/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/030213.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Thursday, February 13, 2003, Vol. 5, No. 31 Headlines ALASKA: First Witness Called In $1B Bristol Bay Price-Fixing Suit APPLE COMPUTER: Plaintiffs File Amended Securities Lawsuit in N.D. CA AVENTIS: LA High Court Upholds Certification for Crawfish Farmers' Suit BALI ATTACK: Australian Magistrate To File Suit Over Federal Negligence BEAZER HOMES: Jury Awards $7.8M To Homeowners For Construction Damages GROUP HEALTH: Reaches Settlement For Lawsuit Filed Over Medical Fees INFONET SERVICES: Asks CA Court To Dismiss Consolidated Securities Suit INFONET SERVICES: Plaintiffs File Amended Derivative Suit in CA Court MACROMEDIA INC.: Trial in Securities Fraud Suit Set November 2003 in MA MASSACHUSETTS: MIT Drops Affirmative Action Summer Program Admissions MASTERCARD INC.: Group Labels Member Banks' Fees "Anti-Competitive" METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER INC.: LA Court Grants Demurrer To Advertising Suit NETZERO INC.: Asks NY Court To Dismiss Consolidated Securities Lawsuit SEMINIS INC.: Shareholders Sue To Oppose Stock Acquisition By Fox Paine UNITED ONLINE: Working To Settle NY Deceptive Business Practices Suit WASHINGTON: Officials, ACLU Members To Meet To Resolve County Jail Suit YAHOO! INC.: Nazi Items Auctions Didn't "Glorify" Crimes, Says Court New Securities Fraud Cases ATMEL CORPORATION: Glancy & Binkow Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA CARREKER CORPORATION: Charles Piven Launches Securities Suit in N.D. TX CARREKER CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Launches Securities Suit in N.D. TX CLEARONE COMMUNICATIONS: Weiss & Yourman Lodges Securities Suit in UT MICHAELS STORES: Glancy & Binkow Lodges Securities Lawsuit in N.D. TX MOTOROLA INC.: Pomerantz Haudek Commences Securities Lawsuit in N.D. IL SAWTEK INC.: Glancy & Binkow Commences Securities Fraud Suit in M.D. FL VERITAS SOFTWARE: Scott + Scott Commences Securities Lawsuit in N.D. CA ********* ALASKA: First Witness Called In $1B Bristol Bay Price-Fixing Suit ------------------------------------------------------------------ The first witness has been called in Superior Court, in Anchorage, in the $1 billion class action launched by 4,500 Bristol Bay, Alaska, fisherman, who allege that the Seattle processors and the Japanese importers conspired from 1989 to 1995, to fix prices in Bristol Bay, the Associated Press Newswires reports. Jerry Hatton, the first of many witnesses who will be testifying, is a permit holder in the sockeye salmon fishery in Bristol Bay. He told about the insecurity of never knowing what the price was going to be for his catch, because the processors never told the fishermen until the season was over, sometimes, not until the next season was about to start. Mr. Hatton's testimony was contrary to opening statements by lawyers for processor Icicle Seafoods, that fishermen were equally enthusiastic with the processors about starting the season without a price set for the harvested fish. Mr. Hatton said being a fisherman at Bristol Bay was full of uncertainty and loss. He testified about the time he signed with All Alaska Seafoods, a processor, to deliver to All Alaska his entire harvest from the Ugashik fishery, but the tender from All Alaska Seafood refused to take his catch, even though there was a signed agreement. After searching and finding no other buyer, he had to dump 38,000 pounds of sockeye salmon. Completing defendants' opening arguments before the first witness, Mr. Hatton, was called, Robert Adolph, lead attorney for Ocean Beauty Seafoods, told the jury, "I don't want you to think 4,500 fishermen marched into the courtroom. We are dealing with a few unhappy fishermen . (Ocean Beauty) never conspired with anyone and has never even been asked to join a conspiracy." Attorneys for the approximately 4,500 fishermen say the defendant processors and importers conspired to fix prices because they wanted to get for themselves a higher portion of the profits as the markets shrank in the late 1980s. The defendants, on the other hand, say there has been no conspiracy and that worldwide salmon conditions caused reduced prices. APPLE COMPUTER: Plaintiffs File Amended Securities Lawsuit in N.D. CA --------------------------------------------------------------------- Plaintiffs in the securities class action filed against Apple Computer, Inc. filed an amended complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The suit also names as defendants Company CEO Steve P. Jobs. The suit, filed on behalf of persons who purchased the Company's publicly traded common stock between July 19, 2000, and September 28, 2000, alleges violations of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act and seek unspecified compensatory damages and other relief. The Company filed a motion to dismiss on June 4, 2002, which was heard by the court on September 13, 2002. On December 11, 2002, the court granted the Company's motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, with leave to plaintiffs to amend their complaint within thirty days. The Company believes these claims are without merit. AVENTIS: LA High Court Upholds Certification for Crawfish Farmers' Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The Louisiana Supreme Court reaffirmed the class certification ruling which was upheld by the Third Circuit Court of Appeal in September of in the suit filed for crawfish farmers seeking damages for the loss of their crawfish which they claim were killed by ICON, a pesticide made by Aventis (NYSE: AVE). The defendants appealed the original class certification opinion rendered by St. Landry Parish District Court Judge James Genovese to the Third Circuit Court of Appeal where the ruling was upheld last September. The defendants then filed a writ against this ruling with the Louisiana Supreme Court, where the ruling was again upheld and affirmed last week. This ruling from the state Supreme Court allows the crawfish farmers to proceed as a class