Splash Technology Holdings, Inc. - 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

Splash Technology Holdings, Inc. Conclusion: According to the most recent docket posted on the site, on June 24, 2002 and January 22, 2003, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed three, separate appeals with prejudice filed previously by Plaintiffs, defendant Splash Technology and certain Individual Defendants, and the third filed by one Individual Defendant and Radius Inc.

On August 29, 2001, the Court entered two Orders by U.S. District Judge Saundra B. Armstrong granting motions by defendants to dismiss the second amended complaint with prejudice. Three Notice of Appeals were then filed by the Plaintiffs and the Defendants.

The original complaint charges Splash, certain of its officers and directors, its lead underwriters, two venture capital firms and Radius, Inc. with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint alleges that in order to inflate the price of Splash stock, while concealing the adverse conditions which Defendants knew were already impacting Splash's business, Defendants falsely represented that demand for all of Splash's products was strong, Splash occupied a unique market position characterized by accelerating market demand, Splash's financial results were indicative of continued strong product demand, there was very strong demand for Splash print servers in Asia, Splash's growth rate would be fueled beyond the industry's growth rate of 35% and Splash could grow revenue and earnings 35%-50% with substantial upside as it gains market share.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 3577
Sector: Technology
Industry: Communications Equipment

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Splash Technology Holdings, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	SPLH
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.splashtech.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Clarence F. Scott, et al. v. Splash Technology Holdings, Inc., et al.

COURT: N.D. California	DOCKET NUMBER: 99-CV-0109
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Saundra Brown Armstrong
DATE FILED: 1/13/1999	SOURCE: Internet
CLASS PERIOD START: 1/7/1997	CLASS PERIOD END: 10/13/1998
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Law Offices of Bruce G. Murphy 265 Llwyds Lane, Vero Beach La, FL, 32963 (voice) 561.231.4202, (fax) , Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (San Diego, CA) 600 West Broadway, 1800 One America Plaza, San Diego, CA, 92101 (voice) 800.449.4900, (fax) , support@milberg.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 2

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Complaint for Violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 01/13/1999
Notice of Entry of Related Case Order
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 03/05/1999
Declaration Of Stanley S. Mallison In Support Of (1) The Scott Plaintiff Group's Motion For Appointment Of Lead Plaintiffs Pursuant To Section 21d(A)(3)(B) Of The Securities Exchange Act Of 1934 And For Approval Of Lead Plaintiffs' Choice Of Counsel; And (2) The Scott Plaintiff Group's Motion To Consolidate For All Purposes Two Related Actions Against Splash Technology Holdings, Inc., Et Al.
Type: Declaration		Date on the document: 03/15/1999
The Scott Plaintiff Group's Notice Of Motion, Motion And Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support Of Motion For Appointment Of Lead Plaintiffs Pursuant To Section 21d(A)(3)(B) Of The Securities Exchange Act Of 1934 And For Approval Of Lead Plaintiffs' Choice Of Counsel
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 03/15/1999
The Scott Plaintiff Group's Notice of Motion, Motion and Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion To Consolidate for All Purposes Two Related Actions
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 03/15/1999
Supplemental Declaration Of John K. Grant In Support Of The Scott Plaintiff Group's Motion For Appointment Of Lead Plaintiffs Pursuant To Section 21D(a)(3)(B) Of The Securities Exchange Act Of 1934 And For Approval Of Lead Plaintiffs' Choice Of Counsel
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 04/27/1999
The Scott Plaintiff Group's Reply In Support Of Motion For Appointment Of Lead Plaintiffs Pursuant To Section 21D(a)(3)(b) Of The Securities Exchange Act Of 1934 And For Approval Of Lead Plaintiffs' Choice Of Counsel
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 04/27/1999
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Consolidating Actions, Appointing Lead Plaintiffs, Scheduling Defendants' Motions to Dismiss, and Concerning Document Preservation
Type: Other		Date on the document: 04/29/1999
Notice of Entry of Order
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 05/06/1999
Declaration of Steve S. Nikkhou in Support of Splash Defendants' Motion To Dismiss the Complaint
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 06/14/1999
Splash Defendants' Notice of Motion and Motion To Dismiss the Complaint and Supporting Memorandum
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 06/14/1999
Supplemental Declaration of Steve S. Nikkhou in Support of Splash Defendants' Motion To Dismiss the Complaint
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 06/14/1999
Declaration of David M. Lisi in Support of Digital Origin fka Radius, Inc.'s and Charles W. Berger's Motion To Dismiss the Complaint
Type: Declaration		Date on the document: 06/18/1999
Digital Origin fka Radius, Inc.'s and Charles W. Berger's Notice of Motion and Motion To Dismiss the Complaint; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 06/18/1999
Underwriter Defendants' Notice of Motion and Motion To Dismiss Consolidated Complaint and Memorandum in Support
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 06/18/1999
Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Expedited Motion for Continuance of Motions To Dismiss
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 08/06/1999
Defendants' Statement of Recent Decision in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Continuance of Motions To Dismiss
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 09/29/1999
Notice of Entry of Order Granting Plaintiffs' Expedited Motion for Continuance of Date for Filing Amended Complaint Pending Ninth Circuit Ruling
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 10/06/1999

