Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 1 of 72

LERACH COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN & ROBBINS LLP

LERACH COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN & ROBBINS LLP (“Lerach Coughlin”) is a 180-lawyer law firm 

with offices in San Diego, San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York, Boca Raton, Washington, D.C., 

Houston, Philadelphia and Seattle (www.lerachlaw.com). Lerach Coughlin is actively engaged in 

complex litigation, emphasizing securities, consumer, insurance, healthcare, human rights, 

employment discrimination and antitrust class actions. Lerach Coughlin’s unparalleled experience 

and capabilities in these fields are based upon the talents of its attorneys who have successfully 

prosecuted thousands of class action lawsuits. As a result, Lerach Coughlin attorneys have been 

responsible for recoveries of more than $45 billion. 

This successful track record stems from our experienced attorneys, including many who left 

partnerships at other firms or came to Lerach Coughlin from federal, state and local law enforcement 

and regulatory agencies, including dozens of former federal prosecutors. Lerach Coughlin also 

includes more than 25 former federal (circuit and district) and state judicial clerks. 

Lerach Coughlin currently represents more institutional investors in securities and corporate litigation 

– public and multi-employer funds – than any other firm in the United States. 

William S. Lerach is widely recognized as one of the leading securities lawyers in the United States. 

He has prosecuted hundreds of securities class and stockholder derivative actions, resulting in 

recoveries of billions of dollars. Mr. Lerach and the firm are involved in many of the largest and 

highest profile securities suits in recent years, including Enron, Dynegy, AOL-TimeWarner and 

WorldCom. 

Patrick J. Coughlin has been lead counsel in several major securities matters, including In re Apple 

Computer Sec. Litig., where he obtained a $100 million verdict. Prior to joining the firm’s 

predecessor, Mr. Coughlin was a federal prosecutor in Washington, D.C. and San Diego handling 

complex white collar fraud matters. He helped try one of the largest criminal RICO cases ever 

prosecuted by the United States, United States v. Brown, as well as an infamous oil fraud scheme 

resulting in a complex murder-for-hire trial, United States v. Boeckman. Mr. Coughlin now heads up 

the prosecution of the high profile HealthSouth and Qwest cases. Mr. Coughlin has handled and 

resolved a number of large securities cases involving such companies as 3Com, Boeing, IDB 

Communications Group, Unocal, Sybase, Connor, Media Vision, ADAC, Sunrise Medical, Valence, 

Sierra Tucson and Merisel. In addition, Mr. Coughlin spearheaded actions against the tobacco 

industry, resulting in the phase-out of the Joe Camel Campaign and a $12.5 billion recovery to the 

cities and counties of California – unique in the nation. 

John J. Stoia, Jr. has prosecuted numerous nationwide complex securities class actions, including In 

re Am. Cont. Corp./Lincoln Sav. & Loan Sec. Litig., MDL No. 834 (D. Ariz.), which arose out of the 

collapse of Lincoln Savings & Loan and Charles Keating’s empire. Mr. Stoia was a major part of the 

plaintiffs’ trial team which resulted in verdicts against Keating and his co-defendants in excess of $3 

billion and recoveries of over $240 million. Mr. Stoia has been involved in over 40 nationwide class 

actions brought by policyholders against U.S. and Canadian life insurance companies seeking redress 

for deceptive sales practices during the 1980s and 1990s, including, among others, Prudential, New 

York Life, Transamerica Life Insurance Company, General American Life Insurance Company, 

Manufacturer’s Life, Metropolitan Life, American General, US Life, Allianz, Principal Life and Pacific 

Life Insurance Company. Because of Mr. Stoia’s efforts, victimized policyholders have recovered over 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 1 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 2 of 72

$7 billion. Mr. Stoia also successfully litigated numerous cases brought against life insurance 

companies for racial discrimination involving the sale of small value or “industrial life” insurance 

policies during the 20th century, including serving as lead counsel in McNeil v. Am. Gen. Life Ins. and 

Accident Co., the first major settlement involving discrimination claims ($234 million recovery). Mr. 

Stoia has since resolved other race-based insurance cases, including Brown v. United Life Ins. Co., 

Morris v. Life Ins. Co. of Georgia and Thompson v. Metro. Life. In late summer 2004, Mr. Stoia filed 

the first complaint alleging kickbacks and rigged bidding in the insurance industry and was hired by 

California Insurance Commissioner John Garamendi to represent the citizens of California in suits 

alleging these practices. 

Paul J. Geller has served as lead or co-lead counsel in a majority of the securities class actions that 

have been filed in the southeastern United States in the past several years, including cases against 

Hamilton Bancorp ($8.5 million); Prison Realty Trust (total combined recovery of over $120 million); 

and Intermedia Corp. ($38 million). Mr. Geller was one of the court-appointed lead counsel in cases 

involving the alleged manipulation of the asset value of some of the nation’s largest mutual funds, 

including Hicks v. Morgan Stanley & Co., Case No. 01 Civ 10071 (S.D.N.Y.) ($10 million settlement); 

Abrams v. Van Kampen Funds, Inc., Case No. 01 C 7538 (N.D. Ill.) ($31.5 million settlement); and In Re 

Eaton Vance Sec. Litig., Case No. 01-109 (D. Mass.) ($10 million settlement). Mr. Geller has also 

successfully represented consumers in class action litigation. He was one of the lead counsel in a 

nationally publicized consumer privacy case, Kehoe v. Fidelity Federal Bank & Trust ($50 million 

settlement). Mr. Geller was also counsel to the lead plaintiff in Stoddard v. Advanta, a case that 

challenged the adequacies of interest rate disclosures by one of the nation’s largest credit card 

companies ($11 million settlement), and was personal counsel to one of the lead plaintiffs in the 

American Family Publishers sweepstakes litigation, which alleged that the defendants misled 

consumers into thinking they would win a lottery if they purchased magazine subscriptions ($38 

million settlement). 

Samuel H. Rudman served in the Enforcement Division of the United States Securities & Exchange 

Commission in its New York Regional Office as a staff attorney, where he was responsible for 

numerous investigations and prosecutions of violations of the federal securities laws. Thereafter, Mr. 

Rudman joined one of the largest corporate law firms in the country, where he represented public 

companies in the defense of securities class actions and also handled several white collar criminal 

defense matters. 

Since joining the firm, Mr. Rudman has been responsible for the investigation and initiation of 

securities and shareholder class actions. In addition, Mr. Rudman developed a concentration in the 

area of lead plaintiff jurisprudence and has been responsible for numerous reported decisions in that 

area of securities law. 

Mr. Rudman continues to focus his practice in the area of investigating and initiating securities and 

shareholder class actions and also devotes a considerable amount of time to representing clients in 

ongoing securities litigation. 

Darren J. Robbins has extensive experience in federal and state securities litigation, serving as lead 

counsel in the In re Dollar Gen. Sec. Litig., In re Prison Realty Sec. Litig., and In re Hanover Compressor 

Sec. Litig. Mr. Robbins currently represents numerous pension funds in state and federal courts across 

the country and concentrates his practice in the structuring of corporate governance enhancements 

in connection with the resolution of shareholder class and derivative litigations. Mr. Robbins was 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 2 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 3 of 72

recognized as California Lawyer Attorney of the Year for 2003 as a result of his participation as lead 

counsel in Hanover Compressor, where plaintiffs recovered approximately $85 million and obtained 

numerous groundbreaking corporate governance changes, including direct shareholder nomination 

of board members and the mandatory rotation of the company’s outside audit firm. 

PRACTICE AREAS AND CURRENT CASES

Securities 

As recent corporate scandals clearly demonstrate, it has become all too common for companies and 

their executives to manipulate the market price of their securities by misleading the public about the 

company’s financial condition or prospects for the future. This misleading information has the effect 

of artificially inflating the price of the company’s securities above their true value. When the 

underlying truth is eventually revealed, the prices of these securities plummet, harming those 

innocent investors who relied upon the company’s misrepresentations. 

Lerach Coughlin is the leader in the fight to provide investors with relief from corporate securities 

fraud. Lerach Coughlin utilizes a wide range of federal and state laws to provide investors with 

remedies, either by bringing a class action on behalf of all affected investors or, where appropriate, 

by bringing individual cases on behalf of large institutional investors. 

The firm’s reputation for excellence has been repeatedly noted by courts and has resulted in the 

appointment of Lerach Coughlin attorneys to lead roles in hundreds of complex class action securities 

and other cases. In the securities area alone, the firm’s attorneys have been responsible for a number 

of outstanding recoveries on behalf of investors which, in the aggregate, exceed $45 billion. 

Currently, Lerach Coughlin is lead or named counsel in approximately 500 securities class action or 

large institutional investor cases, including: 

• Enron securities class action 

• AOL/Time Warner individual institutional investor private actions 

• Cisco Systems securities class action 

• Coke securities class action 

• Oracle securities class action 

• WorldCom Bond individual institutional investor private actions 

• HealthSouth securities class action 

One of the reasons for Lerach Coughlin’s dominance stems from the firm’s unparalleled dedication of 

resources towards investor recovery. For example, the firm has approximately 125 attorneys 

dedicated to investigating and prosecuting securities fraud class action and derivative cases on behalf 

of hundreds of institutional investors. In addition to ample human resources, Lerach Coughlin is also 

well capitalized to meet the demands of prosecuting complex cases. 

Lerach Coughlin’s securities department includes dozens of former federal and state prosecutors and 

trial attorneys. The firm’s securities practice is also strengthened by the existence of a strong 

Appellate Department, whose collective work has resulted in numerous legal precedents. The 

securities department also utilizes an extensive group of in-house economic and damage analysts, 

investigators and forensic accountants to aid in the prosecution of complex securities issues. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 3 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 4 of 72

While obtaining recoveries for our clients is our primary focus, Lerach Coughlin attorneys have also 

been at the forefront of securities fraud prevention. The firm’s prevention efforts are focused on 

creating important changes in corporate governance, either as part of the global settlements of 

derivative and class cases or through court orders. Recent cases in which such changes were made 

include: Pirelli Armstrong Tire Corp. Retiree Medical Benefits Trust v. Hanover Compressor Co., Case 

No. H-02-0410 (S.D. Tex.) (groundbreaking corporate governance changes obtained include: direct 

shareholder nomination of two directors; mandatory rotation of the outside audit firm; two-thirds of 

the board required to be independent; audit and other key committees to be filled only by 

independent directors; creation and appointment of lead independent director with authority to set 

up board meetings); In re Sprint Shareholder Lit., Case No. 00-CV-230077 (Circuit Ct. Jackson County, 

Mo.) (in connection with the settlement of a derivative action involving Sprint Corporation, the 

company adopted over 60 new corporate governance provisions which, among other things, 

established a truly independent Board of Directors and narrowly defines “independence” to 

eliminate cronyism between the board and top executives; required outside board directors to meet 

at least twice a year without management present; created an independent director who will hold 

the authority to set the agenda, a power previously reserved for the CEO; and imposed new rules to 

prevent directors and officers from vesting their stock on an accelerated basis); Teachers’ Ret. Sys. of 

Louisiana v. Occidental Petroleum Corp., Case No. BC185009 (Cal. Super. Ct. 1998) (as part of the 

settlement, corporate governance changes were made to the composition of the company’s Board of 

Directors, the company’s Nominating Committee, Compensation Committee and Audit Committee); 

and Barry v. E*Trade Group, Inc., Case No. CIV419804 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Mateo County) (in 

connection with settlement of derivative suit, excessive compensation of CEO eliminated (reduced 

salary from $800,000 to zero; bonuses reduced and to be repaid if company restates earnings; 

reduction of stock option grant, and elimination of future stock option grants) and important 

governance enhancements obtained, including the appointment of a new unaffiliated outside 

director as chair of board’s compensation committee). Through these efforts, Lerach Coughlin has 

been able to create substantial shareholder guarantees to prevent future securities fraud. 

The firm works exclusively with noted corporate governance consultant Robert Monks and his firm, 

LENS Governance Advisors, to shape corporate governance remedies for the benefit of investors. 

Insurance 

Fraud in the insurance industry by industry executives, agents, brokers, lenders and others is one of 

the most costly crimes in America. Driving up everyone’s insurance prices, some experts estimate the 

annual cost of this rising tide of white collar crime to be $120 billion nationally. Lerach Coughlin 

stands at the forefront in protecting the rights of consumers and state and federal entities against 

insurance fraud and unfair business practices in the insurance industry. 

Beginning in August 2004, Lerach Coughlin was the first to expose the illegal and improper bidrigging and kickback scandal between insurance companies and their brokers. The firm is currently 

one of the lead firms representing businesses, individuals, school districts, counties and the State of 

California in numerous actions in state and federal courts nationwide. 

Our attorneys prosecute claims relating to the fraudulent and improper sale and servicing of 

insurance policies to recoup losses for victimized policyowners. For example, Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys have represented and continue to represent policyowners against insurance companies who 

made misrepresentations at the point of sale concerning how the policy will perform, the amount of 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 4 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 5 of 72

money the policy will cost, and whether premiums will “vanish.” Claims also include allegations that 

purchasers were misled concerning the financing of a new policy, falling victim to a “replacement” or 

“churning” sales scheme where they were convinced to use loans, partial surrenders or withdrawals 

of cash values from an existing permanent life insurance policy to purchase a new policy. To date, 

Lerach Coughlin has been responsible for over $4 billion in recoveries for defrauded policyholders. 

Lerach attorneys have long been at the forefront of race discrimination litigation against life 

insurance companies for their practice of intentionally charging African-Americans and other 

minorities more for life insurance than similarly situated Caucasians. Our attorneys have recovered 

over $400 million for African-Americans and other minority class members as redress for the civil 

rights abuses they were subjected to, including landmark recoveries in McNeil v. Am. Gen. Life & 

Accident Ins. Co., Thompson v. Metro. Life Ins. Co. and Williams v. United Ins. Co. of Am. 

Antitrust 

Lerach Coughlin’s antitrust practice focuses on representing plaintiffs in complex litigation, such as 

small businesses and individuals who have been the victims of price-fixing, unfair trade practices or 

other anticompetitive conduct. The firm has taken a leading role in many of the largest federal pricefixing and price discrimination cases throughout the United States. 

For example, Lerach Coughlin attorneys played a lead role in In re NASDAQ Market-Makers Antitrust 

Litig., MDL No. 1023 (S.D.N.Y.), serving as Court-appointed co-lead counsel for a class of investors. 

The class alleged that the NASDAQ market-makers set and maintained wide spreads pursuant to an 

industry-wide conspiracy in one of the largest and most important antitrust cases in recent history. 

After three and one half years of intense litigation, the case was settled for a total of $1.027 billion, 

the largest antitrust settlement ever. An excerpt from the Court’s opinion reads: 

Counsel for the Plaintiffs are preeminent in the field of class action litigation, and the 

roster of counsel for the Defendants includes some of the largest, most successful and 

well regarded law firms in the country. It is difficult to conceive of better 

representation than the parties to this action achieved. 

See In re NASDAQ Market-Makers Antitrust Litig., 187 F.R.D. 465, 474 (S.D.N.Y. 1998). 

One of the most significant opinions in the case was Judge Sweet’s decision to certify the class of 

millions of investors over the strenuous objections of defendants. In re NASDAQ Market-Makers 

Antitrust Litig., 169 F.R.D. 493 (S.D.N.Y. 1996). Oral argument on behalf of plaintiffs on the class 

certification motion was presented by Leonard B. Simon, Of Counsel to Lerach Coughlin. 

Other cases include: 

• Hall v. NCAA (Restricted Earnings Coach Antitrust Litigation), Case No. 94-2392-KHV 

(D. Kan.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys served as lead counsel and lead trial counsel for 

one of three classes of coaches who alleged that the National Collegiate Athletic 

Association illegally fixed their compensation by instituting the “restricted earnings 

coach” rule. On May 4, 1998, the jury returned verdicts in favor of the three classes for 

more than $67 million. Trial counsel included the firm’s attorney Bonny E. Sweeney. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 5 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 6 of 72

• In re Disposable Contact Lens Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1030 (M.D. Fla.). Lerach 

Coughlin attorneys served as co-lead counsel for a class of contact lens wearers alleging 

that the principal manufacturers of disposable contact lenses conspired with the 

leadership of the American Optometric Association and other eye care practitioners to 

boycott alternative channels of contact lens distribution, including pharmacies and 

mail order suppliers. The case settled for $89 million five weeks into a jury trial, shortly 

after plaintiffs’ trial counsel, including Lerach Coughlin attorney Christopher M. Burke, 

defeated defendants’ motion for a directed verdict. 

• Microsoft I-V Cases, J.C.C.P. Case No. 4106 (San Francisco Super. Ct.). Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys served on the executive committee in these consolidated cases, in which 

California indirect purchasers challenged Microsoft’s illegal exercise of monopoly 

power in the operating system, word processing and spreadsheet markets. In a 

settlement approved by the Court, class counsel obtained an unprecedented $1.1 

billion worth of relief for the business and consumer class members who purchased the 

Microsoft products. 

Current cases include: 

• In re Currency Conversion Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1409 (S.D.N.Y.). Lerach 

Coughlin attorneys are co-lead counsel (with one other firm) in this multi-district 

litigation, in which a class of general purpose VISA and MasterCard cardholders allege 

that VISA and MasterCard, and certain leading member banks of Visa and MasterCard, 

conspired to fix and maintain the foreign currency conversion fee charged to U.S. 

cardholders. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants failed to adequately disclose the fee 

in violation of federal law. Discovery continues, and the plaintiffs’ motion for class 

certification is fully briefed. 

• Thomas & Thomas Rodmakers, Inc. v. Newport Adhesives and Composites, Inc.

(the Carbon Fiber Antitrust Litig.), Case No. CV-99-7796 (C.D. Cal.). Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys are co-lead counsel (with one other firm) in this consolidated class action, in 

which a class of purchasers alleges that the major producers of carbon fiber fixed the 

price of carbon fiber from 1993 to 1999. The trial Court denied defendants’ motions to 

dismiss and granted plaintiffs’ motion to certify the class, and the Ninth Circuit Court 

of Appeals has rejected defendants’ challenge to the Court’s class certification Order. 

Discovery is continuing. 

• In re Carbon Black Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1543 (D. Mass.). Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys serve as co-lead counsel for a class of businesses that allege that the major 

producers of carbon black unlawfully conspired to fix the price of carbon black, which 

is used in the manufacture of tires, rubber and plastic products, inks and other 

products, from 1999 through the present. The parties are currently engaged in 

discovery. 

• In re DRAM Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1486 (N.D. Cal.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys 

serve on the executive committee in this multi-district class action, in which a class of 

purchasers of high density low-cost-per-bit, random access memory chips, known as 

DRAM, allege that the leading manufactures of semiconductor products fixed the price 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 6 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 7 of 72

of DRAM from the fall of 2001 through at least the end of June 2002. Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys took the lead in briefing and successfully opposing defendant’s motion to 

dismiss, which was denied. The parties are engaged in discovery. 

• In re Medical Waste Services Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1546 (D. Utah). Lerach 

Coughlin attorneys are co-lead counsel in this multi-district antitrust class action 

litigation involving two separate cases. In the first (the Tri-State Class Action), plaintiffs 

allege defendants illegally conspired to allocate customers and territories in the market 

for the collection, transportation and disposal of medical waste in three mountain 

states. In the second case (the Stoll Action), the firm is co-lead counsel for a California 

class of plaintiffs who allege that Stericycle, the largest provider of medical waste 

collection and disposal services in the United States, unlawfully monopolized the 

market for these services in California. Discovery is ongoing, and plaintiffs expect to 

move for certification of the class in July 2004. 

• In re Microsoft Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1332 - D. Md. Lerach Coughlin attorneys 

have served as lead counsel, co-lead counsel and on the executive committees of more 

than 15 indirect purchaser actions against Microsoft brought in both state and federal 

courts alleging Microsoft illegally exercised its monopoly power in the operating 

system, word processing and spreadsheet markets. Plaintiffs successfully defeated 

motions to dismiss, challenges to class certification and motions for summary judgment 

in many state cases. Plaintiffs also engaged in a massive discovery effort in order to 

defeat Microsoft’s challenges regarding its unlawful acts, and to prepare for trials in 

California and Minnesota, both of which ultimately resolved before the cases reached a 

jury. In many states, the parties are currently in the process of finalizing settlements 

and/or achieving Court approval in settlements which provide an unprecedented result 

for indirect purchaser class members. 

• The California Wholesale Electricity Antitrust Litig., Case No. 02-CV-990 (S.D. 

Cal.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys are co-lead counsel (with one other firm) in this 

litigation, which alleges buyers and sellers in markets operated by the California Power 

Exchange and California ISO manipulated markets during the period May 1, 2000 to 

June 19, 2001. The culmination of several years of litigation, review of company 

documents and investigation have led to the determination of widespread market 

manipulation of the California and Western energy markets during 2000 and 2001. 

The findings show the trading strategies and withholding of power, employed by 

Enron and other companies, were undertaken in an effort to manipulate the California 

energy market which led to increased energy prices for consumers. Plaintiffs reached 

a landmark settlement in the litigation with the Williams Companies worth an 

estimated $400 million. The case is currently before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 

awaiting oral argument on several issues. 

Consumer 

Lerach Coughlin’s attorneys represent plaintiffs nationwide in a variety of important, complex 

consumer class actions. Lerach Coughlin attorneys have taken a leading role in many of the largest 

state and federal consumer fraud, human rights, environmental, public health and tobacco-related 

cases throughout the United States. Lerach Coughlin is also actively involved in numerous cases 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 7 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 8 of 72

relating to the financial services industry, pursuing claims on behalf of individuals victimized by 

abusive mortgage lending practices, including violations of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures 

Act, market timing violations in connection with the sale of variable annuities and deceptive 

consumer credit lending practices in violation of the Truth-In-Lending Act. 

Current consumer cases include: 

• Dell’s Bait and Switch Scheme. Plaintiffs have sued Dell, Inc. and its financing 

partners, Dell Financial Services and CIT Bank, in connection with their bait and switch 

sales and financing practices. The class action complaint alleges that Dell uses its 

advertisements to lure customers in, promising low-price computers. At the point of 

sale, Dell engages in one of several bait and switch schemes, including substituting 

lesser quality computer components for those ordered and paid for by customers, 

increasing the purchase price without adequate notice to customers, and canceling 

orders when Dell does not want to honor advertised deals. This class action also 

alleges illegal financing behavior, including Dell switching or failing to adequately 

disclose the terms of Dell’s financing agreement, including less favorable financing 

plans, hidden charges and fees, and much higher interest rates. 

• eBay Shill Bidding Litigation. Lerach Coughlin attorneys represent a plaintiff and 

class members in litigation against auction company eBay. The class action alleges 

unlawful shill bidding by eBay in its online auctions. Plaintiff alleges that eBay’s 

practice of increasing winning bids, when an eBay customer uses eBay’s proxy bidding 

tool, violates numerous California auction and consumer laws. 

• Illegal Internet Gambling Advertisements. Lerach Coughlin represents the general 

public and a class of California residents who have been harmed by the illegal online 

advertising for gambling casinos. In a complaint upheld by Judge Kramer of the San 

Francisco complex litigation department, plaintiffs have alleged that the numerous 

online search engines have violated California Law by taking payment in exchange for 

advertising illegal gambling websites. 

• Cellphone Termination Fee Cases. Lerach Coughlin attorneys are co-lead counsel in 

a lawsuit against the six major wireless telephone service providers in California. The 

plaintiffs allege that the early termination fee provisions in defendants’ contracts are 

illegal penalties under California Law, designed to unfairly tether consumers to longterm contracts and prevent customers from changing their wireless service providers. 

• Tenet Healthcare Cases. Lerach Coughlin attorneys are co-lead counsel in a class 

action alleging a fraudulent scheme of corporate misconduct, resulting in the 

overcharging of uninsured patients by the Tenet chain of hospitals. The firm’s 

attorneys represent uninsured patients of Tenet hospitals nationwide who were 

overcharged by Tenet’s admittedly “aggressive pricing strategy” which resulted in price 

gouging of the uninsured. Judge McCoy of the Los Angeles Superior Court granted 

preliminary approval of a settlement between plaintiffs and Tenet. 

• AT&T Wireless Coverage Maps. Lerach Coughlin attorneys represent consumers in a 

Los Angeles action that alleges false and misleading advertising by AT&T Wireless. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 8 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 9 of 72

Plaintiffs claim that AT&T Wireless’s coverage maps are deceptive because they fail to 

disclose that defendants’ service area is riddled with coverage gaps and holes. 

Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief from the court requiring AT&T Wireless to publish 

accurate coverage maps indicating where consumers are actually able to place wireless 

telephone calls throughout the Los Angeles region. AT&T Wireless was acquired by 

Cingular Wireless. 

Prior consumer cases include: 

• Schwartz v. Visa. After years of litigation and a six month trial, Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys won one of the largest consumer protection verdicts ever awarded in the 

United States. In Schwartz v. Visa Int'l, et al., Case No. 822404-4 (Cal. Super. Ct., 

Alameda County), California consumers sued Visa and MasterCard for intentionally 

imposing and concealing a fee from their cardholders. The Court ordered Visa and 

MasterCard to return $800,000,000 in cardholder losses, which represented 100% of 

the amount illegally taken, plus 2% interest. In addition, the Court ordered full 

disclosure of the hidden fee. 

• In re Lifescan, Inc. Consumer Litig., Case No. CV-98-20321-JF (N.D. Cal.). Lerach 

Coughlin attorneys were responsible for achieving a $45 million all-cash settlement 

with Johnson & Johnson and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Lifescan, Inc., over claims 

that Lifescan deceptively marketed and sold a defective blood-glucose monitoring 

system for diabetics. The Lifescan settlement was noted by the District Court for the 

Northern District of California as providing “exceptional results” for members of the 

class. 

Human Rights, Labor Practices and Public Policy 

Lerach Coughlin attorneys have a long tradition of representing the victims of wrongdoing, ranging 

from unfair labor practices to the violation of human rights. These include: 

• Does I, et al. v. The Gap, Inc., et al., Case No. 01 0031 (D. N. Mariana Islands). In this 

groundbreaking case, Lerach Coughlin attorneys represented a class of 30,000 garment 

workers who alleged that they had worked under sweatshop conditions in garment 

factories in Saipan that produced clothing for top U.S. retailers such as The Gap, Target 

and J.C. Penney. In the first action of its kind, Lerach Coughlin attorneys pursued 

claims against the factories and the retailers alleging violations of RICO, the Alien Tort 

Claims Act and the Law of Nations based on the alleged systemic labor and human 

rights abuses occurring in Saipan. This case was a companion to two other actions: 

Does I, et al. v. Advance Textile Corp., et al., Case No. 99 0002 (D. N. Mariana 

Islands), which alleged overtime violations by the garment factories under the Fair 

Labor Standards Act, and UNITE, et al. v. The Gap, Inc., et al., Case No. 300474 (Cal. 

Super. Ct., San Francisco County), which alleged violations of California’s Unfair 

Practices Law by the U.S. retailers. These actions resulted in a settlement of 

approximately $20 million that included a comprehensive Monitoring Program to 

address past violations by the factories and prevent future ones. The members of the 

litigation team were honored as Trial Lawyers of the Year by the Trial Lawyers for 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 9 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 10 of 72

Public Justice in recognition of the team’s efforts at bringing about the precedentsetting settlement of the actions. 

• Kasky v. Nike, Inc., 27 Cal. 4th 939 (2002), cert. dismissed, 539 U.S. 654 (2003). The 

California Supreme Court upheld claims that an apparel manufacturer misled the 

public regarding its exploitative labor practices, thereby violating California statutes 

prohibiting unfair competition and false advertising. The Court rejected defense 

contentions that any misconduct was protected by the First Amendment. The Court 

found the heightened constitutional protection afforded to noncommercial speech 

was inappropriate in such a circumstance. 

• The Cintas Litigation. Brought against one of the nation’s largest commercial 

laundries for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act for misclassifying truck drivers 

as salesmen to avoid payment of overtime. 

Shareholder derivative litigation brought by Lerach Coughlin at times also involves anti-union 

activities, including: 

• Southern Pacific/Overnite. A shareholder action stemming from several hundred 

million dollars in loss of value in the company due to systematic violations by Overnite 

of U.S. labor laws. 

• Massey Energy. A shareholder action against an anti-union employer for flagrant 

violations of environmental laws resulting in multi-million dollar penalties. 

• Crown Petroleum. A shareholder action against a Texas-based oil company for selfdealing and breach of fiduciary duty while also involved in a union lockout. 

Lerach Coughlin attorneys also represented over 2,300 Taco Bell workers who were denied thousands 

of hours of overtime pay because, among other reasons, they were improperly classified as overtime 

exempt employees. Currently, the firm’s attorneys represent CINTAS workers with similar claims of 

violation of federal and state labor laws. 

Environment & Public Health 

Lerach Coughlin attorneys have also represented plaintiffs in class actions related to environmental 

law. The firm’s attorneys represented, on a pro bono basis, the Sierra Club and the National 

Economic Development and Law Center as amici curiae in a federal suit designed to uphold the state 

and federal use of project labor agreements (“PLAs”). The suit represented a legal challenge to 

President Bush’s Executive Order 13202, which prohibits the use of project labor agreements on 

construction projects receiving federal funds. Our Amici Brief in the matter outlined and stressed the 

significant environmental and socio-economic benefits associated with the use of PLAs on large scale 

construction projects. 

Attorneys with Lerach Coughlin have been involved in several other significant environmental cases, 

including: 

• Public Citizen v. US DOT. Lerach Coughlin represented a coalition of labor, 

environmental, industry and public health organizations including Public Citizen, The 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 10 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 11 of 72

International Brotherhood of Teamsters, California AFL-CIO and California Trucking 

Industry in a challenge to a decision by the Bush Administration to lift a 

congressionally-imposed “moratorium” on cross-border trucking from Mexico on the 

basis that such trucks do not conform to emission controls under the Clean Air Act, and 

further, that the Administration did not first complete a comprehensive environmental 

impact analysis as required by the National Environmental Policy Act. The suit was 

dismissed by the Supreme Court, the Court holding that because the DOT lacked 

discretion to prevent cross-border trucking, an environmental assessment was not 

required. 

