/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/020328.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Thursday, March 28, 2002, Vol. 4, No. 62 Headlines FIRST ALLIANCE: $60M "Deceptive Practices" Settlement Awaits Approval FORD MOTOR: Judge Refuses To Halt Foreign Suits Over Rollover Accidents MERIDIA LITIGATION: Pharmaceutical Firms Face Suit Over Meridia Drug MICROSOFT CORP.: Justice Dept Given Chance To Respond To Objections TOBACCO LITIGATION: Three Major Companies Sued Over "Light" Cigarettes US NAVY: Subic Bay Naval Base Workers To Sue Over Asbestos Exposure WEAPONS LABS: Agree To Change Hiring Ways To End Asian-American Boycott Securities Fraud ALLIANCE CAPITAL: IL Court Dismisses Without Prejudice Securities Suit BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB: Schiffrin Barroway Files Securities Suit in NY BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY BSQUARE CORPORATION: NY Court Orders Securities Suits Consolidated CALPINE CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA CORVIS CORPORATION: NY Court Orders Consolidation of Securities Suits CVS CORPORATION: MA Federal Court Consolidates Securities Fraud Suits DYNACQ INTERNATIONAL: Stull Stull Commences Securities Suit in S.D. TX GSV INC.: NJ Federal Court Dismisses Securities Suit With Prejudice JP MORGAN: To Mount Vigorous Defense v. Securities Suits Over Enron JP MORGAN: Schiffrin Barroway Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY JP MORGAN: Cauley Geller Commences Securities Suit in S.D. New York L90 INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in C.D. California MEASUREMENT SPECIALTIES: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit in NJ MEASUREMENT SPECIALTIES: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in NJ MEDI-HUT CO.: Rabin Peckel Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey METAWAVE COMMUNICATIONS: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in W.D. WA NEW FOCUS INC.: CA Court Dismisses Without Prejudice Securities Suit NEWPOWER HOLDINGS: Wolf Popper Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY NVIDIA CORPORATION: Robbins Umeda Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA OWENS CORNING: Asks MA Federal Court To Dismiss Securities Fraud Suit PERINI CORPORATION: NY Court Dismisses Preferred Shareholders Suit TREX COMPANY: Asks Court to Dismiss Consolidated Securities Suit in VA UBS PAINEWEBBER: Spencer Associates Launches Securities Suit in S.D. TX ********* FIRST ALLIANCE: $60M "Deceptive Practices" Settlement Awaits Approval --------------------------------------------------------------------- Nearly 500 poor and elderly Maryland residents could share in a $60 million settlement that the federal government reached with a California home mortgage company accused of deceptively charging clients exorbitant fees and interest rates, The Baltimore Sun recently reported. First Alliance Mortgage Corporation, in an agreement with the Federal Trade Commission, said it will repay nearly 18,000 borrowers from 18 states and the District of Columbia, who obtained loans from January 1, 1992 through March 23, 2000, when the Company filed for bankruptcy. During that period, the Company approved 514 loans to 472 borrowers in Maryland. Nearly 100 of those borrowers lived in the Baltimore area. FTC officials said yesterday that the average compensation for victims will be $2,500 to $3,500. The Company admitted no wrongdoing. The settlement is subject to approval by a federal court in Santa Ana, California. The agreement with the Company is the largest case involving predatory lending that ever has been settled by the FTC, said Joel Winston, associate director for financial practices with the Commission's Bureau of Consumer Protection. The AARP, six states and lawyers representing individuals and class- action groups also have filed lawsuits against the company, and helped FTC propose a settlement. "It is a sign that the federal government, along with the states and other groups, will work in a coordinated way to combat lending fraud because of the potential harm to consumers," said Mr. Winston. The lawsuits alleged that the mortgage company targeted elderly people who had considerable home equity but needed money to repay other debts. The Company also is accused of charging customers fees that amounted to 10 percent to 25 percent of their loans. In other cases, customers claimed that the Company had given them adjustable-rate mortgages without telling them. Many of the plaintiffs said they did not find out until they received exorbitant bills months later. Under the proposed agreement, the borrowers would be paid from assets in the Company's bankruptcy estate. Company executive Bruce Chisick and his wife Sarah, who served on the board of directors, were ordered to pay $20 million from their personal funds. An additional $4 million will come from insurance policies. "Predatory lending has been an explosive problem in the last decade," said Stuart Cohen, managing attorney for the AARP. "We hope this settlement sends a message both to the financial institutions that have provided funding for these types of practices, (and) to the people directly engaged in predatory lending, that there is a collective effort (not) to allow these practices to occur without (their) being challenged." FORD MOTOR: Judge Refuses To Halt Foreign Suits Over Rollover Accidents ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Federal Judge Sarah Evans Barker refused to dismiss hundreds of lawsuits against Ford Motor Company and Bridgestone Corporation's Firestone unit relating to Ford Explorer rollover accidents occurring in Venezuela and Colombia, Reuters reports. Hundreds of personal injury and class actions were filed against the two Companies, after Ford Explorers equipped with Firestone tires started getting into accidents last year. Federal investigations later revealed that tread separation of the tires caused the accidents, which resulted to 271 deaths and more than 800 injuries in the United States. Judge Barker, in her ruling, stated that the two companies did not prove the lawsuits would get an adequate hearing in Venezuela, and that the public interest would not be served by dismissing the Colombian accidents. "While we cannot ignore Colombia's interest in the safety of its citizens, neither can we ignore the US interest in these cases as evidenced by congressional testimony about the notice Ford and Firestone received on the alleged defects through the accidents in South America," Judge Barker wrote in her decision. Firestone told Reuters it was "extremely disappointed" by the decision and is considering an appeal. "We believe these disputes should be resolved in the countries where the accidents occurred, where the plaintiffs and their families live and where the witnesses and investigating officers are located," the company said in a statement. Ford also said it would appeal. Company spokeswoman Kathleen Vokes told Reuters, "It means U.S. citizens will now have to get in line at the courthouse behind individuals from other countries.Any time a foreign citizen has a problem with a product that