/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/081113.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Thursday, November 13, 2008, Vol. 10, No. 226 Headlines BAXTER INT'L: Discovery Completed in Ill. ERISA Violations Suit BROADCOM CORP: Court Grants Dismissal Motion in Securities Suit BUILDING MATERIALS: Faces California Suit Over Unpaid Overtime CBEYOND INC: Amended Complaint Filed in Ga. Securities Lawsuit CENTURYTEL INC: Appeal on Certification of "Beattie" Denied EMBARQ CORP: To Contest Retirees' Claims Over Benefit Plans HARTFORD FINANCIAL: Keller Rohrback Announces Investigation INSPIRE PHARMACEUTICALS: N.C. Suit's Dismissal Still on Appeal INTERNATIONAL COAL: City of Ann Arbor's Suit Junked on Sept. 30 INTERNATIONAL COAL: Still Faces Saratoga Advantage Suit in W.Va. ISILON SYSTEMS: Bid to Dismiss Consolidated Amended Suit Pending NATIONAL AUSTRALIA: Appeals Court Affirms Dismissal of N.Y. Suit PROTIVITI INC: Seeks to Strike Class Allegations in "Tran" Case REGIONS FINANCIAL: Faces Suits by Funds Investors & Shareholders ROBERT HALF: Calif. Court Stays Suit by "Inside Sales Persons" ROBERT HALF: Calif. Overtime Compensation Litigation Stayed ROBERT HALF: Faces Temporary Staffing Employees' Suit in Calif. ROBERT HALF: Mass. Court Denies Discovery Motion in "O'Donnell" ROBERT HALF: Still Faces Calif. Lawsuit by Executives, Managers TELECOM FIRMS: JPML to Hold Hearing on Nov. 20 for Texting Suits U.S. RAILROADS: Court Denies Dismissal Bid in Surcharges Lawsuit WASHINGTON MUTUAL: Major Shareholder Files Securities Fraud Suit New Securities Fraud Cases CADENCE DESIGN: Bronstein Gewirtz Announces Stock Suit Filing ********* BAXTER INT'L: Discovery Completed in Ill. ERISA Violations Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- Discovery was completed in the purported class-action lawsuit against Baxter International, Inc., which alleges violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, according to the company's Oct. 31, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. The purported class-action suit was filed in October 2004 before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against Baxter and its current chief executive officer, then- current chief financial officer, and their predecessors for alleged ERISA violations. The plaintiff alleges that the defendants, along with the Administrative and Investment Committees of the company's 401(k) plans, breached their fiduciary duties to the plan participants by offering Baxter common stock as an investment option in each of the plans during the period of January 2001 to October 2004. The plaintiff alleges that Baxter common stock traded at artificially inflated prices during this period and is seeking unspecified damages and declaratory and equitable relief. In March 2006, the trial court certified a class of plan participants who elected to acquire Baxter common stock through the plans between January 2001 and the present. In April 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied Baxter's interlocutory appeal and upheld the trial court's denial of Baxter's motion to dismiss the case. Baxter has filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings. Discovery has been completed in this matter. The suit is "Rogers v. Baxter Int'l. Inc., et al., Case No. 1:04-cv-06476," filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, Judge Joan B. Gottschall, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs are: Robert D. Allison, Esq. Robert D. Allison & Associates, 122 S. Michigan Avenue, Ste. 1850 Chicago, IL 60603 Phone: 312-427-4500 e-mail: rdalaw@ix.netcom.com - and - Michael M. Mulder, Esq. (mmmulder@mmbmlaw.com) Meites, Mulder, Mollica & Glink 20 South Clark Street, Suite 1500 Chicago, IL 60603, Phone: 312-263-0272 Fax: 312-263-2942 Representing the defendants is: Matthew Robert Kipp, Esq. (mkipp@skadden.com) Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom, LLP 333 West Wacker Drive, Suite 2100 Chicago, IL 60606 Phone: 312-407-0700 BROADCOM CORP: Court Grants Dismissal Motion in Securities Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California granted a motion that sought for the dismissal of an amended complaint in the consolidated securities fraud class-action lawsuit against Broadcom Corp. From August through October 2006, several plaintiffs filed these purported shareholder class-action complaints in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against Broadcom and certain of its current or former officers and directors (Class Action Reporter, May 10, 2007): -- "Bakshi v. Samueli, et al., Case No. 06-5036 R (CWx)," -- "Mills v. Samueli, et al., Case No. SACV 06-9674 DOC R(CWx)," and -- "Minnesota Bakers Union Pension Fund, et al. v. Broadcom Corp., et al., Case No. SACV 06-970 CJC R (CWx)." The essence of the plaintiffs' allegations is that Broadcom improperly backdated stock options, resulting in false or misleading disclosures concerning, among other things, Broadcom's business and financial condition. The plaintiffs also allege that Broadcom failed to account for and pay taxes on stock options properly, that the individual defendants sold Broadcom stock while in possession of material nonpublic information, and that the defendants' conduct caused artificial inflation in Broadcom's stock price and damages to the putative plaintiff class. They assert claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. In November 2006, the Court consolidated the Options Class Actions and appointed the New Mexico State Investment Council as lead class plaintiff. In October 2007 the federal appeals court resolved a dispute regarding the appointment of lead class counsel. In March 2008 the district judge entered a revised order appointing lead class counsel. The lead plaintiff filed an amended consolidated class action complaint in late April 2008, naming additional defendants that include certain current officers and directors of Broadcom as well as Ernst & Young LLP, the company's former independent registered public accounting firm. In October 2008, the district judge granted defendants' motions to dismiss with leave to amend, according to the company's Oct. 22, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. The suit is "Sonam Bakshi v. Henry Samueli et al., Case No. 2:06-cv-05036-R-CW," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Judge