSQ, Full Tilt, Blue Crown
and Infamous.


ULTA SALON: Faces Suit Alleging California Labor Law Violations
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ulta Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc., is a defendant in a
putative employment class action lawsuit alleging that Ulta
violated various provisions of the California labor laws,
according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended
August 3, 2013.

The Company states: "On March 2, 2012, a putative employment class
action lawsuit was filed against us and certain unnamed defendants
in state court in Los Angeles County, California. On April 12,
2012, the Company removed the case to the United States District
Court for the Central District of California. The plaintiff and
members of the proposed class are alleged to be (or to have been)
non-exempt hourly employees. The suit alleges that Ulta violated
various provisions of the California labor laws and failed to
provide plaintiff and members of the proposed class with full meal
periods, paid rest breaks, certain wages, overtime compensation
and premium pay. The suit seeks to recover damages and penalties
as a result of these alleged practices. The Company denies
plaintiff's allegations and is vigorously defending the matter."

Ulta Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc. (Ulta) is a beauty
retailer, which provides one-stop shopping for prestige, mass and
salon products and salon services in the United States. During the
year ended January 28, 2012 (fiscal 2011), the Company opened 61
new stores. It operates full-service salons in all of its stores.
Its Ulta store format includes an open and modern salon area with
approximately eight to 10 stations. The entire salon area is
approximately 950 square feet with a concierge desk, skin
treatment room, semi-private shampoo and hair color processing
areas. Each salon is a full-service salon offering hair cuts, hair
coloring and permanent texture, with salons also providing facials
and waxing.


WEIGHT WATCHERS: "Burke" Class Action Dismissed Without Prejudice
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Amy Burke purchased two different diet ice cream bars sold under
the Weight Watchers label. Ms. Burke alleges that Weight Watchers
International, Inc. and Wells Enterprises, Inc., which
manufactured the diet ice cream bars, misrepresented the number of
calories on the entire line of bars.  Accordingly, Ms. Burke filed
a putative class action captioned AMY BURKE, Plaintiff, v. WEIGHT
WATCHERS INTERNATIONAL, INC. and WELLS ENTERPRISES, INC.
Defendants, CIV. NO. 2:12-06742 (WJM), (D. N.J.).

Ms. Burke's four-count Amended Complaint alleges breach of express
warranty, violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, breach
of implied warranty, and unjust enrichment. Defendants moved
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) to dismiss
claims related to diet bars that Burke did not purchase.
Defendants also moved pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
12(b)(6) to dismiss the entire Amended Complaint, arguing that Ms.
Burke's claims are preempted by the federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act. Finally, Defendants moved pursuant to Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 12(f) to strike certain allegations in the
Amended Complaint relating to a Today Show segment on low-calorie
ice cream.

District Judge William J. Martini denied the Defendants' Rule
12(b)(1) motion to dismiss saying the basis for Ms. Burke's claims
is the same with respect to all of the Diet Bars, the Diet Bars
are closely related because they belong to the same product line,
and the Defendants are the same.

Judge Martini granted the Defendants' Rule 12(b)(6) motion to
dismiss holding that even if Ms. Burke has pled the elements of a
state law cause of action in Counts I-IV, her claims are
preempted. Accordingly, the Court dismissed Counts I-IV without
prejudice.  The Defendants' Rule 12(f) motion to strike was also
denied.

The Court granted Ms. Burke 30 days in which to file a Second
Amended Complaint addressing only those deficiencies identified in
the Court's opinion.

A copy of the District Court's October 17, 2013 Opinion is
available at http://is.gd/nSGkLafrom Leagle.com.


* CPSC Mulls Rules to Ban Magnetic Toy Balls From U.S. Market
-------------------------------------------------------------
Andrea Rock, writing for Consumer Report News, reports that
Buckyballs, Zen Magnets, and other high-powered magnetic desk toys
have been popular holiday gifts in recent years.  But at a public
hearing on Oct. 22 held by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety
Commission, several doctors urged not only that consumers should
cross these dangerous toys off holiday shopping lists but also
that these magnetic balls should be banned from the U.S. market.

The desk toys typically contain more than 200 tiny round or cube-
shaped neodymium magnets that are at least 15 times more powerful
than standard magnets.  They stick together with such force that
if a child swallows more than one they can draw together parts of
the gastrointenstinal track, boring holes in the stomach or
intestines.  This could result in severe, life-threatening
complications within hours.

These products are labeled for those 14 years and older and carry
warnings about ingestion hazards.  But the tiny magnetic balls
increasingly have ended up in children's hands and mouths, often
causing serious injuries.  Young children, for whom mouthing
behavior is a natural part of early-childhood development, are
most at risk for swallowing these magnets.  Teens also have been
injured when they accidentally swallowed rare-earth magnets they
were using to mimic lip and tongue piercings.

The CPSC hearing focused on its proposed new rules.  The rules
would prohibit the sale of neodymium magnetic ball sets containing
even a single magnet that has a flux index, or magnet strength, of
more than 50 and which is small enough to fit within the small-
parts cylinder the CPSC uses to test for choking hazards.
A set of magnetic balls like these would typically have more than
200 pieces.

Doctors and consumer advocates on the hearing panel strongly urged
the CPSC to make final and adopt its proposed safety standard.
Panelists also asked the CPSC to ensure that its definition of
high-powered magnetic products would encompass jewelry, pens, and
other novelty items that comprise primarily or entirely small
high-powered magnets.

"The CPSC's previous actions -- including improving warnings,
publishing public service announcements, and recalling of existing
products -- were necessary and appropriate, but it is clear that
additional steps are needed to protect public safety," said
Ami Gadhia, senior policy counsel for Consumers Union, the policy
and advocacy arm of Consumer Reports.

While 11 U.S. companies already have voluntarily stopped selling
rare-earth magnetic desk toys, others continue to do so, including
the Denver-based Zen Magnets and Star Networks USA, which sells
Magnicube Magnet Balls and Magnet Cubes. The CPSC has sued both
companies to compel them to stop selling magnet sets and comply
with a recall.

Some magnet importers and other critics have argued that the
CPSC's proposed safety standard amounts to government overreach,
and they blame parents for their children's magnet-related
injuries.  But doctors at the hearing strongly argued that small
neodymium magnets pose a unique and unacceptable risk that
justifies the CPSC's proposed action.

Of the 100,000 foreign-body ingestions that occur each year in the
U.S., mostly in children, coins are by far the most common object
ingested, but others include sharp nails and pins.  Even so, most
pass out of the body naturally, with only 10 to 20 percent
requiring endoscopic removal and less than 1 percent needing
surgery, said Ian Lebowitz, M.D., assistant professor of
pediatrics at Virginia Commonwealth University.  But high-powered
magnetic ingestion cases are much different: 80 percent require
some form of medical intervention and 20 percent of these need
significant surgery.  "I have taken out hundreds of different
foreign bodies in my career but few pose the morbidity risk of
these magnets," Mr. Lebowitz said.

Bryan Rudolph, M.D., assistant professor of pediatrics at Albert
Einstein College of Medicine, disputed claims that negligent
parents are to blame for children's magnet ingestions, saying that
no amount of warning or parental vigilance can prevent these
magnet ingestions, which he described as "accidents involving an
irreparably unsafe product."

Within the last year alone, there have been at least seven
published reports of high-powered magnet ingestions affecting
children in the U.S.  For example, a recent study based on an
analysis of emergency-room data from the National Electronic
Injury Surveillance System estimates that from 2002 through 2011,
7,159 emergency-room visits were attributable to high-powered
magnet sets.

And a survey of 201 pediatric gastroenterologists from 44 states
identified 482 cases of documented magnet ingestions in children
from 2002 to 2011, with 820 of them occurring from 2009 through
2011.  The high frequency of magnet ingestions in that three-year
period corresponds to the introduction of high-powered magnet desk
toys.

The number of publicly reported magnet ingestions really
represents "only the tip of the icebarg," said Marsha Kay, M.D.,
chairwoman of pediatric gastroenterology at the Cleveland Clinic
Chindren's Hospital.  Ms. Kay said that within the last two weeks,
a young doctor in training at a New York City hospital had told
her that she had encountered five cases of magnet ingestion in the
last 14 months.

Pointing out that one company alone -- the former Buckyballs maker
Maxfield & Oberton -- sold 1.5 million magnet sets between 2009
and 2011, Maria Oliva-Hemker, M.D., chief of Pediatric
Gastroenterology and Nutrition at Johns Hopkins Children's Center,
told CPSC commissioners that "sales of high-powered magnet sets by
multiple manufacturers indicate that there are billions of high-
powered magnet balls now in our environment."  Therefore, she
said, the risk of magnet ingestion by children will remain high
for a period of time despite all efforts by doctors and consumer
groups to educate the public about their dangers.

In fact, eliminating the risks posed by high-powered magnet sets
requires not only banning their sale but also "doing everything
possible to remove products already sold from any environment
where children live, visit, play, or learn," said
Athos Bousvarous, M.D., president of the North American Society
for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, in a
statement released jointly by consumer-advocacy groups and medical
associations.


                        Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Lawsuit Trends Research Headlines Chamber Summit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform on Oct. 23 identified
asbestos, class-action, data privacy, and False Claims Act
lawsuits among the leading lawsuit trends, in a paper released at
its 14th Annual Legal Reform Summit. The first-of-its-kind large-
scale survey of lawsuits, The New Lawsuit Ecosystem - Trends,
Targets, and Players, details litigation trends, and the growing
alliance between state attorneys general and plaintiffs' lawyers.

"This broad look at the lawsuit ecosystem demonstrates that
litigation abuse remains a multi-billion dollar industry with
plaintiffs' lawyers constantly searching for new profit centers,"
said Lisa A. Rickard, president of ILR. "Abusive lawsuits rarely
benefit anyone other than the lawyers who file them, and drain
millions of dollars from business expansion and the creation of
new jobs."

The New Lawsuit Ecosystem also identifies the industries most
frequently targeted by emerging theories of liability, and for the
first time names the individual plaintiffs' lawyers behind the
litigation.

At the Summit, ILR also released research related to False Claims
Act reforms at the state and federal levels, closing loopholes for
class action abuse, making the case for state-based legal reforms,
and third-party litigation financing in Australia.

At the Summit, ILR honored key individuals and organizations who
are working to improve America's litigation environment with its
annual Legal Reform Awards.

In addition, the Summit was held in conjunction with ILR's 15th
anniversary.

"Over the last 15 years, we made great progress in stabilizing our
broken legal system, but we must remain vigilant as certain
problems have persisted and new ones have emerged," said Rickard.
"From challenges in state legislatures and taking on jackpot
jurisdictions, to combating an explosion of arbitrary federal
enforcement activity, only by remaining proactive and persistent
can we continue to heal the lawsuit system."

To view a full list of research released and award recipients,
visit www.instituteforlegalreform.com. Join the conversation via
Twitter using hashtag #ILRSummit

ILR seeks to promote civil justice reform through legislative,
political, judicial, and educational activities at the national,
state, and local levels.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is the world's largest business
federation representing the interests of more than 3 million
businesses of all sizes, sectors, and regions, as well as state
and local chambers and industry associations.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Toxic Dust Found in Burned Arizona Hotel Rubble
----------------------------------------------------------------
Carol Broeder, writing for Arizona Range News, reported that a
definitive positive test for asbestos and a new plan is underway
for the burned Desert Inn Motel on South Haskell Avenue, in
Willcox, Arizona.

According to the report, at a meeting, the City Council approved
two resolutions -- one involving California Bank and Trust, and
the other involving Krishna Pal Singh and Urmila Singh -- which
released the City from liability stemming from any "demolition,
clean up, or abatement" of the burned motel.

Currently the city has a letter from the bank, but is still
awaiting a letter from the owners.

The Singhs are named as the owners of the Desert Inn, and
Californina Bank and Trust as the "lender/beneficiary" of the Deed
of Trust, which was recorded Nov. 21, 2007 in the Cochise County
Recorder's Office, in the original principal amount of $800,000.

While the resolution involving the Singhs was unanimously approved
by Council, the City has received only one of the owner's
signatures and is currently waiting on the other.

In response to a question by Councilman Sam Lindsey, Willcox City
Manager Ted Soltis replied, "We are anticipating those signatures
will come back by the end of the week."

Both resolutions state that the City is empowered by State statute
"to exercise control to abate and remove dangerous buildings and
structures that have become a nuisance and possible health threat"
to its citizens.

The resolutions state that the Desert Inn "now has become a
nuisance structure requiring abatement action," which the Singhs
and California Bank and Trust "are not willing to undertake."

A brief discussion ensued prior to the Council's unanimous vote.
(Councilman Bill Holloway was absent for the meeting.)

Soltis said that once the City obtains all releases, it can "issue
a permit to a group that wants to clean up the property."

In response to a question from Mayor Bob Irvin, Soltis explained
that "Willcox Cares," a committee of the Willcox Chamber of
Commerce and Agriculture, has already received bids from three
firms for "removing the hotel."

"They are all certified to remove material that is tainted with
asbestos," he told the Council.

The lowest bid is $90,000.

Lindsey asked if volunteer labor is taken into account, Soltis
replied that the low bid is for the entire project.

In August this year, the City contracted with an independent
agency, Environmental Strategies, Inc., of Tucson for the thorough
sampling of debris from the burned motel.

