CAR_Public/040210.mbx           C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
           Tuesday, February 10, 2004, Vol. 6, No. 28

                       Headlines                            

ALTRIA CORPORATION: WV Federal Court Remands Suit To State Court
AMERICA ONLINE: Appeals Court Upholds FL Consumer Fraud Lawsuit
AMERICAN MULTI-CINEMA: Employees Launch Overtime Wage Suit in CA
ATLAS COLD STORAGE: Ontario Investors Sue For Securities Fraud
AVENTIS: 63 Austrians Sue Over Contaminated Plasma Injections

CANADA: Govt To Appeal B.C. Ruling On Residential Settlements
CATHOLIC CHURCH: Judge Asks Covington Abuse Suits Be Settled OOC
CONSOL ENERGY: Shareholders Launch Securities Suits in W.D. PA
CUMULUS MEDIA: IL Court Enters Final Judgment in Stock Complaint
DAIMLERCHRYSLER AG: Court Okays $300M Pact In Shareholder Suit

EPHEDRA LITIGATION: Regulators Move To Finalize Ban In April
EVEREN SECURITIES: Stock Settlement Hearing Set For February 26
FLORIDA: Appeals Court Reverses Approval of False Claims Pact
FLOWSERVE CORPORATION: Announces Probe Of Financial Statements
GARDEN FRESH: Asks CA Court To Dismiss Shareholder Fraud Lawsuit

GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 1.8M Cars For Ignition Switch Problems
GLAXOSMITHKLINE: To Settle Relafen Antitrust Lawsuit For $175M
INCO LTD.: Ontario Court Refuses Appeal of Certification Denial
LOS ALAMOS: More Female Employees Expected to Join Bias Lawsuit
MARTHA STEWART: Defense Lawyers Suggest Mr. Faneuil Had Grudge

MASSACHUSETTS FINANCIAL: SEC Files, Settles Admin. Proceedings
MEDIRISK INC: Securities Suit Settlement Hearing Set March 22
NEW ORLEANS: Appeals Court Reverses Court Ruling in Tax Lawsuit
NEW YORK: Gloversville Faces Complaint Over Prescription Plan  
NEWPOWER HOLDINGS: Settlement Hearing Set March 10, 2004 in NY

PASTA & CO: Recalls "Tuna Noodle" Casserole For Undeclared Eggs
PENIS ENLARGEMENT PRODUCTS: CA Man Launches Suit V. Distributors
PENNSYLVANIA: Settlements Proposed for Graphite Antitrust Suits
PENNSYLVANIA: PA Court Announces $202M Corrugated Box Settlement
PEREGRINA CHEESE: Recalls Fresh Cheese For Possible Health Risk

PLAYWELL TOY: Recalls 11,200 Activity Cubes For Choking Hazard

                 New Securities Fraud Cases

AGCO CORPORATION: Schiffrin & Barroway Files Stock Lawsuit in IL
AGCO CORPORATION: Cauley Geller Files Securities Suit in N.D. IL
DEUTSCHE BANK: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. NY
INTERPOOL INC.: Cauley Geller Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in NJ
INTERPOOL: Schiffrin & Barroway Files Securities Lawsuit in NJ

                        *********

ALTRIA CORPORATION: WV Federal Court Remands Suit To State Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Northern District of
West Virginia has granted Plaintiff's Motion to Remand a lawsuit
originally filed in the  Circuit Court of Hancock County, West
Virginia against ALTRIA GROUP, INC. and PHILIP MORRIS USA, on
behalf of Plaintiff Donald Virden, et al.

This is a purported consumer fraud class action allegedly
arising under the West Virginia Consumer Credit and Protection
Act, and under the common law doctrine of unjust enrichment.
Plaintiff is a resident of New Cumberland, West Virginia, who
alleges that he purchased and consumed on average approximately
two and a half packs of Marlboro Lights cigarettes per day
for approximately twenty years, and is seeking damages on behalf
of himself and others similarly situated.
      
Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Altria Group, Inc. and its
wholly owned subsidiary, Phillip Morris USA, deceived purchasers
of Marlboro Lights by:  

     (1) falsely or deceptively claiming that Marlboro Lights
         had lower tar and nicotine content than regular
         cigarettes;

     (2) failing to disclose the fact that measurements
         purporting to reflect reduced tar and nicotine levels
         were not the product of "benign changes" in tar and
         nicotine levels but were based on changes in cigarette
         design and composition;  

     (3) failing to disclose that defendants "intentionally
         manipulated the design and  content of Marlboro Lights
         in order to maximize nicotine delivery while falsely
         and/or deceptively claiming lowered tar and nicotine;"

     (4) failing to disclose that defendants engineered their
         cigarettes to "fool the machine tests that Defendants
         use as a basis to market their cigarettes as 'lights';"
         and

     (5) failing to disclose that the techniques employed by
         defendants to purportedly reduce the levels of tar
         "actually increase the harmful biological effects .
         caused by the tar ingested to the consumer."
      
On March 28, 2003, plaintiff filed this action in the Circuit
Court of Hancock County, West Virginia, seeking relief on behalf
of himself and "all others similarly situated." The first
defendant to be served in the state court action received its
copy of the complaint on April 3, 2003. Both defendants then
removed this action to this Court on May 2, 2003. On June 3,
2003, Plaintiff filed a motion to remand this action to state
court.                              


AMERICA ONLINE: Appeals Court Upholds FL Consumer Fraud Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court of Appeals of Florida, First
District affirmed a ruling by the Circuit Court of Duval County,
which denied Defendants motion to dismiss of a lawsuit brought
against America Online, Inc., on behalf of Plaintiff Robert
Pasieka, et al.

This class action lawsuit was filed by Pasieka on behalf of
consumers who subscribed to the defendants online services. The
complaint contains allegations detailing Pasieka's difficulty in
canceling these services, and the Defendant's continued billing
for the services after cancellation. In addition, the complaint
describes methods employed by the Defendant with regard to
subscription efforts and customer retention procedures, with
particular allegations as to deceptive and unfair acts or
practices. Claims were made in two counts, one under the FDUTPA
at section 501.204, Florida Statutes, and the other under the
FFGAL at section 817.415, Florida Statutes, with Pasieka seeking
damages as well as declaratory and injunctive relief.


AMERICAN MULTI-CINEMA: Employees Launch Overtime Wage Suit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
American Multi-Cinema, Inc. faces a class action filed in the
Orange County, California Superior Court, styled "Conrad Grant
v. American Multi-Cinema, Inc. and DOES 1 to 100, Case No:
03CC00429.  The suit was filed on behalf of current and former
"senior managers," "salary operations managers" and persons
holding similar positions who claim that they were improperly
classified by the Company as salaried exempt employees over the
prior four years.

Plaintiff alleges violations of the California Labor Code and
unfair business practices and seeks:

     (1) overtime pay,

     (2) pay for meal and rest periods,

     (3) statutory penalties, including penalties of up to $100
         per underpaid employee per pay period in which he or
         she was underpaid or any other violation and waiting
         time penalties of up to 30 days wages for former
         employees,

     (4) prejudgment interest,

     (5) attorneys fees,

     (6) costs, and

     (7) declaratory and injunctive relief.


