/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/010627.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Wednesday, June 27 2001, Vol. 3, No. 125 Headlines AVENUE A: Stull Stull Commence Securities Suit In S.D. New York CACHEFLOW INC.: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit In S.D. NY CENTEX HOMES: Estrada & Thomson File Securities Suit In E.D. CA CHRONIMED INC.: Cauley Geller Files Minnesota Securities Suit EL SITIO: Schiffrin Barroway Files Securities Suit In S.D. New York EXPEDIA INC.: Schiffrin Barroway Files Securities Suit In S.D. NY INFOSPACE INC.:Kirby McInerney Sues Over Securities Issues In W.D. WA INTERSIL HOLDING:Schiffrin Barroway Begins Securities Suit In S.D. NY IPRINT TECHNOLOGIES: Faces Suit In SD New York For Securities Fraud KANSAS CITY: School District Pays 'Dropped' Retirees In Settlement MICRON ELECTRONICS: Lawsuit for Overtime Pay May Draw Many Joiners MINIMED INC.: Merger Agreement With Medtronic, Inc. Sets Off Suit In CA NETWORK COMMERCE: Wechsler Harwood Files Securities Suit In W.D. WA ONVIA.COM: Milberg Weiss Begins Securities Suit In S.D. New York SPRINT CORPORATION: Faces Suit In Kansas Over Aborted WorldCom Merger SUMITOMO CORPORATION:US Judge Approves $150M Settlement Of Copper Case TEXAS:State Faces Multimillion Suit For Trespass, Fraud, & Conversion TIVO INC.: Milberg Weiss Sues For Shareholders In S.D. New York TRANSMETA CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Files CA Securities Suit TYSON FOODS: Chimicles Tikellis Files DE Suit For IBP Stock Sellers UNDERWRITERS LITIGATION: Cauley Geller S.D. NY Securities Suit Begins * Supreme Court Upholds Copyright Protection To Free-lance Writers ********* AVENUE A: Stull Stull Commence Securities Suit In S.D. New York --------------------------------------------------------------- Stull, Stull & Brody filed recently a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of purchasers of Avenue A, Inc. (NASDAQ:AVEA) common stock between February 28, 2000 and June 14, 2001, inclusive. The complaint alleges that defendants Avenue A, Inc., Morgan Stanley & Co., Incorporated, Salomon Smith Barney, Inc., Brian P. McAndrews, Nicolas J. Hanauer and Robert M. Littauer violated Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. On or about February 28, 2000, Avenue A commenced an initial public offering of 5,250,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $24 per share. In connection therewith, Avenue A filed a registration statement, which incorporated a prospectus, with the SEC. The complaint further alleges that the Prospectus was materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that: (i) Morgan Stanley and Smith Barney had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which Morgan Stanley and Smith Barney allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of Avenue A shares issued in connection with the Avenue A IPO; and (ii) Morgan Stanley and Smith Barney had entered into agreements with customers whereby Morgan Stanley and Smith Barney agreed to allocate Avenue A shares to those customers in the Avenue A IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional Avenue A shares in the aftermarket at pre- determined prices. As alleged in the complaint, the SEC is investigating underwriting practices in connection with several other initial public offerings. For more information, contact: Howard Longman, Esq. at Stull, Stull & Brody by calling toll-free 1-800-337-4983, or by e-mail at SSBNY@aol.com, or by fax at 212/490-2022, or by writing to Stull, Stull & Brody, 6 East 45th Street, New York, NY 10017. CACHEFLOW INC.: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit In S.D. NY ------------------------------------------------------------------ Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP filed Monday a class action on behalf of purchasers of the securities of CacheFlow Inc. (NASDAQ: CFLO) between November 18, 1999 and December 6, 2000, inclusive. The action, captioned Don R. Powell v. CacheFlow Inc., Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc., Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation, BancBoston Robertson Stephens Inc., Salomon Smith Barney Inc, Brian M. NeSmith, and Michael J. Johnson, is pending in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York. The complaint alleges violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. On or about November 18, 1999 CacheFlow commenced an initial public offering of 5,000,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $24.00 per share. In connection therewith, CacheFlow filed a registration statement, which incorporated a prospectus, with the SEC. The complaint further alleges that the Prospectus was materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that: (i) the Underwriter Defendants (Morgan Stanley, Credit Suisse, Robertson Stephens and Salomon) had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which the Underwriter Defendants allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of CacheFlow shares issued in connection with the CacheFlow IPO; and (ii) the Underwriter Defendants had entered into agreements with customers whereby the Underwriter Defendants agreed to allocate CacheFlow shares to those customers in the CacheFlow IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional CacheFlow shares in the aftermarket at pre- determined prices. For more information, contact: Steven G. Schulman or Samuel H. Rudman One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl. New York, NY, 10119-0165 by Phone: (800) 320-5081 by E-mail: cacheflowcase@milbergNY.