CAR_Public/040206.mbx           C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

           Friday, February 6, 2004, Vol. 6, No. 26

                       Headlines

AGENT ORANGE: Vietnamese Victims Launch Injury Suit in NY Court
APO HEALTH: Reaches Agreement To Settle Unsolicited Fax Lawsuit
CALIFORNIA: Senator Calls For Prison Reforms at Youth Authority
CALIFORNIA: Grocers Reject Binding Arbitration To Halt Strike
HOLLINGER INTERNATIONAL: Faces Suits Over Unauthorized Payments

IBP INC.: Cattle Feeder Testifies For Company in Antitrust Suit
LIQUOR FIRMS: Charged with Encouraging Underage Drinking in CA
MAINE: Court Appointee For Mental Health Care Bares Suggestions
MONSANTO CO.: Farmers Launch Suit Over Roundup Ready Contracts
MONTANA: Homeowners Vow To Appeal Dismissal Of Blackfeet Lawsuit

OHIO: Ex-Huntington Meadow Tenants Sue Cincinnati Over Closure
PROGRESS ENERGY: Investors Commence Securities Suit In NY Court
SARA LEE: IL Judge Approves Settlement, Donation To Food Charity
SUPERBOWL: TN Woman Sues Janet Jackson Over Breast Baring Stunt
TYCO INTERNATIONAL: Ex-Execs Seek Dismissal Of Larceny Charges

VANCOUVER CITY: BC Court Refuses To Add New Defendants To Suit

                     Asbestos Alert

ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Judge Wolin Refuses To Recuse Self in Case
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Chubb Reports Taking Charges for Asbestos
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Judge in Historic Asbestos Trial Dies
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ford Motor Wants Ex-Worker's Body Exhumed
ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 100,000 Deaths Eyed Over the Next 25 Years

ASBESTOS ALERT: North Safety Faces Asbestos-Related Cases
ASBESTOS ALERT: Couple Gets $6 Million Damages in Asbestos Case


                  New Securities Fraud Cases

BEST BUY: Goodkind Labaton Launches Securities Suit in MN Court
BIOPURE CORPORATION: Goodkind Labaton Files Stock Lawsuit in MA
CAPITAL MANAGEMENT: Stull Stull Lodges Securities Lawsuit in AZ
CORINTHIAN COLLEGES: Deadline To File Lead Plaintiff Set Feb. 9
DEUTSCHE BANK: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY

EDWARD D. JONES: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Suit in E.D. MO
HOLLINGER INTERNATIONAL: Charles Piven Files Stock Lawsuit in IL
IBIS TECHNOLOGY: Federman & Sherwood Files Securities Suit in MA
MERCK & CO.: Milberg Weiss Launches Securities Suit in E.D. LA
MICROMUSE INC.: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Suit in N.D. CA

MICROMUSE INC.: Glancy Binkow Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. CA
MICROMUSE INC: Brian Felgoise Commences Securities Suit in CA
NETWORK ENGINES: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in MA Court
NETWORK ENGINES: Milberg Weiss Launches Securities Lawsuit in MA
PARMALAT FINANZIARIA: Much Shelist Files Securities Suit in NY

REDBACK NETWORKS: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Securities Suit in CA
ROYAL DUTCH: Bernstein Liebhard Launches Securities Suit in NJ
RYLAND GROUP: Brodsky & Smith Commences Securities Suit in TX
SILICON IMAGE: Abbey Gardy Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
TV AZTECA: Cauley Geller Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY

VIRBAC CORPORATION: Kirby McInerney Files Securities Suit in TX
WAVE SYSTEMS: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Fraud Lawsuit in MA
WINN-DIXIE STORES: Bernstein Liebhard Files Stock Lawsuit in FL
WINN-DIXIE STORES: Charles Piven Launches Securities Suit in FL

                        *********

AGENT ORANGE: Vietnamese Victims Launch Injury Suit in NY Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
Vietnamese victims of Agent Orange have filed a lawsuit against
U.S. chemical companies in the United States District Court in
Brooklyn, New York, The Age reports.  The suit is the first
lawsuit of its kind.

U.S. and South Vietnamese armies sprayed millions of liters of
the toxic herbicide over South Vietnam from 1961 to 1971, to
destroy the vegetation used by communist forces for cover and
food.  Hanoi has said that the defoliant has caused health
problems for more than one million Vietnamese and continues to
have devastating consequences.

A study, released in August last year by scientists from the
United States, Germany and Vietnam, found that Agent Orange was
still contaminating people through their food consumption.
Dioxin, the defoliant's deadly component, can cause an increase
risk of cancers, immunodeficiencies, reproductive and
developmental changes, nervous system problems and other health
effects, according to medical experts.

Tran Van Thu, secretary of the Vietnam Association for Agent
Orange Victims, told AFP "We are demanding compensation from
more than 20 American companies for the health problems caused
by America's use of Agent Orange."  The plaintiffs were named as
Nguyen Thi Phi Phi, Duong Quynh Hoa, who are both women, and
Nguyen Van Quy.

Mr. Thu declined to say which companies had been targeted, but
Dow Chemical Co and Monsanto Co were among the largest
manufacturers of Agent Orange.

These firms are no strangers to Agent Orange litigation.  In
1984, in a class action settlement with no admission of
liability, a number of manufacturers agreed to pay $US180
million (about $A236 million today) to US war veterans who died
or became ill after exposure to Agent Orange or other
defoliants.

For years US veterans have been seeking additional compensation
to that settlement, and in June 2003 the US Supreme Court ruled
they could continue to pursue claims against the manufacturers
despite the earlier settlement.


APO HEALTH: Reaches Agreement To Settle Unsolicited Fax Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
APO Health, Inc., a multi-faceted distributor of medical, dental
and veterinary supplies, announced that it has reached an out of
court settlement in an unsolicited customer broadcast fax class
action lawsuit by Kenro, Inc.

Details of the settlement agreement will be reviewed by the
court, which must approve the settlement before it becomes
final.  Mediation in this matter was court ordered.

After extensive negotiations, APO Health's attorneys agreed to
settle the litigation for up to $4.5 million, which will be
placed in a Settlement Fund created and completely covered by
insurance from APO Health's insurer. Once approved by the court,
notice of the settlement will be sent to the class action
plaintiffs. As a result of this settlement, if approved, APO
Health will have no out of pocket expenses related to the
creation or management of this Settlement Fund.

APO Health's attorneys agreed to settle the case to avoid
further expensive litigation and uncertainty and to put the
issue behind the Company. The Company emphasized the settlement
is not an admission of liability.


CALIFORNIA: Senator Calls For Prison Reforms at Youth Authority
---------------------------------------------------------------
California Sen. Gloria Romero called for reforms in the
California Youth Authority (CYA), after several reports
detailing the problems in the prisons were made public this
week, the Stockton Record reports.

The CYA and prisoner advocacy group Prison Law Office started
the reports in response to a 2000 class action filed by Prison
Law Office, which accused the CYA of failing to provide adequate
health care, mental-health treatment and educational
opportunities.

The recently-released report, made with the help of a task force
that investigated Preston Youth Correctional Facility in Ione,
revealed that a housing unit there, Tamarack Lodge, was not
suitable for wards with mental-health problems.  The report was
just one of the four documents made public this week.

The reports are highly critical of how the Youth Authority
provides treatment for and ensures the safety of the young
offenders it is charged with rehabilitating.  The reports
studied CYA operations and care of the 4,600 detained juveniles
at 11 institutions, raised concerns over health care, schooling
and a menacing atmosphere of violence.

The new findings echo reports published in The Record in January
2000 detailing how the Youth Authority used psychotropic
medications to control rowdy wards and were prescribed by
psychiatrists who were not board-certified.  The Record's four-
month investigation revealed that wards were overseen by Youth
Authority staff who had little experience or training to safely
monitor the use of mood-altering drugs.

Sen. Romero said that the CYA must develop a plan to restructure
what the reports called the nation's most violent juvenile
detention system, The Record states.  "The mission of the
California Youth Authority is to rehabilitate," Sen. Romero, D-
Los Angeles, said.  Reading the reports left her to conclude
"the first thing that needs rehabilitation is the California
Youth Authority."

Youth Authority Director Walter Allen III still is reviewing the
reports and won't comment, a spokeswoman told The Record.  Sue
Burrell, a staff attorney at the Youth Law Center, said Preston
and N.A. Chaderjian Youth Correctional Facility, a youth prison
southeast of Stockton, appear prominently in the reports.


CALIFORNIA: Grocers Reject Binding Arbitration To Halt Strike
-------------------------------------------------------------
Supermarket chains involved in a four-month strike-lockout with
Southern California grocery clerks rejected an offer from the
workers' union Wednesday to have its members return to work
immediately if the companies would agree to binding arbitration,
the Associated Press reports.

In a joint statement issued shortly after union officials
announced their offer, Albertsons Inc., Kroger Co. and Safeway
Inc. called the proposal an effort to "shift the focus" from the
union's "inability" to negotiate a settlement.  "Labor disputes
are resolved by face-to-face negotiations with people familiar
with the issues," the companies' statement said.  "Only the
parties to this labor dispute, engaged in active negotiation,
can arrive at a reasonable solution that is mutually acceptable
to both sides."

There was no immediate reaction from the United Food and
Commercial Workers leadership, which gathered earlier with
political and religious leaders at a news conference to discuss
their offer, AP stated.

Union leaders warned then their walkout would continue if the
companies did not agree to the their proposal.  "If for some
reason, the employers refuse to go into binding arbitration, we
will continue to strike," Rick Icaza, president of the UFCW
Local 770, told AP.

Under the terms outlined by the union, the companies and the
union would have selected an independent arbitrator to find a
compromise to the issues separating them, particularly the scope
and cost of pensions and health benefits for current and future
hires.  The union wanted the arbitrator to ultimately decide the
outcome of the dispute and for the decision to be binding for
both sides.

"We believe strongly enough in the merits supporting our bargain
proposals that we are willing to put their fate in the hands of
an objective, neutral party," Greg Conger, president of the UFCW
Local 324, told AP.

During arbitration, the roughly 70,000 grocery clerks would work
under the terms of their last contract, which expired on October
5.  The chains would have had to fire the thousands of
replacement workers hired since the dispute began on October 11.

"The time has come, in the best interest of your employees, our
members, the community and your companies to end this dispute
honorably and fairly," the union said in its proposal.  "We
believe our proposal to you provides the basis for achieving
such a result."


HOLLINGER INTERNATIONAL: Faces Suits Over Unauthorized Payments
---------------------------------------------------------------
Hollinger International, Inc. and former chairman and chief
executive officer Conrad Black face a bevy of litigation, after
it was discovered that he and other executives pocketed GBP19
million in unauthorized payments, MediaGuardian.co.uk reports.

The Louisiana Teachers Retirement System launched a class action
against the Company and Mr. Black charging them with failing to
disclose the transfer of millions of dollars of Hollinger funds
into their own pockets."  The suit alleges that improper deals
were called to the attention of the board of directors but "the
directors simply rubber stamped the transactions."  The suit
also names as defendants several people who have served as
members of the Hollinger International board, former executive
vice-president David Radler and Hollinger Inc.

Another shareholder, Cardinal Equity Value Partners, is also
filing a suit against Mr. Black and 20 other past and present
directors.  The Company itself is suing Lord Black, Mr. Radler,
Hollinger, Inc. and the private Ravelston corporation for GBP110
million.

Another lawsuit relates to the sale of Hollinger, Inc. to Sir
Frederick and Sir David Barclay, owners of a GBP4 billion media
empire in the United Kingdom.  The Barclays bought Hollinger,
Inc. in a 260m deal two weeks ago, but the Hollinger board is
going ahead with a plan to dispose of assets, claiming it has
the authority to sell the company in defiance of Lord Black.

Hollinger International is trying to introduce a "poison pill"
defence that would dilute the value of Lord Black's controlling
stake in the company.  Legal proceedings get under way in
Delaware on February 18, where a court will decide if Lord Black
was entitled to change Hollinger International's bylaws.

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission also issued
a court order in Chicago against the Company, seeking to protect
its minority shareholders.  The Company will challenge the order
on February 26.


IBP INC.: Cattle Feeder Testifies For Company in Antitrust Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
An Amarillo cattle feeder testified in favor of IBP, Inc. in an
antitrust class action filed against it in the United States
District Court in Montgomery, Alabama, saying that he thought
the various marketing agreements between feedyards and packers
were not detrimental to the cash market, the Amarillo Globe News
reports.

