 | ||
|
| Home Annual/Quarterly Updates About Us
|
Comverse Technology, Inc. Summary: On March 5, 2008, the plaintiffs filed a Second Consolidated Amended Complaint and later filed a revised version of the complaint on April 10, 2008. An individual defendant filed a motion to dismiss in part. On July 15, 2008, the lead plaintiffs filed a motion to certify the class. On July 18, 2008, the individual defendant’s motion to dismiss was granted and the claims against him were dismissed.
In an article dated February 26, 2008, Comverse Technology Inc., the world's largest maker of voice-mail software, lost a bid to dismiss a lawsuit filed by investors who said they were defrauded by an options-backdating scheme led by ex-Chief Executive Officer. United States District Court Judge Nicholas Garaufis, in Brooklyn, New York, denied a request by Comverse to dismiss a consolidated class-action, or group lawsuit, filed in 2006 against Comverse and other former top executives.
Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Amended Complaint on March 23, 2007. Defendants filed their first motions to dismiss the Consolidated Amended Complaint on July 30, 2008, while one individual defendant filed his motion to dismiss on August 21, 2007.
In an article dated March 6, 2007, the federal judge overseeing a class action lawsuit against embattled telecommunications company Comverse Technology has vacated a magistrate judge's decision recommending the appointment of Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins as lead plaintiff's counsel. Finding that Lerach Coughlin's client, Plumbers and Pipefitters National Pension Fund (P&P), did not in fact have the greatest financial interest in the litigation, Eastern District Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis, in In re Comverse Technology, Inc. Securities Litigation, 06-CV-1825, last week granted a request by Pomerantz Haudek Block Grossman & Gross to serve as lead plaintiff's counsel. In appointing the firm that role under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, the judge said Pomerantz Haudek's client, the Menorah Group, purchased "the greatest number of net shares" of Comverse stock, "expanded the greatest number of net funds" and suffered "the greatest loss."
The original Complaint alleges that defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of materially false statements. Specifically, defendants failed to disclose information regarding the true timing of stock option grants made to key executives. This manipulation of the grant dates permitted the individual defendants to enrich themselves, while artificially inflating net income, operating income and retained earnings. Had the timing not been manipulated, and properly accounted for, these financial measures would have been materially lower.
The complaint further alleges that on or around March 14, 2006, Comverse announced the creation of a special committee of its Board of Directors composed of outside directors to review matters relating to the company's stock option grants, the accuracy of the stated dates of option grants and whether all proper corporate procedures were followed. Then, on April 17, 2006, Comverse revealed that it would restate its financial statements for the first three quarters of fiscal 2006, for the 2001-05 fiscal years, and possibly previous periods. The adjustments are expected to be material. On this news, Comverse stock dropped from $29.15 on March 13, 2006 to $23.31 on April 17, 2006, a decline of over 20%.
Similar securities class actions against Comverse Technology, Inc. have also been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 3661
Sector: Technology
Industry: Communications Equipment
| COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: | Comverse Technology, Inc. |
| COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: | CMVT |
| COMPANY WEBSITE: | http://www.cmvt.com |
| FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE | |||||||||||||||||
| Anthony Caiafia, et al. v. Comverse Technology, Inc., et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT | |||
| Class Action Complaint - Jury Trial Demanded | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 04/19/2006 | ||
| Order | |||
| Type: Order of Consolidation | Date on the document: 8/16/2006 | ||
| Memorandum & Order | |||
| Type: Order Appointing LP/LC | Date on the document: 9/27/2006 | ||
| US District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 11/29/2006 | ||
| Memorandum and Order | |||
| Type: Order Appointing LP/LC | Date on the document: 3/2/2007 | ||
| REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||||||||||||||||
| In Re Comverse Technology, Inc. Securities Litigation | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||
| Consolidated Amended Complaint For Violations Of Federal Securities Laws | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 3/23/2007 | ||
| Report & Recommendation | |||
| Type: Other | Date on the document: 10/31/2007 | ||
| Memorandum and Order | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 2/19/2008 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 8/6/2008 | ||
| OTHER DOCUMENTS | |||
| Class Action Complaint for Violation of Federal Securities Laws - Demand for Jury Trial | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Tully Nadel, et al. v. Comverse Technology, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 04/25/2006 | ||
| Verified Shareholder's Derivative Complaint | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Braverman, et al. v. Comverse Technology, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 05/01/2006 | ||
| Class Action Complaint for Violations of Federal Securities Laws - Demand for Jury Trial | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Thomas, et al. v. Comverse Technology, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 05/04/2006 | ||
| Class Action Complaint - Jury Trial Demanded | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Gorman, et al. v. Comverse Technology, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 06/01/2006 | ||
| Class Action Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws - Jury Trial Demanded | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Moore, et al. v. Comverse Technology, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 06/12/2006 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Thomas, et al. v. Comverse Technology, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 08/08/2006 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Moore, et al. v. Comverse Technology, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 08/28/2006 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Nadel, et al. v. Comverse Technology, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 08/28/2006 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Gorman, et al. v. Comverse Technology, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 09/28/2006 | ||
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