• Sierra Club v. AK Steel. Brought on behalf of the Sierra Club for massive emissions of 

air and water pollution by a steel mill, including homes of workers living in the 

adjacent communities, in violation of the Federal Clean Air Act, RCRA and the Clean 

Water Act.

• MTBE Litigation. Brought on behalf of various water districts for befouling public 

drinking water with MTBE, a gasoline additive linked to cancer.

• Exxon Valdez. Brought on behalf of fisherman and of Alaska residents for billions of 

dollars in damages resulting from the greatest oil spill in U.S. history.

• Avilla Beach. A citizens’ suit against UNOCAL for leakage from the oil company 

pipeline so severe it literally destroyed the town of Avilla Beach, California.

Federal laws such as the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act and state laws such as California Proposition 65 exist to protect the environment and the public 

from abuses by corporate and government organizations. Companies can be found liable for 

negligence, trespass or intentional environmental damage and be forced to pay for reparations and 

to come into compliance with existing laws. 

Prominent cases litigated by Lerach Coughlin attorneys include representing more than 4,000 

individuals suing for personal injury and property damage related to the Stringfellow Dump Site in 

Southern California, participation in the Exxon Valdez oil spill litigation, and the toxic spill arising 

from a Southern Pacific train derailment near Dunsmuir, California. 

The Fight Against Big Tobacco 

Lerach Coughlin attorneys have led the fight against Big Tobacco since 1991. As an example, Lerach 

Coughlin attorneys filed the case that helped get rid of Joe Camel representing various public and 

private plaintiffs, including the State of Arkansas, the general public in California, the cities of San 

Francisco, Los Angeles and Birmingham, 14 counties in California, and the working men and women 

of this country in the Union Pension and Welfare Fund cases that have been filed in 40 states. In 

1992, Lerach Coughlin attorneys filed the first case in the country that alleged a conspiracy by the Big 

Tobacco companies. 

Pro Bono 

Lerach Coughlin attorneys have a long history of engaging in pro bono cases and have been 

recognized for their demonstrated commitment to providing pro bono services to the poor and 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 11 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 12 of 72

disenfranchised. In 2003, Lerach Coughlin attorneys Eric Isaacson, Bonny Sweeney and Amber Eck 

were nominated for the prestigious 2003 California State Bar President’s Pro Bono Law Firm of the 

Year award, based in large part on their efforts with the ACLU in Sanchez v. County of San Diego. 

The San Diego office received a commendation from the State Bar President for its “dedication to the 

provision of pro bono legal services to the poor and for the significant contribution [the firm] made 

to extending legal services to underserved communities.” In recommending the firm for the award, 

Carl Poirot of the San Diego Volunteer Lawyer Program praised the firm for its “extraordinary 

efforts” in the case, stating that the “legal team generously gave of their time in the vigorous 

representation of a class of individuals who clearly do not have the financial resources nor 

wherewithal to retain legal counsel. The County’s questionable conduct would have gone 

unchallenged but for the intervention” of the legal team. 

Sanchez is a class action brought on behalf of welfare applicants against the County of San Diego 

seeking an injunction requiring the County to discontinue its “Project 100%” program. Under Project 

100%, investigators from the San Diego D.A.’s office, Public Assistance Fraud Division, enter and 

search the home of every person who applies for welfare benefits, even though there is no suspicion 

of fraud or wrongdoing, and despite the fact that every individual is required to undergo an 

extensive application process with numerous verifications. Plaintiffs contend that these searches by 

law enforcement officers, performed without cause or suspicion, violate state and federal statutes 

and the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. 

The Court certified a class of all present and future applicants for CalWORKs cash aid and food stamps 

in San Diego County who are subject to a search of their home under Project 100%. Defendants have 

since admitted that the use of home visits to determine eligibility for food stamps violates California 

state regulations and has agreed to settle these claims. Although defendants were granted summary 

judgment on the remaining claims, plaintiffs are currently in the process of filing an appeal with the 

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and are optimistic about the prospects for success there. Due to the 

substantial number of hours dedicated to this important case, lead attorneys Eric Isaacson, Bonny 

Sweeney and Amber Eck were awarded the SDVLP Distinguished Service Award. 

The San Diego office was also named as one of three finalists for the 1999 Pro Bono Law Firm of the 

Year award by the SDVLP, based in part for its work on the Badua v. City of San Diego case. Badua

was a case brought on behalf of Jenny Badua against the City of San Diego. After working for the 

City for 15 years, she was placed on Long Term Disability (“LTD”) leave due to severe manic 

depression. Under the City’s LTD Plan, which is similar to many other LTD plans, individuals with 

physical disabilities receive benefits until age 65 or older, but individuals with mental disabilities 

receive benefits for only two years. We alleged that this differential treatment of persons with 

mental disabilities violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and federal and state disability 

nondiscrimination statutes. Unfortunately, after three years of working on the case, the Ninth Circuit 

Court of Appeals issued an Opinion upholding the constitutionality of an LTD plan nearly identical to 

the one at issue, and plaintiffs settled the case for a nominal award to the plaintiff. However, the 

Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund (“DREDF”) and the ACLU commended our efforts and 

described this as one of the most important issues of the year. 

Our co-counsel, Linda Kilb of the DREDF, said in recommending us for the award: “The talent, effort 

and commitment of [Lerach Coughlin attorneys have] been invaluable, and it is difficult to imagine 

how the case could proceed without them. DREDF is enormously appreciative of [Lerach Coughlin 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 12 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 13 of 72

attorneys’] continuing role in this case, and of SDVLP’s assistance in finding us co-counsel of this 

caliber.” 

JUDICIAL COMMENDATIONS

 Lerach Coughlin attorneys have been commended by countless judges all over the country for 

the quality of representation in class action lawsuits. 

 When Judge Harmon appointed Lerach Coughlin attorneys as lead counsel for Enron securities 

purchasers, she commented: 

In reviewing the extensive briefing submitted regarding the Lead Plaintiff/Lead 

Counsel selection, the Court has found that the submissions of [Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys] stand out in the breadth and depth of its research and insight. 

Furthermore, Mr. Lerach has justifiably “beat his own drum” in demonstrating the role 

his firm has played thus far in zealously prosecuting this litigation on Plaintiffs’ behalf. 

Later, in a preliminary class certification order discussing the issues of Enron, Judge Harmon had this 

to say about our firm: 

The firm is comprised of probably the most prominent securities class action attorneys 

in the country. It is not surprising that Defendants have not argued that counsel is not 

adequate. Counsel’s conduct in zealously and efficiently prosecuting this litigation 

with commitment of substantial resources to that goal evidences those qualities.... 

Since the beginning they have propelled the Newby litigation forward. They have 

established the website by which attorneys serve and communicate with each other, 

established the central depository for discovery materials, negotiated an agreed, 

organized, nonduplicative, and pared-down discovery schedule, and negotiated 

complex settlements with a number of defendants.

See In re Enron Corp. Sec. Litig., 206 F.R.D. 427, 458 (S.D. Tex. 2002). 

 In Stanley v. Safeskin Corp., Case No. 99 CV 454-BTM (S.D. Cal. May 25, 2004), where Lerach 

Coughlin obtained $55 million for the class of investors, Judge Moskowitz stated: 

I said this once before, and I’ll say it again. I thought the way that your firm handled 

this case was outstanding. This was not an easy case. It was a complicated case, and 

every step of the way, I thought they did a very professional job. 

 In Roy v. The Independent Order of Foresters, Case No. 97-6225 (SRC), slip op. at 32 (D.N.J. 

Aug. 3, 1999), Judge Chesler noted in his Opinion on class certification that: 

The firm of [Lerach Coughlin], which is co-lead counsel for the plaintiff, was also 

counsel for the plaintiff class in the Prudential case. Thus, the adequacy of the 

plaintiff’s representation is beyond reproach. Furthermore, the tremendous and 

unprecedented settlements which the [Lerach Coughlin] firm has helped to secure for 

the plaintiff classes in both this case and the Prudential case are a testament to 

counsel’s vigorous pursuit of the class interests. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 13 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 14 of 72

 In a November 9, 1998 Order approving settlements totaling over $1.027 billion, the Court in 

In re NASDAQ Market-Makers Antitrust Litig., 187 F.R.D. 465, 474 (S.D.N.Y. 1998), commented of 

Lerach Coughlin attorneys, including Len Simon; 

Counsel for the Plaintiffs are preeminent in the field of class action litigation, and the 

roster of counsel for the Defendants includes some of the largest, most successful and 

well regarded law firms in the country. It is difficult to conceive of better 

representation than the parties in this action achieved. 

 In approving a recovery in excess of $200 million in Transamerica, Judge Danielsen of the 

California Superior Court made it a point to comment on the professionalism of Lerach Coughlin’s 

lawyers: 

It would be hard to imagine what question I could come up with that I haven’t already 

seen the information that I needed in the submissions that have been made to this 

Court. I can’t remember anything so thoroughly and professionally handled in the 20-

some odd years that I’ve been involved in the law. It is interesting to see law practiced 

honorably. And I think all of the lawyers who have involved themselves in this case can 

be very proud of their profession. 

See Natal v. Transamerica Occidental Life Ins. Co., Case No. 694829, Hearing Transcript dated June 26, 

1997, at 39:3-12. 

 Similarly, in Prudential, in approving the settlement of a nationwide class action against a life 

insurer for deceptive sales practices, Judge Wolin observed: 

[T]he results achieved by plaintiffs’ counsel in this case in the face of significant legal, 

factual and logistical obstacles and formidable opposing counsel, are nothing short of 

remarkable.... Finally, the standing and professional skill of plaintiffs’ counsel, in 

particular Co-Lead Counsel, is high and undoubtedly furthered their ability to 

negotiate a valuable settlement and argue its merits before this Court. Several 

members of plaintiffs’ counsel are leading attorneys in the area of class action 

litigation. 

See In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. Sales Practices Litig., 962 F. Supp. 572, 585-86 (D.N.J. 1997), 

vacated on other grounds, 148 F.3d 283 (3d Cir. 1998). Lerach Coughlin attorneys were co-lead 

counsel in this litigation. At the Fairness Hearing in Prudential, Judge Wolin stated that “there is no 

doubt that Class Counsel have prosecuted the interests of the class members with the utmost vigor 

and expertise.” In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. Sales Practices Litig., 962 F. Supp. 450, 519 (D.N.J. 

1997), aff’d, 148 F.3d 283 (3d Cir. 1998) (emphasis added). 

 In approving a $100 million settlement in In re Prudential Securities Limited Partnerships Litig., 

912 F. Supp. 97, 101 (S.D.N.Y. 1996), for which Lerach Coughlin attorneys were part of the lead 

counsel, Judge Pollack noted that he had “the opportunity at first hand to observe the quality of 

plaintiffs’ class counsel’s representation, both here and in prior complex litigation, and [was] 

impressed with the quality of plaintiffs’ class counsel.” In his Opinion on class certification, Judge 

Chesler elaborated that: 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 14 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 15 of 72

The firm which is co-lead counsel for the plaintiff, was also counsel for the plaintiff 

class in the Prudential case. Thus, the adequacy of the plaintiff’s representation is 

beyond reproach. Furthermore, the tremendous and unprecedented settlements 

which the firm has helped to secure for the plaintiff classes in both this case and the 

Prudential case are a testament to counsel’s vigorous pursuit of the class interests. 

See Roy v. The Independent Order of Foresters, Case No. 97-6225 (SRC), slip op. at 32 (D.N.J. Aug. 3, 

1999). 

 At the Settlement Hearing in the Chipcom litigation, for which Lerach Coughlin attorneys 

were counsel, Judge Woodlock remarked: 

[I]t seems to me that the level of legal services, the quality of legal services, the 

attention to the case on behalf of the plaintiffs, and ultimately plaintiffs’ class, was 

really very high quality and ought to be recognized by an appropriately high 

percentage figure here. 

Of course, I disagree on the merits of the case. That is not, however, to say that 

I disagree with the quality of the lawyering or disregarded the quality of the lawyering 

or thought that the quality of the lawyering was not at the highest level. To the 

contrary, I thought it was at the highest level and that ought also to be reflected here. 

See Nappo v. Chipcom Corp., Case No. CA-95-11114-WD (D. Mass.), Settlement Hearing Transcript 

dated June 26, 1997, at 13-14. 

NOTABLE CLIENTS

Public Fund Clients 

• Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation. 

• Alaska State Pension Investment Board.

• California Public Employees’ Retirement System.

• California State Teachers’ Retirement System.

• Teachers’ Retirement System of the State of Illinois, Illinois Municipal Retirement 

Fund, Illinois State Board of Investment.

• Los Angeles County Employees Retirement Association (LACERA). 

• Maine State Retirement System. 

• The Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission Employees’ Retirement 

System.

• Milwaukee Employees’ Retirement System.

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 15 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 16 of 72

• Minnesota State Board of Investment.

• New Hampshire Retirement System.

• Ohio Public Funds (Ohio Public Employees Retirement System, State Teachers 

Retirement System of Ohio, School Employees Retirement System of Ohio, Ohio 

Police and Fire Pension Fund, Ohio State Highway Patrol Retirement System, and 

Ohio Bureau of Workers’ Compensation).

• Pompano Beach Police & Firefighters Retirement System. 

• The Regents of the University of California.

• State Universities Retirement System of Illinois.

• State of Wisconsin Investment Board.

• Tennessee Consolidated Retirement System.

• Washington State Investment Board.

• Wayne County Employees' Retirement System. 

• West Virginia Investment Management Board.

Multi-Employer Clients 

• Alaska Electrical Pension Fund. 

• Alaska Hotel & Restaurant Employees Pension Trust Fund. 

• Alaska Ironworkers Pension Trust. 

• Alaska Laborers Employers Retirement Fund. 

• Chemical Valley Pension Fund of West Virginia. 

• Carpenters Health & Welfare Fund of Philadelphia & Vicinity.

• Carpenters Pension Fund of Baltimore, Maryland. 

• Carpenters Pension Fund of Illinois. 

• Carpenters Pension & Annuity Fund of Philadelphia & Vicinity. 

• Southwest Carpenters Pension Trust (f/k/a Carpenters Pension Trust for Southern 

California). 

• Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 16 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 17 of 72

• Construction Industry and Carpenters Joint Pension Trust for Southern Nevada. 

• Employer-Teamsters Local Nos. 175 & 505 Pension Trust Fund. 

• Heavy & General Laborers’ Local 472 & 172 Pension & Annuity Funds. 

• UNITE Family of Funds. 

• 1199 SEIU Greater New York Pension Fund. 

• Massachusetts State Carpenters Pension Fund. 

• Massachusetts State Guaranteed Annuity Fund.

• New England Health Care Employees Pension Fund. 

• New Mexico Public Funds (New Mexico Educational Retirement Board, New Mexico 

Public Employees Retirement Association, and New Mexico State Investment 

Council). 

• PACE Industry Union-Management Pension Fund. 

• SEIU Staff Fund. 

• Southern California Lathing Industry Pension Fund. 

• United Brotherhood of Carpenters Pension Fund. 

Additional Institutional Investors 

• Bank of Ireland Asset Management.

• Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company.

• Standard Life Investments. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 17 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 18 of 72

PROMINENT CASES AND PRECEDENT-SETTING DECISIONS

Prominent Cases 

• In re Enron Sec. Litig., Case No. H-01-3624 (S.D. Tex.). In appointing Lerach Coughlin lawyers 

as sole lead counsel to represent the interests of Enron investors, the Court found that the firm’s 

zealous prosecution and level of “insight” set it apart from its peers. Ever since, Lerach Coughlin and 

lead plaintiff The Regents of the University of California have aggressively pursued numerous 

defendants, including many of Wall Street’s biggest banks and law firms. Despite each defendant’s 

claim that as a matter of law it could not be found liable for plaintiffs’ losses, Lerach Coughlin and 

The Regents have thus far obtained settlements in excess of $7.1 billion for the benefit of investors. 

Lerach Coughlin continues to press substantial and sizable claims against numerous defendants, 

including Enron’s senior-most officers and several large international banks, with every intention of 

winning further large recoveries at trial for the victims of this corporate catastrophe. 

• In re NASDAQ Market-Makers Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1023 (S.D.N.Y.). Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys served as Court-appointed co-lead counsel for a class of investors. The class alleged that the 

NASDAQ market-makers set and maintained wide spreads pursuant to an industry wide conspiracy in 

one of the largest and most important antitrust cases in recent history. After three and one half 

years of intense litigation, the case was settled for a total of $1.027 billion, the largest antitrust 

settlement ever. An excerpt from the Court’s Opinion reads: 

Counsel for the Plaintiffs are preeminent in the field of class action litigation, and the roster 

of counsel for the Defendants includes some of the largest, most successful and well regarded 

law firms in the country. It is difficult to conceive of better representation than the parties to 

this action achieved. 

• In re Dynegy Sec. Litig., Case No. H-02-1571 (S.D. Tex.). As sole lead counsel representing 

The Regents of the University of California and the class of Dynegy investors, Lerach Coughlin 

obtained a combined settlement of $474 million from Dynegy Inc., Citigroup, Inc. and Arthur 

Andersen LLP for their involvement in a clandestine financing scheme known as Project Alpha. Given 

Dynegy’s limited ability to pay, Lerach Coughlin structured a settlement (reached shortly before the 

commencement of trial) that maximized plaintiffs’ recovery without bankrupting the company. Most 

notably, the settlement agreement provides that Dynegy will appoint two board members to be 

nominated by the Regents, which Lerach Coughlin and the Regents believe will result in benefits to 

all of Dynegy’s stockholders. 

• In re Am. Cont. Corp./Lincoln Sav. & Loan Sec. Litig., MDL No. 834 (D. Ariz.). Lerach 

Coughlin attorneys served as the Court-appointed co-lead counsel for a class of persons who 

purchased debentures and/or stock in American Continental Corp., the parent company of the now 

infamous Lincoln Savings & Loan. The suit charged Charles Keating, other insiders, three major 

accounting firms, three major law firms, Drexel Burnham, Michael Milken and others with 

racketeering and violations of securities laws. Recoveries totaled $240 million on $288 million in 

losses. A jury also rendered verdicts of more than $1 billion against Keating and others. 

• In re 3Com, Inc. Sec. Litig., Case No. C-97-21083-JW (N.D. Cal.). A hard-fought class action 

alleging violations of the federal securities laws in which Lerach Coughlin attorneys served as lead 

counsel for the class and obtained a recovery totaling $259 million. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 18 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 19 of 72

• Mangini v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Case No. 939359 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco 

County). In this case, R.J. Reynolds admitted, “the Mangini action, and the way that it was vigorously 

litigated, was an early, significant and unique driver of the overall legal and social controversy 

regarding underage smoking that led to the decision to phase out the Joe Camel Campaign.” 

• Cordova v. Liggett Group, Inc., et al., Case No. 651824 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Diego County), 

and People v. Philip Morris, Inc., et al., Case No. 980864 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco County). 

Lerach Coughlin attorneys, as lead counsel in both these actions, played a key role in these cases 

which were settled with the Attorneys General global agreement with the tobacco industry, bringing 

$26 billion to the State of California as a whole and $12.5 billion to the cities and counties within 

California. 

• Does I, et al. v. The Gap, Inc., et al., Case No. 01 0031 (D. N. Mariana Islands). In this 

ground-breaking case, Lerach Coughlin attorneys represented a class of 30,000 garment workers who 

alleged that they had worked under sweatshop conditions in garment factories in Saipan that 

produced clothing for top U.S. retailers such as The Gap, Target and J.C. Penney. In the first action of 

its kind, Lerach Coughlin attorneys pursued claims against the factories and the retailers alleging 

violations of RICO, the Alien Tort Claims Act and the Law of Nations based on the alleged systemic 

labor and human rights abuses occurring in Saipan. This case was a companion to two other actions: 

Does I, et al. v. Advance Textile Corp., et al., Case No. 99 0002 (D. N. Mariana Islands) – which 

alleged overtime violations by the garment factories under the Fair Labor Standards Act, and UNITE, 

et al. v. The Gap, Inc., et al., Case No. 300474 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco County), which alleged 

violations of California’s Unfair Practices Law by the U.S. retailers. These actions resulted in a 

settlement of approximately $20 million that included a comprehensive Monitoring Program to 

address past violations by the factories and prevent future ones. The members of the litigation team 

were honored as Trial Lawyers of the Year by the Trial Lawyers for Public Justice in recognition of the 

team’s efforts at bringing about the precedent-setting settlement of the actions. 

• In re Exxon Valdez, Case No. A89 095 Civ. (D. Alaska), and In re Exxon Valdez Oil Spill 

Litig., Case No. 3 AN 89 2533 (Alaska Super. Ct., 3d Jud. Dist.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys served on 

the Plaintiffs’ Coordinating Committee and Plaintiffs’ Law Committee in the massive litigation 

resulting from the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska in March 1989. A jury verdict of $5 billion was 

obtained and is currently on appeal. 

• In re Washington Public Power Supply Sys. Sec. Litig., MDL No. 551 (D. Ariz.). A massive 

litigation in which Lerach Coughlin attorneys served as co-lead counsel for a class that obtained 

recoveries totaling $775 million after several months of trial. 

• Hall v. NCAA (Restricted Earnings Coach Antitrust Litigation), Case No. 94-2392-KHV (D. Kan.). 

The firm was lead counsel and lead trial counsel for one of three classes of coaches in consolidated 

price fixing actions against the National Collegiate Athletic Association. On May 4, 1998, the jury 

returned verdicts in favor of the three classes for more than $54.5 million. 

• Newman v. Stringfellow (Stringfellow Dump Site Litigation), Case No. 165994 MF (Cal. 

Super. Ct., Riverside County). Lerach Coughlin attorneys represented more than 4,000 individuals 

suing for personal injury and property damage arising from their claims that contact with the 

Stringfellow Dump Site may have caused them toxic poisoning. Recovery totaled approximately $109 

million. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 19 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 20 of 72

• In re Prison Realty Sec. Litig., Case No. 3:99-0452 (M.D. Tenn.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys 

served as lead counsel for the class, obtaining a $105 million recovery. 

• In re Honeywell Int’l, Inc. Sec. Litig., Case No. 00-cv-03605 (DRD) (D. N.J.). Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys served as lead counsel for a class of investors that purchased Honeywell’s common stock. 

The case charged defendants Honeywell and its top officers with violations of the federal securities 

laws, alleging defendants made false public statements concerning Honeywell’s merger with Allied 

Signal, Inc., and also alleging that defendants falsified Honeywell’s financial statements. After 

extensive discovery, Lerach Coughlin attorneys obtained a $100 million settlement for the class. 

• In re AT&T Corp. Sec. Litig., MDL No. 1399 (N.J.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys served as lead 

counsel for a class of investors that purchased AT&T common stock. The case charged defendants 

AT&T Corporation and its former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, C. Michael Armstrong, with 

violations of the federal securities laws in connection with AT&T’s April 2000 initial public offering of 

its wireless tracking stock, the largest IPO in American history. After two weeks of trial, and on the 

eve of scheduled testimony by Armstrong and infamous telecom analyst Jack Grubman, defendants 

agreed to settle the case for $100 million. In granting approval of the settlement, the Court stated 

the following about Lerach Coughlin: 

Lead Counsel are highly skilled attorneys with great experience in prosecuting complex 

securities action[s], and their professionalism and diligence displayed during litigation 

substantiates this characterization. The Court notes that Lead Counsel displayed excellent 

lawyering skills through their consistent preparedness during court proceedings, arguments 

and the trial, and their well-written and thoroughly researched submissions to the Court. 

Undoubtedly, the attentive and persistent effort of Lead Counsel was integral in achieving the 

excellent result for the Class. 

• City of San Jose v. PaineWebber, Case No. C-84-20601(RFP) (N.D. Cal.). Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys filed a lawsuit on behalf of the City of San Jose to recover speculative trading losses from its 

former auditors and 13 brokerage firms. In June 1990, following a six-month trial, the jury returned a 

verdict for the City, awarding over $18 million in damages plus pre-judgment interest. The City also 

recovered an additional $12 million in settlements prior to and during the trial. 

• Hicks v. Nationwide, Case No. 602469 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Diego County). Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys represented a class of consumers alleging fraud involving military purchasers of life 

insurance, in which a jury trial resulted in a full recovery for the class, plus punitive damages. 

• In re Nat’l Health Labs. Sec. Litig., Case No. CV-92-1949-RBB (S.D. Cal.). Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys served as co-lead counsel and obtained a pretrial recovery of $64 million in this securities 

fraud class action. 

• In re Informix Corp. Sec. Litig., Case No. C-97-1289-CRB (N.D. Cal.). Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys served as co-lead counsel for the class and obtained a recovery of $137.5 million. 

• In re Apple Computer Sec. Litig., Case No. C-84-20148(A)-JW (N.D. Cal.). Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys served as lead counsel and after several years of litigation obtained a $100 million jury 

verdict in this securities fraud class action. The verdict was later upset on post-trial motions, but the 

case was settled favorably to the class. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 20 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 21 of 72

• In re Nat’l Med. Enters. Sec. Litig., Case No. CV-91-5452-TJH (C.D. Cal.). Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys served as co-lead counsel and recovered $60.75 million in this securities fraud class action. 

• In re Nucorp Energy Sec. Litig., MDL No. 514 (S.D. Cal.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys served 

as co-lead counsel in this consolidated class action and recovered $55 million. 

• In re U.S. Fin. Sec. Litig., MDL No. 161 (S.D. Cal.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys acted as 

chairman of the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee and achieved a pretrial recovery of over $50 million. 

• Barr v. United Methodist Church, Case No. 404611 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Diego County). 

Lerach Coughlin attorneys served as lead and trial counsel in this class action on behalf of elderly 

persons who lost their life savings when a church-sponsored retirement home that had sold them 

prepaid life-care contracts went bankrupt. After four years of intensive litigation – three trips to the 

U.S. Supreme Court and five months of trial – plaintiffs obtained a settlement providing over $40 

million in benefits to the class members. In approving that settlement, Judge James Foucht praised 

the result as “a most extraordinary accomplishment” and noted that it was the “product of the skill, 

effort and determination of plaintiffs’ counsel.” 

• Grobow v. Dingman (The Henley Group Litigation), Case No. 575076 (Cal. Super. Ct., San 

Diego County). Lerach Coughlin attorneys served as co-lead counsel and obtained $42 million 

derivatively on behalf of The Henley Group, Inc. 

• In re Itel Sec. Litig., Case No. C-79-2168A-RPA (N.D. Cal.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys served 

as co-lead counsel in this securities class action that recovered $40 million. 

• In re Fin. Corp. of Am., Case No. CV-84-6050-TJH(Bx) (C.D. Cal.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys 

served as co-lead counsel and obtained a recovery of $41 million. 

• In re Oak Indus. Sec. Litig., Case No. 83-0537-G(M) (S.D. Cal.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys 

served as co-lead counsel in this case and obtained a recovery of $33 million. 

• In re Wickes Cos. Sec. Litig., MDL No. 513 (S.D. Cal.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys served as 

liaison counsel in this consolidated securities law class action that recovered $32 million. 

• Weinberger v. Shumway (The Signal Companies, Inc.), Case No. 547586 (Cal. Super. Ct., San 

Diego County). Lerach Coughlin attorneys served as co-lead counsel in this derivative litigation 

challenging executive “golden parachute” contracts, and obtained a recovery of approximately $23 

million. 

• In re Seafirst Sec. Litig., Case No. C-83-771-R (W.D. Wash.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys 

served as co-lead counsel in this class action and obtained a pretrial recovery of $13.6 million. 

• In re Waste Mgmt. Sec. Litig., Case No. 83-C2167 (N.D. Ill.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys served 

as co-lead counsel in this case and obtained a pretrial recovery of $11.5 million. 

• In re IDB Commc’ns Group, Inc. Sec. Litig., Case No. CV-94-3618 (C.D. Cal.). Lerach 

Coughlin attorneys served as co-lead counsel in this case and obtained a pretrial recovery of $75 

million. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 21 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 22 of 72

• In re Boeing Sec. Litig., Case No. C97-1715Z (W.D. Wash.). A securities class action in which 

Lerach Coughlin attorneys served as co-lead counsel for the class obtaining a recovery in the amount 

of $92.5 million. 

• Thurber v. Mattel, Inc., et al., Case No. CV-99-10368-MRP (C.D. Cal.). Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys served as Chair of the Executive Committee of Plaintiffs’ Counsel and obtained a recovery 

of $122 million. 

• In re Dollar Gen. Sec. Litig., Case No. 3:01-0388 (M.D. Tenn.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys 

served as co-lead counsel and obtained a recovery of $172.5 million. 

• Pirelli Armstrong Tire Corp. Retiree Med. Benefits Trust v. Hanover Compressor Co., 

Case No. H-02-0410 (S.D. Tex.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys served as lead counsel and obtained a 

recovery of $85 million.

• In re Reliance Acceptance Group, Inc. Sec. Litig., MDL No. 1304 (D. Del.). Lerach Coughlin 

attorneys served as co-lead counsel and obtained a recovery of $39 million.

• Schwartz v. Visa Int'l, et al., Case No. 822404-4 (Cal. Super. Ct., Alameda County). After 

years of litigation and a six month trial, Lerach Coughlin attorneys won one of the largest consumer 

protection verdicts ever awarded in the United States. Lerach Coughlin attorneys represented 

California consumers who sued Visa and MasterCard for intentionally imposing and concealing a fee 

from their cardholders. The Court ordered Visa and MasterCard to return $800,000,000 in cardholder 

losses, which represented 100% of the amount illegally taken, plus 2% interest. In addition, the 

Court ordered full disclosure of the hidden fee. 