The suit alleges the Company manipulated cash cattle prices by
using "captive supplies of cattle," or cattle which it owns or
controls more than seven days before slaughter.  The plaintiffs
in the suit claim that because the Company is the largest beef
packer in the world it can force changes in the market.

Mr. Herring is the president and CEO of Friona L.P., which owns
five feedyards in Texas and three feed manufacturing facilities
in Texas and New Mexico.  He told the court that IBP had a major
packing plant at Amarillo within 70 miles of Friona's feeding
facilities.

Mr. Herring asserted that his company sells cattle both through
special marketing arrangements with packers and on the cash
market.  He said he initiated the marketing agreement with IBP
by calling them and said that the Company was flexible and easy
to work with.  "We have been successful selling cattle under
marketing agreements," he said, the Amarillo Globe News reports.

Mr. Herring added that as president of Amarillo-based Texas
Cattle Feeders Association in 1997, he opposed moves by other
cattle producers to ban packer feeding.  He also denied that IBP
dictated policy to the Texas cattle feeding organization.

IBP lawyers also called Kansas cattle feeder Lee Borck to
testify.  Involved in the ownership of four feedyards, Borck
said ever since he first became involved in cattle feeding in
the 1970s, he had sold cattle in the cash market, but in 1989,
he joined nine owners of 10 other feedyards to form the Beef
Marketing Group and try to find a better way to sell their
cattle.

Mr. Borck said they initially had a marketing agreement with
Excel, but in 1994 changed to IBP.  He said their agreement
calls for the cattle that Borck ships them to be priced based at
the top of the Kansas cash cattle market with a series of
premiums and discounts based on the quality of each head of
cattle sold, the Amarillo Globe News states.  He said he thinks
the arrangement with IBP is beneficial to his cattle feeding
business.


LIQUOR FIRMS: Charged with Encouraging Underage Drinking in CA
--------------------------------------------------------------
Two of the world's biggest brewers face a class action filed in
Los Angeles, California Superior Court, alleging they advertised
to minors in violation of state law, AdAge reports.  The suits
name

Seattle class action lawyer Steve Berman filed the suit against
Anheusuer-Busch Co. and SABMiller.  Anheuser's chief products
are the popular Budweiser and Bud Light, while Miller bottles
Miller, Miller Genuine Draft, Miller Lite and Miller High Life.

The suit makes claims under two laws, one banning advertising
intended to influence underage drinking and the state consumer
protection law.  Specifically, the suit alleges charges the
defendants with:

     (1) marketing malt alternatives, which the suit calls
         "alcopops," to underage drinkers;

     (2) advertising disproportionately in magazines reaching
         youths;

     (3) saturating youth-targeted radio with ads;

     (4) promoting events at colleges; and

     (5) distributing toys and products "as part of their
         coordinated attempt to hook minors."

The suit cited Anheuser's promotional wares like toy trucks,
airplanes, piggy banks and kazoos, along with a frog cup that
says "Budweiser" on it, t-shirts, Budweiser-branded playing
cards with illustrations of talking frogs, drinking glasses with
cartoons of the frogs and a Budweiser beach towel, AdAge
reports.  The suit seeks $4 billion in disgorgement of profit.
Aside from the $4 billion in profit, the suit seeks an
injunction barring any further efforts to reach an underage
audience.

Mr. Berman told AdAge he filed the suit because of "a bunch" of
recent studies that examined the relationship between teenage
beer consumption and advertising, and that Anheuser-Busch and
Miller are "inflating their profits" through underage drinkers.

Francine Katz, an Anheuser-Busch vice president, said in a
statement today that Anheuser-Busch did not believe the lawsuit
has merit, AdAge reports.  "Our marketing and advertising is
directed at adults and is placed in programming that is watched
overwhelmingly by adults."

The beer maker cited a 2003 review of industry marketing
activities by the Federal Trade Commission that "confirms our
practices are responsible."  The company also said that in
California underage drinking has declined.

SABMiller labeled the suit "frivolous" and "without merit" and
said such lawsuits "obfuscate the real issues."  The marketer
also said it intended to "vigorously" defend itself in court,
AdAge.

Both firms mentioned a 2003 review of industry marketing
activities by the Federal Trade Commission that concluded that
there is "no evidence of intent to target minors with (flavored
malt beverage) products, packaging or advertising."

Mr. Berman said he named the two brewers -- and not Coors
Brewing Co. or others -- in part because he wanted to avoid some
of the problems that arose during the tobacco litigation, when
numerous defendants made cases hard to hear.  "These two brewers
account for 70% of the market share. They were more egregious in
the type of conduct they engaged in," he told AdAge.


MAINE: Court Appointee For Mental Health Care Bares Suggestions
---------------------------------------------------------------
Former Maine Supreme Court chief justice Daniel E. Wathen
disclosed several of the public comments he receive about the
state of Maine's mental health system, the Central Maine Daily
Sentinel reports.

Mr. Wathen was appointed last year to implement a court decree
governing care for patients treated at Augusta Mental Health
Institute.  Among the comments that he received were that the
state's mental health system is complicated, that state mental
health officials need to listen more to Mainers who use their
services and that state programs should increase, not reduce,
program choices for people with mental illnesses.

Mr. Wathen told the Sentinel the handful of comments he received
have been useful and may find their way into changes being
negotiated between lawyers for AMHI patients and those for the
state.  "It strikes me as being really useful stuff that will
eventually be useful in deciding essentially what the issues
are, what we need to define and what we need to accomplish," he
said.

Maine Association of Mental Health Services Executive Director
Ronald S. Welch warned against continuing a system that puts
consent decree class members ahead of others and fails to
adequately fund new requirements.  "To ignore the reality of
cost only speaks to the inevitable compromise of this plan," he
told the Sentinel.

Melinda Davis of the Advocacy Initiative Network told Mr. Wathen
efforts to identify unmet needs of mentally-ill Mainers through
their individualized treatment plans might not work because only
a minority of state patients have them.

Carol Carothers, executive director of the Maine Chapter of the
National Alliance for the Mentally Ill, told the Sentinel, "The
(state plan) fails to adequately include the needs and wishes of
families and consumers in obtaining and documenting compliance .
We are disappointed that much of the plan is designed to collect
new data but leaves current processes in place."


MONSANTO CO.: Farmers Launch Suit Over Roundup Ready Contracts
--------------------------------------------------------------
Monsanto Co. faces a class action filed in the United States
District Court in St. Louis, Missouri, over improperly signed
contracts over the re-use of the Company's herbicide-resistant
soybeans Roundup Ready, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports.

Retired Southern Illinois farmer Eugene Stratemeyer and lawyer
Ron Osman filed the suit over contracts accepting terms limiting
re-use of the seed, stating that farmers must buy new seeds
every season.  The suit alleges some of these contracts were
signed by someone other than the buyer without the authority to
do so.

The suit doesn't demand money but it asks to force the Company
to go through thousands of its contracts to determine how many
were "forged." It also wants the court to order the company
never to use such forged agreements against the farmers in any
way.

In 2002, Mr. Osman and Mr. Stratemeyer lost a case to Monsanto,
when a jury in the same court decided the farmer willfully
violated the patent on Roundup Ready, which dominated the
marketplace. The Company insisted that under its agreement with
buyers, the farmers must buy new seeds every season.  The
company has won millions of dollars suing farmers who harvested
modified seed from the previous crop for reuse. Some have been
blacklisted, with sellers told not to deal with them.

Mr. Stratemeyer lost only $14,000 in damages, a fraction of what
some farmers have been ordered to pay.  Monsanto wants that
award tripled, and also is asking reimbursement of lawyers'
fees, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports.

Monsanto lawyers admit that some of the contracts don't bear
authentic signatures.  The company says the forgeries were
committed by retail suppliers of the seed, not Monsanto itself,
St. Louis Post-Dispatch states.

James Monafo, lawyer for Monsanto, said Wednesday that examining
every signature would be costly and pointless.  "We're not using
the contracts," he said.  "It's not happening. It would be
stupid to do so."

U.S. District Judge Michael J. Reagan will decide, perhaps next
month, whether to certify the farmers as a class.




MONTANA: Homeowners Vow To Appeal Dismissal Of Blackfeet Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs are asking the United States Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals to review a lower court ruling dismissing a 2002 civil
case filed against the United States Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) and Blackfeet Housing by eight Blackfeet
tribal members over substandard homes allegedly making residents
ill, Knight-Ridder / Tribune Business News reports.

Plaintiffs Martin Marceau, Candice LaMott, Julie and Joseph
Rattler Jr., John Edwards Jr., Deana Mountain Chief and Gary and
Mary Grant filed suit on behalf of themselves and other owners
of 153 HUD homes that were built with wooden foundations on the
Blackfeet Indian Reservation in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

The residents, who want to turn the litigation into a class-
action case, said the unstable foundations caused structural
damage and water leaks, which in some instances have prompted
the explosive growth of mildew and toxic molds. Wood used for
the foundations was also treated with a highly-toxic
preservative, chromated copper arsenate, or CCA, a substance the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has since decided should be
removed from commercial sale because of health concerns.

The plaintiffs argue that HUD and Blackfeet Housing officials
built and arranged the mortgaging of the homes under HUD's
Mutual Help Homeownership Opportunity Program while knowing that
the foundations were inferior and potentially harmful. They
wanted Haddon to order the agencies to either replace or repair
the houses, most of which are still occupied.

"HUD has failed to fulfill its congressional mandate to provide
decent, suitable, safe, and sanitary housing for members of the
Blackfeet Indian Reservation, a recognized lower-income group,
and to provide housing of sound standards of design,
construction and livability," attorneys Tom Towe and Jeffrey
Simkovic alleged in court documents.  "The Housing Authority has
sold homes to representative plaintiffs and other class members
that are substandard, unsafe, unsuitable, unsanitary, unhealthy
and uninhabitable."

Attorneys for the federal agency, former HUD Secretary Mel
Martinez, and the tribal housing program argued that there was
no wrongdoing and their clients are institutionally immune from
such a suit.  Mr. Haddon agreed with their contentions and
suggested that the case may be better suited for the U.S. Court
of Federal Claims, which handles a limited type of lawsuits
against government entities.

In a telephone interview with Knight-Ridder, Mr. Towe said that
venue would be inappropriate because the Court of Federal Claims
doesn't have the authority to issue the type of damages he and
Simkovic are seeking.  He called Mr. Haddon's ruling
"disappointing," and said he believes there's plenty of
precedent for instead deciding in his clients' favor.


OHIO: Ex-Huntington Meadow Tenants Sue Cincinnati Over Closure
--------------------------------------------------------------
The city of Cincinnati, Ohio faces a class action filed by a
group of former Huntington Meadows apartment complex tenants,
charging officials with conspiring to evict hundreds of poor
families from the site nearly two years ago to build upscale
housing, Cincinnati.com reports.

Two local attorneys filed the suit in the United States District
Court in Ohio, alleging that the city violated several state and
federal laws by denying residents equal protection under the law
and through breach of contract and abuse of process.

Huntington Meadows was Cincinnati's largest privately owned
apartment complex until its closure in September 2002, with
1,168 units on 60 acres.  Its tenants were mostly elderly or the
working poor, including many single mothers with children.  Some
tenants had lived at the site for more than a decade.

Habitat America, the company appointed to manage the complex
after its owners filed bankruptcy, asked a court to evict
residents and shut the complex a year later after a consultant
hired by Habitat said residents were endangered by mold, sewage
and asbestos throughout the complex.  However, a subsequent
inspection by the Cincinnati Health Department found only about
a half-dozen of the units posed a health hazard.

Although a judge hadn't yet ordered the evictions, Vice Mayor
Alice Reece wrote the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development in early July 2002 stating residents would be forced
to leave by August 31.  In her letter, she cited the "high
levels of bio-contamination," although the local inspection
ordered by Council's health committee, of which she chairs,
found only isolated problems.

The suit further claims that Vice Mayor Alicia Reece improperly
used her office to gain financial benefit for herself and her
family by pushing for the complex's demolition.

Attorneys Jennifer Kinsley and Kenneth Lawson said the evictions
were unnecessary, pushed through solely to advance a plan that
Reece got Council to approve in 2000 for redeveloping the
Seymour Avenue business district in Bond Hill, Cincinnati.com
reports.