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In Re: Splash Technology Holdings, Inc. Securities Litigation

COURT: N.D. California	DOCKET NUMBER: 99-CV-0109
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Saundra Brown Armstrong
DATE FILED: 10/25/2000	SOURCE: Notice
CLASS PERIOD START: 1/7/1997	CLASS PERIOD END: 10/13/1998
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Second Amended
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (Los Angeles, CA) 355 S Grand Ave - Ste 4170, Los Angeles, CA, 90071-3172 (voice) 213.617.9007, (fax) , Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (S.F., CA) 100 Pine Street - Suite 2600, San Francisco, CA, 94111 (voice) 415.288.4545, (fax) 415.288.4534, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (San Diego, CA) 600 West Broadway, 1800 One America Plaza, San Diego, CA, 92101 (voice) 800.449.4900, (fax) , support@milberg.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 3

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
First Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint For Violations Of The Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 12/14/1999
Declaration of Steve S. Nikkhou in Support of Splash Defendants' Motion To Dismiss the Amended Complaint, Volume 2 of 2
Type: Declaration		Date on the document: 01/18/2000
Splash Defendants' Notice of Motion and Motion To Dismiss the Amended Complaint and Supporting Memorandum
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 01/18/2000
Notice of Entry of Order
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 01/25/2000
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 99-CV-109
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 01/27/2000
Litigants
Type: Other		Date on the document: 01/27/2000
Notice of Entry of Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 09/29/2000
Defendants’ Statement of Recent Decisions in Support of Their Motions to Dismiss the Second Amended Consolidated Complaint
Type: Motion		Date on the document: 06/12/2001
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 01/22/2003

OTHER DOCUMENTS
Complaint for Violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Case Name and/or Number: Libros v. Splash Tech Holdings, et al
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 01/28/1999
Notice of Entry of Related Case Order
Case Name and/or Number: Libros, et al. v. Splash Technology Holdings, Inc., et al.
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 03/05/1999
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 99-CV-461
Case Name and/or Number: Libros v. Splash Tech Holdings, et al
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 05/04/1999
Litigants
Case Name and/or Number: Libros v. Splash Tech Holdings, et al
Type: Other		Date on the document: 05/04/1999
U.S. Court of Appeals Docket
Case Name and/or Number: Clarence F. Scott, et al. v. Splash Technology Holdings, Inc., et al.
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 07/14/2003
U.S. Court of Appeals Docket [cross-appeal]
Case Name and/or Number: Clarence F. Scott, et al. v. Splash Technology Holdings, Inc., et al.
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 07/14/2003
U.S. Court of Appeals Docket [cross-appeal]
Case Name and/or Number: Clarence F. Scott, et al. v. Splash Technology Holdings, Inc., et al.
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 04/04/2005

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

