CAR_Public/020319.mbx                C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
                Tuesday, March 19, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 55

                            Headlines

ALASKA MILK: Faces Possible Suit As Milk Poisons Students in Pampanga
AIRLINE MERGER: Controversial Hawaiian, Aloha Airlines Merger Scrapped
AUSTRALIA: Insurance Giant Director Guilty Of Breaking Corporations Law
CANADA: Hospital, Psychiatrist Probed Over Physical Abuse of Patients
DYLEX LTD.: Former BiWay Managers Commence Suit Over Unpaid Bonuses

ENERGY COMPANIES: Arizona Landowners File Suit Over Coal-Bed Royalties
HMO LITIGATION: Doctors Commence Legal Battle Against Health Plans
LEVEL PROPANE: Settles Suit Over Customer Overcharges in Ohio
OKLAHOMA: Jail Faces Potential Suit For "Inhuman" Treatment of Inmates
PAYPAL INC.: Faces Second Consumer Accounts Suit in N.D. California

SLAVE LABOR: Appeals Court Asked To Allow WWII Labor Suit To Proceed
SMURFIT NEWSPRINT: Settles WA Suits Over Defective Cladwood Siding
SMURFIT-STONE: Faces Suit For Violation of Antitrust Laws in IL, PA
VITAMIN ANTITRUST: Australian Court Allows Consumer Suit v. Drug Firms

                         Securities Fraud

ADVANCED SWITCHING: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Securities Suit in E.D. VA
AREMISSOFT CORPORATION: Files For Reorganization To Settle Suits in NJ
AT HOME: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Suit in S.D. New York
COMPUTER ASSOCIATES: Kirby McInerney Commences Securities Suit in NY
COMPUTER ASSOCIATES: Slotnick Shapiro Files Securities Suit in E.D. NY

CORNING INC.: Robbins Umeda Commences Securities Fraud Suit in W.D. NY
GILAT SATELLITE: Schiffrin Barroway Lodges Securities Suit in E.D. NY
HANOVER COMPRESSOR: Robbins Umeda Commences Securities Suit in S.D. TX
JP MORGAN: Schatz Nobel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
JUNIPER NETWORKS: Schiffrin Barroway Launches Securities Suit in CA

LUMENIS LTD.: Bull Lifshitz Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
MEDI-HUT CO.: Berger Montague Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey
NATIONAL GOLF: Schiffrin Barroway Lodges Securities Suit in C.D. CA
NEWPOWER HOLDINGS: Bernstein Liebhard Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY
NVIDIA CORPORATION: Abbey Gardy Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA

NVIDIA CORPORATION: Cohen Milstein Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
PDI INC.: Denies Allegations in Securities Fraud Suits in New Jersey
QWEST COMMUNICATIONS: Bailey Peterson Files Securities Suit in CO
REGENERATION TECHNOLOGIES: Berger Montague Files Securities Suit in FL
RHYTHMS NETCONNECTIONS: NY Court Consolidates Securities Fraud Suits

SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES: Rabin Peckel Commences Securities Suit in E.D. NY
SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES: Brian Felgoise Initiates Securities Suit in NY
TYCO INTERNATIONAL: Faruqi Faruqi Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
                             
                            *********

ALASKA MILK: Faces Possible Suit As Milk Poisons Students in Pampanga
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Philippine food company, Alaska Milk Corporation (AMC), faces a
potential class action filed by parents of school children in the
province of Pampanga, after they fell prey to milk-poisoning, the
Manila Bulletin reports.

Students of the St. Rosario Elementary School in Minalin, Pampanga fell
ill after drinking the Company's chocolate milk under a school feeding
program instituted by the Philippine Department of Education.  Further
investigation revealed that children in the elementary schools of the
barrios of Sto. Domingo, San Isidro and Lourdes were also poisoned.  A
total of 245 children were diagnosed with poisoning, while more than a
thousand were brought to the Jose BN. Lingad Memorial Regional Hospital
(JBLMH) for diagnosis.  No serious cases were reported.

Provincial Administrator, Benalfre Galang, was quoted in a news report
that his office is helping the victims' parents file a suit against the
Company, which could be held liable because the poisoning incident
happened as soon as the children drank the chocolate milk.

Mr. Galang told the Manila Bulletin, "There is a provision in the law
that if the effect of poisoning was immediate, then the product is
considered as not fit for public consumption.And Alaska could be held
liable for what happened in Minalin."  Further investigation is still
being conducted to strengthen the case against the Company.

Company Corporate Affairs Director, Santiago Polido, issued a statement
that the milk drunk by the children was of good quality. "We reviewed
all aspects of our involvement and we found out that there was nothing
wrong with the products delivered under the DepEd program," he said.  
"From production to storage to handling to the time they were delivered
to DepEd, the products were in good condition."

Pampanga Governor Lito Lapid was alarmed over the Company's immediate
"hand washing" in the incident, Mr. Galang said.  He added that it is
too early for the Company to disclaim responsibility for the matter.


AIRLINE MERGER: Controversial Hawaiian, Aloha Airlines Merger Scrapped
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hawaiian Airlines and Aloha Airlines have terminated their planned
merger, saying the two parties were unable to satisfy the conditions of
the merger agreement, Associated Press reports.

The planned merger, initially undertaken to strengthen the Companies'
financial situations after losses incurred due to the reduction of air
travel after September 11, met with widespread opposition from both
Companies' employees, stockholders and consumers.  Class actions were
also commenced in Hawaii courts, stating the merger would lead to
higher prices and poorer service.

Hawaiian Chairman John W. Adams announced earlier that the airline
rejected a deadline extension requested by TurnWorks Inc., a Texas-
based company working to merge the two carriers, Associated Press
reports.  In response to the announcement, Aloha spokesman Stu
Glauberman said, "Aloha is aware of the decision by Hawaiian Airlines,
and will issue comments at the appropriate time."


AUSTRALIA: Insurance Giant Director Guilty Of Breaking Corporations Law
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Justice Kim Santow, of the New South Wales Supreme Court, found that
former HIH Insurance director Rodney Adler, the collapsed insurance
giant's former chief executive, Ray Williams, and former chief
financial officer Dominic Fodera, broke corporations law in a $10
million deal, according to a recent report by the AAP News.  The
Justice found the threesome had breached 13 sections of the
Corporations Act.  Justice Santow will hear submissions from the
parties next week before deciding what penalties to impose.  The Court
can impose fines of up to $200,000 for each Act breach.

Contraventions by Mr. Adler and the Adler Corporation, found to have
breached the Act five times, were "the most serious of all," Justice
Santow said.  He added that, as a director of the collapsed HIH, "Mr.
Adler was required to act in good faith and for proper purpose, neither
of which he did."

The Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) originally
sued Mr. Adler, Mr. Williams and Mr. Fodera over the transfer of $10
million from an HIH subsidiary to Pacific Eagle Equities, owned by Mr.
Adler's family company, Adler Corporation, on June 15, 2000.  The money
was used to buy $4 million worth of HIH shares to prop up its ailing
share price by giving the impression he had bought the share with his
own money, Justice Santow found.