Getting rid of the low-income apartments would increase the
value of surrounding properties, the attorneys said.  Those
properties include Integrity Hall, a nearby conference center
owned by Reece's father, Steven Reece.

The plaintiffs and Budget Real Estate Inc. are seeking an
injunction to prevent two Bond Hill churches from moving forward
with a plan to buy the property, raze the apartments, and build
300 single-family houses and condominiums there.  The two
churches - Allen Temple and Tryed Stone Baptist Church - want to
redevelop the site.  Allen Temple has spent $150,000 since 2001
evaluating Huntington Meadows for possible redevelopment.

The Winn Companies, a Boston firm, had bought the site for about
$1 million at a sheriff's auction a year ago.  It later sold the
site to RCM Cincinnati Estates for $2.6 million.  The two
churches have proposed using $10 million in city money to buy
the property from RCM.  Cincinnati City Council is to vote this
week on whether to give $13.7 million in taxpayer money to the
churches to assist with the project, Cincinnati.com reports.

The suit alleges that the two churches are major contributors to
Vice Mayor Reece's campaign, and alleges "tortious interference
in business relationships" by blocking Budget's purchase of the
land.

"We believe the city of Cincinnati played a large role and an
unlawful role in closing this property," attorney Jennifer
Kinsley told Cincinnati.com.  "The complaint indicates that, in
her official role as a Council member and vice mayor, (Reece)
took specific steps to evict the residents and help redevelop
the property in line with her personal vision."

The vice mayor countered Tuesday that Huntington Meadows closed
in September 2002 because its owners filed bankruptcy, and the
receivership appointed to manage the site had trouble renting
units.  As a result, the complex was losing money,
Cincinnati.com reports.

Her involvement wasn't improper, Ms. Reece said.  "I
categorically deny these false allegations . This is nothing
more than a pattern of malicious, slanderous and false
allegations filled with personal attacks by certain attorneys,
designed to defame my name in the community.  I will continue to
fight for neighborhood development throughout our city."

Mayor Charlie Luken also defended plans for the site,
Cincinnati.com states.  "The city intends to move forward with
the housing development, and we will not be deterred by those
who have no interest in helping the city and its neighborhoods,"
he said.


PROGRESS ENERGY: Investors Commence Securities Suit In NY Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
Gerber Asset Management LLC filed a class action in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York against
Progress Energy Inc. and its chairman William Cavanaugh,
claiming the utility failed to disclose information Florida
Progress shareholders needed when approving the 2000 merger with
CP&L Energy, Knight-Ridder/ Tribune Business News reports.

Christopher Keller, an attorney for Gerber, told the Tribune
Business News the firm "lost a considerable amount of money" on
the securities once Progress Energy made the information public
in 2002.  Garrick Francis, a Progress Energy spokesman, said
company attorneys were reviewing the lawsuit and had no
immediate comment.

The case involves what Progress Energy told Florida Progress
shareholders about securities known as contingent value
obligations, or CVOs.  CVOs derive value from a company asset.
In this case, the CVOs from Progress Energy, the merged company
of CP&L Energy and Florida Progress, are based on the value of
its synthetic fuels operations, Mr. Keller said.  Synthetic fuel
provides Progress Energy, the parent company of Progress Energy
Florida in St. Petersburg, with about $300 million a year in tax
credits for 12 million tons, Mr. Francis said.

Mr. Keller told the Tribune Business News Progress Energy gave
the CVOs in March 2000 to Florida Progress shareholders to
entice them to approve the merger but failed to say the company
could not use tax credits for all the synthetic fuel it could
produce, about 18 million tons annually.  The value of the CVOs
was about $54 million, the lawsuit says.  Mr. Keller said the
CVOs have lost about 80 percent of their value since Progress
Energy made its disclosure in 2002.


SARA LEE: IL Judge Approves Settlement, Donation To Food Charity
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cook County, Illinois Judge Jennifer Duncan-Brice signed an
order where she approved the closing of a settlement fund from a
class action case and also approved the final disbursement of
the remaining money in the settlement.

The attorneys on both sides agreed that the money left over from
the class action would not go back to the defendant and would
not go to any of the attorneys.  Instead, the attorneys asked
the judge to approve that the remainder, $10,599.70, be donated
to the Greater Chicago Food Depository.

According to attorney Kenneth B. Moll, who served as Lead
Counsel in the matter, "Once class action funds have been
properly delegated, we have an opportunity to do something very
good for our communities.  This is especially important in this
political climate, when many of our community services may be
facing shortages."

The donation arose from a class action lawsuit involving Sara
Lee Company.  According to Mr. Moll, "Sara Lee also deserves the
public's respect for approving this donation. Sara Lee was very
supportive of this donation and this particular charity."

According to its Mission Statement, "The Greater Chicago Food
Depository, Chicago's food bank, is a not-for-profit food
distribution center providing food for hungry people while
striving to end hunger in our community. The Food Depository
distributes donated and purchased food through a network of 600
pantries, soup kitchens and shelters. Tens of thousands of men,
women and children each week rely on the food provided by the
Food Depository."

The organization's services can be viewed by visiting the
Website: http://www.chicagosfoodbank.org.

For more information, contact Michael S. O'Meara of Kenneth B.
Moll & Associates, Ltd. by Phone: 312-558-6444 by Fax:
312-558-1112 by E-mail: lawyers@kbmoll.com or visit the firm's
Website: http://www.kbmoll.com


SUPERBOWL: TN Woman Sues Janet Jackson Over Breast Baring Stunt
---------------------------------------------------------------
A Knoxville woman has filed a class action against Janet Jackson
and Justin Timberlake, over Ms. Jackson's now infamous exposure
of one of her breasts when Mr. Timberlake ripped off part of her
costume during their number at the Super Bowl halftime show, The
Knox News reports.  The suit also names as defendants television
networks MTV, CBS and Viacom International, Inc., owner of the
two channels.

Terri Carlin filed the suit in the United States District Court
in Knoxville, Tennessee, alleging that she and other viewers
were injured by their lewd actions.  The suit was filed "on
behalf of all Americans who watched the halftime show."

"As a direct and proximate result of the broadcast of the acts,
(Carlin) and millions of others saw the acts and were caused to
suffer outrage, anger, embarrassment and serious injury," the
lawsuit filed by Knoxville attorney Wayne A. Ritchie II states.

The suit also states that all of the defendants knew that the
Super Bowl, the pre-eminent sports event in the United States,
would be watched by millions of families and children.
"Nevertheless, (they) included in the halftime show sexually
explicit acts solely designed to garner publicity and,
ultimately, to increase profits for themselves," Mr. Ritchie
wrote.

The suit alleges the defendants violated an "implied" contract
with viewers not to subject them to allegedly lewd material.
"Families have an expectation that they can trust companies and
individuals such as the defendants not to expose families to
sexually explicit conduct during broadcasts of prime time events
such as the Super Bowl," the lawsuit states.

No one was available for comment at Viacom International Inc.,
or at Mr. Jackson's or Mr. Timberlake's record companies
Wednesday night, the Knox News reports.  Ms. Jackson has
apologized.  She said MTV, CBS and the NFL did not know what was
going to happen.


TYCO INTERNATIONAL: Ex-Execs Seek Dismissal Of Larceny Charges
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lawyers for Tyco International Ltd.'s former chief executive L.
Dennis Kozlowski and former financial chief Mark H. Swartz asked
the United States District Court in New York to dismiss an
indictment against them, saying prosecutors failed to prove
their case after nearly four months of trial testimony, the
Associated Press reports.

The arguments came a day after New York prosecutors rested their
case against the former executives, who are charged with
stealing $600 million from the Bermuda conglomerate in
unauthorized pay and illicit stock sales.

Mr. Swartz's attorney Michael Grudberg asked the court to
dismiss an unusual enterprise corruption count against the
former executives.  The charge more typically is used in
organized crime or boiler room cases.  Mr. Grudberg said
prosecutors failed to show that a separate hierarchy had been
organized to commit crime, a key element of the charge.  "La
Cosa Nostra in Italian means 'our thing,'" he told Judge Michael
Obus, AP reports.  "There has to be a thing."

Prosecutors voluntarily dismissed a grand larceny count related
to a $2 million bonus paid to former Tyco general counsel Mark
Belnick, and a count that alleges falsifying business records.
However, Assistant District Attorney Marc Scholl argued that a
jury must decide the remaining 33 counts against the former
executives, AP states.  "If money is going out of Tyco and being
used to finance personal investments ... that is not indicated
in the ordinary course of business," he said.

The defense is scheduled to begin their case on Monday.  Lawyers
won't say if either former executive will take the witness
stand.  They have denied the charges.  Before resting their case
Tuesday, the prosecutors submitted Mr. Kozlowski's divorce
agreement as a motive for a large-scale looting of Tyco assets,
AP reports.

Judge Michael J. Obus in New York State Supreme Court ruled
Tuesday that jurors could view the agreement, minus personal
details, because it involves "obviously a great deal of money"
that Kozlowski needed to pay out between January 1995 and
September 2002.

Mr. Kozlowski's defense had argued that the divorce agreement
isn't relevant, because the former CEO isn't accused of using
Tyco bonuses at the heart of the case to pay his ex-wife.  The
agreement called for Mr. Kozlowski to provide his ex-wife with a
new Mercedes car every three years for the rest of her life.
She also gets a driver while she lives in New York.  Her driver
in 2000 made $84,000 a year, plus benefits.


VANCOUVER CITY: BC Court Refuses To Add New Defendants To Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Supreme Court of British Columbia refused to add several
more defendants to the purported class action filed against the
Vancouver City Savings Credit Union on behalf of all its members
who have been advanced an overdraft loan from the firm after
February 5, 1997, the Investment Executive reports.

Kurt MacKinnon filed the suit, alleging that the charges made to
VanCity members in relation to such overdraft loans are unlawful
because they exceed the $5 overdraft charge, which is excluded
from the definition of criminal interest under the Criminal
Code.  Mr. McKinnon asked the court to add as defendants seven
other credit unions:

     (1) Coast Capital Savings Credit Union,

     (2) North Shore Credit Union,

     (3) Community Savings Credit Union,

     (4) Chemainus Credit Union,

     (5) Comox Valley Credit Union,

     (6) Kootenay Savings Credit Union and

     (7) Vernon & District Credit Union

However, the court concluded that the claims sought to be raised
against the seven institutions are not connected with, or
related to, the claim advanced by the VanCity plaintiffs.  It
dismissed MacKinnon's application and awarded costs to the
proposed defendants.


                     Asbestos Alert


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Judge Wolin Refuses To Recuse Self in Case
---------------------------------------------------------------
A federal judge refused to remove himself from overseeing five
bankruptcy cases involving companies sued by people exposed to
asbestos, the New York Times reports.

Some of those involved sought to have the judge, Alfred M. Wolin
of United States District Court, step aside, claiming some of
his advisers had a "blatant conflict," while others, including
two of the companies, said he should stay.

Judge Wolin had appointed five advisers with expertise in
asbestos cases, two of whom are advocates for asbestos victims
in a pending bankruptcy before another federal judge in Newark.

Judge Wolin addressed the issue in a 100-page opinion directed
at the parties involved and the Court of Appeals for the third
circuit in Philadelphia, which is to decide the issue. A three-
judge panel of the appellate court heard arguments Dec. 12 in
the case, but Judge Wolin declined to participate.

Lawrence Robbins, a lawyer for Kensington International, a
financial institution that is owed money from one of the
bankrupt companies and is seeking to have Judge Wolin removed,
disagreed with the ruling.

The five companies that are in bankruptcy are W. R. Grace,
Owens- Corning, Armstrong World, U.S. Gypsum and Federal Mogul.

Grace and Owens-Corning opposed recusal, as did lawyers for
asbestos victims. They said the judge can filter any information
from the advisers that is not objective and that delaying the
cases to assign a new judge would harm the bankrupt companies
and people suffering from asbestos-related problems.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Chubb Reports Taking Charges for Asbestos
--------------------------------------------------------------
The New Jersey-based insurer recently announced that it took a
series of charges including $250,000,000 to boost asbestos-
related reserves but its quarterly earnings rose 28 percent on
higher insurance rates.

Chubb has been hit hard by asbestos claims due to ballooning
litigation. In the third quarter of 2002, the company added $625
million to reserves. It said that as of the end of 2003,
reserves for asbestos were over $1 billion.

