The Rosen Law Firm today announced that it has filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of all purchasers of Industrial Enterprises of America, Inc. ("IEAM" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: IEAM) (formerly IEAM.OB) stock during the period from November 14, 2006 through November 8, 2007 (the "Class Period").

To join the IEAM class action, go to the website at http://www.rosenlegal.com or call Laurence Rosen, Esq. or Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email lrosen@rosenlegal.com or pkim@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action.

NO CLASS HAS YET BEEN CERTIFIED IN THE ABOVE ACTION. UNTIL A CLASS IS CERTIFIED, YOU ARE NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL UNLESS YOU RETAIN ONE. YOU MAY ALSO REMAIN AN ABSENT CLASS MEMBER.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York as case no. 07-CV-10321. You can obtain a copy of the complaint from the clerk of court or you may contact counsel for plaintiffs Laurence Rosen, Esq. or Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email lrosen@rosenlegal.com or pkim@rosenlegal.com.

The complaint charges that IEAM and certain of its present and former officers, directors, and control persons violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing materially false and misleading statements pertaining to IEAM's business prospects and condition, and filing financial statements with the SEC materially false financial statements.

On November 7, 2007 the Company announced that investors could no longer rely on its historical financial statements and that the Company had not properly followed generally accepted accounting principles, necessitating a revision of reported revenue, among other things. The Company also announced that it had suspended its CFO pending a review. As a result of these events, the Complaint asserts that the price of IEAM stock dropped, damaging investors.

A class action lawsuit has already been filed on behalf of IEAM shareholders. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than January 15, 2008. If you wish to join the litigation or to discuss your rights or interests regarding this class action, please contact plaintiff's counsel, Laurence Rosen, Esq. or Phillip Kim, Esq. of The Rosen Law Firm toll free at 866-767-3653 or via e-mail at lrosen@rosenlegal.com or pkim@rosenlegal.com.

The Rosen Law Firm has expertise in prosecuting investor securities litigation and extensive experience in actions involving financial fraud. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the nation, concentrating its practice in securities class actions.

CBS filed a motion yesterday seeking the dismissal of a lawsuit by Dan Rather, who says that the network violated his contract by giving him too little to do after it forced him off the evening news in 2005 and that its investigation of the news segment about President Bush’s National Guard service was politically biased.

“This lawsuit is a regrettable attempt by plaintiff Dan Rather to remain in the public eye, and to settle old scores and perceived slights, based on an array of far-fetched allegations,” the network said in a 30-page brief filed in State Supreme Court in Manhattan. The papers represented the network’s first response to the suit Mr. Rather filed on Sept. 19.

Referring specifically to Mr. Rather’s assertion that CBS and its senior executives had sought to do the White House’s bidding in commissioning an incomplete investigation of the National Guard segment, the network said: “CBS and its executives are not now, and never have been, out to get Dan Rather.”

Mr. Rather agreed to step down from the “CBS Evening News” in March 2005, a year earlier than he had planned, after the network said it could not authenticate documents that had been used as evidence in the segment about Mr. Bush’s time in the Air National Guard.

In response to arguments that CBS gave Mr. Rather insufficient airtime after he left the “CBS Evening News” — first on the weeknight edition of “60 Minutes” and later on the flagship Sunday edition — the network cited a “pay or play” clause in his contract. “As long as Rather was paid the specified compensation, CBS had no obligation to give him any on-air exposure,” the network said.

In an accompanying statement, the network called Mr. Rather “one of the most important figures in the history of journalism” and said it was “mystified and saddened” by the suit.

A spokesman for Mr. Rather’s lawyers released a statement last night that said: “It is unfortunate that CBS is trying to delay discovery of the facts and a trial of Dan’s claims. We are confident the court will reject these tactics and allow the case to go forward.”

A face-off begins this coming week among the world's major powers over whether to impose new economic sanctions to pressure Iran into suspending its nuclear-fuel program.

Weeks of shadow diplomacy will start to gel on Thursday, when the governing board of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, meets in Vienna to debate the IAEA's latest report on Iranian cooperation with inspections of its fuel program. Iran says its program is purely civilian. The U.S. and its European allies believe it is for weapons.

