/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/040713.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Tuesday, July 13, 2004, Vol. 6, No. 137 Headlines BISYS GROUP: CO Suit Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set July 18, 2004 BRIDGESTONE-FIRESTONE: CA Court Refuses Tire Suit Certification COMMERCE BANCORP: Scott + Scott Updates NJ Securities Fraud Suit CORINTHIAN COLLEGES: Investors Launch CA Securities Fraud Suit DE BEERS: To Plead Guilty To Antitrust Charges in American Court DEY L.P.: Employees Lodge Overtime Wage Lawsuit in Napa County GOLD BANC: Clarifies Merger, Announces Fiduciary Suit Dismissal HAYES LEMMERZ: Suit Settlement Hearing Set September 29, 2004 INFANT FORMULA: FDA Issues Warning On Infant Formula From China ISPAT ISCOR: Suit Over Environmental Degradation Possible in NY JC NICHOLS: Parent Settles Shareholder Fraud Lawsuit For $5.7M LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES: Suit Settlement Hearing Set July 27, 2004 MCDONALD'S CORPORATION: CA Consumer Commences "Fat Oil" Lawsuit MILBANK TWEED: Requesting Dismissal From Enron Litigation MONSTER CABLE: Suit Settlement Hearing Set August 26, 2004 PRICE CHOPPER: Recalls Mussels Because of Listeria Contamination QUALITY DINING: Shareholders Launch Suit Over Going Private Bid SPECTRALINK CORPORATION: Suit Settlement Hearing October 7, 2004 SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES: SEC Suspends, Settles Fraud Charges V. CPA TRIBUNE CO.: Olympic Carpet Files Suit V. Inflated Circulation VICURON PHARMACEUTICALS: Plaintiff Deadline Set August 14, 2004 New Securities Fraud Cases CALLIDUS SOFTWARE: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. CA CENTRAL FREIGHT: Lasky & Rifkind Lodges Securities Suit in TX CORINTHIAN COLLEGES: Charles Piven Files Securities Suit C.D. CA CORINTHIAN COLLEGES: Weiss & Yourman Files Securities Suit in CA INTRABIOTICS PHARMACEUTICALS: Marc Henzel Files Stock Suit in CA MASTEC INC.: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. FL MERIX CORPORATION: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Securities Suit in OR NDCHEALTH CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in GA QUALITY DISTRIBUTION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in FL QUOVADX INC.: Marc Henzel Files Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA SUPERCONDUCTOR TECHNOLOGIES: Marc Henzel Lodges Stock Suit in CA VERITAS SOFTWARE: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Suit in DE YUKOS OIL: Schatz & Nobel Files Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY YUKOS OIL: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY ********* BISYS GROUP: CO Suit Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set July 18, 2004 -------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP reminds investors that the lead Plaintiff deadline for class action filed in the United States District Court District of Colorado, on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired BISYS Group Inc. ("BISYS" or the "Company") securities on any exchange (NYSE:BSG) between October 23, 2000 to May 17, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period") is on July 18, 2004. The complaint alleges defendants caused BISYS's shares to trade at artificially inflated levels through the issuance of false and misleading financial statements that underrepresented anticipated adjustments to its commissions receivables. As a result of this inflation, BISYS was able to raise $250 million in a convertible note offering while the individual defendants were able to reap more than $25 million in insider trading proceeds. On May 17, 2004, the Company issued a press release that stated, in pertinent part: Based upon a continuing review and analysis of commissions receivable in its Life Insurance division, BISYS has determined that the previously reported adjustment of $24.7 million ($15.5 million net of tax) to commissions receivable in its Life Insurance division will be increased to approximately $70 million to $80 million (approximately $44 million to $50 million net of tax). The stock price fell 10%, to below $13 per share, on this news. For more details, contact Eric J. Belfi or Aaron D. Patton at Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP by Mail: 275 Madison Avenue, Suite 801, New York, NY 10016 by Phone: (800) 497-8076 or (212) 682-1818 by Fax (212) 682-1892 or by E-mail: info@murrayfrank.com BRIDGESTONE-FIRESTONE: CA Court Refuses Tire Suit Certification --------------------------------------------------------------- After being denied national class action status for a defective tire lawsuit by a California judge, the attorneys involved in the suit plan to continue their legal battle, the Desert Sun reports. According to Pasadena attorney Joseph Lisoni, who represents Cathedral City resident Roger Littell, 65, in the suit against Bridgestone-Firestone Inc., "We feel the judge misunderstood the theory of our case." Mr. Lisoni said he would immediately file an appeal with the California Fourth District Court of Appeal and in the next 10 days asking Judge Christopher Sheldon to reconsider his decision. Judge Sheldon had denied Mr. Lisoni's motion "without prejudice," meaning it can be refilled, the Desert Sun reports. Judge Sheldon issued his ruling after a hearing so brief that Bridgestone/Firestone representatives were not even given a chance to take into court two tires and a chart they'd brought as evidence. In denying Mr. Lisoni's motion, Judge Sheldon said evidence required for class-action certification was lacking in every area. Though arguing unsuccessfully, Mr. Lisoni did address key issues required for class-action certification - that there are questions of law and fact common to members of the class in various states. In this case, the common question is whether the Steeltex tires are defective. However, according to Judge Sheldon, people in 38 states had different types of tires and different sets of facts for why tires failed. Mr. Lisoni also said that in addition to appealing Judge Sheldon's decision, he would also pursue class-action status in six states, including California. The states were picked because they had the highest frequency of Steeltex tire failure. Mr. Littell's suit, which was filed in August 2002, alleges that defects in the design and manufacture of the Steeltex tire series have led to tread separations and caused collisions, injuries and deaths. The tires the lawsuit targets are Steeltex R4S, R4SII and A/T tires commonly used on vans and recreational vehicles. Bridgestone/Firestone announced in February it was recalling Steeltex tires from a Canadian plant because of increased claims. However, the recall is a voluntary safety campaign to determine if there's a problem with the tires and is not an admission the tires are defective, MacDonald told the Desert Sun. Bridgestone/Firestone spokesman, Dan MacDonald acknowledged that the company is under a cloud because of previous lawsuits involving the ATX, ATX II and Wilderness AT tires, which were involved in accidents with 271 deaths, but stated that the current ruling by Judge Sheldon was just and he further reiterated that "The judge analyzed the facts and made a proper decision." On Monday, a state court judge in Texas approved a $149 million settlement on behalf of owners of those three types of tires. Only plaintiffs who had not suffered injury or property damage were involved in the settlement, which resolved 30 class-action lawsuits against Bridgestone-Firestone. The Company has spent an estimated $1.5 billion on recall- related costs in those cases and only recently returned to profitability. COMMERCE BANCORP: Scott + Scott Updates NJ Securities Fraud Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Scott + Scott, LLC announces updates and new allegations in a class action lawsuit initiated in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on behalf of the purchasers of Commerce Bancorp (NYSE: CBH)("Commerce") securities between the period of June 1, 2002 and June 28, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"). Plaintiffs allege that during this period, that Commerce and certain of its officers and directors were in violation of the United States Federal securities laws (Securities Exchange Act of 1934). The complaint alleges that the Individual Defendants, who include officers and directors of Commerce, had intimate knowledge of FBI investigations and grand jury proceedings delving into the actions of defendants Commerce, Ronald White ("White"), Glenn Holck ("Holck"), and Stephen Umbrell ("Umbrell"). The FBI raided the law offices of White, Director of Commerce Bank/Pennsylvania, on October 16, 2003. Thereafter, the attorneys representing Holck, president of Commerce Bank/Pennsylvania, and Umbrell, regional vice-president of Commerce Bank/Pennsylvania, had access to the telephone tapes