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.milberg.com CENTEX HOMES: Estrada & Thomson File Securities Suit In E.D. CA --------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Estrada & Thomson filed a lawsuit against Centex Homes, an affiliate company of Centex Corporation (NYSE:CTX) in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California asserting a class action claim. Estrada & Thomson and Law Offices of James G. Schwartz, Plaintiffs' attorneys, are prosecuting the lawsuit on behalf of the owners of 207 residences located in the Serrano and Crescent Ridge subdivisions in El Dorado County and in the Treelake Village subdivision in Placer County, California. The Complaint includes causes of action for strict liability, breach of express warranty, unfair business practices, breach of contract, negligent design, and intentional and negligent misrepresentation. The Complaint alleges that there are common issues concerning stucco exteriors, heating and air conditioning systems, roofs and windows. The Complaint seeks damages for the costs of remedying the stucco exteriors, heating and air conditioning systems, roofs and windows, restitution of monies relating to the unfair business practice claim, and attorneys fees and costs. The complaint alleges that the estimated cost of remedial work approaches eight million dollars. For more information, contact: Estrada & Thomson, Livermore through Armand M. Estrada by Mail: 925/447-9482 or visit the firm's Website: www.estrada-thomson.com CHRONIMED INC.: Cauley Geller Files Minnesota Securities Suit ------------------------------------------------------------- Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP filed a class action in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota on behalf of purchasers of Chronimed Inc. (Nasdaq: CHMDE) securities during the period between October 27, 1999 and June 13, 2001, inclusive. The complaint charges Chronimed and certain of its officers and directors with violating the federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market during the Class Period, thereby artificially inflating the price of Chronimed securities. For additional information, contact: CAULEY GELLER BOWMAN & COATES, LLP through its Client Relations Department: Jackie Addison, Sue Null or Charlie Gastineau by Mail: P.O. Box 25438, Little Rock, AR 72221-5438 by Phone: 1-888-551-9944 (toll free) or by E-mail: info@classlawyer.com EL SITIO: Schiffrin Barroway Files Securities Suit In S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------------------- Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP filed a class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of El Sitio, Inc. (Nasdaq: LCTO) from December 9, 1999 through December 6, 2000, inclusive. The complaint charges El Sitio and certain of its officers and directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning its business and financial condition. For further details, contact: Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP through Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Stuart L. Berman, Esq. by Mail: Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 1-888-299-7706 (toll free) or 1-610-667-7706 or by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com EXPEDIA INC.: Schiffrin Barroway Files Securities Suit In S.D. NY ----------------------------------------------------------------- Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of Expedia, Inc. (Nasdaq: EXPE) from November 9, 1999 through December 6, 2000, inclusive. The complaint charges Expedia and certain of its officers and directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning its business and financial condition. For more details, contact: Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP through Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Stuart L. Berman, Esq. by Mail: Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 1-888-299-7706 (toll free) or 1-610-667-7706 or by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com INFOSPACE INC.:Kirby McInerney Sues Over Securities Issues In W.D. WA --------------------------------------------------------------------- Kirby McInerney & Squire, LLP has commenced a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington on behalf of all purchasers of InfoSpace, Inc. (NASDAQ: INSP) securities during the period from January 26, 2000 through January 30, 2001, inclusive. The action charges InfoSpace, Inc. and its founder and Chairman, Nave en Jain, with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by reason of material misrepresentations and omissions. The complaint alleges that between January 2000 and January 2001, Defendants disseminated false and misleading information concerning InfoSpace's actual FY 1999 and 2000 financial performance and expectations concerning the Company's FY 2001 revenue and earnings. In fact, neither InfoSpace's reported FY 1999 and FY 2000 results nor its projected FY 2001 performance were accurate. The complaint further alleges that the Company's public representations were the result of Defendants' efforts to manipulate InfoSpace's reported earnings and expected FY 2001 performance and were designed to (and did) allow: (i) Jain to sell millions of dollars of his own InfoSpace shares at artificially inflated prices; and (ii) allow InfoSpace to complete a series of acquisitions using shares of the Company's artificially inflated stock as currency, including the October 2000 acquisition of Go2Net. On January 30, 2001, Defendants disclosed that InfoSpace would report no revenue growth or EPS for FY 2001, but rather would report declining revenue and a significant loss for the year, contrary to the representations repeatedly made