N-SAR EXHIBIT 77E

Pending Litigation.  Since 2009, a number of class action, derivative and individual lawsuits have been pending in federal and state courts against OppenheimerFunds, Inc., the Fund’s investment advisor (the “Manager”), OppenheimerFunds Distributor, Inc., the Fund’s principal underwriter and distributor (the “Distributor”), and certain funds (but not including the Fund) advised by the Manager and distributed by the Distributor (the “Defendant Funds”).  Several of these lawsuits also name as defendants certain officers and current and former trustees of the respective Defendant Funds.  The lawsuits raise claims under federal securities laws and various states’ securities, consumer protection and common law and allege, among other things, that the disclosure documents of the respective Defendant Funds contained misrepresentations and omissions and that the respective Defendant Funds’ investment policies were not followed.  The plaintiffs in these actions seek unspecified damages, equitable relief and awards of attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses.  On June 1, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado gave preliminary approval to stipulations and agreements of settlement in certain putative class action lawsuits involving two Defendant Funds, Oppenheimer Champion Income Fund and Oppenheimer Core Bond Fund.  On September 30, 2011, the court entered orders and final judgments approving the settlements as fair, reasonable and adequate.  Those orders are not subject to further appeal.  These settlements do not resolve other outstanding lawsuits relating to Oppenheimer Champion Income Fund and Oppenheimer Core Bond Fund, nor do the settlements affect certain other putative class action lawsuits pending in federal court against the Manager, the Distributor, and other Defendant Funds and their independent trustees.

In 2009, what are claimed to be derivative lawsuits were filed in New Mexico state court against the Manager and a subsidiary (but not against the Fund) on behalf of the New Mexico Education Plan Trust challenging a settlement reached in 2010 between the Manager, its subsidiary and the Distributor and the board of the New Mexico section 529 college savings plan.  These lawsuits allege breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence and violation of state securities laws, and seek compensatory damages, equitable relief and an award of attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses.  On September 9, 2011, the court denied plaintiffs’ request for a hearing to determine the fairness of the settlement, finding that plaintiffs lacked standing to pursue derivative claims on behalf of the Trust.  On October 27, 2011, the parties to these actions filed a joint motion to dismiss the lawsuits with prejudice, which the court granted on October 28, 2011.

Other class action and individual lawsuits have been filed since 2008 in various state and federal courts against the Manager and certain of its affiliates by investors seeking to recover investments they allegedly lost as a result of the “Ponzi” scheme run by Bernard L. Madoff and his firm, Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities, LLC (“BLMIS”).  Plaintiffs in these suits allege that they suffered losses as a result of their investments in several funds managed by an affiliate of the Manager and assert a variety of claims, including breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and violation of federal and state securities laws and regulations, among others.  They seek unspecified damages, equitable relief and awards of attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses.  Neither the Distributor, nor any of the Oppenheimer mutual funds, their independent trustees or directors are named as defendants in these lawsuits.  None of the Oppenheimer mutual funds invested in any funds or accounts managed by Madoff or BLMIS.  On February 28, 2011, a stipulation of partial settlement of three groups of consolidated putative class action lawsuits relating to these matters was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.  On August 19, 2011, the court entered an order and final judgment approving the settlement as fair, reasonable and adequate.  In September 2011, certain parties filed notices of appeal from the court’s order approving the settlement.  On July 29, 2011, a stipulation of settlement between certain affiliates of the Manager and the Trustee appointed under the Securities Investor Protection Act to liquidate BLMIS was filed in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York to resolve purported preference and fraudulent transfer claims by the Trustee.  On September 22, 2011, the court entered an order approving the settlement as fair, reasonable and adequate.  In October 2011, certain parties filed notices of appeal from the court’s order approving the settlement.  The aforementioned settlements do not resolve other outstanding lawsuits against the Manager and its affiliates relating to BLMIS.

On April 16, 2010, a lawsuit was filed in New York state court against the Manager, an affiliate of the Manager and AAArdvark IV Funding Limited (“AAArdvark IV”), an entity advised by the Manager’s affiliate, in connection with investments made by the plaintiffs in AAArdvark IV.  Plaintiffs allege breach of contract against the defendants and seek compensatory damages, costs and disbursements, including attorney fees.  On July 15, 2011, a lawsuit was filed in New York state court against the Manager, an affiliate of the Manager and AAArdvark Funding Limited (“AAArdvark I”), an entity advised by the Manager’s affiliate, in connection with investments made by the plaintiffs in AAArdvark I.  The complaint alleges breach of contract against the defendants and seeks compensatory damages, costs and disbursements, including attorney fees.  On November 9, 2011, a lawsuit was filed in New York state court against the Manager, an affiliate of the Manager and AAArdvark XS Funding Limited (“AAArdvark XS”), an entity advised by the Manager’s affiliate, in connection with investments made by the plaintiffs in AAArdvark XS.  The complaint alleges breach of contract against the defendants and seeks compensatory damages, costs and disbursements, including attorney fees.

The Manager believes the lawsuits and appeals described above are without legal merit and, with the exception of actions it has settled, is defending against them vigorously.  The Defendant Funds’ Boards of Trustees have also engaged counsel to represent the Funds and the present and former Independent Trustees named in those suits.  While it is premature to render any opinion as to the outcome in these lawsuits, or whether any costs that the Defendant Funds may bear in defending the suits might not be reimbursed by insurance, the Manager believes that these suits should not impair the ability of the Manager or the Distributor to perform their respective duties to the Fund, and that the outcome of all of the suits together should not have any material effect on the operations of any of the Oppenheimer mutual funds.