Company and Case Information

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


BigBand Networks, Inc.
Summary: The original class action lawsuit was filed against BigBand Networks, Inc. in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, on behalf of shareholders who purchased the common stock of BigBand in connection with the Company's Initial Public Offering ("IPO") on or about March 15, 2007, or who purchased shares thereafter in the open market.

BigBand, certain of its officers and directors, and the Company's underwriters -- collectively, "defendants" -- are charged with including, or allowing the inclusion of, materially false and misleading statements in the Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with the IPO, in violation of the Securities Act of 1933.

The Complaint charges that BigBand raised over $159 million through the sale of 10.7 million shares, despite the Registration Statement's false and misleading statements issued in connection with the IPO. Specifically, the Complaint charges defendants with failing to adequately conduct a due diligence investigation into the Company prior to the IPO, and that they failed to reveal BigBand was not performing according to plan, lacked significant controls and procedures, and lacked any reasonable basis to forecast near-term foreseeable financial and operational results.

The Complaint further alleges that defendants failed to reveal the Company's results were already underperforming expectations at the time of the IPO, and that they had boosted the financial results of the quarter immediately prior to the offering by loading customers with unnecessary inventory -- such that sales in future quarters would foreseeably be adversely impacted as customers "worked off" excess inventory prior to purchasing more of BigBand's products. Additionally, the Complaint asserts that defendants failed to disclose that the roll out of its new products was not proceeding according to its growth plan, and that this transition too was adversely impacting revenues in the near-term.

On September 28, 2007, BigBand shares fell over 30% in a single trading day -- falling from over $9.00 per share to below $6.00 per share, before closing at $6.49 on exceptionally heavy trading volume of almost 7 million shares. This precipitous decline occurred after the truth was revealed to investors the previous evening that the problems existing at the time of the IPO, and detailed in the Complaint, would result in extremely disappointing results for the third quarter of 2007, including substantially reduced revenues.

On February 14, 2008, the Court entered the Orders granting the motion to consolidate the cases and granting the motion to appoint Lead Plaintiff and Lead Counsel. On May 30, 2008, a Consolidated Class Action Complaint was filed by the plaintiff, adding violations of §12(a)(2) of the Securities Act to the list of counts. On August 8, 2008, the defendants filed motions to dismiss the Consolidated Class Action Complaint. On February 23, 2009, District Court Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong denied the two pending motions to dismiss, without prejudice to refilling.

On April 6, 2009, a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement was filed. The proposed settlement is in the amount of $11 million in cash. On June 1, 2009, Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong granted the motion for preliminary approval of the settlement. A Settlement Fairness Hearing is set for September 15, 2009.

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


COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: BigBand Networks, Inc.
COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: BBND
COMPANY WEBSITE: www.bigbandnet.com

FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE
Bikash Mohan Mohanty, et al. v. BigBand Networks, Inc., et al.
 COURT: N.D. California  DOCKET NUMBER: 07-CV-05101
 JUDGE NAME: Hon. Saundra Brown Armstrong
 DATE FILED: 10/03/2007  SOURCE: Notice of Filing
 CLASS PERIOD START: 03/15/2007  CLASS PERIOD END: 10/03/2007
 TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Complaint (Unamended and Unconsolidated)
 PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  • 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, info@csgrr.com/
  • Finkelstein, Thompson & Loughran
      1050 30th Street, NW, Washington, DC, 20007
       (voice) 202.337.8000, (fax) 202.337.8090, contact@ftllaw.com
  • Kahn Gauthier Swick, LLC (NY)
      12 East 41st Street, 12th Floor, New York, NY, 10016
       (voice) 212.920.4310, (fax) 212.696.3730, info@kglg.com
  • Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer, LLP (San Francisco, CA)
      100 Pine Street, 26th Floor, San Francisco, CA, 94111
       (voice) 415.772.4700, (fax) 415.677.1233, info@kaplanfox.com
  • Lockridge, Grindal, Nauen P.L.L.P.
      Suite 301, 660 Pennsylvania Avenue Southeast, Washington, DC, 20003-4335
       (voice) 202.544.9840, (fax) 202.544.9850,
  • Saxena White PA (Boca Raton)
      2424 North Federal Highway, Suite 307, Boca Raton, FL, 33431
       (voice) 800.361.5096, (fax) 888.782.3081, info@saxenawhite.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
  • Scott & Scott LLC (Connecticut)
      P.O. Box 192, 108 Norwich Avenue, Colchester, CT, 06415
       (voice) 860.537.5537, (fax) 860.537.4432, scottlaw@scott-scott.com
  • Wolf Popper, LLP
      845 Third Avenue, New York, NY, 10022-6689Ave
       (voice) 877.370.7703, (fax) 212.486.2093, IRRep@wolfpopper.com
    _____________________________________________
     TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS:  9