by them during 2000 that the Company was experiencing strong revenue growth during 4Q99, and FY 2000 and that InfoSpace would continue to post strong revenue growth through FY 2001. As Defendants began to reveal some of their improper conduct, including the fact that the Company's projected revenues and earnings estimates were false, InfoSpace's shares fell to less than $6 per share, a 95% decline from their Class Period high of $138-1/2 per share. For more information, contact: Ira M. Press, Esq. Shan Anwar KIRBY McINERNEY & SQUIRE, LLP 830 Third Avenue 10th Floor New York, New York 10022 Telephone: (212) 317-2300 or Toll Free (888) 529-4787 E-Mail: sanwar@kmslaw.com INTERSIL HOLDING: Schiffrin Barroway Begins Securities Suit In S.D. NY ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of Intersil Holding Corporation (Nasdaq: ISIL) from February 25, 2000 through December 6, 2000, inclusive. The complaint charges Intersil and certain of its officers and directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning its business and financial condition. For further details, contact: Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP through Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Stuart L. Berman, Esq. by Mail: Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 1-888-299-7706 (toll free) or 1-610-667-7706 or by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com IPRINT TECHNOLOGIES: Faces Suit In SD New York For Securities Fraud ------------------------------------------------------------------- Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP filed a class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of iPrint Technologies, Inc. (Nasdaq: IPRT) securities during the period between March 8, 2000 and December 6, 2000, inclusive. The complaint charges defendants iPrint, Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation, FleetBoston Robertson Stephens, Royal P. Farros and James P. McCormick with violations of Sections 11, 12(a) (2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. On or about March 8, 2000, iPrint commenced an initial public offering of 4.5 million of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $10 per share. In connection therewith, iPrint filed a registration statement, which incorporated a prospectus, with the SEC. The complaint further alleges that the Prospectus was materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that (i) Credit Suisse and Robertson Stephens had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which Credit Suisse and Robertson Stephens allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of iPrint shares issued in connection with the iPrint IPO; and (ii) Credit Suisse and Robertson Stephens had entered into agreements with customers whereby Credit Suisse and Robertson Stephens agreed to allocate iPrint shares to those customers in the iPrint IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional iPrint shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices. For more information, contact: CAULEY GELLER BOWMAN & COATES, LLP through its Client Relations Department: Jackie Addison, Sue Null or Charlie Gastineau by Mail: P.O. Box 25438, Little Rock, AR 72221-5438 by Phone: 1-888-551-9944 or by E-mail: info@classlawyer.com KANSAS CITY: School District Pays 'Dropped' Retirees In Settlement ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Hickman Mills School District in Kansas City will be sending out settlement checks to the eight retirees whose names were inadvertently dropped from the final settlement agreement in a class action age discrimination lawsuit, according to a recent report in The Kansas City Star. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's attorney has admitted that the EEOC made the error of omitting the eight names from the final settlement. Fifty of the former employees of the school district already have received checks totaling about $458,000, based on the consent decree drafted by the EEOC. The eight remaining retirees will receive checks totaling about $70,000, according to Hickman Mills Superintendent Marge Williams. She also said she agreed with the school board's decision to pay the eight retirees. Since a settlement had been reached, she said, it was apparent to the board that all members of the class action suit should be paid, even though the school district was not legally bound to do so. The federal court judge presiding over the class action had ruled that the school district's early retirement plan between 1991 and 1996 discriminated against older employees because it offered a lump sum that decreased each year an employee went beyond age 55 before retiring. In the settlement agreement, retirees were paid the balance of what they would have received had they been paid the entire lump sum. MICRON ELECTRONICS: Lawsuit for Overtime Pay May Draw Many Joiners ------------------------------------------------------------------ Hundreds of employees may join a lawsuit accusing Micron Electronics of violating the Fair Labor and Standards Act in the area of overtime pay for sales employees, according to a recent Associated Press report. Since the lawsuit was filed, eight current and former employees have agreed to join the complaint. According to their attorney Dan Williams, they will ask the court to certify the lawsuit as a class action in order to accommodate hundreds more who may have received similar treatment. The lawsuit alleges that Micron supervisors used verbal reprimands and warnings to discourage employees from recording overtime and that Micron encouraged off-the-clock work by sales staff by suggesting that such extra work could lead