that were at the center of the eventual criminal indictments. It is alleged that these tapes clearly establish the culpability of the three Commerce Bank/Pennsylvania defendants. During the grand jury proceedings, various Commerce officers testified, many of them with representation from attorneys from the law firm of a member of the Board of Directors of Commerce. In December 2003 and January 2004, a few months after the raid on White's law offices, the Chairman and CEO sold and/or disposed of Commerce shares for insider sale proceeds of USD $5.9 million. Despite the intimate knowledge of Commerce senior executives, including its Chairman and CEO, of the investigation and criminal grand jury proceedings, it is alleged that such information was never disclosed to investors during the Class Period and only became known on or about June 29, 2004. On that, US Attorney Patrick Meehan announced that a former Commerce director and two executives had been indicted of various charges which include conspiracy to commit honest services fraud, wire fraud, mail fraud, extortion and making false statements to the FBI. The complaint further alleges that Commerce and certain of its officers and directors engaged in improper, inherently unsustainable, and potentially criminal bribery and bid-rigging in order to win underwriting awards and gain government deposits. In recent indictments of two executives and a director of Commerce Bank/Pennsylvania, it is alleged that such practices were used to procure over USD $233 million (the current complaint alleges USD $50 million) in government deposits (according to an investigation of City records by the Philadelphia Daily News) and USD $1.7 million in fees from the City of Philadelphia alone. Moreover, the indictments indicate that the practices included the direct participation of Commerce's chairman and chief executive officer. Others involved have been indicted as well. Currently, 18% of Commerce's deposits are from municipalities, more than any of its rivals. Analysts have expressed concern that such government deposits may shrink as a result of the indictments. Securities analysts have expressed concern that Commerce Bank's government deposit base, and underwriting and insurance businesses could suffer as a result of municipalities' fear of "guilt by association" with Commerce Bank. Additionally, since the filing of the first complaint by Scott + Scott, significant new allegations have surfaced and will be plead, including: (1) Commerce laundered funds between its state and federal political action committees (PACs), which have given more than USD $3.1 million to candidates and political parties since 1998, in order to circumvent Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board's rule G-37. Scott + Scott is informed that Commerce Capital Markets employees contributed to the federal PAC because the contributions to the state PACs would have prevented Commerce from performing municipal underwriting services for any municipalities in which the state PACs made campaign contributions. Nevertheless, the federal PACs regularly loaned funds to the state PACs. For example, on August 7, 2001, Pennsylvania Auditor General Robert Casey Jr. received a USD $25,000 campaign contribution from Compac, Commerce's Pennsylvania state PAC. On the same day, Compac received a USD $25,000 loan from Commerce's federal PAC. Casey subsequently selected Commerce Bank for two state bond offerings. (2) Former employees have alleged that Commerce effectively required certain of its employees to make contributions to the PACs. (3) It is alleged that Commerce improperly capitalized ordinary expenses as pre-opening expenses for bank premises and equipment, thereby artificially increasing reported net income. Commerce capitalizes almost twice as much as its rivals for pre-opening expenses per branch. (4) Scott + Scott is informed that in October 2003, the FBI raided Commerce's main Pennsylvania office at 20th and Market streets, which was not disclosed to investors. (4) Scott + Scott is also informed that Commerce Bank director and Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Commerce Insurance Services, Inc. (and Commerce's largest insider shareholder) George Norcross has been the subject of at least one criminal RICO investigation and a civil RICO lawsuit regarding his political activities in New Jersey. According to press reports, of the 312 New Jersey municipalities that share insurance costs, 305 used Commerce Insurance Services for their risk management services as of February 2003. For more details, contact Neil Rothstein by Mail: 108 Norwich Avenue, Colchester, CT 06415 by Phone: 1/800-404-7770 (EDT) or 1/800-332-2259 (PDT) or 1/619-233-4565 (California) or 860/537-3818 by Fax: 860/537-4432 or by E-mail: nrothstein@scott-scott.com or CommerceBancorpSecuritiesLitigation@scott-scott.com CORINTHIAN COLLEGES: Investors Launch CA Securities Fraud Suit -------------------------------------------------------------- Shareholders launched a securities class action against Corinthian Colleges, Inc. (Nasdaq: COCO), two current officers and one former officer, in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The complaint alleges Corinthian and certain of its officers violated federal securities laws by failing to disclose the Company's lack of internal controls and that the Department of Education had uncovered violations in the application process for federal student loans at one of its campuses in December of 2003. The complaint further alleges that as a result, the school had lost its ability to receive advance payments on its student loans. Only after these events were ultimately revealed by certain publications did the Company acknowledge them to the investing community. In fact, during the Class Period, defendants specifically denied knowledge of any "events or activities that would warrant any concern in the Company's performance," and continued to announce record results and optimistic forecasts to the market. All the while, certain Company insiders sold more than $18 million worth of their personal shares of Corinthian stock during the Class Period. Corinthian operates approximately 150 for-profit colleges and training centers in North America, including Bryman College, Florida Metropolitan University, Rhodes College and the National Institute of Technology. DE BEERS: To Plead Guilty To Antitrust Charges in American Court ---------------------------------------------------------------- De Beers, the world's largest diamond company, has indicated that it would plead guilty on Tuesday to an American suit, charging it with fixing the prices of industrial diamonds, a court clerk for an Ohio Court said, the Business Report states. The Company failed to appear in court to face the suit, filed in 1994, alleging that it conspired to violate antitrust laws in 1991 and 199. The Company's admission ends a ten-year legal battle and would net a maximum penalty of US$10 million, Keith Mayton, a clerk for Judge George Smith in Columbus, Ohio, told the Business Report. Andrew Bone, a spokesperson for the Company, declined to comment on the suit. The Company's guilty plea might pave the way for it to expand in the US, where half of all diamond jewelry is sold. The company is already moving beyond the $8 billion-a- year rough diamond industry into the $60 billion diamond retail market through a venture with LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton. However, pleading guilty to the US charge might attract more lawsuits, Chaim Evan-Zohar, the principal shareholder in Ramat Gan, an Israeli-based consultant told the Business Report. "Entering such a plea will be a monumental mistake," Mr. Evan- Zohar said. "Any admission will be used quickly and immediately by many other class action lawyers." The Company also faces a suit filed last week in New York by WB David & Co, a jeweler and former De Beers client, demanding at least $100 million in damages and alleging it behaved like a monopoly. The Company has labeled the suit "without merit." DEY L.P.: Employees Lodge Overtime Wage Lawsuit in Napa County -------------------------------------------------------------- Employees of Dey L.P. initiated a lawsuit seeking class action status claiming that the Company failed to pay them for overtime they worked, Napa Valley Register reports. Michael McBride, Ali Rahman, John Chase, Eric Lyman, Jerome Serrano, and Dolores Calvo filed the suit against Dey, Napa County's largest employer, claiming that the company illegally bilked them out of overtime pay by using employee's paychecks as a makeshift contract to shield the company from lawsuits. The plaintiffs also claim that the company did not count the time required to don scrubs and gowns that are needed for work in the company's manufacturing rooms. "Dey has acknowledged that its overtime policies were improper and