ATLAS COLD STORAGE: Ontario Investors Sue For Securities Fraud
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Atlas Cold Storage Income trust faces an investor class
action filed by two high-profile lawyers in the Ontario Superior
Court of Justice, the Canadian Press reports.  The suit seeks
damages from the trust, its operating company and several
directors and executives.  Also named in the complaint are the
fund's auditors, Ernst & Young, and the lead underwriter of the
trust issue, BMO Nesbitt Burns.

Lawyers Harvey Strosberg and Joseph Groia filed the suit, citing
losses to unit holders caused by the past five months of
accounting turmoil, including deepening restatements of
financial results.

Last weekend, the Company made deep downward revisions to
previously reported financial results and indicated it is
preparing to sue one or more of its former executives.  The
scandal has led to the departure of three senior executives:
former CEO and director Patrick Gouveia, as well as the fund's
chief financial officer and its vice-president of finance.

"There have been several restatements of Atlas Cold Storage
Income Trust's financial results for 2000 and 2001 causing
Canadian investors to suffer considerable losses," Mr. Groia
told the Canadian Press.  "The purpose of this claim is to help
those investors exercise their legal rights to recover those
losses."

Mr. Strosberg said in an interview a key issue is whether the
duties of the auditors to the trust's managers are different
from their duties to shareholders.

Atlas issued a release late Friday saying it had not yet been
served with the suit, the Canadian Press reports.  "Atlas will
respond appropriately once it has had an opportunity to review
and assess the Notice of Action."

Mr. Groia told the Press the number of potential plaintiffs and
the amount of damages remain to be determined, adding that a
statement of claim is to be submitted within a month.  "Nobody
knows where the money's going to come from," he said of the
notice of legal action.  "Our claim, though, is not just against
the trust. It's against the directors and officers, it's against
the auditors and it's against the lead underwriter."


AVENTIS: 63 Austrians Sue Over Contaminated Plasma Injections
-------------------------------------------------------------
French-German pharmaceutical giant Aventis faces a lawsuit filed
by sixty-three Austrians infected with Hepatitis C, blaming
contaminated plasma injections from the Company's unit Seroplas,
Der Spiegel news weekly says in its latest edition.

In 2001, courts in the Austrian cities of Linz, Klagenfurt and
Vienna awarded 7.5 million euros ($12.38 million) to 259
plaintiffs over the case based on insurance claims by Seroplas.  
However, this time, the insurance companies only offered each
plaintiff one-third of the settlement amount.

"It is unacceptable to have second-class victims here," Vienna-
based lawyer Hans-Otto Schmidt told Der Spiegel.


CANADA: Govt To Appeal B.C. Ruling On Residential Settlements
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Ottawa federal government will appeal a British Columbia
court's ruling making it solely responsible for the settlement
of sexual abuse claims in native residential school settlements
in the province, the Associated Press reports.

Churches operated these schools, originally set up to help
"Christianize" native people and their children, for the federal
government until the 1970s.  Rumors of widespread sexual abuse
emerged and in 1998, former Indian affairs minister Jane Stewart
officially apologized for the abuse, unleashing a wave of
lawsuits against the federal government.  More than 12,000
plaintiffs are now suing for compensation.

In 1998, the court ruled that the Ottawa government was 75%
liable and the United Church was 25% liable.  Ottawa has offered
to pay 70 % of validated abuse claims that are settled out of
court.  Plaintiffs were to collect the rest from the church
involved.

The December appeals court ruling overturned the judgment,
placing total responsibility for compensation on the
government's shoulders for compensation owed to former students
who were sexually abused.  The appeal court cited "significant
developments" since the trial judge ruled, including a Supreme
Court of Canada decision.  

"It appears that the fact that the church is in the category of
a non-profit charitable organization is one which weighs in
favor of not imposing vicarious liability upon it in
circumstances where, as in this case, the injured party can make
full recovery from Canada," wrote Justice William Esson, AP
reports.

The federal government is not willing to let this judgment
stand, a government source told AP on condition of anonymity.  
Plaintiffs were being informed Friday of the Justice
Department's decision to appeal to the high court and an
official announcement is expected Monday.

Ottawa has announced a $1.7-billion plan to speed out-of-court
settlements, of which it will pay 70 per cent for proven
physical or sexual abuse.  At current rates, it's estimated
residential school claims would drag on in court for 50 years
and run up legal bills of at least $2 billion - not including
settlements.  Ottawa also faces a class-action lawsuit that, if
certified, seeks up to $12 billion in damages for all forms of
abuse, including loss of native languages and culture.


CATHOLIC CHURCH: Judge Asks Covington Abuse Suits Be Settled OOC
----------------------------------------------------------------
Judge John Potter, who is presiding over the emotionally charged
class action, sex-abuse case against the Diocese of Covington
instructed attorneys from both sides to 'try to set aside (your)
differences and settle the case out of court', The Cincinnati
Enquirer reports.

Class action and diocesan attorneys must return to Boone Circuit
Court April 6 with a mechanism to settle the claims. If the two
sides can't agree on one way to do it, they are to each propose
their own way of resolving the claims.

"We will do our best to meet the judge's request," diocesan
attorney Carrie Huff of Chicago told the Enquirer. "I'm not
optimistic we will agree upon a mechanism."

Ms. Huff, who was twice heckled by people in the courtroom, told
Judge Potter that the diocese plans to formally ask that the
class be decertified.  She told the judge she believed the
remaining claims could be settled individually but not in the
structure of a class action.

"He (the judge) is trying to move the case to a resolution,"
class attorney Bob Steinberg of the Cincinnati firm of Waite,
Schneider, Bayless & Chesley, told the Enquirer.  "It is what a
judge should try to do. We are very happy with that."

Mr. Steinberg told the Enquirer he had never had a case in his
career where an attorney refused to address settlement requests,
referring to Ms. Huff's previous refusal to discuss any
settlement of the class action.

This was the first hearing called by Judge Potter, who was
recently assigned the case after the previous judge retired amid
accusations he was biased.  "This is unlike any case I have been
involved in," Judge Potter said after attorneys from both sides
lobbed a volley of insults at each other, the Enquirer reports.


CONSOL ENERGY: Shareholders Launch Securities Suits in W.D. PA
--------------------------------------------------------------
CONSOL Energy, Inc. faces several class actions filed in the
United States District Court for the Western District of
Pennsylvania, alleging violations of the federal securities
laws.  The suits also name as defendants J. Brett Harvey and
William J. Lyons.

The complaints allege, among other things, that the defendants
violated sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule
10b-5 promulgated under that Act and that during the period
between January 24, 2002 and July 18, 2002 the defendants issued
false and misleading statements to the public which failed to
disclose or misrepresented the following, among others:

     (1) CONSOL Energy utilized an aggressive approach regarding
         its spot market sales by reserving 20% of its
         production to that market.  By increasing CONSOL
         Energy's exposure to the spot market, CONSOL Energy was
         subjecting itself to increased risk and uncertainty as
         the price and demand for coal could be volatile;

     (2) CONSOL Energy was experiencing difficulty selling the
         production that it had allocated to the spot market,
         and, nonetheless, CONSOL Energy maintained its
         production levels which caused its coal inventory to
         increase;

     (3) CONSOL Energy's increasing coal inventory was causing
         its expenses to rise dramatically, thereby weakening
         its financial condition; and

     (4) based on the foregoing, defendants' positive statements
         regarding CONSOL Energy's earnings and prospects were
         lacking in a reasonable basis at all times and
         therefore were materially false and misleading.