has any part designed or manufactured in the US and sold in their country, they will be allowed to sue in the US courts." MERIDIA LITIGATION: Pharmaceutical Firms Face Suit Over Meridia Drug -------------------------------------------------------------------- A nationwide class action was commenced against Abbott Laboratories and Knoll Pharmaceuticals, over the diet drug Meridiar, sibutramine hydrochloride monohydrate, which allegedly increases the risk of cardiac complications. It is estimated that over 8.6 million people in 70 countries have used Meridia. On March 19, 2002, Public Citizen petitioned the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to remove Meridia from the market. According to the petition, there have been almost 400 serious adverse reactions reported to the FDA since Meridia was first marketed in February 1998, through September, 2001. These serious reactions included almost 30 deaths, over 150 patients hospitalized and almost 150 patients with arrhythmia. Of the almost 30 deaths, 19 died of cardiovascular causes including 10 people under the age of 50, three of whom were women under the age of 30. On March 8, 2002, the Italian Health Ministry suspended the sale of Meridia (a/k/a Reductil, Reduxade and Ectiva) following 50 reports of adverse events. According to British Department of Health, over 200 patients taking Meridia reported adverse reactions, including 2 deaths. In December 2001, Britain's Drug and Therapeutics Bulletin warned that Meridia had limited benefits and unwanted side effects. French drug regulators have also reported receiving almost 100 cases of side effects. According to Abbott, since the first clinical trials began, there have been 34 deaths reported worldwide in patients using Meridia, 28 in the United States, 2 in Italy, 2 in Britain, 1 in South Africa and 1 in Switzerland. The FDA estimates that approximately 20,000 Meridia prescriptions are filled in the United States each week. In 1997, before receiving FDA approval, an FDA advisory committee voted 5-4 that the benefits of Meridia did not outweigh its risks. Meridia was reviewed by an FDA medical officer who recommended that it not be approved because research showed the potential for cardiac complications. According to Kenneth Moll, lawyer for the plaintiffs, "Meridia should never have been approved. The clinical tests clearly show that the risks of death and serious injuries greatly outweigh its minimal effectiveness." For more information, contact Mike O'Meara or Carrie Graziani of Kenneth B. Moll and Associates by Phone: 312-558-6444 by Fax: 312-558-1112 by E-mail: lawyers@kbmoll.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.kbmoll.com MICROSOFT CORP.: Justice Dept Given Chance To Respond To Objections -------------------------------------------------------------------- US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly offered the US Justice Department the chance to offer its opinion on whether or not nine states have the right to ask for strong, nationwide penalties against software giant Microsoft Corporation, Associated Press reports. The states oppose the settlement, crafted by the Justice Department with nine other states and the Company, to settle state antitrust suits accusing Microsoft of unfairly using their competitive advantage to overprice its software. The dissenting states say the settlement is not harsh enough and call for stronger penalties against Microsoft. The Company has asked Judge Kollar-Kotelly to dismiss the dissenting states' suit, on the grounds that only the federal government can seek nationwide penalties. "In light of Microsoft's apparent concern for the authority of the United States .it seems most prudent to ask the United States to enlighten the court with its views on the issues," Judge Kollar-Kotelly wrote. The Justice Department had no immediate comment, according to an AP report. TOBACCO LITIGATION: Three Major Companies Sued Over "Light" Cigarettes ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Class actions have been filed against three of the nation's largest tobacco companies over "light cigarettes" following an Oregon jury's award of $150 million to a woman who charged Philip Morris Companies with misleading smokers to believe "light" cigarettes were safer, the Associated Press reports. The suits name as defendants Philip Morris, RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company and Brown and Williamson Corporation. The suits charge the Companies with consumer protection laws violations. Philadelphia lawyer Stephen Sheller told AP, "It's a scam, because they get people to believe that they reduce health risks when that is a false statement." The Companies use the "light" term to describe cigarettes with less than 15 milligrams of tar, which helps deliver nicotine to smokers. In the 1960s, health advocates widely believed that this could help reduce health risks. However, studies conducted by the American Cancer Society, commenced in the 1980s, revealed that lung cancer death rates continued to rise among smokers, despite lower tar levels. Another study by the National Cancer Institute revealed that cigarettes that yielded low tar and nicotine when tested on government-approved machines gave off higher levels when smoked by people. That's because people who smoke lights tend to inhale more deeply and take more puffs to get the nicotine they need, the Associated Press reports. The suits cite these studies as evidence. They also pointed to certain advertisements by the companies, allegedly encouraging people to try "light cigarettes" as a safer alternative to regular cigarettes. Mr. Sheller referred to a 1999 Brown & Williamson ad for Carlton cigarettes that read, "Isn't it time you started thinking about number one?" A 1974 RJ Reynolds ad carried the headline "To smoke or not to smoke" and suggested if smokers did not want to quit, they should try Vantage. The defendants have denied the allegations in the lawsuits. RJ Reynolds spokesman, Seth Moskowitz, told AP cigarette manufacturers use terms like "full-flavor," "lights" and "ultra lights" to differentiate strength of taste and amount of tar and nicotine. "These terms do not, and are not meant to, imply that any cigarette brand style or any category of cigarettes is safer than any other," he said. William Ohlemeyer, Philip Morris' vice president and associate general counsel, said the Company never attempted to deceive anyone. "There is a warning on these cigarettes that is identical to every pack of cigarettes sold in this country," Mr. Ohlemeyer told AP. "There is no such thing as a safe cigarette. No one has ever advertised these cigarettes as being safe." US NAVY: Subic Bay Naval Base Workers To Sue Over Asbestos Exposure ------------------------------------------------------------------- A US-trained Filipino lawyer plans to file a class action against the United States Navy on behalf of former shipyard workers at the Subic Naval Base in Olongapo City, Philippines who presently suffer from asbestosis and other ailments allegedly caused by exposure to asbestos while working in the base. Lawyer Perfecto Yasay