CAR_Public/030424.mbx                C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
                Thursday, April 24, 2003, Vol. 5, No. 80

                            Headlines                            

ALASKA: Economist For Defense In Sockeye Salmon Case Refutes Processor
AT&T WIRELESS: Begins Mediation In Suit Over Out-of-State Phone Calls
CALIFORNIA: Los Angeles Board Agrees To Settle Illegal Search Lawsuit
CHARMING SHOPPES: Fashion Bug Employees Commence Overtime Wage Suit
DENTAL ASSOCIATIONS: MD Court Dismisses Consumer Law Violations Lawsuit

FIRE-LITE ALARMS: Recalls Power Supplies For Alarm Systems Malfunction
HASTINGS ENTERTAINMENT: TX Court Approves Securities Suits Settlement
ILLINOIS: Disappointed Fans Sue Creed Over Unsatisfactory Live Concert
KAWASAKI MOTORS: Voluntarily Recalls 45 Engines For Fire, Burn Hazard
LANDS' END: Voluntarily Recalls 6T Children's Parkas For Choking Hazard

OWT INDUSTRIES: Voluntarily Recalls Electric Routers for Injury Hazard
POLARIS INDUSTRIES: Recalls 56T Polaris ATVS For Accident, Fire Hazard
RAYMOND OAK: Voluntarily Recalls Wooden Toy Chests for Injury Hazard
UNISYS CORPORATION: Retired Workers To Stage Protest Over Lost Benefits
WAL-MART STORES: IN Court Grants Certification To Overtime Wage Lawsuit

*Reduction of Bond in Light Tobacco Suit Leads to Other Complications

                     New Securities Fraud Cases

ACCLAIM ENTERTAINMENT: Holzer Holzer Lodges Securities Suit in E.D. NY
ACCREDO HEALTH: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in W.D. TN
ATMEL CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA
CREDIT SUISSE: Shapiro Haber Launches Securities Fraud Suit in MA Court
INTERCEPT INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. GA

KING PHARMACEUTICALS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in E.D. TN
NORTHWESTERN CORPORATION: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Stock Suit in SD
NORTHWESTERN CORPORATION: Scott + Scott Files Securities Lawsuit in SD
ORTHODONTIC CENTERS: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Securities Suit in LA
PEC SOLUTIONS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA

PHARMACIA CORPORATION: Glancy & Binkow Lodges Securities Lawsuit in NJ
SOLECTRON CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Fraud Suit in CA
VAXGEN INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Lawsuit in N.D. CA
VITALWORKS INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Lawsuit in CT
VOICEFLASH NETWORKS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in S.D. FL

                             *********

ALASKA: Economist For Defense In Sockeye Salmon Case Refutes Processor
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An economist, who recently testified for the defense in the sockeye
salmon antitrust case, said that the dramatic increase of farmed salmon
imported to Japan posed serious price competition for the Bristol Bay
commercial fishermen who held permits to fish the sockeye salmon during
the period 1989 to 1985, Associated Press Newswires reports.

Economist Yuko Kusakabe, testifying for the processors charged in the
price-fixing case, disagreed with comments given in a deposition for
Icicle Seafoods, that the impact of farmed salmon did not become a
serious competitive factor until 1994 or 1995.

"One person's view in one company that farmed salmon did not offset the
price of his product, does not talk about the overall Japanese salmon
market," said Ms. Kusakabe.

Her comments, given under cross-examination in a class action trial
being conducted in Superior Court in Anchorage, contradicted those of
defendant processor Icicle Seafood.  Larry Hill, a senior executive
vice president for Icicle, had said in a deposition that the impact of
farmed salmon probably did not become a factor until 1994 or 1995.

Ms. Kusakabe showed jurors photographs and videos of Japanese food
markets where Alaskan sockeye salmon competed with many other species,
including farmed salmon.  Ms. Kusakabe said even though the photos and
videos were taken in 2003, they reflect a similar situation in place
during the period of the alleged conspiracy between the Seattle
processors and the Japanese importers to set the sockeye salmon prices
in Bristol Bay.

Ms. Kusakabe previously testified for the oil companies in two separate
lawsuits stemming from spills in Glacier Bay and the Exxon Valdez oil
spill in Prince William Sound.  Fishermen also filed those lawsuits.

The lawsuit in the instant case, filed on behalf of some 4,500 Bristol
Bay sockeye salmon permit holders, alleges that major Japanese
importers and Seattle-based processors conspired to lower prices paid
to the commercial Bristol Bay fishermen.  Plaintiffs are asking for
hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.


AT&T WIRELESS: Begins Mediation In Suit Over Out-of-State Phone Calls
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Mediation begins in the class action filed against AT&T Wireless in
Denver District Court in Colorado, over penalties customers incurred
due to billing policies for out-of-state cell phone calls, the Denver
Rocky Mountain News reports.

The suit was filed due to a delay in the billing of out-of-state phone
calls, which occurred because a third party - the out-of-state cell
phone company - became involved.  The suit alleges that billing delays
caused customers to exceed their designated monthly "bucket" of
minutes, resulting in penalties.  

For example, a customer with a subscription package of 1,100 minutes a
month received a bill that included all the minutes the customer logged
for out-of-state activity the previous month.  Those minutes counted
against the customer's 1,100-minute limit in the current month, the
Rocky Mountain News reports.

The plaintiffs assert that out-of-state minutes should be billed in the
month that calls occurred. When a customer exceeds the monthly limit,
AT&T Wireless applies a penalty, anywhere from 25 cents to 45 cents a
minute.  AT&T Wireless calls the next-month billing a "common industry
practice born of necessity."

The mediation commences three years after William K. Lester Jr. and
Anthony Vastano filed the suit, arguing that customers shouldn't have
to pay those penalties.  Ron Wilcox, lead counsel for the plaintiffs,
said a settlement among the attorneys meeting Wednesday is no sure
thing.  No arbitrator is involved, the Rocky Mountain News reports.  He
estimates that 635,000 people could participate in the suit, which
includes anyone who signed up for AT&T cellular service from May 1998
to March 1999 and still had service as of December 23, 1999.

"We make clear to our customers when they roam on another carrier's
network, they may be billed for the call the subsequent month," said
AT&T Wireless spokeswoman Rochelle Cohen.  Ms. Cohen declined to
comment on the mediation, the Rocky Mountain News reports.

Mr. Wilcox declined to speculate on the likelihood of a settlement
Wednesday.  But, he said, "Both parties have an interest in reaching
some resolution in the matter."


CALIFORNIA: Los Angeles Board Agrees To Settle Illegal Search Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors agreed to settle for
US$2.75 million a class action filed by protesters who were arrested at
the 2000 Democratic National Convention, including women subjected to
strip and body cavity searches, Reuters reports.