In his Sept. 23 letter to the City, the firm's President Ken
Goodman said that the report confirms that there is asbestos-
containing materials in the samples submitted to the laboratory on
Aug. 26.  He went onto say, "The amount and diversity of the
asbestos containing materials renders the entire debris field of
the Desert Inn of Willcox positive for RACM (Regulated Asbestos
Containing Material), and as such must be removed following all
EPA, NESHAP, and OSHA regulations with regard to asbestos
abatement."

According to the Aug. 31 lab report, of the 91 samples taken, 37
of them tested positive -- 30 for anywhere from one to 10-percent
chrysotile; while an additional seven tested positive for less
than one-percent chrysotile.

"Chrysotile" is one of the three most common types of asbestos,
along with amosite, and crocidolite, according to the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) website.

The lab report indicates that of the 30 positives, three were at
10-percent; nine were at eight-percent; nine were at five-percent;
one was at three-percent; 10 were at two to three-percent; and
four were at one to two-percent.

(Nine of the total 91 samples were in two parts, either testing
both tile and adhesive, or both drywall and surfacing.)

The ADEQ required a more thorough sampling, which ADEQ was unable
to do, after its Inspector Brian Jones did a second sampling of
the debris on July 30, according to a report obtained from ADEQ on
Aug. 12.

Jones, who is with the ADEQ's "Asbestos National Emissions
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) Program," Air
Quality Compliance Section, Inspections and Field Service Unit,
first conducted a "compliance assistance visit" to the burned
motel on July 9.

The six samples from the July 9 visit "were determined not to be
asbestos containing," however, Jones said more samples would be
taken.  Results from the July 30 second sampling showed that the
block fill insulations were "less than or equal to one-percent
actinolite and classified as vermiculite," which Jones described
as a "naturally occurring mineral."

"It is a granular product that is absorbent and resistant to heat
and has been in commerce for almost 80 years, mainly used in
construction, insulation, and gardening products," said Jones,
adding that "it looks like shiny, small pieces of popcorn, and is
usually a light-brown or gold color."  He explained that due to
"scientific uncertainties associated with existing testing
techniques, there is no easy way or dependable testing method to
differentiate between vermiculate that might have some asbestos
fibers" and that which does not.

Soltis told the Range News, "Essentially, ADEQ conducted two
inspections for asbestos and did not find any."

"They are now requiring a third, more thorough independent study,
per NESHAP rules," which the City put out for bid, he said at the
time.

"We are hopeful that no asbestos will be found and clean-up can
proceed."

At this point (prior to a thorough sampling), Jones said that when
the burned motel in Willcox is cleaned up, "ADEQ recommends all of
the material should be treated as asbestos containing waste
material, and be taken to an approved asbestos land fill."  He
explained that the samples collected "did not represent a thorough
inspection of the facility."

"Due to the fire damage, some areas were not accessible for
sampling; therefore, ADEQ staff was unable to collect all suspect
asbestos containing materials," Jones said in the 48-page report.
"A thorough inspection must be conducted prior to the clean-up of
this site, or the parties performing the clean-up can assume that
all fire-damaged materials be treated as asbestos containing waste
materials."

                       Previous City actions

In February, the City had put the demolition out to bid with a
March 1 deadline.

It received four demolition bids for the burned motel. Only one
contractor -- Environmental Response, Inc. -- met all the
requirements requested in the bid packet, and their bid was
$309,000 to remove everything and take it to an asbestos site in
Casa Grande.

In a March 27 letter to the Council, the City's Development
Services Administrator Jeff Stoddard said his department
"recommends that we reject all bids and go back out to bid with
some adjustments made to the existing bid document."

"Staff now recommends that the City only remove the destroyed
structure at this time," he said.

"If the City does acquire the property (through court proceedings)
the City can then proceed demo of other structures, if the Council
would like to do so, with City staff and equipment," said
Stoddard, explaining that it would be a cost savings to the
taxpayers.

Stoddard explained that the City pays $500 per month to keep a
fence around the property, and if the City did  acquire the motel
property, there are $45,000 in back taxes owed on it.
Lindsey said that the property is probably only worth $15,000 to
begin with.

Councilman Bill Holloway said that the City should "get after them
legally."

City Attorney Ann Roberts said that the City should "move forward
in Superior Court."  She said that going after the owner won't do
any good, as he hasn't any money, adding, "We know the bank does."

In the City's Oct. 16, 2012, newsletter, then-City Manager Pat
McCourt referred to it as the "motel building on the west end of
town, or the never-ending story, might be another name."  "The
short story is that this is in the legal system which moves
slowly," he said.

"This has not been forgotten. The City continues to work with the
property owner and the mortgage company to try to get them to take
the responsibility to clean up their property," McCourt said at
the time.  He explained that the Council had set aside $100,000
for the City to perform the cleanup, "if the owners will not do
the job."

"If the City has to do the cleanup, then the City wants to be able
to place a claim against the property to try to recover some
(hopefully all) of the cost that the taxpayers spend to clean up
this private property," McCourt said.

"We are sorry this is taking so long," he said. "We are working
diligently to protect private property rights; protect the public
safety, and protect the public tax dollars."

The vacant Desert Inn Motel was a total loss after the fire that
occurred on March 24, 2012.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Weirton Fibro Abatement Passed
-----------------------------------------------
WTOV9.com reported that the council in Weirton, West Virginia, met
in a special session to discuss a few items on the agenda.  The
proposed asbestos abatement for Willow Street was passed
unanimously. It is a continuation of the demolition project where
the buildings have to be checked and treated for asbestos by law
before they are demolished.

According to the report, there is no money coming from the city of
Weirton because it is state and federally funded by the Hazard
Mitigation Grant. Council hopes to have the asbestos abatement
done in November and the property should be cleared in the spring.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Gwydir Mayor Responds to Alleged Fibro Dumping
---------------------------------------------------------------
Kerrin Thomas, writing for ABC News, reported that the Mayor of
Gwydir Shire Council, in New South Wales, Australia, says historic
asbestos dump sites found at Warialda aren't related to a more
recent incident of illegal dumping in the town.

According to the report, the Environment Protection Authority has
been investigating the Council's asbestos management since broken
pipes, made from bonded asbestos and mixed in with excavated soil,
were dumped near the town's Showground

Following tip-offs from the community, the Authority confirmed it
had found three sites where asbestos was dumped up to 20 years
ago, with another six sites still to be tested.

Gwydir Mayor, John Coulton, says he suspects this type of dumping
has occurred all over the state.

"I think it happened before people were even aware of the danger
of asbestos and I think you'll find it's right around NSW and I
think every Council's going to have the same problem," he said.

"Certainly the [dumping] incident of a couple of weeks ago was a
mistake, but it was isolated and I think the other discoveries
have just occurred over the years, before there was any
regulation."

John Coulton says it's obvious the material at the newly-
discovered sites has been there a long time.

"We've printed a map out and the men are going to put spots on the
map where they think there could be asbestos, but they're old
sites and they're quite stable until moved," he said.

"We'll be advised by the EPA as to what we need to do with them,
but I think they'll be covered over and their location recorded so
there can't ever be any future development there."

John Coulton also says Council staff who illegally dump asbestos
will face the sack.  He says he's confident it won't happen again.

"It was a terrible thing to happen, it should never have happened,
and I've been assured by Council staff that it'll never happen
again," he said.

"We have a protocol for handling asbestos and what's been added to
that protocol now is that if any Shire employee illegally dumps
asbestos it will be an immediate dismissal."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Skegness Hotel Fined GBP39K Over Fibro Exposure
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is Lincolnshire reported that a Skegness hotel has been fined
GBP44,512 in fines and costs for exposing staff to asbestos.

According to the report, the County Hotel in North Parade,
Skegness, in the United Kingdom, was successfully prosecuted by
East Lindsey District Council after a series of breaches of the
Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.

The owners of the hotel, UK Holiday Group Ltd, pleaded guilty to
three separate breaches relating to exposure of employees to
asbestos.

Since the offences came to light the hotel on Skegness Seafront,
has carried out extensive work to remove large quantities of high-
risk asbestos lagging from boiler tanks and pipe work in its
basement.

The council's health and safety inspector, Rod MacKenzie, said:
"Asbestos can pose significant danger to health. Asbestos-related
disease kills far more people in the UK than are killed on our
roads.

"All businesses have an obligation to know whether their premises
contain asbestos and to take appropriate steps to remove or
contain any that is identified.

"The simple fact in this case is that because of the hotel's
failure, workers have been put at risk, and face an uncertain
future. I would urge all business proprietors to make sure they
are not exposing staff, customers or themselves to such a
potentially dangerous material."

On October 17 Skegness Magistrates imposed fines totalling
GBP39,000 on the hotel's owners and awarded costs totalling
GBP5,392 to ELDC.

A spokesman for the authority said they were alerted to asbestos
at the premises following concerns raised by a member of staff at
the hotel.

Prosecution was then considered due to the significant quantity,
type of material (high risk lagging), length of time present
(decades), exposure of staff and lack of management/safety
controls.

It is thought at least two members of staff had significant
exposure to the asbestos while working at the premises.
A hotel spokesman said: "We took immediate action to rectify the
problem once it came to our notice prior to the involvement of
ELDC.

"We have cooperated fully with the council and those responsible
are either no longer working for the company or have been
disciplined.

"The problem solely related to a limited area in the basement of
the property to which the public never had access and the hotel
stayed open throughout the investigation with the approval of the
council."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Department of Energy Fined for Removal Violations
------------------------------------------------------------------
Kristen Griffin, writing for Mesothelioma.com, reported that a
nuclear production complex from the Manhattan Project era is
embroiled in an asbestos removal controversy. The decommissioned
Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington State is under the
direction of the United States Department of Energy is facing
$115,000 in asbestos removal violations from the United States
Environmental Protection Agency.

The Hanford Nuclear Reservation manufactured the plutonium used in
the first nuclear bomb and the bomb that was dropped over Nagasaki
during World War II.

Stemming from demolition work conducted by a third-party
contractor at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation or Hanford Site, the
allegations brought forward by the EPA include asbestos
contaminating the site's soil, creating a brand new waste site
that will require extensive decontamination work, and failing to
properly label trucks carrying asbestos waste. The asbestos waste
shipments were sent to the Environmental Restoration Disposal
Facility.

According to the EPA, the heftiest portion of the $115,000 fine --
$85,000 -- is the result of not properly labeling the asbestos
waste trucks, placing workers at the Environmental Restoration
Disposal Facility assigned to unload the deadly debris in harm's
way. If the trucks were designated properly, workers at the
facility would have taken necessary precautions to ensure health
and safety. Specifically, the allegations of asbestos violations
surround demolition work conducted at the Hanford Nuclear
Reservation in 2009 and 2010.

Asbestos is a highly toxic, naturally-occurring set of minerals
used widely in building materials and supplies. At Hanford,
asbestos-containing products included cement asbestos board
siding, paneling and components of a large water tower. When
disturbed, asbestos particles can contaminate the air, leading to
exposure. Classified as a carcinogen, exposure to asbestos
particles can lead to asbestosis, lung cancer and mesothelioma.
Mesothelioma -- a common diagnosis stemming from asbestos exposure
-- is a rare form of cancer with an exceptionally high lethality
rate. Most with a mesothelioma cancer diagnosis die soon after the
disease is discovered.

The Department of Energy has 15 days to respond to the fines and
allegations issued by the EPA.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Former Parmatown Mall Gets $2MM for Fibro Removal
------------------------------------------------------------------
Doug Rogers, writing for Newsnet5.com, reported that plans to
transform the downtown of Parma, Ohio, received a $2 million
boost.  The money will go toward the $70 million redevelopment of
the former Parmatown Mall into The Shoppes at Parma, featuring
modern retail and new medical offices, among other amenities.

Cuyahoga County Council approved the award from Cuyahoga's Western
Reserve Fund, created to support economic development throughout
the county, according to a news release from the county
executive's office.

The money will assist with asbestos removal from medical office
buildings and retail buildings. The funds will also pay to
demolish dated retail buildings.

"This site has been a development priority for a long time," said
Cuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald in a news release. "It
took a team approach from the public sector and the county's
investment to make this transformation a reality. In addition to
the new construction -- and the jobs that come with it --
remediating and redeveloping this site will be a long term boost
to Parma's premier commercial real estate and spur additional
growth in the area."

Phillips Edison & Co. will redevelop and manage the 82-acre site.
New development will create about 600 construction and 1,750
retail jobs. This will also increase income taxes for the county
and generate a project $3.6 million in sales tax.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Clinical Tests to Control Mesothelioma Cancer
--------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Povtak, writing for Asbestos.com, reported that a recently
launched, international clinical trial that involves the targeted
killing of mesothelioma cancer stem cells soon could provide a
much-needed breakthrough for patients around the world.

The mesothelioma trial, which is expected to involve 350-400
patients across 11 countries, will study the cancer stem cell
inhibitor defactinib (VS-6063), which has shown considerable
promise in treating other cancers.

"The potential is there. If this (trial) turns out positive, it
would be a big step forward for mesothelioma patients. It could
become the next drug to be used," oncologist James Stevenson,
M.D., principal investigator at the Cleveland Clinic, told
Asbestos.com. "It has been a long time coming. I know all the
investigators working on this trial are excited about the
promise."

Stem cells represent only a small percentage of cells in a tumor,
but they are considered the major cause of tumor resistance to
chemotherapy, the primary reason for recurrence of the cancer, and
eventual progression of the disease.

This will be the first time a drug has been designed to inhibit a
specific protein  (Focal Adhesion Kinase, or FAK) within the
mesothelioma stem cells.