has attempted to obtain a waiver of certain overtime claims from its employees," their complaint filed in Napa Superior Court states. "Dey provided certain employees with a check that contained the following language on the back of the check: 'Cashing this check constitutes a complete waiver of any claim associated with Dey's 12 hour non-exempt shifts or penalties arising prior to December 14, 2003.'" Mr. Rahman and Ms. Calvo are former manufacturing employees at Dey, while the rest of the plaintiffs still work for Dey. The employees told NapaNews.com that Dey paychecks did not provide the company with legal cover because they did not inform the employees of all the legal rights they would waive if they cashed the check. Mel Engle, president and CEO of Dey L.P. released a statement in reaction to the lawsuit. "We settled the back pay issues raised in this complaint with the state of California earlier this year, and are now working to understand the merits of this new case," he said. "We had the impression that the state had the statutory authority to represent the employees' interests. The new complaint doesn't refer to the settlement with the state. Lawsuits and litigation don't move companies forward; teamwork in an environment of mutual trust does. It is in this spirit that I am approaching this current matter." The parties are scheduled to discuss the case in front of judge on November 29, 2004, the Napa Valley Register reports. GOLD BANC: Clarifies Merger, Announces Fiduciary Suit Dismissal --------------------------------------------------------------- Gold Banc Corporation, Inc. ("Gold Banc") (Nasdaq:GLDB) has been informed that statements and quotes attributable to Gold Banc appear on the website DealAnalytics.com that contain information regarding the status of the pending merger with Silver Acquisition Corp., including the effect of the previously announced qui tam lawsuit on the merger. Gold Banc has stated that it did not authorize these statements to be made and reiterates its previous statement that it is currently not in a position to determine what effect, if any the qui tam lawsuit will have on the pending merger. The merger cannot be closed unless regulatory and shareholder approval have been obtained and the other conditions to closing have been satisfied or waived. Gold Banc notes, in this regard, that the Office of Thrift Supervision has updated its website (www.ots.treas.gov) to indicate that its decision due date with regard to Silver Acquisition's application has been moved to October 19, 2004. The actual approval date may be earlier or later contingent upon various factors, including Silver Acquisition's submission date of additional information requested by the OTS. Each time the OTS requests additional information, 45 days are added to the review process (30 days for the applicant to respond to the request and 15 days for the OTS to determine the sufficiency of the submitted information). On July 6, 2004, the OTS requested additional information, triggering the new decision date referenced above. Once the application is deemed complete, the OTS generally has 60 days to render a decision, which time period is factored into the aforementioned decision date. Silver Acquisition has informed Gold Banc that it is taking all actions within its disposal to expedite the processing of its applications, including submitting the requested information well in advance of the allotted 30-day period. Gold Banc continues to be unable to predict whether regulatory approval will be received; or if such approval is received, the timing of receipt thereof, the expiration of any applicable waiting period thereafter, or the consummation of the merger. Unless extended by mutual agreement, the merger agreement can be terminated by Gold Banc or Silver Acquisition if the closing has not occurred by November 24, 2004. Gold Banc also announced the dismissal with prejudice of the class action lawsuit filed by Lori McBride on behalf of herself and other similarly situated stockholders against Gold Banc and nine of its directors alleging a breach of fiduciary duty by Gold Banc and the named directors in connection with the merger, which had been previously disclosed in Gold Banc's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2004. HAYES LEMMERZ: Suit Settlement Hearing Set September 29, 2004 ------------------------------------------------------------- The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan - Southern Division will hold a fairness hearing for the proposed settlement for the class action filed against Hayes Lemmerz International, Inc. on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the equity securities of the Company during the period from June 3, 1999 through and including September 5, 2001, and who were damaged thereby. The Court has scheduled a fairness hearing to approve the proposed settlement, which will be held before the Honorable Arthur J. Tarnow in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division, at 3:00pm, on September 9, 2004. For more details, contact Hayes Lemmerz Equity Securities Litigation by Mail: c/o The Garden City Group, Inc. - P.O. Box 9000 #6236, Merrick, NY 11566-9000 or Daniel Osborn, Esq. of Beatie And Osborn LLP, by Mail: 521 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3400, New York, NY 10175 INFANT FORMULA: FDA Issues Warning On Infant Formula From China --------------------------------------------------------------- The Food and Drug Administration is warning consumers not to feed their infants infant formula from China because the safety and nutritional adequacy of infant formula from China is unknown. Recently, infant formula from China by the name of Guan Wei Yuan was found for sale in an Asian retail market in New York. To date, FDA is not aware of any illnesses or injuries associated with Chinese infant formula, Guan Wei Yuan. However, the analysis of certain Guan Wei Yuan powdered formulas by the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets food laboratory found the formula to contain less than 1/7 of the federally required minimal amount of protein per serving, approximately 1/4 the required amount of fat and only minute amounts of declared calcium and magnesium. There is no guarantee that this product, as a potential sole source of nutrition, would provide adequate nutrients for an infant. Consumption by infants, under conditions of use described on the label and labeling, could result in outcomes including severe illness or death. The federal law requires that any infant formula marketed in the U.S. must be registered with the FDA at least 90 days before marketing. Manufacturers are required to provide assurances that they are following good manufacturing practices and quality control procedures and that the formula will allow infants to thrive. Such assurances have not been provided for any infant formulas from China. Therefore, the agency is warning consumers that the safety and nutritional adequacy of infant formula from China is unknown. FDA will continue to investigate and work with New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets and alert other states of the findings. Consumers are advised to report any adverse reactions related to infant formula immediately to your health care provider as well as the FDA and state and local agencies. For more details, contact The Food And Drug Administration - Media Inquiries: 301-827-6242 or Consumer Inquiries: 888-INFO-FDA. ISPAT ISCOR: Suit Over Environmental Degradation Possible in NY --------------------------------------------------------------- The class action filed against Ispat Iscor, Africa's biggest steel producer, seeking compensation for people who suffered degradation of their environment, is on its way to a New York high court, the Business Report states. 