against Aventis, the manufacturer of the pesticide ICON, and seed distributors who coated ICON on rice seed. Opelousas attorney, Pat Morrow, one of the lawyers representing the farmers, said the ruling by the Supreme Court is another tremendous victory for hundreds of Louisiana's crawfish farmers whose crops were damaged by ICON. "Now that the original class certification has been re-affirmed by the highest court in the state, the crawfish farmers can proceed as a class against those parties responsible for the damages. This final ruling validates the farmers' right to proceed on a level, legal playing field against Aventis, a well-financed, multinational corporation. Now these rural, individual farmers can join together to present evidence of legal and factual issues that are common to all crawfish farmers," he said. The original lawsuit was filed in St. Landry Parish, Louisiana, in 2000. The crawfish farmers allege that the pesticide ICON (Fipronil) devastated Louisiana's 2000 and 2001 crawfish crop after its introduction on the rice seed in 1999. In 2000, Louisiana's crawfish production dropped from 41 million pounds to 16 million pounds. Although ICON's purpose is to kill the water weevil, the enemy of the rice crop, farmers and experts testified at trial that it also kills crawfish. The crawfish farmers testified unanimously that once their fields were contaminated by ICON, there was a wide-spread crawfish kill. Although Aventis and the seed distributor defendants contend that ICON is safe, studies conducted by aquaculture experts and the LSU AgCenter prove otherwise. Once ICON-coated rice seeds are planted in the fields, ICON contaminates the water and sediment in which the crawfish feed. Scientists say ICON and its degradates will remain in the sediment and may continue to cause damage to crawfish production for many years to come. "Now that the defendants' writ has been denied by the Louisiana Supreme Court, the crawfish farmers will at last get their day in court. The steering committee for the class will be requesting a trial date from Judge Genovese, which will hopefully be set on his docket for later this year," said Hunter Lundy, of Lundy & Davis Law Firm in Lake Charles, co-counsel representing crawfish farmers. Notices will be sent out shortly to all potential class action participants with information on how to file claims. For more information, contact Patrick Morrow by Phone: 1-800-356-6776 or contact Dawn M. Barrios by Phone: 1-888-771-0788. BALI ATTACK: Australian Magistrate To File Suit Over Federal Negligence ----------------------------------------------------------------------- An Adelaide, Australia Magistrate, who lost his son in the bombing of the Sari nightclub in Bali, plans to file a civil action in Australia, The Age reports. The magistrate, Brian Deegan, said he wants to charge federal authorities with negligence for their conduct during the aftermath of the Bali tragedy. Mr. Deegan gave a couple examples of the negligence that would be alleged such as, bodies lost or misplaced in the makeshift morgue and the careless reporting to relatives -- as when officials first notified Mr. Deegan his son was dead, and then called again to say he was missing. Mr. Deegan said that to bring the civil action he would have to brief lawyers in Adelaide, who would then file the action in the Federal Court, alleging the negligence of the federal authorities during the early days of the tragedy. Mr. Deegan also said that he is a signatory to the US class action, to which five Australian families and one survivor recently have added their signatures, and which will run parallel to the suit launched by families of the victims of the World Trade Center attack. The actions can be joined because the same people and organizations named in the September 11 action have been identified as those responsible for the Bali bombings. Richard Middleton of the US law firm Suggs, Kelly and Middleton arrived in Melbourne recently. Mr. Middleton, who is one of the lead co- counsel in the action naming the alleged financial supporters of al- Qaeda, says he sees the litigation's objective to be the cutting off of the supporters' funds, thereby disabling al-Qaeda's worldwide network of organizations and other institutions. BEAZER HOMES: Jury Awards $7.8M To Homeowners For Construction Damages ---------------------------------------------------------------------- A 12-person jury, in a class action, after three months of listening to "complex testimony about structural engineering and geotechnical soil testing," deliberated for a day and a half and returned a verdict in the "longest, largest construction defect trial in Southern Nevada history," The Las Vegas Review-Journal reports. The jury, last week, awarded $7.8 million in home construction defect damages to some 200 homeowners at Craig Ranch Village, a North Las Vegas residential development constructed by Beazer Homes. Attorneys for the homeowners were requesting $23.7 million to repair cracks in foundations, walls and driveways allegedly caused by expansive soil conditions. However, Beazer Homes, had contended it would cost only $3.4 million to fix the homes. Less than 10 homes had serious damage. About 50 homes were classified into three categories of damages. The jury cleared Beazer Homes of any violations of implied or expressed warranties and found contributing negligence by both the class action members and Beazer Homes. Seven percent contributory negligence was allocated to the homeowners and 93 percent to the builder. Judge Allan Earl said the jurors performed their duties well in dealing with the first soils case to be heard in the District Court's new Complex Litigation Center. GROUP HEALTH: Reaches Settlement For Lawsuit Filed Over Medical Fees -------------------------------------------------------------------- Tens of thousands of current and former members of Group Health Cooperative, Group Health Options and Group Health Northwest are eligible for reimbursement of what is expected to add up to millions of dollars in fees they paid