Manuel L. Real, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs are: Michael D. Braun, Esq. Braun Law Group 12400 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 920 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Phone: 310-442-7755 e-mail: service@braunlawgroup.com - and - Bryan L. Crawford, Esq. Heins Mills & Olson 3550 IDS Ctr., 80 South 8th St. Minneapolis, MN 55402 Phone: 612-338-4605 Fax: 612-338-4692 Representing the defendants are: Gordon A. Greenberg, Esq. McDermott Will & Emery 2049 Century Park E, 34th Fl. Los Angeles, CA 90067-3208 Phone: 310-277-4110 Fax: 310-277-4730 - and - Stephen S. Hasegawa, Esq. (shasegawa@irell.com) Irell & Manella 1800 Avenue of the Stars, Ste. 900 Los Angeles, CA 90067-4276 Phone: 310-277-1010 BUILDING MATERIALS: Faces California Suit Over Unpaid Overtime -------------------------------------------------------------- Building Materials Holding Corp. is facing a purported class- action lawsuit in California, which accuses it of failing to pay for millions of dollars worth of overtime work, according to Industrial Distribution. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on Sept. 22, 2008, under the caption, "Eduardo Acevedo et al v. Building Materials Holding Corporation et al., Case No. 2:08-cv-06227-SJO-CW." It alleged that the company and several of its subsidiaries, including San Francisco-based SelectBuild Construction Inc., withheld overtime and other wage payments (Class Action Reporter, Oct. 6, 2008). The Los Angels Times reported that the complaint is specifically alleging that San Francisco-based BMHC coerced current and former workers in Arizona, California and Nevada into working unpaid overtime. The 14 plaintiffs also accused the beleaguered firm, which shuttered some of its operations in California and Arizona in response to the housing crunch, of asking them to sign blank time sheets, skip breaks, and travel without reimbursement, the newspaper reported. The suit is "Eduardo Acevedo et al v. Building Materials Holding Corporation et al., Case No. 2:08-cv-06227-SJO-CW," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Judge S. James Otero, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs is: Richa Amar, Esq. (ramar@rsglabor.com) Rothner Segall and Greenstone 510 South Marengo Avenue Pasadena, CA 91101 Phone: 626-796-7555 Fax: 626-577-0124 Representing the defendants is: Sascha M Gleckler, Esq. (sgleckler@gibsondunn.com) Gibson Dunn and Crutcher 333 South Grand Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90071 Phone: 213-229-7000 CBEYOND INC: Amended Complaint Filed in Ga. Securities Lawsuit -------------------------------------------------------------- An amended complaint was filed in a purported securities fraud class-action lawsuit against Cbeyond, Inc. that was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, under the caption, "Weisberg v. Cbeyond, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 08-CV-1666." On May 6, 2008, a purported class action lawsuit was filed against the company and its chairman and chief executive officer, James F. Geiger. The action was brought by Steven Weisberg, individually and on behalf of a proposed class of purchasers of the company's common stock between Nov. 1, 2007, and Feb. 21, 2008. It asserts violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and regulations thereunder, based upon allegations that the company underreported its customer churn rate. The plaintiff seeks to recover an unspecified amount for damages on behalf of himself and all other members of the purported class. On October 24, 2008, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint which—in accordance with court rulings—changed the purported class representatives to two institutional investors, Genesee County Employees' Retirement System and the Essex Regional Retirement Board. The Amended Complaint also added J. Robert Fugate, the company's chief financial officer and an executive vice president, as an individual defendant. The Amended Complaint does not materially alter the allegations of the original complaint, according to the company's Oct. 31, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. The suit is "Weisberg v. Cbeyond, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 08-CV-1666," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Judge Clarence Cooper presiding. Representing the plaintiff are: Martin D. Chitwood, Esq. (mchitwood@chitwoodlaw.com) Chitwood Harley Harnes 2300 Promenade II 1230 Peachtree Street, NE Atlanta, GA 30309 Phone: 404-873-3900 Fax: 404-876-4476 - and - Mark C. Gardy, Esq. Gardy & Notis, LLP Suite 110 440 Sylvan Avenue Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632 Phone: 201-567-7377 Fax: 201-567-7337 Representing the defendants are: Scott P. Hilsen, Esq. (shilsen@alston.com) Alston & Bird 1201 West Peachtree Street One Atlantic Center Atlanta, GA 30309-3424 Phone: 404-881-7000 - and - David A. Becker, Esq. Latham & Watkins 555 Eleventh Street, N.W., Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20004-1304 Phone: 202-637-2174 CENTURYTEL INC: Appeal on Certification of "Beattie" Denied ----------------------------------------------------------- Centurytel, Inc.'s appeal of the certification of a class in a consumer lawsuit, entitled, "Beattie, et al. v. CenturyTel Inc.," has been denied. The suit was filed by Barbrasue Beattie and James Sovis on Oct. 28, 2002 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. It alleges that the company unjustly and unreasonably billed customers for inside wire maintenance services. The plaintiff seeks unspecified money damages and injunctive relief under various legal theories on behalf of a purported class of over two million customers in the companys telephone markets. On March 10, 2006, the court certified the suit as a class action and issued a ruling that the billing descriptions the company used for these services during an approximately 18-month period between Oct. 29, 2000 and May 2002 were legally insufficient. The company's appeal of this class certification decision was denied. The suit is "Beattie, et al. v. Centurytel, Inc., Case No. 1:02- cv-10277-DML," filed in the U.S District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Judge Judge David M. Lawson, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs are: Gregory J. Boulahanis, Esq. Boulahanis & Assoc. 