• Morris v. Lifescan, Inc., Case No. CV-98-20321-JF (N.D. Cal.). Lerach Coughlin attorneys were 

responsible for achieving a $45 million all-cash settlement with Johnson & Johnson and its whollyowned subsidiary, Lifescan, Inc., over claims that Lifescan deceptively marketed and sold a defective 

blood glucose monitoring system for diabetics. The Lifescan settlement was noted by the U.S. District 

Court for the Northern District of California as providing “exceptional results” for members of the 

class. 

• Thompson v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 216 F.R.D. 55 (S.D.N.Y. 2003). Lerach Coughlin attorneys 

served as lead counsel and obtained $145 million for the class in a settlement involving racial 

discrimination claims in the sale of life insurance. 

• In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. Sales Practices Litig., 962 F. Supp. 450 (D. N.J. 1997). In 

one of the first cases of its kind, Lerach Coughlin attorneys obtained a settlement of over $1.2 billion 

for deceptive sales practices in connection with the sale of life insurance involving the “vanishing 

premium” sales scheme. 

• Brody v. Hellman, Case No. 00-CV-4142 (D. Colo.). Lerach Coughlin was Court-appointed 

counsel for a class of former stockholders of US West, Inc. who sought to recover a dividend declared 

by US West before its merger with Qwest. The merger closed before the record and payment dates 

for the dividend, which Qwest did not pay following the merger. The case was hard fought, and the 

plaintiffs survived a motion to dismiss, two motions for summary judgment and successfully certified 

the class over vigorous opposition from defendants. In certifying the class, the Court commented, 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 22 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 23 of 72

“Defendants do not contest that Plaintiffs’ attorneys are extremely well qualified to represent the 

putative class. This litigation has been ongoing for four years; in that time Plaintiffs’ counsel has 

proven that they are more than adequate in ability, determination, and resources to represent the 

putative class.” The case settled for $50 million, an outstanding settlement for the class given the 

novel and difficult legal questions raised in the case. 

Precedent-Setting Decisions 

Investor and Shareholder Rights

• Dura Pharm., Inc. v. Broudo, __ U.S. __, 125 S. Ct. 1627; 161 L. Ed. 2d 577 (2005). Resolving a 

conflict among the circuits on pleading and proving loss causation, the Supreme Court adopted a rule 

that investors may proceed by pleading and proving that securities they purchased declined in value 

because of the fraud alleged – as, for example, by alleging that the securities’ market price fell when 

news of the issuer’s true financial state began to leak out. 

• In re Daou Systems Inc. Sec. Litig., 411 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2005). The Ninth Circuit 

sustained investors’ allegations of accounting fraud and ruled that loss causation was adequately 

alleged by pleading that the value of the stock they purchased declined when the issuer’s true 

financial condition was revealed. 

• Barrie v. Intervoice-Brite, Inc., 409 F.3d 653 (5th Cir. 2005). The Fifth Circuit held that 

where corporate officers made public statements together, an investor’s allegations of the false 

statements meets the heightened pleading requirements for federal securities claims, and that the 

corporate officer who stood by silently while false statements were made – failing to correct them – 

may be liable along with the officer who actually made them. 

• Newby v. Enron Corp., 394 F.3d 296 (5th Cir. 2004). The Fifth Circuit upheld a partial 

settlement in a complex case that was structured to support further litigation of that case in order to 

maximize recovery against the remaining defendants. 

• Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund v. Citigroup, Inc., 391 F.3d 844 (7th Cir. 2004). The 

Seventh Circuit upheld a district court’s decision that the Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund was 

entitled to litigate its claims under the federal Securities Act of 1933 against WorldCom’s 

underwriters before a state court rather than before the federal forum sought by the defendants. 

• City of Monroe Employees Retirement System v. Bridgestone Corp., 387 F.3d 468 (6th 

Cir. 2005). The Sixth Circuit held that a statement regarding objective data supposedly supporting a 

corporation's belief that its tires were safe was actionable, where jurors could have found a 

reasonable basis to believe the corporation was aware of undisclosed facts seriously undermining the 

statement's accuracy. 

• Nursing Home Pension Fund, Local 144 v. Oracle Corp., 380 F.3d 1226 (9th Cir. 2004). The 

Ninth Circuit ruled that defendants’ fraudulent intent could be inferred from allegations concerning 

their false representations, insider stock sales and improper accounting methods. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 23 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 24 of 72

• Southland Sec. Corp. v. INSpire Ins. Solutions Inc., 365 F.3d 353 (5th Cir. 2004). The Fifth 

Circuit sustained allegations that an issuer’s CEO made fraudulent statements in connection with a 

contract announcement. 

• No. 84 Employer-Teamster Joint Council Pension Trust Fund v. Am. W. Holding Corp., 

320 F.3d 920 (9th Cir. 2003). America West is a landmark Ninth Circuit decision holding that investors 

pleaded with particularity facts raising a strong inference of corporate defendants’ fraudulent intent 

under heightened pleading standards of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. 

• Pirraglia v. Novell, Inc., 339 F.3d 1182 (10th Cir. 2003). In Pirraglia, the Tenth Circuit upheld 

investors’ accounting-fraud claims, concluding that their complaint presented with particularity facts 

raising a strong inference of the defendants’ fraudulent intent, and that absence of insider trading by 

individual defendants did not mean they lacked a motive to commit fraud. 

• In re Cavanaugh, 306 F.3d 726 (9th Cir. 2002). In Cavanaugh, the Ninth Circuit disallowed 

judicial auctions to select lead plaintiffs in securities class actions, and protected lead plaintiffs’ right 

to select the lead counsel they desire to represent them. 

• Lone Star Ladies Inv. Club v. Schlotzsky’s, Inc., 238 F.3d 363 (5th Cir. 2001). In Lone Star 

Ladies, the Fifth Circuit upheld investors’ claims that securities-offering documents were incomplete 

and misleading, reversing a district court Order that had applied inappropriate pleading standards to 

dismiss the case. 

• Bryant v. Dupree, 252 F.3d 1161 (11th Cir. 2001). The Eleventh Circuit held that investors 

were entitled to amend their securities-fraud complaint to reflect further developments in the case, 

reversing a contrary district court Order. 

• Bryant v. Avado Brands, 187 F.3d 1271 (11th Cir. 1999). Interpreting the Private Securities 

Litigation Reform Act of 1995, the Eleventh Circuit held that its provision requiring investors to plead 

facts raising a strong inference of scienter does not abrogate the principle that recklessness suffices to 

establish liability for violations of §10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. 

• Berry v. Valence Tech., Inc., 175 F.3d 699 (9th Cir. 1999). The Ninth Circuit held that 

negative articles in the financial press do not cause the one-year “inquiry notice” statute of 

limitations to run, and indicated possible acceptance of an “actual knowledge” standard that would 

greatly extend the statute of limitations for victims of securities fraud. 

• Hertzberg v. Dignity Partners, Inc., 191 F.3d 1076 (9th Cir. 1999). The Ninth Circuit reversed 

dismissal of investors’ claims that securities-offering documents were misleading, holding purchasers 

who bought shares in the aftermarket had standing to bring claims under the Securities Act of 1933 

where a material fact is misstated or omitted from a registration statement. 

• StorMedia, Inc. v. Superior Court, 20 Cal. 4th 449 (1999). Interpreting the antimanipulation provisions of California’s state securities laws, the California Supreme Court held that a 

corporation engages in the offer or sale of securities when it maintains an employee stock option or 

stock purchase plan, and thus may be liable under the statute for disseminating false or misleading 

public statements. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 24 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 25 of 72

• Diamond Multimedia Sys., Inc. v. Superior Court, 19 Cal. 4th 1036 (1999). The California 

Supreme Court held that the California State securities laws’ broad anti-manipulation provisions 

provide a remedy for out-of-state investors damaged by manipulative acts committed within the 

State of California. 

• Cooper v. Pickett, 137 F.3d 616 (9th Cir. 1998). Cooper is the leading Ninth Circuit precedent 

on pleading accounting fraud with particularity. The Court held that plaintiffs stated claims against a 

company, its independent auditors and its underwriters, for engaging in a scheme to defraud 

involving improper revenue recognition. 

• McGann v. Ernst & Young, 102 F.3d 390 (9th Cir. 1996). McGann is a leading federal 

appellate precedent interpreting Securities Exchange Act of 1934 §10(b)’s provision prohibiting 

manipulative or deceptive conduct “in connection with” the purchase or sale of a security. The Court 

rejected contentions that auditors could not be liable for a recklessly misleading audit opinion if they 

directly participated in no securities transactions. Rather, an accounting firm is subject to liability if it 

prepares a fraudulent audit report knowing that its client will include the report in an SEC filing. 

• Provenz v. Miller, 102 F.3d 1478 (9th Cir. 1996). In Provenz, the Ninth Circuit reversed a 

district court’s entry of summary judgment for defendants in an accounting fraud case. The decision 

is a leading federal appellate precedent on the evidence required to prove fraudulent revenue 

recognition. 

• Knapp v. Ernst & Whinney, 90 F.3d 1431 (9th Cir. 1996). The Ninth Circuit affirmed a jury 

verdict entered for stock purchasers against a major accounting firm. 

• Warshaw v. Xoma Corp., 74 F.3d 955 (9th Cir. 1996). Warshaw is a leading federal appellate 

precedent on pleading falsity in securities class actions, sustaining allegations that a pharmaceutical 

company misled securities analysts and investors regarding the efficacy of a new drug and the 

likelihood of FDA approval. The Court also held that a company may be liable to investors if it misled 

securities analysts. 

• Gohler v. Wood, 919 P.2d 561 (Utah 1996). The Utah Supreme Court held that investors need 

not plead or prove “reliance” on false or misleading statements in order to recover under a state law 

prohibiting misleading statements in connection with the sale of a security. 

• Fecht v. Price Co., 70 F.3d 1078 (9th Cir. 1995). Fecht is another leading precedent on 

pleading falsity with particularity. It sustained allegations that a retail chain’s positive portrayal of its 

expansion program was misleading in light of undisclosed problems that caused the program to be 

curtailed. The Ninth Circuit held that investors may draw on contemporaneous conditions – such as 

disappointing results and losses in new stores – to explain why a company’s optimistic statements 

were false and misleading. It also clarified the narrow scope of the so-called “bespeaks caution” 

defense. 

• In re Software Toolworks Sec. Litig., 50 F.3d 615 (9th Cir. 1995). In Software Toolworks, 

the Ninth Circuit reversed the summary judgment entered for defendants, including a company and 

its top insiders, independent auditors and underwriters. Among other things, the Court held that 

auditors and underwriters could be liable for their role in drafting a misleading letter sent to the SEC 

on the corporate defendant’s attorneys’ letterhead. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 25 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 26 of 72

• In re Pac. Enters. Sec. Litig., 47 F.3d 373 (9th Cir. 1995). The Ninth Circuit approved 

shareholders’ settlement of a derivative suit as fair, reasonable, and adequate. 

• Kaplan v. Rose, 49 F.3d 1363 (9th Cir. 1994). The Court reversed entry of summary judgment 

for defendants because investors presented sufficient evidence for a jury to conclude that a medical 

device did not work as well as defendants claimed. 

• In re Wells Fargo Sec. Litig., 12 F.3d 922 (9th Cir. 1993). Wells Fargo is a leading federal 

appellate decision on pleading accounting fraud, sustaining investors’ allegations that a bank 

misrepresented the adequacy of its loan-loss reserves. 

• Krangel v. Gen. Dynamics Corp., 968 F.2d 914 (9th Cir. 1992). The Ninth Circuit dismissed 

defendants’ appeal from a district court’s Order upholding plaintiff investors’ choice of forum by 

remanding the matter to the state court. 

• Colan v. Mesa Petroleum, Co., 951 F.2d 1512 (9th Cir. 1991). In a shareholder derivative 

action, the Ninth Circuit held that exchange of common stock for debt securities was a “sale” subject 

to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934’s regulation of short-swing profits. 

• In re Apple Computer Sec. Litig., 886 F.2d 1109 (9th Cir. 1989). The Ninth Circuit reversed 

summary judgment for defendants, holding that investors could proceed to trial on claims that a 

company’s representations about its new disk drive were misleading because they failed to disclose 

serious technical problems. 

• Blake v. Dierdorff, 856 F.2d 1365 (9th Cir. 1988). The Ninth Circuit reversed a district court’s 

dismissal of claims for fraud brought against a corporation’s directors and its lawyers. 

• Mosesian v. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co., 727 F.2d 873 (9th Cir. 1984). The Ninth Circuit 

upheld an investor’s right to pursue a class action against an accounting firm, adopting statute of 

limitation rules for §10(b) suits that are favorable to investors. 

ADDITIONALLY, IN THE CONTEXT OF SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE ACTIONS, Lerach Coughlin attorneys have 

been at the forefront of protecting shareholders’ investments by causing important changes in 

corporate governance as part of the global settlement of such cases. Three recent cases in which such 

changes were made include: 

• Teachers’ Retirement Sys. of Louisiana v. Occidental Petroleum Corp., Case No. 

BC185009 (Cal. Super. Ct.). As part of the settlement, corporate governance changes were made to 

the composition of the company’s board of directors, the company’s nominating committee, 

compensation committee and audit committee. 

• In re Sprint Shareholder Litig., Case No. 00-CV-230077 (Circuit Ct. Jackson County, Mo.) In 

connection with the settlement of a derivative action involving Sprint Corporation, the company 

adopted over 60 new corporate governance provisions, which, among other things, established a 

truly independent Board of Directors and narrowly defined “independence” to eliminate cronyism 

between the board and top executives; required outside board directors to meet at least twice a year 

without management present; created an independent director who will hold the authority to set the 

agenda, a power previously reserved for the CEO; and imposed new rules to prevent directors and 

officers from vesting their stock on an accelerated basis. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 26 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 27 of 72

• Pirelli Armstrong Tire Corp. Retiree Medical Benefits Trust v. Hanover Compressor 

Co., Case No. H-02-0410 (S.D. Tex.). Groundbreaking corporate governance changes obtained include: 

direct shareholder nomination of two directors; mandatory rotation of the outside audit firm; twothirds of the board required to be independent; audit and other key committees to be filled only by 

independent directors; and creation and appointment of lead independent director with authority to 

set up board meetings. 

Insurance

• Lebrilla v. Farmers Group, Inc., 119 Cal. App. 4th 1070 (2004). Reversing the trial court, the 

California Court of Appeal ordered class certification of a suit against Farmers, one of the largest 

automobile insurers in California. The case involves Farmers' practice of using inferior imitation parts 

when repairing insureds’ vehicles. 

• Dehoyos v. Allstate Corp., 345 F.3d 290 (5th Cir. 2003), cert. denied, 2004 U.S. LEXIS 3088 

(Apr. 26, 2004). The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that claims under federal civil rights statutes 

involving the sale of racially discriminatory insurance policies based upon the use of credit scoring did 

not interfere with state insurance statutes or regulatory goals and were not preempted under the 

McCarran-Ferguson Act. Specifically, the Appellate Court affirmed the district court’s ruling that the 

McCarran-Ferguson Act does not preempt civil-rights claims under the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the 

Fair Housing Act for racially discriminatory business practices in the sale of automobile and 

homeowners insurance. The U.S. Supreme Court denied defendants’ petition for certiorari and 

plaintiffs can now proceed with their challenge of defendants’ allegedly discriminatory credit scoring 

system used in pricing of automobile and homeowners insurance policies. 

• In re Monumental Life Ins. Co., 345 F.3d 408, (5th Cir. 2004). The Fifth Circuit Court of 

Appeals reversed a district court’s denial of class certification in a case filed by African-Americans 

seeking to remedy racially discriminatory insurance practices. The Fifth Circuit held that a monetary 

relief claim is viable in a Rule 23(b)(2) class if it flows directly from liability to the class as a whole and 

is capable of classwide “computation by means of objective standards and not dependent in any 

significant way on the intangible, subjective differences of each class member's circumstances.” 

• Moore v. Liberty Nat’l Life Ins. Co., 267 F.3d 1209 (11th Cir. 2001). The Eleventh Circuit 

affirmed the district court’s denial of the defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, 

rejecting contentions that insurance policyholders’ claims of racial discrimination were barred by 

Alabama’s common law doctrine of repose. The Eleventh Circuit also rejected the insurer’s argument 

that the McCarran-Ferguson Act mandated preemption of plaintiffs’ federal civil rights claims under 

42 U.S.C. §§1981 and 1982. 

• Massachusetts Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Superior Court, 97 Cal. App. 4th 1282 (2002). The 

California Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court’s Order certifying a class in an action by purchasers 

of so-called “vanishing premium” life-insurance policies who claimed violations of California’s 

consumer-protection statutes. The Court held that common issues predominate where plaintiffs 

allege a uniform failure to disclose material information about policy dividend rates. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 27 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 28 of 72

Consumer Protection

• Kasky v. Nike, Inc., 27 Cal. 4th 939 (2002), cert. dismissed, 539 U.S. 654 (2003). The California 

Supreme Court upheld claims that an apparel manufacturer misled the public regarding its 

exploitative labor practices, thereby violating California statutes prohibiting unfair competition and 

false advertising. The Court rejected defense contentions that such misconduct was protected by the 

First Amendment. 

• West Corp. v. Superior Court, 116 Cal. App. 4th 1167 (2004). The California Court of Appeal 

upheld the trial court’s finding that jurisdiction in California was appropriate over the out-of-state 

corporate defendant whose telemarketing was aimed at California residents. Exercise of jurisdiction 

was found to be in keeping with considerations of fair play and substantial justice. 

• Spielholz v. Superior Court, 86 Cal. App. 4th 1366 (2d Dist. 2001). The California Court of 

Appeal held that false advertising claims against a wireless communications provider are not 

preempted by the Federal Communications Act of 1934. 

• Day v. AT & T Corp., 63 Cal. App. 4th 325 (1998). The California Court of Appeal held that an 

action which seeks only to enjoin misleading or deceptive practices in the advertising of telephone 

rates does not implicate the federal filed-rate doctrine, and can proceed under Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 

§§17200 and 17500. The Court also held that the claims were not preempted by the Federal 

Communications Act, that the California Public Utilities Commission does not have exclusive 

jurisdiction, that the doctrine of primary jurisdiction did not compel dismissal or stay of the action, 

and that the plaintiffs were not required to exhaust their administrative remedies. 

• Mangini v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 7 Cal. 4th 1057 (1994). The California Supreme Court 

upheld allegations that a cigarette manufacturer committed an unlawful business practice by 

targeting minors with its advertising. It flatly rejected the manufacturer’s contention that the action 

was preempted by federal cigarette labeling laws. 

• Jordan v. Dep’t of Motor Vehicles, 75 Cal. App. 4th 449 (1999). The California Court of 

Appeal invalidated a non-resident vehicle “smog impact” fee imposed on out-of-state autos being 

registered for the first time in California, finding that the fee violated the Interstate Commerce 

Clause of the U.S. Constitution. 

• Clothesrigger, Inc. v. GTE Corp., 191 Cal. App. 3d 605 (1987). The California Court of 

Appeal reversed the trial court’s decision refusing to apply California Law to the claims of 

nonresident plaintiffs. In reversing the lower court’s ruling, the Court found that California Law may 

constitutionally apply to the claims of proposed nationwide class members who are not residents of 

California, provided there are significant contacts to the claims asserted by each member. 

• Lazar v. Hertz Corp., 143 Cal. App. 3d 128 (1983). The California Court of Appeal ordered a 

consumer class certified in an Opinion that significantly broadened the right of injured consumers to 

bring class actions. 

• Barr v. United Methodist Church, 90 Cal. App. 3d 259 (1979). The California Court of 

Appeal rejected constitutional defenses to an action for civil fraud and breach of contract committed 

by religiously affiliated defendants. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 28 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 29 of 72

Antitrust

• Law v. NCAA, 134 F.3d 1010 (10th Cir. 1998). The Tenth Circuit upheld summary judgment on 

liability for plaintiffs in college coaches’ antitrust action against the National Collegiate Athletic 

Association on the issue of antitrust liability under §1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. §1 

(plaintiffs subsequently prevailed on a damages trial). It also upheld the district court’s Order 

permanently enjoining the NCAA from enforcing the “restricted earnings coach” rule, through which 

NCAA member institutions limited the salary of certain coaches to $12,000 during the academic year. 

• In re NASDAQ Market-Makers Antitrust Litig., 172 F.R.D. 119 (S.D.N.Y. 1997). In a case 

where plaintiffs alleged that approximately 30 NASDAQ market-makers engaged in a conspiracy to 

restrain or eliminate price competition, the District Court certified a class of millions of investors – 

including institutional investors to be represented by five public pension funds. 

• In re Disposable Contact Lens Antitrust Litig., 170 F.R.D. 524 (M.D. Fla. 1996). Plaintiff 

contact lens purchasers alleged that defendant manufacturers conspired on a nationwide basis to 

eliminate competition and maintain artificially inflated prices for replacement contact lenses. The 

District Court denied defendant manufacturers’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ Clayton Act claims and 

granted their motion for class certification, finding that plaintiffs’ vertical–conspiracy evidence was 

general to the class and provided a colorable method of proving impact on the class at trial. 

• In re Currency Conversion Fee Antitrust Litig., 265 F. Supp. 2d 385 (S.D.N.Y. 2003). In a 

case consolidating more than 20 putative class actions, plaintiff credit card holders alleged that two 

credit-card networks, Visa and MasterCard, and their member banks, conspired to fix the foreigncurrency conversion fees they charged. The District Court found that plaintiffs pleaded facts 

sufficient to permit the inference of an antitrust conspiracy, denying defendants’ motion to dismiss 

the antitrust allegations. 

• Pharmacare v. Caremark, 965 F. Supp. 1411 (D. Haw. 1996). The District Court denied 

defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ Robinson-Patman Act claim in a case where the largest 

company in the alternate-site infusion therapy industry had pleaded guilty to mail fraud for making 

improper payments to physicians in exchange for their referrals of patients. Plaintiffs, defendant’s 

competitors, alleged that they suffered injury as a result of defendant’s agreements, which violated 

the anti-kickback provisions of the Clayton Act, §2(c) as amended by the Robinson-Patman Act, 15 

U.S.C. §13(c). 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 29 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 30 of 72

THE FIRM’S PARTNERS

WILLIAM S. LERACH is widely recognized as one 

of the leading securities lawyers in the United 

States. He has headed the prosecution of 

hundreds of securities class and stockholder 

derivative actions resulting in recoveries for 

defrauded shareholders amounting to billions 

of dollars. Mr. Lerach has been the subject of 

considerable media attention and is a frequent 

commentator on securities and corporate law, 

as well as a frequent lecturer. He represents 

numerous public and multi-employer pension 

funds in corporate securities matters. 

He is the author of Plundering America: How 

American Investors Got Taken for Trillions by 

Corporate Insiders - The Rise of the New 

Corporate Kleptocracy, 8 Stanford J. of Law, 

Bus. and Fin. 1 (2002); Why Insiders Get Rich, 

and the Little Guy Loses, L.A. Times, Jan. 20, 

2002; The Chickens Have Come Home to Roost: 

How Wall Street, the Big Accounting Firms and 

Corporate Interests Chloroformed Congress 

and Cost America’s Investors Trillions; 

Achieving Corporate Governance 

Enhancements Through Litigation, keynote 

address to Council of Institutional Investors 

spring meeting, Mar. 27, 2001; The Private 

Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 - 27 

Months Later: Securities Class Action Litigation 

Under The Private Securities Litigation Reform 

Act’s Brave New World, Washington U. L. Rev., 

Vol. 76, No. 2 (1998); An Alarming Decline In 

the Quality of Financial Reporting

(unpublished paper presented to 7th Annual 

BusinessWeek CFO Forum (June 1998); co 

author of Civil RICO in Shareholders Suits 

Involving Defense Contractors in Civil RICO 

Practice: Causes of Action, published by John 

Wiley & Sons, Inc. (1991); The Incorporation 

Trap: How Delaware Has Destroyed Corporate 

Governance (unpublished paper presented to 

the Council of Institutional Investors (1990)); 

Securities Class Actions and Derivative 

Litigations Involving Public Companies: A 

Plaintiff’s Perspective, ALI/ABI, Civil Practice 

and Litigation in Federal and State Courts 

(1985), ABA Fall Meeting (1985) and PLI 

Securities Litigation, Prosecution and Defense 

Strategies (1985); Alternative Approaches for 

Awarding Attorneys’ Fees in Federal Court 

Litigation: It’s Time to Unload the Lodestar

(unpublished paper presented to the Ninth 

Circuit Judicial Conference (1984)); Class Action 

and Derivative Suits in the Aftermath of 

Control Contests, Mergers and Acquisitions: 

Choice of Forum and Remedies; 

Attorney/Client Privilege in Class and 

Derivative Cases, ABA 1984 Annual Meeting 

(1984); Class Actions: Plaintiffs’ Perspectives, 

Tactics and Problems, ALI/ABA, Civil Practice 

and Litigation in Federal and State Courts 

(1984); Life After Huddleston: Streamlining 

and Simplification of the Securities Class 

Action, 7 Class Action Reports 318 (1982). He is 

also the author of Termination of Class 

Actions: The Judicial Role, McGough & Lerach, 

33 U. Pitt L. Rev. 446 (1972); Class and 

Derivative Actions Under the Federal Securities 

Laws (1980 Regents of the University of 

California). 

Mr. Lerach is chief counsel in many of the 

largest and highest profile securities class 

action and corporate derivative suits in recent 

years, including Enron, Dynegy, Qwest and 

WorldCom. He is listed in the “Best Lawyers in 

America” and is a Master of the American Inns 

of Court. Mr. Lerach has been the President of 

the National Association of Securities and 

Commercial Lawyers (NASCAT), a national 

group of attorneys concentrating in 

commercial and securities litigation. Mr. 

Lerach is a member of the Editorial Board of 

Class Action Reports and frequently lectures on 

class and derivative actions, accountants’ 

liability, and attorneys’ fees, and has been a 

guest lecturer at Stanford University, University 

of California at Los Angeles and San Diego, 

University of Pittsburgh, San Diego State 

University and at the Council of Institutional 

Investors and the International Corporate 

Governance Network. He is also a member of 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 30 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 31 of 72

the American Law Institute faculty on Federal 

and State Class Action Litigation. 

Mr. Lerach received his Bachelor of Arts degree 

from the University of Pittsburgh in 1967 and 

his Juris Doctor degree in 1970 where he 

graduated second in his class, magna cum 

laude, and was a member of the Order of the 

Coif. The University recently bestowed one of 

its highest awards on Mr. Lerach, designating 

him a "Legacy Laureate" as one of the 

University's most outstanding graduates. Mr. 

Lerach was admitted to the Pennsylvania Bar in 

1970 and to the California Bar in 1976. Mr. 

Lerach was a partner with Pittsburgh firm Reed 

Smith Shaw & McClay before moving to 

California. Mr. Lerach serves as Chairman of 

Lerach Coughlin. He is a member of the 

Pennsylvania and California Bar Associations 

and has been admitted to practice before 

numerous federal and state courts. He is a 

member of the ABA Litigation Section’s 

Committee on Class Actions and Derivative 

Skills. 

Mr. Lerach has testified before federal and 

state legislative committees concerning 

corporate governance and securities matters 

and is frequently quoted in the national media 

regarding corporate issues. 

Mr. Lerach was honored by President Clinton 

who appointed him to be a member of the 

United States Holocaust Memorial Council. 

PATRICK J. COUGHLIN is the firm’s Chief Trial 

Counsel, and has been lead counsel for several 

major securities matters, including one of the 

largest class action securities cases to go to 

trial, In re Apple Computer Sec. Litig., Case No. 

C-84-20148(A)-JW (N.D. Cal.). Mr. Coughlin has 

argued in the United States Supreme Court on 

behalf of shareholders, Dura Pharms., Inc. v. 

Broudo, 544 U.S. 336 (2005), in which an 

important decision was issued by the high 

court concerning loss causation in securities 

cases. Although the Court overruled 

established 9th Circuit precedent, the decision 

is widely regarded as a favorable one for 

investors alleging fraud. 

Formerly, Mr. Coughlin was an Assistant 

United States Attorney in the District of 

Columbia and the Southern District of 

California, handling complex white collar fraud 

matters. During this time, Mr. Coughlin 

helped try one of the largest criminal RICO 

cases ever prosecuted by the United States, 

United States v. Brown, et al., Case No. 86-

3056-SWR, as well as an infamous oil fraud 

scheme resulting in a complex murder-for-hire 

trial, United States v. Boeckman, et al., Case 

No. 87-0676-K. 

Mr. Coughlin’s recent trials involving securities 

violations include cases against Wells Fargo 

and California Amplifier. Cases that settled on 

the eve of trial include cases against Alcatel 

and America West. Throughout his career, Mr. 

Coughlin has tried more than 50 jury and nonjury trials. Mr. Coughlin tried one of the 

largest private RICO trials against the major 

tobacco companies on behalf of hundreds of 

thousands of Ohio Taft-Hartley health and 

welfare fund participants. Mr. Coughlin also 

helped end the Joe Camel ad campaign, a 

cartoon ad campaign that targeted children 

and secured a $12.5 billion recovery for the 

Cities and Counties of California in the 

landmark 1998 state settlement with the 

tobacco companies. 

JOHN J. STOIA, JR. received his Bachelor of 

Science degree from the University of Tulsa in 

1983. While working on his degree, Mr. Stoia 

was elected President of the National Political 

Science Honor Society and graduated with 

highest honors. In 1986, Mr. Stoia received his 

Juris Doctor degree from the University of 

Tulsa and graduated in the top of his class. In 

1987, Mr. Stoia graduated in the top of his 

class from the Georgetown University Law 

Center in Washington, D.C., receiving his 

Masters of Law in Securities Regulation. 

Thereafter, Mr. Stoia served as an enforcement 

attorney with the U.S. Securities and Exchange 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 31 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 32 of 72

Commission prior to going into private 

practice. Mr. Stoia is one of the founding 

partners of Lerach Coughlin. 