for alternative medical services, while current members now have expanded access to these services as part of Group Health's coverage plan. The opportunity to be reimbursed for care provided by naturopaths, acupuncturists and massage therapists is the result of a settlement reached in a class action filed against Group Health. The settlement would reimburse eligible consumers for all of the money they spent out of pocket, except for a "co-pay" fee of $8.65 per visit that would be deducted from the reimbursement. Notification of the settlement is already under way to about one million people who were enrolled in Group Health between June 1, 1996 and December 31, 2002. Claimants have until June 19 to apply; filing is free. It is estimated that 100,000 people could be eligible for reimbursement, said Rick Spoonemore of Sirianni Youtz Meier & Spoonemore law firm in Seattle, which represented Group Health members in the class-action lawsuit. Rick Spoonemore and Jon Meier of Sirianni Youtz Meier & Spoonemore have previously obtained awards or settlements totaling in excess of $36 million in several cases against insurers - including Premera Blue Cross and Regence BlueShield - that were not providing coverage for alternative medical services consistent with the law. "We are pleased that this settlement will provide full reimbursement to individuals who paid for the services of naturopaths, acupuncturists and massage therapists out of their own pocket," Mr. Spoonemore said. "There is no deduction for attorney fees or anything else, except an $8.65 per visit co-payment approximation." The settlement was reached after two class actions were filed in state and federal court against Group Health. Both lawsuits made similar allegations that Group Health illegally required members to exhaust "traditional" medical treatment and imposed strict requirements on physician referrals before they could receive treatment by naturopaths, acupuncturists or massage therapists. The lawsuit is based on Washington's 1996 "Every Category of Provider" law, which requires health care insurers to cover all forms of state-licensed, regulated health care on the same basis. In the settlement, Group Health denies that it violated the law. The settlement has been granted preliminary approval by both a state and federal court. Final approval will be sought from both courts in June. Current and former Group Health members who file claims will find the process uncomplicated. For claims of $500 or less, all that is required is completion of a simple form that lists the approximate treatment dates, the amount spent and the name and address of the care provider. Claims of more than $500 require only a letter from the provider, receipts, cancelled checks or other similar proof that the treatment was provided during the claim period. Mr. Spoonemore encouraged eligible people to pursue claims even if they don't have records at home to prove they received treatment. He said duplicate records, or a letter indicating treatment was delivered, could be obtained from the person's alternative health care providers. "I think if people take a little time to contact their alternative providers to obtain records and submit a claim, it may add up to a sizeable amount," he said. If everyone with a claim sent in a claim form, the total amount of claims could reach $10 million, he estimated. Millions of dollars are available for individuals to claim - they just need to submit their claims, he added. In addition to reimbursing patients for past care, the settlement also creates new opportunities for Group Health members to receive alternative health care. It permits members to seek naturopathic and acupuncture treatment without having to first obtain a referral from a Group Health physician. Massage therapy would still require a physician's referral but is covered by Group Health. The settlement also creates a separate fund that will be used over five years to reduce premium rates for Group Health members. A neutral expert will ensure that Group Health is in compliance with its obligations under the settlement agreement. Impacts from the settlement go beyond payment reimbursements, Mr. Meier said. "Hundreds of thousands of Group Health Cooperative members now have access to a wide range of services rendered by naturopaths, massage therapists and acupuncturists as a result of the agreement," he said. "With respect to care rendered by naturopaths and acupuncturists, they also have the right to seek that treatment without first getting a referral -- which is a big departure from normal operating procedure at Group Health. When they have exhausted their non-referral visits, there is a mechanism in place to ensure that their primary care physician provides them with a fair assessment of whether further alternative care should be made available." "This could even reduce health care costs because people now can choose alternative care providers as their first option without having to run the gamut of traditional care that Group Health formerly required," he said. The settlement was reached after a year of negotiations and multiple mediation sessions before a retired judge. "We are impressed with the cooperation shown by Group Health and we are encouraged that this settlement will open doors to forms of health care that consumers need," Mr. Spoonemore said. For more information contact Rick Spoonemore or Jonatham Meier by Mail: Alternative Health Care Litigation, 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3410, Seattle WA 98104 by Phone: 866-510-1792 by E-mail: altcarelaw@sylaw.com or visit the Website: http://www.altcarelaw.com INFONET SERVICES: Asks CA Court To Dismiss Consolidated Securities Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Infonet Services, Inc. asked the United States District Court for the Central District of California to dismiss the consolidated securities class action pending against it and several of its current and former officers and directors. The suit was filed on behalf of public investors who purchased the Company's