16 residents of the Steel Valley town of Vanderbijlpark initially filed the suit, alleging that the Company polluted their water and brought sickness and suffering to their families, for over 40 years. The suit also alleged that polluted water killed livestock, and caused crops and vegetables to wither and die. The Company has taken steps to counteract the charges. In an advertisement in the Financial Mail last week, the Company announced that it was investing over R1 billion to ensure that its steel mills were rated zero effluent. "When we say we will be compliant with environmental global practice, it is more than simply a commitment, it is a matter of trust. On that you have our word," the advert said. However, the six-member Steel Valley Crisis Committee and its allies were not ready to take the Company's word. Bobby Peek, the director of groundWork, an environmental group that has supported the crisis committee, described the advert as "greenwash" and told the Business Report the steel giant was spending huge sums of money to tell the world what it intended to do when little had been done. According to pollution ecologist and former Iscor employee Pieter van Eeden, " . we cannot trust the word of Iscor." He had leaked information to the media and the claimants and said that the company had ignored all the directives of the government as well as the plight of the community. However, Marius Keet, the deputy director of water quality management at the department of water affairs, said Iscor had submitted the plans and a water use licence had been issued to the company. According to the licence, the slag dump in the Vaal area would have to be phased out by 2010 and a new location found. This was being monitored by the department. Mr. Keet also said the department was in talks with the company and the community to ensure Iscor did rehabilitate the environment, the Business Report states. Samson Mokoena, the crisis committee chairman, told the Business Report the members had lost faith in the South African courts and this was the reason they were preparing to take class action against the company in New York. They would target Iscor's suppliers in the US as well as LNM Holdings, a major shareholder of Iscor. In 2002, the Johannesburg high court granted an interdict for the plaintiffs against the Company. However, in the same year, the Company obtained a gag order preventing the applicants from speaking to the media about the case. It was later lifted in September 2002. Later, presiding judge Michael Hellens recused himself after facing charges of bias. A year later, judge Meyer Joffe dismissed the application on the grounds that it was "deficient." Attorney for the plaintiffs Nathan Lewin told the Business Report that his team had in June petitioned the chief justice of the supreme court of appeal for special leave to appeal. He refused to comment on whether he was planning to move the case to New York. "It is the only route that will ensure that Iscor accounts for the way it has destroyed the environment," he added. Iscor spokesperson Elton Fourie could not say how much had been spent on rehabilitating the environment. Research would have to be conducted to determine the amount. Iscor said it was "expending between R140 million and R161 million on environmental capital expenditure on company-wide projects for the first six months of 2004," the Business Report states. JC NICHOLS: Parent Settles Shareholder Fraud Lawsuit For $5.7M -------------------------------------------------------------- Highwoods, parent of J.C. Nichols Company, agreed to settle a securities class action filed against J.C. Nichols in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas for $5.7 million. Highwoods, a Raleigh, N.C.-based real estate investment trust, acquired Nichols in 1998 for $65 per share. The original complaint charges defendants with violations of Sections 11, 12(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 ('Securities Act'), in connection with, among other things, the dissemination of a Joint Proxy/Prospectus on Form S-4 on or about June 2, 1998 (the 'Proxy'), containing materially false and misleading statements and omissions of material fact, through which defendants obtained shareholder approval of the acquisition of JCN by Highwoods (the 'Acquisition'). Specifically, the complaint alleges, inter alia, that the Proxy was misleading in its recommendation of the Acquisition, its discussion of alternatives to the Acquisition, other offers, the limitations of the scope of the fairness opinion, contained in the Proxy, and the Company's refusal to indemnify Duff & Phelps, an advisor to the ESOP. The complaint also charges certain of the defendants with violations of their common law fiduciary duties under Sections 14(a) and 20 of the Exchange Act, and Sections 409(a) and 502(a) of ERISA in connection with their effectuation of the inadequate and unfair Acquisition. The class includes a subclass of all participants in the J.C. Nichols Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) The suit styled "Flake v. J.C. Nichols Company, is pending in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas on behalf of purchasers of the Company's stock from June 2,1998 through October 1,1998. The plaintiff firms in the suit are: (1) Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP, Mail: 100 Park Avenue, New York, NY, 10017, Phone: 212-907-0700, Fax: 212-818-0477, by E-mail: info@glrslaw.com; (2) Lasky & Rifkind, Ltd., Mail: 100 Park Avenue, New York, NY, 10017; (3) Logan Law Firm LLC, Mail: 153 West 151st Street, Suite 110, Olathe, KS, 66051-0790, Phone: 913-390-8900, E- mail: jklogan@actec.org. LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES: Suit Settlement Hearing Set July 27, 2004 -------------------------------------------------------------- The Circuit Court of Kanawha County, West Virginia will hold a fairness hearing for the proposed settlement for the class action filed against Lucent Technologies, Inc. on behalf of all persons who purchased, financed or leased a Y2K Non-Compliant Telecommunications product from Lucent Technologies Inc. or AT & T Corporation, between January 1, 1990 and December 31, 1999. The fairness hearing will be held before the Honorable Tod J. Kaufman in Circuit Court, Kanawha County Judicial Annex, WV, on July 27, 2004 at 10:00am. For more details, contact The Claims Administrator - Community Health Association by Mail: c/o Gilardi & Co. LLC, P.O. Box 1110, Corte Madera, CA 94976-1110 or by Phone: (800) 447-7657 MCDONALD'S CORPORATION: CA Consumer Commences "Fat Oil" Lawsuit ---------------------------------------------------------------- Fast food giant McDonald's faces another class action, filed in the United States District Court in San Francisco, California, alleging the Company failed to fulfill its promise of switching to healthier lower-fat cooking oil, ABC News Online reports. San Francisco talk show host Katherine Fettke filed the suit, alleging the Company reneged on the promise it made in September 2002 that it would switch its cooking oil to help eliminate the trans fatty acids from its menu. The suit alleges the Company was not fully using a cooking oil with reduced levels of trans fatty acids and has yet to publicly disclose that in an effective manner. Ms. Fettke alleged that she would not have bought McDonald's Filet-O-Fish and French fries for herself and Happy Meals, Chicken McNuggets and crispy chicken sandwiches for her children several times last year had she known the oil switch had not taken place. "If they had a solution, what's the problem here?" Ms Fettke told Reuters. "I thought I was getting a better choice as far as fast food goes." Ms. Fettke had earlier filed a lawsuit seeking to stop Kraft Foods from selling its popular Oreo Cookies in California to children because the cookies contained trans fatty acids. These acids have been linked to increased levels of "bad" cholesterol and associated with clogged arteries. The Company has yet to see the suit. McDonald's spokeswoman Lisa Howard said the company's oil switch was progressing, though at a pace slower than expected, ABC News Online reports. "In February of 2003, we made a broad public statement that the change in our cooking oil was taking longer than anticipated and would be delayed," she said in a statement. Since then, McDonald's has reduced levels of trans fatty acids in its McNuggets and other chicken foods and the company is "committed to getting it right for our customers." MILBANK TWEED: Requesting Dismissal From Enron Litigation --------------------------------------------------------- Milbank Tweed will attempt this week to ask for the dismissal of a class action filed against it in relation to its role in the massive fraud at fallen energy giant Enron Corporation that later led to its bankruptcy in late 2001, the Financial Times reports. The suit alleges that Milbank Tweed, one of the world's most prestigious law firms, played a significant role in the Enron debacle in its capacity as legal adviser to the group and some of its investment banks. The suit is less prominent than those filed against other outside Enron law firms such as Vinson & Elkins and Kirkland & Ellis, but the firm would be severely damaged if it lost or were forced to settle. Prominent class action firm Milberg Weiss filed the suit on behalf of the Company's investors. Milberg has since split into two firms and the Milbank case is being managed by the new firm of Lerach Coughlin Stoia & Robbins. William Lerach told FT.com, "My view is that Milbank Tweed is the worst of all the advisers. They were participating with a number of the banks in structuring the very manipulative transactions that inflated Enron's earnings and balance sheet." In its first motion to dismiss, Milbank says many of the transactions that it was involved in were private placements of securities and therefore not issues brought by the class-action