Beginning in 2006, certain corporations that had assets greater than $50 million were required to file their basic tax forms electronically. Approximately 15,500 of them filed their returns electronically last year. Starting in 2007, certain businesses with assets of more than $10 million had to file electronically.

"Corporations of all sizes are seeing the long range advantages of integrating their tax filing in an electronic environment along with their tax and financial accounting," said IRS Treaty Administration Director Elvin Hedgpeth. "While large and mid-size corporations are required to e-file, many small corporations are seeing the advantages of e-filing voluntarily."

Attorney Advertising. Notice is hereby given that a class action has been commenced in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on behalf of purchasers of the securities of Aetna Inc. ("Aetna" or the "Company") (NYSE: AET) between October 27, 2005 and April 27, 2006, inclusive (the "Class Period").

Stull, Stull & Brody has substantial experience representing employees who suffered losses from purchases of their employer's stock in their 401(k) plans. If you bought Aetna securities through your Aetna retirement account and have information or would like to learn more about these claims, please contact us.

The Complaint charges Aetna and certain of its officers and directors with violations of sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. Specifically, the Complaint alleges that during the second half of 2005 Aetna touted its expanding membership rolls as a primary reason for an increase in operating income.

During the Class Period, defendants misrepresented or failed to disclose the rise in Aetna's medical cost ratio ("MCR"), which is the percentage of dollars a company spends on healthcare, including physician reimbursement, and is the key number for health plans in terms of their level of profitability. Unbeknownst to investors, however, from at least as early as September 2005 defendants had in their possession information that contradicted, or rendered false, statements made by the defendants throughout the Class Period.

On April 27, 2006, the Company shocked the market when it disclosed a rise in its MCR relative to the prior year. This higher MCR coupled with large membership growth meant that the Company was under-pricing its health plans in order to speed up enrollment. This fact, which the defendants knew by September 2005, was conspicuously absent from defendants' public disclosures between October 27, 2005 and April 27, 2006. From April 26, 2006 to April 27, 2006, Aetna's shares fell from $46.43 per share to $37.00 per share, a decline of $9.43 per share, or more than 20 percent, representing a loss in market capitalization of $5.4 billion.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all those who purchased or otherwise acquired Aetna securities during the Class Period, which is between October 27, 2005 and April 26, 2007, inclusive. If you purchased or otherwise acquired Aetna securities during the Class Period, and either lost money on the transactions or continue to hold the securities, you may wish to serve as a lead plaintiff. If you purchased Aetna securities during the Class Period, you may request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff by no later than December 24, 2007.

A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the proposed lead plaintiff's claims are typical of the claims of the other class members, and that the proposed lead plaintiff will adequately represent the class. Under certain circumstances, one or more class members may together serve as "lead plaintiff." Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. You may retain Stull, Stull & Brody, or other counsel of your choice, to serve as your counsel in this action. Stull, Stull & Brody has litigated many class actions for violations of securities laws in federal courts over the past 30 years and has obtained court approval of substantial settlements on numerous occasions. Stull, Stull & Brody maintains offices in New York and Los Angeles.

Vonage Holdings said late Thursday it has settled its patent dispute with Verizon Communications.

Vonage said the terms of the resolution depend on how the Court of Appeals decides its pending petition for rehearing regarding two of the Verizon patents.

If Vonage wins rehearing on either patent or if the injunction is vacated, Vonage said it will pay Verizon $80 million.

If Vonage does not win a rehearing, or if the stay is lifted reinstating the injunction, Vonage will pay Verizon $117.5 million.

In March 2007, a jury found that Vonage was infringing three valid Verizon patents and awarded $58 million in damages.

The trial judge subsequently issued an injunction which was stayed pending Vonage's appeal.

In September, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the trial court's decisions on infringement, validity and injunction as to two of the Verizon patents and remanded as to the third patent.

Vonage said it filed a petition for rehearing which is pending in the Court of Appeals.

But the Republican minority leader, John A. Boehner of Ohio, said late revisions to the bill were "window-dressing rather than substantive changes."

Throughout hours of debate, several Republican opponents of the legislation said its supporters were trying to ram it through while much of the California delegation was back home because of the wildfires in their state. Ten of the 26 members who did not vote today are from California, and 8 of the 10 are Republicans.

A week ago, President Bush's veto of the original bill was sustained, as the 273-to-156 vote in support of the bill was 13 short of the toll needed to overturn the veto. Forty-four Republicans voted then to override the veto, and the suspense before today's vote was whether the bill's supporters would convert any Republicans. But only 43 Republicans voted for the bill today.