Mr. Stoia worked on dozens of nationwide 

complex securities class actions, including In re 

Am. Cont. Corp./Lincoln Sav. & Loan Sec. Litig., 

MDL No. 834 (D. Ariz.), which arose out of the 

collapse of Lincoln Savings & Loan and Charles 

Keating’s empire. Mr. Stoia was a member of 

plaintiffs’ trial team, which obtained verdicts 

against Mr. Keating and his co-defendants in 

excess of $3 billion and settlements of over 

$240 million. 

Mr. Stoia has been responsible for over $10 

billion in recoveries on behalf of victims of 

insurance fraud due to deceptive sales 

practices such as “vanishing premiums,” 

“churning,” and discrimination in the sale of 

burial or debit insurance. 

Mr. Stoia has been involved in over 40 

nationwide class actions brought by 

policyholders against United States and 

Canadian life insurance companies seeking 

redress for deceptive sales practices during the 

1980s and 1990s. Mr. Stoia was Lead or CoLead Counsel and actively involved in 

nationwide cases against, among others, 

Prudential ($4+ billion), New York Life ($600+ 

million), Transamerica Life Insurance Company 

($250+ million), General American Life 

Insurance Company ($85+ million), 

Manufacturer’s Life ($550+ million), 

Metropolitan Life ($2 billion), American 

General and subsidiaries ($500+ million), 

Allianz ($55+ million), Principal Life ($380+ 

million) and Pacific Life Insurance Company. 

Mr. Stoia was also involved in numerous cases 

brought against life insurance companies for 

racial discrimination involving the sale of debt 

or “industrial life” insurance policies during 

the 20th century. Mr. Stoia was lead counsel in 

McNeil v. Am. Gen’l Life Ins. Accident Ins. Co., 

the first major settlement involving 

discrimination claims which resulted in a $234 

million recovery for class members. Mr. Stoia 

resolved other race-based insurance cases, 

including Brown v. United Life Ins. Co. ($40 

million), Morris v. Life Ins. Co. of Georgia ($55 

million), and Thompson v. Metropolitan Life

($145 million). 

Mr. Stoia brought some of the first cases 

against the insurance brokerage industry and 

insurers relating to undisclosed kickbacks 

known as “contingent commissions” and 

illegal bid-rigging activities. He is one of the 

lead plaintiffs’ counsel in the consolidated 

MDL proceedings pending in the United States 

District Court for the District of New Jersey (In 

re Employee-Benefit Ins. Brokerage Antitrust 

Litig., Civ. No. 2:05-cv-1079(FSH), and In re 

Insurance Brokerage Antitrust Litig., Civ. No. 

2:04-cv-5184(FSH), MDL No. 1663). He is also 

the lead trial counsel representing the 

California Department of Insurance against 

five of the largest Employee Benefit Insurance 

companies (MetLife, Prudential, Hartford, 

Cigna and UnumProvident) for violating 

California Insurance Regulations for failing to 

disclose payments of contingent commissions 

to brokers in California and other improper 

activities. The People of the State of California 

v. Universal Life Resources, Case No. GIC838913 

(Cal. Super. Ct., San Diego). To date, four out 

of the five defendants have agreed to 

sweeping changes in their disclosure practices 

within California as a result of that action. 

Mr. Stoia currently represents numerous large 

institutional investors who suffered hundreds 

of millions of dollars in losses as a result of the 

major financial scandals, including AOL/Time 

Warner, and is court-appointed Co-Lead 

Counsel in eight nationwide class actions 

against sellers of deferred annuities to senior 

citizens. 

Mr. Stoia was selected as Litigator of the 

Month by The National Law Journal (July 

2000). Mr. Stoia is also a frequent lecturer on 

numerous legal topics. Recent speaking 

engagements and lectures include: ALI-ABA, 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 32 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 33 of 72

Practicing Law Institute and American Trial 

Lawyers Association seminars and conferences: 

Speaker, ALI-ABA Program: Life and Health 

Insurance Litigation (2004); Co-chair, ALI-ABA 

Program 11th Annual: Financial Services and 

Insurance Industry Litigation (2006); Speaker, 

ATLA Winter Convention – Securities Fraud: 

Rights and Remedies of Shareholders; Speaker, 

ATLA Annual Convention – Insurance Law 

Section, Panel: Broker/Dealer Liability (2006); 

Speaker, ACI Consumer Finance Class Actions 

Conference (2005); Speaker, Barreau du 

Quebec Class Action Seminar (2005); Speaker, 

12th Annual ALI-ABA Conference on Life 

Insurance and Financial Services Industry 

Litigation (2007); Speaker, IBA West Blue 

Ribbon Conference (2006); Speaker, 

Conference on Industry Litigation 2007 (ALIABA); Speaker, 2007 International Reinsurance 

Summit; and Speaker, Association of Life 

Insurance Counsel Panel (May 2007). 

SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS: 

March 18, 2005 New York City, NY: ALI-ABA 

Program: Financial Services and Insurance 

Industry Litigation 

July 24, 2005 Toronto, Canada: ATLA Annual 

Convention – Insurance Law Section, Panel: 

Broker/Dealer Liability 

September 26, 2005 New York City, NY: ACI 

Consumer Finance Class Actions Conference 

October 21, 2005 Quebec, Canada: Barreau du 

Quebec Class Action Seminar 

March 30-31, 2006 Washington, DC: Co-Chair; 

ALI-ABA Conference on Life Insurance and 

Financial Services Industry Litigation 

May 1, 2006 Kona, Hawaii: IBA West Blue 

Ribbon Conference 

July 27-28, 2006 New York City, NY: PLI Class 

Action Litigation Prosecution and Defense 

Strategies 

February 14, 2007 Washington, DC: The 

Federalist Society’s Corporations, Securities & 

Antitrust Practice Group – Class Action Fairness 

Act: Two Years Later 

May 7, 2007 San Diego, CA: Association of Life 

Insurance Counsel Panel 

May 10-11, 2007 Chicago, IL: Insurance Industry 

and Financial Services Litigation 

June 6-8, 2007 Bermuda: 2007 International 

Reinsurance Summit 

July 12, 2007 NYC: PLI Annual Conference on 

Class Action Litigation 

PAUL J. GELLER received his Bachelor of Science 

degree in Psychology from the University of 

Florida, where he was a member of the 

University Honors Program. Mr. Geller then 

earned his Juris Doctor degree, with highest 

honors, from Emory University School of Law. 

At Emory, Mr. Geller was an Editor of the Law 

Review, was inducted into the Order of the 

Coif legal honor society, and was awarded 

multiple American Jurisprudence Book Awards 

for earning the highest grade in the school in a 

dozen courses. 

After spending several years representing blue 

chip companies in class action lawsuits at one 

of the largest corporate defense firms in the 

world, Mr. Geller became a founding partner 

and head of the Boca Raton offices of the 

national class action boutiques Cauley Geller 

Bowman & Rudman, LLP and Geller Rudman, 

PLLC. In June 2004, through a merger of 

Lerach Coughlin Stoia & Robbins, LLP and 

Geller Rudman, PLLC, Mr. Geller opened the 

Boca Raton, Florida office of the firm. 

In May 2005, Mr. Geller was selected by The 

National Law Journal as one of the nation’s 

top “40 Under 40” – an honor bestowed upon 

40 of the country’s top lawyers under the age 

of 40. The NLJ had previously compiled its “40 

Under 40” list in July 2002; Mr. Geller is the 

only lawyer in the country that was selected 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 33 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 34 of 72

for inclusion both in 2002 and again in 2005. In 

July 2006, as well as July 2003, Mr. Geller was 

featured in Florida Trend magazine as one of 

Florida’s “Legal Elite.” Mr. Geller has also been 

featured in the South Florida Business Journal

as one of Florida's top lawyers, and was named 

one of the nation’s top 500 lawyers by 

Lawdragon in August 2006. 

Mr. Geller is rated AV by Martindale-Hubbell 

(the highest rating available) and has served 

as lead or co-lead counsel in a majority of the 

securities class actions that have been filed in 

the southeastern United States in the past 

several years, including cases against 

Hamilton Bancorp ($8.5 million settlement), 

Prison Realty Trust (co-lead derivative 

counsel; total combined settlement of over 

$120 million); and Intermedia Corp. ($38 

million settlement). Mr. Geller recently 

served as one of the court-appointed lead 

counsel in cases involving the alleged 

manipulation of the asset value of some of 

the nation’s largest mutual funds, including 

Hicks v. Morgan Stanley & Co. ($10 million 

settlement); Abrams v. Van Kampen Funds, 

Inc. ($31.5 million settlement); and In Re 

Eaton Vance Sec. Litig. ($10 million 

settlement). 

Mr. Geller is also heavily involved in 

corporate governance litigation. For 

example, Mr. Geller recently represented a 

shareholder of Applica Inc. who was 

concerned with allegedly reckless 

acquisitions made by the company. Mr. 

Geller and his partners secured a settlement 

that required Applica to establish a new 

independent Acquisitions Committee 

charged with conducting due diligence and 

approving future acquisitions, even though 

such a committee is not required by SEC 

regulations. In another corporate 

governance lawsuit, Mr. Geller and his cocounsel challenged the independence of 

certain members of a Special Committee 

empaneled by Oracle Corp. to look into 

certain stock sales made by its Chairman and 

CEO, Larry Ellison. After Delaware Chancery 

Court Vice Chancellor Leo E. Strine issued an 

Order agreeing that the Special Committee 

was “fraught with conflicts,” The Wall Street 

Journal called the decision “one of the most 

far-reaching ever on corporate governance.” 

Mr. Geller has also successfully represented 

consumers in class action litigation. He recently 

settled Kehoe and Neilsen v. Fidelity Federal, a 

consumer class action alleging privacy 

violations filed in the Southern District of 

Florida, for $50 million. He was personal 

counsel to the lead plaintiff in Stoddard v. 

Advanta, a case that challenged the 

adequacies of interest rate disclosures by one 

of the nation's largest credit card companies 

($11 million settlement), and was personal 

counsel to one of the lead plaintiffs in the 

American Family Publishers sweepstakes 

litigation, which alleged that the defendant 

misled consumers into thinking they would 

win a lottery if they purchased magazine 

subscriptions ($38 million settlement). 

During the past few years, several of Mr. 

Geller's cases have received regional and 

national press coverage. Mr. Geller has 

appeared on CNN Headline News, CNN 

Moneyline with Lou Dobbs, ABC, NBC and FOX 

network news programs. Mr. Geller is regularly 

quoted in the financial press, including The 

New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The 

Washington Post, and BusinessWeek. 

Mr. Geller has been or is a member of the 

Association of Trial Lawyers of America, the 

Practicing Law Institute, the American Bar 

Association, the Palm Beach County Bar 

Association (former Member of Bar Grievance 

Committee) and the South Palm Beach County 

Bar Association (former Co-Chair of Pro Bono 

Committee). 

SAMUEL H. RUDMAN received his Bachelor of 

Arts degree in Political Science from 

Binghamton University in 1989 and earned his 

Juris Doctor degree from Brooklyn Law School 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 34 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 35 of 72

in 1992. While at Brooklyn Law School, Mr. 

Rudman was a Dean’s Merit Scholar and a 

member of the Brooklyn Journal of 

International Law and the Moot Court Honor 

Society. 

Upon graduation from law school, Mr. 

Rudman joined the Enforcement Division of 

the United States Securities & Exchange 

Commission in its New York Regional Office as 

a staff attorney. In this position, Mr. Rudman 

was responsible for numerous investigations 

and prosecutions of violations of the federal 

securities laws. Thereafter, Mr. Rudman joined 

one of the largest corporate law firms in the 

country, where he represented public 

companies in the defense of securities class 

actions and also handled several white-collar 

criminal defense matters. 

Since joining the firm, Mr. Rudman has been 

responsible for the investigation and initiation 

of securities and shareholder class actions. In 

addition, Mr. Rudman developed a focus in the 

area of lead plaintiff jurisprudence and has 

been responsible for numerous reported 

decisions in this area of securities law. 

Mr. Rudman continues to focus his practice in 

the area of investigating and initiating 

securities and shareholder class actions and 

also devotes a considerable amount of time to 

representing clients in ongoing securities 

litigation. 

DARREN J. ROBBINS received his Bachelor of 

Science and Master of Arts degrees in 

Economics from the University of Southern 

California. Mr. Robbins received his Juris 

Doctor degree from Vanderbilt Law School, 

where he served as the Managing Editor of the 

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law. 

Mr. Robbins oversees Lerach Coughlin’s merger 

and acquisition practice. Mr. Robbins has 

extensive experience in federal and state 

securities class action litigation. Mr. Robbins 

served as one of the lead counsel in the In re 

Prison Realty Sec. Litig. ($120+ million 

recovery), In re Dollar Gen. Sec. Litig. ($172.5 

million recovery) and Pirelli Armstrong Tire 

Corp. Retiree Med. Benefits Trust v. Hanover 

Compressor Co. ($85+ million recovery). Mr. 

Robbins currently represents institutional and 

individual investors in securities actions in state 

and federal courts across the country, 

including The Regents of the University of 

California in the Enron litigation and 

numerous public pension funds in the 

WorldCom bond litigation. 

Mr. Robbins is a frequent speaker at 

conferences and seminars concerning securities 

matters and shareholder litigation across the 

country. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 35 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 36 of 72

KEITH F. PARK graduated from the University of 

California at Santa Barbara in 1968 and from 

the Hastings College of Law of the University 

of California in 1972. 

Mr. Park is responsible for the recoveries in 

more than 1,000 securities class actions, 

including actions involving: Dollar General 

($162 million recovery); Mattel ($122 million 

recovery); Prison Realty ($105 million recovery); 

Honeywell (in addition to the $100 million 

recovery, obtained Honeywell's agreement to 

adopt significant corporate governance 

changes relating to compensation of senior 

executives and directors, stock trading by 

directors, executive officers and key 

employees, internal and external audit 

functions, and financial reporting and board 

independence); Sprint (in addition to $50 

million recovery, obtained important 

governance enhancements, including creation 

of “Lead Independent Director” and expensing 

of stock options); Hanover Compressor (on top 

of $85 million recovery, obtained the following 

governance enhancements, among others: 

direct shareholder nomination of Board and 

mandatory rotation of audit firm); 3COM ($259 

million recovery); Chiron ($43 million recovery); 

MedPartners ($56 million recovery); NME 

($60.75 million recovery); and TCI ($26.5 

million recovery). 

He is admitted to practice in California and 

New York. 

HELEN J. HODGES received her Bachelor of 

Science degree in accounting from Oklahoma 

State University in 1979. While attending 

Oklahoma State, Ms. Hodges obtained her 

private pilot’s license and in 1980 was a 

member of Oklahoma State’s flying team, 

which won top honors at the National 

Intercollegiate Flying Association competition. 

Ms. Hodges became a certified public 

accountant in 1982 and received her Juris 

Doctor degree from the University of 

Oklahoma in 1983, where she was the 

Managing Editor of the Law Review. She was 

admitted to the State Bars of Oklahoma in 

1983 and California in 1987. 

Ms. Hodges was a staff accountant with Arthur 

Andersen & Co. and served as the law clerk for 

the Penn Square cases in the Western District 

of Oklahoma. Ms. Hodges has been involved 

in numerous securities class actions, including: 

Knapp v. Gomez, Civ. No. 87-0067-H(M) (S.D. 

Cal.), in which a plaintiffs’ verdict was returned 

in a Rule 10b-5 class action; National Health 

Labs, which was settled for $64 million; and 

Thurber v. Mattel, which was settled for $122 

million. 

REED R. KATHREIN is a partner in the San 

Francisco office of Lerach Coughlin. Mr. 

Kathrein received his Bachelor of Arts degree 

from the University of Miami, cum laude, in 

1974 and received his Juris Doctor degree in 

1977. He served as Editor-in-Chief of the 

International Law Journal. For the past 15 

years, he has focused his practice on complex 

and class action litigation, principally involving 

securities or consumer fraud. He was lead 

counsel in numerous state as well as federal 

court actions around the country, including colead counsel in the In re 3Com Sec. Litig., 

which settled for $259 million. 

Mr. Kathrein publishes and lectures extensively 

in the fields of litigation, consumer and 

securities law, class actions, and international 

law. He annually co-chairs the Executive 

Enterprises program for corporate officers and 

counsel entitled, “Dealing With Analysts and 

the Press.” He has spoken to the American Bar 

Association, the American Business Trial 

Lawyers Association, the Consumer Attorneys 

of California, the Practicing Law Institute, the 

Securities Law Institute, the National Investor 

Relations Institute, state and local bar groups, 

private seminar organizations and 

corporations. He testified before the Senate 

Foreign Relations Committee on behalf of the 

American Bar Association in favor of advice 

and consent to ratification of treaties on 

international sales, arbitration, evidence and 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 36 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 37 of 72

service of process. He testified before the 

California Assembly and Senate Committees on 

Y2K litigation, the unfair trade practice act 

and changes in the business judgment rule. He 

actively fought the passage of the Private 

Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and 

the Securities Litigation Uniform Standard Act 

of 1998. He worked behind the scenes to 

shape the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 on 

corporate responsibility and accountability. 

He served as chairman of the Private 

International Law Committee of the American 

Bar Association from 1984-1990, as a director 

and officer of the International Business 

Counsel Mid-America from 1983-1988, where 

he also chaired the policy committee. He acted 

as an advisor to the U.S. State Department’s 

Advisory Committee on Private International 

Law from 1984-1990. He is a member of the 

executive committee of the National 

Association of Securities and Commercial Law 

Attorneys, and since 1998 has been a member 

of the Board of Governors of the Consumer 

Attorneys of California. 

Formerly, Mr. Kathrein was a partner in the 

Chicago law firm Arnstein & Lehr, where he 

represented national and international 

corporations in litigation involving antitrust, 

commercial, toxic tort, employment and 

product and public liability disputes. Mr. 

Kathrein graduated from the University of 

Miami in 1977, where he received his Bachelor 

of Arts degree, cum laude. He served as 

Editor-in-Chief of the International Law 

Journal. He is admitted to the Bar of the 

States of Illinois (1977), Florida (1978) and 

California (1989). 

ERIC ALAN ISAACSON received his A.B. summa 

cum laude from Ohio University in 1982. He 

earned his Juris Doctor with high honors from 

the Duke University School of Law in 1985 and 

was elected to the Order of the Coif. Mr. 

Isaacson served as a Note and Comment Editor 

for the Duke Law Journal, and in his third year 

of law school became a member of the Moot 

Court Board. After graduation, Mr. Isaacson 

clerked for the Honorable J. Clifford Wallace 

of the United States Court of Appeals for the 

Ninth Circuit. 

In 1986, Mr. Isaacson joined the litigation 

department of O’Melveny & Myers, where his 

practice included cases involving allegations of 

trademark infringement, unfair business 

practices and securities fraud. He served as a 

member of the trial team that successfully 

prosecuted a major trademark infringement 

action. 

Mr. Isaacson has taken part in prosecuting 

many securities fraud class actions. He was a 

member of the plaintiffs’ trial team in In re 

Apple Computer Sec. Litig., Case No. C 84-

20198(A)-JW (N.D. Cal.). 

Since the early 1990s, his practice has focused 

on appellate matters in cases before the 

California Courts of Appeal, the California 

Supreme Court, the United States Court of 

Appeals and the United States Supreme Court. 

See, e.g., In re Daou Sys., Inc., Sec. Litig., 411 

F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2005); Illinois Municipal 

Retirement Fund v. CitiGroup, Inc., 391 F.3d 

844 (7th Cir. 2004); Lone Star Ladies Inv. Club v. 

Schlotzsky’s Inc., 238 F.3d 363 (5th Cir. 2001); 

Hertzberg v. Dignity Partners, Inc., 191 F.3d 

1076 (9th Cir. 1999); Warshaw v. Xoma Corp., 

74 F.3d 955 (9th Cir. 1996); Fecht v. Price Co., 

70 F.3d 1078 (9th Cir. 1995); Mangini v. R.J. 

Reynolds Tobacco Co., 7 Cal. 4th 1057 (1994). 

Mr. Isaacson’s publications include: What’s 

Brewing in Dura? (coauthored with Patrick J. 

Coughlin and Joseph D. Daley), Loyola 

University Chicago Law Journal (publication 

forthcoming in 2005); Duped Investors See 

“Dura” as Diamond in the Rough, (coauthored 

with Patrick J. Coughlin and Joseph D. Daley), 

Los Angeles Daily Journal, July 5, 2005, p. 8; 

Pleading Scienter Under Section 21D(b)(2) of 

the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: Motive, 

Opportunity, Recklessness and the Private 

Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (coCase 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 37 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 38 of 72

authored with William S. Lerach), 33 San Diego 

Law Rev. 893 (1996); Securities Class Actions in 

the United States (co-authored with Patrick J. 

Coughlin), in William G. Horton & Gerhard 

Wegen, editors, Litigation Issues in the 

Distribution of Securities: An International 

Perspective 399 (Kluwer International/ 

International Bar Association, 1997); Pleading 

Standards Under the Private Securities 

Litigation Reform Act of 1995: The Central 

District of California’s Chantal Decision (coauthored with Alan Schulman & Jennifer 

Wells), Class Action & Derivative Suits, Summer 

1996, at 14; Commencing Litigation Under the 

Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995

(co-authored with Patrick J. Coughlin), in Jay B. 

Kasner & Bruce G. Vanyo, editors, Securities 

Litigation 1996, 9-22 (Practicing Law Institute 

1996); The Flag Burning Issue: A Legal Analysis 

and Comment, 23 Loyola of Los Angeles Law 

Rev. 535 (1990). 

Mr. Isaacson also has received awards for pro 

bono work from the California Star Bar and 

the San Diego Volunteer Lawyer Program. He 

has filed amicus curiae briefs on behalf of a 

variety of organizations, including the Social 

Justice Committee and Board of Trustees of 

the First Unitarian Universalist Church of San 

Diego. Since January 2004, Mr. Isaacson has 

served as a member of the Board of Directors – 

and since March 2005 as Board President – of 

the San Diego Foundation for Change, an 

organization dedicated to funding and 

supporting community-led efforts that 

promote social equality, economic justice, and 

environmental sustainability. Its grantees have 

included groups as diverse as Activist San 

Diego, the Interfaith Committee for Worker 

Justice, and the San Diego Audubon Society. 

Mr. Isaacson has been a member of the 

California Bar since 1985. He is also admitted 

to practice before the United States Supreme 

Court, the United States Courts of Appeals for 

the Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, 

Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits, 

and before all federal district courts in the 

State of California. 

MARK SOLOMON earned his law degrees at 

Trinity College, Cambridge University, England 

(1985), Harvard Law School (1986), and the 

Inns of Court School of Law, England (1987). 

He is admitted to the Bar of England and 

Wales (Barrister), Ohio and California, as well 

as to various U.S. Federal District and Appellate 

Courts. Mr. Solomon regularly represents both 

U.S. - and U.K. - based pension funds and asset 

managers in class and non-class securities 

litigation. Mr. Solomon is a founding partner 

of Lerach Coughlin. 

Before studying law in England, Mr. Solomon 

served as a British police officer. After 

qualifying as a barrister, he first practiced at 

the international firm Jones Day in Cleveland, 

Ohio (1987-1990), followed by practice at the 

Los Angeles office of New York’s Stroock & 

Stroock & Lavan (1990-1993). At those firms, 

Mr. Solomon’s representations included the 

defense of securities fraud and other whitecollar crimes, antitrust, copyright, commercial 

and real estate litigation and reinsurance 

arbitration. While practicing in Los Angeles, 

acting for plaintiffs, Mr. Solomon took to trial 

and won complex commercial contract and 

real estate actions in the Orange County and 

Los Angeles Superior Courts, respectively. 

Since 1993, Mr. Solomon has spearheaded the 

prosecution of many significant cases. He has 

obtained substantial recoveries and judgments 

for plaintiffs through settlement, summary 

adjudications and trial. He litigated, through 

trial, In re Helionetics, where he and his trial 

partner, Paul Howes, won a unanimous $15.4 

million jury verdict in November 2000. He has 

successfully led many other cases, among 

them: Schwartz v. TXU et al. ($150 million 

recovery plus significant corporate governance 

reforms); In re Informix Corp. Sec. Litig. ($142 

million recovery); Rosen, et al. v. Macromedia, 

Inc. ($48 million recovery); In re Community 

Psychiatric Ctrs Sec. Litig. ($42.5 million 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 38 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 39 of 72

recovery); In re Advanced Micro Devices Sec. 

Litig. ($34 million recovery); In re TeleCommunications, Inc. Sec. Litig. ($33 million 

recovery); In re Home Theater Sec. Litig. ($22.5 

million judgment); In re Diamond Multimedia 

Sec. Litig. ($18 million recovery); Hayley, et al. 

v. Parker, et al. ($16.4 million recovery); In re 

Gupta Corp. Sec. Litig. ($15 million recovery); 

In re Radius Sec. Litig.; In re SuperMac Tech., 

Inc. Sec. Litig. (combined recovery of $14 

million); Markus, et al. v. The North Face, et al. 

($12.5 million recovery); In re Brothers 

Gourmet Coffees, Inc. Sec. Litig. ($9 million 

recovery); Anderson, et al. v. EFTC, et al. ($9 

million recovery); In re Flir Sys. Inc. Sec. Litig. 

($6 million recovery); In re Nike, Inc. Sec. Litig. 

($8.9 million recovery); Sharma v. Insignia ($8 

million recovery); and In re Medeva Sec. Litig. 

($6.75 million recovery). 

Mr. Solomon chaired the American Bar 

Association Directors and Officers Liability SubCommittee and the Accountants Liability SubCommittee between 1996 and 2001. 

RANDI D. BANDMAN is a partner at Lerach 

Coughlin whose responsibilities include the 

management of the Los Angeles office and the 

firm's Institutional Investor Department. Ms. 

Bandman received her Juris Doctor degree 

from the University of Southern California and 

her Bachelor of Arts degree in English from the 

University of California at Los Angeles. Ms. 

Bandman's practice at Lerach Coughlin has 

focused on securities and consumer class 

actions in both state and federal court. She 

has represented shareholders of companies in 

industries as diverse as aircraft manufacturing, 

battery technology, and computer software. 

These cases, which yielded significant 

recoveries for the plaintiffs, were against such 

companies as: WorldCom ($650 million); 

National Health Labs ($64 million); Sybase 

($28.5 million) and Unocal ($47.5 million). Ms. 

Bandman was responsible for running one of 

the largest class actions in the country over a 

four-year period against the Boeing Company, 

which settled for more than $90 million. Ms. 

Bandman was also an early member of the 

team that directed the prosecution of the cases 

against the tobacco companies. 

Using her extensive experience in asserting 

claims for injured investors, Ms. Bandman 

lectures and advises public and union funds 

both domestically and internationally on their 

options for seeking redress for losses due to 

fraud sustained in their portfolios. Ms. 

Bandman is currently interfacing with 

numerous public and Taft-Hartley pension 

funds, including those workers for various 

States and Municipalities, the Entertainment 

Industry, Sheetmetal Workers, Construction, 

Air Conditioning, Food and Hospitality, and 

Plumbers and Teamsters. 

Ms. Bandman has served as a lecturer on 

numerous matters concerning securities 

litigation to attorneys for continuing legal 

education, as well as a panelist for the 

Practicing Law Institute. 

THEODORE J. PINTAR received his Bachelor of 

Arts degree from the University of California at 

Berkeley in 1984 where he studied Political 

Economies of Industrial Societies. Mr. Pintar 

received his Juris Doctor degree from the 

University of Utah College of Law in 1987, 

where he was Note and Comment Editor of 

the Journal of Contemporary Law and the 

Journal of Energy Law and Policy. Formerly, 

Mr. Pintar was associated with the firm of 

McKenna, Conner & Cuneo in Los Angeles, 

California, where he focused in commercial 

and government contracts defense litigation. 

Mr. Pintar is co-author of Assuring Corporate 

Compliance with Federal Contract Laws and 

Regulations, Corporate Criminal Liability 

Reporter, Vol. 2 (Spring 1988). 

Mr. Pintar participated in the successful 

prosecution of numerous securities fraud class 

actions and derivative actions, including 

participation on the trial team in Knapp v. 

Gomez, Case No. 87-0067-H(M) (S.D. Cal.), 

which resulted in a plaintiff’s verdict. Mr. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 39 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 40 of 72

Pintar also participated in the successful 

prosecution of numerous consumer class 

actions, including: (i) actions against major life 

insurance companies such as Manulife ($555 

million settlement value) and Principal Life 

Insurance Company ($379 million settlement 

value); (ii) actions against major homeowners 

insurance companies such as Allstate ($50 

million settlement) and Prudential Property 

and Casualty Co. ($7 million settlement); and 

(iii) actions against Columbia House ($55 

million settlement value) and BMG ($10 million 

settlement value), a direct marketer of CDs and 

cassettes. 

Mr. Pintar is a member of the State Bar of 

California and the San Diego County Bar 

Association. 

JOY ANN BULL received her Juris Doctor degree, 

magna cum laude, from the University of San 

Diego in 1988. She was a member of the 

University of San Diego National Trial 

Competition Team and the San Diego Law 

Review. Ms. Bull focuses on the litigation of 

complex securities and consumer class actions. 

For nine years, Ms. Bull has concentrated her 

practice in negotiating and documenting 

complex settlement agreements and obtaining 

the required court approval of the settlements 

and payment of attorneys’ fees. These 

settlements include: In re Dole Shareholders’ 

Litig., Case No. BC281949 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los 

Angeles County) ($172 million recovery plus 

injunctive relief); Lindmark v. Am. Express, 

Case No. 00-8658-JFW(CWx) (C.D. Cal.) ($38 

million cash payment plus injunctive relief); In 

re Disposable Contact Lens Antitrust Litig., 

MDL No. 1030 (M.D. Fla.) (cash and benefits 

package over $90 million plus injunctive relief); 

In re LifeScan, Inc. Consumer Litig., Case No. C98-20321-JF(EAI) (N.D. Cal.) ($45 million cash 

recovery); In re Bergen Brunswig Corp. Sec. 

Litig., Case No. SACV-99-1305-AHS(ANx) (C.D. 

Cal.) ($27.9 million cash recovery); Hall v. 