Another $3.8 million was spent on buying three investment holdings from
Adler Corporation with which Mr. Adler "had long been dissatisfied,"
the Judge said.  The remainder was given in unsecured loans to
companies associated with Mr. Adler and his Company.  Mr. Adler denied
all these charges and argued that he was not a director of HIH Casualty
and General Insurance and did not oversee its investments.  ASIC has
asked that Mr. Adler be banned from being a director of other companies
and that he be ordered to pay a fine.

After the verdict, Mr. Adler said he was disappointed by the decision
and announced he would lodge an appeal.  Mr. Adler said, "It has been a
long and difficult case.  I am obviously disappointed with what I have
heard to date.  I am glad at least that this part of the case is over
because there is a future," he said.  Mr. Adler said he was looking
forward to giving his version of events at the HIH Royal Commission,
which is examining the circumstances of Australia's biggest corporate
collapse with losses of up to $5.3 billion.

Solicitor Bruce Dennis, who is mounting a class action on behalf of
1,000 shareholders against the HIH bosses, said the verdict could end
Mr. Adler's career.  ASIC Chairman David Knott said the ruling was an
important outcome for all share market investors, because "it
reinforces the expectation that directors will observe proper standards
of conduct and will not place personal interests ahead of those of the
company."


CANADA: Hospital, Psychiatrist Probed Over Physical Abuse of Patients
---------------------------------------------------------------------
New Zealand police are commencing an investigation of Melbourne
psychiatrist Dr. Selwyn Leeks, after 34 of his former patients
complained of physical abuse while receiving treatment as children at
the Lake Alice Hospital in the 1970s, Melbourne Age reports.  Last
year, the hospital paid patients $5.3 million in compensation over
charges of physical abuse, while New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark
issued a public apology.

The patients charged Dr. Leeks with subjecting them to electric shocks
and pain-inducing injections as children.  Last year, former New
Zealand High Court Judge Sir Rodney Gallen reported that the Lake Alice
"patients," aged between eight and 16, were given electric shocks and
painful injections for minor breaches of discipline, and lived in a
state of "extreme fear and hopelessness."

Complaints have been filed with Wellington police, referring to Dr.
Leeks, and other staff that might have been involved.  Lawyer Grant
Cameron, who handled the class action, filed the complaint.

Dr. Leeks told the Melbourne Age, he did not want to comment on the
police inquiry, but that he was "not particularly worried" about it.
"It's something that seems to happen every 25 years," he said.  "It's
all happened before."


DYLEX LTD.: Former BiWay Managers Commence Suit Over Unpaid Bonuses
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The sole director of bankrupt retailer, Dylex Ltd., two past directors,
and merchandise liquidator, Garcel Inc., are being sued by
former managers of Dylex's discount chain BiWay, The Globe and Mail
reported recently.

Thomas Englefield, a former manager at a Biway store in Caledonia,
Ontario, filed a class action on behalf of all BiWay managers, claiming
a total of $375,297.34 in unpaid bonuses promised during the chain's
liquidation last June and July.  The suit also seeks $2.5 million in
punitive damages from:

     (1) New York-based businessman Hardof Wolf, who bought Toronto's
         Dylex last year;

     (2) former director Arthur Jacques;

     (3) former director Donald McCarthy; and

     (4) California-based merchandise liquidator Garcel Inc., operating
         as Great American Group

A second class action filed recently by Mr. Englefield against Mr. Wolf
demands around $18 million in unpaid wages and termination pay, along
with $5,000 in damages for each of Dylex's 4,000 workers laid off last
year.


ENERGY COMPANIES: Arizona Landowners File Suit Over Coal-Bed Royalties
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A group of Arizona landowners commenced a class action suit against
about 30 coal-bed methane companies including Devon Energy, Pennaco
Energy and CMS, seeking higher payments from the companies that lease
the landowners' mineral rights for methane development, the Billings
Gazette reports.

The suit alleges that the Companies failed to pay them the proceeds
that they are entitled to as royalty owners, and that the Companies
also failed to pay royalties on all of the gas produced from the
methane wells and failed to report the full amount of gas that is
produced at the wells.  The plaintiffs seek 18 percent annual interest
on the unpaid royalties.

The Companies have denied the charges.  Vinnie White, spokesman for
Devon Energy, told the Gazette, "Our policy is to treat everyone we do
business with fairly . We pay our interest in accordance with the terms
of our contractual agreements and the law."

"We pay our fair share of royalty payments. We take a conservative
approach to calculating our royalty liability and we believe this
lawsuit is totally without merit," said Kelly Farr, a spokesman for
CMS.


HMO LITIGATION: Doctors Commence Legal Battle Against Health Plans
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Illinois State Medical Society is the latest doctor group in the
nation to take to the courts in the escalating battle between
physicians and managed-care plans, the Chicago Tribune reported
recently.  The American Medical Association already has become
increasingly litigious, having filed a variety of briefs and lawsuits
against health insurance companies under the direction of the Chicago-
based national doctor group's litigation center.

Illinois' Medical Society is rallying its 15,000 member doctors behind
a two-year-old lawsuit the group says will help Illinois physicians who
complain they are not being told up-front how they will be paid by the
health insurers.  The decision to offer support for this lawsuit comes
at a time that a similar state legislative initiative is stalled in
Springfield, Illinois.  "We want health insurers to disclose all of the
elements of the contract, which they don't do now," said Dr. Ronald
Ruecker, President of the State Medical Society.  "Some doctors
actually do not even know this (nondisclosure) is going on."

The Society is backing a lawsuit filed in Madison County
Circuit Court by Dr. Timothy Kaiser, who alleges that certain managed
care plans shortchange physicians by bundling fees, causing lower
payments to doctors.  Dr. Kaiser also says insurers use computer
systems to systematically reduce payments to physicians.  Although the
Society itself is not a plaintiff, the organization said it is taking
the unprecedented step of assisting Dr. Kaiser, and other physicians
joined in the suit, with case development and discovery.  The case has
been certified as a class action so more physicians can join the
lawsuit.

The defendant insurers say the allegations in the lawsuit are
groundless.  Preferred provider organizations run by Cigna Corporation,
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Illinois, and Healthlink are named in the
suit.  "We believe we have fully honored our PPO contracts with the
physicians and that the underlying legal claims in this suit are
without merit," Cigna spokesman Wendell Potter said.

The case is being watched closely by Illinois insurers and employers,
who last year defeated the "Fairness in Health Care Servicing Act,"
which would have given doctors more clout in negotiating fees insurers
provide in their contracts.  Insurers say such a bill would further
increase rising health-care costs by fattening physician salaries.  "We
do not feel it is appropriate for the Illinois State Medical Society to
use the court system and essentially taxpayer money for a lawsuit that
is being filed to help push their (the physicians') agenda," said David
Dring, spokesman for the Illinois Association of Health Plans.

The medical society is not ruling out supporting future court actions
against health insurers.  "Lawsuits are an unfortunate tool we have to
use, but if we see a situation where we can help, we will do it," said
Dr. Ronald Ruecker, the Society's President.


LEVEL PROPANE: Settles Suit Over Customer Overcharges in Ohio
-------------------------------------------------------------
Level Propane Gases, Inc. settled a class action and a lawsuit filed by
the Attorney General, over allegations that the Company overcharged its
customers and failed to deliver gas last winter, the WKYC News reports.