and environment lawyer Ben Kudo met with members of the Subic Asbestos Victims Association (SAVA) last week to discuss the suit. Some 4,000 workers might participate in the suit. The workers allegedly contracted illnesses from exposure to asbestos- containing materials, used in consumer, industrial, maritime and building products. Mr. Yasay has vowed to support the victims and push for a ban on the use of asbestos in the country, according to a Philippine Star report. WEAPONS LABS: Agree To Change Hiring Ways To End Asian-American Boycott ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Federal officials and the leader of two Asian-American academic organizations boycotting the nation's three premier weapons laboratories, recently reached a compromise, according to a report by the New York Times News Service. The labs offered to change hiring and promotion practices at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratory, in exchange for the boycott's end. The discrimination issue has surpassed the bounds of the academic community, however. The California-based Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory faces a wage discrimination class action alleged by the women employed there. Last week, another class action was filed on behalf of hundreds of LLNL's Asian-American employees. The academic boycott reportedly rose up out of anger over the treatment of Dr. Wen Ho Lee, a Los Alamos weapons scientist, whom the government accused of spying. Dr. Lee eventually pleaded guilty to one count of mishandling classified data. Longer-standing claims of discrimination were its foundation, though. In early 2000, the Asian Pacific Americans in Higher Education and the Association of Asian American Studies urged Asian-American scientists to boycott the three weapons laboratories by not applying for jobs at the facilities. Professor L. Ling-chi Wang, leader of the Association of Asian American Studies, and director of the Asian American Studies Program at the University of California at Berkeley, said, "I will call an end to the boycott and urge Asian-Americans to begin to apply for jobs [at the three national laboratories]." Professor Wang added, "I would even take a step beyond and get Apahe (Asian Pacific Americans in Higher Education) to develop a plan" for national recruitment. John Browne, director of Los Alamos National Laboratory, has met repeatedly with Professor Wang since the boycott started. Recently, Ping Lee, a special assistant to Mr. Browne, said "We are really close to bringing closure." A draft agreement for changes has been sent to the National Nuclear Security Administration of the Energy Department, which oversees the labs and must agree to any changes at the three national laboratory sites. General John A. Gordon, the security agency administrator, said recently that "This thing we are calling an agreement is really very broad." He continued, "I am very hopeful that this will be the foundation and pave the way to make a change in the relationship we have with those Asian-American organizations." General Gordon further remarked that, "a strong business sense dictates that we cannot afford to cut ourselves off from the brightest minds in the country. He noted that, "there is a strong moral case...we are going to do the right thing." If a formal agreement is signed, said Professor Wang, it will focus on creating a plan for increasing the promotion opportunities for Asian- American scientists and addressing what he regards as disparities in research opportunities that discriminate against minorities. It will also introduce mechanisms that hold the laboratories accountable to their promises to change the workplace environment for minorities. Although the Energy Department declined to release a copy of the document pending its review in Washington, Professor Wang said he had insisted, and the laboratories had agreed, that changes in dealings with Asian-Americans should apply to all minority groups at the laboratories, including women. The impact of the boycott has been widely debated, and even some Asian- Americans have criticized it as tending to isolate minority scientists already at the national laboratories. However, everyone agrees that the boycott has been an embarrassment to the laboratories as well as a hindrance to their recruiting efforts, particularly after September 11, when they focused on building staff in response to new threats to national security. Richard Mah, an associate director for weapons engineering and manufacturing at Los Alamos, sees the boycott removal as a positive step, "especially in the climate right now when we are in a large hiring mode." Mr. Mah, who was promoted in October, fills the highest Los Alamos post ever held by an Asian-American. Mr. Mah acknowledged that the boycott "did have a large impact" on the lab's ability to hire Asian-Americans. The weapons complex is aware that there is much untapped talent among scientists of Asian descent. They earn more than a quarter of all doctorates in science and technology at American universities each year, but, as an example, still make up only five percent of the technical work force at Los Alamos. Although some scientists in the Asian-American community are doubtful that great change can be wrought by an agreement and the lifting of the boycott, there is a general belief, like the one voiced by Gene I. Awakuni, vice provost for student affairs at Stanford University, that "if the national labs establish a concrete plan that reflects a genuine effort by the administration to address systemic issues that militate against the interests of Asian-American scientists, I believe the boycott will be lifted." Moves already made by the labs are a good first step, Mr. Awakuni, said. Securities Fraud ALLIANCE CAPITAL: IL Court Dismisses Without Prejudice Securities Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois dismissed without prejudice the amended class action against Alliance Capital Management, LLP charging the Company, Alliance Fund Distributors, Inc. (AFD) and other defendants with violations of the 1940 act and breaches of common law fiduciary duty, relating to six mutual funds with which the Company has investment advisory agreements, including: (1) the Alliance Premier Growth Fund, (2) Alliance Health Care Fund, (3) Alliance Growth Fund, (4) Alliance Quasar Fund, (5) The Alliance Fund and (6) Alliance Disciplined Value Fund. The principal allegations of the amended complaint are that: (i) certain advisory agreements concerning these funds were negotiated, approved and executed in violation of the 1940 Act, in particular because certain directors of these funds should be deemed interested persons under the 1940 Act; (ii) the distribution plans for these funds were negotiated, approved and executed in violation of the 1940 Act, and (iii) the advisory fees and distribution fees paid to the defendants are excessive and, therefore, constitute a breach of fiduciary duty. On March 13, 2002, the court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss and dismissed the complaint without prejudice. The plaintiffs have until April 2002 to