NCAA, Case No. 94-2392-KHV (D. Kan.) ($54.4 

million cash recovery); In re Glen Ivy Resorts, 

Inc., Case No. SD92-16083MG (Banker. Ct. C.D. 

Cal.) ($31 million cash recovery); and In re 

Advanced Micro Devices Sec. Litig., Case No. C93-20662-RPA(PVT) (N.D. Cal.) ($34 million cash 

recovery). 

BONNY E. SWEENEY is a partner in the San 

Diego office of Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller 

Rudman & Robbins LLP, where she specializes 

in antitrust and unfair competition class action 

litigation. She is currently Chair of the 

Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law Section 

of the State Bar of California, and has served 

on the Executive Committee of the Section 

since 2002. 

Bonny is co-lead counsel in several multidistrict antitrust class actions pending in 

federal courts around the country, including In 

re Payment Card Interchange Fee and 

Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation

(Eastern District of New York), In re Carbon 

Black Antitrust Litigation (District of 

Massachusetts), and In re Currency Conversion 

Fee Antitrust Litigation (Southern District of 

New York), and serves on the Plaintiffs’ 

Executive Committee in In re Dynamic Random 

Access Memory (DRAM) Antitrust Litigation

(Northern District of California). In Currency 

Conversion, Bonny helped recover $336 million 

for class members through a proposed 

settlement that is awaiting approval from the 

federal court. In DRAM, the federal court 

recently approved a partial settlement of more 

than $160 million. 

Bonny was one of the trial lawyers in Law v. 

NCAA/Hall v. NCAA/Schreiber v. NCAA (District 

of Kansas), in which the jury awarded $67 

million to three classes of college coaches. She 

has participated in the successful prosecution 

and settlement of numerous other antitrust 

and unfair competition cases, including In re 

LifeScan, Inc. Consumer Litigation (Northern 

District of California), which settled for $45 

million; the Bank Privacy Cases (San Francisco 

Superior Court), which resulted in better bank 

privacy policies, funding to non-profit groups 

advocating for privacy rights, and benefits to 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 40 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 41 of 72

credit cardholders, In re NASDAQ MarketMakers Antitrust Litigation (Southern District 

of New York), which settled for $1.027 billion, 

and In re Airline Ticket Commission Antitrust 

Litigation (District of Minnesota), which settled 

for more than $85 million. 

In 2003, Bonny was honored with the Wiley M. 

Manuel Pro Bono Services Award and the San 

Diego Volunteer Lawyer Program 

Distinguished Service Award. In addition to 

her service for the Antitrust and Unfair 

Competition Law Section, Bonny contributes to 

legal education by speaking on antitrust 

topics, California’s unfair competition law, and 

complex litigation matters. 

Bonny graduated summa cum laude from Case 

Western Reserve University School of Law in 

1988, where she served as editor of the Law 

Review and was elected to the Order of the 

Coif. She earned a Master of Arts degree from 

Cornell University in 1985, a Chinese Language 

Certificate from the Beijing Language Institute 

in 1982, and a Bachelor of Arts degree from 

Whittier College in 1981. 

A litigator since 1988, Bonny is admitted to 

practice in California and Massachusetts, and is 

a member of the Antitrust Section of the 

American Bar Association and the Antitrust 

and Unfair Competition Law Section of the 

California Bar Association. 

TRAVIS E. DOWNS III received his Bachelor of 

Arts degree in History, cum laude, from 

Whitworth College in 1985, and received his 

Juris Doctor degree from University of 

Washington School of Law in 1990. Mr. Downs 

concentrates his practice in securities class 

actions and shareholders’ derivative actions. 

Mr. Downs is responsible for the prosecution 

and recovery of significant settlements in the 

following cases: In re Informix Corp. Sec. Litig., 

Case No. C-97-1289-CRB (N.D. Cal.) ($137.5 

million recovery); In re MP3.com, Inc. Sec. 

Litig., Case No. 00-CV-1873-K(NLS) (S.D. Cal.) 

($36 million recovery); In re Conner 

Peripherals, Inc. Sec. Litig., Case No. C-95-2244-

MHP (N.D. Cal.) ($26 million recovery); In re 

Silicon Graphics, Inc. II Sec. Litig., Case No. 97-

4362-SI (N.D. Cal.) ($20.3 million recovery); In 

re J.D. Edwards Sec. Litig., Case No. 99-N-1744 

(D. Colo.) ($15 million recovery); In re Sony 

Corp. Sec. Litig., Case No. CV-96-1326-JGD(JGx) 

(C.D. Cal.) ($12.5 million recovery); In re 

Veterinary Ctrs. of Am., Inc. Sec. Litig., Case No. 

97-4244-CBM(MCx) (C.D. Cal.) ($6.75 million 

recovery); In re JDN Realty Corp. Derivative 

Litig., Case No. 00-CV-1853 (N.D. Ga.) (obtained 

extensive corporate governance 

enhancements); In re Hollywood 

Entertainment Corp. Sec. Litig., Case No. 95-

1926-MA (D. Or.) ($15 million recovery); In re 

Legato Sys., Inc. Derivative Litig., Case No. 

413050 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Mateo Cty.) 

(obtained extensive corporate governance 

enhancements); and In re Flagstar Cos., Inc. 

Derivative Litig., Case No. 736748-7 (Cal. Super. 

Ct., Alameda County) (obtained extensive 

corporate governance enhancements). 

Mr. Downs is a member of the Bar of the State 

of California and is also admitted to practice 

before the district courts of the Central, 

Northern and Southern Districts of California. 

He is also a member of the American Bar 

Association and the San Diego County Bar 

Association. Mr. Downs lectures and 

participates in professional education 

programs. 

G. PAUL HOWES, after Marine Corps Vietnam 

service, received his Bachelor of Arts degree 

with distinction from the University of New 

Mexico, was elected to Phi Beta Kappa and Phi 

Kappa Phi, and was the tympanist for the New 

Mexico Symphony Orchestra. He received his 

Juris Doctor degree and Masters in Public 

Administration from the University of Virginia. 

He served as a Special Assistant to the Director 

of the FBI, Judge William H. Webster, and then 

as a law clerk to Judge Roger Robb, United 

States Circuit Court of Appeals for the District 

of Columbia Circuit. He was an ABC News 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 41 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 42 of 72

correspondent for the Washington Bureau and 

then served for 11 years as an Assistant U.S. 

Attorney for the District of Columbia, primarily 

prosecuting complex drug organization homicides. He is a member of the New Mexico, 

District of Columbia and California Bars. 

SPENCER A. BURKHOLZ received his Bachelor of 

Arts degree in Economics, cum laude, from 

Clark University in 1985, where he was elected 

to Phi Beta Kappa, and received his Juris 

Doctor degree from University of Virginia 

School of Law in 1989. Mr. Burkholz 

concentrates his practice in securities class 

actions, and has recovered settlements in the 

following cases: 3Com ($259 million); Vesta Ins.

($78 million); Samsonite ($24 million); Emulex

($39 million); Mossimo ($13 million); Triteal

($13.8 million); Price Co. ($15 million); 

Stratosphere Corp. ($9 million); and IMP ($9.5 

million). 

Mr. Burkholz was also on the trial team in 

Long v. Wells Fargo. Mr. Burkholz is currently 

representing large public and multi-employer 

pension funds seeking to recover for their 

investments in WorldCom bonds. Mr. Burkholz 

is a member of the California Bar and has been 

admitted to practice in numerous federal 

courts throughout the country. 

TIMOTHY G. BLOOD graduated cum laude and 

with honors in Economics from Hobart College 

in 1987 and the National Law Center of 

George Washington University in 1990. He 

was elected to Phi Beta Kappa, Omicron Delta 

Epsilon (Economics) and the Moot Court Board 

(first year honors). 

Mr. Blood focuses on consumer fraud and 

unfair competition litigation with a focus on 

actions brought by policyholders against life 

and property and casualty insurers for 

deceptive sales practices, racial discrimination 

and systematic failures in claims adjustment. 

Mr. Blood has been involved in a number of 

cases that have resulted in significant 

settlements, including McNeil v. Am. Gen. Life 

& Accident Ins. Co. ($234 million), Lee v. USLife 

Corp. ($148 million), Garst v. Franklin Life Ins. 

Co. ($90.1 million), In re Gen. Am. Sales 

Practices Litig. ($67 million), Williams v. United 

Ins. Co. of Am. ($51.4 million); and Sternberg v. 

Apple Computer, Inc. ($50 million). 

Mr. Blood is also responsible for several 

precedent-setting appellate decisions, 

including Lebrilla v. Farmers Group, Inc., 119 

Cal. App. 4th 1070 (2004). Mr. Blood is a 

frequent lecturer on class action procedure 

and consumer fraud issues and is a member of 

the Board of Governors of the Consumer 

Attorneys of California. 

Mr. Blood is admitted to practice in California 

and in the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Fifth, 

Sixth, Eighth, Ninth and Eleventh Circuits and 

the U.S. District Courts for the Southern, 

Central, Eastern and Northern Districts of 

California. He is a member of the San Diego 

County and American Bar Associations, the 

State Bar of California, the Association of 

Business Trial Lawyers, the Association of Trial 

Lawyers of America and the Consumer 

Attorneys of California. 

ARTHUR C. LEAHY graduated with a Bachelor of 

Arts degree in Business from Point Loma 

College in 1987. In 1990, Mr. Leahy graduated 

cum laude and received a Juris Doctor degree 

from the University of San Diego School of 

Law, where he served as Managing Editor of 

the Law Review. While in law school, Mr. 

Leahy authored an article published in the San 

Diego Law Review and other articles published 

in another law journal. In addition, he served 

as a judicial extern for the Honorable J. 

Clifford Wallace of the U.S. Court of Appeals 

for the Ninth Circuit. After law school, Mr. 

Leahy served as a judicial law clerk for the 

Honorable Alan C. Kay of the U.S. District 

Court for the District of Hawaii. 

For eight years, Mr. Leahy has worked on 

securities fraud and consumer class actions in 

which his clients recovered millions of dollars. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 42 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 43 of 72

Mr. Leahy is a member of the California Bar 

and has been admitted in numerous federal 

courts throughout the country. 

FRANK J. JANECEK, JR. received his Bachelor of 

Science degree in Psychology from the 

University of California at Davis in 1987, and 

his Juris Doctor degree from Loyola Law School 

in 1991. He is admitted to the Bar of the State 

of California, the district courts for all districts 

California, and to the U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the Sixth, Ninth and Eleventh Circuits. For 11 

years, Mr. Janecek has practiced in the area of 

consumer, Proposition 65, taxpayer and 

tobacco litigation. He has participated as a 

panelist and a speaker in continuing legal 

education programs relating to California’s 

Unfair Competition laws, public enforcement 

tobacco litigation and challenging 

unconstitutional taxation schemes. 

Mr. Janecek litigated several Proposition 65 

actions, including People ex. rel. Lungren v. 

Superior Court, 14 Cal. 4th 294 (1996), which 

was jointly prosecuted with the Attorney 

General’s office. These actions resulted in the 

recovery of more than $10 million in 

disgorgement and/or civil penalties and 

warnings to consumers of their exposure to 

cancer-causing agents and reproductive toxins. 

Mr. Janecek chaired several of the litigation 

committees in California’s tobacco litigation, 

which resulted in the $25.5 billion recovery for 

California and its local entities. Mr. Janecek 

also handled a constitutional challenge to the 

State of California’s Smog Impact Fee, in the 

case Ramos v. Dep’t of Motor Vehicles, Case 

No. 95AS00532 (Sacramento Super. Ct.). As a 

result of the Ramos litigation, more than a 

million California residents received full 

refunds, plus interest, totaling $665 million. 

Mr. Janecek is the co-author with Patrick J. 

Coughlin of “A Review of R.J. Reynolds’ 

Internal Documents Produced in Mangini v. R.J. 

Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 939359 - The Case 

that Rid California and the American 

Landscape of ‘Joe Camel’” (January 1998), 

which, along with more than 60,000 internal 

industry documents, was released to the public 

through Congressman Henry Waxman. He is 

also the author of California’s Unfair 

Competition Act and Its Role in the Tobacco 

Wars (Fall 1997). Mr. Janecek is a member of 

the American Bar Association, the California 

Bar Association, the San Diego County Bar 

Association and the Consumer Attorneys of 

California and San Diego. 

DAVID J. GEORGE earned his Bachelor of Arts 

degree in Political Science from the University 

of Rhode Island, summa cum laude. Mr. 

George then graduated at the top of his class 

at the University of Richmond School of Law. 

At the University of Richmond, Mr. George was 

a member of Law Review, was the President of 

the McNeill Law Society/Order of the Coif, and 

earned numerous academic awards, including 

outstanding academic performance in each of 

his three years there and outstanding 

graduate. 

Before joining Lerach Coughlin, he was a 

partner in the Boca Raton office of Geller 

Rudman, PLLC. While at Geller Rudman, Mr. 

George, a zealous advocate of shareholder 

rights, has been lead and/or co-lead counsel 

with respect to various securities class action 

matters, including: In re Cryo Cell Int’l, Inc. Sec. 

Litig. (M.D. Fla.); In Re Shaw Group Sec. Litig. 

(E.D. La.); In Re Teco Energy Sec. Litig. (M.D. 

Fla.); and In Re Mannatech, Inc. Sec. Litig., (D. 

N.M.). Mr. George has also acted as lead 

counsel in numerous consumer class actions, 

including Lewis v. Labor Ready, Inc. (S.D. Fla.), 

and Flaxman v. Geico (S.D. Fla.), among many 

others. Before joining Geller Rudman, Mr. 

George spent more than a decade as a 

commercial litigator with two of the largest 

corporate law firms in the United States. 

During that time, Mr. George aggressively 

prosecuted and defended a wide array of 

complex commercial litigation matters, 

including securities class action matters, noncompete litigation, fraud claims, and real 

estate-based litigation matters. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 43 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 44 of 72

Mr. George is licensed to practice law in the 

state courts of Florida, as well as the United 

States District Courts for the Southern, Middle 

and Northern Districts of Florida. He is 

currently or has been a member of the 

American Bar Association, the Academy of 

Florida Trial Lawyers, the Palm Beach County 

Bar Association and the South Palm Beach 

County Bar Association. 

SANFORD SVETCOV is a partner with the 

Appellate Practice Group of Lerach Coughlin. 

He has briefed and argued more than 300 

appeals in state and federal court, including: 

Braxton v. Mun. Court, 10 Cal. 3d 138 (1973) 

(First Amendment); Procunier v. Navarette, 434 

U.S. 555 (1978) (civil rights); Parker Plaza West 

Partners v. UNUM Pension & Ins. Co., 941 F.2d 

349 (5th Cir. 1991) (real estate); Catellus Dev. 

Corp. v. United States, 34 F.3d 748 (9th Cir. 

1994) (CERCLA); United States. v. Hove, 52 F.3d 

233 (9th Cir. 1995) (criminal law); Kelly v. City 

of Oakland, 198 F.3d 779 (9th Cir. 1999) 

(employment law, same gender sexual 

harassment); United States v. Henke, 222 F.3d 

633 (9th Cir. 2000) (securities fraud); Moore v. 

Liberty Nat’l Life Ins. Co., 267 F.3d 1209 (11th 

Cir. 2001) (civil rights); and In re Cavanaugh, 

306 F.3d 726 (9th Cir. 2002) (securities fraud). 

Mr. Svetcov’s professional appellate litigation 

experience includes securities fraud litigation, 

CERCLA, CEQA, commercial litigation, Clean 

Water Act, Civil Rights Act litigation, toxic 

torts, federal criminal law, California writ 

practice, employment law and ERISA. 

Mr. Svetcov was a partner with the firm of 

Landels Ripley & Diamond, LLP, in San 

Francisco, from 1989 to 2000. His extensive 

legal experience includes service as: Chief, 

Appellate Section, U.S. Attorney’s Office, San 

Francisco, 1984-1989; Attorney-in-Charge, 

Organized Crime Strike Force, San Francisco, 

1981-1984; Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney, San 

Francisco, 1978-1981; Deputy Attorney 

General, State of California, 1969-1977; Legal 

Officer, U.S. Navy, VT-25, Chase Field, Beeville, 

Texas, 1966-1969; and Deputy Legislative 

Counsel, Legislature of California, Sacramento, 

1965-1966. 

Mr. Svetcov is certified as a Specialist in 

Appellate Practice by the State Bar of 

California Board of Legal Specialization. He 

was selected by the Attorney General for the 

Department of Justice’s John Marshall Award 

for Excellence in Appellate Advocacy in 1986 

and is a member and past President (1998) of 

the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers, 

and a member of the California Academy of 

Appellate Lawyers. 

In 1999, Chief Justice Rehnquist appointed Mr. 

Svetcov to a three-year term on the Federal 

Appellate Rules Advisory Committee. He is 

also an ex-officio member of the Ninth Circuit 

Rules Advisory Committee on Rules and 

Internal Operating Procedures. His other 

memberships and service commitments to the 

legal profession include: the California 

Academy of Appellate Lawyers; the Bar 

Association of San Francisco (Appellate Courts 

section); the American Bar Association 

(Appellate Judges Conference) Committee on 

Appellate Practice; and the Northern California 

Federal Bar Association, Board of Directors. 

Mr. Svetcov earned his Bachelor of Arts 

degree, cum laude, from Brooklyn College in 

1961 and his Juris Doctor degree from the 

University of California at Berkeley in 1964. He 

is a member of the Bars of the State of 

California, the U.S. Supreme Court, the Court 

of Appeals, Fifth, Eighth, Ninth and Eleventh 

Circuits, and the U.S. District Court, Northern 

District of California. 

For two decades, he as been active as a teacher 

and lecturer at continuing legal education 

programs, including those of the ABA 

Appellate Practice Institutes (1990-2000); the 

Ninth Circuit Federal Bar Association Appellate 

Practice Seminar, and the N.I.T.A. Appellate 

Advocacy Seminar and Fifth Circuit Bar 

Association Appellate Practice Seminars (1991-

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 44 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 45 of 72

1999). He has served as an adjunct professor at 

Hastings College of Law and an instructor in 

Appellate Advocacy at the U.S. Attorney 

General’s Advocacy Institute (1980-1989). 

Mr. Svetcov is also active in community affairs. 

He has been a member of the San Francisco 

Jewish Community Relations Council since 

1982, its president from 1991-1992, and during 

the years 1993-1995, he also served on the 

Northern California Hillel Council. 

MICHAEL J. DOWD graduated from Fordham 

University, magna cum laude, with a Bachelor 

of Arts degree in History and Latin in 1981. 

While at Fordham, he was elected to Phi Beta 

Kappa. He earned his Juris Doctor degree 

from the University of Michigan School of Law 

in 1981 and entered private practice in New 

York that same year. He was admitted to 

practice in New York in 1985 and in California 

in 1988. 

Mr. Dowd served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney 

in the Southern District of California from 

1987-1991 and again from 1994-1998. As an 

Assistant U.S. Attorney, Mr. Dowd obtained 

extensive trial experience, including the 

prosecution of bank fraud, bribery, money 

laundering and narcotics cases. He is a 

recipient of the Director’s Award for Superior 

Performance as an Assistant U.S. Attorney. Mr. 

Dowd has been responsible for prosecuting 

complex securities cases and obtaining 

recoveries for investors, including cases 

involving WorldCom, Qwest, Vesta, U.S. West, 

Safeskin and Bergen Brunswig. Most recently, 

Mr. Dowd was the lead lawyer for the Lerach 

Coughlin trial team in In re AT&T Corp. Sec. 

Lit., which was tried in the District of New 

Jersey, and settled after two weeks of trial for 

$100 million. Mr. Dowd also participated in the 

firm’s tobacco cases. 

DAVID C. WALTON earned his Bachelor of Arts 

degree in Accounting from the University of 

Utah and his Juris Doctor degree from the 

University of Southern California Law Center in 

1993. While there, he was a staff member of 

the Southern California Law Review and a 

member of the Hale Moot Court Honors 

Program. 

Mr. Walton is a member of the Bar of 

California. Mr. Walton, a Certified Public 

Accountant (California, 1992) and Certified 

Fraud Examiner, who is also fluent in Spanish, 

focuses on class actions on behalf of defrauded 

investors, particularly in the area of accounting 

fraud. He has investigated and participated in 

the litigation of many large accounting 

scandals, including Enron, WorldCom, 

Informix, HealthSouth, Dynegy and Dollar 

General. In 2003-2004, Mr. Walton served as a 

member of the California Board of 

Accountancy which is responsible for 

regulating the accounting profession in 

California. 

RANDALL H. STEINMEYER earned his Bachelor of 

Science degree from the University of Southern 

California in 1993, and his Juris Doctor degree, 

cum laude, from Hamline University School of 

Law in 1996, where he was a member of the 

Hamline Law Review. He is the author of The 

Interrelationship Between NASD Arbitrations 

and NASD Disciplinary Proceedings, 281 

Practicing Law Institute (1998). Formerly, Mr. 

Steinmeyer headed the securities litigation 

department of Reinhardt & Anderson in St. 

Paul, Minnesota. Mr. Steinmeyer is a member 

of the Bar of Minnesota and the U.S. District 

Court for the District of Minnesota. Mr. 

Steinmeyer is a former securities broker and 

held a Series 7 license with the National 

Association of Securities Dealers. 

In 2003, he was a guest lecturer at Oxford 

University on the impact of corporate and 

broker dealer fraud on the investment 

community. He also sits on the Board of 

Directors of the Hedge Fund Association. He 

has authored numerous articles on the hedge 

fund industry and offshore financial 

community. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 45 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 46 of 72

Mr. Steinmeyer focuses on class actions on 

behalf of defrauded investors. Mr. Steinmeyer 

was appointed lead counsel in several large 

and complex class actions which resulted in the 

recovery of tens of millions of dollars for 

aggrieved investors. Mr. Steinmeyer’s reported 

cases include: Ganesh LLC v. Computer 

Learning Ctrs., 1998 WL 892622 (E.D. Va. 1998); 

Gart v. Electroscope, 1998 WL 757970 (D. Minn. 

1998); Chill v. Green Tree Fin. Corp., 181 F.R.D. 

398 (D. Minn. 1998); and In re Transcrypt Int’l 

Sec. Litig., Case No. 4:98CV3099, 1999 U.S. Dist. 

LEXIS 17540 (D. Neb. Nov. 4, 1999). 

JEFFREY W. LAWRENCE received his Bachelor of 

Arts degree, magna cum laude, from Tufts 

University in 1976. In 1979, Mr. Lawrence 

graduated magna cum laude with a Juris 

Doctor degree from Boston School of Law. He 

was a staff member of the Boston University 

Law Review from 1977-78, and its editor from 

1978-79. 

From September 1979 to September 1980, Mr. 

Lawrence served as a law clerk to the 

Honorable Walter Jay Skinner, U.S. District 

Court, District of Massachusetts. He was 

admitted to the Massachusetts Bar in 1979, 

and to the Bar of California in 1991. He is 

licensed to practice before the U.S. Court of 

Appeals, First and Ninth Circuits, the U.S. 

District Court, District of Massachusetts and the 

Northern District of California. 

From 1983-1994, Mr. Lawrence was an 

Assistant U.S. Attorney, Criminal Division, 

where he obtained extensive trial experience 

in white-collar crimes, ranging from moneylaundering to stock fraud. 

HENRY ROSEN obtained his Bachelor of Arts 

degree in 1984 from the University of 

California, after attending American College in 

Paris. In 1988, Mr. Rosen received his Juris 

Doctor degree from the University of Denver, 

where he was Editor-in-Chief for the University 

of Denver Law Review. Mr. Rosen served as 

Judicial Law Clerk to the Honorable Jim R. 

Carrigan, U.S. District Court, District of 

Colorado, from 1989 to 1990. He is a member 

of the firm’s Hiring Committee and is also a 

member of the firm’s Technology Committee, 

which focuses on applications to digitally 

manage documents produced during litigation 

and internally generate research files. 

Major clients include Minebea Co., Ltd., a 

Japanese manufacturing company, 

represented in a securities fraud arbitration 

against a U.S. investment bank. Mr. Rosen has 

significant experience prosecuting every aspect 

of securities fraud class actions and has 

obtained hundreds of millions of dollars on 

behalf of defrauded investors. Prominent 

cases include: In re Storagetek Sec. Litig., Case 

No. 92-B-750 (D. Colo.); In re Access HealthNet 

Sec. Litig., Case No. SACV-96-1250-GLT(EEx) 

and Case No. SACV-97-191-GLT(EEx) (C.D. Cal.); 

In re Valence Sec. Litig., Case No. C-95-20459-

JW(EAI) (N.D. Cal.); In re J.D. Edwards Sec. 

Litig., Case No. 99-N-1744 (D. Colo.); In re 

Bergen Brunswig Sec. Litig. and Bergen 

Brunswig Capital Litig., Case No. SACV-99-

1462-AHS(ANx) (C.D. Cal.); In re Advanced 

Lighting Sec. Litig., No. 1:99CV8936 (N.D. 

Ohio); and In re Safeskin Sec. Litig., Case No. 

99cv454-BTM(LSP) (S.D. Cal.). 

Mr. Rosen is admitted to the California Bar 

(1991) and the Colorado Bar (1988). He is a 

member of the State Bar of California, the 

American Bar Association (Litigation Section), 

the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, 

the California Trial Lawyers of America, 

California Trial Lawyers Association and the 

San Diego Trial Lawyers Association. 

RANDALL J. BARON was born in Albuquerque, 

New Mexico in 1964. Mr. Baron received his 

Bachelor of Arts degree from University of 

Colorado at Boulder in 1987, and his Juris 

Doctor degree, cum laude, from University of 

San Diego School of Law in 1990. He was a 

member of the San Diego Law Review from 

1988-1989. Mr. Baron was admitted to the 

California Bar in 1990 and the Colorado Bar in 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 46 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 47 of 72

1993. Since 1997, Mr. Baron is licensed to 

practice in Colorado State Court as well as the 

U.S. District Court for the Southern, Northern 

and Central Districts of California, as well as 

the District of Colorado. 

Formerly, Mr. Baron served as a Deputy District 

Attorney in Los Angeles County. From 1990-

1994, he was a trial deputy in numerous offices 

throughout Los Angeles County, where he 

tried over 70 felony cases. From 1990-1994, 

Mr. Baron was part of the Special Investigation 

Division of the Los Angeles District Attorneys 

office, where he investigated and prosecuted 

public corruption cases. He concentrates his 

practice in securities litigation and actions for 

breach of fiduciary duty. 

EDWARD P. DIETRICH was born in White Plains, 

New York on October 14, 1961. Mr. Dietrich 

received his Bachelor of Arts degree from 

Skidmore College in 1983. He received his Juris 

Doctor degree from George Washington 

University in 1986 and was elected to Phi Beta 

Kappa. He was a member of the Moot Court 

Board. He was admitted to the New York 

State Bar in 1987. Mr. Dietrich is able to 

practice in U.S. District Court, Southern and 

Eastern Districts of New York, U.S. District 

Court, Northern District of California (1994), 

California and U.S. District Courts, Central 

District of California (1995), U.S. District Court, 

Southern and Eastern Districts of California, 

U.S. District Court, District of Arizona and U.S. 

Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit (1997). 

JACK REISE earned his Bachelor of Arts degree 

in History from Binghamton University. He 

graduated cum laude from University of Miami 

School of Law where he was an Associate 

Editor on the University of Miami InterAmerican Law Review and was also the 

recipient of the American Jurisprudence Book 

Award in Contracts. 

Since he began practicing law, Mr. Reise has 

been devoted to protecting the rights of those 

who have been harmed by corporate 

misconduct. Mr. Reise started his legal career 

representing individuals suffering the 

debilitating affects of asbestos exposure back 

in the 1950s and 1960s. 

Mr. Reise has since concentrated his practice 

on class action litigation, including securities 

fraud, shareholder derivative actions, 

consumer protection, unfair and deceptive 

insurance practices and antitrust. Prior to 

joining the firm, Mr. Reise was a partner at the 

law firm of Cauley Geller. 

A substantial portion of Mr. Reise’s practice is 

devoted to representing shareholders in 

actions brought under the federal securities 

laws. He is currently serving as lead counsel in 

more than a dozen cases nationwide, including 

Abrams v. Van Kampen Funds, Case No. 01 C 

7538 (N.D. Ill.) (involving a mutual fund that is 

charged with improperly valuating its net asset 

value), and In re NewPower Holdings Sec. 

Litig., Case No. 02 Civ. 1550 (CLB) (S.D.N.Y.), 

which settled with several of the defendants 

for $26 million. 

Mr. Reise has been admitted to the Florida Bar 

since 1995. He is also admitted to practice 

before United States Courts of Appeals for the 

First, Fourth and Eleventh Circuits, as well as 

the Southern and Middle District Courts of 

Florida. 

PAMELA M. PARKER received her Bachelor of 

Arts degree in Political Science and French, 

with a concentration in International Politics, 

from the State University of New York at 

Binghamton, and was elected to Phi Beta 

Kappa. Ms. Parker received a Juris Doctor 

degree from Harvard Law School, cum laude,

in 1982. While at Harvard, Ms. Parker was an 

Articles Editor of the Civil Rights/Civil Liberties 

Law Review. After graduation, she served as a 

law clerk to the Honorable Frank J. Battisti, 

Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court, Northern 

District of Ohio. Upon leaving the clerkship, 

Ms. Parker worked as an associate with the 

New York firm of Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 47 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 48 of 72

& Garrison. In 1988, Ms. Parker became 

associated with the New York firm of 

Lankenau Kovner & Bickford, concentrating 

her practice in representation of publications, 

libel defense and First Amendment law. 

For 13 years, Ms. Parker’s practice has included 

appellate matters and environmental, 

consumer fraud and securities fraud litigation. 

Ms. Parker participated in the successful 

prosecution of several important actions, 

including: In re The Exxon Valdez, Case No. 

A89-095 (D. Alaska), in which she served as a 

member of the trial support team, and which 

resulted in a $5 billion jury verdict; Pinney v. 