plaintiffs. It says it was not part of a grand scheme to defraud. Milbank separately pointed out to the Financial Times that it was not criticized in the extensive report into the collapse of Enron by Neal Batson, a court-appointed examiner who otherwise slammed many of Enron's banks and other advisers. MONSTER CABLE: Suit Settlement Hearing Set August 26, 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------- The California Superior Court for the County of San Mateo will hold a fairness hearing for the proposed settlement for the class action filed against Monster Cable Products, Inc. on behalf of all purchasers and owners of Monster "Power Cells" High Capacity Alkaline Batteries. The settlement hearing will be held before the Honorable Carol L. Mittlesteadt in the Hall of Justice, Courtroom 8A, 400 County Center, Redwood City, CA 94063, on August 26, 2004 at 9:00am. For more details, contact Edward A. Wallace of the Wexler Firm LLP by Mail: One North LaSalle Street, Suite 2000, Chicago, IL 60602 by Phone: 312-346-2222 or by Fax 312-346-0022 or Shannon P. Cereghino Finkelstein Thompson and Loughran by Mail: 235 Pine Street, 15th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94104 by Phone: 415-477-6730 or by Fax: 415-477-6710 OR visit the settlement Web site: http://www.powercellsetlement.com PRICE CHOPPER: Recalls Mussels Because of Listeria Contamination ---------------------------------------------------------------- Responding to a recall from New England Smoked Seafood, Inc., Price Chopper Supermarkets is voluntarily recalling 4oz. Packed Smoked Mussels with a specific "Best If Used By: August 25, 2004" date. The product has the potential to be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes, an organism that 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 Smoked Mussels were distributed to Price Chopper retail stores in Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York and Pennsylvania. The packages were packed in a 4 oz. Vacuum-packed bags labeled as "Chef Noel's New England Smoked Seafood Applewood Smoked Mussels Vermont Made". The firm was notified of the findings of Listeria monocytogenes by the State of New York Department of Agriculture and Markets during a routine sampling collection. The FDA was also notified of this problem. There have been no reported illnesses to date. Customers may return the product to Price Chopper for a full refund. For more details, contact Price Chopper's Consumer Services Department at 1-800-666-7667, Option 3 or Mona J. Golub, Director of Public Relations and Consumer Services at (518) 379-1480. QUALITY DINING: Shareholders Launch Suit Over Going Private Bid --------------------------------------------------------------- Restaurant chain Quality Dining faces a shareholder class action filed in St. Joseph Superior Court in Indiana, opposing a bid by several company officials to return the business to private ownership, The South Bend Tribune reports. In June, five Company executives, led by president and chief executive officer Daniel B. Fitzpatrick, announced plans to pay $2.75 per outstanding share, delist the company from the Nasdaq and take it back to private ownership. Company executives cited the expenses of remaining a public company as the reason for going back to private ownership. Law firm Kroger Gardis & Regas filed the suit against the Company, its directors and two of its officers on behalf of its shareholders, alleging the defendants breached their fiduciary duty by advancing their individual interests at the expense of public shareholders. The suit seeks an injunction stopping the effort to take the company private, as well as monetary damages and court costs. The suit also names as defendants: (1) Gerald O. Fitzpatrick, (2) James K. Fitzpatrick, (3) John C. Firth, (4) Philip J. Faccenda, (5) Ezra H. Friedlander, (6) Bruce M. Jacobson, (7) Steven M. Lewis, and (8) Christopher J. Murphy III The board already has directed an independent committee -- board members not part of the proposed buyout -- to review the offer. Company officials expected it to take months before the proposal would be brought before shareholders, the South Bend Tribune reports. Many shareholders met the announcement with dismay, particularly since they were offered $5 per share in May 2000 by QDI Acquisition, a subsidiary of former dissident shareholders NBO. The lawsuit alleged the Company's offer of $2.75 per share constitutes unfair dealing because the price doesn't adequately reflect the progress and future value of the company. The suit further alleged that the members of the Fitzpatrick Group hold 44.7 percent ownership of the outstanding shares, which puts the group in position to "virtually ensure consummation of the transaction without regard to its fairness to Quality Dining's public shareholders." No response had been filed by the company as of Friday, the South Bend Tribune stated. No court dates have been set. The company could not be reached for comment Friday, but stated the lawsuit is without merit. SPECTRALINK CORPORATION: Suit Settlement Hearing October 7, 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------- The United States District Court for the District of Colorado will hold a fairness hearing for the proposed settlement for the class action filed against Spectralink Corporation on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the publicly-traded common stock of the Company during the period from April 19, 2001 through and including January 11, 2002. The hearing will be held before the Honorable Wiley Y. Daniel in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado, Alfred A. Arraj Courthouse, 901 19th Street, Denver Colorado 80294-3589, at 9:00am on October 7, 2004. For more details, contact Spectralink Corporation Securites Litigation by Mail: c/o The Garden City Group, Inc. - P.O. Box 9000 #6159, Merrick, NY 11566-9000 by Phone: 1-(877)-824-5823 or visit their Web site: http://www.gardencitygroup.comor Lori G. Feldman, Esq. Milberg Weiss Bershard & Schulman LLP BY Mail: 1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2550, Seattle, Washington 98154 or Kip Shuman, Esq. of Dyer & Schuman LLP by Mail: 801 East 17th Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80218 SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES: SEC Suspends, Settles Fraud Charges V. CPA --------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission today instituted and simultaneously settled an administrative proceeding pursuant to Rule 102(e) of the Commission's Rules of Practice against James Dean, a former Symbol Technologies, Inc. (Symbol) executive and certified public accountant licensed to practice in the State of New York. Without admitting or denying the Commission's findings, Dean consented to a Commission order suspending him from appearing or practicing before the Commission as an accountant. The administrative proceeding was based on the entry of a partial final judgment against Dean on June 9 by the Honorable Leonard D. Wexler of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, in the action entitled SEC v. Symbol Technologies, Inc., et al., 04 Civ. 2276 (LDW). Dean consented, without admitting or denying the allegations of the Commission's complaint, to the entry of the partial final judgment which permanently enjoins him from violating Sections 10(b) and 13(b)(5) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5 and 13b2-1 thereunder, and from aiding and abetting violations of Sections 13(a) and 13(b)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 12-20, 13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder. In its complaint, filed on June 3, the Commission alleged that Dean employed a number of improper accounting practices that violated generally accepted accounting principles while engaged in a fraudulent scheme to manipulate Symbol's reported financial results. As a result of the scheme, Symbol restated (1) selected financial data for 1998 and 1999, including revenue and net income; (2) the annual financial statements for 2000 and 2001; and (3) selected quarterly data, including revenue and net income, for 2001 and the first three quarters of 2002. TRIBUNE CO.: Olympic Carpet Files Suit V. Inflated Circulation -------------------------------------------------------------- The media company, Olympic Carpet initiated a lawsuit seeking class action status against the Tribune Co. in response to the company's announcement that it inflated circulation numbers at two of its newspapers, the AP Online reports. The suit alleges that Tribune defrauded advertisers by inflating the figures. Advertising rates are commonly set according to newspaper circulation. The Chicago-based media company claims that, since June circulation figures had been inflated at Newsday, a New York newspaper, and at Hoy, a Spanish-language daily launched by Newsday and