Under the settlement with the State, the Company will be required to
use a more consumer-friendly contract and provide written confirmation
of verbal price quotes, said Joe Case, spokesman for Attorney General
Betty Montgomery.  "The Attorney General's office in the past couple
years has received over 4,000 complaints against this company.This was
a company that literally left customers out in the cold."

The Company will also repay US$4 million to its customers, the Equal
Justice Foundation of Columbus told WKYC news.  The Company also will
pay $2.2 million in damages to customers and $325,000 in penalties.

The Company said the settlement institutes improvements that it began
last winter.  "This settlement is good for both our customers and
Level," President Walter J. Himmelman said in a news release.  The
class action part of the settlement will be filed in the US District
Court in Columbus.


OKLAHOMA: Jail Faces Potential Suit For "Inhuman" Treatment of Inmates
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A Lawyer planning a potential class action against Garfield County Jail
in Oklahoma added another name to the list of plaintiffs in the suit,
after an inmate was allegedly beaten up by fellow inmates last week,
Enid News and Eagle reports.

Attorney Stephen Jones added Danny Ray Long to the plaintiffs list in
the planned suit, which alleges possible civil rights violations
against the jail.  Plaintiffs include inmates Jesse Daniel Goldston and
Terry Lee Caldwell, who were reportedly assaulted by other inmates
within days of each other last month while housed in 10-man cells, the
same type of cell in which Long was incarcerated.  The suit will
represent all county jail inmates.

The suit seeks to ask county officials to finance the construction of a
new jail to prevent overcrowding and civil and human right violations.  
If that were to happen, Jones told Enid News, his clients would
reconsider their decision to sue.  "In our opinion, that would be a
sign of a good faith step for the County," he said.

County Commissioner Wendell Vencl said the commissioners and Sheriff
Bill Winchester are willing to explore the option, but cannot make the
decision in time for next week, when the lawsuit will be filed.  Mr.
Vencl said such a decision required major research, saying "Obviously
we can't gather that much information and make a decision in three
days."

Garfield County Undersheriff, Jerry Niles, said no charges have been
filed against any inmate for assaulting Mr. Long. He did not know how
many inmates were in the cell at the time, only that there were less
than 10, Enid News reports.


PAYPAL INC.: Faces Second Consumer Accounts Suit in N.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Online payments service provider Paypal, Inc. faces a consumer class
action filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of
California, over allegations that the Company restricted, closed or
froze some its users' accounts, BizReport.com reports.

The suit follows another similar case filed in February by national law
firm Jacoby and Myers in California Superior Court, making similar
allegations against the Company.

Company spokeswoman Julie Anderson told Bizreport.com, "PayPal has over
14 million users who make 200,000 payments every day, so clearly PayPal
provides a popular and growing service that lets people and small
businesses exchange payments easily and securely.While we take customer
comments very seriously, we believe these suits are without merit and
will contest them vigorously."


SLAVE LABOR: Appeals Court Asked To Allow WWII Labor Suit To Proceed
--------------------------------------------------------------------
A flurry of legal briefs have been filed in a California appeals court,
urging the court to let a Korean-American sue a Japanese cement
company, doing business in the United States, for allegedly using slave
labor during World War II, the Associated Press reported recently.  The
State Attorney General's Office, legislators and a coalition of Asian-
American groups all filed separate written arguments in the case during
the past week.  The State Appellate Court temporarily halted the
lawsuit in January and has set an April 30 date for hearing arguments
on whether it should proceed.

Attorney Barry A. Fisher, who represents Jae Wong Jeong, 79, a retired
teacher, said to a news conference that "Mr. Jeong is simply seeking
compensation for the time he was forced to work."  Mr. Jeong, whose
lawsuit seeks class-action status, also wants an apology and a trust
fund to benefit other former forced laborers.  Attorney for the Onoda
Cement Company's Los-Angeles-based subsidiary, Douglas Mirell, did not
immediately return a call for comment.

Victims of Japanese forced labor have gone to court in California and
other states seeking compensation from leading Japanese companies,
including Mitsubishi Corporation and Mitsui & Company, for the
treatment they experienced during the war.  The US Department of State
and Department of Justice have opposed the lawsuits, however, saying
the 1951 treaty that officially ended the war with Japan precludes
prisoners of war from seeking reparations.

The implications of the treaty puts at issue, in Jeong's case, the
constitutionality of a 1999 California law allowing wartime forced-
labor victims in Europe and Asia to seek redress until 2010 against
multi-national firms that operate in the State.  The law is
constitutional, according to Phyllis Cheng, a State Deputy Attorney
General whose office filed a "friend of the Court" (amicus curiae)
brief.  "The law does not conflict with the foreign affairs power of
the US government," she said.

A federal court ruled against the California law in September of last
year, but two months later Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Peter
Lichtman allowed Mr. Jeong's case to move forward.  Judge Lichtman said
he was concerned the government was acting in an "uneven manner" by
allowing claims made by Holocaust survivors to go forward, while
preventing Asian victims from seeking reparations from Japanese
companies.

Another brief was filed by a group of California legislators, including
Senate President Pro Tem John L. Burton, and Assembly Speaker Herbert
J. Wesson Jr., whose district includes Los Angeles' Koreatown.  The
assemblyman has not taken a position on the merits of the claims, but
he supports Mr. Jeong's right to have the suit heard by a jury, said
Mr. Wesson's spokesman, Michael Bai.


SMURFIT NEWSPRINT: Settles WA Suits Over Defective Cladwood Siding
------------------------------------------------------------------
Smurfit Newsprint Corporation settled, for approximately $26.5 million,
the class action suit pending in King County, Washington State Court,
relating to Cladwoodr, a composite wood siding product manufactured by
the Company used primarily in the construction of manufactured or
mobile homes.  The suit alleged that Cladwood siding on their homes
prematurely failed.

As a result of the settlement, the Company paid $20 million into a
settlement fund, plus up to approximately $6.5 million of
administrative costs, plaintiffs' attorneys' fees, and class
representative payments.  The claims period was originally scheduled to
expire in February 2002, but will be extended for up to three years in
accordance with a protocol that limits the Company's liability for
future claims to the amount remaining in the claim fund.


SMURFIT-STONE: Faces Suit For Violation of Antitrust Laws in IL, PA
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Packaging manufacturer, Smurfit-Stone Container Corporation, faces
seven class actions filed in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois and in the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

These complaints allege that the Company reached agreements in
restraint of trade that affected the manufacture, sale and pricing of
corrugated products in violation of antitrust laws. The suits have been
amended to name several other defendants, including subsidiary
Jefferson Smurfit Stone, Inc.  The suits seek an unspecified amount of
damages arising out of the sale of corrugated products for the period
from October 1, 1993 through March 31, 1995.

Under the provisions of the applicable statutes, any award of actual
damages could be trebled. The complaints have been transferred to and
consolidated in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania, which has certified two plaintiff classes.

The Company has appealed the class certification rulings in the Third
Circuit Court of Appeals, and is vigorously defending these cases.  The
Company believes that the resolution of these matters will not have a
material adverse effect on its consolidated financial condition or
results of operations.


VITAMIN ANTITRUST: Australian Court Allows Consumer Suit v. Drug Firms
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Australian Federal Court allowed an antitrust class action accusing
some of the world's major pharmaceutical companies of vitamin price-
fixing to proceed, the Food Navigator reports.  The suit alleges
pharmaceutical giants Roche, BASF and Aventis Animal Nutrition
conspired to fix prices for vitamins A, C, E, B2, B5 and betacarotene.