  •  DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT
    Class Action Complaint For Violations Of Securities Laws
    Type: Complaint Date on the document: 10/3/2007
    Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference And ADR Deadlines
    Type: Order Date on the document: 10/3/2007
    Order
    Type: Order Appointing LP/LC Date on the document: 02/13/2008
    Stipulation And Order Regarding Consolidation And Scheduling
    Type: Order Date on the document: 2/13/2008
    Notice Of Motion And Lead Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion For Preliminary Approval Of Settlement And Memorandum Of Points And Authorities In Support
    Type: Motion Date on the document: 04/06/2009

    REFERENCE COMPLAINT
    In re BigBand Networks, Inc. Securities Litigation
     COURT: N.D. California  DOCKET NUMBER: 07-CV-05101
     JUDGE NAME: Hon. Saundra Brown Armstrong
     DATE FILED: 05/30/2008  SOURCE: Docket
     CLASS PERIOD START: 03/15/2007  CLASS PERIOD END: 03/15/2007
     TYPE OF COMPLAINT: Consolidated Complaint
     PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  • Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP (Los Angeles)
      700 South Flower Street - Suite 2940, Los Angeles, CA, 90017
       (voice) 213.330.7150, (fax) 213.330.7152, info@hagens-berman.com
  • Kahn Gauthier Swick, LLC (NY)
      12 East 41st Street, 12th Floor, New York, NY, 10016
       (voice) 212.920.4310, (fax) 212.696.3730, info@kglg.com
    _____________________________________________
     TOTAL NUMBER OF PLAINTIFF FIRMS:  2

  •  DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT
    Consolidated Class Action Complaint For Violation Of Securities Laws
    Type: Complaint Date on the document: 5/30/2008
    Order
    Type: Order Date on the document: 02/23/2009
    Order
    Type: Order Date on the document: 02/23/2009
    Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement And Providing For Notice; Exhibit A
    Type: Order Date on the document: 06/01/2009
    U.S. District Court Civil Docket
    Type: Docket Date on the document: 06/01/2009

     OTHER DOCUMENTS
    Class Action Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws - Demand for Jury Trial
    Case Name and/or Number: Ellen Brodsky, et al. v. BigBand Networks, Inc., et al.
    Type: Complaint Date on the document: 10/05/2007
    Class Action Complaint - Jury Trial Demanded
    Case Name and/or Number: Abrena Winston, et al. v. BigBand Networks, Inc., et al.
    Type: Complaint Date on the document: 10/18/2007
    Class Action Complaint for Violations of the Federal Securities Laws - Jury Trial Demanded
    Case Name and/or Number: Donald Smith, et al. v. BigBand Networks, Inc., et al.
    Type: Complaint Date on the document: 10/19/2007
    Class Action Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws - Demand for Jury Trial
    Case Name and/or Number: Wayne Luzon, et al. v. BigBand Networks, Inc., et al.
    Type: Complaint Date on the document: 11/06/2007
    U.S. District Court Civil Docket
    Case Name and/or Number: Wayne Luzon, et al. v. BigBand Networks, Inc., et al.
    Type: Docket Date on the document: 11/06/2007
    Class Action Complaint for Violation of Federal Securities Laws - Demand for Jury Trial
    Case Name and/or Number: Debra L. Bernstein, et al. v. BigBand Networks, Inc., et al.
    Type: Complaint Date on the document: 11/14/2007
    U.S. Civil Court Docket
    Case Name and/or Number: Debra L. Bernstein, et al. v. BigBand Networks, Inc., et al.
    Type: Docket Date on the document: 11/15/2007
    Class Action Complaint for Violations of Federal Securities Laws - Jury Trial Demanded
    Case Name and/or Number: Eugene L. Hammer, et al. v. BigBand Networks, Inc., et al.
    Type: Complaint Date on the document: 11/16/2007
    U.S. District Court Civil Docket
    Case Name and/or Number: Eugene L. Hammer, et al. v. BigBand Networks, Inc., et al.
    Type: Docket Date on the document: 11/16/2007

    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