The executives of Chubb said in a conference call that they
decided to take a conservative approach to asbestos reserves,
especially after seeing a surge in lawsuits in anticipation of
possible legislation that would create a fund to cover
settlements. Chubb executives said they were skeptical that the
proposal would make it into law.

In addition to the asbestos charge, its results included a
pretax $96,000,000 charge to cap its exposure to deteriorating
credit derivative contracts as it winds down that business.

"When you look at the number in millions it's big, but when you
compare it to the size of Chubb it's not earth-shattering,
everybody knew that the asbestos was under review," said Miles
Henderson, an analyst at Victory Capital Management, which owns
Chubb shares. "The reaction won't be elation, but I think we're
OK with what they reported."


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Judge in Historic Asbestos Trial Dies
----------------------------------------------------------
A judge who had presided over the historic asbestos-injury case
that ended up being the nation's largest mass trial recently
died.

Judge Marshall A. Levin, a former Baltimore circuit court judge,
decided to consolidate all pending asbestos claims from the city
and several Maryland counties, leading to a mammoth case with
8,600 plaintiffs, 14 defendants, 40 lawyers and more than 7
million documents during the 1992 trial.

During his 40-year career, he also implemented a one-trial, or
one-day, system for jury duty in Baltimore in 1982. That meant
rather than having prospective jurors show up at court every day
for a month, they only had to report for one day or sit through
one trial if they were selected.

He was a 1938 graduate of City College and earned a bachelor's
degree from the University of Virginia in 1941.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: Ford Motor Wants Ex-Worker's Body Exhumed
--------------------------------------------------------------
A lawyer for Ford Motor Co. believes exhuming Donald Adams from
his grave will provide answers to resolve a legal dispute,
Associated Press reports.

But Rita Adams doesn't want to see her husband's body removed
from North Lawn Cemetery.

"I feel once you're laid to rest, that's it," the Nimishillen
Township widow told Stark County Probate Judge Dixilene Park.

Ford wants Adams' body exhumed to perform an autopsy to see if
he actually died because of asbestosis, a lung disease caused by
inhaling asbestos.

Adams died in March 1998 at age 70. Doctors ruled respiratory
failure due to pulmonary fibrosis as the cause of death. They
also cited suspected lung cancer and other lung disease.

Ford is questioning an Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation
decision to give Adams' widow $14,066 per year -- paid to her at
a rate of $270.50 weekly -- as compensation for her husband's
death.

An appeal of the workers' compensation case is pending in Stark
County Common Pleas Court. The case can't be resolved until Park
rules on the request to exhume Adams' body.

Adams worked as a tool-and-die maker at Ford's Canton Forge
Plant from 1952 until 1986. Co-workers say Adams routinely came
in contact with asbestos at his job.

"It was pretty darn tough because he suffered for three years,"
Rita Adams said of her husband's death. She filed a workers'
compensation claim in 2000. The agency honored her claim and
began making weekly payments.

Robert C. Meyer, a lawyer with Buckingham, Doolittle &
Burroughs, which is representing Ford, said exhuming Adams' body
would end questions about what caused his death. If tests verify
that Adams died from asbestosis, it's very likely Ford's benefit
appeal would be dropped.

But doctors providing testimony in the case said they don't
believe any lung tissue will remain from Adams' body, said
Anthony Ania, lawyer for Rita Adams. If there will be nothing to
test, the body shouldn't be exhumed, he said.


ASBESTOS LITIGATION: 100,000 Deaths Eyed Over the Next 25 Years
---------------------------------------------------------------
UK insurers are aware of the impact of asbestos-related claims,
and have made attempts to reserve for them, according to an
insurance industry consultant, the Global Reinsurance reports.

Commenting in reaction to a paper published in this week's
British Medical Journal, which stated that 100,000 people are
expected to die of mesothelioma, an asbestos-related disease in
the developed world over the next 25 years, Darren Michaels, a
consultant in the Tillinghast business of Towers Perrin, said
that these figures were "broadly in line" with estimates from
previous studies of mesothelioma.

Nevertheless, the BMJ paper is a stark reminder of the levels of
mesothelioma, one of several different asbestos-related diseases
and the most fatal of them, expected to hit developed countries.
The paper asserts that one in every hundred men born in the
1940s will die from mesothelioma, and with a lag time between
exposure and development of 25 years to more than 50 years, the
death rate is continuing to increase.

Current mortality rates in the UK are 1,800 deaths per year, and
this is expected to rise to 2,000 per year in the peak years of
2015 to 2002. The paper further suggests that the situation is
similar in Europe, as well as Australia, which had the highest
asbestos usage in the world. By contrast, the US mortality rates
have probably peaked now, states the paper, because of "earlier
awareness and action on asbestos imports."

Mr. Michaels concurred that asbestos-related diseases are a
problem in Europe, though exposure levels to the mineral varied
from country to country. In addition, different European
countries have different compensation systems - for example,
German sufferers have been compensated by the state social
security system, while UK mesothelioma victims have been
compensated generally through employers' liability policies.

In addition, he told Global Reinsurance, it is so far only the
U.S. where non-impaired individuals have received compensation
from exposure to asbestos, even though they do not display any
health problems. The BMJ paper points out that individuals
exposed to asbestos as teenagers who remained in high risk
occupations have a lifetime risk of developing mesothelioma of
as high as one in five.

Tillinghast has previously issued estimates for the economic
damage of asbestos-related diseases of $200,000,000,000 in the
US, of which $120,000,000,000 is expected to be picked up by the
insurance industry. Mr. Michaels said this estimate still
stands, though the current attempt to launch a universal
asbestos settlement fund in the US may be delayed beyond the
anticipated presentation of the appropriate Bill to Senate this
spring.

Finally, Mr. Michaels also expressed his worry that asbestos
continues to be used in developing economies. "It is another
concern," he told Global Reinsurance.


ASBESTOS ALERT: North Safety Faces Asbestos-Related Cases
---------------------------------------------------------
North Safety Products, a business segment of Norcross Safety
Products, reports that it is presently named as a defendant in
around 692 asbestosis- and silicosis-related lawsuits.


The lawsuits are brought by a total of around 24,000 plaintiffs
involving respirators manufactured and sold by it or its
predecessors. Most of these suits allege that these conditions
resulted in part from respirators that were negligently designed
or manufactured. The defendants are often numerous, and include,
in addition to respirator manufacturers, employers of the
plaintiffs and manufacturers of sand (used in sand blasting) and
asbestos and the company's predecessors and/or the former owners
of such business.

Norcross acquired its North Safety Products subsidiary on Oct.
2, 1998 from Siebe plc. In connection with the acquisition,
Siebe, which was subsequently merged with BTR plc, now known as
Invensys plc, contractually agreed to indemnify Norcross for any
losses, including costs of defending claims, resulting from
respiratory products manufactured prior to its acquisition of
North Safety Products in October 1998.

In addition, the Rhode Island-based subsidiary is contractually
entitled to indemnification from Norton Company, an affiliate of
Saint-Gobain, which owned the North Safety Products business
prior to Invensys. In connection with Siebe's acquisition of the
North Safety business from Norton Company, Norton Company
indemnified North Safety Products with respect to respiratory
products sold prior to Jan. 10, 1983.


COMPANY PROFILE

Norcross Safety Products L.L.C.
2211 York Rd., Ste. 215
Oak Brook, IL 60523-4019
Phone: 630-572-8230
Fax: 630-572-8518
http://www.nspusa.com

Description: Norcross Safety Products makes protective equipment
for the agricultural, fire service, industrial, and utility
markets.

North Safety Products
2000 Plainfield Pike
Cranston, RI 02921
Phone: 401-943-4400
Fax: 401-946-7560
http://www.northsafety.com

Description: North Safety Products manufactures and distributes
protective equipment including first aid products, headgear,
clothing, and footwear.


ASBESTOS ALERT: Couple Gets $6 Million Damages in Asbestos Case
----------------------------------------------------------------
An asbestos ruling awards $6,000,000 to a couple in
Pennsylvania, the Associated Press reports.

The Allegheny County jury found that William Lisac, 62, of
Shaler, was exposed to asbestos when he worked with valves
produced by DeZurik Inc., of Sartell, Minnesota.  Mr. Lisac was
a steamfitter for more than 40 years and worked with the valves,
which are used by power plants, chemical plants and steel mills.

A Pittsburgh jury deliberated about four hours last week before
deciding Mr. Lisac and his wife deserved $3,000,000 each.
Lisac's attorneys said other companies targeted in the lawsuit
entered into confidential settlements, leaving DeZurik as the
only company that took the case to trial.  A lawyer for the
Sartell-based company says the man's illness had nothing to do
with exposure to their product.

Mr. Lisac sued manufacturers of products he had worked with in
the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, when he was a steamfitter hired to
repair pipes and valves.  His attorney, Janice Savinis, said
valve gaskets and packing were made with asbestos at that time.


COMPANY PROFILE
SPX Valves and Controls (dba DeZurik/Copes-Vulcan)
A unit of SPX Corporation (NYSE: SPW)
250 Riverside Ave. N.
Sartell, MN 56377 (Map)
Phone: 320-259-2000
Fax: 320-259-2227
http://www.copes.com

Employees    : 24, 200
Revenue      : $5,045,800,000
Net Income   :   $127,400,000
Assets       : $7,091,500,000
Liabilities  : $5,399,100,000
(As of Dec. 31, 2002 of SPX Corp)

Description: SPX Valves and Controls is a unit of SPX
Corporation.  The company manufactures products such as
butterfly, knife gate, globe control valves as well as
consistency transmitters, regulators and governors, and valve
diagnostic systems.


                  New Securities Fraud Cases


BEST BUY: Goodkind Labaton Launches Securities Suit in MN Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of
Minnesota, on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise
acquired publicly traded securities of Best Buy Co., Inc.
between January 9, 2002 and August 7, 2002, inclusive.

During the Class Period the Company issued a series of
misleading statements to the market. Specifically, these
statements were false as they misrepresented or omitted that
Best Buy's Sam Goody Stores were performing worse than the
Company's expectations, requiring Best Buy to shrink the sizes
of some Sam Goody's stores and close others, that Best Buy's
efforts to re-merchandise Sam Goody stores was failing badly,
depressing the Company's operations and earnings, and that the
company's increases in capital expenditures to modernize the
look of Sam Goody stores was not yielding the desired financial
effect.

On August 8, 2002, Best Buy issued a press release announcing
that it was lowering its earnings outlook for its fiscal second
quarter to a range of $0.17 to $0.21 per share, compared with
prior guidance of $0.30 to $0.32 per share. In response to this
announcement, shares of Best Buy fell sharply, falling from
$30.80 on August 7, 2002 to $19.55 the following day, for a one-
day decline of 36%.

For more information, contact Christopher Keller, by Phone:
800-321-0476.


BIOPURE CORPORATION: Goodkind Labaton Files Stock Lawsuit in MA
---------------------------------------------------------------
Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts, on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise
acquired publicly traded securities of Biopure Corporation
between March 17, 2003 and December 24, 2003, inclusive, against
the Company, and:

     (1) Thomas A. Moore,

     (2) Carl W. Rausch, and

     (3) Ronald F. Richards

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Defendants
issued numerous positive statements concerning the progress of
its application to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration seeking
regulatory approval to market Hemopurer in the United States for
patients undergoing orthopedic surgery. In truth however, the
FDA had informed Defendants of flaws in the Hemopurer
application, citing "safety concerns" arising from adverse
clinical data submitted with the company's application. The
"safety concerns" made FDA approval of Hemopurer highly
unlikely. Prior to the disclosure of these facts, Defendants
conducted at least two offerings of Biopure common stock and
insiders sold hundreds of thousands of Biopure common shares at
artificially inflated prices.

On December 24, 2003, under the threat of civil litigation by
the Securities and Exchange Commission, Defendants announced
that in fact the FDA had halted further clinical trials of
Hemopurer due to safety concerns. Defendants also disclosed that
commercial release of Hemopurer in the United States would be
delayed beyond mid-2004. The market reaction to these
disclosures was swift and dramatic. On December 26, 2003, the
share price of Biopure plummeted, falling 16%, to close at $2.43
per share.

For more information, contact Christopher Keller, by Phone:
800-321-0476.