"The hopes are high that we have something very promising here,"
said Dean Fennell, Ph.D., Thoracic Medical Oncology chair at the
University of Leicester in the United Kingdom.

"There is a lot of enthusiasm for this one. It could change the
way we treat this disease," said Fennell, also the incoming
president of the International Mesothelioma Interest Group. "It
has that kind of potential."

                            Long-Term Maintenance

Defactinib, in the study, will be used for mesothelioma
maintenance that follows the standard chemotherapy treatment with
Alimta (Pemetrexed). Unlike standard chemotherapy, defactinib is
less toxic with considerably fewer side effects, allowing it to be
used for extended periods to combat the tumor stem cells that
Alimta misses.

Alimta still is the only FDA-approved drug for the treatment of
mesothelioma. It was approved in 2005. It has shown little, if
any, ability to control cancer stem cells, which made this trial
with defactinib so highly anticipated. Past research has suggested
that standard chemotherapy, while shrinking the size of tumors,
actually increases the percentage of untouchable stem cells, which
leads to metastasis.

"The stem cells are like the queen bee in the beehive. They are
the rare ones that drive the growth of the cancer," Fennell told
Asbestos.com. "When these cells are attacked, the cancer does not
have the capacity to grow."

Both Stevenson and Fennell were encouraged by the international
scope of this trial and the early enthusiasm by both investigators
and potential participants. Defactinib, for mesothelioma
treatment, already has received an FDA Orphan Drug designation,
which is designed to accelerate the development of therapies for
rare diseases.

                         Study Will Span the Globe

The multi-center study involves the United States, Canada,
Australia, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and South Africa.
Fennell believes the broad coverage could produce a quicker-than-
normal data analysis, coming as early as the end of 2014 or
beginning of 2015.

The Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, along with the Abramson Cancer
Center in Philadelphia, and the University of Chicago Medical
Center in Chicago, are the three sites recruiting patients in the
United States.

The study will compare the overall survivor rates and progression-
free survival of subjects receiving defactinib against those
receiving a placebo. Participants will receive 400 mg orally twice
daily, or the placebo.

Participants will be required to first undergo a test to determine
their level of the biomarker merlin. The pre-trial data already
has suggested that defactinib will be more effective in patients
with lower levels of merlin. The study will group patients
accordingly, to evaluate the effectiveness of the drug in both the
overall mesothelioma population, and also for those with low
levels of merlin.

                             Help Could Be Near

Mesothelioma, which is caused by exposure to asbestos, has no
cure. A diagnosis often comes with a prognosis of just six to 18
months. Even with a multi-level approach that includes surgery,
chemotherapy and radiation, the increased survival is usually
measured in months and not years.

"The incidence of mesothelioma is increasing worldwide. This is
not going away," Fennell said. "There is an unmet need right now
for better treatment options. Our hope is to recruit participants
quickly."

Verastem Inc., which developed defactinib, also has helped fund
testing the drug in trials involving ovarian cancer and non-small
cell lung cancer. Verastem is developing several cancer drugs
designed to target stem cells.

"Defactinib is a drug that is unique in the way it works,"
Stevenson said. "To find a drug that could control this disease,
to kill the stem cells left behind, would be a vast improvement."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Belfast Trust Fined for Fibro Failings
-------------------------------------------------------
Construction Ireland reported that Belfast Health and Social Care
Trust (BHSCT) has been fined GBP6,500 plus costs of GBP1,500 at
Laganside Crown Court after previously pleading guilty to two
breaches of health and safety regulations.

The case arose following an investigation conducted by the Health
and Safety Executive for Northern Ireland (HSENI) into an incident
which occurred at the Royal Victoria Hospital during February
2011.

Several construction workers and a BHSCT employee were potentially
exposed to asbestos during the replacement of switchboards and
cabling in the basement area of the Royal Victoria Hospital for
Sick Children and Out Patients Department.

The BHSCT had previously carried out asbestos surveys of the
basement area which was known to contain asbestos in the form of
thermal insulation debris on the floor and pipes but this
information was not passed on to those involved in the
construction project.

After the hearing, Dale Shirlow, an Inspector with HSENI's Major
Investigation Team said: "The dangers posed by the presence of
asbestos are clear. There is no known 'safe limit' and it is often
many years after exposure before asbestos-related diseases appear
-- so it is important that exposure to asbestos fibres is kept to
an absolute minimum.

"Belfast Health and Social Care Trust failed in its duty to
properly manage the risks of asbestos in its premises and as a
result at least one employee and several external contractors have
potentially been exposed to harmful fibres."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Warning for NSW Bushfire Zones
-----------------------------------------------------
SkyNews.com reported that residents returning home after the NSW
bushfires have been warned that asbestos has been found in at
least 48 of the properties so far inspected.

About 235 homes have been assessed and 175 analysed further for
asbestos, with the dangerous material detected in 48 houses,
former NSW Rural Fire Service commissioner Phil Koperberg told ABC
radio.

'Any house built prior to 1987 is more likely than not to have an
asbestos content,' he said.

Many areas are yet to be inspected and even though the risk of
exposure is 'low,' Mr Koperberg warned people to stay out of their
homes if they're unsure.

'(It's) better to be sure than sorry,' he said.

Signs will be placed outside properties where asbestos is found
and an information hotline will also be set up.

Mr Koperberg, who is the Blue Mountains emergency recovery co-
ordinator, visited Winmalee with Premier Barry O'Farrell.

Premier Barry O'Farrell said the asbestos risk was probably
minimal.

'However it's better to be safe than sorry,' he told reporters at
the Winmalee Fire Station.

A co-ordinated clean up effort would be undertaken quickly, he
said, and burnt out properties with asbestos would be sign-posted.

Blue Mountains Emergency Recovery co-ordinator Phil Koperberg said
people who had already returned to homes shouldn't panic.

'This is an exponential type of event so the longer and the
greater the exposure the higher the risk,' he said.

'We're asking people who have been (to burnt out homes) not to go
back until we've settled the sites down.'

He said of the 235 homes destroyed by fire 67 had so far been
found to have asbestos.

There were also safety concerns about arsenic in treated pine and
of the potential for remaining structures to collapse.

Mr Koperberg said the asbestos assessment teams hadn't been able
to get into the fire zones because conditions had been too
dangerous.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Abatement Needed at Expo Pool
----------------------------------------------------
Joe Sutter, writing for The Messenger, reported that demolition of
Expo Pool, Iowa, could begin by Nov. 10, depending on the weather,
according to discussion at a Fort Dodge Parks and Recreation
meeting.  Two bids for the demolition were received, one from
Rasch Construction for $78,000, and one from Hovey Construction
for $146,000.

Parks and Recreation Director Lori Branderhorst said the City
Council will likely accept the bid from Rasch at a meeting.

"Right now, we are doing asbestos abatement," Branderhorst said.
"There was asbestos found when they did the test last year, in the
caulk. We'll be abating that in the month of November."

The company will remove the pool completely, and not fill it in as
was discussed earlier, she said, because the potential cost
savings were not as great as originally estimated.

The earliest work could begin is Nov. 10. Rasch still hopes to
complete the work this year, weather permitting. Branderhorst said
the city hopes to seed the site this winter.

There's plenty of money for the demolition, she added, but not
much for construction of the park.

"We've got the shelter to do yet, and we've got a couple of things
we have to do yet," she said. "The all-purpose court may not get
built."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Family Blames Mother's Lung Cancer to Fibro
------------------------------------------------------------
The Southeast Texas Record reported that an asbestos lawsuit has
been filed by the estate of the late Gloria Harris alleging her
lung cancer was caused by her husband's asbestos exposure at
Texaco.

The lawsuit was filed by Joe Harris filed suit against Texaco, and
other defendants including TRMI Holdings, Huntsman Petrochemical,
Triplex, Santa Fe Braun, Resco Holdings, Bechtel Corp., Sequoia
Ventures, Chicago Bridge & Iron and LGS Technologies.

According to the lawsuit, Joe's late wife inadvertently breathed
the asbestos dust from his clothes and riding his vehicle, which
he had been exposed to during his employment at Texaco. This
allegedly caused her to develop asbestos-related lung cancer, from
which she died on February 24, 2012.

The suit accuses the defendants of manufacturing and using
asbestos products without warning workers, such as Joe, of the
health hazards associated with the carcinogenic mineral.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Woman Blames Fibro Exposure for Cancer
-------------------------------------------------------
The Louisiana Record reported that Rosemary Rodosta has filed an
asbestos lawsuit alleging she developed asbestos-related cancer as
a direct result of both direct and secondary asbestos exposure. In
her lawsuit Rodosta asserts she has been diagnosed with pleural
mesothelioma, which she alleges is a result of both household
asbestos exposure from when she was child living in her parents'
residence in Louisiana, and from direct exposure as a result of
smoking Kent Cigarettes from 1947 to 1967.

Named defendants in the lawsuit are: Lorillard Tobacco Company,
Hollingsworth and Vose Company Inc., Eagle Inc., One Beacon
American Insurance Company, McCarty Corporation, Reilly Benton
Company Inc., Falstaff Brewing Corporation, Taylor-Seidenbach Inc.
and their insurers.

Rodosta alleges that her father worked at Falstaff Brewery, where
he was frequently exposed to asbestos, and would come home covered
in asbestos dust, which would "emanate from his person." As a
child living in this environment she claims she suffered secondary
asbestos exposure.  She further alleges her direct exposure to
asbestos came later, as a result of smoking Kent Cigarettes from
1947 to 1967, because the micronite filters of these cigarettes
contained crocidolite or blue asbestos at least from the period of
March 1952 through May 1956.

The defendants are accused of intentional misconduct, fraud, and
concealment or conspiracy to defraud or conceal the dangers of
asbestos-containing products.

Rodosta is seeking an unspecified amount in damages is sought for
medical costs, lost earnings, mental sufferings and reduced
quality of life.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Courthouse Fibro Forces Murder Trial Move
----------------------------------------------------------
ABC News reported that a Townsville murder trial will be heard in
Cairns after the discovery of asbestos in the courthouse disrupted
several legal cases.

Troy William Reed is accused of killing his former partner's
15-month-old boy in 2011.  He has pleaded not guilty to murder.

His trial was due to start in the Supreme Court in Townsville but
the discovery of asbestos in a courtroom forced the trial to be
rescheduled.  The five-day trial has now been listed to start in
Cairns.

In the District Court, four trials have been adjourned while the
council chambers have been converted into a temporary courtroom.

The Department of Justice says the asbestos removal work will
continue over three weeks and the measures in place will ensure
there is no significant backlog of cases.

The department says courtrooms will gradually reopen when safe.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Toxic Dust Danger in Gas Masks, Warns MP
---------------------------------------------------------
Mary Louis, writing for Kent Online, reported that potential
dangers to children of asbestos in First World War gas masks has
been highlighted by North Thanet MP Sir Roger Gale.  He is urging
schools to take the utmost care when dealing with the antique
masks for illustrative and educational purposes.  His warning
comes as Britain prepares for major commemorations of the
centenary of the Great War.

MP Jim Sheridan, chairman of the All-Party Group for Occupational
Health and Safety, has flagged up concerns that the masks can
release asbestos fibres when they are pulled over faces or
handles.

Sir Roger said: " In commemorating the anniversary of the
commencement of the First World War we are encouraging schools,
colleges and history societies to put together exhibitions of WW1
material. Inevitably, the surviving artifacts will include items
such as "tin hats" and, of course, gas masks.

"Nobody wants to deter enthusiasm or to act as a killjoy but we
are advised that there are inherent risks in the handling of
antiquated technology that, with greater understanding, would not
be acceptable today. "Handle with care" or, preferably not at all,
would seem to be the order of the day!"

Gas masks use a filter to absorb hazardous chemicals.

Asbestos was used in the filters on masks from both world wars.
Blue asbestos is a substance later found to cause potentially
fatal pleural and peritoneal mesothelioma in a high proportion of
factory workers who were exposed to it.

Modern gas masks do not use asbestos.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Removal Part of $78MM Renovation
-------------------------------------------------------
Theresa Katalinas, writing for Bensalem Patch, reported that as
the school district moves forward on a $78 million renovation and
expansion of Bensalem High School, in Pennsylvania, containing,
removing and abating asbestos will be integral, an official told
Patch.

School board member Wayne Lewis, who heads the facilities
committee, told Patch after a school board meeting that officials
recently reviewed buildings and looked at "how to contain"
asbestos.

For the most part, Lewis said asbestos work will coincide with
demolition efforts at the high school. The board will put out a
request for proposal for bidders to provide price quotes for
contractors to "go wall to wall" to remove asbestos tiles, as well
as the building's original piping and fireproofing.

It's too early to determine the total cost of asbestos removal and
abatement efforts, Lewis said.

District officials said previously that $15 million of the $78
million price tag would be reserved for soft costs, such as
asbestos abatement, furniture and construction fees, and
contingency funds for change orders.

Asbestos was commonly used in certain products, including building
materials, to resist heat and corrosion, according to the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

Exposure to asbestos, even in small amounts, can cause lung
disease and cancer, particularly for workers during construction,
or other instances when asbestos is disturbed, according to OSHA.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Toxic Dust Closes 3 Turcot Work Sites
------------------------------------------------------
Andy Riga, writing for The Montreal Gazette, reported that
Transport Quebec is downplaying a discovery of asbestos that led
it to temporarily close three work sites related to the new Turcot
Interchange.

