UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

   LITIGATION RELEASE NO. 16170 / June 2, 1999

   SEC v. EMANUEL PINEZ ET AL., Civil Action No. 97-10353-PBS (D. MA.)

   The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that Gilboa
   Peretz and his company PG Technologies were held in civil contempt for
   obstructing justice by making intentionally false and misleading
   statements at a hearing in federal district court. Specifically, Judge
   Patti Saris found that Peretz lied concerning the relationship between
   Pinez and a PG Technologies bank account that had been previously
   frozen by the Court. In addition, Judge Saris ordered Peretz and PG
   Technologies to pay $15,000 which was released to them as a result of
   their false statements.

   This action against Peretz and PG Technologies arises out of the
   emergency action filed against Pinez in February 1997 for insider
   trading in advance of the news that he was to be fired from Centennial
   Technologies Inc. and that the company had been the subject of a large
   scale financial fraud. On February 14, 1997, as part of the emergency
   relief, Judge Saris froze assets of any funds in the name of or in the
   direct or indirect control of Pinez. PG Technologies' account, which
   at the time contained approximately $30,000, was immediately frozen
   because Pinez was a signatory on the account. PG Technologies
   requested a lift of the freeze and on February 24, at a hearing before
   Judge Saris and under oath, Peretz claimed that none of the $30,000
   came from Pinez. Based on Peretz' sworn statement, the court lifted
   the freeze. The funds were immediately expended, and PG Technologies
   is now bankrupt.

   The Court found that the Commission presented persuasive documentary
   evidence that Peretz intentionally misled the court at that February
   24 hearing. The court found that the $30,000 was in fact money that
   had come from Pinez. In so finding, the Court also noted that PG
   Technologies had acknowledged in a "settlement agreement" with
   Centennial that it had previously purchased blank computer cards from
   Centennial at the instruction of Pinez, and that Pinez had provided
   the money for the payment.

   The Court concluded that Peretz gave intentionally false and
   misleading testimony about the source of the money in the account "in
   order to interrupt and interfere with the Court's efforts to freeze
   Pinez's assets for the benefit for defrauded investors in Centennial."
   The Court noted that it would not have released the funds if it had
   been made aware of Pinez's involvement in PG Technologies.

   For further information, please see Litigation Release Nos. 15258