The positions of the U.N.'s big powers are already well staked out. The U.S., Britain and France want the U.N. Security Council to impose a third round of much tougher sanctions on Iran. China and Russia are reluctant. Twice already, when Iran failed to meet suspension deadlines, the Security Council has worked out a middle road of relatively low-impact sanctions. This time, as an end-of-month deadline for Iran to suspend enrichment approaches, reaching agreement is likely to be harder.

One reason is that the Security Council's strategy has been questioned lately. That strategy is to pressure Iran to suspend its fuel program, so it can't develop the know-how to make fuel for nuclear warheads even as it negotiates guarantees of the fuel program's peaceful nature. The IAEA's chief, Mohammed ElBaradei, in May said the strategy had become pointless. Iran already has the know-how, he said.

The Egyptian-born diplomat then made his own parallel proposals to Tehran, asking the Iranians to come clean on questions about how its decades-old covert nuclear program was developed. Mr. ElBaradei circulated his progress report on that effort Thursday. It said the Iranians are being more transparent but are still holding back some information and have accelerated their enrichment program.

The common international front on Iran, always shaky, shows growing stress. Russia and China have been angered by U.S. saber-rattling and unilateral sanctions, as well as by threats from France and Britain that Europe could impose unilateral sanctions on Iran's oil and finance industries if the Security Council doesn't act. That Security Council vote is scheduled for December.

China Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi, visiting Tehran earlier this past week, said further sanctions would do "no good." Russian media and trade publications have widely reported that Iran has begun talks to buy more than 200 Russian SU-30 fighter jets and 40 Chinese J-10 aircraft to modernize its obsolete air force. Iran has neither confirmed nor denied the talks. China this past week scuttled a meeting on Iran of senior diplomats from the major powers, scheduled for Monday in Brussels, citing a schedule conflict, according to diplomats familiar with the matter.

"There has been dragging of feet by the Chinese" on a new council resolution, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Zalmay Khalilzad told reporters in New York Thursday, warning Beijing that if it blocked further U.N. sanctions, it would be responsible for the failure of diplomacy to rein in Iran's nuclear program.

Awash in oil revenue, Iran appears increasingly confident it can outlast the Western pressure. Tehran didn't even reply to an offer from European Union foreign-policy representative Javier Solana, who negotiates with Iran on behalf of the EU and the Security Council's permanent members, to hold talks this coming week ahead of the next suspension deadline.

Despite an analysts' upgrade, shares of Virgin Mobile USA Inc. fell Friday to their lowest point since the company's recent trading debut after the company said its third-quarter loss widened as operating expenses rose.

The wireless service provider's shares fell $1.54, or 14.4 percent, to $9.19 Friday. Earlier, the shares traded as low as $8.07.

Virgin Mobile said late Thursday that its third-quarter loss widened to $7.3 million, compared with a loss of $5.1 million in the year-ago quarter.

The company said its pro-forma loss totaled 15 cents per share, compared with a loss of 10 cents per share in the year-ago period.

Revenue rose year over year to $319.5 million from $271 million, as an increase in service revenue overshadowed a decline in equipment sales.

In a note to clients Friday, Stanford Group Company analyst Michael Gary Nelson upgraded the stock to "Hold" from "Sell," saying challenges the company faces -- such as increasing competition -- are well balanced with opportunities for raising shareholder value.

The analyst called Virgin Mobile's third-quarter results "mixed" and its fourth-quarter outlook for between 350,000 and 400,000 net customer additions "weak." But he also said its guidance for 2008 EBITDA -- or earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization -- of between $155 million and $175 million is strong.

With oil prices surging and U.S. stock prices slumping, chip maker Advanced Micro Devices Inc.'s sale of an 8.1 percent stake to the Abu Dhabi government's investment arm represents the latest plunge by a wealthy Middle Eastern nation into a troubled U.S. corporation.

It also raises fresh questions about the appropriateness of Middle Eastern firms owning large chunks of U.S. businesses that specialize in advanced technologies.

