En Pointe Technologies, 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

En Pointe Technologies, Inc. Conclusion: On October 4, 2006, the Court entered the Final Judgment signed by U.S. District Judge Anthony J. Battaglia. According to the Final Judgment, this Court hereby dismisses this Action on the merits and with prejudice against all persons or entities who are Class Members, in favor of Defendants and without costs to any of the parties as against any other settling party, except as provided in the Stipulation. Plaintiff's counsel are awarded fees of $600,000.00 (33 1/3%) plus interest of the same rate earned in the settlement fund until the date of payment, and dispursements of $60,461.39. The two lead plaintiffs (Robert Famberg and Richard Tavano) shall receive a payment of $5,000.00 each, for their services to the Class.

According to a press release dated August 10, 2006, a hearing has been scheduled before this Court on September 29, 2006 at 9:00 A.M., Courtroom A, United State Courthouse, 940 Front St., San Diego, CA 92101-8900, to consider approval of the proposed settlement of this action for, among other consideration, $1.8 million; certification of a plaintiff class; Class Counsel's application for attorney's fees and reimbursement of expenses; and related matters in the action.

As reported by the Company’s FORM 10-Q for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2005, in an amended complaint, the plaintiffs limited their claims to claims against the Company and its Chief Executive Officer. In response to a motion to dismiss, the Court further limited plaintiffs’ claims to allegations of market manipulation and insider trading. The En Pointe defendants have answered the amended and limited complaint. The Court certified the case as a class action.

The original class action law suit was filed alleging violations of the federal securities laws (including Sections 10(b) and 20(a). The lawsuit alleges that En Pointe and certain management insiders participated in a scheme to artificially inflate the Company's stock price and misrepresent the condition of its business. The complaint alleges that En Pointe issued a series of false and misleading statements during the Class Period that allowed insiders to divert almost $50,000,000 of shareholders' money. According to the complaint, this scheme included creating artificial demand for the stock, refusing to execute sell orders, and misrepresenting En Pointe's ownership interest in Supply Access, Inc. The complaint specifically alleges that while the stock was inflated to over $45.00 a share, insiders dumped their holdings.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 5045
Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Hardware

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	En Pointe Technologies, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	ENPT
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.enpointe.com/

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Ruffalo, et al. v. En Pointe Technologies, Inc., et al.

COURT: S.D. California	DOCKET NUMBER: 01-CV-00205
JUDGE NAME: Hon. M. J. Lorenz
DATE FILED: 02/02/2001	SOURCE: Notice
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/07/1999	CLASS PERIOD END: 04/13/2000
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Unamended/Unconsolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS IN THIS OR SIMILAR CASE:
Brodsky & Smith, LLC 11 Bala Avenue, Suite 39, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004 (voice) 610.668.7987., (fax) 610.660.0450, esmith@Brodsky-Smith.com Finkelstein & Krinsk LLP 501 West Broadway, Suit 1250, San Diego, CA, 92101 (voice) 877.493.5366, (fax) 619.238.5425, Finkelstein, Thompson & Loughran 1050 30th Street, NW, Washington, DC, 20007 (voice) 202.337.8000, (fax) 202.337.8090, contact@ftllaw.com Krause Kalfayan Benink & Slavens, LLP 1010 Second Avenue, Suite 1750, San Diego, CA, 92101 (voice) 619.232.0331, (fax) 619.232.4019, Stull, Stull & Brody (New York) 6 East 45th Street, New York, NY, 10017 (voice) 310.209.2468, (fax) 310.209.2087, SSBNY@aol.com Wechsler Harwood LLP 488 Madison Avenue 8th Floor, New York, NY, 10022 (voice) 212.935.7400, (fax) , info@whhf.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 6

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws - Jury Trial Demanded
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 02/02/2001

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

In Re: En Pointe Technologies, Inc. Securities Litigation

COURT: S.D. California	DOCKET NUMBER: 01-CV-00205
JUDGE NAME: Hon. M. J. Lorenz
DATE FILED: 10/07/2002	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 12/07/1999	CLASS PERIOD END: 04/13/2000
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: First Amended and Consolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Braun Law Group, P.C. 12400 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 920, Los Angeles, CA, 90025 (voice) (888)658-7100, (fax) , info@braunlawgroup.com Finkelstein & Krinsk LLP 501 West Broadway, Suit 1250, San Diego, CA, 92101 (voice) 877.493.5366, (fax) 619.238.5425, Finkelstein, Thompson & Loughran 1050 30th Street, NW, Washington, DC, 20007 (voice) 202.337.8000, (fax) 202.337.8090, contact@ftllaw.com Krause Kalfayan Benink & Slavens, LLP 1010 Second Avenue, Suite 1750, San Diego, CA, 92101 (voice) 619.232.0331, (fax) 619.232.4019, _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 4

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint For Violations Of The Federal Securities Laws Jury Trial Demanded
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 06/18/2001
First Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 10/07/2002
En Pointe Technologies, Inc.’s And Attazaz Din's Third-Party Complaint For Implied Indemnification And Contribution Against First Union
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 01/10/2006
Notice Of Pendency Of A Class Action, And A Proposed Settlement
Type: Notice		Date on the document: 07/05/2006
Proof of Claim and Release
Type: Other		Date on the document: 07/05/2006
Final Judgment and Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 09/29/2006
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 09/29/2006

OTHER DOCUMENTS

Case Name and/or Number:
Type:		Date on the document:

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