to a managerial position. Additionally, supervisors altered time cards by reducing the amount of overtime shown on the cards. Further, Micron violated the Fair Labor Act by calculating overtime pay based only on the employees' base pay and failed to factor in commissions as well. The complaint requests a jury trial, payment of overtime due the plaintiffs, as well as damages. Although most of the allegations come from operations in Micron Electronics recently sold to Gores Technology Corp., a Los Angeles based technology investment firm, still Micron retains responsibility for the actions begun and carried on during its ownership. Micron officials declined comment on all allegations. MINIMED INC.: Merger Agreement With Medtronic, Inc. Sets Off Suit In CA ----------------------------------------------------------------------- A merger agreement to make MINIMED INC. a wholly owned subsidiary of Medtronic, Inc. triggered a suit against the Company and its directors. The suit was filed last June 6 in the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of Los Angeles. The plaintiffs purport to represent a class of stockholders of the Company asserting a claim related to the Merger and in connection with an alleged violation of the fiduciary duties owed by the Company and its directors to the Company's stockholders. The complaint seeks preliminary and permanent injunctive relief that would, if granted, prevent the completion of the Merger. The Company believes that these allegations are without merit, and intends to vigorously defend this action. NETWORK COMMERCE: Wechsler Harwood Files Securities Suit In W.D. WA ------------------------------------------------------------------- Wechsler Harwood Halebian & Feffer LLP filed a class action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle on behalf of all investors who purchased the common stock of Network Commerce Inc. (NASDAQ: NWKC) between September 28, 1999 and April 16, 2001, inclusive, and who suffered damages thereby. For additional details, contact: Patricia A. Guiteau, Paralegal Shareholder Relations Department Wechsler Harwood Halebian & Feffer LLP 488 Madison Avenue 8th Floor New York, New York 10022 Telephone: (877) 935-7400 (toll free) Facsimile: (212) 753-3630 ONVIA.COM: Milberg Weiss Begins Securities Suit In S.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------------------- Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP filed Monday a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Onvia.com, Inc. (Onvia.com or the Company) (NASDAQ: ONVI) between February 29, 2000 and December 6, 2000, inclusive. The action is pending in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York against defendants Onvia.com, Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation, FleetBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc., Glenn S. Ballman and Mark T. Calvert. The complaint alleges violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. On or about February 29, 2000, Onvia.com commenced an initial public offering of 8,000,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $21 per share. In connection therewith, Onvia.com filed a registration statement, which incorporated a prospectus, with the SEC. The complaint further alleges that the Prospectus was materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that: (i) Credit Suisse and Robertson Stephens had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which Credit Suisse and Robertson Stephens allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of Onvia.com shares issued in connection with the Onvia.com IPO; and (ii) Credit Suisse and Robertson Stephens had entered into agreements with customers whereby Credit Suisse and Robertson Stephens agreed to allocate Onvia.com shares to those customers in the Onvia.com IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional Onvia.com shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices. As alleged in the complaint, the SEC is investigating underwriting practices in connection with several other initial public offerings. For more information, contact: Steven G. Schulman or Samuel H. Rudman One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl., New York, NY, 10119-0165 by Phone: (800) 320-5081 by E-mail: onviacase@milbergNY.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.milberg.com SPRINT CORPORATION: Faces Suit In Kansas Over Aborted WorldCom Merger --------------------------------------------------------------------- Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, LLP filed a class action in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas on behalf of purchasers of Sprint Corporation (NYSE:FON; PCS) publicly traded securities during the period between October 4, 1999 and September 19, 2000. The complaint charges Sprint and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. This action is against Sprint and its present and former executives, including William T. Esrey, Sprint's Chairman and CEO, as well as WorldCom, Inc. and Bernard J. Ebbers, WorldCom's Chairman and CEO. Sprint is in the telecommunications business, offering hardline and wireless long-distance service. It is the third largest long-distance carrier in the U.S. and has revenues of $17+ billion per year. The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants made false and misleading statements concerning Sprint and WorldCom, their business and finances and Sprint's merger with WorldCom to secure approval of the merger to extract hundreds of millions of dollars of benefits in connection with the aborted merger of Sprint and WorldCom. Defendants were able to extract these monies via: (1) secretly