Asbestos was found on one site in recent days, leading to the
closing of that site and two other nearby ones as a precautionary
measure while more testing is conducted, said Alain Dube, the
Transport Quebec official overseeing the Turcot project.

The shutdowns affect work for new infrastructure and have no
effect on traffic. Fewer than 50 workers are affected.
Construction should resume within two weeks, Dube said.

When inhaled in significant quantities, asbestos fibres can cause
scarring of the lungs or various forms of cancer, Health Canada
says.

It's unclear if the asbestos in question came from railway
activities or if it was dumped there, Dube said.

The Turcot Yards, bounded by Notre-Dame-de-Grace, St-Henri and
Highway 20, was a major train hub, first for the Grand Trunk
Railway and later for Canadian National, beginning in the early
20th century. It was a simple container depot when it closed in
2002. A year later, Transport Quebec bought it.

"We had no documentation that showed asbestos had been used" by
the railways, Dube said. "We were all a little surprised,
including our experts."

He said testing was not done for asbestos because there was no
indication it had been used in the area.

The asbestos came to light this week after Quebec worker-safety
board ordered tests at one site (near Pullman St., which is closed
to traffic), suspecting lead contamination. The site was closed
Oct. 16.

Test results, which Transport Quebec received, showed varying
levels of asbestos in all the samples, Dube said. That led the
department to immediately close two other sites -- one near des
Carillon Ave., the other on land where a new ramp from Highway 15
south to Highway 20 west is being built.

Test results from those two other sites are expected, Dube said.
He said the asbestos was found in boiler slag, a byproduct of
coal-fired boilers.

"We're not taking any chances, because there is coal slag in
several places around the Turcot Yards."

However, Dube said, "we're used to dealing with asbestos and the
measures required to protect workers are very well established."

Once test results are in, a plan will be put together outlining
how the asbestos will be removed, with the safety of workers in
mind, Dube added.

Among other things, workers will be issued protective masks and
disposable outfits, he said.

It's too early to tell how much removing the asbestos will cost,
Dube said.

It's unclear what effect, if any, the asbestos find will have on
the overall Turcot project, which is expected to cost $3.7 billion
and be completed in 2020.

"We don't yet know the extent of the contamination," Dube said.
"For the moment, it's having a minor impact on these preparatory
sites."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: GTAC Said Fibro Claim Jumping to 'Conclusions'
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Simonson, writing for Superior Telegram, reported that the
company that wants to mine the Penokees for iron ore is disputing
recent findings of asbestos-like fibers in minerals there.

Two weeks after Northland College Geoscience Professor Tom Fitz
found what he called large concentrations of grunerite rock, which
contains asbestos-like fibers, Gogebic Taconite wanted to know
more. So GTAC, Fitz and a team of geologists toured the Ashland
County area. Fitz said they found more of the grunerite rock.

"It is apparent when you look at the grunerite that it is long,
slender crystals whether you look at that in the field with a hand
lens or whether you look at it under the microscope, it is
apparent that it is potentially hazardous. That's clear," Fitz
said

But GTAC spokesman Bob Seitz said more lab work needs to happen
before these minerals can be declared hazardous.

"They're making a jump from grunerite to asbestos and there are a
lot of facts in between there that just haven't been shown yet. We
want to take a more cautious approach, take a look at what the
actual facts are, do the testing on the samples and not jump to
conclusions."

Fitz agrees they need to find out more about the formation.

"There's reason to believe that this is hazardous," Fitz said.
"GTAC agrees with this and everybody agrees there needs to be more
studies on this. Really what isn't determined at all yet is the
extent of this stuff. How far east and west does it go along the
(Penokee) ridge."

Fitz is shipping his samples off to laboratories at UW-Madison,
the University of Minnesota-Duluth and Lawrence University in
Appleton. GTAC said it is also doing microscopic testing, but
results won't be made public until they apply for a mining permit.
That could take another year.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Halts Roof Work at Ottawa Museum
-------------------------------------------------------
Don Butler, writing for Ottawa Citizen, reported that the Canada
Science and Technology Museum has halted work on replacing its
roof after asbestos was discovered in roofing materials in the
nearly 50-year-old building.

The museum discovered in October, on the first day of the
renovation project, that cement in the roof had a one-per-cent
concentration of asbestos, said Fernand Proulx, the interim
president and CEO of the Canada Science and Technology Museums
Corporation.

"As we started taking some of the membrane off, we notice some of
the materials didn't look quite like concrete," Proulx said.

When testing confirmed the presence of asbestos, the museum
corporation halted work and brought in Stantec Consulting Ltd. to
test air quality, beginning the evening of Oct. 16.

The tests did not detect the presence of asbestos fibre, and
showed only "minimal or non-existent particulate readings, well
below required standards," the corporation said in a news release.

Proulx said the museum is now conducting air quality tests on a
regular basis. "We've had zero traces at this point and we're
monitoring it," he said.

The museum plans to reseal the roof over the next two or three
days and postpone the roof replacement for several months while it
figures out how to proceed, Proulx said. "Because of the asbestos,
we're going to have to have a different approach to take (the old
roof) out."

While Proulx stressed there was no risk to museum visitors or
staff, he said the problem will cause "a little disturbance" in
the museum, with plastic protecting some of the artifacts. He
doesn't expect the problem to interfere with the public's ability
to visit the museum.

"If through any kind of adjustments to the ceiling there was any
kind of risk where the air quality was diminished, we'd have to
take other actions at that point," he said. "But we're pretty
confident we can manage it."

The St. Laurent Boulevard museum is housed in a former bakery
warehouse that is needs $3.4 million in major structural repairs,
according to the museum corporation's 2013-14 budget.

The budget estimated the cost of the roof replacement at $2.5
million, but Proulx said that is likely to rise because of the
asbestos problem.

He said it may be possible to do "a little bit" of the work on the
roof before the summer if the museum corporation decides to do it
in phases. "With all the tourists, it's not the kind of
construction you want to have in a peak summer season," he said.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Black River Board Hires Firm for Abatement Work
----------------------------------------------------------------
Watertown Daily Times reported that during a special meeting, the
village Board of Trustees in Black River, New York, approved
expending funds for a hazardous material survey for the Route 3
pump station renovation project.

The board contracted with Asbestos & Environmental Consulting
Corp. of East Syracuse for asbestos abatement study at the pump
station at a cost not to exceed $4,000.

The village has also hired Dodson & Associates Consulting
Engineers of Schenectady for the design and construction phase of
the engineering services for the pump station renovation.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Complaint Exposes Tension in Benton County
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Sara Schilling, writing for Tri-City Herald, reported that a
complaint about possible asbestos exposure at the Benton County,
Washington, courthouse in Prosser has exposed some tension in
county government.

Officials said a series of facility complaints from Assessor
Barbara Wagner's office has cost the county hundreds of thousands
of dollars. She describes a "good ol' boy" system that has
ostracized her.

A construction project this summer upgraded some bathrooms on the
third floor of the courthouse, above the assessor's office. The
complaint, from an assessor's employee, said the work was leading
to asbestos exposure through dust and debris.

A state Department of Labor & Industries inspection in August
found no violations and no penalties were assessed.

Wagner said employees were concerned because an asbestos survey
five years ago found trace amounts of asbestos fibers in
insulation above the drop-in ceiling in her office. The trace
amounts subsequently were removed. But the survey left open the
possibility of more asbestos elsewhere.

Wagner said she wasn't told before the recent bathroom work began
that the county arranged for an asbestos survey of the
construction area and had a contractor remove asbestos-containing
material.  She didn't find out until after the construction debris
and dust had reached a peak, she said.

However, the county's risk manager and safety coordinator said
elected officials and department heads were told about the
asbestos abatement before the bathroom construction started.

Commissioner Shon Small, chairman of the board of commissioners,
said the safety of the public and employees is paramount and the
county takes concerns and complaints seriously.

The county has spent about $340,000 since the mid-1990s on studies
and facility improvements stemming from assessor's office
complaints, officials said.  That includes indoor air quality
studies of the county annex in Kennewick, where the assessor's
office used to have a satellite office.

Wagner closed her office at the annex temporarily in January 2008,
saying poor air quality and mold was making her employees sick.

Two separate investigations found no indoor air quality
violations, but they recommended improvements to the ventilation
system serving the assessor's area, the Herald reported in 2008.
One found "possible mold colonization" in the ventilation system.

The county replaced ducts and made other improvements to the
system, but Wagner said the health problems persisted, the Herald
reported.  She closed her office at the annex indefinitely in May
2008. The department's Kennewick workers relocated to the county
justice center in Kennewick that fall.

As assessor's office worker told the Herald this week that the
health problems have gone away since the move.

County risk management officials said annex air quality complaints
have too.

When it comes to the $340,000 figure, Wagner said it's unfair to
put that cost on her office, when, for example, air quality
studies looked at the whole annex. She also said workers from
other departments had air quality concerns.  Wagner, who's held
the elected assessor's post more than 20 years, said she has
advocated for customers and her employees, and it's the county's
responsibility to maintain its facilities.  She said she feels the
county operates on a "good ol' boy" system and that at times she's
been ostracized when it comes to facilities needs and requests.

Small described the "good ol' boy" comment as unprofessional and
said it's incorrect both for past commissioners and the three
current commissioners, who all joined the board in the past
several years and are a new generation of leadership.

Melina Wenner, the county's risk manager, said the county always
takes health and safety concerns seriously, and "we have gone
above and beyond to satisfy (the assessor's office) that they are
in a safe environment."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Over-Sensitivity to Fibro May Have Led to Death
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ella Rhodes, writing for Derby Telegraph, reported that former
weaver Audrey Berry may have died because of an over-sensitivity
to asbestos, an inquest has ruled.  The 76-year-old had been
diagnosed with mesothelioma, despite never having had any obvious
exposure to asbestos, which causes the condition.

Consultant pathologist Dr Andrew Hitchcock told Derby and South
Derbyshire Coroner's Court that about 95% of mesothelioma cases
were due to asbestos exposure.  The cause of the other 5% remains
a mystery.

Dr Hitchcock told Mrs Berry's inquest: "We must be very cautious
in cases like this. Some people consider the 5% to be down to
natural disease but those 5% might just be cases where we can't
show a link.

"And some people with mesothelioma may be very sensitive to
asbestos."

Mrs Berry, of Laburnum Crescent, Allestree, died on April 30 this
year.

Her husband, John, told the inquest that, after his wife's
diagnosis, they had discussed where she may have been exposed to
asbestos.  He said: "We didn't know how she'd developed it and
assumed it was through work. We thought she'd got it through the
weaving place she worked from 1954 to 1956.

"She worked in the office at first and then wanted to go into the
mill."

Mrs Berry worked later in the same machine shop as her husband at
Rolls-Royce.

Mr Berry said: "There was no asbestos there as far as I know."  He
said that, after his wife's diagnosis, she was visited by asbestos
specialists who said there was a chance that heating pipes in the
mill where she worked as a weaver may have been responsible for
her asbestos exposure.

Dr Hitchcock said the death had been caused by malignant
mesothelioma, though there was no evidence of pleural plaques or
pulmonary fibrosis which are signs of asbestos exposure.

In summing up, deputy coroner Louise Pinder said: "This is not a
straight forward case. A majority of the cases we deal with are
straightforward and we often see asbestos fibres or pleural
plaques

"It has not been possible to demonstrate a causal link between
exposure to asbestos and the development of the mesothelioma."

She said there were different explanations for the 5% of cases
where "no causal link whatsoever" was seen between mesothelioma
and asbestos, including that there may be a population of people
who were "very sensitive" to the deadly dust.

She recorded a narrative conclusion: "We were not able to explain
a causal link between asbestos and the mesothelioma which does not
mean the link is not there."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Pupils Kept Off U.K. School in Fibro Leak Fears
----------------------------------------------------------------
Lancashire Evening Post reported that St Joseph's Catholic Primary
in Preston, in the United Kingdom, was closed for the day before
the start of half term amid fears of an asbestos leak. It is
understood that the problem arose when a workman putting up a
smoke alarm in the school kitchen is believed to have drilled into
the material.

Breakfast and after school clubs were also cancelled.

However, the 315-pupil school was open to nursery and reception
class pupils -- though they were told to take in sandwiches
because no hot meals would be prepared.

One mum, who did not wish to be named, said: "We got a letter at
short notice saying the school would be closed for the day. No
explanation."  She said the noted added it was "imperative to have
this closure on health and safety grounds."

The Rigby Street premises is one of many schools across Lancashire
which were built using asbestos.  Experts say the material is safe
as long as it is "not disturbed."

However, headteacher Gerry O'Brien, said: "Our site supervisor
raised concerns after realising that some minor drilling work in
the kitchen area was in a part of the ceiling containing asbestos.

"We had to make a quick decision and felt it was best to close the
school to be on the safe side.

"The issue was quickly resolved with the support of the county
council and the building was made completely safe for pupils to
return.

"Lancashire County Council was able to issue an asbestos safety
certificate once the necessary checks had been completed.

"The issue was quickly resolved and the building is completely
safe for pupils to return. "He added that an an explanatory letter
was being sent home to parents.

Mr O'Brien added: "We will be working with our contractors and the
county council to investigate what happened."

The majority of schools which were built before 2000 have asbestos
in them but although carcogenic, it is deemed safe if contained.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Toxic Dust Removed From Jezzine Barracks Site
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jessica Nairn, writing for ABC News, reported that asbestos
removal work at the Jezzine Barracks redevelopment site in
Townsville, Australia, has been completed.