CAPITAL MANAGEMENT: Stull Stull Lodges Securities Lawsuit in AZ
---------------------------------------------------------------
Stull, Stull & Brody initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the District of Arizona, on
behalf of a class (the "Class") consisting of all persons or
entities who purchased or otherwise acquired shares or other
ownership units of Janus Worldwide Fund (Nasdaq:JAWWX), American
Funds EuroPacific Fund (Nasdaq:AEPGX), MFS Emerging Growth Fund
(Nasdaq:MFEGX), Legg Mason Value Trust Fund (Nasdaq:LMVTX),
Artisan International Fund (Nasdaq:ARTIX), AXP International Y
Fund (Nasdaq:IDIYX), SEI International Equity A Fund
(Nasdaq:SEITX), SEI Emerging Markets I Fund (Nasdaq:SIEMX) or
other mutual funds between May 22, 2000 and July 3, 2003,
inclusive.

The Complaint charges that, throughout the Class Period,
defendants Capital Management Investors Holdings, Inc. ("CMIH"),
Security Trust Company ("STC"), Grant Seeger ("Seeger") and
William Kenyon ("Kenyon") violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, and aided and abetted in the breach of fiduciary
duties.

More specifically, the complaint alleges that defendants STC, an
unregistered financial intermediary, Seeger, STC's former Chief
Executive Officer, and Kenyon, STC's former president,
facilitated and participated in fraudulent late trading and
market timing schemes by a group of related hedge funds. From
May 2000 to July 2003, defendants facilitated hundreds of trades
by the hedge funds in nearly 400 different mutual funds.

Approximately 99% of these trades were transmitted to STC after
the 4:00 p.m. EST market close; 82% of the trades were sent to
STC between 6:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. EST. The hedge funds' late
trading was effected by defendants through STC's electronic
trading platform, which was designed primarily for processing
trades by third party administrators ("TPA") for retirement
plans. STC repeatedly misrepresented to mutual funds that the
hedge funds were a retirement plan account, even though STC's
employees and senior management, including Seeger and Kenyon,
knew that the hedge funds were not a TPA or a retirement plan
account.

The mutual funds expected that retirement plans and their TPAs
required several hours after the market closed to process trades
submitted by thousands of plan participants before market close,
but the hedge funds had no such business purpose for submitting
their own trades as late as five hours after market close.

In addition to late trading, defendants also assisted the hedge
funds in various strategies -- some devised by Seeger -- to
conceal their market-timing activities from mutual funds,
including misrepresenting that the hedge funds were retirement
accounts, allowing the hedge funds to trade in accounts marked
with STC's tax identification number, and "piggybacking" the
hedge funds' timing trades on the trades of other STC clients
without their knowledge.

Late trading allowed the hedge funds to trade mutual fund shares
at the established 4:00 p.m. EST market close price based upon
events reported after close of the market or perceived market
momentum caused by after-hours trading. Market timing allowed
the hedge funds to engage in short-term trading that exploited
inefficiencies in mutual fund pricing. As a result of the late
trading and market timing activities facilitated by defendants,
the hedge funds realized a profit of approximately $85 million.
STC had a compensation arrangement with the hedge funds that
included a custodial fee as large as 1% (STC charged most of its
TPA clients a custodial fee of just .10%) and a 4% profit
sharing arrangement with respect to most of the hedge funds'
trades. STC received over $5.8 million in direct compensation
from the hedge funds. Late trading and market timing harmed
mutual fund shareholders who did not participate in the scheme
between STC and the hedge funds.

As a result of "late trading" and "timing" of mutual funds, the
hedge funds and defendants and their intermediaries profited
handsomely. The losers were unsuspecting long-term mutual fund
investors. Defendants' profits came dollar-for-dollar out of
their pockets.

On November 25, 2003, the SEC announced that it had brought
civil charges against the STC Defendants based on the
allegations set forth above; the New York State Attorney General
announced that it had charged the STC Defendants with grand
larceny, fraud and falsifying business records; and the Office
of the Comptroller of the Currency, the federal bank regulator,
ordered STC to dissolve itself by March 31, 2004.

For more details, contact Tzivia Brody by Mail: 6 East 45th
Street, New York, NY 10017 by Phone: 1-800-337-4983 by Fax:
212-490-2022 or by E-mail: SSBNY@aol.com


CORINTHIAN COLLEGES: Deadline To File Lead Plaintiff Set Feb. 9
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Wechsler Harwood LLP announced that the deadline
to move for lead plaintiff in the class action suit filed in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York, against the Nasdaq Stock Market Inc. and its President and
CEO, on behalf of all persons who traded the stock of Corinthian
Colleges, Inc. between 10:46 a.m. and approximately 12:30 p.m.
on December 5, 2003, is set February 9, 2004.

In sum, the complaint alleges that the defendants violated
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
and SEC Rule 10b-5. Beginning at approximately 10:46 a.m. on
December 5, 2003, the market price of COCO fell precipitously
from $57.45 to as low as $38.97 per share within 12 minutes. At
10:58 a.m., Nasdaq halted trading in COCO, stating that the
plunge was caused by "misuse or malfunction" of an electronic
trading system. Nasdaq permitted trading to resume approximately
one hour later at 11:55 a.m. When COCO reopened at 11:55 a.m.,
the price of the stock recovered quickly. Approximately 30
minutes after trading in COCO resumed, Nasdaq belatedly
announced that it would cancel all trades in COCO made between
10:46 a.m. and 10:58:08 a.m. At no time prior to approximately
12:30 p.m. did Nasdaq inform investors that it would cancel all
trades in COCO between 10:46 a.m. and 10:58:08 a.m. Therefore,
during the period between the time COCO resumed trading at 11:55
a.m. and the time Nasdaq announced the cancellation of such
trades at approximately 12:30 p.m., investors made trading
decisions in reliance on Nasdaq's statement that trading had
resumed and without knowing that Nasdaq had decided to cancel
the trades between 10:46 a.m. and 10:58:08 a.m. Nasdaq's belated
cancellation of such trades caused injury to investors who
traded COCO securities between 10:46 a.m. and approximately
12:30 p.m. on December 5, 2003.

For more information, contact David Leifer, by Mail: 488 Madison
Avenue, 8th Floor, New York, New York 10022, by Phone:
(877) 935-7400 (toll free), or by E-mail: dleifer@whesq.com.


DEUTSCHE BANK: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York, on behalf of all purchasers of
the securities of the Scudder family of funds operated by
Deutsche Bank AG, Scudder Investments, Deutsche Investment
Management Americas, Inc. and Deutsche Asset Management, Inc.
between January 22, 1999 and January 12, 2004, inclusive,
seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Act of 1933, the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Advisers Act
of 1940.

The Funds and the symbols for the respective Funds subject to
the lawsuit are:

      (1) Scudder 21st Century Growth Fund   (Sym: SCNAX, SCNBX,
         SCNCX)

     (2) Scudder Aggressive Growth Fund   (Sym: KGGAX, KGGBX,
         KGGCX)

     (3) Scudder Blue Chip Fund   (Sym: KBCAX, KBCBX, KBCCX)

     (4) Scudder Capital Growth Fund (Sym: SDGAX, SDGBX, SDGCX,
         SDGRX, SDGTX)

     (5) Scudder Dynamic Growth Fund   (Sym: KSCAX, KSCBX,
         KSCCX)

     (6) Scudder Flag Investors Communications Fund   (Sym:
         TISHX, FTEBX, FTICX, FLICX)

     (7) Scudder Global Biotechnology Fund   (Sym: DBBTX, DBBBX,
         DBBCX)

     (8) Scudder Gold & Precious Metals Fund   (Sym: SGDAX,
         SGDBX, SGDCX)

     (9) Scudder Growth Fund   (Sym: KGRAX, KGRBX, KGRCX)

    (10) Scudder Health Care Fund   Sym: SUHAX, SUHBX, SUHCX)

    (11) Scudder Large Company Growth Fund   (Sym: SGGAX, SGGBX,
         SGGCX, SCQRX)

    (12) Scudder Micro Cap Fund   (Sym: SMFAX, SMFBX, SMFCX,
         MGMCX, MMFSX)

    (13) Scudder Mid Cap Fund   (Sym: SMCAX, SMCBX, SMCCX,
         SMCRX, BTEAX, BTCAX)

    (14) Scudder Small Cap Fund   (Sym: SSDAX, SSDBX, SSDCX,
         SSDRX, BTSCX)

    (15) Scudder Strategic Growth Fund   (Sym: SCDAX, SCDBX,
         SCDCX, SCDIX)

    (16) Scudder Technology Fund   (Sym: KTCAX, KTCBX, KTCCX,
         KTCIX)

    (17) Scudder Technology Innovation Fund   (Sym: SRIAX,
         SRIBX, SRICX)

    (18) Scudder Top 50 US Fund   (Sym: FAUSX, FBUSX, FCUSX)

    (19) Scudder Contrarian Fund   (Sym: KDCAX, KDCBX, KDCCX,
         KDCRX)

    (20) Scudder-Dreman Financial Services Fund   (Sym: KDFAX,
         KDFBX, KDFCX)

    (21) Scudder-Dreman High Return Equity Fund   (Sym: KDHAX,
         KDHBX, KDHCX, KDHRX, KDHIX)

    (22) Scudder-Dreman Small Cap Value Fund (Sym: KDSAX, KDSBX,
         KDSCX, KDSRX, KDSIX)

    (23) Scudder Flag Investors Equity Partners Fund   (Sym:
         FLEPX, FEPBX, FEPCX, FLIPX)

    (24) Scudder Growth & Income Fund   (Sym: SUWAX, SUWBX,
         SUWCX, SUWRX, SUWIX)

    (25) Scudder Large Company Value Fund   (Sym: SDVAX, SDVBX,
         SDVCX)

    (26) Scudder-RREEF Real Estate Securities Fund (Sym: RRRAX,
         RRRBX, RRRCX, RRRSX, RRRRX)

    (27) Scudder Small Company Stock Fund   (Sym: SZCAX, SZCBX,
         SZCCX)

    (28) Scudder Small Company Value Fund   (Sym: SAAUX, SABUX,
         SACUX)

    (29) Scudder Tax Advantaged Dividend Fund   (Sym: SDDAX,
         SDDBX, SDDCX, SDDGX)

    (30) Scudder Flag Investors Value Builder Fund   (Sym:
         FLVBX, FVBBX, FVBCX, FLIVX)

    (31) Scudder Focus Value+Growth Fund   (Sym: KVGAX, KVGBX,
         KVGCX)

    (32) Scudder Lifecycle Mid Range Fund   (Sym: BTLRX)

    (33) Scudder Lifecycle Long Range Fund   (Sym: BTILX, BTAMX)

    (34) Scudder Lifecycle Short Range Fund   (Sym: BTSRX)

    (35) Scudder Pathway Conservative Portfolio (Sym: SUCAX,
         SUCBX, SUCCX)

    (36) Scudder Pathway Growth Portfolio (Sym: SUPAX, SUPBX,
         SUPCX)

    (37) Scudder Pathway Moderate Portfolio   (Sym: SPDAX,
         SPDBX, SPDCX)

    (38) Scudder Retirement Fund Series V  (Sym: KRFEX)

    (39) Scudder Retirement Fund Series VI   (Sym: KRFGX)

    (40) Scudder Retirement Fund Series VII   (Sym: KRFGX)

    (41) Scudder Target 2010 Fund   (Sym: KRFBX)

    (42) Scudder Target 2012 Fund   (Sym: KRFCX)

    (43) Scudder Target 2013 Fund   (Sym: KRFDX)

    (44) Scudder Total Return Fund   (Sym: KTRAX, KTRBX, KTRCX,
         KTRGX)

    (45) Scudder Emerging Markets Growth Fund   (Sym: SEKAX,
         SEKBX, SEKCX)

    (46) Scudder Emerging Markets Income Fund   (Sym: SZEAX,
         SZEBX, SZECX)

    (47) Scudder European Equity Fund (Sym: DBEAX, DBEBX, DBECX,
         MEUEX, MEUVX)

    (48) Scudder Global Fund   (Sym: SGQAX, SGQBX, SGQCX, SGQRX)

    (49) Scudder Global Bond Fund   (Sym: SZGAX, SZGBX, SZGCX)

    (50) Scudder Global Discovery Fund   (Sym: KGDAX, KGDBX,
         KGDCX)

    (51) Scudder Greater Europe Growth Fund   (Sym: SERAX,
         SERBX, SERCX)