Sunnyvale-based AMD, the world's No. 2 microprocessor maker, needs the $622 million investment from the Mubadala Development Company to help lift the company out of a deep financial slump.

AMD has lost more than $1.6 billion so far this year, and has just $1.5 billion in cash on hand as it works to pay down $5.3 billion in debt. The financial woes have caused AMD's stock to fall more than 35 percent since the start of the year, a slide that has wiped out nearly $4 billion in shareholder wealth.

The infusion, announced Friday, is a necessary jolt for AMD is it hunts for money to fund its counteroffensive against Intel Corp., the world's largest chip maker, and amid a huge spike in investments in U.S. companies from Middle Eastern nations.

Middle Eastern investments in U.S. companies has increased more than fivefold in 2007, leaping from $4.5 billion on 32 deals last year to nearly $25 billion on 42 deals so far this year, according to data compiled by Thomson Financial.

The money invested in the past two years is more than the entire total invested from 1990 to 2005, according to the latest Thomson data. During that period, $24.8 billion in investments were made in 258 deals.

Oil-rich countries have been enriched further in recent months by a run-up in the price of a barrel of oil, which has been hovering in the $90 range while many U.S. stocks continue to suffer from the housing and lending morass that's led some banks to absorb billions of dollars in losses.

The biggest deal so far this year involving Middle Eastern firms was General Electric Co.'s $11.6 billion sale of its plastics division, completed in August, to petrochemicals manufacturer Saudi Basic Industries Corp., a public company based in Riyadh that is 70-pecent owned by the Saudi Arabian government.

Firms based in the United Arab Emirates, a federation of seven oil-rich states, have invested nearly $10 billion in real estate, financial, power generation and other types of companies in the United States.

Earlier this year, Mubadala bought a 7.5 percent stake in the management operations of private-equity firm Carlyle Group for $1.35 billion, and this week unveiled a partnership with military contractor Northrop Grumman Corp. to collaborate on aerospace and aviation technologies.

The deal with AMD makes the Abu Dhabi government-run investment fund AMD's third-largest shareholder, according to AMD's latest regulatory filings, a development that AMD vows will not trigger a review by the U.S. government because it's a minority investment and Mubadala will not get a board seat.

However, some experts doubt that claim, citing the sensitivity of AMD's technology, which besides being used widely in consumer personal computers and corporate servers is also used in Defense Department computers and other government machinery.

John Reynolds, an attorney at Wiley, Rein & Fielding in Washington, said the transaction could face scrutiny by Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S., or CFIUS, a 12-member panel headed by the Treasury Department, because the U.S. government is very interested in acquisitions by government-run investment funds, known as sovereign wealth funds, such as Mubadala.

China, Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern and Asian countries have set up such funds, which control an estimated $2.5 trillion in assets.

In addition, if AMD has government contracts for classified work, interest from CFIUS and Congress "is apt to be considerable, even if the investment is non-controlling," Reynolds said.

Generally, passive investments of less than 10 percent of a company's shares do not trigger review by CFIUS. But that is not a hard-and-fast rule, Reynolds said, and an ownership stake below 10 percent is not automatically shielded from review.

The product -- once promoted as increasing eyelash growth -- had been sold and distributed by San Jose, California-based Jan Marini Skin Research, Inc, which accused the FDA of unfairly singling it out.

The FDA said it considered Age Intervention Eyelash "adulterated" and potentially dangerous, notably for users with elevated pressure inside the eye.

The product contains bimatoprost, an active ingredient in an FDA-approved drug to treat this condition.

For patients on the prescription drug, using Age Intervention Eyelash may boost the risk of optic nerve damage "because the extra dose of bimatoprost may decrease the prescription drug's effectiveness," the FDA said.

Jan Marini, the company's president and chief executive, said the product at issue had been in its warehouse since September 2006, when California public health authorities "embargoed" it at FDA request.

The company added in a statement it had offered to destroy the product, "but the FDA recently informed JMSR that it preferred to seize the product so that it could issue a press release announcing the seizure."

"We have been unfairly singled out," Marini said in a telephone interview. "Other companies use the same ingredient and we're not aware of any action that has been taken against them."