Great Western Bank, et al., Case No. CV-95-

2100-I(RNBx) (C.D. Cal.), in which she served as 

one of the principal attorneys for plaintiffs and 

which resulted in a settlement of $17.2 million; 

and Does I, et al. v. The Gap, Inc., et al., Case 

No. 01 0031 (D. N. Mariana Islands), in which 

she was the lead prosecuting attorney and 

which resulted in a $20 million settlement, 

including a precedent-setting Monitoring 

Program to monitor labor and human rights 

practices in Saipan garment factories. In July 

2003, Ms. Parker was named Trial Lawyer of 

the Year by the Trial Lawyers for Public Justice 

in recognition of her work on the case in the 

Northern Mariana Islands. 

Ms. Parker is a member of the Appellate 

Practice Group of Lerach Coughlin. She has 

worked on a variety of appellate matters 

before numerous courts, including the U.S. 

Courts of Appeal for the Fifth, Sixth, Ninth and 

Tenth Circuits and the appellate courts of 

California, Alabama, Ohio and Tennessee. She 

is a Lawyer Representative to the Ninth Circuit 

Judicial Conference. 

Ms. Parker is admitted to practice in California 

and New York. She has been an active 

member of the Federal Bar Association, the 

San Diego County Bar Association and the 

Lawyers Club of San Diego, and also holds 

memberships with the American Bar 

Association and California Women Lawyers. 

She sits on the Board of Directors for the Legal 

Aid Society of San Diego. 

STEVEN W. PEPICH received his Bachelor of 

Science degree in Economics from Utah State 

University in 1980 and his Juris Doctor degree 

from De Paul University in 1983. Mr. Pepich is 

admitted to practice before the Courts of 

California and the District Court for the 

Southern, Central, Eastern and Northern 

Districts of California. Mr. Pepich has been 

engaged in a wide variety of civil litigation, 

including consumer fraud, mass tort, royalty, 

civil rights, human rights, ERISA and 

employment law actions, as well as many 

securities and corporate litigations. He was 

part of the plaintiffs’ trial team in Mynaf v. 

Taco Bell Corp., which settled after two 

months of trial on terms favorable to two 

plaintiff classes of restaurant workers, for 

recovery of unpaid wages. He was also a 

member of the plaintiffs’ trial team in 

Newman v. Stringfellow where, after a ninemonth trial in Riverside, California, all claims 

for exposure to toxic chemicals were ultimately 

resolved for $109 million. 

Mr. Pepich has also participated in the 

successful prosecution of numerous securities 

fraud class actions, including: Gohler v. Wood, 

Case No. 92-C-181 ($17.2 million recovery); In 

re Advanced Micro Devices Sec. Litig., Case No. 

C-93-20662-RPA(PVT) ($34 million recovery); In 

re Catalyst Semiconductor Sec. Litig., Case No. 

C-93-2096 ($15 million recovery); In re Gupta 

Corp. Sec. Litig., Case No. C-94-1517 ($6 million 

recovery); In re Louisiana-Pacific Corp. Sec. 

Litig., Case No. C-95-707 ($65 million recovery); 

and In re Boeing Sec. Litig., Case No. C-97-

1715Z ($92 million recovery). Mr. Pepich is a 

member of the American Bar Association, the 

San Diego Bar Association and the Association 

of Business Trial Lawyers of San Diego. Mr. 

Pepich co-authored with William S. Lerach 

Personal Liability Considerations of Officers 

and Directors in the Takeover Context, CEB, 

Business Law Institute, April 1986, and New 

Diligence Considerations in the Context of the 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 48 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 49 of 72

Federal Securities Laws, CEB Fourth Annual 

Securities Institute, May 1986. 

LAURA ANDRACCHIO focuses primarily on 

litigation under the federal securities laws. She 

has litigated dozens of cases against public 

companies in federal and state courts 

throughout the country, and has contributed 

to hundreds of millions of dollars in recoveries 

for injured investors. Most recently, Ms. 

Andracchio led the litigation team in Brody V 

Hellman, a case against Qwest and former 

directors of U.S. West seeking an unpaid 

dividend, recovering $50 million. In late 2004, 

she was a lead member of the trial team in In 

re AT&T Corp. Securities Litigation, which 

settled for $100 million after two weeks of 

trial in district court in New Jersey. Prior to 

trial, Ms. Andracchio was responsible for 

managing and litigating the case, which was 

pending for four years. She was also the lead 

litigator in In re P-Com, Inc. Securities 

Litigation, which resulted in a $16 million 

recovery for the plaintiff class. 

Ms. Andracchio is a member of the State Bars 

of California and Pennsylvania, and the federal 

district courts for the Northern, Central and 

Southern Districts of California and the 

Western District of Pennsylvania. She received 

her Bachelor of Arts degree from Bucknell 

University in 1986, and her Juris Doctor degree 

with honors from Duquesne University School 

of Law in 1989. While at Duquesne, Ms. 

Andracchio was elected to the Order of 

Barristers and represented the Law School in 

the National Samuel J. Polsky Appellate Moot 

Court competition, in which she placed as a 

finalist, and in the regional Gourley Cup Trial 

Moot Court competition. 

JOHN K. GRANT was born in Provo, Utah in 

1961. Mr. Grant received his Bachelor of Arts 

degree from Brigham Young University in 1988 

and his Juris Doctor degree from the University 

of Texas at Austin in 1990. Mr. Grant was 

admitted to the California Bar in 1994. 

KATHLEEN A. HERKENHOFF received a Bachelor 

of Arts in English Literature from the 

University of California at Berkeley in 1989 and 

received a Juris Doctor degree from 

Pepperdine University School of Law in 1993. 

While at Pepperdine, she received American 

Jurisprudence Awards in Constitutional Law 

and Agency-Partnership Law. After 

graduation from Pepperdine, Ms. Herkenhoff 

was an enforcement attorney with the U.S. 

Securities and Exchange Commission. 

Ms. Herkenhoff is a 1993 admittee to the State 

Bar of California and has been admitted to 

practice before the U.S. District Courts for the 

Northern, Central, Eastern and Southern 

Districts of California. Ms. Herkenhoff has 

successfully prosecuted several complex 

securities class actions, including obtaining a 

$122 million settlement against Mattel, Inc. 

and several of its former officers and directors. 

KIMBERLY C. EPSTEIN is a partner with the San 

Francisco office of Lerach Coughlin. Having 

been associated with the Lerach Coughlin 

lawyers since 1994, Ms. Epstein’s practice has 

focused on securities class actions in both state 

and federal court. She has represented 

shareholders of companies in industries as 

diverse as microchip developers, pump and 

valve manufacturers and golf apparel. Over 

the past decade, Ms. Epstein has litigated cases 

that have recovered tens of millions of dollars 

on behalf of defrauded shareholders. 

Ms. Epstein obtained her Juris Doctor degree 

from University of San Francisco in 1993, where 

she was a joint J.D./MBA candidate, and her 

Bachelor of Science degree in Business 

Administration from California State University 

at Hayward in 1988. Prior to her employment 

with the securities litigation bar, she clerked 

for the Honorable William J. Cahill. She is 

licensed to practice in the state of California 

and before the U.S. District Courts in Northern 

and Central California, Arizona and the U.S. 

Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 49 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 50 of 72

MICHELLE M. CICCARELLI represents workers, 

consumers and shareholders in a broad range 

of complex class action litigations for securities 

fraud, fraudulent business practices, human 

rights abuses, labor and employment 

violations, as well as derivative litigation for 

breaches of fiduciary duties by corporate 

officers and directors. She is the Editor of 

Lerach Coughlin’s Corporate Governance 

Bulletin and Taking Action - Fighting 

Corporate Corruption, and the author of 

Improving Corporate Governance through 

Litigation Settlements, Corporate Governance 

Review, 2003. She is a frequent lecturer on 

securities fraud, corporate governance, and 

other issues of import to institutional investors. 

She participated in the successful prosecution 

of several important actions, including Does I, 

et al. v. The Gap, Inc. et al., Case No. 01-0031 

(D N. Mariana Islands), in which she was one of 

the lead litigators, spending several months on 

Saipan working with clients, investigating 

claims, and obtaining discovery. The case was 

successfully concluded with a $20 million 

settlement, including a precedent-setting 

Monitoring Program to monitor labor and 

human rights practices in Saipan garment 

factories. 

Formerly, she practiced in Kentucky in the area 

of labor and employment law. She was the coeditor of the Kentucky Employment Law Letter

(1998) and co-author of Wage and Hour 

Update (Lorman 1998). She was also a regular 

lecturer for the Kentucky Cabinet for Economic 

Development. 

She was a law clerk to the Honorable Sara 

Walter Combs, Kentucky Court of Appeals 

(1994-95) after obtaining her Juris Doctor 

degree from the University of Kentucky in 

1993. She is a member of the California and 

Kentucky Bars, and is admitted to practice 

before the U.S. District Courts for both 

jurisdictions as well as the Sixth Circuit Court of 

Appeals. 

JAMES I. JACONETTE was born in San Diego, 

California in 1967. Mr. Jaconette is one of 

three partners responsible for the day-to-day 

prosecution of In re Enron Corp. Sec. Litig. (S.D. 

Tex.) and In re Dynegy, Inc. Sec. Litig. (S.D. 

Tex.), on behalf of lead plaintiff the Regents of 

the University of California, and the large 

classes of public investors represented in those 

actions. Mr. Jaconette has litigated securities 

class actions and corporate governance/merger 

& acquisition-related actions since 1995. To 

date, cases in which Mr. Jaconette executed a 

primary litigating role, including In re Informix 

Corp. Sec. Litig. (N.D. Cal.), have resulted in 

approximately $300 million in settlements, 

judgments, or common funds that benefited 

investors. 

Mr. Jaconette attended San Diego State 

University, receiving his Bachelor of Arts 

degree with honors and distinction in 1989 

and his M.B.A. in 1992. In 1995, Mr. Jaconette 

received his Juris Doctor degree cum laude

from Hastings College of the Law, University of 

California, San Francisco. Mr. Jaconette was 

the Mortar Board Vice President from 1988-

1989, a member of the Hastings Law Journal 

from 1993-1994, and Associate Articles Editor 

for same from 1994-1995. Mr. Jaconette 

authored The Fraud-on-the-Market Theory in 

State Law Securities Fraud Suits, Hastings Law 

Journal, Volume 46, August, 1995. In 1993, Mr. 

Jaconette served as law clerk to the Honorable 

Barbara J. Gamer, and in 1994, as extern to the 

Honorable William H. Orrick, Jr., District Judge. 

In 1995, Mr. Jaconette was admitted to the 

California Bar and licensed to practice before 

the U.S. District Court, Southern District of 

California. 

TOR GRONBORG was born in Portland, Oregon 

in 1969. Mr. Gronborg received his Bachelor of 

Arts degree in 1991 from the University of 

California at Santa Barbara and was a recipient 

of an AFL-CIO history scholarship. In 1992, Mr. 

Gronborg did graduate work in international 

relations and strategic studies at the University 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 50 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 51 of 72

of Lancaster, UK on a Rotary International 

Fellowship. Mr. Gronborg received his Juris 

Doctor degree from Boalt Hall at the University 

of California at Berkeley where he was a 

member of the Moot Court Board. 

Mr. Gronborg was admitted to the California 

Bar in 1995, and in 1997 was licensed to 

practice in the courts of the Ninth Circuit and 

the Northern, Central and Southern Districts of 

California. Mr. Gronborg’s practice areas at 

Lerach Coughlin include securities litigation, 

and campaign and election law. 

THOMAS E. EGLER was born in Pittsburgh, 

Pennsylvania in 1967. Mr. Egler received his 

Bachelor of Arts degree from Northwestern 

University in 1989. Mr. Egler received his Juris 

Doctor degree in 1995 from Catholic University 

of America, Columbus School of Law, where he 

served as Associate Editor for Catholic 

University Law Review from 1994-1995. From 

1995-1997, Mr. Egler was Law Clerk to the 

Honorable Donald E. Ziegler, Chief Judge, U.S. 

District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania. 

Mr. Egler was admitted to the California Bar in 

1995 and the Pennsylvania Bar in 1996. He is 

admitted to practice before the U.S. District 

Courts for the Western District of Pennsylvania, 

the Northern, Southern and Central Districts of 

California, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the Third and Eleventh Circuits. 

PATRICK W. DANIELS is a partner of the Firm 

and the global director of business 

development for Lerach Coughlin. He received 

his Bachelor of Arts degree from the University 

of California, Berkeley, cum laude, and his Juris 

Doctor degree from the University of San 

Diego School of Law. 

Working hand in hand with the Chairman of 

the Firm, Bill Lerach, Mr. Daniels oversees the 

Firm’s client outreach and development 

programs. He advises hundreds of public and 

multi-employer pension funds, fund managers, 

insurance companies and banks around the 

world on issues related to corporate fraud in 

the U.S. securities markets and “best practices” 

in the corporate governance of publicly traded 

companies. He has represented dozens of 

institutional investors in some of the largest 

and most significant shareholder actions in the 

U.S., including Enron, WorldCom, AOL Time 

Warner, HealthSouth and Royal Dutch Shell, to 

name just a few. 

Mr. Daniels leads the Firm’s cooperative efforts 

and joint ventures with outside independent 

advisors, including former U.S. Secretary of 

State Madeleine Albright’s firm, The Albright 

Group, to provide advice and counsel to major 

investors in the U.S. markets. As part of these 

joint ventures, Mr. Daniels works very closely 

with political and financial leaders throughout 

the world to advise national and state 

government pension funds, central banks and 

fund managers in the U.S., Australia, the 

United Kingdom and the European Union. 

In the area of advancing international 

standards on human rights, Mr. Daniels was a 

lead counsel in an international coalition of 

attorneys and human rights groups who won 

an historic settlement with major U.S. clothing 

retailers and manufacturers, including The 

Gap, Ralph Lauren, Donna Karan and Calvin 

Klein, on behalf of a class of over 50,000 

predominantly female Chinese garment 

workers on the island of Saipan in an action 

seeking to hold the Saipan garment industry 

responsible for creating a system of indentured 

servitude and forced labor in the island’s 

garment factories. The coalition obtained an 

unprecedented agreement for supervision of 

working conditions in the Saipan factories by 

an independent NGO, as well as a substantial 

multi-million dollar compensation award for 

the workers. 

Mr. Daniels is based in the Firm’s headquarters 

in San Diego but he is also a managing partner 

of the Firm's Manhattan office. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 51 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 52 of 72

ANDREW J. BROWN was born in Northern 

California in 1966. He received his Bachelor of 

Arts degree from the University of Chicago in 

1988 and received his Juris Doctor degree from 

the University of California, Hastings College 

of Law in 1992. Upon passing the Bar, Mr. 

Brown worked as a trial lawyer for the San 

Diego County Public Defender’s Office. In 

1997, he opened his own firm in San Diego, 

representing consumers and insureds in 

lawsuits against major insurance companies. 

His current practice focuses on representing 

consumers and shareholders in class action 

litigation against companies nationwide. 

As a partner of Lerach Coughlin, Mr. Brown 

continues to change the way corporate 

America does business. He prosecutes 

complex securities fraud and shareholder 

derivative actions, resulting in multi-million 

dollar recoveries to shareholders and 

precedent-setting changes in corporate 

practices. Examples include: In re 

Unumprovident Corp. Sec. Litig., 396 F. Supp. 

2d 858 (E.D. Tenn 2005); Does I, et al. v. The 

Gap, Inc., et al., Case No. 010031 (D. N. 

Mariana Islands); Arlia v. Blankenship, 234 F. 

Supp. 2d 606 (S.D. W.Va. 2002); and In re 

FirstEnergy Corp. Sec. Litig., 316 F. Supp. 2d 

581 (N.D. Ohio 2004).

Mr. Brown is admitted to the Bars of California 

and the U.S. District Courts for all Districts in 

California. 

CHRISTOPHER BURKE earned his Juris Doctor 

degree from the University of Wisconsin in 

1993 and his Ph.D. in 1996. His practice areas 

include antitrust and consumer protection. He 

has been part of the trial teams that 

successfully prosecuted the In re Disposable 

Contact Lens Antitrust Litig. ($89 million) and 

Schwartz v. Visa, et al. ($800 million). 

Prior, he was an Assistant Attorney General at 

the Wisconsin Department of Justice. He has 

lectured on law-related topics including 

constitutional law, law and politics and civil 

rights at the State University of New York at 

Buffalo and at the University of Wisconsin. His 

book, The Appearance of Equality: The 

Supreme Court and Racial Gerrymandering

(Greenwood, 1999), examines conflicts over 

voting rights and political representation 

within the competing rhetoric of 

communitarian and liberal strategies of 

justification. 

JONATHAN M. STEIN earned his Bachelor of 

Science degree in Business Administration from 

the University of Florida, where he 

concentrated his studies in Finance. While at 

Florida, he was selected to join the honor 

society of Omicron Delta Epsilon, recognizing 

outstanding achievement in Economics. Mr. 

Stein earned his Juris Doctor degree from Nova 

Southeastern University, where he was the 

recipient of the American Jurisprudence Book 

Award in Federal Civil Procedure and served as 

Chief Justice of the Student Honor Court. 

Mr. Stein began his practice of law in Fort 

Lauderdale as a prosecutor in the State 

Attorney’s Office for the Seventeenth Judicial 

Circuit of Florida, where he handled numerous 

jury trials. Before concentrating his practice in 

class action litigation, he also practiced as a 

litigator with one of Florida’s largest law firms, 

where he concentrated on fighting insurance 

fraud. Prior to joining Lerach Coughlin, Mr. 

Stein was a partner with Geller Rudman, PLLC. 

Mr. Stein is involved in all aspects of class 

action litigation, including securities fraud, 

shareholder class and derivative actions, 

consumer fraud, products liability and 

antitrust. 

A substantial portion of Mr. Stein’s practice is 

dedicated to the representation of public 

shareholders of companies whose shares are 

acquired through management buyouts, 

leveraged buyouts, mergers, acquisitions, 

tender offers and other change-of-control 

transactions. Mr. Stein has represented clients 

in seeking to protect shareholders by insuring 

that they receive maximum compensation for 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 52 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 53 of 72

their shares and also by insuring that they 

receive all necessary information and 

disclosure concerning the transactions. He has 

been successful in restructuring many 

transactions and recovering millions of dollars 

in additional value for shareholders. 

Mr. Stein is licensed to practice law in the state 

courts of Florida, as well as in the United States 

District Courts for the Southern and Middle 

Districts of Florida and the District of Colorado. 

In addition to these courts and jurisdictions, 

Mr. Stein regularly works on cases with local 

counsel throughout the country. Mr. Stein has 

been or is a member of the Association of Trial 

Lawyers of America, the American Bar 

Association, the Palm Beach County Bar 

Association and the South Palm Beach County 

Bar Association. 

ROBERT M. ROTHMAN earned his Bachelor of 

Arts degree in Economics from the State 

University of New York at Binghamton. He 

then earned his Juris Doctor degree, with 

distinction, from Hofstra University School of 

Law. During law school, Mr. Rothman was a 

member of the Law Review and was awarded 

The Dean’s Academic Scholarship for 

completing his first year in the top one percent 

of his class. 

After law school, Mr. Rothman practiced 

commercial litigation with an international law 

firm. Having litigated cases involving many of 

the nation’s largest companies, Mr. Rothman 

has extensive experience in the areas of 

consumer protection, antitrust and investment 

fraud. Mr. Rothman also regularly tries and 

arbitrates cases. For example, he obtained a 

multi-million dollar verdict after the trial of a 

shareholders’ derivative case, as well as multimillion dollar judgments on behalf of 

defrauded investors. 

Prior to joining Lerach Coughlin, Mr. Rothman 

was a partner at Geller Rudman, PLLC, where 

he concentrated his practice on representing 

shareholders and consumers in class actions. 

Mr. Rothman is admitted to practice before 

the courts of the State of New York, as well as 

the United States District Courts for the 

Southern and Eastern Districts of New York. 

Mr. Rothman is a member of the American Bar 

Association’s Sections of Litigation and 

Antitrust Law. 

DANIEL DROSMAN is a partner with Lerach 

Coughlin. He is a former federal prosecutor 

with extensive litigation experience before 

trial and appellate courts. His practice focuses 

on securities fraud litigation and other 

complex civil litigation. Mr. Drosman is 

admitted to practice in New York and 

California and before federal courts 

throughout those states. 

Mr. Drosman is a native San Diegan who 

received his Bachelor of Arts degree in Political 

Science from Reed College in 1990, with 

honors, and was a member of Phi Beta Kappa. 

He received his Juris Doctor degree from 

Harvard Law School in 1993. Following 

graduation from law school, Mr. Drosman 

served for three years as an Assistant District 

Attorney for the Manhattan District Attorney’s 

Office. While there, Mr. Drosman served in 

both the appellate section, where he briefed 

and argued over 25 cases to the New York 

appellate courts, and in the trial section, where 

he prosecuted a wide variety of street crime. 

From 1996-1997, Mr. Drosman was an associate 

in the New York office of Weil Gotshal & 

Manges, where he concentrated his practice in 

civil litigation and white-collar criminal 

defense. 

In 1997, Mr. Drosman returned to San Diego 

and became an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the 

Southern District of California. In the Southern 

District, Mr. Drosman tried cases before the 

U.S. District Court and briefed and argued 

numerous appeals before the Ninth Circuit 

Court of Appeals. He was a member of the 

border crimes unit, where he was assigned to 

investigate and prosecute violations of the 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 53 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 54 of 72

federal narcotics and immigration laws and 

official corruption cases. During his tenure as 

an Assistant U.S. Attorney, Mr. Drosman 

received the Department of Justice Special 

Achievement Award in recognition of 

sustained superior performance of duty. 

Mr. Drosman’s practice involves representing 

defrauded investors in securities class actions, 

an area in which he has co-authored a law 

journal article. 

AZRA Z. MEHDI earned her Bachelors of Arts in 

1992 from the University of Illinois at Chicago, 

with high honors in English and German 

Literature. She was a member of the Honors 

College and spent a year at the University of 

Vienna in Austria. She received her Juris 

Doctor degree from DePaul University College 

of Law in Chicago in 1995. Upon graduation, 

Ms. Mehdi did an internship at the Austrian 

law firm of Ortner Poch & Foramitti. Ms. 

Mehdi focuses her practice on antitrust 

litigation and securities fraud litigation. 

Ms. Mehdi is admitted to practice in New York 

(1996), California (2002), before the U.S. 

District Court for the Southern and the Eastern 

Districts of New York (1997), and the U.S. 

District Court for the Northern, Central and 

Southern Districts of California (2002). She is a 

member of the American Bar Association, the 

California Bar Association and the San 

Francisco Bar Association. Ms. Mehdi is fluent 

in German and Hindi. 

KEVIN K. GREEN is a member of the firm’s 

Appellate Practice Group. He received his 

Bachelor of Arts degree in Political Economy, 

with honors and distinction, from the 

University of California at Berkeley in 1989, 

and his Juris Doctor degree from Notre Dame 

Law School in 1995. Following graduation, he 

served as a law clerk to the Honorable 

Theodore R. Boehm, Associate Justice, 

Supreme Court of Indiana, and the Honorable 

Barry T. Moskowitz, U.S. District Judge, 

Southern District of California. 

In 1999, Mr. Green entered practice on behalf 

of defrauded consumers and investors. After 

handling a wide range of appellate matters, he 

became a Certified Appellate Specialist, State 

Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization. 

Due to the national scope of the firm’s 

caseload, Mr. Green has handled appeals in 

numerous states. Illustrative decisions include: 

McKell v. Washington Mutual, Inc., 142 Cal. 

App. 4th 1457 (2006) (reversing dismissal of 

class claims against mortgage lender under 

California’s Unfair Competition Law); In re 

Guidant Shareholders Deriv. Litig., 841 N.E.2d 

571 (Ind. 2006) (adopting “demand futility” 

standard for derivative litigation and rejecting 

“universal demand” standard); Branick v. 

Downey Savings & Loan Ass’n., 39 Cal. 4th 235 

(2006) (approving leave to amend to satisfy 

Proposition 64); Hyams v. Halifax PLC, No. A1078-04T3, 2005 WL 3441230 (N.J. Super. A.D. 

Dec. 16, 2005) (reversing dismissal and 

concluding that New Jersey residents could sue 

British bank in United States); Lebrilla v. 

Farmers Group, Inc., 119 Cal. App. 4th 1070 

(2004) (reversing denial of class certification 

and ordering certification of statewide class); 

West Corp. v. Superior Court, 116 Cal. App. 4th 

1167 (2004) (upholding personal jurisdiction 

over telemarketers sued under California law); 

Robinson Helicopter Co., Inc. v. Dana Corp., 34 

Cal. 4th 979 (2004) (amicus brief on behalf of 

National Association of Shareholder and 

Consumer Attorneys); Lavie v. Procter & 

Gamble Co., 105 Cal. App. 4th 496 (2003) 

(addressing “reasonable consumer” standard 

under California law); and Ritt v. Billy Blanks 

Enters., 2003 Ohio 3645 (Ohio Ct. App. 2003) 

(reversing denial of class certification). 

In addition to briefing and arguing appeals 

and writs, Mr. Green is active in professional 

activities. He sits on the State Bar of California 

Committee on Appellate Courts, as well as the 

San Diego County Bar Association Appellate 

Court Committee. In connection with the firm’s 

consumer fraud practice, he is a member of the 

State Bar Antitrust and Unfair Competition 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 54 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 55 of 72

Law Section. He is also a longtime member of 

the American Constitution Society and the 

Federal Bar Association. 

Mr. Green is the author of The Unfair 

Competition Law After Proposition 64: The 

California Supreme Court Speaks, Journal of 

Competition (Vol. 15, No. 2, Fall/Winter 2006) 

(published by State Bar Antitrust and Unfair 

Competition Law Section). While a student, he 

authored A Vote Properly Cast? The 

Constitutionality of the National Voter 

Registration Act of 1993, 22 Journal of 

Legislation 45 (1996) (published by Notre 

Dame Law School). Admitted to the State Bar 

of California in 1995, he is also admitted to 

practice before the U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the Ninth Circuit and all federal district courts 

in California. 

JONAH H. GOLDSTEIN is a partner with Lerach 

Coughlin. Formerly, Mr. Goldstein was an 

Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern 

District of California, where he tried 13 jury 

trials (including a seven-defendant 11-week 

trial), and briefed and argued appeals before 

the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. 

In 1991, Mr. Goldstein received his Bachelor of 

Arts degree in Political Science from Duke 

University. He received his Juris Doctor degree 

from the University of Denver College of Law 

in 1995, where he was the Notes & Comments 

Editor of the University of Denver Law Review. 

Following graduation from law school, Mr. 

Goldstein served as a law clerk for the 

Honorable William H. Erickson on the Colorado 

Supreme Court. 

Mr. Goldstein is admitted to practice in 

Colorado (1995) and California (1997). 

SHAWN A. WILLIAMS earned his Bachelor of 

Arts degree in English from the State 

University of New York at Albany in 1991. He 

earned his Juris Doctor degree from the 

University of Illinois College of Law in 1995. 

Upon graduation from law school, he served as 

an Assistant District Attorney in the Manhattan 

District Attorney’s Office (1995-2000), where 

he spent four years in the trial division, 

prosecuting all levels of street crimes, and one 

year conducting white-collar fraud 

investigations. 

Mr. Williams’ practice focuses on class action 

securities fraud matters. He is admitted to 

practice in all courts of the State of New York, 

including the U.S. District Courts for the 

Southern and Eastern Districts of New York. 

Mr. Williams is also admitted to practice in all 

courts of the State of California and the United 

States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 

JOSEPH D. DALEY received his undergraduate 

degree from Jacksonville University and his 

Juris Doctor degree from the University of San 

Diego School of Law. Mr. Daley is a member of 

the firm's Appellate Practice Group, where his 

practice concentrates on federal appeals. 

Mr. Daley edited the award-winning Federal 

Bar Association Newsletter (San Diego chapter) 

in the Year 2000, and served as the Year 2000 

Chair of San Diego's Co-operative Federal 

Appellate Committees ("COFACS"). Mr. Daley 

co-authored What's Brewing in Dura v. 

Broudo? The Plaintiffs' Attorneys Review the 

Supreme Court's Opinion and Its Import for 

Securities-Fraud Litigation, 37 Loy. U. Chi. L.J. 1 

(2005), and The Nonretroactivity of the Private 

Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 25 

Sec. Regulation L.J. 60 (1997), reprinted in 3 

Sec. Reform Act Litig. Rep. 258 (1997) and 25 

RICO L. Rep. 819 (1997). 

While attending law school, Mr. Daley was a 

member of the USD Appellate Moot Court 

Board (1995-96) and received several awards 

for written and oral advocacy, including: Order 

of the Barristers, Roger J. Traynor 

Constitutional Law Moot Court Team (Best 

Advocate Award); Philip C. Jessup International 

Law Moot Court Team (United States National 

Champions, First Place Regional Team); USD 

Alumni Torts Moot Court Competition (First 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 55 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 56 of 72

Place Overall and Best Brief); the USD Jessup 

International Law Moot Court Competition 

(First Place Overall and Best Brief); and the 

American Jurisprudence Award in Professional 

Responsibility. 

Mr. Daley was admitted to the California Bar in 

1996. He is admitted to practice before the U.S. 

District Courts for the Northern, Southern, 

Eastern, and Central Districts of California, as 

well as before the Supreme Court of the 

United States, and the U.S. Court of Appeals 

for the Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, 

Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh 

Circuits. 

DOUGLAS R. BRITTON was born in Los Angeles, 

California, in 1968. Mr. Britton received his 

Bachelor of Business Administration degree 

from Washburn University in Topeka, Kansas in 

1991 and his Juris Doctor degree, cum laude, 

from Pepperdine University Law School in 

1996. Mr. Britton was admitted to the Nevada 

Bar in 1996 and to the California Bar in 1997 

and is admitted to practice in all of the state 

courts in California, as well as the U.S. District 

Courts for the Northern, Southern, Eastern, 

and Central Districts of California. Mr. Britton 

has been litigating securities class action 

lawsuits since his admission to the Bar in 1996. 