    (52) Scudder International Fund   (Sym: SUIAX, SUIBX,
         SUICX)

    (53) Scudder International Equity Fund   (Sym: DBAIX, DBBIX,
         DBCIX, BEIIX, BEITX, BTEQX)

    (54) Scudder International Select Equity Fund (Sym: DBISX,
         DBIBX, DBICX, DBITX, MGINX, MGIVX, MGIPX)

    (55) Scudder Japanese Equity Fund   (Sym:  FJEAX, FJEBX,
         FJECX)

    (56) Scudder Latin America Fund   (Sym: SLANX, SLAOX, SLAPX)

    (57) Scudder New Europe Fund   (Sym: KNEAX, KNEBX, KNECX,
         KNEIX)

    (58) Scudder Pacific Opportunities Fund   (Sym: SPAOX,
         SBPOX, SPCCX)

    (59) Scudder Worldwide 2004 Fund   (Sym: KWIVX)

    (60) Scudder Fixed Income Fund   (Sym: SFXAX, SFXBX, SFXCX,
         SFXRF, MFINX, MFISX)

    (61) Scudder High Income Plus Fund (Sym: MGHYX, MGHVX,
         MGHPX)

    (62) Scudder High Income Fund   (Sym: KHYAX, KHYBX, KHYCX,
         KHYIX)

    (63) Scudder High Income Opportunity Fund   (Sym: SYOAX,
         SYOBX, SYOCX)

    (64) Scudder Income Fund   (Sym: SZIAX, SZIBX, SZICX)

    (65) Scudder PreservationPlus Fund   (Sym: BTPIX, BTPSX)

    (66) Scudder PreservationPlus Income Fund (Sym: PPIAX,
         PPLCX, DBPIX)

    (67) Scudder Short Term Bond Fund   (Sym: SZBAX, SZBBX,
         SZBCX

    (68) Scudder Short Duration Fund   (Sym: SDUAX, SDUBX,
         SDUCX, MGSFX)

    (69) Scudder Strategic Income Fund   (Sym: KSTAX, KSTBX,
         KSTCX)

    (70) Scudder US Government Securities Fund   (Sym: KUSAX,
         KUSBX, KUSCX)

    (71) Scudder California Tax-Free Income Fund   (Sym: KCTAX,
         KCTBX, KCTCX)

    (72) Scudder Florida Tax-Free Income Fund   (Sym: KFLAX,
         KFLBX, KFLCX)

    (73) Scudder High Yield Tax-Free Fund   (Sym: NOTAX,
         NOTBX, NOTCX, NOTIX)

    (74) Scudder Intermediate Tax/AMT Free Fund   (Sym: SZMAX,
         SZMBX, SZMCX)

    (75) Scudder Managed Municipal Bond Fund   (Sym: SMLAX,
         SMLBX, SMLCX, SMLIX)

    (76) Scudder Massachusetts Tax-Free Fund   (Sym: SQMAX,
         SQMBX, SQMCX)

    (77) Scudder Municipal Bond Fund   (Sym: MGMBX, MMBSX)

    (78) Scudder New York Tax-Free Income Fund   (Sym: KNTAX,
         KNTBX, KNTCX)

    (79) Scudder Short Term Municipal Bond Fund   (Sym: SRMAX,
         SRMBX, SRMCX, MGSMX, MSMSX)

    (80) Scudder EAFE r Equity Index Fund   (Sym: BTAEX, BTIEX)

    (81) Scudder Equity 500 Index Fund   (Sym: BTIIX)

    (82) Scudder S&P 500 Stock Fund   (Sym: KSAAX, KSABX, KSACX)

    (83) Scudder Select 500 Fund  (Sym: OUTDX, OUTBX, OUTBX,
         OUTRX

    (84) Scudder US Bond Index Fund (Sym: BTUSX )

    (85) Scudder Cash Reserves Fund

The wrongful conduct alleged in and which is the subject of the
lawsuit relates to "timing." The lawsuit alleges that timing
injures ordinary mutual fund investors who are not allowed to
engage in such practices and benefits the mutual fund companies.

For more information, contact Charles J. Piven, P.A. by Mail:
The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite
2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202, by Phone: 410/986-0036, or by
E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com.


EDWARD D. JONES: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Suit in E.D. MO
---------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Missouri, on behalf of purchasers of the
securities of any of the Preferred Funds, as defined below,
between January 25, 1999 and January 9, 2004, inclusive, seeking
to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
against defendants Edward Jones & Co., and:

     (1) John W. Bachmann,

     (2) Douglas E. Hill,

     (3) Michael R. Holmes,

     (4) Richie L. Malone,

     (5) Steven Novik,

     (6) Darryl L. Pope, and

     (7) Robert Virgil Jr.

The action is brought on behalf of purchasers of shares or units
in any of the following mutual fund families during the Class
Period:

     (i) Lord Abbett Funds

    (ii) American Funds

   (iii) Federated Funds

    (iv) Goldman Sachs Funds

     (v) Hartford Mutual Funds

    (vi) Putnam Funds; and

   (vii) Van Kampen Funds

According to the complaint, defendants violated sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder by the Securities and Exchange
Commission, and all amendments thereto, by issuing a series of
material misrepresentations to the market during the Class
Period.

The complaint alleges that defendants, in clear contravention of
their disclosure obligations under the securities laws, failed
to disclose that Edward Jones received valuable incentive
payments -- valued reportedly at $100 million per year -- from
the Preferred Funds, or their affiliates, in return for Edward
Jones recommending those funds to its clients, and otherwise
steering its clients to purchase interests in those funds.

Edward Jones' undisclosed arrangements operated as a fraudulent
scheme that exploited the misplaced trust of its clients, which
Edward Jones carefully cultivated by falsely representing, on
its Web site and in other public documents, that it considers
each clients' "unique financial objectives" in tailoring
supposedly appropriate investments, and using similar
representations. In fact, throughout the Class Period, Edward
Jones pushed its brokers to sell only certain mutual funds
because (unbeknownst to Class members) it was paid to do so. On
January 9, 2004, The Wall Street Journal exposed Edward Jones'
scheme in an article that detailed Edward Jones' wrongdoing
based on an investigation that included interviews with 18
former and current Edward Jones brokers.

For more information, contact Steven G. Schulman, Peter E.
Seidman, or Andrei V. Rado, by Mail: One Pennsylvania Plaza,
49th fl., New York, NY, 10119-0165, by Phone: 800-320-5081, by
E-mail: edwardjones@milberg.com, or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.milberg.com.


HOLLINGER INTERNATIONAL: Charles Piven Files Stock Lawsuit in IL
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities
class action in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois, on behalf of those who purchased,
converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired securities, including
the common stock traded on the New York Stock Exchange, of
Hollinger International, Inc. between August 13, 1999 and March
31, 2003, inclusive, against defendant Hollinger International,
various other entities and individuals and certain of Hollinger
International's current and former officers and directors.

The action charges that the defendants violated federal
securities and/or other laws by, among other things, issuing a
series of materially false and/or misleading statements to the
public throughout the Class Period which statements had the
effect of artificially inflating the market price of Hollinger
International's securities.

For more information, contact Charles J. Piven, P.A., by Mail:
The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite
2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202, by Phone: 410/332-0030, or by
E-mail: piven@pivenlaw.com.


IBIS TECHNOLOGY: Federman & Sherwood Files Securities Suit in MA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Federman & Sherwood, LLP initiated a securities class action in
the United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts, on behalf of shareholders of IBIS Technology
Corporation common stock during the period between October 2,
2003 and December 12, 2003, inclusive.

The lawsuit 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 October 2, 2003 and
December 12, 2003.

For more information, contact: William B. Federman, by Mail: 120
N. Robinson, Suite 2720, Oklahoma City, OK  73102, by Phone:
(405) 235-1560, Fax: (405) 239-2112, or by E-mail:
wfederman@aol.com.


MERCK & CO.: Milberg Weiss Launches Securities Suit in E.D. LA
--------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Louisiana, on behalf of purchasers of the
securities of Merck & Co., Inc. between May 22, 1999 and October
22, 2003, inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, against the Company and:

     (1) Kenneth C. Frazier,

     (2) Richard C. Henriques,

     (3) Raymond V. Gilmartin,

     (4) Judy C. Lewent, and

     (5) Mary M. McDonald

According to the complaint, 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 during the Class Period.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
engaged in a marketing campaign which included false and
misleading statements concerning the safety profile of Merck's
painkilling drug, Vioxx, and Vioxx's superiority to its rival
drug, Celebrex, manufactured by Merck's competitor, Pfizer. On
November 16, 1999, the Food and Drug Administration sent a
letter to defendants which stated that certain of Merck's
promotional pieces of Vioxx were false and misleading and lacked
fair balance.  Moreover, during the Class Period, defendants
failed to disclose material information concerning the degree of
the serious adverse side-effects of Vioxx, including
significantly increased risks of heart attacks in patients
taking the drug.

Specifically, in March 2000, defendants released the results of
a Merck-sponsored study called the Vioxx Gastrointestinal
Outcomes Research which demonstrated "significantly few heart
attacks were observed in patients taking naproxen (0.1 percent)
compared to the group taking Vioxx 50 mg (0.5 percent) in this
study." In September 2001, defendants received another letter
from the FDA concerning Merck's marketing of Vioxx during which,
the Agency warned, Merck minimized the potentially serious risk
of increased heart problems discovered in the VIGOR study and
downplayed the adverse effects of using Vioxx with the drug
Coumadin. The FDA concluded in the letter that Merck's marketing
of Vioxx was "false, lacking in fair balance, or otherwise
misleading(.)"

Despite available information, defendants failed to adequately
disclose the degree of the serious adverse risks of Vioxx,
contending that the FDA Warning Letter and other studies were
inaccurate and/or inconclusive, and instead, continued to tout
the efficacy of the drug and the revenues derived from the sale
thereof.

As a result of defendants' false and misleading statements, the
price of Merck's securities was artificially inflated during the
Class Period, enabling Company insiders to sell their personally
held shares of Merck for over $175 million in proceeds, and
causing injury to plaintiff and other members of the Class.

On October 22, 2003, an article was published on Reuters
reporting Merck's third quarter 2003 results and confirming that
Vioxx "is suffering from clinical trial data suggesting it might
slightly raise the risk of heart attacks, and the growing
perception that its pain-fighting capabilities are no better
than traditional painkillers."

On October 30, 2003, The Wall Street Journal explained that the
above-mentioned data was derived from another study sponsored by
Merck which demonstrated that within the first 30 days of taking
Vioxx, the risk of a heart attack was increased 39% in
comparison with Celebrex.

For more information, contact Steven G. Schulman, Peter E.
Seidman, or Andrei V. Rado, by Mail: One Pennsylvania Plaza,
49th fl., New York, NY, 10119-0165, by Phone: (800) 320-5081, by
E-mail: merckco@milberg.com, or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.milberg.com.


MICROMUSE INC.: Marc Henzel Launches Securities 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 purchasers of the securities
of Micromuse, Inc. (Nasdaq: MUSEE) between January 20, 2000 and
December 29, 2003, inclusive.

According to the complaint, 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 during the Class Period.  The
complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
knowingly or recklessly issued materially false and misleading
financial statements that misrepresented the Company's earnings
and shareholder equity. During this period, Company insiders
sold Micromuse stock for proceeds of approximately $174 million.

The class period ends on December 30, 2003. On that date, the
Company announced that filing of its annual report on Form 10-K
would be delayed pending completion of an internal inquiry,
primarily regarding accounting for accrued expenses and expense
recognition, and that the Company expected the inquiry to lead
to a restatement of financial results for the fiscal years
ending September 20, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003. In reaction to
this announcement, the price of Micromuse common stock dropped
by 12.4%, from a closing price of $6.90 on December 29, 2003,
and closed the day down 4% at $6.59 on volume ten times greater
than average.

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


MICROMUSE INC.: Glancy Binkow Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. CA
---------------------------------------------------------------
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP initiated a Class Action lawsuit in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California, on behalf of a class consisting of all persons who
purchased securities of Micromuse, Inc. between October 24, 2000
and December 30, 2003, inclusive.