securities during the period from December 16, 1999 through August 7, 2001, and names as defendants the Company and: (1) Jose A. Collazo, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman, (2) Akbar H. Firdosy, Chief Financial Officer, (3) Douglas Campbell, (4) Eric M. De Jong, (5) Morgan Ekberg, (6) Masao Kojima, (7) Joseph Nancoz, (8) Rafael Sagrario, (9) KDDI Corporation, (10) KPN Telecom, (11) Swisscom AG, (12) Telefonica International Holding B.V., (13) Telia AB, (14) Telstra Corporation Ltd., (15) Merrill Lynch & Co., (16) Warburg Dillon Read LLC, (17) ABN AMRO Inc., (18) Goldman Sachs & Co., (19) Lehman Brothers Inc. and (20) Salomon Smith Barney Inc. The suit alleges that defendants made misrepresentations and omissions regarding the AUCS channel in the Company's Form S-1 registration statement and the accompanying prospectus for its initial public offering and in other statements during the class period. The plaintiffs assert against the Company and its officers and directors violations of Sections 11, 12 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and violations of Section 20(a) and 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The plaintiffs have requested a judgment determining that the lawsuit is a proper class action, awarding compensatory damages and/or rescission, awarding costs of the lawsuit and awarding such other relief as the court may deem just and proper. The court is set to hear the motions for dismissal on July 21, 2003. INFONET SERVICES: Plaintiffs File Amended Derivative Suit in CA Court --------------------------------------------------------------------- Plaintiffs in the shareholder derivative lawsuit against Infonet Services, Inc. filed an amended consolidated suit in Los Angeles County Superior Court. The suit names as defendants the Company and: (1) Jose A. Collazo, (2) Makoto Arai, (3) Douglas Campbell, (4) Eric M. de Jong, (5) Morgan Ekberg, (6) Timothy P. Hartman, (7) Heinz Karrer, (8) Matthew J. O'Rourke, (9) Rafael Sagrario, (10) Akbar H. Firdosy, (11) KDDI Corporation, (12) KPN Telecom, (13) Swisscom AG, (14) Telefonica International Holding B.V., (15) Telia AB, (16) Telstra Corporation Ltd., (17) Masao Kojima, (18) Yuzo Mori, (19) Hanspeter Quadri, and (20) Jose Manuel Santero Munoz The suit alleges that the defendants breached their duties toward the Company either through their alleged participation in, or alleged failure to adequately oversee, the purported conduct and events that are alleged in the federal securities suits, including a claim against the shareholders of the Company's Class A shares for alleged insider trading under California Corporation Code Section 25402. MACROMEDIA INC.: Trial in Securities Fraud Suit Set November 2003 in MA ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Trial for the securities class action pending against Macromedia, Inc. is set for November 2003 in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. In September 2000, Allaire Corporation, prior to its acquisition by the Company, and certain of Allaire's officers and directors were named as defendants in several class actions. The suits allege violations of the federal securities laws, and were later consolidated. The consolidated suit, filed on behalf of a putative class defined as those who purchased Allaire stock between January 26, 2000, and September 18, 2000, named as defendants Allaire and: (1) Joseph J. Allaire, (2) Jeremy Allaire, (3) David A. Gerth, and (4) David J. Orfao The consolidated suit alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5, and asks for damages, interest, and attorneys' fees and costs. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the suit. In September 2001, the court ruled that the suit did not comply with the pleading standards imposed by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, and permitted plaintiffs to file an amended complaint in accordance with specific requirements imposed by the court. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on In November 2001, which asserted similar claims on behalf of a putative class of stockholders who purchased Allaire stock between December 7, 1999 and September 18, 2000. In June 2002 the court denied defendants' motion to dismiss the amended complaint. The parties have commenced discovery on this matter. The suit is in its early stages and the Company is not able to predict the outcome of the litigation at this time. MASSACHUSETTS: MIT Drops Affirmative Action Summer Program Admissions --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Massachusetts Institute of Technology has joined several educational institutions in dropping their affirmative action program for fear of a court challenge, by scrapping a minority-only admissions policy for two summer programs designed to build math and science skills in high school students and incoming freshmen, the Associated Press reports. The school announced it was opening the two programs to all students after admitting only African-American, Hispanic and American Indian students for three decades. "Our best advice was that for racially exclusive programs, our chance of winning (a potential suit) were essentially zero," Robert P. Redwine, MIT's dean for undergraduate education, told The Boston Globe in Tuesday's editions. The university has been the object of the United States Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights probe, after a conservative advocacy group filed a complaint. Mr. Redwine said the university will look for other ways to target minority students. It will now consider factors including whether students are the first in their family to attend college and whether they attended a high school that sends few students to college, the Associated Press reports. "Are we afraid there is a possibility we will be less effective? Yes," Mr. Redwine said. "The discussions we have had have been really painful." Earlier, Princeton University decided to scrap its summer enrichment program for minority students also for fear of an affirmative action suit, an earlier