file an amended complaint. The Company believes that the suit is without merit and intends to vigorously defend against these allegations. BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB: Schiffrin Barroway Files Securities Suit in NY -------------------------------------------------------------------- Schiffrin & Barroway, 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 the common stock of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (NYSE: BMY) from September 19, 2001 through January 4, 2002, inclusive. The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors with violating the federal securities laws by making itself, and allowing its drug development partner to make, without correction, materially false and misleading statements about the progress of its Erbitux cancer treatment drug's application for FDA approval even as the Company knew that the application and data were false. Specifically, the suit alleges that on December 28, 2001, a press release disclosed that the FDA had rejected the filing of a Biologics License Application for Erbitux. On January 4, 2002, The Cancer Letter reported that the FDA repeatedly informed defendants about problems with the Erbitux clinical trials during the class period. These shocking revelations caused the stock to plummet from a class period high of $56 to below $50 - and now to $40. For more information, contact Marc A. Topaz or Stuart L. Berman by Mail: Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 888-299-7706 (toll free) or 610-667-7706 by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.sbclasslaw.com BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of purchasers of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (NYSE: BMY) between September 19, 2001 and January 4, 2002, inclusive, against the Company and certain of its officers. The suit alleges that defendants violated the federal securities laws by making itself, and allowing its drug development partner to make, without correction, materially false and misleading statements about the progress of its Erbitux cancer treatment drug's application for FDA approval even as the Company knew that the application and data were false. Specifically, the suit alleges that on December 28, 2001, a press release disclosed that the FDA had rejected the filing of a Biologics License Application for Erbitux. On January 4, 2002, The Cancer Letter reported that the FDA repeatedly informed defendants about problems with the Erbitux clinical trials during the class period. These shocking revelations caused the stock to plummet from a class period high of $56 to below $50, and now $40. For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182 BSQUARE CORPORATION: NY Court Orders Securities Suits Consolidated ------------------------------------------------------------------ The securities class actions pending against BSquare Corporation in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York have been consolidated into a single action. The suit charges the Company, certain of its current and former officers and directors, and the underwriters of its initial public offering with violations of federal securities laws. The suit, filed on behalf of purchasers of the Company's common stock during the period from October 19, 1999 to December 6, 2000, alleges that the underwriter defendants agreed to allocate stock in the Company's initial public offering to certain investors in exchange for excessive and undisclosed commissions and agreements by those investors to make additional purchases of stock in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices. The suit further alleges that the prospectus for its initial public offering was false and misleading in violation of the securities laws because it did not disclose these arrangements. The Company intends to defend these actions vigorously. However, due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation, the Company cannot accurately predict the ultimate outcome of the litigation. Any unfavorable outcome of litigation could have an adverse impact on the Company's business, financial condition and results of operations. CALPINE CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action on behalf of an institutional investor in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of purchasers of Calpine Corporation (NYSE: CPN) publicly traded securities during the period between January 5, 2001 and December 13, 2001. The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Company owns, develops, acquires, and operates power-generation facilities and sells electricity and steam, primarily in the US Calpine's stock, which went public in 1996, on a split adjusted basis, went from $2 at the IPO stage to over $33 in January 2001. The suit alleges that the Company's stock price was very important because the Company was planning at this time to build or acquire $15 billion worth of plants over the next four years. The financing for these plants was based on the performance of its stock because many of its bond buyers were looking to convert to common stock. If the stock did not perform, financing would be difficult to fund the Company's expansion. However, certain of the Company's manipulative transactions, including those with Enron, such as inflated revenues, began to emerge on December 9, 2001. On December 14, 2001, prior to the market opening, Moody's Investors Service announced that it might cut the credit rating on the Company's $11.6 billion of debt to junk. In response, Company shares plummeted to $12.50, a more than 26% drop. Then, after the close of the market on December 14, 2001, Moody's Investors Service announced that it had in fact cut its rating of the Company's debt to junk. As now revealed, at all times during the class period, defendants issued false and misleading statements and press releases concerning the Company's sale of and demand for power and its ability to generate sufficient cash revenue to service its debt. During the class period, before the disclosure of the true facts, the individual defendants sold their personally held common stock generating more than $34 million in proceeds and the Company raised billions of dollars in a series of debt offerings. For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182 CORVIS CORPORATION: NY Court Orders Consolidation of Securities Suits ----------------------------------------------------------------- The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York ordered consolidated nine securities class actions commenced in May 2001 against Corvis Corporation, relating to its initial public offering (IPO) on behalf of all persons who purchased the Company's stock between July 28, 2000. The suit names as defendants the Company, its directors and officers who signed the registration statement in connection with the IPO, and certain of the underwriters that participated in the IPO. The suits allege that the registration statement and prospectus relating to the Company's initial public offering contained material misrepresentations and/or omissions in that those documents did not disclose: (1) that