The complaints ask the court to award unspecified damages to
plaintiffs and award plaintiffs' reasonable costs and expenses
incurred in connection with this action, including counsel fees
and expert fees.  


CUMULUS MEDIA: IL Court Enters Final Judgment in Stock Complaint
----------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Ronald Guzman of the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois entered Final Judgments and Orders of
Permanent Injunction against Cumulus Media Inc., a Delaware
corporation with headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia, its former
Chief Financial Officer, Richard J. Bonick, Jr., its former
Executive Chairman, Richard W. Weening, and its former Vice
President of Finance, Daniel O'Donnell, for engaging in two
separate schemes to artificially inflate Cumulus' financial
position.  

The Commission's complaint, filed on December 10, 2003, alleged
that throughout 1999, Cumulus and Mr. Bonick prematurely
recorded revenue from package advertising contracts into
Cumulus' books and records causing Cumulus to overstate its net
revenues and broadcast cash flows and understate its net losses
in its quarterly reports for the first and third quarters of
1999 and in registration statements and prospectuses for two
secondary offerings of Cumulus' common stock during July and
November 1999.  

The Commission's complaint further alleged that in a second
scheme, Cumulus, Mr. Weening and Mr. O'Donnell engaged in an
attempt to manage Cumulus' earnings and broadcast cash flow for
the fourth quarter of 1999 in order to bring those figures in
line with Wall Street analysts' expectations.

The Final Judgments, entered pursuant to the defendants'
consents and without admitting or denying the allegations of the   
complaint, permanently enjoined the defendants from violating or
aiding and abetting violations of the federal securities laws.  

Specifically, the Court permanently enjoined Cumulus and Bonick
from violating or aiding and abetting violations of Sections
17(a)(2) and 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act of 1933, Sections
13(a), 13(b)(2)(A), 13(b)(2)(B) and 13(b)(5) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 12b-20, 13a-13 and 13b2-1
thereunder.  

The Court permanently enjoined Mr. Weening and Mr. O'Donnell
from violating or aiding and abetting violations of Sections
13(b)(2)(A) and 13(b)(5) of the Exchange Act and Rules 13b2-1
and 13b2-2 thereunder.  In addition, the Court imposed civil
penalties of $50,000, $75,000 and $40,000, respectively, against
Mr. Bonick, Mr. Weening and Mr. O'Donnell.  

The suit is styled "SEC v. Cumulus Media Inc., et al., Case No.
03-C-8908."


DAIMLERCHRYSLER AG: Court Okays $300M Pact In Shareholder Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. District Judge Kent Jordan granted approval to the $300
million settlement proposed by DaimlerChrysler Corporation for a
securities class action relating to its 1998 merger with the
former Chrysler Corp, Dow Jones Business News reports.

Judge Jordan signed off on the agreement, which he reviewed in
December.  Under the settlement, lawyers for shareholders will
get more than $66.8 million in fees and $2.9 million in expenses
out of the settlement funds.

Billionaire investor Kirk Kerkorian filed a suit against the
Company, and trial in the suit is set to resume at noon Monday.  
DaimlerChrysler Chief Executive Juergen Schrempp will once again
be on the stand discussing the negotiations that led to the
combination of the Michigan car manufacturer with Daimler-Benz
AG, Dow Jones reports.

Mr. Kerkorian and the shareholders alleged they were duped into
a takeover disguised as a merger of equals.  Their lawsuits
claim they are owed the difference between the price Chrysler's
stock would have commanded in a buyout and the price they were
given under the merger of equals label.


EPHEDRA LITIGATION: Regulators Move To Finalize Ban In April
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Bush administration is aiming to get the controversial
herbal stimulant ephedra off store shelves by April - the
government's first ever ban on a dietary supplement, the
Associated Press reports.

Ephedra once was hugely popular for weight loss and body-
building.  However, it was found to be able to cause life-
threatening side effects even in seemingly healthy people who
take the recommended doses, because the amphetamine-like
stimulant speeds heart rate and constricts blood vessels.  It is
particularly risky for anyone with heart disease or high blood
pressure or people engaging in strenuous exercise.

Ephedra has been linked to 155 deaths and dozens of heart
attacks and strokes.  In December, the Food and Drug
Administration warned consumers to stop using ephedra
immediately, saying it was working to ban sales by early this
year, AP reports.

Sales already have plummeted because of publicity about the
herb's dangers, and three states - New York, Illinois and
California - have passed their own bans.  After FDA's December
announcement, sales spiked briefly as some ephedra believers
stocked up.

A regulation formally setting that ban in motion will be
published "very soon," possibly by Friday, Associate
Commissioner Peter Pitts told AP.  Sixty days after that
publication, all sales must cease.

The FDA isn't waiting for the formal ban to stop sales of some
products that contain ephedra. On Thursday, the FDA seized
supplements from a Massachusetts-based Internet seller,
Musclemaster.com, saying the Web site illegally claimed that the
products enhanced athletic performance.  The products seized
included more than 800 bottles of Betatrim, Thermbuterol and
Stacker 2.  A call to the company was not immediately returned,
AP reports.


EVEREN SECURITIES: Stock Settlement Hearing Set For February 26
---------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Susman & Watkins, LLP announced that a
settlement hearing will be held on Thursday, February 26, 2004,
at 11:00 a.m, in the Court of Chancery Courthouse at The Circle,
Georgetown, Delaware 19947, to determine the appropriateness of
benefits in regards a lawsuit brought against Everen Securities,
Inc., on behalf of former Everen clients whose money market
sweep accounts funds were transferred as of November 1, 1996,
from investment companies managed by Zurich-Kemper Investments,
to investment companies managed by Mentor Investment Group,
Inc., pursuant to the terms of a Joint Venture Agreement between
Everen, Wheat Butcher Singer, Inc. and Mentor,  The Case is
titled O'Malley v. Boris, et al., Civil Action No. 15735-NC.

Under the proposed settlement, former Everen clients whose money
market sweep account funds were transferred to Mentor as of
November 1, 996, will be eligible to receive two Investment-
related Benefits:

     (1) The Class A Share Benefit, under which Class Members
         and their Eligible Transferees may purchase up to a
         total of $50,000 of Class A Shares of certain mutual
         funds sponsored by Evergreen Investment Management
         Company LLC, at net asset value; and

     (2) The Commission Benefit, under which Class Members and
         their Eligible Transferees may execute agency
         transactions for the purchase or sale of securities
         through Wachovia Securities, LLC, with a waiver of up
         to a maximum of $200.00 in total commissions otherwise
         charged on such transactions.

Both Benefits will be available to Class Members for a five (5)
year Benefit Period and would be transferable to certain family
members and other Eligible Transferees.

For more information, contact Susman & Watkins, LLP, by Mail:
Two First National Plaza, Suite 600, or by Phone: (312) 346-3466


FLORIDA: Appeals Court Reverses Approval of False Claims Pact
-------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court of Appeals of Florida, First
District reversed and remanded a ruling by the Circuit Court for
Leon County, which granted final approval of a settlement in
regard to a lawsuit brought against the State of Florida, R.
Brent Maggio and numerous nursing homes he owns and manages, on
behalf of Plaintiff Mindy Myers, alleging fraudulent practices
in violation of the False Claims Act.