ELLEN A. GUSIKOFF STEWART was born in New 

York, New York in 1964. She received her 

Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics from 

Muhlenberg College in 1986 and her Juris 

Doctor degree from Case Western Reserve 

University in 1989. Mrs. Stewart was admitted 

to the California Bar in 1989, and is admitted 

to practice before all federal courts in 

California, the Sixth and Ninth Circuit Courts of 

Appeals and the Western District of Michigan. 

Mrs. Stewart currently practices in the firm’s 

settlement department, negotiating and 

documenting the firm’s complex securities, 

merger and consumer privacy class and 

derivative actions. Notably, these settlements 

include: In re Vesta Ins. Group, Inc. Sec. Litig., 

(N.D. Ala. 2002) ($78 million recovery, to date); 

In re Prison Realty Sec. Litig., (M.D. Tenn. 2001) 

(over $140 million in cash and stock); Stanley v. 

Safeskin Corp., (S.D. Ca. 2003) ($55 million 

recovery); and In re Wisconsin Energy 

Derivative Litig., (Milwaukee County Circuit 

Court). 

A. RICK ATWOOD, JR. prosecutes securities class 

actions, merger-related class actions, and 

shareholder derivative suits at both the trial 

and appellate levels. He has successfully 

represented shareholders in federal and state 

courts in numerous jurisdictions, including 

Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, 

Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, New York, New 

Jersey, Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, South 

Dakota, Texas, Tennessee, Utah, Washington 

and Washington, D.C. 

Mr. Atwood was born in Nashville, Tennessee 

in 1965. In 1987, he received a Bachelor of 

Arts degree with honors in Political Science 

from the University of Tennessee at Knoxville. 

He received a Bachelor of Arts degree, with 

great distinction, in Philosophy from the 

Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in Leuven, 

Belgium in 1988. He received his Juris Doctor 

degree in 1991 from Vanderbilt University Law 

School, where he served as Authorities Editor 

on the Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational 

Law. 

Mr. Atwood was admitted to the California Bar 

in 1991 and is licensed to practice before the 

United States District Courts for the Southern, 

Central and Northern Districts of California. 

Previously, Mr. Atwood was an associate in the 

Los Angeles office of Brobeck Phleger & 

Harrison LLP. 

JONATHAN E. BEHAR was born in Los Angeles in 

1968. In 1991, Mr. Behar received his Bachelor 

of Arts degree in English Literature from the 

University of California at Santa Barbara, with 

high honors, and his Juris Doctor degree from 

the University of San Diego School of Law in 

1994. He is admitted to the State Bar of 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 56 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 57 of 72

California (1994) and the Southern and Central 

Districts of California (1998 and 2000, 

respectively). 

As a partner at Lerach Coughlin, Mr. Behar 

currently practices in the areas of securities, 

environmental and consumer litigation. Mr. 

Behar was actively involved in the prosecution 

of two of California’s seminal tobacco cases, 

Mangini v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, 

the “Joe Camel” case, as well as Cordova v. 

Liggett Group, Inc., et al., which alleged a 40-

year conspiracy by the United States tobacco 

manufacturers. 

AMBER L. ECK graduated from Pepperdine 

University, magna cum laude, with a Bachelor 

of Arts degree in 1990. Upon graduation, she 

worked for two years at a Los Angeles legal 

newspaper, the Metropolitan News-Enterprise. 

Ms. Eck then attended Boston University 

School of Law, graduating magna cum laude in 

1995. At Boston University, Ms. Eck was a 

member of the Giles Sutherland Rich 

Intellectual Property Moot Court Team which 

received honors for Best Brief in the Northeast 

Region. In addition, she served as Case and 

Note Editor for the Boston University 

International Law Journal, and Chapter Justice 

for Phi Alpha Delta. 

Ms. Eck’s practice focuses on the prosecution 

of securities class actions and shareholder 

derivative suits. In addition, Ms. Eck received 

the Wiley W. Manuel Pro Bono Service Award 

in 1999 and the Distinguished Service Award in 

2002 from the County of San Diego for pro 

bono service. Ms. Eck is a member of the 

California (1995) and Nevada (1996) Bars, and 

is admitted to practice before the United 

States District Courts for all districts in both 

jurisdictions. She served on the Board of 

Directors for the Barristers Club of San Diego 

(1996-1997) and is a member of the American 

Inns of Court, Enright Chapter. 

DENNIS J. HERMAN is a 1992 graduate of 

Stanford Law School, where he received the 

Order of the Coif and the Urban A. Sontheimer 

Award for graduating second in his class. 

Mr. Herman concentrates his practice in 

securities class action litigation on behalf of 

defrauded investors. Mr. Herman is actively 

involved in the firm’s ongoing prosecution of 

securities fraud class actions, including those 

now pending against VeriSign Corp. and The 

Coca-Cola Company, Inc. He has also 

participated in the successful prosecution of 

numerous other securities fraud claims that 

have resulted in substantial recoveries for 

investors, including actions filed against: 

Northwestern Corp. (recovery in excess of 

$40 million); Specialty Laboratories, Inc. 

($12 million recovery); Electro-Scientific 

Industries, Inc. ($9 million); and Commtouch 

Software, Inc. ($15 million recovery). 

Mr. Herman also concluded the successful 

representation of the estate of a bankrupt 

company in lawsuits against its former officers 

and outside auditor seeking recovery for 

actions that deepened the company’s 

insolvency before it went bankrupt. 

Previously, Mr. Herman practiced for 10 years 

in Denver, CO, where he had a general 

commercial litigation practice and litigated 

many cases involving fraud and other tort 

claims, as well as a wide variety of cases 

involving contract claims, land use disputes, 

environmental issues, inter-governmental 

disputes, voting rights, and intellectual 

property disputes. Mr. Herman is admitted to 

practice in both California and Colorado, and is 

a member of the bar of the United States 

Courts of Appeals for the Fifth, Eighth and 

Tenth Circuits as well as the bars of the United 

States District Courts for Colorado, and the 

Northern, Central and Southern Districts of 

California. Prior to attending law school, Mr. 

Herman was an investigative reporter and 

editor for a number of newspapers in 

California and Connecticut. 

NANCY M. JUDA concentrates her practice in 

employee benefits law and works in the firm’s 

Institutional Investors Department. Ms. Juda 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 57 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 58 of 72

received her Juris Doctor degree from 

American University in 1992 and her 

undergraduate degree from St. Lawrence 

University in 1988. 

Prior to joining Lerach Coughlin, Ms. Juda was 

employed by the United Mine Workers of 

America Health & Retirement Funds, where she 

began her practice in the area of employee 

benefits law. Ms. Juda was also associated 

with union-side labor law firms in Washington, 

D.C., where she represented the trustees of 

Taft-Hartley pension and welfare funds on 

qualification, compliance, fiduciary and 

transactional issues under ERISA and the 

Internal Revenue Code. 

Using her extensive experience representing 

union pension funds, Ms. Juda advises TaftHartley fund trustees regarding their options 

for seeking redress for losses due to securities 

fraud. Ms. Juda currently advises trustees of 

funds providing benefits for members of 

unions affiliated with the Building and 

Construction Trades Department of the AFLCIO, including funds sponsored by the 

Operative Plasterers and Cement Masons 

International Association of America and 

Canada, International Union of Painters and 

Allied Trades, United Union of Roofers, 

Waterproofers and Allied Workers and 

International Union of Elevator Constructors. 

Ms. Juda also represents workers in ERISA class 

actions involving breach of fiduciary duty 

claims against corporate plan sponsors and 

fiduciaries. 

Ms. Juda is licensed to practice in Maryland 

(1992) and the District of Columbia (1995). She 

is a member of the National Coordinating 

Committee for Multi-Employer Plans, the 

International Foundation of Employee Benefit 

Plans, the Employee Benefits Committee of the 

American Bar Association’s Section of Labor 

and Employment Law and the AFL-CIO 

Lawyers’ Coordinating Committee. 

Ms. Juda is the Editor of the firm’s quarterly 

newsletter, Taking Action – Fighting Corporate 

Corruption. 

JEFFREY D. LIGHT was born in Los Angeles, 

California in 1964. He received his Bachelor of 

Science degree from San Diego State University 

in 1987 and his Juris Doctor degree from the 

University of San Diego in 1991, cum laude. 

Mr. Light was the recipient of the American 

Jurisprudence Award in Constitutional Law. 

He served as law clerk to the Honorable Louise 

DeCarl Adler, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, and the 

Honorable James Meyers, Chief Judge, 

Southern District of California, United States 

Bankruptcy Court. Mr. Light was admitted to 

the California Bar in 1992 and is admitted to 

practice before all federal courts in California. 

Mr. Light is also a member of the San Diego 

County Bar Association and is on the Attorney 

Fee Arbitration Panel. Mr. Light currently 

practices in the firm’s settlement department, 

negotiating, documenting and obtaining court 

approval of the firm’s complex securities, 

merger, consumer and derivative actions. 

These settlements include: In re AT&T Corp. 

Sec. Litig. (D.N.J. 2005) ($100 million recovery); 

In re Infonet Corp. Sec. Litig. (C.D. Cal. 2004) 

($18 million recovery); and In re Ashworth, Inc. 

Sec. Litig. (S.D. Cal. 2004) ($15.25 million 

recovery). 

CHRISTOPHER P. SEEFER received his Bachelor of 

Arts degree from the University of California, 

Berkeley in 1984 and his Master of Business 

Administration degree from the University of 

California, Berkeley in 1990. He received his 

Juris Doctor degree from the Golden Gate 

University School of Law in 1998. Mr. Seefer 

was a Fraud Investigator with the Office of 

Thrift Supervision, Department of the Treasury 

(1990-1999) and a field examiner with the 

Office of Thrift Supervision (1986-1990). Mr. 

Seefer is a member of the Bar of California, the 

United States District Court for the Northern 

District of California and the United States 

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 58 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 59 of 72

X. JAY ALVAREZ graduated from the University 

of California, Berkeley, with a Bachelor of Arts 

degree in Political Science in 1984. He earned 

his Juris Doctor degree from the University of 

California, Berkeley, Boalt Hall, in 1987 and 

entered private practice in San Diego, 

California that same year. 

Mr. Alvarez served as an Assistant U.S. 

Attorney for the Southern District of California 

from 1991-2003. As an Assistant U.S. Attorney, 

Mr. Alvarez obtained extensive trial 

experience, including the prosecution of bank 

fraud, money laundering and complex 

narcotics conspiracy cases. During his tenure as 

an Assistant U.S. Attorney, Mr. Alvarez also 

briefed and argued numerous appeals before 

the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. 

At Lerach Coughlin, Mr. Alvarez’s practice 

areas include securities fraud litigation and 

other complex litigation.

ANNE L. BOX graduated from the University of 

Tulsa with a Bachelor of Science degree in 

Economics in 1985 and received a Juris Doctor 

degree in 1988. While in law school, she was 

the Articles Editor for the Energy Law Journal 

and won the Scribes Award for her article 

Mississippi’s Ratable-Take Rule Preempted: 

Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Corp. v State Oil 

and Gas Bd., 7 Energy L.J. 361 (1986). From 

1988-1991, she was an Associate Attorney in 

the Energy Section of Jenkins & Gilchrist, P.C. 

in Dallas, Texas. In 1991, she became an 

Assistant District Attorney in Tarrant County, 

Texas where she tried over 80 felony cases to 

verdict. Ms. Box was elevated to Chief 

Prosecutor in 1998, and along with supervising 

felony attorneys, her responsibilities included 

running the day-to-day operations of a felony 

district court. Ms. Box was admitted to the 

State Bar of Texas in 1989 and the State Bar of 

California in 2003. Her practice at Lerach 

Coughlin focuses on securities fraud. 

WILLIAM J. DOYLE II earned his Bachelor of 

Arts degree in 1993 from the University of San 

Diego, majoring in Business Economics. Mr. 

Doyle earned his Juris Doctor degree in 1997 

from California Western School of Law. 

Previously, Mr. Doyle was a civil litigator with 

the firm of Wingert Grebing Brubaker & Ryan, 

LLP in San Diego. 

Mr. Doyle’s practice focuses on securities fraud, 

antitrust and financial services class actions. 

Mr. Doyle is admitted to practice before the 

U.S. Court of Appeal for the First Circuit, the 

U.S. District Courts for the Southern, Central 

and Northern Districts of California, the U.S. 

District Court for the District of Colorado and 

all California State courts. He is a member of 

the American Bar Association, the State Bar of 

California, the Association of Trial Lawyers of 

America, and the Association of Business Trial 

Lawyers. 

VALERIE L. MCLAUGHLIN was born in 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in 1973. Ms. 

McLaughlin has litigated numerous cases 

against public companies in federal and state 

courts throughout the country that have 

resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars in 

recoveries for defrauded investors. Many of 

these cases also resulted in these companies 

instituting major corporate governance 

changes. Ms. McLaughlin is currently litigating 

several multi-billion dollar accounting fraud 

cases, including HealthSouth and Oracle. 

Before practicing in the plaintiffs’ bar, Ms. 

McLaughlin worked at a well-respected San 

Diego defense firm litigating complex cases. 

Ms. McLaughlin received her Bachelor of Arts 

degree in Political Science from California 

State University San Marcos in 1994 and her 

Juris Doctor degree from California Western 

School of Law in 1997. In 1997, Ms. 

McLaughlin was admitted to the California Bar 

and is licensed to practice in all California State 

Courts as well as all U.S. District Courts in 

California. She is a member of the California 

Bar Association, San Diego County Bar 

Association, American Bar Association, and the 

San Diego Lawyers Club. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 59 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 60 of 72

MATTHEW MONTGOMERY was born in Pontiac, 

Michigan in 1970. Mr. Montgomery received 

his Bachelor of Arts degree from Stanford 

University in 1992 and his Juris Doctor degree 

from the University of California, Berkeley in 

1995. Mr. Montgomery was admitted to the 

California Bar in 1995 and is licensed to 

practice in the courts of the Ninth and Sixth 

Circuits, as well as the Northern, Central and 

Southern Districts of California. Mr. 

Montgomery practices in the firm’s securities 

litigation group. 

STEPHEN J. ODDO graduated from Santa Clara 

University with a Bachelor of Arts degree in 

English with a Spanish minor. He received his 

Master of Arts degree from the Medill School 

of Journalism at Northwestern University 

before receiving his Juris Doctor degree from 

the University of San Diego. Mr. Oddo was 

admitted to the California Bar in 1994. He 

specializes in securities class actions involving 

mergers and acquisitions. 

DAVID A. ROSENFELD earned his Bachelor of 

Science degree in Accounting from Yeshiva 

University’s Sy Syms School of Business and his 

Juris Doctor degree from the Benjamin N. 

Cardozo School of Law. 

While in law school, Mr. Rosenfeld interned in 

the chambers of the Honorable Frederic Block 

in the United State District Court for the 

Eastern District of New York. 

Mr. Rosenfeld was responsible for initiating 

some of the largest and most significant 

securities and shareholder class action lawsuits 

since the passage of the Private Securities 

Litigation Reform Act of 1995, and developed 

an expertise in the area of lead plaintiff 

jurisprudence. 

In 2003, Mr. Rosenfeld joined Samuel Rudman 

in opening the New York office of Geller 

Rudman, PLLC and assisted Mr. Rudman in 

raising the firm’s profile as one of the nation’s 

“most active” plaintiffs’ firms. 

At Lerach Coughlin, Mr. Rosenfeld continues to 

concentrate his practice on the investigation 

and initiation of securities and consumer fraud 

class actions. Mr. Rosenfeld also advises the 

firm’s institutional and individual investor 

clients on issues related to their involvement in 

securities class action lawsuits. 

Mr. Rosenfeld is admitted to practice in the 

States of New York and New Jersey and in the 

United States District Courts for the Southern 

District of New York, Eastern District of New 

York, District of New Jersey, District of 

Colorado, Eastern District of Wisconsin and the 

Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas. 

SCOTT SAHAM was born in Detroit, Michigan in 

1970. Mr. Saham received a Bachelor of Arts 

degree in 1992 from the University of 

Michigan. Mr. Saham received a Juris Doctor 

degree from the University of Michigan Law 

School in 1995. 

Mr. Saham is licensed to practice law in both 

California and Michigan. Mr. Saham’s practice 

areas include securities and other complex 

litigation. Prior to join Lerach Coughlin, Mr. 

Saham served as an Assistant United States 

Attorney in the Southern District of California. 

EX KANO SAMS II was born in Los Angeles in 

1971. In 1993, Mr. Sams received his Bachelor 

of Arts degree in Political Science from the 

University of California, Los Angeles. In 1996, 

Mr. Sams received his Juris Doctor degree from 

the University of California, Los Angeles, 

where he was a member of the UCLA Law 

Review. 

After graduating from UCLA Law School, Mr. 

Sams represented plaintiffs in complex and 

class action civil rights litigation, including 

employment, housing and sexual harassment 

discrimination. Mr. Sams was actively involved 

in a number of actions against the tobacco 

industry and participated in a trial against 

numerous tobacco companies. Mr. Sams also 

participated in California litigation against the 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 60 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 61 of 72

tobacco industry which resulted in billions of 

dollars in recovery to cities and counties in 

California. 

As a partner of Lerach Coughlin, Mr. Sams 

continues to represent plaintiffs in securities, 

consumer and environmental litigation. Mr. 

Sams is a member of the State Bar of California 

and has been admitted to the United States 

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the 

United States District Courts for Northern, 

Southern, Eastern and Central Districts of 

California and the District of Colorado. 

SUSAN GOSS TAYLOR graduated from the 

Pennsylvania State University in 1994 with a 

double major in International Politics and 

Russian. She earned her Juris Doctor degree 

from The Catholic University of America, 

Columbus School of Law in 1997. While in law 

school she was a member of the Moot Court 

team, and was a student attorney in the D.C. 

Law Students in Court Program, where she was 

responsible for defending juveniles and 

indigent adults in criminal proceedings. Ms. 

Taylor was admitted to the Bar in California in 

1997. 

Ms. Taylor served as a Special Assistant United 

States Attorney for the Southern District of 

California where she obtained considerable 

trial experience prosecuting drug smuggling 

and alien smuggling cases. 

Ms. Taylor entered private practice in 1999, 

initially focusing on antitrust and consumer 

fraud class actions. Ms. Taylor has served as 

counsel on the Microsoft antitrust litigation 

and the DRAM antitrust litigation, as well as 

on a number of consumer actions alleging 

false and misleading advertising and unfair 

business practices against major corporations 

such as General Motors, Saturn, Mercedes-Benz 

USA, LLC, BMG Direct Marketing, Inc., and 

Ameriquest Mortgage Company. As a partner 

with Lerach Coughlin, Ms. Taylor has been 

responsible for prosecuting securities fraud 

class actions and has obtained recoveries for 

investors in litigation involving WorldCom and 

Qwest. 

Ms. Taylor is a member of the California Bar 

Association, the San Diego County Bar 

Association, the American Bar Association, 

Consumer Attorneys of San Diego, and 

Lawyer’s Club. She also is an active member of 

the Junior League of San Diego. 

DEBRA J. WYMAN was born in La Mesa, 

California in 1967. Ms. Wyman specializes in 

securities litigation and has litigated numerous 

cases against public companies in the state and 

federal courts which resulted in hundreds of 

millions of dollars in recoveries to investors. In 

late 2004, Ms. Wyman was a member of the 

trial team in In re AT&T Corp. Sec. Litig., which 

was tried in the District Court in New Jersey, 

and which settled after two weeks of trial for 

$100 million. Currently, Ms. Wyman is 

litigating the complicated accounting fraud 

matter against HealthSouth Corporation, one 

of the largest and long-running corporate 

frauds in history. 

Ms. Wyman received her Bachelor of Arts 

degree from the University of California, Irvine 

in 1990 and her Juris Doctor degree from the 

University of San Diego School of Law in 1997. 

Ms. Wyman was admitted to the California Bar 

in 1997 and is licensed to practice before all 

the California State Courts, as well as all the 

U.S. District Courts in California and the 

Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. She is a 

member of the California Bar Association and 

the San Diego County Bar Association. 

JOHN J. RICE graduated cum laude from 

Harvard University with a Bachelor of Arts 

degree in History, and received his Juris Doctor 

degree from the University of Virginia. After 

law school, he was a judicial law clerk to the 

late U.S. District Court Judge Judith N. Keep of 

the Southern District of California. 

Mr. Rice brings significant trial experience to 

Lerach Coughlin, where he is a member of the 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 61 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 62 of 72

firm’s litigation team. Prior to joining the firm, 

he prosecuted a wide array of cases, ranging 

from complex white-collar to murder to 

Russian organized crime cases. Most recently, 

he worked as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the 

Southern District of California, specializing in 

public corruption cases. He has also served 

stints prosecuting organized crime for the U.S. 

Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of 

New York and was nominated to serve as 

Branch Chief in the Northern Mariana Islands, 

prosecuting public corruption and white-collar 

criminal cases. 

Mr. Rice has been praised for his diligent 

efforts to combat graft, corruption and 

collusion among public and private officials in 

San Diego. In 2005, he spearheaded 

prosecution teams on behalf of the U.S. 

Attorney’s Office that successfully convicted 

the acting San Diego Mayor and a well-known 

councilman on federal corruption charges. In 

May 2006, Mr. Rice again exposed and 

prosecuted corrupt public figures, this time 

unraveling an intricate plot between a former 

college president and a political consultant 

who were misappropriating public funds for 

campaign finance. 

Mr. Rice also served as Assistant U.S. Attorney 

in the Southern District of New York and 

Assistant Attorney General in the Republic of 

Palau. He was the Branch Chief at the U.S. 

Attorney’s office for the Commonwealth of 

the Northern Mariana Islands. Most recently, 

Mr. Rice was Assistant U.S. Attorney at the U.S. 

Attorney’s office in San Diego, California. 

Mr. Rice serves as an adjunct professor at the 

University of San Diego School of Law and 

Western State University School of Law. He is 

also an Instructor at the Department of Justice 

Office of Legal Education and a frequent 

lecturer of trial advocacy and advanced trial 

advocacy. 

CHRIS COLLINS earned his Bachelor of Arts 

degree in History from Sonoma State 

University in 1988 and his Juris Doctor degree 

from Thomas Jefferson School of Law. His 

practice areas include antitrust and consumer 

protection. Mr. Collins first joined the firm in 

1994 and was a part of the trial teams that 

successfully prosecuted the tobacco industry. 

Mr. Collins left the firm and served as a Deputy 

District Attorney for the Imperial County 

where he was in charge of the Domestic 

Violence Unit. Mr. Collins is currently counsel 

on the California Energy Manipulation 

antitrust litigation, the Memberworks upsell 

litigation, as well as a number of consumer 

actions alleging false and misleading 

advertising and unfair business practices 

against major corporations. 

Mr. Collins is a member of the American Bar 

Association, the Federal Bar Association, the 

California Bar Association and the Consumer 

Attorneys of California and San Diego. 

JAMES D. MCNAMARA earned his Juris 

Doctor degree from the University of San 

Diego School of Law in 1997 and a Bachelor of 

Arts degree in Political Science from the 

University of San Diego in 1994. Mr. McNamara 

was admitted to practice in California in 1997. 

Mr. McNamara’s practice focuses primarily on 

consumer protection, with an emphasis on 

actions brought by policyholders against life, 

auto and other insurers for deceptive sales 

practices. He has also been engaged in 

consumer fraud and antitrust matters in the 

mortgage lending, telecommunications and 

insurance brokerage industries. 

He is a member of the San Diego County Bar 

Association, American Bar Association, the 

State Bar of California, and the Association of 

Trial Lawyers of America. 

DAVID W. MITCHELL was born in Wilmington, 

Delaware in 1973. He graduated from the 

University of Richmond in 1995 with a Bachelor 

of Arts degree in both Economics and History 

and thereafter received his Juris Doctor degree 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 62 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 63 of 72

from the University of San Diego School of Law 

in 1998. 

Prior to joining the firm, Mr. Mitchell served as 

an Assistant United States Attorney in the 

Southern District of California. While at the 

U.S. Attorney's Office, he worked on cases 

involving narcotics trafficking, bank robbery, 

murder-for-hire, alien smuggling, and 

terrorism. He tried nearly 20 cases to verdict 

before federal criminal juries and made 

numerous appellate arguments before the 

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. 

Mr. Mitchell's practice focuses on securities 

fraud and antitrust litigation. He is a member 

of the State Bar of California and is admitted 

to practice before the Southern and Central 

Districts of California and the Ninth Circuit 

Court of Appeals. 

WILLOW E. RADCLIFFE earned her Bachelor 

of Arts degree from the University of 

California at Los Angeles in 1994 and her Juris 

Doctor degree from the Seton Hall University 

School of Law, cum laude, in 1998. Ms. 

Radcliffe clerked for the Honorable MariaElena James, Magistrate Judge for the United 

States District Court for the Northern District 

of California, prior to joining the firm. 

Ms. Radcliffe's practice at Lerach Coughlin 

focuses on the prosecution of securities class 

actions and derivative actions in state and 

federal court. She is a member of the 

California bar, and is admitted to practice 

before the United States District Court for the 

Northern District of California. 

DOUGLAS WILENS earned his Bachelor of 

Science degree in Accounting from the 

University of Florida. He graduated with 

honors from the University of Florida College 

of Law where he received a “Book Award” for 

the highest grade in his class for Legal 

Drafting. Mr. Wilens is licensed to practice law 

in the state courts of Florida and New York, as 

well as in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals 

and the United States District Courts for the 

Southern and Eastern Districts of New York 

and the Southern, Middle and Northern 

Districts of Florida. 

Prior to joining Lerach Coughlin, Mr. Wilens 

was an associate in the Boca Raton office of 

Cauley Geller where he was involved in all 

aspects of class litigation, including the 

prosecution of claims of securities fraud, claims 

of breach of fiduciary duty related to changeof-control transactions, and consumer 

protection actions. Prior to joining Cauley 

Geller, Mr. Wilens was an associate in the New 

York office of Proskauer Rose LLP, a nationally 

recognized firm, where he litigated complex 

actions on behalf of numerous professional 

sports leagues, including the National 

Basketball Association, the National Hockey 

League and Major League Soccer. 

Mr. Wilens is or has been a member of the 

American Bar Association, New York City Bar 

Association, Broward County Bar Association, 

Sports Lawyers Association and the Florida Bar 

Section on Entertainment and Sports Law. Mr. 

Wilens has also served as an adjunct professor 

at Florida Atlantic University and Nova 

Southeastern University where he has taught 

undergraduate and graduate level Business 

Law classes. 

OF COUNSEL

ALBERT H. MEYERHOFF has concentrated his 

practice for more than 30 years in labor, civil 

rights and environmental law. After 

graduating from Cornell Law School in 1972, 

he joined California Rural Legal Assistance 

representing farm workers and the rural poor. 

These efforts included the landmark case of 

CAAP v. Regents of the University of California, 

challenging the use of public research funds to 

promote agricultural mechanization. He also 

litigated a host of state and federal civil rights 

cases involving racial discrimination in 

employment, voting and public education, 

including Maria P. v. Riles, invalidating a 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 63 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 64 of 72

California statute excluding undocumented 

children from California schools. In 1981, Mr. 

Meyerhoff joined the Natural Resources 

Defense Council (NRDC), a national 

environmental organization, as Director of 

their Public Health Program. His concentration 

is in litigation concerning toxic substances and 

occupational health has and brought successful 

challenges to the continued use of cancercausing pesticides (Les v. Reilly), the exclusion 

of women of “child-bearing age” from the 

workplace (Love v. Thomas), and the California 

Governor’s failure to comply with Proposition 

65, an anti-toxics law (AFL-CIO v. Deukmejian). 

During his 17 years with NRDC, Mr. Meyerhoff 

testified more than 50 times before the U.S. 

Senate and House of Representatives. 

Mr. Meyerhoff has authored numerous articles 

for scholarly and general publications, 

including the Stanford Law Review, EPA 

Journal, Environmental Law Quarterly, The 

New York Times, The Washington Post and Los 

Angeles Times. He has appeared regularly on 

such programs as CBS News 60 Minutes, ABC 

20/20, NBC Dateline, Good Morning America, 

The Today Show and The NewsHour with Jim 

Lehrer, and has been an invited speaker at the 

Harvard Business School, the National 

Academy of Sciences, the American Academy 

of Sciences and the AFL-CIO. 

Since 1998, Mr. Meyerhoff has been lead 

counsel in several labor and environmental 

cases, including UNITE v. The Gap, contesting 

the sale of garments manufactured under 

sweatshop conditions in the Commonwealth of 

the Mariana Islands, and Public Citizen v. US 

DOT, challenging cross-border trucking from 

Mexico to conform to NAFTA but in violation 

of U.S. environmental laws. 

Mr. Meyerhoff was selected as “Trial Lawyer of 

the Year” by Trial Lawyers for Public Justice 

and for a lifetime achievement award from the 

ACLU.

LEONARD B. SIMON is admitted to practice in 

California, New York, and the District of 

Columbia. 

Mr. Simon’s practice has been devoted heavily 

to litigation in the federal courts, including 

both the prosecution and the defense of major 

class actions and other complex litigation in 

the securities and antitrust fields. He has 

argued more than 20 appeals in the federal 

and state courts of appeal. He has also 

represented large, publicly traded 

corporations. 

Mr. Simon served as plaintiffs’ co-lead counsel 

in In re American Cont’l Corp./Lincoln Sav. & 

Loan Sec. Litig., MDL No. 834 (D. Ariz.) (settled 

for $240 million), and In re NASDAQ MarketMakers Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1023 

(S.D.N.Y.) (settled for more than one billion 

dollars). He is currently in a leadership 

position in the private Microsoft Antitrust 

Litig., and in the California Utilities Antitrust 

Litig. He was centrally involved in the 

prosecution of In re Wash. Public Power Supply 

Sys. Sec. Litig., MDL No. 551 (D. Ariz.), the 

largest securities class action ever litigated. 

