Rational Software Corporation - Securities Class Action

Company and Case Information

IMPORTANT INFORMATION | INDEX OF FILINGS | SEARCH

Home

Index of Filings

News and Press Releases

Filings

Decisions

Settlements

Litigation Activity Indices

Top Ten List

Annual/Quarterly Updates

Clearinghouse Research

Articles & Papers

Search

Related Sites

About Us

Local Rules

Sponsors

Register

_______________
Copyright (c) 2001
Stanford Law School

Rational Software Corporation Conclusion: According to the latest docket posted, on May 5, 2000, a Second Amended Consolidated Complaint was filed against the remaining defendants, and on August 8, 2000, the defendants responded by filing a motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint. On October 30, 2000, the Court entered the Order by Judge Jeremy Fogel granting motion to dismiss Second Amended Complaint. Judgment dismissing the case was entered on October 31, 2000. On November 22, 2000, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal, and on June 3, 2002, the Court entered the copy of the judgment from the U.S. Court of Appeals affirming the decision of the District Court.

As previously reported by the Company’s FORM 10-K For the Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 2000, the following actions have been filed against the Company, its officer, Cowen & Company and a Cowen analyst. The action, In re Rational Software Securities Litigation, No. 21001-JF (N.D. Cal. May 26, 1998) is a consolidated action supplanting prior complaints filed against defendants. The actions are putative shareholder class action lawsuits. The complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 through the selective disclosure of material inside information regarding the Company's prospects and seek damages on behalf of a class of shareholders who purchased the Company's Common Stock on October 8, 1997. Plaintiffs have dismissed the Complaint as against the Company and its officer.

The original Complaint charges Rational, certain of its officers, and Cowen & Company, Inc. ("Cowen"), with violations of federal securities laws. Plaintiff complains of Rational's dissemination of material inside information regarding Rational's business prospects on a selective and discriminatory basis. Plaintiff contends that Rational provided material inside information to Cowen during the course of the day of October 8, 1997, permitting Cowen to inform its institutional clients and let them dump shares of Rational prior to full and proper disclosure of such information on a widespread basis to the investing public. Only after the market closed did Rational inform the investing public of the downward forecast of the Company's prospects.

Several similar, purported class action complaints were filed in the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern District of New York and Eastern District of Virginia. Those complaints have been transferred to the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts and have subsequently been consolidated with the lead case.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 7372
Sector: Technology
Industry: Software & Programming

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Rational Software Corporation
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	RATL
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.rational.com/

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Randall, et al., v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.

COURT: N.D. California	DOCKET NUMBER: 97-CV-21001
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Susan Illston
DATE FILED: 10/10/1997	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/08/1997	CLASS PERIOD END: 10/08/1997
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: First Consolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS IN THIS OR SIMILAR CASE:
Lionel Z. Glancy 1801 Avenue of the Stars Suite 308, Los Angeles, CA, 90067 (voice) 310.201.9150, (fax) , Wechsler Harwood LLP 488 Madison Avenue 8th Floor, New York, NY, 10022 (voice) 212.935.7400, (fax) , info@whhf.com Weiss & Yourman (New York, NY) The French Building, 551 Fifth Ave., Suite 1600, New York, NY, 10126 (voice) 212.682.3025, (fax) 212.682.3010, info@wyca.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 3

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 10/10/1997

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In Re: Rational Software Corporation Securities Litigation

COURT: N.D. California	DOCKET NUMBER: 97-CV-21001
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Jeremy Fogel
DATE FILED: 05/05/2000	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 10/08/1997	CLASS PERIOD END: 10/08/1997
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Second Amended and Consolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (FL) 515 North Flagler Drive - Suite 1701, West Palm Beach, FL, 33401 (voice) 561.835.9400, (fax) , Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP (LA) 1801 Ave. of the Stars, Suite 311, Los Angeles, CA, 90067 (voice) (310) 201-915, (fax) (310) 201-916, info@glancylaw.com Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego) 401 B Street, Suite 1700, San Diego, CA, 92101 (voice) 206.749.5544, (fax) 206.749.9978, info@lerachlaw.com Wechsler, Harwood, Halebian & Feffer, LLP 488 Madison Avenue, New York, NY, (voice) 212.935.7400, (fax) 10022, Weiss & Lurie (Los Angeles) 10940 Wilshire Blvd., 24th Floor, Los Angeles, CA, 90024 (voice) (310) 208-2800, (fax) (310) 209-2348, info@wllawca.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 5