The board voted 4-0, with one supervisor absent to settle the suit,
charging the county with subjecting 23 women in the 71-member group to
illegal searches.  The men in the group said they were not strip-
searched, but were denied phone calls and access to medication.  Under
California law suspects arrested on misdemeanor charges cannot be
strip-searched unless the charge involves weapons, drugs or violence,
Reuters states.  The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department revised
its search policies after the lawsuit was filed in California Superior
Court.


CHARMING SHOPPES: Fashion Bug Employees Commence Overtime Wage Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Charming Shoppes faces a new class action filed in the Los Angeles
County Superior court, California by a former Fashion Bug employee,
alleging the Company misclassified as exempt employees all Fashion Bug
store sales managers in California.  The suit also names as defendant
Fashion Bug of California, Inc.

The suit further asserts that the plaintiffs are actually nonexempt
employees and entitled to be paid overtime which they had not received.
The plaintiff alleges violations of Labor Code Sections 1194 and 515
and related claims, and seeks back pay and injunctive relief for the
misclassification, and reimbursement and disgorgement of profits.

As of March 28, 2003, the case has not yet been served on Charming
Shoppes or Fashion Bug, and an answer has not yet been prepared.  The
Company intends to vigorously and aggressively oppose class
certification and the merits of the class cases should either be
certified, or the individual case should a class not be certified.  
Although the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be predicted with
any certainty at this stage, the Company does not believe that the
cases will have a material impact on its financial condition or results
of operations.


DENTAL ASSOCIATIONS: MD Court Dismisses Consumer Law Violations Lawsuit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A Baltimore County Circuit Court judge has thrown out a class-action
lawsuit against the American Dental Association (ADA) and the Maryland
State Dental Association (MSDA), finding that the court has no
jurisdiction over the ADA and that the plaintiffs failed to state a
claim of fraud or Consumer Protection Act violations against the
professional associations.

Judge Lawrence Daniels dismissed "with prejudice" the complaints in the
case of Lisa Hogan and Victoria Bolton and on behalf of an unnamed
class of plaintiffs v. The American Dental Association, et al.  Judge
Daniels issued his ruling in Baltimore on April 18. The lawsuit was
filed in February 2002.

The lawsuit alleged the defendants engaged in unfair and deceptive
trade practices in violation of the Maryland Consumer Protection Act,
contending that amalgam fillings are dangerous and that the defendants
purposely concealed that information from consumers.

Dental amalgam, the silver-colored filling material that dentists have
used to restore hundreds of millions of decayed teeth, is made from
silver, copper and tin, in addition to mercury, which chemically binds
these components into a hard, stable and safe alloy.

"We are very pleased with this ruling," said ADA President T. Howard
Jones, D.M.D.  "We hope the courts will continue to put these lawsuits
behind us so that we may go unhindered in devoting our time and efforts
to promoting the nation's oral health and working on solutions to help
improve access to oral health service."

Courts in New York and Georgia dismissed similar lawsuits earlier this
year.


FIRE-LITE ALARMS: Recalls Power Supplies For Alarm Systems Malfunction
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fire-Lite Alarms, Inc. is voluntarily recalling about 2600 power
supplies used with building alarm systems.  They are used with
notification appliance circuits that provide an audible, visual, or
audio-visual combination notification to building occupants in the
event of a fire.  The recalled power supplies were sold nationwide from
September 2001 through November 2002 under the Fire-Lite and Notifier
brand names for $480 to $530.  Only power supplies with a date code of
4602 or lower are included in this recall.

Fire-Lite models FCPS-24FS6 and FCPS-24FS8, and Notifier models FCPS-
24S6 and FCPS-24S8 can have incomplete solder connections.  The
Notifier model ACPS-2406 can have an improper circuit response with low
input voltage.  Both of these conditions may result in a building alarm
system not functioning properly.  No incidents have been reported.

For more details, contact the Company's Customer Service and Technical
Support Center by Phone: (203) 484-7161 between 8 am and 5 pm ET Monday
through Friday.


HASTINGS ENTERTAINMENT: TX Court Approves Securities Suits Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
granted final approval to the settlement proposed by Hastings
Entertainment, Inc. to settle the consolidated securities class action
filed against it and certain of its current and former officers and
directors.

Following the Company's March 2000 restatements of its financial
information, nine purported class actions were filed, asserting various
claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934.  Although four of the lawsuits were originally filed in the
Dallas Division of the Northern District of Texas, all of the five
pending actions were transferred to the Amarillo Division of the
Northern District and were consolidated.  One of the Section 10(b) and
20(a) lawsuits filed in the Dallas Division was voluntarily dismissed.

In May 2000, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas against the Company, its current and
former directors and officers at the time of its June 1998 initial
public offering and three underwriters, Salomon Smith Barney, A.G.
Edwards & Sons, Inc. and Furman Selz, LLC asserting various claims
under Sections 11, 12(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933.  Motions
to dismiss these actions were filed by the Company and, on September
25, 2001, were denied by the Court.

On September 12, 2002, the Company announced that an agreement in
principle to settle the actions had been reached.  The settlement
received final approval by the court on March 10, 2003.  The settlement
required a payment of $5.75 million on behalf of the defendants in the
lawsuits and the assignment to the plaintiff settlement class of any
claims the Company may have had against KPMG Peat Marwick, LLP, its
outside auditors at the time of the March 7, 2000 announcement.

The settlement resolves all claims against the Company, its current and
former defendant officers and directors and the defendant underwriters.
The plaintiff settlement class separately settled all claims against
KPMG.


ILLINOIS: Disappointed Fans Sue Creed Over Unsatisfactory Live Concert
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rock group Creed faces a class action filed in the Cook County Circuit
Court in Illinois, Chancery division by disappointed fans who watched
their December 29 concert at the Allstate Arena in Rosemont, WBAL.com
reports.

Plaintiffs Philip Berenz and his wife, Linda, Chad Costino and Wendy
Costino allege that lead singer Scott Stapp was too "drug-addled" to
remember his own songs.  The suit, filed on behalf of everyone who
attended the concert, states Mr. Stapp was "so intoxicated and/or
medicated that he was unable to sing the lyrics of a single Creed
song."  The plaintiffs further alleged that ". during the Creed
concert, Stapp left the stage on several occasions during several songs
for long periods of time, rolled around on the floor of the stage in
apparent pain or distress, and appeared to pass out on stage during the
performance."

The Berenzs and Costinos said they spent a combined $227 for concert
tickets, service fees, and related expenses including parking, and were
entitled to hear all facets of the band's songs, including the vocals,
WBAL.com reports.  Mr. Stapp's inability to perform was "tantamount to
a cancellation," in the words of the suit.  The suit also names as
defendants Creed guitarist Mark Tremonti, drummer Scott Phillips, and
Jeff Hanson Management and Promotions Inc.  The suit estimates that the
potential damages that could be awarded to the approximately 15,000
concertgoers will be around $2 million.