The Federal Court ruled that the Companies could not remove themselves
from the class action just because they did not have a physical
presence in Australia. They will now face legal proceedings alongside
their local subsidiaries.  Food Navigator reports that the European
Commission has already fined eight companies for their part in the
cartel, while the US authorities have also penalized the producers.

In February, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court also allowed
consumers to file an antitrust suit under the State's consumer
protection laws.

                           Securities Fraud

ADVANCED SWITCHING: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Securities Suit in E.D. VA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Virginia on behalf of purchasers of Advanced Switching Communications,
Inc. (NASDAQ:ASCX) securities between October 4, 2000 and February 12,
2002, inclusive, against the Company and certain of its officers and
directors and Morgan Stanley Dean Witter.

The suit alleges that defendants violated the federal securities laws
by issuing a series of material misrepresentations throughout the class
period that had the effect of artificially inflating the market price
of the Company's securities.

The Company initiated its IPO pursuant to a prospectus dated October 5,
2000. The prospectus contained promising information, detailing that:
shipments of its A-4000 product were being deployed; the A-4500 product
would be commercially accessible by 2001; and a contract for $24
million with Qwest Communications had been signed.

Specifically, the suit alleges that at the time of the prospectus, the
statements were false and misleading because:

     (1) the A-4000 product did not work effectively;

     (2) the A-4500 product would not be offered commercially in 2001
         as even the prototype had not yet been created; and

     (3) the contract with Qwest would most likely not be honored as
         the Company would be unable to meet the terms of the contract
         and due to the fact that Qwest would be unable to successfully
         utilize the A-4000 product.

Due to the trouble with the A-4500 and the failure of the Qwest
contract, among other problems, the Company announced its
implementation of a proposed plan of liquidation on February 5, 2002.
Then, on February 12, 2002, it was released to the public that a $17
million refund had been requested from a key customer regarding the
shipping of a defective product.

For further details, contact Fred Taylor Isquith, Gregory Nespole,
Michael Miske, Gustavo Bruckner, George Peters or Derek Behnke by Mail:
270 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016 by Phone: 800-575-0735 or
by E-mail: classmember@whafh.com or visit the firm's Web site:
http://www.whafh.com. E-mail should refer to Advanced Switching.  


AREMISSOFT CORPORATION: Files For Reorganization To Settle Suits in NJ
----------------------------------------------------------------------
AremisSoft Corporation (Pink Sheets:AREM) today filed a voluntary
petition for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the United States
Bankruptcy Code in the US Bankruptcy Court for the District of New
Jersey.  The bankruptcy was filed in order to implement a plan of
reorganization, which will settle the securities class action against
the Company.  The Company's filing is expected to have no effect on the
operations of SoftBrands, its wholly owned subsidiary that provides
enterprise software solutions.

The proposed reorganization plan would provide that:

     (1) all secured and unsecured claims approved by the Court will be
         paid in full;
    
     (2) the Company will contribute its litigation claims and certain
         other assets to a liquidating trust that will pursue those
         claims and liquidate the assets primarily for the benefit of
         securities class action plaintiffs;

     (3) securities class action plaintiffs will receive all of the
         beneficial interests in the liquidating trust but SoftBrands
         will be entitled to 10 percent of the distributions from the
         trust;
    

     (4) Holders of the Company's common stock will receive 39.5
         percent of the common stock of SoftBrands and securities class
         action plaintiffs will receive 60.5 percent of the common
         stock of SoftBrands;


     (5) all existing equity interests in the Company will be cancelled
         and the Company dissolved.

The reorganization plan has not been approved and is subject to change
by the Court. Shareholders of record will receive a disclosure
statement providing more detail about, and enclosing a copy of, the
reorganization plan prior to its confirmation by the Court and will
have an opportunity to vote on the reorganization plan.

The Company plans to ask the Court to schedule a hearing to approve the
disclosure statement related to the Company's plan of reorganization
within the next 30 days. If the disclosure statement is approved,
solicitation materials will be distributed. If the necessary classes of
claims or interests vote to approve the plan, the Company will seek to
have the plan confirmed by June 15, 2002.

George Ellis, Chairman and CEO of AremisSoft, stated, "This is a
continuation of the process we began last October to separate our
successful vertical software businesses from the legal and regulatory
issues facing AremisSoft. Strategically, today's filing should be
viewed as another important and necessary step in building SoftBrands
into a world-class software company that can provide value for our
customers, our employees and our shareholders."


AT HOME: Bernstein Liebhard Commences Securities Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard and Lifshitz LLP initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York on behalf of persons who acquired At Home Corp., d/b/a Excite@Home
(NASDAQ: ATHM) common stock between April 17, 2001 and August 28, 2001,
inclusive.

The suit asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated by the SEC
thereunder and seeks to recover damages. The complaint alleges that the
Company and certain of its current and former officers and directors
violated the federal securities laws by making misstatements regarding,
and by failing to disclose adverse material facts regarding, the
Company's business and financial condition during the class period and
also by virtue of their status as control persons of the Company.

Specifically, the suit alleges that defendants failed to disclose that
the Company was burning through its cash at a substantially higher rate
than indicated in its filings with the SEC and in other public
statements and that it had obtained $100 million worth of convertible
note financing in June 2001 based on alleged misrepresentations that
subjected the Company to the threat of immediate claims that could put
it into bankruptcy.

The suit further alleges that defendants affirmatively misrepresented
the amount of cash that the Company would need to finance its ongoing
operations for the calendar year 2001 by falsely stating in April 2001
that an additional $85 million in financing would be sufficient to meet
At Home's needs for cash during 2001.  Despite obtaining a total of
$185 million in new financing, the complaint alleges, on September 29,
2001, At Home announced that it would seek bankruptcy protection, and
on October 23, 2001, the Company's share price hit a 52-week low of
four cents per share.

The complaint further alleges that the Company, which at all relevant
times held a 74% voting interest in the Company, is liable for the
foregoing under Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
based on its status as a control person of the Company.

According to the complaint, due to defendants' deceptive and illegal
conduct, the Company's stock price was artificially high throughout the
class period, causing plaintiff and the other class members to purchase
their Company securities at inflated prices.

For more information, contact Linda Flood by Mail: 10 East 40th Street,
New York, New York 10016 by Phone: 800-217-1522 or 212-779-1414 by E-
mail: ATHM@bernlieb.com or visit the firm's Web site:
http://www.bernlieb.com.


COMPUTER ASSOCIATES: Kirby McInerney Commences Securities Suit in NY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Kirby McInerney & Squire LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on
behalf of all purchasers of certain Computer Associates (NYSE:CA)
securities, including common stock, during the period from May 28, 1999
through February 25, 2002.

The suit charges the Company, as well as its Chairman, Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, with violations of Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These violations, the
complaint alleges, stem from defendants' materially false and
misleading statements during the class period that, as detailed below:

     (1) misrepresented the Company's business, operations and
         financial performance; and

     (2) caused the Company's shares to trade at artificially-inflated
         prices.