owned by Tribune. Four New York-based business owners sued Tribune and Newsday in February, but the new lawsuit, did not name any of the company's 14 newspapers specifically. However, an attachment to the lawsuit included two monthly bills from Exito, the former name of the Tribune Co.'s Spanish- language newspaper in Chicago. Tribune changed Exito's name last fall to Hoy to match its sister publication in New York. VICURON PHARMACEUTICALS: Plaintiff Deadline Set August 14, 2004 --------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP reminds investors that the lead Plaintiff deadline for a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Vicuron Pharmaceuticals Incorporated ("Vicuron" or the "Company") (Nasdaq:MICU) between January 6, 2003 and May 24, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period") is on August 14, 2004. The action is for remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"). The action, 04-CV-2627, is pending in the United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania against defendants Vicuron; George F. Horner, III; Dov A. Goldstein; and Timothy J. Henkel. The Complaint alleges that, during the Class Period, defendants artificially inflated the price of Vicuron stock by concealing negative material information concerning both the safety and efficacy of Anidulafungin, Vicuron's intravenous treatment of fungal infections which is the subject of late-stage clinical trials for the treatment of esophageal candidiasis, invasive aspergillosis, and invasive candidiasis/candidemia. Defendants concealed key adverse information regarding the development and commercialization of Anidulafungin, which raised serious concerns about the FDA's future approval of the drug. The partial disclosure of the contents of an FDA letter, dated Monday, May 24, 2004, detailing the failure of Vicuron to supply data necessary to support its claim that Anidulafungin can be used to treat esophageal candidasis, caused Vicuron shares to plummet $8.86 to $13.04, a loss of over 40% from the previous trading day and a loss of over 45% from its Class Period high of $23.90. For more details, contact Eric J. Belfi or Aaron D. Patton of Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP by Phone: (800) 497-8076 or (212) 682-1818 by Fax: (212) 682-1892 by E-mail: info@murrayfrank.com or visit their Web site: http://www.murrayfrank.com/newcases_208.htm New Securities Fraud Cases CALLIDUS SOFTWARE: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in N.D. CA ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United Stated District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of purchasers of Callidus Software, Inc. (Nasdaq:CALD) common stock during the period between November 19, 2003 and June 23, 2004 (the "Class Period"), including those who acquired their shares pursuant to the Company's November 2003 Initial Public Offering ("IPO"). The complaint charges Callidus and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Callidus is a provider of enterprise incentive management ("EIM") software systems to global companies across multiple industries. The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants caused Callidus stock to trade at artificially inflated levels through the issuance of false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business and prospects. According to the complaint, the defendants knew but concealed from the public the following adverse facts: (1) the Company's financials were suffering at the time of the IPO due to competition from established enterprise software vendors, including Siebel, and established ERP vendors, such as SAP, who could bundle their EIM offerings with other software products and therefore compete more aggressively on prices; (2) in the Company's license revenues, the Company was, prior to the Company's IPO, experiencing a material adverse trend in this business segment; (3) as a result of the Company experiencing a severe adverse trend in "license" revenue, the Company's future "service" revenue would be materially and adversely impacted for future quarters; (4) the Company used as a barometer for its sales forecasts its 18 quota-carrying sales representatives who were severely behind on hitting their unrealistic quotas; and (5) prior to the IPO, the Company had planned on bringing its Cezanne software team "in-house," which would dramatically impact the Company's earnings per share in future quarters. On June 24, 2004, before the market opened, the Company issued a press release announcing that the Company's "chairman and chief executive resigned, and it warned that second-quarter and full- year results would not meet . . . financial targets." On this news the Company's shares fell to $5.01 per share, well below the Class Period high and even the IPO price. For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com CENTRAL FREIGHT: Lasky & Rifkind Lodges Securities Suit in TX ------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Lasky & Rifkind, Ltd., initiated a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired publicly traded securities of Central Freight Lines, Inc. ("Central Freight" or the "Company") (NASDAQ:CENF) in connection with or traceable to its December 12, 2003 Initial Public Offering ("IPO"), inclusive (the "Class Period"). The lawsuit was filed against Central Freight and Robert V. Fasso, Patrick J. Curry and Jeffrey A. Hale ("Defendants"). The complaint alleges that Defendants violated sections of the Securities Act of 1933. On December 12, 2003, Central Freight announced that it had completed an IPO of 8.5 million shares of stock pursuant to a Prospectus/Registration statement. The IPO was priced at $15 per share for total net proceeds of $77.9 million. Specifically the complaint alleges that the Prospectus/Registration statement was materially false and misleading and failed to disclose that the Company's resource planning process was not performing as anticipated, that the Company's aggressive expansion were negatively impacting margins, that the Company's insurance claims accrual rate was incorrect because the Company failed to adequately reserve for accident frequency, and that the Company was experiencing significant operating issues. On June 16, 2004 Central Freight announced that it expected to report a loss per share of as much as $0.14 per share, including an $0.11 per share tax benefit. This announcement marked the second time in as many quarters that the Company had missed analyst expectations. Shares responded negatively to the news, falling $3.99 to $8.55 per share, representing a decline of 31.8%. For more details, contact Lasky & Rifkind, Ltd. by Phone: 800-495-1868 or by E-mail: investorrelations@laskyrifkind.com CORINTHIAN COLLEGES: Charles Piven Files Securities Suit C.D. CA ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of Corinthian Colleges, Inc. (Nasdaq:COCO) between August 27, 2003 and June 23, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Central District of California against defendant Corinthian, Anthony Digiovanni, David Moore and Dennis Beal. 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. No class has yet been certified in the above action. For more details, contact the law offices of 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 by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com CORINTHIAN COLLEGES: Weiss & Yourman Files Securities Suit in CA ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Weiss & Yourman initiated a lawsuit seeking class action status in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of purchasers of Corinthian Colleges, Inc. (Nasdaq: COCO) securities from August 27, 2003, through June 23, 2004, inclusive. Corinthian operates approximately 150 for-profit colleges and training centers in North America, including Bryman College, Florida Metropolitan University, Rhodes College and the National Institute of Technology. The complaint alleges that Corinthian and certain of its officers violated federal securities laws by failing to disclose the Company's lack of internal controls and that the Department of Education had uncovered violations in the application process for federal student loans at one of its campuses in December of 2003. The complaint further alleges that as a result, the school had lost its ability to receive advance payments on its student loans. Only after these events were ultimately revealed by certain publications did the Company acknowledge them to the investing community. In fact, during the Class Period, defendants specifically denied knowledge of any "events or activities that would warrant any concern in the Company's performance," and continued to announce record results and optimistic forecasts to the market. All the while, certain Company insiders sold more than $18 million worth of their personal shares of Corinthian stock during the Class Period. For more details, contact Weiss & Yourman - Los Angeles Office by Phone: (800) 437-7918 by E-mail: info@wyca.com or visit their Web site: http://www.wyca.com INTRABIOTICS PHARMACEUTICALS: Marc Henzel Files Stock Suit in CA ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of all persons who purchased the publicly traded securities of IntraBiotics Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Nasdaq: IBPI) between September 5, 2003 and June 22, 2004 inclusive. Also included are all those who acquired IntraBiotics' shares in its offerings on October 10, 2003 and May 5, 2004. Present and former employees who purchased stock through IntraBiotics' Retirement Savings Plans are also included. The Complaint alleges that IntraBiotics, a biopharmaceutical company, and certain of its officers and directors issued materially false statements concerning the Company's drug iseganan. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose: (1) that iseganan was not safe and well-tolerated at therapeutically relevant doses when administered to the oral cavity; (2) that the drug caused a higher rate of ventilator - associated pneumonia ("VAP") and mortality as compared to placebo; (3) that despite knowing and/or recklessly disregarding the aforementioned facts, the defendants nevertheless raised capital through offerings of its common stock in order to portray to the market that iseganan was a viable marketable product that was on the "fast track" to FDA approval; and (4) that as a result of the above, the defendants statements concerning iseganan were lacking in any reasonable basis. On June 23, 2004, the Company announced that an independent data monitoring committee recommended to IntraBiotics that it discontinue its pivotal trial of iseganan for the prevention of VAP based on an interim analysis of the data. On this news, IntraBiotics fell $9.45 per share or 69%, to close at $4.23 per share. For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com MASTEC INC.: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. FL ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United Stated District Court for the Southern District of Florida on behalf of purchasers of the securities of MasTec, Inc. (NYSE: MTZ) between May 13, 2003 and April 12, 2004, inclusive. The complaint charges MasTec, Austin Shanfelter, and Donald Weinstein with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The Complaint alleges that defendants made material misstatements with respect to the Company's financial results. More specifically, the Complaint alleges that defendants failed to disclose and indicate the following: (1) that the Company was materially inflating its financial results; (2) that the Company was prematurely recognizing revenue on various contracts; (3) that the Company's practice of improperly recognizing revenue was in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP"); (4) that the Company overstated its inventory; (5) that the Company failed to have adequate reserves for bad debts, inventory, cost overruns, and projected losses on certain projects; and (6) as a result, the Company's financial results were materially inflated at all relevant times. The truth about the Company's inflated financial results began to emerge on March 10, 2004, when MasTec announced that the filing of its 10-K would be delayed past the March 15th deadline. On news of this shares of MasTec fell $2.00 per share or 16.75 percent on March 10, 2004 to close at $9.94 per share. On March 18, 2004, MasTec further declined $2.31 per share, or 23 percent, to close at $7.75 per share when Standard & Poor's Rating Services put the Company's BB credit rating on watch for a downgrade. Then on April 13, 2004, MasTec announced its 2003 operating results and disclosed material problems that may result in a restatement of its previously announced financial results. More specifically, the Company announced a net loss of $39.7 million ($0.83 per share) on revenue of $873.9 million for the year. Additionally, the Company disclosed that during its review and analysis of the Company's annual results, MasTec's management identified a number of matters that impacted current and prior- period operating results. These included additional reserves for bad debts and inventory, cost overruns and projected losses on certain projects, valuation reserves for state deferred tax assets, revenues recognized on various contracts, work in progress and inventory overstatements at a Canadian subsidiary, the closing of Brazilian operations, the accrual for certain insurance reserves which was complicated by the receivership of a prior insurance carrier, and other items. Defendants concluded that these matters required a detailed analysis and evaluation to determine the appropriate accounting treatment. Some of these issues may require restatements of amounts previously reported. News of this shocked the market. Shares of MasTec's stock price dropped $1.50 per share, or 15.5 percent, on April 13, 2004 on unusually large trading volumes. For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com MERIX CORPORATION: Wolf Haldenstein Lodges Securities Suit in OR ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP initiated a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon, on behalf of all persons who purchased the securities of Merix Corporation ("Merix" or the "Company") (Nasdaq: MERX) between July 1, 2003 and May 13, 2004, inclusive, (the "Class Period") against defendants Merix and certain officers of the Company. The case name is Cheng v. Merix Corporation, et al. 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. The complaint alleges that statements made by the defendants during the Class Period were materially false and misleading because they failed to disclose and misrepresented the following adverse facts: (1) the significant decline in the demand for the Company's premium services, which Merix was experiencing when it made its positive projections yet failed to disclose, would foreseeably result in lower profits and have a material impact on the Company's financial results; (2) the purported demand was not being driven by strong end-user demand, but rather, the building up of inventory of Merix products by Merix' customers, especially higher-margin products, that could satisfy end-user demand, thereby jeopardizing Merix's new product sales; and (3) as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company and their projections regarding the Company's financial and operational performance. For more details, contact Fred Taylor Isquith, Esq., Christopher S. Hinton, Esq., George Peters, or Derek Behnke of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP by Mail: 270 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016 by Phone: (800) 575-0735 by E- mail: classmember@whafh.com or visit their Web site: http://www.whafh.com/cases/merix.htm NDCHEALTH CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in GA --------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United Stated District Court for the Northern District of Georgia on behalf of purchasers of the securities of NDCHealth Corporation (NYSE: NDC) between October 1, 2003 and March 31, 2004, inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint charges NDC, Walter M. Hoff and Randolph L.M. Hutto with violations of Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. Throughout the Class Period, defendants issued quarter after quarter of strong financial results. Defendants failed to disclose that these stellar financial results were only made possible through improper revenue recognition practices in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP"). On April 1, 2004, before the market opened, defendants shocked the market by announcing that NDC would delay it will delay the release of its fiscal third-quarter financial results as it "reviews some aspects of how it records revenue." The Company said the review relates to the timing of sales recognition in its value-added reseller channel in NDC's physician business unit. In response to the news concerning NDC's previously undisclosed accounting issues, the price of NDC stock dropped nearly 20% to close at $22.70 on unusually large trading volumes of nearly 4.8 million shares traded - - far greater than NDC's average daily trading volume of about 298,000 shares. For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com QUALITY DISTRIBUTION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in FL -------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on behalf of purchasers of Quality Distribution, Inc. (Nasdaq: QLTY) common stock during the period between November 7, 2003 and February 2, 2004, inclusive. The complaint charges Quality Distribution, Thomas L. Finkbiner and Samuel M. Hensley with violations of Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1933. On or