According to the suit and news reports, the band's management issued an
apology to Chicago area fans for the quality of the performance.  The
apology, they said, read, in part, "We apologize if you don't feel that
the show was up to the very high standards set by our previous shows in
Chicago ... We hope that you can take some solace in the fact that you
definitely experienced the most unique of all Creed shows and may have
become part of the unusual world of rock and roll history!"


KAWASAKI MOTORS: Voluntarily Recalls 45 Engines For Fire, Burn Hazard
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Kawasaki Motors Corporation, U.S.A. is voluntarily recalling about 45
engines that have been incorporated into Ventrac compact articulated
tractors manufactured by Venture Products Inc.  The recalled engines
are 27 horsepower, liquid-cooled, overhead-valve (OHV), V-twin models
with electric start and horizontal output shafts.  The engine model and
serial numbers are on a label at the top of the engines and next to the
radiator cap: Engine Model: FD750D Application: AS02 Serial No.: 000001
through 020851  

Vibration during operation can result in abrasion wear to the fuel
tube, leading to a fuel leak.  If the fuel leak comes in contact with a
spark or flame, it can cause a fire and burn hazard.  Kawasaki has
received one report of fuel leakage, which resulted in a fire and burn
injury to the operator.

For more information, contact a Ventrac authorized dealer, or contact
the Company by Phone: (866) 902-9381 between 8:30 am and 4:45 pm PT
Monday through Friday, or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.kawpower.com.


LANDS' END: Voluntarily Recalls 6T Children's Parkas For Choking Hazard
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Lands' End Inc. is voluntarily recalling approximately 6,000 children's
parkas.  The recalled parkas are style numbers 79725 and 79721.  Style
numbers can be found on the top line of a small label that is
immediately behind the larger garment care label.  The parkas were sold
through the Lands' End catalog, web site and certain Sears, Roebuck and
Co. retail stores from November 2002 through mid-January 2003 for
$79.50 or below.

The zipper box may detach, allowing the zipper slide to detach.  The
small parts, if detached, could pose a risk of choking.  The Company
has received reports of the zipper detaching, but no injuries have been
reported.

For more details, contact the Company by Phone: (800) 200-6212 or visit
the firm's Website: http://www.landsend.com.


OWT INDUSTRIES: Voluntarily Recalls Electric Routers for Injury Hazard
----------------------------------------------------------------------
OWT Industries, Inc. is cooperating with the United States Consumer
Product Safety Commission (CPSC) by voluntarily recalling about 5,200
electric routers used in woodworking.  The on-off switch on the routers
could stick in the "on" position, posing a risk of serious lacerations
to the operator and bystanders.  The Company has not received any
reports of injuries or incidents.  This recall is being conducted to
prevent the possibility of injury.

This recall involves Craftsmanr routers, model number 315.17510 with
date codes of A0304 or lower.  The model numbers and date codes are
printed on a black data label located on the electric motor's housing.  
The routers have an aluminum base with black handles and a black motor.  
All affected routers were packaged with a cloth carry bag under the
stock number 17518.  Routers sold without the bag are not involved in
the recall.

Sears sold these routers nationwide from November 2002 through January
2003 for about $60.

For more details, contact the Company by Phone: (800) 932-3188 between
8 am and 5 pm ET Monday through Friday, or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.sears.com.


POLARIS INDUSTRIES: Recalls 56T Polaris ATVS For Accident, Fire Hazard
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Polaris Industries Inc. is recalling about 56,000 2000 and 2001 Polaris
Xpedition 325, Trail Boss 325, and Magnum 325 all terrain vehicles
(ATVs).  These products are 4-wheeled vehicles intended for use in off-
road areas.  Polaris dealers nationwide sold these vehicles from
January 1999 through August 2000 for approximately $6,000.

The ATVs may have loose or leaking oil cooler line clamps, that can
release hot, pressurized oil.  This may lead to thermal burns, to
engine failure due to oil pressure loss and, in rare circumstances,
could cause a vehicle fire.

Polaris Industries Inc. has received 1,290 warranty claims or service
calls pertaining to the loose or leaking oil cooler line clamps.  There
have been 20 minor injuries associated with oil line failures; these
injuries have been first or second degree burns, bruises and skin
rashes resulting from the leaking oil.

For more information, contact the Company by Phone: (800)-POLARIS.


RAYMOND OAK: Voluntarily Recalls Wooden Toy Chests for Injury Hazard
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Raymond Oak Inc., of Fountain Valley, Calif., is voluntarily recalling
about 200 toy chests.  The toy chests are wooden and were manufactured
with a natural birch or oak finish.  The chests measure 36-inches in
length, 20-inches in width and 21-inches in height.  A sticker on the
toy chests reads "MADE IN CHINA" and "SC51CT-MP."  Furniture stores
nationwide sold the recalled toy chests from May 2000 through January
2002 for about $99.

The toy chest's lid support hinges can fail, allowing the lid to fall
onto a child's head, neck, fingers or hands.  In addition, spaces at
the end of the hinge on the lid can cause pinch, crush or laceration
injuries to children's fingers.  The Company has received one report of
a 7-year-old girl whose finger was bruised after the toy chest lid
slammed down on her left index finger.

For more details, contact the Company by Phone: (866) 614-1281 between
9 am and 5 pm PT Monday through Friday.


UNISYS CORPORATION: Retired Workers To Stage Protest Over Lost Benefits
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Retired employees of Unisys Corporation (UIS) began a campaign of
national protests and informational picketing to focus attention on the
company's fraudulent promises of "lifetime" medical benefits and its
tactics in fighting the long-running class action they filed in late
1992, days after the Company announced that it was terminating their
benefits.

The protests support the legal claims of approximately 9,000 retirees
and spouses around the country who charge that the Company (and its
predecessor Burroughs) broke federal law by systematically
misrepresenting that they would receive valuable "lifetime" medical
coverage paid by the company as part of their retirement benefits.  The
company cited these benefits to justify its pay rates, fight
unionization, and induce early retirements by older workers.

Court rulings in the lawsuit repeatedly have found that the Company
systematically misrepresented to employees that they and their spouses
would receive lifetime, company-paid medical benefits after they
retired.  For example, in March 2001 the US Court of Appeals in
Philadelphia summarized rulings that "Unisys representatives
'affirmatively represented to [employees] that their medical benefits
were guaranteed once they retired, when the company knew in fact this
was not true.'"  In January 2002, the trial court likewise ruled that
there was evidence that the company made "numerous oral and written
misrepresentations" about the medical benefits.

The protests also will draw attention to the company's delaying tactics
in the lawsuit.  Despite previous settlements covering other parts of
the case, the company continues to resist a fair resolution for the
remaining 9,000 retirees, many of whom dedicated 20 to 30 or more years
to the company and were pioneers of the United States computer
industry.

