in

NEW YORK–Feb. 1, 2005- LAWFUEL – The Law News Network -The law firm…

NEW YORK–Feb. 1, 2005- LAWFUEL – The Law News Network -The law firm of Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on January 31, 2005 on behalf of all persons who purchased, converted, exchanged, or otherwise acquired the common stock of Silicon Image, Inc. (“Silicon Image” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: SIMG) between October 19, 2004 and January 24, 2005, inclusive, (the “Class Period”) against defendants Silicon Image and certain officers and directors of the Company.

The action, Curry v. Silicon Image, Inc., et. al. is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Docket No. 05-00456 and has been assigned to the Hon. Maxine M. Chesney, U.S. District Judge.

The Complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) thereunder, thereby artificially inflating the price of Silicon Image securities. Generally, the Complaint alleges that the Company gave fourth quarter guidance on October 19, 2004 and has since undergone a time of undisclosed executive uncertainty, and distractions which were not disclosed while insiders sold Company stock. Plaintiffs allege that, on November 11, 2004, the Company appointed Steven Laub as Chief Executive Officer and President; that the Company failed to disclose material adverse facts, including fundamental disputes between Steven Laub and others at Silicon Image regarding Mr. Laub’s relative role and responsibility which resulted in substantial distractions from achieving guidance; that 281,742 shares were sold by insiders at Silicon Image who were in a position to know of the material adverse information of the fundamental disputes and resulting distractions; and that the SEC commenced a formal investigation into trading in Silicon Image shares on January 25, 2005.

The Complaint further alleges as follows. On January 25, 2005, the Company issued two press releases. One release, entitled “Silicon Image Announces Appointment of Steve Tirado as Chief Executive Officer Replacing Steven Laub,” announced the resignation of its Chief Executive Officer and President, Steven Laub, and appointment of Christopher Paisley as the Company’s new Chairman of the Board of Directors. The second press release, entitled “Silicon Image Reports Fourth Quarter 2004 Financials,” stated that the Company’s revenue in the fourth quarter decreased by 4% in comparison to the third quarter. The price of the Company stock has declined by 15% since January 24, 2005.

If you purchased, converted, exchanged, or otherwise acquired Silicon Image common stock during the Class Period, you may request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff by April 1, 2005. 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 class member’s claim is typical of other class members, and that the class member 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 Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP, or other counsel of your choice, to serve as your counsel in this action. Investors, who acquired Silicon Image, Inc. common stock during the period October 19, 2004 through January 24, 2005 inclusive, may contact Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP at the telephone number or Email address below for more information regarding the class action lawsuit. Investors can also visit Lovell Stewart Halebian’s website at www.lshllp.com to view a copy of the complaint. Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP has represented investors in numerous financial class actions and obtained the largest class action recoveries under three separate federal statutes.

British MP George Galloway and his opponent the Daily Telegraph will leave no stone unturned to sort out what could be a spectacular libel case.