Yogurt company The Dannon Company has refuted the class-action lawsuit filed against it in Los Angeles, California.

The company has said the complaint does not have any support for the generalizations made in the lawsuit and the publication cited in the lawsuit does not disprove the company's scientific substantiation for its product benefits. The report cited in the lawsuit, published by the American Academy of Microbiology, does not refer to any Dannon products, the company added.

The company also said it makes all scientific studies about its products available to the public and follows the method of peer-review and publication and regularly consults independent experts in the field of probiotics about the science behind all its probiotic claims.

The company has claimed that the scientific journals which have reviewed and published the findings on its products and the consumers who use the products have confirmed the benefits.

The case has dragged in the courts since it was filed in March 2003.

"This appeal took two years," said Kathy Henry, one of the plaintiffs. "We're glad about the appeals court ruling, but it's been cruel to make residents wait this long."

A spokesman for Dow said the company is reviewing the opinion.

"We continue to believe that the trial court erred in granting class certification," Scot Wheeler said. "Among other things, the trial court ignored evidence that upwards of one-third of the residential properties sampled showed no contamination."

Since the lawsuit was filed, hot spots of dioxin have been found in the Saginaw River.

An earlier ruling in the case dismissed the residents' demand to make Dow pay for medical monitoring for potential health problems.

Dow contends a University of Michigan study shows that people who live in contaminated areas do not show higher levels of dioxin in their blood than people who don't live near the river.

The New York-based company told the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that it believes the lawsuit related to its previously announced offering of convertible preferred shares was without merit.

De Beers, the world's largest diamond importer, settled a class action lawsuit Monday worth $297 million, which would be divided roughly in half between consumers and diamond merchants and resellers.

The lawsuit charged that De Beers and its subsidiaries violated antitrust, unfair competition and consumer-protection laws by monopolizing diamond supplies, and conspired to control the diamond prices by fixing and raising them as per their discretion.

The South African company, which controls 40 percent of the world's diamond trade. was also charged with false advertising.

Under the settlement, De Beers would pay $22.5 million to the "direct purchaser class members and $272.5 million to "indirect purchaser class members."

Consumers who purchased diamonds from De Beers directly or indirectly between 1994 and 2006 will be eligible to receive a rebate. The rebate amount will be determined based on the quality of the diamond.

The case is being heard in the US District Court for the District of New Jersey. The next hearing in the case is set for April 14.

Gibson filed the suit on behalf of Keith Kay, Orlando Perez and Shannon Smith, who became incensed when Xbox Live's service was plagued with connectivity issues over the holidays. Smith contacted Microsoft in December in an attempt to determine the cause of the outage, but got in touch with Gibson when he received no response.

As Gibson explained to MTV, the class action suit is a valid way for disgruntled Live subscribers to be heard: "When you have one person who is mad and they can't get a response, and they can't get their complaints addressed by a company like Microsoft, the only way to get their attention is in numbers." According to Gibson, more than 50 people have joined Kay, Perez, and Smith in the suit.

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing material misrepresentations to the market concerning Virgin Mobile's business, operations and financial performance, thereby artificially inflating the price of the Company's stock.

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. If you purchased the common stock of Virgin Mobile pursuant or traceable to the Company's Initial Public Offering on or about October 11, 2007 through November 15, 2007, you have certain rights, and have until January 22, 2008, to move for Lead Plaintiff status. To be a member of the class you need not take any action at this time, and you may retain counsel of your choice. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this Notice or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact Howard G. Smith, Esquire, of Law Offices of Howard G. Smith, 3070 Bristol Pike, Suite 112, Bensalem, Pennsylvania 19020, by telephone at (215)638-4847, Toll-Free at (888)638-4847, by email to howardsmithlaw@hotmail.com or visit our website at http://www.howardsmithlaw.com.