certain of the underwriters had solicited and received undisclosed fees and commissions and other economic benefits from some investors in connection with the distribution of the Company's common stock in the initial public offering and (2) that certain of the underwriters had entered into arrangements with some investors that were designed to distort and/or inflate the market price for the Company's common stock in the aftermarket following the initial public offering. Dispositive motions have not yet been filed, and no discovery has occurred. The court has ordered the plaintiffs to file a consolidated amended complaint by the end of March 2002. The Company intends to vigorously defend itself and its officers and directors. CVS CORPORATION: MA Federal Court Consolidates Securities Fraud Suits --------------------------------------------------------------------- The United States District Court of Massachusetts consolidated several securities class actions against CVS Corporation and its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Thomas M. Ryan. The consolidated suit alleges that several public statements by the Company between February and May 2001 failed to disclose that, as later reported by the Company in a June 27, 2001 press release, the Company's earnings per share for the second quarter and for the full year would be lower than previously anticipated. Following the June 27, 2001 announcement, the price of the Company's common stock fell from $44.10 to $36.51 per share. The suit asserts claims for alleged securities fraud under sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder Under the court's consolidation order, a lead plaintiff and lead counsel were appointed as provided under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, as amended, and plaintiffs were directed to file a consolidated amended complaint within 60 days of entry of that order. The consolidated amended complaint has not yet been filed. These actions are in their earliest stages. The Company and Mr. Ryan believe that the claims asserted in the actions are without merit and intend to defend against them vigorously. DYNACQ INTERNATIONAL: Stull Stull Commences Securities Suit in S.D. TX ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Stull Stull and Brody initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Dynacq International, Inc. (NASDAQ:DYII) between November 29, 1999 and January 16, 2002, inclusive against the Company and certain of its officers. The complaint alleges that defendants violated 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. Specifically, the suit alleges defendants represented that the Company's favorable financial results were due to its commitment to quality and cost-effective care. Throughout the class period, defendants repeatedly stated that the Company's financials were strong and that it was consistently achieving "record results." Defendants actually knew that the quality of the Company's balance sheet was eroding, that it was violating federal law in the maintenance of its facilities and that it improperly cared for patients. On January 16, 2002, TheStreet.com ran an article on the Company entitled, "Dynacq's Doubtful Accounts Send Distress Signals," which exposed many of the Company's problems. These disclosures shocked the market, causing the Company's stock to immediately tumble 29% and causing plaintiff and class members to suffer damages thereby. The stock is currently trading below $7 per share. For more information, contact Tzivia Brody by Mail: 6 East 45th Street, New York, NY 10017 by Phone: 800-337-4983 by Fax: 212-490-2022 by E- mail: SSBNY@aol.com GSV INC.: NJ Federal Court Dismisses Securities Suit With Prejudice ------------------------------------------------------------------- The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey dismissed with prejudice the consolidated securities class action against GSV, Inc. and certain of its current and former officers. The suit alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making or causing the Company to make materially false and misleading statements about its financial performance and business operations. The plaintiffs have 30 days to appeal from the decision. The Company has not been advised as to whether or not the plaintiffs plan to appeal from the court's decision. JP MORGAN: To Mount Vigorous Defense v. Securities Suits Over Enron ------------------------------------------------------------------- JP Morgan Chase, Inc. labels "without merit" nine securities class actions pending against the Company and certain of its officers in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, over its relationship to fallen energy trader Enron Corporation. The suits allege that the Company issued false and misleading press releases and other public documents relating to Enron in violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. The Company intends to defend against these actions vigorously. However, there can be no assurance as to the outcome of any of these pending lawsuits or of any other litigation or proceeding that may be brought by or against the Company relating to Enron. JP MORGAN: Schiffrin Barroway Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY ------------------------------------------------------------------ Schiffrin & Barroway, 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 the common stock of JP Morgan Chase & Co. (NYSE: JPM) from March 22, 2001 through February 1, 2002, inclusive. The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors with issuing false and misleading statements. The complaint alleges that the Company misrepresented its risk and loss exposure related to its well-established practice of making commodities loan from transactions, derivative loan transactions and other related financing transactions. Specifically, the Company misrepresented its risk and loss exposure related to its Enron Corporation dealings as being approximately $900 million. However, the Company later admitted that, in fact, its total Enron related exposure was actually about $2.6 billion, or almost three times the earlier figure. Shortly thereafter, the Company wrote down $1.13 billion in non-performing assets, specifically losses related to Enron. For more information, contact Marc A. Topaz or Stuart L. Berman by Mail: Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 888-299-7706 (toll free) or 610-667-7706 by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.sbclasslaw.com JP MORGAN: Cauley Geller Commences Securities Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------------------- Cauley Geller Bowman & Coates, LLP initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of JP Morgan Chase & Co. (NYSE: JPM) common stock during the period between March 22, 2001 and February 1, 2002, inclusive. The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors with issuing false and misleading statements. The complaint alleges that the Company misrepresented its risk and loss exposure related to its well-established practice of making commodities loan from transactions, derivative loan transactions and other related financing transactions. Specifically, the Company misrepresented is risk and loss exposure related to its Enron Corporation dealings as being approximately $900 million. However, the Company later admitted that, in fact, its total Enron related exposure was actually about $2.6 billion, or almost three times the earlier figure. Shortly thereafter, the Company wrote down $1.13 billion in non-performing assets, specifically losses related to Enron. For further details, contact Jackie Addison, Sue Null or Shelly Nicholson by Mail: P.O. Box 25438, Little Rock, AR 72221-5438 by Phone: 888-551-9944 by E-mail: info@classlawyer.