The Complaint charges Micromuse and certain of the Company's
executive officers with violations of federal securities laws.
Among other things, plaintiff claims that defendants'
dissemination of materially false and misleading statements
concerning Micromuse's financial performance caused the
Company's stock price to become artificially inflated,
inflicting damages on investors. Micromuse develops, markets and
supports a family of scalable software solutions that enable the
effective monitoring of the status of multiple devices and
elements underlying an information technology service delivery
infrastructure. The complaint alleges that during the Class
Period defendants caused Micromuse to report in its public
filings, press releases and other public statements favorable
financial results by misrepresenting the Company's financial
performance.

Plaintiff claims 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 had improperly accounted for the
         timing of certain accrued expenses and the recognition
         of certain other expenses;

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

     (3) that as a result, the values of the Company's net
         income and financial results were materially overstated
         at all relevant times.

For more information, contact Michael Goldberg, by Mail: 1801
Avenue of the Stars, Suite 311, Los Angeles, California 90067,
by Phone: (310) 201-9161 or Toll Free at (888) 773-9224, or by
E-mail: info@glancylaw.com.


MICROMUSE INC: Brian Felgoise Commences Securities Suit in CA
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Brian M. Felgoise, P.C. initiated a
securities class action in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of California, on behalf of shareholders
who acquired MicroMuse, Inc. securities between January 20, 2000
and December 29, 2003, inclusive, against the company and
certain key officers and directors.

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

For more information, contact Brian M. Felgoise, by Mail: 261
Old York Road, Suite 423, Jenkintown, Pennsylvania, 19046, by
Phone: (215) 886-1900, or by E-mail:
securitiesfraud@comcast.net.


NETWORK ENGINES: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in MA Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the District of
Massachusetts on behalf of purchasers of Network Engines, Inc.
(Nasdaq: NENG) publicly traded securities during the period
between November 6, 2003 and December 10, 2003, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that by the start of the Class Period,
defendants knew, but failed to disclose, that Network Engines
was in the process of renegotiating its distribution contract
with EMC, and that EMC was demanding price reductions, which, if
agreed to, would negatively impact the Company's future
financial results.

Nevertheless, throughout the Class Period, defendants issued
positive statements highlighting the Company's strong financial
performance, continued growth and the success of its
relationship with EMC, its largest customer.  Defendants failed
to disclose, however:

     (1) that the Company was in the process of renegotiating
         its distribution contract with EMC;

     (2) that EMC was demanding price concessions to bring its
         agreement with Network Engines in line with the pricing
         that Network Engines was providing to other customers;

     (3) that the new distribution contract with EMC would
         negatively impact the Company's future financial
         performance;

     (4) that the Company would not be able to sustain the
         growth in its gross margins as a result of the amended
         contract; and

     (5) as a result, the Company's positive statements issued
         during the Class Period were materially false and
         misleading when made.

Finally, on December 10, 2003, the Company announced, among
other things, that it had renegotiated its distribution contract
with EMC and the amended contract would negatively impact the
Company's gross profit related to the sale of EMC-approved Host
Bus Adapters and the Company's distribution operations gross
profit.

Following this announcement, shares of Network Engines common
stock fell $3.92 per share, or 39%, to close at $6.10 per share,
on extraordinarily high trading volume, and have continued to
decline since that time.

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


NETWORK ENGINES: Milberg Weiss Launches Securities Lawsuit in MA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
District of Massachusetts, on behalf of purchasers of the
securities of Network Engines Inc. between November 6, 2003 and
December 10, 2003, inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, against defendants Network
Engines and certain of its senior executive officers.

According to the complaint, defendants violated sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder by the Securities and Exchange
Commission.

The complaint alleges that defendants' favorable Class Period
representations regarding their business were materially false
and misleading because they failed to disclose that the
Company's agreement with its largest customer, EMC Corporation,
accounting for over 47% of total 2003 revenues, was being
renegotiated and that EMC was demanding terms that would
materially and negatively impact Network Engines' profitability.
Instead of disclosing the highly material fact that a key
customer was pushing for concessions that would be harmful to
the Company, and difficult to effectively resist given EMC's
tremendous clout in the negotiations, defendants falsely
represented that its strong growth in 2003 marked a "dramatic
turnaround for Network Engines," and that such growth was
sustainable and expected to continue in 2004.

On December 10, 2003, the Company announced in a press release
that "its distribution agreement with EMC Corporation has been
amended, effective January 1, 2004. The amendment . . . provides
for increased costs to Network Engines relating to the sale of
EMC-approved host bus adapters." In reaction to this belated
disclosure, the price of Network Engines common stock plummeted,
falling $3.92 per share to close at $6.10 per share, a one day
drop of 39%, on unusually heavy trading volume that was more
than a dozen times its average daily trading volume for the
preceding three months.

For more information, contact Steven G. Schulman, Peter E.
Seidman or Andrei V. Rado, by Mail: One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th
fl., New York, NY, 10119-0165, by Phone: (800) 320-5081, by E-
mail: networkengines@milberg.com, or visit the firm's Website:
http://www.milberg.com.


PARMALAT FINANZIARIA: Much Shelist Files Securities Suit in NY
--------------------------------------------------------------
Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein, P.C. initiated
a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of New York, on behalf of purchasers of
the securities (including American Depository Receipts "ADR's",
and bonds) of Parmalat Finanziaria SpA between January 5, 1999
and December 29, 2003, inclusive.

It has been alleged that Parmalat, Calisto Tanzi, Stefano Tanzi,
Luciano Del Soldato, Domenico Barili, Francesco Giuffredi,
Giovanni Tanzi, Fausto Tonna Deloitte & Touche Tohmatsu,
Deloitte & Touche SpA, Citigroup, Inc., Grant Thornton
International, Grant Thornton SpA, Bonlat Financing Corp.,
Coloniale SpA, Zini & Associates, and Buconero LLC violated the
federal securities laws by issuing a series of materially false
and misleading statements to the market. These misstatements
have had the effect of artificially inflating the market price
of Parmalat's securities.

Specifically, the Complaint alleges that throughout the Class
Period, the Company failed to disclose that: the defendants'
statements were materially false and misleading because they
failed to disclose and/or misrepresented the following adverse
facts:

     (1) that its assets in its audited financial statements
         were overstated;

     (2) that Parmalat falsely stated that it had used its
         "excess cash balances" -- which actually did not exist
         -- to repurchase corporate debt securities worth 2.9
         billion euros (approximately $3.6 billion), when in
         fact it had not repurchased those debt obligations and
         they remained outstanding;

     (3) that the $625 million of Parmalat's cash allegedly
         invested in a liquid investment fund in the Cayman
         Islands could not be retrieved because it was
         falsified;

     (4) that the Company used off-shore shell companies, such
         as Bonlat Financing Corp., Buconero LLC, and Epicurum
         to falsify its financial results;

     (5) that defendants C. Tanzi and S. Tanzi siphoned as much
         as 800 million euros ($1 billion) from Parmalat
         operations, mainly to finance other family businesses;

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

     (7) that as a result, the value of the Company's net income
         and financial results were materially overstated at all
         relevant times.

On December 9, 2003, defendant Calisto Tanzi, then Parmalat's
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and his son, defendant
Stefano Tanzi, a senior Parmalat executive, met with
representatives from a New York City-based private equity and
financial advisory firm regarding a possible leveraged buyout of
Parmalat. During that meeting, in response to a comment by one
of the Tanzis about liquidity problems at Parmalat, one of the
New York firm's representatives noted that Parmalat's financial
statements showed that the company had a large amount of cash.

In response, defendant Stefano Tanzi stated that the cash was
not there, and that Parmalat really had only 500 million euros
in cash. Later, defendant Luciano Del Soldato, then Parmalat's
Chief Financial Officer, joined the meeting. During a discussion
of Parmalat's outstanding debt, Mr. Del Soldato stated that
Parmalat's debt was actually 10 billion euros, much higher than
the balance sheet showed. Mr. Del Soldato indicated that the
balance sheet was incorrect because the company had not
repurchased 2.9 billion euros of Parmalat bonds. The balance
sheet falsely reflected that the bonds had been repurchased.
These revelations ultimately lead to Parmalat announcing that it
had been declared insolvent by an Italian Court on December 29,
2003.

For more information, contact Carol V. Gilden, by Phone:
(800) 470-6824, or by E-mail: investorhelp@muchshelist.com.


REDBACK NETWORKS: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Securities Suit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, on behalf of all persons who
purchased securities of Redback Networks, Inc. between April 12,
2000 and October 10, 2003, inclusive, against the defendants,
certain officers and directors of the Company.

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal
securities laws by issuing materially false and misleading
statements throughout the Class Period that had the effect of
artificially inflating the market price of the Company's
securities.

Redback's initial public offering, on May 17, 1999, was priced
at $23. On June 28, 1999, Redback announced a multi-year,
multi-million-dollar agreement with Qwest Communications
International, Inc. Although the duration and the specific
amounts of the contract were not quantified, on July 9, 1999,
Redback stock was trading at $146. The Complaint alleges that
Defendants knew that there was no real commitment by Qwest and
that Qwest had entered into the agreement solely because Qwest
executives had received shares of Redback stock on the IPO.
Throughout the Class Period, Redback and Qwest continued this
practice of Qwest purchasing products from Redback in exchange
for Qwest executives receiving shares of Redback stock.
Additionally, the complaint further alleges that Qwest did not
need or want the large quantities of product it had ordered, and
in fact, had no strong obligation to purchase more products in
the future.

For more information, contact Fred Taylor Isquith, Gregory M.
Nespole, Christopher S. Hinton, George Peters, or Derek Behnke,
by Mail: 270 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016, by Phone:
(800) 575-0735, by E-mail: classmember@whafh.com, or visit the
firm's Website: http://www.whafh.com.


ROYAL DUTCH: Bernstein Liebhard Launches Securities Suit in NJ
--------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP initiated a securities class
action lawsuit in the District of New Jersey, on behalf of all
purchasers of American Depository Receipts of Royal Dutch
Petroleum Company and/or The Shell Transport and Trading
Company, PLC between December 3, 1999 and January 9, 2004,
inclusive, against defendants: Royal Dutch and Shell Transport,
and:

     (1) Shell Petroleum N.V.,

     (2) Shell Petroleum Limited,

     (3) Maarten van der Bergh,

     (4) Judy Boynton,

     (5) Malcolm Brinded,

     (6) S.L. Miller,

     (7) Harry J.M. Roels,

     (8) Paul D. Skinner,

     (9) M. Moody-Stuart,

    (10) Jeroen van der Veer, and

    (11) Philip R. Watts

The lawsuit alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder. Between December 3, 1999 and January 9, 2004, the
defendants issued a series of material misrepresentations to the
market concerning the Company's financial standing.

More specifically, the defendants' statements during the Class
Period were materially false and misleading because they failed
to disclose and/or misrepresented the following adverse facts,
among others:

     (i) Royal Dutch/Shell had overstated its proved oil and gas
         reserve figures by 20%;

    (ii) Royal Dutch/Shell accomplished the overstatement by
         including in its proved oil and gas reserves figures,
         when its venture partners did not, estimates from the
         Gorgon Joint Venture in Australia and the Nigerian
         Projects in Africa when such projects did not meet
         industry and Securities and Exchange Commission
         standards for proved reverses;

   (iii) the inclusion of Gorgon Joint Venture in Australia and
         the Nigerian Projects in Africa and other projects was
         accomplished through the booking of its proved oil and
         gas reversed figures on the basis of initial letters of
         intent rather than on the basis of when such projects
         had been contracted; and

    (iv) as a result, Royal Dutch/Shell's true market value was
         materially overstated at all relevant times.

On January 9, 2004, Royal Dutch/Shell announced that, following
internal reviews, some proved hydrocarbon reserves would be re-
categorized. The total non recurring re-categorization, relative
to the proved reserves as stated at December 31, 2002,
represented 3.9 billion barrels of oil equivalent of proved
reserves, or 20% of proved reserves at that date. Over 90% of
the total change is a reduction in the proved undeveloped
category; the balance is a reduction in the proved developed
category. Additionally, the Company stated that of the re-
categorization, two thirds (2.7 billion barrels) related to
crude oil and natural gas liquids, and one third (1.2 billion
boe or 7.2 trillion standard cubic feet) to natural gas.
Moreover, Royal Dutch/Shell indicated that the FAS69
standardized measure of discounted future cash flows associated
with the proved reserves would be impacted.

On news of this, shares of Shell Transport fell 6.9%, or $3.12
per share, on heavy volume to close at $41.69 per share on
January 9, 2004. Additionally, shares of Royal Dutch fell 7.8%,
or $4.15 per share, on heavy volume to close at $48.61 per share
on January 9, 2004.