"It's unfortunate that even after a week of meetings and adjustments to the bill at the Republicans' request, they would still apparently prefer to play politics instead of reauthorizing a program the vast majority of the country supports," Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, said after today's vote. "Once again, Republicans have chosen partisanship over pediatrics."

The Senate will probably approve the revised bill next week. There is a veto-proof majority in favor of the bill in the Senate, but today's vote in the House, as well as last week's, signal that it will sustain Mr. Bush's veto again.

If that happens, Democrats said, they may extend the existing insurance program for children through next summer. They would then schedule another vote on the issue in September or October, in the hope of inflicting maximum political damage on Republicans just before the 2008 elections.

Two prominent Republican senators who generally side with the White House, Orrin G. Hatch of Utah and Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, expressed disappointment after this afternoon's vote, underscoring how the children's insurance issue cuts across party politics.

"It's a shame that this legislation, which is even stronger than the compromise legislation passed earlier this month, did not secure a veto-proof majority of support from members of the House of Representatives," Mr. Grassley said.

Mr. Hatch called today's outcome "a lost opportunity for America's low-income, uninsured children" and said he was dismayed that the issue had become such a political battle. "As a result, low-income children will continue to be uninsured," he said. "That is a shame."

The new bill, like the one vetoed by Mr. Bush on Oct. 3, would cost $60 billion over five years, an increase of $35 billion over the current level of spending.

Supporters of the new bill said it addressed all the major concerns that prompted Republicans to oppose an earlier version. The new bill, they said, would end coverage of adults, ban coverage of illegal immigrants and generally prohibit states from covering children in families with incomes above three times the poverty level, or $61,950 for a family of four.

Speaker Pelosi said the restrictions on adults, immigrants and high-income families were clear in the first bill, and "they are even clearer in the second bill."

For the cost of just 41 days of the Iraq war, Democrats said, the government could finance a full year of health care for 10 million children.

But President Bush said his concerns had not been addressed "in a meaningful way," and many Republican lawmakers said the changes were illusory.

"The bill puts lipstick on a sow," said Representative Thomas M. Reynolds, Republican of New York. "Today is raw politics — trotting out a vote just for the sake of a vote."

Representative Ginny Brown-Waite, Republican of Florida, said the State Children's Health Insurance Program would still be a "magnet for illegal aliens." Representative Mike Rogers, Republican of Michigan, said that rich children could still qualify for benefits because states, in determining eligibility, could ignore or disregard part of a family's income.

Representative Tom Price, Republican of Georgia, said the bill still called for a "a massive tax increase" The federal excise tax on cigarettes would be increased to $1 a pack, up 61 cents from the current level.

And Representative Pete Sessions, Republican of Texas, said that under the new bill, as under the original, two million people would lose private health insurance coverage and enroll in the expanded government program.

Radian Group Inc. (NYSE: RDN) issued a statment following recent volatility in the financial markets, which has affected its stock price.

The company said, "the company has a strong capital position and balance sheet. We believe actions taken during the third quarter, including the sale of the Sherman interest for approximately $278 million and the draw down of $200 million of the $400 million revolving credit facility, provide the company with financial flexibility and adequate liquidity for the long term."

Radian Group will report third quarter results on November 1st.

Shares of Radian Group sank 23.6% today to a new 52-week low. The stock closed at $9.99 today. A dividend cut from competitor MGIC Investment Corp. (NYSE: MTG) expanding the decline.

"We stay his execution pending the Supreme Court's resolution of Baze vs Rees," the court said, referring to the high court's decision last month to review whether lethal injections cause unacceptable pain.

Siebert's lawyers had argued that the drug combination used for lethal injection might interact with his medication for pancreatic cancer and hepatitis C and cause undue pain.

Siebert was convicted of the 1986 strangling deaths of Sherri Weathers, her two young sons and Weathers' friend Linda Jarman. Also convicted of murdering another woman, Siebert claims to have murdered others in various U.S. states.

Bryan Stevenson, director of the Equal Justice Initiative, which helped bring the suit on Siebert's behalf, said: "It would grossly inappropriate to carry out executions that may soon be declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court."

Louella Kelley, Jarman's sister, lamented the ruling. "He's beaten the system again," she said in an interview. "He got himself educated in law while he's been in prison and his lawyers are very, very good. But all along he's been smarter than our justice system."

Alabama Gov. Bob Riley had said on Monday the execution would go ahead. It would have been the first since the beginning of a "creeping moratorium" that has halted executions in at least six U.S. states.