Input/Output, Inc. - Securities Class Action

Company and Case Information

IMPORTANT INFORMATION | INDEX OF FILINGS | SEARCH

Home

Index of Filings

News and Press Releases

Filings

Litigation Activity Indices

Annual/Quarterly Updates

Clearinghouse Research

Articles & Papers

Search

Related Sites

About Us

Local Rules

Sponsors

Register

_______________
Copyright (c) 2001
Stanford Law School

Input/Output, Inc. Conclusion: According to the Company’s FORM 10-Q For The Quarterly Period Ended September 30, 2005, one of the complaints was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff in that case on April 28, 2005. On May 13, 2005, the court ordered the three remaining cases to be consolidated into one case, styled Harold Read, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Input/Output, Inc, Robert P. Peebler, J. Michael Kirksey, and Michael K. Lambert. On August 26, 2005, the court ordered that the class action allegations contained in the consolidated lawsuit be stricken from the lawsuit for the plaintiffs’ failure to identify and designate a lead plaintiff in the lawsuit. On September 2, 2005, the court ordered that the former putative class action lawsuit be dismissed without prejudice

The complaint charges I/O and one or more of its officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the company failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse facts which were known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them: (1) that the integration of GXT and I/O was a significant failure; (2) that in contrast to I/O representations, GXT project pipeline lacked in volume; (3) that, in addition to the company as a whole, I/O's business development group, within the ISG group, was suffering from poor management execution; (4) that company's internal growth, due to poor management execution, remained stagnant irregardless of management's assertions otherwise; and (5) that as a result of the above, the defendants' statements about the company were lacking in any reasonable basis when made.

Furthermore, on or around January 4, 2005, I/O issued a press release wherein it announced that fourth quarter results would be significantly below the low end of the company's guidance of $0.08 per share primarily because two high margin GXT data library sales were not completed as expected. News of this shocked the market. As a result, shares of I/O fell $1.41 per share, or about 17 percent, to close at $6.90 per share on usually high trading volume.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 3829
Sector: Technology
Industry: Scientific & Technical Instr.

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Input/Output, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	IO
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.i-o.com/

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Harold Read, et al. v. Input/Output, Inc., et al.

COURT: S.D. Texas	DOCKET NUMBER: 05-CV-00108
JUDGE NAME: Hon. Nancy F. Atlas
DATE FILED: 01/11/2005	SOURCE: Notice of Filing
CLASS PERIOD START: 05/10/2004	CLASS PERIOD END: 01/04/2005
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Unamended/Unconsolidated
PLAINTIFF FIRMS IN THIS OR SIMILAR CASE:
Emerson Poynter LLP 2228 Cottondale Avenue, Suite 100, Little Rock, AR, 72202 (voice) 800.663.9817, (fax) 501.907.2556, epllp@emersonpoynter.com Hoeffner & Bilek, LLP 440 Louisiana - Suite 720, Houston, TX, 77002 (voice) 713.227.7720, (fax) , 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 Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Los Angeles) 355 S. Grand Avenue, Suite 4170, Los Angeles, CA, 90071 (voice) 213.617.9007, (fax) 213.617.9185, info@lerachlaw.com Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (NY) 200 Broadhollow Road, Suite 406, Melville, NY, 11747 (voice) 631-367-7100, (fax) 631-367-1173, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP 3 Bala Plaza E, Bala Cynwyd, PA, 19004 (voice) 610.667.7706, (fax) 610.667.7056, info@sbclasslaw.com Scott & Scott LLC P.O. Box 192, 108 Norwich Avenue, Colchester, CT, 06415 (voice) 860.537.5537, (fax) 860.537.4432, scottlaw@scott-scott.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 7

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint - Jury Trial Demanded
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 1/11/2005
Memorandum and Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 8/29/2005
Order Of Dismissal
Type: Order		Date on the document: 9/2/2005
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 09/02/2005

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

