![]() |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| TeleCommunication Systems Summary: According to a Press Release dated October 30, 2001, a complaint was filed alleging violations of Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. On or about August 8, 2000, TeleCommunication commenced an initial public offering of 4,700,000 of its shares of common stock at an offering price of $17 per share (the 'TeleCommunication IPO'). In connection therewith, TeleCommunication filed a registration statement, which incorporated a prospectus (the 'Prospectus'), with the SEC. The complaint further alleges that the Prospectus was materially false and misleading because it failed to disclose, among other things, that: (i) Chase, Deutsche, Salomon, Banc of America, Merrill Lynch, Bear-Stearns, and Thomas Weisel had solicited and received excessive and undisclosed commissions from certain investors in exchange for which Chase, Deutsche, Salomon, Banc of America, Merrill Lynch, Bear-Stearns, and Thomas Weisel allocated to those investors material portions of the restricted number of TeleCommunication shares issued in connection with the TeleCommunication IPO; and (ii) Chase, Deutsche, Salomon, Banc of America, Merrill Lynch, Bear-Stearns, and Thomas Weisel had entered into agreements with customers whereby Chase, Deutsche, Salomon, Banc of America, Merrill Lynch, Bear-Stearns, and Thomas Weisel agreed to allocate TeleCommunication shares to those customers in the TeleCommunication IPO in exchange for which the customers agreed to purchase additional TeleCommunication shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined prices. INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION: SIC Code: 4812 Sector: Technology Industry: Software & Programming
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 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||