Myers filed a qui tam action for damages and civil penalties
against the defendants, alleging fraudulent practices in
violation of the False Claims Act. While the proceeding was
pending, the State of Florida, intervened pursuant to section
68.083(6)(a), filing a complaint seeking damages and civil
penalties arising from false claims and reports submitted to the
Medicaid program for nursing home services and for care to
persons in certain nursing homes.

After the trial court had granted summary judgment for Maggio on
five out of seven counts, the state and the defendants entered
into a proposed settlement agreement, and, over Myers'
objection, the state thereafter moved for the court's approval
of it. At the hearing conducted on the motion, Myers presented
evidence showing that the proposed settlement failed to comply
with the statutory criteria of reasonableness, etc. The lower
court, while approving the agreement, never determined whether
the stipulation was reasonable, because it concluded only that
the settlement had not been obtained through fraud. This was an
error, the filing stated.

FLOWSERVE CORPORATION: Announces Probe Of Financial Statements
--------------------------------------------------------------
Flowserve Corporation on Friday announced that the Securities
and Exchange Commission initiated an informal inquiry related to
the February 3, 2004 announcement to restate its financial
statements.

Flowserve Corporation is one of the world's leading providers of
industrial flow management services.  Operating in 56 countries,
the company produces engineered and industrial pumps for the
process industries, precision mechanical seals, automated and
manual quarter-turn valves, control valves and valve actuators,
and provides a range of related flow management services.


GARDEN FRESH: Asks CA Court To Dismiss Shareholder Fraud Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Garden Fresh Restaurant Corporation asked the San Diego Superior
Court in California to dismiss the stockholder class action
filed against it, its directors and 25 unnamed "Doe" defendants
in the San Diego Superior Court in California, styled "Allan
Aites v. Garden Fresh Restaurant Corp., et al., Case No.
GIC818850."

The suit alleges that the individual defendants breached their
fiduciary duty to the Company's stockholders in connection with
the merger by advancing their individual interests at the
expense of the Company's stockholders.  The complaint also
alleges that the individual defendants failed to properly value
the Company, ignored conflicts of interest in connection with
the merger and failed to engage in arm's length negotiations in
the merger.  The complaint seeks:

     (1) a declaration that the original merger agreement was
         entered into in breach of the defendants' fiduciary
         duties;

     (2) an injunction against the defendants preventing them
         from consummating the merger unless a procedure or
         process is adopted to obtain the highest possible price
         for the stockholders;

     (3) disclosure of fourth quarter financial information;

     (4) rescission of the merger agreement;

     (5) such other equitable relief as the court deems
         appropriate; and

     (6) an award of attorneys' fees, among other relief

The Company believes this lawsuit is without merit.  A hearing
on the defendants' demurrer and application to have the
complaint dismissed was scheduled by the Court for February 6,
2004. The claims have not progressed sufficiently for the
Company to estimate a range of possible exposure, if any.


GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 1.8M Cars For Ignition Switch Problems
--------------------------------------------------------------
General Motors Corporation, in cooperation with the U.S.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), said
Friday it is recalling 1.8 million cars to repair potential
problems with the ignition switch that may cause a fire.

The models involved are 1998-2001 Chevrolet Cavaliers and
Pontiac Sunfires built between March 1997 and April 2001. In
addition, some 1998 Pontiac Grand Am, Oldsmobile Achieva, and
Buick Skylark cars built between March 1997 and January 1998 are
being recalled.

Of the total, 1.4 million of the vehicles are in the United
States and 337,000 are in Canada. The remaining vehicles are
outside these countries.  The vehicles are to be serviced to
prevent high electrical current flow through the ignition switch
that may cause a fire in the steering column.

The automaker said there have been reports of 80 incidents of
heat build up, melted components, smoldering parts, or fires in
the ignition system and steering column. It said no injuries or
fatalities have been reported.


GLAXOSMITHKLINE: To Settle Relafen Antitrust Lawsuit For $175M
--------------------------------------------------------------
GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) reached an agreement to settle an American
antitrust case involving the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory
product Relafen for US$175 million, pharmalicensing.com reports.  
The suit, filed on behalf of direct purchasers, including
pharmaceutical wholesalers, is pending in the United States
District Court in Massachusetts.

Similar actions from other plaintiffs in the Relafen antitrust
matter, including claims made by Teva, chain drug stores and Eon
Labs have also been settled, resulting in further payments from
GSK.  There remains outstanding, a claim from a class of
indirect purchasers, including consumers, which is scheduled for
trial in June 2004, pharmalicensing.com reports.

GSK continues to believe that its actions were appropriate in
obtaining and enforcing its patent for Relafen.  GSK is one of
the world's leading research-based pharmaceutical and healthcare
companies.


INCO LTD.: Ontario Court Refuses Appeal of Certification Denial
---------------------------------------------------------------
A panel of the Ontario, Canada divisional court judges refused
an appeal of a lower court decision refusing class certification
to a CD$750 million class action filed against Inco Ltd. and the
Ontario government.

The suit, which also names several other parties as defendants,
alleged CD$600 million in compensatory damages and CD$150
million in punitive damages covering certain residents who lived
in the Port Colborne area since 1995 and allegedly suffered a
decline in their property values as a result of, and health and
other injuries from exposure to, metals and related emissions
from the refinery.

In June 2002, hearings were held in the Ontario Superior Court
of Justice to consider whether this action, or any portion of
it, should be certified to proceed as a class action.  In July
2002 the court rejected certifying any part of the action as a
class action.  

The material that the plaintiff has filed as part of the appeal
indicates that the plaintiff is seeking only damages for
property value diminution and has narrowed the number of
citizens that the plaintiff is purporting to represent.  In the
ruling, the judges agreed with Superior Court Justice Ian
Nordheimer's earlier ruling that the claim by residents of Port
Colborne was not suitable to proceed as a class action.


LOS ALAMOS: More Female Employees Expected to Join Bias Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
More plaintiffs are expected to join the wage discrimination
class action filed against the Los Alamos National Laboratory,
an attorney for the plaintiffs told the New Mexico Business
Weekly.

Two female employees filed the suit in the United States
District Court, charging the laboratory with violating federal
law by not paying them the same as their male counterparts. The
lawsuit claims the female employees were denied promotions,
higher wages and educational opportunities that were provided to
male employees.

The suit further asserted that the laboratory's management
refused to correct the discriminatory practices, even if they
had been aware of it for years.  "The long-standing pay
disparity between female and male employees at LANL exists in
many different divisions at LANL, and upon information and
belief, hundreds, perhaps thousands of female LANL employees
have been adversely affected," the suit asserts.

Four more names have been added to that lawsuit and a motion has
been filed to classify the lawsuit as a class action.  
Magistrate Judge Richard L. Puglisi, who is presiding over the
case, has yet to rule on that motion.

The Company denied the allegations, calling the lawsuit
"groundless," the New Mexico Business Weekly reports.  The
Company also cited an independent report conducted by economists
at Santa Monica, California-based Welch Consulting Group in
2002, which found that there were very few instances in which
women were being paid less than men.