Earlier this year, the council requested the Commonwealth foot the
bill to get rid of the toxic material which was discovered at the
former military site.  The barracks was gifted to the council
several years ago to be turned into a community park.

The Commonwealth put forward about $350,000 for the asbestos
removal work.  The park is expected to be completed by March.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro-Contaminated St. Peter's Coolangatta Closes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Potts, writing for Goldcoast.com, reported that it's the
end of an era for one of the Gold Coast's oldest churches, with
asbestos and an impossibly high repair bill forcing its closure
after 75 years.

A Liturgy of Deconsecration was held at St Peter's Church
Coolangatta, which was built in 1937 and required repairs costing
more than $200,000 to remove exposed asbestos.

Just a small congregation of the faithful were in attendance at
the Anglican church's last service, which was presided over by
southern region Bishop Alison Taylor and parish priest Father
Stephen Redhead.

The church, on the corner of Latham and Dutton streets, is the
city's second-oldest and its site , a commercial property, is
expected to soon be put to market.

Fr Redhead said its closure was a day of "great sadness".

"We simply do not have the capital for the rectification work as
well as the income to provide operational costs for the site," he
said.

"People get emotional about churches because family weddings,
baptisms, confirmations and funerals which happen there linger in
the memories.

"However, the harsh reality is that people are not attending
church, not supporting the financial burdens of the parish and
there is simply not enough people or money to maintain the number
of buildings which were built in a different day and age."

St Peter's congregation of around 25 parishioners will now worship
at either Tweed Head's St. Cuthbert's church or Palm Beach's St
Paul's Anglican Church.

However, it may leave a legacy at the Palm Beach church which, Fr
Redhead said, would likely be renamed the Church of St Peter and
St Paul.

The sale of its site will be used to upgrade the Palm Beach
church's hall while St Peter's stained glass, altar, lectern and
font will all be incorporated into the existing building.

Its flagpole has been donated to the Kirra Hill Historic Society
while St Peter's bell, which was given to the church by the Parish
of Laidley, will be returned to its original owners.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Historic Marlow Rowing Club to be Demolished
-------------------------------------------------------------
James Nadal, writing for Bucks Free Press, reported that
demolition of Marlow Rowing Club's historic clubhouse is set to
finally take place.  The work to create the new GBP2.5m
watersports hub was delayed twice this month -- first by a
potentially dangerous gas pipe and then by asbestos.

A vibration monitor has been fitted to the pipe by National Grid
and most of the asbestos has now been removed.

Lynne Moran, press officer for MRC, said: "The demolition is now
finally going ahead after the problems with the gas pipe and
asbestos.

"If anyone would like to come down and watch the progress they can
do from the other side of the bridge."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Found at SEW Building Site in Frankston
--------------------------------------------------------------
Christian Tatman, writing for Frankston Standard Leader, reported
that traces of asbestos have been found at the South East Water
building site at Frankston, in Australia.

SEW managing director Kevin Hutchings said small traces of non-
friable asbestos were found mixed among old building rubble during
excavation works.

"Testing has indicated that the non-friable asbestos, in which the
fibres are bonded by cement, vinyl, resin or other similar
material," Mr Hutchings said.

"It is not hazardous and poses no risk to the surrounding area.

"It is not uncommon for non-friable asbestos to be found on
building sites that have been untouched for many years."

SEW is in the early stages of building its new eight-storey
headquarters in Frankston.

Mr Hutchings said SEW's builder was following all requirements for
the safe removal of the material.

"The area has been isolated and asbestos removal specialists have
been on site to remove and dispose of the material in accordance
with EPA guidelines and WorkSafe regulations," he said.

"While the material poses no risk to public health, to ensure
surrounding businesses were not alarmed by the specialists on
site, we notified all businesses immediately surrounding the
construction site."

A Frankston Council spokeswoman said both SEW and the EPA were
working on the matter.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: AAT Warns of Potential Ticking Timebomb
--------------------------------------------------------
Michael Alexander, writing for The Courier, reported that a
Scottish charity has warned that a legacy of Fife's industrial
past is a "potential ticking timebomb".

Asbestos Action Tayside (AAT), which works with victims of
asbestos exposure and their families, has urged people across Fife
with concerns about their exposure to asbestos to seek help and
support as soon as possible.

AAT made the call as figures released by the Scottish Government
show the number of hospital admissions in the region for asbestos-
related conditions has increased by nearly 35% in the past five
years.

AAT held an information and awareness-raising event for
individuals concerned about exposure to asbestos and their
families in Kirkcaldy.

The event saw the launch of a new credit card-size card to help
raise awareness of AAT's free and confidential nationwide helpline
service.

AAT says an increasing number of individuals are being diagnosed
with asbestos-related conditions following exposure to fibres
which may have occurred up to 40 years ago.

People exposed to asbestos can suffer from a number of conditions,
from pleural plaques, a form of scarring of the lungs which may
not develop into anything more serious, to mesothelioma at the
other end of the scale, an aggressive and incurable form of lung
cancer.

Alison Blake, general manager of Asbestos Action Tayside, fears
significant numbers of people suffering asbestos-related
conditions are not accessing the support available to them and
their families, or fully aware of their legal rights.

Ms Blake said: "An increasing number of people in Fife have to
face up to the harsh reality of a lingering death sentence simply
because of the work they may have undertaken many years ago.

"Each week we deal with many individuals and families whose lives
have been blighted. It is likely the number of those affected by
asbestos exposure in the region has yet to peak.

"It is accordingly essential that every effort is made to educate
the public, in Fife and elsewhere of the dangers of asbestos
exposure, not just in the workplace but also to those who may
engage in domestic DIY activities.

"The statistics also appear to suggest that a significant number
of individuals receiving treatment for asbestos related conditions
may not be accessing the wider support services available.

"Of particular concern is that there may be a number of people
diagnosed with pleural plaques who, because they do not experience
any obvious incapacity, do not access the wider support services
available, including legal services."

These individuals are therefore not made aware of their rights to
pursue a legal claim in Scotland, or the fact that if they fail to
do so within three years of diagnosis, they may be subsequently
time barred and prevented from pursuing a legal remedy, even if a
more serious asbestos related condition is diagnosed."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Monroe Couple Fined for Improper Fibro Handling
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Wright, writing for The Register-Guard, reported that a
Monroe, Oregon, couple has been fined $10,200 by the state
Department of Environmental Quality for letting an unlicensed
person perform asbestos abatement work on a home they own on
Bellfountain Road west of Monroe. The penalty was so high in part
because the hazardous asbestos waste from the house was buried on
the property in violation of state disposal rules, the state said.

The couple, Nathan and Sara Gamache, also were cited, but not
fined, for storing asbestos-containing materials and waste in the
open. The demolition waste -- which included sheetrock with
asbestos-containing popcorn ceiling texture -- was observed by a
DEQ inspector in August in an uncovered waste disposal drop box
and on a concrete pad next to the drop box at the construction
site, the agency said.

Five days after the inspection, a drop box waste hauler contacted
DEQ to report that the drop box was now empty and that the
asbestos waste may have been buried on the property. DEQ later
confirmed that the asbestos waste had in fact been buried on the
premises, and required the Gamaches to hire a licensed asbestos
abatement contractor to excavate and properly dispose of the
waste.

The Gamaches complied with the order, the agency said.

The Gamaches have 20 days upon receiving the DEQ's certified
letter dated Oct. 17 to appeal the fine.

The Gamaches are the co-owners of Nate Gamache Logging in Monroe.
A phone number associated with the business was disconnected, and
the Gamaches did not immediately respond to a request for comment
left with a family member.

The Gamaches bought the property in December 2012 and signed a
statement acknowledging that there was "asbestos throughout the
house," the DEQ said in its formal finding.

Despite that knowledge, the Gamaches demolished the residential
structure and placed the waste in a drop box without hiring a
licensed asbestos contractor, the finding concluded.

The base penalty for a "major magnitude violation" is $6,000 but
the fine was doubled in this case because the violations occurred
on at least two separate days -- when the home was demolished and
again when the waste material was removed from the drop box and
buried in an excavated area, the DEQ said.

State and federal regulations require that all asbestos-containing
waste materials set for disposal be packaged in leakproof
containers and disposed of only at landfills authorized to accept
asbestos. Asbestos fibers are a respiratory hazard proven to cause
lung cancer and other ailments, and are a hazardous air pollutant
for which there is no known safe level of exposure, the DEQ said
in a news statement announcing the penalty against the Gamaches.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: EPA Fines Former Winchester Hotel Owner
--------------------------------------------------------
The Associated Press reported that the owner of a former central
Idaho hotel must pay a $21,000 fine for asbestos safety violations
after failing to test for the cancer-causing material before
demolishing the century-old structure.

The Environmental Protection Agency said BBA Winchester LLC, owned
by Brian Bagley, settled with the federal regulator after it found
problems with how he knocked down the hotel in Winchester.

The EPA entered the case after Bagley demolished the structure
starting in late 2011 or early 2012.

After determining the debris was contaminated, the EPA worked with
Bagley to make sure the waste was properly removed by a certified
contractor.

However, the agency says what had been a $2,000 demolition
contract ballooned into a $55,000 asbestos waste cleanup and
disposal project, all because Bagley didn't follow proper
procedures.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fla. Court Upholds Verdict v. Union Carbide
------------------------------------------------------------
HarrisMartin Publishing reported that a Florida appellate court
has affirmed a $16.5 million verdict in an asbestos case, allowing
the judgment entered against Union Carbide Corp. to stand.

According to the Florida 4th District Court of Appeals' online
docket, the verdict was affirmed per curiam. The appellate court
heard oral arguments in the matter on Oct. 15, the docket states.

The underlying case involves claims asserted on behalf of Charles
Garrison, who was allegedly exposed to asbestos while working on a
four-month remodeling project in college.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Calif. Court Dismisses Claims v. Parker Hannifin
-----------------------------------------------------------------
HarrisMartin Publishing reported that a California federal court
has awarded summary judgment to asbestos defendant Parker Hannifin
Corp., finding that "a reasonable jury could not find that any
product manufactured or supplied by Parker was a substantial
factor in causing plaintiff's alleged injury."

In two Oct. 24 documents, the U.S. District Court for the Central
District of California opined that the plaintiff had failed to
prove the "fundamental" element of causation.

Paul Olds filed the complaint, contending that he had been exposed
to asbestos-containing products while serving in the U.S. Air
Force.

Defendant Parker Hannifin Corp. moved for summary judgment.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Company Charged Over Christchurch Hospital Fibro
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Olivia Carville, writing for The Press, reported that the New
Zealand Government has laid charges following an investigation
into asbestos exposure at Christchurch Hospital.

Two contractors were allegedly exposed to white asbestos while
working on earthquake repairs on the hospital roof earlier this
year.

Goleman employees Jeff Richards and Petra Doner became concerned
the moss and lichen they were working with may contain asbestos
and gave Canterbury District Health Board (CDHB) a sample to test
on March 27.

An external chemical risk management company confirmed the
presence of white asbestos to the CDHB on April 2.

Goleman was informed of the results and advised to halt work
immediately, however that work continued and the employees claim
they were not notified of the positive results.

It wasn't until a group of workers approached Fletchers, the
project manager for the hospital, with growing concerns their
workplace could be contaminated on April 10 that the site was
eventually shut down.

The workers claim they may have unknowingly put patients and
hospital staff at risk to the poisonous substance while walking
through active wards.

Both Richards and Doner handed in their resignations following the
asbestos saga, furious they were "put in danger without choice" by
their employer.

After a lengthy investigation, the Ministry of Business,
Innovation and Employment (MBIE) has now laid charges against two
organisations under the Health and Safety Act.

MBIE would not name the organisation "given they have the right to
seek name suppression in court", a spokesman said.

One charge is for a breach of Section 18 of the Health and Safety
in Employment Act 1992, the other is for a breach of Section 6 of
the same Act.

"No further comment on the charges or this case can be made as it
is now before the courts," he said.

The case is due before the Christchurch District Court on
November 13.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Contractor Accused of Dumping Fibro in Cellar
--------------------------------------------------------------
Elaine Thompson, writing for Telegram & Gazette, reported that the
owner of a local plumbing and heating company who allegedly
disposed of some asbestos-containing material in the crawl space
of a customer's basement was arraigned in Worcester Superior
Court, in Massachusetts.

Francis Scavone III, 27, owner of Scavone Plumbing & Heating is
charged with five counts of violating the Massachusetts Clean Air
Act. The office of the attorney general in a press release this
morning said Mr. Scavone failed to follow the required procedures
relative to removal of asbestos, disposed a portion of the
asbestos waste in an unpermitted location (in the basement of the
home), and failed to file the required notification of asbestos
removal with the state Department of Environmental Protection.

Mr. Scavone pleaded not guilty to the charges at his arraignment
and was released on personal recognizance. He is prohibited from
working on any job or project involving asbestos-containing
material.

"Plumbing and heating contractors are well aware that asbestos is
a known carcinogen because they encounter asbestos-containing
materials routinely in their line of work," MassDEP Commissioner
Kenneth Kimmell said in the press release. "The removal and
disposal must be done by licensed and trained asbestos
professionals in accordance with the regulations and with the
required work practices to protect workers, the general public and
the environment."