Class Action Reporter story states. The seven-week program encourages black and Hispanic undergraduates to pursue graduate work in public policy and international affairs. MASTERCARD INC.: Group Labels Member Banks' Fees "Anti-Competitive" -------------------------------------------------------------------- The United Kingdom's Office of Fair Trading ruled that credit card giant Mastercard's member banks charged "anti-competitive" interchange fees for credit and charge card purchases, finextra.com reports. OFT further said in a statement that the Company has been leveling unreasonably high multilateral interchange fees, burdening shoppers and breaking antitrust rules. "The cost of these fees is borne initially by retailers' banks, but is passed on to retailers and, in turn, to consumers through higher retail prices," the OFT said in a preliminary statement, finextra.com states. "In effect, these fees act like a tax on retail transactions that is paid by all consumers in shops that accept credit cards." The group gave the Company until spring 2003 to implement changes to the agreement with its member banks. The group said that it will undertake an infringement action, should the Company fail to do this. The move could cost MasterCard and its member banks millions of pounds in lost revenue. Mastercard and Visa face a class action filed by a group of American retailers over their debit charges. In Australia, both Visa and MasterCard have formally challenged a decision by the Reserve Bank of Australia to mandate a decrease in interchange fees, finextra.com reports. METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER INC.: LA Court Grants Demurrer To Advertising Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Los Angeles Superior Court ruled in favor of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc. and other entertainment studios in several class actions charging them with false advertising relating to their use of reviewer quotes in the advertisements for the motion pictures. In July 2001, a class action was filed against the Company and eight of its subsidiaries arising from the studio's use of reviewer quotes in film advertisements without disclosing that the reviewers allegedly received things of value from the studio in connection with press junkets and publicity efforts. The suit alleges: (1) deceptive and unfair business practices, (2) fraudulent concealment, (3) fraudulent inducement, (4) false and misleading advertising, and (5) claims under the Consumers Legal Remedies Act The same plaintiffs simultaneously sued nine studios, including the six other major studios in identical but separate class actions. On September 28, 2001, the plaintiffs amended their complaints to include claims based on allegations that studios use reviewer quotes out of context and include in "trailers" scenes that are not included in the associated films, thus constituting false and misleading advertising. The studios filed demurrers and motions to strike the complaints. On January 24, 2002, the court granted the studios' motions to strike the complaint pursuant to the California Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) statute. The court entered judgment in favor of the studios on January 14, 2003 and awarded attorneys' fees and costs against the plaintiffs. The time to appeal that decision has not yet expired and the Company does not know if plaintiffs will appeal. The Company denies any wrongdoing or unlawful activity. NETZERO INC.: Asks NY Court To Dismiss Consolidated Securities Lawsuit ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Netzero, Inc. asked the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York to dismiss the consolidated securities class action pending against it, certain of its officers and directors and the investment firms Goldman Sachs, BancBoston Robertson Stephens and Salomon Smith Barney alleging violations of the federal securities laws. The suit alleges that the prospectus through which the Company conducted its initial public offering in September 1999 was materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that: (1) the underwriters of the Company's initial public offering had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which the underwriters allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of Company shares issued in connection with initial public offering; and (2) the underwriters had entered into agreements with customers whereby they agreed to allocate Company shares to those customers in the initial public offering in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional Company shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices. The complaints against the Company have been consolidated with similar complaints filed against other companies and investment firms. The defendants, including the Company, in these consolidated cases have moved to dismiss the plaintiffs' complaints and the motion to dismiss has been argued and is pending before the court. SEMINIS INC.: Shareholders Sue To Oppose Stock Acquisition By Fox Paine ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Seminis, Inc. faces four securities class actions relating to the proposed transaction under which Fox Paine & Company, LLC, a San Francisco based private equity firm and certain Savia related parties will acquire all of the outstanding Company shares. Three of these actions were filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery (New Castle County), while the fourth, was filed in California Superior Court (Ventura County). The DE suits name as defendants Savia S.A. de C.V. (Savia) and the Company, along with the Company's directors. The CA complaint names as a defendant the Company and its directors. All four complaints purport to be brought on behalf of Company common stockholders or their successors. All four complaints allege that the above-described transaction, if consummated, would provide insufficient consideration to the Company's common stockholders and allege that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties in connection with the transaction. The complaints seek a preliminary and permanent injunction to enjoin the transaction and, in the event the transaction is consummated, rescission and damages. The defendants will vigorously defend these actions. UNITED ONLINE: Working To Settle NY Deceptive Business Practices Suit --------------------------------------------------------------------- United Online, Inc. is participating in settlement negotiations for a nationwide class action filed against it and subsidiaries NetZero, Inc. and Juno Online Services, Inc., alleging unlawful, unfair or deceptive business practices, in New York court. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants used misleading marketing and promotional materials regarding their billable Internet access services. The plaintiffs are seeking injunctive relief, restitution, disgorgement of profits, the establishment of a constructive trust and attorneys' fees. The Company filed a demurrer to the complaint, which the court granted in part and denied in part. The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in August 2002, naming only United Online and NetZero as defendants. The Company has filed an answer denying the material allegations of the amended complaint and asserting certain affirmative defenses. The parties are currently engaged in settlement discussions. The parties have agreed to participate with the court in a non-binding mediation of certain issues relating to the settlement, to be conducted on March 4, 2003. WASHINGTON: Officials, ACLU Members To Meet To Resolve County Jail Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------------- A Jefferson County, Washington official and representatives of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) will attempt to reach a settlement in a lawsuit filed over the county's jail conditions, the Peninsula Daily News reports. The suit was filed last year, alleging that the Jefferson County jail was overcrowded and that health-care staffers were unavailable when needed. Inmates were given single blankets and were forced to use shampoo containers as a makeshift hot-water bottle to keep warm at night. County administrator David Goldsmith will travel to Seattle to start the mediation process before federal magistrate judge Ricardo Martinez. "We'll try to mediate or eliminate as many concerns as possible as opposed to going to trial," Mr. Goldsmith told the Peninsula Daily News. YAHOO! INC.: Nazi Items Auctions Didn't "Glorify" Crimes, Says Court --------------------------------------------------------------------- A Paris court absolved Yahoo! Inc. of legal responsibility in relation to the auctions of Nazi paraphernalia once held on its Web site, the Associated Press reports. France's Union of Jewish Students and the International Anti-Racism and Anti-Semitism League filed the suit in 2000, after the Company allowed Nazi collectibles, including flags with swastikas, to be sold on its auction pages. Later, the French court made a landmark ruling, ordering Yahoo! to block Internet surfers in France from auctions selling Nazi memorabilia. This was in accordance with French law barring the display or sale of racist material. The Company later banned Nazi material and began charging users to make auction listings. The Company continued to oppose the proceedings in France, however. They later asked a California court to affirm that US companies could not be regulated by countries that have more restrictive laws on freedom of expression. The court granted this motion. A second attack was launched against the Company by the French Holocaust survivors, their families, and the Movement Against Racism and for Friendship Between People. They commenced a lawsuit for one symbolic euro. The court ruled that Yahoo and its former chief executive, Tim Koogle, never sought to "justify war crimes and crimes against humanity" - the accusation leveled by human rights activists, including Holocaust survivors and their families, the Associated Press reports. However, the Paris court said Tuesday that "justifying war crimes" means "glorifying, praising, or at least presenting the crimes in question favorably." Yahoo and its auction pages did not fit that description, the court said. Neither of the groups that filed complaints against Yahoo returned calls seeking comment about the decision, the Associated Press reports. It was not immediately clear if they planned to appeal. New Securities Fraud Cases ATMEL CORPORATION: Glancy & Binkow Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Glancy & Binkow LLP initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of all persons who purchased securities of Atmel Corporation (Nasdaq: ATML) between January 20, 2000 and July 31, 2002, inclusive. The suit charges Atmel and certain of its executive officers with violations of federal securities laws. Among other things, plaintiff claims that defendants' material omissions and the dissemination of materially false and misleading statements concerning Atmel's revenue and earnings caused Atmel's stock price to become artificially inflated, inflicting damages on investors. Atmel manufactures computer chips for wireless phones, computer disk drives and DVD players. The complaint alleges that during the class period, defendants caused Atmel's shares to trade at artificially inflated levels through the issuance of false and misleading financial statements, while at the same time concealing that Atmel was selling defective chips to its customers which would lead to product recalls, repairs and loss of customer relationships. On July 31, 2002, news reports disclosed that Seagate Technology, Inc. had filed a lawsuit alleging that Atmel chips caused flaws in millions of disk drives which Seagate manufactured from 1999 to 2001. The complaint further alleges that while Atmel's stock price was artificially inflated due to defendants' false statements, defendants sold more than $500 million in notes in a private placement offering. Atmel later registered these securities for resale via