![]() |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Anadigics, Inc. Summary: On November 24, 2008, an Order was entered consolidating Kuznetz v. Anadigics, Inc., into Attias v. Anadigics, Inc. According to press releases dated November 11 and 12, 2008, the complaint charges the defendants and certain of its current and former officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Between July 25, 2007 and February 12, 2008 (the "Class Period"),The complaint charges that the representations contained in the defendants’ press releases, SEC filings, conference calls and presentations during the Class Period were materially false and misleading when made because they failed to disclose that: (i) the Company was experiencing manufacturing inefficiencies associated with increased production levels and would not be able to meet its stated guidance; (ii) the Company was at risk of losing customers due to its inability to meet demand; and (iii) as a result of the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company and its prospects. According to the complaint, on October 23, 2007, the Company held a conference call to discuss its third quarter earnings announcement and the Company’s operations. In response to the disappointing earnings announcement, the price of Anadigics common stock declined from $19.34 per share to $15.60 per share on heavy trading volume. However, defendants continued to conceal that the Company’s manufacturing inefficiencies were continuing to erode the Company’s profitability. Then, on February 12, 2008, Anadigics announced its financial results for the fourth quarter and year-end 2007. Following this announcement, the price of Anadigics common stock dropped from $10.36 per share to $8.86 per share, on extremely heavy trading volume. INDUSTRY CLASSIFICATION: SIC Code: 3674 Sector: Technology Industry: Semiconductors
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 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||