 | ||
|
| Home Annual/Quarterly Updates About Us
|
Synchronoss Technologies, Inc. Summary: The original class action was filed against defendants Synchronoss, its President, CEO and Chairman and its CFO and Treasurer. According to the complaint, defendants violated sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5, by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market during the Class Period. Synchronoss is a provider of on-demand multi-channel transaction software management platforms that enable communications service providers to automate new subscriber activation, order management and service provisioning.
The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants made fraudulent material misrepresentations and omissions regarding Synchronoss's business and operations. Specifically, Synchronoss materially misrepresented the Company's financial condition and future prospects to the Company's shareholders and the investing public.
Synchronoss provides technology to AT&T, Inc. ("AT&T") that allows AT&T, as the exclusive United States service provider of the Apple iPhone, to "lock" Apple iPhones distributed to AT&T's wireless phone customers. The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Defendants failed to disclose to investors numerous warning signs that the unlocking of iPhones jeopardized Synchronoss's iPhone contract with AT&T.
While Apple iPhones were extensively being unlocked for use with other wireless carriers, Synchronoss continued to maintain that its future prospects for growth were positive. However, on June 9, 2008, AT&T announced Synchronoss would not be activating the iPhone 3G, which was released in July of 2008. Rather, the iPhone 3G is activated in-store, effectively removing Synchronoss from the transaction altogether. On this news, Synchronoss stock fell from $13.31 to $11.03, a 17.1% decline.
On December 30, 2008, the Court granted the motion to consolidate several cases, granted the motion to appoint Herman M. Braude and Richard Kerwick as lead plaintiffs and further granted the motion to appoint Gardy & Notis, LLP, Milberg LLP and The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. as lead counsel for the lead plaintiffs. On March 13, 2009, the lead plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint.
INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION:
SIC Code: 7371
Sector: Technology
Industry: Software & Programming
| COMPANY/ISSUER NAME: | Synchronoss Technologies, Inc. |
| COMPANY/ISSUER TICKER: | SNCR |
| COMPANY WEBSITE: | http://www.synchronoss.com |
| FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT IN THE DATABASE | |||||||||||||||||
| Barry Schutsky, et al. v. Synchronoss Technologies, Inc., et al. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE FIRST IDENTIFIED COMPLAINT | |||
| Class Action Complaint | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 9/5/2008 | ||
| Order | |||
| Type: Order of Consolidation | Date on the document: 12/30/2008 | ||
| REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||||||||||||||||
| In Re Synchronoss Securities Litigation | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| DOCUMENTS FOR THE REFERENCE COMPLAINT | |||
| Consolidated Class Action Complaint And Jury Trial Demand | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 03/13/2009 | ||
| U.S. District Court Civil Docket | |||
| Type: Docket | Date on the document: 3/13/2009 | ||
| OTHER DOCUMENTS | |||
| Class Action | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Theodore E. Beaton v. Synchronoss Technologies, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 9/18/2008 | ||
| Class Action Complaint Under Federal Securities Laws | |||
| Case Name and/or Number: Jeffrey L. Ornoff, et al. v. Synchronoss Technologies, Inc., et al. | |||
| Type: Complaint | Date on the document: 09/23/2008 | ||
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