a Registration Statement. For more details, contact Michael Goldberg by Mail: 1801 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 311, Los Angeles, California 90067, by Phone: (310) 201-9161 or (888) 773-9224 or by E-mail: info@glancylaw.com. CARREKER CORPORATION: Charles Piven Launches Securities Suit in N.D. TX ----------------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of Carreker Corp. (NASDAQ: CANIE) between May 20, 1998 and December 10, 2002, inclusive, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, against the Company and certain of its officers and directors. The action charges that defendants violated 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 more details, contact Charles J. Piven by Mail: The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202, by Phone: 410-986-0036 by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.pivenlaw.com CARREKER CORPORATION: Milberg Weiss Launches Securities Suit in N.D. TX ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a securities class action on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Carreker Corporation (Nasdaq:CANIE) between May 20, 1998 and December 10, 2002, inclusive, and who sustained damages thereby. The action is pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, against the Company, John D. Carreker (Chairman and CEO) and Terry L. Gage (CFO). The complaint 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 between May 20, 1998 and December 10, 2002. According to the complaint, throughout the class period, Carreker filed financial statements with the SEC which represented that the Company was consistently delivering numerous consecutive quarters of record, double-digit growth, which the Company attributed to the strong demand for its products and Carreker's business model. In addition, according to the complaint, the Company expressly assured investors of its "dedication to transparent reporting practices" and highlighted the supposed "quality and integrity of (Carreker's) accounting and corporate governance practices." These statements were materially false and misleading, according to the complaint, because they failed to disclose that the Company had been improperly recognizing revenues throughout the class period, thereby artificially inflating its revenues, income and earnings per share. On December 10, 2002, the Company issued a press release announcing that it was investigating whether revenues were improperly recognized by being booked at once instead of ratably over a period of time, as required by applicable generally accepted accounting principles. This belated disclosure severely and negatively impacted Carreker's stock price, causing it to fall by 22.6% in one day on extremely heavy trading volume, from a December 9 close of $5.08 per share to close at $3.93 per share on December 10. Subsequently, the SEC initiated an investigation, which is ongoing, into the Company's accounting practices. On January 28, 2003, the Company announced that it will be restating the financial reports it has filed since 1998. For more details, contact Steven G. Schulman or U. Seth Ottensoser by Mail: One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th fl. New York, NY, 10119-0165 by Phone: 800/320-5081 by E-mail: Carreker@milbergNY.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.milberg.com CLEARONE COMMUNICATIONS: Weiss & Yourman Lodges Securities Suit in UT --------------------------------------------------------------------- Weiss & Yourman initiated a securities class action against ClearOne Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ:CLRO) and certain of its officers in the United States District Court for the District of Utah, Central District on behalf of purchasers of Company shares between April 17, 2001 and January 15, 2003. The complaint charges defendants with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. It alleges that defendants issued a series of material misrepresentations that caused plaintiff and other members of the class to purchase Company common stock at artificially inflated prices. For more details, contact Mark D. Smilow, David C. Katz, and/or James E. Tullman by Mail: The French Building, 551 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1600 New York, NY 10176 by Phone: (888) 593-4771 or (212) 682-3025 or by E- mail: info@wynyc.com MICHAELS STORES: Glancy & Binkow Lodges Securities Lawsuit in N.D. TX --------------------------------------------------------------------- Glancy & Binkow LLP initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas on behalf of all persons who purchased securities of Michaels Stores, Inc. (NYSE: MIK) between August 8, 2002 and November 7, 2002, inclusive. The suit charges Michaels Stores and certain of its executive officers with violations of federal securities laws. Among other things, plaintiff claims that defendants' material omissions and the dissemination of materially false and misleading statements concerning Michaels Stores' financial performance and business prospects caused Michaels Stores' stock price to become artificially inflated, inflicting damages on investors. Michaels Stores is a national specialty retailer which provides arts and crafts supplies for hobbyists. The complaint alleges that, during the class period, defendants consistently represented that Michaels Stores would continue to grow and increase market share, despite the fact that the Company already was experiencing a downturn in store profits and earnings per share and was being affected by the same market conditions that were hurting virtually all of the Company's competitors. The complaint further alleges that at the time Michaels Stores was being adversely affected by the aforementioned factors, but prior to any disclosure to the market, certain of the defendants, while in possession of material adverse information, sold more than $15.3 million worth of their personally held Michaels Stores common stock to the unsuspecting public. For more details, contact Michael Goldberg by Mail: 1801 