The complaint alleges that, during the class period, the Company's
public statements and representations were rendered false and
misleading by certain accounting and sales practices involving how and
when it would recognize revenue. These practices, as described in
detail in the complaint, and as discussed in the Wall Street Journal
and the New York Times, are now under investigation by the Securities
and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the US Attorney's office.

When news of these investigations emerged in late February 2002,
Company stock lost over one third of its value, falling from its
closing price of $25.31 on February 19, 2002 to a February 22, 2002
closing price of $15.99.

According to the suit, beginning not later than May 1999, the Company
created the impression that its revenue growth was sustainable by
falsely claiming that it had transitioned from its mainframe core
business to selling software for distributed systems. Simultaneously,
as the complaint alleges, the Company inflated its reported revenue by
extending contracts in the middle of their term, booking all the
revenue from the sale of a software license, but not writing down the
revenue from the overlapping period for which it had recognized revenue
under the old license, thereby double-counting revenue for the overlap
in the licensing periods.

In an attempt, according to the complaint, to hide the severe revenue
decline the Company was actually experiencing, defendants instituted a
"new business model" involving sales of flexible subscription
agreements instead of fixed-term licenses, which was intended to
disguise its inability to continue selling long-term licenses for
mainframe software.  The Company engaged in these practices without
alerting the market to the actual deterioration in its financial
condition, and by releasing non-GAAP-compliant financial results which
used revenue booked in prior periods to obscure a dramatic drop in new
sales.

For more details, contact Ira M. Press or Orie Braun by Mail: 830 Third
Avenue, 10th Floor, New York, New York 10022 by Phone: 212-317-2300 or
Toll Free 888-529-4787 by E-Mail: obraun@kmslaw.com or visit the firm's
Web site: http://www.kmslaw.com


COMPUTER ASSOCIATES: Slotnick Shapiro Files Securities Suit in E.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Slotnick, Shapiro & Crocker, LLP initiated a securities class action on
behalf of a union pension fund in the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of New York on behalf of all purchasers of certain
Computer Associates International, Inc. (NYSE: CA) securities,
including common stock, during the period from May 28, 1999 through
February 25, 2002.

The action charges the Company, as well as its Chairman, Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, with violations of
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These
violations, the Complaint alleges, stem from defendants' materially
false and misleading statements during the class period that, as
detailed below:

     (1) misrepresented the Company's business, operations and
         financial performance; and

     (2) caused the Company's shares to trade at artificially-inflated
         prices.

The suit alleges that, during the class period, the Company's public
statements and representations were rendered false and misleading by
certain accounting and sales practices involving how and when the
Company would recognize revenue.

These practices, as described in detail in the suit, and as discussed
in the Wall Street Journal and The New York Times, are now under
investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the
US Attorney's office.

When news of these investigations emerged in late February 2002, the
Company stock lost over one-third of its value, falling from its
closing price of $25.31 on February 19, 2002 to a February 22, 2002
closing price of $15.99.

According to the suit, beginning not later than May 1999, the Company
created the impression that its revenue growth was sustainable by
falsely claiming that the Company had transitioned from its mainframe
core business to selling software for distributed systems.

Simultaneously, as the suit alleges, the Company inflated its reported
revenue by extending contracts in the middle of their term, booking all
the revenue from the sale of a software license, but not writing down
the revenue from the overlapping period for which the Company had
recognized revenue under the old license, thereby double-counting
revenue for the overlap in the licensing periods.

In an attempt, according to the suit, to hide the severe revenue
decline the Company was actually experiencing, defendants instituted a
"new business model" involving sales of flexible subscription
agreements instead of fixed-term licenses, which was intended to
disguise its inability to continue selling long-term licenses for
mainframe software.

The Company engaged in these practices without alerting the market to
the actual deterioration in its financial condition, and by releasing
non-GAAP-compliant financial results, which used revenue booked in
prior periods to obscure a dramatic drop in new sales.

For more information, contact Stephen D. Oestreich by Mail: 100 Park
Avenue, 35th Floor, New York, NY 10017 by Phone: 212-687-5000 or
888-367-5291 toll-free by Fax: 212-687-3080 or by E-Mail:
tcallahan@sscny.com


CORNING INC.: Robbins Umeda Commences Securities Fraud Suit in W.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Robbins Umeda & Fink, LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Western District of New York on
behalf of purchasers of the securities of Corning, Inc. (NYSE:GLW)
between September 27, 2000 and July 10, 2001, inclusive.

The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors
with issuing false and misleading statements concerning its business
and financial condition. Specifically, the complaint asserts claims
against the Company and officers Roger G. Ackerman, Katherine A. Asbeck
and James B. Flaws for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

For more details, contact Marc M. Umeda by Mail: 1010 Second Ave.,
Suite 2360, San Diego, CA 92101 by Phone: 800-350-6003 or by E-mail:  
info@ruflaw.com


GILAT SATELLITE: Schiffrin Barroway Lodges Securities Suit in E.D. NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP launched a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on
behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of Gilat Satellite
Networks, Ltd. (Nasdaq:GILTF) from November 13, 2000 through October 2,
2001, inclusive.

The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors
with issuing false and misleading statements concerning its business
and financial condition. Among other things, plaintiff claims that the
defendants knew or recklessly disregarded, yet covered up the fact,
that:

     (1) the demand for and acceptance of the Company's products and
         the products of its subsidiary, StarBand Communications, Inc.,
         were greatly overstated;

     (2) the Company was having difficulty manufacturing and selling
         its chief product, Very Small Aperture Terminal (VSAT)
         profitably;

     (3) the Company's purported gross profit margins were false;

     (4) the Company was materially understating its costs and expenses
         and

     (5) the Company, accordingly, would have to take massive charge-
         offs, numbering in the hundreds of millions of dollars in the
         future.

The suit claims that defendants' material omissions and the
dissemination of materially false and misleading statements caused the
Company's stock price to become artificially inflated, inflicting
enormous damages on investors.

For more information, contact Marc A. Topaz or Stuart L. Berman by
Phone: 888-299-7706 (toll free) or 610-667-7706 or visit the firm's Web
site: http://www.sbclasslaw.com


HANOVER COMPRESSOR: Robbins Umeda Commences Securities Suit in S.D. TX
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Robbins Umeda & Fink, LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas on
behalf of purchasers of the securities of Hanover Compressor Company
(NYSE:HC) between May 15, 2000 and January 28, 2002, inclusive.

The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors
with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The suit
alleges violations of the federal securities laws arising out of
defendants' issuance of false financial statements and other false and
misleading statements about the Company's operating performance.

For more details, contact Brian J. Robbins by Mail: 1010 Second Ave.,
Suite 2360, San Diego, CA 92101 by Phone: 800-350-6003 or by E-mail:  
info@ruflaw.com


JP MORGAN: Schatz Nobel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
------------------------------------------------------------------
Schatz and Nobel, PC initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf
of all persons who purchased the common stock of JP Morgan Chase & Co.
(NYSE: JPM) between December 31, 2000 and February 1, 2002, inclusive.

The suit alleges that the Company, a global financial services company,
violated the federal securities laws by failing to disclose material
risks of its business in its SEC filings and other public disclosures
made during the class period.

Specifically, the Company's business involved making commodities loans,
derivative loans, and other transactions that were designed to be "off
the books" financing for its borrowers. These creative transactions
were, in essence, loan transactions that were presented as other types
of transactions as part of a fraudulent scheme to disguise the loans as
assets and to wrongfully obtain surety bonds guaranteeing payment.