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.classlawyer.com L90 INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in C.D. California ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of purchasers of L90, Inc. (NASDAQ: LNTY) common stock during the period between July 26, 2001 and March 12, 2002. The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The suit alleges that as part of their effort to boost the price of Company stock, defendants misrepresented its true prospects in an effort to conceal its improper acts until they were able to conceal their fraud by selling the Company to a third party prior to filing the Company's 10-K (due March 31, 2002). In order to overstate revenues and assets in its second and third quarters of 2001, the Company violated generally accepted accounting principles and SEC rules by engaging in improper "roundtrip" transactions with HomeStore.com and its customers. These transactions had the effect of dramatically overstating revenues and assets. On February 4, 2002, the Company issued a press release entitled, "L90 Reports Regulatory Inquiries." The press release stated in part: "L90, Inc., an online media and direct marketing company, today announced that the Company has received notice from the Securities and Exchange Commission that the Commission is conducting an investigation into the Company. In connection with this investigation, the Commission has issued the Company and one of its directors subpoenas requesting documents related primarily to the Company's financial records." On this news the Company's shares plummeted by more than 50% the following trading day and continued to plummet further in the weeks that followed and defendants revealed further incriminating facts. On March 12, 2002, L90 issued a press release entitled, "L90 Provides Additional Information on Internal Investigation." The press release stated in part: "L90, Inc., an online media and direct marketing company, today provided additional information on the status of the ongoing internal investigation by the Company and the Audit Committee of its board of directors in response to the previously announced Securities and Exchange Commission investigation of the Company, and the request for information from Nasdaq Listing Investigations." For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182 MEASUREMENT SPECIALTIES: Milberg Weiss Commences Securities Suit in NJ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities class action on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Measurement Specialties, Inc. (AMEX: MSS) between November 9, 2001 and February 15, 2002 inclusive, in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, against the Company, Joseph R. Mallon, Jr. (CEO and Chairman) and Kirk J. Dischino (CFO). The suit charges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements to the market during the class period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the Company's common stock. On November 9, 2001, the Company issued a press release announcing supposedly "record" financial performance for its second quarter of 2001, including a 23% increase in sales over the second quarter of 2000 and an $800,000 reduction in inventories since June 30, 2001. These financial figures were repeated in a Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Then, on February 15, 2002, prior to market open, the Company issued a press release announcing that it expects to restate its financial results for the second quarter of 2001, due to potentially mis-valued inventory. It also stated it is investigating whether it will have to restate its reported financial results for other quarters. In addition, the Company announced that it will delay filing its Form 10-Q for the third quarter of 2001 with the SEC until after it completes its ongoing investigation into its method of valuing inventory and that it has terminated the employment of its Chief Financial Officer. Immediately following the announcement, the American Stock Exchange halted trading in the Company's common stock pending its filing of a Form 10-Q for the third quarter of 2001. To date, the Company has not filed its Form 10-Q and its stock has not resumed trading. For more information, contact Steven G. Schulman or Samuel H. Rudman by Mail: One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl., New York, NY, 10119-0165 by Phone: 800-320-5081 by E-mail: measurementpecialtiescase@milbergNY.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.milberg.com MEASUREMENT SPECIALTIES: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in NJ -------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey against Measurement Specialties, Inc. (AMEX: MSS) and certain of its officers and directors, on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased the Company's common stock between August 1, 2001 and February 14, 2002. The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the federal securities laws. The suit alleges, among other things, that during the class period defendants issued a series of false and misleading statements regarding the Company's financial condition. In addition, the registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with the offering misrepresented and omitted material facts concerning the Company's financial results. Furthermore, during the class period, and in violation of generally accepted accounting principles, defendants caused the Company to falsely report favorable financial results by, among other things, improperly recognizing revenues and improperly overstating inventories. As a result, Company stock traded at artificially inflated levels during the class period. For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182 MEDI-HUT CO.: Rabin Peckel Commences Securities Suit in New Jersey ------------------------------------------------------------------ Rabin and Peckel LLP initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf of all persons or entities, who purchased Medi-Hut Co. Inc. common stock (Nasdaq:MHUT) between April 4, 2000 through February 4, 2002, both dates inclusive, against: (1) Joseph A. Sanpietro, (2) Laurence M. Simon, (3) Robert Russo, (4) Vincent Sanpietro, (5) James G. Aaron, (6) James S. Vacarro, (7) Lawrence Marasco, and (8) Rosenberg Rich Baker Berman & Co., company auditor The suit alleges that the Company, a pharmaceutical sales company, and six of its top officers as well as its auditors misled the investing public during the class