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 311, Los Angeles, California 90067, by Phone: (310) 201-9161 or (888) 773-9224 or by E-mail: info@glancylaw.com. MOTOROLA INC.: Pomerantz Haudek Commences Securities Lawsuit in N.D. IL ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross LLP initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, against Motorola, Inc. (NYSE:MOT) and three of the Company's top officers on behalf of investors who purchased the Company's common stock during the period between February 3, 2000 and May 14, 2001, inclusive. The suit alleges that the Company, a global telecommunications business, violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing false and misleading statements concerning the Company's business, revenues and earnings which served to artificially inflate the price of the Company's common stock. In particular, defendants made numerous false statements about transactions between Motorola and Telsim Mobil Telekomunikasyon Hizmetleri A.S. (Telsim), a Turkish cellular phone system operator controlled by Turkish citizen Kemal Uzan, his sons, and various members of his immediate family. On February 3, 2000, Motorola issued a press release announcing that it had entered into a three-year agreement to provide products and services to Telsim with potential revenue of $1.5 billion. However, Motorola failed to disclose that the deal with Telsim required Motorola (through Motorola Credit Corp.) to provide Telsim with $1.7 billion in vendor financing. On March 29, 2001, Motorola filed its Annual Proxy Statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission in which Motorola only partially disclosed the magnitude of its vendor financing commitments and failed to disclose the precarious nature of those loans. On April 6, 2001, following the publication of an analysis of Motorola's vendor financing deals, shares of Motorola stock dropped twenty-three percent. Six weeks later, Motorola's revealed that $728 million of the Telsim loan was past due and that Motorola actually had loaned Telsim $2 billion in vendor financing -- $300 million more than previously disclosed. For more details, contact Andrew G. Tolan by Phone: (888) 476-6529 ((888) 4-POMLAW) by E-mail: agtolan@pomlaw.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.pomlaw.com SAWTEK INC.: Glancy & Binkow Commences Securities Fraud Suit in M.D. FL ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Glancy & Binkow LLP initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on behalf of all persons who purchased securities of Sawtek, Inc., currently a subsidiary of TriQuint Semiconductor, Inc. (Nasdaq: TQNT), between January 27, 2000 and May 24, 2001, inclusive. The suit charges Sawtek and certain of its executive officers with violations of federal securities laws. Among other things, plaintiff claims that defendants' material omissions and the dissemination of materially false and misleading statements concerning Sawtek's business operations and financial performance caused Sawtek's stock price to become artificially inflated, inflicting damages on investors. Sawtek designs, develops, manufactures and markets a broad range of electronic signal processing components, based on "surface acoustic wave" or SAW technology, primarily for use in the wireless communications industry. The complaint alleges that during the class period, defendants misrepresented Sawtek's financial performance by improper "channel stuffing" -- inflating revenue by shipping more products than distributors could sell -- and by disseminating false and misleading statements concerning the Company's revenue and business prospects despite a widespread downturn in the wireless and telecommunications markets. Sawtek's actual financial performance was revealed on May 23, 2001, when defendants' acknowledged that the Company's projected results for the quarter ending June 30, 2001, would fall well below the Company's previously issued revenue guidance. By the close of trading on the next day, May 24, 2001, Sawtek's stock price had plunged more than seventeen percent (17%) from the previous day's close as a result of this news. For more details, contact Lionel Z. Glancy, or Michael Goldberg by Phone: 1-310-201-9150, or +1-888-773-9224, by E-mail: info@glancylaw.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.glancylaw.com VERITAS SOFTWARE: Scott + Scott Commences Securities Lawsuit in N.D. CA ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott + Scott, LLC initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, on behalf of purchasers of VERITAS Software Corporation (Nasdaq: VRTS) publicly traded securities during the period between January 24, 2001 and January 16, 2003, inclusive. The complaint charges VERITAS Software Corporation and certain of its officers and directors with issuing false and misleading statements concerning its business and financial condition. Specifically, the complaint alleges that: (1) the Company lacked sufficient internal controls and therefore was unable to understand its true financial standing; (2) the Company had improperly accounted its transaction with AOL Time Warner; (3) the Company's improper treatment of its transactions and revenue recognition policies resulted in material overstatement of revenue and income at all relevant times. The scheme deceived the investing public regarding VERITAS' business, operations and management and inflated the intrinsic value of the Company's shares. On January 17, 2003, the Company announced the restatement of its 2000, 2001 and 2002 financial statements as a result of its improper accounting for transactions with AOL Time Warner. The release stated in part: "(t)he transactions involved a $50 million software purchase by AOL and a $20 million advertising services purchase from AOL." For more details, contact David R. Scott or Neil Rothstein by Phone: 1-800-404-7770 by E-mail: drscott@scott-scott.com or nrothstein@scott- scott.com or visit the firm's Website: http://www.scott-scott.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 * * *