 | ||
|
| Home Annual/Quarterly Updates About Us
|
Sigma Designs, Inc. Conclusion: According to the docket posted, on July 11, 2000, the Court entered the Order and Judgment by U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel granting the motion to dismiss the Corrected First Amended Complaint. The case was closed.
As previously reported by the Company’ FORM 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 31, 2000, in February 1998, two punitive class action complaints were filed against the Company in the United States District Court, Northern District Court of California, Romine, et al. v. Sigma Designs, Inc., et al., No. C-98-0537-TEC (N.D.Cal.) and Shah, et al. v. Sigma Designs, Inc., et al., No C-98-0582-MHP (N.D.Cal.). The federal court consolidated complaint alleges that Sigma Designs, Inc. and certain of its officers and former officers and/or directors, issued false or misleading statements regarding the Company’s business prospects during the period October 24, 1995 through February 13, 1997. The complaint does not specify the amount of damages sought by the plaintiffs. On October 8, 1999, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint. In response to this motion, the plaintiffs agreed and filed a second amended complaint. On April 21, 2000, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. The hearing on that motion is scheduled for June 26, 2000.
The complaint charges Sigma and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Sigma makes multimedia products for use in personal computer products, including MPEG products. The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Sigma and the individual defendants made false and misleading statements about the state of Sigma's business, its finances, the success of its new marketing initiatives, the success of its development of newer products, demand for its products and its future prospects for the purpose of inflating the price of Sigma stock so they could complete an acquisition using shares as currency and sell 366,500 of stock they held at inflated prices for $3.7 million.
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 3577
Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Peripherals
| COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: | Sigma Designs, Inc. |
| COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: | SIGM |
| COMPANY WEBSITE: | http://www.sigmadesigns.com |
| FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE | |||||||||||||||||
| Romine, et al. v. Sigma Designs, Inc., et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT | |||
| Complaint for Violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 02/10/1998 | ||
| Declaration Of Lisa C. Atkinson In Support Of Plaintiffs' Motion To Be Appointed Lead Plaintiff Pursuant To Sect;21d(A)(3)(B) Of The Securities Exchange Act Of 1934 | |||
| Type: Declaration | Date on the document: 04/13/1998 | ||
| The Romine Group's Notice Of Motion And Motion And Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support Of Plaintiffs' Motion To Consolidate Cases For All Purposes | |||
| Type: Notice | Date on the document: 04/13/1998 | ||
| Defendants' Statement of Non-Opposition to Plaintiff the Romine Group's Motion To Be Appointed Lead Plaintiffs and for Appointment of Lead Plaintiffs' Co-Lead Counsel | |||
| Type: Motion | Date on the document: 04/16/1998 | ||
| Defendants' Statement of Non-Opposition to Plaintiff the Romine Group's Motion To Consolidate Cases for All Purposes | |||
| Type: Motion | Date on the document: 04/16/1998 | ||
| REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||||||||||||||||
| Romine, et al. v. Sigma Designs, Inc., et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||
| CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 98-CV-20458 | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 02/08/1999 | ||
| Litigants | |||
| Type: Other | Date on the document: 02/08/1999 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 07/10/2000 | ||
| OTHER DOCUMENTS | |||
| Complaint for Violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Shah, et al. v. Sigma Designs, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 02/12/1998 | ||
| Plaintiffs' Notice Of Motion And Motion And Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support Of Motion To Be Appointed Lead Plaintiff Pursuant To Sect. 21d(A)(3)(B) | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Shah, et al. v. Sigma Designs, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Motion | Date on the document: 04/13/1998 | ||
| CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 98-CV-20459 | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Shah, et al v. Sigma Designs, Inc., et al | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 03/25/1999 | ||
| Litigants | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Shah, et al. v. Sigma Designs, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Other | Date on the document: 03/25/1999 | ||
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