Robbins Umeda LLP announces that the firm commenced a class action lawsuit on October 7, 2011, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, Eastern Division, on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased the common stock of Stereotaxis, Inc. between February 28, 2011 and August 9, 2011 against certain of the Company's officers and directors for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The plaintiff is represented by Robbins Umeda LLP and Carey, Danis & Lowe.

Stereotaxis designs, manufactures, and markets a cardiology instrument control system, called Niobe®, for use in a hospital's interventional surgical suite to enhance the treatment of coronary artery disease and arrhythmias. The Company also markets the Odyssey system as a data management solution for remote viewing and recording of live interventional procedures. The Company's executive offices are located in St. Louis, Missouri.

The complaint alleges that beginning on February 28, 2011, Chief Executive Officer Michael Kaminski, along with certain officers and directors at Stereotaxis, issued a series of positive statements to investors about the business condition and future prospects of the Company that were materially false and misleading, and that caused shares of the Company's stock to trade at artificially high prices.

In particular, the complaint alleges that officials at the Company failed to disclose to investors material adverse facts that: (1) Stereotaxis was unable to leverage its extensive portfolio and scale of products and services in a strategically beneficial manner; (2) market feedback from users of the Company's technology was "mixed"; (3) the Niobe system was far from the "standard of care" and needed "fundamental product improvements"; (4) demand for the Niobe and Odyssey systems was weak, and that the number of units being sold was decreasing; (5) the reported backlog of orders did not fairly represent future revenue the Company expected to recognize; and that (6) the Company overstated its market edge.

On August 8, 2011, the Company announced financial results for the second quarter of 2011 that revealed that the Company was performing well below expectations. Additionally, the press release disclosed to investors that the Company was forced to suspend its full year guidance for 2011, and that Daniel Johnston was resigning as the Chief Financial Officer. On this news shares of Stereotaxis declined by more than 58% of their value, closing on August 9, 2011 at just $1.19 per share.

If you purchased Stereotaxis stock during the Class Period and wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from October 10, 2011. To discuss your shareholder rights, please contact attorney Gregory E. Del Gaizo at 800-350-6003 or via the shareholder information form.

Robbins Umeda LLP represents individual and institutional shareholders in derivative, direct, and class action lawsuits. The law firm's skilled litigation teams include former federal prosecutors, former defense counsel from top multinational corporate law firms, and career shareholder rights attorneys. Robbins Umeda LLP has helped its clients realize more than $1 billion of value for themselves and the companies in which they have invested. For more information, please go to http://www.robbinsumeda.com

Olympic champion LaShawn Merritt was cleared to defend his 400-meter title in London next year after the American won his appeal Thursday against an IOC rule banning doping offenders from the games.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport annulled the International Olympic Committee rule that bars any athlete who has received a doping suspension of more than six months from competing in the next summer or winter games.

The three-man CAS panel said the rule, adopted in 2008, was "invalid and unenforceable" because it amounted to a second sanction and did not comply with the World Anti-Doping Agency code. It said the rule amounted to a "disciplinary sanction" rather than a matter of eligibility.

Merritt, the American 400-meter gold medalist in Beijing, had been ineligible under the IOC rule to compete in London even though he completed his doping ban this year after testing positive for a banned substance found in a male-enhancement product.

Former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the first Hispanic attorney general in U.S. history, has joined one of Nashville’s largest law firms and will play a role in mentoring younger lawyers.

Gonzales, 56, will focus on government relations, government investigations and white-collar defense for Waller Lansden Dortch & Davis LLP, the firm said Wednesday.

He also will be involved in the firm’s diversity initiatives, which include a mentoring program.

“It is a great honor for me to join Waller Lansden, a firm that I greatly admire,” Gonzales said in a statement. “Waller Lansden has a reputation for providing incisive legal representation while caring deeply for its clients. The firm’s breakthrough initiatives to encourage diversity in the workplace are admirable.”

Gonzales became the first Hispanic attorney general in U.S. history when President George W. Bush appointed him in 2005.

But he left the post in 2007 under a cloud of controversy stemming from allegations that, under his watch, the U.S. Justice Department improperly hired and fired several U.S. attorneys for political reasons.

According to Scott Cole, within days of being hit with a class action lawsuit for failing to offer meal and rest breaks to its California workforce, Guitar Center fired the man who pioneered the lawsuit and allowed its workers to parade the named plaintiff’s final paycheck around the workplace. In immediate reaction to these events, the plaintiff’s attorneys at Scott Cole & Associates amended the Complaint today to allege a wrongful termination and invasion of privacy claim.

“If Guitar Center thinks it can send a message to its workers that standing up for their rights will cost them, this new wrongful termination claim sends a stronger message right back,” says Scott Cole, the principal lawyer on the case. “Firing our client was a big mistake.”

The lawsuit is entitled Pellanda v. Guitar Center, Inc.

Oakland-based Scott Cole & Associates, APC is one of California’s premiere class action law firms and is devoted to representing individuals in employment and consumer rights litigation. For more information about our practice and cases, visit www.scalaw.com or call (510) 891-9800.

The Supreme Court seemed split Tuesday on whether to require police to read Miranda rights to prison inmates every time they interrogate them about crimes unrelated to their current incarceration.

The high court heard arguments from lawyers from the state of Michigan who want a federal appeals court decision overturning Randall Lee Fields' conviction thrown out.

Fields was serving a 45-day sentence in prison on disorderly conduct charges when a jail guard and sheriff's deputies from Lenawee County, Mich., removed him from his cell and took him to a conference room. The deputies, after telling him several times he was free to leave at any time, then questioned him for seven hours about allegations that he had sexually assaulted a minor. Fields eventually confessed and was charged and convicted of criminal sexual assault.

Fields was then sentenced to 10 to 15 years in prison but appealed the use of his confession, saying that he was never given his Miranda rights on the sexual assault charges.

On appeal, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati threw out his confession and conviction, ruling that it is required that police read inmates their Miranda rights anytime they are isolated from the rest of the inmates in situations where they would be likely to incriminate themselves.

This case is another example of the courts' recent struggle to clearly define Miranda rights, which have been litigated since they first came into being in 1966. The courts require police to tell suspects in custody they have the right to remain silent and the right to have a lawyer represent them, even if they can't afford one.

The tale of returned mail and a missed deadline might seem comical, if it did not involve a man trying to stave off execution. Supreme Court justices had harsh words Tuesday for lawyers who abandon their clients and a state legal system that does not seem overly concerned.

At the end of a lively hour of arguments, it appeared that the court would order a new hearing for Alabama death row inmate Cory Maples, who lost the chance to appeal his death sentence because of a mailroom mix-up at the venerable New York law firm Sullivan and Cromwell and the diffidence of a local court clerk.

Two Sullivan and Cromwell lawyers were pressing Maples' claim that his earlier legal representation was so bad that it violated the Constitution -- until they both left the firm without telling Maples or the Alabama courts.

Deadlines usually matter a lot at the Supreme Court, where a few years back a defendant who was late to file an appeal because the judge gave his lawyer the wrong date still lost his case. Another principle to which the court often holds dear is that it's tough luck for defendants whose lawyers make mistakes.

But Tuesday's case, perhaps because it involves the death penalty, was the rare instance when the court seemed prepared to grant some leeway on both counts.