21905 Garrison Avenue Dearborn, MI 48124 Phone: 313-277-2550 Fax: 313-277-2550 - and - Elwood S. Simon, Esq. (esimon@esimon-law.com) Elwood S. Simon Assoc. 355 S. Woodward Avenue, Suite 250 Birmingham, MI 48009 Phone: 248-646-9730 Fax: 248-258-2335 Representing the defendants are: Jennifer L. Frye, Esq. (jfrye@dickinsonwright.com) Dickinson Wright 301 N . Liberty, Suite 500 Ann Arbor, MI 48104 Phone: 734-623-7075 Fax: 734-623-1625 - and - David J. Houston, Esq. (dhouston@dickinsonwright.com) Dickinson Wright 215 S. Washington Square, Suite 200 Lansing, MI 48933-1888 Phone: 517-371-1730 EMBARQ CORP: To Contest Retirees' Claims Over Benefit Plans ----------------------------------------------------------- Embarq Corp. and other defendants intend to contest the claims and charges in a putative class-action lawsuit filed by a group of retirees, according to the company's Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. In December 2007, a group of retirees filed a putative class- action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas, challenging the decision to make certain modifications to Embarq's retiree benefits programs generally effective Jan. 1, 2008. During the 2007 second quarter, Embarq amended its other post- retirement medical and life insurance plans to eliminate medical coverage and Medicare premium subsidies for Medicare-eligible retirees and Medicare-eligible beneficiaries and cap the maximum amount of life insurance benefits through the company-sponsored plan for qualified retirees at US$10,000, effective Jan. 1, 2008. The defendants include Embarq, certain of its benefits plans, its Employee Benefits Committee and its plan administrator. Additional defendants include Sprint Nextel and certain of its benefits plans. In addition, a complaint in arbitration has been filed by 15 former Centel Corp. executives, similarly challenging the benefits changes. The suit is "William Douglas Fulghum et al. v. Embarq Corp. et al., Case No. 07-CV-2602 KHV/JPO," filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas, Judge Kathryn H. Vratil, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs are: Diane A. Nygaard, Esq. (diane@nygaardlaw.com) Jason M. Kueser, Esq. (jason@nygaardlaw.com) The Nygaard Law Firm 4501 College Boulevard, Suite 260 Leawood, Kansas 66211 Phone: 913-469-5544 Fax: 913-469-1561 Alan M. Sandals, Esq. (asandals@sandalslaw.com) Scott M. Lempert, Esq. (slempert@sandalslaw.com) Sandals & Associates, P.C. One South Broad Street, Suite 1850 Philadelphia, PA 19107 Phone: 215-825-4000 Fax: 215-825-4001 Stewart W. Fisher, Esq. (sfisher@gmf-law.com) Glenn, Mills & Fisher, P.A. Post Office Drawer 3865 Durham, NC 27702 Phone: 919-683-2135 Fax: 919-688-9339 - and - Richard T. Seymour, Esq. (rick@rickseymourlaw.net) Law Office of Richard T. Seymour, PLLC 1150 Connecticut Ave., NW Suite 900 Washington, DC 20036 Phone: 202-862-4320 Fax: 800-805-1065 HARTFORD FINANCIAL: Keller Rohrback Announces Investigation ----------------------------------------------------------- SEATTLE, Nov. 11, 2008 -- Keller Rohrback L.L.P. today announced that it is investigating The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. ("Hartford" or the "Company") for potential violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended ("ERISA"). The investigation focuses on investments in Company stock in The Hartford Investment and Savings Plan (the "Plan"). Keller Rohrback's investigation involves concerns that Hartford and other administrators of the Plan may have breached their ERISA-mandated fiduciary duties of loyalty and prudence to participants and beneficiaries of the Plan. A breach may have occurred if the fiduciaries failed to manage the assets of the Plan prudently and loyally by investing the assets in Company stock when it was no longer a prudent investment for participants' retirement savings. For more details, contact: Jennifer Tuato'o, Paralegal Erin Riley, Esq. Derek Loeser, Esq. Lynn Sarko, Esq. Phone: (800) 776-6044 e-mail: investor@kellerrohrback.com INSPIRE PHARMACEUTICALS: N.C. Suit's Dismissal Still on Appeal -------------------------------------------------------------- The plaintiffs in a consolidated class-action lawsuit Inspire Pharmaceuticals, Inc. are still appealing to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit the dismissal of their case by the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina. On Feb. 15, 2005, the first of five identical purported shareholder class-action complaints was filed against the company and certain of its senior officers. Each complaint alleged violations of sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5, and focused on statements that are claimed to be false and misleading regarding a Phase 3 clinical trial of the company's dry eye product candidate, ProlacriaTM (diquafosol tetrasodium). Each complaint sought unspecified damages on behalf of a purported class of purchasers of the company's securities between June 2, 2004, and Feb. 8, 2005. On March 27, 2006, following a consolidation of the lawsuits into a single civil action and the appointment of lead plaintiffs, a consolidated class action complaint asserting the same allegations as the original ones was filed. The consolidated complaint also asserts claims against certain parties that served as underwriters in the company's securities offerings during the period relevant to the complaint. It seeks unspecified damages on behalf of a purported class of purchasers of the company's securities from May 10, 2004, to Feb. 8, 2005. In May 2006, the plaintiffs agreed to voluntarily dismiss their claims against the underwriters on the basis that they were time-barred. On June 30, 2006, the company and other defendants asked the court to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and does not satisfy the pleading requirements under applicable law. In July 2007, the court granted Inspire's and the other defendants' request and dismissed the consolidated action with prejudice. On Aug. 24, 2007, the plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and the company and the other defendants filed an opposition brief in January 2008. On Aug. 24, 2007, the plaintiffs filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The plaintiffs filed