period through improper accounting practices that seriously distorted the Company's financial results. Specifically, it alleged that the Company failed to disclose the relationship between its Vice President for Sales Marketing, Lawrence Marasco, and its largest customer, Larval, a company in which Mr. Marasco was the sole owner. Sales to Larval accounted for 62% of the Company's revenues in 2001. Moreover, in auditing the Company's financials, its auditors allegedly withheld information to the investing public about the sales to Larval. By failing to disclose these related party transactions, the Company, its officers, and its auditors allegedly violated generally accepted accounting standards, thereby causing the price of Company shares to be artificially inflated during the class period. When the relationship between the Company, Mr. Marasco and Larval was revealed, Company shares fell 51% to $3.29, and as low as $2.27 the following day. For more details, contact Eric Belfi or Sharon Lee 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. METAWAVE COMMUNICATIONS: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in W.D. WA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel commenced a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington on behalf of all purchasers of Metawave Communications Corporation (Nasdaq: MTWV) common stock during the period from April 24, 2001 and March 14, 2002, inclusive. The suit charges the Company, as well as its chief executive officer and chief financial officer, with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The violations, as the complaint alleges, stem from the issuance of allegedly false and misleading financial statements and financial projections during the class period, which had the effect, during the class period, of artificially-inflating the price of Company shares. On March 14, 2002, after the close of the markets, the Company issued a press release disclosing a number of surprises concerning the Company, including: (1) that it would restate its 2001 earnings, reducing revenue by $5 million to $7 million out of the $43.6 million of total revenue previously reported, a change of 11% to 15%, because of "unauthorized commitments" made to customers in Asia; (2) that it would terminate its SpotLight GSM product line due to "insufficient customer demand;" (3) that it would close its Taiwan facilities, cut its Chinese operation and reduce its United States workforce by 42% in an effort to lower operating expenses; (4) that the restructuring would result in a first quarter (2002) charge of $23 million to cover inventory and accounts receivable write-offs, employee severance, facilities closures, and other shutdown costs; (5) that it had fired its Chief Financial Officer, Stuart Fuhlendorf; and (6) that it had revised its first-quarter 2002 revenue guidance to about $6 million, well below the $8.5 million to $9 million range Wall Street had been led to expect for the Company's first quarter (2002) revenue. After disclosure that the Company's current financial results would not be as expected, and that previously-reported financial results would be even lower than reported, its shares swiftly lost more than 70% of their value. For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://members.aol.com/mhenzel182 NEW FOCUS INC.: CA Court Dismisses Without Prejudice Securities Suit -------------------------------------------------------------------- The United States District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed without prejudice the securities class action filed against New Focus, Inc., (Nasdaq: NUFO), its directors, and certain officers in March 2001. The suit asserted violations of federal securities laws arising from the Company's January 30, 2001 announcement of revenue guidance for fiscal year 2001. While dismissing the action, the court provided the plaintiffs with the opportunity to file an amended complaint within thirty days after the date of the order. The plaintiffs did not file an amended complaint before this deadline, thus concluding the lawsuit. "We are extremely pleased with the federal court's dismissal of the shareholder class action lawsuit. From the beginning of this suit we felt that the claims of the plaintiffs were weak and unfounded. In a strongly worded decision the court agreed with our view and ruled favorably on our motion to dismiss the suit. By winning at this point in the legal process, the lawsuit will not proceed to the costly and time-consuming discovery stage, which precedes a jury trial or settlement hearing. Additionally, the company's legal defense costs are fully reimbursable under our insurance coverage," said Clark Harris, the Company's chairman, president and chief executive officer, in a statement. NEWPOWER HOLDINGS: Wolf Popper Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY ------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolf Popper LLP initiated a securities class action against NewPower Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: NPW) and certain of its senior officers and directors in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of all persons who purchased the Company's common stock in the initial public offering on October 5, 2000, or on the open market during the period beginning on October 5, 2000 through October 19, 2001, inclusive. The suit alleges that during the class period, the Company and the individual defendants violated Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The suit alleges that defendants violated the securities laws by making numerous statements about the Company's ability to successfully employ complex hedging strategies to reduce the adverse effects of price volatility in the wholesale energy market. Defendants positively stated that such strategies would be successful as they were the result of the Company's close relationship with Enron. However, defendants knew that such strategies would fail because Enron's subsidiary, Enron Energy Services, had attempted these same strategies for a considerable length of time, and its key executives (some of whom were officers and directors of the Company) knew they were in almost all cases unsuccessful. As is now well known, but was or should have been known to the defendants at the time of the Company's October 5, 2000 IPO and during the class period, the complaint alleges that Enron was nothing but a house of cards. Enron, and its senior executives had formed a network of off-balance sheet, or special purpose entities (SPEs) to do business with Enron at non-market terms to create the illusion of profitable operations at Enron. Enron's senior executives controlled these SPEs and caused the SPEs to incur billions of dollars of debt that Enron guaranteed, but excluded from reporting on its financial statements. As Enron collapsed under its own weight, the Company too began to feel the pressure of numerous transactions and strategies that were bald attempts to hedge, hide debt and boost reported financial results. As the true facts concerning the risks of the Company's business model emerged, its share price declined and