Company and Case Information

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