According to authorities, in November 2012, Scavone Plumbing &
Heating removed an old heating system from a Worcester home.
Authorities allege that Mr. Scavone failed to notify MassDEP that
the work would disturb asbestos and did not follow the appropriate
procedures to prevent asbestos emissions.

Authorities also allege employees of Scavone Plumbing & Heating
who were performing the work were instructed to dispose of some of
the asbestos-containing material in the crawl space of the
basement of the home.

A Worcester County grand jury returned indictments against Mr.
Scavone on Sept. 19. He was arraigned in Worcester Superior Court
and is due back in court on Dec. 5 for a pretrial conference.

Anyone with information about a potential environmental crime may
contact the MassDEP Environmental Strike Force Hotline at (888)
VIOLATE (846-5283) or the attorney general's office at (617) 727-
2200.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Center Urges Auto Mechanics to Call for Meso Info
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Lung Cancer Asbestos Victims Center is now urging diagnosed
victims of mesothelioma, or their family members, to call them for
the names and specific contact information of the most experienced
mesothelioma lawyers in the United States if the victim was an
automotive mechanic in the time frames between the 1950s and
1980s.

Compensation for these types of individuals can easily exceed a
million dollars, but compensation for this rare form of cancer is
directly related to the skill of the attorney that represents
their clients. For more information, diagnosed mesothelioma cancer
victims, or their family members are urged to call the Lung Cancer
Asbestos Victims Center anytime at 866-714-6466.

What types of auto, or truck parts could have exposed auto, or
truck mechanics to asbestos between the 1950s, and 1980s?

   * Auto & truck brakes
   * Auto & truck brake linings
   * Auto & truck mufflers
   * Auto & truck clutches
   * Auto & truck head gaskets, and cylinder rings
   * Auto & brake fire walls
   * Auto & truck valve rings

The Lung Cancer Asbestos Victims Center says, "According to the
CDC the states with the highest incidence of a rare form of cancer
called mesothelioma include: Maine, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, West
Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming. However, based on the calls we
receive we believe California, Texas, Florida, New York, Ohio,
Maryland, Michigan, Iowa, Indiana, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Nebraska,
Kansas, Missouri, North Carolina, Georgia, Louisiana, Alabama,
Oklahoma, Arkansas, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Idaho,
Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon, and Alaska should also be on the
list."

Aside from auto repair facilities, other high-risk workplaces for
asbestos exposure and mesothelioma include the US Navy, shipyards,
power plants, manufacturing factories, chemical plants, oil
refineries, mines, smelters, aerospace manufacturing facilities,
construction work sites, railroads, or automotive manufacturing
facilities. http://LungCancerAsbestosVictimsCenter.Com

According to the CDC, mesothelioma is a type of cancer that is
100% related to exposure to asbestos. As long as the victim, or
their family members, can prove the exposure to asbestos, the
center will do everything possible to help connect them one of the
most experienced mesothelioma lawyers in the nation. These skilled
mesothelioma lawyers consistently get the best financial
compensation results for their clients."

For more information, diagnosed victims of mesothelioma and
asbestos related lung cancer are urged to call the Lung Cancer
Asbestos Victims Center anytime at 866-714-6466.
http://LungCancerAsbestosVictimsCenter.Com

For more information about a rare form of cancer caused by
exposure to asbestos called mesothelioma, please visit the US
Centers For Disease Control's web site:
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5815a3.htm


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Pauses Georgetown Clean-up
-------------------------------------------------
ABCNews4.com reported that Georgetown, South Carolina mayor says a
cigarette tossed into a trash can behind one of the Front Street
businesses started the fire that destroyed most of a block along
the historic roadway.

And now officials are saying clean-up is on hold because a special
asbestos crew has to come in to safely remove the toxic insulation
material.

The news of the clean-up delay and the cause of the fire came as
Gov. Nikki Haley told a crowd of people that Georgetown would not
be receiving any federal funding to rebuild from FEMA.

The governor says her office is coming up with an ad campaign that
will cost $20,000 and focus on tourism in Georgetown. During the
recovery update, Fire Chief Joey Tanner said they are still
waiting for a preliminary report on the cause of the fire.

However, Georgetown Mayor Jack Scoville says he believes the fire
was caused by a cigarette in a trash bag. Tanner says there were
early reports the fire started in a trash can, but he is still
waiting on a preliminary report.

Scoville adds that asbestos was found in the debris and is holding
up the clean-up process.

"Some minute particles of asbestos were located in various areas
of the site. I think they are coming from some caulking in one of
the buildings and possibly from some roofing material that was put
up," he said.

Scoville says they will continue to work with the Department of
Health and Environmental Control on sampling the debris and
planning the clean-up.

"DHEC says until we get this resolved, the workers can't clean the
lots," he said.

Scoville expects the testing to continue and he hopes DHEC will be
finished by the end of the week.

Meanwhile, city officials are trying to decide who will clean up
the debris. Ideas include the National Guard or private
contractors.

The fire started late in September and destroyed 10 buildings and
seven homes, displacing 130 employees.

The Georgetown Fire Relief Fund has been set up for donations
through First Citizens Bank on Front Street.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Wash. Court Remands Suit v. Crane Co.
------------------------------------------------------
HarrisMartin Publishing reported that a Washington federal court
has remanded an asbestos case alleging exposure in the U.S. Navy,
saying that the removing defendant failed to prove that a federal
defense was available.

In the Oct. 22 opinion, the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of Washington reiterated another federal court's
conclusion that a "contract with the government is not a one-way
ticket to federal court."

Alan and Donna McMann filed the claims in state court, contending
that Alan McMann's exposure to asbestos-containing products caused
him to develop mesothelioma.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Md. Court Allows "Every Exposure" Testimony
------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel M. Krainin, Esq. -- dkrainin@bdlaw.com -- a principal at
Beveridge & Diamond PC, an environmental and energy law firm,
wrote, "Overturning what some commentators had considered a
leading opinion rejecting the so-called "any exposure" theory,
Maryland's highest court ruled that an expert may testify that
"every exposure to asbestos is a substantial contributing cause"
of mesothelioma. Dixon v. Ford Motor Co., 433 Md. 137 (2013).

"The husband and children of a woman who died of mesothelioma
filed suit against Ford Motor Company for negligent failure to
warn of the dangerous asbestos in their products. Dixon, slip op.
at 1. Joan Dixon claimed she was exposed to asbestos from two
sources: (1) her husband, a mechanic who worked almost exclusively
on Ford brakes, brought asbestos-laden dust home with him on his
clothes, which she laundered; and (2) a drywall joint compound
allegedly manufactured by Georgia-Pacific that her husband used in
a repair project at their home. Id. at 4-5. After a 12-day trial,
the jury concluded that the only substantial contributing factor
in causing Ms. Dixon's mesothelioma was the dust from the Ford
brake products and returned sizeable verdicts in the Plaintiffs'
favor. Id. at 2.

At trial, the jury heard Dr. Lauren Welch's expert testimony that
even though Ms. Dixon may have been exposed to asbestos from a
drywall joint compound during a home repair project, the Ford
brake dust was still a cause of her disease because "every
exposure to asbestos is a substantial contributing cause" of
mesothelioma. Id. at 10. On appeal, the intermediate court threw
out this "every exposure" opinion testimony, finding that Dr.
Welch should have relied on a theory of "probabilistic causation"
instead, and that the opinion was not helpful to the jury. Id. at
3. For more information on the intermediate court's decision,
seehttp://www.environmentallawportal.com/Maryland-Court-Rejects-
Any-Exposure-Theory.

The Maryland Court of Appeals reversed, finding that the
intermediate court had improperly ignored the context within which
Dr. Welch provided her testimony. Id. at 10. Dr. Welch provided
her opinion based on the evidence that dust was brought into the
Dixons' home twice a week for 13 years, and that the repeated
exposure was high-intensity because asbestos fibers would remain
in the home for an extended period. Id. at 13-16. With that
background and context, the court was unwilling to conclude that
Dr. Welch's opinion that each exposure increased the likelihood of
contracting mesothelioma was a novel scientific theory."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Deadly Dust in Warwick Student Bedrooms
--------------------------------------------------------
Sian Elvin, writing for The Boar, reported that a Freedom of
Information request by the publication has revealed that every
single bedroom in campus accommodation buildings Westwood and
Tocil, in Warwick University, in the United Kingdom, contains
asbestos.

This news comes after the Guardian revealed over the summer that
Warwick is the university which provides the most rooms that
contain asbestos to students.

The Board said 2,313 rooms on campus contain asbestos, which is 35
percent of the total number of available bedrooms, including
shared accommodation.  It has also been revealed that over 94
percent of rooms in Rootes and Redfern also contain asbestos.

A number of students have expressed confusion and frustration over
the matter, saying that they had not been told that the substance
was in the vicinity of their rooms.

A first-year student currently living in Westwood anonymously told
the Boar: "I am very angry that the University has not informed me
that I am living in a room which contains asbestos.

"Even if it is safe, I should still be told so I am made aware, in
case any damage occurs which could expose or uncover it."

Natalie Tang, a first-year Economics undergraduate currently
living in Rootes, added: "I'm confused as to why students have
been allowed to move into rooms which potentially contain
asbestos. It should be removed as soon as possible."

A spokesperson for Warwick University has confirmed that students
are not told that their rooms contain asbestos, and has said that
they do not need to be told because "the asbestos is sealed inside
other materials and is therefore completely safe.

"The University complies fully with all statutory requirements and
good practices regarding the materials containing asbestos in
those rooms.

"Similar materials can still be found in a great many domestic
houses and flats from the same period."

All of the accommodations containing asbestos were built between
1956 and 1977, and are legally allowed to contain it
as long as they were erected before laws banning the substance
were passed in 1985.

Kate Balzan, a second-year History undergraduate who lived in
Westwood last year, commented: "I still find this worrying.

"Although as long as the asbestos is not damaged, it does not pose
a risk to the person's health and it is unlikely that I have had
any exposure to asbestos fibres, it does make me concerned that
material that can cause long-term health effects is in the
vicinity."

Cryfield and Benefactors also host a number of rooms which contain
the substance, although almost 40 percent of bedrooms which
contain asbestos are located in the Rootes accommodation.

Campaigners, such as those from the Association of Teachers and
Lecturers and the British Lung Foundation, are concerned that as a
result of not knowing whether asbestos is in their rooms, students
will not report damage in accommodation which could expose
asbestos.

Last year when a pipe burst in the accommodation block
International House, students were told they may have to evacuate
their bedrooms whilst measures were taken to remove asbestos.
Although Warwick Accommodation staff later confirmed that the
asbestos had not been exposed so it did not pose a risk to
students living there, the reports over the summer have concerned
former residents.

Second-year Psychology student Shareen Rikhraj, who lived in
International House at the time of the incident, commented on the
present situation.  She said: "I think it's a little unfair that
it has become a big deal now that it's affected many more rooms.

"It wasn't seen as that big of an issue when it was only in
International House.

"There shouldn't have been over six months of a gap between
telling International House residents about it and the rest of
Rootes."

The Boar further investigated whether asbestos was present in
other buildings on Warwick campus.

A spokesperson for the University of Warwick said: "[Warwick] is
aware of asbestos-containing materials located in non-residential
buildings.

"The University carries out annual re-inspections of all of its
buildings that contain asbestos-containing materials, and also
carries out specific project related surveys prior to commencing
intrusive works on site.

"All parts of the University which contain such materials have
asbestos protection measures in place."

It is believed that over 17,000 students nationally have been
sleeping in rooms which contain asbestos.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Hurdle in NBN Broadband Rollout
------------------------------------------------------
Lucy Battersby, writing for The Age, reported that design and
construction of NBN Co's network has stalled because of the change
in government policy and a "significant backlog" of work caused by
Telstra's asbestos remediation program.

Construction due to start in November in parts of Melbourne has
been delayed until early next year, according to the contractors
hired.

Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull said in September that
NBN Co would meet its contractual obligations by continuing to
roll out fibre while the company "conducts the strategic review of
the project".

NBN Co has confirmed it stopped design work immediately after the
election, but would start issuing work again soon.  But a
spokesman for NBNCo said the construction delay was due to Telstra
halting work in May on its underground pits and ducts to deal with
asbestos.

But subcontractors warn that the delays have caused a "temporary
paralysis" in the rollout and may lead to job losses.

An NBN spokesman said: "Following the federal election, we took
the prudent step of not issuing new designs to contractors for
fibre to the premises until we had clarity around the new policy.
That's only sensible. We will recommence the issuing of designs
from next week."

NBN Co has changed its fibre rollout map and also took about
500,000 premises around the country off its construction schedule.

These were premises where initial planning had started but actual
construction work had not.

Meanwhile, subcontractors to NBN Co's construction partner,
Transfield, have started writing to politicians to warn about job
losses as work dries up.

A spokeswoman for Transfield directed queries back to NBN
Co."Transfield Services is not in a position to comment about the
reduction in work packages and contract instructions. Please
contact NBN directly, as the decision regarding workflow is
completely up to them."

Several contractors told Fairfax Media they were encouraged to
ramp up their business and train more staff in recent years to
meet the rollouts demands.

But they now faced several work-free months while NBN Co
redesigned its network, and may have to start sacking staff.

"As far as we have been told, NBN Co are not releasing any work
until the Liberal government does their 60-day assessment and
works out which way they want to go," a subcontractor, Hasan
Rifat, told Fairfax Media.

"We are all finishing whatever construction work was given to us
and were told the next release of fibre serving area module jobs
would be in February or March."

