Motorola, Inc. - 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

Motorola, Inc. Summary: The original complaint charges Motorola and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Motorola builds, markets and sells products, services and applications that make connections to people, information and entertainment through broadband, embedded systems and wireless networks.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that in the summer of 2006, Motorola's poor financial performance had depressed its stock price to below $19 per share. In order to artificially inflate the price of Motorola stock, defendants began a series of false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business and prospects. Specifically, defendants repeatedly told investors to expect strong growth in sales and revenues. On October 17, 2006, defendants announced that Motorola had failed to meet its revenue and sales projections. As a result of this announcement, Motorola's stock price declined over 7% in two trading days. Then on January 4, 2007, defendants announced that Motorola's fourth quarter 2006 results also failed to meet expectations. This time, the Company's stock price declined almost 8%.

On October 16, 2007, the Court issued the Order signed by U.S. District Judge James B. Moran consolidating the actions and appointing the Macomb County Employees’ Retirement System as Lead Plaintiff and approving their selection of Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP and Miller Law LLC as Lead and Liaison Counsel, respectively. On December 20, 2007, a Consolidated Amended Complaint was filed. The defendants responded by filing motions to dismiss on February 5, 2008.

On September 23, 2008, U.S. District Judge James B. Moran issued the Memorandum Opinion and Order dismissing Count I as to two individual defendants and denied the remainder of the defendants' motion to dismiss. The parties soon after engaged in discovery proceedings. On February 27, 2009, the plaintiff filed a motion to certify the class. On August 25, 2009, that motion was granted.

On March 15, 2010, the plaintiffs were granted leave to file redacted second amended complaint. The plaintiffs filed a (Redacted) Second Amended Complaint that day. On November 17, 2010, one of the individual defendants was voluntarily dismissed from the action. On March 14, 2011, a Stipulation of Dismissal of All Claims against two individual defendants. On March 25, 2011, the defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, which was denied on July 25, 2011.

On February 02, 2012, a Stipulation of Settlement was filed by the court outlining the understanding of the parties in conjunction with the resolution of the case.

On February 15, 2012, an Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement and Providing for Notice was signed by the judge in this case.

On May 09, 2012, a Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice; an Order Approving Plan of Allocation of Settlement Proceeds; and an Order Awarding Attorneys' Fees and Expenses and Reimbursement of Plaintiffs' Expenses were issued by the Court thereby dismissing this case with prejudice.

INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 3663
Sector: Technology
Industry: Communications Equipment

COMPANY/ISSUER NAME:	Motorola, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER:	MOT
COMPANY WEBSITE:	http://www.motorola.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE

Eric Silverman, et al. v. Motorola, Inc., et al.

COURT: N.D. Illinois	DOCKET NUMBER: 07-CV-04507
JUDGE NAME: Hon. James B. Moran
DATE FILED: 08/09/2007	SOURCE: Notice of Filing
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/19/2006	CLASS PERIOD END: 01/04/2007
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (Melville) 58 South Service Road, Suite 200, Melville, NY, 11747 (voice) 631.367.7100, (fax) 631.367.1173, Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego) 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA, 92101 (voice) 619.231.1058, (fax) 619.231.7423, Miller Law LLC 115 S. LaSalle Street, Suite 2910, Chicago, IL, 60603 (voice) 312.676.2665, (fax) , info@MillerLawLLC.com Schiffrin Barroway Topaz & Kessler, LLP (Radnor) 280 King of Prussia Road, Radnor, PA, 19087 (voice) 610.667.7706, (fax) 610.667.7056, info@sbtklaw.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 4

DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
Class Action Complaint for Violation of Federal Securities Laws - Demand for Jury Trial
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 08/09/2007
Order Consolidating The Actions, Appointing Lead Plaintiff And Approving Select Of Lead And Liaison Counsel
Type: Order		Date on the document: 10/16/2007

REFERENCE COMPLAINT

Eric Silverman, et al. v. Motorola, Inc., et al.

COURT: N.D. Illinois	DOCKET NUMBER: 07-CV-04507
JUDGE NAME:
DATE FILED: 03/15/2010	SOURCE: Docket
CLASS PERIOD START: 07/19/2006	CLASS PERIOD END: 01/04/2007
TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Second Amended
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. (New York) 350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5508, New York, NY, 10118 (voice) 212.686.1060, (fax) 212.202.3827, lrosen@rosenlegal.com _____________________________________________ TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS: 1

DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
Consolidated Amended Complaint For Violation Of The Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 12/20/2007
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Type: Order		Date on the document: 09/23/2008
Second Amended Complaint For Violation Of Federal Securities Laws
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 03/15/2010
Stipulation And Order Of Dismissal Of All Claims Against Daniel M. Moloney And Gregory Q. Brown
Type: Order		Date on the document: 03/15/2011
Memorandum Opinion And Order
Type: Memorandum		Date on the document: 07/25/2011
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 07/26/2011
Stipulation of Settlement
Type: Settlement		Date on the document: 02/02/2012
Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement And Providing For Notice
Type: Other		Date on the document: 02/16/2012
Memorandum Opinion And Order
Type: Other		Date on the document: 05/07/2012
Final Judgment And Order Of Dismissal With Prejudice
Type: Other		Date on the document: 05/09/2012
Order Approving Plan Of Allocation Of Settlement Proceeds
Type: Other		Date on the document: 05/09/2012
Order Awarding Attorneys’ Fees And Expensies And Reimbursement Of Plaintiffs’ Expenses
Type: Other		Date on the document: 05/09/2012
U.S. District Court Civil Docket
Type: Docket		Date on the document: 05/14/2012

OTHER DOCUMENTS
Class Action Complaint - Jury Trial Demanded
Case Name and/or Number: Katherine Acheson, et al. v. Motorola, Inc., et al.
Type: Complaint		Date on the document: 09/05/2007

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