"The Welch report speaks for itself and allegations of the
complaint that are inconsistent with the conclusions of the
Welch report are denied," the Company said in its answer.  
However, the plaintiffs' lawsuit alleges that report was
manipulated.

LANL Director Pete Nanos told the Business Weekly his
administration has worked hard at addressing concerns about
wages and will continue to have an open-door policy with the
entire staff.  "I urge employees who have genuine concerns about
potential disparities in their own salaries to contact their
managers and I will see to it that the matter is reviewed and
addressed if appropriate," Mr. Nanos said.

Attorney Patrick D. Allen of Albuquerque-based Yensen, Lynn,
Allen & Wosick law firm, who is representing the employees, told
the Business Weekly his office is receiving calls on a weekly
basis from past and present female employees who are concerned
their rights might have been violated and are calling on him to
investigate.  He did not comment further on the lawsuit and
declined to say how many people have contacted his firm.

"I really don't know how many people we are in contact with and
I can't say how many people are going to be added to the
lawsuit," Allen told the Business Weekly.  "I just really don't
know."


MARTHA STEWART: Defense Lawyers Suggest Mr. Faneuil Had Grudge
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lawyers for Martha Stewart and her Merrill Lynch broker Peter
Bacanovic implied that the government's star witness Douglas
Faneuil had a grudge against the domestic trendsetter, which led
him to falsely accuse her of insider trading, Reuters reports.

In his most damaging testimony so far, Mr. Faneuil described Ms.
Stewarts behavior in the days prior to the sale, drawing
laughter from the jurors.  Mr. Faneuil had earlier testified
that he warned Ms. Stewart that the founder of a biotech company
in her portfolio was dumping his shares.  Ms. Stewart and her
co-defendant Peter Bacanovic, her former Merrill Lynch broker,
maintain that they had a preexisting order to sell shares of
ImClone Systems Inc. if they dropped below $60.  They are
charged with conspiring to cover up the reason Ms. Stewart sold
her shares.

David Apfel, Mr. Bacanovic's lawyer, interrogated Mr. Faneuil
about complaints he had made to his friends about Ms. Stewart's
rudeness on the phone.  The attorney suggested to the jury that
Ms. Stewart's behavior irked Mr. Faneuil so much that he
described it to regulators.

Mr. Faneuil answered the defense attorney's questions with
anecdotes that often filled the courtroom with laughter, AP
reports.  At one point he likened Ms. Stewart's voice over the
phone to "a lion roaring underwater" and said "I have never ever
been treated more rudely by a stranger on the telephone."

The defense attorney asked Mr. Faneuil if he had told
prosecutors that Ms. Stewart "told you she was going to leave
Mr. Bacanovic and leave Merrill Lynch unless the hold music was
changed."  Mr. Faneuil said it was true that Stewart did
threaten to drop his boss over the hold music, but he added  
"this is one conversation with Ms. Stewart I chose not to tell
Peter about."

Earlier, Mr. Faneuil said he lied to investigators for months
about the stock trade out of fear and intimidation that left him
afraid of his boss Bacanovic.  Portrayed by the defense as a
drug user and a liar, Mr. Faneuil, 28, eventually came forward
to tell authorities that Mr. Bacanovic ordered him to pass
insider information about ImClone Systems Inc. to Ms. Stewart
and later pressured him to cover up the reasons behind her
trade.

Mr. Faneuil said he covered up the stock sale because, "I felt I
would be fired if I didn't lie."  He pleaded guilty to a
misdemeanor for his part in the scheme and agreed to testify
about Stewart's sale of nearly 4,000 shares of ImClone on Dec.
27, 2001.  Mr. Faneuil described a "schizophrenic" atmosphere at
Merrill Lynch in the months following Ms. Stewart's ImClone
sale, where he was sometimes intimidated by his boss.  "I really
wasn't aware of being physically afraid of Peter until the day I
came forward," he said, AP reports.


MASSACHUSETTS FINANCIAL: SEC Files, Settles Admin. Proceedings
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed settled
administrative and cease-and-desist proceedings against
Massachusetts Financial Services Co. (MFS), its chief executive
officer John W. Ballen, and its president and chief equity
officer Kevin R. Parke, for violating federal securities laws by
allowing widespread market timing trading in certain MFS mutual
funds in contravention of those funds' public disclosures.

The Commission ordered MFS to pay $225 million, consisting of
$175 million in disgorgement and $50 million in penalties.  The
Commission's Order further requires MFS to undertake certain
compliance and mutual fund governance reforms designed to
enhance the independence of mutual fund boards of trustees and
strengthen oversight of MFS's compliance with the federal
securities laws.  

For their roles in the misconduct, the Commission ordered MFS
CEO Ballen and president Parke each to pay a penalty of
$250,000, disgorge over $50,000 each in ill-gotten gains derived
from MFS's market timing practices, and refrain from associating
with any investment adviser or registered investment company for
a period of nine months and six months, respectively.  In
addition, for a period of three years, Mr. Ballen and Mr. Parke
will be prohibited from serving as an officer or director of any
investment adviser, from serving as an employee, officer, or
trustee of any registered investment company, and from
performing certain duties for any investment adviser or
registered investment company.  All of the money paid by MFS,
Mr. Ballen, and Mr. Parke will be distributed to harmed
shareholders.

According to the Commission Order, beginning in late 1999, MFS
began including disclosures in its retail mutual fund
prospectuses that prohibited market timing trading in those
funds.   Contrary to those disclosures, MFS internally
categorized certain of its retail funds as "Unrestricted Funds"
with respect to market timing, and knowingly permitted
widespread market timing in these funds.  

Mr. Ballen and Mr. Parke implemented MFS's undisclosed policy
permitting market timing trading in its Unrestricted Funds
during the same period that they signed registration statements
for these funds that stated they prohibited market timing.  The
Commission also found that late trading and market timing
activities in the Unrestricted Funds caused appreciable harm and
disruption to those funds.
     
The Commission's Order finds that MFS, Mr. Ballen, and Mr. Parke
violated Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the Investment Advisers
Act and Section 34(b) of the Investment Company Act, and
requires them to cease and desist from violating these
provisions.  MFS, Mr. Ballen, and Mr. Parke consented to entry
of the Commission's Order without admitting or denying the
findings.

The Commission's investigation of MFS and this enforcement
action have been coordinated with the New York Attorney
General's Office and the New Hampshire Bureau of Securities
Regulation, and the Commission's investigation is continuing.   


MEDIRISK INC: Securities Suit Settlement Hearing Set March 22
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Northern District of
Georgia, Atlanta Division announced that a hearing will be held
before the Honorable Charles A. Pannell, Jr. in the United
States Courthouse, 75 Spring Street, S.W., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-3361, at 10:00 a.m., on March 22, 2004 to determine the
appropriateness of a proposed settlement of $4,000,000 in
regards a lawsuit brought against Medirisk Inc. Securities, on
behalf of all purchasers of Medirisk common stock issued in a
secondary public offering pursuant to, or traceable to, a
registration statement and prospectus that became effective on
June 11, 1998.

