Tyson Foods, Inc. 2002 annual report notes to  consolidated  financial  statements p 54 In December 2001, a stockholder derivative lawsuit was filed in the Court of Chancery of the state of Delaware against the Company’s Board of Directors and nominally, the Company. The complaint concerns the alleged violations of immigration laws that are the subject of the indictment by the U.S. Department of Justice (see below). In general, the complaint alleges that the members of the Company’s Board failed to exercise reasonable control and supervision over the Company’s employees and processes, implement adequate internal controls, adequately inform themselves, or take adequate and good faith remedial actions with respect to the Company’s immigration practices and matters giving rise to the indictment. The complaint seeks unspecified damages against the individual Board members; no relief is sought against the Company. The Company and members of its Board have filed a motion to dismiss in the Chancery Court of Delaware and intend to vigorously defend these claims. General Matters On or around February 15, 2002, the Company learned that a processing facility owned by Zemco Industries, Inc., a subsidiary of IBP, is the subject of an investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s office in Bangor, Maine, into allegedly improper testing and recording practices. The Company acquired Zemco as part of the Company’s acquisition of IBP on September 28, 2001. Zemco has responded to grand jury subpoenas and is cooperating fully with the U.S. Attorney’s office. Neither the likelihood  of an unfavorable outcome nor the amount of ultimate liability, if any, with respect to this matter can be determined at this time. In December 2001, the Company, two current employees and four former employees were indicted in the U.S. District Court  in the Eastern District of Tennessee. The indictment alleges these six employees conspired to violate and did violate immigration laws involving approximately 15 named individuals at one of the Company’s poultry processing facilities. The indictment also alleges that the Company utilized the services of temporary employment agencies in furtherance of the alleged conspiracy. The indictment seeks fines and forfeiture of amounts not specified. Trial for this matter is expected in February 2003. The Company intends  to vigorously defend this indictment and believes it has meritorious defenses to the government’s theories of recovery; however, neither the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome nor the amount of ultimate liability, if any, with respect to this case can be determined at this time. Consistent with the forfeiture theory advanced in the indictment referred to above, private plaintiffs filed the following  three lawsuits. On April 10, 2002, plaintiffs filed  Trollinger, et al. vs. Tyson Foods, Inc. , No. 4:02-cv-23 (E.D. Tenn.) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee (Winchester Division), a purported class-action lawsuit against Tyson, on behalf of all current and former employees of 15 named Tyson facilities who had been legally authorized to work in the United States. The complaint in that action asserts a claim against Tyson under the Racketeer Influence and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute. The complaint alleges that Tyson engaged in a scheme to depress its employees’ wages by hiring illegal aliens and seeks unspecified trebled-damages. The Company has moved to dismiss the complaint. On July 17, 2002, the court granted the Company’s Motion to Dismiss the case  for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Plaintiffs have filed a Notice of Appeal. The Company intends to vigorously defend these claims; however, neither the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome nor the amount of ultimate liability,  if any, with respect to this case can be determined at this time. On March 6, 2002, plaintiffs filed  Baker, et al. vs. IBP, inc. , C.A. No. 02-4019 (C.D. Ill.) in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois (Rock Island Division), a purported class-action lawsuit, on behalf of all current and former employees of IBP’s Joslin, Illinois, facility who had been legally authorized to work in the United States. The complaint asserts a claim against IBP under the RICO statute. The complaint alleges that IBP engaged in a scheme to depress its employees’ wages by hiring illegal aliens and seeks unspecified trebled-damages. The Company has moved to dismiss the complaint. On October 21, 2002, the court granted  the Company’s Motion to Dismiss the case for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Plaintiffs have filed a Notice of Appeal. The Company intends to vigorously defend these claims; however, neither the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome nor the amount of ultimate liability, if any, with respect to this case can be determined at this time. On April 17, 2002, plaintiff Cynthia Cruz filed  Cruz vs. Tyson Foods, Inc. , C.A. No. 02 C 2761 (N.D. Ill.), a purported class-action lawsuit against Tyson and others on behalf of all persons with Hispanic surnames whose identities and social security numbers were allegedly “stolen” and misused by the named defendants. The complaint asserts a claim under the RICO statute, a claim for violation of the federal civil rights statute, and common-law claims for defamation, violation of privacy and property rights, fraud, and tortious