about November 7, 2003, Quality Distribution commenced an initial public offering of 7 million of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $17.00 per share (the "IPO"), thereby raising approximately $110.7 million. In connection therewith, Quality Distribution filed a registration statement, which incorporated a prospectus (the "Prospectus"), with the SEC. The complaint alleges that the Prospectus was materially false and misleading because Quality Distribution materially overstated its financial results and its financial statements were not prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP"). On February 2, 2004, the Company announced that it expected to take a fourth-quarter charge and restate its results back to 2001 after discovering insurance law violations at Power Purchasing Inc. ("PPI"), one of its subsidiaries. The Company announced that it expects to take fourth-quarter 2003 charges of between $3 million and $6 million and it forecast net income for the same period would be negatively impacted by the problems at the subsidiary, along with other one-time expenses. For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com QUOVADX INC.: Marc Henzel Files Securities Fraud Suit in N.D. CA ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of all persons who purchased the publicly traded securities of Quovadx, Inc. (Nasdaq: QVDX) between November 3, 2003 and March 15, 2004, inclusive/ The Complaint alleges that defendants, including certain of its officers and directors, with violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as well as Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. Quovadx, Inc. provides software and services that enable companies to achieve competitive process advantage. The complaint will allege that defendants issued a series of materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business, financial condition, earnings and prospects. Specifically, on March 16, 2004, shares tumbled after the software firm said it had failed to collect payments from a large customer, forcing a restatement of 2003 results. The Englewood, Colo., company also disclosed that it would delay filing its annual report with the Securities and Exchange Commission to allow time to complete the revisions. Quovadx said it had been unsuccessful in collecting funds from Infotech Network Group, a consortium of 15 Indian information-technology companies. Quovadx had previously recorded more than $11 million in revenue from the Infotech contract. Now, Quovadx will remove the Infotech revenue from its 2003 results. As a result of these materially false and misleading statements and omissions, plaintiff will allege that the price of QVDX securities was artificially inflated during the Class Period For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com SUPERCONDUCTOR TECHNOLOGIES: Marc Henzel Lodges Stock Suit in CA ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court Western District of California on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of Superconductor Technologies, Inc. (Nasdaq: SCON) between January 9, 2004 and March 1, 2004, inclusive. The action is pursuing remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint charges the Company and certain of its officers and directors for violations of the federal securities laws. During the Class Period, it is alleged that the Company projected first quarter 2004 revenues to be in the range of 10 to 13 million dollars. However, in actuality, first quarter revenues were later announced to be closer to 4 million dollars, due to changes in demand made by two (2) of the Company's customers. The complaint further alleges that the Company and its officers and directors knew of this decreased demand for its product well in advance of this previous allegedly inflated revenue projection. For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.com VERITAS SOFTWARE: Charles J. Piven Lodges Securities Suit in DE --------------------------------------------------------------- The law offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted, exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of Veritas Software Corporation (Nasdaq:VRTS) between April 21, 2004 and July 6, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The case is pending in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against defendant Veritas, Edwin J. Gillis and Gary L. Bloom. 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. No class has yet been certified in the above action. For more details, contact the law offices of 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 by E-mail: hoffman@pivenlaw.com YUKOS OIL: Schatz & Nobel Files Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Schatz & Nobel, P.C., initiated a lawsuit seeking class action status has been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons who purchased the publicly traded securities of Yukos Oil Company (OTC: YUKOF; YUKOY) (Russia: YUKO) ("Yukos") between February 13, 2003 and October 25, 2003 inclusive, (the "Class Period"). Also included are all those who acquired Yukos' shares through its acquisitions of Sibneft, Geoilbent, and Vostochnaya. The Complaint alleges that Yukos, a vertically-integrated oil company, issued materially false statements. Specifically, defendants created a complex network of shell companies to evade taxes on the production, refining and sale of oil and oil products. These shell companies were registered in territories with preferential tax treatment in order to receive special tax exemptions and minimize tax liability. Since these shell companies were not separate legal entities, Yukos was required to recognize the full amount of the receipts associated with these transactions for its own tax purposes and was not entitled to the preferential tax treatment these shell companies were granted. Accordingly, Yukos' tax liability was materially understated and its earnings were materially overstated. For more details, contact Nancy A. Kulesa of Schatz & Nobel, P.C. by Phone: (800) 797-5499 by E-mail: sn06106@aol.com or visit their Web site: http://www.snlaw.net YUKOS OIL: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Fraud Suit in S.D. NY -------------------------------------------------------------- The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Yukos Oil Company (Pink Sheets:YUKOF) (Pink Sheets:YUKOY) (Russia:YUKO) between February 13, 2003 and October 25, 2003. The complaint charges Yukos, certain of its officers and directors and its accounting advisors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Yukos is one of Russia's leading vertically-integrated oil companies, and one of the world's largest non-state owned oil companies. The complaint alleges that defendants created a complex network of shell companies to evade taxes on the production, refining and sale of oil and oil products. These shell companies were registered in territories with preferential tax treatment to enable these companies to receive special tax exemptions in order to minimize Yukos' tax liability. Since these shell companies were not separate legal entities, as Yukos maintained control over the operations of these companies, Yukos was required to recognize the full amount of the receipts associated with these transactions for its own tax purposes and was not entitled to the preferential tax treatment these shell companies were granted. Accordingly, Yukos' tax liability was materially understated and its earnings were materially overstated in violation of GAAP. Defendants' scheme began to unravel in October 2003 when the market learned that Russian authorities had arrested the Company's largest shareholder and CEO, defendant Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and had charged him with fraud, embezzlement and evading taxes on hundreds of millions of dollars that was owed to the government. At this time, the Russian authorities also announced that they would pursue criminal prosecutions against other senior Yukos officials. Ultimately, Yukos, which has been audited by the Tax Ministry of Russia for its fiscal year 2000 tax returns, will be required to pay approximately $3.3 billion for 2000 alone due to its understatement of its tax liability, including interest and penalties. The Tax Ministry intends to audit Yukos' books for 2001-2003 based upon the same charges. Yukos could ultimately be expected to pay upwards of $10 billion to the Tax Ministry for defendants' involvement in the illegal tax evasion scheme. For more information, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, by Phone: 610-660-8000 or 888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail: mhenzel182@aol.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. ********* 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. Glenn Ruel Se�orin, 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 * * *