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Rational Defendants' Notice of Motion and Motion To Dismiss; Supporting Memorandum of Points and Authorities
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 06/29/1998
Reply Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Rational Defendants' Motion To Dismiss
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 09/14/1998
Order Granting Defendants' Motions To Dismiss and Dismissing Consolidated Complaint With Leave To Amend
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 10/05/1998
Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiffs' Motion for Limited Discovery Complaint With Leave To Amend
Type: Order		Date on the document: 12/04/1998
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 97-CV-21001
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 03/16/1999
Litigants
Type: Other		Date on the document: 03/16/1999
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 06/03/2002

OTHER DOCUMENTS
Class Action Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws
Case Name and/or Number: Sachs, et al. v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 10/21/1997
Class Action Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws
Case Name and/or Number: Kalapa, et al. v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 11/07/1997
Class Action Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws
Case Name and/or Number: Weiner, et al. v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 12/08/1997
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 97-CV-2081
Case Name and/or Number: Lynch, et al. v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 02/24/1998
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 98-CV-20588
Case Name and/or Number: Dolnick, et al. v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 06/05/1998
Litigants
Case Name and/or Number: Dolnick, et al. v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Other		Date on the document: 06/05/1998
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 97-CV-21079
Case Name and/or Number: Kalapa, et al. v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 06/16/1998
Litigants
Case Name and/or Number: Kalapa v. Rational Software Corp., et al
Type: Other		Date on the document: 06/16/1998
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 98-CV-20563
Case Name and/or Number: Sieger, et al. v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 07/30/1998
Litigants
Case Name and/or Number: Sieger, et al. v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Other		Date on the document: 07/30/1998
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 97-CV-21086
Case Name and/or Number: Weiner, et al. v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 10/15/1998
Litigants
Case Name and/or Number: Weiner, et al. v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Other		Date on the document: 10/15/1998
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 97-CV-21000
Case Name and/or Number: Sachs, et al., v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 10/16/1998
Litigants
Case Name and/or Number: Sachs v. Rational Software, et al
Type: Other		Date on the document: 10/16/1998
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Enforcing the Stay Provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995
Case Name and/or Number: Randall, et al. v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Other		Date on the document: 12/18/1998
Reply Memorandum in Support of Petition for Writ of Mandamus Enforcing the Stay Provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995
Case Name and/or Number: Randall, et al., v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Other		Date on the document: 03/18/1999
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 98-CV-20314
Case Name and/or Number: Lynch, et al. v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 03/25/1999
Litigants
Case Name and/or Number: Lynch, et al. v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Other		Date on the document: 03/25/1999
Opinion [granting defendants' Petition for Writ of Mandamus vacating the district court's order for limited discovery]
Case Name and/or Number: Randall, et al., v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Other		Date on the document: 08/30/1999
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Case Name and/or Number: Sachs, et al., v. Rational Software Corporation, et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 03/08/2001

WARNING AND DISCLAIMER OF LIABILITY:
The information included on this Web site, whether provided by personnel employed by Stanford Law School or by third parties, is provided for research and teaching purposes only. Neither Stanford University, Stanford Law School, nor any of their employees, agents, contractors, or affiliates warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information or analyses displayed herein, and we caution all readers that inclusion of any information on this site does not constitute an endorsement of the truthfulness or accuracy of that information. In particular, this Web site contains complaints and other documents filed in federal and state courts, which make allegations that may or may not be accurate. No reader should, on the basis of information contained in or referenced by this Web site, assume that any of these allegations are truthful.

Go to Search page | Go to Case Index page | Back to Top

