<p align= justify >According to a press release dated September 13, 2007, the complaint charges LCA and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. LCA is engaged in the provision of fixed-site laser vision correction services at its LasikPlus vision centers.</p> <p align= justify > </p>
<p align= justify >The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s business and financial results, including EPS guidance of $2.05 to $2.15 for 2007. As a result of defendants’ false statements, LCA stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, reaching a high of $50.56 per share in July 2007.</p>
<p align= justify > </p>
<p align= justify >Then, on July 31, 2007, before the market opened, LCA issued a press release announcing its financial and operational results for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2007, and in a surprise announcement retracted the Company’s statements through the first seven months of the year that it would earn $2.05 to $2.15 for the year, lowering it EPS guidance for 2007 to $1.90 to $2.00. On this news, LCA’s stock collapsed to close at $35.51 per share, a decline of 17%, on volume of 3.5 million shares.</p>
<p align= justify > </p>
<p align= justify >According to the complaint, the true facts, which were known by defendants but concealed from the investing public during the Class Period, were as follows: (a) the Company lacked requisite internal controls, and, as a result, the Company’s projections and reported results issued during the Class Period were based upon defective assumptions about the Company’s marketing budget and deferred revenue; and (b) the Company knew that its revenues were driven almost entirely by the number of procedures performed in its vision centers during the first quarter of the each year and that the Company’s existing stores (in operation for over 12 months) were not showing growth and any overall growth was being derived from new store openings. As a result, the Company’s projections issued during the Class Period about its forecasted 2007 EPS were at a minimum reckless.</p>