 | ||
|
| Home Annual/Quarterly Updates About Us
|
Sonic Solutions, Inc. Summary: On January 10, 2008, the Court issued the Order by Martin J. Jenkins granting the motion to appoint City Of Westland Police and Fire Retirement System and Plymouth County Retirement System as lead plaintiffs and approved their selection of Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP and Labaton Sucharow LLP as lead counsels. On March 21, 2008, a Consolidated Class Action Complaint was filed. On May 27, 2008, the plaintiffs filed a Corrected Consolidated Class Action Complaint. The defendants have filed a motion to dismiss the Corrected Consolidated Class Action Complaint, which is currently pending before the Court.
The original complaint charges Sonic and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Sonic develops and markets computer software related to digital media, such as data, photographs, audio and video in digital formats.
The complaint alleges that prior to the Class Period, Sonic had manipulated its stock option accounting which caused its SEC filings made during the Class Period to be false. Also during the Class Period, Sonic and its top officers made false and misleading statements about its business and prospects, all while concealing its false stock option grant practices, causing its stock to trade at artificially inflated levels.
On February 1, 2007, Sonic announced that it had commenced a voluntary review of its historical and current stock option grant practices and related accounting. Then, on May 17, 2007, after the market closed, Sonic announced its preliminary unaudited financial results for the fourth quarter ended March 31, 2007, and stated that based on its previous review, Sonic lacked sufficient documentation for certain historical option grants and that the measurement dates associated with these option grants will need to be adjusted. The Company further stated that it will have to record additional cash and non-cash charges for stock-based compensation expense and restate previous financial statements, and that such charges will be material.
On this news, Sonic's stock collapsed from $13.37 per share to as low as $11.76 per share on volume of 1.8 million shares. This drop continued a decline from $18 per share which began in February 2007, when Sonic first disclosed its stock option problems.
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 7373
Sector: Technology
Industry: Computer Networks
| COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: | Sonic Solutions, Inc. |
| COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: | SNIC |
| COMPANY WEBSITE: | www.sonic.com |
| FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE | |||||||||||||||||
| City of Westland Police and Fire Retirement System, et al. v. Sonic Solutions, et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT | |||
| Complaint For Violation Of The Federal Securities Laws | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 10/4/2007 | ||
| Order Granting The Retirement Funds' Motion For Appointment As Lead Plaintiff And Approving Their Selection Of Lead Counsel | |||
| Type: Order | Date on the document: 1/10/2008 | ||
| REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||||||||||||||||
| City Of Westland Police And Fire Retirement System And Plymouth County Retirement System, et al. v. Sonic Solutions, Inc., et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||
| Consolidated Class Action Complaint For Violations Of The Federal Securities Law | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 3/21/2008 | ||
| [Corrected] Consolidated Class Action Complaint For Violations Of The Federal Securities Law | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 5/27/2008 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 6/27/2008 | ||
| 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