These transactions subjected the Company to large credit risks, large
risks of refusal to make repayment (or to insure performance), and
large risks of liability to the debtor and third parties. All of these
risks were material to the Company and rendered false and misleading
the positive statements (and risk disclosures) that the Company made
during the class period.

For example, on November 21, 2001, the Company issued a public
statement to the effect that its total exposure to Enron Corporation
was approximately $900 million. However, this figure did not disclose
the Company's true exposure to Enron because it failed to include its
exposure to Enron resulting from its systematic practices alleged
above. Only later in the class period did the Company reveal that its
total Enron-related exposure risk was approximately $2.6 billion due to
the risks associated with the practices alleged above.

Federal examiners are now assessing the true extent of the Company's
undisclosed risk. As a result of the previously undisclosed risk
already partially disclosed, the Company's stock price has fallen by
40%.

For more details, contact Andrew M. Schatz, Patrick A. Klingman, Wayne
T. Boulton, Nancy A. Kulesa by Phone: 800-797-5499 by E-mail:
sn06016@aol.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.snlaw.net


JUNIPER NETWORKS: Schiffrin Barroway Launches Securities Suit in CA
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway LLP initiated a securities suit against Juniper
Networks, Inc. (Nasdaq:JNPR) claiming that the Company misled investors
about its business and financial condition, in the US District Court
for the Northern District of California on behalf of all investors who
bought Company securities between April 12, 2001 through June 7, 2001.

The suit alleges that the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Specifically, the complaint alleges that during the class period,
defendants stated that the Company was on track to have 2ndQ 01
revenues of $330+ million and earnings per share (EPS) of $0.25, and
that deferred revenue (i.e., revenue not yet recognized because
customers had not yet accepted products) had declined because customer
acceptance cycles were shorter than in the past.

Defendants also represented the Company was on track to report 2001 EPS
of $0.90-$1.00, pro forma, causing its stock to trade as high as
$69.50. Defendants took advantage of this inflation selling 747,463
shares, for proceeds of $42.9 million.

Then, on June 8, 2001, the Company disclosed that its 2nd Quarter 2001
revenues would be much lower than previously represented and earnings
would be less than half of prior estimates. Defendants also admitted
that customer acceptance cycles were in fact much longer than in the
past, stretching from days to months. One analyst noted that the
Company's announcement was matched in "severity by its tardiness."

On this news, Company shares dropped to $38.02, or more than 46% lower
than the class period high of $69.50. Ultimately, the Company reported
a loss for 2001 and pro forma EPS of just $0.50, half what defendants
represented, and its stock has declined to $13.

For further details, contact Schiffrin & Barroway by Phone: at
888-299-7706 (toll free) or 610-822-2221 by Fax: 610-822-0002 by E-
mail: info@sbclasslaw.com or visit the firm's Web site:
http://www.sbclasslaw.com.  


LUMENIS LTD.: Bull Lifshitz Commences Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bull & Lifshitz, LLP initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf
of purchasers of Lumenis Ltd. (Nasdaq:LUME) common stock during the
period between January 7, 2002 through February 28, 2002, inclusive.

The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors
with violations of the federal securities laws by issuing materially
false and misleading statements throughout the class period that had
the effect of artificially inflating the market price of the Company's
securities.

On February 28, 2002, the Company revealed the facts concerning the SEC
investigation in a conference call. These shocking revelations caused
the stock to plummet 30% in one day and more than 69% from its class
period high, resulting in damages to plaintiff and members of the
class.

For more information, contact Peter D. Bull or Joshua M. Lifshitz by
Phone: 212-213-6222 by Fax: 212-213-9405 by E-mail:
counsel@nyclasslaw.com or visit the firm's Web site:
http://www.nyclasslaw.com


MEDI-HUT CO.: Berger Montague Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Berger & Montague, PC initiated a securities class action against Medi-
Hut Co. (Nasdaq:MHUT) and certain of its officers and directors in the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, on behalf
of all persons or entities who purchased the Company's common stock
during the period from April 4, 2000 through February 4, 2002.

The complaint seeks damages for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder. The defendants are the Company and:

     (1) Joseph A. Sanpietro, President and Chief Executive Officer,

     (2) Laurence M. Simon, Chief Financial Officer,

     (3) Robert Russo, Treasurer,

     (4) Vincent Sanpietro, Secretary,

     (5) James G. Aaron, director, and

     (6) James S. Vacarro, director

The suit alleges that defendants knowingly and recklessly disseminated
materially false and misleading statements and omissions that
misrepresented the Company's business, operations and financial
performance.  As stated in the suit, the Company misled the investing
public by failing to disclose that a Company vice president, Lawrence
Marasco had a controlling interest in Larval Corporation, the Company's
largest customer.  Specifically, the Company failed to disclose that
Mr. Marasco, Vice President for Sales and Marketing, had a controlling
interest in Larval. During fiscal year 2001, sales to Larval accounted
for 62% of the Company's revenues.

Because Mr. Marasco had a controlling interest in one of the Company's
customers, generally accepted accounting principles dictated that the
Company identify sales to that customer as related party transactions.
The Company, however, failed to disclose the true nature of its sales
to Larval.  Indeed, each report it filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission during the class period, including quarterly and
annual reports, was devoid of any reference to the fact that one of its
largest customers was controlled by a Company employee.  These reports
were disseminated to shareholders and/or were publicly available to
potential investors.

The suit also alleges that the misrepresentations and omissions by
defendants influenced the views of stock market analysts and the
investing public and brought about an unrealistic assessment of the
Company's performance and prospects, and that, as a result, Company
stock traded at artificially inflated prices throughout the class
period.

On February 4, 2002, the nature of the relationship between the
Company, Lawrence Marasco and Larval Corp. was revealed to the market.
The investing public, recognizing that a majority of its revenues in
fiscal year 2001 were generated via sales to a related party, reacted
swiftly and severely. By the close of business on February 4, shares
had lost 51% of their value, falling $3.41 per share to $3.29 in
unusually heavy trading. Four days later, Grant Thornton LLP resigned
its position as the Company's independent auditor after only two weeks.
Grant Thornton served as the Company's auditors from January 24, 2002
through February 8, 2002.

For more information, contact Darin R. Morgan, Kimberly A. Walker by
Mail: 1622 Locust Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103 by Phone: 888-891-2289
or 215-875-3000 by Fax: 215-875-5715 by E-mail: InvestorProtect@bm.net
or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.bergermontague.com


NATIONAL GOLF: Schiffrin Barroway Lodges Securities Suit in C.D. CA
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a securities class action in the US
District Court for the Central District of California, on behalf of
purchasers of National Golf Properties, Inc. (NYSE:TEE) securities
between April 1, 1999 through November 14, 2001(including all purchases
in or pursuant to the Company's May 17, 2001 secondary offering),
claiming the Company misled shareholders about its business and
financial condition.

The suit alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  Specifically, the suit alleges that
the Company and certain of its officers and directors with issuing
false and misleading statements concerning its business and financial
condition.