Mr Rifat said his company was due to start construction work in
West Brunswick in early November, but had been told this would not
start until next year.

If construction was delayed, households in these suburbs were
unlikely to get fibre to the home connections, despite NBN Co
completing several months of pre-rollout work, such as checking
underground ducts and network design.

Opposition communications spokesman Jason Clare called on the
Coalition to honour existing contracts and complete the existing
rollout plans.  He said small businesses and households removed
from the rollout maps were "the first victims" of Coalition cuts
to the NBN.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Forces North Oxford Church to Close
----------------------------------------------------------
Emma Harrison, writing for Oxford Mail, reported that a north
Oxford, United Kingdom church is hoping to open in time for
Christmas after the discovery of asbestos forced its closure.

St Giles' Church, which is attended by hundreds of worshippers a
year, has closed for six weeks for the building to be
decontaminated.

The asbestos was discovered in the flooring during work to prepare
the church for the installation of a new heating system.

Church services and events will continue throughout the closure in
the parish hall and at St Margaret's Church.  And it is hoped the
church, in Woodstock Road, will open in time for its popular carol
service at Christmas.

Canon Dr Andrew Bunch, vicar at St Giles', said: "It is not a
health hazard unless it is moved, and during building work if it
is there we have got to remove it.

"They will clean the boards and take all the suspected dust away.

"They have got to get through all the stuff in that area and
either decontaminate it or remove it.

"When they are clearing the asbestos they will be working on the
heating system in the same areas."

The church has been able to upgrade its old heating system thanks
to a GBP200,000 gift from an anonymous organisation. Mr Bunch
said: "Throughout the main body of the church we will have
underfloor heating and the existing heating system will be
upgraded.

"We will get a few more radiators and a new boiler.

"It is a lot of work."

He added: "It is an old system. It has been a very cold church for
many years."

About 100 worshippers regularly attend Sunday services.

All the Sunday 10.30am Holy Communion services will take place in
the parish hall during the closure.

Other services and events will be held in the parish hall or at St
Margaret's Church, in St Margaret's Road, North Oxford.

Mr Bunch said: "We are planning to open for Christmas with some of
the new pipework in place.

After Christmas it will be closed or partially closed while we
complete the job."

It is hoped the church will open in time for its popular carol
service due to take place on December 22, at 6.30pm.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: 177 Cases Consolidated With NY Inmates Class Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Joanna Seybert of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of New York issued three separate orders on Oct. 18,
2013, consolidating 177 cases into the Consolidated Action titled
Butler, et al. v. DeMarco, et al., 11-CV-2602 (JS) (GRB).

The Plaintiffs in the consolidated action were men detained in the
Suffolk County Correctional Facilities.  They allege that they
were subjected to inhuman conditions that pose unreasonable and
substantial risks to their health.  Among other allegations, the
men said they were at risk of exposure to asbestos from the
leaking pipes, which are lined with insulation believed to contain
asbestos.  The leaking water has caused floor tiles in the
facility to turn upward, exposing the glue underneath them, also
believed to contain asbestos.

Full-text copies of Judge Seybert's Orders are available at:
http://is.gd/sKLXoB,http://is.gd/iMc7V1,http://is.gd/bc53Lsfrom
Leagle.com.

Daniel H. R. Laguardia, Esq. -- daniel.laguardia@shearman.com --
Melissa Godwin, Esq. -- melissa.godwin@shearman.com -- and Edward
Timlin, Esq. -- edward.timlin@shearman.com -- at SHEARMAN &
STERLING LLP, in New York, Counsel for Plaintiffs.

Arlene S. Zwilling, Esq., Office of the Suffolk County Attorney,
Hauppauge, NY.

NEW YORK CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, Corey Stoughton, Taylor
Pendergrass, New York, New York, Of Counsel.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: La. Court Denies Bids to Dismiss Widow's Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Martin L.C. Feldman of the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of Louisiana denied without prejudice
CenterPoint Energy Inc.'s motion for summary judgment on
peremption and prescription; and Associated Electric Cooperative,
Inc.'s motion for summary judgment in the case captioned CAROL
PHILLIPS, ET AL., v. ABB COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC., ET AL.,
SECTION "F," CIVIL ACTION NO. 13-594(E.D. La.).

The lawsuit arises from a widow's claim that her husband's
exposure to asbestos while working for several companies over many
years caused him to develop mesothelioma and, ultimately, his
death.

A full-text copy of Judge Feldman's order and reasons dated
Oct. 23, 2013, is available at http://is.gd/4Dsk8Qfrom
Leagle.com.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: "McMann" Suit Remanded to Wash. State Court
------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Benjamin H. Settle of the United States District Court for
the Western District of Washington, Tacoma, granted the motion to
remand to the Pierce County Superior Court for the State of
Washington, the action titled ALAN McMANN and DONNA McMANN,
Plaintiffs, v. AIR & LIQUID SYSTEMS CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants, CASE NO. C13-5721 BHS (W.D.Wash.).

The McManns allege that Alan McMann developed mesothelioma by
exposure to Crane Co.'s as well as other defendants' products that
contained asbestos.

A full-text copy of Judge Settle's Order dated Oct. 22, 2013, is
available at http://is.gd/yPqdIHfrom Leagle.com.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Calif. Court Affirms Ruling in "Pfeifer" Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
William and Anne Pfeifer asserted claims for negligence, strict
liability, and loss of consortium against John Crane, Inc.,
alleging that its asbestos-laden products caused William Pfeifer's
mesothelioma.  During the trial, the court rejected JCI's
proffered instructions regarding its "sophisticated user" defense,
and directed a verdict on the defense.  After the jury returned a
verdict in the Pfeifers' favor, a judgment was entered awarding
them compensatory and punitive damages.  The trial court
subsequently entered orders, inter alia, crediting JCI with an
offset for pre-verdict settlements, and awarding expert fees to
the Pfeifers. JCI appealed from the judgment and certain related
orders, and the Pfeifers cross-appealed.

In a decision dated Oct. 29, 2013, the Court of Appeals of
California, Second District, Division Four, concluded that the
trial court correctly declined to give JCI's requested
instructions on its "sophisticated user" defense, which stated
that employees of a sophisticated user are deemed to be
sophisticated users.  The Court of Appeals held that when a
manufacturer provides hazardous goods to a "sophisticated"
intermediary that passes the goods to its employees or servants
for their use, the supplier is subject to liability for a failure
to warn the employees or servants of the hazards, absent some
basis for the manufacturer to believe the ultimate users know or
should know of the hazards.  With respect to JCI's other
contentions, the Court of Appeals concluded there was sufficient
evidence to support the jury's findings regarding comparative
fault, and that the award of punitive damages was supported by the
evidence and was not excessive in amount.  The Court of Appeals
dismissed JCI's appeal insofar as it challenges an award of expert
fees to the Pfeifers, as JCI filed no notice of appeal from the
award.

Regarding the Pfeifers' cross-appeal, the Court of Appeals
affirmed the trial court's determination of JCI's credit for the
pre-verdict settlements.

The Court of Appeals otherwise found no error in the judgment and
related orders, with the exception of an error both sides
acknowledge regarding the determination of the Pfeifers' net
recovery of economic damages.  The Court of Appeals therefore
dismissed JCI's appeal in part, modified the judgment to reflect
the correct determination of the Pfeifers' net economic damages,
and affirmed the judgment and related orders, as modified.

The case is ANNE PFEIFER, Individually and as Personal
Representative, etc., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. JOHN CRANE,
INC., Defendant and Appellant, NO. B232315 (Cal. App.).  A full-
text copy of the Decision penned by Justice Nora Margaret Manella
is available at http://is.gd/qh9KXXfrom Leagle.com.

Plaintiffs and Appellants William Pfeifer and Anne Pfeifer are
represented by:

         Brian P. Barrow, Esq.
         SIMON GREENSTONE PANATIER BARTLETT
         301 East Ocean Blvd., Suite 1950
         Long Beach, California 90802
         Tel: (562) 590-3400
         Fax: (562) 590-3412

John L. Cooper, Esq. -- jcooper@fbm.com -- Racheal Turner, Esq. --
rturner@fbm.com -- and Deborah K. Barron, Esq. -- dbarron@fbm.com
-- at Farella Braun & Martel, for Defendant and Appellant John
Crane, Inc.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ruling in Cleaver-Brooks Insurance Suit Affirmed
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Cleaver-Brooks was a subsidiary of The Coca-Cola Company from 1970
through 1982.  During and after the time that Cleaver-Brooks was
owned by Coca-Cola, Cleaver-Brooks was engaged in the business of,
among other things, manufacturing and distributing packaged
boilers, some of which contained asbestos.  Beginning in the late
1980s and continuing to the present, Cleaver-Brooks was named as a
defendant in more than 200,000 lawsuits in which multiple
plaintiffs sought damages from Cleaver-Brooks as a result of
bodily injury or wrongful death allegedly caused by their exposure
to asbestos in Cleaver-Brooks' products.  Cleaver-Brooks expects
it will be named in future asbestos-related lawsuits.

From January 1, 1979, through January 1, 1981, the AIU Insurance
Company, Inc., Lexington Insurance Company, and National Union
Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, P.A., insured Cleaver-Brooks
through six excess liability insurance policies.

Beginning in 2004, dozens of insurers, including the Insurers
here, were parties to a lawsuit filed in Milwaukee County Circuit
Court.  The 2004 Coverage Action addressed how liability for
defense and indemnity expenses associated with the asbestos
lawsuits against Cleaver-Brooks should be allocated among Cleaver-
Brooks' insurance companies.

Before the Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, District I, is the
Insurers' appeal from the circuit court's 2013 order for
declaratory judgment.  The circuit court's 2013 order granted
Cleaver-Brooks and Coca-Cola's motion for partial summary
judgment, and directed the Insurers to simultaneously pay shares
of indemnity proportional to their respective indemnity limits in
the 1979 and 1980 policy years, so that the policies will exhaust
at the same time.  Additionally, National Union and AIU were
ordered to cover the full amount of defense costs until all the
policies' indemnity limits are exhausted.  The Insurers argue on
appeal that the circuit court erred in concluding that they must
pay their policy limits for each policy year simultaneously, and
instead contend they must be paid sequentially pursuant to a 2007
judgment.

Because the plain language of the 2007 judgment, the plain
language of the policies at issue, and caselaw do not support the
Insurers' position, a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals
composed of Judge Ralph Adam Fine, Judge Joan F. Kessler and Judge
Kitty K. Brennan, affirmed.

The appeal is CLEAVER BROOKS, INC. AND THE COCA-COLA COMPANY,
PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. AIU INSURANCE COMPANY, LEXINGTON
INSURANCE COMPANY AND NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF
PITTSBURGH, PA., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS, APPEAL NO. 2013AP203 (Wis.
App.).  A full-text copy of the Decision, dated Oct. 29, 2013,
penned by Judge Brennan is available at http://is.gd/dK3iRffrom
Leagle.com.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Quigley Attys' Final Fee Applications Allowed
--------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Stuart M. Bernstein of the United States Bankruptcy Court
for the Southern District of New York issued an order overruling
the objections raised by the U.S. Trustee to the final fee
applications submitted by Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, as attorneys
for debtor Quigley Company, Inc.; Togut, Segal & Segal LLP, as
attorneys for Albert Togut in his capacity as legal representative
for future asbestos personal injury claimants; and Caplin &
Drysdale, Chartered, as attorneys for the Official Committee of
Unsecured Creditors.

The following table summarizes the final applications that were
submitted by the professionals:

   Applicant                Fees      Expenses
   ---------            -----------   --------
   Schulte              $21,080,652   $519,770
   Caplin                $5,406,992   $215,502
   The Togut Firm        $3,651,454    $48,133

The U.S. Trustee raised the question on whether the counsel and
other professionals are entitled to compensation for the work they
did in proposing or supporting a plan that failed, inter alia, for
lack of good faith.

Judge Bernstein allowed the final fee applications filed by the
three firms, although he asked that Caplin's fees be reduced by
$20,600.

In supporting his decision, Judge Bernstein held that "Schulte and
the Togut Firm established the presumptive reasonableness of their
fee requests through the twenty-six interim applications, and with
a few exceptions, so did Caplin.  These applications detailed the
services that each rendered in connection with the case.  The time
entries adequately detail what each firm did, when it did it and
how long it took to do.  All of the services were rendered in the
case, and on their face, were reasonable and necessary to the
administration of the case.  Furthermore, Schulte and the Togut
Firm certified in accordance with the Court's Amended Guidelines,
that the fees and disbursements they sought were billed at rates
and in accordance with practices customarily employed and
generally accepted by their applicant's clients."

Judge Bernstein rejected the U.S. Trustee's argument that
Schulte's services rendered in connection with the promulgation
and prosecution of the Fourth Plan would not have been undertaken
by a reasonable attorney on behalf of its client although Quigley
faced a difficult fight and the outcome was in doubt.  This
conclusion follows even more strongly in the case of Caplin and
the Togut Firm who did not propose the Fourth Plan but ultimately
supported it, Judge Bernstein said.

The bankruptcy case is In re: QUIGLEY COMPANY, INC., Chapter 11,
Debtors, CASE NO. 04-15739 (SMB)(Bankr. S.D.N.Y.).  A full-text
copy of Judge Bernstein's Decision dated Oct. 24, 2013, is
available at http://is.gd/OjpXvKfrom Leagle.com.