According to 1988 retiree Ken Perrin of Highland, Michigan, who worked
for Burroughs and then Unisys for 32 years, "The courts have repeatedly
said that the company lied to us about our benefits. I'm shocked that
Unisys continues to drag out the court case. It's not how an honorable
employer should treat people who dedicated their lives to the company.
It looks like they're just waiting for us to die." The retirees' lead
attorney, Alan Sandals of Philadelphia, summarized the situation now
confronting the retirees: "If the company had done this to its
customers or suppliers, its executives would have gone to jail or the
company would have been forced out of business. But with thousands of
retired employees as its victims, Unisys seems to believe that it
should fight in court forever in order to avoid a fair resolution. The
headline is 'Unisys to Retirees - Drop Dead.'"

The initial protest activities will occur on April 23 at the company's
world headquarters in Blue Bell, Pennsylvania (a Philadelphia suburb)
and at one of its main manufacturing plants in Plymouth, Michigan (a
suburb of Detroit).  Retirees and their legal representatives will make
statements and be available for interviews.  These activities will take
place the day before Unisys' annual meeting of shareholders.  
Additional activities will occur throughout the spring.


WAL-MART STORES: IN Court Grants Certification To Overtime Wage Lawsuit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marion County Judge Gary Miller allowed up to 113,000 current and
former Wal-Mart and Sam's Club employees to join a class action against
the retail giant, alleging that it forced Hoosier workers to work "off-
the-clock," the Indystar.com reports.

The suit alleges the plaintiffs worked unpaid overtime and were forced
to skip meals and breaks.  The suit also seeks back pay for the time
the workers were forced to do "off the clock" work.  Jim Knauer, an
attorney for one of the plaintiffs named in the suit, told the Indystar
Wal-Mart's corporate motto "Do what ever it takes," means employees
work more hours than they are paid.

"That means you get your work done without working overtime," Mr.
Knauer continued.  "The only way they could get their work done was to
clock out and go back on their shift."

Wal-Mart spokeswoman Cynthia Illick said the company disagrees with the
judges ruling, the Indystar.com reports.  "We believe the class
certification is improper and we're exploring options, including
appeal," she said.  She the workers claims and said Wal-Mart has a
strict policy that prohibits employees from working off the clock.


*Reduction of Bond in Light Tobacco Suit Leads to Other Complications
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For Altria, Philip Morris's parent company, the short-term risk has
passed.  Judge Nicholas Brody, of Madison County, Illinois, last week
reduced the $12 billion appeal bond he had ordered Altria's tobacco
arm, Philip Morris USA, to post if it wanted to appeal against a $10.1
billion damages award to $1.1 Illinois smokers.  These smokers, the
plaintiffs in the Illinois class-action lawsuit, alleged they were
deceived by the cigarette company's misleading claims about its "light"
cigarettes, into believing the "lights" were safer than the company's
regular cigarettes.

The reduced bond requirement of around $7 billion defuses the threat,
or challenge, Philip Morris made to a listening world:  if the appeal
bond is not reduced, the company may have to file for the protection of
bankruptcy and certainly it would not be able to pay its share of the
annual installment, due April 15, to the 46 states who are parties with
the major tobacco companies to the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement
(MSA).  Philip Morris, the largest of the tobacco companies, pays
annually an amount greater by a little more than one-half, of the total
annual installment paid by the companies.

The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that therefore, the state governments
and the investors in the state' tobacco-settlement bonds all breathed
easier when Judge Brody reduced the amount of the appeal bond and
averted the crisis - or bargaining ploy - of bankruptcy, and Philip
Morris made its $2.6 billion payment to the multi-state Tobacco
Settlement Fund.  Most of the 46 states now depend upon tobacco money's
annual arrival to resolve their budgetary woes.  Plans for the use of
the money are included in their annual budgets.  You might say, and
many of the media came forward with the expression, that the states are
"hooked" on tobacco money.

What of the longer term effects? For the cigarette companies, the
impression that the tobacco litigation threat has waned, has been
punctured.  Big Tobacco now faces a new breed of "lights" class action
suits, the Financial Times reports.  These lawsuits do not seek
personal injury damages, but claim, instead, damages based on
deceptive, misleading statements made by the companies about their
product; the kind of statements that create liability under the
consumer fraud laws of many states.  These are the copycat cases that
already have been brought under the standard that was the plaintiffs'
battle cry in the Illinois case.  Two have been certified as class
actions; eight others have been filed.  Another loss in a state with no
cap on appeal bonds could see a replay of the Illinois calamity.

The offset against the legal risk used to be Altria's reliable earnings
growth.  That, too, has been punctured.  Heavy discounting has reversed
Philip Morris's market share losses to deep-discount cigarettes.  But,
as last week's fall in quarterly earnings showed, that has come at a
huge cost to the bottom line.  Another round of state excise taxes, the
Financial Times reports, could again push Marlboro prices up to levels
at which smokers finally balk.

Further, the possibilities that the legal risk will recede do not seem
hearty.  Since the 1998 agreement between the states and US tobacco
companies, analysts have questioned whether the cigarette industry is
still the same, The San Diego Union-Tribune reports.  On March 26,
Standard & Poor placed the tobacco bond ratings on Credit Watch with
negative implications, but has not downgraded any of the debt.  Also,
on March 26, the date on which Judge Brody announced both his verdict
and the amount of the appeal bond, Moody's Investors Service and Fitch
Ratings cut their ratings on almost $19 billion of the debt, which
remains on negative watch.

Philip Morris's warning of possible bankruptcy and a potential
inability to pay the $2.6 billion to the states stunned the market for
bonds backed by tobacco settlement dollars, sending prices sharply
lower and all but killing off demand for new bond issues from Virginia
and California.  California put on hold the $2.3 billion bond issue it
needs to pay bills, but in light of the ruling reducing the bond, state
Controller Steven Westly said the bond issue could be in the market
soon.

Whether or not the prices will rise in the bond market backed by
tobacco money is arguable, since investors seem to be unconvinced, the
San Diego Union-Tribune reports that tobacco bonds make a safe
purchase.

"There is plenty more bad news that could come from Philip Morris or
the other tobacco companies," said Josh Gonze, an assistant portfolio
manager at Thornburg Investment Management in Santa Fe.

Some of the states, not many, have sold the whole of their anticipated
tobacco money settlement to investors -- including mutual funds, big
Wall Street firms, as well as small investors who responded to radio
ads -- in exchange for up-front cash.  New Jersey, for example, sold
its $7.5 billion tobacco settlement to investors in exchange for $3.5
billion in cash.  Those investors, not the state, could lose money if
the Tobacco Settlement Fund falls apart, The Philadelphia Inquirer
reports.

On Friday, last week, Standard & Poor's Ratings Service lowered its
ratings on various tobacco-settlement bonds, maturing after April 15,
2004 -- a long-term negative statement, in itself, of the legal risks
abounding in the tobacco companies' future.  However, the credit
analysis firm cited the "adverse litigation environment" as one of
several reasons for the rating reductions.