modifying the "change of control" definition in Sprint's executive compensation plan, allowing hundreds of millions of dollars of unvested stock options to accelerate and vest simply on a shareholder vote to approve the merger with WorldCom, rather than the actual completion of the aborted merger with WorldCom; and (2) the systematic failure to disclose to Sprint's public shareholders information possessed by the Sprint Defendants that the proposed merger was almost certain to never occur due to concerted opposition from government officials. For more information, contact: Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP through William Lerach by Phone: 800/449-4900 or by E-mail: wsl@milberg.com SUMITOMO CORPORATION:US Judge Approves $150M Settlement Of Copper Case ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The settlement deal involving claims amounting to $150 million by copper traders against Japanese trading house Sumitomo Corporation is now approved, the Reuters News Agency said recently. U.S. Federal Judge Milton Pollack in Manhattan approved the settlement, which absolved the Japanese company from further action for illegal trades that cost $2.6 billion in losses, the news agency said. Sumitomo scandalized the copper futures market in 1996, sending prices plunging, when it disclosed losses from unauthorized deals made by senior trader Yasuo Hamanaka, Reuters said. The terms of the settlement agreements include the establishment of a fund to be placed in escrow accounts and invested in treasury bills maturing October 25, 2001. Hamanaka was fired in 1996 and is currently serving an eight-year prison term after being convicted of forgery and fraud. The trading losses allegedly occurred between 1986 and 1997, Reuters said. TEXAS: State Faces Multimillion Suit For Trespass, Fraud, & Conversion ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For more than a generation, they were told that the land had become part of the Canadian River and belonged to the State of Texas instead of them. Now, reinforced by a recent Texas Supreme Court ruling, private landowners along a 12-mile stretch of the Canadian River, east of the Sanford Dam, are filing suit against the State of Texas to take control of land that rightfully belongs to them. At stake are millions of dollars in oil and gas royalties. The lawsuit is prompted by a 1999 decision by the Texas Supreme Court, in a separate property dispute. In that case, title to more than 13,000 acres of land being used by the State was turned over to landowners along the river as it flows from northeast of Borger, Texas past the bridge north of Pampa. In that previous case, Brainard v. The State of Texas, there were no oil or gas wells located on the disputed property. This current lawsuit involves landowners along a different segment of the River, where the State of Texas and its lessees have produced and sold oil and gas from the property for many years. In addition to the boundary dispute will be the question: Are the private landowners entitled to millions of dollars in oil and gas sales derived from the land when it was improperly controlled by the State? "The answer is yes," says Jody Sheets, attorney for the landowners, who today filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of the landowners in Hutchinson County, Texas. The lawsuit seeks to oust the State and its lessees from the property and to obtain financial relief including punitive damages for the property owners. "The Texas Supreme Court has ruled that the private landowners along the Canadian River own the land down to where the land meets the water as it flows today," complaint noted. According to Sheets, "for years, substantial oil and gas drilling and production activities have occurred on the properties involved in the new suit. More than 300 separate landowners may be entitled to not only remove the State and its lessees from their property, but also to receive profits derived from the State's wrongful activities." The lawsuit names the State of Texas and JM Huber Corporation as defendants. Huber leased mineral rights, which the company and State officials claimed were located in the bed of the Canadian River. According to the lawsuit, the State misled landowners as to the location of the boundary between their land and the River and relied on theories that it knew or should have known were incorrect. The defendants are accused of trespass, fraud and conversion. For more information, contact: Hicks Thomas & Lillienstern through Jody Sheets (806/376-7585), John Thomas (713/854-5669) or Michelle Steckel (800/559-4534) TIVO INC.: Milberg Weiss Sues For Shareholders In S.D. New York --------------------------------------------------------------- Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP filed Monday a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Tivo, Inc. (NASDAQ: TIVO) between September 29, 1999 and December 6, 2000, inclusive. The action is pending in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York against defendants Tivo, Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation, BancBoston Robertson Stephens, Inc., Hambrecht & Quist LLC, Michael Ramsay, James Barton and David H. Courtney. The complaint alleges violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. On or about September 29, 1999, Tivo commenced an initial public offering of 5,500,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $16 per share. In connection therewith, Tivo filed a registration statement, which incorporated a prospectus, with the SEC. The complaint further alleges that the Prospectus was materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that: (i) Credit Suisse, Robertson Stephens and H&Q had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which Credit Suisse, Robertson Stephens and H&Q allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of Tivo shares issued in connection with the Tivo IPO; and (ii) Credit Suisse, Robertson Stephens and H&Q had entered into agreements with customers whereby Credit Suisse, Robertson Stephens and H&Q agreed to allocate Tivo shares to those customers in the Tivo IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional Tivo shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices. As alleged in the complaint, the SEC is investigating underwriting practices in connection with several other initial public offerings. For more information, contact: Steven G. Schulman or Samuel H. Rudman One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl. New York, NY, 10119-0165 by Phone: (800) 320-5081 by E-mail: tivocase@milbergNY.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.milberg.com TRANSMETA CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Files CA Securities Suit ------------------------------------------------------------- Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, LLP filed a class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of purchasers of Transmeta Corporation (NASDAQ:TMTA) publicly traded securities during the period between November 7, 2000 and June 20, 2001. The complaint charges Transmeta and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. On November 7, 2000, Transmeta completed its Initial Public Offering pursuant to a Registration Statement and Prospectus, selling 14,950,000 shares (including over-allotments) at $21.00 per share for net proceeds of $289 million. The complaint alleges that in connection with Transmeta's IPO and continuing throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and misleading statements about Transmeta's business and its principal product, the Crusoe family of microprocessors, stating that this technology represented a revolutionary process that delivered longer battery life in Mobile Internet Computers while delivering high performance. As a result, Transmeta's stock traded as high as $50-7/8 per share. In May 2001, as the Transmeta insiders' lock-up agreements expired, five of the Individual Defendants sold 829,500 of their Transmeta shares for proceeds of over $10.5 million. Then, just weeks later, Transmeta was forced to admit that its results for the Second Quarter 2001 would be much worse than defendants had previously represented and that Transmeta would, in order to properly account for its impaired inventory, be forced to record a multi-million dollar inventory charge in connection with Transmeta's inventory for defective and/or outdated products. Following Transmeta's announcement, Transmeta stock collapsed to $5.12 per share before closing at $5.36 per share, an 89% decline from its Class Period high of $50.875. For more information, contact: Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP through William Lerach by Phone: 800/449-4900 or by E-mail: wsl@milberg.com TYSON FOODS: Chimicles Tikellis Files DE Suit For IBP Stock Sellers ------------------------------------------------------------------- Chimicles & Tikellis LLP has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, on behalf of all persons and entities who sold IBP, Inc. common stock during the period from March 29, 2001 through and including June 15, 2001. The Complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Tyson (NYSE: TSN) and its controlling stockholder, Don Tyson and senior officers violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making misrepresentations and omissions of material fact concerning Tyson's true intentions with respect to its definitive merger agreement with IBP and IBP's financial condition. On March 29, 2001 Tyson announced it was discontinuing the Merger and publicly disseminated a letter by which Tyson informed IBP of its decision. Tyson's public statements, among other things, charged that IBP had breached numerous representations and warranties in the Merger Agreement, which could not be cured. Thereafter, IBP sued to enforce the Merger. On June 15, 2001, Vice Chancellor Strine of the Court of Chancery in Delaware ordered Tyson to perform the contract holding "the problems at DFG (IBP) apparently played no part in (Don Tyson's) decision, nor did the comments from the SEC." In re IBP, Inc. Shareholders Litigation, Del. Ch. C.A. 18373, V.C. Strine (June 15, 2001). The lawsuit further charges that Tyson's false and misleading announcement had a material impact on the price of IBP's common stock, which immediately fell 35%. Since the Court of Chancery's decision, the stock has recovered and surged from $18.27 per share on June 15, 2001 to $24.35 on June 18, 2001, the first trading day after the Court decision. For additional information, contact: Chimicles & Tikellis LLP through Pamela S. Tikellis, Esq. or Robert J. Kriner, Jr., Esq. by Phone: 302/656-2500 UNDERWRITERS LITIGATION: Cauley Geller S.D. NY Securities Suit Begins --------------------------------------------------------------------- Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP filed a class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of Intersil Holding Corporation (Nasdaq: ISIL) securities during the period between February 25, 2000 and December 6, 2000, inclusive. The complaint charges defendants Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation, Salomon Smith Barney, Inc., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, and FleetBoston Robertson Stephens with violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. On or about February 25, 2000, Intersil commenced an initial public offering of 20 million of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $25 per share. In connection therewith, Intersil filed a registration statement, which incorporated a prospectus, with the SEC. The complaint further alleges that the Prospectus was materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that (i) defendants had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which defendants allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of Intersil shares issued in connection with the Intersil IPO; and (ii) defendants had entered into agreements with customers whereby defendants agreed to allocate Intersil shares to those customers in the Intersil IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional Intersil shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices. As alleged in the complaint, the SEC is investigating underwriting practices in connection with several other initial public offerings. For more information, contact: CAULEY GELLER BOWMAN & COATES, LLP through its Client Relations Department: Jackie Addison, Sue Null or Charlie Gastineau by Mail: P.O. Box 25438, Little Rock, AR 72221-5438 by Phone: 1-888-551-9944 (toll free) or by E-mail: info@classlawyer.com * Supreme Court Upholds Copyright Protection To Free-lance Writers ------------------------------------------------------------------ Leaders of the National Writers Union and the International Union, UAW described Monday's Supreme Court ruling -- which upholds copyright protections for free-lance writers -- as a victory for creators and consumers. Union leaders also offered to begin negotiations immediately with the publishing industry to develop a comprehensive and fair system for compensating free-lance writers for electronic reuses of their work. "The Court has upheld the spirit of the Constitutional protection for copyright, which was written for the benefit of individual authors," said Jonathan Tasini, president of the National Writers Union (UAW Local 1981) and the lead plaintiff in Tasini vs. New York Times. "Now, it's time for the media industry to negotiate to pay creators their fair share," he said. The Court upheld a September 1999 unanimous ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, which found that The New York Times and publishers had committed copyright infringement when they resold free- lance newspaper and magazine articles, via electronic databases such as LexisNexis, without asking permission or making additional payments to the original authors. "We're proud to have supported our members in the National Writers Union in their fight to be treated fairly by the publishing industry," said UAW President Stephen P. Yokich. "Today's decision paves the way for writers and other creators to be fairly compensated for their work. That's good news for all of us, because we all benefit when the legal protections of copyright encourage the creation of new art, science, and literature," he added. The International Union, UAW, has provided legal and financial support for the groundbreaking litigation, which was filed by nine free-lance members of UAW Local 1981, the National Writers Union, in 1993. "Our message to the publishing industry now is: let's negotiate," said UAW Vice President Elizabeth Bunn, who directs the union's Technical, Office and Professional Department. "The way to deal with these obligations is to meet at the bargaining table so we can find solutions that are fair to writers, to the industry, and for consumers," she said. "The NWU," Tasini said, "is already party to a class action lawsuit, which will enforce the copyright protections affirmed today (Monday) by the Supreme Court." "We want to settle past claims in a reasonable fashion, and establish a mechanism so that free-lancers can be compensated fairly from now on," said Tasini. The Publication Rights Clearinghouse (PRC), said Tasini, established by the NWU in 1993, offers a way for writers and publishers to track the ownership of copyright, and payment for authorized re-sale of copyrighted works. Free-lance writers, whether or not they are NWU members, can use the PRC to license their works by visiting www.nwu.org . Further details regarding the Tasini vs. New York Times litigation can be found at: www.nwu.org/tvt/vichome.htm The National Writers Union has 7,000 members nationwide, including journalists, book authors, technical writers and poets. It is the only union dedicated solely to advancing the interests of free-lance writers. The International Union, UAW has more than 1.3 million active and retired members, including more than 100,000 members in its Technical, Office and Professional Department. In addition to free-lance writers, the UAW also represents attorneys, clerical workers, educators, firefighters, graphic designers, health care workers, graduate student employees, librarians, museum workers, public employees, and many others. ********* 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., Trenton, New Jersey, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C. Enid Sterling, Larri-Nil Veloso and Lyndsey Resnick, Editors. Copyright 2001. All rights reserved. ISSN 1525-2272. This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior written permission of the publishers. Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but is not guaranteed. The CAR subscription rate is $575 for six months delivered via e-mail. Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof are $25 each. For subscription information, contact Christopher Beard at 301/951-6400. * * * End of Transmission * * *