The suit alleges that David G. Price misappropriated funds from a
publicly traded company and funneled them to himself via a scheme of
complicated financial dealings involving the Company and a variety of
Price-controlled entities. Price-controlled entities conduct
substantial business with the Company, to the detriment of its
shareholders.  Mr. Price's plan culminated in a May 2001 secondary
offering that generated over $31 million from plaintiff and other class
members which went to a Price-controlled entity, Oaks Christian High
School.

Defendants allegedly violated the Securities Act of 1933 by issuing a
false and misleading registration statement and prospectus, which
became effective May 17, 2001, and included materially false and
misleading financial statements, and other false and misleading
statements, pursuant to which 1.175 million Company shares were sold to
plaintiff and other members of the class.

Defendants allegedly violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by
making a series of materially false and misleading statements
concerning the business and financial operations of the Company with
the intent and having the effect of substantially inflating the trading
price of common stock.

For more details, contact Marc A. Topaz or Stuart L. Berman by Phone:
888-299-7706 (toll free) or 610-822-2221 or by E-mail:
info@sbclasslaw.com


NEWPOWER HOLDINGS: Bernstein Liebhard Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard and Lifshitz LLP initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York on behalf of persons who acquired NewPower Holdings common stock
between October 5, 2000 and December 5, 2001, inclusive.

The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors
with issuing false and misleading statements concerning its business
and financial condition. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the
registration statement and prospectus for the Company's public offering
on October 5, 2000 was false and misleading in several ways, including
misrepresentations and omissions concerning the adequacy of risk
management systems put in place in conjunction with Company affiliate,
Enron Energy Services, Inc. (EES), and the true nature and purpose of
certain related party transactions, including transactions pursuant to
which Enron attempted to hedge its investment in the Company through
use of a partnership known as "Raptor III," which was conceived and
designed by Enron CFO Andrew Fastow.

Claims regarding these misrepresentations and omissions have been
asserted under Section 11 of the Securities Act against the
underwriters of the October 5, 2000 initial public offering and against
those persons who were directors (or about to become directors) of the
Company at the time of that offering, including its top executives, CEO
H. Eugene Lockhart, Chairman Lou L. Pai and CFO William I. Jacobs.

The complaint alleges in this regard that the Company and certain of
its officers and directors misrepresented or failed to disclose:

     (1) that the Company had not adopted effective and appropriate
         hedging strategies against volatility of commodity prices;

     (2) that the Company was on course to achieve its financial goals
         and had sufficient liquidity to do so; and

     (3) that certain forward contracts with EES posed little risk of
         loss when in truth and in fact they were driving the Company
         toward insolvency, and were largely structured to protect and
         enrich Enron, the Company's controlling shareholder.

According to the complaint, due to defendants' deceptive and illegal
conduct, the Company's stock price was artificially high throughout the
class period, causing plaintiff and the other class members to purchase
their securities at inflated prices.

For further information, contact Ms. Linda Flood, Director of
Shareholder Relations, by Mail: 10 East 40th Street, New York, New York
10016 by Phone: 800-217-1522 or 212-779-1414 by E-mail:
NPW@bernlieb.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.bernlieb.com  


NVIDIA CORPORATION: Abbey Gardy Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbey Gardy, LLP lodged a securities class action against NVIDIA
Corporation (Nasdaq:NVDA) in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, on behalf of all persons or entities
who purchased the Company's common stock during the period from
February 15, 2000 through February 14, 2002.  The suit also names as
defendants Jen-Hsun Huang, President and Chief Executive Officer and
Christine B. Hoberg, Chief Financial Officer.

The suit alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).  
Specifically, the complaint alleges that as part of their effort to
boost the price of Company stock, defendants misrepresented the
Company's true prospects in an effort to conceal its improper acts
until they were able to sell at least $66 million worth of their own
Company stock.

In order to overstate revenues and assets in its 4th Quarter 2000 and
1st to 3rd Quarter 2001, the Company violated generally accepted
accounting principles and SEC rules by engaging in an illegal
accounting scheme. This scheme had the effect of dramatically
overstating revenues and assets.

On February 14, 2002, after the close of the market, the Company  
admitted in part that its past accounting for its prior results may be
inaccurate in a press release entitled, "NVIDIA Corporation Conducting
Review of Certain Transactions at the Request of the SEC."  On this
news the company's shares plummeted the following day.

For more information, contact Nancy Kaboolian or Jennifer Haas by
Phone: 800-889-3701 or by E-mail: JHaas@abbeygardy.com or
nkaboolian@abbeygardy.com


NVIDIA CORPORATION: Cohen Milstein Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, PLLC initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California, on behalf of purchasers of the common stock of NVIDIA
Corporation (Nasdaq:NVDA) during the period Feb. 15, 2000, through and
including Feb. 14, 2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The
complaint alleges, among other things, that during the class period
defendants issued a series of false and misleading statements
concerning the Company's financial condition. In order to overstate
revenues in its financial statements, the Company violated generally
accepted accounting principles and SEC rules by engaging in an improper
scheme.

As a result of defendants' misleading statements and accounting
improprieties during the class period, the price of the Company's
common stock traded at artificially inflated prices.

For more information, contact Andrew N. Friedman or Diana Steele by
Mail: 1100 New York Avenue, NW West Tower, Suite 500 Washington, DC
20005 by Phone: 888-240-0775 or 202-408-4600 or by E-mail:
afriedman@cmht.com or dsteele@cmht.com


PDI INC.: Denies Allegations in Securities Fraud Suits in New Jersey
--------------------------------------------------------------------
PDI Inc. vowed to mount a vigorous defense against several class
actions commenced in January 2002 against the Company, its Chief
Executive officer and its Chief Financial Officer, in the US District
Court for the District of New Jersey alleging violations of the
Securities Act of 1934.

The suits were brought as purported shareholder class actions under
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the 1934 Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, on behalf of purchasers of the Company's stock May 22, 2001
through November 12, 2001.  The suits allege that the defendants
intentionally or recklessly made false or misleading public statements
and omissions concerning our financial condition and prospects with
respect to its marketing of Ceftin in connection with the October 2000
distribution agreement with GlaxoSmithKline, as well as its marketing
of Lotensin and Lotrel in connection with the May 2001 distribution
agreement with Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.

The Company believes that these three complaints will ultimately be
consolidated into one action, and that the allegations in these
complaints are without merit.  The Company has yet to file a response
to the suits and discovery has not yet commenced.


QWEST COMMUNICATIONS: Bailey Peterson Files Securities Suit in CO
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bailey and Peterson PC initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the District of Colorado, on behalf of
all purchasers of Qwest Communications International, Inc. common stock
during the period April 19, 2000, through and including February 13,
2002.

The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers, with
violations of federal securities laws. Specifically, plaintiffs have
brought claims under sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. Plaintiffs
claim that the Company and certain of its officers knowingly or
recklessly issued, caused to be issued, and participated in the
issuance of deceptive and materially false and misleading statements to
the investing public regarding the Company, which artificially inflated
the price of its common stock.

For more information, contact James S. Bailey, Jr. or Randall M.
Livingston by Mail: 1660 Lincoln St., Suite 3175, Denver, Colorado
80264 by Phone: 303-837-1660 or by E-mail: bailey@b-p-law.com or
livingston@b-p-law.com or visit the firm's Web site:
http://www.aescon/bhplaw/index.htm.  