Even good news threatens the settlements:  Americans are smoking less.
Altria has told investors that Philip Morris USA cigarette shipments
slipped 16 percent during the first quarter, compared with last year,
while operating profit dropped 40 percent.  The company supplies almost
half of all U.S. cigarettes.

Smoking may have a better future overseas, according to The
Philadelphia Inquirer.  Philip Morris International said foreign
shipments, which account for three-quarters of its sales, rose nearly
four percent during the quarter.  However, Marlboro sales were down in
Western Europe and also slumped in Saudi Arabia and other Arab
countries, reflecting "anti-American sentiment," Altria said.


                     New Securities Fraud Cases


ACCLAIM ENTERTAINMENT: Holzer Holzer Lodges Securities Suit in E.D. NY
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Holzer Holzer & Cannon, LLC initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on
behalf of purchasers of Acclaim Entertainment, Inc. (Nasdaq:AKLM)
publicly traded securities during the period between January 11, 2002
and September 19, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that throughout the class period, Defendants
issued various false and misleading statements regarding the Company's
financial performance.  These statements were materially false and
misleading, according to the complaint, because they failed to disclose
and/or misrepresented that the Company:

     (1) was engaging in channel stuffing, whereby it induced customers
         to take products that they neither wanted, needed or could
         sell in the short-term;

     (2) was experiencing severe operating problems related to the
         development, content, cost, market testing, distribution and
         sales of the Company's products;

     (3) was experiencing decreased demand for products, including
         Turoc: Evolution and Aggressive In-Line, among others,
         resulting in the Company's inability to meet revenue and
         earnings guidance;

     (4) had distribution and retail sales tracking information systems
         which caused the Company to materially underestimate
         allowances for sales returns and price concessions;

     (5) developed computer games with mature themes which materially
         impeded the Company's ability to access broad-based retail
         channels; and

     (6) based on the foregoing, Defendants' opinions, projections and
         forecasts concerning the Company and its operations were
         lacking in a reasonable basis at all times.

The class period ended on September 19, 2002, when Acclaim shocked the
market by issuing a press release announcing it now expected to report
an operating loss for the fourth quarter of 2002, primarily because of
sharply lower revenues.  In addition, the Company lowered its guidance
for the first and second quarters of its 2003 fiscal year, as well as
for the 2003 fiscal year.

Upon release of this news, the market for Acclaim common shares
collapsed, losing over 29% of their value in a single day's trading to
close at $1.56 per share on September 19, 2002.

For more details, contact Michael I. Fistel, Jr. by Phone:
(888) 508-6832 by E-mail: mfistel@holzerlaw.com


ACCREDO HEALTH: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in W.D. TN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Western District of
Tennessee on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of Accredo
Health, Inc. (NasdaqNM: ACDO) from June 16, 2002 through April 7, 2003,
inclusive.

The complaint alleges 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 material misrepresentations to the
market between June 16, 2002 and April 7, 2003, thereby artificially
inflating the price of Accredo common stock.

The complaint alleges that these statements were materially false and
misleading because they failed to disclose and misrepresented these
adverse facts, among others:

     (1) that the Company was failing to timely record an impairment in
         the value of certain receivables that it had acquired in a
         recent acquisition.  As a result, the Company's reported
         financial results were artificially inflated throughout the
         class period;

     (2) as a result of the foregoing, the Company's financial
         statements published during the class period were not prepared
         in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
         and were therefore materially false and misleading;

     (3) that the Company would not have been able to meet its stated
         earnings guidance had it properly reserved for its accounts
         receivables; and

     (4) based on the above, defendants' earnings guidance and positive
         statements concerning the Company was lacking in a reasonable
         and therefore materially false and misleading.

On April 8, 2002, prior to the opening of the market, Accredo shocked
the market by announcing that it was reducing its previously issued
earning guidance and that it was examining the adequacy of reserves for
accounts receivables that it acquired in a recent acquisition. In
response to this announcement, the price of Accredo Health common stock
declined precipitously falling from $25.40 per share to as low as
$13.76 per share, on extremely heavy volume. During the Class Period,
Accredo insiders sold more than $12 million worth of their personally-
held Accredo stock while in possession of the true facts about the
Company.

For more details, 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 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


ATMEL CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California on behalf of all persons who acquired securities of Atmel
Corporation (NasdaqNM: ATML) From January 20, 2000 to July 31, 2002.  
The case is pending against the Company, George Perlegos, and Donald
Colvin.

The complaint charges that during the class period, 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 material
misrepresentations to the market, thereby artificially inflating the
price of Atmel securities.  Specifically, the Complaint alleges that,
Defendants inflated the Company's revenues and earnings by concealing
that Atmel was selling defective chips to its customers, which would
lead to product recalls, repairs, and loss of customer relationships.

The complaint further alleges that while Atmel's stock price was
artificially inflated, Defendants sold more than $500 million in notes
in a private placement offering.  This scheme was revealed on July 31,
2002, when 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. On this news,
the Company's stock price declined to $2.96.

For more details, 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 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


CREDIT SUISSE: Shapiro Haber Launches Securities Fraud Suit in MA Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP initiated a securities class action against
Credit Suisse First Boston and financial analyst Tim Mahon on behalf of
persons who purchased Atmel Corporation (NASDAQ: ATML) common stock
from July 22, 1999 through August 6, 2001, inclusive in the United
States District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

The complaint alleges that the defendants violated section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by
issuing favorable research reports on Atmel that were materially false
or misleading by failing to disclose conflicts of interest of Credit
Suisse, and in particular the practice of Credit Suisse to gain
lucrative investment banking business by providing coverage and issuing
favorable research reports on existing or prospective investment
banking customers.

According to an administrative complaint filed by the Secretary of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, CSFB purposely misled investors by
disseminating into the marketplace fraudulent material misstatements of
fact in analyst reports.

For more details, contact Thomas G. Shapiro, Ted Hess-Mahan or Liz
Hutton by Mail: 75 State Street, Boston, MA 02109 by Phone:
800-287-8119 or by E-mail: cases@shulaw.com


INTERCEPT INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. GA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia,
on behalf of all persons who purchased securities of Intercept Inc.
(Nasdaq: ICPT) between September 16, 2002 and January 9, 2003,
inclusive, and who were injured thereby.  The action, is pending
against the Company and:

     (1) John W. Collins (Chief Executive Officer),

     (2) G. Lynn Boggs (President and Chief Operating Officer),

     (3) Scott Meyerhoff (Chief Financial Officer), and

     (4) Garrett M. Bender (President and Chief Executive Officer of
         Internet Billing Co. Ltd. (iBill) a wholly owned subsidiary of
         the Company)

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 September 16, 2002 and January 9,
2003.  The complaint charges Intercept 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 Intercept's business operations and financial
performance caused Intercept's stock price to become artificially
inflated, inflicting damages on investors.  InterCept and the
Individual Defendants made material misrepresentations and/or omitted
to make material disclosures throughout the class period due to their
false assurances that the adult pornography internet portion of their
merchant processing business was insignificant and their failure to
disclose that VISA regulations implemented on November 1, 2002, which
were targeted specifically to address risks of internet pornography
card processing, had caused a material loss of business.

