 | ||
|
| Home Annual/Quarterly Updates About Us
|
Ramp Networks, Inc. Conclusion: According to the docket, on September 3, 2003, a Stipulation of Settlement was filed and on April 14, 2003, the Court entered the Final Judgment and Order of dismissal with prejudice. The case was terminated. On March 3, 2005, the Court further entered the Order authorizing the disbursement of the net settlement fund.
The original complaint alleges that defendants, throughout the class period, issued materially false and misleading statements to the public regarding Ramp's financial results, Ramp's future financial prospects, and marketplace demand for and acceptance of Ramp's products. As defendants continued to issue press releases and financial statements attesting to the company's purported sequential and year-over-year revenue growth, Ramp Networks stock reached an artificially inflated trading price of $26.75 per share. On September 29, 2000, however, defendants revealed that Ramp's revenues for the quarter ending the next day would be approximately 85% lower (and its loss 75% higher) than it had previously led analysts and the market to believe - a drastic decline in revenue in sequential and year-over-year terms. The next trading day, Ramp's share price dropped to $2.06 per share - decline of over 90% from Ramp's Class Period high. The lawsuit seeks to recover losses suffered by investors who purchased Ramp Networks stock during the class period, excluding the defendants and their affiliates. On November 14, 2000, subsequent to the filing of the suit, defendants issued a press release admitting that the financial statements it had issued for the first two quarters of 2000 were materially false and overstated when issued and would require a restating downwards. The action asserts claims for violations of sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. §78j(b) and §78t(a)) and SEC Rule 10b-5 (17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5) against Ramp Networks, Inc. and Mahesh Veerina (Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of Ramp Networks). On October 6, 2000, the first of several actions against Ramp Networks was commenced in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. On January 8, 2001, the court appointed Kirby McInerney & Squire as co-lead counsel for the proposed class of Ramp investors. On February 24, 2001, we filed an amendeded consolidated class action complaint. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss, and on June 22, 2001, the court dismissed the complaint, but granted plaintiffs leave to amend and resubmit their complaint.
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 7372
Sector: Technology
Industry: Software & Programming
| COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: | Ramp Networks, Inc. |
| COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: | RAMP |
| COMPANY WEBSITE: | http://www.rampnet.com |
| FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE | |||||||||||||||||
| Simon, et al. v. Ramp Networks, Inc., et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT | |||
| Class Action Complaint for Violation of the Securities Laws. Jury Trial Demanded | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 10/02/2000 | ||
| Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 11/27/2000 | ||
| REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||||||||||||||||
| In Re: Ramp Networks, Inc. Securities Litigation | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| OTHER DOCUMENTS | |||
| Complaint for Violation of Federal Securities Laws. Jury Trial Demanded | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: 00-CV-21043 | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 10/05/2000 | ||
| Complaint for Violation of Federal Securities Laws. Jury Trial Demanded | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: 00-CV-21086 | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 10/23/2000 | ||
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