For more information, contact: Janine L. Pollack, of MILBERG
WEISS BERSHAD HYNES & LERACH LLP, by Mail: One Pennsylvania
Plaza, New York, NY 10119-0165, or by Phone: (212) 594-5300


NEW ORLEANS: Appeals Court Reverses Court Ruling in Tax Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Court of Appeals of Louisiana, Fourth District
reversed and remanded a ruling by the District Court, Orleans
Parish, which granted Defendants Exception from Prescription,
and dismissing Plaintiffs' petition and first amending petition,
with prejudice, in a lawsuit brought against the City of New
Orleans, Linebarger Goggan Blair Pena & Sampson, L.L.P. f/k/a
Heard Linebarger Graham Goggan Blair Pena & Sampson, L.L.P., and
United Governmental Services of Louisiana, Inc., on behalf of A.
Remy Fransen, Jr., and Allain F. Hardin, challenging penalties,
interest, and attorney fees assessed to delinquent personal
property taxes.

The suit was filed, on behalf of both plaintiffs against the
City and the law firm, alleging that attorney's fees were in
violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct, and that the
collection of these additional fees and penalties violated the
Louisiana Constitution.  In addition to the named defendants,
plaintiffs served the state attorney general.  On April 29,
2002, plaintiffs amended their original petition to name UGSL as
an additional defendant, alleging that this *145 company shared
fees with the law firm.  A second amending and supplemental
petition was filed to add Fransen and Hardin, A.P.L.C., as an
additional party plaintiff because of the assessment of
penalties, interest and fees for failing to pay the parties'
business personal property taxes timely.
                                                
Defendants filed various exceptions to the petition and first
amended petition, including the subject exception of
prescription.  Plaintiffs filed various motions, including two
motions for partial summary judgment.  On September 13, 2002,
the trial court rendered judgment in favor of defendants on
their exception of prescription only, dismissing plaintiffs'
original and first amended petition, with prejudice. Plaintiffs
appealed.


NEW YORK: Gloversville Faces Complaint Over Prescription Plan  
-------------------------------------------------------------
Gloversville city officials are preparing for a grievance
hearing scheduled for this week after the Civil Service
Employees Association filed a class action grievance against the
city, on behalf of unit members and stems from the city's
imposition of a new prescription plan, The Leader Herald
reports.

The grievance was filed January 27, according to a news release
from the CSEA, which represents 46 employees at city hall and
the Department of Public Works.  The release said, "The
grievance seeks as remedy adherence to contract language and
that employees be 'made whole' for any lost benefits now and in
the future."

CSEA members are concerned with different dollar amounts being
charged for certain drugs that were covered at a lower co-pay
prior to the proposed switch, according to the news release.
The CSEA's contract with the city states if members were to
switch prescription drug plans, the benefits should be equal to
or better than those of the previous plan, which was offered by
Express Scripts.

The release said that some members have found certain items,
such as syringes, are no longer covered under a prescription
benefit, but instead are covered under a medical benefit at a
cost much higher to the subscriber than the previous co-pay.

"This is a mess that needs to be cleaned up," said Kathy
Garrison, CSEA capital region president.  Mayor Frank La Porta
declined to comment while negotiations were ongoing, referring
all questions to the city labor attorney, Bryan Goldberger.

Mr. Goldberger said as per the grievance procedure in the
collective bargaining agreement between the city and the union,
city officials will discuss the union's complaints with union
officials.  "We will hear out the unions and review the matter,"
he said.

The city has been involved in negotiations with the CSEA, Police
Benevolent Association and Fire fighters Union regarding a
health care switch since November in order to save the city
money.  In addition to changing health insurance carriers, the
switch would involve union members and retirees changing
prescription drug plans from Express Script to a plan included
in a Blue Cross/Blue Shield PPO plan.


NEWPOWER HOLDINGS: Settlement Hearing Set March 10, 2004 in NY
--------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York announced that a settlement hearing, for the proposed
sum of $26,000,000 in cash, will be held on March 10, 2004, at
2:00 p.m., before the Honorable Charles L. Brieant, 300
Quarropas St., White Plains, NY 10601-4150, in the lawsuit
brought against Newpower Securities, on behalf of all persons
who purchased the common stock of Newpower Holdings, Inc. during
the period between Oct. 5, 2000 and Dec. 5, 2001, inclusive.

For more information, contact Plaintiff's Co-Lead Counsel: S.
Gene Cauley, Paul J. Geller,  Jack Reise, or Randall K. Pulliam,
of Cauley Geller Bowman & Rudman, LLP, by Mail: 11001 Executive
Center Drive, Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72211; or Andrew L.
Barroway or Katherine M. Ryan, of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP, by
Mail: Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004.


PASTA & CO: Recalls "Tuna Noodle" Casserole For Undeclared Eggs
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pasta & Co. of Seattle, WA., in cooperation with the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration (FDA), is recalling its 11 ounce and 2
lb. packages of "Tuna Noodle" casserole because it contains
undeclared eggs. People who have allergies to eggs run the risk
of serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if they consume
these products.

The recalled "Tuna Noodles" were distributed through Pasta &
Co.'s five neighborhood retail stores located in Bellevue,
Issaquah (location closed July 2003) Redmond, Queen Anne and
University Village.

The product comes in an 11 ounce plastic container or a 2 lb.
foil pan with a clear plastic lid. Affected items are marked
with lot #001 - 365 on the bottom of the package. All unsold
packages are being relabeled with the correct ingredient
statement.

No other Pasta & Co. products are affected. No illnesses have
been reported to date in connection with this problem.

The recall was initiated after it was discovered during a
labeling update that the ingredient labels on the affected
products did not include the reference to eggs.

Consumers who have purchased these products and wish to return
them for a full refund may do so by returning them to one of
Pasta & Co.'s four retail stores. Consumers with questions may
contact the company at 206-322-1644.


PENIS ENLARGEMENT PRODUCTS: CA Man Launches Suit V. Distributors
----------------------------------------------------------------
California resident Jeffery Horton filed a suit against several
international companies in the United States District Court in
Denver, Colorado, alleging that the penis-enlargement products
they market and distribute do not work, Knight-Ridder/ Tribune
Business News reports.  The suit names as defendants:

     (1) Leading Edge Marketing Inc. of British Columbia,

     (2) TechniPak LLC of Greeley,

     (3) Unipay Processing Ltd. of Cyprus,

     (4) DM Contact Management Ltd. of British Columbia,

     (5) Advanced Botanicals Ltd. of British Columbia and

     (6) several individuals associated with the companies

The suit, filed on behalf of an estimated 1 million people who
ordered the products in response to advertisements on
television, radio and spam e-mail, charges these firms with
false advertising.

"I was wondering for a long time why no one has gotten around to
suing these penis-enlargement guys, because it seems like a
pretty blatant - fraud," New York lawyer Brad Corsello, who
filed the lawsuit on behalf of Mr. Horton, told the Tribune
Business News.

The suit charges Leading Edge with promoting its enlargement
products by e-mail, radio ads and television - including a half-
hour infomercial starring adult-film legend Ron "Hedgehog"
Jeremy.  The lawsuit accuses the defendants of fraud, theft and
money-laundering.  The lawsuit claims that oils and herbal
supplements marketed by Leading Edge under the brand VigRx do
not produce the promised permanent enlargement of the penis or
cure for erectile dysfunction, among other things.  The products
cost an average of $110 apiece, according to the lawsuit.