When defendants belatedly acknowledged the impact on InterCept's
business, the market's reaction to the disclosures was swift and
severe.  Following these disclosures, the market price of InterCept
common stock dropped nearly 50% from a $18.51 to slightly over $8 per
share at the close of trading on January 10, 2003, after the
disclosures were made.

For more details, 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 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


KING PHARMACEUTICALS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in E.D. TN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Tennessee, Northeastern Division at Greeneville, on behalf of
purchasers of King Pharmaceuticals (NYSE: KG) publicly traded
securities during the period between February 16, 2000 and March 10,
2003, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities & Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing materially false
and misleading statements during the class period and violated sections
11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 by issuing a materially false
and misleading Registration Statement and Prospectus in connection with
the Company's acquisition of Jones Pharma, Inc.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants issued statements
regarding the Company's financial performance and future prospects and
the strong demand for its branded pharmaceutical products, notably
Altace and Levoxyl.  Moreover, the complaint alleges that the Company
failed to disclose that certain of its rebate and pricing practices
subjected it to heightened governmental scrutiny.

As alleged in the complaint, these statements were each materially
false and misleading when made as they misrepresented and/or omitted
the following adverse facts which then existed and disclosure of which
was necessary to make the statements made not false and/or misleading,
including:

     (1) that the Company's rebate practices and "best price" lists
         subjected it to heightened regulatory scrutiny as governmental
         agencies increased their activity in this area;

     (2) that the Company had understated the level of generic
         competition for Levoxyl; and

     (3) that the Company had engaged in questionable sales to VitaRx
         and Prison Health Services during 1999 and 2000.

On March 11, 2003, King Pharmaceuticals shocked the market when it
revealed that it was subject to an SEC investigation for, among other
things:

     (i) the sales of its products to VitaRx and Prison Health Services
         during 1999 and 2000;

    (ii) its "bestprice" lists;
   
   (iii) all documents related to the pricing of its pharmaceutical
         products to any governmental Medicaid agency during 1999; and

    (iv) the accrual and payment of rebates on Altace from 2000 to the
         present

In response to this announcement, the price of King Pharmaceuticals
common stock declined precipitously, falling from $15.90 per share to
$12.17 per share.

For more details, 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 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


NORTHWESTERN CORPORATION: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Stock Suit in SD
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the District of South Dakota on behalf
of all purchasers of the common stock of NorthWestern Corporation
(NYSE:NOR) from August 2, 2000 through March 31, 2003, inclusive.

The complaint charges NorthWestern and certain of its executive
officers and directors with issuing false and misleading statement
concerning its business and financial condition.  Specifically the
Company failed to disclose that:

     (1) the Company had not maintained adequate reserves for accounts
         receivable in its subsidiary, Expanets;

     (2) massive amounts of the Company's goodwill was impaired and
         would require significant write-downs;

     (3) that the Company lacked adequate internal controls and was
         therefore unable to ascertain the true financial condition of
         the Company; and

     (4) that as a result, the value of the Company's net income and
         financial results were materially overstated.

Subsequently, on April 16, 2003, before the market opened, NorthWestern
announced that it would take significant charges for fiscal year 2002
totaling $878.5 million.  The breakdown of the charges included:

     (i) an impairment of goodwill and other long-lived assets related
         to one of the Company's subsidiaries Blue Dot Services, Inc.
         for $301.7 million,

    (ii) an additional impairment of goodwill and other long-lived
         assets related to another Company subsidiary Expanets, Inc.
         for $288.7 million,

   (iii) a charge for discontinued operations for a third subsidiary
         CornerStone Propane Partners L.P. for a net of tax benefit of
         $101.7 million,

    (iv) a valuation allowance of a deferred tax asset for $71.5
         million,

     (v) billing adjustments and accounts receivable write-offs related
         to Expanets equaling $65.8 million,

    (vi) an impairment of the Montana First Megawatts project for $35.7
         million, and

   (vii) the retirement of an acquisition term loan, equaling a net of
         tax benefit of $13.4 million.

By the close of trading on April 16, 2003, the share price plummeted to
$1.95 per share, 92% down from its class period high of $23.53 per
share.

For more details, contact Marc A. Topaz or Stuart L. Berman by Phone:
(888) 299-7706 (toll free) or (610) 667-7706 by E-mail:
info@sbclasslaw.com


NORTHWESTERN CORPORATION: Scott + Scott Files Securities Lawsuit in SD
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott + Scott, LLC initiated a securities class action on behalf of
institutional investors in the United States District Court for the
District of South Dakota on behalf of purchasers of NorthWestern
Corporation (NYSE: NOR) publicly traded securities during the period
between February 7, 2002 and March 31, 2003.

The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  
Throughout the class period, defendants issued a series of materially
false and misleading statements concerning the financial and
operational condition of the Company.  In fact, throughout the class
period, while many of the Company's competitors were announcing revised
guidance, NorthWestern consistently stated that the Company's
proprietary business model was allowing NorthWestern to continue to
achieve "improved performance" and earnings of between $2.30 to $2.55
per share by the end of 2002.

Both prior to and throughout the class period, management of the
Company consistently represented that its subsidiaries, including
Expanets and Blue Dot, were achieving and would continue to achieve
these results.  In fact, however, investors would ultimately learn at
the close of the class period, which defendants had managed to conceal
throughout the class period, that:

     (1) The Company's non- utility subsidiaries were not performing
         according to plan, with at least 20% of Blue Dot's locations
         performing so poorly that they would be sold or closed within
         the foreseeable future, and with Expanets running its reserves
         about $66 million short of its rapidly escalating
         delinquencies;

     (2) defendants had artificially inflated the Company's balance
         sheet as well as its reported earnings and EPS figures, by
         failing to write down the impairment of, and take necessary
         reserves for, its failing Blue Dot and Expanets businesses,
         which impairments and reserve adjustments ultimately resulted
         in a massive $880 million charge;

     (3) through a complicated scheme of questionable accounting and
         subsidiaries owned partially by senior management, losses at
         both Blue Dot and Expanets were subverted and reallocated to
         owners of minority interests or shareholders in the Company's
         subsidiary, which allowed the Company to keep these losses off
         its balance sheet, and to artificially inflate earnings and
         income and mask the poor performance of NorthWestern
         throughout the class period; and

     (4) defendants had materially misstated the conditions of both
         Blue Dot and Expanets, which were not poised for nor
         experiencing "long-term growth" nor "value creation," but were
         rather in poor financial and operational condition, with at
         least 20% of Blue Dot's locations terminal and with an unknown
         amount of other locations also in poor condition, and with
         almost $302 million in charges and reserves required to be
         taken by Expanets, in addition to an approximate $289 million
         charge required for Blue Dot.