REGENERATION TECHNOLOGIES: Berger Montague Files Securities Suit in FL
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Berger & Montague, PC commenced a securities class action against
Regeneration Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ:RTIX) and certain of its
officers in the United States District Court for the Northern District
of Florida, on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased
Regeneration Technologies, Inc. common stock during the period from
July 25, 2001 through January 31, 2002.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers with
issuing false and misleading statements concerning its business and
financial condition. Specifically, the suit alleges that defendants
made highly positive statements regarding the Company's financial
results.  The Company reported quarter after quarter of "record"
financial results and strong revenue growth which caused the price of
its securities to trade as high as $12.82 per share during the class
period. These statements were allegedly false and misleading because
the Company failed to take a charge against earnings to recognize
worthless inventory.

On February 2, 2002, the Company shocked the market by announcing that
it was delaying its fourth quarter and year-end results for fiscal year
2001 while "management completes its evaluation of certain inventory
issues."  The Company also announced that its Chief Financial Officer,
Richard Allen, and Vice President of Marketing and Sales, James
Abraham, are leaving the Company effective immediately. The Company
further announced that it is "evaluating whether these issues may
affect RTI's previously reported financial results" and although "RTI's
annual results have not been finalized, company officials expect to
report a loss for both the quarter and the year."

In response to the news the price of Company stock plunged more than
50% from $10.15 on January 31, 2002 to $5.19 on February 1, 2002.

For more information, contact Todd S. Collins, Douglas M. Risen or
Kimberly A. Walker by Mail: 1622 Locust Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103
by Phone: 888-891-2289 or 215-875-3000 by Fax: 215-875-5715 by E-mail:
InvestorProtect@bm.net or visit the firm's Web site:
http://www.bergermontague.com


RHYTHMS NETCONNECTIONS: NY Court Consolidates Securities Fraud Suits
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The seven class actions filed in July and August 2001 against Rhythms
Netconnections, Inc. have been consolidated in the US District Court
for the Southern District of New York along with approximately 800
other securities suits involving approximately 180 issuer defendants
and numerous other defendants.  The suit, entitled In RE: Initial
Public Offering Securities Litigation, is under Federal judge Schira
Scheindlin.

The suits name as defendants the Company, its present and former
officers and directors and certain underwriters who participated in the
Company's initial public offering of common stock. One additional
lawsuit, commenced after the Company filed its petition seeking
bankruptcy protection, does not name as the Company as a defendant, but
names as defendants certain of its officers and directors and certain
underwriters who participated in the Company's initial public offering
of common stock.

In these actions, plaintiffs allege that the Company violated Section
11 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, in connection with its initial public offering of
common stock, by filing a registration statement and prospectus with
the Securities and Exchange Commission which contained material
misrepresentations and/or omissions with respect to undisclosed:

     (1) excessive fees and commissions allegedly charged by the
         Company's underwriters in connection with the allocation of
         Company shares; and

     (2) agreements between the Company's underwriters and their
         customers which were allegedly designed to inflate the market
         price of Company stock after its initial public offering.

In certain of these actions, plaintiffs also allege that the Company
violated securities laws by disseminating a registration statement and
prospectus in connection with a secondary offering of the Company's
common stock which allegedly contained the same material
misrepresentations and/or omissions as those purportedly contained in
its offering documents in its initial public offering.


SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES: Rabin Peckel Commences Securities Suit in E.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rabin and Peckel LLP initiated a securities class action in the United
States Eastern District Court of New York, on behalf of all persons or
entities who purchased Symbol Technologies, Inc. common stock
(NYSE:SBL) between October 19, 2000 and February 13, 2002, both dates
inclusive.

The suit alleges that defendants violated Section 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing a series of
materially false and misleading statements about its quarterly and
annual financial results for 2000 and its quarterly financial results
for the first quarter of 2001.  In particular, it is alleged that the
Company improperly booked a $10 million royalty payment in the third
quarter of 2000 and of improperly recorded more than $40 million in
revenue in the first quarter of 2001.

The suit alleges that as a result of these false and misleading
statements the price of Company stock was artificially inflated
throughout the class period causing plaintiff and the other members of
the class to suffer damages.

For further details, contact Eric Belfi or Maurice Pesso by Mail: 275
Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016 by Phone: 800-497-8076 or 212-682-
1818 by Fax: 212-682-1892 by E-mail: email@rabinlaw.com or visit the
firm's Web site: http://www.rabinlaw.com.


SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES: Brian Felgoise Initiates Securities Suit in NY
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Brian M. Felgoise, PC commenced a securities class
action on behalf of shareholders who acquired Symbol Technologies, Inc.
(NYSE:SBL) securities between October 19, 2000 and February 13, 2002,
inclusive, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District
of New York, against the Company and certain key officers and
directors.

The suit charges that defendants violated the federal securities laws
by issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements to
the market throughout the class period which statements had the effect
of artificially inflating the market price of the Company's securities.

For further details, contact Brian M. Felgoise by Mail: 230 South Broad
Street, Suite 404, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19102 by Phone:
215-735-6810 or by E-mail: BrianFLaw@yahoo.com


TYCO INTERNATIONAL: Faruqi Faruqi Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Faruqi and Faruqi LLP initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf
of all purchasers of Tyco International, Ltd. (NYSE:TYC) securities
between December 13, 1999 and February 5, 2002, inclusive.

The suit charges defendants with violations of federal securities laws
by, among other things, issuing a series of materially false and
misleading press releases concerning the Company's financial results
and business prospects.  

Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants concealed that the
Company paid nearly $8 billion for more than 700 acquisitions that were
never disclosed to the public or in its public filings.  Defendants
further concealed that the undisclosed acquisitions cost over 100% more
than the transactions that had been disclosed, based on a price
calculated as a multiple of the acquired company's revenues.

Contrary to defendants' misrepresentations that the Company had ample
free cash flow and that its emergency backup credit lines would remain
undrawn, on February 5, 2002, the last day of the class period, the
Company announced that it was forced to exit the commercial paper
market and draw down the full $5.9 billion from emergency backup credit
lines in order to pay for $4.5 billion in outstanding commercial paper
debt.

The defendants later admitted that increased borrowing costs and fees
respecting the emergency debt "could cut 45 cents (per share), or $900
million, from Tyco's previous estimate of the company's fiscal 2002
earnings of $7.4 billion or $3.70 a share."  

In response to the emergency debt announcement by the Company, the
trading price of Company shares fell to $23.10 per share - a class
period low and a decrease of almost 70% from the value of Company
shares at the time that certain of the individual defendants made their
insider sales - with trading volume of 69,398,800 shares.

For more information, contact Anthony Vozzolo by Mail: 320 East 39th
Street, New York, NY 10016 by Phone: 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 by E-
mail: Avozz@faruqilaw.com or visit the firm's Web site:
http://www.faruqilaw.com


                              *********


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, Aurora Fatima
Antonio and Lyndsey Resnick, Editors.

Copyright 2002.  All rights reserved.  ISSN 1525-2272.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic re-
mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior written
permission of the publishers.

Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be
reliable, but is not guaranteed.

The CAR subscription rate is $575 for six months delivered via e-mail.  
Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same firm for the
term of the initial subscription or balance thereof are $25 each.  For
subscription information, contact Christopher Beard at 240/629-3300.

                  * * *  End of Transmission  * * *