it became clear that its business was far less profitable and far more risky than any of the defendants had previously disclosed. For more details, contact Robert C. Finkel or Abigail Kowaloff by Mail: 845 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10022-6689 by Phone: 212-451-9620 by Fax: 212-486-2093 or 877-370-7704 by E-mail: IRRep@wolfpopper.com or visit the firm's Web site: http://www.wolfpopper.com NVIDIA CORPORATION: Robbins Umeda Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Robbins Umeda & Fink, LLP initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of purchasers of the securities of NVIDIA Corp. (Nasdaq:NVDA) between Feb. 15, 2000 and Feb. 14, 2002, inclusive. The suit charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint alleges that the Company violated generally accepted accounting principles and SEC rules by engaging in an illegal accounting scheme that dramatically overstated revenues and assets. The defendants misrepresented the Company's true prospects in order to conceal its wrongful acts until the defendants were able to sell at least $66 million worth of their own stock. On February 14, 2002, the Company partially admitted that its past accounting for its prior results may be inaccurate. This news caused the company's shares to plummet the following day. For more details, contact Marc M. Umeda by Mail: 1010 Second Ave., Suite 2360, San Diego, CA 92101 by Phone: Toll Free: 800-350-6003 or by E-mail: info@ruflaw.com OWENS CORNING: Asks MA Federal Court To Dismiss Securities Fraud Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Owens Corning asked the United States District Court for the Southern District of Massachusetts to dismiss the amended securities class action pending against certain of its current and former directors and officers, and certain underwriters in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, alleging federal securities violations. The suit does not name the Company as defendant. The suit, filed on behalf of purchasers of certain unsecured debt securities of the Company in offerings occurring on or about April 30, 1998 and July 23, 1998, alleges that the registration statements pursuant to which the offerings were made contained untrue and misleading statements of material fact and omitted to state material facts which were required to be stated therein and which were necessary to make the statements therein not misleading, in violation of sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933. The motion to dismiss the action was filed on November 20, 2001. The Company labeled the suits "without merit" in a disclosure to the Securities and Exchange Commission. PERINI CORPORATION: NY Court Dismisses Preferred Shareholders Suit ------------------------------------------------------------------ The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed a preferred shareholders class action filed against Perini Corporation, and several of its current and former directors by holders of the Company's $21.25 Convertible Exchangeable Preferred Stock. The suit alleges claims for: (1) breach of contract, (2) breach of fiduciary duty, (3) fraud, and (4) negligent misrepresentation The suit, originally filed in the Supreme Court of New York, alleges that the defendants improperly authorized the exchange of Series B Preferred Stock for Common Stock without first paying all accrued dividends on the $21.25 Preferred Stock. More specifically, the suit alleges that the defendants violated the terms of the $21.25 Preferred Stock when, in March 2000, they authorized the exchange of Series B Preferred Stock for Common Stock. The suit further alleges that the defendants issued a false and misleading prospectus in 1987 relating to the issuance of the $21.25 Preferred Stock. In May 2001, the defendants removed the action to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. In June 2001, the plaintiffs amended the suit to limit the suit to an action for breach of contract against the Company and an action for breach of fiduciary duty against the defendant directors. TREX COMPANY: Asks Court to Dismiss Consolidated Securities Suit in VA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Trex Company, Inc. asked the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia to dismiss the amended consolidated securities suits naming as defendants the Company and: (1) Robert G. Matheny, president and director, (2) Roger A. Wittenberg, executive vice president of material sourcing and international operations and director, (3) Anthony J. Cavanna, executive vice president, chief financial officer and director, and (4) Andrew U. Ferrari, executive vice president of marketing and business development and director The suit, filed on behalf of purchasers of the Company's securities between November 2, 2000 and June 18, 2001, alleges that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of and Rule 10b-5 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making false and misleading public statements or omissions concerning the Company's operating and financial results, expectations, and business and by filing misleading reports on Forms 10-Q and 10-K with the Securities and Exchange Commission. In January 2002, the defendants filed a motion to have the amended consolidated complaint dismissed with prejudice. That motion is in the process of being briefed and, accordingly, the defendants' time to answer has not yet expired. Discovery is stayed pursuant to the automatic stay provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The Company believes that the lawsuits are without merit and intends to vigorously defend these lawsuits and any other similar lawsuits that may be served on the company. UBS PAINEWEBBER: Spencer Associates Launches Securities Suit in S.D. TX ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Spencer and Associates PC filed a class action against UBS PaineWebber, Inc. in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, alleging violations of federal securities laws. Specifically, the suit alleges federal statutory fraud and violations of section 12(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 and violations of section 20(a), section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. The suit further claims that, from March 2001, and possibly before, through November, 2001, in connection with its "strong buy" recommendation of Enron Stock, and its "sell" and "hold advice" to Enron stock and option holders, the Company: (1) employed manipulative and deceptive devices, contrivances, schemes, and artifices to defraud them; (2) made false statements of material fact and omitted to state material facts necessary in order to make the statements not misleading in light of the circumstances under which they were made; and (3) employed acts, practices, and a course of business that operated or would operate as a fraud and deceit upon plaintiffs. For more information, contact Bonnie Spencer by Mail: 4041 Richmond Ave, 5th Floor, Houston, Texas 77027, 888-237-4529 or by Phone: 888-237-4529 ********* 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 * * *