As a result of the foregoing, at no time during the class period did
defendants have a good faith basis to project earnings anywhere near
$2.55 per share for fiscal year 2002.

For more details, contact David R. Scott or Neil Rothstein by Mail: 108
Norwich Avenue, Colchester, Connecticut 06415 by Phone: 800/404-7770 by
Fax: 860/537-4432 or by E-mail: drscott@scott-scott.com or
nrothstein@scott-scott.com.


ORTHODONTIC CENTERS: Schiffrin & Barroway Lodges Securities Suit in LA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway LLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana on
behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of Orthodontic Centers of
America, Inc. (NYSE:OCA) from November 14, 2002 through March 18, 2003,
inclusive.

The complaint charges OCA and certain of its officers and directors
with violations of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934.  More
specifically, the complaint alleges that on May 17, 2001, OCA and
OrthAlliance, Inc. announced that the parties had entered into a
definitive merger agreement, whereby a wholly owned subsidiary of OCA
would merge into OrthAlliance in a stock-for-stock transaction, with
OrthAlliance becoming a wholly owned subsidiary of OCA.

Following the May 17, 2001 announcement, a number of OrthAlliance's
affiliated practices filed lawsuits against OrthAlliance and/or
notified OrthAlliance that it was in default under their service,
management service, and consulting agreements, in response to which
OrthAlliance engaged outside counsel to represent its interests.

The complaint also alleges that after the announcement of the completed
merger on November 9, 2001, OCA set forth an integration plan with
respect to OrthAlliance affiliated practices.  The integration plan,
however, was not proceeding "very, very well" as articulated by
defendants.  In fact, several other OrthAlliance affiliated practices,
in addition to the practices that filed lawsuits, discontinued paying
their services fees under their service, management service, and
consulting agreements; while at the same time, OCA continued to
recognize revenue it allegedly received from such fees.

The complaint further alleges that the statements disseminated by
defendants during the class period and with respect to the financial
well-being of the Company were each materially false and misleading
because OCA failed to disclose and indicate that the integration of
OrthAlliance practices was not proceeding as had indicated by the
defendants, which, in turn, caused the Company to experience less
profit generation because:

     (1) not only had some OrthAlliance practices sued but other
         OrthAlliance practices had discontinued paying their services
         fees;

     (2) because the Company continued to recognize revenue from the
         services from OrthAlliance practices that were in litigation
         and from those that had stopped paying their service fees;

     (3) because the defendants mischaracterized that only "some
         doctors" had stopped paying their service fees, which only
         created "a little noise" for the Company when in fact the
         magnitude of the problem, which OCA was required to report,
         was greater than reported;

     (4) because the Company was recognizing revenue in violation of
         the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP); and

     (5) because the defendants were actively concealing these facts in
         order to manipulate the Company's earnings outlooks in order
         to maintain its favorable stock prices.

The complaint additionally alleges that following the close of the
markets on March 18, 2003, OCA issued a press release announcing its
year-end earnings for 2002 wherein the Company reported that earnings
and fee revenue were down from the previous year.  The decline in fee
revenue resulted from numerous OrthAlliance affiliated practices that
discontinued paying fees required under their service, management
service, and consulting agreements in 2002.

Market reaction to these revelations was swift.  Immediately following
the announcement on March 19, 2003, shares of the Company fell $3.93,
or 41 percent, to close at $5.64, from a closing price of $9.57 per
share on March 18, 2003.

For more details, contact Marc A. Topaz or Stuart L. Berman by Phone:
(888) 299-7706 (toll free) or (610) 667-7706 by E-mail:
info@sbclasslaw.com


PEC SOLUTIONS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. VA
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Virginia on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of PEC
Solutions Inc. (NasdaqNM: PECS) from October 22, 2002 through March 14,
2003, inclusive.

Throughout the class period, as alleged in the complaint, defendants
issued a series of materially false and misleading statements
concerning the Company's business, operations and prospects.  The
complaint alleges that these statements were materially false and
misleading when made as they failed to disclose and misrepresented the
following adverse facts, among others:

     (1) that the Company was experiencing declining demand for its
         products and services as the failure of Congress to approve a
         budget for 2003 was causing governmental agencies to delay
         projects;

     (2) that the Company was experiencing material problems with
         certain of its biometric identification contracts and would
         not be generating the revenue that it had anticipated from
         those contracts; and

     (3) as a result of the foregoing, the Company was materially
         overstating the strength of its pipeline of projects and its
         prospects.

On March 14, 2003, after the close of the market, as alleged in the
complaint, PEC Solutions shocked the market when it issued a press
release announcing that it was revising its guidance for the first
quarter 2003 and for the year ending December 31, 2003.

In response to this announcement, the price of PEC Solutions common
stock declined precipitously falling from $15.80 per share to $9.81 per
share, a decline of more than 37%, on extremely heavy trading volume.
During the class period, prior to the disclosure of the true facts, the
Individual Defendants and other PEC Solutions insiders sold their
personally-held shares of PEC Solutions common stock to the
unsuspecting public reaping proceeds of more than $13 million

For more details, 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 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


PHARMACIA CORPORATION: Glancy & Binkow Lodges Securities Lawsuit in NJ
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Glancy & Binkow LLP initiated a securities class action in the United
States District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf of all
persons who purchased securities of Pharmacia Corporation (NYSE: PHA)
between April 17, 2000 and August 22, 2001, inclusive.

The complaint charges Pharmacia 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
Pharmacia's business operations and prospects caused the price of
Pharmacia's securities to become artificially inflated, inflicting
damages on investors.  Pharmacia is primarily involved in the
development, manufacturing and sale of pharmaceutical products sold
throughout the world to a wide range of customers, including
pharmacies, hospitals, chain warehouses, governments, physicians,
wholesalers and other distributors.

The complaint alleges that during the class period defendants marketed
Celebrex -- a once-daily prescription medication that provides
powerful, 24-hour relief from arthritis -- as a new type of drug that,
unlike aspirin or ibuprofen, retarded pain and inflammation without the
adverse side effects of ulcers or gastrointestinal bleeding.  

Along with Pfizer, Inc., which funded the clinical study, Pharmacia
trumpeted the results of the "Celecoxib Long-term Arthritis Safety
Study," which compared the gastrointestinal problems of patients who
used Celebrex with patients who used other nonsteroidal anti-
inflammatory drugs and found that Celebrex caused fewer
gastrointestinal problems than traditional drugs, such as ibuprofen.
Subsequently, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)
published the study's results, purportedly showing that Celebrex caused
fewer gastrointestinal problems than traditional drugs.