their opening appellate brief on Nov. 19, 2007. The company and the other defendants filed an opposition brief on January 18, 2008. The plaintiffs filed their reply on Feb. 22, 2008, according to the company's Oct. 31, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. The suit is "Mirco Investors, LLC v. Inspire Pharma, et al., Case No. 1:05-cv-00118-WLO," filed before the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, Judge William L. Osteen, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs are: Leslie Bruce Mcdaniel, Esq. Mcdaniel & Anderson, L.L.P. P.O. Box 58186 Raleigh, NC 27658-8186 Phone: 919-872-3000 Fax: 919-790-9273 e-mail: mcdas@mcdas.com - and - Kristi Stahnke Mcgregor, Esq. (kmcgregor@milbergweiss.com) Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman, LLP 5200 Town Ctr. Cir., Ste. 600 Boca Raton, FL 33486 Phone: 561-361-5022 Fax: 561-367-8400 Representing the defendants are: William Mark Conger, Esq. (mconger@kilpatrickstockton.com) Kilpatrick Stockton, L.L.P. 1001 W. Fourth St. Winston-Salem, NC 27101 Phone: 336-607-7309 Fax: 336-734-2633 - and - Barry m. Kaplan, Esq. Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati 701 Fifth Ave., Ste. 5100 Seattle, WA 98104 Phone: 206-883-2500 Fax: 206-883-2699 INTERNATIONAL COAL: City of Ann Arbor's Suit Junked on Sept. 30 --------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, on Sept. 30, 2008, dismissed the City of Ann Arbor Employees' Retirement System's class-action lawsuit against International Coal Group, Inc. in its entirety. On April 5, 2007, the plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit against the company and certain of its officers, directors and underwriters. The amended complaint asserted claims under Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 based on alleged false and misleading statements in the registration statements filed in connection with the company's November 2005 reorganization and December 2005 public offering of common stock. The company and the named officers and directors filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on Sept. 28, 2007, as did the underwriters. The plaintiffs did not appeal the dismissal, according to the company's Nov. 7, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. International Coal Group, Inc. -- http://www.intlcoal.com/-- produces coal in Northern and Central Appalachia with a range of mid to high British thermal unit (Btu), low to medium sulfur steam and metallurgical coal. The Company is headquartered in Scott Depot, W.V. INTERNATIONAL COAL: Still Faces Saratoga Advantage Suit in W.Va. ---------------------------------------------------------------- International Coal Group, Inc. is still facing a purported class-action lawsuit filed by Saratoga Advantage Trust in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, according to the company's Nov. 7, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. On Jan. 7, 2008, Saratoga Advantage Trust filed a class-action lawsuit against the company and certain of its officers and directors. The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, based on alleged false and misleading statements in the registration statements filed in connection with the company's November 2005 reorganization and December 2005 public offering of common stock. In addition, the complaint challenges other of the company's public statements regarding its operating condition and safety record. International Coal Group, Inc. -- http://www.intlcoal.com/-- produces coal in Northern and Central Appalachia with a range of mid to high British thermal unit (Btu), low to medium sulfur steam and metallurgical coal. The Company is headquartered in Scott Depot, W.V. ISILON SYSTEMS: Bid to Dismiss Consolidated Amended Suit Pending ---------------------------------------------------------------- A motion to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint purported to be brought on behalf of a class of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired Isilon Systems, Inc.'s stock during the period Dec. 16, 2006 to Oct. 3, 2007 remains pending. On Nov. 1, 2007, a putative class-action complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington against the company and certain of its current and former directors and officers. The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated there under, as well as under Sections 11 and 15 of the U.S. Securities Act of 1933. Substantially similar complaints were filed later in the same court and all of these cases were subsequently consolidated. On April 18, 2008, lead plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint against the company, certain of its current and former directors and officers, underwriters, and venture capital firms. The consolidated complaint purports to be brought on behalf of a class of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the company's stock during the period Dec. 16, 2006 to Oct. 3, 2007. The plaintiffs allege that defendants violated the federal securities laws by issuing a false and misleading registration statement and prospectus in connection with the company's Dec. 16, 2006 initial public offering and by thereafter misrepresenting the company's current and prospective business and financial results, thereby causing the company's stock price to be artificially inflated during the purported class period. They seek unspecified compensatory damages, interest, attorneys' fees and costs, and injunctive relief. On Sept. 30, 2008, the company and the other defendants moved to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint, according to the company's Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The suit is "Youakim v. Isilon Systems Inc. et al., Case No. 2:07-cv-01764-MJP," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, Judge Marsha J. Pechman, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs are: Karl Phillip Barth, Esq. (kbarth@lmbllp.com) Lovell Mitchell & Barth 11542 NE 21st Street, Ste. A Bellevue, WA 98004 Phone: 425-452-9800 - and - Matthew K. Handley, Esq. (mhandley@cmht.com) Cohen Milstein Hausfeld & Toll PLLC 1933 18th Street NW, Ste. 303 Washington, DC 20005 Phone: 202-408-4600 Representing the defendants are: Jerome F. Birn, Jr., Esq. (jbirn@wsgr.com) Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati 650 Page Mill Rd. Palo Alto, CA 94304 Phone: 415-493-9300 - and - Seth Aronson, Esq. (saronson@omm.com) O'Melveny & Myers 400 S. Hope St., Ste. 1050 Los Angeles, CA 90071-2899 Phone: 213-430-6000 NATIONAL AUSTRALIA: Appeals Court Affirms Dismissal of N.Y. Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the purported class-actions lawsuit, "In re: National Australia Bank Securities Litigation, Case No. 1:03-cv- 06537-BSJ," Melissa Klein Aguilar of Compliance Week reports. The suit was brought as a class-action on behalf of purchasers of the equity, debt, and other securities of National Australia Bank Ltd. including, but not limited to, its ordinary shares and American Depositary Receipt (ADRs) between April 1, 1999 and Sept. 3, 2001, inclusive (Class Action Reporter, Nov. 28, 2006). The consolidated class-action complaint alleged that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by disseminating materially false and misleading statements concerning fraud by NAB at its subsidiary, HomeSide Lending, Inc. According to Compliance Week, the root of the dispute was accounting troubles at the company's U.S. subsidiary, HomeSide Lending. Those irregularities led NAB to restate its financials and sent its stock price tumbling; the foreign plaintiffs then sued NAB, alleging violations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5. The plaintiffs contended that the fraud occurred primarily in Florida, where HomeSide was located and where the false numbers at issue were created. However, according to Compliance Week, the district court disagreed and said the foreign plaintiffs had no jurisdiction to sue in U.S. courts. It also dismissed the claim of a fourth plaintiff, Robert Morrison, who purchased ADRs and sought to represent a class of American purchasers for failure to state a claim. Essentially, the district court dismissed the claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim, a ruling that was later appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Compliance Week reported that on Oct. 23, 2008, the Second Circuit affirmed a lower court's decision to dismiss the securities class-action lawsuit, which was brought against NAB by three foreign plaintiffs that had purchased shares abroad, and who sought to represent a class of non-American purchasers of NAB ordinary shares, The appeals court only dealt with the issues involving the three foreign plaintiffs. Despite the "unusual fact-pattern," the court said in its decision, "the usual rules still apply." The court cited an earlier decision, "Alfadda v. Fenn," in its ruling that subject-matter jurisdiction exists on foreign plaintiffs' claims only if the defendant's conduct was "more than merely preparatory to the fraud, and particular acts or culpable failures to act within the United States directly caused losses to foreign investors abroad," according to Compliance Week. The suit is "In re National Australia Bank Securities Litigation, Case No. 1:03-cv-06537-BSJ," filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Judge Barbara S. Jones, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs are: Thomas A. Dubbs, Esq. (tdubbs@labaton.com) James W. Johnson, Esq. (jjohnson@labaton.com) Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP 100 Park Avenue, 12th Floor New York, NY 10017 Phone: 212-907-0700 or 212-907-0859 Fax: 212-818-0477 or 212-883-7059 E-mail: - and - Menachem E. Lifshitz, Esq. (lifshitz@bernlieb.com) Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP 10 East 40th Street New York, NY 10016 Phone: 212-779-1414 Fax: 212-779-3218 Representing the defendants are: A. Graham Allen, Esq. Rogers, Towers, P.A. 1301 Riverplace Boulevard, Suite 1500 Jacksonville, FL 32207 Phone: (904) 398-3911 Fax: (904) 396-0663 George T. Conway, III, Esq. (GTConway@wlrk.com) Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz 51 West 52nd Street New York, NY 10019 Phone: (212) 403-1000 Fax: (212) 403-2000 - and - Robert Scott Loigman, Esq. (rloigman@fklaw.com) Eric Jonathan Seiler Friedman, Kaplan, Seiler and Adelman 1633 Broadway New York, NY 10019 Phone: (212) 833-1114 Fax: (212) 373-7914 PROTIVITI INC: Seeks to Strike Class Allegations in "Tran" Case --------------------------------------------------------------- Protiviti Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Robert Half International, Inc., filed a motion to strike the class allegations in a purported class-action lawsuit in connection to overtime pay. On May 4, 2006, Don Tran, on behalf of himself and a putative class of salaried Consultants and Senior Consultants, and a sub- class of terminated salaried Consultants and Senior Consultants, filed a complaint in California Superior Court naming Protiviti Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the company, as defendant. The complaint alleges that salaried consultants based in California have been misclassified under California law as exempt employees and seeks an unspecified amount for unpaid overtime pay alleged to be due to them had they been paid as non-exempt, hourly employees. The plaintiff also seeks an unspecified amount for statutory penalties for alleged violations of the California Labor Code arising from the alleged misclassification of these employees as exempt employees. The complaint further seeks damages and penalties for the failure to provide meal and rest periods, and for the failure to reimburse business expenses, including, without limitation, parking and cellular telephone expenses. On Feb. 28, 2008, the Court allowed Plaintiff to amend the complaint to name as class representatives two additional former Protiviti Consultants, who had worked for Protiviti's "Internal Audit" business line. The plaintiff had worked for Protiviti's "Technology Risk" business line. On April 3, 2008, the plaintiffs agreed in open court to dismiss their claim for failure to reimburse business expenses. On May 12, 2008, the plaintiffs filed a motion to certify the class and Protiviti filed a motion to strike the class allegations, according to Robert Half's Oct. 31, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. Robert Half International, Inc. -- http://www.rhi.com/-- provides specialized staffing and risk consulting services. The Company, through its Accountemps, Robert Half Finance & Accounting, and Robert Half Management Resources divisions, is a