Mr. Simon is an Adjunct Professor of Law at 

Duke University, the University of San Diego, 

and the University of Southern California Law 

Schools. He has lectured extensively on 

securities, antitrust and complex litigation on 

programs sponsored by the ABA Section of 

Litigation, the Practising Law Institute, and 

ALI-ABA, and at UCLA Law School, University 

of San Diego Law School and Stanford Business 

School. He is an Editor of California Federal 

Court Practice, and has authored a law review 

article on the Private Securities Litigation 

Reform Act of 1995. 

Mr. Simon received his Bachelor of Arts degree 

from Union College in 1970 and his Juris 

Doctor degree from Duke University School of 

Law, Order of the Coif and with distinction, in 

1973. He served as law clerk to the Honorable 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 64 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 65 of 72

Irving Hill, U.S. District Judge for the Central 

District of California, in 1973-74. 

BYRON S. GEORGIOU received his Bachelor of 

Arts degree, with great distinction, with 

honors in Social Thought and Institutions, in 

1970 from Stanford University, attending on 

an Alfred P. Sloan full academic scholarship. 

After a year co-founding and teaching 7th and 

8th graders at the Mariposa School, which has 

thrived for 35 years as an alternative primary 

through middle school in rural Mendocino 

County, he attended Harvard Law School, 

graduating magna cum laude in 1974. He was 

admitted to the California Bar in 1974 and 

served for one year as law clerk to the 

Honorable Robert F. Peckham, Chief Judge of 

the U.S. District Court for the Northern District 

of California. He is a member of the Bar of the 

U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals 

for the Ninth Circuit and the U.S. District 

Courts for the Northern, Eastern, Central and 

Southern Districts of California. 

Mr. Georgiou served from 1975-1980 in various 

capacities with the California Agricultural 

Labor Relations Board, defending the 

constitutionality of the law up through the 

U.S. and California Supreme Courts and 

prosecuting unfair labor practice cases 

enforcing the collective bargaining rights of 

farmworkers, who had been excluded from 

coverage under the National Labor Relations 

Act. 

From 1980-1983, Mr. Georgiou served as Legal 

Affairs Secretary to California Governor 

Edmund G. Brown Jr., responsible for litigation 

by and against the Governor, judicial 

appointments, liaison with the Attorney 

General, Judiciary and State Bar, legal advice 

to the Governor and members of his Cabinet, 

and exercise of the Governor’s powers of 

extradition and clemency. 

From 1983-1994, he was Managing Partner and 

co-founder of the San Diego law firm of 

Georgiou, Tosdal, Levine & Smith, engaged in 

a general civil practice, with emphasis on 

litigation, appearances before executive and 

legislative governmental bodies and 

representation of labor organizations and 

their members, including contract negotiations 

and enforcement for many California public 

and private sector unions. 

In 1994, he co-founded and served as President 

of American Partners Capital Group, 

concentrating in serving the needs of 

institutional investors through capital 

formation programs in a variety of alternative 

asset categories. 

In 1981 Mr. Georgiou was honored as Public 

Official of the Year by the California Trial 

Lawyers Association and served as Chair of the 

Governor’s Task Force on Alcohol, Drugs and 

Traffic Safety, one of the nation’s first vehicles 

for enacting tough drunk driver legislation 

sponsored by the Mothers Against Drunk 

Driving (MADD). 

Mr. Georgiou serves as the primary liaison with 

a number of the firm’s principal institutional 

clients and is actively involved in the historic 

litigations seeking recoveries for defrauded 

investors in Enron, Dynegy, AOL Time Warner

and WorldCom. 

SANDRA STEIN received her Bachelor of Science 

degree from the University of Pennsylvania 

and a Juris Doctor degree from Temple 

University Law School. She is a member of the 

Pennsylvania and Washington, D.C. Bars. Ms. 

Stein concentrates her practice in securities 

class action litigation, legislative law, and 

antitrust litigation. She served as counsel to 

U.S. Senator Arlen Specter and to the U.S. 

Institute for Law and Economic Policy, a think 

tank which develops policy positions on 

selected issues involving the administration of 

justice within the American Legal System. In 

addition, Ms. Stein served on the Board of 

Advisors of the Annenberg Institute of Public 

Service at the University of Pennsylvania. Ms. 

Stein was the recipient of the National 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 65 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 66 of 72

Federation of Republican Women’s “Best of 

America” Award and has been honored by the 

White House, California State Senate, and 

California State Assembly for civic leadership. 

In a unique partnership with her daughter, 

Attorney Laura Stein, the Steins serve as two of 

the top asset-recovery attorneys in the firm. 

The Steins focus on maximizing profits and 

minimizing losses to shareholders due to 

corporate fraud and breaches of fiduciary 

duty. They also seek to deter future violations 

of federal and state securities laws by 

reinforcing the standards of good corporate 

governance. 

Ms. Stein has been active in a number of 

organizations, including the National 

Association of Shareholder and Consumer 

Attorneys (NASCAT), National Association of 

State Treasurers (NAST), the AFL-CIO Lawyers 

Coordinating Committee, the National 

Coordinating Committee for multi-employer 

Plans (NCCMP), and the International 

Foundation for Employer Benefit Plans (IFEBP), 

among others. 

Ms. Stein has addressed the National 

Association of Auditors, Controllers and 

Treasurers on the subject of corporate 

governance and its role as a positive force in 

future class action securities settlements. She 

has also spoken before numerous AFL-CIO 

conventions and dozens of public and multiemployer pension funds. 

ELISABETH A. BOWMAN practice areas include 

class action consumer protection and antitrust. 

In addition, Ms. Bowman oversees and assists 

in the preparation of Lerach Coughlin’s 

litigation graphics. 

Ms. Bowman assisted in the successful 

prosecution of the following trials: Long v. 

Wells Fargo Company, et al.; Yourish v. 

California Amplifier, et al.; In re Helionetics, 

Inc. Securities Litigation.; Schwartz v. Visa, et 

al.; Douglas Shooker, et. al. v. Gary Winnick, 

et.al.; and In re AT&T Corp. Securities 

Litigation. 

Ms. Bowman received her Bachelor of Fine 

Arts degree. from the University of Alaska at 

Anchorage in 1986, where she majored in Fine 

Arts and Psychology. While a student at the U 

of A, she received a grant from the Ford 

Foundation to participate in the artists in 

residency program at the Visual Arts Center, 

Alaska. Ms. Bowman received her Juris Doctor 

degree from the University of San Diego in 

1989. During the summer of 1987, she 

attended USD’s Institute on International and 

Comparative Law in Oxford, England. 

Ms. Bowman was in private practice as a 

criminal defense attorney for eight years, 

handling both trials and appeals in state and 

federal courts. Ms. Bowman is a member of 

Volunteers in Parole (“VIP”), an organization 

based on the Big Brothers’ paradigm, in which 

attorneys are matched with parolees from the 

California Youth Authority in an effort to offer 

positive mentoring. She also served on VIP's 

local and state-wide boards. 

Ms. Bowman is a member of the California Bar 

(1990), and is admitted to the Supreme Court 

of the State of California, the U.S. District 

Court for the Southern District of California, 

the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 

and the Supreme Court of the United States. 

JAMES CAPUTO has focused his practice on the 

prosecution of complex litigation involving 

securities fraud and corporate misfeasance, 

consumer actions, unfair business practices, 

contamination and toxic torts, and 

employment and labor law violations. He has 

successfully served as lead or co-lead counsel in 

numerous class and consumer action litigation 

matters, including, for example: In re S3 Sec. 

Litig., Case No. CV770003 (Cal. Super. Ct., Santa 

Clara County); Santiago v. Kia Motors Am., 

Case No. 01CC01438 (Cal. Super. Ct., Orange 

County); Case No. 0988 MJJ (N.D. Cal.); In re 

Fleming Co. Sec. Litig., Case No. 5:02-CV-178 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 66 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 67 of 72

(TJW) (E.D. Tex.); In re Capstead Mortgage 

Corp. Sec. Litig., Case No. 3:98-CV-1716 (N.D. 

Tex.); In re Valence Tech. Sec. Litig., Case No. 

C95-20459 (JW)(EAI) (N.D. Cal.); In re THQ, Inc. 

Sec. Litig., Master File No. CV-00-01783-JFW 

(C.D. Cal.); and In re ICN Pharm. Corp. Sec. 

Litig., Case No. CV-98-02433 (C.D. Cal.).

Mr. Caputo was formerly a partner at Spector 

Roseman & Kodroff. He was one of the trial 

counsels in the year-long trial of Newman v. 

Stringfellow, a toxic exposure case involving 

nearly 4,000 plaintiffs. That case ultimately 

settled for approximately $110 million. He was 

co-trial counsel in an employment law class 

action against Taco Bell, which settled for $14 

million. 

Mr. Caputo received a Bachelor of Science 

degree from the University of Pittsburgh in 

1970 and a Masters degree from the University 

of Iowa in 1975. In 1984, he received his Juris 

Doctor degree, magna cum laude, from 

California Western School of Law, where he 

served as Editor-In-Chief of the International 

Law Journal. He also clerked for Presiding 

Justice Daniel J. Kremer of the California Court 

of Appeal from 1985-1987 and to Associate 

Justice Don R. Work of the California Court of 

Appeal from 1984-1985. He has co-authored 

No Single Cause: Juvenile Delinquency and the 

Search for Effective Treatment (1985) and 

authored Comment, Equal Right of Access in 

Matters of Transboundary Pollution: Its 

Prospects in Industrial and Developing 

Countries, 14 Cal. West. Intl. L. J. 192 (1984). 

Mr. Caputo has also numerous presentations to 

various legal and professional groups 

regarding complex and class action litigation. 

He is admitted to practice in the State of 

California and the U.S. District Courts for the 

Southern, Central and Northern Districts of 

California as well as numerous other 

jurisdictions. Mr. Caputo is a member of the 

San Diego County and American Bar 

Associations, the Consumer Attorneys of 

California, and the Association of Trial Lawyers 

of America. 

MITCHELL D. GRAVO concentrates his practice in 

lobbying and government relations. He 

represents clients before the Alaska 

Congressional delegation, the Alaska 

Legislature, the Alaska State Government and 

the Municipality of Anchorage. 

Mr. Gravo attended Ohio State University as an 

undergraduate before attending the University 

of San Diego School of Law. He came to 

Alaska in 1977, served briefly as an intern with 

the Municipality of Anchorage and then 

clerked a year for Superior Court Judge J. 

Justin Ripley. After his clerkship with Judge 

Ripley, he went back to the work for the 

Municipality of Anchorage, where he first 

served as the executive assistant to the 

Municipal Manager and then as the first 

lobbyist for the then Mayor of Anchorage, 

George M. Sullivan. Mr. Gravo has been 

described as one of the "top lobbyists in the 

state" by Alaska's major daily newspaper, The 

Anchorage Daily News. 

His legislative clients include the Anchorage 

Economic Development Corporation, the 

Anchorage Convention and Visitors Bureau, 

UST Public Affairs, Inc., the International 

Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Alaska 

Seafood International, Distilled Spirits Council 

of America, RIM Architects, Anchorage Police 

Department Employees Association, Fred 

Meyer, and the Automobile Manufacturer’s 

Association. 

JACQUI E. MOTTEK received her Bachelor of 

Science degree in Government and Politics, 

cum laude, from the University of Maryland, 

College Park in 1979. Ms. Mottek obtained her 

Juris Doctor degree in 1986 from the University 

of San Francisco School of Law, where she was 

a recipient of the American Jurisprudence 

Award in Constitutional Law and a member of 

the University of San Francisco’s Law Review. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 67 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 68 of 72

Ms. Mottek was associated with the law firm 

Brobeck Phleger & Harrison from 1987-1994. 

In 1994, Ms. Mottek served as sole chair in a 

jury trial resulting in a verdict in favor of her 

clients of $1 million. In 1994, Ms. Mottek 

became a partner with the firm Lieff Cabraser 

Heimann & Bernstein, concentrating her 

practice in plaintiffs’ class actions with an 

emphasis on consumer fraud litigation and 

other complex business litigation for plaintiffs. 

She successfully prosecuted a certified class 

action on behalf of physicians who provided 

medical services to Blue Cross of California 

HMO members. She is the author of The 

Impact of Classwide Arbitration on Mandatory 

Arbitration, Vol. 1, No. 13, Class Action 

Litigation Report, (October 27, 2000). 

Prior to joining Lerach Coughlin in 2004, Ms. 

Mottek prosecuted consumer fraud class 

actions. She serves as co-lead counsel in 

several consumer class actions, including Tenet 

HealthCare Cases II, JCCP 4285, pending before 

the Los Angeles Superior Court, and as co-lead 

counsel and a member of the executive 

committee of the Cellphone Termination Fees 

Litig., JCCP 4332, pending before the Superior 

Court of Alameda County. She is also a senior 

litigator in Spielholz v. LA Cellular, Inc., Case 

No. BC186787 (resulting in the published 

opinion Spielholz v. Superior Court, 86 Cal. 

App. 4th 1866 (2001), granting a petition for a 

writ of mandamus she drafted in a question of 

first impression in California); in the matters 

coordinated before the federal court in the 

Northern District of Illinois, styled In re Owen 

Federal Bank Mortgage Servicing Litig., MDL 

No. 1604; and as counsel in Paton v. Cingular 

Wireless, Case No. CGC-04-428855, in the 

Superior Court of San Francisco. 

L. THOMAS GALLOWAY received a Bachelor of 

Arts degree in History/Latin from Florida State 

University and received his Juris Doctor degree 

from the University of Virginia Law School in 

1972, where he was a member of the Editorial 

Board of the University of Virginia Law Review. 

Mr. Galloway is the founding partner of 

Galloway & Associates, a law firm that 

concentrates in the representation of 

institutional investors – namely, public and 

multi-employer pension funds. 

Mr. Galloway has authored several books and 

articles, including: The American Response to 

Revolutionary Change: A Study of Diplomatic 

Recognition (AEI Institute 1978); America’s 

Energy: Reports from the Nation (Pantheon 

1980); Contributor, Coal Treatise (Matthew 

Bender 1981); Contributor, Mining and the 

Environment: A Comparative Analysis of 

Surface Mining in Germany, Great Britain, 

Australia, and the United States, 4 Harv. Envtl. 

L. Rev. 261 (Spring 1980); A Miner’s Bill of 

Rights, 80 W. Va. L. Rev. 397 (1978); and 

Contributor, Golden Dreams, Poisoned Streams

(Mineral Policy Center Washington D.C. 1997). 

Mr. Galloway represents and/or provides 

consulting services for the following: National 

Wildlife Federation, Sierra Club, Friends of the 

Earth, United Mine Workers of America, Trout 

Unlimited, National Audubon Society, Natural 

Resources Defense Council, German Marshal 

Fund, Northern Cheyenne Indian Tribe and 

Council of Energy Resource Tribes. He is a 

member of the District of Columbia and 

Colorado State Bars. 

JERRILYN HARDAWAY, in the Houston Enron 

Trial office, is a seventh-generation Texan who 

grew up in Greenville and graduated from 

Texas A&M with three undergraduate degreesEnglish, Psychology and Applied Mathematics. 

She was a Fulbright Scholar, studying Italian 

architecture and writing a prize-winning 

article on international trade relations. 

Despite her primarily liberal arts education, she 

was really only interested in computers, 

focusing on software development for 

vertically integrated markets, which led to an 

interest in antitrust law. She graduated in 

1993 from the University of Houston Law 

Center, where she was a member of the 

Houston Journal of International Law. She 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 68 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 69 of 72

worked alongside renowned class-action 

attorney Charles Kipple for the next eight 

years, assisting as lead counsel or co-lead 

counsel in several complex anti-trust cases 

through 1999, including In re Lease Oil 

Antitrust Litig., MDL No. 1206, in the Southern 

District of Texas, Corpus Christi Division. After 

traveling and living abroad for three years, she 

returned to Houston and, in March 2002, was 

asked to “build a simple database, probably 

won’t take longer than the summer.” Now, 

more than two years later, her Enron 

databases manage more than 100 million 

documents and she supervises two teams of 

litigation support. Mrs. Hardaway is a 

frequent speaker and author on electronic 

discovery and developing issues in technology 

and the law. She speaks several languages, 

which helps because she very much enjoys 

traveling. 

ERAN RUBINSTEIN practices in the area of 

securities litigation with a special emphasis on 

international institutional investor clientele. 

He is resident in the firm’s Manhattan office. 

While Mr. Rubinstein acquired his earlier 

experience defending class action cases, 

working with some of the largest firms in San 

Francisco and Philadelphia, he has spent recent 

years focused exclusively on the prosecution of 

such cases, including The Relafen Class Action 

Litigation (following in the footsteps of the 

Israeli company Teva’s Relafen patent 

litigation), the Initial Public Offering Securities 

Litigation, and the AOL Time Warner Merger 

Litigation. 

During college, Mr. Rubinstein studied in 

London and Kenya. He received his Bachelor of 

Arts degree in International Relations from 

California Polytechnic State University, San Luis 

Obispo in 1998 and his Juris Doctor degree 

from Widener University School of Law in 

2001. During law school, where he achieved 

Dean’s Honors List, Mr. Rubinstein was both a 

regional finalist and a coach in the ABA 

Negotiation Competition. He also argued at 

the Jessup International Law Moot Court 

Competition. 

Mr. Rubinstein holds the following Bar 

affiliations: Bar of the Supreme Court of 

Pennsylvania (2001); Bar of the Eastern District 

of Pennsylvania (2003); American Bar 

Association; and Pennsylvania Bar Association. 

SUSAN BOLTZ RUBINSTEIN practices in the area 

of securities litigation with a special emphasis 

on international institutional investor clientele. 

She is resident in the firm’s Manhattan office. 

Prior to entering private practice, she was an 

Assistant District Attorney. She then acquired 

her initial class action litigation experience, 

working on the defense side, with some of the 

largest defense firms. Ms. Boltz Rubinstein 

then became associated with a preeminent 

white-collar criminal defense firm. Among 

other clients, she represented the Delaware 

Insurance Commissioner in her efforts to 

recover millions of dollars looted from policy 

holders. The case represents the nation’s 

largest insolvency due to fraud and involved 

money laundering through foreign, including 

Israeli, banks. 

Ms. Boltz Rubinstein has spent recent years 

focused exclusively on the prosecution of class 

actions. These cases have included the Relafen 

Class Action Litigation, the Initial Public 

Offering Securities Litigation, and the AOL 

Time Warner Merger Litigation. 

Ms. Boltz Rubinstein received her Bachelor of 

Arts degree in English/Modern European 

Studies from La Salle University in 1986, where 

she was a member of the Honors Program. 

She received her Juris Doctor degree from 

Dickinson School of Law in 1994. She 

graduated from college with high distinction 

and was a Molyneaux Scholarship recipient. 

During law school she was an Associate 

Editor/Member of the Dickinson Journal of 

International Law. She successfully completed 

comparative law courses at the following law 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 69 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 70 of 72

schools: University of Florence (Co-Recipient of 

DiNicola Scholarship; achieved highest grade in 

International Family Law seminar); University 

of Strasbourg; and the University of Vienna. 

Ms. Boltz Rubinstein holds the following Bar 

affiliations: Bar of the State of New York 

(2004); Bar of the Eastern District of 

Pennsylvania (2003); Bar of the Supreme Court 

of Pennsylvania (1996); American Bar 

Association; Pennsylvania Bar Association; and 

New York Bar Association. 

SPECIAL COUNSEL

THE HONORABLE LAWRENCE IRVING joined Lerach 

Coughlin in 2006 as special counsel to the firm, 

advising the firm’s institutional investor clients 

regarding securities matters, including 

litigation and settlements, and acting as the 

firm’s liaison with the Regents of the 

University of California – the lead plaintiff in 

the Enron securities class action. Previously, 

Judge Irving was appointed by Judge Barbara 

Lynn as Guardian ad Litem for the investor 

class in the Halliburton securities case, to 

review and report to the court on the fairness 

of the proposed settlement. 

Judge Irving received his B.S. in Business 

Administration and his L.L.B from the 

University of Southern California. For many 

years, Judge Irving was a leading trial lawyer in 

San Diego. He was elected a Fellow in the 

prestigious American College of Trial Lawyers 

and was President of the San Diego Chapter of 

the American Board of Trial Advocates. He was 

appointed to the Federal Bench in San Diego 

in 1982, having received an Exceptionally Well 

Qualified rating by the American Bar 

Association. He presided over numerous highprofile criminal and civil trials, including a fivemonth jury trial in the Nucorp securities class 

action. 

Judge Irving resigned from the Federal Bench 

in 1990 because of his stance against Federal 

Sentencing Guidelines and Minimum 

Mandatory Sentencing laws. He received 

numerous awards for his judicial service, 

including awards from such diverse groups as 

the FBI and ACLU. 

Judge Irving has mediated many high profile 

cases since 1991, including numerous large 

class action securities cases. According to the 

Los Angeles Daily Journal, Judge Irving is one 

of the most sought after mediators/arbitrators 

in California. Judge Irving successfully 

mediated the resolution of actions against the 

following companies: Lincoln Savings & Loan 

(U.S.D.C. Ariz.); Coeur d’Alene (U.S.D.C. Colo.); 

Morrison Knudsen (U.S.D.C. Idaho & Del.); 

Sensormatic (U.S.D.C. Fla.); ADM Archer 

Daniels Midland (U.S.D.C. Ill.); Hollywood Park, 

LA Gear, Occidental, Lockheed, Clothestime, 

Great Western Savings, Pacific Enterprises, 

Toyota, Venture Entertainment and Ascend 

(U.S.D.C. C.D. Cal.); Pioneer Mortgage, 

National Health Labs and Proxima (U.S.D.C. 

S.D. Cal.); Ross Systems, Resound, Insignia 

Solutions, IMP, Informix and Leasing Solutions 

(U.S.D.C. N.D. Cal.); Salomon Bros., Woolworth 

Corporation and Standard Microsystems 

(U.S.D.C. N.Y.); and Washington Mutual, 

Foodmaker, Mercer Ind., Price Costco, Gensia 

and Midcom Communications (U.S.D.C. Wash.). 

In addition, Judge Irving also mediated the 

$2.2 billion settlement in the Enron securities 

litigation with defendant J.P. Morgan (U.S.D.C. 

S.D. Tex.). 

Judge Irving has served as chair and a member 

of numerous Judicial Selection Committees, 

including as Chair of former California 

Governor Pete Wilson’s San Diego Superior 

Courts Committee, Chair of Senator Barbara 

Boxer’s Southern California Federal Judicial 

and U.S. Attorneys Selection Committee, Chair 

of several San Diego U.S. Magistrate Judicial 

Selection committees, and currently serves on 

President Bush’s Southern California Federal 

Judicial and U.S. Attorney Selection 

Committee. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 70 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 71 of 72

Judge Irving has received several awards, 

including the following: 1990 Trial Judge of 

the Year – San Diego Trial Lawyers, 1990 

Annual Award of San Diego Defense Lawyers 

(Civil), 1990 Criminal Defense Lawyers’ Club of 

San Diego, “Extraordinary Abilities as a Federal 

District Judge,” 1990 San Diego Press Club – 

Headliner Law and Justice, 2001 Witkin Award, 

and 2002 San Diego Bar Association 

Outstanding Service Award. Judge Irving is also 

a member of many Professional Associations 

including: Fellow, American College of Trial 

Lawyers; Fellow, American Bar Foundation; 

American Board of Trial Advocates (President 

San Diego Chapter 1972); San Diego County 

Bar Association (Board of Directors 1972-1975, 

Vice President 1975, Treasurer 1974 and Chair 

Magistrate Judge Selection Panel 1999-2001). 

Judge Irving will continue to serve as mediator 

in certain cases and will continue his pro bono

activities on behalf of significant causes. 

SUSAN K. ALEXANDER graduated with honors 

from Stanford University in 1983 and earned 

her Juris Doctor degree from the University of 

California, Los Angeles in 1986. Ms. Alexander 

joined the Appellate Practice Group at Lerach 

Coughlin in 2000, focusing on federal and 

state appeals of securities fraud class actions. 

Ms. Alexander has argued on behalf of 

defrauded investors in the Fifth, Ninth, and 

Tenth Circuits. Representative results include 

Pirraglia v. Novell, Inc., 339 F.3d 1182 (10th Cir. 

2003) (reversal of district court dismissal of 

securities fraud complaint), and Barrie v. 

Intervoice-Brite, Inc., 397 F.3d 249 (5th Cir. 

2005) (reversal of district court dismissal of 

securities fraud complaint). 

Ms. Alexander’s prior appellate work was with 

the California Appellate Project (“CAP”), 

where she prepared appeals and petitions for 

writs of habeas corpus on behalf of individuals 

sentenced to death, as well as supervising 

private attorneys in their preparation of 

appeals and habeas corpus petitions. At CAP, 

and subsequently in private practice, Ms. 

Alexander litigated and consulted on death 

penalty direct and collateral appeals for 10 

years. Representative results include In re 

Brown, 17 Cal. 4th 873 (1998) (reversal of first 

degree murder conviction, special circumstance 

finding, and death penalty), and Odle v. 

Woodford, 238 F.3d 1084 (9th Cir. 2001) 

(remand of death penalty conviction for 

retrospective competency hearing). Ms. 

Alexander was previously associated with 

Bronson, Bronson & McKinnon, where she 

litigated professional malpractice and product 

liability cases on behalf of attorneys, doctors, 

and automobile manufacturers, including 

defense verdicts in two jury trials. 

Ms. Alexander is a member of the Bars of the 

State of California, the U.S. Supreme Court, the 

Court of Appeals, Fifth, Ninth, and Tenth 

Circuits, and the U.S. District Court, Northern, 

Central, Eastern, and Southern Districts of 

California. Ms. Alexander is also a member of 

the Federal Bar Association, Appellate Division 

and the Appellate Practice Section of the Bar 

Association of San Francisco. 

Ms. Alexander is married with three teenage 

children. 

FORENSIC ACCOUNTANTS

ANDREW J. RUDOLPH is a Certified Fraud 

Examiner and a Certified Public Accountant 

licensed to practice in California. He is an 

active member of the American Institute of 

Certified Public Accountants, California’s 

Society of Certified Public Accountants, and 

the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. 

His 20 years of public accounting, consulting 

and forensic accounting experience includes 

financial fraud investigation, auditor 

malpractice, auditing of public and private 

companies, business litigation consulting, due 

diligence investigations and taxation. Mr. 

Rudolph is the National Director of Lerach 

Coughlin’s Forensic Accounting Department, 

which provides the firm with in-house forensic 

accounting expertise in connection with 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 71 of 72
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 

Firm Resumé – Page 72 of 72

securities fraud litigation against national and 

foreign companies. Mr. Rudolph is the 

Director of Forensic Accounting at the firm, 

and has given numerous lectures and assisted 

with articles on forensic investigations and 

financial statement fraud. Mr. Rudolph has 

directed hundreds of financial statement fraud 

investigations which were instrumental in the 

recovered billions of dollars for defrauded 

investors. Prominent cases include Qwest, 

HealthSouth, WorldCom, Boeing, Honeywell, 

Vivendi, Aurora Foods, Informix and Platinum 

Software. 

CHRISTOPHER YURCEK is one of the firm’s senior 

forensic accountants and provides in-house 

forensic accounting and litigation expertise in 

connection with major securities fraud 

litigation. Mr. Yurcek is a Certified Public 

Accountant with 19 years of accounting, 

forensic examination and consulting 

experience in areas including financial 

statement audit, fraud investigation, auditor 

malpractice, turn-around consulting, business 

litigation, and business valuation. Mr. Yurcek 

is currently responsible for overseeing the 

firm’s forensic accounting investigation in In re 

Enron Corp. Sec. Litig. Mr. Yurcek provides the 

firm with in-house forensic accounting 

expertise and directs accounting investigations 

in connection with well-publicized securities 

fraud litigation, including cases such as Enron, 

Vesta, Informix, Mattel, Coca Cola Company

and Media Vision. Mr. Yurcek’s experience 

included providing forensic accounting 

expertise to bankruptcy trustees and audit and 

accounting services at a national CPA firm. Mr. 

Yurcek speaks at professional accounting 

seminars on topics such as financial statement 

fraud and fraud prevention and has coauthored articles on these subjects. Mr. Yurcek 

is a member of the American Institute of 

Certified Public Accountants and the California 

Society of CPAs. 

R. STEVEN ARONICA is a Certified Public 

Accountant licensed in the States of New York 

and Georgia and is a member of the American 

Institute of Certified Public Accountants, the 

Institute of Internal Auditors and the 

Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. He 

has been employed in the practice of 

accounting for 25 years, including: (1) public 

accounting where he was responsible for 

providing clients with a wide range of 

accounting and auditing services; (2) private 

accounting with Drexel Burnham Lambert, Inc., 

where he held positions with accounting and 

financial reporting responsibilities as a Vice 

President; and (3) various positions with the 

United States Securities and Exchange 

Commission (“SEC”). Mr. Aronica has extensive 

experience in securities regulation and 

litigation. At the SEC, Mr. Aronica reviewed 

and analyzed financial statements and related 

financial disclosures contained in public filings 

for compliance with generally accepted 

accounting principles, generally accepted 

auditing standards, and the accounting and 

auditing rules, regulations and policies of the 

SEC. Mr. Aronica was also an Enforcement 

Division Branch Chief, responsible for 

managing a group of investigators and 

accountants who initiated, developed and 

executed numerous investigations involving 

financial fraud, accounting improprieties and 

audit failures. Mr. Aronica has been 

instrumental in the prosecution of numerous 

financial and accounting fraud civil litigation 

claims against companies which include Lucent 

Technologies, Oxford Health Plans, Computer 

Associates, Aetna, WorldCom, Tyco, Vivendi, 

AOL Time Warner, Ikon, Thomas & Betts, 

InaCom and Royal Ahold. In addition, Mr. 

Aronica helped prosecute numerous claims 

against each of the major U.S. public 

accounting firms. 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 15-5 Filed 07/02/2007 Page 72 of 72