Michael L. Cook, Esq. -- michael.cook@srz.com -- and Lawrence V.
Gelber, Esq. -- lawrence.gelber@srz.com -- at SCHULTE ROTH & ZABEL
LLP, in New York, Attorneys for Debtor.

Elihu Inselbuch, Esq. -- einselbuch@capdale.com -- Ronald E.
Reinsel, Esq. -- rreinsel@capdale.com -- and Rita C. Tobin, Esq. -
- rtobin@capdale.com -- at CAPLIN & DRYSDALE, CHARTERED, in
Washington, D.C. 20005, Attorneys for the Official Committee of
Unsecured Creditors.

Scott E. Ratner, Esq. -- seratner@teamtogut.com -- at TOGUT, SEGAL
& SEGAL, LLP, in New York, Attorneys for the Legal Representative
for Future Asbestos Personal Injury Claimants of Quigley Company,
Inc.

THE UNITED STATES TRUSTEE is represented by Greg M. Zipes, Esq.,
and Andrew Velez-Rivera, Esq., in New York.

                         About Quigley Co.

Quigley Co. was acquired by Pfizer in 1968 and sold small amounts
of products containing asbestos until the early 1970s.  In
September 2004, Pfizer and Quigley took steps that were intended
to resolve all pending and future claims against the Company and
Quigley in which the claimants allege personal injury from
exposure to Quigley products containing asbestos, silica or mixed
dust. Quigley filed for bankruptcy in 2004 and has a Chapter 11
plan and a settlement with Chrysler.

Quigley filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection (Bankr.
S.D.N.Y. Case No. 04-15739) on Sept. 3, 2004, to implement a
proposed global resolution of all pending and future asbestos-
related personal injury liabilities.

Lawrence V. Gelber, Esq., and Michael L. Cook, Esq., at Schulte
Roth & Zabel LLP, represent the Debtor in its restructuring
efforts.  Elihu Inselbuch Esq., at Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered,
represents the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.  When
the Debtor filed for protection from its creditors, it disclosed
$155,187,000 in total assets and $141,933,000 in total debts.

In April 2011, the bankruptcy judge approved a plan-support
agreement with Pfizer and an ad hoc committee representing 30,000
asbestos claimants.

A May 20, 2011 opinion by District Judge Richard Holwell concluded
that Pfizer was directly liable for some asbestos claims arising
from products sold by its now non-operating subsidiary Quigley.
The district court ruling was upheld in the appeals court.

In August 2013, the U.S. District Court reaffirmed the June 28,
2013 U.S. Bankruptcy Court order confirming Quigley's Chapter 11
Plan of Reorganization.  Because this proceeding involved
asbestos-related litigation, both Bankruptcy and District Court
approval was required.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Petition for Writ of Mandate in PI Suit Denied
---------------------------------------------------------------
An attorney's website advertised her success in two cases raising
issues similar to those she was about to try in the asbestos-
related personal injury action filed by Richard and Christie
Steiner.  The trial court admonished the jury not to "Google" the
attorneys or to read any articles about the case or anyone
involved in it.  Concerned that a juror might ignore these
admonitions, the court ordered the attorney to remove for duration
of trial two pages from her website discussing the similar cases.

In a decision dated Oct. 30, 2013, the Court of Appeals of
California, Second District, Division Six, concluded that this was
an unlawful prior restraint on the attorney's free speech rights
under the First Amendment.  Whether analyzed under the strict
scrutiny standard or the lesser standard for commercial speech,
the order was more extensive than necessary to advance the
competing public interest in assuring a fair trial, the Court of
Appeals said.  Juror admonitions and instructions, like those
given in the case, were the presumptively adequate means of
addressing the threat of jury contamination in this case, the
Court of Appeals held.

Although the order was improper, it is no longer in effect and
thus no relief can be granted, the Court of Appeals noted.
Accordingly, the Court of Appeals denied the petition for writ of
mandate.

The case is CHRISTIE STEINER et al., Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR
COURT OF SANTA BARBARA COUNTY, Respondent; VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF
AMERICA et al., Real Parties in Interest, 2D CIVIL NO. B235347
(Cal. App.).  A full-text copy of the Decision is available at
http://is.gd/HXovoofrom Leagle.com.

The Petitioners are represented by:

         Simona A. Farrise, Esq.
         Carla V. Minnard, Esq.
         FARRISE FIRM, P.C.

            -- and --

         Sharon J. Arkin, Esq.
         THE ARKIN LAW FIRM
         225 South Olive, Suite 102
         Los Angeles, CA 90012
         Tel: 1-800-748-6186
         Fax: 1-510-588-4536
         E-mail: info@farriselaw.com

No appearance for Respondent.

Laurie J. Hepler, Esq. -- lhepler@cbmlaw.com -- Nathaniel K.
Fisher, Esq. -- nfisher@cbmlaw.com -- at Carroll, Burdick &
McDonough LLP; and Herzfeld & Rubin, P.C., for Real Party in
Interest Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.

Herzfeld & Rubin may be reached at:

         HERZFELD & RUBIN, P.C.
         125 Broad Street,
         New York, New York, 10004
         Tel: (212) 471-8500
         Fax: (212) 344-3333
         Email: info@herzfeld-rubin.com

John M. Thomas, Esq. -- jthomas@dykema.com -- at Dykema Gossett
LLP, for Real Party in Interest Ford Motor Co.

McKenna Long & Aldrige LLP for Real Party in Interest Pneumo Abex.
The firm may be reached at:

         MCKENNA LONG & ALDRIGE LLP
         300 South Grand Avenue
         14th Floor
         Los Angeles, CA 90071
         Tel: (213) 688-1000
         Fax: (213) 243-6330


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ruling on Taxing Expert Witness Fees Affirmed
--------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff Richard Steiner contracted terminal lung cancer.  He was
a longtime smoker and, early in his life, worked with motor
vehicle parts that purportedly contained asbestos.  He contended
that the effect of his smoking was profoundly exacerbated by his
exposure to the asbestos, resulting in his cancer.  Mr. Steiner
and his wife, Christie Steiner, brought a personal injury action
against a number of automobile parts manufacturers, including
defendants Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., Ford Motor Co.,
Nissan North America, Inc., and Pneumo-Abex Corp.  The trial was a
"battle of experts."  The Plaintiffs contend they were hamstrung
by the trial court's rulings limiting the scope of their cross-
examination of the defense experts.

Following a jury verdict, Volkswagen and Ford claimed their expert
witness fees as an item of costs based on the Plaintiffs'
rejection of their pretrial offers to compromise under Code of
Civil Procedure section 998.  The trial court granted the
Plaintiffs' motion to tax the expert witness fees, concluding that
the respective offers of $2,202 and $5,000 were not reasonable or
made in good faith.

In a decision dated Oct. 30, 2013, the Court of Appeals of
California, Second District, Division Six, affirmed both the
judgment and the order taxing the expert witness fees, after
finding that Volkswagen and Ford failed to show that the court
abused its discretion in striking the fees.

The cases are CHRISTIE STEINER, as successor in interest, etc.,
Plaintiff and Appellant, v. VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF AMERICA, INC., et
al., Defendants and Respondents, 2D CIVIL NO. B236532 (Cal. App.)
and CHRISTIE STEINER, as successor in interest, etc., Plaintiff
and Respondent, v. VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF AMERICA, INC., et al.,
Defendants and Appellants, 2D CIVIL NO. B240488 (Cal. App.).  A
full-text copy of the Decision is available at http://is.gd/rDCcYR
from Leagle.com.

Sharon J. Arkin, Esq., at The Arkin Law Firm, and Simona A.
Farrise, Esq., at Farrise Firm, for Appellant Christie Steiner.

James Yukevich, Esq. -- jyukevich@yukelaw.com -- Steven D.
Smelser, Esq. -- ssmelser@yukelaw.com -- and Patricia Ball, Esq.
-- pball@yukelaw.com -- at Yukevich Calfo & Cavanaugh; and John M.
Thomas, Esq., and Tamara A. Bush, Esq. -- tbush@dykema.com -- at
Dykema Gossett, for Appellant Ford Motor Company.

Laurie J. Hepler, Esq., and Nathaniel K. Fisher, Esq., at Carroll,
Burdick & McDonough; and Herzfeld & Rubin, for Appellant
Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.

Susan Vargas, Esq. -- susan.vargas@bowmanandbrooke.com -- and John
Eberlein, Esq. -- john.eberlein@bowmanandbrooke.com -- at Bowman &
Brooke, LLP; and Margaret M. Grignon, Esq. --
magrignon@reedsmith.com -- at Reed Smith, for Respondent Nissan
North America, Inc.

Jennifer Judin, Esq. -- jjudin@dehay.com -- and Kevin Wyles, Esq.
-- kwyles@dehay.com -- at Dehay & Elliston; and David P. Herrick,
Esq. -- DHerrick@HerrickAssociates.com -- at Herrick & Associates,
for Respondent Pneumo-Abex Corp.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Quigley Company's Plan Declared Effective
----------------------------------------------------------
BankruptcyData reported that privately-held Quigley Company's Plan
of Reorganization became effective, and the Company emerged from
Chapter 11 protection.

The Bankruptcy Court confirmed the Plan on June 28, 2013; and the
District Court reaffirmed the Bankruptcy Court confirmation order
on August 2, 2013. Because this proceeding involved asbestos-
related litigation, both Bankruptcy and District Court approval
was required.

                         About Quigley Co.

Quigley Co. was acquired by Pfizer in 1968 and sold small amounts
of products containing asbestos until the early 1970s.  In
September 2004, Pfizer and Quigley took steps that were intended
to resolve all pending and future claims against the Company and
Quigley in which the claimants allege personal injury from
exposure to Quigley products containing asbestos, silica or mixed
dust. Quigley filed for bankruptcy in 2004 and has a Chapter 11
plan and a settlement with Chrysler.

Quigley filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection (Bankr.
S.D.N.Y. Case No. 04-15739) on Sept. 3, 2004, to implement a
proposed global resolution of all pending and future asbestos-
related personal injury liabilities.

Lawrence V. Gelber, Esq., and Michael L. Cook, Esq., at Schulte
Roth & Zabel LLP, represent the Debtor in its restructuring
efforts.  Elihu Inselbuch Esq., at Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered,
represents the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.  When
the Debtor filed for protection from its creditors, it disclosed
$155,187,000 in total assets and $141,933,000 in total debts.

In April 2011, the bankruptcy judge approved a plan-support
agreement with Pfizer and an ad hoc committee representing 30,000
asbestos claimants.

A May 20, 2011 opinion by District Judge Richard Holwell concluded
that Pfizer was directly liable for some asbestos claims arising
from products sold by its now non-operating subsidiary Quigley.
The district court ruling was upheld in the appeals court.

In August 2013, the U.S. District Court reaffirmed the June 28,
2013 U.S. Bankruptcy Court order confirming Quigley's Chapter 11
Plan of Reorganization.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Specialty Products Must Have PI Claims Deadline
----------------------------------------------------------------
Law360 reported that a Delaware bankruptcy judge said on Nov. 5
that there must be a deadline set for asbestos-related personal
injury claimants to file proofs of claim in the Specialty Products
Holding Corp. case, despite strenuous objections from
representatives of those claimants who argued it could shut out
thousands of potential claims.

According to the report, an attorney for Eric D. Green, the
representative for future asbestos claimants, argued at a hearing
in Wilmington that a claims bar date would serve no purpose.

                     About Specialty Products

Cleveland, Ohio-based Specialty Products Holdings Corp., aka RPM,
Inc., is a wholly owned subsidiary of RPM International Inc.  The
Company is the holding company parent of Bondex International,
Inc., and the direct or indirect parent of certain additional
domestic and foreign subsidiaries.  The Company claims to be a
leading manufacturer, distributor and seller of various specialty
chemical product lines, including exterior insulating finishing
systems, powder coatings, fluorescent colorants and pigments,
cleaning and protection products, fuel additives, wood treatments
and coatings and sealants, in both the industrial and consumer
markets.

The Company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection (Bankr. D.
Del. Case No. 10-11780) on May 31, 2010.  Gregory M. Gordon, Esq.,
Dan B. Prieto, Esq., and Robert J. Jud, Esq., at Jones Day, serve
as bankruptcy counsel.  Daniel J. DeFranceschi, Esq., and Zachary
I. Shapiro, Esq., at Richards Layton & Finger, serve as co-
counsel.  Logan and Company is the Company's claims and notice
agent.  The Company estimated its assets and debts at $100 million
to $500 million.

The Company's affiliate, Bondex International, Inc., filed a
separate Chapter 11 petition on May 31, 2010 (Case No. 10-11779),
estimating its assets and debts at $100 million to $500 million.

On May 20, 2013, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order estimating
the amount of the Debtors' asbestos liabilities, and a related
memorandum opinion in support of the estimation order.  The
Bankruptcy Court estimated the current and future asbestos claims
associated with Bondex International, Inc. and Specialty Products
Holding at approximately $1.17 billion.  The estimation hearing
represents one step in the legal process in helping to determine
the amount of potential funding for a 524(g) asbestos trust.


                             *********

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., Washington, D.C., USA. Noemi Irene
A. Adala, Joy A. Agravante, Valerie Udtuhan, Julie Anne L. Toledo,
Christopher Patalinghug, Frauline Abangan and Peter A. Chapman,
Editors.

Copyright 2013. 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 $775 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 A. Chapman at 215-945-7000 or Nina Novak at 202-241-8200.



                 * * *  End of Transmission  * * *