The complaint alleges that, unbeknownst to JAMA, the study was flawed
because the Company manipulated the results -- by not including in the
final analysis all of the data collected through the entire duration of
the study -- to show that Celebrex was safer for the stomach and
digestive tract than conventional drugs.  During the class period, the
Company failed to make adequate disclosures concerning this study and
used this study in their continuing efforts to have the Food and Drug
Administration remove the warning label from Celebrex.

However, on August 22, 2001, The Wall Street Journal reported that
researchers from the Cleveland Clinic reviewed clinical trials of
Celebrex which indicated that the medication might carry an increased
risk for cardiovascular events.  They concluded that heart-attack rates
with Celebrex were high enough to be a concern, stating: "Given the
remarkable exposure and popularity of this new class of medications, we
believe that it is mandatory to conduct a trial specifically assessing
cardiovascular risk and benefit of these agents.  Until then, we urge
caution in prescribing these agents to patients at risk for
cardiovascular morbidity."

Study author Dr. Eric Topol commented in the article that the results
are a "cautionary flag that seems to say something is going on that
needs further exploration."  On this news, Pharmacia's stock dropped
below $40 per share.

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.


SOLECTRON CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Fraud Suit in CA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of Solectron
Corporation (NYSE: SLR) publicly traded securities during the period
between September 17, 2001 and September 26, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint charges Solectron 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 defendants issued numerous statements reporting
artificially inflated financial results.  The complaint alleges that
these statements were materially false and misleading because they
failed to disclose and/or misrepresented the following adverse facts,
among others:

     (1) that the Company was carrying tens of millions of dollars of
         obsolete and unsaleable inventory in its Technology Solutions
         division which was required to be written down.  As a result
         of the foregoing, Solectron's reported financial results were
         artificially inflated at all times during the Class Period;

     (2) as a result of the Company's failure to writedown its
         inventory in a timely manner, the financial statements
         published by the Company during the Class Period were not
         prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting
         Principles and were materially false and misleading; and

     (3) that it was materially false and misleading to characterize
         the Company's earnings during the Class Period, as ``in line''
         with Company guidance, when had the Company properly accounted
         for its inventory it would have drastically missed its
         guidance.

On September 26, 2002, after the market closed, Solectron issued a
press release announcing its financial results for the fourth quarter
of 2002 and fiscal year 2002. The Company also reported that it was
booking a pre-tax charge of $97 million to reserve for inventory
revaluation and write-off. Solectron attributed the bulk of the charge
to ``inventory risk assumed by Solectron's product-oriented Technology
Solutions business unit ...'' Following this announcement, and other
revelations, shares of Solectron common stock fell from their previous
close.

For more details, 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 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


VAXGEN INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Lawsuit in N.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California on behalf of purchasers of VaxGen Inc. (NASDAQ: VXGN)
securities during the period between August 6, 2002 and February 26,
2003.

The complaint charges VaxGen and certain of its officers and directors
with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  VaxGen is
engaged in the development and commercialization of AIDSVAX, a vaccine
designed to prevent infection or disease caused by HIV (Human
Immunodeficiency Virus), the virus that causes AIDS.  During the class
period, defendants were completing the final stages of AIDSVAX's Phase
III clinical trials required to obtain Food and Drug Administration
approval to market AIDSVAX as an AIDS vaccine.

Throughout the class period, defendants caused VaxGen to make a number
of positive statements about the status of the trial and describing
their eventual plans to manufacture and market AIDSVAX, causing
VaxGen's stock to trade at artificially inflated prices.

On February 23, 2003, VaxGen shocked the market by reporting the long-
anticipated results of the US trials, disclosing that the "study did
not show a statistically significant reduction of HIV infection within
the study population as a whole, which was the primary endpoint of the
trial."  The partial disclosure of the overall failure of the US
clinical trial caused VaxGen's shares to plummet, declining over 50% to
approximately $3 per share on February 24, 2003.

However, even when defendants released the results on February 24,
2003, they claimed that while the vaccine failed to demonstrate
efficacy on U.S. caucasians, the trials had demonstrated 30%-84%
efficacy rates in U.S. blacks and Asians.  That analysis, the company
said, had less than a 1% chance of being due to random chance, making
it highly statistically significant.  VaxGen President Donald P.
Francis touted the results as evidence that AIDSVAX could protect
against HIV infection.  

As reported by The Wall Street Journal on February 24, 2003, the
"results overall won't lead the Food and Drug Administration to approve
the vaccine for use in the wider public, but the company hopes that
further analysis, as well as results from another trial being conducted
in Thailand on injection drug users, may prompt the agency to approve
the vaccine for some ethnic minorities."  These corrective statements
had their intended effect and VaxGen's stock closed at close to $7 per
share on February 24, 2003.

However, on February 26, 2003, defendants were forced to admit that the
reliability of their earlier reports of higher efficacy rates for non-
caucasians were impaired because they had not taken the requisite
"penalties" to account for the fact that less than 500 of the 5000
clinical trial participants were non-caucasians, resulting in an
extremely small subset of data being analyzed for non-caucasians.  As
the news that earlier promises that AIDSVAX could prove useful for non-
caucasians fell apart, the stock declined further, resulting in a total
loss in market cap since November 18, 2002 of approximately 85%.

For more details, 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 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


VITALWORKS INC.: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Fraud Lawsuit in CT
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut on
behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of VitalWorks, Inc.
(NasdaqNM: VWKS) publicly traded securities during the period between
April 24, 2002 and October 23, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint charges VitalWorks, Inc. and certain of its officers and
directors with issuing false misleading statements concerning its
business and financial condition.  Specifically, the complaint alleges
that the defendants issued false and misleading statements concerning
the Company's increasing revenues and future prospects.

On October 23, 2002, VitalWorks announced that it had failed to achieve
pre- announced third quarter 2002 revenues and was lowering revenue
guidance for the remainder of fiscal year 2002; additionally, the
Company reported that it was lowering revenue guidance for fiscal year
2003 by over 10%.  Market reaction to defendants' belated disclosures
was swift and severe.

On October 24, 2002, the first day of trading following VitalWorks
announcements, the price of VitalWorks common shares fell over 56% in
value to close at $3.13 per share on record trading volume of over 14
million shares.

For more details, 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 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com


VOICEFLASH NETWORKS: Marc Henzel Commences Securities Suit in S.D. FL
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action
against VoiceFlash Networks, Inc. (OTC: VFNX.PK) and certain of its
officers in the United States District Court for the Southern District
of Florida, on behalf of purchasers of VoiceFlash shares between March
15, 2002 and January 24, 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 VoiceFlash common stock at artificially inflated
prices.

For more details, 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 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.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 2003.  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  * * *