For more information, contact the Shareholder Relations
Department, by Mail: 10 East 40th Street, New York, New York
10016, by Phone: (800) 217-1522 or (212) 779-1414, or by E-mail:
RD@bernlieb.com.


RYLAND GROUP: Brodsky & Smith Commences Securities Suit in TX
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Brodsky & Smith, LLC initiated a securities
class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas, on behalf of shareholders who
purchased the common stock and other securities of Ryland Group,
Inc. between October 22, 2003 and January 7, 2004, inclusive.

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated federal
securities laws by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market during the Class Period,
thereby artificially inflating the price of Ryland Group
securities.

For more information, contact Marc L. Ackerman, or Evan J.
Smith, by Mail: Two Bala Plaza, Suite 602, Bala Cynwyd, PA
19004, by Phone: toll free 877-LEGAL-90, or by E-mail:
clients@brodsky-smith.com.


SILICON IMAGE: Abbey Gardy Commences Securities Suit in N.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Abbey Gardy, LLP initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California, on behalf of a class of all persons who
purchased or acquired securities of Silicon Image, Inc. between
April 15, 2002, the day the Company announced its financial
results for its first quarter ended March 31, 2002 and November
15, 2003, the day the Company announced an investigation into
its revenue recognition practices associated with its licensing
transactions, against the Company, and:

     (1) David Lee (Chairman),

     (2) Steve Tirado (President and COO), and

     (3) Robert Gargus (Vice Pres. & CFO)

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 during the Class Period thereby
artificially inflating the price of Silicon securities.

The Complaint alleges that Defendants made a series of false and
misleading statements starting on April 15, 2002. The Complaint
alleges that the press releases issued on April 15, 2002, June
13, 2002, July 23, 2002, October 15, 2002, January 15, 2003,
April 15, 2003, July 22, 2003, September 30, 2003 and October
19, 2003 were materially false and misleading. In additions, the
Complaint alleges that the Company's Form 10-Q's and Form 10-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 12,
2002, July 30, 2002, November 8, 2002, March 27, 2003, May 8,
2003, and August 14, 2003 were materially false and misleading.

The Complaint alleges that each of these above referenced press
releases and SEC filings were materially false and misleading
because, during the Class Period defendants, had overstated
Silicon's license revenue by improperly recognizing revenue that
did not satisfy revenue recognition criteria. The Complaint also
alleges that, as a result of the improper revenue recognition,
the Company's net income and earnings were overstated and its
financial statements were prepared in violation of General
Accepted Accounting Principles.

In addition, the Complaint alleges that while in possession of
material non public information that defendants Lee, Gargus and
Tirado sold thousands of shares of their personally held Silicon
stock. On November 14, 2003, Silicon announced that its Form 10-
Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2003 would not be timely
filed because an investigation into the Company revenue
recognition practices associated with its licensing transaction.
On this news, Silicon's shares fell more than 27.7% to close at
$6.40.

For more information, contact Susan Lee, by Mail: 212 East 39th
Street, New York, New York 10016, by Phone: (212) 889-3700, or
(800) 889-3701 (Toll Free, or by E-mail: slee@abbeygardy.com.


TV AZTECA: Cauley Geller Commences Securities Suit in S.D. NY
-------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Rudman, LLP initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York, on behalf of purchasers of TV Azteca, S.A.
de C.V. publicly traded securities during the period between
October 6, 2003 and January 7, 2004, inclusive.

During the Class Period defendants failed to disclose certain
related- party transactions between a privately-held company
jointly owned by the Company's Chairman, Ricardo Salinas Pliego
and the Company's President, M. Saba Masri and one of the
Company's affiliates -- Unefon Corporacion RBS a wireless
telecommunications provider in Mexico.

Specifically, defendants denied any affiliation with a "white-
knight" group of investors that had saved Unefon from bankruptcy
back in June of 2002. Defendants stonewalled disclosure of the
true facts, including ignoring advice from their securities
lawyers in the U.S., until a spin-off of Unefon was completed in
December 2002. The spin-off anticipated that Unefon's shares
would be registered to trade in the U.S. markets facilitating a
merger with Salinas' other telecommunications holdings. Then, on
January 9, 2004, defendants stunned the markets by admitting
that the "white-knight" investors were in fact Salinas and Saba
who made a profit of $218 million when their privately-held
company bought Unefon's debt for $107 million and then sold it
back for $325 million.

Market reaction to defendants' belated disclosures was severe.
By January 12, 2003, the first day of trading following the
Company's admission the price of TV Azteca securities fell more
than 14.9 percent in value to close at $7.76 per share in heavy
trading volume.

For more information, contact Samuel H. Rudman, or David A.
Rosenfeld, Client Relations Department: Jackie Addison, Heather
Gann or Chandra West, by Mail: P.O. Box 25438, Little Rock, AR
72221-5438, by Phone: 1-888-551-9944 (toll free), Fax:
1-501-312-8505, or E-mail: info@cauleygeller.com.


VIRBAC CORPORATION: Kirby McInerney Files Securities Suit in TX
---------------------------------------------------------------
Kirby McInerney & Squire, LLP initiated a class action lawsuit
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Texas, Ft. Worth Division, on behalf of all purchasers of Virbac
Corporation securities during the period from May 3, 2001
through November 12, 2003, inclusive.

The action charges Virbac and certain of its senior officers
with violations of Sections 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The alleged violations stem
from the dissemination of false and misleading statements, which
had the effect -- during the Class Period -- of artificially
inflating the price of Virbac's shares.

Investors allege that during the class period, the Company
issued a series of material misrepresentations to the market
concerning the Company's financial results that materially
overstated Virbac's net income, earnings per share and inventory
in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

For more information, contact Aaron Hovan, or Vivian Lee, by
Mail: 830 Third Avenue, 10th Floor, New York, New York  10022,
by Phone: (212) 317-2300 or Toll Free (888) 529-4787, or by E-
mail: vlee@kmslaw.com.


WAVE SYSTEMS: Milberg Weiss Files Securities Fraud Lawsuit in MA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP   initiated a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
District of Massachusetts, on behalf of purchasers of Wave
Systems Corporation common stock during the period between July
31, 2003 and February 2, 2004.

The complaint charges Wave and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. Wave creates technologies and services to secure and sell
digital information. The Company's EMBASSY technology is a
hardware and software-based device that enables secure
transaction processing and distributed information metering in
users' personal computers.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
issued materially false and misleading statements to the
investing public to inflate the Company's shares by associating
the Company "publicly" with two of the World's biggest
technology companies -- Intel and IBM. With the "appearance" of
two new separate revenue streams, defendants sought to, and did,
raise monies via a private placement for the Company, and
certain of the Company's officers and directors pocketed over
$1.5 million in insider trading proceeds. On December 18, 2003,
the Company issued a press release in which it announced that
the SEC was investigating certain public statements made by Wave
in August 2003, as well as certain insider selling that occurred
around the same time.

Defendants' public statements during the Class Period failed to
disclose that

     (1) the Company's IBM announcement dated August 4, 2003
         would result in no direct revenue to the Company;

     (2) the Company's Intel announcement dated July 31, 2003
         was actually immaterial and would not generate any
         revenue to the Company until 2004, if ever;

     (3) the so-called Intel contract did not require Intel to
         purchase even one piece of software; and

     (4) the number of Trusted Platform Module-enabled
         motherboards shipped over the course of 2003 and 2004
         would be de minimis.

The complaint alleges that, as a result of the defendants' false
statements, Wave stock traded at inflated levels during the
Class Period, increasing to as high as $4.53 per share on August
5, 2003, whereby the Company and the Company's top officers and
directors sold more than $8.6 million worth of their own shares.

For more information, contact William Lerach, by Phone:
800-449-4900, or by E-mail: wsl@milberg.com.


WINN-DIXIE STORES: Bernstein Liebhard Files Stock Lawsuit in FL
---------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP initiated a securities class
action lawsuit in the Middle District of Florida, on behalf of
all persons who acquired securities of Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc.
between October 9, 2002 and January 30, 2004, inclusive, against
defendants Winn-Dixie, and:

     (1) Frank Lazaran,

     (2) Allen R. Rowland, and

      (3) Richard P. McCook

Throughout the Class Period, Defendants portrayed Winn-Dixie, a
public company whose chief asset is its large supermarket chain
serving Florida, Alabama, Georgia, and several other
southeastern states, as a growing and competitive company. In
fact, just the opposite was true.

Throughout the Class Period, Winn-Dixie was suffering from
substantial undisclosed long-term business and financial
problems. The Company was unable to market its Winn-Dixie brand
competitively, it was unable to reduce excess expenses when
needed, it recorded the carrying value of its long-lived assets
at inflated levels, and maintained insufficient reserves for
self-insurance. In addition, Winn-Dixie had no credible or
workable marketing plan in place which would allow it to compete
effectively with other large supermarket chains and discounters,
such as Publix and Costco.

Nevertheless, throughout the Class Period, defendant Allen
Rowland and later defendant Frank Lazaran, Rowland's successor
as CEO, continued to tell investors that Winn-Dixie was
following through on its strategic marketing plan. As evidence
of its success and financial health, Winn-Dixie declared cash
dividends throughout the Class Period.

Approximately mid-way through the Class Period, in June 2003,
Rowland stepped down as CEO and received $7.7 million in
severance pay, supposedly for improving store operations and
enhancing the Company's financial condition. When Lazaran
replaced him, unbeknownst to the investing public, Lazaran
ordered his senior management to conduct a "comprehensive
review" of Winn-Dixie's "entire business model." Even while this
plan to restructure the Company's business model was underway,
Winn-Dixie and Lazaran continued to tell the public that the
Company was successfully executing its sales and marketing plan,
with declared dividends to prove it. The Company's stock price
rose throughout the Class Period on this encouraging news.

On January 30, 2004, before the opening of trading, Winn-Dixie
and Lazaran lowered the boom. In a press release that day,
Lazaran stunned the public with disastrous financial results for
the Company's second fiscal quarter ended January 7, 2004. The
Company's sales were down over a quarter of a billion dollars
from the prior year period. The Company had sustained a loss of
$79.5 million, or $0.57 per share. Employing understatement,
Lazaran told the public: "[W]e recognize that we cannot continue
down this path."

The Company also announced that it would take a "series of major
actions" to change the way the Company does business, including,
brand positioning for its Winn-Dixie brand, $100 million in
expense reduction by July 1, 2004, in-depth analysis of the
Company's core markets, market share, and competitive
positioning, an "image makeover program," and an initiative to
"reengineer" organizational effectiveness and accountability. In
addition, the Company announced that it would recognize a $36.4
million charge to earnings for impairment to its long-lived
assets, namely, its store locations, and would add $21.4 million
to its reserves for self-insurance expense, which included
additional reserves for workers' compensation claims. The
Company also cut its dividend indefinitely.

The market reacted swiftly to the news. Winn-Dixie's stock
plunged from $9.09 to $6.56 per share on volume of 24.6 million
shares.

For more information, contact the Shareholder Relations
Department, by Mail: 10 East 40th Street, New York, New York
10016, by Phone: (800) 217-1522 or (212) 779-1414, or by E-mail:
WIN@bernlieb.com.


WINN-DIXIE STORES: Charles Piven Launches Securities Suit in FL
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities
class action in the United States District Court for the Middle
District of Florida, on behalf of shareholders who purchased,
converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of
Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. between October 9, 2002 and January 29,
2004, inclusive.

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 information, contact Charles J. Piven, P.A. by Mail:
The World Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite
2525, Baltimore, Maryland 21202, by Phone: 410/986-0036, or by
E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com.


                        *********

A list of Meetings, Conferences and Seminars appears in each
Wednesday's edition of the Class Action Reporter. Submissions
via e-mail to carconf@beard.com are encouraged.

Each Friday's edition of the CAR includes a section featuring
news on asbestos-related litigation and profiles of target
asbestos defendants that, according to independent researches,
collectively face billions of dollars in asbestos-related
liabilities.  The Asbestos Defendant Profiles is backed by an
online database created to respond to custom searches. Go to
http://litigationdatasource.com/asbestos_defendant_profiles.html

                        *********


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., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Frederick, Maryland
USA.  Roberto Amor, Aurora Fatima Antonio and Lyndsey Resnick,
Editors.

Copyright 2004.  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  * * *