specialized provider of temporary, full-time project professionals in the fields of accounting and finance. REGIONS FINANCIAL: Faces Suits by Funds Investors & Shareholders ---------------------------------------------------------------- The class-actions lawsuits filed in federal and state courts on behalf of investors who purchased shares of certain Regions Morgan Keegan Select Funds and shareholders of Regions Financial Corp. are in the preliminary stages. The company and certain of its affiliates were named in class- action lawsuits filed in late 2007 and during 2008. The complaints contain various allegations, including claims that the Funds and the defendants misrepresented or failed to disclose material facts relating to the activities of the Funds. No class has been certified, according to the company's Oct. 30, 2008 Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. Regions Financial Corp. -- http://www.regions.com/-- is a financial holding company that operates throughout the South, Midwest and Texas. The Company provides traditional commercial, retail and mortgage banking services, as well as other financial services in the fields of investment banking, asset management, trust, mutual funds, securities brokerage, insurance and other specialty financing. ROBERT HALF: Calif. Court Stays Suit by "Inside Sales Persons" -------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California stayed a lawsuit over unpaid overtime that was filed against Robert Half International, Inc. On Aug. 9, 2005, Lizette Greene, on behalf of herself and a putative class of salaried "inside sales persons," filed the complaint with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California naming the Company and three of its wholly owned subsidiaries as defendants. In December 2005, the plaintiff amended the complaint, alleging that purported "inside sales persons" based in California have been misclassified under federal law as exempt employees and seeks an unspecified amount for unpaid overtime pay alleged to be due to them had they been paid as non-exempt, hourly employees. In addition, the plaintiff also makes two claims under the California Private Attorney Generals Act seeking an unspecified amount for statutory penalties for alleged violations of the California Labor Code arising from the alleged misclassification of these employees as exempt employees. The plaintiff also asserts a claim under California Business and Professions Code Section 17200 for a putative nation wide class of purported "inside sales persons." On Dec. 22, 2006, the plaintiff filed a motion for conditional certification of their federal claims in which they seek to represent a class of salaried employees who worked for the Company and certain of its subsidiaries in California within three years before the complaint was filed and seeking permission to mail class members a notice regarding their right to opt into the case as plaintiffs. In June 7, 2007, the Court stayed this litigation pending resolution of a litigation filed with the California Superior Court against the company by Mark Laffitte. The company reported no development in the matter in its Oct. 31, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. The suit is "Greene v. Robert Half International Inc. et al., Case No. 3:05-cv-03248-SC," filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Judge Samuel Conti presiding. Representing the plaintiff is: Mark Andrew Chavez, Esq. (mark@chavezgertler.com) Chavez & Gertler LLP 42 Miller Avenue Mill Valley, CA 93941 Phone: 415-381-5599 Fax: 415-381-5572 Representing the defendant is: Gilmore F. Diekmann, Jr., Esq. (gdiekmann@seyfarth.com) Seyfarth Shaw LLP 560 Mission Street, Suite 3100 San Francisco, CA 94105 Phone: 415-397-2823 Fax: 415-397-8549 ROBERT HALF: Calif. Overtime Compensation Litigation Stayed ----------------------------------------------------------- A class-action lawsuit filed in California Superior Court by employees of Robert Half International, Inc., who were allegedly denied overtime compensation has been stayed. On Sept. 10, 2004, plaintiff Mark Laffitte, on behalf of himself and a putative class of salaried account executives and staffing managers, filed the complaint with the California Superior Court naming the company and three of its wholly owned subsidiaries as defendants. The complaint alleges that salaried account executives and staffing managers based in California have been misclassified under California law as exempt employees and seeks an unspecified amount for unpaid overtime pay alleged to be due to them had they been paid as non-exempt hourly employees. In addition, the plaintiff seeks an unspecified amount for statutory penalties for alleged violations of the California Labor Code arising from the alleged misclassification of these employees as exempt employees. The court heard cross-motions concerning class certification, and on Sept. 18, 2006, issued an order certifying a class with respect to claims for alleged unpaid overtime pay, but denied certification with respect to claims relating to meal periods and rest time breaks. On Aug. 15, 2008, the Court stayed the litigation pending the California Supreme Court's ruling in another case unrelated to the Company entitled, "Harris v. Superior Court." The ruling in such case may have a material adverse bearing on the Company's position in this litigation. The company reported no development in the matter in its Oct. 31, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. Robert Half International, Inc. -- http://www.rhi.com/-- provides specialized staffing and risk consulting services. The Company, through its Accountemps, Robert Half Finance & Accounting, and Robert Half Management Resources divisions, is a specialized provider of temporary, full-time project professionals in the fields of accounting and finance. ROBERT HALF: Faces Temporary Staffing Employees' Suit in Calif. --------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Half International, Inc. is facing a purported class- action lawsuit in California Superior Court that was filed by temporary staffing employees. On Sept. 16, 2008, Donald R. Green, on behalf of himself and a putative class of all temporary staffing employees in California, filed a complaint in California Superior Court naming the company and one of its