Officials at TechniPak did not return calls seeking comment late
Thursday, the Tribune Business News reports.  The TechniPak
website describes the company as an operation that handles order
processing, warehousing, shipping and payment processing.


PENNSYLVANIA: Settlements Proposed for Graphite Antitrust Suits
---------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania announced that settlements have been proposed in
class action lawsuits alleging anti-trust violations in the sale
of non-machined and semi-machined isostatic and isotropic
graphites with the following Defendants: Le Carbone Lorraine,
Carbone Lorraine North America Corp., Carbone of America
Industries Corp., Michel Coniglio, SGL Carbon Corp., SGL Carbon
LLC, Tokai Carbon Company, Ltd., Tokai Carbon USA, Inc., Toyo
Tanso Company, Ltd., Toyo Tanso USA, Inc., Penngraph Inc.,
Ibiden Company, Ltd. And Ibiden USA Corp.

The settlements will provide approximately $18 million to pay
claims from direct purchasers in the United States who bought
non-machined and semi-machined isostatic or isotropic graphite
during the period July 1, 1993 to February 28, 1998 from the
defendants.

The lawsuit claimed that Defendants engaged in an unlawful
conspiracy to fix, raise, maintain or stabilize the prices of
non-machined and semi-machined isostatic or isotropic graphite
sold in the United States in violation of Section 1 of the
Sherman Act.

The Court will hold a hearing on this case on April 26, 2004.
For more information, contact Class Counsel: Steven A. Kanner,
or Douglas A. Millen, of Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament &
Rubenstein, PC, by Mail: 191 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 1800,
Chicago, IL 60606-1615, by Phone: 312-521-2000


PENNSYLVANIA: PA Court Announces $202M Corrugated Box Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania announced that a settlement of $202,572,489 million
has been proposed in the class action lawsuits brought against
Defendants: Stone Container Corp., Temple-Inland Inc.,
International Paper Co., Georgia Pacific Corp., Jefferson
Smurfit Corp., PCA, Gaylord Container Corp., Union Camp Corp.,
and Weyerhaeuser Co., on behalf of those who purchased
corrugated boxes or sheets between Oct. 1, 1993 and November 30,
1995, inclusive.

Briefly, the lawsuit alleges that Defendants conspired beginning
in 1993, to, among other things, increase artificially the
prices of corrugated boxes and sheets throughout the United
States, in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Anti-trust Act.

The Court has already approved prior settlements with certain
Defendants totaling $75.2 million. Two individual proposed
settlements have been reached with the remaining Defendants. A
separate settlement has been reached with Stone Container Corp.,
Jefferson Smurfit Corp., Stone-Smurfit Container Corp. for $92.5
million. A separate settlement has been reached with Packaging
Corp. of America, Tenneco, Inc., and Tenneco Packaging, Inc.,
for $34,872,489. If these settlements are approved, the
settlements in the litigation will total $202, 572, 489. A
hearing will be held on March 26, 2004 at 1:00 p.m. in Court 1B,
United States Courthouse, 601 Market Street Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania 19106.

For more information, contact C0-Lead Counsel for the Classes:
Howard Langer, of Golomb Honik & Langer, by Mail: 121 South
Broad Street, 9th Floor, Philadelphia, PA 19107; Eugene A.
Spector, of Spector Roseman & Kodroff, PC, by Mail: 1818 Market
Street, Suite 2500, Philadelphia, PA 19103; or Michael J. Freed,
of Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein, PC, by Mail:
191 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 1800, Chicago, IL 60606-1615.


PEREGRINA CHEESE: Recalls Fresh Cheese For Possible Health Risk
---------------------------------------------------------------
Peregrina Cheese Co. located at Ten Eyck Street, Brooklyn, New
York 11206, in cooperation with the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA), is recalling 14-oz. packages of "Queso
Fresco" Fresh Cheese, a soft Mexican-style cheese, code 1635,
because it has the potential to be contaminated with Listeria
monocytogenes, an organism which can cause serious and sometimes
fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly people, and
others with weakened immune systems. Although healthy
individuals may suffer only short-term symptoms such as high
fever, severe headache, stiffness, nausea, abdominal pain and
diarrhea, Listeria infection can cause miscarriages and
stillbirths among pregnant women.

The recalled "Queso Fresco" Fresh Cheese was distributed to
retail stores in metro New York City and northern New Jersey.

The "Queso Fresco" Fresh Cheese is packaged in clear, rigid
plastic containers with Plant # 36-8431 and an adhesive sticker
bearing code "1635".

No illnesses have been reported to date in connection with this
problem.

The contamination was noted after testing by the US Food and
Drug Administration revealed the presence of Listeria
monocytogenes in 14-oz. packages of "Queso Fresco" Fresh Cheese,
code 1635. The FDA and the company continue to investigate the
source of the problem.

Consumers who have purchased 14-oz. packages of "Queso Fresco"
Fresh Cheese, code 1635, are urged to return them to the place
of purchase for a full refund. Consumers with questions may
contact the company at 718-456-2391.


PLAYWELL TOY: Recalls 11,200 Activity Cubes For Choking Hazard
--------------------------------------------------------------
PlayWell Toy Company, West Orange, New Jersey, in cooperation
with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), is
recalling 11,200 PlayWell Crayolar Activity Cubes since the
small parts can detach from the cube, posing a choking hazard to
small children.

PlayWell has received three reports of small parts detaching,
including one report of a child mouthing a piece of the activity
cube. No injuries have been reported.

The Crayolar activity cube is about 9-inches tall and is made of
wood. Each side of the activity cube has a different game,
including shape sorting cut-outs and crayon character wheels.
The top of the activity cube has crayon characters and beads
that slide along a spiral glide. The packaging is labeled
"Crayolar Activity Cube" and "Playwell."

The activity cubes, manufactured in China, were sold at Shopko
Stores nationwide from October 2003 through January 2004.

Consumers are urged to take the product away from small children
immediately and contact PlayWell for instructions on returning
the product for a full refund.

For more information, contact Call PlayWell Toy Company toll-
free at (800) 836-7928 anytime or visit the firm's Web site at
www.regcen.com/activitycube.


                New Securities Fraud Cases


AGCO CORPORATION: Schiffrin & Barroway Files Stock Lawsuit in IL
----------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a class action lawsuit in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois, on behalf of all purchasers of the securities of AGCO
Corp. between February 6, 2003 and February 5, 2004, inclusive,
against AGCO, and:

     (1) Robert J. Ratliff, and

     (2) Andrew H. Beck

The lawsuit alleges defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder. During the Class Period, the defendants
issued a series of material misrepresentations to the market
concerning the Company's financial results.

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) that the Company improperly recorded revenue on its
         "bill and hold" transactions where risk did not pass to
         the customer;

    (ii) that the Company recklessly disregarded its own
         policies regarding recognizing revenue; and

   (iii) as a result of the foregoing, the Company's net income
         and earnings per share published during the Class
         Period were not in accordance with Generally Accepted
         Accounting Principles and were therefore materially
         false and misleading.

