Fischer Imaging Corporation - 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

Fischer Imaging Corporation Conclusion: On June 21, 2005, the Court entered the Order signed by U.S. District Judge Richard P. Matsch granting the defendants’ motions to dismiss the Amended Class Action Complaint. Judgment was entered and the Amended Complaint was dismissed without prejudice. On July 25, the plaintiff filed a motion to clarify the June 21 Order, but the Judge denied the motion by the Order entered on August 1, 2005.

According to a press release dated March 7, 2005, Fischer Imaging Corporation announced that the United States District Court for the District of Colorado denied preliminary approval for the previously disclosed proposed settlement of the putative class action lawsuit brought by plaintiffs The Sorkin, LLC and James K. Harbert. A hearing on motions to dismiss all claims is scheduled for May 6, 2005.

The original complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by disseminating materially false and misleading financial statements and press releases to the public concerning the Company's revenues and earnings. Further, the complaint alleges that defendants failed to timely correct the series of material falsehoods and misrepresentations falsehoods disseminated to the market between February 14, 2001 and April 1, 2003, thereby artificially inflating the price of Fischer Imaging securities. On April 1, 2003, Fischer Imaging announced in a press release that based on a review being conducted by the Company and Ernst & Young, LLP, it was necessary that Fischer Imaging delay the filing of its Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2002. The Company announced that based on preliminary findings, it will be necessary to restate its financial statements for the first three quarters of 2002 and the years ending December 31, 2000 and 2001. On April 2, 2003, and as a result of the prior day's announcement, the share price of Fischer Imaging tumbled to close at $4.40, down 18.36% from the previous day's close of $5.39

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 3844
Sector: Healthcare
Industry: Medical Equipment & Supplies

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Fischer Imaging Corporation
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	FIMG
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.fischerimaging.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

The Sorkin LLC, et al. v. Fischer Imaging Corporation, et al.

COURT: D. Colorado	DOCKET NUMBER: 03-CV-00631
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Richard P. Matsch
DATE FILED: 04/10/2003	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/14/2001	CLASS PERIOD END: 04/01/2003
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Unamended/Unconsolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS IN THIS OR SIMILAR CASE:
Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman, LLP (New York) 200 Broadhollow, Suite 406, Melville, NY, 11747 (voice) 631.367.7100, (fax) 631.367.1173, Dyer & Shuman, LLP 801 E. 17th Avenue, Denver, CO, 80218-1417 (voice) 303.861.3003, (fax) 800.711.6483, info@dyershuman.com Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A. World Trade Center-Baltimore,401 East Pratt Suite 2525, Baltimore, MD, 21202 (voice) 410.332.0030, (fax) , pivenlaw@erols.com Schiffrin & Barroway LLP 3 Bala Plaza E, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004 (voice) 610.667.7706, (fax) 610.667.7056, info@sbclasslaw.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 4

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Law
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 04/10/2003

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

The Sorkin LLC, et al. v. Fischer Imaging Corporation, et al.

COURT: D. Colorado	DOCKET NUMBER: 03-CV-00631
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Richard P. Matsch
DATE FILED: 10/21/2003	SOURCE: Business Wires
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/14/2001	CLASS PERIOD END: 04/01/2003
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Consolidated and/or Amended
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Allen & Vellone, P.C. 1600 Stout Street, Suite 1100 , Denver, CO, 80202 (voice) 303.534.4490, (fax) 303.893.8330, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP 3 Bala Plaza E, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004 (voice) 610.667.7706, (fax) 610.667.7056, info@sbclasslaw.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 2

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Judgment
Type: Other		Date on the document: 06/21/2005
Order Dismissing Amended Class Action Complaint
Type: Order		Date on the document: 06/21/2005
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 08/01/2005

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