wholly owned subsidiaries as defendants. The complaint alleges that temporary employees in California were improperly denied expense reimbursement and wages for time purportedly spent preparing for interviews, and traveling to and attending interviews with, alleged clients of defendants. The plaintiff seeks penalties and equitable and legal remedies under Section 17200 of the California Business and Professions Code and Sections 1194 and 2802 of the California Labor Code. Robert Half International, Inc. -- http://www.rhi.com/-- provides specialized staffing and risk consulting services. The Company, through its Accountemps, Robert Half Finance & Accounting, and Robert Half Management Resources divisions, is a specialized provider of temporary, full-time project professionals in the fields of accounting and finance. ROBERT HALF: Mass. Court Denies Discovery Motion in "O'Donnell" --------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts denied a motion in the matter, "O'Donnell et al v. Robert Half International, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:04-cv-12719-NMG," which sought to conduct discovery on class claims in the case, according to the company's Oct. 31, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. On Dec. 6, 2004, Ian O'Donnell and David Jolicoeur, on behalf of themselves and a putative class of salaried staffing managers, account executives and account managers, filed the complaint with the Massachusetts Superior Court naming the Company and one of its wholly owned subsidiaries as defendants. The complaint alleges that salaried staffing managers, account executives and account managers based in Massachusetts within the past two years have been misclassified under Massachusetts law as exempt employees and seeks an unspecified amount equal to three times their unpaid overtime compensation alleged to be due to them had they been paid as non-exempt, hourly employees, plus costs and legal fees. It also makes similar allegations under the U.S. Fair Labor Standards Act on behalf of all staffing managers, account executives and account managers employed in any state other than Massachusetts and California within the past three years and seeks an unspecified amount for unpaid overtime pay alleged to be due to them had they been paid as non-exempt, hourly employees, plus an equal amount as liquidated damages. The case has been removed to the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. As the company disclosed in its previous filings, the Court has previously denied conditional certification of Plaintiffs' federal claims as a collective action and Plaintiffs' state law claims as a class action. On Oct. 21, 2008, the Court denied Plaintiffs' motion to conduct discovery on class claims and directed that discovery be limited to the individual claims of the named plaintiffs. The case remains limited to three individuals. The suit is "O'Donnell et al v. Robert Half International, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:04-cv-12719-NMG," filed with the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs is: Shannon E. Liss-Riordan, Esq. (sliss@prle.com) Pyle, Rome, Lichten, Ehrenberg & Liss-Riordan, P.C. 18 Tremont Street, Suite 500 Boston, MA 02109 Phone: 617-367-7200 Fax: 617-367-4820 Representing the defendants is: Richard L. Alfred, Esq. (ralfred@seyfarth.com) Seyfarth Shaw World Trade Center East, Two Seaport Lane, Suite 300 Boston, MA 02210-2028 Phone: 617-946-4800 Fax: 617-946-4801 ROBERT HALF: Still Faces Calif. Lawsuit by Executives, Managers --------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Half International, Inc. and its subsidiaries are still facing a purported class-action lawsuit in California over unpaid overtime. On Sept. 24, 2007, Van Williamson, on behalf of himself and a putative class of salaried account executives and staffing managers, filed the complaint with the California Superior Court naming the company and three of its wholly owned subsidiaries as defendants. The complaint alleges that salaried account executives and staffing managers based in California were not provided meal periods, paid rest periods, and accurate itemized wage statements. It seeks one hour of wages for each employee for each meal and rest period missed during the statutory liability period. The suit also seeks an unspecified amount for statutory penalties for alleged violations of the California Labor Code arising from the alleged failure to provide the meal and rest periods and accurate itemized wage statements. The allegations in the complaint are substantially similar to the allegations included in the complaint filed by Mark Lafitte against the company and three of its wholly owned subsidiaries on Sept. 10, 2004. The company reported no development in the matter in its Oct. 31, 2008 Form 10-Q Filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2008. Robert Half International, Inc. -- http://www.rhi.com/-- provides specialized staffing and risk consulting services. The Company, through its Accountemps, Robert Half Finance & Accounting, and Robert Half Management Resources divisions, is a specialized provider of temporary, full-time project professionals in the fields of accounting and finance. TELECOM FIRMS: JPML to Hold Hearing on Nov. 20 for Texting Suits ---------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation is scheduled to hold a hearing Nov. 20, 2008 on requests to consolidate some two dozen antitrust class-action lawsuits, alleging that AT&T Mobility, Verizon Wireless, Sprint Nextel Corp. and T-Mobile USA Inc. conspired to raise text message prices in recent years, RCR Wireless reports. The panel is entertaining competing requests from various plaintiffs to transfer the lawsuits to a federal court in Illinois, Louisiana, Ohio or the District of Columbia, according to RCR Wireless. RCR Wireless reported that the lawsuits spread like wildfire after Senate Judiciary antitrust subcommittee Chairman Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) raised concerns in a Sept. 9, 2008 letter to wireless executives about the price for individual text messages rising from 10 cents to 20 cents over the past three years among the major cellular operators. In written responses to Sen. Kohl last month, RCR Wireless reports that CEOs of AT&T Mobility, Sprint Nextel, and T-Mobile