On February 5, 2004, the Company shocked the market when it
issued a press release announcing its fourth quarter and year-
end results for fiscal 2003, the period ended December 31, 2003.
At that time, the Company also disclosed that AGCO received an
informal inquiry from the SEC asking AGCO for its policies and
related information with regard to AGCO's accounting for revenue
recognition (particularly bill and hold transactions), sales and
sales returns and allowances, plant and facility closing costs
and reserves, and personal use of corporate aircraft.

Upon this news, shares of the Company's stock fell approximately
16%, or $3.10 per share, to close at $16.25 per share on
extremely high trading volume.

For more information, contact Marc A. Topaz, or Stuart L.
Berman, by Mail: Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd,
PA  19004, by Phone: 1-888-299-7706 (toll-free) or
1-610-667-7706, or by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.com.


AGCO CORPORATION: Cauley Geller Files Securities Suit in N.D. IL
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Rudman, LLP initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois, on behalf of purchasers of AGCO Corp.
publicly traded securities during the period between February 6,
2003 and February 5, 2004, inclusive, against AGCO, and:

     (1) Robert J. Ratliff, and

     (2) Andrew H. Beck

The lawsuit alleges defendants violated with violations of
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.  During the Class Period,
the defendants issued a series of material misrepresentations to
the market concerning the Company's financial results.

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) that the Company improperly recorded revenue on its
         "bill and hold" transactions where risk did not pass to
         the customer;

    (ii) that the Company recklessly disregarded its own
         policies regarding recognizing revenue; and

   (iii) as a result of the foregoing, the Company's net income
         and earnings per share published during the Class
         Period were not in accordance with Generally Accepted
         Accounting Principles and were therefore materially
         false and misleading.

On February 5, 2004, the Company shocked the market when it
issued a press release announcing its fourth quarter and year-
end results for fiscal 2003, the period ended December 31, 2003.
At that time, the Company also disclosed that AGCO received an
informal inquiry from the SEC asking AGCO for its policies and
related information with regard to AGCO's accounting for revenue
recognition (particularly bill and hold transactions), sales and
sales returns and allowances, plant and facility closing costs
and reserves, and personal use of corporate aircraft. Upon this
news, shares of the Company's stock fell approximately 16%, or
$3.10 per share, to close at $16.25 per share on extremely high
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 by E-mail: info@cauleygeller.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 as follows:

     (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.


INTERPOOL INC.: Cauley Geller Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in NJ
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cauley Geller Bowman & Rudman, LLP initiated a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of
New Jersey, on behalf of purchasers of Interpool, Inc. publicly
traded securities during the period between May 8, 2000 and
December 26, 2003, inclusive, against Interpool, and:

     (1) Raoul Witteveen,

     (2) Martin Tuchman,

     (3) William Geoghan, and

     (4) Mitchell I. Gordon

The lawsuit alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder. During the Class Period, the defendants issued a
series of material misrepresentations to the market concerning
the Company's financial results.

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) that Interpool had materially overstated its net income
         and earnings per share;

    (ii) that Interpool improperly accounted for finance leases
         by recognizing them as revenue rather than as a
         reduction of the net investment of the lease;

   (iii) that Interpool improperly classified its computer
         leasing segment as a discontinued operation when the
         Company knew or recklessly disregarded that this
         segment did meet the requirements for a discontinued
         operation;

    (iv) that Interpool's financial results were in violation of
         Generally Accepted Accounting Principles;

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

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

On March 6, 2003, Interpool shocked the investing community when
it announced that it would delay the release of its 2002 year-
end financial statements and would restate its 2001 and 2000
financial statements and its quarterly results for the first
three fiscal quarters of 2002.

On July 18, 2003, Interpool announced it would further delay the
release of its audited financial statements for 2002 and its
restated financial statements for 2001 and 2000 while special
outside counsel engaged by Interpool's audit committee conducted
an inquiry into the causes of the incorrect accounting treatment
that required the restatement of past financial results.

On October 10, 2003, Interpool announced that after a
preliminary report by an independent outside law firm appointed
by the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors to investigate
accounting issues, the Board had accepted the resignation of
defendant Witteveen.  News of this shocked the market. Shares of
Interpool fell 13.4%, or $2.22 per share, to close at $14.35 per
share.

Interpool further shocked the market on December 29, 2003 when
it announced that it anticipated an additional delay in the
completion of its restated 2000 and 2001 financial statements
and 2002 financial statements and the filing of its Annual
Report on Form 10-K for 2002 with the Securities and Exchange
Commission ("SEC"). On this news shares of Interpool fell
37.69%, or $7.26 per share, to close at $12.00 per share. On
January 6, 2004, Interpool announced that the SEC had notified
the company that its informal investigation into its accounting
had become a formal SEC inquiry.

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 by E-mail: info@cauleygeller.com.


INTERPOOL: Schiffrin & Barroway Files Securities Lawsuit in NJ
--------------------------------------------------------------
Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP initiated a class action lawsuit in
the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey,
on behalf of all purchasers of the publicly traded securities of
Interpool, Inc. between May 8, 2000 and December 26, 2003,
inclusive, against Interpool, and:

      (1) Raoul Witteveen,

      (2) Martin Tuchman,

      (3) William Geoghan, and

      (4) Mitchell I. Gordon

The lawsuit alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder. During the Class Period, the defendants issued a
series of material misrepresentations to the market concerning
the Company's financial results.

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) that Interpool had materially overstated its net income
         and earnings per share;

    (ii) that Interpool improperly accounted for finance leases
         by recognizing them as revenue rather than as a
         reduction of the net investment of the lease;

   (iii) that Interpool improperly classified its computer
         leasing segment as a discontinued operation when the
         Company knew or recklessly disregarded that this
         segment did meet the requirements for a discontinued
         operation;

    (iv) that Interpool's financial results were in violation of
         Generally Accepted Accounting Principles;

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

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

On March 6, 2003, Interpool shocked the investing community when
it announced that it would delay the release of its 2002 year-
end financial statements and would restate its 2001 and 2000
financial statements and its quarterly results for the first
three fiscal quarters of 2002. On July 18, 2003, Interpool
announced it would further delay the release of its audited
financial statements for 2002 and its restated financial
statements for 2001 and 2000 while special outside counsel
engaged by Interpool's audit committee conducted an inquiry into
the causes of the incorrect accounting treatment that required
the restatement of past financial results. On October 10, 2003,
Interpool announced that after a preliminary report by an
independent outside law firm appointed by the Audit Committee of
the Board of Directors to investigate accounting issues, the
Board had accepted the resignation of defendant Witteveen. News
of this shocked the market. Shares of Interpool fell 13.4%, or
$2.22 per share, to close at $14.35 per share.

Interpool further shocked the market on December 29, 2003 when
it announced that it anticipated an additional delay in the
completion of its restated 2000 and 2001 financial statements
and 2002 financial statements and the filing of its Annual
Report on Form 10-K for 2002 with the Securities and Exchange
Commission ("SEC"). On this news shares of Interpool fell
37.69%, or $7.26 per share, to close at $12.00 per share. On
January 6, 2004, Interpool announced that the SEC had notified
the company that its informal investigation into its accounting
had become a formal SEC inquiry.

For more information, contact Marc A. Topaz or Stuart L. Berman,
by Mail: Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 400, Bala Cynwyd, PA  
19004, by Phone: 1-888-299-7706 (toll free) or 1-610-667-7706,
or by E-mail: info@sbclasslaw.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  * * *