USA said that although the price of individual text messages has risen, the cost for many users has actually decreased due to their subscription to high-volume and unlimited texting packages. Sen. Kohl honored Verizon Wireless' request to keep the content of its letter confidential. The price-fixing lawsuits against the $144 billion cellular industry target a growing wireless data/content market, which accounts for $27.5 billion in annual revenue for wireless operators, according to the RCR Wireless report. U.S. RAILROADS: Court Denies Dismissal Bid in Surcharges Lawsuit ---------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia denied a motion by several U.S. railroad operators that sought for the dismissal of a consolidated class-action lawsuit that accuses them of illegally fixed fuel surcharges, Doug Cameron of Dow Jones Newswires reports. Initially, several purported class-action lawsuits were filed in various federal district courts regarding fuel surcharges. They were filed by shippers that accuse the defendants of colluding to set and inflate fuel surcharges between at least July 2003 and June 2007 in violation of U.S. antitrust laws. In November 2007, these lawsuits were consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, under the caption, "In Re: Rail Freight Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation – MDL- 1869, Case No. 1:07-mc-00489-PLF." The defendants in the consolidated litigation, include: -- The association of American Railroads, -- BNSF Railway Co., -- CSX Transportation, Inc., -- Kansas City Southern Railway Co., -- Norfolk Southern Railway Co., and -- Union Pacific Railroad Co. Recently, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp. (BNSF), CSX, Norfolk Southern, and Union Pacific, sought to dismiss the litigation. However, their challenge was denied by Judge Paul Friedman in a District of Columbia court ruling issued last week. The also told them to provide further evidence to the plaintiffs, according to Dow Jones Newswires. The suit is "In Re: Rail Freight Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation – MDL-1869, Case No. 1:07-mc-00489-PLF," filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Judge Paul L. Friedman, presiding. Representing the plaintiffs are: Stephen R. Neuwirth, Esq. (stephenneuwirth@quinnemanuel.com) Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges, LLP 51 Madison Avenue 22nd Floor New York, NY 10010 Phone: (212) 849-7000 Fax: (212) 849-7100 e-mail: - and - Roger M. Adelman, Esq. (radelman@erols.com) 1100 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 730 Washington, DC 20036 Phone: (202) 822-0600 Fax: (202) 822-6722 Representing the defendants are: Tyrone R. Childress, Esq. (childresst@howrey.com) Howrey LLP 550 South Hope Street Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Phone: (213) 892-1800 Fax: (213) 892-2300 - and - Kent Alan Gardiner, Esq. (kgardiner@crowell.com) Crowell & Moring, L.L.P. 1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004-2595 Phone: (202) 624-2578 Fax: 202-628-5116 WASHINGTON MUTUAL: Major Shareholder Files Securities Fraud Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Ontario Teachers Pension Plan Board of Canada, a major shareholder, has filed a securities class-action complaint against Washington Mutual, Inc., and some officers, including former Chief Executive Kerry Killinger, Jon Talton of The Seattle Times reports. The complaint alleges the company moved away from its traditional, low-risk roots while embracing risky subprime loans and secretly abandoning proper standards, according to The Seattle Times report. Washington Mutual, Inc. -- https://www.wamu.com/ -- is a consumer and small business banking company with operations in U.S. markets. The company is a savings and loan holding company. It owns two banking subsidiaries, Washington Mutual Bank (WMB) and Washington Mutual Bank fsb (WMBfsb), as well as numerous non-bank subsidiaries. The company operates in four segments: the Retail Banking Group, which operates a retail bank network of 2,257 stores in California, Florida, Texas, New York, Washington, Illinois, Oregon, New Jersey, Georgia, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, Utah, Idaho and Connecticut; the Card Services Group, which operates a nationwide credit card lending business; the Commercial Group, which conducts a multi-family and commercial real estate lending business in selected markets, and the Home Loans Group, which engages in nationwide single-family residential real estate lending, servicing and capital markets activities. New Securities Fraud Cases CADENCE DESIGN: Bronstein Gewirtz Announces Stock Suit Filing ------------------------------------------------------------- NEW YORK, Nov. 11, 2008 -- Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of those who purchased the securities of Cadence Design Systems, Inc. ("Cadence" or the "Company") between April 23, 2008 and October 22, 2008, inclusive (the "Class Period"). The complaint charges Cadence and certain of its current and former officers with violation of the Securities Act of 1933. On or about October 15, 2008, Cadence's stock declined 15% after the company disclosed that five of its executives had resigned including Michael Fister, the President, Chief Executive Officer, and director of the company. Merely a week later, on or about October 22, 2008 the Company stunned investors by acknowledging that the company was reviewing the recognition of revenue related to customer contracts signed in the first quarter of 2008 and that it expected to restate its financial statements not only for that quarter, but also the first half of 2008. On this news, shares of Cadence declined $1.10 per share, more than 25%, to close on October 23, 2008 at 3.22 per share, on unusually heavy volume. No Class has yet been certified in the above action. For more details, contact: Peretz Bronstein, Esq. Eitan Kimelman (eitan@bgandg.com) Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC Phone: 212-697-6484 ********* 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 research, 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 S. Senorin, Stephanie T. Umacob, Gracele D. Canilao, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors. Copyright 2008. 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 * * *